A three-ring circus in Cambridge
CAMBRIDGE — Council may rue the day that Waqas Bhutto came to the city’s planning committee to appeal the decision of the boulevard committee.
What started out as a debate over one man’s decorating project ended up raising a maintenance issue for boulevards across the city.
In April 2016, Bhutto spent $30,000 to install a new concrete driveway at his Porter Crescent home in Cambridge. As part of that job, he added a cement apron to his sidewalk and had three concrete rings cast for his boulevard to provide a hard edge around a flower bed, the boulevard tree and a utility box.
Prior to the installation, he contacted the city to ask if any permits were required. He was told no permits were needed, but he should consult with his neighbours to make sure they didn’t have any objections. There were no objections and the installation took place.
In October 2017, the city received a complaint that the grass in front of Bhutto’s home was too high and unkempt. He told councillors there had been a death in the family at the time of the complaint and he had the grass cut when the city bylaw enforcement officer visited.
During the inspection, Bhutto was informed that the three concrete rings might also be an issue, but the officer wanted to consult with his manager.
The city later told him the three rings had to be removed, but he could appeal the matter to the city’s boulevard committee. After losing the appeal, Bhutto then asked if he could appeal the committee’s decision and was referred to council.
On Tuesday night, Bhutto was back before councillors for a second time. Two weeks ago, he made his plea to council and was told there is no mechanism in place to appeal a boulevard committee decision.
But council asked staff to submit a report on the matter and asked Bhutto to return with some photos so they could see what he has been talking about.
Bhutto presented those photos at Tuesday’s meeting and several members of council initially supported what he had done.
“I can’t see he’s done anything wrong,” Coun. Mike Devine suggested.
That’s when assistant city solicitor Nadia Kolten stepped in.
Kolten, quoting from the boulevard bylaw, said, “No owner shall permit anything on the boulevard that obstructs or obscures access to installations belonging to the city, the region and any utility provider.”
She went on to say that access must be maintained in case of an emergency. There is a gas main running beneath the boulevard on Porter Crescent in front of Bhutto’s home.
Kolten then went a step further, referring to Ontario’s Municipal Act.
“The act makes it the obligation of the municipality to maintain the boulevard. There is nothing in the boulevard bylaw that requires any owner to maintain a boulevard. Many owners do and I think we want to compliment them for doing that, but the Municipal Act makes it an obligation, a legal obligation of the city,” she said.
While city council does not have a mechanism in place to review appeals by the boulevard committee, a review of the boulevard bylaw is currently underway.
Cambridge Mayor Doug Craig offered Bhutto an apology for all the trouble the city has put him through and asked councillors to refer his issue to the review for its consideration.
Should the review decide that the three rings must be removed, council has directed that the removal will be done at the city’s expense.
As for Kolten’s comments regarding the maintenance of boulevards, Coun. Frank Monteiro summed up the feelings of several members of council.
“I could say something, but that’s a can of worms I don’t want to open.”