2018 project budget · 2018-08-17 · legislative and community services ls-18-09. added december...

2018 Project Budget

Matrix

1

APPROVED2018 Projects Matrix

Department Project Type Serv Enhance Funding Project Group

Budget Reference

Number Notes Note Detail. Project Project Total 2018 2019 2020Corp. Services Oper General Revenue Corp. Services CS-18-01 Air Photo Refresh 60,000 60,000 Corp. Services Cap Office Equipment Reserve Corp. Services CS-18-02 Business Services Hardware and Software 135,000 135,000

Corp. Services Cap Office Equipment Reserve Corp. Services CS-18-02Business Services Hardware and Software (Evergreen & Small Printers)

Corp. Services Cap Yes General Revenue Corp. Services CS-18-04 #1. Contingent on verifying successful implementation in another Municipality. Budget and PM Modules 115,000 115,000

Corp. Services Oper General Revenue Corp. Services CS-18-05 #2.County is applying for grant through FCM for $50K. If received, will be used on this project. Asset Management Projects 190,000 65,000 125,000

Corp. Services Cap Office Equipment Reserve Corp. Services CS-18-06 Office Furniture (Administration Building) 10,000 10,000

Corp. Services Cap Facility Reserve Carry Over CS-04-17 Added November 29th, 2017 Security Refresh 21,500 21,500

Ops Cap General Revenue Re-occurring OS-18-17 Asphalt Long Patching 400,000 400,000 408,000 416,000 Ops Cap MSI Re-occurring OS-18-18 Base Stabilization 600,000 600,000 612,000 624,000 Ops Cap MSI Re-occurring OS-18-19 Re-Chipping Program 1,035,000 1,035,000 1,056,000 1,077,000 Ops Cap Gas Tax Re-occurring OS-18-19 Re-Chipping Program 665,000 665,000 678,000 692,000

Ops Cap MSI Re-occurring OS-18-20 Changed Funding Source to be split between MSI and General Revenue (Oct 23) Re-Gravel Program 1,600,000 1,600,000 1,632,000 1,665,000

Ops Cap Aggregate Levy Re-occurring OS-18-20 Additional Funding Source added Feb 27, 2018 - Aggregate Levy Revenue Re-Gravel Program 150,000 150,000 153,000 156,000

Ops Cap General Revenue Re-occurring OS-18-20 Changed Funding Source to be split between MSI and General Revenue (Oct 23) Re-Gravel Program 250,000 250,000 255,000 260,000 Ops Cap General Revenue Re-occurring OS-18-22 Subdivision Chip Program 120,000 120,000 122,000 124,000

Ops Cap Yes MSI Collector Road OS-18-01Mar 28th: Updated MSI Funding of $2.6M and reduced Road Reserve Funding to $425K Acme Road Phase 1 Second Lift 2,600,000 2,600,000

Ops Cap Yes Roads Reserve Collector Road OS-18-01Mar 28th: Updated MSI Funding of $2.6M and reduced Road Reserve Funding to $425K Acme Road Phase 1 Second Lift 425,000 425,000

Ops Cap Roads Reserve Collector Road OS-18-02 Bergen Road Repair 820,000 820,000 Ops Cap Yes Roads Reserve Collector Road OS-18-27 #3. Added after Oct 3rd meeting. Bergen Road Engineering 180,000 180,000

Ops Cap Yes Roads Reserve Non-Collector Road Network OS-18-03 East Didsbury Subdivision Improvements 920,000 920,000 Ops Cap MSI Non-Collector Road Network OS-18-04 East Side Gravel Supply 700,000 700,000 714,000 728,000 Ops Cap Yes Roads Reserve Non-Collector Road Network OS-18-05 Range Road 55 Upgrade 1,520,000 1,520,000 Ops Oper General Revenue Non-Collector Road Network OS-18-16 Minor Projects 100,000 100,000

Ops Oper General Revenue Non-Road Projects OS-18-06 MVREMA Update 3,000 3,000 Ops Cap Facility Reserve Non-Road Projects OS-18-09 Olds/Dids Airport Runway Lighting Upgrade 150,000 150,000 Ops Cap Yes General Revenue Non-Road Projects OS-18-10 #7 Approval based on funding agreement Olds/Dids Airport Taxiway Chipping 30,000 30,000 Ops Cap General Revenue Non-Road Projects OS-18-28 #6 Changed after November 1 meeting Sundre Airport Development Plan 50,000 50,000

Ops Oper General Revenue Bridges OS-18-23 Bridge Maintenance Program 117,200 117,200 Ops Cap Bridge Reserve Bridges OS-18-24 2180 - Olds 250,000 250,000 Ops Cap Bridge Reserve Bridges OS-18-24 2457 - Cremona 350,000 350,000 Ops Cap Bridge Reserve Bridges OS-18-24 #6 Changed after November 1 meeting 1384 - Netook 570,000 570,000 Ops Cap Bridge Reserve Bridges OS-18-24 74313 - Olds 300,000 300,000 Ops Cap Bridge Reserve Bridges OS-18-24 940 - Didsbury 60,000 60,000 Ops Cap Bridge Reserve Bridges OS-18-24 13585 - Sundre 60,000 60,000 Ops Cap Bridge Reserve Bridges OS-18-24 304 - Didsbury 60,000 60,000

2

APPROVED2018 Projects Matrix

Department Project Type Serv Enhance Funding Project Group

Budget Reference

Number Notes Note Detail. Project Project Total 2018 2019 2020

Ops Oper Yes Facility Reserve Facility Projects OS-18-11 Environmental Liability Management 200,000 200,000

Ops Cap Equipment Fleet Reserve Equipment OS-18-26 Equipment Replacement Plan (plan to be updated) 3,172,000 3,172,000

Ops Cap Inventory Gravel Pit Projects OS-18-12 Gravel Pit Engineering - - Ops Liability Pit Stripping and Reclamation Reserve Gravel Pit Projects OS-18-13 Gravel Pit Reclamation 800,000 800,000 Ops Cap Unfunded Liability Pit Reclamation Gravel Pit Projects OS-18-14 Gravel Pit Stripping 170,000 170,000 Ops Cap Inventory Gravel Pit Projects OS-18-14 Gravel Pit Stripping - - Ops Liability Unfunded Liability Pit Reclamation Gravel Pit Projects OS-18-15 Staff to engage Olds College McDougal Pit End Use Plan 42,000 42,000

Ops Cap MSI Carry over OS-01-17 RR 52 Bridge And Road Construction ****2 3,300,000 3,300,000 Ops Cap Roads Reserve Carry over OS-01-17 RR 52 Bridge And Road Construction ****2 50,600 50,600 Ops Cap Roads Reserve Carry over OS-02-17 #4. Project is being carried over to 4th year. Was originally 3 years. Fallen Weight Testing 405,000 405,000 Ops Cap MSI Carry over OS-03-17 Westfork Estates Subdivision Improvements 420,000 420,000 Ops Cap Facility Reserve Carry over OS-10-17 #3. Added after Oct 3rd meeting. East Side Shop 950,000 950,000 Ops Oper General Revenue Carry over OS-18-17 #3. Added after Oct 3rd meeting. Design Guidelines and Construction Specs 50,000 50,000 Ops Cap FREC Carry over OS-21-17 #6 Changed from November 1 meeting Protection of Sundre Airport, RR55 & 60 2,750,000 2,750,000

Leg Oper Yes General Revenue Legislative and Community Services LS-18-01 Enhanced Policing Position ***** 170,000 170,000 173,000 177,000 Leg Oper General Revenue Legislative and Community Services LS-18-02 Patrol Radar Units 7,000 7,000 Leg Oper General Revenue Legislative and Community Services LS-18-03 Legacy Land Trust Funding Request 40,000 40,000 Leg Cap Cash in Lieu Legislative and Community Services LS-18-04 Park Interpretive Sign (Winchell Lake) 8,500 8,500 Leg Cap General Revenue Legislative and Community Services LS-18-05 Wetland Enhancement (Jackson Lake) - - Leg Oper Agricultural Reserve Legislative and Community Services LS-18-07 MVC Production Competition Program 400,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Leg Oper General Fire Reserve Legislative and Community Services LS-18-08A 2018 Fire Equip Grants to Urban Partners 894,000 894,000 Leg Cap General Fire Reserve Legislative and Community Services LS-18-08B 2018 Fire Capital (Cremona Fire) 430,000 430,000 Leg Cap General Fire Reserve Legislative and Community Services LS-18-09 Added December 1, 2017 ACP Grant - Cremona Fire Hall 8,320 8,320

Leg Oper Yes General Revenue Agricultural Services AG-18-01 20% Rebate and Alternative Controls - - Leg Oper Yes General Revenue Agricultural Services AG-18-02 #5. Possible future request of capital for $14K. Farm Plastics Round Up Revision - - Leg Oper Yes General Revenue Agricultural Services AG-18-04 Annual ASB Summer Tour 10,000 10,000

Leg Oper General Revenue Carry Over LC-01-17 Added December 1, 2017 Front Signage Update 5,000 5,000

Leg Cap General Revenue Carry Over LC-05-17Added December 1, 2017 Motion RC17-295 to fully fund project

Business Park Signage 120,000 120,000 Leg Oper General Revenue Carry Over LC-06-17 Feb 27, 2018 **(Pending Council Approval) Cremona Ag Society Arena Renovations 500,000 250,000 250,000 Leg Cap General Revenue Carry Over LC-07-17 Cremona Fire Dept Communications 45,000 45,000 Leg Cap General Fire Reserve Carry Over LC-07-17 Cremona Fire Dept Communications 20,000 20,000 Leg Cap General Revenue Carry Over LC-11-17 Records Management Solution 150,000 150,000

P&D Oper General Revenue P&D PL-18-01 IDP Review (Olds and Carstairs) 135,000 135,000

P&D Oper General Revenue Carry Over PL-03-17 Eagle Valley ASP Review 10,000 10,000 P&D Oper General Revenue Carry Over PL-04-17 South Carstairs Economic Growth Node ASP 10,000 10,000

29,889,120 29,214,120 6,278,000 6,019,000

The above Budget Reference Numbers are hyperlinked to their Project Sheet

3

Cap Yearly Funding Requirement CommentAcme Road Phase 1 Second Lift 3,025,000 176,200 Based on 20 year life at 270/km, this a second overlayBergen Road Engineering 180,000 The engineering would be a one time cost. The surface treatment extra $Budget and PM Modules 115,000 15,000 Module yearly costsEast Didsbury Subdivision Improvements 920,000 15,100 20 Year LifeOlds/Dids Airport Taxiway Chipping 30,000 4,300 7 Year LifeRange Road 55 Upgrade 1,520,000 27,000 20 Year Life

Cap Total 5,790,000 237,600 Oper

- - 10,000 10,000

200,000 50,000 Increase from current spend- -

20% Rebate and Alternative Controls Annual ASB Summer Tour Environmental Liability Management Farm Plastics Round Up Revision Rural Crime Reduction Initiative**** 170000 170,000

Oper Total 380,000 230,000 This project is managing an existing scope differentlyGrand Total 6,170,000 467,600

Non-project items:Intermunicipal 550,000

Increased yearly funding needed 1,017,600

Estimated Yearly Funding 39,000,000 Increased Expressed as Percent of Funding 2.61%

Notes:1. A small allowance of 5k per km in gravel saving is made in estimates2. Yearly funding is cash received for re-occurring funding sources

Increased Funding Required Due To 2018 Service Enhancements

4

Sum of 2018Funding Reference Number Project Total

General Revenue AG-18-01 20% Rebate and Alternative Controls - AG-18-02 Farm Plastics Round Up Revision - AG-18-04 Annual ASB Summer Tour 10,000 CS-18-01 Air Photo Refresh 60,000 CS-18-04 Budget and PM Modules 115,000 CS-18-05 Asset Management Projects 65,000 LC-06-17 Cremona Ag Society Arena Renovations 250,000 LC-07-17 Cremona Fire Dept Communications 45,000 LC-11-17 Records Management Solution 150,000 LS-18-01 Enhanced Policing Position ***** 170,000 LS-18-02 Patrol Radar Units 7,000 LS-18-03 Legacy Land Trust Funding Request 40,000 LS-18-05 Wetland Enhancement (Jackson Lake) - OS-18-06 MVREMA Update 3,000

OS-18-10 Olds/Dids Airport Taxiway Chipping 30,000 OS-18-16 Minor Projects 100,000 OS-18-17 Asphalt Long Patching (2018 Project) 400,000

Design Guidelines and Construction Specs (2017 Carry-over) 50,000 OS-18-20 Re-Gravel Program 400,000

OS-18-22 Subdivision Chip Program 120,000 OS-18-23 Bridge Maintenance Program 117,200 PL-03-17 Eagle Valley ASP Review 10,000 PL-04-17 South Carstairs Economic Growth Node ASP 10,000 PL-18-01 IDP Review (Olds and Carstairs) 135,000 OS-18-28 Sundre Airport Development Plan 50,000

LC-01-17 Front Signage Update 5,000 LC-05-17 Business Park Signage 120,000

Grand Total 2,462,200

Projects Funded from General Revenue

1. Asphalt Long Patching is a 2018 project, Design Guidelines and Construction Specs is a carry-over from 2017, the project sheet numberingsequence was changed which resulted in duplicate project numbers.

5


Cash in Lieu LS-18-04 Park Interpretive Sign (Winchell Lake) 8,500 FREC OS-21-17 Protection of Sundre Airport, RR55 & 60 2,750,000 Gas Tax OS-18-19 Re-Chipping Program 665,000 MSI OS-01-17 RR 52 Bridge And Road Construction ****2 3,300,000

OS-03-17 Westfork Estates Subdivision Improvements 420,000 OS-18-04 East Side Gravel Supply 700,000 OS-18-18 Base Stabilization 600,000 OS-18-19 Re-Chipping Program 1,035,000 OS-18-20 Re-Gravel Program 1,600,000


Government Transfers for Capital

6


Agricultural Reserve LS-18-07 MVC Production Competition Program 100,000 Bridge Reserve OS-18-24 13585 - Sundre 60,000

1384 - Netook 570,000 2180 - Olds 250,000 2457 - Cremona 350,000 304 - Didsbury 60,000 74313 - Olds 300,000 940 - Didsbury 60,000

Equipment Fleet Reserve OS-18-26 Equipment Replacement Plan (plan to be updated) 3,172,000 Facility Reserve OS-18-09 Olds/Dids Airport Runway Lighting Upgrade 150,000

OS-18-11 Environmental Liability Management 200,000 OS-10-17 East Side Shop 950,000 CS-04-17 Security Refresh 21,500

General Fire Reserve LC-07-17 Cremona Fire Dept Communications 20,000 LS-18-08A 2018 Fire Equip Grants to Urban Partners 894,000 LS-18-08B 2018 Fire Capital (Cremona Fire) 430,000 LS-18-09 ACP Grant - Cremona Fire Hall 8,320

Office Equipment Reserve CS-18-02 Business Services Hardware and Software 135,000 CS-18-06 Office Furniture (Administration Building) 10,000

Pit Stripping and Reclamation Reserve OS-18-13 Gravel Pit Reclamation 800,000 Roads Reserve OS-01-17 RR 52 Bridge And Road Construction ****2 50,600

OS-02-17 Fallen Weight Testing 405,000 OS-18-01 Acme Road Phase 1 Second Lift 3,025,000 OS-18-02 Bergen Road Repair 820,000 OS-18-03 East Didsbury Subdivision Improvements 920,000 OS-18-05 Range Road 55 Upgrade 1,520,000 OS-18-27 Bergen Road Engineering 180,000


Reserve Funding

7

Sum of 2018 Funding Reference Number Project Total

Inventory OS-18-12 Gravel Pit Engineering 0OS-18-14 Gravel Pit Stripping 0

Unfunded Liability Pit Reclamation OS-18-14 Gravel Pit Stripping 170,000OS-18-15 McDougal Pit End Use Plan 42,000

Grand Total 212,000

Unfunded Liability

8

CCorporate ServicesProjects

9

Service/Program Council Goal Objective Budget 2017

Work Plan/Key Cost

Drivers

Service Level Adjustments

2018

Budget 2018

Property Assessment Economy/Financial Health Goals 2&3

Based on Provincial regulations to provide accurate, consistent and fair property tax assessments to County rate payers.Goal is to assess 20% of rolls, hire a contractor for market land review and get a land book created for the County

$624,250 Tax Rolls – almost 15,000Personnel – 4

One-time costs of35k for market landreview and land book creation

Expected to decreaseby 30-50k

Finance & Accounting All Areas of Finance:

$2,125,900

Account for $45 million budget, 100 staff. Personnel – 8 Insurance Financial System Licensing

The Weave implementation will have a number of impacts in Finance & Accounting

There will be some relatively minor changes

Corporate Services (to be completed with Operating Budget)Work Program 2018

408 Twp. Rd. 320 / Postal Bag 100, Didsbury, AB Canada T0M 0W0T 403.335.3311 F 403.335.9207 Toll Free 1.877.264.9754

www.mountainviewcounty.com

10

Financial Reporting Regulated Governance Goals 1 & 3

To provide Financial Statements for the County in a timely and accurate fashion

Goal this year is to have 2017-year end completed earlier than last year (February 28)

Provide full financial statements for February

No impact

Tax Collection Regulated Economy/Financial Health Goal 2

To collect taxes duefrom ratepayers in a respectful manner while insuring that every effort is made to ensure collection is made

Should collections for 2017 have a negative result wemay have to look at alternatives

None at this time, our collections in the last two years have not seen a big loss of municipal revenue

No impact

Asset Management Infrastructure Goals 1, 2 & 3 Economy/Financial Health Goal 3

To optimize the service levels and life cycle costs of the County’s assets

Legislation is being passed, working on obtaining grants

No additional personnel resources are being added

50-150kdepending on grants

Managerial Reporting Economy/Financial Health Goal 3

To provide meaningful financial information to those responsible for overseeing County programs that assist them in evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of those programs

Further management reports to be developed based on management needs

No additional personnel resources are being added

Marginal cost if any

11

Budget Process Regulated Economy/Financial Health Goals 1, 2 & 3 Governance Goals 1, 2, & 3

To provide an approved financial plan for the County’s operations and capital projects that is open and transparent. Add budget module

New MGA requires a move to a 5 year capital plan

Licensing costs

Business Services To aid in the selection, provision and support of technology tools for councillors and employees of Mountain View County that helpthem to be effective and efficient in performing their duties

All areas of Business Services: $775,760

Computers – 94Mobile Devices – 28 Servers - 20 Personnel – 5.8

No large increases expected this year

GIS Infrastructure Goals 2 & 3

Develop end user access to GIS information to both internal and external stakeholders

Increased both internal and external users to readily available information

No additional personnel resources being added

Marginal cost if any

12

End User Support Infrastructure Goal 2 Increased desktop support availability to staff and Council. Goal to increase efficiency of stakeholders

2018 first full year with new organizational structure (full time desktop support position)

Resources added in Q3 2017

Marginalcost

IT Infrastructure Infrastructure Goal 2 Evaluate and monitor IT infrastructure based on regulatory and end user needs

Security of websiteand servers need to be reviewed with changes to MGA

May have to adjust external contractor budget for review and implementation

10-20k

13

DDepartment: Year:

Project Name: Budget Reference #:

Project Manager: GIS Co-ordinator PProject #: Cost Centre:

RR: TWP: Segment:

Project Type:Approved: Y/N

Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Grants:

Levies:

General Revenue: 60,000.00

Total Funding: $60,000.00

Costs:

Dollar Amount:

60,000.00

Total Cost: $60,000.00

Carry forward:

Project Manager: Amount spent:

Project Director: Budget Remaining:

Air Photo Acquisition

_____________________________

Project Close Out Year End Status

Y/N

_____________________________

Finance only at year end

The air photos are due to be refreshed. Currently this is on a 3 year cycle. Subscription options have been reviewed, but become overlyexpensive for the number of employees that use them. This project will maintain the current service level and not limit how we can use the airphotos.

Reserves:

Governance 1 & 3

Corporate Services 2018

CS-18-01

Project Description & Benefits:

Air Photo Refresh

Council Goal or Initiative:

Project Funding/Costs:

Funding Source:

*Service Level Enhancement - An increase over the established level of service for current and future budget years.

Project Sheet1408 Twp. Rd. 320 / Postal Bag 100, Didsbury, AB Canada T0M 0W0

T 403.335.3311 F 403.335.9207 Toll Free 1.877.264.9754www.mountainviewcounty.com

Operating (Non-Recurr ing) Operating (Service Level Enhancement)*

Contr ibuted Capital

14

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Business Services Mgr. PProject #: Cost Centre:

RR: TWP: Segment:



135,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Costs:

Dollar Amount:$18,000.00

15,000.00

70,000.00

5,000.00

Web Mapping Software Purchase and Install 10,000.00

17,000.00

Total Cost: $135,000.00

Carry forward:



Center Workroom Copier Refresh

PC Evergreen & Small Printers

Reception Copier Refresh

_____________________________


Network Switch Refresh

Y/N

_____________________________


North Workroom Copier Refresh

This includes all items in the Business Services Long Range Plan. The intent of the project is to keep our office software and hardware current.There will be fluctuations in the yearly purchases based on life cycles of the products purchased and the changing demands of the organizationand outside stakeholders.

Reserves: Office Equipment Reserves

Economy/Financial Health 3, Governance 3


CS-18-02


Business Services Hardware and Software



Funding Source:




Operating (Non-Recurring) Operating (Service Level Enhancement)*

Contributed Assets Capital

15

22018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027OOffice Equipment Reserve

Copiers/PrintersNorth Workroom Copier 17,000 19,000Plotter/Large Format Scanner 10,000 11,000Center Workroom Copier 18,000 19,000Shop Copier 7,000 8,000Small Laser Printer Replacement 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,200Reception Copier 15,000 16,000South Workroom Copier 19,000 20,000

Evergreen of PC's/Laptops (4 - year) 69,000 70,000 71,000 72,000 73,000 74,000 75,000 76,000 77,000 78,000IT Infrastructure

Database Server RefreshBackup System Refresh 26,000 27,000Virtual Server Host RefreshiSeries Server Refresh 45,000 45,000Server Room UPS Refresh 11,000 10,000Communication Equipment (switches and routers) 5,000 7,000 6,000 6,000 6,500 7,500 6,000 6,000Firewall 800 4,000 1,000 4,200Administration building Wifi upgrade 4,500 4,500High Availability build 220,000 120,000 240,000 131,000

Council Chambers AV System Upgrade 100,000 109,000Fallentimber AV System Refresh 21,000 23,000Bearberry AV System Refresh 50,000 54,000Phone System Refresh 65,000Postage Machine Refresh 15,000 17,000Access Control System 89,000GPS Equipment (2 units) 10,000 11,500 12,750GIS

GIS Development - Software for improved web maps 10,000New County Map

Dogpound Room AV System 13,000 13,000Office Furniture (Administration Building) as and when needed 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 25,000 15,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Vault Filing System 30,000

OOffice Equipment Reserve Total 465,000 228,000 140,000 155,800 226,600 511,100 235,600 265,100 183,100 221,650

BBeginning Balance 460,000 220,000 222,000 317,000 401,200 419,600 158,500 177,900 172,800 254,700FFunding 225,000 230,000 235,000 240,000 245,000 250,000 255,000 260,000 265,000 270,000

EEnding Balance 220,000 222,000 317,000 401,200 419,600 158,500 177,900 172,800 254,700 303,050

Added this year

OOffice Equipment Reserve 10 year Plan 2018 Budget

16

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Director Corp. Services PProject #: Cost Centre: Finance

RR: TWP: Segment:



Levies:



Costs:


10,000.00

Total Cost: $115,000.00

Carry forward:



The Modules will compliment existing modules in our ERP. This Module will allow us to use our ERP to budget in multiple ways, track stafftraining, and perform wage grid forecasting. The PM module will allow for us to track and schedule the maintenance of all of our assets.Besides enabling our asset management system to be raised to a higher level, the inspection routines will help ensure and document that weare following best practices and established services for our assets. MVC will not consider any project unless the contractor can provideexamples of successful implementation in other organizations. MVC is considering the use of a contractor to write scope to ensure there isalignment and understanding of timelines and scope delivery.

Reserves:

Economy/Financial Health 1 & @


CS-18-04


Budget & PM Modules



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Contractor Costs

Scope Contractor



Operating (Non-Recurr ing) Operating (Service Level


17

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Director Corp. Services PProject #: Cost Centre: Finance

RR: TWP: Segment:


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:$50,000.00

Levies:



Costs:


125,000.00

Total Cost: $190,000.00

Carry forward:



Asset Management Plan will use the help of Consultants to help formulate, write and bring best practices from other jurisdictions. Besides beinga key in determining long range sustainability, asset management is becoming a requirement for grants and other Provinces have made itmandatory. While the building evaluation and replacement schedules are needed, the County needs to have a more scientific method indetermining the timing and valuation of its buildings that have an original cost exceeding $25,000,000.

Reserves:

Economy/Financial Health 1 & @


CS-18-05


Asset Management Projects



Funding Source:


Grants: FCM Asset Management

_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Asset Management Plan (Consultant to advise and help write plan)

Building Evaluation and Replacement Schedules





18

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Director Corp Services PProject #: Cost Centre: 3.80RR: TWP: Segment:



10,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Costs:



Carry forward:



Office Furniture (as needed)

_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Reserves: Office Equipment Reserve


CS-18-06


Office Furniture (Administration Building)



Funding Source:






19

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Business Serv Mgr Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: TWP: Segment:

Project type: Operating (one-time): _______ Operating(on-going);_______ Contributed Assets:_____ Capital:___X__

Internal FTE:


21,500.00Levies:General Revenue:


Costs:Dollar Amount:

$10,000.0010,000.00

1,000.00500.00


Carry forward:



Reserves: Facilities Reserve

Corporate Services

This project will focus in part on making the Administration building security system more functional. The intent is to rework the system so that the system will automatically arm, and be disarmed by the door access system when a valid card is used to open a door. Sensors will also be changed to modernize the system with more current technology.The other part of the project is to improve general physical security by building on the camera surveillance system implemented in 2016. This will include the addition of cameras in the Didsbury Heavy Duty Shop yard, and replacement of one camera in the public entrance to the Administration building.

2017

CS-04-17


Security Upgrades

Council Goal or Regulation

Project Funding/Costs:Funding Source:

_____________________________


Administration building - replace public entrance camera

Y/N

_____________________________

CARRY FORWARD INTO 2018


Administration building security system

Didsbury HD Shop - 1 fixed cameraDidsbury HD Shop - 2 PTZ cameras



20

OOperational ServicesProjects

21

OOperational ServicesRe-Occurring Projects

22

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator PProject #: HP.X.209 Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A



Levies:



Costs:


Total Cost: $400,000.00

Carry forward:



Operational Services hires a contractor to apply asphalt patches to roads based on their condition.

Reserves:

1. Provide an efficient and sustainable road network.2. Provide and maintain Mountain View County’s infrastructure efficiently, effectively and in an environmentally responsible way.

Operational Services 2018

OS-18-17


Asphalt Long Patching



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Paving Contractor





23

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Assistant Director Ops PProject #: HB.X.201 Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Grants: MSI $600,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Costs:


Total Cost: $600,000.00

Carry forward:



Operational Services will identify 8 km of road requiring base stabilizationto be ripped this year, as well as base and chip the 8 km of road that were ripped the prior year.

Reserves:



OS-18-18


Base Stabilization



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Materials, labour and equipment





24

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Assistant Director Ops PProject #: HP.X.214 Cost Centre: 3.8RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Grants: Federal Gas Tax ($665K) & MSI ($1.035M) $1,700,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:

Total Funding: $1,700,000.00

Costs:

Dollar Amount:$1,700,000.00

Total Cost: $1,700,000.00

Carry forward:



Operational Services plans on rechipping its hard surfaced chip seal road inventory every 7 years. In 2018, this will be 121.6 km. Maps of the roads to be re-chipped will be determined in the spring and provided to council prior to final budget approval. Although the service level has

not changed, Operational Services has evaluated the costs of Chipping to come up with more accurate budget amounts.

Reserves:



OS-18-19


Re-Chipping Program



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Gravel, labour and equipment





25

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Assistant Director Ops Project #: MG.X.514 Cost Centre: 3.80

RR: N/A TWP: N/A Segment: N/A


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Grants: MSI $1,600,000.00

Levies: Aggregate Levy 150,000.00General Revenue: 250,000.00



$2,000,000.00

Total Cost: $2,000,000.00

Carry forward:



Gravel, Labour and equipment

_____________________________

Project Close Out Year End StatusY/N

_____________________________

Amended as per Council motion February 27, 2018.


Operational Services has been directed to complete 650 km of re-gravel per year. This service level is based on an assumed spread of 222 tonnes / km and a gravel road width of 8m. Maps of the roads to be re-graveled will be determined in the spring and provided to council prior to final budget approval.

Reserves:



OS-18-20


Re-Gravel Program






Operating (Non-Recurr ing) Operating (Service Level Enhancement)*Contr ibuted Capital

26

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Assistant Director ops PProject #: CP.0.059 Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:

120,000.00

Grants:

Reserves:

Levies:

General Revenue:


Costs:


Total Cost: $120,000.00

Carry forward:



Operational Services selects Subdivisions within the County that require chipping.



OS-18-22


Subdivision Chip Program



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Subdivision Chipping





27

OOperational ServicesCollector Road Projects

28

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator Project #: Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TWP: 292 Segment: T292R41-T292R30


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Grants: MSI $2,600,000.00



Costs:Dollar Amount:$3,025,000.00

Total Cost: $3,025,000.00

Carry forward:



Asphalt Second Lift

_____________________________


_____________________________

Mar 28th: Updated MSI Funding of $2.6M and reduced Road Reserve Funding to $425K


Acme Road Phase 1 is due for a second lift of asphalt to protect the existing infrastructure.

Reserves: Road Reserve



OS-18-01


Acme Road Phase 1 Second Lift







29

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator Project #: Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TWP: 320 Segment: T320 R43






$820,000.00

Total Cost: $820,000.00

Carry forward:



Road Repair

_____________________________


_____________________________


Bergen road requires a major repair between Highway 22 and Range Road 44. This is an estimate only, engineered numbers were not available at the time of compiling.


"1. Provide an efficient and sustainable road network.2. Provide and maintain Mountain View County’s infrastructure efficiently, effectively and in an environmentally responsible way."


OS-18-02


Bergen Road Repair







30

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator Project #: Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TWP: 320 Segment: T320R43 - T320R52






$180,000.00

Total Cost: $180,000.00

Carry forward:



Engineering

_____________________________


_____________________________


This project would involve completing engineering for a total rebuild of Township Road 320 (Bergen Road) from Highway 760 to Highway 22. Township 320 is part of the County's collector road network, and is used as a haul road for gravel resources from the Bergen Pit. Upgrading of this road will lessen maintenance requirements, improve drivability, drainage and increase safety by improving sighlines and reducing verticle curves. This is an estimate only, engineered number was not available at the time of compiling.

Reserves: Roads Reserve

"1. Provide an efficient and sustainable road network.2. Provide and maintain Mountain View County’s infrastructure efficiently, effectively and in an environmentally responsible way."


OS-18-27


Bergen Road Engineering







31

OOperational ServicesNon-Collector Road Projects

32

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator PProject #: CP.0.179 Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A



920,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Costs:

Dollar Amount:TBD

920,000.00

Total Cost: $920,000.00

Carry forward:



Drainage Work

Paving

_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


The East Didsbury Subdivision requires drainage improvements in accordance with the completed Storm Waster Management plan. Paving is also scheduled in the County Roads and Bridge Strategy.

Reserves: Roads Reserve



OS-18-03


East Didsbury Subdivision Improvements



Funding Source:






33

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Assistant Director Ops PProject #: Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Grants: MSI $700,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Costs:


Total Cost: $700,000.00

Carry forward:



Operational Services plan to haul 75,000 tonnes of gravel to the east side of the County to supply that areas gravel needs.

Reserves:



OS-18-04


East Side Gravel Supply



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Contract Trucking





34

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator PProject #: CP.0.159 (6630) Cost Centre: 3.80RR: 55 TTWP: N/A SSegment: R55T325



1,520,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Costs:


Total Cost: $1,520,000.00

Carry forward:



Industrial Road Upgrade

_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


This project involves upgrading Range Road 55 from Highway 584 to the Sundre Airport to and industrial road standard.




OS-18-05


Range Road 55 Upgrade



Funding Source:






35

McDougal Flats Road and Flood Mitigation Projects October 17, 2017

• Please refer to Map A and Drawings 1A, 1B and 1C for an overall view of the area and theproject locations.

1. Project #1 - OS-21-17 – As may be seen on Drawings 1A, 1B and 1C, this project involves theinstallation of culverts, erosion control matting and asphalt/spill over sections on RR 55 and 60. Asindicated on the drawings, new asphalt and erosion control will only be installed along the most erosionsensitive portions of the road. In addition, there is a project to lengthen the west side ditch along therunway at the airport to allow flood water to pass around the airport. This project is planned to be doneusing FREC funding in 2018.

2. Project #2 - OS-18-05 – As may be seen on Map A, this project involves the upgrade of RR 55 from theSundre Airport to Highway 584. This project has been waiting the decision concerning the rezoning ofthe Airport Pit lands to decide on the standard of the road upgrade and is planned to be done inconjunction with Project #1 to reduce costs.

Project Summary Table

Project Project Numbers FREC Project? DWG Number

1 1A Yes 1 1B Yes 2 1C Yes 3

Note - *Total Cost for 1A, 1B,1C $2,643,000.00

No A 2 2

Total Cost for Project 2 is $1,300,000.00

*Total cost to increase amount of asphalt and erosion control overentire length of 1A and 1B $5,117,000.00

* Estimated cost for project 1 (OS-21-17). The amount on the project sheet and the matrix reflect the total projected FREC grant balance at the end of 2017.

36

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Director Operations PProject #: Cost Centre: 6.10RR: TWP: Segment:



Levies:



Costs:


Total Cost: $100,000.00

Carry forward:



Operations has many unscheduled projects that come up during the year. These projects include approach, larger culvert repairs, and small engineering jobs. These jobs would use up valuable maintenance dollars if ran through the conventional budget. This project would cover these

miscellaneous projects and keep the maintenance budget for maintenance.

Reserves:



OS-18-16


Minor Projects



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Miscellaneous expenses





41

OOperational ServicesNon-Road Projects

42

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: DEM PProject #: Cost Centre: 2.10RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A



Levies:



Costs:



Carry forward:



The Mountain View Regional Emergency Management Agency Plan requires an update to stay current.Project is contingent on Urban Regional Partners equal contributions.

Reserves:


CAO Services 2018

OS-18-06


MVREMA Update



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


MVREMA Update





43

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator PProject #: Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A



150,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Possible STIP Grant - Consideration needs to be given to STIP application deadline

Costs:


Total Cost: $150,000.00

Carry forward:



Lighting Upgrade

_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


The runway lighting at the Olds/Didsbury Airport requires upgrade as the current lighting is not operating properly.

Olds/Didsbury Airport will present details to Council for this proposed Project




OS-18-09


Olds/Dids Airport Runway Lighting Upgrade



Funding Source:






44

DDepartment: Year:





Levies:



Possible STIP Grant - Consideration needs to be given to STIP application deadline

Costs:



Carry forward:



This project involves chipping the recently constructed taxiway extension to the tie-down area.

Reserves:



OS-18-10


Olds/Dids Airport Taxiway Chipping



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Taxiway Chipping





45

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator Project #: Cost Centre: 3.80




Levies:General Revenue: 50,000.00

Total Funding: $50,000.00Possible STIP Grant - Consideration needs to be given to STIP application deadline


$50,000.00


Carry forward:



This project would entail creating a development plan for the Sundre Airport. The plan would involve options to help the airport grow in a sustainable way. This may include how to best develop new lots, and improve or upgrade existing infrastructure related to the taxiways, aprons

or runways.

Reserves:



OS-18-28


Sundre airport Development Plan




_____________________________


_____________________________


Development Plan





46

OOperational ServicesBridge Projects

47

CLEARWATER COUNTY RED DEER COUNTY

COUNTY OF KNEEHILL

RED DEER COUNTY

ROCKY VIEW COUNTY

COUNTY OF KNEEHILL

5th M

eridia

n

4th M

eridia

n

M.D. OF BIGHORN NO.8

CLEARWATER COUNTY

ROCKY VIEW COUNTYM.D. OF BIGHORN NO.8

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

S

∙

∙∙

∙

S

∙

S

S

S

∙

S

S

S

S

S

∙

∙

S

∙

∙

S

S

S

∙

S

∙

S

∙

S

34-7-W5

33-7-W5

32-7-W5

34-6-W5

33-6-W5

32-6-W5

31-6-W5

34-5-W5

33-5-W5

32-5-W5

31-5-W5

34-4-W5

33-4-W5

32-4-W5

31-4-W5

34-3-W5

33-3-W5

32-3-W5

31-3-W5

34-2-W5

33-2-W5

32-2-W5

31-2-W5

33-1-W5

32-1-W5

31-1-W5

33-29-W4

32-29-W4

31-29-W4

33-28-W4

32-28-W4

31-28-W4

34-27-W4

33-27-W4

32-27-W4

31-27-W4

31-26-W4

29-6-W5

30-5-W5

29-5-W5

30-4-W5

29-4-W5

30-3-W5

29-3-W5

30-2-W5

29-2-W5

30-1-W5

29-1-W5

29-29-W4

30-28-W4

29-28-W4

30-27-W4

29-27-W4

30-29-W4

Town of Olds

Village of Cremona

Town of Didsbury

Town of Carstairs

Town of Sundre

HWY2

HWY2

TR300

TR340

RR80 RR

271

RR29

0

RR29

0

RR30

RR28

0

TR310

TR330

TR340

RR20

RR40

RR50

TR300

TR320

RR27

0

RR60

TR310

TR320

TR330

RR70 RR

280

RR10

RR20

RR30

RR40RR

50RR60

7977

6720

1887

1432

77706

1801

6797

304

76435

13078

1843

9519

79007

70619

1620

675

577

2411

6699

74053

940

13585

2457

2180

74313

1384584

22

2727

2A

760

22

582

791

575

2

766

766

582

581

584 27

2

582

2

2A

580

579

580

27

766

22766

2A

580

2018 Mountain View County Operations MapProposed Bridge Maintenance and Capital Program

Legend

!2018 Proposed BridgeCapital Program

!2018 Proposed BridgeMaintenance Program

¯1:399,000

48

File Name Located Over Spans Type Work Activity Est CostMVC Various Locations BIM Inspections 16,000MVC Various Locations General Maintenance 20,000MVC Various Locations Misc. Coring of bridges 5,000

675 Carstairs Carstairs Creek 2 RPP/SPInstall 10 cement filled sandbags at U/S bevel. Remove silt/vegetation at D/S bevel of south pipe. Seal crack in ACP. (Class D stream - No RAP)

3,000

1620 Carstairs Rosebud River 3 PAInstall posting signs in advance at bridge - both ends. Replace or repair SB posting sign at junction. Patch 2 concrete posts - 0.3m2. Remove drift and debris from around P1 and south headslope.

5,000

1801 Westward Ho Eagle Creek 2 MPCut and remove drift from U/S bevels. Excavate material from bevels of west pipe and in immediate U/S and D/S channels so both pipes take flow. (Cl. C stream: RAP Oct. 1 - April 15)

5,000

1843 Sundre Fallen Timber Creek 3 PO Caulk and seal abut. joints. Recoat bearings. Patch girder Sp.3-G1. Replace drain trough at pier. 15,0001887 Sundre Trib. Jackson Creek 1 SP Re-arrange rocks out of D/S bevel to protect north bank. (Class D stream with no RAP) 3,0002411 Didsbury Rosebud River 2 HC Repair girder top delams - approx. 3m2 of partial depth. 6,0006699 Didsbury Rosebud River 1 HC Patch curb hole 1,5006797 Sundre Bearberry Creek 3 SC Repair SC girders - Test chip in 2018 to determine extent of concrete deterioration 3,5009519 Cremona Silver Creek 1 SP Grout void under D/S headwall and collar - approx. 1m3 low strength grout. 3,000

70619 Wessex Trib. Carstairs Creek 1 SP Remove 2M long strut section in R7-8. 1,50074053 Bowden Spring Creek 1 TT Replace strip deck, correct wing splice, 2 WG blocks 7,50076435 Olds Trib. Dogpound Creek 1 MP Remove drift in R2, inlet area and from U/S channel area. 5,00077706 Sundre Trib. Bearberry Creek 1 SPE Remove beaver dam and minor drift in barrel 3,50079007 Olds OldsCcreek 1 MP Add 2 struts at U/S, repair R2 strut/tighten others, remove drift. 4,000

304 Westward Ho Little Red Deer River 3 RB Seal ACP deck cracks. By C17 1,500577 Carstairs Trib. Lonepine Creek 1 SPE Install hazard marker delineators along east sideslopes -By C17 1,000

1432 Westward Ho Little Red Deer River 3 RB Seal ACP deck cracks. By C17 1,5006720 Dogpound Dogpound Creek 3 TT Replace 1 post and 1 rail SE approach. By C17 2,0007977 Westward Ho EagleCreek 1 SP Patch potholes in ACP - approx. 2m2. By C17 500

13078 Water Valley Red Deer River 1 NU Paver patch north approach ACP - 80m2. By C17 3,2002018 Bridge Maintenance Total $117,200.00

2018 Bridge CapitalFile Name Located Over Spans Type Work Activity Est Cost2180 Olds Trail Creek 2 CSP Design and construction in 2018 250,0002457 Cremona Graham Creek 1 PG Design and construction in 2018 350,0001384 Netook Trail Creek 1 PG Engineering and construction for replacement structure. Piles rated 2 570,000

74313 Olds Trib. To Lonepine 1 SP Design and construction in 2018 300,000940 Didsbury Dogpound Creek 3 PT/TT Engineering for replacement (defer maintenance -2011 coring).Replace in 2020 60,000

13585 Sundre Bearberry Creek 3 HC Replace P1 and P2 west caps and A2 cap. Pile splice at P2 streamside. From 2014 Coring 60,000304 Didsbury Dogpound Creek 3 HC/FC Replace select caps and corbels - from 2014 coring 60,000

2018 Bridge Capital Total $1,650,000.00

Total of Maintenance and Capital Projects in 2018 $1,767,200.00

2018 Proposed Bridge Maintenance and Capital Program

2018 Bridge Maintenance

49

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Assistant Director Ops. Project #: Various Cost Centre: 6.10RR: N/A TWP: N/A Segment: N/A






$117,200.00

Total Cost: $117,200.00

Carry forward:



See attached sheets for specific bridge information. The bridge maintenance work is done by County staff, or contracted out based on ability.

Reserves:


OS-18-23


Bridge Maintenance Program




_____________________________


_____________________________


2018 Bridge Maintenance Program




50

Project #

$16,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:

Proposed Completion Date:

Insert Photo Here

BVBS Bridge Inspections

Various Locations

Annual bridge and culvert inspections

Bridge Project Sheet1408 Twp. Rd. 320 / Postal Bag 100, Didsbury, AB Canada T0M 0W0


51

Project #

$20,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

MVC General Maintenance

Various Locations

Bridge and culvert general maintenance



52

Project #

$5,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

BVBS Misc. Bridge Coring

Various locations

Misc. coring of bridge structures



53

Project #

$3,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:

Insert Photo Here

675

NW SEC 33 TWP 29 RGE 1 W5M

Install 10 cement/gravel filled sandbags at U/S bevel. Remove silt/vegetation at D/S

bevel of south pipe. Seal crack in ACP. (Class D stream - No RAP)



54

Project #

$5,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:

Insert Photo Here

1620


Install posting signs in advance at bridge - both ends. Replace or repair SB posting sign

at junction. Patch 2 concrete posts - 0.3m2. Remove drift and debris from around P1

and south headslope.



55

Project #

$5,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

1801

SE SEC 29 TWP 33 RGE 4 W5M

Cut and remove drift from U/S bevels. Excavate material from bevels of west pipe and in

immediate U/S and D/S channels so both pipes take flow. (Cl. C stream: RAP Oct. 1 -

April 15)



56

Project #

$15,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:

Insert Photo Here

1843

SE 04 TWP 32 RGE 05 W5M

Caulk and seal abut. joints. Recoat bearings. Patch girder Sp.3-G1. Replace drain trough

at pier.



57

Project #

$3,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

1887


Re-arrange rocks out of D/S bevel to protect north bank. (Class D stream with no RAP)



58

Project #

$6,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:

2018

Insert Photo Here

2411

SE SEC 2TWP 32 RGE 2 W5M

Repair girder top delams - approx. 3m2 of partial depth.




59

Project #

$1,500.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

6699

SW SEC 15 TWP 32 RGE 2 W5M

Patch curb hole



60

Project #

$3,500.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:

Insert Photo Here

6797

NW 04 TWP 33 RGE 06 W5M

Repair SC girders - Test chip in 2018 to determine extent of concrete deterioration



61

Project #

$3,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

9519


Grout void under D/S headwall and collar - approx. 1m3 low strength grout.



62

Project #

$1,500.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

70619


Remove 2M long strut section in R7-8.



63

Project #

$7,500.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:

Insert Photo Here

74053

SE03 TWP 34 RGE 03 W5M

Replace strip deck, correct wing splice, 2 WG blocks



64

Project #

$5,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:

Insert Photo Here

76435


Remove drift in R2, inlet area and from U/S channel area.



65

Project #

$3,500.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

77706


Remove beaver dam and minor drift in barrel



66

Project #

$4,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:

Insert Photo Here

79007

NE SEC 26 TWP 33 RGE 2 W5M

Add 2 struts at U/S, repair R2 struts, tighten others, remove drift.



67

Project #

$1,500.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

304


Seal ACP deck cracks. By C17



68

Project #

$1,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

577


Install hazard marker delineators along east sideslopes. By C17



69

Project #

$1,500.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

1432

SE04 TWP 32 RGE 04 W5M

Seal ACP deck cracks By C17



70

Project #

$2,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

6720

SW03 TWP 29 RGE 04 W5M

Replace 1 post and 1 rail at SE approach. By C17



71

Project #

$500.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

7977

NE SEC 8 TWP 33 RGE 4 W5M

Patch potholes in ACP - approx. 2m2. By C17



72

Project #

$3,200.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

13078

SW02 TWP 30 RGE 05 W5M

Paver patch north approach ACP - 80m2. By C17



73

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Assistant Director Ops. Project #: Various (by Bridge) Cost Centre: 3.80




1,650,000.00Levies:General Revenue:

Total Funding: $1,650,000.00Possible STIP Grant - Consideration needs to be given to STIP application deadline


$1,650,000.00

Carry forward:



2018 Capital Bridge Program

_____________________________


_____________________________

Total Cost:.


See attached sheets for specific bridge information.

Reserves: Bridge Reserve


OS-18-24


Capital Bridge Program







74

Project #

$250,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Capital


Insert Photo Here

2180


Engineering and construction for replacement



75

Project #

$350,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Capital


Insert Photo Here

2457


Engineering and Construction for Replacement



76

Project #

$570,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Capital


Insert Photo Here

1384


Engineering and construction for replacement



77

Project #

$300,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Capital


Insert Photo Here

74313


Engineering and Construction for Replacement



78

Project #

$60,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Maintenance:


Insert Photo Here

940


Engineering for replacement



79

Project #

$60,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Capital


Insert Photo Here

13585


Replace P1 and P2 west caps and A2 cap. Pile splice at P2 streamside.



80

Project #

$60,000.00

Bridge File #

LSD:

Directions:

Capital


Insert Photo Here

304


Replace select caps and corbels, patch curb, replace 2 approach posts.



81

20181 2180 Culvert Replacement Olds SW16-33-2-5 250,000

2 - 1200mm x 9.8 CSP Trail Creek1947

2 2457 Bridge Replacement Cremona NW1-30-4-5 350,0006.1M PG Girder Span Big Prairie Road - Graham Ck

19543 1384 Bridge Replacement Netook SW5-34-2-5 570,000

1 - 6.1m PG Span Trail Creek1957

4 74313 Culvert Replacement Olds SW28-33-28-4 300,0001810 x 69.5m SPCSP Trib. To Lonepine Creek

19825 940 Bridge Rehab Didsbury NW34-31-3-5 60,000

8.5-18.3-8.5 PT/TT Dogpound Creek1959

6 13585 Bridge Rehab Sundre NW6-33-5-5 60,00010.1-11.6-10.1m HC Bearberry Creek

1969 2014 Coring7 304 Bridge Rehab Didsbury SE3-31-3-5 60,000

3 - 10.1-21.3-10.1 HC/FC Dogpound Creek1966

Est. Total 2018 $1,650,000

Replace P1 and P2 west caps and A2 cap. Pile splice at P2 streamside. From

2018 -2020 Mountain View County Capital Bridge Plan Last update by BVBS Sept. 3, 2017These are un-inflated costs.

Design and construction in 2018


Engineering for replacement (defer maintenance -2011 coring).Replace in 2020


Engineering and construction for replacement structure. Piles rated 2

Replace select caps and corbels - from 2014 coring

82

20191 77814 Culvert Replacement Bergen SE27-31-6-5 250,000

1500mm MP 17.1m Trib. Nitchi Creek1975

2 7362 Bridge Replacement Olds SW29-33-27-W4 350,0006.1M PG Girder Span Spruce Creek

3 282 Bridge Replacement Olds SW28-33-28-4 400,0008.5M PG Girder Span Olds Creek

19824 73078 Bridge Replacement Water Valley NW34-31-3-5 350,000

6.1M PG Girder Span Big Prairie Creek

5 2377 Bridge Replacement Crossfield SE13-29-3-5 1,134,600

3 - 6.1m PG Span Acme Road, Beaverdam Creek

6 77639 Culvert Replacement Crossfield SE27-29-29-4 800,0002.4 x 49.3m SPCSP Carstairs Creek

Augered pipes assessment in 20177 74945 Culvert Replacement Westward Ho

Replace 1529 MP with 1800 CSP

Trib. To Little Red Deer NW33-32-4W5 239,000

Est. Total 2019 $3,523,600

Engineering (50k) and construction (300k) for replacement structure

Engineering and construction for replacement structure. Annual BIM inspections until

207K Construction and 32K Eng. Prelim eng in 2017

Engineering and construction for replacement structure by Amec in 2014

2018 -2020 Mountain View County Capital Bridge Plan Last update by BVBS August 23, 2017These are un-inflated costs.

Engineering and construction for replacement structure

Engineering (50k) and construction (300k) for replacement structure

Engineering (60k) and construction (340,000k) for replacement structure

83

2020

1 940 Bridge Replacement Didsbury NW34-31-3-5 1,300,000 Construction costs using 333m2 x $3766

8.5-18.3-8.5m PT/TT Span Dogpound Creek

2 577 Culvert Replacement Carstairs NW30-30-27-4 250,000 Construction Costs2316 x 2560 x 24.4m SPE Trib. Lonepine Creek

3 1432 Bridge Rehab Westward Ho SW4-32-4-5 250,0003 Span RB Little Red Deer River

4 2251 Bridge Replacement Water Valley SW10-30-5-5 350,0001 - 6.1m TT Span Big Prairie Creek

5 76435 Culvert Replacement Olds NW28-32-3-5 280,0001524 x 47.5m CSP Watercourse

6 79527 Culvert Replacement Cremona SW17-30-4-5 380,000

2 - 1219 x 34.2/40.4m CSPs Trib. Little Red Deer River

7 13125 Install bridge size pipe Sundre NW9-32-5-5 230,0001524 x 47.5m CSP Watercourse

Est. Total 2017 $3,040,000

Eng. (30K) and Construction (200k) Costs

2018 -2020 Mountain View County Capital Bridge Plan Last update by BVBS August 23, 2017These are un-inflated costs.

Construction costs

Construction Costs

Overlay and new joints, select painting of girder flanges, extend deck drains, reset

abutment rocker bearingsConstruction Costs

84

OOperational ServicesFacility Projects

85

DDepartment: Year:





200,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Costs:


Total Cost: $200,000.00

Carry forward:



Environmental Consultant

_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


This project entails putting out a unit price request for proposal for a 3 year contract. The purpose of which is to evaluate the County's environmental liability on all County Owned contaminated sites, as well as create a County wide plan to manage these liabilities in a pragmatic

fashion. This plan will aid in managing future costs related to environmental contamination and development of a comprehensive asset management plan.

Historically, over the past few years, we have spent roughly $125,000 but we anticipated an increase to complete the ESAs Level 1&2. It is believed that the County's environmental costs will remain at $200,000 or higher in the foreseeable future


1. Protect and preserve the natural environment through education, collaboration and policy.2. Provide and maintain Mountain View County’s infrastructure efficiently, effectively and in an environmentally responsible way.


OS-18-11


Environmental Liability Management



Funding Source:






86

OOperational ServicesEquipment Projects

10587

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Assistant Director Ops Project #: MR.0.800 Cost Centre: 3.80

RR: TWP: Segment:



3,172,000.00Levies:General Revenue:



29,000.00

Total Cost: $3,172,000.00

Carry forward:



2018 Equipment Replacement - Operations2018 Equipment Replacement - Agricultural Services

_____________________________


_____________________________


Costs are based on the 2018 Long Range Plan.

Reserves: Equipment Fleet Reserve


OS-18-26


2018 Equipment Replacement Plan







88

REVISED: October 20, 2017x 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037

OPS 3,143,000$ 2,190,000$ 1,815,000$ 1,760,000$ 2,330,000$ 1,855,000$ 2,760,000$ 1,438,000$ 2,995,000$ 2,160,000$ 2,525,000$ 2,545,000$ 1,710,000$ 1,780,000$ 2,458,000$ 3,205,000$ 1,435,000$ 1,475,000$ 3,535,000$ 2,070,000$ AG 29,000$ 143,000$ 203,000$ 418,000$ 93,000$ 68,000$ 238,000$ 73,000$ 72,000$ 23,000$ 148,000$ 148,000$ 252,000$ 293,000$ 23,000$ 27,000$ 233,000$ 228,000$ 77,000$ 68,000$

3,172,000$ 2,333,000$ 2,018,000$ 2,178,000$ 2,423,000$ 1,923,000$ 2,998,000$ 1,511,000$ 3,067,000$ 2,183,000$ 2,673,000$ 2,693,000$ 1,962,000$ 2,073,000$ 2,481,000$ 3,232,000$ 1,668,000$ 1,703,000$ 3,612,000$ 2,138,000$

Fleet Purchases for 2017 Amounts Fleet Purchases for 2018 Amounts Unit Numbers Disposals for 2017 Amounts Mileage Kms/Hrs Unit Numbers Disposals for 2017 Amounts Mileage Kms/Hrs

Water Truck 240,000$ Graders x 2 1,000,000$ 1.079 1970 ASPHALT TANKER- 100$ n/a Keep 1.042A

3500 GALLON WATER TANK- 1$ n/a Age

Oil Storage Tank 115,000$ Distributor Trailer 270,000$ 1.129 2000 STERLING TANDEM WATER TRUCK LT8501 5,000$ 13,281 Hrs Beyond Repair 1.058 1975 ASPHALT TRAILER - 1$ n/a Leaking

Motor Graders x 2 995,000$ Plows x 3 60,000$ 1.239 2013 DODGE CHARGERCHARGER 7,000$ 93,970 kms Disp Appr'd 2016 1.077A

1997 1800 GALLON WATER TANK - 1$ n/a Age

Pneumatic Packer 225,000$ 1/2 Ton 45,000$ 2.169 2002 PS200B CAT PNEUMATIC PACKER PS200B 20,000$ 3,663 hrs Replaced 1.087

1993 ENTYRE DISTRIBUTORS-2000 5,000$ n/a Replaced

1/2 Ton (Bylaw) 45,000$ 3/4 Ton x 3 (Foremen) 180,000$ 2.170 2002 CAT 143H 6WHEEL DRIVE GRADER 143H 6WD 30,000$ 11,503 hrs Disp Appr'd 2016 1.130

2000 FORD F250 3/4 TONF250 500$ 330,673 Loosing Spark Plugs

3/4 Ton (Foreman) 50,000$ Water Truck 245,000$ 2.176 2002 ETNYRE CHIP SPREADER 4WD 4WD 25,000$ 1,968 hrs Replaced 1.131

2000 FORD F250 3/4 TONF250 500$ 268,654 Loosing Spark Plugs

Chipspreader 340,000$ Gravel Trucks x 3 825,000$ 2.178A 2003 VEI HELPER PT/PRINTER PORTABLE SCALE HELPER P5 -$ n/a Beyond Repair 1.136

1997 MACK TRACTORCH-613 2,000$ 12,113 Hrs Age Fall 2018

Patrol Car 55,000$ 2.304 JOHN DEERE F725 FRONT MOWER (SUNDRE ARPTF725 -$ 1,255 hrs Beyond Repair 1.143

2001 FREIGHTLINER TANDEM WATERTRUCK FL80 5,000$ 10440 Hrs Age

Traffic Counters 25,000$ 1.143A 100 BARREL WATER TANK - 1$ n/a Attach 1.143

Total 2017 Disposals 87,100$ 1.174 2005 FORD EXPEDITION XLTEXPEDITION XLT 1,000$ 303,788 Age OA - Oct 2017

1.180 2006 GMC SIERRA 1/2 TON FWD SIERRA TKI5753 1,000$ 221,369 Knocking Engine

** 87,000$ 1.182 2006 GMC SIERRA 3/4 TON 4WD SIERRA TK25903 1,000$ 263,260 Knocking Engine

New Purchases to Fleet New Purchases to Fleet 1.189

2007 FORD EXPLORER 4X4 XLT EXPLORER 1,650$ 228,991 Age OA - Oct 2017

Medium Agricultural Tractor (used) 65,000$ Tractor (EQ Hauling) (Used) 75,000$ 1.203 2009 MACK GRANITE TANDEM GRAVEL TRUCK GU713 8,000$ 5404 Hrs High Maintenance

Pull Behind Scraper (used) 57,000$ Equinox E-Start 40,000$ 1.204 2009 MACK GRANITE TANDEM GRAVEL TRUCK GRANITE GU713 8,000$ 7246 Hrs High Maintenance

Wood Chipper 55,000$ 1/2 Ton Eco Diesel Truck 48,000$ 1.206 2009 MACK TANDEM GRAVEL TRUCK GRANITE GU713 8,000$ 4944 Hrs High Maintenance

Smooth Drum Packer 190,000$ Distributor Tractor (Used) 75,000$ 1.995 1979 DELTA TANK TRAILER- 1$ n/a Age

Loader (Medium Size) 280,000$ 2.178 2002 CATERPILLAR 972G LOADER 972G 5,000$ 11623 Hrs Age

Unit Numbers Prior Disposals Amounts Mileage Kms/Hrs 2.244 2008 CATERPILLAR 140M MOTOR GRADER 140M MOTOR GRADER 30,000$ 12527 Hrs Age

1.115 1998 GMC 1/2 TONTC10903

Appr'd 2014 - 198.933 kms Keep 2.261

2008 TENCO 12 FT SNOWPLOW (REVERSIBLE) TCP 125-42 1$ n/a Attach 1.203

Total 2017 Purchases 2,457,000$ Total 2018 Purchases 3,143,000$ 1.149 1999 JC TRIAXLE EQUIPMENT TRAILER - Appr'd 2014 Keep 2.262


1.161 2004 FREIGHTLINER GRAVEL TRUCK FL112

Appr'd 2014 - 3,222 hrs Keep 2.264


1.212 2009 GMC CANYON SLE PICKUP CANYON SLE CREW TT15643 1,000$

Appr'd 2015 - 317,614 kms Disp 2017 2.312

2011 NEW HOLLAND B95B BACKHOE B95B 15,000$ 1,117 Hrs Not Used

2.235 2007 CAT 143H GRADER143H 40,000$

Appr'd 2016 - 12,670 hrs Disp 2017 2.327

2013 CAT 160M MOTOR GRADER 160M MOTOR GRADER 140,000$ 4712 Hrs

2.243 2008 CATERPILLAR 140M MOTOR GRADER 140M 40,000$

Appr'd 2016 - 11,600 hrs Disp 2017 n/a

2009 RADAR TRAFFIC COUNTERS (TMS-SA) x 4 -$ n/a Age FA49 sub 3

** Total Prior Yrs 81,000$ Total 2018 New Disposals 231,658$

= Kept - but now disposing in 2017 ** Total Combined 2018 Disposals 399,658$

PRIOR YEAR(S) APPROVED DISPOSALS O/S

NEW - 2018 DisposalsNEW - 2018 Purchases2017 Purchases

Mountain View County2017 / 2018 Equipment Purchases

2017 Disposals

Mountain View County2017 / 2018 Equipment Disposals

2017 Disposals in 2018

89

OOperational ServicesGravel Pit Projects

90

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator PProject #: Various (by Pit) Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Increase in Inventory Gravel - No Funding Required for Inventory

Total Funding: $0.00

Costs:


20,000.00

35,000.00


Carry forward:



The County has to continually update our its pit plans to stay current with Alberta Environment codes of practice to operate its gravel pits. In 2018 the County needs to submitted updated pit plans for the following pits: Bergen, Bittner, and Deer Springs. This update requires a survey crew to go out and resurvey the area of the pit, volumes of stripping and update the gravel pit reclamation plans. This information is then used

to by Operational Services and Corporate Services to calculate our gravel pit reclamation liability.

Infrastructure1. Provide an efficient and sustainable road network.2. Provide and maintain Mountain View County’s infrastructure efficiently, effectively and in an environmentally responsible way.


OS-18-12


Gravel Pit Engineering



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Bergen Pit

Deer Springs

Bittner Pit





91

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Assistant Director Ops PProject #: Various (by Pit) Cost Centre: 3.80RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A



800,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Costs:


600,000.00

Total Cost: $800,000.00

Carry forward:



Mountain View County forces in combination with our consultant propose to reclaim 2 gravel pits. The priority being the privately owned Harriman pit first and then the County owned Dyck Pit. In 2016 Operational Services completed the reclamations with internal forces, and plan

on doing the same in 2017.

This project will relieve a Liability and is not technically Operating or Capital

Reserves: Pit Stripping & Reclamation Reserve



OS-18-13


Gravel Pit Reclamation



Funding Source:


_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Harriman Pit

South Dyck Pit





92

McDougal Pit Reclamation (2017)

93

DDepartment: Year:





170,000.00

Levies:

General Revenue:


Earthworks and Engineering will ultimately increase the Gravel Inventory Values - no funding required for Inventory

Costs:


170,000.00

Total Cost: $300,000.00

Carry forward:



Earthworks and engineering

Reclamation liability

_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


Prior to crushing gravel the pit needs to be stripped. This is done on as needed basis.

Reserves: Unfunded Liability for Pit Reclamation



OS-18-14


Gravel Pit Stripping



Funding Source:






95

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator Project #: Cost Centre: 3.80



Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Grants:Reserves: Unfunded Liability for Pit Reclamation 42,000.00Levies:General Revenue:



$42,000.00


Carry forward:



Consultant costs

_____________________________


_____________________________


Operational Services plans to hire a consultant to develop an end use plan for the McDougal Pit that includes a recreation, park and/or public use area.Administration to bring back suggestions of using resources from Olds College and internal resources to potentially set up a community committee to recommend ideas on an end use plan rather than using a consultant.

This project will increase a Liability and is not technically Operating or Capital. Direction was given at the November 21, 2017 Budget Meeting to engage Olds College to conduct this work. We have not been able to arrange meetings or discuss costs for this service. As a result we kept the original estimate. It is not anticipated that the variance be material in nature. For the sake of timing the original budgeted amount is



OS-18-15


McDougal Pit End Use Plan







96

OOperational ServicesCarry Over Projects

97

DDepartment: Year:


Project Manager: Ryan Morrison Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________

RR: N/A TTWP: N/A SSegment: N/A

Project type: Operating (one-time): _______ Operating(on-going);_______ Contributed Assets:_____ Captial:__X___

Internal FTE:

Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:$3,600,000.00

50,600.00

Grants: MSI Reserves: Roads ReserveLevies:

General Revenue:


CCosts:


1,345,320.00

470,000.00

Total Cost: $3,650,600.00

Carry forward:



Council Goal or Regualtion


Funding Source:


Operational Services

This project involves replacing temporary bridge BF72532. it also involves road reconstruction through the river valley as well as some channel work.

2017

OS-01-17


RR 52 Bridge and Road Construction

_____________________________


Y/N

_____________________________


BF72532 Construction

River Work and Armouring

Road Work



98

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: N/A TWP: N/A Segment: N/A

Project type: Operating (one-time): _______ Operating(on-going);_______ Contributed Assets:_____ Capital:__X___

Internal FTE:

Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:

405,000.00Grants:Reserves: Roads Reserve Levies:General Revenue:



$135,000.0095,000.00

175,000.00

Total Cost: $405,000.00

Carry forward:







This will be the final year carrying out the Fallen Weight Testing on all of the hard surface roads in the county. Once the testing is complete, a report will be completed which will include surfacing strategies for all the roads tested.

2017

OS-02-17


Fallen Weight Testing

_____________________________


_____________________________


2015 Remaining Contract Value

2017 Remaining Contract Value2016 Remaining Contract Value



99

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: 20 TWP: N/A Segment: 31423R20


Internal FTE:

Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Grants: MSI 420,000.00

Levies:General Revenue:



$420,000.00

Total Cost: $420,000.00

Carry forward:



Re-chipping & Drainage Improvements

_____________________________


_____________________________



This project involves re-chipping the subdivision, as well as drainage improvements along the road.

This project was delayed due to approvals needed due to the new provincial wetland regulations.

2017

OS-03-17


Westfork Estates Subdiv. Improvements



Reserves:




100

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Ops Project Coordinator Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: N/A TWP: N/A Segment: N/A


Internal FTE:





$665,000.00285,000.00

Total Cost: $950,000.00

Carry forward:








This project involves building a 3 bay shop for grader storage at the Bittner Pit. It also involves some site development. This is planned to completed as a design-build contract, simialr to the Ag Shop.

2017

OS-10-17


East Side Shop

_____________________________


_____________________________


Shop StructureSite Work



101

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Director of Operations Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: N/A TWP: N/A Segment: N/A

Project type: Operating (one-time): __X_____ Operating(on-going);_______ Contributed Assets:_____ Capital:_____

Internal FTE:





$50,000.00


Carry forward:





Reserves:



A set of Mountain View County servicing standards would assist in bringing forward development that meet the County’s needs. Using standards from other municipalities do not necessarily serve our local circumstances or needs. The first step to review and update of Planning’s standalone policies and procedures was completed. The next step will be the review the policies and procedures of Operations that impacts subdivision design followed by the appointment of a consultant to lead the review process. This is a joint project between Operational Services and Planning and Development. The project was originally approved in 2015, however no costs have been charged ot project during 2015 or 2016.

2017

OS-18-17


Design Guidelines and Construction Specs


_____________________________


_____________________________

Hiring of a Consultant



102

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Director of Operations Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: N/A TWP: N/A Segment: N/A


Internal FTE:

Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:$2,750,000.00



Total Cost: $2,750,000.00

Carry forward:





Grants: FREC Reserves: Levies:General Revenue:



This project involves crreating a drainage plan for the area West of Sundre to protect the Sundre Airport, Range Road 55 and Range Road 60. The intent is to fund this project by repurposing the 2013 FREC Grant.

2017

OS-21-17


Protection of Sundre Airport, RR55 & 60


_____________________________


_____________________________



This is an estimate only based on remaining FREC grant funds at the end of 2017.

103

LLegislative, Agricultural and Community Services

Projects

104

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Community Services Project #: Cost Centre: 5.60

RR: TWP: Segment:






170,000.00

Total Cost: $170,000.00

Carry forward:



Pursuant to Alberta's Police Act, the Province of Alberta is responsible for ensuring that an adequate and effective level of policing is maintained throughout the Province. Under the Police Act, policing shall be provided to every municipality/community with a population of 5,000 or less and Municipal Districts, Counties, and Improvement Districts. Municipalities covered under Provincially funded policing are eligible to apply for an RCMP Enhanced Police Position at their cost. The Olds RCMP Detachment have a staff allowance of 14 positions. They are currently down 3 positions (2 of which are medical leave). The Didsbury RCMP Detachment have a staff allowance of 10 positions. On paper they are fully staffed with the exception of transfers, holidays, and sick time. The Sundre RCMP Detachment have a staff allowance of 10 positions and are currently fully staffed. **Further options will be presented to Council at a later date.

Reserves:

Community / Quality of Life Goal #1 - Maintain Safe Communities

Legislative and Community Services 2018

LS-18-01


Rural Crime Reduction Initiative




_____________________________


_____________________________


Enhanced Police Position within Mountain View County (includes all costs)




105

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Director Leg. Services Project #: Cost Centre: 5.50

RR: TWP: Segment:






$7,000.00


Carry forward:



Purchase of two new radar units for Traffic Safety within the County at a cost of approximately $ 3500.00 each. Current radar units are 9 years old. Patrol is attempting to upgrade firmware of existing units to restore reliable functionality. If the firmware update is not successful replacement units will be required. Various attempts to correct reliability issues over the past 4 months have not been successful.

Reserves:

Community / Quality of Life1. Maintain safe communities.


LS-18-02


Patrol Radar Units



_____________________________


_____________________________


2 Radar units




106

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Director Leg. Services Project #: Cost Centre: 4.10RR: TWP: Segment:






40,000.00


Carry forward:



Annual Funding Request 2018

_____________________________


_____________________________


Legacy Land Trust has requested $40,000 of funding per year for the next three years (2018, 2019 and 2020). This project sheet provides funding for only one year. "As a result of Mountain View County’s initial investment in Legacy Land Trust, Legacy Land Trust has been able to attract another $10 for every $1 the County has provided. Bringing over a million dollars into the County has ensured a full time executive director position and a .8 conservation coordinator and a summer student for 2017." Plans for 2018 include "1525 acres of projects that are fully funded and in progress, New: currently fundraising for 600 acres of land in MVC & adjacent counties, “Water Quality and You” project scope includes 2018, and will expand to other watershed areas in MVC, New: MVC agricultural conservation projects to be designed and will be broadening funding sources for implementation, Land Trust Model Established: approached by four other counties to date for information and support, continued participation in local event, promotion of all stewardship information and groups and development of outreach materials and programs." Attached is the letter from Legacy Land Trust outlining their funding request.

Reserves:

Environment1. Protect and preserve the natural environment through education, collaboration,and policy.


LS-18-03


Legacy Land Trust Funding Request







107

Mountain View County Grant Request Submission September, 2017

Vision - A community that shares a commitment to conservation and stewardship of our regional landscapes. Mission - Working with you, our community, to help conserve nature, water, wildlife, food, and stories.

Background Legacy Land Trust was a County initiated effort created to provide a conservation option to the land owner community that would benefit the broader community. Beginning in 2005 with a staff person doing initial research to determine if local people wanted access to a local organization able to work with private landowners interested in conservation, when she determined there was interest, a group of volunteers then committed to creating the non-profit society. Legacy Land Trust has been a society operating in Mountain View County since 2013 and a charity since 2015.

Results from last three years of receiving MVC grants • Impressive for a land trust of this size and age and compared to nearly 150 across Canada

within a four year period Legacy has entered into conservation agreements and discussionsfor land nearly 1,700 acres that are all fully funded.

• 140 acres have a registered conservation easement in place. Another 1525 acres will becompleted in the coming months to year or two.

• Hosted nearly 300 people at ten events, some with field walks, that have collectively raisedawareness, raised funds and/or provided education opportunities including estate andsuccession planning, story-telling, riparian stewardship, pollinators, heri tage landscapes,and landscape connectivity

• Have distributed nearly 900 calendars to raise awareness• Have had 11 volunteers that have done GIS maps, assisted with bio-physical baseline field

work, helped with event delivery (music, leading tours, helping with guests (11 people),legal, accounting support, museum location for event, rental discounts, calendar salelocations, donors to silent auction, and photographers to the calendar project – as ancharity the number of volunteers help remind us the value that people place on the workthat is being done, enough that they give their time and talent freely.

• Hire local talents and services as often as possible – including, work on various projectsincluding: design, audit, computer hardware and service, signage and word processing.

• Participated with a booth at Ranching Opportunities, SPOG, and Pathways to Sustainability,Olds Showcase.

• Hosted a month long art show of local nature photographers at the Carstairs museum thatlaunched in conjunction with our AGM - very well received with many people new to themuseum coming to see it.

108

• Started as an all-volunteer organization to now having 1.8 locally employed full time staff• Volunteer board of directors: Jim Smith, George Green, Larry Wright, Kim Good, Sarah

Leach, Michael Dougherty, Connie Harder, Maureen Worobetz, Wayne Notley, and TerryAntoniuk.

What’s coming • Continue to work on the 1525 acres of projects to bring them to completion• Submitting fundraising applications for another 600 acres of environmentally important

land that if successful will be completed over the next three years.• Starting to build experience on agricultural and heritage projects, with first meetings

happening on an agricultural property.• Also a very large focus in 2017 and beyond is working on program we are launching with the

Red Deer River Watershed Alliance and many other partners to target communication andoutreach activities in the Red Deer River escarpment. The program is called Water Qualityand You. The concept is to promote already existing environmental stewardshipinformation to landowners and land managers that can affect water quality of the Red DeerRiver. This initial phase of the program will focus in Mountain View County but the longerterm plan is to expand along the river and throughout the watershed.

Fundraising Ask • The life of a charity is constant fundraising – we have spent the past year focused on raising

funds to deliver conservation easements and to build the Water Quality and You program.We have been successful in doing that. However one of the challenges of operating acharity is that there are financial needs beyond project/program specific grants. So wecontinue to research, understand and work on longer term funding approaches to ensurewe have operational funds that can be used to continue to develop new and necessaryprograms. We continue to have a fund development professional who volunteers his timeto guide us in these efforts.

• As a result of Mountain View County’s initial investment in Legacy Land Trust, we have beenable to attract another $10 for every $1 the county has provided. Bringing over a milliondollars into the county has ensured a full time executive director position and a .8conservation coordinator and a summer student for 2017.

• We have also built a model that other counties are looking at as they are faced with theneed to support their communities and landscapes with conservation tools. We have beenapproached by four other counties asking about how we set up the land trust and why wetook this approach. We were approached by the CPAA conference held in Red Deer eachyear to come and share our story. Al Kemmere and Kim Good presented to a room of about60 people.

• Many funders, especially in the conservation and environmental world want to see a trackrecord of projects before they will provide funding. As a new organization this is verydifficult, and in such a case funders will look at who else has or is funding an organization. In2015 with the approved donation by Mountain View County we were able to double thefunds with grants to assist with start-up costs as well as individual donations. In 2016/17 the

109

funding partnership with the county provided further confidence and legitimacy with other funders and we were able raise nearly $400,000 to deliver the conservation easements to complete the nearly 1700 acres in projects, hire people and deliver programming.

• As we continue to work on long term funding approaches and to support that work werequest a contribution from the County of $40,000 each year for the next three years.

Summary of Mountain View County Grant Request Submission

September, 2017

As a result of MVC funding Legacy has been able to:

2018 Plans Funding Request

Complete 140 acres under CE

1525 acres of projects that are fully funded and in progress

$40,000 / year for 2018, 2019, and 2020.

Raise $10 for every $1 the county has provided

New: currently fundraising for 600 acres of land in MVC & adjacent counties

1.8 locally employed full time staff

“Water Quality and You” project scope includes 2018, and will expand to other watershed areas in MVC

Collaborative Partnership Growth: MVC, ALUS, Cows n Fish, Red Deer River Watershed Alliance etc.

New: MVC agricultural conservation projects to be designed and will be broadening funding sources for implementation

Hire and support local talents and services

Land Trust Model Established: Approached by four other counties to date for information and support

Support Local Events: SPOG, ALUS Green Acreages Guide Workshop, Pathways to Sustainability, Olds Showcase, Carstairs Museum Art Show

Continued participation in local event, promotion of all stewardship information and groups and development of outreach materials and programs.

Attract Other Funders: MVC funding provides confidence and legitimacy – have raised funds from province, foundations and individuals

110

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Manager Ag Services Project #: CP.0.188 Cost Centre: 3.80RR: TWP: Segment:



Levies: CASH IN LIEU $8,500.00General Revenue:



$7,500.00$500.00$500.00


Carry forward:



Sourcing an illustrated, vibrant, eye catching sign raises the profile and adds value to our day use parks. Upgraded signage is suggested for Winchell Lake in 2018. Over the last 3 years, signs have been completed for Hiller's Dam, Bagnall Park and the sign for Davidson Park is currently in progress. The proposed sign for Winchell Lake would include an integrated ecosystem signage including information on wildlife, habitat, stocking program, new aeration project and the primary fish species present. The Alberta Conservation Association has been contacted to collaborate.

Reserves:

Community / Quality of Life2. Provide and support cultural and recreational opportunities.


LS-18-04


Park Interpretive Sign (Winchell Lake)




_____________________________


_____________________________


Sign(s)

InstallationShipping




111

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Manager Ag Services Project #: Cost Centre:RR: TWP: Segment:


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Legacy Land Trust Conservation Easement funds TBD



TBD

Total Cost: $0.00

Carry forward:



Drafting and implementation of the grazing management plan for Jackson Lake S1/2 24 & N1/2 13 32-5 W5M is underway with the goal to preserve and enhace the wetlands. The wetland evaluation has been submitted to Alberta Environment for comment and credit evaluation to finalize the enhacement project which may involve fencing, plantings and habitat enhancement. Project costs can be funded from the Conservation Easement funds received from Legacy Land Trust.

Environment1. Protect and preserve the natural environment through education, collaboration,and policy.


LS-18-05


Wetland Enhancement




_____________________________


_____________________________


Project costs to be determined (TBD)




112

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Community Services Project #: Cost Centre: 5.60RR: TWP: Segment:



$400,000.00Levies:General Revenue:



$100,000.00$100,000.00$100,000.00$100,000.00

Total Cost: $400,000.00

Carry forward:



2018 Installment

2020 Installment2019 Installment

_____________________________


2021 Installment

Y/N

_____________________________


Mountain View County Council approved a contribution of $500,000 - five installments of $100,000 beginning in 2017 - to Olds College BEYOND Campaign for the Werklund Agriculture Institute. The County's investment will be dedicated towards the Producer Mentor Program, of which production competitions are a major component. This aspect of the program will be named as the "Mountain View County Production Competition Program." The contribution will help the College in reaching its matching component for a $16 million donation made by David Werklund and Susan Norman. As per the contract payment is due by the end of June Annually.

Reserves: Agriculture Reserve

In Council’s strategic goals it is stated that Mountain View County will provide an environment in which traditional and new forms of agriculture along with innovative, value-added agricultural industry can thrive.


LS-18-07


MVC Production Competition Program







113

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Community Services Project #: FS.001/FS.002 Cost Centre: 5.63RR: TWP: Segment:


Types of Funding: Dollar Amount:Grants:Reserves: Fire Reserve 894,000.00Levies:General Revenue:



$430,000.00409,000.00

55,000.00

Total Cost: $894,000.00

Carry forward:



Capital Fire Grant - Didsbury

Capital Fire Grants - Small CapitalCapital Fire Grant - Olds

_____________________________


_____________________________


2018 Long Range Plans for Fire Capital

Community / Quality of Life1. Maintain safe communities


LS-18-08A


2018 Fire Equip. Grants to Urban Partners







114

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Community Services Project #: Cost Centre: 3.80RR: TWP: Segment:






$430,000.00

Total Cost: $430,000.00

Carry forward:



Cremona Fire Capital Equipment Purchase

_____________________________


_____________________________


2018 Long Range Plans for Fire Capital

Reserves: Fire Reserve

Community / Quality of Life1. Maintain safe communities


LS-18-08B


2018 Fire Capital (Cremona Fire)







115

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Community Serv Co-ord. Project #: Cost Centre: 5.1

RR: TWP: Segment:






$8,320.00


Carry forward:



Supplemental Costs for completion of Cremona Fire Hall Renovation

_____________________________


Pam Thomas


This request is for supplemental costs to complete the Cremona Fire Hall Renovation, following a recommendation from the Cremona Fire Advisory Committee held on November 28, 2017. This amount is over and above the ACP Grant and approved funding in 2017. As per the current Emergency Services Agreement between the Village of Cremona and Mountain View County (Schedule D - Special Provisions - 4. The County agrees to fund 50% of the cost of Capital Improvements or repairs required to the Fire Hall). The total estimated project cost is $16,640.

Reserves: Fire Reserve


LS-18-09


ACP Grant - Cremona Fire Hall







116

2018 Renovation La c ital uest

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1Total Estimated Pro ect Cost

Office Space

640

$s,000.00$1,200.00

$500.0a

$350.00

$800.00

$900.00$1600.0a

$3,000.00

$1,200.00

$500.00

$350.00

$800.00

$900.00

$1600.00

$83s0.00

lncludes Wood, Drywall, Electrical,lnsulation180 Square Feet4 2'x4' Drop Ceiling lights3'x 4'Double Door180 Square Feet

$72.00 54

$612.00 1

$600.00 1

$350.00 1

$800.00 1

$700.00 1

$1,040.00 1

WallsFlooringLighting

Windows

Door

Ceiling Tile

Floor & Roof

Total

$3,888.00$612.00

$600.00

$350.00$800.00

$700.00

$1,040.00

$7990.00

SCBAWashing StationCabinets

Counter Top

Large Sink

FaucetPlumbing

Electrical

Washer & Dryer

Total

NewAgeCabinents

Sfainless Steel Counter Top

Large double deep basin SinkFaucet with spray nozzle

Building Costs Description Estimated Price Qtv Total

November 28 2017 Page 5 of 7

117

Overhead view of office space and wash station.

November 28 2017 Page 6 of 7

118

-r-?

\

Example of proposed wash station. This is simply intended to give illustration to theproposed idea.

I?

iI

Example of proposed public works office space. This is simply intended to giveillustration to the proposed idea.

1

l

November 28 2017 PageT o17

119

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Manager Ag Services Project #: Cost Centre: 7.10RR: TWP: Segment:






$0.00

Total Cost: $0.00

Carry forward:



No increase expected to the 2018 Operating budget to service this change.

_____________________________


_____________________________


With the increasing availability, awareness and effectiveness of biological controls the Agricultural Service Board proposes expanding the Range and Pasture Herbicide Rebate Program (20% Rebate Program) to include proven biological control measures for Prohibited Noxious and Noxious weeds within range and pasture. The program would cover 20% of the actual purchase price of the biological control and not include other expenses related to the shipping or use of the biological control. This will not results in an increase in project funding in the first year but would fall within Service Level Enhancement. In 2017 the Budget was set at $17,000 and as per recent forecasts would be sufficient for the proposed enhancement.

Reserves:

Agricultural1. Provide an environment in which traditional and new forms of agriculture alongwith innovative, value-added agricultural industry can thrive.


AG-18-01


20% Rebate and Alternative Controls







120

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Manager Ag Services Project #: AG.011 (10074) Cost Centre: 7.10RR: TWP: Segment:






$0.00

Total Cost: $0.00

Carry forward:



The ASB reviewed the Farm Plastic Round-Up Program Review. Program consideration for changes are as follows: • Only collecting plastics that can be recycled through local markets• Investing in equipment to package materials as specified by local markets• Reallocating the incentive to offset processing costs• Investigating other stewardship disposal options for Ag Plastics to discourage on farm burning orburying. The current budget for the Farm Plastics Round-Up and Wire Recycle program is $16,000. With the changes to the Wire program there will not be acost associated to the recycling. The plastic incentive portion of the budget was $10,000 and $2,000 for the purchase of bags. Proposed is to tender the AgPlastics recycling program as the program is not included in the MVRWMC's contracted services agreement. The incentive would be redirected to offset thecosts of processing/handling of recyclable Ag plastics and possibly cover the disposal fee for non-recyclable Ag plastics. Once the results from the tender andconsultations with plastic recyclers/brokers the program will be brought forward for ASB review and Council Approval prior to any changes or capitalpurchases.

Reserves:

Environment1. Protect and preserve the natural environment through education, collaboration, and policy.


AG-18-02


Farm Plastics Round Up Revisions




_____________________________


As part of this review there may be a future request for a capital purchase estimated at $14,000

Y/N

_____________________________





121

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Manager Ag Services Project #: Cost Centre: 7.10RR: TWP: Segment:



Levies:General Revenue: $10,000.00



$2,500.00$2,500.00

$500.00$1,000.00$3,500.00


Carry forward:



Lunch - local sourcing

Miscellaneous Transportation

_____________________________


Advertisements & SignageStaff Coordinator (labour & equipment)

Y/N

_____________________________


Options to host an annual ASB Summer Tour have been evaluated and direction was provided to work in conjunction with the provincial Open Farm Days initiative. Proposed is to coordinate buses to the various host farms in the different areas of the County. A BBQ lunch will be provided at the County Office. A term staff will be required to assist with coordinating buses, lunch, promotion, registration and supporting & encouraging local farms to participate in Open Farm Days (hosting process, assisting with accessing funding for porta-potties, securing insurance through the province, evaluating bus access, assisting with considerations for visitors, parking & garbage). It is anticipated from discussion with neighbouring municipalities to expect 100 participates.

Reserves:

Agricultural1. Provide an environment in which traditional and new forms of agriculture alongwith innovative, value-added agricultural industry can thrive.


AG-18-04


Annual ASB Summer Tour







122

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Communications Coordinator Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: TWP: Segment:

Project type: Operating (one-time): __X____Operating(on-going); _____Contributed Assets:_____ Capital:______

Internal FTE:





$5,000.00


Carry forward:



Reserves:

Legislative and Community Services

The front sign at the Administration Office is proposed to be updated to match the Ag Services Shop Sign. The current sign also features a tagline "Building Rural Better" that, while not officially deleted from our branding, has not been used since 2010 in County branding initiatives. Updating this sign to include our logo and underneath lettering that says "Administration Offices" is what's being proposed to match the Ag Shop motif. Also being considered is replacing the message board sign, with an LED programmable strip. This would allow more versatile messaging which is currently limited by the stock of numbers and letter. The approximate costs are included below.

2017

LC-01-17


Front Signage Update



_____________________________


Andrew Wild


One Single Face non illuminated 5' x 5' sign, including installation (estimated, based on Ag Shop Costs)Council to review design prior to project completion



123

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Economic Development CApproved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: TWP: Segment:

Project type: Operating (one-time): _______ Operating(on-going);_______ Contributed Assets:_____ Capital:______

Internal FTE:





$100,000.00$20,000.00

Total Cost: $120,000.00

Carry forward: Project Manager: Amount spent:Project Director: Budget Remaining:

Reserves:

Encourage diversification and business retention. Encourage a vibrant, rural culture in Mountain View County.


Entrance signs provide distinctive recognition and enable investors and residents to identify the business park locations, and aides to provide in the overall experience that affects whether or not investors will remember the area and decide to do business with the County.Three of the County’s six existing business parks are not specifically owned by any one particular developer. These three parks, along with the two county owned regional airports would benefit from identification signs with the correct name showcased on them. The Economic Development Department recommends, Mountain View County, applies for a grant under the new Community and Regional Economic Support Program (CARES) to fund 50% of the project, during the program second intake April 1-May 31, 2017. Upon approval of the grant funding administration would release an RFP for interested companies to propose design and cost for 5 signs of the same size, look and feel to be installed at the entrance areas of these existing business parks. Council would chose the select the preferred design before a contract for the work would be awarded. After reviewing proposal submitted for the County’s recently complete Highway Entrance Signage project, administration estimates this signage could range anywhere from $10,000-$20,000/sign and installation would be roughly $20,000. This project will be contingent on grant funding, if administration fails to successfully receive funding for this project from the CARES program, the item will be presented again to Council, for a decision at that time whether Council wishes to move forward with the project without grant funding.

2017

LC-05-17


Business Park Signage



Signs x 5Installation

Jeff Holmes


Adena MalykFinance only at year end

Did not receive the CARES Grant - Motion RC17-295 approved project to be fully funded through Tax Rate Stabilization in 2017, Carry Forward in 2018 it will be funded by General Revenue



124

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Community Services Coo Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: TWP: Segment:

Project type: Operating (one-time): ____ Operating(on-going): _______ Contributed Assets: _____ Capital: ______

Internal FTE:





250,000.00$ Capital Contribution to Arena Upgrade 2018 250,000.00$

Total Cost: 500,000.00$

Carry forward:



Reserves:

July 6, 2016 Policies & Priorities Committee Meeting - Cremona Ag Society Delegation - Motion PP16-213: That the Policies and Priorities Committee receive the Cremona AG Society presentation as information; and further, that County Administration and the Cremona AG Society work together to bring the funding request forward to the 2017 budget.


The Cremona & District Ag Society built and have operated the Cremona Arena since 1984, and originally cost $0.5 million to build. As a result of growing demand and changing dynamics, renovations to the exiting facility have become necessary. In the past four years, the Ag Society fundraised and received grants to convert the lighting system, replace the hockey board and glass, completely rebuilt the ice plant and replaced an aging sound system. Cremona Arena Renovations needed: handicap accessibility; repairs to plumbing and heating; re-design of main level area; and add commercial kitchen. The total estimated cost for all renovations is $1.2 million. In the Cremona Recreation District, 84% of the population is rural. As per Scott Builders, if the Cremona Ag Society were to demolish the existing facility and replace with a similiar structure, the cost associated with this project would be in excess of $7,500,000. Based on their review of the existing facility, Scott Builders recommends a renovation or addition to the building as their best option.

2017

LC-06-17


Cremona Ag Society Arena Renovations



Capital Contribution to Arena Upgrade 2017

Jeff Holmes


Pam Thomas

Carry Over into 2018: Ag Society will make a presentation to Council with revised scope and timing.




125

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Community Services Approved: Y/N Project #: CP.0.190 (7410)

RR: TWP: Segment:

Project type: Operating (one-time): _______ Operating(on-going): _______ Contributed Assets: _____ Capital: ______

Internal FTE:


20,000.00Levies:General Revenue: 45,000.00



$14,600.0050,400.00


Carry forward:



Reserves: Fire Reserve - Cremona Small Capital Budget

Community/Quality of Life Strategic Goal #1: Maintain safe communities.


It has been concluded that the existing Cremona Fire Communications Tower's structural integrity has been compromised. Following the 2013 review Communications Group, Red Deer prioritized and concluded that the repair of both the Carstairs and Cremona towers were critical. The Carstairs tower was repaired in 2015, and an amount of $10,986.15, as approved by Council, was taken from the Radio Hub Reserve. Upon proceeding with the Cremona Tower repairs, Communications Group advised that the base of the tower was no longer viable resulting in a quote of $20,457.15 for repairs. With AFRRCS (Alberta First Responder Radio Communiciations System) online and available July 1, 2016 the current radio hub system is likely to be phased out as the equipment ages. There is substantial coverage enhancements and added functionality that AFRRCS will provide to the Cremona Fire Department in comparison to the present conventional hub system. As of November 1, 2016 our 911 dispath provider will also be fully utilizing the AFFRCS system. The Radio Hub Reserve is currently sitting at $38,741.94.

2017

LC-07-17


Cremona Fire Dept Communications



Jeff Holmes


Pam Thomas

Carry Over into 2018: Will update Carry Over amounts before Budget is Finalized


25 - P25 Pagers6 - portable Radios Dual band 700/800 Mhz AFRRCS / VHF AFRRCS compatible



126

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Records Coordinator Approved: Y/N Project #: CP.0.189 (7406)

RR: TWP: Segment:

Project type: Operating (one-time): ____ Operating(on-going);___5 years___ Contributed Assets:_____ Captial:___√___

Internal FTE:





150,000.00

Total Cost: 150,000.00

Carry forward:



2017-2018 Software TBD

_____________________________


Option 2 -Long Term storage $35 000 expansion to mobile storage units in vault

Y/N

Marie Bouchard

Carry Over into 2018: Will update Carry Over amounts before Budget is Finalized


Reserves:

Governance goal #1: MVC will have a culture of open, responsive and effective governance


Our goal is to provide Administration, Council and the Public with access to all records, physical and electronic. As the County continues to grow and modernize the use of Electronic Files is becoming the easiest and most efficient means to manage Records. This project is proposed to be a two year project that will be completed in two stages. The first stage is a storage solution to be able to store more paper records. Right now the file room has reached its full capacity, there are boxes on the floor and no more storage room is available. Iron Mountain offers an off-site solution to this challenge where boxes of Paper Records that are not frequently used can be stored for a short period of time until the Record reaches its end of life in accordance with the retention schedule and is eligible for destruction. The second part of the project is to implement a Records Management software system that will manage all our electronic records, and link to existing paper records, with the ultimate goal of gradually eliminating the production of paper records. As the production of paper records decreases, more room will be available in the vault to bring back any off-site boxes that have longer retention requirements and the services of Iron Mountain for off-site storage will no longer be required. A budget for software implementation was approved in the budget for 2012-2013 but the project was put on hold until the County re-organized our Records Management program and improved our structure and organization of electronic files stored on Common Drives. Preliminary investigation indicates that the average cost for software to meet the County's needs is between $100 000 and $200 000. For more details please see the attached Records Management Strategic Plan. Alternatively, if a software solution is not supported the County will need to explore additional long term storage solutions that need to be investigated that will consist of building new mobiles in the file room (vault) that will increase our storage capacity for paper records.

2017

LC-11-17


Records Management Program & Storage Solution

Council Goal or Regualtion




127

Planning & Development ServicesProjects

128

Planning & Development Work Program for 2018

Evaluation of the Work Program in 2017 Year To Date (YTD)

The Department’s achievements of 2017 YTD include the following completed projects:

1. The third MDP Monitoring Report that evaluated the effectiveness of the policies and objectives of the MDP for the

“Year 5” being the reporting period from August 1, 2016 to July 31, 2017 since the adoption of the MDP in July 2012;

2. Existing Active Gravel Pits redesignation and Land Use Bylaw Amendment project;

3. MDP policy amendment to CCFO policy; and

4. LUB amendments to accommodate trends in the agricultural diversification; reducing the notification area of the

Notice of Decision circulations for discretionary use Development Permits; adding Alternative/Renewable Energy

provisions.

5. AAMDC Resolution prepared for a Provincial review of the Code of Practice for Asphalt Paving Plants.

6. Service levels remain well within the MGA requirements for subdivision and development and although time lines

for processing applications are slightly longer than 2016 and is a result of individual applications rather than a trend

for all applications. A service levels review of 2017 YTD is included as attachment 01.

The Department will continue in the remainder of 2017 and 2018 to complete the following projects:

1. Eagle Valley ASP Review is ready for public consultation and depending on feedback may require additional changes

before scheduling a Public Hearing in 2018.

2. South Carstairs Growth Node ASP has recently received the Servicing Study and will adjust policies before engaging

the public for input.

3. Servicing Standards review by Stantec (consultant) that includes a review of standards for: roads; stormwater

management; TIA triggers and water provision requirements.

4. Sign enforcement of illegal signs and signs without approvals along Highway 27 is near completion and will, after

completion, revert back to complaint driven enforcement.

5. Environmental Significant Areas (ESA). After a workshop in March, a report in June and presentation on the ESA

comparison completed by Tannas, Council provided direction to bring forward a project sheet for 2018 to update

the ESA data with available Provincial data. Agricultural Services will lead this project and if approved by Council will

result in amendments to the ESA mapping and applicable Statutory Plan policies and applicable policies and

procedures.

6. Joint Growth development with the Town of Olds will be included in the IDP Review.

129

The following project from the approved 2017 Work Program that was not started in 2018:

1. Highway 2/27 ASP Review was deferred by Council in April as a Council Strategic Outcome to be delivered over 24

months.

Workplan priorities for 2018 ranked from highest to lowest:

Priority 1

1.1 Municipal Government Act (MGA) Amendments that affects the County’s Statutory Plans and Land Use Bylaw.

To date, the Province introduced three (3) rounds of MGA amendments: The Municipal Government Amendment Act (Bill

20) was passed in March 2015; followed by the Modernized MGA (Bill 21) that was passed in December 2016 and the

Act to Strengthen Municipal Government (Bill 8) that was passed in May 2017. Various Regulations will be amended

and the second group of Regulations is out for consultation until September 22, 2017.

There are amendments required to the County’s Statutory Plans and Land Use Bylaw and can be categorized as:

1) mandatory amendments (to comply with new MGA and Regulations) for example, that an IDP (the highest statutory

document) and that IDPs are now mandatory between municipalities; Intermunicipal Collaboration Frameworks; change

the date of receipt for a decision from 5 days to 7 days; technical processing of applications etc. and

2) optional amendments that a municipality may choose to introduce for example, the introduction of offsite levies for

community recreation and inclusionary housing in the LUB; optional provision of Conservation Easement (CE) at the

subdivision stage.

P&D suggest an Administrative review of the three Acts and bring forward, in a Council workshop format, the

amendments for Council’s review and input.

1.2 MDP Monitoring Report for the sixth year since adoption of the MDP in 2012. This report will also identify issues

with policies as well as items in the Land Use Bylaw that may require amendment. It is also recommended that a

workshop with Council will be an effective way to engage and obtain Council’s feedback.

Priority 2

2.1 Completion of the four (4) projects from 2017.

2.2 Review of the existing IDPs with our urbans. The MGA requires all IDPs and ICFs to be completed within two (2)

years of the enactment. A suggestion for the workplan is to start an IDP Review with two (2) urbans in 2018.

Administration has been working in 2017 with the Town of Olds on developing principles for joint growth. Olds,

Carstairs, Didsbury and Cremona have all signed Master Agreements with the County for Intermunicipal Cooperation;

while the Shared Facilities Agreements were approved for Olds, Didsbury and Cremona at the time of writing the report.

Council is to provide direction if two (2) IDPs is the acceptable number and which Municipalities Administration should

approach for the 2018 workplan. Developing IDPs with our rural neighbour municipalities (Red Deer County; Kneehill 130

County, Rocky View County; MD of Big Horne and Clearwater County) is also identified in 2019 after ICF Agreements. An

Operating Project Sheet for 2018 is to budget for the potential consultant facilitation need.

2.3 Participate in the implementation of the Economic Development Action Plan and bring forward amendments to

Statutory Plan policies to align with the Plan etc.

Priority 3

3.1 Highway 2/27 after the completion of the IDP review with the Town of Olds (Council’s Strategic Outcome over 24

months)

3.2 Complaint bases system for compliance (Council’s Strategic Outcome over 24 months)

Low priority

4.1 Unless otherwise directed by Council the S McDougal Flats ASP Review will remain excluded from the 2018

workplan along with the review of the six (6) older ASPs (Dogpound; East Didsbury; Olds Didsbury Airport; Schlumberger

Industrial; South Cremona; Southwest Didsbury).

Projects with undetermined priority

Provincial initiatives

5.1 Red Deer Regional Plan - assisting Council with this initiative is likely, although the timing is uncertain. This will be a

significant item requiring Council and Planning’s participation.

5.2 The Provincial Floodway Development Regulation will likely require policy and Land Use Bylaw amendments.

The table below summarizes the workplan for 2018:

Priority Resources Commencement 1.1 MGA amendments Internal First quarter of 2018 for workshop with Council 1.2 MDP Monitoring Report Internal Present first January P&P in 2018; prepare Statutory

Plan amendments and LUB amendments 2.1 Four (4) projects completion: Sign enforcement; ASP Review; ASP (new); and Servicing Standards

Internal Sign enforcement completion by the end of 2017; ASP completion after Open Houses may include amendments before scheduling Public Hearings; and Servicing Standards presented to Council in the first quarter of 2018 .

2.2 IDPs Council to identify _______ and _____ Municipalities for 2018

Internal; neighbour municipality with budget allocation for external resources

Engage municipalities identified by Council; Terms of Reference in first quarter of 2018

2.3 Implementation of the Economic Action Plan

Internal As soon as Economic Action Plan is approved by Council

3.1 Highway 2/27 ASP Internal with budget allocated for external resources

TBD

3.2 Complaint Driven System for Compliance

Internal TBD

4.1 Other ASPs Internal TBD 5.1 Red Deer Regional Plan Internal and Council Unknown 5.2 Floodway Development Regulation

Internal Unknown 131

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Attachment 01 Service Levels review for 2017 YTD

Attachment 02 Operating Project Sheet: IDPs in 2018

132

Service Levels

The Department’s primary function consists of processing and reviewing applications. Although the

number of applications is down when compared with previous years, the Department has dealt with

complex and larger files, for example, more Direct Control District applications. Seven (7) MPC

meetings were cancelled this year as a result of the reduced number of applications.

Decision time limits in the MGA and Subdivision and Development Regulations guide service levels for

subdivision applications and Development Permits. Statistics on decisions in recent years will inform

Council on the Department’s performance and will guide future service level targets. Please note the

following on the yearly statistics: the numbers include all applications under the specified type and the

days are expressed as calendar days, not business days.

The Department is well within the decision time limits and YTD indicates a reduction in the average

number of days to process Discretionary Use Development Permits and Compliance Certificates.

The 2017 statistics reported below is for the year to date on August 31, the end of the third quarter of

the year.

Planning: Redesignation

The MGA does not specify a decision time limit for redesignation applications. Please consider when

comparing year to year statistics: the MDP policy change on cluster residential development. Note that

complex files for example DCs with supporting studies and larger files generally takes longer to process

and 2017 included a County initiated project (existing active gravel pits project) as well as two DCs.

Table 1 Redesignation Statistics

Redesignation 2013 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2014 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2015 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2016 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2017 YTD (Jan 1 to Aug 31)

Total # decisions made

63 47 74 56 35

Average # days from submission to decision

137 139 148 133 147

133

Figure 1 Number of Redesignation decisions Figure 2 Average time for a redesignation decision

There were four (4) applications that resulted in more than 200 days due to: compliance issues;

technical land suitability issues and access issues. If these four (4) are excluded, the average days

are very similar to the time lines in 2016.

Planning: Subdivision

In accordance with Section 6 of the Subdivision and Development Regulation, a decision must be

made within 60 days of a completed application otherwise, it is deemed refused. A time extension

agreement starts the 60 days once the redesignation decision is made now forms part of the

application package to ensure that Planning and Development meet the requirements of the

Regulation. Planning has been involved in the review of the Restrictive Covenant as a tool to preserve

environmentally significant areas and continues to implement the changes to the subdivision condition

of conditionally approved subdivisions to reflect the new requirements.

Please note when comparing year to year statistics: the general economic downturn; MDP policy

changes resulting in more single parcel applications (that is generally more simplistic).

63

47

74

56

35

01020304050607080

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017YTD

Number of Redesignation

decisions per year

137

139

148

133

147

125 130 135 140 145 150

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017 YTD

Average number of days for a Redesignation decision

134

Table 2 Subdivision statistics

Subdivision 2013 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2014 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2015 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2016 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2017 YTD (Jan 1 to Aug

31)


45 47 61 46 29

Average # days from redesignation approval to decision

19 52 45 32 35

Figure 3 Number of subdivision decisions Figure 4 Average time for a subdivision decision

There were only three (3) subdivisions that exceeded the 60 day time limit as outlined in the MGA and

all received time extensions as there were technical subdivision requirements, for example, finalizing

the Restrictive Covenant before proceeding with the application to the Approving Authority.

Development: Development Permits

Decision time limits in the MGA (Sec 684) and the Land Use Bylaw (Sec 5.2.6) guide service levels for

Development Permit applications. The timeframe for a decision on a completed application is 40 days,

unless the applicant has entered into a Time Extension Agreement. This is for discretionary and

permitted uses.

45 47

61

46

29

0

20

40

60

80

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 YTD

Number of Subdivision decisions per year

19

52

45

32

35

0 20 40 60

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017 YTD

Average number of days for a Subdivision decision (from date of

Redesignation decision)

135

Table 3 Development Permits - Discretionary Statistics

Discretionary Use 2013 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2014 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2015 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2016 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)


31)


118 118 176 133 70


30 38 27 30 25

Figure 5 Number of Discretionary Use Decisions Figure 6 Average time for a decision

Table 4 Development Permits – Permitted Use Statistics

Permitted Use 2013 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2014 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2015 YTD (Jan 1 to Dec

31)


31)


31)


108 98 87 78 66


9 8 12 8 10

118 118

176

133

70

0

50

100

150

200

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017YTD

Number of Discretionary Use Decisions Per Year

30

38

27

30

25

0 10 20 30 40

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017 YTD

Average Number of Days of Discretionary Use

136

Figure 7 Number of Permitted Use Decisions Figure 8 Average Time for a Decision

Development: Compliance Certificates

There is no time frame for Compliance requests but the Departments’ goal is to process them within

a week.

Table 5 Compliance Certificates Statistics

Compliance Certificates

2013 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2014 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2015 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2016 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2016 YTD (Jan 1 to Aug 31)


76 104 105 73 51


7 5 8 7 6

Figure 9 Number of Compliance Decisions Figure 10 Average Time for a Decision

Development: Enforcement

Formal complaints received in 2017 YTD are trending down when compared with 2016. The Bylaw

Compliance & Enforcement Officer diligently follow up and close files. This builds confidence in the

enforcement process and allows for timely response to complaints. The sign enforcement project

10898 87 78

66

0

50

100

150

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 YTD

Number of Permitted Use DecisionsPer Year

98

128

10

0 5 10 15

2013201420152016

2017 YTD

Average Number of Days of Permitted Use

76

104 105

7351

0

50

100

150

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017YTD

Number of Compliance Decisions Per Year

7

5

8

7

6

0 2 4 6 8 10

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017 YTD

Average Number of Days of Compliance

137

along Highway 27 took considerable time and effort and once the project is complete sign enforcement

will revert back to complaint driven enforcement.

Figure 11 Number of Complaints Received Figure 12 Number of Complaints Closed

Didsbury provides enforcement services to the County as outlined in the annually reviewed Animal/Dog

Control Contract. As part of the new Sub-Agreement to replace the contract the hourly rate is proposed

to be increased by 63 % to reflect cost of service.

Subdivision and Development Appeals

The MGA makes provision to appeal a subdivision decision to either the Subdivision and Development

Appeal Board (SDAB) or the Municipal Government Board (MGB) and Development Permits to the

SDAB. Note that re-hearings are not counted as separate appeals.

Table 6 Appeal Statistics

Appeals 2013 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2014 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2015 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)

2016 (Jan 1 to Dec 31)


31)

SDAB (DP) 2 4 5 4 1 ISDAB SDAB (Stop Order)

1 0 0 1 postponed 1 void due to compliance

SDAB (Subdivision)

0 2 1 0 0

MGB (Subdivision)

1 2 2 3 2 (submitted but not heard)

51 4657 53

35

0102030405060

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017YTD

Complaints Received 2013 -2017 YTD

53

7257

4740

0

20

40

60

80

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017YTD

Complaints Closed 2013 - 2017 YTD

138

The requirement of the Land Use Bylaw since July 2016 to circulate the notification of the decision of

all discretionary use Development Permits to all landowners within a half mile radius of the application

property was amended in 2017 to circulate to the adjacent land or adjoining properties that were

circulated as part of processing of the application. This amendment is to focus the communication to

those who may be affected by a development decision.

GIS Technician position within the Department

In March 2017, the GIS position became vacant and a Senior Management decision was not to

advertise the position but use existing service provision from the GIS coordinator on a trial four (4)

month basis over the summer time. Service levels remained satisfactory but taking into account the

lower volume of applications and limited mapping needs with specialized projects it is recommended

to keep the position fully funded for 2018 in order to have more time to monitor the impact and need

to fill the position.

139

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Manager of Planning Project #: Cost Centre: 4.10RR: TWP: Segment:





Costs:2018: $60,000 allocated for Olds and Carstairs Dollar Amount:

90,000.0045,000.00

Total Cost: $135,000.00

Carry forward:



Intermunicipal Development Plan (IDP) Review of the Town of Olds and Town of Carstairs in 2018. The Town of Didsbury, Town of Sundre, and Village of Cremona are proposed for 2019 as part of a 2 year budget plan. IDPs to comply with MGA requirements. Cost sharing with applicable municipality is anticipated in order to match required funding.

Reserves:

Governance Goal 1, 2 and 3.1. Mountain View County will have a culture of open, responsive and effective governance.2. Promote respectful, positive and productive relationships while maintaining our local autonomy.3. Communicate openly and effectively.

Planning and Development Services 2018

PL-18-01


IDP Review




_____________________________


Consultant/FacilitatorCommunity Engagement

Y/N

_____________________________


2019: $75,000 allocated for Didsbury, Sundre, Cremona





140

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Planner Department Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: TWP: Segment:

Project type: Operating (one-time): ___X__ Operating(on-going);_______ Contributed Assets:_____ Capital:______

Internal FTE:





$10,000.00


Carry forward:



Reserves:

The existing ASP is more than 19 year old and Section 4 of the ASP identify that Council will review the Plan to ensure it meets the needs of the residents. Strategic Governance Goal 1. Mountain View County will have a culture of open, responsive and effective governance

Planning and Development Services

This project sheet is a carry-over from the 2016 budget (PL-01-16). A review of this Plan is led by a Steering Committee that was appointed by Council on August 10, 2016 and is anticipated to conclude in the first half of 2017. No consultants will be used. The budget dollars are for community engagement purposes only.

2017

PL-03-17 (PL-01-16)


Eagle Valley ASP Review



_____________________________


_____________________________


Community Engagement *This sheet may be excluded as a carry-over in 2018 if the Community Engagement concludes in 2017



141

Department: Year:


Project Manager: Planner III Approved: Y/N Project #:________________________RR: TWP: Segment:

Project type: Operating (one-time): _X_____ Operating(on-going);_______ Contributed Assets:_____ Capital:______

Internal FTE:





$0.0010,000.00

*This sheet may be excluded as a carry-over in 2018 if the Community Engagement concludes in 2017


Carry forward:



Reserves:

Strategic Governance Goal 1. Mountain View County will have a culture of open, responsive and effective governance

Planning and Development Services

This project sheet is a carry-over from the 2016 budget (PL-05-16). A review of this Plan is led by a Steering Committee that was appointed by Council on April 13, 2016 and is anticipated to conclude in 2017. ISL Engineering and Land Services Ltd.are the Engineering consultants to review servicing options. The budget dollars are for community engagement and the Engineering consultancy fees.

2017

PL-04-17 (PL-05-16)


S-Carstairs Economic Growth Node ASP



Engineering Consultant ($70,000.00 spent in 2017)Community Engagement

_____________________________


_____________________________




142

2018 project budget · 2018-08-17 · legislative and community services ls-18-09. added december...

Documents