HomeMy WebLinkAboutP-45-78 CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TELEPHONE 2632231 — HAMPTON, ONTARIO, LOB 1JO
TO: Chaijnian ru-0 1,emborn of the
PlzuuiLa,r, exid Development Committee -ay 2)!,, 1;7
OUBJECT: Report on Proposed ReJeniGnation of 010, 'Zon.O..
• Reounot
On April hth, 19731 the Direct= of Public Uornn 7000AV02 a request
from the firm of Ooath, Livingntone and Johnston, BarNintenn anti. 3olicitorn,
on behalf of 1 r. W. T!-Acl-allan, inquirinC as to the of
ating a section of the Old ScugDC Road entenUrg 874.0 fect south f"om
Concession RoaA h from a Class B lublic Meet to a Cl amn A `'iblic
BY resolution ''J-158-78 the WoThn Committee referred the nottoy to thn
Planning and Development Committee.
2. Px1plyplio Situation
No formal application for an amendment to By-law 2111 has yet been
received by the Plannino Department. The subject section of the road
is open, travelled and maintained on a year round. basis luat r,'),oZnl In
the Toim of I'lowcaotle Road Needs Stixly as being deficient in both rvyfacc,
1,riJt)A and adequacy. The Newcastle Works Depaytpcnt advised
that the section of road involved is schcOulej for imp?ov(,icn--'; (IxLl-inc
1978. 1TTiey ilziJertooh a search in the RcCistir-y Office to 0,etc,7,mino tll-ic
v%ifth of the subject roaj which wan constructed in the canly Dart of the
lyth Century an a private toll road. No recorJ& infonlallon sac available,
but 17eancill Broi,nn, O.L.S. advised the WoxfVn Department that in the course
of surveying the abutting properties, he found the fences alonC tho Old
San,o Road to be 66 feet apart, therefore, it may be asnivie(I that the
Town occupies a &Cht-of-way of 66 feet in thin nection of the road.
2
Thee pnesently exists a substantial brick bunaalow ana 0 la= Poultry
bawn on the property a,djoininc the subject Toad whose 0"
the request. Since it already has frontnje on a Clann A RoM (Concennion
Roa,cj. )!) this prop�rty would appear to benefit little from the W009
notion of the Ola SMOC Road, unless the intent in to follow the ro-
desiCnation with an application for severance. The o,m- er oho-Ltld be
cautioned that an application for severance of this j)ro.-?c1-t:r wouLTJ not
appear to conform with the policies of the Durham official Han ana
mnU also be in conflict with the Agricultural Code of Practice.
3. lRacommendation
In conclusion, it is recommended that
1 . The firn of Coath, LivinCstone nnJ Jol'u-noton be aclvisecl
that Council is willing to redeniCnato the pontion of
the Old Sonoog Road referred to in their letter of April
4, 1978, upon receipt of the requirej aDplicoMon and fee.
2. The same firm also be cautioned that the reaosignation of
the subject road does not neceonaoily imply that Pna'
severance of their clientto land would. be CrantV.
Respectfully nubmitteJ,
C-co?.-,,,e F. Howclon,
Town -PlarneT.