Canadian Lawyer InHouse

Q U I Z ANSWERS 1 (c) Changes in municipal zoning are not retroactive. Existing legal uses, even if they are not in conformity with the new zoning, are considered to be "legal non-conforming" until a change of use occurs. Your client's current operations should not be disrupted. However, the new zoning may affect the redevelopment potential or resale value of the site, because it may change the permissible uses as well as the permitted built-form of structures that can be built. There is also a potential impact on the ability to expand or change the existing operations. 2 (b) The Ontario Municipal Act, 2001 provides municipalities with broad powers including the power to regulate businesses. Many municipalities have adopted licensing bylaws regulating certain types of businesses. In the absence of an explicit requirement to obtain one, a municipal business licence is not required to do business. Some municipalities require licences for a particular type of business while others do not. At the same time, even if the primary business (such as a fitness facility) does not require a licence, ancillary uses (such as the snack bar/ restaurant within the fitness club) may still require a municipal business licence. 3 (c) The bylaw officer is threatening to use two separate processes in response to the offensive sign at your company's property: (1) charging your company for having committed a provincial offence which can result in fines upon conviction; and (2) compelling your company to remove the sign in order to comply with the bylaws. Under the first process, if the charge against your company is for having "erected" the sign illegally, your company arguably has a complete defense by virtue of the fact the previous owner had committed the alleged offence of the illegal sign erection. It follows that the charge should be laid against the previous owner who will be liable for the resulting fine upon conviction. At the same time, using the second process, the municipality can issue orders to compel the current property owner to rectify existing property violations. Presumably if the municipality's bylaws prohibit more than just the illegal "erection" of the sign but also other aspects of the operation involving the sign, the municipality has the power to order your company, which is the current property owner, to take actions bringing the property into compliance. 4 (c) Municipalities are required to base their planning approvals on factors relating to the land use, the built-form, and the physical impact caused by the proposed development. The compatibility of the proposed land use, the scale of the proposed development in relation to the rest of the neighbourhood, shadows caused by the new building envelope, overlook/privacy concerns are factors the planning approval authority should consider. However, concerns about the users of the proposed development (such as the behaviour of employees at the proposed development) or the construction activities (such as noise or property damage concerns) — while otherwise legitimate concerns — are not relevant to determining the desirability of a proposed development at the planning approval stage. Your ranking? n One or less correct: might be time to brush up n Two correct: not bad, but some further work needed n Three correct: room for improvement n Four correct: very well done a of Canadian LegaL n daiLy BLognews [ WWW.CANADIANLAWYERMAG.COM/LEGALFEEDS ] Daily upDates s major court ruling News RouNdup events 18 • ju n e 2013 INHOUSE Powered By Canadian Lawyer & Law times

• Cover