1985 Road Committee Minutes
ST _ THOMAS ~ ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18~ 1985
PAGE 1.
Building. 450 sunset Drive, St. Thomas, Ontario. All members were present.
THE COUNTY OF ELG1N ROAD COMM1TTEE met at the county'S Administrative
"MOVED BY: D. pEROV1G!l
SECONDED BY: E. Nf.\llZAMM
THAT THE M1N\lTES OF THE MEETiNG OF NOVEMBER 15, 1985 BE APPROVED.
CARRIED_"
THE ENG1NEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS:
1. All casual help had been laid-off.
2. MUrray Hennessey, county Solicitor had negotiated an agreement with David Ferguson
for land put:chase on county Road #30 for the sum of $11,500 of which $10,000
had been previouslY forwarded. The 1985 Chairman. Mr. McWilliam. had approved
the additional amount and the cheque forwarded to Mr. 1lennessey. A deed and
3. Chittick construction should move in to the county'S Pleasant valley pit to
a release were expected ·
crush gravel. HiggS. who were presentlY draglining gravel fram under the
water would be laid-off before the end of the week. Earth stripping would
4. There would not likely be enough machine operators around ChristmaS and
continue after the NeW Year.
NeW Year's to maintain winter control unless same were called in off
5. Road #28 from Road #45 to southdale Road had been gravel resurfaced. A
holidayS.
feW loads had been placed on Road #37.
6. Gravel Roads had been graded as the opportunity allowed.
7. Drainage work had been high because of the recent wet weather and included
repairing catchbasins, cleaning culvertS, etc.
ST. T1l0MAS, Vl.'l.l.k""--
DEC"EM.BER 1~, 1985
'PAGE 2.
8.
MajOr sign Upgrading progrromnes, as reported to November Road committee had
been started. Stop signS, intersection signS, bridge end markers had been
erected and work was continuing on Road #22 and Road #32.
Some neW gui de
9. winter control had been moderate to date. t\ll available snow fence had
t\ reduction of thirty centS per tonne in the posted price
signs had been made for Road #22.
of salt had been negotiated with canadian salt company.
10. Welding the haunches on the Lynhurst &MC~ain_CUlverwwere being-tried.
been erected.
LynhUrst culvert continued to show signS of movement in spite of extra
shoring in the past week.
Tree cutting would not likelY begin until after the first of the year.
. . tln~k waS almost completed
on the used lnternatiOnal cab over (1980) purchased recentlY' (Truck #116)
h . ,the gupe" r'ktendent'S 1980 Chevrolet t\utomobile waS in very
~ e motor- l-n ~" --
poor condition and waS not e~ected to last long.
BOdy work to the trunk
11.
12. MachinerY repair had been relatiVelY l~gnt.
13.
was required as e,maust fumes were entering the vehicle.
Steel trUSs repairs to the Vienna Bridge had been completed.
'the 1985 budget would be met for the year with little carry_Over intO
1986, however, the Suburban Roads BUdget would be overspent by $6,000 or
-':.is overexpeudit.ure would have to
14.
15 ·
city of St. 'thornas by the a1\lOunt of the overexpenditUre.
St. 'thomas' allocation had been overspent it was likelY that a a1\lall surplUS
AS the city of
-_._~
. b C t L ~~ portion even though
would occur on the countY' s portl-on of t e oun y ev J
the non_Subsidizable po~tion of the budget was conside~ablY ove~spent
becaUse of the lnternatiOnal plowing Match and the need to overspend the
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
@EGEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 3.
General Budget by approximately $10,000 to allow for audit deductions.
The Plowing Match overexpenditure would be more than made up by. the
$18,000 levy for the Supplementary By-Law which had never been approved by
the Ministry.
"MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PAYLISTS BE APPROVED FOR PAY-
MENT :
PAYLIST NUMBER 65 AMOUNTING TO $63,015.05.
PAYLIST NUMBER 66 M10UNTING TO $25.81.
PAYLIST NUMBER 67 AMOUNTING TO $56,253.97.
PAYLIST NUMBER 68 AMOUNTING TO $55,642.57.
PAYLIST NUMBER 69 AMOUNTING TO $60,653~81.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: W. A. MARTYN
SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL
THAT THE ROAD COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE DECEMBER
30TH ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PAYLIST.
CARRIED."
THE ENGINEER REVIEWED paylist practices as attached. Committee
agreed that the accounts should be set up on a two week basis. This would
reduce the number of paylists and would allow computer accounting in the
future. A recommendation would be made to County Government CVLu'uLittee after
a recommendation from the Clerk so that he would be authorized to issue
cheques without the necessity of approval of a formal Road Committee meeting.
ST. Tt\.OMAb, v..'-
DECEMBER 18. 1985
PAGE 4.
"'M.O\TED BY:
A.. lZ. 'FORD
SECONDED BY: E. l'\EUlZAMM
THAT VIE RECOMMEND TO coUNTY COUNC1L TllI>:t TllE MEMBERSHlp FEES FOR
t>.DS AND TRANSPORT t>.Tl0N
THE oNTtUt10 GOOD ROt>.DS t>.SSOClt>.Tl0J'\ AND TllE RO
OF CANt>.Dt>. BE P t>.lD ·
CARR1ED ."
"MOVED BY:' VI. A. MARTYN
SECOJ'\DED BY~ R. F. -pURCELL
THAT WE RECoMMEND TO COUNTY COUNC1L THAT THE 1985.1986 ROt>.D COMM1TTEE
ACJr AS TllE C~lTTEE FOR TllE FOLLcM1NG pURPOSES:
(t>.) SOL1D AND L1QU1D WASTE D1SpOSAL.
(B) M.OSQU1TO CONTROL FOR THE pRiNENT10N OF f,J'\CEpRAL1T1S.
(C) . 1flG'. ER1E EROS10J'\.
CA.RRIED ."
, 'MO\TED Wi:
B . ~EUlZAMM
SBCO~DED BY:
.~""y COUNC1L THAT t>. 13y~Lf\VI BE PASSED
THAT WE REC~EJ'\D TO COu'"
t>.UTHOR1Z1NG THE VlARDf,J'\ AND CLERK TO SlGN pLANS FOR W1DEN1J'\G coUNTY
SSAU,r 1~ 1985~19B6.
ROt>.D: ALL<JI'lANCES AS J'\ECE cu."
A. . lZ. 'FORD
CARR1ED ."
, ''M.O\TED BY:
D. "PERO\Tl Ct\.
SECOJ'\DED BY: E. N~
TW>T TllE COUNTY EJ'\G1NEER BE t>.UTllOR1ZED TO t>.TTEND T1\E FOLl.cM1J'\G
COl'l'lENT10J'\S 1>Jl.D 1 OR MEr:f1NGS AND '1'llE SAl'iE BE RE1'OR'1'ED '1'0 coUNTY
() ",tlE ONTAR10 GOOD ROt>.DS t>5S0C1t>.T101'l COl'l'lEJ'\Tl0J'\.
COUNC1L: A l.Ll
",",1'1',r 1:i'''''1G1NEERS 1 AND M.1J1:'1 ClP AL ENG1J'\EERS'
(B) Tt\.E COUl.~~]. Dl.~
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 5.
ANNUAL MEETING IN FEBRUARY; IN CONJUNCTION WITH
THE ONTARIO GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION CONVENTION.
(C) ROADS AND TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
CONVENTION.
(D) THE MUNICIPAL ENGINEERS' ANNUAL WORKSHOP.
(E) SUBURBAN COMMISSIONERS' ANNUAL MEETING.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: A. K. FORD
SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL
THAT THE ASSISTANT COUNTY ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO ATTEND THE
FOLLOWING CONVENTIONS AND/OR MEETINGS:
(A) THE ONTARIO GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION CONVENTION.
(B) THE COUNTY ENGINEERS' AND MUNICIPAL ENGINEERS'
ANNUAL MEETING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ONTARIO
GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION CONVENTION.
(C) THE MUNICIPAL ENGINEERS' ANNUAL WORKSHOP.
(D) SUBURBAN COMMISSIONERS' ANNUAL MEETING.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: A. K. FORD
SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE WARDEN, REEVE NEUKAMM
AND THE ENGINEER BE APPOINTED TO THE WESTERN ONTARIO MUNICIPALITIES'
_/~
COMMITTEE ON GAS FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS.
CARRI ED. II
THE ENGINEER REPORTED THAT the Ontario Energy Board had completed
their Generic Hearings on Gas Franchises but had not yet delivered a Report.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 6.
each Municipality for the original group would be $4,000 less any contri-
CORRESPONDENCE from the County of Kent indicated that the costs to
r~""
bution from the other Municipalities which had joined for the presentation to
the Energy Board. The County of Brant had already forwarded $1.000 and it
was hoped that others including the County of Huron, Perth. Wellington,
Haldimand~Norfolk, Niagara, Waterloo and the Cities of Guelph. Stratford,
Woodstock. and the Towns of St. Mary'S and Simcoe and the Townships of Delhi
and Zorra would also contribute.
HMOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY cOUNC1L THAT A RESOLUT10N BE
PASSED AUTHOR1Z1NG THE WARDEN AND CLERK TO SUBMlT TO THE
M1N1STRY OF TRANSPORTATlON AND cQMMllN1CAT10NS A pETlTlON
FOR SUBS1DY FOR THE COUNTY OF ELG1N SHOWING ROAD EXpEND1TURES
MADE ON THE cOUNTY OF ELG1N ROAD SYSTEM FROM THE pER10D OF
JANUARY 1. 1985 TO DECEMBER 31. 1985.
CARRIED."
methods for 1985~86. showing the variOUS routes, salt deposits. equipment
THE ENG1NEER REV1EWED winter control. sanding and snow plowing
available and methods of operation. He reported that snoW fence had been erected
but about 3,000 feet was still needed. Solicited prices from the Elgin
Co_Operative were $65.00 per C feet of wooden type, $68.00 per 50 feet of
plastiC type with delivery in mid January. committee felt that they would
not purchase any more snow fence this seaSon but would revieW the amount of
snow fence to be erected. in the Fall of 1986. The level of sanding service
-~/-----"
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 7.
was discussed, it being noted that the service level had been reduced several
years ago when one sander and truck had not been replaced leaving the County
with nine rather than ten units. The Engineer suggested that the Committee
discuss whether or not they wished to purchase a sander to place on the used
truck (Truck #116) just purchased for (I'se for the rest of the winter. A price
had been solicited from London Machinery Company for delivery by the 10th of
January and was $13,656.68 for a ten yard sander installed. The Engineer
states that one of the present sanders (1972 model) would have to be ~eplaced
before next Fall, and if Committee considered the purchase of a sander
presently perhaps some savings could be made by purchasing two at the present
time.
"MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM
SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN
THAT WE ACCEPT THE QUOTATION OF LONDON MACHINERY COMPANY LIMITED
FOR TWO ONLY 10 CUBIC YARD MODEL L-61 SANDERS, AT THEIR
QUOTED PRICE INSTALLED COMPLETE WITH ONTARIO SALES TAX AT
$13,656.68 EACH. THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO NEGOTIATE A
PRICE REDUCTION.
CARRIED. "
THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER AND ENGINEER REPORTED (on pipe arch culverts),
a meeting with the Ministry in early December. They had also viewed welding
techniques that the Township of Howard had done last summer. The techniques
seemed to be reasonably effective and several culverts would be tried,
weather conditions permitting. Work was already underway on the Lynhurst
Culvert with McBain's to follow. It was hoped to do the Bobier Culv.ert on
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 8.
Road #16 west of the Willy's sideroad in the Township of Dunwich, weathe~
and water conditions permitting.
in serious condition across the Province and might fail within the next year.
The Ministry had concluded that up to 150 pipe arch culverts were
To the present time. no effective method of repairing any of the failing cul-
verts had been devised. as little or nO research had been done by the Research
Branch. lt appea~ed that no research would be done at the present time into
the caUse of the culvert failures by the Research Branch.
back a proposed programme by Golder AsSociateS of London. using three of the
The Municipal Roads Branch had agreed to assist and had agreed to
County of Elgin'S culverts as test caseS. lt was hoped to find out from these
as to whether or not ice lensing in the backfill behind the culvert was the
primary caUse of the failure or whether it was just losS of backfill through
erosion caused by water. The Deputy Minister had agreed to approve a
Supplementary By~Law in the amount of $45,000.00. the County's portion being
$4.000.00 and the Ministry's portion being $41.000.00 for this work. A decision
on this proposal would have to be made immediately as the instrumentation would
have to be installed by the first week in January or it waS likely that infor~
maEion from the Winter and Spring seaSon would be unavailable. As it would
be necessary to monitor the culverts for a Whole year, and if work was not
started immediately. the investigation would be prolonged by siX months.
The Ministry felt that it waS essential that the information be available as soon as
possible so that other municipalities might be informed as to the stepS they
might take to try and save as many of their culverts as possible.
DISCUSSION ·
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 9.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVI CH
SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT AN APPLICATION FOR
A SUPPLEMENTARY BY-LAW BE MADE TO THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION
AND COMMUNICATIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $45,000.00 FOR THE INVESTI -
GATION AND MONITORING OF SOIL STEEL STRUCTURES IN ELGIN COUNTY.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: E.. NEUKAMM
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL OF
GOLDER ASSOCIATES FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND MONITORING OF
SOIL STEEL STRUCTURES IN ELGIN COUNTY (THE COST WOULD BE A
MAXIMUM OF $45,000).
CARRIED."
COMMITTEE ADJOURNED FOR DINNER.
AFTER. . . . . REEVE BRADFIELD ABSENT.
CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS:
1. City of St. Thomas with the appointment of Donald Stokes as the City'S
representative on the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission for the term
January 31, 1986 to January 31, 1989.
2. Ontario Good Roads Association regarding Grader School, from May 12th to
the 14th inclusive, fee would be $275.00 per student for fourteen students
from the various Townships in the County of Elgin. The Engineer stated that
he would contact the Township of Southwest Oxford, and Townships of Norfolk
and Delhi to see if they wished to send people to Grader School.
ST. TUOMAS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 10.
3. TownshiP of yarmouth with a zoning By-LaW for residential property on
4. h copY of a letter from the Ontario MuniCipal BOard to the port Stanley
Road #4 near Road # 23 (HOpper).
Terminal Railway saying that the 130ard would require a report from an
independent engineering firm on the varioUs features of the proposed
Railway extension, partiCularlY on safety and operation.
Agriculture and Food. GUelph. stating that they were enclosing a cheque
for $450.00 for the signs supplied by the county of Elgin to be used at
future plowing MatcheS. The Engineer stated that he had hoped to get
closer to the estimated $1.800.00 cost of these signs but as the county
had nO further use for them some money wa s better than no money. Reeve
Martyn said he would investigate further.
on a yearlY basis. The Engineer reported that he had heard rUffiOurs the
C & 0 waS about to abandon their line west of St. ThomaS and would use
the con Rail trackS instead, thuS, there would be no crossing protection
to pay. The C & O's past performance on billingS and rail crossingS would
certainlY be against changing to a yearlY billing method. committee felt
that billings should remain as they were.
THE ENG1NEER REPORTED that he had been approached by officialS of
"",
5. The lnternatiOnal plowing Match and Farm Machinery Show. Ministry of
6. The C & 0 Railway SUggesting that the crossing protection costs be billed
the Bell Telephone to see if Bell could rent space at the countY's radio
tOwer at ~ite Station for their cellular telephone system. Bell would make
a further engineering presentation and preliminary rentalS were discUssed at
$2,500.00 per year. The Engineer reported that he had cleared the negotiatiOns
with the County' s lnsurance company and with the present tenant. Oxford
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 11.
Communications who were renting space from the County for their paging system
at $500.00 per year. The Bell system would be much more elaborate and might
require a small building to be erected whereas Oxford's operation was housed
,.,,-------,
in an 8 x 10 area in the old County Garage.
THE ATTACHED calculations for a 1986 Road Budget were discussed at
some length. Ministry officials had advised on December 17th that the figures
were preliminary only and final amounts would not be available until early
January.
The Committee quickly reviewed some of the items that would have to
be discussed at future committee meetings including:
(a) Replacement of the McBain/Lynhurst culverts on Road #25, and the concrete
culvert on County Road #29, all on the Underhill Drain.
The Assistant Engineer stated that the estimated cost of replacement
without detour arrangements waS approximately $350,000.
(b) As the Ministry of the Environment would give an 85'1. grant to the
c'sewage system 0 f St. Ge orge Str ee t / Lynhur s t / Lynhur st Park are a, the
project would go ahead. The main sewer would go down St. George Street
from Wellington Road to St. George Street Bridge to a depth from 13'
to 17' and thus obliterate the County road completely. Road #26 should
be rebuilt on a revised grade with storm sewers, curb and gutter, proper
granular base, a 24 foot pavement width and realigned if possible through
Cowan Park. The Committee discussed the possibility of approaching the
City of St. Thomas for a realignment through Cowan Park. The drainage
petitions had been forwarded to the Township of Yarmouth for a report
on three municipal drains in the area.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 12.
(c) It was ~oped to conclude an agreement with the Township of Yarmouth
regarding the Sparta Road in the early part of the new year so that
the Countyts Pit could be licensed and used.
(d) As the appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board had been withdrawn it
appeared that the building of a motel at the intersection of Highway #3
and Road #28 would start as soon as possible and this road widening
agreement would be in place and work here would be done early next
Spring. Some costs would fall on the County.
(e) Land Purchase was required on Fairview Avenue before construction
could proceed more than ~ mile south of Concession IV - V.
(f) Although construction had been authorized on Road #45 from Highway #73
to Road #40, little engineering work had been done and no recent land
purchase had been done. It was understood that several drainage
reports would be received shortly.
(g) 1985 traffic counts on Wellington Road (Road #25) were over 10,000
vehicles per day at the County Boundary, and over 6,000 vehicles
south of Highway #3 (Bypass). committee would have to investigate
alternatives to relieve its road congestion
(ie. Hubrey-Highbury-
Radio or four laning Wellington Road).
(h) A meeting had been held with Don Husson, County Engineer of Middlesex.
Middlesex had agreed to the replacement of the open joints in the
Wardsville Bridge in 1986 at a cost of $30,000 (Elgin $15,000).
Middlesex had agreed to consider the gravel resurfacing of half
of Road #37.
A letter was read from the County of Middlesex in which the County
of Elgin'S opinion was asked regarding Radio/Hubrey Road and its
ST. TRaM-AS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 13.
potential as a future King'S Highway extenSion of Highway #73 from
Hamilton Road to Highway #2 and the reversion of the present Highway #74
to the countieS of Elgin and Middlesex as a county road.
the Engineer reported that Mayor Golding had asked that the county dis-
cuss this matter in the reasonablY near future and that a meeting with
St. ThomaS City council be arranged as soon as possible.
(i) Drainage assessmentS for the year would be at least $150,000.00.
(j) Road If5 and Road If) in Aldborough Township were scheduled for gravel
resurfacing in 1986.
(k) NeW machinery waS discussed at some length.
The Engineer waS authorized to purchase new furniture for the office as
required. He noted tuat the tables and drafting desk would be necessary
inasmuch as they had been built into the office at Stanley Street and
could not be moved. some tables and chairs might be available from the
old council Chambers.
A neW spillS bill might necessitate the building of domeS for salted
sand at ~ite Station, DUtton, and Bayham Township garages. presentlY
covered storage is only available for salt.
craSs cutting should improve and speed up with consideration given to
the purchase of tWO higher capacity mowers to replace older equipment.
Information waS being obtained to Upgrade the pavement marking equip'
ment which was twenty years old and did not have sufficient paint or
glaSS bead capacity to do a full day'S work.
the county of Middlesex computer system had been examined and it
appeared that their software programme could be adopted to the county'S
present needS. The county might lean toward a rental/lease System
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 18, 1985
PAGE 14.
for the time being until further County needs could be evaluated.
It was not known when sufficient information would be available to make a
proposal to Road Committee.
As reported in work to Date, one of the 1980 Chevrolet cars was in
very poor condition and another is in need of heavy body work shortly.
In response to queries it was noted that both Chevrolets had over
320,000 km., and both had the original motors. Committee felt that
both cars should be diSposed of with the Engineer'S car going to the
General superintendent (1984 Ford, 52,000 Km.) and as the termS of
employment allowed the Assistant superintendent the use of an
automobile, a neW car would have to be provided for him.
/-"
HMOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL
SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN
THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO PURCHASE TWO AUTOMOBILES
TO REPLACE THE COUNTY'S ~CHEVROLET AUTOMOBILES.
I et'bD
fIJ/' CARRIED."
(I) ':rHE ASSISTANT ENGINEER REPORTED that he was investigating an upgrading
of the St. John'S Ambulance course which was required under the
worker'S compensatiOn Act. Other training courseS would be proposed
at a later date.
.SUFFICIENT MEETINGS WOULD BE REQUIRED so that a Road Budget could be
completed by the March 1st deadline of County Council.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM
THAT WE ADJOURN TO JANUARY 3, (ONE OF JANUARY 9, JANUARY 17,
JANUARY 15) JANUARY 30, FEBRUARY 7, 21, MARCH 5. ALL AT 9 :30 A.M.
CARRIED."
,;::".;;/}/J1/1 /1/\/. ~:~
~ 7'''../~N
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
:-----=-= ;;-, - ~
PAYLIST PRACTICES
___ L -
DECEMBER 1985
OUR PRESENT PRACTICE:
- . ~ -
(A) WAGES P AYLISTS:
-- -.
presentlY the wages are paid every 2 weeks with the employees time
ending on alternative Wednesdays.
The time sheets are processed by the County Engineer's Office and
an information sheet is usually in the Clerk's Office by thursday
A.M.
The employees are paid by cheque or direct deposit one week from
the Friday or Thursday if a Statutory Holiday falls on the Friday
(ie., Christmas, Boxing Day, etC.).
Wage sheetS and time sheetS are brought to the county Road Committee
meetings and passed after the fact as we do not have the wage sheet
listing deductions and other information from the Clerk's Office
for the payliSt until the following wednesday.
our total wages payliSt in 1985 were 26.
(B)
ACCOUNTS'PAYABLE:
- -- -
Ordinary accountS are processed once a month for County Road
committee approval. The cheques for the payliSt are not made out
until the pay list has been approved for payment. This puts a
restriction on the County Road Committee meetingS as most large
accountS are on a monthly basis and a feW dayS must be available
for account preparation. Since paymentS must be made within a
reasonable amount of time after the service haS been rendered the
county Road committee must meet from the 6th to the lath of the
month if at all possible.
Emergency payliSts are available upon the signature of the Warden
and Chairman to a maximum of $3,000.00.
A payliSt for which a dis~ount may be obtained (ie., Union GaS,'
Bell canada, Hydro, etc.) prior to the monthly paylist thiS may
be authorized by the county Engineer and these are approved by
the county Road committee after the fact.
The total amount of payliStS for 1985 is 44.
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
PAYLIST PRACTICES
PAGE 2.
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
. .
(1) That no changes be made in the wages paylist procedure.
(2) That the accounts payable follow the same system as the County of
Middlesex.
That a paylist be sent up for payment every 2 weeks (alternative
weeks to wages).
The paylists would be in the Clerk's Office every Thursday. This
should reduce if not eliminate the need for small paylists for
discount purposes.
The emergency paylist policy should remain the same (we find that
we do not have to use this policy very often).
This method will allow us to better post our accounts and would
allow more flexibility for the Road Cuu..,ittee meetings as all
Road eommittee by-laws, etc., mUst be in the hands of the Clerk
one week prior to County Council.
This system will also allow US to prepare for.computer posting,
for ..mich we would like to get into as soon as possible. (The
software system which the County of Middlesex uses seems adequate
for our needs.)
We feel that the Chairman should be authorized to sign the paylists
and the Clerk be authorized to prepare the cheques and these
cheques forwarded to pay for goods and services without the
necessity of having every paylist approved prior to payment by
the County Road Committee.
We would of course reserve the right of both the County Road
Cuu""ittee and the Engineer to have any contentioUS invoices
discussed by the County Road committee as a ..mole prior to
paYment.
R. G. MOORE
COUNTY ENGINEER
COUNTY OF ELG1N ROA~ ...Q.!P~TMEN~
---'
~D DEPARTMI::N'l' UUDGET 1986,
AMENDED
DECEMBER 17, 1985~
'^
TO THE CHAIRMAN AND MEIlBEJI,S OF THE COUNT'lOF ELGIN ROAD COMIlITTEE'
Transportation and communications in determining the portion of a
This report is a review of the methods used by the Ministry of
County Road Department Budget that is eligible for subsidy and
spending level subsidy they will provide toward the budaet (subsidy
allocation ).
The difference between the total budget and the "earned" subsidy
is payable by the County of Elgin.
funds based on proven needs and thus sets a desirable spending level
Presently the Ministry is following a policY of allocating subsidy
for a County. Any expenditure greater than this desirable level will
not be subsidized, and any spending less than this desirable level
will result in a loss of subsidy at a maximum subsidy rate (approximately
91%). The Ministry matches the amount of money the County would raise at
1.25 Mills (ie., 5~. SubSidy) on the Provincial ~ualized Assessment and
then subsidizes the County at 91% on the remaining expenditure up to the
desired spending level. (Note the attached calculation.)
itemS that the Ministry of Transportation and Communications will not ·
The subsidy rate on "operations" (not including urban rebates or
subsidize) is approximately 76%.
cost allocation. The construction is composed of road and bridge
Our budget is composed of a construction allocati~n and a fixed
construction itel.50f a "capital" nature and a hot miX asphalt resurfacing
allocation. The fixed cost allocation is composed of a maintenance and
overhead cost allocation, new machinery allocation, drainage assessment
auocation. For the past few years our maintenance allocation ha" not
been .sufficient to meet our needs and we have had to take money from
our coustruction allocation to ,cover these costs. In 1985 a $158,000
transfer was budgeted for. As of December 15, 1985 it appears that thiS
transfer to maintenance from construction will be over $250,000.
..
tOUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
~OAD DEPARTMENT BUDGET 1986
PAGE 2.
CALCULATION OF CONSTRUCTION ALLOCATION:
1. Construction - Roads and Bridges.
This allocation is based on a percentage of the total dollar
"needs" of the "Now" and the "1 - 5 Year" period on roads and
bridges construction in the County as defined using a
standardized bench mark cost system approved by the Ministry of
Transportation and Communications.
These bench mark costs are set every 5 years after considerable
discussion between the Ministry of Transportation and
Communications and ourselves and an inflation factor applied yearly
to keep the costs current.
The Needs Study is updated yearly (January 1st) deleting the cost
of work done the previous year and adding the work which meets the
need criteria of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications
after each Spring breakup.
Asphalt resurfacing needs are all considered in the 1 - 5 year needs. _
(The Ministry of Transportation and Cvu"",micatiorts emphasizes that
money allocated for asphalt resurfacing shall be spent on asphalt
resurfacing and not transferred.)
We had a little more leeway as the Ministry of Transportation and
Communications was under funding us according to their formulae in
1985 and thus not in the same position to enforce their rulings.
2. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications believes that an
effort should be made to save those roads that can be saved by
asphalt resurfacing rather than let them deteriorate to the point
where they have to be reconstructed at a much greater cost.
Our present road and asphalt resurfacing programme provides that:
(a) Double surface treatment roads should be covered by 3 inches
of hot mix within an 8 to 10 year period.
We have remaining 12.7 kilometers of surface treatment.
(b) Grader mix mulch.roads should be covered in a 20 year period
we have many kilometers that have not been done (92 kilometers).
(c) Hot mix asphalt roads that are 1 1/2 to 2 inches in depth
should be covered as soon as possible to stop breakup
(elephant tracking). This work has been completed with the
exception of County Road #24 from County Road #36toport
cQlll\!'! Of EJ.oGl11 RO~O OIWlIRnlEll! ?~GE 3.
ROAD OE? lIRnlEtft BU\lG~ 1986
l. ds should be co~e<ed befo<e <uttiog aod
(d) Othe1: hot m x 1:0a
1 1: ave 1 pad \I1l. 11 save
c<ac~IOg becomes SO seVe<e that 00 Y a g
(lIatE: 'that all f\gu<eS as of \lecembe< 11. 19B5 a<e teotatl~e
. ~t S a~d 'a~e oot beeo cooflrmed 10 ~Itlog by the M>olst<Y of
eSt1.ma e ..~.
1<aOS?0<tatIOO aod commuoicatlOOS. Qe hope coofl""atlOO will be
<eeel~ed 10 eo<ly Jaouo<Y,. )
1 d' t fo< 1986 fioa1
?lease use thiS <e?o<t fo< ~~ ao. ~ ~~
it.
subSldY-~' 1986 speoding le~el IS
~ eds u?oo "bieh ou<
OU1: lq85 const1:Uction ne
d. inflation fact01:S).
f 110\l1S (inc1u 1.ng
dete1:mined is as 0
$ 5,635,000
1atAL ROAllS AllO l\RlllGES
\lat \\lll 1'>5?\lAL1 R1>SURfi\ClI1G (llOAllS)
'fatAL NEEDS
$12,160,000
8,064,000
6Q1,000
883,000
-------
~
$21,43Q,000
13 ,\.84,000
.:.-:-------
~
BRIDGBS
~:
N~
1 _ 5 'lEARS
cARR'lO'lBR (N~)
S?at DRAINAGB
'fat.rJ.a ROADS
1hls is aO Inc<ease of 3.2% f<oID 19B4.
had ho\l1evt:>. ~
12"/0. 'We . n al1n Y'P.5\J"'--.
. on ou< const<uet>o · - h~
aod Go",,",oicat,ons 1985 ou< S?eodlng .-
ending levelS. In
of 10% o~e< ou< 1984 sp hi' <e.t<oIot U1l'Ited ou<
'2. 295 000 but t
\.. ld have been $, , f ~ich $315,000
formula ."ou _,0 000 t. ..0<tfa11 of $346,000 0
.. _..hc;idy).
s?endlOg le~els to $l.""'uuo ,a ."--
. d Co~unicat~ons
~ould ha~e been \\loISt<Y of 1<ao.?0<tat,00 aO
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEP ARTME~
ROAD DEPARTMENT BUDGET 1986
PAGE 4.
Our application for a supplementary spending level by-law for
$200,000 was not approved.
Calculation for our 1986 spending level is:
CONSTRUCTION - 3.6% of $27,439,000 or
$ 988,000
HOT MIX ASPHALT RESURFACING - 12% of $13,184,000 or
1,582,000
TOTAL
$2,570,000
As we understand a 15% constraint will apply to our 1986 spending level. The
spending level will be $1,949,000 plus 15% or $2,241,600 (Ministry of
Transportation and Communications rounding).
Again a shortfall of over $328,000 of which $298,000 would be
Ministry of Transportation and Communications' subsidy.
FIXED COSTS:
Maintenance and overhead allocations have in the past been determined
by a combination of historic spending and a complicated formulae
involving traffic lane miles of paved and gravel roads, material, labour
and winter costs (as compared with the rest of the province).
We suffer in allocation of maintenance funds as our percentage of
structural deficient pavement is relatively low at 17%. (I suppose we
should be happy as this makes us one of the better County road
systems in the province - Essex is 15% and Peel and Perth are 16%. The
high is Halton at 64%. Middlesex is 27%, Haldimand-Norfolk 17% and
Oxford 31%.)
We find it impossible to "1 ive" within the maintenance allocations
of the Ministry of Transportation and CVllum.tnications. The only thing
that would permit this would be a mild winter and no spring breakup.
Our 1985 spending level for maintenance and overhead was $2,068,000
or about 3.5% increase on our 1984 spending level for maintenance and
overhead.
It appears an increase of approximately 4.25% will be used for 1986
with an amount of $2,156,000 being proposed.
In 1985 the Ministry of Transportation and Communications
incorporated into their total spending level allocation an allowance
for municipal drainage assessments being 1/2 of the average of the
Continued . . . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
g>Al> DEl'~TMENUU1lG~ PAGE 5.
previOUS 3 years (ie., 1984, 1983 and 1982). In 1985 thiS waS
$48,000. 'this year we understand the average of the past 3 years
will be used ($92,000).
last summer were accepted and will be funded as in the past at 100%
Qur projected roachineryreplacement costS of $356,000 submitted
(1985 _ $344,000 and 1984 _ $335,000). ~ith the increasing cost of
ne" equipment it is hard to say ho" long"" can "hold the line" (a
couple of Mack o.mP 'trucks are over 7 years old).
X!2 jected Fi x~t stil!!ndine Love1Jl.'
MAINTENANCE AND OVERHEAD
$2,156,000
92,000
DRAINAGE ASSESSMENTS
356,000
--
NEW MACl1INER'l AND HOUSING, ETC.
TOTAL
000
~-!-=::
~c"latiOn of 'total spe~'
$2,241,600
fIXED COSTS
2,604,000
----
iiz845..1.6~
=-~
CONSTRUCTION
(In 1985 nudget spending Level "as $4,410,000)
~
(Inc~ease of 9.8%)
youth Corps grantS Which totaled $82,564 in 1985 the increase in the
If "" consider the addition of Canada Works, student grantS and
spending level "ill be 7.9% (as it is doubtful that any of these
grantS will be available to US in 19B6).
ASSESSMENTS:
-- .~
fr~m Municipal Affairs Departments to determine the assessment of the,
'the Ministry of TransportatiOn and eommunicatiOns uses asses~entS
County for road purposes. ThiS is factored a nwober of ways to relate
back to an assessment at 1.25 mills providing sufficient funds to fund
some County road systems at a 50% subsidY level.
over $612 million used in 19B4. The assessment for 1986 from the
In 19B5 a figure of $631 million was used which waS a 3.1% increase
Ministry of TransportatiOn and Co~nications is $636 million (or leSS
than 1% inc~ease from 1985.
continued · · · ·
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
ROAD DEPARTMENT BUDGET 1986
PAGE 6.
The Ministry of Transportation and Communications also sets up
an 'assessment figure upon which the City of St. Thomas 1/2 mill
assessment for Suburban roads is based. In 1985 this assessment was
$82.4 million (yielding a contribution of $41,200 from the City).
Preliminary figures from the Ministry of Transportation and
Communications from 1986 for the City of St. Thomas set their
assessment at $86.4 million or a contribution of $43,200 being a
$2,000 increase.
At the present time it appears that the St. Thomas Suburban Road
Commission will run an overexpenditure of City funds of approximately
$7,000 which will have to come from the 1986 City contribution and
this reduces the effective City contribution from $43,000 to $36,000.
Ministry of Transportation and Communications Subsidy is
Calculated as attached.
Spending Level
$4,845,600
LESS: M.T.C. Subsidy (On operations)
(Subsidy Rate 76.75%)
3, 719,300
LESS: City of St. Thomas Effective Contribution
'36,000
COUNTY LEVY ON OPERATION
$1,090,300
URBAN REBATES:
Calculation using net levy. Additional must be added to cover
urban rebates or non-subsidizable items.
For 1986 the urban assessment is estimated at 19.7% of the total
assessment. Thus the urban rebate would be in the order of $55,000
which is subsidized at 50%. (Ministry of Transportation and
Communications portion $27,500, County portion $27,500.)
NON-SUBSIDIZABLE ITEMS:
In 1985 a budget of $50,000 was used for items not subsidized by
the Ministry of Transportation and Communications which included
$10,000 for the International Plowing Match (although the total
expenditures will be in the order of $29,000). For preliminary
programming the budget is left at last year's amount. (We are not
sure of the non-subsidizable costs of moving the office to the
new administration building.)
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTM~m
~All Dl!!'.AlffiIEIlT jl.UDgg) 986_
PAGE 1.
~Upp~ENTAR'l B'l-~:
communicatio~S indicate that they would be willing to a~prove a
Recent diSCUssions with the Ministn of TransportatiOn and
supplementary by-law for soil ~estS and research into the problem
of cracking pipe arch structural piate '" NrtS in the amount of
$45,000 (Ministry of wansportatiOn and COl\JI\unicatiOns share
$41,000 _ county'S share $4,000).
to the cost of replacement of these p>lverts. (There are 18 culvertS
ThiS will assist in trying to find a solution if only temporary
in Elgin rated 1, 2 or 1 and if an average cost of replacement is
$50,000, any delay in required replacement will be a large savingS to
both the Townships and the County.)
~tal County Levy (~eli~rY anlg'
~vy From aper at ion
$1,090,300
27,500
4,000
urban Rebates
Supplementary ny-laW Regarding pipe Arch culvertS
50,}00
ItemS Not subsidized
TOTAL
lli112,0~
--- -
county share of the non approved supplementary spending for a total
in 1985 the County leVY waS $1,111.000 plus $18,000 for the
of $1,135,000.
projected increase 3.26%.
~.
(',\L,CIILATIU\'; ()t-' (~I{ANT lIND\.:R UPPER TIER PROGRAM l"UK L7UV
;,'_ ~~' c.:=.::.,;;:==::=:::::.=..," ,- -,::;O"=-r-"::;'~::----=-=
ST1'.P
Api)\')\/Hl E:xpe'nditur~ on !{QJ.dti and
B r~(L~('.; to which Grant Applies (Item 1)
Coun~y Effort of 1. 2.1) Millti on Total
County A1iSCSl:lmcnt (1tl~m F)
1. l.~l x It,~rn F~ 1.2.5 x $,6362,000.000
rOOD 1000
STr.-:P 2.
$ 4.845-6:00
- ,------.--=.:
::: $ 795.000
I)l\l~; ,II P \lru.l;I C;ol\lri\)\lllon ;;\t O. 5 Mills
o 'l' !t:.',:,'!,~9 O.~ x $J.>h~OO.OOO $ 43,200
loon 1000
'Cot;d l.,ul a I 1':flP rt at \. 1.5 Mills
;iLI:-~:_!', [<I);IU LII.H' ;i.l 1./.5 Miil~ l~quals the
t.owl Lo\'.d Eilol.t ill StL'P l plus a.n
equi.vJ.l~nt all ollnt of er<.lol
Z x SlL"P Z '- l x $~838. .200
::..U'~J.:.i UlHnd \-toad EC!od a\. 1. ',,5 Mills :::
Step ~ Ininu~ Step j (Unle 55 Step 3
lS grt';).l'~ r than St.ep l)
~,~,l'~ 2_ 2i~) w h 1 ' U u d E ff
c r-.: Ilc rc Hi an nnH~l noa ort
at 1. ?S Mills Grant applying to it is
Step 4 )(. o. '10909 .::
$~.s.!g2.,..2~QQ _ ' x O. 90'109
PluH Grant equivalent to T()~al
Local Effort (Step Z)
Tota.l (;.,) lcul~\ted Amount of Grap~
- or -
I:W'~o of A k)proved Expen(l iture
(ltent 1) O. 8 x $
Wnichl.~vl:r i:i t.he lC;lstier
OR
S T \.: t> 2i!?J
__' Wht'fl,' ll'....rc 1fo no Unuwt Road Effort
at 1. 2.'> Mill~ Grant is SOlV" of Approved
Ex.penditure (ItelU 1) ::; O. 5 x Step 1 ;:
O. 'i x $ ___- __ _
S'l~li.P_.~ Grant applying to Urban Rebate Paid
50"10 of ltl~m H :: O. 5 x $ 55,000
= $ 838.200
$1,676t~
$.3 .169. 200
= $ 2.88L 100
$ 838.200
$ ,,~. 719.300
= $
5 (A) $ 3.719,300
5 tB) $
;: $ 27.500
Plus Grant dpplying to Approved
Expendi.ture (Step 5(A) or Step 5(13) $
MlnuS Ih~l..:eiptti from Property Di.spo8a.l>:(~
~'lll uC ll.l'rn N :. O. x. $ ;: $
'fotaL G I'ant
$
27,500
_.L:.
:i. );,) 7 Tutal Cr.wl Pa.yable under Upper Ti.er
__- --' P rl'lg r.,m I~; rhe Allocation (Item A) or
Step &. whid\eve r is the le 5ser
$ 3.746.800
A ppliCB l>oly to purchj.l.8ea made prior to Janua.ry 1, 1973.
l'crccllU...gt: to be u::;ed i6 that applicable to year in which
I ropcrly wa s IHU' (,;hased.
Page 2. of 3
VA TE DECEMBER 17, 1985
S'f. THoW>S, ON'tARIO
DEC~BER 12, 1985
PAGB 1.
THE couNTY OF ELG1N ROAD C~T'tEE met at the MUniCipal Building at
~ l2 1985 in conjunctiOn with county council.
4:30 p.m.' '!:bursday, l)ecemuer '
B. 1'tEU~
F. PURCELL ~ REEVE VILLAGE 01' D\J't'fON
_ REEVE TOVlNSHIP OF 1\A~
~ REEVE 'foWNSHI1' OF D\JN'tllCll
~ REEVE ToWNSH1P 01' MALAHIDE
~ REEVE ToWNSHI1' OF ALDBOROUGH
~ REEVE ToWNSHIP 01' yAlillO\J'tH .
~:
~ARDBN R.
}1. 1\. S!Bv:lAR!
h. R. FORD
D. PBROV1C1\
~. MARTYN
~:
B. 1\. MARR
c. R. ~lLLSBY
R. BRADF1ELD
~ REEVE ToWNSHI1' 01' SO\J't1:1WOLD
~ REEVE 'fOVlNSHI1' OF SO\J'tH DORCllES'fER
~ REEVE V1LLAGE OF 1'ORT BURWELL
\)
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED BY: A. K. yaRD
cHAI~ OF THE ROAD c~T'fEE 1'OR 1986.
'fRAT REEVE STEWART BE
D. t>EROVl C1\
l"'
CARR1ED ."
f be honour accorded to him.
The Chairman tbanked the members oJ: t
,rM.OVED BY:
SECONDED BY: E. N~
Tl\A'f WE ADJoUJll' 'fa DEc~BER 18, 1985 N'D IN'UARY 3, IN'l1JARY l5
N'D J N'l1JARY 29, 1985; lIJ.,L 11EET1NGS A'f 9: 00 A .11.
CARR1ED ."
D. PEROV1C1\
coUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
== '..~ = ",,~
FIRST REPORT
~ .
NOVEMBER SESSION
1985
TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL
YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS !!IS FOLLOWS~
I. Walmsley Bros. Limited have completed their asphalt paving contractS
for the County of Elgin completing county Road #22 (Fairview Avenue)
in Yarmouth Township and paving for the Village of DUtton.
2. A report on "pipe Arch culvertS" will be forwarded to all local
municipalitieS who presentlY have pipe arch culverts.
Road Committee haS agreed to continue the inspection for the time
being of those culvertS that shoW signS of distresS.
It is expected that Ministry of Transportation and communicatiOns'
policies will be forthcoming for repair and/or replacement of
culvertS thiS winter after receiving input from variOUS
municipal itieS.
WE RECOMMEND
I. That the resolution of the Township of puslinch re an amendment
2. That a by.law be passed restricting the weight of vehicles passing
to the Aggregates Act be filed.
over county bridges as follOWS:
phillmore Bridge (county Road #43) - 15 Tonnes; Robbins Bridge -
4 Tonnes; Fulton Bridge . 15 Tonnes; Meeks Bridge - 8 Tonnes;
Jamestown Bridge _ 15 Tonnes; Vienna Bridge - 20 Tonnes.
These weight restrictions are the same as in the previoUS by.law
for which Ministry of TransportatiOn and communication~ approval
runS out early in 1986.
Repairs are presently being made to the Phillmore and Vienna
Bridges.
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
CHAIRMAN
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
NOVEMBER 15, 1985
PAGE 1.
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on
Friday, November 15, 1985 at 9:00 a.m. All members were present except
Warden Lavereau, Reeve Monteith and Reeve Brooks. Also present was the Engineer
and Assistant Engineer.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 11, 1985 BE APPROVED.
CARRIED."
THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE FOLLOWING:
1. That Murray Hennessey was still attempting to negotiate an agreement with the
Ferguson brothers regarding their land on County Road #30. If he was unable
to conclude an agreement shortly the cheque would be returned so that the
money could be used for other purposes in 1985 and the 1986 Road Committee
would have to deal with the matter.
2. A new draft Agreement for presentation to the Township of Yarmouth for use of
the Sparta Road was being typed.
3. Agreements with both land owners at the intersection of County Road #28
(Centennial Avenue) and Highway #3 had been concluded but no work would be
done this Fall as a request for a Municipal Board hearing had been made on
the rezoning of the motel property on the south-east corner.
4. A 1980 used Cabover International Truck had been purchased from the Brantford
Truck Centre for $9,500. Over twenty truck dealers had been contacted in
Western Ontario and Toronto. Good used tandems were nearly impossible to
find. The truck purchased had been used by the Borough of North-York as a
garbage packer truck.
5. The Ontario Energy Board Hearings on the matter of gas franchises was underway
in Toronto but the Engineer had not been required to testify.
ST. THOW.S, ONTARiO
NOVEMBER 15, 1985
'PAGE 2.
THE ENGiNEER REPORTED ON THE 1J0JU<. TO D!\TE AS FOl"WWS:
I. Most of the budgeted work had been completed. FinanciallY there ~aS about
$60,000 to paY accountS in December after the payment of wageS to
December 31st.
It was likely that the ne~ Inte~natiOnal Double cab 2 Ton Truck would not be
received until late December or early in 1986 and therefore would not be paid
2.
for until 1986.
kn application for interim subsidy would be made shortly.
. 11 h th for winter control it was
UnleSs December was an except~ona y eavy mon
ld have to be carried intO
not likely that an exceSs amount of accountS woU
1986.
The Ontario youth corps p~Og~ammes have bee", completed, billed and payment
waS e><pected from the p~ovince by the end of the month.
FlOyd Humphries, J<eith Player and Fred G~och had attended a construction
signing semina~ sponsored by the OntariO Traffic conference on
November 8th in Barrie.
RepairS to the Phillmo~e and Vienna BridgeS were underway.
Rust holeS had
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
occur~ed at all corne~s of both b~idgeS. Repairs on the phillmore Bridge
would have to be regarded as temporary.
The 1986 Road committee should conside~ replacement of the b~idge within
10.
The FultOn Bridge had been painted and one day of work remained to paint
the top of the ],1eeks Bridge.
Next year the bottom of the ],1eeks Bridge should be coropleted as well as
the Eden B~idge on county Road #44 in Bayhaffi'
AS soon as the county of ],1iddlesex could be encouraged to pay their share
for the replacement of the e><pansion jointS in the Wa~dsville Bridge a
contract should be let fo~ the painting of it.
A sign inventory had been completed and showed that a considerable numbe~
of signS should be ~eplaced immediatelY, including approximatelY 50
f' . 1'0. SignS'
. , 50 'l.'nte~section signS' and a numbe~ 0 max~roU '
, stop Sl.gnS ,
.~oute ma~kers and 'b~idge end marke~S' ·
VJo-rk 'WaS unde-r'Way.
the ne~t 5 year s.
8.
9.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
NOVEMBER 15, 1985
PAGE 3.
County Road #45 and county Road #40.
ll. Wet weather had postponed until Spring any thought of removing stumps on
12. Shoulder gravel had been hauled on county Road #47, South DOrchester Township
and was being hauled on county Road #42 between Road #40 and port Burwell in
Malahide and Bayham TownshipS.
county Road #6 between Black'S Lane and county Road #3 at a cost of over
13. Shouldering work had been completed on County Road #3, north of Rodney and on
14. Drainage complaintS seem to continue partiCularlY over the last fe~ weeks of
$30,000 for material alone.
15. Chittick construction waS planning on returning to the pleasant valley pit to
wet weathe-r.
16. AttemptS would be made to purchase a 99 foot right-of-way (378 feet long) from
crush another pile of gravel before freeze-up,
cayuga construction at the pleasant Valley pit SO the county could cleanUp
the bottom of their gravel pit at the southern boundary.
ChristmaS and stockpiled. Stripping would continue in the area ~here there
17. Some gravel remained in the county area and thiS would be removed before
18. Ken Kleinsteiber of the Ministry of TransportatiOn and communications had
waS gravel.
inspected several pipe arch culvertS in East Elgin including the
Lindsey-Hill Culvert in Malahide Township on which the Township had done
some welding at the haunch.
indicated that the cracking was getting worse and additional jackS had
been placed and it was imperative that the culvert be replaced as soon as
19. Examination of the LynhurSt culvert on county Road #25 over the past week
possible.
The culvert should be replaced with precast concrete culvert as soon as
traffiC could be detoured ne~t year and engineering work was proceeding
on an eme-rgency basiS.
20. crading of gravel roads waS continual.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
NOVEMBER 15, 1985
PAGE 4.
21. Personnel matters were as follows:
(a) Orrie Ostrander was still off and was not likely to return.
(b) George Cook was on pre-retirement holidays.
(c) It was expected that Derk Sloetjes would return from his knee injury
shortly (November 21st).
(d) Most holidays had been used and most time-in-lieu had been used other
than some of Curtis Gordonts and the Engineer. The Engineer asked that
his time be recognized.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT THE FOLLOWING EXTRA TIME FOR THE ENGINEER BE RECOGNIZED AS NOT BEING
USED UNTIL 1986 OR BEYOND:
FROM 1983
25 DAYS (RESOLUTION OF FEBRUARY 27, 1984)
FROM 1984
10 DAYS
FROM 1985
APPROXIMATELY 11 DAYS
CARRIED."
The Committee authorized the Engineer to provide a copy of the proposed
contract for all employees so the necessity of a general meeting could be
avoided because of the possibility of a general call-out for winter control.
THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON WINTER CONTROL AS FOLLOWS:
1. Snow fence was being erected as rapidly as possible although it had been
seriously delayed because of the wet weather.
2. Sand piles were up.
3. All sanders were operative.
4. Some sander routes had been changed and two hired trucks (Streib and
Ryckman) would work in West Elgin.
All County trucks and one of Bob Ryckmants trucks would operate out of
White Station and Brooks would operate out of Bayham.
The older County trucks would be kept close to White Station because of
the chance of breakdowns.
ST. TROMAS, aNT ARlO
NOVEMBER 15, 1985
PAGE 5.
5. Snowplow routes had been rearranged with the neW Truck #l15 being operated out
of DUtton to do routeS in pJ.dborOugh. Routes had been rearranged throughout
the County to place tWO graderS out of DUtton and tWO graders out of White
Station for southwold and yarmouth Townships. A truck would do Wellington
Road (county Road #25) which had been previouslY done by a grader. All
routes had been organized to give early clearing to routes intO St. ThomaS.
WARDEN LAVEREAU AND FRANK CLARKE IN ATTENDANCE · ·
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
.
THAT THE FOLLOWING P AYLISTS BE APPROVED FOR P AVM.ENT :
\
\
\ CARRIED."
\
From the Ontario Good Roads Association statiJi that Grader school would be
held in Elgin County on MaY 12th, 13th and 14tt' 1986 with the local
municipalities sending 15 employees. \
AS the County would be sending several of thei~ employees there would
only be room for 2 or 3 more (likelY the Town~iP of Norfolk and the
\
PAYLIST NUMBER 59 AMoUNTING TO $59,227.09
PAYLIST NUMBER 60 AMOUNTING TO $233.31
PAYLIST NUMBER 61 AMOUNTING TO $115,254.56
PAYLIST NUMBER 62 AMOUNTING TO $62,190.31
PAYLIST NUMBER 63 AMOUNTING TO $256,104.32
CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS:
1.
2. In response to the Onta-rio Good Roads ASSociatlion request for long service
\
\
awards curtiS Gordon's name had been sent in ~40 years).
3. From Glenn Walters, Chairman of the county E~ibit, International Plowing
Match, with thanks for the county Exhibit. \
\
\
4. From the TownshiP of yarmouth with rezoning b~_laws:
(a) For a truck terminal on county Road #22 ~ear county Road #24.
\
(b) For a fuel depot on Highway ff3 at the thdmPson Transport Limited
\
\
\
Township of Delhi).
property.
continued · · · ·
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
NOVEMBER 15, 1985
PAGE 6.
(c) For residential use on Highway #4 south of County Road #27.
(d) For conunercial use at the north-east corner at the intersection of Highway #3
and the Highway #3 By-Pass.
5. From the Township of Yarmouth stating that their official plan had been passed.
6. From the Township of Malahide rezoning property on County Road #42 at
Copenhagan to residential.
7. From the Township of Puslinch with a resolution for levys under the Pits and
Quarries Act.
"MOVED BY: R. J .LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE RESOLlITION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF
PUSLINCH REGARDING THE AGGREGATES ACT BE FILED.
CARRIED."
The Engineer reported that Ministry of Transportation and CVll11uunications
approval on County By-Law ~3-46, restricting weights on bridges on County
roads would end on January 30, 1986 and a new by-law would have to be passed.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED RESTRICTING
WEIGHTS OF VEHICLES PASSING OVER COUNTY BRIDGES AS FOLLOWS:
PHILLMORE (ROAD #43) - 15 TONNES
ROBBINS
4 TONNES
FULTON
- 15 TONNES
MEEKS
- 18 TONNES
JAMESTOWN
- 15 TONNES
VIENNA
- 20 TONNES
CARRIED."
Correspondence from John Wise, M.P. indicated that he had contacted
Mr. Mazankowski, Minister of Transport with regard to the County's problems
with the Chesapeake and Ohio railway crossings and that Mr. Mazankowski had
asked the Canadian Transport Conunission to review the situation.
ST. TROMAS, ONTARIO
NOVEMBER 15, 1985
PAGE 7.
were about to make an agreement with canadian National Rail to use the old
A recent article in the TimeS Journal indicated that the Chesapeake and Ohio
conrail line. If such waS the case it was likely that the whole line would be
abandoned.
The Engineer was requested to obtain further information.
Because of the deterioration of many of the county's guide signS the
Engineer requested permiSsion to implement the new}1inistry of Transportation
and communications guide sign policY at intersections in the county.
priority being given to the port stanley_sparta-Middlemarch areas and being
Replacement of t.he signs 'ilould be implemented over a number of years with
extended to the port BUrwell area as soon as possible. ThiS would give
maximum assistance to the tourist areas.
the signS indicating localitieS such as Sparta, port Stanley, port Bruce, etc.,
The most impOrtant effect of the new poliCY would be to increase in size
larger advanced warning signs indicating the
and the erection of
intersectiOn of a county road and itS number.
implemented as rapidlY as the signs could be made and erected.
The committee felt that the poliCY waS long overdue and should be
The Engineer and the ASsistant Engineer p~esented the attached suromary on
pipe arch culvert inspections, noting that approximatelY 44% of the 85 pipe
arch culvertS on the county and Township roads were showing signS of
distresS, 22% of the culvertS or 19 were in poor condition. It appeared that
the problem waS ongoing and a continued deterioration of some of the culvertS
had been noted throughout summer inspections. It seemed to be merelY a matter
of ~en the pipes would require replacement rather than if.
It appeared that road pipes and super spanS and arch pipes on footings
were in good condition as only 2% of round pipes were showing signS of
deterioration.
The Engineers recoromended that the county continue inSpectiOn of those
pipe arch culvertS on Township roads that showed signs of distresS on a tWO
month frequency and the local municipalitieS 'i1Quld be asked to inspect on a
continued · · · ·
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
NOVEMBER 15, 1985
PAGE 8.
4 to 5 month basis their culvertS which at the present time did not shoW Significant
The local municipalitieS would alsO be asked to inSpect on a monthlY
distreSS.
basiS (miniroUm) those culvertS Which we~e in pOo~ condition or of a Rating #l
(14 i; total), as it seemed impOssible for the countY to make those inspections
that often, as sufficient staff waS not available.
The county would then be inspecting some 20 To'W1\ship culvertS as well as 9 of
their own on a bi_monthly basis. It waS hoped by Spring that the Ministry of
T~anspo~tatiOn and communicatiOns would have furthe~ information and a policY
might be in place to alloW leSS frequent inspections.
The committee agreed that the county should continUe the inspection of the
To'W1\shiP culve~tS showing distresS on a bi_monthlY basiS and that the
Assistant Engineer should contact all To'W1\ship Road superintendents to bring
them up to date on the variOUS problemS in their partiCular municipalitieS SO
that they could continUe with their inspections as well.
The Enginee~ reported on the 1985 Needs Study Update as the MiniStn had
fo~warded the computer printOut fo~ the year.
The attached information sho'W1\ a comparis6n between the 1984 and 1985
Needs StudY Update with an inc~ease in needs of 3.2% from 1984 to 1985. thiS
represented the increase in costS afte~ the inflation factor had been added
and removing the work that bad been done in 1984 and adding needs that were
evident in the Spring of 1985.
~ general increase of approximatelY 2.53% with 12%
kilomete~S of travel dailY'
A suroma~y fo~ the 1986 const~uctiOn prOg~grome waS diSCUssed.
province had agreed to pay an 85% subsidY on sewers in Lynhurst, the
reconst~uctiOn of St. George Street would be necessa~y in 1986 as the sewer
would go from wellingtOn Road to Kettle creek at a depth from 12 to 17 feet.
Realignment of St. Geo~ge St~eet through Cowan pa~k should alsO be done at
the same time. It was very unlikelY little other constructiOn wo~k other
than the replacement of culvertS on county Road #25 (Wellington Road) and
county Road #29 and the const~uction of county Road #45 from Highway #73
AS the
continued · · · ·
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
NOVEMBER 15, 1985
PAGE 9.
to county Road #40 and the reconstruction of St. George Street could be done in
1986.
The committee inspected roads as per the attached sheet and enjoyed lunch
'-"""",
at Laura caverly' s on the way with Warden Lavereau and Frank Clarke absent
for inspection after lunch.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE CHAIRMAN BE AUTUORIZED TO SIGN TUE DECEMBER PAYLIST.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF TUE CHAIRMAN.
CARRIED.tt
~~/f;;;P.IA -
CHAIRMAN
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPAR'fMEN'l'
PLA'fE PIPE AND ARCH INSPECTIONS 1985
~\
The County of Elgin Road Department ca~l'ied o4t furl=her culvert
insp~ctions of the Township and County steel plat~ culveFts in the
~pr~ng und Summer of this year. All culverts wer~ rein~pected at
~east onCe and more numerous inspections were carried 04~ on
'culverts which showed signs of impending failure (plate ~racking and
lPaJor crimping) as deter:mined by our first inspecti.on.
The purpose of the 'additional inspections WaS twofold:
(a) To determine if any patterns or consistencie~ in the
failures could be noted and thus suggest a caUSe of
the failures and possible prevention.
(b) To determine the rate of progress of theije failures and
thus indicate a tentative time schedule for further
inspections and replacement.
Very little information has been received to date from the plate
pipe manufacturers or the Ministry of Transportation and Cowmunications
with respect to the causes of these failures.
The Ministry of Transportation and Communications h~s not banned
the use of these structures and they feel that the problemS to date
appear to be associated with the loss of compaction apd Fhe loss of
fines in the culvert bedding.
the enclosed tables summarize all of the Township and County
inspections to dat~.
It should ,be pointed out that the inspections were carried out
during ,the Spring and Summer seasons when th~ ~ff~ct of ~eavy
rainfall and the freeze~thaw cycle were at a minimum.
The conclusions of these inspections a~e as follows:
(a) The failures that were noted were very random with respect
to supplier, age, plate thickness, depth of fi~l, etc.,
and thus no pattern could be developed that would suggest
a cause of the f&il~res based on the examination of the
culverts themselves. However, the nature of the bedding or
backfill were not examined.
.,
Continu,ed . . . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
PLATE PIPE AND ARCH INSPECTIONS 1985
PAGE 2.
(b) Based on the severe rusting of some of the cracks noted, it
is apparent that many of these failures occurred several
years ago. During the Spring and Summer inspections (which
is a fairly short period of time) it was noted that several
(but not all) culverts showed additional minor cracks
appearing as well as the progression of crimping. In fact
some culverts that showed no cracks in the earlier inspections
developed cracks during this period. It was also noted that
these failures were not limited to pipe arches but also
included pipes.
During the inspections it was also noted that the County and some
of the Townships have provided shoring support works in some of their
culverts. This is only a temporary measure prior to culvert replacement
and it could lead to, further problems caused by flow blockage due to the
presence of ice, tree limbs and debris.
Based on these inspections we would recommend as follows:
(1) Since it appears that the existing failures are progressing
and new ones are occurring; all plate pipe culverts should
be inspected at least once every six (6) months.
(2) 'Culverts showing medium to major crimpina ,should be
inspected once every four (4) months.
(3) Culverts having signs of any cracks should be inspected once
every two (2) months.
(4) Culverts with major cracks which show signs of separation
and culverts with extensive continuous medium crackina
should be considered for replacement. Any shoring or
bracing should be considered as only a temporary measure.
In any event, these culverts should be inspected at least
once everyone (1) month.
(5) The above inspections should be recorded on inspection
sheets (sample enclosed) so that the progress of any
failure can be monitored and further inspections or
\
\.
replacements can be scheduled.
Continued . . . .
NOTE:
1. INSPECT COUNTY RATINGS #1 TO #3 (REQUIRES ONE DAY FOR INSPECTION).
2. INSPECT COUNTY AND TOWNSHIP RATINGS #3 AND #4 (REQUIRES 3 TO 4 DAYS FOR INSPECTION).
3. COUNTY TO INSPECT TOWNSHIP CULVERTS ONLY EVERY TWO MONTHS (RATING #1) AND EVERY FOUR
MONTHS (RATINGS #2 AND #3 ).
4. COUNTY TO INSPECT COUNTY COULVERTS EVERY ONE MONTH (RATING #1) AND EVERY TWO MONTHS
(RATINGS #2 AND #3 ).
5. TOWNSHIP TO INSPECT ALL RATINGS #4 AND #5 AS PER REPORT.
6. TOWNSHIP TO INSPECT RATING #1 MONTHLY AND RATINGS #2 AND #3 EVERY TWO MONTHS.
7. TOWNSHIP TO REPORT ANY CI~GE IN CONDITIONS TO COUNTY FOR FURTHER INSPECTION.
fA
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
PLATE PIPE AND ARCH INSPECTIONS 1985
PAGE 3.
The above inspection schedule is only tentativ~ a~d is not based
on proven engineering principles. qther facto~s which w~ are I~naware
of may increase the rate of failure.
The enclosed culvert summaries include only plate culverts that
have been brought to our attention by the respective Tqwnship Road
Superintendents. Others may exist. Farm access plat~ culverts have
not been inspected and as such the Township Drai~age Inspectors
should be made awaru of the potential problems.
Tables 1 to III enclosed provide an overall summary of all County
and Township culverts and s4~gast a propo~ed lnapectiop progrml~ by
County and Township staff.
Enc.
FRED GROCH
~SSlSTANT COUNTY ~GINEER
I Jl
'.'
S~'l OF ELGIN COUNTY BOLTED pIPE ARCH. CULVERTS
~
11
~
OCTOBER 1985.
1 2 3 4- 5 TOlAL
RATING
".... .
1 1
1?ORT STANLE'l
1 1 1 3 6
SOUTR DORCRESTER
-- ------------
1 1 2
BA'l~
4- 2 6
SO\fC~OLD
2 1 1 2 5 11
MhLPJ:\IDE
1 1 5 1 B
D\JWifI.CR
3 4- 3 2 4- 16
'l ARMOUTR
6 1 2 2 6 17
ALDBOROUGR
14- 6 9 16 22 67
TOWNSRI'P TOTAL
, 18
5 2 1 3 1
COUNT~
19 B 10 19 29 85
COmn'l AND 'tOVll'lSRi.? 'tcrl'AL
..,.
22 10 12 22 34 100
COmn'i ANP 'tOVll'lSRi.? % ,
\ \
-
1 2 3 A- 5 ToTAL
RATING .
-
pORT STANLEY
SOUTH UORCl1ESTER
1 1
BAYRAM
SOUT1:lV10LD 3 3
~ 1 1
MALAl1IDE
3 3
D\J\'TN 1 CR
---
1 1
YARMOUTR
3 3
ALDBOROUGR
1 11 12
TO-wNSRI'P TOTAL
1 7 24 32
COm-rlY
1 8 35 44
COuNt'i AND TOVlNSHIP '\'otAL
2 18 80 100
couNt'i AND '\'OVlNSH1'P % ,
, -
S~Y OF coUNT'i Of ELGIN 'BOLTED PIPE CULVER'\'S
~
OCTOBER 1985.
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
COMPARISON 1984 AND 1985 NEEDS STUDY UPDATE
AS 1985 M.T.C. PRINTOUT WITH ADJUSTMENTS FOR INFLATION
NOVEMBER 1985
1984
1985
BRIDGES
$ 5,548,000
$ 5,635,000
ROADS:
NOW
TOTAL ROADS
$12,930,000 $12,160,000
7,420,000 8,064,000
836,000 697,000
783,000 883,000
$21,969,000 $21,804,000
$27,517,000 $27,439,000
11,856,000 13,184,000
$39,373,000 $40,623,000
1 - 5 YEARS
CARRYOVER (NOW)
SPOT DRAINAGE
TOTAL ROADS AND BRIDGES
RESURFACING
TOTAL NEEDS
INCREASE IN NEEDS 3.2%
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
- ,
TRAFFIC REVIEW FROM 1985 NEEDS STUDY
(1984 INFORMATION - CURRENT JANUARY 1, 1985)
Total Length of County Road Sections 477.4 Km.
Daily Km Vehicle Travel (1984) 410,572 Km.
Average Traffic County 860 Vehicles Per Day.
Daily Km Vehicle Travel (1983) 400,402 Km
Average Traffic Count 839 Vehicles Per Day.
Increase 2.53%.
Percentage Travel on Roads Requiring Construction in the Now or
1 - 5 Year Period 12.3% (50,589 Km Per Day).
Percentage Travel on Roads Requiring Asphalt Resurfacing 35.8%
(147,040 Km Per Day).
(Includes Wellington Road which is approximately 50,000 Km Per Day.)
If we delete Wellington Road Percentage of Travel on Road Requiring
Resurfacing it is Approximately 23.6% (97,000 Km!)
(Volume of Travel on Wellington Road is Approximately 12% of Total
County Travel.)
SUMMABY FORl986 CONSTRUCTION PRO~E
. -'~ ~ - -
I. Replace 3 expansion jointS, Wardsville Bridge, Road #3.
2. Replace 2 pipe arch culverts. Road #25.
3. Replace culvert, Road #29.
5. Road #26 (St. George Street) semi-urban const~uction after
6. Road #45. Highway #73 to Road #40, dependent on land purchase
(some searches done) and municipal drain installation (Taylor and
Brown ).
7. Road #22. concessions IV and V to Road #27 and Road #27 intersection.
Dependent on approval of Agreement for Sparta pit Road, rezoning
appeals, if any, designation by Minist~y of Natural ResOu~ces as a
gravel pit. (Appears that 1987 will be a more likely year fo~
installation of sanitary se"",rs1
8. Road #43. calton Urban, outside surveyS completed, nO design done.
DeSign required on Road #43 and Road #45 intersection, including
curb and gutter and storm drainage. EXpensive urban and semi-urban
construction. )
Road #43 southerlY, no design done and land purchase required.
9. Road #37, outside surveying done, a little design done. Middlesex
drainage required.
10. MiddlemiSS Bridge. Middlesex is not interested in construction.
II. Road #30 (RadiO Road). outside surveying done, no design done.
It will take lengthy negotiations with Middlesex regarding shoring
of right-of-way and const~uction costs.
12. outside su~veying none:
(a) Road #28 (centennial Avenue) - Traffic haS not increased due
to EXPressway. The completion of Road #22 maY alSO relieve
is not interested in construction.
traffiC.
(b) Road #2 _ DUnwich_AldborOugh Townline, easte~IY,
c "'.......-,_,1_......'0 rl
pAGE 2.
, ..
cOUNT'i OF ELG1.N ROAD DEl'ARnmN't
1986 CONSTRUctION -
12. outside su~veying Done: (continued)
(c) Road f/4 _ pJ.dborOugh-Rodney westerlY, Surveying continues,
intersection of Black' s Lane requires redesign.
(d) Road IfO _ Highway f/401, wo~k to start subject to Road
committee app~oval,2 sections (2+ miles) and
-resu-rfacing.
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
ROAD INSPECTION
NOVEMBER 15, ,1985
1. Road #22 - Construction 1985 (Road #45 Inter section).
2. Road #45 - Player's Bridge floor.
3. LUNCH - CAVERLY'S
4. Road #45 - From Highway #73 to Road #40 - Construction 1986.
5. Road #40 - From Mount Salem to Road #42 - Resurfacing 1986.
6. Road #39 - Resurfacing 1985.
7. Port Burwell Bridge floor 1985.
8. Road #42 and Road #50 - Completed Construction 1985.
9. Strachan Street Drain outlet.
10. Road #42
11. Road #43
12. Road #43
13. Road #38
14. Road #32
15. Road #52
Port Burwell Easterly - Resurfacing 1985.
Calton northerly.
Phil1more Bridge repaired.
Richmond - Lewis Acre.
Police College to Road #52 - Completed 1985.
Highway #74 to Road #30 - Resurfacing 1985.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
OCTOBER 11, 1985
PAGE 1.
Friday, october II, 1985 at 9:00 a.m. All members were present. Also present
was Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and communications, the
THE coUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD cOMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on
Enginee~ and Assistant Engineer.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSE'l
THAT THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 5 AND SEPTEMBER 12, 1985 BE APPROVED.
CARRIED_"
THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE FOLLOWING:
I. Most cleanup work at the International Plowing Match had been completed.
Some stone in the driveways still remained, but all the snOW fence had
been removed and postS pulled, etc.
Total costs to date (not subsidizable costs by the Ministry of Transportation
and communicatiOns) including snoW fence, county exhibitS, etc., with labour
overhead waS in exceSs of $28,000 (originallY estimated at $11,000).
CostS cha~ged to Road #26 improvementS including labour overhead were
approximatelY $54,000, against an original estimate of $25,000.
'these costS did not include signing and replacement of signS, etc., although
the International Plowing Match had paid for the purchase of the directional
signS; these had been forwarded to the county of HastingS for nezt year'S
2. The Player's Bridge floor had been completed and reopened to traffic.
Mat ch.
3. The county's Solicitor stated that he would knoW within the week as to
whether or not Ferguson'S (county Road #30) would accept the $lO,OOO
cheque preViOUSlY forwarded.
Yarmouth Council rather than with their Road superintendent.
meeting and ~ecommendatiOns made as to those culve~tS that the county
should continue to inspect on a continuing basis.
4. Negotiations for the Sparta pit road would be continued with the Township of
5. A complete report on pipe arch culvertS would be forthcoming for the next
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
OCTOBER 11, 1985
PAGE 2.
6. An agreement had been concluded with Cen-Tal InvestmentS Limited Which was
simila~ to the agreement with Wiebenga, volekaert and Chirico on county
Road #28.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY CQ\JNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED AUTHORIZING THE
WARDEN AND CLERK TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE coUNTY OF ELGIN AND
CEN_TAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED OWNERS OF A PORTION OF LCYf 11, CONCESSION VIII,
y~OUTH TOWNSHIP SETTING FORTH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE coUNTY OF ELGIN WITH
REGARD TO ENTRANCES FROM COUNTY ROAD #28 ONTO THEIR PROPERTY AND AN ACREEMENT
DIVIDING COSTS BETWEEN THE OWNERS AND THE coUNTY OF ELGIN FOR IMPROVEMENTS
INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER, PAVEMENT AND DRAINAGE ADJACENT TO THEIR PROPERTY.
CARRIED. t1
THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLIffifS:
I. crass cutting waS nearlY completed.
2. pavement marking waS done except fo~ several mileS on county Road #3.
3. sweeping waS continuing.
4. Grading and granular base work had been completed on county Road #22 at
county Road #45 and base paving would be done next week.
A top coat of paving would be placed at the intersection and over the
base coat placed last Fall south of County Road #45.
work would then be completed to just north of the intersection of the
~oad between concession IV and concession V, yarmouth Township.
cravel shouldering of the asphalt would be done the week after next.
Trimming and seeding had been nearly completed. It was hoped that the
lawnS would grOW and would not have to be reseeded ne~t Spring.
Highway #74, County Road #42 at silver creek, county Road #42 and
county Road 1f50 in port Burwell and county Road #42 east of port Burwell
5. CleanuP work on county Roads #'32 and 1f52 between county Road #'30 and
had been completed.
ST. T1:l0MAS, ONTARIO
OCTOBER 11, 1985
PAGE 3.
6. youth Corps funding would be completed at the end of the month, however other
casual workers would be kept on for part of November to help erect snoW fence,
7. Gravel shouldering was underway on county Road If-> between Rodney and
etc.
WardSVille and on County Road #6 between County Road #3 and Black'S
Lane.
Little if any shouldering could effectively be done on county Road #4 or
County Road #6, west of Black' s Lane. It was expected that shouldering work
would be completed next week.
8. DUmP truck safety checkS were underway.
9. Truck #l15 waS in and was being used. The posting for an operator for
Truck #l15 waS underway. The Executive of the Road Department EmployeeS'
Association had requested that nO present operator of dump truckS or the
float be allowed to applY for the position unlesS nO other qualified
application waS received.
"MOVED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE FOLLOWING ACCOuNTS PAYABLE BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT:
PAYLIST NUMBER 51 AMouNTING TO $67,440.91
PAYLIST NUMBER 52 AMOUNTING TO $61 ,621. 91
P AYLIST NUMBER 53 AMOUNTING TO $ 248 .16
PAYLIST NUMBER 54 AMOUNTING TO $177,503.97
PAYLIST NUMBER 55 AMOUNTING TO $74,451.32
PAYLIST NUMBER 56 AMOUNTING TO $44l.47
PAYLIST NUMBER 57 AMOUNTING TO $l33,448.46
CARRIED .H
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
THAT THE ACCOUNT OF WARDEN LAVEREAU lN THE AMOUN':r OF $l, 526 · 8 5 FOR THE
M. H. STEWART
ROADS AND TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA cONVENTION IN VANCOUVER
(HOSPITALITY SUITE) BE APPROVED WITH THE CHAIJl}!AN BEING AUTHORIZED TO
SIGN THE PAYLIST.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
OCTOBER 11, 1985
PAGE 4.
regarding the county'S reply to the Ontario Municipal Board regarding
The Engineer reviewed the attached opinion from the county' s solicitor
liability limitS for the port Stanley Terminal Railway Incorporated.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. ~ILLSEY
THAT ~E RECoMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD BE
FORWARDED A COp'{ OF THE coUNT'i SOLICITOR'S OPINION OF OCTOBER 8, 1985
AS THE COUNTY' S POSITION REGARDING THE DETERMiNATION BY THE ONTARIO
MUNICIPAL BOARD OF THE PROPER AMOUNT OF LIABILITY INSURANCE THAT SHO\JLD
BE CARRIED BY THE PORT STANLEY TERMINAL RAIWAY INCORJ'ORATED.
CARRIED."
at least the five county, four City grOUP before the Ontario Energy Board on
The Engineer reported that a presentatiOn would be made on the behalf of
Hearing on Franchises. A draft (85 pages) had been forwarded to members of
the municipalitieS for their commentS and the municipal appointees (including
Emil Neukamm) would meet on october lIth, p.m. to disCUSS final presentation.
Haldimand-Norfolk, Niagara, Huron County and Oxford County might al SO join
It appeared that a number of municipalitieS including Wellington,
the grOUP, which would lessen the expense to the county (the expense to the
county to date haS been $2,397.39 - 1984 and 1985).
from Strackan Street was noted. The committee agreed to inspect the area at
correspondence from the Village of port Burwell regarding storm sewer outlet
holidayS would alloW him to go on holiday leave as of october 25th.
George Cook would retire at the end of the year and hiS accumulatiVe
their next meeting.
sufficient help would be available for winter control. TWO extra people will
The Engineer recommended that an additional employee be taken on so that
be needed this year as a snow ploW truck had been added.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
OCTOBER 11, 1985
PAGE 5.
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
THAT JACK MATHEWS BE DESIGNATED A REGULAR EMPLOYEE EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 17, 1985;
cLASS IFIC AT ION : cLASS 11, NIL ElG'ERIENCE.
R. J. LAVEREAU
CARRIED."
Ministry of TransportatiOn and communications insisted that thiS be spent on
The Engineer stated that some money remained for neW machinery and as the
neW machinery he recommended that the county' s pavement marker be Upgraded and a
used tandem truck be purchased to replace the 20 year old Ford truck. The truck
could be used as a pavement marker truck and as a sander truck in winter.
could be used effectivelY, and both would have to be replaced.
It was likely that this would be the last Winter that Truck #>3 and Truck #>4
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO PURCHASE A USED TANDEM TRUCK FOR THE
CENTRE LINE MARKING EQUIPMENT AND SANDER BODY.
CARRIED."
with complaints regarding his property. The committee agreed to inspect hiS
correspondence waS noted from Mr. LewiS Ac~e, county Road #38 at Richmond
property at the next Road committee meeting.
correspondence from the Township of Bayham with regard to road closures
'WaS read.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE COUNTY OF ELGIN HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE CLOSING OF THE FOLLOWING
ROAD ALLQlifANCE IN THE TOWNSHIP OF BAyHAM; pART OF SECOND STREET, WEST OF
CENTRE STREET, EAST OF MAIN STREET, REGISTERED PLAN NO. 113, FOR THE
Hf,MLET OF EDEN BEING pARTS #1, #2 AND ff3 OF llR-2689 AND PART OF 'IRE
ROAD ALLQlifANCE BETWEEN CONCESSIONS VI AND vl1 (SOUTH TALBOT ROAD EAST
AND NORTH TALBOT ROAD EAST) THROUGH LOTS 129 AND 130 BEING pARTS #1 AND #2
OF llR- 2346.
CARRIED ."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
OOTOBER 11, 1985
PAGE 6.
CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS:
1. John Wise, M.P. regarding Chesapeake and Ohio crossings, stating that the matter
had been brought to the attention of the Minister of Transport. '.
2. From the Ontario Good Roads Association announcing Grader Schools. The Engineer
noted that the Ontario Good Roads Association had promised that a Grader School
would be held in Elgin County next Summer (some time in June has been set as a
tentative date).
3. From the County of Lambton regarding P.C.B.'s.
4~ From the Township of Yarmouth with rezonings as follows:
(a) Residential on County Road #24 near County Road #23.
(b) Residential on Highway ~ south of County Road ~5.
(c) Industrial on the north-east corner of Highway #3 By-Pass (the property
surrounded on two sides by Kingts Highway).
5. From the Ministry of Transportation and Communications with approval of County
of Elgin By-Law limiting weights on Elgin-Middlesex County line bridges.
6. From Cyril Demeyere requesting that the County of Elgin assist the Town of
Aylmer with repairs to the Myrtle Street Bridge. Inspection had shown that
it was doubtful that floor repairs on the bridge were cost effective as
there were serious deficiencies in the truss.
A more complete inspection would be made within the week for the Town and
the Ministry of Transportation and Communications contacted for their
opinion.
7. Ministry of Transportation and Communications district salt prices for
1985-1986 would be $26.71 per tonne, which was a 6.5% increase on the
actual price paid by the County in 1984-1985.
It is hoped that a 40i per tonne saving could be obtained during
negotiations of this price with the company.
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE ADJOURN TO FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1985 AT 9:00 A.M.
CARRIED."
CHAIRMAN
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD coMJ{lTTEE
::;--~ ~ ;....- ..;:::;
FIRST REPORT
--- ~
OCTOBER SESSION
1985
TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL
YOUR ROAD coMJ{lTTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS:
I. construction haS been completed on County Road #22 at the
county Road #45 intersection, except for a base coat of asphalt
which is expected to start shortly.
A top coat of asphalt will be,placed over the county Road #45
intersectiOn and southerly for approximatelY 3/4 mile. ThiS
will cove~ the base coat of asphalt ~,ich was placed last
Fall.
Most of the trimming and seeding on County Road #22 haS been
2. The deck of the player'S Bridge on county Road #45 in yarmouth
completed.
Township haS been completed with the bridge reopened fo~
traffic.
WE RECoMMEND:
I. That a by_law be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to sign
an agreement between the county of Elgin and cen-Tal InvestmentS
Limited owners of a portion of Lot II, concession VIII, yarmouth
Township setting forth the requirementS of. the County of Elgin
with regard to entrances from county Road #28 onto their property
and an agreement dividing costS between the owners and the
county of Elgin for improvementS including curb and gutter,
pavement and drainage adjacent to their property.
AS cen-Tal InvestmentS Limited haS signed the ag~eement there
will be no need for an appeal to the ontario Municipal Board
ove~ the Township of Yarmouth' s rezoning of ,the p~operty.
county solicitor's opinion of october 8, 1985 as the county'S
position rega~ding the determination by the ontario Municipal
continued · · · · ·
2. That the ontario Municipal Board be forwa~ded a copy of the
PAGE 2.
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD coMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT _ OCTOBER SESSION 1985
- ,-- -=-=--;...--
2.
continued ·
Board of the proper amount of liability insurance that should
. . . .
be carried by the port Stanley Terminal Railway Incorporated.
(A copY of the county Solicitor's opinion to the county
Engineer is attached.)
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
---
CHAIRMAN
. ~
1- ~ent,essc-~ 13aws leT &!J. _ssod,a",es
Barrilte'l and Solicitorl
M,-rray J. Henneaaey, B.A., B.C.L.
1(. Stewart Bowlher, B.A., LL.B.
Stephen H. Gibson, B.A., LL.B.
Deborah-Anne Gibson, B.A., LL.B.
October 8, 1985
Robert G. Moore
Engineer and Road Superintendent
79 Stanley Street
Court House
St. Thomas, Ontario
NSR 3Gl
Re: File No. 5113
Dear Sir:
We have reviewed the letter received by the County from the
O.M.B. relative to the representations made to it by the
Port Stanley Terminal Railway.
It is our opinion that the determination of the adequacy or
inadequacy of insurance can only be made after a careful
examination of statistical data relative to the operation in
question or similar operations. This data would be more
readily available to the O.M.B. which appears to have
jurisdiction over provincial or local railways.
It is also my opinion that the onus of determining the
amount of insurance should not rest with the County as the
County is not a participant in the operation.
In any event it is Qur opinion that unless it can be
established that the County was negligent in any of its
actions relative to the operation of the railway it cannot
be liable should an accident occur. If an accident should
occur on a County Road Allowance by reason of the condition
of the road caused by the railway crossing or an other cause
then there may be a liability upon the County if negligence
by the County can be established.
Yours V~;\::~lYl
:::~~~WS::R & ASS~I~~
\\ -~
~ray J. Hennessey ,
MJH:td
"
108 Centre Street, P.O. Box 648, St. Thom.l, Ontario N6P 3V6 (619) 633..3310
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
THIRD REPORT
SEPTEMBER SESSION
L 9 8 5
TO THE WARDEN AND CHAIRMAN OF THE COtJNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL
YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS:
WE RECOMMEND:
1. That the County of Elgin Road Committee be empowered to make
objection to the Ontario Municipal Board regarding the passing
by the Township of Yarmouth of By-Laws #2891 and #2893 being
13y-Laws applying to the rezoning of a portion of Lot 11, Con-
cession VIII, Yarmouth Township and that if the objection is
made to the Ontario Municipal Board the Road CUll~llittee be
empow~red to remove this objection if in the opinion of the
Road Committee the owners of the property enter intc) a satis-
factory development agreement with the County of Elgin and the
actions of Road Committee be reported to Council at the next
meeting of Council.
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
CHAIRMAN
comrt'f OF f,LG1.~ ROAD GO~~E
~
sF:l"t~ER Sf,SS1.~
1985
'to 'tHE VlARDEN l\l!lD ~ERS OF 'tllf, cQ1.lll't'f OF f,LG1.~ CO\mC1.L
'fOUR ROAD C~'ftf,f, Rf,l'OR'tS ~ 110LLO'<lS~
1NE RECO~'ND ~
That a by~la'" be passed authOt:izing the 'Aat:den and Clet:k to
~"a ,('~..~~,v of f,lgin and
sign an agt:eement bet",een ....- ~u~.._'
d ~at:io ChiricO ownet:s of
'Aillioon 'Aiebenga, John Volekaet:tan
. f ,. nt 10 concession V1.1.1., 'fa"Cll\OUth 'townshiP,
a po~t~on 0 ~ '
setting forth the t:equit:etnentS of the Count'! of Elgin with
n, d #28 ontO tbei~
t:egat:d to entt:ances ft:om count'! ...oa
pt:opet:ty and an agreement dividing costS bet",een the ownet:s
and the count'! fot: i11ll?t:ovementS includ,ing cut:b and guttet:,
paving and, dt:ainage adjaCent to the pt:opet:ty.
ALL 011 W\\1.Q\ 1.S Rf,S?f,CtVULL'f SUmU-'t'tf,D
1.
C\\A1.~
cOUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
~-~ - --.",.~. - -""= ",=:'
FIRST REPORT
--- -
SEPTEMBE~ SESSION
198\5
TO THE WARDEN AND cHAIBMAN OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL
yoUR ROAD COMMiTTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS:
I. work on the port Burwell Bridge deck other than minor crack sealing
and curing work haS been completed and the bridge reopened to
traffic. It was found that the bridge deck waS in an extrede state
of deterioration and further postponement of the work could \have
resulted in repair work being required on the main girderS ~S well.
We have extended the contract of McKay-Cocker Structures Li
(contractors for the port Burwell Bridge) for similar deck
on the player's Bridge on County Road #45 in yarmouth Towns
$
600.00
folloWS:
Site, Office Bonds, Etc.
concrete, Supplied and Placed - 110 Metres @ $180.00
per metre
Lump sum _ Cure, Seal, Etc.
~'~O'OO
3,500.00
-
$23,QOO.00
TOTAl.J
thiS concrete price is $20.00 per metre leSS than the work
port Burwell Bridge. The county of Elgin will supplY and p~ace
reinforcing steel, the expansion joint and remOve deteriora\d
concrete ·
The bridge is presentlY closed and work is underway. The
deterioration of the deck is not nearly as extensive as thaJ of
the port BUrwell Bridge. The bridge will be reopened by
2. We have accepted the tender of Nottingham' s Truck Service L~ited
of Hagersville, Ontario at $25,109.36 for an International 1 Ton
Double cab Truck and Flat Rack with the county's 1977 Doubl' cab
Truck as a trade-in. No local tenders were received. It i~
mid_october ·
hoped to receive delivery before Christmas.
continued · · ·
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT - SEPTEMBER SESSION 1985
PAGE 2.
3. The Engineer has been authorized to investigate various Job
Development Progral.1ul.1es of Employment and, Immigration Canada and
if any appear suitable for County road purposes to make an
application for the grants.
4. Walmsley Bros. Limited have complete.d their paving contracts
with the County of Elgin other than paving for the Village of
Dutton which is a portion of Contract 'D' and for base paving
on County Road #22 at County Road #45.
5. Construction work on County Road #22 at County Road #45 is
expected to start shortly (September 10th).
6. The Engineer has been authorized to proceed with plans,
engineering and land purchase for 1986 construction work on
County Road #45 in Malahide Township between Highway #13 and
County Road #40. Outside surveying has been completed. It
is expected that engineering work, registry office searches and
design will be done in the next few months and land purchase
will start by late Fall.
WE RECOMMEND:
1. That we renew the lease of the University of Western Ontario to
September 30, 1989 for the portion of Lot s 23 and 2l~, South of
the Old Lake Road as shown on Plan D769, Concession I, Ya1;mouth
Township, total area of approximately 10 acres.
The University of Western Ontario leased this land about 15 years
ago for use of their geography classes to study soil erosion.
2. That a by-law be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to sign
an agreement with George L. Tapsell, William Douglas McVety and
Edwin Thomas Banghart to allow them to tap into the Ontario
Ministry of the Environment water line on County Road #29 and
place a water line along the road allowance opposite Lot 3,
Range I, South of Edgeware Road, Yarmouth Township.
This agreement will be similar to other agreements allowing
private water lines on County roads.
Continued . . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT - SEPTEMBER SESSION 1985
PAGE 3.
3. That we make a submission to the hearing called by the Ontario
Energy Board to enquire into the forms of Natural Gas franchises.
The submission to be made either on behalf of the ,County alone or
in conjunction with other cities or counties and that the Engineer
be authorized to make representation as required on behalf of the
County, with any presentation being reviewed by the County of
Elgin Road Committee prior to presentation to the Board unless it
is part of a group submission.
It is expected that the County will be able to join with the
Counties of Essex, Kent, Lambton, Middlesex and the Cities of
St. Thomas, London, Sarnia, Chatham and Windsor to make this
presentation. These municipalities have met on a number of
occasions to discuss the cost of movement of natural gas lines
for municipal works construction and have made several
presentations to the Energy Board in the past 2 years.
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
CHAIRMAN
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 12, 1985
P AG E 1.
Thursday, September 12, 1985 at 9:00 a.m. in conjunction with County council.
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on
All members were present except Reeve Stewart. Also present was the Engineer.
a Development Agreement with William Wiebenga, John Volekaert and Mario chirico
The Engineer, Chairman and Reeve Mopteith reported on negotiations for
on their property on Lot 10, Concession VIII, Yarmouth Township.
Mr. Doug Gunn, County Solicitor with minor ammendments made at the request of
The Agreement had been drawn up by the Engineer and reviewed by
the owners.
The Agreement included:
(a) An agreement to sell 17 feet of land to the County to widen
County Road #28.
(b) The owners to pay the County for the installation of curb and
gutter.
(c) twenty-four (24 Yfeet of pavement from centre line.
(d) Location of entrance way.
(e ) Gr anul ar shoul der ..
(f) The movement as required of a hydro pole.
(g) The reshaping of the property behind the curb to facilitate
outlets from them. It was agreed that the cost to the owners would not
The County would pay for the installation of two catch basins and
drainage ..
exceed $6,000.00 and that the owners would supply an irrevocable letter of
credit to the County for the work.
recommendation to County council was recommended.
The Agreement had been signed by the owners and acceptance and
"MOVED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED
AUTHORIZING THE WARDEN AND CLERK TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN AND WILLIAM WIEBENGA,
CONtINUED .. · .. ..
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 12, 1985
PAGE 2.
"MOVED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: D.PEROVlCH
CONTINUED...
J01:1N VOLEKAERT AND MARIO CHIRICO OWNERS OF A PORTION OF LOT lO,
CONCESSION VlIl, yABMouTH TOWNSHIP. THE AGREEMENT TO SET oUT
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY WITH REGARD TO
ENTRANCES ONTO COUNTY ROAD #28 AND THE ASSUMPTION BY THE OWNERS OF
CERTAIN COSTS OF WIDENING COUNTY ROAD #28 AND THE SALE OF PROPERTY
TO THE COUNTY TO WIDEN COUNTY ROAD #28.
CARRIED ."
north-west corner; Lot II, concession VIII, yarmouth Township owned by
cen-Tal InvestmentS Limited. The county of Elgin Land Division committee had
The Engineer and Chairman reported with regard to the property on the
agreed to a severance subject to the conditionS of the County regarding road
widening, drainage, curb and gutter and pavement widening, etc.
however in the opinion of Mr. Doug Gunn, County Solicitor the one by_law which
included site plan control on the property waS invalid as the by-law referred
The Township of yarmouth had passed tWO by_lawS rezoning the property,
to Section 40 of the 1983 planning Act which had not as yet been proclaimed.
AS the County' s requirementS were not covered in the Act and the Township had
passed the rezoning by_laW Mr. cunn recommended that if the county could not
reach an agreement with the owners of the property for a development agreement
the county should appeal both rezoning by_lawS to the OntariO Municipal Board.
agreement with Cen-Tal InvestmentS Limited should be similar to the agreement
previouSlY concluded with regard to the property on Lot 10, concession VIII,
After some diSCUssion the committee felt that the development
Yarmouth Township owned by William Wiebenga, John volekaert and Mario ChiriCO
as the development agreement had been signed by the owners and appeared fair
and reasonable to the Committee.
---",
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 12, 1985
PAGE 3.
"MOVED BY: K. E. MINTEITH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE ENGINEER, CHAIRMAN AND THE WARDEN (OR THEIR DESIGNATES) BE
AUTHORIZED TO MEET WITH AND NEGOTIATE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH
THE OWNERS OF A PORTION OF LOT 11, CONCESSION VIII, YARMOUTH TOWNSHIP.
(CEN-TAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED)
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD
COMMITTEE BE EMPOWERED TO MAKE OBJECTION TO THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL
BOARD REGARDING THE PASSING BY THE TOWNSHIP OF YARMOUTH OF
BY-LAWS #2891 AND #2893 BEING BY-LAWS APPLYING TO THE REZONING
OF A PORTION OF LOT 11, CONCESSION VIII, YARMOUTH TOWNSHIP AND THAT
IF AN OBJECTION IS MADE TO THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD THE ROAD
COMMITTEE BE EMPOWERED TO REMOVE THIS OBJECTION IF IN THE OPINION
OF THE ROAD COMMITTEE THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY ENTER INTO A
SATISFACTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF ELGIN AND THE
ACTIONS OF ROAD COMMITTEE BE REPORTED TO COUNCIL AT THE NEXT MEETING
OF COUNCIL.
CARRIED."
The 35 day appeal period for the Yarmouth Township by-laws would run
out on October 14th and a meeting of the Road CUHul1ittee wou1 d be required prior
to then if County Council gave their approval to the Cormnitteets resolution.
"MOVED BY:
C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT WE ADJOURN TO FRIDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1985 AT 9:00 A.M.
CARRIED."
CHAIRMAN
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
PAGE 1.
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on
Thursday"September 5,1985 at 9:00 a.m. All members were present. Also present
w~s Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the
Engineer.
"MOVED BY,: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1985 BE APPROVED.
CARRIED."
THE ENGINEER REPORTED AS FOLLOWS:
1. After consultation with the Warden and Chairman a quotation had been solicited
from McKay-Cocker Structures Limited as an extention'of their repair work on
the Port Burwell Bridge for the deck repair work necessary at the Player's
Bridge.
McKay-Cocker Structures Limited would place concrete at $20.00 per metre less
on the Player's Bridge than they had on the Port Burwell Bridge.
Inasmuch as funds were available and reinforcing steel and expansion joints
could be obtained on short notice the Engineer had been authorized to
proceed with the work.
"MOVED BY.: R.J. LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT WE EXTEND THE CONTRACT OF MCKAY-COCKER STRUCTURES LIMITED ON THE
PORT BURWELL BRIDGE REPAIRS FOR DECK REPAIRS AT THE PLAYER'S BRIDGE ON
COUNTY ROAD #45 AS FOLLOWS:
1. SITE OFFICE, BONDS, ETC.
$
600.00
2. CONCRETE SUPPLIED, PLACED, ETC. (110 CUBIC METRES
@ $180.00 PER METRE)
19,800.00
3. LUMP SUM - CORE AND SEAL.
3,500.00
TOTAL
$23,900.00
CARRIED ."
2. Work at the International Plowing Match site continued with County forces
erecting snow fence and gates.
Directional signing on County roads was nearly completed with signing
Continued . . .
s't. 'tH~s, Ot'\'tARIO
SEpTml-BER 5, 1.985
'P AGE 2.
o and
o h by the 1:otinist,:Y of 'transportat1.on
continuing on the King' s H1.g ",a"j
coromunicatiOns ·
Entrances had been put in
.,hich would remain afte': the
,:esult of the wet weather most of theSe
tOeS most of
d.#26 to varioUs p,:oper 1. ,
on countY Roa
o s AS a
plowing ~atch to service propert1.e ·
ent,:anceS ",ere ver"j soft and it ",as
from uunn"i1Je to place
o de': able amount of li1l\estone
arY to naul a conS1.
neceSs 0 d' satisfactory condition
on theSe entranceS to enSure that they ,:ema1.ne 1.n
d t-raf.fic.
o inate
fo-r ant1..C t" .led at the
ld al so be p1.. .c the
e ~ou be-r OL 0
Li1I\eston ointed a mem ASSociat1.on
had been apP . nlo'VJffien' s -
o ee-r ~ta-r1..0 L
The "E,ng1..n f the vp
he-rs 0 0 e
d .c t~O rnem "'" 'C'~ecut1..V ·
se o~ 0 ~atC" D 0 for
waS comPo I plo"'1.ng 0 ial pol1.Ce
.c the Loca 00 'P-rOV1..nc
b -rS OL onta-r1..
d t"'O mem e d with the ol ble fo':
an . __..... r,om-plete _...",,1'\ld be ava1.. a
countY Ga,:age for an emergenc"j.
Disaste,: CQ1l<l\ittee ",hich
"E,~ecutive
3.
4.
p,J:,:angementS had p,,"" -
o atel Y 25 officer S
t,:affic di,:ection; approX1.m
traffic di,:ection.
w assigned to the Plo'iling
that the count"j keep a c,:e
1.t would be neceSsa,:Y 0 d s flashers' ope,:ate a s",eepe':,
_ et:ect ba-r-r1..ca e ,
~atch a,:ea to move S1.gns,
grade': and othe': countY equipment. 0 ould be
bOn the area so that 1.t c
o ould have to e 1.
'the countY eqU1.pntent '"
5.
6.
obtained on sno,:t notice. d #52 would be tUrned
o Road and county Roa
The flashing lightS on 'J/ell1.ngton
tOI septembe,: 20th.
9th and ",oul d run un 1.
on september ,0 . f TransportatiOn and
dnuipment belonged to the ~1.n1.st':Y 0
_ back fo-r an
_ "'" d to have l..t .
uA'<1' 'ViT1.. S1.~e
1.
installatiOn in p.u~e
ld be t:emoved
All signS, etc., wou
ld be sold to the
~atch. Directional signS ",ou
$3.00 each.
'J/o,:k on the county Einibit was nearl"j
o . 'the cost of the sc,:eens ",as
and sc,:eens ,:ece1.ved. (
C t~ -road use- )
-1 ble for futu,:e oun J
cou1 d be ava1.. a
bet: 13th 'ViTith
"ld be erected on septem
The sc-reens ~o.....
1 t d with nictUres nea,:IY mounted
comp e e t"
$300.00 each. .,hich
B.
the pictUres being
placed late on september 16th.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
PAGE 3.
Council meeting and understood that the council would discUSS the Sparta pit
The Engineer reported that he had attended a recent Township of Yarmouth
Road Agreement conditions with their Road superintendent and the Road
superintendent would contact the County Engineer so that further negotiations
communications to submit a paper abstract on the failure of pipe arch
The Engineer had been requested by the Ministry of Transportation and
could take place.
culvertS to the Second International conference on Short and Medium Span
Bridges to be held in Ottawa in August 1986.
THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLCYilS:
I. work had been completed at the port Burwell Bridge.
2. Asphalt patching on County Road #3 had been completed by Walmsley BroS.
Limited. cranular shouldering would be done as soon .as construction
work on county Road #22 waS completed.
summer including County Road #52, county Road #32 and County Road #42.
3. Shouldering haS been completed on other roads which had been paved this
4. ChittiCk construction had crushed approximatelY 20,000 cubic yards of
5. One of the youth Corps programme workers had an accident with the
gravel at the county's Pleasant Valley pit and had moved out.
county'S Truck #110 (half ton pickUP) leaving the road and hitt~ng a
\
\
hydro pole causing $4,000 damage to the truck. The insurance cqmpany
had been notified and the employee discharged.
on work on county Road #25, county Road #26, County Road ill an4 County
\
Road #52 for the Plowing Match opening.
I
6. GraSs cutting had been slowed by heavY rains and a blitz waS being placed
7. White edge pavement marking in East Elgin waS nearlY completed.
8. Repairs were being made to the piers on the Middlemiss Bridge and repairs
\
would be made to the floor of the Tates Bridge.
10. Expenditures appeared to be within estimates with approximatelY I 3.2
I
\
9. cravel roads had been regraded and most of them salt brined.
million dollars having been expended to date.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
PAGE 4.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: K. E. MoNTEITH
THAT THE FOLLOWING PAYLISTS BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT:
PAYLIST NUMBER 47 AMOUNTING TO $66,626.17
P AYLIST NUMBER 48 AMOUNTING TO $l, 268 · 47
PAYLIST NUMBER 49 AMOUNTING TO $63,143.65
PAYLIST NUMBER 50 AMOUNTING TO $279,031.l5
CARRI ED ."
CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS:
I. To John Wise, M.P. regarding the poor condition of Chesapeake and Ohio
2. The Ministry of Transportation and CotllJllUnications announcing the
Railway company crossings in West Elgin, nO reply had been received.
appointment of Mr. G. R. Browning as Director of the southwestern
3. From the Ministry of Transportation and communications stating that they
Region.
would place directional signS to the police college on Highway #73
north of county Road #52 directing traffic via County Road #52.
4. The Township of Bayham rezoning land for a commercial greenhouse on
5. From the Township of Aldborough rezoning property for agricultUral
County Road #46 in corinth.
6. Township of Malahide with tWO rezoningS not on County roads.
purposes in Concession 1.
7. Township of Yarmouth with notice of rezonings as followS:
(a) property in Sparta on County Road #27 for the sale of antiques. It
(b) property on Highway #4 between County Road #45 and County Road 1f51
was noted that the by_law required nine off_street parking spaces.
on the east side for the sale of small lawn and farm tractors.
(c) The former Thompson Trucking property on Highway #3 for a fuel
depot.
Cont inued · · ·
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
PAGE 5.
7. (d) Property at the intersection of County Road #22 and county Road #24 as
a truck terminal. Reeve Haddow noted that the rezoning would legalize
an existing use and that the owner had tWO or three trucks.
8. petro canada with their commentS on the provincial Government'S tlSpills Bill".
It waS noted that under the proposed legislation the municipalitieS would be
able to claim back their costS ,if they were forced to clean up a spill. The
incident of spillage by Sterling Fuels on County Road #53 in Aylmer was
recalled, fortUnatelY Sterling Fuels paid the County for their wo~k.
committee in response to questioning by the committee on the canadian National
Rails intentions for repair of railway crossings in Elgin county.
The Engineer stated he had written to the Railway Transport Committee
commending the canadian National Rail on their recent works stating that the
County had co_operated with the canadian National Rail by lending them
equipment to assist them in their work and that the county was hopeful that
the canadian National Rail would continue to make improvementS to those
conrail crossings that had not already been done, including county Road #8 in
DUtton and county Road #40 in springfield.
Tenders were as attached for the replacement of county Truck #74. It waS
9. A copy of a letter from the canadian National Railway to the Railway Transport
noted that no local dealers tendered and that the Ford company had decided
about a month ago not to produce the type of truck required by the County and at
the present time only InternatiOnal Harvester waS producing it.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT THE TENDER OF NOTTINGflAMS TRUCK SERVICE LIMITED BE ACCEPTED AT $25, 109 · 36
FOR AN INTERNATIONAL MODEL 1654 SERIES TRUCK AND FLAT RACK WITH COUNTY TRUCK #74
AS A TRADE-IN; PROVINCIAL SALES TAX EXTRA IF APPLICABLE.
CARRIED ."
ST. T1:l0MA.S, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
PAGE 6.
to Upgrade the county' s pavement marking equipment, (which waS noW over 18 years
The Engineer reported that he obtained a quotation from Ibis productS Limited
old) however the quotation was more than ezpected and further negotiations would
be required.
on a used cabover truck that would not only serve for pavement marking but also as
the Engineer SUggested that the Upgraded pavement marking, equipment be placed
a sander truck in the Winter. At present t1).e pavement marking equipment waS on a
Winter would likely be the last Winter in which they would be useful. FUrther
AS tWO of the county'S sander truckS were deteriorating rapidlY the coming
1966 Ford truck.
discUssions would be held at the next meeting.
DUnwich solicitors requested the approval of the closing of
correspondence from Cockburn, Foster, C~dmore and Kiteley, Township of
former county
Road #13 which had been reverted to the To~ship of DUnwich and the Village
of DUtton many years ago.
"MOVED B'l: C. R. mLLSEY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVlGll
THAT THE VlLL/'.GE OF DUTTON AND THE TOWNSHIP OF DuNWIGll BE ADVISED THAT THE
COUNTY OF ELGIN HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE CLOSURE AND SALE OF THE ROAD
ALLc:MANCE BETWEEN LOT 14, CONCESSION' A' , VILLAGE OF DUTTON AND LOT 14,
CONCESSION V, SOUTH OF 'A' , TOWNSHIP OF DuNWlGll AS SHOWN ON REFERENCE
pLAN llR~2717 AS PARTS I AND 2.
CARRIED."
permiSsion to install a water line on County Road #29 just west of the
correspondence was read from Edwin Banghart and ASSociateS requesting
canadian National Rail trackS.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
PAGE 7.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A By-LAW BE pASSED TO AUTHORIZE THE
WARDEN AND CLERK TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT wtTH GEORGE ALFRED TAPSELL,
WILLIAM DOUGLAS MCVETY AND EDWIN THOMAS BANGHART TO ALLOW THEM TO TAP INTO
THE oNTARIO MINISTRY OF THE ENVlRONMENTWATER LINE ON cO\lNTY ROAD #29 AND
pLACE A WATER LINE ALONG THE ROAD ALLOWANCE OPPOSITE LOT 3, RANGE 1, SOUTH
OF THEEDGEWARE ROAD, yARMOUTH TOWNSHIP.
CARRIED."
The Engineer noted that an advance notification had been received from
Immigration and EmPloyment canada regarding future Job Development
programmes.
"MOVED If{: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO INVESTIGATE THE JOB DEVELOpMENT PROGRAMME
OF EMPLOYMENT AND IMMIGRATION CANADA AN:D IF ANY APPEAR SUITABLE FOR COUNTY
ROAD pURPOSES TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR GR.AN'fS AVAILABLE.
CARRIED."
Ontario EnergY Board would hold publiC hear:ings into the form of Natural GaS
correspondence was read from Mr. James \McGUigan, M.P.P, stating that the
franchise agreementS and certificates of public convenience and necessity.
This hearing was a direct result of the Western Ontario Counties appeal to
Cabinet regarding the franchise agreements:of the County of Lambton and the
Town of Blenheim and the Union GaS steadfast position in asking municipalitieS
to pay a portion of the cost of moving gas :pipe lineS for construction
purpo se s.
The County of Elgin had been a member of the grOUP of municipalities for
the past twO years and the Engineer and tW~ council memberS had been
representing the county on this matter. The Engineer expected that the grOUP
as a whole would make a presentatiOn, however if the grOUP as a whole did not
wish to make a presentation the county acttng along should do so.
ST. 'nloMAS, ONTARIO
SE'P'tEMBER 5, 1985
t? AGE 8.
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED BY: }1. H. STEWART
'tHAT WE RECQMMEND TO colJNT':l COUNCIL 'tHAT WE l:1AJ.ZE A SUBMISS'!:-ON TO 'nlE HEARING
CALLED WI: THE ONTARIO ENERG'l BOARD TO ENQ\l1.RE INTO 'nlE FQRi:\.S OF NATURAL GAS
FRPJ'lCtILSE AGRE~TS.
'nlE SUmUSSION TO BE MA-DE EITHER ON 'BEHALF OF THE colJNT':l ALONE OR 1N
CONJU1'1CTION VlI'nl 'nlE oTHER couNTIES OR CITIES AND THAT THE\ ENGINEER 'BE
AUTHORIZED TO l:1AJ.ZE REPRESENTATIoN AS REQUIRED ON 'BEHALF OF\ THE couNTY, 'BUT
ALL PRESENTATIONS 'BE REvIEWED BY 'nlE ROAD COMMlTTEE PRIOR \to PRESENTATION
TO 'nlE 'BOARD, UNLESS IT IS PART OF A GROU1' SUmUSS10N.
CARR1BD ."
R. J. LAVERBAU
Mr. }1. J. Hennessey, County Solicitor had been on holidayS and thuS had not
.. .th regard td the countY!S
d th co~ittee!S request for an op~n~on ~
anE','Were e U"'"
.' . d" limit fo-r the port Stanley Te:rminal Rail
legal pos~t~on ~n reco~en ~ng a
. 1..,{' . . 1 Boarid.
Inco-rpo-rated liability insurance to the Ontar~o ~un~c~pa '
cor-respondence had been received from the Township of Ya~outh asking the
. . h 1 " of the -road allowance bet~en'LotS 8 and 9,
County'S op~n~on on t e c os~ng
concession ZIV adjaCent to the }1cInnis property.
The CQ1Ol\\ittee instructed the Engineer to advise the Townsl\.ip of ya-rmouth
that until a cor-ridor had been picked to connect the County ot Elgin RadiO
& 1..,{'ddlesex Hubre~ Road at or nea-r the Co~nty boUnda-ry
Road to the County 0' ".1- }
the -road allowance should not be closed as the-re is a possibility that it
might be -requi-red fo-r a portion of the dive-rsion.
on their official plan and that Mr' H. S. GiO~on,
'd t t of the CountY's future intentions for road
Engineer to prov~ e a sta emen
widening for County roads as required bY section 40 of the PI\>.nning Act.
t h d been forwarded ~ich stated that there might be a need
A statemen a
" " d if a! local
for road widening on variOUS roads from t~me to t~me an '
d b h c ty road "idening might be
municipal street or road waS assume y t e oun ,
required to improve or divert it as "ell.
. t d that the TownshiP of Yarmouth had h~ld a meeting
The Bng~neer repor e
" "tanner haiil requested the
ST. THoMAS, ON'l'hRIO
SEPT~BER 5, 1985
'PAGE 9.
. s the Engtneer stated that legi~latton had not
In answe-r to membe-rs que-r1.e
t o-r a RegiOn to conttol
d by the province to enable the coun Y
yet been passe
d otbe-r tban through a local roU~icipalitteS'
prtvate accesses to county roa s
site rlan control By~Law.
The Engineer repO-rted on potential
~d sout~west inte-rsection of
develOpment of the p-rop~rttes at the
county Road #28 and ~ighway #3.
had been p-reviOuSIY Qwned by the
acres in a-re~) and had
Jobn Volekaett and
Ma-rio Chi-ricO.
d by'.. cen..Tal
. presentlY o~ne .
south~east corne-r 1. s
The p-roperty on the _ ~, - - .",,,l Invest~entS Limited
fe-r-riman;
At the p-resent time it
to a co-rpo-ration known as tbe DOdge
\ s "Ond Motel. "'\:,......- P
60 to 80 rOom JourneY "
. d . t at the p-re5e1~""
. . f. theY could aVO 1.. 1..
-restau-rant bUS1.neSs 1.
. . s had been beld ",ith both g-rouP\s.
Some preliminary d1.SCuSS1.on
",as understood that thiS property 'itl's under optton
G-roup who ",ere inte-rested ~n buildtng a
..1': d not wish to get iintO the
_ ,0:;.':/ u....
The TownshiP of 'ia-rmouth had passed a
f county Road #28 and Highway #3. '):ne
south~west co-rne-r 0
b 16th and it ",ould be ne.cessa-ry to" ~_.
thiS by~laW ,""uld -run out on septem e-r ' '
s so that a development ag-reement m1.ght be
countY to meet witb tbe owne-r ..'
.' b d gutte-r, pavement widen~ng, etc., 1.f
negotiated fo-r land W1-den1.ng, cur an
. & it that thiS ",as deSi-rable.
the Road Corom'-ttee .e
by~la'" rezoning the ~-ropertY on tbe
.:. appeal pe-riod fo-r
The Enginee-r alSO
h had been unable to -reai;,h
-repo-rted that e
,.. and because of
~~licitO-r on land matter 0
. ~' '\\i"\\1S! Gunn.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
PAGE 10.
"MOIJ'ED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT THE ENGINEER, PLUS CRIARMAN OR\WARDEN (OR THEIR DESIGt'!ATE) BE AUTHORIZED
TO MEET WITH GUNN AND ASSOCIATES RE~ARDING ANY AGREEMENTS WITH THE OWNERS OF
A PORTION OF LOT 10 AND LOT 11, CONGESSION VIl1, yARMOUTH 1 OWN SHIP AND THE
coUNTY OF ELGIN.
CARRIED.ll
"MOIJ'ED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT THE ENGINEER, THE CHAIRMAN AND! WARDEN BE AUTHORIZED Tl\) MEET WITH AND
NEGOTIATE WITH THE OWNERS OF THE PORTION OF LOT 10 AND LOT 11,
CONCESSION VIl1, YARMOUTH TOWNSHIP \~OR A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REGARDING
COUNTY ROAD #28.
CARRIED .'1
some discUssion took place regarding the property owned by' cen-Tal InvestmentS
Limited. Correspondence waS read from r' M. H. Beaudry in hiS capacity as
Manager of the Economic Development corooration of the City of: St. Thomas requesting
that the county be lenient with requirementS toward the DOdge Group ina~uch as the
proposed development would provide a I
The Committee members considered h~S letter as that of an iinterested
scale hotel/motel complex which the
community had been trying to encourage
some time.
property o"Wller.
After some diSCUssion the Engineer \was instructed to "fact, find" on thiS
development as well as it ~as understo~d that yarmouth Township might paSs a
by_law rezoning the cen-Tal Investmenti Limited property for ~he motel complex
on september 9th.
Land Division meeting and request as a condition of severance!of a portion of the
The Chairman waS authorized to att~nd with the Engineer the county of Elgin
cen-Tal InvestmentS Limited property t~at the county acquire land widening and
request similar drainage, curb and gut,er and paving work, et<;., as asked for in
the Wiebenga_VOlekaert-Chirico property agreement that the County waS asking for.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
PAGE 11.
t'MOVED BY:
R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN AND TUESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 1985
AT 9 :00 A.M.
CARRIED."
-
--
CHAIRMAN
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
AUGUST 9, 1985
PAGE 1.
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on
Friday, August 9, 1985 at 9:00 a.m. All members were present except
Reeves Stewart and Brooks. Also present was Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry
of Transportation and Communications, the Engineer and Assistant Engineer.
"MOVED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JULY 9, 1985 BE APPROVED.
CARRIED."
THE ENGINEERS REPORTED AS FOLLOWS:
1. The As si stant Engineer reported that the floor had been poured on the
Port Burwell Bridge and the paving for the approach and the removal of
the Jersey Barrier would be done next week with the bridge opening for
traffic by the weekend.
2. Hot mix paving, other than that for the Villages of Rodney and Dutton;
and patching on County Road #3 had been completed.
3. Surface treatment work had been completed.
4. Further inspection of pipe arch culverts had shown more cracks in some
culverts, among them the Bobier Culvert, County Road #16 in Dunwich and
several Township culverts.
A meeting would be held with Mr. K. L. Kleinsteiber of the Ministry of
Transportation and Communications shortly to discuss pipe arch culvert
failures.
5. Excavation of the failed pipe arch culvert on the Dereham-North Dorchester
Townline indicated that it had been improperly backfilled with little if
any gravel around it.
6. The Ministry of Transportation and CUlluuunications would erect 4 foot
"stop signs" at the intersection of Highway #19 and County Road #45.
7. The Engineer had met with Mr. James McGuigan, M.P.P., East Kent-West Elgin
regarding future road funding for Counties and Townships and also stressed
the importance to the County of continued availablility of work programmes.
Continued . . . .
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
AUGUST 9, 1985
PAGE 2.
7. Continued....
Also discussed was the Western Ontario Municipalities intervention in the appeal
to the Cabinet by the County of Lambton over the dismissal of their franchise
agreement with Union Gas by the Ontario Energy Board.
THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Weed cutting was proceeding slowly because of the high turn over of programme
labour.
2. Some cattail spraying had been done and more would be.
3. Chittick Construction had been crushing gravel at the PLeasant Valley Pit
again.
4. Signs were being prepared for the International Plowing Match. Entrances had
been placed on County Road #26 for the Plowing Match. Some snow fence had
been erected.
5. Repairs had been completed on the Brown Drain Culvert on County Road #8 in
Dutton.
6. The St. George Street Hill (County Road #26) had been trimmed back and the
shoulder widened south of the Canadian National Railway tracks.
7. A considerable number of minor drainage jobs had been done.
8. Shouldering was underway on roads that had been hot mix paved. As soon as
they were completed construction would be started on County Road #22 at
County Road #45. Culvert installation on County Road #22 would start next
week.
9. Although some gravel roads were rough, because of the lack of rain, the
Superintendents were reluctant to have them graded as they felt that they
would be in better condition before grading than after. Some grading
might be done after the next heavy rain.
10. A meeting on the Taylor Drain on County Road #45 in Malahide Township had
been held and the Drainage Engineer would complete his report as soon as
possible.
11. Expenditures to date were in line with budgeted amounts.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
AUGUST 9, 1985
PAGE 3.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT:
PAYLIST NUMBER 41 AMOUNTING TO $68,241.72
PAYLIST NUMBER 42 AMOUNTING TO $211.80
PAYLIST NUMBER 43 AMOUNTING TO $73,617.47
PAYLIST NUMBER 44 AMOUNTING TO $67,308.51
PAYLIST NUMBER 45 AMOUNTING TO $504.43
PAYLIST NUMBER 46 AMOUNTING TO $473,126.79
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO MAKE APBLICATION FOR I:"J'TERIM SUBSIDY
PAYMENT FROM THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS WHEN
REQUIRED, AND THAT THE CHAIRMAN BE AUTHORIZiED TO SIGN THI:, APPLICATION.
CARRIED ."
CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS:
1. From Todgham and Case, Engineers of Chatham thanking Coun~y personnel for
supplying information on the Purcell Drain iin Aldborough Township.
2. Newspaper articles noted as follows:
(a) Ontario Hydro announcing that they wou!ld apply for an Environmental
Hearing on the proposed route for tra~smission lines to London from
I
Nanticoke and the Bruce Nuclear Statiqn.
I
(b) The suit against the Federal Government by farmers e:lst of
I
Port Burwell for the erosion of their Iland:! by Lake Etie had been
I
di smi s sed.
I
(c) The Lynhurst sewers would not go ahea~ unless a diff~rent funding
arrangement was available.
(d)
I
The St. Clair County of Michigan Road ICorrnnission lia')ility insurance
I
I
I
had increased in one year from $84,000 to $270,000.
I
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
AUGUST 9, 1985
PAGE 4.
3.
. h h h d sold the ~allacetown
From the Ontario GOvernment stat1-ng t at t ey a
patJ:ol yard to M &. R farmS Limited for $41, 150.
From the port Stanley Terminal Rail IncorpoJ:ated including a certificate for
$2,000,000 liability insurance.
From the TownshiP of Bayham with a rezoning by~laW to rezone land neaJ:
c.ountY Road #43 in Richmond to rural~industrial.
From the Township of NoJ:th DOrchester with notice of a meeting foJ: an
Official ~lan Amendment.
. .c h . f r a minor vaJ:iance
From tbe TownshiP of yarmouth with not1-Ce o~ a ear1-ng 0
.c p J:t LOt 2 concession IV, '{a1:t1louth on the
foJ: 11J:. RobeJ:t BUtcber owner o~ a '
pJ:opeJ:ty next to the county Garage.
, ld ot be closer to the
l'lr. BUtcher wished to build a new garage, but 1-t WOU n
county' s propeJ:tY line than their present garage nor closer to county
Road f{51 than the hoUse is pJ:esentlY'
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
f the AdministratiVe BUilding
From the CleJ:k~Treasurer stating that changeS or
would have to be channeled tn-rough the ~J:opertY Cot!ll\ittee.
, to date on the changeS he had
The Engineer brought tbe Road cowro1-ttee up
-re<luested.
. h~' istry .of TransportatiOn
~r. Frank Clarke "as asked to deteJ:m1-ne t e 1-n
.' b . dy available for a telephone system.
and cororoun1-cat1-ons su S1-
. . I b d been expeJ:ienced
The Warden noted that some delaYS in J:eceiV1-ng mater1-a a
b t .t was still hoped to have tbe building completed by
by the contractor u 1-
mid.-'Novembe1: ·
from the canadian National Rail stating that they were repairing theiJ: line
between St. ThomaS and Glencoe and would replace the cJ:ossing on county
~(\..._", . c C.D'Otembe-r.
9.
the same time.
ld b . r ved as the crossing
The committee felt that the approaches shou e 1-mp 0
waS extJ:emelY rougb at the pJ:esent time.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
AUGUST 9, 1985
PAGE 5.
10. From the University of Western Ontario requesting the renewal of their lease
on Parts of Lots 23 and 24, Concession I, Yarmouth Township.
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT WE RENEW THE LEASE OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF WESTERN ONTARIO TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1989 FOR THAT PART OF LOT 23 AND LOT 24,
SOUTH OF THE OLD LAKE ROAD AS SHOWN ON PLAN D- 769, CONCESSION I, YARMOUTH
TOWNSHIP BEING APPROXIMATELY 10 ACRES.
CARRIED."
The condition of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Cvmpany road crossings in
West Elgin were discussed and the Engineer was instructed to discuss this
matter further with Mr. Reeder of the Canadian Transport CVLLuLdssion and if
necessary send letters to the Transport Minister, Mr. Don Mazankowski and
Mr. John Wise, M.P. as the Committee felt that the condition of these
crossings were going from bad to worse.
The Township of Yarmouth had been requested to rezone property on Highway #3
in the vicinity of County Road #28 (Centennial Avenue) for motel and restaurant
facilities.
The Engineer and Frank Clarke stated that the Central Planning Board some
years ago had suggested that County Road #28 be widened to four lanes between
Highway #3 and the proposed extension of Wellington Street.
Some Committee members felt that the developers should pay all the costs
for widening the road opposite the property to four lanes including drainage,
curb and gutters and paving.
"MOVED BY:
K. E. MONETITH
.-
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY TO MEET
WITH THE TOWNSHIP OF YARMOUTH AND DEVELOPERS IN THE CENTENNIAL AVENUE
AREA TO NEGOTIATE THE WIDENING, DRAINAGE, ETC., OF COUNTY ROAD #28.
CARRIED ."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
AUGUST 9, 1985
PAGE 6.
stating that they were not able to supplY help to erect snow fence at the
The Engineer reported that he had been approached by several municipalitieS
-...".....
International plowing Match at the present time. however they were willing to
lend materialS.
committee agreed that the county should proceed with the erection of the fence,
Inasmuch as the er~ctiOn of snow fence waS an immediate priority the
necessary gateS, etc., at the county'S expense and the materialS that the
county did not have should be borrowed, as available, from the local
municipalities. (this will inc~ease the county's bUdgeted expenditUre for the
project. )
lawye~ fo~ the Sparta pit road, however a numbe~ of the termS and conditions
A p~oposed ag~eement had been received from the Township of yarmouth'S
appeared to be impossible to fulfill. Reeve HaddOW indicated that most itemS
were negotiable.
appea~ed that very little work could be done at the pit this Fall and it was
The Engineer noted that as the matter had dragged on as long as it had it
unlikely that crushed gravel would be available f~om it for 1986 construction.
Truck #74 should be replaced as soon as possible as it waS in poor condition.
There waS approximatelY $40,000 still available in the NeW Machinery Budget.
"MOVED Jl'{: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: K. E. l10NTEITll
THAT TllE ENGINEER BE AUTll-ORIZED TO CALL TENDERS FOR A 2 TON DOUBLE cAB
STARE TRUCK TO REPLACE TRUCK ff/4.
CARRIED."
County comment on the port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated's request to
cor~espondence from the Ontario ~nicipal Board was read requesting that the
decrease their liability inSUrance from $5,000,000 to $2,000,000.
whethe~ the County would have any liability if the county concurre1 with this
The Engineer was inst,UCted to obtain the county solicitor's opinion as to
request as the County had'originallY requested the sum of $5,000,000 fo~
liability inSurance.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
AUGUST 9, 1985
PAGE 7.
construction programme. The Engineer requested that County Road #,+5 be
There waS not sufficient time to disCUSS the county' s complete 1986
designated for construction in 1986 so that engineering 'WOrk and land
purchase' could go ahead SO that it would be ready for work in 1986.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT TIlE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO PROCEED VlI'l'H pLANS, ENGINEERING AND
LAND PURCHASE 01'1 COUNTY ROAD #,+5 BETWEEN HIGHVlAY ff/3 AND COUNTY
ROAD #,+0 FOR 1986 CONSTRUCTION.
cARRIED."
"MOVED BY: K. E. MON'l'EITIl
SECONDED BY: C. R. VlILLSE'l
THAT WE ADJOUID1 TO THURSDAY, SEp']'El'03ER 5 AND TUESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 1985
BOTH AT 9 :00 A.M.
CARR1ED ."
----
C1:lA1RMAN
--',
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
~
JULY SESS10N
1985
'to THE WARDEN AND M~BERS Of 'tilE couNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL
YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS~
'WE RECOMMEND:
I. That a by_laW be passed to alloW the Warden and Clerk to sign
an agreement ~ith Richard L. Gallo~aY the owne~ of a po~tion
of Lot 9, Concession V, yarmouth 'township to ~un a ~ate~ line
along CountY Road #45 from the Elgin Area Wate~ services to
I
hi s propeJ:tY.
'the ag~eement to be in the standard form of a wate~ line
ag~eement between the County and p~ivate individualS.
ALL OF ~Ica IS RESPECfFULLY SUBM1TTED
C1:lA1RMAN
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JULY 9, 1985
PAGE 1.
TUesday, July 9, 1985 at 9:00 a.m. All members except Reeve perovich were
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on
present. Also present were the Engineer and Assistant Engineer.
"MOVED 1l'l: R. J. LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF JUNE 14 AND JUNE 26, 1985 BE
APPROVED ·
CARRI'ED ."
THE ENGINEER AND ASSISTANT ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE FOLLOWING:
I. McKay_cocker Structures Limited, the contractor for the port BUrwell Bridge
floor were presentlY installing the expansion joint and hoped to pour one
half of the neW deck next week. It would be near the end of the month
before the County could resume work on the other half as the neW concrete
2. Walmsley BroS. Limited were paving for the county of Oxford and would
deck would have to, set.
resume work for the county of Elgin on July 15th, starting on county
Road #42, east of port BUrwell and completing asphalt patches on County
Roads #42, #52 and #40 before doing work in West Elgin.
3. Silver creek costS to date were $677,628.
4. the Assistant Engineer reported on the recent inspection of pipe arch
culvertS, some of which had shown no signS of cracking in March were
nOW showing haunch cracking.
The Township of Aldborough had been instructed to shore another culvert.
It appeared that cracking of pipe arch culverts waS an ongoing procesS
and the Engineer stated that he felt that nO local area municipalitieS
should install pipe arch culvertS in the future because of thiS ongoing
problem.
It appeared that all pipe arch culvertS would sooner or later fail.
The twO pipe arch culvertS on Wellington Road which were nOW shored up
should be replaced in 1986.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JULY 9, 1985
PAGE 2.
1.
face treatment ~as underway with work fo~ yarmouth Township with
ntY Road #20 between Fingal and port Stanley having been completed.
5.
THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOL~S~
ss cutting was underWay.
second youth corps programme ~aS unde~waY with the men having been
3.
hi~ed for the programme.
Ma\lahide and DUnwich TownshipS had sp~ayed weeds on countY roadS.
county ~ould spot spray cattailS, pa~ticularlY on roads to the plo~ing
2.
6.
with salt b~ine had only been giving fair resultS because of
alternating drY and wet weather. The dust control budget would be
const~uction was coming sho~tlY to crush more gravel at the
Pleasant valley pit, as the 31,000 tonS previouSlY crushed
4.
5.
eeded.
8.
Sb\OUlde~ wo~k waS continuing on wellington Road.
s~ulde~ wo~k had been completed afte~ paving on the Rain'S Hill
~~ounty Road #33); Road 1f52 from Road #30 to Highway #74; county Road #39
(Ahatharo Street) 1'0rt ]lUr~ell; and a portion of county Road #32 north of
t1e police college.
county Road #31 would be e~ected shortlY'
in EaSt Elgin should be completed by the ~eekend and
7.
11.
~thin a feW dayS in West Elgin.
. _'~a erected at the InternatiOnal plowing ~atch site
9.
10.
14.
en weathe~ conditions did not allOW othe~ wo~k to be done.
Tl\e ~inistry of T~anspo~tation and c()!1lll1llnicatiOns had approved the
clunty. s Needs Study Update. No information was available as to the
f\nanCing for 1986.
. Leon Sharzer of l'ersonnel ~anagement Associat';s had done some
,terviews to ~ite job classificatiOns for sala~ied employees.
. h d b h 1d ...:r1.. th Mt Andy Snriet on the Orchard carroll Drain
A\meet~ng a een e w · r
a second d~aft of the drain ~aS exPected sho~tlY'
12.
13.
ST. TUOMAS, ONTARIO
JULY 9, 1985
'PAGE 3.
15.
A hole had been diSCovered under the pavement on county Road #8 at the
Brown Drain culvert and it ~ould be repaired as soon as possible.
p~epa~ations ~ere being made to underpin the culve~t as ~ell as the drain
had been deepened belo~ the concrete footings.
"MOVED 13Y:
c. R. mLLSE'l
SECONDED BY: M. H. S'tEl'lllRT
'U\A't 'U\E YOLLOWlNG l'AYL1.S'tS BE APPROVED FOR l'AYMENT:
PAYLIST NUMBER 34 AMoUNTING TO $61,651.00
PAYLIST NUMBER 36 AMouN'tING 'to $225.16
PAYLIS't NUMBER 37 AMOUNTING 'to $61 ,877.42
P AYLIS't Nm1BER 38 AMouN'tING TO $3 26 ,004. 5 3
PAYL1.S't NmreER 39 AM()\ll1T1.NG TO $449.12
P AYLIST Nm11\ER 40 AMouN'tING TO $415, 15 2.72
CARRIED ."
M~. H. Reeder of the Railway 'transport c~ission had inspected crossings
of the C & 0 Rail~aY and conrail in West Elgin. It waS expected that the
. u1d orde~ the C & 0 Railway to repair the c~ossings and five
Co'((l1U.1.ttee ,#0 .l-
. d' 1985
high priority crossings would have to be ~epaClre Cln ·
conrail had completed ~epairS on the c~ossings on county Road #14 at
1.ona, countY Road #3 in Rodney and would rebUild c~ossings on County Road #h.
at Black' s Lane and the Rent Townline thiS yea~.
They expected to repair the crossing on County Road #8 at DUtton early
in 1986 if it could not be done thiS fall.
The canadian National RailwaY. had been asked to make repai~S to the
. count'T noad #19 at Frome ~hich ~aS ext~emelY dange~OUS at the
c-roSS1.ng on J ~
present time.
The Engineer reported that the UtilitY c~ittee met on June 2Bth and
had been informed that the Ontario Ene~gy BOard had rejected the Franchise
1\y~LaW of the County of Lambton. This order in effect made the County
. 1~' t of gaS lineS under the public UtilitieS and
~esponsClble for ~"e movemen
continued · ·
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JULY 9, 1985
PAGE 4.
Highways Act which would require the municipality to pay half the labour cost
of the move plus labour saving equipment, etc.
The County of Lambton had appealed the Board Ruling to the Provincial
Cabinet. The County of Lambton would pay the legal costs of the appeal. The
Committee felt that if the appeal failed it would be a very short time before
Natural Resources Gas would ask for a similar order. This would be particularly
onerous on County and Township roads in East Elgin.
The Engineer reported that he had reviewed the proposed costs of the
Strachan Street Drain from the outlet of the 24 inch pipe to the lake.
Preliminary estimates were approximately $20,000 which included 675 feet of
2~t pipe at a cost of $6,500 for pipe plus the laying of pipe, catch basins,
etc.
Inasmuch as the street was used very little if at all, the Engineer felt
that it would be a very questionable use of Public funds as the present
drainage system would probably carry 95% of the flow if r'epairs to the
present pipe system were made by the Village.
The Cvuuuittee felt that the County was not. responsible for the extension'
of the drain inasmuch as the/Committee had completed their agreement with the
Village of Port Burwell with regard to storm drainage connections which had
been made some years ago.
The Engineer was instructed to write to the Village of Port Burwell and
inform them that the County 'would not install the drain and that the
installation of the drain was not a municipal priority at this time.
Correspondence was read from the County of Kent stating that
reconstruction of a 6 X 8 foot concrete box culvert on County Road #7 south
~
of the Bothwell Bridge would be required in the near future. The Engineer
stated that he had written the County asking t.hat Elgin be advised a year
prior to the proposed construction so the appropriate amount could be
included in Elgin's Road Budget.
ST. THO}\ll.S, ONTARIO
J\JL~ 9, 1985
'PAGE 5-
OTED AS fOLLOv:rS:
CORJ$SPOND~C-e WAS 1< . t' onS cknowledging tbe
" d Co~un~ca ~
f Transportat1.on an
1 From the }\.inistry 0 ,ridge floor shOuld
. rtS stating that the player s
CountY' s consultantS repo b "dge was capable of
" tbat tbe t:
"ble and stat~ng
don as poss~ d"
be repaire as so dec and recomroen l.ng
. of concrete on the
. dditiOnal four l.ncbeS
tak~ng an a
tbat, tbiS be done. ~ h"Qh~rioritY for 1986.
uld be OJ,.. a ~t::>
, . ted that the work '.010
The -engineer l.nd1.ca . . t et:ect signS
" pet:m~ss~on
. of AidboroUgh request1.ng .
From tbe Towosh1.P ed tbe erect1.on
," Tbe C01'[lll\ittee appr v
. . g the "Rodney Fall Fa1.r ·
ad'\Tet:t~s~n
2.
3.
4.
of signS as
long as theY were not a traffic hazard.
rnnservatiOn AUthority stating
. flOWS on tbe K,ttle and
as a'\Tailable-
From tbe Kettle creek --
., nod plan areas and channeL
, ^Q soon as information
v-rot:k done by
"ng J,....- 1:. a..... banKS
t:min~ d t:epot: . th t
dete d v-roul "etY v-r~
kS, an "cal Soc~ d #3r
Dodd' s Ct:ee utb llistot:~ countY Roa . "'"'g tbat
'lat:mo t on tat~}..
'II..'lot:th cul '\Tet: t4 onS
e 1.'1 , S "ca ...
ft:o'U\. tn nattet:son d co11Jl'O.un~ ~ CountY
tbe r; " n an . 0 0 J,..
ty at t:tat~O . t:sect.~
tbe coun f 'j'ranspo the inte \ of
o __r.r-ted at _~.....r M.in~st-rY
5.
Fro'U\. tbe M.ini st-rY
direction signS could not be eLv--
" #13 d #74 under the pre,;""-
Road If5 2 and H1.ghway s an
TransportatiOn and co~nicatiOns' policY'
. b the }\.inistry at the
Tbe poliCY proposed last spr1.ng y I .
, been implemented an& when tbiS pol1.CY
ASSociatiOn }\.eeting had not as yet
. 1 . t d tbe }\.inistry might do prope-r. signing.. ~
v-ra S ~mp emen e
. f t: a pt:opet:ty
6. ?rom tbe Towoship of Ai db or OUgh with proposed rezon1.ng 0
. #401 (tbe \fan .ross property).
Road ff3 between Rodney and H1.ghway ~
near d' cent
. b laW to rezone ropertY a )a
h" 0" 1\a"haffi with a zon1.ng y~ I
7 The TOwos 1.P L } .
. T wosbip las an industr1.al
'0 d #46 in concession \fill, ]3ayhaffi 0 \
to county ~oa \
\
, and co~nicatiOns\with a copY of
h '1\11'" . st....y of Tt:anspot:tat~on \
8 From te!:,,I.~n~ J,.
. C fo-r \a St. Tbomas
approval f-rom tbe ltinister, 1o\r. Geo-rge R. }\.c ague, I '
. eve-rt county w.ad #52 f-ro\ll
b '0 d Co~ission re5olut1.on to -r \
subu-r an l"oa 'l.W". ~ b
" " to t e
d 't.l" hv-ray #4 from tbe Suburban Road C' \11Jl'O.~Ss~on
vtellington Roa to ,,1.g
\
\
\
..J
tat:io Good RoadS
abattoi-r ..
County-
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JULY 9, 1985
PAGE 6.
9. From Mr. Richard Galloway, resident of county Road #45 near the
yarmouth Township Garage requesting that he be allowed bermission to place
a water line along county p~ad #45 from the Ministry oflthe Environment
water pipe line to his property.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: K. E. MoNTEITH
WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A By-LAW BE pASSED 1\:0 ALLOW THE WARDEN
AND CLERK TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT WITH RIcHARD L. GALLOWAll .OWNER OF A
PORTION OF LOT 9, CONCESSION V, yARMOUTH TOWNSHIP TO R1 A WATER LINE
ALONG COUNTY ROAD #45 FROM THE ELGIN AREA WATER SERVICEf'; LINE TO .HIS
PROPERTY ·
THE AGREEMENT TO BE THE STANDARD FORM OF WATER LINE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE
coUNTY AND PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS.
CARRIED I."
solicitor, M~. M. J. Hennessey with regard to the county'S ~iability
The Engineer reported that he received a d~aft letter from the County
concerning reportS that the port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated were
only carrying $2,000,000 of insurance rathe~ than $5,000,000.
Mr. Hennessey felt that the county waS not at t.his time\ involved in the
amount of insurance that the port Stanley Terminal Rail Incrrporated were
able to obtain as the Ontario Municipal Board had supercedef the undertaking
of the port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated to the Countr of Elgin with a
Board Order of August 1983 which laid out termS and conditi~ns for the
\
operation of the 2.5 miles of the rail line. One of the co~ditions waS that
\
a $5,000,000 liability inSU~ance must be carried. \
\
I
Mr. Hennessey included a draft letter that he felt should be forwarded by
Stanley Terminal
Rail Incorporated.
\
po~t
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
the Engineer upon direction of the Road connnittee to the
S't. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JULY 9, 1985
PAGE 7.
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED BYt M. H. ST~ART
THAT THE ENGINEER BE INSTRUCTED TO ADVISE THE PORT STAN EY TEJl}I1NAL RAIL
INCORPORATED AS pER THE couNTY Sa'Ll CITOR 'S DRAYt THAT T E PORT STANLEY
TJ'JU'11NAL RAIL INCORPORATED SHOULD NoTIY'>' THE ON'tARIO MIl ICIPI\1. BOARD 'tHAT
THE PORT STAN'LEY TJ'JU'11NA'L RAI'L INCORPORATED WISHED AN ENDMf.NT TO THE
BOARD' S ORDER OF AUGUST 25, 1983 REGARDING 'tHE A}l.OUNT 0 pUB'LIC 'LIABILITY
INSURANCE THAT THE RAI'LVlAY IS REQUIRED 'to cARRY'
c. R. WTLLSEY
CARRIED I"
BOard' s Order. The Corolld:ttee 1:eQuested that the Warden con
at an earlY date, if the Wa1:den waS not satisfied that the
Terminal Rail Incorporated would contact the 'Board in:n:nediat
could forwa1:d a copY of the letter directly to the ontario
port
'the War den st at ed that he would al SO appr oac'::t W. J 0 Iii
Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated urging him to advise the
Municipal Boa1:d of their failure to obtain sufficient insurlnce to meet the
tbe Engineer
Stanle1
111 so tbe Engineer
iUnicipal Board
marketS for municipal liability insurance and partiCularlY
the failure of the NorthUmbe1:land InSUrance company in the
was the main carrier for the Roma InSUrance Organization.
one of the outstanding claimS against Roma was the Muni\iPal Office of
G1:and valley, which had been dest1:oyed in the 1:ecent tornad~. W. Wells
. d l'mited hs time went on
indicated that marketS we1:e becom.ng more an more' \
\ . h'
and that all municipalitieS would suffer a ma1:ked increase tn cost .n t e.1:
liability insurance. \
\
"MoVED BY: M. R. ST'EWART \
SECONDED BYt C. R. VlI'LLSEY \
\
THAT WE ADJOURN TO FRIDAY, AUGUST 9, 1985 A't 9:00 A.M. \
CARRI ED\."
\
\
Mr. 'Lyle Vlell s of the Fr ank Cowan Camp anY reported an i 1ItCre as ing lack of
n the light of
for their information.
ast week, which
CUAl~N
j
R08ERT G, ,,^OORE, 8. Sc., p, lONG,
E.ngineer and Road superintendent
1e\ephOne {S19) 631.S880
1951 l\NLE."< 51.
{COurt \-,\ouse)
S1.1\-\OMP..s, ON1 AR\O
NSR 3G'
July 9~ 1985
?Ort Stanley Te~inal Rail Incorporated
l!. o. BO){ 549
port. Stanley, ontario
NOL 2A.O
Gent1.emen:
'lour let.ter dated June 25th relatiVe to your pUblic Li~bi1i~y
and ?rOpert.Y pamage coverage has been brought ,t.o the attent~On 0
the Count.y of y,lgin Road Co\lllllit.t.ee for it.S op~nion.
The Count.y cannot ag..:ee to yoUr continued operat.ions wit.hout
coverage in theSe areas of at least 'Five }1illion Dollars, thiS
autho..:ity restS enti..:elY with the ontario }1\1ncipa11\Oard under
'the Rai l'way Act.
'de woul~ ask that we be notified of. the date and tune of.
you": Rearing befo..:e the }1unici.pal BOard, to whom we presume f.
yOU will be ma\dng application to amend the BOard' S Order, 0
t.he 2~th of. AUgust, 1983.
'lour publiC announcement relatiVe t.o yoUr insurance c~verage
as reported by the LOndon Free ?..:ess of. JulY 3..:d haS cause uS
some conce..:n inasmUch as yoU nOw readilY admit that yoU are
operating i.n direct contraventiOn of the BOa..:d' s Orde":' If yoU
o erate in contraventiOn to the BOard' s Order we mu~t reassesS
o~..: position and dete~ine if yoU are legallY cross~ng county
Roads ·
. . . . '2.
?O~t Stanley Terminal Rail lncO~po~ated
JulY 9, 19B5
'Page 2.
, f ~ith yoU~ ope~atiOn, which f~om
Vie have nO wish tc) l.nte~ e~e att~active to tou~ist and
all accountS have p~oven to e ve;=l u~ge yoU to make yoU~
~esidentS ali\<.e, ho~eve~, ,we ~~ t ly and ~e<\uest an ea~lY hea~ing.
applicatiOn tc) the ~a~d 1.~ a e
?lease \<.eep US advised.
"loU'C s t'Cu1 y,
,R G. ~00Rf" 11. Sc., ? fong.
foNG1Nfo'BR AND ROAD SU?l?R1NTENDfJ'\'t
RGtA:.\<.ab R J LaV'e-reau
C Vla'tden. · ·
c. ·
ltC. ~. J. Hennessey .
Hennessey, BOWshe~ and ASSOC1.ates
Frank Co~an C01lIPany 'Lirolted
At tentiC)n: ltC. 'Lyle 1!.. Vlells
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JUNE 26, 1985
PAGE 1.
Wednesday, June 26, 1985 at 4:00 p.m. All members were present except
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on
Reeves Perovich and Monteith.
Federal Sales Tax effective July lst and that hot mix asphalt manufactured or
The Engineer reported that sectionS of the Federal Budget had changed
delivered after that date would be subject to Federal Sales Tax at the plant,
including asphalt cement, gravel, sand and machine time and labour to mix it.
Federal Sales Tax would not be applicable on transportation to the
site or the laying of the asphalt.
At the present time Federal Sales Tax was applicable on asphalt
to July lst and not paid for would also be subject to this tax.
There was also an indication that any work that was done previoUs
cement alone.
Engineer recommended that Walmsley Bros. Limited be paid for their work to
As it might be some time before tax exemptions were ascertained the
June 28th, including their holdback.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
DUE TO THE RECENT CHANGES IN FEDERAL SALES TAX, THE ENGINEER BE
AUTHORIZED TO DRAW UP A PAYLIST WITH THE PAYMENT TO WALMSLEY BROS.
LIMITED FOR CONTRACTS 'A', 'B' AND 'c' TO AND INCLUDING JUNE 28, 1985
AND HE BE AUTHORIZED TO RELEASE TO WALMSLEY BROS. LIMITED THEIR
COMPLETE HOLDBACK FOR ALL WORK TO THAT DATE.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE CHAIRMAN BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE PAYLIST OF JUNE 28, 1985
WITH PAYMENTS 'TO WALMSLEY BROS. LIMITED FOR HOT MIX ASPHALT PAVING,
INCLUDING HOLDBACKS.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JUNE 26, 1985
PAGE 2.
Correspondence was read from Walmsley Bros. Limited asking that their
completion dates for their Contracts 'A' and tBt be extended as they had done
some work on Contract tct and Contracts tAl and 'B' would not be fully completed
by the completion date of June 28th.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT WE EXTEND THE COMPLETION DATE OF WALMSLEY BROS. LIMITED
CONTRACT tAt AND CONTRACT tBt, HOT MIX ASPHALT PAVING, TO
JULY 26, 1985.
CA.~RIED."
Correspondence from the Port Stanley TerminaL Rail Incorporated was
read and the Engineer was instructed to obtain an opini.on from the County
Solicitor with regard to the Countyts position on the "Cequest to reduce
insurance from $5,000,000 to $2,000,000 (public liabili.ty and property
damage coverage).
The Engineer was also instructed to bring th2 matter to the
attention of the Countyts insurance agents to ascertain if this would
meet with their approval or not.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE ADJOURN TO TUESDAY,
JULY 9, 1985 AT 9:00 A.M.
CARRIED."
CHAIRMAN
-,
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMJ{iTTEE
:: - ~ =-.;::::::
FIRST REPORT
-- -
JUNE SESSION
1985
TO ':rHE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE couNTY OF ELGIN COUNC1.L
'lOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. ~e have been notified by the Ministry of TransportatiOn and
communications that the county'S applicatiOn for a
SUpplementary spending By-laW has been rejected.
2. ~e have accepted the tender of Mcl<ay-COCker Construction
Limited of London at $47,900 for the replacement of the
port nurwell Bridge deck.
This was the lowest of three (3) bids received.
l.n addition the County is supplying the expansion joint and
the reinforcing steel and doing the necessary scarifying and
removing of old concrete from the deck.
,~ ..
l,t is expected that McKay:..cocker Construction Limited will be
able to start placement of the reinforcing steel and the
expansion joint earlY in July.
3. We have accepted the quotation of McASphalt l.ndustries Limited
for cationic EmUlsion at their price of $0.97 per gallon,
F.O.B. their plant in port Stanley, plus haulage and provincial
Sale s Tax.
l.t is expected that surface treatment work will begin early in
Jul Y ·
YJE REcoMMEND:
I. That a by-laW be passed amending 'By-LaW #84-23, being a
by_laW for the regulation of traffic by adding:
(a) County Road 1f31 from county Road #29 to county Road 1f52.
(0) County Road #27 on the north side. westerly 4 ml}tres
from the west side of county Road 1f36 in the Hamlet of
contin\led
;i
. . . .
Sparta.
PAGE 2.
....
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMM1TTEE
FIRST REPORT - JUNE SESSION 1985
- - - -
1. continued...
The Kettle creek conservation commission haS requested that the
parking be prohibited on county Road #31 to assist them in the,
controlling of park traffiC and unauthorized entries.
The control of parking in Sparta is made at the request of the
TownShip of Yarmouth as they are concerned about the number of
vehicles parking at the corner and the lack of vision.
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPEctF\!LLY suBMITTED
CRA1.RMAN
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JUNE 14, 1985
PAGE 1.
9 :00 a.m.' Friday, June 14, 1985. All member s were present.
Mr. Vlilliam Osborne and Mr. Frank Clarke of the Minist-r1 of Transportation and
C(l!Il!llunicatiOns, the Engineer and the Assistant Engineer.
THE COuNT'{ OF ELC1,N ROAD cOMl'flTTEE met at the Municipal Building at
A1 SO present was
IIMQlTED BY: D. pERQlTI C\l
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSE'{
'filAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEEtIN6 OF MAl' 13, 1985 BE APPROVED.
CARR1ED."
THE ENGINEf;R REPORTED AS FOLL~S:
.d . t' S h S ~eJ'ected the countY's
The Ministry of Transportat~on an C(l!Il!llUn~ca ~on a
1.
-request for a Supplementa-rY BY-LaW.
the Engineer stated that it would be necessary that expenditUres be monitored
ve-ry carefullY for the remainder of the yea-r.
such that very little money ",as remaining uncommitted. yunds for ne'"
projectS would have to be taken from projectS that funds had been committed
to bUt not completed.
C(l!Il!llitmentS made to date we-re
The Chairman had opened three tende-rs on June 13th for the installation of
the expansion joint, reinforcing steel and concrete overlay at the po-rt
Burwell B-ridge. These were as attached.
AS the consultantS estimate ",as $60,000 the Enginee-r recommended that the
tender of McKay-COcker const-ruction Limited be accepted at $47,900 and that
the work proceed as soon as possible.
2.
"MOVED B'l:
Sf;CONDED B'{: R. J. LAVEREAU
T\lAT THE TENDER OF MCRA'{-COCKER CONSTRUCTION LIMITED BE ACCEl'TED FOR'THf;
CONCREtE REPLACEMENT OF THE pORT BURWELL BRIDGE DEetZ AT THf;IR TENDERED
PRICE Of $47,900.
M. 'H. srrEVlART
----,--..., ,
CARR1ED ."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JUNE 14, 1985
'PAGE 2.
3.
The Road Assu~tion By-LaW had been completed and forwarded to the Ministry
of Transportation and communications for approval.
AS provincial cabinet approval waS required it would likely be some monthS
before it would be approved.
The 1hrough Righway BY-Law had been completed and could be passed at the
June countY council session.
It appeared that further negotiations could not be continued with the Ministry
of Natural ReSOurces regarding the return of chatham Street to the Village of
port BUrwell and the county until a new provincial GOvernment waS in place.
. d & ..~ ^~ Elle" of StraffordVille
correspondence had been rece~ve ~rom "~s. =.n J
regarding the intersection of county Road #45 and Highway #19.
The matter had been referred to the Ministry of TransportatiOn and
4.
5.
6.
7.
coromunicatiOns ·
Frank Clarke reported that the MinistrY of TransportatiOn and communications
Traffic section had been instructed by the District Engineer to look at the
intersection and report back to him as soon, as possible.
't1 count" SolicitOr had rec()tlllUl'nded that another attempt
Mr. M. J. ~ennessey, J
be made to settle the land purchase stateroent on County Road #30 with
h & ~10 000 be forwarded to him
Mr. David FergUSon and asked that a c eque ~or '" ,
and he would atte~t to have Mr. FergUSon accept it for the land 1IlSed and
for damageS and interest incurred.
ThiS amount ~aS some $330 more than had been preViOuSlY offered to
Mr. Ferguson from approximatelY a year ago.
MJ:. Hennessey felt that thiS method was worth trying inasmuch as all
previoUS attemptS at negotiations had failed.
"MOVED BY:
K. E. MONTEIT'H
.-:--~
ELG1.N BE AUTHORIZED LV v.rD.'
01' Lor 8 , CONCESSIoN XI.. 'lp,R}l.(JI:lTH TOWNSHIP ,wi': S'IM. OF $10, 000 FOR ALL
LAND SHoWN ON REFERENCE pLAN llR-2619, USED TO ~IDEN couNT'! ROAD #30 iN
1977 AND FOR ALL DAMAGES AND I1.'\TEREST IN CONNEcTION WITH TRE ~IDENING 01'
CARRIED ."
COUNTY ROAD #30.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JUNE 14, 1985
PAGE 3.
The ~ownship of yarmouth waS not in a position to look after weed spraying
on county Roads.
Reeve willsey reported that the TownshiP of South Dorchester could not look
after weed spraying on county roads in south Dorchester as they had alSO
contracted oUt their spraying.
The money allocated on these roads would be allocated for other purposes.
8.
9.
THE ENGINE'ER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS fOl.l,oWS:
The St.thomas Suburban Road commission had passed a resolution reverting
county Road 1f52 from Wellington Road to Highway fr73 to the county, so that
the County could proceed with asphalt resurfacing between countY Road fr30
and Highway ffl4, surface treatment east of county Road fr31 and asphalt
1.
2.
patching west of countY Road #31.
The Suburban Road commission of southwestern OntariO had their Annual
Meeting in Barrie and their Annual Meeting next year would be held in
St. ThomaS.
Salt brine had been applied \10 all roadS. There waS great difficulty in
getting enough salt brine to do the amount of work wished by the County
at the same time.
county Road fr28 had been graded and redone as had county Road #43 north
3.
4.
of calton.
craSs cutting "as underWay.
sweeping was being continued.
pavement marking waS under"ay with the city of St. ':rhomas having been
completed and work underway on county roadS.
Shou1.ders on V1ellington Road "ere being reshaped.
Shoulder gravelling had been completed on county Roads #44, #46 and fr14.
V10rk was nearlY completed at the Silver creek culvert other than some
ditching east and west of the creek Where dirt had been piled in 1983.
Total cost of work to date waS approximatelY $678,000.
Storm drain work on county Road fr22 had been completed south of county
Road #45 and "as underway north of county Road #45.
11.
5.
6.
1.
8.
9.
10.
.-----'
ST. THOMAS, ONTAR10
JUNE 14, 1985
PAGE 4.
12. cleanup work waS underway in port BUrwell in preparation for paving.
13. Gravel shouldering had been hauled on County Road #42 east of port Burwell.
14. the asphalt patching had been completed on county Road #33 (Rain'S Hill ).
15. :ihe' aSi?haltb~Se",coat had been completed on county Road #52 between County
16. The John Deere 644 LOadeJ: had broken a bearing and a gear in the tJ:ansmLSsion
Road #30 and Highway #74.
with cuttingS travelling through the entiJ:e hydJ:aulic system.
the bill had been negotiateddO~from $14,500 to $8,000 with the John
Deere company making up most of the diffeJ:ence.
AS the machine waS over four yearS old and had been purchased used from
a noW bankrupt company the deal sesmed to be the best obtainable under the
17. The Canadian NatiOnal-canadian pacifiC had repaired crossingS on county
ci-rcumstance s.
18. The north approach of the Tate'S Bridge had been repaired.
19. AS the Supplementary By_LaW funding .had not been approved it would not be
Road #14 at Iona Station and County Road #3 in Rodney.
possible to replace the jointS in the Wardsville Bridge thiS year or to
do any creek diversion work at any RettIe creek Bridge.
It appeared that work on county Road #22 would be confined to the section
of road at County Road #45.
It might alsO be necessary to reduce the planned surface treatment projectS
by five kilometers.
If thiS was necessary the section deleted would be county Road #16 from
Middlemarch to St. Thomas'
n. A 1. (JL./l .
~~U l
CountY Road If) had been completed with gravel and a small amount placed
20.
on CountY Road #5. There was approximatelY a 10% overrun on the total job.
21. The WOJ:k at the slide on County Road #3 at the twin valleyS had been
COmpleted with sand fill being used to replace wet silty fill material,
-'~
plastiC tile had been placed in the sand fill.
22. Entrances for the lnteJ:natiOnal plowing Match on County Road #26 had been
spotted and placeroent waS underway.
Signs would be made shortlY'
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JUNE 14, 1985
PAGE 5.
23. It waS expected the report on the orchard-carrol Drain in Shedden would be
24. work at the Beecroft culvert on County Road #40, south of springfield had
read within the month.
been completed with concrete cut~off walls being placed at both ends of the
culvert.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT THE FOLLOWING PAYLIST BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT:
PAYLIST NUMBER 28 AMouNTING TO $53,430.92
PAYLIST NUMBER 29 AMOUNTING TO $3,095.66
PAYLIST NUMBER 30 AMOUNTING TO $54,819. 77
PAYLIST NUMBER 31 AMOUNTING TO $531.22
PAYLIST NUMBER 32 AMouNTING TO $201,434.56
PAYLIST NUMBER 33 AMOUNTING TO $13,931.62
PAYLIST NUMBER 35 AMOUNTING TO $10,000.00
CARRIED ."
with regard to improvementS to the road from Sparta to the GilletS Bridge. It
The Engineer reported that he had met with the Township of yarmouth council
had been agreed that further negotiatiOns would take place, as a reasonable
basis for negotiations had been set.
trucking the county could replace it when the work was completed.
The Township had agreed that if the surface treatment waS destroyed through
The committee authorized continuation of negotiations with the Engineer
reporting back.
QUotations for cationic Emulsion for surface treatment were as attached.
...---~."
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE ACCEPT THE QUOTATION OF MCASPHALT INDUSTRIES LIMITED FOR CATIONIC
EWJLSION AT THEIR QUOTED PRICE OF $0.97 PER GALLON, F.O. B. THEIR pLANT AT
PORT STANLEY OR DELIVERED PRICE OF $0.995 pER GALLON, F.O.B. AN'l POINT IN
_ ^~ ",-"IN. pLUS PROVINCIAL SALES TAX.
CARRIED ."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JUNE 14, 1985
PAGE 6.
that parking be prohibited on County Road #31 because ilf increased vandalism
correspondence was read from the Kettle creek conservation Authority asking
and unauthOrized entry into their Dalewood conservation property from cars parked
along the County road.
be prohibited on the north side of county Road #27 near County Road #36, Sparta
correspondence waS also read from the Township of yarmouth asking that parking
because of the lack of visibility at the intersection When vehicles were parked.
After considerable diSCUssion · · ·
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH.
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY cO\JNCIL THAT A By-LAW BE PASSED AMENDING
By-LAW #34-23, BEING A By-LAW FOR THE REGULATION OF tRAFFIC, BY
ADDING:
(A) COUNTY ROAD 1f31 FROM COUNTY ROAD #29 TO CO\JNTY ROAD 1f52.
(B) ON THE NORTH SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD #27 WESTERLY 4 METRES FROM THE
WEST SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD #36 IN THE flAMLET OF SPARTA.
CARRIED .n
CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS:
I. From the Township of south-West Oxford rezoning property at the county'S
2. From the Township of yarmouth rezoning property on County Road #35 (White).
gravel pit for recreational use.
3. From the Town of Aylmer, rezoning property at Talbot and Elm StreetS in
4. Township of southWOld, rezoning property in Fingal f~r a Wood working Shop.
5. From the Township of Yarmouth, rezoning property on county Road #27, Sparta
for tourist purposes. Reeve Haddow noted that the Township was negotiating
with the owner to provide off_street parking, Which would assist the parking
Aylmer ·
6. From the canadian Transport C~ission stating that the Canadian National and
on county Road #27.
the canadian pacific RailwayS were repairing the former conrail crossings on
county roadS.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JUNE 14, 1985
PAGE 7.
7. From the Brewers Ratail with a report on Drunk Driving. lt was noted that
8. From the Township of Yarmouth wishing to close a portion of road allowance
the ~ame report had been forwarded to all municipalities.
between yarmouth and Westminster Townships near county Roads #30 and #34.
The Engineer reported that he had written to the Townships stating that the
county had no objections to the closing of the Townline Road as long as any
portion within 50 feet of the centre line of a county road remained open.
9. From the Township of Malahide with thanks for the county'S assistance with
IO. From Mr. Norman Klemmer, R. R. #f>, St. ThomaS regarding dust along the
pipe arch culvert inspections.
shoulders of County Road #25.
The committee felt that it waS impossible to control dust on the shoulders
11. From Government Services regarding the tender for the former Ministry of
of paved roads.
Transportation and communications property and buildingS at Wallacetown.
12. From the Township of Yarmouth with a by-law rezoning property on County
No action was taken.
Road #25 at the Cargo Gasoline Station across from the Shore SaleS Barn
13. From the Township of AidborOugh to rezone property for residential purposes
for residential purposes.
on the south side of county Road #2 near West LOrne.
The Engineer waS instructed to reply to the Reeve of port BUrwell with
regard to their request for work on the improvement of the Hagerman Street
would be held in Chatham on June 28th. The Ontario Energy Board had refused the
the Engineer reported that a meeting of the Union Gas Negotiating Cww,ittee
Drain.
negotiated agreement between the county of Lambton and the Union GaS company and
had reinstated the standard franchise claUse with the Service workS on HighwayS
Act, being used as a basis for all work, althOUgh the tWO bodies had negotiated
a different arrangement.
continued · · · ·
ST. ruOMAS, Ol'l'fARI0
JUNE 14, 1985
'PAGE 8.
The countY of Lmnbton had appealed to the Lieutenant Governer in Council for
a rehearing and the Cotlillittee would be requested to support the County' s attetopt
to have the hearing reopened so that the service Vlorks on 1:lighways Act would not
applY but the regular franchise agree1llent presentlY in force
would applY.
It waS noted that if the Union Gas companY waS successful it was likely that
an application fr01ll Natural ReSources GaS would not be far behind and that any
work done on ~nicipal roads <i1Ould have the Service Vlorks on 1:lighways Act applied
to all municipalitieS as well (at a considerable cost to the CountY and the
TownshipS ).
The committee wished the Engineer and the committee well in their
negotiations.
]i'J:om M. J. 1:lennessey, CountY SolicitOr reporting that the Engineer on
the Road committee did not have the authority to close a CountY road for
recreatiOnal purposes but could only be closed under a County Council "By~baw.
The Engineer was however etopowered, under the ?ublic Transportation and
1:lighway Itoprove1llent Act, to close a road as required for repair or 1llaintenance.
After discUssion the Cotlillittee instructed the Engineer to forward a copY
of }\:t. 1:lennessey' s letter to all municipalitieS for their infor<l\ation.
'fbe co~ittee decided that all requestS for road closUres will have to
be forwarded to the1ll through the Engineer for disCUssion and reco~endation,
if any, to countY council.
'fbe 1985 Road Needs Study Up date SuUJlll."rie s wer e di stri bu te d for di scU ssion
. ould not really be diSCUssed
^. three year road and brJ.dge progr""""e c
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JUNE 14, 1985
PAGE 9.
"MOVED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THl\.T VIE ADJOURN TO TUESDAY JULY 9, 1985; FRIDAY, AUGUST 9, 1985 AND
THURSDAY, 3EPTEMBER 5, 1985 ALL AT 9:00 A.M.
CARRIED."
CHAIRMAN
" ,
.~ '
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
RS1K EMULSION QUOTATIONS - JUNE 13, 1985
(a) - 1982 Price 63.3 cents per gallon.
- Delivered to St. Thomas 72.7 cents per gallon.
- Low Bidder - Norjohn Contracting Limited.
(b) - 1983 Price 72.25 cents per gallon (including Provincial Sales Tax).
- Delivered to St. Thomas 83.625 cents per gallon (tax included).
- Low Bidder - Norjohn Contracting Limited.
(c) - 1984 Price 99.3 cents gallon (including Provincial Sales Tax),
Delivered.
Low Bidd~r - McAsphalt Industries Limited
1. McAsphalt Industries Limited
880 Sheppard Avenue East
West Hill, Ontario
MlE 4R2
F.O.B. Terminal Port Stanley
Plus Provincial Sales Tax
Delivery Within-County as Required
2. Norjohn Contracting Limited
P. O. Box 100
Thorold, Ontario
L2V 3Y8
F.O.B. Plant Burlington
plus Provincial Sales Tax
Delivery Within County as Required
97.0 Cents Per Gallon
6.8 Cents Per Gallon
103.8 Cents per Gallon
2.5 Cents Per Gallon
106.3 Cents Per Gallon
95.3 Cents Per Gallon
6.7 Cents Per Gallon
102.0 Cents Per Gallon
6.8 Cents Per Gallon
108.8 Cents Per Gallon
"".
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
~SlK EMULSION QUOTATIONS - JUNE 13, 1985,
PAGE 2.
3. Asenco
Asphalt Engineering Corporation
2201 Lakeshore Road West
Mississauga, Ontario
15J 1 J9
F.O.B. Plant Mississauga
95.0 Cents Per Gallon
Plus Provincial Sales Tax
6.5 Cents Per Gallon
101.5 Cents Per Gallon
Delivery Withint County as Required
11.0 Cents Per Gallon
112.5 Cents Per Gallon
4. Chevron Asphalt Limited
43 Industrial Street
Toronto, Ontario
M4G 1Z2
F.O.B. Plant Toronto
lOt.OO Cents Per Gallon
plus Provincial Sales Tax
7.07 Cents Per Gallon
108.1 Cents Per Gallon
Delivery Within County as Required
13.5 Cents Per Gallon
121.6 Cents Per Gallon
* 3 Hours free unload - demurrage $40.00 per hour.
6,000 Gallons per load minimum.
?ORT "BURY/ELL "BRI()GE NO.4"> m:CR RESTORATION
(INSTALL E1t?ANSI0N JOINTS AND SU??LY AND INSTALL CONCRETE OVERLAY)
S~Y 01' TENDERS RECEIVED
coUN'f'l 01' BLGIN ROAD DE? ARTMEl'l'f
JUNE 13, 1985
CONTRACTOR TotAL TENDER ?RICE
MC\<AY-COCRER CONSTRUc:rION LIMITED $ 47,900.00
-
MC1,.EAN TAYLOR CONSTRUCTION LIMITED $ 62,100.00
ELGIN CONSTRUc:rION COMPANY LIj,fLTED $ 58,950.00
GAFFNEY CONSTRUCTION Lun-TED NO BID
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY l3, 1985
PAGE 1.
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on
Monday, May l3, 1985 at 9:00 a.m. All members were present. Also present were the
Engineer and the Assistant Engineer.
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF APRIL 11, APRIL 25 AND APRIL 26, 1985
BE APPROVED.
CARRIED."
Tenders for hot mix asphalt paving were opened (as attached).
THE ENGINEER REPORTED AS FOLLOWS:
l. No information was available on the County's Supplementary By-Law although the
Ministry of Transportation and Corrnnunications had been contacted several times
and Ron K. McNeil, M.P.P. had been made aware of the lack of response and was
contacting the Minister's office.
2. The Ministry of Transportation and Corrnnunications had approved proposed repairs
to the Port Burwell Bridge.
The bridge would be kept open for single lane traffic. The bridge floor would
be mechanically scarified with the poor concrete being removed with jack
harrnners, etc.
Epoxy coated steel bars would be used as deck reinforcements and approximately
4 inches of concrete would be placed over the original deck for a total of 5
or 6 inches.
Continued . . .
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13, 1985
PAGE 2.
2. Continued...
The original bridge plans had been examined by the County's consultant who found
that as the bridge had been previously designed for an asphalt floor the
additional concrete would not overload the girders.
The consultant had been instructed to order reinforcing steel and the
expansion joints as soon as possible as delivery on the expansion joints was at
least 8 weeks. The County would have half the floor ready for a contractor by
the time the expansion joint was available.
Invitation tenders would be asked of Elgin Construction, McLean-Taylor Construction
of St. Mary's and McKay-Cocker of London and any additional qualified contractors
that were doing work in the area in July. This way the County would be assured
of a contractor who would be in a position to place the concrete when the deck
was prepared.
3. The Frank Cowan Cvmpany Limi.ted was recommending that closures of roads be held
to a minimum for such things as dances, parties, bike-a-thons, etc., and that
closings be restricted only for repairs and maintenance as a number of 1aw-
suits had been launched against municipalities because of inadequate lighting
and closure by service groups.
The matter was discussed by Committee at some length.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT ALL COUNTY ROAD CLOSURE REQUESTS FOR OTHER THAN TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
CLOSURES BE REFERRED TO ROAD COMMITTEE FOR DECISION AND OPINION OF
MR. M. J. HENNESSEY BE OBTAINED REGARDING THE SAME.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13!1 1985
PAGE 3.
4. Further examination of the byhhurst Culvert on Wellington Road had indicated
that holes had rusted through the bottom of the pipe. It would be necessary
to 1llake a thorough exa1llination of all 3 culverts on Vlellington Road to ascertain
Whether or not this problem was critical on the other 2.
It would be necessary to replace the bynhurst culvert next year at the latest.
5. Signs indicating the location of the International ?lowing Match had been
erected on Wellington Road to Road #51 (London) and 1:lighway #3 also.
Unfortunately 1 sign had already been stolen fr01ll Highway #3 (a replacement
6. No reply had been received fr01ll the Ministry of Natural Resources or Government
was underway).
Services regarding the transfer of Chatham Street in the Village of ?ort Burwell.
7. The north span of the Tate'S Bridge had 1ll0ved and collapsed a week previously
and it was not known if it was due to earth 1ll0ve1llents, heavy loads or being
struck by a vehicle or a combination of all three.
Repairs had been effected. Mr. Don 1:lusson, County of Middlesex Engineer had
agreed that as additional shoring had to be done to the approach span of the
bridge just recently the 1llaximum we!ight allowable should be reduced to 5 tonnes.
The Walkers Bridge and the Wi11ey's Bridge will take any full loads necessary
to be delivered to the area.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT VIE RECOMMEND TO COUNtY COUNCIL THAT A "BY~LAVI "BE ?ASSED WHICH Vllbb IN
EFFEGr AMEND COUNTY BY ~ bAVI #84- 2, AMENDING 'f1:lE MAXIMUM Abb01il A"BbE VlEIGHT ON
T1:lE TATE'S "BRIDGE FROM 15 TONNES TO 5 TONNES.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13, 1985
PAGE 4.
8. It had been found that the footings of the McBain CuI VE~rt on County Road #29
had not washed out, although the culvert width was deficient, the Engineer
recommended that replacement be postponed at this time and that the monies
allocated for the job be used to repair the Brown Drain Culvert on County
Road #8 in Dutton where the footings had washed out.
THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Engineer would be on vacation from May 16th to May 27th.
2. The application of salt brine was proceeding, although it was difficult to
get enough because all municipalities were trying to put on brine at the
same time because of the dry weather.
3. Gravel resurfacing on County Road #9 was underway by Alex Newbigging Limited.
4. C. R. Chittick Construction had crushed another l5,000 tons of gravel at the
pleasant Valley Pit.
5. Gravel shouldering on County Road #16 had been completed to County Road #8,
completed on County Road #14 and was underway on County Roads #44 and #46 in
Bayham Township.
6. The sweeper was working well.
A trade-in allowance of $8,000 had been negotiated for the old sweeper
rather than the $5,400 previously offered by Frink and their invoice was
recommended for payment.
7. Stumps on County Roads #52 and #30 had been removed and had been disposed
"'.-.....,
of in erosion washouts on County Road #42 east of Port Burwell. More
stumps were needed to fill the washouts and would be removed from County
Road #40, south of Mount Salem and County Road #45 between Highway #73
as time permitted.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY l3, 1985
PAGE 5.
8. Ditching was underway on County Road #14, having been completed at various
locations on County Road #16.
Areas on County Road #52 between Wellington Road and Highway #74 would be
ditched as would an area on Concession III (Schneider) on County Road #36,
south of Sparta.
9. Cleanup and seeding work on a number of roads including County Roads #16,
#23 and #22 was underway.
10. Pavement marking would start shortly.
ll. The International Plowing Match signs had been erected on County Roads #25,
#52 and on Highway #3 but someone had already stolen one on Highway #3.
12. Junk pickup had been completed on a number of roads in the International
Plowing Match area but it would have to be redone in late August or
early September.
l3. The County of Middlesex would advise if they were able to afford to replace
the joints on the Wardsville Bridge.
l4. Storm drain work on County Road #22, north and south of County Road #45
would start shortly.
15. Delivery of the new Mack Truck was not expected until TIlid-June.
16. Bridge cleaning and washing was nearly done.
17. Truck 189 would be back from Country Collision this week.
l8. Dump truck inspections were nearly completed.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT THE FOLLOWING PAYLISTS BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT:
PAYLIST #23 AMOUNTING TO $52,386.75
PAYLIST #24 AMOUNTING TO $263.22
Continued . . .
ST. T1:lOMAS, Ol'l'fARIO
MAY. 13, 1985
pAGE 6.
"MOVED BY.:
R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED "B'l~ D. ?EROVIC1:l
CONTINUED · · ·
?A'{bIST #25 ~OUNTING TO $57,742,59
?A'{bIST #26 ~oUNTING TO $1,009.65
?A'{blST #27 ~OUNTING TO $212,812.05
CARRIED."
The revised attached Maintenance BUdget waS diSCUssed in s01lle detail.
"MOVED BY.:
SECONDED "B'l ~ R. E. MON'fEIT1:l
T1:lAT 'fltE REVISED MAINTENANCE "BUDGET OF Al'Rlb 25, 1985 AS A'f'fACl:lED IN 'fltE
M. 11. STEWART
~OUNT OF $1,835,000 "BE ADOPTED.
CARRIED_"
"MOVED BY.:
M. 11. srrEWART
SECONDED "B'l~ R. J. 1.,AVEREAU
T1:lAT VIE ACCE?T T1:lE TENDER OF VlAUiSbE'l "BROS. blM1-TED AT $188,473 FOR
CONTRAcT' A' , 1:loT MIX AS?1:lAbT ?AVING.
CARRIED ."
"MOVED BY.:
R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED "BY~ M. 1:l. STEVlART
'fltAT VIE ACCE?T T1:lE TENDER OF VlALMSl.,y;'{ 1\ROS. bIM1TED AT $334,5B3. 75 FOR
CONTRAcT '"B', RoT MIX AS?1:lAbT ?AV1NG.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13, 1985
PAGE 7.
"MOVED BY:
C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE ACCEPT THE TENDER OF WALMSLEY BROS. LIMITED AT $42,525 FOR CONTRACT ICY,
HOT MIX ASPHALT PAVING.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT WE ACCEPT THE TENDER OF WALMSLEY BROS. LIMITED AT $64,475 FOR CONTRACT 'D',
HOT MIX ASPHALT PAVING.
CARRIED."
CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIVED AS FOLLOWS:
l. From the County of Lambton Road Superintendent and from the Ministry of
Transportation and Communications with thanks for the Engineer's help on
the Bridge Maintenance Inspection Seminars in Essex and Lambton Counties.
2. From the Ministry of Transportation and Cvul1uunications with thanks for the
Engineer's assistance with regard to the Bridge and Culvert Maintenance
Seminar in Simcoe County in February.
3. From the City of Sarnia with thanks for the assistance of the County
concerniing excess charges by the Canadian National Railway for crossing
protection.
The City of Sarnia was able to obtain a refund of $4,600.
4. From the Township of South Dorchester and the Township of Malahide and
the Town of Aylmer saying that they would assist in the erection of snow
fence for the International Plowing Match.
Continued . . .
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13, 1985
PAGE 8.
4. continued.
]i'J:om the Village of spr:i'~gfield indicating that they do not have any snoW fence.
The committee indicated ~hat the Village would be requested to send help to
5. ]i'J:01ll Mr. R. Thompson, Di\strict Engineer, Ministry of Transportation and
erect snOW fence.
co~unicatiOns stating that the stop signS at the intersection of 1:lighway #3
and County Road #36 had been replaced and that advanced signS and stop signs
at 1:lighway #19 and countlf Road #45 would be replaced in the near future.
It was not known whether! this work had yet been done or not.
6. Fr01ll the Township of Aldporough with a zoning by~law for residential use on
County Road #2 at the wept limit of Vlest LPrne.
7. ]i'J:om the TO<i1tlship of Aldporough with a rezoning by-law for property north of
Rodney near the Furnival Road for a farm implement dealership.
8. ]i'J:om the Township of Yar\nouth with a notice of a by-law a1llendment for property
on County Road #35 to .er~ct steel buildingS - White.
9. From the Village of Rodn~y with a zoning by-law to amend the residential floor
area required for buildii;>gs in the Furnival Road busineSS section.
10. From the Township of Yar\nouth with a proposed zoning for a craft shop on
county Road #27 and Highway #4 in Union.
\
Reeve 1:laddow indicated that the applicant had withdrawn his application in
the face of strong local, opposition concerned with parking on the County
road.
From the office of the ?fOvincal cabinet thanking the County of Elgin for
the submission and endor~ement last fall of the Ontario Good Roads ASsociation
request for additional f~nding for road purposes.
~-,
11.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13, 1985
PAGE 9.
12. ]i'J:om Andrew Brandt, Minister of the Enviromnent and Robert Nicli, ?resident
of the Sewer and Vlater Main Contractors requesting that the County use
wherever' possible the new ?rovincial Standards.
The Engineer indicated the standards were being used Where applicable.
13. From VI. D. Drinkwater, Director of the Ontario ?olice College stating that
?olice college traffic would try to restrict the use of the shoulders on
County Road 1f32 until such ,time as the shoulders became firmer in the Spring.
14. ]i'J:0lll Robert, James and John byle County Road #1.6 regarding shoulder gravel
being placed by the snoW plow on their front la<i1OS.
The Engineer stated that he had written a letter to the by1e'S but had
15. From susan Harris, Shedden requesting earlier snow plowing on County Road #20,
not solved the problem.
north of Shedden.
The Engineer reported that he had replied to Mrs. Harris stating that
unfortunately all County roads could not be plowed at the same time and
before 8:00 a.1ll. becaUse of a lack of equipment and manpower.
16. ]i'J:om R. c. DUnn and AssociateS with their pay rates for engineering "",rk
regarding the ?ort Burwell and ?layer's "Bridges.
17 . ]i'J:om Mr. M. J. Henne s sey, a copy 0 f a reply to Cr ai g "Bro<i1O so lici tor for
Mrs. Garnham, stating the county' s position on the sale of bot 137, North
Talbot Road to Jack Smyth.
18. ]i'J:om the Village of Rodney requesting that the County take action and have
the canadian National Railway and C & 0 Railway crossings on Furnival Road
repaired.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13, 1985
PAGE 10.
19. From the Canadian Transport Connnission acknowledging the County's request for
an update on the C & 0 Railway crossing repair programme in the County of
Elgin.
The Engineer said that he waS hopeful that the C""""ission would order the
C & 0 Railway to improve the crossing on County Road #3 as well as other
roads as per the Commission~ inspection last summer.
20. From Mr. John Wise, M.P. acknowledging the County's letter to the Canadian
Transport commission with regard to the condition of Conrail crossings in
the County of Elgin.
21. From the County of Oxford, ?lanning Department with notification of an
Official plan Amendment 26, Community Improvement policies.
22. From Ontario Youth Opportunities, with official approval of the County's
phase II, 1984-1985 application to the Youth Corps Programme.
Total grant applicable. $43,264.
23. A telephone message from the Ontario Youth Corps stating that the County's
application for the 1985 grant of $19,968 starting on July 2nd had been
approved.
24. From the Township of Bayham with rezoning by-law for a property on
County Road #38, Bayham-Malahide Town Boundary, rezoning for church
purposes.
Reeve Stewart reported that local residents were concerned that parking
might occur on County Road #38 and would be a hazard.
The Connnittee felt that it waS unfair to speculate as to parking problems
on the County road prior to the church being built and noted that the
zoning by-law required 1 parking space for every 3 church seats and as
Continued · · ·
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY l3, 1985
PAGE ll.
24.
Continued .
the entire property was 1.25 acres there was sufficient room for parking on
the grounds.
25. From the Ministry of Transportatio~ and Communications with a reply to various
letters written to them stating tha.t they trim trees on Highway #74 south of
County Road #52 to improve the visibility and would if money permitted pave
the intersection of Highway #4 and County Road #ll at the Ford Plant.
The Committee felt that this was highly desirable as Road #11 would be used
as one of the main entrances for the International Plowing Match.
26. From the Township of Yarmouth with a zoning by-law to rezone the property
south of the Cargo Gasoline Fillin:~ Station of Road #25 for residential
use.
27. From the Frank Cowan Company Limit~d with a quotation to increase the
County's liability policy from lO million to 15 million dollars, (additional
cost $2,000). From 10 million to 20 million dollars (additional cost
$4,138 ).
The Committee felt that they did n)t wish to increase the liability limit
at this time.
28. The Township of Yarmouth with a notice of a public meeting on June l7th for
the rezoning purposes of the old G~ntennial School at the intersection of
County Road #28 and Highway #3.
Some concern was expressed by memh~rs as the rezoning was for banquet.:::.
facilities, retail sales, gasoline and an automobile dealership.
It was felt that the rezoning should be done by site plan amendment with
entrances carefully controlled and asked that the Engineer be kept
informed and be;'asked to comment on the various rezonings.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13, 1985
PAGE 12.
29. From the County of Simcoe stating that the annual meeting of the Suburban
Road Connnission Association of Ontario will be held in Midland on June 12th.
30. From the Government of Canada with a cheque for $8,1001 being 90% of material
and machine costs in connection with their Canada Works Grant.
Distribution of printed maps was discussed at some length and it was decided
to provide each County department with a number of maps free and each municipality
with 10 maps free and to place maps for sale in all Township Clerk's Offices,
the Town of Aylmer and the Village of Port Stanley with each municipality being
invoiced at 75i each, to be sold at $l.OO each.
If other Village clerks were interested in selling maps the maps would be
provided to them at the same price.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO CALL QUOTATIONS FOR EMULSION FOR 1985.
CARRIED."
THE MEETING ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH . . .
AFTER LUNCH; REEVE D. PEROVICH ABSENT . . .
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT THE ATTACHED RECOMMENDED TRUCK RATES FOR 1985 FOR HIRED VEHICLES BE
ADOPTED.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13, 1985
PAGE 13.
"MOVED BY:
M. H. STEWART
~,
SECONDED BY: C. R.' WILLSEY
THl\.T T1:lE ATTACHED MACHINE RATES OF STRICKLAND "BUbbDOZING AND ENTER?RISES AND
STRIEB TRUCKING bIMITED BE ACCE?TED FOR 1985.
CARRIED ."
The Engineer advised that at long last the Road Depart1llent had nearly completed
a new establishment by_law. Inasmuch as the last by-law was passed in 1971 the
Ministry had been after the County for SOUle years to cumplete a new one.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIb THl\.T A BY~hAW "BE ?ASSED TO ADO?T A ?bAN
OF COUNTY ROAD IMPROVEMENT AND ESTABbIS1:l A COUNTY ROAD SYSTEM IN THE COUNTY
OF EbGIN WHICH WibL IN EFFECT AMEND By-hAW NO. 2166 AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDING
By-LAWS.
CARRIED ."
"MOVED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THl\.T WE RECOMMEND THl\.T A B'l-hAVI BE ?ASSED WHICH WlbL IN EFFECT AMEND
"BY-hAVI NO. 2487 DESIGNATING THROUGH mGH.WAYS IN T1:lE COUNTY OF EbGIN
TO COINCIDE WiTH THE NEW ROAD ESTA"BLISHMENT BY-hAW.
CARRIED."
correspondence was discussed from the Township of Yarmouth asking if the
County was interested in having Careen Dandi bawn do weed spraying on County
Roads in Yarmouth Township.
Cont inued · · ·
ST. T1:l0MAS, ONTARIO
MAY. 13, 1985
'PAGE 14.
Reeve 1:laddow indicated that the TownshiP road forces would look after work on
the county road on a ti1lle basis.
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED BY: R. J. uVEREAU
TRAT T1:lE ENGINEER "BE AU'f1:lORIZED TO N\GoTIATE VlIT1:l 'fltE TOI'ffiSRW 01' yi\RMOU'f1:l TO
RAVE CAREEN DANDI UVIN S?RAY COUN'fY\OADS IN yi\RMOU'f1:l TOI'ffiSRW.
C. R. \i1ILl$EY
CARRIl':D ."
The Village of RodneY requested pepn,ssion to eztend centre Street to County
. _ \ 1~ f th m The~ also requested
Road #3 and have the County do engJ.neerJ.\g wor~ or e. J
that the County pay for 130 feet of curb\and gutter <i1Ork on County Road #3.
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED "BY: R. J. uvEREAU
'f1iAT ?ERMISS10N "BE GRAN'fED TO TRE Vi .UGE 01' RODNEY AS ?ER T1:lEIR REQUEST 01'
MAY 1, 19B5; TO O?EN cEN'fRE STREET VlEST ,OF 1'1:lE FlJRNIV AL ROAD (cQUN'l'Y ROAD #3)
AND TO WJ<B CONNECtIONS AS REQUIRED TO T1:lE ?/>.vEMENT ON FlJRNWAL ROAD VlIT1:l Abb
M. 1\. S'tEVlART
COSTS TO "BE ? />.lD "BY T1:lE VlbUGE OF RODNE'l.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY.:
R. J. LAVEREAU
CARRIED ."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAy 13, 1985
"MOVED BY:
PAGE 15.
C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED By: K. E. MONTEITH
SKETCH SHOWING THE EXACT LENGTH OF THE WORK DONE.
THE VILLAGE TO UiVOICE THE COU/ilTY WHEN THE WORK IS COMPLETED AND TO PROVIDE A
ROAD #3, AT $8.00 PER FOOT, FROM THE POST OFFICE TO HARPER STREET BE GRANTED.
THAT WE AGREE TO THE REQUEST OF THE VILLAGE OF RODNEY FOR 130 FEET OF CURB ON
GARRI1ED."
cancelled later.
County's Insurance Liability. There Would be no problem if Some of the Work Was
Outside Work ~uld be necessary So that COunty forces Would be covered by the
The Engineer requested that resolutions to empower the COunty to do certain
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED By: K. E. MONTEITH
LOTS 20 AND 21, CONCESSION ni, BAYIlAMwrTH TOWNSHIP OF BAYHAM TO PAY
AS REQUESTED, BY THE TOWNSHIP OF BAYIlAM, CULVERT FOR THE TOWNSHIP OF BAYHAM,
THAT THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT BE AV'J.'B:ORIZED TO DESIGN AND INSTALL
APPLICABLE COSTS.
"MOVED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
CARRIED."
-~"
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SERVICES TO THE VILLAGE OF RODNEY, THE VILLAGE OF WEST LORNE, THE VILLAGE OF
THAT THE COU/ilTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT BE AUTHORiZED TO PROVIDE ASPHALT PAVING
DUTTON, THE TOWNsHIP OF SOUTIlWOLD, THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH DORCFlESTER AND THE
VILLAGE OF VIENNA AS REQUIRED, WITH THE VARIOUS MUNICIPALITIES TO PAY THE
COSTS.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY 13, 1985
PAGE 16.
"MOVED BY:
M. H. STEWART
------
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT T1:lE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DE?ARTMENT BE AUTHORIZED TO SURFACE TREAT ROADS
FOR VARIOUS MUNICWAbITIES AND GROUPS AS REQUESTED FOR T1:lE 1985 SEASON VlITH
THE VARIOUS MUNICWAbITIES AND GROUPS TO ?AY T1:lE COSTS.
CARRIED."
A request by the TO<i1l1ship of Yarmouth to have the County assume the road
between Concessions III and IV, from Sparta easterly to the Gi11ets bridge,was
discussed at some length.
Reeve Haddow explained that it waS the wish of his Council that the County
aSsume this road as part of the Development Agreement for rezoning of the
county's property at the bridge as a gravel pit.
The committee felt that the County should not assume the road but should
have some agreement with the TO<i1l1ship regarding the 1llaintenance of the road
and Suggested that the Engineer try to draw up some recommendations as a
starting point for a Development Agreement with the TO<i1l1ship of Yarmouth.
The request of Dave cook to sell his property to the County for gravel
pit purposes was discussed at some length.
It was noted that the only exit to the property was over the ?leasant
Valley Road over a poor bridge or easterly over a steep hill or southerly
through County property to the property presently being rezoned by the
County.
The Engineer was instructed to see Mr. Cook to aScertain his further
feelingS on the sale. It was inti1llated that there were no funds in the
budget for such purposes and they felt that the property would not be of
continued ·
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MAY l3, 1985
PAGE 17.
-",-..""
use for a few years and as such the property would not be worth as much as
Mr. Cook might think it was.
The membership of County Road Committees in light 'of the Association of
Municipalities of Ontario recommendations to the Provincial Cabinet was
discussed.
"MOVED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO (~THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE THAT THE ACT BE
AMENDED TO ALLOW COUNTY COUNCILS TO DESIGNATE COUNTY ROAD COMMITTEES
AS EACH COUNCIL SO DECIDES, WITH THE WARDEN REMAINING AS A MEMBER
EX OFFICO AND THAT ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE BE VOTING MEMBERS.
CARRIED."
The attached Roads Needs Study Update and Preliminary 1986 Spending
Levels as attached were presented with the Engineer stressing that the
estimates were preliminary and there was no guarantee that the Ministry
of Transportation and Communications would fund roads on the same level
as they had in 1985.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT WE ADJOURN TO FRIDAY, JUNE 14, 1985 AT 9:00 A.M.
CARRIED."
CHAIRMAN
· CONTRACTOR
Walmsley Bros. Ltd.,
R. R. # 8,
London, Ontario.
N6A 4C3
Towland (London) 1970 Ltd.
P. O. Box 2815,
Terminal 'At,
London, Ontario.
N6A 4H4
Cayuga Materials and
Construction,
R. R. # 4,
Cayuga, Ontario.
NOA lEO
T .C... G. Material s Ltd.,
P. O. Box l89,
London, Ontario.
N6A 4V7
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
TENDER FOR HOT MIX ASPHALT PAVING - 1985
TENDER SUMMARY
CONTRACT 'A' CONTRACT' B'
TOTAL TENDER PRICE
CONTRACT 'C'
$ 188,473.00 $ 334,583.75
$ 191,367.45
$ 367,780.45
$ 233, 503 . 75
$ 42,525.00
$ 44,370.00
$ 55 ,94LJ.. 00
CONTRACT 'D'
$ 64,475.00
$ 65,3L,.9.00
$ 76,155.00
\
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 MAINTENANCE BUDGET
COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS
(Totals include Payroll Burden.)
OPERATION
1985 MARCH ESTIMATE
1985 APRIL ESTIMATE
A - Bridges and Culverts
- 1 Bridges
- 2 Culverts
130,000
B - Roadside Maintenance
- 1 Grass Cutting
2 Tree Cutting and Brushing
- 4 Drainage
- 5 Roadside Maintenance
- 6 Tree Planting
- 7 Drainage Assessments
(Maintenance)
- 11 Weed Spraying
47,000
60,000
160,000
32,000
4,000
'\ r'\r"I.r"I.
..),VVV
20,000
C - Paved Road Maintenance
- 1 Repairs to Pavement
- 2 Sweeping
70,000
30,000
l30,000
47,000
50,000
160,000
42,000
2,000
'\ r"I.^^
..),VVV
16,000
115,000
30,000
COUNTY
120,000
39,000
40,000
145,000
35,000
2,000
'\ nnr"l.
..),VVV
12,000
100,000
26, 000
REVISED
APRIL 25, 1985.
ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN
ROADS
lO,OOO
8,000
10,000
15,000
7,000
4,000
15,000
4,000
Continued . . . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 MAINTENANCE BUDGET
COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS
OPERATION
C - Paved Road Maintenance (Continued)
- 3 Shoulder Maintenance
- 4 Surface Treatment
D - Gravel Road Maintenance
- 1 Ditching, Drainage and Gravel - Road #26
- 2 Grading Gravel Roads
3 Dust Control
- 4 Prime
5 Gravel Resurfacing
E - Winter Control
Total
- 1 Snow Plowing
2 Sanding and Salting
- 3 Snow Fence
- 4 Standby and Night Crew
F - Safety .Devices
- 1 Pavement Marking
- 2 Signs and Signals
PAGE 2.
1985 MARCH ESTIMATE
ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN
ROADS
1985 APRIL ESTIMATE
COUNTY
76, 000
l75,000
76,000
150,000
62,000
125, 000
14,000
25,000
25 , 000 25 , 000 25 , 000
33,000 33,000 27,000 6,000
48,000 48,000 40,000 8,000
11,000 5,000 3,000 2,000
80,000 97,000 95,000 2,000
600,000
575,000
495,000
80,000
50,000
62,000
50,000
62,000
40,000
44,000
10,000
18,000
Continued . . . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 MAINTENANCE BUDGET
COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS
PAGE 3.
ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN
OPERATION 1985 MARCH ESTIMATE 1985 APRIL ESTIMATE COUNTY ROADS
F _ Safety Devices (Continued)
- 3 Guide Rail 15,000 15,000 13,000' 2,000
.-4 Railroad Protection 43, 000 43,000 34,000 9,000
_ 6' Edge Marking 41,000 41,000 30,000 11,000
- 7 Stump Removal 20,000 20,000 14,000 6,000
TOTALS $1,835,000 ~ $l,835,000 $1,544,000, $291,000
:
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
RECOMMENDED TRUCK RATES FOR 1985
HOURLY RATE
1984
1985
SINGLE AXLE
$ 28 . 00
$36. 25
$29.00
$38 . 00
TANDEM
* KILOMETER RATES ADJUSTED IN 1984 AND RECOMMENDED 1984 RATES BE
USED FOR 1985.
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTME~T
KILOMETER RATES
(TARPING REQUIRED)
o - 3 Ki10metres .88
4 Kilometre Average' 1.00
5' Ki10metre Average 1.10
6 Kilometre Average 1.21
.
7 K110metre Average 1.35
8 Ki10metre Average 1.47
9 Ki10metre Average 1.56
10 Ki10metre Average 1.66
11 J.<i1ometre Average 1.75
12 Ki10metre Average 1.85
13 Kilometre Average 1.95
14 Kilometre Average 2.04
15 Kilometre Average 2.11
16 Kilometre Average 2.15
17 Ki10metre Average 2.22
. "18 Kilometre Average 2.30
19 Kilometre Average 2.40
20 Ki10metre Average 2.48
21 Kilometre Average 2.55
22 Ki10metre Average 2.63
23 Kilometre Average 2.70
24 Ki10metre Average 2.78
25 Ki10metre Average 2.85
26 Ki10metre Average 2.93
\ 27 Ki10metre Average 3.00
,\,
28 Ki10metre Average 3e08
"",
29 Kilometre Average 3.15
30 Ki10metre Average 3.22
YARDAGE RATE = 1 1/2 TIMES KILOMETRE RATE
Continued . . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEl'ARTMEl'l'f
KILOM.ETER RATES
TAR1?lNG REOUIRED)
1?AGE 2.
31 Kilomet~e Ave~age 3.30
3 2 Kilomet~e Ave~age .... 3.38
33 Kilometre Average 3.45
34 Kilomet~e Ave~age 3.51
35 Kilometre Ave~age 3.57
36 Kilomet~e Ave~age 3.64
37 Kilomet~e Average 3.70
38 Kilomet~e Ave~age 3.76
39 Kilomet~e Ave~age 3.82
40 Kilomet~e Ave~age 3.88
STRICRLAND BULLDOZING AND El'l'fER?R1SES L1\o\l'tED
(EO\JWMENT L 1ST AND ?RI C"f,~R 1:l0UR)
~
$15 .00
$65.00
$65.00
$55 .00
$45.00
$45.00
$4.5 .00
$60.00
$60.00
$65 .00
1.1.0 \\-'t Sc-caper 1.6 cu. '{d.
8~-~0 Tere~ DOze-C 1.80 1:lP
8~_20 'tere~ DOze-c and Rippe-c Teeth
1.4-50 ca~e DOzer 1.35 1:l~
1.1._50B Ga~e DOze-c 1.1.5 \\?
1.1.~50 case DOze-c 1.1.5 1:l?
~14 case bOader 1\ cu. '{d.
\<pebring \\oe 1.\ cu. '{d.
\\~taChi \\oe 1\ cu. '!d.
Rubbe-C 'ti-ced cat uoze-c 1.80 \\?
STRE11> 'tRUCR1NG l..IM1'tED
"f,OUIl't'iENT LIE!. AND ?R1CE ?ER \lOUR)
$55.00
$38.00
$38.00
$32.00
$38.00
~38 .00
J.u. 690B Shove1. - 1 ,!d.
J .U. 550 - 6~~ay ])1.ade
.J .U. 450 bOader .
. "Fo1;d 5551\ 'Roe
35 'ton "F1.oat ~ith 'tractor
'ta;ndelll AX1.e ~ate-C 't1:uc\I. - "3,000 Ga1..
COUNTY 01' ELGIN ROAD DE?ARTMENT
--=--'- ~ ..-~
COM!' ARISON 1984 AND 1985 NEEUS STUuY U?uATE
MAY' 3, 1985
"'PRELIM.INARY"
~
1984 1985
;::;.;;...--- ~
BR1.DGES $ 5,548,000 $ 5,540,000
~
~@!;
Nov:I $12,930,000 $12,062,000
1 _ 5 yEARS 1,420,000 1,154,000
CARKiOVER (NOVl) 836,000 242,000
spat DRA1.NAGE 183,000 883,,000
~ ~
TOTAL ROADS ~969~ ~941~~
,:atAb ROAllS ANU BRluGES $21,511,000 $26,481,000
.
11,856,000 ~ 12,523,000
RESUR'F t\,C1.NG ..
~ ~
'tatAL NEEDS ~313,0Q2. ~4/ OO~
COUNTY OF EbGIN ROi>Jl DE? A\t'f}\EN'r
COMPARISON OF S?ENDING ENTITbE"1ENT
,,~'
~
construction. 3.6% of $21,511,000
Resurfacing. 11% of $11,856,000
ToTAL
constrained by Increase of 10"/. over 1983
~lowable $1,949,000
(Shortfall $346,000)
F~
1986 (~ithout Inflation)
~
" 3 601 f d!26 481 000
construction. · ~ 0 ~, ,
Resurfacing'~ ll% of $12,523,000
.contraint Increase of 10"~ over 1984
Allowable $2,144,000
(Shortfall $lB1,OOO)
MAY 3, 1985.
$ 991,000
000
1 304,
~
5 000
~
$ 953,000
ToTAL
000
1 318,
.::------
1 000
~
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
REVISED CONSTRUCTION BUDGET
APRIL 1, 1985
AMENDED APRIL 25, 1985.
BRIDGES
TCTr AL
$175,000
1. Road #42 - Silver Creek $ 37,000
2. Road #29 - Culvert Replacement 30,000.
3. Road #45 - Players Bridge Floor - Engineering 8,000
4~ Road.~2 - Port Burwell Bridge Floor - Replacement 100,000
$175,000
Port ,Burwell Bridge Presently Estimated at $300,000
$100,000 - Bridge Construction
$100,000 - Resurfacing (If the Supplementary By-Law is not approved.)
$100,000 - Road Construction (If the Supplementary By'-Law is not approved.)
ROAD CONSTRUCTION
.TOTAL
$683,000
LESS: PORT BURWELL BRIDGE
lOO,OOO
AVAILABLE UNTIL SUPPLEMENTARY BY-LAW APPROVED
$583,00~
1. Miscellaneous Surveying and Engineering.
$ 25, 000
2. Road #45 - Engineering and Preliminary Work
Highway #73 to Road #40.
25, 000
3. County and St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission
Land Purchase.
75,000
4. Gravel Pit Development - Sparta and Pleasant Valley.
50,000
5. Complete Roads ~2 and #50 in Port Burwell.
80,000
6. Road #22 - .Yarmouth.
328,000
$583,000
\
\.
COUNTY Or' ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 ASPHALT RESURFACING BUDGE1;,
AMENDED l\f~IL 25,1985.
Funds Available Under Work Programme
$944,000
DEDUCT: Port Burwell Bridge Floor if the Supplementary
By-Law is not Approved.
100,000
$844,000
PROGRAMME:
1. Road #3 · 'North of Highway #40l (Spots). $ 80,000
2. Road #3 - Complete between Highway #3 (Aldborough) 25,000
and ROdney.
3. Road h86 - North of Road #45 (Yarmouth).
15,000
4. Road #45 - Jaffa to Highway #73 (Malahide).
5,000
5.,. Road #32 - Police College Gate to Road ~2
(Malahide ).
6. Road #39" - Chath~ Street (Port Burwell).
172,000
55,000
7. Road #42 - Port Burwell Easterly, 1 Mile t.
140,000
365,000
8. Road #52 - Road #30 to Highway #74.
$857,000
/
* It is hoped enough savings can be effected to do all projects
within the Budget. If the Supplementary-By-Law for the Port
Burwell Bridge is approved, funds would be available for
approximately 50% of Road 40,between Road 42 and Mount Salem.
COUNTY 01' ELGIN ROAD COMl'lI'l"l'EE
~
May session
1 <) 8 5
'1'0 the warden and Members of Elgin county council
your Road committee ReportS as FollOWS:
we have accepted the quotation of Ale:l< Newbi9ging Li1llited of ::. '"' ~.
Delaware for 10.000 ton of crushed gravel @ $ 4.80 per tOn. 0. ~4~v~~ g
on County ROad 9 in Dunwich TownshiP bet'Heer; Road 5 and Roa ,eJ.n
the lowest of 5 quotations received. work J.S presentlY under'ilay'
, h ~A- ' t~Y of Transportation and
NO information haS been receJ.ved from t e ~J.nJ.s '
communications on the county'S applicatiOn for a suppl~entary spendJ.ng
bY laW ·
1.
3.
We have accepted the tenders of walmsley Bros., Limited of London for
Hot Mi:l< ASphalt paving as follows:
$191 367 45; for work on Roads 42 and 50 in port BUr'ilell.
Roa; 42 ~ast of port BUr'ilell for 1 mile, Road,39 (Chatham
street) in port BUr'ilell, for the village of VJ.enna.
patching on Road 42 and for resurfacing ,on Road 40 north
of Road 42 for 1 mile (if funds are avaJ.lable).
wa1.lllS1ey' s bid was the lowest of three.
$334,583.75; For asphalt resurfacing on Road 3: from
police college gate to Road 52. Road 52 fr~m H~~hwaY
74 to Road 30, patching on (a) Road 33 (Ka~ns HJ.ll) ·
(b) Road 40 at Glencolin, (c) several areas on ROad 52
and for the TownshiPS of south Dorchester and southwold.
walmsley' s bid was the lowest of two.
cont~act 'A' -
2.
cont~act 'B'
t 'c' $42 525 00 fo~ asphalt paving on Road 22 (Fairview Ave..)
cont~ac - , .
yarmouth Township.
walmsley' s bid waS the lowest of 3.
5.
f B. - hwa'\T
_ $64.475.00 for asphalt patChing on ROad 3 rom ~g "
401 to wardsvi11e in AldboroUgh TOwnshiP and for the
villages of Rodney and Dutton.
wa}.1l\Sley' s bid waS the lowest of 3.
, 0. C unications haS approved reno~ations
The ~nistrY of TransportatJ.on,an dO~ ~'fy)..'ng and r~val of old concrete
11 B 'dge work ~nclu eS sca~J.
of po~t BU~we ~).. .1 . g f an additional 4 inches of concrete and
from the deck and the P aCJ.n 0 t f
::~:n~::;o:~::~ o~o~~,w~~lt~:::e:r:~ :::::e;::s!:]~0~:~~u~
received. The County wJ.ll,remove elo ment of reinforcing steel. jointS
bidders will be asked to ~~ on,~e~ :~ject to single lane traffic while
and neW concrete. The br~ ge "fJ. t will start around mid June. The
under construction. Re1ll0val 0 concre e
cost estimate remainS at $300,000.
, " f 0. that the footings of the concrete
After investJ.gat~on J.: has b~en oun 0. 29 re still belOW stream bottom
culvert on the unde~hJ.ll DraJ.n on Roa l:Ced thiS year. Repairs to
thus this culvert w~ll not have to be r:on are necessarY as the bottom
the Brown Drcein culvert on Road 8 at DUdS the stream bed haS eroded.
of the footings are above the stre~ ~e ~k will be used for Road 8 work.
FundS originallY allocated for Roa wo
UbliC 1lleeting to disCuss the rezoning
The TOwnshiP ~f Yar<l\Outh ha~ hel~:~ on hOts 26 and 27, concession IV,
as a gra~el pJ. t . the cour;ty ~ pr P y 'ved from the pUblic. AdvertiS~ent
yar<l\OUth. NO seriOUS ob) ectJ.ons 1weR~e ~~ccee)..s' 1)..' cence will be 1llade shortlY,
. h ~A- 'st~y of Natu~a eSou~
to obtaJ.n t e ...J.n~ ,,' '1' h' P of yar<l\OUth regarding a
Negotiations are cont~nuJ.ng wJ.th the ownS J.
develop1llent agree1llent.
6.
cont~act 'D'
4.
continued · · . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT
MAY SESSION
1 9 8 5
To the Warden and Members of Elgin County Council
WE RECOMMEND:
1.
That a Bylaw be passed, amending County Bylaw 82-4, which will
decrease the allowable maximum weight of vehicles using Tate's
Bridge over the Thames River in Dunwich to 5 Tonnes from the
present 15 Tonnes. The floor of Tate's Bridge has deteriorated
in the past 6 months.
2.
That a Bylaw be passed adopting a plan of County Road Improvement
and Establishing a County Road System in the County of Elgin which
will in effect amend Bylaw 2166 (passed in 1971), and subsequent
amending Bylaws. The new Establishment Bylaw will show the limits
of the County Road System as it is presently, in :metric. The
Road Department has been preparing this Bylaw for several years.
3.
That a Bylaw be passed which will in effect amend Bylaw 2487
designating through highways in the County of Elgin. The Bylaw will
coincide with the new Establishment Road Bylaw as several road
number designations have been made since the last Bylaw was
passed.
All Of Which Is Respectfully Submitted.
CHAIRMAN.
ST. THOMS, ONTARIO
APRIL 26, 1985
PAGE 1.
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building at
9:00 a.m., Friday, April 26, 1985 for a Road Inspection of West Elgin
(as per attached). All members were present except Warden Lavereau. The
Engineer and the Assistant Engineer were also present.
The Engineer presented the surface treatment list (as attached).
After the inspection was completed the Committee met at the Municipal
Bui1 ding.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO CALL TENDERS FOR HOT MIX ASPHALT
PAVING AS FOLLOWS:
CONTRACT 'A'
1 . ROADS #42 AND #50 IN PORT BURWELL.
2. ROAD #39 (CHATHAM STREET), PORT BURWELL.
3. ROAD #42 FROM EAST LIMIT OF PORT BURWELL, EASTERLY APPROXIMATELY
1 MILE.
4. ASPHALT PATCHING, ROAD #42.
5. ON BEHALF OF THE VILLAGE OF VIENNA.
6. ROAD #40, ROAD #42 NORTHERLY 1 MILE (IF FUNDS AVAILABLE).
CONTRACT 'B'
1. ROAD #32 FROM ROAD #52 TO THE POLICE COLLEGE GATE.
2. ASPHALT PATCHING, 3 LOCATIONS ON ROAD #52 AND ROAD #40 AT
GLENCOLIN.
~,
3. ROAD #52 FROM HIGHWAY #74 TO ROAD #30 WITH ASPHALT PATCHING
ON ROAD #29 AND ON ROAD #52, WEST OF ROAD #31 (1 LOCATION).
4. ROAD #33, 2 LOCATIONS, PATCHING.
5. ON BEHALF OF THE TOWNSHIPS OF SOUTHWOLD AND SOUTH DORCHESTER.
CONTINUED . . . .
ST. T1l0MAS, ONTARIO
AP.RIL 26, 1985
'PAGE 2.
"MOVED BY: D. ?ER0'n:CH
SECONDED "BY: C. R. VllbbSEY
CONTINUED · ·
CONTRACT 1 C'
1. ROAD #22, H.b.8 BASE COAT AT ROAD #,-+5 INTERSECTION; 1:l.b.4
ST. T1:l0MAS blMITS TO NORT1:l S1:l0Rf. GRAVEb ?IT.
CONTRACT 'D'
1. ROAD #3 ? AT CHING , 1lIGRW AY #,-+01 TO VlARDSVILbE :BRIDGE.
2. ON "BEflAbF OF T1lE VIbbt\GES OF DU'f'fON AND RODNEY.
CARRIED ."
The 1lleeting adjOUrned to Monday, May 13, 1985.
CB.AIRMAN
~.
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD INSPECTION
APRIL 26, 1985
1. Leave Court House - 9:00 a.m.
2. Road #22 from the City bi~its to Road #27 - Construction 1984-1985,
f
etc.
3. Road #27 to Sparta.
4. Sparta ?it _ Rezoning underway, application for ?it and Quarry
License underway.
5. ?aving will be required east and west of the Gil1ets Bridge.
6. Road #36, Sparta Southerly - Asphalt resurfacing 1985 or 1986.
7. Road #24 _ Surface treat1llent from Dexter to Road #23, possiblY in
1985.
8. Road #23 to Road #20 in ?ort Stanley.
9. Road #20 in Finga1 _ surface treatment fr01ll top of Stacey's Hill
(Smith Side Road) to Boxall Road under consideration for 1985.
10. COFFEE _ SOUTHWObD TOWNS1:lI? OFFICE.
11. Road #16 to Road #14 _ surface treatment under consideration for
Road #14 from Road #16 to 1:lighway #3.
Ditching 1985 on the west side of Road #14 fr01ll Iona Station to
Road #13.
12. Road #14 from Road #13 to the Middle1llisS Bridge - Should be
considered for future resurfacing.
13. Middlemiss Bridge ~ Replacement sometime when we can talk
Middlesex into helping.
14. Road #9 from Road #14 to Road #5 - Gravelling 1985.
15. Township Road to Road #2.
16. Road #2 to West Lorne.
17. Road #2, Vlest Lorne to Rodney - surface treatment under
consideration for 1985.
18. Road #3, Road #2 to Highway #3 - Ditching, asphalt resurfacing,
surface treatment of shoulders 1983-1984. 1985 work includes
single surface treatment on shoulders pluS 1llinor ditching.
19. Road #3, South of New GlasgoW - ?aving 1983-1984.
20. LUNCH - NEW GLASGOW.
continued · · · ·
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD INSPECTION
APRIL 26, 1985
PAGE 2.
21. Road #4 West of Rodney - Consideration for future reconstruction.
22. Through County of Kent Roads to Road ~.
23. Road #3 to Wardsville Bridge - Expansion joint replaced in 1984,
etc. We propose to replace open finger joints, as soon as the
County of Middlesex agrees to the expenditure. Paint the
following year.
24. Road #3 from Wardsville to Highway #401 - Spot asphalt patching
required in 1985. (Estimate $80,000)
25. Road #9, Aldborough Township of Road #5, Township Road to Road #2.
26. Road #2 to Dutton - Consideration for future reconstruction from
Townline easterly to Ecker Drain.
27. Road #8, Dutton to Wallacetown - Resurfacing and shoulder work in
198 2-1984.
28. Road #8, South of Wallacetown to Pearce Park - Surface Treatment
scheduled for 1985.
29. Road #16 - Gravel shouldering from Road #8 to the Willey's Side
Road, recently completed.
30. Road #l6 to St. Thomas.
31. Return to Court House unless International Plowing Match Site is
not inspected on April 25th.
* Road Committee Meeting - Resolutions for asphalt resurfacing, etc.
coUNTY OF EbGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
= . '--'~-=- ...---:._ :r-=
SURFACE TREATMENT LIST
- ~---~
A'PRIL 22, 1985
1. RO ad #2 _ VIe st 1 imi t 0 f curb and gutter in VIe st borne
to Rodney e~cept asphalt patches (1980).
2. Road #8
1:lighway ff3 (WallacetO<i1U to ?earce ?ark)
3. Road #14 _ 10na, southerly portions as marked (1979).
(1979).
4. Road #16 _ Fingal "Bridge to west side of Middlemarch
5. Road #20 - 1:lighway ff3 (Shedden southerlY to south limit'
neW asphalt).
6. Road #20 - ClutterbuckS to top of StacY 1:lill, e~cept
patch west of yorkS (1980).
7. Road #24 - Road #23 toward De~ter at least as far as
Road #22, finish up road (1981).
8. Road #42 - Finish fr01ll 1:l011ywood Side Road to north
limit of ?ort Burwell (1977).
9. Road #52 - Road #31 easterly to "Baker_penhale Drain.
curve (1982).
TOTAL
(* ?reliminary Estimate $4,500 per KID)
BRIDGE APPROACHES
- --
(100 feet, east side, triple)
1. Y ar1ll0uth- Mal ahide To<i1Uline ~ orwell.
2. CookS - Road #43.
3. ?hi1l1ll0re - Road #43.
4. Fulton _ 50 feet each way, west side.
100 feet, east side.
~lM~
6.5 KIn t
4.6 KIn
1.5 KIn t
5.5 KIn t
0.3 KIn
5.6 KIn:t.
3.0 KIn t
3.2 KIn
1.3 KIn:t.
---
31.5 KIn
:::;;:.;::::;
southda1e Road, northerly 1/2 mile t (include southda1e
1. Road #28
intersection ).
300 feet t south of Road #45 to north li1llit of calton
2. Road #43
cemetery.
_ _..:l ./1:16
]i'J:01ll Road #52 to Road #11.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
APRIL 25, 1985
PAGE 1.
9 :00 a.1ll., Thursday, April 25, 1985, for a Road Inspection of East Elgin
THE COUNTY OF EbGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building at
(as per the attached itinerary). All 1lle1llbers were present except Reeve Monteith,
also present were the Engineer and Assistant Engineer.
Township of Yarmouth to have the County take over the road between
The Engineer reported that he had received a request from the
Concessions III and IV, Yarmouth Township from Sparta to the Gi11ets Bridge,
as a condition for the rezoning of property o<i1O.ed by the County in bots 26
and 27, concession IV (for gravel pit purposes).
The committee agreed to inspect the road the following day.
gravel on County Road #9, Dunwich Township (as attached).
At lunch time the Assistant Engineer presented quotations for crushed
"MOVED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE ACCE?T THE QUOTATION OF AbEX NEW"BIGGING bIMITED AT $4.80
PER TON FOR GRANULAR . AI SUl'?bIED AND AP?bIED TO COUNTY ROAD #9
"BETWEEN ROAD #5 AND ROAD #1.4 IN DUNIUCH TOWNSHU.
CARRIED."
revised Construction Budget which were the same as that which waS presented
The Engineer presented an Asphalt Resurfacing Budget and a
to committee at the meeting of April 11th, except that he recommended that
if extra funds were available that a portion of Road #40, South of Mount
Salem be asphalt resurfaced rather than a portion of Road #36, south of
Sparta, inasmuch as there would be no gravel for shouldering on Road #36
because of the delay in the rezoning of the Sparta ?it.
The meeting adjourned to ApEil 26, 1985.
~4- wAf) ~'-}/ ~ ~~ ':--
CHAIRMAN
coUNT)' 01' ELGIN ROAD INS?ECTlON
~
1.
heave court 1:l0Use ~ 9 :00 a.1ll.
TO Road ff36 frOtll 1:lighway ff3 to Road #45 ~ ASphalt resurfaced
1983~1984, minor trim work remainS.
county' s ?leasant valley Gravel ?it ~ Gra"l1el piled and ready
2.
t
3.
fo~ c~ushing 1985.
county Road #45, ?layerS "Bridge floor ~ Testing and engineering
1985 to be repaired in 19B6.
Road #45, fr01ll Jaffa to 1:lighway #73 ~ Asphalt resurfacing 19B4,
1llinor tri~ing re1llainS.
COFFEE ~ "BIbb C1NERbY' S.
-0, ..:1 JJJ.5 'tlighwa'1 #73 to Road #40 ~ ?rogrfUllll\ed for
Return to ,,-oau 1t~ , n J
reconstructiOn and resurfacing. Road widening will be required
but little haS been purchased to date. A municipal drainage
. ..:1. 11..ttle enginee~ing wo~k haS been done.
~epo~t l.S penu1.ng,
stU1l1PS have been removed.
Road #40, Mount salem, southerlY - Asphalt resurfacing should be
Some
4.
5.
6.
7.
10.
done in 1986.
S il ver creek culvert, RO ad #42 ~ Recon structe d in 19B3 ~ 1 984.
tri1ll work and seeding remainS in 1985.
Road #42 to ?ort BUrwell ~ ASphalt patching required in several
1 oca t ionS "mere culvert rep 1 aceroent s were done in 198 3 ~ 1984.
surface treatment fr01ll the 1:lo11Y"ood Side Road to the li1llitS of
Some
8.
9.
11.
?ort "Burwell scheduled for 19B5.
f . s d in 1985. Vlith
Road ff39 (Chathmn Street) ~ ReSur aCJ.ng propo e
luck a portion of chatha1ll Street will be returned to the Village
of ?Ort "Burwell and the County of Elgin fr01ll the Ministry of the
EnvironmentS' sewage Treatroent ?lant, southerlY.
Roads #42 and #50 in ?ort "Burwell ~ Final coat of asphalt 1985,
urban reconstruction in 1984.
Road #42 east of ?Ort "Burwell ~ one 1llile ()f asphalt resurfacing
proposed in 19B5 (presentlY surface treated), erosion in several
locations, stU1llPs are being hauled to the worst erosion areas.
?ermiSsion haS been received to haul stU1llPs to other locations.
continued · · · ·
12.
13.
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD INSPECTION
APRIL 25, 1985
PAGE 2.
14. Township of Bayham, Tunnel Road - Pipe arch culvE~rt failure.
15. LUNCH - STRAFFORDVILLE.
l6. Road #38 to Richmond - Recent construction.
17. Road #43 to Calton - Gravel resurfacing 1984. Under construction
for future reconstruction for 1 mile south of Calton to 1/2 mile
north of Calton.
18. In passing note Phillmore and Cook's Bridge (bai1ey bridge).
19. Road #45 to Road #40 - Highway #3 to south of Glencolin, surface
treatment proposed in 1985. Asphalt patching proposed on curve
and at the Glenco1in Bridge to railway track approaches.
,
20. Township Road to Road #32 (Police College Road) _ Construction
1983 to 1985.
21. Highway #73 to the Police College - Minor ditching required only.
Surface treatment from Police College to Road #52 in poor
condition, recommended for hot mix asphalt 1985. Railway crossing
in abeyance pending the decision of the Canadian National Railway
as to whether one or two tracks will be required.
22. Road #52 in Springfield.
23. Roads #49, #48 and #47 to Avon (Road #37).
24. Road #37 - Inspect from Oxford Townline to Belmont.
25. Highway #74 to Road #52.
26. Road #52 to Road #30 - Proposed asphalt resurfacing 1985.
27. If time - International Plowing Match Site, County Roads #52 and #26.
28. Road #25 - Pipe arch culvert failures, Lynhurst and McBains, culverts
presently supported by shoring.
29. Road #29 ... Concrete culvert, McBains, culvert footings seriously
exposed by drain work.
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
]0,000 TONS OF CRUSHED GRAVEL
COUNTY ROAD #9 ... TOWNSHIP OF DUNWICH
. .. /
1. Alex Newbigging Limited
R. R. #1
Delaware, Ontario
2. McKenzie Henderson
P. O. Box ll6
Arkona, Ontario
NOM lBO
~. Johnston Bros. (Bothwell) Limited
P. O. Box 220
Botwell, Ontario
NOP lCO
4. South Winds Sand and Gravel Limited
764 Wharncliffe Road South
London, Ontario
N6J 2N4
5. TCG Materials Limited
P. O. Box 189
.London, Ontar~o
N6A 4V7
6. Babinsky Trucking Limited
R. R; #3
Komoka, Ontario
7. Huron Construction Company Limited
P. O. Box 609
Chatham, Ontario
N7M 5KB
$4.80 per ton
$4.86 per ton
$4.95 per ton
$4.95 per ton
$5.2l per ton
No Bid Received
No Bid Received
.'
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 ASPHALT RESURFACING BUDGET
APRIL 11, 1985
Funds Available Under Work Programme
$944,000
DEDUCT: Port Burwell Bridge Floor if the Supplementary
By-Law is not Approved.
100,000
( $844,000
PROGRAMME:
1.1 Road #3 - North of Highway #401 (Spots).
$ 80,000
2. Road #3 - Complete between Highway #3 (Aldborough)
and Rodney.
"
25, 000
3. Road #36 - North of Road #45 (Yarmouth)~
l5,000
4. Road #45 - Jaffa to Highway #73 (Malahide),
5,000
5. Road #32 - Police College Gate to Road #52
(Malahide).
172,000
6. Road #39 - Chatham Street (Port Burwell).
55,000
7. Road #42 - Port Burwell Easterly, 1 Mile +.
l40,000
8. Road #5 2 - Road #30 to Highway #74.
365,000
$857,000
* It is hoped enough saving can be affected to do all projects
within the Budget. If the Supplementary By-Law for the Port
Burwell Bridge is approved funds would be available for
approximately 50% of Road #40, north of Road #42.
BRIDGES
1. Road #42
2. Road #29
3. Road #45
4. Road #42
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
REVISED CONSTRUCTION BUDGET
TOTAL
Sil ver Creek
Culvert Replacement
Players Bridge Floor - Engineering
Port Burwell Bridge Floor - Replacement
Port Burwell Bridge Presently Estimated at $300,000
$100,000
$lOO,OOO
$100,000
Bridge Construction
APRIL 1, 1985
$l T5, 000
$ 37,000
30,000
8,000
100,000
$l75,000
Resurfacing (If the Supplementary By-Law is not approved.)
Road Construction (If the Supplementary By..Law is not approved.)
ROAD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
LESS: PORT BURWELL BRIDGE
AVAILABLE UNTIL SUPPLEMENTARY BY-LAW APPROVED
2. Road #45
1. Miscellaneous Surveying and Engineering.
Engineering and Preliminary Work
Highway #73 to Road #40.
3. County and St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission
Land Purchase.
4. Gravel Pit Development - Sparta and Pleasant Va1leYI~
5. Complete Roads #42 and #50 in Port Burwell.
6. Road #22
Yarmouth.
$683,000
lOO,OOO
$583,000
$ 25, 000
25, 000
75,000
50,000
80,000
328, 000
$583,000
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT
APRIL SESSION
1985
TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL
YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS:
l. The Road Committee is scheduled to inspect roads in East Elgin on
April 25th and roads in West Elgin on April 26th.
2. We expect approval shortly of our application to Employment and
Immigration Canada under the "Challenge '85" Summer Employment
Experience Development (S.E.E.D.) Prograrrn:ne for a survey
technician.
Potential value of the programme is $9,694.
3. We have received approval for a Canada Works Prograrrnne which is
underway to employ eight (8) laid-off employees from 1983 and
1984 for the period from April 9th to June 7th.
These workers will be paid directly through the Unemployment
Insurance Commission and the County will be given an allowance
for machine rentals and materials required.
The potential value of the project is $28,900.
4. The Province of Ontario has approved a County's 1981+ application
to the Ontario Youth Corps Programme for eight (8) youths for a
period of twenty six (26) weeks beginning April 9th..
The potential value of this programme is $43,264.
5. County Road #43, the Bayham-Malahide Townline, has been gravel
resurfaced between Calton and Richmond.
6. Quotations have been called for crushed gravel from the Komoka
area for County Road #9 in Dunwich Township from County Road #5
to County Road #14; approximately lO,OOO tons of gravel is
required.
The quotations are due April 25th&
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
CHAIRMAN
ST. T1:l0MAS, ol'l'fAR 10
A'PRIL 11, 1985
1?AGE 1.
T1:lE couNT)' 01' EbGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the MuniCipal "Building on
Thursday, 1\pril 11, 1985 at 1 ~30 p.1ll. All 1lle1llbers were present as were the
Engineer and Assistant Engineer.
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED B)'~ C. R. mbLSE)'
TRAT T1:lE MlN1J'fES 01' T1:lE MEE'tINGS 01' fEBRUAR)' 15, fE"BRUAR)' '2.1,
MARC1:l 7 AND MARC1:l 15, 1985 "BE Al'?ROVED.
D. 'PEROVIC1:\
CARRIED."
Reeve Stewart, Chair<l\an of the county Govern1llent committee stated
. t' .c.' d .......1 th the wa" that the County Road Co~ittee
that the c~ttee waS sa J.SLJ.e w~ J
1llade their decisions by resolution. Their recent report to County Council
requested that other committees do their business by resolution as 1lluch-as
pOSSible.
TlIE ENG1NEER RE?ORTED /'$ fOb bOWS ~
That the Government of canada had approved the canadian National and
1.
canadian ?acific take over of conrail.
A letter had been written to the canadian Transport co~ission requesting
that a commiSsion order be given to the canadian NatiOnal/canadian ?acific
Railways to i1llprove and repair railway crossings on all public roads in
the CountY in accordance with the recommendatiOn of the inspection that
waS made by the canadian Transport commission Engineer and countY Engineer
in 1984.
A letter <i1Ould also be written to the Co~iSsion asking that an order be
given to the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway to itoprove their crossings in
accordance with the inspection recommendatiOn 1llade in 19B4.
ln spite of 1llany promises tbe Chesapeake and Ohio Railway bad not done
any <i1Ork on any of their crossingS.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
APRIL 11, 1985
PAGE 2.
2. Approval for the canada Vlorks ?rogra~e to hire eight (8) laid-off workers
fr01ll 1983~1984 had been received fr01ll EmPloyment and I~igration Canada.
These workers would be employed fro1ll April 9th to June 7th and their
wageS paid through the Unetoployment InsUrance commission. An allowance
of approxi1llatelY $9,500 would be given to the county for materials and
machine rentals.
?otential value of this programme with wages, etc., was approximatelY
3. The ?rovincial Government has approved a late 1984 Fall application of
$28,900.
the County for a Youth Corps ?rogramme. Eight (8) youthS would be
e1llployed fr01ll April 9th for twenty six (26) weeks at $4.00 per hour
(pluS a bonUS if they stayed 1ll0re than twelve (12) weeks).
The potential value of thiS programme with wageS and allowances to the
County was approximatelY $43,250.
under the Challenge 185 summer Development Programme funds in the
a1ll0unt of $9,700 to hire a survey technician- The person hired would
have to be a summer student in surveying or civil ~~gineering who would
be returning to school in the Fall.
4. It was expected that EmPlOyment and Immigration canada would approve
5. The 1llaps had not yet been received fr01ll the printers.
6. NO infopnatiOn waS available on the SupplementarY By-baw.
7. The recent inclement weather had stopped further testS on the ?ort "Burwell
b:ridge floor.
correspondence had been received fr01ll Mr- Ken Kleinsteiber stressing that
the bridge floor be repaired in 1985 and that the ?layers Bridge on County
Road #45 waS also suffering seriouS deterioration and should be repaired as
soon as possible.
Engineer outlined the inspection procedure that.the county <i1Ould follow,
The inspection of pipe arch culverts waS proceeding and the Assistant
----',
stating that seven (7) county culvertS and tWO (2) Township culvertS would
continued · · · ·
ST. TllOl'lAS, QNTAR10
A'PRIL 11, 1985
pAGE 3.
be inspected every three (3) weeks and another thirty_si>< (36) culvertS including
three (3) county culvertS and thirty_three (33) TownshiP culvertS would be:
d . (6) ~~eeks It waS hoped to inspect all culvertS every si>< (6)
inspecte every SJ.>< ~ ·
monthS, both in the sU1lJ1ller and <i1inter. lnspection information 'ifOuld be forwarded
to the TownshipS and those culvertS not on the three (3) or si>< (6) week inspection
h. ff". ,,1 s to 1llake
list sheetS should be inspected on a periodic basis by TOwns J.p 0 J.CJ.
sure that there were nO serioUS proble1llS.
1:ligh water had stOpped the inspection of onlY five (5) pipe arch culvertS on
TownshiP -roads.
A number of meetings had been held with varioUs committees, Ontario ?rovincial
1. d the "inistr" of transportatiOn and communications _concerning the
?O J.ce an "' J
InternatiOnal ?lowing Match.
parking and plo<i1ing lands had still to be designated.
The committee agreed that signS should be erected on countY Road #25,
county Road #52 and 1:lighway ff3 indicating the site of the ?lo<i1ing Match.
The erection of these signS now would perhapS ease traffic congestion when
h h S ~~ell as adve-rtising the InternatiOnal ?lowing Match.
t e roatc was on a ~ -
ManY signs would be required for general information during the InternatiOnal
?lo<i1ing MatCh and theSe <i1Ould be 1llade as ti1lle per<l\itted throughout the SUflllllE'r.
Traffic signS on county Roads #52, #25, #26 and #30, etc., had been
inspected and a considerable nU1llber of signS would be replaced as soon as
possible in preparation for the ?lo<i1ing Match.
The County's liability when entering private lands for plo<i1ing Match
purposes waS diSCUssed at some length.
. t d that "r Vlells of the ]i'J:ank Cowan Company bimited had
The EngJ.neer repor e ~ ·
asked that a resolution be passed SO that County emplOyees would be covered
when entering ontO private lands by the County's liability insurance and
The'traffic floW pattern had been set althoUgh s01lle
~orkers' compensation Insurance.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
APRIL 11, 1985
'PAGE 4.
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED BY: R. J. I..t\VEREAU
THAT T1:lE STAFF OF T1:lE COUNTY ROADS DE? ARTMENT "BE AUT1:l0RIZED TO AND INSTRUCTED
M.. R. STEWART
TO ENTER 0l'l'f0 1J>JlDS UNDER O?TION OR bEASE BY T1:lE bQCAb coMJ{LT'fEE OF THE
Ol'l'fARIO ?bOVlMEN'S ASSOCIATION FOR ?b()1ilING MATCH ?URPOSES AS REQUIRED FROM
TIME TO TIME INCbUDING T1:lE ERECTION OF SNOW FENCE REQUIRED AND VlORK
REQUIRED ON T1:lE COUNTY EX1:lI"BIT. T1:lIS RES abUT ION IS ?.AS SED SO TRAT T1:lE
CoUNTY'S bIABlbITY INs\JRiINCE TllROUG1:l T1:lE FRANK COWAN caMP ANY bIMITED Vllbb "BE
IN FORCE AND T1:lE STAFF ?RO'fECTED "BY VlORKERS' COMl'ENSATION ·
CARRIED."
culvert on County Road #8 at ])Iltton had been undercut and re1lledial <i1Ork <i1Ould
It appeared. that the footings to the concrete culvert on the Bro<i1tl Drain
be required thiS summer.
McBain, had not been undercut by the municipal drain construction as had been
There waS a possibility that the concrete footings on county Road #29,
previoUSlY thought. If such waS the case the Engineer felt that he <i1Ould
recommend to committee that the culvert replace1llent be postponed until 1986.
The county had been put on notice regarding an accident at the intersectiOn
of county Road #32 and County Road #5 2.
county Road #45. ?ictUres of the intersection had been forwarded to
A fatal accident had occurred at the intersection of county Road #22 and
]i'J:ank Cowan C01llpany bimited. It appeared that the motorist westbound on
county Road #45 did not stOp and waS the probable cause of the accident.
area of Fairview Avenue this summer waS completed the committee should decide
The Engineer stated that after the construction that waS slated for that
whether or not further safety device s were required.
ST. T1:l01:lAS, ONTARiO
Al'RIL 11, 1985
'PAGE 5.
T1:lE El'\GlNEER RE?ORTED ON T1:lE VlORR TO DATE AS FObbC1ifS:
The five (5) new pickUP truckS had been received as well as the neW Case
1.
"Backboe and the new Elgin sweeper-
Truck #88 (Mack Truck) waS at count1lY Collision with bOdy ""rk being done.
Truck #A5 (pickUP) had been returned after being repai]:ed for collision
damage caused last winter when it was backed into by a sander.
!)UlllP truck inspectiOns were underway.
Recent postings for machinery operators -were Donald "Britton to S<i1eeper,
and JroneS 1:laskell to backhoe.
A replace1llent would be required for Mr. 1:laskell in the garage.
Reginald 1:lutchings had lost his license for a three (3) 1ll0nth period and
had been reclassified to class I, Labourer.
bion Sharzer had met with County Department 1:leads regarding County
2.
3.
4.
7.
employment policies.
A 1lleeting with Don 1:lusson, County Engineer, County of 1!li-ddlese:>< to
inspect boundary bridgeS would not be held until later in the 1ll0nth.
Snow fence had been picked up, sander sand sno<i1P lowS had been -r e1llOved
county and hired equip1llent- Vlinter stand~bY ended on April 9th.
f-r om
5..
6.
The Gartlln "Bridge on County Road #5 2 had been checked for concrete
deterioratiOn and none found.
"Bridge floor cleaning waS underWay.
sweeping was underway with VleSt Elgin cotopleted.
?icking up of junk, etc., waS underWay on varioUs roads'in the ?lowing Match
d #16 Road #22 _ )'ar<l\outh, Road #'32 ~ Malahide
area and would be done on Roa '
and Road #'36 north of Road #45.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12. Sign repair was underway.
Road #43 fr01ll calton to Ricb:lllOnd had been gravelled.
u. .:1 #44 f-rom Righway #3 to the east side of the Otter
Shoulders on CountY "oau
13.
creek bridge had been gravelled.
LeSs than 1,000 tonS of crushed gravel remained at the county' s pleasant
valleY ?it (the gravel crushing contractor would return earlY in MaY).
~-"
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
APRIL 11, 1985
PAGE 6.
14. crushed gravel would be applied to shoulderS in Dunwich TO'if(lship and also
Road #14, SouthWO 1 d~ D\l.nwi ch TO'if(ll ine.
15 . Spring work that was up coming included spot dr ainag e work, gr adin!l 0 f shoul der s ,
grading of roads, application of salt brine,
stump removal on county Road #52 and Road #30 and cleanup <i1Ork at the
?leasant valley and the Sparta ?its.
?ave1llent marking would start earlY in MaY.
16 . Tree planting woul d be underway next week.
17. The railing postS on the Dodd'S creek "Bridge on Vlellington Road and the
lB. The surface treatment on Road #32, north of the ?olice college waS in
calton Bridge ~ould be completed shortlY.
poor condition and it was rec01fll1l"nded that instead of surface treating
it again, fj..nal construction (3" of hot mix) should be completed thiS
su~er rather than postponed for several years.
19. The slide at the T<i1in valley School would be repaired as soon as weather
20. An applicatiOn had been made to the catfiSh creek conservation for a
and soil conditions permitted.
per1llit to clean out under the Glencolin Bridge on Road #40.
21. serious ground water erosion was occurring on the Vlilliaro vanderven
property on Road #42 east of ?ort Burwell.
The stutops fr01ll Road #30 and Road #52 would be taken to the slide and if
extra stUIllPS were required they <i1Ould be re1ll0ved fr01ll Road #40, south of
Mount salem or Road #45 west of Road #40.
22. A check list for surface treat1llent waS being prepared.
23. A neW maintenance budget 'ifOuld be presented at the May 1lleeting.
24. Asphalt patching waS required in a large nUIllber of locations and as
much as possible should be done.
ST. T1:l0MAS, <m'fARIO
A'PRIL 11, 1985
pAGE 7.
"MOVED Wi ~
SECONDED B'l: M. 1:l. STEWART
TRAT T1:lE FObbQ1il1.NC ACCOUNTS ?AYABbE ?A'{LlSTS "BE A??RO'fED FOR ?AYMEl'l'f:
? A'{bIST 1'\UMBER 1 7 t,M.OUN'tDlG TO $51,646. 69
?A'{bIST 1'\UMBER 18 t,M.oUN'tING TO $218.76 \
? A'{bIST l'lIJM"BER 19 t,M.OUNTING TO $1,474. 09
? A'{bIST l'lIJM"BER 20 t,M.QUNTING TO $78,833. 7 0
? AYbIST 1'\UMBER 21 t,M.oUN'tING TO $103,922. 75
?A'{bIST l'lIJM"BER 22 t,M.oUN'tING TO $113,006.34
c. R. vllLLSEY
CARRIED ."
'~MO\TED WI.:
S EC01'\DED BY: D. ?EROITIC1:l
TRAT TtlE ENGINEER BE A1J'f1l0RIZEJ) TO CALb QuarATIONS FOR GRAVEbbING ON
ROAD #9 FROM ROAD #5 TO ROAD #14 TO CbOSE 01'\ A?R Ib 25, 1 985 ·
CARRIED ."
lZ. Eo MONTEITll
The Engineer reported that he had 1llet with Mr. Maurice 1,e-.ris of the
lUnistn' of Natural ResOurces regarding the reasSU1ll1'tiOn of chatha1ll Street in
'Po-rt BU-rwell.
The committee instructed the Engineer to meet wit 1). Mr. bewis to trY to
negotiate an earlY return to the Village of ?ort BUrwell and the County, of
chatham Street as presentlY travelled.
d h s:. might have to be erected
The Co~ittee waS not concerne t at snow ~ence
south of the south limit of the road to keep vehicles off the beach.
. ~ ted the attached budget for asphalt resurfacing and
The Eng~nee-r p-resen
. d. to the Ministry of Transportation and co~unicatiOns
constructJ.on, correspon J.ng
construction allocations.
The budget s wer e di scus sed at some length. The committee agreed to make a
final decision after the Roads Inspections on bPril 25th and April 26th.
'fbe agendas for the Road InspectiOns and meal arrangementS were diSCUssed.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
APRIL 11, 1985
PAGE 8.
Correspondence from the Port Stcnley Terminal Rail Incorporated asking that
-----"
Road #51 and Road #-45 be reopened to railway traffic was discussed at some length.
"MOVED BY:
R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
THAT WE GR)~T PERMISSION TO THE PORT STANLEY TERMINAL RAIL INCORPORATED TO
CROSS COUNTY ROADS #45 AND #51 ON THE SAME BASIS AS THE USE OF CROSSING
ON ROAD #21.
THE COUNTY WILL REMOVE THE ASPHALT, TO ALLOW TRAINS TO CROSS.
THE COUNTY TO INSTALL ADVANCE WARNING SIGN AND PORT STANLEY RAIL TO INSTALL
CROSS BUCKS (REFLECTORIZED) WITH PORT STANLEY RAIL NOr TO USE THE CROSSING
UNTIL THE CROSS BUCKS ARE INSTALLED.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLS EY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT THE QUOTATION OF DEN-MAR BRINES LIMITED, BOTHWELL DATED FEBRUARY 15, 1985
AS FOLLOWS BE ACCEPTED:
(A) WEST ELGIN - $18.09 PER CUBIC METRE.
(B) CENTRAL ELGIN - $21.99 PER CUBIC Mr~RE.
(C) EAST ELGIN - $23.17 PER CUBIC METRE.
CARRIED."
Correspondence from the Village of Dutton complaining about overnight parking
of a transport truck on Road #13 was di scussed.
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE THAT THEY DEAL WITH
A COMPLAINT FROM THE VILLAGE OF DUTTON REGARDING PARKING ON SHACKLETON
STREET.
CARRIED."
ST. Tt\Ol:\AS, Ol'l'fARIO
APR1L 11, 1985
'PAGE 9.
. d Brown solicitOrs of 'rill sonburg acting fol:
correspondence fr01ll "Brown an '
1 f b t 131 North 'ralbct Road to Jack SmYth
Etta Gal:nha1ll regarding the county' s sa e 0 0 '
db' a legal opinion'of
d. dd the Engineer was inStructe to 0 taJ.n
was 1.. scusse an
w:. M. J. 1:lenne s sey ·
"MOVBD BY'::
C R ~lLLSE~ 1985
SECONDED BY~ . . FR1DAY A?Rlb 26,
Ib 25 1985 AT 9 :00 A.M. AND '
Tw..'r VIE ADJQUBl'\ TO T1:UJRSDAY, A?R · FR1DAY JUt'lE 14, 1985.
w,Y 13 1985 AND 9 :00 A.M., '
9.00 A.M. AND 9 :00 A.M.. MO!:<DAY, '
AT . cp;BR1ED ."
D. 'PER()\T1C1:l
-r
c-ft,~~'
_-:-:---- C1:lA1RMN"
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
REVISED CONSTRUCTION BUDGET
BRIDGES
TOTAL
l. Road #42
2. Road #29
3. Road #45
4. Road #42
Sil ver Creek
Culvert Replacement
Players Bridge Floor - Engineering
Port Burwell Bridge Floor - Rep~acemenlt.
APRIL 1, 1985
$175,000
$ 37,000
30,000
8,000
100,000
$175,000
Port Burwell Bridge Presently Estimated at $300,000
$100,000 - Bridge Construction
$100,000 - Resurfacing (If the Supplementary By-Law is not approved.)
$100,000 - Road Construction (If the Supplementary By.-Law is not approved.)
ROAD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
LESS: PORT BURWELL BRIDGE
AVAILABLE UNTIL SUPPLEMENTARY BY-LAW APPROVED
1. Miscellaneous Surveying and Engineering.
2. Road #45
Engineering and preliminary Work
Highway #73 to Road #40.
3. County and St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission
Land Purchase.
4. Gravel Pit pevelopment - Sparta and Pleasant Valley,.
5. Complete Roads #42 and H50'in Port Burwell.
6. Road #22
Yarmouth.
I.
$683,000
100,000
$583,000
$ 25,000
25, 000
75,000
50,000
80,000
328,000
$583,000
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 ASPHALT RESURFACING BUDGET
APRIL ll, 1985
Funds Available Under Work Programme
$944,000
100,000
DEDUCT: Port Burwell Bridge Floor if the Supplementary
By-Law is not Approved.
$844,000
PROGRAMME:
1. Road #3 - North of Highway #401 (Spots).
2. Road #3 - Complete between Highway #3 (A1dborough)
and Rodney.
$ 80,000
25 , 000
3. Road #36 - North of Road #45 (Yarmouth).
4. Road #45 - Jaffa to Highway #73 (Malahide).
15,000
5,000
172,000
5. Road #32 - Police College Gate to Road #52
(Malahide).
6. Road #39 - Chatham Street (Port. Burwell).
7. Road #42 - Port Burwell Easterly, I Mile +.
55,000
l40,000
365,000
8. Road #52 - Road #3 0 to Highway #74.
$857,000
* It is hoped enough saving can be affected to do all projects
within the Budget. If the Supplementary By-Law for the Port
Burwell Bridge is approved funds would be available for
approximately 50% of Road #36, South of Sparta (estimate for
work from Sparta to Road #24 is $196,000).
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT
MARCH 28TH SESSION
1985
TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIl.
YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. We accepted the quotation of C. R. Chittick Construc.tion Limited of
Ilderton, Ontario at 68i per ton for crushing gravel at the County's
pleasant Valley Pit.
They have crushed approximately 16,000 tons to date and will return
early in May to crush another 50,000 to 60,000 tons.
2. The Engineer has been authorized to make an application to the
Township of Yarmouth for rezoning of the County's property on the
South Half of Lots 26 and 27, Concession IV, Yarmouth Township to
be licensed as a gravel pit under the Provincial Pits and Quarries
Act.
The Township is presently advertising for a Public ~~eting which
will be held on Monday, April 29th.
3. The firm of R. C. Dunn and Associates of London is presently
providing engineering services for the repair and/or replacement
of the Port Burwell and Player's Bridge floor s (County Road #45,
Yarmouth Township).
Both bridges were built in the late 1860's and the concrete floors
have deteriorated badly.
Recommendations from the Ministry of Transportation and CVlluuunications
indicate that the Port Burwell Bridge floor will have to be replaced
this year and the Player'S Bridge floor will have to be done next
year at the latest.
The firm of R. C. Dunn and Associates have been the County's
consultants on the Thames River Bridges and are spE~cialists in
remedial work on concrete floor replacements.
Continued .. . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT - MARCH 28TH SESSION 1985
PAGE 2.
WE RECOMMEND:
l. That a by-law be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to sign a
deed to the Village of Dutton and the Township of Dunwich to
Parts No. 2 and No.4, Reference plan IlR-968, Parts of Lots 29
and 30, Lot l6, Registered Plan 149 in the Village of Dutton.
These parts are a one (1) foot reserve that the County had retained
so that an entrance to County Road #B could not be gained from
Lots 29 and 30.
The Township and the Village have now purchased the property from
private owners and are building a Fire Hall on the property and
have requested permission for an entrance to County Road #8.
The sale of these two (2) parts will allow the municipalities an
entrance onto County Road #8.
2. That the St. Thomas Suburban Road CCmd.uission Budget in the amount
of $340,000 be approved; this budget was contained in the County
Road Budget which was approved by County Council at the budget
session on March 20th.
3. That a resolution be passed adopting the attached statement of
work that was contained in the budget approved by County Council
on March 20th and the statement be forwarded to the Minister of
Transportation and CVUd.llunications for his approval.
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
CHAIRMAN
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
SECON D REPORT
, ~
MARCH 20TH SESSION
1985
TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY,OF ELGIN COUNCIL
YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS:
WE RECOMMEND:
1. That a resolution be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to
sign an agreement with Employment and Immigration Canada to
allow the County to enter an agreement under Section 38 of the
Unemployment Insurance Act for a Canada Works Programme.
It is hoped that this programme will provide the County of Elgin
Road Department with eight (8) workers for a period of eight (8)
weeks to start shortly after Easter.
This programme is somewhat different than other Canada Works
Prograrrnnes inasmuch as we understand that the payments will be
made through the Unemployment Insurance Corrnnission rather than
through County funds to be reimbursed later.
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
CHAIRMAN
~N1"LO~~oMM~
FIRST REPORT
-- -
w.Rca 2O't1:l SESSION
1.985
TO T1:lE VlARDEN AND MEl'1"BERS OF T1:lE COUNT'l OF ELG1.N COUNCIL
'lOUR ROAD C~1.'f'fEE RE?ORTS AS FObb~S I
vre RECOMM-END:
That the s~ of $1,000 be budgeted in 1985 for MoSquito control for
the prevention of encephalitiS.
That the rebate to urban 1llunicipalitieS be 25% of their Road LeVY
as in past yea~s.
That the honorari~ for the St. Thomas Suburban Road co~iSsioners
be $11:;.00 for the period of January 1, 1985 to January 31, 1986.
For tnanY yearS the honorarium haS been $150.00 per year.
?roVincial legiSlation has recentlY been amended to provide that the
Suburban co~iSsioners' ter1llS expire at the end of January of the
year following a 1llunicipal election rather than at the end of a
1.
2.
3.
calenda-x: yea~.
the coromiSsione~S.
That the attached budget in the a1ll0unt of $4,520,000 as amended,
dated March 1, 1985 be approved.
That the norroal road leVY be set at $1,117,000 as detailed, in the
ThuS the honorari~ will coincide with the term of
4.
6.
amended budget of March 1, 1985.
That an application be tnade to the Minister of Transportation and
cororounications for approval of a Supplementary "By-baW for the
d. f ~200 000 which will require an additional CountY Road
spen :\.ng 0 .p ,
bevY. of approximatelY $18,000 ($182,000 required fr01ll the Ministry
of Transportation and co~unicatiOns).
This supple1llentarY by~law, if approved, will assist in part to
offset s01lle of the difference between the construction objective
of $2,2950000 to ~ich the County of Elgin was entitled to under
the ~inisttY of TranspottatiOn and coromunications construction
formulae and the $1,949,000 objectiVe ~ich the MinistrY of
Transportation and cororounicatiOns will subsidize under the normal
continued
. . .
5.
p-x:og~ amme.
!'IRST RE1'ORT ~ Mi\RC1:l 20'fl\ SESSION ~
6. continued...
The 1ll0ney will be used in part for asphalt resurfacing on high
prioritY roads (Note: ?age #B on the attached BUdget), other high
prioritY work includes repairS to the ?ort BUrwell and ?laye~S
B-ridge decks.
Since the budget waS written we have learned that tWO (2) steel
pipe arch culvertS on Vlellington Road (COuntY Road #25) will require
~eplace1llent. These culvertS installed in 1962 have developed
serioUS cracking across the haunch boltS and have been shored up as
a safetY measu-re.
AS well the cleaning of the underhill Drain last fall haS lowered
L 'Klo
the grade of the ditch below the bott01ll of the culverLs.
esti1llate of cost haS yet been determined.
Abb 01' 1iI1\IC1:l IS RES?EC'fl'lfLb'l SUllMIT'fED
CH.AIRMAN
't ~
cotiN't'l Of f;t.GHI ROAD DE? AR'fMf;l'l'f
1985 ROAD 0f;1' ARTlo\EN't lI\lDGr:r
~
~ENDBD
MAltCR 1, 1 <}B5 .
~
. t.
(cOUl'l'f'l Of EbGIN Al'lD S't. 't1:lOMAS SUll\lRlIAN ROAD COMMISSION)
~:
(a) ROadS and -aridges
(b) Mphalt Resurfacing
$ 9<}1,000
<}5B,000
1,8.35,000
(b ) OVe1':bead
(c) NeW Machinery
391,000
344,000
44,000
141,000 CR.
~:
(a) Maintenance
(d)
(e)
Drainage ~ssessnentS
f d to "oad and Bridge constructiOn
't1': an s e 1': 1': e L'-
54,000
Utban Rebates
Ite1llS Not subsidized bY the Minist~Y of Transpo~tatiOn
and communicatiOns
Tatt\L
O 000
5 ,
--------
o 000
~
~
$1,111,000
41,000
Count)' 1fi;v)'
]i'J:om the city of St. 'th01llas Toward St. Th01llas Suburban
Road commissi.on
Minist~Y of TransportatiOn and oo~unicatiOns subsidY
'totAL
000
3 362,
.:.:------
000
~
. d cowrounicatiOns SubsidY was
L1984 lo\inistry of TransportatJ.on an
. . Oth r Than ItemS NO!,; fo~
.~ 100.000 and the Total E~pendJ.tU~es e
d "11~a\
(PAGE 2. ) ,
~'l Of--W~ ~3'ff!MEN1.
!J85 M.1NISTR'l Of.-!~N~ORTA'f10~D..s~
gp10I~01lJ~I~
AMENDED
MARC\\ 1, 198)
FIXED COSTSt
..---- .-.....
$2,076,000
Maintenance and overhead Allocation
344,000
NeW Machinery (from 1984 Needs Study update)
47,000
---- --
Drainage AssessmentS
1/2 of 1981, 1982, 1983 Average
TOTAL
~46~
2.Q~TRtlCtl ~:
$ 991,000
3.6% Road and Bridge Needs ]i'J:om 1984 Update
(.~6 X $21,517,000)
1,304,000
11% of Resurfacing Needs ~ 1984 Update
(.11 X $11,856,000)
TOTAl,
~2~'~
$1,949,000
The construction override is 1984 construction
Spending Objective ?luS l~h
($1,112,000 + 10%)
$346,000,
LOSS 'through override
?ercentage of construction Objective subsidized by the
Ministry of Transportation and communications
~49~~ 85~
2,295,000 or ~
1f the override had "Been Allowed the county of Elgin
Share of the Additional ?rograrome Vlould be APproxi1llatelY
$31,500
Total Maintenance and construction spending Objectives
using the ove~~ide
$4,416,000
Ministry of Transportation and communi-catiOns Average
subsidy Rate on Operations 15.52%
(In 1984 the subsidy Rate VIaS APproxi1llate1Y 74.78%)
_~...::"'" J.-~~______
AMENDED
MARC\\. 1, 19&5
/
~':t~,l.t~I~~~~~~~)\~~ (~~~J~~,~~~~l'~ L:0.E.R3 ~~
~~l'\',fJ- A t'!)pl',r,d sxpe'oditu re on Ito"ds and
Briel i',r;. to whil:h Grant J\ ppiies (Itern 1)
$~~
1 .
~Ti:? 2. CounLy EHort of \. 2.'i MillS on 'fotal
- -":.:;,.;;;...- .
County f\6SCSsrncnt (It"n1 f)
\. tS )\ ~ l.25 x $,~J2901000- ~ $ lBB150---
\000 \QOO ~'
PhI!, ",. \" 111'\.1>1" cont.-il>UliOn ;~t O. S MiUs
() " , 1I"'.:.1~9 ' o. I) x $Jl~~ $ 41,200___
\000 1000 ~
','ot;.1 I,U' 0.1 I.:rl"rt at \. 75 Mills
:: $.J?q..9~~
-
"
\
.
\~
.
.
:iD:.':'.~" \(II.\U 1-,(1"1'1 ..I 1.15 Mi''\S "quaIS the
\.ot,..1 I .0.' ,.1 8!io..t iI' Stq' l, pIuS an
equivalent an ount of erant
2. x Step 2. ~ 2. x $.~~----
$~
-
$2,756~~
Whicncv"r i:; the IllsS"r S (PI.) $= ~.335,~
OR
_ percentage subsidiZed =' 15.52"/.
S'\'\-: r> 2.UU
_' WheN th..re is no Untlwt RoadEHort
at 1. 2.'l Mills Grant is 'i0"/. o[ }>.ppro"ed
I.: xpt' n' \ itu r" (1tern 1) " o. S lI. Step I ;:
0. \) x :\'> S (B) $
_..-- --- -'- --==
~10:'-~ Grant applyin~ to Url>an Rebate Paid
, SO~. oi 11,,\11 H ~ O. 5 x $ 54,000
- ~ ---
::.\XJ::.:!.. lInll";~ HoaO \<:[iort al \. ':S MillS;
Step ~ rnious Step '~ (UnlesS Step 3
IS I!,r" at d than St,~ p \)
~.~. ~~_ i\.f;.) W h \ . U u dEft
e 1''' t \e re IS an nn\l~t "Oa .ort
at \. I,S Mills Gralll applying to it is
Step ~ )(. 0. 40QOC) ;;.
$ J...1-'~~Q.~~ _ ' ]t O. ')090")
Ph)~ Gr;Lnt cqui"a.lent to Tota.l
Local \;:Ho rl (Step 2)
:: $11505,000 ---
$_830,000 _____
4:. 3 33 5 9 0 00 -----=:;::::;;:
~~
Tot..1 t~.,.lculated }>.rnouot of Grant
_ or -
klO'~. of Ai,pro..,ed El'pCn(.iture
\Itern \) '" O~ II x $--
:: $
~
:: $E 900~
----
PIu:; Grant a.pplying to l\ilVroved
~:l'll('.n(hture (Step S(A) or Stell 5(B) $
--
-
Minu:; Hc,:c ipts i rorn V rope rty DiSPOlla.l~'.
"/.. of Iwlll N ~ O. x $ ~ $
- - - -
'(' otaJ G.'a nl
---
?';I':.!...l '('01,;\1 C,r;\ot payable undcr\lppcr Tier
'Prngr->Ill ii\ rhe ....Uocation (Itern }>.) or
~tep (,. wl.i,'ncvc r ill t\le lesser
'.t,: 1\ pphes only ttl purch;>ses rnade pTior to January I. 1913.
\ 'el'cent'-"i!.C to he \l,,,~11 is that applicable to year in ""hich
. ropcTtV waS l"'l'chased.
D~'1''G'-
$
~~~
$ at. . ,',_ ~6h~O--=:
cQllNT'i Of EbGIN ROl\D DE? AR'fMl'!E't
~
u. istt'q of transnortatiOn and ~nications Spending
",J.n J r Objective
?bUS: urban Rebate s
SUB 'toTAl.
LESS. ~inistrY of transportatiOn and co~unications
. subsidy
SUB 'tarA'L
'LESS:
contribution of the city of St. Thomas to
Suburban Roads
i\DD: ItemS Not for subsidY
(PAGt 4. )
AMENDED
MARC\\. 1, 1985
$4,41.6,000
54,000
---------
$4,410,000
3,362,000
.-:-------
$1.,108,000
41,000
---------
$1,061,000
50,000
---------
~
t(1rAb couN't'i LEV'i
19B4 Levy $1,031,000
19B4 E~penditUre (APpro~i1llatelY) $1,001,095
"
COUNTY 01' EbG1.N ROAD DE? AR'l'MENT
~
COUNTY NOT FOR SUl\S1.DY
AchninistratiVe Cba"ges frotn Clerk' s Office
for ?ayro1l ?reparation.
.
. . 1.
t.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
\\
\;
conventiOn 1:lospitality suiteS, EtC.
LiabilitY lnsu}:ance.
l-\e11\bershipS. Retirement A\.lOwances, Etc.
8.
SiC\!:. Leave ?lan ?ayouts.
overexpenditUre to Earn l-\aximutn subsidY.
urban Rebates on Non SUbSidized EXpenditUres.
1.nternational ?lowing Match Expenditures
(ErectiOn of Sno~ Fence, EtC.)
AUditOr Fee Regarding 1983 ~ 1984 C.O.E.D. ?roject
9.
AMENDED
MARCH. 1, 1985
$ 5,000
2,100
1,500
1,500
23,000
4,000
2,500
10,000
400
------
000
~
COUNtY OF ELGIN RQ~ DEPARTMENT
1985 MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION p~D COMMUNICATIONS ASSESSMENT AND
PROPOSED COUNTY ROAD LEVY
(THIS PAGE INFORMATION ONLY)
COUNTY" ROAD LEVY
URBAN ASSESSMENT RURAL ASSESSMENT TOTAL ASSESSMENT
COtJ1-tl'Y (I~MILLION5 ) (IN HI LLIONS ) (IN MILLIONS)
BRUCE 255 .04 459.96 715
GREY 176.86 533.14 710
- OWEN SOUND 73.2
h1JRON 254.26 555.74 810
PERTH 105.29 398.71 504
- STRATFORD 116.8
WELLINGTON 209.50 478.5 688
- GUELPH 290.2
ELGIN 121 + 510 + 631
- ST. THOMAS
82.4
VICTORIA
238 +
594
356 +
TOTAL
COUNIY LEVY
[INCLUDES NON
SUBSIDIZED]
(IN TH~S.AN.DS ~
1,640
1 ,405
2,162
800
1,900 :t
(PAGE 6.)
AMENDED MARCH 8, 1985
FUNDS AVAILABLE
TO SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION
FROM- SEPARATED CITY
(IN THOU~ANDS)
36.6
58.4
145 . 1
1,117
18 (Suppleinentary By-Law)
1,135
(M.T.C. Subsidy $3,362,000)
41.2
1,203 (Various Sources)
(M.T.C. Subsidy $3,390,O~O)
'.
:'
,
.
{
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
CONSTRUCTION
Road and Bridge Construction Allocation
1. Transfer to Maintenance Because of Under Allocation
in Maintenace.
2. Surveying and Engineering on Future Road and Bridge
Construction Projects.
3. Engineering and Preliminary Work, Road #45 from
Road #40 to Highway #73, Malahide Township.
4. Engineering, Replacement of Port Burwell and Player's
Bridge Floors (Road #45), Yarmouth Township.
5. ~ounty Land Purchase.
6. St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Land Purchase.
7. Increase in Stock Balance.
(Pleasant Valley and Sparta Pits,' Etc.)
8. Completion of Work Road #42, Silver Creek.
9. Comp1eti~n of Work Road #32,'Malahide Township.
10. Completion of Work Road #42 and Road ~O in
Port Burwell.
1l. Replacement of Culvert Road #29, Southwold Township.
12. Work on Road #22 (Fairview Avenue), Yarmouth Township.
13. Replacement of Port Burwell and/or Player's Bridge
Floors (Road #45), Yarmouth Township. (Funds Must
Come From Road #22 Allocation.)
TOTAL
(PAGE 7.)
AMENDED
MARCH 1, 1985
$991,000
$147,000
25,000
25,000
8,000
60,000
15,000
50,000
37,000
35,000
80,000
30,000
479,000
$991,000
COUNTY.OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
RESURFACING ALLOCATION
(A) COMPLETION OF WORK UNDERWAY
1. Road #36 north of Road #45 - Yarmouth
minor ditching, seeding and shoulder
gravel.
2. Road #4S from Jaffa to Highway #73 - Malahide
minor ditching, seeding and shoulder gravel.
3. Road #3 from Road #2 to Highway #3 - Aldborough
minor ditching, seeding, shoulder work and
single surface treatment on shoulders.
(B) NEW WORK (NOT LISTED ON BASIS OF PRIORITY)
(The following Roads and Cost Estimates Should be
Examined Fully in the Spring after the Frost is
Out of the Ground. It is Unlikely that we can
Afford More Than Half the Distance Listed.)
1. Road #39 (Chatham Street), Port Burwell - 1.0 rom + .
2. Road #42, east limit of Port Burwell, easterly in
Bayham Township - 1.6 Km.
3. Road #52 - Road #30 to Highway #74 (Yarmouth
Township) - 5.6 KID.
4. Road #36 - Sparta to Road #24 (Yarmouth
Township) - 3.0 KID.
5. Road #40 - Mount Salem to Road #42 (Malahide
Township) - 4.1 Km.
(PAGE 8 ~ )"
AMENDED
MARCH 1, 1985
$958,000
15,000
5,000
25, 000
COUNTY Of EbC1N ROAD DE? l\R'fMEN'f
S~Y Of fIXED COSTS
.
I
.
\'
countY and St. 'fb()1lllis Suburban Road Maintenance
County and St. 'fbomas Suburban Road ()V'erhead
Ne~ }\achine'rY
Drainage Asses~ntS - CountY Roads
Drainage Mses~ntS - St. Thomas Suburban Roads
Ministry of TransportatiOn and communicatiOns fixed
cost Allocation from ?age #2
S1:l0RT fAbb lN AbbOCAT1ON
('to be Transferred ]i'J:om Road construction)
MARC\\ 1, 1. 9B5
$1,B35,000
391,000
344,000
30,000
14,000
--------
$2,614,000
2,461,000
--------
~
(PAGE 10.)
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 MAINTENANCE BUDGET
COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS
. AMENDED
MARCH 1, 1985
(Maintenance Comparisons for 1982, 1983 and 1984 include County and Suburban Roads Expenditures.
Burden. )
All totals include Payroll
ST. THOMAS
SUBURBAN
OPERATION 1982 1983 1984 1985 ESTIMATED COUNTY ROADS
A - Bridges and Culverts
- 1 Bridges 63,208 140,766 97,219 130,000
120,000 10,000
- 2 Culverts 63,297 71,289 37,326
B - Roadside Maintenance
- 1 Grass Cutting 19,718 17,894 41,888 47,000 37,000 10,000
- 2 Tree CUtting and Brushing 70,305 111,471 79,498 60,000 54,000 .:'-- .000
4 Drainage 132,430 163,074 190,735 160,000 142,000 l~,OOO
- 5 Roadside Maintenance 30,161 37,907 39,393 32,000 26,000 6,000
- 6 Tree Planting 2,605 10,067 4,088 4,000 4,000
- 7 Drainage Assessments 7,707 3,296 2,350 3,000 3,000
(Maintenance)
- 11 Weed Spraying 12 J 6 27 15,769 12, 716 20,000 16,000 4,000
C - Paved Road Maintenance
1 Repairs to Pavement 60,133 68,514 48,966 70,000 66,000. 4,000
- 2 Sweeping 31,843 22,251 27,273 30,000 26,000 4,000
::r-
COUl\"lY OF ELGIN ROAD D!P ARmEf\7
1985 HA'Ih"7ENANCE ~UDGET
CO'Jh'7Y AND ST. TH~~S SUB1JRBA.~ ROADS
OPERATION
C - Paved Road Maintenance (Continued)
- 3 Shoulder Maintenance
-, Surface Treatment
D - Gravel Road M~intenance
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
~
1982
102,169
144,027
Ddtchint~ Drainag~ and Gravel-Road #26
Grading Gravel Roads 25,043
J).J st Control 36,905
Prime 4,166
Gravel Resurfacing 85.109
E - Wi.nter Control
Total
- 1 Sno"''' Plo\o."ing
-'2 -Sanding and Sol ting
- 3 Sno"'.. Fence
~ Standby and Night Crew
:F - Safety De:vice s
1 Pavement Markinf
2 Signs and Signals
497,778
124,565
325,500
25,801
21.912
1.1.814
17.511
1983
1984
2~5,522
419,447
86,697
1~2, 263
28,229
1,5.713
3,945
35,745
23,976
29,853
40,029
2.635
70,128
210,9.55
29,819
144,974
16,131
20,031
~5B , 201
127.326
296,395
19,754
Ii, t 726
44,197
46,366
46, o~s
45,345
1985 ESTIK4TED
76,000
175,000
25,000
33,000
4B, 000
11,000
BO,OOO
600,000
.5 0,000
62,000
. ':" -.
~ --..
. : -:-- e. .
.. __ e_ .
,..~ n.. '!'"'rV
"..,..., ~, .. .
62,000
157,000
27,000
40,000
8,000
7B,000
515,000
40,000
~.OOO
(PAGE 11.')
PAGE 2.
ST. TH OY.,AS
SUBURBA.l\
~,.. ... .....,..
nVh.1J~
14,000
18 J 000
25,000
6,000
B,OOO
3, 000
2,000
85.000
10,000
18,000 ,
COUJ\'7Y OF ELGIN ROAD DEP ARmENT
198.5 MAIl\"TENANCE BUDGET
COU1ITY A~D ST. THO!-L-\S SUBURBA.?\ ROADS
(PAGE 12.)
PAGE 3.
OPERATION
1982
1983
F - Safety Devices (Continued)
- 3 Guide Rail
- 4 Railroad Protection
- 6 Edge Marking
- 7 Stump Removal
5,510
33,766
30, 409
11,995
38,548
36,392
TOT ALS
$1,578,241
$1,529,352
Winter Control 1979
Yinter Control 1980
~inter Control 1981
$359.431
$260,443
$366.369
1984 M.T.C. Maintenance and Overhead Allocation
$1,999,000
1984 Maintenance Expenditure
1984 Overhead
$1,659.316
367,473
:$2,026,789
1984
ST. THOMAS
SUBURBAN
ROAD.S..
1985 ESTIMATED
COUNTY
17,829 15,000 14,000 1,000
48,322 43,000 34,000 9,000
37,967 41,000 30,000 11,000
28,561 20,000 14,000 6 , 000
$1,659,316 $1, 835,000 $1,557,000 $278,000
-.
1985 Maintenance Budget
1985 Overhead Budget
$1,835,000
391,000
$2,226,000
. f ~ '
, ,
.
. .
.
COUNTY OF EI.G1N l~OAD UEPAH'l'MENT,
I
. '"
,. ,
19ti5 BUDGe-f.
OVEl{JIEAD
(COUNTY AND S'l'. 'l'HO~1AS SU UU1UiAN ROADS)
.
,
.
I."
J'
OPERATION
1982
Superintendence
117,771
Clerical
61,473
Garage and White Stati~n Property 101,882
(1962, 1983 ~nd 1984 Include Rodney Cdragc)
Office
17,039
5,996
4,046
tool&
iadio
Needs Study Update and Traffic Count~
7,727
7,921
2,684 .
Trainins Courses
Miscellaneous Insurance
Retirement Benefits (Sick Time)
Deferred Time
38CR.
Tal'ALS
$]26,501
-
1983
19~4
(PAGE 13.) .
AMENDED
MARCH 1, 1985
19U5 ESTIMATE
135,000
68,000
110,000
31,000
15,000
4,500
8',000
4,000
2,500
13,000
$391tOOO
1985 Distribution: (1) St. Thomas Suburb"ll R04Q Commission $33,000 (8.3%.:!:)
(2) County of Elgin $358,000
19t13
Without Retirement Benefits $347.000
\ \
~I'\'"
131,051 115,176
64,513 64,346
106,362 98. 823
15,189 23,390
13,697 11,096
3,880 4,265
9,472 15,785
1,143 2,861
2,453 2,320
16,131 26,784
670CR. 2,627
$'363,221 $3() 7 t 473
1984
'340,669
19t15
$378.000
ST. T1:lOMAS SU"BUR"BAN ROAD CQMM.ISS'i01'1 OVER1:lE~
(Nor INCbUDED 'iN OVER\l.EI\D CAbCUbATIONS 'iN
~
ST. 'fltOMAS SU"BUR'BNI ROAD CoMM,'iSS'i01'1 ROADS I
construction - Land 1'Urchase
_ Drainage AssesgnentS
'Maintenance
~:
All construetion 1.te1llS Other Than #l (Maintenance
Shortfall AmOunt $147,000 and #6 St. thomas
Suburban Road Commission band Vurchase $15,000)
All Asphalt Resurfacing
countY Road Maintenance
countY Road Drainage AssessmentS
307 000
Suburban ?ercentage ~~
B.3"/o
01:
(PAGE 1'4. )
$ 15,000
14,000
'000
278,
------
000
~
$ B29,000
958,000
1,557,000
30,000
--------
~
.
. .
t.'
.'
..
. "
, .
..
.
COUUTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
..
.
19a5 BUDCET
~'
PA YI{OLL UU1{1)EN
(PAGE 15.)
(APPLICABLE TO COUNTY AND s'r. T110~1AS SUBURBAN ROADS)
ITEM
llJti2
1983
, Holidays With Pay:
<a) Annual
(b) Statutory
(c) Compassiona~e Leave
(c1) Jury
106,886
52,314
1,961
111,363
51,310
1, 498
Sick Benefits
36,022 40, 103
3,190 3, 25 2
2, 509 2,459
10,038 9,108
18,698 28,503
15,179 ' 18,456
67,200 70,103
23,290 ' 39,017
33,429 37,280
13,416 11,639
719 564
Inclement Weather and Standby
tJed1cal
Safety Equipment
~orkmen's Compensation Insurance
Canada Pension
O.".E.a..S.
U.I.C.
O.H.l.P. and E.H.C.
L.T.O.
Life Insurance
Payroll Burden Charged to the
Canada Bmployment Programme and
N.I.E.D.S. Programme
397CR.
16,299CR.
TOl'ALS
$1 H Lt , 454
.$408, 156
- -
PAYl<OLL IJLJUUEN OISTIU HUTION
.
1982
Total Labour
Less Labouc in Payroll Burden
Less Labour Provinclal Incentive Progr~~nc
Less Canada Summcf '83 and 184
Lea, LabQllt' Canac1a &uployment Pro8rarwue
Less Canada Works (1984)
Less Ontario Youth Corp Proaranan~ (19U4)
Net Labour
Payroll Bt.Irden
Payroll Burden as a ~ of Net Labour
$1,290,572
203,945
32.678
3,338
1,050,611
384,454
36.59341.
AMENDED
MARCH 1, 1985
19H4
1985 1-:~'fl\1ATE
1 :20, 202
~~3,815
329
74
110,000
57,000
512,904
48,000
2,651
3,000
8,474 9,500
27,132 34, 000
19,469 20,000
69,163 71,000
39,378 42,000
39,606 42,000
1 :2, 1 06 13,500
555
4,247 CR.
NIL
$441,611
----
$ 450.000
----
19H3
1984
$1, ~l02, 557
209,038
70,087
2,363
92.9J2
'1.314~215
229,996
433
1,938
1,028,157
408,356
39.7173%
24,a45
9,2~9
1,l07,184
44l,611
39.86441.
" eOu\'lT'! OF ELGIN ROAD OE\? ARTMENT
192; nuoctf - PA'lROLL n\lROEN
. (APPLICAnLE TO COUNT'! ANO ST. 'fIlOMAS S\lI\\lR\lI\N ROADS)
. . ----- . - -' ~. - ~
PAGE 2.
$1,410,000
1985 _ Labour Estimated
LeSS Labour in Government programmes
Nl'L
leSS Labour in ?ayroll Burden
218,000
-- ---
~~tl92~
- --
.
I
.
"
.
. I
payroll Burden a9 a ~ of Net Labour
(payroll Burden distributed to County Overhead, Maintenance and construction Accounts)
450 000
r;f92,000 '" 31.75"/.
Net Labour
\ .
.
t
.
'I
.
.
(p AG E 1 7 . )
ST. THOMAS SUBRUBAN ROAD COMMISSION
1985 BUDGET SUMMARY
AMENDED
MARCH,1, 1985
Budget Subsidized by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications
1. Construction (from Page #7)
St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Land Purchase
$ 15, 000
2. Fixed Costs:
(a) St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Drainage
Assessments (From Page #9)
l4,000
(b) . Maintenance of the Suburban System (From Page #12) 278,000
(c) Overhead, (From Page #13)
33,000
$340,000
Share of City of St. Thomas- Estimated Ministry of
Transportation and CVll&luunications Subsidy (75.52%)
is $256,768. City of St. Thomas Share of the
St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Budget is 5~o
of the Difference Between the Budget and Ministry
of Transportation Subsidy
$41,616.00
Add: 50% of Items Not For Subsidy ($400 - Total)
200.00
41,200..00
$ 616.00
469.0l
$ 146.99
Deduct: 1985 1/2 Mill Contribution of the City
of St. Thomas
Deduct: Surplus From 1984
DEFICIT TO 1986
ST. THOMAS, ONTAR10
MARCH 15, 1985
PAGE 1.
Friday, March 15, 1985 at 9:00 a.1ll. All memberS were present e~cept Reeve Brooks.
Al so present waS the Engineer, the Assistant Engineer and }!r. ]i'J:ank clarke of the
TlfE COUNTY OF EbGIN ROAD coMMITTEE met at the ~nicipal Butlding on
Ministry of TransportatiOn and corowunicatiOns.
'fbe Engineer reported on the revised subsidy figUreS fr01ll the Ministry
of Transportation and communications. The attached comparison detailed spending
objective losses suffered by s01lle CountieS and RegionS becaUse of the left. over
ride on 19B4 construction allocations.
The Engineers reported on inspection of pipe arch culvertS on TownshiP
roads and the committee agreed that the inspection of seriouslY damaged culvertS
should continUe by county forceS, however only those culvertS that appear to be in
danger at thiS ti1lle would have to be inspected on a periodic basis by County
forces as there were toO 1llany culvertS for the county to inSpect on a continuing
basiS.
The Assistant Engineer gave each Reeve a preli1llinary report on his own
TownshiP and promised a full report when more inspections had been completed.
It was felt that 12 to 15 culvertS on TownshiP and County roads would
require inspection on an on going basis.
APplicatiOns have been made to the Ontario Good Roads ASSociation to
enrol John "Brown and Keith ?layer intO the OntariO Good Roads ASSociation Road
school on MaY 6th, 7th and Bth.
The Engineer had again been asked to assist the Ministry of
Transportation and co~unications in providing the "Bridge Maintenance and
lnspection Course at the school.
THE El1GINEER RE?ORTED ON 'fltE VlOllR TO DATE AS FObbOWS:
1. NO serioUs breakup of gravel roads had occurred, repairs to pavement were
being 1llade as necessary and roads were being graded as often as required.
2. bittle tree cutting had been done.
continued · · · ·
-~'
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MARCH 15, 1985
PAGE 2.
3. A meeting with the Township of Yarmouth council would be held on the evening
4. The side slope on county Road #3 near the Twin Valleys School had again slid
of March 18th with regard to the rezoning of the county's Sparta ?it.
and it would be necessary to re1ll0ve a considerable a1ll0unt of material by
bulldozing it onto the adjacent property and rebuild the slope with granular
5. Tile drainage problems on county Road #9 had been repaired.
material.
A culvert on county Road #29 near the Ford water tower was replaced.
6. Gravelling was continuing on county Road #43 as trucks were available.
7. The ?layer'S Bridge floor and the ?ort BUrwell "Bridge floor had been patched.
B. Truck #88 would be sent to country collision on the 1st of April for body
10. Flooding on the Otter creek waS the 1ll0st seriouS in recent years.
9. DUmp truck inspections would also be required in April.
work..
11. Mower partS had been purchased in bulk fr01ll southwest Equip1llent at an lB%
12. Maurice I,ewiS, of the Ministry of Natural ReSOurces would be 1llet at County
discount.
Road #39, ?ort BUrwell to see if an agreement could be made for the return
of Chatham Street to the Village of ?ort BUrwell.
of the ?ort BUrwell "Bridge- It appeared that the bridge floor would have to
be repaired in 1985, or seriouS damage to the bea1llS underneath would result
because of salt penetration.
13. Norm Vlarner of R. C. Dunn and ASSociates were proceeding with the inspection
"MOVED "BY: R. J. bAVEREAU
SECONDED "BY: R. E. MONTEITH
T1J.AT 'fltE FOb'LOWING AccOUNTS ? AYA"BbE "BE ? AS SED FOR ? AYMENT :
?AYbIST NUM"BER 11 AMOUNTING TO $54,022.83
?AYbIST NUM"BER 12 AMoUNTING TO $268.09
?AYbIST NUMBER 13 AMoUNTING TO $995.BI
?AYbIST NUMBER 14 AMOUNTING TO $69,15B.91
? AYbIST NUM"BER 15 AMoUNTING TO $1, 4B5 · 66
?AYbIST NUMBER 16 AMOUNTING TO $193,373.1B
CARRIED ."
--'"
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MARCH l5, 1985
PAGE 3.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A RESOLUTION BE PASSED TO EMPOWER
THE WARDEN ANP CLERK TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH EMPLOYMENT AND IMMIGRATION
CANADA TO ALLOW THE COUNTY TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT' UNDER SECTION 38 OF
THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT FOR A CANADA WORKS PROGRAMME.
CARRIED."
The Engineer presented quotations for a Tractor/Backhoe as attached and
noted that Harold Ellis (Ford Sales, Talbotville) had decided not to quote.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: Co R. WILLSEY
THAT WE ACCEPT THE QUOTATION OF TENNECO CANADA INCORPORATED FOR THE SUPPLY
OF A 680H CASE BACKHOE AT THEIR QUOTED PRICE OF $38,841 INCLUDING TAX WITH
COUNTY'S 1977 - 510 JOHN DEERE BACKHOE AS TRADE-IN, ~ITTH THE UNDERSTANDING
THAT A FULL 2 YEAR WARRANTY BE PLACED ON THE MACHINE n
IF THIS OPTION IS NOT ACCEPTED BY TENNECO CANADA INCORPORATED THE TENDER
TO REVERT TO SOUTHWEST TRACTOR INCORPORATED.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE BUDGET OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN
ROAD COMMTSSION IN THE AMOUNT OF $340,400 BE APPROVED.
CARRIED."
The Engineer presented a quotation from Allcorn Assoc.iates for printing
County maps on the scale of l" = 2 Miles. After discussion.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MARCH 15, 1985
'PAGE 4.
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED BY: M. 1:l. STEVlART
T1:lAT Tl1E ENGINEER. BE l\llT1:l.0RIZED TO ACCEJ'T T1:lE QUcrrATION OF AbbCORN ASSOCIATES
FOR 5,000 coUNTY MA?S AT 50 cENTS EACll ?bUS TAJ(.ES mT1:l A l'ORTION 1:lAVING 'fltE
?b()1ilU'lG MATC1:l SITE S1:lCll'lN oN 'fltEM.
lZ. E. MONTEITH
CARRIED_"
"MOVED BY:
SECONDED "BY: C. R. mLLSE'i
T1:lAT VIE ADJOURN TO T1:lIlRSDAY, APRlb 11, 1985 AT 1 :30 ? .M.; ROAD INS?ECfION
9 :00 A.M., T1:lURSDAY, APRlb 25 AND FRIDAY, A?Rlb 26, 1985; AND FRIDAY,
D. 'PEROVICH
MAY 10, 1985 AT 9:00 A.M.
CARRIED ."
y~
Cl1.A.IR}1AN
~
~'
S?ENDING OJ3JEcrIVE bOSSES ON CONSTRUCTION OVErotDB AbbO~ATIO~
MARCR 1985
Blgin Reduced fr01ll $2,295,000 to $1,949,000
bOSS $346,000 ~ M.T.C. subsidY $314,500
(91% )
1:lalton Region ~duced from $3,513,000 to $2,837,000
bOSS $676,000 ~ M.T.C. SubsidY $338,000
(50% )
York Reduced from $6,966,000 to $6,918,000
bOsS $48,000 _ M.T.C. subsidy $24,000
(50% )
1:laldiroand~Norfolk Region ~duced from $2,542,000 to $2, 83,000
bOss $259 ,000 ~ M.T .C. SubsidY $235,000
(91% )
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
BACKHOE QUOTATIONS
MARCH 15, 1985
(To Trade 1977 John Deere 510 Backhoe on a "New" Machine)
1. Southwest Tractor Incorporated
288 Exeter Road
London, Ontario
N6L lA3
John Deere JD 5l0B, Manufactured September 1984.
Used as a demonstrator (96 Hours), New Machine Warranty 1 Year.
276 Cu. In. Motor 70 Net H.P., Power Shift Transmission.
14.5 X 16 - 10 Ply Front Tires and 21 X 24 - 10 Ply Rear Tires.
ROPS - Sound Proofed Cab, Dual Backhoe Controls, 35 Gallon Per
Minute Pump, Lift Capacity of Loader 6,180 Lbs.
Backhoe Digging Force 10,200 Lbs., 30 Inch Bucket.
$40,499.50 Net Trade-In.
(Va~ue of Tire~ [Dealer Cost] About $1, 130 ~ore Than Case.)
2. Tenneco Canada Incorporated
R. R. #3
Lambeth, Ontario
NOL lSO
Case 680H, Manufactured 1983.
New Machine Warranty I Year.
336 Cu. In. Motor, 85 SAE H.P., Power Shift Tran~mission.
11.00 X 16 - lO Ply Front Tires and 19.5 X 24 - 12 Ply Rear Tires.
ROPS - Sound Proof Cab, Dual Backhoe Controls, 45 Gallon Per
Minute Pump, Lift Capacity of Loader 5,800 Lbs.
Backhoe Digging Force 10,500 Lbs. , 30 Inch Bucket (I Year Warranty).
$38,841 Net
Difference: $1,608 (Not Calculating Tires)
$478 (Considering Tires)
Question: A 1983 Manufactured Machine, Wearing Surfaces Without Oil?
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE 1.
9:30 a.111., Thursday, March 7, 1985. All 111e111bers except Reeve 1:laddow were
T1:lE cOUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD CQMM:ITTEE met at the Municipal "BUilding at
present. Also present waS the Engineer and the Assistant Engineer.
T1:lE ENGINEER RE?ORTED AS FObb01ilS:
1. That Mr. Ken Kleinsteiber of the Ministry of Transportation and communications
Structural Office had inspected culvertS on the County and Township road
sy ste111S f1:'om 10: 00 a.m. to 6:30 P .111. on Mar ch 6th.
Inspection included all pipe arch culvertS that were in serioUS condition
and round pipes in "Bayhmn Township and on county Road #45 at the ?layers
Bridge.
Ministry officialS were of the opinion that the tWO (2) culvertS on county
Road #25 (Vlellington Road), byhhurst and Mc"Bains were in serioUS condition
and should be strutted i~ediatelY. This work had been started as of
March 7th.
Mr. Kleinsteiber was of the opinion that the culvert on concession III,
"Bayham TownshiP (Township of Bayhmn road) waS beyond repair and that the
culvert on Tunnel Road between concessions II and III, "Bayham TownshiP
(Township of Bayham road) should be inspected at frequent intervals to
ascertain if cracking waS worsening.
Middlesex and it had been agreed that boundary bridges and road proble111S
would be discussed in the Spring when both Elgin and Middlesex 111aintenance
prioritieS become 1110re apparent.
(Toronto) had placed a l~k override on construction ezpenditures rather than
the 25% previouslY reported to committee.
A new budget had been prepared on this basis (a phone call fr0111 the Ministry
of TransportatiOn and communications office in LPndon indicated that the
subsidy allocations would be $6,000 leSS than indicated on the budget).
The committee elected not to change the budget.
2. The Engineer had 111et with Mr. Don 1:lusson, County Engineer, county of
3. AdditiOnal information fr0111 the Ministry of Transportation and communications
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
MARCH 7, 1985
P AG E 2.
The attached budget was diScUssed at same length.
~ application for a supplementary spending by_law was discUssed for the sum
of $200,000 which, if approved, would make up partiallY for the construction
funds lost becaUse of the Ministry's override.
?ort "Burwell "Bridge floors would be available but repairs would have to be given
It was not known ~en costS for the repairs to ?layers "Bridge and the
priority as Mr. Kleinsteiber had indicated that it was unlikely that the ?Ort
BUrwell "Bridge in partiCular would last another year without repairs.
the budget would be rediScUssed in MaY after winter control costS and spring
The committee felt that even though the present budget might be adopted
breakUP costs had become apparent.
Reeve Monteith SUggested that Road Tour dateS be set as soon as possible.
"MOVED BY: C. R. VllbbSE'l
SECONDBD BY: D. ?EROVIC1:l
T1:lAT 'fltE DRAY!: "BUDG-gr DATED WlRC1:l 1, 19B5 BE FORVlARDED TO coUNTY COUNClb FOR
Al'?ROIT At. IN blEU OF T1:lE DRAY!: "BUDGET DATED FE"BRU ARY 15, 1985 ·
CARRIED."
"MOlTED BY: R. J. bA VEREAU
SECONDED "BY: M. 1:l. STEWART
T1:lAT VIE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNClb T1:lAT T1:lE No1U1Ab ROiID bEVY "BE $1,117,000
IN 19B5 AND RESOurrION NO. 11 OF T1:lE MEETING OF FE"BRUARY 21, 19B5 "BE
RESCINDED ·
CARRIED ."
'"""...-'-~~
ST. T1:lOMAS, Ol'l'fARIO
MARCl1 7, 1985
-pAGE 3.
"MOVED Wi:
SECONDED "BY: C. R. Vl1.bbSE'l
T1:lAT VIE RECOMMEND TO COUl'l'fY COUNClb 'fllAT A RESOUlTloN "BE ? ASSED AJ)O?TING 'fltE
?RO?OSED STAT~T Of VlORR CONTA1.NED IN T1:lE DRAvr "BIlOCF:f DATED j,jARC1:l 1, 19B5
S1:l()\'l1.NG 'fltE EZ?ENDITURES fOR 1985 AND T1:lE STtSEl'lENT "BE fORVI p,RDED TO T1:lE
M1.N1.STER Of TRAN S?ORTAT1. ON AND COMMUNICAT1. oNS fOR pJ'?R(J\/ p.;L. (Tat p.;L "BUDGF:f
$4,470,000. )
'flt1.S STATEMENT TO "BE fORVlARDED IN b1.E\l Of 'fltE DRAvr 1lIlOCF:f DATED
YE"BRUARY 15, 1985.
D. 'PERO\T1Cl1
CARRIED ."
"MOVED B'Y:
SECONDED ~: R. E. MOl'l'fEIT1:l
TllAT VIE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNClb TllAT A SU??bEl'lEN'tARY "BY ~ bAVI "BE ? AS SED 1.N
'fltE AMOUNT Of $'200,000 fOR COUNTY ROllP ?URl'OS ES 1iI1:l1. C1:l VlI1..1.. REQU1.RE AN
ADDITIoNp.;L bf.l/'l Of A??ROX1J'l.!\TEbY $18,000.
M. 11. STEVlART
CARRIED ."
, 'MOVED B'Y:
M. 11. STEVlART
SECONDED "BY: R. J .bAVERENl
TllAT VIE l\PJOURN TO 9 :00 A.M., fR1.DAY, j,jARC1:l 15, 1985.
CARRIED ."
~~~-
~ - Cl1AIRMAN
ST. THOMAS ~ ONTARIO
FEBRUARY 21, 1985
'P AGE 1.
T1:lE cOUNTY OF E:LGIN ROAD CQMM1TTEE 111et at the Municipal Building at 9,00 a.111.,
Thursday, February 21, 1985. All 111e111bers were present except Chair<l\an McVlilliam and
Reeve 'Perovich.
"MOVED "By, R. J. bAVEREAU
SECONDED "BY' c. R. VllbbSEY
THAT KEN MONTEIT1:l BE CHl\.IR}\AN FOR T1:lE MEETING OF FE"BRUARY 21, 1985.
CARRIED ."
"MOVED "BY' c. R. 1iIIlJ,SEY
SECONDED "BY' R. J. bAVEREAU
'f1:lAT 'fltE MINUTES OF T1:lE MEJrrING OF JANUARY 31, 1985 "BE Al'?ROVED.
CARRIED."
further 111eetings >1ould be held with Mr. Ken Kleinsteiber and Dr. Rodger Dorton,
1:lead of the Structural Depart111ent of the Ministry of Transportation and
The investigation into the steel pipe culverts waS continuing and that
communicatiOns at the Ontario Good Roads convention.
T1:lE ENGINEER. RE?ORTED ON 'fltE VlORK TO DATE AS FObb<WIS'
1. Vlinter control continued heaVY.
2. ChittiCk construction bimited had started to crush gravel at the ?leaSant
valley ?it and would continue until February 28th When they would 1110ve
3." A used 3 1/2 horsepower weed sprayer, with tank and b00111 had been purchased
back to London Township-
to spray isolated weed patches and cattails along County roadS.
asked that engineering work be started as soon as possible as it appeared
to him that 111ajor repair work would be required in 1985.
The Engineer reported that the Ministry of Transportation and communications
4. The ?ort "Burwell "Bridge floor was deteriorating rapidlY and Reeve Stewart
had still not forwarded subsidy AllocatiOns for 1985 and the allocations would
not likely be available for another 10 dayS.
The co~ittee diSCUssed the budget at some length.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
FEBRUARY 21, 1985
PAGE 2.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED AUTHORIZING THE
WARDEN AND CLERK TO SIGN A DEED TO PART NO. 2 AND NO.4, REFERENCE PLAN
NO. llR-986, BEING PARTS OF LOTS 29 AND 30, BLOCK 16, REGISTERED PLAN NO. l49
IN THE VILLAGE OF DUTTON TO THE CORPORATION OF THE VILLAGE OF DUTTON AND TO
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF DUNWICH.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE HONORARIUM FOR THE COMMISSIONERS
OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION BE $175.00 FOR THE PERIOD OF
JANUARY 1, 1985 TO JANUARY 3l, 1986.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY:
R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT WE APPOINT THE FIRM OF R. C. DUNN AND ASSOCIATES TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE PORT BURWELL AND THE PLAYERS BRIDGE FLOORS.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT PAYLIST NUMBER 10 AMOUNTING TO $1,800.00 BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY:
M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE URBAN REBATES TO LOCAL
MUNICIPALITIES BE 25% OF THEIR ROAD LEVY AS IN PAST YEARS.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
FEBRUARY 21, 1985
PAGE 3.
"MOVED BY:
C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: R.J. LAVEREAU
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT $l,OOO.OO BE BUDGETED IN 1985 FOR
MOSQUITO CONTROL FOR THE PREVENTION OF ENCHEPHALITIS.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY:
C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT THE DRAFT BUDGET DATED FEBRUARY 15, 1985 BE FORWARDED TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR APPROVAL.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY:
C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A RESOLUTION BE PASSED ADOPTING THE
PROPOSED STATEMENT OF WORK CONTAINED'IN THE DRAFT BUDGET OF FEBRUARY l5, 1985
AND SHOWING THE PROPOSED EXPENDITURES FOR 1985 AND THE STATEMENT BE FORWARDED
TO THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS FOR HIS APPROVAL.
(TOTAL BUDGET $4,71l,000.)
CARRI ED."
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVERE AU
THAT WE RECO}:1MEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE ROAD LEVY BE $l,l33,OOO IN 1985.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY:
C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: K. E. MONTEITH
THAT THE CHAIRMAN BE AUTHORIZED TO APPROVE A PAYLIST TO REIMBURSE THE WARDEN
FOR THE HOSPITALITY SUITE AND SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR THE ONTARIO GOOD ROADS
ASSOCIATION CONVENTION.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
FEBRUARY 21, 1985
PAGE 4.
would require approximatelY $8,000 worth of partS plus over 200 hours of shop labour
The Engineer reported that the county's John Deere 510 "Backhoe purchased in 1977
to refurbish it into reasonable working condition, 2 neW tireS worth $l,BOO <i1Ou1d
also be required (these would be required i~ediatelY).
done to the engine to date it was a 111atter of speculation as to when a major overhaul
As the 111achine had run between 5,000 and 6,000 hour s and no repair work had been
would be required.
Deere 510 "B "Backhoe or equivalent. The Engineer waS instructed to call quotations
It was esti111ated the 111achine could be traded for $40,000 (net) on a neW John
for a neW backhoe fram Case, Ford (1:larold ElliS, Talbotvi11e) and John Deere for
committee consideration.
of Elgin band Division committee were noted, with no action necessary on the Road
Three appeals to the Ontario Municipal "BOard on the decisions fr0111 the County
committee'S part.
out with snOW fence for the InternatiOnal ?lowing Match were received.
Letters from the TownshiP of Malahide and the Town of Ay1111er agreeing to help
"MOVED "BY: M. 1:l. STEW ART
SECONDED "BY: C. R. VllbbSE'l
TllAT VIE ADJOllRN TO FRIDAY, MARCH 15, 1985 AT 9 :30 A.M.
CARRIED ."
* ~~: To members of council; the 1985 "Budget as approved by the February 21st
meeting will have to be amended because of changes by the Ministry of
Transportation and communications in their subsidy Allocation and is
therefore not included in the present Minutes. A revised budget will
be forwarded in due course.
{"^, ALk!I
~ -tr^
- '
@
Ontario
-
-
Ministry of
Transportation and
communications
Municipal Roads Office
1201 Wilson A'Ienue
3rd Floor, West Tower
Downsview, Ontario
M3M 138
January 23, 1985
(416) 248-3621
Mr. R. G. Moore
County Engineer
county of Elgin
, '19 stanley Street
st. Thomas, ontario
N5R 301
Dear Sir:
Re; U.P,eer Ti!t Pro,grllm m~ A.sSessmen~ for 198.?
As yoU are aware, a key element in the Upper Tier funding arrangement is
the ministeriallY adjusted assessment established for your municipality.
'nIe e.ssessment data was received directly from Municipal Affairs and
Housing and the neW equalization factors have been applied again this
year. 'nIe assessment value is based on the Total Equalized Assessment
used in the county apportionments, weighted at SS'lb for farm and
residential. 'nIe 1985 adjusted upper tier assessments were derived by
applying. a factor of 0.609 to the Total EqualiZed Assessment valUes. A
printout of the assessment data is attached.
'nIerefore for 1985, the assessment to be used by the Ministry to determine
the grant payable under the Upper Tier programme is;
County of Elgin - $631,000,000
*'"
,. !
I :J,,',..I ".
7 b . "
'f I 1. ~"'''V
,v .'.\,~ .
Yours very truly
-'..' ,f ~
, \ \
, . : \.. \
~ i
JMC/LE/nr
c.c District Municipal Engineer
Reiional Municipal Engineer
~ttachment to the Upoer l"ier ~sse~
1981\
lota1 E~ua1i.led =
~ssessment
tco1 8),
.!~COl 2. + co1 6) Yo. 100
c01 7
1984 ~"in"ister"iallY ~djUsted ~ssessment:
county/Re9"iOn: 1984 1(~ Yo. 0.609
separated Urbans: i984 1(~ Yo. 0.203
I'
~.
1he county total Equa1"iled ~ssessment t1(~) eYo.ciudes separated urbanS
and other mun"iC"ipai"it"ies not contr"ibut"in9 to the ~Road System.
~ ...-.
8/01/85 ASSESSMENT DATA DERIYED FROM THE 1983 APPORTIONMENT PROGRAM PAGE 17
82(83 TAXABLE ASSESSHEHT;EQUIVALENT ASS~C:C:HENT FROM APPORTIONMENT
AND REG PROGRAMS
TAXABLE TAXABLE 'PAY IN LIEU PAY IN LIEU APPORTIONMENT REG PROGRAM 3 YEAR AYG TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL COM IHO BUS RESIDENTIAL COM INn BUS EQUIVALENT EQUIVALENT EQUALIZATION EquALIZED
MUNICIPALITY ASSESS (1 ) A<'C'ESS(2) .<'<':ESS(3) ASSESS(4) ASSESS(5) ASSESS(6) FACTOR(7) ASSESS(8}
AYLMER T 6~706,774 4,435,245 197~057 149,335 616,124 583,892 9.73 89~494~984
BELMONT Y 938,052 178~136 28,625 98~076 100,025 6.96 11 ~409 .!.:4
DUTTON Y 996,486 469,853 18,250 105,325 103,274 8.39 13~363,456
PORT BURWELL 640,507 155~255 18,690 50,936 52,888 7.74 7.240,581
PORT STANLEY. 2,411,411 1,090,166 67.878 236,103 252,721 7.82 34,132,519
RODNEY V 1,016,295 457,286 16,211 25~949 148,131 151,014 8.49 13,748,6~9
SPRlt-lGFIELD Y 457,562 74,577 5,624 31,632 29,334 6.13 5,800,489
VIENNA V 357,959 100,045 13,775 13,775 7.37 4,215,698
WEST LORNE V 1,308,%55 697,075 48,375 2,765 125,681 149,002 8.26 18,954,200
ALDBOROUGH TP 5,812,789 558,245 13,259 117,532 124,037 4.23 91,709,574
BAYHAM TP 6,621,004 559,804 14,835 107,366 112,257 5.20 82,954,096
DUNWICH TP 4,740,376 405,126 87,320 137,248 142,805 3.98 79,274,798
HALAHIDE TP 8,307,307 1,815,581 908 2,336,093 2,532,159 2,541,266 5.37 166,217,225
SOUTH DORCHES 2,835,840 112,634 ~65 50,390 54,444 4.10 42,116,829
SOUTHWOLD TP 7,664,555 10,096,636 440 50,435 346,909 326,882 6.79 215,596,804
YARMOUTH TP 12,257,355 852,865 472,565 1,432,664 1,378,843 5.61 159,951,033
U. TIER TOTAL 63,072,527 22,058,529 262,991 3,292,088 6,150,051 6,116,459 .00 1,036,180,279
COllN'f'l Of BLG1N RO~ DB"!'AR't}1BN't
1985 ROAD DB"!' AR'niBN't BUllG~
fi-
~~ox-~~J
~ ~f(~
19B5 w"" ./
y. 15, /'
FEBRUAR
?
s~y
~
~
$2,220,000
~aintenance and overhead countY and St. 'thomaS
Suburban Road cowmission
B59,000
1,lB6,000
construction
344,000
Asphalt Resurfacing
52,000
Ne'W Macbinery
urban Rebates
ltems Not Subsidized by the }1inistry of 'transportatiOn
and communicatiOns
TOTaL
O 000
5 ,
-------
000
~
~
$1,133,000
41,000
countY LeVY
St. 'thomas Suburban Road CowmiSsion
~inistrY of 'transportatiOn and communicatiOns subsidY
TOTAL
000
3 531,
.:.:-------
000
~4..1/1,L~1,
~
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEl'ARniENT
1985 MINISTRY OF TRJ>J'lSl'OltrATI0N~
~
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
Maintenance and overbead (1984 + 2 1/2%)
$2,000,000 + 2 1/2%
$2,050,000
constt:'Uction
3.6% of Road and Bridge Needs - 1984 Update
.036 X $27,517,000
$ 991,000
10% of Resurfacing Need - 1984 update
1~~ X $11,856,000
1,186,000
Drainage AssessmentS _ 1/2 of 1981, 1982 and 1983 Average
7 000
4 ,
--------
000
~
Ne\>1 Machinet:'Y
TO'tAL
000
$2,215,
000
344,
--------
000
~
over Ride _ 1984 construction Allocation + 25%
($1,772,000 + 25%)
(Using over Ride)
j
('1\\.J~ll1..J\'Ll5=\!'-~~Y: 0~~]E\")ER 'tlER PROGRJ>..~ r"'~"
:.:7.'';.~"' .::.:,;-:;;;:;..:;;:..~_.:;:.;.--,.
~II'..EJ- p..pil\'l"H,d F.y.penditure on Ito~~S and' $ 4 609 .OO~
, Bridi~"'; to .w\uch Grant J\pp\leS tltetn 1) ~
~ l' i.: P ~ counLY \,:Ho rt oE 1. Vi Milts on 'fotal
__.::..:-- count\! J\ssesstncnt t1tctl. f)
\ '1/. ~ It,'I1' f ' \,2?" $.~~ :: $~'
. _ ~ \ 000
\' 1\1 ,; ;.;. ". \ \ rua" Cant ,'iuot ion at O. ? Mil\S
(\ " " 11."\)\ C. . n."''' $~W~ $ 41.200___
.-\600 \ 000 ~
~~v..., ~'-~~
"t.
.
,
.
~
~ )'hk':> ~)
...........-.......".,-_.. ..
'f o\." I I,'" ,11 I,: I [" rt at \. l.? MinS
\l""c.l bll"\'\ at L 7.? Mi',ls equals the
tOla\ \ ,0" "I f,llo rt i 1\ St" P 1. plUS an
eqUi"alent all aunt oE \1rant
2 " Step 2- 2 " $~th2iQ.---
::$~
$
<; I \':? ')1 J\) ." ~"t noa.d 'C' tt 0 rt
._,_.___~-Whcr.: t\lere 15 an un..'{' ~ "."
a.t \. l,? Mi\lS Gra.nt applying to it is
Step 0\ y. o. '10')0') =
$'?:..2~.QSL _' " O. ')0 ')0')
pluli Gr;.lnt equiValent to 'total
\..ooc"'" to~Hort tStep 2)
Tot",1 t:.c1Iculated AtnOunt oE Grant
\lllll.ct HOllu \.:Elort at \. .,,1) MiUS ::
Step l rninus Step'} t\.ln\eSS Step 3
,sgrt';).te r than SteP I)
$~~
:... \' \;. p .\
..". .....,-,.~........
::$~
$~
$~~
80 "/. 0 { p.. ','P rove d E"pe n(' itu re
\ltetn 1\ '0 0, B " $----
... or ..
:: $
!) tA) $~
1l.'fl1lCEl<tAG1> SUB. 16 · \11%
~
~
W hienc"" r i'; t.he \e slIe l'
OR
---
~r\,\,:r> ')1'8\ .
__.~Wher" t\",rc 1& no\Jn1l\et Road Eiiort
at \. ~'i !lAi\\& Grant is 'i0"/. of A.ppro'ied
1-: "p"n{Ii\U rc lltctn 1) :: O. ? " Step 1 ::
(). ~ >'. $ --.. -.... ------
~ tB) $~
:).\,\.:\) 1
-- ..----
Grant applyinj!, to \Jrl>an Rebate 1?a.id
?O"/o 01 ltetn H " O. ? J( $~ ;:; $~
plu'; c; rant a.pplying to J\pl' roved
1-:ll.\'lCn{\iturc lStcP ?tp..) or Step stB) $~
MinUS \\c..:eipt5 frotn proi'e-rtY DiSPOSa.\>\'#
"/" uE \tl'111 N " O. - " $--- ::: $~
---
'fota~ Grant
'rut.a. \ C..,,,,,t payable unde l' \lppe:r 'tie:r
? rn!\ riAlll i ,; The Allocation tltetn A) or
Step <>. .whi,'.h.ever is the lesser
$~~~
. 5 l' \~: p b
~~.-.
$lJ531,Q90.~
..'" '.
','"
A.ppHell o"ly to pu.rc\lil-Ses tnade p'1'.ior to :January, 1, 1 ~1>.
\ 'erce"t;~gt' to he "sed i.s that appl~ca.b1e to yea.r Ul 'Wh~ch
, ropc'1'lY .wa S \>"rchased.
PJ\'t~~-----
, '~
'\
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
COUNTY LEVY
Ministry of Transportation and Communications Spending
Objective
LESS: Ministry of Transportation and Communications
Subsidy on Operations
SUB TOTAL
LESS: Contribution of City of St. Thomas Toward
Suburban Roads
SUB TOTAL
Urban Rebates (Without Items Not For Subsidy $52,000)
ADD: County of Elgin Share 50%
SUB TOTAL
ADD: Items Not For Subsidy
TOTAL COUNTY LEVY
1984 Levy $1,031,000
1984 Expenditures (Approximate) $1,001,095
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
$4,609,000
3,511,000
$1,098,000
41,000
$1,057,000
26,000
$1,083,000
50,000
$1,133,000
cOIJ1'lT'l 01' ELGIN ROAD 01'.1' AltTl1EN't
~
collN'f'l Nor FOR SUBSID'l
1.
AdministratiVe ChargeS from Clerk'S Office
for l'ayroll l'reparation.
convention nospitalitY suiteS, etc.
2.
LiabilitY lnsu~ance.
3.
~ember~hiPS, Retirement Allo~ances, etc.
4.
Sick Leave 1'1an l'ayouts,
overexpenditUre to Earn ~axi'[lR1m subsidY'
urban RebateS on Non subsidiz.ed E,q>enditUres.
InternatiOnal 1'10~ing ~atch ExpenditUres
(Erection of Sno~ Fence, etc.)
, 5.
6.
1.
8.
AMENDED
VEBRUAR1 15, 1985
$ 5,000 '
2,500
1,500
1,500
23,000
4,000
2,500
O 000
1 ,
------
000
~
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS ASSESSMENT AND
PROPOSED COUNTY ROAD LEVY
COUNTY LEVY AVAILABLE
COUNTY ROAD LEVY [INCLUDES NON TO SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION
URBAN ASSESSMENT RURAL ASSESSMENT TOTAL ASSESSMENT SUBSIDIZED] SEPARATED CITY
COUNTY (IN MILLIONS) (IN MILLIONS) (IN MILLIONS) (IN THOUSANDS) (IN THOUSANDS)
BRUCE 255.04 459.96 715 1,640
GREY 176.86 533.14 710 1 , 405
- OWEN SOUND 73.2 36.6
HURON 254. 26 555.74 810 2,162
PERTH 105 . 29 398.71 504 800
- STRATFORD 116.8 58.4
WELLINGTON 209.50 478.5 688 N/A
- GUELPH 290.2 145.1
ELGIN 121 + 510 + 631 1,133
- ST. THOMAS 82.4 41.2
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
CONSTRUCTION
Road and Bridge Construction Allocation
Drainage Assessments
LESS: Loss Because of Ministry of Transportation and
CVllUl1unications Over Ride
NET CONSTRUCTION ALLOCATION
1. Transfer to Maintenance because of Under Allocation.
2. Surveying and ~gineering on Future Road and Bridge
Construction Projects.
3. Engineering and Preliminary Work, Road #45 from
Road #40 to Highway #73.
4. Engineering, Replacement of Port Burwell and Player's
Bridge Floor s.
5. County Land Purchase.
6. St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Land Purchase.
7. Drainage Assessments, County Roads.
8. Drainage Assessments, St. Thomas Suburban Road
CUUUl1issiori.
9. Increase in Stock Balance.
(Pleasant Valley and Sparta Pits, Etc.)
10. Completion of work Road #42, Silver Creek.
11. Completion of work Road #32, Malahide Township.
12. Completion of Work Road #42 and Road #50 in
Port Burwell.
13. Replacement of Culvert Road #29, St. Thomas Suburban
Road Commission.
14.
Work on Road #22 (Fairview Avenue), Yarmouth
Township.
$ 991,000
47,000
$1,038,000
9,000
$1,029,000
$ 170,000
25, 000
25,000
8,000
60,000
15,000
30,000
14,000
50, 000
37,000
22,000
80,000
30,000
463,000
$1,029,000
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
RESURFACING ALLOCATION
(A) COMPLETION OF WORK UNDERWAY
.
.'
,.
1. Road #36 north of Road #45 - Yarmouth
minor ditching, seeding and shoulder
gravel.
2. Road #45 from Jaffa to Highway #73 - Malahide
minor ditching, seeding and shoulder gravel.
3. Road #3 from Road #2 to Highway #3 - Aldborough
minor ditching, seeding, shoulder work and
single surface treatment on shoulders.
(B) NEW WORK
1. Road #39 (Chatham Street), Port Burwell.
2. Road #42, east limit of Port Burwell, easterly
approximately 1 mile (Bayham Township).
3. Road #52 ~ Road #30 t.o Highway #74 (Yarmouth
Township ).
4. Road #36 - Sparta to Road #24 (Yarmouth
Township ).
(OR)
5. Road #40 - Mount Salem to Road #42 (Malahide
Township ).
\
.\..
$1,186,000
15,000
5,000
25,000
.,'
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 MAINTENANCE BUDGET
COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS
AMENDED
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
(Maintenance Comparisons for 1982, 1983 and 1984 include County and Suburban Roads Expenditures.
Burden.)
All totals include Payroll
ST. THOMAS
SUBURBAN
OPERATION 1982 1983 1984 1985 ESTIMATED COUNTY ROADS
A - Bridges and Culverts
- 1 Bridges 63 , 208 140,766 97,219
63,297 71,289 37,326 130,000 120,000 10,000
- 2 Culverts
B - Roadside Maintenance
- 1 Grass Cutting 19,718 17,894 41,888 47,000 37,000 10,000
- 2 Tree Cutting and Brushing 70,305 111,471 79,498 72,000 60,000 12,000
- 4- Drainage 132,430 163,074 190,735 160,000 142,000 18,000
- 5 Roadside Maintenance 30,161 37,907 39,393 32,000 26, 000 6,000
- 6 Tree Planting 2, 605 10,067 4,088 4,000 4,000
- 7 Drainage Assessments 7,707 3,296 2, 350 3,000 3,000
(Maintenance)
- 11 Weed Spraying 12,627 15,769 12, 716 20,000 16,000 4,000
C - Paved Road Maintenance
- 1 Repairs to Pavement 60,133 68,514 48,966 70,000 66,000 4,000
- 2 Sweeping 31 ,843 22,251 27,273 30,000 26,000 4,000
...- -.
.... ~ e_.
. ,~-
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROADDEP ARTME!\'T
1985 MAI!\'TENANCE BUDGET
C~TY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS
PAGE 2.
ST. THOY.t.AS
SUBURBAl\l
OPERATION 1982 1983 1984 1985 ESTIMATED Com..'TY ROADS
~ p -
C .. Paved Road Maintenance (Continued)
- 3 Shoulder Maintenance 102,169 245,522 86,697 76,000 '60,000 16,000
- 4 Surface Treatment 144,027 119,447 142,263 180,000 160,000 20,000
D - Gravel Road Maintenance
- 1 Oi tching, Drainage and Gravel-Road #26 23,976 25,000 25,000
- 2 Grading Gravel Roads 25, 043 28,229 29,853 33,000 27,000 6,000
- 3 D..t st Control 36,905 45,713 40,029 48,000 40,000 B,OOO
- 4 Prime 4,166 3,945 2,635 11,000 B,OOO 3,000
- 5 Gravel Resurfacing 85, 109 35,745 70,128 80,000 78,000 2,000
E - Winter Control
Total 497,778 210,955 458,201 575,000 493,000 82, 000
- 1 Snow Plol-.'ing 124,565 29,819 127,326
- 2 Sanding and Salting 325,500 144,974 296,"'395
- 3 Snow Fence 25,801 16,131 19,754
- 4 Standby and Night Crew 21,912 20,031 14,726
F - Safety Devices
- 1 Pavement Marking 41,814 44,197 46, 058 50,000 40,000 10,000
- 2 Signs and Signals 77,511 46,366 45,345 62,000 44,000 18,000
"
COUh'TY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 l-1AINTENANCE BUDGET
COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBA.~ ROADS
OPERATION
1982
F - Safety Devices (Continued)
- 3 Guide Rail
- 4 Railroad Protection
- 6 Edge Marking
- 7 Stump Removal
5,510
33,766
30,409
TOTALS
$1,578,241,
Winter Control 1979
Winter Control 1980
Winter Control 1981
$359,431
$260.443
$366,369
1984 M.T.C. Maintenance and Overhead Allocation
1984 Maintenance Expenditure
1984 Overhead
$1,659,316
367,473
j2, 026, 789
4- _<<
. -.
PAGE 3.
1983
11,995
38, 548
36,392
$1,529,352
$1,999,000
1984
ST. THOMAS
SUBURBA.~
ROADS
1985 ESTIMATED
COUNTY
17,829 15,000 14,000 1,000
48,322 43,000 34,000 9,000
37,967 41,000 30,000 11,000
28,561 20,000 10,000 10,000
$1,659,316 $1,827,000 $1,538,000 $289,000
:
1985 M.T.C. Maintenance and Overhead Allocation
1985 Maintenance Budget
1985 Overhead Budget
$1,827,000
393,000
$2,220,000
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 BUDGET
OVERHEAD
(COUNTY AN D ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS).
.
I.-
OPERATION
1982
1983
1984
Superintendence 117,771 131,051 115,176
Clerical 61,473 64,513 64,346
Garage and White Station Property 101 ,882 106,362 98,823
(1982t 1983 and 1984 Include Rodney Garage)
Office 1 7 , 039 15,189 23 , 390
Tools 5,996 13,697 11,096
Radio 4,046 3,880 4,265
Needs Study Updpte and Traffic Counts 7,727 9,472 15,785
Training Courses 7,921 1 , 143 2,861
Miscellaneous Insurance 2,684 2,453 2,320
Ret.frement Benefits (Sick Time) 16,131 26,784
Deferred Time 38 CR. 670CR. 2,627
TOTALS $326,501 $363,221 $367,473,
1985 Distribution:
(1 )
(2 )
St. Thomas Suburban Road Conunission 30; t)--,;--u
County of Elgin 'I> 3b3/ /Nl)
1983
$347,000
Without Retirement Benefits
1984
$340,689
1985
$380,000
\
AMENDED
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
1985 ESTIMATE
135,000
68,000
110,000
31, 000
15,000
4,500
10,000
4,000
2,500
13,000
$393, 000
COillJTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
1985 BUDGET
PAYROLL BURDEN
(APPLICABLE TO COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS)
ITEM 1982 1983 1984 1985 ESTIMATE
.
I
.
I'
.
~olidays With Pay:
(a) Annual 106:J886 111,363 120,202 112,000
(b) Statutory 52,314 51,310 53,815 57,000
(c) Compassionate Leave 1,961 . 1,498 329
(d) Jury 74
Sick Benefits' 36,022 40,103 5 2, 904 50,000
Inclement Weather and Standby 3,190 3 , 25 2 2,651 3,000
Medical 2, 509 2,459
Safety Equipment 10,038 9 , 1 08 8,474 9,500
Workmen's Compensation Insurance 18,698 28 , 503 27,132 32,000
Canada Pension 15,179 18,456 19,469 20,500
O.M.E.R.S. 67,200 70, 103 69,163 71,000
U.I.C. 23,290 39,017 39,378 43,000
O.H.I.P. and E.H.C. 33,429 37,280 39. 606 41,500
L.T.D. 13,416 11,639 12, 106 13,500
Life Insurance 719 564 555
Payroll Burden Charged to the
Canada Employment Programme and
N.E.E.D.S. Programme 397CR. 16,299CR. 4,247 CR. NIL
TOTALS ,$384,454 .$408,356 $441,611 $453,000
--=--
PAYROLL BURDEN DISTRIBUTION
1982 1983 1984
Total Labour $1,290,572 $1 ,AO 2, 557 $1,374,215
Less Labour in Payroll Burden 203,945 209,038 229,996
Less Labour Provincial Incentive Programme 32,678 70,087 433
Less Canada Swwuer '83 and '84 ~,363 1,938
Less Labour Canada Employment Programme 3,338 92,912
Less Canada Works (1984) 24,845
Less Ontario Youth Corp Programme (1984) 9,219
, I Net Labour 1 , 050, 611 1,02&,157 1,107,784
~
Payroll Burden 384,454 408,356 441,611
Payroll Burden as a % of Net Labour 36.5934% 39..7l73% 39.8644%
COUNT'! OF "ELGIN ROAD DEl' p.RT\'1"EN'!:
19B~ BIlllGF! - Y A'lROLL BURD"ElI
A?YLICABL"E TO co\JNT'l AND ST. T\l.Ql4t\S SUBllRfu\N ROADS)
19B~ _ Labout "Estimated
LeSS Labout in Govetn1llCnt YtOgtattllles
Less LabOur in yayroll 1\Urden
Net taboU'[
.
\
. .."
I'
yayroll 1\Utden as a '/. of Net LabOUr
(payroll Burden disttibuted to CountY
\
'\ \
Ii
$1,430,000
NIL
222,000
-------
~
~ "" 31.~'/.
1,20B,OOO
overhead, Maintenance
1>> AGE 2.
and consttl1ctiOn Accounts)
ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION
-'
1985 BUDGET SUMMARY
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
1. Maintenance (From Page #3 of the 1985 County and
St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Maintenance
Budget).
$289,000
2. Construction (From Page #l of the St. Thomas
Suburban Road Commission Construction
Budget ).
(a) Land purchase
$15,000
(b) Drainage AsseSffinents
14,000,
29,000
3. Overhead ~ St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission
Share 8% of Total Overhead of $380,000
(Being $393,000 Less Retirement Benefits)
30,000
TOTAL BUDGET SUBSIDIZED BY THE MINISTRY
OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS j348,00~
City of St. Thomas Share of Suburban Road Commission
Budget _ 5~k of Remainder after Ministry of
Transportation and communications Subsidy.
Ministry of Transportation and CouuuUnications Subsidy
Estimated at 76% of $348,000 $264,480
City of St. Thomas Share $41,760.00
Add 5~k of St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission ItemS 300.00
Not For Subisdy - 50% of $600
TOTAL SHARE OF THE CITY OF ST. THOMAS $42,060.00
469.01
Deduct: surplus for 1984.
Deduct; 1985 1/2 Mill Contribution of the City of
St. Thomas
41,200.00
ESTIMATED DEFICIT TO 1986
$ 390.99
f'-,
ST. THOMAS, ONTARI0
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
PAGE 1.
9:30 a.m., Friday, February 15, 1985. All members except Reeve Mc~illiam were
present. Also present waS Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of TransportatiOn
THE ,cOUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal BUilding at
and communications, the Engineer and the Assistant Engineer.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT KEN MONTEITll BE CflAIJlW1l'1 FOR TIlE MEETiNG OF FEBRUJ\RY 15, 1985.
CARRIED."
THE ENGINEER REPORTED AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the Township of Malahide had accepted the county'S offer to supply
gravel used on the Sparta Road to facilitate the hauling of sand for the
Silver creek Culvert in December 1983. the gravel would be supplied and/or
hauled during the 1985 seaSon.
The total value of the offer would be $10,000 based on $2.85 per ton for
crushed gravel and any haulage at the 1984 county Truck RateS.
unemployment ~orker section for 8 workers to work 8 weeks. The value of
the grant for the labour would be approximatelY $17,000, however there
would be nO grant on materials or rentals.
The progrgrome should be approved by the Federal Government by late March
so the work would be done in April and May.
althoUgh a number of culvertS could not be inspected because of snoW and
2. AA. application had been made under canada ~orks progrgrome through the
3. InspectiOn of structural plate culverts continued in the Townships,
water conditions.
The culvert in the poorest condition was in the Township of Bayham in
concession 111, being a 10 foot round pipe which has floated up on the
inlet end, the Township had closed the road.
Further discUssions were being held with the MinisttY of Ttanspottation and
communications and other officials. AS yet there appeared to be no failure
pattetn other than cracks at the top of the haunch in large span pipe arch
---
culvert s.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
PAGE 2.
4. the personnel C()ll\1llittee had met and "ould be making rec()ll\1llendations to
5. Insurance policies and invoices had been received from the Frank co",an company
county council regarding ",agES, etc., for road ",orks.
Limited, revie",ed and the invoices placed on the payliSt for payment.
Reeve Monteith reported on OntariO 11.ydro' s plans for transmission lineS and
said Ontario 11.ydro would addreSS county council.
t11.E :eNGINEER REPORtED ON T11.E 'ifORK TO DATE AS FOLLOVIS:
1. 'ifinter control remained extremelY expensive to the present. The costS to
date ",ere approximatelY $Z26,000 Wbich ",as approximatelY a $37,000 increase
2. carrier Mack Limited would give the county a credit of $3,600 to",ard the
over 1984 spending.
3 . Steel pipe culvert s "'OU 1 d be ordered shortlY fr om corrugate d pipe Limited.
repair of truck cabs ",hich had rusted prematurelY'
4. planS ",ere continuing for traffiC control ",ork at the International plowing
Match ·
"MOVED BY:
R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. 11.. STEWART
T11.AT T11.E FOLLOVIING pA'lLISTS BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT:
l' A'lLI ST NUMBER 7 AMOUNTING TO $64,329. 72
l' A'lLI ST NUMBER B AMOUNTING TO $1, B 73 · 67
l' A'lLIST NUMBER 9 AMOUNTING TO $214,013. 57
CARRTED."
Gravel crushing quotatiOns ",ere received as attached.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LA VEREAll
SECONDED BY: M. 11.. STEWART
T1:lAT 'ifE ACCEPT T11.E QUOTATION OF C. R. CflITTICK CONSTRUCTION LIMITED FOR T11.E
19B5 GRAVEL CRUS11.ING AT T11.E COUNTY'S PLEASANT VALLEY PIT AT 6Blt pER TON.
CARRIED."
.~,
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
PAGE 3.
"MOVED BY: C. R. VlILLSEY
SECONDED BY; D. PEROVlCll
TllAT TllE ENGINEER BE AUTllORIZED TO MMCE AN APPLICATION TO TllE TOWNSlllP OF
yARl{OUTll FOR TllE REZONING OF TllE COUNTY'S PROPERTY IN TllE SOUTll llALF OF
LOTS 26 AND 27, CONCESSION 1V, yARl{OUTll AS A GRAVEL pIT, TO BE LICENSED
UNDER TllE pIT AND QUARRIES Ac:f.
CARRIED ."
The Committee examined in detail the First February Report to county council
wnich detailed the 1984 expenditUres.
and communications Subsidy Allocations had not yet been received and the budget might
The Engineer presented the 1985 BUdget noting that the Ministry of Transportation
have to be amended at a later time.
was found that it had to be amended becaUse of a decrease in Minb;try of Transportation
These estimates were diSCUssed in some detail. (The BUdget is not attached as it
and communications subsidy, the neW budget will be forwarded later.)
TllE MEETING ADJOURNED FOR LUNCll
AFTER LUNCH · · ·
CORRESPONDENCE VIAS READ AS FOLLOWS:
1. From the Ministry of Transportation and co~nications with thanks to the
Engineer for hiS assistance in the Ministry of TransportatiOn and
communicatiOns' Bridge seminar for the Grey-BrUCe Area.
the expansion jointS be replaced at the Vlardsvi11e Bridge prior to painting.
The Engineer was instructed to meet with the County of Middlesex to diSCUSS
thiS matter as the Committee concurred with the Ministry's recommendation.
for access to the neW administrative building for fire control purposes.
2. From the Ministry of TransportatiOn and communications recommending that
3. From the Township of Yarmouth with a copy of a letter pointing out a need
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
PAGE 4.
4. From the Village of Rodney with a zoning by-law to amend the floor area required
in new dwelling units over commercially used property on Furnival Road.
5. From the Township of Southwold with a proposed zoning for a car dealership at
Concessions 'A' and 'B' on the Wellington Road.
Members expressed concern that a possible entrance off of Wellington Road
could cause a possible obstruction to the view at the intersection and
the possibility of placement of illumination which could mislead traffic.
The Engineer was instructed to inform the Central Elgin Planning Committee
and the Township of Southwold of the Committe~s concerns.
6. From Mr. Don Husson, County Engineer, County of Middlesex expressing his
concern over maintenance costs on boundary bridges and asked that no work
on boundary bridges or other townline roads other than nominal maintenance
and/or winter control be done without consultation with him, as the County
of Middlesex did not have sufficient funds to pay their share of the work.
The Engineer was instructed to meet with Mr. Husson to discuss the matter.
7. Armco-Westeel regarding steel pipe arches.
8. From the Village of Springfield stating that they had no snow fence but
would assist in the erection at the International Plowing Match.
9. From Ibis Products Limited with paint quotations for white and yellow
traffic paint, being the same as 1984 prices. The quotation was less
than the one accepted by the County of Middlesex for 1985 from Niagara
Paint Company and was less than Ibis Products' quotation to the County
of Middlesex for 1985.
10. From the Village of Dutton requesting an entrance from County Road #8 for
the new Dum;rich- Dut ton Fire Hall.
The County in selling the adjacent property had kept a one foot reserve
along County Road #8 so that an entrance to the propE~rty could only be
gained from John Street.
The CV1Llluittee haduno objection to having a fire hall entrance on County
Road #8.
The Engineer was instructed to obtain quotations for painting maps
showing the County road system in colour.
ST. TROM-AS, ONTARIO
FEBRUARY 15, 1985
PAGE 5.
The Enginee~ ~ecommended that it be inc~eased f~om $150.00 pe~ yea~, Which it had
been fo~ many yea~S, to $175.00 and would cove~ from Janua~y 1, 1985 to Janua~y 31, 1986.
The hono~a~ium to the St. Thomas subu~ban Road C()lllll\ission membe~s was discUssed.
AS the commiSsion'S term would e~i~e at that time thiS would b~ing the hono~a~ium
pe~iod into line with the pe~iod of se~vice.
The committee ag~eed to ~ecommend thiS to county council.
"MOVED BY; D. PEROVlCll
SECONDED BY: C. R. 1illLLSE'l
'J1lAT ~ ADJOURN TO Tl11lRSDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1985 AT 9 :00 A.M.
CARRIED.11
) --./' 1
~,~='-/~
~ c1:lAIRMAN
~.
COUNTY OF' ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
QUOTATIONS FOR GRAVEL CRUSHING AT TH~
PLEASANT VALLEY PIT
FEBRUARY 1985
.
I
'.
\
1. C. R. Chittick Construction Limited
R. R. #3
Ilderton,ililtario
NOM 2AO
68 Cents Per Ton
2. Alex Newbigging Limited
P. O. Box 1
Delaware, Ontario
79 Cents Per Ton
3. Johnston Bros. (Bothwell) Limited
P. O. Box 220
Bothwell, Ontario
No QUotation Received
4. Lyle McBeth
1242 Baseline Road West
London, Ontario
No Quotation Received
5. Marcon Limited
Attention: Mr. John C. Cattle
R. R. #1
Brownsville, Ontario
No Quotation Received
6. Pleasant Valley Aggregates Limited
R. R. hO
St. Thomas, Ontario
No QUotation Received
7. Jack Tanner Construction Limited
R. R. #2
Stratford, Ontario
No Quotation Received
8. Gordon Wiseman Limited
R. R. #1
Woodstock, Ontario
No Quotation Received
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT
TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE ELGIN COUNTY COUNCIL
YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS:
FEBRUARY SESSION
1985
St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Roads in 1984.
The following is a Summary of Expenditures on Elgin County and
In accordance with Ministry of Transportation and Communications'
practice, Payroll Burden such as Holidays With Pay, Sick Time, etc.,
separate item.
has been distributed to various projects and does not appear as a
CONSTRUCTION
(A) Roads and Bridges:
(1) Silver Creek Culvert Replacement, County
Road #42, Malahide Township. (Total
Expenditure 1983 and 1984 $662,283.89.)
(2) County Road #22 (Fairview Avenue) from
St. Thomas City Limits to County Road #27,
Yarmouth Township.
(3) County Road #32 (Police College Road) from
Highway #73 to County Road #52, Malahide
Township.
(4) County Road #42 and County Road #00 in
the Village of Port Burwell, construction.
(5) Replacement of Geary Drain Culvert, Road #9,
Aldborough Township (pipe purchased 1983).
(6) County Road #45 from Highway #73 to Road #40,
Malahide Township (surveys, engineering, etc. ).
(7) Land purchase including land surveying,
legal costs, etc., on County Roads #3,
#8, #22, #45, etc.
(8) Surveys and engineering work on roads for
future construction.
TarAL
(B) Asphalt Resurfacing:
(1) County Road 113 from Port Glasgow to Rodney
in A1dborough Township.
$ 263,795.56
543,108.29
111,327.89
330,880.49
2,080.58
4,684.30
15,097.56
21,581.91
$1,292,556.58
$
77 ,466.71
Continued . . . . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT - FEBRUA~Y SESSION 1985
(B) Asphalt Resurfacing: (Continued)
(2) County Road #8 from Highway #3 (Wallacetown)
to Dutton in Dunwich Township.
(3) County Road #36 north of County Road #45 in
Yarmouth Township.
(4) County Road #l~5 from Jaffa to lligln>J'ay //:73
in Malahide Township.
TOTAL
(C) Miscellaneous:
(1) Credit on machinery ownership costs, etc.,
charged to accounts receivable, townline
accounts and miscellaneous machine credits.
(2) New and used machinery and major repairs to
presently owned equipment.
(3) Paving sand and salt pile area, driveways
at County Garage White Station and addition
to County Garage for tractor to power
emergency generator.
(4) Drainage assessments against County roads.
(5) Sale of Rodney Garage (net after disbursements).
[Ministry of Transportation and Communications
regards this portion as a receipt.]
PAGE 2.
$
29,734.68
215,130.84
253,189.15
$ 575,521.38
$
36,192.47 CR.
293,364.14
34,399.70
26,870.02
2,063.16 CR.
TOTAL $ 316,378.23
TOTAL COUNTY COSTS ('A', 'B', 'C')
(D) Construction St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission:
(1) Miscellaneous surveys and engineering.
(2) Land purchase.
(3) Drainage assessments against St. Thomas
Suburban Road Connnission Roads.
TOTAL COST BY ST. THOMAS
SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION
TOTAL COUNTY OF ELGIN AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN
ROAD COMMISSION CONSTRUCTION
$2,184,456.19
$
754.93
10,205.59
3,631.59
$
14,592.11
$2,199,048.30
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT - FEBRUARY SESSION 1985
PAGE 3.
MAINTENANCE - COUNTY ROADS
*NOTE: Letters and numbers correspond to Ministry of Transportation and Communications'
Account Numbers.
COUNTY ROADS
ST. THOMAS
SUBURBAN ROAD
COMMISSION
ROADS
TOTAL
A - Culverts and Bridges
- 1 Bridges
- 2 Culverts
90,858.23
36,818.10
6,360.12
507.85
97,218.35
37,325.95
B - Roadside Maintenance
- 1 Grass Cutting
- 2 Tree Cutting
- 4 Drainage
- 5 Roadside Maintenance, Washouts,
Shouldering, etc.
- 6 Tree Planting
- 7 Drainage Assessments (Repairs Only)
- 11 Weed Spraying
34,835.08 7,053.00 41,888.08
64,229.18 15,268.74 79,497.92
167,900.25 22,834.31 190,734.56
26,921.03 12,471.90 39,392.93
4,088.25 4,088.25
2,317.91 31.68 2,349.59
9,788.06 2,928.20 12,716.26
C - Hard Top Maintenance (Paved Roads)
- 1 Repairs to Pavement
- 2 Sweeping
- 3 Shoulder Maintenance (including
gravelling, ditching, etc.)
- 4 Surface Treatment
44,754.59 4,210.89 48,965.48
25,643.19 1,630.24 27,273.43
76,385.98 10,312.95 86,698.93
115,204.38 27 , 058 . 09 142,262.47
D - Loose Top Maintenance (Gravel Roads)
- 1 Drainage, Gravel, etc., Road #26
(Bostwick Road)
- 2 Grading Gravel Roads
- 3 Dust Control (Calcium Chloride and
sal t brine)
4 Dust Control (prime)
- 5 Gravel Resurfacing
23,975.88 23,975.88
25,215.50 4,637.49 29,852.99
33,226.68 6,802.56 40,029.24
87.70 2,547.37 2,635.07
69,354.59 772.84 70,127.43
E - Winter Control
- 1 Snow Plowing
- 2 Sanding and Salting
- 3 Snow Fence
4 Winter Standby
* Total Winter Control ($458,201.16)
106,848.96
255,772.55
17,698.78
12,826.74
20,477.13
40,622.31
2,054.98
1,899.71
127,326.09
296,394.86
19,753.76
14,726.45
* 1983 Winter Control
1982 Winter Control
1981 Winter Control
$210,955
$497,778
, $366,369
Continued . . .
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT - FEBRUARY SESSION 1985
PAGE 4.
MAINTENANCE - COUNTY ROADS
COUNTY ROADS
ST. THOMAS
SUBURBAN ROAD
COMMISSION
ROADS
TOTAL
F - Safety Devices
- 1 Pavement Marking (Center Line) 38,004.10 8, 054. 29 46,058.39
- 2 Signs 40,080.29 5,264.66 45,344.95
- 3 Guide Rail 17,112.16 716.61 17, 8 28. 77
- 4 Railroad Protection 40,953.72 7,368.18 48,321. 90
- 6 Edge Marking 27,895.22 1 0, 071 .50 37,966.72
- 7 Stump Removal 9,879.11 18,681.91 28,561.02
TOTALS $1,394,700.33 $264,615.39 $1,659,315.72
-- -----,-.-
OVERHEAD - COUNTY
1. Superintendence, including County
Engineers, Superintendents, and
Vehicles.
106,307.49
8,868.56
115, 1 76. 05
2. Clerical
59,391.12
4,954.62
64,345.74.
3. Office
21,589.37
1,801.06
23,390.43
4. Garages (White Station and Rodney)
Stock and Timekeepers, Maintenance,
Heat, etc.
91,367.29
7,456.14
98,823.43
5. Tools
10,241.85
854.41
11 , 096.26
6. Radio
3,936.34
328.38
4,264.72
7. Needs Study Update and Traffic Counts
13,979.96
1,805.27
15,785.23
8. Training Courses
2,641.17
220.34
2,861.51
9. Miscellaneous Insurance
2,140.90
178.60
2,319.50
10. Retirement Benefits (sick time paid to
retired employees)
26,783.53
26,783.53
11. Deferred Time
2,626.64
2,626.64
TOTALS
$341,005.66
$26,467.38
$367,473.04
Overhead is charged against the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Roads on a percentage
basis of the cost of construction and maintenance on the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission
Roads as a percentage of all construction and maintenance on both St. Thomas Suburban Roads
and County Roads (urban rebates, equipment purchases, drainage asses~ents, items not for
subsidy, etc., are not considered in determining the overhead percentage). In 1984 the
Overhead Charge to the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission was 7.7%.
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
FIRST REPORT - FEBRUARY SESSION 1985
PAGE 5.
MISCELLANEOUS
Rebate to Town of Aylmer and Villages of 25% of their Road Levy
$51,019.04
Distributed Labour Costs and Payroll Burden totaled $441,611.30 in 1984
and was distributed in accordance with Ministry of Transportation and
Communications standard practice to the various operations.
ITEMS NOT SUBSIDIZED BY THE
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS
COUNTY ROADS
ST. THOMAS
SUBURBAN ROAD
COMMISSION
ROADS
TOTAL
1. Road Liability Insurance
2. Miscellaneous (including memberships,
etc. )
3. lnvoices from the County Clerks Office 4,242.63
for preparation of employee payroll
4. Sale of Rodney Garage (net after 4,814.06 CR.
disbursements). Portion not regarded
by the Ministry of Transportation and
C..mu....mications as a receipt
1,043.00
4,572.27
150.00
130.41
1,193.00
4,702.6~
4,242.63
4,814.06 CR.
5. Sale of North-West Part of Lot 137, 55,355.40 CR.
North of Talbot Road, Houghton
Township (net after disbursements)
6. Payment for accumulated sick time to 28,038.55
employees still in employment of the
County of Elgin
55,355.40 CR.
28,038.55
TOTALS
$22,273.01 CR.
$280.41
$21,992.60 CR.
SUMMARY
ST. THOMAS
SUBURBAN ROAD
COMMISSION
COUNTY ROADS ROADS TOTAL
(A) Construction 2,184,456.19 14,592.11 2,199,048.30
(B) Maintenance 1,394,700.33 264,615.39 1,659,315.72
(C) Overhead 341,005.66 26,467.38 367,473.04
(D) Urban Rebates 51 , 01 9 . ot~ 51,019.04
(E) Items Not For Subsidy 22,273.01 CR. 280.41 21,992.60 CR.
SUBTOTALS $3,948,908.21 $305,955.29 $4,254,863.50
ADD: 1984 Stock Balance 48,829.63 CR. 48,829.63 CR.
$3,900,078.58 $305,955.29 $4,206,033.87
DEDUCT: 1983 Stock Balance 66,251.38 CR. 66, 251. 38 CR.
TOTALS $3,833,827.20 $305,955.29 $4,139,782.49
(Total for Ministry of Transportation and Communications Subsidy $4,161,775.09)
on the
f22B, jBO.31
NIL
----
~
$105,955.29
228,580.3\.
.:------
~
$38,687.49
943.50
----
$39,630.99
40,100.00
----
~
CAl>C\lLAT10N OF N1':t C(lllllT'l EJ{F1lN01TURE
~
l'Iinist<Y of T<anspO<ution and COt\l1lunicationS subsidY Allocations \le<e'
The 19B4 Road Le~ ~<ovided $1,031,000
. 1984 ~e-e '4 600 436.61 and in 19B3 ~<e $5,343,165.36,
Total vouche< yaymentS ,n ..,'
l' AGE 6.
c()1lNI'l Of ELC1N RO!\DC()\\l\l1'tEE
flRST REYOR't _ fEnRUAR'l SESS10N 1985
CAl>C\lLAT1ON Of /J'\()1lNI YA'lAnLE n'l Cln: Of ST. 't1\OMAS
TOIlAllD T\\E ST. T\\OMAS SU1l\lR~ ROAIl C()\\l\lSSlON RO~
calculatiOn of l'Iinist<Y of T<anSpo<tation and communicatiOns payable
St. Thomas subu<ban Road commission Road system E~penditu<es.
1. A"e<age $uM\.dY Rate on Ol'otottOfiS l\~l'.nultuto$
74.7189% of $305,674.88
2. subsidy on ltemS Not Fo< subsidY
'tarAl> SUllS10'l fROM l'I1N1S1R'l Of TRANSyO!rrAT10N ANO c<JMllllN1CA'tl0NS
Total St. Thomas SubU<ban Road commission E~enditu<es
LES S :
l'Iinist<Y of 't<anspo<tatiOn and oororounications subsidY
Bi\lJ,}ICE
Sha<e of City of St. ThomaS 50% of Balance
ADD: Deficit from \.983
SUB'tO'tAL
OEIlUCT: 1/2 l'Iill cont<ibution fo< 19B4 f<om City of St. Thomas
SURl'LUS 'to \.985
(a) Gene<al subsidy AllOcation
Total CountY Road and St. Thomaa Subu<ban Road commission
E~penditUres
LESS:
l'Iinist<Y of T<anSpo<tatiOn and communicatiOns subsidY
cost to city of St. Thomas of the St. Thomas Subu<ban
Road CommiSsion
LESS:
N1':t ESl1l'\ATEIl COST TO c()lllIT'i Of ELC1N (SUBJECt TO
l'Il1'l1STR'l Of 'tRANSYORTAT10N AND c<JMllllN1CAT10NS AUOi't)
and in 1982 ~e<e $4,919,410
~
$4, \.39,782.49
3,100,000.00.
38,681.49
------
095 .00
~
PAGE 7.
~'
COUNT'! OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE
DRST REl'~T _~UARY s~SI_2.~.Y~
The difference between tbe total voucher paymentS and total road expenditures
included:
(a) work done on Towoline Roads and BridgeS and invoiced to county of Middlesex
(b) SUrface treatment work for various municipalitieS including City of St. Thomas
and County of Oxford.
and County of Kent ($99,429.24).
(c) Rot mix paving and otber work, etc., for various local municipalitieS
( d) CUr band gu tte r, P avi ng, e t c., on AI- dbor ough- \lI1n"n. ch TO>lOline o.rerpa s sat
($26,599.64 ).
Righway #401 (Charged to Ministry of TransportatiOn and eomrounications).
The County of Elgin Road Department in 1984 participated in 4 ~loyment
(a) Government of Canada '84 summer Incentive prograwme (surveying ASsistance)
progr~S in addition to the work listed above.
(b) canada/Ontario enployment Development programme (C.O.E.D.) completion of
at a value of $2,441.00.
1983 project for tbe Road Department and the MuSeUtu ($3,512.11).
(c) canada Works prograwme (Federal) in the Spring and early summer (to
relieve local unemployment) $26,000.00.
(d) Ontario Youth corp project (provincial) work completed in 1984 but Final
APplications not made until 1985 (1984 total $10,141.55).
The Road Depacement waS requested to have personnel available for a Mosquito
Control programme for the prevention of encephalitis. The cost of $1,065.76
was charged to the General Government Account.
ALL OF WICR IS RESPECTFIJl.LY SumITTED
-
-
CHAIRMAN
\
.\
JANUARY 31, 1985
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
PAGE 1.
Thur sday , January 31, 1985. All member s except Reeve McWill iam were pre sent · Al so
present was Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and communications, the
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building at 9:30 a.m.,
Engineer and the Assistant Engineer.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
T1!.AT lZ. E. MONTEITH BE CHAIRMAN.
CARRI ED .1t
ttMOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: R. J. LAVEREAll
T1!.AT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF J AN\JARY 11, 1985 BE APPROVED.
CARRIED."
THE ENGINEER REPORTED AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the provincial Government had changed their minds about the payment of the
bonuses under the Youth Corp programme. These would noW be paid by the county
to the 4 eligible youthS and the province would reimburse the County.
2. DiSCUssions with Mr. Doug Miller of Employment Canada indicated that the County
could secure a canada Works Grant using a section of the Unemployment Insurance Act.
Approval would take approximatelY 6 weeks with work underway approximatelY
3. Further diSCUssions would be held with Malahide Township officials regarding
April 1.
crushed gravel placed on the Sparta Road.
The Township felt that they would be able to verify the amount of crushed gravel
put on the road and requested that the County supply a third of the gravel
actually placed on the road.
encountered waS on a Bayham Township road. A ten foot diameter pipe was in such
poor contition that the road would have to be closed and the culvert replaced in
1985. Several other Township culverts showed signS of cracking as well.
continued · · ·
4. The inspection of structural plate culvertS continued. The most serious problem
JANUARY 31, 1985
ST. T1:lct1AS, ONTARIO
PAGB 2.
In South Do~cheste~ seve~al culve~tS including a la~ge a~ch on the West catfiSh
creek at C~osslY 1:tunte~ "e~e c~acked. the ~ecent sno" had stopped inspection
5.
of other culverts.
Telephone diSCUssions ",1th 3 enginee~S in the united States, yielded little
information though they p~()1tliSed to advise if they found anything.
culve~t inspections by Jens Madsen and \(en UaUghlin of p;r.mco canada had been
done and they "e~e confe~~ing ",1th thei~ p;r.mco enginee~S in the united StateS.
the ?e~sonnel Meeting had been postponed because of bad "eathe~' the Enginee~
had coro:pleted a "age and sala~y su~veY among adjaCent ~nicipaliteS "hich had
been fo~"a~ded to the ?e~sonnel committee.
Release of the info~mation to othe~s "ould be at the disc~etion of the
the ?e~sonnel committee commended the Enginee~ fo~ ~educing back holiday time
in 1984 and at the same time p~oviding an adequate level of se~vice to' his
personnel co~ittee.
department ·
A $46.72 invoice f~()1tl GUnn and AsSociates fo~ se~vices ",1th ~ega~d to
Donald ZellaS "ould be paid ",1th the nezt accounts.
T1:tE ENGINEER RE?ORTED ON T1:tE WOR\( TO DATE AS fOLLOWS:
1. Winte~ cont~ol fo~ the past 2 "eeks had been heaVY' Sno" plo"ing had been
continuOus f~om the 18th of Janua~y to date. sanding had also been heaVY'
2. Repai~S to equipment "e~e as follo"s:
(a ) Truck #88
Ti11ling gea~ p~oblems. Repai~ed by ca~~ie~ Mack Inco~porated.
T~ansmiSSion, app~o"i11l"telY $2,000 "o~th of ~epai~S "e~e
Total cost ove~ $4,000.
~equi~ed fo~ shifte~ ~ods and yokeS althoUgh nO gea~S in the t~ansmiSsion
(b) Grader #18
had been ~eplaced.
all sno" plo" equipment ",auld have to be ~emoved SO it "as being postponed
the ai~ coro:p~esso~ pump "ould have to be ~eplaced, ho"eve~
(c ) Truck #84
as long as the t~uck ",auld ~un.
continued · · ·
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 31, 1985
PAGE 3.
(d) Grader #21
Block heater repairs as it ~as improperlY installed ~hen
purchased fr01l1 \1011linion Road Machinery.
3.
Large "StOp SignS" and" Stop Ahead SignS" with flasher s on top of them had been
Very little tree cutting had been done.
erected at the intersection of Road #45 and county Road #16 at Middlemarch.
4.
This would improve the safety of the intersection for traffic fr01l1 the North
5. Some piling of pit run gravel ~aS being done at the pleasant valley pit as time
considerab1 y.
6. Nt application to ya:rmouth Township would be made shortly for the rezoning of
pe:rmitted by county trucks.
7. Sno~ ~as being removed fr01l1 bridge floors throughout the county.
the sparta pit.
"MOVED BY: M. R. STtwART
SECONDED BY: R. J. Ll\VEREAll
T\1t\T T1:lE FOLLomNG P A'lL1 STS BE APPROVED FOR P AYJ1El.'l'l' :
PA'lL1ST NUMBER 2 ~OUNT1NG TO $57,166.13
PAYL1ST NUMBER 4 ~oUNT1NG TO $198.36
PAYL1ST NUMBER 5 ~OUNT1NG TO $60,313.29
PA'lL1ST NUMBER 6 ~OUNT1NG TO $400.15
CARRIED_"
chai:rman Monteith reported on ontario Rydro studies on the hydrO corridor
fr01ll the BrUce NUclear plant to London noting that all corridors that ~ere
originallY considered ~ithin Elgin ,rere still being considered as ""ell as a
nU!llber of transfo:rmer siteS in north south~old Township.
Ontario 1:lydrO would make a final choice as to the best line and have an
Environmental Rearing at a later date.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 31, 1985
PAGE 4.
CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOL10WS:
1. From MacLaren Plansearch Incorporated with notice that the Village of Dutton
would proceed with an Official Plan Amendement for property east of Currie
Street and north of Jordan Street in the Village of Dutton to be changed from
residential to industrial-cvllulLercial.
The Cvuuuittee had no objection to the proposed changE~ and instructed the
Engineer to inform the Village of Dutton.
2. From the Ministry of Transportation and Communications with approval of
By-Law No. 84-32 to ammend the County road system to show County Road #5 as
presently travelled.
Copies of the By-Law had been sent to the Townships of Aldborough and
Dunwich.
3. From the Township of Southwold with a rezoning notice of the south-west
corner of County Road #11 and Highway #4 for a tire repair business.
Reeve Monteith stated that the Township expected a ntnnber of objections to
the business. The property had previously been acquired by the Bank of
Commerce to erect a bank.
Members noted that the Ministry of Transportation and CVll11uunications would
request that if the rezoning was approved that the entrance be off of
County Road #11.
4. Notices of rezonings from the Township of Aldborough including a house lot
on County Road #2 for Gillick and the lot on County Road #3, in
Concession X on the west side of the road to reduce the area allowed for
trailer sales and to rezone the remainder of the property for agricultural
purposes.
Reeve Perovich stated that the Township wished to minimize the commercial
area on County Road #3 between New Glasgow and Rodney.
5. From the Ford Motor Company stating that orders for special vehicles with
police packages, etc., would not be accepted after March 11th.
6. From the Township of Southwold with a copy of a petition of Township
ratepayers asking for improvements at the intersection of Road #45 and
Road #16 at Middlemarch.
Continued . . .
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 31, 1985
PAGE 5.
The Chairman noted that the County had made considerable improvements within
the last 2 weeks (see Item #4, Page #3).
The Ministry of Transportation and Communications' Traffic Section stated that
flashing lights could not be installed at the inters(~ction as the intersection
was too close to the railway crossings of the C & 0 and a motorist could get
confused between flashing lights for the railway signals and flashing lights
at the intersection.
The Ministry of Transportation and CUllu11I.lnications' Traffic Section had advised
that flashing lights should not be installed on a permanent basis at the
intersection of Wellington Road and Road #52 as the lights would conflict with
the present intersection illumination.
They felt that a 2 week period at the time of the International Plowing Match
would be the maximum that the flashing Lights should be used. The materials
necessary would be borrowed from the Mini stry of Transportation and CUl1uuunications.
The lights would be installed at other Ministry locations after the International
Plowing Match.
A quotation from the Corrugated Pipe Company in Stratford had been received in
which they indicated that their pipe price if ordered before February 28th with
delivery before the end of April would be increased by 5~Yo based on their price
submitted in April 1983.
Even with the 5% increase the Corrugated Pipe Company's prices were lower than
any submitted in 1983 and the new price quoted had been accepted and an order
would be placed shortly.
The Engineer requested that any of the Townships requiring a considerable
amount of pipe should advise the Engineer so that an ordler could be made up and
delivered to a garage close to that Township so that trucking costs could be
minimized.
After some discussion the Engineer was asked to notify all the Municipalities
that snow fence and assistance to erect snow fence would be required from all
Municipalities for the International Plowing Match.
Continued . . .
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 31, 1985
PAGE 6.
These costs should be borne by the County and the various municipalities and
should not be charged back to the local Plowing Match Connnittee. In all
likelihood such costs would not be subsidized by the Ministry of Transportation
and Cormnunications and each municipality should make provision in their own
budget for these costs.
THE MEETING ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH · · ·
After lunch Mr. Lyle Wells of the Frank Cowan Company was in attendance and
explained the County's Insurance policies and reviewed the attached information.
"MOVED BY: M. H. STEWART
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT WE RENEW THE FOLLOWING INSURANCE POLICIES WITH THE FRANK COWAN COMPANY
LIMITED _ MUNICIPALITY LIABILITY, NON OWNED AUTO, AUTOMOTIVE FLEET, FLOATER
POLICY INCLUDING NON LICENSED EQUIPMENT:
SURVEYING EQUIPMENT
RADIO EQUIPMENT
MOVEABLE PROPERTY OF OTHERS
TOOLS, STOCK, MATERIALS, SNOW FENCE
GARAGE BUILDINGS
VALUABLE PAPER
ENGINEER'S OFFICE FURNITURE, ETC.
BOILER AND MACHINERY POLl CY
WEED SPRAYING
CRIME PACKAGE
ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 31, 1985
PAGE 7.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION BE PASSED:
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THAT THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ACCEPT THE
AGREEMENT OF THE GENERAL ACCIDENT ASSURANCE COMPANY TO INSURE THE LIABILITY
ASSUMED BY THIS RESOLUTION AS FOLLOWS:
THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN HEREBY:
1. ASSUMES THE LIABILITY FOR BODILY INJURY TO OR DEATH OF ANY PERSON OR
DAMAGE TO OR DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY OF OTHERS, IMPOSED BY LAW UPON:
(A) MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, TRUSTEES, BOARD MEMBERS" STATUTORY OFFICERS,
OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEER WORKERS OF THE COUNTY FOR LIABILITY
WHICH ARISES OUT OF THE USE OR OPERATION BY SUCH PERSON OF ANY
LICENSED MOTOR VEHICLE, OR
(B) THE OWNER OF ANY LICENSED MOTOR VEHICLE, FOR LIABILITY WHICH ARISES
OUT OF THE USE OR OPERATION OF SUCH LICENSED MOTOR VEHICLE BY
MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, TRUSTEES, BOARD MEMBERS" STATUTORY OFFICERS,
OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEER WORKERS OF THE COUNTY.
2',. DECLARES THAT SUCH ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING
LIMITATIONS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS:
(A) THIS ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY APPLIES ONLY TO THE USE OR OPERATION
OF A LICENSED MOTOR VEHICLE IN CANADA OR THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA BY MEMBERS OF COUNCIL,.TRUSTEES, BOARD MEMBERS, STATUTORY
OFFICERS, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEER WORKERS ON BEHALF OF THE
COUNTY INCLUDING TRAVEL TO AND FROM WORK AND ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS.
(B) THIS ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY APPLIES ONLY IN EXCESS OF EXISTING
INSURANCE CARRIED BY THE OWNER OF THE LICENSED MOTOR VEHICLE WHICH
WAS BEING USED OR OPERATED BY MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, TRUSTEES, BOARD
MEMBERS, STATUTORY OFFICERS, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEER WORKERS
AT THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT AND DOES NOT APPLY UNLESS THE LICENSED
MOTOR VEHICLE WHICH WAS BEING USED OR OPERATED BY SUCH PERSON AT
THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT IS INSURED FOR NOT LESS THAN THE MINIMUM
THIRD PARTY LIABILITY LIMIT REQUIRED BY THE INSURANCE ACT FOR THE
PROVINCE OF ONTARIO.
CONTINUED . . .
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 31, 1985
PAGE 8.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
CONTINUED . . .
2. (C) THIS ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY IS SUBJECT TO THE AGREEMENTS, CONDITIONS,
TERMS AND LIMIT OF LIABILITY INSURED IN THE NON-OWNED AUTOMOBILE
POLICY ISSUED BY THE GENERAL ACCIDENT ASSUFUlliCE COMPANY AND SHALL
TERMINATE WHENEVER SUCH NON-OWNED AUTOMOBII.JE POLICY IS TERMINATED.
CARRIED."
The First Report of the Road Cvuuuittee for February detailing the expenditures
of 1984 was discussed in detail.
WARDEN LAVEREAU LEFT THE MEETING . . .
The Interim Budget for Maintenance, Overhead and Payroll Burden was distributed
to the members for detailed review at the next meeting.
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE ADJOURN TO FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1985 AT 9:30 A.M., THURSDAY,
FEBRUARY 21, 1985 AT 9 :00 A.M. AND FRIDAY, MARCH 15~. 1985 AT 9 :30 A.M.
CARRIED."
~f~~
I CHAI~
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 11, 1985
PAGE 1.
THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Hunicipal Building at
9:30 a.m., Friday, January 11, 1985. All members were present. Also present was
Mr. William Osborne and Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and
CVlluuunications, the Engineer and the Assi stant Engineer.
"MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING FOR DECEMBER la, 1984 BE APPROVED.
CARRIED."
THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON PERSONNEL MATTERS AS FOLLOWS:
1. That Donald Zellas, a member of the Roads Department staff for the past 18 ye.ars.
had resigned as of January 29th after his 1985 Holidays.
2. That Orrie Ostrander, Jim Haskell, William Sloetjes and Allan Moon were off
sick. It would be Spring before William Sloetjes would return and it was
not known how long Orrie Ostrander would be off (6 weeks minimum).
3. Lewis Small would receive a presentation (watch) at County Council on
Wednesday.
4. The Engineer had met with the Personnel Committee on January 2nd and was
requested to make a survey of comparative wages for both hourly rated and
salaried Road Department employees using adjacent Counties and Municipalities.
5. That holiday carryover into 1985 for hourly rated employees would be 15 days
compared to 49 1/2 days in 1983 to 1984 and for salaried employes 1/2 day
compared to 56 days in 1983 to 1984.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE PERSONNEL COMMITTEE THAT THE FOLLOWING EMPLOYEES BE
PERMITTED TO CARRY THE FOLLOWING NUMBER OF 1984 HOLIDAYS INTO 1985.
JOHN BROWN 1 DAY CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
GLENN CROSS 1 DAY CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
NORMAN GLOVER 1/2 DAY CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
GARY GORDON 1 DAY CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
RALPH GORDON 1 DAY CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
CONTINUED . . . . .
"MOVED BY:
R. J. LAVEREAU
SECONDED BY:
M. H. STEWART
CONTINUED · ·
. . .
B.ARRY HERRINGTON
JOHN HOFFM.AN
EDWIN KELLEY
STANLEY LUNN
ORR-IE OSTRANDER
WILLIAM SLOETJES
DANNY WELCH
R. G. MOORE
1 DAY
1/2 DAY
1 DAY
1/2 DAY
4 1/2 DAYS
2 DAYS
1 DAY
1/2 DAY
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 11, 1985
PAGE 2.
CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
SlCR ~ HOSP1TAL ~ SURGERY
SlcK ~ HOSPlTAL - SURGERY
CALL IN WINTER CONTROL
PERSONNEL MATTERS
cARRIED."
THE ENG1NEER REPORTED ON THE fOU..OWtNG;
1. That. no further information regarding land purchase from ferguSon' s on
2. The...Ontario youth progra1]l1lle had been completed in Decelllber but forms for
Road #30 had been received.
the final payro.ent had not yet been r.eceived from the province.
3. The county had been notified that their Canada ~orks Application had not
4. A meeting had been held "ith Mr. Ron McNeil. M.P.P, and he had promised to
been approved.
look intO an agreement proposed by the Ministry of the Environro.ent regarding
the assumption of chatham Street by the Village of port EUr.,ell.
5. T:\J.at a meeting had been held .,tth the To_ship of Malahide to....discUSs payro.ent
for sand used by the county of Elgin for the Silver creek culvert job in
AP agreelllent had been reached "ith the To_ship "ith regard topayroent for
December of 1983.
surface treatment "ork done by the county in 1984 on concesSion 11.
THE El'lG1NEER REPORTED ON THE ~oRK TO DArE AS fOLLOWS:
2. Soro.e sign repair "ork had been carried on along "i1;h guide rail repairs,
1. ~inter control had been light.
miscellaneous drainage, and some garbage had been picked up on county
Roads #25 and #52 but recent sno"s and colder "eather had stopped "ork.
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 11, 1985
PAGE 3.
3. The new entra~ce road at the Pleasant Valley Pit was nearly completed.
Higgs' drag l~ne was presently excavating gravel from under the water near
the Pleasant Valley Aggregate property line.
The fence had been reconstructed at the north side of the Township road at
the County's North pleasant Valley Pit.
Earth stripping of the south pit was continuing.
4. The Calton Bridge railing had been painted and the railing on the Dodds Creek
Bridge on Wellington Road was being removed and painted.
5. Equipment repair had been light and Dominion Road Maehinery had replaced a
sleeve and pipton in the motor in Grader #21 at no charge to the County
(purchased last Fall and still under warranty).
I
6. Mr. Ken Kleinsteiber of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications in.
Toronto had requested that the Engineer assist him and Mr. Frank Clarke in
the inspection of a large arch culvert in the Dereham-North Dorchester Townline
which had failed at the end of December.
Inspection had shown serious defects icluding cracking of plates at lower
haunch bolts Fcross the corrugations and at the top of the arch.
A subsequent inspection of the County's structural plate culverts revealed
problems in 6 of the 41 culverts on the County roads and inspection work ,was
continuing.
The 2 worst structural plate culverts were on Wellington Road at Lynhurst
School and McBain's. Some cracking had also been found on Brookts Culverts
on County Roa~#4~ at the Playerts Culvert on County Road #45 in Yarmouth
and the Fowler Drain Culvert on County Road #16 in Southwold and the Casey
I
Drain Culvert10n County Road #45 in Southwold.
I
The Ministry :lad recvLLLLuendedthat the Townships procc~ed with an inspection
I
of their structural plate culverts as soon as possible for similar defects.
Mr. Frank Clarke and Mr. William Osborne stated that they were in the
process of asking all Counties to inspect all culverts in the County and
local system throughout Middlesex, Oxford and Haldimand-Norfolk as soon as
I
possible. Th~y suggested that this should be done by the Counties rather
then by consultants and requested that the County of Elgin assist in
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 11, 1985
PAGE 4.
t~aining inspectO~S fo~ the othe~ countieS as they we~e knowledgeable in
inspecting st~uctu~al plate culve~ts.
The Enginee~ ~epo~ted that as Fred G~och and Keith playe~ we~e in the p~ocesS
of inspecting county b~idgeS and culve~tS; they could unde~take an inspection
of the st~uctural plates fo~ the local municipalitieS immediatelY and
recommend that thiS be done at no cost to the Municipality as it would
p~obablY take leSS than a day per municipality.
"MOVED BY; lZ. E. MONTEITH
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVlCfl
TflAT T1lE COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT INSPECt AT NO CHARGE TO THE l1UNIClPALITIES
ALL STRUCTURAL pLATE STEEL CULVERTS ON J1IlN1CIP AL ROADS IN ELGIN.
CARRIED."
"MOVED BY; M. H. STE\lART
SECONDED BY; R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT TRJ!. FOLLoYIING P AYLI STS BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT:
PAYLIST mmBER 62 AMoUNTING TO $~9,0~~.92
PAYLIST mmBER 64 AMoUNTING TO $61,084.94
PAYLIST NUMBER 6~ AMOUNTING TO $188.68
PAYLIST mmBER 66 ,\M.OUNTING TO $33,643.11
PAYLIST mmBER 1 AMOUNTING TO $62,122.64
APYLIST mmBER 2 AMoUNTING TO $113,937.43
CARRIED."
COBRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED !!$ FOLLoYIS:
1. 1'Urthe~ greetings f~om Mr. Cha~lie Jackson.
2. prog~anJllIe fo~ the ()rltario Good Roads ASSociation convention.
3. The Minist~Y of Transpo~tatiOn and ~nications ~egarding pedestrian
4. TownshiP of yarmouth with a zoning by.law fo~ a g~avel pit on the Robert
c170 ssove17 s.
Rycl<m,r[) pr.ope~ty on CountY Road #4~'
~. A land severance notice f~om North J)O~cheste~ TownshiP' The Enginee~ noted
that he had not received notice of the land seve~ance until the time for
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 11, 1985
PAGE 5.
the appeal hctd gone by, thus a request for road widening could not be made to
the Township for road widening needed to widen County Road #37 east of Avon.
The Engineer requested that notices for zoning by-1cHlTs and land division
notices, 'etc., be forwarded as soon as possible so sufficient time was
available to review these applications and take appropriate action.
6. Land severanae, County Road ~6, Bayham Township concerning Willis Weaver.
The Engineer was instructed to use the present Road CVllunittee policy; that.
if a paved road has not been widened, that a request for widening be made
when an application for severance is requested by a land owner.
7. From the Ministry of Transportation and Communications thanking the Engineer
for his assist.ance at the Bridge Maintenance and Inspection Seminar in
London.
The Engineer noted that Mr. Ken K1einsteiber had requested his assistance
for 2 seminal1's in the Spring one in Owen Sound on the 23rd and 24th of
January and 1 in Barrie on the 12th of February.
The requests were granted as Mr. K1einsteiber had assisted the County and
I
the local Municipalities on many occasions with their bridge problems.
8. Mr. C. J. De'q1eyere with tentative plans for the improvement of the
intersection at Elm and Talbot Streets in the Town of Aylmer.
The cost wouid be borne by the Town of Aylmer as the senior municipality at
the intersection (end of new curb returns being the change in jurisdiction
between the County and the Town).
The County h~d done traffic classification counts for 2 days at the
intersection1at the request of the Ministry.
9. From the Towhship of A1dborough with notice to pass a by-law to close a
I
portion of Atma Street, Registered plan No. 32, in the Hamlet of Airey
I
(New G1asgow~.
"MOVED BY: C. R. WILLSEY
SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH
THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE TOWNSHIP OF ALDBOROUGH BE
ADVISED THAT I THE COUNTY OF ELGIN HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE CLOSURE OF A
PORTION OF ALMA STREET IN THE HAMLET OF NEW GLASGOW, SITUATED IN LOT 6,
CONCESSION X~II, TOWNSHIP OF ALDBOROUGH.
CARRIED."
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 11, 1985
PAGE 6.
The Engineer stated that gravel crushing quotations :should be called shortly
so that a contract could be awarded in sufficient time that a contractor could
move his crusher into the pit before the Istbf March so that crushed gravel
would be available for the Spring season.
If the crusher was not moved prior to the 1st of March it could not be moved
until the 1st of Mayas half load season applied.
"MOVED BY: R. J. LA VEREAU
SECONDED BY: M. H. STEWART
THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO, CALL GRAVEL CRUSHING QUarATIONS AT THE
COUNTY'S PLEASANT VALLEY PIT..
CARRIED."
The Committee agreed that the County of Kent's invoices regarding the legal
costs incurred in the Union Gas Franchise Agreem~nt discussions should be paid
through the County Road Committee. The invoice costs to December 22, 1984 for
Elgin's share were approximately $1,200.00.
THE COMMITTEE ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH . . . .
AFTER LUNCH REEVE STEWART ABSENT . . . .
The Cvuuuittee instructed the Engineer to prepare for the Chairman's
I
tignature a letter of.thanks to the Honourable James Snow for the construction
?f Highway #4 at County Road #23 last Summer.
I
I
I
I The Committee instructed the Engineer to prepare for the Chairman's
I
signature a letter of thanks to the property owners living near the Silver Creek
I
fu1vert for the use of their property during the reconstruction of the
I .
Silver Creek Culvert.
I
I
I
I Mr. M. J. Hennessey suggested that he draw a correcting deed to
I
~r. John Paul Shahan for a part of the property of Lots 4 and 5, Concession II,
I
I
$outhwo1d Township, with the understanding that Mr. Shahan would give the
I
I
pounty a deed for the property that the County thought it was receiving from
I
I
I
I
I
I
ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO
JANUARY 11, 1985
PAGE 7.
the Board of Education to widen county Roads #18 and #20. (The deed registered
in 1969 had an incorrect description.)
\.
"MOVED BY: R. E. MONTEIT1l
SECONDED BY; R. J. LAVEREAU
THAT WE REcoMMEND TO cQUNTY COUNCll. THAT A By-LAi'l BE pASSED AUTHORIZING THE
i'lARDEN AND CLERK- TO SlGN A DEED TO JOJ:1.N PAUL s}!ARl\N FOR A pORTI0N OF
LOTS I; AND 5, CONCESSION 11, SOUt11WOLD TOWNSHIP AS A CORRECtlNG DEED FOR
PROPERTY ACQUIRED FRm1 THE ELGIN BOARD OF EDUCATI0N IN 1969 FOR 1i11DENING
OF ROADS #18 AND #20.
CARRIED_"
The county Road Committee'S part in the International plowing Match was
The Engineer reported that Bell canada had requested permission to bury a
diSCUssed at some length.
150 pair cable on the east side of i'lellington Road from St. George Street to
concession 'B', southwold TownShip and would bury a 100 pair cable west on the
TownshiP road for the tented city.
installation of permanent flashing ligbtS at the intersection of i'lellington Road
The committee instructed the Engineer to investigate the cost of the
and county Road #52 rather than the installation of flashing lightS for the term
of the InternatiOnal plowing Match only,
The county Road Committee' s partiCipatiOn of the county' s exhibit was discussed
at some length.
"MOVED BY; D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY: C. R. 1i11LLSJ':{
T1:\AT i'lE pUT ON A PICTORIAL DISPLAY DEPICtlNG THE COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT IN
THE COUNTY EXl!lBlT AT THE INTERNATI0NAL pL(lW1NG MATCH.
CARRIED ."
ST. THOMA.S, ONTARIO
JANUARY 11, 1985
pA.GE 8.
I1MOVBD BY: R. B. MONrBITH
SBCO~DBD BY; C. R. mLLSB'l
TllAT TIlB ENGINEER BB AUTHORIZBD TO ATTEND THE l'LOWMEN'S CONVENTION IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE INTERNATI0~AL PLOWlNG MATCH IN ELGIN. CONVENTION AT THE
ROYAL YORK HOtEL IN TORONrO ON JANUARY 18TH.
cARRIED ."
The Committee agreed that Ray Collard should be added to the International
1'10wing Match Traffic C=ittee.
with the city of St. Thomas no decision had yet been made regarding the
Reeve Monteith and Reeve HaddOW reported that althOUgh discUssions continued
installation of sanitary sewers in the t.ynhurst area. It appeared likely that
sewers would be installed on portions of St. George Street.
he be informed as it might be advantageoUS for the county to reconstruct portions
The Engineer requested that as soon as further information was available that
of St. George Street, which was nOW a deficient road, in conjunction with the
sewers and sufficient time f<1r budgeting~woUld be re4uired. Reeve Monteith
felt that there would not be any actual work done in 1985.
I1MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH
SECONDED BY; C. R. mLLSEY
TRAT WE ADJOuRN TO THURSDAY, JANUARY 31, 1985 PIS. 9 :30 A.M.
cARRIED ."
.~J<:t- /'-> tv4/~:-~':'-.
coUNTY Of ELGIN ROAD -2~TTEE
- -- ~ =-- -,....
!lR~ RER9~
JANUARY SESSION
1985
TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS Of THE cOUNTY Of ELGIN COUNCIL
YOUR ROAD c(lMM.'1TTEE REPORTS 1>$ FOLLOWS:
1. That we have purchased a Mack DM 685S Diesel Tandem \lUmp Truck from
carrier Mack Truck centre Incorporated of London for $63,869.00
being one of six bids received. There is no provincial SaleS Tax
on thiS item. We expect delivery in late Mayor early June.
this trUck is similar to our present Mack DUmP Trucks.
fleaVY \lUty DUmP Box, Frink Snow plow flarness, Closed Wing Tower,
controls, etc., and a Frink 470 SR flooker One-Way Snow plow.
This equipment is similar to other equipment owned by the county.
The total cost is $37,639.00. We understand that if the material
is purchased through Carrier Mack Truck centre Incorporated with
the tandem truck no provincial SaleS Tax is applicable.
The purchase of this truck and snow plow will alloW us to add one
unit to our snow plowing fleet and will also alloW US to reduce
the rental of dump trucks throughout the rest of the year. Some
of our snOW plow equipment is in excess of 20 years old.
2. We have purchased from Frink canada of Cambridge Ontario a Frink
WE RECOMMEND:
1. That a By_LaW be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to sign
plans for widening County road allowances as necessary in
2. That the 1984 _ 1985 Road committee act as the committee for the
1984 - 1985.
following pu~poses:
(a) Solid and Liquid Waste DispOsal.
(b) Mosquito control programme for the prevention of EncephalitiS.
3. That the membershiP fees for the Ontario Good Roads ASSociation and
(c) Lake E~ie E~osion.
for the Roads and Transportation ASSociation of canada be paid.
continued · · ·
PAGE 2.
,~ ~
coUNT"l OF ELG1N ROAD CQMM1't'tEE
FlRS't REl'OR't _ Jl\NUAR"l SESS10N 1985
- - - -
4. '!:hat Mr. Al bert Aucl<.lan~ the county' s member on the St. 'thotnaS
Suburban Road Commission be authorized to attend the Ontario
Good Roads Association convention with the usual convention
allowance paid by the County.
Suburban Road commission be authorized to attend the Annual
Meeting of the Suburban Roads commission Association of Ontario.
submit to the Ministry of 'transportation and cOtmtlUnicatiOns a
petition for subsidy for the County of Elgin showing road
expenditures made on the county of Elgin Road system for the
period of ~anuarY 1, 1984 to December 31, 1984.
haS nO objections to the closure of a portion of road opened
under By-LaW ff364 in Lot 1, Conce s sion lX, nunwi ch 'township.
5. 'that Mr. Albert AUckland the county' S member on the St. 'th01llas
6. '!:hat a resolution be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to
1. '!:hat the 'township of nunwich be advised that the County of Elgin
8. 'that the County Engineer has been authorized to attend the
following conventions and meetingS:
(a) '!:he Ontario Good Roads convention.
(b) The County Engineers' MuniCipal Engineers' Annual Meeting
hel~ in conjunction with the Ontario Good Roads convention.
(c) Roads and Transportation Association of Canada convention.
(d) Municipal Engineer s' Allnual WorkshoP'
(e) The Suburban Roads commission AsSociation Annual Meeting.
9. 'the Assistant county Engineer has been authorized to attend the
following conventions and/or meetingS:
(a) '!:he Ontario Good Roads convention.
(b) The Municipal Engineers' Annual Meeting in conjunction with
the Ontario Good Roads convention.
(c) Municipal Engineers' Allnual Meeting.
(d) '!:he Suburban Roads commission ASsociation Allnuql Meeting.
ALL OF WIllCR lS RESJ'EGrFllLL"l S1JBM1-TTED
----
c1lA1RMAN
~
~
JANUi\l{'l SESS10~
1985
'rO 'rILE "ARDEN AND M~BERS OF .rHE COUNT! OI' ELC1N cQ\lllC1L
'lQ\lll ROAD COMlll'ftEE REroRtS AS FOLLOVIS:
'rhe Enginee< has been autbo<iZed to attend the onta<io rlo~en's
ASSociation convention on Feb<Ua<Y 8tb in to<onto.
'rhat the EmPloyment and Development B<anch of Employment and
lwroig<ation canada haS advised US that the can.da "o<KS
APplicatiOn made by the CountY Road Depa<troent laSt Fall haS not
1.
2.
been app1:oved.
1.
tbat the 'rownsbip of Aldbo<OUgh be advised that the County of
Elgin haS nO objectiOn to the closU<e of a po<tion of Alma St<eet
in the u~let of Ne~ claSgo~ in tpt 6, concession Xl11, townshiP
vfE RECOMt.fEND
or i\ldb01:0ugb.
'rhat the ,,"<den and Cle<K be autho<ized to sign a deed to
John raul Shahan of the TownshiP of south~uld fo< a poction of
LotS 4 and 5, concession n (as attached in schedule' A' ).
ln 1969 the CountY of Elgin obtained ftom the Elgin County l\OatO
of Education land ~idening at the oneida school at the inte<sectiOn
of countY Roads #18 and #20, ~ith deed, the desc<iptiOn being
inc01:1:ect.
Me. Shahan ~ill g<ant the county of Elgin a p<ope< desctiption fo<
the p<opetty obtained to ~iden CountY RoadS #lB and #20.
!ILL OF milCH lS REsrEcrFULL'l SU\lM1.'ftED
2.
\"
GHA.IRMAl~
SCHEDULE "A"
ALL AND SINGULAR that certain parcel or tract of land and
premises situate, lying and being in the Township of Southwold,
~p the County of Elgin and being composed of Part of Lot 4 and
Part of Lot 5, Concession 2, as more particularly described
asfollaws:-
'~EOINN~NGat a point heroin referred to as Point af lBeginning,
Five (5), formed by the interesection of the North East
limit of the Oneida Road (Public Road laid out by By-Law Number
Forty-nine (49) through said Lot Five (5) with the North West
limit of the road allowance between the 2nd and 3rd Concessions
an~Premising that the Bearings of the South Easterly limit of
said Lot 5 is North 45 degrees, 30 minutes, East and relating all
bearings herein thereto;
THENCE North 45 degrees, 30 minutes East along the South Easterly
limits of Lots 5 and 4, a distance of Two Hundred and Ninety-seven
an4 Seventy-six one hundredths feet (297.76') to a point in a
fence marking the North Easterly limit of the lands formerly used
as a school grounds;
THENCE North 42 degrees, 29 minutes, 20 seconds West a distance
of.Seventeen and One one-hundredths feet (17.01') to the
int~rsection of a line that is parallel to the South Easterly
liwitof said Lot 4 and which line id distant Seventeen feet (17')
measured North Westerly at right angles from the South Easterly
limit of said Lot 4, which point is the point of commencement
of the hereinafter described lands and premisei;
I :,
THENCE North Westerly parallel to the South Westerly limit of
said Lot 4 a distance of Two Hundred and Fourteen feet (214')
toa point;
THENCE in a Westerly direction along the edge of a gully or ravine
I to a point on a line distant Two Hundred and Eighty and Fifty
I' ' ,
i: one-hundredths feet (280.50') Northerly from the Southerly limit
.1
i'
II of Lot 4, said line being drawn parallel with the Sout~ Westerly
li:ll1it of Lot 4 from a point on said South Easterly limit, One
Hundred and Eighty-one and Fifty one-hundredths feet (181.50')
North Easterly from the point formed by the interesection of the
North East limit of the said Oneida Road with the North West
-,--.,......
SCHEDULE "A" CONTINUED
limit of the road allowance between the said 2nd and 3rd
Concessions (said interestion being the "point of beginningll;
THENCE South Westerly parallel with the North West limit of the
said Road Allowance between the 2nd and 3rd Concessions to a
point distant Twenty-five and Twenty-five one-hundredths feet
(25.25') measure North Easterly at right angles from the North
Easterly limit of the North East limit of the said Oneida Road
laid out by By-Law Number 49 through Lot 5;
THENCE South 44 degrees, 49 minutes, 20 seconds East parallel
to the North Easterly limit of the road laid out by By-Law
Number '49 through said Lot 5, a distanceof Two Hundred and
Sixty-three and Fifty one-hundredths feet (263.50') to a point;
&. I!"
THENCE North 45 degrees, 30 minutes East parallel to the South
Easterly limits of Lots 5 and 4 a distance of Two Hundred and
Seventy-three and Twenty-six one-hundredths feet (273.26'), more
or less to the point of commencement.
.j
i'
I'
:i
!:
I;
: ~~
'I,
i.
!
)
:j
ii
I;
.1
.9.Q1lNT'L.9!' EL('~N ROAD COMMITTEJ~
- -===---.---
SECOND REPORT
;::.;;;;...;-- -
JANUARY SESSION
1985
TO THE WARDEN AND l11lMUERS OF T\l~ COUNTY OF ELCIN COUNCIL
y(}\lR ROAD CQl1MITTBB RBPORTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Engineer bas been authorized to attend the ontario Plo~n's
Association convention on February 8th in Toronto.
2. That the EmPloyment aud Development Branch of Bnployment and
Immigration canada has advised us tbat the canada Works
Application made by the County Road Department last Fall has not
been appL'OVed.
WE RECQMM.END
1. That the Townsbip of Aldborough be advised that the r,ountY of
Blgin has no objection to the closure of a portion of Alma Street
in the uamlet of NeW GlasgoW in Lot 6, concession XIII, Township
of Aldborough.
2. That the Warden and Clerk be authorized to sign a deed to
John paul Shahan of the Township of southwuld for a portion of
LotS 4 and 5, Concession 11 (as attached in Schedule · A' ).
In 1969 the county of Elgin obtained ,rom the Elgin County Board
of Education land wid€ning at the oneida School at the intersection
of County Roads #18 and #20, with deed, the description being
incorL'ect.
l1r. Shahan will grant the county of Blgin a proper description for
the property obtained to widen county Roads #18 and #20.
ALL OF WHICH IS RBSPBcrFllLLY SUB!1ITTBD
\"
--
CHAIRMA1:;J
SCHEDULE "A"
1\LL AND SINGULAR that certain parcel or tract of land and
premises situate, lying and being in the Township of Southwold,
~n the County of Elgin and being composed of Part of Lot 4 and
,P~.rtof Lot 5, Concession 2, as more particularly described
a point herein referred to as Point of Beginning,
Five (5), formed by the interesection of the North East
li~it of the Oneida Road (Public Road laid out by By-Law Number
'Forty-nine (49) through said Lot Five (5) with the North West
limit of the road allowance between the 2nd and 3rd Concessions
an6Premising that the Bearings of the South Easterly limit of
said Lot 5 is North 45 degrees, 30 minutes, East and relating all
bearings herein thereto;
THENCE North 45 degrees, 30 minutes East along the South Easterly
limits of Lots 5 and 4, a distance of Two Hundred and Ninety-seven
ang Seventy-six one hundredths feet (297.76') to a point in a
fence marking the North Easterly limit of the lands formerly used
as a school grounds;
THENCE North 42 degrees, 29 minutes, 20 seconds West a distance
of Seventeen and One one-hundredths feet (17.01') to the
intersection of a line that is parallel to the South Easterly
limit of said Lot 4 and which line id distant Seventeen feet (17')
North Westerly at right angles from the South Easterly
li~it of said Lot 4, which point is the point of commencement
of the hereinafter described lands and premisei;
THENCE North Westerly parallel to the South Westerly limit of
said Lot 4 a distance of Two Hundred and Fourteen feet (214')
to a point;
THENCE in a Westerly direction along the edge of a gully or ravine
to a point on a line distant Two Hundred and Eighty an~ Fifty
one~hundredths feet (280.50') Northerly from the Southerly limit
of Lot 4, said line being drawn parallel with the South Westerly
limit of Lot 4 from a point on said South Easterly limit, One
Hundred and Eighty-one and Fifty one-hundredths feet (IBl.50')
North Easterly from the point formed by the interesection of the
North East limit of the said Oneida Road with the North West
. .
SCHEDULE "A'l CONTINUED
limit of the road allowance between the said 2nd and!r~
Concessions (said interestion being the "point of bel~irlfiinglt;
THENCE South Westerly parallel with the North West li~it of the
said Road Allowance between the 2nd and 3rd Concessidri~ to a
point distant Twenty-five and Twenty-five one-hundredths feet
(25.25') measure North Easterly at right angles from the North
Easterly iimit of the North East limit of the said Oneida Road
laid out by By-Law Number 49 through Lot 5;
THENCE South 44 degrees, 49 minutes, 20 seconds East ~araliel
to the North Easterly limit of the road laid out by By~Law
Number 49 through said Lot 5, a distanceof Two Hundr€~d and
Sixty-three and Fifty one-hundredths feet (263.50') to a point;
;" ~f
THENCE Noith 45 degrees, 30 minutes East parallel to the South
Easterly limits of Lots 5 and 4 a distance of Two Hundtedand
Seventy-three and Twenty-six one-hundredths feet (273.26'), mOre
or less to the point of commencement.