HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-119-87V ~Q~
TORN OF NE~lCASTLE
REPORT File # ~ ~ ~~~' ~- ~`' 1
Res. # -';;;°~,~ a ~~,~' +~~/
By-Law #
~-rl~: General Purpose and Administration Committee
~~~ Tuesday, May 19, 1987
REP~tT #;~ : _ P n - ~ 197 FILE # : N I N ~ ..1~-
S~1B~CT: ROAD ALLOWANCES WITHIN HA~96LY PLAN OF SUBDIVISION
PART OF LOTS 11 and 12, CONCESSION 2, BUWI~ANVILLE
AND REGISTERED PLAN 82, PART OF LUT 13, CONCESSION 2,
BUWMiANV ILLS
WORKS FILE: B-12-1 and B-13-2
RECOi~ENDATIONS:
/ .
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
~econmrend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PU-119-87 be received; and
* 2. 1-HAT Staff be provided with direction; and
3. THAT the various interested parties be advised of Council's decision.
BACKGROUND AND CUf~I(~IENTS:
+t the Counci 1 I~leeti ng of f~larch 23, 1987 the attached letter from Flumphreys, Hi 1 loran and
Cureatz, barristers & Solicitors, was received by Council and referred to the Director of
Planning and the Director of Public Works for review and report to the General Purpose and
Admini strati on Committee. Staff have now had an opportuni ty to review this request and
offer the following comments.
The roads in question are shown on existing Town rnapping as Hambly Street and Lord E~Igin
Streeir. These roads were orgi na11y laid out. as part of the.. Hardy. Plan of Subdivision
..2
~a~
REPURT NO.: PD-119-87 Page 2
which-was filed in the Registry Office for `t he County of Durham on March
3, 1857. On June 20, 1977 the Town of Newcastle passed fay-law No. 77-47,_
pursuant to the, then, Section 29 of the Planning Act thereby deeming
Lots 1 to 16 inclusive of the Hamb~ly Plan in Part of Lot 12, Concession
2, former Town of Bowmanville, not to be a P an of Subdivision.
:'Section 29 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1970, is still in effect as
Section 4y(4) of the Planning Act, 1953. Pursuant to this provision, the
Council of a local municipality may, by by-law, designate any Plan of
Subdivision or part thereof that has been registered for eight (8) years
or more which shall be deemed not to be a registered plan of subdivision
for the purposes of Section 49(3) of the Planning Act. Passing of a
Deeming Qy-law effectively prevents the conveyance of lots within an old
plan of subdivision without the approval of the Land Division Committee.
Normally a lot located within a registered Plan of Subdivision can be
conveyed without such approval.
In reviewing the provisions of By-law No. 77-47 and the requirements of
the Planning Act, it is clear that the municipality has the authority to
deem all of the plan of subdivision or any part of a plan of subdivision.
The wording of By-law No. 77-47 would imply that only Lots 1 to 16 of the
Hambly Plan were deemed. There is no specific reference to roads laid
out within that plan, however, in the absence of a deeming of said roads.,
they still exist-:and anatural severance occurs which, in itself, would.
subdivide the land to a certain extent. In researching the deeming
i
by-laws, some consideration wasgiven to the possibility of passing,a
further deeming by-law to delete the roads. This option was rejected,
however, on the advice of,both the Town's Solicitor-and a Solicitor from
the Ministry of Municipal Affairs. Their-position being that deeming
by-laws were meant only to prevent conveyances of lots, not to wipe the
slate clean of roads and, lots laid out by older plans.
In this instance, the subject road allowances are entirely contained
within three (3) property ownerships; the majority of which is owned by
...3
ca)
REPOFZT NU.: PD-119-87 Page '3
Cvir. Hillman's clients. The balance of the road allowance is located
witViin a ten acre parcel shown as one ownership and a parcel presently
the subject of a subdivision application by Veltri and Sons. If the Town
takes the position that these roads were not deemed at the same time as
the Plan of Subdivision, three (3) additional parcels will be created,
one of which wi 11 be landlocked. It is Staff's opinion that the intent
of the Town, in 1977, was to prevent conveyance of lots within older
registered plans of subdivision although retention of these road
allowances, as public streets, would certai my not be in the public
interest since they do not comply with the Town's Official Plan nor are
they appropriate for the proper residential development of this area.
Under current Town Policy, any roads considered to be public roads must
be closed and conveyed in accordance with Town Policy. Lnasmuch as only
four (4) property owners are affected by these proposed closures, they
would be the sole individuals to benefit from same. The only other
consideration is financial related to any monetary considerations for
such closure (previously established at $14,000. per acre). In this
instance, closing the roads will permit the proper development of these
lands and the establishment of a road pattern in conformity with the
Town's Official Plan. Since it is also policy of the Town of Newcastle
to require developers to construct, without compensation, new roads
within developing areas and to convey appropriate road allowances to the.
Town, it would seem there is some merit i n waiving the nortilral road
closing policy as it relates to compensation for said roads. This could.
be done in consideration of the. intent of Section 317 ofi the Municipal
Act which provies that, where a highway (road) is laid out without
compensation, i n ;place of an original road al lowance.:, a ach_ property owner
abutting said original road allowance is .entitled to that road allowance.
to the middle l i ne of same. Since the Survey Act provi ded that Title to
the roads would then rest with the abutting property owners, the cloud on
title is removed.
...4
/~~ ~~)
REPURT NU.: PD-119-87 Page 4
Staff note that there are tvao (2) other outstanding requests of a similar
nature. Une being the Veltri lands on High Street and the other being
for lands owned by 671461 Untario Limited involving Edsall and Rehder
Avenue. If handled in accordance with Town road closing policy
substantial costs could be i ncurred by the subdividers for road closing.
However, since both these requests involve lands within proposed plans of
subdivision, a consistent solution is advisable. Staff propose to deal
with these requests in a similar fashion. Staff suggest two options are
available. CUne, that these roads be closed in accordance with Town
Policy save and except that pursuant to the intent of Section 317 of tyre
Municipal Act, that no compensation be sought by the Town, other than
_ _ _._-_
survey and legal costs.! This is suggested inasmuch as new roads will
eventually be laid out to replace the closed allowances The second
option is t{~at the roads be closed in accordance with Town Policy and
compensation be sought on the basis of a land value of $14,000. per
acre.
Staff respectfully request that direction be provided with respect to
Council's
preferred option.
Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation
---~ --~
j to the C ommi tt e e
~ ,
~~,~ ~ ~~ - r - r r; .f
`i . Edwards, f~1.C. ~:P. ,
Lawrence E,.;'Kotsef
-Ui rector of P 1 anni ng Chi of Ac~n'(~ni strat i ve Officer
r ~
~.>~°
~
~~
.
or on J.~: g i, P. ng.
Director of Public bJorks
TTE*j i p
*Attach.
Apri 1 `L7 , 1987
CC: Humphreys, Hillman & Cureatz CC: Kitchen, Kitchen & Simeson
barristers & Sol i citors Barri stets & Soli ci tors
P.U. fjox 186 P.O. Box 428
36 1/2 King.:Street East 86 Simcoe Street South
OSHAWA, Untario UShiAWA, Untario
L1H 7L1 L1H 7L5
CC: Veltri and Son
c/o Veltri Complex
68 King Street East
BUWh1ANVILLE, Untario
L1C 3X2
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
40 TEMPERANCE STREET
BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO
Ll C 3A6
March 26, 1987.
Mr.~W. A. Hillman,
Solicitor,
Humphreys, Hillman & Cureatz,
Barristers &'Solicitors,
P. 0. Box #186,
36~ King Street East,
OSHAWA, Ontario.
L1H 7L1.
Dear Sir:
__ __ y ~,)
TELEPHONE 623-3379
~`~ ~~'
~..;
MAR 19&7
li?i ;';'ii
p~ArdNlNG ~yCS
a~PARr~n~Nr
Re: .Part Lots:11.&.12,.Concession.2,:Bowmanvi11e,
~Our'File:'''77~44:99 .. ......................
At a regular .meeting of~Council held Monday, March 23 ,1987, the
following resolution was passed: '
"That the communication dated February 24, 1987,.from.Mr.
W. A. Hillman, Solicitor of the firm of Humphreys, Hillman
& Cureatz,'36~ King St. E., Oshawa, L1H 7C1, requesting
that the municipality convey certain lands within the north-
west quarter of Lot 12, Bowmanville to his clients be .received;
And that the subject correspondence be referred to the Director
of Planning and the Director of Public Works,~for.review and a
report to the General Purpose and Administration Committee;
And further that Mr. Hillman be advised of Council's decision."
Yours truly,
~~~~~~
Rosemary Rutledge, A:M:C:T.,
Deputy Clerk.
RR.Jos.
Copy to: Planning Dept.
Public Works Dept.
• I~~NC/C _.. i ~~
~ ~D~y~ll#Ald~"IONS DIRECTION D - 3
' HUMPHREYB HILLMAN & CUREATZ TELEPHONE 571-2555
' BARRISTERS b SOLICITORS AREA CODE 416
W.ARLEIGH HILLMAN, O•C. JOHN D. HUMPHREY S, O.C.
ASSOCIATE: SAM L.CUREAT2, O•C., M.P. P.
(FORMER MINISTER IN THE GOVERNMENT Of ONTARIO
RUSSELL D.HUMPHREY S, O.C.
(RETIRED 19 B2)
P. O. BOX iB6
36 V2 KING 5T. EAST
OSHAWA, ONTARIO
G` ~QR~ LIH 7L1
77~ ~ 1~1.
February 24, 1987.
The Corporation of the Town
of Newcastle, _
Hampton, Ontario LOB 1J0.
Attention: Mayor and Council
Dear Sirs:
Re: Part Lots 11 & 12 Concession 2
(Bowmanville) Newcastle
Our clients, Dr. Peter and Marianne Zakarow, are the owners
of certain lands located in the north end of the Town of
Newcastle, known as part of Lots 11 and 12 Concession 2
Bowmanville.
Recently, Dr. and Mrs. Zakarow have agreed to sell inter
alia, under option, part of Lot 12 Concession 2 and with
regard to these latter lands the solicitor for the intended
purchaser has pointed out that certain lands contained
therein were laid out as streets on a plan of the north-
west quarter of Township Lot 12 made by L.H. Shortt PLS
for William Hambly and which was filed in the Registry
Office for the County of Durham on March 3rd, 1857. In
turn, the said solicitor has demanded that our clients
obtain (and that is the purpose of this letter) to them-
selves a release and conveyance of the lands affected
by these streets from the proper governmental authority
and to give the purchaser good and clear title thereto.
For your information, we are enclosing a sketch showing
the lands in question:.. -~
It appears that over the past number of years there has
been correspondence with representatives of your Town as
to the status of these streets. Apparently, some comments
have been advanced by the owner of abutting lands that the
Town's title to these lands which were laid out as streets
on Hambly's plan is questionable in that he says that these
streets were never opened, no monies were ever spent on
them by thy: manici.polity nox were trey ever travelled or
used as streets; and also, the owners from time to time
have always used the lands as their own and they always
regarded the said lands as their own; and that although
v-3 T~~
-2-
because of Section 16 of the Limitations Act it has not
been possible since June 13th, 1922, to obtain title to
lands owned by a municipal corporation by adverse possession,
there was a 65-year period between the time that this pro-
vision came into effect (1922) and the time that the streets
were laid out ozi Hambly's plan (1857). However, it is not
our present wish or intention to become involved in any
confrontation with the Town of Newcastle over these street
allowances.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, we are _given to understand
that the intended purchaser of the Zakarow-lands will be
submitting a plan of subdivision thereof to the Town of New-
castle for its approval, upon the registration of which the
said streets (I presume)..which are laid out on that plan would
have to be dedicated to the municipality. Accordingly, any
lands that the municipality might release on the Hambly plan
to Zakarow would in turn be replaced by those streets to be
designated on the said future plan of subdivision.
For the reasons above recited, we would therefore ask for. your
consideration to the closing of the said streets indicated on
the Hambly plan (shown in red on attached sketch) and the
subsequent conveyance to the Zakarows who are the abutting
owners.
gtt
encls
You s truly,
Humphreys Hillman & Cureatz
~. ,
~-
Kitchen, Kitchen ~. Simeson
Barristers and Sol(citors
Ronald J. Kitchen
Gary G. Kitchen
Alastair H. Simeson
Faye M. McFarlane
December 17th, 1986.
The Corporation of the
Town of Newcastle
Department of Planning
Hampton, Ontario
LOB IJO
and Development
Attention: David Gray, Esq.
Dear Sirs:
Re: 671461 Ontario Ltmited
P.O. Box 428
86 Simcoe St. South
Oshawa. Ontario
LiH 7L5
Telephone (416) 579-5302
I act on behalf of the above company
which is beneficial owner of certain lands in the Town of Newcastle shown
on Plan 82. A short way of describing my client's ownership would be to
say that it owns all of the lands west of Lots 68, 76 and 94 which are shown
on the Plan. The present registered owner of the property is Mr. Aleksandr
Bolotenko who holds the lands as .trustee for my client. These lands include
part of Edsall Avenue and part of Rehder Avenue. The streets were laid
out by Plan 82 and were dedtcated as public streets as part of the registration
process. The root of title of my client is registered September 23rd, 1935.
In that deed, and possibly in prior deeds, the owner of the property has
conveyed an interest in those parts of Edsall Avenue and Rehder Avenue
which are presently included in my client's deed.
I understand that you may have discussed
this problem with Bas van Andel or Sam Gust who are principals of the above
company. The corporation proposes to file an application for first registration
of these lands under the Land Titles Act. Before I can certify title to the
Province of Ontario, the ownership of the streets referred to above must
be clarified.
I am assuming the Town of Newcastle
does not claim any interest in the lands in question. On that assumption,
I propose that when a reference plan has been prepared, I will forward it
to you together with a Quit Claim in favour of_ my client to be executed by
the Town of Newcastle.
~~ ~ ~~~
continued...
c c Ica)
/...2
However, at this stage I would appreciate
some written confirmation from the Town of Newcastle that they are in agreement
with this procedure.
Therefore, I hope to hear from you soon.
For your reference, I am enclosing a photocopy of Part of Plan 82 showing
the lands in question.
Yours very truly,
KITCHEN, KITCHEN & SIMESON
~'?~}'1~~u~
RONALD J. KITCHEN
RJK/ct
-Encl.
c. c. 671461 Ontario Limtted
' REGIONAL MU(VICIPALITYOF
~, DURHAM
SCALE: I incA r 50 fNt '
1
a ~/ ~ I ) /
365
NQ
.. _~.r.., ~.sr:' Mw. IIe serest rabae ~4O8i
Pots
.~
and
r~ I ~~
~r. . -r ~ (il•
1r ~i i rY ~.~1_ ~.~.i ~ Lri `y
Intl !F
N~2°I7~E
Npaq .._ _ rap4et
Wire Fent1
l va_.~%i \ /a_
1 ,' ~~~
~, ?
15537 Y' 'A
tt I J n
f n
~F 'Ic I(
I
217.64' !repass j : :J z :T:~
1 j ~o fn ~ I
I p
la 7I~j=R _ ~~ ~~)V
I ~ A 1_
~ N lelfq'bN)
~~ ~~
gY _ _
^~
p = _ r
fop ' I1V~l_I ~~~`~
/ O t
~11~)
Nrodewt--~
>_~
C'"~ i
m
N
~ I k ~~
~:~;~LL
I I
~i~ I
j ~ ~ ~,ic
AREA
I
\N~' I
I
I
1
I
i
b °~~~
I ~~
tai
. } _ _' ~
~ ~? 1 t: I ~ Nn°IS'E
= ~ 9.931 ACR ~
. ... _._ .. __. .__...._..,__ y_-.. __.. .._ ____ I .~
f r
~ I! I~
.,,,r rf. ( ,~I
r;r~
• II
/ h°.nr
I ~~
it 1 ~ ?~
I I '~''~
iti ' '• 1
S~
N I
~i
~
~ 2
_
f
'+~ZI
._r n ~ . t'+
~
I ( +
I
3_
s },F
~N ~ „1
~
m
Rz
I
Y
= _~ .+
s
' lssal'a.et
~ sae
~ Slfry le
re..
a.u 3 E
s g
~ ^.
~ r--~ 1 r_-
~
zW
~ I~ / , _ _
~ l ~: nnr~
re WOel '
° N72°I~'E 134.92'
y (q»°eeanfW
~ ;
~b g ~$
~?4 "~arf .`g ~ s
.r
Nejo1 W Z= ` Iref. NQ 13956
~ i
,
r~
~ \ ~{
N
SURVEY
,~ 1 r1ERE6Y CERTIFY
r! ,°-, : \ I. rn~t wrvey aM Obn o~e
7E ~ and MRe{pslrypclaM
~ p 2.7ne Purvey .af Nmpkl
Q ~ fP_n
~~ BEARING EFERENCE awd s,19Ta.
R atarinpt tln+n nerem are °ftr 1 K,derrve0 fnxn pASarralgrd
a an R>brlc al IM meridian Mr°u~nN S W AngM l.ol68, R.P tRB2,
To+n d t3arm°mille (76°41'50 W Laq~tude).
I.
E -~- penakf I~faw
(arr xwn. 1 n
_ t~ 1 .,, ~.. sia"m
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
~(d)
40 TEMPERANCE STREET
BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO
L1C3A6 TELEPHONE 623-3379
January 27, 1987.
Aitchison, Starzynski, Evans & Bolotenko,
Barristers and Solicitors,
115 Simcoe Street South,
P.O. Box 978,
Oshawa, Ontario.
L1H 7N2
Attention: Aleksandr G. Bolotenko
Dear Sir:
RE: Veltri and Son Limited,
~' High Street, Bowmanville, Town of Newcastle
Newcastle File No. 18T-84035
Our File: B-12-i(RC)
Further to your letter of January 13, 1987, please be advised
that Council direction to staff established the value of the
portion of the Elgin Street road allowance in question, at
$14,000.00 per acre.
The resulting land cost to your client is $10,873.00 ($14,000.00
per acre X 0.7767 acres) for Part 4 of Plan 1OR1866.
I trust this information will clarify the situation with respect
to this matter. If your client wishes to finalize the
transaction, please contact the undersigned.
Yours truly,
f~~
Gordon J. Ough, P. Eng.,
Director of Public Works.
GJO:jco
t
s
5 r
,~
~-
AITCHISON, STARZYNSKI, EVANS & BOLOTENKO
BARRISTERS -SOLICITORS
JAMES N. AITCHISON. B.A., LL.B.
JOHN G. STARZYNSKI, LL.B.
ALEKSANDR G. BOLOTENKO, LL.B.
BARRY L. EVANS, B.A., LL.B.
January 13,19
OE STREET SOUTH
O. BOX 978
ONTARIO L1 H 7N2
L. 433-1 174
~J (~~
Corporation of the Town of_Newcastle,
40 Temperance St.,
Bowmanville,Ontario.
L1C 3A6
Attention: "Public'Works'Department
Dear Sir:
Re: 'Veltri,and Son Limited:,
Nigh, Street,' Bowmanville,.Town of Newcastle
;IVewcastle``File<No. °;18T-84035
,.., iWork's `Depi;:°~FiTe:-'B=t2`?(RC) ...;. ... ,
'Please be advised that'we are the solicitors for Veltri:and Son
Limited. ,'.
~.
We enclose herewith correspondence received from: ,the. Planning Department.
dated October 6,1986, and a copy of our correspondence of September 30,1986.
'Would you kindly advise your position pertaining`to the road
allowance.
,,
Yours tr ly,
AITCfI SO ,STARZY SKI, EVANS&BOLOTENKO ~`
;;
Al ksa r Bolotenko
AGB: cah
Enclosures
40 TEMPERANCE STREET
BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO
L1C3A6 TELEPHONE 623-3379
October 6, 1986
Aitchison, Starzynski, Evans & Bolotenko
Barri stets & Solicitors
115 Simcoe Street South
P.O. Box 978
OSNAWA, Ontario -
L1H 7N2
ATTENTION: Mr. A.G. Bolotenko
Uear Sir:
RE: YELTRI AND SON LIMITED
High Street, Bowmanville, Town of Newcastle
OUR FILE NO.: 18T-84035 (WORK'S DEPT. FILE: 6-12-1(RC) )
Your correspondence of September 30, 1986, in respect of the subject
plan, is hereby acknowledged. In that regard, I am unable to
confirm, without Counci 1 consi deration and i nput from the Public
Works Department, that the Town would be willing to consider your
client's proposal. I would confirm that I have discussed this
possibility with your client previously, however, since it is a
matter more within the jurisdiction of the Public Works Department
and inasmuch as a previous Council position has been taken, I believe
it would be necessary and appropriate for them• to review and report
on same.
By copy of this letter I
Department to notify you
consideration by Council.
- Yours tr -->
z ~~~ ~.
T.T. Edwards, M.C.I.P.
Director of Planning
TTE*jip
( ~`
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE ~~ ~ •- ju"~;
am hereby requesting the Public Works
if and when such a report i s prepared for
~~~~
cc: Public Works Department
~c~
,~
September 30,1986,
Mr. Terry Edward,
Planning Director,
Panning Department,
Town of Newcastle,
40 Temperance St.,
Bowmanvilie, Ontario.
L1C 3A8
Dear Sir:
Re: Veltri and Son Limited -
Nigh St. Bowmanville
File No. 18T-84035
Please be advised that we are the solicitors for Veltri and Son Limited.
It is our understanding that our client has had discussions with your-
department pertaining to proceeding with the above-Hated plan of subdivision. It is
our understanding further that at present the subject lands contain existing road
allowance in favour of the Town of Newcastle. We have been advised by our client that
as a result of an amendment to the proposed layout of the lots, that this road allowance
,will be released by the To~vn of Newcastle for nominal consideration in consideration of
the other roads that are being created within the said subdivision and as well, with
respect to the extension of High Street.
Would you kindly advise the Town's position in this matter at your
earliest convenience. I thank you and look forward to your earliest reply.
Yours truly,
AITCNISON,STARZYNSKI,EVANS&BOLOTENKO
Aleksandr G. Bolotenko
AGB: cah
I~' (~)
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE Y
BY-LAW NUMBER 87-
being a By-law to amend By-law No. 77-47 of the Corporation of the Town of
Newcastle being a by-law to deem registered plans not to be registered.
WHEREAS Section 49(4) of the Planning Act, 1983, authorizes a municipality to
designate any plans or parts of plans that have been registered for eight (8)
years or more as not being a plan of subdivision for subdivision control
purposes.
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient in order to facilitate the proper
development of land in the municipality. That said By-law No. 77-47 be
amended.
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Newcastle hereby
enacts as follows:
1. Subsection (b) of By-law No. 77-47 is hereby amended by adding thereto the
words "Lord Elgin Street north of Fourth Street, Hambly Street and" prior to
the word "lots" in the first line thereof.
2. By-law No. 77-47 is hereby further amended by adding thereto the
following new subsection (w):
"(w) Lots 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 95, 96, Reserve Blocks, Edsall Avenue
fronting Lots 79 to 84 inclusive, and Rehder Avenue fronting Lots 95
and 96, all in Registered Plan No. 82 registered in the Registry
Office for Newcastle (10) on July 9, 1913."
3. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of passing hereof.
BY-LAW read a first time this day of 1987
BY-LAW read a second time this day of 1987
BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of
1987.
~"
HAMBLY PLAN
DEEMING OF LORD I=LGIN STREET AND HAMBLY STREET
NOT TO BE PART'OF A REGISTERED PLAN.
O B.KENNEDY, H.000PER,W. COOPER
P. ZAKAROW , M. ZAKAROW
O VELTRI & SON LTD,
THE CORPORATION OF THE TUWN OF NEWCASTLE
BY-LAW NUMBER 87-
being a By-law to amend By-law No. 77-47 of the Corporation of the Town of
Newcastle being a by-law to deem registered plans not to be registered.
WHEREAS Section.49(4) of the Planning Act, 1983, authorizes a municipality to
designate any plans or parts of plans that have been registered for eight (8)
years or more as not being a plan of subdivision for subdivision control
purposes.
AND 4dHEREAS it is deemed expedient in order to facilitate the proper
development of land in the municipality. That said By-law No. 77-47 be
amended.
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Newcastle hereby
enacts as follows:
1. Subsection (b) of By-law No. 77-47 is hereby amended by adding thereto the
words "Lord Elgin Street north of Fourth Street, Hambly Street and" prior to
the word "lots" in the first line thereof.
2. By-law No. 77-47 is hereby further amended by adding thereto the
following new subsection (w):
"(w) Lots 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 95, 96, Reserve Blocks, Edsall Avenue
fronting Lots 80 to 84 inclusive and a Reserve Block, and Rehder
Avenue fronting Lot 96 and a Reserve Block, all in Registered Plan
No. 82 registered in the Registry Office for Newcastle (10) on July
9, 1913."
3. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of passing hereof.
BY-LAW read a first time this day of 1987
BY-LAW read a second time this day of 1987
BY-LAt9 read a third time and finally passed this day of
1987.
CL RK
HAMBLY PLAN
DEEMING OF LORD ELGIN STREET AND HAMBLY STREET
NOT TO BE PART OF A REGISTERED PLAN.
~:.J B,KENNEDY, H,000PER,W. COOPER
O P. ZAKAROW , M, ZAKAROW
® VELTRI & SON LTD,
-- -