Speeding Up Local Planning Decisions

Summary#

This bill changes Manitoba’s Planning Act and the City of Winnipeg Charter. Its goal is to speed up planning and zoning decisions, set clear timelines, and clarify how public objections are handled. It also creates simpler rules for small land splits and modest changes to livestock operations.

• Sets firm timelines: most hearings or reviews must start within 120 days and decisions must be made within 60 days.
• Changes how objections to zoning and planning by-laws are handled by the Municipal Board (a provincial tribunal), including when it holds a hearing and when it only reviews the written record.
• Limits appeals in some cases and makes certain Municipal Board decisions final.
• Creates a “minor subdivision” category for simple land splits that meet set conditions.
• Lets existing livestock operations make small, “authorized” changes (including up to a 15% increase in animal units) with a simple zoning memo, if they meet conditions.
• Narrows what limits local councils can put on livestock operations, mainly to siting and setbacks.
• Requires notice to people who spoke or objected, and requires the Municipal Board to post its reports online.

What it means for you#

• Residents and community members

  • If enough objections are filed against a proposed zoning or secondary plan by-law, the Municipal Board gets involved.
  • In some cases, the Board reviews only the city or municipal record and issues recommendations (no new hearing or new evidence). Council must consider these recommendations before final approval.
  • In other cases, the Board holds a hearing within 120 days and issues an order within 60 days. That decision is final.
  • You will get notice if you spoke at the earlier hearing or filed an objection. Only those people can take part in the Board process.
  • Fewer appeals are allowed when council has considered the Board’s recommendations, and no appeal is allowed when the Board issues a final order.

• Property owners and developers

  • Faster timelines for reviews, hearings, and decisions (generally 120 days to start, 60 days to decide).
  • A new “minor subdivision” path applies to simple cases, like creating one new lot, consolidations that don’t add titles, or party wall splits—if they already match local plans and zoning and don’t create new public roads or change highway access.
  • If your project faces objections, the Board may either review the file on the record or hold a hearing. Its decisions or recommendations will guide whether and how a by-law can pass.

• Farmers and livestock operators

  • You can make an “authorized change” to existing buildings that house animals—or, for supply-managed parts of an operation, a modest intensification—if:
    • You get a zoning memorandum confirming the operation appears to match zoning, and showing animal units before and after; and
    • The change does not raise animal units by more than 15%.
  • These authorized changes are not treated as new construction or intensification that would trigger full approvals.
  • For large operations (300+ animal units), some minor condition changes can be handled under a simpler process.
  • Municipal councils are limited in adding extra conditions on livestock operations beyond siting and setbacks set in planning by-laws.
  • You may be required to pay for or share the cost of works to service the operation (e.g., roads, drainage, fencing, landscaping).

• Municipal councils and the City of Winnipeg

  • Must send full planning records to the Municipal Board when objections meet the referral threshold.
  • Must wait to pass final reading of a by-law until the Board has issued recommendations (and council has considered them) or, if a hearing is held, until the Board confirms or directs changes.
  • The Board posts its reports online within seven days of sending them to you.
  • Shorter, fixed timelines apply to your referrals, hearings, and decisions.
  • Some older overlapping procedures are repealed to simplify the process.
  • Your ability to add new restrictions on livestock operations is narrowed.

• Regional planning and pending applications

  • Pending applications are not subject to new regional planning by-laws that are adopted after the application is in process.
  • Timing rules clarify when municipalities must bring their by-laws in line with regional plans.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Clear timelines will speed up decisions for housing, business, and farms.
• A single, province-wide process improves predictability for applicants and communities.
• Board reviews “on the record” keep public input from earlier hearings while avoiding repeat hearings and delays.
• Limiting appeals after the Board’s involvement reduces costs and uncertainty.
• Minor subdivision rules and authorized livestock changes cut red tape for small, low-risk adjustments.
• Narrowing local limits on livestock operations prevents inconsistent or burdensome rules.

Opponents' View#

• Fewer appeals and more final Board decisions may weaken community voice and local council control.
• Reviews without new hearings limit chances to bring forward new facts or respond to late changes.
• Allowing up to a 15% increase in animal units as an “authorized change” could affect neighbors (odor, traffic, manure) without a full review.
• Tight deadlines may rush complex planning decisions or strain municipal staff capacity.
• Clarifying that pending applications aren’t subject to new regional by-laws may undercut newer community plans.
• Shifting some servicing costs to livestock owners and requiring more documentation could add expenses for rural operators.