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

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_1968_A8 M45.pdf [ 8.33MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0093578.json
JSON-LD: 1.0093578+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0093578.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0093578+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0093578+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0093578+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0093578 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0093578.txt
Citation
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 April,  1968  In p r e s e n t i n g  this  thesis  in partial  advanced degree a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y  Library  shall  agree that  make i t f r e e l y  permission  available  I agree that the  f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y .  copying of t h i s  thesis  I further  f o r scholarly  by t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n -  tatives.  I t i s understood  financial  gain  shall  o f B r i t i s h Columbia,  f o r extensive  p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d  f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an  that  copying o r p u b l i c a t i o n  n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n  of this  thesis f o r  permission.  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 V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a Date  April.  1968  Columbia  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 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, through the following hypothesis: The Town Planning 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: 1. Systems Mainteance; 2. Community Planningj 3. Openness; 4. Efficiency; 5. Effectiveness; 6. Justice. The hypothesis i s tested and proven invalid.  However the test  i t s e 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 v a l i d i t y of the hypothesis, namely, "not proven". Notwithstanding the problem i n establishing and testing the hypothesis, i t i s f e l t that the thesis i s 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 i s based upon systems theory.  A  conceptual framework i s a means of organizing concepts and facts  about a given class of phenomena i n a consistent and logically satisfying manner while lacking the precision of a theory. The main sources of supporting data for the conceptual framework 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.  iii TABLE OF CONTENTS  Page ABSTRACT  i  TABLE OF CONTENTS  iii  LIST OF TABLES  v  LIST OF FIGURES  v  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  vi  Chapter I  II  III  IV  INTRODUCTION  1  CHAPTER OUTLINES  9  CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK - SYSTEMS THEORY  12  SYSTEMS THEORY  13  STRUCTURES OF POLITICAL LIFE  20  PROCESSES OF POLITICAL LIFE  22  THREE CLASSES OF VARIABLES  30  THE COURTS  32  THE REMEDIES  37  NOVA SCOTIA CASES  41  SUMMARY  45  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 V  VI  Page THE HYPOTHESIS AND TEST OF HYPOTHESIS  71  QUESTIONNAIRE  71  INPUT VARIABLES  79  OUTPUT VARIABLES  82  HYPOTHESIS  87  TEST OF HYPOTHESIS  87  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  2  SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, ZONING BY-LAW, OFFICIAL.TOWN PLAN. (QUESTIONS 1-6) .  81  REPLIES TO QUESTIONS 1-11  89  3 Table E-l  5  POPULATION IN COUNTIES, TOWNS, AND CITIES 1956 - 1966  183  E-2  LABOUR FORCE BY INDUSTRY, NOVA SCOTIA AND CANADA. 1951 and 1961  186  E-3  LABOUR FORCE IN THE SERVICE SECTOR, NOVA SCOTIA, 1951 and 1961  187  LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1  MODEL OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM  19  2  FEEDBACK MODEL  28  3  THE SYSTEMIC FEEDBACK LOOP  29  vi 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. "Cummunity Planning i n 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. 2  ^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 p r i o r i grounds. 2. The topics which Mr. Lang mentioned involved the three planning instruments known as the o f f i c i a l town plan, the zoning bylaw, 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 i n 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 i n 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 d i f f i c u l t 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 i s set out i n 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 i s 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 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: 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 questionnaire mailed to planning authorities and municipalities i n the Province. The questionnaire and individual replies are set out i n Appendix C. Certain characteristics of the questionnaire and the treatment of i t cast the results of the test of the hypothesis i n doubt. 1.  The questionnaire was not designed with the conceptual frame-  work or the hypothesis i n mind.  It was designed to gather information  mainly about planning appeal and review i n 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 f i n a l 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 i n the Province, which  5  would have involved mailing out somewhere i n 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 o f f i c i a l s  judging by the offices of the respondents.  Planning o f f i c i a l s  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 d i f f i c u l t 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 i n the replies.  One of the respond-  ents, Halifax Regional Planning Commission, i s 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 Total Population of Municipal Units  Population (1966) 5,191 61,000 90,000 244,943 10,489 40,325 86,792 32,767 326,564  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 i s useful at this point i n the thesis. Appeal and review serve two broadly defined purposes:  one i s  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 i n which there i s 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 i n the proper, i . e . legal manner and where possible i n 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. are:  These purposes  f i r s t to provide an opportunity for citizens to voice their  concerns and to meaningfully participate i n the process of selfgovernment 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 i n 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 s comments on the role of procedure 1  i n zoning.  Milner noted that zoning procedures must serve four  purposes:$ Main Purposes 1.  " . . . z o n i n g procedure ought to be aimed at assuring that the by-law complies with the o f f i c i a l town plan or that a suitable explanation i s offered why i t does not."  2.  " . . . t o ensure that reasonable steps have been taken to -enable the council, i n forming i t s policy and drafting i t s precise by-laws, to inform i t s e l f f u l l y of the implications of i t s 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 t s 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 p o l i t i c a l system and between the p o l i t i c a l system and the environment. Appeal and review are reiterative functions i n the sense that the process of appeal and review can take place only after a decision has been or i s l i k e l y 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 i n 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 i s 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 i s some authority to whom the appeal can be directed and who i s competent to carry out the review.  Within the p o l i t i c a l 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 p o l i t i c a l 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 i s 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. framework i s provided by systems theory.  The conceptual  Systems theory defines the  p o l i t i c a l system, locates the subject-matter of the thesis, and provides the conceptual tools for the analysis of relationships between the planning system and i t s environment and between elements within the planning and p o l i t i c a l systems.  The planning system i s defined by the  Town Planning Act and i s a subsystem of the p o l i t i c a l system of the Province of Nova Scotia (provincial and local authorities). The functioning of a system i s 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 P o l i t i c a l Life^ i n which the concepts of systems, p o l i t i c a l 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 i n the administrative process.  The courts are analysed as a review body.  The judicial  ^ a v i d East on, A Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c a l L i f e . (New York: John Wiley and Sons L t d . , 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 i s 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 i s 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 i s  experiencing a very low rate of growth, and that this growth i s  11 concentrated i n a few urban centres.  In planning terms this means  that the problem i s 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 i s devoted to a description of the government of Nova Scotia, provincial and local authorities. Subsumed under this section i s 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. questionnaire i s included i n Chapter V. Chapter VI contains the conclusions.  A copy of the  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 i s the p o l i t i c a l system since community planning i s a function of the p o l i t i c a l system, and this i s a thesis about procedures i n regard to the o f f i c i a 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 p o l i t i c a l 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 i s the conceptual framework.  Later i n this  chapter the systems relevant variables are grouped under input variables, systems variables, and output variables. w i l l provide the criteria for the hypothesis.  Output variables  Data for the hypothesis  and i t s test are set out i n Chapters III and IV.  This chapter sets  up the conceptual framework and briefly discusses the three classes of variables. Province 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). 1  13 SYSTEMS THEORY The systems approach i s 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 i s 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 i n 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 i n the definition by adding: " . . . c e r t a i n 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 A . D . Hall and R.E. Fagen "Definition of a System", General Systems V o l . 1, 1956, p. 18. 2  3  Ibid-  ^Anatol Rapoport, "Some Approaches to P o l i t i c a l Theory", David Easton ed., Varieties of P o l i t i c a l 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 i n 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 w i l l not attempt to "solve" any problems through the use of systems theory, but i t w i l l use the theory as a means of identifying c r i t i c a l 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 i s 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, i n which the system becomes disorganized, that i s homogeneous, whereas the alternative i s an open system which imports information, or energy, negative entropy, i n which case the system tends to increase i n 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 " . . . t h e ensemble of organic regulations which act to maintain the steady state of the organism..."^  ^Ludwig von Bertalanffy, "General System Theory — A C r i t i c a l Review", General Systems. V o l . VII, 1962, p.6.  15 Homeostasis i s 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 i s attempting to achieve, a change i n a c r i t i c a l variable leading to a predispostion toward another state of equilibrium at a higher level of complexity i f the system i s "progressing", or a lower level of complexity i f the system i s degenerating".  A p o l i t i c a l system i s 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 i s 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 i n 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. 6  Ibid,  p.#  The response (output)  16 i n terms of the production of bolts or planning i s 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 i s likewise described by this model since the control apparatus enables the system to respond to feedback cum stimuli i n 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 p o l i t i c a l system, as are the local and provincial levels of government. David Easton defines the p o l i t i c a l system " . . . a s 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 c a l l authoritative policies, decisions, and implementing a c t i o n s . . . " . An alternative definition of the p o l i t i c a l system was set out by Gabriel Almond i n which he states " . . . t h e p o l i t i c a l system i s that  7David Easton, A Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c a l L i f e . (New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1965) p. 21. David Easton, "Categories For the Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c s " , p. 144. 8  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  p o l i t i c a l system i s the legitimate, order-maintaining or transforming system i n the society."^  Almond s definition i s less useful for our f  purposes since i t was essentially designed to explain differences between p o l i t i c a l systems, nevertheless, some of his definitions and concepts w i l l prove to be usable i n this thesis. David Easton*s systems approach w i l l provide the framework for conceptual thinking about appeal, review, planning, the o f f i c i a l town plan, zoning by-laws, and subdivision regulations. In A Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c a l Life which provides a framework for the analysis of appeal, review, and planning, David Easton notes three methodological objectives: 1.  " . . . t o establish c r i t e r i a for identifying the important variables requiring investigation i n a l l p o l i t i c a l 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 p o l i t i c a l system. ^Gabriel A. Almond and James S. Coleman, editors, The Politice," of Developing Areas. (Princeton, N . J . : Princeton University Press, I 9 6 0 ) p. 7 . 10  David Easton, A Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c a l L i f e , p . 8  ^ I b i d . p. 1 3 .  18 As a consequence of the systems characteristics of p o l i t i c a l l i f e , a p o l i t i c a l system comprises a system of behaviour, i s surrounded by environments, i s open, that i s 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 p o l i t i c a l system.  "Disturbances"  are simply the influences from the other environments, and from within (subsystems of the p o l i t i c a l system) which compel the p o l i t i c a l system to respond by changing i t s product to the environment and/or by making structural modifications. In very simple terms the systems approach to p o l i t i c a l l i f e can be envisaged as model comprising the p o l i t i c a l system, outputs to the environment, and inputs from the environment which are linked together i n a systematic fashion. Figure 1 diagrammatically sets out components and their relationships. The concepts composing the systems analysis of p o l i t i c a l l i f e f i t into two broad classes — those treating the structures and those treating the processes of p o l i t i c a l l i f e .  ^Ibid.  P.18  ENVIRONMENT  I N P U T 6  ENVIRONMENT  THE Demands Support  POLITICAL SYSTEM  ENVIRONMENT  Decisions and Actions  0 U T P U T S  ENVIRONMENT  FIGURE I 13 MODEL OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM  •^David Easton, A Framework For P o l i t i c a l Analysis (Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1965) Diagram 3, "A Simplified Model of a P o l i t i c a l System".  20 STRUCTURES OF POLITICAL LIFE P o l i t i c a l structures are designed to facilitate ends of the p o l i t i c a l systems, the central end being persistence, the retention of the a b i l i t y to cope with demands of a stressful and non-stressful sort through suitable responses i n the form of outputs. The structural components of the p o l i t i c a l system are: the authorities, receptors, responding agents, gatekeepers, and channels. These components are essentially defined by their function (including powers) and location i n the p o l i t i c a l system. 1.  Authorites The authorities l i e within the p o l i t i c a l 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 t s environment.  Typical authorities are the  legislature, the courts, and the executive. 2.  Receptors Receptors are authorities to whom feedback i s d i r e c t e d . ^  3.  Responding Agents Responding agents may be authorities or members of the p o l i t i c a l 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 P o l i t i c a l L i f e , p. 420.  21 In the aggregate, their actions may lead to a new set of circumstances that can be designated as a generalized response i n the system."^ 4.  Gatekeepers Gatekeepers are those specialized elements of the p o l i t i c a l system, located at either the boundaries or well within the p o l i t i c a l system whose function i s 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 i s "conversion") may be performed by the authorities, p o l i t i c a l 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 i n 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, i n a relatively autonomous fashion, " . . . i n response to internal moral norms that inspire them to l i v e up to the ideal expectation of the culture with regard to what i s expected of the authorities i n the system."^ Finally, one of the crucial variables i n the activation of the gatekeeping function i s the timing of the flow of demands. 15  I b i d , p. 247  •^The Politics of Developing Areas, p. 17. 17 A Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c a l L i f e , p. 97.  22 5.  Channels Channels are paths of flow for input and output elements comprising " . . . t h e interrelationships among such familiar secondary p o l i t i c a l structures as interest groups, parties, opinion leaders, mass media, p o l i t i c a l leaders, legislatures, and relevant unorganized publics.  What makes i t possible  to describe connections among these structures i n a p o l i t i c a l system as channels i s that regardless of where a demand i s 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 i n the number of channels or increase i n specialization of channels, or both. 19  Channels may be of two types, direct or mediated.  In the  former case, information (or demands) i s transmitted directly to the authorities.  In the latter case, information (or  demands) i s 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 i n the context of the 18  I b i d . p. 119.  19Ibid p. 418. r  23 systems analysis approach are designed to engender support for the regions, system, or authority, by meeting existing demands, forestalling future demands by anticipatory action, or engendering a generally favourable climate for the system i n a diffuse manner. Outputs, l i k e inputs, may cross the boundaries of the system or may move from one element of the p o l i t i c a l system to another.  Move-  ment within the system i s 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 i n an output which crosses the system's boundary. Outputs and inputs can be viewed as exchange and transactions — two subsidiary notions which w i l l be important i n the thesis. "Echanges can be used to refer to the actuality of the relationships, to the fact that the p o l i t i c a l system and those systems i n 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 p o l i t i c a l 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 i n the environment that i s relevant to p o l i t i c a l stress."^1 Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c a l L i f e , p. 26. ^ I b i d . p. 26  24  Inputs are the raw materials of the p o l i t i c a l process i n the forms of demands and supports. This thesis i s mainly concerned with demands i n the form of appeals and demands to the authorities to modify or repeal a given enactment. A demand i s defined " . . . a s 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 . " Demands may be broad or narrow i n scope. the authorities.  2 2  Demands are directed toward  Demands, and supports originating within the  p o l i t i c a l system are termed "withinputs". Demands, while essential for the rationale of the p o l i t i c a l system, are i t s greatest source of danger since demands are potentially stress-inducing both i n terms of volume and i n terms of content. Stress i n either case " . . . w i l l tend to undermine the capacity of a system to produce i t s 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-  i s t i c s (complexity, dissension creating, d i f f i c u l t y i n treatment) the system's channels are unable to cope with the flow of demands within a suitable period of time and backlog of demands i s created.  Demands  are not processed and hence not converted into requisite outputs, resulting i n among other things, more untreatable demands and  22  I b i d . p.38  23  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 i s crucial i f the  system i s 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 a b i l i t y of the system to adapt to the demands.  It i s implicit i n  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 a r i s e , i f 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" i n content terms that the system simply cannot cope with i t and s t i l l maintain i t s 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 t s 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 p o l i t i c a l system w i l l be the same for both types of stress. 2  ^ I b i d . p. 58  At this stage Easton merely states that the  26 problem of demand input overload may be handled by an increase i n number of channels — which i s about as close to being specific about structura 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 information i f they are to maintaintthe desired levels of support. Feedback i s 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  " . . . t h e actual flow patterns and relatated  effects..."^  The meaningfulness of the feedback concept i s 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 i n terms of s k i l l s , imagination, and organizational a b i l i t y 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 authorities  1  willingness and  a n i l i t y (resources and competence) to respond to feedback from the environment and from subsystems.  These constraints are very  important with respect to the system's a b i l i t y to maintain the 25 Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c a l L i f e , p. 366. 26lbid, p.p. 363-364 A  requisite level of supports.  However, i t i s beyond the scope of this  thesis to analyze the constraints arising from motivational considerations. Information has two functions:  one i s to describe the state of  the system and the environment, and the other i s 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 i k e l y to be most successful. Information and demands often may be incorporated i n 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 i s that i t i s initiated by a reaction to a system s outputs. 1  Information feedback can be assessed i n terms of i t s volume, accuracy, delays i n transmission, direction, and the behaviour of the authorities.28 The phases around a feedback loop comprise: 1.  Stimuli i n the form of outputs and outcomes;  2.  Feedback response:  27  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 i s presented by Figure 3«  III  Information feedback 1  II  Feedback response  Producers of inputs of support and of demands  I  Producers of outputs  j ,  IV Output reaction  Feedback stimuli  FIGURE 2  3  0  FEEDBACK MODEL  ^ I b i d . Diagram 7, "The Four Phases of the Systemic Feedback Loop", p. 381.  The P o l i t i c a l System  Input boundary threshold  _Output boundary threshold  Producers of inputs  Producers of outputs demands Flow of information feedback about demands  Interaction between demands and support  support  To the Authorities Information feedback about support  To the Regime To the P o l i t i c a l Community  The Systemic Feedback Loop  FIGURE 3  J  THE SYSTEMIC FEEDBACK LOOP  Interaction between outputs and information about demands and support  Outputs  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  i n 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 i s 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 i n regard to the planning instruments. The output variables provide the c r i t e r i a 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 c l a r i f y thinking and point to useful concepts and insights about the operation of the system.  3 Charles E. Rice, "A Model for the Empirical Study of a Large Social Organization", General Systems. V o l . VI, 1961. 2  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 i s to be used for the input, output, and systems variables i s to be found i n Chapter IV.  Material i s  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 environment 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 i n which the system carries out i t s functions. Output variables are "...variables whose measurement would reflect the performance of any organization with respect to , . . " - ^ the goals of the organization or system.  33  Ibid.  34ibid.  32 CHAPTER III THE COURTS The role of the courts i n the administrative process i s described i n 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 i n regard to community  planning i n Nova Scotia the courts are used infrequently as a review device. The significance of the courts i n 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 i n common-law countries are able to infuse certain norms of behaviour into the administrative process. The courts influence the governmental process i n four main ways: l)  by interpreting the meaning of legislative enactments, rules, regulations and by-laws and thus playing the role of the authoritative impartial umpire where there i s 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 t s powers failed to authorize the type of municipal enactment i n which case council exceeded i t s jurisdiction and the by-law i s invalid. Likewise an enactment of the provincial legislature may be deemed ultra-vires of the province i f i t f a l l s within the federal jurisdiction under the British North America Act. The court's interpretative function combined with i t s authoritativeness means that legislative enactments, by-laws, and so forth have to be drafted with the courts* attitude i n mind because disregard w i l l lead to l i t i g a t i o n 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. their right of review.  The courts however preserve  The courts w i l l only exercise review on  questions of jurisdiction and law, or when a specific action or cause exists which l i e s within the judicial frame of reference, or where there i s a specific procedure by which the matter i s brought before  34 the attention of the courts*  In each case, the court reviews the  matter and f i n a l l y the court issues a decision (the outcome).  If the  decision i s unsatisfactory to the appellant or defendant, then the process of appeal and review can recommence depending upon the circumstances of the case.  With variations the same basic steps are  applicable i n any circumstance i n which an attempt i s 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 i s elucidated i n the following remark by John W i l l i s . 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 i s arrived at. They require that the authority honestly apply i t s 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 f a i r play and, i n 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 i s 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 thinking i n the following statement:  John W i l l i s , "Administrative Law i n Canada", Canadian Bar Review. 1961, Volume 39, p. 256. x  2  I b i d . p.p. 256-257.  35 In England . . . the courts have been diffident i n controlling the exercise of discretionary powers conferred by statute. Partly this flows from the omnipotence of Parliament, partly from a d i f f i c u l t y i n f i t t i n g bare discretionary powers into a pattern of legal thinking which i s focussed mainly on rights and duties and which reflects the nineteenth century laissezfaire outlook dominant i n 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 i e l d , however, i s not defined positively, but merely represents an area of possible action not prohibited by duties or contravening the rights of others. Mere powers are d i f f i c u l t 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 i s 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 i s 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 d i f f i c u l t for the courts to accept), are not wholly alien to judicial patterns of thought. But statutory powers which are discretionary and cannot be related i n their exercise to anything approaching a legal rule, but on the contrary are to be exercised i n accordance 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 i s not inherent i n 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 i n 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 i n English Law" i n 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 i s described i n the following terms by J . G . Pink: . . . i n an effort to achieve day to day working solutions to the problem (of administrative justice), microscopic distinctions must be drawn, i n each area of legislation, between more "individual preferences" expendable i n 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 d i s t i n c t i o n .  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 determine 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 f i e l d covered by the Town Planning A c t ) ,  7  an attempt to have the enactment i n 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, V o l . 23, A p r i l 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 i s 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 i s l i k e l y 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) i s 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 w i l l  generally not review a case on i t s merits, but instead on a point of law, unless, the decision i s so unreasonable as to constitute i n 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, i s significant i n 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 f i n a l interpreters i n the definition of words and meanings of statutes, rules, regulations, by-laws and other legal documents.  Declaratory Judgement The declaratory judgement i s 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 w i l l not issue i n cases whence there i s no person interested i n opposing the matter, or, i f the judgement w i l l not afford the p l a i n t i f f real r e l i e f , 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 i n regard to statutes and municipal by-laws to establish: 1. 2. 3. 4.  Validity of the enactment; Interpretation or effect; Validity of administrative acts of officers of the Crown; and Validity of decisions of statutory tribunals." Q  A l l a n Findlay, "Declaratory Judgement", The Law Society of Upper Canada (Lectures). (Toronto: Richard de Boo Ltd. 1961), p. 187. 8  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 i s to prevent somebody from undertaking a course of action that w i l l affect some persons* or groups* personal or property rights. Injunction i s an equitable remedy, whereas a prohibition i s 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 w i l l only be applied against an inferior tribunal, or a board or body which has a duty to act judicially.A judicial act i s 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, l i k e prohibition and the other remedies, i s discretionary, however, i f a p l a i n t i f f can show that he has a right that i s being violated he i s generally entitled to an injunction to 19  prevent recurrence of that violation.  An injunction w i l l not be  granted i f i t can be shown that the act complained of i s t r i v i a l , or, that another adequate remedy e x i s t s . ^ Mandamus The writ of mandamus i s issued by a court to compel some person or tribunal to carry out some duty imposed upon i t by law.^ p.  -  It  1 ° B . J . Mackinnon, "Prohibition, Certiorari, and Quo Warrants" Ibid 243. ^ I b i d . p. 293. ^ff-B-iyilliston,. "Injunctions", p. 88 p. 88. i 3 l b i d . p.p. 89-90 14F.A. Brewin, "Mandamus", Ibid, p. 273.  cannot be issued where the exercise of the duty i n question i s discretionary, that i s , the person or tribunal has a choice whether or not to carry out a duty. One of the points i n the writ of mandamus i s that "while mandamus l i e s 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 . . . i s an order by the Court quashing a ruling or decision of such staturtory tribunal which has gone outside i t s jurisdiction. " ^ A writ of certiorari  issues:  (a) where there i s want or excess of jurisdiction when the inquiry begins or during i t s progress; (b) when, i n the exercise of jurisdiction there i s - 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 i s fraud.^'  Bergman 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. 15  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 j u d i c i a l thinking i s to examine j u d i c i a l decisions.  I t i s even more pertinent  to examine decisions i n the j u r i s d i c t i o n that t h i s 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 l e g a l 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 j u d i c i a l process of Nova Scotia, and t h i s 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 t o 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. I t can be assumed for a variety of reasons that a certain number of appeals are resolved at the county court l e v e l 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, t h i s i s a matter f o r 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  1 8 , 1944/45 to Volume 5 2 , 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 c r i t e r i a .  Only  one case referred to the Town Planning Act, and this was i n conjunction with the Halifax City Charter, another case devolved upon an interpretation of the Halifax City Charter alone, and one was an expropriation 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 i s being put as a review body i n 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 Expropriation 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 i n admitting certain evidence and erred i n permitting certain questions of the witnesses. The appeal was dismissed because: l)  the appellants failed to allege "that the judge had erred i n improperly considering some element or thing which he should not have considered or that i n his valuations he acted upon 18  Maritime:^Provinces Reports v . 52 1966/67 p. 2 5 0 .  some error i n 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 i n this case, one concerns the manner i n 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 i n the eyes of the Supreme Court, the appeal would have been allowed. 20  2.  Re. Clarendon Development Limited.  This case f a l l s under municipal law (The Town Planning Act, R.S.N.S., 1 9 5 4 , c  2 9 2 , s. 16, The Halifax City Charter, s. 103 ( 2 ) ,  City of Halifax Ordinance 2 , Rules 4 , 5 , 2 2 , 2 4 and 4 0 ) 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 i n this case, and the meaning of the word "affected."  In effect an attempt was made to overturn the ordinance  ^Ibid. 20  I b i d V. 51 1965/66 p. 108  i n 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 i s one of law for the Court.  Its reasonableness i s determined by an examination  of a l l the circumstances, the objects sought to be obtained and the reason and necessity for i t s existence.  It must not be unreasonable  and oppressive as applied to certain property and as applied to the particular subject matter, even though i t s general purpose i s valid. There i s a legal presumption i n 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 i s made of the grounds for the issuance of a writ of mandamus. 3. Council.  Re. Johnston and the Committee on Works of the Halifax City 22  This case f a l l s 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 t s jurisdiction by failure to follow the rules of natural justice (Halifax City Charter ss. 109, 1 1 6 , 7 5 7 , Acts of I960 c. 6 5 , s. 1 3 ; Ordinance 5 0 ) .  ^ I b i d . p.p. 108-109 x  22  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 i n the vote on the resolution." 3 2  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 i n i t s proceedings. As was noted earlier though, the definition of a judicial act i s very broad.  !  SUMMARY The role of the courts i n 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 n u l l i f y administrative and legislative decisions can only do so i n highly restricted circumstances, where some specific right can be proven to have been affected and a person or group brings an action against the administrator or 23  Ibid.  24  I b i d , p.p. 345-346  administrative body.  The courts are therefore review bodies i n 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 i t s planning that are pertinent to the analysis of statutory provisions i n regard to the planning instruments.  Some additonal  materials was obtained throug the responses to the questionnaire."*" The general population, and economic and governmental characteri s t i c s of Nova Scotia are described, and the statutory processes regarding the planning instruments are also set out.  This material  i s used i n Chapter V i n the formulation and test of the hypothesis. While the reason for describing statutory processes i s selfevident, the reason for setting out the other information i s 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 t s rate of growth provides a basis (the replies to the questionnaire are another source) for the assumption that there i s a relatively low volume of demands which are being directed to the planning system.  THE PROVINCE Population and Economy  2  The population of Nova Scotia i s presently 756,039 compared to 3  ^•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 i n 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 i n 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 3 0 $ of the  population i n 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 leaving the Province i n the 1951-1961 decade.^  Nova Scotia's population  declined from an estimated 760,000 i n 1964 to the present 756,039 (1966).  6  The economic base of the Province i s 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 i n 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 f e l t i n manufacturing, other services, and construction.'''  Its impact i s especially marked i n 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 . Vlbid, p. 32.  "Population, Nova Scotia and Canada".  Government Nova Scotia i s divided into 66 municipalities. unincorporated area within the province.  There i s no  These municipalities are  rural municipalities, c i t i e s , towns, and villages.  Villages are  not mentioned i n the Town Planning Act, and so i n this thesis the term "municipality" w i l l henceforth not include villages.  A rural  municipality i s the municipal authority for that part of a county which has hot been incorporated as c i t i e s , towns, or villages. the county i s 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 i s 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 i s required then i n 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  Thus,  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.**  50  The Courts The courts merit a brief mention because they are an integral part of the p o l i t i c a l process i n 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 i s injuriously affected by a project under an o f f i c i a l town plan to obtain compensation from council ( 22(l)  ).  If there i s any question as to whether  Province of Nova Scotia, Municipal Affairs Act. R.S.N.S. 1954 Chapter 186. Section 4 (Halifax: Queen's Printer). 8  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, 1967 c. 73 (Halifax: Queen's Printer). 9  or not a property has been injured or about the amount and manner of payment of compensation, the matter shall be determined by arbitration ( 2 2 ( 2 ) ). Section 23 sets out the situation under which compensation i s not entitled. 1.  These situations occur where:  The injury occurs due to the passage of a zoning by-law  under this Act ( 23(l) ); 2.  Where the property i s affected by provisions i n an o f f i c i a l  town plan which "would have been enforceable without compensation i f they had been contained i n a zoning by-law" ( 2 2 ( 2 ) ); and 3.  Where the person i s entitled to compensation under another  act and this Act, he shall not be entitled to compensation under both ( 2 2 ( 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 i n the Supreme or County Court to obtain any or a l l of the remedies provided by law and set out i n this section ( 2 4 ( 1 ) ).  24 ( 2 ) The Court or a judge thereof may hear and determine the same at any time, i n Court or i n chambers, and i n addition to any other remedy or r e l i e f may a) make orders restraining the continuance or repetition of any such contravention or failure or the new or further contravention or failure i n respect of the same property; b) make orders directing the removal or destruction of any building or structures or part thereof which i s i n contravention of or f a i l s to comply with this Act, or an o f f i c i a 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  o r d e r i s not complied w i t h , t o e n t e r upon t h e l a n d and premises w i t h n e c e s s a r y workmen and equipment and t o remove and d e s t r o y t h e b u i l d i n g o r s t r u c t u r e o r p a r t t h e r e o f a t t h e expense o f t h e owner; and c ) make such f u r t h e r o r d e r as t o t h e r e c o v e r y o f t h e - expense o f any such removal and d e s t r u c t i o n , and f o r t h e enforcement o f t h i s A c t , o r o f f i c i a l town p l a n , by-law o r r e g u l a t i o n , and as t o c o s t s , as t h e Court o r judge deems p r o p e r ; and any such o r d e r may  be i n t e r l o c u t o r y , i n t e r i m o r  final.  S e c t i o n 25 p e r m i t s any d u l y a u t h o r i z e d o f f i c e r o r s e r v a n t o f c o u n c i l t o e n t e r any p r o p e r t y and conduct  such i n v e s t i g a t i o n s as  a r e n e c e s s a r y t o t h e purpose o f t h e A c t .  F i n a l l y , S e c t i o n 26  enables c o u n c i l t o e x e r c i s e any powers  g r a n t e d under t h i s A c t and o t h e r a c t s t o c a r r y out t h e purpose o f this  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 t h e same system.  political  I n a m a t t e r such as p l a n n i n g where t h e a p p r o v a l o f t h e  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 a c t i v i t i e s , t h e two  c l a s s e s o f a u t h o r i t i e s can be thought  of  o f as  l y i n g w i t h i n t h e same, a l b e i t l o o s e l y s t r u c t u r e d o r g a n i z a t i o n .  CONTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW, AND  The  OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN, SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS  o f f i c i a l town p l a n , t h e z o n i n g by-law, and s u b d i v i s i o n  r e g u l a t i o n s a r e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e v i c e s o r i n s t r u m e n t s which a r e designed t o accomplish  c e r t a i n ends which can be l o o s e l y grouped  under t h e heading o f "community p l a n n i n g " .  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 f l e x i b l e 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) t o 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 t o and alterations in-the o f f i c i a l town plan; (c) t o 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 prepared to any railway board or public authority having j u r i s d i c t i o n 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) t o 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 t r a n s i t , 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) t o 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 p r o v i s i o n f o r t h e method o f f i n a n c i n g any works and expenses t o be i n c u r r e d i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h o r i n c i d e n t a l t o t h e c a r r y i n g o u t o f t h e development p r e s c r i b e d i n t h e o f f i c i a l town p l a n o r any p a r t o f p a r t s o f such develoment. (2) I n a m u n i c i p a l i t y where t h e r e i s a board, a c o u n c i l , b e f o r e a d o p t i n g , amending, r e p e a l i n g an o f f i c i a l town o r e x e r c i s i n g any o f t h e powers r e f e r r e d t o i n s u b s e c t i o n ( l ) s h a l l r e q u e s t t h e board f o r a r e p o r t t h e r e o n u n l e s s a r e p o r t . h a s been subm i t t e d by t h e b o a r d t o t h e c o u n c i l w i t h i n s i x months p r i o r thereto.  I t i s noteworthy t h a t i n t h i s g e n e r a l grant o f powers t o c o u n c i l to for  p l a n f o r t h e community t h e r e i s u n c e r t a i n t y as t o whether p l a n n i n g streets, transportation f a c i l i t i e s ,  facilities  c a n be conducted without  p a r k s and o t h e r p u b l i c  t h e p r i o r e x i s t e n c e o f an o f f i c i a l  town p l a n , s i n c e i n t h e s e c t i o n 4 ( l ) d e a l i n g w i t h t h e s e m a t t e r s t h e o f f i c i a l town p l a n i s n o t mentioned.  As Mr. J.B. M i l n e r  notes:  The Nova S c o t i a A c t ... s e p a r a t e l y a u t h o r i z e s t h e c o u n c i l t o p r e p a r e a p l a n f o r development t o be known as "The O f f i c i a l Town P l a n " and t o p r e p a r e c o - o r d i n a t i n g p l a n s f o r harbour, r a i l w a y , r a p i d t r a n s i t , s t r e e t r a i l w a y and a i r p o r t f a c i l i t i e s , as w e l l a s s t i l l o t h e r p l a n s , o r o t h e r p r o v i s i o n s , f o r s t r e e t w i d e n i n g and p r o j e c t e d s t r e e t s . "  Once an o f f i c i a l town p l a n has been adopted c o u n c i l may n o t u n d e r t a k e any p u b l i c improvements i n c o n s i s t e n t o r a t v a r i a n c e the plan.^-  with  Whether o t n o t such a r e s t r i c t i o n a p p l i e s e q u a l l y t o  by-laws i s u n c e r t a i n . e x p l i c i t i n t h i s regard  The P l a n n i n g Act-  1-2  o f Ontario i s q u i t e  s t a t i n g t h a t except under c e r t a i n d e f i n e d  «J.B. M i l n e r , "Trends i n P l a n n i n g Law i n Canada", Nova S c o t i a Community P l a n n i n g C o n f e r e n c e. 1966. •^-Town P l a n n i n g A c t . S e c t i o n 5. P r o v i n c e o f O n t a r i o , The P l a n n i n g A c t . R.S.O. I960. Chapter 296. ( T o r o n t o : Queen's P r i n t e r , O f f i c e C o n s o l i d a t i o n , 19677. 1 2  55 circumstances no by-law shall be passed that i s not i n conformance with*the o f f i c i a l p l a n .  13  The zoning by-law i s 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 d i s t r i c t , 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 i n any d i s t r i c t , or fronting upon any street or part of a street, and prohibiting the erection of 13  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) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)  areas to be reserved for public purposes; width, location and gradients of streets; access to existing streets or highways; zoning provisions and building l i n e s ; size and shape of black and l o t s . - ^  PLANNING SYSTEM Authorities The authorities constituted by the Town Planning Act are described.  now  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 t h i s thesis.  1.  The Minister of Municipal Affairs i s empowered to approve  the o f f i c i a l town plan, and the zoning by-law and any amendments thereto, 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 t s duties.  He i s 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 o f f i c i a l town plan and any variations thereof; d) to prepare a zoning by-law and any amendments thereto; c) to act i n an advisory capacity i n the carrying into effect of an o f f i c i a l town plan and i n the administration of a zoning by-law; d) to act i n an advisory capacity i n a l l matters pertaining 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 r a f f i c , i n connection with the laying out of streets and the use of land, and of any neighboring lands for building or other purposes.  Also, the board may exercise certain powers of council with regard to subdivisions ( 27(4) 4.  )•  Council, which i s given the power to carry out the Act i n 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 i s 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 o f f i c i a l town plan and the zoning by-law, subdivision regulations are sui generis. .  Conmiunity Planning Instruments O f f i c i a l Town Plan The procedures are the same for enactment, amendment, and repeal of o f f i c i a l town plan.  However, as a f i r s t 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.  O f f i c i a l town plan i s prepared by either council or the  planning board. 2.  Where there i s 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 s i l e n t 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 " l e g a l "  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 i s prepared. b) Council publishes a notice of i t s intention to pass the zoning  by-law i n 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 i s a board,  the request must be referred to the board for consideration and report (S. l 6 ( l ) ).  Presumably council can i n i t i a t e an amendment  or repeal. a) Person applies to council for an amendment or repeal, or conversely, council decides to secure same. b) Application i s referred to Board for consideration and report. c) If council decides that i t i s necessary to amend or repeal the by-law, a notice i s published of a hearing (S. 16 (2)  ).  d) Hearing i s held, "and a l l persons whose property would be affected by such amendment or repeal may appear i n person or by attorney or by petition" (S. 16(3)  ), following which council may  make i t s 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 i s 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.  3.  14).  Variation Section 20 (l) provides: "Appeal shall l i e to the council i n the following cases: a) by any person who i s dissatisfied with the decision of any o f f i c i a l charged with the enforcement of a zoning by-law; b) by any person desiring to obtain the benefit of any exception i n a zoning by-law; c) by any person claiming that owing to special conditions the l i t e r a l enforcement of a zoning by-law would result i n unnecessary harship; d) i n any other cases where provision for appeal i s 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 i n 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 i n 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 subd i v i s i o n 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 ) ) t o 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, c e r t i f i e d by  the appropriate o f f i c e r s , 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 l y i n g within three miles of a c i t y or two miles of a town (s. 27(S) ). •^Nova Scotia, Community Planning Division, Department of Municipal A f f a i r s , "A Model Form of Subdivision Regulations for Towns i n Nova Scotia", Halifax, 1 9 6 4 . 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 t s 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, i n which case within thirty days after the receipt of the plan the city or town may appeal the rural jmonicipality s approval to the Minister and notify the board of the 1  rural municipality of i t s appeal. Section 27 "(6) The Minister may f i x 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 i n respect of the further development or sale of the subdivision i n 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 i s 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 i n Chapter II. The systems variables are grouped under "structures" and "instruments".  STRUCTURES Authorities 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 c o u r t s . Division.  The M i n i s t e r i s a s s i s t e d by the Community Planning  The planning board plays an advisory r o l e i n t h a t i t may  prepare the o f f i c i a l town p l a n and zoning by-law, and make recommendations 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 p l a n and the zoning by-law, and t h i s report has to be included by c o u n c i l i n i t s submission t o the M i n i s t e r f o r approval.  I n a d d i t i o n , the  planning board may exercise the power of approval over s u b d i v i s i o n plans without the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of any outside body.  The courts are  a u t h o r 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 a u t h o r i t i e s make a u t h o r i t a t i v e decisions about the use o f l a n d . Responding Agents The responding agents are s i m i l a r to the a u t h o r i t i e s but excludi n g the c o u r t s , and adding the municipal o f f i c e r s and servants who implement the decisions o f the a u t h o r i t i e s such as the b u i l d i n g inspector. Receptor Receptors are the a u t h o r i t i e s exclduing the c o u r t s . Gatekeepers Gatekeepers are l i k e w i s e the a u t h o r i t i e s who receive raw demands, 16 f o r example " p r i v a t e appeals" •^See Appendix D.  t o the M i n i s t e r and convert these i n t o  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 f o r rezoning may be sent d i r e c t l y 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 f o r rezoning. The Act does not mention a l l of the gatekeepers because, as i t i s demonstrated i n Almonds l i s t of attributes of the p o l i t i c a l 1  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.  Ratepayers groups may summarize a diversity of demands 1  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 d i s t i n c t i o n can therefore be made between gatekeepers who are e x p l i 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  l a t t e r 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,  t h i s 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 O f 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 i s that no public work shall be undertaken which i s  contrary to the plan, and the other, by implication i s that no by-law shall be enacted contrary to the o f f i c i a 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  i s made for a hearing and those who are l i k e l y to be affected are allowed to present their opinions.  This hearing i s the only  opportunity provided for i n the Act for "appeal".  The matter i s  complicated i f one of the provisions of the o f f i c i a l town plan includes a proposal for zoning i n which case the hearing could raise questions pertaining to property rights i n a very specific sense as well as i n 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 i n the hearing, and i f i t decides to go ahead with the enactment of the o f f i c i a l town plan, sends i t s by-law to the Minister for approval.  Zoning By-law The zoning by-law i n contrast to the o f f i c i a l town plan affects specific rights by assigning benefits and l i a b i l i t i e s 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 i n an action before the courts, an additional avenue of appeal i s 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 i n specific instances. The specificity of the zoning by-law i s further recognized i n 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 i n both cases of the zoning by-law and the o f f i c i a 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 i k e l y 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 i s to council or the Minister on policy grounds. Appeal from a decision of an o f f i c i a l i n 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 i s economical and  clearly set out so that there i s no danger that an appeal w i 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 subdivision within two miles of a city of three miles of a town, there i s no provision for appeals, public hearings, or Ministerial approval when a subdivision plan i s to be approved.  The planning board under  normal circumstances i s the sole approving authority.  CONCLUSION The population of Nova Scotia declined between 1964 and 1966. Only 54$ of the Province's population lives i n urban centres, and 38$ of i t s population i s classed as rural non-farm. The organization for planning i s 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 o f f i c i a 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 i s no planning board.  Only council may decide  upon zoning variances and there i s no statutory appeal from a decision of council.  Public hearings occur precedent to the enactment, amend-  ment, and repeal of the o f f i c i a l town plan and zoning by-law. In sum, i t can be concluded that the adrninistrative structure and procedures of planning i n 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 i s to set up the hypothesis and to test i t .  However, before the hypothesis can be treated i t i s  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 i n Chapter I I ; 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 i s set out i n i t s entirety below.  The  individual replies are set out i n Appendix C. This questionnaire i s divided into four parts: Part I, General (Questions 1-12); Part I I , Objections (Questions 13 and 14); Part III, Appeal - Zoning and O f f i c i a l Town Plan (Questions 15-24); and Part IV, Appeal - Subdivision (Questions 25-28).  There i s 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 i s eight.  72  QUESTIONS  1966  Name:  Municipal Unit:  Chairman, Town Planning Board  ~  Population  City, Town or Municipal Clerk  Other PART 1: 1.  GENERAL  Do you have subdivision regulations? Yes  2.  No  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 5.  Comments, i f any:  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  6.  No  No  I f the answer to (5) was yes, i s t h i s Town Plan, i n your opinion, an effective documents? Yes  No  73 7.  Do you have an active Town Planning Board? Yes  8.  No  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 10.  Has your municipal unit adopted a building by-law? Yes  11.  No  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  PART II: 13.  No  Do you have a building inspector or committee? Yes  12.  No  No  Comments:  OBJECTIONS  Where your Council i s considering written objections to an O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning By-law, does this take the form of an open hearing i n which interested parties may make oral as well as written presentations? Please explain the manner i n which your Council treats objections to the O f f i c i a l Town Plan or Zoning By-law.  74  14.  Do you f e e l 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  PART I I I :  No  Comments, i f any  APPEAL - ZONING AND OFFICIAL TOWN FLAN  Section 20 of the Town Planning Act, as amended i n 1965, provides: "When a person i s d i s s a t i s f i e d with the decision of an o f f i c i a l i n the course of his administration of t h i s Act or of a by-law made under t h i s Act, he may appeal from t h i s decision to the council by giving notices i n writing of such appeal to the clerk not l a t e r 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 s h a l l 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 f e e l that a person d i s s a t i s f i e d 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, i s 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 i s 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 i n 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 l i k e to see exceptions or variances provided for?  23.  Do you feel the grounds for appeal under Section 2 0 should be changed? Yes  No  I f "Yes", what changes?  24.  Which of the following forms of appeal would your prefer? comment. Apeal to Planning Board Appeal to separate local body Appeal to regional body Appeal to Provincial body Other (Please specify)  Please  PART IV: 25.  APPEAL - SUBDIVISION  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 t h i s 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. "indirect  ,,  They are termed  because they provide general indicators about the t o t a l  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. are assumed.  These rules  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 a f f a i r s .  80 The basic goal of the p o l i t i c a l system and the planning subsystem i s assumed to be maintenance and development at progressive levels of homeostasis.  Change i s 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 i k e l y 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 i n 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 i n 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 V a r i a b l e s  The p e r t i n e n t d i r e c t i n p u t i n d i c a t o r s a r e a s c e r t a i n e d from t h e r e p l i e s t o q u e s t i o n s 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 15, 17, 18, 20, and 26 o f t h e questionnaire.  TABLE 2 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, ZONING BY-LAW, OFFICIAL TOWN PLAN (QUESTIONS  1-6)  NUMBER OF COMMUNITIES .WITH Subdivision Regulations 6  ENFORCING 6  Z o n i n g By-law  8  8  O f f i c i a l Town P l a n  3  2  Three respondents i n r e p l y t o q u e s t i o n 1 5 i n d i c a t e d "no",  and  t h r e e i n d i c a t e d " y e s " , t h a t t h e r e i s a tendency t o p e t i t i o n t h e Minister.  Two  r e p l i e s were ambiguous.  The number o f a p p e a l s heard by c o u n c i l i n t h e two y e a r p e r i o d beginning January 1 , was j>..  Only two  1965  and ending December 3 1 ,  1967  1?)  (Question  communities i n d i c a t e d t h a t a p p e a l s had o c c u r r e d t o  council.  Following Question 17,  Q u e s t i o n 18 i n d i c a t e s t h e d e s t i n a t i o n  o f t h e a p p e a l s a f t e r t h e y had been h e a r d by c o u n c i l . went beyond c o u n c i l .  T h i s a p p e a l was  Only one  appeal  directed to the Minister 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 i n 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 i s 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 w i l 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 r s t of a l l the formulation of goals which w i l l be the c r i t e r i a i n the hypothesis, and secondly the formulation 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 i n setting out relevant goal forms which are more logically satisfying. Some of the goals set for them w i l 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 t s environments. The goals and their derivation are set out with a general discussion of the variables. The primary goal i s systems maintenance which, i s 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 c r u c i a l 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 ,  s e l f - j u s t i f y i n g , and so are not analysed.  The values are described  below. 1.  Openness  Openness can be almost a synonym for a c c e s s i b i l i t y , implying that  the inhabitants of a given political-administrative j u r i s d i c t i o n are given the opportunity to influence i n large the policies and goals that characterise the j u r i s d i c t i o n , 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 t h i s thesis, the fewer the approving or reviewing authorities the more e f f i c i e n t 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 e x p l i c i t 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.  I t may be i n e f f i c i e n t i n relation to other  means of accomplishing the same ends, but t h i s 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 l o g i c a l untidiness of the natural law doctrine some d e f i n i t i o n 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 are i n the 1  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 s h a l l 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: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.  Systems maintenance; Community planning; Openness; Efficiency; Effectiveness; Justice.  TEST OF HYPOTHESIS 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 t e s t . 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 v a l i d i t y of the test devoles upon the question whether or not the test measures what i t should. questions are the issues or topics covered by the test.  Related 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 procedures regarding the o f f i c i a l town plan, zoning by-law, and subdivision  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 i n the discussion of input variables.  It was established that the system  i s not l i k e l y 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 i n the questionnaire relating to hearings and appeals show that the number of appeals i s not a r t i f i c i a l l y 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  1-11  Question  Number of Replies Yes  1  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 t o t a 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 j u 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 S t e l l a r t o n s replies t o questions 1 and 2 had to be discarded. f  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, r e l a t i v e l y 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 I t i s very d i f f i c u l t t o measure openness objectively, and t h i s task i s not accomplished here.  The questionnaire and the replies  to i t are a poor t e s t , 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 boards  T  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. council acts as an appeal body for zoning variances.  Furthermore,  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 M i n i s t e r i a l review creates the hypothetical (hypothetical that i s , u n t i l evidence i s collected to prove or disprove the p o s s i b i l i t y that "behind-the-scenes" manoeuvering takes place) situation i n which a person d i s s a t i s f i e d with a decision of council can go behind council s back and attempt to influence the Minister. 1  This possib-  i l i t y cannot be eliminated i f m i n i s t e r i a l 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 certain tasks. The number o f a p p e a l s t o c o u n c i l and o t h e r governmental a u t h o r i t i e s as a l r e a d y shown has been low.  A l s o , t h e r e has been  l i t t l e tendency t o a p p e a l from a d e c i s i o n o f c o u n c i l o r p l a n n i n g board r e g a r d i n g t h e o f f i c i a l town p l a n , z o n i n g by-lav;, o r s u b d i v i s i o n regulations. The procedures  s e t out i n t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t f o r t h e  official  town p l a n , z o n i n g by-law, and s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s appear t o fairly  simple.  Only t h r e e governmental a u t h o r i t i e s a r e f o r m a l l y  i n v o l v e d , namely, t h e M i n i s t e r o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s , c o u n c i l , the planning  be  and  board.  The p r e c e d i n g remarks suggest t h a t t h e s t a t u t o r y procedures i n r e g a r d t o t h e o f f i c i a l town p l a n , z o n i n g by-law and s u b d i v i s i o n regulations s u s t a i n the goal of  efficiency.  Effectiveness The t e s t f o r e f f e c t i v e n e s s l i e s  2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 15, 18, and Questions 15, 18, of  appeals.  i n the r e p l i e s to questions  26.  and 26 c o n c e r n t h e number and d e s t i n a t i o n s  The r e p l i e s t o t h e s e q u e s t i o n s on a p p e a l show t h a t  the decisions of o f f i c i a l s ,  t h e p l a n n i n g board,  s u b s t a n t i a l l y a c c e p t a b l e t o t h e community.  and c o u n c i l a r e  More i n f o r m a t i o n  c o u l d have been o b t a i n e d i f a q u e s t i o n had been i n s e r t e d about t h e outcomes o f a p p e a l s , t h a t i s , about t h e numbers o f d e c i s i o n s t h a t were r e v e r s e d and  s u s t a i n e d on  appeal.  The response t o q u e s t i o n s 2, 4, i n T a b l e 5.  6, 7, 8, and 9 were s e t out  These q u e s t i o n s f o c u s upon t h e enforcement  and  and implementation of the intentions of the Town Planning Act.  The  results indicate that while subdivision regulations and zoning bylaws 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 f o r effectiveness i s inconclusive.  Justice The two rules of natural justice, right to a f a i r hearing, and no man s h a l l 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 t o hear the appellant.  Some dissatisfaction with the existing manner of handling appeals was expressed i n the replies t o the questionnaire. The seven respondents who commented on appeal structure (the respondent for Stellarton did not offer any opinions on t h i s 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 o f f i c i a 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.  F a i l to achieve good planning, and justice.  The test yields inconclusive results for effectiveness and, so i t i s 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 i s not valid. However, methodological weaknesses i n the preparation of the conceptual framework, the hypothesis, the questionnaire, and the paucity of replies suggest that a more appropriate verdict for the hypothesis i s "not proven".  95 CHAPTER VI CONCLUSIONS This thesis had i t s origins i n the remarks made by Mr. R.S. Lang, Director of the Community Planning Division i n Nova Scotia, about the lack of a planning appeal and review system i n 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 i n a systematic fashion and to develop a meaningful hypothesis, a conceptual framework was created. systems theory.  This conceptual framework was based upon  The hypothesis was derived from the output variables  of systems theory. Province 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). 1  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 i s 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 a b i l i t y to establish measurable relationships between the input, systems, and output variables.  These relationships were not established,  one of the reasons being the i n a b i l i t y to postulate or define sufficiently precise variables.  Much of the potential of systems  theory was not realized through this lack i n 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 i n the Province, through economic and population data about the Province set out i n Chapter II, and general notions derived from the fields of p o l i t i c a l science and public administration. The burden of the test of the hypothesis lay with the results  obtained from the questionnaire. were received.  Unfortunately, only eight replies  However, the planning authorities that responded  represented some of the most populous communities i n 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 questionnaire indicated serious shortcomings i n the form of the questionnaire. More f r u i t f u l 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 i n the  questions could have been eliminated. Finally, i n regard to the weaknesses of data collection, a c r i t i c a 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 i n the discussion of role of the courts proved  useful i n analyzing procedures, and furthermore indicated the very limited role that the courts play i n the planning process i n 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. University of Toronto Press, 1957.  Toronto:  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. John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1966.  New York:  5. Chapin, F. Stuart Jr. Urban Land Use Planning. Second Edition. Urbana: University of I l l i n o i s Press, 1965. 6.  Easton, David. A Framework for P o l i t i c a l Analysis. C l i f f s , N . J . : Prentice Hall Inc., 1965.  7. Easton, David. A Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c a l L i f e . John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1965. 8.  Easton, David, ed. Varieties of P o l i t i c a l Theory. C l i f f s , N . J . : Prentice Hall Inc., 1966.  9.  Garner, J . F . 1963.  Administrative Law.  Englewood New York: Englewood  London: Butterworth L t d . ,  10. Golembiewski, Robert T . , Frank Gibson and Geoffrey Y. Cornog, editors. Public Administration Readings i n 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. G r i f f i t h , 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 I I . 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. L i t t l e , Brown and Company, 1965.  16. Kent, T . J . Jr. The Urban General Plan. Publishing Co., 1964.  San Francisco: Chandler  17. Litterer, Joseph A. The Analysis of Organizations. John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1965. 18. Marshall, H.H. Natural Justice. 1959.  Boston:  London:  New York:  Sweet and Maxwell L t d . ,  19. Meehan, Eugene J . The Theory and Method of P o l i t i c a l Analysis. Homewood, I l l i n o i s : 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 L t d . , 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. Stevens and Sons L t d . , 1959.  24. Wade, H.W.R. 1966. 25.  Administrative Law.  Oxford:  London:  The Clarendon Press,  Wade, H.W.R. Towards Administrative Justice. of Michigan Press, 1963.  Ann Arbor: University  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. 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.  Census. 1966. Ottawa: Queen's  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 i n 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. 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.  C.  Hal ifax: Queen's  Province of Ontario, The Planning Act. Toronto: The Queen's Printer, 1967, R.S.O. I960, Chapter 296.  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 C r i t i c a l Review". General Systems. V o l . VII, 1962.  3.  Brewin, F.A. (1961).  "Mandamus". The Law Society of Upper Canada Lectures Toronto:  Richard de Boo L t d . , 1961  4.  Dunham, A l l i s o n . "Property, City Planning, and Liberty". Land: Anglo-American Planning Practice.  Law and  5.  Easton, David. "Categories for the Systems Analysis of P o l i t i c s " . Vacieties of P o l i t i c a l Theory.  6.  Findlay, Allan. "Declaratory Judgement". The Law Society of Upper Canada Lectures (1961). Toronto: Richard de Boo L t d . , 1961.  102 7.  Hall, A.D. and R.E. Fagen. "Definition of System". Systems. V o l . I, 1956.  General  8.  Hart, W.O. "Control of the Use of Land i n English Law". Land; Anglo-American Planning-Practice.  9.  Lay-field, F.H.B. "Planning Decisions and Appeals". Anglo-American Planning Practice.  Law and  Law and Land:  10.  Milner, J.B. "An Introduction to Subdivision Control Legislation". Canadian Bar Review. V o l . 43, 1965.  11.  Milner, J . B . "An Introduction to Zoning Enabling Legislation". Canadian Bar Review. V o l . 4 0 , 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 i n 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. V o l . 39, 1961.  15.  Pink, J . G . "Judicial •Jurisdiction* i n the Province of Privative Clauses". Faculty of Law Review University of Toronto. V o l . 23, A p r i l , 1965.  16.  Rapoport, Anatol. "Some System Approaches to P o l i t i c a l Theory." Varities of P o l i t i c a l Theory.  17.  Rice, Charles, E. "A Model for the Empirical Study of a Large Social Organization". General Systems. V o l . 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. V o l . 22, April 1964.  20.  W i l l i s , J . "Administrative Decision and the Law: The Canadian Implications of the Franks Report." University of Toronto Law Journal, 1959.  21.  W i l l i s , John; "Administrative Law i n Canada". Vol. 39, 1961.  22.  Williston, W.B. "Injunctions". The Law Society of Upper Canada Lectures (1961). Toronto: Richard de Boo L t d . , 1961.  Canadian Bar Review  103  23.  Young, O.R. "A Survey of General Systems Theory". Vol. IX, 1964.  General Systems  24.  Young, O.R. "The Impact of General Systems Theory on P o l i t i c a l Science". General Systems. Vol. IX, 1964.  D.  REPORTS  1.  Lang, R.S. "Community Planning i n Nova Scotia 1 9 6 7 " . Address to the Nova Scotia Community Planning Conference, Amherst, N.S., November 9 - 1 0 , 1 9 6 ? , 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 i n 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 A f f a i r s . Nova Scotia. Letter, February 28, 1968.  F. 1.  COURT CASES 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 o f f i c i a 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 i n sections 27 to 3 0 . 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 Municipali t y 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 t s 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 i n the past four years. They are authorized by Section 21 (l) of the Nova Scotia Town Planning Act. Part II i s a special supplement to Part I and may be adopted under Section 27 (9) of the Nova Scotia Town Planning Act. Part II i s 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, i n 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 i s 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 t s 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.  Ill 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 t s approval  2.  The Board may endorse such comments as are considered appropriate on the plans prior to their return to the submitter.  3.  Any tentative plans submitted must be i n 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 f i n a l plans 4. A f i n a l 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 f i n a l plan for the approval of the subdivision by the Board; (b) a statement signed by the submitter or submitters that he or they i s 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 w i l l lay water and sewer mains i n such streets according to the specifications l a i d 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 f i n a l 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 i n the f i e l d , 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 l a i d outj length of arc, degrees and points of curvature, r a d i i , and tangent bearings i n 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 f i n a l plans of subdivision shall also: (a) have a clear space or binding margin of at least one inch i n width; (b) conform to the requirements for registration i n the Registry of Deeds; (c) be certified by a Provincial Land Surveyor of Nova Scotia, i n 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 i s 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 d i f f i c u l t or impossible.  12.  A street shall not enter or intersect one on which t r a f f i c i s heavy i f there i s 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 t r a f f i c i s heavy.  13.  Where a street i n an adjoining subdivision abuts the boundaries of a subdivision submitted to the Board, a street i n the latter shall be l a i d out i n prolongation of such street unless i t would be i n violation of these regulations.  115  14.  A l o t having an area and l o t frontage less than the area and lot frontage prescribed i n the following schedule w i l l not be approved by the Board except as set out i n Section 1 5 hereof;  I  R - l Residential (a)Single Family(one dwelling)  Min. Lot Area  1 5 , 0 0 0 sq. f t . i n  Min. Lot Frontage on Bldg. Line  areas with no sewer service  75 f t .  6 , 0 0 0 sq. f t . i n  areas with sewer service II  60 f t .  R-2 Residential (a) Single Family(one dwelling)  1 5 , 0 0 0 sq. f t . i n areas with no sewer service otherwise  60 f t .  6 , 0 0 0 sq. f t .  (b) Semi-detached(two dwellings) built about a central vertical axis (c) Duplex (two dwellings) placed one above the other  as above  60 f t .  as above  60 f t .  (d) Row (three or more dwellings 3 , 5 0 0 s q . f t . for contained i n one building each each unit with separated from the other a combined min. vertically) of 1 6 , 5 0 0 s q . f t .  Minimum combined frontage 110 f t .  (e) Apartments (three or more dwellings contained i n one building)  2,000 s q . f t . per unit with a minimum combined area of 8,000 sq. f t .  as above  (f) Nursing and Rest Homes  same as above  60 f t .  2 , 5 0 0 sq. f t .  25 f t .  (a) Any building used for r e t a i l or wholesale trade and the 3 , 0 0 0 sq. f t . storage or warehousing of goods wares, or merchandise.  30 f t .  III R-3 Residential (a) A l l residential R - l and R-2 Uses (b) Trailer Courts IV  General Commercial  (b) Workshop subsidiary to permitted r e t a i l uses  3,000 sq. f t .  30 f t .  (c) Business or professional office  3,000 sq. f t .  30 f t .  12,000 sq. f t .  120 f t .  2,000 sq. f t . per unit with a minimum combined area of  75 f t .  (b) Any building used for r e t a i l trade.  3,000 sq. f t .  30 f t .  (c) Business or professional office  3,000 sq. f t .  30 f t .  12,000 sq. f t .  120 f t .  12,000 sq. f t .  120 f t .  (d) Garage or service station for the selling of gasoline and o i l s , automobile accessories and the minor adjustment of vehicles V  Local Commercial  (a)  Apartments (two or more dwellings contained i n one commercial building)  (d) Garage or Service Station for the selling of gasoline and o i l s , automobile accessories and the minor adjustments of vehicles. VI  4,000 sq.  ft.  Industrial (a) Garage or Service Station  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,  if  (a) any undersized lot so formed i s 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 i n length.  Recommended to the Minister  DEPUTY MINISTER OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS Prescribed t h i s  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 i s hereby prescribed subject to the approval of the Town Council and of the Minister of Municipal Affairs.  Streets i n 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 i n 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 l a i d down i n the regulations and by-laws of the Town. 2.  The owner of every subdivision'shall, before f i n a l approval of  such subdivision i s given, (a)  construct a l l streets shown thereon and pave such streets i n s t a l 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, i n fee simple, free from incumbrances}  3.  The Board shall not give f>Lnal approval to any subdivision u n t i l 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 f i n a l approval of the subdivision i s given,  119  (a)  deposit with the Board a deed duly executed, conveying to the town the t i t l e i n and to the streets i n the subdivision; i n the case mentioned i n clause (b) (i) the deed shall be for a l l the streets; i n the case mentioned i n clause (b)  (ii),  i t shall be for a l l the streets i n the area i n the subdivision mentioned i n his notice and this shall from time to time be followed by deeds for the streets i n 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 • i n s t a l l curbs and gutters thereon, a l l within a period of time set out i n such agreement and i n 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 i n s t a l l curbs and gutters thereon, a l l within a period of time set out i n such agreement and i n 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 i n 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 i n accordance with the terms thereof and i n 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 i n the agreement. (3) If, i n the opinion of the owner, the amount estimated by the Board as the cost of performing the work i s excessive, he may require the Board to arbitrate the amount, i n which case proceedings shall be as nearly as possible i n accordance with the Arbitration Act, Chapter 1 3 , R.S. 1 9 5 4 . (4) An owner who has sold ten lots out of the said subdivision, i n front of which streets have not been constructed and paved, and curbs and gutters have not been l a i d , shall forthwith proceed to construct the street or streets i n front of said lots and to pave said streets and to i n s t a l l curbs and gutters thereon, and shall not s e 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 i n 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 u n t i l 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 i n 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 i n i t s decision to grant or to withhold approval of a subdivision for any cause whatever.  APPENDIX C REPLIES TO QUESTIONNAIRE  QUESTIONS •  •  Name:  •  •  • ^ •  •  /$ k//?- / X ^ < ? ^ X t  Chairman, Town Planning Board Other  £>/MC?4-S  •pkKl 1: 1.  No  A4>/  Comments, i f any:_  4*>  //•  No  I f the answer to (3) was yes, do you enforce t h i s Zoning By-Law? 1  No  Comments, i f any:  •  "  Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town Plan, approved by the Minister and registered with the county r e g i s t r a r of deeds: Yes  6.  No  Do you have a Zoning by law?  Yes ^ 5.  S%/?>v*jp  Do you enforce the subdivion regulations:  Yes 4.  Clerk  Do you have subdivision regulations:  Yes*""  3.  J;*?.  C i t y , Town or Municipal  GENERAL  Yes ^  2.  c/  )  Coc/^^ 1966 .Municipal Unit: <^j> ^^/£zr. Population: ^  No  ^  I f the answer to (5) was yes, i s the Town Plan, i n your opinion, an e f f e c t i v e document? Yes  No.  — '  *  2.  124 <'.  Oo you have an active Town Planning Board? Yes ^  No  1  8.  Does the Town Planning Board meet regularly? Yes  9.  No.^  Does the Town Planning Board carry out the f u l l prescribed under the Town Planning Act? Yes ^  10.  11.  v /  1  No  No  I f the answer to (11) was yes, has the Council or Building Inspector 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 issuing of building permits: . Yes  PART II:  13.  unit adopted a building bylaw?  Do you have a building inspector or-cotnmittee? Yes ^  12.  No.  Has your municipal Yes  range of duties  No  Comments:  '  OBJECTIONS  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 O f f i c a l Town Plan or Zoning Bylaw. )&s.  \  *<4> <r* ^v<v^. /  <  *2^j£2/£ -J/t//  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? Yes^  PART III:  No  125  Comments, i f any:__  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 p e t i t i o n the Minister, e i t h e r before or a f t e r Council has decided on the matter? , Yes  No.  a^y  Please comment:  16.  cnz/shn •  Do you feel that a person d i s s a t i s f i e d 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 p e t i t i o n the Minister? Yes ^  No  Please state why:  17.  J^SX  /. ^m^ss  o4: /yJ^^y/y^^  /o<r.o/ a -  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?  126 4.  18.  19.  How  many of these appeals went from your Council to:  .  The Minister of Municipal A f f a i r s -The County Court The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia  I f possible, b r i e f l y l i s t the typical reasons why From the decision of your Council  20.  '  — ' • — ' '  .  To the Minister  .  To the Courts  •  applicants appealed: ~  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 i s too cumbessome Community i s small cost (legal fees) too high Other (Blease specify)  21.  Appeal <£OCJ+7/y  In your opinion, should the Town Planning Act r e l a t i n g 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 l o t owner against the invasion of his fundamental r i g h t or private  /^sf  127 property which would result from adherence to the s t r i c t l e t t e r of -the zoning bylaw)? •yes Please .comment:  No '  o<>,.:• x  j"<r<f  :  3  '  If the answer to (21) was yes, how would you l i k e to see exceptions or variances provided for?  Do you feel the grounds f o r appeal under Section 20 should be changed? Yes ^  No#*~  7£ o/e ffs>z<  If 'Yes', what changes?_  norr  Which of the following forms of appeal would you prefer? Appeal to Planning B  o  a  r  d  —  fJef^a-c.  '  Appeal to rggional body;  * ^  /< \  Appeal to Provincial Body  A>4>r<?  r*^t  Please comment.  '  Appeal to separate local body  Other (Please specify)  c/ec^/s  w  v  "  •  ^ c ^ / ^ / p  2 .  ~o  128  6.  &  *HT i v . APPEAL  25.  - SUB1DIVIS0N  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? Ho  Yes''  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 t o : The Minister M,  The Courts  27.  I f possible, b r i e f l y 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 f o r improving or adding to this questionnaire. '  "  •  . . . . . . .  ^  FOR OFFICE USE  130  Date  Sent:  Date  Received:  QUEST I Of'  k<$ 1^h~6pip'ioK  Name:  • C h a i r m a n , Town  Planning  nether  y  PART  1.  1:  3.  4.  5.  • No  JiAfy/^  ^  <r^>/-  Clerk  ^To^^  ?  S£^ ,-A,  regulations?  the s u b d i v i s i o n  regulations?  j&S,ySacS*-^/*,  Comments, i f any:  a zoning  bylaw?  • N0  I f the answer ^ Y es  Town o r M u n i c i p a l  Population:  • No  Do y o u have ^ Yes  Sx^ydry  Unit:  GENERAL  Do you e n f o r c e B'Yes  DCity,  gyttr,*/ /%^  Do y o u have s u b d i v i s i o n E/ Yes  2..  Board  Municipal  O No  t o ( 3 ) was y e s , do y o u e n f o r c e  this  zoning  bylaw?  Comments, i f any:  Do y o u have an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n , a p p r o v e d by t h e M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d w i t h the c o u n t y r e g i s t r a r o f deeds? • Yes  If an  No  the, answer t o (5) was y e s , i s t h i s e f f e c t i v e document?  • Yes  No  Town  Plan,  i n your  opinion,  f  ^  2.  <  131  7.  DJ you .have an r/Ves  8.  Does  the  /  Has  .  Do  out the Act?  full  range  of  duties  unit  adopted  a building  bylaw?  • No  you  have  a building  inspector  or  committee?  DNO  I f the answer to (11) was y e s , has the c o u n c i l o r b_uJJ^i_ng i n s p e c t o r o r committee assumed the P l a n n i n g Board's" r e s , p o n s i b i T i t i e s f o r the i s s u i n g o f b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s ? ^Yes  PART I I:  13.  regularly?  orflo  your municipal  t^Yes  12.  B e a r d meet  Town P l a n n i n g  Does the Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d c a r r y p r e s c r i b e d under the Town P l a n n i n g  Yes  11.  Board?  • No  D Yes  10.  Town P l a n n i n g  D No  S Yes  9.  active  • No  Comments:  kt/A  JW^<?  f&vjt^  OBJECTIONS  Where y o u r C o u n c i l 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 P l a n o r Z o n i n g B y l a w , does t h i s take the form o f an open h e a r i n g i n w h i c h i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l as w e l l as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? P l e a s e e x p l a i n the manner i n which y o u r 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 P l a n o r Z o n i n g Bylaw.  ^21  3.  14.  132  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a d e q u a t e s c o p e i s g i v e n t o p e r s o n s to an o f f i c i a l town p l a n o r z o n i n g bylaw? Vves  ONo  Comments, i f any:  objecting  -  PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND O F F I C I A L 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 t h e r e any t e n d e n c y f o r p e r s o n s s e e k i n g a change o r s e e k i n g to p r e v e n t a c h a n g e , t o 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 b e f o r e or a f t e r C o u n c i l has d e c i d e d on t h e m a t t e r ? .f'Yes Please  16.  •  comment:  ' <^<^*> //,  . ^ ,/ ,-//y 0  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a p e r s o n d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e d e c i s i o n o f C o u n c i l w i t h r e g a r d t o a z o n i n g bylaw o r o f f i c i a l town p l a n , s h o u l d be permitted to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? c/Ves Please  17.  • No  • No state  why:  How many a p p e a l s were h e a r d by y o u r C o u n c i l u n d e r S e c t i o n 20 of t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1, 1965 t o December 31, 1967?  _2_L  133  )'6.  How  many o f t h e s e  appeals  went  from y o u r C o u n c i l t o :  . The M i n i s t e r o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s The County C o u r t The Supreme C o u r t o f Nova S c o t i a  19.  If possible, briefly appealed:  list  the t y p i c a l  . From t h e d e c i s i o n o f y o u r  20.  To  the M i n i s t e r  To  the C o u r t s  reasons  why  applicants  Council  In y o u r o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n P l a n n i n g A c t used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes  A/G^ ^ •' *>  A'/&-  /V/s?•  (Section  20) o f the. Town  S'No  P l e a s e comment why: • P e o p l e don't u n d e r s t a n d t h e i r r i g h t s • P r o c e d u r e i s t o o cumbersome • Community i s s m a l l • Appeal cost ( l e g a l fees) too high • Other (please s p e c i f y )  21.  In y o u r o p i n i o n , s h o u l d the Town P l a n n i n g A c t r e l a t i n g t o z o n i n g p r o v i d e f o r e x c e p t i ons ( w i t h t h e e x a c t c o n d i t i o n s under w h i c h m i n o r e x c e p t i o n s may be g r a n t e d s e t out i n t h e bylaw o r A c t ) o r va r i an ces (a method o f s a f e g u a r d i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner a g a i n s t the i n v a s i o n o f h i s f u n d a m e n t a l r i g h t o f p r i v a t e  134 5.  p r o p e r t y which w o u l d r e s u l t of t h e z o n i n g b y l a w ) ?  &4es Please  from a d h e r e n c e t o t h e s t r i c t  '• -K/NO comment:  -rsC^/c/  //'  <5<r s~  S  o<+/  I f t h e answer t o (21) was y e s , how would y o u l i k e e x c e p t i o n s or v a r i a n c e s p r o v i d e d f o r ?  _  <£v  Do y o u f e e l changed? _/Yes If  letter  to see  /t&jsuL  t h e grounds  f o r appeal  under S e c t i o n  • No  "Yes", what  ^y^-"  20 s h o u l d be  . .  changes?  Which o f the f o l l o w i n g comment.  -2Q •  forms o f a p p e a l  would y o u p r e f e r ? " " •  1  o Appeal  to Planning  Board  •  Appeal  to separate  local  o Appeal  to regional  body  •Appeal  to Provincial  • Other (Please  '  Please p, ^y_^y_ t  I  body &r  //;^is/<-,s  body  specify)  c^^wc-• /  ^  6.  -135  APPEAL - SUBDIVISION  P A f t i  IV;-  25.  Do y o u f e e l t h e r e s h o u l d be some form o f a p p e a l to t h e M i n i s t e r o r t h e C o u r t s ) t o t h e d e c i s i o n s Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d on s u b d i v i s i o n m a t t e r s ?  t^Yes' If  26.  ( o t h e r than o f the  CNo  " Y e s " , what  form  of appeal?  -  > /.  decs^re-,  D u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1965 t o December 1967, how many a p p e a l s have t h e r e been from d e c i s i o n s o f y o u r P l a n n i n g B o a r d or C o u n c i l t o . The M i n i s t e r . The C o u r t s  / /v^-e  27.  If possible,  28.  S t a t e any o t h e r o p i n i o n s y o u may o b j e c t i ons.  / &  i*/  briefly  l  &  list  (  the t y p i c a l  gounds  have  f o r appeal:  regarding  a p p e a l and  CM. J }//<:>>  /  ,  y  ^  -s  •  136 7.  .  1  L i s t any s u g g e s t i o n s y o u have -ques t i onnai r e .  .  f o r improving  or adding  to  this  /  /  "  prices  /  C ' / d s ; / ^  t / c / s t J i  f  yp  '  y6«~"S-0  6  -4/  "  c/  s ~ < ' ' S  J  /  s£<j>.  :  C-H<?/  r u K u r r i i> u u J t Hate  Sent:  Date  Received:  137 HYVo->  a ~ i |<o a  •QUESTIONS  1966 Name: [  I,. Lufrka  Municipal  A c t i n g Chief Planner • C h a i r m a n , Town P l a n n i n g  Board  „. ocity,  Unit: c i t y of  •  Halifax,  . Population:  .  Tov.'n o r M u n i c i p a l  86. 7Q>  Cierk  • Other  PART 1; 1.  GENERAL  Do y o u 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 y o u e n f o r c e • Yes  p(Ho  •••Z. Do y o u have •-. $(Yes  4.  the s u b d i v i s i o n  regulations?  Comments, i f any: _ _ _ _ _  a zoning  bylaw?  • No  I f t h e answer t o ( 3 ) was. y e s j & Yes  • No  do y o u e n f o r c e  this  zoning  bylaw?  Comments', i f any:  "  Do y o u have an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n , a p p r o v e d by t h e M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d w i t h t h e county, r e g i s t r a r o f d e e d s ?  • Yes  If an  .-  E3 No C i t y C o u n c i l a p p r o v e d an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n i n 1945 b u t i t was never a p p r o v e d b y t h e M i n i s t e r b e c a u s e t h a t was n o t a r e q u i r e m e n t . a t -the t i m e . _ ! —" .  the answer t o (-5) was y e s , i s t h i s e f f e c t i v e document?  • Yes  • No  Town P l a n , 1n y o u r • „ . . / • •  The P l a n i s n o t an e f f e c t i v e document.  op1nion,  ;  7.  .Do  you  have  an  a c t i v e Town P l a n n i n g • —  %  . ^YeS 8.  # Yes  '  Town P l a n n i n g DNO  B o a r d meet r e g u l a r l y ? . -  Does the Town P l a n n i n g -Board c a r r y , o u t the * p r e s c r i b e d u n d e r the Town P l a n n i n g A c t ? '. • O Yes  KNo  1. 2.  10.  Has $  11.  Yes  Do  12.  • No  you  have  full  range  of  duties  We d o 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 and don't need 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 . Not i m p l e m e n t i n g o n O f f i c i a l T o w n P l a n a s we d o not have one.  your municipal  . $ Yes  unit *  adopted ••  a building  a building "  inspector  bylaw?  '.-  or  committee?  o No  I f the answer t o (11) was y e s , has the c o u n c i l o r b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r o r committee assumed the P l a n n i n g B o a r d ' 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 o f b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s ? . .  WYes  PART 11:  13.  i  . • NO  Does the  9,  Board?  . o No  Comments:  :  '  OBJECTIONS  Where y o u r C o u n c i l 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 t o an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n or Z o n i n g B y l a w , does t h i s t a k e the form o f an open h e a r i n g i n w h i c h i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l as w e l l as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? P l e a s e e x p l a i n the manner i n which y o u r C o u n c i l t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s t o the O f f i c i a l Town P l a n o r Z.oning B y l a w . . O f f i c i a l Town P l a n i s o b s o l e t e . Z o n i n g B y - l a w was a p p r o v e d i n 19 50 and P u b l i c H e a r i n g s w e r e h e l d a t t h a t t i m e . B o t h w r i t t e n and o r a l o b j e c t i o n s w e r e c o n s i d e r e d . . b y t h e C i t y C o u n c i l and • some chancres were made as a r e s u l t o f 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 h e l d " t o c o n s i d e r o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e Z o n i n g By-lav/.  . > . .  .y ".  :  14.  .  -  "  .';  •••  - "''  •  r;  ,  . . . .  Do.you f e e l t h a t a d e q u a t e s c o p e i s g i v e n t o p e r s o n s t o an o f f i c i a l town p l a n o r z o n i n g b y l a w ?  139'  "  objecting  i  • Yes • No Comments, i f any: I t a p p e a r s f r o m o u r e x p e r i e n c e t h a t most p e o p l e do n o t h a v e 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 t h e P u b l i c H e a r i n g i s h e l d , as t h e d e t a i l s and t h e p r o s and c o n s o f t h e i s s u e a r e u s u a l l y b r o u g h t o u t a t t h e H e a r i n g . ( s PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND O F F I C I A L 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 thisdecision 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.  16.  Is t h e r e any t e n d e n c y f o r p e r s o n s s e e k i n g a change o r s e e k i n g to p r e v e n t a change,' t o 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 b e f o r e o r a f t e r .Counci 1 has d e c i d e d on the m a t t e r ? • Yes  • No.  Please  comment:  You  could  answer  that  question better  than  we  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a p e r s o n d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e d e c i s i o n o f C o u n c i l w i t h r e g a r d t o a z o n i n g ' b y l a w o r o f f i c i a l town p l a n , s h o u l d be : p e r m i t t e d to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? • Yes . Please :  • No state  i why: •  17.  '  P e r h a p s some f o r m o f a p p e a l  as the O f f i c i a l  i n m a t t e r s a<~  Town P l a n - a n d Z o n i n g  importer  shrm-M  How many a p p e a l s were h e a r d by y o u r Coun.cil u n d e r S e c t i o n 20 o f the Town P l a n n i n g A c t d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1, 1965 t o December 31, 1967? ,Nnne..  pern-it  •perh^py tiii uppi opt i u i - -  •—  t  - .  o f o r o b j e c t i n g t o a p l a n o r Zoning changes w o u l d be  after  • t h e H e a r i n g . I f a two wee>: "period were a l l o w e d between t h e v  ' H e a r i n g and t h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n by C o u n c i l , t h e s e p e t i t i o n s ^ c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d by C o u n c i l i n t h e  interim.  140  4.  18.  How.many o f . The j ". The h  19.  a p p e a l s went  from y c u r  M i n i s t e r of Municipal A f f a i r s c t y Court Supreme Court"~bf N o v e f b c o t i a  e  o  u  the  decision  To  the  Minister  To  the  Courts  list  the  typical  •  to:  \  r e a s o n s why  of your Council  In y o u r o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n P l a n n i n g A c t used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes  Council  None ~__ •  n  If possible, b r i e f l y appealed: From  20. j.  these  141  applicants  Not  (Section  20)  of  anpHnahiP  the  Town  No  P l e a s e comment why: • People don't u n d e r s t a n d t h e i r r i g h t s • Procedure i s too cumbersome • Community i s s m a l l • Appeal c o s t ( l e g a l - f e e s ) too high D Other ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) / I n our op i n i o n ^ r ? ^ ^ ? ? e a d e c i s i o n - i s t a k e n , t h e C i t y ' s comoeter s t a r t has f u l l y examined t h e m a t t e r and t h a t t h e r W i s i n n i s r o c r > n ' ancThence s u f f i c i e n t grounds a r e n o t a v a i l a b l e f o r a p p e a l . The p u b l * 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 . 1  1  0  1  5  t  h  a  t  b  e  f  o  r  g  21.  In y o u r o p i n i o n , s h o u l d the Town P l a n n i n g A c t r e l a t i n g t o z o n i n g p r o v i d e f o r e x c e p t i ons ( w i t h the e x a c t c o n d i t i o n s u n d e r w h i c h m i n o r e x c e p t i ens may be g r a n t e d s e t out i n the bylaw o r A c t ) or ye r i ances (a method o f 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 a g a i n s t the i n v a s i o n o f h i s f u n d a m e n t a l r i g h t o f p r i v a t e  e  p r o p e r t y which w o u l d r e s u l t -of the zoning bylaw}? 32tfes  from a d h e r e n c e t o t h e s t r i c t ...'_ _ '_•[_ ,  letter .  0 No  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 ( e x c e p t i o n end v a r i a n c e s ) . C o u n c i l h a s t h e power t o g r a n t m o d i f i c a t i o n s but i t i s a cumberance p r n r p r i i i r p f n r " h ^ * H r - - , 1 1 y . ^ j ^ - - . r _ . ^ ^ _ . . _ . . . . ^ . j _ w o u l d welcome L e g i s l a t i o n a l l o w i n g e x c e p t i o n s and v a r i a n c e s . Please  n  22.  I f the answer t o (21) was y e s , how w o u l d y o u l i k e •exceptions or variances provided f o r ?  An A p p e a l B o a r d s e t up b y t h e P r o v i n c e S t a f f t o h a n d l e minor  23. Do y o u f e e l • •• changed? ;  D Yes If  24.  f o r appeal  r  c  t o see  2 0 s h o u l d be  . changes? _  Which o f t h e f o l l o w i n g forms comment. ' to Planning  Board  •  Appeal  to separate  local  o  Appeal  t o r e g i o n a l body to Provincial (Please  '  o f appeal  body  specify)  \ body  ••  would you p r e f e r ?  Leave as i s  • Appeal  • Other  t  o r C i t y f o r e x c e p t i o n s and  under S e c t i o n  • No  " Y e s " , what  • Appeal  n  variances.  t h e grounds  „• . {  r  Please  PART IY:  25.  .  V.  APPEAL - SUBDIVISION  Do y o u f e e l t h e r e s h o u l d be some f o r m o f a p p e a l ( o t h e r to the M i n i s t e r o r the C o u r t s ) t o t h e d e c i s i o n s o f t h e Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d on s u b d i v i s i o n m a t t e r s ? • Yes  than  • No  • I f " Y e s " , what  form  o f a p p e a l ? __A£_j3rg.s_j^  t h e Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d .  through  I f Appeal i s permitted t o C i t y C o u n c i l ,  t h i s w o u l d have t h e e f f e c t o f a l l s u b d i v i s i o n s g o i n g t o C o u n c i l , w h i c h we do n o t f a v o u r . 26. ;  D u r i n g the p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1965 t o December 1967, how many a p p e a l s have t h e r e been from d e c i s i o n s o f y-our P l a n n i n g B o a r d or Counci1 to  «  None  The M i n i s t e r . The C o u r t s  '27.  •  28.  •  If possible,  '' •  briefly  list  the  typical  '  ' •' '  gounds  f o r appeal.:  Not a p p l i c a b l e  S t a t e any o t h e r o p i n i o n s y o u objections .  may  Not a p p l i c a b l e  have  regarding  ;  appeal  and  •  .  L i s t any s u g g e s t i o n s y o u have »questionnai r e . '  Ca)  f o r improving  Plan.  and s h o u l d be mandatory.  .  M e e t i n g s s h o u l d be h e l d b y a l l p a r t i e s  _  ' concerned .  before '  Some f o r m o f Development P e r m i t 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 w h i c h have a m u l t i p l i c i t y  o f uses and a r e n o t on c u s t o m a r y s i n g l e ' l o t s • ,  this  At p r e s e n t t h i s i s p e r m i s s i v e  t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t i s changed. (c)  to  C i t i e s s h o u l d be r e q u i r e d b y t h e P r o v i n c e t o have and m a i n t a i n a a Master  (b)  or adding  s e p a r a t e use.'  f o r each  rur\ ui i  IVL  v w L.  Date  145  Hf&Ui  Date S e n t :  Ajb&  R e c e i v e d : \ji\Mtf(J(rf  QUESTIONS  Name:  • M{vsoJ  Municipal  • C h a i r m a n , Town P l a n n i n g  Board  /, O^UO&VQAJ  \  Unit:  OCity,  Town o r M u n i c i p a l  1  9  6  6  Population:  ' lp cm  Clerk  • Other  PART 1 •; 1.  GENERAL  Do y o u have .cfYes  2.  4.  Comments, i f any:  • No  • No  regulations? "  bylaw? >  t o (3)  was y e s , do y o u e n f o r c e  Comments, i f any:  this  zoning  bylaw?  '  Do y o u have an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n , a p p r o v e d by t h e M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d w i t h the c o u n t y r e g i s t r a r o f deeds? • Yes  6.  the s u b d i v i s i o n  a zoning  I f t h e answer ,-TVes  5.  • No  Do y o u have o "Y es  regulations?  • No  Do you e n f o r c e p"Ves  3.  subdivision  , • No  I f the answer t o (5) was y e s , i s t h i s an e f f e c t i v e document? • Yes  • No  Town P l a n ,  1n y o u r  opinion,  2.  7.  Do  you  have D  p Yes  8.  Does  the  • Yes  9.  an  146  a c t i v e Town P l a n n i n g  No  Town P l a n n i n g  B o a r d meet  regularly?  • No  Does the Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d c a r r y • p r e s c r i b e d under the Town P l a n n i n g  10.  Board?  • Yes  J?\\a  Has  municipal  your  B Yes  oSi--^ s ^ . , b A v < ^  unit  adopted  out the Act?  full  range  of  duties  -v,*  a building  bylaw?  • No  r 11.  Do  you  have  J^Yes  12.  a building inspector  or  committee?  D No  I f the answer t o ( 1 1 ) was y e s , 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 o r committee assumed the P l a n n i n g B o a r d ' 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 o f b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s ? o Yes  PART I I :  • No  Comments:  OBJECTIONS  13.  r  Where y o u r C o u n c i l 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 t o an • O f f i c i a l Town P l a n o r Z o n i n g B y l a w , does t h i s t a k e the form . o^ A o f an open h e a r i n g i n w h i c h i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l ' OdV <: ^ written presentations? P l e a s e e x p l a i n the manner v' , -v ' i j w h i c h y o u r C o u n c i l t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s t o the O f f i c i a l Town ^ u jUw o r Z o n i n g Bylaw. p^cJaJwr.  Cci(c^-^  r i\  ;  a s  w  e  a s  \ ' >ran n  y  U..\.  \i.CV i.-i. -t i  /  I'.^  , / K  -  | -(  ^•lal'L. -"Pic/ bv.  147 3.  4. .  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a d e q u a t e s c o p e i s g i y e n t o p e r s o n s t o an o f f i c i a l town p l a n o r z o n i n g b y l a w ? ,OYes  ONo  objecting  Comments, i f any:  PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND  O F F I C I A L 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 t h e r e any t e n d e n c y f o r p e r s o n s s e e k i n g a change o r s e e k i n g to p r e v e n t 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 b e f o r e or a f t e r C o u n c i l has d e c i d e d on the m a t t e r ? • Y e s , a Please  16.  comment: ( v . \ . . t U  .:. ,--,,>.._•»•  cV p . t - i v i v , - 4 r , l--Wv^.-.(;j\  -  j j - f C L J ^ ^  U  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a p e r s o n d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h the d e c i s i o n o f C o u n c i l w i t h r e g a r d t o a z o n i n g bylaw o r o f f i c i a l town p l a n , s h o u l d be p"ermi,Tted t o p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? EfYes Please  17  No  • No state  why:  _  [;>.•• p.->  C  cvv^c--  How many a p p e a l s were h e a r d by y o u r C o u n c i l u n d e r S e c t i o n 20 of the Town P l a n n i n g A c t d u r i n g the p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1, 1965 t o December 31, 1967?  W  148  4.  18.  How  many o f t h e s e  appeals  went  from y o u r C o u n c i l t o :  . The M i n i s t e r o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s The County C o u r t _ . The Supreme C o u r t o f Hova S c o t i a  .Oo )  :  19.  If possible, briefly appealed:  list  v  the t y p i c a l  . From t h e d e c i s i cn o f y o u r C o u n c i l  0  r e a s o n s why  applicants  Ixs.- i ^ c-v - c\_Q.  - V - g i l ®\ ~£  . To t h e Mi ni s t e r  . To t h e C o u r t s  20.  In y o u r o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n P l a n n i n g A c t used f r e q u e n t l y ?  P Lease  comment why:  ./^Procedure  21.  20) o f t h e Town  jf'iio  D Yes  cost  (Section  (legal  j_ People /  i s t o o cumbersome fees)  too high  don't p  understand  Community  • Other  their  i s small  (please  rights ^Appeal  specify)  ....  a (Li 4^.-jj.T^~<y'\  In y o u r o p i n i o n , s h o u l d t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t r e l a t i n g t o z o n i n g p r o v i d e f o r e x c e p t i ons. ( w i t h t h e e x a c t c o n d i t i o n s under which m i n o r e x c e p t i o n s may be g r a n t e d s e t o u t i n t h e bylaw o r A c t ) o r v a r i ances ( a method o f s a f e g u a r d i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner a g a i n s t t h e i n v a s i o n o f h i s f u n d a m e n t a l r i g h t o f p r i v a t e  149  5.  p r o p e r t y which would r e s u l t of t h e z o n i n g b y l a w ) ? ^Yes  from a d h e r e n c e t o t h e s t r i c t  letter  O No  P l e a s e comment:  22.  I f the answer t o (21) was y e s , how would y o u l i k e e x c e p t i o n s or v a r i a n c e s p r o v i d e d f o r ?  23.  Do y o u f e e l changed? • Yes If  24.  t h e grounds  forms o f a p p e a l  to Planning  Board  Appeal  to separate  local  Appeal  to regional  ^ody  •Appeal  20 s h o u l d be  changes?  Which o f t h e f o l l o w i n g commen t .  •  under S e c t i o n  • No  " Y e s " , what  ^•'Appeal  f o r appeal  t o see  to P r o v i n c i a l  • Other (Please  would you p r e f e r ?  Please  body  body  s p e c i f y ) ."TV-^;lAr  . C ^\ ^  V H ft-i u,L..v_.c,.  '150 6.  -  PART  IV;  25.  Do y o u f e e l t h e r e s h o u l d be some form o f a p p e a l to t h e M i n i s t e r o r t h e C o u r t s ) t o t h e d e c i s i o n s Town P l a n n i n g Board on s u b d i v i s i o n m a t t e r s ?  APPEAL - SUBDIVISION  • Yes  • No  If  what  "Yes",  form  ( o t h e r than of the  of appeal?  I .J L  26.  •  ..  \  w  \ :^A'^  ffl^-X  ;  D u r i n g the p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1965 t o December 1967, how many . a p p e a l s have t h e r e been from d e c i s i o n s o f y o u r P l a n n i n g Board or C o u n c i l to . The M i n i s t e r . The C o u r t s  0  27.  If possible,  28.  S t a t e any o t h e r o p i n i o n s y o u may obje.cti.o-ns. ,•  g > , <L ^  TIs  A A  'T'l. -i (  a.  v u  briefly  list  VA^ .  A  •<•'•.-•  c,-..,wc-li  c:-^^^  f.  the t y p i c a l  have  ;  A  ,c i  r e g a r d i n g a p p e a l and /,  ]  :  ^ ^ ^ . ^ is •(  gounds. f o r a p p e a l :  i .-•  yvv-oir ^ . ( A , c c v ^ ^ c - A - j u.-i.  A  fAA...^.A ' { " L r w A  V-t A t " pi,<A-vittv c vv(>j Uvcc L  Ox. A  d  a v •. •  J4-C  «XA- VO\^A. c|.ct)c(  151 7.  29.  L i s t any s u g g e s t i o n s y o u have •questionnaire.  f o r improving  or adding  to t h i s  ?  0  T V I U  / ) v  ^<>vi  .•vi:_  (X  w.c. _c_- v_  <T  uL;. \GV  (Uc(  1  Date S e n t : Date  MttUM 4-/60  Received:  152  Hfnu,aLJLQ  QUESTIONS  •  Name: _Q  _ Municipal  • C h a i r m a n , Town P l a n n i n g  Board  Bother  (pjcmn/o^  PART 1:  GENERAL  1.  Do y o u have er^Yes  2.  3.  5.  Popul a t i on: ^____^£  Town o r M u n i c i p a l  Clerk  N/<> v  regulations?  the s u b d i v i s i o n  Comments, i f any:  a zoning  • No  • No  regulations? ri'cf  k  //r> A  e. ct w * /•> V s. y  bylaw? <  '  t o (3) was yes,' do y o u e n f o r c e Comments, i f any:  £ •.:>  this  zoning  bylaw?  c,Li^ .  Do y o u have an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n , a p p r o v e d by t h e M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d w i t h t h e c o u n t y r e g i s t r a r o f deeds? B-fes  6.  • No  I f t h e answer es  CCity,  j^-g-gr »--r^  • No  Do y o u have erYes  4.  subdivision  Do you e n f o r c e EfYes  1)//<?c  Unit:  • No  I f t h e answer t o ( 5 ) was y e s , i s t h i s an e f f e c t i v e document?  • Yes  EiiJo  Town P l a n ,  i n your  opinion,  2.  7.  Do y o u have sHes  8.  range  of duties  .>?  unit  adopted  a b u i l d i n g bylaw?  oNo  a building  inspector  o r committee?  DNO  I f t h e answer t o (11) was y e s , has t h e c o u n c i l o r b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r o r committee assumed t h e P l a n n i n g 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 o f b u i l d i n g permits? EKYes  PART 11:  13.  a NO  Do y o u have EfYes  12.  regularly?  • No  Has your m u n i c i p a l crimes  11.  B o a r d meet  Does t h e Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d c&rry o u t t h e f u l l p r e s c r i b e d under t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t ? B-f^s  10.  Board?  D No  Does t h e Town P l a n n i n g _KfeT  9.  an a c t i v e Town Planning  153  • No  Comments:  OBJECTIONS  Where your C o u n c i l 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 t o an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n o r Z o n i n g B y l a w , does t h i s t a k e t h e form o f an open h e a r i n g i n w h i c h i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s may make o r a l as w e l l as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? P l e a s e e x p l a i n the manner i n w h i c h y o u r C o u n c i l t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e O f f i c i a l Town P l a n o r Z o n i n g Bylaw.  f  ^  A  3.  14.  154  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a d e q u a t e s c o p e i s g i v e n t o p e r s o n s o b j e c t i n g to. an o f f i c i a l town p l a n o r z o n i n g bylaw?  tsTes  • No  Comments, 1 f any:  PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND  O F F I C I A L TOWN PLAN  _ec.-z.cm 20 of the Town Planning Act, as amended in 1965, provides: Section is dissatisfied with the decision of an official "When a person in the courseof. this Act or of a by-law in: . . of. hi.s administration nndp. under thin Act. he mau avneal from this decision to the cox council made under this Act, he may appeal from this decision to the 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 any council to waive any requirement of the by-law or "o permit person to contravene any such requirement". 15.  Is t h e r e any t e n d e n c y f o r p e r s o n s s e e k i n g a change o r s e e k i n g to p r e v e n t a c h a n g e , t o 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 b e f o r e o r a f t e r C o u n c i l has d e c i d e d on t h e m a t t e r ? E-Yes PI ease  • No comment:  yy-'j-'h.c  16.  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a p e r s o n d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e d e c i s i o n o f C o u n c i l w i t h r e g a r d t o a z o n i n g bylaw o r o f f i c i a l town p l a n , s h o u l d be p e r m i t t e d t o p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? • Yes Please  trffo^ state  why:  7 17.  At  ^9  How many a p p e a l s were h e a r d by y o u r C o u n c i l under S e c t i o n 20 of t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1, 1965 t o December 31, 1967?  155 4.  18.  ino'w many o f t h e s e  appeals  went  from y o u r C o u n c i l t o :  .. The M i n i s t e r o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . The County C o u r t _____^___ " . The Supreme C o u r t o f Nova S c o t i a  19.  If possible, briefly appealed:  list  the t y p i c a l  . From t h e d e c i s i o n o f y o u r C o u n c i l  . To t h e M i n i s t e r  To the C o u r t s .  20.  '  reasons  why a p p l i c a n t s  .  '  ______________  ,/ w. t-<  c ••/ (  ^-t  tc«+  o- _^,.._<. lx  _ _V  A _~A  In y o u r 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) o f t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes  OTTo  P l e a s e comment why: • P e o p l e don't u n d e r s t a n d t h e i r r i g h t s •Procedure i s t o o cumbersome O-Community i s s m a l l • Appeal cost (legal fees) too high E f f t h e r ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) ___________ .J-T^-i  21.  *'^,Z.\'->?..  In y o u r o p i n i o n , s h o u l d the Town P l a n n i n g A c t r e l a t i n g t o z o n i n g p r o v i d e f o r e x c e p t i o n s ( w i t h t h e e x a c t c o n d i t i o n s u n d e r which minor e x c e p t i o n s may be g r a n t e d s e t o u t i n t h e bylaw o r A c t ) or v a r l a n c e s (a method o f s a f e g u a r d i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner a g a i n s t the i n v a s i o n o f h i s f u n d a m e n t a l r i g h t o f p r i v a t e  156  p r o p e r t y which w o u l d r e s u l t o f the, z o n i n g b y l a w ) ? Yes Please  from a d h e r e n c e t o t h e s t r i c t  • No  M  comment:  c  /Li  A>x-«s->T-I  C  ,(j^f^  22.  I f the answer t o (21) was y e s , how would you l i k e exceptions or variances provided for?  23.  Do y o u f e e l changed? E.-Ye's If  24.  t h e grounds  f o r appeal  " Y e s " , what  forms  to Planning  Board  Cs!>Appeal  to separate  local  to r e g i o n a l  body  Appeal  • Appeal  t o see  20 s h o u l d be  changes?  Appeal  •  under S e c t i o n  ^~  • No  Which o f the f o l l o w i n g comment. •  letter  to P r o v i n c i a l  • Other (Please  body  specify)  o f appeal  body  .  would you p r e f e r ?  Please  '  6.  PART IV:- APPEAL - SUBDIVISION  25.  Do y o u f e e l t h e r e s h o u l d be some form o f a p p e a l to t h e M i n i s t e r o r t h e C o u r t s ) t c t h e d e c i s i o n s Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d on s u b d i v i s i o n m a t t e r s ? Y>s If  26.  "Yes",  r_No what  If possible,  ...  28.  form  of appeal?  ^  .  ^  t  ^  C--^SL^A.  JLfit^-Jl  D u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1965 t o December 1967, how many .appeals have t h e r e been from d e c i s i o n s o f y o u r P l a n n i n g Board or C o u n c i l t o . The M i n i s t e r . The C o u r t s  27.  ( o t h e r than o f the  ,  /  ^  briefly  list  the t y p i c a l  gounds, f o r a p p e a l :  J  S t a t e , a n y o t h e r o p i n i o n s y o u may have objections.  r e g a r d i n g a p p e a l and  L i s t any s u g g e s t i o n s y o u have ques t i o n n a i r e .  f o r improving  or adding  to  this  T5T  FOR OFFICE USE Date  Sent:  Date  Received:  QUESTIONS  r  />  Name  c  •  (sct/&'S  • C h a i r m a n , Town P l a n n i n g •^Other  PART 1: 1.  •  Do y o u ha Ye  DCity,  L  0  O  t  C  c  9  6  1. o n: 1 a11  f-f^Jopu  f  Town o r M u n i c i p a l  6  Clerk  .  subdivision  t / Yes  • No  Do y o u have •'Yes  regulations?  • No  Do y o u e n f o r c e  4.  Board  Unit:  1  GENERAL  d/ves  3.  Municipal  i  the s u b d i v i s i o n  regulations?  . Comments, i f any: //Ao.^^.^  a.zoning  bylaw?  >  ;.^...<.>4,,  .  • No  I f the answer t o (3) was y e s , do y o u e n f o r c e E^Yi Yes  / g t ^ ^ ^ ^  • No  this  Comments, i f any: TJ/Z^.J//  zoning  bylaw?  ./<  Do y o u have an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n , a p p r o v e d by t h e M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d w i t h t h e c o u n t y r e g i s t r a r o f deeds?  ElYes  • No  I f the answer t o (5) was y e s , i s t h i s an e f f e c t i v e document?  art e S  • NO  Town P l a n ,  J^-^s^^^^^sS^^^^'^^^&r J^CZ^^T  i n your  opinion,  160  2.  7.  Do y o u have gi^Yes  8.  Does  t h e Town- P l a n n i n g nNo  Has y o u r  municipal  Do y o u have  regularly?  gcf s & a « 7 f ^ ^ ^ - y €L.  unit  abuilding  DNO  range  of duties  adopted  a building  bylaw?  inspector  o r committee?  gsn*6 st-^U c*~^> (eftf&ea& 4-+*-<*6  ^LU^A^  I f t h e answer t o (11). was. y e s , has. t h e c o u n c i l o r b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r o r committee assumed t h e P l a n n i n g B o a r d ' 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 o f b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s ?  ° Yes  PART 11 : 13.  meet  ONo  E^Yes  12.  Board  ONo  tAes  11.  Board?  Does t h e Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d c&rry o u t t h e f u l l p r e s c r i b e d under t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t ? o' Yes  10.  Town P l a n n i n g  • No  B'Yes  9.  an a c t i v e  • No  OBJECTIONS  ^<^uz^rAz s«?  Comments:  *  •  '  1  A - J ^ ^ J A  a<^^L^,U.J  Where y o u r C o u n c i l 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 t o an . O f f i c i a l Town P l a n o r Z o n i n g Bylaw,.does t h i s t a k e t h e f o r m , o f an open h e a r i n g 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 w e l l as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? P l e a s e e x p l a i n t h e manner i n which y o u r C o u n c i l t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e O f f i c i a l Town P l a n o r Z o n i n g Bylaw-.  161  3.  14.  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a d e q u a t e s c o p e i s g i v e n t o p e r s o n s to an o f f i c i a l town p l a n o r z o n i n g bylaw?  FYes  ^WTTo  Comments,  i f any:  ^  .  /  ,  objecting  ^ .r<</<> ;  -<U  PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND O F F I C I A L 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 t h e r e any t e n d e n c y f o r p e r s o n s s e e k i n g a change o r s e e k i n g to p r e v e n t a change, t o 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 b e f o r e or a f t e r C o u n c i l has d e c i d e d on t h e m a t t e r ? Yes PI ease A-t+^SS//  16.  •  N  o  comment: ./iS-*  tJ^9-? y. n  <ff^f2^U<r-^  y^-ws^ ,  Z/s.Ps'^^/t  . - ^ St/fa;  •• <^r<C;  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a p e r s o n d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e d e c i s i o n o f C o u n c i l w i t h r e g a r d t o a z o n i n g bylaw o r o f f i c i a l town p l a n , s h o u l d be p e r m i t t e d t o p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? _&es Please  _/NO state  why:  /fCf  s S /  ^ n . ^ t ^ ^ Z ,  . '  J^&*Z*^L*A/L.  fastf.fz&e.^.A/j^.<t<^f  17.  How many a p p e a l s were h e a r d by y o u r C o u n c i l under S e c t i o n 20 of t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1, 1965 t o December 31, 1967?  162  4.  IS.  How  many o f t h e s e  appeals  went  from y o u r C o u n c i l t o :  . The M i n i s t e r o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . The County C o u r t . . The Supreme C o u r t o f Nova S c o t i a  19.  If possible, briefly appealed: From  20.  list  the t y p i c a l  the d e c i s i o n o f y o u r C o u n c i l  To  the M i n i s t e r  To  the C o u r t s  reasons  c  ^  A.^ruu-  why  applicants  .y.^<-/^C  a^&sj..,*.,.^  ^x>.-y sA^?&<.>-$dis^  In y o u r o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n P l a n n i n g A c t used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes  -  (Section  20) o f the Town  G/NO  P l e a s e comment why: • P e o p l e don't u n d e r s t a n d t h e i r r i g h t s • P r o c e d u r e i s t o o cumbersome • Community i s s m a l l O Appeal cost ( l e g a l fees) too high • Other (please s p e c i f y )  21.  In y o u r o p i n i o n , s h o u l d the Town P l a n n i n g A c t r e l a t i n g t o z o n i n g p r o v i d e f o r e x c e p t i ons ( w i t h t h e e x a c t c o n d i t i o n s under w h i c h m i n o r e x c e p t i o n s may be g r a n t e d s e t out i n t h e bylaw o r A c t ) v a r i ances (a method o f 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 a g a i n s t t h e i n v a s i o n o f h i s f u n d a m e n t a l r i g h t o f p r i v a t e o  r  163  5.  p r o p e r t y which would r e s u l t of the z o n i n g bylaw)? y^Yes  • No  Please  comment:  from a d h e r e n c e t o t h e s t r i c t  I f the answer t o (21) was y e s , how would y o u l i k e e x c e p t i o n s or v a r i a n c e s p r o v i d e d f o r ?  Do you f e e l changed? sfYes If  the grounds  f o r appeal  under S e c t i o n  letter  to see  20 s h o u l d  be  O N o "  " Y e s " , what  ^  changes?  Which o f the f o l l o w i n g comment.  forms  o f appeal  ^Appeal  to Planning  B o a r d -»  •  Appeal  to separate  local  •  Appeal  to r e g i o n a l  body  peal • Other  to P r o v i n c i a l (Please  -fiu.-  body  t  <  would y o u p r e f e r ?  ^<u^/{y  a-*L±t  '  Please  u^ty  • .  body ^ j ^ J ^  specify)  j  :  ^  164 6.  PAR"  IV:  25.  Do y o u f e e l t h e r e s h o u l d be some form o f a p p e a l to t h e M i n i s t e r o r t h e C o u r t s ) t o t h e d e c i s i o n s Town P l a n n i n g Board on s u b d i v i s i o n m a t t e r s ?  26.  APPEAL - SUBDIVISION  c/Yes  ONo  If  what  "Yes",  form  of appeal?  Z A ,. ;/  ^ s - i ^ .  ( o t h e r than o f the  /Jy  C  .-^y.^z«A->-  D u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1965 t o December 1967, how many a p p e a l s have t h e r e been from d e c i s i o n s o f y o u r P l a n n i n g Board or Counci1 t o The The  Minister Courts  - ,  briefly  &«.*./cL  27.  If possible,  list  28.  S t a t e any o t h e r o p i n i o n s y o u may o b j e c t i ons .  A  the t y p i c a l  have  gounds  f o r appeal:  r e g a r d i n g a p p e a l and  ^(^u 6j*p£>4<./ /£^<^ .st/s*^ st^Ps _sj/t<$  S.^ST  165  7  29.  i ' s t any s u g g e s t i o n s you ques.ti onnai r e .  have  f o r improving  or adding  to  this  Date Date  Sent:  x  0  Received:  i-  OUESTICNS  // C /.'/ - /  .Name:  / /  l  Municipal  • C h a i r m a n , Town P1 anni ng . B o a r d s Other  PART 1.  1:  • No  I M . ^ ',  the s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s ? Comments, i f any:  '  a z.oni ng by law?  • No  I f the answer fi^Yes  5.  Clerk  • No  Do y o u have t/Yes  4.  Town o r M u n i c i p a l  GENERAL  Do you e n f o r c e E^Yes  3.  — 5  DCity,  Do y o u 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  2.  >Ytr.  ~r> y/1966 J/tCtTK'^trfL Population:  Unit:  • No  ' '  t o (3) was y e s . do y o u e n f o r c e  this  Comments, i f any:  zoning  bylaw?  ,  Do you have an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n , a p p r o v e d by t h e 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? b Y e s D N o  6.  I f t h e answer t o (5) was y e s , i s t h i s an e f f e c t i v e document? Yes  • No  Town P l a n ,  i n your  opinion  X6?  7.  Do y-.-u have & Vi.*s  8.  Board?  • No  Does t h e Town P l a n n i n g d'i es  S.  an a c t i v e Town P l a n n i n g  B o a r d meet  regularly?  • No  Doer, t h e Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d c e r r y . p r e s c r i b e d under t h e Town P l a n n i n g j/ves  1C.  Has y o u r m u n i c i p a l  Do y o u have  adopted  a b u i l d i n g bylaw?  a building inspector  o r committee?  ^  I f the answer t o ( 1 1 ) was y e s , has t h e c o u n c i l o r b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r o r committee assumed t h e P l a n n i n g 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 o f b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s ?  PART I I :  _ • __  unit  D N O  • Yes  13.  of duties  DNO  •s/Y.es  12.  range  • No  _/res  11.  out the f u l l Act?  • No  Comments:  J*-^  ,y  c<aU  c  c<- ^-^^-^^  OBJECTIONS  &*-c^  Where y o u r C o u n c i l 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 t o an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n o r Z o n i n g B y l a w , does t h i s t a k e t h e form o f an open h e a r i n g 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 w e l l as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? P l e a s e e x p l a i n t h e manner i n which y o u r C o u n c i l t r e a t s o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e O f f i c i a l Town P l a n o r Z o n i n g Bylaw. ,  •  /  . ..  [  6  ~ / . .  v  ^  .  168  3.  !4.  Do you f e e l t h a t a d e q u a t e s c o p e i s g i v e n t o p e r s o n s •Lc, •'. o f f i c i a l town p l a n o r z o n i n g bylaw?  r^i&z  DNo  Comments, i f any:  PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND  objecting  •  O F F I C I A L 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 t h e r e any t e n d e n c y f o r p e r s o n s s e e k i n g a change o r s e e k i n g to p r e v e n t a c h a n g e , t o p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r , e i t h e r b e f o r e or a f t e r C o u n c i l has d e c i d e d on the m a t t e r ? • Yes  y No  Please  comment L___-  16.  Do y o u f e e l t h a t a p e r s o n d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h the d e c i s i o n o f C o u n c i l w i t h r e g a r d t o a z o n i n g bylaw o r o f f i c i a l town p l a n , s h o u l d be /• p e r m i t t e d to p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? ^2/ 7u- cV-vdu -J-/"' Yes Please  17.  _No state  / if why:  ^6<v-  3  .  c^/S-C £.<KsSf~  How many a p p e a l s were h e a r d by y o u r C o u n c i l u n d e r S e c t i o n 20 o f the Town P l a n n i n g A c t d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1, 1965 t o December 31 , 1967? X )  -rr-  /  ^  •  16?  18.-  * •* many o f t h e s e  a p p e a l s went  from y o u r C o u n c i l  A ?Mc A/OAJ G  . The M i n i s t e r o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . The County C o u r t . The Supreme C o u r t o f Nova S c o t i a  19.  If possible, appealed:  briefly  . From the d e c i s i o n  To  list  to; /  r  A/Q<*/G  the t y p i c a l  reasons  of your Council  why  R  applicants  :  ^  t h e Mi ni s t e r  . To the C o u r t s  20.  In y o u r o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n P l a n n i n g A c t used frequently? • Yes  (Section  20) o f t h e Town  jlNo  P l e a s e comment why: • People don 1 understand t h e i r r i g h t s • P r o c e d u r e i s t o o cumbersome • Community i s s m a l l • Appeal cost ( l e g a l fees) too high • O t h e r ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) c^c cj_^^^^J! 1  21.  In y o u r o p i n i o n , s h o u l d the Town P l a n n i n g A c t ^ r e l a t i n g t o z o n i n g p r o v i d e f o r e x c e p t i ons ( w i t h t h e e x a c t c o n d i t i o n s under w h i c h m i n o r e x c ep t i o n s m ay be g r a n t e d s e t out i n t h e bylaw o r A c t ) or v a r i ances (a method o f s a f e g u a r d i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a l l o t owner a g a i n s t the i n v a s i o n o f h i s f u n d a m e n t a l r i g h t o f p r i v a t e  170 5.  p r o p e r t y which w o u l d r e s u l t of t h e z o n i n g b y l a w ) ? Ekyes Please  22.  J^No  <CP—=  ___  -  w_  Do y o u f e e l changed?  t h e grounds  6 Yes  o  If  24.  yyjLt<:<J?J  I f the answer t o (21) was y e s , how would exceptions or variances provided for?  p  "Yes", what  changes?  Appeal  /_?  ^Appeal  •  •  .  Appeal  • Appeal • Other  to Planning  Board  to separate  local  t o r e g i o n a l body to Provincial  body  (Please s p e c i f y )  you l i k e ,  I T  x_  f o r appeal  Which o f the f o l l o w i n g forms comment. •  to the s t r i c t  letter  • ,•  comment: ~~7lLi^  , — L - . i , . ^ . -  23.  from a d h e r e n c e  -  ^ '  ^-o^yy^^->7 " Z  t o see  "  ^  — "Ti^  under S e c t i o n 20 s h o u l d be  4 J'i'g.o/'  of appeal  '•^'•<  would  ^ ^ a ^ ^ - .  you p r e f e r ?  Please  \ body  'o •< :-f' i  J  L^Altspu-JLd  A J  ofic^  _  -PAP"  25.  IV;  APPEAL - SUBDIVISION  Do you f e e l t h e r e s h o u l d be some form o f a p p e a l to the M i n i s t e r o r the C o u r t s ) t o t h e d e c i s i o n s Town P l a n n i n g Board on s u b d i v i s i o n m a t t e r s ? • Yes If  26.  >CNO  "Yes , 11  what  form  of appeal?  '  D u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1965 t o December 1967, how many a p p e a l s have t h e r e been from d e c i s i o n s o f y o u r P I a n n i n g Board or C o u n c i l t o The The  27.  ( o t h e r than o f the  /v&^se_____AA/J.  Minister Courts  If possible,  briefly  list  the t y p i c a l  gounds  f o r appeal  A-V/7.  28.  S t a t e any o t h e r o p i n i o n s y o u may  have r e g a r d i n g a p p e a l and  9  . . ^ s t any s u g g e s t i o n s y o u - q u e s t i o-nne i re .  have  f o r improving  or adding  to  4  this  '  y  -f-  •y  \  i UK Ui" h i Li: U i c Wiuukii  Date  Sent:  Date  Received:  r /  -  H^^hb  QUESTIONS  Name  •V, Cs  Municipal-Unit:  v  D Chairman,•Town  Planning  Board  CCity,  ^ W i f  0  ' "  r3fekpr,  Town o r M u n i c i p a l  1966  Population:  S o  Clerk  • Other  PART 1 : 1.  GENERAL  Do y o u have • Yes  | 2.  If  the s u b d i v i s i o n - r e g u l a t i o n s ? Comments, i f any  a zoning  bylaw?  DNo  the answer t o . ( 3 )  • Yes  5.  • No  Do you have •'Yes  regulations?  ,Cl No  Do you e n f o r c e es  3.  subdivision  • No  was y e s , do y o u e n f o r c e  Comments, i f any:  this  zoning  \ ^ . . l l \Xt j - i x c i  bylaw? ...n A c i ^  Do y o u have an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n , a p p r o v e d by t h e M i n i s t e r and r e g i s t e r e d w i t h t h e c o u n t y r e g i s t r a r o f deeds? • Yes  -a No  I f the answer t o (5) was y e s , i s t h i s an e f f e c t i v e document? • Yes  • No  Town P l a n ,  i n your  opinion,  174  •'. ' Do  you  have  ,D'No  • Yes  8.  Does  the  • Yes  9.  Has  Do  —c^-i  -  \Jc  c A  Board  meet  y^,  O-o  P-Ce^. V'5c4  ^ p t u l f b j  .  regularly?  out the Act?  full  range  of  duties  . •No  unit  adopted  a building  bylaw?  • .No  you  have  a building inspector  or  committee? '  DNO  I f the answer t o (11) was y e s , has the c o u n c i l o r b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r or committee assumed the P l a n n i n g B o a r d ' 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 o f b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s ? • Yes  PART I I :  13.  •X  your municipal  • Yes  12.  Town P l a n n i n g  -_*-  Does the Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d c a r r y • p r e s c r i b e d under the Town P l a n n i n g  .•'Yes  11.  U  Board?  .•'No  • Yes  10.  an. a c t i v e Town- P l a n n i n g  ' / .,• No  OBJECTIONS  Comments:  " ( <••-(•' '" -4-xu>-^... _v, ( _..-g,<..>.c.r;» ^_.Uv\v----A S  W-.-c  vA  .-v.. <•  <\ \^  \ fv ^  ^  Where y o u r C o u n c i l 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 t o an O f f i c i a l Town P l a n or Z o n i n g B y l a w , does t h i s t a k e the form o f an open h e a r i n g 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 w e l l as w r i t t e n p r e s e n t a t i o n s ? P l e a s e e x p l a i n the manner i n w h i c h y o u r 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 P l a n o r Z o n i n g Bylaw.  •  3.  Do you f e e l t h a t a d e q u a t e s c o p e i s g i v e n t o p e r s o n s to an -of f i c i a i town p l a n o r z o n i n g bylaw? PYes  DNo  175  objecting  Comments, i f any:  PART H i : APPEAL - ZONING AND  O F F I C I A L 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 t h e r e any t e n d e n c y f o r p e r s o n s s e e k i n g a change o r s e e k i n g to p r e v e n t a c h a n g e , t o p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r , e i t h e r b e f o r e or a f t e r C o u n c i l has d e c i d e d on the m a t t e r ? • Yes  DNo  Please  comment:  '• ' <.• .. y. ^_;c'. V_.LA. n c„  Ii---V V.» f V  ! ,J ;  16.  Do you f e e l t h a t a p e r s o n d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e d e c i s i o n o f C o u n c i l w i t h r e g a r d t o a z o n i n g ' b y l a w o r o f f i c i a l town p l a n , s h o u l d be p e r m i t t e d t o p e t i t i o n the M i n i s t e r ? • Yes Please  17.  nNo state  •  ~  why:  How many a p p e a l s were h e a r d by y o u r C o u n c i l under S e c t i o n 20 o f the Town P l a n n i n g A c t d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1, 1965 t o December 31, 1967?  iS.  .now  many o f t h e s e  appeals  went  . The M i n i s t e r o f M u n i c i p a l . The County C o u r t The Supreme Ceurt~of~'-'ova  19.  I f possible', b r i e f l y appealed: . From  list,  from y o u r C o u n c i l t o :  Affairs Scotia  the t y p i c a l  the d e c i s i o n o f y o u r  reasons  Council  why  applicants  '  . To t h e M i n i s t e r  To  20.  the  Courts  In y o u r o p i n i o n , i s t h i s p r o v i s i o n P l a n n i n g A c t used f r e q u e n t l y ? • Yes  (Section  20) o f t h e Town  • No  P l e a s e comment why: • People don't u n d e r s t a n d t h e i r r i g h t s • P r o c e d u r e i s t o o cumbersome • Community i s s m a l l • Appeal cost (legal fees) too high • Other (please s p e c i f y )  21.  In y o u r o p i n i o n , s h o u l d t h e Town P l a n n i n g A c t r e l a t i n g t o z o n i n g p r o v i d e f o r e x c e p t i ons ( w i t h t h e e x a c t c o n d i t i o n s under w h i c h m i n o r e x c e p t i o n s may be g r a n t e d s e t o u t i n t h e bylaw o r A c t ) or v a r i an ces (a method o f 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 a g a i n s t the i n v a s i o n o f h i s f u n d a m e n t a l r i g h t o f p r i v a t e  :;r-  1 !  5.  p r o p e r t y which would r e s u l t of th e z o n i n g b y l a w ) ?  from  adherence  to the s t r i c t  • elle  (  • Yes  n Mo  Please  comment:  22.  I f the answer t o (21) was y e s , how would e x c e p t i o n s or v a r i a n c e s p r o v i d e d f o r ?  you l i k e  23.  Do y o u f e e l ch anged?  Section  • Yes If  24.  t h e grounds  f o r appeal  changes?  Which o f the f o l l o w i n g forms comment. ' •  Appeal  t o P l a n n i n g Board  •  Appeal  to separate local  •  Appeal  to r e g i o n a l  • Other  20 s h o u l d be  O No  " Y e s " , what  • Appeal  under  t o see  tody  to P r o v i n c i a l (Please  body  s p e d fy)  o f a p p e a l would  body  you p r e f e r ?  Please  178 C.  _A«iT_ IV;  :  25.  APPEAL - SUBDIVISION  Do y o u f e e l t h e r e s h o u l d be some form o f a p p e a l ( o t h e r to t h e M i n i s t e r o r t h e C o u r t s ) t o t h e d e c i s i o n s o f t h e Town P l a n n i n g B o a r d on s u b d i v i s i o n n a t t e r s ? • Yes If  26.  than  • No  " Y e s " , what  form  of appeal?  .  .  D u r i n g t h e p e r i o d J a n u a r y 1965 t o December 1967 , how' many a p p e a l s have t h e r e been from d e c i s i o n s o f y o u r P l a n n i n g B o a r d or C o u n c i l to . The M i n i s t e r . The C o u r t s  .  27.  If possible, briefly  28.  S t a t e any o t h e r o b j e c t i ons.  list  opinions  the t y p i c a l  gounds f o r a p p e a l :  y o u may have r e g a r d i n g  appeal  and  179  29.  L i s t any s u g g e s t i o n s you q ues t i onnai r e .  have  f o r improving  or adding  to  this  180  APPENDIX D PRIVATE APPEALS  PRIVATE APPEALS  Mr. R.S. Lang, Director of the Community Planning Division explained "private appeals" as follows i n a latter dated February 28,  1968:  Private 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 i s unfair and costly to the developers who have gone through the relatively open 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 i s concerned with his own role i n these matters; he doesn t consider himself a rubber stamp and yet, i f he seriously considers zoning applications there i s the danger that , municipal councils w i l l take the easy way out and approve everything, leaving i t to us to stop the bad ones. Its an interesting dilemma." 1  ,  t  f  APPENDIX E POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT NOVA SCOTIA  183 TABLE E - l NOVA SCOTIA POPULATION IN COUNTIES, TOWNS, AND CITIES 1956 - 1966  1  21,682  1961 22,649  3_9j56 21,579  765  800  805  Bridgetown  1,041  1,043  1,060  Middleton  1,769  1,421  1,765  Antigonish County  13,076  14,360  14,890  3,592  4,344  4,856  125,478  131,507  129,572  2,964  2,999  2,960  Glace Bay  24,416  24,186  23,516  Louisburg  1,314  1,417  1,617  New Waterford  10,381  10,592  9,725  Notrth Sydney  8,125  8,657  8,752  Sydney (City)  32,162  33,617  32,767  Sydney Mines  8,731  9,122  9,171  Colchester County  34,640  34,307  35,700  Stewiacks  1,024  1,042  982  Truro  12,250  12,421  13,007  Cumberland County  39,598  37,767  35,933  Annapolis County Annapolis Royal  Antigonish Cape Breton County DoDdiiion  Nova Scotia, Department of Trade and Industry, Economics and Development Division, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Nova-Scotia - An Economic Profile Volume V. 1967. Table 1, pp. 57-59, and Dominion Bureau of Statistics Census. 1966.  184 Cumberland County (continued)  2__1  1S__  Amherst  10,301  10,788  10,551  Oxford  1,545  1,471  1,426  1,849  1,834  1,835  7,348  5,836  5,380  19,869  20,216  19,827  2,145  2,308  2,305  13,802  13,274  12,830  Canso  1,261  1,151  1,190  Mulgrave  1,227  1,145  1,124  197,943  225,723  244,948  Dartmouth  21,093  46,966  58,745  Halifax City  93,301  92,511  86,792  Hants County  24,889  26,444  26,893  Hunstport  1,298  1,381  1,438  Windsor  3,651  3,823  3,765  18,235  18,718  18,152  Inverness  2,026  2,109  2,022  Port Hawkesbury  1,078  1,346  1,866  37,816  41,747  42,249  Berwick  1,134  1,282  1,311  Kentville  4,937  4,612  5,176  Wolfville  2,497  2,413  2,533  Parrsboro Springhill Digby County Digby Guvsborough County  Halifax County  Inverness County  Kings County  185 1956  19__1  1966  34,207  34,998  36,114  Bridgewater  4,445  4,497  4,755  Lunenburg  2,859  3,056  3,154  Mahone Bay  1,109  1,103  1,296  44,566  43,908  44,490  New d a s cow  9,998  9,782  10,489  Picton  4,564  4,534  4,254  Steilarton  5,445  5,327  5,191  Trenton  3,240  3,140  3,229  Westville  4,247  4,159  4,147  12,744  13,155  12,807  3,500  3,712  3,60?  Richmond County  10,961  11,374  11,218  Shelburne County  14,604  15,208  16,284  Clarke s Harbour  945  945  1,002  Lockport  1,207  1,231  1,284  Shelburne  2,337  2,408  2,654  Victoria County  8,185  8,266  8,001  Yarmouth County  22,392  23,386  23,552  Yarmouth County  8,095  8,636  8,319  694,717  737,007  756,039  Lunenburg County  Picton County  Queen*s County Liverpool  1  TOTALS  186  ON  O  ON  H  •  •  O  O  r - l rH  •  O  vtf  IN O  if\ CO  NO  NO  H  H  CO  CM  H  ON  ~* O  •  •  CM  a  a  C>-  NO  (\!  ON  g  H  •  rH  £>-  CM  CO  NO  CO  «A CM  »  —4"  "A >f  o' \b' o"  CN  CO  ON  O  3 §* ^ r--  UN O  H  3  •\  CM  UN  NO  3  o H  o  3^.  •  UN  •  •  O  o co  I  «o o n <r\ o o> O « 4 -4" C vO  •  UN  NO  NO *\  CM  a H in o H  NO  O  sa •H  •  CM  UN  -*  ON  o UN  3  E> -4" • •  N  •  -4" o  NO  4  •  H  ON  H  CM  CM  O  IA H t > o r l co O ^ O -4- CM O  UN •  NO  4 • -4" -4^ •  ON  CO  o  O  UN  CM CM  NO  UN  H  N©  UN UN  cS  CM  c~  H  ON •K L  i—I » O-  £>« NO  «  CO  •  UN  H  CO  O  •>  tr\ ON  ON *\ CM  CM  UN ON  H  vO  ITS  -4 S\  CM  •» so £> UN •>  UN  NO  •  CJN UN <p\ A N O CO NO  -4*  CO  H  H  NO ON  »v rH «v  £  sO lA {^i • • • CN  ON NO UN  8 -4CO  o  UN  CO H  H  -4 -4-  8 CO NO ON CM  8  rH  O  UN ON  ON ON NO  CM  O NO  NO  CM •K CO ON  &3  t>  CM Tf  CM• rH•  CM • H  ir\  • -4• c>-•  vO  CN-  •  - *  Q  -4  •P fl  NO  •  CO - H  H  fl  fl  -p  o o  ON  CO  O CM  flj >  •I  ON  CM  ON  •K  UN  C-  -4" t> •\  ON  o  £>-  -4-  UN UN H  NO  UN  NO  ON  CM  H  -4-  ON  NO  NO  CO H  ON H  H  •K  CO  53  O CM  CO  -4•V-  NO •K .  NO  CO CO  ON  CO  ON  o  O  "w8•H cd •°« •A  UN  ON  A  UN  •V  CM  •P  NO ON  1 UN  ON  H  CO  CO  U  I o  U "8 -3 M  t si m  cd H  CD •rl  (0  •P CO d> (-1 O  CO  ca  •d  H C  •H -P  H  UN  O  .p  "2 q  +5 O  •fl H  t-l U g  •P  •3  co  o o  J3H  HO  O cd  id  O  ON  c  •H  •H  to § o  o  5  13  •H  p (0 c CM  CO PQ  a) o  o  co  Nova S c o t i a Voluntary Planning Board, " F i r s t Plan f o r Economic Development t o 1968" (Halifax: Queen's P r i n t e r , February 1966), Table F-5.  TABLE E-3  J  LABOUR FORCE IN THE SERVICE SECTOR NOVA SCOTIA. 1951 and 1961  1951  1961  23,656  27,160  14.8  8,587  9,603  11.8  3,559  5,652  58.8  Community, Business and Professional Services  17,057  27,380  60.5  Personal, Domestic and Miscellaneous Services  14,909  17,573  17.9  Public Administration  7,513  9,342  24.3  Totals  75,281  96,730  28.5  Defense  15,376  27,474  78.7  Total Services and Defence  90,657  124,184  37.0  Category Retail Wholesale Trade Finance, Insurance and Real Estate  Source:  % Increase  Census of Canada, 1951 and 1961  NOTE: The 1951 data were changed to conform to the new Standard Industrial Classification used i n 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  289  216  -25.3  Storage Communication  2,354  5,456  Electricity, Gas and Water  2,567  2,427  37,122  40,486  Totals Source:  4  Census of Canada, 1951 and 1961  I b i d . Table F-7  +131.8 -5.6 +9.1  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
France 39 0
United States 21 1
China 12 19
United Kingdom 2 0
Zambia 1 0
Unknown 1 0
Canada 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 42 0
Seattle 8 0
Ashburn 4 1
Fuzhou 4 0
Hartford 2 0
Columbus 2 0
Beijing 2 0
Nanjing 2 0
Guangzhou 2 0
Ilford 1 0
Bountiful 1 0
West Drayton 1 0
Roubaix 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

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