HomeMy WebLinkAboutWD-74-85 TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
�} REPORT F' le
r �G Res.
By-Law #
MEETING: THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 1985.
REPORT #: WD-74-85 FILE #: C-23-6
SUBJECT: PETITION FROM RESIDENTS IN THE AREA OF THE ROAD ALLOWANCE BETWEEN LOTS 22
& 23 CONCESSION 6 OF THE FORMER TOWNSHIP OF CLARKE REQUESTING THE OPENING
OF A ROAD ON SAID ROAD ALLOWANCE WHICH WILL PROVIDE FOR YEAR-ROUND USE.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended:
1. That this report be received; and,
2. That Petitioners, represented by Mr. Louis Obrist, who have requested
that the Town open the road allowance between Lots 22 & 23 in
Concession 6 of the former Township of Clarke, be forwarded a copy of
Council 's resolution of June 11 , 1984, which reads as follows:
THAT Report WD-55-84 be received and Mr. Obrist be advised that ,
having considered all of the information available, the road between
Lots 22 and 23, in Concession 6, former Township of Clarke, falls into
the category of an unopened road, as defined by Section 1.5 of the
Town's policy in such matters and, as such, does not qualify for
improvement; and,
. . . .2
Page 2
Report No. WD-74-85
THAT Mr. Obrist be advised that the Town is prepared to discuss the
upgrading of either the north or south, or both portions of the said
road to Town standards for agricultural use, at the cost of the
benefitting land owners, as is done with subdivision developers; and,
THAT a copy of this report be forwarded to Mr. Obrist to explain this
position and be advised that the Town still supports this position.
3. That a copy of this report be provided to the petitioners to further
elaborate on the above position.
REPORT:
Council has recently received a petition pertaining to the subject matter
which makes the following points:
1. The subject road allowance was closed during the 1960's by
reconstruction of Concession Road 6, without proper Council
endorsement;
2. The subject road allowance is the only means of travel between the
6th and 7th Concession Road, the condition of which forces farm
equipment to hazardously use Highway 35/115 to gain access to certain
farm lands.
. . . .3
Page 3
Report No. WD-74-85
Members of Council are very familiar with this situation having had previous
representation made for improvement by Mr. Fred Obrist, and having
considered the contents of several reports. A very detailed review of this
matter was put forth in Report WD-55-84 and subsequent supplementary
information attached hereto. Having considered such information , Mr. Obrist
was advised as indicated in Recommendation 2, above.
The current representation, which includes a petition from other residents
in the area, makes the two points previously noted which have not been dealt
with in detail before. Firstly, it is contended that the road allowance was
closed through reconstruction of Concession Road 6 without proper Council
endorsement. In fact, legal survey plans on files as well as instruments
relating to the acquisition of lands by Mr. Obrist to the west of the
subject road allowance would indicate that it was not officially opened.
This is not saying that the road was never used for travel , because in fact
it was, but there is no evidence that it was ever "opened" by the
municipality.
Secondly, it is stated that there is no means, other than Highway 35/115, to
travel from the 6th to the 7th Concession. The road allowances between Lots
20 & 21 in Concession 6, (Jewell Road) is an opened road, constructed to a
hard top standard, maintained year round by the Town. It is recognized that
use of this road by Mr. Obrist and other area residents does require some
out-of-way travel , however, if safety is a concern, this is a viable
alternate route.
The petition goes on to request construction of a road on the road allowance
between Lots 22 & 23.
. . ..4
Page 4
Report No. WD-74-85
Aside from the points raised in Report WD-55-84 relating to the need to jog
the intersection at Concession Road 6, it should also be pointed out that
costs to build a road would be significant. Approximately one mile of road
would need to be constructed to Town standards at a cost of about $300,000.
The need to construct to Town standards may be questioned, with the thought
that a little grading and gravel would do. As members of Council are aware,
such construction leads to continual expenditures on maintenance in the
future and should not be considered. Furthermore, it is doubtful whether
M.T.C. would subsidize anything but construction to a specific standard.
With respect to subsidy, it should be pointed out that because of limited
funding available, M.T.C. may not consider subsidizing the road in question
in any event. Where there is alternate routing for through traffic, the
Ministry does not look favourably upon construction of new roads unless
traffic volumes are so high that there is no alternative.
i
As pointed out previously, construction costs associated with this road
would be in the order of $300,000. M.T.C. ' s 1985 approved construction
objective for the Town was $1.16 Million in total , therefore, a project of
this nature, even if it were subsidized by M.T.C., would use about
twenty-five percent of the Town' s road construction budget. This would mean
reallocation of funds from other projects which have already been budgeted
elsewhere in the Town. If M.T.C. did not subsidize construction, it would
be wholly at the expense of the Town, and, the $300.000 price tag would
represent about 9 mills on the tax rate.
. . . .5
Page 5
Report No. WD-74-85
Having considered all of the above and the attached previous considerations ,
it is recommended that the Town maintain its previous position.
Respectfully submitted,
R.G. Dupuis , P. Eng.,
Director of Public Works.
RGD:j co
November 12, 1985.
i
Attachment
i
I
i
I
i
Va)
Q
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT R. DUPUIS, P. ENO., DIRECTOR
HAMPTON,ONTARIO TEL.(416)263.2231
LOB 1J0
987.5039
Y
REPORT TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
MEETING OF JUNE 4, 1984.
REPORT NO. .. WD-55-84
SUBJECT: ROAD ALLOWANCE BETWEEN LOTS 22 AND 23
IN CONCESSION 6 OF THE FORMER TOWNSHIP
OF CLARKE (OBRIST) .
RECOMMENDATION:
It is respectfully recommended:
1. That this report be received; and,
2. That Mr. Fred Obrist be advised that Town Policy does
not make provision for upgrading or construction of
roads which have not previously existed; and,
3. That a copy of this report be forwarded to Mr. Obrist
to explain this position.
. . .2
Page 2
REPORT NO. WD-55-84
REPORT:
On occasion in the past few years, Council has been
approached by Mr. Fred Obrist with the request that the road
r
between Lots 22 and 23 in Concession 6 of the former
Township of Clarke be upgraded to allow him access to an
orchard on the west side of said road. In response to the
most recent request, Mr. Obrist was advised that his request
would be considered upon adoption of a policy for
maintenance of unimproved roads in the Town. The policy is
now in place and Mr. Obrist has inquired with respect to how
the Town proposes to proceed.
Early in May, the road was reviewed with Mr. Obrist
throughout its length from the 6th Concession to the end of
the maintained section at the Lowery farm. The southerly
300 to 500 metres is overgrown with fairly mature trees,
some of them probably twenty years old, and has piles of
earth and stone placed within the road allowance. There is
no evidence of a road, and the general condition would
I suggest that one has never existed at this location.
The section between the northerly limit of this area and the
Lowery farm is generally cleared of trees and shows evidence
of being used quite regularly by farm equipment. However,
there is little evidence of a travelled road ever existing
through this section. No gravel or culverts have been
placed with the exception of a location where a watercourse
crosses the road allowance. Mr. Obrist admits having placed
the gravel and the culvert appears to be a used one, placed
by private individuals.
. . .3
Page 3
REPORT NO. WD-55-84
There is some sign of the tops of hills being graded off,
however, there is some substantiation that this was done by
farmers with their equipment as they proceeded to the
fields. While on site a location was noted where Mr. Lowery
had disked the road only a few days before. There are no
ditches along the road.
Mr. Obrist suggested that the status of the road be
discussed with Mr. John Stone, a long time resident of the
area, and a former reeve in Clarke Township. Mr. Stone was
contacted and he advised that to the best of his knowledge
the road has never been used for vehicular traffic, but did
accommodate horse travel at one time. Mr. Stone offered the
comment that, at one time, the question of opening the road
was considered and the Township took the position that it
would have to be realigned at the south end to line up with
the road to the south (Vicker Road) for safety reasons.
Town policy deals with maintenance of unimproved roads and
from the facts brought forth in this situation, there is not
a road to maintain. Substantial grading and gravel works
would have to be undertaken to provide a suitable road for
traffic. Furthermore, property acquisition would be
necessary for realignment at the 6th Concession.
Mr. Obrist has indicated a strong preference for access to
his lands via the road from the south, which possibility is
eliminated unless the Town is willing to construct an
improved public road through Concession 6. Town Policy does
not provide for same.
. . .4
Page 4
REPORT NO. WD-55-84
In summary, there does not appear to be a road, unimproved
or otherwise, to maintain, and without considerable
construction and associated expenditure, improved access to
the Obrist lands cannot be provided.
Y
It is, therefore, recommended that Mr. Obrist be so
advised.
Respectfully submitted,
R.G. Dupuis , P. Eng.,
Director of Public Works.
RGD:j co
May 23, 1984.
cc: Mr. F. Obrist
f
VI
FACTS RELATING TO 1966 SEVERANCE OF PARCEL
NOW BELONGING TO OBRIST
1. Prior to May, 1967, parcels in excess of ten acres did not
require any approval for severance. Severance of parcels
greater than ten acres merely required that the owner
have sufficient documentation for legal aspects,
registration and transfer of title. Thus the municipal
body in force at the time (Clarke Township) would have
had no opportunity for comment with respect to the
availability of access to an improved road.
2. Instrument No. 65188, attached hereto, makes reference to
a right-of-way for access from the 6th Concession to the
severed parcel (see underlined section on Page 2) .
3. Instrument No. 106648, attached hereto, similarly makes
reference to such right-of-way, and raises interesting
points in paragraphs 3 & 4 on Page 2. These paragraphs
make it evident that both the purchaser and vendor
understood the road allowance between Lots 22 & 23 to be
unopened and not for public travel .
i
R.G. Dupuis.
RGD:j co
June 8, 1984.
Attachments
51 b S V1- (am)
Deed—Without Dower
01 11thi X
made (in duplicate) the 28th day of January,
one thousand nine hundred and seventy-four.
3Jtt Pursuance of Zbe §�Dfjort _formZ of Conbepanceg act
�etY�eefl;
Dye&Durham JOHN KEGEL, of the Township of Uxbridge, in the
Co.tlmited
Toronto,Cenede Regional Municipality of Durham, Assistant Cost
Form l tot Accountant, (formerly Town of Weston, Count, of
York)
hereinafter called the Grantor
of the First Part:
- and -
FRIDOLIN JOHAN OBRIST, Farmer, of the Town of
Newcastle, in the Regional Municipality of
Durham, (formerly Township of Clarke, County of
Durham) , and his wife, LILY ROSE OBRIST, of the
same place,
hereinafter called the Grantees
of the Second Part:
- and -
MARGARET KEGEL, wife of the Grantor,
hereinafter called the Party of the Third Part :
W1tIM55td) that in consideration of other valuable consideration
and the sum of Two ($2.00)------------------------------Dollars
of la«•ful money of Canada noN�7 paid by the said Grantee s to the said
Grantor (the receipt Nvhereof is hereby by him acknoNvIedged),
the said Grantor 10 1rant unto the said Grantee s in fee simple,
as joint tenants and not as tenants in common.
Oil anb A)ingular th at certain parcel or tract of land and premises
situate lying and being in the Town of Newcastle in the Regional
Municipalityof Durham formerly in the Township of Clarke in the I
County of Durham and being composed of part of the South half o1
Lot 23 in the Sixth Concession of the geographic Township of
i Clarke containing by admeasurement 28.25 acres, be the same more
or less, described as follows :
i
PREMISING that the easteriv limit of said Lot 23 has a bearin_
of North 17 degrees 37 minutes West and relating all bearinlos
herein thereto;
�I
I
I �
I
i
I i
li I
D,d of Lend
Pag,2—Dyr i Durham
COMMENCING at an iron bar marking the North-easterly angle of the
South one-half of said Lot 23, said iron bar distant Northerly
in the Easterly limit of said Lot 23 thirty-four hundred and
eighty-four and two-tenths feet (3484.2' ) from the South-easterly
angle thereof;
THENCE South 17 degrees 37 minutes East along the Easterly limit
of said Lot 23 a distance of ten hundred and thirty-five and two-
tenths feet (1035.2') to an iron bar;
THENCE South 73 degrees 19 minutes 20 seconds West a distance of
twelve hundred and four and three-tenths feet (1204.31 ) to an
iron bar planted in the line of a fence running Northerly said
fence marking the Westerly limit of said Lot 23;
THENCL North 17 degrees 42 minutes West along the said fence a
distance of ten hundred and seven and seven-tenths feet (1007. 7' )
to an iron bar planted in the line of a fence running Easterly,
said fence marking the Northerly limit of the South one-half of
said Lot 23;
THENCE North 72 degrees 01 minutes East along the said fence a
distance of twelve hundred and five and sixty-four one-hundredth_
feet (1205. 641 ) more or less to the point of commencement.
The hereinabove described lands are shown in heavy outline on
a map or plan made by M. D. Brown, Ontario Land Surveyor, which
said plan is dated July 21, 1965.
TOGETHER with the use of an existing road running south oh
t e Ven ors pro ert and loading out to the Dur a fo
as ong as it may reasonably be necessar Y for the Purchaser to
have UFF-77-573--a7lowance betwe n Lots 22 $ 23 to the east of the
lan s erein opene b y The luwnship of Clarke.
I
I
I
I
i
as joint tenants and not as tenants in common
To babe anb tO bolb unto the said Grantee s/their heirs and
assigns, to and for them and their sole'and only use for ever. �bubjcct II
0cbcrtbc1c8g to the reservations, limitations, provisoes and conditions,
expressed in the original grant thereof from the Crown.
I�
I
I
I.
i
I
I
106648
MEMORANDUM OF AGREE. T U1.
made this Twenty-fourth day of February, 1982.
BETWEEN:
ANDRIES (ANDY) HIEMSTRA, of the Town of Newcastle
in the Regional Municipality of Durham, and
PIETJE (PATRICIA) HIEMSTRA, his wife, of the same
place,
hereinafter called the "VENDORS"
OF THE FIRST PART:
and FRIDOLIN JOHAN OBRIST, of the Town of Newcastle
in the Regional Municipality of Durham, Farmer, and
LILY ROSE OBRIST, of the same place, his wife,
hereinafter called the "PURCHASERS"
OF THE SECOND PART:
WHEREAS the Vendors and the Purchasers are owners of
adjacent lands in Lot 23 in the 6th Concession of the Geographic
Township of Clarke now part of the Town of Newcastle in the
Regional Municipality of Durham and the Vendors have agreed to sell
to the Purchasers 24.70 acres of the vendors' lands so that
following the completion of the said sale and purchase, the Parties
hereto shall own the following parcels of land:
PARCEL 1 -- containing approximately 28 acres owned by the
Purchasers and being more particularly described in instru-
ment No. 65188 registered February 26th, 1974;
PARCEL 2 -- containing approximately 24.70 acres being pur-
chased by the Purchasers from the Vendors and lying immediately
south of Parcel 1 and being described as Part One on
Plan 1OR 1443;
PARCEL 3 -- containing approximately 43.3 acres being the
remaining lands in the names of the Vendors and more particu-
larly described as Parts 2, 3 and 4 on Plan 1OR-1443.
Said parcels being more particularly described in Schedule "A" hereto.
AND WHEREAS the Parties hereto have certain matters in
relation to the use of each other's properties upon which they
t,ish to confirm their agreement.
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the premises and the mutual
covenants, terms and conditions hereinafter set out, the Parties
hereto for themselves, their executors, administrators, heirs and
assigns HEREBY MUTUALLY COVENANT AND AGREE with each other as
fol l ores:
1 . The Vendors as owners of Parcel/3 shall have the right
for 3 years From the date hereof to take water from the pond lo-
cated on Parcel 2 for their normal farm operations together with
the necessary ac•cet:= thereto for' such purposes provided always
there i= suff'icient water for use by the Purchasers in their
;rav opera; ion
The I'urc hammer .as owner~ of Parcels 1 and 2 shall have
tht• rtcht and c ,scment for a Period of 20 year:, from the date here-
-2_
of to use the existing roadway running southerly from Parcel 2
through Parcel 3 to the Concession Road between Concessions 5
and 6 for the purpose of access for planting, spraying and har-
vesting fruit or other crops on Parcels 1 and 2 and provided that
the Purchasers maintain such roadway and exercise their rights
at times that are not inconvenient or objectionable to the Vendors.
3. The Purchasers shall continue their efforts to have the
Town of Newcastle open the road allowance between Lots 22 and 23,
Concession 6 so as to provide access thereover from parcels 1 and
2 to the said Concession Road and the Vendors agree to support
the Purchasers' application and if required, sell and convey such
lands from the south-east corner of Parcel 3 as may be necessary
to open the said road allowances to public traffic.
4. Upon the said road allowance between said Lots 22 and 23
being opened for public travel by the Town of Newcastle, the
rights granted to the Purchasers by paragraph number Three hereof
shall be forthwith terminated.
5. The Vendor shall retain the right to relocate the
existing roadway described in Paragraph 2 herein to such
other location as may be required from time to time.
1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the said parties hereto have hereunto
set their hands and seals.
SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED )
IN THE
,_PRESENCE OF
Andries (Andy Hiemstra
Pietje (Patricia) Hiemstra
Fridolin Johan Obrist
Lily-Rose Obrist
V
I
`
}
' 7c-)�~/^/ L) AIZ-Iv'Ltb-7�14�` '/ ~y . D - 1
/
/ C000VDiCdtiODS D1r8CtiOn
WHEREAS the currently unimproved road between Lots 22 and 23 running
from Concession 6 to Concession 7 of the former Township of Clarke in
/ the Town of Newcastle was effectively closed during the 1960 ' s by the
reconstruction ; ; of the sixth concession and not by an order of
council , and whereas there is only one road open between Highway
115-35 and the Kendal-Newtonville road thereby forcing farm machinery
to use a busy provincial highway which may constitute a significant
traffic hazard , and whereas the current condition of the road denies
access to certain lands between the concessions, THEREFORE we the '
undersigned petition council to take immediate action to bring this
road up to a standard that would permit vehicular traffic between the
aforementioned concessions. '
'
^^
�^ j Al 0.
1
\ / /
/ /°� /n 7'-�
`
- ~ . . .. `.
(»� �
\ /
/ � L
°` ' - -
«/� U � / y�
01
r
`
-'