Mister Massey, the county engineer, told the Limestone County Commission on Nov. 3 that the primary item requiring action from his office was Montgomery Ridge, a minor subdivision seeking preliminary and final approval to create seven lots in District 1.

Massey also reported roadwork operations: a paver was returned to service and crews moved to Stewart Ferry Road with a planned daily production target of roughly 500–650 tons, but he said plant availability and high regional demand are currently metering asphalt deliveries and could limit daily output.

On bridges, Massey explained FHWA inspection terms and said the county posts inspection results as required. He said “structurally deficient” and “functionally obsolete” are reporting categories that can sound more severe than the operational state; bridges that are weight‑restricted often appear in those categories. He confirmed the county inspects and maintains structures and will close bridges when inspections indicate safety risks. Several county structures are on a three‑month inspection cycle, and Massey characterized some as "entering the end of their life," but he said inspection results did not indicate immediate closures at this session.

Massey described funding and access complications for some replacement projects: when endangered‑species findings forced design changes, estimated replacement costs rose and outside reviewers in some cases recommended constructing a road tie‑in as a lower‑cost alternative, complicating eligibility for state and federal funding. He said developers' master‑plan stubs can provide secondary access when built, but in the relevant subdivision the developer has not completed that phase.

In other business commissioners discussed constituent requests for systematic roadside tree trimming to improve safety. Staff explained that under the county’s competitive‑procurement threshold, projects under $30,000 may be awarded without formal bids but larger contracts require a bid process. The commission asked staff to solicit estimates on several locations and return with a recommendation and cost information so commissioners can determine whether to move forward with a standing annual trimming contract or use smaller, piecemeal purchases.

No final votes on the subdivision, tree‑trimming program, or specific pavement contracts were recorded on the transcript; staff indicated multiple follow‑up items for future meetings.