Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFIN-2025-255 - Asset Management Plans (AMPs) – Proposed Levels of ServiceStaff Report Financial Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Finance and Corporate Services Committee DATE OF MEETING: June 16, 2025 SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Hagey, Director of Financial Planning & Asset Management, 519-904-9347 PREPARED BY: Ryan Hagey, Director of Financial Planning & Asset Management, 519-904-9347 WARD(S) INVOLVED: All Wards DATE OF REPORT: May 20, 2025 REPORT NO.: FIN -2025-255 SUBJECT: Asset Management Plans (AMPs) — Proposed Levels of Service RECOMMENDATION: That the Asset Management Plans for all City of Kitchener assets as attached to Financial Services Department report FIN -2025-255 be approved. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to provide summary information about the City's asset management plans (AMPs) for all assets and provide a recommendation for Council approval that ensures compliance with provincial legislation. The key findings of this report are that the City has assets with a current replacement value of $15.1 billion and that 83% of assets have a condition rating of fair or better. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: Asset management is a coordinated set of activities to realize optimal value from the organization's assets throughout their lifecycle. This includes original construction/ acquisition, day-to-day operating and maintenance activities, more significant rehabilitation and renewal investments, all the way up to asset retirement and disposal. In addition to the various treatments applied to physical assets, having appropriate information and a proper framework is key to effective asset management. AMPs are an integral part of proper asset management as they document asset information, asset activities/programs, and resources needed to provide a defined level of service. Asset Management Plans (AMPs) All municipalities must prepare AMPs to comply with O.Reg.588/17: Asset Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure. The regulation prescribes the content to be included in the AMPs which includes information such as: Page 108 of 350 • Current and proposed levels of service • Performance of assets • Statistical information (e.g. current replacement value, age, condition) • Lifecycle activities needed to maintain the levels of service • Risks related to the assets and mediation plans to offset those risks The regulation also includes specific compliance deadlines which are summarized below. The City has met the previous regulatory deadlines and will meet the upcoming deadline with the approval of this report. • July 1, 2022 — current levels of service AMPs for core assets • July 1, 2024 — current levels of service AMPs for non-core assets • July 1, 2025 — proposed levels of service AMPs for core & non-core assets The remainder of this report provides the key findings of the most recent AMP which was prepared by an external consultant (SLBC Advisory Services) with assistance from the City's Asset Management group and the City divisions that manage the specific assets. The attached report is just over 200 pages and includes an Executive Summary highlighting the content included in this staff report as well as detailed chapters on the assets of each service area. REPORT: Asset Value Updated information from the most current iteration of the AMP shows the City of Kitchener has $15.1 billion worth of assets as shown in the table below. Citv Assets Included in AMPs and their Current Replacement Values Core Assets AN Non -Core Assets Wastewater Water $3,144.7M $2,791 AM Facilities Forestry $2,007.9M $172.OM Gas Stormwater $2,171.5M $2,023.5M Parks & Trails Fleet $124.7M $78AM Roads $2,018.6M Transportation $59.3M Bridges & Culverts $479.1 M Golf $15.2M Cemeteries $9.2M Parking $3.3M SUBTOTAL (CORE) $12,628.8M SUBTOTAL (NON-CORE) $2,470.OM COMBINED TOTAL $15,098.8M The table shows the majority of the City's assets ($12.6 billion) are "core" as defined by provincial legislation and relate to roads and underground infrastructure like water, sewer, and natural gas. The current replacement value of "non-core" assets ($2.5 billion) is predominantly made up of City facilities ($2.0 billion) such as arenas, pools, community centres, parking garages, and City Hall. Page 109 of 350 Asset Condition In addition to updated valuations, the latest iteration of the AMP also includes information about the condition of the City's assets. The pie graph below shows that 83% of the City's assets have a condition score of fair or better. This means the majority of City assets still have plenty of useful life in them to continue delivering valued services to the local community. Where condition scores are poor or very poor, those assets are still providing service, but the asset has significant deterioration which requires more regular maintenance to keep it in working condition or may be at risk of not meeting defined levels of service. According to SLBC Advisory Services, Kitchener's asset condition profile is better than average compared to the other municipalities for which they have helped prepare AMPs. This speaks to the foresight of Council in taking a long-term view of their role in stewarding City assets and approving ongoing investment programs like the road reconstruction program that replaces roads, water, sanitary, and stormwater assets, or the Sustainable Urban Forestry Strategy that plants and maintains City trees. Poor. $1496.9M 10:. Condition of All City Assets Very PGor Uliknown $359.5M Condition 2% $751.5M 51.41 $ A further breakdown of asset condition by service area is provided in the graph below. This graph further shows the condition of assets in the majority of areas is fair or better (i.e. the bars are mostly green and yellow). This means asset conditions broadly across the City are in decent condition. The one major exception is Facilities. The graph shows that a significant portion of the Facilities portfolio has a condition rating of poor or worse (i.e. the bar is largely orange and Page 110 of 350 red) which means there is elevated risk of asset failure or service delivery interruption in Facilities compared to the other asset groups within the City. One final observation from the graph is that the majority of assets with an unknown condition (i.e. gray portions of the bar) are within the Sanitary and Stormwater utilities. Page 111 of 350 Condition of Assets by Service Area Sanitary Utility Water Utility Gas Utility ' $2171.5M Stormwater , 52023.5M Roads & SidewaLks I $201MIVI Facilities , 52007.9M Bridges & Culverts 5479.11V! Forestry $172.01VI Parks, Open Spaces & Trails I $124.7M Fleet I $73,4M Transportation I $59.31V! Golf I $15.2M Cemeteries $9,2M Parking $3.3M $3144.7M ' $2791.4M $O.OM $500.0M $1000.01VII $1500.OM $2000.OM 52500.OM $3000.0M Replacement Value Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ VeryPoor Unknown Condition Condition scores for assets have been determined through methods like regularly scheduled inspection programs, ad hoc inspections, building condition assessments, or estimated based on the age of the assets. Where asset condition is unknown, the City is planning to develop inspection programs to gather this needed information. Infrastructure Renewal Fundin_g Gap The need for asset renewal is constant in a city as large as Kitchener, and significant investments have already been made over several years to proactively address needs in several areas. One example of this is the City's full road reconstruction program which has replaced over 100 kilometres of roads and underground pipe infrastructure since it's inception in 2004. S3500.014 For most asset types the existing budgets are adequate to meet the proposed levels of service (LOS) included in the AMPs. Generally this means the overall condition of assets and delivery of service will be maintained at or near current levels. For instance, the overall road condition index target of 70% will be met, but some brand-new roads will have a condition rating of 100% while some older roads will have a condition rating closer to 50% and be good candidates for rehabilitation or reconstruction. That being said, this iteration of the AMP shows there are two areas of the City requiring additional investment above and beyond the planned 10 -year capital budget to meet the proposed LOS for their area. Facilities ($24.5 million/year), and Natural Gas assets ($6.1 million/year) are leading to a 10 -year infrastructure renewal gap of $306 million. This Page 112 of 350 means if additional funding is not invested in those two areas it is expected the overall condition of assets in those portfolios and the ability to deliver service will worsen over the next decade. Neither of these areas is a surprise to staff. As was noted in last year's non-core AMP update, Facilities has been a known issue dating back to the development of a Long -Term Financial Plan in 2019. Over the past several years Council has already approved additional funding of $70 million over a 10 - year span to help address facility renewal needs. At the same time, the City has built/acquired a number of facilities that have added to the Facilities portfolio. Newly built facilities like the Huron Community Centre are in excellent condition and don't need much renewal spending, but older acquisitions like the Conrad Centre for the Performing Arts and the SDG Idea Factory (former BMO building) were existing buildings with a need of renewal spending at the time they were acquired by the City. Staff will continue to look for ways to address additional facility condition and funding needs through a number of activities including but not limited to: • Inspecting facilities more frequently to better identify specific needs • Conducting additional maintenance on higher need assets • Considering higher rate increases to provide additional funding for asset renewal • Advancing special levies/user fees dedicated to asset renewal • Pursuing grant funding, especially where it will align with plans to achieve greenhouse gas reductions • Developing a strategy related to facility acquisition/disposal Likewise, the need for additional spending on the renewal of Natural Gas assets has been an issue that has been emerging for the past few years. Recent reports from Kitchener Utilities about the Gas utility and natural gas rates have included indications that higher rates will be needed in future years to properly address the need for more spending on capital renewal. Continuous Improvement Plan One of the other benefits of completing the AMPs has been a better understanding the areas where the City can improve. Based on the most current AMP project, recommendations for improvement were identified by staff and the including: • Implementing more robust data collection, inspection, and maintenance programs • Developing a comprehensive method of forecasting asset portfolio growth • Documenting ownership and stewardship of all assets • Aligning levels of service with all long-term strategy documents • Standardizing the approach to risk management across all service areas • Improving documentation of asset maintenance history and costs STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None at this time. It is expected that recommendations about additional funding for continuous improvement activities and asset renewal will be brought forward by relevant divisions through stand-alone reports and/or future budget processes. Page 113 of 350 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: FIN -2024-208 Asset Management Plans for Non -Core Assets APPROVED BY: Jonathan Lautenbach, Chief Financial Officer ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — 2025 Asset Management Plan — Proposed Levels of Service Page 114 of 350 2025 City of Kitchener Asset Management Plan Proposed levels of Service OEM tib Nl�sNk not N�1! a Document ID : 05-15-2025 FINAL DRAFT SLBC Page 116 of 3502 Contents 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 1.1 The Purpose of the Plan..........................................................................................................................7 1.2 Asset Description....................................................................................................................................7 1.3 Levels of Service......................................................................................................................................9 1.4 Future Demand.....................................................................................................................................10 1.5 Lifecycle Management Plan..................................................................................................................10 1.6 Financial Summary................................................................................................................................10 1.7 Monitoring and Improvement Program...............................................................................................12 2.0 INTRODUCTION 14 2.1 City Services Included in this Plan.........................................................................................................14 2.2 Provincial Asset Management Requirements.......................................................................................14 2.3 Asset Management at the City of Kitchener.........................................................................................15 3.0 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE 19 3.1 Asset Inventory and Valuation..............................................................................................................19 3.2 Asset Hierarchy.....................................................................................................................................20 3.3 Asset Capacity and Performance..........................................................................................................21 3.4 Asset Condition.....................................................................................................................................22 3.5 Asset Registry Completeness & Assumptions.......................................................................................24 4.0 LEVELS OF SERVICE 27 4.1 Customer Research and Expectations..................................................................................................29 4.2 Strategic and Corporate Goals..............................................................................................................29 4.3 Legislative Requirements......................................................................................................................30 4.4 Customer Values and Community Levels of Service.............................................................................32 4.5 Technical Levels of Service....................................................................................................................34 5.0 FUTURE DEMAND 35 6.0 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 36 6.1 Acquisition Plan....................................................................................................................................36 6.2 Disposal Plan.........................................................................................................................................37 6.3 Operations and Maintenance Plan.......................................................................................................37 6.4 Renewal Plan........................................................................................................................................39 6.5 Non -Infrastructure Solutions................................................................................................................41 7.0 RISK MANAGEMENT 42 Page 117 of 3503 7.1 Critical Assets........................................................................................................................................42 7.2 Risk Assessment....................................................................................................................................42 7.3 Infrastructure Resilience Approach......................................................................................................46 7.4 Service and Risk Trade-Offs..................................................................................................................46 8.0 FINANCIAL SUMMARY 47 8.1 Funding Sources....................................................................................................................................47 8.2 Affordability of Proposed Service Levels..............................................................................................48 8.3 Managing Risks Associated with Funding Gaps....................................................................................50 8.4 Limitations of Forecasts and Funding Gaps..........................................................................................51 9.0 REFERENCES 52 10.0 APPENDIX A - FLEET SERVICES 53 10.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE......................................................................................................53 10.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE...............................................................................................................................55 10.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.......................................................................57 10.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN....................................................................................................................60 10.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING.....................................................................................61 11.0 APPENDIX B - CEMETERY SERVICES 63 11.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE......................................................................................................63 11.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE...............................................................................................................................65 11.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.......................................................................68 11.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN....................................................................................................................71 11.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING.....................................................................................72 12.0 APPENDIX C - GOLF SERVICES 74 12.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE......................................................................................................74 12.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE...............................................................................................................................76 12.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.......................................................................78 12.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN....................................................................................................................80 12.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING.....................................................................................80 13.0 APPENDIX D - FORESTRY SERVICES 82 13.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE......................................................................................................82 13.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE...............................................................................................................................83 13.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.......................................................................85 13.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN....................................................................................................................88 13.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING.....................................................................................89 Page 118 of 3504 14.0 APPENDIX E -PARKING SERVICES 91 14.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE......................................................................................................91 14.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE...............................................................................................................................93 14.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENTAND FINANCIAL SUMMARY .......................................................................95 14.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN....................................................................................................................97 14.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING.....................................................................................98 15.0 APPENDIX F - PARKS, OPEN SPACES & TRAILS SERVICES 99 15.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE......................................................................................................99 15.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE.............................................................................................................................101 15.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.....................................................................104 15.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN..................................................................................................................107 15.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING...................................................................................108 16.0 APPENDIX G -TRANSPORTATION SERVICES 110 16.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................................110 16.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE.............................................................................................................................112 16.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.....................................................................114 16.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN..................................................................................................................117 16.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING...................................................................................118 17.0 APPENDIX H -WATER UTILITY SERVICES 119 17.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................................119 17.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE.............................................................................................................................121 17.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.....................................................................125 17.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN..................................................................................................................128 17.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING...................................................................................129 18.0 APPENDIX I -SANITARY UTILITY SERVICES 131 18.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................................131 18.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE.............................................................................................................................136 18.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.....................................................................140 18.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN..................................................................................................................143 18.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING...................................................................................145 19.0 APPENDIX J - STORMWATER SERVICES 146 19.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................................146 19.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE.............................................................................................................................148 19.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENTAND FINANCIAL SUMMARY .....................................................................151 19.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN..................................................................................................................154 Page 119 of 3505 19.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING...................................................................................156 20.0 APPENDIX K - BRIDGES & CULVERTS SERVICES 157 20.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................................157 20.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE.............................................................................................................................159 20.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.....................................................................161 20.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN..................................................................................................................163 20.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING...................................................................................164 21.0 APPENDIX L - ROADS & SIDEWALKS SERVICES 165 21.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................................165 21.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE.............................................................................................................................167 21.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.....................................................................170 21.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN..................................................................................................................173 21.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING...................................................................................174 22.0 APPENDIX M -GAS UTILITY SERVICES 176 22.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................................176 22.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE.............................................................................................................................178 22.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY.....................................................................180 22.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN..................................................................................................................183 22.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING...................................................................................184 23.0 APPENDIX N -FACILITIES SERVICES 186 23.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................................186 23.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE.............................................................................................................................188 23.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENTAND FINANCIAL SUMMARY .....................................................................191 23.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN..................................................................................................................194 23.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING...................................................................................196 24.0 APPENDIX O -ADDITIONAL ASSET DATA 198 24.1 ESTIMATED SERVICE LIVES..................................................................................................................198 24.2 COF RATINGS......................................................................................................................................205 Page 120 of 3506 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 The Purpose of the Plan This City of Kitchener Proposed Levels of Service Asset Management Plan (AM Plan) details information about infrastructure assets with actions required to achieve proposed levels of service in a cost-effective manner while outlining associated risks. The plan defines the services to be provided, how the services are provided, and what funds are required over a 10 -year planning period. The AM Plan is aligned with the City's Long -Term Financial Plan which considers a 10 -year planning period. 1.2 Asset Description This AM Plan covers the infrastructure assets that provide multiple City services. The largest portion of the asset mix are Sanitary Utility assets with a replacement value of $3,144.7M (approximately 21% of the total replacement value of all City assets). The infrastructure assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 1.1. Table 1.1: Assets covered by this Plan Misc Small Equipment, Lawn/Turf Fleet Equipment, Off Road Equipment, Licensed $78.4 Equipment, Arena Equipment, Dump/Fire Trucks 0.5 Page 121 of 3507 Cemetery Infrastructure (Gates, Bollards, Garbage Cans, Fountains, Benches, Cemeteries Roadways, Parking Lots, & Fences), Cemetery $9.2 0.1% Structures, Equipment, Horticulture, Interment Features, Interment Memorials Course Infrastructure (Irrigation Systems, Golf Lighting, Biek Racks, Flag Poles, & Benches), o $15.2 0.1/ Course Structures, Course Features, Golf Carts Forestry Street Trees, Park, Cemetery, Golf & Other o $172.0 1.1/ Trees Parking Lots —Above Ground, Parking Parking Equipment, EV Charging Stations, Parking $3.3 0.0% Sundry & Miscellaneous Parks, Open Recreational Fields, Recreational Hard Spaces &Trails Surfaces, Playgrounds, Pedestrian Network, o $124.7 0.8/ Park Amenities & Furnishings Streetlights & Poles, Traffic Signs & Transportation Pedestrian Crossings, Pedestrian Railings, $59.3 0.4% Road and Pedestrian Islands & Traffic Page 121 of 3507 Figure 1-1. Page 122 of 3508 Calming, Street Furniture & Other Furnishings Mains, Service Pipes and Appurtenances, Water Utility Valves, Hydrants, Bulk Water Stations, $2,791.4 18.5% Meters Sanitary Utility Mains, Service Pipes and Other o $3,144.7 20.8/ Appurtenances, Manholes, Pumping Stations Mains, Service Pipes & Other Appurtenances, Ditches, Culverts & Other Conveyances, Stormwater Manholes, Catchbasins, Quality Control o $2.023.5 13.4/ Devices, Stormwater Management Facilities & Ponds, Low Impact Development, Storm Leads, Inlets, Outlets & Weirs Bridges & Bridges, Culverts o $479.1 3.2/ Culverts Roads & Roads, Sidewalks, Walkways and Crosswalks, o $2,018.6 13.4/ Sidewalks Pathways, Cycling, Network Links, Guiderails Gas Utility Distribution System, Meters, Water Heaters $2,171.5 14.4% Administration, Aquatics, Arenas, Arts & Culture, Cemeteries, Commercial, Facilities Community Centres, Fire, Golf, Operations, $2,007.9 13.3% Parking Garages, Parks & Open Spaces, Residential, Sport TOTAL $15,098.8 100% The above infrastructure assets have a replacement value estimated at $15.1 billion with a condition profile of these assets shown in Figure 1-1. Page 122 of 3508 Figure 1-1— Condition Profile Very Poor Unknown $359.5M Condition 2% $751.5M 5% Poor $1496.9M 10% $3 1.3 Levels of Service $4536.9M 30% Levels of Service (LOS) and current performance on these various measures are tracked in each service area appendix section. Measures include those defined by 0. Reg. 588/17 for roads, structures, sanitary, water, and stormwater infrastructure, as well as measures defined by the City to reflect specific priorities and concerns related to service delivery across all the service areas. In general, the LOS measures were organized into three categories: • Capacity & Use LOS demonstrate if services have enough capacity and are accessible to the customers. This includes measures that outline the growth needs for the City to meet the needs from increases in population. Page 123 of 3509 • Functional LOS demonstrate if services meet the community's needs and meet their intended or required purpose. Typical functional LOS for the City include meeting legislative requirements and energy efficiency initiatives for facilities and fleet. • Quality & Reliability LOS demonstrate if services are reliable and responsive to customers. These LOS measures focus on ensuring that assets are kept in a state of good repair and that maintenance work is being performed on time. Along with each LOS, a proposed target was outlined by the City which was used to support the modelling of lifecycle costs needed to achieve that target. A summary of the LOS framework for each service area is provided in the service area summaries included in the Appendix. 1.4 Future Demand Demand drivers are circumstances that may impact future service delivery and use of assets. These drivers can include things such as population change, climate change, regulations, and changes in demographics. Demand for new services will be managed through a combination of managing existing assets, upgrading of existing assets, and providing new assets to meet demand. 1.5 Lifecycle Management Plan 1.5.1 What does it Cost? The forecasted lifecycle costs which are necessary to provide the services covered by this AM Plan include growth, upgrade, operation, maintenance, and renewal of assets. The summary of forecasted lifecycle costs for each service area are shown in Table 1.2. Table 1.2: Summary of Lifecycle Costs Fleet $2.0 $12.6 $8.3 Cemeteries $0.1 $2.7 $0.07 Golf N/A $3.3 $0.3 Forestry $7.4 $6.2 $0.5 Parking N/A $2.9 $0.02 Parks, Open Spaces & Trails $4.0 $21.3 $6.9 Transportation $1.8 $5.1 $0.4 Water Utility $15.3 $63.2 $18.4 Sanitary Utility $22.1 $107.0 $25.7 Stormwater $14.3 $32.7 $8.6 Bridges & Culverts N/A $2.4 $0.7 Roads & Sidewalks $14.5 $20.8 $22.6 Page 124 of 35010 Gas Utility $5.3 $99.7 $14.4 Facilities $14.5 $24.6 $36.7 1.6 Financial Summary 1.6.1 Planned Budgets and Forecast Costs As shown in Table 1.2, the growth and upgrade need for City assets is estimated at an average of $101.3 million per year over the next 10 years which includes a 0.5% year -over - year growth and upgrade of assets to account for development. There is currently no quantifiable funding gap for growth and upgrade, however on-going development of Master Plan updates will inform future growth -related service levels and recommendations. The operating budget focused on asset -related operations and maintenance is $404.4 million per year from 2025-2034. The estimated increase accounts for growth in the asset portfolio (at least 0.5% annually from development) to maintain service levels over the next 10 years. The renewal need for City assets is estimated at an average of $143.8 million per year over the next 10 years and total funding gap of $30.6 million per year. This renewal need is forecasted to meet proposed service levels that the City selected based on affordability and risk. A summary of renewal needs and funding gaps is shown in Table 1.3. Table 1.3: Renewal Needs Summary Fleet Cemeteries Golf Forestry Parking Parks, Open Spaces & Trails Transportation Water Utility Sanitary Utility Stormwater Bridges & Culverts $8.3 $8.3 N/A $0.07 $0.07 N/A $0.3 $0.3 N/A $0.5 $0.5 N/A $0.02 $0.02 N/A $6.9 $6.9 N/A $0.4 $0.4 N/A $18.4 $18.4 N/A $25.7 $25.7 N/A $8.6 $8.6 N/A $0.7 $0.7 N/A Page 125 of 35011 Roads & Sidewalks $22.6 $22.6 N/A Gas Utility $14.4 $8.3 $6.1 Facilities $36.7 $12.3 $24.5 • 1.6.2 Funding Gap The funding gaps shown in Table 1.3 illustrate that over the next 10 -years, the City has allocated enough budget to meet the proposed LOS for all the service areas except for Gas Utility and Facilities. This is primarily due to the challenges with linear infrastructure in the recent past which has required significant investment to improve asset condition and continue to receive large budgets to maintain condition. Additionally, there are data gaps for other service areas (i.e., Parks, Open Spaces, and Trails) that limit the accuracy of the forecasted renewal needs to meet the proposed LOS. Service areas like Golf and Cemeteries do not need to plan for managing growth in their portfolio often while Parking, Transportation, and Fleet run much high percentages of run -to -failure given the low criticality nature of their assets. Forestry's assets are living assets that rely more on O&M than renewal. Additionally, this AM Plan is a medium-term planning document looking only at the next 10 years, and there are service areas that will have funding gaps in the future if the current funding is maintained (see appendix sections for specific lifecycle costs for each service area). The allocation in the planned budget for renewal of assets is insufficient to provide the proposed level of service modelled in this AM Plan, for the planning period for the following service areas: • Gas Utilities: The condition of assets is expected to deteriorate based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The proposed performance is to maintain the overall condition of assets similar to the current state over the next 10 years. This results in a funding gap of $6.1 million/year which the utility plans to fund through requesting rate increases. • Facilities: The condition of assets is expected to deteriorate based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The proposed performance is to maintain the overall condition of assets similar to the current state over the next 10 years. This results in a funding gap of $24.5 million/year which the City plans to manage through seeking grant opportunities, improved planning and maintenance processes, ensuring that building condition assessments are completed regularly to identify critical repairs, and updating the acquisition and disposals framework. Additionally, the City will continue to strategically plan initiatives that help extend building life and reduce long-term costs. 1.6.3 Managing the Risks To manage the risks of the renewal funding gaps, the City will continue to prioritize available funding based on the criticality of projects to prevent disruptions to service delivery. The City Page 126 of 35012 also continues to improve planning and coordination of capital projects between departments to maximize resources. The City will continue to identify funding opportunities through federal and provincial programs and explore potential partnerships and corporate sponsorships to raise external funds. 1.7 Monitoring and Improvement Program The next steps resulting from this AM Plan to improve asset management practices are: ■ City to formalize a condition assessment program to complete assessments for any assets currently listed in Unknown condition or assets that use age as a proxy for condition to support more accurate lifecycle needs and financial strategies. ■ City to monitor and update replacement values of assets as they undertake renewal projects and review unit costs in future updates of asset replacement values. ■ City to formalize levels of service, monitor performance on measures included in the AM Plan on an annual basis, and review and update service levels (add or remove measures, and set targets) as required to reflect alignment with other City plans and studies. ■ Conduct formal risk assessments to prioritize preventative maintenance activities and renewal /capital investments. ■ City to continue to develop and update the 10 -year forecast of lifecycle activities based on formalized / updated levels of service, formal risk assessments, and updated asset information (as applicable). A summary of the improvement recommendations for each service area is provided in the service area summaries included in the Appendix. ■ City to implement capital planning software and preventative maintenance programs. Page 127 of 35013 2.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Kitchener (the City) is in Waterloo Region, in the middle of southwestern Ontario. The City covers an area of 137 square kilometres and has a population of approximately 320,3601; making it the largest City in the Region. The City has been designated as a growth area through the Provincial Growth Plan: Places to Grow and has seen significant population growth that is expected to continue through the next decade. The City owns and maintains assets that support City departments providing a wide range of services to its residents. This Asset Management Plan (AM Plan) will communicate the requirements for the sustainable delivery of services through efficient management of assets, compliance with regulatory requirements, and required funding to provide the appropriate levels of service over the planning period (2025-2034). The AM Plan has been prepared in accordance with Ontario Regulation (O.Reg.) 588/17—Asset Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure, under the Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act, 2015. The Regulation lays out the requirements for all AM Plans, as well as deadlines to meet to certain milestones. This iteration of the AM Plan meets requirements for Proposed Levels of Service. 2.1 City Services Included in this Plan The City provides many services directly to residents and visitors and between departments. The services included in this AM Plan are indicated below. 2.2 Provincial Asset Management Requirements The Province of Ontario requires all municipalities that seek provincial infrastructure funding have an asset management plan, or plans, in place. To encourage a similar approach across municipalities, in 2012, the province introduced Building Together: Guide for Municipal Asset Management Plans, which defined the key components of an effective asset management plan. More recently in 2017, the province approved 0. Reg. 588/17—Asset Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure, under the Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act, 2015. The Regulation mandates the development of an asset management policy, asset management 1 As per Statistics Canada Estimate Page 128 of 35014 plans, and their content. Additionally, milestones are included for when municipalities must fulfill certain requirements, outlined below in Figure 2-1. Figure 2-1— 0. Reg. 588/17 Milestones July 1st 2019 The City's first AM Policy was completed in 2012, and most recently Strategy AM updated in 2024. The Policy outlines the goals and objectives of asset Policy management within the Organization. At the City, Core AMPs prepared in accordance with o Reg 588117 July Ist 2022 include water, wastewater, Stormwater, Roads & Traffic, Bridges & Core AMPs Culverts, and Gas. These AMPS must document current Levels of Service and the cost to maintain them. Non -care AMPS included Facilities, Cemeteries, Parking, Parks, Open July 1st 2024 Spaces & Trails, Golf, Forestry, Transportation and Fleet. These AMPS must document current Levels of Service and the cost to maintain them. July Ist 2025 14 14 1 > By this time, the City is required to have an approved AMP for all assets Proposed Levels that builds upon the 2022 and 2024 requirements. These AMPS must document proposed Levels of Service, what activities will be required to of meet them, and a strategy to fund them. 2.3 Asset Management at the City of Kitchener The City of Kitchener has been practicing asset management planning for at least 15 years, starting with the introduction of Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) legislation. Since 2007, several efforts have resulted in well-established asset management programs and procedures, as well as the inclusion of a dedicated Asset Management Division in the City's corporate structure. Kitchener City Council adopted the most recent Corporate Asset Management Strategy in 2016. The goals outlined in the strategy are to extend the useful life of all assets, in the most cost-effective way, while managing risk and meeting the agreed upon levels of service. The AM Plan is a key tactical (medium-term, 2-10 year) planning document that relies on input from strategic planning activities and informs shorter -term decision making. The AM Plan provides a framework to validate the City's budgeting processes and assist in prioritizing work activities, including capital projects, based on risk. It discusses levels of service that align with the 2023 to 2026 Strategic Plan goals and lifecycle management strategies intended to reduce the overall cost of asset ownership. 2.3.1 Corporate Asset Management System An asset management system should aim to achieve a line of sight between corporate strategic goals outlined in the strategic plan, and operational plans, policies and procedures, as illustrated in Figure 2-2. The two guiding documents in this system are the Asset Management Strategy and Asset Management Policy, most recently updated in 2016 and 2024, respectively. The Asset Management Policy defines the intent, scope and principles of Page 129 of 35015 asset management at the City of Kitchener, and who is responsible for enacting the policy. Section 5.3 — Climate Change Impacts of this AM plan discusses these impacts specific to the City and strategies to build and maintain assets through the lens of resiliency, sustainability, adaptation, and mitigation. The Asset Management Strategy defines how the principles of the policy will be put into practice and the three guiding principles of asset management at the City of Kitchener which are to: 1. Balance asset condition and levels of service, 2. Allocate financial resources among priorities and, a iv X W C N R 3 v CL L LL CL a Qi Shift how we do business — such as introducing programs to support the requirement for high-quality data services. Figure 2-2 — City of Kitchener Asset Management System operational Plans, Polities, and Procedures In addition to the Asset Management Strategy and Policy, this AM Plan should be read in conjunction with other planning documents, outlined in Table 2.1 below. Additionally, The City of Kitchener resides within the Region of Waterloo and has adopted various planning documents for the Region (i.e., TransformWR, etc.) Table 2.1: Key Planning Documents 2023-2026 Corporate Strategic The document outlines the strategic goals that are to be Plan championed by Council and staff across the City. The Official Plan is a legal document that contains goals, objectives and policies to manage and direct physical and Official Plan (2014) land use change and their effects on the cultural, social, economic and natural environment within the City. This Plan provides a framework for decision-making and plays several essential roles in the future planning of the City. Page 130 of 35016 Kitchener, Changing for Good - The City's Corporate Climate Action Plan aims to achieve Corporate Climate Action Plan meaningful and measurable carbon emission reductions (2019) throughout its operation, while also adapting to impacts resulting from climate change. Under Ontario Regulations 25/23, public sector agencies Energy Conservation & in Ontario must report annual energy consumption and Demand Management Plan develop a five - year conservation and demand (2019-2023) management plan intended to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. The DC Study includes preparing a development forecast, Development Charges establishing historical service levels, determining the Background Study (2022) increase in need for services arising from development and appropriate shares of costs and attribution to development types (residential and non-residential). Key stakeholders in the preparation and implementation of this AM Plan are shown in Table 2.2. Table 2.2 - Key Stakeholders in the AM Plan City Council are the overall owners of the City's assets. Council approves asset management policies and asset City of Kitchener Elected funding allocation through the annual corporate budget Council process. An overarching expectation of a standard of care is required by Council to ensure commitment to effective asset Management practices. The Leadership Team provides corporate oversight to the program to ensure that the goal and directions of the Corporate Leadership Team Corporate Asset Management program are maintained, and the program remains consistent with the overall Strategic Plan. This committee provides leadership and strategic direction for supporting systems/processes specific to the delivery of asset/work management information for the City of Asset Management Kitchener. Further, in support of the city-wide asset Steering Committee management strategies, the committee provides leadership and governance to the Asset Management Policy statement through the provision of information necessary for the long- range forecasts of asset investment needs, services levels, risks, costs and other performance measures. Fleet, Cemetery, Golf, These service areas of the City are responsible for the Forestry, Parking, Parks, operation and maintenance of City assets and to ensure the Page 131 of 35017 Open Spaces & Trails, assets are meeting their service requirements. These groups Transportation, Water were engaged throughout the AM Plan development to Utility, Sanitary Utility, ensure their service area was accurately reflected in this Stormwater, Bridges & plan. Culverts, Roads & Sidewalks, Gas Utility, Facility Service Areas The Finance division within Financial Services prepares an annual operating budget and 10 -year capital forecast for Finance Council's consideration. The annual budget helps identify the spending plans and priorities for the City for the upcoming year and is informed by the City's Strategic Plan, various master plans, and feedback from the community. 2.3.2 Asset Management Plan Methodology The information presented in the AM Plan is based on O. Reg. 588/17 requirements, the Guide for Municipal Asset Management Plans, originally issued by the Ontario Ministry of Infrastructure, and leading asset management practices. Costs and replacement values in this AM Plan are estimated in 2025 dollars. The AM Plan was developed by SLBC Inc. in collaboration with City staff through: • Review of background materials available on the City's web site and provided by the City's project team including asset inventories, planning documents, and budgets • Workshops with internal partners • Interim meetings with the City's project team • Data and information transfers • Review of interim outputs by the City's project team and other stakeholders, and incorporation of comments into the final AM Plan. Page 132 of 35018 3.0 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE 3.1 Asset Inventory and Valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's services. The assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 3.1. All table and figure values are shown in this report are reported at the start of (2025) dollars. The largest portion of the asset mix are Sanitary Utility assets with a replacement value of $3,144.7M (approximately 21% of the total replacement value of all City assets). Table 3.1— Assets covered by this Plan Misc Small Equipment, Lawn/Turf Fleet Equipment, Off Road Equipment, Licensed $78.4 Equipment, Arena Equipment, Dump/Fire Trucks Cemetery Infrastructure (Gates, Bollards, Garbage Cans, Fountains, Benches, Cemeteries Roadways, Parking Lots, & Fences), Cemetery $9.2 Structures, Equipment, Horticulture, Interment Features, Interment Memorials Course Infrastructure (Irrigation Systems, Lighting, Biek Racks, Flag Poles, & Benches), Golf Course Structures, Course Features, Golf $15.2 Carts 0.5% 0.1% 0.1% Forestry Street Trees, Park, Cemetery, Golf & Other $172.0 1.1% Trees Parking Lots —Above Ground, Parking Parking Equipment, EV Charging Stations, Parking $3.3 0.0% Sundry & Miscellaneous Parks, Open Recreational Fields, Recreational Hard Spaces &Trails Surfaces, Playgrounds, Pedestrian Network, o $124.7 0.8/ Park Amenities & Furnishings Streetlights & Poles, Traffic Signs & Transportation Pedestrian Crossings, Pedestrian Railings, o $59.3 0.4/ Road and Pedestrian Islands & Traffic Calming, Street Furniture & Other Furnishings Mains, Service Pipes and Appurtenances, Water Utility Valves, Hydrants, Bulk Water Stations, $2,791.4 18.5% Meters Sanitary Utility Mains, Service Pipes and Other o $3,144.7 20.8/ Appurtenances, Manholes, Pumping Stations Page 133 of 35019 The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in each of the service area chapters located in the Appendix. 3.2 Asset Hierarchy An asset hierarchy provides a framework for structuring data in an information system to assist in collection of data, reporting information and making decisions. The hierarchy includes the asset class and component used for asset planning and financial reporting and service level hierarchy used for service planning and delivery. The service hierarchy is shown is Table 3.2. Table 3.2 — Asset Service Hierarchy Ensure that the City's fleet of vehicles and equipment is Fleet reliable, safe, and operational when needed, with minimal downtime for repairs or maintenance, and a planned replacement schedule. Provide well-maintained, accessible cemetery grounds that Cemeteries serve the needs of families and the community, with regular grounds maintenance, efficient burial services, and a respectful environment. Page 134 of 35020 Mains, Service Pipes & Other Appurtenances, Ditches, Culverts & Other Conveyances, Stormwater Manholes, Catchbasins, Quality Control o $2,023.5 13.4/ Devices, Stormwater Management Facilities & Ponds, Low Impact Development, Storm Leads, Inlets, Outlets & Weirs Bridges & Bridges, Culverts o $479.1 3.2/ Culverts Roads & Roads Sidewalks Walkways and Crosswalks $2,018.6 13.4% Sidewalks Pathways, Cycling, Network Links, Guiderails Gas Utility Distribution System, Meters, Water Heaters $2,171.5 14.4% Administration, Aquatics, Arenas, Arts & Culture, Cemeteries, Commercial, Facilities Community Centres, Fire, Golf, Operations, $2,007.9 13.3% Parking Garages, Parks & Open Spaces, Residential, Sport TOTAL $15,098.8 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in each of the service area chapters located in the Appendix. 3.2 Asset Hierarchy An asset hierarchy provides a framework for structuring data in an information system to assist in collection of data, reporting information and making decisions. The hierarchy includes the asset class and component used for asset planning and financial reporting and service level hierarchy used for service planning and delivery. The service hierarchy is shown is Table 3.2. Table 3.2 — Asset Service Hierarchy Ensure that the City's fleet of vehicles and equipment is Fleet reliable, safe, and operational when needed, with minimal downtime for repairs or maintenance, and a planned replacement schedule. Provide well-maintained, accessible cemetery grounds that Cemeteries serve the needs of families and the community, with regular grounds maintenance, efficient burial services, and a respectful environment. Page 134 of 35020 3.3 Asset Capacity and Performance Assets are generally provided to meet design and service standards, when available. Any service performance deficiencies are detailed in the Appendix service area summaries. Page 135 of 35021 Ensure that golf course facilities are well-maintained and Golf provide a high-quality experience for golfers, with well -kept greens, fairways, and other amenities. Maintain healthy, sustainable urban forests by managing tree Forestry planting, pruning, removal, and ensuring safety around trees while protecting the urban canopy from disease and pests. Provide an adequate number of well-maintained parking Parking spaces in convenient locations, with clear signage and minimal congestion. Parks, Open Spaces & Maintain parks, open spaces, and trails that are safe, clean, Trails and accessible for recreational use, supporting the health and well-being of the community. Transportation Provide an efficient, safe, and well-maintained transportation network. Provide safe, potable water to residents and businesses, Water Utility ensuring water distribution and quality are maintained at high standards. Ensure the safe and efficient collection of wastewater while Sanitary Utility maintaining system integrity to prevent blockages or overflows. Effectively manage stormwater runoff to prevent flooding, Stormwater protect water quality, and maintain drainage systems to handle various storm events. Ensure that bridges and culverts are safe, structurally sound, Bridges & Culverts and capable of handling traffic loads while minimizing disruptions from necessary repairs or maintenance. Maintain safe, smooth, and accessible roads and sidewalks, Roads &Sidewalks minimizing disruptions from potholes, cracks, and other issues, while ensuring high mobility for residents and businesses. Provide a safe, reliable, and efficient gas distribution system Gas Utility that meets the needs of residents and businesses, while ensuring environmental sustainability and regulatory compliance. Ensure that all City -owned and operated facilities are Facilities properly maintained, accessible, and safe for public use, including regular cleaning, repair, and security measures. 3.3 Asset Capacity and Performance Assets are generally provided to meet design and service standards, when available. Any service performance deficiencies are detailed in the Appendix service area summaries. Page 135 of 35021 3.4 Asset Condition Assets can be inspected and monitored through multiple methods as shown in Table 3.3. The City employs both internal staff and external contractors and consultants to perform inspections of City owned assets using the frequency listed in Table 3.3 or on an as needed basis for assets not included in the table. The results of these inspection programs provide the City with meaningful empirical data that can be used to gauge the condition of assets and needs for asset maintenance or renewal. The cost for these condition assessments is included in the operational costs Section 6.3 of this AM Plan. Table 3.3 — Condition Assessments Roads & • Pavement Quality Index (PQI) for • Every 2 years (roads) Sidewalks roads • Every year (sidewalks) Stormwater • CCTV Inspections for Mains • 12 -year cycle for CCTV inspections (-8% per year) • Bathymetric Surveys for Stormwater • 5-10 year cycle for Management Facilities and Ponds Bathymetric Surveys (including forebay) Sanitary Utility • CCTV Inspections for Mains • 12 -year cycle for CCTV inspections (-8% per year) • Visual Inspections for Maintenance • 10 -year cycle for Holes and Catch Basins Maintenance Holes and Catch Basins Water Utility • Condition evaluation based on age, • Ongoing monitoring with material and break history comprehensive reviews on an as needed basis Facilities • Facility Condition Index (FCI) which • Typically conducted every involves a detailed evaluation of 5-7 years building components, systems, and structures to determine repair and replacement needs Bridges & • Bridge Condition Index (BCI) which • Required every two years Culverts involves detailed structural by Ontario regulations. inspections to evaluate the condition of bridges and culverts Gas Utility • CP Survey to measure the cathodic • Annually for CP Survey protection program effectiveness for • 1/3 of gas pipes are steel pipe surveyed annual for leaks • Leak Survey to identify and investigate gas leaks Page 136 of 35022 Condition is measured using a 1 — 5 grading system as detailed in Table 3.4. This consistent approach for assessing asset performance is used across the City to enable effective decision support. A finer grading system may be used at a more specific level, however, the AM Plan results are translated to a 1— 5 grading scale for ease of communication. Table 3.4 — Condition Grading System Condition Description of Asset Lifecycle Needs Typical Age -B.: Grading ]@ Mapping 1— Very Good New or recently Regular maintenance >75 — 100% rehabilitated Remaining Life Physically sound with Maintenance/repair >50 — 75% 2 — Good some elements showing costs fit within signs of wear. operating budget Remaining Life Signs of deterioration, 3 —Fair performing at lower level Minor capital repairs >25 — 50/ needed Remaining Life than intended. Significant deterioration Major capital repairs >0 — 25% 4 —Poor is evident. needed Remaining Life Advanced deterioration, Replacement or At or Beyond 5 — Very Poor service levels possible inability to meet refurbishment needed Service Life The condition profile of the City's assets is shown in Figure 3-1. The condition assessment of the City's assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 85% of the City's assets have a condition rating of fair or better (excluding assets in unknown condition). This highlights the City's commitment to maintaining their services. The largest portion of unknown condition assets includes: Sanitary ($390.4 million), Stormwater ($300.9 million), Roads & Sidewalks ($18.2 million), Forestry ($17.9 million), and Water ($15.5 million). The other service areas also have unknown assets with a total replacement value of $8.5 million. The City plans to identify these asset conditions in the coming years through improved data collection and management practices. Page 137 of 35023 Figure 3-1— Asset Condition Profile Very Poor Unknown $359.5M Condition 2% $751.5M 5% Poor $1496.9M 10% Fair $3139.9M 21°x6 $4536.9M 30% Figure 3-2 — Asset Condition Profile by Service Area Page 138 of 35024 San itary Utility Water Utility Gas Utility Stormwater Roads & Sidewalks - Facilities _ Bridges&Culverts , $479.1M Forestry $172.0M Parks, Open Spaces&Trails I I $124.7M Fleet I I $78AM Transportation I $59.3M Golt $15.2M ' $2171.5M $2023.5M I$2018.6M $2007.9M ' $3144.7M $2791.4M Cemeteries $9.2M Parking $3.3M $0.011 $500.011 $1000.011 $1500.011 $2000.OM $2500.OM $3000.OM $3500.OM Re placement Value s VeryGood Good Fair Poor ■VeryPoor Unknown Condition 3.5 Asset Registry Completeness & Assumptions In compiling this AM Plan, all asset registries used by the City were reviewed to understand the responsible stakeholders for asset data across the City and to assess the completeness of the register (i.e., register exists and fields that are critical to the assets' lifecycle and financial management are populated with accurate values). The information included in the registries was used to develop the AM Plan. The following categories have been employed to assess the completeness of asset registries: Table 3.5 — Asset Registry Rating Categories Data based on sound records, procedures, investigations and analysis, Good documented properly but may have minor shortcomings. Dataset is complete and estimated to be accurate ± 10%. Data based on sound records, procedures, investigations and analysis which Fair is incomplete or unsupported, or extrapolated from a limited sample. Dataset is substantially complete but up to 50% is extrapolated data and accuracy estimated ± 25% Poor Dataset may not exist or be fully complete, and most data is estimated or extrapolated Each service area's data was assessed for their asset register and LOS. The assessment's results, using the rating scale above, are provided in Table 3.6. Page 139 of 35025 -6 O _0 O _0 O L _0 O L _0 O _0 O _0 O _0 O _0 O -a O _0 O _0 O U O O O cv `i O cB `i O O O O O O O O u (7 (7 (7 (7 (7 (7 (7 0 (7 (7 (7 (7 (3) Q N C co a Q Q � a O 0 O 0 o 0 o O cL 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O o O (7 (7 (7 z (7 LL (7 (7 (7 (7 (7 (7 (7 (7 a Q X Q- N E O N u t O O O O O OL N V) O C7 L.L. L.L. LL L.L. L.L.(7 LL LLU C7 O C7 E N L N � L y N V) EN C N O > O O L L L L L O L L O O O O 4 O (7 (7 (7 LL LL (7 0 0 (7 Q E E V) N M M 6-0 4- N N � QC U C C O L U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O x N (7 0 0 (7 � i- (7 (7 (7 (7 (7 0 C7 0 O N a-.+ Q Q Q a-.+ O O fB O � O O O O O O O Li- i- LL (D(D L.fB L LL (D 0 0 0 Q9 0 O C m =5 4 V) L O O O O O O O O O O O O - N O <7 O 0 O 0 fB LL O (D fB L.L.+ O C7 O (7 O C7 O (7 O (7 O C7 O 0 O 0 ' U > U 4A V) � N V) VI � N C }+ C W V) a-•+ V) O U i N Y 4-1 V) O _ N (B 4A V)0 4-1> fB N } 1- U a c 4-1 C) O3:C V) co — 0) 4- O N C 4a V) V) V) C N a +� C L dp 'tj N co V) +' C C O 7 UL (7 �O a a m � cn 0 c% m (7 L.L. co N O LO M O O (D O) (B n 4.0 LEVELS OF SERVICE Levels of Service (LOS) define the performance the City's assets are intended to deliver over their service lives. LOS are statements that describe the outputs and objectives the City intends to deliver to its residents, businesses, and other stakeholders. LOS are guided by a combination of customer expectations, legislative requirements, internal policies and procedures, and affordability. Effective asset management requires that LOS be formalized and supported through a framework of performance measures, performance levels, and timeframes to achieve performance levels, such that the activities and costs to deliver the documented LOS can be determined. Figure 4-1 shows the LOS framework and line of sight from higher-level Corporate priorities to detailed asset -specific Technical LOS. Corporate commitments and legislated LOS guide the development of Community LOS. The Community LOS outline the services that the assets need to deliver to the City's residents and businesses. Community LOS can be categorized into one of the following customer service attributes: • Capacity & Use: Services have enough capacity and are available to customers. • Function: Services meet customer needs while limiting health, safety, security, natural and heritage impacts. • Quality & Reliability: Services are reliable and responsive to customers. • Financial Sustainability: Services are affordable and provided at the lowest cost. Customer service attributes are translated into Community LOS, which measure services from a community resident/business perspective, and Technical LOS that define asset performance levels. These LOS define asset needs and drive the required lifecycle activities and associated funding to mitigate risks, as follows: • Capacity & Use LOS inform Acquisition needs • Function LOS inform Upgrade needs • Quality & Reliability LOS inform Renewal, Operations and Maintenance needs • Financial Sustainability LOS inform Funding needs This line of sight shows how the day-to-day management of City assets supports the achievement of higher-level strategic priorities. Risk is evaluated according to each of the four community LOS. This evaluation is described further in Section 7.0. A risk management summary for each service area is included in their respective Appendix summary. 27 Page 141 of 350 §\ 0000 (D \ \\ \j\ \ to co \ \ } / \ / 2 C) LO q y CN � _ 7 a_ \ {\> k %�J 2u � � �=< §\ 0000 (D \ \\ \j\ \ to co \ \ } / \ / 2 C) LO q y CN � _ 7 a_ 4.1 Customer Research and Expectations This AM Plan is prepared to facilitate consultation prior to adoption of levels of service by the City of Kitchener. Future revisions of the AM Plan will incorporate customer consultation on service levels and costs of providing services. This will assist Council and stakeholders in matching the level of service required, service risks and consequences with the customer's ability and willingness to pay for the service. Research on customer expectations has been done periodically for some service areas, but not on a consistent basis. This will be investigated for future updates of the AM Plan. 4.2 Strategic and Corporate Goals This AM Plan is prepared under the direction of the Corporate Asset Management Strategy which is in alignment with the City of Kitchener's Strategic Plan (2023 — 2026). The City of Kitchener's Strategic Plan was developed with the consultation of residents, community organizations, businesses and councillors. Further to this, the AM Strategy supports the United Nations Sustainability Goals (SDGs) which outline the ways to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all. The City's vision is: "Building a city for everyone where, together, we take care of the world around us — and each other." Strategic goals have been set by the City of Kitchener. The relevant goals and objectives and how these are addressed in this AM Plan are summarised in Table 4.1. Building a Connected City Together Cultivating a Green City Together Table 4.1— Goals and how these are addressed in this Plan We live in all kinds of neighbourhoods and types of housing. We work together to ensure that we each have secure and affordable homes. We get around easily, sustainably and safely to the places and spaces that matter most to us. We follow a sustainable path to a greener, healthier city. We work together to enhance and protect our parks and natural environment while transitioning to a low -carbon future. We support businesses and residents to make more climate -positive choices. The AM Plan ensures that transportation infrastructure (such roads, sidewalks, bridges, and culverts) is well-maintained for safe and efficient travel. Parking facilities are provided in convenient locations, and facilities are accessible for all residents. The AM Plan focuses on sustainable practices for parks, open spaces, forestry, and stormwater management. It includes strategies for maintaining urban forests, reducing carbon emissions, and using climate -resilient infrastructure. It also includes preserving green spaces and enhancing water quality through the Page 143 of 350 29 Creating an Economically Thriving City together Fostering a Caring City Together Stewarding a Better City Together We use our collective strengths to grow an agile and diverse local economy powered by talented entrepreneurs, workers and artists. We work together to create opportunities for everyone and a resilient future that propels our city forward. We welcome residents of all ages, backgrounds and lived experiences. We work together on the decisions that matter to us and have a meaningful influence in our community. We're healthy and thriving as we easily access the diverse and inclusive programs and services we need to succeed. We, the City's employees, are stewards of Kitchener's present and its future. We're responsive, innovative, diverse and accountable public servants who work together efficiently to serve residents. We remove barriers and champion residents' collective vision for a better city and a better world. 4.3 Legislative Requirements water, stormwater, and sanitary utilities. The AM Plan supports economic growth by ensuring reliable infrastructure such as roads, water, stormwater, gas, and sanitary utilities are maintained. It focuses on efficient operation of facilities, parking, and transportation systems, contributing to the business environment and economic opportunities for the community. The AM Plan ensures that public spaces such as parks, community centres, and recreational facilities are well-maintained and accessible. It emphasizes safe and clean environments for all residents, focusing on inclusivity and meeting the needs of the community with accessible and well-maintained public spaces. The AM Plan guides City operations with a focus on sustainability, innovation, and accountability. It outlines how the City will invest in infrastructure and services that align with long-term goals, including climate action and public safety. A sample of the legislative requirements relating to the City's management of assets are provided provided in Table 4.2. This AM Plan is prepared in accordance with 0. Reg 588/17, which lays out the requirements for Asset Management Plans prepared by municipalities across Ontario and milestones that all municipalities are required to meet. Please note that the list of legislative requirements is not exhaustive. Page 144 of 35030 Table 4.2 — Legislative Requirements Establishes strategic, long-term, sustainable plans to manage core and non-core capital infrastructure assets by 2024. The Regulation requires: • Municipal governments to adopt AM Plans for all Ontario Regulation 588/17 infrastructure assets including identifying levels of service and costs of maintaining services. • Municipal governments to set technical metrics and Page 145 of 35031 qualitative descriptions for each asset. The purpose of the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Funeral, Burial and Act is to regulate bereavement service providers. The Act Cremation Services Act provides guidelines for the operation of cemeteries, crematoriums and funeral homes. The Accessibility for The purpose of the AODA is to develop, implement and Ontarians with Disabilities enforce standards for accessibility related to goods, Act (AODA) services, facilities, employment, accommodation and buildings. Technical Standards and Facilities must comply with technical standards and safety Safety Act regulations depending on the industry or equipment they include such as elevating devices. Regulates the operation of vehicles, including municipal Highway Traffic Act fleets, road safety, and signage. Impacts transportation, roads, and fleet management. Environmental Protection Governs environmental management related to air, land, and water, impacting stormwater, wastewater, parks, Act forestry, and landfill management. Ensures safe drinking water through compliance with water Safe Drinking Water Act quality standards, asset maintenance, and risk management planning for the Water Utility. Governs the protection and conservation of water Ontario Water Resources resources, impacting water, sanitary, and stormwater Act utilities. Objects of Trust 7 (d) to preserve, maintain, reconstruct, restore and manage property of historical, architectural, Ontario Heritage Act archaeological, recreational, aesthetic, natural and scenic interest. This act is of specific relevance to the protection of heritage trees. The practice of professional forestry is the provision of Professional Foresters Act services in relation to the development, management, conservation and sustainability of forests and urban forests where those services require knowledge, training and Page 145 of 35031 Ontario Building Code experience equivalent to that required to become a member under this Act. 2 (c) watershed protection and management. This act Conservation Land Act defines "areas of natural and scientific interest" and Minimum Maintenance "wetland". Standards (MMS) The Minister may establish programs to protect, manage or establish woodlands and to encourage forestry that is consistent with good forestry practices. 2002, c. 17, Sched. Forestry Act C, s. 12 (2). 11 (1) The council of a municipality may pass by- Technical Standards and laws, (c) for planting and protecting trees on any land Safety Act, 2000 acquired for or declared to be required for forestry purposes. 2002, c. 17, Sched. C, s. 12 (3). Fire Protection and Facilities, especially public spaces, must comply with fire Prevention Act safety regulations. Ontario Building Code The Ontario Building Code has specific requirements facilities, such as parking garages. Establishes minimum standards for road and highway Ontario Regulation 239/02, maintenance for all municipalities. MMS regulations Minimum Maintenance pertain to various elements of road repair and Standards (MMS) maintenance, such as the frequency of road inspections, weather monitoring, ice formation on roadways, snow accumulation, and sidewalk trip ledges. Under this act, Regulation 212/01: Gaseous Fuels and Technical Standards and Regulation 210/01 Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems define all Safety Act, 2000 the standards and requirements of gas distributors to ensure the safe operation of gas distribution systems. The Ontario Energy Board (OEB) facilitates competition in the sale of gas to users, informs consumers and protects their interests with respect to prices and the reliability and quality of gas service, and ensures the financial viability of Ontario Energy Board Act, the gas industry for the transmission, distribution and 1998 storage of gas. Gas distribution companies seek OEB approval to set their rates however, Kitchener Utilities is exempted from section 36 of the act related to rate setting mechanisms. All other regulations of the Act about competition, marketing, customer rights, and licensing apply to Kitchener Utilities. 4.4 Customer Values and Community Levels of Service The LOS discussed in this AM Plan are focused on measures developed to support achievement of the City's higher level strategic priorities and key areas of investment. This AM Plan summarizes the performance of the measures based on the most current data available. The City has determined targets and proposed service levels (as per O.Reg.588/17 Page 146 of 35032 requirements for Proposed LOS) and has aligned these service levels with information in other planning documents. As discussed in Section 4.0, service levels are defined in three ways: community levels of service, customer levels of service and technical levels of service. Community LOS are qualitative statements categorized by service values and attributes. They can be identified as community expectations on certain services as well as how the more technical work activities are impacting customer experiences. The Community LOS performance measures highlight data that has direct impact on a citizen. Service area specific Community LOS can be found in the service area summaries in the Appendix Service values and attributes indicate what aspects of the service is important to the customer. A description of the service values and their alignment to customer and community LOS is provided in Table 4.3. Table 4.3 — Service Values and Community LOS Capacity/Use Capacity & Available Use Scope Function Function Safety Resilience Is the service over or under used? Do we need more or less of these assets? The service can be used/reached at convenient times. The service is broad enough that it serves the entire population. Services meet customer needs while limiting health, safety, security, natural and heritage impacts. The service is provided in a manner that protects users from harm. Considers future impacts such as climate change that may put stress on the system. Quality & Quality The standard to which the Reliability service is provided. Ensure adequate infrastructure to meet growing population and community needs. Provide accessible infrastructure for inclusion and meeting diverse resident needs. Provide infrastructure in acceptable condition and cleanliness by following and providing proper maintenance standards and inspections. Page 147 of 35033 Consistently good quality or Maintain infrastructure Reliable performance - works when proactively to minimize service users expect it to work. unexpected failures. How much does the service Affordable cost? Is it fair and is the service Provide infrastructure Financial provided worth this cost? management services Sustainability Service is provided with in an efficient and cost - Efficient maximum productivity and effective manner. minimal wasted effort. A summary of the LOS framework for each service area is provided in the service summaries included in the Appendix. 4.5 Technical Levels of Service Operational or technical measures of performance are used to demonstrate delivery of customer service values (i.e., the achievement of Customer LOS). These technical measures relate to the activities and allocation of resources to best achieve the desired customer outcomes and demonstrate effective performance. Technical service measures are linked to the activities and annual budgets covering: Acquisition The activities to provide a new service that did not exist previously, or an expansion of an existing service. Upgrade The activities to provide a higher level of service than previously provided. Operation The regular activities to provide services. Maintenance The activities necessary to retain an asset as near as practicable to an appropriate service condition. Maintenance activities enable an asset to provide service for its planned life. Renewal The activities that return the service capability of an asset up to that which it had originally provided. In most cases, Technical LOS have been measured and reported on over the past three years. By comparing the LOS for the current year against that of previous years, a trend can be identified and qualified. It is important to monitor the service levels regularly as circumstances can and do change. Current performance is based on data availability, existing resource provision, and work efficiencies. It is acknowledged changing circumstances such as technology and customer priorities and lifestyle trends will change over time. In order to provide a comprehensive understanding of service expectations, the levels of service for each service area are outlined in the individual service area summaries located in the Appendix. Page 148 of 35034 5.0 FUTURE DEMAND Demand drivers are circumstances that may impact future service delivery and use of assets. These drivers can include things such as population change, climate change, regulations, changes in demographics, seasonal factors, vehicle ownership rates, consumer preferences and expectations, technological changes, economic factors, environmental considerations, etc. The City is in the process of updating their Official Plan to outline additional specifics on how the City plans to grow to 2051. Based on the most recent Official Plan (2014), the City was projected to have a population of 319,500 and an employment of 132,500 by 2031. Statistics Canada's estimate of the 2024 population of the City was 320,3602. This exceeds the forecasted population seven years earlier than predicted. The new official plan (that is currently under development) is estimating, at a high level, that the City's population will grow to approximately 500,000 by 2051. With this significant and rapid growth, demand for City services has increased and will continue to increase as the City looks to grow to 500,000. Demand for new services will be managed through a combination of managing existing assets, upgrading of existing assets, and providing new assets to meet demand and demand management. Demand management practices can include non -infrastructure solutions, insuring against risks and managing failures. Demand management is a key focus for the Kitchener Utilities as they look to manage their portfolio of assets through the energy transition. This AM Plan incorporates the known growth assets to help meet this expected new demand for services, but the City is currently working on various forward-looking plans to provide more accurate estimates of the long-term infrastructure and service delivery needs that will be required to serve a population of 500,000. Z See Statistics Canada reference here Page 149 of 35035 6.0 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY The lifecycle management plan details how the City plans to manage and operate the assets at the agreed levels of service (outlined in the service area summaries in the Appendix) while managing life cycle costs. 6.1 Acquisition Plan Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. Assets may also be donated to the City though various means including subdivision development and expansion of existing services or the inclusion of new services. Proposed acquisition of new assets, and upgrade of existing assets, are identified from various sources such as community requests, proposals identified by strategic plans or master plans, and partnerships with others. Potential upgrades and new works should be reviewed to verify that they are essential to the City's needs and fits long range planning. Proposed upgrades and new work analysis should also include the development of a preliminary renewal estimate to ensure that the services are sustainable over the longer term. Verified proposals by City leadership can then be ranked by priority and available funds and scheduled in future works programs. Currently, no ranking criteria has been established for the acquisition of City assets, however this will be developed in a future revision of this AM Plan through the development of a dedicated asset management acquisition policy. Where applicable, the City assumes that there will be at least a 0.5% growth in the asset portfolio annually to account for assets assumed through development. City teams are working to develop a more accurate assessment of future growth requirements for each asset portfolio. Forecast acquisition asset costs for all City assets are summarized in Figure 6-1. The assumed 0.5% growth in assets is indicated by the grey bars and the specified growth in the capital plan is shown by the green bars. The City is working to improve the accuracy of this forecast as it looks to manage growth demand in the future. The forecast acquisition costs for each service area can be found in the appendix. Page 150 of 35036 Figure 6-1— Yearly Acquisition Summary � Capital Plan based Growth & Upgrade y $250 Development based Growth c o_ — — 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth ($101.3M) E Ln N $200 ■ N N 91 $150 - 3 -c c v IC $100 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - LUIBM M M M M M $50 d c C 0s $ a 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) When the City introduces new assets, there must be a recognition for the need for future operational funding for service, maintenance, and renewal costs. Future depreciation must be accounted for when reviewing long term sustainability, lifecycle, and total cost of ownership. Expenditure on new assets and services in the capital works program will be accommodated in the long-term financial plan, but only to the extent that there is available funding. The City plans for growth such that there is sufficient community infrastructure and facilities to meet the current and projected needs of the population. Acquiring these new assets will commit the funding of ongoing operations, maintenance, and renewal costs for the period that the service provided from the assets is required. Page 151 of 35037 6.2 Disposal Plan Disposal includes any activity associated with the permanent disposal of a decommissioned asset including sale, demolition or relocation. Currently, the City has plans to decommission and demolish the Moore St. SPS within the next 1-2 years. Currently, no process has been established for the disposal of City assets, however this will be developed in a future revision of this AM Plan through the development of a dedicated asset management disposal policy. 6.3 Operations and Maintenance Plan Operations include regular activities to provide services and may not have a direct impact to the overall health of the asset. Examples of typical operational activities include cleaning, asset inspection and supply of power. Asset condition is ideally determined from asset inspections, either from internal staff or from external parties. When possible, asset inspection programs should be developed and regularly employed to collect asset data. Maintenance includes all actions necessary for retaining an asset in an appropriate condition including regular ongoing day-to-day work necessary to keep assets operating. Regular maintenance activities allow asset degradation to follow an expected lifecycle rather than accelerating towards an earlier disposal or replacement. Examples of typical maintenance activities include scheduled asset care and minor repairs. All maintenance activities are either planned or reactive in nature. When possible, the majority of maintenance activities should be planned and executed through preventative maintenance programs. Where maintenance budget allocations are such that they will result in a lesser level of service, the service consequences and service risks have been identified and are highlighted in this AM Plan. Assessment and priority of reactive maintenance is undertaken by staff using experience and judgement. The forecasted operations and maintenance costs are expected to vary in relation to the total value of the asset inventory. If additional assets are acquired, the future operations and maintenance costs are forecast to increase. If assets are disposed of, the forecast operations and maintenance costs are expected to decrease. Figure 6-2 shows the forecast operations and maintenance costs at the corporate level. The values in the figure do not consider inflation but only consider the increase expenses due to growth in the asset portfolio. The forecast operations and maintenance costs for each service area can be found in the Appendix. Figure 6-2: Operations and Maintenance Summary Page 152 of 35038 o $450.0 E $400.0 ui $350.0 N O $300.0 m $250.0 $200.0 CL X LU $150.0 o $100.0 u $50.0 a 2 $0.0 CL Planned O&M Budget Increase Current O&M Budget (2025) — — 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($404.41VI) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) As shown in the figure, the O&M budget is planned to increase by approximately $29.0 million per year 2034 to keep pace with asset growth and aging infrastructure. If 0&M funding does not increase accordingly, there is a risk that deferred maintenance will accelerate asset deterioration which can lead to higher renewal costs in the future. This highlights the importance of sustained 0&M investment to maintain service levels and extend asset life. 6.4 Renewal Plan Renewal is typically carried out through major capital work which does not significantly alter the original service provided by the asset. This work typically restores, rehabilitates, replaces or renews an existing asset to its original service potential. Work over and above restoring an asset to original service potential is considered to be an acquisition resulting in additional future operations and maintenance costs. Assets requiring renewal are identified from either: ■ Using the Asset Register data to project the renewal costs (current replacement cost) and renewal timing, or ■ Using an alternative approach to estimate the timing and cost of forecast renewal work (i.e. condition modelling system, staff judgement, average network renewals, or other). The useful lives of assets used to develop projected asset renewal forecasts are located in Section 24.1 in the Appendix. The estimates for renewals in this AM Plan were based on the asset register data. 6.4.1 Renewal Ranking Criteria Asset renewals are typically undertaken to either: ■ Ensure the reliability of the existing infrastructure to deliver the expected service it was constructed to, or ■ To ensure the infrastructure is of sufficient quality to meet the service requirements. Asset renewals are typically prioritized by identifying assets or asset groups that: Page 153 of 35039 ■ Have a high consequence of failure, ■ Have a condition score that is less than the threshold to provide an expected level of service, ■ Have high use and subsequent impact on users would be significant, ■ Have higher than expected operational or maintenance costs, and ■ Have the potential to reduce life cycle costs by replacing it with a modern equivalent asset that would provide the equivalent service. A detailed ranking/rating of renewal projects within each service area was not within the scope of this AM Plan and is recommended to be conducted for all service areas in the future. The ranking criteria used to determine priority of identified renewal proposals is detailed in Table 6.1. Table 6.1— Renewal Priority Ranking Criteria Consequence of Failure • Environmental Impact • Health & Safety Impact 50% • Service Delivery Impact • Financial Impact Probability of Failure • Physical Condition Rating 50% • Performance Rating Total 100% 6.4.2 Summary of Forecasted Renewal Costs Renewal costs are projected to increase over time if the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. The forecast of renewal costs is based on the available inventory data and feedback provided by the City. Generally, good asset management practice allows for a small portion of the asset portfolio to be replace when failed and not on a set schedule. This would typically occur for assets that are easily replaced, of lower value, and are readily available. These assets generally Page 154 of 35040 make up a small portion of the service area asset portfolios as each area has a small portion of their assets that they run to failure (indicating they would be in Very Poor condition). This analysis incorporates two separate renewal forecasting scenarios; the Planned Budget / Expected Performance renewal forecast scenario (which defers the replacement of certain assets in order to align with the planned renewal budget in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan) and the Proposed LOS renewal scenario (which aligns the replacement of assets with the lifecycle activities the City would like to undertake to achieve their proposed service levels). The intention of the renewal costs figures is to show the average annual renewal need/budget over the 10 -year forecasted period. This is used to assess the financial sustainability of the current budget and to understand the associated condition impacts. Table 6.2 shows the Annual Average Renewal Needs for the Proposed LOS. The associated appendix describes the specific actions that each service area is taking to manage the indicated funding gap. Table 6.2 — Renewal Needs Forecast Fleet $8.3 Cemeteries $0.07 Golf $0.3 Forestry $0.5 Parking $0.02 Parks, Open Spaces & Trails $6.9 Transportation $0.4 Water Utility $18.4 Sanitary Utility $25.7 Stormwater $8.6 Bridges & Culverts $0.7 Roads & Sidewalks $22.6 Gas Utility $14.4 Facilities $36.7 6.5 Non -Infrastructure Solutions Non -Infrastructure solutions are infrastructure related costs that may not be associated with any one specific asset in the City's asset registry but are important in the planning and execution of the previous asset lifecycle categories. Some of the non -infrastructure solutions Page 155 of 35041 can include the consultant costs in the creation of a master plan, working with partner organizations, customer surveys, demand management, restocking of maintenance vehicles, and inventory updates. The costs for the development of plans and strategies are incorporated into the operations and maintenance cost summary for each service area. Page 156 of 35042 7.0 RISK MANAGEMENT The City of Kitchener has Enterprise Risk Management strategy which outlines the process to identify, assess, and mitigate risks to ensure that corporate objectives are achieved. Risk management is embedded in many City processes including strategic planning, business planning, and project approval procedures. In addition, the City's risk management approach assists in allocation of resources to the areas of highest risk across the City's portfolio. 7.1 Critical Assets Critical assets provide life safety and public health and well-being to the community based on Provincial standards. Assets found in this category may be included for having a high consequence of failure (COF) causing significant loss or reduction of service directly impacting services to the community. Critical assets have been identified as having a consequence of failure rating of 4. The COF ratings for each individual service area can be found in Appendix Section 24.2 By identifying critical assets and failure modes the City can ensure that investigative activities, condition inspection programs, maintenance, and capital expenditure plans are targeted to minimize risks. 7.2 Risk Assessment The City has adopted an impact criteria and risk category matrix that quantifies the impact and likelihood criteria and assigns a numerical value to the resulting score. A majority of City risk registers use this terminology to support consistency across the City's assets. For the purpose of this plan, risk was assessed at a high level. A granular risk assessment within in each service area was not within the scope of this AM Plan and is recommended to be conducted for all service areas in the future. The risk register is an assessment process that identifies credible risks, the likelihood of the risk event occurring, the consequences should the event occur, development of a risk rating, and evaluation of the risk. The City will develop a risk treatment plan for non -acceptable risks as part of future improvement. Risk is evaluated using the following formula: Risk Score = Probability of Failure * Consequence of Failure The consequence of failure is determined based on the highest rating across the consequence categories in the following matrix. Page 157 of 35043 f0 C al h0 E � O � O a) O N C > U O U C bD al N C O 7 al 0 + a' c C C N GD O O ° b O bD C D- E al C N N y 0 0 f0 7 N t -p U a) 0 U + O + C O C 3 2 E v a v C c bD a) -0 O N f0 N O Ep C > a-0 U O C -6 U al W a) f0 f0 f0 O_ GD 2 C Y E U vCL E bD O N t m N � M 7 '0 U 0 O +o E C C2 v O > N a) GD E f0 m ro C v E C O C v O a) GD f0 yN.� E a, n7 vNi � ro C aCl E M C v O 'N L T � a w It It O LO 0 co LO 0) (B 0- U_ U O > U al N i U + N U N ? + O o E N O p U i p+' C al h0 O_ -0 E it O -O y, Q C a, o > 3 — o _ N ,v_ O f0 Ln O V C +' C = -p U +' O nY E p h a) O N .0 N C >, :� O- E O C p +� i U O C U OU 0 N rp N y 0 •N ar >. N O N O +� — — > Q ro E — 0D C 0D ,� p ro E N vN U 7 O° Y al = O O_ U a) 0> O -0 N al O p D X N ro N N f0 N > O p N C O_ Q U -0 a) O O_ ° N N C N °- X C C O N a) a) O C m N t X — C a) C -' a) O C t N p •v N C y., al +O+ +� > > — + a) U -0 O O C o — + 0 +� ° �>> °' o c° U U U E C v °° E N t U a) V O m U N C v v C '6 X O O O N �-O ) ) UX CO Z N �U N f0 U _0 v v U •, O G Ln � � V — N ++ v > �1 N — v ° E N Y N O a)C f0 p 0 0D a) C U (D c: fi y., O 110 N C *' h0 h >.° •� 7 w +� O .N N C C O O p U 0_ Z) a' _0 o u v v p O C mU a) a) ro E C O a-� N C O E O_ O C E C a) O N "0° E E t c c v _0 •° ° O v U w — a) •— c 7 i a) o a O a .N OU c v Z) u v v 00 O 2 Ln � � O 0 'E E N N .0 O N al vii ++ ++ U U ? Q U p +p+ — al f0 N N N ° ro a) a) Q w �0 y,, a) o i U Z) O o c mo c O O E p ._^ U O O C U o 0 .N 0 a a w Z N c v O U V � N N x O C o N `_- 0 O O .� a0 D O N a) u E CGD E v v -0 E.E N � � a, o o N 'ZI bD '° 0 E E — +� C0 0 +� .N U t-0 y E Z) ++ U 7 f0 7 alO C C -p al al 7 w a) O i 7 O i w ,O'E, 7 p N �0 p 0 CO a) N C .E O E c V E O ° v E v o v v m C O N 6 N C '^ 7 al f0 N C 0 N al O O a) 7 v ? > i C(Du > a) N w GD al � t Ln X al f0 U U '0 N a) t O_ ° C ° U '� C+ h C E al O O '� 0 p v 0 -° U_ .0 U N v w Q 0 i o al vii +' Ln >` vOi a0., N O O C U> ° N Ca) 0 N h0 p 0 0 N d N d n I w N Z O C GD a�-� a�-� + X G C C0 C N w 0 O t U O N� 0 0 v a0 > a) > a E fO io U O a) O_ p O N C GD N N U N a) N •0 C + , C N f0 ,C o N al al o Q a) -° N a) v Ln C 0 O v a) �m U' .-- ° a >� O E` V V o ++ C U Ln aO� -a) N -0 N al n N T a) N 0 i E ++ p al O o C 7 p 7 �^ C GD N E- n .0 N N +�+ Q T i al •� 0 N � al T U OCL U (A W O f0 C al h0 E � O � O a) O N C > U O U C bD al N C O 7 al 0 + a' c C C N GD O O ° b O bD C D- E al C N N y 0 0 f0 7 N t -p U a) 0 U + O + C O C 3 2 E v a v C c bD a) -0 O N f0 N O Ep C > a-0 U O C -6 U al W a) f0 f0 f0 O_ GD 2 C Y E U vCL E bD O N t m N � M 7 '0 U 0 O +o E C C2 v O > N a) GD E f0 m ro C v E C O C v O a) GD f0 yN.� E a, n7 vNi � ro C aCl E M C v O 'N L T � a w It It O LO 0 co LO 0) (B 0- O LO Cl) O m LO 0) M 0 - Ln T O U N 0N C O' N �_ ° p- aO 3 0 o ao E C O O E f0 _0 uvOi O ++ N Y ? .7O UO O + fo U C 6 0 N m U fo QU ? w 6 GOC: v v mo E +� O v E 0 C U U ? io C N _r_ U pa C N U O N i N +LL+ _0 •O -6 > N N •v a) 0 v O cCL C a) w O m CL Um O O O O u '� *' O � V', Q� U O N 0 0 •N rp •� O ro E Gba 0 h i '� Y al n C a) vOi C O v O al 6 v N N Y -O — — N N c E E ,E C al a E U a1 Ln -0Q J ^ t4 y0 -6 GO O O N O N D) o O a) U ON GO u E C '6 _ C \ U C O al h aT� C •� U* '6 0 +� �) O a) U .� O om p O> N 7\ U fi -6 N m •C 7 al w U C 'O '— O2 b O_ t c ++ 7 U fl.w c pU LL C C i a) m C LL LL LL U (] LL -O N C ++ J Jp C O O U +LL+ tioU C al o a, O E u O U >? a) 0 O GO O a) a) >.Q O > C '6 O — E al \ >, C N U C C U O N O N ? O a) O i �^ U ; 16 a) .�-bD 7 N O 0 N 0--o O E p E N o ED, v a) a) a) v E > o v a) O > 0 tiO o C -6 v� a) U v z V C E U > v N .� O o v v c fO E -0 m U ci al 7 -p O a) in U c n O .� E p iv E c c E a v N _0 v o v > Y a aco E c u v O > N N E i> +� 6 O — +� N O U a+ N 'O al C U O C -O N E i U .0 O U fo pia fo > O U i t/} al U Q ++ fo fo C c v E 0 M D� O au)) c c 3 a) N v 'v E _ c c°— t O c = = a) u v v > o � a O U > z) tiO + u a) LL O Z a) L9 aO .E a) tiO (n C LL C" LL c N al N a) 0 N-5 'O 'O + v N N V ° E c D, (7O `� a) U \ O 'a) \ C Q w p >. O al O -O N N o N C 2c GO v a) a) v v a>i v E - tio C]O Z) U > O 2 O � _ — N O U E O_ a) 0 >i E O O o 2 `� O C0 a) > N N NUOo LnU -6 E al a) -6 C +� ,� 7 a) O a) C C ci O -6 a) a) C 7 Y a) W A "- O_ C E > O_ v O �^ b.0 O ro C N 0 Ga N -6 O i D U .--I -6 O a) a) '6 U O C > U' > C N C al a) io V', O '6 N a) — _ i O N '6 a E c E E p v N u v v v 3 c a) c E. E e E' a) c a`) + O p U aa)i OU m O N 0 ii N d .-Ni a) C C c E c o O > Q alU EO i O C v UO O + fo\ o 3 a) C: + — 0 0 v o -0 -1 p v E O a) 6O UO al m �n p U ++ f0 c E _0c U n N v O 0�> E v O a) E U +' o U ro 0 U -6 al a) O > o 0 N O N O 0 O +, Z n p v O .- Q cn'6 E O .� N o Q a) � T O i O a+ � �L7 a3 Q C mNO w r- w oc LL oc O LO Cl) O m LO 0) M 0 - Ln The probability of failure is determined either by the physical condition or the performance ratings outlined in Table 7.2 for a specific asset: Table 7.2 — Probability of Failure Rating Scale 1 Very Good Rare No material likelihood; not considered $5,964.6 41.6% further in risk assessment. 2 Good Unlikely Occurs infrequently in municipal 100.0% environments but is not impossible. Occurs periodically in municipal 3 Fair Somewhat Likely environments and could happen at the City of Kitchener. Occurs frequently in municipal 4 Poor Likely environments and has occurred or is likely to occur at the City of Kitchener. 5 Very Poor Almost Certain Extremely likely to occur at the City of Kitchener. The risk map shown in Figure 7-1 combines the consequence of failure ratings with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within this AM Plan. Of note is that unknown condition assets are not included in the risk exposure map as there was no way to accurately quantify their probability of failure. Figure 7-1— Risk Exposure Map for All City Assets Risk exposure in year 2025 $, millions Qj U Catastrophic $2,355.3 W-2 jWM_IU, WN r -i 3 2 Major $1,245.9 $1,005.3 a 'i; N LL Moderate $886.0 $472.2 o ° �i $48.7 $47.9 $20.5 $20.8 Somewhat Almost Rare Unlikely Likely Likely Certain Probability of Failure Risk Exposure High Moderate Low $ $5,964.6 41.6% Total $14,347.4 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The City has mitigation plan for all High-risk assets which are outlined in the service area summaries in the Appendix. These Page 160 of 35046 mitigation plans primarily involved priority renewal work for these assets which reduces the risk to the City. 7.3 Infrastructure Resilience Approach The resilience of the City's infrastructure is vital to ensure services are provided to residents and customers. To adapt to changing conditions the City's requires an understanding of its capacity to 'withstand a given level of stress or demand', and to respond to possible disruptions to ensure continuity of service. Resilience recovery planning, financial capacity, climate change risk assessment and crisis leadership are key components to consistency. The City does not currently measure resilience in service delivery. This will be included in future iterations of the AM Plan. 7.4 Service and Risk Trade -Offs The City's decisions related to balancing costs, resources, service levels, and risk aim to maximize benefits from available resources. Potential Gaps There are some operations and maintenance activities and capital projects that are potentially unable to be undertaken within the next 10 years. These may include: ■ Planned maintenance (preventive maintenance programs) ■ Deferred renewal work Service Trade -Off If there is forecasted work (operations, maintenance, renewal, acquisition, or disposal) that cannot be undertaken due to available resources, then this will result in service consequences for users. These service consequences can include: ■ If some of the planned maintenance is not completed, this typically results in more unplanned service disruptions. ■ Deferred capital renewal work may result in lower asset condition that does not meet user expectations and potential asset closures. Risk Trade -Off The operations and maintenance activities and capital projects that cannot be undertaken may sustain or create risk consequences. These risk consequences include: ■ An increase in unplanned repairs and associated service disruptions. ■ Higher lifecycle management costs, deteriorating assets, and potential asset closures. ■ Deteriorating assets may become unsafe or have safety concerns and expose the City to potential liabilities. These actions and expenditures are considered and included in the forecast costs as outlined in Section 6.0 and in each service area summary in the Appendix. Page 161 of 35047 8.0 FINANCIAL SUMMARY This AM Plan identifies the forecast operations, maintenance, and renewal costs required to provide an agreed level of service to the community over a 10 -year period. This provides input into 10 year financial and funding plans aimed at providing the required services in a sustainable manner. This AM Plan focuses on identifying the state of good repair or renewal need for infrastructure investments to meet proposed service levels and identifying any funding gaps associated with these service levels. The funding gap is the shortfall of the planned investment in the 10 -Year Capital Plan compared to the forecasted needs to meet proposed service levels. Funding gaps for other lifecycle activities such as growth and service improvements are estimated where data is currently available but have generally not yet been quantified and will be informed by future development of Master Plans or Strategic Plans. 8.1 Funding Sources Through the City's budgeting process, capital project and operating activity expenditure information is gathered from each service area. These financial plans include several key sources of funding as outlined in Table 8.1. Figure 8-1 shows the funding sources and the amounts allocated to each source from 2025-2034. Table 8.1— Summary of Funding Sources This funding is collected from developers to help fund infrastructure required to support new growth. These Development Charges & funds are used to pay for capital costs associated with Community Contributions growth -related projects, such as water and wastewater expansions, roads, and community facilities. This funding source ensures that growth pays for growth and helps reduce the financial burden on existing taxpayers. This funding applies to services that operate as self- sustaining business units, such as water, wastewater, stormwater, and gas utilities. These services are funded Enterprise (Self -Funded through user fees and charges, rather than property taxes, Services) ensuring that costs are recovered directly from those who use the service. The revenues generated are reinvested into operations, maintenance, and capital renewal of the associated infrastructure. This funding includes financial contributions from other levels of government (e.g., federal or provincial) or agencies. These are typically provided through Grants & External Funding infrastructure programs, stimulus packages, or environmental initiatives. While not guaranteed annually, grants can significantly offset capital costs and are often tied to specific projects or outcomes. Page 162 of 35048 These funds are designated savings set aside by the City to finance future capital needs or to address unexpected expenditures. These reserves support long-term financial Reserve Funds & Other sustainability by smoothing out year-to-year budget Capital Reserves fluctuations and providing funding for asset renewal, replacement, or major repairs. They may be specific to asset types or more broadly allocated to general capital needs. This funding includes municipal property tax revenues and serves as a primary source for capital investment in non - Tax & Capital Expenditure growth -related infrastructure. This funding supports the Budget renewal and upgrade of all assets. The budget is approved annually and aligns with strategic priorities, lifecycle needs, and available fiscal capacity. Figure 8-1— Funding Sources (2025-2034) Tax & Capital Expenditure Budget $21D.8M Reserve Funds & 11% Other Capital Reserves $243.1M 13% Grants & External Funding $46.6M 20% Enterprise (Self - Funded Services) $1082.1M 58% 8.2 Affordability of Proposed Service Levels Development Charges & Community Contributions $290.7M 166 The Financial Strategy section compares the planned capital funding available in the City's 10 -year Capital Plan against the forecasted capital needs to determine if there is a funding gap to meet proposed service levels. 8.2.1 Growth & Upgrade As discussed in Section 6.1, the growth and upgrade need for City assets is estimated at an average of $101.3 million per year over the next 10 years which includes a 0.5% year -over - year growth and upgrade of assets to account for development. Currently, the only known funding gap for upgrades is $2M/year for achieving the GHG emissions reduction service Page 163 of 35049 levels for facilities but this is a preliminary gap and it will be confirmed in the future as additional mechanical/GHG studies are completed. There is no current quantifiable funding gap for growth and upgrade of the other service areas, however on-going development of Master Plan updates will inform future growth -related service levels and recommendations. 8.2.2 Operations & Maintenance The operating budget focused on asset -related operations and maintenance is $404.4 million per year from 2025-2034. The estimated increases account for growth in the asset portfolio to maintain service levels over the next 10 years and includes a 0.5% year -over -year growth to account for development. Operating budget pressures were noted primarily for Roads & Sidewalks and Sanitary Utility Assets: • Roads & Sidewalks: If renewal projects are deferred, leading to deterioration of the asset portfolio over the 10 -year period covered in this AM Plan, there will be a need to increase the spending on 0&M to account for the increased reactive maintenance to manage the deteriorated asset condition (i.e., fixing potholes, repairing cracks, etc.). • Sanitary Utility: While there is a specific budgetary item related to spills, there is difficulty tracing the spill back to the responsible party and recovering costs associated with remediating the spill. 8.2.3 Renewal As discussed in Section 6.4, the renewal need for City assets is estimated at an average of $143.8 million per year over the next 10 years and total funding gap of $30.6 million per year. This renewal need is forecasted to meet proposed service levels selected by the City considering affordability and risk. For most service areas, the proposed service level at least maintains the current condition. For some assets, an improved condition is proposed where the service level is based on recommendations from formal engineering reports or inspections such as OSIM inspections for bridges or BCAs for facilities. The funding gaps represent needs that exceed the overall funding available in the 10 -year Capital Plan for infrastructure renewal. A significant investment gap is estimated for Gas Utility and Facilities assets. A summary of renewal needs and funding gaps is shown in Table 8.2. Table 8.2 — Renewal Needs Summary Fleet $8.3 $8.3 N/A Cemeteries $0.07 $0.07 N/A Golf $0.3 $0.3 N/A Forestry $0.5 $0.5 N/A Parking $0.02 $0.02 N/A Page 164 of 35050 Parks, Open Spaces & Trails $6.9 $6.9 N/A Transportation $0.4 $0.4 N/A Water Utility $18.4 $18.4 N/A Sanitary Utility $25.7 $25.7 N/A Stormwater $8.6 $8.6 N/A Bridges & Culverts $0.7 $0.7 N/A Roads & Sidewalks $22.6 $22.6 N/A Gas Utility $14.4 $8.3 $6.1 Facilities $36.7 $12.3 $24.5 Figure 8-2 illustrates the resulting condition profile for all City assets based on the Planned Budget for each service area. Based on the Planned Budget renewal scenario, the overall asset condition for all City assets is expected to slightly deteriorate over the next 10 years. Figure 8-2: Planned Budget Condition Profile 2.4go % of Assets in Very Poor Condition ,qu�a 3 $16,OD0 $14,000 _ _ 0 E $12,000 LM $10,000 N 0 $$,DOD 3 j $6,000 c ^ Fr E $4,000 M C $2,000 CL m Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 30 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor ■ Unknown Condition Error! Not a valid bookmark self -reference. illustrates the resulting condition profile for all City assets based on the Proposed LOS the City has chosen for each service area. Based on the Proposed LOS renewal funding scenarios chosen by the City, the overall asset condition for all City assets is expected to improve over the next 10 years. This scenario is unlikely to be realized given that there is a $30.6 million / year funding gap to meet the Proposed LOS. Page 165 of 35051 2.4q'o $16,000 $14,000 0 E $12,000 w $10,000 N O a $8,000 0 j $6,000 c E $4,000 a V Q $2,000 CU Figure 8-3: Proposed LOS Condition Profile L� %of Assets in Very Poor Condition 1.5% n r i r Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor s Very Poor Unknown Condition The forecast condition profiles for each of the service areas listed above are outlined in the service area summaries in the Appendix. 8.3 Managing Risks Associated with Funding Gaps The City reviews and updates Master Plans to assess what is working well and what may need adjustment, to ensure the plan continues to reflect the needs and priorities of a growing community. The Master Plans help manage risks related to population growth by identifying where growth is occurring and deciding if planned projects are in the right places, or if changes are needed to better serve growing communities. To manage the risks of the renewal funding gaps, the City will continue to prioritize available funding based on the criticality of projects to prevent disruptions to service delivery. The City also continues to improve coordination and collaboration to improve planning and coordination of capital projects between departments to maximize resources. The City will also continue to identify funding opportunities through federal and provincial programs and explore potential partnerships and corporate sponsorships to raise external funds. 8.4 Limitations of Forecasts and Funding Gaps The forecasts and funding gap estimates in this AM Plan are based on currently available data and are expressed in 2025 dollars. For assets where construction year and formal condition assessments are not available, the renewal forecast assumes that these assets require a regular average annual reinvestment amount based on their replacement value and estimated service life. Timing of lifecycle activities can therefore be improved by investment in data collection or expanding the condition assessment program, as identified for various service areas. Some forecasts are also based on older condition assessments which should be updated for critical infrastructure to increase the accuracy of the renewal forecast. Data gaps were resolved where possible through consultation with City staff during development of this AM Plan. Page 166 of 35052 9.0 REFERENCES United Nations, Managing Infrastructure Assets for Sustainable Development Kitchener Changing for Good, Our Climate Strategy Action Plan City of Kitchener, Corporate Risk Management (GOV-COR-016), p 2 0. Reg. 588/17: Asset Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure City of Kitchener Cycling and Trails Master Plan 2020 City of Kitchener Places & Spaces — Parks Strategic Plan City of Kitchener Development Charges Study 2022 City of Kitchener Leisure Facilities Master Plan 2019 City of Kitchener Strategic Plan 2023-2026 City of Kitchener Official Plan 2014 City of Kitchener Sanitary Master Plan City of Kitchener Stormwater Master Plan TransformWR, 2021 Page 167 of 35053 10.0 APPENDIX A - FLEET SERVICES The Fleet service area is responsible for the procurement, maintenance, and lifecycle management of the City's vehicle and equipment inventory used across all departments to support service delivery. 10.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's Fleet services. The assets managed by Fleet Services and included in this AM Plan are shown in Table 10.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Dump/Fire Truck assets with a replacement value of $29.8M (approximately 38% of the total replacement value of all Fleet assets). Table 10.1—Assets Inventory Summary Misc Small Augers, Compactors, Pallet Truck, $1.6M 2.0% Equipment Scissor Lifts, etc. Lawn/Turf Aerators, Lawn Mowers, Seeders, $7.5M 9.5% Equipment Tractors, etc. Off Road Backhoes, Excavators, Forklifts, $18.7M 23.9% Equipment Sweepers, etc. Licensed Cars, Pickups, Trailers, Vans, etc. $19.5M 24.9% Equipment Arena Equipment Ice Edgers and Ice Resurfacers $1.4M 1.7% Dump/Fire Trucks Aerial Pumpers, Dump Trucks, Fire $29.8M 38.0% Rescues, Garbage Packers, etc. TOTAL $78.4M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Page 168 of 35054 Figure 10-1. Figure 10-1— Asset Age Profile 12 OA 10 1.4 0.1 3.1 1.5 8 e. 1.5 w 6 c v 4 m d 2 0 Misc Small Lawn/Turf Off Road Licenced Arena Dump/Fire Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Truck Avg. Age Within Service Life Avg. Remaining Service Life ® Avg. Years Beyond Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: ■ Misc Small Equipment and Arena Equipment have an average age that has surpassed their average service life. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for Fleet services is shown in Page 169 of 35055 Figure 10-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 10-3. The condition assessment of the City's Fleet assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 62% of the City's Fleet assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Figure 10-2 — Asset Condition Profile Page 170 of 35056 19.2% Figure 10-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category $1.6M $7.5M $18.7M $19.5M $1.4M $29.8M 100% 90% 80% 70% 3 60% 50% CU 40% E °; 30% M CL 20% cu 10% 0% Misc Small Lawn/Turf Off Road Licenced Arena Dump/Fire Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Truck Very Good Good Fair N Beyond Expected Service Life Unknown Condition 10.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 10.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 171 of 35057 O LO M 4- 0 N N O1 (B n 0 N Vf 0 ol 00 ol � o .1 V) >- f6 f6 O O O O O O O O (B _0 -p Q 0 N o V V Ln 4L - W N A E N i 7 7 >,U0, U o0 o U co U U X 00 U N X X X � N X N X N N o6 N N N 2 Q d Q Q olo rl N C M �o z oo z oo "o c� V) j• o 0 0 o Q C un Il rl to z O M co lD M a � ' Y i -a O6 6 > N 4-10 N U U �4-U � -p 4 Np N pp N O O ) N 4- 7 CJ i > 'a _0 m +J J p � p- p � 7 pN C j � �i N Uf0 fB f6 Q y N 0 V)a 0 Q Q E a� �, N Q p o� o N a > U � � d > co p> Q Q U tv v Q Q i p Q -6 u 7 0, m W O 'p Vf O f6 Vf N N C N p Vf C V N V) p C po Q E C Vf4- +'ate•+ N y O y _� (6 O c'c u ate•+ N '� •� V) N Q N E N chi) 4- Q N t C C p N u Q p v)O u N C C C N f6 C C C m t C +m-1 N C Vf L- >% > +�+ OC Cf OC O LO M 4- 0 N N O1 (B n 0 10.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 10.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 10-4. City teams are working to develop a more accurate assessment of future growth requirements for each asset portfolio. Figure 10-4 — Yearly Acquisition and Upgrade Summary � Growth $4.0 Upgrade LM — — 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth/Upgrade ($2.OM) Y $3.5 c CL X .� $3.0 W 2 m o $2.5 cn E CL $2.0 -- — — ——————————————— — — — — —- Ln +�+ N OY$15 c7 $1.0 c c M $0.5 $0.0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 10.3.2 Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 10-5 shows the forecast operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased relative to the growth of the overall asset portfolio (See Section 10.3.1 for related growth costs). Regular increases due to inflation were not included. Page 173 of 35059 Figure 10-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($12.6M) $16.0 c 0 $14.0 $12.0 Ln cQ a 'v $10.0 N d $$.0 c a $6.0 x W 2 $4.0 ad O $2.0 s m a, $0.0 .p M Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) 12034♦ 10.3.3 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed, and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 174 of 35060 Figure 10-6 shows the forecasted condition of Fleet assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: 1. The planned budget 2. The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $8.3 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Fleet assets. Page 175 of 35061 Figure 10-6 — Forecast Renewal Scenarios The condition of assets is expected to improve (% of assets beyond expected service life) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based on its age relative to its estimated service life (see Table 24.1 in Appendix 0) and estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. $90 37'99° % of Assets Beyond Expected ServiceLife 4.3% o $80 $70 ■ ."� $60 Ln $50 a $40 $30 r C $20 $10 . EL M $- CL Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 W (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which improves asset condition over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with Fleet assets. $90 37.9% % of Assets Beyond Expected Service Life 4.3% V $80 - _ = $70 Ln $60 71■ ID $50 == $40 $30 $20 $10 son $- CL 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 W (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 176 of 35062 Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Fleet assets is approximately $8.7 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). The City's proposed renewal investment of $8.3 million per year in the renewal of Fleet assets from 2025 — 2034 aligns well with the expected need in the years beyond the analysis period. 10.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Supply Chain Disruptions: The procurement team is always looking for alternative suppliers to strengthen the supply chain and make it more resilient. There is pre - committed capital funding which helps to get orders in early so that the fleet arrives when it is needed. • Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: Some charging stations are set up, but the City is working to develop an improved strategy for future electrification that includes fleet, supporting infrastructure, etc. This strategy will also consider the risks due to power outages and how deployment of the assets will occur. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.14 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Fleet services. As shown in Figure 10-7, an estimated $32.4 million (41.4%) of Fleet assets currently have a high-risk exposure. Figure 10-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Fleet Assets Risk exposure in $7.8 $7.8 2025 S. millions $7.4 $0.0 $0.0 Somewhat Almost Rare Unlikely Likely Likely Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure Catastrophic L 3 3 Major UO)c `� Moderate o 0 Minor Figure 10-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Fleet Assets Risk exposure in $7.8 $7.8 2025 S. millions $7.4 $0.0 $0.0 Somewhat Almost Rare Unlikely Likely Likely Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure High Moderate Low $27.349% .0% Total Critical asset risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk risk and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Table 10.3. Page 177 of 35063 Table 10.3 - Risk Mitigation and Plans Arena Equipment Poor asset Dump/Fire Trucks condition Licensed Equipment resulting in the High inability to Off Road Equipment perform services Renewal $0.9 work to perform any $18.7 necessary Low $6.8 repairs or replacement $6.1 of assets Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 10.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Fleet asset management are shown in Table 10.4. Table 10.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Fleet • Develop more accurate unit costing for fleet assets, particularly for specialized equipment State of Local • Develop a condition assessment approach applicable to all Infrastructure assets to support a more comprehensive asset management approach allowing the City to transition away an age based approach Page 178 of 35064 • Consider breaking out metrics by asset categories to better reflect the City's fleet management practices • Develop formal metrics for capacity and use to track vehicle utilization during comprehensive condition assessments • Create functional levels of service metrics related to environmental initiatives, such as converting vehicles to electric alternatives Levels of Service • Refine the tracking of fuel consumption data to support environmental initiatives and align with the City's corporate climate action plan • Refine the tracking of preventative maintenance completion rates by separating different categories of inspections (commercial vehicles, non-commercial vehicles, specialized equipment) • Consider excluding lower -value assets from certain metrics to get a more accurate picture of fleet performance • Embed vehicle equivalency analysis into asset attributes to help quantify the financial impact of fleet maintenance • Analyze the financial impact of adjusting the preventative maintenance schedule Lifecycle Management • Develop specific budget accounts to fund inspections and and Financial Summary preventative maintenance • Create a model to understand the financial impact of not achieving target performance levels • Develop a clearer understanding of future growth acquisitions that are required to meet service targets • Improve the alignment of the fleet risk assessment with Enterprise Risk Framework and asset management • Consider the impact of parts availability on vehicle downtime Risk Management and incorporate this into risk assessments • Develop a risk assessment for managing fleet maintenance during unpredictable events like bad winters Page 179 of 35065 11.0 APPENDIX B - CEMETERY SERVICES The Cemeteries service area manages municipal and abandoned burial grounds, ensuring respectful interment services, maintenance of cemetery infrastructure, and preservation of historical and cultural assets. 11.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's Cemetery services. The Cemetery assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 11.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Interment Memorials assets with a replacement value of $5.7M (approximately 62% of the total replacement value). Note that buildings structures (i.e., mausoleums, etc.) are included in the Facilities Appendix and not this Appendix section. Table 11.1—Assets Inventory Summary Cemetery Infrastructure — Garbage Cans, Fountains, Gates, Bollards, Benches Discrete Cemetery Infrastructure — Roadways/Parking Lots, Fences Linear Wetland Gazebo, Wetland Cemetery Structures Bridge, Pond Bridge, Dedication Centre Pergola, Serbian Pergola, Trail Entrance Features Equipment Lowering Units Horticulture Horticultural Beds Interment Features Art/Artifacts, Stone Walls, Reflection Stones Statues, Memorial Trees, Memorial Benches, Burial Interment Greens, Urn Tables, Memorials Columbarium, Ossuary/Scattering Gardens, Memorial Plaques $0.1M $2.1M 22.3% $0.6M 6.0% $0.02M 0.2% $0.2M 2.6% $0.6M 6.0% $5.7M 61.7% TOTAL $9.2M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 11-1. Page 180 of 35066 Figure 11-1— Asset Age Profile 120 100 go } 60 74.6 c I m ho 40 1fi.0 10.0 20 22.0 18.0 18A 27.0 0 yes a`�e -e y�a� ySo �e C+atie ®iia 0`�a Qe<Qo Qa{$ F�a� o o O� ■ Avg. Age Within Service Life I Remaining Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: ■ Any assets missing information on install date have been excluded from the asset age profile shown above. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for cemetery services is shown in Figure 11-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 11-3. The condition assessment of the City's Cemetery assets provides some perspective on the overall reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 99% of the City's cemeteries assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Approximately $0.1 million (1%) of Cemetery assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised primarily of Memorial Benches (0.1 million). Page 181 of 35067 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% a 50% m a c 40% m E 30% m 20% 10% 0% Figure 11-2 —Asset Condition Profile Poor $0.0m Ora Fair $7.2M 79% Unknown Condition $0.1M 1% Good $1.3M 14% Very Good $0.6M fi% Figure 11-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category $0.1M $21M Cemetery Cemetery Infrastructure - Infrastructur Discrete Linear Very Good $0.6M $0.02M $0.210 $0.6M $5.7M Cemetery Equipment Horticulture Interment Interment e - Structures Features Memorials Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition 11.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 11.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 182 of 35068 \ It \ ? m m z z u k 4-1E �O t 0 V) E 3 \ E Bu m -s- % / * y 2 z m m •= \ \ E m 0 % 1 e 4 \ It \ ? m m / E \ / / ƒ ƒ 4 / E § \ V) / 0 ( o u E 0 0 G ƒ \ 3: \ e \ e Ln 2 k �O t 0 V) E 3 % E Bu m -s- % < * y 2 z m m •= e ,m E \ % 1 e 4 E e g 0% O 0 E k# 0 2 7 % >\ R u 0 m p m > " / 2 o e o \ k / /m % E o / e $ ) o \ 7 \ u e 4-1 u m / E 0 3 \ / \ M m \ 7 g E / ° E/ E@ f ) E\ \ E u to e\ 2 > o/_ E e U: y\ > o < u o 2 0 / k z k \ \ / / m 2} m / E \ / / ƒ ƒ 4 / E § \ V) / 0 ( o u E 0 0 G ƒ \ 3: \ e \ e Ln C) LO q y q c _ 7 n M. �O s � e \ 2 > y = a y e m s e E E e E e g 0% u 0 E u k# 0 2 % >\ R 0 0 / ± / k m / e ) \ \ 0 k / £ 2 / E 0 tE \ / \ M m \ 7 g E / ° E/ E@ f ) E\ \ E u y} e\ 2 > u < E e U: y\ > o < u o 2 0 k / / m 2} g 2 u /U W / � m % = e �.g.§ ) E / % G w 0 / \ ) W e / > 0 2 u== M \/ E/ g m E& u/ u/ ® � � — : . � _ Cf cc C) LO q y q c _ 7 n M. N a-.' a.., to N -O i N N 'a c9 N � v C N O cv i N C to N N N i }, O O co Q— 5 a, Q- U a� Q) o °a-' N o '> °' O O w ami ° `L° ami v E c O °' N°�+ °' E°° 3 a E a`°i O " tao °' ° o N E O .� c O c0 N Q c i bA m O It N O Ln N 4.1 C N E i N C 4- N O N N cn N E t � h0 Z '� O LO M 4- 0 co N 0) (B n O rl 11.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 11.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 11-4. The City assumes that there will be at least a 0.5% growth in the asset portfolio annually (some of which might not be reflected in the following figure). City teams are working to develop a more accurate assessment of future growth requirements for each asset portfolio. Figure 11-4 — Yearly Acquisition Summary $0.30 a $0.25 =a v W� $0'20 10 -year Average .o Annual Planned 2 = $0.15 Growth & Upgrade bb E ($0.1M) 0 $o.10 3 o '~ (D $0.05 --——————————————————————————— v c c a $0.00 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 11.3.2 Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 11-5 shows the forecast operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased relative to the growth of the overall asset portfolio (See Section 11.3.1 for related growth costs). Regular increases due to inflation were not included. Page 185 of 35071 Figure 11-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 30 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($2.7M) w Ln ro $2.0 m y3 $1.5 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year! Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 11.3.3 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 186 of 35072 Figure 11-6 shows the forecasted condition of Cemetery assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $0.07 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Cemetery assets. Page 187 of 35073 Figure 11-6 — Forecast Renewal Scenarios The condition of assets is expected to be maintained (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on staff reported condition (86% of assets by replacement value). For the remaining assets, the condition is determined based on their age relative to their estimated service life (see Table 24.2 in Appendix 0). The forecast then estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. $10 .0% % of Assets in Very Poor Condition 0 o $9 $8 $7 'n $6 N N $5 °1 $4 $3 $2 � $1 1 � r M$_ . ■ L Q 41 Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which maintains asset condition over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with Cemetery assets. $10 0.0% % of Assets in Very Poor Condition o $9 $8 $7 N $6 N $5 °1 $4 $3 r a� $2 aEi $1 , � ■ °1 Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 188 of 35074 Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Cemetery assets is approximately $0.2 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). Therefore, the City's proposed renewal investment of $0.07 million per year in the renewal of Cemetery assets from 2025 — 2034, may be insufficient to address renewal need in the years beyond the analysis period. 11.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Overcrowding: The Cemeteries Strategic Plan completed in 2025 and lays out recommendation for managing capacity in the future. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.15 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Cemetery services. As shown in Figure 11-7, an estimated $0.02 million (0.2%) of Cemetery assets currently have a high-risk exposure. Figure 11-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Cemetery Assets Risk exposure in i W11$0.015 0.0 2025 S. millions $5.07 $0.05 $0.00 Rare Unlikely Somewhat Likely Almost Likely Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure Catastrophic L 3 3 Major cModerate = o $5.28 0 Minor Figure 11-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Cemetery Assets Risk exposure in i W11$0.015 0.0 2025 S. millions $5.07 $0.05 $0.00 Rare Unlikely Somewhat Likely Almost Likely Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure $ % High = Moderate $5.28 58.1% Low Total $9.1 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk, and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Table 11.3. Page 189 of 35075 Table 11.3 — Risk Mitigation and Plans Lowering Units Poor asset condition resulting in the High inability to perform burial services Renewal work to perform any necessary repairs on the assets Low and regular planned maintenance to prevent unplanned downtime Approximately $4,500 per year Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 11.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Cemetery asset management are shown in Table 11.4. Table 11.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Cemeteries • Consider centralizing all parking lots across different service areas (including cemeteries) for consistent management and reporting State of Local • Develop a more comprehensive inventory of cemetery roads Infrastructure and integrate them into the Roads Program for better long- term maintenance planning • Determine condition of assets currently reported in unknown condition Page 190 of 35076 • Develop usage -based measures rather than simple ratios to better reflect cemetery access and utilization • Consider incorporating customer service metrics, including: total inquiries received, sales completed, number of emails and phone calls received and placed Levels of Service • Separate metrics for outdoor maintenance teams and administrative teams to better track customer service and staffing costs • Develop a more accurate method to track cremation interments and lot sales to better forecast capacity needs • Upgrade cemetery management software to better track and manage cemetery assets and operations • Develop a detailed cost estimation process for taking on new cemeteries, including labour and equipment implications • Create a more accurate method to estimate burial and staffing costs, accounting for seasonality and labour Lifecycle Management allocation challenges and Financial Summary • Develop a comprehensive maintenance strategy for cemetery roads that aligns with the city's overall road maintenance program • Develop detailed cost estimate for abandoned cemeteries the City must assume ownership of as per legislation • Develop a risk assessment framework specific to cemetery operations, considering: capacity constraints, maintenance Risk Management requirements and heritage preservation needs • Create a risk mitigation strategy for cemetery expansion, aligned with the master plan recommendations Page 191 of 35077 12.0 APPENDIX C - GOLF SERVICES The Golf service area operates the City -owned golf courses, providing recreational opportunities to residents while maintaining the associated grounds, buildings, and equipment. 12.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's golf services. The golf assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 12.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Course Infrastructure - Linear assets with a replacement value of $8.6M (approximately 57% of the total replacement value). Table 12.1— Assets Inventory Summary Course Lighting, Bike Racks, Flag Poles, Benches, Infrastructure $0.1M 0.9% — Discrete Water Fountains, Garbage Cans Course Infrastructure Irrigation Systems, Pedestrian Bridges $8.6M 56.6% — Linear Course Entrance Features $0.01M 0.1% Structures Bunkers, Fairways, Greens, Rough, Course Practice Greens, Tee Complexes, Short Course Greens, Short Course Tees $4.9M 31.9% Features (Synthetic), Practice Ranges (Synthetic), Practice Ranges (Natural) Golf Carts (Gas), Golf Carts (Electric), Golf Carts Golf Carts (Lithium) $1.6M 10.5% TOTAL $15.2M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 12-1. Page 192 of 35078 Figure 12-1— Asset Age Profile 50 5.3 45 40 35 30 m y 25 15.0 20 `L 6.0 5.0 15 10 5 8.0 6.3 0 z�y ��� ecy �yy Caa1 J�,\ tae 0 cy� Qta ■ Avg. Age Within Service Life ❑ Remaining Service Life ® Avg. Years Beyond Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: ■ Irrigation systems are shown to, on average, be beyond their expected service life and City staff noted that as issues arise, they manage and fix leaks. ■ Any assets missing information on install date have been excluded from the asset age profile shown above. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for golf services is shown in Figure 12-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 12-3. The condition assessment of the City's golf assets provides some perspective on the overall reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 71% of the City's golf assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Approximately $3.8 million (25%) of Golf assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised of Greens (1.8 million), Bunkers (1.2 million), Rough (0.6 million) and Fairways (0.2 million). Page 193 of 35079 100% 90% 80% 70% -- 60% 2 50% c 40% a E u 30% m EL W 20% 10% 0% Figure 12-2 — Asset Condition Profile Unknown Condition $3.8M 25.0% Very Poor Good $0.7M $5.8M 4.4% 37.9% Fair $3.4M 22.1% Figure 12-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category $0.1M $8.6M Course Course Infrastructure - Infrastructure - Discrete Linear ■ Very Good Good $0.01M $4.9M Course Structures Course Features $1.6M Golf Carts Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition 12.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 12.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 194 of 35080 O a O 7 C 4- 7 C +.; p) +, C V) c�6 C N (3) � a-+ L C mCC V) It VI tip -6 C C L U u V (9 O .— m O .— O 0 y L- C: 4-1 > tip a-.+ > tip a-.+ -� L O� UD UD Q C-1 C C C C- C 4-1 4-1 4-1 V) p O Q O m a a VI4-1 Ln m N Op) W 00 Y > M u m a-�+ O > 4 — n M V N 00 taA c y Y C O O d O d O C > to O O p) p) d 00Q 00 N Ln W O ; - E L �.o Q O O N .. +�.+ C .. i-nN p) tlp .� u1 N O+, Y .. N �O VI L M 4N., MO Y tv VI -O p) E > L j Op N p) p) Q1 O Q N; V) ( M L > 00 y l0 C rn N 4A u m N Y V) V) o V) Q E -0f° o _ Z d r, 4 00 Q 0000 ; o L Q 0 ami ami V) Q 'O O O hC0 4- N N f6 O O N Y1 a-•' C VI a..+ >� � V u � a-.+ Vf >� t (a cv a..' > > p) >. m VI i u O _0 � O a-.+ W 0 tip y C O O VI 4A p) u }+ u 0 w -O L a-.+ a-.+ p) co C -O +� D ON 0 Q a-.+ y 0 -O 0 0 � N p) f6 p) N f6 N N 4A p) VI N p) uD v .Q Q Q fB C QC .0 (� Q L C QC V) E C C C O i Q p) C p) fL6 VI L .� OU 0 L .> '6 OU 7 a OU f6 fB Z tap C Z t C O VI Z a.. (D VI U Q o w tap C p) 'C > -p 0 tS L C m N y C L 4.1 C: � fB h fB L V Q- C f6 N OC O fB 7 L.2 pL) tp fB a- .0 0 ' y a �V) p Q C > 0VI uOO >M •CN�fB O C`- p C p f6 L CCNQVI L s Q uC m u u of .S ++ 0 V f6 D Q � Cf LL U N O LO M 4- 0 LO O) N 0) (B n 12.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 12.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. However, the City has no planned growth or expansion of golf assets during the analysis period. 12.3.2 Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 12-4 shows the operations and maintenance costs that were forecasted to remain steady as there is no plan to increase the Golf portfolio in the next 10 years, with the exception of regular inflation increases. c 0 vi LA N O N L 3 QJ Q X. W 2 W O Q1 .O d $4 Figure 12-4 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual 0&M Need ($3.3M) $3 - - $2 — - I $0 - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 12.3.3 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Figure 12-5 shows the forecasted condition of Golf assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: 1. The planned budget 2. The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $0.3 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Golf assets. Page 196 of 35082 Figure 12-5 — Forecast Renewal Scenarios The condition of assets is expected to be improved (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on staff reported condition (75% of assets by replacement value). For the remaining assets, the condition is determined based on their age relative to their estimated service life (see Table 24.3 in Appendix 0). The forecast then estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. $18 o $16 .E $14 ,,:, $12 N $10 N $8 W $6 _ $4 E $2 w CL W cc % of Assets in Very Poor Condition Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which improves asset condition over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with Golf assets. $18 � $16 o_ — $14 ,.,:, $12 c $10 as $8 $6 $4 E $2 Q w 5.996 % of Assets in Very Poor Condition Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 197 of 35083 Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Golf assets is approximately $0.6 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). Therefore, the City's proposed renewal investment of $0.3 million per year in the renewal of Golf assets from 2025 — 2034, may be insufficient to address renewal need in the years beyond the analysis period. 12.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Supply Chain Disruptions: Most procurement for golf assets is conducted with suppliers in Ontario which staff indicated improves the resilience. Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: Staff noted that upgrades to the Maintenance Building would be required in order to electrify additional fleet assets. Irrigation: Staff manage irrigation needs annually based on weather conditions. Irrigation breaks are managed as needed. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.15 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Cemetery services. As shown in Figure 12-6, there are currently no Cemetery assets with high-risk exposure. Figure 12-6 — Risk Exposure Map for Golf Assets Risk exposure in year 2025 $, millions Risk Exposure Catastrophic 1l1ff $0.0 WV W 3 3 Major $2.0 $0.0 c $3.2 $0.0 Moderate 0 0 U Minor Rare UnlikelySomewhat Likely Almost Likely Certain Probability of Failure Risk Exposure $ % High WV W $5.3 45.9% Moderate Low Total $11.5 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High, however, there are currently no golf assets with a risk rating of High. 12.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Golf asset management are shown in Table 12.3. Page 198 of 35084 Table 12.3 — Improvement Recommendations — Golf Page 199 of 35085 • Improve condition assessment methodology beyond age - based ratings to better reflect actual asset performance, State of Local especially for irrigation systems Infrastructure • Develop a more comprehensive inventory of golf course equipment with standardized service life estimates • Asses the current condition of the "Unknown" condition assets • Consider adding "cost per round" as a financial efficiency metric to evaluate operational performance Levels of Service • Consider developing maintenance standards for grass cutting cycles as a quality metric, though this would need to account for weather variability • Improve tracking of operating costs against rounds played to better understand financial sustainability • Develop more detailed replacement schedules for high- value assets like irrigation systems and pump houses Lifecycle Management • Create a more structured approach to cart fleet and Financial Summary management based on usage data to optimize replacement timing • Establish clearer categorization of capital projects between growth, renewal, and upgrade to improve budget allocation • Develop a more detailed maintenance strategy for golf course assets that accounts for seasonal variations • Incorporate climate change considerations into risk Risk Management assessments, particularly for irrigation systems and course conditions Page 199 of 35085 13.0 APPENDIX D - FORESTRY SERVICES The Forestry service area oversees the management and stewardship of the City's urban forest, including street trees, park trees, and natural wooded areas, supporting canopy health and biodiversity while also expanding the canopy to meet City canopy targets. 13.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's forestry services. The forestry assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 13.1. Table 13.1—Assets Inventory Summary Street Trees $129.9M 75.5% Trees Park, Cemetery, Golf & Other Trees $42.1M 24.5% TOTAL $172.OM 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 13-1. Overall Street Trees have an average age of 41.8 years and Park, Cemetery, Golf & Other Trees have an average age of 44.6 years. Figure 13-1— Asset Age Profile $6 o $5 $4 Ln N O N $3 aU m $2 c a� E U $1 0) CL (U 0: $0 o Ln m Ln Ln F1 n m m Ln .-7 M1 m m Ln -1 r. M m Ln .i n m m Ln -1 r. m N Ln UD M- W m m O O r1 N N M M -:t Ln Ln LD LD 1, W W m m O .-1 -4 N .--4 r-1 ri H -4 �4 .--1 H -4 H H .-1 H -4 H -4 H .-i H .--1 r-1 H H -4 N N f V N Install Year Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for forestry services is shown in Figure 13-2. The asset condition profile by lifecycle category is shown in Figure 13-3. The condition assessment of the City's forestry assets provides insight into the reliability of its assets. Overall, approximately 83% of the City's forestry assets have a condition rating of fair or Page 200 of 35086 better. Approximately $17.9 million (10%) of Forestry assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised of Street Trees (10.6 million) and Park, Cemetery, Golf & Other Trees (7.3 million). 100% 90% 80% 70% X 60% v 50% o� 40% E m 30% a a 20% 10% 0% Figure 13-2 — Asset Condition Profile Unknown / Not Recorded Very Poor / Dead $17.9M $2.5M 10% 2% AA Poor _ $8.9m 5% Good Fair $103.1M $39.5M 60% 41 23% Figure 13-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Lifecycle Category $6.3M $43.6M $37.5M $11,5M $57.3M $27M Establishment Juvenile Mature Mature or Semi -mature Unknown Class Senescent Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor / Dead Unknown Condition 13.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 13.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 201 of 35087 C) LO q y CN 0 CN _ 7 n 2 2 ® \ \ \ / \ \ / \ 4-1 f V $ / % •- » 0 / e = e/\ L- E m 2 2 \ \ \ 14 E / 4-1 § s / �o 2 � 2 > = o $ = m u 2 > m/__/\ o/ 'J a e / \ \ ( / 2 � � f § \ o y E e o (D\ E° e/ @' \ / E / & f / 2 + .§ q/E2 6 \ §\ \E k) k 2 / o 4-1 O s = ] \ L-- \ \0 m E b.0 �Z § s � oL- ° < \ } \ 2 Ln E It � } \ \ / \ 2 2 � / & � \ \ (Cl ! / / 4-1 ƒ E 2 0 E\/ e 2 2 w 7 o / mm } �.§ : ) } \ 1 \ \ � / \ Q)k #\ 2 E E E E E / { E 3 & \ / 7 \ > 0 e u C: � 3 / § » ƒ \ \ / ( / / / \ / " u ƒ ) % 2 / 2 E .§ u # ® ca : ■ � � C C) LO q y CN 0 CN _ 7 n 2 13.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 13.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 13-4. This figure includes an estimated 4,000 trees per year that are being assumed by the City from existing developments (estimated replacement value is $1800/tree). v U E CL N L N -0 c� v c c CL Figure 13-4 — yearly Acquisition and Upgrade Summary $7.50 $7.45 $7.40 $7.35 $7.30 $7.25 $7.20 $7.15 $7.10 $7.05 Capital Plan based Growth & Upgrade Development based Growth 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth & Upgrade ($7.41VI) -------------- ------------ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 13-5 shows the forecast operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased by 10% annually to account for an increase in the size of the asset portfolio, as identified by the department leadership. Regular increases related to inflation were not included. Additional annual increases to operations and maintenance costs, outside of the existing budget, included: • $225k/year to meet a 7 year pruning cycle instead of a 10 year cycle. • $114k/year to hire 2 additional arborists to implement the juvenile street tree pruning program. • $20k/year to support an incentive program to encourage the retention of mature trees located on private property. This program would allow homeowners to access funding to subsidize cost of pruning on private trees. Similar programs have been implemented successfully elsewhere. Page 203 of 35089 $10 c o $9 E $8 +rF $7 r� 0 `W $6 $5 3 c $4 a� a $3 x LU 2 $2 06 O $1 -c °i $0 u N 'o a` Figure 13-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary O&M Need Additional Requests for Services — — 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($6.2M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 13.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 204 of 35090 Figure 13-6 shows the forecasted condition of Forestry assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $0.5 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Forestry assets. Page 205 of 35091 Figure 13-6 — Forecast Renewal Scenarios The condition of assets is expected to be improved (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on staff reported condition (86% of assets by replacement value). For the remaining assets, the condition is reported as "Unknown". The forecast then estimates the replacement of assets based on the reduction of Very Poor and Poor condition assets to align with the planned budget. $zoo 1.7% o $180 $160 E $140 N $120 a cv_ $100 %of Assets in Very Poor/Dead Condition 0.0% PO■= -RE ME" --A, :o 1.7% o $180 .0 4, N $120 CD $100 dn o. cu W Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor ■ Unknown Condition The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which improves asset condition over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with renewal of Forestry assets. $200 1.7% o $180 $160 E$140 N $120 CD $100 580 jf $60 Y m $40 aEi $20 CL $o CU W %of Assets in Very Poor/Dead Condition Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 206 of 35092 Currently, it is not possible to determine a lifecycle average annual renewal need for Forestry assets (this value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life). The City is currently working on developing approximate replacement values of Forestry assets by species in order to determine this amount for future iterations of the AM Plan. 13.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Weather -Related: The City has a proactive pruning program that helps to reduce the weight of the tops of trees. Staff noted a need to improve the pruning program for young trees so that they become more resilient to weather. • Biological: Staff are working on an invasive species management plan which will outline the needs for the future. • Lack of Watering: Current watering program allows for watering forthe tree's first two years. Staff noted that there are not enough resources to increase watering during period of drought in summer months. • People's Use/Abuse of Trees: Staff hang information on doors regarding new trees that are planted in resident's yards. • Tree Procurement: Staff have specific tree procurement specifications based on where trees will be planted which has helped trees meet their expected service life. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.17 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Forestry services. As shown in Figure 13-7, an estimated $10.2 million (6.6%) of Forestry assets currently have a high-risk exposure. Figure 13-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Forestry Assets Risk Exposure $ Risk exposure in year 2025 $, millions ;$116.7 g75.7% $154.1 100.0% Catastrophic $0.0 3 Major $75.9 N ii Moderate $5.3 $1.3 a o ci Minor 111 ',�� Rare Unlikely Somewhat Likely Almost Likely Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure $ High Moderate Low ;$116.7 g75.7% $154.1 100.0% Total Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk, and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Table 13.3. Page 207 of 35093 Table 13.3 — Risk Mitigation and Plans 13.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Forestry asset management are shown in Table 13.4. Table 13.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Forestry • Update tree inventory data regularly to ensure the most accurate representation of forestry assets • Develop a more comprehensive valuation methodology for State of Local trees that accounts for ecological and social benefits Infrastructure • Improve data collection for tree species diversity to support urban forest resilience planning • Incorporate woodlots into future AM Plans • Asses the current condition of the "Unknown" condition assets Page 208 of 35094 Renewal Poor asset work to condition perform any resulting in Street Trees High necessary Low $10.2 potential safety maintenance risks to the or public replacement of assets Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 13.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Forestry asset management are shown in Table 13.4. Table 13.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Forestry • Update tree inventory data regularly to ensure the most accurate representation of forestry assets • Develop a more comprehensive valuation methodology for State of Local trees that accounts for ecological and social benefits Infrastructure • Improve data collection for tree species diversity to support urban forest resilience planning • Incorporate woodlots into future AM Plans • Asses the current condition of the "Unknown" condition assets Page 208 of 35094 • Refine the tree canopy cover measurement methodology to allow for more frequent updates than the current 5 -year interval • Develop a more detailed tracking system for the average time to remove and replace trees, with a goal to reduce Levels of Service from two years to one year • Create metrics to track the percentage of new trees planted versus replacement trees to measure canopy expansion • Establish clear performance measures for tree planting in new developments to ensure consistent application of standards • Develop more accurate costing models for preventative maintenance activities to better forecast budget needs • Develop an improved deterioration model for trees that accounts for early tree failures (<5 years) • Incorporate tree planting targets (1,000 trees per year) into Lifecycle Management long-term financial modelling and Financial Summary • Establish clearer financial implications for improving the ratio of preventative to reactive work • Develop a funding strategy to support the City's tree canopy target of 30% by 2050 and 33% citywide by 2070 • Incorporate the financial value of ecosystem services provided by trees into the asset valuation • Create a methodology to prioritize preventative maintenance based on risk factors • Establish clear risk ratings for different tree species based Risk Management on susceptibility to pests, diseases, and climate change • Implement a risk-based approach to tree planting that considers location, species selection, and climate resilience • Develop contingency plans for extreme weather events that may impact the urban forest Page 209 of 35095 14.0 APPENDIX E - PARKING SERVICES The Parking service area manages on -street and off-street municipal parking assets, including surface lots, meters, and other equipment to support mobility and downtown vitality. 14.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's Parking services. The Parking assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 14.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Surface Lots assets with a replacement value of $2.5M (approximately 76% of the total replacement value). Table 14.1—Assets Inventory Summary Parking Lots —Above o Ground Surface Lots $2.5M 75.6/ Parking Equipment Pay by Plate Units $0.2M 6.2% EV Charging Stations EV Charging Stations $0.1M 2.1% Parking Sundry & o Miscellaneous Bike Racks, Light Standards $0.5M 16.1/ TOTAL $3.3M 100 The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 14-1. Page 210 of 35096 Figure 14-1— Asset Age Profile 40 35 30 25 12F.`J i ,6 } 20 C 15 10 13.0 15.0 5 0 Surface Lots Pay by Plate Units EV Charging Stations ■ Avg. Age Within Service Life 71 Remaining Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: ■ Any assets missing information on install date have been excluded from the asset age profile shown above. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for Parking services is shown in Page 211 of 35097 Approximately $0.5 million (16%) of Parking assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised primarily of Light Standards ($0.4 million) and Parking Bollards ($0.1 million). Figure 14-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 14-3. The condition assessment of the City's Parking assets provides insights into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 81% of the City's Parking assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Approximately $0.5 million (16%) of Parking assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised primarily of Light Standards ($0.4 million) and Parking Bollards ($0.1 million). Figure 14-2 —Asset Condition Profile Page 212 of 35098 Poor $0.1M 3% Very Good j $0.3M 8% Fair $2.3M 70% Good $0.1m 3% Figure 14-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category $2.5M 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% a 3 50% 40% E 30% a a 20% 10% 0% Parking Lots -Above Ground $0.2M $0.1M Parking Equipment EV Charging Stations $0.5M Parking Sundry & Miscellaneous Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Unknown Condition 14.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 14.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 213 of 35099 _I_- E o � \ < ° / \ \ 2 \ 2 =.g a / ƒ § � ( \ \ 3 ( / m \ � ) / § / m \ » E > ° ¢ 3 E § y \ / k c °/ .± \ e .§ 0 \ > a \ m 2 @ E a u \ B.§ e 3 = e m._ � \ > 2 m E � R= 7 4,_ E t G e m ® •° 2 ® � \ ° � u/ •E E \ \ 207 o / MI \ �a �3 / \ \ Cf \ e / _I_- o � \ < \ / \ \ ) e / \ § \ < _ ? ) 2 \ a 5 e � § � _ ? ) $ a 5 e \ m \ \ 3 ( / \ E 2 / \ » E ¢ bn V \ e e � ƒ f c °/ .± e & _ .§ 0 \ / \ \ 2 \ § � E E s > s§ \ e \ \ 3 e% E 2 / J u ° e — } ¢ / � ƒ •g �} 5 $ e & .§ ././ ? 4 2 4-1/ \ \ 2 \ b / u \ 2 )'� % y ¥ .§ m u// E E t 0 207 �a �3 Cf � C) LO q y � CN _ 7 n / e 14.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 14.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. However, the City has no planned growth or expansion of Parking assets during the analysis period. 14.3.2 Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance costs Figure 14-4 shows the operations and maintenance costs that were forecasted to remaining steady as there is no plan to increase the asset portfolio in the next 10 years, with the exception of regular inflation increases. $4 $3 $2 $1 $0 CL Figure 14-4 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($2.9M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 14.3.3 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are not projected to increase for parking assets as there is no plans to grow the portfolio and as assets fail, there is a process to review if the asset is required to be replaced or if the space could be repurposed for other City initiatives. Page 215 of 350101 Figure 13-6 shows the forecasted condition of Parking assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: 1. The planned budget 2. The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $0.02 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Parking assets. Figure 14-5 — Forecast Renewal Scenarios The condition of assets is expected to deteriorate (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on staff reported condition (82% of assets by replacement value). For the remaining assets, the condition is determined based on their age relative to their estimated service life (see Table 24.4 in Appendix 0). The forecast then estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. $4 0.0% % of Assets in Very Poor Condition 3.8% c 0 E $3 LM o $2 N N 7 j $1 41 C N E - g Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 ar (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 216 of 350102 The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which will cause asset condition to deteriorate over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with Parking assets. This aligns with the City's run -to -failure strategy for Parking assets. Once the assets have reached failure, the City plans to dispose of these assets for development purposes. $4 0.0% % of Assets in Very Poor Condition 3.8% 0 E $3 N 7 $1 C N Q- Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 4) W (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030). (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Unknown Condition Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Parking assets is approximately $0.1 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). However, this analysis is not relevant due to the City's run -to -failure strategy for Parking assets. 14.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Maintenance Issues: Staff visit and inspect parking lots daily and conduct an annual review of asphalt condition to identify needs. • Capacity Planning: A long-term parking strategy is being developed in 2025 which will outline the parking needs for the City. • System Failures: There is a 10 -year contract with an existing contractor with 9 -years remaining. This contract includes service level agreements for response times for outages. Page 217 of 350103 Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.18 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Parking services. As shown in Figure 14-6, there are currently no Parking assets with high-risk exposure. Figure 14-6 — Risk Exposure Map for Parking Assets Risk exposure in N11 $0.0 2025 $, millions $0.0 $2.3 $0.1 Rare Unlikely Somewhat Likely Almost Likely Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure Catastrophic L 3 3 Major cModerate 0 0 0 Minor Figure 14-6 — Risk Exposure Map for Parking Assets Risk exposure in N11 $0.0 2025 $, millions $0.0 $2.3 $0.1 Rare Unlikely Somewhat Likely Almost Likely Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure $ % High:$2.486.6% 1 11. Moderate Low Total $2.8 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High, however, there are currently no Parking assets with a risk rating of High. 14.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Forestry asset management are shown in Table 14.3. Table 14.3 — Improvement Recommendations — Parking • Create an inventory for bollards in the above ground State of Local parking lots Infrastructure • Asses the current condition of the "Unknown" condition assets • Consider adding capacity and use metrics to track parking Levels of Service utilization rates • Align parking service levels with the City's 2023-2026 strategic plan objectives Lifecycle Management and Financial Summary • N/A Risk Management • N/A Page 218 of 350104 15.0 APPENDIX F - PARKS, OPEN SPACES & TRAILS SERVICES The Parks, Open Spaces & Trails service area includes the planning, development, and maintenance of the City's parks, natural areas, sports fields, and trail networks, promoting recreation, environmental stewardship, and community well-being. 15.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's parks, open spaces, and trails services. The park, open space, and trail service assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 15.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Pedestrian Network assets with a replacement value of $74.1M (approximately 59% of the total replacement value). Table 15.1—Assets Inventory Summary Ball Diamonds, Cricket, Lawn Recreational Fields Bowling, Soccer Fields, Disc $27.6M 22.1% Fields, Field Hockey Pitch Outdoor Rinks, Tennis Courts, Recreational Hard Basketball Courts, Volleyball Surfaces Courts, Bike Parks, Skateboard $8.6M 6.9% Parks, Shuffleboard Court, Pickleball Court Playgrounds Playgrounds $12.3M 9.9% Pedestrian Network Boardwalks, Bridges, Trails $74.1M 59.4% Park Amenities & Dog Parks, Bike Racks, Garbage Containers, Picnic Tables, $2.2M 1.8% Furnishings Bollards, Benches TOTAL $124.7M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 15-1. Page 219 of 350105 45 40 35 30 15.3 Figure 15-1— Asset Age Profile Avg. Age Within Service Life Remaining Service Life fr Avg. Years Beyond Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: ■ Any assets missing information on install date have been excluded from the asset age profile shown above. ■ Outdoor Rinks, Tennis Courts, Basketball Courts and Playgrounds have an average age that has surpassed their average service life. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for parks, open spaces and trails services is shown in Figure 15-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 15-3. The condition assessment of the City's parks, open spaces and trails assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 69% of the City's parks, open spaces and trails assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Approximately $2.8 million (2%) of Parks, Open Spaces & Trails assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised primarily of Parks Garbage Containers (0.8 million), Trails (0.6 million), Dog Parks (0.5 million), Parks Picnic Tables (0.3 million) and Parks Bike Racks (0.2 million). Page 220 of 350106 14.9 5.5 i 25 c 0.3 4.3 16.8 wo 20 40.0 40.0 Q 7.0 7.0 7.5 15 10 20.0 15.0 13.1 5 0 4�V\ za\\ Q \\e� �a 0 4ra'`¢v t�y0 Qa Qat \G�\e Q Avg. Age Within Service Life Remaining Service Life fr Avg. Years Beyond Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: ■ Any assets missing information on install date have been excluded from the asset age profile shown above. ■ Outdoor Rinks, Tennis Courts, Basketball Courts and Playgrounds have an average age that has surpassed their average service life. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for parks, open spaces and trails services is shown in Figure 15-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 15-3. The condition assessment of the City's parks, open spaces and trails assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 69% of the City's parks, open spaces and trails assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Approximately $2.8 million (2%) of Parks, Open Spaces & Trails assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised primarily of Parks Garbage Containers (0.8 million), Trails (0.6 million), Dog Parks (0.5 million), Parks Picnic Tables (0.3 million) and Parks Bike Racks (0.2 million). Page 220 of 350106 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% a 50% c E 40% a m 30% a 20% 10% 0% Figure 15-2 — Asset Condition Profile Unknown Condition 0 RM 18% Fair $14.8M 12% Good $58.3M 47% Figure 15-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category $27.6M $8.6M $12.3M $74.1M $2.2M 15.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 15.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 221 of 350107 Recreational Fields Recreational Hard Playgrounds Pedestrian Network Park Amenities & Surfaces Furnishings ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition 15.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 15.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 221 of 350107 -- _ 2 \ / y o / / 0- a) m o � E 7 \ 2 e y / _ / g / m . I /7-\ 0 0 o _ 3 E o / m \ E B o u g g y 2 2 m / \ \ f 2 k 2 ) ° E E E > � $ E E E ƒ u k 2 3 3 = 2 \ / @ E \ § y 2 0 / 2 \ \ k / E § m \ 6 6 6 / / \ _ ! E % / / f ° m m \ k @ o e ƒ ƒ ƒ o_ 2§ E t _ Q) t% 7 m 0 E§§ = o © / / ° E _ = 0 C S -0 _ a -- _ 2 \ / y o / / 0- a) m o � E C) LO q y CN CN CN _ 7 n $ 2 e _ / m . I o m \ E / > � e = 2 \ / @ E \ § y / 2 [ E § � m ƒ @ / 4-1 \ \ 2 / / % W - % / 2 = o © / / ° � _ = 0 \ s )� _° G) \ E 2 2 5= / / J \ m / / E _E _ e � _ C + \ s + e �E @ 4-1 \ m / E 2 / y> o e u %/% \/ y y y \ E 2 4 3°� 3 k 5 # / / u % \ u E u= t e > t E - o_ \ ƒ E E » \ e ( ° ± 0 \\ t/\ s e . s E[ a . / / k \ / / \ _ a \ k 1 u k .\ 06 : 0 CL v� C) LO q y CN CN CN _ 7 n $ C) LO q y q CN CN _ 7 n 0 2 \/ _ƒ U a a a a / \) 0 .0 2 2 2 2 \ .4- e4-1 \ E +E: 0 § f E o a r14 I m m \ 0 \ \ \ \ y 0 e \ G m § _ E® k \ 7 \ \ < \ ƒ '\ % ° ® \ \ ° z / \ / / / V / D / / \ / \ §§ 0 \ £ e % G m § E® \ ƒ '\ % ° ® \ \ ° \ / V / D / / \ / 3 / § s t± Q) E 4- 0 a 2 0 a® e\\ f E 0 g� y y a= 0 a= y t E U m 0 y 2 y/ y/ E y 4-\ 7 2ƒ 0 2} { § § k ®E \ \ % k - e \ / s 3 \ 5= m m \ V) f§ ƒ� 2 g) 2 M \ 0 E < 0/ 2 k m 2 E\ .§ E/ E& �2 3cc 15.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 15.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 15-4. The City assumes that there will be at least a 0.5% growth in the asset portfolio annually to account for assets assumed through development. City teams are working to develop a more accurate assessment of future growth requirements for each asset portfolio. Figure 15-4 — Yearly Acquisition and Upgrade Summary Capital Plan based Growth & Upgrade $12.0 Development based Growth (0.5% YoY) — — 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth & Upgrade ($4.OM) $10.0 a X W ; m C $8.0 "O O N CL E $6.0 L Ln D N $4.0 CU CU v C $2.0 ro a $0.0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 30 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 15-5 shows the operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased relative to the growth of the overall asset portfolio (See Section 15.3.1 for related growth costs). Regular increases due to inflation were not included. Page 224 of 350110 $25.0 c 0 $20.0 Ln N O N m $15.0 O $5.0 Figure 15-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($21.3M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 15.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 225 of 350111 Figure 15-6 shows the forecasted condition of Parks, Open Spaces and Trails assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $6.9 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Parks, Open Spaces and Trails assets. City staff noted that the capital plan estimates are more accurate than the condition reported for each asset due to gaps in the available data. City staff are working to improve the condition assessment of Parks, Open Spaces, and Trails assets to ensure improved alignment of the capital plan with the condition of physical assets. Page 226 of 350112 Figure 15-6 — Forecast Renewal Scenarios The condition of assets is expected to improve (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on staff reported condition (71% of assets by replacement value). For the remaining assets, the condition is determined based on their age relative to their estimated service life (see Table 24.5 in Appendix 0). The forecast then estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. $140 c g $120 $100 Ln $80 N v $60 3 3 $40 c E $20 E u m 0- % of Assets in Very Poor Condition W W Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 QC (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031). (2032). (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which improves asset condition over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with Parks, Open Spaces and Trails assets. $140 g $120 - E $100 IN $80 N W $60 3 $40 W W $20 % of Assets in Very Poor Condition 0.0% j m Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 227 of 350113 Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Fleet assets is approximately $4.7 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). The City's proposed renewal investment of $6.9 million per year in the renewal of Parks, Open Spaces and Trails assets from 2025 — 2034 is sufficient to meet the expected need in the years beyond the analysis period based on the available asset data. 15.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Climate Change: Staff are looking into moving trails that are prone to flooding issues, adjusting the planting list to include species that are better suited to warmer climates, using drought tolerant grasses for open spaces, improving access to shade in parks to help deal with heat waves, and installing weather stations to detect wind bursts to support faster operational response. Inequitable Access: There is an update parkland strategy in 2025 that addresses intensification and equitable access. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure failure ratings (see Table 24.19 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Parks, Open Spaces & Trails services. As shown in Figure 15-7, an estimated $18.8 million (15.4%) of Parks, Open Spaces & Trails assets currently have a high- risk exposure. Figure 15-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Parks, Open Spaces and Trails Assets Risk exposure in year 2025 $, millions Risk Exposure Catastrophic $21.6 3 3 $0.4 $0.5 Major cModerate 44.5% $13.0 $18.8 0 100.0% U Minor Rare Unlikely Somewhat Likely Almost Likely Certain Probability of Failure Risk Exposure $ % High Moderate Low MM $54.3 44.5% Total $121.9 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk, and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Page 228 of 350114 Table 15.3. Table 15.3 — Risk Mitigation and Plans Playgrounds Skateboard Parks Bike Parks Soccer Fields Outdoor Rinks Basketball Courts Poor asset condition resulting in the High inability to perform services $11.0 Renewal $1.7 work to $0.5 perform any necessary Low $2.8 repairs or $0.4 replacement of assets $0.9 Tennis Courts $1.5 Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 15.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Parks, Open Spaces and Trails asset management are shown in Table 15.4. Table 15.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Parks, Open Spaces and Trails • Improve condition information for all assets (i.e., sports fields, playgrounds, etc.) to better inform lifecycle State of Local management strategies Infrastructure • Establish an inventory system to better manage asset acquisitions and disposals so the City knows what assets they are managing. Page 229 of 350115 • Add a metric for the percentage of trail network that is paved or winter -maintained • Add metrics on utilization rates of bookable sports resources (average occupancy or percentage of use) Levels of Service • Align levels of service with the Park Strategic Plan objectives, particularly regarding: evaluating current and future location/quantity of parks, providing strategic guidance for acquiring new parks, assessing underserved areas and growth projections and applying an equity lens to prioritize acquisitions • Clarify ownership and management of assets related to the cycling and trails master plan recommendations • Determine where funding flows for maintenance of various Lifecycle Management assets to ensure proper budgeting and Financial Summary • Develop a more detailed understanding of maintenance requirements for horticulture assets • Develop a more accurate method for budgeting growth due to development, rather than using a simple percentage increase • Implement risk assessment for both asset management and project prioritization that aligns with Enterprise Risk Risk Management Framework • Re -assess risk following improvement in condition assessments to gather a better reflection of asset portfolio risk Page 230 of 350116 16.0 APPENDIX G - TRANSPORTATION SERVICES The Transportation service area encompasses the planning, maintenance, and enhancement of road related infrastructure to ensure safe and efficient mobility for all modes of travel. 16.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's Transportation services. The Transportation assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 16.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Streetlight & Poles assets with a replacement value of $36.7M (approximately 62% of the total replacement value). Table 16.1—Assets Inventory Summary Streetlights & Poles Streetlight, Streetlight Pole Traffic Signs & Traffic Signs, Pedestrian Pedestrian Crossings Crossings & Beacons Pedestrian Railings Railing Road and Pedestrian Islands & Traffic Calming Street Furniture & Other Furnishings TOTAL Road Islands, Raised Crosswalks, Speed Humps, Pedestrian Pads Street Benches, Bollards $36.7M $6.3M $0.1M $15.3M $1.OM $59.3M The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 16-1. 61.8% 10.6% 0.2 25.8% 1.6% 100% Page 231 of 350117 60 50 L 40 TI 30 tLf Figure 16-1— Asset Age Profile 10 11.4 13.5 0 L 1.5 Road Islands Pedestrian Crossing Street Benches Avg. Age Within Service Life Remaining Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: ■ Any assets missing information on install date have been excluded from the asset age profile shown above. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for Transportation services is shown in Figure 16-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 16-3. The condition assessment of the City's Transportation assets provides insights into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 83% of the City's Transportation assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Approximately $1.2 million (2%) of Transportation assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised primarily of Transportation Bollards (0.9 million), Traffic Signs (0.1 million) and Railings (0.1 million). Page 232 of 350118 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% CU 2 50% 3 Z 40% E 30% CL CU z 20% 10% 0% Poor $2.6M 4% Figure 16-2 —Asset Condition Profile Unknown e. — Fair $31,3M 53% Figure 16-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category $36.7M $6.3M $0.1M $15.3M $1M L Streetlights & Light Traffic Signs & Pedestrian Railings & Road & Pedestrian Street Furniture & Poles Pedestrian Crossings Guiderails Islands & Traffic Other Furnishings Calming Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Unknown Condition 16.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 16.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. The City adds Traffic Calming and Street Lighting assets as it expands or acquires assets from developers. Assets related to improving safety and traffic calming are identified through other data exercises/audits. Page 233 of 350119 / \ $ C) LO q y ,'T q CN _ 7 n a 2 ƒ � \ t>> * y 2 \ m t E / / u ( § o - - a o � o E 0 \ ° /%t\� m ° / e § k e'V-) \ > m Q) m s g m m m/ 4- E \ E� \ §� to /_ / # � E ® o ° ± ± .§ 3 § / � \ k 3 e E u V)/ m y & C) LO q y ,'T q CN _ 7 n a 2 ƒ � t>> * y \ / § / u ( o a y \ E e § / ) \ 0 / .§ 3 § / / ƒ e E u / 4 m .o / \ ( / s 2 0 % y & .§ �a Sot 16.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 16.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 16-4. The City assumes that there will be at least a 0.5% growth in the asset portfolio annually to account for assets assumed through development. City teams are working to develop a more accurate assessment of future growth requirements for each asset portfolio. $2.5 w Q7 $0.5 c ro a. $0.0 Figure 16-4 — Yearly Acquisition Summary ,Capital Plan based Growth & Upgrade � Development based Growth (0.5% YoY) — — 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth & Upgrade ($1.8M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 16-5 shows the operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased relative to the Page 235 of 350121 growth of the overall asset portfolio (See Section 16.3.1 for related growth costs). Regular increases due to inflation were not included. $6.0 C O E $5.0 vw U, 0 $4.0 N N M $3.0 2 °6 $1.0 O m m $0.0 ° Year 1 CL (2025) Figure 16-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($5.1M) Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 16.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 236 of 350122 Figure 15-6 shows the forecasted condition of Transportation assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $0.4 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Transportation assets. Page 237 of 350123 Figure 16-6 — Forecast Renewal Scenarios The condition of assets is expected to deteriorate (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on staff reported condition (75% of assets by replacement value). For the remaining assets, the condition is determined based on their age relative to their estimated service life (see Table 24.6 in Appendix 0). The forecast then estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. c$70 10.3% % of Assets in Very Poor Condition $60 ■UI) $50 N N $40 W ' $30 s $20 $1040 y r °C Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 238 of 350124 The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which will cause asset condition to deteriorate over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with Transportation assets. This aligns with the City's current plan to operate many Transportation assets to failure. The City is generally targeting around a 20% failure rate in order to better understand asset service lives before seeking additional funding from Council. c$70 10.3% % of Assets in VeryPoor Condition 16.3% $60 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 1 $50 LnN N $40 a� $30 $20 m Cr Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good I Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor -1 Unknown Condition Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Transportation assets is approximately $1.8 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). However, this analysis is not relevant due to the City's operate to failure strategy for Transportation assets. 16.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Weather Events: All traffic assets are designed to be weather-proof. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.20 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Transportation services. As shown in Figure 16-7, there are currently no Transportation assets with high-risk exposure. Page 239 of 350125 Figure 16-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Transportation Assets Risk exposure in i $0.0 $4.6 POW -19-001=-1 $27.8 , $0.2 $0.0 Somewhat Almost Rare Unlikely Likely Likely Certain Probability of Failure Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High, however, there are currently no Transportation assets with a risk rating of High. 16.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Transportation asset management are shown in Table 16.3. Table 16.3 — Improvement Recommendations — Transportation Risk Exposure Catastrophic L 3 3 Major cModerate 111011111 56.1% o 100.0% 0 Minor Risk exposure in i $0.0 $4.6 POW -19-001=-1 $27.8 , $0.2 $0.0 Somewhat Almost Rare Unlikely Likely Likely Certain Probability of Failure Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High, however, there are currently no Transportation assets with a risk rating of High. 16.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Transportation asset management are shown in Table 16.3. Table 16.3 — Improvement Recommendations — Transportation Risk Exposure $ % High Moderate Low '1 1 1 $32.6 111011111 56.1% $58.1 100.0% Total State of Local • Clarify the delineation of assets between Roads, Parks and Infrastructure Transportation, particularly for multi -use trails and raised crosswalks • Track the percentage of signalized intersections equipped with Levels of Service accessible pedestrian signals and the percentage of streetlights with LED fixtures Lifecycle Management • Develop a more accurate method for budgeting growth due to and Financial Summary development, rather than using a simple percentage increase Risk Management • N/A Page 240 of 350126 17.0 APPENDIX H - WATER UTILITY SERVICES The Water Utility service area delivers safe, potable water to residents and businesses through the operation and maintenance of water treatment mains, service connections and other appurtenances. 17.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's water utility services. The water utility assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 17.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Mains assets with a replacement value of $1,254.OM. This category of assets accounts for approximately 45% of the total replacement value of all water utility assets. Table 17.1—Assets Inventory Summary Mains $1,254.OM 44.9% Service Pipes $1,140.OM 40.8% Mains, Service Pipes and Appurtenances Pipe Casings $5.4M 0.2% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 17-1. Page 241 of 350127 Chambers $20.7M 0.7% Main Valves $148.6M 5.3% Valves Service Valves $113.3M 4.1% Hydrants Hydrants $89.9M 3.2% Bulk Water Stations Bulk Water Stations $0.1M 0.0% Meters Meters $20.3M 0.7% TOTAL $2,791.4M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 17-1. Page 241 of 350127 Figure 17-1— Asset Age Profile 120 100 80 60 44.8 48.8 73.1 c 40 bD a 20 0 Mains Asset condition Service Pipe Casings Chambers Service Hydrants Bulk Water Meters Pipes valves Stations Avg. Age Within Service Life Avg. Remaining Service Life The asset condition profile by replacement cost for water utility services is shown in Figure 17-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 16-3. The condition assessment of the City's water utility assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 94% of the City's Water Utility assets have a condition rating of fair or better. It should be noted that water main breaks occur on assets with varying conditions (not only limited to assets in Very Poor or Poor condition). Replacement of water mains is primarily driven by the number of water main breaks. Approximately $15.5 million (1%) of Water Utility assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised of Service Pipes ($7.2 million), Service Valves ($3.1 million), Pipe Casings ($2.5 million), Main Valves ($1.4 million), Chambers ($0.9 million) and Hydrants ($0.5 million). Page 242 of 350128 Poor $80.1m 3% Figure 17-2 — Asset Condition Profile Very Poor Unknown $57.4M Condition 2% Fair $615.8M 22% Gooi $615. 22% Figure 17-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category Page 243 of 350129 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% ami 40% E U 30% l0 CL 20% Ql 10% 0% $1254.OM $1140.OM $SAM $203M $148.6M $113.3M $88.9M NE-Im $0.1M $20.3M ■ Mains Service Pipe Chambers Main Valves Service Hydrants Bulkwater Meters Pipes Casings Valves Stations ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition 17.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 17.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 244 of 350130 y y o » Ln / / Ln e 4 y y 7 0 @ r14 e e e y / 2 / 2 j E j E / ? y 4- / 4- / v v / e / e \ > > y y o » Ln / / Ln e 4 y y 7 0 @ r14 e e e C) LO q y LO ,'T CN _ 7 n e \ y y y 7 7 \ m u / / 5 = E 2 k m / e / E \ ) / a 3 ) # 2 ® $ _ ® $ § / m = E \ _ \ $ - §o k / § 0 \ / / \ % 2 / 2 ± 0- 2 ± E/ k cf< 0 E ) ua 0 \u } / aa \' \' 0 # \ e � 004- > e ƒ £ E \ 3 m £ E \ 3 / % / \ Z 0 k ƒ / V) � ƒ 2 .-0 2 " / 4- �.2- = ® ® V) E \ \ 6/� 3 V V) •\ '\ V '\ 0ƒ 0 0/ f\ 'E 'E 'J 'E '>> / J @ _ / @ e E___ e E= e 0#> 0%@ E« Q E 3"M E E E 3 Eƒ a" 3) R E a 06 0 ■ D vLL C) LO q y LO ,'T CN _ 7 n e \ l0 O O Ol V V rn o Ln L V -0 L Q L O co N p 0 u Q L �O (B i E 7 +J 4-1 'p \ ~ (B ate-- O C Q L 'a co p p C V) O cv N D N 'a N p L 0 'v C N .; V c9 a V 'p -0 C O cB '6 N O N +J L p v O O N N E p a-+ a-+ Q y y L L a-•+ ami 3 L a� o ami '� E O a, a, C C L N Q" N> C a� C co 'FE 4 p 4 O N ^ �O O O0 E n O0 O0 > E Ou O Q O u N C O 0 N Q N O O i O > u V N a-•' L a) C) 3: N W }_+ @( 2 V Y cB N E v -Lo- a) _ 4-1 'p C j, 4- M Y V) C EO N w O 4 N a-.+ i co L cv N O LO M 4- 0 N N 0) (B n N m e y / \ 0 % \ ) § m o E 6 m p v ƒ o� t @ > » e � \ J \ ( $ o k = $ a / \ � E q / a d \ 2 C) LO q y � � CN _ 7 n \ y 7 f o \ 2 / \ \ � / ° § CL • § % 2 � s m° '( \ # '� e R a 2 > E @ y E o § y t # E / y y / y y \ \ > / s e / / \ o E $ ƒ ƒ � _ ® \ 4-1 s m 2> * § S .( \ ./ m { / / \ g C) LO q y � � CN _ 7 n \ 17.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 17.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 17-4. The City assumes that there will be at least a 0.5% growth in the asset portfolio annually to account for assets assumed through development. City teams are working to develop a more accurate assessment of future growth requirements for each asset portfolio. Figure 17-4 — yearly Acquisition and Upgrade Summary v $20.0 =o $18.0 $16.0 CL x w c $14.0 � o fO 1� ao $12.0 CL -� $10.0 �Ln N 3 N 2 _ $8.0 $6.0 CU CU $4.0 M CL $2.0 $0.0 Capital Plan based Growth & Upgrade Development based Growth (0.5% YoY) — — 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth & Upgrade ($15.3M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 17-5 shows the operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased relative to the growth of the overall asset portfolio (See Section 17.3.1 for related growth costs). Regular increases due to inflation were not included. Page 248 of 350134 $70.0 C 0 E $60.0 ,r} N $50.0 0 N c, $40.0 7 $30.0 CL x LU $20.0 Q6 m $10.0 V o $0.0 a Figure 17-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual 0&M Need ($63.2M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 17.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 249 of 350135 Figure 17-6 shows the forecasted condition of Water Utility assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $18.4 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Water Utility assets. Page 250 of 350136 Figure 17-6 — Forecast Renewal Costs The condition of assets is expected to improve (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on their age relative to their estimated service life (55% of asset by replacement value) (see Table 24.7 in Appendix 0). For the remaining assets, the condition is determined based on staff reported condition. The forecast then estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. $3,000 % of Assets in Very Poor Condition 0.0% N• o $2,500 — — E � $2,000 Ln N O N i m $1,500 1 $1,000 m E m M $500 C. m ;a Year Year Year Year Year Year5 Year6 Year Year8 Year9 Year10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 251 of 350137 The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which improves asset condition over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with Water Utility assets. $3,000 o $2,500 u—i $2,000 N O m $1,500 F A 7 $1,000 a a v $500 a a o: % of Assets in Very Poor Condition I = r Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year? Year Year Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Water Utility assets is approximately $38.0 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). Therefore, the City's proposed renewal investment of $18.4 million per year in the renewal of Water Utility assets from 2025 — 2034, may be insufficient to address renewal need in the years beyond the analysis period. 17.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Climate Change: The City is a member of ONWarn which is an early warning system for issues. There is a formalized process for responding to frozen services and a backflow prevention program. There is also a plan to remove air relief chambers to reduce flooding impacts. • Overuse and Demand Growth: The City works closely with the Region on water supply master planning and mitigation measures. The City is also working on an official plan that includes a plan to respond to infill development. • Asset Criticality: There is a criticality rating system for all water assets and it is currently being updated in alignment with the Region's information. This work will identify high criticality pipes which will support targeted future investment. Page 252 of 350138 Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.21 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Water Utility services. As shown in Figure 17-7, an estimated $201.4 million (7.3%) of Water Utility assets currently have high-risk exposure. Figure 17-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Water Utility Assets 2025 $, millions Risk Exposure $ % High $121.7 Moderate $816.5 29.4% Low $49.8 Total $2,775.8 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk, and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan is shown in Table 17.3. Table 17.3 — Risk Mitigation and Plans Mains $121.7 Main Valves Poor asset Renewalwork $49.8 condition to Service Valves resulting in the perform any $3.0 Chambers inability to High necessary Low $14.6 perform repairs or Hydrants services replacement $9.6 of assets Service Pipes $2.7 Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 17.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Water Utility asset management are shown in Page 253 of 350139 Table 17.4. Table 17.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Water Utility Page 254 of 350140 • Asses the current condition of the "Unknown" condition State of Local assets Infrastructure • Develop a condition grading program that converts current annual Hydrant inspections to a condition grade • Consider adding a metric for tracking the effectiveness of proactive maintenance programs like valve cycling and main Levels of Service cleaning • Develop relationship between LOS metric data collection and asset management reporting and decision making • Develop a more accurate method for budgeting growth due to development, rather than using a simple percentage increase Lifecycle Management • Develop a more detailed work plan for water main renewal, and Financial Summary particularly focusing on areas with known issues like the Forest Heights area • Establish an improved condition forecast that considers capital work as part of broader reconstruction projects to show the condition improvements to the portfolio • Implement risk assessment for both asset management and Risk Management project prioritization that aligns with Enterprise Risk Framework Page 254 of 350140 18.0 APPENDIX I - SANITARY UTILITY SERVICES The Sanitary Utility service area manages the collection and conveyance of wastewater to pumping stations, protecting public health and the environment through a reliable sewer network. 18.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's sanitary utility services. The sanitary utility assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 18.1 and Table 18.2. The largest portion of the asset mix are Mains assets with a replacement value of $2,035.4M (approximately 67% of the total replacement value). Table 18.1- Linear Assets Inventory Summary Mains $2,035.4M 66.9% Mains, Service Pipes Force Mains $101.4M 3.3% and Other Appurtenances Service Pipes $791.1M 26.0% Plugs $0.3M 0.0% Manholes Maintenance Holes $116.3M 3.8% TOTAL $3044.6M 100% Table 18.2 - Vertical Assets Inventory Summary Stoke SPS $3.OM 3.0% Patricia SPS $1.2M 1.2% Moore SPS $0.7M 0.7% Oxford SPS $1.4M 1.4% Falconridge SPS $2.4M 2.4% Victoria/Breslau (Shirley) SPS $8.4M 8.4% Pumping Stations Carson SPS $2.4M 2.4% Manchester SPS $4.3M 4.3% Otterbein SPS $4.OM 4.0% Springmount SPS $3.OM 3.0% Bancroft SPS $1.6M 1.6% Apple Tree SPS $2.OM 2.0% Woolner Trail SPS $8.4M 8.4% Page 255 of 350141 Chandos SPS $2.3M 2.3% King Street SPS $7.6M 7.5% River Birch SPS $2.6M 2.6% Pioneer Tower SPS $2.6M 2.6% Homer Watson SPS $10.8M 10.8% Conestoga College SPS $1.9M 1.9% New Dundee SPS $9.7M 9.7% Nathalie SPS $7.4M 7.4% New Old Mill SPS $12.3M 12.3% TOTAL $100.1M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 18-1 and Figure 18-2. Figure 18-1— Linear Asset Age Profile 120 100 80 55.8 m 60 74.4 40 4 20 so 0 Mains Force Mains ■ Avg. Age Within Service Life 13.6 37.3 Service Pipes Plugs Maintenance Hales ❑ Avg. Remaining Service Life Page 256 of 350142 Figure 18-2 — Vertical Asset Age Profile Age in Years 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Stoke EmEm— 67.9 Patricia 71.1 Moore 65.5 Oxford 34.8 Falconridge 59.4 Victoria/Breslau 65.3 Carson 69.0 Manchester 33.8 Otterbein 48.7 Springmount 45.8 Bancroft 62.7 Apple Tree 59.3 Woolner Trail 86.8 Chandos 71.1 King Street SPS sieges 81.2 River Birch 55.4 Pioneer Tower 66.0 Homer Watson i 97.2 Conestoga College 57.3 New Dundee SPS WAlm 103.6 ] Avg. Age Within Service Life El Avg. Remaining Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profiles: ■ Any assets missing information on install date have been excluded from the asset age profiles shown above. Asset condition The asset condition profiles by replacement cost for sanitary utility services is shown in Figure 18-3 and Page 257 of 350143 Figure 18-5. The asset condition profiles by asset category are shown in Figure 18-4 and Figure 18-6. The condition assessment of the City's sanitary utility assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 80% of the City's linear sanitary utility assets have a condition rating of fair or better and approximately 78% of the City's vertical sanitary utility assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Approximately $370.7 million of Linear Sanitary Utility assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised of Service Pipes ($355.8 million), Mains ($12.9 million), and Maintenance Holes ($2.0 million). Approximately $19.7 million of Vertical Sanitary Utility assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised of Nathalie SPS ($7.4 million) and New Old Mill SPS ($12.3 million). Figure 18-3 — Linear Asset Condition Profile Unknown Condition $370.7M Very Poor 12% $49.7M 2% Poor $197.3M 6% Fair $581.8M 19% 5815.9M 27% Figure 18-4 — Linear Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category Page 258 of 350144 R 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% $2035.4M $101.4M $791.1M Mains Force Mains ■ Very Good Good Fair Service Pipes Poor ■ Very Poor $0.31VI $116.3M Plugs Maintenance Holes Unknown Condition Figure 18-5 — Vertical Asset Condition Profile Very Good Very Poor Unknown $0.8m Condition 1% $19.7M 20% Poor Good $1.7M $40.8M 2% 41% Fair $27.6M 27% Figure 18-6 — Vertical Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category Page 259 of 350145 0% Replacement Value (%) 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Sto ke - Patricia Moore Oxford Falconridge - Victoria/Breslau Carson Manchester Otterbein - Springmount Bancroft - AppleTree - WoolnerTrail Chandos King Street SPS - River Birch Pioneer Tower Homer Watson Conestoga College New Dundee SPS Nathalie SPS New Old Mill SPS ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition 18.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE $3.OM $1.2M $0.7M $1AM $2.4M $8AM $2.4M $4.3M $4.OM - $3.OM $1.6M $2.OM $8.4M $2.3M $7.6M $2.6M $2.6M $10.8M $1.9m $9.7M $7.4M $12.3M Table 18.3 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 260 of 350146 u 2 e E _'> e Q ° � ( y y y } G � / / k� \ f 0 ( / 2 E 2 \ ƒ E u ƒ E 4- t E 2® / o 3 c= e '- o°= e § ° 3 m / \ k 2 @ @ k / [ c % \ e \ ' e S ® E e \ 2 E y 3 u y 2 u ) \ / # ./ / �•§ \ / § E= O e g 2 e ./ 2 m= 2 \ E / 3 § / ) E) 3 ( , bio / u ® 0 / ° 4-1 1 \ e > 4- m 4-1 s — .0 g E e . / @ , •u \ '\ \ E u > % _ _ _ / \ m k \ § § y § u � \ � \ 7 EA :EA C� e � v / � y \ Ln \ � q y \ 00 / � ± 2 e e / � # � y y � \ / » k� \ ° y m E\ 2 E 2 \ ƒ E 3 ƒ E o E / o 3 4- U E e § ° [ @ .0/ ƒ 2 @ @ E 2 [ e 3 E S 0 § d \ 2 E \ ± E u E 0 >/ E) u \ E u / \ 4 R 4-1 e 3 / § 3 4- 0 § Q) 2 e > 4- m 5 » s — .0 g _ e . / @ , •u \ '\ E u > % _ _ _ / \ k \ § § § u \ � EA :EA C� v ± 2 e / o # � y � t / » k� y m E\ 2 E 2 \ ƒ E 5 f ƒ E o E / o § � § � ¢ 2 0 \ _ / m L- ao) E 2 \ / V) 0 \ _ / m L- ao) E 2 \ / � 2 \ \\ § § 7 -0 % -0— e \\, CL G S E } 'R2 3St C) LO q y � CN _ 7 n \ e 2 e / # � y � t 3 § \ E\ L, ƒ 2 .g o E / £ 4—= t 2 s e § ° / u .§ / ƒ 2 @ @ E 2 = e f � E $ •� E \ 2 E \ y.\ § >/ E) u E E 2 E § � § � ¢ 2 0 \ _ / m L- ao) E 2 \ / V) 0 \ _ / m L- ao) E 2 \ / � 2 \ \\ § § 7 -0 % -0— e \\, CL G S E } 'R2 3St C) LO q y � CN _ 7 n \ e C) LO q y CN S CN _ 7 n \ 7/ Ek \ E 2 -r- « 0 _ 5ƒ 2 « t Q } E I§} a » o } CL o s ƒ ` ` ° � % } 2 % o % o % ®_ % > — =- =7#7—=G®#= =-�2�= §� f}\/)oa) //\j��\\)/}{\\\// B& 3 & E D E E§&§ 2 j ` o§ 2 k `/ a ƒ($ E 7 w m a% S E 7±&= m o e > 7 = u E 7— G 8= u_ a 2 a 2 - [ M o } 7 f - \ ® \ - \ { . ®±) \ \ o � { . ) 0 2 z� a E 2 0® o o °{ , 0} 3:- 2 E 3 o \ { \ $ § E { / % � / } % { E \ s t .-.- 0 ®§ 5 { _& 7 2> g m% M a o 2 %® 0 2&�®®E > 4 U CL vi / ,gam % § � % $ / j f a j t 7 / \ a / � bD U o&>a z \� _o— =y377# o \ k o § E } \ \ a § % 7 » f k / 5 y ± % 0 5 f] %° 5 Q E g/ƒ/ Q= g§ 2 y\ o >-T>>, /) t« j 2 a a E \§ a 7\\/ a a= o\« G= o oG o / G= a t e[ 0 2 a m E = a% = 7 ° m % \ � 2 / m ƒ ; \ ° ' co y u 4- \2 2 § 3 ƒ / 2 / k (\ / \ k 2 " 2 2 / 2 3 » ) 2 / O E / ° J/ E _ s / y $ \ § / ° / / / o q � e m o e\ / Ln \ \ / 0 \ \cl� / u \ / Q)@ / = g q \ / @ / 7 u Y E § a 0 / \ f B m o R_ E § 5 y o u 4-1 ( \ \ _/ = g \ a / J @ e = 2.gj % o (D $°f$'&0 C: 5 y u u \ 7/ Ek \ E 2 -r- « 0 _ 5ƒ 2 « t Q } E I§} a » o } CL o s ƒ ` ` ° � % } 2 % o % o % ®_ % > — =- =7#7—=G®#= =-�2�= §� f}\/)oa) //\j��\\)/}{\\\// B& 3 & E D E E§&§ 2 j ` o§ 2 k `/ a ƒ($ E 7 w m a% S E 7±&= m o e > 7 = u E 7— G 8= u_ a 2 a 2 - [ M o } 7 f - \ ® \ - \ { . ®±) \ \ o � { . ) 0 2 z� a E 2 0® o o °{ , 0} 3:- 2 E 3 o \ { \ $ § E { / % � / } % { E \ s t .-.- 0 ®§ 5 { _& 7 2> g m% M a o 2 %® 0 2&�®®E > 4 U CL vi / ,gam % § � % $ / j f a j t 7 / \ a / � bD U o&>a z \� _o— =y377# o \ k o § E } \ \ a § % 7 » f k / 5 y ± % 0 5 f] %° 5 Q E g/ƒ/ Q= g§ 2 y\ o >-T>>, /) t« j 2 a a E \§ a 7\\/ a a= o\« G= o oG o / G= a t e[ 0 2 a m E = a% = 7 C) LO q y q S CN _ 7 n $ e u \ 2 O e / ° k / § \ u / u / ( k Ln / / u / u / Ln § § / - / / .§ ± / / ƒ° s/ e a) e 4- \ e 4- / e $ % e / g > > > U 2\ 0& 0 7 0- � W/ y WC: _ � s m E/ y y y o m ± 0 / @ I -0 ° E V) 4 % ƒ 2 = •- - > r- 4-14- �� � e > o 4-1® ol )u E (' z z V) Lm / / > � _ e 41 y \� \ z z )uE ƒ 2 = '> � e j± _ \ _ \ o \ y u §\qa ` W0- \/%\ \ ƒ 7) = a g - ) 3 / \ - E 3 _\ / E E��7»a0-u o =- U § t' _. / § { \ / e ° ® « § 2 ® ) ) � / LA 2 7 § ` e .g e % e 2 \ % /)=75 o E7 E >2 E2 t E / 'e ) / m e 2 e a f 0 s 2> ))u'/ E 2 /•/'� / ƒ $ E 2 \ E §'> » 2 e E 2 e g£ V) / m .L 5 0 u 3 \ e / 0 2 \ \ \ / k k C) LO q y q S CN _ 7 n $ e 18.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 18.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 18-7. Of note is that the City will be assuming the Region's Spring Valley Sanitary Pumping Station ($17.4M) and associated force main infrastructure in the coming years. The City is working closely with the Region to determine allocation of costs for the force main infrastructure. The City assumes that there will be at least a 0.5% growth in the asset portfolio annually to account for assets assumed through development. City teams are working to develop a more accurate assessment of future growth requirements for each asset portfolio. v $35.0 L L $30.0 d Q X W $25.0 a .o m CL E $20.0 Ln c $15.0 O [V $0.0 Figure 18-7— Yearly Acquisition Summary Capital Plan based Growth & Upgrade Development based Growth (0.5% YoY) — — 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth & Upgrade ($22.1M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 18-8 shows the operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased relative to the growth of the overall asset portfolio (See Section 18.3.1 for related growth costs). Regular increases due to inflation were not included. Page 264 of 350150 $120.0 0 $100.0 .n Ln N N $80.0 w $40.0 5 06 O $20.0 m v o $0.0 a Figure 18-8 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($107.OM) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 18.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 265 of 350151 Figure 18-9 shows the forecasted condition of Sanitary Utility assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $25.7 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Sanitary Utility assets. Page 266 of 350152 Figure 18-9 — Forecast Renewal Costs The condition of assets is expected to improve (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on their age relative to their estimated service life (60% of asset by replacement value) (see Table 24.8 in Appendix 0). For the remaining assets, the condition is determined based on staff reported condition. The forecast then estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. $3,500 1.4% % of Assets in Very Poor Condition 0.0% $3,000 0 = $2,500 E ,4 $2,000 Ln N $1,500 N $1,000 $500 W ani $- U Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 W (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) cc Very Good Good Fair Poor ® Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 267 of 350153 The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which improves asset condition over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with Sanitary Utility assets. Z r- .2 E 44 Ln N 0 N W m 7 c W E a L M CL W $3,500 1.4% $3,000 $2,500 $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $500 �j % of Assets in Very Poor Condition 0.0% Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Unknown Condition Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Sanitary Utility assets is approximately $33.3 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). Therefore, the City's proposed renewal investment of $25.7 million per year in the renewal of Sanitary Utility assets from 2025 — 2034, may be insufficient to address renewal need in the years beyond the analysis period. 18.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Climate Change: The Sanitary Master Plan outlines specific actions that support the City's approach to managing climate change for sanitary assets. • Demand Growth: The Sanitary Master Plan outlines how the sanitary system plans to grow to respond to City population growth. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.22 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Sanitary Utility services. As shown in Figure 18-10 and Page 268 of 350154 Figure 18-11, an estimated $790.3 million (29.6%) of Linear Water Utility assets and $30.1 million (37.5%) of Vertical Sanitary Utility assets currently have high-risk exposure. Figure 18-10 — Risk Exposure Map for Linear Sanitary Utility Assets Risk exposure in year 2025 $, millions Catastrophic : $651.8 Major $0.0 $0.0 LZ Moderate al $20.8 $17.6 0 C-) Minor Rare Unlikely Somewhat Likely Almost Likely Certain Probability of Failure Figure 18-11— Risk Exposure Map for Vertical Sanitary Utility Assets Risk exposure in year 2025 $ millions Risk Exposure $ High Moderate Low $6 90.3 25.8% $2,673.9 100.0% Total Rare Unlikely Likely Catastrophicilda $40.8 $40.8 50.7% Low •� Major $0.0 $0.0 a Moderate $0.0 $0.0 0 0 U Minor Somewhat Almost Likely Certain Probability of Failure Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk, and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Table 18.4. Table 18.4 — Risk Mitigation and Plans Risk Exposure High Moderate $ i $40.8 50.7% Low $80.4 100.0% Total Mains —100 year Mains -80 year Force Mains — 100 year Force Mains — 80 year Service Pipes — 100 year Maintenance Holes Poor asset condition resulting in the High inability to perform services Various assets at all pumping stations $30.1 Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. Page 269 of 350155 $193.5 $553.5 Renewal work to $6.5 perform any necessary repairs or $7.7 replacement Low of assets. $0.1 Increase pipe $28'9 inspections. Various assets at all pumping stations $30.1 Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. Page 269 of 350155 18.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Sanitary Utility asset management are shown in Table 18.5. Table 18.5 — Improvement Recommendations — Sanitary Utility • Develop a condition assessment program for the City's Force Mains • Improve the condition assessment methodology for pipes without previous CCTV data, currently using age as a proxy State of Local • Update the condition ratings to account for outdated CCTV Infrastructure information that may not reflect current conditions • Develop a condition assessment program for pipes 600 millimetres and larger, which currently lack condition data • Asses the current condition of the "Unknown" condition assets • Develop a more accurate tracking system for the percentage of properties connected to the municipal Levels of Service wastewater system • Develop definitions for reactionary versus preventative maintenance work orders to enable future tracking of this ratio • Develop a more accurate method for budgeting growth due to development, rather than using a simple percentage increase • Lifecycle Management Include non-recoverable costs for spills in the financial and Financial Summary planning • Establish a budget line item specifically for addressing spills and their cleanup • Account for the cost impact of contractor -caused main breaks, including the challenges of recouping costs • Implement risk assessment for both asset management and project prioritization that aligns with Enterprise Risk Risk Management Framework • Consider the impact of the cathodic protection program on the condition assessment of assets Page 270 of 350156 19.0 APPENDIX J - STORMWATER SERVICES The Stormwater service area manages surface water runoff through a network of pipes, ponds, ditches, and green infrastructure, mitigating flooding risks and enhancing water quality. 19.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's stormwater services. The stormwater assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 19.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Mains assets with a replacement value of $1,101.1M (approximately 54% of the total replacement value). Table 19.1 -Assets Inventory Summary Stormwater Mains $1,101.1M 54.4% Mains, Service Pipes Service Pipes $265.4M 13.1% & Other Stormwater Ponds $240.8M 11.9% Appurtenances Valves $0.2M 0.0% Plugs $0.3M 0.0% Low Impact Ditches $4.7M 0.2% Ditches, Culverts & Culverts $0.3M 0.0% Other Conveyances Holding Tanks $1.6M 0.1% Driveway Culverts $1.5M 0.1% Maintenance Holes Maintenance Holes $121.9M 6.0% Catchbasins Catchbasins $79.OM 3.9% Quality Control Oil and Grit Separators $15.5M o 0.8/ Devices Stormwater Stormwater Management $134.3M o 6.6/ Management Facilities Facilities & Ponds Stormwater Ponds $240.8M 11.9% Bioretention $0.1M 0.0% Permeable Pavement $0.1M 0.0% Low Impact Infiltration Galleries $25.8M o 1.3/ Development Holding Tanks $1.6M 0.1% Underground Facilities $0.2M 0.0% Storm Leads $16.2M 0.8% Storm Inlets $2.6M 0.1% Storm Leads, Inlets, Storm Outlets $5.4M 0.3% Outlets & Weirs Storm Weirs $1.OM 0.1% Storm Forebays $5.5M 0.3% TOTAL $2,023.5M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 19-1. Page 271 of 350157 Mains Service Pipes Valves Plugs Maintenance Holes Catchbasins Figure 19-1— Asset Age Profile Age in Years 0 20 40 60 80 100 Oil and Grit Separators jjjj+ 37.0 Stormwater Management Facilities 56.8 Bioretention 2.4 22.6 Permeable Pavement WMA] Infiltration Galleries 17.4 Holding Tanks ® 1.3 Subsurface Facilities 20.7 Storm Leads Storm Inlets Storm Outlets 'I 2.5 ■ Avg. Age Within Service Life n Avg. Remaining Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: 120 ■ Any assets missing information on install date have been excluded from the asset age profile shown above. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for stormwater services is shown in Figure 19-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 19-3. The condition assessment of the City's stormwater assets provides insights into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 77% of the City's stormwater assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Approximately $300.9 million (15%) of Stormwater assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised primarily of Stormwater Ponds ($240.8 million), Stormwater Management Facilities ($33.2 million), Mains ($8.0 million), Storm Forebays ($5.5 million), Page 272 of 350158 Ditches ($4.7 million), Driveway Culverts ($1.5 million), Service Pipes ($1.2 million) and Storm Weirs (1.0 million). Figure 19-2 — Asset Condition Profile Very Poor $63.7M Unknow 3�Conditia $300.9A Poor 15% $96.8M 5% Fair $120.4M 6% Good $436.2M 21% Figure 19-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category 100% $1367.1M $6.4M $121.9M $79M $15.5M $375.1M $27.9M $30.7M � ■ _ 90% 80% 70% .E y 60% 3 } 50% — C A 40% CL _m 30% 20% 10% ■ 0% Mains, Service Ditches, Maintenance Catchbasins Quality Control Stormwater Low Impact Storm Leads, Pipes & Other Culverts & Holes Devices Management Development Inlets, Outlets Appurtenances Other Facilities & & Weirs Conveyances Ponds ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition 19.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 19.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 273 of 350159 C) LO q y � � CN _ 7 n ? e « m s k # cr .§ / \ / / / y E u \ 2 00 ) § 3 E § § 0 E _ m.= \ > e / § 0 0 E e »@ u0 \ e @ u G u u / / / § / / & ƒ ® ».[ ol E E / / 3 2 u 5 2 e \ a $ ' / �� ro E / a a E E 2 2 •u ._ 7 m m \ \ \ 6 / y \\er y / E E f \ 2 « /a 2 m 6 \ e $ E / / k § V) / e 3 \ > > � ) % 2 / ° 0 G 0 _ > % y 5 ( / e o y E w ' » m\ k \ \ 5 E \ E 2+ t 0 t a \ # � ® / e •� @.g e •» a) E �.§ E .) •� t=/ m eƒ\ e\ 0§�\ % g B E 0 g ƒ E E 2 ± E m E/ m 2 2 3 E y yeef & o 3 \ c e e 4-1 y .§ >u (•\ o \ % E m y \ \ ƒ bp / o 5 \ E E / \ o \ \ . E m @ g ° -o a \ ® e = \ e f .g / \ / \ \ ƒ ± ƒ .\ [ § C s y / \ ¢ / E E ' e f \ ± E u B B= o m E-® 2 a.§ 3\ E .§ } EEE & Eƒ \ E% E E 2 E 06 ca 0) CL � Cf ot C) LO q y � � CN _ 7 n ? e C) LO q y LO rl- q _ 7 n m / 2 / \ j / j E e - - 4-1 \ / E / > > \ / / / \ / 0 \ \ m § e .§ s}= e { 2 \ m t Q 2 y E \ 0= �) \/� \/ \ 2 / 3 CO / \ § u 4-1 f \ / / ± ) k \ ± ) k 19.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 19.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 19-4. The City assumes that there will be at least a 0.5% growth in the asset portfolio annually to account for assets assumed through development. City teams are working to develop a more accurate assessment of future growth requirements for each asset portfolio. V) $20.0 L =a $18.0 c CL $16.0 X Lu c $14.0 — $12.0 on E eL $10.0 L LO 3 N $8.0 O _ "a $6.0 v v $4.0 r� r; $2.0 $0.0 Figure 19-4 — Yearly Acquisition Summary Capital Plan based Growth & Upgrade Development based Growth (0.51 YoY) — — 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth & Upgrade ($14.3M) -- -------------- - - - - -- � iMl�l� Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year S Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 19-5 shows the operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased relative to the growth of the overall asset portfolio (See Section 19.3.1 for related growth costs). Regular increases due to inflation were not included. Page 276 of 350162 $40.0 c 0 E $35.0 Ln $30.0 N O V $25.0 N d Y $20.0 C a $15.0 x w $10.0 coO a $5.0 Y V o $0.0 Q Figure 19-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($32.7M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 19.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 277 of 350163 Figure 19-6 shows the forecasted condition of Stormwater assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $8.6 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Stormwater assets. Page 278 of 350164 Figure 19-6 — Forecast Renewal Costs The condition of assets is expected to be improved (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on their age relative to their estimated service life (67% of asset by replacement value) (see Table 24.9 in Appendix 0). For the remaining assets, the condition is determined based on staff reported condition. The forecast then estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. $2,500 3 7% % of Assets in Very Poor Condition o $2,000 E w $1,500 N O N Gl $1,000 7 N $500 E CL W �11�11II' 3.3% Ll Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027} (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair ■ Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 279 of 350165 The proposed performance is the same as the expected performance, which improves asset condition over the next 10 years. As a result, there is no funding gap associated with Stormwater assets. This City may have the opportunity to additionally improve the overall condition of assets based on coordination of specific capital projects (i.e., road reconstructions). $2,500 3 7% X of Assets in Very Poor Condition 3.3! $2,000 E L= — -- - $1,500 Ln N N at $1,000 3 X13 C $500 N E Ld V $ g. cu X Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024' (2025) (2026) ,2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor z Very Poor Unknown Condition Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Stormwater assets is approximately $25.2 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). Therefore, the City's proposed renewal investment of $8.6 million per year in the renewal of Stormwater assets from 2025 — 2034, may be insufficient to address renewal need in the years beyond the analysis period. 19.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Climate Change: A Master Plan is under development currently which will include recommended actions to address climate change impacts. The City uses InforWorks ICM to support improved hydraulic modelling. Additionally, IN curve scenarios are expected to be included in the Master Plan to understand climate impacts. • Blockages and Maintenance Issues: There is a Cityworks code in place to address blockages/maintenance issues and weekly checks are completed in addition to the service requests. Page 280 of 350166 • Human -Induced: The City has robust standard operating procedures for how spills are managed and the impacts mitigated. Ponds are used as secondary containment when required. • Urbanization: Permeable pavement is being installed in high -flooding -risk areas, pipes are being increased in size in urban areas, and the City has established a policy to help control stormwater at the source. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.23 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Stormwater services. As shown in Figure 19-7, an estimated $196.1 million (11.4%) of Stormwater assets currently have high-risk exposure. Figure 19-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Stormwater Assets Risk Exposure High Moderate Low $ % Risk exposure in year 2025 $, millions ' Catastrophic $317.7 Major $5.2 $3.9 U) " cU Moderate $29.1 3$51.7'.o Minor ii Rare Unlikely Somewhat Likely Almost I Likely Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure High Moderate Low $ % $407.6 23.7% ' Total $1,722.7 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk, and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Table 19.3. Table 19.3 — Risk Mitigation and Plans Mains —100 year $92.8 Mains — 80 year Mains — 50 year Holding Tanks Maintenance Holes Storm Inlets Storm Leads Storm Outlets Poor asset condition resulting in the inability to perform services High Renewal work to perform any necessary repairs or replacement of assets Low $46.1 $3.7 $0.5 $14.8 $0.9 $6.4 $2.2 Page 281 of 350167 Stormwater Management $8.9 Facilities Catchbasins $19.8 Oil Grit Separators $0.2 Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 19.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Stormwater asset management are shown in Table 19.4. Table 19.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Stormwater Page 282 of 350168 • Improve data collection for ditches, culverts, and driveway culverts which currently have unknown condition due to missing installation dates and condition assessments State of Local • Develop a more robust inspection program for stormwater Infrastructure assets to reduce reliance on age -based condition assessments • Asses the current condition of the "Unknown" condition assets • Improve data collection for resilience metrics, particularly for the percentage of properties resilient to 100 -year storms and percentage of municipal stormwater system resilient to 5 -year storms Levels of Service • Utilize GRCA mapping and hydraulic model results to better determine resilience levels for stormwater infrastructure • Implement tracking for maintenance activities in City Works and GIS to improve data reliability for performance metrics • Develop metrics for cleaning programs such as catch basin and OGS cleanouts once data becomes available Lifecycle Management • Develop a more accurate method for budgeting growth due and Financial Summary to development, rather than using a simple percentage increase Page 282 of 350168 • Implement risk assessment for both asset management and Risk Management project prioritization that aligns with Enterprise Risk Framework Page 283 of 350169 20.0 APPENDIX K - BRIDGES & CULVERTS SERVICES The Bridges & Culverts service area includes the inspection, maintenance, and rehabilitation of bridge and culvert structures that ensure connectivity and safe passage over waterways and other obstructions. 20.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's bridges and culverts services. The bridge and culvert assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 20.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Road Bridges assets with a replacement value of $391.3M (approximately 81.7% of the total replacement value). Table 20.1— Assets Inventory Summary Road Bridges $391.3M 81.7% Bridges Rail Bridges $8.2M 1.7% Pedestrian Bridges $5.8M 1.2% CSP Culverts $8.5M 1.8% Culverts Other Culverts $65.3M 13.6% TOTAL $479.1M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 20-1. Page 284 of 350170 Figure 20-1— Asset Age Profile 80 0.6 70 60 s0 LA L- m m 40 } .E 30 ea a 20 10 0 8.7 Road Bridges Rail Bridges Pedestrian CSP Culverts Other Culverts Bridges ■ Avg. Age Within Service Life El Avg. Remaining Service Life 0 Avg. Years Beyond Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: ■ CSP Culverts have an average age that has surpassed their average service life. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for bridges and culverts services is shown in Figure 20-2. The asset condition profile by asset type is shown in Figure 20-3. The condition assessment of the City's bridges and culverts assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, 100% of the City's bridges and culverts assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Page 285 of 350171 a� m c W E a) U M CL W o= 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Figure 20-2 —Asset Condition Profile Fair $2.9M 1% Good $389.9M 81% Figure 20-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Type $391.3M $8.2M $5.8M $8.5M $65.3M JL Road Bridges Rail Bridges Pedestrian CSP Culverts Other Culverts Bridges Very Good Good Fair Poor � Very Poor Unknown Condition 20.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 20.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 286 of 350172 -j # 3 { / ƒ ƒ ƒ _s_— e ® •- y y y E$\ 4-- m E 5 E 5 E e 9 t= k \$ c \$ co u / > E / / % / % •% 4-1 k\ E e e 0 0 .- ' 7 2 _ 3& • . 7 > m •e .g m > / a e / 3 » \ \ » \ \ § e ® \ 4 - t .- > > 3 > % Ln % E/ E 'Q e g m Z a E e ,g � •- 2 a a ) @ •- 2 5 a � t � t \ E 0 \ § $ \ f > § $ E \ § \ § E>m u> � g r14 4-1 / -S-- \ � \ \ � > 3 3 � 0 § � c � \ \ \ n § ƒ \ •_ c./_ y k 7 k U \ \ \ \ / \ 2 / § ¢ \ 2 E § 2 ƒ \ e> E u Q .- u = 3 / ƒ ƒ / $ e g 3 ®s 4-- m ƒ e ) e ƒ e ) / k / � k / 4-1 — \/ biO •% 4-1 k\ E e e m&_ $ .- ' 7 2 _ 3& • . 7 U0 g k\ = _ o _ o m�� t.-/ { _ t E $ 'u m'7) = _ = 2 .g e g u m » E/ E 'Q e g m Z m •- •- e ,g � •- 2 a a ) @ •- 2 5 a (° 2 k \ E 0 \ § $ \ f > § $ E g 5/ E>m u> � u E m u> § � c � \ \ \ n § ƒ \ •_ c./_ y k 7 k U \ \ \ \ / \ 2 / § ¢ \ 2 E § 2 ƒ \ e> E u Q .- u = / ƒ ƒ / $ e g 3 ®s 4-- m > ƒ k / � k / 4-1 \ \/ •% 4-1 E e = > .0 E / / / E E = 4-1 1 0 0 4-12 [ { § � c � \ \ \ n § ƒ \ •_ c./_ y k 7 k U \ \ \ \ / \ 2 / § ¢ \ 2 E § 2 ƒ \ e> E u Q .- u = 2 3� C) LO q y rl- c CN _ 7 n / e ƒ / / / e g 3 ®s / % 7 / 4-1 \/ D2/ 2 = > .m e E / / « .§ / 4-1 2 3� C) LO q y rl- c CN _ 7 n / e 20.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 20.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. However, the City has no planned growth or expansion of bridge and culvert assets during the analysis period. Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance costs Figure 20-4 shows the operations and maintenance costs that were forecasted to remain steady as there is no plan to increase the Bridge portfolio in the next 10 years, with the exception of regular inflation increases. o $3.0 E u} $2.5 Ln N Q $2.0 G7 n Figure 20-4 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($2.4M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 30 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 20.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 288 of 350174 Figure 20-5 shows the forecasted condition of Bridges & Culverts assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $0.7 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Bridges & Culverts assets. Page 289 of 350175 Figure 20-5 — Forecast Renewal Costs The condition of assets is expected to be maintained based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based on OSIM condition assessments. The OSIM condition assessment was an independent assessment of bridge and culvert condition and deterioration. $600 o $500 E $400 Ln N O ^' $300 v 3 :3 $200 C W E $100 of Assets in Very Poor Condition Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good L Good Fair Poor Very Poor Unknown Condition The proposed performance is to complete the rehabilitation recommendations found in the OSIM report over the next 10 years. Since the planned budget is sufficient to fund the OSIM rehabilitation recommendations, there is no funding gap associated with Bridges & Culverts assets. $600 % of Assets in Very Poor condition 0-0 o $500 $400 ■ow Ln N a $300 as 3 $200 M M I I I irpm, IV M I I M Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ VeryPoor Unknown Condition Page 290 of 350176 Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Bridges & Culverts assets is approximately $6.5 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). Therefore, the City's proposed renewal investment of $0.7 million per year in the renewal of Bridges & Culverts assets from 2025 — 2034, may be insufficient to address renewal need in the years beyond the analysis period. 20.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Extreme Weather Events: OSIM inspections are completed every 2 years to track any asset deterioration that might have been caused by extreme weather. • Traffic Overload: Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) counts are being reviewed and monitored to understand their impacts on asset condition. • Cost Escalation: Staff reviews cost estimates on an ongoing basis and tracks all tender values with the MTO and Construction Statistics Canada information. • Outdated Design Standards: All load restriction bridges are known and the OSIM inspections that are conducted every two years will identify any new restrictions. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.24 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Bridges & Culverts services. As shown in Figure 20-6, an estimated $2.9 million (0.6%) of Bridges & Culverts assets currently have high-risk exposure. Figure 20-6 — Risk Exposure Map for Bridges & Culverts Assets 2025 $, millions Risk Exposure $ % High Moderate Low ' $389.9 81.4% Total $479.1 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk, and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Page 291 of 350177 Table 10.3. Table 20.3 - Risk Mitigation and Plans Renewal Poor asset work to Park St. Railway condition perform any Underpass (Asset ID resulting in the High necessary Low $2.9 —916) inability to repairs or perform services replacement of assets Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 20.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for bridge and culvert asset management are shown in Table 20.4. Table 20.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Bridges & Culverts State of Local Infrastructure • N/A • Establish clear aspirational targets for Bridge Condition Index (BCI) values to guide long-term planning Levels of Service • Establish a consistent methodology for tracking and reporting on loading or dimensional restrictions for both road and pedestrian bridges • Develop a bridge lifecycle model that algins with the OSIM inspections to forecast the required operations, Lifecycle Management maintenance, and renewal activities needed to meet and Financial Summary specified conditions • Develop a long-term capital investment forecast to better understand rehabilitation / replacement needs for current bridges and culverts outside of the 10 -year forecast. Risk Management • N/A Page 292 of 350178 21.0 APPENDIX L - ROADS & SIDEWALKS SERVICES The Roads & Sidewalks service area manages the condition and functionality of municipal roadways, sidewalks, and related infrastructure to support accessibility and safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians. 21.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's roads and sidewalks services. The road and sidewalk assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 21.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Roads assets with a replacement value of $1,827.2M (approximately 91% of the total replacement value). Table 21.1— Assets Inventory Summary Roads Roads $1,827.2M 90.5% Sidewalks $178.9M 8.9% Sidewalks, Walkways and Walkways $0.6M 0.0% Crosswalks Crosswalks $0.2M 0.0% Pathways Pathways $0.1M 0.0% Cycling Cycling $10.OM 0.5% Network Links Network Links $O.OM 0.0% Guiderails Guiderails $1.6M 0.1% TOTAL $2,018.6M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 21-1. Page 293 of 350179 Figure 21-1— Asset Age Profile 90 80 70 60 L s0 58.2 � 70.0 40 tko 30 47.8 20 23.5 19.6 10 0 Roads Sidewalks Walkways Crosswalks Pathways Cycling Network Links ■ Avg. Age Within Service Life ❑ Avg. Remaining Service Life Notes on the above Asset Age Profile: ■ Guiderails are not included in the analysis above because they are missing information on install date. Asset condition The asset condition profile by replacement cost for roads and sidewalks services is shown in Figure 21-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 21-3. The condition assessment of the City's roads and sidewalks assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 91% of the City's road and sidewalk assets have a condition rating of fair or better (excluding assets in unknown condition). Approximately $18.2 million (1%) of Roads & Sidewalks assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised of Roads (16.0 million), Guiderails (1.6 million) and Sidewalks (0.6 million). Page 294 of 350180 Figure 21-2 —Asset Condition Profile Poor $144.2M 7% Very Poor Unknown $27.OM Condition 1% $18.2M 1% Fs $671 3: Figure 21-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category 100% $1827.2M $178.9M ■90% 80 70% 2 60% M > 50% C W 40% u 30% 20% 10% 0% Roads $0.6M $0.2M $0.1M $10.0M $O.oM Sidewalks Walkways Crosswalks Pathways Cycling Network Links Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition 21.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 21.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 295 of 350181 u \ 2 e \ m § g § o o /4- 0 2 ƒ/_ E E _ » - ~ -0 / 0 ° � � '� 2 0 - s M s a g = u 0 e\ e # fƒ% e t E m % m 7 E m m& % 2 § \ � B a L-= uo y= + E —ƒ2 :>> / u ° ) Ln § f \ Ln / § \ / m q .m 6 2 \ / 6 k / § " @ .m \ ? e % m ƒ r U Ln / / < O \ / 7 � f@ $ \ Ln 0 § \ m / 6 2 E 6 <- .. _ o m e .. _ > ƒ $ « 3 6 ® 5 a \ U / / 2 \ / \ m \ - < I y e / / Q)\ / $ 2 E 6 < e § .. e § % / % \ / 7 » \ U \ / g \ e \ < % E 6 \k ~ / -# — \ y 3 0-0§ 2 0 0 & e 7 ± 0/ g o/ k� 2 4-1 ƒ \ ( » E \ / % .7 u \ y '= G m \ E % 2 E 0�� ƒ 2 e t a u / — E _ 2 2 m u g E 2 E 2\ \§ƒ 0 0 \ � £ / 1 � \ � < 2= k y 3 3/ 9 t s.4- 0 E e\ .� 5 t e» k \ e»_ u E§ u G ± \ E / 'k � 7 $ 7 / / > � � a M / @ a e ° ® _ 2 % s o o / % \ < 2 x = 2 a.§ 3 .§ E/ ou a_ _'� m u _< 2 4 ou � u C� v C) LO q y S c CN _ 7 n (N _ e Ln r -I 01 N lD M Ln -i (9 O N C O 4� 0 O O L L VI t1A E � E u Z O L VI N t v } Q O -O V) t t E U 4- V) C - fL6 O r- a Z N O N M W n N -p L +' O 4-1 c6 L E a, VI ao O •Q • b 4A bn �� a S E .O C L tw a- L > a N L O OE j o t cv -0 N Q Ll N N C_ L L a-•+ C U L rl 4-1 M U > N .E 4-1 U N O 4- 0 L VI O N 0 4 N 4- W W y VI C Q V) 4- C c9 N O (B N V E y U 404 -' N Co V) (6 > C o a goy � f6 a z 0 O r - a Z a Z V) a-•+ > N 4-1 Vf a a L O .� +' X 4-1a +-1 O O O C Q L 4- of O V) L c C f6 O O LO M 4- 0 N N 0) (B n M 00 N cv N '6 N c > U O O > N N O L fl N + L C (� M `- O V) +' N C 7 f6 I a L N N E Vf � Q ' — a, a, a -• + 0 0 Q E VI L L a..+ U O LO M 4- 0 N N 0) (B n M 00 21.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 21.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 21-4. The City assumes that there will be at least a 0.5% growth in the asset portfolio annually to account for assets assumed through development. City teams are working to develop a more accurate assessment of future growth requirements for each asset portfolio. Figure 21-4 — yearly Acquisition and Upgrade Summary Capital Plan based Growth & Upgrade Development based Growth (0.5% YoY) $35.0 _ _ 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth & Upgrade ($14.5M) P $30.0 w X- ^ $25.0 W V GJ � $20.0 t 0. L,,, $15.0 _______________________ a+ N O N $10.0 d $5.0 ro a $0.0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031` (2032) (2033) (2034) Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 21-5 shows the forecast operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased relative to the growth of the overall asset portfolio (See Section 21.3.1 for related growth costs). Regular increases due to inflation were not included. If renewal projects are deferred, leading to deterioration of the asset portfolio over the 10 - year period covered in this AM Plan, there will be a need to increase the spending on 0&M to account for the increased reactive maintenance to manage the deteriorated asset condition (i.e., fixing potholes, repairing cracks, etc.). Page 298 of 350184 $25.0 r- 0 $20.0 VV LA N N $15.0 a 3 $10.0 c m CL x w g $5.0 06 0 54 u $0.0 a �o CL Figure 21-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($20.8M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 21.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 299 of 350185 Figure 21-6 shows the forecasted condition of Roads & Sidewalks assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $22.6 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Roads & Sidewalks assets. Page 300 of 350186 Figure 21-6 — Forecast Renewal Costs The condition of assets is expected to deteriorate (% of assets in very poor condition) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based primarily on staff reported condition (90% of assets by replacement value). For the remaining assets, the condition is determined based on their age relative to their estimated service life (see Table 24.11 in Appendix 0). The forecast then estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. $2,500 1.4°l0 % of Assets in Very Poor Condition2.2% o $2,000 E v� $1,500 LM N O N � $1,000 .o $500 a� Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 301 of 350187 The proposed performance is to follow the planned budget which will result in minor deterioration of the road portfolio over the next 10 years. This deterioration would lead to an increase in operations and maintenance costs and the City will be managing this deterioration through improved planning and coordination of preventive maintenance activities. $2,500 1.4°l0 % of Assets in Very Poor Condition F2% o $2,000 E v* $1,500 Ln N a N $1,000 $500 a� V Q $- G1 Year o Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Unknown Condition Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Roads & Culverts assets is approximately $27.0 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). Therefore, the City's proposed renewal investment of $23.6 million per year in the renewal of Roads & Sidewalks assets from 2025 — 2034, may be insufficient to address renewal need in the years beyond the analysis period. 21.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Extreme Weather Events: Any changes to road conditions are captured through roads needs studies conducted every two years or through the road patrol in the interim time between road studies. • Cost Escalations: Procurement bids are evaluated against MTO, tender prices changes, and Statistics Canada information. The procurement team typically has a plan in place if costs unexpectedly escalate for tenders. Page 302 of 350188 Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.25 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Roads & Sidewalks services. As shown in Figure 21-7, an estimated $169.8 million (8.5%) of Roads & Sidewalks assets currently have high-risk exposure. Figure 21-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Roads & Sidewalks Assets 2025 $, millions Risk Exposure $ High Moderate Low work to $113.0 $1,452.9 72.6% Total $2,000.3 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk, and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Table 21.3. Table 21.3 — Risk Mitigation and Plans 21.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for road and sidewalk asset management are shown in Table 21.4. Page 303 of 350189 Renewal Roads Poor asset work to $113.0 condition perform any resulting in the inability High necessary Low to perform Sidewalks p repairs or replacement $56.7 services of assets Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 21.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for road and sidewalk asset management are shown in Table 21.4. Page 303 of 350189 Table 21.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Roads & Sidewalks State of Local • Determine condition of assets currently reported in unknown Infrastructure condition Levels of Service • N/A • Incorporate improved deterioration modelling to assess and plan road repair, rehabilitation, and reconstruction projects Lifecycle Management • Develop a forecast for O&M spending that accounts for and Financial Summary deterioration of the road and sidewalk assets • Develop a more accurate method for budgeting growth due to development, rather than using a simple percentage increase • Implement risk assessment for both asset management and Risk Management project prioritization that aligns with Enterprise Risk Framework Page 304 of 350190 22.0 APPENDIX M - GAS UTILITY SERVICES The Gas Utility service area oversees the delivery and maintenance of the municipal gas distribution system, ensuring safe, reliable, and efficient energy service to customers. 22.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's gas utility services. The gas utility assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 22.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Mains assets with a replacement value of $1,259.OM (approximately 58% of the total replacement value). Table 22.1— Assets Inventory Summary Page 305 of 350191 Mains $1,259.OM 58.0% Service Pipes $790.7M 36.4% Valves $11.5M 0.5% Distribution System Service Valves $1.9M 0.1% Gas Casings $0.5M 0.0% Regulator Pits $O.OM 0.0% Regulator Stations $3.OM 0.1% Meters Meters $59.9M 2.8% Water Heaters Water Heaters $44.9M 2.1% TOTAL $2,171.5M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 22-1. Page 305 of 350191 Figure 22-1—Asset Age Profile O' 6 80 70 Asset condition 54.4 31.5 51.3 19.9 4.6 Gas Regulator Regulator Meters Water Casings Pits Stations Heaters : Avg. Remaining Service Life The asset condition profile by replacement cost for gas utility services is shown in Figure 22-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 22-3. The condition assessment of the City's gas utility assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. The condition of gas utility assets was based on the age of each asset. The gas utility team implements risk mitigation measures, as indicated in the Risk section, for any infrastructure assets that are having performance issues. Overall, approximately 97% of the City's gas utility assets have a condition rating of fair or better (excluding assets in unknown condition). Approximately $0.1 million ($70K) of Gas Utility assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised of Gas Casings ($52K) and Water Heaters ($18K). Page 306 of 350192 60 46.8 L so 30.9 �- 40 It"D 30 20.5 17.7 a 20 10 0 Mains Service Valves Service Pipes Valves Avg. Age Within Service Life Asset condition 54.4 31.5 51.3 19.9 4.6 Gas Regulator Regulator Meters Water Casings Pits Stations Heaters : Avg. Remaining Service Life The asset condition profile by replacement cost for gas utility services is shown in Figure 22-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 22-3. The condition assessment of the City's gas utility assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. The condition of gas utility assets was based on the age of each asset. The gas utility team implements risk mitigation measures, as indicated in the Risk section, for any infrastructure assets that are having performance issues. Overall, approximately 97% of the City's gas utility assets have a condition rating of fair or better (excluding assets in unknown condition). Approximately $0.1 million ($70K) of Gas Utility assets are in unknown condition. These unknown assets are comprised of Gas Casings ($52K) and Water Heaters ($18K). Page 306 of 350192 A Figure 22-2 — Asset Condition Profile Past Service Life Poor $32.9M $34.6M 1% 2% Fair $452.2M 21'9x; Unknown Condition $0.1M 0% Good $1067.7M 49% Figure 22-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category $1259.OM $790.7M $11.5M $1.9M $0.5M $O.OM $3.OM $59.9M $44.9M .LUU7 90% 80% 70% 601 50% m 40% 30% 20% 10% o% Mains Service Valves Service Gas Regulator Regulator Meters Water Pipes Valves Casings Pits Stations Heaters ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Past Service Life Unknown Condition 22.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 22.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 307 of 350193 C) LO q y c 0 q _ 7 n 7 e E ) E .g 3 _ / •- \ > I,- 0 = \ b § \ y 0 0 / R / ° m/ 0 ^ / /[ _ § y \ 3 » y E m m m / 0 0 / £ 0 e y e > / y 0 0 £ 0 \ � e bn L- 0 0 / \ a a 0 \ 3 \ % ) / > s 2 m bn § 2 / 2 k 0 \ / ( / ° / ƒ 7 = a / y I / 2 / @ g g \ / m 2 a 0 / \ \ / / y \ m°\ 0 2 e $ o 3° u m -= - s _ § e 4-1 1 % e 2\ V) 2 E}§ § 2 E> s E 2 E\ yƒ o /± \° �'_ @®@ y E y 2 / / / ) E - E \ y \ y / / ƒ \ / \ y u y § / s 4-1 \ / % \ 41 \ § - \ � _ 4- 6 \ k \ @ 2 § § \ % / u / ° 0 tW m e E /» g y 2 t f & y2 e= G E\ e 2° E# G[ e y e\\ t\ 3 e 2 s 2 34-1 ƒ s bn e E 2 3/ B 2§\ fW%ƒ E% f f Eƒ E\\ 3 E E E 06 06 & ■ 2 0) CL � Cf ot C) LO q y c 0 q _ 7 n 7 e 22.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 22.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social, or environmental needs. There is limited forecast growth beyond 2031 as the Gas Utility is in the process of exploring and studying the impact of the energy transition to their business. This transition will be explored in a separate project and incorporated into future AM Plans. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 22-4. Figure 22-4 — Yearly Acquisition Summary Capital Plan based Growth & Upgrade $7.0 _ _ 10 -year Average Annual Planned Growth & Upgrade ($5.3M) �+ $6.0 Y a_ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W $5.0 CL X W V v $4.0 a o CL E $3.0 Ln +L+ N c N $2.0 C7 a $1.0 a $0.0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 22-5 shows the operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased relative to the growth of the overall asset portfolio (See Section 22.3.1 for related growth costs). Regular increases due to inflation were not included. Page 309 of 350195 w* $100.0 N N O M $80.0 d L Z $60.0 d CL W $40.0 2 03 ° $20.0 d V o $0.0 a` Figure 22-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary 10 -year Average Annual O&M Need ($99.7M) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 22.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed, and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 310 of 350196 Figure 21-6 shows the forecasted condition of Gas Utility assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $8.3 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Gas Utility assets. Page 311 of 350197 Figure 22-6 — Renewal Needs Forecast The condition of assets is expected to deteriorate (% of assets beyond expected service life) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast determines the current condition of each asset based on its age relative to its estimated service life (see Table 24.12 in Appendix O) and estimates the planned replacement year based on when the asset has reached end of life. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. N $2,500 1.5% % of Assets Past Service Life 3.8% c ° �r $2,000 o $1,500 N (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 312 of 350198 $1,000 ami $500 11 L 3 u M a $- cu W Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Page 312 of 350198 The proposed performance is to maintain the overall condition of assets similar to the current state over the next 10 years. This results in a funding gap of approximately $6.1 million per year. The Gas Utility will be exploring increasing user rates over the next 10 -years to support the long-term maintenance of asset condition to meet the proposed LOS. $2,500 C 0 'E $2,000 Ln N $1,500 N d 2 $1,000 $500 m M ra m Cr 1.5%0 % of Assets Past Service Life 0 Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown Condition Additionally, the lifecycle average annual renewal need for Gas Utility assets is approximately $36.4 million per year. This value is determined by taking the sum of the replacement value of each asset in the portfolio divided by its estimated service life. The purpose of this value is to evaluate if there is potential renewal investment needed outside of the analysis period (2035 onward). Therefore, the City's proposed renewal investment of $14.4 million per year in the renewal of Gas Utility assets from 2025 — 2034, will be insufficient to address renewal need in the years beyond the analysis period. 22.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Supply Chain Disruptions: Gas meters are ordered at least one year in advance and the City maintains a surplus inventory of pipe. There are also many options for suppliers of gas utility assets. • Electrification Trends: Staff use a gas demand model that reviews capacity in the pipes and evaluated growth needs. Staff are looking at future demand in the 5 -10 - year timeframe to try to forecast needs. • Peak Load: Staff are challenged in determining future load demands and are working to be more strategic in the long-term investments to manage load demands. Page 313 of 350199 Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk exposure framework shown in Section 7.0 combines the consequence of failure ratings (see Table 24.26 in Appendix 0) with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within Gas Utility services. As shown in Figure 22-7, an estimated $280.2 million (12.9%) of Gas Utility assets currently have high risk exposure. Catastrophl � L 'j- Major cc Moderate U Minor Figure 22-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Gas Utility Assets Risk exposure in yeas $708.7 $302.3 2025 $, millions $232.7 $6.8 $2.0 Rare Unlikely) Somewhat Likely Almot Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure $ Renewal High Moderate Low : Poor asset condition $1,252.5 t57.70% Total $2,171.4 100.0% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Table 22.3. The City has a robust monitoring program to mitigate the probability of failure of gas utility assets to keep the public safe. Table 22.3 — Risk Mitigation and Plans Mains Renewal $212.1 Service Pipes Poor asset condition work to $56.7 perform any Valves resulting in the High necessary Low $2.8 inability to Service Valves perform p repairs or $0.5$0.5 Water Heaters services of assets $5.1 Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 22.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for gas utility asset management are shown in Page 314 of 350200 Table 22.4. Table 22.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Gas Utility State of Local • Develop a more robust inspection program for Gas Utility Infrastructure assets to reduce reliance on age -based condition assessments • Develop a more robust system for tracking and reporting the number of hours below 20 psi to ensure service reliability • Implement a formal tracking system for instances of Levels of Service exceeding contractual demand with associated costs and penalties • Establish a formal system to track and distinguish between planned maintenance outages and unplanned downtime • Formalize the tracking of the valve turning program to ensure all valves are exercised according to schedule • Develop more comprehensive documentation of preventative maintenance programs and their financial impacts • Create a dedicated capital budget line for statutory meter replacements to ensure compliance with regulatory Lifecycle Management requirements and Financial Summary • Develop a more detailed lifecycle costing model that accounts for the unique characteristics of gas utility assets, including regulatory requirements • Implement a system to track maintenance costs by asset type to better inform lifecycle management decisions • Confirm service life for gas pipes to better forecast replacement needs Page 315 of 350201 • Develop a more comprehensive approach to identifying critical assets • Develop methods to quantify safety risks associated with gas asset failures to better prioritize investments Risk Management • Incorporate environmental risk considerations into the asset management decision-making process • Implement risk assessment for both asset management and project prioritization that aligns with Enterprise Risk Framework Page 316 of 350202 23.0 APPENDIX N - FACILITIES SERVICES The Facilities service area manages the lifecycle of City -owned buildings and structures, including community centers, administrative offices, and operations buildings, ensuring they remain safe, accessible, and functional. 23.1 STATE OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE Asset inventory and valuation A variety of assets support the delivery of the City's facilities services. The facility assets covered by this AM Plan are shown in Table 23.1. The largest portion of the asset mix are Arenas, with a replacement value of $487.8M and a total building area of 590,303 square feet. Arenas account for approximately 24.3% of the replacement value of all facilities assets. Table 23.1- Assets Inventory Summary Administration 227,378 $212.6M 10.6% Aquatics 97,636 $123.OM 6.1% Arenas 590,303 $487.8M 24.3% Arts & Culture 278,740 $248.7M 12.4% Cemeteries 34,464 $20.6M 1.0% Commercial 101,473 $151.5M 7.5% Community Centres 185,076 $159.6M 8.0% Fire 62,304 $101.2M 5.0% Golf 45,210 $20.8M 1.0% Operations 387,725 $221.4M 11.0% Parking Garages 518,776 $149.3M 7.4% Parks & Open Spaces 75,701 $28.1M 1.4% Residential 7,828 $2.2M 0.1% Sport 111,431 $81.2M 4.0% TOTAL 2,724,045 $2,007.9M 100% The age profile of the assets included in this AM Plan are shown in Figure 23-1. Asset Age Profile was calculated using a weighted average age of assets based on current replacement value (CRV). All table and figure values are shown in current day dollars. Residential assets are the oldest City facilities with an average age of 84.3 years against a useful life expectancy of 80 years. This suggests that these assets have, on average, met or exceeded their anticipated lifespan, potentially warranting closer attention and investment in maintenance, refurbishment, or disposal to ensure the continued well-being and safety of residents. In contrast, parking garages exhibit a notably lower average age of 21.7 years against a useful life expectancy of 80 years, emphasizing recent investments in this area. Page 317 of 350203 Figure 23-1— Asset Age Profile ■ Age A Estimated Service Life 7, Years Beyond Service Life SPORT 0 E 32.8 RESIDENTIAL PARKS & OPEN SPACES PARKING GARAGES 58.3 OPERATIONS 23.7 GOLF 13.3 FIRE 55.6 COMMUNITY CENTRES 30.1 COMMERCIAL 56.0 CEMETERIES ARTS & CULTURE 123.5 ARENAS 25.3 AQUATICS 31.4 ADMINISTRATION 46.7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Asset condition 90 The asset condition profile by replacement cost for facilities services is shown in Figure 23-2. The asset condition profile by asset category is shown in Figure 23-3. The condition assessment of the City's facilities assets provides insight into the reliability of its infrastructure. Overall, approximately 51% of the City's facilities assets have a condition rating of fair or better. Page 318 of 350204 Figure 23-2 — Asset Condition Profile $72.3M Very Poor 4% r $908M Poor 45% $555.4M Fair 28% $182.2M Good 9% Figure 23-3 — Asset Condition Profile by Asset Category Replacement Value 1%j 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ADMINISTRATION AQUATICS ARENAS ARTS & CULTURE CEMETERIES COMMERCIAL , COMMUNITY CENTRES , FIRE GOLF OPERATIONS ■ PARKING GARAGES PARKS & OPEN SPACES - RESIDENTIAL SPORT ■ Very Good Good Fair Poor ■ Very Poor Unknown 23.2 LEVELS OF SERVICE Table 23.2 shows the current service levels and planned target for each LOS. The lifecycle activities and resulting costs were developed to meet the target service levels identified within this section. Page 319 of 350205 0 LO q y 0 CN q _ 7 a_ / (N 0 / o 0 2 # � \ / / \ e> � ~ 7 r,4/ ) ® , C) > Uc \ m \ - / / '\ \ /bn Ln / m \ / \ \ m \e / \ G 0 % ~ m E / 2 / \ / 7 0 / y E C y U m / 9 2 g \ / \ �� c \ LO � cq / q \ a = 0 LO q y 0 CN q _ 7 a_ / (N /bn \e \ G 0 % ~ m / / m � E / � C)/ / ~ k.0m m U m U »4-1 2 bn / k k \ - ? \ = § e = _ % y y \ § § ¢ [ / & e > / \ g Ln. s \ ) k § E u \ = 2 ) 4-1 2_±•g @ V) E W CL _> / 2 4- E r° e ° J° J � ƒ§ � a e S/ e u S— } \ E $ $ x / ƒ ' \ / / / a Q) u o % % \�_ Q) Co Cl) CL u E co u g (D 2 �_ > C E y k/ c \ k Cl) co % 2 [ = to ) » e \ s / e e l> m\\ 3 O /\ m§ E 2 /)§% e ƒ \ \ ( \ 4-1 uo \ E \ / / ( e / . ./ (ƒ / { / ) \ / E / / E G ( ƒ 7 8 5 \ ƒ > / \ k E / / ƒ \ o= o E Eƒ u k g§ 2 5 8/ E g t)/ + m e u u m co� .§ u u E ._ e �& 0 27 CY LL � 0 LO q y 0 CN q _ 7 a_ / (N To address the demands due to the increasing population, the City is currently developing an Arenas Strategy that will be examining whether to maintain older facilities or build new multi -pad facilities. This strategy as well as other studies will address capacity -related issues for existing facilities and inform future measures for inclusion in the next AM Plan Kitchener Public Library has been included in the calculation of the GHG emissions measures, as the City will manage these service levels by applying emissions reductions activities across all facilities. Kitchener Public Library has been excluded from all other measures, and from all other sections of the AM Plan. It is not possible to determine a proposed performance for, or the impact of available funding on, the ratio of planned versus unplanned work measure at this time. The City is optimizing the work order and planning process to be more efficient, and will monitor how the performance of this measure will change over the next few years. Page 321 of 350207 23.3 LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL SUMMARY 23.3.1 Summary of Forecast Acquisition Costs Acquisition reflects new assets that did not previously exist within the inventory. They may result from growth, demand, social or environmental needs. Forecast acquisition asset costs are summarized in Figure 23-4. Figure 23-4 — Yearly Acquisition and Upgrade Summary $140 r- 0 $120 N Growth N $100 Upgrade $80 X 10 -Year Annual Average Upgrade Needs - $3.3M/yr W $60 10 -Year Annual Average Growth Needs - $11.2M/yr a c $40 a V U/ O a $20 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Growth projects for facilities typically span over several years. Expenditures for the 2024 and prior funded portions of growth projects total $80.5M, and are not included in Figure 23-4. Upgrade needs are concentrated in 2025 because future upgrade needs have not yet been identified. There is an estimated minimum $2 million per year need to meet the GHG emissions reductions targets, which the City expects to refine further through future audits. Summary of Forecast Operations and Maintenance Costs Figure 23-5 shows the operations and maintenance costs that are forecasted to increase over the next 10 years. Operations and maintenance costs were increased according to the growth projections outlined in Figure 23-4. Page 322 of 350208 Figure 23-5 — Operations and Maintenance Summary $30 10 -Year Average Annual O&M Need ($24.6M/yr) C$25 -------------1--------- N $20 0 N N 3 $15a+ c ai CL x Lu $10 2 Cz O $5 U u a �O $0 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year 10 (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 23.3.2 Summary of Forecast Renewal Costs Forecast renewal costs are projected to increase over time as the asset inventory increases, renewal schedules are delayed and/or budgets are reprioritized. Page 323 of 350209 Figure 21-6 shows the forecasted condition of Facilities assets over the next 10 years, based on two scenarios: The planned budget The proposed LOS the City has chosen Based on the planned budget outlined in the 2025 — 2034 Capital Plan, the City has approximately $12.3 million per year to invest in the renewal of its Facilities assets. Page 324 of 350210 Figure 23-6 — Forecast Renewal Costs The condition of assets is expected to deteriorate (an increase in % FCI) based on the currently available budget for capital renewal over the next 10 years. The renewal forecast is determined based on condition assessments, which forecast the planned replacement year for each asset, based on condition and estimated remaining service life. Table 24.13 in Appendix 0 provides typical service lives of building elements. Renewal of certain assets have been deferred in order to align the forecast with the planned budget. 30% 25% X ar M 20% 0 L CL 0% 12.60 13.4% ti Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 (2024) (2025) (2026) 19.9% 24.5% 22.9% 23.1% 23.5% 23.8% 21.3% 21.9% Year3 Year4 YearS Year6 Year7 YearS Year9 Year10 (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) Page 325 of 350211 The proposed performance is to maintain the overall condition of assets similar to the current state over the next 10 years, at an FCI of 12.6% by 2034. The cost to maintain this service level is $36.7 million per year. With an available budget of $12.3 million per year, achieving this proposed service level results in a funding gap of approximately $24.5 million per year. The City is managing this shortfall and the potential deterioration in condition through seeking grant opportunities, improved planning and maintenance processes, prioritizing preventive and predictive maintenance over reactive maintenance, and developing an improved project prioritization process. To manage building condition while in a funding deficit, the City will continue to conduct condition assessments to identify critical repairs and leverage existing asset management tools to streamline operations. The City will also continue with strategic planning initiatives to help extend building life and reduce long-term costs. Consideration of outsourcing specialized tasks and adopting a prioritization framework will optimize maintenance by ensuring limited resources are focused on the most urgent and impactful needs. 18% 0 16% 16.3% 16.4% 15.8% 15.5°%n YearO Yearl Year2 Year3 Year4 Years Year6 Year7 Year8 Year9 Year10 (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027) (2028) (2029) (2030) (2031) (2032) (2033) (2034) 23.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN Risk to Capacity & Function Levels of Service The City is expected to grow significantly over the next 10 -years and they are enhancing their service delivery through targeted improvements to service function (i.e., environmental, accessibility, performance, etc.). The capacity growth and functional improvements yield multiple risks that need to be managed by the City including: • Provision of Services: The City has committed to adding several new facilities and expanding spaces at existing facilities, as noted in Figure 22-4, to provide sufficient capacity of services and manage the risks associated with population growth. Future capacity needs and associated risks will be evaluated through master planning and ongoing service reviews. Page 326 of 350212 • GHG Emissions: The City has set an aspirational target of net zero emissions by 2050. To help achieve this, the City will continue to refine estimates on the need to reduce emissions through future audits and GHG pathway studies on high emission facilities. The City will pursue grants from higher levels of government for projects related to reducing GHG emissions. Risk to Reliability Levels of Service The Reliability LOS refers to the City's aim to ensure that its assets are kept in a state of good repair to reduce the incidence of unplanned service interruptions due to poor asset condition. The risk map shown in Figure 23-7 combines the consequence of failure ratings with the probability of failure ratings for all infrastructure represented within the service area. To align with the corporate risk framework, assets with an SFU (Supporting Functional Use) score of 1 and 2 have been reclassified as a Minor consequence of failure. Figure 23-7 — Risk Exposure Map for Facilities Assets Risk exposure in year 2025 $, Millions W 3 Catastrophic $12.5 LL o Major 1 1 $10.5 $0.0 ; a u C Moderate $325.9 $337.4 a W c u° Minor OF +: Rare Unlikely Somewhat Likely Almost Likely Certain Probabilitv of Failure Risk Exposure $ High Moderate $ 686.3 34% Low $2,008.0 100% Critical risks are those assessed with a risk rating of High. The mitigation plan, residual risk and mitigation costs of implementing the selected mitigation plan are shown in Table 23.3 for High-risk assets. Table 23.3 — Risk Mitigation and Plans Poor facility condition Renewal work resulting in including: Fire Station 1 facility closure High and disruption Roof replacement, of critical HVAC replacements services Moderate $7.2M Page 327 of 350213 Moderate $1.8M Moderate $2.2M Moderate $59.6M Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 23.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Facilities asset management are shown in Table 23.4. Table 23.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Facilities State of Local • Continue to conduct regular building condition assessments Infrastructure Levels of Service • Consider past safety issues and incorporate added safety elements into corporate facility design standards Page 328 of 350214 Poor facility Renewal work condition including: resulting in Fire Station 2 facility closure High Roof replacement, and disruption HVAC replacements, of critical Roadway pavement services replacement Poor facility condition Fire Station 3 resulting in Renewal work and Ambulance facility closure High including: Station and disruption LED lighting of critical services Renewal work including: Poor facility Major rehabilitation condition of Berlin Tower Kitchener City resulting in (glass curtain walls), Hall facilityclosure High g replacement of and disruption lighting, elevator of critical modernization, services replacement of exterior aluminum wall panels Moderate $1.8M Moderate $2.2M Moderate $59.6M Note * The residual risk is the risk remaining after the selected risk mitigation plan is implemented. 23.5 AM PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING It is vital in any AM Plan to recognize areas of future improvements to ensure effective asset management and informed decision making. The improvement recommendations for Facilities asset management are shown in Table 23.4. Table 23.4 — Improvement Recommendations — Facilities State of Local • Continue to conduct regular building condition assessments Infrastructure Levels of Service • Consider past safety issues and incorporate added safety elements into corporate facility design standards Page 328 of 350214 • The overarching corporate goal is to net zero emissions by 2050. Develop costs related to GHG reduction and energy consumption • Complete accessibility audits and determine accessibility upgrade needs Lifecycle Management • Determine funding gap related to planned maintenance and and Financial Summary implement formal preventive maintenance activities as required to lower unplanned maintenance and risk of unexpected service disruptions • Develop strategies regarding disposals, acquisitions, temporary facilities, replacement versus rehabilitations of old facilities as part of overall approaches to manage the funding gap • Improve the alignment of the facilities risk assessment with Enterprise Risk Framework Risk Management • Monitor potential impacts on accelerated deterioration of facility elements due to extreme weather events, and account for added costs in renewal forecasts Page 329 of 350215 24.0 APPENDIX O - ADDITIONAL ASSET DATA 24.1 ESTIMATED SERVICE LIVES Table 24.1— Estimated Service Lives - Fleet Cars 8 Pickups 8 Vans 8 Crew Cabs 8 Small Dumps (10,000 to 18,000 Ib. GVW) 7 Single Axle Dump Trucks (30,000 to 39,000 Ib. GVW) 8 Tandem Dump Trucks (50,000 to 55,000 Ib. GVW) 9 Tridem 11 Flushers 16 Sweepers (large and small) 6 Rollers 13 Tractor Loaders 11 Tractor Loader Backhoes 10 Heavy Loaders 16 Graders 16 Turf Tractors LCG 13 Tar Kettles 16 Self -Propelled Gang Mowers 11 Trailer -Mounted Compressors 160 CFM 11 Ice Machines 11 Self -Propelled Rotary and Reel Mowers 8 Diesel Garden Tractor 13 Table 24.2 — Estimated Service Lives - Cemeteries Ossuary/Scattering Gardens 100 Statues 100 Art/Artifacts 100 Stone Walls 100 Reflection Stones 100 Memorial Plaques 100 Memorial Trees 100 Memorial Benches 15 Burial Greens 10 Urn Tables 10 Columbarium 40 Page 330 of 350216 Horticultural Beds 100 Roadways & Parking Lots 30 Fences 50 Gates 10 Cemetery Bollards 10 Cemetery Garbage Cans 10 Fountains 15 Cemetery Benches 15 Wetland Gazebo 30 Wetland Bridge 30 Pond Bridge 30 Dedication Centre Pergola 30 Serbian Pergola 30 Trail Entrance Feature 30 Lowering Units 15 Table 24.3 — Estimated Service Lives - Golf Irrigation Systems 40 Lighting 20 Golf Bike Racks 10 Entrance Features 20 Flag Poles 20 Golf Benches 10 Bunkers 30 Fairways 30 Greens 30 Rough 30 Practice Greens 30 Tee Complexes 15 Short Course Greens 30 Short Course Tees (Synthetic) 10 Practice Ranges (Synthetic) 15 Practice Ranges (Natural) 15 Ball Washers 15 Golf Carts (Gas) 8 Golf Carts (Lithium) 8 Golf Cart Bridges 50 Practice/Driving Range Tee 20 Golf Cart Path 50 Page 331 of 350217 Table 24.4 — Estimated Service Lives - Parking Surface Lots 35 Pay by Plate Units 15 EV Charging Stations 15 Parking Bike Racks 10 Light Standards 30 Parking Bollards 10 Parking Gates 10 Table 24.5 — Estimated Service Lives — Parks, Open Spaces & Trails Ball Diamond 40 Cricket Pitch 40 Lawn Bowling 40 Soccer Field 40 Outdoor Rink 10 Tennis Court 20 Basketball Court 20 Volleyball Court 20 Bike Park 20 Skateboard Park 20 Playground 15 Boardwalk 15 Bridge 30 Shuffleboard Court 15 Disc Field 40 Field Hockey Pitch 40 Dog Park 40 Parks Bike Racks 15 Parks Garbage Containers 15 Huron Natural Area Picnic Shelter 15 Picnic Tables 15 Parks Bollards 15 Parks Benches 15 Trails 30 Pickleball Court 20 Page 332 of 350218 Table 24.6 — Estimated Service Lives — Transportation Streetlight Pole 50 Streetlight 20 Railing 50 Road Islands 50 Raised Crosswalk 50 Speed Hump 50 Pedestrian Crossing 15 Transportation Bollards 15 Street Benches 15 Pedestrian Pad 50 Traffic Signs 15 Table 24.7 — Estimated Service Lives — Water Utility Mains Service Pipes Pipe Casings Chambers Hydrants Main Valves Service Valves Permanent Bulk Water Stations Temporary Bulk Water Stations Meters 100 (HDPE, HDPE in Cl, PVC, PVCB, PVCF, PVCO) 80 (DI, COP, CPP, ST) 50 (AC, CI) 100 (HDPE) 50 Same as Mains 55 (100mm Dia.) 55 (150mm Dia.) 50 (200mm Dia.) 45 (Remaining Sizes) 25 15 15 (3/4", 5/8") 12 (1") 10 (Remaining Sizes) Table 24.8 — Estimated Service Lives — Sanitary Utility Mains Force Mains 100 (CP, HDPE, PVC, RCP) Service Pipes 80 (AC, DIP, PE, SP, VCP, XXX) Plugs 50 Manholes 50 *Estimated Service Lives for Vertical Assets vary by building component Page 333 of 350219 Table 24.9 — Estimated Service Lives — Stormwater Mains Service Pipes Valves Plugs Ditches Culverts Driveway Culverts Manholes Catchbasins Oil and Grit Separators Stormwater Management Facilities Stormwater Ponds Bioretention Permeable Pavement Infiltration Galleries Holding Tanks Subsurface Facilities Storm Leads Storm Inlets Storm Outlets Storm Weirs Storm Forebays 100 (CP, CSB, CSU, HDPE, PVC, RVC) 80 (AC, PE, VCP) 50 (CSP) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 80 80 25 25 25 25 25 50 50 50 50 50 Table 24.10 — Estimated Service Lives — Bridges & Culverts Road Bridges 75 Rail Bridges 75 Pedestrian Bridges 50 CSP Culverts 50 Other Culverts 75 Table 24.11— Estimated Service Lives — Roads & Sidewalks Roads Sidewalks, Walkways & Crosswalks Pathways 20 (Surface) 40 (Base) 80 (Concrete) 30 (Asphalt/Other) Page 334 of 350220 Cycling Network Links Guiderails 50 Table 24.12 — Estimated Service Lives — Gas Utility Mains 80 Service Pipes 60 Valves 40 Service Valves 40 Gas Casings 80 Regulator Pits 60 Regulator Stations 60 Meters 24 Water Heaters 9 Table 24.13 — Estimated Service Lives — Facilities Substructure 40 Floor Construction 40 Roof Construction 40 Exterior Walls 40 Exterior Windows 30 Exterior Doors and Grilles 30 Exterior Horizontal Enclosures 20 Interior Partitions 50 Interior Doors 30 Interior Specialties 10 Stairs 50 Wall Finishes 20 Flooring 20 Ceiling Finishes 20 Stair Finishes 20 Conveying 25 Plumbing 30 HVAC 30 Fire Protection 30 Electrical Service 30 Lighting 30 Page 335 of 350221 Other Electrical 30 Communications, Electronic Safety and Security and 10 Integrated Automation Equipment and Furnishings 10 Special Construction 50 Sitework 30 Page 336 of 350222 24.2 COF RATINGS Table 24.14 — COF Ratings - Fleet Misc Small Equipment 1 Lawn/Turf Equipment 1 Off Road Equipment 3 Licensed Equipment 3 Arena Equipment 2 Dump/Fire Trucks 4 Table 24.15 — COF Ratings - Cemeteries Ossuary/Scattering Gardens 1 Statues 1 Art/Artifacts 1 Stone Walls 2 Reflection Stones 2 Memorial Plaques 1 Memorial Trees 1 Memorial Benches 1 Burial Greens 1 Urn Tables 1 Columbarium 3 Horticultural Beds 1 Roadways & Parking Lots 2 Fences 1 Gates 1 Cemetery Bollards 1 Cemetery Garbage Cans 1 Fountains 1 Cemetery Benches 1 Wetland Gazebo 2 Wetland Bridge 2 Pond Bridge 3 Dedication Centre Pergola 2 Serbian Pergola 2 Trail Entrance Feature 2 Lowering Units 4 Page 337 of 350223 Table 24.16 — COF Ratings - Golf Irrigation Systems 2 Lighting 2 Golf Bike Racks 1 Entrance Features 1 Flag Poles 1 Golf Benches 1 Bunkers 2 Fairways 2 Greens 2 Rough 2 Practice Greens 1 Tee Complexes 1 Short Course Greens 1 Short Course Tees (Synthetic) 1 Practice Ranges (Synthetic) 1 Practice Ranges (Natural) 1 Ball Washers 1 Golf Carts (Gas) 2 Golf Carts (Lithium) 2 Golf Cart Bridges 3 Practice/Driving Range Tee 1 Golf Cart Path 2 Table 24.17 — COF Ratings - Forestry Street Trees 3 Park, Cemetery, Golf & Other Trees 2 Table 24.18 — COF Ratings - Parking Surface Lots 2 Pay by Plate Units 1 EV Charging Stations 1 Parking Bike Racks 1 Light Standards 1 Parking Bollards 1 Parking Gates 1 Page 338 of 350224 Table 24.19 — COF Ratings — Parks, Open Spaces & Trails Ball Diamond 2 Cricket Pitch 2 Lawn Bowling 2 Soccer Field 2 Outdoor Rink 2 Tennis Court 2 Basketball Court 2 Volleyball Court 2 Bike Park 4 Skateboard Park 4 Playground 3 Boardwalk 4 Bridge 4 Shuffleboard Court 2 Disc Field 2 Field Hockey Pitch 2 Dog Park 2 Parks Bike Racks 1 Parks Garbage Containers 1 Picnic Tables 1 Parks Bollards 1 Parks Benches 1 Trails 2 Pickleball Court 2 Table 24.20 — COF Ratings — Transportation Streetlight Pole 3 Streetlight 3 Railing 2 Road Islands 1 Raised Crosswalk 2 Speed Hump 1 Pedestrian Crossing 3 Transportation Bollards 1 Street Benches 1 Pedestrian Pad 1 Traffic Signs Warning -3 Other - 2 Page 339 of 350225 Table 24.21— COF Ratings — Water Utility Mains 4 Service Pipes (>4") 4 Service Pipes (<=4") 2 Pipe Casings 1 Chambers 3 Hydrants 2 Main Valves 3 Service Valves 2 Permanent Bulk Water Stations 1 Temporary Bulk Water Stations 1 Meters 1 Table 24.22 — COF Ratings — Sanitary Utility Mains 4 Force Mains 4 Service Pipes 2 Plugs 2 Manholes 2 Stoke SPS 4 Patricia SPS 4 Moore SPS 4 Oxford SPS 4 Falconridge SPS 4 Victoria/Breslau SPS 4 Carson SPS 4 Manchester (Lift Station) SPS 4 Otterbein SPS 4 Springmount SPS 4 Bancroft SPS 4 Apple Tree SPS 4 Woolner Trail SPS 4 Chandos SPS 4 King Street SPS 4 River Birch SPS 4 Pioneer Tower SPS 4 Homer Watson SPS 4 Conestoga College SPS 4 New Dundee SPS 4 Page 340 of 350226 Nathalie SPS 4 New Old Mill SPS 4 Table 24.23 — COF Ratings — Stormwater Mains 4 Service Pipes 2 Valves 3 Plugs 2 Ditches 2 Culverts 4 Driveway Culverts 2 Manholes 2 Catchbasins 2 Oil and Grit Separators 2 Stormwater Management Facilities 4 Stormwater Ponds 4 Bioretention 2 Permeable Pavement 2 Infiltration Galleries 2 Holding Tanks 2 Subsurface Facilities 2 Storm Leads 3 Storm Inlets 3 Storm Outlets 3 Storm Weirs 3 Storm Forebays 4 Table 24.24 — COF Ratings — Bridges & Culverts Mains 4 Service Pipes 2 Valves 3 Plugs 2 Ditches 2 Culverts 4 Driveway Culverts 2 Manholes 2 Catchbasins 2 Page 341 of 350227 Oil and Grit Separators 2 Stormwater Management Facilities 4 Stormwater Ponds 4 Road Bridges 4 Rail Bridges 4 Pedestrian Bridges 3 CSP Culverts 3 Other Culverts 4 Table 24.25 — COF Ratings — Roads & Sidewalks Roads 4 (Class 1 & 2) 3 (Class 3, 4 & 5) Sidewalks, Walkways & Crosswalks 3 Pathways 3 Cycling 3 Network Links 3 Guiderails 2 Table 24.26 — COF Ratings — Gas Utility Mains 4 Service Pipes 3 Valves 3 Service Valves 3 Gas Casings 2 Regulator Pits 2 Regulator Stations 3 Meters 1 Water Heaters 2 *Note that COF ratings for Facilities vary by individual facility Page 342 of 350228