Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Systems approach in the analysis of the official town plan, Zoning by-law, and subdivision regulations.. McMillan, Arvo Arnold 1968-07-26

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1968_A8 M45.pdf [ 8.33MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093578.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093578-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093578-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093578-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093578-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093578-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093578-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093578-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093578.ris

Full Text

THE SYSTEMS APPROACH IN THE ANALYSIS OF THE OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN, ZONING BY-LAW, AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS: A CASE STUDY OF THE TOWN PLANNING ACT OF NOVA SCOTIA by ARVO ARNOLD McMTT.T.AN B.A., Dalhousie University, 1962 M.A., Queen*s University, 196$ A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the School of Community and Regional Planning We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Apri l , 1968 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p urposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n  t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Arvo A. McMillan Department o f Community and Regional Planning i The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date Apri l . 1968 ABSTRACT This thesis analyses the provisions of the Town Planning Act of Nova Scotia with respect to the procedures for the enactment, amendment, and repeal of the off ic ia l town plan, the enactment, amendment, variation, and repeal of the zoning by-law, the enactment of subdivision regulations, and the approval of subdivision plans, through the following hypothesis: The Town Planning Act of Nova Scotia does not require amendment i f the statutory provisions for the enact ment, amendment, and repeal of the o f f i c i a l town plan, the enactment, amendment, variation, and repeal of the zoning by-law, the enactment of subdivision regulations, and the approval of subdivision plans pursuant to the subdivision regulations are to be satisfactory in terms of: 1. Systems Mainteance; 2. Community Planningj 3. Openness; 4. Efficiency; 5. Effectiveness; 6. Justice. The hypothesis is tested and proven invalid. However the test i t se l f and the methodology for the development of the conceptual framework and the consequent hypothesis are found to be sufficiently defective to necessitate an alternative conclusion about the valid i ty of the hypothesis, namely, "not proven". Notwithstanding the problem in establishing and testing the hypothesis, i t i s felt that the thesis is worthwhile inasmuch i t has established a valid theoretical framework for the treatment of land use planning related issues and points to further areas of research. The conceptual framework is based upon systems theory. A conceptual framework is a means of organizing concepts and facts about a given class of phenomena in a consistent and logically satisfying manner while lacking the precision of a theory. The main sources of supporting data for the conceptual frame work and the test of the hypothesis are the Town Planning Act. population and economic data about the Province of Nova Scotia, and responses to a questionnaire which was mailed to planning authorities i n the Province. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT i TABLE OF CONTENTS i i i LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v i Chapter I INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER OUTLINES 9 II CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK - SYSTEMS THEORY 12 SYSTEMS THEORY 13 STRUCTURES OF POLITICAL LIFE 20 PROCESSES OF POLITICAL LIFE 22 THREE CLASSES OF VARIABLES 30 III THE COURTS 32 THE REMEDIES 37 NOVA SCOTIA CASES 41 SUMMARY 45 IV NOVA SCOTIA - THE PROVINCE AND THE PLANNING SYSTEM 47 THE PROVINCE 47 CONTENT OF THE OFFICIAL TOWN FLAN, ZONING BY-LAW AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS 52 PLANNING SYSTEM 56 SYSTEMS VARIABLES 63 CONCLUSION 69 iv Chapter Page V THE HYPOTHESIS AND TEST OF HYPOTHESIS 71 QUESTIONNAIRE 71 INPUT VARIABLES 79 OUTPUT VARIABLES 82 HYPOTHESIS 87 TEST OF HYPOTHESIS 87 VI CONCLUSIONS 95 BIBLIOGRAPHY 99 APPENDIX A 104 APPENDIX B 108 APPENDIX C 122 APPENDIX D 180 APPENDIX E 182 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 RESPONDING PLANNING AUTHORITIES 5 2 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, ZONING BY-LAW, OFFICIAL.TOWN PLAN. (QUESTIONS 1-6) . 81 3 REPLIES TO QUESTIONS 1-11 89 Table E - l POPULATION IN COUNTIES, TOWNS, AND CITIES 183 1956 - 1966 E-2 LABOUR FORCE BY INDUSTRY, NOVA SCOTIA AND 186 CANADA. 1951 and 1961 E-3 LABOUR FORCE IN THE SERVICE SECTOR, NOVA 187 SCOTIA, 1951 and 1961 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 MODEL OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM 19 2 FEEDBACK MODEL 28 3 THE SYSTEMIC FEEDBACK LOOP 29 v i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my gratitude to Professor B. Wiesman of the School of Comunity and Regional Planning for the assistance he rendered during the course of the thesis and to Mr. W.F. Lane for his valuable criticisms. I must also express my appreciation for the assistance of Mr. R.S. Lang, Director of the Community Planning Division of the Nova Scotia Department of Municipal Affairs which was absolutely essential for the completion of this thesis. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This thesis originated from some very practical concerns expressed by Mr. R.S. Lang, Director of the Community Planning Division of the Department of Municipal Affairs i n Nova Scotia about the lack of adequate provisions for appeal and review under the Town Planning Act."*1 He made the following remarks at a recent 2 planning conference: 1. THERE IS NO SYSTEM OF PLANNING APPEAL. Nova Scotia i s the only Province i n Canada lacking such a system. One effect has been to limit municipalities'' discretionary power. But i t has also meant the Minister's office often becomes the scene of private appeals.3 And, as we have no precedents by the Courts to guide us i n making planning decisions; a planning appeal system would solve these problems and serve the democratic process more satisfactorily. 2. THE SEPARATION BETWEEN PROVINCIAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POWERS IS CONFUSED. There i s no reason why the Minister should have to approve every tiny change of land use. These such purely local matters could be delegated to councils i f we had an appeal system.^ •••Province of Nova Scotia, Town Planning Act. R.S.N.S. 1954. Chapter 292 as amended by 1956 c.43, 1964 c.45, 1965 c.51, 1966 c.55, 196? c.73 (Halifax: Queen's Printer). See Appendix A for summary of Act. 2"Cummunity Planning in Nova Scotia 1967" - Address to the Nova Scotia Community Planning Conference, Amherst, N.S., November 9-10, 1967, R.S. Lang. Director of Community Planning. ^See Appendix D for explanation. ^Ibid, P. 8. 2 The thesis* original goal had been to recommend amendments to the Town Planning Act to incorporate the necessary provisions for appeal and review. However the goals of the thesis rapidly became more comprehensive , r 1. It was realized that any suggestions for amendments to the Act had to be based upon some method of evaluating the validity and implications of Mr. Lang's remarks since the problem could not be assumed to exist on a priori grounds. 2. The topics which Mr. Lang mentioned involved the three planning instruments known as the of f i c ia l town plan, the zoning by law, and subdivision regulations, not to mention the Town Planning Act. 3. If the three planning instruments and the Act were going to be examined then the matter of the roles of the various planning authorities would have to likewise be examined. 4. The thesis, by nature of the appeal and review function as defined later in this chapter, would have to analyze the statutory provisions for the enactment, amendment, and repeal of the o f f i c i a l town plan, the enactment, amendment, variation and repeal of the zoning by-law, the enactment of subdivision regulations, and the approval of subdivision plans. The question raised by Mr. Lang began to have very extensive ramifications and somehow a l l of the relevant ramifications had to be handled in a meaningful and economical fashion. A framework was required which was capable of ordering the relevant facts and issues. 3 This framework was called the "conceptual framework". The development of both a conceptual framework and the formulation of specific amendments to the Town Planning Act was found to be an excessively diff icult task especially since the draughtsmanship of statutes i s a highly technical f i e l d . Therefore, this thesis focussed upon the development of an appropriate conceptual framework and the preliminary analysis of the three planning instruments. The cpnseptual framework as i t is set out in Chapter II i s based upon systems theory. The hypothesis i s derived from the conceptual framework and the general areas of p i l i t i c a l science and public administration. This hypothesis is designed not only to test the suitability of statutory provisions regarding the planning instruments but also to indicate the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology developed i n this thesis. The hypothesis i s : The Town Planning Act of Nova Scotia does not require amendment i f the statutory provisions for the enactment, amendment, and repeal of the off ic ia l town plan, the enactment, amendment, variation, and repeal of the zoning by-law, the enactment of subdivision regulations, and the approval of subdivision plans pursuant to the subdivision regulations are to be satisfactory in terms of: 1. Systems maintenance; 2. Community planning; 3. Openness; 4. Efficiency; 5. Effectiveness; 6. Justice. It was found that while provisions satisfy the requirements of systems maintenance, openness, and efficiency, they f a i l to satisfy the requirements of community planning and justice. The tests yielded 4 inconclusive results for effectiveness. As a consequence, the hypothesis was invalid. However, certain weaknesses i n methodology suggested that a more valid conclusion about the hypothesis was that i t was "not proven". The main test for the hypothesis was eight responses to a question naire mailed to planning authorities and municipalities i n the Province. The questionnaire and individual replies are set out in Appendix C. Certain characteristics of the questionnaire and the treatment of i t cast the results of the test of the hypothesis in doubt. 1. The questionnaire was not designed with the conceptual frame work or the hypothesis in mind. It was designed to gather information mainly about planning appeal and review in the Province and to provide a basis for suggestions for the amendment of the Town Planning Act. The questionnaire was prepared and sent out before the final versions of the framework and the hypothesis had been drafted. 2. The questionnaire was mailed to the Director of the Community Planning Division who then had i t typed up and mailed out as a questionnaire of the Community Planning Division. This led to two problems resulting i n a lack of control over the results: a) some minor changes were made i n the wording and form of the original questionnaire and since the author failed to keep an original copy of the questionnaire he cannot ascertain where the changes were made; b) the author does not know how many questionnaires were sent out, but the author did instruct the Division to mail a questionnaire to every planning authority and/or municipality in the Province, which 5 would have involved mailing out somewhere in the area of 60 to 7 0 questionnaires. 3 . The questionnaire was not subjected to a pretest or check through personal interviews with any of the respondents which probably meant that a certain amount of ambiguity and overlap occurred i n the questions. 4 . The questionnaire was apparently mailed to planning officials judging by the offices of the respondents. Planning officials probably tend to have a professional bias when questioned about provisions for appeal and objections i n the same manner that lawyers would tend to have opposite biases. In either case i t would have been very difficult to obtain an objective assessment of the use and need of provisions for appeal and objections. The responding municipalities represented approximately one half of the Province's population so that at least a certain quality of representativeness was achieved in the replies. One of the respond ents, Halifax Regional Planning Commission, is not a municipality. The respondents and their populations are set out i n Table 1 . TABLE 1 RESPONDING PLANNING AUTHORITIES Authority Town of Stellerton City of Dartmouth Municipality of the County of Halifax Halifax Regional Planning Commission Town of New Glasgow Municipality of the County of Cape Breton City of Halifax City of Sydney Population (1966) 5,191 6 1 , 0 0 0 9 0 , 0 0 0 244 ,943 1 0 , 4 8 9 40 ,325 86 ,792 3 2 , 7 6 7 Total Population of Municipal Units 326 ,564 6 Appeal and Reviews Appeal and review are important concepts i n the analysis of provisions regarding planning instruments. Therefore, an extensive definition of these concepts is useful at this point in the thesis. Appeal and review serve two broadly defined purposes: one is to improve the substantive quality of regulations by providing a means whereby a regulation may be questioned and thence reviewed either by the authority that made the decision or some other authority such as the courts, administrative boards, another administrative officer, or the legislating body and thus create a situation in which there is greater likelihood that a l l the relevant considerations are taken into account i n the enactment and exercise of a regulation. The other i s essentially procedural, that i s , to ensure that the regulations are enacted, varied, amended, exercised, and repealed in the proper, i . e . legal manner and where possible in a manner consonant with the rules of natural justice. Appeal and review serve two other purposes, and these are bound up with the nature of democratic self-government. These purposes are: f i rs t to provide an opportunity for citizens to voice their concerns and to meaningfully participate in the process of self- government without derogating from the right and duty of the duly elected and appointed authorities to govern; and second to give the authorities an opportunity to explain their actions and the purposes of the regulations under discussion in an open forum. One group of procedures or a single form of organization cannot encompass a l l the functions of appeal and review. 7 These remarks are from Milner 1s comments on the role of procedure in zoning. Milner noted that zoning procedures must serve four purposes:$ Main Purposes 1. " . . .zoning procedure ought to be aimed at assuring that the by-law complies with the of f i c ia l town plan or that a suitable explanation is offered why i t does not." 2. " . . . to ensure that reasonable steps have been taken to -enable the council, in forming i ts policy and drafting i ts precise by-laws, to inform i tse l f fully of the implications of i ts p o l i c y . . . " Subsidiary Purposes 3. " . . . t o enable ratepayers to let off steam..." 4. " . . . t o provide a corresponding opportunity for the council and i ts staff to explain . . . to the public . . . what planning and zoning are a l l about." Appeal and review serve as linkages (one of several types) between elements within the polit ical system and between the political system and the environment. Appeal and review are reiterative functions in the sense that the process of appeal and review can take place only after a decision has been or i s l ikely to be made and only i n reference to that decision or decisions. Another decision may be made by the reviewing authority which w i l l reconfirm, modify, or replace the original, decision. Review may take place separately of appeal i n the administrative sense of a systematic review of decisions and actions to provide an internal check upon the outputs and inputs of any system. Appeal takes place 5j.B. Milner, "Legal Requirements in Zoning Procedure", Nova Scotia Community Planning Conference, October 20-21, 1966. (Institute of Public Affairs, Dalhousie University, Halifax, 1966) 8 when some person or group within or outside the system is dissatisfied with an output of one of the authorities and seeks to have this output altered so as to better conform to the needs of the person or group doing the appealing. The activities of appeal and review imply that there is some authority to whom the appeal can be directed and who is competent to carry out the review. Within the polit ical context of this thesis, the authority may be independent or structurally differentiated from the body making the original decision, or may be the same authority, but a higher status person within that authority. Thus, i f an administrator makes an original decision this decision may be appealed to some authority such as the courts or the legislature, or i t may be appealed to the administrator's supervisor. In either case the reviewing authority has the power to substitute its judgement or decision for that of the original authority. Depending upon the nature of the issue and the degree of complexity and differentiation within the poli t ical system, appeal and review may proceed through several different stages with the reviewing authority becoming an originating authority i f the reviewing authority's decision is appealed from. Appeal and review then has a function of providing an opportunity for the modification of system's outputs to better conform with the requirements of the appellant. However, appeal and review are also crucial i n terms of the system's internal requirements, that i s , i f we think of appeal as a means of conveying information, as part of the feedback loop which enables the authorities within the system to adjust their outputs to better meet the requirements of the environment 9 and i n this way avoid the creation of potentially stressful demands, and better s t i l l , to engender supports. CHAPTER OUTLINES Chapter II establishes the conceptual framework. The conceptual framework is provided by systems theory. Systems theory defines the polit ical system, locates the subject-matter of the thesis, and provides the conceptual tools for the analysis of relationships between the planning system and i ts environment and between elements within the planning and political systems. The planning system is defined by the Town Planning Act and is a subsystem of the polit ical system of the Province of Nova Scotia (provincial and local authorities). The functioning of a system is viewed as a set of interactions between input, systems, and output variables. The criteria for the hypothesis are derived from the classification of output variables. The main source for the systems analysis i s David Easton*s The Systems Analysis of Political Life^ in which the concepts of systems, poli t ical system, subsystems, environment, authorities, gatekeepers, channels, receptors, effectors, stress, inputs, demands, supports, outputs, information, feedbacks, and feedback loops are introduced. Chapter III describes the role of the courts in the administra tive process. The courts are analysed as a review body. The judicial ^ a v i d East on, A Systems Analysis of Political Life . (New York: John Wiley and Sons Ltd. , 19651T 10 remedies of declaratory judgement, prohibition, injunction, certiorari, and mendamus and the conditions necessary to bringing them into effect are described, along with the general grounds for judicial review of administrative actions. It i s shown that the courts can only intervene when a specific right of a person or group can be shown to have been injured or is about to be injured. This feature severely limits the breadth of judicial review of administrative behaviour, as partially evidenced by the relative paucity of cases relating to planning that have been heard by the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia over a twenty year period. Three actions brought before the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia are discussed. This analysis of the role of the courts i n planning is significant inasmuch: 1. The recommendations about planning procedures and structures have to account for the attitude of the courts toward legislation:, 2. The courts are one means of carrying out the appeal requirements of the function; and, 3. The judiciary directly through actual review of administrative action, and indirectly as an example and through the implied threat of review, infuse certain norms such as openness, fairness, impartiality and justice into administrative behaviour. These norms form part of the context of the planning system as goals or objectives of the system. Chapter IV provides the factual background for the thesis. The chapter begins with a description of the population and economic characteristics of Nova Scotia. It i s shown that the Province is experiencing a very low rate of growth, and that this growth is 11 concentrated i n a few urban centres. In planning terms this means that the problem is substantially one of bringing existing services up to acceptable standards rather than accommodating additional growth. There i s relatively l i t t l e stress on existing methods of handling planning problems. The remainder of Chapter IV is devoted to a description of the government of Nova Scotia, provincial and local authorities. Subsumed under this section is an extensive discussion and analysis of the Town Planning Act. It defines a planning organization composed of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, the Community Planning Division of the Department of Municipal Affairs, council of a municipality, and the planning board. The procedures and content of the o f f i c i a l town plan, zoning by-law, and subdivision regulations are described as set out i n the Act. Chapter V gives content to the input and output variables, derives the hypothesis, and tests the hypothesis. A copy of the questionnaire i s included in Chapter V. Chapter VI contains the conclusions. 12 CHAPTER II CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK - SYSTEMS THEORY A conceptual framework i s a way of ordering thinking about any given class of phenomena. A conceptual framework i s not defined with sufficient precision to be termed a theory while i t has many of the same functions, that i s , to define a subject area and to postulate relationships about the elements i n a logically vigorous fashion. The general subject area is the polit ical system since community planning is a function of the polit ical system, and this is a thesis about procedures i n regard to the off ic ia l town plan, zoning by-law, and subdivision regulations which are instruments for the realization of various community planning objectives. The Town Planning Act"^ " i s deemed to define a planning system (subsystem of the polit ical system of Nova Scotia) composed of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, council, the planning board, and i n a very tenuous sense - the courts. Systems theory is the conceptual framework. Later in this chapter the systems relevant variables are grouped under input variables, systems variables, and output variables. Output variables wil l provide the criteria for the hypothesis. Data for the hypothesis and i ts test are set out in Chapters III and IV. This chapter sets up the conceptual framework and briefly discusses the three classes of variables. 1Province of Nova Scotia, The Town Planning Act. R.S.N.S. 1954  Chapter 292, as amended by 1956 c. 43, 1964, 1965, c. 51, 1966 c. 55, 1967 c. 73 (Halifax: Queen's Printer). 13 SYSTEMS THEORY The systems approach is based upon general systems theory. General systems theory i s an attempt to pull within a group of related theories, those about separate areas of concern, e.g. physics, biology, starting from the notion of a "system". In systems terms, a system is defined as "a set of objects together with relationships between the objects and between their attributes." 2 Three central notions i n the definition of the system are "objects", "attributes", and "relationships". Objects are defined as the parts or components of a system and are unlimited in variety. Attributes are the properties of objects, such as: number, weight, state, and velocity. Relationships defines those properties which hold the system together.-^ In addition to the original definition of a system by Hall and Fagen, Anatol Rapoport introduces a dynamic-analytical dimension in the definition by adding: " . . .certain relationships imply othersj" and, " . . . a given state of relationships at one time w i l l imply a specifiable state of relationships at another time."^- Information embodied i n messages i s the crucial linkage variable, tying the components of the system together and relating the system to 2 A . D . Hall and R.E. Fagen "Definition of a System", General  Systems Vol. 1, 1956, p. 18. 3 Ibid- ^Anatol Rapoport, "Some Approaches to Political Theory", David Easton ed., Varieties of Political Theory (Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 1966), p.p. 129-130. 14 the environment through the two classes of summary variables — inputs (including feedback) and outputs. Information in this context is understood i n the broadest sense to include transfers of energy, such as verbal messages, physical action-projects, protest marches or transfers of funds, which have the potential to act as cues for responses. The thesis wil l not attempt to "solve" any problems through the use of systems theory, but i t wi l l use the theory as a means of identifying cr i t ical variables and establishing concepts and hypothesis. There are various approaches, including general systems theory, which offer explanations analgous to and employ conceptual approaches which can subsumed under systems theory. The system as defined is a dynamic ensemble of relations between various components. In a closed system, according to certain laws of theraodynamics there i s a tendency toward entropy, defined as a state of maximum probability, in which the system becomes disorganized, that i s homogeneous, whereas the alternative is an open system which imports information, or energy, negative entropy, i n which case the system tends to increase in complexity and differentiation and grows i n the organismic sense i n which one of the possible outcomes or states i s to homeostasis which has been defined as " . . . the ensemble of organic regulations which act to maintain the steady state of the organism..."^ ^Ludwig von Bertalanffy, "General System Theory — A Critical Review", General Systems. Vol. VII, 1962, p.6. 15 Homeostasis is analogous to the equilibrium model of a system. However, the concept of homeostasis or equilibrium merely refers to a state at a given time which the system is attempting to achieve, a change i n a cr i t ical variable leading to a predispostion toward another state of equilibrium at a higher level of complexity i f the system is "progressing", or a lower level of complexity i f the system is degenerating". A polit ical system is an open system. The concepts of system, open system, and homeostasis as described imply: 1. An discrete entity known as a system which has boundaries; 2. Interactions between components of the system which enable the system to maintain various states; and 3. Transfers across systems boundaries of information which can be refined into outputs into the environment (that which surrounds the system) and inputs from the environment. The Cybernetics model of the self-adjusting machines facilitates understanding of the main structural aspects of the systems processes. The Cybernetics model establishes three elements, four, i f the feedback is structured as a loop or channel. These elements are: an effector which produces a response to the environment, this response triggers a sensing device, feedback which sends into a receptor a long with stimuli, and the receptor sends a message to a control appartus which in turn sends a message to effector.^ Essential to the model are goals which can be set out i n qualitative or quantitative terms, e.g. 10,000 bolts an hour, or community planning. The response (output) 6 Ibid , p.# 16 in terms of the production of bolts or planning is fed through a sensing device which informs the control apparatus of the actual performances. The control box "evaluates" performances, and i f necessary adjusts same according to predetermined goals or standards. The Cybernetic unit of control apparatus, receptor, effector, sensor, and feedback loop can be linked to other units forming a very complex system. This simple model illustrates that a system must have goals which determine the sorts of responses that are required by the system. Homeostasis is likewise described by this model since the control apparatus enables the system to respond to feedback cum stimuli in a manner designed to maintain the system at a given or predetermined state. A system may contain subsystems. Organizations, however defined, can be defined as subsystems of the polit ical system, as are the local and provincial levels of government. David Easton defines the polit ical system " . . .as those interactions through which values are authoritatively allocated for a society..."''' comprising " . . . a complex set of processes through which certain kinds of inputs are converted into the types of outputs we may call authoritative policies, decisions, and implementing actions.. ." . An alternative definition of the polit ical system was set out by Gabriel Almond i n which he states " . . . the polit ical system is that 7David Easton, A Systems Analysis of Political Life . (New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1965) p. 21. 8David Easton, "Categories For the Systems Analysis of Politics", p. 144. 17 system of interactions to be found i n a l l independent societies which performs the functions of integration and adaptatoon (both internally and vis a vis other societies) by means of the employment, or threat of employment, of more or less legitimate physical compulsion. The polit ical system is the legitimate, order-maintaining or transforming system i n the society."^ Almondfs definition is less useful for our purposes since i t was essentially designed to explain differences between poli t ical systems, nevertheless, some of his definitions and concepts w i l l prove to be usable in this thesis. David Easton*s systems approach wil l provide the framework for conceptual thinking about appeal, review, planning, the off ic ia l town plan, zoning by-laws, and subdivision regulations. In A Systems Analysis of Political Life which provides a framework for the analysis of appeal, review, and planning, David Easton notes three methodological objectives: 1. " . . . to establish criteria for identifying the important variables requiring investigation in a l l political systems:" 2. " . . . t o specify the relationships among these variables:" and 3 . " . . . t o achieve these goals through a set of generalizations that hang together with greater than lesser coherence and interdependence. " ^ In his analysis Easton i s concerned with those elements pertinent to the survival of the polit ical system. ^Gabriel A. Almond and James S. Coleman, editors, The Politice," of Developing Areas. (Princeton, N.J . : Princeton University Press, I960) p. 7 . 1 0 David Easton, A Systems Analysis of Political Life , p .8 ^ I b i d . p. 1 3 . 18 As a consequence of the systems characteristics of political l i f e , a polit ical system comprises a system of behaviour, is surrounded by environments, i s open, that is subject to influences from these environments, and possesses the capacity to more or less effectively respond to the demands of the environment i n a variety of ways.-^2 The inability to respond to certain types of demands leads to the partial or complete breakdown of the political system. "Disturbances" are simply the influences from the other environments, and from within (subsystems of the polit ical system) which compel the polit ical system to respond by changing i ts product to the environment and/or by making structural modifications. In very simple terms the systems approach to polit ical l i f e can be envisaged as model comprising the political system, outputs to the environment, and inputs from the environment which are linked together in a systematic fashion. Figure 1 diagrammatically sets out components and their relation ships. The concepts composing the systems analysis of polit ical l i f e f i t into two broad classes — those treating the structures and those treating the processes of polit ical l i f e . ^ I b i d . P.18 ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT I N P U T 6 Demands Support THE POLITICAL SYSTEM Decisions and Actions 0 U T P U T S ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT FIGURE I 13 MODEL OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM •^David Easton, A Framework For Political Analysis (Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1965) Diagram 3, "A Simplified Model of a Political System". 20 STRUCTURES OF POLITICAL LIFE Political structures are designed to facilitate ends of the poli t ical systems, the central end being persistence, the retention of the ability to cope with demands of a stressful and non-stressful sort through suitable responses in the form of outputs. The structural components of the polit ical system are: the authorities, receptors, responding agents, gatekeepers, and channels. These components are essentially defined by their function (including powers) and location in the polit ical system. 1. Authorites The authorities l i e within the political system. Their task i s to produce authoritative and associated outputs which are more or less capable of producing the desired effects within the system and i ts environment. Typical authorities are the legislature, the courts, and the executive. 2. Receptors Receptors are authorities to whom feedback is directed.^ 3. Responding Agents Responding agents may be authorities or members of the political system or both. Where the responding agents are authorities the responses are quite specific comprising deliberate and calculated action. "But a response may also be more diffuse and diversified; i t may appear as individual and isolated reactions on the part of the members severally considered. H A Systems Analysis of Political Life , p. 420. 21 In the aggregate, their actions may lead to a new set of circumstances that can be designated as a generalized response in the system."^ 4. Gatekeepers Gatekeepers are those specialized elements of the polit ical system, located at either the boundaries or well within the political system whose function is the conversion of diffuse wants and expectations into specific demands, that can be considered and perhaps managed by the authorities. The gate keeping function (an analogous term is "conversion") may be performed by the authorities, polit ical parties, opinion leaders, interest groups, and opinion leaders. The gate keeping or conversion process i s similar to Gabriel Almond's interest articulation and aggregation functions.^ The role of the authorities in want-conversion (gate-keeping) should be further elucidated since this treats a matter close to the thesis. Authorities may act as demand generators and want-convertors i n their own right, in a relatively autonomous fashion, " . . . i n response to internal moral norms that inspire them to l ive up to the ideal expectation of the culture with regard to what is expected of the authorities in the system."^ Finally, one of the crucial variables in the activation of the gatekeeping function is the timing of the flow of demands. 1 5 I b i d , p. 247 •^The Politics of Developing Areas, p. 17. 17 A Systems Analysis of Political Life , p. 97. 22 5. Channels Channels are paths of flow for input and output elements comprising " . . . the interrelationships among such familiar secondary polit ical structures as interest groups, parties, opinion leaders, mass media, polit ical leaders, legislatures, and relevant unorganized publics. What makes i t possible to describe connections among these structures i n a political system as channels i s that regardless of where a demand is initiated, i t becomes a message that may move from and through any of these subsystems to another, depending on the demands particular career."-^ Channel capacity determines the number and types of demands that may be handled. Responses to an ~ excessive demand situation may be an increase in the number of channels or increase in specialization of channels, or both. 1 9 Channels may be of two types, direct or mediated. In the former case, information (or demands) is transmitted directly to the authorities. In the latter case, information (or demands) is relayed to the authorities by gatekeepers. PROCESSES OF POLITICAL LIFE 1. Outputs Outputs are products of the authorities such as decisions, actions, policies, programmes, and press releases which in the context of the 1 8 I b i d . p. 119. 19Ibidr p. 418. 23 systems analysis approach are designed to engender support for the regions, system, or authority, by meeting existing demands, forestall ing future demands by anticipatory action, or engendering a generally favourable climate for the system in a diffuse manner. Outputs, l ike inputs, may cross the boundaries of the system or may move from one element of the polit ical system to another. Move ment within the system is explemplified by the forwarding of a decision of the executive to an operating department which then proceeds to put the decision into effect, say, the construction of a highway or the issuance of a regulation. The output of the executive member becomes an input for the operating department resulting in an output which crosses the system's boundary. Outputs and inputs can be viewed as exchange and transactions — two subsidiary notions which wi l l be important in the thesis. "Echanges can be used to refer to the actuality of the relationships, to the fact that the political system and those systems in the environment have reciprocal effects on each other. Transactions may be employed when we wish to emphasize the movement of an effect i n one direction from an environmental system to the polit ical system, or the reverse, without being concerned at the time about the reactive behaviour of the other system."^ 2. Inputs Inputs are "...summary variables that concentrate and mirror everything in the environment that i s relevant to polit ical stress."^1 Systems Analysis of Political Life , p. 26. ^ I b i d . p. 26 24 Inputs are the raw materials of the polit ical process in the forms of demands and supports. This thesis is mainly concerned with demands in the form of appeals and demands to the authorities to modify or repeal a given enactment. A demand is defined " . . .as an expression of opinion that an authoritative allocation with regard to a particular subject-matter should or should not be made by those responsible for doing s o . " 2 2 Demands may be broad or narrow in scope. Demands are directed toward the authorities. Demands, and supports originating within the polit ical system are termed "withinputs". Demands, while essential for the rationale of the polit ical system, are i ts greatest source of danger since demands are potentially stress-inducing both in terms of volume and in terms of content. Stress i n either case " . . . w i l l tend to undermine the capacity of a system to produce i ts characteristic outputs, authoritative decisions."' The crucial systems variable under the both types of stress just mentioned i s time. Due to excessive volume or content character istics (complexity, dissension creating, difficulty in treatment) the system's channels are unable to cope with the flow of demands within a suitable period of time and backlog of demands is created. Demands are not processed and hence not converted into requisite outputs, resulting in among other things, more untreatable demands and 2 2 I b i d . p.38 2 3 I b i d . p.57 25 dissatisfaction i n the environment which eventually leads to a loss of support for the system. A certain level of support is crucial i f the system is to survive at a l l The excessive volume situation leads to what David Easton calls "demand input overload". 2^ This demand input overload i s essentially the same phenomenon that occurs under the situation of content stress, since under both types of stress the time variable determines the ability of the system to adapt to the demands. It i s implicit in Easton*s remarks, that demands ordinarily of a non-stressful type w i l l produce stress i f there are too many for the system to effectively handle. A sudden peaking of demands w i l l not allow the system to develop the appropriate adaptive measures that a more evenly paced flow of demands would permit. Thus, a content stress need not necessarily arise , if the system has enough time to cope with an unusual or complex problem. Of course, this last statement does not eliminate the possibility that a demand may be so "outrageous" in content terms that the system simply cannot cope with i t and s t i l l maintain i ts general terms of reference. For example, a democratic system of government may not be able to adapt to the requirements of waging a war without completely changing i ts characterito say, a totalitarian system. Notwithstanding the conceptual unity of volume stress and content stress, the systems approach does not give us reason to assume that structural adaptations of the political system w i l l be the same for both types of stress. At this stage Easton merely states that the 2 ^Ibid. p. 58 26 problem of demand input overload may be handled by an increase in number of channels — which i s about as close to being specific about structur a l adaptations that Easton gets. Finally, the notion of feedback and information are discussed. "Feedback", "Feedback loop", and "Feedback processes" are informations concepts embodying the notion that the authorities must obtain informa tion i f they are to maintaintthe desired levels of support. Feedback is the return of systems relevant information to the authorities. The Feedback loop describes the channels this informa tion follows to reach the authorities. And feedback processes are " . . . the actual flow patterns and relatated e f f e c t s . . . " ^ The meaningfulness of the feedback concept is predicated upon four assumptions about states of the system. 1. There exist interrelationships of outputs, demands, and supports. 2. The authoritites are responsive to information inputs from the environment. 3. The authorities are competent in terms of ski l ls , imagination, and organizational ability to achieve their goals. 4. The authorities possess sufficient resources to respond affectively to demands.^° The above are assumed to be valid for the state of affairs of Nova Scotia. The assumptions are slightly unrealistic inasmuch there are always constraints upon the authorities1 willingness and anility (resources and competence) to respond to feedback from the environment and from subsystems. These constraints are very important with respect to the system's ability to maintain the 25A Systems Analysis of Political Life , p. 366. 26lbid, p.p. 363-364 requisite level of supports. However, i t i s beyond the scope of this thesis to analyze the constraints arising from motivational considera tions. Information has two functions: one is to describe the state of the system and the environment, and the other is to describe the effects of outputs.2? Information enables the authorities to adapt before the event and to know what sorts of adaptations are l ikely to be most successful. Information and demands often may be incorporated in the same message and handled by the same structures or channels. Thus, a public hearing while being a forum for the presentation of information in the form of opinions and arguments, may also provide an opportunity for the expression of demands. The notion bf-.feedback can include demands as well as information, since the essential characteristic of feedback is that i t is initiated by a reaction to a system1 s outputs. Information feedback can be assessed in terms of i ts volume, accuracy, delays in transmission, direction, and the behaviour of the authorities.28 The phases around a feedback loop comprise: 1. Stimuli in the form of outputs and outcomes; 2. Feedback response: 2 7 I b i d , p. 364 2 8 l b i d , p. 366 3. Information feedback about the response; and, 4. Output reaction to feedback response.^9 Figure 2 simply illustrates the feedback model. A more complex version is presented by Figure 3« III Information feedback II Feedback response 1 Producers of inputs of support and of demands Producers of , outputs j IV Output reaction I Feedback stimuli FIGURE 2 3 0 FEEDBACK MODEL ^ I b i d . Diagram 7, "The Four Phases of the Systemic Feedback Loop", p. 381. Input boundary threshold Producers of inputs The Political System Interaction between demands and support demands Flow of information feedback about demands support To the Authorities Information To the Regime feedback about support To the Political Community _Output boundary threshold Producers of outputs Interaction between outputs and information about demands and support Outputs The Systemic Feedback Loop FIGURE 3 J THE SYSTEMIC FEEDBACK LOOP 30 As i t i s described, feedback conceptually includes appeal since appeal likewise i s a response to an output of the system. Feedback in general includes any sort of response to any output and consequent outputs need not necessarily follow, whereas appeal as defined earlier requires a specific output by an authority reaffirming, amending, or nullifying the original output which triggered the appeal. This specific output of the authority is a decision resulting from review. THREE CLASSES OF VARIABLES The systems approach generates three classes of variables, known as input variables, systems variables, and output v a r i a b l e s T h e s e variables provide a means of analyzing the provisions of the Town Planning Act for procedures in regard to the planning instruments. The output variables provide the criteria for the hypothesis. The variables are postulated on the assumption that there are measurable relationships between these variables. Even where i t i s not possible to establish precise relationships between the variables, the grouping or classification of facts about a system under the three classes of variables serves to clarify thinking and point to useful concepts and insights about the operation of the system. 32Charles E. Rice, "A Model for the Empirical Study of a Large Social Organization", General Systems. Vol. VI, 1961. Charles Rice analyzes the operation of psychiatric hospitals using the three classes of variables. He used a correlational analysis to compare the operations of different psychiatric hospitals. Some of the material which is to be used for the input, output, and systems variables is to be found in Chapter IV. Material is also obtained from the eight replies to a questionnaire which was mailed to a l l of the planning authorities of the Province, and from a further analysis of the Town Planning Act. This questionnaire and the replies to i t also form the basis for the test of the hypothesis. Input variables are ".. .those parameterei.of the systems environ- ment whose variability affects the system's functioning."^ Systems variables are the pertinent elements internal to the system such as authorities, channels, gatekeepers, the relationship between these elements, and the manner in which the system carries out i ts functions. Output variables are ". . .variables whose measurement would reflect the performance of any organization with respect to , . . " - ^ the goals of the organization or system. 3 3 I b i d . 34ibid. 32 CHAPTER III THE COURTS The role of the courts in the administrative process is described in this chapter. The general principles of judicial review are set out with a discussion of the judicial remedies. Three cases touching upon matters related to community plaiining heard by the Nova Scotia Supreme Court are examined. It i s shown that in regard to community planning in Nova Scotia the courts are used infrequently as a review device. The significance of the courts in the administrative process extends beyond their use as a means of review, because: 1. Legislative enactments, rules, regulations, ordinances, by-laws and administrative actions are potentially subject to judicial review; and 2. In the broader sense the judiciary are able by virtue of their power of review and as a model of behaviour in common-law countries are able to infuse certain norms of behaviour into the administrative process. The courts influence the governmental process in four main ways: l ) by interpreting the meaning of legislative enactments, rules, regulations and by-laws and thus playing the role of the authorita tive impartial umpire where there is a conflict or uncertainty about the meaning of the rules established by the legislature and other rule-making bodies; 33 2) by determining the legitimacy—legality of behaviour according to the rules (points of law); 3) by compelling compliance with the rules; and 4) by interjecting certain common law concepts such as natural justice into quasi-judicial activities. The courts act as a means of appeal and review within the limits set out above. The courts may determine the legality of enactments i f they are the creatures of superior legislation. For example a municipal by-law may be termed ultra-vires of the statute under which council purports to act i f the enabling act granting council i ts powers failed to authorize the type of municipal enactment in which case council exceeded i ts jurisdiction and the by-law is invalid. Likewise an enactment of the provincial legislature may be deemed ultra-vires of the province i f i t falls within the federal jurisdiction under the British North America Act. The court's interpretative function combined with i ts authorita- tiveness means that legislative enactments, by-laws, and so forth have to be drafted with the courts* attitude i n mind because disregard wi l l lead to litigation and possibly frustration of the legislature*s intentions. A matter to be reviewable by the courts must l i e within what the legislature deems to be reviewable. The courts however preserve their right of review. The courts w i l l only exercise review on questions of jurisdiction and law, or when a specific action or cause exists which lies within the judicial frame of reference, or where there is a specific procedure by which the matter is brought before 34 the attention of the courts* In each case, the court reviews the matter and finally the court issues a decision (the outcome). If the decision is unsatisfactory to the appellant or defendant, then the process of appeal and review can recommence depending upon the circum stances of the case. With variations the same basic steps are applicable in any circumstance in which an attempt is made to alter a decision. The basic factor i n judicial review i n Canada i s that i n general, except when a statute grants appeal to courts, we have to look to the Common Law principles of judicial review."*" The basic role and attitude of the courts toward review is elucidated in the following remark by John Wil l is . The jurisdiction of the courts i s very limited and no more than supervisory. They have no power to review the substance of the deciding authority's decision except (and i t i s becoming an important exception) questions of law on the face of the record, but they do have power to review the process whereby the decision is arrived at. They require that the authority honestly apply i ts mind to deciding the question i t i s empowered to decide and no other question. They also require that the procedure the authority adopts for hearing the dispute conforms to the fundamental rules of fair play and, in effect, set minimum standards of fairness for the process of adjudication. In a word, the courts have an inherent quasi-constitutional power to guarantee the citizen against arbitrary decision and that is a l l the power they have.2 An English authority on the matter of administrative law (W.O. Hart) sets out the context and consequences of judicial think ing in the following statement: xJohn Will is , "Administrative Law i n Canada", Canadian Bar  Review. 1961, Volume 39, p. 256. 2 Ibid . p.p. 256-257. 35 In England . . . the courts have been diffident in controlling the exercise of discretionary powers conferred by statute. Partly this flows from the omnipotence of Parliament, partly from a difficulty in fi t t ing bare discretionary powers into a pattern of legal thinking which is focussed mainly on rights and duties and which reflects the nineteenth century laissez- faire outlook dominant in the period when the rule of strict precedent had recently been accepted and was forming the foundations for the development of the modern law. This judicial attitude recognizes that freedom of action exists i n certain fields, perhaps flowing from rights. Such a f ie ld , however, is not defined positively, but merely represents an area of possible action not prohibited by duties or contra vening the rights of others. Mere powers are difficult to f i t into this setting. Some statutory powers can, of course, be regarded as doing no more than removing an internal bar i n the constitution of the body upon which they are conferred. Other statutory powers which have an external operation cannot be so simply dealt with, but many are not only carefully defined but their exercise is made dependent upon a definable standard or the existance of some set of circumstances. The power, for instance, to condemn property for clearance as unfit for human occupation is related to a specific norm, the existance of which could, i f necessary, become a justiciable matter. Such statutory powers, therefore (though s t i l l diff icult for the courts to accept), are not wholly alien to judicial patterns of thought. But statutory powers which are discretionary and cannot be related in their exercise to anything approaching a legal rule, but on the contrary are to be exercised in accord ance with such indeterminable ideas as policy and expediency, are aimost incapable of judicial control. In the end the courts have shown extreme reluctance to interfere with the exercise of statutory powers of a discretionary nature. Appeal, moreover, i s the creature of statute and is not inherent in the grant of a discretionary power, even where the decision of an administrative body involves a point of law. In the absence of a statutory right of appeal the courts will do no more than consider whether the exercise of the power was ultra vires, whether i t was exercised in good faith, and where i t i s of a quasi-judicial type, whether the rules of natural justice were observed i n reaching the decision, having regard, however, to the nature of the deciding body. Such review provides no appeal on the merits and only a limited scope for controlling the more outrageous departures from reasonable practice.3 %.0. Hart, "Control of the Use of Land in English Law" in Charles M. Haar, Editor, Law and Land: Anglo-American Planning  Practice. (Harvard University Press and M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts), p.p. 18-19. 36 The judicial posture vis a vis administration and individual rights is described in the following terms by J .G. Pink: . . . in an effort to achieve day to day working solutions to the problem (of administrative justice), microscopic distinctions must be drawn, in each area of legislation, between more "individual preferences" expendable in the interest of administrative efficiency and "individual rights" to be jealously guarded, at least for interim periods, even at the expense of decreased administrative effectiveness.... The most important issues are the standards upon which the distinction should be based, and, even more crucial, who should draw the distinction. 4 There have been attempts to exclude judicial review by means of privative clauses of xvhich there are two main types, a clause excluding the application of the prerogative writs, what J .G. Pink class "the comprehensive *no certiorari* clause",-* and the "exclusive jurisdiction"^ section which grants the administrative body to deter mine the law as well as the facts that apply within a given subject area. These privative clauses have not effectively excluded judicial review. Appeal to a court from a decision of an arinri ni strative body can take the form of a request for damages (very infrequent, and hardly applicable i n the field covered by the Town Planning Act ) , 7 an attempt to have the enactment in question declared ultra-vires, an application for a declaratory judgement, or one of the writs of 4«J.G. Pink, "Judicial 'Jurisdiction* i n the Presence of Privative Clauses", Faculty of Law Review.' University of Toronto, Vol. 23, April 1965, p.p. 5-6. 5 I b M , P. 7 6 I b i d . p. 8 ^Province of Nova Scotia, Town Planning Act. R.S.N.S. 195k. Chapter 222, as amended by 1956 c. 43, 1964 c. 45, 1965 c. 51, 1966 c. 55, 1967 c 73 (Halifax: Queen*s Printer). injunction, prohibition, mandamus, and certiorari. Injunction is an equitable remedy, whereas prohibition, mandamus, and certiorari are prerogative writs. The distinction need not concern us. THE REMEDIES The remedies of declaratory judgement, injunction, prohibition, mandamus, and certiorari are the most commonly used means of securing review by lower court of administrative decisions, and are therefore the subject of the following discussion. The remedies have the following elements i n common: 1. a person or group exists who has a clearly defined right which i s being injured, or is l ikely to be injured (the preventive remedies of injunction and prohibition) by some action or lack thereof of a clearly defined court, tribunal, or administrative body and this person (plaintiff) is bringing an action for one of the remedies. In legal terms the person bringing the action must have sufficient locus standi. 2. In the consideration of one of these remedies the court wi l l generally not review a case on i ts merits, but instead on a point of law, unless, the decision is so unreasonable as to constitute in the eyes of the court an excess of jurisdiction. These two constraints on judicial review mean that judicial review can occur only under extraordinary circumstances. The position of the courts however, is significant in that administrative behaviour has to operate within the general context of norms as interpreted by the courts. The courts i n addition, facilitate the administrative process by acting as final interpreters in the definition of words and meanings of statutes, rules, regulations, by-laws and other legal documents. Declaratory Judgement The declaratory judgement is a discretionary remedy which purpose g is to determine legal relationships. Generally speaking i t w i l l only be granted under certain circumstances. In addition to those circumstances which have been mentioned as common to a l l the remedies, i t has been observed that a declaratory judgement wil l not issue in cases whence there i s no person interested in opposing the matter, or, i f the judgement w i l l not afford the plaintiff real relief , or, i f the judgement would be inquitable, cause public inconvenience, or be contrary to public policy. The declaratory judgement, among other purposes, can be used in regard to statutes and municipal by-laws to establish: 1. Validity of the enactment; 2. Interpretation or effect; 3. Validity of administrative acts of officers of the Crown; and Q 4. Validity of decisions of statutory tribunals." 8 Allan Findlay, "Declaratory Judgement", The Law Society of Upper Canada (Lectures). (Toronto: Richard de Boo Ltd. 1961), p. 187. 9 I b i d . p.p. 202-207 39 Injunction and Prohibition The injunction shares with prohibition the attribute of being a preventive remedy, that i s , i t s job is to prevent somebody from undertaking a course of action that w i l l affect some persons* or groups* personal or property rights. Injunction is an equitable remedy, whereas a prohibition is one of the prerogative writs. An injunction w i l l apply to any party whether i t be a trade union, a business establishment, or an arimini strative body, whereas prohibition wi l l only be applied against an inferior tribunal, or a board or body which has a duty to act judicially.- A judicial act is defined as " . . . an act done by competent authority upon consideration of facts and circumstances and imposing l i a b i l i t y or affecting the rights of others." 1^ An injunction, like prohibition and the other remedies, is discretionary, however, i f a plaintiff can show that he has a right that is being violated he i s generally entitled to an injunction to 19 prevent recurrence of that violation. An injunction wil l not be granted i f i t can be shown that the act complained of is t r i v i a l , or, that another adequate remedy exists .^ Mandamus The writ of mandamus is issued by a court to compel some person or tribunal to carry out some duty imposed upon i t by law.^ - It 1 ° B . J . Mackinnon, "Prohibition, Certiorari, and Quo Warrants" Ibid p. 243. ^ I b i d . p. 293. ^ff-B-iyilliston,. "Injunctions", p. 88 p. 88. i3lbid. p.p. 89-90 14F.A. Brewin, "Mandamus", Ibid, p. 273. cannot be issued where the exercise of the duty in question is discretionary, that i s , the person or tribunal has a choice whether or not to carry out a duty. One of the points in the writ of mandamus is that "while mandamus l ies to compel the exercise of a discretion, the Court has no power to compel the exercise of a discretion i n a particular way...""'""' Certiorari "Certiorari . . . is an order by the Court quashing a ruling or decision of such staturtory tribunal which has gone outside i ts jurisdiction. " ^ A writ of certiorari issues: (a) where there is want or excess of jurisdiction when the inquiry begins or during i ts progress; (b) when, i n the exercise of jurisdiction there is - an error on the face of the adjudication; (c) where there has been an abuse of jurisdiction . (as by mis-stating the complaint, etc., or disregard of the essentials of justice and the conditions regulating the functions and duty of the tribunal); (d) where the Court i s shown to be disqualified by . likelihood of bias or by interest; and (e) where there is fraud.^' 15Bergman J.A. Pozier v. Ward (1947) 2 W.W.R. 193, 55 Man. R. 214 (1947) 4 D.L.R. 316, reversing (1947) 1 W.W.R. 807. l 6 F . A . Brewin, p. 273 Mackinnon, p. 300 41 NOVA SCOTIA CASES In the f i n a l analysis the only way to understand ju d i c i a l thinking i s to examine jud i c i a l decisions. It i s even more pertinent to examine decisions i n the jurisdiction that this thesis i s concerned about, Nova Scotia. The general remarks about j u d i c i a l attitudes and the various remedies were derived second-hand from legal writers commenting upon "leading cases". The Nova Scotia Supreme Court and Court of Appeals operate within the guidelines l a i d down by previous decisions, precedent, and within the rules l a i d down by the Judicature Act of Nova Scotia, and as well, must take into consideration the attitude of the Supreme Court of Canada to which appeals can be had from the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia. There i s one serious gap i n our understanding of the judic i a l process of Nova Scotia, and this i s the role of the county courts whose decisions are not reported i n law reports and are thus not accessible. Therefore, i t i s impossible to estimate the to t a l number of planning and related appeals to the courts and to deduce the effectiveness of the courts as a planning appeal and review device. It can be assumed for a variety of reasons that a certain number of appeals are resolved at the county court level and never reach the Nova Scotia Supreme Court or Court of Appeals. In the same manner certain decisions of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court and Court of Appeals are not appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. It would be tantalizing to hypothesize about the county court situation, but, this i s a matter for another study. The Maritime Provinces Reports sets out a l l the cases heard by The Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. A l l the Reports from Volume 18, 1944/45 to Volume 52 , 1966/67 were examined for cases relating to the Town Planning Act, or which raised questions pertinent to planning. Three cases were discovered to meet the criteria. Only one case referred to the Town Planning Act, and this was in conjunction with the Halifax City Charter, another case devolved upon an inter pretation of the Halifax City Charter alone, and one was an expropria tion case. These cases by no means indicate the scope of the Courts* potential as a review body, but they do indicate the very limited use to which the Court is being put as a review body in planning. The following cases were a l l heard by the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia. 18 1 . Re. Ives; Re. Crichton Park Realties limited. This case was an appeal from a judge-arbitrator under the Expro priation Act. R.S.N.S. 1954, c 9 1 , ss. 7 , 1 9 . The Crown (Nova Scotia) had expropriated two parcels of land and was dissatisfied with the decision of the arbitrator. It therefore appealed the decision of the arbitrator on the grounds that the judge-arbitrator had erred in admitting certain evidence and erred in permitting certain questions of the witnesses. The appeal was dismissed because: l ) the appellants failed to allege "that the judge had erred in improperly considering some element or thing which he should not have considered or that in his valuations he acted upon 18Maritime:^Provinces Reports v. 52 1966/67 p. 2 5 0 . some error in principle"; and 2 ) the judge committed no error i n the application of the principles of law related to compensation, nor did he make an excessive award. Comment There were two issues involved in this case, one concerns the manner in which the judge went about making the award (procedure), and the other was the amount of award (substantive justice). We can presume that i f the award had been excessive in the eyes of the Supreme Court, the appeal would have been allowed. 20 2 . Re. Clarendon Development Limited. This case falls under municipal law (The Town Planning Act, R.S.N.S., 1954 , c 292 , s. 16, The Halifax City Charter, s. 103 ( 2 ) , City of Halifax Ordinance 2 , Rules 4 , 5 , 2 2 , 24 and 40) and comprised an application for a writ of mandamus to compel the City to rezone a parcel of property which i t had failed to do because Council had failed to pass the rezoning by the required two-thirds majority. The vote was 8 -3 instead of the required 9 -3 and the Mayor consequently ruled against the rezoning. The Court had to decide on two questions, whether a special majority was required in this case, and the meaning of the word "affected." In effect an attempt was made to overturn the ordinance ^ I b i d . 2 0 I b i d V. 51 1965/66 p. 108 in regard to this property. The application was dismissed by the Court. In rendering the decision, Mr. Justice Currie commented: "It i s established law that the reasonableness of an ordinance is one of law for the Court. Its reasonableness is determined by an examination of a l l the circumstances, the objects sought to be obtained and the reason and necessity for i ts existence. It must not be unreasonable and oppressive as applied to certain property and as applied to the particular subject matter, even though i ts general purpose is valid. There is a legal presumption in favour of the reasonableness of ordinance which may be displaced by proper evidence or from what appears on the face of the ordinance. A court should be reluctant 2' to substitute i t s discretion for that of the municipal authorities." No mention is made of the grounds for the issuance of a writ of mandamus. 3 . Re. Johnston and the Committee on Works of the Halifax City Counci l . 2 2 This case fal ls under certiorari and involved an application by a property owner for the writ to quash a decision by the Committee to demolish his house on the grounds that the Committee exceeded i ts jurisdiction by failure to follow the rules of natural justice (Halifax City Charter ss. 109, 1 1 6 , 757 , Acts of I960 c. 6 5 , s. 1 3 ; Ordinance 5 0 ) . ^ x Ibid. p.p. 108-109 2 2 I b i d . v. 46 1961/62 p. 345. 45 The order and resolution of the Committee were quashed. It was determined that the "Committee meetings were not a l l attended by the total number of members appointed to that body, although a l l participated in the vote on the resolution."23 Chief Justice Ilsley established two points essential to the grant of a writ of certiorari, that the Committee was bound to act judicially i n this matter, and that the Committee acted contrary to the rules of natural justice. 2^ - If the Committee had not been obligated to act judicially, (l) the writ would not have been obtainable, and (2) i t would not have been obliged to follow the rules of natural justice in i ts proceedings. As was noted earlier though, the definition of a judicial act is very broad. ! SUMMARY The role of the courts in administration was discussed. This discussion was followed by an examination of three cases heard by the Nova Scotia Supreme Court relating to planning. It was shown that the courts while having the power to nullify administrative and legislative decisions can only do so in highly restricted circum stances, where some specific right can be proven to have been affected and a person or group brings an action against the administrator or 2 3 I b i d . 2 4 I b i d , p.p. 345-346 administrative body. The courts are therefore review bodies in only extraordinary circumstances, as evidenced by the relative paucity of appeals arising out of planning and related legislation to the Nova Scotia Supreme Court. CHAPTER IV NOVA SCOTIA - THE PROVINCE AND THE PLANNING SYSTEM This chapter contains most of the facts about the Province and its planning that are pertinent to the analysis of statutory provisions in regard to the planning instruments. Some additonal materials was obtained throug the responses to the questionnaire."*" The general population, and economic and governmental character istics of Nova Scotia are described, and the statutory processes regarding the planning instruments are also set out. This material is used in Chapter V in the formulation and test of the hypothesis. While the reason for describing statutory processes i s self- evident, the reason for setting out the other information is perhaps less clear, and thus needs explaining. First of a l l , this data enables the reader to have some understanding about the physical and social context of this theses; and secondly, the information, especially about the size of population and i ts rate of growth provides a basis (the replies to the questionnaire are another source) for the assumption that there is a relatively low volume of demands which are being directed to the planning system. THE PROVINCE Population and Economy2 The population of Nova Scotia is presently 756,0393 compared to •^See Appendix C for the replies to the questionnaire. 2 Appendix E contains the tables setting out the population and employment data for Nova Scotia. ^Dominion Bureau of Statistics, Census, 1966. 48 737,807 in 1961. The Halifax-Dartmouth metropolitan area contains 145,537 people, 19$ of the province's population. Due to the high proportion of rural non-farm inhabitants in Nova Scotia, the Province's population has tended to be less urbanized than the rest of Canada - 54$ urban as compared with the national averaged of 7 0 $ . The rural non-farm category comprised 30$ of the population in Nova Scotia, compared with 19$ i n Canada.^ The rate of growth, both economic and demographic has tended to be lower than the rest of the country due i n part to the very low immigration and the high rate of emigration, some 34,000 people leav ing the Province i n the 1951-1961 decade.^ Nova Scotia's population declined from an estimated 760,000 in 1964 to the present 756,039 (1966).6 The economic base of the Province is graphically illustrated by the distribution of employment amongst various industries, and distribution of employment within the service sector. The following tables show that the defence establishment plays a very important role in the Province's economy, directly employing some 10$ of the provincial labour force i n 1961. The secondary effects of the defence establishment can be felt in manufacturing, other services, and construction.''' Its impact is especially marked in the Halifax- Dartmouth area. %ova Scotia Voluntary Planning Board, "First Plan for Economic Development to 1968", (Halifax: Queen's Printer, February 1966), p. 24, - Citations from 1961 Census. ^Ibid. p. 24. °Ibid, Appendix I, Table F - l . "Population, Nova Scotia and Canada". Vlbid, p. 32. Government Nova Scotia is divided into 66 municipalities. There is no unincorporated area within the province. These municipalities are rural municipalities, cities, towns, and villages. Villages are not mentioned in the Town Planning Act, and so in this thesis the term "municipality" w i l l henceforth not include villages. A rural municipality is the municipal authority for that part of a county which has hot been incorporated as cities, towns, or villages. Thus, the county is distinct from the municipality of the county, and has no administrative or legal l i f e . The term "county" merely refers to a geographical subdivision of the province. The general powers of the Minister of Municipal Affairs to approve local by-laws, resolutions, ordinances, and regulations, where any Act so requires i t is described as follows: 1. Where by any Act or consent of the Minister of or to any resolution, regulation, ordinance, by-law borrowing or other act or matter is required then in his discretion: a) he may approve or consent to a l l or part - thereof; or b) i f he approves or consents to a part there- - of then from time to time he may approve or consent to other parts or to the remainder thereof; or c) he may attach any qualification, condition or stipulation subject to which his approval or consent becomes effective; or d) he may approve or consent subject to such . amendment as he may stipulate and may direct: l ) that the resolution, regulation, ordinances, by-law or other act or matter shall be effective as amended until the council which adopted i t otherwise determines; or 50 11; that the resolution, regulation, ordinance, - by-law, or other act, or matter shall not be effective until the council which adopted i t has adopted the amendment.** The Courts The courts merit a brief mention because they are an integral part of the polit ical process in Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia enjoys the same judicial system as the other provinces with the Supreme Court at the apex, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court County Courts, and Provincial Magistrate's Courts. Justices of the Supreme and County Courts are appointed by the Governor-General i n Council, while provincial magistrates are appointed by the Province. Depending upon the enabling statute, appeal may be held to the county court and thence the Supreme Court or appeal may be held directly to the Supreme Court. Damages and Enforcement Damages and enforcement merit a brief mention since Part II of the Act? which treats this matter contains the Act's only explicit reference to the courts, and this part grants council the general power to carry out the provisions of this Act. Section 22 enables the owner of a property which is injuriously affected by a project under an off ic ia l town plan to obtain compensa tion from council ( 22(l) ). If there is any question as to whether 8Province of Nova Scotia, Municipal Affairs Act. R.S.N.S. 1954  Chapter 186. Section 4 (Halifax: Queen's Printer). 9Province of Nova Scotia, Town Planning Act. R.S.N.S. 1954  Chapter 292. as amended by 1956 c. 43, 1964 c. 45, 1965 c. 51, 1966 c. 55, 1967 c. 73 (Halifax: Queen's Printer). or not a property has been injured or about the amount and manner of payment of compensation, the matter shall be determined by arbitration ( 22(2) ). Section 23 sets out the situation under which compensation i s not entitled. These situations occur where: 1. The injury occurs due to the passage of a zoning by-law under this Act ( 23(l) ); 2. Where the property is affected by provisions i n an off ic ia l town plan which "would have been enforceable without compensation i f they had been contained in a zoning by-law" ( 22(2) ); and 3 . Where the person is entitled to compensation under another act and this Act, he shall not be entitled to compensation under both ( 22(3) ). Section 24 sets out the enforcement of the Act, enabling the clerk when authorized by council or a standing committee thereof to bring proceedings in the Supreme or County Court to obtain any or a l l of the remedies provided by law and set out in this section ( 24(1) ). 24 (2) The Court or a judge thereof may hear and determine the same at any time, in Court or in chambers, and in addition to any other remedy or relief may a) make orders restraining the continuance or repetition of any such contravention or failure or the new or further contravention or failure in respect of the same property; b) make orders directing the removal or destruction of any building or structures or part thereof which is in contravention of or fails to comply with this Act, or an off ic ia l town plan, by-law or regulation made under this Act, and authorizing the council or a standing committee thereof or an o f f i c i a l of the municipality, i f such order i s not complied with, to enter upon the land and premises with necessary workmen and equipment and to remove and destroy the b u i l d i n g or structure or part thereof at the expense o f the owner; and c) make such f u r t h e r order as to the recovery of the - expense o f any such removal and destruction, and f o r the enforcement o f t h i s Act, or o f f i c i a l town plan, by-law or r e g u l a t i o n , and as to costs, as the Court or judge deems proper; and any such order may be i n t e r l o c u t o r y , i n t e r i m or f i n a l . Section 25 permits any duly authorized o f f i c e r or servant o f c o u n c i l to enter any property and conduct such i n v e s t i g a t i o n s as are necessary to the purpose of the Act. F i n a l l y , Section 26 enables c o u n c i l to exercise any powers granted under t h i s Act and other acts to carry out the purpose o f t h i s Act. P r o v i n c i a l and l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s l i e w i t h i n the same p o l i t i c a l system. In a matter such as planning where the approval o f the M i n i s t e r o f Municipal A f f a i r s i s required f o r c e r t a i n types o f a c t i v i t i e s , the two classes of a u t h o r i t i e s can be thought of as l y i n g w i t h i n the same, a l b e i t l o o s e l y structured organization. CONTENT OF THE OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN, ZONING BY-LAW, AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS The o f f i c i a l town plan, the zoning by-law, and s u b d i v i s i o n regulations are administrative devices or instruments which are designed t o accomplish c e r t a i n ends which can be l o o s e l y grouped under the heading of "community planning". 53 The o f f i c i a l town plan as i t i s described below i n the Act i s a very flexible instrument that can be interpreted as either a single document containing a l l the necessary material or a series of documents within a common fuame of reference. l . ( l ) Subject to the approval of the Minister any council shall have power: (a) to prepare a plan or plans for development, either as-to the whole or any part or parts thereof, with details of development either endorsed upon the plan or contained i n schedules referring to any such plan, which plan or plans and details of development shall be known as "The O f f i c i a l Town Plan"; (b) from time to time make additions to and alterations in-the o f f i c i a l town plan; (c) to prepare co-ordinating plans for the development of harbour, railway and rapid transit and street railway and airport f a c i l i t i e s , and to recommend plans so pre pared to any railway board or public authority having jurisdiction i n the matter, and to any railway or other company concerned therewith, and to use a l l lawful measures to secure the adoption such plans and the due cooperation of terminal, transportation, and other f a c i l i t i e s of commerce and t r a f f i c within and about the municipality; (d) to make provision for any street widening project by defining the minimum distance from the centre or side l i n e of existing or projected streets at which buildings or other structures may be erected, placed, constructed or reconstructed; (e) to make provision for the reservation of land for projected streets or street widening projects, and for parks and other public purposes; (f) to make provision for the supply of l i g h t , water, sewerage, street transit, and other f a c i l i t i e s to the various parts of the area included i n an o f f i c i a l town plan; (g) to prescribe the order i n which any part or parts of the development provided for i n the o f f i c i a l town plan w i l l be carried out and the order i n which any designated parts of the area included i n the o f f i c i a l town plan w i l l be supplied with l i g h t , water, sewerage, street transit and other f a c i l i t i e s . 54 (h) t o make pr o v i s i o n f o r the method of financing any works and expenses t o be incurred i n connection with or i n c i d e n t a l to the carrying out of the development prescribed i n the o f f i c i a l town plan or any part of parts of such develoment. (2) In a mu n i c i p a l i t y where there i s a board, a c o u n c i l , before adopting, amending, repealing an o f f i c i a l town or exer c i s i n g any o f the powers r e f e r r e d to i n subsection ( l ) shall request the board f o r a report thereon unless a report.has been sub mitted by the board to the c o u n c i l within s i x months p r i o r thereto. I t i s noteworthy that i n t h i s general grant of powers to coun c i l to plan f o r the community there i s uncertainty as to whether planning f o r s t r e e t s , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s , parks and other public f a c i l i t i e s can be conducted without the p r i o r existence of an o f f i c i a l town plan, since i n the section 4 ( l ) dealing with these matters the o f f i c i a l town plan i s not mentioned. As Mr. J.B. Milner notes: The Nova S c o t i a Act ... separately authorizes the co u n c i l to prepare a plan f o r development to be known as "The O f f i c i a l Town Plan" and to prepare co-ordinating plans f o r harbour, railway, r a p i d t r a n s i t , s t r e e t railway and a i r p o r t f a c i l i t i e s , as w e l l as s t i l l other plans, or other provisions, f o r street widening and projected s t r e e t s . " Once an o f f i c i a l town plan has been adopted c o u n c i l may not undertake any pu b l i c improvements inconsistent or at variance with the plan.^- Whether ot not such a r e s t r i c t i o n applies equally t o by-laws i s uncertain. The Planning Act- 1 - 2 of Ontario i s quite e x p l i c i t i n t h i s regard s t a t i n g that except under c e r t a i n defined «J.B. Milner, "Trends i n Planning Law i n Canada", Nova S c o t i a  Community Planning Conference. 1966. • -^Town Planning Act. Section 5. 1 2 P r o v i n c e of Ontario, The Planning Act. R.S.O. I960. Chapter 296. (Toronto: Queen's P r i n t e r , O f f i c e Consolidation, 19677. 55 circumstances no by-law shall be passed that is not in conformance with*the off ic ia l p l a n . 1 3 The zoning by-law is described as follows under the Town Planning Act: 12 Subject to the approval of the Minister, the council may, by by-law, to be known as a zoning by-law, make regulations for any or a l l of the following purposes: a) dividing the municipality or any portions thereof into districts, which may be described by detailed description or by the use of plans or partly by one method and partly by the other; b) designating certain districts within which i t shall be lawful to erect, construct, alter, reconstruct, repair or maintain certain types of buildings, or to carry on certain business, trades or callings; c) designating certain districts within which i t shall be lawful to erect, construct, alter, reconstruct, repair or maintain certain types of buildings, or to carry on certain businesses, trades or callings; d) designating the height, ground area, and bulk of buildings thereafter erected, constructed, altered, reconstructed or repaired; e) prescribing building lines and the depth, size or area of yards, courts and other open spaces to be maintained, and the maximum density of population permissable within any district , the minimum size of rooms and the means of lighting and ventilating the same; f) prescribing as to any district the class of use of buildings or land shall be excluded or subjected to special regulations and designating the uses for which buildings may not be erected, constructed, altered, reconstructed, or repaired, or land used, or designating the class of use which only shall be permitted; g) controlling the architectural design, character and appearance of any or a l l buildings proposed to be erected in any district , or fronting upon any street or part of a street, and prohibiting the erection of 1 3 I b i d . Section 15 ( l ) . 56 any building i n contravention of such regulation; h) prohibiting the erection of any building i n any d i s t r i c t or part of a d i s t r i c t u n t i l provision has been made to the satisfaction of the council for the supply to such building of l i g h t , water, sewerage, street transit and other f a c i l i t i e s or any of them which the council may deem necessary; i ) regulating the erection and repair of buildings, preventing the erection of wooden fences i n specified areas, prohibiting the erection or placing of buildings, other than with main walls of stone, brick or concrete and roofing of incombustible material, within defined areas, and regulating the construction and dimension of chimneys. The content of the zoning by-law as i t has just been cited pre prescribes the uses that are permissible, where these uses are to be situated, and the conditions to be attached to the situation of uses. Subdivision regulations must include general provisions treating: ( i ) areas to be reserved for public purposes; ( i i ) width, location and gradients of streets; ( i i i ) access to existing streets or highways; (iv) zoning provisions and building lines; (v) size and shape of black and l o t s . - ^ PLANNING SYSTEM Authorities The authorities constituted by the Town Planning Act are now described. Authorities i n systems terms are those persons or agencies located i n the p o l i t i c a l system which make binding decisions. •^^ Town Planning Act, Section 27 ( l ) . Also, see Province of Nova Scotia (Community Planning Division, Department of Municipal Affairs) "A Model Form of Subdivision Regulations for Towns i n Nova Scotia" (Halifax: N.S.: February 1964) — included i n Appendix B of this thesis. 1. The Minister of Municipal Affairs is empowered to approve the of f i c ia l town plan, and the zoning by-law and any amendments there to, and to prescribe subdivision regulations, and where necessary, assume the powers of council under the Act when i t has failed to carry out i ts duties. He is also given the power to hire such staff and assistance as may be required. 2. The Supreme and County Courts, as has been noted, are specifically granted the power to enforce the provisions of the Act and implicitly have certain review powers i n questions of law and jurisdiction. 3. A planning board, composed of up to seven persons including the mayor or warden (ex officio) and at least three members of council, may be estbalished by council with the following powers and duties ( 3 (l) ): a) to prepare an off ic ia l town plan and any variations thereof; d) to prepare a zoning by-law and any amendments thereto; c) to act in an advisory capacity in the carrying into effect of an off ic ia l town plan and in the administration of a zoning by-law; d) to act in an advisory capacity in a l l matters per taining to town planning with the general object of serving: 1) economic use, 2) proper sanitary conditions, 3) amenity and 4) conveniences, including suitable provisions for t raffic , in connection with the laying out of streets and the use of land, and of any neigh boring lands for building or other purposes. Also, the board may exercise certain powers of council with regard to subdivisions ( 27(4) )• 4. Council, which is given the power to carry out the Act in a manner to be discussed later. 5. Servants and officers of council, who may carry out certain administrative duties. Aside from any other consideration of a descriptive sort, there is a procedural relevance to setting out the authorities. They are the focal points toward whom the appeals are directed, and, as a corollary, are competent to carry out review. While there are procedural similarities between the off ic ia l town plan and the zoning by-law, subdivision regulations are sui generis. . Conmiunity Planning Instruments Official Town Plan The procedures are the same for enactment, amendment, and repeal of of f i c ia l town plan. However, as a f irst step, council must have the approval of the Minister before proceeding with the preparation of an o f f i c i a l town plan (S. 4(l) ). Where a planning board exists, i t may be entrusted with the preparation of the plan (S. 3(l>d) ). The steps are: 1. Official town plan is prepared by either council or the planning board. 2. Where there is a board, council submits the plan to the board for a report (s. 4(2) ). 59 3 . A notice i s published about the plan. (s. 6 ( 1 , 2 ) ) . 4 . Council considers and determines a l l written objection thereto (s. 6 ( 3 ) )• 5 . Council makes a decision, and i f i t decides to proceed within the adoption, amendment, or revocation of the plan sends copy of same to the Minister for approval (s. 7 ) . 6 . Minister approves " 5 " . 7 . A notice i s published and the plan i s f i l e d with the county registrar of deeds (s. 9 ( 1 , 2 ) ) . The Act i s silent on means of appealing an act of Council or one of i t s offices under the o f f i c i a l town plan save where a person can establish that his property has been injuriously affected and that he i s entitled to compensation (S. 2 2(l) ). The appellant's only recourse i s " p o l i t i c a l " , i.e. that he can convince the Minister or a sufficient number of councellors of his case, or "legal" appeal on some point of law. Zoning By-law The preparation of a zoning by-law requires the prior approval of the Minister (S. 1 2 ) . Procedures vary for the enactment, amendment and repeal, and variation of the zoning by-law. Adoption, amendment or repeal i s not effective u n t i l approved by the Minister (S. 1 4 ) . 60 1. Adoption a) Zoning by-law is prepared. b) Council publishes a notice of i ts intention to pass the zoning by-law in the area affected (S. 13(l) ). c) Council considers and determines a l l written objections thereto (S. 13(a) ). d) Council decides to adopt the plan and submits same to Minister for approval (S. 14), which includes, among other things, the report of the planning board. 2. Amendment and Repeal Amendment and repeal can be initiated by a person who makes an application to council therefor (S. 16(1) ). If there is a board, the request must be referred to the board for consideration and report (S. l6(l) ). Presumably council can initiate an amendment or repeal. a) Person applies to council for an amendment or repeal, or conversely, council decides to secure same. b) Application is referred to Board for consideration and report. c) If council decides that i t is necessary to amend or repeal the by-law, a notice is published of a hearing (S. 16 (2) ). d) Hearing is held, "and a l l persons whose property would be affected by such amendment or repeal may appear in person or by attorney or by petition" (S. 16(3) ), following which council may make i ts decision. e) Council confirms, amends, or repeals the by-law (S. 16(3) ). f) However, two-thirds majority of a l l members of council w i l l be required i f "a protest against the proposed amendment or repeal is presented i n writing to the council no less than two days prior to the hearing, duly signed by the assessed owners of at least twenty percent of the properties affected by the proposed amendment repeal" (S. 16(e) ). g) The Minister approves the changes (S. 14). 3. Variation Section 20 (l) provides: "Appeal shall l i e to the council in the following cases: a) by any person who is dissatisfied with the decision of any off ic ia l charged with the enforcement of a zoning by-law; b) by any person desiring to obtain the benefit of any exception in a zoning by-law; c) by any person claiming that owing to special conditions the l i te ra l enforcement of a zoning by-law would result in unnecessary harship; d) in any other cases where provision for appeal is made by a zoning by-law. 2. No appeal shall be from the decision of the council." Subdivisions The procedure for the prescription of subdivision regulations and the approval of subdivisions in contrast with the procedures for the o f f i c i a l town plan and the zoning by-law reflect different notions about the nature of the two classes of land use controls, inasmuch that subdivision; regulations on the surface at least, do not affect existing rights in property to the same degree as the 62 other controls. Thus, except i n a special class of circumstances there i s no provision for hearings and the other procedural devices for f a i r play. Subdivision regulations are prescribed by the Minister (s. 2 7(l) ). The Minister i s not involved i n the approval of subdivision plans. The Act sets out the following steps for the approval of sub division plans: 1 . The developer submits tentative plans to council, or the board, as the case may be. 2 . Within four weeks of the submission of the tentative plan and other such material as the council or board deems necessary, council or the board must notify the applicant i n writing of the i objectionable features of the plan (s. 2 7 ( 3 ) ) . 3 . Although the Act does not specify i t , the applicant then submits a copy of the f i n a l subdivision plan (s. 2 7(l,c) ) to council or the board for approval.^ The process of submission of plans and modifications of the tentative and f i n a l plan can continue u n t i l a satisfactory set of plans i s submitted to council. 4 . Council or board approves the f i n a l plans, certified by the appropriate officers, and i t i s f i l e d with the registrar of deeds (s. 2 7 ( 2 ) ) . Special Circumstances—Subdivisions The special circumstances occur when a rural municipality attempts to approve a subdivision i n an area lying within three miles of a city or two miles of a town (s. 27(S) ). •^Nova Scotia, Community Planning Division, Department of Municipal Affairs, "A Model Form of Subdivision Regulations for Towns i n Nova Scotia", Halifax, 1964 . See Appendix B. 63 If the rural municipality does not have a board, the subdivision may be approved i f the board of the city or town affected grants i ts approval. If a rural municipality with a board approves a subdivision within three miles of a city or two miles of a town, the subdivision may be registered i f the board forwards a true copy of the subdivision plan to the affected cities and towns, in which case within thirty days after the receipt of the plan the city or town may appeal the rural jmonicipality1s approval to the Minister and notify the board of the rural municipality of i ts appeal. Section 27 "(6) The Minister may fix a time and place for the hearing of parties to such appeal and notice of the time and place of hearing the appeal shall be served by the appellant upon the municipal clerk. (7) The giving of such notice of appeal shall stay any action in respect of the further development or sale of the subdivision in question and every part thereof untiLl the decision of the Minister has been made and communicated to the municipality and the city or town concerned. (8) The Minister may upon such appeal adopt, amend, alter, vary or revoke the plan of subdivision so appealed from and the decision of the Minister shall be f i n a l . " SYSTEMS VARIABLES It is possible to translate the structures and procedures involved with the three planning instruments into systems terms and to group them under systems variables as mentioned in Chapter II. The systems variables are grouped under "structures" and "instruments". STRUCTURES Author i t i es The a u t h o r i t i e s are the M i n i s t e r , c o u n c i l , the planning board, and the courts . The M i n i s t e r i s ass is ted by the Community Planning D i v i s i o n . The planning board plays an advisory r o l e i n that i t may prepare the o f f i c i a l town plan and zoning by-law, and make recommend ations about these instruments. Also the report of the planning board i s required i n law (Town Planning Act) when the enactment or changes thereto are proposedcconcerning the o f f i c i a l town plan and the zoning by-law, and t h i s report has to be included by counc i l i n i t s submission to the M i n i s t e r f o r approval . In a d d i t i o n , the planning board may exercise the power of approval over subdivis ion plans without the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of any outside body. The courts are author i t i e s i n the s p e c i a l i z e d instances mentioned e a r l i e r . Together, these author i t i e s make author i ta t ive decisions about the use of l a n d . Responding Agents The responding agents are s i m i l a r to the author i t ies but exclud i n g the courts , and adding the municipal o f f i c e r s and servants who implement the decisions of the author i t ies such as the b u i l d i n g inspector . Receptor Receptors are the author i t i e s exclduing the courts . Gatekeepers Gatekeepers are l i k e w i s e the author i t i es who receive raw demands, 16 f o r example " p r i v a t e appeals" to the M i n i s t e r and convert these i n t o •^See Appendix D. outputs. Some authorities, for example: council mediates raw demands for re-zoning by raising a by-law which then i s sent to the Minister for approval. A raw demand for rezoning may be sent directly to the Minister, who may, under the Act, order council to pass same. There i s good reason to suspect that consideration of every private demand for rezoning by the Minister would lead to a demand input overload. Council as a gatekeeper serves to both reduce the number of rezoning requests that are presented to the Minister and to present these requests i n such a form that they can be disposed of with less time than "raw" demands by the Minister. This does not necessarily imply that the overall time required to process a rezoning application might not be less i f the procedures were changed to enable the Minister to handle raw demands for rezoning. The Act does not mention a l l of the gatekeepers because, as i t i s demonstrated i n Almonds1 l i s t of attributes of the p o l i t i c a l system, interest articulation and aggregation may be performed by various individuals and groups. The newspaper may articulate and aggregate (by selecting) demands which are floating around the conraunity. Ratepayers1 groups may summarize a diversity of demands about land use controls and present them as a single demand to the authorities, and the same may be said for the lobbyist who has special access to council or the Minister. Aggregation and articulation may be performed by members of the p o l i t i c a l system such as c i v i l servants and other administrative agencies. A distinction can therefore be made between gatekeepers who are expli c i t l y mentioned by the Act - the Authorities, and those gatekeepers not mentioned by the Act. Given the data base of the thesis, the latter class of gatekeepers can only be dealt with by conjecture. Channels Channels are the paths that messages follow. The Act creates a network of authorities which assigns direction to the channels, but only specifies one channel, the public hearing - a specialized device by which the community i s able to transmit i t s opinions to the authorities. The public hearing i s likewise a part of the feedback loop i n that i t i s one means of transmitting feedback to the authorities. The operation of a channel can be visualized thus: a person applies for rezoning to council; council may refuse the rezoning as simultaneously a gatekeeper, receptor, and authority; the channel i s blocked; however, the person may reroute his application to the Minister.and thus create a new channel. However as noted before, this creation of a new channel to by-pass existing and commonly used channels may be very expensive and the outcome problematical. The planning system i s investigated by examining the possible procedures under the Act concerning the o f f i c i a l town plan, the zoning by-law, and subdivision regulations. INSTRUMENTS Of f i c i a l Town Plan The o f f i c i a l town plan imposes two sorts of constraints upon land use. One is that no public work shall be undertaken which is contrary to the plan, and the other, by implication is that no by-law shall be enacted contrary to the of f i c ia l town plan. Since the enactment of the plan alone cannot be shown to injure any private rights then appeal cannot l i e to the courts. However, provision is made for a hearing and those who are l ikely to be affected are allowed to present their opinions. This hearing is the only opportunity provided for in the Act for "appeal". The matter is complicated i f one of the provisions of the off ic ia l town plan includes a proposal for zoning in which case the hearing could raise questions pertaining to property rights in a very specific sense as well as in the more general sense. By the time a hearing i s held a report from the planning board has been obtained. Council considers the report of the planning board and the submissions in the hearing, and i f i t decides to go ahead with the enactment of the off ic ia l town plan, sends i ts by-law to the Minister for approval. Zoning By-law The zoning by-law in contrast to the of f i c ia l town plan affects specific rights by assigning benefits and l iabi l i t ies to definable parties, and, the Act provides for variance of a zoning by-law. Since interests are created under a zoning by-law that may be represented in an action before the courts, an additional avenue of appeal is created - to the courts. The courts are empowered to review a decision of the authority on questions of law, and jurisdiction. Furthermore 68 councils' power to grant variances under the Act creates a class of situations under which appeal may be held and council may review the application of the by-law in specific instances. The specificity of the zoning by-law is further recognized in the Act which explicitly states that a person may apply to the clerk of the municipality for the amendment or repeal of a zoning by-law who shall immediately refer this to the planning board for a report thereon which i s then submitted to council. Otherwise, the procedures are similar in both cases of the zoning by-law and the of f i c ia l town plan with respect to enactment, amendment and repeal. However, the unique procedural aspects of the zoning by-law judicial review, and provisions for variance should be examined. Judicial review on questions of law and jurisdiction occurs where a clearly defined party's rights have been injured or are l ikely to be injured by a zoning by-law. A substantive question, injury, creates an opportunity for the review of the legality of the existing or proposed action. Assuming that injury can be proven and thus sufficient locus standi created, satisfaction w i l l be achieved by the applicant only i f he can show that the action taken or about to be taken was i l l e g a l . If the action was legal, the applicant's only recourse is to council or the Minister on policy grounds. Appeal from a decision of an off ic ia l in the course of the administration of the by-law (application for a variance) may be held to council, " . . . but nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the council to waive any requirement of the by-law or to contravene any such requirement." (Section 20). This procedure is economical and clearly set out so that there is no danger that an appeal wi l l be taken to anybody other than council. Subdivision Regulations The procedures for the enactment of subdivision regulations do not provide for representations by the public. Except under special circumstances where a rural municipality wishes to approve a sub division within two miles of a city of three miles of a town, there is no provision for appeals, public hearings, or Ministerial approval when a subdivision plan is to be approved. The planning board under normal circumstances is the sole approving authority. CONCLUSION The population of Nova Scotia declined between 1964 and 1966. Only 54$ of the Province's population lives in urban centres, and 38$ of i ts population is classed as rural non-farm. The organization for planning is relatively simple. Essentially, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, council, and the planning board are the only planning authorities. The Minister must approve the enactment, amendment and repeal of the of f i c ia l town plan, and zoning by-law. The Minister prescribes subdivision regulations, but the approval of subdivision plans resides with the planning board, or council where there is no planning board. Only council may decide upon zoning variances and there is no statutory appeal from a decision of council. Public hearings occur precedent to the enactment, amend ment, and repeal of the of f i c ia l town plan and zoning by-law. In sum, i t can be concluded that the adrninistrative structure and procedures of planning in Nova Scotia reflect the low demands that are being placed upon the planning system. 71 CHAPTER V THE HYPOTHESIS AND TEST OF HYPOTHESIS The main purpose of this chapter is to set up the hypothesis and to test i t . However, before the hypothesis can be treated i t is necessary to discuss and analyze the input variables and output variables of the planning system. Perhaps the prtions of this chapter treating input and output variables could have been more logically included in Chapter II; however, Chapters III and IV contained information necessary to the analysis of these variables. Also, input and output variables are closely connected with the formulation and test of the hypothesis. QUESTIONNAIRE The questionnaire is set out in i ts entirety below. The individual replies are set out in Appendix C. This questionnaire is divided into four parts: Part I, General (Questions 1-12); Part II, Objections (Questions 13 and 14); Part III, Appeal - Zoning and Official Town Plan (Questions 15-24); and Part IV, Appeal - Subdivision (Questions 25-28). There is also Question 29 which requests the respondent to submit any suggestions he might have for improving the questionnaire. The maximum number of replies to any question is eight. 72 QUESTIONS 1966 ~ Name: Municipal Unit: Population Chairman, Town Planning Board City, Town or Municipal Clerk Other PART 1: GENERAL 1. Do you have subdivision regulations? Yes No 2 . Do you enforce the subdivision regulations? Yes No Comments, i f any: 3. Do you have a zoning by-law? Yes No 4. I f the answer to (3) was yes, do you enforce this zoning by-law? Yes No Comments, i f any: 5. Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the Minister and registered with the county registrar of deeds? Yes No 6. I f the answer to (5) was yes, i s this Town Plan, i n your opinion, an effective documents? Yes No 73 7. Do you have an active Town Planning Board? Yes No 8. Does the Town Planning Board meet regularly? Yes No 9. Does the Town Planning Board carry out the f u l l range of duties prescribed under the Town Planning Act? Yes No 10. Has your municipal unit adopted a building by-law? Yes No 11. Do you have a building inspector or committee? Yes No 12. If the answer to ( l l ) was yes, has the council or building inspector or committee assumed the Planning Board's responsibilities for the issuing of building permits? Yes No Comments: PART II: OBJECTIONS 13. Where your Council is considering written objections to an Official Town Plan or Zoning By-law, does this take the form of an open hearing in which interested parties may make oral as well as written presentations? Please explain the manner in which your Council treats objections to the Official Town Plan or Zoning By-law. 74 14. Do you feel that adequate scope i s given to persons objecting to an o f f i c i a l town plan or zoning by-law? Yes No Comments, i f any PART I I I : APPEAL - ZONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN FLAN Section 20 of the Town Planning Act, as amended i n 1965, provides: "When a person i s dissatisfied with the decision of an o f f i c i a l i n the course of his administration of this Act or of a by-law made under this Act, he may appeal from this decision to the council by giving notices i n writing of such appeal to the clerk not later than fifteen days after the decision has been communicated to him. The council may, after hearing the appellant and the O f f i c i a l and any other person, affirm, vary or rescind the decision of the o f f i c i a l but nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the council to waive any requirement of the by-law or to permit any person to contrvene any such requirement". 15. Is there any tendency for persons seeking a change or seeking to prevent a change, to petition the Minister, either before or after Council has decided on the matter? Yes No Please comment: 16. Do you feel that a person dissatisfied with the decision of Council with regard to a zoning by-law or o f f i c i a l town plan, should be permitted to petition the Minister? Yes No Please state why: 17. How many appeals were heard by your Council under Section 20 of the Town Planning Act during the period January 1, 1965 to December 31, 1967? 75 18. How many of these appeals went from your Council to: The Minister of Municipal Affairs The County Clerk The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia 19. If possible, briefly l i s t the typical reasons why applicants appealed: From the decision of your Council To the Minister To the Courts 20. In your opinion, is this provision (Section 20) of the Town Planning Act used frequently? Yes No Please comment why: People don't understand their rights Procedure i s too cumbersome Community is small Appeal cost (legal fees) too high Other (please specify) 21. In your opinion, should the Town Planning Act relating to zoning provide for exceptions (with the exact conditions iuider which minor exceptions may be granted set out in the by-law or Act) or variances (a method of safeguarding the individual lot owner against the invasion of his fundamental right of private property which would result from adherence to the strict letter of the zoning by-law)? 76 Yes No Please comment 22. If the answer to (21) was yes, how would you like to see exceptions or variances provided for? 23. Do you feel the grounds for appeal under Section 20 should be changed? Yes No If "Yes", what changes? 24. Which of the following forms of appeal would your prefer? Please comment. Apeal to Planning Board Appeal to separate local body Appeal to regional body Appeal to Provincial body Other (Please specify) PART IV: APPEAL - SUBDIVISION 25. Do you feel there should be some form of appeal (other than to the Minister or the Courts) to the decisions of the Town Planning Board on subdivision matters? Yes No If "Yes", what form of appeal? '  26. During the period January 1965 to December 1967, how many appeals have there been from decisions of your Planning Board or Council to The Minister The Courts 27. If possible, briefly l i s t the typical grounds for appeal: 28. State any other opinions you may have regarding appeal and objections. List any suggestions you have for improving or adding to this questionnaire. 79 INPUT VARIABLES The input variables used i n this thesis are of two general types: those pertaining to the volume, type, and distribution of demands; and those that can be defined as the general rules of the system. The f i r s t group of input variables can be further broken down into direct and indirect input variables. The direct input variables are so deemed because the replies to the questionnaire provide some indication of the number of appeals, the types of appeals, and the destinations of these appeals. The indirect input variables are those about the Province which are set out i n Chapter IV, namely, population, population distribution, economic base, and rate of population growth. They are termed "indirect , , because they provide general indicators about the total volume of demands which are directed to the planning system. Any analysis of the demand-capacity relationship must consider a l l demands. The rules of the system can be entered either at the input side or the output side insofar they represent goals the achievement of which can be measured. However, the rules of the system are not specific to the planning system and can be broadly thought of as constraints or parameters which affect the functioning of the system. These rules are assumed. They are derived from certain notions i n the systems theory and from the assumption that human beings tend to favour the existing state of affairs. 80 The basic goal of the polit ical system and the planning subsystem is assumed to be maintenance and development at progressive levels of homeostasis. Change is acceptable to the authorities and the environ ment only i f the goals of survival, certain values such as democracy and fairplay, and long-standing structural characteristics such as the legislature, cabinet, departmental organization are retained. Indirect Inout Variables It was shown i n Chapter IV that the Province has very few large urban centres, a small population ( 7 5 6 , 0 3 9 ) , and a low rate of population growth. As a consequence i t was assumed that the total number of demands directed to the planning system were l ikely to be very low. This assumption conceals the possibility that a low general rate of population growth may include significant population shifts within the Province, or a marked deficit in services which would generate a large number of planning issues, and as a consequence, a large volume of demands. It has to therefore be further assumed that the low rate of growth does not conceal large population shifts and deficits in services. Therefore, on the basis of certain assumptions about population growth, level of services, and their relationship to demands, the indirect input variables lead to the assumption that a low number of demands are directed to the planning system. D i r e c t Input Variables The pertinent d i r e c t input i n d i c a t o r s are ascertained from the r e p l i e s t o questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 15, 17, 18, 20, and 26 of the questionnaire. TABLE 2 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, ZONING BY-LAW, OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN (QUESTIONS 1 - 6 ) NUMBER OF COMMUNITIES .WITH ENFORCING Subdivision Regulations 6 6 Zoning By-law 8 8 O f f i c i a l Town Plan 3 2 Three respondents i n r e p l y to question 15 i n d i c a t e d "no", and three i n d i c a t e d "yes", that there i s a tendency t o p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r . Two r e p l i e s were ambiguous. The number o f appeals heard by co u n c i l i n the two year period beginning January 1 , 1965 and ending December 3 1 , 1967 (Question 1 ? ) was j>.. Only two communities i n d i c a t e d that appeals had occurred to c o u n c i l . Following Question 1 7 , Question 18 in d i c a t e s the d e s t i n a t i o n of the appeals a f t e r they had been heard by c o u n c i l . Only one appeal went beyond c o u n c i l . This appeal was dir e c t e d to the M i n i s t e r of 82 Municipal Affairs. This appeal to the Minister of Municipal Affairs occurred, i n a community where council had not heard any appeals, which suggests either that the questionnaire was badly worded, the respondent misunderstood the question, or the appellent had by-passed council. Following was answered i n the replies to Question 17. Question 26 which asked how many appeals went from the planning board on subdivision matters to the Minister established that five communities had not experienced appeals from the planning board. Three communities indicated that appeals in the two year period had been made to the Minister, one of the respondents noting that "quite a few" appeals had been made to the Minister. It does not appear from the questionnaire, even i f the results were to be extrapolated to include a l l of the Province's planning units, that there is a significant volume of appeals reaching the Minister or council. The respondents included the major planning authorities of the Province. OUTPUT VARIABLES The definition of output variables wil l yield the criteria for the analysis of statutory procedures, and, as a consequence, generates a portion of the hypothesis. According to the definition of output variables the formulation of output variables requires f i rs t of a l l the formulation of goals which wi l l be the criteria in the hypothesis, and secondly the formu lation of appropriate variables grouped by goals where measure would reflect the performance of the planning system's appeal and review function. The goals of the planning system are derived from the main requirements of a system and from certain norms about procedures. These goals are arbitrary insofar they reflect the authors opinion of what constitute significant community norms about procedures and what constitute the goals of a system. Certainly a great deal more work could be done in setting out relevant goal forms which are more logically satisfying. Some of the goals set for them wil l be mutually enhancing, others w i l l have l i t t l e or no relationship with the other goals, and s t i l l others w i l l derogate from the accomplishment of the other goals. For example, the achievement of justice and efficiency may be impossible without one or the other being-weakened, however justice and systems maintenance may be mutually enhancing. Some of the goals and specific variables are similar to the input variables, reflecting the interrelationships between the system, and i ts environments. The goals and their derivation are set out with a general discussion of the variables. The primary goal is systems maintenance which, is simply the avoidance of stress-producing demands("demand input overload"). Since demands can produce stress both through volume and content character-i s t i c s , the appropriate outputs are those which satisfy the environment. The appropriate systems internal adaptations are to develop a rough correspondence between channel capacity and demands. The crucial output variables for systems maintenance i s the volume, type, and destination of demands. This output variable has already been subsumed under direct input variables. This i s one of the c r i t e r i a of the hypothesis. The next goal i s community planning. Community planning i s measured by the number of cuimiiunities which have carried out the provisions of the Town Planning Act with respect to the establishment of a planning board, meetings of the planning board, and the enactment and enforcement of the planning instruments. There are four other goals loosely termed "procedural values". Procedural Values Beyond the stated purposes of an instrument there are other objectives which must be sustained i n the operation of any instrument i f these instruments are to be effective and to l i e within and sustain the democratic form of government as i t i s now practised i n Canada. The procedural values are treated as axiomatic, that i s , self-justifying, and so are not analysed. The values are described below. 1. Openness Openness can be almost a synonym for accessibility, implying that the inhabitants of a given political-administrative jurisdiction are given the opportunity to influence i n large the policies and goals that characterise the jurisdiction, are given the opportunity to be hear on any relevant matter affecting them, and are given the opportunity to discover the reasons for any decision. The three characteristics of openness are discrete, but mutally interdependent. Some of the requirements of openness are analogous to those of "justice". 2. Efficiency Efficiency refers to the relationship of inputs (time, money, s k i l l s , energies) to outputs. Outputs i n the governmental sense when the subject matter i s regulations unlike hard goods such as dams, roads, and parks are defined subjectively — for the time being at least. Other things being equal, efficiency i s enhanced through simplicity of procedures and governmental organization. To put i t i n a form relevant to this thesis, the fewer the approving or reviewing authorities the more efficient i s the planning process because less time and effort i s consumed i n securing approval. There fore simplicity i s one way to secure efficiency. 3. Effectiveness An instrument must be able to accomplish i t s explicit purposes. A zoning by-law which f a i l s to control the distributon of land use, or an o f f i c i a l town plan which does not guide development may be deemed ineffectual. It may be inefficient i n relation to other means of accomplishing the same ends, but this may not affect i t s 86 effectiveness. One measure of effectiveness i s whether or not the instrument i s enforced. 4. Justice Justice i s a notion that l i e s at the back of our minds whenever we evaluate some action by an administrator or any other person who makes allocative types of decisions. Various attempts have been made to define the quality of justice i n reference to natural law and natural justice concepts but the natural law doctrines are of a metaphysical order and are ambiguously spelled out, as are rules of natural justice. Notwithstanding the logical untidiness of the natural law doctrine some definition of natural law and natural justice i s essential i f appeal and review are to be treated because a good many of our arguments pro and con various procedures are1 i n the f i n a l analysis based upon some commonly accepted notions of what i s right and what i s wrong. As an absolute value, Lord Esher M. R. i n Voinet v. Barrett noted: "Natural justice — that i s ... the natural sense of what i s right and wrong".1 Natural justice i s also a procedural or instrumental value encompassing the notions of openness, fairness, and impartiality, to be realized through the two rules of "a) no man shall be judge i n his own cause, and b) both sides shall 2 be heard, or audi alteram partem." H^.H. Marshall, Natural Justice. (London: Sweet and Maxwell Limited, 1959) p. 6. . 2 I b i d . p. 5. 87 HYPOTHESIS The Hypothesis i s : The Town Flarming Act of Nova Scotia does not require amendment i f the statutory provisions for the enactment, amendment and repeal of the o f f i c i a l town plan, the enactment, amendment, variation, and repeal of the zoning by-law, the enactment of subdivision regulations, and the approval of subdivision plans pursuant to the subdivision regulations are to be satisfactory i n terms of: The test of the hypothesis requires not only a test of the hypothesis but also an examination of the v a l i d i t y of the test. The examination of the v a l i d i t y of the test has methodological significance, and, i f properly carried out, provides the impetus to further research. The examination of the va l i d i t y of the test devoles upon the question whether or not the test measures what i t should. Related questions are the issues or topics covered by the test. The test . i s composed of replies to a questionnaire, data from Chapter I I , and general materials related to the subject matter. The test has to establish whether or not the statutory proced ures regarding the o f f i c i a l town plan, zoning by-law, and subdivision 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Systems maintenance; Community planning; Openness; Efficiency; Effectiveness; Justice. TEST OF HYPOTHESIS 88 regulations can satisfy the requirements of systems maintenance, community planning, openness, efficiency, effectiveness, and justice. Systems Maintenance The test for systems maintenance was occureed mainly in the discussion of input variables. It was established that the system is not l ikely to suffer from demand input overload due to the relative paucity of demands, and the tendency for issues created by the demands to be resolved by council and by the planning board. Furthermore, the infrequency of appeals seems to indicate that the system's outputs tend to be satisfactory to the environment. Other replies in the questionnaire relating to hearings and appeals show that the number of appeals is not ar t i f ic ia l ly reduced through factors such as lack of knowledge of procedures and rights and lack of funds, or governmental (local and provincial) about appeals. Good Planning Good planning measures are to a degree similar to those used to evaluate the volume of demands, namely, replies to questions 1 - 6 . In addition, the use of the planning board and the questions about building by-laws (questions 7 - l l ) are tabulated below. 89 TABLE 3 REPLIES TO QUESTIONS 1 - 1 1 Question Number of Replies 1 Yes 6 No 2 6 3 8 4 8 5 3 5 6 1 6 7 7 1 8 6 2 9 3 5 10 8 11 8 The number of responses to questions 1, 2, and 6 does not tota l eight. Questions 1 and 2 do not apply to the City of Halifax because the City does not have subdivision regulations. The City of Halifax lacks sufficient open land to ju s t i f y subdivision regulations. Also, since the City of Halifax does not have nor enforce an o f f i c i a l Town Plan and subdivision regulations, the respondent claimed i n reply to question 9 that the planning board i s not carrying out i t s f u l l range of duties. The Town of Stellerton ,s respondent offered contra dictory replies to questions 1 and 2, stating that while the Town lacks subdivision regulations, i t enforces subdivision regulations, so that Stellarton fs replies to questions 1 and 2 had to be discarded. 90 The problems just noted suggest that more thought should have been applied to the preparation of the questionnaire. Given the paucity of responses no s t a t i s t i c a l tests can be applied. The results suggest that the goal of community planning i s not realized since while most of the replies indicate that the communities have and enforce subdivision regulations and zoning by-laws and have planning boards, relatively few have o f f i c i a l town plans or have effectively functioning planning boards. Notwithstanding the danger of extrapolating eight replies to cover a l l 66 municipalities, the significance of the eight planning units (noted i n Chapter IV) suggests that the goal of community planning i s not being realized i n the Province. [Openness It i s very d i f f i c u l t to measure openness objectively, and this task i s not accomplished here. The questionnaire and the replies to i t are a poor test, instead the test i s mainly derived from some general notions i n p o l i t i c a l science and public administration. There are ample opportunities to be heard set out i n the procedures for the various instruments. The main policy-making role i s assigned to council, an elected body while the Minister i n practice has solely review functions. The planning boardsT approval of subdivision plans i s the only jarring note, but the board does include some council-members who are responsible to the electorate. Public hearings are required prior to the enactment or amendment, of the o f f i c i a l town plan and zoning by-law. Furthermore, council acts as an appeal body for zoning variances. Thus i t would seem that on one respect the goal of openness i s achieved. In another respect, openness i s not so apparently achieved, since Ministerial review creates the hypothetical (hypothetical that i s , u n t i l evidence i s collected to prove or disprove the possibility that "behind-the-scenes" manoeuvering takes place) situation i n which a person dissatisfied with a decision of council can go behind council 1s back and attempt to influence the Minister. This possib i l i t y cannot be eliminated i f ministerial review i s to be retained as seems to be necessary. Replies to questions i n the questionnaire touching upon public hearings and appeals while d i f f i c u l t to interpret, do not seem to indicate much concern for openness. Perhaps different results might have been obtained i f members of the public and council instead of planning o f f i c i a l s had been questioned. In conclusion, the goal of openness i s realized under the Act. Efficiency Other things being equal efficiency i s enhanced through simplicity of procedures. The crucial questions are then those that touch upon the number of authorities involved i n any given class of decisions. The number of appeals also reflects upon the efficiency of governmental processes since an appeal may complicate the performances of a given task by involving authorities and necessitatevthe redoing of c e r t a i n tasks. The number o f appeals to c o u n c i l and other governmental a u t h o r i t i e s as already shown has been low. Also, there has been l i t t l e tendency to appeal from a d e c i s i o n of co u n c i l or planning board regarding the o f f i c i a l town plan, zoning by-lav;, or subdivision regulations. The procedures set out i n the Town Planning Act f o r the o f f i c i a l town plan, zoning by-law, and s u b d i v i s i o n regulations appear to be f a i r l y simple. Only three governmental a u t h o r i t i e s are formally involved, namely, the M i n i s t e r of Municipal A f f a i r s , c o u n c i l , and the planning board. The preceding remarks suggest that the statutory procedures i n regard to the o f f i c i a l town plan, zoning by-law and subdivision regulations s u s t a i n the goal of e f f i c i e n c y . E f f e c t i v e n e s s The t e s t f o r effectiveness l i e s i n the r e p l i e s to questions 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 15, 18, and 26. Questions 15, 18, and 26 concern the number and destinations o f appeals. The r e p l i e s to these questions on appeal show that the decisions of o f f i c i a l s , the planning board, and c o u n c i l are s u b s t a n t i a l l y acceptable to the community. More information could have been obtained i f a question had been i n s e r t e d about the outcomes of appeals, that i s , about the numbers of decisions that were reversed and sustained on appeal. The response to questions 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 were set out i n Table 5. These questions focus upon the enforcement and and implementation of the intentions of the Town Planning Act. The results indicate that while subdivision regulations and zoning by laws are effective planning controls, o f f i c i a l town plans are not effective guides to action. The planning board according to the replies to question 9 i s not an effective body. Question 8 about the regularity of planning board meetings i s not as significant as Question 9 as a test of effectiveness. The test for effectiveness i s inconclusive. Justice The two rules of natural justice, right to a f a i r hearing, and no man shall be judge i n his own case, are not effectively met i n the procedures set out i n the Town Planning Act since there i s no avenue of appeal to an independent tribunal from the decision of an o f f i c i a l . Furthermore, there i s no appeal from council i n the instance of variances to an outside, more impartial body. However, under section 20 of the Act, council i s required to hear the appellant. Some dissatisfaction with the existing manner of handling appeals was expressed i n the replies to the questionnaire. The seven respondents who commented on appeal structure (the respondent for Stellarton did not offer any opinions on this matter) a l l f e l t that appeals should be hear by some body other than council, either an independent appeal body, or the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Conclusion about the Hypothesis The test of the hypothesis indicates that the procedures regarding the off ic ia l town plan, zoning by-law, and subdivision regulations set out under the Town Planning Act are: 1. Satisfactory with regard to the goals of systems mainten ance, openness, and efficiency; and, 2. Fail to achieve good planning, and justice. The test yields inconclusive results for effectiveness and, so i t is not known whether or not the procedures sustain the goal of effectiveness. Given the conflicting results obtained from the test of the hypothesis, the hypothesis is not valid. However, methodological weaknesses in the preparation of the conceptual framework, the hypothesis, the questionnaire, and the paucity of replies suggest that a more appropriate verdict for the hypothesis is "not proven". 95 CHAPTER VI CONCLUSIONS This thesis had i ts origins i n the remarks made by Mr. R.S. Lang, Director of the Community Planning Division in Nova Scotia, about the lack of a planning appeal and review system in Nova Scotia and the deleterious consequences of this lack. It was quickly discovered that i f this thesis was going to deal with some of the issues posed by Mr. Lang, i t would have to deal with the realm of issues contained under the heading of statutory provisions for procedures i n the enactment, amendment, and repeal of the o f f i c i a l town plan, the enactment, amendment, variation, and repeal of the zoning by-law, the enactment of subdivision regulations, and the approval of subdivision plans under the Town Planning Act."*" A hypothesis had to be developed which would provide an effective test of the procedures contained i n the Act. And furthermore, an effective test of the hypothesis would have to be devised. In order to handle the questions raised by the procedures in a systematic fashion and to develop a meaningful hypothesis, a conceptual framework was created. This conceptual framework was based upon systems theory. The hypothesis was derived from the output variables of systems theory. 1Province of Nova Scotia, Town Planning Act. R.S.N.S. 1954. Chapter 292, as amended by 1955 c 43, 1964 c. 45, 1965, c. 51, 1966 c. 55, 1967 c. 73 (Halifax: Queen's Printer). Systems theory was selected for the conceptual framework since i n the author*s opinion i t i s the only method of analysis which is sufficiently comprehensive to include a l l the issues raised by the procedures and which provides a sufficiently sharp tool for analysis of the questions posed. Also, systems theory has potential for further development through the refinement of concepts and data collection. The usefulness of systems theory i s a function of the ability to establish measurable relationships between the input, systems, and output variables. These relationships were not established, one of the reasons being the inability to postulate or define sufficiently precise variables. Much of the potential of systems theory was not realized through this lack in the definition of variables. However, systems theory did provide a means of developing and organizing the concepts and facts about the procedures for the planning instruments and did provide the theoretical rationale for the hypothesis. The main verdict was "not proven". The hypothesis was tested by means of a questionnaire mailed to every planning authority in the Province, through economic and population data about the Province set out i n Chapter II, and general notions derived from the fields of polit ical science and public administration. The burden of the test of the hypothesis lay with the results obtained from the questionnaire. Unfortunately, only eight replies were received. However, the planning authorities that responded represented some of the most populous communities in the Province so that with some justification the results could be extrapolated for the whole Province. The nature of the replies and second thoughts about the questionn aire indicated serious shortcomings i n the form of the questionnaire. More fruitful results would have been obtained i f some questions had been asked about the professional planning staff available to the various planning authorities, i f the term "active planning board" had been defined through itemization of the attributes of an "active planning board", and likewise i f the matter of enforcement had been handled more precisely. Also, some overlap and ambiguity in the questions could have been eliminated. Finally, i n regard to the weaknesses of data collection, a c r i t ica l defect was the lack of information about the procedures within the Department of Municipal Affairs and the volume and type of planning questions handled by the Department. Without this information a reasonably accurate picture could not be obtained about the possible existence of a "demand input overload" situation. The role and function of the courts i n planning was discussed i n general and specific terms i n Chapter III. This discussion seemed to l i e slightly outside the mainstream of the thesis. Notwithstanding, the notions developed in the discussion of role of the courts proved useful i n analyzing procedures, and furthermore indicated the very limited role that the courts play in the planning process in Nova Scotia. While this thesis failed i n conclusively proving or disproving the hypothesis i t was a success as an attempt to develop a frame of reference for treating questions related to community planning. It points directions for further research. Insofar i t creates a valid conceptual framework the treatment of planning-related questions and poses valid questions for further study, this thesis has f u l f i l l e d the author*s main objectives. 99 BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS 1. Almond, Gabriel, A. and James S. Coleman, editors* The Politics of Developing Areas. Princeton, N.J . : Princeton University Press, 1960. 2. Beck, J . Murray. The Government of Nova Scotia. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1957. 3. Banjafield, D.G. and H. Whitmore. Principles of Australian Administrative Law. Third Edition. Sydney: The Law Book Company, 1966. 4. Branch, Melville C. Planning; Aspects and Applications. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1966. 5. Chapin, F. Stuart Jr. Urban Land Use Planning. Second Edition. Urbana: University of I l l inois Press, 1965. 6. Easton, David. A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood C l i f f s , N. J . : Prentice Hall Inc., 1965. 7. Easton, David. A Systems Analysis of Political Life . New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1965. 8. Easton, David, ed. Varieties of Political Theory. Englewood C l i f f s , N. J . : Prentice Hall Inc., 1966. 9. Garner, J .F . Administrative Law. London: Butterworth Ltd. , 1963. 10. Golembiewski, Robert T . , Frank Gibson and Geoffrey Y. Cornog, editors. Public Administration Readings in Institutions. Processes. Behaviour. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1966. 11. Green, Philip P. Jr. Cases and Materials on Planning Law and Arim-iwi at ration. Chapel H i l l : Institute of Government University of North Carolina, 1962. 12. Griffi th, J .A.B. Central Departments and Local Authorities. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1966. 13. Gross, Bertram M. The Managing of Organizations The Administrative Struggle. Volumes I and II . New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964. 100 14. Haar, Charles M. , editor. Law and Land: Anglo-American Planning Practice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press and the MIT Press, 1964. 15. Jaffe, Louis L . Judicial Control of Administrative Action. Boston: L i t t l e , Brown and Company, 1965. 16. Kent, T . J . Jr. The Urban General Plan. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co., 1964. 17. Litterer, Joseph A. The Analysis of Organizations. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1965. 18. Marshall, H.H. Natural Justice. London: Sweet and Maxwell L td . , 1959. 19. Meehan, Eugene J . The Theory and Method of Political Analysis. Homewood, I l l inois : The Dorsey Press Inc., 1965. 20. Robson, W.A. Justice anri Administrative Law A Study of the British Constitution. London: Stevens and Co., 1951. 21. Rowat, Donald C , editor. The Ombudsman - Citizen's Defender. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd. , 1965. 22. Scott, William G. The Management of Conflict Appeal Systems i n Organizations. Homewood: Richard D. Irwin Inc., and the Dorsey Press, 1965. 23. Smith, S.A. de. Judicial Review of Administrative Action. London: Stevens and Sons Ltd. , 1959. 24. Wade, H.W.R. Administrative Law. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1966. 25. Wade, H.W.R. Towards Administrative Justice. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1963. 26. Young, Stanley and Charles E. Summer Jr. Management: A Systems Analysis. GLenview: Scott, Foreman and Company, 1966. B. PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 1. Dominion Bureau of Statistics. Census. 1966. Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1967. 2. Province of Alberta. The Planning Act. Edmonton: Queen's Printer, 1965, R.S.A. 1963, Chapter 43, and An Act to Amend the Planning  Act. 1967, Chapter 60. 101 3. Province of Newfoundland, The Urban and Rural Planning Act. St. Johns: The Queen's Printer, 1965, No. 28. 4. Province of Nova Scotia, Department of Municipal Affairs. "A Model Form of Subdivision Regulations for Towns in Nova Scotia." Halifax: Queen's Printer, 1964. (mimeo) 5. Province of Nova Scotia, Department of Trade and Industry Economics and Development Division. Nova Scotia - An Economic Profile  Volume V. 1967. Halifax: Queen's Printer, 1967. 6. Province of Nova Scotia. Municipal Affairs Act. Hal ifax: Queen's Printer, R.S.N.S. 1954, Chapter 186. 7. Province of Nova Scotia. Town Planning Act. Halifax: Queen's Printer, 1962, R.S.N.S. 1954, Chapter 292 and the following amendments: 1964, Chapter 45, 1965, Chapter 51, 1966, Chapter 55, and 1967, Chapter 73. 8. Province of Nova Scotia, Voluntary Planning Board, First Plan for Economic Development to 1968. Halifax: Queen's Printer, 1966. 9. Province of Ontario, Ontario Municipal Board, Sixtieth Annual Report. Toronto: Queen's Printer, 1965. 10. Province of Ontario, The Planning Act. Toronto: The Queen's Printer, 1967, R.S.O. I960, Chapter 296. C. ARTICLES AND PERIODICALS 1. Bakke, E. Wight. "Concept of the Social Organization", General Systems. Volume IV, 1959. 2. Bertalanffy, Ludwig von. "General System Theory - A Critical Review". General Systems. Vol . VII, 1962. 3. Brewin, F.A. "Mandamus". The Law Society of Upper Canada Lectures (1961). Toronto: Richard de Boo Ltd. , 1961 4. Dunham, Allison. "Property, City Planning, and Liberty". Law and Land: Anglo-American Planning Practice. 5. Easton, David. "Categories for the Systems Analysis of Politics" . Vacieties of Political Theory. 6. Findlay, Allan. "Declaratory Judgement". The Law Society of Upper Canada Lectures (1961). Toronto: Richard de Boo Ltd. , 1961. 102 7. Hall , A.D. and R.E. Fagen. "Definition of System". General Systems. Vol . I, 1956. 8. Hart, W.O. "Control of the Use of Land in English Law". Law and Land; Anglo-American Planning-Practice. 9. Lay-field, F.H.B. "Planning Decisions and Appeals". Law and Land: Anglo-American Planning Practice. 10. Milner, J.B. "An Introduction to Subdivision Control Legislation". Canadian Bar Review. Vol. 43, 1965. 11. Milner, J .B. "An Introduction to Zoning Enabling Legislation". Canadian Bar Review. Vol. 40, 1962. 12. Milner, J.B. "Legal Requirements i n Zoning Procedure". Nova Scotia Community Planning Conference. Oct. 20-21. 1966. 'Halifax: Institute of Public Affairs, Dalhousie University, 1966. 13. Milner, J .B. "Trends i n Planning Law in Canada" Nova Scotia Community Planning Conference. Oct. 20-21. 1966. Halifax: Institute of Public Affairs, Dalhousie University, 1966. 14. Millward, P.J. "Judicial Review of Administrative Authorities In Canada". Canadian Bar Review. Vol. 39, 1961. 15. Pink, J .G. "Judicial •Jurisdiction* in the Province of Privative Clauses". Faculty of Law Review University of Toronto. Vol . 23, Apri l , 1965. 16. Rapoport, Anatol. "Some System Approaches to Political Theory." Varities of Political Theory. 17. Rice, Charles, E. "A Model for the Empirical Study of a Large Social Organization". General Systems. Vol. VI, 1961. 18. Tepper, Ronald and Bruce Toor. "Judicial Control Over Zoning Boards of Appeal: Suggestions for Reform". UCLA Law Review Volume 12 #3, March 1965. 19. Waterman, J.B, "Right to a Hearing and Natural Justice". Faculty  of Law Review. University of Toronto. Vol. 22, April 1964. 20. Wil l is , J . "Administrative Decision and the Law: The Canadian Implications of the Franks Report." University of Toronto Law Journal, 1959. 21. Will is , John; "Administrative Law in Canada". Canadian Bar Review Vol. 39, 1961. 22. Williston, W.B. "Injunctions". The Law Society of Upper Canada Lectures (1961). Toronto: Richard de Boo Ltd. , 1961. 103 23. Young, O.R. "A Survey of General Systems Theory". General Systems Vol. IX, 1964. 24. Young, O.R. "The Impact of General Systems Theory on Political Science". General Systems. Vol. IX, 1964. D. REPORTS 1. Lang, R.S. "Community Planning in Nova Scotia 1967". Address to the Nova Scotia Community Planning Conference, Amherst, N.S., November 9-10, 196?, mimeo. 2. Milner, J .B. Tentative Prosposals for the Reform of the Ontario Relating to Community Planning and Land Use Controls. Toronto: Ontario Law Reform Commission, 1967. S. UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL AND OTHER SOURCES 1. Dhillon, Jagdev Singh. "The Zoning Board of Appeal: A Study of Its Role In the Implementation of Municipal Planning Policy in British Columbia". Unpublished MSC Thesis, April 1966. Division of Community and Regional Planning University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 2. Lang, R.S., Director of the Community Planning Division, Department of Municipal Affairs. Nova Scotia. Letter, February 28, 1968. F. COURT CASES 1. Pozier v Ward (1947) 2 W.W.R. 193, SS Man. R. 21A (1947) 4 D.C.R., reversing (1947) 1 W.W.R. 8O7. 2. Re Clarendon Development Limited (1965) 51 M.P.R. 108. 3. Re Johnston and the Committee on Works of the Halifax City Council (1961) 46 M.P.R. 345. APPENDIX A  A SUMMARY OF THE TOWN PLANNING ACT  CHAPTER 292  REVISED STATUTES OF NOVA SCOTIA 1954 AS AMENDED BY 1956, c. 43 I960, c. 48 1964, c 45 1965, c. 51 1966, c. 55 1967, c. 73 105 A SUMMARY OF THE TOWN PLANNING ACT The Town Planning Act has 57 sections which are set out under six parts. The six parts of the Act are summarized here to provide the reader of this thesis a guide to the Act. PART I OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW Part I contains sections 2 to 21 and establishes the basic planning framework, that i s , provides for creation of planning boards, sets out council's and the board's planning powers and establishes the content of the of f i c ia l town plan, and the zoning by-law and the procedures for their enactment, amendment, variation, and revocation. PART II DAMAGES AND ENFORCEMENT Part II contains section 22 to 26. It establishes the cirumstances under which council may or may not be compelled to pay damages to a property owner affected by the exercise of council's powers under the Act, the powers of council with respect to the removal of structures and payment therefor to council, the right of authorized servants or officers to enter properties and court enforcement of such right, and the power of council to enforce this Act. PART III SUBDIVISIONS Part III treats the matter of subdivisions in sections 27 to 30. It provides for the prescription of subdivision regulations, the powers of council, the board, building inspector, and minister with respect to subdivisions. PART IV ADMINISTRATION Part IV enables: l ) the Minister to hire the necessary staff and assistance, and delegate such duties as he deems necessary; and 2) council to levy funds for the expenses of a board. Also i t provides: l ) that any powers conferred under this Act are i n addition to any other powers granted to council under other acts; and 2) that existing by-laws may be adopted i f satisfactory to the Minister: and that the Act shall not affect existing powers or duties. This Part includes sections 32 to 36. PART V METROPOLITAN PLANNING COMMISSIONS Part V provides for the establishment of planning commissions encompassing two or more municipalities, setting out the conditions under which this may take effect and the powers and duties of such commission. Part V runs from section 37 to 46. This Part does not apply to the City of Halifax, the City of Dartmouth and the Municipal i ty of the County of Halifax. PART VI HALIFAX-DARTMOUTH AND COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION Part VI creates the Halifax-Dartmouth and County Regional Planning Commission and establishes i ts powers, duties, and procedures, contains sections 47 to 57• APPENDIX B A MODEL FORM OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS  FOR TOWNS IN NOVA SCOTIA A MODEL FORM OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR TOWNS IN NOVA SCOTIA Prepared by the Community Planning Division Department of Municipal Affairs Province of Nova Scotia Halifax, N.S. February, 1964 EXPLANATION These model regulations are composed of two parts. Part I contains the standard form of subdivision regulations that many towns have been using as a guide in the past four years. They are authorized by Section 21 (l) of the Nova Scotia Town Planning Act. Part II is a special supplement to Part I and may be adopted under Section 27 (9) of the Nova Scotia Town Planning Act. Part II is recommended for adoption as i t w i l l insure performance by the subdivider. These model regulations are designed as a guide only, and may have to be altered somewhat for the particular needs of each town by the planning board or town council. For examplej i f a town wishes to include the laying of sewer or water mains, or both, in Part II of this model, then this can conveniently be done by entering the necessary words i n the various sections of the proposed regulation. Part I is a regulation that the Minister may prescribe. If you wish i t to apply to your Town we w i l l require resolutions passed by your Council and by your Planning Board asking the Minister to prescribe i t j these must be accompanied by a copy of the regulations as a schedule to the resolutions. Part II i s a regulation that your Plaruiing Board prescribes by a resolution of i ts own with approval of the Council. If you wish to adopt i t , you should send to us two copies certified by the Secretary of the Planning Board to have been adopted by the Board, and also certified by the Town Clerk to have been approved by the Council. I l l PART I IN THE MATTER of the Town Planning Act, and i n the Matter of the The Council of being a where no special Act of Legislature applies with respect to subdivision, having requested the Minister of Municipal Affairs to prescribe regulations, with respect thereto, the said Minister, pursuant to Section 27 of Chapter 292 of the Revised Statutes, 1954, the Town Planning Act, hereby prescribes for the the following regulations respecting subdivisions of land: Subdivision Regulations (Prescribed under Part III, Chapter 292, Revised Statutes Nova Scotia 1954, the Town Planning Act.) Procedure to be adopted for tentative plans 1. Any person proposing to subdivide property may submit tentative plans of the proposed subdivision to the Board for i ts approval 2. The Board may endorse such comments as are considered approp riate on the plans prior to their return to the submitter. 3 . Any tentative plans submitted must be in duplicate, drawn to a scale of not smaller than 50 feet to 1 inch, may be based on deed description of property to be sub-divided, but not necessarily as surveyed, and shall show the following: (a) name and address of submitter; (b) name and address of owner i f not submitter; 112 (c) name of owners of a l l abutting properties; (d) proposed size and shape of lots and blocks; (e) proposed width, grade, and location of streets; (f) access to existing streets; (g) areas, i f any, reserved for public purposes; (h) north point, scale and date. Procedure to be adopted for the approval of final plans 4. A final plan of subdivision when submitted for the approval of the Board shall be accompanied by: (a) a request i n writing of the owners of the land shown on such final plan for the approval of the subdivision by the Board; (b) a statement signed by the submitter or submitters that he or they is or are the owners of the land shown thereon; (c) a written agreement duly executed by the owner of the property, that he w i l l construct a l l streets shown on the said plan, including paving and installation of curbs and gutters, and wi l l lay water and sewer mains in such streets according to the specifications laid down i n the regulations of the Town relating thereto, and w i l l convey the streets to the Town within five days after the Town has so requested. 5. The approval or disapproval of the Board attested to by the signature of the Chairman must be signified on one copy of the plan and returned to the submitter within four weeks of submission. 6. A final plan of subdivision, must be submitted for the approval of the Board i n duplicate showing: (a) name and address of submitter; (b) name of proposed subdivision; (c) the boundaries of the property surveyed, with accurate distances and bearings as determined by survey in the f ie ld , with closure error not exceeding one unit per thousand units by compass and one unit per three thousand units by transit; (d) the length and bearings of the boundary lines of a l l lots, streets, rights of way, and easements as laid outj length of arc, degrees and points of curvature, radii , and tangent bearings in the case of curved lines; (e) the width of a l l streets and rights of way; (f) the accurate location of one or more permanent monuments; (g) the proposed lot numbers, and street names; (h) any reservations, private or otherwise; (i) contours for road grades and drainage; (j) location of houses and buildings on adjoining properties; (k) north point (True or Magnetic) scale and date. Such final plans of subdivision shall also: (a) have a clear space or binding margin of at least one inch in width; (b) conform to the requirements for registration in the Registry of Deeds; (c) be certified by a Provincial Land Surveyor of Nova Scotia, in the manner required by the Registry Act and any other Act i n force at the time of application for approval of subdivision. 114 General provision 8. Any street or road, whether a new street or road, or an extension of an existing street or road, must have a right of way of at least f i f t y feet; but this minimum shall be increased to such width as is necessary to meet the current requirements of the Department of Highways. 9. Where cul-de-sacs are used to develop odd shaped remnants of the subdivision or to f i t the street pattern to the topography of the tract, they shall be determined by a turn-around having a minimum radius of 45 feet from the centre of the cul-de-sac. 10. Streets shall intersect one another at right angles, or as nearly at right angles as possible. 11. Where one street meets or intersects another, either street or both streets may cross the other; but no additional street may enter at or approximately at that intersection unless the topography of the area makes any other reasonable plan difficult or impossible. 12. A street shall not enter or intersect one on which traffic is heavy i f there is another street so intersecting i t on the same side within a distance of one thousand feet measured along the side line of the street on which traffic is heavy. 13. Where a street in an adjoining subdivision abuts the boundaries of a subdivision submitted to the Board, a street in the latter shall be laid out in prolongation of such street unless i t would be in violation of these regulations. 115 1 4 . A lot having an area and lot frontage less than the area and lot frontage prescribed in the following schedule w i l l not be approved by the Board except as set out in Section 1 5 hereof; I R-l Residential (a)Single Family(one dwelling) Min. Lot Area 1 5 , 0 0 0 sq. f t . in areas with no sewer service 6 , 0 0 0 sq. f t . i n areas with sewer service Min. Lot Frontage on Bldg. Line 75 f t . II R-2 Residential (a) Single Family(one dwelling) 1 5 , 0 0 0 sq. f t . in areas with no sewer service otherwise 6 , 0 0 0 sq. f t . (b) Semi-detached(two dwellings) built about a central vertical as above axis (c) Duplex (two dwellings) placed one above the other as above (d) Row (three or more dwellings 3 , 5 0 0 sq.ft . for contained in one building each each unit with separated from the other vertically) (e) Apartments (three or more dwellings contained in one building) (f) Nursing and Rest Homes III R-3 Residential (a) A l l residential R-l and R-2 Uses (b) Trailer Courts IV General Commercial a combined min. of 1 6 , 5 0 0 sq.ft . 2,000 sq.ft . per unit with a minimum combined area of 8,000 sq. f t . same as above 2 , 5 0 0 sq. f t . (a) Any building used for retail or wholesale trade and the 3 , 0 0 0 sq. f t . storage or warehousing of goods wares, or merchandise. 60 f t . 60 f t . 60 f t . 60 f t . Minimum combined frontage 110 f t . as above 60 f t . 25 f t . 3 0 f t . (b) Workshop subsidiary to permitted retail uses 3,000 sq. f t . 30 f t . (c) Business or professional office 3,000 sq. f t . 30 f t . (d) Garage or service station for the selling of gasoline and o i l s , automobile 12,000 sq. f t . 120 f t . accessories and the minor adjustment of vehicles V Local Commercial (a) Apartments (two or more 2,000 sq. f t . per dwellings contained in one unit with a minimum 75 f t . commercial building) combined area of 4,000 sq. f t . (b) Any building used for retai l trade. 3,000 sq. f t . 30 f t . (c) Business or professional office 3,000 sq. f t . 30 f t . (d) Garage or Service Station for the selling of gasoline 12,000 sq. f t . 120 f t . and o i l s , automobile accessories and the minor adjustments of vehicles. VI Industrial (a) Garage or Service Station 12,000 sq. f t . 120 f t . 15. Approval may be given to the subdivision of land into lots a l l or some of which do not meet the requirements of Section 14, i f (a) any undersized lot so formed is to be added to and become part of another lot which meets the requirements of Section 14 or which appears on a registerexi plan or deed, and i f (b) any remaining parcel or parcels meet the requirements of Section 14. 16. Blocks of land shall be designed so that streets shall intersect at right angles as far as possible. 17. Blocks shall not exceed 1,200 feet in length. Recommended to the Minister DEPUTY MINISTER OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS Prescribed this day of , 1964. MINISTER OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS 118 PART II Resolved by the Town Planning Board of the Town of . . . that the following regulations be and the same is hereby prescribed subject to the approval of the Town Council and of the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Streets in Subdivision 1. (l) In this Regulation: "Board" means Town Planning Board of the Town; "Council" means the T-om Council of the Town; "Town" means Town of (a) Where reference in this regulation i s made to construction of streets, paving and installation of curbs and gutters, i t means such construction, paving and installation according to the specifications laid down in the regulations and by-laws of the Town. 2. The owner of every subdivision'shall, before final approval of such subdivision is given, (a) construct a l l streets shown thereon and pave such streets instal l curbs and gutters thereon; and (d) deposit with the Board a deed, duly executed, conveying to the Town the t i t l e i n and to said streets, in fee simple, free from incumbrances} 3. The Board shall not give f>Lnal approval to any subdivision until the requirements of Section 2 have been complied with, except as set out i n Section 4« 4. (l) In the alternative to the requirements of Section 2, the owner may, at his option, before final approval of the sub division is given, 119 (a) deposit with the Board a deed duly executed, conveying to the town the t i t l e in and to the streets in the subdivision; in the case mentioned in clause (b) (i) the deed shall be for a l l the streets; in the case mentioned in clause (b) ( i i ) , i t shall be for a l l the streets in the area in the sub division mentioned i n his notice and this shall from time to time be followed by deeds for the streets in the area mentioned int.each subsequent notice; and (b) sign, execute, and f i l e with the Board, (i) an agreement under seal to construct the streets shown on said plan and to pave said streets and to • install curbs and gutters thereon, a l l within a period of time set out in such agreement and in accordance with this regulation, particularly subsection (4) of this Section; and also a bond of indemnity for twice the amount estimated by the Board as the cost of performing the said work i n the subdivision; or ( i i ) a notice to the Board that he proposes to develop the subdivision by instalments, indicating the area which he proposes to develop first(and from time to time thereafter, indicating the futther area he then proposes to develop) and execute and f i l e with the Board an agreement to construct the streets within the specified area shown on said plan and to pave said streets and to install curbs and gutters thereon, a l l within a period of time set out in such agreement and in accordance with this regulation, particularly subsection (4) of this Section; and also a bond of indemnity for twice the amount estimated by the Board as to the cost of performing the work in the area covered by the agreement. (2) A bond of indemnity required hereby shall be i n favour of the Town duly executed by the owner and by a duly approved guarantee company, conditioned on the carrying out and completion of the agreement in accordance with the terms thereof and in accordance 120 with this regulation and. with other by-laws and regulations of the Town relating to subdivisions and to such work, which bond of indemnity shall not be subject to cancellation, termination or expiration during the period of time for completion of the work, as set out in the agreement. (3) If , i n the opinion of the owner, the amount estimated by the Board as the cost of performing the work is excessive, he may require the Board to arbitrate the amount, in which case pro ceedings shall be as nearly as possible in accordance with the Arbitration Act, Chapter 13 , R.S. 1954. (4) An owner who has sold ten lots out of the said subdivision, in front of which streets have not been constructed and paved, and curbs and gutters have not been laid, shall forthwith proceed to construct the street or streets in front of said lots and to pave said streets and to instal l curbs and gutters thereon, and shall not se l l any other lots from the said subdivision until he has done so; the word "sold" and the word " s e l l " as used herein, include the execution of an agreement of sale or of an option to s e l l ; this shall be one of the terms of the agreement hereinbefore mentioned. (5) If the owner has complied with subsection (l) hereof, the Board may approve the entire subdivision i f hechasscomplied with subclause (i) of clause (b) of said subsection (l) or may approve that part of the subdivision referred to in his notice and agreement i f he has complied with sub-clause ( i i ) of clause (b) of said subsection. If he has any other agreement or bond out-121 standing of the type contemplated by this regulation and not completely executed, by performance, the Board may vdthold approval of further areas until he has performed the same. (6) Approval of a subdivision or of part of a subdivision shall lapse and cease to be effective upon expiration of the time set out in the agreement for performance of the work, i f said work has not then been completed. 5. Nothing herein contained shall be taken to require the Council to accept a deed of any street; or to restrict the Board in i ts decision to grant or to withhold approval of a subdivision for any cause whatever. APPENDIX C  REPLIES TO QUESTIONNAIRE QUESTIONS • • • • • • ^  • ) /$ C o c / ^ ^ 1966 Name: k//?- / X ^ < ? ^ X t .Municipal Unit: <^j> ^^/£zr. Population: ^ * Chairman, Town Planning Board City, Town or Municipal Clerk Other £>/MC?4-S c/ J;*?. S%/?>v*jp •pkKl 1: GENERAL 1. Do you have subdivision regulations: Yes ^  No 2. Do you enforce the subdivion regulations: Yes*"" No Comments, i f any:_ A4>/ 4*> //• 3. Do you have a Zoning by law? Yes No 4. If the answer to (3) was yes, do you enforce this Zoning By-Law? Y e s 1 ^ No Comments, i f any: • "  5. Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the Minister and registered with the county registrar of deeds: Yes No ^ 6. If the answer to (5) was yes, is the Town Plan, in your opinion, an effective document? Yes No. — ' 2. 124 <'. Oo you have an active Town Planning Board? Yes 1^ No 8. Does the Town Planning Board meet regularly? Yes No.^ 9. Does the Town Planning Board carry out the f u l l range of duties prescribed under the Town Planning Act? Yes ^ No. 10. Has your municipal unit adopted a building bylaw? Y e s v / No 11. Do you have a building inspector or-cotnmittee? - Yes 1^ No 12. If the answer to (11) was yes, has the Council or Building Inspector or Committee assumed the Planning Board's responsibilities for the issuing of building permits: . Yes No Comments: ' PART II: OBJECTIONS 13. Where your Council.is considering written objections to an O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw, does this take the form of an open hearing in which interested parties may make oral as well as written presentations? Please explain the manner in which your Council treats objections to the Offical Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw. )&s. \ *<4> <r*/^v<v^.<- *2^j£2/£ -J/t//  125 Do you feel that adequate scope is given to persons objecting to an o f f i c i a l town plan or 20-ning bylaw? Y e s ^ No Comments, i f any:__ PART III: APPEAk - BONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN Seat-ion 20 of the Town Planning Act, as amended in 1965, provides: "When a person is dissatisfied with the decision of an official in the course of his administration of this Act or of a by-law made under this Act, he may appeal from this decision to the council by giving notice in writing of such appeal to the clerk not later than fifteen days after the decision has been communicated to him. The council may, after hearing the pppellant and the Official and any other person, affirm, vary or rescind the decision of the official but nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the council to waive any requirement of the by-law or* to permit any person to contravene any such requirement". 15. Is there any tendency for persons seeking a change or seeking to prevent a change, to petition the Minister, either before or after Council has decided on the matter? , Yes No. Please comment: a^y J^SX cnz/shn • 16. Do you feel that a person dissatisfied with the decision of Council with regard to a zoning bylaw or o f f i c i a l town plan, should be permitted to petition the Minister? Yes ^  No Please state why: /. ^m^ss o4: /yJ^^y/y^^ /o<r.o/ a - 17. How many appeals were heard by your Council under Section 20 of the Town Planning Act during the period January 1, 1965 to December 31, 1967? 4. 126 18. How many of these appeals went from your Council to: The Minister of Municipal Affairs — . -The County Court ' • — •  The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia ' ' ' 19. If possible, briefly l i s t the typical reasons why applicants appealed: From the decision of your Council ~ . To the Minister . To the Courts 20. In your opinion, i f this provision;(Section 20) of the Town Planning Act used frequently? Yes No.""" Please comment why: ^People don't understand their rights Procedure is too cumbessome Community is small Appeal cost (legal fees) too high Other (Blease specify) <£OCJ+7/y /^sf 21. In your opinion, should the Town Planning Act relating to zoning provide for exceptions (with the exact conditions under which minor exceptions may be granted set out in the bylaw or Act) or variances (a method of safeguarding the individual lot owner against the invasion of his fundamental right or private 127 property which would result from adherence to the s t r i c t letter of -the zoning bylaw)? •yes No Please .comment: ' j"<r<f o<>,.:• x 3 : ' If the answer to (21) was yes, how would you like to see exceptions or variances provided for? Do you feel the grounds for appeal under Section 20 should be changed? Yes ^ No#*~ If 'Yes', what changes?_ 7£ o/e ffs>z< norr c/ec^/s r*^t Which of the following forms of appeal would you prefer? Please comment. Appeal to Planning B o a r d ' — fJef^a-c. Appeal to separate local body ' Appeal to rggional body; * ^ /< Appeal to Provincial Body \ 2 . Other (Please specify) A>4>r<? w v " • ^ c ^ / ^ / p ~o  6. 128 &*HT iv. APPEAL - SUB1DIVIS0N 25. Do you feel there should be some form of appeal (other than to the Minister or the Courts) to the decisions of the Town Planning Board on Subdivision matters? Yes'' Ho If "Yes", what form of appeal? 7o ' 4%-'«rse*s - ^<?t? f 26. • During the period January 1965 to December 1967, how many appeals have there been from decisions of your Planning Board or Council to:- The Minister The Courts M, 27. If possible, briefly l i s t the typical grounds for appeal: 28. State any other opinions you may have regarding appeal and objections. r / 129 L i s t any suggestions you have for improving or adding to this questionnaire. ' . . . . . . . " • ^ FOR OFFICE USE Date Sent: 130 Date Received: QUEST I Of' Name: k<$ 1^h~6pip'ioK Municipal U n i t : Sx^ydry P o p u l a t i o n : ^ • Chairman, Town Planning Board D C i t y , Town or Municipal Clerk nether y gyttr,*/ /%^ JiAfy/^ ^ <r^ >/- ^To^^? S£^f,-A, PART 1: GENERAL 1. Do you have s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? E/ Yes • No 2.. Do you enforce the s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? B'Yes • No Comments, i f any: j&S,ySacS*-^/*, 3 . Do you have a zoning bylaw? ^ Y e s • N 0 4. If the answer to ( 3 ) was yes, do you enforce t h i s zoning bylaw? ^Y es O No Comments, i f any: 5. Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d with the county r e g i s t r a r of deeds? • Yes No If the, answer to (5) was yes, i s t h i s Town Plan, i n your o p i n i o n , an e f f e c t i v e document? • Yes No 2. < 131 7. DJ you .have an a c t i v e Town Planning Board? r/Ves D No 8. Does the Town Planning Beard meet r e g u l a r l y ? / S Yes • No 9. Does the Town Planning Board carry out the f u l l range of d u t i e s p r e s c r i b e d under the Town Planning Act? D Yes . orflo 10. Has your municipal u n i t adopted a b u i l d i n g bylaw? Y e s • No 11. Do you have a b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee? t^Yes DNO 12. If the answer to (11) was yes, has the c o u n c i l or b_uJJ^i_ng i n s p e c t o r or committee assumed the Planning Board's" res,ponsibi T i t i e s f o r the i s s u i n g of b u i l d i n g permits? ^ Y e s • No Comments: kt/A JW^<? f&vjt^ ^21 PART I I: OBJECTIONS 13. Where your Council i s c o n s i d e r i n g w r i t t e n o b j e c t i o n s to an O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw, does t h i s take the form of an open hearing i n which i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l as well as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? Please e x p l a i n the manner in which your Council t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s to the O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw. 3. 132 14. Do you f e e l that adequate scope i s given to persons o b j e c t i n g to an o f f i c i a l town plan or zoning bylaw? V v e s ONo Comments, i f any: - PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN Section 20 of the Town Planning Act, as amended in 1965, provides: "When a person is dissatisfied with the decision of an official, in the course of his- administration of this Act or of a by-law made under this Act, he may appeal from this decision to the council by .giving notice in writing of such appeal to the clerk not later than fifteen days after the decision has been communicated to him. The council may, after hearing the appellant and the Official and any other person, affirm, vary or rescind the decision of the official but nothing, herein shall be deemed to authorize the council to waive any requirement, of the by-law or to permit any person to contravene any such requirement". 15. Is there any tendency f o r persons seeking a change or seeking to prevent a change, to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r , e i t h e r before or a f t e r C ouncil has decided on the matter? .f'Yes • No • ' Please comment: <^ <^ *> //, . ^ ,/0,-//y  16. Do you f e e l that a person d i s s a t i s f i e d with the d e c i s i o n of Council with regard to a zoning bylaw or o f f i c i a l town p l a n , should be permitted to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? c/Ves • No Please s t a t e why: 17. How many appeals were heard by your Council under S e c t i o n 20 of the Town Planning Act during the p e r i o d January 1, 1965 to December 31, 1967? _2_L 133 )'6. How many of these appeals went from your Council t o : . The M i n i s t e r of Municipal A f f a i r s A/G^ The County Court ^ The Supreme Court of Nova S c o t i a •' *> 19. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l reasons why a p p l i c a n t s appealed: . From the d e c i s i o n of your Council To the M i n i s t e r A'/&- To the Courts /V/s?• 20. In your o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n ( S e c t i o n 20) of the. Town Planning Act used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes S'No Please comment why: • People don't understand t h e i r r i g h t s • P r o c e d u r e i s too cumbersome • Community i s small • Appeal cost ( l e g a l fees) too high • Other (please s p e c i f y ) 21. In your o p i n i o n , should the Town Planning Act r e l a t i n g to zoning provide f o r except i ons (with the exact c o n d i t i o n s under which minor exceptions may be granted set out i n the bylaw or Act) or va r i an ces (a method of safeguarding the i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner against the i n v a s i o n of h i s fundamental r i g h t of p r i v a t e 5. 134 property which would r e s u l t from adherence to the s t r i c t l e t t e r of the zoning bylaw)? &4es '• -K/NO Please comment: //' -rsC^/c/ <5<r s~ S o<+/ ^y^-" If the answer to (21) was yes, how would you l i k e to see exceptions or variances provided for? _ <£v /t&jsuL Do you fe e l the grounds f o r appeal under S e c t i o n 20 should be changed? _/Yes • No . If "Yes", what changes? . -2Q • Which of the f o l l o w i n g forms of appeal would you p r e f e r ? Please comment. 1 " " • p,t^y_^y_ o Appeal to Planning Board ' I  • Appeal to separate l o c a l body o Appeal to re g i o n a l body &r //;^is/<-,s • A p p e a l to P r o v i n c i a l body • Other (Please s p e c i f y ) c^^wc-• / ^ 6. -135 P A f t i I V ; - APPEAL - SUBDIVISION 25. Do you f e e l there should be some form of appeal ( o t h e r than to the M i n i s t e r or the Courts) to the d e c i s i o n s of the Town Planning Board on s u b d i v i s i o n matters? t^Yes' C N o I f "Yes", what form of appeal? - decs^re-, > / . 26. During the p e r i o d January 1965 to December 1967, how many appeals have there been from d e c i s i o n s of your Planning Board or C ouncil to . The M i n i s t e r / ( . The Courts /v^-e 27. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l gounds f o r appeal: 28. State any other opinions you may have regarding appeal and o b j e c t i ons. / & i*/ & CM. J }//<:>> l / , y ^ -s • 136 7. 1 . . L i s t any suggestions you have f o r improving or adding to t h i s -ques t i onnai r e . / / " yp ' " 6 prices / C ' / d s ; / ^ t / c / s t J i f y6«~"S-0 c / s ~ < ' ' S J / s£<j>.: C-H<?/ -4/ r u K u r r i i> u u J t 137 Hate Sent: Date Received: HYVo-> a~i |<o a •QUESTIONS 1966 Name: [ I,. Lufrka M u n i c i p a l U n i t : c i t y of . P o p u l a t i o n : 86. 7Q> A c t i n g C h i e f Planner „. • H a l i f a x , . - • Chairman, Town Planning Board o c i t y , Tov.'n or Mu n i c i p a l C i e r k • Other PART 1; GENERAL 1. Do you have s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? , • Yes J^cNo * 2. Do you enforce the s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? • Yes p(Ho Comments, i f any: _ _ _ _ _ •••Z. Do you have a zoning bylaw? •-. $(Yes • No 4. I f the answer to (3) was. y e s j do you enfo r c e t h i s zoning bylaw? & Yes • No Comments', i f any: " Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d with the county, r e g i s t r a r of deeds? • Yes E3 No C i t y C o u n c i l approved an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n i n 1945 but .- i t was never approved by the M i n i s t e r because t h a t was not a requirement.at -the time. _ ! —" . I f the answer to (-5) was y e s , i s t h i s Town P l a n , 1n your op1nion, an e f f e c t i v e document? • „ . . / • • • Yes • No The Plan i s not an e f f e c t i v e document. ; 7. .Do you have an a c t i v e Town Planning Board? % • — i . ^ Y e S . • NO ' 8. Does the Town Planning Board meet r e g u l a r l y ? . # Yes D N O - 9, Does the Town Planning -Board carry, out the f u l l range of d u t i e s * p r e s c r i b e d under the Town Planning Act? '. • O Yes KNo 1. We do n o t h a v e S u b d i v i s i o n R e g u l a t i o n s a n d d o n ' t n e e d them as a l l l a n d . i s d e v e l o p e d i n t h e C i t y . 2. Not i m p l e m e n t i n g on O f f i c i a l Town P l a n a s we do n o t h a v e one. 10. Has your municipal u n i t adopted a b u i l d i n g bylaw? $ Yes • No * •• " '.- 11. Do you have a b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee? . $ Yes o No 12. I f the answer to (11) was yes, has the c o u n c i l or b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee assumed the Planning Board's r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s •for the i s s u i n g of b u i l d i n g permits? . . WYes . o No Comments: : '  PART 11: OBJECTIONS 13. Where your Council i s c o n s i d e r i n g w r i t t e n o b j e c t i o n s to an O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw, does t h i s take the form of an open hearing i n which i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l as well as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? Please e x p l a i n the manner in which your C o u n c i l t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s to the O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Z.oning Bylaw. . O f f i c i a l Town Plan i s o b s o l e t e . Zoning By-law was approved i n 19 50 and P u b l i c Hearings were h e l d a t t h a t time. Both w r i t t e n and o r a l o b j e c t i o n s were considered..by the C i t y C o u n c i l and • some chancres were made as a r e s u l t of o b j e c t i o n s r a i s e d . Open h e a r i n g was held" t o con- s i d e r o b j e c t i o n s t o the Zoning By-lav/.  . > . . - " .'; - r ;"'' • 139' " :.y ". . ••• . . . . , 14. Do.you f e e l that adequate scope i s given to persons o b j e c t i n g to an o f f i c i a l town plan or zoning bylaw? i • Yes • No Comments, i f any: I t appears from our e x p e r i e n c e that most people do not have a c l e a r ' u n d e r s t a n d i n g as' t o what i s ' p r o posed u n t i l a f t e r the P u b l i c H e a r i n g i s h e l d , as the d e t a i l s and the pros and cons of the i s s u e are u s u a l l y brought out at the H e a r i n g . ( s PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN • a t t a c h e d shee Section 20 of the Town Planning Act,, as amended in 2965, provides; "When a -person is dissatisfied with the decision of an official in the course of his administration of this Act or of a by-law made under this Act, he may appeal from this- decision to the counoil by giving notice in writing of such, appeal to the clerk not later than fifteen days after the decision has been communicated to him. The council may, after hearing the appellant and the Official and any other person, affirm, vary or rescind the decision of the official but nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the council to waive any requirement of the by-law or to permit any person to contravene any such requirement". 15. Is there any tendency f o r persons seeking a change or seeking to prevent a change,' to p e t i t i o n t h e M i n i s t e r , e i t h e r before or a f t e r .Counci 1 has decided on the matter? • Yes • No. ' Please comment: You c o u l d answer t h a t q u e s t i o n b e t t e r than we 16. Do you f e e l t h a t a person d i s s a t i s f i e d with the d e c i s i o n of C o u n c i l with regard to a zoning'bylaw or o f f i c i a l town p l a n , should be : permitted to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? • Yes • No i .: Please s t a t e why: Perhaps some form o f appeal i n matters a<~ i m p o r t e r • as the O f f i c i a l Town Plan-and Zoning shrm-M pern-it 17. How many appeals were heard by your Coun.cil under S e c t i o n 20 of the Town Planning Act during the p e r i o d January 1, 1965 to December 31, 1967? ,Nnne.. •perh^py tiii uppi opt i u i - - •— t - . of or o b j e c t i n g t o a plan or Zoning changes would be a f t e r •v the Hearing. I f a two wee>: "period were allowed between the ' H e a r i n g and the f i n a l d e c i s i o n by C o u n c i l , these p e t i t i o n s ^could be considered by C o u n c i l i n the i n t e r i m . 140 4. 141 18. How.many of these appeals went from y c u r C o u n c i l t o : . The M i n i s t e r of Municipal A f f a i r s None j h e c o u n t y Court ~__ \ ". The Supreme Court"~bf Novefbcoti a • 19. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l reasons why a p p l i c a n t s appealed: From the d e c i s i o n of your C o u n c i l N o t a n p H n a h i P To the M i n i s t e r To the Courts 20. In your o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n ( S e c t i o n 20) of the Town j . Planning Act used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes • No Please comment why: • People don't understand t h e i r r i g h t s • Procedure i s too cumbersome • Community i s small • Appeal cost ( l e g a l - f e e s ) too high D Other (please s p e c i f y ) / I n our op i n ion ^ r ? ^ 1 1 0 ^ ? ? 1 5 t h a t b e f o r e a d e c i s i o n - i s taken, the C i t y ' s comoeter s t a r t has f u l l y examined the matter and t h a t the r W i s i n n i s ro gcr>n e' ancThence s u f f i c i e n t grounds are not a v a i l a b l e f o r appeal. The publ * a l s o i s aware t h a t C o u n c i l g e n e r a l l y r e s p e c t s S t a f f s ' d e c i s i o n . 21. In your o p i n i o n , should the Town Planning Act r e l a t i n g to zoning provide f o r e x c e p t i ons (with the exact c o n d i t i o n s under which minor e x c e p t i ens may be granted set out i n the bylaw or Act) or ye r i ances (a method of s a f e g u a r d i n g the i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner ag a i n s t the i n v a s i o n of h i s fundamental r i g h t of p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y which would r e s u l t from adherence to the s t r i c t l e t t e r -of the zoning bylaw}? ...'_ _ '_•[_ , . 32tfes 0 No Please comment: T_ie__Zgriing By-law, at. presxaaJt,. . 1 a c l c s - J ^ s o - g ^ i f t e i ^ r r ^ (exception end v a r i a n c e s ) . C o u n c i l has the power t o grant m o d i f i c a t i o n s but i t i s a cumberance prnrpriiirp f n r "h^*Hr - - ,11y . ^ j n ^ r - - . r n _ . ^ t ^ r _ . . _ . . . . ^ . j c _ would welcome L e g i s l a t i o n a l l o w i n g exceptions and v a r i a n c e s . 22. I f the answer to (21) was yes, how would you l i k e to see •exceptions or variances provided f o r ? An Appeal Board set up by the Province or C i t y f o r exceptions and S t a f f t o handle minor v a r i a n c e s . 23. Do you f e e l the grounds f o r appeal under S e c t i o n 20 should be • •• changed? ; D Yes • No . If "Yes", what changes? _ ' • • 24. Which of the f o l l o w i n g forms of appeal would you p r e f e r ? Please comment. ' „• . Leave as i s { • Appeal to Planning Board \ • Appeal to separate l o c a l body o Appeal to re g i o n a l body • Appeal to P r o v i n c i a l body • Other (Please s p e c i f y ) PART IY: APPEAL - SUBDIVISION 25. Do you f e e l there should be some form of appeal ( o t h e r than to the M i n i s t e r or the Courts) to the d e c i s i o n s of the Town Planning Board on s u b d i v i s i o n matters? . V . • Yes • No • I f "Yes", what form of appeal? __A£_j3rg.s_j^ through the Town Plan n i n g Board. I f Appeal i s per m i t t e d t o C i t y C o u n c i l , t h i s would have the e f f e c t of a l l s u b d i v i s i o n s going t o C o u n c i l , which we do not favour. 26. During the p e r i o d January 1965 to December 1967, how many ; appeals have there been from d e c i s i o n s of y-our Planning Board or Counci1 to « None The M i n i s t e r ' ' • ' ' • ' ' .  . The Courts '27. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l gounds f o r appeal.: • Not a p p l i c a b l e  28. State any other opinions you may have regarding appeal and o b j e c t i o n s . • Not a p p l i c a b l e ; • L i s t any suggestions you have f o r improving or adding to t h i s »questionnai re. ' Ca) C i t i e s should be r e q u i r e d by the Province t o have and _ maintain a a Master P l a n . At present t h i s i s permissive and should be mandatory. . '  (b) Meetings should be h e l d by a l l p a r t i e s concerned before the Town Plan n i n g Act i s changed. . ' (c) Some form of Development Permit i s needed f o r g r e a t e r :.. f l e x i b i l i t y i n modern, complexes which have a m u l t i p l i c i t y of uses and are not on customary s i n g l e ' l o t s f o r each • , separate use.' rur\ ui i I V L v w L. 145 Date Sent: Hf&Ui Ajb&  Date Received: \ji\Mtf(J(rf QUESTIONS \ /, 1 9 6 6 ' Name: • M{vsoJ Municipal U n i t : O^UO&VQAJ P o p u l a t i o n : lp cm • Chairman, Town Planning Board O C i t y , Town or Municipal C l e r k • Other PART 1 •; GENERAL 1. Do you have s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? .cfYes • No 2. Do you enforce the s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? p"Ves • No Comments, i f any: " 3. Do you have a zoning bylaw? o "Y es • No > 4. I f the answer to (3) was yes, do you enforce t h i s zoning bylaw? ,-TVes • No Comments, i f any: '  5. Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d with the county r e g i s t r a r o f deeds? • Yes , • No 6. I f the answer to (5) was yes, i s t h i s Town Pla n , 1n your o p i n i o n , an e f f e c t i v e document? • Yes • No 2. 146 7. Do you have an a c t i v e Town Planning Board? p Yes D No 8. Does the Town Planning Board meet r e g u l a r l y ? • Yes • No 9. Does the Town Planning Board c a r r y out the f u l l range of d u t i e s • p r e s c r i b e d under the Town Planning Act? • Yes J?\\a oSi--^ s^.,bAv<^ -v,* 10 . Has your municipal u n i t adopted a b u i l d i n g bylaw? B Y e s • N o r 1 1 . Do you have a b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee? J ^ Yes D No 12 . I f the answer to ( 1 1 ) was yes, has the c o u n c i l or b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee assumed the Planning Board's r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r the i s s u i n g of b u i l d i n g permits? o Yes • No Comments: PART I I : OBJECTIONS 1 3 . Where your Council i s c o n s i d e r i n g w r i t t e n o b j e c t i o n s to an ; • O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw, does t h i s take the form . o^  A of an open hearing i n which i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l ' OdV rCci(c^-^<: a s w e ^ a s w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? Please e x p l a i n the manner v' , i\ -v ' i j n which your Council t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s to the O f f i c i a l Town y ^ r \u'jUw>ran or Zoning Bylaw. p ^ c J a J w r . \i.CV i.-i. -t i U . . \ . - | / - ( ^•lal'L. -"Pic/ bv. I'.^ , / K 147 3 . 4. Do you f e e l that adequate scope i s giyen to persons o b j e c t i n g . to an o f f i c i a l town plan or zoning bylaw? ,OYes ONo Comments, i f any: PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN Section 20 of the Town Planning Act, as amended in 1965, provides: "When a person is dissatisfied with the decision of an official in the course of his administration of this Act or of a by-law mad.e under this Act, he may appeal from this decision to the council by giving notice in writing" of such appeal to the clerk not later than fifteen days after the decision has been communicated to him. The council may, after hearing the appellant and the Official and any other person, affirm, vary or 2'escind the decision of the official but nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the council to waive any requirement of the by-law or to permit any person to contravene any such requirement". 15. Is there any tendency f o r persons seeking a change or seeking to prevent a change, to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r , e i t h e r before or a f t e r Council has decided on the matter? • Y e s , a No Please comment: (v .\ . . tU .:. ,--,,>.._•»• cV p . t-ivi v , - 4 r , l--Wv^.-.(;j\ - j j - f C L J ^ ^ U W 16. Do you f e e l that a person d i s s a t i s f i e d with the d e c i s i o n of C o u n c i l with regard to a zoning bylaw or o f f i c i a l town p l a n , should be p"ermi,Tted to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? EfYes • No Please s t a t e why: _ [;>.•• p.-> C c v v ^ c - - 17 How many appeals were heard by your Council under S e c t i o n 20 of the Town Planning Act during the p e r i o d January 1, 1965 to December 31, 1967? 4. 148 18. How many of these appeals went from your Council t o : . The M i n i s t e r of Municipal A f f a i r s The County Court : _ .Oo . The Supreme Court of Hova S c o t i a v ) 0 19. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l reasons why a p p l i c a n t s appealed: . From the deci s i cn of your C o u n c i l Ixs.- i ^  c-v - c\_Q. -V-gil ®\ ~£ . To the Mi ni s t e r . To the Courts 20. In your o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n ( S e c t i o n 20) of the Town Planning Act used f r e q u e n t l y ? D Yes jf'iio P Lease comment why: j_ /People don't understand t h e i r r i g h t s ./^Procedure i s too cumbersome p Community i s small ^ A p p e a l .... cost ( l e g a l fees) too high • Other (please s p e c i f y ) a (Li 4^.-jj.T^~<y'\ 21. In your o p i n i o n , should the Town Planning Act r e l a t i n g to zoning provide f o r except i ons. (with the exact c o n d i t i o n s under which minor exceptions may be granted set out i n the bylaw or Act) or vari ances (a method of safeguarding the i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner against the i n v a s i o n of h i s fundamental r i g h t of p r i v a t e 149 5. property which would r e s u l t from adherence to the s t r i c t l e t t e r of the zoning bylaw)? ^ Y e s O No Please comment: 22. If the answer to (21) was yes, how would you l i k e to see exceptions or variances provided for? 23. Do you f e e l the grounds f o r appeal under S e c t i o n 20 should be changed? • Yes • No If "Yes", what changes? 24. Which of the f o l l o w i n g forms of appeal would you p r e f e r ? Please commen t. ^• ' A p p e a l to Planning Board • Appeal to separate l o c a l body Appeal to re g i o n a l ^ody • A p p e a l to P r o v i n c i a l body • Other (Please speci fy) ."TV-^;lAr . C ^\ ^ V H ft-i u,L..v_.c,. '150 6. - • PART IV; APPEAL - SUBDIVISION 25. Do you f e e l there should be some form o f appeal (other than to the M i n i s t e r or the Courts) to the d e c i s i o n s of the Town Planning Board on s u b d i v i s i o n matters? • Yes • No I f "Yes", what form of appeal? I .J L .. \ w \ : ^ A ' ^ ffl^-X ; 26. During the pe r i o d January 1965 to December 1967, how many . appeals have there been from d e c i s i o n s of your Planning Board or Council to . The M i n i s t e r 0  . The Courts 27. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l gounds. f o r appeal: 28. State any other opinions you may have regarding appeal and obje.cti.o-ns. ,• /, g>, <L ^  v u VA^ . ; : ] TI- A A A •<•'•.-• ^ ^ ^ . ^ i s yvv-oir ^ . ( A , ccv^^c-A - j a J- s ' T ' l . ( - i c,-..,wc-li •( A ,c i i .-• u.-i. A fAA...^.A ' { " L r w A d v •. • 4-C a . c : - ^ ^ ^ f. V-t A t " pi,<A-vittv c vv(>j Uvcc L Ox. A «XA- VO\^A. c|.ct)c( 7. 151 29. L i s t any suggestions you have f o r improving or adding to t h i s •questionnaire. ? ( U c ( 1 0 T V I U / ) v ^ < > v i .•vi:_ (X w.c. _c_- v_ <T uL;. \GV Date Sent: MttUM 4-/60 152 Date Received: Hfnu,aLJLQ QUESTIONS • Name: _Q _ Municipal U n i t : j^ -g-gr »--r^  Popul a t i on: ^____^£ • Chairman, Town Planning Board C C i t y , Town or Municipal C l e r k B o t h e r (pjcmn/o^ 1)//<?c N/<> v  PART 1: GENERAL 1. Do you have s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? er^Yes • No 2. Do you enforce the s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? EfYes • No Comments, i f any: ri'cf k //r> A e. ct w * /•> V s. y 3. Do you have a zoning bylaw? erYes • No < ' 4. If the answer to (3) was yes,' do you enforce t h i s zoning bylaw? es • No Comments, i f any: £ •.:> c,Li^ .  5. Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d with the county r e g i s t r a r of deeds? B-fes • No 6. If the answer to (5) was yes, i s t h i s Town Pla n , i n your o p i n i o n , an e f f e c t i v e document? • Yes EiiJo 2. 153 7. Do you have an a c t i v e Town Planning Board? sHes D No 8. Does the Town Planning Board meet r e g u l a r l y ? _KfeT • No 9. Does the Town Planning Board c&rry out the f u l l range of duti e s p r e s c r i b e d under the Town Planning Act? B-f^s a NO . > ? 10. Has your municipal u n i t adopted a b u i l d i n g bylaw? crimes oNo 11. Do you have a b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee? EfYes D N O 12. I f the answer to (11) was yes, has the c o u n c i l or b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee assumed the Planning Board's r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r the i s s u i n g of b u i l d i n g permits? EKYes • No Comments: PART 11: OBJECTIONS 13. Where your Council i s c o n s i d e r i n g w r i t t e n o b j e c t i o n s to an O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw, does t h i s take the form of an open hearing i n which i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l as well as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? Please e x p l a i n the manner in which your Council t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s to the O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw. f ^ A 3. 154 14. Do you f e e l that adequate scope i s given to persons o b j e c t i n g to. an o f f i c i a l town plan or zoning bylaw? tsTes • No Comments, 1f any: PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN _ec.-z.cm 20 of the Town Planning Act, as amended in 1965, provides: "When a person is dissatisfied with the decision of an official in the course- of hi.s administration of this Act or of a by-law nndp. under thin Act. he mau avneal from this decision to the cox Section "When in: . . . . made under this Act, he may appeal from this decision to the council by' giving notice in writing of such appeal to the clerk not later than fifteen days after the decision has been communicated to The council may, after hearing the appellant and the Official and any other person, affirm, vary or rescind the decision official but nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize council to waive any requirement of the by-law or person to contravene any such requirement". him. of the "o permit any the 15. Is there any tendency f o r persons seeking a change or seeking to prevent a change, to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r , e i t h e r before or a f t e r C ouncil has decided on the matter? E-Yes PI ease yy-'j-'h.c • No comment: 16. Do you f e e l that a person d i s s a t i s f i e d with the d e c i s i o n of Council with regard to a zoning bylaw or o f f i c i a l town p l a n , should be permitted to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? • Yes t r f f o ^ Please s t a t e why: A 7 t ^9 17. How many appeals were heard by your Council under S e c t i o n 20 of the Town Planning Act during the p e r i o d January 1, 1965 to December 31, 1967? 4. 155 18. ino'w many of these appeals went from your Council to: .. The M i n i s t e r of Municipal A f f a i r s . The County Court _____^___ " ' . The Supreme Court of Nova S c o t i a 1 9 . I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l reasons why a p p l i c a n t s appealed: . From the d e c i s i o n of your Council . ' . To the M i n i s t e r ______________ To the Courts. ,/ w. t-< c ••/ ( ^ - t tc«+ o-lx_^,.._<. _ _ V A _~A C<?<:.<,•<- 20. In your o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n ( S e c t i o n 20) of the Town Planning Act used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes OTTo Please comment why: • People don't understand t h e i r r i g h t s • P r o c e dure i s too cumbersome O-Community i s small • Appeal cost ( l e g a l fees) too high E f f t h e r (please s p e c i f y ) ___________ . J - T ^ - i *'^,Z.\'->?.. 2 1 . In your o p i n i o n , should the Town Planning Act r e l a t i n g to zoning provide f o r exceptions (with the exact c o n d i t i o n s under which minor exceptions may be granted set out i n the bylaw or Act) or varlances (a method of safeguarding the i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner against the i n v a s i o n of h i s fundamental r i g h t of p r i v a t e 156 property which would r e s u l t from adherence to the s t r i c t l e t t e r of the, zoning bylaw)? Yes • No Please comment: M c / L i A>x-«s->T-I C ,(j^f^ ^~ 22. If the answer to (21) was yes, how would you l i k e to see exceptions or variances provided f o r ? 23. Do you f e e l the grounds f o r appeal under S e c t i o n 20 should be changed? E.-Ye's • No I f "Yes", what changes? 24. Which of the f o l l o w i n g forms of appeal would you p r e f e r ? Please comment. • Appeal to Planning Board Cs!>Appeal to separate l o c a l body . ' • Appeal to r e g i o n a l body • Appeal to P r o v i n c i a l body • Other (Please s p e c i f y ) 6 . PART IV:- APPEAL - SUBDIVISION 25. Do you f e e l there should be some form of appeal (other than to the M i n i s t e r or the Courts) t c the d e c i s i o n s of the Town Planning Board on s u b d i v i s i o n matters? Y>s r_No If "Yes", what form of appeal? ^ . ^ t ^ C--^SL^A. JLfit^-Jl 26. During the p e r i o d January 1965 to December 1967, how many .appeals have there been from d e c i s i o n s of your Planning Board or Council to . The M i n i s t e r / ^  . The Courts 27. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l gounds, f o r appeal: ... , J 28. State,any other opinions you may have regarding appeal and o b j e c t i o n s . L i s t any suggestions you have f o r improving or adding to t h i s ques t i o n n a i re. FOR OFFICE USE Date Sent: T 5 T Date Received: QUESTIONS Name /> r i 1 9 6 6 c • (sct/&'S Municipal U n i t : L 0 O t C c ff-f^Jopu 1 a11 1. o n: • Chairman, Town Planning Board D C i t y , Town or Municipal Clerk •^Other • . PART 1: GENERAL 1. Do you ha Ye s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? d/ves • No 3. Do you enforce the s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? t / Yes • No . Comments, i f any: //Ao.^^.^ / g t ^ ^ ^ ^ ;.^...<.>4,, Do you have a.zoning bylaw? > . •'Yes • No 4. If the answer to (3) was yes, do you enforce t h i s zoning bylaw? E^Yi es • No Comments, i f any: TJ/Z^.J// ./< Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d with the county r e g i s t r a r of deeds? ElYes • No If the answer to (5) was yes, i s t h i s Town Plan, i n your o p i n i o n , an e f f e c t i v e document? a r t e S • N O J^-^s^^^^^sS^^^^'^^^&r J^CZ^^T 2. 160 7. Do you have an a c t i v e Town Planning Board? gi^Yes • No 8. Does the Town- Planning Board meet r e g u l a r l y ? B'Yes nNo gcf s & a « 7 f ^ ^ ^ - y €L. 9. Does the Town Planning Board c&rry out the f u l l range of dut i e s p r e s c r i b e d under the Town Planning Act? o' Yes ONo 10. Has your municipal unit adopted a b u i l d i n g bylaw? t A e s ONo 11. Do you have a b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee? E^Yes D N O gsn*6 st-^U c*~^> (eftf&ea& 4-+*-<*6 ^LU^A^ 12. If the answer to (11). was. yes , has. the c o u n c i l or b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee assumed the Planning Board's r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r the i s s u i n g of b u i l d i n g permits? ° Yes • No Comments: ^<^uz^rAz s«? A - J ^ ^ J A PART 11 : OBJECTIONS * • ' 1 a<^^L^,U.J 13. Where your Council i s c o n s i d e r i n g w r i t t e n o b j e c t i o n s to an . O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw,.does t h i s take the form, of an open hearing i n which i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l as well as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? Please e x p l a i n the manner in which your Council t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s to the O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw-. 3. 161 14. Do you f e e l that adequate scope i s given t o persons o b j e c t i n g to an o f f i c i a l town plan o r zoning bylaw? F Y e s ^WTTo Comments, i f any: ^ . / , ^;.r<</<> -<U PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN Section 20 of the Town Planning Act., as amended in 1965, provides: "When a person is dissatisfied with the decision of an official in the course of his administration of this Act. or of a by-law made under this Act, he may appeal from this decision to the council by giving notice in writing of such appeal to the clerk not later than fifteen days after the decision has been communicated to him. The council may, after hearing the appellant and the Official and any other person, affirm, vary or rescind the decision of the official but nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the council to waive any requirement of the by-law or to permit any person to contravene any such requirement". 15. Is there any tendency f o r persons seeking a change or seeking to prevent a change, to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r , e i t h e r before or a f t e r Council has decided on the matter? Yes • N o PI ease comment: tJ^9-?ny. y^-ws^ A-t+^SS// ./iS-* <ff^f2^U<r-^ , Z/s.Ps'^^/t . - ^ St/fa; •• <^r<C; 16. Do you f e e l that a person d i s s a t i s f i e d with the d e c i s i o n of Council with regard to a zoning bylaw or o f f i c i a l town p l a n , should be permitted to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? _&es _/N O Please s t a t e why: /fCf s S / ^ n . ^ t ^ ^ Z , . ' J^&*Z*^L*A/L. fas tf.fz&e.^.A /j^.<t<^f 17. How many appeals were heard by your Council under S e c t i o n 20 of the Town Planning Act during the p e r i o d January 1, 1965 to December 31, 1967? 4. 162 IS. How many of these appeals went from your Council to: . The M i n i s t e r of Municipal A f f a i r s . The County Court .  . The Supreme Court of Nova S c o t i a - 19. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l reasons why a p p l i c a n t s appealed: From the d e c i s i o n of your Council c ^ A.^ruu- .y.^<-/^C a^&sj..,*.,.^  To the M i n i s t e r To the Courts ^x>.-y sA^?&<.>-$dis^ 20. In your o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n ( S e c t i o n 20) of the Town Planning Act used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes G / N O Please comment why: • People don't understand t h e i r r i g h t s • P r o c e d u r e i s too cumbersome • Community i s small O Appeal cost ( l e g a l fees) too high • Other (please s p e c i f y ) 21. In your o p i n i o n , should the Town Planning Act r e l a t i n g to zoning provide f o r excepti ons (with the exact c o n d i t i o n s under which minor exceptions may be granted set out in the bylaw or Act) o r v a r i ances (a method of safeguarding the i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner against the i n v a s i o n of h i s fundamental r i g h t of p r i v a t e 163 5. property which would r e s u l t from adherence to the s t r i c t l e t t e r of the zoning bylaw)? y^Yes • No Please comment: If the answer to (21) was yes, how would you l i k e to see exceptions or variances provided for? Do you f e e l the grounds f o r appeal under S e c t i o n 20 should be changed? sfYes O N o " If "Yes", what changes? ^ j t < Which of the f o l l o w i n g forms of appeal would you p r e f e r ? Please comment. ^ A p p e a l to Planning Board -» -fiu.- ^<u^/{y a-*L±t u^ty • Appeal to separate l o c a l body ' • • Appeal to r e g i o n a l body . peal to P r o v i n c i a l body ^ j ^ J ^ ^ • Other (Please s p e c i f y ) :  164 6. PAR" IV: APPEAL - SUBDIVISION 25. Do you f e e l there should be some form of appeal ( o t h e r than to the M i n i s t e r or the Courts) to the d e c i s i o n s of the Town Planning Board on s u b d i v i s i o n matters? c/Yes ONo If "Yes", what form of appeal? Z ; /A ,. ^ s - i ^ . C/Jy .-^y.^z«A->- 26. During the p e r i o d January 1965 to December 1967, how many appeals have there been from d e c i s i o n s of your Planning Board or Counci1 to The M i n i s t e r - , &«.*./cL A The Courts 27. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l gounds f o r appeal: 28. State any other opinions you may have regarding appeal and o b j e c t i ons . ^(^u 6j*p£>4<./ /£^<^ .st/s*^ st^Ps _sj/t<$ S.^ST^^^^-7 165 2 9 . i ' s t any suggestions you have f o r improving or adding to t h i s ques.ti onnai re. Date Sent: x 0 Date Received: i - OUESTICNS // C / / l ~r> y/1966 .Name: /.'/ - / Municipal U n i t : J/tCtTK'^trfL P o p u l a t i o n : • Chairman, Town P1 anni ng . Board D C i t y , Town or Municipal Clerk s Other >Ytr. — 5 I M . ^ ' , PART 1: GENERAL 1. Do you have s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? c/Yes • No 2. Do you enforce the s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? E^Yes • No Comments, i f any: ' 3. Do you have a z.oni ng by law? t/Yes • No ' ' 4. I f the answer to (3) was ye s . do you enforce t h i s zoning bylaw? fi^Yes • No Comments, i f any: ,  5. Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d with the county r e g i s t r a r of deeds? b Y e s D N o 6. If the answer to (5) was yes, i s t h i s Town Pla n , i n your o p i n i o n an e f f e c t i v e document? Yes • No X6? 7. Do y-.-u have an a c t i v e Town Planning Board? & Vi.*s • No 8. Does the Town Planning Board meet r e g u l a r l y ? d ' i e s • N o S. Doer, t h e Town Planning Board cerry out the f u l l range of duties . p r e s c r i b e d under the Town Planning Act? j/ves • No 1 C . Has your municipal unit adopted a b u i l d i n g bylaw? _/res D N O 1 1 . Do you have a b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee? •s/Y.es D N O ^ 1 2 . If the answer to ( 1 1 ) was yes, has the c o u n c i l or b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee assumed the Planning Bo.ard's r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r the i s s u i n g of b u i l d i n g permits? • Yes • No Comments: ,yJ*-^c<aU c  PART I I : OBJECTIONS c<- ^-^^-^^ &*-c^ 1 3 . Where your Council i s c o n s i d e r i n g w r i t t e n o b j e c t i o n s to an O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw, does t h i s take the form of an open hearing i n which i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l as well as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? Please e x p l a i n the manner in which your Council t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s to the O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw. , _ • _ _ • / . .. [ 6 ~ / . . v ^ . 3. 168 !4. Do you f e e l that adequate scope i s given to persons o b j e c t i n g •Lc, •'. o f f i c i a l town plan or zoning bylaw? r^i&z DNo Comments, i f any: •  PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN Section 20 of the Town Planning Act, as amended in 1965, provides: "When a person is dissatisfied with the decision of an official in the course of his administration of this Act or of a by-law made under this Act, he may appeal from this decision to the council by giving notice in writing of such appeal to the clerk not later than fifteen days after the decision has been communicated to him. The council may, after hearing the appellant and the Official and any other person, affirm, vary or rescind the decision of the official but nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the council, to waive any requirement of the by-law or to permit any person to contravene any such requirement". 15. Is there any tendency f o r persons seeking a change or seeking to prevent a change, to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r , e i t h e r before or a f t e r C o uncil has decided on the matter? • Yes y N o Please comment L _ _ _ - 16. Do you f e e l that a person d i s s a t i s f i e d with the d e c i s i o n of Council with regard to a zoning bylaw or o f f i c i a l town p l a n , should be /• permitted to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? ^2/ 7u- cV-vdu -J-/"' Yes _No / if Please s t a t e why: ^6<v- 3 . c^/S-C £.<KsSf~ 17. How many appeals were heard by your Council under S e c t i o n 20 of the Town Planning Act during the p e r i o d January 1, 1965 to December 31 , 1967? X ) -rr- / ^ • 16? 18.- * •* many of these appeals went from your Council to; . The M i n i s t e r of Municipal A f f a i r s A/?Mcr . The County Court A/OAJ G . The Supreme Court of Nova S c o t i a A/Q<*/GR 19. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l reasons why a p p l i c a n t s appealed: . From the d e c i s i o n of your Council : ^ To the Mi ni s t e r . To the Courts 20. In your o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n ( S e c t i o n 20) of the Town Planning Act used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes j l N o Please comment why: • People don 11 understand t h e i r r i g h t s • Procedure i s too cumbersome • Community i s small • Appeal cost ( l e g a l fees) too high • Other (please s p e c i f y ) c^c cj_^^^^J! 21. In your o p i n i o n , should the Town Planning A c t ^ r e l a t i n g to zoning provide f o r excepti ons (with the exact c o n d i t i o n s under which minor e x c ep t i o n s m ay be granted set out i n the bylaw or Act) or vari ances (a method of safeguarding the i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner against the i n v a s i o n of h i s fundamental r i g h t of p r i v a t e 170 5. property which would r e s u l t from adherence to the s t r i c t l e t t e r of the zoning bylaw)? Ekyes J^No • , • Please comment: ~~7lLi^ yyjLt<:<J?J - ^-o^yy^^->7 Z" 22. If the answer to (21) was yes, how would you l i k e to see exceptions or variances provided for? , , — L - . i , . ^ . - < C P — = ___ w_ x _ I T - ^ ' " ^ — "Ti^ 23. Do you f e e l the grounds f o r appeal under S e c t i o n 20 should be changed? 6 Yes p o If "Yes", what changes? /_? 4 J'i'g.o/' '•^'•< ^ ^ a ^ ^ - . 24. Which of the f o l l o w i n g forms of appeal would you p r e f e r ? Please comment. • Appeal to Planning Board \ ^ A p p e a l to separate l o c a l body 'o •<i:-f' A L^Altspu-JLd  • . J J ofic^ • Appeal to re g i o n a l body _ • Appeal to P r o v i n c i a l body • Other (Please s p e c i f y ) -PAP" I V ; APPEAL - SUBDIVISION 25. Do you f e e l there should be some form of appeal ( o t h e r than to the M i n i s t e r or the Courts) to the d e c i s i o n s of the Town Planning Board on s u b d i v i s i o n matters? • Yes >CNO I f "Yes 1 1, what form of appeal? '  26. During the p e r i o d January 1965 to December 1967, how many appeals have there been from d e c i s i o n s of your PIanning Board or C o u n c i l to The M i n i s t e r /v&^se- The Courts _____ AA/J. 27. I f p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l gounds f o r appeal A-V/7. 28. State any other opinions you may have regarding appeal and 9 . . ^ s t any suggestions you have f o r improving or adding to t h i s -questi o-nne i re . 4 y' -f- \ •y i UK Ui" h i Li: U i c Date Sent: Wiuukii r / - Date Received: H^^hb QUESTIONS Name • V , C s v ^ W i f 0 ' " 1966 M u n i c i p a l - U n i t : r3fekpr, P o p u l a t i o n : S o D Chairman,•Town Planning Board C C i t y , Town or Municipal Clerk • Other PART 1 : GENERAL 1. Do you have s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? • Yes ,Cl No | 2. Do you enforce the s u b d i v i s i o n -regulations? es • No Comments, i f any 3. Do you have a zoning bylaw? •'Yes DNo If the answer to.(3) was yes, do you enforce t h i s zoning bylaw? • Yes • No Comments, i f any: \ ^ . . l l \Xt j - i x c i ...n A c i ^ 5. Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d with the county r e g i s t r a r of deeds? • Yes -a No If the answer to (5) was yes, i s t h i s Town Pla n , i n your o p i n i o n , an e f f e c t i v e document? • Yes • No 174 •'. ' Do you have an. a c t i v e Town- Planning Board? • Yes ,D'No U-_*- - — c ^ - i O-o P-Ce^ . V'5c4 \Jc c A y ^ , ^ p t u l f b j . 8 . Does the Town Planning Board meet r e g u l a r l y ? • X • Yes .•'No 9. Does the Town Planning Board carry out the f u l l range of d u t i e s • p r e s c r i b e d under the Town Planning Act? • Yes . •No 10. Has your municipal unit adopted a b u i l d i n g bylaw? .•'Yes • .No 11. Do you have a b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee? • Yes D N O ' 12. I f the answer to (11) was yes, has the c o u n c i l or b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee assumed the Planning Board's r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r the i s s u i n g of b u i l d i n g permits? ' / " ( <••-(•' '" -4-x-• Yes .,• No Comments: u>-^...vA_v, ( _..-g,<..>.c.r;» ^_.Uv\v----A S •  PART I I : OBJECTIONS W-.-c .-v.. <• <\ \^ \ f v ^ ^ 13. Where your Council i s c o n s i d e r i n g w r i t t e n o b j e c t i o n s to an O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw, does t h i s take the form of an open hearing i n which i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l as well as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? Please e x p l a i n the manner in which your Council t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s to the O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw. 3. 175 Do you f e e l that adequate scope i s given to persons o b j e c t i n g to an -of f i c i ai town plan or zoning bylaw? PYes DNo Comments, i f any: PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN Seat-ion 20 of the Town Planning Act, as amended in 1965, provides: "When a person is dissatisfied with the decision of an official in the course of his admini3tration of this Act or of a by-law made under this Act, he may appeal from this decision to the council by giving notice in writing of such appeal to the clerk not later than fifteen day3 after the decision has been communicated to him. The council may, after hearing the appellant and the Official and any other person, affirm, vary or rescind the decision of the official but nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the council to waive any requirement of the by-law or to permit any person to contravene any such requirement". 15. Is there any tendency f o r persons seeking a change or seeking to prevent a change, to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r , e i t h e r before or a f t e r C o uncil has decided on the matter? • Yes DNo Please comment: '• ' <.• .  y. ^ _;c'. V_.LA. n c„ Ii V---V V.» f !;,J 16. Do you f e e l that a person d i s s a t i s f i e d with the d e c i s i o n of Council with regard to a zoning'bylaw or o f f i c i a l town p l a n , should be permitted to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? • Yes nNo • ~ Please s t a t e why: 17. How many appeals were heard by your Council under S e c t i o n 20 of the Town Planning Act during the p e r i o d January 1, 1965 to December 31, 1967? iS. .now many of these appeals went from your Council to: . The M i n i s t e r of Municipal A f f a i r s . The County Court The Supreme Ceurt~of~'-'ova S c o t i a 19. I f possible', b r i e f l y l i s t , the t y p i c a l reasons why a p p l i c a n t s appealed: . From the d e c i s i o n of your Council '  . To the M i n i s t e r To the Courts 20. In your o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n ( S e c t i o n 20) of the Town Planning Act used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes • No Please comment why: • People don't understand t h e i r r i g h t s • P r o c e d u r e i s too cumbersome • Community i s small • Appeal cost ( l e g a l fees) too high • Other (please s p e c i f y ) 21. In your o p i n i o n , should the Town Planning Act r e l a t i n g to zoning provide f o r excepti ons (with the exact c o n d i t i o n s under which minor exceptions may be granted set out i n the bylaw or Act) or vari an ces (a method of safeguarding the i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner against the i n v a s i o n of h i s fundamental r i g h t of p r i v a t e :;r-1 ! 5. property which would r e s u l t from adherence to the s t r i c t • e l l e of th(e zoning bylaw)? • Yes n Mo Please comment: 22. If the answer to (21) was yes, how would you l i k e to see exceptions or variances provided for? 23. Do you f e e l the grounds f o r appeal under S e c t i o n 20 should be ch anged? • Yes O No If "Yes", what changes? 24. Which of the f o l l o w i n g forms of appeal would you p r e f e r ? Please comment. ' • Appeal to Planning Board • Appeal to separate l o c a l body • Appeal to r e g i o n a l tody • Appeal to P r o v i n c i a l body • Other (Please s p e d fy) 178 C. :_A«iT_ IV; APPEAL - SUBDIVISION 25. Do you f e e l there should be some form of appeal ( o t h e r than to the M i n i s t e r or the Courts) to the d e c i s i o n s of the Town Planning Board on s u b d i v i s i o n n a t t e r s ? • Yes • No If "Yes", what form of appeal? . . 26. During the p e r i o d January 1965 to December 1967 , how' many appeals have there been from d e c i s i o n s of your Planning Board or Council to . The M i n i s t e r . The Courts . 27. If p o s s i b l e , b r i e f l y l i s t the t y p i c a l gounds f o r appeal: 28. State any other opinions you may have regarding appeal and o b j e c t i ons. 179 29. L i s t any suggestions you have f o r improving or adding to t h i s q ues t i onnai re. 180 APPENDIX D  PRIVATE APPEALS PRIVATE APPEALS Mr. R.S. Lang, Director of the Community Planning Division explained "private appeals" as follows in a latter dated February 28, 1968: 1Private appeals*, as referred to on page 8 of my Amherst speech, means audiences granted by the Minister to developers whose applications for rezoning have been granted by the municipal authorities but have been recommended against by our Division. The developer usually appears with his solicitor and retinue of experts who try to refute my arguments; i t i s not a pleasant process for me. But more important, i t is unfair and costly to the developers who have gone through the relatively ,open t procedure of public hearings, Planning Board meetings and appearances before Council, only to be confronted with a behind-closed-doors, further series of obstacles. On the other hand, the Minister is concerned with his own role in these matters; he doesnft consider himself a rubber stamp and yet, i f he seriously considers zoning applications there is the danger that , municipal councils wi l l take the easy way out and approve everything, leaving i t to us to stop the bad ones. Its an interesting dilemma." APPENDIX E  POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT NOVA SCOTIA 183 TABLE E - l NOVA SCOTIA POPULATION IN COUNTIES, TOWNS, AND CITIES 1956 - 1966 1 Annapolis County 21,682 Annapolis Royal 765 Bridgetown 1,041 Middleton 1,769 Antigonish County 13,076 Antigonish 3,592 Cape Breton County 125,478 DoDdiiion 2,964 Glace Bay 24,416 Louisburg 1,314 New Waterford 10,381 Notrth Sydney 8,125 Sydney (City) 32,162 Sydney Mines 8,731 Colchester County 34,640 Stewiacks 1,024 Truro 12,250 Cumberland County 39,598 1961 22,649 800 1,043 1,421 14,360 4,344 131,507 2,999 24,186 1,417 10,592 8,657 33,617 9,122 34,307 1,042 12,421 37,767 3_9j56 21,579 805 1,060 1,765 14,890 4,856 129,572 2,960 23,516 1,617 9,725 8,752 32,767 9,171 35,700 982 13,007 35,933 Nova Scotia, Department of Trade and Industry, Economics and Devel opment Division, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Nova-Scotia - An Economic Profile  Volume V. 1967. Table 1, pp. 57-59, and Dominion Bureau of Statistics Census. 1966. Cumberland County (continued) Amherst 10,301 Oxford 1,545 Parrsboro 1,849 Springhill 7,348 Digby County 19,869 Digby 2,145 Guvsborough County 13,802 Canso 1,261 Mulgrave 1,227 Halifax County 197,943 Dartmouth 21,093 Halifax City 93,301 Hants County 24,889 Hunstport 1,298 Windsor 3,651 Inverness County 18,235 Inverness 2,026 Port Hawkesbury 1,078 Kings County 37,816 Berwick 1,134 Kentville 4,937 Wolfville 2,497 2__1 10,788 1,471 1,834 5,836 20,216 2,308 13,274 1,151 1,145 225,723 46,966 92,511 26,444 1,381 3,823 18,718 2,109 1,346 41,747 1,282 4,612 2,413 184 1S__ 10,551 1,426 1,835 5 ,380 19,827 2,305 12,830 1,190 1,124 244,948 58,745 86,792 26,893 1,438 3,765 18,152 2,022 1,866 42,249 1,311 5,176 2,533 Lunenburg County Bridgewater Lunenburg Mahone Bay Picton County New das cow Picton Steilarton Trenton Westville Queen*s County Liverpool Richmond County Shelburne County Clarke1s Harbour Lockport Shelburne Victoria County  Yarmouth County  Yarmouth County TOTALS 1956 34,207 4,445 2,859 1,109 44,566 9,998 4,564 5,445 3,240 4,247 12,744 3,500 10,961 14,604 945 1,207 2,337 8,185 22,392 8,095 694,717 19__1 34,998 4,497 3,056 1,103 43,908 9,782 4,534 5,327 3,140 4,159 13,155 3,712 11,374 15,208 945 1,231 2,408 8,266 23,386 8,636 737,007 185 1966 36,114 4,755 3,154 1,296 44,490 10,489 4,254 5,191 3,229 4,147 12,807 3,60? 11,218 16,284 1,002 1,284 2,654 8,001 23,552 8,319 756,039 186 3 o N O o H 3 ^ . O o co I H i n o H sa •H -p o o CO flj > "8 -3 M O N O N O O C>- H £>-• • • • • • » O N H O r-l rH rH N O CM CM CO - * CO «A CM —4" O g "A >f a a vtf o' \b' o" IN if\ (\! r-- CO U N O CO N O ~* O O N N O H 3 § C N O H * ^ 3 H CO CM 4 O vO • • • • • • • UN H O N -4" -4^  H N O «o o n IA H <r\ o o> o co O « 4 -4" C - t > -4 rl O ^ S\ O -4- CM H O N UN H vO U N • • U N CM U N -4" o U N N O CM N O O N U N N O N O -* C O c~ *\ •> •» CM O N o so £> a 3 U N o H U N O N •K L O CN- CM N O • • « • CM U N H N © CM cS CO O N CJN O N O U N •\ <p\ A CM N O CO vO i r \ U N O N H *\ CM U N -4 c>-• • • O CM H ITS U N -4* N O O N C O O N H rH »v «v CM -4 -4-CM £ sO lA {^i • • • C N N O E> -4" • • • O N 4 i— I £>- CM » « • O - N O H CM rH N O • • • CO Q H -4 CO U I o U •P CO d> (-1 O (0 t si m • H ca CD •rl H • H C - P c •H O o JH •H 3 "2 +5 .p q O O id p HO cd fl t-l U • P • H g (0 c •3 co O o o o U N CO H 8 CO N O O N CM 8 U N O N rH O N H N O CM U N O N C O U N O O N N O •> 8 •K O C O O - N O tr\ CM N O t> O N -4- O N CM ON O N C - o -4- H -4- CM CO UN O -4" £>- N O O N N O N O ON C O CM t> UN UN ON H -4- N O UN •I •K •\ •K •V •K . •V ON UN O N UN N O CM N O C O C O ON o CM H ON H H CO CM &3 Tf ON •P fl CO - H fl CO fl53 O "8 A O •H •P w cd •°« •A CO cd H •d H U N ON 5 13 CM N O O N 1 UN O N H CO to § o CO P Q a) o o co Nova Scotia Voluntary Planning Board, "First Plan for Economic Development to 1968" (Halifax: Queen's Printer, February 1966), Table F-5. TABLE E-3 J  LABOUR FORCE IN THE SERVICE SECTOR  NOVA SCOTIA. 1951 and 1961 Category 1951 1961 % Increase Retail 23,656 Wholesale Trade 8,587 Finance, Insurance and Real Estate 3,559 Community, Business and Professional Services 17,057 Personal, Domestic and Miscellaneous Services 14,909 Public Administration 7,513 Totals 75,281 Defense 15,376 Total Services and Defence 90,657 Source: Census of Canada, 1951 and 1961 27,160 9,603 5,652 27,380 17,573 9,342 96,730 27,474 124,184 14.8 11.8 58.8 60.5 17.9 24.3 28.5 78.7 37.0 NOTE: The 1951 data were changed to conform to the new Standard Industrial Classification used in the 1961 census. 3lbid. Table F-6 188 TABLE E-4 4 LABOUR FORCE IN THE SUPPORTING SECTORS  NOVA SCOTIA. 1951 and 1961 Sector 1951 1961 % Change Construction 16,391 15,524 -5 .3 Transportation 15,521 16,863 +8.6 Storage 289 216 -25.3 Communication 2,354 5,456 +131.8 Electricity, Gas and Water 2,567 2,427 - 5 .6 Totals 37,122 40,486 +9.1 Source: Census of Canada, 1951 and 1961 4 Ibid . Table F-7 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093578/manifest

Comment

Related Items