7 September 2012 Councillor Linda Mosher, District 17, Halifax Regional Municipality PO Box 1749, Halifax, NS Dear Councillor

Mosher; I am writing further to our recent communications concerning the text of the Reg ional Subdivision Bylaw, s 9(1), and its relevance to the possible approval of a concept plan currently under consideration by Development Services for the shor es of the Northwest Arm at #65 Boscobel Road, lands of the IMP Group. Please no te that I am writing here in my personal capacity, as next-door neighbour to thi s property, since, as I have noted previously, my role as Member of the Legislat ive Assembly appears to create tension in the conversation. Please accept this as a formal request to return Clause 9(1) of the Regional Sub division Bylaw to Council for confirmation of the intent of the clause, and amen dment to reflect this intent, before any concept plan is approved for residentia l subdivision involving the creation of a public street in any area designated a s "Harbour" on the Generalized Future Land Use Map of the Halifax Regional Plan. If Council did in fact intend to allow creation of new public streets and street frontages everywhere in the Urban Service Area, including those areas marked "H arbour" and slated for further planning, (as distinct from those marked Capital District), it will be very simple to amend the text to clarify this. If it is n ot Council's intention, this will give Council the opportunity to confirm its in tention as stated in the clause as it stands. Given the many statements in plan and policy, and designations of sensitivity of the "Harbour" area on various maps and other elements of the Regional Plan, I b elieve it is extremely important that this prohibition not be dismissed out of h and, based solely on the opinion of development officers who admit they "can't e xplain" the significance of the clause in its current form, and can't think of a ny precedents since the adoption of the Regional Plan and Subdivision Bylaw. I will note that the prohibition on creation of new public streets does not forb id all residential development in the Harbour-designated areas, but it would req uire public participation and community input to vary the existing provisions, c ommunication which has been vehemently excluded by the current insistence that s uch development is as of right. Clause 9(1) is at the very least, ambiguous, and I believe that the responsible and ethical approach is to request clarification from Regional Council before kn owingly permitting the provision to be dismissed. This is especially important as the development at Boscobel Road appears to a precedent-setting event for the areas marked Harbour (as distinct from the Capital District designation) on the Regional plan's Generalized Future Land Use Map. WIth thanks in advance for your time and diligence, and I will be happy to speak to this at Regional Council, Sincerely, Michele H. Raymond cc. Members of Regional Council

HRM legal department