End of the road

County won’t pursue claim for Outlet River lane

The County is walking away from a fight over what was once a public lane at the Outlet River at the south end of Sandbanks Provincial Park. On Thursday last week, Council quietly agreed to extinguish any residual rights the County has, or may have had, to this bit of lane. Now mostly overgrown, the lane once delivered motorists from the roadway across Outlet River to Sandbanks Beach.

But now the lane is a narrow pathway that is interrupted a few dozen yards from County Road 18 by a gate, and by fence at the park boundary. It seems neighbours have continued to use the lane to gain access to the beach and the park, but this is neither sanctioned or desired by park officials.

The Times reported in a series of stories that the landowner, through which the lane runs, had recently erected signs and barriers discouraging the use of this lane. Neighbours produced old maps and other documents clearly indicating the presence of a recognized roadway. They had historical accounts documenting the continued use of the lane as public access.

Presented with these stories the County agreed to investigate its rights and interests in the road. Last week, Shire Hall officials concluded there was little to be gained, and perhaps the risk of liability exposure, if it pursued this claim.

Works chief Robert McAuley acknowledged that it did appear that the lane was part of a Quarter Sessions roadway that once extended along the beach and shoreline around much of the western part of the County. But he said the interest in this road had been dropped more than half a century ago. Further, the provincial park had claimed part of the roadway and absorbed it into their property. As such, the residual lane doesn’t lead anywhere.

“It’s a road to nowhere,” said McAuley. “It serves no public purpose.”

Furthermore, the County is highly resistant to assuming roads. Property taxpayers can’t fund the repair and maintenance of the hundreds of kilometres of roads that it manages currently. McAuley is loathe to take on any more.

Yet he is acutely aware that some road disputes are worth fighting for. But not this one.

Most council members were inclined to go along with the Commissioner McAuley’s recommendation, but Councillor Lenny Epstein wanted to ensure that the County’s decision not to engage in a legal fight didn’t prejudice those private individuals who might press a claim through the court system.

McAuley assured the Picton councillor that it would not impact that claim.

“A right of way may exist,” said McAuley. “But we see no purpose in pursuing this.”

The risk, according to McAuley was all on the downside. Thus his desire and recommendation to extract the municipality from any liability exposure on this land.

Questioned after the meeting, McAuley cautioned landowners not to read this as the County walking away from its claims to municipal rights of way and other public lands. He said the County would continue to vigorously defend certain public roadways, particularly where they provide access to waterways.

He noted the disputed claim on Pleasant Bay Road specifically as worth defending.

“Some we want to keep,” said McAuley. “But we don’t want to add more roads just to have more roads. But some we will fight for.”

Neighbours and other interested parties may still pursue a claim through the courts, but the County is out.