(February 11, 1998) From Robert Truman, 63 Brumell Avenue

APlease take this as a request from me and others to make a deputation to the York Community Council at its meeting of April 1.

The purpose of this deputation is to provide additional information to the Council which they did not have when the by-law was enacted, and to request the Community Council to reconsider the by-law, particularly as it applies to the area of smaller (predominantly 25 foot) lots west of Jane Street, south of Dundas Street.

My reasons for this request are several.

First, I believe the amount of development permitted by the by-law is excessive for the area.

No study was done of the area to determine the impact and effect of the by-law. The analysis which preceded the enactment of the by-law by York Council consisted primarily, if not exclusively, of a review of Committee of Adjustment applications for a four year period, of which less than 4% were in the area described above.

Second, I am certain that I, and most, if not all, of my neighbours, did not receive notice of the by-law=s enactment. The lack of interest at your Council=s public hearing where, I understand, three people attended but did not speak, and only two written submissions, should have been an indication of the inadequacy of the notice given for a matter that affected a large portion of the City and its residents.

Thirdly, notwithstanding the notice matter, the introduction of zoning changes of this magnitude should be done on the basis of neighbourhood consultation and analysis, and not on a City-wide basis. There is simply too much variety within the boundaries of the former City of York to permit the generalization of the type proposed in this by-law.

Finally, I have some experience in these matters and I agree it is important to permit change without every application going to the Committee of Adjustment. However, I am not aware of any municipality where this objective has been accompanied by such an extravagant, and potentially harmful, increase in development rights.

I have, incidentally, met with the Planning and Legal staff and I am satisfied that there are no further grounds for discussion with staff in the absence of directions from Council.

I appreciate your assistance in this matter and I would also like to receive confirmation of the date and time of the Council meeting.

If you have any questions, please let me know.@

AI previously wrote to the Board on November 12, 1997, outlining my concerns and requesting party status in this matter.

I am now writing to confirm that I, and others in the neighbourhood, are hoping to address the York Community Council on this matter on April 1. However, as of this date, discussions with the staff have not resolved any of the concerns I had when I originally wrote to the OMB.

I would like to raise some procedural questions.

First, I requested party status in my letter of November 12, 1997 and provided a copy of that letter to the City Clerk. Am I to provide copies of that request to the other parties? If so, I would appreciate being provided with a list of those to whom any further notice is to be given.

Second, I understand the municipality might request that those parts of the by-law not subject to a formal objection, be approved. Would the Board deal with such a request prior to dealing with the issue of party status for myself and others?

Third, while I am prepared to give evidence on the substance of my concerns about the by-law at any time, I believe the question of notice should be dealt with as a preliminary matter.

Notice was given in the form of a display ad in a weekly paper, the York Guardian, and I believe that notice was inadequate by any standard.

More importantly, based on my own recollections and based on my discussions with may people in my immediate area, I am satisfied that we received no notice at all. The municipality seems to assume that the York Guardian is delivered door-to-door on a weekly basis and it may in fact be in other areas of the City. I have enclosed a copy of a letter from the then City of York Clerk where he makes that assumption.

Since my letter to the Clerk, I have received two issues of the York Guardian, one in December after discussing the matter with an official of the City, and one, inexplicably, last weekend. I don=t see how one could assume that notice was given to us by the use of this paper.

I would like to request the OMB to direct the municipality to give better notice of the proposed by-law. Could you please advise me of the proper way of bringing such a motion and must I be added as a party first.

I will appreciate any assistance you can provide.@

(February 5, 1998) From the Acting Secretary, Ontario Municipal Board

At the request of AJP Investments Ltd., Robert and Sandra Carson, Kaukab Billah, Kinsale Investments Ltd., 1087993 Ontario Limited and 1179510 Ontario Inc., the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has referred to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 17 (11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, proposed Amendment No. 127 to the Official Plan for the former City of York, now the City of Toronto

Minister=s File No. 20-OP-0002-127

OMB File No. 0960036 Case No. PL968690

Kinsale Investments Limited, Kaukab Billah and Marl L. Kerr have appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c P.13, as amended, against Zoning By-law 3623-97 of the former City of York, now the City of Toronto.

OMB File No. R970320 Case No. PL971323

NOTICE OF PREHEARING CONFERENCE

The Ontario Municipal Board will conduct a prehearing conference respecting this matter.

If you do not attend the prehearing conference, the Ontario Municipal Board may proceed in your absence and you will not be entitled to any further notice of these proceedings.

TIME AND PLACE OF PREHEARING CONFERENCE

A prehearing conference will be held

at: the Council Chamber, York Civic Service Centre

2700 Eglinton Avenue West YORK

on: MONDAY, the 6th day of APRIL, 1998

at: 10:00 O=CLOCK (local time) in the FORENOON

PURPOSE OF PREHEARING CONFERENCE

The conference will deal with preliminary and procedural matters, including the following:

* Identification of parties. These persons have the right to participate throughout by presenting evidence, questioning witnesses, and making final arguments. In order for the Board to determine your status for the hearing, you or your representative should attend the prehearing conference and ask to be added as a party. Groups, whether incorporated or not, who wish to become parties should name a representative. Parties do not need to be represented by lawyers.

* Identification of participants. Persons who do not wish to participate throughout the hearing may attend the hearing and make a statement to the Board. Such persons should also attend the prehearing conference.

* Identification of issues.

* Start date of the hearing.

* Duration of the hearing.

* Directions for prefiling of witness lists, expert witness statements & written evidence.

* Possibility of settlement of any or all of the issues.

* The hearing of motions.

* Such further matters as the Board considers appropriate.

Everyone present should come prepared to consider specific dates for proceedings in this matter.

Evidence or formal statements may also be heard at the prehearing conference in an attempt to settle the matters in dispute. Note that even if no settlement is reached the Board may make a final decision on the evidence it has received.

All parties or their representatives should attend the prehearing conference.

DATED at Toronto this 5th day of February, 1998.@

(All attachments are on file in the Clerk=s Office, York Civic Service Centre.)

Everyone present should come prepared to consider specific dated for proceedings in this matter.

(A copy of By-Law No. 3623-97 and all relevant information is on file in the Clerk=s Office, York Civic Service Centre)