A shed that encroaches on a township road allowance is the driving force behind a request for a road closing and the land purchase for a Rothsay property owner.
Mapleton council on Jan. 10 deferred a decision on the request by Ryan and Nicole Martin. They hold property at Lots 86, 87, 112, and 113 on Concession 14, off County Road 7 in the hamlet.
Council had deferred its decision originally because a poor quality map it received was inadequate to show the location of the shed and the unopened road allowance that is owned by the township. That road allowance is known as Nelson Street, and it runs from County Road 7 to another unopened road allowance to the north called Head Street.
Nelson Street is to the east of the Martin holdings. It is 264 feet deep and 66 feet wide.
Council heard that several years ago the Martins applied for and received a building permit for an accessory shed. Township officials later learned the building encroached onto township property, something that would not be evident just looking at the undeveloped road. There are also some trees growing on it.
Township chief administrative officer Patty Sinnamon said in an interview last week the Martins have asked to buy the road allowance to make the shed legal.
?It makes sense to close it off and sell it to them,? she said.
In her report to council she stated the sale price across Ontario for such transactions is usually the costs of the sale, including the required advertising of the property, legal fees and other disbursements, as well as survey costs.
?Based on previous unopened road allowance transfers (11 since amalgamation in 1999), the total cost has been less than $5,000 and is generally borne by those receiving the lands.?
If the township sells the lands, it can be taxed. As it is, Mapleton gets no revenue from it.
Sinnamon added, ?In this instance, it is still my recommendation that the cost be shared on a 50:50 basis between the property owner and the municipality. An undertaking has been signed by the Martins to share in the cost.?
In explaining the history of such road allowances, Sinnamon said in her report ?The majority of unopened road allowances were created many decades ago (some as far back as mid-1880s) as in this case. They would have been created by a developer at the time and for whatever reason, the development did not proceed.?
Sinnamon said there are lots to the north of the Martins? holdings, and Head Street is unopened there, but its extension to the west is a legal road and property owners in that area will not be affected by frontage issues if council closes Nelson Street.
When asked if the property owner to the south of the Martins should also have an opportunity to buy half of the road allowance, Sinnamon said that is normal practice, but sometimes the laws do not fit the circumstances.
In this case, the shed encroaches so far onto the road allowance that it covers over half the road width. If the township considers sideyard requirements, it makes no sense to sell to anyone other than the Martins.
Nonetheless, council decided to delay a decision until it can consult the landowner to the east about the situation.
Sinnamon said she was unsure if the issue would be considered at the Jan. 24 council meeting or in February.
