Laneway update - 10 Dec. 2012
2 views
Skip to first unread message
David Mennier
Dec 11, 2012, 3:44:15 PM12/11/12
to lan...@googlegroups.com
Hi folks,
Here's a quick, 5-point update on the laneway issue:
1. Upcoming Public Information Exchange Meeting
The information exchange meeting is still scheduled for Thursday, 20th of Dec., 7 p.m., at Memorial Hall on Dufferin Row. The hall is now booked.
I will send out general invitations and the agenda to everyone soon, and place posters in the neighbourhood, but I still am waiting for all key invitees to respond.
At this point, we have:
- Alain Miguelez, City of Ottawa, confirmed
- Councillor Peter Clark, will try but unlikely (has family visiting that evening)
- NECA, Mike Histed, Chair, Heritage & Planning Committee, confirmed
- Tobi & Fiona, new owners of 169 Ivy, unavailable but will send house photos for the meeting
- CCCC and CCC, awaiting their responses
- residents of our block, most have indicated their intention to attend
Note that we expect some media to be present, although I have not contacted any media outlets.
2. New Survey + City and Four Owners Meeting
Also, before the meeting, two other important events will likely happen:
- the results of a new survey of the laneway, as it pertains to the 4 properties around the new home on 169 Ivy (175 Ivy, and 73 & 75 Vaughan)
- a smaller meeting with the City and the owners of these 4 properties over the specific issue of the rear access for 169 Ivy
Both of these events may impact on the content of the meeting on the 20th of Dec.
3. Questionnaire Results
The results of the recently distributed questionnaire will be presented at the meeting on 20th Dec.
Residents from almost all lots on the block returned questionnaires, so thank you all for your time and effort!
The only questionnaires not returned were:
- one house, at 95 Vaughan, that does not actually abut the lane
- one house, at 2 Putman, that does not actually abut the lane
- owner at 169 Ivy did not return survey (was left at building site but they may not have received it)
- owner at 175 Ivy did not return survey, reason unknown
A questionnaire has also been PDF'ed and emailed to the owners of 83 Vaughan (currently in Qatar), so they have the option of doing it.
So, of the residents of the 22 lots that did return the questionnaire, all were opposed to the change of funtion of the laneway,
except for one who ticked 'indifferent', and one that did not indicate, citing more info needed to make a decision.
Note that many households have more than one resident or owner, so some lots had multiple votes.
As I mentioned, the results will be presented at the meeting, but it is clear, however the data is interpreted,
that the vast majority (90%+) of residents are in favour of keeping the lane 'as is'.
4. Option to 'close' the laneway
If everyone is not yet aware, the laneway in our block is actually classified as 'open', even though it has been untravelled and encroached upon for decades.
There is a municipal process to open or close a road or laneway. **See bottom of this email.
We residents of block, now that the clear majority have indicated a preference to keep the lane 'as is',
could now consider submitting this municipal application, which arguably should have been done many years ago.
If this is the case, we should raise this idea at the meeting and have community feedback on this idea.
Note that submitting an application to close a laneway does not imply that the City would approve such a request.
5. Adverse Possession
Although I am sure our situation will never come to litigation (it would be long, costly and most likely, have an unfavourable outcome as we are talking about City land, which enjoys special status), for your reading enjoyment, I include a couple of articles on adverse possession (squatter's rights) in the context of Ontario:
Hope you are all well and I'll pass along any more info as it becomes available.
See you all at the meeting on the 20th.
Regards,
_________________________
David P. Mennier
@ 87 Vaughan
** From http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/planning-and-development/how-develop-property/street-or-lane-closing-or-opening
"Occasionally, the City receives a request to close a public lane or street, and to deed the land to abutting property owners. While these lanes or roads are shown on a registered Plan of Subdivision, they often have not been maintained by the City. Although still legally "open", they may be overgrown with trees and encroached upon by gardens, fences and garages so that it is no longer possible to use them for through passage. In other cases, the lane or road is open and closing it would deny access to some properties.
Once an application is received it is circulated to City Departments, the Ward Councillor, Community Organizations, affected agencies, and abutting owners. The application is then reviewed and on the basis of the input, staff will decide either to approve or refuse the closing. If the decision is to approve the closure, City Council will pass a By-law.
In the event that a lane or street is closed, the land will remain under the ownership of the City. Once the road closing application is approved, the City may decide to sell the lands at a price to be determined by City Council (usually market value).
For road closures the applicant must provide all necessary documentation and any money owing to the Legal Services Branch prior to the conveyance of lands for a road closing. A by-law must be prepared and passed by Council. (An application can also be made to open a public street or lane.)"
Here's a quick, 5-point update on the laneway issue:
1. Upcoming Public Information Exchange Meeting
The information exchange meeting is still scheduled for Thursday, 20th of Dec., 7 p.m., at Memorial Hall on Dufferin Row. The hall is now booked.
I will send out general invitations and the agenda to everyone soon, and place posters in the neighbourhood, but I still am waiting for all key invitees to respond.
At this point, we have:
- Alain Miguelez, City of Ottawa, confirmed
- Councillor Peter Clark, will try but unlikely (has family visiting that evening)
- NECA, Mike Histed, Chair, Heritage & Planning Committee, confirmed
- Tobi & Fiona, new owners of 169 Ivy, unavailable but will send house photos for the meeting
- CCCC and CCC, awaiting their responses
- residents of our block, most have indicated their intention to attend
Note that we expect some media to be present, although I have not contacted any media outlets.
2. New Survey + City and Four Owners Meeting
Also, before the meeting, two other important events will likely happen:
- the results of a new survey of the laneway, as it pertains to the 4 properties around the new home on 169 Ivy (175 Ivy, and 73 & 75 Vaughan)
- a smaller meeting with the City and the owners of these 4 properties over the specific issue of the rear access for 169 Ivy
Both of these events may impact on the content of the meeting on the 20th of Dec.
3. Questionnaire Results
The results of the recently distributed questionnaire will be presented at the meeting on 20th Dec.
Residents from almost all lots on the block returned questionnaires, so thank you all for your time and effort!
The only questionnaires not returned were:
- one house, at 95 Vaughan, that does not actually abut the lane
- one house, at 2 Putman, that does not actually abut the lane
- owner at 169 Ivy did not return survey (was left at building site but they may not have received it)
- owner at 175 Ivy did not return survey, reason unknown
A questionnaire has also been PDF'ed and emailed to the owners of 83 Vaughan (currently in Qatar), so they have the option of doing it.
So, of the residents of the 22 lots that did return the questionnaire, all were opposed to the change of funtion of the laneway,
except for one who ticked 'indifferent', and one that did not indicate, citing more info needed to make a decision.
Note that many households have more than one resident or owner, so some lots had multiple votes.
As I mentioned, the results will be presented at the meeting, but it is clear, however the data is interpreted,
that the vast majority (90%+) of residents are in favour of keeping the lane 'as is'.
4. Option to 'close' the laneway
If everyone is not yet aware, the laneway in our block is actually classified as 'open', even though it has been untravelled and encroached upon for decades.
There is a municipal process to open or close a road or laneway. **See bottom of this email.
We residents of block, now that the clear majority have indicated a preference to keep the lane 'as is',
could now consider submitting this municipal application, which arguably should have been done many years ago.
If this is the case, we should raise this idea at the meeting and have community feedback on this idea.
Note that submitting an application to close a laneway does not imply that the City would approve such a request.
5. Adverse Possession
Although I am sure our situation will never come to litigation (it would be long, costly and most likely, have an unfavourable outcome as we are talking about City land, which enjoys special status), for your reading enjoyment, I include a couple of articles on adverse possession (squatter's rights) in the context of Ontario:
Squatter's rights a tricky issue - 2001 - thestar.com
http://www.aaron.ca/columns/2001-04-04.htm
What is the time line for adverse possession in Ontario? - undated - Wikianswers.com
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_time_line_for_adverse_possession_in_Ontario
Hope you are all well and I'll pass along any more info as it becomes available.
See you all at the meeting on the 20th.
Regards,
_________________________
David P. Mennier
@ 87 Vaughan
** From http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/planning-and-development/how-develop-property/street-or-lane-closing-or-opening
"Occasionally, the City receives a request to close a public lane or street, and to deed the land to abutting property owners. While these lanes or roads are shown on a registered Plan of Subdivision, they often have not been maintained by the City. Although still legally "open", they may be overgrown with trees and encroached upon by gardens, fences and garages so that it is no longer possible to use them for through passage. In other cases, the lane or road is open and closing it would deny access to some properties.
Once an application is received it is circulated to City Departments, the Ward Councillor, Community Organizations, affected agencies, and abutting owners. The application is then reviewed and on the basis of the input, staff will decide either to approve or refuse the closing. If the decision is to approve the closure, City Council will pass a By-law.
In the event that a lane or street is closed, the land will remain under the ownership of the City. Once the road closing application is approved, the City may decide to sell the lands at a price to be determined by City Council (usually market value).
For road closures the applicant must provide all necessary documentation and any money owing to the Legal Services Branch prior to the conveyance of lands for a road closing. A by-law must be prepared and passed by Council. (An application can also be made to open a public street or lane.)"
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages