The URL can be used to link to this page

1992 Suburban Road Committee I' f- ' ' I )~ (', V \ sA-') ~inistry ~inistere of des ,"-.' Transportation Transports Ontario (705) 235-8691 Roads Transportation Office . Cochrane Temiskaming Resource Centre P.O. Bag 3010, Hwy 101 South Porcupine, Ontario PON 1HO December 23, 1992 Mr. George Leverton Clerk Treasurer County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5V1 Dear Mr. Leverton: Re: Ministerial Adjusted Assessments for Cities and Separated Towns - Pursuant to Section 68(3) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act (Suburban Roads Commissions) The 1993 Ministerial Adjusted Assessment (MMA) value for each city or separated town situated within your county is noted on the attached calculation sheet. Pursuant to Section 68(3) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, the MMA must be used in determining the 1993 limiting contribution of each city and separated town to its associated suburban roads commission. MMA values were derived from based assessment data provided by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and have been calculated as 0.203 times the total weighted equalized assessment (where the discount factor of 0.203 simply indexes the values to their pre 1983 levels), times a growth factor which reflects the inflation rate and growth in total assessment, relative to 1991. Should you wish details on this calculation, please contact the undersigned. Yours truly,.. r') ~~~ P. A. Waterman Head, Program Management Roads Transportation Office Program Development Branch PAW/cmk Attach. cc: Fred Groch Made from recovered materials Fait de materiaux recuperes ,-' RSSES~'!~[NT OERIlJED fRON 1992 HPPQRTI@MDH PRQGRB.M., q1/q? TR~RIlI r A~~r~~MnH ~ rl1l1TlIlll rin A~r,r~r,HnH fR1111 --r -- .. ........-- ....----..-....,. ...'"\0..... ....--...... ....-...-.................. .. .......... RESUURCE EQURLIZflTInH GRRNT PRGGRBJ1 ELGItl SEPARATED TAXABLE TAXABLE REG PROUINCIAl TOTAL UEIGHTEn SEPRRAT [Q URBAN RES/fARM COM/BUS/INO EQUIUALDH 3 VEAR RUG EQUALIZED URBAN MUlHCIPALITIES ASSESSMENT ASSE5SMEtH ASSESSMENT EQUALIZ fACTOR ASSESSi1ENT MAA (A) (8) (C) (0) (fUER) st ThOMas C 17110223 25112592 3322989 6.15 883678108 167,500,000 TOTAL 17,110,223 25,112,592 3,322,989 883,678,109 167,500,000 (0.55 * A) t B t C TlJEA ::: ------------------ 01100 SEPRRATED URBAN MAA::: 0,203* TUEA * Gf (ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST HUNDRED THOUSAND) HOTE: EQUALIZATION fACTORS WILL HAUE BEEH ADJUSTED TO SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE AUERAGE Of THE GAZETTEO UALUES Of 1991, '90 AHO '89, If AN AREA WIDE OR MARKET UAlUE REASSESSMENT HAS BEEN UNDERTAKEN. GROWTH fACTOR ( 6f ) REfLECTS THE INfLATIONARV RATE RHO THE GROWTH IN TOTAL ASSESSMENT fOR SEP. TO'JH5 & CITIES, RELATIVE Tn 1991. fOR 1993, Gf :: 0.934 ~I.:._l'iQ.tlB.2._~'=!.~'=!.B.~B.ti_B.Q.B.Q._~g-'.'1tl!'~~!'Qti REPORT October 29, 1992 TO THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION: The st. Thomas Suburban Road Commission has control over the following roads (since June 29, 1992): 1. Road #16 from County Road #45 (Middlemarch) to the st. Thomas boundary. 2. Road #22 (Fairview Avenue) from the south limit of the City of st. Thomas to the north limit of County Road #27. 3. Road #25 (Wellington Road) from the north limit of Highway #4 to County of Middlesex boundary being the centre of the road allowance between the Townline of Westminster and the Township of Yarmouth. 4. Road #26 <St. George Street) from the City of St. Thomas boundary (Kettle Creek) to the east limit of County Road #25. 5. Road #28 from the south limit of Highway #3 to the north limit of County Road #45. 6. Road #30 from the City of St. Thomas boundary to the County of Middlesex being the centre of the road between the Township of Yarmouth and the Town of Westminster. 7. Road #31 from the City of st. Thomas boundary to the south limit of County Road #52. 8. Road #56 (Elm Street) from the boundary of the City of St. Thomas easterly to the west limit of County Road #36. 9. Road #57 (Southdale Road) from the east limit of Highway #4 to the west limit of County Road #22. The County of Elgin has ~ompleted resurfacing and channelization on County Road #25 north of the Highway #3 by-pass to and including channelization at the intersection of County Road #52 and County Road #25. Included in the above work was the replacement of a structural steel plate culvert with a precast concrete culvert. Also completed in 1992 were channelization and paving at the intersection of County Road #25 and the 11th Concession Road of the Township of Yarmouth. In 1992 the section of County Road #16 from County Road #45 to the Hamlet of Fingal was reverted to the County System enabling the County to resurface this section of road. Other than normal maintenance work, very little maintenance was required this year in areas of bridge and culvert repair, surface treatment, shoulder maintenance, gravel resurfacing and roadside maintenance. This led to a surplus in the ~taintenance Budget which was used in the Construction Budget to carry out additional work on County Road #25. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION '3.~'=-Q.B.I_=-_Q.~IQ.~~B._~2..1._!..2.2.~--------- PAGE 2. In 19ge, the Drainage Assessment was paid for the Wardle Drain located north of the railway tracks on County Road #25 in the Township of Yarmouth. In 1992, some road widening was purchased on County Road #57 (Southdale Road) and on County Road #28 (Centennial Avenue). Several discussions have been held with the Consultant, Cyril J. Demeyere Limited, regarding the proposed sports/educational complex. Improvements to County Road #22 (Fairview Avenue) and County Road #57 (Southdale Road) have been agreed to by the Consultant. Middlesex County has completed the construction of Hubrey Road and this has led to an increase in traffic on County Road #30 (Radio Road) · Although the 1993 road program has not been discussed with the County of Elgin Road Committee, it would appear that the most serious need for the Suburban Commission in 1993 would be th~ continuation of the completion of resurfacing and channelization on County Road #25 particularly between St. George Street and Highway #4. The replacement of a structural steel plate culvert on Elm Street (County Road #56) may also have to be considered. In 1992, the use of a mulching machine was used to remove stumps on lawns in road allowances and calcium chloride was used on Centennial Avenue rather than prime or brine. At this point in time, it appears that these methods are providing positive results from a servicing and costing point of view. . At this time, it appears that expenditures on the Suburban Road Commission will be close to the budget proposed at the beginning of the year. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED l~ of) ) ---------~~~=-~------------ FRED GROCH, COUNTY ENGINEER ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO OCTOBER 16, 1992 PAGE 1. THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION met at the Engineer's Office at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, October 16, 1992. All members were present as well as the County Engineer. IIMOVED BY: D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT WE ADOPT THE MINUTES OF THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 3, 1992. CARRIED. II 1992 CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM STATUS: The Engineer reported that the majority of the construction work has been completed on Wellington Road including the replacement of the Aarts Culvert, resurfacing and channelization between Highway #3 and County Road #52 as well as resurfacing and channelization at the 11th Concession Road. The Engineer indicated that this work was more than originally planned and that the construction in this area of Wellington Road is essentially complete. The Engineer handed out a Balance Sheet for the Suburban Road Commission as well as his estimated maintenance and construction costs to the end of the year. These estimates indicate that the overexpenditure on the construction portion of the Suburban Road Budget was compensated by a savings in the Suburban Maintenance Budget. The Engineer reported that County staff and equipment were deeply involved in construction work this year and not as much preventative maintenance was carried out as originally planned. The Engineer reported that should additional funds be available between now and the end of the year that consideration should be made of some resurfacing of County Road #16 east of Middlemarch and/or the removal of the knoll on County Road #28 south of the 6th Concession Road. The Engineer reported that road widening was purchased this year on County Road #28 and the trees have been removed in this area. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO OCTOBER 16, 1992 PAGE 2. SURBURBAN ROAD SYSTEM: The Engineer reported that the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario has approved the reversion of County Road #16 from Middlemarch to Fingal to the County Road System. ONTARIO GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION, FEBRUARY 21-24, 1993: The Engineer reported that he had obtained room reservations at the Royal York Hotel for the above conference for all three Committee Members. ST. THOMAS SPORTS/EDUCATION COMPLEX: The Engineer reported that he had been dealing with Mr. John Wiebe of Cyril J. Demeyere Limited regarding the proposed road work to accommodate this development on County Road #22 and County Road #57. The Engineer reported that the City's consultant was cooperating with the requirements of the County Road Department in this matter. The Engineer also reported that, in conjunction with the City of St. Thomas, road widening was being negotiated with Mr. Hepburn on the south side of Southdale Road to provide for wider shoulders, relocation of hydro lines and ditching. WELLINGTON ROAD RAILWAY CROSSING: The Engineer reported receiving a copy of a letter from a Mr. MacLeod of St. Thomas which was directed from the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario regarding the poor condition of this crossing. The Engineer indicated that the basic problem with the crossing was that the railway line was on a curve and thus was installed with a super elevation and that the road would have to be reconstructed to provide a smooth transition for this situation. It was suggested that further resurfacing and channelization of Wellington Road proposed in 1993 should include this area in an effort to address this problem. ANNUAL DUES: The Engineer reported that he had paid the annual dues of $25.00 for membership in the Suburban Road Commission Association of Ontario for 1992/1993. IIMOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO OCTOBER 16, 1992 PAGE 3. CARRIED." JJ1~ --- . .,.,... ."""'"'''''' .. . """ . ,. CHAIRMAN . ' ST. THOt"IAS SUBURBAhl ROAD COtvlH 155 I Ot,,1 (A) MAINTENANCE BUDGET FORECAST TO YEAR END I TEtv1 A B B B B B B C C C C C C D D o D o E E E F F F F F F Bridges and Culverts 1 2 if. 5 6 Grass Cutting Tree Cutting Drainage Roadside Maintenance T T' e e P 1 ant i ng M i sce 11 aneCJUS 1 2 3 if. 5 6 Pavement Repairs Sweeping Shoulder 'A' Surface Treatment Shoulder Grading Machine Laid Asphalt 2 3 if. 5 Grading Brine Prime Gravel Resurfacing Calcium 1 2 4 Snowplowing Salting and Sanding Standby 1 2 3 4 (, 7 Centreline Painting Signs Guide Rail H. R. Protection Edge Painting Btump Removal ESTIMATED BALANCE OF MAINTENANCE BUDGET OCTOBER 8, 1992 ESTIMATED BALANCE $la,OOO ($3,000) ($3,000) ($2~000) $5,000 $1,000 $5,000 ($3,000) $0 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $11,000 ($1 ,000) $c~ ,000 $(~ ,000 $27,000 $:3,.boo $0 $ 1:3,000 ($3,000) $~5 ,000 $13,000 $1 ,000 $0 $~5 ,000 $:3 ,000 $10<3,000 -------- -------- ST. I HUH()S ~)lJBUfUJ("I',1 nOAD COI"II11 S~3 I UI"I OCTOBEH 8, 1'392 MAINTENANCE AND CONSTRUCTION BUDGET FORECASTS PAGE 2. --------------------------------------------- (9) CONSTRUCTION BUDGET FORECAST TO YEAR END ITEM ESTIMATED BALANCE 1 . Road #25 Resurfacing ($84,000) 2. Aarts Culvert Replacement ($21,000) $2,000 3. Drainage Assessment 4 . Engineering $0 5. Land Purchase $0 ESTIMATED BALANCE OF CONSTRUCTION BUDGET ($103,000) ~------- -------- SUMMARY Estimated Maintenance Surplus Estimated Construction Overexpenditure $109,000 ($103,000) Estimated Balance to Year End $6~OOO ----,---- -------- 1. Consider some resurfacing on Road #16 east of Middlemarch. 2. Consider removing knoll on Road #28 south of Southdale. Elgin County Roads Balance Sheet Printed on Wednesday, October 14,1992 at 14:~8:32 SECTiON 1 Suburban Area Part A - Maintenance Sort Code A Activity A1~~SA SA A-1 BRIDGES A1~1SA SA A-11 CLEAN & WASH BRDG A1~2SA SA A-1~~ BRIDGE INSPECT. A2~~SA SA A-2 CULVERTS A2~lSA SA A-2~~ CULVERT INSPECT, Expend I ture 388.95 1 ,942. 12 122.98 3,317.84 526.83 Page Budget 2~,~~0.~0 0.~0 ~.~0 0.~0 lIJ. ~0 1 Balance 19,611.05 -1,942.12 -122,98 -3,317.84 -526.83 ------------ ------------ ------------ 6,298,72 20,000,00 13,701.28 A300SA SA B-1 GRASS & WEED CUTT. A301SA SA B-2 TREE CUTTING A3~2SA SA 8-4 DRAINAGE A303SA SA B-5 ROADSIDE MTNCE, A304SA SA B-6 TREE PLANTING A306SA SA B-11 WEED SPRAYING A307SA SA B- MISCELLANEOUS 19, 170. ~7 11,386,59 5,627,26 2,317.61 0.~0 0.~0 0.~~ 15,000,00 10,000.00 9,000.00 10,000.00 1,000.00 0,00 5,000,00 -4,170.07 -1,386,59 3,372,74 7,682.39 1,000.00 0.00 5,000.00 ------------ ------------ ------------ 38,501.53 50,000.00 11,498.47 A400SA SA C~l PAVEMENT REPAIRS A401SA, SA C-2 SWEEPING A402SA SA C-3 SHOULDER MTNCE. A403SA SA C-4 SURFACE TREATMENT A404SA SA C-5 SHOULDER MTNCE.' A405SA SA C-6 MACHINE LAID HOTMX 11,917.12 3,68~.54 0.00 0.00 2,913.85 0.00 10,000.00 5,000."0 10,000."0 10,000.00 4,0"0.00 11 , 0"0 . "0 .' -1,917,12 1,319.46 10,000.00 10,000,"0 1 ,086, 15 11,000.00 ------------ ------------~ ------------ 18,511,51 50,00",00 31,488,49 A500SA SA D~2 GRADING A501SA SA 0-3 DUST CONTROL A502SA SA 0-4 PRIME A503SA SA 0-5 GRAVEL RESURFACING A504SA SA D- CALCIUM CHLORIDE 7,036.49 5 , 206 . 19 0.00 3,~77.41 6,447.18 8,~~0.00 1~.0~0.00 2,"~~,0~ 30,~00.00 10,00".00 963.51 4,793.81, 2,000.0e1 26,922.59 3,552,82 ------------ ------------ ------------ 21,767,27 60,0"0.00 38,232,73 A60~SA SA E-1 SNOWPLOWING A6~lSA SA E-2 SANDING & SALTING A6~2SA SA E-4 WINTER STANDBY 18,359.58 41,938.85 ~.00 25,00~,~0 7~,000.~0 5,"~~.00 6,640,42 28,~61.15 5,~~~.00 ------------ ------------ ------------ 60,298,43 100,000,00 39,701,57 A700SA SA F-1 PAVEMENT MARKING A7~lSA SA F-2 SIGNS A7~2SA SA F-3 GUIDE RAIL A703SA SA F-4 RAILROAD PROTECT. A704SA SA F-6 EDGE MARKING A705SA SA F-7 STUMP REMOVAL 7,249,43 613,20 142.16 2,898,31 6,542,73 1,~62,58 15,0~".00 10,000.~0 1,000.~0 4,0~0.00 15,000.00 5,000.00 7,75".57 9,386.80 857.84 1 ,101. 69 8,457.27 3,937.42 ------------ ------------ ------------ A800SA SA TRAFFIC COUNT 754.07 18,508,41 50,000,00 31,491.59 -754."7 0.00 ------------ ---~-------- ------------ 754,07 0.00 -754.07 Total Suburban Area Maintenance 164,639.94 ------------ ------------ ------------ 165,360.06 33",0""."" Elgin County Roads Bala'nce Sheet Printed on Wednesday, October 14,1992 SECTION 1 Suburban Area Part B - Contruetlon Sort Code B Ac t I v I t Y BR25~~ ROAD 25 ENGINEERING BR25~2 ROAD 25 TOPSOIL BR25~3 ROAD 25 EXCAVATION/DITCH. BR25~5 ROAD 25 'B' FILL BR25~6 ROAD 25 'A' GRAVEL BR25~7 ROAD 25 HOT MIX BR2510 ROAD 25 CURB BR2511 ROAD 25 CURB REMOVAL BR2512 ROAD 25 STORM SEWERS BR2514 ROAD 25 CATCHBASINS BR2516 ROAD 25 SIGNS BR2518 ROAD 25 EROSION CONTROL BR255~ ROAD 25 MISCELLANEOUS B7~~CO AARTS CULVERT ENGINEERING B7~2CO AARTS CULVERT TOPSOIL B7~3CO AARTS CULVERT EXCAVATION B705CO AARTS CULVERT 'B' FilL B706CO AARTS CULVERT 'A' GRAVEL B7~7CO AARTS CULVERT HOT MIX B712CO AARTS CULVERT STORM SEWER B714CO AARTS CULVERT CATCH9ASINS B716CO AARTS CULVERT SIGNS B718CO AARTS CULVERT EROSION PRO 9722CO AARTS CULVERT CONCRETE 9723CO AARTSCULVERT PRECAST B75~CO AARTS CULVERT MISCELLAN, 9S01~0 S,A, DRAINAGE ASSESSM.CON BT0200 S,A, SURVEYS/DESIGN ENG, BT0300 S.A, MISC. LAND PURCHASE Total Suburban Area Construction Total Suburban Area Accts Pay Ending 10/01/92 Wages Ending 10/07/92v/ Mach Time Ending 10/07/92v/ Gravel Tr Ending ~9/30/92 6Q~JbL ~') /"\5 k.()j~l~ '<1. Expend I ture 4,692.60 5,339.23 10,411,50 30,618.78 72,659.01 100,764.52 24,148.10 493.61 9,573,72 562.90 14,293.73 253.57 2,094.49 Page 2 BUdget Balance 245,12'00.00 0.00 0.00 12'.00 12'.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12'.12'12' 12'.12'0 0.00 240,307.40 -5,339.23 -10,411.50 -30,618,78 -72,659,01 -100,764.52 -24,148.18 -493.61 -9,573,72 -562,98 -14,293,73 -253,57 -2,094.49 --------~--- ------------ ------------ 275,905.76 245,000,00 -30,905.78 2,065.29 2,592.65 23,033,53 8, 192. 17 30,239.46 4,316,31 5,524.80 260,00 1,779.86 7,153.85 2, 198 . 34 66,236.42 1,567.30 143,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.0e 0.e0 0.ee 0.00 0.0e 0.00" 0.00 0,00 0,00 0.0rtJ 140,934,71 -2,592,65 -23,033,53 -8,192,17 -30,239,46 -4,316,31 -5,524,80 -260,00 -1,779.86 -7,153.85 -2,198.34 -66,236.42 -1,567.30 ------------ ------------ ------------ 155,159,98 143,000,00 -12,159.98 1,599.93 235.94 1,969.97 5,000.00 19,500,0rtJ 5,000.00 3,400.07 19,264.06 3,03rtJ.03 ------------ ------------ ------------ 3,8rtJ5,84 29,500,0((j 25,694.18 434,871,58 ------------ ------------ ------------ -17,371,58 417,500.00 ------------ .----------- ------------ 147,988.48 599,511,52 747,500,00 Accts Ree Ending 10/14/92 ~ Benefits Ending 09/23/92 Stock Ending 09/15/92 Mise Tr End I ng to/14/92 V ~ S~OQ ( -S~o) \ (7) ~inistry ~inistere of des W Transportation Transports Ontario Mr. Fred Groch, P. Eng. County Engineer County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive ~T. THOMAS, Ontario N5R 5Vl Dear Sir: 0: S~ Thomas Suburban Roads Resolution Dated Jun 3..1992 659 Exeter Road (Hwy. #135) Box 5338, London" Ontario N6A 5H2 (519) 681-1441 July 2, 1992 The above noted resolution has been duly signed and approved by our Regional Director, Mr, Richard Puccini. I have attached the original approval for your records. Yours truly f? cfU R.E. Stock Senior Municipal Supervisor District #2, London Made from recovered materials Fait de materiaux recuperes LGROCH13.RES Ontario ~inistry ~inistere of des Transportation Transports 659 Exeter Road, P.O. Box 5338 LONDON, Ontario - N6A 5H2 Telephone: (519) 681-1441 June 29, 1992 Mr. F. Groch Engineer for the st. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5V1 Dear Mr. Groch: St.Thomas Suburban Roads Commission Designation as Suburban Roads Commission Resolution Dated June 3, 1992 --------------------------------------- Please be advised that pursuant to Section 66 of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P50 as amended, that as the Minister's designee I hereby approve St. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission Resolution dated June 3, 1992. A copy of the approved Commission Resolution is attached for your records. Yours truly, ~.----:;;:; "_..,,~/" .~ /'.~~~ -----. '-"~" /~~ R. Puccini, P. Eng. Regional Director Southwestern Region, London KWB:120:kb Encl. cc: P. Ginn, Att'n: C. G. Kirk W. Simms Made from recovered materials Fait de materiaux recuperes ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION IIMOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: THAT THE DESIGNATION AS A SUBURBAN ROAD OF THE FOLLOWING ROAD IS HEREBY REVOKED EFFECTIVE WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION OF ONTARIO. (A) ROAD #16 FROM COUNTY ROAD #45 (MIDDLEMARCH) TO COUNTY ROAD #20 (FINGAL), A DISTANCE OF 6.29 KMS. CARRIED. II R. FERGUSON, CHAIRMAN I, FRED GROCH, SECRETARY AND ENGINEER TO THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE IS A CERTIFIED COpy OF A RESOLUTION PASSED ON JUNE 3, 1992 BY THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION. DATED JUNE 3, 1992 / ~7 r;~, '__ FRED GROCH, SECRETARY AND ENGINEER TO THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION I .; '10'" FilED anOCH, BASe" M.Enq., P,Eng. Engineer nnd noad Superintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE S1. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 FAX NO. 1-519-633-7661 CLAYlON WAl TEllS, BASe. PEng Assistant County Engineer June 3, 1992 Ministry of Transportation of Ontario P.O. Box 5338 London, Ontario N6A 5H2 Attention: Mr. Wayne $imms Distri~t Municipal Engineer Gentlemen: Re: St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Change in Suburban Road System The St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission at a meeting on June 3, 1992 passed the attached resolution for which we request approval of the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario. We are enclosing two copies of a map showing the revised Suburban Road Commission System. Yours truly, FG:pg Ene. /' fJ ,........ ....,._ ,f ~./ .,' / C. I x;~. /;>,") ~/.J)/ --C.... /'/ ./~.v_" ~ FRED GROCH, B.A.S~., M.Eng., P.Eng. ENGINEER AND ROAD SUPERINTENDENT ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COr-t4ISSION "MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND D. R.STOKES THAT THE DESIGNATION AS A SUBURBAN ROAD OF THE FOLLOWING ROAD IS HEREBY REVOKED EFFECTIVE WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION OF ONTARIO. (A) ROAD #16 FROM COUNTY ROAD #45 (MIDDLEMARCH) TO COUNTY ROAD #20 (FINGAL), A DISTANCE OF 6.29 KMS. CARRIED." R. FERGUSON, CHAIRMAN I, FRED GROCH, SECRETARY AND ENGINEER TO THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION HEREBY CERTIFY TJ1AT THE ABOVE IS A CERTIFIED COpy OF A RESOLUTION PASSED ON JUNE 3, 1992 BY THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION. DATED JUNE 3, 1992 / ~ () /' ~ ,-LV FRED GROCH, SECRETARY AND ENGINEER TO THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JUNE 3, 1992 PAGE 1. THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION met at the Engineer's Office at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, June 3, 1992. All members were present as well as the County Engineer. IIMOVED BY: D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT WE ADOPT THE MINUTES OF THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION MEETING DATED MARCH 2, 1992. CARRIED. II CORRESPONDENCE: 1. The County of Essex invited the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission to the Area Meeting which is to be held on Wednesday, June 17, 1992 in Windsor. The Engineer reported that due to Road Department Employee Award Presentations at County Council that day he would not be attending. HowE~ver, the Assistant County Engineer, Mr. Clayton Watters, would make arrangE~ments to attend this meeting with the Members. The Engineer handed out agendas for the information of the Members for that meeting. 2. The County of Middlesex sent information regarding the Greater London Area Arbitrator John Brant's Report on the annexation bid by the City of London of portions of local municipalities in the County of Middllasex. This letter was signed by the Warden who requested support for the maintenance of a Suburban Road System in the London Area. The Engineer reported that this request was addressed by County Council and by resolution, County Council supported Middlesex's request. The Engineer reported that this topic would also be on the agenda at the Area Meeting in Windsor. 3. The City of St. Thomas approved the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission's 1992 Budget and their contribution of $83,800. WORK TO DATE: 1. The Engineer reported that engineering work was completed for the replacement of the Aarts Culvert and the resurfacing and channelization of Wellington Road from Highway #3 to County Road #52. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JUNE 3, 1992 PAGE 2. The Engineer reported that due to the use of Highway #3 for a detour route, the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario has requested that signal lights be installed at the intersection of County Road #52 and Highway #3 (at a cost of $8,000) and that a right-hand turning lane be constructE~d by the County at the south-west intersection of Highway #3 and Wellington Road. The Engineer reported that the latter request by the Ministry should be a Ministry responsibility. The Engineer reported that he would pursue this matter further with the Ministry. However, to expedite this project, the County may be forced to carry out the latter work. The Ministry also indicated that the County may have to install the detour signing on Highway #3. The Engineer reported that the additional costs for the Aarts Culvert would be taken out of the funding allowance for the resurfacing of Wellington Road. 2. The Engineer reported that calcium chloride was being used on County Road #28 south of St. Thomas and that it was too soon to tell thE~ effectiveness of this form of dust control. 3. The Engineer reported that right-of-way was being purchased on the west side of Centennial Avenue south of the 6th Concession. This will enable the County to remove some trees at a knoll and remove part of the knoll for better visibility and snow storage. 4. The Engineer reported receiving several items of correspondence regarding the Freedom of Information Act and it was recommended that this information be filed for future reference. 5. The Engineer reported that resurfacing asphalt costs are expected to be substantially less than last year which would allow the County to carry out more resurfacing projects that originally anticipated. Since the next greatest need for resurfacing is County Road #16, it was felt that the County could start on the resurfacing of the section from Middlemarch to Fingal. "MOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES THAT THE DESIGNATION AS A SUBURBAN ROAD OF THE FOLLOWING ROAD IS HEREBY REVOKED EFFECTIVE WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION OF ONTARIO. CONTINUED . . . ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JUNE 3, 1992 PAGE 3. "MOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES CONTINUED . . . (A) ROAD #16 FROM COUNTY ROAD #45 (MIDDLEMARCH) TO COUNTY ROAD #20 (FINGAL), A DISTANCE OF 6.29 KMS. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. CARRIED." 12..,.,/./'/. ,...""..., ~' if ..- 6 "'I - ~.-/~ CHAI~AN ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MARCH 2, 1992 PAGE 1. THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION met at the Engineer's Office at 10:00 a.m. on Monday, March 2, 1992. All members were present including the Acting County Engineer. Chairman Ferguson welcomed all members to the meeting and thanked the members for appointing him Chairman. Member Albert Auckland thanked members of the Committee for nominating him as an Honorary Member of the Ontario Suburban Road Association. "MOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES THAT WE ADOPT THE MINUTES OF THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION MEETING DATED FEBRUARY 5, 1992. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT WE APPROVE THE EXPENDITURE OF $25.00 AS A CONTRIBUTION TO PURCHASE A GIFT FOR THE RETIRING SECRETARY-TREASURER OF THE ONTARIO SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION, MR. ALLAN HOLMES WHO HAS TAKEN UP ANOTHER POSITION. CARRIED." The Engineer handed out a copy of the County of Elgin Road Department Construction Programme Priorities for future years. It was recommended that this information be included in the Minutes for future reference. The Engineer pointed out that the programme involved approximately 10 years of future road construction and that undoubtedly this programme would be changed by Road Committee on a yearly basis as changing conditions warranted. The Engineer handed out the 1992 Maintenance Budget for the County and St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission and discussed each item of the budget as it related to the Suburban Road System with the members of the Committee. It was recommended that this 1992 Maintenance Budget be included with the Minutes. The Engineer further discussed the method of determining the 1992 overall St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Budget and handed out the proposed 1992 Budget including construction and fixed costs. It was recommended that this budget be enclosed with the Minutes. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO MARCH 2, 1992 PAGE 2. "MOVED BY: D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT THE BUDGET OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION IN THE AMOUNT OF $800,000.00 AS DETAILED IN THE FEBRUARY 28, 1992 REPORT TO THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE AND THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION BE ADOPTED AND FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY OF ELGIN AND THE CITY OF ST. THOMAS FOR THEIR APPROVAL. CARRIED. II The Engineer reported that the County of Elgin Road Tour would be held on April 7th and April 10th and that the Suburban members would be welcome to attend. The road tour would start at the County Administration Building at 9:00 a.m. and hopefully return by 4:30 p.m. "MOVED BY: D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. CARRIED. II M."//~~ J" / -::.L ... L . C~N ~Q.1LNr!~y -_.Q,E._.I:lkQ.l~__RQAQ_I2~e.liRTM ~NT ~.Q.HSi1Jl!:LQ_T ION PROGRAH PR lOR I TIES "I< ( 1 ) 192.~ JANUARY 10, 1992 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OVERALL J' PRIORITY COST ESTIMATE $000 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE TOTAL $000 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE 1 PHILMORE BRIDGE 800 2 HARRIETSVILLE DRAIN BRIDGE T/L 165 3 TAITS BRIDGE - LEGAL T/L 10 4 AARTS CULVERT - ROAD #25 150 5 ROAD #25 CHANNELIZATION 250 6 ROAD #4 RECONSTRUCTION 1,302 7 JOSEPH STREET HILL ROAD #23 ENG. 20 8 ROAD #37 UPGRADE 50 19 ROAD #34 BELMONT WEST 583 10 ROAD #52 LAND PURCHASE LEGEND: S - SUPPLEMENTARY C - CONSTRUCTION R - RESURFACING M - MAINTENANCE SU - SUBURBAN T/L - TOWNLINE "I< (I) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEW 600 965 975 1 , 125 1 ,375 2,677 2,697 2,747 3,330 3,330 c c C-s SU-c SU-R c c M R R QQUi'fry OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT CQN~:r.gYG'r I.Q.N PRQGRA!1_E..R I OR I T I ~S *' ( 1 ) 1993 JANUARY 10, 1992 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I OVERALL PRIORITY PROJECT COST ESTIMATE SOOO COST ESTIMATE TOTAL $000 TYPE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/9 ROAD #25 CHANNELIZATION 400 400 SU-R 11 TAITS ,BRIDGE REMOVAL TIL 100 500 C-S 12 WARREN STREET - ROAD #21 JOINTS 30 530 C 13 KNOTS MILLS - ROAD #48 JOINTS 30 560 C 14 TAYLOR-ARMSTRONG CULVERT - ROAD #48 150 710 C 15 ROAD #8 NORTH OF HIGHWAY #401 548 1,258 C 16 ROAD #46 TO HIGHWAY #3 368 1,626 C 17 ROAD #35 NORTH OF ORWELL 460 2,086 C 18 ROAD #37 UPGRADING 50 2 , 136 M 20 ROAD #52 EAST 530 2,666 R 21 NORTH FLEMING BRIDGE - ROAD #3 265 2,931 C 22 WARREN STREET DECK - ROAD #21 129 3,060 C LEGEND: S - SUPPLEMENTARY C - CONSTRUCTION R - RESURFACING M - MAINTENANCE SU - SUBURBAN T/L - TOWNLINE *(1) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEW ~Q~~TY_QE_AL~LN._RQAR-Q~eARTtl~NT ~OJi~TR!I~J'ION PROGRAM PRIORITIES * (1) 1994. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- JANUARY 10, 1992 OVERALL PRIORITY PROJECT -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 ROAD #25 23 CALTON BRIDGE JOINT - ROAD #45 24 WEST EDEN BRIDGE JOINT - ROAD #44 2S MURRAY WATSON CULVERT - ROAD #48 26 ROAD #8 NORTH OF ROAD #9 27 ROAD #46 AT ROAD #44 28 ROAD #27 TO CULVERT 29 ROAD #37 UPGRADE 30 ROAD #3 RODNEY URBAN 31 ROAD #16 32 ROAD #19 AT HIGHWAY #401 33 ROAD #49 34 ? 35 ROBBINS BRIDGE - LEGAL 38 DINGLE STREET JOINT 39 DAYTON MILLS CULVERT ROAD #56 40 TANSLEY DRAIN CULVERT ROAD #56 LEGEND: S - SUPPLEMENTARY C - CONS'rRUCT I ON R - RESURFACING M - MAINTENANCE SU - SUBURBAN T/L - TOWNLINE *(1) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEW COST ESTIMATE $000 COST ESTIMATE TOTAL $000 TYPE 251 251 SU-R 30 281 C 30 311 C 150 461 C 411 872 C 150 1,022 C 734 1,756 C 50 1,806 M 335 2,141 R 149 2,290 SU-R 69 2,359 R 271 2,630 R 20 2,650 c-S 30 2,680 c-s 150 2,830 SU TO C 150 2,980 8U TO C ~.9UNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMEN'r ~Q!:!?TR!J_~T tON PROGRA11-.RBJ OR I TIES * ( 1 ) 1995 JANUARY 10, 1992 --------------------------------------------------------------------------~ COST COST OVERALL ESTIMATE ESTIMATE PRIORITY PROJECT $000 TOTAL $000 TYPE 31 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ROAD *16 - RESURFACING 275 275 36 FINGAL BRIDGE DECK ROAD #16 9S 370 37 ST. GEORGE STREET JOINT 30 400 41 ROAD *8 SOUTH OF HIGHWAY *3 669 1 ,069 42 ROAD *47, ROAD *48 TO AVON 500 1,569 43 ROAD #37 UPGRADE 50 1,619 44 ROAD #21 WARREN STREET 194 1 ,813 46 ROAD #3, RODNEY TO HIGHWAY #401 304 2,117 47 KAINS DECK - T/L 55 2 ,172 48 WILLYS DECK - ROAD #8 T/L 144 2,316 49 ORWELL JOINT - ROAD #35 30 2,346 50 BUCKS JOINT - ROAD #46 30 2,376 51 GROVESEND CULVERT - ROAD #42 150 2,526 52 BROOKS CULVERT - ROAD *47 150 2,676 54 ROAD #47, ROAD #48 TO AVON 324 3,000 LEGEND: S - SUPPLEMENTARY C - CONSTRUCTION R - RESURFACING M - MAINTENANCE SU - SUBURBAN T/L - TOWNLINE ~(1) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEW SU-R su-C su-c C c M R R c c c C c c c ~Q!J.tLTY._ Qf__J;;_~gJJi_RO l!Q_Q.~f2l~_RTH ENT ~Q!i~~.rJl!:!.~T.IQ!L,PROGRh.!LJ2.RLOR I TIES !.LU, 1992. JANUARY 10, 1992 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- COST COST OVERALL ESTIMATE ESTIMATE PRIORITY PROJECT $000 TOTAL $000 TYPE -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31 ROAD #16 - RESURFACING 317 317 SU-R 4S ROAD #16 - RESURFACING 83 400 SU-R 53 ROAD #28 - RECONSTRUCTION 1,395 1,795 SU TO C 54 ROAD #47 - ROAD #48 TO AVON 295 2,090 C 56 ROAD #37 UPGRADING 50 2,140 M 57 ROAD #2, WEST LORNE 500 2,640 R 59 ROBBINS BRIDGE REMOVAL T/L 100 2,740 C 60 KAINS BRIDGE JOINT T/L 30 2,770 C 61 WILLEY'S BRIDGE JOINT T/L 30 2,800 C 62 LAKEVIEW CULVERT - ROAD #42 150 2,950 C 63 SPRINGFIELD N. CULVERT - ROAD #49 150 3 ,100 C LEGEND: S - SUPPLEMENTARY C - CONSTRUCTION R - RESURFACING M - MAINTENANCE SU - SUBURBAN T/L - TOWNLINE *(1) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEW QQUNTY-9.L-gLGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT ~O~?TR~QTJON PROGRAM PRIORITIES *(1) 1997 JANUARY 10, 1992 -------------------------------------------------------.------------------- ~ COST COST OVERALL ESTIMATE ESTIMATE PRIORITY PROJECT $000 TOTAL $000 TYPE -------------------------------------------------------.------------------- 45 ROAD *16 - RESURFACING 400 400 SU-R 53 ROAD *28 - RECONSTRUCTION 935 1,335 SU/C 55 ROAD #48 - ROAD #47 TO HIGHWAY #3 860 2 , 195 C 66 ROAD #37 UPGRADE 50 2,245 M 67 ROAD #2, WEST LORNE 425 2,670 R 68 BOTHWELL BRIDGE JOINT T/L 30 2,700 C 69 BAKER-PENH ALE CULVERT - ROAD #52 150 2,850 C 70 MAC HEPBURN'CULVERT 150 3,000 SU TO C LEGEND: S - SUPPLEMENTARY C - CONSTRUCTION R - RESURFACING M - MAINTENANCE SU - SUBURBAN T/L - TOWNLINE *(1) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEW QQYJJTY__QF EL~IN ROAD DEPARTHENT CONSTRUCTIO~_ERQGRAM PRIORITIES *(1) 1998' JANUARY 10, 1992 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- COST COST OVERALL ESTIMATE ESTIMATE PRIORITY PROJECT $000 TOTAL $000 TYPE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 45 ROAD #16 - RESURFACING 258 256 SU-R 58 ROAD #16 - RESURFACING 142 400 SU-R 55/65 ROAD #48 - ROAD #47 TO HIGHWAY #3 444 844 C 64 ROAD #6 - RECONSTRUCTION 961 1,605 C 71 ROAD #43 - RECONSTRUCTION 542 2,347 C 72 ROAD #27 TO TIL 454 2,601 C 73 ROAD #37 UPGRADE 50 2,651 t1 74 GOLF COURSE CULVERT - ROAD #27 150 3,001 C LEGEND: S - SUPPLEMENTARY C - CONSTRUCTION R - RESURFACING M - MAINTENANCE SU - SUBURBAN T/L - TOWNLINE *(1) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEW QQ!lNTY_PF _ELG I N ROliP_Q~PAR'tMENT CQN~TBUCT19N PROGRA.M PR tOR I TIES * ( 1 t 1999 JANUARY 10, 1992 -------------------------------------------------------'-------------------t COST COST OVERALL ESTIMATE ESTIMATE PRIORITY PROJECT $000 TOTAL $000 TYPE -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 58 ROAD #16 - RESURFACING 400 400 SU-R 7S ROAD #23 HILL 630 1,030 c 76 ROAD #27 HILL 70 1 , 100 C 77 ROAD #37 UPGRADE 50 1 ,150 M 78 ROAD #24 - RECONSTRUCTION 1,850 3,000 c LEGEND: S - SUPPLEMENTARY C - CONSTRUCTION R - RESURFACING M - MAINTENANCE SU - SUBURBAN T/L - TOWNLINE *(1) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEW ~Q~N1~Y_~~~L9IN ROAD DEPARTMENT QQNSTRUCTION PROGRAM PRIORITIES *(12 200Q JANUARY 10, 1992 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------t COST COST OVERALL ESTIMATE ESTIMATE PRIORITY PROJECT $000 TOTAL $000 TYPE -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 58 ROAD #16 - RESURFACING 199 199 SU-R 78 ROAD #24 - RECONSTRUCTION 1 ,071 },270 c GRAND TOTAL 25,741 LEGEND: S - SUPPLEMENTARY C - CONSTRUCTION R - RESURFACING M - MAINTENANCE SU - SUBURBAN T/L - TOWNLINE *(1) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEW COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT 1992 MAINTENANCE BUDGET COUNTY AND ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS ------------------------------------ February 28, 1992 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OPERATION 1992 ESTIMATED ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROADS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COUNTY A - Bridges and Culverts B - Roadside Maintenance 1 Grass Cutting 2 Tree Cutting and Brushing 4 Drainage 5 Roadside Maintenance 6 Tree Planting Miscellaneous C - Paved Road Maintenance 1 Miscellaneous Repairs 2 Sweeping 3 Application of Shoulder Gravel 4 Surface Treatment 5 Shoulder Maintenance Including Grading 6 Machine Laid Hot Mix Patching Major Patches D - Gravel Road Maintenance 2 Grading Gravel Roads 3 Dust Control ' 4 Prime 5 Gravel Resurfacing Calcium E - Winter Control 1 Snowplowing 2 Sanding and Salting 4 Standby and Night Crew TOTAL F - Safety Devices 1 Pavement Marking Centreline 2 Signs and Signals 3 Guide Rail 4 Railroad Protection 6 Edge Marking (Pavement) -, Stump Removal $130,000 $110,000 $20,000 i 195,000 \ 15,000 /~180 ,000 280,000 270,000 ,10,000 149,000 140,000 9,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 11,000 10,000 1,000 25,000 20,000 5,000 60,000 50,000 10,000 45,000 40,000 5,000 215,000 205,000 10,000 205,000 195,000 10,000 39,000 35,000 4,000 254,000 250,000 4,000 107,000 100,000 7,000 88,000 80,000 8,000 110,000 100,000 10,000 3,000 1,000 2,000 215,000 185,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 225,000 200,000 25,000 570,000 500,000 70,000 55,000 50,000 5,000 $850,000 $750,000 $100,000 75,000 60,000 15,000 190,000 180,000 10,000 21 ,000 20,000 1,000 84,000 80,000 4,000 65,000 50,000 15,000 51 ,475 46,475 5,000 ---------- ---------- ---------- $3,517,475 $3,187,475 $330,000 ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION 1992 BUDGET A. CONSTRUCTION 1 . Replacement of Aarts Culvert, Road #25 Wellington Road Miscellaneous Land Purchase Road #25 (Wellington Road) Resurfacing and Channelization 2. 3. 4. Sub-Total Construction Design Engineering by County B. FIXED COSTS 1 .. 2. 3. Maintenance of Suburban Roads Drainage Assessments Overhead (7X of Construction and Maintenance) TOTAL 1992 SUBURBAN ROAD BUDGET Ministry of Transportation of Ontario Subsidy at 79.88X Suburban Road Expenditure LESS: County Share (50X) City Share ADD: Items Not For Subsidy (Total of $2,500 at 50X for Memberships and Conferences) ADD: Deficit from 1991 LESS: 1992 City of St. Thomas 1/2 mill excluding $1000 overpayment in 1991 Deficit to 1993 FEBRUARY 28, 1992 $143,000 5,000 245,000 393,000 19,500 $412,500 -------- -------- $330,000 5,000 52,500 $387,500 -------- -------- $800,000 -------- -------- $639,000 161 ,000 80,500 80,500 1 ,250 81 , 750 1 , 733 83,483 82,800 $683 ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO FEBRUARY 5, 1992 PAGE 1. THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION met at the Office of the Acting County Engineer at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, February 5, 1992" Present were Mr. Albert Auckland, who is the representative for the County of Elgin and Mr. Donald R. Stokes, who is the representative of the City of St. Thomas. Also in attendance was Mr. Fred Groch, the Acting County Engineer, who was also the Acting Chairman for this meeting. The Acting County Engineer provided a By-law and a letter received from the Clerk of the County of Elgin which appointed Mr. Albert Auckland to the Suburban Road Commission as the County appointee. It was recommended that this letter and By-law be included in the minutes. "MOVED BY: D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT WE APPOINT MR. RODERICK FERGUSON AS THE THIRD MEMBER OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION AS PER SECTION 65, SUB-SECTION 3 OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT ACT, R.S.O. 1980, CHAPTER 421. CARRIED. II "MOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES THAT WE APPOINT MR. RODERICK FERGUSON AS CHAIRMAN OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION FOR THE TERM OF FEBRUARY 1, 1992 TO JANUARY 31, 1993. CARRIED. II "MOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES THAT WE APPOINT MR. STOKES AS ACTING CHAIRMAN FOR THIS MEETING. CARRIED. II The Acting County Engineer read the Minutes of the meeting held on January 2, 1992. The Acting County Engineer reported that any business arising from these Minutes would be discussed during the course of the meeting. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO FEBRUARY 5, 1992 PAGE 2. "MOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 1992. CARRIED. II "MOVED BY: D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT THE HONORARIUM FOR RODERICK FERGUSON FOR THE PERIOD OF FEBRUARY 1, 1992 TO JANUARY 31, 1993 BE $175.00. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: D. R. STOKES SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT WE APPROVE THE ATTENDANCE OF THE THIRD MEMBER OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION, MR. RODERICK FERGUSON TO THE ONTARIO GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION ANNUAL CONVENTION AND THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION EXECUTIVE MEETINGS AND THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSIONS OF ONTARIO WITH THE USUAL EXPENSES, MILEAGE AND OTHER EXPENSES PAID. CARRIED." The Engineer reported receiving a letter from the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario indicating that the 1992 Ministerial Adjusted AssE~ssment for the City of St. Thomas would be $167,600,000.00. It was recommended that this correspondence be filed in the Minutes. "MOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE AND THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL THAT THE CITY OF ST. THOMAS BE REQUESTED TO CONTRIBUTE THE PROCEEDS OF A RATE OF ONE-HALF (i) MILL BASED ON THE 1992 MINISTERIAL ADJUSTED ASSESSMENT VALUE OF $167,600,000.00 PER R.S.O. 1980, CHAPTER 421 , SECTIONS 68 AND 69 (PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT ACT). THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION WILL BE $83,800.00 FOR 1992. CARRIED." ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO FEBRUARY 5, 1992 PAGE 3. The Acting County Engineer reported that this was an increase of 13.7% over 1991 and thus, it was expected that the 1992 Suburban budget would increase by approximately $100,000.00. The Acting County Engineer reported receiving miscellaneous information from the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario regarding the Freedom of Information Act. It was recommended that this information be filed. The Acting County Engineer distributed a Summary of the 1991 Expenditure on the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission for the information of the members. The Acting County Engineer reported that he would be meeting with Mr. John Dewancker, the City Engineer, on Friday, February 7, 1992 to discuss the proposed complex abutting County Road #22 and County Road #57 to addre!ss any concerns related to the Suburban Roads such as turning lanes, street lighting, drainage, curbs and gutter, etc. The Acting County Engineer reported that the 1992 Road Allocations have not yet been received from the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario. Therefore, estimates would have to be used to present a 1992 Road Budget to the County of Elgin Executive Committee by March 4, 1992 which would be addressed on March 4 and ratified by County Council on March 25, 1992. The Acting County Engineer reported that the Road Committee would be submitting a Preliminary Budget to the Executive Committee for March 4, 1992 which would include the Suburban Road Commission Budget. Should changes be required, a Suburban Meeting could be held prior to ratification by County Council so that the final budget presented to Council would be acceptable to the Suburban Road Commission. Some discussion was held regarding the status of the Ontario Suburban Road Commission Executive Meeting to be held during the Ontario Good Roads Association Convention as well as the status of the appointment of Mr. Albert Auckland as an honorary member. The Acting County Engineer indicated that he would pursue these matters further and report to the members accordingly. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO FEBRUARY 5, 1992 PAGE 4. IIMOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. CARRIED. II ~J~l~~ CHA I R~N ST. THOi"1AS SUBURBAN ROAD COt1M I 55 I ON -----------------------------------..- } ~!lt!t!B.B.~-QE._.L22.L_~~~~t!Q.l!.~8.~ Construction Maintenance Overhead Total -Subsidy by Ministry of Transportation of Ontario at 79.89% Balance after subsidy 50% payable by City of St. Thomas 50% of Items Not For Subsidy ($1,230.00) Total payable by City of St. Thomas Add: 1990 Deficit Sub-Total '=-~~~ : C i t Y 0 f St. Tho mas 1 99 1 1 /2 Mil 1 DEFICIT TO 1992 FEBRUARY 4, 1992 $361,184.24 255 ,378 . 14 56,317.20 $672,879.58 537 ,566 . 18 $135,313.40 ----------- ----..------- $ 67,656.70 615.00 $ 68,271. 70 7 , 161 . 30 $ 75,433.00 73,700.00 $ 1,733.00 ----------- ----------- ~~J (Qb ~]J ~ G.e. lEVERTON, A.M.C.T. COUNTY CLERK \ January 27, 1992 Mr. Albert W. Auckland R. R. #7 ST. THOMAS, ontario N5P 3T2 Dear Albert: 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 PHONE (519) 631-1460 FAX (519) 633-7661 Enclosed please find a copy of By-Law No. 92-3 which appoints you as a member of the st. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission for the period February 1st, 1992 to January 31st, 1995. The County extends its appreciation for past serviceE; provided and looks forward to you serving as their representative for the next three years. . Yours truly, ~~~,~~ G. C. Leverton, Clerk. GCL:sh c.c. - F. Groch COUNTY OF ELGIN ny-Law No. 92-3 "B~I~g_!\_ n y.~ IJ1\lt,_TO ~tPPOIJL~__.1.\_J!~!J,D.EtR_~~rrlJ)E: ST. ~I.IJ)HJ\n JJJU!!l.RIl~N RQ~J~J?_G9IJ!1.]Jt~L:l9N" WHEREAS Srctioll 65, Chapter P.50, of 'I'he I'ubllc Trnllri-- portation and lIiglnvny I mrn-ovcment Act providps for thp appointment of members of a SUblllh;Hl Hoads Commission; and WHEREAS onc, of the three persons on the Commission, i.s to be appointeq by COltllt-.y Council. NOH 'I'IIEHEF()Pl;; the Munlcipal Counci.l or the Cor-por.nLi on of the County of Elgin 0Jl;lCLs as follows: 1. 'l'hat 1\lbprt-. "1. l\l1ckland be, nnd 1s h~r.eby alPpointpc1 t.o the st. Thomas Suburh;)Jl Ho;,ds Commissi on for the perIoel Febrll<lry 1st, 1992 to January J 1 f~t-., 1995. 2. That By-Lnvl flo. 89-2 be and the same is herl~by repe(\led. READ a first time this 7.211d day of January, 1992. READ a second time thi~ 27.nd day of Januar.y, 1992. READ a third time and rllFl11y passed this 22nd day of January, 1992. ..~-~~~~ 7~,~ -/____ __ G. C. Leverton, Clerk. J' / / ( Z,/l /' --!J~:'!::::J.lj~--I-~~C (,. I. F. Ly lev l'larden. .o, (705) 23~-8691 (j) Ontario ~inistry ~inistere of des Transportation Transports Program and Priority Development Branch Cochrane Temilkaming Resource Centre P.O. Bag 3010, Hwy 101 South Porcupine, Ontario PON lHO )., \ 'f . '\'V: "" / December 23, 19H1 Mr. George Leverton, Clerk Treasurer County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5V1 Dear Mr. Leverton: Re: Ministerial Adjusted Assessments for Cities and Separated Towns - Pursuant to Section 68(3) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act (Suburban Roads Commissions) The 1992 Ministerial Adjusted Assessment (MAA) value for each city or separated town situated within your County is noted on the attached calculation sheet. Pursuant to Section 68(3) of the Public Transportation and ltIighway Improvement Act, the MAA must be used in determining th,e 1992 limiting . contribution of each city and separated town to its associated Suburban Roads Commission. MAA values were derived from base assessment data provided by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and have been calculated as 0,203 times the total weighted equalized assessment (where the discount factor of 0.203 simply indexes the values to their pre 1983 levels), times a growth factor which reflects the inflation rate and growth in total assessnlent, relative to 1991, Should you wish details on this growth factor, please contact either the undersigned or Paul Waterman at (705) 235-8691. I1c'~ P. C. Ginn, Manager Roads Planning Office Program and Priority Development Branch PCG/dlv Attachment cc: Engineer 'M t\ A _ft" 1.... ASSESSMENT OERIUEO fROM 1991 APPORTIONMEHT PROGRAM 90/91 I HXABlE ASSESSMENT; EQUIUALEHT ASSESSMENT fROM RESOURCE EQUALIZATION GRANT PROGRAM ElGIN SEPARATED TAXABLE TAXABLE REG PROUIHCIAl TOTAL WEIGHTED SEPARATED URBAN RES/fARM COM/BUS/IHO EQUIVALENT 3 YEAR AUG ~EQUALIZED URBAH MUHICIPALIfIES ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT EQUAl.IZ fACTOR ASSESSMENT MAA (A) (8) (C) (0) (TUEA) St ThOMaS C H226358 27046087 3121364 6.15 890971763 167,600,000 TOTAL 41,226,3SB 27,046,OB7 3,121,361 890,974,763 I 167,600,000 (0.55 * A) + B + C TUEA :: uu____u__u____ 0/100 SEPARTATEO URBAN MAA :: 0.203 * TUEA * Gf (ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST HUNDRED THOUSAND) HOTE: EQUALIZATIOH fACTORS WILL HAUE BEEH ADJUSTrD TO SOMETHING OTHER THAH THE AUERAGE Of THE GAZETTEO VALUES Of 1990, '89 AND '88, If AN AREA WIDE OR MARKET UALUE REASSESSMENT HAS BEEN UNDERl AKEN. GROIJlH fACTOR ( Gf ) REfLECTS THE IHflATIOHARV RAlE ANO THE GROWTH IN TOTAL ASSESS11EHT rOR SEr. lOUNS & CITIES,RELATIUE TO 1991. fOR 1992, Gf = 0.926 -/ · J ~ //(./ 1/ . ) J '7 \.,'-'-. I ~ g ,;'1" "--- ,y ,- ) . 7) 25 (./1(; . p Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario Commissaire ~ I'information et ~ la protection de la vie priv6e/Ontario June 5, 1992 Dear Co-ordinator, I am pleased to enclose the first issue of IPC Practices, a new publication which we hope will provide useful information for those working with the Freedom of Information and Protect:ion of Privacy Act and the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. This issue features the first release from our Appeals department. "Drafting a Letter Refusing Access to a Record" offers recommendations on what steps to take in order to prepare a proper decision letter. Included are a checklist, a sampl~~ letter and an index of records. The creation of IPC Practices is in response to nUDlerous requests from Freedom of Information and Privacy Co-ordinators who have asked for ideas on how they might streamline internal procedures to allow them to provide better service to the public. IPC Practices will be issued on a regular basis and mailed to all municipal and provincial Co-ordinators included ()n our mailing list. Feel free to make photocopies for anyone else in your organization who you feel might find the informatic)n helpful. Future issues will cover a variety of topics such as "Mediation: What an Institution Can Expect," "Compliance Investigation Procedures" and "Third Party Commercial and Personal Information." IPC Practices is published with your needs in mind and I hope you find it interesting and practical. I welcome your 1:houghts on how we might make it better, as well as your suggestions for topics that could be addressed in future issues. If you have any comments about IPC Practices or any other IPC publication, please contact Sarah Jones, Manager of Communications. Yours truly, tfj~ A! rrV'^ '(.) jTom Wright Commissioner Encl. ~ 80 Bloor Street West, Suite 1700, Toronto, Ontario M5S 2V1 80, rue Bloor ouest Bureau 1700 Toronto (Ontario) M5S 2V1 416-326-3333 1-800-387-0073 Fax/TelEk: 416-325-9195 ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JANUARY 2, 1992 PAGE 1. THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION met at the Office of the Acting County Engineer at 10:00 a.m., Thursday, January 2, 1992. All members were present. The Engineer read the Minutes of August 9, 1991. The Engineer reviewed the contents of the Minutes and updated the members on the status of all 1991 construction and maintenance projects. The Engineer reported that he felt that the 1992 Budget would be similar to the 1991 Budget and it was felt that the Suburban Road system would not require changes in 1992. The Engineer reported that a letter had been written to the Ontario Suburban Road Commission Association nominating Mr. Albert Auckland as an Honorary Member. No reply had been received to date. "MOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND i SECONDED BY: R. FERGUSON THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1991 BE APPROVED. CARRIED." CORRESPONDENCE: The Engineer reported that the following correspondence had been addressed to the Suburban Road Commission. 1. Miscellaneous information from the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (Freedom of Information Act). It was recommended that this correspondence be filed. 2. From the Ministry of Municipal Affairs; a manual entitled "Municipal Conflict of Interest Review". It was recommended that this information be filed. 3. A letter from the City of St. Thomas regarding the appointment of Mr. Donald R. Stokes as the 1992 - 1995 St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission appointment. It was recommended that this correspondence be included with the Minutes. ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JANUARY 2, 1992 PAGE 2. COUNTY OF ELGIN SUBURBAN COMMISSION APPOINTMENT: The Engineer read a resolution dated December 18, 1991 from the County of Elgin Road Committee recommending to County Council that Mr. Albert Auckland be appointed to the Suburban Road Commission for the term of February 1, 1992 to January 31, 1995. It was recommended that this resolution be included in the Minutes. The Engineer reported that this appointment would be addressed at the January 22, 1992 County Council Session. 1991 CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE SUMMARY: The Engineer provided the most recent summary of statements for costs incurred for construction and maintenance in the Suburban ~)ads system in 1991. The Engineer reported that although the figures were not complete he felt that the final adjustments would leave the Commission with a slight balance or deficit. "MOVED BY: R. FERGUSON SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT THE MEMBERSHIP FEE FOR THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION OF ONTARIO FOR 1992 BE PAID. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: R. FERGUSON SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT THE MEMBERSHIP FEE FOR THE ONTARIO GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION FOR 1992 BE PAID. CARRIED." "MOVED BY: D. FERGUSON SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND THAT WE NOMINATE ROBERT G. MOORE, COUNTY ENGINEER FOR ~HE ONTARIO GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION LONG SERVICE CERTIFICATE IN RECOGNITION OF HIS LONG SERVICE TO THE ROAD INDUSTRY IN THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO AS WELL AS IN THE COUNTY OF ELGIN. CARRIED." ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO JANUARY 2, 1992 PAGE 3. Commission member, Mr. Donald R. Stokes indicated to the Engineer that a suitable date for the meeting of the new Commission would be on Wednesday, February 5, 1992 at 10:00 a.m. The Engineer reported that he would be the Acting Chairman to start this meeting and he would take this date into account. "MOVED BY: A. AUCKLAND SECONDED BY: D. R. STOKES THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. CARRIED." /,"} /(;/ ~." ~:r CHAIRMAN ."1 .~,~ ~~:. \'< ~ ~ Ministry : . .' . , of c.W. Transportation Ontario Ministere des Transports I) (", I, \ sA') ,.\ (705) 235-8691 Roads Transportation Office Cochrane Temiskaming Resource Centre P.O. Bag 3010, Hwy 101 South Porcupine, Ontario PON IHO December 23, 1992 Mr. George Leverton Clerk Treasurer County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive S1. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5Vl Dear Mr. Leverton: Re: Ministerial Adjusted Assessments for Cities and Separated Towns - Pursuant to Section 68(3) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act (Suburban Roads Commissions) The 1993 Ministerial Adjusted Assessment (MMA) value for each city or separated town situated within your county is noted on the attached calculation sheet. Pursuant to Section 68(3) of the P,:!blif Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, the MMA must be used in determining the 19931imiting contribution of each cityiand separated town to its associated suburban roads commission. I MMA values were derived from based assessment data provided by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and have been calculated as 0.203 times the total weighted equalized assessment (where the discount factor of 0.203 simply indexes the values to their pre 1983 levels), times a growth factor which reflects the inflation rate and growth in total assessment, relative to 1991. Should you wish details on this calculation, please contact the undersigned. ~Yt:2~ P. A. Waterman Head, Program Management Roads Transportation Office Program Development Branch PAW/cmk Attach. cc: Fred Groch Made from recovered materials Fait de materiaux recuperes ... 055[SSi~Et!f DERIIJEO fROM 1 992 npPlJRT!m;~E!n PRQ~N1. q1/q? TAIlAllt r A~~r~~:1n1T ~ rl1llTllAl nIT Ar,r,r~q1nlT FQI1H --r -.. . .......-- ..--....-..-....,. ......-.. ....--...... ....---......-..... .. ...-.. R[SUUF.C[ EQUHuznnmt GRRtn PRGGRm1 ELGltI SEPARRTEO TAXABLE TAXABLE REG PRGUI lIeI RL TOTAL UEIGHTEO SEPRRRT[D URBAN RES/fARM COM/BUS/I 110 EQUIUHlEllT 3 VEAR RUG EQUAU ZEO URBRN ilUIHCIPALITIES ' A5SES5tlElH ASSESS!tElIT ASSE5SilEHT EQUALIl fACTOR RSSE5SltEllT MAA (A) (8) (C) (0) (TUEA) 5l ThoMas C ~7110223 25112592 3322989 6.15 883678108 167,500,000 TOT AL 17,110,223 25,112,592 3,322,989 883,678,100 "Y}.~J';SOO,OOO (0.55 * H) I B t C TlJEA = ------------------ 0/100 SEPARATED URBAN MAR = 0,203 II TUEA 1I Gf (ROUtlOEO TO THE NERREST HUllOREO THOUSRND) IIOT[: EQUALIZRTION fACTORS WIll HAUE BEEtI ADJUSTED TO SQMETHIHG OHlER THAN THE AVERAGE Of THE GAZETTEO UALUES Of 1991, '90 ANO '89, If AN ARER WIDE OR MRRKET UAlUE REASSESSMElIT HAS BWI UHOERTRKEH. GROWTH fACTOR ( 6f ) REflECTS THE IHflATIOHARV RATE RUO THE GROOm III TOTAL ASSESS11EHT fOR SEP, TO'JII5 & CITIES,RElATIUE TO 1991. fOR,,'i1993, GL = 0.931 ,'1 ~~~'~-;;\ ~inistry \~ ~:ansportation Ontario Ministere des Transports (705) 235-8691 Roads Transportation Office Cochrane Temiskaming Resource Centre P.O. Bag 3010, Hwy 101 South Porcupine, Ontario PON IHO December 23, 1992 ['i') r[(~;C~ iT{1 lfl'II'\I' .. \ "~'" "t,.. f'" . ",~.::f' ,J~;N 4 t99j Mr. George Leverton Clerk Treasurer County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5VI CmmTY OF EUHN cunK'S OFr!!:E Dear Mr. Leverton: Re: Ministerial Adjusted Assessments for Cities and Separated Towns - Pursuant to Section 68(3) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act (Suburban Roads Commissions) The 1993 Ministerial Adjusted Assessment (MMA) value for each city or separated town situated within your county is noted on the attached calculation sheet. Pursuant to Section 68(3) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, the MMA must be used in determining the 1993 limiting contribution of each city and separated town to its associated suburban roads commission. MMA values were derived from based assessment data provided by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and have been calculated as 0.203 times the total weighted equalized assessment (where the discount factor of 0.203 simply indexes the values to their pre 1983 levels), times a growth factor which reflects the inflation rate and growth in total assessment, relative to 1991. Should you wish details on this calculation, please contact the undersigned. Yours Indy,. I") ~~~ P. A. Watennan Head, Program Management Roads Transportation Office Program Development Branch Letter 1#. .l:?~. . . . o Filed ~~.o... PAW/cmk ..........."... Attach. ~~11 ~ r'll' r.......-. · . . . J. . ~ J 9~ . · · · . cc: Fred Groch Made from recovered materials Fait de materiaux recuperes "~~(SSM[MT OEP.!I.lEO fRIJt! 1 g92 nrrOp.Hm!MEMT PRQ;RRM 91/92 lflRflBH flSS[s.s.~nH; rQm:lJ~lENt flS~[S.Sf1[HI fRUM RESnURlT EQURUZRnON GRRNT PROGRAM H.G!N SErnp.RTED TOXROlE TRXRBLE REG PROUItICIRl TOTRl UnGHTfO SrPRRRT[lJ URBAN RES/fARM CON/BUS/INO EQUIUmIHI 3 VERR RUG EQlJRLIZ(O URBAN MUtUnPRLIT IES RSSESSMENT RSSESSMENT RSSESstlEHT EQURUl fACTOR ASSESSMENT MAR (R) (B) (C) (0) (TUrA) st ThoMas C 171lO223 25112592 3322999 6.15 983678109 167,500,000 TOTAL 17,110,223 25,112,592 3,322,989 883,678,109 167,500,000 (0.55 l! R) ~ 0 ~ C TUEA 0/100 SEPARATED URBAN MRA'" 0 .203 * TUfA * 6f (ROIJHOED TO THE NEAREST HutlOREO THOUSRNO) NOTE: EQURLIZRTION fRCTORS YIlL nRUE BEEH RDJUSTrD TO SOl1HHIN6 OTHER THAt! HIE RUrRRGE Of THE 6AznTEO VALUES or 1991, '90 AHO '89, If AN RRER UIU[ OR MRRKn URLUE RERSSES5t!EHT HAS BEEN UNOERTAKEN. GROUTH fACTOR ( 6f ) REflECTS HIE IHflRTIOHRRV RATE RHO THE GROOm IN TOTAL ASSESSMENT fOR SEP. TOIJNS & CIlI[S,RElRTIUE TO 1991. roR 1993, Gf :: 0.931 CLAYTON WATTERS. BASe., PEng. Assistant County Engineer 450 SUNSET DRIVE S1. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 FAX NO. 1-519-633. 7661 FRED GROCH. BASe" M,Eng., PErlg. Engineer and Road Superintendent November 18, 1992 Mr. R. A. Barrett, City Administrator Department of Administrative Services City of St. Thomas P.O. Box 520 St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3V7 Dear Bob: Re: St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission As per your request, please find enclosed a Suburban road map with the 1992 construction program. FG:pg Enc. YOU~S tjruI1J' lOw< 1 -1CD-~1 FRED GROCH, B. A. Sc., M. Eng ., lY .Eng . ENGINEER AND ROAD SUPERINTENDENT .':'" ~.=f' ~1.!._It!.Q.tlB.~_?.y.!!y.8.~B.f.i_8.Q.B.Q._Q.Q.t!t!!.~~!.Q.f.i REPORT October 29, 1992 TO THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION: ~The st. Thomas Suburban Road Commission has control over the following .' . roads (Slnce June 29, 1992): 1. Road #16 from County Road #45 (Middlemarch) to the st. Thomas boundary. 2. Road #22 <Fairview Avenue) from the south limit of the City of st. Thomas to the north limit of County Road #27. 8. ROdd #25 <Wellington Road) from the north limit of Highway #4 to County of Middlesex boundary being the centre of the road allowance between the Townline of Westminster and the Township of Yarmouth. 4. Road #26 <St. George Street) from the City of st. Thomas boundary (Kettle Creek) to the east limit of County Road #25. 5. Road #28 from the south limit of Highway #3 to the north limit of County Road #45. 6. Road #30 from the City of St. Thomas boundary to the County of Middlesex being the centre of the road between the Township of Yarmouth and the Town of Westminster. 7. Road #31 from the City of st,. Thomas boundary to the south limit of County Road #52. 8. Road #56 (Elm Street) from the boundary of the Cit)! of st. Thomas easterly to the west limit of County Road #36. 9. Road #57 (Southdale Road) from the east limit of Highway #4 to the west limit of County Road #22. The County of Elgin has completed resurfacing and channelization on County Road #25 north of the Highway #3 by-pass to and including channelization at the intersection of County Road #52 c~nd County Road #25. included in the above work was the replacement of a structural steel plate culvert with a precast concrete culvert. Also completed in 1992 were channelization and paving at the intersection of County Road #25 and the 11th Concession Road of the Township of Y~rmouth. In 1992 the section o~ Cpunty Road #lG from County Road #45 to the Hdmlet of Fingal was reverted to the County System enabling the County to resurface this section of road. Other than normal maintenance work, very little maintenance was required this year in areas of bridge and culvert repair, surface treatment, shoulder ma~ntenance, gravel resurfacing and roadside maintenance. This led to d surplus in the Maintenance Budget which was used in the Construction Budget to carry out additional work on County Road #25. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION 'l~Q.'lI_=-_Q.~IQ.~~fl_s.~.L_t~~L_____---- PAGE 2. In 1992, the Drainage Assessment was paid for the Wardle Drain located north of the railway tracks on County Road ~25 in the Township of Yarmouth. In 1992, some road widening was purchased on County Road ~57 (Southdale Road) and on County Road #28 (Centennial Avenue). Several discussions have been held with the Consultant, Cyril J. Deme~~re Limited, regarding the proposed sports/educational complex. Improvements to County Road #22 <Fairview Avenue) and County Road #57 (Southdale Road) have been agreed to by the Consultant. Middlesex County has completed the construction of Hubrey Road and this has led to an increase in traffic on County Road #30 (Radio Road) · Although the 1993 road program has not been discussed with the County of Elgin Road Committee, it would appear that the most serious need for the Suburban Commission in 1993 would be the continuation of the completion of resurfacing and channelization on County Road #25 particularly between St. George Street and Highway #4. The replacement of a structural steel plate culvert on Elm street (County Road #5&) may also have to be considered. In 1992, the use of a mulching machine was used to remove stumps on lawns in road allowances and calcium chloride was used on Centennial Avenue rather than prime or brine. At this point in time, it appears that these methods are providing positive results from a servicing and costing point of view. . At this time, it appears that expenditures on the Suburban Road Commission will be close to the budget proposed at the beginning of the year. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED ~' . f) ~./'U'''/~'-k ---------------------------------------- FRED GROCH, COUNTY ENGINEER Corporation of the County of Elgin No .. .. (j) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. THAT WE ADOPT THE MINUTES OF THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION MEETING OF ~ JUNE 3, 1992. . ." f - ~-(~ I~ ~== Corporation of the County of Elgin No ..@. ............ . Seconded by h~~ c:.'i. .. .~, OCTOBER 16, 1992 cd, f 12{ ~>_._----------- -".. ;<'. ~~,,:::;:r~,. ~"'<.,~",,,. . "~,,-,,.-l.? " -J Moved by THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. ~ k2f /~ 7.. j, -' ~ -~ -----..- - dJuJ @ ~inistry ~inistere of des W Transportation Transports Ontario 659 Exeter Road (Hwy. #135) Box 5338, London, ,Ontario N6A 5H2 (519) 681-1441 July 2, 1992 Mr. Fred Groch, P. Eng. County Engineer County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive ST. THOMAS, Ontario N5R 5Vl Dear Sir: 0: St. Thomas Suburban Roads .Resolution Da~ Jun ~ 1992 The above noted resolution has been duly signed and approve:d by our Regional Director, Mr. Richard Puccini. I have attached the original approval for your records. Yours truly ~ ;; '\ "// /' .,.1-" :I , (' i,.I,."....~ // V .-J~.rf" LE. Stock Senior Municipal' Supervisor District #2, London Made from recovered materials Fait de materiaux recuperes LGROCH 13.RES ~ Ontario ~inistry ~inistere of des Transportation Transports 659 Exeter Road, P.O. Box 5338 LONDON, Ontario - N6A 5H2 Telephone: (519) 681-1441 June 29, 1992 Mr. F. Groch Engineer for the St. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive st. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5V1 Dear Mr. Groch: St.Thomas Suburban Roads Commission Designation as Suburban Roads Commission Resolution Dated June 3, 1992 --------.------------------------------- Please be advised that ptirsuant to Section 66 of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P50 as amended, that as the Minister's designee I hereby approve st. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission Resolution dated June 3, 1992. A copy of the approved Commission Resolution is attached for your records. Yours truly, ~"'-/ , ,/,.:::~~~ ,_' c' ,- ' ....,.. ~,... ,-if'" //:::' ",>" ..",..., "" ,// ''/ /" ...-C- R. Puccini, P. Eng. Regional Director Southwestern Region, London KWB:120:kb Encl. cc: P. Ginn, Att'n: C. G. Kirk W. Simms Made from recovered materials Fait de mat~riaux r~cup~res ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COftt1ISSION SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND D. R. STOKES "MOVED BY: THAT THE DESIGNATION AS A SUBURBAN ROAD OF THE FOLLOWING ROAD IS HEREBY REVOKED EFFECTIVE WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION OF ONTARIO. (A) ROAD #16 FROM COUNTY ROAD #45 (MIDDLEMARCH) TO COUNTY ROAD H20 (FINGAL), A DISTANCE OF 6.29 KMS. CARRIED." R. FERGUSON, CHAIRMAN I, FRED GROCH, SECRETARY AND ENGINEER TO THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE IS A CERTIFIED COpy OF A RESOLUTION PASSED ON JUNE 3, 1992 BY THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION. DATED JUNE 3, 1992 tRE~R~ER TO TAE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION "7./ ";/),)'(:1 /' :: ~~c " .~;::7 ,/ ~/~e> - _ ' .' i, 'l'- t' ~ ,~':. } ;,.. ~1~_I~Q~~~~~~~~~~~_~Q~Q_~Q~~IS~lQ~ AGENDA ------ EJ3.IQeY.1._Q~TO~~~_!~.J.._!~~g_e!'_lQ : OQ_a~.~ ~VAdoPtion of Min,ut,es..A" .JL l!5Y ~ # -;) .,;- t/'7 ~ j/'1:. t/'1992 ConstrUftio, n, and ,Maintenance Program Status (E:?nc,lo,sure>. ) " \.. recJ( f.t- 4:"';- .J- t?? ,/\&I ~ -{ ~-o J' -9- }/ t.' I' It!. J ".4..../j? ~ h.. v'3. Correspondence., /f-t[..pa · Vb. Ministry of Transportation of Ontario regarding Road #16. vc. ~'. Ontario Good Roads Association regarding February 21-24, 1993 Co n f er e nc e. 10 g 'V-\.) f2O"d tJ f::..{1tY/ Cyril Demeyere regarding Sports/Education Complex. ~ ;:J, /tJ, \f/. Ministry of Transportation of Ontario regarding Road #25 railway c l- 0 S sin Q, . ~" .. ~ tf"Z... ~ ~ S. ,4 oJi(.~~ '-j/ -:;,)-<$ -- Adjournment. c. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION OCTOBER 8 'I 1992 (A) MAINTENANCE BUDGET FORECAST TO YEAR END ITEM A B B B B B B C C C C C C D D D D D E E E F F F F F F Bridges and Culverts 1 2 4 5 6 Grass Cutting Tree Cutting Drainage Roadside Maintenance Tr'ee Planting Miscellaneous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pavement Repairs Sweeping Shoulder JAJ Surface Treatment Shoulder Grading Machine Laid Asphalt 2 3 4 5 Grading Brine Prime Gravel Resurfacing Calcium 1 2 4 Snowplowing Salting and Sanding Standby 1 2 3 4 6 7 Centreline Painting Signs Guide Rail Ii.. R II Pro t e c t ion Edge Painting Btump Removal ESTIMATED BALANCE OF MAINTENANCE BUDGET EST I t11~ TED BALANCE $13,000 ($3,000) ($3,000) ($2,000) $5,000 $1 ,000 $5,000 ( $ 3 ,000) $0 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $11,000 ($1 ,000) $2,000 $,2 ,000 $27.,000 $3 ,"000 $0 $13,,000 (~.3, 000) ~;5 ,000 ~;8 ,000 $1,000 $0 $5,000 ~;3 ,000 $109,000 -------- -------- ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION OCTOBER 8, 1992 MAINTENANCE AND CONSTRUCTION BUDGET FORECASTS PAGE 2. (B) CONSTRUCTION BUDGET FORECAST TO YEAR END ITEM ESTIMATED BALANCE 1 . Road #25 Resurfacing ($8l/. ,000) 2. Aarts Culvert Replacement ($21.,000) 3. Drainage Assessment $E~ ,000 4. Engineering $0 5. Land Purchase $0 ESTIMATED BALANCE OF CONSTRUCTION BUDGET ($10a,000) -------- --,------- SUMMARY Estimated Maintenance Surplus Estimated Construction Over~xpenditure $109,000 ($103,000) Estimated Balance to Year End $6..~ 000 -~~--~-- -------- 1. Consider some resurfacing on Road #16 east of Middlemarch. 2. Consider removing knoll on Road #28 south of Southdale. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ---------------------------------~- AGENDA ~~IQ~y~_QgTO~~~_!~~_l~~g_~I_!Q:OO A~~ 1. Adoption of Minutes. 2. 1992 Construction and Maintenance Program Status (enclosure). 3. Correspondence. a. Ministry of Transportation of Ontario regarding Road #16. b. Ontario Good Roads Association regarding February 21-24, 1993 Conference. c. Cyril Demeyere regarding Sports/Education Complex. d. Ministry of Transportation of Ontario regarding Road #25 railway crossing. 4. Adjournment. J' SUBURBAN ROADS COMMISSION ASSOCIATION" 1992 - 1993 ANNUAL DUES Commission Amount Class 1991 CQunty Population I, of City or Sep. - Town Chatham $25 B 42,800 Kent London $65 E 302,679 " Middlesex , Owen Sound $25 B 20,809 Grey Stratford $25 B 27,311 Perth St Marys $19 A 5,482 Perth St Thomas I v $25 ) B 29,558 . Elgin --- Windsor $40 D 190,954 Essex Barrie $30 C 60,870 Simcoe Orillia $25 B 24,062 Simcoe Guelph $30 C 85,625 Wellington Belleville $25 B 35,169 Hastings Brockville $25 B 21,207 Leeds and Grenville Gananoque $20 A 4,988 Leeds and Grenville Prescott $20 A 4,189 Leeds and Grenville Smiths Falls $20 A 9,235 Leeds and Grenville Cornwall $25 B 46,619 Stormont, Dundas' and , Glengarry Kingston $30 C 60,930 Frontenac Pembroke $25 B 13,379 Renfrew Peterborough $30 C 67,823 Peterborough Trenton $25 B 16,065 Northumber- land Smiths Falls $20 A 9,235 Lanark Corporation of the County of Elgin No ......(j) .. .......... ...... . WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 Seconded by I I THAT WE ADOPT THE MINUTES OF THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION MEET~NG DATED I I MARCH 2, 1992. ~ Moved by I I 1 ~ - + I I 1 ~ I r : Corporation of the County of Elgin No ...@............. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 Moved ~ ~~ Seconded bY-/ . Z-- ..~\ ~@ THAT THE DESIGNATION AS A SUBURBAN ROAD OF THE FOLLOWING ROAD IS HEREBY REVOKED EFFECTIVE WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION OF ONTARIO. (A) ROAD #16 FROM COUNTY ROAD #45 (MIDDLEMARCH) TO COUNTY ROAD #20 (FINGAL), A DISTANCE OF 6.29 KMS. Corporation of the County of Elgin No .W.. .. .. .. .. .. . Seconded by WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 ~ ~~ Moved by - THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. f AfAAI1 '1, e COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES RE: SUBURBAN ROAD SYSTEM JUNE 5, 1992 Please be informed that effective June 3, 1992 County Road #16 between Fingal and Middlemarch has been reverted from a Suburban Road to a County Road. FRED GROCH COUNTY ENGINEER FRED GROCH, BASe., M.Eng" P.Eng. Engineer and Road Superintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE S1. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 FAX NO. 1-519-633-7661 CLAYTON WATTERS, BASe., PEng, Assistant County Engineer June 3, 1992 Ministry of Transportation of Ontario P.O. Box 5338 London, Ontario N6A 5H2 Attention: Mr. Wayne Simms District Municipal Engineer Gentlemen: Re: St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Change in Suburban Road System The St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission at a meeting on June 3, 1992 passed the attached resolution for which we request approval of the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario. We are enclosing two copies of a map showing the revised Suburban Road Commission System. Yours truly, FG:pg Enc. "" ?tJJ /./' .'1 C. p~.~jJ . FRED GROCH, B. A. Sc. II M. Eng ., P. Eng . ENGINEER AND ROAD SUPERINTENDENT Sf. TIIOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION "MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: A. AUCKLAND D. R. STOKES THAT THE DESIGNATION AS A SUBURBAN ROAD OF THE FOLLOWING ROAD IS HEREBY REVOKED EFFECTIVE WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION OF ONTARIO. (A) ROAD #16 FROM COUNTY ROAD #45 (MIDDLEMARCH) TO COUNTY ROAD #20 (FINGAL), A DISTANCE OF 6.29 KMS. CARRIED. II R. FERGUSON, CHAIRMAN I, FRED GROCH, SECRETARY AND ENGINEER TO THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE IS A CERTIFIED COpy OF A RESOLUTION PASSED ON JUNE 3, 1992 BY THE ST. TIIOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION. DATED JUNE 3, 1992 FRED GROCH, SECRETARY AND ENGINEER TO THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 AT 10:00 A.M. V 2 .t/1:orrespondence. .~ .45.eMcR~ ~. ~ounty of Essex re: Area Meeting, June 17, ,/ ~. vCity of St. Thomas re: 1992 Budget. t,../o ~bunty of Middlesex re: Report submitted by John Brant for the Greater London Area Arbi trat,o r." ' , ," ~ " ,',.. _ ,Jk ".11 fl ffr ~~ '- 5/'t\ V1 d I s P /,c/ H 5',,9 ': vr{' I~ v r,-~'-4 ., ' J '. , .3 (.,.,/3. vWOrk To Date. eft fA'-,T ~ .---- / " . ;.f---:.; # 4f"~C ;- c / b . ~~) j(f)~) ~ v"4.4reedom of Information Act Correspondence. --r., 6' <-1.,"-,>> . ~ 1Jfl~' C,w.... ~. ~ ./ P. f.' Ej2-JZ'~~~w 1992, Windsor ~/ . (j) 1. vAciOPti on of March 2, 1992 Mi nutes . (J) 5. 1./1992 County of Elgin Road Resurfacing Program. ~ 6. v1Idjournment. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992 AT 10:00 A.M. 1. Adoption of March 2, 1992 Minutes. 2. Correspondence. a. County of Essex re: Area Meeting, June 17, 199~~, Windsor b. City of St. Thomas re: 1992 Budget. c. County of Middlesex re: Report submitted by John Brant for the Greater London Area Arbitrator. 3. Work To Date. 4. Freedom of Information Act Correspondence. 5. 1992 County of Elgin Road Resurfacing Program. 6. Adjournment. ....' CORPORA liON OF THE COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX WARDEN'S OFFICE TELEPHONE - 434-73 TOLL FREE - 1-800-265-59 .JJ~~ (r~~ ---.-_.~---.------- MIDDLESEX COUNTY BUILDING, 399 RIDOUT STREET N.. LONDON, ONTARIO, N6A 2P'l St. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission c/o County Clerk 9 Gladstone Avenue ST. THOMAS, Ontario N5R 213 {,1 1.:: (.... f": R \f c:: 0 "'. '~ ~,.",{! !'." ~. fr,,,, !\pn ~~9 199i Dear Sir: I~ "~ S "{' ).., A ('1 L :::~.. ~.." .~..'... ..""- " '~~' On March 30, 1992, the Greater London Area Arbitrator, John Brant, submitted his report recommending his solu.tions to the on going annexation bid by the City of London of portions of local municipalities in the County of Middlesex. The Arbitration process disappointing. and its resul ts were very Of particular interest, Mr. Brant is recommE~nding that the Ci.ty's commitment to our suburban roads system will cease after a 10 year period. The principle of a suburban roads system is that an urban centre contribute financially to the construction and maintenance of the major arterial roads leading into the urban centre. The traffic flowing to and from the urban centre creates the demands and costs on the road systems. Th.e same traffic provides the urban centre with its economic prosperity. It is in the interest of the urban centre that well planned and maintained roads link it with the surrounding area. I request your endorsation of the County's opposition to this recommendation. If you support our opposition pllease advise the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and your localM. P. P. ' s. If you require further information please call our County Office at 434-7321. Yours truly, lct. ./ FG/kb Frank Gare Warden Middlesex County Corporation of the County of Elgin No ........................... TUESDAY, MAY 12, 1992 J Moved by Seconded by PETER J. LEACK, A.M.C.T. City Clerk Office of the Clerk P.O. Box 502, City Hall St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3V7 Telephone (519) 631-1680 Fax (519) 633-9019 ~orporation of the Cjty of St. Thomas ~~@ffiUW~~ MAY 4 1992 COUNTY OF ELGIN ClERK'S OFFICE April 30th, 1992 Mr. G. C. Leverton, Clerk St. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive ST. THOMAS, Ontario N5R 5Vl Re: 1992 Budget Dear Mr. Leverton: Please be advised that the Coun6il of the City of St. Thomas passed the following resolution pertaining to the 1992 budget for the St. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission: "THAT: The Levy of the St. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission on the City of St. Thomas for the year 1992, be approved in the amount of $83,800.00 and further that the 1992 budget estimates of the Commission be approved.", Should you have any questions in this regard, pleasE~ advise. P.'.]. Leack City Clerk PJL/mlv cc: Mr. R. A. Barrett, city Administrator Mr. J. Gubinczki, City Treasurer Letter ,. ~ . . . . o Filed tiS Referred to .If:~: .-t;'l.~ . . . . . ............... CopJTo ~: c',e" (-1-1' \.............. r17,4 "-1' / Y/, f' ~ ............... > ~ (Q) g G.C. LEVERTON, A.M.C.T. COUNTY CLERK 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 PHONE (519) 631-1460 FAX (519) 633-7661 April 16, 1992 Mr. Rod Ferguson R. R. #2 ST. THOMAS, ontario N5P 3S6 Dear Sir: Elgin County Council wishes to extend an invitation to you to have lunch with them at their May 20th, 1992 Session. Please arrange to be at the County Administration Building, 450 Sunset Drive, st. Thomas, at 12:00 noon. Yours truly, .~~^~/ G. C. Leverton, Clerk. GCL:sh c.c. - F. Groch ? .~] -.. ./ [QL.:J g g G.C. LEVERTON, A.M.C.T. COUNTY CLERK April 16, 1992 Mr. Albert W. Auckland R. R. #7 ST. THOMAS, ontario N5P 3T2 Dear Sir: 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 PHONE (519) 631-1460 FAX (519) 633-7661 Elgin County Council wishes to extend an invitation to you to have lunch with them at their May 20th, 1992 Session. Please arrange to be at the County Administration Building, 450 Sunset Drive, st. Thomas, at 12:00 noon. Yours truly, .~ )4,..-../ G. C. Leverton, Clerk. GCL:sh c.c. - F. Groch ~J V ~ g g G,C. lEVERTON, A.M.C.T. COUNTY CLERK 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 PHONE (519) 631-1460 FAX (519) 633-7661 April 16, 1992 Mr. Don Stokes 19 Paulson Court ST. THOMAS, ontario N5R 1N1 Dear Sir: Elgin County Council wishes to extend an invitation to you to have lunch with them at their May 20th, 1992 Session. Please arrange to be at the County Administration Building, 450 Sunset Drive, st. Thomas, at 12:00 noon. Yours truly, ~..~ G. C. Leverton, Clerk. GCL:sh c.c. - F. Groch Corporation of the County of Elgin No .....W. .............. . Seconded by THAT WE ADOPT THE MINUTES OF THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION MEETING DATED FEBRUARY 5, 1992. ~-k?I Corporation of the County of Elgin No ....Jy........... MARCH 2, 1992 Seconded by Moved by THAT WE APPROVE THE EXPENDITURE OF $25.00 AS A CONTRIBUTION TO PURCHASE A GIFT FOR THE RETIRING SECRETARY-TREASURER OF THE ONTARIO SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION, MR. ALLAN HOLMES WHO HAS TAKEN UP ANOTHER POSITION. r J/ Corporation of the County of Elgin ~ No ........................... MARCH 2, 1992 Moved bY~-~ Seconded by - Clv,-~- THAT THE BUDGET OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION IN THE AMOUNT OF $800,000.00 AS DETAILED IN THE FEBRUARY 28, 1992 REPORT TO THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE AND THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION BE ADOPTED AND FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY OF ELGIN AND THE CITY OF ST. THOMAS FOR THEIR APPROVAL. ~~ ~F Corporation of the County of Elgin No ........................... @ Seconded by ~CH 2, 1992 th~J ~ ~ Moved by THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. CAAh~~ a ~ \... ([)1. (jJ 2. ~. ~ 4. ft) 5. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, MARCH 2, 1992 Adoption of February 5, 1992 Minutes. Gift for Allan Holmes, Secretary-Treasurer, Ontario Suburban Road Commission. O~-~ County of Elgin road Department Construction Program Priorities. 1992 Suburban Road Commission Budget. Adjournment. (h,)- /~/-e~'f ~-r/ C""____. ~ ,~, 6- \..~,....."....... ,~ tJ/~ G....-f?;Q C:l~ as;. j' 0 ... " fJ; /-. ~#~1/ W~f" e--V ~v.~ (?~ Y-, ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, MARCH 2, 1992 1. Adoption of February 5, 1992 Minutes. 2. Gift for Allan Holmes, Secretary-Treasurer, Ontario Suburban Road Commission. 3. County of Elgin road Department Construction Program Priorities. 4. 1992 Suburban Road Commission Budget. 5. Adjournment. ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION 1992 BUDGET ----------------------------------- A.' CONSTRUCTION 1 . Replacement of Aarts Culvert, Road #25 Wellington Road Miscellaneous land Purchase Road #25 (Wellington Road) Resurfacing and Channelization 2. 3. 4 . Sub-Total Construction Design Engineering by County B. FIXED COSTS 1. Maintenance of Suburban Roads 2. Drainage Assessments 3. Overhead (7% of Construction and Maintenance) TOTAL 1992 SUBURBAN ROAD BUDGET Ministry of Transportation of Ontario Subsidy at 79.88Y. Suburban Road Expenditure LESS: County Share (50Y.) City Share ADD: Items Not For Subsidy (Total of $2,500 at 50% for Memberships and Conferences) ADD: Deficit from 1991 LESS: 1992 City of St. Thomas 1/2 mill excluding $1000 overpayment in 1991 Deficit to 1993 5~ FEBRUARY 2a, 1992 $143,000 5,000 245,000 393,000 19,500 $412,500 ...----.....- -------- $330,000 5,000 52,500 -------- $387,500 ---------- -------- $800,000 -------- -------- $639,000 161,000 80,500 -------- 80,500 1,250 -------- 81 , 750 1,788 -------- 83,483 ..c>:," ,> 82,800 -------- 'bS9 1.... ~ @:::-.i ~' (b?) G.C. LEVERTON, A.M.C.T. COUNTY CLERK 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 PHONE (519) 631-1460 FAX (519) 633-7661 February 20, 1992 Mr. Peter Leack city Clerk city of st. Thomas P. o. Box 520 ST. THOMAS, ontario N5P 3V7 Dear Sir: I wish to advise that the following recommendation of the County Roads Committee was adopted by Elgin County Council at their meet- ing held February 19th, 1992: ' "That County Council instruct the Clerk to notify the city of st. Thomas that their 1992 contribution to the st. Thomas Suburban Road Commission be one-half mill based on the Ministry of Trans- portation of ontario assessment value of $167,800,000 ($83,800) as per section 68 and 69 of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, R.S.O. 1980 Chapter 421.11 This is being forwarded as an official notification that the one-half mill will be required. Yours truly, ,,~/-------~".~~ G. C. Leverton, Clerk. GCL:sh c.c. - F. Groch ~l @:J rt2) 'lS~ ~.Y tJ"'i.II' o. J> .., \ ~.' .~ t' '. .. >>0..' ;;.~ ~ :.~.If ....:A,~~ '...."';rt.:~. . G.C. LEVERTON, A,M.C,T. courn Y CLERK f'ffONF Ujl~l) (,:1111(,0 FAX (fj 19) f3:n lG(ll 1\50 SU~JSFI DrllVF :s r. THOMAS. ONTAFlIO tE, n 5 \'1 \ January 27, 1992 Mr. Albert W. Auckland R. R. #7 ST. THOMAS, ontario N5P 3T2 Dear Albert: Enclosed please find a copy of By-Law No. 92-3 which appoints you as a member of the st. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission for the period Febru~ry 1st, 1992 to January 31st, 1995. The County extends its appreciation for past service~; provided and looks forward to you serving as their representative for the next three years. Yours truly, ~~, ~.,......", G. C. Leverton , Clerk. GCL: sh. '"'' c. c. - F. ',Groch""; S I. IIIDI1()S SUBURBAN nuno COt"1Iv1 I 88 I ON _.__6_~____._____________________________ ... SLJI'11.,\"ny OF 1991 E X PEND I TURE --.-.-------------------------- Construction Maintenance Overhead \ ' ~, I " ""'" '" T8 0 bt a ~ d b M . . t f '1' '''-''''"''' t t. f U S1 Y Y 1nlS ry (J' r-anspo",",\a lion 0' Ontario at 79.8gY, ~ I "\, Balance after subsjdy '1,\, /'\ 50Y. payab 1 e by C i l y 0 f S l. Thomas' \""\ 50% of Items Not rrll' Subsidy ($1,230.00)' I I Total payable by City of st. Thom~s Add: 1990 Deficit I i Sub-Total I h~~~ : C it Y 0 f St. 'l h 0 mas 1 991 1/i2 Mil 1 DEFICIT TO 1992 I f \ , FEBRUARY 4, 1992 1; 36 1 , 1 84 . 2ft 255 ,378 . III 56,317.20 $&72,879.58 537 ,5bb . 18 $135,313.40 ----------- ----------..-... ~ 67,b5~.70 615.00 $ 68,271. 70 7 , 161 .30 $ 75,433.0(1 73,700.00 $ 1,733.00 ----------- -----------.- COUNTY OF ELGIN ny-IJaw No. 92-] ~1!}l!J~~t.)\ n Y- I, 1\tt._r:t~AJ' P oJ_tJ.r__.1\ ___'1 E~JD_EJt-'-~.Q_".1J1F1 ST...!-_'r.JIOH7\n .H.{rQJLR~J\N RQ1\P.~__G9JJUJP.~_I..QP" WIIEREJ\S Sl?(~ t~ i nil () 5, Chapter P. 50, 0 f 'I'he ruhll c Tr n Ilri-- porta t ion and II 1911\"<1 y Improvement J\ct prov .i.d0~ for the appo i II t.lTlP.1l t of members of a Sublll! \;1 Jl POi:\ds Commi~s ion; and WHEREAS on"', of the three persons on the commissIon, .i.~ to be appointeq by COl1Jl\.y Council. NO\'1 1'IIEHEFnpr;: t 110. f1unic.ipal Conllell or the Corpor<1t-..i Oil or the County of Elgin 0Jl;H~tS as follows: 1. 'l'hat J\lbrrt-. \'1. ^Hckland be, nnd i~ h0reby flppo.i.ntrrl to the st. 'I'homas SutHlrh;lll Hn;.,ds Commiss Jon f or the per .1.10(1 FelH~U<1 ry 1st, 1.992 to Januflryll ~~t, 1995. 2. 'l'hat By-I.;)\-! flo. 89-2 be and the same is hereby repe("lled. READ a first time th.i S /./.lld day of January, 1992. READ a second time th i s 7. /. ncl day of t.January, 1992. READ a third time and r.i.lFllly passed this 2211d day of January, 1992. ." <--, . ..--::J~_,"""""'~-<.--t...<-( / ~.)', ~' G. C. Lever t~()n , Clerk. /' ( (;(,'~ /~ ~l~~ (I. F. LyleV Warden. '" ROBEfH G. MOORE, 8. Sc" P. ENG, Engineer and Road Superintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE 81. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 FAX NO. 1-519-633-7661 FRED GROCH, BASe., M.Eng., PEng, Acting County Engineer February 6, 1992 Mayor and Members of the City of St. Thomas Council c/o Mr. R. A. Barrett, City Administrator Department of Administrative Services P.O. Box 520 St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3V7 Dear Mayor and Members of Council: The St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission held a meeting on February 5, 1992. Present were Mr. Albert Auckland, who is the representative for the County of Elgin and Mr. Donald R. Stokes, who is the representative for the City of St. Thomas. These two members appointed Mr. Roderick Ferguson as the third member on the Commission for a three year period. Mr. Roderick Ferguson was elected Chc.irman of the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission for 1992. The honorarium for the Commission members was set at $175.00 per annum (as in past years). The Commission passed a resolution requesting that the City of St. Thomas be notified of the t mill contribution totalling $83,800.00 which will be required for the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission system in 1992. This Resolution will be passed on to the County of Elgin Road Committee as well as County Council for official notification to the City. An accounting of the work completed in 1991 and a budget for 1992 will be forwarded in the near future when available. Yours truly, ',;? J.j) 0 " j/fc d//,,,,,--::../I(-f)dc._.._- I FRE~GROCH, SECRETARY AND ACTING ENGINEER TO THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION FG:pg c.c. Mr. G. C. Leverton County Clerk r::--------:-' ROBEHr G. MOORE, B. Sc., P. ENG, Engineer and Road Superintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 FAX NO. 1-519-633-7661 FRED GROCH, BASe.. M,Enq" P.Eng, Acling County Engineer February 12, 1992 Suburban Road Commission Association Office of the Secretary-Treasurer County of Wellington c/o Ms Elaine Ellery Administration Centre 74 Woolwich Street Guelph, Ontario NIH 3T9 Gentlemen: Re: St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission For your information the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission consists of the following personnel: Mr. Donald R. Stokes (City of St. Thomas Representative) Mr. Albert Auckland (County of Elgin Representative) Mr. Roderick Ferguson (Chairman of the St. Thomas Commission) Yours truly, FG:kab Enc. FRED GROCH, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., P.Eng. ACTING COUNTY ENGINEER P.S. Please find enclosed my personal cheque for $25.00. F.G. Corporation of the County of Elgin No ....Cl).................. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1992 .,.. P 5,~,'",".......,...~..., Moved by ,..x:;;/:"t:-;;J';'" ,..>.-:;:::::::::,:"/ Seconded by ~~~ THAT WE APPOINT MR. RODERICK FERGUSON AS THE THIRD MEMBER OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION AS PER SECTION 65, SUB-SECTION 3 OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT ACT, R.S.O. 1980, CHAPTER 421. ~~ ~~ Corporation of the County of Elgin No .. .@.................. ~Y' FEBRUARY 5, 1992 Moved by A ' ~ Seconded by , p '"." ~."'.~.. ."-=--~ THAT WE APPOINT MR. RODERICK FERGUSON AS CHAIRMAN OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION FOR THE TERM OF FEBRUARY 1. 1992 TO JANUARY 3;1. 1993. ~ ~~~ Corporation of the County of Elgin No. ...... (!!)..................... :Moved by Seconded by WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, S . 1 92 ~ . eSSlOn 9_ ,. ,~, ,,;2:.. .," '. "," . ""'"' ~ .~.-.== ..-~;""'" .. ..- .~.+"~-"'-;....."""~....,-""-'.,~,....,."'~"',......,,.~...._'" THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 1992. ~~ (/J/PJ Corporation of the County of Elgin No ..@) ................. ... WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1992 ~ Moved by -', - -- "~:-~-.,--'" .,~ Seconded by a~ THAT THE HONORARIUM FOR RODERICK FERGUSON FOR THE PERIOD OF PEBRUARY 1, 1992 TO JANUARY 31, 1993 BE $175.00. ~~~/ ,~ Corporation of the County of Elgin ~o .....~ ................. . WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1992 ~--- Moved by ._ . , '4'.,.~ Seconded by ~ THAT WE APPROVE THE ATTENDANCE OF THE THIRD MEMBER OF THE ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION, MR. RODERICK FERGUSON TO THE ONTARIO GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION ANNUAL CONVENTION AND THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION EXECUTIVE MEETINGS AND THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSIONS OF ONTARIO WITH THE USUAL EXPENSES. MILEAGE AND OTHER EXPENSES PAID. &tfj/)--(€, ~:/ ~MJ Corporation of the County of Elgin No..... [1J......... ................. :Moved by ~DAY' FEBRUARY 5, .Session 19~ Seconded by ~. ~~ THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD COMMITTEE AND THE COUNTY OF ELGIN COUNCIL THAT THE CITY OF ST. THOMAS BE REQUESTED TO CONTRIBUTE THE PROCEEDS OF A RATE OF ONE-HALF (t) MILL BASED ON THE 1992 MINISTERIAL ADJUSTED ASSESSMENT VALUE OF $167,600,000.00 PER R.S.O. 1980, CHAPTER 421, SECTIONS 68 AND 69 (PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT ACT). n -e _ L ;,4-1' "5 c(?~.f-rt'b41t'd/I') WI)/ be ';93) <gOO,c50 f?-o V /i/;;', ? ~/J/)~/ iJfd .: I .- c ~ :z: ~ ~~ CEt a ~ = \ ! ~ "". 'j -' a: . a 0 \ ill.. , a ~ ... , : 0 ~ Z :;) :I ~ ..0 ~ ro ..0 QI ro ro QI 8 :> C,) o QI ~ Ul /1' . (02. / ~@8,', ~4 ~ ~,(t) ,F .' (})6. (]) 7. @) 8. C--,,//9 · G--l0. trj 11 . 1: ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ------_-.._----------------------~------ ~'>~~ "~ ~ AGENDA ------ ~~Q~~~Q~~~_~~~~~~~~_~~_!~~g_~I_!Q~QQ_~~~~ Appointment of County Member (By-law and letter). ~/~rd-'~ MI)Vt-J KJ,. Appointment of Third Member. Appointment of Chairman. Appointment of Acting Chairman. Approval of Minutes of January 2, 1992 meeting. Honorarium for Appointed Member. Conference attendance for Appointed Member. City Contribution. Correspondence. L/A:. Miscellaneous Information from the Informatioln and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario regarding Freedom of Infor,~ ,at-.ion Act. -- ,fl" ( {? \/"i i. Ministry af Transpartat ion of Ontario regarding 1992 Ministerial Adjusted Assessment. :C-'t,.{c::[ucl'.J} V::-JV1/~'Vl, -f./3.\"?c~ St . Thomas SU,burban Roa~ JcamrQiS;;;,'a ann Summary (a ,19C,..Jl E"X, ,pend 1,,' ture. . .-. ~( -($'e-.- :?;o / .f~ e-. J ~..~S-~-~ -- ~i JL-r> f'/Ic'V\ Adjournment. ! c--R j;U~ ;;~ ~ () ;tJ=L@ CI<t V (} 1S ~~, p~ (l~~- (/ /l } 'j--~ A ~ ,1:> tL~ ~..-~ <:;~ (ZrJ ~OJ ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION ------...~------------------------------ AGENDA ------ ~~Q!:!~~.Q~~i_!:.~~fi~t!fi~_~..2._.!.2~g_~!._.!. 0 : Q.Q._~~~~ 1. Appointment of County Member (By-law and letter). 2. Appointment of Third Member. 3. Appointment of Chairman. 4. Appointment of Acting Chairman. 5. Approval of Minutes of January 2, 1992 meeting. 6. Honorarium for Appointed Member. 7. Conference attendance for Appointed Member. 8. City Contribution. 9. Correspondence. i. Miscellaneous Information from the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario regarding Freedom of Information Act. ii. Ministry of Transportation of Ontario regarding 1992 Ministerial Adjusted Assessment. 10. St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Summary of 1991 Expenditure. 11. Adjournment. ROBERT G, MOORE, R Sc., P. ENG. Engineer and Road Superintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE S1. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 FAX NO. 1-519-633-7661 FRED GROCH, BASe., M.Eng., P.Eng. Acting County Engineer January 16, 1992 Corporation of the City of St. Thomas Department of Administrative Services P. o. Box 520 City Hall St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3V7 Attention: Mr. Robert A. Barrett City Administrator Gentlemen: Re: City Contribution to Suburban Roads Commission Further to your letter dated January 9, 1992 please find a copy of correspondence dated December 23, 1991 from the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario regarding the 1992 Ministerial Adjusted Assessments as per Section 68(3) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act. Although County Council has not addressed this issue to date I would assume that they would request a 0.5 Mill contribution from the City as in previous years. In the past the City has paid the expenses for attendance by the City member on the Suburban Roads Commission to attend the Ontario Good Roads Association Annual Conference. Trusting that this letter provides adequate information for your immediate needs. Yours truly, FG:kab Enc. FRED GROCH, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., P. Eng. ACTING COUNTY ENGINEER l" ROBERT A. BARRETT, A.M.C.T., C.M.C. City Administrator Department of Administrative Services P.O. Box 520, City Hall St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3V7 Telephone (519) 631.1680 Fax (519) 633.9019 Corporation of the City of St. Thomas January 9th, 1992 Mr. R. G. Moore Secretary St. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission 450 Sunset Drive ST. THOMAS Ontario N5R 5V1 Re: 1992 Budaet Estimates Preliminary budget guidelines have. been, developed for 1992 and these are being communicat.ed to allpub~icbodies who will be making submissions tothe,Coun.cil,or will be making requisitions or levies which are to be included in the Council ' s consolidated estimates for 1992, for their consideration. Submission of your 1992 budget should be filedwit.h Mr. P. J. Leack, City Clerk, with a copy to Mr. J. Gubinczki, City Treasurer, on or before January 31st, 1992. A preliminary budget report may then be submitted for the interim review ojE the Finance and Administration Committee on February 18th, 1992. Any new or extraordinary budgetary item is to be identified and a full explanation provided in a supplementary comme!ntary to be appended to your estimates. Please give careful consideration to all items of anticipated revenue and again make notes in your detailed budget analysis indicating where improvements might be made in increasing overall revenues. The prioritization of expenditures should be not.ed on your detailed budget analys.is by assigning the numerical priorities which follow each item, together with such othE3r notes or explanations which might be helpful to you and thE3 Council in assessing the need for expenditures proposed. Expenditures are to be prioritized on the following basis: 2 1) expenditures which cons't.~tute>.afir~ commitmenh eg. debt charges and other long term financing commitments, supplementary pension payments, retirement and termination allowances, contractual commitments and other fixed and/or irrevocable expenditures; 2) expenditures which are compulsary in nature by st,ate which: (a) are not subject requisition, or to Council review eg '. education (b) are in the nature of a levy or demand subject only to a provincial appeal or review process eg. Conservation Authorities, Family and Children's Services, Public Health Act, Police Services; 3) expenditures for essential public services, thl9 reduction, constraint or elimination of which may result in a serious threat to public health, public safety, or give rise to litigation ego water supply, pollution control, garbage collection and disposal, fire and police services; 4) expenditures for essential or quasi-essential services, the reduction, constraint or elimination of which would cause undue hardship, cause damage or excessive deterioration resulting in extensive repair or replacement or seriously affect the ability of the municipality to perform essential services to a reasonable standard, eg. Social Services such as income maintenance programs, child care, home nursing services, accommodation of the elderly, maintenance and operation of physical plant; 5) non-essential but otherwise highly desirable service or programs, the curtailment or absence of which may cause some hardship, some deterioration in value, some mate!rial loss in the revenue base, ego subsidizable road E~xpenditures, maintenance of physical plant or facility; 6) non-essential services, the curtailment or termination of which might cause minor hardship, inconvenience,. discomfort, nor find public acceptance; 7) expenditures curtailment or unperceivable unacceptance. for other termination difficulty, non-essential of which will inconvenience, sel~vices , not. create discomfort the any or It is proposed that any increase in the portion of 1:he Council's budget to be raised by taxation should be within the 5%-6% maximum range exclusive of approved new programs or services.. To achieve this goal, proposed expenditures for 1992 are not to exceed 6%-7% over the approved budgetary allocation for 1991, o:r the actual 1991 expenditures, whichever is the lessor, making adjustments for 3 extraordinary expenses incurred in 1991. Any new or €!xtraordinary expenses in 1992 will require explanation and justification. Your co-operation and assistance in developing your estimates within the guidelines and submitting them within the time noted above would be most sincerely appreciated. Yours truly, R. A. Barrett, AMCT, CMC City Administrator ROBERT G. MOORE, B. Sc., P. ENG. Engineer and Road Superintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 FAX NO. 1-519-633-7661 FRED GROCH, BASe., M.Eng.. P.Eng. Acting County Engineer January 24, 1992 Mr. Roderick Ferguson R. R. #2 St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3S6 Dear Rod: Re: St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission For your information please be informed that County Council has appointed Mr. Albert Auckland as the County member on the St. Thomas Suburban Roads Commission at their January 22nd meeting. Please be informed that the Ontario Good Roads Association Annual Conference will be held on Sunday, February 23 to Wednesday, February 26, 1992 at the Royal York Hotel in Toronto. I have made an application for registration in your name for the Conference, however I have not made any arrangements for meals or for the spousal program. This can be done on your arrival in Toronto. At present I do not have a room booked for you, however I hope to obtain one from one of the Townships. I am enclosing Ontario Good Roads Association information and I would like to point out that the Annual Meeting of the Ontario Suburban Roads Commission will be held during the Conference. The first St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 5th at 10:00 a.m. when the 3rd member will be appointed and a Chairman elected. Yours truly, FG:kab Enc. FRED GROCH, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., P.Eng. ACTING COUNTY ENGINEER ROBERT G. MOORE, B. Sc., P. ENG. Engineer and Road Superintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 FAX NO. 1-519-633-7661 FRED GROCH, BASe., M.Eng" P.Eng. Acting County Engineer January 24, 1992 Mr. Donald R. Stokes 19 Paulson Court St. Thoms, Ontario N5R INI Dear Don: Re: St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Please be informed that County Council has appointed Mr. Albert Auckland as the County member on the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission at their meeting on January 22nd. For your information the Ontario Good Roads Association Annual Conference will be held on Sunday, February 23 to Wednesday, February 26, 1992 at the Royal York Hotel in Toronto. I have a room reserved for you and I have made an ~~plication for registration to this conference, however I have not made any arrangements for meals or your spouse. This could be done when you arrive in Toronto. I am enclosing Ontario Good Roads Association information and I would like to point out that the Annual Meeting of the Ontario Suburban Roads Commission will be held during the Conference. The first St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 5th at 10:00 a.m. when the third member will be appointed and a Chairman selected. Yours truly, FG:kab Enc. FRED GROCH, B. A . Sc ., M . Eng., P. Eng . ACTING COUNTY ENGINEER ROBERT G. MOORE, B. Sc" P. ENG. Engineer and Road Superintendent 450 SUNSET DRIVE S1. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 TELEPHONE (519) 631-5880 FAX NO. 1-519-633-7661 FRED GROCH, BASe., M,Eng., PEng. Acting County Engineer January 24, 1992 Mr. Albert Auckland R. R. #7 St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3T2 Dear Albert: Re: St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission Please be informed that at the January 22nd meeting County Council appointed you as the County member on the St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission. For your information the Ontario Good Roads Association Annual Conference will be held at the Royal York Hotel in Toronto from Sunday, February 23 to Wednesday, February 26, 1992. I have a room reserved for you and I have made an application for your registration to the conference. I have not made any arrangements for your spouse or meals, however these can be done when you arrive at the Hotel. I am enclosing Ontario Good Roads Association information and I would like to point out that the Annual Meeting of the Ontario Suburban Roads Commission will be held during the Conference. The first St. Thomas Suburban Road Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 5th at 10:00 a.m. when the third member will be appointed and a Chairman selected. Yours truly, FG:kab Enc. FRED GROCH, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., P.Eng. ACTING COUNTY ENGINEER .: z o i z o ~ ~~ Ii ~ : 0 ~ z ~ ~l 0) ,..... 8 '5 ~ r.n ~ rO >. '"0 rO ~ "'t$ '"0 ~ 8 :> to) o ~ ~ r.n '- Corporation of the County of Elgin No ...? l:V.................. Moved by ARY I> 1qql> THlJRSDAY, JANU ' , 17.~ !\ ~---- Seconded by THAT THE MEMBERSHIP FEE FOR THE SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION OF ONTARIO FOR 1992 BE PAID. &~ :1- #/ Corporation of the County of Elgin No .... QL............. ,'"'> d THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 1992 ~, ' ti '\ Moved by I~ Seconded by ~ . ~ THAT THE MEMBERSHIP FEE FOR THE ONTARIO GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION FOR 1992 BE PAID. .: . o .- C :II o z: ~ :;&D Ii J l ~ o ; - 0 ~ z ~ a:l 1""'4 a '5 G> rn /' /' Corporation of the County of Elgin No ...0............... ~DAY' JANUARY 2, 1992 ~ / ~ Moved by " -~V.." " Seconded by =-- "'" --- THAT WE ADJOURN TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIRMAN. ~ M/ ST. THOMAS SUBURBAN ROAD COMMISSION AGENDA THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 1992 AT 10:00 A.M~ @ 1. Minutes of the Meeting of August 9, 1991. -f~ ~l _0 K I cr cr '-;}- f-. y::~ 2 · Correspondence · -t> -..., , (l ~. .sAa~~, ~ , -. G>'~I-J't:I C- J' Y' c.-''--a. Miscellaneous I nfor-mat ion from the Information and Privacy Commissioner IOntar io (PIA). ,~;' !-.Q --'b. Municipal Conflict of Interest Review (MMA). J} r -p t;",,<:f . ~. City of St. Thomas re: 1992/1995 Commission Appointment. ~ ~Ya-~ County of Elg i n Commission Appoi ntment..-.a ~.::.r..J -, ~ r ,",,/: "A ~ c.... .. c.->'0 // . ~'4C, 1991 Construction and Maintenance :Recap. _ lLJ~ "s:;: _ --_._,_.."._._._..~...,........._"...,...~...._-_..,--~,.. Resolutions. l.",,"4 · 5. ~. OGRA Membership. ""'--'-~"",-~-~",^.,~,",~~",~,-~~",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,",-,,,,~,~"""''''""..,,,,..~..'" ~ SA... o G M - '1l ';;JC c>f f .J:>.RJ7 ll'- - ~'- --"-~._---_.......,_.." ROBERT A. BARRETT, A.M.C.T., C.M.C. City Administrator Department of Administrative Services P.O. Box 520, City Hall St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3V7 Telephone (519) 631.1680 Fax (519) 633-9019 Corporation of the City of St. Thomas October 2, 1992 Mr. Fred Groch, P. Eng., Engineer & Road Superintendent County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive ST. THOMAS, Ontario N5R 5Vl RE: Southdale Road Widening - St. Thomas/Elgin Education and Recreation Complex Dear Mr. Groch: I am advised by John Wiebe, of Cyril J. Demeyere Ltd. that you would be willing to negotiate and seek to conclude an agreement with the Hepburn's for acquisition of a 17' road widening across the full frontage of their property on the south side of Southdale Road, on the basis that the County would bear it's normal costs at standard County rates, and the City would bear the balance of costs incurred. It is our understanding that the standard County rates are $2,000.00 per acre for the lands plus $12.00 per rod fencing allowance, and that the County normally pays all legal survey costs. It is also our understanding that if road widening is granted, the Hepburn's may require an entrance culvert which would be provided by the County. Please accept this as your written authority to continue your negotiations with the Hepburn's to acquire the required right- of-way and the committment on behalf of the City Corporation to bear the additional costs incurred above those normally paid by the County of Elgin. We are anticipating that the~ Ci ty' s share of the costs would be under $5,000.00. Should you anticipate now or during the negotiations that the Ci ty I s costs might exceed that amount, I would appreciate being advised. Con t 'd . . . 2 We look forward to the successful outcome of your negotiation of this property acquisition. c.c. - J. Dewancker, P.Eng., Director of Engineering - J.D. Wiebe, P.Eng., Cyril J. Demeyere Ltd., Consulting Engineers