could some one translate this for me , re a piece of proprerty
It is on an unopened municipal road allowance, but it is NOT on a municipal road. There may be an access road/trail, but it is likely small and accessible by ATV only. You would NOT have to cross over any other private properties to access the lot; however, you would be entitled (legally) to utilize the road allowances and Crown Land in the area to access the lot.
__________________
I,m as cool as Milner , but axeually a bit more like Beckwith
Seems to me that the lot is surrounded by other properties, one being municipal property, which for now you can use to gain access to the lot.
Problem I see is, what if that changes in the future? No access.
Sounds like a Dignam property description. "Unopened municipal road allowance" is just that, it's been surveyed for a road, but it hasn't went any farther. Nothing has been properly cleared for a roadway, or it may have been cleared at one time and has since grown over. "There may be an access road/trail" again just as it says, hunters and or locals may have used the access enough with ATV's to have a trail. Sounds like it's not land locked by private property, but you may have to cross Crown Land at some point to get to it. You would have legal access using the municipal access that's there, but you can bet it would be up to you open it up on your own dime if need be. If it's in an area that is 'unincorporated' the municipality may not have near as much say on what you do to develop it. They will 'suggest' you follow building codes and the like, but aren't in a position to enforce it. Best check it out. I would suggest getting a topographical map and some time on Google maps satellite view to gain as much info as you can. It would be tough to find out after, you bought a swamp, or can only get to it certain times of the year. Also visit the site, see for yourself what is there, and what it takes to get to it. Your going to have to move some items in and possibly back out, and with no formal road, better see first hand what it's about.
I did what your considering, about 20 years ago. Bought 150 acres up north just outside of Hearst. My wife and I had 14 candidate properties in mind to choose from. The closest was near Barrie. Next was Larder Lake, then just outside of Moonbeam. The other 11 were all around Hearst. Went in Feb. figured might as well go at it's worst (winter isn't the worst, black fly season is...been there, done that.) Whittled the list down to 3 around Hearst. By Oct we settled on one, and pulled the trigger. We've had 3 offers on the property over the years, but have hung on to it.
What ever you do...do your homework, and spend a bit to get the info you need to make an informed decision. Best of luck.
the farm i owned for 20yrs south of madoc had about 1800ft of un-opened road allowance on the south end of it that was once an opened road. it had 2 homes on the road just off the highway and then went un-opened at my property line. i kept about 50ft clear to access a field. i snooped into pushing further to see about maybe a lot or 2. i was told for access go ahead but for them to assume it, it had to be up to their standards, chip and tar. depending on where you are it probably isn't a un-opened rd but on the books with the township, surveyed and titled, as a road allowance?? for use in the future if and when needed. down here the township owns 30ft per side from center which is public property.
how do you access it, sounds like over crown land if you don't cross any private property? at that point you should have on your deed guaranteed unencumbered access to it and under what conditions, ie; how good of trail/road you could have to access the allowance. you are going to need a permit to build much more than an outhouse anymore, another question. i would also check natural resources for their input as they will probably own the access. if they are allowing pcs of deeded land around the allowance to happen, that land to get into it might be going for sale in the future. they are selling off certain pcs of crown land down this way. how or what is selected i don't know as i have never checked into that.
they probably don't put or allow a road allowance somewhere without a reason, maybe, and it's usually long term. they can think 20-25yrs out on some stuff. do as much homework you can in whatever the time frame you have and make a gut decision. good luck
Sounds like the property behind me in Parry Sound area.He bought it and went and cleared a 10 ft path to get in and the Ministry took him to court where he was fined $53,000 for doing it.I would check it out before I would go to far on it.
an unopened road allowance is just that - a length and width of land that is designated as a municipal road allowance on a map back in the days of incorporation. It may traverse on that map - a swamp, mountains, lakes, rivers, or there just isn't any reason to open it due to no houses or traffic in the area etc etc - hence why it is unopened as it isn't feasable for one reason or another to open it up to general use. It is for these reasons you see many "Forced Roads" that traverse private property at one time so as to go around these natural issues
People have land that abut these unopened road allowances all over Ontario
You need municipal Council approval to use the unopened road allowance - and if you do not obtain such - you use it at your own peril and cost and if you cause damages - you can and most likely will be held accountable for any repairs.
It is very common for a municipality to offer to applicants the use of the unopened road allowance at their own peril and cost - and only after signing and acknowledging that there will never be services nor upgrades on said road allowance for any reason.
If you have a serious intent to purchase land that is only accessed by virtue of an unopened raod allowance - you best contact your municipality
Also note - that usually one can not obtain a building permit when the land you own is not fronting on a municipally maintained road - which an unopened road allowance is not So if you are buying with the intent to build a get away - make dam sure you can obtain a building permit - cuz if you don't - it wouldn't be the first time an illegal structure was torn down for you
:)
-- Edited by Seeker1056 on Wednesday 8th of June 2016 03:59:48 PM
A recent media report has brought to light something called “Land grant patents”. These documents are instrumental in protecting land owners against the unlawful infringment on their ability to own, use and profit from their private property. The land grant patents are vital in the fight to control overzealous governments and their agencies for two basic reasons. The first is that they spell out in very specific terms what those rights include, and secondly it makes those rights eternal. For those of you who don’t like the monarchy, I would suggest that in this instance at least, it has done us all an unparalleled service.
During the reign of Queen Victoria, land grants where issued to immigrants to what was then Upper Canada. [ modern day Ontario ] At that time during the 1820′s and ’30′s, settlers where given the rights to the timber, the water on and in the land and the minerals that may lay within the borders of the granted land.
These rightswhere granted to to the original settler, his heirs, or to any assignors to whom the land was sold, forever. In other words, the rights stay with the property, irrespective of who holds the title. There where exceptions the crown would impose in some cases, but for the most part the land was given without reservation. Any reservations are noted on the grant, and if they are not explicitly spelled out, then no such reserve exists. The vast majority of land in Ontario is in fact “granted land” with a patent attached. There are modern day examples of cases in law and provincial legislation, where land grant patents are cited and used to defend property rights. Here is a relevant paragraph from an article out of the Midland Free Press, May 2000.
“…The first major test case of the Crown’s ownership of shoreline property was decided almost thirty years ago. In 1970, Mr. Justice Stark of the Supreme Court of Ontario, held in the trial of Walker et al v. the Attorney General (Ontario) that where one of the boundaries of the land granted by a Crown patent is to be a boundary of water, then that boundary is at the water’s edge unless the grant reserves in clear and definite words a space between the lands granted and the water boundary. Thus, Walker owned his property to the water’s edge of Lake Erie in the Township of Bertie, near Fort Erie.
The Crown appealed to the Court of Appeal for Ontario and lost, then appealed further to the Supreme Court of Canada, again without success. Thus, the trial judgement was affirmed by the Court of Appeal for Ontario in 1972 and by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1974…”
If you recall, back in 2004 the city of Toronto was looking for a new landfill and the Adams mine site near Elliot lake was given consideration. A company bought the site, did enviornmental assements and spent large sums of money to prepare for the expected use of the mine as a landfill. Then Toronto changed it’s mind, and the Elliot lake site was dropped from consideration. The province decided to compensate the firm for it’s losses but to do that, it passed legislation called the Adams lake mine act that included the stipulation that the company relinquish all rights under the land grant patent. So now we have a case decided in favour of land grant patents in the Ontario Supreme court in 1972, by the Supreme court of Canada in 1974, as well as a piece of provincial legislation requiring a firm to relinquish their rights under their grant as a condition for compensation. These two cases demonstrate the significance of the land grant patents and more importantly that the province recognizes their ability to prevent well intentioned but rights infringing legislation, bylaws or regulations from being enacted and enforced. The upshot is that should this become widely known, radical changes in the way the province does business will have to take place. This will overturn or nullify 25 to 30 pieces of legislation such as the Nutrient management act, the Spiecies at risk act, and the Clean water act. It will also effectively neuter organizations like conservation authorities as well as requiring government departments like the Ministry of Natural resources as well as the Ministry of the Environment to respect the rights of property owners as they should have done all along. The impact of this cannot be overstated, and from a landrights perspective, is the best news to ever come down the pike in the long fight to get the government to remember who is slave and who is master.
