The URL can be used to link to this page

1986 Road Committee Minutes COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT DECEMBER SESSION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: WE RECOMMEND: I. That a by-law be passed which will in effect amend By-Law #24-77 authorizing speed limits and designating a 60 kilometer per hour speed zone on a portion of County Road #16 which is described as follows: From the road allowance between Lots 38 and 39, Talbot Road East, Southwold Township to 221 metres east of the west limit of Lot 40, Talbot Road East being a.total distance of 610 metres. The speed limit zone is opposite the Southwold School and Elgin Manor. This by-law replaces the by-law passed at the November Session which had an error in the schedule. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED . CHAIRMAN COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT DECEMBER SESSION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELCIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: WE RECOMMEND: I. Whereas traffic between the Cities of London and St. Thomas desires to travel directly between the centres of both cities and the eastern industrial areas of both Cities, rather than use existing King's Highways #4 and #74. And Whereas as a result, traffic on the Wellington Road under the control of the Counties of Middlesex and Elgin has increased to the point the road has reached its capacity and widening portions of it to 4 lanes and the channelization of all intersections is now required, And Whereas the improvement of a Highbury, Hubrey, Radio Road Link between London and St. Thomas would not only alleviate the need for some of the improvements of Wellington Road for a number of years but also connect the industrial areas of the Counties of Middlesex and Elgin including the Cities of London and St. Thomas, the London and St. Thomas Airports, and provide the residents of each municipality with a much better connection with Highway #401 while greatly improving safety for the road users. And Whereas at a meeting of representatives of the Counties of Middlesex and Elgin and the Ministry of Transportation and Communications the Wardens of Elgin and Middlesex recommended to the Rbad Committees of 'the Counties of Elgin and Middlesex and the Councils of the Counties of Elgin and Middlesex and the Cities of London and St. Thomas that representation be made to the Provincial Government to provide additional funding to the Counties of Elgin and Middlesex to allow them to construct the entire Highbury, Hubrey, Radio Road Link as soon as possible. We therefore recommend to County Council that representation be made~to the Provincial Government to prOVide additional funding to CO\J!>Il'i or 'ELl31!>1 ROI\Il Cow>\nt'Et . UJ0~~. \ pl\G'E Z. ", ",I" "ig''"'" ,."". R,'i' RO" ,i,t " ",' " ",\1'1' "d ,.,\ ,.' ,,,j'" ,i,'i' ,., Ilmi" " ,.' """ " E,gl' " "",'h' ""i"'" t" s,. Th'>"' S"",,' ",' ".."",' "d'b" ,b' .,,,,, ", ,.,'lO" " ", ""t, ",d "ooi"'" t" 'b""'" " tb' st. ,."" S""", R"d '""",'" "d t" ""t, E""'" " "tb,'i"d t, ",t "tb ""i",,1 ,,,,,,,,t,'i'" " """,d on tniS matter. 'b" ,b' "~"~I"~'"' " 'b' S,. ,."" S""", R"d ,,..,,,,,' i' .m"b 'b" ""',',' ,.,t """",,'i" " m'" to tb' ",,1,,1" "","",t to ,,,,Id' ,dditl",1 "~,'I"~ " ,.' ""ti" ,f EI,i' "d 'id'I"" to ",,, 'O! tb' """"tiO' 0' ", """ "",,-R"" RO" ",t " "" " ""i'l' " ,'d""d. ., ,1,0 ,"" "tb ,.' st. Thom" s""", Ro,d ,,,,,,,'0' t.,t 'hO ,,'i'" ,."Id " "", tb' """" " ,.' S,. Th"" s,b',"" ",d ,,..,,,,,, " "", of t" ,,..i"'"' "II ,II", z. I\LL Or Vl\'\IC\'\ IS R'ESI''EClr\lLL'l S\l'B1'/Ini'Ell c\'\I\W1'/l/'l.!>I COU~1~ or tLGl~ RO~O CO~~111tt ~ OtCE~BtR SESS10~ 1986 10 1~t ~~ROt~ ~~O ~t~BtRS Or 1~ECOU~1~ Or tLG1~ COU~ClL ~OURRO~O CO~l11tt RtPOR1S ~S rOLLO~S: 1. 1hat a by-la~ be passed ~hich ~ill in effect amend By-La~ 124-77 authOrizing speed limits and designating a 60 Kilometer per hour speed lone on a portion of county Road Il6 ~hich is described as fo11o~S: rrom the road al.\o~ance bet~een Lots 38 and 39. 1albot Road tast. south~old 10~nshiP to 22l metres. east of the ~est limit of Lot 40. 1albot Road East being a,total distance of 610 metres. 1he speed limit zone is opposite the south~old School and Elgin ~anor. d t the ~o~ember session 1his by-la~ replaces the by:la~ passe a ~hich had an error in the schedule. ~LL Or ~~lC~ lS RtSPtC1rULL ~ SUB~111EO ~E RECO\'l\\'I\E~U: Cr\l\lR\'I\I\~ COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT DECEMBER SESSION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELCIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: ct WE RECOMMEND: 1. Whereas traffic between the Cities of London and St. Thomas desires to travel directly between the centres of both cities and the eastern industrial areas of both Cities, rather than use existing King's Highways #4 and #74. And Whereas as a" result, traffic on the Wellington Road under the control of the Counties of Middlesex and Elgin has increased to the point the road has reached its capacity and widening portions of it to 4 lanes and the channelization of all intersections is now required, . I And Whereas the improvement of a Highbury, Hubrey, Radio Road Link between London and St. Thomas would not only alleviate the need for some of the improvements of Wellington Road for a number of years but also connect the industrial areas of the Counties of Middlesex and Elgin including the Cities of London and St. Thomas, the London and St. Thomas Airports, and provide the residents of each municipality with a much better connection with Highway #401 while greatly improving safety for the road users. And Whereas at a meeting of representatives of the Counties of Middlesex and Elgin and the Ministry of Transportation and Communications the Wardens of Elgin and Middlesex recommended to the Road Committees of 'the Counties of Elgin and Middlesex and the Councils of the Counties of Elgin and Middlesex and the Cities of London and St. Thomas that representation be made to the Provincial Government to provide additional funding to the Counties of Elgin and Middlesex to allow them to constr~ct the entire Highbury, Hubrey, Radio Road Link as soon as possible. We therefore recommend to County Council that representa~ion be made~to the Provincial Government to provide additional funding to the Counties of Elgin and Middlesex to allow the constru~tion of COU~I~ Of cLGl~ RO~O CO~~111cc ~ O(Cc~BcR ScSSlO~ \986 10 1"( ~~RO(~ ~~O ~(~B(RS Of 1"( COU~I~ Of cLGl~ COU~ClL ~OUR RO~O CO~ll1cc RcPOR1S ~S fOLLO~S: ~E RECO~~ENQ: 1hat a by-la~ be passed ~hich ~ill in effect amend By-La~ #24-77 authOrilin9 speed limits and designating a 60 Kilometer per hour speed lone on a portion of County Road #16 ~hich is described as \ . fO\\O~S: from the road a1-10~ance bet~een Lots 38 and 39, 1albot Road cast, south~old lo~nshiP to 221 metres east of the ~est limit of Lot 40, lalbot Road East bein9 a,total distance of 610 metres. lhe speed limit lone is opposite the south~Old School and clgin ~anor. d t the ~o~ember session lhis by-la~ replaces the by:la~ passe a ~hich had an error in the schedule. ~LL Of ~"lC" IS R(SPcClfULL~ SUB~111(O C\1f\lR~I\N COUN1~ Of ELGlN RO~O COM~111EE ~ OECE~BER SESSIO~ \986 10 1HE W~ROEN ~NO ~E~BERS Of 1HE COUN1~ Of ELClN COUNCIL ~OUR RO~O CO~MI11EE REPOR1S ~S fOLLOWS: WE RECOMME~O: l. Whereas traffiC between the Cities of London and st. 1homas desires to travel directlY between the centres of both cities and the eastern industrial areas of both CitieS, rather than use ey,.isting King'S Highways #4 and #74. ~nd Whereas as a result. traffiC on the Wellington Road under the control of the counties of Middlesex and Elgin has increased to the point the road haS reached its capacity and widening portions of it to 4 lanes and the channelilatiOn of all intersections is .1 no~ re~uired, ~nd Whereas the impro~ement of a Highbury. Hubrey, Radio Road LinK between London and st. 1homas would not onlY alle~iate the need for some of the impro~ements of Wellington Road for a number of years but alsO connect the industrial areas of the Counties of ~iddlesey,. and Elgin including the CitieS of London and St. 1homas, the London and st. 1homas ~irports, and pro~ide the residents of each municipality with a much better connection with Highway #401 while greatlY impro~ing safety for the road users. ~nd Whereas at a meeting of representati~es of the countieS of ~iddlesey,. and Elgin and the ~inistry of 1ransportatiOn and communicatiOns the Wardens of Elgin and ~iddlesey,. recommended to the RDad committees of.the counties of Elgin and Middlesex and the councils of the counties of Elgin and Middlesex and the Cities of London and st. 1homas that representatiOn be made to the provincial Government to provide additional funding to the Counties of Elgin and ~iddlesey,. to allow them to construct the entire Highbury. Hubrey, Radio Road LinK as soon as possible. We therefore recommend to county council that representatiOn be made' to the pro~incial Go~ernment to pro~ide additional funding to _~A Middlesey,. to allow the constru~tion of COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT - DECEMBER SESSION 1986 PAGE 2. the entire Highbury, Hubrey, Radio Road Link as soon as pos~ible and that the project within the limits of the County of Elgin be under the auspices of the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission and that the Warden and Chairman of the County Road Committee, the Chairman of the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission and the County Engineer be authorized to meet with Provincial representatives as required on this matter. 2. That the resolution of the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission in which they requested that representation be made to the Provincial Government to provide additional funding to the Counties of Elgin and Middlesex to allow for the construction of the entire Hubrey-Radio Road Link as soon as possible be endorsed. We also agree with the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission that the project should be under the auspices of the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission as funds of the Commission will allow. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED CHAIRMAN 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO DECEMBER 3, 1986 p~GE 1. lHE COUN1Y OF ELGIN ROAD COMMIllEE met at the Municipal Building on Wednesday, December 3, 1986 at 9:30 a.m. All members except Reeve Bradfield were present. Also present was Mr. FranK ClarKe of the Ministry of lransportatiOn and communicatiOns, the Engineer and Assistant Engineer. "MO\/ED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM lHAl lHE MlNU1ES OF 1HE MEE1ING OF OC10BER 8, 1986 BE APPRO\/ED. C~RRIED." lHE ENGINEER REPOR1ED AS FOLLOWS: 1. lhat the expropriation plan for Cowan ParK had been registered and the County solicitor, Mr. Murray J. Hennessey waS presentlY negotiating with the City of st. lhomas with regard to occupation and compensation. 2. lhat a grade for st. George Street would be forwarded to A. M. Spriet and 3. permission had not been received to proceed with worK at the Glencolin Bridge. Reeve NeuKamm indicated that he would discUSS the matter with the Chairman of the catfiSh creeK conservation Authority. 4. It would be necessary to have a meeting with the 10wnshiP of southWold council regarding the orchard-carroll Drain and the County's invoice for ~orK. Associates by the end of next weeK. considerable engineering worK remained to be done and several matters including who would do the paving, etc., clarified. -...-.--..,.." 5. lhe Railway lransport committee had advertised, advising of the canadian PacifiC Railway's desire to abandon the port Burwell subdivision. lhe county's position on road crossings was being forwarded to the Railway lransport committee and the Canadian Pacific Railway with copies to the 10wnshiP of Bayham and the \/illage of port Burwell. lHE ENGINEER REPOR1ED ON lHE WORK 10 DAlE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Winter control had been light to date, snow fence had been erected and all snowplowS and sanders mounted. S 1". I" \\Ol'\f>,S, 0 t.\1" f>,R 10 otCtl'\~tR 3, 1986 PI\Gt. 2. K #88 at Carrier l'\acK as b 'ld tne engine on I"ruc 2. It nad been necessary to re Ul "n d seiled, fortunatelY d tne number Sly,. plStOn a an oil line nad broKen an neduled for rebuilding d I"ne motor nad been SC tne cranK snaft ~as not damage · , 330 000 Kilometers on it presentlY, na~ing apprOXlmatelY , in tne spring of 1987, d Road #14 for tne ~inter. f>, com leted on Road #13 an 3. snouldering nad been p d from tne Gore ?it a~el nad been sal~age ' ' considerable amount of gr ~nite station resultlngln haul gra~e\ frOm 't ~aA not been necessary to thUS 1 II U a large sa~ings. \ t d for tne ~inter. d #45 nad been comp e e 4. Cleanup ~orK on Roa ,Kf'lled and ~ould be opened oad #29 ~as belng bac 1 . 5. I"ne l'\c~ain Cul~ert on R , ne~ fences ~as under~aY on Road #2 \ f O\A fence and tne erectlOn of 6. Remo~a 0 U in oun~icn 1"0~nsniP' 7. orainage repairs ~ere being made ~ eA to Keen most of tne casual lt ~as IIO? U y oecember as tnere ~as a considerable number of s\lort \ Y . at \\Ugn Lyle'S on Road #16. emplOyees on until tne 19tn of dangeroUS trees tnat snould 8. be cut. ?it \\aul Road for tne present time. 9 ~orK nad been completed on tne sparta ' . ' ~n'te statlOn as Gra~el ~ould be nauled from tne sparta ?It to 1 time permitted tnrOUgn tne ~inter. A ,,'ou\d be started f all County roaus n 10. f>, general sign impro~ement programme or snortlY. ' \\ for , . een deli~ered to tne ?OllCe Co ege 11. \\orse ora~n ~enicle SlgnS nad b \3. their erection. I"ne 1986 t.\eeds studY computer r~vv' - of wansportatiOn and communicatiOns. ," nt to tne attention u\ v' 'tteA and tne error nad been broUg oml u ' f 1987 , '~e its full constructiOn allocatlOn or · tne County mlgnt recel ' , t t~e end of oecember wl~l be It appears tnat tM Ilro)ected eXllendltures 0 d , 1 amount of s~ 1 t haS to be use ~itnin tM 1986 Road ~udget, unlesS a arge before tne end of tne year. ._~^~t. nad been recei~ed from tne l'\inistry c~~eral costed sections nad been \2. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO DECEMBER 3, 1986 PAGE 3. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL ~ SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN THAT THE ACCOUNTS PAYLIST BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT: PAYLIST NUMBER 48 AMOUNTING TO $71,221.49 PAYLIST NUMBER 49 AMOUNTING TO $430,369.90 PAYLIST NUMBER 50 AMOUNTING TO $73,547.13 PAYLIST NUMBER 51 AMOUNTING TO $371,242.50 CARRIED." The Engineer reported that the road assumption by-law was in Toronto and he had been promised that it would be processed as Quickly as possible. It would probablY not be approved by Cabinet until mid January because of the Christmas recess. Funds would be available for maintenance and overhead and at the request of the Ministry a revised request for new machinery money from approximatel~ $450,000 to $625,000 had been forwarded. This would allow the County to obtain a snowplow truck and a new front end loader and a grader to replace Grader #17 in 1987. Unfortunately a number of purchases would have to be put off until 1988 or 1989. New machinery requirements for both 1988 and 1989 would be in excess of $600,000. It was not known at this time the amount of allocation that might be given to the County for new machinery for 1987. Posts for Stop Signs and Route Markers were presently being placed and signs would be erected as soon as by-laws had been approved. No response had yet been received fr~ the Counties of Middlesex, Oxford and the Region of Haldimand-Norfolk with regard to the County's request for the assumption of the townlines. It was likely that the Region of Haldimand-Norfolk would pass a by-law to assume the townline between Road #45 and Road #38 at an early date. SI. I~O~~S, 0~I~R10 OECEtJ\EER 3, 1986 PAGE 4. correspondence from tne lo~nsniP of soutn~old re~uesting tnat tne county assume a portion of tne Dela~are-soutn~old lo~nline bet~een ~iddlese~ Road #15 and tne sanitarY Landfill Site ~as disCUssed at some lengtn. lne committee ~as of tne feeling tnat until sucn time as tne ~inistrY appro~ed tne present by-la~S and discUssions nad been completed ~itn tne county of ~iddlese~ and tneir appro~al recei~ed to assume portions of tne ~estminster-Dela~are- soutn~old lo~nline presentlY under disCUssion, it ~ould be premature to approacn eitner the ~inistrY or ~iddlese~ on tne assumption of furtner roads as county Roads. lne Engineer ~aS instructed to notifY tne 1o~nsniP of soutn~old accordinglY 1ne committee asKed that tne matter be put before tne 19B7 Road committee for discUssion as soon as disCUssions nad been fa~OurablY concluded ~itn tne county 1M Cnairman and Engineer reported on tM ~uotations recei~ed for a tandem trucK as attacned. lney stated tnat tney nad accepted tne lo~est ~uotatiOn and tne trucK ~aS presentlY ~itn frinK canada in preston na~ing a bOy,. placed on of tJ\idd1esex. lne quotation of frinK canada ~as accepted inasmucn as all tne County e~uipment ~as frinK and tnUS ~aS interCnangeable. lne price ~as in line ~itn similar e~uipment purcnased 2 years ago. it. "tJ\O\lEO E'{: E. ~ E \J KAtJ\tJ\ SECO~DED B~: ~. K. fORD 1~~1 VIE ~CCEPl 1~( QU01~110~ Of C~RR1ER ~~CK \RUCK CE~\RE l~CORPOR~IED Of LO~DO~ fOR ~ ~~CK ~ODEL D~ 6B6 S ~S pER I~E1R QU01~ll0~, ~S ~~E~DED, ~1 $75,156.00 \PRO~1~C1~L S~LES 1~~ E~IR~ 1f 11 lS fOU~D 10 BE ~PPL1C~BLE ~1 ~ L~IER D~IE). CJ\RRIEO." Sl. ,HO~~S, 0~,~R10 DECE~BER 3, 1986 pl\GE 5. "~O\jED B'{: SECO~~E~ B~: ~. PERO~lCH ,H~I ~E ~CCEPI IHE QUO,~,10~ OF FRl~K C~~~~~ FOR ~ FR1~K ~O~EL 8B2 ~U~P BO~ ~1 1HE1R QUO,E~ PRlCE OF $l7,424.00 ~~~ ~ FR1~K S~O~PLO~ ~~~ H~R~ESS CO~PLE1E ~llH CLOSE~ 10~ER ~I 1HE1R QUOI(~ PR1CE OF $l4,924.00 ~~~ ~ FR1~K ~O~EL 470 SK O~E-~~~ S~O~PLO~ ~I ,HE1R QUO,E~ PR1C( OF $8,408.00 FOR ~ 101~L PR1CE OF $40,756.00 ~LL 10 BE ~OU~,E~ O~ IHE COU~I~'S ~~ 686 S ~~CK 1RUCK. R. f. PURCELL CI\RRIED." IHE E~G1~EER REPORIE~ O~ PERSO~~EL ~~1IERS ~S FOLLO~S: l. Inat a posting had been made for ~ssistant stoCKKeeper Class 1, inasmucn as nO applicatiOns nad been made for Class 111 stoCKKeeper. Ine applicatiOns ~ould close on ~ecember 4tn. 2. Inat craig lur~ey ~as e~pected to na~e nis Class ,~' license immediatel~ and as ne ~as a licensed mecnanic as ~ell, tne Engineer recommended tnat ne be designated a regular emplOyee. Inere ~as a considerable amount of mecnanical maintenance ~orK required to be done. "~O\jED B'{: SECO~~E~ B~: ~.~. ~~RI~N ,H~I CR~lG IUR~E~ BE ~ES1G~~IE~ ~ REGUL~R E~PLO~EE, CL~SS 11 t~lL E~PER1E~CE) EFFECll~E ~ECE~BER ll, 1986. R. f. PURCELL CI\RR 1 ED. II CORRESPON~E~CE ~~S ~OIE~ ~S FOLLO~S: l. From tne ~inistr~ of IransportatiOn and communicatiOns stating tnat a . . 1 d h' uld be in effect for 1987. 4.6% funding increase for munlC1pa roa s "0 2. proctor and Redfern Group ~itn notice of proposed e~pansion of tne se~age lagoon for tne ~illage of Rodne~. 3. Ine Count~ of SimCoe ~itn a resolution protesting tne increase in radio license fees for muniCipal radio s~stems. Ine Count~ of Elgin'S costs ~ould rise from $236.00 ~earl~ to $l,434.OO yearlY. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO DECEMBER 3, 1986 PAGE 6. "MOVED BY: D. PEROV I CH SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE THAT THE RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY OF SIMCOE REGARDING THE PROPOSED RADIO LICENSE FEE TO A MUNICIPALITY BE ENDORSED. CARRIED." THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION IN ATTENDANCE, MR. ROBERT MARTIN, CHAIRMAN AND MR. DONALD STOKES AND MR. ALBERT AUCKLAND MEMBERS. . . . Warden Purcell reported on the meeting of November 21st between the Wardens of Elgin and Middlesex, the Chairmen of the Road Committees of Elgin and Middlesex, Mr. Sam Richardson, Chairman of the London Suburban Road Commission and Mr. Gerald Browning, Mr. Ambrose Hickey and Mr. John Wice of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications. The Warden felt that considerable progress had been made at the meeting and the two Wardens had passed a resolution recommending to the County Councils and Road Committees and Suburban Commissions of both Counties that additional funding be applied for immediately for the completion of the Highbury-Hubrey- Radio Road Link. It appeared that the Ministry was quite favourable to providing extra funding for the diversion of a portion of the road in Elgin County and for a swamp portion south of the Wilton Grove Road in Middlesex County. It was not known whether an extra allocation would be provided for the portion under Middlesex's control between the two locations. The Ministry felt that the whole portion of the road should be done at the same time as it was of little use to do both the south and north ends without the road in between. The Warden suggested that approvals be given as soon as possible as he understood that the Minister would visit the area in January and it was hoped that he might travel over both the Wellington Road and the Hubrey-Highbury-Radio Road Link during his visit. SI. I~O~~S, O"l~RIO DECE~BER 3, 1986 ?I\GE 7. lhe commiSsion ey,.pressed their interest in thiS pro)ect and were agreeable to a presentatiOn to the ~inister. Chairman ~artin stated the commission was willing to build the pro)ect as a st. lhomas suburban Road commission road. lhe ~arden SUggested that recommendatiOns be made to County council and to the City of st. lhomas as soon as possible so that representati~es could meet with the ~inister on the matter and preliminary engineering wor~ could be completed in 1987 SO that construction could be done in 19B8 and 1989. \I~O\lED B'<: E. NE\J\ZI\~~ SECO"OEO B~: ~. K. fORO ~~ERE~S lR~fflC BE1~EE" I~E Clll(S Of LO"OO" ~"O SI. I~O~~S OESIRES 10 lR~~EL OlREC1L~ BE1~EE" I~E CE"IRES Of B01~ ClllES ~"O I~E E~SlER" 1"OUS1Rl~L ~RE~S Of B01~ Cll1ES, R~I~ER 1~~" USE E~lS11"G Kl"G'S ~lG~~~~S *4 ~"O *74. ~"O ~~ERE~S ~S ~ RESUL1, lR~fflC 0" I~E ~ELL1"Gl0" RO~O U"OER I~E CO"IROL Of l~E COU"11ES Of ~lOOLESE~ ~"O ELG1" ~~S l"CRE~S(O 10 I~E pOl"1 I~E RO~O ~~S RE~C~EO liS C~p~Cll~ ~"O ~lOE"l"G POR110"S Of 11 10 4 L~"ES ~"O I~E c~~""ELll~ll0" Of ~LL 1"IERSEC110"S lS "O~ REQUIREO. ~"O ~~ERE~S I~E l~PRO~E~E"1 Of ~ ~lG~BUR~, ~UBRE~, R~OlO RO~O Ll"K BEI~EE" LO"OO" ~"O SI. I~O~~S ~OULO "01 O"L~ ~LL(~l~IE I~E "EEO fOR SO~E Of I~E l~PRO~E~E"IS 0" ~ELL1"Gl0" RO~O fOR ~ "U~BER Of ~E~RS BUl ~LSO CO""ECl I~E 1"OUS1Rl~L ~RE~S Of I~E COU"11ES Of ~lOOLESE~ ~"O ELG1" 1"CLU01"G I~E Cll1ES Of LO"OO" ~"O SI. I~O~~S, I~E LO"OO" ~"O SI. l~O~~S ~lRPOR1S, ~"O PRO~lOE I~E RESIOE"IS Of E~C~ ~U"lCIP~Lll~ ~ll~ ~ ~UC~ BEilER CO""EC110" ~11~ ~lG~~~~ *40l ~~ILE GRE~IL~ l~PRO~I"G s~fEl~ fOR I~E RO~O USERS. ~"O ~~ERE~S ~1 ~ ~E(11"G Of REPR(SE"1~11~ES Of I~E COU"IIES Of ~lOOLESE~ ~"O ELG1" ~"O I~E ~l"IS1R~ Of 1R~"SPOR1~\l0" ~"O Co~~U"lC~110"S I~E ~~ROE"S Of (LG1" ~"O ~IOOLESE~ RECO~~E"OEO 10 I~E RO~O CO~~lIIEES Of I~E COU"llES Of ELGl" ~"O ~lOOLESE~ ~"O I~E COU"CILS Of I~E COU"11ES Of ELGI" ~"O ~lOOLESE~ ~"O I~E n\lES Of LO"OO" ~"O SI. I~O~~S 1~~1 REPRESE"I~110" BE ~~oE 10 I~E PRO~I"CI~L GO~ER"~E"1 10 PRO~lOE ~OOI110"~L fU"OI"G 10 I~E COU"11ES Of ELGI" ~"O ~lOOLESE~ 10 ~LLO~ I~E~ 10 CO"SIRUCl I~E E"11RE ~lG~BUR~, ~UBRE~, R~OlO RO~O Ll"K ~S SOO" ~S POSSIBLE. ~E I~EREfORE RECO~~("O 10 COU"I~ COU"CIL 1~~1 REPRESE"I~ll0" BE ~~oE 10 ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO DECEMBER 3, 1986 PAGE 8. IIMOVED BY: E;~NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD CONTINUED . . . THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO THE COUNTIES OF ELGIN AND MIDDLESEX TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ENTIRE HUBREY, RADIO ROAD LINK AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND THAT THE PROJECT WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN BE UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION AND THAT THE WARDEN AND CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNTY ROAD COMMITTEE, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION AND THE COUNTY ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO MEET WITH PROVINCIAL REPRESENTATIVES AS REQUIRED ON THIS MATTER. CARRIED. II IIMOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. CARRIED.II $" /' ~4A/ /(.~::r.~..~ - - -7~ - CHAIRMAN :~, COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 9UOTATION FOR TANDEM DUMP TRUCK CAB AND CHASSIS NOVEMBER 14, 1986 In some cases extras had to be added to a Quotation to provide for a cab and chassis that the County of Elgin felt was a minimum standard. 1. Carrier Mack Truck Centre Incorporated 90 Enterprise Drive London, Ontario N6 N I A8 Mack Model OM 686S 201 Inch Wheel Base, 136 Inch Cab Axle, Frartle:$lJ1itable Including Crossmembers. 20,000 LB. Front Axle and 44,000 LB. Rear End with RS440 Hendrickson Suspension, 1,500 LB. Ft. Torque Input 6 Speed Transmission and 285 Maxidyne Engine, Butterfly Hood, Air Dryer, Leece Neville Alternator, 18 X 22.5 Front Tires and 11 R 22.5 Rear. Available Now. Engine Warranty 480,000 Km or 3 Years. $75,156.00 2. Sherway Ford Sales 1575 The Queensway Toronto, Ontario MaZ IT9 Ford Model LTS 9000 209 Inch Wheel Base, 150 Cab to Axle, Frame Suitable Including Cross members, 46,000 Rear End with RT440 Suspension, 18,000 LB. Front Axle With Built Spring. ' Cat 340 6B, Engine, Butterfly Hood and Leece Neville Alternator. Battery Boxes, etc., moved to allow installation of snowplow harness. Fuller RT 14615 Transmission, Air Dryer, 15 X 22.5 Front Tires, 11 X 22.5 Rear Tires. Available Now. Warranty Engine 160,000 Km or 2 Years. $75,350.00 3. Forest City International Trucks Limited 1712 Dundas Street East London, Ontario N5W 3C9 International Model 5070 Paystar 190 Inch Wheel Base, Frame Suitable Including Cross Members, 20,000 LB. Front Axle, 46,000 Rear Axle with RT 440 Hendrickson Suspension. Cummins NTC Motor, Butterfly Hood, Leece Neville Alternator, Fulle~ RTO 11608LL Transmission. 18 X 22.5 Front Tires, 11 X 22.5 Rear Tires. Available Now. $75,926.00 4. Brantford Truck Centre Limited P.O. Box 325 Brantford, Ontario N3T 2A3 International Model F 2674 Fuller RTO 11607LL, 9 Speed. Not AV4ilable Until Christmas. ?I\.GE 2. ~~~~~~l~~ ~~~l~f>.~~~ ~~~R~~l Cf>.B f>.tiD C\\f>.SSlS 5. ~otion Lincoln ~ercury 276 E)(eter Road London, ontario "6 L \1\.3 L1S 9000 tOrd. fuller Ria l1608LL. p ntlY in LOuiS~ille. . ~~~~ oj)tiOl\S .to be added to be sUltable. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 1. THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on Wednesday, November 5, 1986 at 9:30 a.m. All members were present. Also present was Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, the Engineer and Assistant Engineer. The Warden and the Engineer reported on the Radio-Hubrey Road Link noting that a meeting had been set up fur" ~ovember 21st between representatives of the Counties of Elgin and Middlesex to discuss the Road Link. To date the Clerk had not received any objections to the passing of an expropriation by-law to obtain a right-of-way through Cowan Park. "MOVED BY: D. PEROV I CH SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED TO EXPROPRIATE LANDS IN THE TOWNSHIP OF YARMOUTH IN THE COUNTY OF ELGIN BEING PART LOT 1, BLOCK 'G1 AND PART OF LOTS 2 AND 3, BLOCK I'EI, REGISTERED PLAN #28 AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLt DESCRIBED AS PART #1 AND PART #2 ON A PLAN DEPOSITED IN THE REGISTRY OFFICE FOR THE REGISTRY DIVISION OF ELGIN NO. 11 AS l1R-2933 TO IMPROVE COUNTY ROAD #26 (COWAN PARK PROPERTY). CARRIED." The engineering for the St. George Street sewers was being slowed considerably due to a lack of time to compile a complete presentation of the County's position to the Consultants, however surveys were underway and a profile would be available for most of the road by the end of the month. The Provincial Drainage Tribunal meeting on the Parks Drain, Road #20 had dismissed the appeal of Ross Gregory. A final report on pipe arch culverts would be forwarded to the Ministry as soon as further inspections, at the request of the Ministry were made on culverts near Oakville, and in Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry Counties. It was hoped to do a complete inspection this Fall. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 2. The Catfish Creek Conservation Authority had indicated that they might pay a portion (85%) of the cleaning out of the silt at the Glencolin Bridge (Road #40). This offer would have to be confirmed by the Catfish Creek Conservation Authority executive and was subject to the availability of funds in their budget for 1986. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT THE ENGINEER BE INSTRUCTED TO REMOVE THE SILT FROM THE VICINITY OF THE GLENCOLIN BRIDGE ON ROAD #40 PROVIDED THAT THE CATFISH CREEK CONSERVATION AUTHORITY AGREES TO PAY 85% OF THE COST. CARRIED." Further meetings would be held with Andrew Spriet regarding assessment on the Orchard-Carroll Drain, Road #20 at Shedden. The Canadian Pacific Railway had stated that they were going to file an abandonment request for the Port Burwell Subdivison, however they would meet with County representatives at any time to discuss the concerns that the County might have with regard to crossings. The Engineer was instructed to advise the Canadian Pacific Railway of the County's requirements. The Engineer was instructed to obtain a suitable retirement present for Curtis Gordon with a presentation to be made at County Council on November 19th. The Solicitor for Mr. Norman Garbett had issued a writ against the County of Elgin for an accident which had occurred on Road #26 on June 28th. The Garbett's had been hit by a car owned by Heath Chevrolet, Oldsmobile, Cadillac Limited, the operator of which did not have a driver's license according ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 3. to the Police Report and was intoxicated. The County was a third party in the hopes that if the Judge found anything wrong with the road that the County's insurance company might be forced to pay the rest of judgement that might not be paid by Heath Chevrolet Limited. THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Paving had been completed on Road #13, but wet weather had until recently restricted shouldering. If the wet weather subsided, all shouldering would be completed this Fall. 2. Work on Road #45 was continuing with trimming work nearly complete for the season. 3. The shouldering work required for winter on Road #24 and Road #36 would be done by the end of the week. Additional work would be required in 1987 and would have to be budgeted for. 4. The Sparta Pit Road, although not completed, was in much better condition and the work required would be completed in 1987. 5. Preparation for winter control operations were being taken and included applications for night duty, standby lists, operator lists with the same sander and snowplow routes as in 1985 - 1986 as they seem to work well and problems, if any, could be sorted out when the road assumption by-laws came into effect. Sanders had been put on Trucks #63 and #70 and more sanders would be put on as soon as possible as well as snowplows. A considerable amount of salt had been received and the sand piles had been completed. Norman Glover and John Brown, both Class IV, Foremen had been appointed to -', assist in emergency night and weekend duties and would serve on the same basis as Keith Player had in former years. These foremen would work on a rotating basis with Floyd Humphries and Keith Play~r. 6. The motor on Truck #88, Mack (approximately 350,000 kilometers) had to be repaired at a cost of approximately $8,000. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 4. 7. Body work would be completed shortly on Truck #95 and it would then be sent to have the springs and rear suspension repaired before the snowplow was mounted. 8. Grader #17 could only be used in an extreme emergency. 9. Snow fence would be erected as soon as farmers had done their plowing after the removal of their corn. 10. Pavement marking had been completed. II. The joints on the Wardsville Bridge had been replaced and expansion joints were completed on the St. George Street Bridge, Eden Bridge and Calton Bridge. 12. A sign programme would be started as soon as possible. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS BE PASSED: PAYLIST NUMBER 44 AMOUNTING TO $73,276.66 PAYLIST NUMBER 45 AMOUNTING TO $68,291.74 PAYLIST NUMBER 46 AMOUNTING TO $68,919.89 PAYLIST NUMBER 47 AMOUNTING TO $106,894.66 CARRIED. II The desirable County road system was discussed and the members' questions answered. The Engineer stated that it would be necessary to have separate resolutions and by-laws for all deletions and assumptions for the townline roads. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED AMENDING COUNTY OF ELGIN BY-LAW #85-27 BEING A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH A COUNTY ROAD SYSTEM IN THE COUNTY OF ELGIN BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING ROADS ON SCHEDULE 'A'. THE BY-LAW TO BECOME EFFECTIVE ON APrROVAL OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL OR JANUARY 1, 1987 WHICH EVER DATE IS LATER. CARRIED. II ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 5. SCHEDULE 'AI ~ 1. Townships of Aldborough and Dunwich Townline from the south limit of County Road #9 in Dunwich Township, southerly to the north limit of County Road #2. 2. In the Township of southwold, road between Concessions 11 and 111 from the east limit of County Road #14 to the west limit of County Road #20. 3. In the Township of Southwold, the road between Concessions II and 111 east of County Road #19 to the south limit of the Townline between the Townships of Delaware and Southwold. 4. In the Township of southwold, the road between Lots 30 and 34, in the North Side of Talbot Road East and the road between Lots 30 and 31, in the South Side of the North Branch of the Talbot Road (Smoke Road). 5. In the Township of southwold, the road from County Road #20 near Meeks Bridge and running northerly and easterly to ~e road between Concessions III and IV in the Township of Yarmouth from the southwold-Yarmouth Townline easterly to Highway #4. 6. In the Township of Southwold, the road between Concessions 'A' and 'B' from County Road #25 to the Bostwick Road, and the Bostwick Road from the road between Concessions 'A' and 'B' northerly to the Townline between Southwold and Westminster Townships. 7. In the Township of Yarmouth, the road between Concessions V and VI (southdale Road) from Highway #4 to County Road #22. 8. In the TownshiP of Yarmouth, the road between Concessions VII and VIII from County Road #28 to County Road #36 (Elm Street Extension). 9. In the Township of Yarmouth, the road between Concessions XI and XII from County Road #25 to Highway #74. 11 . In the Township of South Dorchester, the road between Concessions X and Xl from Highway #74 to Highway #73. In the Townships of Malahide and Yarmouth the Townline road from Highway #3 at Orwell to County Road #52. continued . · . . · 10. -~'" SI. I~O~~S, O~I~RIO NO\JEl'i\BER 5, 1986 pl\GE 6. l2. In the 10~nshiP of Bayham, the road bet~een Lots 5 and 6 and the de~iation there from throUgh concessions ~lll, the ~orth Side of lalbot Road and in the Gore concession, ~orth of the lalbot Road bet~een ~igh~aY #3 to county Road #38. 13. ~ain street in the ~illage of springfield from county Road #40 to the east limit of the ~illage of springfield. l4. lhe lo~nline Road bet~een the lo~nshipS of ~alahide and south Dorchester and the de~iations from it from the east limit of the ~illage of springfield, easterlY to the lo~nline Road bet~een the 10~nshipS of south Dorchester and ~alahide and south-~est Oxford. "l'i\O\JED B'{: StCO~DtD B~: ~. K. rORD 1~~1 ~t RtCOMMt~D 10 COU~I~ COU~ClL 1~~1 ~ B~-L~~ Bt p~SStD ~~t~Dl~G COU~l~ Or tLG1~ B~-L~~ #85-27 Btl~G ~ B~-L~~ 10 tSl~BL1S~ ~ COU~I~ RO~D s~Slt~ l~ l~t COU~I~ Or tLG1~ B~ ~DD1~G l~t rOLLO~l~G RO~DS O~ SC~tDUL( '~'. 1~~1 l~t B~-L~~ 10 BtCO~t trr(Cl1~t O~ ~PPRO~~L Or l~t LltUlt~~~1 GO~tR~OR l~ COU~CIL ~~D l~t ~PPRO~~L B~ l~t LltUlt~~~1 GO~tR~OR l~ COU~ClL Or ~ Sl~lL~R ~SSU~Pl10~ B~-L~~B~ l~t COU~I~ Or ~lDDLtSt~. CI\RRIED." E . N E \.\\<J\l'i\l'i\ ~ 1. lhe lo~nline Road bet~een the 10~nshiP of south~old and the 10~nships of Dela~are and ~estminster from the road allo~ance bet~een concessions II and 111 in the 10~nshiP of south~old easterlY to the Bost~icK Road (except the intersectiOn of ~igh~aY #4). "l'i\O\J ED B'{: StCO~DtD B~: t. ~tUK~~~ 1~~1 ~t RtCO~~t~D 10 COU~I~ COU~CIL 1~~1 ~ B~-L~~ Bt p~SStD ~~t~Dl~G COu~l~ Or (LGl~ B~-L~~ #85-27 Btl~G ~ B~-L~~ 10 tSl~BL1S~ ~ COU~l~ RO~D s~Slt~ l~ l~t COu~l~ Or tLG1~ B~ ~DD1~G l~t rOLLO~l~G RO~DS O~ SC~tDULt '~'. 1~~1 l~t B~-L~~ 10 BtCO~t trrtCl1~t O~ ~PPRO~~L Or l~t LltUlt~~~1 GO~tR~OR l~ COU~ClL continued . · . · 1\. \(. fORD ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 7. "MOVED BY: 'A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM CONTINUED . . . . AND THE APPROVAL BY THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL OF A SIMILAR ASSUMPTION BY-LAW BY THE COUNTY OF OXFORD. CARRIED. II SCHEDULE 'AI 1. The Townline between the Townships of South-West oxford, Dereham opposite Concession XII, Township of Dereham from the Malahide-South Dorchester Townline southerly to the road allowance between Concessions IX and X, Township of Malahide. 2. The road allowance between the Township of South-West Oxford (Dereham) and the Townships of Malahide and Bayham from the west Townline of the Township of South-West Oxford with the Township of Malahide easterly to the Townline ~ad between the Township of Bayham and the Town of Tillsonburg (formerlY the Township of Middleton). 3. The Townline Road between the Township of Bayham and the Town of Tillsonburg from Highway #3 north-westerly to the Townline Road between the Township of South-West Oxford and the Township of Bayham. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT BY-LAWS BE PASSED AMENDING COUNTY OF ELGIN BY-LAW #85-27 BEING A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH A COUNTY ROAD SYSTEM IN THE COUNTY OF ELGIN BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING ROADS ON SCHEDULE 'A'" THAT THE BY-LAW TO BECOME EFFECTIVE ON APPROVAL OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL AND THE APPROVAL BY THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL OF A SIMILAR ASSUMPTION BY-LAW BY THE REGION OF HALDIMAND-NORFOLK. CARRIED. II Continued . . . ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 8. SCHEDULE 'AI 1. The Town1ine Road between the Township of Norfolk and the Township of Bayham from the deviations therefrom, from Highway #19, southerly to Elgin County Road #45. "MOVED BY: W. A MARTYN SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED AMENDING COUNTY OF ELGIN BY-LAW #85-27 BEING A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH A COUNTY ROAD SYSTEM IN THE COUNTY OF ELGIN BY DELETING THE FOLLOWING ROADS ON SCHEDULE IAI. THE BY-LAW TO BECOME EFFECTIVE ON APPROVAL OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL OR JANUARY 1, 1987 WHICH EVER DATE IS LATER. CARRIED." SCHEDULE 'AI 1. County Road #33 in its entirety. 2. County Road #26 from County Road #25 to King's Highway #3. 3. County Road #26 from County Road #52 to County Road #11. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE 1987 ROAD COMMITTEE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED AMENDING COUNTY OF ELGIN BY-LAW #85-27 BEING A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH A COUNTY ROAD SYSTEM IN THE COUNTY OF ELGIN BY REMOVING COUNTY ROAD #29 BETWEEN COUNTY ROAD #25 AND COUNTY ROAD #26 FROM THE COUNTY ROAD SYSTEM AS SOON AS THE CONSTRUCTION WORK ON THE CONCRETE CULVERT ON THE UNDERHILL MUNICIPAL DRAIN (KNOWN AS THE MCBAIN CULVERT) HAS BEEN COMPLETED. CARRIED. II 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO NO\lEMBER 5, 1986 P ~GE 9. "MO\lED B'l: SECO~DED B~: W.~. M~Rl~~ lH~1 WE RECOMME~D 10 COU~I~ COU~CIL lH~1 lHE 1987 RO~D COMMIllEE RECOMME~D 10 COU~I~ COU~CIL lH~1 ~ B~-L~W BE p~SSEO ~ME~DI~G COU~I~ Of ELGI~ B~-L~W #85-27 BEI~G ~ B~-L~W 10 ES1~BLISH ~ COU~I~ RO~D S~SIEM i~ lHE COU~I~ Of ELGI~ B~ REMO~l~G COU~I~ RO~D #29 BE1WEE~ COU~I~ RO~D #25 A~D COU~l~ RO~D #3l fROM lHE COU~I~ RO~D S~SIEM ~S SOO~ ~S lHE REPLACEME~1 Of lHE CO~CRE1E CUL~ERl K~OW~ ~S lHE LI~DSA~ CUL~ERl H~S BEE~ COMPLE1ED. D. PERO\llCH C~RRIED." "MO\lEO B'l: SECO~DED B~: W. A. M~Rl~~ lH~1 WE RECOMME~D 10 COU~l~ COU~CIL lH~1 lHE COU~I~ Of ELGI~ PROCEED I~ CO~JU~C110~ WI1H ~~D CO~SUL1~TIO~ WI1H lHE 10W~SHIP Of MAL~HIDE ~~D lHE 10W~ Of ~~LMER 10 DESIG~~IE ~ ROU1E fOR ~ COU~I~ RO~D BE1WEE~ HlGHWA~ #73 10 HlGHW~~ #3 I~ lHE ~OR1H-E~SI QU~DR~~l Of lHE 10W~ Of ~~LMER ~~D/OR I~ lHE ~DJ~CE~1 L~~DS Of lHE 10W~SHIP Of MAL~HIDE. ~. K. FORD C~RRIED. II A neW lhrough Highway By-LaW would be reQuired to taKe effect upon approval of Lieutenant Governor in council of the revised road system. "MO\lED B'l: SECO~DED B~: W. A. M~Rl~N lH~l WE RECOMME~D 10 COU~I~ COUNCIL lH~1 B~-LAWS BE p~SSED WHICH I~ EffECl WILL ~ME~D B~-LAW #85-3l ~U1HORl21~G lHROUGH HIGHW~~S, lHE B~-LAW WILL DESIG~~IE ~S lHROUGH HIGHWA~ lHOSE RO~DS lHAl ~RE RECOMMENDED 10 BE ASSUMED B'l 1HE COUN1'l. R. F. PURCELL C~RRIED." staff Sergent K. W. MoneY, St. lhomas Ontario provincial police stated that he was in favour of having the speed limit reduced on Road #16 in the area of the southwold Elementery School and the Elgin Manor from 80 Kilometers to 60 Kilometers. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 10. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED AMENDING BY-LAW #2477 AUTHORIZING SPEED LIMITS BY ADDING THE PORTION OF COUNTY ROAD #16 (DESCRIBED ON SCHEDULE IAI) AND RESTRICTING THE RATE OF SPEED THEREON TO 60 KILOMETERS PER HOUR. CARRIED. II SCHEDULE 'AI County Road #16 in the Township of Southwold being Talbot Road East as shown on Registered Plans 0-1020 and 0-1021 from the East limit of the road allowance between Lots 38 and 39, North of Talbot Road East, Southwold Township to 221 metres east of the west limit of Lot 40, North of Talbot Road East, Township of Southwold a distance of approximately 610 metres. PERSONNEL MATTERS WERE REPORTED ON AS FOLLOWS: 1. Gerald Smith had resigned his stockkeeper position and was presently on sick leave. The position would be posted. 2. Norman Glover and John Brown, Class IV Foremen had been assigned to standby and night duty to assist the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent. It was hoped to give some of the Class IV Foremen additional responsibilities so that they would be able to take complete charge of some jobs in the future as the Assistant Superintendent and Assistant Engineer had to spend too much of their time on one particular construction job. It would be necessary to post for two or three Class IV Foremen next Spring depending on promotions to Class V Foremen and the additional road mileage assumed. It had been found that due to the lack of a Summer Works Crew Foreman, spare operators, untrained help, etc. had to be pressed into service at short notice. 3. The Engineer recommended that two additional employees, Michael Hare and Bruce Boughner be added to the regular staff. Both had Class 10' licenses and had worked for the County for several summers. Craig Turvey would be added to our regular staff also once Mr. Turvey obtained his Class IAI license. Mr. Turvey was already a licensed mechanic but had not worked in his trade recently. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 11. IIMOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT MICHAEL HARE AND BRUCE BOUGHNER BE DESIGNATED AS REGULAR EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN, CLASS II (NIL EXPERIENCE) AS OF NOVEMBER 13, 1986. CARRIED.II Tenders for pickup trucks were as attached. It was recommended that because of the low trade-in allowance ($600.00) offered for Truck #85 that it be kept as the summer crew truck. The low tender of E. L. Fordham Motors Limited with only one trade-in was still the low bid. IIMOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT WE ACCEPT THE TENDER OF E. L. FORDHAM MOTORS LIMITED FOR THE SUPPLY OF TWO (2) PICKUP TRUCKS AS PER THEIR TENDER AND COUNTY SPECIFICATIONS AT A TOTAL TENDER PRICE OF $25,573, INCLUDING PROVINCIAL SALES TAX WITH TRUCK #87 AS A TRADE-IN. CARRIED. II Tenders for tractors and disc mowers were as attached. Only three tenders met the specifications for disc side mount mowers. Because of the low trade-in value it was decided to keep the Massey Ferguson Tractor for emergency work and seeding work as it was presently equipped with a seeder. The Engineer reported that the base price of the Case International Tractors was slightly cheaper than the base price of the two tractors bought previously in the year from Ross Wilson, the additional cost being the side mount of the disc mowers over a rear mount. "MOVED BY: W. A. MARTYN SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE ACCEPT THE TENDER OF JONES AGRO POWER AND EQUIPMENT LIMITED FOR THE SUPPLY OF TWO (2) TRACTORS AND SIDE MOUNT DISC MOWERS AS PER THEIR TENDER AND COUNTY SPECIFICATIONS AT A TOTAL TENDER PRICE OF $42,868.48 INCLUDING PROVINCIAL SALES TAX. CARRIED. II 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO NO~EMBER 5, 19B6 p~GE 12. It was felt that if the side mount disc mowers worKed well it waS liKelY that the two mowers purchased earlY in the season would be modified to side mount mowers in the winter of 1987 - 1988. lhe Engineer reported that he had been informed that there were a number of tandem trUCKS available at the present time with specifications similar to the last tandem truCK purchased, but it was not liKelY that a snowplow or dump boy,. could be obtained before the end of January of 1987. lhe Chairman recommended that Quotations be obtained as rapidlY as possible 50 that the unit would be available for a portion of the ~inter. lhe Engineer reminded the committee that their spare snowplow tGrader #l7) could only be used under ey,.treme emergencies because of its poor condition. "MO~ED B'{: SECONDED B~: E. NEUK~MM lH~l lHE ENGINEER BE ~U1HORIIED 10 C~LL QU01~110NS FOR ~ I~NDEM DUMP lRUCK tSPECIFIC~110NS SIMIL~R 10 lRUCK #ll5 _ M~CK) 10 BE DELIVERED BEFORE lHE END OF 1986 ~ND lH~1 lHE CH~IRM~N BE ~U1HORIIED 10 ~CCEPl ~ QU01~110N H~VING REG~RD FOR lHE COUN1~IS NEEDS, lHE EQUIPMENl ~V~ll~BLE ON lHE VEHICLE ~ND ~~ ~l L~B 1 L 11'{.. ~. K. fORD C~RRIED. II "MO~ED B'{: SECONDED B~: ~.~. M~Rl~N lH~1 lHE ENGINEER BE ~U1HORIIED 10 OB1~IN ~ QU01~110N FROM FRINK C~N~D~ FOR ~ DUMP BOX ~NO SNO~PlO~ EQUIPMENl 10 BE MOUN1EO ON lHE lRUCK FOR ~HICH QU01~ll0NS ~RE REQUlRED tlHE BOX ~ND EQUIPMENl 10 BE SIMll~R 10 lH~1 ON lRUCK #l15) ~ND lHE CH~IRM~N BE ~U1HORIIED 10 CONFlRM lHE QU01~110N. R. f. PURCELL C~RRIED." lhe committee diSCUssed the draft form of an agreement with the port Stanley lerminal Rail Incorporated with the amendments made by the County solicitor, Mr. M. J. Hennessey. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 13. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE ACCEPT THE DRAFT FORM OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THE PORT STANLEY TERMINAL RAIL INCORPORATED AND REQUEST OUR SOLICITOR, MR. M. J. HENNESSEY TO FORWARD THE AGREEMENT TO THE PORT STANLEY TERMINAL RAIL INCORPORATED FOR THEIR COMMENTS AND IF IT IS AGREEABLE TO THEM, WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED AUTHORIZING THE WARDEN AND CLERK TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY. CARRIED." CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. From the Ontario Police College stating that they would pay for Horse Drawn Vehicle Signs for County Road #32 and would erect the same. The Committee agreed to providing the signs, billing the cost to the Police College and allowing them to erect them. 2. From the Township of Yarmouth with a rezoning by-law regarding the Sparta Merchantile, Road #27, Sparta. 3. From the Township of Bayham with zoning by-laws, two properties on Bayham Drive being the Townline between Bayham and Tillsonburg in Lot 20, Concession XI. It was recommended that the County obtain road widening as a condition of the rezoning and the Chairman asked the Engineer to notify the Bayham Council accordingly and to enclose land agreements with both notifications. 4. From the Township of Aldborough with various zoning amendments including a proposed amendment to rezone the old Township garage to commercial use. Reeve Perovich stated that the buyer was going to use it for automotive sales. The Committee instructed the Engineer to write the Township and suggest that the rezoning be done by site plan amendment which would restrict the positioning of "for sale" vehicles on the site so that vision at the intersection of the Gore Road and Furnival Road would not be obstructed. 5. From the County Land Division Committee stating that'the Ministry of Agriculture and Food had objected to severances including one for Continued . . 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO NO~EMBER 5, 1986 p~GE 14. ~lice Bucanan, Road #37 at Belmont. The County would be forced to attend the ontario Municipal Board Hearing as they had requested widening as a condition of the severance by the committee and the ontario Municipal Board might ignOre the county's request if there was nO representatiOn- \lMO~ED B'{: D. PERO~lCH SECONDED B~: R. F. PURCELL TH~T WE ~DJOURN TO WEDNESD~~, DECEMBER 3, 1986 ~T 9:30 ~.M- C~RRIED.\I ---- , .. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TENDERS FOR 2 PICKUP TRUCKS NOVEMBER 1986 Trade-Ins County Truck #85 (Chevrolet Pickup) Truck #87 (Dodge Pickup) All prices include Ontario Sales Tax and are for 2 vehicles as per County specifications. OPTION IAI (WI1HOUT TRADE-INS) 1. Forest City Plymouth Chrysler Limited 1835 Dundas Street East London, Ontario N5W 3E7 Dodge 250 2. E. L. Fordham Motors Limited 241 Furnival Road Rondey, Ontario NOL 2CO GMC Model R20903/E63 $26,161.50 Delivery 6 to 8 weeks. $26,215.00 3. St. Thomas Plymouth Chrysler 275 Wellington Street St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 2S6 Dodge 0-250, 8 Cylinder, 5 Litre. $26,330.56 4. Eeley Chevrolet Oldsmobile Limited P.O. Box 100 Straffordville, Ontario NOV lYO Chevrolet Model C 20. Delivery 8 to 12 weeks (depending on paint order) $26,828.92 5. DisbroweMotors 827 Talbot Street St. Thomas, Ontario GMC Model R20903 Delivery 9 weeks. $27,641.43 6. Highbury Ford 1365 Dundas Street East London, Ontario Ford 250, 6 Cylinder, 4.9 Litre. Delivery 90 days. $27,695.26 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TENDERS FOR 2 PICKUP TRUCKS OPTION lA' (WITHOUT TRADE-INS) PAGE 2. 7. Talbot Mercury Sales Limited 700 Talbot Street St. Thomas, Ontario N5P I E2 Ford 250 $27,875.64 8. Motion Lincoln Sales Limited 276 uK eter Road London, Ontario N6L lA3 Ford 250 $28,218.04 9. Eastway Ford Sales Limited 1012 Talbot Street St. Thomas, Ontario N5P I G3 Ford 250, 8 Cylinder, 5 Litre. Delivery 8 to 10 weeks. $28,628.92 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TENDERS FOR 2 PICKUP TRUCKS OPTION IBI (WITH TRADE-INS TRUCK #85 AND TRUCK #87) *Difference between Low 'AI and Low 'B' $1,230.50 I. E. L. Fordham Motors Limited 241 Furnival Road Rodney, Ontario NOL 2CO 2. St. Thomas Plymouth Chrysler 275 Wellington Street St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 2S6 3. Motion Lincoln Sales Limited 276 Exeter Road London, Ontario N6 L I A3 4. Eeley Chevrolet Oldsmobile Limited P. O. Box 100 Straffordville, Ontario NOV lYO 5. Disbrowe Motors 827 Talbot Street St. Thomas, Ontario N5P lE4 6. Talbot Mercury Sales Limited 700 Talbot Street St. Thomas, Ontario N5P lE2 7. Highbury Ford 1365 Dundas Street East London, Ontario N5W 3B5 8. Eastway Ford Sales Limited 1012 Talbot Street St. Thomas, Ontario N5P IG3 9. Forest City Plymouth Chrysler Limited 1835 Dundas Street East London, Ontario N5W 3E7 (WITH TRUCK #87 AS TRADE-IN 'ONLY') 1. E. L. Fordham Motors Limited 241 Furnival Road Rodney, Ontario NOL 2CO NOVEMBER 1986 $24,931.00 $25,474.56 $25,757.04 $25,758.92 $25,929.43 $26,270.64 $26,625.26 $26,702.92 NO BID $25,573.00 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TENDERS FOR 2 TRACTORS AND DISC MOWERS. (REAR MOUNT) OPTION 'A' NOVEMBER 1986 (NO TRADE-IN) r. 1. Belarus Equipment of Canada Limited 43 Goldthorne Avenue Toronto, Ontario M8Z 557 Belarus 405 53 H.P. - 253 Cu. In. Displacement 13.6" Rear Tires $18,692.90 Mower Rear Mount Belarus KRN-2.1 (6' 10") 6,663.96 $25,356.86 2. Jones Agro-power Equipment Limited Fingal, Ontario NOL 1 KO Kuhn Model GMD66HD (7' 10" Cut) $25,834.08 9,540.84 Case International Model 585 $35~374.92 3. Ellis Farm Equipment Limited R. R. #7 St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3T2 Ford 4610 II With Low Profile Front Axle New Holland 463 HD Mower $38,252.50 4. Routly and Phillips Limited 730 Talbot Street West Aylmer, Ontario N5H 2Vl Case IH Model 685 - 62 H.P. Taarup Mower $39.754.61 5. Ellis Farm Equipment Limited R. R. #7 St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3T2 Ford 4610 II Special Utility New Holland 463 HD Mower $40,232.00 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TENDERS FOR 2 TRACTORS AND DISC MOWERS PAGE 2. 6. Lee Farm Equipment Limited R. R. #1 Rodney, Ontario NOL 2CO Massey Ferguson Model 270 $30,638.30 (2 Year Warranty - Delivery by December 31, 1986) Mower G.M.D. 66 H.D. Kuhn (711011 Cut) Rear 3 Point Hitch, P.T.O. Drive 10,301.92 $40,940.22 7. Van-Cross Farm Equipment Limited R. R. #3 St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3S7 John Deere 2150 General Purpose John Deere Model 260 Mower $41,409.00 8. London ford Equipment Sales Limited P.O. Box 11 8 Hyde Park, Ontario NOM lZO Ford 4610 Mower Kuhn G.M.D. 66 H.D. (71 10" Cut) Rear Mount $31,030.00 10,914.00 Delivery 30 - 60 Days $41,944.00 9. Vandenbrink Farm Equipment Incorporated Sparta, Ontario NOL 2HO Kubota L 4150F Lely 240 Mower $45,152.29 10. Vandenbrink Farm Equipment Incorporated Sparta, Ontario NOL 2HO White 2-55 Lely 240 Mower $46,414.89 * Spring Tender 1986 2 Tractors and Mowers Outrignt Would Have Been $37,5~7.00. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMEN~ OPTION IB1 (WITH TRADE-IN) * Trade-In Massey Ferguson Model 130 and Mower. * Difference Between Option 'A' and 'B' (Jones Agro-Power) $2,140.00 1. Belarus Equipment of Canada 2. Jones Agro-Power Equipment Limited 3. Ellis Farm Equipment Limited Ford 4610 II Low Profile 4. Ellis Farm Equipment Limited Ford 4610 Special Utility 5. RoutJy and Phillips Limited 6. Lee Farm Equipment Limited 7. London Ford Equipment Sales Limited 8. Van-Cross Farm Equipment Limited 9. Vandenbrink Farm Equipment Incorporated Ku bot a 10. Vandenbrink Farm Equipment Incorporated White $21,611.96 $33,234.92 $34,293.00 $36,273.00 $37,443.41 $38,157.33 $38,199.00 $38,841.00 $42,277.29 $43,739.89 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TWO TRACTORS AND MOWERS SIDE MOUNT AS REQUIRED IN SPECIFICATIONS, (OUTRIGHT NO TRADE-IN) 1. Jones Agro-Power Equipment Limited Fingal, Ontario NO L 1 KO Case International Model 585 Side Mount Lely Model 240 (7' 10" Cut) (Mower Mount Originated by Doughty and Williamson Limited, Jarvis, Ontario) 2. Ross E. Wilson International Limited R. R. #1 Glencoe, Ontario NO LIMO Case International 585 Side Mount Lely Model 240 Mower 3. Southwest Tractor Incorporated 16 Royce Court London, Ontario N6 ElL 1 John Deere Model 2350 Lely Model 240 Side Mount NOVEMBER 1986 $42,868.48 $46,956.27 $49,825.74 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT SECOND REPORT NOVEMBER SESSION 1 9 B 6 , ! TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: WE RECOMMEND: I. That a by-law be passed to expropriate land to improve County Road #26 in the Township of Yarmouth in the County of Elgin being part of Lot 1, Block IG' and part of Lots 2 and 3, Block lEI, Registered Plan #28 and being more particularly described as Part #1 and Part #2 on a plan deposited in the Registry Office for the Registry Division of Elgin No. 11 as lIR-2933, (Cowan Park Property). ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, CHAIRMAN COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT NOVEMBER SESSION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Asphalt paving had been completed on Road #45 in Malahide Township between Highway #73 and Road #40 for the season. A base coat of pavement was placed on the entire length and a top coat of pavement was placed on approximately 60% of the length. Although held up by recent wet weather much of the trimming work has been completed. 2. Shouldering and trimming work continues on Road #13 and Road #14 north of Road #13 and also on Road #36 south of Sparta where asp~alt pavement was placed earlier. 3. Two GMC Pickup Trucks have been purchased from E.L. Fordham Motors Limited of Rodney at their tendered price of $25,573.00 (including Provincial Sales Tax) with Truck #87 (1979 Dodge 3/4 Ton Pickup) as a trade-in. -E.L. Fordham Motors-being / the lowest of 9 tenders received. 4. We have purchased two Model 585 Case International Tractors complete with two Lely 8 Foot Side Mount Mowers from Jones Agro-Power Equipment Limited of Fingal. These tractors are similar to two purchased last Spring although the mowers are side mount while the mowers purchased in the Spring were rear mounted. The Region of Haldimand-Norfolk has been quite successful with similar units this Summer. In all ten tenders were received for both rear and side mount mowers and tractors. 5. Your Committee has completed discussions and Road Inspections dealing with a desirable County road system. Separate By-Laws will be required for those portions of road that involve - 2 - COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT NOVEMBER SESSION 1986 5. (Continued) Townline Roads as further discussions will be required with the Road Committees of the Townline municipalities of Middlesex Oxford and Haldimand-Norfolk, as the approval of the adjacent municipalities will be required before a Townline road can be assumed. WE RECOMMEND: 1. That a by-law be passed amending By-Law No. 24-77 authorizing speed limits by designating at 60 kilometers an hour a portion of Road #16 which is described as follows: From the road allowance between Lots 38 and 39, North Talbot Road East, Southwold Township to 221 metres east of the west limit of Lot #40, North Talbot Road East, being a total distance of 610 metres. The speed zone is opposite the Southwold Township School and Elgin Manor. 2. That a by-law be passed amending County of Elgin By-Law No. 85-27, being a by-law to establish a County Road System in the County of Elgin by deleting the following County roads; (a) County Road #33 in its entirety. (b) County Road #26 from County Road #25 to King's Highway #3. (c) County Road #26 from County Road #52 to County Road #11. The by-law is to become effective with the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Councilor January 1, 1987 whichever is later. 3. That the 1987 Road Committee recommend to County Council that a by-law be passed amending County of Elgin By-Law No. 85-27 being a by-law to establish a County Road System in the County of Elgin by removing County Road #29 between County Road #25 and County Road #26 from the County Road System as soon as the construction work on the concrete culvert on the Underhill Municipal Drain (known as the McBain Culvert) has been completed. .. '3 .. ~O~EMBER SESSIO~ 1986 COU~I~ Or ELGl~ RO~D COMMlllEE r 1 RS1 REPORl -------- \b) lhat the 1987 Road committee recommend to county Council that a by-la~ be passed amending County of Elgin By-La~ ~o. 85-27 being a by-la~ to establish a County Road System in the County of Elgin bY remo~ing County Road *29 bet~een county Road * 25 and County Road *31 from the County Road System as soon as the replacement of the concrete cul~ert KnO~n as the Lindsay cul~ert has been completed. lhat a by-la~ be passed amending County of Elgin By-La~ ~o. 85-27 being a by-la~ to establiSh a County Road System in the county of Elgin bY adding the follo~ing roads: 10~nshipS of ~ldborOUgh and Dun~ich 10~nline from the south limit of CountY Road *9 in Dun~ich 10~nshiP' southerlY to the north limit of county Road *2. In the 10~nshiP of south~old, road bet~een concesSions 11 and III from the east limit of county Road *14 to the ~est limit of county Road #20. In the 10~nShiP of south~old, the road bet~een concessions 11 and III from the east limit of county Road *19 to the south limit of the 10~nline Road bet~een the 10~nshiPS of Dela~are and SQutn\tJold. In the 10~nshiP of south~old, the road bet~een Lots 30 and 34 in the ~orth Side of lalbot Road East and the road bet~een Lots 30 and 31, in the south Side of the ~orth Branch of the lalbot Road l smOKe Road). In the 10~nshiP of south~old, tM road from county Road *20 near MeeKS Bridge and running northerlY and easterlY to the road bet~een concesSions III and l~ in the 10~nshiP of ~armouth and on the road bet~een concessions III & l~ ~armouth frOm the south~Old-~armouth 10~nline easterlY to ~igh~aY *4. In the 10~nshiP of south~old, the road bet~een concesSions ,~' and 'B' from County Road *25 to the Bost~iCK Road, and the Bost~iCK Road frOm the road bet~een concessions ,~' and 'B' northerlY to the 10~nline bet~een south~old and ~estminster 10~nships. \C) 4. 5. \a) \0) \e) \f) - 4 - COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT NOVEMBER SESSION 1986 (g) In the Township of Yarmouth, the road between Concessions VI and VII (Southdale Road) from Highway #4 to County Road #22. (h) In the Township of Yarmouth, the road between Concession VII and VIII from County Road #28 to County Road #36 (Elm Street Extension). (i) In the Township of Yarmouth, the road between Concessions XI and XII from County Road #25 to Highway #74. (j) In the Township of South Dorchester, the road between Concessions X and XI from Highway #74 to Highway #73. (j) In the Townships of Malahide and Yarmouth the Townline road from Highway #3 at Orwell to County Road #52. (k) In the Township of Bayham, the road between Lots 5 and 6 and the deviation therefrom through Concessions VIII, the North Side of Talbot Road and in the Gore Concession, North of the Talbot Road between Highway #3 to County Road #38. (1) Main Street in the Village of Springfield from County Road #40 to the east limit of the Village of Springfield. (m) The Townline Road between the TownShips of Mal~hide and South Dorchester and the deviations from it from the east limit of the Vi~lage'of Springfield, easterly to the Townline Road between the Townships of South Dorchester and Malahide and South-West Oxford. The by-law to become effective on approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Councilor January 1, 1987 whichever date is later. 6. That we recommend to County Council that a by-law be passed amending County of Elgin By-Law #85-27 being a by-law to establish a County Road System in the County of Elgin by adding the following roads: (a) The Townline Road between the Township of Southwold and the TownShips of Delaware and Westminster from the road allowance between Concessions II and III in the Township of Southwold easterly to the Bostwick Road (except the intersection of Kingls Highway #4). - 5 - MO~(~B(R S(SSlOM 19B6 COUM1~ Of (LGIM RO~O CO~~lll(( f 1 RSl REPORl lne by~la~ to become effective on approval of tne Lieutenant Governor in council and tne approval bY tne Lieutenant Governor in counCil of a similar as!:UmptiOl1 by~la~ bY tne county of ~iddleseJ<.' tc) lnat ~e recommend tnat a by-la~ be passed amending county of o 0 L ~ 05 27 being a by~la~ to establisn a county Elg1n oY- a~ \~o. 0 - Road System in tne county of (lgin bY adding; lne 10~nline bet~een tne 10~nsniP of soutn~~est OJ<.ford loerenam) o 0 vII 10~nsniP of soutn-~est OJ<.ford from tne OppOS1te concesS10n ^ ' o tn rly to tne road ~alanide~Soutn oorcnester 10~nl1ne sou e . d ~ I ~nsniP of ~alanide. allo~ance bet~een concesS10ns l~ an · 0 lne road allo~ance bet~een tne 10~nsniP of soutn~~est OJ<.ford o d B n frOm tne ~est 10~nline and tne 10~nsniPS of ~alan1de an aY am of tne 10~nsniP of soutn~~est OJ<.ford ~itn tne 10~nsniP of ~alanide easterlY to tne 10~nline Road bet~een tne 10~nsniP of Baynam and tne 10~n of lillsonburg. o f B ynam and tne 10~n lne 10~nline Road bet~een tne 10~nsn1P 0 a of lillsonbUrg from ~ign~aY .#3 nortn~~esterlY to tne 10~nline Road bet~een tne 10~nsniP of soutn~~est OJ<.ford and tne 10~nsniP of Baynam. . 1 of tne Lieutenant lne by~la~ to become effect1ve on approva On cou~cil and tne approval of tne Lieutenant Governor GOvernor 1.. .. d in council of a similar assumption by~la~ bY tne county of OJ<.for · lnat a by~la~ be passed amending county of (lgin By~La~ Mo. B5~27 being a by-la~ to establisn a county Road System in tne county of (lgin bY adding: lne 10~nline Road bet~een tne 10~nsniP of MorfolK and tne 10~nsniP of Baynam from tne deviations tnerefrom. frOm ~ign~aY #19. soutnerlY to (lgin county Road #45. . ~ 1 of the Lieutenant 1he by~la~ to beCome effect1~e on appro a On Council and tne approval of tne Lieutenant Governor GO~ernor 111 II in Council of a similar assumption by-la~ bY tne Region of ~aldimand~MorfolK. 8. 7 · ta) tb) ta) -- 6 -- ~O~E~BER SESS10~ 1936 CO\J~1'{ Of t.lGl~ f 1 RS1 RE?OR1 1hat the county of Elgin ?roceed in conjunction ~ith and consultatiOn ~i th the 1 o~n s hi? of ~a 1 ah i de and the 1 o~n of jl.y 1 mer, to des i gnate a route for a county road bet~een ~igo~aY ~73 to ~igo~aY ~3 in the north-east Quadrant of toe 1o~n of jl.ylmer and/or in the adjaCent lands of toe 1o~nsoi? of ~laoide. 9. 10. 10at a by-la~ be ?assed ~hich ~ill in effect amend By-La~ ~o. 35-31 authOrizing toroUgh oi9o~aYs. jI. ne~ by-la~ is necessitated because of toe assum?tion and re~ersion of toe ~arioUS county roads as recommended in RecommendatiOn 2,5,6,7, and 3. jl.LL Or ~~lC~ lS RESPEC1rULL~ SUB~111EO' C\11\ 1 R\'l\I\~ 51. lHO~~5, O~I~RIO OC10BER 29, 1986 pl\GE 1. lHE COU~I~ Of ELGI~ RO~O CO~~lIIEE met at tne ~unicipal Building on ~ednesdaY, october 29, 1986 at 9:00 a.m. ~ll members were present except Ree~e ~arr. ~lsO present wes ~r. franK ClarKe of tne ~inistry of lransportatiOn and communicatiOns, tne Engineer and ~ssistant Engineer. ~embers went on a Road Inspection of roads in East and ~est Elgin wnicn were proposed to be assumed as County roads, following tne attacned SChedule. REE~E ~~Rl~~ LEfl lHE ~~El1~G ~1 ~OO~ HOUR · · · lne meeting adjOUrned at 3:30 p.m. to ~ednesdaY, ~o~ember 5, 1986 at 9:30 a.m. 51. 1HO~~5, ON1~RIO OC10BER 8, 1986 p~GE 1. 1HE COU~1~ Of ELGl~ RO~D CO~~111EE met at tne ~unicipal Building, 450 sunset Drive on Wednesday, october 8, 1983 at 9:30 a.m. ~ll members were present except Reeve ~arr and Reeve ~artyn. ~lso present was ~r. franK ClarKe of tne ~inistrY of 1ransportation and communications and tne Engineer. \I~O\JEO B'(: ~. K. FORO SECO~DED B~: E. ~EUK~~~ 1H~1 1HE ~1~U1ES Of 1HE ~EE11~G Of ~UGUS1 28, 1986 BE ~PPRO~ED. C~RRIEO." 1ne Warden reported on tne meeting witn tne Honourable Ed fulton, ~inister of 1ransportatiOn and communications regarding tne Hubrey-RadiO Road LinK between st. 1nomas and London. 1ne Warden stated tnat tne delegation nad been well received and tnat tne ~inister appeared to be interested and felt tnat consideratiOn could be given for extra funding to tne counties of Elgin and ~iddlesex. 1nis would be followed up at a furtner date bY nis staff. 1HE E~Gl~EER REPOR1ED ~S fOLLOWS: 1. ~ letter nad been received from tne catfiSn creeK conservation ~utnority regarding silting at tne Glencolin Bridge; nowever tney nad no SUggestions on waYs to decrease tne silting. 2. 1nat tne ontario Drainage 1ribunal nad been set on tne parKs Drain on Road #20 between Snedden and fingal on tne complaint of Ross GregorY; but nO report nad as yet been received. 3. Pictures were snown of tne moutn of tne Little otter CreeK on Road #42 east of port Burwell during a direct soutnerlY wind. ~ltnougn considerable erosion was caused at otner locations along tne snore very little wave action was evident at tne moutn of tne culvert on Road #42. 4. 1he County of ~iddlesex had approved soils testing at the 1ates Bridge and Golders ~ssociates had been instructed to proceed as soon as possible. -----,~~, ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO OCTOBER 8, 1986 PAGE 2. 5. Mr. Ken Kleinsteiber had recommended welding along the valley bolts of the corner plates of the Newell Culvert and Brooks Culvert as part of the Ministry's subsidy allocation for pipe arch culvert inspection and that the London District had requested a resolution from Road Committee requesting this transfer of funds. IIMOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE REQUEST THAT THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TO ALLOW TRANSFER OF A PORTION OF THE SUPPLEMENTARY FUNDS DESIGNATED FOR THE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OF PIPE ARCH CULVERTS TO THE WELDING OF CRACKS ALONG THE SIDE PLATES ON THE NEWELL (COUNTY ROAD #32) AND BROOKS DRAIN (COUNTY ROAD #47) CULVERTS. CARRIED. II 6. The Village of Rodney had replied with regard to the crosswalk proposals and their request should be recommended to County Council for a by-law change. 7. The Engineer reported on the Roads and Transportation Association of Canada Conference. 8. The Orchard-Carroll Drain had been completed and the Township of Southwold had been invoiced. Mr. Andrew Spriet had missed his appointment to view the completed work and another appointment would have to be arranged. 9. That the salt quotation from Canadian Salt Company for 1986 had been received and after some negotiation the company had agreed to reduce the price by 50~ per tonne from the district price to $28.03. Although this was an increase over last year of 6.1%, the District price had increased by 6.8%. REEVE MARTYN IN ATTENDANCE . . . 10. An agreement had been made with Petro Canada for a decrease in diesel fuel and gasoline prices of 5.9~ per litre from July 1st onwards and the rebate would amount to approximately $7,400 for both since that time. Continued 51. 1HOM~S, ON1~RIO OC10BER 8, 1986 ? ~GE 3. ---- 10. Diesel fuel would now be 37.1i per litre and gasoline would be 38i per litre. ~lthoUgh the Engineer felt that it was possible to buY fuel at a cheaper price from others we would lose our rebate to the 1st of JulY. lhe committee agreed to stay with Petro Canada as their fuel supplier for the time being. 11. lhat no information had been received from Murray Hennessey on the Cowan ParK expropriation and further attempts to have Mr. Hennessey complete the worK would be made immediatelY. lHE E~Gl~EER REPOR1ED O~ lHE WORK 10 D~IE ~S fOLLOWS: 1. construction of Road #45 had been slow due to the recent wet weather. Crushed gravel was being placed on the east end near Road #40 and undercut worK was underway at the west end. It would be approximatelY the 17th of october before thiS undercut worK could be completed. ~ll culvert pipes had been placed as well as curb and gutter worK at the Luton intersection and Road #40 intersection. ~s the shOulders were extremelY wet it was doubtful that much trimming worK could be done thiS fall. Paving would liKely be done the weeK of october 20th. 2. Road #40, shOuldering; Road #13, shOuldering; Sparta Pit Road worK as well as shouldering worK on Roads #24 and #36 had also been delayed by the wet weather. It would be impossible to do any granular base on Road #22 thiS fall. 3. pavement repairs were underway in the port stanley area on Roads #20, #21 and #23. 4. lhe construction of the concrete culvert on Road #29 at McBains was awaiting better weather conditions. 5. Grass cutting was completed. 6. pavement marKing had been completed for both the County and the City of st. lhomas except for worK after paving on Road #45, etc. 7. lhe fall stump removal programme would be doubtful if the wet weather 8. It was hoped to start land purchase before the end of the month on Road #2 between the EcKer Drain culvert and the ~ldboroUgh lownline. continued. ~, ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO OCTOBER 8, 1986 PAGE 4. 9. Survey work was continuing on the St. George Street alignment and grade although it would be some time before the Davis Street intersection and the Wellington Road intersection engineering work would be done. 10. Welding had been completed on the Newell and Brooks Culverts as well as the Baker-Penhale Culvert on Road #52 west of Road #30. 11. Work was underway on the expansion joints of the Wardsville Bridge. 12. It would be necessary to replace the pistons and liners on the motor on Grader #20. 13. All work had been completed on all trucks other than Truck #95 (Ford, LTS 9000) which was having body work done at Country Collision. 14. Grader #17 which had been used as a spare should not be used except under emergency conditions as the ball bearings from the broken carrier bearings had taken some pieces out of the gears in the rear end. Grader #17 should be traded-in by next Spring at the latest. 15. The financial conditions were reported to date and it appeared that there were funds available to proceed with paving on Road #13 west of the Wil1y's Side Road. "MOVED BY: W. A. MARTYN SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT WE EXTEND THE CONTRACT OF WALMSLEY BROS. LIMITED ON ROAD #13 TO PAVE AN ADDITIONAL 1.6 KILOMETERS TO 2.0 KILOMETERS WESTERLY FROM 0.5 KILOMETERS EAST OF THE WILLYIS SIDE ROAD. CARRIED. II There was approximately $65,000 in the new machinery budget. which would have to be spent Gn new equipment this year. The Engineer recommended that two of the older pickup trucks be traded-in (approximately 160,000 kilometers on each truck) for 1987 models and also two tractors with disc mowers be purchased and the County's 1975 Massey Ferguson Tractor be traded-in (if the County receives a reasonable bid for the tractor). It was felt that w!ith the addition of two disc mowers to replace the sickle bar mower, grass cutting in future years could be done in reasonable time. Continued . . . . ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO OCTOBER 8, 1986 PAGE 5. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT THE COUNTY ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO CALL TENDERS FOR TWO TRACTORS AND EXTRA HEAVY DUTY DISC MOWERS WITH THE COUNTY'S TRACTOR #27 (MASSEY FERGUSON TRACTOR AND MOWER) AS TRADE-IN. (IF NO OTHER COUNTY DEPARTMENT IS INTERESTED IN PURCHASING THIS TRACTOR.) CARRIED. II "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT THE COUNTY ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO CALL TENDERS FOR TWO PICKUP TRUCKS WITH COUNTY TRUCK #85 AND COUNTY TRUCK #87 AS TRADE-INS. (IF NO OTHER COUNTY DEPARTMENT IS INTERESTED IN PURCHASING THESE TRUCKS.) CARRIED. II That the total bridge and road construction needs as approved by the Minister of Transportation for 1987 (converted to 1986 dollars) totaled $43,867,000 which was approximately 8% more than the 1985 Needs (after adjustment for inflation). It appeared that if the Ministry's subsidy allocations were on the same basis in 1987 that a construction and asphalt resurfacing allocation of 2 3/4 million dollars might be expected against an allocation of $2,530,000 in 1986 or 109.6% of the 1986 allocation (however there was an additional $101,000 supplementary by-law in 1986). It was not known whether or not there would be any 1987 supplementary allocations. It appeared that the total expenditures without the supplementary allocation in 1987 would be approximately 1/4 million dollars more in 1987 than in 1986. Inasmuch as the County's Ministry of Transportation and Communications assessment for 1987 had been set at $624,000,000 against $636,000,000 in 1986, the impact upon the County rate would not be significant. The City of St. Thomas contribitionto Suburban Roads would be approximately $44,000 in 1987 compared to $43,000 in 1986. Because of the 1985 deficit the Suburban Road Continued . . S1. 1HOM~S, ON1ARIO OC10BER 8, 1986 PAGE 6. commission effective contribution from the City of St. Thomas was approximatelY $34,000. ~s a result of these changes it was likely that the increase in the County levy could be held to the order of 2% for 1987 exclusive of the county's share of maintenance allocation for any assumption of roads. Because of the County's assessment position any additional maintenance allocation would be subsidized at 91%. The Chairman noted that in the 1987 Budget considerable emphasis would have to be placed on new machinery and he was glad to see that so far the County's initial request for $422,000 for equipment and housing had been approved by the Ministry. He noted that a grader would be required and consideration should be given to the replacement of the County 3 Yard Michigan Loader (purchased used in 1978) and a new dump truck and snowplow would also be necessary. The Engineer requested permission to add three casual employeeS to the regular staff inasmuch as the regular staff had been reduced by three in the past year. (One employee deceased, another retired and a third on long term disability with no chance of r~urning to County e~loyment.) "MO\JED BY: w. A. MAR1YN SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM TH~T LEON~RD KELLY, RICH~RD VIR~G ~ND ~RTHUR WEBBER BE DESIGN~TED ~S REGUL~R EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN, CL~SS 2 (NIL EXPERIENCE) ~S OF OC10BER 16, 1986. CARRIED." "MO\JED BY: R. F. PURCELL .-----" SECONDED BY: D. PERO\JICH TH~T THE FOLLOWING ~CCOUNTS BE p~SSED: p~YLlST NUMBER 40 ~MOUNTlNG TO $75,766.34 p~YLIST NUMBER 41 AMOUNTING TO $436,951.83 PAYLIST NUMBER 42 ~MOUNTING TO $68,288.70 p~YLIST NUMBER 43 AMOUNTING TO $317,123.83 CARRIED." 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO OC10BER 8, 1986 pl\GE 7. The Committee discUssed a desirable County road system noting the information attached. ~fter some discUssion the committee agreed that the roads proposed for additions and deletions to the system should be inspected as soon as possible so that a final recommendation could be made to the November County Council meeting for the passage of the necessary by-lawS. The committee also felt that maps should be forwarded to all ~nicipalitieS who did not have one and a revi~ should be done by the Engineer at the october County council meeting. It was decided to arrange a meeting with the County of ~iddlesex as soon as possible to discUSS worK on the HighbUry-Hubrey Road Extension and to try and develop a joint proposal to the ~inistrY of Transportation and communications for additional funding. "MO'JED B'(: v.!. 1\. M1\R1'(N SECONOEO B~: E. NEUK~~~ TH~T WE ~UTHORIIE THE CH~IRM~N, ENGINEER ~NO W~ROEN TO PURSUE ~ JOINT PROPOS~L fOR THE MINISTR~ Of TR~NSPORT~TION ~NO CO~~UNIC~TIONS IN~OL~ING ELGIN, ~IOOLESEX ~NO THE LONOON ~NO ST. THOM~S SUBURB~N RO~O CO~~ISSIONS CONCERNING THE HIGHBUR~-HUBRE~ EXTENSION JOINING LONOON ~NO ST. THO~~S. CI\RRIED." The Engineer was instructed to obtain a suitable gift for curtis Gordon upon his retirement in oecember and present it to him at the November meeting of County council. "MO'JED B'(: D. PERO\JICH SECONOEO B~: W.~. M~RT~N WE RECOM~ENO TO COUNT~ COUNCIL TH~T ~ B~-L~W BE p~SSEO ~MENOING COUNT~ B~-L~W #84-23 BEING ~ B~-L~W fOR THE REGUL~TION Of TR~ffIC B~ ~~ENOING SCHEOULE ,~I 2 to) TO RE~O ~S fOLLOWS: COUNT~ RO~O #8 fROM ~ POINT 79.7 METRES NORTH Of THE NORTH LIMIT Of M~R~ STREET NORTHERL~ fOR 52.4 ~ETRES ON THE WEST SlOE Of COUNT~ RO~O #8. CI\RRIED." ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO OCTOBER 8, 1986 PAGE 8. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORO SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED TO AMEND COUNTY BY-LAW #84-23 BEING A BY-LAW FOR THE REGULATION OF TRAFfIC ADDING TO SCHEDULE 'A' SECTION 3 DESIGNATION OF CROSSWALK ZONES ON ROAD #3 IN THE VILLAGE OF RODNEY: (A) NORTHERLY LIMIT Of CROSSWALK COINCIDES WITH THE NORTH LIMIT OF CLARK STREET. (B) NORTHERLY LIMIT OF CROSSWALK IS 4.5 METRES NORTH Of THE NORTH LIMIT OF VICTORIA STREET. (C) NORTHERLY LIMIT Of CROSSWALK COINCIDES WITH THE SOUTHERLY LIMIT Of MORIAH STREET. (D) SOUTHERLY LIMIT OF CROSSWALK IS 2 METRES NORTH Of THE NORTH LIMIT Of HARPER STREET. (E) SOUTHERLY LIMIT OF CROSSWALK COINCIDES WITH THE SOUTH LIMIT Of QUEEEN STREET. ALL CROSSWALKS TO BE 2 METRES IN WIDTH. CARRIED." Correspondence was read from the Canadian Pacific Railway in which they announced that they intended to obtain an abandonment order from the Canadian Transport Commission to abandon the Port Burwell Subdivision. The cost to the County for crossing protection on Road #38 and Road #45 was approximately $950.00 each per year and with abandonment these costs could be eliminated. An agreement with the Canadian Pacific Railway would be necessary regarding removal of the old crossings, drainage and reasphalting the property at Road #42 at Port Burwell. Widening should also be obtained from the Railway to coincide with the right-of-way limits obtained on either side of the crossing on Road #45. After discussion "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO FORWARD TO AND MEET WITH THE CANADIAN PACIfIC RAILWAY WITH REGARD TO THE CROSSING Of THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY AND THE AFFECTED COUNTY ROADS. CARRIED." ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO OCTOBER 8, 1986 PAGE 9. The Engineer noted that he had heard rumors that the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway was ready to ask for an abandonment order from the Canadian Transport Commission for a portion of their lines from St. Thomas to Shedden. The Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario had informed the County that it would be necessary to apply for a certificate of authorization as the County occasionally offered engineering advice to County rE~sidents and to other municipalities even though in most cases they did not receive any renumeration for the same. The cost was $75.00 plus $50.00 renewal. The County's present liability insurance would cover any liability created by the issuance of the certificate. The Committee agreed that the Engineer's draft ageement with the Port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated was adequate and instructed that it be forwarded to the County Solicitor for his comments. CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. From the Township of Southwold with a zoning by-law for property at the intersection of Road #16 and Road #20 in Fingal for Joe Dees Wholesaling for a Wholesale/retail operation. The Engineer felt that it was likely that this zoning application would be taken to the Ontario Municipal Board. 2. The Village of Port Stanley with regard to the flooding of an area of County Road #20 at George Street. The Engineer reported that he had sent a letter to the Village asking what had occurred to the agreement between the Village and the operators of the potash storage properties as the operators had agreed previously to improve the drainage in the area at their own expense and if this was improved flooding on the County roads would not likely occur. 3. The Township of Yarmouth with re~,ard to parking on Road #27 and the entrances into the Sparta Continuation School to accommodate parking for tour buses. The Committee had no objection to entrances into the former Continuation School property. Reeve Martyn noted that options were still being examined. 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO OC10BER 8, 1986 p~GE 10. 4. province of ontario regarding line load control of certain telepnone lines. Tne Engineer n~ed tnat a nu~er of protected lines were requested. 5. Canadian National Rail stating tnat tney were going to maKe improvements on tne crossings on Road #8 in Dutton and Road #40 in Springfield. 6. from the Ministry of TransportatiOn and communications stating tnat tnere would be no holdbacK on interim subsidy payments. 7. The Ministry of Transportation and communications with property for sale on Hignway #3 west of the former BostwicK Road, near Road #26. The committee indicated th~ they were n~ interested in tniS property as it did not front on a County road. 8. from tne County of Elgin Land DiVision committee reporting tnat tney nad received an appeal by R. Walcarius regarding his property fronting on Road #45 in '1armoutn TownsniP. 9. R. H. foulds, ClerK, County of Kent regarding natural gas, oil connections across County roads to Union Gas users and endorsing a draft by-law. A copy of Mr. foulds letter and draft by-law have been forwarded to all TownshiPS for tneir information and for their future use. 10. from the Ministry of Transportation and communications advising tMt it was illegal to close a road and cnarge a toll for cnarity purposes. 11. ~tario police ~llege requesting signs for horse dr~n vehicles on Road #32. The Engineer was requested to looK further into tne matter, 12. from the Elgin County Board of Education regarding reducing tne speed on Road #16 at tne soutnwOld scnool. Tne Engineer was requested to asK tne opinion of tne ontario provincial police with regard to tne enforcement of tne zone if tne speed limit was reduced. 13. from tne TownsniP of '1a~~n requesting pe~ission to run water fr~ tne soutn ditcn on tne west Pleasant Valley nill i~O ~e county.s gravel pit. Tne Engineer stated tnat permission nad been received from tne Ministry of Natural ResOurces to remove tne berm between tne pit and tne road and wnen tniS was done tnere would be no objection to tne Townsnip of '1armoutn using a portion of tne property for tne ditcn. altMU9n the committee was not partiCularlY in favOur of tnem. 51. lHOM~5, ON1~RIO OC10BER 8, 1986 pJ\GE 11. 14. ~ letter from J. ~anoell Peppers, Fingal to ~arden purcell with regard to parking in Fingal. lhe ~arden stated that he would approach the 10wnship for an answer on the parking problem in Fingal. "MO\lED B'l: ~. K. FORD SECONOEO BY: E. NEUK~MM 1\-1~ 1 ~E ~OJOURN 10 ~EON ESO~ y, OClOB ER 29, 1986 ~ 1 9: 00 ~. M · F OR ~ RO~O INSPEcnON ~NO ~EONESO~Y, NO~EMBER 5, 1986 ~1 9 :30 ~.M. (REGULII.R MEE11NG). C~RRIED." ----,- .~ AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made in triplicate this day of , 1986. BETWEEN: THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN hereinafter called the "COUNTY" - and - PORT STANLEY TERMINAL RAIL INCORPORATED hereinafter referred to as the "RAILWAY COMPANY" WHEREAS the Railway Company operates an excursion train between Port Stanley, Ontario and Union, Ontario and agrees to fulfill the terms of this agreement with the County of Elgin. AND WHEREAS the Parties hereto retain any existing rights under The Railway Act, Municipal Act, and the applicable legislation to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board or other judicial forum with respect to any issue in dispute between them or seek a variation of the terms of this agreement. 1. The Railway Company shall at all times carry Public Liability Insurance and will otherwise indemnify the County from any claims for damages resulting from any injury to any person or party from the operation of the said excursion train or upon the lands and premises used by the Railway Company, and shall upon reasonable request produce the said insurance for the County's inspection. The County shall be named insured in the said policy aqd the poliCY shall proVide~~~ (~o cancellation shall be effective without prior written notice by the Insurer to the County. 2. The Railway Company will erect and maintain all required warning signs at County road crossings. Ttlese signs will conform to Ministry of Transportation and .Communications standards. 3. (a) The Railway Company shall maintain all road surfaces at C04nty road crossings between the rails and within three feet of the rails and keep same free from mud, debris, material or oth~r obstructions and perform such other work as the County Eng.neer I - 2 - may from time to time designate. In the event that the County Engineer directs the Railway Company to perform work which the Railway Company believes to be unwarranted or inappropriate, it shall have the right to appeal the direction of the County Engineer to the Council of the corporation of the County of Elgin for a final determination with respect to such work. \b) lhat without written notice to the Railway company. the County if in the opinion of the County Engineer an emergency e~ists in respect to any road surfaces, works or services, any maintenance which in the opinion of the County Engineer is necessary to meet such emergencY and all of the costs thereof shall be paid by the Rai Iway Company to the County. After such work is performed the Railway Company shall have the right to appeal any such assessment of costs to the counci I of the County of Elgin, if it believes that the work performed was unwarranted or Inappropriate or if It believes that the costs assessed with respect to such work are e~cesslve. \c) Where no emergency e~ists the County shall provide notice in writing to the Railway Company, and if the Railway company falls to undertake the maintenance work within fourteen \14) days of the mailing of the written notice. or having commenced the maintenance work fails to proceed e~penditioUSlY with the completion of such work, the County may proceed and do the same and all of the costs thereof shall be paid by the Railway Company to the County. 4. lhe Railway Company shall upon the e~ecution of this agreement deliver to the county Engineer a copy of the letter of credit from a Chartered Bank in the sum of len lhoUsand Dollars \$10,000.00) providing for faithfUl performance of all of the obligations of the Railway Company under this agreement and their agreement with the 10wnship of ~armouth which shall also be In favOur of the County of Elgin · - 3 - .." 5. The Ra i I way Company agrees where by th is agreement any costs, fee or amount is payable by the Railway Company to the County, such costs, fee or amount shall be paid within thirty (30) days of the mai.ling of the statement therefor by prepaid first class mail addressed to the Railway Company at P. O. Box 549, Port Stanley, Ontario. If not paid within thirty (3D) days of the mailing of such statement, interest shall be payable at the rate of ten percent (101) per annum from the date of mailing until payment and the County may draw on any letter of credit provided by the Railway Company for the faithful performance of its obligations and any amount paid on such draw shall be applied in payment of the cost, fee or amount owing and any interest in respect thereto. If any costs, fee or amount is at any time unpaid and the County does not draw upon the letter of credit, or any draw made is insufficient to pay the cost, fee or amount owing, or the balance thereof together with interest which may be payable it may be recovered as a debt in an action in any Court of competent jurisdiction together with all costs incurred therewith on a solicitor and client basis. 6. The Railway Company will operate trains across the County road crossings in a safe and responsible manner. All trains will stop at all County road crossings and will be flagged over. 7. The Railway Company will not operate a train across the County road crossings between sunset Jnd sunrise (Iocal time) except in an emergency. 8. In the event that automatic Signal protection is ordered necessary in the opinion of the Council of the County of Elgin, then the Railway Company will pay the total cost of such installation and shall undertake such installation within eight (8) months of written notice and thereafter proceed expeditiously with the completion of such work. 9. Upon removal of the rails, the Railway Company will restore the affected County road crossings to conform with the existing Canaoian National Railway standards policy and procedures applicable under the same circumstances. " ., - 4 - " ~ 10. The Agreement is terminable: (a) At the option of the_ County immediately upon thecomrnencement or happening of any occurrence connected with the insolvency, receivership, or bankruptcy of the Railway Company. 11. The parties specifically agree that they may at any time and from time to time negotiate the variation of the terms of this agreement including the extension of the term of this agreement and such variation shall be binding upon the parties if the agreement is reached in writing duly executed by the parties under corporate seal. 12. No right or obligation under this agreement shall be assigned by the Railway Company in whole or in part without the written consent, such consent by the County shall not be unreasonably withheld. WITNESS the Corporate Seal of THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN and PORT STANLEY TERMINAL RAIL INCORPORATED, duly attested by the hands of their proper signing officers in that behalf. PORT STANLEY TERMINAL RAIL INCORPORATED Per: Per: THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN Per: Per: ,\ -. PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD SYSTEM 1. Aldborougll-Dullwjctl Towllline between ROild'U2 and Road #9 meets Criterid 11911. Reduced cell size (north side) Criteria "4" leads over HighwdY 11401 and Thames River (new bridge across river at Walkers. 5 ton )imit On Tates Bridge). (Gravel) DISTANCE CORRECTIONS DRAFT #2 OCTOBER 3. 1986 4.8 Km 2. Southwold road between Concession II and Concession I II between Hoad #14 and ROdQ #20 meets Cri teria IIgll. Reduced ceJ I size (east- west) presently no east-west Co~nty road between Highway #2 dnd Highway #3. Traffic will no longer use Highway #401 as qn alternative because of heavy volume of trucks. Road will also act as westerly extension of County roads proposed in Yarmouth and South Dorchester lowlISlpps (one half paved). 6.9 Krn 3. Smoke Road from Highway 113 to Middlemarch. extension of Road #45 to Higllway H3. Meets Criteria 113" services Cargi II grain elevators main road for south Southwold. Yarmouth and Md I all i de lownsll i ps. Meets Criteria "gII, reduced cell size (north- south). . (All paved.) 4. Southwold Townline from Hi9hwa~ #4 to St. Thomas Sanitary Collection Regional disposql site. Meets Criteria 11311. (All paved.) (I/2 of 5.6 Km) 2.8 Km 4.3 Km 5. Golf Club road and extension for Highway #4 to Road #20. Meets Criteria "4" (crossing Kettle Creek), large concentration of people west of Highway #3 and at Union, Road H20 (arena, school). Considerable demand. Paved 1.9 KIll - Gravel 1.7 Kill 3.6 km' 6. Southdale, Highway #4 to Road #22 Meets Criteria 11811, Urban arterial extension Paved. 2.1 Km 7. Extension of Road #56 (Elm Street) from Road '28 to Road #36. Meets Criteria IIB". Urban arter~al extension (Elm Street). Paved 0.4 Km - Rest Gravel. (1985 A.A.D.T. east of Road #28 - 550 V.Pd.) 4.3 Km PROPOSEO ADD IT IONS TO THE COUNTY .OF ELGIN ROAD SYSTEM P^GE 2. 8. Ext~nsion of Road #48 from Higl1wuy #73 to Road #25. Meets Criteria "9" (Reduced). Meets Criteria "4" (no crossing of Kettle Creek for 2 miles north of Road #52). Provides east-west service for traffic from Oxford County, Culloden Road. Brownsville. Significant east-west traffic (to Ford Plant and Wellington Road, etc.). Approximately.40% paved. 19.9 Km 9. Extension of Road "35 between Road #52 and Hi ghway #3. Meets Cr iter i a "4" Catf ish Creek (Rogers Side Road unusable). Meets Criteria "1" Orwell to County Road #52. Meets Criteria "9" Cell size (north-south). Paved 0.4 Km - Rest Gravel 4.5 Km 10. Extension of Road #52 easterly. Meets Criteria "I" Springfield to Tlllsonburg. Meets Criteria 1/9" reduced cell size (east-west). 4.5 Km east of Springfield paved, rest gravel. Entirety in Elgin - 5.5 Km. Townline - 10.8 Km. (Net) 10.6 Km 11. Extension of Road "46 from Highway #3 to Road #38. Meets Criteria "4" (no other north-south road over Otter Creek). Meets Criteria "9" Reduced cell size (north-south). Meets Criteria "I" Straffordville. Port Burwell to Ingersoll. 4.0 Km 12. Extension of Road #55 from Road #45 to Highway #3. Meets Criteria "9" Reduced north-south cell size. Ministry of TransporLalion and Communications approval now received for portion between Road #45 and Road #38. Traffic desire line changed. Road #3B to Road #55 now surface treated. Townline 13.2 Km (Net) 6.85 ~n'l 13. Aylmer By-Pass north-east Quadrant. Meets Criteria "4". No crossing of Catfish Creek now. All traffic must go through main intersection. Traffic desires line into north-east Quadrant and north-west quadrant. No existing road. PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD SYSTEM PAGE 3. 14. (Additions suggested by both the Regional and Head Office Ministry of Transportation and Communications Officials if the above roads arc assumed. This will make a continuous road and linkup (a) #4 to #8 and (b) #2 to #4.) (a) Road between Concession IAI and IB'I SouLl1wolJluwll~llip (pilveJ) dlld tile Westminster-Southwold Townline for 2 kilometers east of Highway #4 (gravel). Total distance (Townline 50%). 4.05 (b) Road between Concession II and III from Road #19 to Delaware-Southwold Townline (gravel). Z.9 Km TOTAL ADDITIONS 81.6 Km !"\ 1\ PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD SYSTEM PAGE 3. 14. (Additions suggested by both the Regional and Head Office Ministry of Transportation and Communications Officials if the above roads are assumed. This will make a continuous road and 1 i nkup (a) 114 to 118 amI (l.J) 112 to 114.) (a) Road between Concession lA' and 181. SOULllwulJluww,llip (pdVl~J) dlld tile Westminster-Sou1.l1wold Townline for 2 kilometers east of Highway #4 (gravel). Total distance (Townline 50%). (b) Road between Concession II and III from Road 1119 to Delaware-Southwold Townline 4.05 (gravel). 2.9 Km TOTAL ADDITIONS Bl.6 Km .' \ ,\ COU"I~ OF eLGl" RO~O CO~~lllee ~ OC10BER SESS10N 1986 10 l~e ~~ROe" ~"O ~e~BeRS OF l~e COU"I~ OF eLGl" COU"ClL ~OUR RO~O CO~~lllee RePOR1S ~S FOLLO~S: 1. lhe ~arden, Chairman and engineer ha~e been authOrized to ?Ursue a joint ?ro?osal to the ~inistrY of lranS?ortatiOn and communicatiOns in~ol~ing the . f M'AA1ese~ and elgin and the London and countleS 0 r\lUU st. lhomas Suburban Road commissions concerning the . d n t to ioin London and ~ighbUry_~ubrey-Radl0 Roa ~oU e J st. 1\\omas. ~ meeting ~as held ~ith the ~onourable cd Fulton, ~inister of lranS?ortatiOn and communicatiOns on se?tember 29th at ~hich the com?letiOn of the road linK and methods of financing the ~orK ~ere diSCUssed.. 2. Recent ~et ~eather had delayed all County road and bridge construction. ~s a result no granular base ~orK ~ill be attem?ted on Road #22 tFair~ie~ ~~enue) thiS year. Placement of as?halt ?a~ement on Road #45 bet~een Road #40 and ~igh~aY #73 is e~?ected to start the ~eeK of october 20. 3. ~almsleY Bros. Limited contract for as?halt ?a~ing on Road #13 has been e~tended to a??ro~imatelY 1.0 to 1.5 t of the ~ill"'S Side Road. Because of the Kilometers ~es \I J delay on Road #45 ~orK is under~aY on Road #13. 4. "e~ e~?ansion joints are being ?laced to re?lace the O?en finger joints on the ~ards~ille Bridge. It is hO?ed to ha~e the County of ~iddlese~ su?er~ise a ?ainting contract on the bridge ne~t year. ~E RECOtJ\tJ\ENO: 1. lhat a by-la~ be ?assed to amend County of elgin By-La~ _. ~~ for the regulation of traffic bY: COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT - OCTOBER SESSION 1986 PAGE 2. 1. (a) Amending Schedule 'AI, Section 2, Subsection (0) to read: County Road #8 from a point 79.7 metres north of the north limit of Mary Street northerly for 32.4 metres on the west side of County Road #8. This regulation will correspond to changes in the commercial section of the Village of Dutton. (b) Adding Section 3, being the designation of crosswalk areas. (Width of all crosswalks to be 2 metres.) 1. On Road #3 in the Village of Rodney. (i) Northerly limit of crosswalk coincides with the north limit of Clark Street. (ii) Northerly limit of crosswalk is 4.5 metres north of the north limit of Victoria Street. (iii) Northerly limit of crosswalk coincides with the southerly limit of Moriah Street. (iv) Southerly limit of crosswalk is 2 metres north of the north limit of Harper Street. (v) Southerly limit of crosswalk coincides with the south limit of Queen Street. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED CHAIRMAN . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT SEPTEMBER SESSION , 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Walmsley Bros. Limited have completed their asphalt resurfacing portion of their contracts with the County of Elgin and have completed work on: (a) County Road #40 between Mount Salem and County Road #42. (b) County ~oad #36 between Sparta and County Road #24 and a portion of County Road #24 easterly toward Port Bruce. (c) County Road #14 between County Road #13and the Middlemiss Bridge (other than Highway #401). (d) A portion of County Road #13 from County Road #14 westerly to approximately 1/2 kilometer east of the Willey's Side Road. 2. Two precast concrete culverts have been installed on Wellington Road between St. George Street and Highway #3 CSt. Thomas By-Pass) replacing two pipe arch steel culverts. 3. A concrete box culvert is presently being constructed on County Road #29 near Wellington Road. 4. Construction work is underway on County Road #45 between Highway #73 and County Road #40. A portion of this road will be paved in October. 5. The County of Middlesex has approved the hiring of Golder Associates for soils tests at the Tates Bridge to ascertain whether or not the north pier is stable. This information will be required before any major funds can be spent on the bridge. (The bridge floor is in poor condition and should be replaced within the next 2 'or 3 y~ars.) '....., , \' I\Gt.. 2. COU"1~ Of ELGI" RO~O CO~~111EE SECO"O REPOR1 _ SEP1E~BER SESSION 1986 6. ~ draft of a ~ro~osed agreement bet~een tne port stanley 1erroinal Rail Incor~orated and tne county of Elgin is . being studied bY county Road committee members. 7. Im~ro'lements na'le been com~leted at the intersection of county Road ~28 ~centennial ~'1enue) and ~ign~aY ~3 ~itn tnet~O ~ro~erty o~ners snare ~$5,OOO eacn) na'ling been recei~ed. 1nis ~orK fulfills tne agreement bet~een tne 1985 county council and tne ~ro~erty o~ners. 8. 1ne ~inistrY of 1ransportatiOn and communicatiOns nas been requested to pro'lide additional funding for tne completion of county Road ~30 from tne road allo~ance . . vII and concesSion ~III, ~armoutn bet~een concesS1on ^ 1o~nsni~ to tne ~iddlese~ county boundary for tne com~letion of tne Radio-~ignbUrY Road LinK. ~ meeting ~itn tne ~inister of 1rans~ortatiOn and communications ~ill be neld on se~tember 29tn ~itn ~arden purcell and cnairman ste~art attending. 9. 1ne Canadian 1ransport commission naS been ad'lised tnat tne county is agreeable to tne installatiOn of flasning lignt signalS at tne Canadian "atiOnal Rail~aY crossing on county Road ~32 ~police college Road). 1ne County nas agreed to ~aY to~ard tne constructiOn and maintenance of tne crossing ~rotection in tne usual ~ercentage as ordered bY tne Board. 1ne present ~i9-~ag ~rotection is considered obsolete bY tne Canadian "ational Rail~aY and tne Canadian 1ransport \0. commission. Road Committee nas decided to ~roceed ~itn engineering and land purcnase for future constructiOn on '1arioUS County roads in tne follo~ing order ~after completion of ~orK under~aY or programmed): ~a) County Road ~2 from tne EcKer Orain to ~ldborOugn 1o~nline in Dun~icn 1o~nsni~. f"__,l..!.~..-..J ?J\Gc '3. CQU~I~ Qr ELG1~ RQ~O CQ~~lIIEE SECQ~O REPQRl _ SEP1E~aER SESSIQ~ 19B6 county Road ~43 from concesslons 11 and 111 to concesslons 1\1 and \I, ~alahlde lo\'lnshi? belng the aaynam-~alahlde 10\'lnHne north and south of calton. lc) county Road ~4 from the ~ent 10\'lnllne easterlY to 10. ,b) Rodney. ld) county Road ~B from the Canadlan ~atlonal Rail\'lay tracKs to ~arY street ln the \llllage of outton. constfUction \'lorK ?NsentlY ?lanned and under\'laY includes: la) county Road ~22 lralrvle\'l ~venue) from county Road ~45 to county Road ~27. lb) countY Road ~45 from ~lgh\'laY ~73 to county Road iA-O. lc) county Road ~26 lSt. George street) from tM st. lhomas clty llmlts to ~elllngton Road including the channellzatlon at st. George street and crescent ~venue lLynhurst) ln conjunctlon \'llth sanltarY se\'ler installatiOn · A' ted ln future years ~S?halt resurfaclng has been ues1gna as fo l\O'l4s: la) com?letlon of county Road ~l3 \'lesterly.to the curb and gutter sectlon ln the \llllage of outton. R d #Q at the entrance to pearce parK. l b ) county oa 0 lc) county Road ~42 from county Road ~4Q to the \llllage of port auf\'le \l. lhe Englneer has been lnstructed after meeting \'llth the ~lnlstry of lranS?ortatlon and communlcatlons offlclalS to ?resent to Commlttee recommendatlOns for a deslrable county road System uslng the ~lnlstrY of lranS?ortatlon and communlcatlons deslrable road criteria. lhere \'ll\l be de letlons ffOm tJM ?resent System as \'lell as adqltlons. lhe recommendatlOns \'llll be dlsCussed at fu\ure Road committee meetlngs and flnal recommendatiOns maqe to county councll. \\. \2. p~Gt. 4. COU"1~ of ElG1" RO~O CO~111EE SECO"O REPOR1 ~ SEP1E~BER SESS10" 1986 VlE RECOMV\ENO: 1. 1nat a by~laW be passed to amend county of Elgin By-laW i84~23 for tne regulation of traffiC bY adding tne follO'fling: ta) county Road i40 from tne soutn limit of Broadway street in tne ~illage of springfield, soutnerlY 544 metres on tne west side of county Road i40. tb) county Road i40 from tne soutn limit of Broadway street in tne ~illage of springfield soutnerlY 43 metres on tne east side of county Road i40. ~lL Or ~~lC~ lS RESPEC1rUll~ SUB~111EO -------- CH"l RM"N COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT SEPTEMBER SESSION 19B6 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: WE RECOMMEND: 1. That a by-law be passed to expropriate land in the Township of Yarmouth for the improvement of County Road #26 between the City of St. Thomas to County Road #25 which is more particularly described as follows: In the Township of Yarmouth in the County of Elgin being Part of Lot I, Block 'G~ and Part of Lots 2 and 3, Block lEI, Registered Plan #28 and be4ng more particularly described as Part #1 and Part #2 on a plan deposited in the Registry Office for the Registry Division of Elgin (No. 11) as lIR-2923. Our Solicitor has advised us to acquire the interests of all parties including the City of St. Thomas to facilitate the proper title to this portion of Cowan Park so that County Road #26 may be diverted and used for a right-of-way for proposed sanitary sewer installations in the Lynhurst and St. George Street area. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED CHAIRMAN ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 28, 1986 PAGE 1. THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on Thursday, August 28, 1986 at 9:30 a.m. All members were present except Reeve Martyn and Reeve Bradfield. Also present was Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the Engineer. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF AUGUST 7, 1986 BE APPROVED. CARRIED. II THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE FOLLOWING: 1. That the draft agreement with the Port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated was being typed and after being checked would be forwarded to Committee Members for their comments. 2. That the County of Middlesex had not yet dealt with the County's request for the approval of soils testing work at the Tates Bridge. It appeared that the movements at the Tates Bridge had diminished over the past month. 3. The Engineer had met with Don Husson, County Engineer of Middlesex at the Middlemiss Bridge and Mr. Husson had agreed that continuing repairs were necessary. The County of Middlesex would be agreeable to establishing alignment for a new bridge in 1986 and agreeable to appointing a consultant to prepare preliminary plans, soils tests for preliminary approvals in 1987, and completion of final plans in late 1987 or 1988, so that tenders could be called for a new bridge when it appeared that the old bridge would require major repairs to the deck or the abutment. The County of Middlesex would proceed with aerial photography and contour plans as soon as possible. An agreement on the alignment should be concluded by Christmas. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications Research Branch was presently taking stress measurements on the steel truss and approach span and information should be available within the month. Mr. Husson felt that if the deck continued to deteriorate it would not be an undue h~rdship to ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 28, 1986 PAGE 2. Middle~ex resi~ents to lower the weight limit to 10 tonnes as it appears most truck traffic using the bridge originated on Highway #401 west of County Road #14 and was bound for the Strathroy area. 4. That he had contacted Mayor Janet Golding of the City of St. Thomas with regard to the Radio-Hubrey Road extension. The Mayor had promised to support the County's proposal and to do what she could from a political standpoint. A further letter had been sent to Mr. Gerald Browning, Regional Director of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications stating Elgin County's position and asking for increased funding. The County of Middlesex Engineer had agreed to present the matter to Mr. Browning again as soon as possible as well. 5. The reference plans for the property at Cowan Park were nearly completed and that Mr. Hennessey was contacting the City of St. Thomas with regard to the Countyls plans to expropriate the right, title and interest in the property and that the expropriation by County Council should be done as soon as possible. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL WHEREAS FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE IMPROVEMENT OF COUNTY ROAD #26 FROM THE CITY OF ST. THOMAS TO THE EAST LIMIT OF COUNTY ROAD #25, ALL IN THE TOWNSHIP OF YARMOUTH IT IS EXPEDIENT TO EXPROPRIATE ALL RIGHTS, TITLE AND INTEREST IN THE LANDS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: IN THE TOWNSHIP OF YARMOUTH IN THE COUNTY OF ELGIN BEING PART OF LOT 1, BLOCK 'G1 AND PART OF LOTS 2 AND 3 BLOCK 'E' REGISTERED PLAN 28 AND BEING ~'" MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS PART #1 AND PART #2 ON A PLAN DEPOSITED IN THE REGISTRY OFFICE FOR THE REGISTRY DIVISION OF ELGIN (NO. 11) AS IIR THE ROAD COMMITTEE FOR THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN THEREFORE REQUESTS THAT THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN DO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ACQUIRE THE SAID LANDS BY EXPROPRIATION. CARRIED.II 6. That a set of used scales had been purchased from Fred Nelson and Sons Limited from his pit near Lakefield Ontario and Mr. Nelson would deliver these to the County Garage. The scales appeared to be in near perfect condition. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 28, 1986 PAGE 3. "MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT WE PURCHASE FROM FRED NELSON AND SONS LIMITED, KEENE, ONTARIO ONE (1) SET OF USED 50 TON CANADIAN SCALES WITH 10 FOOT X 35 FOOT STEEL DECK AND SCALE HOUSE AT .$8,000.00 PLUS PROVINCIAL SALES TAX, F.O.B. WHITE STATION GARAGE. CARRIED." 7. That a used truck had finally been located and the purchase price was in excess of the Engineer's original estimate. Good used trucks were extremely difficult to find due to the present large demand with very few trucks being sold from 1979 to 1981 because of the economic depression at that time. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE PURCHASE A USED 1979 TANDEM DUMP TRUCK, COMPLETE WITH BOX, MODEL LTS 9000, SERIAL NO. Y902VFA6338 FROM RAYMOND JACOBS, WELLSELEY, ONTARIO FOR $32,500 (TRUCK TO BE CERTIFIED FOR VEHICULAR REGISTRATION). CARRIED." 8. That he had met with Reeve Black of the Village of Rodney and they had reviewed the private drive entrances and a cost sharing arrangement had been suggested for one entrance that required work. It was suggested that major curb and gutter work be postponed until 1987 inasmuch as the Village of West Lorne had been advised that there were no funds available for 1986. Minor curb repairs in the area of the fire damage would have to be made this year and would be paid for by the County at $8.00 per lineal foot (total cost less than $1,000). The Village of Rodney Council would re-examine their requests for parking ~, restrictions and crosswalk zones and forward them as soon as possible. THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Most expenditures appeared to be within budget although no great savings had been made on any particular category. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 28, 1986 PAGE 4. 2. Alex Newbigging Limited had quoted $4.25 per ton for thle supply and placement of crushed gravel on Road #37 between the Village of Belmont and Highway #73 at $4.25 per ton; to be applied in October. The offer had been accepted. ($4.00 per ton for the supply and application of crushed gravel between Highway #73 and the Oxford County Line this Spring.) 3. Paving was continuing on Road #14 and Road #13 and it was hoped that the quantity savings on Road #36 and Road #40 would allow work to be done to nearly the Willey's Side Road on Road #13. 4. The construction of the concrete box culvert on Road #29 (McBains) was underway. 5. Tree cutting on the Sparta Pit Road was continuing as time permitted. 6. Shouldering on Road #40 would be completed early next week but trimming and seeding remained. 7. Work at the Orchard-Carroll Drain in Shedden had been completed as had work at the crossings of the Smith-Bailey Drain on Elm Street (Road #56) and Centennial Avenue (Road #28). 8. Work was underway at the intersection of Highway #3 and Road #28 with the $5,000 certified cheques having been received from both participants in the project. Curb and gutter had been completed on the west side and was underway on the east side. 9. The Port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated employees had raised the rail on Road #45 and County employees had asphalted in the crossing. 10. The Canadian National Railway would raise rails on Road #25 (Wellington Road) within the week. 11. Pavement marking was continuing with edge marking nearly completed. 12. Grass cutting was continuing. 13. Repairs had been completed to the deck of the Middlemiss Bridge. 14. The floor stringers on the Harrietsville Bridge on Road #37 had been reinforced. 15. The bailey bridge had been erected for the Township of Yarmouth at the Pleasant Valley site. 16. Considerable work on the expansion joints of the Wardsvil1e Bridge, St. George Street Bridge and Eden Bridge remained to be done. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 28, 1986 PAGE 5. 17. Extensive work would be required on the frame of Truck #83 (1978 Mack, 425,000 kilometers). Reinforcements to the frames on Truck #84, Truck #89, Truck #90 and Truck #88 would also be required. Enginebearings would be done on Truck #89 and Truck #90 as well as the fuel pump and injectors. Both trucks had over 330,000 kilometers on them and the motorQ, had not been touched. The cab on Truck #95 (Ford 9000) would be required as well as some body work this Fall. Work on the Mack trucks would be done by Carrier Mack Limited. The hoist on Truck #88 would also have to be replaced with a new hoist costing $2,400; the old hoist would be rebuilt as a spare (work to be done by the County). It appeared that one truck would be out of operation from the 1st of September to snowplowing time to have required maintenance work done. Very little maintenance work had been done on trucks in the last year other than the motor in Truck #84. Although a new motor for Truck #88 had been budgeted for in 1986 it appeared that even though there were 340,000 kilometers on it a new motor would not be required. "MOVED BY: R. F PURCELL SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS BE PASSED: PAYLIST NUMBER 36 AMOUNTING TO $70,959.41 PAYLIST NUMBER 37 AMOUNTING TO $112,059.39 PAYLIST NUMBER 38 AMOUNTING TO $64,919.13 PAYLIST NUMBER 39 AMOUNTING TO $225,894.51 --', CARRIED. II "MOVED BY: D. PEROV I CH SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO APPLY FOR INTERIM SUBSIDY FROM THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS AND THE CHAIRMAN BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE APPLICATION FORM. CARRIED. II ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 28, 1986 PAGE 6. CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Mr. Koscis regarding his development on Road #23. The Engineer had replied to him sugggesting that he approach the Township of Yarmouth to find out their requirements before submitting his final plans for County approval. 2. From the Town of Aylmer with annexation of property near Elk Street. 3. From the Township of Bayham with zoning by-laws, none of which were on County roads. 4. From the Town of Aylmer with variations from their zoning by-law, none of which were on County roads. 5. From the Township of Southwold stating that they had approved the variation for a building for Mr. Pritchard at a distance of 20 feet from the property line rather than the 12 feet which he had requested and it be contingent on the proper drainage of his lot. 6. From the Township of Malahide including correspondence from the Catfish Creek Conservation Authority asking that the County of Elgin clean the sandbar under the Glencolin Bridge on Road #40. After discussion. The Committee decided to inspect the bridge on their Fall road inspection as it had been noted that it had been cleaned out a number of times and that the sandbar reappeared within six months after having been removed. The Engineer was instructed to advise the Township of Malahide of the Committee's reluctance to do any work at this time. The Engineer noted that he had not received any further notice with regard to parking zones or towaway zones from any municipality. Cllanges in the by-law would have to be left in abeyance until such time as other municipalities replied. ~" Correspondence was read from the Regional Municipality of Haldimand-Norfolk stating that as part of their continuing road programme to update their systems to a desirable County road system a number of changes in the road system were being made and requesting that the County of Elgin consider adding to their road system the Houghton-Bayham Townline between Road #38 and Road #45 as an extension to the present Road #55 which presently extended Road #42 to Road #45. 51. 1\-10Vlf>5, 0l'l1 /l.R 10 I\UGUSl 28, 1986 ?I\GE 7. "lJ\O'JED \j'{: 5ECOl'lOEO Bi: E. l'lEUK/l.VIVI 1\-1/l. I lAE /l.OJOURl'l 10 lAEOl'lE50/l. i, OC10BE R 8, 1986 /l. I 9: 30 /l.. VI. CI\RR 1 ED. " 1\. K. FORD C\-\I\ 1 RlJ\I\~ 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO ~UGU51 7, 1986 p~GE 1. lHE COUN1~ OF ELGIN RO~O COMMIllEE met at the Municipal Building, 450 sunset Orive, lhursday, ~ugust 7, 1986 at 9:30 a.m. ~ll members were present. ~lso present was Mr. JaCK Wice, Oistrict MuniCipal Engineer of the Ministry of lransportation and communicatiOns, the Engineer and the ~ssistant Engineer. "MO~EO B~: ~. K. FORO SECONOEO B~: E. NEUKAMM lH~1 lHE MINU1ES OF lHE MEEllNGS OF JUNE 10 ~NO JUL~ 2, 1986 BE ~PPRO\lED. C~RRl ED. \I lHE ENGINEER REPOR1EO AS FOLLOWS: 1. lhat the rezoning of the sparta Pit had at long last been completed and a Ministry of Natural ResOurces, Pits and Quarries License would be issued very shortlY. 2. lhat an agreement had been reached with the port stanley lerminal Rail Incorporated for the improvement of the crossing on Road #45. It had been agreed that the port Stanley lerminal Rail Incorporated would lift the rails and ties 1 1/2" on the low side and 1/2" on the high side and the County would cut bacK and replace the asphalt. lhe County would also supplY a load of stone so that the port stanley lerminal Rail could balast the tracKS. correspondence had been received from the port stanley lerminal Rail Incorporated in which they indicated that they felt that an agreement was not necessary with the County of Elgin as all the pertinent points were contained in the First Municipal Board order. committee members had some doubt as to whether or not the ontario Municipal Board had the legal right to allow the port Stanley lerminal Rail Incorporated to use county road crossings as they were not a railway company. lhe committee felt than an agreement with the port StanleY lerminal Rail Incorporated would protect all parties and inasmuch as the port stanley lerminal Rail Incorporated did not wish to provide an agreement the committee reQu~sted the Engineer to prepare a draft agreement and forward it to members for their consideration. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 7, 1986 PAGE 2. 3. The District Office of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications had agreed to recommend to Head Office that funding be provided for soils tests at the Tates Bridge in 1987 under Section 53 of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act (this funding provides for the construction of Townline bridges by Counties). 4. That extensive repairs would again be required on the floor of the Middlemiss Bridge. Some steel stringers on the south approach span had broken loose from the main floor beams and would have to be welded down. A hole full width of the deck and approximately 2" wide had broken through and the deck would have to be shored from the stringers underneath so that cold mix would not fallout. More holes could be expected due to heavy traffic in the future. 5. A reference plan for the Cowan Park property would be available by the 20th of August. Mr. Hennesseyls recommendations for the expropriation of outside interests in the property, other than the City of St. Thomas Park, would be available at the next meeting so that a recommendation could be made to the September meeting of County Council. 6. A meeting with Mr. G. R. Browning, Regional Director of the Minjstry of Transportation and Communications and Mr. Don Husson, County Engineer, County of Middlesex had been held with regard to road links between St. Thomas and London with particular emphasis on the Hubrey-Radio Road Link. Mr. Browning suggested that the best method of improving the link would be to petition the Ministry to provide extra funding for this link; as it appeared that it would be many years before the Province could if ever, build the Hubrey-Highbury Road as a Provincial Highway, and if they did would likE~ly request that Highway #74 be reverted to the County prior to or just after the construction of this link. A considerable increase in traffic had occurred in the past year. -,~ The Committee felt that immediate action should be taken to have the Hubrey-Radio Link built as soon as possible to relieve a portion of this traffic. The Engineer was instructed to make representation to the Ministry for extra funding and discuss the matter with the Mayor of St. Thomas and the County of Middlesex. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 7, 1986 PAGE 3. 7. Most projects were within budget, although there was not great savings on any project other than some on asphalt resurfacing work due to the decrease in the price of asphalt cement. It was expected that enough money could be saved on all resurfacing work to extend the work on Road #13 to 1 kilometer west of the Cowal Side Road. There would be no saving for the culvert replacements on Wellington Road and Road #29. Municipal drain assessments for the year would be closer to $170,000 than to the $150,000 estimated and sufficient funds would have to be committed to pay these drainage invoices as received. Little if any would be saved on construction estimates with work on Road #45 from Road #40 to approximately 1/2 kilometer west of the Luton intersection. This would cover the area of the Taylor Municipal Drain which would be installed as soon as possible. New assessment figures from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs indicated that the total County assessment had increased by less than 3/4 of 1% in the past year. Factors for urban areas had decreased and factors for rural areas had increased other than the Township of Malahide which remained constant and the Township of Yarmouth which had decreased. The urban areas would pay a higher percentage to the County rate in the future (30 years ago the urbans paid nearly 25% of the total County rate whereas presently they are paying less than 20%). 8. That the County Road Committee's letter to the Township of Aldborough with regard to their Official Plan had received considerable press in West Elgin. The Assistant Engineer showed slides of the installation of the concrete culverts on Wellington Road. THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Good progress was being made on grass cutting with a little work remaining in South-Yarmouth Township and Bayham Township for the first cut. The Committee requested a second cut as soon as possible, particularly in the areas of severe wild carrot infestation. 2. A crew would assist the Township of Yarmouth in erecting a bailey bridge at Pleasant Valley over the Catfish Creek beginning next week. 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO ~UGU51 7, 1986 p~GE [\. ~ 3. Measurements were being taKen at the Patterson Culvert to ascertain whether or not the radius of the top arch of the culvert had increased beyond the minimum allowable and would have to be reinforced. 4. Centre line marKing had been completed on all roads other than thOSe roads that had been slated for construction and white edge marKing was underway. The compressor motor had to be rebuilt in July. 5. WorK was nearlY completed at the orchard-carroll Drain on Road #20 and on Road #56 and Road #28 at the smith-Bailey Drain crossings. 6. worK would be undertaKen shortlY on Road #28 at Highway #3 at the Cen-Tal and Wiebenga properties, both having made $5,000 contributions in 1985 toward this worK. 7. Culvert installation on Road #45 between Luton and Road #40 would start as soon as possible. 8. Shouldering was continuing on Road #40 south of Mount Salem. 9. ~rrangements had been made with the Ford Motor Company to obtain top soil from their pile at Talbotville (3,000 or 4,000 yards would be trucKed to White Station for future use). 10. It was expected that paving would start on Road #14 and Road #13 around the 20th of ~Ugust. 11. surface treatment worK including worK for Chatham TownshiP and the ~illage of port Burwell had been completed. 12. The MccreadY Drain crossing on Road #28 had been completed and the TownshiP of Yarmouth billed. 13. CleanuP worK was nearlY completed on Wellington Road at the neW culverts. 14. The concrete culvert on Road #29 would be started approximatelY ~ugust 25th. 15. The remainder of the gravel from the front of the Sparta Pit was being trucKed to the baCK so that it could be crushed. 16. Salt brine worK had been completed for the second time in East Elgin and would be done as necessary in West Elgin. 17. ~ used bomag roller had been purchased for $2,500 to alleviate the need for a rental as it was being used on a continuoUs basis (price of a neW roller $15,000). 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO ~UGU51 7, 1986 P ~GE 5. 19. Needs study worK had been completed other than railroad inventory, which was still underway as neW pictures would have to be taKen of all crossingS. A programme of sign replacement would be undertaKen shortlY, with traffic sign Quotations having been requested from 5 companies. lhese signS would m~e a large improv~ent in the Quality of the signing on county roads; ~ith worK starting as soon as possible. 18. 20. Pipe arch culvert inspection had been completed in stormont, Dundas and Glengarry counties for the Ministry of lransportation and communications and a report forwarded. Some of their culverts were in very seriouS condition. It is expected that several meetings would be held in early september with the Ministry of lransportation and communications and a general policy formulated for the province as a result. 21. Golder Associates had completed soils tests, including soils boring at the Lindsey Hill Culvert in the lownshiP of Malahide. It was found that the material at thiS culvert was in a very loose state and was of a high silt content. "MO\JED B'l: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED B~: D. PERO~ICH lHAl lHE FOLLO~ING ACCOUN1S BE APPRO~ED FOR PA~MEN1: PA~LISl NUMBER 30 AMOUN1ING 10 $68,799.66 PA~LISl NUMBER 31 AMOUN1ING 10 $339,640.77 PA~LISl NUMBER 32 AMOUN1ING 10 $71,111.23 PA~LISl NUMBER 33 AMOUN1ING 10 $313,232.88 PA~LISl NUMBER 34 AMOUN1ING 10 $64,079.14 PA~LISl NUMBER 35 AMOUN1ING 10 $208,202.80 C~RRIEO." lhe Engineer was commended upon his Brief to the committee on LaKeshore Management and was instructed to place a coPY of the Brief in the Minutes. lhe committee hoped that a provincial policY on erosion, including the washouts from the land which was peculiar to the area East of port Burwell would be recommended bY the provincial committee. SI. 1\-10M/l.S, 01'l1 /l.R 10 l\UGUS1 7, 1986 pl\GE 6. lne committee diSCUssed tne letter from tne Long point Regional conservation /l.utnority. In vie~ of tne fact tnat tne conservation /l.utnority estimate of tne cost of protectiOn from tne ~illage of port Bur~ell easterlY past tne Little Otter creeK ~as over $460,000 and an Environmental /l.ssessment \-Iearing ~ould be reQuired, tne committee felt tnat tne entire matter snould be left in abeyance until tne provincial committee on Snoreline Management nad made tneir recommendatiOns to tne province and a provincial policY ~aS in place. lne committee felt tnat it ~ould be necessary to monitor tne area at tne culvert very closelY inasmucn as tne ~illo~ trees ~nicn are protecting tne otter creeK culvert nad nearlY been ~asned out in tne last storm and could be removed easilY bY tne ne)(t storm. lne Engineer ~as instructed to ~rite tne Long point Regional conservation /l.utnority stating tne Road committee's position on tne matter. correspondence from tne ontario Good Roads /l.sSociatiOn tnanKed Elgin county for nosting tne recent Grader scnool and tnanKed tne Engineer for nis comments on it. committee agreed tnat certificates of attendance to tne 4 county emplOyees snould be presented at county council. Ministry of lransportatiOn and communicatiOns ~itn notice of a seminar on "Oa nge rou s Goods" on /l.ugu st 13tn. 1M committee f e 1 t tne /l.s s i st ant Eng i nee r , superintendent and /l.ssistant superintendent (Keitn Player) snould attend tne seminar. /I. meeting nad been neld witn tne Canadian lransport commission regarding rail~aY protection on Road ~32 at tne Canadian l'latiOnal Rail~aY tracKs. lne present protectiOn ~as of tne ~i9-~ag variety. /l.ltnOugn tne lransport commission nad reQuested tnat tne County and conrail nave tne protectiOn replaced some years ago conrail nad postponed the matter until sucn time as the Canadian l'latiOnal Railway nad assumed the crossing. lne Canadian l'latiOnal Rail~aY are going to eliminate tneir double tracK at tnat crossing and use onlY tne south tracK as a throUgn tracK, tnUS flashing lights ~ould suffice. lne flashing lights would be paid for in the usual formula of the Board (BOard BO%, 51. 1HOMA5, ON1ARIO AUGU51 7, 1986 PAGE' 7 · the municipality 12 1/2% and the railroad 7 1/2%). The cost to the Cou~y was $6,000 or $7,000. The present wig-wag hung over the paved porti~ of the road and the Board officals were Quite surprised that they had not been damaged. "MO\]ED B'(: SECONDED B~: W. A. MART~N THAT WE AD~ISE THE CANADIAN TRANSPORT COMMISSION THAT THE COUNT~ Of ELGIN IS AGREEABLE TO THE INSTALLATION Of fLASHING LIGHT SIGNALS AT THE CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWA~ CROSSING ON COUNT~ ROAD #32 AND AGREE TO PA~ TOWARD THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE Of THE CROSSING PROTECTION AT THE USUAL PERCENTAGE AS ORDERED B~ THE BOARD. E. NEUKAMM CARRIED." CORRESPONDE NeE WAS AS fOLLOWS: 1. To the Canadian National Railway regarding the improvement of Road #40 and Road #8 crossings in springfield and Dutton. It was not liKely that the canadian National Railway would repair these crossings u~il they could remove the north rail at these crossingS. 2. The Environmental Assessment Board with a notice of the Lynhurst Sewage project Hearing on August 6th. Reeve Martyn stated that the Hearing was completed in 3 hours. 3. The Town of Aylmer with notices of variances from setbaCK by-lawS. 4. TownshiP of Bayham and TownShiP of AldborOugh with zoning by-law notices not on County roads. 5. A copy of a letter from Mr. George Leverton to Gerald smith appolOgizing for his picture appearing in the County newspapers with a caption stating that he had only 10 years service, where in actual fact he had 20 years service. THE MEETING ADJOURNED fOR LUNCH AF1ER LUNCH . . . REE\JE MARR ABSEN1 ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 7, 1986 PAGE 8. The proposed plan of subdivision for property on Road #23 owned by Mr. William Koscis near Port Stanley was discussed at some length. Approximately 15 lots were proposed near Hill and Emery Streets. The Committee agreed with the Township of Yarmouth that these lots should be by plan of subdivision with most lots fronting on Hill and Emery Streets rather than from the County road. The Committee had no objection to the extension of Emery Street onto the County road providing that all costs were paid by the subdivider. He would have to enter into an agreement with the County and place a bond to ensure that this work was done to specifications. A request from Ron Ferguson to purchase property at the cutoff corner of Lot 21, Concession VI, Yarmouth Township that was acquired lln 1952 by the County of Elgin for road widening was discussed. The property would amount to approximately 1/4 of an acre after allowing for road widening required at the present time plus a daylight corner. Mr. Ferguson would also have to purchase the unused road allowance between Lots 20 and 21 from the Township of Yarmouth. The Engineer was instructed to inform Mr. Ferguson that the County would sell the property for $2,000 per acre and Mr. Ferguson would be responsible for all legal costs including reference plans and preparation of a deed. Township of Aldborough requesting sign improvements at f~oad #3 at Lake Erie (New Glasgow). Reeve Perovich could not suggest any improvements in the present conditions as there was a steel guide rail across the road with a large checkerboard and New Glasgow was a 60 kilometer speed zone. Reeve Perovich asked that a "Stop Ahead Sign" be erected at Road #3 and Highway #3. (Note the sign has been in place for some time.) The application of Douglas and Fay Pritchard, for a minor variance for a reduction in front yard requirements for a new house, owners of part of Lot 44, North Talbot Road East, Township of Southwold with the propE~rty fronting on Road #16 at the Fingal Hill was discussed at some length. The Engineer was instructed to advise Mr. Pritchard and his solicitor 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO ~UGU51 7, 1986 P ~GE 9. Mr. Eitel, the 10~nshiP of south~old and the Kettle creek conservation ~uthority that the County ~ould in all likelihOod at some future time require all of the original lalbot Road road allo~ance so that improvements could be made to the fingal hill. lhis ~ould eliminate most of the green area that Mr. pritchard ~as noW using as front yard. lhe Engineer was also instructed to deposit a copy of this letter at the County Registry Office. lhe Engineer SUggested that a used tandem truck be purchased (estimated cost $25,000) to replace the Dodge tandem scrapped last Spring inasmuch as the present dump trucks would not be replaced for at least a year and another truck would be required for Winter sanding and 2 of the 5 County trucks used for sanding were not the most reliable. "MO\/ ED B'I: W . ~. M~R1'IN SECONDED B'I: R. f. PURCELL lH~1 lHE ENGINEER BE ~U1HORI2ED 10 PURCH~SE ~ USED I~NDEM lRUCK 10 BE USED ~S ~ 5~NDER/FlO~1 1RUCK. C~RRIED." lhe request of the \/illage of Rodney for no parking lones, crosswalks, replacement of curbing and improvement of driveWays ~as noted. lhe committee instructed the Engineer to di~uSS the matter further with Reeve Black noting that it was very late in the year to make a request for ~orK to be done in 1986. lhe request of the \/illage of West Lorne of June 27th for the replacement of curb and gutter waS diSCUssed at some length. lhe committee instructed the Engineer to advise the \/illage of West Lorne that inasmuch as manpower and funds for construction had been committed in March it was very difficult to reallocate theSe prioritieS and it was very unlikelY that the worK could be done this year unlesS manpower became available very late in the season for a very limited amount of work. lhe request would be held until1987. 51. 1HOM~5, ON1~RIO ~UGU51 7, 1986 p~GE 10. lhe county's parking by-law was discUssed at some length and the Engineer noted that the only replY to his letter on towaway zones was from the 10wn of ~ylmer stating that they did not wish any towaway zones in their municipality. lhe committee decided to leave the matter until the next meeting in the hopes that more replies would have been received. lhe Engineer recommended that the request of the ~illage of Springfield for a no-parking zone on Road #40 be recommended to County council. "MO\JED B'(: SECONDED B~: D. PERO~ICH lH~1 ~E RECOMMEND 10 COUN1~ COUNCIL lH~1 ~ B~-L~~ BE p~SSED 10 ~MEND B~-L~~ #B4-23 FOR lHE REGUL~110N OF lR~FFIC B~ ~DDING lHE FOLLO~ING: t~) COUN1~ RO~D #40 FROM lHE SOU1H LIMll OF BRO~D~~~ SIREEl IN lHE ~ILL~GE OF SPRINGFIELD, SOU1HERL~ 544 ME1RES ON lHE ~ESl SIDE OF COUN1~ RO~D #40. tB) COUN1~ RO~D #40 FROM lHE SOU1H LIMll OF BRO~D~~~ SIREEl IN lHE ~ILL~GE OF SPRINGFIELD SOU1HERL~ 43 ME1RES ON lHE E~SI SIDE OF COUN1~ RO~D #40. R. f. PURCELL C~RRIED." lhe Committee discUssed the attached reports on construction and resurfacing needs. Since the report had been written the Ministry of lransportation and communications had agreed to funding of the soilS tests at the lateS Bridge under Section 53 ttownline bridge supplementary) and the $B,OOO would not be required from the 19B7 construction Budget. ~fter some disCUssion the committee instructed the Engineer to continue discUssions with the County of Middlesex officials to trY to impress upon them the need for engineering work to be started immediatelY for the replacement of the Middlemiss Bridge. lhe committee felt that it was a waste of money to make deck repairs to the present bridge as it would bean ongoing and continual process with no improvement to the bridge. lhe committee also felt that major repairs would be required within 2 years. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO AUGUST 7, 1986 PAGE 11. The Engineer was instructed to have discussions with thE~ County of Middlesex and the officials of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the Mayor of St. Thomas to press for additional funding for the continuation of the Hubrey-Highbury Road Link. The Committee felt that there was very litte point in building only one section, but that all sections of the link be built as soon as possible to relieve the present congestion on Wellington Road as it appeared that a four lane road would be needed on Wellington Road within 5 years if no alternative route had been developed by that time. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE GRAVEL RESURFACE ROAD #37 BETWEEN THE EAST LIMIT OF THE VILLAGE OF BELMONT AND HIGHWAY #73 AND THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO OBTAIN A QUOTATION FROM ALEX NEWBIGGING LIMITED AND IF SATISFACTORY PROCEED WITH THE WORKIN OCTOBER 1986. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: W. A. MARTYN SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE MAKE A REQUEST TO THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF COUNTY ROAD #30 THROUGH CONCESSION XIII, TOWNSHIP OF YARMOUTH (RADIO-HUBREY ROAD LINK). CARRIED. II "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN THAT WE PROCEED WITH ENGINEERING AND LAND PURCHASE FOR FUTURE CONSTRUCTION ON COUNTY ROADS IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: (1) ROAD #2 FROM ECKER DRAIN TO ALDBOROUGH TOWNLINE (DUNWICH TOWNSHIP). (2) ROAD #43 FROM CONCESSIONS II AND III, MALAHIDE TOWNSHIP TO CONCESSIONS IV AND V, MALAHIDE TOWNSHIP (MALAHIDE AND BAY HAM TOWNSHIPS). (3) ROAD #4 FROM THE VILLAGE OF RODNEY TO THE KENT TOWNLINE (ALDBOROUGH TOWNSHIP). (4) ROAD #8 FROM THE CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY TRACKS TO MARY STREET IN THE VILLAGE OF DUTTON. CARRIED. II 51. IHO~~5, O~I~RIO P\UGUS1 7, 1986 ?P\GE 12. "MO\lEO B'{: 5ECO~OEO B~: O. PERO~lCH IH~1 IHE fOLLO~l~G RO~05 BE OE51G~~IEO fOR ~5PH~LI RE5URf~Cl~G l~ fUIURE ~E~R5: ll) COMPLEIE RO~O #13. l2) RO~O #3 PE~RCE p~RK E~IR~~CE. l3) RO~O #42 fROM RO~O #40 10 PORI BUR~ELL. p\. \Z. FORO CP\RRIEO." "MO\lEO B'{: E. NEU\ZP\MM 5ECO~OEO B~: ~. K. fORO IH~ I ~E ~OJOUR~ 10 IHUR50~ ~, ~UGU51 23, 1936 ~ I 9: 30 ~. M · CP\RRIEO." . f "<l~"" 1..1....... ,of. ''I.. : ". ~~ :':' .. I:; l.\'... . :...~, .'":.);.~~~~ ,rJ:p..i.1!!i.~--" .;&~ - .~....._. ROBERT G. MOORE. B. Sc.. P. ENG. Engineer and Road Superintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631.5880 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT BRIEF ON SHORELINE MANAGEMENT FOR PUBLIC MEETING . JULY 23, 1986 - PORT DOVER There is a need for a Provincial policy on shoreline management. In the past, shoreline protection has been handled on Ci crisis basis by the Provincial Government. After each stor~ and upon surveying the damage location, if public or ~unicipal outcry ~as sufficient, the Provincial Ministry of Municipal Affairs or some other Ministry has designed some sort of programme to meet that particular emergency or need. These programmes have var~ied over the years and have ranged from excellent to extremely poor. The costs to the municipalities and private individuals haVE~ also varied from nil to 100%. Projects have been supervised by the Ministries of Transportation and Communications, Natural Resources and Municipal Affairs, among others. In the past no one was certain of what kind of a programme or funding might be instituted after any particular storm, erosion or shoreline problem in any particular area on a long term basis. In many cases the clean up work was well underway without the municipality or individuals having any idea what kind of financing, if any, might be forthcoming. , , ., - 2 - There is a need for a Provincial policy on shoreline mangement. This policy should be explicit enough so that individuals and municipalities would know in what areas the Province will assist in protecting property, etc., from erosion, as well as the eventual extent of that protection and the help that will be given in interim between the policy being formulated and protection being in place in a given area. Undoubtedly the shoreline protection pOlicy would have a. number of different variations through nil protection, nominal protection to extremely effective protection, well engineered so that it would protect against all but the most catastrophic wave action and flooding. This Provincial poliCY should give a range (rate) of the subsidy monies available for each of these areas of protE~ction 'that might be expected by individuals and/or municipalities so that the benefits from a policy would be greatest. An individual would have to decide whether or not to improve his property or in the extreme, salvage what he could, as rapidly as possible, and leave the area as the cost of trying to protect his property may be many times the value of the property. The policy would also be advantageous to municipalities as they are owners of roads and other structures that also require maintenance and upgrading. If a muniCipality knew the Province's long range policy on shoreline management in a particular area, they could then decide whether m~jor improvements on the road or structure were warranted, or if only nQminal maintenance should be done with the ultimate intention of abandoning the municipal work to the Lake and providing the required municipal services in another location. - 3 - ,. ~reas that are going to be ~rotected minimallY should be designated under the Planning ~ct as Hazard lones and anyone that does any building. im~ro~ements. etc.. in thOSe areas should be made well aware. that they do so at their own riSK and that there ~ill be no pro~incial assistance to ~rotect them against any ty~e of laKeshore erosion. 1he ~olicY should state the res~onsibilitieS of the pro~ince. owners and the munici~alities tbe it local. county or Regional). We ha~e no doubt that it ~ill be difficult to formulate a ~oliCY on the munici~al le~el. It ~ill taKe the wisdom of solomon to decide which munici~ality should be in~ol~ed and be res~onsible for costs tif the ~olicy indicates that costs should be le~ied at the munici~al le~el); should it be the local munici~alitie~. the regionalized local munici~alitieS or the County tRegion). What distance a~aY from the shoreline should the benefit extend to and the owners of the ~ro~erty assist in ~aying toward the ~rotection? 1 wish yOU well with that ~uzzle. 1here is no doubt that a shoreline management ~olicY will be ~artiCularlY difficult to formulate. ~artiCularlY with ~arying needs around the pro~ince and the varying munici~al structures. We are also concerned that ~roblems in built u~ areas would taKe precedence o~er problems in rural areas. 1here are many buildingS. etc.. in jeopardY in areas which are not considered built up and a general poliCY should be formulated that will taKe their needs into account qS ~ell. \ #'. ,,, - 4 - POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD SYSTEM The County of Elgin must in the next few years make a major decision with regard to two of its County roads. If a Provincial policy on shoreline management and erosion was in place, County Council would be able to make these decisions, regarding the improvement of these roads based on this long range pOlicy. One road is County Road #24 from Port Bruce westerly (shown in Green on the map). T~e Province, through the Ministry of Transportation and Communications Development Road Programme in 1963 - 1964 paid 100% of the cost of relocating this road away from the Lake. Within the next 10 years a decision about repair of County Road #24, just west of Port Bruce will have to be made because of continual erosion from Lake Erie to the south ~nd from Catfish Creek to the north. If another crossing of Catfish Creek is required to sustain traffic to the Port Bruce area the cost will be several million dollars. It may well be that the entire road system east of County Road #36 would have to be revised at a cost of several million dollars more. We are also faced with shoreline erosion threatening County Road #42 east of Port Burwell (shown in Red on the map). We are now considering erosion protection at the Little Otter Creek Culvert (just east of Port Burwell). We are very concerned that this culvert and its approaches could be damaged in a storm and estimate the cost for its replacement at over $600,000. The Long Point Region Conservation Authority is presently investigating erosion protection and we attach a copy of our letter to the Authority (Appendix 'AI). 'l' ... - 5 - county Road #42 east of port Burwell to the Haldimand-NorfolK Regional Townline was relocated from the LaKe banK approximatelY 60 years ago because of laKeshore erosion. Past County Road committees have postPoned the needed rebuilding of the present road until the long range policy of the province toward shoreline management and erosion control is Known as active erosion is still occurring. ~ORELlNE lROSlON~ROM~ W~ ~ rather unique shoreline erosion is occurring on County Road #42, east of Po~ Burwell. sufficient ground w~er filterS thrOugh ~e sand layer to the silt-clay layer so that large erosion gullies are formed. Unless the sand is prevented from flowing with the water. bY some means of filtration and velocity reduction, the large gullY moves quite rapidlY inland. The concentration of water formed erodes the silt underlayer down to the LaKe level. These gullies occur on a continuing basis and we are never sure where the next one might start. sometimes it taKes a great deal of material to halt their progress to the point where vegetation control is possible. Pictures of these erosion gullies along the shoreline east of port Burwell are attached {APpendix 'B'). We would be pleased to elaborate further on any of tnese comments in this brief and loOK forward to seeing a comprehensive prQvincial poliCY on shoreline management in place in the near future. R. G. MOORE COUN1Y ENGINEER COUN1Y OF ELGIN ... 'II' APPENDIX 'A' -'n"~~'- ". I ,.'..'...., .~ '~'I' 'I:, :. '~Ji . j ".11(1 c. . ':riM... ~~,.. .~~~:. ROBERT G. MOORE. B. Sc.. P. ENG. EnuinoIH and Huad Supmintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 ._-t"' " Mr. James Oll~er~ General Manager Long Point Regional Conservation Authority P. O. Box 525 Simcoe, Ontario Dear Mr. Oliver: Re: Erosion, East of Port Burwell Elgin County Road #42 Further to our conversation of July 14th w.~ wish to' advise of our feelings on the control of Lake Erie erosion from Port Burwell easterly to the Norfolk-Haldimand Region Boundary. We have concerns regarding the safety of the culvert on the Little Otter Creek in Lot 14, Concession I, Bayham Township. Erosion protection easterly from the Village of Port Burwell limits to the east of the mouth of the Little Otter Creek to protect the structure and 'some of Mr. Vanderispaillie's property has been under continual' discussion for some years. Since the culvert has been placed a considerable amount of shoreline has eroded and has made the culvert more prone to damage from. major storms. It is difficult to estimate how much damage might occur to the culVert and to the approaches in a major storm. If the culvert and the approaches would be completely lost, the cost of replacement could easily be $600,000. County Road #42 east of Port Burwell 1s quIte close to the shoreline, a major portion of the road was relocated in 1927 and not only has the old road eroded into the Lake but also much of the area between the old road and-the present road. . . . . . 2 ... ,. .' ...," , Mr. James Oliver, General Manager Long Point Regional Conservation Authority Ju ly 18, 1986 Page 2. If we lost the culvert through storm damage the County would have to consider the practicality of a new road into Port Burwell from the east. We would probably consider the rebuilding of County Road #55 (being the townline road between Haldimand-Norfolk and Elgin) through Concession I, Bayham Township and the road between Concession I and Concession II, Bayham Township from the Haldimand-Norfolk County line to Highway #19. This is a total distance of about 8.7 kilometers and would probably cost between 2.5 and 3 million dollars without any work at the Little Otter Creek Bridge. Our estimate of costs to rebuild the present road between Lots 16 and 17 to the Norfolk County line (a distance of 5.3 kilometers) is 1.2 million dollars or less than half the alternative. It is very difficult to place a cost benefit ratio between lake erosion protection and replacement costs of a new road but we feel the first step woulQ beta protect the area from the Village of Port Burwell to east of the mouth of the Li ttle Otter Creek. There wi 11 be other areas of " the lakeshore that should be protected as time goes on and it would certainly be advantageous to protect these as well to el iminate the need for another road in the near future. The only real alternative to erosion protection would be the ultimate abandonment of all of County Road #42 east of Port Burwell and the lands and buildings between the County road and the lake and the replacement of this road with another between Concession I and Concession II, Bayham Township. This would put the need for lake protection off for many years and probably from a cos~ benefit ratio might be the advantageous thing to do. However if we give that much to "Mother Nature II whe're do we draw the line and say "We .will allow no more erolsion beyond th i s po i nt ". .' We would be glad to provide further information if you require it and look forward to your comments. Yours truly, RGM:kab . I~ J/ 1h-.1 . R. G. MOORE,' B: sf/I' P. ~fng. ENGINEER AND ROAD ~~PERINTENDENT COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1986 NEEDS STUDY REPORT AUGUST 1986 (A) HEADINGS USED FOR ROAD SECTIONS ARE AS FOllOWS: 1. Ministry of Transportation and Communications Section. (This section is not used by the County.) 2. County Road Number location. In both kilometers and miles. 3. AADT (Annual Average Daily Traffic Count) These are mostly 1985 figures or 1984 figures if they did not differ appreciatively from 1985. 4. CR (Condition Reading) Using the Ministry of Transportation and Communications guide lines a perfect road would be (100) and could go as low as ( 0 ) . (20) to (30) is a very poor road. 5. PR (Priority Rating) A numerical Ministry of Transportation and Communications equation using a combination of traffic count and condition rating. The higher the priority rating the greater the need for construction work (theoretically). A priority rating can go above (100). 6. CD (Critically Deficient) A "Now Need" construction needs is difficult to discern from "l to 5 Years" construction needs. "Now Base" costs are the same need as 1984 needst only a different cost base is used. (B) FINANCIAL AllOCATIONS The 1986 Needs (see attached) are approximately 106.7% over the 1985 Needs and the normal spending allocation of 107% of the 1986 spending allocation might be expected if the same rules are followed by the Ministry in 1987 as in 1986. ~ 2 - In 1986 an additional $101,000 (supplementary allocation) was given by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications. Between $300,000 to $350,000 will be required from the construction and asphalt resurfacing allocation (usually from the resurfacing allocation) to make up the shortfall in Ministry of Transporation and Communications' maintenance and overhead allocations. The 1987 budget totals will likely be approximately the same as 1986 budget. The Ministry's assessment figures for the County for 198? will vary slightly from (less than 1%) those used in 1986. In 1987 the total County assessment will rise very little from 1986 but the urbans will share a greater portion of it than in 1986. (C) CONSIDERATION OF COUNTY ROAD CONSTRUCTION/RESURFACING PROGRAMME The following are some considerations that the Road Committee should consider when deciding which roads to add to their construction or resurfacing programmes. 1. Financial (you can't build if you don't have the money). 2. A commitment to do the worst road first. The County Needs Study Priority Ratings are useful, although they do not take into account any of the political and other intangible factors. Use the rating as a guide only (it is not a be all and end all). 3. A need to spread projects across the County. You can't do work in one municipality for five years and do very little work elsewhere. 4. Co-ordination with adjacent Counties and Regions for joint Townline roads and roads connecting to another across a County boundary. If a County does not wish to improve a joint road there is little the Committee can do other than to meet with the adjacent County and try to convince them to favourably view the County of Elgin's wishes. - 3 - 5. That roads should be rebuilt or resurfaced t9lprovid~:,,~I,\ continuous road through certain sections of the County (ie., Road #45, Road #52, Road #2, etc.). 6. The consideration that it is very poor politically to . resurface a ~i~ce of road, as bad as it may be, in the middle of two sections which are in need of rebuilding. True the resurfaced road may be one of the highest priorities but the flack from the residents to the local Reeve will be '\0' rather great. 7. The need to do some urban work. Fortunately sanitary sewers are now completed in all separated urbans, although they are still underway in the built up areas of Yarmouth Township (which are just as urban aS,our Villages). (D) RESURFACING PROGRAMME The resurfacing programme is intended to restore a section to as near its original section as possible, to replace necessary culverts and restore ditches to their original cross-section. Usually done on roads that have previously been widened to 100 feet, although in some cases we have resurfaced a narrow right-of-way and purchased widening. The past programme of the County has been to try to, in conjunction with their long range programme, resurface those roads that are of a poor riding quality, such as old surface treatment, mulch, etc. and those hot mix roads with a high volume of traffic which have serious rutting or al1igatoring problems. These hot mix roads must be resurfaced before they become critical even though some mulch and surface treatment roads would have to be left to future years. A list of surface treatment roads, single lift asphalt roads and mulch roads are attached for your consideration as well a~ a priority list of hot mix roads which will require resurfacing within the next few years. - 4 - (E) CONSTRUCTION The consfructionprogramrnemust'be-ongolng and be flexible enough to include major repairs to bridges and culverts and other work in conjunction with adjacent municipalities. We must remember that the Middlemiss Bridge is not going to last forever. We also must work with the Ministry of the Environment to rebuild roads after sanitary sewer installations (we may have Elm Street and Centennial Avenue in Yarmouth Township on our hands as soon as we get finished with the Lynhurst-St. George project). A listing of projects for 1987 and onward is attched. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED R. G. MOORE, COUNTY ENGINEER COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1986 NEEDS STUDY UPDATE CONSTRUCTION NEEDS (IN THOUSANDS) PRELIMINARY AMENDED JULY 4, 1986 ROADS "Now" 1984 Base $10,588 9,494 1-5 Years 1984 Base $20,082 To Convert to 1986 (Using 1985 Inflation Factor) X 1.04 $20,885 1 ,824 1,126 ADD: 1986 Base.IINow" 1986 Drainage TOTAL NEEDS $23.835' BRIDGES 1984 Base - $4.763 X 1.02 (to 1985) ADD: 1986 Base $4.858 471 $5.329 Total Construction $29,164 Asphalt Resurfacing 14,206 (Being 1.06 X 13,402 - 1984 Base) TOTAL NEEDS $43,370 1986 NEEDS _ 43,370, _ 106 7% 1985 NEEDS 40,623 - . 1987 SPENDING ALLOCATION Construction - 3.46% of $29,164 Asphalt Resurfacing - 12% of $14.206.000 $1,009,100 1, 704,700 $2.713.800 1987 _ 2,713.800 = 107.2% 1986 2,531.300 In 1986 Supplemental Allocation of $101,000 in addition was given by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications. carryo~er ~or~ from 1986, nopefullY nil \as ~e e~pect to na~e all snouldering ~or~, etc., on projects done tniS fall). COUII1~ Of t.L G 111 RON) Ot.P I\R1lo1t.1I1 ~ \ 1\) SURf I\C t. i\\t.l\ilolt.1I1 ROI\\)S 1\11\1 I\Rt. 1101 1\ COIlSi\\UCil Oil 1It.t.\) 9 - ~ _ I\t Pearce par~, mostlY tourist traffic. onlY fair condition. condition Rating ,81) from ~ellington Road easterlY \built bY tne loIinlstry of 1ransportatiOn and cowrounicatiOns). ReasonablY good condition. 0.8 v..m ~ 1.0 v..m 1\ - ~ 200 'Jenicles per daY' condition Rating ,91) \lign~aY i3 to Road i46. fair conditiOn onlY, 2,0 to 300 ~enicles per daY' conditiOn Rating \83) \.2 v..m \ 8 ) S lIlGLt. L1 fi \101 loin I\SP\lI\L 1 Road i24 _ \lign~aY i13 ~esterlY to ~or~ done in ~ 1986. ,00 ~enicles per daY \tourist). \\esurfacebefore crac~ing is tOO seriOUS. condition Rating l81) 1\.7 v..m lfl.pproY-imate \y) n.O v..m ~ from Road i40 to port 8ur~ell limitS. I\~erage 1,000 + ~enicles per daY, condition Rating - 2 sectiOns \11 and 831 priority Rating \22 and 191 ~st Lorne to \)un~icn line, I\ldborougn 1o~nsniP' 9,0 ~enicles per daY, condition Rating \78) priority Rating l21\) 3.\ v..m ,C) ~ 2 - ~ Road #23 - Highway #4 to north limits of the the Village of Port Stanley. 850 to 1,200 vehicles per day. Condition Rating (76) Priority Rating (33) Road #40 - Highway #3 to Glencolin. 750 vehicles per day. Condition Rating (73) Priority Rating (29) Road #13 - From Dutton curb and gutter, easterly to 1986 work. 450 to 500 vehicles per day. Condition Rating (72) Priority Rating (27) Road #8 - Sections between the Concession Road between Concession Gore and Concession IV and Thames River. 650 vehicles per day, diminishing to 400 vehicles at Willey's Bridge. Condition Rating (82) Priority Rating (19 and 16) ROpd #24 - Dexter to Road #36. 400 vehicles per day. 3.8 Km Condit1on Rating (81) Priority Rating (17) Road #14 - Road #16 to Highway #3. 450 to 550 4.0 Km - 2 - (C) MULCH 1.4 Km 5.7 Km 4.5 Km :t 6.4 Km vehicles per day. Condition Rating (83) Priority Rating (24) Road #48 - Road #47 to Oxford County Line and 3.2 Km including 50% of Oxford County Line. 550 to 600 vehicles per day. Condition Rating (84) Priority Rating (16) ~ 3 ~ 3.2 Km tC) ~ Road #46 _ \1igh~aY #3 to corinth. 460 to 600 ~ ' ) ~ehic1es per day. condition Rating (86) priority Rating (13) \O)~ 1he greatest problem is dishing. cracKing and roUghness. 1hough the ~orst roads are not as rough or as hard to drive on as mulch road. the traffic volume is much higher and a ne~ surface jUstified thrOugh traffiC volumes alone. Roads that ~ill require resurfacing in the next fe~ years: la) Road #26 _ lWellington Road) thrOughout. ~ condition Rating t77) priority Rating - 2 sections l39 and 47) lo) Road #62 _ from High~aY #74 to High~aY #73. 8.0 ~ ~ condition Rating \83 and 84) priority Rating l19 and 20) \c) Road #62 _ from High~aY #73 to springfield. 3.0 ~ ~ condition Rating t85) priority Rating (17) \d) ~ad ~ _ from 80xall Road to~ard port stanley. 4.9 ~ condition Rating t77) priority Rating (23) 10tal programme in 1986 - 17 ~ ~. COU"1~ Of ELG1" RO^O OEP^R1~E"1 ~ \981 CO"S1RUC1l0" PROGR^~~E~ \. county of E\gin snare of crossing protection Road #32. 2. ~nt 10~nline land purcnase and en9ineering. 8.000 3. 1ates 8ridge. soils test (COunty snare). 8.000 4. Land purcnase andsur~eys for \981 and fol\O~ing years. 6,000 1. Road #42 erosion protection Van Order Cu\~ert (east of port 8urwe\1). 2. 8r\dge decK renabi\itation (Warren street or Katns) if tneir condition deteriorates seriouslY. : 3. ~ior reabi\itatiOn to Road #30. pattersons Cu\~ert depending on sur'Jey results. WORK 1" PROGRESS (S"OULO 8E CO"1l"UEO) \. Road #45. ~lanide 10~nsniP bet~een Road #40 and "ign~ay #13. SQme base coat aspnalt. ditcning, some cu\~erts. snouldering and top coat aspna\t entire \engtn remains. 2. Road #22 from concession lV to concesSion V Road to Road #21 including t~O intersectiOns and impro~ements on Road #21 for 'Jision. ~ \. County's snare of St. George street reconstructiOn including storm drainage. curb and gutter and intersection impro~ements, etc.. land purcnase Co~an ParK. relocatiOn of Canadian "atiOna\ signals~ etc. Responsibi\ity for mo~ement of some utilities and replacement of aspnalt is un~no~n at tnis time. \ - 2 - ~JE~S OIS~USSEOJillH QIHER MUNICIPALlIIE~ 1. Middlesex hopes to build Radio-Hubrey Road from Belmont Road to the County line in 1988 - 1989. lhere may be special funding available for this road. Representations must be made to the Ministry of lransportation and communications. 2. Middlemiss Bridge continUes to deterIorate. It cannot be put off forever even if Middlesex thinks so. Our share may be 1.5 million dollars If ~e are lucky, if not more. NEW PROJECTS (Outside Surveying' Done) 1 . Road #4- 2. Road #2 3. Road #8 _ Kent countyUne to Rodney. . _ oun~lch 10wnline, easterlY to Ecker Oraln. _ Main Street, outton, Canadian NatIonal tracks to Mary street. 4. Road #28 _ (Centennial Avenue) Highway 1I3 to Road #45. 5. Road #31 _ High~ay #13 to Avon (Middlesex county LIne). 6. Road #43 _ Calton urban and south to road bet~een Concessions 11 and Ill. Bayham lo~nshiP. workIng on Road #B from High~ay #401. north to road between Concession l~ and Gore. . APPENDIN c RE PLA C E$ /9. ,. NEEO$ S TUO)' . PA(fE_~__.. SUA/MARY OF ROAD SECTIONS' - REv/SED APRIL /9 8 6- -----------..---- # ----- - PAGES 76 - 81 4..~'o+ t:. '"' LEN6TK 19f'."! CONSTRUCTION /989_ _ SASE COSTS .+. 4..... ~+ () L o C A TION A.AOT. CR. PRo ca BM. COSTS- - RE- v.(S :J . 2 l.lJ SURFACE CONSTRUCTI 0 IV >-c,'4I ~ ~Q ..J ..J NOW I I - 5 18-10 jSPOT DRAlNtESURFAC ~ i NOW- Y-" ---== . . 59 16 Top of Fingal Hill to Kettle Creek 0.10.1- 2000 20 100 X 204 113 33. From C & 0 F.ntr~ncp. to K~in, Rrirlop , 1. 21 0 _ 71 400 19 I 75 X 54? 102 28 Road 56 to Highway # 3 . 1.811.1. 237: 48 73 920 144 40 At Concession 7 & 8 0.3 0.2 70t. 34 69 X 228 4 2 Ald.-Dun. Townline to Ecker Drain I 5. of 3.1 95C 44 62 11253 92 26 Kettle Creek to Road 25 1.4 0.9 28De 60 59 807 198 56 St. Thomas Limits to Road 28 1'.0 0.6 355C 163 57 X /65 85 I 24 Road 23 to Road 22 2.9 1.8 65C 50 51 X I 662 . 1 05 I 29 From 1.0 Km East of Road 25 to Start of Hot Mix 1.4 0.9 190 34 51 X 405 31 8 Hwy. 401 to Concession 4 and Gore 1.1 0.7 95C 55 50 283 10 I 3 C & 0 Tracks to Queen Street 0.4 0.31 275C 66 49 I 334 127 37 BelmOnt East Bridae to Hwv. 73 5.6 3.5 20C 37 49 X 613 22 I 7 C1achan to Thames River - 4.8 3.01105e 158 48 J 1592 I I 40 109 30 Concession 12 & 13 to Middlesex Line 1. 9 1.2 40C 44 48 X 91 25 St. Thomas Expressway to Middlesex Line 4.9 3.1 10,465 77 47 I 604 tll01 28 0.9 Km. South of Road 56 to Road 56 0.9 0.6 85G 57 47 X 235 158 43 North Limit of Calton to S. Limit of Richmond 5.9 3.7 200 40 47 X 2030 . -- .". , - 155 42 From Lot 17 to Norfolk Line r. ., ., ':l 400 50 46 1234 v.ul~..,J --.- J .9 . 3 .' Ki og St~eet. to C & a.Tracks . - 0.2 0.1 2750 69 45 106 86 l - --- ---- 24 Road 22 to 1.0 Km West of Dexter 2.6 1.6 68C 56 45 602 - 0.9lo.6 ----- 157 43_ Road 45 ~Q ~Q!t~ limit of Calton 30e ~ ~ --X-. 251 171 45 --Fro~ !~~ Km West of p'c~n 40 to Road 40 ~ lL...2.. 125" ..2L. .!L- -A2.2 r 33 8 Road 9 to 0.6 Km North of Road 9 0.6 0.4 54C 56 43 133 =cJ .- --0 I I i .. ,,,of .. - I i. A..~'o+ t- ~ ... 4.' ~+ 0 .. . ~fJ g' t.1 ~ c., 'l\i ~ 100 126 16 24 25 129 130 131 - 228 17 90 93 q4 156 197 73 78 128 87 20 103 55 170 APPENDIX C SUMMARY OF ROAD SECTIONS LOCATION 28 37 4 8 8 37 37 37 8 Road 45 to 0.9 Km SrHrtl'} fo Road 56 East LImit Belmont to Belmont East Brtdge From C & 0 at Kent Line to Black's Lane End of Pavement to South Limit of Wallactown South Limit of Wallacetown to Highway 3 West Limit Avon to Road 47 Road 47 to East Limit Avon East Limit Avon to Oxford Line Station Street to Mary Street 4 Black's Lane to West Limit Rodney 25 Highways 3 and 4 to Expressway 26 Road -25 to 0.5 Km West of Road 25 ?h From n^~ Km WP~t of Rn~rl ?~ to Fxrrp~~w~v 43 Road 42 to Road 45 55 Road 42 to Concessions 2 and 3, Bayham 20 South Limit of Shedden to Highway 3 20 37 24 6 Road 18 to M~ddles~x Line Highway 73 to West Limit Avon From 1.0 Km \~est oi' De~'ter to Dexter' Road 7 to Black's Lane R();l~ ~6 to RrraQ ?~, R.Q(H1 28 to Fast Lim~tF~!:C:ll Highway 73 to 1.4 Km West of Road 40 ?q 16 45 REPLACE$ 19ti' NEEDS S7l1DY REVISED APRIL 1986 ----.-----------. ---.- LENCiT'" 2 ..s ~ l&I A.A.D.T. CR. PH. CD ~ S . . 2.5 1.6 1.31 0.8 2.711. 8, 3.41 2.1 0.3 0.2 0.410.2' 'O~2.10.d 2.7 1.7 0.4 . 0.31 3.4 2.1 750 2.3 1.41 5000 0.5 0.3 140 ? _? 1" 4 1:1!) 4.2 2.6 220 3.7 2.3 200 0.3 0.2 1100 3.1 1.9 5.2 3.;;2 1.0 0.6 2.4 1.5 -~ fL~ n J. ~ .Jl....2. 2 .8 1. 7 --. 500 200 400 600 1050 210 320 260 1500 57 47 56 59 65 49 54 52 68 41 41 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 63 39 77 39 47 39 40 _ ~q 52 39 X 50 39 X 67 38 X 100 45 38 X 230 53 38 X 680 64 37 450 63 35 ~~---3, ~ 2llliL --15.. -34.. _ Ifl~n 73 34 --,--- I __ _ _ - PAGES tti - 81 1984 CONSTRUCTION -8.-/411.- COSTS- RE- I SURFACE NOW J 1 - st. - 10 x 595 X 157 97 X X 298 354 926 635 401 569 u.n PASE_l___ 199f>... SASE COSTS CONSTRUCTION NOW- 'sPOrORAlN~ESURFAC 697 792 49 780 226 I 256 I 156 236 625 h.l ::an 9 7 I _ .<J" +' ~. o' ....<-.~ ,,"A,' .~-or L<J ~ .~~ ~ ~ ..,0...- q; 74 82 114 143 84 107 125 41 7 8 35 50 58 150 28 38 328 3 43 1 68 139 184 APPENDIX C' SUMMARY OF ROAD SECTIONS - REVISED APRIL 19 8 6 ----- ------.-----. ----- REPLACES 196' NEEDS STUDY PA6E_.J___ LOCATION 20 23 34 40 23 30 37 13 3 3 9 15 16 42 8 9 8 2 14 2 20 39 51 Highway 3 to North Limit Shedden Highway 4 to East Stre~t, Port Stanley Road 30 to 0.3 Km West Highway 3 to 0.3 Km South of C~ncessions 7 and 8 North Limit Sanitary Sewer to Highway 4 St. Thomas to Road 52 Highway 74 to East Limit Belmont End of Curb to Road 14 Highway 3 to Road 2 Road 2 to King Street Road 3 to" Hi ghway 76 Road.a to End of Curb Road 45 to 0.1 Km West of Kettle Creek McConnell's Gate to 1.3 Km West of Port Burwell South Limit Dutton to Station Street Road 8 to Road 14 Mary Street to North Limit Dutton East Limit West Lorne to Aldborough-Dunwich Line South Limit lona to Highway 3 .~ Road 3 to West Limit West Lorne - PAGES 76 - III LEN&T.... 2 lU A.A.D-T. CR. PRo CD. ... ... ~ s J9-'!:! CONSTRUCTION SA#. COSTS NOW 1-5 1--10 0.7 O.l 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 3.0 1.~ 1.6 1.( 1.4 o. S 0'.60.4 8.4 5.2 5.5 3.4 0.8 0.5 8.2 5.1 0.2 0.1 4.8 3.0 6.0 3.7 0.2 0.1 9.5 5.9 0.7 0.4 3.1 1.9 0.8 0.5 6.4 4.0 Lots 14 and ~5: ~~ ~.U.R. to Lot$ 6 2~~ 7. ~ ~ ~_~_~-~_9 -3.0 Road 42 to lak~ Frie -W Q.R Southwo1d Line to C.N. Tracks 0.7 0.4 C- 880 1200 300 775 1060 1950 200 500 11 /~ 2750 95 750 1850 950 1500 125 1500 925 550 1575 ~?r ]75 190 70 11 72 33 61 33 X 73 29 76 28 79 28 64 28 72 27 7P. /h 82 26 62 26 75 26 80 26- 77 26 80 25 64 25 80 25 78 24 76 24 8? (3 77 - ?, --liL ~:3..- 70 23 ~hh 52 lob RE- SURFACE 3S ?07 l/h 1()~ 612 /8Z ::l4::l ~7~ 93 lIS ?i? 7? ~?Q 129 52 ~ 198J~_ BASE COSTS CONSTRUCTION NO'" SPOr ORAIN RESURFA ~O 11 ~ 133 I ce APPENDINg' c REPLACES /9.. NEEDS STUO., PAf;E.Lu.. SUMMARY OF ROAD SECTIONS - REVISED APRIL 1986 ... ___ 4' ____._..____. __._. - PAf;ES 76 - BI tlo+ .c- ~ LEH&T.... /!ifl.'! CONSTRUCTION 198 _ ~_ BASE COSTS ~. it L o C A 7 / 0 N A.A.Gr. CR. PRo ca s.M.' COSTS- - - RE- . ~~;...'" ""-:~ 0 Cd. ~ kI SURFACE CONSTRUCTION ~'v~ 4""'~'" -' -' HOW I I - 5 I · - 10 SPOT DRAlN~ESURFAC 1IC i NOW- 11 3 Queen Street to North limit Rodney 0.70.3.1810 83 22 74 12 3 North'limit Rodney to 401 1.61.01650 83 22 107 37 9 Road 5 to Road 8 7.514.7~ 95 68 22 105 149 42 Road 40 to McConnell Gate 4.0 2.5 975 80 22 , 356 192 52 West limit Springfield to Road 40 0.9 0.6 1450 82 22 (Pc 29 8 North limit Dutton to 401 0.8 0.5 1750 184 21 65 56 16 East limit Fingal to lots 28 and 29 3~6 2.2 19i5 84 21 258. 57 I 16 From lots 28 and 29 to Road 45 2.2 1.4 1975 84 21 I 150 95 I 26 Road 52 to Road II 1.6 1.0 120 70 21 118 I 36 Road 24 to Concessions 2 and 3 1.6 1.0 Sin 78 21 109 11 9 36 Concessfons 2 and 3 to South limit Sparta 1.4 0.9 750 80 21 I 100 (I 179 48 Highway 73 to Road 47 5 . 5 3. 41 900 81 21 415 51 IS End of Curb to Road 2 .. 0.810.5 750 181 20 J 77 60 17 i Road 19 to Middlesex Road 15 1.5 0.9 280 77 20 10 79 21 Road 20 to Highway 4 0.410.31110/83 20 ::;/ : , 141 40 S. Limi~ Mount Salem to N. limit Mount SaIenO.7 0.4 1215 83 20 . . 35 147 41 Hiqhway 19 to Union Street: Vienna 0.6 0.4 390 78 .20 34 190 52 Orwell Road to Hiqhway 73 4.3 2.7 1250 83 20 297 16.3 3.9 ---- 19 5 Road 9 to Thame~ R~yer . . 150 74 19 I .. --- , I 27 8 N. limit Wallacetown to S. limit Dutton 3.6 2.2 1250 84 19 . - . - --- --- I 32 8 ConceSS!0~ 4 ~rl- 60r~ to ~o~~ 2 _ 2. 9 :L...a 650 ...a.L -L9... _ ?('\? - 61 18 Roa~ ~Q ~South) to Road !9 l.....a ..2....A lQr) L6- -1JL _ J:;") - 71 20 Road 16 to North Limit Fingal 0.4 0.2 1100 8~ 19 7~ ,- 24 Dexter to Road 36 27 Highway 4 to East Limit Union 38 East Limit Richmond to Lot 114 45 Highway 19 to Norfolk Line 40 . Road 45 (West) to Highway 3 8 to. 6 Km North of Road 9 to Thames Ri ver 14 Road 16 to South Limit Iona " 27' r-.-.-- J ~'o+ ;:~ i'", . , ~-;"oo;, " -~ i I +..... ~.<) I . lyu.# fJ 0'" ~ " ~ ~ 151 42 189 52 . 302. 2 "i 14 3 89 24 140 40 178 47 52 2 2 9 191 202 5 36 88 96 134 174 242 34 42 ''-,' -"'~9 .,.., 116 t 121 177 180 --1..a7 r APPENDIX C REPLACES A PR ILl 9 B 6 -----------------. ---.- SUMMARY OF ROAD SECTIONS - REVISED '9.' NEED$ STUDY ~ PAGES 76 - 81 PAtlE_~___ L-'O "'C ~ -'7 tON LEN6TH- J9-'!..~ CONSTRUCTION /98p. _ BASE COSTS A.AOT. CR. PRo CD. 1lM. COSTS" -- RE- a Id SURFACE CONSTRUCT/ 0 IV -J ...J tHOW '1-5 I · - 10 'SPOT DRAlN~ESURFA~ lC s_ NOW- 1.3 0.8 1040 83 19 88 3.7 2.3 1250 84 19 255 0.4 0.3 1600 85 19 46 3.0 1.9 1030 84 18 210 f 6.2 3.9 550 81 18 541 3.5 2.2 625 82 18 242 0'.210. 1 550 82 18 18 3.0 1.9 1370 85 18 207 0.510.3 1600 86 18 131 2.2 1.4 725 84 17 153 3.6 2.2 75 74 17 50 3.8 2.4 390 81 17 281 o . 310 . 2 I 1250 J 86 117 I I 33 1.1 0.7 1030 85 17 5.6 3.5 830 84 17 386 3.7 2.3 1300 86 17 I 219 3.5 2.2 420. 83 16 257 . 3.2 2.0 ~ 440 83 ~ 16 237 0.6 0.4 760 85 16 J 59 0.5 0.3 650 84 16 \:)2. ~ 0.3 0.2 1300 87 16 50 -- -- 5.5 3.4 525 83 16 475 -- --. 2.9 1.8 575 84 16 I 236 4 . 9 13.0 I 10 I 0 I 86 I 16 293 1.3 Km W. Port Burwell to N. Limit Port Burwell Highway 74 to Orwell Road Highway 76 to East Limit West Lorne Highway 401 to Concession IV Road 36 to Highway 73 (Port Bruce) Road 42 to South Limit Mount Salem South Limit Avon to Road 37 Highway 73 to West limit Springfield Wellington Street to Highway 76 Ecker Drain to Road 8 Highway 76 to Road 5 34 36 47 48 52 \~est 'Umit Sparta "to Road "'36 , West limit Belmont to Hi~hway 74 Road 27 to North Street - Road 48 to South limit Avon - Road 47 to Road 54 Road 25 to Road 30 1'-"- ." ~o+ ~-+.1 ~:-A..' . ~+ () ,,~CJ ., t~" -- -.." 194 53 196 54 2 2 195 53 18 4 23 8 49 14 64 20 98 I 27 160 44 173 45 15 3 45 I 14 47 14 97 27 175 J 46 46 14 70 20 .14-6 ,atO 182 r _49 185 51 65 20 181 49 REPLACES 196' NEEO$ STUDY - PAGES 7& - 81 APPENDIJt c SUMMARY OF ROAD SECTIONS - REVISED APRIL 19 B 6 .--------....----.. ---... PASE_..&___ LENGTK L o 'C 4 TION A.A.D.r. CR. PRo CD. 2 Id ..J ~ - End of Curb to Beech Street (Aylmer) 0.6 ~.4 I 1500 86 16 Oxford-Road 20 to Road 48 0.8.5 600 84 16 West Limits West Lorne to Wellington Street 0.5 ).3 1600 88 15 From Elm Street to Highway 73 (Aylmer) 0.6 ~.4 1650 88 15 i-lest Limit Rodney to Road 3 0.6 J.4 750 87 14 Pearce Park to End of Pavement 0.8 b.s 140 81 14 Highway 401 to Thames River 3~5 2.2 630 86 14 Erie Street to Bridge Street (Port Stanley) 0.3 ~.2 600 86 14 Lawton Side Road to West Limit Sparta 3.2 ~.() 905 87 114 Road 46 to Highway 3 1.2 ~. 7 275 83 14 Road 43 to Highway 19 6.6 k.l 890 87 14 , 5.3 ~.3 Road ~ to Thames River 750 88 13 South Limit lona Station to C & 0 Tracks - ,0.2p.II 850 f 88 13 Road 13 to Highway 401 1.8 1. I 600 87 13 East Limit Union to Lawton Side Road 5.3 3.3 1130 88 13 Highway 3 to Corinth 3.2 2.0 490 86 13 C & 0 TraCKS TO Road 13 1.1 !.7 850 89 12 South Limit Fingal to Road 16 0.2 .1, 690 89 12 BOO '89 , ..Q.i9"'*m "South 'of 'Road"52 tn Ro'ad 52' <<. . 0.9 .6 12 North Limit Springfield to Road 48 2.5 1.6 550 88 12 -. .. C. N. Tracks to Highway 4 - O'Bf+ 630 88 12 . - - Highway 4 to Start of Curb 1.0 .6 1040 90 11 - - -- Road 52 to North Limit Springfield 0.3 .2 550 88 11 J9Jl.'! CONSTRUCTIOk B. AI. . C 0 S T S---- NOVl . -10 RE- SURFACE /sa!?.. BASE COSTS CONSTRUCTION N 0 VI- 'sPar ORA/NIRESURF; 37 7Z /~-D 53 249. 52 2.i~ 83 44 136 377 267 73 119 164 J 39 I""Q+ t " +A..'~'4-- ly<.l _cr '" 0" ~ of!' q,; 67 108 162 154 6 83 <3\ 135 54 136 137 142 152 172 193 40 66 69 72 75 80 112 117 . I 124 APPENDIJt C SUMMARY OF ROAD SECTIONS REPLACE$ /96' NEEDS STUDY - REVISED APRIL /9 B 6 ---------.....----. --.-. :' ,1.. .0 C ill .7 , 0 Ii LENGTH- :a -I ~ "" A.A.Dr. CR. PRo ca -I S North Limit Port Stanley to Lots 14 and 15, S.U.R. 3.1 1.9 20 30 44 42 3 23 Road 52 to Concesstrons 12 and 13 West Limit Eden to iHighway 19 East Limit Port BurriiWell to Lot 17 Lake Erie to Highw~W 3 Joseph Street to N~th Limit Sanitary Sewer '")'"") "" -- K' ~Ai") 2, 1 --;(; 5.,r -r/{c r'l ~ ~ L ;r-i. I Ts 38 16 38 38 40 42 45 53 13 20 20 20 20 22 32 35 36 Lot 114 to West Limmt Straffordville ~Jest Limit Fingal tro Road 20 West Limit Straffomdvil1e to Highway 19 Highway 19 to East ~imit Straffordvil1e North Lim'i t ~iount Sialem to Road 45 (West) Nortt. Limit Port Bu~rwell to Highway 19 Road 40 to Road 43 Highway 3 to End of' iCurb Road 8 to End of Cu~b Start of Curb to Na~th Limit Port Stanley Lots 6 and 7, N. & $. U. R. to S. Limit Fingal North limit FingSll, ito South qmit Shedden North limit Shedden: to Hiphway 401 Road 24 to Road 27 Police College to mIDad 52 Road 45 to Highway 3 Road 45 to Highway ~ 4.0 2.5 0.3 b.2 1.6 1.0 2.0 1.2 0.5 ().3 C:;:;,Z _3.'1 4~6 2.9 0.5 ~.3 0.4 .2 0.3 .2 1.9 1.2 0.6 0.4 6.1 3.8 0.2 t..1 0.6 .4 0.4 .3 2.1 1.3 3.4l2.1 }.,,~ 2.4 3.2 2.0 -- 2.7 1.7 -- 4.9 3.0 ~ 455 88 10 680 90 460 90 550 91 420 91 1200 92 .2 5'::0 9-f. 1065 94 960 92 11 00 96 1070 96 1825 91 1300 89 1080 92 1500 93 550 93 1040 94 690 94 1100 94 10 10 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 820 695 425 1070 800 94 5 95 5 --- 94 5 --- 94 5 --- 93 5 - PAGES 76 - 81 PASE.2.___ 1984 CONSTRf.,'CTJON -e.-AI. COS rs- ..--- RE- SURFACE NOW '1-5 1&.10 1989.. BASE COSTS CONSTRUCTION N 0 VI- IsPOrORAlN~ESURFAI 6-lrh 100 90 20 18 12 7 20 7'2 12 /0 40 III 111I000" "".., 11I111 APPENDIX C REPLACES 19.' NEEDS STUOY PASE_~__ SUMMARY OF ROAD SECTIONS - RE'VISED APRIL /986- - PAGES 76 - 81 ----------------- . CJ'o+ ~ .;# LEN&TH- 19 -'!_~ CONSTRUCTION '!is?. _ BASE COSTS ,~, ~ ' 'L o C A TION A.ADT. CR. PH. CD S. AI. . COSTS- ,- RE- - ....'" as~ t ~ tJJ SURFACE Iyu.,. tJ . ...J ~ ~O ...J S NOW I I - 5 I . - 10 lC 138 38 East Limit Straffordvi lIe to Norfolk Line 4.5 2.8 850 94 5 148 42 Highway 73 to Road 40 4.1 2.6 865 94 5 153 42 Highway 19 to East Limit Port Burwell 0.7 0.4 550 96 5 /1 161 44 Highway 3 to West Limit Eden 5.4 3.4 430 94 5 163 45 Road 16 to East River Road 4.6 2.9 550 94 5 165 45 1.2 Km West of Highway 4 to Highway 4 1.2 0.7 625 94 5 169 45 Road 35 to Highway 73 4.1 2.5 1325 96 5 214 3 From Concession 4 to Road 6 1.5 0.9 1030 94 5 10 26 8 Highway 3 to North Limit Wallacetown 0.2 0.1 1250 94 4 39 II Highway 4 to Road 26 2.0 1.2 350 93 4 44 14 Highway 3'to South Limit lona Station 2.5 1.6 900 91 4 62 19 Highway 3 to Southwold Station 5.9 3.7 390 95 4 104 29 Road 25 to 1.0 Km East of Road 25 .. 1.0 0.6 180 91 4 115 34 Kettle Creek to West Limit Belmont 0.9 0.6 620 95 4 120 36 South Limit Sparta to Road 27 0.5 0.3 750 92 4 75 145 40 Glenco1in to 0.9 Km South of Road 52 3.3 2.1 800 94 4 167 45 Road 22 to Road 36 7 .1 4.4 1440 95 4 15 176 46 Corinth to Oxford County Line 1.6 1.0 500 94 4 188 52. Road, 30,to Highway 74 . . 5.6 3.5 1775 95 4 21 6 Black's Lane to Road 3 4.2 2.6 390 94 3 -' 52 16 Road 8 to Road 14 11.6.7.2 460 93 3 100 ... ... '. ..- 53 16 Road 14 to West Limit Fingal 5.8 3.6 865 96 3 - -- -- 77 20 ; Hiqhway 4~1 to Road 18 0.3 0.2 370 .2L --L - - I II III .. __~_ 1_11-"'___ II I - ~+ -- - ---- I -..,,,,.----."""'''''''''''.11''''''''''''11I.''''''''''.''''.'''' APPENDI)f C REPLACES 19fi' NEEDS STUDY PA6E_:J___ SUMMARY OF ROAD SECriJONS - REVISED APRIL 19 8 6 - PAGES 76 - 81 . - . - - . - . - - .. . - - - - II - u' + ~ c LEN&TK- 19-'1:! CONSTRUCTION 198~_ . BASE COSTS A;.- 0 . -" tIl' ~. L 0 C A 7 ", "0 N A.A..D.T. CR. PRo Co. 8.M. COSTS --- RE- ..- A...... ~ <) 2 lIJ .- tSURFACE CONSTRUCTION ~u., tI o. -' -' NOVl I I - 5 " q; ~ 2 . -10 H 0 VI' SPOT ORAINIRESURFA --= - .--.- - - - =--=:I 110 31 Road 29 to Road 52 1.6 1.0 1090 94 3 III 32 Highway 73 to Police College . 3.2 2.0 900 96 3 - 122 36 North Street to Pleasant Valley Road 1.8 1.1 1300 96 3 164 45 East Ri ver Road to 1.2 Km West of Highway 4 1.0 0.6 625 95 3 .. 166 45 Highway 4 to Road 22 2.1 1.3 1800 96 3 168 45 Road 36 to Road 35 3.7 2.3 1300 96 3 106 29 Beginning of Hot Mix to Road 31 -0.4 0.3 190 96 2 123 36 Pleasant Valley Road to Road 45 1.1 0.7 1130 96 2 183 50 Road 42 to Highway 19 0.7 0.4 865 98 2 186 52 Expressway to Road 25 1.8 1.1 500 97 2 12 63 20 William Street to Erie Street, Port Stanley 0.3 0.2 600 0 0 193 132 38 Highw~y 3 to West Limit Richmond 1.8 1.1 1050 98 0 133 38 West Urni t Richmond to East Umi t Rllchmond .. 0.5 0.3 1050 98 0 TOTALS 10,588 9,49<+ n,Lfo~ !,~2.'t 1,/2.<'; . APPENOIX 0 SUMMARY OF BRIDGES - R,yi..d u.~.GIi........... .19.~~.. riDGE NO NAME 9 6 4 phi Il-more Middlemiss Tates 2 6 S 3 Robbins Jamestown Fleming Cr. N. Fulton s Lings ~ Meeks Glencolin 3 Cooks 2 Be Imont 'We st Gil1etts Vienna Iona Largie Fleming Cr. S. King Harriestville Dr. 37 Dodd' 5 Fleming Creek Bothwell ROAD NO LOCA TJON 43 14 Lot 3, Concession S.S.T.R., Bayh~ Lot C, ConcEUision III, Dunwich Lot 7, Concession A in B. F., DJn1.1i.ch Lot 5, R. 1 and 2, E.R.R., South~old 3 Lot 28, Concession II, Yarmouth Lot 11, Concessions II and III, Aldborough Lots 3 and 4, R. 1, W.R.R., Southwold Lot 49, E.S.T.R.N.B., Southwold Lot 16, R. 1, N.U.R.. Southwold 40 43 Lot 21, Concessions VII and VIII. Malahide Lot I, Concession V, Bavham 34 Lot 15, Concession XV, Yarmouth Lot 27_ Concessions III and IV. Yarmouth Lot 14. Concession 111_ Bavham 14 9 3 Lot C. Concession VIII. Dunwich Lot 11, Concessions II and III~ DJnwich Lots 8 and 9, Concession III, Aldborou8h 52 Lot 17, Concession XII. South Dorchester Lot 11 ~ Conce s sion VII.. North and South ,ryorche ste,r 25 Lot A. Gore Concession. Southwold Lot A, Gore Concession, Aldborou~h 7 Lot lL-f~~~~ssion B.F.~ Aldboroush REPLACES PAGES 82, 83 and 84 Dffh, 1969 NEEOS STUOY 0;1' . /9..5:[. S.M. COSTS A.A.D.T. c.R. F?R. CD 19 J[~. BASE COSTS NOW EL.,N LOCAL NOW EL.IN LOCAL 200 15 68 X 13271327 630 37 64 X 116J1l69 _=- 7:5" 9 ~O X 138L 1384 ---- t -- 20_-1.L~..!..~981f- 981 50 ~~~)05~ 1058 685 53 47 X 168 168 620 100 60 440 95 953 /2.~-o 4340 100 90 Hl7!: . 90 60 50 120 700 61 200 50 ~30 29 45 30 43 X 8~ 42 41 X 811 40 56~ 564 .3'1 X, 132i 1327 73 65 62 27 24 24 80 73 87 19 17 X 115 115 14 90 12.. 85 I 10 Ix <t3 <13 8q 8 7 5 82 811 2.0 2.0 8 8 3 3 PRESENT Pag, _1. JlJRISDIC TION FUTURE Elgin' Elgin Els;dn-Mid.41 c I E12in-Middle Elgin-Middle. Local El~in El~in Elgin Elgin Local Local El~in Local Elgin-Middle. Local Local El~in Elgin E12in E12in Elgin El~in-Middle. E12in-Middle. :r ....",....1 Elo;n Elein Elqin El~in El~in E1~in Local F.l~in E12in Ehdn El~in Elein-Middle. E12in-M;""le. Sub. Rd. Sub. Rd. l='loi.n-Kf'nt: Elgin-Kent Miadlesex Local Elgin-Kent Miadlesex P09~ .2. PAGES 82~ 83 and 84 of Ihe 1969- NEEDS STUDY REPLACES APPENDIX 0 SUMMARY OF BRIOGES Re.,is,d u..HMCU........... .19.e.~. Ig.'[~ BASE COSTS . 1$ "Eli... 8.M. COSTS JURISDICTION rllOGE ". ROAD NO A.A.D:r. C. R. F!R. ~O' ~NOW LOCATION NAME NOW EL~/N LOCAL PRESENT FUTURE EL~'N El~in Elein ~...2L--L_:_____. ~ 100 ~_;___...2E..~ ~.l.Q.Q.... --2-'-:'_ _ _ ~ 41 420 100 0 .---~-~--~-- 460 100 0 46 Lots 5 and 6~ Concession IX~ Bayham 3 Lots 14 and,15, Concession B.F., Aldborough .4 Stimer 5 El~in-Middle. E12in-Middle Wardsville 2 Flein_Mirlrllp. Flpin_Mirlrllp 5 Lot 1. Concession 'e' in B.F.. Dunwich 8 Lots 14 and 15, Concession 'A' in B~F., Dunwich 16 Lot 24, Concession II, Dun~ch Lot 24, Concession III, Southwald Lot 26, Concessior. III, Southwo1d 3 5 .1 .4 .5 Walkers ElRin-Middle. Elgin-Middle Willeys Port Talbot Elgin Elgin _ Elgin-Middle. Local _ Elgin-Middle. Local o o 400 100 400 100 Gov't Drain #3 Gov't Drain #1 Elgin Elgin 'SUb. Road Sub. Road o 965 95 2800 100 20 Lots 15 and 16, S.T.R.N.B., Southwold Tal bot Creek .7 Sub. Road o o o 26 Lot 47, N.T.R.E., Yarmouth St. George St. Fingal Sub. Road l .2oe>c 100 16 Lot 45, N.T.R.E., Southwold 33 Lot 1, Concession VIII, Yarmouth w ~8 98 Sub. Road Sub. Road -7"~o 100 ~l Kains El~in lOB IOS El~in o o o 1110 100 /~OD 98 77:/' 100 21 Village of Port Stanley 45 Lot 25, Concessions V and VI. Yarmouth 30 Lots 8 and 9, Concession XI~ Yarmouth Lot 9~ Concessions XIII and XIV. Yarmouth Lot 13, Concession XIV, Yarmouth 37 Lot 21.. ..Concessio.n VII. North and South Dorchester !5 Warren Street F.lpin F.l pi n I ~ubC' ~nR.d Players !8 ~uh. Rn~ci \00 \00 ~9 Patterson E12in-Middle. Local E12in-Middle. Local o .0 o o 75 lJ7 100 100 ;2.00 100 !o. n J3 14 !6 McGi,nnis Harkness f1Rt~-~~ddl~C' ~l~fn_Mirlnlp El~in-Middle. E12in-Middle Belmont..Eas.t: 200 100 37 Lot 18,. Concession VII, NQrth and South Dorchester 48 Lot 10, Concessions X and XI, South Dorchester Spring Creek E12io ___ Elgit" Elgin El~in Elgin 900 100 0 ------- Brooks E1~in Local o I:z.~-c 100 52 Lot 20, Concession XII, South Dorchester 17 Hoover ~ ?n ~ 00 " Lot 24, Concession N.E.R.. Yarmouth Lot 28, Concession N.T.R., Yarmouth ;9 Kingsmi11 Orwell Local o 200 100 ~o APPENDIX 0 SUMMARY OF BRIOGES - R~yis,d ___.~~_........." .19_~~.. A.A.D.T. CR. RH. ce JURISDICTION 3RIOGE ROAD . NO NAME NO LOCATION 41 Elm Street 53 Town of Aylmer 42 Dingle Street Town of Aylmer 45 Port Burwe 11 42 Village of "Port Burwell 47 Calton 45 Lot 4, Concession IV, Bayham 50 Rirl.m"'nd 38 Lot 112, N. and S. T.R., Bayham 51 RaIson 38 Lot 119, N. and S. T.R., Bayham 53 "West Eden 44 Lot 16, Concessions VIII and IX, Bayham 56 Kettle Creek 52 Lot 5, Concession X, Yarmouth 58 Ke ttle Creek 45 Lots 6 and 7, R. 2, E.R.R., Southwold 60 Dodd's Creek Lot 24, Concession III, Southwa1d 61 Garton 52 Lot 18, Concession X, Yarmouth 62 Van Order 42 Lot 14, Concession I, Bayham 74 Spring- Water 35 Lot 28, Concession VI, Yarmouth 26 St. George Street at C.N.R. TOTAL COST REPLACES PAGES 82183 and 84 of fh, 1969 NEEDS STUDY P09' _~_ . 1$ .~-- S.M. COSTS '9.a:?e BASE COSTS NOW CL.'N LDCAL NOW EL.'" LOCAL 1<:100 97 0 ------ ~lOO ~_ /~oo 100 0 -- -- 890 100 0 1030 96 0 1065 100 0 430 100 0 1010 100 0 625 100 0 400 100 0 17~o 100 0 ~-~o 100 O. 960 100 o I :J.b 00 0 0 ;,-s $~ 10 10 ~.:# .ys 9079 47~3 4316 47f Jf7J PRESENT FUrURE - El gin . ElRin El~in I Local Elgin Elgin El~in El~in El~in Elgin Elgin Elgin EIlZin Elgin Elgin Elszin Elgin Elgin Elgin-Middle. Local Sub. Rd. Sub. Rd. Elgin El~in I 1=:1 qi n I 1=:1 ~i n Sub. Rd. Sub. Rd. ST. THOMAS, 'ONTARIO JULY 2, 1986 PAGE 1. THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building on Wednesday, July 2, 1986 at 9:30 a.m. All members were present. Also present was Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the Engineer. Tenders for RSlK Emu~sion were opened and were as attached. "MOVED BY: A. K. RORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE ACCEPT THE TENDER OF MCASPHALT INDUSTRIES LIMITED AT $50,072.79 FOR 190,000 LITRES OR RSIK EMULSION FOR APPROXIMATELY 20.4 KM OF SURF AC E TREATMENT ON COUNTY ROADS. CARRIED." THE ENGINEER REPORTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The 1964 Dodge Truck (Truc~ #64) and the 1965 Ford Truck (Truck #75) had been sold for a total of $1,700.00. 2. Tates Bridge continued its !movements. A proposal had been received from Golder Associates for investigational work for a soils study and they were of the opinion that considerable engineering work would have to be done to ascertain whether or not the pier piles had been damaged and estimated that the cost of this work would be approximately $17,000.00. They noted that it was about 110 feet from the bridge deck to hard glacial till and that movements could occur any 0here in this strata above the till. The Engineer was instructed to send the estimate to the County of Middlesex for their approval. 3. The Chairman and the Enginaer reported on the Port Stanley Terminal Rail Hearing before the Ontario Municipal Board and a letter received by the ~" Clerk on July 2nd. The Board advised that they would not make a ~uling on insurance as they felt the Board was empowered to investigate the safety aspect of the railroad only. The Board had ruled that the Port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated would have to be incorporated as a railway as soon as possible. They could not use the portion of the line north of Union to carry passengers until SI. 1\-10MI\S, O\'\II\R 10 JUL'{ 2, 1986 pl\GE 2. tne line ~as Upgraded as per tne recommendatiOn of tneir Engineer and nad been inspected bY a Board's Engineer and anotner \-Iearing neld. lne Board also felt tnat otner matters concerning tne line from union to port stanley ~ere not a concern of tne Board \-Iearing. I\ftei DiscUssion "MO\1ED \j'{: SECO\'\DED B~: E. \'\EUKI\MM 1\-11\1 I\-1E COU\'\I~ E\'\G1\'\EER BE 1\,\SIRUC1ED 10 I\D~lSE I\-1E pORI SII\\'\lE~ lERM1\'\l\l Rl\ll l\'\CORPORI\IED B~ REG1S1ERED Ml\ll 1\-11\1 I\-1E COu\'\l~ Or ElG1\'\ REQU1RES 1\ SlG\'\ED OPERI\11\,\G I\GREEME\'\1 1~ED11\IEl~ DUE 10 I\-1E RECENl 0\'\II\R10 MU\,\lC1Pl\l BOI\RD RUl1\,\G I\\,\D 1\-11\1 ~E ~lS\-I 10 REMED~ I\-1E CURRE\'\1 COU\'\I~ ROI\D CROSS1\'\G DEr1C1E\'\C1ES 1\'\ CO_OPERI\110\'\ ~11\-1 I\-1EM O\,\/OR BErORE rR1DI\~, I\UGUSl lSI. CI\RRIED." R. f. PURCELL 4. lnat consumers Gas ~as not interested in selling salt brine to tne county of Elgin at tne present time. Ree~e Bradfield stated tnat ne ~ould speaK furtner to Mr. sangster of consumers Gas on tne matter. S. Ree~e Martyn stated Mr. Orland \-IartfOrd ~as still objecting to tne Sparta Pit rezoning and tnat he ~ould be in touch ~ith him ~hen he returned from no1idayS. 6. Mr. M. J. \-Iennessey ~aS recommending that the county proceed to ac~uire the portion of Co~an parK that theY reQuired for the impro~ement of Road #26 bY e~propriatiOn as it appeared that the heirs of Da~id Co~an could not be found to be dealt ~ith. 1t appeared that the county had the right to clear up their title bY e~propriatiOn from the City and that negotiations for the City'S interest should be undertaKen ~ith the City. lhe Engineer ~as instructed to ha~e Don \-IOUghton, ontario land sur~eyor dra~ a reference plan as soon as possible SO that the committee could maKe a recommendatiOn to County council tnat e~propriatiOn procedures be started. 7. 1nspection of pipe arch cul~erts in stormont, Dundas and Glengarry CountieS for the MinistrY had been delayed until ne~t ~eeK. -,~., ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JULY 2, 1986 PAGE 3. When Mr. K. Kleinsteiber returned from holidays it was hoped to have a meeting between the Ministry and the Soils Consultants so that a general policy with regard to the repair of pipe arch culverts could be formulated and recommended for Provincial wide use. 8. Reeve Bradfield reported on the meeting with the Long Point Conservation Authority concerning erosion east of Port Burwell. The Village of Port Burwell had forwarded a resolution stating that they were in favour of protection and asked the County to participate in protecting their roads and bridges. The Engineer was instructed to contact the Long Point Conservation Authority to discuss the needs of the Authority so the Authority could proceed with their estimates for work in the area of the Little Otter Creek where Reeve Stewart felt that erosion was quite serious. 9. The Engineer reported that he had written Mr. Thompson, District Engineer, Ministry of Transportation and Communications on the County's position on County road responsibilities at interchanges of Highway #401. As neither the Region of York or Durham felt they had no responsibilities for the roadways at the interchange areas the County of Elgin should not assume these responsibilites until such time as other Counties and Regions in the Province did. 10. A meeting had been held with Mr. Dave Behm of Totten, Sims, Huicki Limited of Whitby regarding updating Needs Study information. Additional information received included: (a) Resurfacing needs on all hot mix asphalt roads within a 16 to 20 year period of being placed. (This would add over 4 kilometers of needs to the County's resurfacing programme.) -~...... (b) The Needs for replacement of curb and gutter and storm drains on non-deficient (for construction or resurfacing) urban County roads. This would increase the construction needs considerably (Road #2 in West Lorne, Road #16 in Fingal, Road #34 in Belmont and Road #53 in Aylmer among others). A long range programme for the replacement of deficient curb and gutter anq storm drains should be instituted. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JULY 2, 1986 PAGE 4. 11. The Committee noted correspondence from the Village of West Lorne with regard to improvement of curb and gutter on Road #2. The matter was held in abeyance until August, until it could be ascertained whether funds for such work could be taken from construction projects (Road #45 in Malahide Township) as it appeared that there would not be a cost savings on the installation of culverts on the Wellington Road. 12. The Engineer reported that he was working with the County's Auditors with regard to computers. It had been agreed that only an IBM compatible system would be acceptable for the County's needs as all the Ministry's new programmes would be IBM compatible. It appeared that any County bookkeeping system that was being used and not IBM compatible would not be useful to the County. The County of Lanark was using an IBM compatible system for their Road Department bookkeeping (cost of equipment and software $15,000.00). The Engineer was instructed to proceed with investigations so that a decision could be made later in the year. THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Work continued on the box culvert replacements on Wellington Road. Both culverts had been placed and backfill work was underway. It was hoped to reopen the road before the middle of the month. A second coat of emulsion and chips had to be placed on the Bostwich Road (Road #26) and patching had to be done every day due to the large volume of detour traffic on the road. 2. Walmsley Bros. Limited were continuing with hot mix paving. Patching had been completed on Road #40 as well as asphalt resurfacing from Mount Salem to Road #42. It was expected that Road #36 and Road #24 would be completed early next week. It was not known whether or not Walmsley Bros. Limited would do work on Road #14 and Road #13 prior to their contract on Highway #3 or would leave their contract on Highway #3 part way through to do their work for the County. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JULY 2, 1986 PAGE 5. 3. The work on the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway crossings had been completed and bills would be forwarded shortly to the Chesapeake and Ohil Railway. 4. Pavement marking was continuing in East Elgin with work having been completed in the Town of Aylmer on Highways #3 and #73 (connecting link). 5. Chittick Construction would crush gravel at the Sparta Pit for 72t per ton (being 4t per ton more than the price for the Pleasant Valley Pit in 1985) and would do this work early in August if the rezoning problems could be solved. 6. As soon as culvert backfill on Wellington Road was completed, surface treatment work would be done and shouldering work on Road #40 would be started before the end of July. 7. Work would start in the middle of the month on the Orchard-Carroll Drain on Road #20 at Shedden. 8. No appeals had been received on the Smith-Bailey Drain on Road #56 and Road #28 and work would be started by the end of the month. 9. It was hoped to start the placement of culverts on Road #45 near Highway #40 in the middle of August. 10. Construction and maintenance work was on budget at the present time. "MOVED BY: D. PEROV I CH SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN THAT THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS BE PASSED FOR PAYMENT: PAYLIST NUMBER 28 AMOUNTING TO $68,300.65 PAYLIST NUMBER 29 AMOUNTING TO $107,656.60 CARRIED." CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. From the Village of Port Burwell thanking the County for resolving the drainage problem at Strachan Street. 2. From the Kettle Creek Conservation Authority with noticeofaflood damage reduction study in parts of the City of St. Thomas and the Township of Yarmouth. The Engineer had replied to the Conservation Authority stating that the County was interested in the study and that the County had a considerable amount of SI. I\-\O"'I\S, 0\'\1 I\R I 0 JUl'{ 2., 19B6 ?J\GE 6. of information tnat could be of use to tne consultant. 3. from tne lo~nsniP of Baynam ~itn zoning by-la~S for: \a) property on Road #3B east of strafford~ille for rural residential. \b) Residential use, concession ~ in tne \-\amlet of corintn. 4. from tne lo~nsniP of soutn~old for tne oees property at tne intersection of Road #16 and Road #20 in fingal. " t d tnat tne lo~nsniP taKe note of recommendatiOns for a lne Englneer reQues e " cnange in tne location for emplOyee parKing. Ree~e "'arr stated tnat it appeared tnat tne lo~nsniP ~ould ~ant a number of cnanges in tne plan as ~ell and tnat tne property ~ould be rezoned by site plan amendment and for~arded to tne county prior to its passing. 5. lo~nsniP of ~armoutn ~itn a notice tnat tne ontario ",unicipal Board ~ould near an application against tne rezoning of a property in Union for a 6. surpluS equipment dispOsal. 7. \'\otice of a public I'\eeting bY tne snoreline ",anagement Re~ie~ committee scneduled for port Oo~er on JulY 23rd. lne Engineer ~as asKed to attend. B. from soutn~estern ontario ",unicipalitieS committee on Union Gas. Ree~e \'\euKamm and tne Engineer reported on tne meeting of June 27tn stating tnat a steering committee of 7 persons nad been set UP frOm tne area to disCUSS francnisecnanges~itn all gas companies and tne EnergY Board. "t" since tne It appeared tnat tne ",unicipaliteS ~ere in a mucn better pOSl lOn ' nearing than tneY ~ere pre~iOuS1Y and that if anY decision ~as made as far as municipalitieS na~ing to paY for gas line relocations; it ~ould probablY not applY to any lines laid prior to 19B1. 9. from tne lo~nsniP of 1\1dborOUgn ~itn a draft of tneir official plan. Ree~e pero~icn pointed out tnat tneir draft plan included strip residential R d #4 ~est of RodneY and Road #3 on Road #2 bet~een \lest Lorne and Rodney, oa . nortn of Rodney to \-\ign~aY #401. lne Engineer ~aS instructed to ~rite tne lo~nsniP requesting tne lo~nsniP . C 'ttee felt tnat allo~ing striP de~elOpment on county re~ie~ tnlS as tne omml garage. fortunatelY tne property ~aS not on a county road. from tne county property committee requesting tnat tney be ad~ised of ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JULY 2, 1986 PAGE 7. roads would defeat the purpose of having arterial County roads and could lead to difficulties in the purchasing of the necessary right~of-ways to widen Road #4 as an arterial road. The Engineer was also asked to point out to the Township Council the need for continuing sources of granular material at a reasonable price for both County and Township road construction. Reeve Neukamm on behalf of the County Government Committee asked that the County Road Committee designate those roads that towaway zones for parking infractions would apply to. The Engineer was instructed to write to the reeves of the various municipalities in which the parking restriction by-law applied and ask them to list the sections that a towaway zone should be applied to. The Needs Study Update report was discussed and the Engineer stated that it appeared that Ministry of Transportation and Communications funds for 1987, if allocated on the same basis as in 1986 would be about the same for construction and resurfacing as in 1986. It would still be necessary to transfer $300,000.00 to $350,000.00 from the resurfacing allocation to the maintenance and overhead. This would leave approximately $1,300,000.00 for resurfacinq and $1,000,000.00 for construction. It was not known of course whether a supplementary by-law for construction would be available in 1987 ($100,000.00 being available in 1986). A complete list of deficient sections would be availabl(~ for the next meeting and a map showing deficiencies would, if possible, be sent to each Road Committee member prior to the next meeting. Carryover construction to 1987 would include Road #45 between Highway #73 and Road #40 and Fairview Avenue (Road #22) between Road #45 and Road #27. Both of these jobs should be completed in 1987 if possible. E~penditures on Road #26 (St. George Street) were unkno\Mn at this time but would include storm drainage and curb and gutter excavation. It was expected the excavation costs and granular base costs would be included in the sewer ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JULY 2, 1986 PAGE 8. contract and it was not known if paving costs would be included in the sewer contract or not. Other costs such as movement of railway crossings, utilities and land purchase, etc., would be the County's and they were unknown at this time. The engineering work in Dutton was not far enough completed to ascertain whether or not the sidewalk system could be replaced and resurfacing work could be done without complete construction. The Engineer Suggested that once the Road #45 corridor from the Norfolk County line to Highway #401 was completed, the corridor from Highway #3 via Iona Station through Dutton, West Lorne and Rodney to the Kent County Line should be upgraded with those sections carrying the most traffic being completed first. The Engineer noted that the County of Middlesex wished to complete the Hubrey-Highbury Road Link between Concession XIII, ~armouth TownshiP and the Belmont-Glanworth Road in 1988 or 1989. The EngineerS of the County of Middlesex and Elgin had been invited to a meeting next week with the Ministry to discuss road links between St. Thomas and London. The Committee agreed to discuss the future construction and resurfacing programme at the next meeting. MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT WE ADJOURN TO THURSOA~, AUGUST 7, 1986 AT 9:30 A.M. CARRIED." ~ ~ ~ CHAIRMAN~ -" ,,,1 SUMM~'RL ~' couNT'! Or' ~I,.G1.11 ROAD DEPA~T T~llD~R ~ Julr1 2. f 19S6. . fo~ 190 000 j..itres of t\lll1:. 1\\Jl\UlsiOn Tender prJ.ces are ~. ' ' ,.,_. f 7% and includeS l'rovincial sales T~ 0 · ~ ~ McI\Spnalt l.ndUStri.esj..~ted. p,O. BO~ 539, · l'ort Sti1.nleY.' ()ntarJ.o. ' $ SO,012.19 ASphalt ~ngi.neering corporation. 220l j..a:\I.eshore '1\Oad ~est. ,MisSissauga. j..53 l39. $ S2,ass.00 llOrjOnn t.i:llIited. 1? .0. BO~ 100, 'thOrold. ontario, $ 61,803,1.0 \ l COUM1~ Of ELGIM RO~O CO~lIIEE ~ JUNE SESSIO~ \986 10 I"E ~~ROEM ~MO ~E~BERS Of I"E COUM1~ Of ELGIM COUMCIL ~OUR RO~O CO~~nlEE REI'OR1S ~S fOLLO~S: 1. ~almsleY Bros. Limited are e~~ected to start tneir contract for not mi~ asvnalt vaving snortlY, ~or\<. 'Ilill start on Road 1140 in ~alanide lo'llnsniV follo'lled by 'Ilor\<. on Road 1136 and Road 1124 at SVarta. 2. ~ revised maintenance budget in tne amount of $2,021,000 nas been avvroved and 'Ilill be for'llarded to council ~mbers 'Ilitn tne ~inutes of June lotn Road committee. lne ne'll budget 'Ilas necessitated bY tne svending of all monies allocated for 'Ilinter control in 1986 t$580.000) ~M~ \~. ~dditiOnal maintenance requirementS of $109,000 testimated) 'Ilere ta\<.en from tne asVnalt resurfacing vrogramme. 'tlE RECOMME~D: 1. In at By-La'll Mo. 1794, bein9 a by-la'll to regulate tne location of gasoline and diesel fuel Vumvs on lands adjaCent to county roads be reVealed. 2. lnat By-La'll Mo. 1814. being a by-la'll to regulate tne location of buildings and structures adjacent to county roads be revealed. 'Botn of tnese by-la'llS 'Ilere vassed in tne earlY 1960'S and do not allo'll for any variance regardleSS of circumstances. ~s all 10'llnsniVS no'll nave zoning by~:aws dea li nil 'Il it" set bac\<. s. etc.. and na'le a \IIetnod of allowing '1ariances. tne committee felt tnat tne coun:y's b~-lawS were nO longer required and in some cases w~re toO restrictive. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT - JUNE SESSION 1986 PAGE 2. The set back by-law did not apply in the Town of Aylmer or in any of the Villages. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED CHA I RM~\N 51. lHO~~5, O~I~RIO JUNE 10, 1986 ?I-\GE 1. lHE COU~I~ Or ELGI~ RO~D CO~~IIIEE met at the county of Elgin 19B6 t 1'30 P m ~ll members ~unicipal Building on luesday, June 10, a' .' ~ere present e~cept Ree~e ~illseY, ~lSO present ~as ~r. rran~ Clar~e of the ~inistrY of lransportatiOn and communicatiOns, the Engineer and the ~ssistant Engineer. \\~O\1ED B'l: 5ECO~DED B~: Eo ~EUK~~~ lH~1 lHE ~1~U1E5 Or lHE ~EE11~G5 Or ~PRIL 30 ~~D ~~~ 14, 19B6 BE 1-\??RO\1ED. 1-\. \Z. fORD CI-\RR1ED." lHE E~GI~EER REPOR1ED O~ lHE rOLLO~I~G: . 1. lhat ~r. Ken Kleinsteiber of the ~inistry of lransportatiOn and communicatiOns had e~amined the lates Bridge and ~as of the opinion that the reason for the mo~ements of the north pier should be ascertained as soon as possible. He felt that a soils report should be commissioned to ascertain ~hether or not the failure ~as belo~ the bottom of the old footings of the original pier as it ~as 45 feet belo~ the trUSs bearing plate. ~r. Kleinsteiber thoUght that the ~ood piles ~hich ~ere dri~en in 1930'S tted off and that the failure might be occurring belo~ the might na~e ro " top of the piles and abo~e the bottom of the original footing. 't hlaS li~el~ that failure mo~ement ~ould continUe If such ~as the case 1 n J and could jepordiZe the bridge. It might be necessarY to relie~e the pressure on the bridge pier bY mo~ing part of the hill to the north. lhiS information should be ascertained before the bridge floor had to be replaced in the ne~t 2 or 3 years. lhe committee felt that the soils report ~ould be desirable before any major amount of money ~as spent on the bridge and the consent of the county of ~iddlese~ should be recei~ed before proceeding. lhe Engineer ~as authOrized to as~ Golder ~ssociateS of London for a proposal on the ~or~. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JUNE 10, 1986 PAGE 2. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO CONTACT THE COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX TO REQUEST THE COUNTY TO PAy!THEIR SHARE OF SOIL TESTS AT THE TATES BRIDGE. CARRIED." 2. Four stringers on the Harrietsville Bridge (1/2 mile east of Highway #73) were nearly rusted off at the west abutment and would have to be shored up from the footing using a header beam support off the piling footing. The bridge was already listed as deficient on the County Needs Study because of lack of waterway capacity. 3. Engineers from Armco-Westeel Limited were concerned with the condition of the Patterson culverts on Road #30 as they felt that in the past fifteen years the top arch of the culvert may have come down to the point were it was no longer within the tolerable dimentions allowed and reinforcing ribs or struts would be required over all three culverts. Repairs were required on the bevelled ends of two of the pipes this Summer even if the rest of the pipe was within the tolerable limits. The Assistant Engineer would take measurements of the culvert as soon as possible. 4. The Engineer felt that requests for new tenders might lower emulsion prices by 13 to 14 cents per gallon. The Engineer was authorized to investigate further and report to the Chairman. 5. No further information was available on the supply of salt brine from the Consumer Gas brine pit at Port Stanley. 6. Correspondence was noted from the Township of Southwold, instructing Mr. Joe Dees to remove his refrigerated trailer from his property adjacent to County Road #16 at Fingal. 7. The Engineer felt that it appeared that the County's set-back by-law and gas pump set-back by-law passed in the early 1960's had outlived their usefulness as all Townships now had zoning by-laws with set-back regulations in them. These by-laws could now take precedence over the County by-law as they were less restrictive, particularly in built up areas and would allow a person a method of obtaining a variance agreeable to the local Councils. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JUNE 10, 1986 PAGE 3. One case being an addition to the fire hall in the Hamlet of Shedden. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT BY-LAW #1814 BEING A BY-LAW TO REGULATE THE LOCATION OF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES ON LANDS ADJACENT TO COUNTY ROADS BE REPEALED. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT BY-LAW #1794 BEING A BY-LAW TO REGULATE THE LOCATION OF GASOLINE AND DIESEL FUEL PUMPS ON LANDS ADJACENT TO COUNTY ROADS BE REPEALED. CARRIED." 8. Reeve Martyn reported that there was still an objection to the Township of Yarmouth's rezoning by-law to rezone the County's Sparta Pit as a gravel pit. He would attempt to have this objection removed as soon as possible, otherwise the use of the pit would be delayed until Fall as an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing would be required. 9. The Engineer reported that his paper had been accepted for presentation at Second International Conference on Short Span Bridges in Ottawa in August. Approximately 40 papers had been accepted for presentation of the original 160 papers submitted. Presentations would be made from Canada, the United States, Japan, China, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, Portugal, Australia and New Zealand. ~"" 10. Work by Golder Associates was continuing on the reason for pipe arch culvert failures and an interim report would be completed shortly. One of their findings was that frost penetrations behind the pipe culverts was much greater than expected, thus increasing the number of freeze-thaw cycles that were occurring in the pipe arch culvert. Poor quality backfill and poor compaction seemed to be major reasons for failure. Continued ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JUNE 10, 1986 PAGE 4. The Township of Howard had removed the culvert that they had welded last Fall and no further information could be obtained. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications requested that the Engineer inspect some culverts in the Counties of Stormount, Dundas and Glengarry as soon as possible. II. Quotations for culvert pipe was as attached and the Engineer had accepted the low bid of Koppers International Canada Limited for Quotations 'A' and 'C', the material being on order. Quotation 'B' would not be required as Quotaion IC' took precedence over it. THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Annual Meeting of the Suburban Road Commissions of Ontario would be hosted by the St. Thomas Commission on June 11th. 2. Work on the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway crossings continued with work having been completed on Road #33 (Kains Hill), Road #16 and Road #45 at Middlemarch, Road #4 (Kent Townline), Black's Lane and Road #20 at Shedden. 3. Intersection repairs would be made at the intersection of Road #3 and Concession V in the Township of Aldborough on a tempoary basis until a hot mix asphalt contract was called for the area. 4. Grass cutting was underway. 5. Salt brine work has been completed. 6. Surface treatment work was nearly done, with work having been completed on: (b) (c) (d) (e) .--...." (f) (g) (a). Road #43 at Calton. Road #28 1/2 mile south of Elm Street. Road #29. Garage parking lot. Road #26 (Bostwick Road) for a detour for the culvert replacement on Wellington Road. Road #33 at the Chesapeake and Ohio tracks. For the Township of Yamouth, the City of St. Thomas, Union Cemetery Vi llage of Belmont, and the Catfish Creek Conservation Authority at Springwater. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JUNE 10, 1986 PAGE 5. 7. lenders had been called for the sale of lrucK #64 (Dodge landem) and Truck #75 (Dodge Cabover). 8. ~or~ ~as schedule to begin on Wellington Road on June 16th. 9. Some ditching ~ould be done on the Sparta Pit road, ho~e~er it could not be completed until Bell Canada mo~ed a cable on the ~est Catfish Cree~ Hill. 10. Asphalt pa~ing ~as scheduled to start at the end of ne~t ~eeK. ,/-'. 11. Pavement marking was underway. 12. Some gra~el had been piled at the Sparta Pit and a price had been solicited fr~ ChitticK Construction for crushing appro~imatelY 2B,000 ton of gra~el (if the pit rezoning proceeded). 13. Needs Study Update ~or~ continued but representati~es of Totten, Simms and Associates had not been inter~ie~ed ~ith regard to costs. lhis would be done before the end of June so it could be forwarded early in July. 14. lhe smith-Bailey Drain report on Road #56 and Road #2B ~ould be read on the 17th of June. 15. Mr. Lloyd webstef had been gi~en a lea~e of absence to the middle of July for personal reasons. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THE lHE rOLLOWI~G ACCOU~IS PAYABLE BE APPROVED FOR PAYME~I: PA~LISl ~UMBER 24 IN THE AMOUNl OF $64,62B.97 PAYLISl NUMBER 25 IN lHE A~OUNl Or $44,B77.67 PAYLISl NUMBER 26 IN THE AMOUNl Or $60,266.B9 PAYLISl ~UMBER 27 IN lHE AMOUNl OF $126,363.BO CARRIED. II lhe attached proposed Maintenance Budget ~as discussed and approved. SECO~DED B~: D. PERO~IC~ lH1\1 lHE ~~I~IE~I\~CE BUDGE' Or JU~E 10, 19B6 I~ lHE 101~L ~l-IOU~1 Or $2,021,000 BE ~PPRO~ED. llHE I~CRE~SE I~ lHE ~~I~IE~~~CE BUDGE' o~ER lHE BUDGEl Or l-II\RC~ 19B6 IS 10 Co~E rROl-l lHE ~SPH~Ll RESURr~CI~G ~LLOC~110~.) "MO\1ED B'l: 51. 1HOMI-\5, ON1~RIO JUNE 10, 1986 ?I-\GE 6. w. f\. MI-\R1'l N CJ\RR 1 ED. ,\ ~ request from the ~illage of port Bur~ell to complete a drain on strachan street to ser~e as the outlet for ~ariouS streets in the ~illage of port Bur~ell and Road #42 ~as discUssed at some length. It ~aS felt that the most economical method of sol~ing the problem ~as to replace the e~isting 15 and IB inch pipe ~ith one 24 inch pipe from the end of the pre~ioUS county ~or~ to the outlet l126 metres of pipe ~ould be required at a cost of appro~imatlY $10,000, pluS deli~ery). ~fter discUssion. . · II~O~EO B~: R. r. PURCELL SECO~OEO B~: ~. K. rORO lH~1 ~E ~ILL PRO~IDE 24 I~CH PIPE rRO~ lHE C~ICH B~SI~ BUILl O~ SIR~CH~N SIREE' B~ lHE Cou~H Or ELGI~ 10 ~~ OU1LE' O~ lHE BE~CH PRO~IDED lH~1 lHE ~ILL~GE Or PORI BUR~ELL I~SI~LLS lHE pWE )\~D ~ECESS~R~ C~ICH B~SI~S. Cf\RRIED." Chairman ste~art and Ree~e Bradfield reported on a proposed meeting by the Long point con~r~ation ~hority to discUSS the shore pr~ectiOn adjaCent to Road #42, east of port Bur~ell. lhe meeting ~ould be held on June 17th. lhe ~ssistant Engineer ~as as~ed to attend as the Engineer ~ould be attending the smith-Bailey Drainage Report. 1. ~inistrY of lransportatiOn and communicatiOns appro~al of supplementary by-la~ allocations in the amount of $45,000 for technical in~est\gatiOn of pipe arch cul~erts and $100,000 for the construction of cul~erts on ~ellington Road · CORRESPO~OE~CE ~~S ~OIED~S rOLLO~S: 51. lHOM~S, O~I~RIO JUNE 10, 1986 ?I\GE 7. 2. rrom ~r. ~. B. ~ander ~een of the Chesapea~e and OhioRail~aY e~pressing his than~s for the co_operatiOn from the County in the repair Chesapea~e and OhiO Rail~aY crossings on County roads. 3. 10~nshiP of Bayham, 10~nshiP of ~alahide and the 10~nshiP of ~ldborOUgn ~ith ~arioUs zoning by-la~S. 4. rrom the ~inistry of lransportatiOn and communications describing access controls on pro~incial High~aYs. lhe committee noted that thiS ~as of more interest to local municipalitieS than to the county. 5. ~r. R. lhompson, District Engineer, ~inistrY of lransportatiOn and communicatiOns regarding the di~ision of responsibilitieS bet~een tne County and the pro~ince on County roads and High~aY #401 interchanges. lhe Engineer ~as instructed to ac~no~ledge ~r. lhompson's letter and to try to resol~e the problem, but ~ere concerned that if the County assumed any additional responsibilitieS there ~as no ~inistrY of lransportation and communcatiOn's funding for the costs in~ol~ed as o~er $300,000 had been ta~en from the county's ~sphalt Resurfacing Budget for maintenance purposes and unlesS the Ministry ~as ~illing to fund the additiOnal costs it ~ould be difficult for the County to assume additiOnal responsibilities. lhe Engineer recommend that lruC~ Rates as attached be adopted noting that ~ilometer ton rates had not been increased in 19B5 and that demand for trUC~S ~as e~tremelY high in 19B6, ~ith rental rates ha~ing gone gone up because of thiS demand and greatlY increased insurance and repair costs. II~O~ED B~: R. r. PURCELL SECO~DED B~: 'Il.~' ~~Rl~~ lH~1 ~E RECO~~E~D lH~1 lHE \RUCK R~IES rOR 19B6 BE ~PPRO~ED. CI\RR1ED.\1 p.ar~ing by-la~ amendments ~ere discUssed and the committee felt that they should not be recommended to County council until the County Go~ernment committee ~as able to propose methods of enforcement and the ~illage of springfield to be notified of tnis. 51. lHO~~S, O~I~RIO JUNE 10, 1986 ?I\GE 8. lhe county's positiOn for the ontario ~unicipal Board Hearing for the port stanley lerminal Rail Incorporated ~as disCUssed at some length in accordance ~ith the attached position. lhe committee appro~ed the position and re~uested that the Chairman attend the Hearing if at all possible. lentati~e information on the ~eeds studY update ~aS presented. "~O\jED B'l: E. NEU\ZI-\~M SECO~DED B~: ~.~. ~~Rl~~ lH~1 ~E ~DJOUR~ 10 JUL~ 2 ~~D ~UGUSl 7, 19B6 ~1 9:30 ~.~. CI-\RR 1 ED. " .~" COU~I~ or ELGI~ RO~D DEP~Rl~E~1 REQUESl rOR PIPE QU01~110~S ~ ~ 1. Koppers InternatiOnal canada Limited ? o. BoY- 3458 Cambridge, ontario N3\-\ 5C6 2. ~rmco-~esteel Limited ? O. BoY- 3000 Guelph, ontaiio Nl\-\ 6?2 3. E. S. Hubbell and sons Limited ? O. BoY- 118 lhames~ille, ontario NO? 2\Z0 4. Canada Cul~ert and ~etal products Limited ? O. BoY- 578 ~aple, ontaiio LOJ 1 EO 5. Clemmer Industries l1964) Limited ? O. BoY- 130 ~ateiloo, ontaiio N2J 41-\1 6. corrugated Pipe company ? O. BoY- 176 stiatfoid, ontaiio N51-\ 611 $28,275.78 $28,698.15 $29,905.20 $31 ,028.74 $31,976.00 $36,440.00 QU011-\110N \B\ ~ 1. canada Cul~ert and ~etal products umited ? O. BoY- 578 ~aple, ontario LOJ 1 EO ~ 1. Koppers InternatiOnal Canada Limited ? O. BoY- 3458 Cambridge, ontario N3\-\ 5C6 2. Clemmer Industries l19(4) umi ted ? O. BOY- 130 ~aterloo, ontario N2J 41-\1 3. E. S. Hubbell and sons Limited ? O. BoY- 118 lhames~ille, ontario NO? 2\Z0 4. ~rmco-~esteel Limited ? o. BOY- 3000 Guelph, ontario Nl\-\ 6?2 $10,980.26 $6,864.22 $6,966.85 $6,998.00 $9,169.00 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED TRUCK RATES FOR 1986 (HOURLY RATES) Single Axle Tandem 1985 $29.00 $38.00 1986 $31.50 $42.00 KILOMETER RATES (TARPING REQUIRED) 0- 3 Kilometers 4 Kilometer Average 5 Kilometer Average 6 Kilomete'r Average 7 Kilometer Average 8 Kilometer Average 9 Kilometer Average 10 Kilometer Average 11 Kilometer Average 12 Kilometer Average 13 Kilometer Average 14 Kilometer Average 15 Kilometer Average 16 Kilometer Average 17 Kilometer Average 18 Kilometer Average 19 Kilometer Average 20 Kilometer Average 21 Kilometer Average 22 Kilometer Average 23 Kilometer Averqge 24 Kilometer Average 25 Kilometer Average 26 Kilometer Average 27 Kilometer Average 28 Kilometer Average 29 Kilometer Average 30 Kilometer Average Over 30 Kilometers .90 1.08 1.21 1.33 1.45 1.57 1.68 1.79 1.90 2.00 2.10 2.19 2.28 2.36 2.44 2.50 2.56 2.62 2.68 2.74 2.80 2.86 2.92 2.98 3.04 3.20 3.26 3.32 3.32 + 5~ Per KIm. YARDAGE RATE + I 1/2 TIMES KILOMETER RATE .fQUNTY OF ~IN !3QAD CiLMMITTg ~RM~L I~ 1. The Port Stanley Terminal Rail IncorpOrated shall carry PUblic Liability and Property Damage Insurance to the satisfaction of the Ontario Municipal Board. The insurance shall hOld harmless the County of Elgin because of any agreement between the COunty of Elgin and the Port Stanley Terminal Rail IncorpOrated. JUNE 10, 1986 2, Signs, including advance Warning signs shall Conform With the Ministry of Transportation and Communications standards and shall be erected and maintained at the expense of the Port Stanley Terminal Rail IncorpOrated. 3. Automatic signal protection if reqUired and ordered by the Ontario Municipal Board shall be at the eXpense of the Port Stanley Terminal Rail IncorpOrated. 4. All road repairs in the OPinion of the County of Elgin to crOSsings on County roads, within 3 feet of the rail, shall be borne by the Port Stanley Terminal Rail IncorpOrated. 5. A bond of Ten Thousand DOllars ($10,000.00) shall be Posted by the Port Stanley Terminal Rail IncorpOrated in favour of the County of Elgin to ensure payment for any Work that the County has to do that is not done within ten (10) days of the Port Stanley Terminal ~il Inco~Orated being notified to do a~ particular Work. SUch Work shall incl ude the paving oVer of all County road crossings of the Port Stanley Terminal Rai 1 IncorpOrated if the Port Stanley Terminal Rail IncorpOrated ceases to operate for any reason. 6. All trains shall stop at all County road crossings and be flagged across the crOSsings as required by the Rai 1 way Act. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE PORT STANLEY TERMINAL RAIL INCORPORATED PAGE 2. 7. The Port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated will not operate trains across County road crossings between sunset and sunrise (local time)t except in an emergency. 8. All legal costs of this agreement to be borne by the Port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated. 9. Upon removal of the rails the Port Stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated will restore all County Road crossings to conform to standard Canadian National Rail policie,s and procedures applicable under the same circumstances. .il. \ :\ COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT MAY SESSION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. An Agreement has been reached with the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway regarding the repair of their County road Crossings in West Elgin. The County of Elgin will at their expense repair crossings on County Road #33, Kains Hi 11; County Road #16, Middl1emarch; County Road #2 spur line in West Lorne and the spur line on County Road #3 (Furnival Road) in Rodney. The Chesapeake and Ohio Railway will raise the crossing on County Road #45 at Middlemarch and will completely rebuild the crossing on County Road #4t Kent Townline. The County of Elgin and the Chesapeake and Ohio will jointly replace the planks and asphalt at the crossings on County Road #45 at Middlemarch; County Road #20t Shedden; County Road #14 at Iona; County Road #2 at West Lorne; County Road #3, Rodney; and County Road #4, Black's Lane. The County will be paid for all their labour and asphalt work for these crossings by the railroad. No work is required at the present time on County Roa9 #8 in Dutton. This agreement has been negoitiated with the assista~ce of the tanadianTransport Commission. A request has been forwarded to the Commission asking that the County of Elgin be relieved of the costs of the flashing light signals at all crossings as regular train schedules have been stopped. 2. lhe main north pier of the Tates Bridge is being monitored closely as it has moved approximately 4 inches in the past year with a 2 inch movement between May 1st and May 13. ? I\GE ?. COU~\~ Or ElGl~ RO~D CO~~l\\Et rlRst REPORl _ ~~~ SESSIOt-l 19B6 ~~. Ken Kleinsteiber, Head of the ~uniCipal ~ppro~al section of the ~inistry of lransportatiOn and communicatiOns will ihspect the bridge on ~ay 27th. If large mo~ements continUe to occur the bridge ~ill na~e tb be closed to traffic until the mo~ement ends. 3. ~ellington Road bet~een st. George street and Hi9~~aY #3 . t~t. lhomas E~press~aY) is e~pected to be closed on June 16th fbr the replacement of 2 pipe arch cul~erts ~ith precast concrete bo~ cul~erts. county Road #26 tBostiC~ Road) ~ill be primed and used as a detour. 4. QuotatiOns recei~ed for RSIK Bmulsion~ere 142% of last year'S QuotatiOns and the committee ~ill do a limited surface treatment programme unlesS a lo~er price can be negotiated later in the season. 5. lhe tender of ~almsleY Bros. Limited in the amount of $366,576.00 has been accepted for hot mi~ pa~ing in East Elgin including asphalt resurfacing on county Road #40 from ~unt salem to county Road #42 in ~alahide 10~nshiP; County Road #36 from sparta to County Road #24 and County Road #24 a??ro~imatelY 1.5 ~ilometers east of County Road #36 in ~armouth 10~nshiP; the approaches to the Gillets aridge, east of sparta tas part of the agreement on the sparta Pit Road ~ith the 10~nshiP of ~armouth). ~sphalt patching on county Road #40 in ~alahide 10~nshiP bet~een High~aY #3 and County Road #45. Base coat pa~ing on County Road #45 from County Road #40 appro~imatelY 2.4 ~ilometers ~esterlY, also in ~alahide 10~nshiP' ~almsleY Bros. Limited ~as the lo~est of 2 tenders recei~ed. 6. lhat ~e ha~e accepted the tender of ~almsleY Bros. Limited at $327,38B.75 for hot mi~ asphalt pa~ing in ~est Elgin, including asphalt resurfacing on County Road #14 from county Road #13 to County Road #9 tlo~nline bet~een Dun~ich and south~old) and County Road #13 from County Road #14 pl\GE 3. COU~I~ Or ELGl~ RO~D COM~IIIEE rlRSl REPORl - M~~ SESSION 19B6 to co~al Side Road in Dun~ich io~nshi? {approximatelY 2.3 ~i10meters) and ~or~ for the 10~nshiP of southwold and the ~illage of Dutton in the amount of $75,997.00 ~a1ms1ey Bros. Limited ~as the lo~est of 3 tenders recei~ed. ~LL Or ~HICH IS RESPEC1FULL~ SUBMIllED -------- CHl\l RMI\N ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MAY 14, 1 986 PAGE 1. THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the County Building, 450 Sunset Drive, at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, May 14, 1986. All members were present except Reeve Martyn and Reeve Bradfield. Also present was Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, the Engineer and the Assistant Engineer. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF APRIL 10, APRIL 17 AND APRIL 18, 1986 BE APPROVED. CARRIED. II Tenders for asphalt paving were opened and were as follows: CONTRACT IAI - EAST ELGIN Walmsley Bros. Limited - $366,567.00 Towland London (1970) Limited - $387,844.00 CONTRACT IB' - WEST ELGIN Walmsley Bros. Limited - $327,888.75 Towland London (1970) Limited - $332,881.75 T.C.G. Materials Limited - $395,645.00 The tenders were within 2% of the County estimates. THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE FOLLOWING: 1. An agreement had been reached with the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway, through Mr. W. B. Vander Veer, Division Manager from Detroit with the aid of representatives from the Canadian Transport Commission to improve crossings in West Elgin. """"'-"', It has been agreed that the County would, at the County's expense repair the crossing on Road #33, Kains Hill; Road #16 at Middlemarch; the spur line on Road #2 and the south spur line on Road #3 in Rodney. The Chesapeake and Ohio Railway would repair the crossing on Road #4 the Kent Townline at their expense and would raise the crossing at Middlemarch on Road #45. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MAY 14, 1986 PAGE 2. The Chesapeake and Ohio Railway would pay the County ,of Elgin for repairs and the placement of asphalt on Road #45 at Middlemarch; Road #20 at Shedden; Road #14 at Iona; Road #2 at West Lorne; Road #3 (Furnival Road), Rodney; and Road #4 (Black's Lane). There was no work required on Road #8 in Dutton. Work was scheduled to start on May 20th on Road #45 at Middlemarch. 2. Emulsion quotations were as attached. There was a large increase in the emulsion prices and the Committee was of the opinion that they should not do any more prime or surface treatment work than absolutely necessary in the hopes that buyer resistance would force a lowering of prices sometime during the season. It was decided to leave the surface treatment budget in abeyance until such time as a final decision was made. "MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT WE ACCEPT THE QUOTATION OF MCASPHALT INDUSTRIES LIMITED AT THEIR QUOTED PRICE OF 34.24 CENTS PER LITRE, DELIVERED F.O.B., COUNTY OF ELGIN (FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL SALES TAX INCLUDED), FOR RSIK EMULSION WITH QUANTITIES USED TO BE A MINIMUM. 33.17 CENTS PER LITRE, F.O.B., PORT STANLEY TERMINAL. CARRIED. II 3. The legal problems involved in obtaining the Cowan Park property from the City of St. Thomas had been referred to' Mr. M. J. Hennessey; but no report had been received. 4. The Assistant Engineer reported that he had a salt brine test done on the Consumers Salt Brine Pit at Port Stanley and it was in the neighbourhood of 18% compared to approximately 8% for ~, that being used by the Township of Dunwich. The Engineer was instructed to obtain further information to see if it was possible to obtain salt brine from Consumers Gas Brine Pit at Port Stanley. It was decided that a new Maintenance Budget should be prepared for the June meeting of Road Committee, leaving as much surface ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MAY 14, 1986 PAGE 3. treatment money in reserve as possible. Complaints had been received about a trailer being parked on Road #16 at Fingal by Mr. Joe Dees. The Committee suggested that the matter be referred to the Township of Southwold as it appeared to be a zoning by-law infraction. THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS: I. The north main abutment on the Tates Bridge had moved 2 inches in the past 2 weeks and 4 inches in the past year. The bridge would be monitored daily. Repairs to the north span, wood floor were being made. Conversations had been held with Mr. Ken Kleinsteiber of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and he suggested that if movement continued bridge traffic should be stopped until such time as the movement stopped. Mr. Kleinsteiber would, inspect the bridge on May 27th. 2. The Ontario Good Roads Grader School held from May 12th to May 14th was well received. 3. Road #26 from Wellington Road to Highway #3 Expressway had been gravelled. 4. Alex Newbigging Limited would start gravelling on May 15th on Road #37 between Highway #73 and the Oxford County Line. 5. Stumps had been removed on Road #13 between the Willey's Side Road and Road #14. 6. Curb and gutter had been placed ahead of resurfacing at the intersection of Road #36 and Road #24. 7. Gravel was being piled at the Sparta Pit and work would continue throughout the week. Although the old scales had been moved to the pit they would not be satisfactory on a long term basis because ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MAY 14, 1986 PAGE 4. of their age, poor condition and their limited capacity as a tandem truck could not be weighed without weighing each axle separately. It would be necessary to obtain a set of 50 ton scales as soon as possible. 8. Some work had been done on the Sparta Pit Road. Otto Schneider had been approached and was agreeable to sell land on the west approach hill for improvements. 9. It was hoped to start construction on Wellington Road on June 16th. Approval had been received from the Ministry of Transportation and Communications for the culvert plans. It appeared that precast culverts would be available to meet that schedule. 10. Some miscellaneous ditching had been done on Road #16, Road #30, and Road #45 at Shaw's Culverts. 11. Cleanup work was underway on Road #22. 12. Repairs and shoring would be necessary under the south approach of the Middlemiss Bridge as the stringers were showing signs of severe deterioration. 13. The material for the replacement of the joints on the Wardsville Bridge had been received and would be placed as soon as a crew was available. 14. Prime and surface treatment work would have to start approximately the first of June so that the detour route would be ready for the Wellington Road closing. 15. Three casual employees had been classified as Class lA' employees and would act as spare machinery operators as required throughout .......-...","", the Summer. Many of the regular operators had a considerable amount of deferred time because of the large amount of overtime incurred last Winter during winter control operations. 16. The appointment of Keith Player as Assistant Superintendent was discussed at some length. Warden Purcell reported that the Personnel Committee had discussed a wage grouping for Mr. Player and requested that Mr. Crossman be approached to suggest the correct documentation ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MAY 14, 1 986 PAGE 5. that should be forwarded to the Personnel Committee to place Mr. Player in the proper position in the grid. The Engineer stated that although Mr. Curtis Gordon would not retire until the year's end he recommended that Mr. Player be appointed as of June 1st to allow for an orderly transition. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE PERSONNEL COMMITTEE THAT KEITH PLAYER BE APPOINTED AS ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF THE ROAD DEPARTMENT EFFECTIVE JUNE 1, 1986. CARRIED.II "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: D. PEEROVICH THAT THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS BE PASSED FOR PAYMENT: PAYLIST NUMBER 22 AMOUNTING TO $60,020.72 PAYLIST NUMBER 23 AMOUNTING TO $152,314.58 CARRIED. II "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE ACCEPT THE TENDER OF WALMSLEY BROS. LIMITED FOR HOT MIX ASPHALT CONTRACT 'AI AT THEIR TENDERED PRICE OF $366,567.00 CARRIED." "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE ACCEPT THE TENDER OF WALMSLEY BROS. LIMITED FOR HOT MIX ASPHALT.CONTRACT 'B' AT THEIR TENDERED PRICE OF $327,388.75. CARRIED." CORRESPONDENCE WAS READ FROM THE FOLLOWING: 1. From the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Ken Kleinsteiber, Head of the Approval Section requesting that the Middlemiss Bridge be available for load testing the last week in August. The bridge would be closed during the actual load ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MAY 14, 1986 PAGE 6. testing, which would only last a few hours. 2. From the Township of Mersea regarding repayment of gas lease royalties. ! l "MOVED BY: D. PEROICH SECONDED BY: A.K. FORD THAT THE RESOLUTION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MERSEA BE REFERRED BACK TO THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED." 3. Village of Springfield requesting parking restrictions on Road #40. The Committee instructed the Engineer to prepare a by-law amendment so that if the County Government Committee decided on an appropriate method of control the County's Parking By-Law could be amended. Reeve Marr was asked to have the Township of Southwold reconsider their position on parking in Fingal and to advise the County Engineer of their wishes as soon as possible. 4. From the Township of Southwold with authorization to do the work on the Orchard-Carroll Municipal Drain in Shedden. 5. From the Roads and Transportation Association of Canada regarding hospitality suites at the 1986 Convention. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT THE COUNTY OF ELGIN DOES NOT PROVIDE A HOSPITALITY SUITE AT THE ROADS AND TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA CONVENTION IN 1986. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E.NEUKAMM THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO PURCHASE A SUITABLE SET OF SCALES FOR USE IN THE SPARTA PIT AND SELL THE PRESENT SET WHEN ANOTHER SET IS .--~ PURCHASED. CARRIED." The Engineer stated that he would hope to have the completed Needs Study updated showing the current needs for the meeting in July so that a continuing road programme could be discussed at that time. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MAY 14., 1986 PAGE 7. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM ( SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE ADJOURN TO TUESDAY, JUNE 10 AT 1:30 P.M. AND WEDNESDAY, JULY 2, 1986 AT 9:30 A.M. CARRIED. II ~~ .//:;:;~A:;-:7t CHAIRMAN '-~' a\\On tinC\Uding pro~incia\ sales 1a~)' ta) _ \983 price 7'~:~S cents \>er 9 t \>er gaHon tta~ inclUded). _ De\i~ered to st. 1nOmas 83.62S cen : ' _ lO~ Bidder _ "orionn contracting l\m\ted.. , \\on tinc\Uding pro~inC\a\ saleS 1a~) to) _ \984 price 99.3 cents.\>er ga . de\i~ered. .' d _ lO~ Bidder _ ~~s\>na\t \ndustries l\m\te · " \\On t23.4 cents \>er litre) t\nc\ud\ng tc) _ \98S price \06.3 cents \>er ga . pro~incia\ sales 1a~)' ' ' _ lO~ Bidder _ ~~\>na\t ;ndustries L\m\ted. CO\l"1'l Of tLG\" RO~D DEP~R1"'t"1 RS \ V. tl'l\lLS \ Ot\ Q\101 ~ n Ot\S - w-. 'I n. \986 " \ ~~s\>na\t \ndustrieS Limited . 880 sne\>\>ared ~~~nue East ~est "i\\. Ontar\O t>\\ E 4\1.2. ) · \ t\nc\udin pro~incia\ sales 1a~' f.O.B. 1ermina\ port stan e . I c06 C nts per GA\\on) 33.\1 centS Per lltre \\.~ e )' 0, 'red tInc\Udinn pro~inca\ sa\~a~ · ~ count" ~s "eau\ 34.24 cents Per litre 2 cne~ron ~s\>na\t Limited . 43 \nduStria\ ~treet 10ronto. ontar\O ~G \12- D~ count 34.9S cents per litre t\ncludinn pro~incial sales 1a~): ~ t\o oemurrage Rate Gi~en. 3. t\Orio\ln contracting limited P.o. ~O~ \00 . 1noro\d. Ontar\O \..2.~ 3~8 ~ count 3S.203 cents per litre pro~incia\ sales la~): 4. 1.J. pounder tontario) limited 106 orenda \lOad, Bram\>ton. ootar\O \..o~ 3'ilo f.~unt _ A_^~~ Per \..\tfe , ..:~ pyolL\lO\ \r<;,Er~elime)' ."'l ,--' ,NTRACT -A. [M II - ROAD '40 [M #12 .ROAD '36 [M #13 - ROAD '24 [M #14 - ROAD '45 :M #15 - ROAD ##40 :M #16, - . SPARTA PIT At CONTRACT .. A II OEseR'~ . ES~ TONS . -_I!.J-_.~_'_ _}.I~QQ . _~I!.J..:~'" _ __ ~~ ~~ . __~._L.:~!._ _ g~2~~ . H.l.4. 2,625 I _ _ H_. 1-.: ~..! _ _ J -,}_?? I _.~._l.:~~ _ __~,}_~Q . I H. L.a. _ _2..,~J_~ . ~ ~ -.. - . .. - - .. , __~: ~=~J_ _ _}.!.~~Q I , .-...- _.._--.._~_..... . H.l.4. 250 ----- - ---..-- . .....--- . ---.- -. _.....!_. - - ----.- I -... _ _ _ -J . _ _ _ _ _ _ __ . . .-. -. . ..... . .. -.. - - -.-. I . ....-.---...-- ..-.._~. I I ..---. .------.- --..-.- -- .. - - ..-. ..-. -.. --- SUMMARY I W (J l f'lf ~ I ~ { lfifT PRfCE AMOUNT. i'B'Y7 --..- /8 ~'1 .- ... - -- .(~-~:= (9_ ~:: /8 e.~- ........... - -.. /' .:::s- (.8 .... ----- /13 30 -.-. --- ~.J. 9';'- _~2~_:- ~~!~/_l<:~ 60 S.ti"-" 7~- -~- -- --- t --- - - -- ...-- ~~/~GI.1;')- - - ............... ..l 7'z/:,<i 1. .! ~ :: .. eo _ ....'...__ d?>- <;/..... 7~- . . .=-;.u..~___ '~I 677 :$~ _,_ _ __L__ ----_..!_-- ./~- ;:t;>"') ~"1::. '-::'- ....)"_ ~.~!. --- __ ___ _L___ ,\~"'~~~. ~""ti ---. ...... -- .'.-- 6 ;-'-'2 ~-o _.";./-.~-!_- ___ _ __1___ .I/' .., ~.". ~/..". ^^ ______? <:!)/dc. ,~.~ f, ---- .....----- --\Xl..-- ..___.J._.. . -......1..- -...-.-..! ..... --.--- _!_.- _______J____ OF HOT MIX I ~WL~-iD UNIT PR I CE .;;2 0 o~. -~-~~ "D ,~ S?"____ /'1 " , ........_~~ /9 ~" , ~....._~ ./5:.~: _ /0 7,';>- · _t____ !.? 9"~ ---- ,,, 7'"9 ~L_.__ . "'/ .,:t::.- g(.<.::.J' -- TENDERS AMOUNT ~~~i. 00 .... + .- - ... --- <f{S- 9~~. 7~- .. ~~_..--- .. - ... ~ ... !.. ....- ,~?:Jli.J.;l :;.... .,;-. G- "'-0 ~;. _ 9 f _,_-__ -----_!_-- ...-.::. "" '7oB7, ;~ ~.. ... ~ ...----- ""'j -:>:....... ~~ ~.i.:Y_~ _1___ -.. - - -'--- 4Q~-/. .~~ /--'4/- _.. __ _ ..__ ...._.... .1__- ~~_~~~_L:.::. -.- --- --'-_.- 1':.'" . ~...... ~ 'V "':?" ~ -~..{_! --- - .-..... - - ! ...... . f :::;......- Dr; / DO _._._.._ ~/. 7""~ t-- -. .-....__1_- ------_!._- .._-_.._~..- ______. J..__ _.__._. __I __ _ ____1___ UNIT .PRI CE . ---..-... 198.6._ AMOUNT _...~~J~., '-1_- .... ...... ~ ..l..__ ------.--- --- --_!_- ---.........---- ____ __1 ___ ________l__ ------.--- ... _.......... J---..,., . -______1_- __.-..... .J__ '-'_ __.... .. .1.,.._ ---.-----'--- -.---.'-- .._ -_____.1..-- ______._1___ ____ J..__ _.___.J._ I UNIT PRICE '~ ....~ ....-. i AMOUNT ____J__ .l...__ l __ __ __ __J___ - -.. - - _! --- __ .. __ _ L...... -----_!_-- _____l__ __ ____1__ ----_..!._- ____ _ __J__ ______t.__ ----. - -'-..- -----_-1.__. ~_..._.__I___- - ..._ .. _1_- -....-. ..I...- -_._.. .J..__ ........--.. .!....... -..___.l.__ COUNTY ESTIMATE' UNIT PRICE l!3~Z~ !~:.~~ le.t".2.2 J.~.t"_2.2 18...22 lR ?2 la:..?~ 18.62 ?? 15 AMOUNT tl,_Op~ J. QQ. ~9.J 670 ,SQ. _J___ .. ~:i.t. 2 93J 's_Q. 4l s eZ7J.SQ -------.--- ~5..052J.50 20.[ Qc\':l laD. -_____.J___ {~.s'O.9.4l5Q . .-. - -- - ....., .~~~J.li.Qc --- -.---'-..- .5..,.681.!.50 _.__.._.1___ . $353.774100 -. ------....-- _.._.. ..1___ ----..--,.-- ._ ..._...t... ._ ..._..J__ ._... .._1._ -""~ '\ I"" NTRACT · B · ~ [M III - ROAD 1114 [M 112 - SOUTHWOLD [M 13 - DUTTON :M #14- ROAD #113 ~AL CONTRACT "B" OEseR'''' E S 1':. TON S . _Jj~L..._8:_ _4.,J99. . __I!J._.~_' _ _~ .z~~Q- . __~-=..l..:~!._ _3.!~QQ_ I . -- -............... .....- .-.- I .. _ t.!-_l.:~-, _ _.; _ ~Z?.. I . - .............. ---- - - --- I _ _ !i o:.l.: ~! _ _ ~ L ~Q.q_ . __ !I.:!- :.4.~_ )_,]]9_ . . . _..~.. - - ----. I ___ _ ___J __ ________ I ___ __ - __1______---- .....---.. .-..-- - . - - --- . ____ - - - _2_- _ _ ... - --- , I --.... . .. -.. - - .. . ... -...... . ,.......-....,---.--.. ---- I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _l . :- _ _ _ _ _ __ -- - -. - . - - - .... - - .. ... 1 ---.--.--'- .------- --..-.- --....--- ----..... 1 , ... .. - - - -.-. . - -.. - . -. SUMMARY OF I tv fJ I 1'// S j ,2 -( U'4IT PR4CE - AMOUNT L2 ;/~ - --. /7 ~~- .- -... ...- Z{1f;:L':~ ~,8~ 7 t ,...-0 ~__ _ :.l_ ____ I~ .;;;,- _':1_ ___ /9 .y'~ .-..---- .4< C/}~o<;; '7?., ..7.l.-'" --- -~ .--- ..,,~- bi ..;!.)~~ I ' ~ 1- __ _ _ _ _ _ /.2i: - - -----1.--- ~ :1""j ("- ~?? 7::;'- 11"' c::;) ~ . ,'UI -',.-'. ~ \ --. --- -'---- ___ __ _1 ____ _.__ ___1__- __ - __ - t___ ___._ _ _1___ ___ _ _ _L___ _____.J____ . ------_!_-- ------ - _! ---- ______ _l____ ------_.!_-- HOT MIX TENDERS "~LAr~ D UNIT PRICE .If!:. ti_-:e: ~D09 ...----... ~L::~ lZ90 ---- Lx. 9'; - ---- ~, AMOUNT 92 Z'd:;l 00 -.... - - --- ~,..~ t!=>_1_0:: ____ _L__ ~~ ?. ((, I o. C. -""-' - . - --- ___ - - _1__- /<aio~-> .~~- - -.. ~....- ----- .!_- iLQ ..' - oc; r J-f /!i _0_'____ ::",-'c:-:o .,$.~- ~ 9.-;; . ---+__ _ :iir' _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __l ___ -2:2..;1 </5? I 7~ "'-""""" "Q,.) , ______ _.1____ ------_!_-- -....--- ...!...- ___ __ ___1__- ______ __l___ ________J.._ ___ ___ _l__ --------1.--- ______ _. J____ ---------, __ _ ____1___ UNIT PRICE ..,-: 80 :'~~ ..- ,-;:;c~u ~~-- .'j:; Be Gi:."~ -----~ cJ8 8D ... ~ ...... --...- .,#:~ /..... Cd~___ .....- 80' du____ 198.9... -'~C" 4-" AMOUNT /1.6.&'601 o~ ..._.....~- 9~ g~f;,-I ~o -'r----- - - - -- ~ - -- A? ~-.Jo ,00 /c.,;:,;. _L~____ .__ ___ _l___ /u geo. ,oc.. ~----- --_. - - - -- - .! --- ,,=,0 ~2<.- oC> ~~;--~~ -'-- d...... -'.L~- 00 74~r~-!-.- ________l___ &7'~- t, y'~" I C,O . ------.,--- ____ _ _J_. ." -----. -'---- -.-----......-- ----- -. - ~---- - ___. __ _.1___. --- ----,--- ________l.__ ______..1.__. ..____ _..1.___ _._____1_._. UNIT PRICE --- -4- AMOUNT __ ___ J__ ---_..!_- ____ _J__. __ __ __J___ - -- - - _!._-- __ _ ___l__ -----_!_-- ______l__ --- ----'-- __ ____ t___ _____ _.1____ ------_!_.-- I ---- - - ------ . . - - - - _I. ___ -- - .---. -'- -.- . ---- - - -'-- ------- --'---- ___._._ _J.__ _.. __ - __ .t. __ _______t ._ I COUNTY ESTIMATE UNIT PRICE _18..9.7 _1~..:'..i7 J~.:_~O _{4~~O ..18...27 _!~___~7 AMOUNT 89.159.~.o_ 7~~2.~~DO_ _1___ 6!...l50 ..QO_ _______t__ 9.".91.~ ~'J!L -------,--- 4Z.!2S",tlO 3~.,,~2t~I2. __t__ $318.. 612 .125 --- ----.I---- ---- - --.I---- ____.___J___ -_.-- - --'--- - -----_!_-- __ ____ __ __1__ ________l___ ---.---_!_-- ______._ _1__- __.______J_._ _______1__ ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 30, 1986 PAGE 1. THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building, 450 Sunset Drive on Wednesday, April 30, 1986 at 9:30 a.m. All members were present except Reeve Bradfield. Also present was Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, the Engineer and the Assistant Engineer. THE ENGINEER REPORTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Sparta Pit rezoning by the Township of Yarmouth had been completed and objections would be received until May 20th. In the meantime the Ministry of Natural Resources would hold the County's application for the pit license. 2. The Chesapeake and Ohio Railway crossings would be inspected on May 2nd with representatives of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway and the Canadian Transport Commission. 3. Road #9 gravelling had been completed. THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Gravelling on Road #26 would be done next week. 2. The quotation of Alex Newbigging Limited for $4.00 per ton to supply and spread gravel on County Road #37 had been accepted, he would start work mid-May. 3. Approximately another 12 or 15 loads of gravel had been applied on Road #28 (Centennial Avenue). 4. Salt brine work was underway with some already having been applied on Road #5 and Road #9. ..........--......, 5. Chittick Construction Limited would finish crushing on April 30th at the County's Pleasant Valley Pit. Approximately 1/2 of the right-of-way of the Pleasant Valley Aggregate property had been removed. 6. Work was continuing at the Sparta Pit with the entrance being improved, the property fenced on the east side and roadway work was underway. The old scales from the County Garage being moved to the pit and set up. In the long run the scales would have to be replaced. Gravel would be piled as soon as possible. Chittick Construction Limited would quote a price for crushing as soon as the pile was up and if satisfactory, start crushing in mid-July. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 30, 1986 PAGE 2. lhe proposed ~ork on the Sparta Pit Road had been appro~ed by the 10~nship of 'armouth. lhere ~as still s~e cleanup at Sparta and the condor ~as needed to cut some lo~ hanging branches. Gra~el needed for ~ork on the Pit Road ~ould be ta~en from the property under the Old Sparta Stone Pit license, ~hich ~as still in effect. 7. Stump remo~al had been completed on Road #40, Road #45, Road #36 and Road #14. The Chairman had authorized the removal of stumps on Road #13 from Road #14 to Willey's Side Road. B. Ditching ~or~ ~as under~ay at the outlet of the Ba~er-penhale Drain on Road #52 to remo~e se~eral feet of ~ater ~hich had been lying in the pipe arch cul~ert so the cul~ert could be further inspected as it appeared to be failing. 9. Ditching ~as required on the Fingal Hill on Road #16 and Road #45 at Sha~s culvert and Road #30 at the Da~e Ferguson property. 10. Cleanup ~ork ~ould begin shortly on Road #22 ~ith drain constructio~ north of Road #45. 11. lhe old fence had been cleaned up on Road #45 bet~een High~ay #73 and Road #40. 12. Gravel shouldering on Road #2B (Centennial A~enue) at Elm Street had been done as ~ell as on Road #2 at the east limit of West Lorne. 13. Miscellaneous drainage ~or~ ~as under~ay as ~ell as bridge cleaning work. 14. S~e repairs ~ere required at the ~iddlemiss Bridge and the lates Bridge. 15. Emulsion and pipe Quotations ~ould be put out shortly. 16. It ~as hoped to start ~or~ on the ~ellington Road culverts on June 15th. The Shriners Con~ention ~as scheduled for the ~ee~end 17. Curb and gutter at the intersection of Road #36 and Road #24 ~ould before. be placed next week. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 30, 1986 PAGE 3. 18. Work at the intersection of Centennial Avenue and High~/ay #3 would not likely be undertaken until July. 19. Five old oil~ gasoline and diesel fuel storage tanks at the County Garage had been removed. 20. The poor condition of the Canadian National crossing at Glencolin on Road #40 had been brought to the attention of the Canadian National Railway. 21. A posting for a spare operator had been made with Jack Mathews being assigned the position. 22. It would be necessary that 2 or 3 casual employees be promoted to Class lA' (Casual Operators) because of the shortage of operators who would be on vacation or deferred time this Summer. The appointment of an Assistant Superintendent was discussed briefly. The Engineer asked to discuss the wage structure with the Personnel Chairman. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT THE FOLLOWING PAYLISTS BE APPROVED: PAYLIST NUMBER 20 AMOUNTING TO $72,252.03 PAYLIST NUMBER 21 AMOUNTING TO $43,483.11 CARRIED. II The budget was discussed at some length; a maintenance budget was discussed. Total maintenance costs would be approximately ~ $2,000,000, which would be up $78,000 from the budgeted amount of $1,912,000. The $580-,000 budgeted for winter control had been expended and total winter control to the end of December was estimated at $765,000. A number of maintenance items would have to be cut including bridge maintenance, drainage, and shoulder maintenance. It had been rumored that the price of asphalt emulsion would increase considerably and if this was the case it would either be necessary to increase the S1. 1HO~I-\S, ON1~R10 J\?RIL 30, 1986 pJ\GE 4. surface treatment budget to do the 20 ~ilometers originallY programmed or else reduce the mileage to a ~ery lo~ amount, and hope that the price ~ould go do~n in se~eral months. It was decided to lea~e the maintenance budget in abeyance until the surface treatment costs ~ere ~no~n. lhe Chairman Suggested that portions of the Strachan street drain in port Bur~ell be in~estigated and repaired by the Village of port Bur~ell before any decision ~as made on the request of port Bur~ell to ha~e the County twin the outlet. I-\fter some discUssion. . . · R. F. ?URCELL "MO\1ED B'{: SECO~OEO B~: ~.~. ~~Rl~N lH~1 lHE E~GlNEER BE ~U\HORlIED 10 C~LL lE~DERS rOR HOl ~lX ~SPH~Ll pl-\~lNG ~S FOLLOWS: 1. O~ BEH~Lr Or lHE 10~NSHIP Or SOU1H~OLO tBOX~LL RO~D). 2. O~ BEH~Lr Or lHE VILL~GE Or DUll0~. 3. COU~I~ RO~D #14 _ RESURr~CI~G rRO~ COU~I~ RO~D #14 10 ~PPROXIM~IEL~ COUN1~ RO~D #9, EXCEPl ~1 HIGH~~~ #401. 4. COUN1~ RO~D #13 _ rRO~ CoU~I~ RO~D #14 10 CO~~L SIDE RO~D t2.3 K~). (CON1RI-\C1 \ B \ ) CJ\RRIED." "MO~ED B'{: W. 1-\. MJ\R1'{N SECONDED B~: D. PEROVIC~ lH~1 lHE E~GI~EER BE ~U1HORIIED 10 C~LL lE~DERS rOR HOl ~IX ~SPH~Ll ?1-\~lNG ~S FOLLOWS: CON1R~C1 1 ~ 1 1. COUN1Y RO~D #40 _ p~ICHI~G BE1~EE~ COU~I~ RO~D #45 ~NO HIG~W~~ #3. t~PPROXI~~IEL~ 1.3 K~) 2. CoU~I~ RO~O #40 _ RESURF~CI~G BE1~EE~ ~ou~1 S~LEM ~~D COUN1~ ROI-\D #42. 3. COu~n RO~o#36 _ RESURr~CI~G, SP~Rl~ 10 COU~I~ RO~D #24 ~~D COU~I~ RO~D #24 E~SI OF COU~I~ RO~D #36 t~PPROXI~~IEL~ 1.5 K~). CON11NUED . . . I ..----~'" ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 30, 1986 PAGE 5. "MOVED BY: W. A. MARTYN SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH CONTINUED . . . 4. AT THE APPROACHES TO GILLETS BRIDGE (2 INCH LIFT). 5. COUNTY ROAD #45 - BASE COAT FROM COUNTY ROAD #40 WESTERLY APPROXIMATELY 2.4 KM. CARRIED." Correspondence was read from the City of St. Thomas indicating that they might have a title problem with the Cowan Park property and if a portion was sold to the County for the improvement of Road #26 it would be necessary that this sale did not impinge upon the City's rights to use the remainder of the property as a park in perpetuity. It was agreed that the County solicitor should investigate further. Further correspondence was read from Wayne Eitel regarding Pritchard on Road #16t Fingal Hill indicating that the Township of Southwold was satisfied that Mr. Pritchard could move closer to the property line than the Township By-Law indicated and that the Township Council had no objection to this. Reeve Marr indicated that the Township did have objections to this and the Engineer was instructed to inform Mr. Eitel that until Southwold Township was satisfied with the set-back, the County Road Committee was not prepared to recommend an amendment to the County's Set-Back By-Law. A quotation for pavement marking paint from Ibis Products Limited was discussed. It was agreed that further quotations would not be called as the quoted price was 6~ per litre lower than the price received by the County of Middlesex which had closed tenders the week before. ~ "MOVED BY: Ro F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE ACCEPT THE QUOTATION OF IBIS PRODUCTS LIMITED FOR WHITE AND YELLOW TRAFFIC PAINT AT THEIR QUOTED PRICE OF $1.62 PER LITRE, FEDERAL SALES TAX INCLUDED, ONTARIO SALES TAX EXTRA, F.O.B. WHITE STATION GARAGE. CARRIED. II ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 30, 1986 PAGE 6. dWarden Purcell initiated a discussion on a County wide- computer system and felt that such a system should be compatible with other departments. After discussion "MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE RECOMMEND TO THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE THAT THEY AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY'S AUDITORS TO PROCEED WITH A STUDY WITH REGARD TO THE COMPUTER NEEDS FOR THE ROAD COMMITTEE WITH A VIEW OF IMPLEMENTING AN ADEQUATE COUNTY COMPUTER SYSTEM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. CARRIED. II The rezoning of the property on County Road #3 at the north limit of Highway #401 and Aldborough Township was discussed at some length and the Engineer was instructed to ascertain further information. No further information was available on the Port Stanley Terminal Rails Incorporated application to the Ontario Municipal Board, although the dates of June 12th and June 13th have been set for a Board Hearing at the County building. CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. From the City of St. Thomas approving the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission budget. 2. From the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Mr. Ken Kleinsteiber, Head, Municipal Approval Section requesting the assistance of Fred Groch at the Ontario Good Roads School, Bridge Maintenance Course in Guelph on May 5th to May 7th. 3. Township of Yarmouth rezoning property in Sparta. 4. Township of Southwold with a minor variance for the building of a medical centre at the intersection of Road #20 and Highway #3 in Shedden. The building would be placed at the farthest point from both roads on the lot. 5. The Township of Southwold with a variance for side lines on Road #19 which would allow for the building of a house to meet the County Set-Back By~Law. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 30, 1986 PAGE 7. 6. A proposal by Lloyd Reeb for sub-dividing 4 lots on the south side of Road #45, west of the London and Port Stanley property. The County had no objections, however an agreement would have to be entered into with the Township of Yarmouth. 7. From the City of Burlington requesting that legislation be amended so that the local municipality would have the power to control hazardous goods routes through the i r mun i c i pa 1 i ty . "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE ADJOURN TO 9:30 A.M., WEDNESDAY, MAY 14 AND 9:30 A.M., TUESDAY, JUNE'IO, 1986. CARRIED. II .. "L-..... ~ ~~~4~~~~~, CHAIRMAN ~" S't. 'tllOMAS, 0l'1'tAR10 A"PR1L 18, 1986 "PAGB 1. ",n CO......,-'fty.y. met at tbe MUnicipal Building, 'tllE COUJ:1't'l 01' Y.LCll'1 ROw> 1.1l''' . -1 18 1986 at 9 :00 a.m. 1>.11 450 sunset Drive, St. 'tbomas on Fr1.daY, p,pr1. ' member s were pre sent e:ltcept Reeve tJ. so pre sent was Mr. 1tlayne S iroms, Mr. YJ;ank clarke of tbe Ministry of J:01arr, Reeve Bradfield and Reeve Martyn. 1>.cting District MUniCipal Engineer and 'transportatiOn and c~nicatiOns and the Bngineet:. . ]1,1' as per tbe attacbed 'tbe Coromittee inspected roads 1.n 1tlest g1.n agenda. d ~< -1 30 1986. 'tbe meeting adjOUrned to 1tledneS ay, "pr1. ' t" ~ COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE WEST ELGIN ROAD INSPECTION APRIL 18, 1986 1. Leave 450 Sunset Drive 9:00 a.m. 2. Port Stanley via County Road #23. 3. County Road #20, Port Stanley to Fingal. 4. County Road #16, Fingal to Burwell's Corner. 5. County Road #14 (Burwell's Corner) to Iona. 6. - COFFEE - (IONA) . 7. County Road #14 to County Road #13 - Scheduled for resurfacing from County Road #13 to County Road #9 in 1986. 8. Middlemiss Bridge - Ministry of Transportation and Communications will do tests on the bridge in August of 1986. The County of Middlesex does not wish to programme reconstruction.. 9. County Road #9 - Site of the Township of Dunwich brine pit. 10. County Road #9 (Dunwich Township) - Road gravelled in 1985. 11. County Road #9 (Aldborough Township) - To be gravelled in 1986, as well as County Road #5 to Walkers Bridge. 12. County Road #3 (Furnival Road). 13. County Road #3 to Wardsville - Portions resurfaced a.nd patched in 1985. Joints on the Wardsville Bridge are to be replaced in 1986. 14. Highway #2 to County Road #7, Aldborough Townline south over the Bothwell Bridge - Joint jurisdiction of the Bothwell Bridge Elgin 27~% - Middlesex 22~% - Kent 50%. Culvert replacement Lather Hill. 15. County Road #6, Clathan to Black's Lane. 16. County Road #6 to County Road #3, County Road #3 to Rodney, County Road #4 in Rodney west to the Kent Town1ine - Road in poor condition. 17. Return to Rodney. 18. County Road #3, Rodney - Entrances south, Furnival ~~ad. 19. County Road #2 to West Lorne. 20. - LUNCH - (WEST LORNE) . continued . . . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE WEST ELGIN ROAD INSPECTION APRIL 18, 1986 PAGE 2. 21. County Road #2, West Lorne to Aldborough-Dunwich TCMnline _ Need for resurfacing. 22. County Road #2, easterly to Ecker Drain - Road in poor condition, Mary Street to Canadian National tracks. 23. Main Street in Dutton (County Road #8). 24. County Road #13, Dutton to County Road #14 - Portion under consideration for resurfacing in 1986. 25. Township of Southwold Gore Road to County Road #20, County Roads #20, #18 and #17 in Southwold Township, Township Road to Highway #4, County Road #11 to County Road #26. 26. Wellington Road - Culvert replacement at the Lynhurst School and McBains. 27. County Road #29 - Culvert at McBain's. 28. St. George Street - Location of sewer main trunk for the Lynhurst and St. George Street area. 29. County Road #33, Kain's Hill - Chesapeake and Ohio 'ralbot Yard closed. 30. Township Roads to County Road #45 - Return to County Building, 450 Sunset Drive. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 17, 1986 PAGE 1. THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the Municipal Building at 9:00 a.m., Thursday, April 17, 1986. All members except Reeve Marr were present. Also present was Mr. Frank Clarke of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the Engineer. The Engineer presented quotations as attached for crushed gravel on County Road ~ in Aldborough Township and County Road H5 i.n Aldborough and Dunwich Townships. In addition to the three quotations received Babinsky Trucking Limited of Komoka; Huron Construction Company of Chatham; South Winds Sand and Gravel of London; and McKenzie Henderson of Arkona were asked but failed to quote. The Engineer noted that the quotation was approximately 20 cents over the County's estimated price of $6.00. It was felt that there could be nothing done about reducing the price. "MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT WE ACCEPT THE QUOTATION OF T.C.G. MATERIALS LIMITED, LONDON, ONTARIO TO SUPPLY AND SPREAD GRANULAR 'A' ON COUNTY ROAD ~ FROM COUNTY ROAD #3 TO COUNTY ROAD #5 AND ON COUNTY ROAD #5 FROM COUNTY ROAD #9 (DUNWICH TOWNSHIP) TO WALKERS BRIDGE AT THEIR QUOTED PRICE OF $6.21 PER TON. CARRIED." The Committee inspected roads in East Elgin as per the attached agenda and adjourned at 4:30 p.m. to Friday, April 19, 1986. t;6.... .I ~:t'//A:_L . 0 A , -;-.. , J!.-':-'- '" I~~ ~ CHAIRMAN COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT QUOTATION FOR CRUSHED GRAVEL COUNTY ROADS #9 AND #5, ALDBOROUGH AND DUNWICH TOWNSHIPS (13,000 TONS) 1. T.C~G. Materials Limited P. O. Box 189 London, Ontario N6A 4v7 $6.21 Per Ton 2. Alex Newbigging Limited R. R. #1 Delaware, Ontario ~~6. 74 Per Ton 3. Johnston Bros. (Bothwell) Limited P. O. Box 220 Bothwell, Ontario NOP lCO ~~6. 98 Per Ton * NOTE: 1985 Gravel for County Road #9 (Dunwich Township) was supplied by Alex Newbigging at $4.80 per ton. ~O~~~ ~T g.0N RO~CT.!Q!'!. ~7,~ 1986 CONS'J'RUCTION PROGR)\MME: ~-~-- 1. wellington Road and county Road 1\29 (yarmouth and southwold TOwnshiPS) _ Replacement of three culverts. 2. county Road 1\45 from Road 1\40 westerlY to Luton. 3. county Road 1\22 (Fairview l\.venue) - completion of work from 1985 and construction southerlY from concessions IV and V as far as 4. Engineering for culvert replacement - Kent_l\.ldbOrOugh Townline, funding will permit. 5. county Road 1\3, wardsville Bridge - Replacement of bridge jointS. Road #7. 6. Engineering work _ St. George street (county Road 1\26). 1. County Road 1\40 _ Mount salem to County Road 1\42, Malahide TownshiP' 1986 ASpHALT RESURFACING: 2. County Road 1\36 _ From the south limit of sparta to County Road 1\24, county Road 1\24 from County Road 1\36 easterlY approximatelY 1 1/2 3. County Road 1\14 (SouthWOld-DunwiCh Townline) - From county Road 1\13 kilometers. to County Road #9. 4. Wi th Remaining Funds ,: (a) County Road 1\42 - From county Road 1\40 easterlY, (b) County Road 1\13 - From county Road 1\14 westerlY, - or - ~10N: 1. Leave 450 sunset Drive at 9:00 a.m. 2. County Road 1\22 (Fairview l\.venue) from the city limits to county Road 1\27 _ Reconstructed in 1984 and 1985; work south of concessions IV and V remains. 3. County Road 1\27 to sparta. continued . . . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMM.I'1"l'EE EAST ELGIN ROAD INSl'ECTI0N ~ PAGE 2. 4. To1HnshiP of YaP"outh Road from sparta to Gillets Bridge - Road ~ h' and the County for sUbject to agreement bet~een the>o~s ~p repairs and/Or improvement. Inspection of sparta l'it. To1HnshiP Road easterlY to Bigh~aY ~73. _ COFFEE - (EMIL NB~'S)' t R d ~40 - l'ortion County Road ~45 from Bigh~aY ~73 to coun y oa bet~een the Municipal Drain just ~est of Luton to county Road ~40 , 'f t 11 possible. land purchase should be completed th~s year ~ a a near 1 y completed, st1J1l\P removal .underway. County Road ~40 south _ ASphalt resurfacing scheduled from ~. d ~42 st1J1l\ps have been removed. Mount salem to County ~oa · d' 1985 on the Silver creek County Road ~42 _ Inspect ~ork co111Plete ~n 5. 6. '7 . 8. 9. cu1vex:t. 1 _ under consideratiOn county Road ~42 from county Road ~40 easter y f' . 1986' ~ork ~ould start at County Road ~40 and for resur ac~ng ~n ' ~ould proceed easterlY as far as funding ~ould permit. t R d *45 - Some county Road ~43 from county Road ~42 to Coun y oa . . f the road ~aS primed in 1985 for ditching has been done 1 a port~on 0 10. 11. 12. dust contx:01. D d ~^3 ~0x:thex:1Y to cooks Bridge - T~porarY Bailey Bridge. county ~oa it~ l.~ . . d in 19851 considerable realignment ~ork l'hil11l\Ore Br~dge - Repa~re ~ould be required for replacement. d ~38 Rich1l\ond to straffordville. county Roa it ' ff d 'lle to Norfolk-Elgin To~nline, County Road ~38 east of stra or v~ southerlY on the T(lW!\line to County Road ~45. CountY Road ~55 , d ~42 _ This is being maintained from County. Road ~45 to County Roa . of tla1dimand-Norfolk the portion alreadY constructed bY the Regl.on 1.1. t~"cted bY Baldimand-Norfolk and the r~ainder is to haS been x:eCons J,....... t f Elgin ~hen it is a priority ~itb be reconstructed bY the Coun y 0 the CountY of Elgin. d ~^2 to l'ort Burwell _ varioUs erosion areas along the county Roa it~ d' th mox:e sex:ioUs ax:eas. road ~ith $tumPs being place ~n e 11 to 1 mile east _ ASphalt resurfaced in 1985. yx:om pox:t Burwe _ LuNCB - (l'ORT BURWELL) · continu,ed. . . 13. 14. 15. 16. 1'7 . 18. '10 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE EAST ELGIN ROAD INSPECTION APRIL 17, 1986 PAGE 3. 20. Inspection of County Road #42 and County Road #50 in Port Burwell - Construction completed in 1985. 21. Port Burwell Bridge - Major deck repairs in 1985. 22. Highway #19 through Vienna, noting Vienna Bridge - Bridge repaired in 1985. 23. Request from the Village of Port Burwell for improvements to Strachan Street storm drain outlet; continuation of outlet from the Village limits, easterly to the Little Otter Creek. 24. County Road #39 (Chatham Street) - Asphalt resurfaced in 1985. 25. County Road #45 from Highway #19 to Mount Salem. 26. County Road #40 to Highway #3 - Asphalt patching will be required this year. Resurfacing of County Road #40 from Highway #3 to County Road #45 west was added to County Needs in the Spring of 1986. 27. Highway #3 to County Road #40, Glencolin, Township Road to County Road #32 (poloce College Road) - County Road #32 was completed in 1985. 28. County Road #32 to County Road #52 to Springfield. 29. County Road #52 to Springfield - Municipal drain East Street in Springfield, drainage costs include curb and gutter; added to the Needs in 1986 for the Village of Springfield. (Construction has not been programmed.) 30. County Roads #49, #48 and #47 to County Road #37 - County Road #37 to be gravelled in 1986. 31. - COFFEE - (CLARENCE WILLSEY'S). 32. Highway #74 to Highway #3, Highway #3 to County Road #35, County Road #35 to County Road #45 to Player's Bridge - Bridge deck repaired in 1985. 33. County Road #36 to Pleasant Valley Pit - Gravel crushing is underway along with stripping. The gravel pit is nearly depleted in the front area. 34. County Road #36 to Sparta, Sparta to County Road #24 and County Road #24 easterly approximately 1.5 kilometers - Scheduled for asphalt resurfacing in 1986. 35. County Road #24 to County Road #23. to Highway #4 - Re"turn to County Building, 450 Sunset Drive. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE = __ -==--c ~--= ~RST REPOR~ APRIL SESSION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Your Road conullittee 1tlill inspect County. roads on April 17th in East Elgin and on April lBth in West Elgin. 2 . A planned meeting 1tli th the county of Elgin Road conulli ttee and the county of Middlesex ROad conullittee has been deferred bY the county of Middlesex Road conullittee to a later date. 1. That the county Road conullittee be authorized to participate in the WE RECOMMEND: proposed ontario Municipal Board hearing dealing 1tlith an application by the port stanley Terminal Rail Incorporated to extend their operations from union to st. Thomas and to change the limit of their liability insurance required by the ontario Municipal The Road committee's position cannot be ascertained on the matter Board. . until a copY of an Engineering Report ordered by the ontario Municipal Board is received. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED ---- CHAI'RMAN ST. THO'MAS, ONTARIO APRIL 10, 1986 PAGE 1. 9:30 a.m., Thursday, April 10, 19B6. All members ~ere present. Also.present ~as Mr. Frank Clarke and Mr. Wayne Simms, Acting Municipal Engineer of the THB COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at 450 sunset Drive at Ministry of Transportation and communications, the Engineer and Assistant Engineer. I1MJVED BY: E. NEIJKAMM SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT THB MlN1.1TES OF THB MEETINGS OF FEBRUARY 21 AND MARCH 5, 19B 6 BE PASSED. CARRIED." THB ENGINEER REl'ORTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Spring breakup had been relativelY light, some soft spotS had occurred on gravel roads partiCularlY on County Road #37, county Road #2B (centennial Avenue) ap.d a fe~ on County Road I/A. 2. Asphalt patching ~ould be required on county Road #40 south of Summers 3. Frost heaves on County Road #4, County Road #2 bet~een West Larne and corner for appro><imatelY a mile. ])Utton and county Road #45 bet~een High~ay #13 and wton had subsided so that travel ~aS nearly normal on these sections. not seem to be SO many broken tile or plUgged catCh basins thiS Spring 4. Drain~ge costS ~ould likely be less than in previoUS years as there did 5. It ~as probable that savings could be made in some other areas as ~ell as in past years. including Roadside Maintenance, Bridge Maintenance and perhaps Repairs 6. All the ~inter control budget ~ould be spent by mid April and additional to pavement. funds ~ould be necessary for the Fall. A ne~ maintenance budget ~ould be presented on April 30th. It ~aS likely that some money ~ould have to be taken from asphalt resurfacing. previouslY budgeted for municipal drains ~ould not be sufficient. -~, 7. More MuniCipal Drainage ReportS had been received and the $150,000 ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 10, 1986 PAGE 2. TllE ENGINEER AND ASSISTANT ENGINEER REPORTED ON TllE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The First Aid Training course -was under-way on Friday afternoons during 2. The Grader school for MaY 12th to MaY 14th had been filled, -with an April. 3. The Ministry of Transportation and communications had requested that application from south-West Oxford Township, Fred Groch help out at the Road School inasmuch as one of their regular lectUrers bad been sent to Jordan on assignment. 4. Pipe culvert inspections -were continuing, some cracks had been found on 5. Engineering research from C01ders ASSociateS -waS continuing and a the pipe arch culvert on county Road #40 at Beecrofts. preliminary report had been received but nO conclusive findings -were yet 6. The tractors and mo-wers -would be delivered in mid-May. available. 7. The superintendent had attended the Vegetation control Seminar in London on April 2nd and reported that "Roundup" -was still an approved chemical 8. The Sparta pit Agreement had been signed and the Township of yarmouth for vegetation control. 9. Tree cutting -waS under-way on the Sparta pit Road and -work -would be done ",ou1d pass the zoning by-1a-W the first of next -week. in the driveway. Gravel -would be piled as time permitted. Mr. Rob Richardson -would again rent the property for 1986 at the same rental rate as 1985 ($1,200.00). for crushing at the Sparta Pit, inasmuch as he -was already -working at the 10. The Engineer -was authorized to negotiate -with C. R. ChittiCk Limited 11. The Assistant Engineer had purchased roach of the land -widening required Pleasant valley pit. on county Road #45 bet-ween lligh-way #73 and Luton. lle -was hopefUl of signing the rest of the small holdings -within the next fe-w -weeks and -would negotiate -with the ne-w owner of the McKnight property after he took possession on the 1st of May. ----"'~ ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 10, 1986 PAGE 3. 12. The removal of stU11lPS "as under"ay on county Road #40 south of Mount Salem and "ould start shortlY on county Road #45. Stumps "ould also be removed on county Road 1f36 south of Sparta to county Road #24 and. on county Road #1-4 bet"een county Road #1-3 and the Middlemiss Bridge. completed for the time being. All County gravel at the lo"er level had been excavated and stripping on the pleasant Valley Aggregate property (99 feet ]{ 300 feet) "as under"ay and excavation of gravel "ould start shortly. When their gravel had been excavated the land "ould be levelled off and an ~pplication "ould be made for release of the rehabilitatiOn money being held by the province. It "as expected that C. R. Chittick Limited "ould continue crushing until 13. The stripping at the pleasant valley pit at the front section had been 14. Sno" fence had been removed and all sanders had been removed from hired the end of April. trucks but "ould remain on county trucks to take care of emergencies. 15. Some gravel had been placed on County Road #28 (centennial Avenue) south 16. Grading of gravel roads "as under""ay as required. of Elm Street. 17. QUotations for gravel resurfacing on county Road #A and county Road If5 "ere 18. TreeS for planting and municipalitieS "ould be received approximatelY due on April 16th. April 15th. Additional treeS "ere being ordered to take care of the orders of local municipalities. they have had in the past 10 years, "hich seemed odd as breakUP on both county and Township roads in Elgin "ere not extensive. 19. The county of Middle seX "as experiencing one; .of . the "or st breakUP s that 20. Machinery repair had not been extensive in the last month. Repairs had been made to Truck #Al (the float truck). The track idlers and track chains had been replaced on the TOo7 and a sleeve kit "as being installed in the TOo8. to Ibis pr oduct s in N iagar a Fall s "i thin the next "eek to have the Upgraded pavement marking equipment placed on the truck. 21. Truck #1-16 (InternatiOnal Cabover) "as being painted and "ould be taken ST. TllOMAS, ONTARIO A'PRIL 10, 1986 'PAGE 4. 22. The TownshiP of 'la~outh "as not interested in 'truck #f>4 (DOdge Tandem 'truck) and it would be sold by tender as "ould Truck #75 (1966,C600 Ford) as soon d f ...... "1~ag~a FallS Both trucks "ould be ad~ertiSed at as it "as returne rou' ~~ ~ · the same time. Ree~e Ford indicated that there might be enough salt brine to do county Road ~ in uun"ich but little more until mid_SUmmer. The Road Needs Study Update would be done shortlY' sections that had becoroe deficient o~er the Vlinter "ould be inspected "ith Mr. ]"rank clarke of the Ministry of TransportatiOn and communicatiOns. The Engineer recei~ed permission from the C()1llll\ittee to meet "ith Mr. Da~e BOehm of Totten, SimS, Hubick and AsSociates Limited to diSCUSS the roethods that theY "ere using for financial arrangement S for countieS in Eastern Ontario. . h ld ~n ...'ft..~ tby"ith Mr. BOebm in 1984 had been ~erY beneficial A meet1.ng e .... WJ.L.... 23. 24. to the county. Gra~el resurfacing on CountY Road #37 "ould be started as soon as possible (MaY 15th by Ale~ Ne"bigging Limited). quotations for emulsion "ould be required shortlY' Soroe shOulder gra~elling would be done as time pe~itted (COuntY Road #40 bet"een Mount Salem and High"ay #3). Most of them had 26. 21. 28. 29. Ten people had been hired as casual help for the Su~er. "orked for the oountY pre~iouslY. Jim Vlatters, clasS StoCkkeeper had lost hiS dri~ers license for a year and 30. had been placed in claSS 1 (LabOurer). A posting for a Stockkeeper "ould be done shortlY "hich "ould likely result in postings for other positions as "ell. --~, "MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH SECONDED B'l: VI. A. MART'lN T11AT T1:lEFOLLO'ilING PA'lLIST BE APPROVED: PA'{1.IST N1JMP>ER 13 AMOUNTING TO $1,089.96 PA'lLIST 1'lUMBER 14 AM01JN'tING TO $57,517.76 PA'{1.IST N1JMP>ER 15 AMo1JN'tI1'lG TO $144,940.53 CONTINUED · · · ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 10, 1986 PAGE 5. "MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN CONTINUED . . . PAYLTST NUMBER 16 AMOUNTING TO $54,467.62 PAYLIST NUMBER 17 AMOUNTING TO $38,602.88 PAYLIST NUMBER 18 AMOUNTING TO $79,169.38 PAYLIST NUMBER 19 AMOUNTING TO $56,493.97 CARRIED." The County of Middlesex Road Committee had cancelled a proposed meeting with the County of Elgin Road Committee on April 30th. The Elgin Road Committee was of the opinion that further meetings between the two would have to be arranged by the County of Middlesex and would have to be held at their convenience. It was not likely that a meeting would be held before July or Augu st. The Committee decided that they did not wish to discu.ss the Hubrey-Highbury Road further until additional information was available from the County of Middlesex. The Engineer was instructed to meet with Mayor Golding and to bring her up to date on the deliberations between the two Committees regarding the Hubrey-Highbury Road. Quotations for precast concrete box sections for culverts on Wellington Road and County Road #29 were as attached. The Engineer reported that they felt that there would be a savings of $8,000 to $10,000 to the County for a poured in place box culvert on County Road #29 and recommE~nded that precast sections be purchased for the two culverts on Wellington Road only. The ~ target date for delivery is mid-June. S't. 't11.0MAS, ON'tARI0 APRIL 10, 1986 "PAGE 6. "MOVED BY': SECONDED B'l: R. F. J'lJRCELL 't1:1A't WE ACCEJ"t 't11.E QUarA'tl0N 01" CONCRE'tE 1'11'1'. COW' Nfl, LONDON, FOR 'tHE SuppL'l AND DELlVER'l 01" 200 FEJrt 01" 10' )(. 8' l'BECAS't REINFORCED CONCRJrtE BO)(. SEctIONS 'to BE USED 'to REpUCE 'tVlO pU'tE 1'11'1'. ARCHES ON VlELLING'tON ROAD (MCBAIN AND L'lN1:\URS't SC11.00L) FOR A 'tarAL COS't 01" $84,693. 9 2 INCLUDTNG FEDERAL AND pROVTNCIAL SALES 'tAZES, BEING AL'tERNA't1'fJ!. 'A' 01" 'tHEIR QuarA'tl0N. (A DISCOUN't 01" 5% VJ1LL BE ALLOVlED IF pA~ IS MADE B'l 'tm: 25't11. 01" 'tm: MQN'r11. FOLLOWlNG S11.11'MEN't. ) E. NEm-zAMM CARRIED ." 'the Enginee1: 1:ep01:ted that he had contacted the City of st. 'tholllaS with 1:ega1:d to 1:ight~of~waY fo1: St. Ge01:ge St1:eet 1:evisions th1:ough COwan pa1:k. Atneeting had been held with Mr. J. J. cassidy, supe1:intendent, d h' '1 Chesapeake and Ohio Railway with 1:ega1:d to the Chesapeake an 0 1.0 1:a1. C1:ossings on va1:iOUs CountY 1:0ads in Vlest Elgin. It appea1:ed that the . .. t d '1 r.epai-r wo-rk inasro.\1cb Chesapeake and Ohio Railway waS 1.n no pOS1.t1.on 0 0 an; . as they had t1:ansfe1:1:ed all of thei1: f01:ceS to sa1:nia and we1:e noW running all of thei1: t1:ainS on the canadian National (old con1:ail t1:ackS) in Vlest Elgin- 1 . f tbe-t.... p~esent line that they would llIaintain would be 'the on y p01:t1.ons 0 ~~. f1:olll VleSt L01:ne to the Rent County Line to se1:vice the elevat01:s. 'the Enginee1: was auth01:ized to llIeet with the BOa1:d of 't1:ansp01:t and if necessa1:Y petition the 11.onou1:able John Vlise to attelllpt to get an ea1:1y solution to the 1:epai1:ing of the C1:ossings as all committee llIelllbe1:S felt that o~r\ nUllle1:0Us cOlllplaintS had sollle of the C1:ossings we1:e e1<t1:elllelY dange1:0Us been 1:eceiVed by all. C01:1:espondence was read frolll the Village of DUtton, DUtton District ch~be1: of Corotne1:ce and the DUtton public UtilitieS COmmission rega1:ding the p1:0posal fo1: the illlP1:0velllent of CountY Road #B in the Village of DUtton. 'the Committee ag1:eed to diSCUSS the tnatte1: fU1:the1: when the 1:0ad illlp1:0vetnent p1:0g1:grome waS discUssed. ~', ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 10, 1986 PAGE 7. A ten page petition asking for improvements on County Road #4, west of It was noted that some of the people that had signed the petition were from The committee agreed that the petition would be discUssed when the future ~, Rodney was presented by Reeve perovich. quite a distance such as oakville, Ancaster and St. Mary's. road construction programme was considered. Road inspection arrangementS were discussed. correspondence was noted from the St. Thomas Answering Service requecsting rental space on the county's radio tower. The Engineer stated'that Oxford comrounications were discussing the matter further with the St. Thomas Answering Service. If the St. Thomas Answering Service felt that they still wished space on tbe tower negotiations would likely be done through Oxford communications inasmuch as OXford communications was already renting space on the county's tower. CORRESPONDENCE WAS NoTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. From the Ministry of Transportation and Communications with the appointment 2. From Don pickerskill of the Kettle Creek conservation Authority commending of Mr. Wayne Simms as Acting Municipal Engineer. the County for the good condition of county Road #37 during the Maple syrup 3. From pollard BroS. Limited with their prices for calcium chloride for the Season. 4. From A. M. Spriet and ASSociates regarding the expansion of the Village of 1986 Season _ $203.91 flake equivalent metriC tonne. DUtton sewage works. The expansioncof the sewage works would not interfere with any county roads or drainage structures. 5. Zoning by_lawS from the Tomlship of Yarmouth. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 10, 1986 PAGE 8. 6. zoning by_la""S frOlIL the To1ilt1ship of AldborOugh. The Engineer ""as instructed to ",rite the To"",ship of Aldborough Suggesting that they put a site plan control by_la"" on the property in Lot 8, The property has been purchased by the Ontario pork producers Marketing concession VI at High""ay #401. Board and ""ould be used as a hog assembly and marketing yard. The Engineer did not kno"" ""hether or not the Ministry retained control of the property necessary for ,,,,,idening the county Road and if they did not, as a condition of the rezoning a 17 foot ""idening ""ould be required frOlIL 7. FrOlIL the Village of springfield regarding parking on EaSt Street. The the property. Engineer ""as instructed to advise the Village that as there ""ere nO by_la""S prohibiting. parking on EaSt Street it ""ould be impossible for the 8. From the Village of springfield regarding a proposed school crossing zone county By-La"" Officer to police parking. The Engineer stated that the county policY ""ould be to place the necessary on East Street near the school. signS and pavement markings provided the school Board ""ould undertake school crossing GUard protection. UnlesS crossing GUard protection ""as in place a crossing could only lead to false sense of security on the 9. From the Ontario }\l1nicipal Board stating that a hearing ""ould be convel!led part of the children using the cross ""alk. shortly after receipt of an engineering report from the port Stanley Terminal This hearing ""ould not only consider liability insurance coverage but also consider the extenSion proposed by the port Stanley Terminal Rail""ay from Railway · the end of their present rail""ay at Union to St. Thomas. The committee noted that it ""ould be difficult to formulate a stand on the matter until such time as the engineering report had been received but felt that the Committee should be represented at the hearing. ST. TROMAS, ONTARIO APRIL 10, 1986 -PAGE 9_ "MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: R. F. pURCELL TEAT VIE RECoMMEND TO couNTY COUNCIL TRAT THE couNTY ROAD COMMITTEE BE AUTHORIZED TO l'ARTlCll'ATE IN THE l'ROl'OSED ONTARIO Mffi'1:tCIl'AL BOARD V1. A. MARTYN HEARING FOR THE l'ORT STAJ'lLEY TEllMINAL RAIL INCORl'ORATED. CARRIED ." "MOVED BY: SECONDED B'{: E. NElJKAMI'l TEAT VIE ADJOurol TO T}lIJRSDAY, l\1'RIL 17 AJ'lD FRIDAY, A1'RIL 18, 1986 AT 9 :00 A.M. AJ'lD VlEDNESDAY, l\1'RIL 30, 1986 AT 9 :30 A.M. A. lZ. FORD CARRIED-" F-A - ~'" A _ ,..u h TRMAN COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT CULVERT REPLACEMENTS ON COUNTY ROAD #25 SUMMARY OF QUOTATIONS 10' X 8' PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX SECTIONS SUPPLIER TOTAL QUOTATION PRICE * ALTERNATE 'A' ALTERNATE 'B' CONCRETE PIPE COMPANY $84,693.92 $121,959.25 UTILITY VAULT COMPANY OF CANADA LTD. $84,694.00 $121,959.36 WATERLOO CONCRETE PRODUCTS LIMITED $84,694.00 $121,959.36 Prices do not include discount of 5% if payment is received by the 25th of the following month. - Trucked to job site including Federal and Provincial Sales Tax. - Alternate 'A' - 200 lineal feet (366.45 per foot) (Plus Taxes) - Lynhurst and McBain Culverts on Wellington Road (County Road #25) . - Alternate 'B' - 288 lineal feet. - For Lynhurst and McBain Culverts County Road #25 and McBain Culvert on County Road #29. - Recommendation - That we accept Alternate 'A' Concrete PipE~ Company - Build poured in place culvert County Road #29. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT March 5, 1986. TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. We have purchased from Ross E. Wilson International of Glencoe, two Case International Model 585 tractors and two rear mount 8 foot TAARUP mowers at a net price of $33,812.00 (including provincial Sales Tax) with the trade-in of two 1970 ,John Deere 1020 tractors. The old mowers were kept for parts. Delivery of the new tractors and mowers is expected by the end of April. 2. We have accepted a quotation from Ibis Products Limited of Niagara Falls to rebuild our 1966 Wald Pavement Marker at $37,855 plus Provincial Sales Tax. It will be mounted on our 1980 cab-over International tandem truck. The paint pumps will be replaced and the capacity of the paint and glass bead tanks increased to give us better productivity. An electronic flashing sign will replace a flag person on the rear. The whole unit will be removable so that the truck will be available for use as a sander truck in the Winter. New units (without a truck) are approximately $120,000. WE RECOMMEND. That a Bylaw be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to sign an agreement with the Township of Yarmouth for maintenance and improvements to the road allowance between Concession III & IV, Yarmouth between the Catfish Creek and Hamlet of Sparta to facilitate the operation of a County gravel pit in Lot 26, Concession IV, Yarmouth. (A copy of the Agreement was forwarded to all Members of Council with the minutes of the meeting of March 5, 1986.) All of which is respectfully submitted. CHAIRMAN. March 1986. COUN'fYOF ELGIN ROAD DEPAH'I'MEN'r TENDERS FOR 2 TRACTORS & MOWERS 1. London Ford Equipment Sales Limited, Box 118, Hyde Park, Ontario NOM lZO. Ford 4610 SU (Special Utility) 201 cu. in. displacement, 52 H.P. 8 speed, 11 inch clutch. 7.50 x 16 - 6 ply, front tires (as requested). 16.9 x 24 - 6 ply, rear tires. Blue colour. Tractor weight 4,770 Ibs. Standard brakes. Warranty, 1 year parts and labour. 2 Tractors $ 27,244. less 5,500 trade - Net with tax $ 23,266.00 Mower CM 240 VICON 94 inch cut., Replacement discs $ 58.50 Knives $ 1. 40 10,451.00 $ 33,711.00 2. Ross E. Wilson International R.R. # 1, Glencoe, Ontario Case International 585. 206 cu. in. displacement, 58 H.P. 8 speed, 11 inch clutch. 7.50 x 16 - 6 ply, front tires. 16.9 x 24 - 6 ply, rear tires. Red colour. Hydraulic brakes. 16.6 G,P. minute pump. Category II. 3 point Hitch. Weight 5,640 Ibs. Warranty 12 months. 2 Tractors $23,500. less 3,500 trade - Net with tax $ 21,400.00 TAARUP, 94 inch cut. Discs $155.00 Knives $ 1. 92 12,412.00 $ 33,812.00 3. Jones Agro-Power & Equipment Limited, Finga1, Ontario NOL 1KO Case International 585. 206 cu. in. displacement, 58 H.P. AS ABOVE. Includes Fluid LOQded Tires. 2 Tractors $28,800. less 5,000 trade - Net with tax $ 25,466.00 KUHN GM,D 66 liD Discs $ 68.15 Blades $ 1.77 10,165.00 $ 35,631.00 4. London Ford Equipment Sales Limited, Box 118, Hyde Park, Ontario NOM lZO~ Ford 4610 LCG. Same basic specifications as 4610 SUo 2 Tractors $29,186. less 5,500 trade - Net with tax $ 25,344.00 Mower CM240 VICON as above 10,451.00 $ 35,795.00 Continuted . . . . COUNiry OF ELGIN ROl\D DEPl\RTMENT TENDERS FOR 2 TRACTORS & MOWERS, 5. Ellis Farm Equipment Limited, R.R. # 7, St. Thomas, Ontario. Ford 4610 SUo As Tender # 1 but fluid in tires to increase weight to 5,730 lbs. Ml\RCH 1986, PAGE 2, 2 Tractors $ 27,608. less trade 4,000 - Net with tax $ 25,260.56 Kuhn GMD 66 HD Mower (New Holland 10,272.) 6. Crrg@ Power & Equipm~nt, ~.R. # 3, Box 758, Lambeth, ontario. 10,550.20 $ 35,810.76 Lot'a,\' Mod!:;l :!.-1fJ Case 380B - 179 cu. in. displacement, - Net with tax $ 23,326.00 J.J,2c,/j,()() (Motor too small.) 7. Van-Cross Farm Equipment Limited, R.R. tt 3, St. Thomas, Ontario. John Deere 2350 Tractor. 239 cu. in. displacement, 62 H.P. - Net with tax John Deere 260 Mower 8. Ross E. Wilson International, R.R. # 1, Glencoe, Ontario. Case International Model 685. 239 cu. in. displacement, 62 H.P. - Net with tax TAARUP, Model 206 Mower 9. Southwest Tractor Inc., 16 Royce Court, London; Ontario N6E ILl. John Deere 2350. LELY Model 240 10. Lee Farm Equipment Limited, R.R. # 1, Rodney, Ontario. Massey Ferguson Model 283 248 cu. in. displacement, 67 H.P. KUHN GMD 66 HD Mower $ 36,594.00 $ 28,237.30 10,565.18 $ 38,802.48 $ 28,034.00 12,412.00 $ 40,446.00 $ 29,960.00 11,500,00 $ 41,460.00 $ 30,192.19 10,854.08 $ 41,046.27 Continued . . , , COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TENDERS FO.R 2 TRACTORS & MOWERS. 11. Vandenbrink Farm Equipment Inc., Sparta, Ontario NOL 2HO. White 2-65 or White 2-55 Tractors LELY 240...6 Mower KUBOTA Model M7030 DT (4 W.O.) Lely 240-6 Mid Mount Mower 12. Routly and Phillips Limited, 730 Talbot Street West, Aylnler, Onta~io N5H 2Vl. Case International 485. (179 gu. In. u11uinu) Case International 585. MARCH 1986. PAGE 3. $ 36,219;50 10,657.20 $ 46,876.70 $ 4,8,257.00 $ 24,680.30 Ii' :U,649.:n $ 23,578.52 March 1986. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TENDERS FOR 2 TRACTORS & MOWERS 1. London Ford Equipment Sales Limited, Box 118, Hyde Park, ontario NOM lZO. Ford 4610 SU (Special Utility) 201 cu. in. displacement, 52 H.P. 8 speed, 11 inch clutch. 7.50 x 16 - 6 ply, front tires (as requested). 16.9 x 24 - 6 ply, rear tires. Blue colour. Tractor weight 4,770 Ibs. Standard brakes. Warranty, 1 year parts and labour. 2 Tractors $ 27,244. less 5,500 trade - Net with tax $ 23,266.00 Mower CM 240 VICON 94 inch cut. Replacement discs $ 58.50 Knives $ 1.40 10,451.00 $ 33,717.00 2. Ross E. Wilson International R.R. # 1, Glencoe, Ontario Case International 585. 206 cu. in. displacement, 58 H.P. 8 speed, 11 inch clutch. 7.50 x 16 - 6 ply, front tires. 16.9 x 24 - 6 ply, rear tires. Red colour. Hydraulic brakes. 16.6 G.P. minute pump. Category II. 3 point Hitch. Weight 5,640 Ibs. Warranty 12 months. 2 Tractors $23,500. less 3,500 trade - Net with tax $ 21,400.00 TAARUP, 94 inch cut. Discs $155..00 Knives $ 1.92 12,412.00 $ 33,812.00 3. Jones Agro-power & Equipment Limited, Fingal, Ontario NOL lKO Case International 585. 206 cu. in. displacement, 58 H.P. Includes Fluid Loaded Tires. AS ABOVE. 2 Tractors $28,800.1ess 5,000 trade - Net with tax $ 25,466.00 KUHN GMD 66 HD Discs $ 68.15 Blades $ 1.77 10,165.00 $ 35,631.00 4. London Ford Equipment Sales Limited, Box 118, Hyde Park, ontario NOM lZO. Ford 4610 LCG. Same basic specifications as 4610 SU. 2 Tractors $29,186. less 5,500 trade - Net with tax $ 25,344.00 Mower CM240 VICON as above 10,451.00 $ 35,795.00 continuted . . . . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TENDERS FOR 2 TRACTORS & MOWERS. 5. Ellis Farm Equipment Limited, R.R. # 7, St. Thomas, Ontario. Ford 4610 SUe As Tender # 1 but fluid in tires to increase weight to 5,730 Ibs. MARCH 1986. PAGE 2. 2 Tractors $ 27,608. less trade 4,000 - Net with tax $ 25,260.56 Kuhn GMD 66 HD Mower (New Holland 10,272.) Case Power & Equipment, R.R. # 3, Box 758, Lambeth, Ontario. 10,550.20 $ 35,810.76 Case 380B - 179 cu. in. displacement. - Net with tax $ 23,326.00 LELY Model 240 (Motor too small.) 7. Van-Cross Farm Equipment Limited, R.R. # 3, St. Thomas, Ontario. John Deere 2350 Tractor. 239 cu. in. displacement, 62 H.P. - Net with tax John Deere 260 Mower 8. Ross E. Wilson International, R.R. # 1, Glencoe, Ontario. Case International Model 685. 239 cu. in. displacement, 62 H.P. - Net with tax TAARUP, Model 206 Mower 9. Southwest Tractor Inc., 16 Royce Court, London, Ontario N6E ILl. John Deere 2350. LELY Model 240 10. Lee Farm Equipment Limited, R.R. # 1, Rodney, Ontario. Massey Ferguson Model 283 248 cu. in. displacement, 67 H.P. KUHN GMD 66 HD Mower 13,268.00 $ 36,594.00 $ 28,237.30 10,565.18 ,$ 38,802.48 $ 28,034.00 12,412.00 $ 40,446.00 $ 29,960.00 11,500.00 $ 41,460.00 $ 30,192.19 10,854.08 $ 41,046.27 Continued . . . . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT TENDERS FOR 2 TRACTORS & MOWERS. 11. Vandenbrink Farm Equipment Inc., Sparta, Ontario NOL 2HO. White 2-65 or White 2-55 Tractors LELY 240-6 Mower KUBOTA Model M7030 DT (4 W.D.) Lely 240-6 Mid Mount Mower 12. Routly and Phillips Limited, 730 Talbot Street West, Aylmer, Ontario N5H 2Vl. Case International 485. (179 cu. in. engine) Case International 585. ~lARCH 1986. PAGE 3. $ 36,219.50 10,657.20 $ 46,876.70 ~; 48,257.00 ~; 24,680.30 ~; 21,649.31 ~; 23,578.52 S't. 't\loW>S, 0N'tAR10 'MARCt\. 5, 1986 "PAGE 1. 1\Uilding, 450 sunset l)l:iVe, St. 'thoma~' ,,- . d l'rank clarke of the Ministry of present ~as the Assistant 1'.ng~neer an 'transportatiOn and co~unicatiOns, 9 30 at the CountY 't\l1'. couN'tY 01' l'.l,GlN ROAD cmft'l.l't't1'.1'. met at : a.m. , . " A' 1 member s ~ere present. A1 SO "'MOVED BY: S1'.COND1'.D 1\Y: 1'.. NE\l~ Y 7 1986 1\1'. 1\l'PRO'l1'.D. 'tEA't 't\l1'. MlN\l'tJ'.S 01' 't\l1'. l'\1'.l':nNG 01' l'1'.1\RUl\R ' A. lZ. fORD CARRIED ." R'C'no"'t1'.D ON p1.1'1'. C\lL'lJ'.R't INSP1'.GrlONS AS 1'01,l,OVlS: TUE ENGINEER .1:>1: I}:\. the 'to~shiP of DUn~ich bet~en .._Hb. player inspected a culvert for A_A ted that it had deteriorated _._n at L~~ ~ePor _ _ ~ ^- '\ '<J 01: tbe sboul d be sbo1:~"'" -- 11 h d been reported by tne "~ further failures since last l'a a 't\l1'. 1'.NGlN1'.1'.R R1'.P01U"u u" .... . ,. ond labour to l'ebruary 6th, and 1 ~inter control costS '.oJith mach1;net b~m" ~der of $406,000. 'there ~ere nO . b 8th ~ere ~n t e o. accountS to ~e ruar~l bl to reduce these costs. machine cred~tS ava~ a e 11 used up and ~as being replaced. 2. 'the sand pile had been a d tha. t stOrmS came every ~eekend. 3. It seeme d' s men ~ere available. 4 'tree cutting ~as procee ~ng a . e ~idening on Road #45 from ~t~n to 5 Fred Groch had purchased m~st hO~ : should proceed as soon as poss~ble . Road #40. cQtlll1littee agree t a ld bet~een Wton and \ligh~aY #73, . to bUY as much ~idening as he cOu h rk could be done in thiS sect1.0n althoUgh it ~aS likelY that not mUc ~o tbiS year.. ~ ld be continued . bad been started anu. ~ou . _spect1.on. 6. 1. 8. ST. THOMAS, ONTAR1.0 MARCH 5, 1986 PAGE 2. 9. The invoice for insurance had been received and costS not for subsi~ ld b $9 150 00 rather than the estimated $12,800.00 by the Fran :~an c:ro.pa~y p~ evi ous 1 y . However, cO st s for 1 icence sand i nsur ance on county vehicles and equipment would be over $56,000. REEVE MARTYN RBl'ORTED on personnel items affecting the Road Depa1:tment. "MoVED BY: VI. A. MARTW SECONDED BY: R. F. 1'1JRCELL T1lAT l' AYL1.ST #11 1.1'1 THE p.M01JNT OF $56,818. 94 , AND l' A '[L1.ST #12 1.1'1 THE p.M01JNT 01" $81, 516 .59 BE A1'1'ROVED FOR l' A'l11ENT · cARR-TED ." , ''MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH SECONDED BY: A. R. FORD THAT THE C\:lA1.~ BE A1J'fHOR1.ZED TO l\1'1'RoVE A 1'A'[L1ST 1.1'1 THE p.M01JNT 01" $1,089.96 TO RE1.MBURS E VlARDEN 1'1JRCELL FOR THE 1l0S1'1.TAL1.TY SU1.TE AND SU1'1'L1.ES 1'1JRCl1ASED FOR T1lE ONTAR1.0 GOOD ROADS ASSOC1.AT1.0N CoN'JENT1.0N. CARRIED ." TRA1.N1.NG COURSES VlERE NorED AS FOLLOWS: The:First Aid Course had been organized for every Friday after~ April or earlY May. 5T. TllOMA5, ONTARIO MAR-Cll 5, 1986 'PAGE 3. COBRESpONDB\'1CE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS: From C. R. Bro~ing, Regional Engineer, Ministry of TransportatiOn and communicatiOns, thanking Warden purcell f~r the chance to meet Road committee at the last Road committee meet~ng. 3. To~shiP of AldborOUgh and To~ship of yar1llouth ",nth noticeS of amend~ mentS to zoning bylawS. Ontario Municipal Board ",nth notice of llearing for llerries property which is not on a county road. Request from the Fingal Optimist Club for per1lliSsion to close Road #20 in Fingal for their Opti~fest. "MOVED BY: w. A. J1ART'l1:1 SECONDED B'l: D. pEROIT1 CH TllAT WE pSN'lS E TllE OPTIMIST CLUB 01' FlNGAL Tfi1\T TllE couNTY ROAD c()l,ft1lTTEE IS NOT PREPARED TO CLOSE coUJ:1T'l ROAD #20 FOR TllElR ANNUAL O'PTI-FE5T. CARRIED ." 1. 2. 4. 5. From the CountY of Elgin Road Department ];iD:plo~ees .ASsociatiOn request~ in that the CountY match their one time contr~but~On of $500.00 to Mr~. John La1llPman. Reeve Martyn and warden purcell ~ecommende~ that the Coromittee make thiS contribution, the matter hav~ng been ~~~~u~~dl b the personnel cororoittee, cororoittee feeling that it ~as.an ~n ~v~ ua ~mmittee matter. The Road Department ];iD:plOyees ASSOc~at~on had alreadY made a similar contribution to Mrs. Lampman. CARRIED ." REEITE J1ART'l1:1 REPORTED TllAT ",nth a feW minor changeS, the To~shiP of yar1llouth would be agreeable to an agreement on the sparta Road to allo" "MOlTED BY: W. A. J1ART'l1:1 SECONDED BY: E. NE\ll(l\MM. TllAT WE WJCf. A ONE TIME l' A 1M.E1:1T OF $500 · 00 TO }IRS. Jo1:l1:1 lJ,M.1'MA1:1 TO MATCH TllE C01:1TRlBUTlON 01' ROADS DEPARTMEl'T EMPLO'lJ',ES ASSOC1.~ ATlON 01' A Sl~LAR AMOUl'lT. the County to rezone thiS property for the Sparta pit. Committee authorized the warden, Engineer and Reeve Martyn to make theSe minor adjUstments. "MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: A. R. FORD TllAT \>IE RECOW'lB\'1D TO COU1:1TY COU1:1ClL T1:lAT A BY~LA\>I BE PASSED A\JTll.ORlZlNG TllE WARDEN & CLERK TO SIGN AN AGREFMB\'1T \>IlTll TllE E. NEUl(l\MM. ST. TJ:lmlAS, Olttl\R10 111\RCll 5, 1986 PAGE 4. An"MO''''''' fOR MAllttfll~CE ~D lW'R()I1Ji'.M.1'.N'fS TO TJ:lE TOWNSU11' Of Y~> ",II d V y~()1J'tU B~Efll ROAD ALL~~CE Bf:t'<lEfll CONCESSION 111 an 1 , ' A1..1D Up,M1.f:t Of S1'l\RTh TO fhCILIThTE TJ:lE 01'ERA-' TJ:lE ChTYlSU CREER "" TI0N Of h coUNTY GRAVEL 1'lT IN 1,O't 26, CONCESSION 1V y~O\l'fU' CARRl'ED ." TfllDERS fOR TRActORS ~D l'1ry11?SS VJERE p,S h'tThC\1.ED. AfteJ: consi... deJ:able diSCUssion. A. lZ. fORD SECONDED BY: D. 1'ER()I11 C\1. '" _" T""'DER Of ROSS E. '<llLSON llttERNhTIONhL fOR TUhT \iE hCCtl'. .I1'" "'" TAi\RU1' l'1~ERS hT TJ:lEIR 2 llttElWhTI0Np.,L cASE 585 TRActORS '<llTU 2 tr.33 812 h]"!ER TRADE~lN. Nf:t TfllDERED 1'RICE Of ~, · CARRIED ." "MO'JEDB"i ~ D fOR DINNER. d l'1Ef:t1NG ADJOUlUlE ty of DouglaS an 'PEC'l'ED the pJ:opeJ: ''''ER Tll'1E CO~TTEE INS d ],trs. 1'1:itcha1:d gr. Dl,'" . 1 U111. w: · an t the tOp of f~nga . _ _,......t''1 Road 16 a h t the'1 could 1 "IN SO t a J . . ~,,-I-...bacK lW.a ..:1 +-ne.l:.t: v- .1 -I-'hat the ...._~ -was no~v- p1:esent hoUse ",as "'.~"',' 0 d 1 fuJ:tbeJ: a-way 1.,1.""--- not be a g1:eat ea . their lot to meet the T01ilUSII>< have sufficient area ~n .c . ther front, bad< or side yardS. 1l\entS 1.oJ: e1.. TJ:lE coUNTY BUILDING. l'1EETING RESmfi!.D hT 1.<ER '<lp,S D1SCIlSSED. The 'r'l' S l' h VJi'.M.Eltt MAR . U1'GRADING Of TJ:lE COUN s old and that . t ",as some 20 year J:e sent equ1..P1l\en f,nginee1: stated that the p least t",ice a year, capacity of build the pUmPs at . it ",as necessary to re 110'" a full daY's ",o1:k ~n treat enough to a . both hand B tankS ".ere nO g . th Upgr'ading the ma1:ker . It ",as felt that "'~ . h East or '<lest Elg~n. 'thout a truck ",as e ~te1: h ne'" marker 1iI1. 5 to 8 yeaJ:s. _~A for another ,. is mounted on the J: aded ro.aJ:l.'eJ: . .... ('\ ()oO. 'i!he"O. tbe upg ... .co"" sale. ld be pUL.. up 1. 1. tJ:ucK -wou ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MARCH 5, 1986 iPAGE 5. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT WE ACCEPT THE QUOTATION OF IBIS PRODUCTS LIMITED DATED AUGUST 19, 1985 IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,855.00 PLUS SALES TAX TO UPGRADE THE COUNTY OF ELGIN'S PRESENT CENTRELINE PAINT STRIPER AND TO MOUNT IT ON THE COUNTY'S 1980 INTERNATIONAL TRUCK. CARRIED." DISCUSSION OF PARKING BYLAWS was postponed until after County Government Cuuuuittee had dealt with enforcement of the Bylaw. REPORT FROM MR. VINCENT, CIVIL ENGINEER OF LONDON regarding the Ellis property on Road #25 was discussed and the Engineer was instructed to advise the Township of Yarmouth that the Committee felt the matter was a local problem and should be dealt with by the Township. MR. PRITCHARD'S REQUEST FOR CHANGE in the County Bylaw was dis- cussed. The Engineer was instructed to advise Mr. Pritchard and his solicitor that the Committee were not prepared to amend the Bylaw at the present time, although he might wish to make a further application once he met all the requirements of the Township of Southwold. COMMITTEE DISCUSSED THE HUBREY-HIGHBURY ROAD and it was agreed that the County of Middlesex Road Committee and possibly the Suburban CUlluuission be invited to a meeting in late April or early May. The Engineer was instructed to make appropriate arrangements. THE ENGINEER WAS INSTRUCTED to make a formal request to the City of St. Thomas for the property that would be required through Cowan Park for the improvement of St. George Street. COUNTY'S POLICY ON LOSS OF DRIVING PRIVILEGES because of an alcohol or drug related offense was discussed at some length and the --...----.. Engineer was instructed to proceed with the use of his present policy until such time as Personnel Committee had completed their work on the Policy. It was the County's present policy that an employee without driving privileges would be reverted to Class I Labour and stay in that category until such ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MARCH 5, 1986 PAGE 6. time as he receives his driving privileges back again, then he would have to apply for any job opening thereafter rather than be automatically reverted to his old job. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E .NEUKAMM THAT WE ADJOURN TO APRIL 10TH AT 9:30 A.M. CARRIED." o/1:~~42- ~ CHAIRMAN. ,,1 ,1 ,_ 1 . rt~~~ (~ V~ I~ -------- COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT Amended February 21/86. MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION & COMMUNICATIONS SPENDING LEVEL OBJECTIVES & MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION & COMMUNICATIONS SUBSIDY ALLOCATIONS. (a) Construction Spending Level Objective. (i) Construction Roads & Bridges~ 3.46% of the 27,439,000 NEED ........ $ 949,300. (ii) Hot Mix Asphalt Resurfacing. 12% of the 13,184,000 NEED ........ 1,582,000. TOTAL $2,531,300. FIXED COSTS - Spending Level Objective Maintenance & Overhead . . . .- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,176,000. Drainage Assessments ....................... 92,000. New Machinery & Housing 356,000. $2,624,000. Initial Spending Level Objective(Operations). Construction - $2,531,300. Fixed Costs 2,624,000. $5,155,300. Initial Subsidy Allocation - $4,028,900. Subsidy On Urban Rebates 28,000. Subsidy On Operations $4,000,900. Rate of Subsidy 4,000,900 = 5,155,300 77.61% COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1986 BUDGET SUMMARY CONSTRUCTION COUNTY ROADS & BRIDGES $ 946,300 SUPPLEMENTARY ROADS & BRIDGES j 101,000 SUPPLEMENTARY PIPE ARCH CULVERT J 45,000 ASPHALT RESURFACING 1,382,000 $2,474,300 FIXED COSTS MAINTENANCE $1,682,000 OVERHEAD 383,000 DRAINAGE ASSESSMENTS 116,000 NEW MACHINERY 356,000 $2,537,000 TOTALS CONSTRUCTION $2,474,300 FIXED COSTS 2,537,000 URBAN REBATES 56,000 ITEMS NOT SUBSIDIZED BY MTC 50,000 $5,11.7 ,3'00 TOTAL BUDGET $5, 408 ,800 2. Amended February 21/86 ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS $ 3, 000 $ 3,000 $230,000 23, 000 34,000 $287,0100 $ 3,000 287,000 1,500 $291,500 TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1985, $4,537,216 (19.2% INCREASE) TOtAL $ 949,3100 101,000 45, 000 1,382,000 $2,477,;300 $1,912,000 406,000 150,000 356,000 $2,824,000 $2,47i7.,300 2,824,000 56,000 51 ,500 $5,40$ ,800 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION & COMMUNICATIONS SUBSIDY - On Operations ............. - On Urban Rebates ............. Supplementary Roads & Bridges .. Supplementary Pipe Arch Culvert. Total Budget .................... $5,408,800. Les MTC Subsidy .................... 4,161,700. Less Share of City of St. Thomas toward Suburban Roads ............... 34,100. County Levy $1,213,000. 3. Amended February 21/86. $4,000,900. 28,000. 91 , 800. 41,000. $4,161,700. COUNTY O~GIN ROAD DEPARTMENT - . Amended February 21/86. CONSTRUCTION BUDGET .,- -'- Available _ Roads & Bridges .......................... $ 949,300. _ Supplementary Allocation ................. TOTAL Asphalt Resurfacing ...................... Required for Fixed Costs over Allocation .. Net Available For Asphalt Resurfacing ..... 101,000. $1,050,300. $1,582,000. 200,000. ' $1,382,000. I ----- 4. 5. CONSTRUCTION ROADS & BRIDGES Amended February 21/86. Available $1,050,300. 1. St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Surveys & Land Purchase $ 3,000. 2. Surveys, Pre Engineering on Future Projects etc. ......'..... 40,000. 3. Land Purchase including widening of Rd. 45 from Hwy. 73 to Rd. 40, Rd. 22 in Conc IV, Rd. 26 St. George Street and future work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . ..' . . . . . 65,000. 4. Engineering Culvert Replacement Kent Aldborough townline Rd. 7 ............................ 10,000. 5. Rd. 3 Aldborough, County of Elgin share of Joints in Wardsville Bridge ...................................... 15,000. 6. Rd. 22 Fairview Avenue - Engineering & Clean-up from 1985 .. 20,000. 7. Rd. 26 Yarmouth & Southwold & St. George Street Engineering etc. 12,000. 8. Rd. 25, 29, Yarmouth & Southwold - Replacement of 3 Culverts 360,000. SUB-TOTAL $ 5 25 , 000. ROAD CONSTRUCTION (A) Rd. ,45 from Rd. 40 westerly toward Luton approximately (Base coat of Asphalt only) & Engineering etc. on Rd. 45 from HWy. 73 to Rd. 40. Preliminary Estimate .. $ 450,000. (B) Rd. 22 from Rd. Allowance between Conc IV - V southerly as far as funds permit ...................................... 75,300. TOTAL $1,050,300. 6. I' ASPHALT RESURFACING AmendE~d February 21, 1986. At the present time of dropping world oil prices and the dropping Canadian dollar vs., the U.S., we do not know how much more thE~ reduced dollar will cost us (i.e., American content, equipment, etc.) or if the oil price reduction will give us any reduction in the price of asphalt cement. (Asphalt cement may even cost more as the competition in ontario is very limited at the present time.) Available Spending Level - $ 1,382,000. Roads are not in priority other than Road #40 and Road #36 which are likely of a higher priority than other roads. 1. Road 40 - Malahide Township from Mount Salem to Road 42. 4.1 Km 320,000. 2. (a) Road 36 - Yarmouth from south limit of Sparta to Road 24. 3.0 lKm 245,000. (b) Road 24 - Yarmouth from Road 36 easterly 1.5 Km 120,000. 3. Road 14 - Southwold-Dunwich from Road 13 to Road 9 and patch hill to Middlemiss Bridge (except Hwy. 401). 4.9 Km 480,000. SUB-TOTAL $1,165,000. 4. Road 42 - Malahide from Road 40 to Stalter Gully. 2.7 :Km 260,000. SUB-TOTAL $1,425,000. 5. Road 44 - Bayham from Highway 3 to Road 46 (surface treatment) 1.2 Km 95,000. 6. Road 8 - Dunwich, surface treatment into Pearce Park. 0.85 KIn 83,000. 7. Road 13 - Dunwich from east limit of curb and gutter in Dutton to Road 14. (Needs Study Cost + 15%.) 8.4 Km 704,000. 8. Road 2 - Aldborough - From east limit of West Lorne to Aldborough-Dunwich Townline. (Needs Study Cost + l5%~) 3.1 KIn 245,000. Priorities to be set by late April, tenders called and paving work to start by May 20. . r--- COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1986 MAINTENANCE BUDGET COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN' ROADS Amended February 21, 1986. (Maintenance CVULparisons for 1983, 1984 and 1985 include County and Suburban Roads Expenditures. All totals include Payroll Burden ) ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN OPERATION 1983 1984 1985 1986 ESTIMATED COUNTY ROADS A - Bridges and Culverts - 1 Bridges 140,766 97,219 88,256 135,000 123,000 12,000 - 2 Culverts 71,289 37,326 66,796 B - Roadside Maintenance - 1 Grass Cutting 17,894 41,888 . 52,221 67,000. 59,000 8,000 2 Tree Cutting and Brushing 111,471 79,498 23, 126 40,000 36,000 4,000 - 4 Drainage 163,074 190,735 162,667 165,000 145,000 20,000 - 5 Roadside Maintenance 37,907 39,393 51,575 40,000 36,000 4,000 - 6 Tree Planting 10, 067 4,088 1,169 4,000 4,000 7 Drainage Assessments 3,296 2,350 5,813 5,000 5,000 (Maintenance) 11 Weed Spraying 15,769 12, 716 11,751 1,000 1,000 C - Paved Road Maintenance - 1 Repairs to Pavement 68,514 48,966 136,302 100,000 90,000 10,000 - 2 Sweeping 22, 251 27 , 273 23 ,804 25,000 22,000 3,000 . OJ COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1986 MAINTENANCE BUDGET COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS PAGE 2. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN OPERATION 1983 1984 1985 1986 ESTIMATED COUNTY ROADS C - Paved Road Maintenance (Cont-tnue d ) - 3 Shoulder Maintenance 245,522 86,697 212,549 110,000 95,000 15,000 - 4 Surface Treatment 119,447 142,263 111,438 132,000 86,000 46,000 D - Gravel Road Maintenance - 1 Ditching, Gravel and Pr ime - Road #26 23 , 976 55,899 - 2 ,Grading Gravel Roads 28,229 29,853 3.9,680 35,000 30,000 5,000 - 3 Dust Control 45,713 40,029 53,990 52,000 44,000 8,000 - 4 Prime 3,945 2,635 7,139 12,000 9,000 3,000 - 5 Gravel Resurfacing 35,745 70, 1 28 110,191' 150,000 150,000 E - Winter Control Total 210,955 458,201 533,197 580,000 515,000 65,000 - 1 Snow Plowing 29,819 127,326 183,826 - 2 Sanding and Salting 144,974 296,395 294,579 - 3 Snow Fence 16,131 19,754 27 , 403 4 Standby and Night Crew 20,031 14,726 27,390 F - Safety Device s - 1 Pavement Marking 44,197 46, 058 52,941 48,000 41,0~0 7,000 - 2 Signs and Signals 46,366 45,345 93,470 80,000 70,000 10,000 . Q) COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1986 MAINTENANCE BUDGET COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS OPERATION F - Safety Devices (Continued) - 3 Guide Rail - 4 Railroad Protection - 6 Edge Marking - 7 Stump Removal TOTALS Winter Control 1980 $260,443 Winter Control 1981 $366,369 Winter Control 1982 $497,778 1983 11,995 38,548 36,392 $1,529,352 1985 M.T.C. Maintenance and Overhead Allocation 1985 Maintenance Expenditure 1985 OVerhead $2,001,358 381,145 $2,382,503 1984 1985 1986 ESTIMATED PAGE 3. COUNTY ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS 1,000 4,000 5,000 17,829 12,666 12,000 11,000 48,322 ~40, 451 45,000 41,000 37,967 47,104 49,000 44,000 28,561 7,157 25,000 25 , 000 $L,659,316 $2,001,358 $1,912,000 $1,682,000 ~ . ~ $ 230,000 1986 M.T.C. Maintenance and Overhead Allocation $2,176,000 $2,050,000 1986 Maintenance Budget 1986 Overhead Budget $1,912,000 406,000 $2,318,000 10. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD'DEPARTMENT 1986 BUDGET OVERHEAD (COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS). Amended February 21/86. OPERATION 1983 1984 1985 1986 ESTIMATE Superintendence 131,051 115,176 126,724 134,000 Clerical 64,513 64,346 68,785 72,000 Garage and White Station Property 106 , 36 2 98,823 104,615 109,000 (1983 and 1984 Include Rodney Garage) Office 15,189 23,390 31,558 27,000 Tools 13,697 11,096 15,788 14,000 Radio 3,880 4,265 4,823 6 , 5 00 Needs Study Update and Traffic Counts 9,472 15,785 8,610 8,500 Training Courses 1 , 143 2,861 2,257 7,000 Miscellaneous Insurance 2,453 2,320 2,370 3,000 Retirement Benefits (Sick Time) 16,131 26,784 14,218 25,000 Deferred Time 670 CR. 2,627 1,397 TOTALS $363,221 $367,473 $381,145 $ 406,000 Without Retirement Benefits 1983 $347,090 1984 $340,689 1985 $366,927 1986 $ 381,000 1986 103.8% 1985 1986 Distribution: (1) St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission - 6% other than Retirement Benefits - $ 23,000 (2) County of Elgin - $383,000 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1986 BUDGET ITEMS NOT SUBSIDIZED BY THE 11. 1YlINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES FROM CLERK'S OFFICE FOR PAYROLL PREPARATION. 2. CONVENTIONHOSPITALITY SUITES, ETC. 3. LIABILITY INSURANCE. 4. MKMBERSHIPS, ETC. 5 . SICK LEAVE PLAN PAYOUTS. 6. OVER EXPENDITURE TO EARN MAXIMUM SUBSIDY. (Approximately $ 9,.5,00 in 1985) 7. URBAN REBATES ON NON-SUBSIDIZED EXPENDITURES. 8. INTERNATIONAL PLOWING MATCH EXPENDITURES (SNOW FENCE, COUNTY EXHIBIT AND MISCELLANEOUS). 9. EXPENDITURES RELATED TO HOVING INTO NEW ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING. 10. C.O.E.D. WORK AUDIT 11. ROAD COMMITTEE INSPECTIONS (BUSES, ETC.) 12. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION MEMBERSHIPS, FEES, ETC. In addition Over Expenditure To Earn Maximum _ subsidy was $ 9,500 + so total Not Subsidized was approximately $ 74,200 1985 COST $ 4,541 2 ,523 1,205 899 21,640 3,342 29,403 400 368 373 $ 64,694 Amended February 21/86. 1986 ESTIMATED $ 4,500 1,500 12,800 1,500 17,500 9,,000 2,500 700 In Suburban Budget $ 50,000 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT ,'- ' --- - ... --- - 1986 BUDGET - ' - PAYROLL BURDEN . - - ~PLICABLE TO COUNTY ~D ST. TIlOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS l 1983 1984 1985 ITEM 12. February 21/86. 1986 ESTIMATE Holidays With Pay: (a) Annual 111,363 120,202 109,148 115,000 (b) Statutory 51,310 53,815 53,595 61,000 (c) compassionate Leave 1,498 329 958 )' (d) Jury 74 37 ~ 1,000 Sick Benefits 40,103 52,904 44,590 40,000 Inclement Weather and Standby 3 , 25 2 2,651 2,608 3,000 Medical 2,459 Safety Equipment 9 ,108 8,474 9,384 9 , 5 00 Workmen'S compensation Insurance 28,503 27,132 33,529 38,000 Canada pension 18,456 19,469 20,094 22,000 O.M.E.R.S. 70,103 69,163 70, 199 72 , 500 U.l.C. 39,017 39,378 41,578 45,500 O.H.I.P. and E.H.C. 37,280 39,606 40,871 44,000 L.T.D. 11,639 12,106 12,582 ) ) 14,000 Life Insurance 564 555 682 ) payroll Burden Charged to the Canada EmPloyment programme and N.E.E.D.S. progr~e & I.p.M. 16,299 CR. 4,247 CR. 12,015 CR. 1,500 CR. - ~ - - TOTALS $408,356 $441,611 $427,840 $ 464,000 --1-1--- ---- :- ~ ..-:.- ............ PAYROLL BURDEN DISTRIBUTION 1983 Total Labour LeSs Labour in payroll Burden $1,402,557 209,038 70,087 2,363 92,912 LesS Labour provincial Incentive programme LeSS canada summer '83, '84 and '85 LeSS Labour canada Employment programme LeSS Canada Works (1984 and 1985) LeSS Ontario Youth Corps programme (1984 and 1985) Net Labour Payroll Burden payroll Burden as a % of Net Labour 1,028,157 408,356 39.7173% 1984 1985 $1,374,215 229,996 433 1,938 $1,381,922.99 210,956.40 4,304.00 24,845 9,219 1,107,784 441,611 39.8644u/o (IPM )16,803.01 54,155.70 1,095,703.88 427,840.34 39.047% COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1986 BUDGET - PAYROLL BURDEN (APPLICABLE TO COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS) 1986 - Labour Estimated Less Labour in Government Programmes Less Labour in Payroll Burden (Holidays) (Sick Time) (Inclement Weather) Net Labour Payroll Burden $ 464,000 Payroll Burden as a percentage of Net Labour 464,000 1,247,000 = 37.2% 13. PAGE 2. $ 1,482,000 15,000 CR. 220,000 $ 1,247,000 (Payroll Burden distributed to County Overhead, Maintenance and Construction Accounts.) 14. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION BUDGET FEBRUARY 21/86. As of January 1/86 the St. Thomas Suburban Road CVllul1ission has control of 49 km. of the 478 km. of the total County Road System or approximately 10% of the System. There is approximately 42 km. of paved road and 7 km. of gravel road. The total St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Budget is estimated at $290,000 being approximately 6% of the total County Budget (other than New Machinery Purchase). This percentage is used as an apportionment for overhead between the County and the Suburban Road System. CONSTRUCTION Surveys, Land Purchase, etc. $ 3 , 000 FIXED COSTS Drainage Asses~ents Maintenance Total 34,000 230,000 23,000 $290,000 Overhead (6% of County estimate) Items not subsidized by MTC 1,500 Calculation of Amount Payable by City of St. Thomas toward St. Thomas Suburban Road Cvuul1ission Subsidy on Operations Expenditures of $290,000 is 77% or Balance to be divided between County of Elgin and City of St. Thomas is Add Items Not Subsidized 223,300 66,700 1,500 $ 68,200 Share of City of St. Thomas $ 34,100.00 Add Deficit for 1985 9,107.27 Total Required $ 43,207.27 ~ Mill from City of St. Thomas will provide $,43,200.00 Deficit to 1987 7.27 OPERATION 15. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION.. BUDGET February 7, 1986. MAINTENANCE AMOUNT A - Bridges and Culverts - 1 Bridges - 2 Culverts B - Roadside Maintenance - 1 - 2 - 4 - 5 12,000. Grass Cutting Tree Cutting and Brushing Drainage Roadside Maintenance 8,000. 4,000. 20,000. 4,000. C - Paved Road Maintenance - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 Repairs to Pavements Sweeping Shoulder Maintenance Surface Treatment 10,000. 3,000. 15,000. 46,000. D - Gravel Road Maintenance - 2 - 3 - 4 Grading Gravel Roads Dust Control Prime 5,000. 8,000. 3,000. E - Winter Control Total - 1 Snow Plowing - 2 Sanding and Salting - 3 Snow Fence - 4 Standby and Night Crew F - Safety Devices i - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 6 65,000 Pavement Marking Signs and Signals Guide Rail Railroad Protection Edge Marking 7,000. 10,000. 1,000. 4,000. 5,000. $ 230,000. TOTAL FIRST REPORT Ii~~~ MARCH SESSION 1 986 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE, TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF ELGIN COUNTY COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: WE RECOMMEND. 1. That the sum of $ 500.00 be budgeted in 1986 for mosquito control. 2. That the rebate to Urban Municipalities be 25% of their Road Levy as in past years. 3. That the honorarium for the members of the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission be $ 175.00 for the period of February 1, 1986 to January 31, 1987. 4. That the budget of the St, Thomas Suburban Road Commission in the amount of $291,500 as attached be approved. 5. That the attached budget in the total amount of $5,408,800 be approved and that a Resolution be passed adopting a statement of proposed work of the normal portion of the budget in the total amount of $5,211,300 and the statement be forwarded to t.he Minis ter of 'l'ransportat.ion and Conununications for his approval. 6. That an application be made to the Minister of Transportation and Communications for approval of a supplementary Bylaw in the amount of $91,800 (subsidy) for supplementary road and bridge ~onstruction work. This amount has already been allocated to the County of Elgin by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications but a formal application must be made to the Minister of Transportation and Communications by County Council. 7. That the County Road Levy for 1986 be $1,213,000 as contained in the Road Committee Budget dated February 21, 1986. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, CHAIRMAN. COUNTY OF ELGIN -,-,:c.... -I . ROAD DEfA~TMENl Amended FE~bruary 21/86. !!INISTK~ OF TRANSPOlITATION & gQMM\lNICATIOJlS SPENIJLNC LEVEL OllJECT'!yES &. M1NlSTHY 0, TltANSpm<rNCLON & CQMMUNlCNrlONS suuSlUY ALLOCNrlON>i. . ----... - (a) Construction Spending Level Objective. (i) construction Roads & Bridgea. 3.46% of the 27,439.000 NEED ........ $ 949.300. (ii) Hot Mix Asphalt Resurfacing. 12% of the 13,184,000 NEED ........, TOTAL !}XED. COST~ .. Spending Level Objective ....................... Maintenance & Overhead ....................... Drainage Asses~ents ....................... New Machinery & Housing Ioitial Spoo~iO" l~'vol ObjOctiVC(opcrution.). construction .. $2,531,300. Fixed Costs .. 216~OOO... $5,155,300. Initial subsidy Allocation .. $4,028,900. subsidy On Urban RebateS .. 28,00'2:. .. subsidy On Operations .. $4,000,900. Rate of Subsidy ~,00~900 :::: 77.61~l.o 5,155,300 1,582t.2..0<h $2.,531t300. I.' ,---".....-= $ 2, 116 , 000. , 92,000. 356} DO? $2,624,000. ~-~ 2. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT Ame:nded February 21/86 1986 BUDGET S tJMMARy CONSTRUCTiON COUNTY ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN KOAOS 'tOTAL SUPPLEMENTARY ROADS & BRIDGES J $ 946,300 101,000 $ 3,000 $ 949,3-00 ROADS & BRIDGES 101,000 SUPPbEMENTARY PIPE ARCH CULVERT J 4~,oOO 45,000 ASPHALT RESURFACING ,193829000 $2,474,300 $ 3,000 1 , 3829 000 $2,477,300 FIXED COSTS MAINTENANCE $1,682,000 $230,000 $1,912,000 OVERHEAD 383,000 23,000 406,000 DRAINAGE ASSESSMENTS 116,000 34,000 150,000 NEW MACHINERY 356,000 -- 356,000 $2,537,000 $287,000 $2,824,000 TOTALS CONSTRUCTION $2,414,300 $ 3,000 $2,477,300 FIXf;D COSTS 2,5~7,QOO 287,000 2,824,000 URBAN REBATES ~6,QOO -- 56,000 lTEMS NOT SUBSIDIZED BY MTC ~OtOOO 19500 51 9 500 , $5, tV ,3'00 $291,500 $5,40~,800 TOT~ BUPG~ $5,408,800 TOTAL EX)?ENPITURE H~85. $4, ~37 ,216 q 9.2% lNCREME) COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPAR1'MENT MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION & COMMUNICATIONS SUBSID~ ... On Operations "."..,....... ... On Urban Rebates ...",....... Supplementary Roads & Bfidges .. Supplementary Pipe Arch Culvert. Total Budget .................... $5,408.800. Les MTC Subsidy......."............ 4,161,700. Less Share of City of St. Thomas toward Suburban Roads ............... 34,100. County Levy $1,213,000. Amended February 21/86. $4,000,900, 28,000. 91,aoO. 41,000. $4,161,700. // 3. lI'l; ,', \ " COUNTY OF E.!:Q.lli ,ROAQ DEPARTMENT. ^llI~md",d l~ght.'Utu;'Y H/al1. CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Available _ Roads & Bridges .......................... $ 949,300. _ Supplementary Allocation ................. 101,000. 'fOTAL $1,,050,300. A~phi.llt RCl:lurtu<.:inB ...................... $1,582,000. Required for Fixed Costs over Allocation .. 200,000. Net Available For Asphalt Resurfacing ..... $1,382,000. 4. 5. CONSTRUCTION ROADS & BRIDGES Amended February 21/86. Available $1~050)300. 1. St. Thomas Subqrban Roap Commis~ion Su~v~ys & Land Purchase $ 3,000. 2. Surveys, Pre Engineering on Futqre Projects etc. ........... 40,000. 3. Land Purchase including widening of Rd. 45 from Hwy. 73 to Rd. 40, Rd. 22 in Cone IV, Rd. 26 St. George Street and future work.' ..................................... 65,000. 4. Engineering Culvert Replacement Kent Aldborough townline Rd. 7 .......,.................... 10,000. 5. Rd. 3 Aldborough, County of Elgin share of Joints in Wardsville Bridge .............................."...... 15,000. 20,000. 6. Rd. 22 Fairv1ew Avenue - Engineeripg & 'Clean-up from 1985 .. 7. Rd. 26 Yarmouth & Southwold & St. peorge Street Engin4~ering etc. 12,000. 8. Rd. 25, 29, Yarmouth. & Southwolc1 .. Replacement of 3 Culverts 360,000. SU~TOTAL $ 5 25 , 000. ROAD CONSTRUCTION (A) Rd. .45 from Rd. 40 westerly towqrd Luton approximately (Base coat of Asphalt only) & Engineering etc. on Rd. 45 frQm ~Wy. 73 ~o Rd. 40. Preliminary Estimate .. $ 450,000. (B) Rd. 22 from Rd. Allowance .between Cone IV .. V souther'ly as far as funQs permit ..................................... 75,300. TOTAL $1,050,300.. . 'I( .. '" , 1\.SpHALT RESURF1\.Cl~ l\1I\ended February 21 , 1986 · 1\.t the present t~me of dropp~ng ~orld o~l pr~ces and the dropp~ng d t k ,~ho~ much more the reduced dollar canad~an dollar vs., the u.S., ~e 0 nO .no t tc) or if the oil price reduction will cost uS (i.e., l\1I\erican content, equ~pmen · e · ven ~ill give uS any reduction in the price of asphalt cement. (1\.Sphalt cem~nt ~y e cost more as the competition in ontario is very limited at the present t~me. 1. 2. {a) 3. 1\.vailable spending Level - $ 1,382,000. ROadS are not in pr~or~ty other than 1tQad \140 and 1tQad \136 ~hich are likely of a h~gher pr~()rit1 than other roadS. ROad 40 _ ~alahide To~nshiP from ~ount sale1l\ to d 42 4.1 ~ 320,000. Roa .' ROad 36 _ yarmouth frQlll south limit of sparta to Road 24. 3.0 ~ 245,000. 1.5 ~ 120,000. {b) Road 24 _ yarmouth from 1tQad 36 easterly Road 14 _ south~Old-Dun~iCh from I\Oa~ 13 t~ Road 9 and patch hitl to ~~ddlenu.ss Bridge (e~cept Uwy. 401l, 4.9 ~ 480,000. SUB-~~ $1,165.000. 4. Road 42 _ ~al,ahide from 1tQad 40 to stalter GullY. 2.1 ~ 260,000. sua-~T~ $1.425.000' " . 2 1<l\\ 95,00Q, 5. ROad 44 _ Bayham frOlll Uigh~a1 3 to \loaq '\() (Surface treatment) 0.85 ~ 83,000. ROad 8 _ pun~ich, surface treatment into 'Pearce 'P ar1<;.. 8.4 1<l\\ 704,000. 6. Road 13 _ Dun~~ch frOlll east lim~t of curb and gutter ~n Dutton to Road 14. (NeedS study cost + 15\.) _ 1\.ldboroUgh _ From east l~t of ~est LOme to 1\.ldbOrOugh-Dun~iCh To~nline. (NeedS study cost + 15\.) 3.1 I(JI\ 245,000. 7. Road 2 B. prioritieS to be set bY late April, tenders called and paving ~ork to start by ~ay 20. ~ ~INT~ ' couNTY AND S-r. -ra<Jl'll'S SUBURlll'N WADS ).986 ESTIMATED O~EW\TION A _ BridgeS and Cu).verts _ 1 BridgeS _ 2 culverts B _ Roadside Maintenance _ 1 Grass cutting _ 2 Tree cutting and Brushing _ 4 Drainage _ 5 Roadside Maintenance _ 6 Tree p).anting 7 Drainage Assessments (Maintenance) ).). weed spraying c ~ paved Road Maintenance ). Repairs to 'Pavement 2 SVleeping 3 Shoulder Maintenance 4 surface Treatment D - Gravel Road Maintenance 2 Grading Grave). Roads 3 Dust control 4 prime 5 Gravel Resurfacing E - winter control Total 1 snoVl PloVlin9 2 sanding and salting 3 snoVl Fence 4 standbY and Night creVl F ... safety Devices ). pavement Marking 2 Signs and SignalS 3 Guide Rail COUNTY ---- ).35,000 ).23,000 February 21, ).9~6. - --- ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS ------- ).2,000 67,000 59,000 8,000 40,000 36,000 4,000 ).65,000 ).45,000 20,000 40/000 36/000 4,000 4,000 4,000 5,000 5,000 1,000 ).,000 . ).00/000 25,000 110,000 ).32/000 35,000 52/000 ).2,000 ).50,000 580,000 48,000 80,000 12,000 90,000 22,000 95,000 86,000 30,000 44,000 9,000 ).50,000 515,000 4)./000 70,000 1).,000 ).0,000 3,000 15,000 46,000 5,000 8,000 3,000 65,000 7,000 ).0,000 ).,000 COUtlT'l OF ELGltl i\0l'>U U1?;\?l'>RT~T ~986 Ml\ltl'rBtl)\tlCE BUDGET COUtlT'l )\tlU ST. orflOMl\S SUBUl$)\tl ROWS 01?ER1\TION F _ safety Devices (continued) 4 Fai~road protection 6 Edge Marking _ 7 stumP R~oval TOTpJ..iS FebruarY 21, 1986. 1?age .B · ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS' 1986 ESTIMATED COUNT":! 4,000 45,000 41,000 49,000 44,000 25,000 25,000 ----- ----- $1,912,~ $1 ,~ft ~~ 5,000 ----- $ 230 ,OO~ ...-- 9. COUN'l'Y OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1986 BUDGET OVERHEAD (COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS) OPERATION Superintendence Clerical Garage and White Station Property (1983 and 1984 Include Rodney Garage) Office Tools Radio Needs Study Update and Traffic Counts Training Courses Miscellaneous Insurance Retirement Benefits (Sick Time) Deferred Time Without Retirement Benefits Feblcuary 21, 1986. 1986 ESTIMATE 134,000 72,000 109,000 27,000 14,000 6,500 8,500 . I 7,000 3,000 25,000 - $ 406,000 1986 $ 381,000 1986 Distribution: (1) St. Thomas Suburban Road Cpmmission - 6~ other than Retirement Benefits - $ 23,000 (2) County of Elgin - $383,000 COOtlT'! OF El.Gltl~~R~~ ~ I~S NOT SOBSIDIZED BY TUE "1>lISTRY OF TFNlS?ORTl\.TIOtl Mlll COW'OllICl\.TIOtlS 1. l\.ll"ltlISTRl\.TI~E cHl\.RGES FFD" CLE~'S OFFICE FOR PAYROLL pREPAM'l:10N. COtlllEtlTIOtl HOS?1Tl\.L IT'! SOlTES, E'l'C. 2. LIA.BILl'rY INSUMNCB. 3. 4. MBMBBRS1:flPS, BTC. s. SICK LBA'JB PL~ PA'iOUrs. 0~f:R Ell?ENDIT\lRE TO El\.Rtl !MllI"O" SOBSID~' (l\.ppro~imate1Y ,9,500 in 1985) olffil'tl REBl\.TES otl tlOtl_SUBSIDIZ.ED Ell?ENOIT\lRES, 6. 8. Ell?EtlDITQRES RELl\.TED TO "O~lllG ItlTO llJi:ll ADM,INISTMTl'JB BUILDING. 9. ST. TU()I4I\S SUBOFllMl 1lOl\.D CO",^ISSIOtl MBM,BBRS1;llPS, fBBS, BTC, 1. February 21, 19B6. ~ $ 4,500 1,500 12,BOO 1,500 17,500 9,000 2,500 700 In Suburban 'Budget. ----- $ 50,000 .L.L. ST, THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION llUOGET -- F$BRUAR'l 21/86. As of J~nuary t/86 the St, ThomA~ Supu~b~n ao~d ~~ssion haS con~ro~ of 49 ~. of the 478 ~. of the ~o~~\ county Road Syst~ or approximately 10% Qf the S~$tem. There is approxtmately 42 ~. of p~~a4 ~o~d and 7 ~. of gr~e~ ~oad. The total St. TqomaS sub?fban ~~4 ~ission ~dge~ is est~ted a~ ~290.00Q bei~g approxtmafelY 6% ~f ~qe tot~t CPunty ~d$et (Qtqe~ ~ha~ Ne~ Mac~inery futcnase). thiS p~rceqta~a is use4 a~ ~ app9tt~o~n~ for overhead between the county ~d the S~burban RPad system. CONSTRUCTION . ' $ 3.000 Surveys, Land purchase, etc. Drainage Asses~ents Maintenance Overhead (6% of County estimate) Total 34,000 230,000 ~3tOOQ "$290,000 FIXED COSTS - . 1,500 Items not subsidized by MTC Calc~la~on of ~ount p~able bJ Ci~ of St,. T~oma~ toward St, Thomas suburban Road commission subsidy on Operations ExpenditUres of $290,000 is 77% or Balance to be divided between County of Elgin and City Ot St. Thomas is Add Items Not subsidized 223,300 66,700 ~50Q $ 68,200 ahate of City of St, 'thomClfi Add Deficit for \985 $ 34.100.00 9.107.27 " .. Total Required $ 4:l, 207.27 \ Mill from City of St. Thomas will proviQe $ 43,200.00 7.21 Deficit to 1987 S'1'. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION BUDGET MAINTENANCE OPERATION A - Bridges and Culverts - 1 13ridges - 2 Culverts 13 - Roadside Maintenance - 1 Grass Cutting - 2 Tree Cutting and Brushing - 4 Drainage - 5 Roadside Maintenance C - Paved Road Maintenance - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 Repairs to Pavements Sweeping Shoulder Maintenance Surjace Treatment D - Gravel Road Maintenance - 2 Grading Gravel Roads - 3 Dust Control - 4 Prime E - Winter Control Total - 1 Snow Plowing - 2 Sanding and Salting - 3 Snow l"epee - 4 Standby and Night Crew F - Safety Devices - 1 Pavement Marking 2 Signs apd Signals - 3 Guide Rail - 4 Railroad Protection - 6 Edge Marking TQTJ\L Februal:Y 7, 1986. AMOUNT 12,000. 8,000. 4,000. 20,000. 4,000. 10,000. 3,000. 15,000. 46,000. 5,000. 8,000. 3,000. 65,000 7,000. 10,000. 1,000. 4,000. 5,000. $ 230,000. 12. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO FEBRUARY 21, 1986 PAGE 1. Drive, St. ThomaS, on February 21, 1986 at 9:30 A.M. All members were present except Reeve Marr. Also present were Mr. Frank clarke of the Ministry of THE coUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the County Building, 450 sunset iTransportatiOn and communications and the Assistant Engineer. The Engineer was absent due to illnesS. "MOVED BY: D. perovich SECONDED BY: A. Ford THAT TIlE MINUTES OF THE MEErING OF JANUARY 30, 1986 BE APPROVED. CARRIED." 1. The recent mild weather has reduced the winter control effort somewhat THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER REPORTED on work to date as followS' althOUgh salting and sanding waS required due to temperatures slightly above 2. Truck #83 (Mack Tandem) haS been put back into service after completion of a freezing- 3. Truck #64 (1975 Dodge Tandem) haS been sidelined due to the need of rilaj;Q1' motor overhaul. repairs on the radiator and transmiSsion. The fate of thiS vehicle will be addressed at a later date. With the use of Truck #116 (1980 IH cabover) we are again back to 9 sander routes. 4. Other than normal maintenance repairs, the graderS have been performing 5. TWO sander motorS (WiSConsins) have recentlY failed. We have installed a satisfactorilY · Briggs and Stratton motor ($ 1200) on one unit. To date it appears to be 6. Work at the pleasant valley pit haS included removal of overburden and pond working well. 7. Tree cutting haS been progressing at both the east and west areas of the County infilling as weather and equipment availability permit. 8. DUe to the wet / heaVY snow, catchbasin c1eanout haS been carried out on a as well as brushing in the St. Thomas area. regular basiS. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO FEBRUARY 21, 1986 PAGE 2. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN THAT THE FOLLOWING PAYLISTS BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT: PAYLIST # 8 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 57,937.33 PAYLIST # 9 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 1,759.83 PAYLIST # 10 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 91,284.22 CARRIED." CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED as follows: 1. From the Township of Yarmouth with a notice of rezoning of property on County Road #27 (Sparta) as commercial. 2. From the Township of Yarmouth with a'notice of rezoning of property on County Road #27 and #36 (Sparta) to legalize the location of the bUilding. Reeve Martyn indicated that the Yarmouth Council would discuss the Sparta Road agreement at their next meeting. He would also discuss with the Road Superintendent what quantities of granular material would be required for Township use. Upgrading of the pavement marker was deferred to the next meeting due to the absence of the Engineer. The Chairman indicated that the proposed work should,not be delayed too long as summer is approaching. The Assistant reviewed the proposed 1986 road budget which had been previously presented and only minor changes added to be consistant with the official Ministry of Transportation and CUlLImunications grant as recently received by letter. In addition to the normal subsidy, the Ministry of Transportation and Communications this year have provided a supplementary allotment of $ 101,000 for road and bridge construction projects. The Committee discussed 1986 priorities for road reconstruction and asphalt resurfacing. These are shown in the enclosed budget. A road tour has been scheduled in April in order that the condition of ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. FEBRUARY 21, 1986. PAGE 3. the roads can be inspected following spring breakup. In summary, the proposed 1986 road expenditure includes a total expenditure of $ 5,408,000 (19.2% increase over 1985) with a county levy of $ 1,213,000 (6.9% increase over 1985). The overall rate of Ministry of Transportation and Communications Subsidy is 77.61%. "MOVED BY: R. PURCELL". SECONDED BY: A. FORD THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE BUDGET OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 291,500.00 BE APPROVED. CARRIED." ) "MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT AN APPLICATION FOR A SUPPLEMENTARY BYLA1-'T BE MADE TO THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 91,800.00 (SUBSIDY) FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION .A..ND IMPROVEMENT. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: A.. FORD SECONDED BY: R. PURCELL THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE HONORARIUM FOR ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSIONERS BE $ 175.00 FOR THE PERIOD OF FEBRUARY 1, 1986 TO JANUARY 31, 1987. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: R. PURCELL THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE SUM OF $ 500.00 BE BUDGETED FOR IN 1986 FOR A MOSQUITO CONTROL PROGRAMME FOR THE PREVENTION OF ENCEPHALITIS. CARRIED. " ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. FEBRUARY 21, 1986. PAGE 4.. "MOVED BY: A. FORD SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE URBAN REBATES TO LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES BE 25% OF THEIR ROAD LEVIES AS IN FORMER YEARS. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: R. PURCELL THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE COUNTY ROAD LEVY BE $ 1,213,000.00 IN 1986. CARRIED.." "MOVED BY: W. MARTYN SECONDED BY: A. FORD THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A RESOLUTION BE PASSED DETAILING WORK CONTAINED IN THE 1986 BUDGET ~ATED FEBRUARY 21, 1986 AND TOTALING $ 5,408,800 AND THE STATEMENT OF PROPOSED EXPENDITURES BE FORWARDED TO THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS FOR HIS APPROVAL. CARRIED." Reeve Perovich requested that the Road Committee consider the use of a bus for the April road tour. It was suggested that maybe the Homes bus could be used. The Engineer was requested to investigate this matter further. The Assistant Engineer reported that he would accept the Long Service Award Certificate at the Ontario Good Roads Assocation on bE~half of Curt Gordon, Assistant Superintendent. It is proposed to present this certificate to Mr. ~\ Gordon at the next County Council Meeting. The Assistant Engineer reported that in the last few years the Road Department has had the use of government subsidized program labour to assist the ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. FEBRUARY 21, 1986. PAGE 5. survey crew for the summer. This year the programme called "Challenge 86 Summer Employment/Experience Development (SEED)" subsidizes the wages by $ 4.00 per hour. "MOVED BY: A. FORD SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHORIZED TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR THE HIRING OF 2 SURVEY TECHNICIAN STUDENTS FOR THE SUMMER UNDER THE CHALLENGE 86 SUMMER EMPLOYMENT/EXPERIENCE PROGRAMME (S.E.E.E.) CARRIED." Reeve Martyn and Warden Purcell brought the Chairman and the Road Committee up to date on the negotiations of the Personnel Committee with the Road Employees AssociationJwith respect to the 1986 - 1987 wage and benefit contract. "MOVED BY: R. PURCELL SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH THAT WE ADJOURN TO MARCH 5 AT 9 :30 A.M. APRIL LO AT 9:30 A.M. APRIL 17 & 18 AT 9:00 A.M. APRIL 30 AT 9:30 A.M. MAY 14 AT 9:30 A.M. CARRIED .f' ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. ~~. 17(/.) . --~~~- ST. TIlOMAS, ONTARIO FEBRUARY 7, 1986 'PAGE 1. 450 sunset Drive on FebruarY 7, 1986 at 9:30 a.m. Tl:1E COmlTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE met at the CountY Building, AlSO present waS the Engineer and All members were present ",~" except Reeve 1ilillseY and Reeve Jo1artyn. Assistant Enginee~. "Jo10VED BY: D. PEROVICIl SECONDED BY: t>,.. 1<.. FORD T\lJ'.T TIlE Jo1IN1lTES OF THE Jo1EETING OF Jl\l'IUARY 17, 1986 BE APPROVED. CARRIED." THE ENGINEER JJf,PORTED ON Tl:1E 1il0Rl<. TO DM'E AS FOLL01ilS: . d: . the "as t week as it had 1ilinter control was not qULte as stea Y Ln r been previouslY but today' s storm would likelY ta1<e all ..eekend to clean 1. 5. up. 1ilageS and machine time costS to JanuarY 22nd and accounts to JanuarY 31st on County and Suburban roadS were approximatelY $ 311 ,000 · 00 · b . g ~enlaced in Truck ~83 (Jo1ack tandem). The 1X\otO~ 'tJas eJ..n ~ S;: The Jo1use\ll1l floor was nearlY repaired. some dead trees on county roads were being cut. . ~ d ,,'le for the second time It had been necessarY to replenLsh t"e san rL 6. 2. 3. 4. thiS ~inte~. From the f~lY of the Late percy Funnell, appreciation for fl~ers during their recent bereavement. From the ToWn of t>,.ylmer asking the County to enter into an agreement with the Town to alloW the TQ'IH!l to place watertnains and sanitarY sewer Systems on County roads in the Town of Aylmer. coRRESPONDENCE 1il1l.S NO'l'ED t>,.S yoLr,01ilS: 1. 2. "MOVED BY:, E. NEU~ ~.______,r~''''' SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL TaAT 1ilE JJf,coMJIIEND TO COmlTY COUNCIL T\lJ'.T By-IJ>>1ilS BE pt>,.SSED t>,.UTIlORI:bING TIlE 1ilt>,.RDEN l\ND CLERl<. TO SIGN t>,.GJJf,El'\El'lTS 1ilITIl 'flU!. TOm< OF AyLMER FOR THE INSTl\l>LATION OF 1ilt>,.TEFl'Il'INS !\.ND Sl\l'IITARY SE1ilERJ\.GE SySTEM ON COUNTY ROt>,.DS IN TIlE TOm< OF AyLMER. CARR1ED." ST. TH.OMAS, ONTARIO FEBRUARY 7, 1986 PAGE 2. felt that in order to keep the roadside graSS and weedS under control without spraying, it would be necessary' to improve cutting in 1986. It waS sUggested GraSS mowing for the coming season was discUssed, and committee that the twO oldest tractors be' traded for twO 50-60 H.P. tractors with 8' disc type mowers. The old mowers would be kept for parts for the other county mo\'i1ers. REEVE MARTYN IN ATTENDANCE . . . . "MOVED BY: W. A. MJ\RTYN SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT THE ENGINEER BE i\UTHORIZED TO TENDER FOR TWO 50-60 H. P. TBACTORS AND 8 FOOT SIDE OR BEi\R MOUNT DISC TYPE MOWERS WITH 2 OF COUNTY'S TRACTORS AS TRADE-INS. CARRIED." tion and communications Regional office in attendance. TheY spoke on the The revised draft of ,the Budget was diSCUssed at some length. Mr. G. R. Browning arid Mr. John Wice of the Ministry of Transporta- Ministry of Transportation and communicatiOns' funding policies for both the county and local roadS and answered members' queries. THE MEETING ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH. AFTER LUNCH, :BEEVES MAFR AND BBADFIELD ABSENT. Budget diSCUssions continued and construction and resurfacing priori- tieS were diSCUssed. The Engineer stated that the Ministry of Transportation and communications insisted that funds allocated for asphalt resurfacing must be used for that purpose. Committee hoped to have final Ministry of Trans- portation and communications' allocations available for the next meeting on the 21st of February sO that the necessary recommendations could be made to county council. A decision would have to be made on construction priorities so that land purchase could start shortlY' ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO FEBRUAR"i 7, 1986 PAGE 3. and the Engineer had examined county Road 1\8 in Dutton. ':!'here were many drainage and structural deficiencies in the road section between the CNR tracks The Engineer reported that at the request of the Warden, RaY Collard and Mary Street. It also appeared that some repairs would be necessary in the spring at the intersection of Shackleton street west. Warden purcell noted that the ChaIllber of C011'/f{\erce waS amtioUS to contribute towardS the improvement of sidewalkS and street lights and might contribute to other portions of the work as well. It was felt bY coromittee that it would be wise to have a surVey on the entire street SO that a cost estimate could be made. "MOVED BY: E. NEUJ.<AMM SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD TllAT THE ENGINEER BE 1\.UTHORIZED TO DO ENGINEERING SURVEYS ON R01\.D 1\8 IN DUTTON FRoM T1lE c. N . R. TRl\.CJ.<S TO Ml\.RY STREET. CARRIED." present policY, the payment for land waS at the rate of $2,000.00 per acre with the erection of a standard 9 line woven wire fence if wished by the owner, The present County Land purchase poliCY was diSCUssed. Under the on the widened road limit. If the owner did not wish a fence, a payment of $12.00 per rod waS made. If ne fence was erected, the owner would receive nearlY $4,000.00 per acre for land based on a 17' road widening. ':!'he co11'/f{\ittee felt that as most of Road 1\22 and some widening on ROad 1\45 had alreadY been purchased on that baSis, the present land purchase poliCY should remain. "MOVED BY: 1\.. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUJ.<AMM 1\.DJOUBN TO FEBRUl\.RY 21 1\.T 9: 30 1\..M., Ml\.RCH 5 1\.T 9: 30 1\..M. , 1\PRIL 101\.T 9:30 1\..M., 1\PRIL 17 & 18 AT 9:00 A.M., 1\PRIL 30 AT 9:30 A.M., Ml\.Y 14 AT 9:30 1\..M. CARRIED." --- COUNf'Y/~GION EFFECTIVE SUBSfDY RA~rE 19B5 STORMONT, DUNDAS ~ GLENGARRY 80,,0 HALIBURTON 78.9 HASTINGS 18.6 PRESCOTT & RUSSELL 78.5 VICTORIA 78.3 LANARK 78.1 PRINCE EDWARD 77.1 GREY 76.9 LEEDS & GRENVILLE 76..5 LENNOX & ADDINGTON 76.3 PETERBOROUGH 76.1 MUSKOKA 76.1 RENFREW 75.7 ELGIN 75.5 WELLINGTON 75.5 HURON 72.5 SUDBURY 71.5 BRUCE 68~9 PERTH 67.5 BRANT 66.6 HALDIMAND-NORFOLK 66.0 .. DUFFERIN 64.4 NORTHUIYWERLAND 64.2 MIDDLESEX 64.0 FRONTENAC' 63.5 CONTINUED . . . . II t EFFECTIVE SUBSIDY COUNTy/REGION RATE -- - -- 1985 OTTAWA-CARLETON 62.2 OXFORD 61.4 NIAGARA 60.5 1<ENT 57.7 WATERLOO 56.4 DURflAM 55.6 1,..AMBTON 53.9 HAMILTON-WENTWORTH 51.6 ESSEX 50.0 HALTON 50.0 PEEL 50.0 SIMCOE 50.0 yoRK 50.0 f o COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT FEBRUARY SESSION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL: YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the Engineer has been authorized to call tenders for two (2) Tractors of approximately 50 - 60 horsepower with side or rear mount, disc type mowers. It is expected that 2 - 1971 Model 1020 John Deere Tractors will be traded in. 2. That the Engineer has been authorized to conduct engin1eering surveys on Road 8 in Dutton fr0m:the C.N.R. Railway tracks northerly to Mary Street, a distance of approximately seven hundred feet. 3. That we have been advised by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications that they will provide an initial subsidy allocation of $ 4,028,900 (including Urban Rebates) to subsidize ~expenditures (including Urban Rebates) of $ 5,211,300 in 1986. The Ministry provided subsidy of $ 3,356,000 on expenditures of $ 4,472,522 in 1985. In addition the Ministry of Transportation and Communications will provide a supplementary allocation of $ 91,800 to subsidize Road Improvement Expenditures of $ 101,000. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications has already agreed to provide subsidy of $ 41,000 toward an expenditure of $ 45,000 for Soils and Engineering Investigation work at pipe arch culverts located on various county and township roads. Total Expenditures (other than items not subsidized by Minis1try of r" Transportation and Communications) are estimated at $ .5,357,1300 with Ministry of Transportation and CUl1uLLunicationsf subsidy at $4,161, 700. WE RECOMMEND that By-Laws be passed authorizing the Wa,rden and Clerk to sign agreements with the Town of Aylmer to permit the T.own to install water systems and sanitary sewerage systems on county roads in the Town of Aylmer. These agreements will be similar to ,those ...: continued ... couNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE - FIRST REPORT FEBRUARY SESSION 1986 P ag e 2. agreements with the Townships of Yarmouth and Southwo1d for the installation of sanitary sewerage systemS on county roads that were authorized in January of 1986. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. ~ j ~.."A/_. ..:L;a-~01'. ' '" ";1..-1./ I / ..' ' .. .,- CHAIRMAN ST. THoMAS, QN'l'ARI0 J~UARY 30, 1986 "PAGE 1. 30 at the countY THE COUNT'i OF ELGIN ROAD CO~ITTEE met at 9' a.m., Th All members present except ReeveS Building, 450 sunset D!ive, St. omas. l'1arr, Br adfie1d, and l'1artyn. HMO\TED Wi ~ SECONDED BY: R. f. pURCELL T1:lAT THE l'1IN\lTES OF THE l'1E~INGS OF DECJ!,M:BER 12, 1985, DECJ!,M:BER 18, 1985 ~D J~UAR'i 3, 1986 BE APPROVED. D. "PERO\TICtl . the Frank Cowan company TWE ENGINEER REPORTED that he had wr1.tten . Road Department inSUrance, (a) the "th the following instruct1.ons on W1. $ 000 1 d Floater policy would remain at 1, · deductible on both the Feet an . ded to delete the following itemS, scaleS, (b) the Floater po11.cy be emen 1955 Ga1ion roller, . 1973 International tractOr, 1966 Wayne brush ch1.Pper, ..: ... ~....ne.r CARR1ED ." fur... than the radio tOwe~ " the following insurance p~- (c) accept1.ng .__ orC.ountS receivable blanket poc'-, if the radio tOwe1. cv~l. ~ "cipa1 risks. ity inSurance crommun1. o\NO.ed auto. the pe-riod of (b) b d been cut. Sorol' treeS a d JIh in A1dboroUgh. " d on countY Roa 1fV " b d been repa1.re A. tile dra1.n a (c) (d) (e) (f) ST. T1l0MAS, ONTARIO J~ARY 30, 1986 'PAGE 2. (g) percy wnne11, an e'~p--' v' ~ne 15 year sago, had passed away and last week. d for the office prior to propertY All furnitUre had been purChase' . urchases should be routed committee deciding that a~l furn~t~~: ~ropertY committee had been through them, and the Cha1-rman 0 so advised. (h) . . t d ~ith fo~est .' office were be1-ng negot1-a e RadiO commun1-cat1-ons for the .~. h waS of the obsolete .' rt'h base stat1-on ~).~1-C city commun1-cat1-ons. ,e 11 vacuum tube type would be replaced as we · (i) ,rM.OVED BY': A. R. fORD SECONDED BY: E. Nr;IJlZAMM THAT T1lE FOLLQ'il1~G PAYLISTS BE APPROVED FOR 1'AYl'lENT' # 6 1" T1lf. ~OUNT OF $58,018. 88 · 'P AYL1ST .. l.~ # 1 1" T1lE ~01lNT OF $57,414.91. 'PA.YLIST .. ,l.~ CARR1'ED ." REE'lf. 1\LACR of RonneY in attendance to disCUSS parking problems 1'10 .10n asked that the CountY supplY CQiltRf.Sl'Ol'1Df.NCf. WAS NQ'tf.D AS FOLLOWS: d . tS f t~e fgmi1~ of the late John L~man for flowerS an 1- 1. Thanks rom " J . p~opertY on Road #52 ld .th a notice of rezon1-ng TownshiP of southWO W1- . near ~e11ington Road as residential, AartS property. don.a.tiOn. to the DiabetiC ASSociation. 2. . h~a #lq at Straffordvi11e Township of Bayham rezoning property on 1l1-g y . 3. as special residential. "MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: A. FORD W. MARTYN ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JANUARY 30, 1986 PAGE 3. THAT WE RECOMMEND TO PERSONNEL COMMITTEE THAT THE FOLLOWING ROAD DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES BE PERMITTED TO CARRY THE 1985 HOLIDAYS INDICATED INTO 1986. ',KENNETH ABBOTT JOHN BROWN GLENN CROSS CLARE DEAN RALPH GORDON DAVID HAGERTY JAMES HASKELL JOHN HOFFMAN EDWIN KELLEY STANLEY LUNN ROBERT MCCREADY TED MCCREADY FRED MARSHALL DELL MORRIS ORRIE OSTRANDER WILLIAM SLOETJES KEN TELFER JAMES WATTERS LLOYD WEBSTER DANNY WELCH RONALD ZELLAS TOTAL 3 DAYS 2 DAYS \ DAY 1 DAY 3 DAYS ~ DAY 1 DAY 6~ DAYS 4~ DAYS 5\ DAYS 4 DAYS 5 DAYS 4 DAYS 3 DAYS 29~ DAYS 7 DAYS 2\ DAYS ~ DAY 2\ DAYS 4~ DAYS 1\ DAYS 62 DAYS REEVE BRADFIELD in attendance. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOU1'. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. SICK AND ON LONG TERM DIS- ABILITY. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. WINTER CONTROL CALLOUT. (OTHER THAN O. OSTRANDER 29~ DAYS.) CARRIED." THE ENGINEER REPORTED that he had received m~itten notice from the Ministry of Transportation and Communications that the County of Elgin's assessment for grant purposes for 1986 would be $636,000,000 as compared with $632,000,000 for 1985 and the City of St. Thomas's assessment had been set at $86,400,000 for the purposes of the half mill eontribution to Suburban Roads. The half mill contribution would be $43,200.00 for 1986 which was up $2,000.00 from 1985. ~ THE ATTACHED SHEETS showing the Ministry of Transportation and Communications' Spending Allocation and Subsidy Levels were discussed at some length. It was noted that Provincial Grants were greatly increased for 1986 and thus construction allocations were up. The money designated for asphalt resurfacing would have to be used for that purpose. The County road levy would have to be increased as well, and would have to be $1,212,000 or up 6.8% from the $1,135,000 raised in 1985. ST. Tlt()1'lAS, ONTARIO Jp,NIJAR'f 30, 1986 -pAGE 4. CoMMITTEE STARTED DIS CUSS1. ONS ON TltE BUDGET. CoMMITTEE l\DJOURNED FOR l,Ul'lCl1. A"ftER LUNCl1 WITH REEVE WJl.T'11< ABSENT. CoMMITTEE CONTI}\\JED THEIR DISCUSSIONS on the BUdget. The tenta~ 'neer for minOr modificatiOns to tive budget was referred back to the Eng:t be presented again at the next meeting on February 7th. Road #16 on COBRESPOllDRNCE REGARDING ']'llE pritchard property on ' . ve of southWOld would be in the Finga1 Hill was postponed unt:t1 the Ree of yarmouth would be in attendance. d JJJc5 & #22 waS postponed until the Reeve RURAl, l11l'ILLI1'\G on Roa 1t~ attendance · "MOVED BY: E. !'lEU~ SECOl1DED BY: A. 1<.. FORD ']'llAT WE l\DJOilRN TO FEBRUARY 7Tlt AT 9 :30 A.l'l.. CARR1ED ." c 0 U N T Y 0 F E L G I~ Janua~Y 24, 1986. <, "-- ROAD DE?ARTMENT ~_. ,<.....,.. ~ISED MINISTRY OF TRANSPOR~TI0.! & fQMM\lli~10NS STI'NDU!Q-LEV]L 011!.ECTIVEi & MINISTR'i OF TRANSl'O;TION '& COMMU!!ICATI0NS SUBSIDY ALLOCATIONS. - - - -.,- " " " ~ (a) CQnsttuction spending Leye\ Objec~ives. (i) consttuction Roads & Bt~dgeS, 3.46% of 21,439,OQO ~RED _------------- $ 949,389. (ii) Hot Mix Asphalt ResurfaC~n~. 12% of 13,\84,OPO ~EED _------------- 1,582,080. ---- M.T.C. ALLOCATION TOTAL _---------------------------------- ~2,53\,000. Maintenance & overhead _--------------------- $2,176,000. FIXED COSTS _ spending Level Objectives -- ~ Urainage AssessmentS _--------------------- 92,000. 356,000. NeW Machinery & Housing ---------------------- $2,624,000. Total spending Level Objectives (OperatiOns). construction - $2,531,000. Fixed costS - $2,624,000. $5,155,000. Total subsidy AllocatiOn $4,028,900. $ 28,000. subsidY On Urban' Rebates $4,000,900. subsidy On operations Rate of subsidy ~000,9~~ 77.61% 5,155,000 ~ St. 'fhom~ contribution Towards Suburban Roads lz Mill"" $ LeSs Deficit from 1985 NET $ Less city Share of ItemS Not subsidized ~ Net Effective Confrib~tiOn of St. Thoma~ ~tY LeV~ For operationS Total Spendi~g LeVel ppetatiOns --------- LeSS M.T.C. S~psidy ~ Operations ------~ LeSs citY of S~. Thomas Effective cont~ibution .- County LeVY FOt operations -------------- cont.inued 43,200. 9,000. 34,200: 700. ---- $ ~,5~~ $5,155,000. 4,000,900. 33,500. ~ $;;.120,60Ch . . . . . . COUNTY OF ELG1N ~ T~t~county_.~For Operations countY Share of ur1:>an Re1:>ateS county Share of supplementary su1:>sidy AllOcation Toward Road 11t\provement countY Share of Supplementary BY Law re pipe Arch CU1ve",r.s - --------------------------- $1,120,600. 28,000. --------------------------- 9,000. 4,000. --------------------------- 000. 50, ~ $~E-'=- ~ ItemS Not subsidi~ed ~creas0r~ 1982. ~ _$1,212,000. ~~O~ ~ 6.18% 1,135,000 u-rban Rebates Supplementary AllocatiOn ~e Road 11t\proveroent SupplementarY By Law re pipe Arch culvertS --------------------------~----------- _-------------------------- $5~155,000. ~p~TURE !QR 198~ spending Level Objectives ..---......--....-..-- 000. 56, 9 000. 9 , 000. 45, ~ $~5~ -..--..---...------ --------------------------- E"penditu~e fo~ subsidY 1985 EXpenditUre for subsidY _$4,472,522. ~c~tom~ --------- 19.8% M.T.C. ALLOCATION FIZED COSTS Maintenance & QVe",nead --.........--...---...............---- Drainage AssessmentS -........-...--........----......---... $2; 176,000. 92,000. 356,000. ~ $2,624,000. ---................................--...--...... Ne\o1 Machine-ry ~ BunSili! 150,000. 356,000. ~ $2,824,000. ~d costS must come from. construction Allocation. ~aintenance & OVe",head __-----~------------- $2,318,000. ..._...............~........._-_......_--_... \)I:ainage AssessmentS --......-..--..................-...----... Ne'W' MachineJ:Y ~RUCQ9! Road & Budget spending Level Objectives Supplementa~y spending Level 01:>jective ..-...-- $ 949,000. 99,000. .---- ---------------------------- .....-- 1,582,000. ... 200,000. ~ $~~ Resurfacing Deduct over E:!tPenditUre on Maintenance -...............-......---------...- JanuaJ:~ Report to council lesS Drainage Asses~~n~& e1 606 676 J Ne~ ~ach~nery ------ ~.' · · Net For construction l-r""r-rease 5t'/o) ------------ I t,. ""..)U''11.1 \Jr~ ~..~~~,~~~~~~~~\::~~~~O(j~ STI-.fJ- .1\\".)\"1'''('.1 f,ltllen.1iture on \tl)~ds and' $ 5,155,000. ,. ._ BridW"; \0 which Grant j\ppheS lIte'll) l' ~ Sl'E:? 2 countY \.;{{ort oE \.7.>; MiltS on 1'ota\ __~ GO\1l\t" i\,;sessmcnt l\tl\n~ f) . \. 'l.~' ~ 11.,111\ f' , \,2S It $.~~ " $~' 11\00 \ OOQ PhI!; ;.,. p. ,\ rua ',\ Co till' i uut i 01\ a.t O. S ~i.\\~ (\ '" 111.,11 (i . n. '" It $_~' ^" (\nO~ $ 43. 2~ . -rooO l~ ~ 'fot;>.' 1,0' ill j,:H"rt at \.7.':> MiUs ;: $~~~~ ((I\ao} ,_,II.,r\ ~t L 'l.S Mi',\s ~q\la,h\ tnll I.ot."\ 1 ,0"..1 ElLol't iI' $t~.p 1. ph~s an equiv3\ent al\.ount .){ r.~<1'(\t 7. It Step 7. ~ 7..lt $-~~~ $ 1,616,4~ ~=-- ~rhP ~) .....-...... ." ..... -.... . <.;' I. \-~? ~(^) \ . 'It n 'Ilt \:loa.d Effo..t . _." _~_ Vol he r.: \. ,ll reI \l an v n ~(. '" · at \. 15 \V\iHs Grant applying lo it is Ste P .\: 1l. \). <j0<) 0<) " , $}~lt~QQ _. It o. <)090<) {'lUll Grant equivalent. to 'total 1.o0cal I':Hort \Step 7.) -rotal c" lculated J\mount uE Grant \lnt1",t j{oau ,,:Hurt a.t 1. .~S Milll! " Step l I'{\inu& Step) l\lnlc&S Stl'll) .\ fl I'. rt'3t<l r' t"all 51.ep \) $ 3',418,60~~ -- :~ \' \.~ P ..\ ... ...............-..-- =$~ $~ $ - -_.-!:::. 'Do'~. of /",.proved Eltpen(\ituie i,\tem \) , 0, \'. It $------ .. or .. :: $ S lJ\) $~ VoIhic'nll""r i,1 t.\\e Ip,II11er OR ...... S'1'\"1-' S''8\ ' ' ~..;......~Whe re tnde is nO unmd Road Eifort , at \. 15 \V\il\s Grant is ,>0"1. or A.pprO'led ~:ltpen.'iturC l\~em 1) " o. S ]I: SteP 1 '" o. I;) ~ $-...-------- S lB) $...~ 5T\~: p b --;;;.--- .--' Grant applyin~ to Urban Rebate raia - so"1o oi Item H " o. S It $~ '" $- 28,0~- ~\\Il' (irant a.p-p\y\ng to J\.'PVroved. , 4 000 560. ,,:It\lcnl\iturc \Stell SlM or Ste\i 5\\\\ $~ 1v\ i nUS \tllC e ,pt& i rom ? rope \'1.'1 bl &1l08aV'<'" . "/. ur \tl'(1\ N " o. - ,. $-"- ,,$---- -- 'total (i,-an\. $ 4,028,5~O. ~ ,:; . \' \.: \') 1 --'-- -rllt.al r,rO\nt {'",yable under Upper 'tier -p rn \l. r ,lln \" The .1\ 1\oc a tion litem J\) 0 r Step b.' V/\,i"htlver \11 the \e8&et $ 4,02B,900. ....... -d"'" .." '. 4'-' A.P{l\ie& onl'/ to {lurchil-ses made {lrior ~o 3anuar'l. \. \913. l'erce1\l'>gc \0 he "se'\ is thatapplicablt to year In <NhlCh . roVerlV was \."rchased. PA1'E~~ -~ ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 17, 1986. PAGE 1. THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE MET AT THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, Sunset Drive, St. Thomas at 9.30 A.M., January 17, 1986. All members except Reeve Bradfield were present. 1. John Lampman, a Road Department employee for the past nine years and presently THE ENGINEER REPORTED AS FOLLOWS: acting as a winter night man had passed away very suddenly on January 9th. Services had been held on January 11th, flowers had been sent and a contri- bution would be made to The Canadian Diabetes Association in his memory. 2. Negotiations had been completed with London Machinery Company Ltd. for tWO sanders and the initial quoted price of $26,459.50 had been reduced to $25,605.64. "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE ACCEPT THE QUOTATION OF LONDON MACHINERY COMPANY LTD., FOR 2 MODEL LONDON L-61 SANDERS, ONE 10 CU. YD. CAPACITY AND ONE 8 CU. YD. CAPACITY AT A NET PRICE OF $25,605.64 INCLUDING PROVINCIAL SALES TAX. CARRIED." 3. Office furniture required had been purchased from The Table and Chair Company, Highbury #135, London, which had discounted their prices by 10%. Total cost was $3,373.00 plus Provincial Sales Tax. A drafting desk had been purchased from Mercury Blueprinting company of London at a cost of $1,400.00 plus provincial Sales Tax. Additional furniture was not required at the present time but an electric typewriter had to be replaced, likely by a word processor at a later date. 4. The New Machinery Budget would be updated for committee'S consideration. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 17, 1986. PAGE 2. 5. Two 1980 Chevrolet cars had been sold for $825.00 and $882.00 respectively on an "as was, as is" basis etc. Tenders received were as attached. 6. Mr. David Hobbs, Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Transportation and communications had confirmed that the Ministry was prepared to provide supplementary allocation of $41,000.00 for the geotechnical investigation and monitoring of structural steel plate culvertS in Elgin county. Infor- mation to be available on a province-wide basis to any Government body with the pipe arch culvert failure problem. THE ENGINEER REPORTED ON THE WORK TO DATE AS FOLLOWS: 1. TWO clippingS in the Rodney Mercury giving favourable reportS on the County'S winter maintenance operations. committee were somewhat amazed. 2. The London Free PreSs showing erections of new large intersection signS at Elgin Road 22 and Road 45. 3. The p.ower divider in Truck #84 had been replaced. 4. The clutch had been replaced on Grader #18 and a hydraulic clutch pump would 5. The motor on Truck #83 would be rebuilt immediately rather than in the Spring have to be replaced. as it used 12 1itreS of oil in one day. 6. The 10 yard sander had been mounted on Truck #116 and was in use. 7. It waS hoped that the sander on Truck #63 could be replaced within the 8. Wet weather conditions had stopped stripping at pleasant valley pit. next tWO weeks. 9. sand piles were being kept to a minimum so that potential environmental ..---"'~ . problems could be lessened. & 10. Some tree cutting had been done in West Elgin on Road #45. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 17, 1986. PAGE 3. 11. Welding on the Bobier culvert on Road #16 in Dunwich had been completed. It was unlikely any other culverts would be welded until spring. 12. Repairs had been made to a snowplow frame, tb the Michigan Loader bucket, and to the John Deere 644 Loader bucket. 13. A report on the Taylor Drain on Roa.d #45 in Ma1ahide had been received, to be read on the 6th of February. "MOVED BY: W. A. MARTYN SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL THAT THE fOLLOWING PAYLISTS BE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT' PAYLIST NUMBER 3 of 1986 AMOUNTING TO $77,609.69 PAYLIST NUMBER 4 of 1986 AMOUNTING TO $1,581.81 PAYLIST NUMBER 5 of 1986 AMOUNTING TO $136,970.97. CARRIED." 1. The Townshi.p of Southwo1d requesting that a. Bylaw be passed to restrict CORRESPONDENCE WAS READ FROM: parking on portions of Road #16 in Finga1. The matter was left in abeyance until County Government had dealt with enforcement of the County's ParMing Bylaws. 2. The Township of Ma1ahide rezoning properties on Road #42, at Copenhagen for residential purposes. MR. LYLE WELLS OF THE FRANK COWAN COMPANY IN ATTENDANCE TO DISCUSS INSURANCE. -..... liability insurance in limits of $7,000,000.00 compared to liability limits of Mr. Wells reported that at the present time he was only able to offer $10,000,000.00 in previoUS years. He pointed out that insurance costs on fire insurance, floater damage, etc., would not increase significantly from previous continued · · · · · ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 17, 1986. PAGE 4. years, however, the liability section of all policies (both road liability and automotive liability) would be increased considerably. He was not able to offer environmental coverage such as weed spraying insurance, insurance against damage through any sort of pollution such as salt, diesel fuel, emulsions etc., etc., except under a different policy. This policy would provide coverage up to one million dollars per claim or an aggregate of twO million dollars for all claims during the year's policy period, however, the policy would be subject to a $10,000.00 per claim deductible, annual premium would be $10,203.00 and exclusions would include clean-up expenses to the County's property or damage to one's own equipment, liability assumed from others which is not covered by a written agreement, any risk under worker'S compensation claims, Nuclear Energy claims, airport risk, fineS or other penalties, and any damage that would ordinarily be expected to be incurred when a project was being done, along with costs necessary to correct any pre_existing conditions and routine monitor Subsidizable Road Department costs were estimated at $46,300.00 charges etc. compared to $35,100.00 and $12,704.00 non_sUbsidizable compared to $1,205.00 in 1985. c"""aittee diScUssed the general liability problem with Mr. Well s at some length and a number of options were proposed to reduce costs to the County, one being an increase in deductib1es to $2,500.00 or $5,000.00 from the present $1,000.00. Another Suggestion was the removal from protection of those items which had low risk damage,itemS of limited value, and tools and supplies. Among itemS discussed were radio unitS, snow fence, stock, and prop- erty such as scales, surveying equipment, etc. Also discussed was the cost of insuring furniture in the Road Department. ST.. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 17, 1986.. PAGE 5. After some discussion it was decided to leave the matter of the environ- mental liability policy in abeyance at the present time and to leave the deductible at the present $1,000.00. Committee instructed the Engineer to review all items noW insured to decide whether or not some of the lesser valued items should re- main covered and savings made in that category although they realized that savings would be minimal. MEETING ADJOURNED FOR DINNER. AFTER DINNER REEVE PEROVICH ABSENT.. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN THAT WE RENEW THE FOLLOWING INSURANCE POLICIES WITH THE FRANK COWAN COMPANY. MUNICIPAL LIABILITY (7 MILLION DOLLAR LIMIT). NON- OWNED AUTO, AUTOMOTIVE FLEET, FLOATER POLICY INCLUDING NON-LICENSED EQUIPMENT, CRIME PACKAGE, BOILER (ENGINEERING), VALUABLE PAPERS, ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, GAR~GES. THE MATTER OF INSURANCE (IF ANY) FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITY TO BE ADDRESSED LATER. CARRIED." MAYOR GOLDING OF THE CITY OF ST. THOMAS AND CASE DONKERS, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS IN ATTENDANCE. Mayor Golding discussed a number of things of 'which she has concerns at the. present time including the proposed closing of Wellington Road for the replacement of culverts on the Underhill MUnicipal Drain. She pointed out that she e"l'ected 5,000 or 6,000 Shriners to corne to St. Thomas on the June 14th, and 15th weekend and hoped that they would not find it impossible to come into St. Thomas because of road construction on the arteries leading in to St. Thomas. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 17, 1986. PAGE 6. She also expressed concerns over the St. George Street sewer plan and the apparent lack of progress being made towards tender call. The Committee advised her that the sewer project was not under their jurisdiction. Also discussed was the extension of Radio Road - Hubrey Road-Highbury Avenue route between St. Thomas and London. It was agre1ed by all concerned that while it was desirable to have this road built as soon as possible, a decision by Committee as to the direction that Committee wished to handle the matter had not yet been made. Mayor Golding requested that Committee make a decision as soon as possible and keep her advised of their actions; the Chairman stated that he would. MAYOR GOLDING AND MR. DONKERS LEFT THE MEETING. CORRESPONDENCE WAS NOTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. From the Township of Yannouth with notices of minor variances on Road #22 and County Road #26. 2. From the Township of Yarmouth with a Bylaw rezoning property on the Highway #3 Bypass south of the Conrail property for commercial purposes. 3. From Mr. Osborne, District Municipal Engineer stating that the Regional Director, Mr. Browning and some of his staff would attend County Road Committee meeting on February 7th. 4. From Mr. G. C. Leverton reminding Committee that 30 copies of the Budget would be required by March 1st for distribution to Council. 5. From Ontario Good Roads with announcement of micro-computereourse. It was felt that the course might be more appropriate next year. 6. From the Township of Southwold requesting permission from the Cbunty of Elgin to install sanitary sewers on County roads. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 17, 1986 PAGE 7. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD . THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED AUTHOR- IZING THE WARDEN AND CLERK TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHWOLD FOR THE INSTALLATION OF SANITARY SEWERS ON COUNTY ROADS. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT A BY-LAW BE PASSED AP- POINTING ALBERT AUCKLAND AS THE COUNTY'S REPRESENTATIVE ON THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION FOR THE PERIOD FROM FEBRUARY 1, 1986 TO JANUARY 31, 1989. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: W. A. MARTYN SECONDED BY: E. NEUKAMM THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE COUNTY'S REPRESENTATIVE ON THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION BE AUTHORIZED TO ATTEND THE ONTARIO GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION CONVENTION IN TORONTO, AND THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION OF ONTARIO EXECUTIVE AND ANNUAL MEETINGS WITH THE USUAL CONVENTION EXPENSES PAID. CARRIED ." FIRST AND SECOND REPORTS TO COUNCIL of the January Session were dis- tributed and commented upon. Reeve Martyn noted that the Township of Yarmouth would discuss the proposed agreement regarding Sparta Road at the next meeting of Township Council. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 17, 1986 PAGE 8. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT WE ADJOURN TO JANUARY 30, 1986 at 9:30 A.M. CARRIED." 0/ / ~~~:,,~~ CHAIRMAN ~~.~ ~ 'l'l>NDB1l.S 'FOR 1980 tlSEO C\ll>\1ROtl>T j>.U'tQMOBlLES Cj>.R * 2l Gl1El>N \ SERII>.L * lL1.6911A1l 59106 · $ 825.00 ROY 'Laforge $ 762.00 Ken Telfer $ 410.00 Jim watters CAR ~ 4 t~ROON\ Sl>RIAL ~ l.L6911A1.1.S9S8i. $ 882.00 Ken Telfer $ B25.00 ROY Laforge $ 755.00 Allan Moon $ 520.00 Jim watters Will.i(lll\ vannatter $ 400. 00 JanUa.ry 14, 1986. COuNTY OJ? BLGIN ROAD CO~ITTBB ~ JANUA'R'Y SESSION 1 9 8 6 TO TtU> \olAFDBN AND MEMBBRS OJ? TtU> couN'J"1 OJ? BLGIN COuNCIL 'QrT\S AS rOLLO'Vi1S ~ YOUR ROAD CO~ITBB FEPO,'" 6 'tn tne That we ha'ie renewed effecti'ie Januan' 29. 198 · W1. J?ranl< Cowan company our Road Depart1l\ent insUrance as fo1-1-ows'- d t Automoti'ie J?1-eet. Municipa1- Liabi1-itY. Non ();<ne . .Act o. ..' , t ~loater po1-iCY' crime package. Bngineering (Boi1-er and EC1UJ..plUen 1: . .. s GarageS (COmprehensi'ie). pressure ~esse1-s), Brrors and ~1.SS1.on · ~a1-uab1-e papers. and Accounts ReceiVab1-es. b ~""le to obtain 1-iabi1-itY insUrance to a se'ien VJe nave een GUJ to ten mi1-1-ion dol1-ar. 1-iroit in mi1-lion do1-lar 1-~it on1-Y C01l\pared px:evioUS yeax:s. rotect the County against f ' sux:ance "\Nould p , t'\Tne 0 J..n 1-ater. Th1.S>" 'rh onlY insurance llution, etc. e , 'l't'\T salt pO . 1-1.ab1. 1.>' . 't weed spraY1.ng 'll'on dollaX: lJ..lUJ.. , d one lUJ.. J.. t tilUe px:ovJ.. eS a a'iiod,lab1-e at the presen " f the ).ife of po1-ii::Y i1-1-ion do1-lar 1-1.m1.t or . er c1-a~ "ith a tWO m ,$10.000 deduct1.b1-e p ..' ld be subJect to a t... claJ..m "\NOu 'tlA....rJever eaCll ' ld be $10,233.. 00 t... nx:emJ..\J)1\ "\NOu _"\ costs).. Tlle.l:' , co~~unicatiOns) . L J..on & 'llU." . _ ....... (;;I.ll;::>1:;'''''j.. ....c;;o..... fo~ environmental liability wi1-1- be disCUssed InsUx:ance j.. (1 year) - 1.\....... t and 1ego..I- linc1-uding adjUStmen -~~. , .f "'....--~~~ , ' d bY tne M.inist.x:y 0 I s__~s1.d1.Ze ' ,non "-" ' 1986 1.S "'~-- padkage J..n The cost of insurance . " of Transportat1.u" , " b tne M.J..nJ..stx:y at $46.300 sUbS1.d1.Zed y __,. Cowan company ~ Ministry of J?ra"'" ..~ . dized bY t"e d $1-2 704 non-s"-,,S1. " CoJ1l1l\unicatiOns an I ,3'0 1-00 sUbsidized bY the , agaJ..nst $ , co~~unicatJ..on5' d cl 205 tation" 'u... . ) an >? ' Transpor . ' (32% 1.ncrease , & co~unicatJ..ons Portat1.on . s MinistXY of Trans ' " cowmunicat1.on , ' f Txansportat1.on tne M.J..nJ..str1 0 non_sUbsidized bY 62 1-/2% from 1-98'0. _,.,,~ rl'I",,+'ril increase )' lljb:J- ,l.""-- (1-0'04% increase 1.n . d to delete co'ierage been J..nstx:ucte E gineer na5 A1-thoUgh the n . ot warr<i!l'ted. any . that the coverage 1.S n , tne polJ..c1 fro1l\ anY items 1.n the 1-arge increase '11 be small as 1 x:elUi\J)1\ cost "\NJ.. , gs in tne toto. p f county assets.. sa'i1.n . rep1-ace1l\ent 0 1-' abilitY tathet than ).n is in thitd patty ). continued .. .. .. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE JANUARY SESSION 1 9 8 6 THIRD REPORT - 2 - WE RECOMMEND: 1. That a bylaw be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to sign an agreement with the Township of Southwold for the installation of sanitary sewers on County roads. This agreement will be similar to the agreement with the Township of Yarmouth. It will allow Southwold to combine with the Township of Yarmouth to install a sewer system in the Lynhurst, Lynhurst Park and St. George Street areas. 2. That a bylaw be passed appointing Albert Auckland as the County's representative on the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission for the period from February 1, 1986 to January 31, 1989. 3. That Albert Auckland be authorized to attend the Ontario Good Roads Association Convention in Toronto, the Suburban Roads Association of Ontario executive meetings and the Suburban Roads commission Annual Meeting with the usual convention expenses paid. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. {JHAIRMAN COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT TO THE WARDEN AND MENBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: JANUARY SESSION 1986 St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Roads in 1985. The following is a Sumnary of Expenditures on Elgin County and In accordance with Ministry of Transportation and Communications' has been distributed to various projects and does not appear as a practice, Payroll Burden such as Holidays With Pay, Sick Time, etc., separate item. CON STRU(,'T I ON (A) Bridge 5: (1) Silver Creek Culvert Replacement, County Road #42, MaliJhidl~ Township. (Total Expenditure 1983 to 1985 inclusive was $ 685,042.'13) (2) Rehabil"itation of the Port Burwell Bridge, County Road #42, Port Burwell. (3) Rehabilitation of Players Bridge, County Road #45, Yarmouth Township. TOfAL $ (B) Roads: (1) County Road #22 (Fairview Avenue) from St. Thomas City Limits tQ County Road #27, Yarmouth Township. (Project cost to date>[other than land] 1983-85 is $ 931,486 (2) County Road #32 (Police College Road) from Ontario Police College to County Road #52, Malahide Township. Project cost (other than land). 1980 - 85 was $1,445,232. (3) County Road 1142 and County Road 1150 111 l'Ol't. tiurwcll, Pl.'oJ4-!!.:\; COliC. IlJllJ-U5 $ 412,397.36 22,759.84 169,721. 53 108,633.47 301,113.84 362,780.97 :213, ?15 .19 57,486.14 Ccmtinued . q CO~Y OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECoND REPORT - JAN,UARY SESSION 1986 (B) Roads: (Continued) (4) Land purchase lllctudJng !:iUl'Vl'YH, I'LL. (5) Surveys and engineering work on roads for future construction.& Misc. Grading. ~ (C) Asphalt Resurfacing: (l) County Road #3 from Highway IIJ to Rodney in ALdborough Township. (Project Cost) $ 747,524.64 (2) County Road #3 from County Road In to Thames River in Aldborough Township. (3) County Road #36 completion of work for 1985 from County Road #45 to Highway #3 in Yarmouth Township. (4) County Road #39 in Port Burwell. (5) County Road #42 from Elizabeth Street in Port Burwell easterly approximately 1 mile, Port Burwell and Bayham Township. (6) County Road #52 from Highway #74 to County Road #30, Yarmouth Township. (D) 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) Drainage assessments charged against County roads. (4) Development of Sparta Gravel Pit, Yarmouth Township. TatAT-, $ TarAL $ TOTAL PAGE 2. ,t . ,1 7 I . :' 1 28,589.70 667,243.23 11,706.72 107,852.60 4,271.43 39,725.14 135,335.04 334,960.00 633,850.93 21,285.25 Credit 321,726.16 32,862.41 8,997.59 $ 342,300.91 TOTAL COUNTY EXPENDITURES 'A', 'B', 'C' AND 'D' $ 1,944,508.91 ---------- -- . .,> ,.'-~- ----- --- .-"..- ---- -,~""~- COUNTt OF ELG1N ROAD G~lTTEE ~J~ (E) ST. TIIOW'S SUIIURIIAN RQAll c~l as 1011 COIISTRUG'f10N n) 1IlaceHaeecoa so<'leYs aed ee~lnee<le~. (2) Laud purchase. (3) oraleage .ssessmee~s charged a~ales~ s~. 'rho.'.' s"I""'''.'' \\oa.\ c.,.,,,,..I"" Roads. 'tar AI.. COS't~'l 5't. 't\\OMA5 SU~UR~AN ROAU COMMISSION T(Yl'AL COUNT'l OF ELG1N AND ST. TIIOW'S SUllUSllAll ROAD C~lSS10ll COllSTRUG'flON tI, "PAGE 3. 4,596.19 12,151.84 14,504.54 $ 31,259.11 $ 1,915,168.08 . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE .SECOND REPORT - JANUARY SESSION 1986 PAGE 4. MAINTENANCE - COUNTY ROADS *NOTE: Letters and numbers correspond to Ministry of Transportation and Communications' Account Numbers. 11 A . Culverts and Bridges - 1 Bridges . 2 Culverts 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 C . Hard Top Maintenance (Paved Roads) 1 Repairs to Pavement . 2 Sweeping . 3 Shoulder Maintenance (including gravelling, ditching, etc.) ~ 4 Surfac@ Tf~ntm@nt D - Loose Top Maintenance (Gravel Roads) - 1 Drainage, Gravel, Prime, etc., Road #26 (Bostwick Road) - 2 Grading Gravel Roads - 3 Dust Control (Salt Brine) - 4 Dust Control (Prime) . 5 Gravel Resurfacing E - Winter Control . 1 Snow Plowing - 2 Sanding and Salting - 3 Snow Fence . 4 Winter Standby * Total Winter Control * 1984 Winter Control 1983 Winter Control 1982 Winter Control $458,201 $210,955 $497,778 COUNTY RO^DS ST. THOMAS mrmmnAN Rt1An COMMISSION ROADS TOTAL 76,835.23 11,421.27 13,712.10 88,256.50 66,795.81 53,083.71 41,290.25 10,930.26 52,220.51 14,837.86 8,288.62 23,126.48 129,411. 58 33,255.34 162,666.92 32,886.87 18,687.86 51,574.73 1,169.27 - - 1,169.27 5/115.13 697.76 5,812.89 11,242.73 508.14 11,750.87 119,442.47 20,683.38 16,859.46 3,120.75 136,301. 93 23,804.13 192,210.22 111,431.(,3 20,338.78 212,549.00 111,437.63 55,898.66 55,898.66 33,261. 55 6,410.73 39,600.28 41,992.05 11,997.76 53,989.01 3,669.52 3,469.92 7,139.44 102,761.67 7,435.77 110,197.44 154,580.62 29,237.69 183,826.31 253,620.59 40,957.91 294,578.50 23,031.23 4,371.35 27,402.58 23,770.47 3,619.27 27,389.74 455,010.91 78,186.22 533,197.13 Continued . . . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT JANUARY SESSION 1986 PAGE 5~ MAINTENANCE - COUNTY ROADS ST. THOt-IAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION COUNTY ROADS ROADS TOTAL F - Safety Devices - I Pavement Marking (Center Line) 44,955.90 7,995.49 52,941. 39 - 2 Signs 73,194.75 20,274.92 93,469.67 - 3 Guide Rail 11,469.31 1,196<.53 12,665.94 - 4 Railroad Protection 34,2.).8.60 6,231.95 40,450.55 - 6 Edge Marking 40,967.14 6,137.29 47,104.43 - 7 Stump Removal 2,075.85 5,0801.65 7,156.50 TOTALS $ 1,653,223.58 $ 348,134.23 $ 2,001,357.81 OVERHEAD - COUNTY ST.THOHAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION COUNTY ROADS ROADS .. TOTAL 1. Superintendence, including County Engineer, ^ssistant Engineer, Superintendents and Vehicles. 116,585.62 10,1~7.88 126,723.50 2. Clerical 63,281. 90 5,50~~.77 68,784.67 3. Office 29,033.47 2 , 524~ .65 31,558.12 4. Garage - Stock and Timekeepers, Maintenance, Heat, Etc. 96,246.13 8,369.23 104,615.36 # 5 . Too 1 s 14,524.75 1, 26J~. 02 15,787.71 6. Radio 4,438.03 38S.92 4,823.95 7. Needs Study Update and Traffic Counts 7,574.51 1,0351.37 8,609.88 8. Training Courses 2,076.11 1801.53 2,256.64 9. Mis~ell~~~9~S ln~~r~~ce 2,180.15 18~' . 58 2,;169.73 10. Retirement Benefits (Sick Time Paid to Retired Employees) l,.4 , 218.01 14,218.0.). 11. Deferred Time 1,397.33 1,397.33, TOTALS 351,556.01 29,589.95 381,144.96 Overhead is charged against the St. Thomas Suburban Road Conmission Roads on a percentage basis of the cost of construction and maintenance on the St. Thomas Suburban Road Conunission Roads as a percentage of all construction and maintenance on both St. Thomas Suburban Roads and County Roads (urban rebates, equipment purch:as,es, drainage assessments, items not for subsidy, etc., are not considered in determj_nin~ the overhead percentage). In 1985 the Overhead charge to the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission was 8%. comrr~ oY Bt.CW RO~D (,OMM1.'t'!:BE SECOtID 1'$PO"! _ J""tlAR~ SBSS10ll 1986 ~ 1'1\GE6. :,; S2r,n1.14 d Vllla eS oE 25% oE thelr Road Levy Rebate to '\00\<1\ of Ml..er a~ (r E _ ort,tlo~ ,nd C,",",,,,,,<.,,tlO~') (SOboldl..d by ~. Ml~l.tr' 0 .,noP . d t tled S 121,..0.3. t~ Dlstrlbuted t.abour costS a~d yayroll EUr e~ 0 a \ \ l t of rra~.portatlO~ a~d ",ere dlstrlbuted l~ aeeorda~ee ,,,It' Mn s 'V " comou~leatlO~S sta~dard praetlee to tbe varloUs operatlO~S' if!) 1985 & ~ l\1.ll1 S"TR~ 0 f '\OR~llS pORr ^ r1 Oll ~ll n c()l<\l'\1lll~ l. Road t.labllity l~sura~ce 2. Mlseella~eous (l~elUdi~E Me..bershiPS, Road ()OI'1IlIittee l~speetiO~S, \lOSpitality suiteS, EtC.) loNOlees from the cou~ty Clerks Offlee for yreparatiO~ of anployee payroll 3. 4. ya~pt for ~ec~\ated Sick ri~e ~o ~toyeeS still i~ EmplOyme~~ of the countY of. Elgi.n 5. Yayme~t to st. "Thomas Suburba~ Road ()OI'1IlI1Ssio~er (YeeS a~d E<pe~ses) l~ter~atiO~al Ylo",i~E Match (cou~ty E~hlblt. EreetiO~ of S~o'" Ye~ee, EtC.) 1. tlrban Rebates llot Subsidized bY the Ministry of rra~SportatiO~ a~d co~untcattons 6. 'fotal RebateS to 'fOW~ of I<Vl..er a~d Vlllages ",ere $ 55,119.59 ~ s't. 't\\(J~\AS suuURBl\N ROAD cQm\lSSlON ~ 1,205.00 ~ 104.00 1,101.00 4,412.84 222.60 1\,190.24 4,540.10 4,540.10 21,6'39.96 21,619.96 150.00 150.00 2~,403.25 2<),40).25 3,341.85 ),3t\1.P,5 $ 64,693.60 'to'! ALS $ 64,217.00 $ 476.60 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE ,SECOND REPORT - JANUARY SESSION 1986, PAGE 7. SUMMARY ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION COUNTY ROADS ROADS - !OTAL, (A) Construction 1,944,508.91 (B) Maintenance 1,653,223.58 (C) Overhead 351,556.01 (D) Ut'ban Rebates 52,437.74 (E) ItemS Not For Supsidy 64,217.00 31,259.17 1,975,768.08 348,134.23 2,001,357.81 29,588.95 381,144.96 52,437.74 476.60 64,693.60 DEDUCT: 1984 Stock Balance SUUT01' ALS $ 4,065,943.24 $ 409,458.95 $ 4,415,402.19 126,671.06 $ 4,602,073.25 64,857.03 TOTALS $ 4,537,"216.22 ADD: 1985 Stock Balance (Total for Ministry of transportation and CommunicatiOnS subsidy $ 4,472,522.62 1 CALCULATION OF AMOUNT PAYABLE BY CITY OF ST. THO~ !OWARD THE ST. THOMAS SUIlURBAN ROAD COMM1.s~ION ROAD_SYSTEM Calculation of Ministry of Transportation and communications payable on the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Road system Expenditures. 1. Average Subsidy Rate on Operations E.penditures of $ 408,982.35 was 75.33% or 2. Subsidy on It.emS Not {t'or Sub::;ldy of $ 476.60 is nil $ 308,086.40 DEFIel'l' TO 1986 $ 308,086.40 $ 409,458.95 $ 308,086.40 rl' $ 101,372.55 $ 50,686.27 $ 469.01 $ 50,217.27 $ 41. :200.00 $ 9,107.27 TOTAL SUBSIDY FROM MlNISTRY OF TRANSPOlITATlON AND COMMUNICATIONS Total St. Thomas Suburban Road COIlUlllssion Expenditures ,LES S . Minh try 0 f Tr an sport a ti 0 \l and COIl,nun ic at ion s Subs i dy BALANCE Share of City of St. ThomaS 5~k of aalance pEDUC~; surplus From 1984 SUBTCYrAL DEDUCT. i/2 Mill Contribution for 1985 from City of St. Thoma' rAGE 8. c{)IlllTl Of f,\,GIN ROt.ll c.<JM11ltlllE SEC01'1t\ RB~O~ _ J~1'1UMt"! SESSION lqe6 ~ Ct.1..CUV1101'l Of Nt\: COmrr"l E1<:PE1'1\J1.1URE ~ d 'catiO~s subisdY ~inist~y of 1ransportation an Co~~n' .n lqeS ~as $ 3,3S6,OOO 4,,5:n,216.22 ., d d St 1h"",as S~b~~ban Road COl""ISS.on 'total count)" Roa an · E}t\'enditu'tes 3,15(',,000.00 " " ,'d C tftlIUnitatto"~ SIi".ltty LtSS~ ~i"i.tf1 o[ ttanapottat,on an 0 :;;:.:::;.- t citV of St 1homas of the St. 1h"",aS SubU~ban LESS: cost 0 J · ~ Road CommiSsion 50,686.21 CIN (SI1R1Ec:r 10 ~lNIS1R"! Nt\: ts1lw<1Ell CoS1 10 COIJll1"l Of E1.., '." ~ c' _""11'11 c ^rl,01'lS ~ tlP 1 r )1,130 , S 29 , q S Of rRN1SPOR1^1101'1 ,"." ,\n"'" ' $le 000 tO~ard a Supplementary RY-1..a~ 1he lqe5 Road 1..eVY provided $1,111,000 plUS ' inistr of r~ans~ortatiOn and commPnlcatiOOS' ""ich ~aa neve~ a~proved by the ~ ' y \10ta1 LevY $ l,11S,000) <1~ ng i. lqe4 we~e $4,600,416.61 and lna5 'te $ 5 140,u ~.o., n 10ta1 Vouche~ paymentS in 00 we 0 in lq81 ~e~e $5,143,165.36. d total road e~pend.tUres 1he difference between the total voucher paymentS an included: d d IIridgeS and invoiced to county of ~iddlese~ (a) "o~" done on 1n"",une ROa s an and Count)" of O~fo'td. " for va~ioUS municipalitieS including City of St. 1homas Su'tEace t'teatment ~o't and county of ~nt ($ 113,114.42) for varioUs local municipalitieS \lot mi~ paving and othe~ ""rle, etc., (b) (c) 3 ,,". 1 "troent l''tOg'tammes t i lq85 pa~tiCipated in ~ 0,... 1he County of 1l1gin Road lJepartmen n in addition to the ""r" li.ted above. ' "l~"v<, y'''~ ^a.1ata"C") aL .. " ,', ,"~ f\~""'o" ,,,C",,tl v<' ,'r "g" o"~'<' ,. ta ) (:ovo ."me" L o! Lon"' a ($143,144.11) the 5 ring and ea~ly Summer (to relieve (b) canada "orles f<Og~~e (fede~al) in p a value of ~ 4,100.00 (c) local ~nemPloyment) $q,433.1q. ontariO "louth co~ps f<Og~a~e (p~Ovincial) ""r" and 2 p~Og~~es in lq85 \ 5 68,414.00) completion of lq84 p~Ogr~e ~ c()llN'ty OF ELCl11 ROAD CQMl!lTtEE SEcoND REPORT _ JANUARY SESSIoN 1986 ?t\G"E <}. The RPad Qepartment waS requested to have personnel available for a ~squitO '1'\\" n' .1. "' . ~"", '/ ~ w.. c\..c~o d ConHO 1 pcogr atl1\lC I' ,," II'" I'''''v'' ", ,,,,, "I' """"1'1''''\ \I'''' to the General Government Account. ALL OF \11I1 CII IS RRS~RCt~I1M sul\l'll-TtRD CHAIRMAN .. ~ .. ,I' COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE ,FIRST REPORT 'JANUARY SESSION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. We have received from Nottinghan's Truck Service Limited, Hagersville, an International 2 Ton Double Cab Truck with Flat Rack that was ordered last September. 2. We have negotiated the purchase of two Sanders of 8 and 10 cubic yard capacity respectively from London Machinery Company Limited of L9ndon, at a cost with Provincial Sales Tax of $25,605.64. One will replace a 1972 unit which is in poor condition, the other has been mounted on a 1980 International Cabover Truck purchased by the County in November for use as a paint marking truck. The extra amo~nt will give the County 10 sander units. Although we had 10 units at one time, we have had only 9 for several years. Your Committee feels 10 units are required to give adequate service. 3. We have purchased from Eeley Chevrolet Olds Limited, Strafford- ville, two 1986 Chevrolet Caprice automobiles at $10,668.00 each plus Provincial Sales Tax. The Engineer and the Assistant Superintendent are driving these, and the Superintendent is driving the County's 1984 Ford. The County's 1980 Chevrolet Automobiles are being tendered to Road Department employees. 4. We have recommended to County Government Committee that a bi- weekly system of paylist account qpprovals be set up. These would be paid on alternate weeks to the wages paylist and woul~ be compatible with a future computer bookkeeping system. Continued . . . . . . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT - JANUARY SESSION 1986 PAGE 2. 5. That the County Engineer has been authorized to attend the fol- lowing conventions and/ur meetings: The Ontario Good Roads Association Convention (February); The County Engineers Municipal Engineer's annual meeting held in conjunction with the Ontario Good Roads Association Convention; The Roads and Transportation Association of Canada Convention; The Municipal Engineers Annual Workshop; The Suburban Commissioners' Annual Meeting (This will be hosted by St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission); The International Conference on Short and Medium Span Bridges sponsored by the Civil Engineers' Association of Canada, to be held in Ottawa on August 18th to the 21st. Thi3 Conference is held every four years and the Engineer's abstract on "Failures of Soil Steel Plate Culverts is one of sixty abstracts from over 165 from 12 countries accepted for presentation at the Conference. 6. The Assistant County Engineer has been authorized to attend the following conventions and/or meetings: The Ontario Good Roads Association Convention (February); The County Engineers Municipal Engineer's meeting held in conjunction with the Ontario Good Roads Association Convention; The Municipal Engineers Annual Workshop; and The Suburban Commissioners' Annual Meeting. 7. A meeting will be arranged at the request of the County of Middlesex to discuss the improvement of the Radio-Hubrey-Highbury Road link between London and St. Thomas. 1985 traffic counts on Wellington Road show in excess of 10,000 vehicles per day average at the Middlesex Boundary, with over 6,000 vehicles per day south of Highway #3 (St. Thomas Expressway). Thi s is an increase of approximately 1,000 vehicles per day in each of the last three years. Continued . . . . . . 1> [\\,j\:,. J- c()llll'rl Of Et.GlN ROAD c0W'l1'l:tEE . fl,RSt RllfORt . JA\lU!IR'{ SllSS10ll 1 g8b 'WE RECO~END~ . t the OntariO cood \l<>ads and wanspor- 'that the _hers1'W teeS or tation ASSociatiOn ot canada bo paid. C ittee tO~ the tollO~M 'that the 1985-&6 Road ~ittee act as a o~ 1. 2. ing p\l~pOses~ solid and Liquid ~aste DiSpOsal. lioSquitO control tOr the pre"ention ot Encephalitis. (a) (c) d authO~i.ing the ~arden and Clerk to sign ~hat a By-La~ be paSse ssa~Y in 19B5-B6- plans for widening CountY Road a110~ances as nece d 1 Y and the 'By" La~ such authO~i.atiOn BY_La~s roust be passe year . . . ht be ~equi~ed d 1 '1 1 include anY roads that ~,den,ng ""g sche u e \iTl. Lake E~ie E~osion. (b) 3. on in 19B6. " u\<- and the Enginee~ be appointed to 'that the ~a~den, Ree"e ,,0 . GaS r;::anchise , ',Attnicipal itieS corr<<:n1.ttee on the 'Weste~n onta~1.0 ~~ 4. l\g~eetnentS. 'the OntariO Energy Board haS co1l'Pleted ceneric Rearings on Cas b~ late Feb~ua~Y. , d is e){.pected to p~esent a Report , · F~ anch:t se s an '11 ~'e able to complete thei~ th Corr<<:nittee ~1. u 1t is e"!lOcted that 0 ~o~k sho~tlY the~eafte~. " th ~a~den and cle~k to 'that a ResolutiOn be passed authOr",ng e , d C ~\lnicatiOns a submit to the liinister of 'transportat,on an 0 f Elgin's road e"l'enditU~es petition for subsidY for the CountY 0 h eriod of January 1, f Elgin road Syste'" for tOP tnade on the countY 0 19&5 to Decembe~ ,1, 1985. d to thO liinistry of 'transpo~tation and 'that application be ",a 0 La~ in the ~ount of $45,000 , at~O~s fo~ a supplementa~Y BY- Co~un1.C ~.. f oil steel st~\lctU~es for the in"estig.tiOn and",onitO~ing 0 s (pipO arch .ul"orts) in Elgin county. continued · . . · · · ;. 6. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT - JM~UARY SESSION 1986 PAGE 4. W(' have already t'occlved un appl'ov;11 l<,l[:('1:' [rom the Deputy MinlstC'r. Committee has authorized Golder Associates Ltd. of London to pro- ceed with the monitoring of three culverts on County of Elgin roads and one on the Township of Malahide roads to ascertain the effect of temperature etc. on backfill conditions, erosion of backfill, ice lensing in the backfill, that may occur in these structures so as to better attempt to find the reasons for the failures and to try to come up with a repair system to save as many as possible of the pipe arch culv('rts across the Province. The Ministry feels that this work would be better carried on at a municipal level than with their Research and Development Branch and as the County has been assisting the Ministry in monitoring work across the Province during the past year, the ministry has felt that the project should be done in Elgin County. The in- [ormation obtained through the studies will be of great assistance. The Ministry esti.matcs that between 125 ilnd 140 pipe arch culverts across the Province are presently in danger of failing within 5 years. 7. That a By-Law be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to sign an agreement with the Township of Yarmouth for the installation of sanitary sewers on various County Roads in the Township. This By-Law will be similar to those agreements the County has now with the local municipalities for the installation of water lines on County roads. The By-Law will allow the' Township to install and maintain the sewer system with the requirement that if any part of the system needs to be relocated for County work, it v;rill be done at the expense of the Township of Yarmouth. ALL OF ~iICH IS RESPE(~FULLY SUBMITTED CHAI ~lAN ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 3, 1986. PAGE 1. THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE MET AT 9:30 A.M., January 3, 1986, at the County Administration Building, Sunset Drive, St. Thomas, Ontario. All members were present. THE ENGINEER REPORTED AS FOLLOWS: 1. That he was, still negotiating with London Machinery Limited for two sanders and that the General Manger, Mr. L. McGill would be back on January 6th from holidays. 2. That quotations had been received from dealers for automobiles and the lowest tender had been accepted. "MOVED BY: E. NEUKAMM SECONDED BY: A. K. FORD THAT WE ACCEPT THE QUOTATION OF EELEY CHEVROLET AND OLDSMOBILE LIMITED FOR TWO (2) 1986 MODEL CHEVROLET CAPRICE AUTOMOBILES AT THE QUOTED PRICE OF $ 10,668.00 EACH PLUS PROVINCIAL SALES TAX. CARRIED." Delivery had been made. "MOVED BY: R. F. PURCELL, SECONDED BY: D. PEROVICH, THAT THE ENGINEER BE AUTHROIZED TO SELL BY BID TO THE COUNTY ROAD EMPLOYEES, THE COUNTY'S 1980 CHEVROLET AUTOMOBILES. CARRIED." 3. That the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers had accepted his abstract on Failures of Soil Steel Plate (pipe) Arch Culverts which was one of about 65 selected from over 140 abstracts from 12 countries accepted for presentation at the International Conference on Short and Medium Span Bridges to be held in Ottawa in August. The Conferenc~ held once very four years,is of an international character with most papers presented -" by foreign authors. \ -----' ST. THOMAS, ONT~RI0. J1\NU1\R"i 3, 19B6. PAGE 2. "MOVBD BY: 'W. ~. MJ\RT'lN SBCONDBD BY: D. l'BROVICH TW<T TaB ENGINEBR BB ~UTHORIZBD TO ~TTBND THB INTBBN~TI0Nl\.L CONFBRBNCB ON SHORT AND J!l[EDluM Sl'hN BRIDGBS IN OTT~'W~ FROM ~UGUST 18 TO j\UGUST 21 INCLUS1\'B 'WITH B){l'BNSBS l'~ID ~ND Tl1B s)'.MB TO BB RBPORTBD TO COUNCIL. C1\RRIED.t1 COST COMP~RIS0NS BY TaB ~SSIST~NT BNGINBBR for replacement of l'ort Burwell and l'layer'S Bridge floOrs were as attached. (1) Tl1B BNGINEBR BBl'ORTED ON TaB 'WOBJ'- TO D~TB ~S FOLLO'WS S~YING: . C t 1 h d been hea'~' both snow plowing 'atl.d sanding; That 'W~nter on ro a""' salted sand piles at all locations were nearlY depleted and were being (2) replaced as the opportunity arose. B5 $ 57 000 00 compared to a salt bill carry-over to date from 19 waS " carry-Over last year into January of $ 37,000.00; Most equipment was working reasonablY ~ell, althoUgh Truck ~64, a 1975 Dodge, had developed air compressor troubles; 'Welding of plates at Lyrihurst Culvert, County Road ~25 waS continuing as (3) (4) (5) time permitted; Golders had started placing their equipment for testing of temperatures (6) There would be a considerable carry-Over of holidaYs from 1985 into 1986 as operators had been called out practicallY every day since mid_December; . 1 D ,."le cab sta1<e Rack Truck frolll NottinghalUS, Delivery of the Internat~ona o~ purchased last september waS expected the first of the week; . poor condition, and it was The 1972 Frink sander on Truck ~63 waS ~n very ge'Y'V'lent could be made with London Machinery so that a ne~ hoped that an arranLLL sander could be mounted on it very shortlY' at varioUs culverts; (7) (B) (9) ST. TlIOW>S, 0l'lTAR10. JA~UARY 3, 1986. PAGB 3. , fl t.e!' insurance and some length as ",ell as proposed equipment insurance l:CSt., oa , The Chairl!\an and 'ilarden were of the opinion t.hat. unt:cl _~~ ~~~resent.at.i~e t.o ascertain TlIE ATTACHED ll'lSUPANCE BBVIBW FOR 1986 waS re~iewed and diSCUssed at. hOw tl\uch liability :c,,~u~~"~= ~~u~~ be bY deleting cert.ain it.ems, or increasing "M.OVBD BY: A. 1.<.. FORD SECOl'lDED BY: R. F. PURCELL TEl'T T1J.B FOU.O'illl'lG PAYLlSTS BE APPROVED FOR PAyMBl'lT: $ 28,161.15 PAYLIST NUM.BBR 1 OF 1986 ~OUNTll'lG TO $ 60,213.38 2 OF 1986 ~OUl'lTll'lG TO $120,618.03. CARRIBD." PAYLlST NmlBER 70 PAYLIST ~uW3BR 1. co1UJ.BSPOl'lDEl'lCE 'ilAS l'loTED AS FOLW'ilS: , 'cations wit.h approval of Frotl\ the M~nist.ry of Transport.at:con and Cowroun:c , ht. f vehicles on bridges By-LaW 85-55 rest.ricting the we:cg 0 ta Decembex: 19, 1987. from the C. & o. Railway which rejected The Engineer's coPY of a let.ter bac1< , 1 ~a~ yearl~ billing for crossing prot.ect.ion. t.he:cr proposa ~ ~ > ~ ' "' rt.y on count.y Roads "",,,,of yarmouth . for t.he rezon:cng o~ prope From t.he '~e. .. . _ ""e~e Mart.yn noted that. 2. 4. cowroercial purPose'" 0'- ~27 and ~36 in sparta for t parking for se~eral tt h' faX: aff stx:ee bY. the Ta~nS 1.p . t' ans ~ex:e under\'Jay. negat1.a J.. , tl\ent.s in t.he area. ' ' cowroercial establ:CSh ' t' 1 use an e~1.st1.ng , faX: x:es1.den 1.0. , f sout.hwold rezon:cng From t.he Townsh:CP 0 f 'il llingt.on Road. sout.h side of Road ~52 just. ",est. 0 e ,ld house lot. on t.he . S t.h RodneY Dra:cn wou ,.,_~~ _~_~,rS t.o the OU The village of RoOneY st.at.ing U'~~ ~"l!-- " rorat.ed share $ 733.00. $ 1 500 00 ",it.h t.he Count.y of Elg:cn s p cast ' · From t.he village of RoOneY regarding dri~ewaY acceSs to Furni~al Road. .~ writ.e to t.he village t.o ascertain t.he _ ... _ _".; p~ed bY 3. 5. 6. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 3, 1986. PAGE 4. 7. From the Ontario Good Roads Association with a programme for their Convention. THE COMMITTEE EXAMINED A PROPOSED AGREEMENT BE'WTEEN THE COUNTY OF ELGIN and the Township of Yarmouth for maintenance of the road between Sparta and Gillet's Bridge so the County could obtain rezoning, and a Pits & Quarries Licence for Sparta' Gravel Pit. Reeve Martyn stated that the agreement seemed fair and that he would discuss it with his Council and decide on the tonnage of gravel that the Township would be interested in purchasing from the County on a yearly basis. The Committee asked Reeve Martyn to have his Council review the agreement as soon as possible. OUTSTANDING ITEMS FROM 1985 ROAD COMMITTEE meetings were noted as follows: 1. Parking on Road #16 in Fingal. Chairman Stewart stated that County Government would discuss the policing of the County's Parking Restriction By-Laws and until such time as they could make a recommendation to County Council, no further parking By-Laws should be considered. 2. No further correspondence has been received from Louis Acre, and his complaint of drainage on Road #38 at Richmond. The Committee felt that matters sould be left in abeyance'unless he complained further. 3. The Village of Port Burwell with regard to the storm sewer outlet on Strachan Street. The Committee felt that the matter should be discussed further after an examination of the problem during the Spring Road Inspection. The Engineer was asked to provide an updated estimate of costs. MEETING ADJOURNED FOR DINNER. AFTER DINNER . "MOVED BY: A. K. FORD, 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 WITH THE TOWNSHIP OF YARMOUTH FOR THE INSTALLATION OF SANITARY SEWERS ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 3, 1986. PAGE 5. ON V1\.RIOUS COUNTY R01\.DS IN THE TOWNSHIP. CARRIED.n "MOVED BY: W. 1\.. j.\1\.RTYN, SECONDED BY: R. F. PURCELL, TR1\.T WE RECOMMEND TO DOUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE TR1\.T THE R01\.D DEP1\.RTMENT BE PEro-IITTED TO ST1\.RT 1\. BIWEE1Zl.'v SYSTEM OF 1\.CCOUNT p1\.yJl\ENTS 1\.ND TR1\.T THE TRE1\.SURER BE 1\.UTHORIZED TO j.\1\.KE p1\.yJl\ENTS ON 1\. BI-WEEKLY B1\.SIS UPON THE R01\.D SUPERINTENDENT'S SIGN1\.TURE AND 1\. YEARLY GENERAL COMMITTEE RESOLUTION 1\.UTHORIZING THE CR1\.IRMAN TO SIGN THE 1\.CCOUNTS. CARRIED." The Ministry would not have available desirable spending levelS or Ministry of Transportation and communications' subsidies for a week to 10 dayS. It COMMITTEE DISCUSSED pRELIMIN1\.RY BUDGET ITEMS. waS hoped that the final spending level would be at least as high as those presented in the Report dated December 17, 1985. machin<;iry budget were discUssed. (Note: The attached new machinery budget Some of th~ construction priorities, fixed costs priorities and a neW has been updated to shOW the actual costs of machinery purchased to date.) county'S equipment on cattails, etc., should be done and a concentrated effort Should be made to cut all. graSS from fence to fence as required. committee COMMITTEE 1\.GREED nO weed spraying other than spot spraying with the asked to have Roads 1f5 and 1f9 in 1\.ldborough Township and half of Road 1f37 for. gravel resurfacing in the first draft of the Maintenance Budget. prime would be required on Road 1f28 from southdale Road one half mile north, on Road 1f37 in the village of Belmont and on Road 1f43 from calton north (the section done in 1985). ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO. JANUARY 3, 1986. PAGE 6. Construction priorities were discussed at some length, particularily in the light that it would probably not be known until June or July as to how much sewerage work would be done on St. George Street. It was felt that all other work such as placing of culverts on Wellington Road, etc., and asphalt resurfacing, should be done first so that funds left available were known and if it appeared that sewerage work on St. George Street would not be done, other construction projects could be done before fall. The Machinery Budget was reviewed briefly and it was noted that motors in Trucks #83 & #88 would be replaced as required and that some items would be deferred until Fall so that if more urgent needs appeared funds would be available. THE WARDEN REPORTED THAT Mayor Golding wished to meet with County of Elgin Road Committee at the next meeting to discuss the County's proposals and time of work on Wellington Rd, St. George Street, etc. Committee felt that it was desirable when St. George Street was rebuilt to realign the road through Gbwanpark and felt that the Engineer should approach the City of St. Thomas Engineering Department with plans prior to the meeting, so that officials had time to familiarize themselves with the County's problems. DISCUSSION ON THE RELIEF OF TRAFFIC ON WELLING'TON ROAD was postponed until the next meeting. "MOVED BY: D. PEROVICH, SECONDED BY: W. A. MARTYN, THAT WE ADJOURN TO JANUARY 17, 1986 AT 9:30 AM. CARRIED." ~~4~4~~~ '/"-7 CHAIRMAN ELGIN 'i O'F COUNT T ~ _~'1\n DE-P~ ~ \ Decerobe~ 3i, i98S. i. 2 ~U~OMO~1LBS - DBC~~BR 31. 19B5 QUOT1\TI0NS 'FOR ~. ~ t_Oidsmobiie Limited, Eeie":! CbeV~O.1-e BO){ iOO, . strafford~ille, ontar,o NOJ i "LO 1986 _ c~e~rolet caprice ' is Incn Tl.~es. ~6 4.3 Litre MotOr _ --------- $ 21,336. , , 'eac~ $10,66B.) -------- 2 venl.C.1-es \ 2. o rd~'" Motors Limited, f..L. ),:0 ROane":!, onta~io. 19B5 c~e~rolet 1mpala ' e v6 4.3 Litre MOtor. 86 Cbev~oiet caP~l.C ~6 3.8 Litre MotOr & 19 -------- $ 21.900. -------------------------- 2 vebicies 3. Dempse":! cn~'1sie~ -p.O. BO){ 38, lWill\e~' onta~io NS\\ 2R8 Limited, 1985 _ ]lOdge Diplomat salon. 1986 _ Dodge Diplomat salon. -- ------------------------------- $ 22,890. 2 vebicies 4. ~o~d saieS Limited, East~aY ),: iOi2 TaibOt st~ee~' st. Tbomas, onta~l.O NS-P iG3 1985 cr~n ~ictoria S. 302 ~-8 - 14 1nC~ ~ireS' i98S cro~n victoria 302 ~_8 _ 15 1nC~ ~ires _-------------- $ 23.265. ------------------- 2 venicies S. ~~~~outb CbrYsier, st. TnOll\aS J; .1-r- 215 wellington st~eet, st. Tnomas, ontarl.O NSR 256 $ 23,6S3. iie saion i986 -Piymoutb carave 19B6 1'1yl1lOut~ cara~elle SalOn -- ------------------------- 2 vebicies ----------- COUNTY OF ELGIN PAGE 2. ROAD DEPARTMENT DECEMBER 31, 1985. QUOTATIONS FOR 2 AUTOMOBILES - DECEtlliER 31, 1985 PROVINCIAL SALES TAX EXTRA - CONTINUED. 6. Co-Trac Ford Mercury Sales Limited, 204 Main Street, Dutton, Ontario NOL IJO 1985 - Crown victoria - Ford. 1986 - Crown victoria - Ford. 2 Vehicles -------------------------------- ~; 23,990. 7. Disbrowe Leasing, 827 Talbot Street, St. Thomas, Ontario N5P lE4 One 1985 Pontiac parisienne (Demonstrator 17,050 KM). 1 Vehicle ------------------------------- $ 12,945. 8. Mike Hutchinson Limited, 188 Talbot Street West, Aylmer, Ontario 1985 Chevrolet Caprice. 2 Vehicles ------------------------------ :~ 31,000. PLAYER'S AND P9.~:, ,BURWELL BRIDGE DECK REPAIRS COST COMPARISON DECEMBER 1985. PORT BURWELL (7) PLAYER'S (8) (%) (%) Engineering (Dunn and Golder) $ 22,024.00 14 $ 15,863.00 15 County Labour Including County 34,856.00 22 23,143.00 21 Engineering and Superintendence Machine Time and Miscellan~ous 14,235.00 9 8,569.00 8 Equipment and Material Rebar 14,767.00 (2) 10 8,502.00 8 Joint 15,403.00 (3) 10 18,797.00 (3) 17 McKay Cocker (Concrete) 45,518.00 (4) 29 24,698.00 (5) 23 Approaches (Including Milling) 9,988.00 (6) 6 9,178.00 (6) 8 TOTAL $156,791.00 (1) 100 $108,750.010 (1) 100 Concrete Pad 4" + 5" + 2 7,840 Ft. 2 Area 12,000 Ft. Unit Costs (10) $13.35 Per Ft. 2 2 $14.30 Per Ft. $143.50 Per Metre 2 $153.70 Per Metre 2 RATIO PLAYER'S PORT BURWELL (%) 72 66 60 58 122 54 92 125 65 (1) Does not include the purchase cost of Jersey Barriers and air guns ($13,096.00). (2) Replaced more existing rebar. (3) Joint was the same length but we paid a premium for early deli.very at Player's. (4) Including joint work. (5) Joint work by ,County and unit price for concrete cheaper regaI~ding one pour. (6) Same amount of asphalt. (7) One lane open. (8) Bridge closed, used bidwe11 finisher and concrete pump. (9) Labour and machine rental (approximately 50%) including McKay Cocker. (10) Including 25% of (1). County Engineer's Report To: County Council From: RR Lee - County Engineer Date: December 18, 1985 Part I 1) County Road Funds in excess of the matching 5010 subsidy grant At a County Road Committee meeting on 25 September 1985, the Engineer was instructed to poll the adjacent Counties to determine the amount of funds, if any, they spend on their Road System in excess of the matching subsidy grant. Following are the results of this poll: County 100% Funds supplied by County in excess of the matching subsidy grant - Averages out at $220,000 per year for past 5 years - Averages out at $320,000 per year for past 5 years Kent Lambton Middlesex - Averages out at $600,000 per year for past' 5 years - - -e- - but County Engineer Bob Moore says some of their Townships overspend $200,000 to $300,000 each on their own projects, and cannot afford to contribute to a County overexpenditure too. - $200,000 in 1985. First time, but we have done work by debentures from time to time. The last one was paid off in 1983. Elgin Essex ..2/ 1. cou~ ;;..--- ~ OF ELGIN ~ PRIORITIES FI~ED COSTS l'll'1~~p,.NCE PRIORITIES Decewbex 31, 19B5. BRlpGE A~D CU1.;I1ERT l'll'INTENl\,.cE , ainting, finisn lIlee\<.'s Bridge ongoing ~or\<. in~ludes br~~~~: stream cleanoutS at cu~v~rtS painting and Br~dge ,Road, e floOrs. etc. EXpansion )O~~tS , a~d bxidges. clean~ng bx~dg ,n~' dge floox. 1Il0n~tox~ng ,. . n irs to Tate s D~~ 1 tS st. GeoXge Street. "epa welding of pipe aXcn CU '>1er d xe aixs to pipe arcn cul'>1extS~ ~ ext~t un\<.nQ1lln at tb.e pxesent t:cme. 2. VJEED AND GFl'oSS CUT'l'I~G In 19B5 ~e cut fence to fence. 3. ~- cut trees as xequixed. 4. , d 30 catcnbasinS Road 2B at aignwa1. *3 Di tCnin9 includ~n9 Roa 't wi tn pxopext1 oWneXs. intersectiOn as peX agreemen ~ 5. ~ 6. TREE p~ ' ~ t"' '\, i'" rtueS tl.on. , .,' . f "OLA" stoc\<. presen"" "~ 1\."\Tal.lab1.11.tY 0 1. ~ . , . . g "'oWnsniP contxactors. nav~ng . f. C t" as to n~x~n · Decis~on 0 oun, d snxa1ing if possible. T~sniPS 100\<. afteX ~ee r B. AIRS TO PA\]~S . . obs l:'\ore grader . done neaX resuxfac~ng)' . Some not mix patCn~ng extS and dxain sags etc. spx~ng leveling ~ox\<. to dO ~n cul'>1 laXge account. Sollie ~or\<. on '11 indicate e~pend~tUxe to a 'Vll. . Road 2B intexsect~on. 9. GFl'o 'JEL SlioULDER l'll'1~TJ!,Nl\~CE. xavelling should complete onc~ Including gxader wox\<. and 9 f tne eax11 ~ox\<. over aga~n. axound in 19B6 and start some 0 futuXe llIaintenance snould AS ~ox\<. nas been completed once. be leSS. 10.' SUBl!~ '11 be xequiXed again ~ 30 \<.ilollleteXS ~~ It is li\<;.e11 that 25 to thiS year. 11. 1?'R1}\lNG ~. olll soutb.dale ROad 1/2 mile noxt'n. we nave pxillled Road 28 fX t d 'Oioad 43 fxom Road 45 . 1 f BellllOn an " ROad 37 in tb.e \]~l age 0 He (caltOn). Road 26 noxth north 3Ppxoximate11 3/4 of a m _~ ~2 ~ill not be redone. ,!, COUNTY OF ELGIN - ROAD DEPARTMENT PAGE # 2 PRIORITIES FixED COSTS - MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES DECEMBER 31, 1985. 12. GRAVEL RESURFACING Slated this year are Roads # 5 and # 9, Aldborough ~'ownship. Middiesex has agreed to set up funds for 1/2 of Road # 37. Suggest that the portion between Highway # 73 and the Oxford County Line be done. 13 . PAVEMENT MARKING/CENTRELINING Now all paved roads plus the heavier travelled road~; around St. Thomas - twice, (Wellington Road, Fairview Avenue, Road # 16 Fingal, etc.). l4. SIGNS A fairly large expenditure as sign work has been let to deteriorate for a few years. We started changing intersection Guide Signs in 1985 and this will take 3 or 4 years to complete. 15. RAI~ROAD PROTECTION We are pretty much at the mercy of the Railroads. 16. EDGE MARKING We do not do all our roads. The mileage of roads done does keep creeping up year by year as we complete new construction. 17. STUMP REMOVAL We are trying to do some stump removal each year. We seem to have a place for all the stumps we can dig in the w'ashouts on Road # 42 east of Port Burwell. We require a considerable number of stumps ,on this road besides those that we would normally dig out on Road # 40 south of Mount Salem and Road # 4S between Road # 40 and Highway # 73. There is no shortage of stumps to remove. 18. OVERHEAD ITEMS We expect an average year for Needs Study and Traffic Counts, Training Courses costs will be up slightly as we are trying to organize a refresher Course in St. John's Ambulance. We expect to send several persons to Grader School and several to Ontario Good Roads Road School in Guelph. 19. DRAINAGE ASSESSMENTS Drainage assessments are presently estimated at $150,000.00 and there is' still a number of reports not received that surveying has been completed on. 20 . NEW MACHINERY The Ministry will allot $356,000.00 and they indicate strongly that this must be spent on new machinery and housing. See attached. 1. ~ 1986 BUDGET _ jJ\Nlll\.lf:l 3 I 1986, CONSTRUCTION 1?Rl0RlT1.ES 1<ENT/ELGIl< BOUNDl\.R':l ROl\.D II 1 CUr.;.JERT (Lather gill). l\.lreadY spent (our share) $ 41000~00' 1986 construction 1981. further Engineering and Land purc aSe I ~ o f ELGIN 2. SUR'IJE':lS f r.J>JlD 1?UBCfl1'>.SES & ENG1NJ'!$RIl<G. d II 1 Rent I 'advanced planning Including Road II 45 I Road, ~ 22 f ;0; \\ 14 M.iddlemisS Bridge for Road II 43 Philmore BP. ge f d' 0 Road connection to gubrey Road alignment grades I Road II 30 Ra l- and futUre surveY.s. 5 ~l\.BDSV1LLE BRIDGE - M.iddlesex haS agreed.' l<B1?LJ\.CEM.ENT OF JOINT - l<B1?LJ\.CEJoIENT Of cUL'IlERTS _ ~ELLll<GTOl< ROl\.D & BDl\.D II 29. ST. GEORG~' II 26 (BOSt'<1icl< Road) ~. '__ . t countY. Road . ~sect~ons a ~ Includes l-nte~ ." llington Roau' 7\ "1'enue on V'le ;1 crescent p," \ anu. Fl\.IRVlm'l l\.'lJEWJE - ROl\.D 22. , / mile further with the land we, ~e can go approx;cma.telY 1 2, 'g completed for 1/2 ml-le ha~e presentlY purchased. (Engl-neerl-n onlY.. ) ROl'>D0' ' timateS etc. f remain ~ t of Engineerl-ng eS h S been purchased. l\. considerable ~~~ other than se~erances a to be done. NO 3. 4. 5. 6. I. ROl\.D II 40 M.OUNT Sl\.LEM. TO ROl'>D II 42. 1 ck of 'funds. "., duled in 1985 but delayed due .to a This road ~aS sCl~e l<BSDFl'l\.CING1?RI0R1TIES 1. 3. ROl\.D II 36 fROM. S1?l\.RTl\. TO ROl\.D II 24. (a) Road II 14 north of lona station. tb) Road:\:\: 13. (c) BOad II 25 (~ellington Road) · (d) BOad II 8 surface treatment at 1?earce 1?arl< -mile. approximatelY 1/2 2. d u on the condition of high priority FINl\.L SCflEDULIl<G of resurfacing ~e~~~t:ee haS done thOse ,roadS that shO'<1 .-"ads in the spr.ix;g. ,ln thesPa~tgt~egardleSs of previoUS coroml-tments. _ __~ uriorl-ty l-n the prl-n tf) tg) , II 3 surface treatment Road II 44 from Road II 46 to gl-gh'<1aY f Bay'haJl\ To~nship. Road II 30 from st. ThOmaS citY limits to Road II 52. II 40 easterlY to 1?Ort Burwell. , Road II 42 from ROad ' e arch cul~ertS in M.alahl-de decision must be made on pl-P 1\ . . s done before resurfaCl-ng l- · te) C 0 U N T Y o F ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT - . 1986 MACHINERY BUDGET 1. Truck # 117 International Double Cab stake Rack. Amended January 6, 1986. $ 26,800.00 3. Two (2) LOndon Machinery Co. Sanders - 10 yard capacity 25,600.00 5. sparta Gravel pit Development. 25,000.00 6. Radio units including office and existing replacements (some units purchased in 1963) 8,000.00 7. used Tandem T~uck to be used as a float truck and sander. Replace Truck # 63 (1974 Ford) or Truck # 64 (1975 Dodge) 8. Major upg.rading of pavement Marking Equipment - present equipment 1966 vintage. 9. Motor _ Truck #83 (1979 Mack Dump Truck) 375,000 KM. as "'of December 15, 1985 10. Motor _ Truck #88 (1980 Mack DumP Truck) 305,000KM (now) (FALL). 11. Two (2) Tractors-Mowers for weed cutting (1971 John Deere Model 1020 Tractors as Trade-Ins). 12. Major Rebuild 1979 TD-8 Bulldozer and/or 1980 TD-7 Bulldozer. 13. computer and software programmes (partial) 14. Trade 1979 1/2 Ton Chevrolet & 1979 Van (FALL) 15. Sale of used 1980 Chevrolet Cars 30,000.00 35,000.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 & 1972 55,000.00 50,000.00 20,000.00 22,000.00 1,000.00 cr. - $ 348,000.00 NEW MACHINERY ALLOCATION MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS - $ 356,000.00 - ~..:,-----= - AGREEMENT , .. - -- THIS AGREEMENT made in duplicate thiS day 0 f , 1985. BETWEEN: THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF yABMotrrH Hereinafter called the IlTOWNSHlP" OF THE FIRST pART _ and - THE CORPORATION OF .THE COUNTY OF ELGIN Hereinafter called the "COUNTY" Of 'tHE SECOND pART WERUS the county is the owner of Part of Lot 26. in ConcesSion lV. in the TownshiP of yarmouth more partiCularlY described in Schedule lA' attached hereto. and has applied to the Township for an mnenUment to Township By-LaW #1998 to permit the use of the said lands as a gravel pit to be licensed by the province of OntariO under ~he pitS and IT 15 AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD that to fullY utilize t~e property as a Quarries Act. gravel pit the haulage of gravel over roads under the jurisdiction of the Township of yapnouth will be reqUiTed including. but not restricted to the road allowance between concessions 111 and IV from catfiSh CreeK to County Road #27 and County Road #36 in the Halll1et of Sparta. NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT ~lTNESSETH that in consideration of the Township enacting the mnenUment requested and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein. the parties hereto covenant and 1. The County will to the best of thei~ ability plan their WOTK so ag~ee as'followS: that the hauling of gravel between the catfiSh creeK and the Village of Sparta is done at timeS that will not adverselY interfere 2. The county will not (otheT than in an emergency) operate theiT pit with tourist operations. or haul gravel at other than normal wOTKinS dayS between the hours 3. The county will not. except with the consent of the Township of of 1 :00 a.m. and 6 :00 p.m. Yarmouth. alloW the use of their said property Lot 26. con1;.~nued . . . ... 2 ... ,'" Concesslon V, Yarmouth Township for other than uses allowed under the Pits and Quarries Act, agricultural uses or passive recreation. 4. The County will place and maintain on Concessions III and IV such signing as is required by any act to indicate their entrance and the use of entrance by trucks, etc., and the Township gives the County pe~ission to do so. 5. It is agre,ed that subject to the permission of the ~rownship of Yarmouth the County of Elgin may at County of Elgin expense improve the present road to make it suitable in the opinion of i the County of Elgin for use of vehicles hauling gr~~el ~Tom the County of Elgin property on Lot 26, Concession IV. The extent of the improvement will be at the descretion of the County of Elgin but it is understood that adequate steps shall be taken to stop erosion from any roadside area worked and that any roadside area disturbed shall be reseeded and vegetation encouraged to grow on it. This work may include but not necessaril,y be limited to: (a) Cutting of limbs overhanging the travelled road that would interfere with vision or be within six (6) feet: of the top of a loaded vehicle. (b) Cut trees within ten (10) feet of the trave11c!d portion of the travelled road (subject to the Townsht.p and abutting property owners' permission) and removal of stumps if the County of Elg~n deem it is necessary. (c) Cut trees outside ten (10) feet of the traveLLed portlon of the road on any curve if obstructing vision ,(subject to the Township and abutting property owners' permission). (d) Move back mail boxes (Shaw, Derms, Churchill and McCully) and widen the road by removing some of the shoulder on the south side between the top of the hill from Catfish Creek to the road in Lot 24, Concession III. Material not needed to widen the shoulders wi.ll be used to widen the gully immediately east of the Hamlet of Spa~~a. CQntinued . . . suit.a\:iI.C vision on t.he hi\.1. · t El in shall obta~n 1.f a ,;ight-of-'day is l:el;\uil:ed the countY 0 g f the 'to'dl\sl.\iP of 'C\\\."\lIOuth a\\d t.he t.he s- in the niil\le 0 . f "'lain ...n\.1. nay an cost\> inv01.ved. count;:f 0 .. '" r h l.\. be desio~d to pl:event erosion and shall be 'the slopeS s..a '" plant.ed \Ji.~h suitable vesetat.ion. . . b Uft. of t.he hOt. 'I\Ii)C. asphalt pa"eroent. (0') place t.'dO (2) inC eS ] . 1 150 'dest. of the pit. ent.l:ance (appl:Oltilllllte Y ... t ent.l:ance of the f Gil1etS 6l:idge), to t.~ eaS feet ~est. 0 :1 \-. east side of Gi\.let.s '6l:idge. ~it on t.ue ' d \. " d if d~sir(;d b'/ t.l.e count.Y of Elgin 'this 'dol:\(. ma'l be e a,e . 1 t b'1 t.he count.Y uf .until an asphalt. paving r.onf.1:aCt is e Y;1. in in t.1.\e south- 'i al:\\\out.h . al:e1h g vel ovel: the l:oad bet1llllen f Eloin is act.iVe1Y hauling gra 6 tAhen the countY 0 " . .. t.he countY of Elgin 1 1.1.~ and IV fl:Om the pit to sparta. conceSs ons ~ d b the follO'ding: sha\.1 ll\aintain the l:Oa Y. (a) ()1:ading (blading) the l:oad' ...nt.h a 1\IOtol: gl:adel:. _ 3 - (e) b d at t"e ou1.1" iuunediatelY eaSt. of the \\all\let ~iden t e roa ..." J ion (if ~ertui~ed) i 1 i.s available. peLll\ ss~o .. of sparta as ll\atel: a b bt i ed in the 1\ll.lI>C to encl:oach on pl:iVate property to e 0 a n of the To'dl\shiP of 'iaLll\OUth. (f) 1'\ r il t.o be ta\(.cn d01jll\. and el:ected using 'the eltisting gu ue ra the eltisting ll\atel:iaI.S on the 'didened fill. th side bet:.'deen the ~iden the tl:ave1.1ed l:oad on the nol: h f t la'dl\ of uenniS road in LOt 24, concession 1.11. and t. e l:on i so..no of the sh0\.11der. b'1 "eU\o'\1 ng !,..- uth side as l:ight-of-'daY '<liGen the travelled road on t.J:\e so ,. fi 111 of OttO' scJ:\neidel:. is available opposite t>>e e . h oud. side on the hi\.1 'de st 'Aiden the tl:ave1.\.ed toad on t e s . i. i al.l dl:ainage and placing any of catfish Cl:ee\l.. Ma nta n neceSsal:Y el:osion contl:ol devices. cut baC\(. tt.e side hi1.\. at the bottOl\l of the hi1.\. at t'ne h 'ide to obtain 'dest ~ide of catfiSh Cl:ee\l. on tJ:\e sout 5 Jg) (h) (1 ) f t 0\1\ f' (\> ) (c) (d) suppress the dust. J.\,epail: an'1 base failul:e. Re~lace t.hat Cl:UsJ:\el1 gl:avel 'dhicJ:\ haS \leen lOSt. and teal: due t.o tJ:\e countY's opel:ations, t."tO\1g~ \lJear 'f>nt.inued . . . (e) .. 4. .. Repair as far as pract.ica1. t.hat. port.ion of the road t.hat d 1. i underst.ood t.hat. if is present.1Y surface t.reat.e. t. S f ~l in it. 1.& not. pract.ical in t.M opinion of t.he count.Y 0 g _oint.ain t.he surface t.reat1l1ent.. t.he COunt.Y of Elgin t.o u- d ortion of it. t.O has t.he opt.ion of ret.urning t.he roa or a P .t 1. ed as ner 6 (a). (b). \.\. d Sur face t.O be \Ill!-~nt.a n r a g1: ave e AS t.he 'to~ship of '{ar1llout.h aut.horit.Y is responsible for t.he , f t."e road t.he countY of Elgin win \Ill!-inUin ('Mhen toaint.enance 0 ,l~ . t.h road) t.he road t.o t.he required act.ivelY haul~ng over e f '{ rmout.h under sect.ion b (a). (b). st.andard!S of t.he 'to~ship 0 a (c) and (d). (c) and (d). t.hi s re l\u ire1l\il nt.. f Elain is not. rel\uired t.o countY 0 0 snow plowing. sanding. salt.ing. graSS \Ill!-int~nance of guide rail. 8. 1,t. is understood that. t.he . cont.ribut.e t.o t.he cost. of ~al culvert. rep1ace1l\ilnt. cutti.ng~ nOJ..~" t f ut.i1it.ies. ditch maint.enance. lno'Ve1\\en 0 . ... ~'. of \.. . f '{ar1llout.h r.naY purchase a ~ 9 'the 'tO~Sl~')..P 0 . 'the " und during any calendar year. of crushed grave'\. on t."e grO t ~;\.Qin to 1. be t.he cost. to t.he count.Y 0 g cost. of t.his grave t.o . bUt. nOt. 1~it.ed t.O. o~ershiP producet.hat. gravel inc1ud~ng. . ?it.s and QUarries 1icense,fees. cost.s. st.ripping. crush~ng. ssions 1.1.1. and 1.V .t artd \Ill!-int.enance cost.s on Conce const.ruct.~on ... . tOn \ \ hau1 road and pit. develop1l1ent.. " aet. ~earlY using 1ateSt. records. cost.s and ~his pr.ice t.O ue ~ J pro1ect.ions avai1able. 'the sale of anY gravel in eJtceSs of f the countY of 'Slgin Road ag-reement 0 tOn shaft be at the C01IJIlit.t.ee and the 'to~shiP continued · · · - 5 - of Yarmouth in. any' particular y~ar the Township mclY wish to purchase this gravel. 'the pric~ of the gravel to be the same as the yearly price heretofore referred to. 10. This Agreement may be varied at any time by the two parties. 11. This Agreement is binding upon any purchaser of that property owned by the County of Elgin in Lot 26, Concession IV, Yarmouth Township in the event of a sale of the prope~ty by the County of Elg:in. 12. This Agreement may pe regi stered against the landf~ as described in Schedule 'A' by the Township of Yarmouth if they so desire. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Corporations have hereunto affixed their Corporate Seals by the hands of their propel;' signing,officers duly authorized in this behalf. ~. .. THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN WARDEN CLERK THE CORPORATION OF THE' TOWNSHIP OF YARMOUTH REEVE CLERK COUNTY OF ELGIN INSURANCE REVIEW 1986 DECEMBER 1985 The following is a list of Policies in effect on County BU1ildings, Property and Liability. Unless otherwise stated Policies are through the Frank Cowan Company and are due January 29, 1986. 1. MUNICIPAL LIABILITY The liability limit for each claim is $10,000,000. The County's General Liability Policy protects the Road Department, including non licensed equipment and road liability operations, County Road Department employees and volunteers. Spraying Liability (weed and mosquito) is insured under other Policies. The 1985 Liability charged to the Road Depart~ent was $9,584.00 (subsidized by the Ministry of Transportation and C~mmunications $332.00 charged to each of 27 unlicensed units and $620.00 non subsidized). (Total $6,154.00 in 1984). The Policy includes coverage for bodily injury, death, damage to property, personal injury liability (libel and slander), environmental pollution, blanket contractual agreement and any liability the County might incur through issuance of a permit (moving, location, etc.). The Policy also contains an employer's liability clause which covers the County in the case where an employee is not considered a workman under the Workmen's Compensation Board. The Policy in 1985 was through the General Accident Company for the primary coverage and the excess was provided by the Guarantee Company of North America. 2. NON'OWNED AUTO Liability limits $10,000,000 protects the County against damage suits, etc., involving vehicles not owned by the County, but working for the County (eg., private dump trucks, private cars, etc.). Liability for licensed vehicles borrowed or hired by the County is I $100,000 ($100.00 Deductible). The coverage includes all employees, officials of the County, members of Council and volunteers. Continued . . . ", <" PAGE 2. \ COUNTY.OF ELGIN 1llSURANCE REVIEW 1982. 2. NON OWNED AUTO A "contractual Liabil it Y Extension" wa s added in 1982 to the Policy, (continued) total cost in 1984 waS $425.00 and $465.00 in 1985. 3. AUTOMOTIVE FLEET - ' The Automotive Schedule for 1986 includes 34 vehicles and a float (an increase of 2 vehicles over January 1985). A number of vehicles have been "Valued" - Total aggregate value of all Road Department Vehicles for 1984 was $983,500 and for 1985 waS $1,073,000. The liability limit is $10,000,000 with $1,000 deductible per accident and physical damage claims. We received an excellent merit rating for 1985. In 1982 a Blanket coverage on the fleet was begun; ie., replacement of vehicles if lost by a vehicle of the same use, kind and size if one is lost regardless of the asSigned value of the unit lost. [Other than "Valued" items which will be paid for at the valued amount in the policy.] Covers inappropriately licensed drivers. Cost of Fleet Insurance was $12,549.00 in 1983, $12,621.00 in 1984 and $11,072.00 in 1985. 4. FLOATER POLI c:l \' Covers Road Department Equipment, Materials and is All Risk. (a) Non licensed equipment (including snoW plowing equipment). (b) surveying equipment. (c) Radio equipment including antenna and base stations. (d) Moveable property of others rented, borrowed or leased. (e) Tools, stock, materials, snowfence, etc. (f) Valuable paper s. (g) Engineer's Office, furniture, etc. (a) The non l:icensed equipment includes 50 items, plus snow plOWS, totalling $2,067,500 in 1984 and $2,121,000 in 1985. As in the Fleet policY this PolicY is a Blanket coverage; ie." Replacement value, new item for item lost of the same size and options; 8 itemS are "Valued" and would if lost be Cont inued · · · ~' COUNTY OF ELGIN INSURANCE REVIEW 1986 PAGE 3. replaced with a piece of used equipment of similar value. Items of stock and tools that are subject to loss (such as tools, culverts, etc.) are valued at $50,000. The rate in 1985 for most equipment (not stock) was 55 cents per hundred,. snow plowing equipment 30 cents pE~r hundred. (b) Surveying equipment in 1985 was $6,000 ("Valued"). All Risk, Cost 1% - $100.00 deductible on losses. Premium $60.00. (c) Radio equipment was valued at $50,000 including the t~wer. Again All Risk (lightning, droppage, etc.) - $100.00 deductible. Premium 1% in 1985. (d) Moveable property of others to value of $150,000 - Premium $100.00 per year losses paid on actual cash value. Protects County for rented, borrowed and leased equipment. (e) Tools, material, snowfence, etc., - $1,000 deductible per occurrence - Value $50,000. I (f) Valuable papers - replacement including any necessary work to regather the information - Value $100, 000 (PrE~mium included at no charge ). (g) Accounts Receivable (including information to regather the information ) $100,000 - ie., ledgers, invoice~), etc., (included at no charge). (h) Furniture, etc., in Engineer's Office - ReplacE~ment value. Total Floater Premium in 1984 was $11,447 and in 1985 was $10,198. 5. BOILER AND MACHINERY POLICY (ALSO KNOWN AS ENGINEERING POLICY) Policy insures boilers, pressure vessels, tanks, etc., including boiler,hot water tank, air tank, etc., at County Garages and air tanks and compressors, sprayers, etc., on mobile equipment. For repair and replacement of equipment due to repture, etc. Limit per accident $1,000,000. Premium in 1985 was $211.00. Policy is comprehensive. \ \ 6. WEED SPRAYING Liability $10,000,000 per spraying day (Policy also covers Mosquito Spraying when endorsed). Also in name of Elgin-St. Thomas Health Unit. Continued . . . coUNTY Of BLGIN INSURANCE,REVl~ 1986 1?AGE 4. 6. ~ (continued) premium for weed spraying Liability in 1985 waS $481.00. This policy provides protection to the countY when others are spraying weeds on county Roads. .. ',. 1.~ Fidelity Bond in the amount of $300,000 on all county ~p10yees and Members of Council for the protectiOn of the county against diShonest actS of insureds. Road Department share of premium in 1985 waS $269.00. poliCY also covers audit expenses incurred in determining and qualifying the loss. 8. COIlNTYROAll DEPARTMENT BUILDINGS All peril poliCY including fire, wind, malicioUS actS, damage from falling objectS (ie., radio tower and aircraft), water pipe ruptut:e. Blanket coverage applicable to main garage onlY. otuet:S valued. \ 1984 :;.,;.--- Main Garage $603,800 Storage Building Hanger 150,000 (Valued) Old Storage Building 25,000 (valued) White Station salt Building 35,000 (Valued) Rodney Garage (Grader Shelter) 10,000 (valued) Bayham TownshiP salt Building 25,000 (valued) !)Unwich TownshiP Salt Building 30,000 (valued) ------ ~ In 1984 the premium was $3,446.00 and in 1985 waS All 1985 ::..:-- $628,000 150,000 (Valued) 25,000 (valued) 35,000 (Valued) NIL 25,000 (valued) 30,000 (Valued) ------ ~ $2,915.00. ERRORS AND OMMIS SIONS protectS the county against claimS that allege that an error and/or oromission type by Council ~embers and BmP10yees have resulted in a financial loSS, rather than bodily injury or property dronage loSS covered by Municipal Liability. Also includes misrepresentatiOn ($10,000,000 limit _ deductible $1,000). Charged to Road Department in 1985 waS $880.00. Includes unitentiona1 9. error in administratiOn of employee benefitS. Total insurance costS for 1985 (Frank Cowan company Limited) was $35,100 subsidized and $1,205 non subsidized. COUNTY OF ELGIN INSURANCE FLEET LIST (NO PROVINCIAL SALES TAX ON DUMP TRUCKS) 1984 GUARANTEE 1985 GUARANTEE .ITEM# YEAR TRADE NAME SERIAL NUMBER VEHICLE # AMOUNT AMOUNT 1. 1984 Ford Crown Victoria 2FABP43F9EX164l29 1 13,500 2. 1980 Chevrolet Impala lL69HAl159569 2 13,000 13,500 3. 1980 Chevrolet Impala lL69HAl15958l 4 13,000 13,500 4. 1975 Frehauf Lowbed Float Model 3OW67540l 91 18,000 (Valued) 20,000 C35LJ2 5. 1974 Ford Model 8000 LTS Tandem Y80HV-VI0209 63 25,000 (Valued) 30,000 (Valued) (Diesel) [Sander] (Valued) 6. 1975 Dodge Model 0800 Tandem R8lH14T0049l4 64 25,000 (Valued) 30,000 (Valued) (Diesel) [Sander] 7. 1976 Ford Model LTS 8000 Tandem Y80DVB35461 70 35,000 (Valued) 40,000 (Valued) (Diesel) [Sander] 8. 1977 Ford Model LTS 8000 Tandem Y80DVC13594 72 70,000 75,000 (Diesel) [Sander] ...9. 1977 Ford F600 Stake F60Dc461349 74 20,000 20,000 (Traded For Truck h1l7) 10. 1966 Ford Model C553 C55BY865266 75 20,000 (Valued) 30,000 (Valued) (Val ued ) 11. 1978 Mack Tandem Diesel Dump DM685S-37320 83 82,000 93,000 Frink Box 10B2 JANUARY 1986 1986 AMOUNT FOR BLANKET INSURANCE PURPOSES 15,000 15,000 15,000 22,000 35,000 (Valued) 35,000 (Valued) 35,000 (Valued) 40,000 (Valued) 20,000 10,000 (Valued) 90,000 COUNTY OF ELGIN INSURANCE FLEET LIST JANUARY 1986 PAGE 2. 1986 AMOUNT FOR 1984 GUARANTEE 1985 GUARANTEE BLANKET INSURANCE .ITEM # YEAR TRADE NAME SERIAL NUMBER VEHICLE # AMOUNT AMOUNT PURPOSES 12. 1978 Mack Tandem Diesel Dump DM611S-4846 84 82, 000 93,000 90,000 Frink Box 10H2, Model ET673-8M2843 13. 1979 Chevrolet Pickup Truck CCU4491150550 85 11 ,500 11 , 500 1 2, 5 00 1/2 Ton, Model 10 14. 1979 Chevrolet Van 3/4 Ton CGL2694137225 86 13,000 13,000 14,000 15. 1979 Dodge Model 0272, 3/4 Ton D27JE9C127618 87 11 , 5 00 11,500 12,500 Club Cab 16. 1979 Mack Tandem Dump Truck and RD685S7292 88 82,000 93,000 90,000 Box 17. 1980 Mack Tandem Dump Truck and DM685S-44884 89 82,000 93,000 90,000 Box 18. 1980 Mack Tandem Dump Truck and DM685S-44891 90 82,000 93,000 90,000 Box 19. 1974 GMC Tandem Diesel and Fifth YJH904V590576 91 35,000 (Valued) 40,000 (Valued) 40,000 (Valued) Wheel ,20. 1981 'Ford F250 Supercab Pickup 1FTFX25E8BKA21191 92 11,500 11,500 12, 500 21. 1981 Ford F350 Pickup 2FTHF35G6BCA51734 93 13,500 13,590 14,500 22. 1981 Dodge Pickup, Model 0-342 1B7LD34T5BS175939 94 13,500 13,500 14,500 23. 1982 Ford LTS 9000 Dump Truck and 1FDZY90W7CVA17423 95 82,000 93,000 90,000 Box COUNTY OF ELGIN INSURANCE FLEET LIST JANUARY 1986 ITEM # YEAR TRADE NAME 24. 1983 Dodge Van Model B322 25. 1983 Dodge Pickup 26. 1983 Dodge Pickup 27. 1983 Dodge Pickup 28. 1985 Dodge Pickup 29. 1985 GMC Double Cab Pickup Model TC30943-AS3 30. 1985 GMC Double Cab Pickup Model TC30943-AS3 31. 1985 GMC Double Cab Pickup Model TC30943-AS3 32. 1985 GMC Double Cab Pickup Model TC30943-AS3 33. 1985 Mack Dump Truck and Box 34. 1980 International Cabover Model (Purchased November 1985) 35. 1986 International Double Cab 1984 GUARANTEE SERIAL NUMBER VEHICLE If AMOUNT 2B4JB31T2DK398502 96 13,000 IB7JD24T1-ES-274845 97 .11,500 ID7JD24T3-ES-274846 98 11,500 IB7JD24TlES281360 99 11,500 IB7DJ24T6F5636170 110 IGTGC33M4FS517465 111 IGTGC33MXFS518703 112 IGTGC33M8FS518778 113 1GTGC33M8FS518733 114 2M2B126C4FCOl1826 115 KCA12273 116 117 1985 GUARANTEE AMOUNT 13,000 11,500 11 ,500 11,500 11,500 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 82,000 PAGE 3. 1986 AMOUNT FOR BLANKET INSURANCE PURPOSES 14,000 12,500 1 2, 500 12,500 12,500 16,000 16,000 16,000 16,000 90,000 35,000 (Valued) 32,000 $1,167,500 * * (Not Including Truck #74) COUNTY OF ELGIN MACHINERY LIST - FLOATER POLICY JANUARY 1986 NOTE: Those Items Valued Represents Total Value Receivable. Others are Blanketed, Replaced Machine for Machine. 1986 AMOUNT FOR 1984 GUARANTEED 1985 GUARANTEED BLANKET INSURANCE ITEM # YEAR ITEM SERIAL NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT PURPOSES - 1. 1974 Grader #17 - Champion 600B 74-600B-1232-6649 120,000 80,000 (Valued) 80,000 (Valued) 2. 1976 Grader #18 - Champion D-740 740- 21-277-9685 120,000 115,000 125, 000 3. 1979 Grader #19 - Champion D-740 740-21-666-11863 120,000 115,000 125,000 4. 1979 Grader #20 - Champion D-740 740-22-123-12187 125, 000 115,000 125, 000 5. 1981 Grader #21 - Champion D-740 740-82-46-14350 115,000 125,000 6. 1971 Tractor #19 - John Deere Model JDI020RU and 131650 16,000 16,000 8,000 (Valued) Side Mounted ,Mower 7. 1971 Tractor #20 - John Deere Model JDl020RU and 131654 16,000 16,000 8,000 (Valued) Side Mounted Mower 8. 1973 Tractor #22 - John Deere Model JD301 and 183518 18,000 18,000 25,000 Side Mounted Mower 9. 1973 Tractor #23 - John Deere Model JD30l and 183515 18,000 18,000 25,000 Side Mounted Mower 10. 1973 Tractor #26 - International Model 2300A and A470002BOO0898 6,000 (Valued) 6,000 (Valued) 6,000 (Valued) 1850 Loader 11. 1975 Tractor #27 - Massey Ferguson Model 135 and 446547 18,000 18,000 25, 000 Mower COUNTY OF ELGIN MACHINERY LIST - FLOATER POLICY JANUARY 1986 ITEM # YEAR 12. 1981 13. 1982 14. 1982 15. 1981 16. 17. 1984 18. 1984 19. 1983 20. 1977 21. 22. 1978 23. 1955 ITEM 1984 GUARANTEED AMOUNT SERIAL NUMBER ; Tractor #34 - International Model TD-8E Bull do zer 7704 75,000 Tractor #35 - John Deere Model 410 Backhoe and Loader 380685 49,000 Tractor #36 - John Deere Model 410 Backhoe and Loader 384305 49,000 Tractor #37 - International Model TD-7E Dozer 5670 60,000 Tractor #88 - Ford Model 3550 Loader and Post Hole Auger 23,500 Tractor #39 - John Deere Model 3'01 Tractor and Mower 710593 Tractor #40 - John Deere Model 301 Tractor and Mower 710635 Tractor #41 - Case Model 680H Backhoe (Purchased 1985) 9151029 Loader h5 - Michigan Model l25B 170,000 Loader #U - John Deere J644B 340392DW 125, 000 Loader #7 - John Deere 544B Loader 3l0277T Roller h1 - Galion Tandem Steel Wheeled Roller Model TC5-8G (Valued) 9,000 (Valued) 1985 GUARANTEED AMOUNT 85,000 54,000 54,000 65,000 23, 000 18,000 18,000 65,000 175,000 120,000 100,000 10,000 (Valued) PAGE 2. 1986 AMOUNT FOR BLANKET INSURANCE PURPOSES 80,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 27,000 25 , 000 25 , 000 65,000 180,000 110,000 90,000 12,000 (Valued) COUNTY OF ELGIN MACHINERY LIST - FLOATER POLICY JANUARY 1986 PAGE 3. 1986 AMOUNT FOR 1984 GUARANTEED 1985 GUARANTEED BLANKET INSURANCE ITME # YEAR ITEM SERIAL NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT PURPOSES - - 24. 1962 Roller #2 - Galion 9 Wheel Rubber Tired NIL Roller, Model 9-C (Valued) 25. 1976 Roller #3 - Gallion 9 Wheel SPC-LW-12-5806 35,000 (Valued) 40,000 (Valued) 45,000 26. 1968 Etnyre - 2500 Galion Distributor J2557 5 0, 000 50,000 53,000 27. 1972 Sander #8 - Frink EX-l 0- 0591-72 14,000 11,000 13,500 28. 1975 Sander #10 - King Seagrave Model HDTS 75482 14,000 11,000 13,500 29. 1975 Sander #11 - King Seagrave Model HDTS 75483 14,000 11,000 13,500 30. 1977 Sander #12 - King Seagrave Model HDTQ 14,000 11,000 13,500 31. 1980 Sander #13 - King Seagrave Model K-61-l 14,000 11,000 13 , 5 00 32. 1980 Sander H14 - King Seagrave Model K-6l-2 14,000 11,000 13,500 (Brooks Truck) 33. 1984 Sander #15 - London Machinery Company Limited 84- 046 11,000 13 , 5 00 34. 1984 Sander #16 - London Machinery Company Limited 84- 047 11,000 13,500 35. 1984 Sander #17 - London ~achinery Company Limited 84- 048 11,000 13,500 36. 1966 Wald Pavement Marking Equipment, Compressor, 40,000 45,000 20,000 (Valued) Etc., Truck Mounted 37. Bros. Vibrating Roller H1 - Model VP4D (Valued) 203 5,000 (Valued) NIL NIL 38. Bros. Vibrating Roller #2;- Model VP4D (Valued) 225 5,000 (Valued) NIL NIL COUNTY OF ELGIN MACHINERY LIST - FLOATER POLICY JANUARY 1986 ITEM # YEAR 39. 40. 1968 41. 42. 1965 43. 44. 1966 45. 1969 46. 47. 48. 49. 1985 50. 51. 52. 1984 53. 54. ITEM PAGE 4. 1986 AMOUNT FOR 1984 GUA.T{ANTEED 1985 GUARANTEED BLANKET INSURANCE SERIAL NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT PURPOSES A184105 NIL NIL NIL 22567 5,000 (Valued) NIL NIL 20,000 (Valued) 20,000 (Valued) 20,000 (Valued) 804x 8,000 (Valued) 4,000 (Valued) NIL 0976 18,000 19,000 (Motor - E5289-9) 300411 7,000 (Valued) 8,000 (Valued) 8,000 (Valued) K-3447 40,000 45,000 48,000 667354 NIL NIL NIL 30,000 30, 000 35,000 12,000 12,000 15,000 A183 S 100,000 110,000 42448LC 30,000 35,000 30,000 (Valued) 144,000 150,000 176,000 19-84-234 10,000 12,000 40,000 50,000 55,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 60,000 50,000 55,000 $2,299.500 Vulca Tamp - 60 Inch Sheepsfoot Roller Canadian Scale 30 Ton Scales #2 (Valued) Canadian Scale 50 Ton Scales #3 Jaeger 125 CFM Compressor Air Compressor #2 - Holman 185 CFM Wayne Brush Chipper - Model l2T265 Etnyre Chip Spreader Power Curber - ModelG3000 Overhead Crane - Richard Wilcox Model 11-230 Rotary Hoist - Dover Elgin Pelican Sweeper Condor Man Lift Snow Plow Equipment as Per Attached List Wiltsie Trailer Miscellaneous Tools, Supplies and Equipment Floater: (a) Surveying Equipment (b) Radio Equipment ~CUI~ 1. Truck #83 ~ .. 1978 Mack 2. Truck #f3.4 1978 MaCk 3. Truck #88 1979 Ma~ 4. Truck #89 1980 MaCk ). Truck ~O 1980 }t1a~ ~UNT'::.2! ,J.LGlN ~EPAR~E~ JANUJ\R'l 1.J}86 ~ow PLOWING EQUIPMEt!E. ~0\JN.1 PLOW EOUl PMl~N't - ... ...- 8.000 (a) 1972 ~inf }t1odel 470 SK "poke~ on~ Way ~loW, Tor Lok QUick'"it~~ (11116-12) File 72-5 (purchased for Truck #55) 7,000 (0) 1969 frinf SnoW plow RarneSs & Wing (PUrcoase4 originallY for Truck #44) n1e 6l)-lP 3,000 (c) 1945 j; ~ink V plow 8,000 (a) 1972 Frin\t Model 470 SK Uooker One Way plpW Tor Lok QUick "itch (11115-72) File 72-5 (\)urch,\seqfor 'tr1)ck #56 ) ., , QQO (0) 1966 fri~k SnQW PlOW Uarne.. & wing (?utohaaeq or,ginDllY fot Ttuek #l2) Vile 66_16 (NeW Tpwer, JanuarY 1919 See File) 3,000 (c) ploW purchased used 1974 Sut1Uli'r "V" File 74..8 8,000 (a) 1974 Frink Model 470 SK Hooker One Way plow, Tor Lok Quick Hitch, File 74..8 7,000 (0) 1919 Frlnk Closed Tower and HarneSS (NeW Style), File 80-3 "Wing See File 74- 5, (purChased from Walker BroS. APproximatelY 1964 Frink) (c) 1976 Craig V plow, llodel 650 (purChased from Galion llanufacturing, St. Thomas) (a) 1976 Frink Model 470 SK Hooker One Way plow Tor Lok quick Uitch, File 76-4 (0) 1916 Frink Rarness 100 llodel Tower, "Wing, EtC., File 76-4 (c) Waocollodel #7, Serial #6159 (a) 19~0 llodel 410 S~, Rooker plow and CK Driveframe. 307-12 "Wing, Closed Tower. (0) 1916 Craig, (PUrchased from Galion Manufacturing) (a) 1911 Frink llodel 470 Sit 1\00ker One WaY ploW, Tor Lok quick Uitch File 77-2 6. Truck #95 1983 'Ford LTS 9000 (b) 1977 Frink Rarness 100 llodel Tower, Wing, Etc., File 77-2 (c) 1975 craig V ploW (purChased from Galion llanufacturing St..Thomas) continu~d 3,000 8,000 7,000 3,000 8,000 7 ,000 (Tawer, Etc. ) ),000 t~ ,000 7,000 3,000 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT SNOW PLOWING EQUIPMENT MACHINE 7. Grader #17 8. Grader #18 1976 Champion D-740 9. Grader #19 1979 Champion 0-470 10. Grader #20 1979 Champion 0-740 11. Grader #21 1981 Champion D-740 12. Truck #115 1985 Mack PLOW EQUIPMENT (a) Champion Model 9900 "V" Plow, Harness and Wing, File 68-1 ((~iginally Grader #14). (b) Frink Model 440 SK OnE! Way. (a) 1976 Model 145S One Way Champion Plow Wing and Harness, File 76-10. (b) Model #9 Frink Plow "V", Serial No. 509V 9262 64. (a) Harness and Snow Wing" (b) "V" Plow, Wabco Model /f), File 71-1 Serial No. 1634 (GradE!r #16). (c) Frink 440 51<. One Way Snow Plow (Grader #-16) (a) Frink Model 440 SK, 9 Foot One Way Plow, Model SB Moldboard New Driveframe (I<. Model) in 1977 (From Grader #15). (b) Wabco #9 "V" plow (Purchased used from Champion with Grader #20) Serial No. 1636. (c) Harness and Snow Wing" Champion (Purchased with Grader #20). (a) One Way 9 Foot Model 145S Champion Plow, Harness and Wing, File 74-3. (b) 1958 used Champion "V" Plow, File 74-3. (a) Frink Model 470 SK Hooker One Way Plow, File 84-14. (b) Frink Model #780, Closed Tower and Snow Wing, etc., File 84-4. (c) "\fI' Plow, Wabco Model #6, (Originally on Grader #13, File 64-3. JANUARY 1986 PAGE 2. AMOUNt 3,000 4,000 (Wing) 3,00e 3,000 4,000 (Wing) 3,000 4,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 4,000 3,000 4,000 (Wing) 3,000 8,000 7,000 3,000 $176,000 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT - JANU.ARY SESSION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: The following is a Summary of Expenditures on Elgin County and St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Roads in 1985. In accordance with Ministry of Transportation and Communications' practice, Payroll Burden such as Holidays With Pay, Sick Time, etc., has been distributed to various projects and does not appear as a separate item. CONSTRUCTION (A) Bridges: (1) Silver Creek Culvert Replacement, County Road #42, Malahide Township. (Total Expenditure 1983 to 1985 inclusive was $ 685,042.73) 22,758.84 (2) Rehabilitation of the Port Burwell Bridge, County Road #42, Port Burwell. 169,721.53 (3) Rehabilitation of Players Bridge, County Road #45, Yarmouth Township_ 108,633.47 TOTAL $ 301,113.84 (B) Roads: (l) County Road #22 (Fairview Avenue) from St. Thomas City Limits to County Road #27, Yarmouth Township. {Project cost to date [other than land] 1983-85 is $ 931,486 362,780.97 , , (2) County Road #32 (Police College Road) from Ontario Police College to County Road #52, Malahide Township_ Project cost (other than land). 1988 - 85 was $1,445,232. 213,915.19 " (3) County Road #42 and County Road #50 in Port Burwell, Project cost. 1983-85 $ 412,397.36 57,486.14 Continued . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT "'7 JAN~UARY SESSION 1986 (B) Roads: (Continued) (4) Land purchase including surveys, etc. (5) Surveys and engineering work on roads for future construction.& Misc. Grading. (c) Asphalt Resurfacing: (1) County Road #3 from Highway #3 to Rodney in Aldborough Township. (Project Cost) $ 747,524.64 (2) County Road #3 from County Road #9 to Thames River in Aldborough Township. (3) County Road #36 cU1L1}Jletion of work for 1985 from County Road #45 to Highway #3 in Yarmouth Township. (4) County Road #39 in Port Burwell. (5) County Road #42 from Elizabeth Street in Port Burwell easterly approximately 1 mile, Port Burwell and Bayham Township. (6) County Road #52 from Highway #74 to County Road #30, Yarmouth Township. (D) 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) Drainage assessments charged against County roads. (4) Development of Sparta Gravel Pit, Yarmouth Township. TOTAL $ TOTAL $ TOTAL PAGE 2. 4,471..23 28,589.70 667,243..23 11,706.72 107,852.60 4,271.43 39,725.14 135,335.04 334,960.00 633,850.93 21,285.25 Credit 321,726.16 32,862.41 8,997.59 $ 342,300.91 TOTAL COUNTY EXPENDITURES 'A', 'B', 'c' AND'D' $ 1,944,508.91 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND' EEJ?QRT- - '.JANUARY SESSION 1986 (E) ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION CONSTRUCTION (1) Miscellaneous surveys and engineering. (2) Land purchase. (3) Drainage assessments charged against St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Roads. TOTAL COST BY ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION TOTAL COUNTY OF ELGIN AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION CONSTRUCTION PAGE 3. 4,596.79 12,157.84 14,504.54 $ 31,259.17 $ 1,975,768.08 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE :SECOND REPORT-.- JANUARY SESSION 1986 PAGE 4. MAINTENANCE - COUNTY ROADS *NOTE: Letters and numbers correspond to Ministry of Transportation and Communications' Account Numbers. A - Culverts and Bridges - 1 Bridges - 2 Culverts 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 C - Hard Top Maintenance (Paved Roads) - 1 Repairs to Pavement - 2 Sweeping - 3 Shoulder Maintenance (including gravelling, ditching, etc.) - 4 Surface Treatment D - Loose Top Maintenance (Gravel Roads) - 1 Drainage, Gravel, Prime, etc., Road #26 (Bostwick Road) - 2 Grading Gravel Roads - 3 Dust Control (Salt Brine) - 4 Dust Control (Prime) - 5 Gravel Resurfacing E - Winter Control - 1 Snow Plowing - 2 Sanding and Salting - 3 Snow Fence - 4 Winter Standby * Total Winter Control * 1984 Winter Control 1983 Winter Control 1982 Winter Control $458,201 $210,955 $497,778 COUNTY ROADS ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ROADS TOT AL 76,835.23 53,083.71 11,421.27 13,712.10 88,256.50 66,795.81 41,290.25 10,930.26 52,220.51 14,837.86 8,288.62 23,126.48 129,411.58 33,255.34 162,666.92 32,886.87 18,687.86 51,574.73 1,169.27 - - 1,169.27 5,115.13 697.76 5,812.89 11,242.73 508.14 11,750.87 119,442.47 20,683.38 16,859.46 3',120.75 136,301.93 23,804.13 192,210.22 111,437.63 20,338.78 212,549.00 111,437.63 55,898.66 55,898.66 33,261.55 6,418.73 39,680.28 41,992.05 11,997.76 53,989.81 3,,669.52 3,469.92 7,139.44 102,761.67 7,435.77 110,197.44 154,588.62 29,237.69 183,826.31 253,620.59 40,957.91 294,578.50 23,031.23 4,371.35 27,402.58 23,770.47 3,619.27 27,389.74 455,010.91 78,186.22 533,197.13 Continued . . . PAGE 5. COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT JANUARY SESSION 1986 MAINTENANCE - COUNTY ROADS . .. COUNTY ROADS ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ROADS TOTAL . - F _ Safety Devices _ 1 pavement Marking (Center Line) 44,955.90 7,985.49 52,941.39 _ 2 Signs 73,194.75 20,274.92 93,469.67 _ 3 Guide Rail 11,469.31 1,196.53 12,665.84 _ 4 Railroad protection 34,218.60 6,231.95 40,450.55 _ 6 Edge Marking 40,967.14 6,137.29 47,104.43 _ 7 Stump Removal 2,075.85 5,080.65 7,156.50 TOTALS $ 1,653,223.58 $ 348,134.23 $ 2,001,357.81 OVERHEAD - COUNTY ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION COUNTY ROADS ROADS - TOTAL 1. superintendence, including County Engineer, Assistant Engineer, superintendents and Vehicles. 116,585.62 10,137.88 126,723.50 63,281.90 5,502.77 68,784.67 2. Clerical 29,033.47 2,524.65 31,558.12 3. office 4. Garage - Stock and Timekeepers, Maintenance, Heat, Etc. 96,246.13 8,369.23 104,615.36 14,524.75 1,263.02 15,787.77 5. Tools 4,438.03 385.92 4,823.95 7. Needs Study Update and Traffic Counts 7,574.51 1,035.37 8,609.88 6. Radio 2,076.11 180.53 2,256.64 8. Training Courses 2,180.15 189.58 2,369.73 9. Miscellaneous Insurance 14,218.01 10. Retirement BenefitS (Sick Time paid to Retired Employees) 14,218.01 1,397.33 1,397.33 TOTALS 351,556.01 29,588.95 381,144.96 11. Deferred Time 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 assessmentS, itemS not for subsidy, etc., are not considered in determining the overhead percentage). In 1985 the Overhead charge to the St. Thomas Suburban Road commission was 8% · COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND-'REPORT - JANUARY SESSION 1986 MISCELLANEOUS Rebate to Town of Aylmer and Villages of 25% of their Road Levy (Subsidized by the Ministry of Transportation and Cvuuuunications) Distributed Labour Costs and Payroll Burden totaled $ 427,840~34 in 1985 & were 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 1. Road Liability Insurance 1,101.00 2. Miscellaneous (Including Memberships, Road Committee Inspections, Hospitality Suites, Etc.) 4,190.24 3. Invoices from the County Clerks Office for Preparation of Employee Payroll 4,540.70 4. Payment for Accumulated Sick Time to Employees Still in Employment of the County of Elgin 21,639.96 5. Payment to St. Thomas Suburban Road Commissioner (Fees and Expenses) 6. International Plowing Match (County Exhibit, Erection of Snow Fence, Etc.) 29,403.25 7. Urban Rebates Not Subsidized by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications 3,341.85 TOTALS $ 64,217.00 Total Rebates to Town of Aylmer and Villages were $ 55,779.59 ^- ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ROADS 104.00 222.60 150.00 $ 476.60 PAGE 6. $ 5f!4~7.74 TOTAL 1,205.00 4,412.84 4,540.70 21,639.96 150.00 29,403.25 3,341.85 $ 64,693.60 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT ,- JANUARY SESSION 1986 SUMMARY COUNTY ROADS ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ROADS (A) Construction 1,944,508.91 (B) Maintenance 1,653,223.58 (C) Overhead 351,556.01 (D) Urban Rebates 52,437.74 (E) Items Not For Subsidy 64,217.00 31,259.17 348,134.23 29,588.95 476.60 SUBTOTALS $ 4,065,943.24 $ 409,458.95 ADD: 1985 Stock Balance DEDUCT: 1984 Stock Balance TOTALS PAGE 7. TOTAL 1,975,768.08 2,001,357.81 381,144.96 52,437.74 64,693.60 $ 4,475,402.19 126,671.06 $ 4,602,073.25 64,857.03 $ 4,537,216.22 (Total for Ministry of Transportation and Communications Subsidy $ 4,472,522.62 ) CALCULATION OF AMOUNT PAYABLE BY CITY OF ST. THOMAS TOWARD THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ROAD SYSTEM Calculation of Ministry of Transportation and Communications payable on the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Road System Expenditures. 1. Average Subsidy Rate on Operations Expenditures of $ 408,982.35 was 75.33% or 2. Subsidy on Items Not For Subsidy of $ 476.60 is nil TOTAL SUBSIDY FROM MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS Total St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Expenditures LESS: Ministry of Transportation and COull1Lunications Subsidy BALANCE Share of City of St. Thomas 50% of Balance '~ DEDUCT: Surplus From 1984 SUBTOTAL DEDUCT: 1/2 Mill Contribution for 1985 from City of St. Thomas DEFICIT TO 1986 $ 308,086.40 $ 308,086.40 $ 409,458.95 $ 308,086.40 $ 101,372.55 $ 50,686.27 $ 469.01 $ 50,217.27 $ 41.200'-00 $ 9,107.27 COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT,- JANUARY SESSION 1986 PAGE 8. CALCULATION OF NET COUNTY EXPENDITURE (ACTUAL ROAD LEVY) Ministry of Transportation and Communications Subisdy in 1985 was $ 3,356,000 Total County Road and St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Expenditures 4,537,216.22 LESS: Ministry of Transportation and Communications Subsidy 3,356,000.00 LESS: Cost to City o:f St. Thomas of the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission 50,686.27 NET ESTIMATED COST TO COUNTY OF E~GIN (SUBJECT TO MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS AUDIT)1,130,529.95 The 1985 Road Levy Provided $1,117,000 plus $18,000 toward a Supplementary By-Law which was never approved by the Ministry of Transportation and Communicat~ons. (Total Levy $ 1,135,000) Total Voucher Payments in 1985 were $ 5,140,613.89, in 1984 were $4,600,436.61 and in 1983 were $5,343,165.36. The difference between the total voucher payments and total road expenditures included: (a) Work done on Townline Roads and Bridges and invoiced to County of Middlesex and County of Oxford. ., (b) Surface treatment work for various municipalities including City of St. Thomas and County of Kent ($ 173,114.42) (c) Hot mix paving and other work, etc., for various local municipalities ($143,744.71) The County of Elgin Road Department in 1985 participated in 3 Employment Programmes in addition to the work listed above. (a) Government of Canada '85 Summer Incentive Programme (Surveying Assistance) at a value of $ 4,700.00 (b) Canada Works Programme (Federal) in the Spring and early Surrmer (to relieve local unemployment) $9,433.19. \: (c) Ontario Yoqth Corps Programme (Provincial) work completion of 1984 programme and 2 progl1annnes in 1985 ($ 68,414.00) COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE ~SECOND_REPORT - JANUARY SESSION 1986, The Road Department was requested to have personnel availabl€~ for a Mosquito PAGE 9. Control Progrannne for the prevention of encephalitis. The cost of $ 266.71 was charged to the General Government Account. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED CHAIRMAN COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE ,FIRST REPORT 'JANUARY SES,SION 1986 TO THE WARDEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL " YOUR ROAD COMMITTEE REPORTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. ' We have received from Nottinghan's Truck Service Limited, Hagersville, an International 2 Ton Double Cab Truck with Flat Rack that was ordered last September. 2. We have negotiated the purchase of two Sanders of 8 and 10 cubic yard capacity respectively from London Machinery Company Limited of London, at a cost with Provincial Sales Tax of $25,605.64. One will replace a 1972 unit which is in poor condition, the other has been mounted on a 1980 International Cabover Truck purchased by the County in November for use as a pain~ marking truck. The extra amount will give the County 10 sander units. Although we had 10 units at one time, we have had only 9 for several years. Your Conmtittee feels 10 units are required to give adequate service. 3. We have purchased from Eeley Chevrolet Olds Limited, Strafford- ville, two 1986 Chevrolet Caprice automobiles at $10:,668.00 each plus Provincial Sales Tax. The Engineer and the Assistant Superintendent are driving these, and the Superintendent is driving the County's 1984 Ford. The County's 1980 Chevrolet Automobiles are being tendered to Road Department employees. 4. We have recommended to County Government Committee that a bi- weekly system of paylist account approvals be set up. These would be paid on alternate weeks to the wages paylist and would be compatible with a future computer bookkeeping system. Continued . . . . . . PAGE 2. coUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD CoMMITTEE FIRST REPORT _ JANUARY SE~It!'!- 1~ 5. That the county Engineer haS been authorized to attend the fo1- lowing conventions and/ or meetingS: The Ontario Good Roads Association convention (February); The county Engineers Municipal Engineer's annual meeting held in conjunction with the Ontario Good Roads ASSociation convention; The Roads and TransportatiOn ASSociation of canada convention; The Municipal EngineerS Annual workshoP; The Suburban commissioners' Annual Meeting (ThiS 'will ~e hgsted by St. Thomas Suburban Road Cgromission); The InternatiOnal conference on Short and Medium Span 'BridgeS sponsored by the Civil EngineerS' ASSociation of canada, to be held in Ottawa on August 18th to the 21st. This conference is held every four yearS and the Engineer's abstract on "Failures of soil Steel plate culvertS is one of sixty abstractS from over 165 from 12 countries accepted for presentatiOn at the conference. 6. The ASsistant County Engineer haS been authOrized to attend the following conventions and/or meetingS: The Ontario Good Roads ASSociation convention (February); The county EngineerS Municipal Engineer's meeting held in conjunction with the Ontario Good Roads ASSociation convention; The Municipal EngineerS Annual workshoP; and The Suburban commiSsioners' Annual Meeting. A meeting will be arranged at the request of the county of 7. Middlesex to discUSS the improvement of the Radio_RUbrey_RighbUry Road link between London and St. Thomas. 1985 traffic countS on wellingtOn Road show in exceSs of 10,000 vehicles per day average at the Middlesex BoundarY, with over 6,000 vehicles per daY south of Highway #3 (St. Thomas EXPressway). This is an increase of approximatelY 1,000 vehicles per day in each of the last three years. continued · · · · · · COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT - JANUARY SESSION 1986 PAGE 3. WE RECOMMEND: 1. That the membership fees for the Ontario Good Reads and Transpor- tation Association of Canada be paid. 2. That the 1985-86 Road Connnittee act as a Committee for the follow- ing purposes: (a) Solid and Liquid Waste Disposal. (b) Mosquito Control for the Prevention of Encephalitis. (c) Lake Erie Erosion. 3. That a By-Law be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to sign plans for widening County Road allowances as necessary in 1985-86. Such authorization By-Laws must be passed yearly and the By-Law schedule will include any roads that widening might be required on in 1986. 4. That the Warden, Reeve Neukamm and the Engineer be appointed to the Western Ontario Municipalities Committee on Gas Franchise Agreements. The Ontario Energy Board has completed Generic Hearings on Gas Franchises and is expected to present a Report by late February. It is e:X1>ected that the Committee will be able to complete their work shortly thereafter. 5. That a Resolution be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to submit to the Minister of Transportation and Communications a petition for subsidy for the County of Elgin's road expenditures made on the County of Elgin road system for the period of January 1, 1985 to December 31, 1985. 6. That application be made to the Ministry of Transportation and Communications for a supplementary By-Law in the amount of $45,000 for the investigation and monitoring of soil steel structures (pipe arch culverts) in Elgin County. Continued . . . . . . COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE FIRST REPORT - JANUARY SESSION 1986 PAGE 4. We have already received an approval letter from the Deputy Minister. Cvuuuittee has authorized Golder As sociates Ltd. of London to pro- ceed with the monitoring of three culverts on County of Elgin roads and one on the Township of Malahide roads to ascertain the effect of temperature etc. on backfill conditions, lerosion of backfill, ice lensing in the backfill, that may occur in these structures so as to better attempt to find the reasons for the failures and to try to come up with a repair system to save as many as possible of the pipe arch culverts across the Province. The Ministry feels that this work would be better carried on at a municipal level than with their Research and Development Branch and as the County has been assisting the Ministry in monitoring work across the Province during the past year, the ministry has felt that the project should be done in Elgin County. The in- formation obtained through the studies will be of ,great assistance. The Ministry estimates that between 125 and 140 pipl~ arch culverts across the Province are presently in danger of failing within 5 years. 7. That a By-Law be passed authorizing the Warden and Clerk to sign an agreement with the Township of Yarmouth for the installation of sanitary sewers on various County Roads in the Township. This By-Law will be similar to those agreements the County has now with the local municipalities for the installation of water lines on County roads. The By-Law will allow the Township to install and maintain the sewer system with the requirement that if any part of the system needs to be relocated for County work:, it will be done at the expense of the Township of Yarmouth. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED CHAIRMAN