MINDEMOYA—The municipality of Central Manitoulin’s finance and economic development (FED) committee (made up of council members) is recommending to council to withdraw its notice of contravention on a bylaw by a Carter Bay property owner, in a section of Carter Bay that is excluded from development, until the municipality can obtain clarification on development and land use from the province.
The issue was raised at a committee meeting last week. Bill Cranston, who owns property in Carter Bay, had previously constructed a small building structure on the property—a contravention of the municipal bylaws. The property is located within what is known as the ‘checkerboard zone’ within Carter Bay. When the development had been proposed by a previous owner of Carter Bay for a subdivision development, a building permit was applied for through the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to allow for the planned subdivision and lots could be sold off. However, this was never passed by the ministry and everyone who has bought a piece of this proposed development property in Carter Bay is not allowed to build on or develop their property at all.
“No one is asking the questions that need to be asked,” said Councillor Alex Baran, chair of the committee.
Mr. Cranston told the committee he was told he had to remove the structure on his property under the municipal bylaw. “The bylaw has over 120 plus clauses in it. We’re requesting variance, a special clause to allow us to allow it to remain.”
“We can’t do a single thing on our property,” stated Mr. Cranston. “We can’t put up a gate, a gate post fence, building, gravel or anything else. I know a lot of people wouldn’t have purchased property in Carter Bay if we had known all this.”
Mr. Cranston pointed out that he bought his property after 2002.
Mayor Richard Stephens said, “I understand that section of Carter Bay is actually under provincial jurisdiction, and it is the case that no development can be carried out on that section of Carter Bay. Whether or not need an official variance is needed, I’m not sure.”
It was pointed out by Denise Deforge, municipal treasurer, that if the municipality allowed Mr. Cranston’s structure to remain it would be setting a precedent and other property owners would request the same.
“I understand that no matter what, any type of building or structure being developed, the property owner needs a building permit,” said Councillor Pat MacDonald.
Councillor Baran said at the last FED meeting he said a statement was made that the Manitoulin Planning Board said a decision to approve development could set a precedent if one building owner was allowed to have their structure remain. He wondered what would stand in the way of other property owners making a request a special clause, like Mr. Cranston is requesting.
Raymond McPherson, chief building official, said, “this isn’t a planned subdivision, those checkerboard lots are drawings on paper, not a registered subdivision.”
“There was never a plan for subdivision presented to the municipality,” said Mayor Richard Stephens. “The guy who had control of this property needed money and sold some of the property in checkerboard plots. And since there is not an official plan of subdivision, the rules of the province apply.”
Derek Stephens said Mr. Cranston owns one of these properties. “He owns a legal piece of property, but unless something is done he will be in this legal loophole forever and never be able to develop on the property.”
If Mr. Cranston tried to submit an application to the Manitoulin Planning Board it would be refused because there is not a plan of subdivision in place.
Councillor Dale Scott suggested, “special consideration be given, in this case. And in my opinion I wouldn’t see this as a precedent being set, and it was a set up that someone out of the country made a complaint to the municipality on (Mr. Cranston) developing his structure.”
“This committee accepted the complaint and directed Ray (McPherson) to investigate it,” said Councillor Derek Stephens.
“What we have now in this case is a legal self feeding loophole,” said Councillor Baran. “I wonder if there is something the municipality can do to break this cycle, at the provincial ministerial level, planning board or other agencies that would help break this gridlock.”
“The people that bought these properties in Carter Bay can’t do anything on them at all, which is not fair to them,” said Councillor Baran. “We need to make an effort to get them free from these restrictions so they have somewhere to apply to develop on their property. We want to encourage development in the municipality.”
“We pay taxes on our land and can’t do anything on it,” stated Mr. Cranston.
Ms. Deforge pointed out that before anyone develops anything on their property, no matter what type size of lot they have, or what they are looking to construct, it is the owner who is responsible to know what the property is zoned under. “Landowners need to check before they think of building anything to see if a building permit is required.”
Mr. Cranston and one other Carter Bay property owner had received this type of notice of removal required the meeting was told.
If a special clause to allow Mr. Cranston to keep the small building he has constructed on his property is not agreed on, Councillor Scott said another option is to go to the province and find out if middle road can be found in these types of situations. “It is not just Bill but a lot of landowners that this affects.”
Councillor Baran said this is a similar situation to Providence Bay beach, “where no one wanted to touch anything and nothing could be done to improve the beach, until we asked the right questions to the right minister. Now after filling out several work application, we have a 25-year permit to do some of the work that need to be done.”
The committee passed a motion recommending to council that it withdraw the notice of contravention of bylaw notice forward to Mr. Cranston until the municipality can obtain a clarification on development and land use within the Carter Bay development. As well, municipal staff were directed to obtain information from the relevant authorities regarding what would be required to allow landowner development in Carter Bay.
