Despite a petition launched last year in opposition to the proposed Arthur works yard, it seemed few citizens were interested enough to attend a public information meeting on Feb. 25.
Of roughly two dozen people at the meeting, the majority were township councillors, staff, engineers, a few prospective council candidates, and reporters.
As for actual citizens, those could be counted on one hand – without using all fingers.
The information session was a result of the previous concerns as it attempted to provide the information on why the replacement works yard is needed.
Information from Triton Engineering Services Ltd. stated, “The current public works garage … does not provide sufficient operational capacity, is in a poor state of repair and the water and wastewater departments do not currently have a centralized facility within Arthur from which to operate effectively.”
That “solution” comes with a $1,670,000 cost, according to the report.
In addition, Triton stated, “There is insufficient sand and salt storage facilities available to effectively provide efficient, cost effective winter maintenance and the existing snow disposal facilities have a lack of space, are inaccessible, and not operating consistent with current provincial guidelines.”
The current snow disposal facility is east of Eliza Street, near the village sewage lagoons. Issues with the current work building include an outdated washroom and no women’s washroom. As well there are numerous leaks in the roof, siding and doors.
An outdated ventilation system results in indoor pollutants and unequally distributed hot and cold air throughout the building.
The report also stated that poor lighting contributes to an unsafe workplace.
Because of the lack of space at the Arthur site, some equipment is stored at various locations throughout the township.
Most importantly, the site does not meet the workplace standards set by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board in the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
As for the existing snow dump, the report stated the site is not consistent with provincial guidelines. Further, there is not enough space to contain the amount of snow the township removes during winter maintenance. The site is also not easily accessible for snow removal vehicles.
Further, there is no drainage management to account for melt water, and no control of infiltration of road salt released to the environment, and it is not effectively monitored.
A number of choices were considered before the recommendation was made to replace the existing works yard.
Those options ranged from doing nothing, to renovating the existing building and restricting the use of road salts, to constructing a centralized works yard that included sand and salt storage and a snow disposal facility.
Considerations
– A new centralized structure would be in full conformance with current building codes and standards, and would incorporate the water and sewage departments. The central facility would also ensure effective salt management and materials; and
– Snow removal should occur from heavily travelled roadways as quickly as possible following a storm. However, if a storm happens when the disposal site is full, it would mean township staff would have to travel further to dump the snow – resulting is less time dedicated to road maintenance during inclement weather.
The report stated continuing to use the current site is not a realistic option, due to its size.
Inspections have identified structural, safety and storage deficiencies within the current works garage.
Based on the estimated repair costs, the age, and the limited storage, the report stated, “It is not practical or economically viable to repair the existing facility.”
Further, it stated ongoing maintenance will not address all the current problems.
As for the option of restricting salt usage, the report stated “an alternative to salt would not be economically feasible as environmentally sensitive chemicals cost up to 30 times that of rock salt. Additionally, the township’s road equipment was designed for salt, so a change from road salt to an alternative would require new equipment.
“Given the nature and location of the existing structure, the ‘do nothing’ option will eventually result in a catastrophic failure of the structure. Also, the storage requirements for existing and future development will not be satisfied and operating conditions would remain substandard,” the report stated
It added that based on financial and structural considerations, the recommended solution includes:
– construction of a new works facility that would also accommodate the water and sewage department. The new facility would provide a centralized garage, sand and storage facility and a designated snow disposal facility;
– The proposed site is located just south of Arthur’s main street on Preston Street on land owned by the municipality;
– The site uses land that is restricted for sensitive land used due to its proximity to the sewage treatment plant.
– The estimated total cost of the project is $1,670,000.
Plans to mitigate potential impacts during construction included:
– Construction times set out according to local bylaws to limit noise and dust; and
– Using best management practices to control storm runoff and to contain sediment.
Once the yards are operational plans are to have the building designed and landscaped to ensure low visibility.
As well, the township will have a noise impact study completed during the design phase of the project. Further, a lighting study will be done to ensure there is no impact on adjacent lands.
The design of the snow disposal facility will consider features such as evaporative holding areas to minimize the flow of contaminated melted water to the Conestogo River. Also a monitoring program will be implemented to study ground water, surface water, and soil chemistry of the site.
