[0:03] all right welcome everyone to our
February 7th North Middle sex council
[0:06] meeting roll call everyone is present uh
disclose your pecuniary interest if you
[0:12] have any please forward it to our clerk
uh minutes of the previous meeting any
[0:17] uh errors or omissions business arising
from those
[0:20] minutes from the January 17th meeting
seeing none we need a motion to approve
[0:25] councel Deo councel Nera all in favor
carries thank you at this time we need
[0:31] to have a motion to adjourn to proceed
to public meeting including Committee of
[0:36] adjustment counc Erwin Deputy Mayor
hodgin all in favor Carri thank you and
[0:42] so our first item of business six
o'clock notice of public meeting to
[0:45] consider application mv-1
d224 and
[0:51] mv-2 d224 located at the old uh 132 oill
Street I believe our applicants are not
[0:59] attending this and so this time Abby go
ahead who's speaking Abby are you doing
[1:03] this
okay thank you your honor uh so the
[1:08] purpose and effect of application mv1
d224 is to seek relief from the north
[1:13] middlex zoning bylaw in order to satisfy
conditions of consent b14 2023 for the
[1:20] retained parcel the following variances
are proposed uh so the first one the
[1:26] applicants are requesting a minimum law
area of 4 8 square met whereas the R1
[1:33] Zone requires a minimum lot area of 46
Square met uh the second variance being
[1:40] requested is a front yard setback of 4.7
m to the existing dwelling whereas the
[1:46] R1 Zone requires a minimum front yard
back of six
[1:52] meters the purpose and effect of
application mv2 d224 is to seek relief
[1:57] from the North Middle zoning bylaw
also in order to satisfy conditions of
[2:02] consed b14 2023 for the severed parcel
um so the following variance is proposed
[2:09] um they are requesting a minimum lot
area of 418 square meters whereas the R1
[2:14] Zone requires a minimum lot area of 460
met the subject lands are located on the
[2:21] North northeast corner of Old Mill
Street and George Street within the
[2:25] urban settlement area of
alra the subject lands are within the
[2:29] res residential area land use
designation of the north North Middle
[2:32] sex official plan and are zoned R1
within the North Middle sex zoning bylaw
[2:38] surrounding uses are predominantly
residential in
[2:42] nature as Council may recall the
applicants are not proposing to develop
[2:46] the lands to be severed at this
time uh so I have evaluated the
[2:51] application against the for tests under
the planning act and I am satisfied that
[2:55] each test has been met for the reasons
outlined in my report in terms of agency
[3:01] comments received the County engineer
advised no comments and the manager of
[3:06] infrastructure and operations for the
municipality provided several comments
[3:10] uh that are capable of being addressed
through the the development agreement
[3:15] that is required as part of the
conditionally approved consent in terms
[3:18] of comments received from the public
none were received prior to the
[3:22] preparation of my report it is therefore
uh my recommendation that the
[3:27] application be approved subject to the
reasons outlined in my report thank you
[3:33] thank you Abby at this time I invite
anyone from the public who have comment
[3:37] on this
application seeing none uh committee is
[3:42] there questions comments on this
application none we have a
[3:47] recommendation in front of you I don't
think I need to read it it's in writing
[3:52] moveed by Council dagel seconded by
councelor Nera all in favor carried
[3:57] thank
you all next item is a public meeting to
[4:03] application B1 d224 located at
25976 King Street and I believe uh
[4:10] that's Stephen and Paula Morrison are
they here would you like to come
[4:17] up have your have your
[4:24] time thank you all right Abby go
ahead thank you so the purpose of the
[4:30] subject consent application is to create
one new residential lot along King
[4:34] Street from a property known municipally
as 25976 King Street within the Hamlet
[4:40] settlement area area of
carile the subject lands are are located
[4:45] on the east side of King Street north of
Bruce Street and south of Neil Street
[4:50] within Carlile and are approximately
3,35 square meters in size the applicant
[4:57] is proposing to create a residential
infill lot by way of consent for the
[5:01] purpose of constructing two future
single dep patch dwellings one on the
[5:05] severed lot and one on the retained
lot the lands proposed to be severed
[5:10] would have a frontage of about 30 m and
a lot area of about 1,500 met squared
[5:16] and contain a detached accessory
building and do not have connection to
[5:21] Municipal Water or private sanary
system but they do have an existing
[5:27] access off of King
Street
[5:30] the lands to be retained would have a
frontage of 30 m a lot area of about
[5:35] 1500 met squared and they contain a
single detach dwelling and a detached
[5:40] accessory
building a Municipal Water connection
[5:44] and a private sanitary system and they
also have an existing access off Street
[5:49] the subject lands are within the Hamlet
settlement area land use designation of
[5:53] the North Middle sex official plan and
our zoned Hamlet residential within the
[5:58] North Middle sex zon
bylaw surrounding uses are residential
[6:02] in
nature um so the provincial policy
[6:06] statement County official plan and the
municipality's official plan generally
[6:11] permit residential lot creation within
settlement areas subject to servicing
[6:15] and
compatibility the subject lands again
[6:18] are located with this within the
settlement area of carile which is
[6:21] serviced by Municipal Water and
privately owned sep systems the subject
[6:26] lands have Frontage along King Street
which is a year round maintain Public
[6:31] Road The Proposal is considered
infilling as the subject lands are
[6:35] located within the existing builtup area
of the
[6:38] Hamlet uh staff are of the opinion that
the proposed area of the severed and
[6:43] retained lands is appropriate for the
use of the lands which is residential in
[6:48] need um so provisions of Road access
connection to Municipal Water Services
[6:53] storm water management lot grading and
other standard development obligations
[6:58] are capable of being addressed addressed
through a development agreement as per
[7:01] the conditions of the
consent so in conclusion staff are of
[7:05] the opinion that the proposed
development is appropriate it's
[7:08] consistent with the provincial policy
statement and in Conformity with the
[7:11] county and North Middle official plans
in terms of agency comments received um
[7:18] the asabo Bayfield conservation
Authority uh had no concerns County
[7:22] engineer had no concerns and then um the
manager of infrastructured operations
[7:27] for the municipality provided several
comments related to water roads drainage
[7:32] storm water and waste water as outlined
in my report no comments were received
[7:37] from the public prior to the preparation
of my report um So based on the
[7:43] foregoing it is my recommendation that
application for consent B1 2024 be
[7:49] granted subject to the conditions
outlined in my report thank you thank
[7:53] you Abby at this time Stephen is
anything you'd like to
[7:58] add
[8:03] oh sorry um not really I just we're just
trying to there's a very the house
[8:11] that's there now is in very very poor
shape and needs to be tore down and the
[8:17] lot was big enough to make two and
that's just kind of what our thought was
[8:22] okay all right thank you uh there's no
written submission so once again is
[8:26] there any comments from the public at
this time on this application seeing
[8:31] none uh committee Council
[8:39] Irwin oh did you have a question
councelor canel I do have a question
[8:43] okay thank you um my question is um for
Abby and it's uh under conditions number
[8:49] 10 refers to the owner entry to
development agreement mity is that the
[8:54] owner of the of the lot after sold or
the current
[8:58] owner so thank you for your question um
that would be the current owner however
[9:03] um there is we do have the ability to um
add specific requirements into into the
[9:12] development agreement that would um
apply to the Future owner of the
[9:17] separate parcel thank you okay any other
questions seeing none a motion to
[9:22] approve Council Irwin second by Council
K all in favor carried thank you thank
[9:28] you
our next application is for B2 uh B2
[9:35] d224 located at 1069 West Corner Drive
and I think we have Paul are you you're
[9:42] the only one here tonight for this
application oh come come on up sorry is
[9:46] it joris joris yes thank you thank you
sorry the sorry principle of the or the
[9:54] owner of the properties here as well
okay thank
[9:58] you
Abby as soon as you're
[10:04] ready thank you uh so the purpose and
effect of the subject application is to
[10:09] sever a parcel of land consisting of
approximately 40.2 hectares from an
[10:14] existing Farm parcel consisting of 80.9
hectares known municipally as um 1069
[10:22] West the subject lands are located on
the Southeast corner of West Corner
[10:26] Drive and prance Road and are known
municipally as as 1069 West Corner Drive
[10:31] the applicant is seeking consent
approval to sever a farm parcel to
[10:35] reverse a merger of the
land uh so the land to be severed would
[10:40] have a frontage of approximately 355
meters along West Corner Drive and be
[10:46] approximately 40.2 hectares in
size the lands to be severed are used
[10:52] for agricultural purposes in the form of
field crop production and contain no
[10:58] structures the lands are privately
serviced and do not have access onto
[11:02] west
corner or I guess there would be no
[11:05] services on the lands sorry correct that
the land to be retained would have a
[11:10] frontage of 455 meters along West burner
drive and be approximately 40.2 hectares
[11:16] in size uh the lands to be retained
contain a single detach dwelling uh
[11:22] several out buildings 11 grain bins and
eight smaller feed bins three barns a
[11:30] microfit solar panel and agricultural
land in field Crop Production the lands
[11:35] are privately serviced and have two
existing accesses off of West
[11:40] Corner the subject lands are designated
agricultural within the North Middle SE
[11:45] official plan and are zoned General
Agricultural and Environmental
[11:49] Protection within the North Middle sex
zoning bylaw surrounding land uses are
[11:55] agricult so the provincial policy
statement the county official plan in
[11:59] the north mle sex official plan
generally permit lot Creation in
[12:03] agricultural areas for agricultural
purposes where the lots are of a size
[12:09] sufficiently large to maintain
productive and viable Farm
[12:13] units the minimum lot size requirement
as outlined in both the county and North
[12:19] Middle official plan is about 40
hectares the county official plan also
[12:24] requires compliance with the minimum
distance separation formula
[12:29] the lands to be retained contain three
barns that are used for livestock
[12:35] Agriculture and would therefore trigger
an MDS calculation as per omafra's uh
[12:40] minimum distance separation
document so guideline number eight of
[12:45] that document um speaks to um the MDS
requirements for lot creation um and
[12:53] specifically um to those that uh apply
for situations uh where a farm split is
[12:59] being
contemplated guideline number 41
[13:03] provides details with regards to how the
mvs setbacks um that are required by
[13:08] guideline 8 are to be uh implemented so
essentially
[13:13] um it requires for any new lot that is
vacant and greater than one hectare in
[13:20] size that a hypothetical building
envelope be uh determined for that
[13:27] parcel as I pr L mentioned the purpose
of the subject consent is to sever a
[13:32] parcel of land to reverse an an
inadvertent lot merger no change of use
[13:36] is being proposed for the severed or
retained lands the applicants have
[13:41] indicated that they do not intend to
construct a single detached dwelling on
[13:44] the severed lot and will continue to use
the land in its entirety for field Crop
[13:49] Production while the MDS setbacks to the
new lot line will continue to apply the
[13:55] applicants will be required to uh obtain
a zoning by amendment that will prohibit
[14:00] future residential uses on the severed
lands unless the owner is able to
[14:05] demonstrate MDS compliance for the uh
new single detou
[14:12] dwelling um so the proposed lot line is
intended to create two Parcels with
[14:18] identical lot
areas so as not to create an undersized
[14:22] F person however staff are recommending
that the lot line be straightened and
[14:28] moved to the East 30 m to ensure that
the existing livestock Barn is wholly
[14:33] contained on the separate or the retain
blot both the severed and retained
[14:39] Parcels are zoned A1 and EP and the
north middlex zoning bylaw states that
[14:46] where a lot contains more than one zone
category each portion will be evaluated
[14:51] by its own zoning standards for law area
and frage and some of the other
[14:56] regulations as well so so as part of the
conditions of consent staff recommend
[15:01] that the zoning bylaw Amendment account
for the undersized A1 Zone portion of
[15:06] the severed and retained lands which is
due to um the EP Zone that kind of
[15:11] traverses the rear of this
property so in all um staff are
[15:17] satisfied that the size and
configuration of the proposed Lots will
[15:21] not negatively impact the ability to
farm the lands and the flexibility to
[15:25] adapt to Future farming practices will
not be compromised
[15:30] so staff are in a position to support
the proposed consent application as it
[15:34] will result in Parcels that meet or
exceed the minimum standards set out in
[15:38] the policy documents in terms of agency
comments received the County engineer
[15:43] had no concerns uh building a bylaw
recommended uh a condition that confirms
[15:49] compliance with
MDS and um the manager of infrastructure
[15:53] and operations uh provided several
comments which are outlined in my report
[15:59] uh at the time of the preparation of my
report I had received no written
[16:03] comments from members of the public uh
So based on the foregoing it is my
[16:08] recommendation that application for
consent B2 2024 be granted subject to
[16:14] the conditions in my report thank you
thanks Abby uh Paul do you have comments
[16:19] on this as well thank you worship I um I
don't have a lot of comments and I I
[16:26] thank um Abby the planner for her
assistance in uh getting it getting us
[16:32] to this point um I did just want to flag
um I understand from my client that
[16:38] there is an
existing uh entry way that will be on
[16:42] the severed portion but I understand the
the condition being there and in the
[16:47] past sometimes I've um just spoken to
the the person in charge at North Middle
[16:53] sex and they assess whether we need to
do a whole new entrance or if there's
[16:57] anything that needs to be done to the
existing one so that would be the plan
[17:00] there um and as mentioned the intention
is just to resear these properties that
[17:07] were inadvertently merged to title
because they are held by the same person
[17:12] uh and it's a part of it is tax uh or
state planning and tax uh issues related
[17:18] to that um and I've seen it in different
municipalities different uh rules about
[17:25] whether we can submit the zoning
application before we have the um the
[17:32] the sketch completed ideally we'd like
to be able to submit the zoning
[17:36] application immediately so we can move
this forward trying to follow within
[17:41] fiscal years um so I don't I don't know
whether um the planner has any comments
[17:47] on that but that would be my own s okay
thank you Abby does you respond to that
[17:52] yeah thanks so um currently we do
require that we have the 33 R number so
[17:57] that we're able to legally describe the
lands for the purposes of the zoning
[18:00] bylaw Amendment um otherwise like we can
bring it forward for two readings um but
[18:07] we've kind of moved away from doing that
just uh due to the planning fee refund
[18:12] Provisions in the planning act no I
understand I've I've encountered that
[18:15] issue before so shock me I just thought
I'd inquire if there's has to be two
[18:20] readings it does really move any faster
anyway
[18:24] right okay that's not my phone that's
all I
[18:29] care so there's no written submissions
is there any comments from the public on
[18:34] this
application seeing none uh the
[18:38] committee questions on the committee I I
have just a comment to it every time I
[18:43] see these come forward I don't like them
because people have to spend money that
[18:48] they shouldn't have to spend money on
they should shouldn't be happening as it
[18:51] is and we've talked about this at am and
different places and hopefully it gets
[18:56] corrected because
uh I agree there money spent that
[19:00] shouldn't have to be spent yes I I agree
and there have actually been some useful
[19:07] amendments to the planning act recently
unfortunately none of them are trying to
[19:10] not to this deal with this hope
hopefully that does get done though to
[19:16] agre to spend money no other questions
or comments we have a recommendation to
[19:20] Grant this
application Deputy Mayor Hollin
[19:24] councelor dagel all in favor carried
thank you
[19:28] thank you
[19:32] Council our next application is for
notice of public meeting for application
[19:37] 39t DNM
2303 and that is the lurry plum
[19:43] subdivision for
information and do we have somebody
[19:48] coming in on Zoom okay so we can still
get him in on Zoom
[19:54] okay and I think it's Matt lit Litwin
Chu is that
[20:01] right that's
correct okay so we have them here so I
[20:06] would remind if anybody wants to come up
for public comments just to give your
[20:09] name when you come up to the to the
chair just uh go ahead
[20:14] Abby thank you uh so the purpose of this
report is to provide council with
[20:19] preliminary information on an
application for a plan of subdivision
[20:24] for the subject lands municipally known
as 3477 lurry wrote a recommendation
[20:30] will be given to council at a later
meeting after feedback from the public
[20:34] meeting and the agency and Ministry
circulation has been received and taken
[20:39] into
consideration so the purpose and effect
[20:43] of the proposed draft plan of subvision
is to create seven lots for single
[20:48] detached dwellings uh which would be
accessed from a sawel drive and lurry
[20:54] Road the draft plan of subdivision has
been attached for
[21:00] information in addition to the
applications and the proposed draft plan
[21:04] the submission included the following
supporting documents uh so there was a
[21:08] planning justification report a
servicing capability study
[21:13] Transportation impact brief and a
nitrate impact
[21:20] assessment so the subject lands are a
6.7 hectare parcel located on the
[21:26] northwest corner of a soble drive and
Larry Road within the Hamlet of
[21:30] Larry the lands are vagant of any
buildings
[21:34] instructs the subject lands are
designated Hamlet settlement area within
[21:38] the North Middle official plan and the
subject lands are zoned Hamlet
[21:42] residential within the North Middle sex
zoning
[21:46] BYOD so my report provides a background
on the applicable provincial County and
[21:52] local policy which generally direct new
residential development to existing
[21:57] settlement areas
where full or partial Municipal services
[22:01] are
available the policy documents encourage
[22:05] a wide variety of housing by type size
and
[22:09] T specific to the North Middle sex
official plan the Hamlet settlement area
[22:15] policies Pro provide that approval for
the development of New Lots above um
[22:21] five New Lots within or expanding an
existing Hamet settlement area from the
[22:26] date of the approval of the official
plan shall be supported by a settlement
[22:32] capability study um which was included
in the servicing capability study that
[22:37] was submitted in support of the subject
application the general housing policies
[22:45] provide that intensification and
Redevelopment within the settlement
[22:49] areas will be encouraged to provide a
greater mix and balance of residential
[22:53] housing
ples um and
[22:59] that uh the municipality will be guided
by Municipal service environmental and
[23:04] transportation issues in its
consideration of such
[23:09] opportunities um so neighborhood
compatibility will also be considered
[23:13] relative to the physical car
characteristics in site design of
[23:17] intensification
proposals uh notice of the application
[23:23] has been circulated to agencies as well
as property owners in accordance with
[23:26] the requirements of the plan act and in
terms of agency comments received uh the
[23:32] Assa be field conservation Authority
indicated no concerns Bell Canada Canada
[23:38] Post Hydra 1 and emage gas submitted
standard comments for plans of
[23:43] subdivision uh and those are outlined in
my report uh the TS Valley District
[23:48] School Board uh indicated that they had
no
[23:51] concerns um County of middle sex
Emergency Services requested a number of
[23:56] conditions as outlin in my
report um as did the County
[24:03] engineer and then the North Middle sex
manager of infrastructure and operations
[24:08] has also provided a number of comments
um related to documents to be submitted
[24:13] for review and approval and those are
also outlined in my
[24:17] report um in terms of public comments so
I had none that were received uh prior
[24:22] to the preparation of my report however
staff um subsequently received the
[24:28] following written submissions so uh
Julie and Andrew Canton um submitted a
[24:34] letter citing concerns uh related to a
matter being considered under the
[24:39] drainage act as well as their preference
for no further development within Hamlet
[24:44] area uh amber mlan and Mike sorton um
shared similar concerns related to the
[24:52] matter uh being considered under the
drainage act as well as concerns
[24:56] relating to uh life solution and more
specifically exterior lighting on the
[25:01] homes and out buildings to be built
within the proposed development so as I
[25:06] previously mentioned a more detailed
planning analysis as well as a
[25:10] recommendation will be provided to
council at a subsequent meeting um after
[25:15] all comments received from this public
meeting as well as the agency and
[25:19] Ministry circulation have been taken
into consideration thank
[25:24] you thank you Abby uh at this time Matt
do you have anything you'd like to add
[25:28] from the applicant
side yeah good evening members of
[25:33] council uh my name is Matt linchuk I'm a
land planner with zelinka prmo and we're
[25:37] the planning consultants for the
applicant and this draft plan of
[25:41] subdivision to facilitate as Abby said
the development of seven lots for single
[25:46] detached dwellings Abby's done a great
job with her presentation and we just
[25:49] want to note that uh we do not have a
comprehensive presentation today but uh
[25:53] of course the purpose of this statutory
public meeting is to hear from members
[25:57] of public public with respect to the
proposed development it's our
[26:00] understanding as Abby mentioned there's
only been a couple of comments to date
[26:04] we've had an opportunity to carefully
review staff's report and we uh we note
[26:08] that staff are recommending the draft
plan be uh taken in in principle we hope
[26:12] for a positive endorsement when this
proposal comes to council there are any
[26:16] further questions I'd be happy to answer
them okay thank you Matt at this time
[26:21] you've already made mention of I think
Council you've all got a copy of those
[26:26] written submissions correct
everyone's had those okay uh comments
[26:31] from the public on this
application if You' like come forward
[26:36] sir I think the microphone's already on
so you'd submit your name and
[26:42] just uh my name is Matt white I'm a
resident of 34714 lury Roose uh your
[26:49] worship and council members thank you
very much for giving us the opportunity
[26:52] to present um our case regarding the
proposed subdivision in muray um to set
[26:58] the record straight I'm not a nimi as we
would call them in England not in my
[27:02] backyard um lri actually is a great
little Community I moved to lri about
[27:07] six years ago looking for a rural
lifestyle um at no time did I believe
[27:13] when I moved to lri that there would be
a increase in the size of the Hamlet um
[27:20] I have two objections to this first of
all the fabric of lry um people get
[27:26] along everybody seems to know each other
we say hi when we walk our dogs we like
[27:31] to feel that there is a small community
up there um this whole subdivision
[27:37] basically blindsided the majority of the
residents in we did not have any idea
[27:43] that this was happening and you know the
good folks here we do not want to fall
[27:47] out with them whatsoever we want again
want to maintain the fabric of our small
[27:52] community but in hindsight the delivery
of this has been handled very bad it's
[27:57] going to divide our little Community had
had these good folks literally come door
[28:03] to door and as you can see from the
victorial there ain't many and just came
[28:07] to say hi um we're thinking of doing
this do you have any objections and
[28:13] unfortunately that was not done so
everybody now has put up a defensive
[28:17] guard around this potential subdivision
so if the subdivision was to go forward
[28:24] I do believe that some of the residents
in lri are looking at moving at
[28:29] significant cost to them myself
personally I would consider moving
[28:34] because again it's ruining the fabric of
the little community that I went into um
[28:39] but I do understand the need for
advancement I do understand the needs
[28:42] for homes in ontaria I myself personally
are involved in very large construction
[28:47] projects from New York City to Calgary
Alberta so I make my livelihood on
[28:54] construction however the need for a
affordable homes in this country is not
[28:59] going to be satisfied by the development
in lri the development in L lury is
[29:05] purely for profit exercise and that
brings me on to my second point about
[29:10] seven years ago again when I moved into
lurry my welcome to Middle sex County
[29:15] was a nice Bill to do with um drainage
so there were some drainage improvements
[29:21] about seven years ago and I thought you
know what that's an improvement to the
[29:25] infrastructure I just had some very bad
timing um I paid it and I moved on with
[29:31] my life my understanding now is the work
required to accommodate this new
[29:36] subdivision will require more drainage
works now that drainage works again is
[29:41] going to be build to the residents of
lri probably through a direct tax
[29:46] Improvement um which our understanding
maybe somewhere in the region of $1,500
[29:51] maybe as much as
$2,000 we are not going to see any
[29:55] benefit you know the folks that are
developing that area yes they'll
[29:58] probably see some Financial benefit but
we as residents that's another $2,000
[30:03] potentially at the most out of our
pockets and as you said your honor you
[30:08] don't like to see money being spent when
it's really not necessary um you know
[30:13] one of my neighbors uh Pat White shares
the same last name as Meely coincidental
[30:18] she's a retired nurse she lost her
husband a couple years ago I don't know
[30:23] about her finances but I know she's
probably struggling so a bill like that
[30:27] out the blue is probably going to hurt
her and then her neighbor there's a
[30:32] there's a an old lady lives in that
property she's blind her husband just
[30:37] went into a nursing home and her
daughter suffers with a disability and
[30:42] she's also in a home you know those poor
folks we never see them um obviously
[30:48] money is tight for them just from Optics
and I wouldn't want to be in their
[30:52] position when they see a a bill
potentially called a direct tax
[30:56] Improvement arrive on their doorstep um
this is just a very unfortunate
[31:01] situation I I'm sure the intent here is
very good but again had it been handled
[31:07] differently with the small community
that we're in I think there may be
[31:11] overwhelming support for it but right
now personally I'm objecting to it
[31:16] because I don't think it's been handled
in the proper way and I don't want to
[31:19] pay essentially $2,000 out of my own
pocket to help somebody else make some
[31:24] money I mean I would propose an
amendment to the motion where
[31:29] essentially the increase in property
taxes which North middlex will likely
[31:33] Levy against the improvements to those
lots is paid back to the residents of
[31:39] lri who have had to pay a direct tax
Improvement fee um that is just an
[31:45] amendment proposition I would like to
put forward again I understand we
[31:49] probably can't stop this but if we are
have to pay out of our own pocket I
[31:54] would propose that on the next tax year
when when North Middle sex is collecting
[31:59] taxes from that new subdivision or the
owners of the lots that that extra money
[32:03] is channeled back into a tax uh credit
for the residents who have paid this
[32:08] money therefore equaling it out um but I
again we don't want to divide our little
[32:14] Community we have a a great Community as
I say but again this this um proposition
[32:20] has been made um honestly has divided
our community um and this has been
[32:25] happening well this has been ongoing now
for several months and um I just wish it
[32:29] had been handled differently so thank
you your honor thank you council members
[32:33] for hearing me out I'm rather nervous
I'm just recovering from a triple heart
[32:37] bypass so my heart is fluttering a
little bit but um but I certainly
[32:42] appreciate the time that you've given us
tonight thank you thank you I I would
[32:47] ask Matt do you have any response to
that because I think it's a legitimate
[32:51] concern about the cost to the
neighboring taxpayers about the cost of
[32:57] drainage do you have a comment to that
yeah absolutely um I just want to I just
[33:01] want to thank the neighbor for coming
out and um taking time out their day to
[33:05] provide comments that's what this is all
about um so with respect to this
[33:09] drainage relocation uh of course it is
considered that the relocation of the
[33:13] drain watch you serve to improve
drainage in the area currently as it
[33:16] stands of course it could be a lot
better um furthermore uh it is worth
[33:20] mentioning that as per the municipality
the costs for this drainage relocation
[33:25] are going to be completely on the
applicant so that would be on the uh the
[33:30] developer so I we don't believe that any
other cost would be put on any neighbors
[33:33] in the
area so no cost to Neighbors in the area
[33:37] uh Furthermore with respect to the um
the anticipation that ly would not
[33:42] expand as a hamlet um as per the
municipal op uh the lands are designated
[33:47] as Hamlet residential areas so
residential development in the form that
[33:51] is proposed is contemplated here it is
the plan vision of this community as set
[33:56] out by the the municipal
[34:00] op okay thank you I just want to clarify
that comment you had said there's no
[34:04] cost from drainage cost to the
neighbors correct okay this this
[34:09] development is completely uh developer L
okay thank you thank you sir thank you
[34:16] very much other comments from the public
on this application anyone else like to
[34:20] speak on
this come on come on up Sir come on up
[34:26] he's two and just give your name please
[34:30] and how do I follow that um hi I'm Julie
Canton um we reside at 34684 lry Road
[34:38] and we also own the bacon lot beside us
it's the residential lot at
[34:44] 34688 um we've resided there for almost
10 years now and we from past
[34:52] um uh meetings we weren't able to go
because it was during the week and 9:00
[34:57] a.m. I'm surprised that anybody was able
to go to that meeting but anyways um I
[35:00] just wanted to make sure because as for
the last meeting we were told that we
[35:05] may have been able we would we were told
that we would have to pay for some of
[35:08] the costs and that was just something
that I had up in my write up that we did
[35:11] not want to be responsible for the cost
of rerouting the drain um and we also
[35:16] want to ensure that where um the moson
or sign drain Branch b the first
[35:23] proposal that was set out was to be
rerouted onto our second residential lot
[35:27] 34688 on lry road and we wanted to
ensure that it does not hinder future
[35:32] development opportunities on that second
lot if we were to sell or build on that
[35:36] lot so if there were a drain to go
through it or partially on it we just
[35:40] wanted to make sure that it wasn't going
to hinder future development for our own
[35:44] um what you want say yeah so is there a
way of zooming in on your picture your
[35:50] image of the the map there at 34688
almost in the center of that Frontage of
[35:57] the property that's where the drain
connects
[36:04] in see if we can get that bigger
[36:10] sorry that's not
[36:25] bigger
yeah almost in the center of that front
[36:30] edge there
okay yeah
[36:36] problem so where the drain ties in I'm
not I'm not exactly sure as to where the
[36:40] drain continues from there so on the
drawing that we have in an
[36:45] email it's a blue line going to the
catch Basin we're not sure where it
[36:50] continues from there so if it goes
across our properties to the South and
[36:55] then then goes down the road there or if
it goes straight back towards um Denny's
[36:59] field
there okay uh looking for a little more
[37:04] clarity Okay who wants to who wants to
approach
[37:09] that Jen I can oh Matt go ahead yeah I
can quickly provide some clarity on that
[37:17] as per our drawings the drain is
supposed to run only along the west side
[37:20] of liry and then uh West on of sable so
what's going to happen is it's going to
[37:25] go into the uh the in property
3477 through one of the proposed lots
[37:30] and then down to El so it really should
there is no connection to any
[37:35] neighboring properties okay thank you so
you said on it's going to run on the
[37:39] west side correct yep so down the west
side of ly there into the site and
[37:46] then okay Jaden J maybe Jadon yeah thank
you Mr Mayor through you just want to
[37:53] clarify our doin engineering Inc is
current ly working on this and um they
[37:59] haven't prepared a draft report yet
so it's preliminary to say which side
[38:04] it's on I'm just looking at the the
meeting notes here so it hasn't been
[38:08] determined yet I know they were looking
at the west side and that was looking
[38:11] more likely but it is uh that's not
determined yet they're still working
[38:14] through that process okay so it's still
in process at this point okay thank you
[38:20] thank you no um it's good I'm glad that
we had the opportunity to come and
[38:24] obviously as stated in like my in the is
that we all said we definitely have no
[38:28] qualms at all with any of our neighbors
in L especially MOS we have no qualms
[38:32] whatsoever if I was in your spot I'd do
the same thing um but obviously with
[38:36] four young children we've been there for
10 years and obviously if we could have
[38:39] a last say Obviously we wouldn't want
more neighbors um and obviously l Road
[38:44] is very quiet so our kids learned how to
ride their bikes on l Road so obviously
[38:48] if we had a choice we would say I don't
want more neighbors but obviously um if
[38:54] this is what comes to but um yeah so any
sort of notifications from here on out
[38:58] if we find more information I would
totally love to learn about it as the
[39:02] days go on thanks all right thank you
thank you thank you uh is there any more
[39:08] public
comments on this
[39:12] application any more public comments on
this time seeing none uh Council Council
[39:18] ke thank you mayor R Jaden any idea when
that report for the drainage might be in
[39:25] place so that could maybe put neighbors
Minds at
[39:30] rest yeah through the mayor we're
expecting the the draft report in the
[39:34] next couple
weeks thank
[39:38] you Council
win thank you worship I have two
[39:43] comments or questions one is just to
clarify and I think I got the answer
[39:48] would like clarification um any grinage
work from this property uh would not be
[39:53] a cost to existing Neighbors
the existing Community is that correct
[39:58] did I hear that correct
Matt that is
[40:03] correct okay thank you my second comment
goes back to the planner's report the
[40:08] planner was talking about neighborhood
compatibility and her report and there
[40:13] was one of the respondents talked about
outdoor lighting and light pollution
[40:18] would that be dealt with in terms of
neighborhood
[40:25] compatibility so at this time um I don't
believe that we have anything uh that
[40:31] speaks specifically to lighting um in
the municipality's planning documents
[40:38] um that is something that could be
considered through a future review of
[40:45] the municipality's planning documents
but given that this is a standalone uh
[40:49] application for a plan of subdivision
meaning that there's no Associated
[40:54] zoning bylaw Amendment attached to it um
it's a little bit difficult um for us to
[41:00] consider that through this subject
application
[41:06] specifically thank you just a second
Ashley go ahead thank you your worship
[41:10] I'd just like to site that the
municipality does not have an
[41:13] illumination bylaw at the time but we
currently address concerns with lighting
[41:17] and between neighbors through our public
nuisance bylaw and so it would be
[41:22] potentially covered under
that Jaden were you to speak to this as
[41:27] well do you have
something yes thank you through you just
[41:30] to add to the the
main um the cost of the drainage Works
[41:35] um on page nine of the planner's report
it does include the the comments from
[41:40] the um from the infrastructure and
operations department and there was a
[41:44] comment there that prior to final
approval the owner shall address all
[41:48] matters pertaining to the proposed
relocation of the existing Municipal
[41:51] drain which currently runs through the
property to be developed to the
[41:54] satisfaction of the municip
and that the owner shall be responsible
[41:58] for all costs associated with the
municipal drain relocation so that was a
[42:02] comment we put forward and we'd expect
that to be carried into the subdivision
[42:05] agreement perfect thank you all right
Council canel thank you Mayor Rob uh
[42:11] guess my question is for the developer
maybe perhaps Matt um what's the time
[42:15] frame for this project to uh to
[42:23] begin um we don't have a we don't have a
direct timeline at this stage um I could
[42:30] also my colleague Matt Campbell's
partner with s link p is also on this
[42:33] call right now if he wanted to perhaps
speak to
[42:39] that I don't know if he has speaking
ability in this meeting although he
[42:44] should be in the zoom
[42:51] call good evening Council it's Matt
Campbell here can you hear me yes
[42:56] wonderful uh thanks to my colleague Matt
for passing that over so Matt is
[43:00] absolutely correct there's no defined
timeline for this in this type of
[43:04] development scenario we typically see
site development you know actual uh work
[43:09] proceeding on the ground you know
probably within a year of the draft
[43:15] approval of the subdivision if the
county sees to it that that's what uh
[43:19] the county would like to De with that
there's quite a while uh and there's a
[43:23] lot of work that has to be taken into
account
[43:26] engineering drainage so on and so forth
that has to be done well in advance
[43:30] before any soil actually gets moved so I
would estimate you know a year uh and
[43:36] that's probably on the shorter time
frame usually it's a little bit longer
[43:41] than that but I know that there's uh
some everyone has pushes to get things
[43:45] done quicker so probably plus or minus a
year thank you okay Council irn you had
[43:51] a followup uh yes worship and that just
follows the last comment we have a
[43:55] number members of the community here
this evening I think they'd like to hear
[44:00] the the uh the process going forward
timelines next meetings Etc so they have
[44:06] it in their they have it in their
schedule what the next steps will be so
[44:09] if we could just take a moment under the
uh our planner or the developers planner
[44:14] to talk about the next steps and
timelines for the people of the
[44:18] community okay I would I would think
that's up to the
[44:22] developer for timelines or Abby do you
want to speak to that sure I'm happy too
[44:27] okay um so essentially um what we were
planning to do with uh this subject
[44:33] application was bring forward a
recommendation report at the March
[44:38] council
meeting um so subsequent to that and um
[44:43] depending on um this council's um
recommendation uh it will then be
[44:49] forwarded to the county of middlex um
for the ultimate draft plan approval um
[44:56] which is generally subject to several
conditions um and members of the public
[45:03] are able to uh request notice of that
decision from the county um so yeah and
[45:09] so that would be on March 6th that's cor
that's our planning meeting yes yep
[45:15] thank you anything else on that Council
[45:21] win any other comments questions Council
dagel
[45:26] if we're looking at doing that on March
6 I'd like to see the engineering report
[45:30] from doin here at the same
time aen is that
[45:36] possible through year worship um I know
the the next step is the draft report
[45:41] which I think then there would be an
informal meeting with um all the land
[45:45] owners um but I just have to confirm
that with doin when that will be
[45:48] available and how that aligns the
timeline
[45:53] okay all right so tonight we're here
just it's strictly for information
[45:57] receive this for information and I know
this is the first time it's come before
[46:00] Council as well Council hasn't seen this
application I want to thank everyone
[46:04] from the public on that and I I hope
they got clarification from the
[46:07] developer on the concerns that they had
and I understand uh when there's only 13
[46:12] houses in the community and you're
adding seven but uh just a comment I
[46:17] would make that there was two houses put
really close to me that have no way
[46:20] they're put those in there's not enough
room and I do have two new Good
[46:24] Neighbors on it so it's just want to
make that comment do it that uh it isn't
[46:29] some hopefully it works out well if
there's nothing else we have a
[46:33] recommendation to this for information
councelor dagel councelor Nera all in
[46:38] favor carried thank
you thank you thank you thanks
[46:44] mat uh our final application is a notice
of public meeting for application zba
[46:51] 32024 located at
29463 Co Stream Road and Paul I believe
[46:57] you're if you're by yourself St actually
your worship um the owner Hans Clan is
[47:03] here I it's a
relativ application I don't know if we
[47:08] need to you know he's welcome to come up
but if he wants to add something after
[47:12] he certainly can come forward and add
sounds good go ahead
[47:17] Abby thank you your honor uh so the
purpose and effect of the subject
[47:21] application is to implement a condition
of consent uh associated with consent V8
[47:27] 2023 which conditionally severed a lot
with an area of approximately
[47:33] 39.73 hectar in order to accommodate the
disposal of a surplus Farm
[47:43] dwelling um so the application proposes
to reone the severed lot of consent B8
[47:49] 2023 from the general agricultural A1
Zone to the agricultural small holding
[47:55] exception ag1
Zone to recognize the residential use of
[48:00] PLS application or sorry um the
application also proposes to reone the
[48:06] retain lands of consent V8 2023 from the
general agricultural A1 Zone to the
[48:11] general
agricultural exception
[48:15] a1. 103 Zone to prohibit the
establishment of new dwellings on the
[48:20] REM
F so the lands to be severed uh contain
[48:27] agricultural out buildings to be removed
and agricultural lands in Crop
[48:33] Production that's the lands to be
retained
[48:36] sorry um and the lands to be
[48:41] severed okay so sorry I just need to
correct myself here so the lands to be
[48:46] severed contain a single detou dwelling
an accessory building a green Silo and
[48:51] are serviced by Municipal Water and
private septic um
[48:56] and they have existing access off of
Coldstream Road and then the um lands to
[49:01] be retained contain agricultural out
buildings to be removed and agricultural
[49:05] lands in Crop
Production uh so the subject lands are
[49:10] designated agricultural within the North
Middle sex official plan uh and contain
[49:14] Hazard lands as for schedule a of the
North Middle sex official plan anded
[49:18] Woodlands as for Schedule C of the north
ex
[49:21] plan the subject lands are zoned General
agriculture A1 within the North Middle
[49:27] sex zoning bylaw and a portion of these
lands are regulated by the ass bfield
[49:32] conservation Authority so the provincial
policy statement the county official
[49:36] plan and the municipalities official
plan generally permit lot Creation in
[49:40] agricultural areas to dispose of a
dwelling Surplus to a farming operation
[49:44] as a result of farm consolidation
subject to evaluation
[49:48] criteria uh so the subject resoning was
requested in accordance with Section uh
[49:54] 6.2 D3 three of the North Middle sex
official plan um and it is noted that
[49:59] all other criteria from 6.2 D um has
been met or is capable of being met
[50:06] through the conditions of the
conditionally approved consent so in all
[50:11] uh staff are satisfied that the
application of the Agricultural small
[50:15] holding ag1 zone is appropriate to
recognize the residential use of the
[50:20] lands to be severed and that the
application of the general agricultural
[50:24] exception
a1103 Zone prohibit the establishment of
[50:29] new dwellings on the remnant Farm parcel
is appropriate um and as such uh staff
[50:35] are supportive of the proposed zone
changes in terms of agency
[50:41] circulation um the manager of
infrastructure and operations as well as
[50:46] the County engineer had no comments at
the time of writing the subject report
[50:51] no comments or concerns were received
from the public um So based on the
[50:57] foring it is my recommendation that the
subject application be approved for the
[51:01] reasons outlined in my report thank you
thanks Abby oh thank you your worship I
[51:07] have no comments I agree with no
comments at this time is there any
[51:11] asking there's no written uh comments is
anyone from the public wants to speak on
[51:15] this
application seeing no one Council
[51:20] questions comments mayor
hodgin thank you Mr
[51:26] uh just a question to the some of the
the um I'm just going to read it here
[51:32] the lands to be retained contain a
single detached dwelling F accessory
[51:36] building f a green Sil and are just and
our service by Municipal Water okay why
[51:44] are we keeping the
gr we've
[51:48] asked taken down and I'm thinking it's
probably a steel Greenery I'm not sure
[51:54] because the 91 the map I got the 9911
number is right over the thing and I
[51:59] can't just see the whole picture I'm
just I I believe it has been taken down
[52:05] right it's it has been removed it's just
an old uh
[52:13] photo absolutely okay so it's remov any
other questions
[52:17] comments that was it no other questions
we have a recommendation to approve this
[52:23] application move by councilor Ellison
second by councel Nera all in favor
[52:28] Carri thank you thank you very much
thank you worship thank you Council
[52:32] those are my
matters uh just before the we're done
[52:36] with our planning for this evening but I
just want to say thank you to Abby for
[52:40] uh a short time that you've been here
but but uh the work you've done on all
[52:45] of these RS and at the same time I want
to introduce Ashley I don't know if
[52:49] everybody had the opportunity to meet
Ashley she'll be doing our planning
[52:52] going forward I believe Abby you will be
working on official plan yeah that's
[52:57] correct so I'm going to be moving back
to my policy Focus role but it does
[53:01] sound like I will be back later this
year to get the ball rolling on the
[53:06] official plan review that's upcoming
okay yes canelon I do have one question
[53:13] that is Ashley you continue to be here
on Tuesdays for with the public and
[53:17] address any questions they may have
great question thank you um so the days
[53:21] are going to be Wednesday going forward
well will be here Thursdays of well
[53:24] start um so I'll be here two days
instead of just one so that's Wednesdays
[53:28] and Thursdays not Tu yes correct okay
because I told somebody yesterday you're
[53:32] GNA be here Tu have to change thank yes
but that was that was a great question
[53:36] that was a great comment but thank you
very much Abby and look forward to
[53:40] working thank you all right our next uh
is the start of our department reports
[53:46] and I believe our first one up
is oh sir we need a motion to go out of
[53:52] Committee of adjustment and rejoin
regular meeting councelor
[53:55] C Nera all in favor carried thank you
now our first item is uh AR's coming in
[54:02] person here to do the report that's the
first one and your second one I believe
[54:06] is on the agreement correct the floor is
yours when you're ready
[54:16] aren't I always lose the
[54:20] crowd I
do I guess
[54:25] uh good evening mayor and Council thanks
for having me today uh have two reports
[54:29] through take to council today for your
consideration uh my first report is a
[54:34] fourth quarter and year end report uh to
give Council an idea of building permit
[54:38] activity that we've seen for
2023 um so I'll I'll briefly step
[54:43] Council through through the report and
I'll first start by saying that 2023 was
[54:48] actually a very decent year considering
what we've seen uh in the southwest
[54:52] region uh some municipalities were hit
very heavily uh with the residential
[54:57] decline middle sex Center being one L
mid off as well we saw a great reduction
[55:01] in housing starts new dwellings um some
of our neighbors Southwest Middle sex
[55:06] and Mecca have actually had very good
years better than in previous so uh and
[55:11] North Middle sex really held its own so
a good report really considering what
[55:16] what some of our neighbors and others in
Southern Ontario seen so um we have a
[55:21] slight decrease in new homes uh this
past year of 26 down from 30 in 2022 and
[55:28] the the cost of construction went I
believe down from 46 million down to 42
[55:32] million or 41 million so generally uh a
slight reduction in cost of construction
[55:38] as well but like I said it's it was a
very decent
[55:42] year uh with my year reports I like to
highlight a couple um couple of
[55:47] significant events that occurred each
year so I can say
[55:51] for uh for last year I'm I'm happy to
say that we brought a new building bylaw
[55:56] to council um we do building inspection
for five municipalities and I'm pleased
[56:01] to say that each of those five
municipalities all pass the same
[56:04] building byw that's very helpful for
staff in processing building permits um
[56:09] things from inspections that we do uh
some of the policies in the department
[56:14] and refund policy refund policies even
they're all in that same building bylaw
[56:18] so there a nice level of consistency we
can all work work from so uh it's nice
[56:22] to have that um a year prior we
developed a consistent U fee bylaw with
[56:28] the three municipalities that joined our
group so um again more consistency it's
[56:32] a it's another accomplishment when we
brought on the program those were the
[56:36] two two things we wanted to set forth
first is the consistent PES and a
[56:40] consistent building bylaw so I'm pleased
to say we achieved that um also last
[56:45] year uh we were a recipient of an award
at at Amo for our uh our shared service
[56:51] agreement for the five municipalities so
thought I'd
[56:55] throw that out one more time to council
and probably let it go after this oh
[56:59] yeah we're doing the agreement tonight
aren't we
[57:04] that um so in my report I have a few
tables here outlining a lot of
[57:08] Statistics I'm not sure if council's had
a chance to look at it or not but uh
[57:12] it's a comparison table one is a
comparison of permits and new dwellings
[57:18] uh and cost of construction at each
municipality scene so you can kind of
[57:21] see how North Middle sex did compared to
its neighbors and some po
[57:25] uh in total our Building Division issued
962 permits slightly down from
[57:31] 1146 in 2022 and we approved 268 new
dwellings this is across the five mes
[57:38] not just North Middle sex uh 268 new
dwellings in in this region down from
[57:43] 284 um and three apartment buildings um
it's a slight reduction but um and
[57:49] Southwest Middle sex ad mcaf actually
brought things up where middle sex
[57:53] Center look off kind of dragged it down
so um all in all it's it was a good year
[57:58] we paid the bills and we H part of that
storm but it was it was a much slower
[58:02] year than what we've seen
[58:06] previously um table
two is a specific breakdown for the
[58:12] fourth quarter what we saw in the fourth
quarter and the year-to date numbers and
[58:15] it's a breakdown with types of permits
so it's how many singles we've seen how
[58:20] many garages T tools septic systems a
lot of statistics here again what we saw
[58:26] in the fourth quarter what the year end
numbers were uh as well as yearend
[58:29] numbers from the previous year so you
can see you know how many pools we had
[58:33] last year compared to 2022 and the
cost so it's again it's interesting
[58:39] information um looked at long term for
the stat statisticians I
[58:46] guess the third table is a comparison of
North Middle sex permits permit fees
[58:52] development charges collected and cost
con construction over the past uh past
[58:56] six years so again it's a good
comparator to see how how each year
[59:00] compares to the other um 151 permits is
what we issued last year um building
[59:05] permit fees brought in were
222,000 uh development charges 300 over
[59:09] 300,000 in DCS and the construction
value was over 41
[59:16] million um table four is a breakdown of
new housing or new dwellings have been
[59:21] created again pretty consistent 2020 and
2022 with 26 and 30 those two years up
[59:27] from the previous couple years so um
it's it'll be interesting to see how we
[59:31] do this year high hopes for what we're
GNA see El Craig for example with the
[59:35] new subdivision there uh which leads to
table five we have a breakdown um we
[59:40] like to break down by by settlement
areas so you can see how much growth
[59:43] we've seen in Park Hill versus El
parallel um so it's just some nice
[59:48] numbers to compare at over the over the
next few years as
[59:53] well
so that is my building report for the
[59:57] year end and I open any questions on
that question Council Council
[1:00:02] Irwin just one question work on table
five the rural areas is that any the
[1:00:08] other settlement area or is that
strictly rural farm community yeah
[1:00:14] generally it's the rural farm community
so if it's outside of Park Hiller
[1:00:20] car counc
canelson AR my question has to do with
[1:00:24] the agricultural buildings and I noticed
that that's still the the
[1:00:28] prevalant cost if you will or
construction um are they primarily like
[1:00:34] livestock barns or they drive sheds or
do you
[1:00:37] know uh through the mirror and shooting
from the hip I can't really say but it's
[1:00:41] it's a combination of those whether it's
a drive shed or a livestock building or
[1:00:45] a green bin or a silo they're all lumped
in that one category of farm buildings
[1:00:50] uh if you want more information I can
probably get that for you but
[1:00:55] I'm just curious if if this livestock
building because like they tend to be
[1:00:58] more costly than any other structure
going up on farm and a 23 million in
[1:01:02] change I'm assuming that there's a
significant number of livestock
[1:01:06] buildings going up and I'm just
wondering how many that's okay yeah
[1:01:10] through the mayor um I could probably
get some more information for you um
[1:01:14] sometimes it's deceiving a building
report we could have two permits that
[1:01:17] total 20 million um it's but we
definitely have had agriculture has done
[1:01:22] very well over the last couple years and
they haven't really been by the
[1:01:24] reduction that residential's been
with it's not important okay thank you
[1:01:30] okay other questions counc ke thank you
mayor up Arnie what would the turnaround
[1:01:35] time be on inspection uh should one be
called in I actually had a rate figure
[1:01:39] just ask that day sure uh through the
mayor so the building code requires an
[1:01:44] inspection within 48 Hours of notice uh
our building bylaw we we've taken that
[1:01:49] down to 24 hours um and generally we
meet that timeline so um what we'd like
[1:01:55] to is get the inspection requests in um
I think by 8:00 the night before so when
[1:02:01] we come into work we know what our day
is going to be that day but uh we should
[1:02:05] provide you an inspection the next day
on
[1:02:08] request any other questions Council I
did have one and it is on a smaller app
[1:02:14] permit and that would be a pool for
example do you do inspections on the
[1:02:19] fencing being done and all through that
or does that become a
[1:02:23] BYOD yeah uh to the mayor uh great
question that's our primary inspection
[1:02:28] when it comes to pool permits is the
safety of the yard including the fence
[1:02:32] and the gate uh we do look at you know
how close the pool is to the property
[1:02:35] line and the pool equipment um but
definitely we want to see the fence and
[1:02:39] gate there uh to close off a building
permit we wouldn't leave that for by law
[1:02:42] enforcement perfect thank you no other
questions we have a recommendation to
[1:02:47] receive this
report Council dagel Council K all in
[1:02:51] favor carried and you're on again with
agreement thank you mayor uh my second
[1:02:58] report uh is uh something that we've
come up with regarding funding and U I'd
[1:03:04] like to just identify a typo in this
report I apologize on page two at the
[1:03:09] very top we refer to since 2001 Building
Inspections have been provided to North
[1:03:15] Middle sex from middlex center it's 2021
not 200 but the the intent of that was
[1:03:21] um where I'm going to start with so in
2001 middlex Center started doing
[1:03:26] Building Inspections for luk Mid and
doing our inspections uh we build it out
[1:03:31] based on the kilometers that we drove
and the hours that we spent on files for
[1:03:36] LOL and we did day-to-day hour tracking
and we sent an invoice to Luc Midol
[1:03:42] quarterly um and we've been doing that
for 20 years so when we took on self
[1:03:47] middle sex meaf and North Middle SE we
continued with that time tracking we
[1:03:52] tracking our hours every day uh and also
look the kilometers that we drive um we
[1:03:58] found that now to be fairly honorous for
staff to continue time tracking hour by
[1:04:03] hour and we also found it very
predictable that uh what we estimate
[1:04:09] right now is about two and a half
building inspectors are used to inspect
[1:04:12] for the four
municipalities and so rather than time
[1:04:16] tracking our hour hour by
hour operations whether it's plans
[1:04:20] review uh time on the telephone or doing
our inspections we like we've come up
[1:04:25] with a new for funding formula that we
like the councils to approve uh so right
[1:04:29] now our agreement refers to time
tracking by hour we like to revise that
[1:04:34] agreement to come up with a a formula
that we've approved or or we've
[1:04:37] developed uh which is based on a
combination of the assessment of the
[1:04:41] municipality so a larger municipality
midle North Middle sex has a higher
[1:04:45] assessment than
that uh so a combination of the
[1:04:48] assessment of the municipality as well
as the construction U uh the fees
[1:04:53] collected by that municipality so it's
it's it's 50% of each where each year
[1:05:00] we'll look at the previous year and a
half to see compare the assessment and
[1:05:05] compare the uh the fees that have been
generated by each municipality and we
[1:05:09] would juggle out the costing of Two and
a Half building inspectors and a small
[1:05:13] portion of Chief Building official uh
and we would approve we would provide
[1:05:18] that to your accounting team for
budgeting at the beginning of the year
[1:05:22] so that's what we'd like to take to
council today is that new process rather
[1:05:25] than SP time and just to get it
documented into the
[1:05:29] agreement so will that be that would be
a huge saving on time corre I would
[1:05:34] think on administrative time it is quite
a bit administrative time for our
[1:05:38] building inspectors and also for
building and things okay I was quite a
[1:05:41] bit involved okay I'll turn that over to
council for
[1:05:46] questions I just one comment I would
make it's just and it's just a typo on
[1:05:52] uh
4.1 and it is just it says in the in the
[1:05:56] event that uh that said of that there is
an increase of 10% is that it says that
[1:06:03] three is increase could be it should be
there instead of
[1:06:07] three okay okay that's on the last
paragraph that's just it's just a type
[1:06:13] and Through the Mirror if I can add one
one final thing our billing last year
[1:06:17] was $118,000 to North Middle sex and
right now we're we're suggesting it be
[1:06:21] 129 for 2024 so that's
we we've done the numbers for 2024
[1:06:26] that's what it would be in case council
is wondering okay any other questions
[1:06:31] comments counc Kelis thank you may Rob
AR I understand rationale for your
[1:06:35] argument in your presentation however
should the construction industry slow
[1:06:40] down and then we're we're we're bearing
the cross of these costs that may not be
[1:06:45] needed how how are we going to work with
that yeah through the mirror that's a
[1:06:48] great question and there is that risk uh
what we've seen over the previous five
[1:06:52] years that each has uh resulted or has
come up with a still a decent Surplus
[1:06:59] that Surplus will go into a contingency
fund or Reserve fund at the municipality
[1:07:05] that can be used for the slow years so
this year we're budgeting based on the
[1:07:10] previous two years uh of what we've seen
for activity over those years you have
[1:07:15] seen a surplus and some funds should
have gone into a building building
[1:07:19] department Reserve fund to take care of
those those light years um my hopeful
[1:07:24] that we won't see that if we do then we
may be here having that conversation
[1:07:27] next year but right now our plan is to
have it build out this way um and hopes
[1:07:32] that that will cover
things I have one more question if I may
[1:07:37] and that's on the uh number three page
three I believe building serves the
[1:07:42] calculations for
building and uh if I look at the um
[1:07:48] permanent
revenue and I look down there and I see
[1:07:53] North middle section at 27% and
Southwest Middle SE at 32% and I'm just
[1:07:59] wondering how you we can come to the
conclusion of the costing out and your
[1:08:09] proposal sorry just bear with me for a
moment if you don't no problem it's yes
[1:08:14] the permit revenue is the middle graph
yeah so through the mayor uh the middle
[1:08:19] table shows the permanent revenue of
each of those municipalities in 2022 uh
[1:08:24] those four municipalities have come up
with $760,000 in
[1:08:28] Revenue um below that is is a percentage
I guess of each of those municipalities
[1:08:33] how much of that 760,000 was their cont
was is there is their piece of that P
[1:08:39] and
um so that's that's what that percentage
[1:08:43] refers to so sellus middle sex had a um
had a significant permit Revenue um I
[1:08:50] guess that's your your 20% for North M
sex oh sorry Southwest is 32% North
[1:08:56] Middle sex is
[1:09:01] 27 yeah if you look at the 2023 Revenue
the totals um so the middle table third
[1:09:08] column over 2023 permit revenue is
276,000
[1:09:12] um in total I guess the total of that
middle table is where we have that 32
[1:09:17] and the
[1:09:20] 27 if you see that yeah but but then it
seems like when you go to the bottom
[1:09:24] graph the numbers are reversed right
because then it goes to 27 and 32 and
[1:09:29] you slide over it goes to 32 and 26 so
permit Revenue average is 27 for for 2%
[1:09:36] for us 32 for for Southwest and you
slide over allocation pay municipalities
[1:09:41] the numbers are reversed so I'm just
confused by that yeah and through the
[1:09:45] mayor those numbers reflect a
combination of a waiting of the
[1:09:50] assessment column 2023 assessment column
and the permit Revenue column so the the
[1:09:56] the First Column is 2023 assessment
where North Middle sex is 37% and
[1:10:01] Southwest is
20 okay so assessment that's the value
[1:10:05] of the structures that are going no
that's the assessment of the
[1:10:08] municipality so sex assessment is $2.1
billion I see okay and so it's it's a
[1:10:16] the waiting the allocation is half of
it's weighted on the assessment of the
[1:10:20] municipality how large that municipality
is the assess value so the over assess
[1:10:24] the overall assessed value of North
middlex is 2.1 billion where the over
[1:10:28] assess the overall assess value of
Southwest is two
[1:10:32] billion uh and that's the first category
I guess that's you want to compare
[1:10:36] apples and apples I understand so we
taken half the assessment weight and
[1:10:41] half of the uh
Revenue this is similar to an agreement
[1:10:46] we had L Shores with the fire Services
when it was assess based assessment
[1:10:51] based without representation correct
very
[1:10:54] similar yeah very much we have the Tea
Party in Boston on that it certainly is
[1:11:00] one of the challenges with a shared
service agreement and we want to be as
[1:11:02] transparent as possible uh so we're
still in the early stages of that the
[1:11:07] best way to to build out our time and to
to C share this this serice thank you
[1:11:13] okay other
questions uh just on that will this be a
[1:11:18] living document that's sort of at the
end of the year it's renewed or it's
[1:11:23] checked and it's verified to see that
it's that it's working yes great
[1:11:26] question thank you through the mayor um
this document will change every year um
[1:11:31] and will B be based on the previous
year's construction Value Plus the first
[1:11:35] half of the current year okay so and
because we don't want to wait till the
[1:11:39] end of the year because we all do our
budgets at different times middlex
[1:11:43] Center we want to get our budget set um
in the third quarter so at the first
[1:11:47] half of this year we'll we'll come up
with uh the total construction uh
[1:11:52] Revenue this year year plus last year so
it'll be a year and a half and every
[1:11:57] year we'll recalculate it all right
thank you any other
[1:12:01] questions counc just um TW a question to
worship so this year's a pilot pardon me
[1:12:09] 2024 will be a pilot year correct first
year pilot year so can we review the
[1:12:16] whole uh weighted uh formula before 2025
because after first year we might have
[1:12:21] some service considerations or some
other issues that kind of speaks to the
[1:12:25] mayor's question as
well a council's direction yeah we we
[1:12:30] certainly can make it just for one year
see how this works for our member
[1:12:33] municipalities and then consider
bringing it
[1:12:37] back if that's council's wish that's uh
that's what's in front of
[1:12:43] council council carelis do we need to
make a decision
[1:12:50] tonight what would you defer for what
I'm just ask if we need to make a
[1:12:54] decision ton well we have a
recommendation that's up to Council
[1:12:59] Deal
[1:13:03] okay what's your wish counc deel I'd
like I'd like to see it for one year so
[1:13:09] we can see where how it's
working you're making that a
[1:13:14] motion you're seconding it any
discussion on that in favor of
[1:13:21] that carried
okay okay thank you very much thank you
[1:13:27] we'll be here again in the year yes we
will I'll reach out to I think I think
[1:13:33] that's uh the good side to that I
believe is the fact that it gives a
[1:13:36] chance to see where everybody's at so
okay and it's not a reflection on the
[1:13:40] services understood understood thank you
okay thank you
[1:13:46] thanks our next report is uh manager of
infrastructure and ELR Water Tower
[1:13:54] project update and Stuart come on
[1:13:59] up are you coming up as well Rod no he's
just gonna
[1:14:05] let okay okay perfect thank you yeah all
right go ahead Jaden all
[1:14:12] right okay um good evening your worship
and members of council um as mayor Ro
[1:14:20] mentioned we're joined here tonight by
Stuart Winchester of SEMA Plus
[1:14:23] um who will be available to provide any
additional information as required and
[1:14:27] to assist with answering um any
questions from Council on this report um
[1:14:33] so as requested at a previous council
meeting I've prepared an information
[1:14:36] report for Council for the Ala Craig
Water Tower
[1:14:39] project um the report includes a
timeline of the project in table one and
[1:14:45] there's a financial summary of the
project
[1:14:47] provided as summarized in table two the
design phase was completed approximately
[1:14:54] $45,000 under budget the Construction
contract is estimated to be completed
[1:14:59] approximately
$27,000 under budget and the site
[1:15:04] inspection and contract Administration
contract is estimated to come in
[1:15:07] approximately 63,000 over
budget SEMA Plus Engineering is
[1:15:12] requesting that their site inspection
and contract Administration budget be
[1:15:15] increased by $63,000 to cover additional
engineering costs incurred as a result
[1:15:21] of unforeseen project delays which
summarized in the report and in the
[1:15:24] attached letter um this report also
provides council with some information
[1:15:28] about project efficiencies including a
summary of some of the main project
[1:15:33] efficiencies um and as of the most
recent Payment Certificate there was
[1:15:37] still approximately
$6,200 worth of uncompleted work and
[1:15:44] 7,750 of deficiency work remaining to be
completed um the project is currently in
[1:15:50] the warranty um phase um it received
substantial um performance in October
[1:15:57] 2022 so in October 2024 is when two-year
warranty period comes to an end and the
[1:16:03] next steps on this project are going to
be um working on addressing the
[1:16:07] outstanding deficiencies completing
final testing and inspection and then
[1:16:12] final submittals um before total project
completion so um I'm available and
[1:16:19] steuart's available to answer any
questions Council ask question
[1:16:27] no questions c c k thank you mayor up uh
Jaden and Stewart uh just reading
[1:16:34] through this here this afternoon um
looking through the
[1:16:40] deficiency portion of this and uh it
seems that we're almost being fed
[1:16:46] for uh adverse weather conditions um
different uh ashphalt repairs top soil
[1:16:53] and that kind of stuff
um why would we be why would that be on
[1:17:00] the municipalities
back so through the mayor um those costs
[1:17:06] um you know those deficiencies
identified those aren't items that we're
[1:17:10] we're paying for again um typically for
deficiencies that's money that we'll
[1:17:16] hold back from the contractor um so when
I covered the um that there's remaining
[1:17:23] um uncompleted work and deficiency work
it's money we haven't paid to the
[1:17:26] contractor yet until we're satisfied
that those deficiencies are addressed so
[1:17:31] um they did have to come back and and um
address some of that the issues with top
[1:17:35] soil and the seed and they had to do a
couple ashphalt um repairs when it
[1:17:40] wasn't
satisfactory um so for those matters um
[1:17:45] we're not double paying or being
penalized on
[1:17:48] them and that also like the calibration
of that uh bulk water uh system that
[1:17:54] both you and I worked at to get that
into play
[1:18:00] um okay I'll just leave it at that
you CS thank you Jaden how was SEMA
[1:18:08] awarded this
[1:18:11] contract through the mayor
um I wasn't here but I I believe that um
[1:18:18] the
municipality information because I think
[1:18:21] he was here then but there was um an RFP
process um so the project was put out to
[1:18:28] RFP and proposals were submitted by um
multiple engineering firms and then they
[1:18:34] were selected um and recommended to be
awarded the contract Council then so
[1:18:40] they submitted a bid correct and and
Council accepted that bid yeah they
[1:18:46] submitted that proposal right and so now
the the bid was not adequate to cover
[1:18:52] what these field are costs they're
coming to us to increase the bid post
[1:18:59] taste that's correct um well is that not
on on the bidder is it not on them then
[1:19:05] to be responsible to bid responsibly so
maybe I'll open it up to steuart here as
[1:19:10] well provide comment I think what you're
asking for is justification of the
[1:19:14] increas well absolutely because if they
submit a bid like in my days as a
[1:19:20] contractor when I submitted a bid to
construct the house I couldn't go back
[1:19:23] to the to the owner of the house say oh
I had to hire an extra guy I got to
[1:19:26] charge more that's not how it works okay
so I think but the question is you're
[1:19:30] what justification to the increase
exactly I need to understand I need to
[1:19:35] understand what what promps you to come
back and say well we had to do work that
[1:19:39] we didn't plan on what you should have
planned on in your bidding
[1:19:42] process uh through you Mr Mayor uh the
the bid process for the Els elevated
[1:19:50] tank identified um you know design
requirements uh uh tendering
[1:19:56] requirements and a certain allowance for
uh Services during construction uh as uh
[1:20:02] Jen has identified through the design
phase we were uh somewhat efficient we
[1:20:07] were below budget uh and uh you know
we're able to complete the design phase
[1:20:13] and the tendering phase within uh our
budget uh the construction phase is
[1:20:20] somewhat uh contingent on the
performance the contractor uh and the
[1:20:25] amount of time that it takes the
contractor to finish the the work in
[1:20:29] this particular case and and as outlined
in our letter I may I believe it was of
[1:20:36] 2023 uh there were a number of delays
that
[1:20:39] uh realistically were beyond the the
contractor control there was the uh the
[1:20:45] crane operators strike that uh extended
the construction period by at least a
[1:20:50] month uh then there was uh issues with
uh subcontractors doing codings and well
[1:20:57] first off the delay because of the the
crane operators um strike uh put the
[1:21:04] codings uh application into adverse
weather conditions so things got delayed
[1:21:09] got delayed delayed as a result there
was through that delay there was
[1:21:14] additional uh engineering effort
required to ongoing inspection uh for
[1:21:20] for the uh through that construction
period
[1:21:23] and those are the costs that we're
trying to uh you know make sure that
[1:21:28] we're you know we're uh
compensated and I understand your point
[1:21:33] I I do I hear what you said but I guess
my my thought is why should the rate
[1:21:37] pairs in North Middle sex be penalized
for both oversight it's not their
[1:21:45] responsibility
okay counc
[1:21:49] Hern thank you your worship through you
um and thank you for the report at the
[1:21:54] bottom of page three of the report the
last two paragraphs actually outline the
[1:21:58] delays and I'm curious uh you've
mentioned two there's three here any of
[1:22:03] those delays um attributable to uh any
actions on the
[1:22:08] municipality did we did we uh did we
contribute to any of those delays any of
[1:22:14] our actions or
activities uh through you Mr Mayor uh I
[1:22:19] do not believe that there was any
actions by the ality that caused the
[1:22:24] delay uh you know the the as I indicated
the um uh crane operator strike is
[1:22:32] something that is you know beyond
anybody's control that in in in uh
[1:22:38] working on this particular project that
that's certainly not something that's
[1:22:42] under the contractor's control nor
our nor the municipalities control that
[1:22:48] you know that delay certainly uh
contributed to overall cost over runs at
[1:22:53] least on our perspective uh as
identified in uh Jaden's report we were
[1:22:59] still able to deliver the uh the
construction of the project you know
[1:23:05] efficiently and we are still under the
overall project budget great okay follow
[1:23:10] up on my second question the U the uh
total of the additional costs is
[1:23:19] $63,800 per of the total are you suggest
ing the municipality pick up 100% or is
[1:23:25] that a percentage part of the uh cost
overrun is that 100% 50%
[1:23:34] 75% uh through you Mr Mayor and I I you
know without having all the numbers in
[1:23:40] front of me uh that number would be uh
the costs that have been incurred by
[1:23:46] SEMA for uh for the additional
construction
[1:23:50] period but do not ref reflect the uh the
design budget that was not
[1:23:56] utilized okay councelor Keel you you're
good councelor
[1:24:03] Nera so is this the list the list here
in your report the list of deficiencies
[1:24:09] are these these six things still have to
be completed then Jaden J through the
[1:24:17] mayor um no those aren't the the
remaining outstanding deficiencies I
[1:24:21] just wanted to provide
some of the main deficiencies that that
[1:24:25] we had been working on just to sort of
characterize the general of the
[1:24:29] deficiencies so is there still 60
outstanding or how many are outstanding
[1:24:35] because this has been going on for 16
months and we're still
[1:24:39] not full completion through the mayor
there's certainly not 60 outstanding
[1:24:44] deficiencies um I believe that was the
the total amount that was addressed and
[1:24:48] then they would be reduced over time um
I don't have an exact count of the
[1:24:54] deficiencies um I want to say it's it's
in the order of less than 10 um but the
[1:25:00] total value is identified um so there's
$7,750 worth of uh remaining deficiency
[1:25:08] work just to follow up why isn't that
work being done do we
[1:25:15] know through the mayor
um it has been um challenging to I guess
[1:25:21] get the
to get the contractor back to site to
[1:25:24] address some of these um the tower is
operational so um some of these
[1:25:30] outstanding deficiencies I guess they're
just um not being um prioritized quite
[1:25:36] as much as we'd like to see but I'm not
sure if steart if you any add about um
[1:25:40] status of deficiencies or why not being
addressed uh through you Mr Mayor I do
[1:25:44] know that the the contractor has been
attempting to rectify certain
[1:25:49] deficiencies uh some of their equipment
suppliers have been to the site to
[1:25:53] address uh a problem with one of the
control valves and uh Rod can speak to
[1:26:00] that as well uh they have come with
their forces to address it I understand
[1:26:05] that they did some work have left and
have not resolved that is so that's why
[1:26:10] those items are remaining on the
deficiency list we will make sure that
[1:26:15] those things are corrected before uh the
final uh payments are being made to the
[1:26:21] the contractor the end of the the
warranty um you know and if need be uh
[1:26:27] we can direct uh that those be corrected
by the municipality and the cost
[1:26:32] deducted from
[1:26:35] the
okay I think
[1:26:39] so you think so uh okay just to follow
up on that so these are landmarkers
[1:26:46] respons to do the repairs at this point
for you Mr Mayor yes that is correct and
[1:26:52] so but I am to your point Stuart is um
how long do you wait uh it's one thing
[1:26:58] not to have saw put down or grass
planted but it's another thing when I
[1:27:02] hear a valve is not what it should be Y
and so I'm really at the to me it's like
[1:27:10] let's get it fixed and send them the
bill or subtract it from their bill or
[1:27:14] whatever but I'm I agree that we've
talked about these deficiencies and I
[1:27:19] know Aqua has been here and I think we
ask every time about how they're going
[1:27:24] and it's a tough process and I would
like to see I know this a little bit off
[1:27:28] topic but it isn't because we're hiring
SEMA to look after that stuff right and
[1:27:33] I guess that's where I'm a little bit
I'm a little off on it I understand what
[1:27:38] coun canelon was getting at and because
you're you're working for our interests
[1:27:44] and U I'd like to see those deficiencies
cleaned up I think that is Absolut as I
[1:27:49] said it's one thing when grass wasn't SE
didn't catch or whatever when valves and
[1:27:54] things like that those are certainly
important because if something goes
[1:27:58] wrong we're going to go talk to rod and
say you know what did you do and if he
[1:28:03] tells us it's a valve that I've been
complain or I haven't had fixed you know
[1:28:07] shame on us right so I think with part
of this we need to get these
[1:28:11] deficiencies addressed one way or down
and and um I know it's your report Jaden
[1:28:16] I don't mean to look just used to it but
but that's where I think that's just a
[1:28:20] comment a followup to coun ner counc ke
youe thank you Mayor Rob yeah actually
[1:28:26] it's just a comment and uh and I
think all members of council Council are
[1:28:33] kind of the same thought that um it's a
little Brash to come and want more money
[1:28:39] nothing repaired nothing resolved and
then our next uh topic
[1:28:47] is another contract U yeah let's let's
stay on this one
[1:28:53] it's the point I'm trying perhaps
maybe there's there's a certain level of
[1:28:59] lightess but I guess I just getting to
it is it's Brash to come want more it's
[1:29:04] not what's it going to
take through you Mr May the the budget
[1:29:11] estimate that we provided back in May
was to take the our component of the
[1:29:16] project to completion so everything that
would be required through the the
[1:29:21] remaining
remainder of the of the warranty period
[1:29:25] so ensuring that all the deficiencies
are corrected uh completing the uh
[1:29:30] two-year warranty inspection making sure
that you know if there are any defects
[1:29:34] that are found at the the two-year
warranty inspection are addressed doing
[1:29:38] those inspections that would be included
within that U uh additional fund request
[1:29:45] that's Within These that's in the scope
of these parts okay thank
[1:29:50] you okay counc Q councelor
D what
[1:29:57] happens if we get to October these
things aren't
[1:30:01] done and so we build them or have to
have it done and it costs more than the
[1:30:07] money we have left so I think that's
addressed to you Jaden I I would think
[1:30:12] that's coming to
what through the mayor I mean that's a
[1:30:17] bit of a contractual like wonder if
Stuart might have more expertise with
[1:30:21] that
[1:30:26] I through you Mr Mayor the under the
contract we have certain money set aside
[1:30:32] for deficiencies and uncompleted work
but in addition to that we have a
[1:30:36] substantial amount of money that's held
back as warranty hold back so anything
[1:30:40] that is identified at the end of the
warranty and you know immediately prior
[1:30:45] to full completion of the project uh if
there are Works to be done we have those
[1:30:50] funds available I don't recall the
number uh or the value of the
[1:30:55] maintenance hold back off the top of my
head but it would be well in excess of
[1:30:59] $100,000 that we' still holding on on
the contractor
[1:31:05] on my fear would be if we get into
valving and issues like that it come to
[1:31:12] $100,000
okay Irwin just a final comment you
[1:31:18] worship which may or may not be
addressed goes back to my original two
[1:31:22] questions one is none of the cost
overrun can be contributed to anything
[1:31:27] the municipality did and secondly
100% of the cost overrun in terms of
[1:31:34] fees are being asked by us to pay and I
find that rather
[1:31:43] unfair
okay that's more of a comment you're not
[1:31:47] really looking for an answer to that
that's a comment
[1:31:50] me
are you question I'll leave it up to
[1:31:55] whomever want are you putting a question
in that was a question pretend there's a
[1:32:00] question mark at the end that is a
[1:32:06] St through you Mr Mayor I I certainly do
understand uh you know the the
[1:32:11] perception of um you know we submitted a
bid um and you know we should be
[1:32:16] complying with the bid however you know
the during
[1:32:20] construction uh the amount of effort
that uh as the engineering consultant
[1:32:25] that we have to
provide is is somewhat unknown um that
[1:32:32] we you know on a typical project we will
uh you know incur certain costs incur a
[1:32:37] certain amount of effort through the
construction period uh however
[1:32:43] performance of the contractor uh
certainly has an influence on it
[1:32:47] duration of the contract certainly has
an influence on it we needed we need to
[1:32:52] provide inspection during the active
construction period and you know the the
[1:32:58] efficiency of the contractor addressing
defects and achieving final completion
[1:33:03] of the contract certainly impacts the
level of effort we are required to
[1:33:09] provide you know throughout uh the you
know this period uh no this will
[1:33:16] probably not sound the best we have put
as much effort in as we reasonably can
[1:33:21] to make sure that the contractor is
addressing all the works and all the uh
[1:33:26] the outstanding
works but certainly you know if uh if
[1:33:32] there is non-performance there are steps
we can take we have not taken those yet
[1:33:36] to uh Force the contractor to to jump uh
but uh based on your comments Mr Mayor
[1:33:44] uh I think we have our direction to uh
uh force uh Landmark to move forward
[1:33:50] quickly especially on that the Val isue
yeah thank you that's that absolutely is
[1:33:56] the case because I do believe we ask uh
Aqua every time they come in are the
[1:34:02] deficiencies being addressed and I know
I believe the answer was it's a process
[1:34:08] to me that's that's a wait go ahead
councel nerd I just have a followup to
[1:34:13] that so again we've been waiting 16
months how much longer are we going to
[1:34:20] wait through you Mr Mayor uh we will we
will provide instructions to to Landmark
[1:34:26] to have that work completed within
within a week if they are unable to give
[1:34:31] us a a clear answer or or let me
rephrase that have the work completed
[1:34:37] within a week or submit a uh a schedu an
acceptable schedule to North Middle sex
[1:34:42] within a week and if that's not done
then we are free to move forward and
[1:34:47] have the repairs done on landmark's
behalf thank you and I think having a
[1:34:52] schedule given is is a fair to say that
have it all done in a
[1:34:59] week yeah the schedule of time any other
questions on
[1:35:04] this you're better now
okay oh you better not I thought you
[1:35:09] said you're better now so okay any other
questions any other comments we have a
[1:35:13] recommendation in front of you what is
the way of
[1:35:20] coun
[1:35:23] I would maybe agree to it when it's
complete when it's this increase so
[1:35:31] 63,000 rise contract price
[1:35:36] $444,000 so you're so let me get the
motion that you're making that you're
[1:35:42] saying you agreeing to the motion with
the deficiencies uh looked after is that
[1:35:47] what you're saying I'm trying to get to
increase when the deficiencies are
[1:35:52] looked
[1:35:56] after yeah that is deferring that's what
you're saying till the correct sorry is
[1:36:02] there that's what I wanted to just get
is there a seconder on
[1:36:07] that
Council yes Deputy Mayor hodgin okay in
[1:36:14] favor of that
motion okay yeah go ahead if I may mar I
[1:36:19] have a question so is your motion then
we pay the full amount requested when
[1:36:22] the deficiencies are completed or that
the the amount owing or what we're going
[1:36:27] to subsidize is open for
[1:36:33] negotiation my motion is agreed to the
$63,000 increase upon full completion of
[1:36:41] the defic of the deficiencies this way
it's SEC Cur front of the
[1:36:45] nose to get it
done and and I think I heard steuart
[1:36:51] allude or make a comment that they're
going to hold Landmark accountable for
[1:36:54] some of this is that did I hear
that yes he's going the deficiencies
[1:37:00] SEMA is going to contact Landmark to get
a schedule within a week to get a
[1:37:05] schedule for completion deficiencies and
the steart going to go after Landmark
[1:37:10] for some of the costs associated with
those deficiencies and the delays that's
[1:37:14] a question we'd ask uh through you Mr
Mayor
[1:37:19] um under the under the contract the
delays would be beyond the contractor's
[1:37:24] control uh and because of that there was
an extension to the contract the and as
[1:37:31] such uh liquidated damages for late the
completion would not be applicable there
[1:37:37] is no mechanism to go after Landmark for
additional engineering
[1:37:42] costs and and how was that negotiated
like who agreed to extend the contract
[1:37:46] time that was agreed to through the
construction period sorry
[1:37:51] no go ahead go
ahead okay was Miss P agree to
[1:37:59] that through the mayor I think that I
don't have that information right handy
[1:38:03] I think that was before me but I think
if it was related to the as Stewart said
[1:38:06] you know the cray strike and um as per
the general conditions since acts like
[1:38:12] that they're permitted for contract
extensions okay
[1:38:20] okay
[1:38:28] correct yeah the motion is deferral to
but to pay the to pay the request upon
[1:38:33] comp successful completion of office
yeah yes go
[1:38:40] ahead okay do you Mr Mayor bear with me
here please me if I interpreted but the
[1:38:47] motion would be then that Council
received this report for information and
[1:38:50] that Council increased the budget for
the contract administrating Services
[1:38:55] contract with SEMA Plus Engineering for
the LC Craig Water Tower project by $
[1:39:03] 63,64 for a revised total contract price
of 40
[1:39:10] 444,000
[1:39:20] 448741166 one more not no late charges
and no interest on that hold
[1:39:28] back no okay so we have that motion we
have a second is there any more comment
[1:39:33] on none in
[1:39:37] favor in favor of
that two
[1:39:42] three four oppos to
that
[1:39:47] two it is
passed
[1:39:51] okay thanks sir one one comment I will
make to that project that was a good
[1:39:58] project it's a it's a good
infrastructure in our community I do
[1:40:02] want to make that com that uh to that uh
we do have I have been complaining about
[1:40:07] the deficiencies because I'm you know
they need to be completed but it's a
[1:40:12] good piece of infrastructure and so I
just want to make comment that okay we
[1:40:16] do have uh we have you doing your second
report as well and that is for 5.8 that
[1:40:23] is for the Park Hill Main Street cost
increases Jaden okay thank you Mr Mayor
[1:40:30] and through you um so the purpose of
this report is um to request Council to
[1:40:37] approve the engineering budget for the
Park Hill Main Street construction
[1:40:41] project um to approve increasing that
budget by
[1:40:46] 9,545 for a revised total contract price
of 63100
[1:40:53] 38150 um our engineering consultant see
a plus provided their justification the
[1:40:57] cost increase in the letter which is
attached to the
[1:41:01] report and to summarize the reasons they
are um delayed project startup resulting
[1:41:09] in significant changes to the staging
and progress of the work a significant
[1:41:13] number of unforeseen utility
conflicts deficient granular road base
[1:41:18] required to be
replaced uh very high level of effort
[1:41:21] required to deal with Excuse me
combative nature of the
[1:41:26] contractor um two inspectors were
inquired were required due to the
[1:41:30] revised construction
staging um and then the last one was
[1:41:35] material and compaction testing not
included in the original budget
[1:41:39] estimate um so in accordance with the
municipality's procurement policy
[1:41:43] Council approval is required for capital
expenditures which exceed the budget by
[1:41:50] more than 25
,000 um and also just for council's
[1:41:54] reference included in the background of
the report is just the uh reference to
[1:41:57] the previous reports for the um the
award of the engineering uh contracts
[1:42:03] and the award of the construction and
the contract Administration contract and
[1:42:07] a previous report um where there was a
um an increase to the Construction
[1:42:13] contract price with prex instruction
council's
[1:42:17] reference I'll open it up for
questions
[1:42:22] who wants to start questions on
[1:42:26] that I I'll start um since I don't see
anybody's hand up right now Stuart in
[1:42:32] that is about two inspectors or two
inspectors on site does that include
[1:42:39] having you hired someone to help carry
the
[1:42:43] project and so does that does that
include that being the second
[1:42:48] person uh Mr May no the we did have two
physical inspectors we had hary matharu
[1:42:55] and arpet Patel providing Inspection
Services in addition to Alisa vby
[1:43:01] providing contct Administration
Services okay so and I will ask this
[1:43:07] because you brought in you brought her
in to help with the
[1:43:14] project we shouldn't be responsible to
have to pay for that part of the you
[1:43:20] know
um she was brought in to to or to look
[1:43:24] after to head that project uh not in the
beginning she was brought in partway
[1:43:28] through and to her credit this is not a
knock on anyone um the work that she did
[1:43:34] but could is part of this because you
had to bring her in to help with the
[1:43:39] project because of the extra cost and I
struggle with us bearing the brunt of if
[1:43:45] that's the case so I guess
[1:43:49] so certainly um um Mr Mayor certainly
you know we did uh pay a higher rate for
[1:43:57] leasa services that we would have uh
with uh with the contract administrator
[1:44:03] we had originally anticipated uh
carrying going forward uh
[1:44:08] however the original proposal uh assumed
uh uh a fair amount of senior oversight
[1:44:15] on the contract administrator that would
have also been included within our fees
[1:44:21] that uh through negotiations with uh uh
with Jaden I agreed that our senior
[1:44:28] oversight would not be built to North
Middle
[1:44:32] so maybe not dollar for dollar but uh
you know Lisa's cost would have been
[1:44:38] built to North Middle sex the senior
oversight uh that was provided to Lisa
[1:44:44] was not built in North me we've absorbed
that internally okay that's that's one
[1:44:49] part the other part before I turn it
over to council is all these extra
[1:44:53] billing has to do with the time it took
the overruns and time all this stuff and
[1:44:59] and that's as you know the other side
I'm really struggling with because there
[1:45:04] was five weeks where I saw two guys with
a rake there at that other end and
[1:45:08] otherwise nothing happened and then we
keep hearing from uh from everyone that
[1:45:15] delays delays delays and everybody seems
to be blaming everybody but the
[1:45:20] taxpayers here are are the ones getting
the brunt of this and
[1:45:25] so that five weeks I look at you know
the rush to get asheva done all these
[1:45:31] things and how quick the sidewalk got
done once they did it it seemed to take
[1:45:36] no time but we struggle for all that
time I I would even say almost two
[1:45:41] months where not much was accomplished
and yet we are on the hook for all this
[1:45:45] time I'm so I I gotta say I'm personally
pretty angry about this whole that part
[1:45:51] of the project I mean I look on Main
Street I like it I'm not happy it took
[1:45:56] this long to get a light fixed
but that part and that extra cost and
[1:46:02] it's coming from everywhere all these
extra costs and none of it was on North
[1:46:07] Middle SE that I know of unless you can
CH change my thinking that
[1:46:13] way um Mr Mayor
um I I can't disagree with you um you
[1:46:20] know the that five six week delay where
the the contractor was off site and
[1:46:25] refused to Pro progress the work at any
time uh was frustrating to all of us um
[1:46:32] you know we were constantly on on bra to
proceed with work there was no reason
[1:46:38] that they could not proceed with work uh
that we are actually aware of um and as
[1:46:47] as you say once they came back to you
know proceed with the sidewalk work they
[1:46:52] were able to to get that completed very
quickly there's no reason that that
[1:46:56] couldn't have been done at that
time to just to one additional point in
[1:47:02] there during that period of that that
five or six weeks there would have been
[1:47:07] costs for the contract Administration
related to meeting with the contractor
[1:47:12] pushing on the contractor however our
inspectors were not on site and there
[1:47:16] there would be no charges for the
inspection during that period
[1:47:21] okay um and that doesn't even count
about how much and I'll leave it after
[1:47:25] this I'll I'll turn over to council
about how
[1:47:28] much staff North Middle sex staff time
was eaten up because of all this extra
[1:47:35] time and uh and energy that was wasted I
will say for that time like there's
[1:47:43] there's quite a there's a lot of stuff
that weren't able to be done because
[1:47:46] focusing on on different things that we
shouldn't have had to f up because
[1:47:50] that's why we hire SEMA to look after it
right but it just seemed that we had a
[1:47:55] lot of Staff doing a lot of work on as
well I'll leave it at that because I
[1:47:59] don't think there's an answer for it I
better let it go um councilor Irwin you
[1:48:04] had your hand up thank you worship two
points for for clarification the first
[1:48:09] point is the additional cost outlined
here is
[1:48:12] $195 45 and 50 cents and this is a
shared project with the county is that
[1:48:18] additional cost all for North Middle
[1:48:22] SE K mayor there is a there is cost
sharing there with the county um for
[1:48:28] these additional costs as well as um
overall for the project
[1:48:33] costs just just to clarify that point
you worship so is this our portion of
[1:48:38] the additional cost or would this part
of this be shared with the county I'm
[1:48:42] not clear through the mayor part of that
will be shared the county the exact
[1:48:48] portion of it I can't say right now um
but the part of that is their cost this
[1:48:55] includes the county portion as
well right through the mayor yes it's
[1:49:00] still all the same
taxpayers I'm now your worship that rais
[1:49:05] additional question before I ask my
second one um has this been presented to
[1:49:10] the county
yet through the mayor um we we're
[1:49:16] keeping in close communication with the
county um so they they participate in
[1:49:21] our our regular meetings um so with
respect to this um piece of additional
[1:49:28] cost I'm not sure if uh if we have
shared that with them but we are in
[1:49:32] regular communication and uh so they'll
be
[1:49:36] aware do you have a second question yes
well I several more but I'll just ask
[1:49:41] the second when I originally had your
worship and maybe I'll come back if the
[1:49:45] rest of the council doesn't ask um in
terms of of identifying the
[1:49:51] contractor
um um assessing their ability to do the
[1:49:55] work and and and then finally awarding
the contract to the company was SEMA
[1:50:00] communication was SEMA communication
sorry was SEMA involved in any of those
[1:50:04] in
activities uh through you uh Mr Mayor um
[1:50:11] for the tender process for the the Park
Hill Main Street waterm project um North
[1:50:17] midle sex went through a
pre-qualification process
[1:50:20] to uh pre-qualify you know competent
contractors um the successful contractor
[1:50:29] certainly presented uh you know very
good information uh within the
[1:50:35] pre-qualification documents um North
Middle sex staff did a uh reference
[1:50:42] check on the contractors and received
very positive references from for that
[1:50:47] particular contract um our contractor uh
I'm not certain where those references
[1:50:54] came from um certainly not
seen I I just I do want to say here that
[1:51:02] I don't want to go down a road that we
shouldn't go that we shouldn't go down
[1:51:05] and they certainly showed the capable
capable of doing the work that's that's
[1:51:10] not the issue so I I don't want to make
it look like we got you know I don't
[1:51:15] want
to badmouth any contracts or anybody go
[1:51:19] ahead you only asked that question
because I heard in the Preamble that um
[1:51:24] part of the reason for the additional
cost is competitive the the the nature
[1:51:30] of the contract um they were not easy to
so I just want to understand if SEMA had
[1:51:36] any part in in assessing or helping us
um award to that contract so I I can
[1:51:44] answer that question I think the only
way we can and that is that SEMA brought
[1:51:48] a recommendation
after getting all all the tender process
[1:51:52] sea SEMA brought a recommendation to
council uh for that company to do the
[1:51:58] work and Council approv
that and and uh that's we'll let it go
[1:52:03] with that I mean it's
okay through you Mr Mayor I if I can yes
[1:52:10] following uh completion of the
pre-qualification uh process uh we ended
[1:52:14] up I believe with four or five
pre-qualified contractors each one of
[1:52:18] those contractors was invited to submit
a a detailed Bid And The Selection uh
[1:52:25] essentially once we were passed the
pre-qualification the uh or contractor
[1:52:31] selection was basically based on price
or they may have been disqualified if
[1:52:36] there is irregularities or informalities
within the bid uh unfortunately or in
[1:52:42] this case there wasn't any so there was
uh you know we select based on
[1:52:47] loc okay coun Nera
this last
[1:52:52] 119,000 is this the last payment is this
the last amount of money that you're
[1:52:57] going to be asking for an
increase there any more I guess my
[1:53:01] question is is there any more cost going
forward or will this be the last time
[1:53:05] you come to C asking for more uh through
you Mr Mayor um uh assuming that uh the
[1:53:13] pro or the contractor proceeds finishes
their uh or corrects any deficiencies
[1:53:19] outstanding works
in a reasonable schedule that would be
[1:53:22] it unfortunately uh at this point in
time we do have a a claim that is in
[1:53:29] negotiation with North mle sex and there
is you know I'm not sure where that's
[1:53:35] going to go uh so I'm not going to
commit that this amount would cover our
[1:53:41] assistance in the claim
[1:53:45] negotiations and that's something
another so yeah that that I'm assuming
[1:53:49] is would not be here any other questions
on
[1:53:56] this no other questions we have a
recommendation we have a recommendation
[1:54:01] in front of
us and is that Council increase the
[1:54:05] budget for the contract Administration
Services contract with SEMA engineering
[1:54:10] for the Park Hill ban Street
construction project by
[1:54:13] [Music]
9,545 for revised total contract price
[1:54:18] of 631 ,
[1:54:24] 38150 this this is for services rendered
you have
[1:54:29] to how can we vote for that if we don't
know if we're paying what percentage of
[1:54:34] 119,000 how can how can we vote for this
motion I have no idea if it's 118,000
[1:54:41] we're paying or 50,000 we're paying or
whatever number it is until I have an
[1:54:45] actual number I
[1:54:48] can't so that's on the whole project
though we you know we're paying for the
[1:54:54] whole project and then it's being built
to County as a a third party we're
[1:54:59] looking after the project like we're
we're uh in charge of this project the
[1:55:04] county let North Middle sex do this
project so that will be figured out
[1:55:10] after the fact but this is all part of
the cost and so I'm not sure where we
[1:55:15] could go with that comment made I'm not
sure where we could Jaden
[1:55:20] thanks Mr Mayor just through you to
maybe provide some um some clarification
[1:55:25] on that um so the county is committed
certainly to paying their share their
[1:55:30] share and we have a close working
relationship with them we have met with
[1:55:34] them to go through the cost sharing um
unfortunately that wasn't something that
[1:55:38] was um established prior to construction
which um you know would have been would
[1:55:43] have been good but we basically go
through the contract line items um line
[1:55:47] by line and agree on who who's paying
for what um generally their scope is
[1:55:52] contained to the the roadway from the
curbs in and um the road reconstruction
[1:55:58] that we had to do so um it it would be a
bit of a dynamic number with um what
[1:56:04] their portion of this would be because
our expectation would be that once we do
[1:56:08] that line by line um analysis to figure
out what their portion is that would
[1:56:14] establish a percentage and then their
percentage share they would pay that
[1:56:20] same percentage this cost overrun and
just to give the counselor um some I
[1:56:26] guess Direction on what that um number
would be it's less than half it's I
[1:56:32] would say it's around 15 to 30% would be
the County's share
[1:56:44] approximately sorry Council canelon then
Deputy Mayor thank you Mayor Rob Jaden
[1:56:48] wasn't a good deal of this cost run due
to the uh the the road work that needed
[1:56:53] to be done to increase the base of the
road that it could hold the pavment the
[1:56:56] new
[1:57:00] pavment through the mayor this this cost
increases strictly for for sema's um
[1:57:06] extra work and effort on the project
it'd be hard to determine how much that
[1:57:10] is certainly the road reconstruction
piece of work did take quite a bit of
[1:57:14] time um there was an Associated contract
extension um and we could get into the
[1:57:19] details with that but um certainly the
county is committed to to you know
[1:57:24] working up the details with us um on the
what that cost sharing is well I'm kind
[1:57:29] of with councel on this one because
until we know what that is because if
[1:57:32] this if the cost overrun is
significantly because of the road
[1:57:35] reconstruction that's on the county it's
not on us
[1:57:40] right through the mayor um this the cost
of overrun from SEMA um it's uh
[1:57:49] certainly not I wouldn't say that the
the road reconstruction portion is
[1:57:53] really what's what's driving this um
mostly like it's a there's a lot of
[1:57:58] factors to it it's just the overall
construction project I'm not sure
[1:58:01] steuart G any
[1:58:05] that uh through you Mr Mayor I
guess just where where do you begin with
[1:58:11] this particular
project when when when when the when the
[1:58:16] project was originally tendered and
envisioned uh uh we had previously held
[1:58:21] a public meeting with the the business
owners along Park Hill Main Street and
[1:58:26] the direction that was given to staff
and to to SEMA was to attempt to get
[1:58:32] this project done through the winter
period so that Park Hill Main Street was
[1:58:37] opened through July and August uh for
the summer season for vehicles driving
[1:58:43] to Grand vent so the the The Works were
tendered with a an anticipated start in
[1:58:50] and I don't recall the exact dat but I
believe it was August uh so the notice
[1:58:55] of award went out in time but
unfortunately due to uh supply chain
[1:59:02] issues and difficulty with uh your
Ontario one call and obtaining locates
[1:59:08] contractor wasn't able to commence work
until I believe it was in November if I
[1:59:13] if I recall correctly
regardless because of that um
[1:59:20] the the works could not be uh prosecuted
as was originally anticipated the
[1:59:26] contract was originally set up so the
works would be commenced at the North
[1:59:30] End of uh of the of Park Hill coming
southernly to uh I believe just was it
[1:59:38] past uh M Street M and Hastings
thereabouts and then completing uh full
[1:59:44] restoration of that to binder course
ashal then moving to the South from
[1:59:49] there down to Broadway do the same thing
and then or sorry I guess the first one
[1:59:54] was to Broadway second stage was from
Broadway to Al Elgen Field Road last
[1:59:59] stage being the small portion on Elliot
drive so that that was the original
[2:00:04] setup but because of the late start
weather
[2:00:08] conditions and the in uh uh desire to
keep the the project moving and trying
[2:00:13] to get the the project complete for the
the businesses on Park Hill Main Street
[2:00:18] by July
uh we uh the decision was made to permit
[2:00:24] the contractor to alter the staging and
ended up uh going all the way
[2:00:30] through very shortly on after the after
that decision was made we ran into some
[2:00:36] uh Municipal drains that were uh unknown
to ourselves unknown so they weren't
[2:00:42] shown on the contract drawings so there
was a lot of effort uh spent in
[2:00:47] investigating those drains uh a lot of
effort dealing with a contractor and how
[2:00:52] we work
around you know all of that just
[2:00:56] contributed to additional delays and
additional effort certainly effort on
[2:01:01] our
part but with with those changes we also
[2:01:06] then allowed the contractor to work on
phase three while they're working on
[2:01:11] parts of phase one and that drove the
need to have two inspectors on the site
[2:01:16] because I couldn't have one guy looking
after both ends of the job at the same
[2:01:20] time so the decisions were made through
the construction phase that drove
[2:01:26] additional costs at least for us so you
know it it was decisions made the best
[2:01:33] based on the best information we had at
the time uh and with the desire to get
[2:01:39] this job done as quickly as possible
just as a followup to that given your
[2:01:43] significant experience in bidding these
type of projects is that not to be
[2:01:48] expected the unknown concy that that you
may encounter is that not to be
[2:01:53] expected there are there yeah and there
there are allowances within the contract
[2:01:58] for certain unknowns you know that you
know we do include uh provisional items
[2:02:05] within the contract force or you know
have pricing for things that are
[2:02:10] unexpected
um I would have to say that what we
[2:02:15] encountered down Main Street was
Beyond just about everything that I have
[2:02:22] on a road Recon type
job my final question and th $119,000 as
[2:02:29] you asked what are you willing to settle
for what are you willing to
[2:02:34] negotiate I'm I'm not prepared to answer
that question
[2:02:39] here Deputy Mayor hin s your hand up
please um all that conversation kind of
[2:02:45] forget what I was going to I always was
going to say it the long and short it we
[2:02:49] are being asked to pay 11
19,54 I expect that bill is come to
[2:02:56] 06 we do not know you're not sending out
two bills you not send one to North Mill
[2:03:01] not send one to the county that the
County's chunk is in that and that's I'm
[2:03:05] thinking up to Jaden and the County
engineer to sit down and maybe cut it
[2:03:10] figure 30% 40% whatever the figure it is
so we're still expected to pay the 119 ,
[2:03:19] 540 with a known fact that okay a third
that we might
[2:03:23] get 40,000 or 30,000 40,000 back in the
count so our kind of number that we're
[2:03:29] looking at is 80 or 990,000 somewhere in
that just offer but we are expected to
[2:03:34] pay out of our thing the 119 whether we
want to or not we're we're asked we
[2:03:41] expected to pay this 119 that's what I'm
getting they're not sending O2 bills we
[2:03:45] are still the one going to cut the
check and and instead of we're not going
[2:03:50] to send a bill to or talk with County
just on this portion it's on the whole
[2:03:56] proo right it's going to be one one one
uh agreement that it's going to be
[2:04:02] paid
J thank you Mr May through you just just
[2:04:07] to remind Council to this this is a
project that we did get grant funding
[2:04:11] through the investing Canada
infrastructure program so um just with
[2:04:16] respect to the source of financing for
this project I'm not sure
[2:04:19] um if our treasure has anything to add
in that respect um just with respect to
[2:04:24] where you know the funding um comes
[2:04:29] from counc dagel I'm just looking at the
table one the engineering breakdown
[2:04:35] material testing there was nothing in
the approved
[2:04:38] budget and that uh other than
13,650 uh for additional material
[2:04:45] testing this material testing did it
come about because of all of a sudden
[2:04:49] there was a need to re replace the road
base because it was going to be accepted
[2:04:53] as it was originally and then it was
found to be
[2:04:58] deficient Jaden or Stuart who's gonna
answer Stuart go ahead on the hook again
[2:05:04] through you Mr Mayor um the original
proposal that we provided to Jaden's
[2:05:09] predecessor uh outlined the what we
anticipated for the scope of our work
[2:05:14] and identified that uh the cost of
material testing would be in addition to
[2:05:19] that and carried through a separate
budget whether we uh the material
[2:05:23] testing consultant was carried by North
mle sex directly or uh as additional uh
[2:05:29] fees for
semen so the the original proposal did
[2:05:33] not include material testing though we
always understood that material testing
[2:05:37] would be
required material testing is not
[2:05:40] something that's a service that SEMA
[2:05:45] provides okay is that
good okay is there any other any other
[2:05:51] questions no other
questions we still have a request here
[2:05:56] and a recommendation from staff that we
pay
[2:06:01] $19,500
what's council's wish
[2:06:13] here deputy mayor
[2:06:17] hin
you Mo you move you move I move the
[2:06:23] recommendation okay see where it goes
all right a
[2:06:29] second no seconder on
this what's council's wish
[2:06:36] then councel councel D is it possible to
have a meeting with the county so kind
[2:06:42] of get this broken
down before we agree to it because if
[2:06:48] the county box on it we're up up against
it for
[2:06:52] $120,000 we should see
what the C's come close to what the
[2:06:59] Count's going to be paying of this
portion what's going to come out of
[2:07:02] grant funding so we know what the last
dollars are coming to the
[2:07:10] tax Jaden do you do you have any comment
to that or Carolyn I mean that's
[2:07:16] um the if if I remember it right we are
doing the project and we're submitting
[2:07:23] their share to them overall not
individual
[2:07:26] pieces um is that not
right I'm just I'm just saying if we go
[2:07:32] to them just about
this yeah through you Mr May that's
[2:07:37] correct um we have had a meeting with
the county to go through do that line by
[2:07:42] line review um and we were generally in
agreement with it um you know no issues
[2:07:48] at all working that out with them and I
don't expect there would be any issues
[2:07:53] as we um you know work out the final
numbers um with the County
[2:07:58] engineer um so it would just be I mean
if that's council's wish we can um
[2:08:04] confirm that cost sharing it will take
some time um so i' expect uh you know
[2:08:12] towards uh probably the first meeting in
um March first meeting in March yeah to
[2:08:19] be able to bring that back that
information back to Council on what what
[2:08:23] exactly that cost spit is
[2:08:28] County thank you Mayor Rob so I just
want to quickly simplify this we had the
[2:08:35] estimate a bid a bid awarded County
agrees to X numbers of
[2:08:41] dollars we're the other portion of that
question I'm raising is they have agreed
[2:08:48] to to that will they agree to this
overrun
[2:08:54] proportionately that's I that's what I'm
getting I think that's what all and
[2:09:01] that's the same thing with the $1.8
million we approved from Brix when was
[2:09:05] that to add on to this whole project
wasn't I think it was 1.8
[2:09:10] million
1.5 oh maybe it was 1.58 okay but we we
[2:09:16] approved that here uh because it was
services rendered it's it's much the
[2:09:21] same thing I mean it is an
overrun uh Council just I'm not trying
[2:09:26] to say Direct on it but let's just move
forward on this one way or another like
[2:09:32] let's let's make a decision here tonight
Mr May if I could just make one one
[2:09:36] addition go ahead and and maybe this
will help clarify to council the
[2:09:41] original bid that SEMA provided to North
ble sex for services during the
[2:09:46] construction phase uh was was predicated
on the original contract that uh um uh
[2:09:53] considered completion of the project by
June of
[2:09:58] 2023 um through changes that were
reviewed negotiated argued about and
[2:10:04] ultimately approved by North Middle sex
the completion date was then extended to
[2:10:09] I believe it was November 10th November
yeah so through those changes North
[2:10:13] metalx has agreed to the additional uh
construction period and what we are
[2:10:19] asking for is for compensation for the
additional surfice during construction
[2:10:23] for that
[2:10:26] period uh we did through the through
that period we did repeatedly ask the
[2:10:33] the contractor when they were going to
achieve completion on the project but we
[2:10:37] were unable to uh get you know firm
commitment from them as to when they
[2:10:41] were actually going to get there so you
know in in terms of estimating what our
[2:10:46] over overruns were going to be it was
impossible until such time as they
[2:10:50] actually got I know raises the question
that if the contractor was absentee for
[2:10:59] five weeks or there was no business
being done what were you
[2:11:04] doing to incur costs if they aren't
working you're not
[2:11:09] working through you Mr Meritt as as I
did indicate previously during that
[2:11:14] period we did not have our inspectors on
site there is no inspection ch we did uh
[2:11:19] hold a number of meetings with the
contractor trying to get them to come
[2:11:23] back uh we did you know try to respond
to all their uh numerous R requests for
[2:11:30] information that were repeated and uh
frivolous uh from in my perspective but
[2:11:37] we we tried to work with the contractor
to get them back to get them on site to
[2:11:41] finish the
job okay counc Nera but at a cost of
[2:11:46] almost 120,000
not just for that just for that no not
[2:11:52] just not just for so for the whole
period from June to November corre
[2:11:58] that's corre yeah all right that's a
better way of phrasing for June to
[2:12:04] November but there was about two two
months of zero work being done of
[2:12:10] those five
months by the
[2:12:15] contractor okay right councelor
thank you your worship um comment for
[2:12:20] you and Council I don't think council is
saying a hard go here I think what
[2:12:24] council is saying is we'd like a little
bit more information and defered
[2:12:27] decision get and if that's March that's
only a
[2:12:35] month are you making that a
motion we're we're circling around here
[2:12:40] and
let's I would be happy to make that a m
[2:12:44] work I I don't have the complete list of
all the other information council's
[2:12:47] looking for but I think most of us been
captured in the uh in the discussion
[2:12:51] here this
evening uh so I'll turn that before I
[2:12:55] ask for a second Jaden is that possible
to get some additional information for
[2:12:59] Council for that for
March through your worship uh yes and I
[2:13:04] I just want to clarify with with Council
then is the additional information
[2:13:09] required what the cost split is for this
engineering overrun with the
[2:13:15] county correct is that correct
I think it is your worship and I think
[2:13:20] council is still seeking some clarity in
some of the uh actions Behind These
[2:13:24] numbers maybe we can submit them after
we had a chance to think about it a
[2:13:28] little bit more but I I as I said I
don't think council's making a hard no I
[2:13:33] think they're just wanting some more
information before and I'm putting words
[2:13:37] in other counsel's mouths of course
before we make a decision this evening
[2:13:41] okay so you you've made a motion to
defer this to the march to
[2:13:46] March yes worship and I and I would I
would ask our our our manager here what
[2:13:51] um which meeting in March would be the
best
[2:13:56] one through the
mayor personally just because some
[2:14:00] vacation time coming up it would be the
second one second meeting in March it's
[2:14:04] council's okay okay so is there a second
there for
[2:14:09] that okay we we got many councel Nera
seconded by Council more discussion on
[2:14:16] that so question for councelor Irwin is
is that then to deter you're agreeing to
[2:14:21] pay the full
119,000 subject to what the county is
[2:14:25] willing to compensate this
[2:14:29] one my motion simply said we would make
a decision on this with more information
[2:14:34] whether it's the full amount a partial
amount I'm not sure until we get the
[2:14:38] information obviously thank you
okay in favor of that
[2:14:46] motion car
[2:14:49] okay before we go on to our next report
we're going to take a five minute
[2:14:54] break might even be six minutes but
we'll take a short
[2:15:03] break all right we'll call the meeting
back to order and we will go back
[2:15:09] into
5.5 to report from manager of
[2:15:13] infrastructure on the Northern uh El
Craig Northern drainage issues
[2:15:31] uh 5.4 pardon me uh the drainy
superintendent but I believe Jaden
[2:15:35] you're going to be presenting that
Municipal drain tender results in
[2:15:38] contract award for the Hutcheson Eagles
drain
[2:15:42] a thank you your worship yeah item I
have 5.5 um so this is the the
[2:15:48] Hutchinson or sorry Municipal drain
tender results and contract award for
[2:15:54] the Hutchinson eagleson drain a um so
the purpose of this report is to award
[2:16:00] the tender um for contract MD 01 2024
for the Hutchinson Eagles and drain a to
[2:16:09] jlh Excavating Inc in the amount of
$222,900
[2:16:16] and
90 um excluding
[2:16:21] hsd only one bid was received on this
project however the price came in well
[2:16:27] below the engineers's estimate of
[2:16:46] $297,700 this contractor seems
relatively new to me has he worked with
[2:16:50] us before in
dream through the mayor yes I do believe
[2:16:55] we have worked with this contractor
before is he local where's he
[2:16:59] from through the mayor sorry I don't
have that information okay right but he
[2:17:04] he has work he has done work for AR
Arona yeah he work for okay any other
[2:17:12] questions any other questions on this
train seeing no other questions I have a
[2:17:17] recommendation in front of you move by
councel Irwin seconded by councel Nera
[2:17:22] all in
favor carried all right now we'll go to
[2:17:27] 5.5 and that's Hills Craig North
drainage
[2:17:34] issues um your worship I'm afraid the
the item was moved around on the agenda
[2:17:39] that some Council might be looking at to
move the matter we dealt with last to we
[2:17:46] have it as 5.8 but the rest of
account4 so we're we're using different
[2:17:51] slightly different
[2:18:00] numbers you had the correct item just
the different numbers are
[2:18:04] reflected okay so uh this is the El
Craig
[2:18:09] northage so change the numbers okay
through you yourip this report is a
[2:18:17] follow up to previous reports and
discussions with Council regarding
[2:18:20] drainage issues which have been
occurring in the Northeast area of Al
[2:18:24] Craig um around Queen Street Church
Street and rabbitwood Court area the
[2:18:29] report provides background on the issues
and complaints as well as staff's
[2:18:34] assessment of the cause of the issues
and steps taken to address
[2:18:37] them um so we were able to confirm that
an old storm sewer on Church Street was
[2:18:43] clogged with tree roots and uh we have
some photos there that we'll be able to
[2:18:48] share with Council um was clogged with
tree roots and debris resulting in um we
[2:18:56] believe water backing up um we believe
that this was the cause of the issue
[2:19:00] that some residents on Church Street
were having with their water backing up
[2:19:03] into their basements um you can just see
some photos there of the repair being
[2:19:08] undertaken by by a
contractor um so the contractor was
[2:19:13] hired to complete the repair which was
done on January 23rd and the storm sewer
[2:19:18] is now functioning
properly um a separate uh a second
[2:19:23] separate issue was um encountered
involving ponding water and flooding in
[2:19:30] the rear yards of properties on Church
Street and rabbitwood Court and at the
[2:19:34] December 6th council meeting Council
directed staff to complete an an
[2:19:40] assessment of the drain andu so we had
our drainage engineer our doin Inc
[2:19:45] complete an assessment on December 13
and their findings are summarized in the
[2:19:50] report um so to summarize arin's
findings um they there is a small
[2:19:56] Channel which is an old abandoned CN
Railway ditch uh in the rear yard of
[2:20:01] these properties um with a hicken bottom
Outlet at the East End which is
[2:20:06] approximately 0.84 meters higher than
the West End of the channel the
[2:20:12] abandoned ditch was filled in years ago
by Downstream residents to the East and
[2:20:17] um with the hick and bottom being at a
higher elevation than the rest of the
[2:20:21] channel the water does not currently
drain from that ditch um so um the
[2:20:28] there's also the development property to
north um the new Lots on Queen Street um
[2:20:34] and and those have provided their
grading certificates the municipality
[2:20:38] that verifies that the site drainage is
in accordance with the design approved
[2:20:42] by the
municipality and um additionally the
[2:20:46] southern most lot on Queen Street um did
add some additional catch basins along
[2:20:53] their southern property line to capture
drainage in that area um so the drainage
[2:20:59] for those New Lots should be contained
within the rear yards and not spill onto
[2:21:03] the existing properties of the South our
doin engineering did identify a
[2:21:09] potential solution to address the lowly
ditch area in the rear yards that
[2:21:13] currently don't have a drainage outlet
and that would be for Property Owners
[2:21:18] owner or owners requiring the drainage
they could petition for a new Municipal
[2:21:25] drain um therefore staff is recommending
that Council direct staff to inform the
[2:21:31] residents experiencing drainage issues
in their rear yards of their option for
[2:21:37] petitioning for a municipal drain
through the drainage
[2:21:42] act
[2:21:46] questions
CN just a comment in a question
[2:21:51] appreciate the report and appreciate the
professional opinion here but boy was
[2:22:00] there a lot of water
back so I I'm not sure where it all came
[2:22:06] from because it wasn't there in the past
that being said I did ask this question
[2:22:10] previously uh in anticipation of council
tonight what would be the cost of a
[2:22:15] municipal drain to the residents
[2:22:19] through your worship I did inquire with
our Dobbin um thank you for providing
[2:22:23] the question counselor um and they
provided a very um preliminary estimate
[2:22:28] they they think it could be in the order
of 30,000 to
[2:22:32] $80,000 um you know it's very early they
didn't do a very thorough assessment um
[2:22:37] so there's just a lot of variables um to
that so 30,000 to 80,000 is the range
[2:22:42] they
provided thank you uh can I ask for
[2:22:46] claric
councelor irn you said there was a lot
[2:22:49] of water when are you referring to um we
worship I was there both in the spring
[2:22:55] and the and the fall and uh the backyard
were very flooded um so there was a lot
[2:23:02] of water there in both occasions um I've
never seen that much water in those
[2:23:07] backyards so yeah I just wanted to
clarify I wanted a
[2:23:11] clarification um any other questions
from counselor comments I have one in
[2:23:18] because it's all private property could
the residents just not agree to put in a
[2:23:22] drain themselves if they wanted to and
not make it a municipal drain just to
[2:23:28] private through the mayor yes I do
believe that they can do that you can
[2:23:33] they can do a private drain um or a
mutual agreement drain is also another
[2:23:38] one that would go through the drainage
act but certainly Property Owners can
[2:23:41] can work together to to find a solution
to do I I think that should be part of
[2:23:46] the part of the
uh options to to the residents you know
[2:23:52] if they could if they could meet and
just get together it would
[2:23:55] certainly I'm sure save them a lot of
money and be done more reasonably if
[2:23:59] they could agree to something like that
and uh it'll be interesting uh
[2:24:04] interesting is a wrong word but I wait
to see what happens when they start to
[2:24:08] do the back of that property the uh East
Side East End of that property with the
[2:24:15] tow houses uh to to help mitigate that
water and of course right from the
[2:24:21] beginning you know to help mitigate that
water so I think that's another another
[2:24:25] thing to make sure to make uh people
more comfortable with what's happening
[2:24:30] back there but I think if I I agree to
to give those the results of this to the
[2:24:36] residents but also if private drain is
another option I think that's something
[2:24:40] that should be to S as
well other other comments questions from
[2:24:46] you have a recommendation in front of
you what's your
[2:24:49] wish move the recommendation by Council
Irwin
[2:24:53] seconder councelor canelon in
favor carried thank you thanks
[2:25:03] Jaden all right yours is the next one
again it's the Queen Street gas main
[2:25:10] relocation all right through you your
worship um this is just a um report for
[2:25:16] Council
information um Council may recall that
[2:25:20] um we arranged for embridge to relocate
the gas main on the North End of Queen
[2:25:26] Street in Elsa Craig and that um was to
be completed in advance of our planned
[2:25:32] water main construction project and I
just wanted to give this information to
[2:25:36] council and how the final costs came in
um enbridge's cost did come in quite a
[2:25:42] bit higher than they had estimated um
they estimated the cost to be
[2:25:49] $42,000 sorry $
[2:26:02] 42,73318
7,000 and under the standard
[2:26:08] 3565 cost split um our share of that
overrun would have been around $62,000
[2:26:17] um after discussing that further with
embridge we were able to get them to um
[2:26:24] cut that in half to to evenly split our
share of the cost overrun so um the our
[2:26:31] share of the total overrun is
approximately
[2:26:35] $31,000 so therefore the total um final
cost to the municipality of North Middle
[2:26:41] sex for the gas main
relocation is
[2:26:47] $940 excluding
HST um and this does fall within staff's
[2:26:54] delegated approval so um Council
approval is not required but just wanted
[2:27:00] to bring this for council's information
is there any questions on Deputy Mayor
[2:27:04] hodin quick question Jaden to you m
mayor uh where where are they re
[2:27:09] relocating
[2:27:13] it through the mayor it was just
relocating it from the west side of the
[2:27:19] road the West Boulevard to the East
Boulevard just flipping it to the other
[2:27:22] side so we have a clear running line for
that
[2:27:26] water any other any other questions on
that no other questions we need a motion
[2:27:31] to receive this for information counc
Nera Council dagel all in favor carry
[2:27:37] thank you uh you're up again oh this
lagoons okay so uh on the Park Hill Su
[2:27:43] Lagoon bridging update and Wastewater uh
waste water servicing
[2:27:50] capacity your worship um we have a
report report here an update on the Park
[2:27:56] Hill sewage Lagoon dredging project um
and also some information about um a
[2:28:02] proposed Wastewater servicing capacity
allocation um we wanted to get this
[2:28:06] information into Council in advance of
the um of our budget process so um just
[2:28:14] going through the background we have had
previous reports to Council on this
[2:28:18] matter in July of last year we brought a
comprehensive update report back to
[2:28:25] council about where we stand with the
with the current lagoons and the
[2:28:28] capacity of the lagoons uh as well as
the the plans for the future wastewater
[2:28:33] treatment plants um we basically uh
found that the lagoons are at capacity
[2:28:40] and we can't really proceed with
development at this time um in December
[2:28:46] we um got council's approval for
pre-budget
[2:28:51] approval to move ahead with um an
engineering contract with RV Anderson
[2:28:58] Associates limited to get the design
going for the Lagoon dredging project um
[2:29:06] so since that time in December we've
been working with RBA on this project um
[2:29:10] they have prepared a capital cost
estimate for Lagoon dredging and they
[2:29:14] provide a range for
moving the total quantity of sludge and
[2:29:20] that range is $2.8 million to $3.2
million
[2:29:26] um it's estimated that by removing the
the full quantity of sludge um we could
[2:29:32] free up
approximately the equivalent of 180
[2:29:38] single family equivalent units of
development um we are recommending that
[2:29:44] we proceed with this with proceed with
the project um and proceed the full
[2:29:49] Sledge cleanout however um Council may
also want to consider partial clean out
[2:29:55] which would free up a lesser um quantity
of wastewater treatment capacity for
[2:30:01] development um within the report provide
a table with the current active
[2:30:07] development files in Park Hill for
council's reference
[2:30:10] and
um and then we go into uh
[2:30:17] we do want to recommend that Council
direct staff to put together a a
[2:30:23] Wastewater servicing capacity allocation
policy um and that would help us ensure
[2:30:31] that when we create wastewater treatment
capacity at the lagoons should be
[2:30:36] proceeded with the d sledging project
that that capacity is allocated in a
[2:30:40] fair efficient and transparent manner um
that would be uh done through Council as
[2:30:46] well so that would be a policy we'd put
together in House at no
[2:30:52] cost and that is the report okay
questions Council irn thank you worship
[2:30:58] just one uh question if we do go ahead
and dredge the lagoons what's the
[2:31:05] increased life capacity of
[2:31:10] them uh through the mayor just to
clarify when you talk about life back
[2:31:13] you mean how long would it be good for
[2:31:20] with respect sorry just for
clarification again with respect to
[2:31:23] would it add another 10 years life would
it add another 15 years to the usability
[2:31:27] would it add another five years 25 years
how long would it add to the
[2:31:31] usability so um I don't have I don't
have the exact information on that it'
[2:31:38] be something we'll be working with with
rvy rvy Anderson on um as we continue to
[2:31:43] develop the design um we do know that
the the Lagoon has been accumulating
[2:31:49] sludge since it was built in the the
late 70s I believe it was and that
[2:31:55] there's now you know around
45,000 cubic meters so um you know we
[2:32:01] could determine but it's I guess
complicated or complex um processes in
[2:32:07] that the Sledge how it accumulates and
how it would displace capacity um but I
[2:32:11] can certainly get some information back
for Council on that okay
[2:32:19] there is also added to that is the
thought that if you did some maintenance
[2:32:25] on the lagoons um
that uh may have not been done on nearly
[2:32:31] as regular basis that it could have been
done with the lagoons in the past that
[2:32:37] we could prolong that now how much I
don't know um but there is some there's
[2:32:43] some potential opportunity there as well
[2:32:48] okay other questions Council canel thank
you Mayor Rob I have two questions Jaden
[2:32:54] the first one for you is that um there's
some indication that by doing the
[2:32:59] sledging here we could accommodate up to
an additional 185 single family homes is
[2:33:04] there any guarantee of
[2:33:09] that to the mayor um we do know that
like based on our current capacity um
[2:33:15] analysis that we've done we do know that
the sludge it's basically taking up
[2:33:20] space like it's occupying space there
that would could be used um by by raw
[2:33:26] waste water so um provided that the the
Sledge is removed yes it does create
[2:33:32] capacity okay it's just that I wouldn't
want to be disappointed by an
[2:33:36] engineering report again and my other
question for you is you you make a
[2:33:42] reference here to 37 3759 to 436
tones if we went with a higher limit to
[2:33:49] 436 tones is that all of the sledges in
these lag or just still a portion of
[2:33:58] it the mayor that is the that's total
quantity of of sludge um like that's
[2:34:05] that's kind of a theoretical dry ton
quantity of it it comes out um you know
[2:34:10] as kind of more of a a slurry or a
certain um solids percentage but um
[2:34:16] that's a total F I just did some quick
calculations I just for in FYI it works
[2:34:20] out to $750 per tone to remove it which
is pretty
[2:34:28] steep coun Nera Jaden this is just a
temporary measure I mean we'll still
[2:34:33] have to set aside some funds for a
wastewater treatment plant
[2:34:39] correct through the mayor that's um
correct like the wastewater treatment
[2:34:43] plant is still our our ultimate goal
it's just
[2:34:46] um you know with the inability to fund
that project and see it move forward um
[2:34:52] this is certainly uh I guess to say it's
temporary it is a thing that we have to
[2:34:58] do regardless should we proceed with the
wastewater treatment plant we still do
[2:35:01] have to dredge these lagoons at some
point so it's a matter of time for when
[2:35:06] we have
to and do we have a timeline on when
[2:35:10] they're going to be cleaned out and dged
or is that all contingent
[2:35:15] on getting
um the report back from the
[2:35:21] engineer through the mayor um we would
leave it um open to the potential
[2:35:28] contractors that would do the work um it
could be as early as say end of March
[2:35:35] should the should it be approved um the
budget um RV is working towards having
[2:35:41] the tender documents ready um they
recommend keeping the time line for when
[2:35:46] the work would happen flexible with the
contractor so giving them a window say
[2:35:51] March till um later in the year for them
to do the work and then they can make
[2:35:57] arrangements to do it at their time and
then just one more question Jaden um
[2:36:02] once we get this D sludged is that the
green light for the developers then to
[2:36:06] go ahead and start their project that
they've been
[2:36:10] waiting through the mayor that's the
that's the Hope like we want to get this
[2:36:14] D sludge to help some of these
developments that you know are
[2:36:18] essentially waiting and ready to go um
to be able to proceed with their
[2:36:24] projects thank you
[2:36:27] Jaden I just wanted to add to that so
what Jaden mentioned a few minutes ago
[2:36:31] though it should be subject to a sewage
allocation strategy so that um all the
[2:36:38] capacity isn't used up by one developer
uh it needs to be done on a process that
[2:36:44] allocates it uh often it's done in other
places based on performance so a
[2:36:49] developer that actually is building and
gets building permits and moves ahead um
[2:36:55] would be allocated first rather than
someone who for instance might sit on it
[2:37:00] U waiting for sales or something that
nature so it'll be allocated based on a
[2:37:04] strategy that would be developed and
brought to to council for
[2:37:08] approval councel you had your hand up
any idea how long it would take to do
[2:37:13] the full feed up
[2:37:19] through the mayor I'm just looking at
some notes here from our meeting with
[2:37:22] the consultant but I believe it's it's a
um it's a pretty short uh duration I
[2:37:30] believe it's only two or three weeks I
may ask um we've working very closely
[2:37:34] with aqua on this and we do have Rod
here who's been kind enough to be
[2:37:39] sitting through the meeting maybe I
don't know R if you anything to add or
[2:37:42] maybe you know those specific
information how long it takes the dredge
[2:37:47] again yeah um thank you so um to go with
councelor Irwin's comments and counselor
[2:37:54] uh narrative the the dredging of this
Lagoon that we're talking about in
[2:37:58] particular it is also in relation to the
wastewater treatment plant design so
[2:38:05] this isn't this isn't money that's going
to be spent one time this is actually
[2:38:09] going to help us in that new plant
design so I want to make sure that
[2:38:14] everyone is aware of that so uh we're
going to be able to maintain this Lago
[2:38:19] or do any type of
upgrades as it's being taken down and
[2:38:23] dredged uh in relation to our future
project so that's that's number one U
[2:38:29] normally these uh processes that RBA is
is working on you have a number of
[2:38:35] different processes to dredge it so I
guess it all depends on what process is
[2:38:39] being picked or chosen so yes two three
weeks maybe a month Maybe two month tops
[2:38:47] uh just depending on the process how
we're going to dredge that
[2:38:52] legon okay just to follow up we're
talking to lagoons here are we
[2:38:58] not um the the one cell that we're
talking about that dredging from my
[2:39:04] understanding is the so cell uh first um
but the total project of three million
[2:39:11] or four million or whatever it is is
both being
[2:39:14] done
[2:39:17] yeah
[2:39:20] yeah that is a firm yes that is right
that is the scope of the project is both
[2:39:26] cells correct okay that is correct I
mean the way we answer I just want to
[2:39:31] make okay is that is that
all coun canel thank you Mayor Rob the
[2:39:37] question I have for either one of you
gentlemen is that we've have quite a bit
[2:39:40] of funds invested in the design and
build of the plant itself the mechanical
[2:39:45] plant if we go ahead with this and delay
that plant indefinitely what happens to
[2:39:50] that
[2:39:53] design the design is going to stay as is
because that cell is tied to that design
[2:40:01] so you're not you didn't lose U that
design you know of when we do get our
[2:40:07] funding because I believe we are we're
going to be successful we're going to be
[2:40:10] able to move with that build so again
dredging this Lagoon
[2:40:16] is is something that we're going to have
to do regardless and maintain our our
[2:40:20] system okay so even if it's 5 years down
the road that sign be correct okay thank
[2:40:27] you you said you were good any other
questions but I have one and that is if
[2:40:34] we approve this because nothing happens
overnight with Building Homes and
[2:40:39] everything else if we approve this and
we know this is the case can we start
[2:40:44] that process then of allowing the start
of you know construction of 180 units or
[2:40:51] do we have to wait are we going to wait
till it's completed and
[2:40:55] then and then uh allocate I mean are we
going to start that process as we start
[2:41:01] to work in
conjunction through your worship um I
[2:41:06] think that that ties into this this
Wastewater servicing capacity alloc
[2:41:11] allocation policy and that's really
going to give us the procedures and the
[2:41:15] process for how it gets allocated and
when they can start um but certainly um
[2:41:22] yeah once we get the the go-ahead I
think we want to be sure that you know
[2:41:25] it is successful and we have created
capacity but um yeah there more detail
[2:41:31] to come when we get there I just want to
make comment that this is good to get
[2:41:35] real numbers and to get real
information uh because over the past few
[2:41:41] years I will say or at least the last
two or three years the information's
[2:41:46] been all over the place and I think
having Anderson having that sewing our
[2:41:50] down and all that stuff and actually
getting to right where we need to be
[2:41:54] where's the best way to spend money I
commend you for that we're getting to
[2:41:59] that point is there any more questions
on
[2:42:02] this because we have a recommendation in
front of us oh sorry sorry John sorry P
[2:42:08] K thank you I guess I'll pass this on to
Estelle how are we going to pay for
[2:42:18] this save the egg
[2:42:23] money that will be determined upon
budgets and budget presentation cancel
[2:42:30] thank you it has been it has been a come
to the budget committee no no
[2:42:36] recommendations made yet to go to
council but it has been talked about it
[2:42:40] has been brought forward as
a any other questions on
[2:42:46] it seeing none um let uh Council
received this report for information the
[2:42:53] council direct staff to develop a
Wastewater servicing capacity allocation
[2:42:57] policy for review and approval by the
policy committee and Council you're
[2:43:02] moving that move by councelor Nera
seconded by councelor Irwin all in favor
[2:43:08] carried thank you thanks
Jaden uh we are now is this now the
[2:43:14] William Street SE pumping because I
think br's going
[2:43:19] last right okay William Street sewage
pumping station in Elsa Craig sorry I
[2:43:26] should said
that where are you
[2:43:34] going can't get away that
[2:43:38] early all right thanks Rod I do
appreciate you being here tonight we do
[2:43:43] I mean to help with these These are big
report report and there's we're talking
[2:43:46] a lot of money and a lot of impact on
the community so do appreciate you my
[2:43:51] pleasure okay go ahead Jaden okay thank
you your worship the last one so um
[2:43:57] thanks for your your patience um so I
just want to acknowledge that we are
[2:44:02] joined here um we do have thanks um
we're joined by Dylan Consulting um we
[2:44:08] do have them on the line so also thank
you Jason um Johnson for your patience
[2:44:14] and we also have bander um the design
engineer or maybe he's maybe he's not in
[2:44:19] the call um but uh Jason can you hear us
yep loud and clear Jaden great okay
[2:44:28] thanks a lot for joining um so this
report um is on the William Street
[2:44:34] sewage pumping station uh an update on
the project the design work that we've
[2:44:39] been working on um and an update on the
engineering cost um um so as Council may
[2:44:47] recall um we did bring a report to
Council in July 2023 on the William
[2:44:55] Street pumping station forcan um
engineering and design contract and we
[2:45:01] did award that contract to Dylan
Consulting um to design the upgrade of
[2:45:07] the pumping station and the Force main
um that were nearing capacity and we
[2:45:11] needed to um get upgraded to support all
the growth that's coming up to Elsa C
[2:45:16] and naron um so Dylan was awarded the
engineering contract at a total cost of
[2:45:24] 125,000
[2:45:27] h7220 and then since awarding that
contract we've been working with
[2:45:30] Consulting on the design of this project
um we've made some good progress on the
[2:45:36] project um the design has been um
Advanced to a 50% design level and we've
[2:45:42] received um a submitt package including
a design report cost estimate and
[2:45:47] preliminary design drawings um so that
information is provided within the
[2:45:51] report
um
[2:45:54] the um as as Dylan's been working on the
project the the engineering scope has
[2:46:00] expanded somewhat um and there's been
some additional engineering design work
[2:46:06] that we did not originally anticipate
having to do as we got into the details
[2:46:13] um so that is summarized within the
report and um the two primary items
[2:46:19] there are the design of a new
Equalization tank or an EQ tank and the
[2:46:25] purpose of the EQ tank is to address
capacity limitations at the wastewater
[2:46:31] treatment plant itself and the purpose
of that tank is to store Wastewater
[2:46:37] during Peak flow periods um to control
it and discharge control the discharge
[2:46:43] the plant at a rate that can
handle um and there's also um we've
[2:46:49] decided to complete electrical upgrades
at the William Street site um to provide
[2:46:55] a dedicated power feed uh and and backup
power to that site it's currently it's
[2:47:01] actually fed from the wastewater
treatment plant through a conduit that
[2:47:05] runs under the Sao River
um uh so Dylan Consulting has provided
[2:47:11] an updated cost estimate with the design
package as I noted um and the
[2:47:16] construction cost estimate has increased
significantly um to $6.8
[2:47:23] million um based on Dylan's Class C cost
estimate which is provided in table one
[2:47:29] of the
report um and I just wanted just talking
[2:47:34] about the uh the cost a little bit more
this project was previously identified
[2:47:39] in our development charges background
study because it's certainly a growth
[2:47:44] related project that development charges
pay a large portion of um so in the 2022
[2:47:50] study this projects included the capital
cost of 1.16 million and we are
[2:47:58] currently working on a 20123 2024 update
to the DC background study with Watson
[2:48:05] Associates and with the information we
had available at that time we increased
[2:48:10] the project cost to 2.97 million um
however
[2:48:15] as the designs developed the cost has
obviously went up substantially since
[2:48:19] then so um moving forward with this
project we we are um going to continue
[2:48:26] to develop the detail design building
Consulting um we're going to review the
[2:48:30] cost increase with Watson Associates now
as we're still going through the DC
[2:48:35] study to see if there's possibility to
update that to make sure we're capturing
[2:48:40] the proper development charges towards
this upgrade based on the current cost
[2:48:44] estimate and we're going to continue to
work with Dillan Consulting to confirm
[2:48:47] where we're at with capacity here um you
know how many more homes we can get out
[2:48:50] of this pumping station um and then we
are also looking at a um funding
[2:48:56] application through the the province's
housing enabling Water Systems fund um
[2:49:02] which funds these types of projects um
and then just the um Dillan Consulting
[2:49:10] has requested a a budget increase for
their engineering contract of
[2:49:16] $50,000 to address the additional design
scope as outlined in the report and in
[2:49:22] the attached scope change document so
that 50,000 increase would bring the
[2:49:27] total contract price to
175,000
[2:49:31] $722 excluding HST and um we will I'll
turn it over to council thank
[2:49:43] you
[2:49:47] I was going to repeat John's question
from the last one how are we going to
[2:49:51] pay for
[2:49:57] this I I think uh Jaden did touch on
that and we've applied for a grant to
[2:50:04] this we haven't applied yet but there is
should say we're apply uh I'll be
[2:50:09] bringing a report or Jaden or I will be
bringing a report there is a a funding
[2:50:14] opportunity out there right now through
the province and Jaden alluded to it the
[2:50:19] housing enabling Water Systems fund U
they
[2:50:23] fund um
67% of a project up to 35 million um so
[2:50:31] our portion will be the 20 it's
27% um and uh we would make that
[2:50:39] application by April the 18th uh I don't
know the turnaround time but it's all
[2:50:43] related to to housing that would be
directly um housing opportunities that
[2:50:50] would be directly related to doing the
works so we know that we have a variety
[2:50:55] of housing opportunities happening and
Ela Craig and there's a new one on the
[2:51:01] Verizon for n as well so hopefully uh
with that and in light of all of that
[2:51:08] and making application we might be
successful but there's no
[2:51:13] guarantee okay so so I just wanted to I
I asked Jon this question and maybe this
[2:51:21] is for Jason I believe this question and
that
[2:51:24] is can this project be split up into two
or three different sections like the the
[2:51:33] William Street actual pumping station
and then I know there's the part in the
[2:51:37] plant as well the tank you're talking
about also the line this is also
[2:51:43] including a new line that goes under the
river so is can this be split like can
[2:51:48] the cost and the the project be split
[2:51:53] out if I if I may your your worship I I
could answer that if you'd like yes
[2:51:59] please yeah so um I I maybe just want to
step back one step before I answer the
[2:52:05] phasing question and just maybe part of
the reason why this scope change came
[2:52:09] about um initially we had made the
assumption that the waste water
[2:52:14] treatment plant would be equal to or
greater than the capacity of the William
[2:52:20] Street Pump Station which is generally
sort of you know industry standard uh
[2:52:25] when when a a collection system drains
to a pump station that Outlets directly
[2:52:30] to a wastewater treatment plant
generally they're upgraded designed in
[2:52:35] tandem uh they should sort of meet uh
one another's capacity and unfortunately
[2:52:41] as we dug into the details of this
project we found out that that the uh
[2:52:45] wastewater treatment plant capacity is
actually less than the pumping station
[2:52:52] and uh there's some some complexities
there as it relates to average day flows
[2:52:58] and Peak flows and so that's essentially
where we're running into some issues
[2:53:03] with uh trying to upgrade the pump
station but it's it's already capable of
[2:53:09] pumping more than the treat treatment
plant can handle but the Force main is
[2:53:14] is not the correct
size and it's
[2:53:19] um it's a bit complicated but I guess
the short answer is that it could be
[2:53:24] phased probably into I would say roughly
two major phases the first phase would
[2:53:31] have to include the new pumping station
and the Force
[2:53:36] main um out of the entire cost it would
probably shave maybe two two and a half
[2:53:42] million off of the total to do that
first piece
[2:53:47] um and then the second phase I would say
you could do the EQ tank in the vve
[2:53:53] chamber which is sort of the site work
on the wastewater treatment plant um to
[2:53:59] and basically this is sort of a a
medium-term
[2:54:03] uh solution that that buys you time
before you have to do a full-blown
[2:54:09] wastewater treatment plant uh
expansion um
[2:54:15] I don't know if that answer your
question mayor
[2:54:18] um well it it does uh you're telling me
it could be could be two phases it could
[2:54:24] be two phases but the first phase
unfortunately like no matter what has to
[2:54:29] include the force man and the pumping
station yeah okay and I do know that uh
[2:54:35] a few years ago we did have a leak on
that Forest main uh down in the flats
[2:54:40] before it went through the uh to the
river so we certainly want I have
[2:54:44] another question before I turn it and
that
[2:54:47] is if we did another Force main going
through there could that that force mean
[2:54:53] that's there now be used as a I'll call
it a backup or whatever
[2:54:58] to you know if there was a problem or is
that or you better just to decommission
[2:55:02] it and forget
about if if I can your mayor um the
[2:55:09] existing Force main was leaking
unfortunately uh it it was replaced um
[2:55:15] but with the same size diameter
unfortunately I I just it was before my
[2:55:21] time I don't know that there was any
engineering or design behind that I mean
[2:55:26] if a 250 or 12 in would have been put in
you you would have been laughing here
[2:55:32] but unfortunately it was replaced with a
newer material but it's only 6 in it's
[2:55:37] it's drastically undersized so even if
we increase the horsepower and the
[2:55:42] pumping rate we can only Jam so much
flow through there so yeah it's it's
[2:55:47] it's I would suggest it's uh abandoned
and replaced like upside yeah all right
[2:55:52] thank you I just was trying to figure
out what options you know what options
[2:55:55] do we have and that type of thing this
this one of course hurts because none of
[2:55:59] us were aware until recently about uh
about this particular project but um so
[2:56:06] other questions from Council on this
councelor Tio thank you Mayor Rob
[2:56:12] Carolyn on our grant application it
would only be a one-time Grant is that
[2:56:17] correct or sorry not a grant but funding
we couldn't do that in two parts it
[2:56:22] would be a one time or one offer right
if we applied for it um we would be
[2:56:28] doing it all at once um we could maybe
phase it within the time frame of the
[2:56:33] grant but it would have to be completed
within the time frame of the grant which
[2:56:37] is by 2027 so basically all at once so
what it be advantageous
[2:56:43] to wait to hear back before we make any
move on this to see if we are eligible
[2:56:48] for any type of
[2:56:51] funding and the ask here tonight is to
uh in increase the engineering fees
[2:56:57] correct that is the ask here tonight
through your worship yeah the just to
[2:57:02] bring an update on the project Council
and um to present council with dillings
[2:57:08] scope than Caroline and if I can add to
that to be successful with the grant
[2:57:13] they're looking for projects that are
ready to go so completing the
[2:57:17] engineering work would make us
more more eligible for funding they want
[2:57:23] things that are ready to go follow up
would the engineering be done by the
[2:57:29] time this application is submitted or I
guess would have to
[2:57:35] be through your worship that the
engineering does not have to be done um
[2:57:40] in time for the applications my
understanding we had the opportunity to
[2:57:43] sit in a webinar get some information
about it um so it's good the engineering
[2:57:47] is underway but it doesn't have to be
done um prior to the application yes
[2:57:52] what I meant by that was that the more
we could keep continue to move it ahead
[2:57:57] the better it is for us um and uh and in
fact with this grant the uh engineering
[2:58:05] that we've already done I think up until
forget what the date was um the
[2:58:10] pre-engineering some of that cost will
actually be covered by the grant
[2:58:15] question okay Council
Irwin uh again two questions your
[2:58:19] worship through you um I'll ask the easy
one first uh the $50,000 additional
[2:58:24] engineering cost will that come through
development charge
[2:58:34] fund an answer we don't have an answer
to that right now maybe we'll have to
[2:58:39] look that up for you certainly we'd have
to Ure that this is directly related to
[2:58:44] to uh increase development um I think
that that could certainly be suggested
[2:58:49] that the upgrades are part of that but
I'd have to look at our development
[2:58:54] charge B I'm not
sure um how much related to the dillian
[2:58:59] street pumping station was put in there
so it's my reluctance well okay I'll
[2:59:04] wait for the answer but it makes sense
to me but anyways the second one is a
[2:59:07] little more difficult and a little more
political what's the impact of this um
[2:59:13] project in terms of the assol
[2:59:20] subdiv um you may recall
that um in
[2:59:27] 2023 we did tell them there was certain
amount of capacity available for them
[2:59:32] and they have gone ahead based on that
but there is not enough capacity to
[2:59:37] complete their Project without doing
this
[2:59:41] work I I think I'll I'll go we have to
keep the project moving there's no
[2:59:46] question with the engineer we have to
keep this project
[2:59:49] moving to get to where we need to be but
that's any more questions
[2:59:54] Council any
more Council
[2:59:59] Deo when the current plant was
engineered that land was all taken into
[3:00:05] account as development
[3:00:09] land why and and assigned to all along
Queen Street out to naron to different
[3:00:18] properties why all of a sudden have we
got
[3:00:25] nothing I I we don't have have an answer
for what is being thought of at that
[3:00:30] time
[Music]
[3:00:38] um what was
that oh Jason
[3:00:44] if you'd like I could take a stab please
take a stab at that um the the the work
[3:00:51] that was done bit prior uh I Believe by
kmk was close to what 20 years ago close
[3:00:59] to 20 years ago so it looked at a
20-year growth Horizon and what where
[3:01:04] we're at 20 years later it it just
doesn't seem to jive with the new
[3:01:11] numbers we're coming up at so like where
the exercise that we went through was
[3:01:15] all of the proposed development that's
currently on the table in front of
[3:01:21] council or that we feel would be
upcoming or very highly likely to be
[3:01:26] developed and both naron and Elsa Craig
was all uh considered and that's
[3:01:31] essentially what we're working towards
for the ultimate design of the new
[3:01:36] William Street pumping station but the
current capacity of the plant is is
[3:01:44] um drastically less than that
[3:01:53] um okay I will I guess I I I will add
that as part of these improvements um at
[3:02:00] whatever point the municipality does
proceed and and the new pump station
[3:02:05] gets uh
constructed uh in the initial stages
[3:02:10] um there will only be sort of a minim
amount of capacity
[3:02:16] granted uh or made available but this
still has to happen because the pump
[3:02:22] station Force main and wastewater
treatment plant sort of all need to be
[3:02:26] Apples to Apples orange to oranges and
they're not right now it's all three
[3:02:30] components that don't work well together
they're not really designed to be
[3:02:35] compatible so the new pump station would
be enough capacity and pumps and wet
[3:02:42] well to be good enough for the next 75
years same for the forest main um but
[3:02:47] that doesn't do anything for the
wastewater treatment plant but after
[3:02:53] that is done I would highly recommend
that the municipality uh look at an ey
[3:02:59] and I study because there's
approximately six liters a second that
[3:03:04] we're seeing um come into the wastewater
treatment plant as rainwater or inflow
[3:03:10] and infiltration so um it once the
municipality does phase one I I would
[3:03:17] highly recommend that in that same time
you address or try to address the inii
[3:03:22] issues and the more inii that you can
get out of the system before you decide
[3:03:28] you know or move forward with a Final
Phase that might be a treatment plant
[3:03:32] upgrade you could find by pulling catch
basins and you know roof water leaders
[3:03:37] out of the sanitary um will be a much
more economical way to find
[3:03:44] capacity I think that's a great Point
Jason and we hadn't talked about that
[3:03:48] here at Council yet but uh we did talk
about it at committee that we have a lot
[3:03:53] of rainwater coming into our system and
it really shows council's seen that on
[3:03:58] the uh the peak flows and stuff after a
heavy rain event when Aqua brings a
[3:04:02] report so I think that's a great Point
made that we have to address that as
[3:04:07] well is there any other questions
here if not we have a recommendation in
[3:04:13] front of
uh to receive it as information but also
[3:04:16] to increase the uh engineering
$50,000 to the L price of
[3:04:23] $175,700 moveed by councelor D seconded
by councel heel all in favor carried
[3:04:31] thank you thank you thanks Jason thank
you
[3:04:37] mayor okay I think that's your last
[3:04:42] report
you got one
[3:04:46] more yeah no no but I mean that's your
last okay Brandon you have a
[3:04:53] report thanks thanks Rod thanks for
coming
[3:04:58] Rod Mar members of council the uh report
in front of you is to do with the score
[3:05:04] clock project that was approved December
of 2023 to move forward with council's
[3:05:10] wish at that time was for staff to come
up with a sponsorship method to try and
[3:05:14] fund the score clock um at least a large
portion of it um myself and Felicia have
[3:05:21] come up with a sponsorship campaign to
try and fund that score clock as you can
[3:05:26] see in the report um there are multiple
options that we've come up with
[3:05:32] including the most lucrative one the
title sponsorship which would provideing
[3:05:37] rights to the
arena as Council may be aware we have
[3:05:41] rfpd for naming rights in the past and
been successful in attaining anyone for
[3:05:46] that
service um with the Platinum sponsor the
[3:05:50] Olympia ice resurfacer WP is included
this is also a project that has been
[3:05:56] rfpd in the past and been
unsuccessful staff's belief is that
[3:06:02] going into a blind tender process May
deter some businesses from going after
[3:06:07] these these opportunities so putting a
value on it which they know will make
[3:06:14] them more likely to take that
sponsorship most of the sponsorships
[3:06:20] were designed um with what's included in
them and then having a certain margin
[3:06:26] over top like a board sign for five
years versus a sports field for f Sports
[3:06:31] field signed for five years in silver
sponsorship if you take the numbers on
[3:06:36] those actual sponsorships you and add
both uh percentage just it's pretty much
[3:06:42] in with each other so the added added
sponsor will be a public skate and then
[3:06:49] having your name on a plaque as you
enter the arena we already have a donor
[3:06:52] board for the arena so a separate plaque
on there that basically indicates our
[3:06:57] scoreboard was brought to you by title
sponsor X Platinum sponsor y gold
[3:07:02] sponsor ABCDEF silver sponsor abcdf Etc
so if there's any
[3:07:09] questions happy to answer questions for
Brandon
[3:07:14] counc irn then counc Nera did I hear you
correctly you're going to put an RFP out
[3:07:18] for
fundraising uh no it's not an RFP it it
[3:07:22] is the sponsorship package indicated in
the I heard the term rfps so in the past
[3:07:29] when we wanted a a naming right sponsor
it wasn't a fundraiser it was just for
[3:07:34] naming rights of the Arena we put out an
an art like a request for tender for the
[3:07:38] highest bidder would get their name on
The Arena so RFP because it would be a
[3:07:43] proposal this is what I would like to
name the arena at this cost across this
[3:07:47] many years this is what I would like in
and we were unsuccessful just just
[3:07:51] through your work certainly we're not
going to try that again no what I'm
[3:07:55] suggesting is this is this is a package
that would be approved and we would try
[3:07:59] and sell that
sponsor thank you okay councelor Nera
[3:08:04] and Brandon what happens if we don't get
the the money to for the scoreboard how
[3:08:10] will you be securing funding for that
through grants
[3:08:13] through uh certainly I would plan on
bringing a report back to council
[3:08:17] probably at the end of April to identify
where we're at in this campaign and then
[3:08:22] test council's appetite if we've if we
fundraised
[3:08:25] 40,000 um I would bring that back and
see where councils appetite to proceed
[3:08:30] the project is my belief is that we will
be successful in fundraising more than
[3:08:35] that just a follow-up comment and
Brandon I just want to thank you for
[3:08:39] coming up with ideas to get money and
not for ask Council for
[3:08:47] money counc canelon thank you Mayor Rob
well Brandon I'm excited about this uh
[3:08:52] the pro proposal you have brought
forward and I think I think you will be
[3:08:55] successful and I look forward to hearing
positive
[3:08:59] updates and just one final note on it
any title sponsor um will come back to
[3:09:05] Council in in the form of an agreement
that outlines um the naming rights
[3:09:09] agreement which is quite common for
other municipalities rights
[3:09:13] there okay any other any other questions
on that okay we have a motion in front
[3:09:18] of us to approve the sponsorship methods
outlined in the report moved by
[3:09:23] councelor Nera seconded by Deputy Mayor
hodgin all in favor carried thank you
[3:09:29] thank you we're already at passing of
[3:09:39] accounts that's the liveliest council's
been for a while when I said
[3:09:44] okay passing of
accounts thank you your worship the
[3:09:49] report in front of you outlines the
municipality's expenses for the period
[3:09:53] of January 12th through to February 1st
for a total of $780,000
[3:10:01] 18379 I have received um questions from
members of council that I would like to
[3:10:06] share with all of council so the first
question is the payment of
[3:10:11] 176,000
894 to middlex Center for the cul is
[3:10:17] that the total cost to the
municipality so this is the total cost
[3:10:22] to the municipality so the total cost
for the project was $
[3:10:29] 313,50 so the 50% share to the
municipality is the
[3:10:34] 15654 and that is the total cost for the
project the second question is um the
[3:10:43] payment to Elgen County um
for I'll I'll read the exact question
[3:10:50] for the exact same thing hasmat
operations awareness um for 452 both on
[3:10:56] December
31st um why did we pay them twice for
[3:11:00] the same service uh the there is the
second part of the question um is that
[3:11:07] we are paying for two personnel as well
um help me understand this expense so uh
[3:11:15] basically uh the expense here is for
training for some of our
[3:11:21] firefighters um that was done through
Elgen County um there were one two three
[3:11:28] four different courses that some of our
firefighters attended um the first one
[3:11:35] is a fire instructor one course that was
attended by one of our firefighters
[3:11:40] Casey wall uh the second second one is
public information officer course that
[3:11:46] was attended by Scott dones and Victoria
Constantine and then this this one here
[3:11:52] in regards to the Hazmat awareness
operations um yes there were two
[3:11:57] payments um the reason that there was
two payments and they were not all
[3:12:01] included in the same payment was because
it was on two different dates two
[3:12:06] different dates so we had one
firefighter attend one session and a
[3:12:12] different firefighter attend with the
other session and Elgen County invoices
[3:12:16] per
course and then the third one is for uh
[3:12:21] Fire officer 4 and Scott Jones uh
attended that um course as
[3:12:30] well the next question is regarding the
payment to Anderson
[3:12:37] electronic um it says the description
says annual inspections to what so this
[3:12:43] is the annual inspection of the fire
alarm and emergency lighting at 11
[3:12:49] different facilities within the
municipality so the Elsa Craig Community
[3:12:53] Center the Elsa Craig Library the Elsa
Craig Medical Center this building the
[3:12:59] Carnegie Library the Park Hill medical
center the Leisure Club the Park Hill
[3:13:03] Community Center the Park Hill Arena the
West Williams Hall as well as the old
[3:13:08] town
[3:13:10] hall and the last question question um
is not regarding um these accounts but
[3:13:17] it was a question that was brought up at
the last meeting in January and it was
[3:13:22] regarding uh the additional dollar
amount for the fire hall um so was that
[3:13:27] amount included in your previous project
cost report or is it over and above what
[3:13:33] we saw
previously I will let Brandon speak to
[3:13:37] that
[3:13:40] question so the last two bills would
have been the November progress payment
[3:13:44] as well as the December progress
payment um portions of it are included
[3:13:50] in the contract others would be over and
above such as um you do ashalt you pay
[3:13:54] an AC
adjustment um that cost is never
[3:13:59] budgeted for because they don't know
what the adjustment is going to be
[3:14:01] typically if you pay in November it's a
little bit higher um some of the other
[3:14:06] costs were over the allowances already
so our testing allowance we kind of blew
[3:14:11] out of the water with the contaminated
soils so any testing for ashalt
[3:14:15] compaction we were already over but they
needed to be done um there's also some
[3:14:20] that were credits back towards the
contract um we had about $30,000 saved
[3:14:25] on the fencing by delaying to the end of
the project so that was a credit coming
[3:14:29] back there are a couple outstanding
items as well um we do have Hydro
[3:14:34] Seating to be done still as well as top
coat on the rear side of the fire hall
[3:14:40] so those will come with an AC adjustment
on that but the um Hydro seing will be
[3:14:45] included in the contract and we have
about 50,000 in allowance on that we're
[3:14:49] expected to get back as well so hope
that
[3:14:57] helps is that all your questions that
you had to
[3:15:02] you yes your worship those were all the
questions that I received I now open the
[3:15:07] floor to any other questions other
questions councelor K thank you mayor
[3:15:12] Estelle was that last question one I
earlier yes it was okay
[3:15:21] um do we know do we have any idea how
many more dollars we need to finish this
[3:15:30] with I would estimate that
since I would say since the November
[3:15:36] progress billing now that contract value
that I brought you in the last report
[3:15:41] will be higher than what we
[3:15:48] okay other
questions no other questions we need a
[3:15:53] someone to make a motion to receive this
for Council Irwin councel Nera all in
[3:15:57] favor Carri thanks
[3:16:01] Estelle uh
committees so Lake here in
[3:16:07] primary ABCA uh sorry primary
just received notice that may or sorry
[3:16:15] March 7th is the next meeting okay
ABCA Blue Water recycling for
[3:16:23] information okay um Economic
Development nothing to report but we did
[3:16:30] have an our first North Middle sex
business associating meeting on the 25th
[3:16:35] of January and it was very
[3:16:40] well uh local school advisory
[3:16:45] meeting tomorrow night your worship and
we have some additional information
[3:16:48] we'll be presenting including enrollment
numbers for local schools um and
[3:16:56] including a report from the school board
on the review of School boundaries which
[3:17:01] would be interesting when we bring it
forward thank you I'm hoping to
[3:17:06] attend uh Rec
[3:17:09] committee okay policies
policies same yeah policy we don't meet
[3:17:16] until we kept you busy last
week fire
[3:17:21] committee budget committee uh so we're
working on it and we have another
[3:17:26] meeting Friday which I'm sure will be
all day but uh we have been meeting and
[3:17:32] um thanks Estelle for getting us to this
point but yeah we do have another
[3:17:37] meeting but that process is happening uh
Community Development
[3:17:42] we can say that that has been we've met
and the results will be coming to counc
[3:17:48] for the next meeting correct okay for
the next February meeting the results
[3:17:53] will be coming to council look Aqua
advis um still have not received a date
[3:18:02] for a meeting okay uh so correspondents
the first one is a or skills Development
[3:18:08] Fund to re and to receive and consider
support not going to read that whole
[3:18:14] motion uh I don't think I need to I'm
sure you have all looked at
[3:18:19] it is there a motion to support
[3:18:24] that seeing none it's receive and
[3:18:30] fil um Municipality of Tweed the license
plate renewal i' like to support that M
[3:18:38] up going to be tougher to do now that
they've got rid of their service
[3:18:41] matarial
it okay you would make a motion to
[3:18:45] support that is there a secondary for
that councelor K in favor of that
[3:18:50] carried
okay thank you uh city of sna the carbon
[3:18:56] tax I support that one as well although
I know it's pah but I was support okay
[3:19:00] peer counc Nera all in
favor
[3:19:06] carried uh Township of ler Lake
occupational health and safety act
[3:19:12] receive and
[3:19:15] file letter from
Enbridge of gas uh rebasing application
[3:19:22] receive and
file uh mlhu Board of Health meeting
[3:19:28] summary receive and file city of
Stratford Civic night invitation
[3:19:33] everybody's received that
[3:19:37] invitation okay we'll see file it other
energent business
[3:19:43] Council
ke thank you Mayor Rob um just as of
[3:19:47] today I've received three uh phone calls
from residents of w for wanting to know
[3:19:52] when they may expect to see a road
grader on argal street they have called
[3:19:57] they have witness road graders being
everywhere else but on oural so maybe
[3:20:03] like to see some activity there within
by the weekend would maybe save me on my
[3:20:08] phone Bell hopefully before the weekend
right so okay go ahead Jaden do you have
[3:20:13] something to add to that I know they've
been on that road when it was too wet
[3:20:17] like when it was very wet they've been
on AR I don't know if they were the
[3:20:20] whole length and I know they were doing
they did the North End here yesterday
[3:20:26] but they only the North End to naron
road so could we get a a an answer from
[3:20:31] staff to send that through the Council
on that maybe to all of council because
[3:20:34] I received some as well if I could
actually just have an email sent to me
[3:20:39] or a message that's what I mean but if
you don't mind sending it to all the
[3:20:43] council think I've been getting some of
those same questions in order to cool
[3:20:47] the conversation I said I would be in
touch with them tomorrow yeah okay you I
[3:20:51] think that's
reasonable um other business councelor
[3:20:55] canel you had some yes I do uh I would
Echo councelor ke's concerns I also got
[3:20:59] a call today about the road has been but
when you drive over it once the pootles
[3:21:04] magically reappear the other issue that
I wanted to bring up is I had a call
[3:21:08] today from someone who uh got their tax
bill
[3:21:12] but they asked if with the new format if
the still automatic withdrawal still
[3:21:21] applies uh thank you through your
worship uh yes they do uh there was a
[3:21:26] button that was not clicked in printing
the paq notes on the tax notices but
[3:21:32] rest assure all residents if you were
registered in a p program you are still
[3:21:38] registered in a p program as a followup
to that and this is and I've already
[3:21:43] sent an email to the chair of the policy
committee uh I've got a couple of calls
[3:21:48] from rate payers who attempted to
contact the municipality and we're
[3:21:52] unable to connect with anyone or leave a
voice message because the mailbox is
[3:21:57] full and I and I know we have a policy
in terms of returning TOS to rirs I
[3:22:02] believe was
40 but if mailboxes are full then we
[3:22:06] need to do something about it and
unfortunately this particular case I
[3:22:09] believe it's uh someone who's not been
available work because Illness but then
[3:22:14] we have we have to make some
accommodations for that we have to
[3:22:17] address the issue so that people know
what to do when they need to get a hold
[3:22:22] of go ahead go ahead Estelle true your
worship um you are correct it is the
[3:22:28] mailbox of the individual who has uh
been away on an extended leave we did
[3:22:34] have a a short-term contract individual
in that seat and like you I am now
[3:22:42] finding out that uh those voicemails
were still in the mailbox and have not
[3:22:47] been returned um we are working on it um
the information now is for individuals
[3:22:55] to contact myself and I am returning CS
great but anyway as a followup can I get
[3:23:02] a report back what our policy is on
returning
[3:23:07] costs as chair we'll take it look up
with the policy and see what it is and
[3:23:12] you'll get hear from
me okay is that it councelor Nera I've
[3:23:18] gotten a couple emails from R pairs
regarding the parking on the Boulevard
[3:23:22] on Hasting streets um maybe this
question for you Ashley can we add some
[3:23:28] more signage that says no parking or um
tell the the parish members where they
[3:23:35] could park so they don't park on the
neighboring uh
[3:23:40] Lawns thank you and
worship uh staff have been in contact
[3:23:45] with that parish and and that church in
general we have tried to connect them
[3:23:50] with neighboring businesses in the area
to resolve parking conflicts as to
[3:23:55] provide them alternative sources also we
have um mentioned and tried to persuade
[3:24:01] to use the available Municipal parking
lots such as um like our parking lots
[3:24:07] here our side street parking where it is
permitted and uh the parking lot behind
[3:24:12] the post
office staff have also uh
[3:24:18] been we've been working with public
works department to get increased
[3:24:22] signage in the area to add signage that
explicitly States the no parking on that
[3:24:27] Boulevard and we've also U Been in
conversation that it might end up in
[3:24:32] site plan or having
um is it called sorry an increased
[3:24:39] parking space for disability parking
that also has to be done through a
[3:24:44] process with infrastructure I
believe thank you
[3:24:49] Ashley any other Business Council wiwin
thank you worship I've had some
[3:24:55] constituents um share with me their
concern that since we removed the
[3:24:58] electronic speeding sign on Queen Street
coming south into Elsa Craig speed has
[3:25:04] begun to increase and I'm wondering if
we're going to consider replacing that
[3:25:09] sign or putting a temporary sign back in
place
[3:25:12] um because that is quite a busy road and
traffic has started to increase
[3:25:18] again
Jaden through your through you your
[3:25:22] worship um we would we're C we're
planning on bringing back another report
[3:25:26] to council um we look at doing this on a
six Monon rotation approximately just to
[3:25:32] to keep you guys updated sorry keep
Council updated on the um on the data
[3:25:37] we're getting and then suggesting new
locations keep rotating those signs
[3:25:41] around so um thank you for the comment
we'll take that under consideration for
[3:25:45] the next
report okay any other business I just
[3:25:50] have one uh it's it's come out at the
budget committee and that is to um
[3:25:56] because we apply for a lot of Grants is
to have a have it on paper what grants
[3:26:01] we've all
applied that came up at committee
[3:26:04] because we're talk about not everybody
knows about all the grants so just to
[3:26:08] increase communication to have that come
up that's something counc ke um can we
[3:26:14] also have uh an indicator as to what
ones we have been successfully granted
[3:26:19] just or for
interesting yes certainly what I could
[3:26:23] put on on a regular basis is maybe other
every other meeting what grants were
[3:26:28] applied for and which ones and on the
list show which on be successful
[3:26:31] certainly if we're a successful one I
would immediately let Council know
[3:26:34] anyway but it'll go on the list as well
perfect thank you yeah just so that
[3:26:38] everybody has is
aware okay any other business seeing
[3:26:43] none we'll move on deferred
items I don't think we have well we did
[3:26:49] talk about the Surplus Farm Severance
education uh that we'd have that before
[3:26:54] a council meeting we're not sure which
council meeting yet yes I spoke to the
[3:26:59] planners today about that your worship
and so they're suggesting coming to the
[3:27:04] planning meeting either in March or
April depending on um availability
[3:27:09] starting an hour early starting the
meeting at 5 with a a uh educational
[3:27:14] session with Council uh the presentation
and the time for questions prior to the
[3:27:19] regular meeting starting
okay uh Communications including uh
[3:27:25] County Council you've got the highlights
in front of you there has not been
[3:27:28] another meeting since that we meet next
Tuesday reading of the
[3:27:35] bylaws thank you your worship through
you we have bylaws 6 to 10 of 202 four
[3:27:41] for first and second
reading first and second Council canelon
[3:27:46] counc ke all in favor carried and third
and final please counc dagel Deputy
[3:27:54] Mayor hjin all in favor
carried thank you uh need a motion to go
[3:27:59] into close just and that is for advice
that is subject to client solicitor
[3:28:04] privilege including Communications
necessary for that purpose winter
[3:28:08] maintenance contract move by councelor
Nera section by Council Irwin all in
[3:28:12] favor thank you and I want to thank
Council for staying with us I know it's
[3:28:17] a big
agenda and to staff as well Council and
[3:28:21] staff for going through this so we'll
move to close
[3:28:30] yeah we are back in open Council we have
no report at this time coming out of
[3:28:35] council uh at this time I would just ask
move to
[3:28:40] ajour Nera and counselor ke all in favor
Carri thanks everyone very
[3:28:46] much