Why are we fighting for our land?

Battle for Hastings Overview

In December 1985 a storm hit Long Point, located on the north shore of Lake Erie.  Some homes were damaged on Hastings Drive and one of them was ours.  We were told by the authorities to tear down what remained, that the road would be closed, no rebuilding would be allowed, and the area was re-zoned Hazard Land.
My father wrote to his MP, MPP, and anyone else who would listen about this situation: no insurance pay out, and harassment for even visiting our property.  He eventually gave up ever seeing this situation put right.
In August 2013 we visited our property with our two children to go for a swim.  Someone called the police on us and we were asked to leave.
This has to stop.  This is our land.

We are calling upon Norfolk County to re-zone this road.  It has been over 30 years.  Other parts of Long Point, with the same issues as Hastings Drive, were deemed Hazard Land after the storm but have since been re-zoned!  The Hazard Land designation is expropriation in all but name. 
But it go…

Lakefront Dunnville residents have been told to abandon their homes

The title of the article kind of says it all, doesn't it?

Instead of respecting private property rights, the authorities go straight to serving eviction notices.

As for "the higher water level which we have to investigate," maybe the CA should look into who controls the levels of all the great lakes, since they are indeed all connected. 

Have to say I'm a bit surprised the CA is looking into funding these break-walls, considering most of their time is spent collecting fees for anyone wanting to do anything on regulated land.

Cue MNRF involvement in 3...2...1

Hazardous Motions at LPRCA

The Simcoe Reformer weighs in on the LPRCA vs OMB/LPAT ruling.

The Evolution of Legal Non-Conforming Rights (Toronto: 2010)

Many, if not most, municipalities across Ontario have provisions in their zoning by-laws that purport to limit repair, renovation or use of buildings that are non-conforming as to use or non-complying as to performance standards. The intent and effect of these by-laws are to “encourage” property owners to bring non-conformity or non-compliance to an end.

Two recent decisions, TDL Group Corp. v. Ottawa (City), 2009 CarswellOnt 7336 (O.M.B.), striking out a portion of the  City of Ottawa’s  zoning  by-law  regarding non-conforming rights, and Ottawa (City) v. TDL Group Corp., 2009. Carswell Ont 7168 (Ont. Div. Ct.), which denied the City of Ottawa’s leave to appeal of an order of the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB or Board), signifies a clear and unambiguous ruling that municipalities may not limit or coercively bring to an end non-conforming or non-complying rights beyond the narrow constraints permitted by the Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 and at common law.…

LPRCA in hot water after going against OMB ruling in Long Point

Conflicting views in Norfolk County regarding the recent OMB decision to sterilize our private property.

Timeline of Usage


Stephen Corke of Corke Point on Hastings Drive

Shout out to our friend and neighbour Stephen Corke at Corke Point on Hastings Drive.

Informative website with a live cam:

High court ruling will leave St. John's on hook for expropriation costs

Image snip
<It all revolves around a property owner's right to develop land in a watershed area, and whether the city is effectively expropriating land without compensation when it denies all means of usage. The highest court in this province believes that to be the case, and it could change the way the city deals with property located in sensitive areas like watersheds.>