HomeMy WebLinkAboutWD-26-81 i
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Director's Report to Public Works Committee of February 17, 1981.
ITEM: WD-26-81.
DATE: February 6, 1981.
SUBJECT: Planning & Development Committee (Public)
Meeting of October 27, 1980.
'Road' Widening - Enniskillen (Leadbeater) .
BACKGROUND:
On November 3, 1980, Council adopted a recommendation of the
Planning & Development Committee Public Meeting, held on October
27, 1980, relative to the Proposed Development Plan for the
Hamlet of Enniskillen.
"THAT the matteiL a4 toad widening o4 the
laneway in 4Aont o4 the ptopermy o4 Mu.
LeadbeateA in Enni6kit2en, be Ae4etvr.ed to
the Public Works DiuctoA 4ok a Aepotrt to
the Public Wo&b Committee".
REPORT:
The width of the existing laneway is approximately twenty-five
(25) feet and it would appear that three (3) property owners
abutting same use the laneway for access purposes.
Mrs. Leadbeater apparently, at the Public Meeting, asked if there
were any plans to widen the 'roadway' , how snow removal would be
carried out, and stated that traffic on the 'road' was increasing.
In the first instance, in order to widen the existing access,
which is little more than a laneway, it would be necessary to
acquire both lands and buildings in order to meet Ministry of
Transportation & Communications criteria in respect of width,
which must be sixty-six (66) feet.
At the time of the submission of the Plan of Subdivision for
Jeffery (on adjoining lands to the east) , access by way of the
lane was denied as it was considered that any change in it's
status would be detrimental to the character and environment of
the area.
�X
l
fi
WD-26-81 (2)
In view of the foregoing, and in order to preserve the
existing nature of the area, it would appear to be of no
benefit to consider any changes to the status of the laneway.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT it is recommended as more appropriate and economical
to retain the laneway in it's existing state, and no change
in respect of width and/or status be considered.
2X'
41
7 ,tom
oil) N
r
I"o.
E.
P,r= ATE 6�
E P>%Ty
Soo
qk" :-:f F F E R >/
s c)�
NIS
/16 J4
Ox'7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. J. Dunham, Director of Public Works
FROM: Gertrude Gray, Deputy Clerk/Committee Secretary
DATE: November 5, 1980
SUBJECT: ROAD WIDENING - ENNISKILLEN
At the meeting held on November 3, 1980, Council adopted
the following recommendation of -the Planning and Development
Committee:
THAT the matter of road widening of the
laneway in front of the property of
Mrs. Leadbeater in Enniskillen, be
referred to the Public Works Director
for a report to the Public Works
Committee"
i
i
REC- , nIr�� c
V
i
NOV 5 1980
TOWN OF TLE
i
t, p � x�ing and Development Committee - 2 - October 27, 1980
Dr. Michaels told the Committee that the O. P. A.
had been recommended by the Council of the Town
E ,
, ,
z 'i; :• of Newcastle and by the Planning Department at
the Region but had been tabled at the Planning
M $�{� Committee level as there were 4 objectors to
the Amendment. He asked the Committee to review
7?�5, the objections and send a further report to the
Region.
Resolution #PD-342-80
Moved by Con. Hobbs, seconded by Con. Prout
THAT the matter be referred to Staff to meet with
the objectors and report back to this Committee.
"CARRIED"
Proposed The meeting had been advcrtlsed as a Public: Meeting;
Development to hear comments relative to the Proposed Development
Plan for Plan for Enniskillen.
Enniskillen
Mr, Smith explained that there had been one public
meeting on the plan and comments were invited again
for the consideration of the Committee. The Staff
was looking; for public comment , either verbally or
In writing to the Planning; Department.
Mr. T. Edwards gave a brief summary or the plan.
It now proposes 184 units with a staging of 15 lots
per annum except in the draft approved plan (44 lots) .
The hamlet had been redesignated as a Growth Hamlet
which would require an amendment to the Official Plan
and this had already been forwarded to the Ministry
for approval.
Mrs, Leadbeater Stated that there had been 2 public meetings in
Enniskillen re.lat [ve to the draft approved plan
of subdivision. She asked if there were plans
to widen the road which passes her property, and
asked how snow removal would be carried out. She
said the traffic on the road was increasing.
Edwards Mr, Edwards stated that the road was a substandard
road and not included in the plan of subdivision.
�mltlr Suggested that she contact the Public Works department
relative to the widening; of the laneway in front of her
property.
i
z�
planning and Development Commmittee - 3 - October 27, 1980
f?
It was suggested that the matter he referred to
? the Public Works Director for a report to the
`"` Public Works Committee.
Mrs. Leadbeater . Questioned the status of the wells on the subdivision
property.
Mr. Smith The second well has been drilled and the contamination
problem solved . The subdivider must make an agreement
with the Region and the Ministry of the Environment
for the supply of water.
- R. Rowan Would one section of the plan require individual wells.
Edwards They must be part of the communal water system but
the 2 acre lots would have individual wells and septic
systems,
i
R. Rowan Asked where the boundary of the plan was.
Edwards Lots 17 and 18.
Delegations
J. Beresford Mr. Beresford spoke to the development within the plan
on behalf of the owner of property to the west of the
pond. This property is part of C. L.O.C.A. 's Master
Plan for Hampton. He suggested residential uses of
the property and stated that he had contacted C. L.O. C.A.
and there were continuing discussions to see if they
could work out mutual uses for the land. He asked that
he be allowed to make a presentation at the meeting to
be held in December, for the use of the land, as a result
of the discussions with C. L.O. C,A.
D. Robins Councillor Barr explained that Mr. Robins was ill and would
not be attending.
M. Veltri Mr. Veltri stated that he had nothing o
fi present at phis times,
R. Jeffery Mr. Jeffrey, developer of the proposed plan of subdivision,
requested an extension of his draft approved plan 18T24002
until December of 1981. He explained that he was working
on a central water system and it had been necessary during
the summer to dig a second well. This provided an excellent
I
i
I