TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES
AND OTHER COMMITTEES
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999
ETOBICOKE COMMUNITY COUNCIL
REPORT No. 9
1 Appeal to Ontario Municipal Board - Nazeer Bishay 22 Kingsview Boulevard (Kingsway-Humber)
City of Toronto
REPORT No. 9
OF THE ETOBICOKE COMMUNITY COUNCIL
(from its meeting on June 23, 1999,
submitted by Councillor Mario Giansante, Chair)
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999
1
Appeal to Ontario Municipal Board - Nazeer Bishay
22 Kingsview Boulevard (Kingsway-Humber)
(City Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:
"It is further recommended that:
'WHEREAS this matter was deferred to this day to determine whether Mr. Bishay would install certain landscaping and greenery; and
WHEREAS concerns have been raised over the possible unsightliness of cars parked in the backyard, which had previously been parked in the front yard; and
WHEREAS Mr. Bishay has agreed to erect fencing around the backyard for screening purposes; and
WHEREAS it is in the best interests of the City to settle with Mr. Bishay, rather than oppose him, now that he is in the process of implementing landscaping and greenery and will erect a fence;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Reble Ritche Green & Ketcheson, Barristers and Solicitors, be authorized to attend the Ontario Municipal Board on July 30, 1999, to advise the Board that the City of Toronto will not be opposing Mr. Bishay, providing any Zoning Order made by the Board is not issued until Mr. Bishay has erected a six-foot concrete fence around the backyard, which concrete fence shall include all appropriate drainage measures, including weeping tiles, and be installed within an agreed upon time.' ")
(City Council on July 6, 7 and 8, 1999, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of City Council to be held on July 27, 1999.)
The Etobicoke Community Council recommends the adoption of the confidential report dated June 15, 1999, from Reble, Ritchie, Green & Ketcheson, respecting a settlement proposal in conjunction with an Ontario Municipal Board hearing scheduled for July 30, 1999, which was forwarded to Members of Council under confidential cover.
The Etobicoke Community Council submits the following report (June 15, 1999) from Reble, Ritchie, Green & Ketcheson:
Purpose:
This report represents a status report regarding the matters involving Nazeer Bishay and 22 Kingsview Boulevard.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
None.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that this report be received.
Council Reference/Background/History:
This matter has a lengthy history, which is outlined below.
Mr. Nazeer Bishay is the owner of 22 Kingsview Boulevard. He sought and obtained a building permit for the purpose of constructing a dwelling at that address. During the course of construction, Mr. Bishay strayed from the building permit as follows:
1. The height of the building was 10.27 metres, rather than the permitted 9.5 metres;
2. The rear yard setbacks were 22.24 metres and 22.42 metres, rather than the permitted 22.72 metres;
3. A patio enclosure was not shown on the plans;
4. The front yard driveway was not delineated from the balance of the front yard, allowing vehicles to travel virtually anywhere on the front yard, in contravention of the Zoning Code; and
5. The drainage pattern was not in accordance with the plans submitted.
As a result, Mr. Bishay was prosecuted under both the Building Code Act and the Etobicoke Zoning Code, resulting in convictions and fines totalling $5,350.00. Those convictions were appealed by Mr. Bishay, and the appeal is now scheduled for June 28, 1999.
The City also obtained a mandatory Order from the Court, requiring that Mr. Bishay build in accordance with his building permit. Mr. Bishay's appeal of that Order was dismissed.
Two contempt Orders have been obtained against Mr. Bishay, relating drainage and landscaping. A third contempt Motion, relating to the patio enclosure, the rear yard setback and the height, remains outstanding, pending the outcome of Mr. Bishay's appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (as set out below).
In order to "legalize" the rear yard setback, the patio enclosure and the height, Mr. Bishay applied to the Committee of Adjustment for a variance. That variance request was denied. Mr. Bishay appealed the decision of the Committee of Adjustment to the Ontario Municipal Board. The Ontario Municipal Board dismissed Mr. Bishay's appeal.
In May, 1998, Mr. Bishay brought forward a site specific zoning by-law request, again attempting to "legalize" the rear yard setback, patio enclosure and height. In a report dated May 27, 1998, submitted to this Committee, Karen Bricker, Commissioner of Urban Development, Etobicoke, recommended "that the application be refused and that the applicant be invited to appear in deputation before the Etobicoke Community Council." Mr. Bishay and his counsel did appear before Etobicoke Community Council. Etobicoke Community Council refused his application.
Mr. Bishay appealed this refusal to the Ontario Municipal Board. That appeal was scheduled to be heard on June 14, 1999.
Discussion:
Prior to the Ontario Municipal Board hearing date, Mr. Bishay approached the City, with a view to a possible settlement. The parameters of settlement and our comments thereon will be provided to you under separate confidential cover.
On June 14, 1999, the Ontario Municipal Board, Mr. G. Harron presiding, heard Mr. Bishay's adjournment request. In attendance before the Ontario Municipal Board were Mr. Bishay, the City, through Paul Zuliani and the writer, and six area residents. After hearing submissions from Mr. Bishay, the City and the area residents, Mr. Harron adjourned the hearing to Friday, July 30, 1999 at 10:00 a.m. at the offices at the Ontario Municipal Board, 655 Bay Street, 16th floor, Toronto, Ontario. This hearing is peremptory and will proceed on that date, settlement or no settlement.
Conclusions:
There are no real conclusions to offer in the Bishay matter, in that so many issues remain outstanding.
Contact:
John R. Hart, Solicitor
Tel: (416) 622-6601, Fax: (416) 622-4713, email: rrgk@istar.ca
(City Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential communication (June 15, 1999) from Reble, Ritchie, Green & Ketcheson, Barristers, Solicitors, Notaries, such communication to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.)
(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential communication (June 14, 1999) from Mr. Adam J. Brown, Brown, Dryer, Karol, Barristers & Solicitors, such communication to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.)
(Councillor Shiner, at the meeting of Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, declared his interest in the foregoing Clause in that an associated Solicitor in the firm representing the applicant is representing him in another matter.)
Respectfully submitted,
MARIO GIANSANTE
Chair
Toronto, June 23, 1999
(Report No. 9 of The Etobicoke Community Council, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999.)