This is the exact embedded text of the captured official document.
Snapshot a61d29a8b1c6 · verified 2026-06-10 ·
original document ·
archived snapshot ·
unofficial consolidation, the official version is held by the municipal clerk.
2024 Asset Management Plan
2024 Asset Management Plan - Table of Content
1
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................ 1
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 4
1.1
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT .................................................................................................................................. 4
1.2
OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.3
STATE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE .......................................................................................................................... 5
1.4
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS AND ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................... 6
1.5
CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................................. 8
1.6
RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 9
2
ASSET MANAGEMENT AT THE TOWNSHIP .............................................................................................. 10
2.1
WHAT IS ASSET MANAGEMENT? ...................................................................................................................... 10
2.2
THE STATE OF THE TOWNSHIP'S ASSET MANAGEMENT PROGRAM .......................................................................... 10
2.3
THE ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP'S PLANNING FRAMEWORK .................................................. 11
3
CORPORATE ASSET MANAGEMENT STRATEGY........................................................................................ 13
3.1
LEVELS OF SERVICE ......................................................................................................................................... 14
3.2
RISK MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................................................................... 17
3.3
ASSET LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 22
3.4
FINANCIAL PLANNING ..................................................................................................................................... 23
3.5
TECHNOLOGY, DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................... 24
4
LEVELS OF SERVICE ................................................................................................................................ 27
4.1
ROADS ......................................................................................................................................................... 28
4.2
BRIDGES AND MAJOR CULVERTS ....................................................................................................................... 35
4.3
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT.......................................................................................................................... 38
4.4
FLEET AND EQUIPMENT ................................................................................................................................... 44
5
RISK MANAGEMENT .............................................................................................................................. 50
5.1
THE TOWNSHIP'S RISK ASSESSMENT PROCESS ..................................................................................................... 50
5.2
RISK-BASED ASSET PRIORITIZATION ................................................................................................................... 51
5.3
THE TOWNSHIP'S OVERALL RISK OUTLOOK ......................................................................................................... 53
5.4
ANALYSIS OF ASSET MANAGEMENT NEEDS AND PRIORITIES ................................................................................... 55
6
ASSET LIFECYCLE STRATEGIES ................................................................................................................. 57
6.1
ROADS ......................................................................................................................................................... 58
6.2
BRIDGES AND MAJOR CULVERTS ....................................................................................................................... 60
6.3
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT.......................................................................................................................... 61
6.4
FLEET AND EQUIPMENT ................................................................................................................................... 63
7
CLIMATE CHANGE.................................................................................................................................. 64
7.1
ROADS ......................................................................................................................................................... 65
7.2
BRIDGES AND MAJOR CULVERTS ....................................................................................................................... 67
7.3
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT.......................................................................................................................... 68
2024 Asset Management Plan - Table of Content
2
7.4
FLEET AND EQUIPMENT ................................................................................................................................... 70
8
FINANCIAL STRATEGY ............................................................................................................................ 73
8.1
THE LONG-TERM FINANCIAL PLAN .................................................................................................................... 74
8.2
GROWTH ...................................................................................................................................................... 74
8.3
THE FINANCIAL STRATEGY - OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................. 75
8.3.1
Capital Investment Forecast................................................................................................................. 77
8.3.2
Operating Maintenance Investment Forecast ..................................................................................... 77
8.3.3
Revenue Forecast ................................................................................................................................. 78
8.3.4
Capital Reserves ................................................................................................................................... 79
8.3.5
The Infrastructure Funding Gap ........................................................................................................... 79
8.4
NEXT STEPS IN THE FINANCIAL STRATEGY ........................................................................................................... 80
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................................. 81
APPENDIX I - STATE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND O. REG 588/17 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ........................ 82
i.
Roads ......................................................................................................................................................... 82
ii.
Bridges and Major Culverts ....................................................................................................................... 90
iii.
Stormwater Management ........................................................................................................................ 97
iv.
Fleet and Equipment ............................................................................................................................... 105
APPENDIX II - INFRASTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT VALUES ..................................................................................... 110
APPENDIX III - ASSET LEVELS OF SERVICE OUTCOMES .......................................................................................... 111
APPENDIX IV - THE TOWNSHIP'S RISK MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS ................................................................... 112
i.
Consequences of Failure Table ................................................................................................................ 112
ii.
Asset Class Risk Profile ............................................................................................................................ 115
iii.
Condition Asset Level of Service Risk Profile ........................................................................................... 115
iv.
Performance Asset Level of Service Risk Profile ...................................................................................... 117
v.
Current Risk Priorities .............................................................................................................................. 119
vi.
Ten-year Asset Level of Service Priorities ................................................................................................ 122
2024 Asset Management Plan - Table of Figures
3
Table of Figures
Figure 1.2.1: Infrastructure Replacement Value Summary ............................................................ 5
Figure 1.3.1: The Township's Overall Current State of the Assets ................................................. 5
Figure 1.3.2: The Township's Overall State of Asset Condition and Performance ......................... 6
Figure 1.4.1: Ten-year annual financing needs to meet Current and Proposed Levels of Service. 7
Figure 2.3.1: Relationship of the Asset Management Plan to other Township Plans .................. 11
Figure 3.1: The Township's Corporate Asset Management Strategy ........................................... 13
Figure 3.1.1: Key Outcomes of the Township's Approach to Levels of Service ............................ 14
Figure 3.1.2: The Township's Level of Service Hierarchy (Roads Example) .................................. 15
Figure 3.2.1: The Corporate Risk Hierarchy .................................................................................. 18
Figure 3.2.2: Key Aspects of the Township's Risk Management Approach.................................. 19
Figure 3.2.3: The Relationship between ALOS and Risk ............................................................... 21
Figure 3.3.1: Key Aspects of the Township's Approach to Asset Lifecycle Management ............ 23
Figure 3.4.1: Key Aspects of the Township's Financial Planning for Asset Management ............ 24
Figure 3.5.1: The Township's Data and Information Management Requirements ...................... 25
Figure 5.2.1: Components of the Risk Profile ............................................................................... 52
Figure 5.3.1: Overall Township Risk Profile .................................................................................. 53
Figure 5.3.2: Overall Township Risk Outlook ................................................................................ 54
Figure 5.3.3: The Distribution of Current Risk over Risk Targets .................................................. 54
Figure 6.1: Benefits of Efficient Lifecycle Strategies ..................................................................... 57
Figure 6. 2: Asset Lifecycle Strategies and Costs over Time ......................................................... 58
Figure 8. 1: Components of Township's Financing Strategy ......................................................... 73
Figure 8.3.1.1: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
....................................................................................................................................................... 77
Figure 8.3.2.1: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service ........................................................................................................................................... 78
Figure Al.i. 1: Drummond/North Elmsley Road Network ............................................................. 88
Figure Al.i. 2: Drummond/North Elmsley Road Conditions .......................................................... 89
Figure Al.ii.1: Bridges and Major Culverts..................................................................................... 94
Figure Al.ii.2: Bridges and Major Culverts..................................................................................... 95
Figure Al.ii.3: Bridges and Major Culverts..................................................................................... 96
Figure Al.iii.1: Floodplain mapping ............................................................................................. 101
Figure Al.iii.2: Innisville North Storm Sewers.............................................................................. 102
Figure Al.iii.3: Innisville North Storm Sewers.............................................................................. 103
Figure Al.iii.4: Innisville North Storm Sewers.............................................................................. 104
2024 Asset Management Plan - 1.0 Executive Summary
4
1 Executive Summary
The Township of Drummond/North Elmsley (the Township) was incorporated in 1998 with the
merging of the Townships of Drummond and North Elmsley. The Township is in central Lanark
County and has a population of approximately 8,183 according to the 2021 Census.
1.1 Purpose of the Report
The goal of asset management is to maximize asset value while delivering good services, which
requires finding the right balance between levels of service, risks, and costs. Therefore, a good
asset management system is necessary for delivering the Township's strategic vision, goals, and
service objectives at costs the taxpayer can afford.
The Township of Drummond/North Elmsley's 2024 Asset Management Plan (AMP) is a technical
and financial report outlining the 10-year infrastructure investments required to maintain good,
reliable community services at affordable rates. This report is also required to meet July 1, 2024,
requirements of O. Reg 588/17, Asset Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure.
1.2 Overview
The 2024 AMP focuses on paved and unpaved roads, bridges, major and minor culverts, storm
sewers, fleet, and equipment which comprises 18 asset classes worth an estimated $408.0 million
(2024 values excluding land). Note that facilities are not included in this Asset Management Plan
and will be addressed in the next version of the plan later in 2024.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 1.0 Executive Summary
5
Figure 1.2.1: Infrastructure Replacement Value Summary
1.3 State of the Infrastructure
Figure 1.3.1 illustrates the overall state of the Township's infrastructure which is "Good" with
77% of the assets rating "Good" or "Very Good." Figure 1.3.2 further breaks down the
infrastructure state by condition and performance as measured by the Current Asset Levels of
Service. Overall, 49% of the assets' condition and 87% of the assets' performance are in a "Good"
or "Very Good" state.
Figure 1.3.1: The Township's Overall Current State of the Assets
13%
63%
13%
3%
7%
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
2024 Asset Management Plan - 1.0 Executive Summary
6
Figure 1.3.2: The Township's Overall State of Asset Condition and Performance
Overall Asset Condition
Overall Asset Performance
The "Good" state of the Township's infrastructure is the result of good asset management The
"Good" state of the Township's infrastructure is the result of good asset management practices,
fiscal prudence, and maximizing the use of taxpayers' funds and government grants. The
challenge going forward will be sustaining the "Good" state of the assets and services in the face
of many pressures including:
- Keeping taxes and user fees affordable while addressing growing infrastructure needs
- Climate change
- Increased demands for services
- Static population growth and revenue sources
- The unpredictability of receiving infrastructure grants
1.4 Infrastructure Investments and Analysis
Figure 1.4.1 outlines the annual operating, and capital expenditures required over ten years to
meet the Township's Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service and compares those
expenditure requirements against the Township's historical 6-year average of capital
expenditures and the operating investments in the 2024 budget. As illustrated by figure 1.4.1,
there are gaps between the historical annual average expenditures and the projected
expenditures required to maintain Current Technical Levels of Service and achieve Proposed
Technical Levels of Service. Note that historical expenditures on building and property assets are
not included in in this analysis.
19%
29%
21%
9%
22%
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
11%
76%
11%
1%
4%
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
2024 Asset Management Plan - 1.0 Executive Summary
7
Figure 1.4.1: Ten-year annual financing needs to meet Current and Proposed Levels of Service
Table 1.4.3 sums up the 10-year operating and capital requirements to maintain Current
Technical Levels of Service and achieve Proposed Technical Levels of Service. The total 10-year
infrastructure funding gap is the difference between:
- The infrastructure needs to achieve the Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
(excluding building and property assets)
- The Township's historical 6-year average of annual capital investments plus the 2024
operating investments projected over the next 10 years (in 2024 values).
As Table 1.4.3 indicates, the Township's historical levels of spending fall short of meeting both
Current Technical Levels of Service and Proposed Technical Levels of Service by $6.2 million and
$27.7 million respectively. Affordably achieving the Proposed Technical Levels of Service is not
feasible in the 10-year timeframe; however, the Township is close to being able to financially
sustain its Current Technical Levels of Service.
Table 1.4.3: 10-year Financing Needs to Meet Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
LOS
Targets
10-year
Operating
Needs
10-year
Capital
Needs
Total
10-year
Needs
Historical
Investments1
Total 10-year
Infrastructure
Funding Gap2
Var.3
SI4
Current
LOS
$16.2M
$20.5M
$36.7M
$30.6M
$6.2M
16.8%
0.8
Proposed
LOS
$21.1
$47.1M
$68.2M
$30.6M
$27.7M
40.7%
0.6
*Based on Township's historical 6-year average of capital expenditures and the operating investments in the 2024
budget.
Notes:
1. Historical investments are based on the Township's 6-year average of annual capital
investments plus the 2024 operating investments projected over the next 10 years (in 2024
values).
2024 Asset Management Plan - 1.0 Executive Summary
8
2. The 10-year infrastructure funding gap is the difference between the required expenditures
to meet Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service and the Township's historical 6-
year average projected over 10 years.
3. The infrastructure funding gap measured as a % variance.
4. The Sustainability Index (S.I.) measures the adequacy of the Township's historical 6-year
average projected over 10 years to sustain the current and proposed levels of service. To be
sustainable, a municipality should achieve a minimum index of 0.9.
Moving Forward
The Sustainability Index (SI), which measures the adequacy of the Township's historical spending
averaged over the next 10 years, is currently at 0.8. To financially sustain its infrastructure
targets, a municipality should achieve a minimum Sustainability Index of 0.9.
The full 10-year funding gap to sustain Current Technical Levels of Service can be attributed to
shortfalls in average capital investments. Operating investment levels are adequate. Therefore,
if the Township increases its historical levels of capital investments to reduce its 10-year gap by
at least $5.6 million, then the Township could achieve the minimum sustainability target of 0.9
(excluding building and property needs). The Township should, however, continue working
toward or utilizing some Proposed Technical Levels of Service where matters of safety, efficiency,
and better service and asset management outcomes are evident.
The Township's financial goal is to achieve a balance between good services and good assets that
are affordable at acceptable levels of risk; therefore, the Township's financing strategy will
prioritize closing the infrastructure funding gap to maintain Current Technical Levels of Service.
In the coming months the Township intends to complete a financial strategy (which would also
include the implications of buildings and property) that considers a mix of options including
affordable revenue increases, borrowing, partnership opportunities and seeking grants from the
provincial and federal governments.
1.5 Conclusions
1. The current state of the infrastructure is "Good."
2. The Township cannot affordably achieve its Proposed Asset Levels of Service within the 10-
year timeframe of the Asset Management Plan.
3. To make the Current Technical Levels of Service financially sustainable, the Township will
need to increase its historical capital expenditures over the next ten years, such that it
reduces its infrastructure funding gap by at least $5.6 million (not including building and
property investments).
4. The currently 'Good' state of the Township's infrastructure provides it with time and flexibility
to phase in tax increases to sustain is Current Technical Levels of Service.
5. The Township intends to complete a financial strategy that considers a mix of options
including affordable revenue increases, borrowing and seeking funding grants from the
provincial and federal governments.
6. The Township is progressing toward developing organizational asset management expertise.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 1.0 Executive Summary
9
1.6 Recommendations
1. That Council approves the 2024 Asset Management Plan to comply with O. Reg 588/17, Asset
Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure.
2. The Township prioritizes making Current Technical Levels of Service financially sustainable
within the 10-year timeframe of the Asset Management Plan.
3. The Township completes a financial strategy that considers a mix of options including
affordable revenue increases, borrowing, and seeking funding grants from the provincial and
federal governments.
4. The 2024 Asset Management Plan be used as the basis to inform the 2025 budget and
forecast.
5. That the Asset Management Plan be used as part of the annual budget planning process.
6. Processes be developed and implemented for the annual update of the budget and forecast
and the Asset Management Plan.
7. The Data Management Plan be implemented.
8. The Township continues to build in-house asset management capacity and expertise.
9. The Township undertakes a climate change adaptation strategy.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 2.0 Asset Management at the Township
10
2 Asset Management at the Township
2.1 What is Asset Management?
The ISO 55000 for Asset Management defines asset management as: "the coordinated activity of
an organization to realize value from assets."
In other words, asset management is the integration of policy, practices, and processes to
balance lifecycle costs, affordability, and risks with desired levels of service to maximize asset
value in the pursuit of achieving the municipality's service objectives. Asset management
requires the expertise of people in engineering, operations, finance, technology, and frontline
services, all supported by the right systems and software. Comprehensive asset management
also provides decision-makers with the information that they need to understand the impacts of
their decisions on the ability to deliver services across all the municipality's assets.
2.2 The State of the Township's Asset Management Program
The Township recognizes that comprehensive asset management is the best way to affordably
address the most pressing asset needs. The Township has developed a program of policies,
practices, and processes that support comprehensive asset management planning and decision-
making including:
- An approved Asset Management Policy formalizing the Township's commitment to asset
management.
- The collection of asset data and development of data management plans to maintain asset
information such as asset attributes, acquisition costs, useful service life, current asset
condition and performance ratings, repair and maintenance history, technical levels of
service targets, capital and operating lifecycle costs, etc.
- The organization of the infrastructure into asset hierarchies that draw a line-of-sight between
the assets and the public services that depend on those assets.
- An Asset Register organized by the asset hierarchies containing the most relevant and reliable
asset information.
- Community Levels of Service aligned with Township service objectives and the Strategic Plan.
- Current and proposed Technical Levels of Service that define the assets' operating and capital
requirements, define targets to provide community services, and enable identification of
asset maintenance, repair, and replacement needs.
- A risk management strategy to identify risks to public services due to asset deficiencies and
to prioritize asset repairs and replacements.
- The implications of climate change on infrastructure, services, and asset management
practices.
- Documentation of asset lifecycle strategies and costs for long-range planning of operating
and capital investment plans.
- A 10-year Asset Management Plan that is compliant with Ontario's Asset Management
Regulation (O. Reg 588/17) and aligns with the Township's Strategic Plan.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 2.0 Asset Management at the Township
- Development of staff knowledge and expertise to continuously improve the organization's
asset management program.
2.3 The Asset Management Plan within the Township's Planning Framework
Figure 2.3.1: Relationship of the Asset Management Plan to other Township Plans
As Figure 2.3.1 illustrates, the Strategic Plan sets the course for the Township's planning and
operations every four years including the Asset Management Plan (AMP). Table 2.3.1 summarizes
the alignment between the Township's five current strategic priorities and the outcomes of the
2024 AMP.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 2.0 Asset Management at the Township
Table 2.3.1 - Analysis of the Alignment between the Strategic Plan and the Asset Management Plan (AMP)
#
Strategic Goals
What it Means
How it is Addressed in the AMP
1 Financial
Sustainability
Aligning financial planning with
the Strategic Plan including
ensuring that services and service
levels meet Council's objectives.
The AMP reflects the community
services provided to the residents of
the Township and sets out the asset
Technical Levels of Service and costs
necessary to provide these
Community Levels of Service.
2 Well Maintained
Assets
Ensuring that financial planning
and multi-year budgeting can
sustainably maintain assets to
provide desirable community
services.
The AMP provides a 10-year asset
investment plan to fund the
requirements to maintain
Community Levels of Service and
asset Technical Levels of Service.
3 Managed growth
that protects and
respects our rural
heritage and
natural
environment
Growth is managed in a way that
maintains the Township's rural
character, green spaces, and
healthy lakes and rivers.
The Community Levels of Service and
asset Technical Levels of Service in
the AMP reflect the character of the
community and provide a blueprint
for the design of new, growth-related
assets.
4 Efficient and
responsive delivery
of municipal
services
Keeping pace with the
expectations of our residents in an
ever-changing environment of
legislative and technical and
advances.
The Community Levels of Service and
asset Technical Levels of Service in
the AMP reflect the expectations of
the residents. As customer
expectations change, so does the
AMP.
5 Thriving local
economy
Encourage an environment that
fosters employment and
entrepreneurship and creates
wealth for the community.
Economic growth relies on sound
infrastructure and good community
services. The AMP identifies the asset
requirements to provide that
foundation.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
13
3 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
The Township uses a Corporate Asset Management Strategy to guide the practices and processes
for asset management planning. The Township's Corporate Asset Management Strategy focuses
on the integrated coordination of practices and processes in five key areas:
1. Levels of Service
2. Risk Management
3. Asset Lifecycle Management
4. Financial Planning
5. Technology, Data, and Information Management
Figure 2.3.1: The Township's Corporate Asset Management Strategy
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
14
3.1 Levels of Service
The Township's approach to levels of service is to create meaningful measures that describe the
quality, quantity, and value of services received by the community and the asset requirements
to deliver the services. The Township's approach to establishing levels of service measures are
designed to achieve the following outcomes:
- Desired service levels that are aligned with the Strategic Plan.
- There is a line-of-sight between the community services and the asset requirements to
deliver the services ("line-of-sight" in the context of asset management is the ability to
draw a direct correlation between asset conditions and the service and risk outcomes that
those assets provide)
- Informs the current and future state of the infrastructure.
- Informs asset priorities.
- Set reasonable levels of control to manage risk.
- Informs selection of the most practical asset lifecycle strategies.
- Informs operating and capital investment requirements.
- The measures are limited to what is necessary for decision-making and planning.
Figure 3.1.1: Key Outcomes of the Township's Approach to Levels of Service
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
15
Levels of Service Alignment
The Township has organized the levels of service into a hierarchal framework that distinguishes
the levels of service types and functions and creates a line-of-sight between services to the
community and the assets' technical requirements to deliver community services. Figure 3.1.2
illustrates the levels of service hierarchy using roads as an example.
Figure 3.1.2: The Township's Level of Service Hierarchy (Roads Example)
Defining the Township's Levels of Service Types
Community Levels of Service
Community Levels of Service (CLOS) are non-technical measures describing the residents' service
experience. To a large extent the desired service experience is informed by Council and the
Township's Strategic Plan. The Township's CLOS reflecting Strategic Plan goals can be found in
Section 4 of the AMP.
Technical Levels of Service
Technical Levels of Service (TLOS) measure the technical requirements of the assets to provide
desired CLOS. The Township's TLOS are divided into two categories:
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
16
1. Asset Levels of Service
The Township's Asset Levels of Service (ALOS) are measures of the assets' condition and
performance requirements to provide adequate CLOS and are used to identify capital project
requirements to restore or replace assets. The Township's ALOS measures, criteria and
targets have been derived from industry best practices, regulations, design guidelines and/or
Council directives.
As summarized on Table 3.1.1, the Township divides ALOS into two categories:
a) Condition ALOS measure the physical "health" of the assets and their ability to
function. This is a key measure that determines how much longer assets can continue
to provide services, what actions are required to restore the assets and when.
b) Performance ALOS measure the assets' ability to provide sufficient service safety,
quality, quantity, reliability, accessibility, and/or resiliency to external threats. The
Township uses four performance ALOS measures:
- Operational Functionality,
- Capacity to Meet Demands,
- Operational Resiliency
- Environmental Resiliency.
Each of the four performance ALOS are supported by criteria unique to each asset type that are
used to measure specific asset requirements.
Table 3.1.1: The Township's Asset Levels of Service Categories and Measurement Attributes
Asset Levels
of Service
Measurement Attributes
Using Industry Measures, Ministry Design Guidelines, Regulations, & Other
Precedents
Condition
Physical state of the asset measured by condition rating systems:
-
PCI, BCI, FCI, PACP, "Very Good" to "Very Poor," etc.
Operational
Functionality
-
Efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery.
-
Ability to meet minimum current design and/or safety requirements.
-
Level of operational problems experienced and whether they affect community services.
-
Compliance with current Regulations and/or Standards (including the level of
"grandfathering").
-
Whether all required elements are present.
-
Relevance and effectiveness of technology.
-
Efficiency of resource consumption.
Capacity
to
Meet Demands
-
To what degree capacity satisfies current demands and minimum community service
levels.
-
Level of operational problems experienced.
-
Are there noticeable negative impacts on community service levels or stakeholders.
Operational
Resiliency
-
To what degree minimum service requirements are maintained/protected with back-up
systems, spare capacity, or alternative supply.
-
To what extent the assets are secure from acts of vandalism, trespassing, theft, assault,
or terrorism.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
17
Environmental
Resiliency
-
To what extent the assets are resilient to environmental stresses (e.g., impacts from
wind, fire, flooding, excessive rainfall/snowfall, etc.)
-
To what extent are the assets resilient to the impacts of climate change.
The Township's current and proposed Condition and Performance ALOS measures and ratings
can be found in Section 4 of the AMP and the predominant service outcomes tied to the different
ALOS types are outlined in Appendix II.
2. Operating Maintenance Levels of Service
Operating Maintenance Levels of Service (OMLOS) provide the measures necessary to ensure
assets can be fully utilized and service life is maximized. OMLOS set out the activities and
requirements to inform the operating budget. The Township's OMLOS measures, criteria, and
targets have been derived from industry best practices and regulations. The Township's
current and proposed OMLOS measures and ratings can be found in Section 4 of the AMP.
3.2 Risk Management
The main objective of a municipality is to provide public services, and the purpose of assets are
to facilitate service delivery. Therefore, understanding asset risk should not be limited to the
assets themselves, but should include an understanding of how the risk will affect services and
the municipality's strategic service objectives. For this reason, the Township's approach to risk
management is to utilize enterprise risk management, a methodology that assesses asset risk
relative to the impact it will have on the achievement of corporate service objectives. For
example, roads that are rough and too narrow will cause a higher risk to achieving a service
objective of "good transportation services."
As Figure 3.2.1 illustrates, the higher the asset risks, the higher the risks to corporate service
objectives; therefore, it is also a higher priority for these risks to be addressed through asset
management actions.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
18
Figure 3.2.1: The Corporate Risk Hierarchy
Risk can never be eliminated, only managed. Therefore, a balance must be achieved between
ensuring adequate and sustainable services while accepting a reasonable level of risk. ALOS
dictate likelihood of failure; therefore, the selection of reasonable ALOS targets will provide
reasonable levels of risk management.
Enterprise risk management provides a means to consistently evaluate and prioritize different
assets, asset classes, and ALOS across the organization and is the foundation of the Township's
risk management strategy, which is summarized in Figure 3.2.2.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
19
Figure 3.2.2: Key Aspects of the Township's Risk Management Approach
The Risk Management Framework
Risk is defined by ISO 31000 as the "effect of uncertainty on objectives" and is a function of
consequence of failure X likelihood of failure.
The application of enterprise risk management for asset management requires the consistent
use of consequence and likelihood of failure measures that are applied corporately to all asset
classes.
Consequences (Impact) of Failure
The Township uses a triple bottom line (social, financial, environmental) approach to assess the
consequences of an asset failing to meet its ALOS targets (Table 3.2.1). When assessing the
potential consequences to health and safety, community services, finances, the environment,
and municipal reputation, the Township considers whether the severity of impact due to asset
failure is Very Low, Low, Moderate, High, or Very High. The criteria used to assess consequence
severity was developed by staff based on their expertise and experiences managing the
Township's assets and finances. The Township's full consequence table is included in Appendix
III.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
20
Table 3.2.1: Township's Consequences of Failure Categories
Consequence
Categories
What is Assessed
Health and Safety
Considers the impacts to the health and safety of the public and
municipal staff including potential mental and physical injury, illness, and
loss of life as a result of asset failure, impairment, malfunction,
underperformance, insufficiency, or misuse.
Community
Services
Considers the impacts to infrastructure integrity, community service
functions, and municipal operations as a result of asset failure,
impairment, malfunction, underperformance, or insufficiency.
Financial
Considers the impacts to municipal finances including:
- Unplanned capital and operating costs and associated revenue
losses, to address and correct unexpected asset failures, impairments
or malfunctions.
- Avoidable operating costs and associated revenue losses from
deficient or underperforming assets.
- Compensation for revenue losses, litigation, liabilities or fines from
asset failure, impairment, underperformance or insufficiency.
Environment
Considers the impacts to the natural environment as a result of asset
failure, impairment, malfunction, underperformance, or insufficiency.
Reputation
Consider the impacts to the image and reputation of the Township,
Council, and staff as a result of asset failure, impairment, malfunction,
underperformance, or insufficiency.
Likelihood (Probability) of Failure
The Township has set ALOS targets to manage its asset risks. The likelihood of asset failure is
related to how closely the assets meet their ALOS targets: the closer the assets are to their ALOS
targets, the less likely they will fail and therefore, the less risk to the municipality's service
objectives. As Figure 3.2.3 illustrates, the likelihood of failure and asset risk can change as the
condition of assets change over time.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
21
Figure 3.2.3: The Relationship between ALOS and Risk
Table 3.2.2 below outlines the relationships between ALOS and likelihood of failure. Since asset
conditions change over time due to wear and tear, condition-related likelihood of failure is
estimated both in terms of a timeframe and a percent likelihood. Performance-related likelihood
of failure is not necessarily time sensitive (e.g., size, capacity, volume, output) and therefore, is
represented as a percent likelihood only.
Table 3.2.2 Relationships between Asset Levels of Service and Likelihood of Failure
Asset Level of Service and Corresponding Likelihood of Failure
Condition Levels of Service
Performance Levels of Service
ALOS
Measures
Corresponding Likelihood of Failure
Measures
ALOS Measures
Corresponding
Likelihood of Failure
Measures
Varies by
asset type
and rating
method
Likelihood
of Failure
Ratings
Estimated
Timeframe
%
Likelihood
of Failure
1. Operational
Functionality
2. Capacity to
Meet Demands
3. Operational
Resiliency
4. Environmental
Resiliency
ALOS
Rating
Likelihood
of Failure
Ratings
%
Likelihood
of Failure
Very Good
to Good
Very
Unlikely
>20 yrs.
<10%
Very
Good
Very
Unlikely
<10%
Good to
Fair
Unlikely
11-20 yrs.
10%-30%
Good
Unlikely
10%-30%
Fair to
Poor
Possible
6-10 yrs.
30%-60%
Fair
Possible
30%-60%
Poor to
Very Poor
Likely
1-5 yrs.
60%-90%
Poor
Likely
60%-90%
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
22
Asset Level of Service and Corresponding Likelihood of Failure
Condition Levels of Service
Performance Levels of Service
ALOS
Measures
Corresponding Likelihood of Failure
Measures
ALOS Measures
Corresponding
Likelihood of Failure
Measures
Very Poor
to Failed
Very Likely
or Certain
<1 yr.
>90%
Very
Poor
Very Likely
or Certain
>90%
The Township's risk assessment process, risk profiles, ALOS and Asset Class risk priorities can be
found in Section 5 of the AMP.
3.3 Asset Lifecycle Management
Asset lifecycle strategies vary by asset type and can differ by municipality. Figure 3.3.1 illustrates
the many stages of a typical asset lifecycle. At each stage the Township must consider the best
strategies to maximize asset value to the community and how to continuously improve the
strategies as available funding and regulations change, new technology and materials become
available, and the effects of climate change become more apparent.
Figure 3.3.1: The Typical Asset Lifecycle
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
23
The Township also relies on asset lifecycle strategies to guide the most effective means to achieve
asset TLOS and risk targets which in turn provides a forecast of asset investment
requirements. Figure 3.3.2 summarizes the many of the aspects of asset lifecycle management
at the Township and how it integrates with other aspects of the Township's Corporate Asset
Management Strategy.
Figure 3.3.1: Key Aspects of the Township's Approach to Asset Lifecycle Management
3.4 Financial Planning
The Township's planning for infrastructure investments is directed toward balancing asset
sustainability and desired levels of service at acceptable risk while maintaining affordability for
the taxpayer. The 10-year financial plan is incorporated into the Long-Term Financial Plan and
forms the basis of the Township's annual non-growth infrastructure-related budget and
forecast. Figure 3.4.1 summarizes many of the aspects of the Township's financial planning for
asset management. The recommended levels of infrastructure investments to maintain current
TLOS and achieve proposed TLOS can be found in Section 8 of the AMP.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
24
Figure 3.4.1: Key Aspects of the Township's Financial Planning for Asset Management
3.5 Technology, Data and Information Management
Adequate and accurate data and information is the foundation of asset management and instills
confidence in decision-making and in the AMP. The key features of how asset data and
information are managed at the Township are:
- CGIS Spatial Solutions is currently the Township's asset register and is the source for the most
reliable asset information.
- A data management plan is maintained to guide the regular collection and maintenance of
reliable asset data and information.
- Data collection and management is costly and therefore, the Township focuses on what is
necessary to adequately inform asset management planning.
- Asset hierarchies are used to organize the Township's assets and data for 'line-of-sight'
decision making between asset needs and service objectives.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
25
Figure 3.5.1: The Township's Data and Information Management Requirements
Data Quality and Confidence
The Township recognizes the importance of good asset data and therefore, maintains a data
management plan to collect and manage the necessary information. Data is continually being
collected by staff for road conditions, ditches, signs, barriers, minor culverts, storm sewers, and
much more. In addition, information is being provided by the Roads Needs Study and the bi-
annual Bridge and Major Culvert Inspection Report. Table 3.5.1 provides an outline for measuring
and rating the quality and confidence of data. This table is sourced from the International
Infrastructure Management Manual, which is an internationally recognized and referenced
document for asset management.
Using Table 3.5.1 as a guide, the current Data Confidence Grade for the Township is Medium to
High. The Township's current data management plan, if implemented, is expected to achieve a
confidence rating of High to Very High within the next 5 years.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 3.0 Corporate Asset Management Strategy
26
Table 3.5.1 Data Confidence Grading Scale (Source IPWEA, 2015, IIMM, Table 2.4.6, p 2|71)
Data Confidence Grading Scale
Confidence Grade
Reliability
Accuracy
Very High
Data based on sound records, procedures,
investigations, and analysis, documented
properly, and agreed as the best method
of assessment.
Dataset is complete and
estimated to be accurate ±
2%
High
Data based on sound records, procedures,
investigations, and analysis, documented
properly but has minor shortcomings, for
example some of the data is old, some
documentation is missing and/or reliance
is placed on unconfirmed reports or some
extrapolation.
Dataset is complete and
estimated to be accurate ±
10%
Medium
Data based on sound records, procedures,
investigations, and analysis which is
incomplete or unsupported, or
extrapolated from a limited sample for
which grade A or B data are available.
Dataset is substantially
complete but up to 50% is
extrapolated data and
accuracy estimated ± 25%
Low
Data is based on unconfirmed verbal
reports and/or cursory inspections and
analysis.
Dataset may not be fully
complete, and most data is
estimated or extrapolated.
Accuracy ± 40%
Very Low
None or very little data held.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
27
4 Levels of Service
O. Reg 588/17: Asset Management for Municipal Infrastructure stipulates reporting on
prerequisite Community Levels of Service (CLOS) and Technical Levels of Service (TLOS) measures
in Tables 1 to 5 of the regulation. To meet the requirements of the regulation, the Township has
provided the required reporting for each of the asset categories in Appendices AI i to AI iii. Further
to the regulatory requirements, the Township has established specific CLOS and TLOS that reflect
the services it will provide to the community and the asset requirements to provide those
services. The Township's CLOS are guided by its Strategic Plan, and the current and proposed
TLOS measures and targets are guided by regulations, industry standards, and best practices as
they relate to the Township's specific asset needs.
Community Levels of Service
Community Levels of Service describe the services received by the residents and businesses of
Drummond/North Elmsley. As outlined on Table 4.1, the CLOS and Service Objectives are
connected to the Strategic Goals in the Township's Strategic Plan.
Table 4 .1: Line-of-Sight between Township Strategic Goals and Community Levels of Service
Strategic Goals
Service Objectives
Community Levels of Service
- Well Maintained
Assets.
- Efficient and
responsive delivery of
municipal services.
- A safe and reliable road
network accessible year-
round.
- Efficient management of
infrastructure and
services.
- Readily accessible and
responsive services.
- The roads are safe and
accessible to travel year-round.
- The roads are kept in good
condition and are comfortable
to drive on.
- Issues with road maintenance
are addressed in a timely
fashion.
- The roads reflect the character
of the community.
- The roads provide fair value for
services.
- There is accountable and
transparent management of the
roads system.
- The landfill site is safety and
efficiently managed.
- The landfill site is accessible and
operational year-round.
- Planning and by-law issues are
addressed in a timely fashion.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
28
Technical Levels of Service
The Township has identified current and proposed (target) TLOS for Roads, Bridges, Major
Culverts, Minor Culverts, Storm Sewers, Fleet, and Equipment. The TLOS set minimum targets for
asset condition, performance, and maintenance requirements to achieve CLOS and maximize
asset value. The TLOS are divided into three categories as described on Table 4.2.
Table 4.2: The Township's Technical Levels of Service Categories
TLOS Type
Description
Budget Planning Outcomes
Condition ALOS
Measures the physical or
structural integrity of the assets.
Informs capital investment needs and
occasionally operating maintenance
investment needs.
Performance
ALOS
Measures to ensure assets
provide safe, adequate, efficient,
reliable and accessible services.
Mainly informs capital investment
needs and occasionally operating
maintenance investment needs.
Operating
Maintenance
LOS
Measures to ensure the assets
are properly maintained to
maximize service lifespan and
value and to provide year-round
safe, efficient and accessible
services.
Informs operating investment needs.
4.1 Roads
The Township's Roads inventory includes High Class Bitumen (HCB), Low Class Bitumen (LCB) and
gravel collector roads that service higher volumes of commuter traffic and HCB, LCB and gravel
local roads that service lower volumes of local traffic. Table 4.1.1 summarizes the different road
classes in the Township's inventory and Map AI-i-1 in Appendix I illustrates the Township's road
network.
Table 4.1.1: The Township's Roads Inventory
Asset
Category
Asset Class
Inventory
Replacement Value
(2024 Dollars in
Millions)
Paved Roads
HCB Semi-Urban Local Roads
0.5 km
$0.9
HCB Rural Collector Roads
58.2 km
$90.8
HCB Rural Local Roads
73.2 km
$114.1
LCB Rural Collector Roads
7.0 km
$11.0
LCB Rural Local Roads
3.8 km
$5.9
Sub-Total
142.7 km
$222.6
Gravel Roads
Collector Gravel Roads
8.1 km
$10.3
Local Gravel Roads
113.4 km
$143.1
Sub-Total
121.5 km
$153.4
Roads
Total
264.2 km
$376.0
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
29
Roads Condition Asset Levels of Service Measures and Targets
Condition ALOS measure the physical integrity of the roads. Maintaining roads in good condition
is necessary to achieve several important service objectives:
-
Safety
-
Accessibility and reliability
-
Good surface quality and rideability
-
Minimization of maintenance and rehabilitation costs
To measure the condition of the roads and set Condition ALOS targets, the Township uses a
pavement condition index (PCI). The PCI is a typical industry measure to determine the current
conditions of paved and unpaved roads and help predict when road restoration or reconstruction
is required. The use of a PCI for gravel surfaces reflects similar surface distresses seen in paved
surfaces and ensures a consistent condition measure across a municipality's entire road network.
The PCI uses a scale between 0 and 100 to rate the road conditions and is based on a visual
assessment of surface deficiencies such as cracking and rutting, and the roughness of ride. The
higher the PCI number, the better the pavement or gravel surface condition. Table 4.1.2 shows
the Township's Road condition rating system and Map AI-i-2 in Appendix I shows the condition
ratings for each road. The road condition ratings relative to the PCI ranges for each rating are
generally typical for the industry and consistent with Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO)
guidelines.
Table 4.1.2: The Township's Roads Condition Rating System
Asset Classes
Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Ratings System
Very
Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very
Poor
HCB Pavement - Collector
Roads
> 80
70 - 80
51 - 69
45 - 50
< 45
HCB Pavement - Local
Roads
> 80
65 - 80
46 - 64
40 - 45
< 40
LCB Pavement - Collector
Roads
> 80
70 - 80
51 - 69
45 - 50
< 45
LCB Pavement - Local
Roads
> 80
64 - 80
46 - 64
40 - 45
< 40
Collector Gravel Roads
> 80
70 - 80
45 - 69
35 - 44
< 35
Local Gravel Roads
> 80
64 - 80
41 - 64
30 - 40
< 30
Current Condition of the Roads Assets
The Township has two major road classifications: Collector Roads and Local Roads. Collector
Roads generally operate at higher speeds and carry higher volumes of commuter and commercial
traffic than Local Roads and therefore, need to be managed to a higher PCI target. The Township
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
30
has set a target PCI of 70 for Collector Roads, which corresponds to a "Good" condition. Currently,
the network average for Collector Roads is a PCI of 83.5 (Very Good). The Local Roads carry less
traffic at lower speeds and therefore can be managed to a lower PCI target. The Township has
set a target PCI of 65 for Local Roads, which also corresponds to a "Good" condition. Currently,
the network average for Local Roads is a PCI of 68.5 (Good).
Once a section of road falls below the PCI target set by the Township, the ability to provide safe,
cost-effective transportation services begins to decline and restorative actions such as
resurfacing, re-gravelling, or reconstruction should be planned and/or implemented within a 10-
year timeframe. Table 4.1.3 outlines the current and proposed (target) Condition ALOS for each
of the Township's Road Asset Classes.
Table 4.1.3: The Township's Current and Target Condition Asset Levels of Service for Roads.
Road Asset Classes
Condition Asset Level of
Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
HCB Semi-Urban Local
Pavement Condition
Index
PCI = 35 (Very
Poor)
PCI = 65 (Good)
HCB Rural Collector
Pavement Condition
Index
PCI = 84.4 (Very
Good)
PCI = 70 (Good)
HCB Rural Local
Pavement Condition
Index
PCI = 67.4 (Good)
PCI = 65 (Good)
LCB Rural Collector
Pavement Condition
Index
PCI =76.7 (Good)
PCI = 70 (Good)
LCB Rural Local
Pavement Condition
Index
PCI = 93.6 (Very
Good)
PCI = 65 (Good)
Gravel Rural Collector
Pavement Condition
Index
PCI = 65 (Fair)
PCI = 70 (Good)
Gravel Rural Local
Pavement Condition
Index
PCI = 65 (Good)
PCI = 65 (Good)
Roads Performance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's Performance ALOS categories, measures, and criteria for Roads are summarized
on Table 4.1.4. The Township's road performance criteria are based on regulations, typical
industry design guidelines, and best practices.
Table 4.1.4: Criteria Measured by the Township's Performance Asset Levels of Service for Roads
Level of Service
Target
Criteria Measured
Operational
Good
- Sufficiency of road platform widths (through lanes and shoulder
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
31
Table 4.1.6 outlines the current and target (proposed) Performance ALOS for each of the
Township's Road Asset Classes.
Table 4.1.6: The Township's Current and Target Performance Asset Levels of Service for Roads
Road Asset Classes
Performance Asset Level of
Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
HCB Semi-urban Local
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
HCB Rural Collector
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
HCB 1 Rural Local
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
Level of Service
Target
Criteria Measured
Functionality
areas) to accommodate current traffic volumes, posted speeds,
and road classification.
- Adequacy of road structure (pavement/surface material and
base) capacity to accommodate traffic volumes and loading.
- Appropriate geometric designs and sightlines for posted speeds
(vertical and horizontal alignments)
- Adequacy of roadside protection (e.g., guardrails).
- Adequacy of condition and regulatory compliance of existing
roadside safety devices.
- Adequacy of ditch conditions, design and road drainage.
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
- Sufficient number of lanes to meet peak traffic volumes.
Environmental
Resiliency
Good
- Adequacy of ditch capacity to accommodate design storms.
- Adequacy of erosion protection where required.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
32
Road Asset Classes
Performance Asset Level of
Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
LCB Rural Collector
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
LCB Rural Local
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
Gravel Rural Collector
Operational Functionality
Fair
Good
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
Gravel Rural Local
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
Improvements to Roads Performance Levels of Service
Improvements to correct road performance deficiencies are ideally addressed at the time of a
road reconstruction or a major resurfacing unless an overriding safety concern is present. Table
4.1.5 outlines the road performance improvements required to meet the proposed Performance
ALOS which are reflected in the proposed 10-year capital plan (Appendix A) of the 2021 Roads
Needs Study.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
33
Table 4.1.5: Proposed Performance Asset Levels of Service Improvements
Roads Operating Maintenance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's current and target (proposed) OMLOS for roads are summarized on Table 4.1.6.
The Township's OMLOS targets are based on Provincial regulations and best practices.
Table 4.1.6: The Township's Current and Target Operating Maintenance Levels of Service for Roads
Level of
Service
Improved
Action
Performance ALOS Criteria Being
Addressed
Operational
Functionality
Reconstruct and pave gravel roads:
- Rideau Lakes Road - Best Lane to
Elmgrove Road
- Burns Road - Armstrong Road to
Drummond Conc. 1
- Spence Road - Drummond Conc. 1
to Drummond Conc. 2
- Porter Road - Carroll Road to
Glenview Road
- Sufficiency of road platform
widths (through lanes and
shoulder areas) to accommodate
current traffic volumes, posted
speeds and road classification.
- Adequacy of road structure
(pavement/surface material and
base) capacity to accommodate
traffic volumes and loading.
Operational
Functionality
Regrading roads and intersections:
- Rideau Lakes Road - Regrade Hill
from 15% to 10%.
- Richardson Side Road and County
Road 10 (Intersection
improvements).
- Appropriate geometric designs
and sightlines for posted speeds
(vertical and horizontal
alignments).
Operational
Functionality
Horizontal re-alignments:
- Widenmaier Road - 90-degree
corner.
- Burns Road - Burns Road to
Buttermilk Hill Road.
- Appropriate geometric designs
and sightlines for posted speeds
(vertical and horizontal
alignments).
Roads Operating Maintenance Levels of Service
Activity
Current LOS
Proposed LOS
Road Patrols
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
34
Roads Operating Maintenance Levels of Service
Activity
Current LOS
Proposed LOS
Shoulder
Brushing/Maintenance
Every 10 years
Every 7 years
Shoulder Drop-off
Repairs
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Ditch Cleaning and
Regrading
5 km/year
25 km/year
Sweeping
Once a year
Once a year
Snow Removal
Fully Meet Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Fully Meet Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Pavement Spot Repairs
(potholes & cracks)
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Gravel Road Re-graveling
Maintain the gravel roads
network average at PCI = 65
(Good)
Maintain the gravel roads
network average at PCI = 65
(Good)
Gravel Patch
200 Tonnes per year
700 Tonnes per year
Crack Sealing
Every 10 years after road
resurfacing or reconstruction
where pavement is above PCI =
80.
Every 5 years after road
resurfacing or reconstruction
where pavement is above PCI =
80
Line Painting
100% of roads every year
100% of roads every year
Dust Control
100% of roads once every year
100% of roads once every year
Roads Needs Study
Every 10 years (review every 5
years)
Every 10 years (review every 5
years)
Streetlight
Repairs/Maintenance
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Guardrail Installations
Not applicable
Fully meets MTO Roadside
Design Manual
Guardrail Repairs
Repair existing (as-is)
Fully meets MTO Roadside
Design Manual
Sign replacements
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
35
4.2 Bridges and Major Culverts
The Township's inventory includes five bridges and nine major culverts. Major culverts are
culverts with a width or diameter greater than 3.0 metres. Culverts less than 3.0 metres are
included and assessed as part of the Stormwater Management inventory in Section 4.3. Table
4.2.1 summarizes the Township's Bridges and Major Culvert inventory and Map AI-ii-1 in
Appendix I illustrates the locations of the structures.
Table 4.2.1: The Township's Bridge and Major Culvert Inventory
Asset Category
Inventory
Replacement Value
(2024 Dollars in Millions)
Bridges
5
$7.1
Major Culverts (>3m)
9
$4.5
Structures Total
14
$11.6
Bridge and Major Culvert Condition Asset Levels of Service Measures and Targets
Condition ALOS measure the integrity of the bridges and major culverts. Maintaining bridges and
major culverts in good condition is necessary to achieve several important service objectives:
-
Safety
-
Accessibility and reliability
-
Good surface quality and rideability
-
Minimization of maintenance costs
To measure the condition of the bridges and major culverts and set Condition ALOS targets, the
Township uses a bridge condition index (BCI). The BCI is a typical industry measure to determine
the current conditions of the structures and help predict when repairs and restorations are
required.
The BCI uses a scale between 0 and 100 to rate the structures' conditions and is based on a visual
assessment of structural deficiencies such as cracking, spalling, corrosion, scouring,
barrier/guardrail damage, and erosion. The higher the BCI number, the better the structure's
Roads Operating Maintenance Levels of Service
Activity
Current LOS
Proposed LOS
239/02) and Ontario Traffic
Manual
239/02) and Ontario Traffic
Manual
Traffic Counts (AADT)
Every 10 years
Every 5 years
Reflectivity Testing
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
Fully meets Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
36
condition. Table 4.2.2 shows the Township's Bridges and Major Culverts condition rating system
and Map AI-ii-2 in Appendix I shows the condition ratings for each structure. The structure
condition ratings relative to the BCI ranges for each rating are generally typical for the industry
and are consistent with MTO guidelines.
Table 4.2.2: The Township's Bridge and Major Culvert Condition Rating System
Asset Classes
Bridge and Major Culvert Condition Index (BCI) Ratings System
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Bridges and Major
Culverts
> 80
70 - 80
60 - 69
40 - 59
< 40
Current Condition of the Bridges and Major Culvert Assets
The Township has set a target BCI of 70 for all bridges and major culverts which corresponds to
a "Good" condition. Currently, the average BCI rating for Bridges is 81.2 (Very Good) and the
average BCI rating for Major Culverts is 67.7 (Fair).
Once a bridge or major culvert falls below the target BCI of 70 set by the Township, the ability to
provide safe, cost-effective services begins to decline and restorative actions such as repair or
replacement of the structural elements or a full replacement of the structure should be planned
and/or implemented within the 10-year timeframe depending on the condition of the structure.
Table 4.2.3 outlines the current and target (proposed) Condition ALOS for the Township's Bridges
and Major Culverts Asset Classes.
Table 4.2.3: Current and Target Condition Asset Levels of Service for Bridges and Major Culverts
Structure Asset
Classes
Condition Asset Level
of Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset Levels of
Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Bridges
Bridge Condition Index
BCI = 81.2 (Very Good)
BCI = 70 (Good)
Major Culverts
Bridge Condition Index
BCI = 67.7 (Fair)
BCI = 70 (Good)
Bridge and Major Culvert Performance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's Performance ALOS categories, measures and criteria for Bridges and Major
Culverts are summarized on Table 4.2.4. The Township's bridge and major culvert performance
criteria are based on regulations, typical industry design guidelines, and best practices.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
37
Table 4.2.4: Criteria Measured by the Township's Performance Asset Levels of Service for Structures
Improvements to correct bridge and major culvert performance deficiencies are ideally
addressed at the time of a reconstruction or major refurbishment unless an overriding safety
concern is present. Table 4.2.5 outlines the current and target (proposed) Performance ALOS for
the Township's Bridges and Major Culverts Asset Classes.
Table 4.2.5: The Township's Performance Level of Service Rating System for Structures
Structure Asset Classes
Performance Asset Level of
Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Bridges
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet Demands
Very Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
Major Culverts
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
Performance
ALOS Types
Target
Criteria Measured
Operational
Functionality
Good
- Sufficiency of deck platform/through-lanes widths to
accommodate current traffic volumes.
- Adequacy of roadside safety device protection and barriers.
- Adequacy of condition and regulatory compliance of roadside
safety devices.
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
- Adequacy of structural capacity and number of lanes to meet
peak traffic volumes and loading.
Environmental
Resiliency
Good
- Sufficiency of span and elevation to accommodate a 100-year
or regional storm event with adequate freeboard above high-
water levels.
- Flood protection of lanes during major storm events.
- Adequacy of scouring and armouring protection around
foundations and footings.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
38
Bridge and Major Culvert Operating Maintenance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's current and target (proposed) OMLOS for bridges and major culverts are
summarized on Table 4.2.6. The Township's OMLOS targets are based on Provincial regulations
and best practices.
Table 4.2.6: The Township's Current and Target Operating Maintenance Levels of Service for Structures
Bridge and Major Culvert Operating Maintenance Levels of Service
Activity
Current LOS
Proposed LOS
Bridge Deck Washing
Once a year
Once a year
Bridge Deck Spall Repairs
Fully Meet Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O.
Reg 239/02)
Fully Meet Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O.
Reg 239/02)
Bridge & Major Culvert
Inspections
Biannual Inspections of 100%
of Structures per the Public
Transportation and Highway
Improvement Act
Biannual Inspections of 100%
of Structures per the Public
Transportation and Highway
Improvement Act
4.3 Stormwater Management
The Township's Stormwater Management inventory is comprised of buried linear assets including
storm sewers, catch basins, catch basin manholes, ditch inlets, and minor culverts less that 3.0
metres wide. Roadside ditches and swales are included and assessed as part of the roads
inventory in Section 4.1. Table 4.3.1 summarizes the Stormwater Management Asset Classes in
the Township's inventory and Map AI-iii in Appendix I illustrates the Township's storm sewer
system.
Table 4.3.1: The Township's Buried Stormwater Management Inventory
Asset Category
Inventory
Replacement Value
(2024 Dollars in Millions)
Storm Sewers
804 m
$0.5
Minor Culverts (<3.0m)
672 m
$2.9
Stormwater Management Total
1472 m
$3.4
Storm Sewer Condition Asset Levels of Service Measures and Targets
Condition ALOS measure the integrity of the storm sewers. Maintaining storm sewers in good
condition is necessary to achieve several important service objectives:
- Safety
- Road accessibility and reliability
- Maintaining road and property drainage and a sound road structure
- Minimization of road and storm sewer maintenance and rehabilitation costs
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
39
To measure the condition of the storm sewers and set Condition ALOS targets, the Township uses
a rating system adopted from the Pipeline Assessment Certification Program (PACP), which is
administered by the National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO). The PACP rating
system is a typical industry measure to determine the current conditions of sewer pipes and help
predict when rehabilitation or replacement is required.
The PACP rating system uses a scale between 1 and 5 to rate the sewer pipe conditions and is
based on visual assessment via a closed-circuit television (CCTV) inspection of surface deficiencies
such as cracking, pipe deformation, offset joint, protrusions, etc. The higher the number, the
worse the pipe condition. Table 4.3.2 shows the Township's storm sewer condition rating system
and Map AI-iii in Appendix I shows the condition ratings for each storm sewer. The Township's
storm sewer condition ratings relative to the PACP ratings are consistent with NASSCO. Note that
the Township classifies pipes rated PACP = 5 into two categories according to the PACP rating
descriptions: pipes that are very poor but have not yet failed and pipes that have failed.
Table 4.3.2: The Township's Storm Sewers Condition Rating System
Asset Class
The Township Storm Sewer Rating System using PACP
Very Good/
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
(Not Failed)
Very Poor
(Failed)
Storm
Sewers
PACP = 1 - 2
PACP = 3
PACP = 4
PACP = 5
PACP = 5
- Pipe
segment
has minor
defects.
- Pipe
unlikely to
fail for at
least 20
years.
- Pipe
segment has
moderate
defects
- Deterioratio
n may
continue, at
a 10-to-20-
year
timeframe.
- Pipe
segment
has severe
defects
- Risk of
failure
within the
next 5 to 10
years
- Pipe
segment
has severe
defects.
- Risk of
failure likely
within the
next 5 years
- Pipe segment
has failed.
- Requires
immediate
attention.
Current Condition of the Storm Sewer Assets
The Township has set a target PACP of 3 for all storm sewers which corresponds to a "Fair"
condition. Currently, the average PACP rating for storm sewers is estimated at 3.3 (Fair).
Once a sewer pipe exceeds the target PACP of 3 set by the Township, the ability to provide safe,
cost-effective services begins to decline and restorative actions such as relining or replacement
should be implemented within the 10-year timeframe. Table 4.3.3 outlines the current and target
(proposed) Condition ALOS for the Township's Storm Sewer Asset Class.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
40
Table 4.3.3: The Township's Current and Target Condition Asset Levels of Service for Storm Sewers
Stormwater Asset Classes
Condition Asset Level of
Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Storm Sewers
NAASCO PACP Rating
PACP = 3 (Fair)
PACP = 3 (Fair)
Storm Sewer Performance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's Performance ALOS categories, measures and criteria for storm sewers are
summarized on Table 4.3.4. The Township's storm sewer performance criteria are based typical
industry design guidelines and best practices.
Table 4.3.4: Criteria Measured by the Township's Performance Asset Levels of Service for Storm Sewers
Improvements to correct storm sewer performance deficiencies are ideally addressed at the time
the sewers are reconstructed. Table 4.3.5 outlines the current and target (proposed)
Performance ALOS for the Township's Storm Sewer Asset Class.
Table 4.3.5: The Township's Performance Level of Service Rating System for Storm Sewers
Stormwater Asset Class
Performance Asset Level
of Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Storm Sewers
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
Good
Level of Service
Target
Criteria Measured
Operational
Functionality
Good
- Pipe flow velocities.
- Minimum diameter sizing.
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
- Adequate capacity to prevent flooding of Local Roads during
a 5-year storm or on Collector Roads during a 10-year
storm.
Environmental
Resiliency
Good
- Adequacy of erosion protection where required.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
41
Stormwater Asset Class
Performance Asset Level
of Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
Storm Sewer Operating Maintenance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's current and target (proposed) OMLOS for storm sewers are summarized on Table
4.3.6. The Township's OMLOS targets are based on best practices.
Table 4.3.6: The Township's Current and Target OM Levels of Service for Storm Sewers
Strom Sewer Operating Maintenance Levels of Service
Activity
Current LOS
Proposed LOS
CB/CBMH Cleaning
Every 10 years
Every 5 years
CCTV Inspections
Every 10 years
Every 10 years
Storm Sewer Flushing
Every 10 years
Every 5 years
Minor Culvert Condition Asset Levels of Service Measures and Targets
Condition ALOS measure the integrity of the minor culverts. Maintaining minor culverts in good
condition is necessary to achieve several important service objectives:
-
Safety
-
Road accessibility and reliability
-
Maintaining road and property drainage and a sound road structure
-
Minimization of road and culvert maintenance and rehabilitation costs
To measure the condition of the minor culverts and set Condition ALOS targets, the Township
uses a rating system based in part on the American Association of State Highway Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) Culvert and Storm Drainage System Inspection Guide. The ratings measure the
current conditions of culverts and help predict when rehabilitation or replacement is required.
The Township has adapted the AASHTO rating system to rate the condition of its minor culverts
using a 5-point scale from "Very Good" to "Very Poor." The culverts are rated based on a visual
assessment of the deficiencies such as cracking, corrosion, pipe deformation, offset joints,
protrusions, blockages, etc. Table 4.3.7 shows the Township's minor culvert condition rating
system.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
42
Table 4.3.7: The Township's Condition Rating System for Minor Culverts
Asset
Class
Minor Culvert Condition Ratings
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Minor
Culverts
- New/like new
- Deterioration:
None.
- Structurally
sound.
- Functionally
adequate.
- Deterioration:
Little to none
- Structurally
sound.
- Functionally
adequate.
- Deterioration:
Some
- Structurally
sound.
- Functionally
adequate.
- Deterioration:
Significant
and/or
- Functionally
inadequate.
- Requires
maintenance
or repair.
- Deterioration:
Severe and/or
- Structurally
unsound
and/or
- Functionally
inadequate.
- Possible
imminent
failure or
threat to
public safety.
Current Condition of the Minor Culvert Assets
The Township has set a target of "Fair" for minor culverts. Currently, the average rating for minor
culverts is "Good."
Once a minor culvert drops to a "Poor" condition, the ability to provide safe, cost-effective
services begins to decline and restorative actions such as relining or replacement should be
implemented in the 10-year timeframe. Table 4.3.8 outlines the current and target (proposed)
Condition ALOS for the Township's Minor Culverts Asset Class.
Table 4.3.8: The Township's Current and Target Condition Asset Levels of Service for Minor Culverts
Stormwater Asset Classes
Condition Asset Level of
Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Minor Culverts
AASHTO (Adapted)
Good
Fair
Minor Culvert Performance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's Performance ALOS categories, measures and criteria for minor culverts are
summarized on Table 4.3.9. The Township's minor culvert performance criteria are based on
regulations, typical industry design guidelines and best practices.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
43
Table 4.3.9: Criteria Measured by the Township's Performance Levels of Service for Minor Culverts
Improvements to correct minor culvert performance deficiencies are addressed at the time the
minor culverts are replaced. Table 4.3.10 outlines the current and target (proposed) Performance
ALOS for the Township's Minor Culvert Asset Class.
Table 4.3.10: The Township's Performance Level of Service Rating System for Minor Culverts
Asset Class
Performance Asset Level
of Service Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Minor Culverts
Operational Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
Good
Environmental Resiliency
Good
Good
Minor Culverts Operating Maintenance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's current and target (proposed) OMLOS for minor culverts are summarized on
Table 4.3.11.
Level of Service
Target
Criteria Measured
Operational
Functionality
Good
- Sufficient length to accommodate the necessary road
platform width and minimum ditch sloping requirements.
- Adequate structural capacity to accommodate current
traffic volumes and loading.
- Adequacy of roadside safety device protection and
regulatory compliance.
- Meets minimum diameter recommendations per MTO
Highway Drainage Design Standards for purposes of access
for cleaning and repairs.
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
- Sufficient capacity to accommodate a 10-year design storm
flow for Collector Roads and a 5-year design storm flow for
Local Roads.
Environmental
Resiliency
Good
- Adequate scouring protection of culverts where required.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
44
Table 4.3.11: The Current and Target Operating Maintenance Levels of Service for Minor Culverts
Minor Culvert Operating Maintenance Levels of Service
Activity
Current LOS
Proposed LOS
Minor Culvert
Replacements
Replace worst first ("Very
Poor" culverts) according to
available funding
Fair (Replace when culverts are
"Poor")
Minor Culvert Inspections
Every 5 years
Every 5 years
Culvert Cleaning
In reaction to identified
drainage issues.
As needed when identified by
staff through regular
inspections or road patrols
4.4 Fleet and Equipment
The Township's fleet and equipment inventory includes small pick-up trucks, large tandem dump
trucks, heavy equipment such as graders, loaders and backhoes and accessory equipment such
as trailers and generators. Table 4.4.1 summarizes the different Fleet and Equipment Asset
Classes in the Township's inventory.
Table 4.4.1: The Township's Fleet and Equipment Inventory
Service Division
Asset Class
Replacement Value
(2024 Dollars in Millions)
Roads Operations
Small Trucks
$0.4
Large Trucks
$2.5
Heavy Equipment
$2.3
Accessory Equipment
$0.3
Landfill Operations
Large Trucks
$0.4
Heavy Equipment
$0.7
Accessory Equipment
$0.1
Building Department
Operations
Small Trucks
$0.1
Total
$6.6
Fleet and Equipment Condition Asset Levels of Service Measures and Targets
Condition ALOS measure the integrity of the fleet and equipment. Maintaining the fleet and
equipment in good condition is necessary to achieve several important service objectives:
- Safe operations and use of vehicles and equipment
- Safe operations and public use of roads, bridges, major culverts, stormwater, and landfill
assets
- Maintaining the reliability of vehicles and equipment
- Maintaining the condition, accessibility and reliability of the roads, bridges, major culverts,
stormwater, and landfill assets
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
45
- Minimization of vehicle maintenance costs
Since the Roads Operations and Building Department Operations Fleet and Equipment need to
operate on public rights-of-way while the Landfill Operations Fleet and Equipment are restricted
to operating on the landfill site, the Condition and Performance ALOS measures and targets
differ.
Roads and Building Department Operations Fleet and Equipment Condition Measures
To measure and rate the condition of the Roads Operations and Building Department Operations
Fleet and Equipment assets and set Condition ALOS targets, the Township uses a 5-point scale
from "Very Good" to "Very Poor." The condition rating system is based on the typical useful
service life of the assets and is summarized on Table 4.4.2.
Table 4.4.2: Road and Building Department Operations Fleet and Equipment Condition Rating System
Asset
Classes
Roads and Building Department Operations Fleet and Equipment Condition Ratings
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
All
Assets with
EUSL >25 years:
- ERUSL >20
years
Assets with
EUSL <25 years:
- ERUSL >80%
Assets with
EUSL >25 years:
- ERUSL = 11 to
20 years
Assets with
EUSL <25 years:
- ERUSL = 55%
to 80%
Assets with
EUSL >25 years:
- ERUSL = 6 to
10 years
Assets with
EUSL <25 years:
- ERUSL = 31%
to 54%
Assets with
EUSL >25 years:
- ERUSL = 1 to 5
years
Assets with
EUSL <25 years:
- ERUSL = 5% to
30%
Assets with
EUSL >25 years:
- ERUSL <1
year
Assets with
EUSL <25 years:
ERUSL <5%
Note: EUSL = Estimated useful service life and ERUSL = Estimated remaining useful service life
Landfill Operations Fleet and Equipment Condition Measures
To measure and rate the condition of the Landfill Fleet and Equipment assets and set Condition
ALOS targets, the Township uses a 3-point scale: "Exceeds," "Adequate," and "Poor/Very Poor."
The condition rating system is based on the typical useful service life of the assets and is
summarized on Table 4.4.3.
Table 4.4.3: Landfill Operations Fleet and Equipment Condition Rating System
Asset
Classes
Landfill Operations Fleet and Equipment Condition Ratings
Exceeds
Adequate
Poor/Very Poor
All
ERUSL > 10 years
ERUSL = 1 to 10 years
ERUSL < 1 year
Note: ERUSL = Estimated remaining useful service life
Current Condition of the Fleet and Equipment Assets
The Township has set a target of "Fair" for the Roads Operations and Building Department
Operations Fleet and Equipment assets and a target of "Adequate" for the Landfill Fleet and
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
46
Equipment assets. Currently, the average for the Roads Operations assets is "Fair," the rating for
the Building Department Operations vehicle is "Fair" and the average for the Landfill Operations
assets is "Adequate." Table 4.4.4 outlines the current and target (proposed) Condition ALOS for
each of the Township's Fleet and Equipment Asset Classes.
Table 4.4.4: The Township's Current and Target Condition Asset Levels of Service for Fleet and Equipment
Service
Division
Asset Classes
Condition Asset
Level of Service
Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Roads
Operations
Small Trucks
DNE General 5-
Point Ratings
Poor
Fair
Large Trucks
DNE General 5-
Point Ratings
Good
Fair
Heavy Equipment
DNE General 5-
Point Ratings
Fair
Fair
Accessory
Equipment
DNE General 5-
Point Ratings
Fair
Fair
Landfill
Operations
Large Trucks
DNE Special 3-
Point Ratings
Very Poor
Adequate
Heavy Equipment
DNE Special 3-
Point Ratings
Adequate
Adequate
Accessory
Equipment
DNE Special 3-
Point Ratings
Adequate
Adequate
Building
Department
Operations
Small Trucks
General 5-Point
Ratings
Fair
Fair
Fleet and Equipment Performance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's Performance ALOS categories, measures, and criteria for Fleet and Equipment
are summarized on Table 4.4.5. The Township's fleet and equipment performance criteria are
based on regulations and best practices.
Table 4.4.5: Criteria Measured by the Performance Asset Levels of Service for Fleet and Equipment
Level of Service
Target
Criteria Measured
Operational
Functionality
Good
- Vehicles/equipment are suitable for purpose.
- Vehicles/equipment technology is modern and efficient.
- Vehicles/equipment comply with current regulations.
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
- Adequate quantity of vehicles/equipment to meet normal
service demands.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
47
Improvements to correct performance deficiencies are addressed with the purchase of new
vehicles and equipment. Table 4.4.6 outlines the current and target (proposed) Performance
ALOS for each of the Township's Road Asset Classes.
Table 4.4.6: The Current and Target Performance Asset Levels of Service for Fleet and Equipment
Service
Division
Asset Classes
Performance Asset
Level of Service
Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Road
Operations
Small Trucks
Operational
Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
Good
Operational
Resiliency
Fair
Fair
Large Trucks
Operational
Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
Good
Operational
Resiliency
Good
Fair
Heavy Equipment
Operational
Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
Good
Operational
Resiliency
Very Poor
Fair
Accessory
Equipment
Operational
Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
Good
Level of Service
Target
Criteria Measured
- Vehicles/equipment have adequate physical capacity to meet
service requirements (size, power, load carrying capacity,
throughput, etc.).
Operational
Resiliency
Good
- Adequate back-up/standby vehicles/equipment for peak or
emergency conditions including unforeseen
vehicle/equipment failures.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
48
Service
Division
Asset Classes
Performance Asset
Level of Service
Measure
Asset Levels of Service
Current Asset
Levels of Service
Proposed Asset
Levels of Service
Operational
Resiliency
Poor
Fair
Landfill
Operations
Large Trucks
Operational
Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Very Good
Good
Operational
Resiliency
Very Good
Fair
Heavy Equipment
Operational
Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Very Good
Good
Operational
Resiliency
Very Poor
Fair
Accessory
Equipment
Operational
Functionality
Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Good
Good
Building
Department
Operations
Small Trucks
Operational
Functionality
Very Good
Good
Capacity to Meet
Demands
Very Good
Good
Fleet and Equipment Operating Maintenance Levels of Service Measures and Targets
The Township's current and target (proposed) OMLOS for Fleet and Equipment are summarized
on Table 4.4.7. The Township's OMLOS targets are based on Provincial regulations and best
practices.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 4.0 Levels of Service
49
Table 4.4.7: The Current and Target Operating Maintenance Levels of Service Fleet and Equipment
Fleet and Equipment Operating Maintenance Levels of Service
Activity
Current LOS
Proposed LOS
Regular Maintenance
and Repairs
As required to maintain vehicles
in sound working condition and
meet safety and maintenance
requirements
As required to maintain vehicles
in sound working condition and
meet safety and maintenance
requirements
Rust Protection
(Snowplow Trucks only)
Annually
Annually
Annual Safety
Certification (Large
Trucks excluding Landfill)
Mandated per MTO Highway
Traffic Act
Mandated per MTO Highway
Traffic Act
2024 Asset Management Plan - 5.0 Risk Management
50
5 Risk Management
Risk is the product of consequence of failure multiplied by the likelihood of failure. Risk can never
be eliminated, only managed to levels that are acceptable to the organization. The management
of risk requires the implementation of controls. In the context of asset management those
controls can be setting TLOS targets and having standard operating procedures (SOPs) in the
event of an asset failure and/or service disruption.
Measuring asset risk using an enterprise risk management (ERM) approach is an effective and
transparent way to understand the current state of infrastructure and to prioritize, plan, and
communicate asset management actions across the entire Township's portfolio. For ERM to be
effective, the application of consistent risk assessment measures and processes are required.
5.1 The Township's Risk Assessment Process
The Township's first step was to document the different levels of severity of consequences of
asset failure to health and safety, community services, municipal finances, the natural
environment, and municipal reputation on a Consequences of Failure Table (Appendix III-i).
The next step was to evaluate the severity of failure for each asset class using the Consequences
of Failure Table. Severity is assessed by estimating the potential impacts to health and safety,
community services, municipal finances, the natural environment, and municipal reputation in
the event of an asset failure, performance insufficiency, or the absence of the asset.
The consequences of failure and the likelihood of failure (which is predetermined by the current
Condition and Performance ALOS ratings) are multiplied together in the Township's risk
assessment tool and prioritization model to produce a risk rating that indicates the level of risk
to the assets, ALOS, and Asset Classes. Table 5.1 outlines how the scoring from the risk model is
translated into varying degrees of risk.
Table 5.1: The Township's Risk Ranges and Ratings
Level
Range
Low
< 21
Medium
21 - 59
High
60 - 99
Very High
> 99
Risk Ratings
2024 Asset Management Plan - 5.0 Risk Management
51
5.2 Risk-Based Asset Prioritization
The main objective of the Township's ERM strategy is to determine
priorities objectively and transparently across Asset Classes, ALOS,
and individual assets. The degree of variance from the risk target
provides the relative measures against which all assets, ALOS and
Asset Classes can be compared and prioritized.
Table 5.2 outlines the main risk modelling outputs to evaluate and
communicate corporate asset management risks and priorities
Table 5.2: Key Risk Modelling Outputs to Inform Asset Management Decision-making
Reporting
Output
What is Does
What Information it
Provides
Appendix #
Asset Class
Risk Profile
Illustrates the current and projected 10-
year risk with and without capital
investments based the combined state of
the assets' condition and performance in
each Asset Class. The risk profile is also
used to estimate the 10-year risk after
applying 10-year asset investments.
Provides an initial high-level
organizational comparison
of the Asset Classes in their
current and future state
with and without capital
investments.
III-ii
Condition
ALOS Risk
Profile
Illustrates the current and estimated 10-
year risk based on the current and
estimated 10-year condition according to
their typical lifecycles. The risk profile is
also used to estimate the 10-year risk after
applying 10-year asset investments.
Provides an organizational
comparison of the
Condition ALOS in their
current and future state
with and without capital
investments.
III-iii
Performance
ALOS Risk
Profile
Illustrates the level of risk based on the
current performance of the Township's
assets. Asset performance (e.g. sufficiency
of lane widths) generally remains static
over time unless the assets are replaced or
rehabilitated.
Provides an organizational
comparison of the
Performance ALOS with and
without capital
investments.
III-iv
Current
State Risk
Priorities
Ranks the current Condition and
Performance ALOS priorities according to
the variance from risk targets.
Provides an organizational
perspective of the deficient
ALOS from highest to
lowest and helps to narrow
down to the specific assets
driving the needs.
III-v
2024 Asset Management Plan - 5.0 Risk Management
52
Reading the Risk Profile
Figure 5.2.1 shows an example of the separate Asset Class bars used in the Asset Class, Condition
ALOS and Performance ALOS Risk Profiles. Each bar on the risk profile showing Target Risk,
Current Risk, and Ten-year Risk represents the state of risk for each of the Township's asset
classes. The Township's Risk Profiles can be found in Appendices IV-ii, IV-iii and IV-iv.
Figure 5.2.1: Components of the Risk Profile
Target Risk Bar
The Target Risk, represented by the dark grey bar, measures the asset class risk based on all the
assets meeting their ALOS targets.
Current Risk Bar
The Current Risk, represented by the centre green bar, measures the current risk of the asset
class based on whether the assets within that asset class are meeting, exceeding, or failing their
level of service targets. If the Current Risk bar is shorter than the Target Risk bar, than most of
the assets in the asset class are meeting or exceeding their ALOS targets. If the Current Risk bar
Reporting
Output
What is Does
What Information it
Provides
Appendix #
Ten-year
Risk
Priorities
Ranks the Condition and Performance
ALOS priorities in 10 years according to the
variance from risk targets. Asset conditions
degrade at different rates and because
asset performance does not change over
time, ALOS priorities can change over 10
years.
Provides an organizational
perspective of the deficient
ALOS in 10 years from
highest to lowest and helps
to narrow down to the
specific assets driving the
10-year needs.
III-vi
2024 Asset Management Plan - 5.0 Risk Management
53
and the Target Risk bar at are equal lengths, then generally most of the assets in the asset class
are meeting their ALOS targets. When the Current Risk bar extends beyond the Target Risk bar,
this indicates that a measurable number of assets in the asset class are deficient. The further the
Current Risk bar extends out from the Target Risk bar, the greater the amount of asset
deficiencies in that asset class.
Ten-year Risk Bar
The Ten-year Risk bar, represented by the light grey bar, is tied to the estimated lifespans of the
assets and the Townships asset lifecycle strategies. The Ten-year Risk bar estimates the future
state of risk based on the deterioration of the assets in the asset class over ten years without
rehabilitative actions.
5.3 The Township's Overall Risk Outlook
Figure 5.3.1 illustrates the overall current and projected risk for the Township's infrastructure.
As the Current Risk bar indicates, the Township's overall risk is currently below the Target Risk
which is reflective of the overall "Good" state of the Township's infrastructure. This means that
while many assets are "Poor" or "Very Poor" thus creating some risk above targets, most assets
are currently meeting or exceeding their ALOS and risk targets. However, over the next ten years
the overall risk is projected to extend beyond the Target Risk which reflects that many more
assets will become "Poor" or "Very Poor" in the absence of reinvestments in and improvements
to the infrastructure. As Figure 5.3.2 indicates, the risk is expected to more than double over ten
years without the necessary reinvestments.
Figure 5.3.1: Overall Township Risk Profile
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Overall Township Risk
Risk Level
High
Low
Medium
Severe
Target Risk
Current (Present) Risk
10 Year Risk
2024 Asset Management Plan - 5.0 Risk Management
54
Figure 5.3.2: Overall Township Risk Outlook
Although Figure 5.3.1 indicates that the Township's overall Current Risk is below its overall Target
Risk, there are still existing asset deficiencies in meeting ALOS target within each of the asset
classes that cause the risk to exceed risk targets. Figure 5.3.3 illustrates the distribution of Current
Risk where it exceeds Target Risk in each of the asset classes. As the chart shows, the Current
Risk above targets is evenly distributed across the different asset classes.
Figure 5.3.3: The Distribution of Current Risk over Risk Targets
Current Risk
10 Year Risk
Paved Roads
22%
Unpaved
Roads
18%
Structures
22%
Stormwater
Management
18%
Fleet &
Equipment
21%
2024 Asset Management Plan - 5.0 Risk Management
55
5.4 Analysis of Asset Management Needs and Priorities
Making decisions on what assets to repair or replace given limited resources requires many
technical, financial, and practical considerations. Utilizing the outputs from the risk modelling
provides evidence on where to start to identify and prioritize asset management actions. Since
further rigor is required to narrow down the proposed projects and activities to be included over
the next 10 years in the annual budget and forecast, the asset management priorities have been
allocated to two broad priority categories as outlined in Table 5.4. The priorities are not in any
specific order and were determined using the Current State Risk Priorities (Appendix III-v) and
the 10-year Risk Priorities (Appendix III-vi). The specific projects and activities behind the
priorities listed on Table 5.4 will be further screened as part of planning the 2025 budget and 9-
year forecast.
Table 5.4: Risk Modelling Conclusion to Inform Planning of the Budget and Forecast
10-year
Planning
Priority
Criteria
Asset Management Actions
First Priority
Deficient assets are
currently at high or
very high risk1 or will
be at high risk within
10 years2.
- Replace 8th Concession Drummond Culvert (OSIM
2026).
- Replace Maple Lane Road Culvert (OSIM 2027).
- Rehabilitate Moores Road Culvert (OSIM 2030).
- Reconstruct Innisville HCB Roads (Roads Needs
2028).
- Reconstruct Burns Road to HCB.
- Reconstruct the gravel section of Carroll Road to
HCB.
- Rehabilitate "Poor" or reconstruct "Very Poor" HCB
Collector Roads.
- Rehabilitate "Poor" or reconstruct "Very Poor" HCB
Local Roads.
- Maintain Local Gravel Roads in "Good" condition.
- Replace "Very Poor" minor culverts.
- Regrade the steep hill on Rideau Lakes Road and
reconstruct to HCB (Roads Needs 2025).
- Replace Innisville storm sewers.
- Replace the oldest grader.
- Realignment of 90-degree bend on Widenmaier
Road (Road Needs 2028).
2024 Asset Management Plan - 5.0 Risk Management
56
Notes:
1. The Current State Risk Priorities (Appendix III-v)
2. The 10-year Risk Priorities (Appendix III-vi)
10-year
Planning
Priority
Criteria
Asset Management Actions
- Update or add guardrails at various locations on
Gravel Local Roads.
Second
Priority
Deficient assets are
currently at medium
risk 1 and will remain
at medium risk in 10
years2.
- Intersection improvements at Richardson Side Road
and County Road 10 (Road Needs 2027).
- Earth and tree removals on Oak Lane (Roads Needs
2025).
- Reconstruct Carroll Road and McPhail's Road to
HCB (Currently LCB Collector Roads).
- Replace minor culverts in "Poor" condition
- Reconstruct high volume Gravel Local Roads to HCB
- Widen Gravel Local Roads sections where platform
widths are too narrow for typical traffic demands.
- Update or add guardrails at various locations on
HCB Local Roads.
- Improve ditching on various sections of HCB Local
Roads and Gravel Local Roads.
- Replace Fleet and Equipment assets in "Poor" or
"Very Poor" condition.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 6.0 Asset Lifecycle Strategies
57
6 Asset Lifecycle Strategies
O. Reg 588/17: Asset Management for Municipal Infrastructure stipulates that municipalities
document the full lifecycle of the assets and the operating and capital lifecycle activities that can
be undertaken at lowest costs to achieve current and proposed technical levels of service.
Asset lifecycle strategies include operating and capital funded activities to maximize asset
utilization and value. These activities can include inspections, maintenance, repairs,
refurbishments, reconstructions and replacements. As the example in Figure 6.1 illustrates, if the
lifecycle strategies are planned and executed proactively and efficiently, asset lifespans will be
maximized while providing higher levels of service at lower cost of ownership.
Figure 6.1: Benefits of Efficient Lifecycle Strategies
The Township continually seeks to improve on its asset lifecycle strategies through additional
funding, resources, and by employing new techniques and technology.
Climate change is another factor that impacts asset lifecycles and lifecycle activities and is
discussed further in Section 7.0.
Total Cost of Ownership
Effective lifecycle strategies are not only important to maximize asset value but help the
municipality forecast its future asset investments and to calculate the total cost of asset
ownership; these factors are key to calculating the infrastructure funding gap. Figure 6.2
2024 Asset Management Plan - 6.0 Asset Lifecycle Strategies
58
illustrates the relationship between asset lifecycle investment strategies and whole lifecycle
costs.
Figure 6. 2: Asset Lifecycle Strategies and Costs over Time
6.1 Roads
Table 6.1.1 outlines the roads lifecycle activities that maintain the Township's current TLOS and
what is required to achieve proposed (target) TLOS.
Table 6.1.1: The Township's Current and Proposed Lifecycle Management Strategies for Roads
Lifecycle Activity
Description
Requirements to Meet Current and
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
TLOS
Status
Shoulder
Maintenance
Re-gravelling and
regrading shoulders
to maintain road
safety.
Every 10 years.
Current
Every 7 years.
Proposed
2024 Asset Management Plan - 6.0 Asset Lifecycle Strategies
59
Lifecycle Activity
Description
Requirements to Meet Current and
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
TLOS
Status
Ditch Cleaning
and Regrading
Maintaining or
increasing stormwater
management
capacity.
Approximately 5 km/year.
Current
Approximately 25 km/year.
Proposed
Gravel Road Re-
gravelling
Resurfacing of gravel
roads to provide a
good driving surface
and extend service
life.
Maintain the gravel roads network
average at PCI = 65 (Good).
Current
Maintain the gravel roads network
average at PCI = 65 (Good).
Proposed
Gravel Patch
Repairs to holes,
washouts and soft
spots on gravel roads.
Approximately 200 tonnes/year.
Current
Approximately 700 tonnes/year.
Proposed
Crack Sealing
Maintenance to
extend asphalt
pavement life.
Every 10 years after road resurfacing
or reconstruction where pavement is
above PCI = 80.
Current
Every 5 years after road resurfacing or
reconstruction where pavement is
above PCI = 80.
Proposed
Partial Depth
Reconstruction:
Collector Roads
Rehabilitation of the
road to provide a
good driving surface
and extend service
life.
Generally rehabilitating below a PCI of
45.
Current
Rehabilitate when PCI is between 45
to 50.
Proposed
Convert surface treated (Low Class
Bitumen) roads to asphalt.
No
Change
Full Depth
Reconstruction:
Collector Roads
Full replacement of
the road surface and
base.
Generally reconstructing below a PCI
of 40
Current
Reconstruct when PCI is below 45.
Proposed
Convert surface treated (Low Class
Bitumen) roads to asphalt when
reconstruction is warranted.
No
Change
Partial Depth
Reconstruction:
Local Roads
Rehabilitation of the
road to improve the
road surface and
base.
Generally rehabilitating below a PCI of
40
Current
Rehabilitate when PCI is between 40
to 45.
Proposed
Convert surface treated (Low Class
Bitumen) roads to asphalt when
partial depth reconstruction is
warranted.
No
Change
2024 Asset Management Plan - 6.0 Asset Lifecycle Strategies
60
Lifecycle Activity
Description
Requirements to Meet Current and
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
TLOS
Status
Full Depth
Reconstruction:
Local Roads
Complete
replacement of a very
poor road with a new
road structure.
Generally reconstructing below a PCI
of 35
Current
Reconstruct when PCI is below 40.
Proposed
Convert surface treated (Low Class
Bitumen) roads to asphalt when full
depth reconstruction is warranted.
No
Change
Surface
Treatment: LCB
Collector Roads
Rehabilitation of the
road to provide a
good driving surface
and extend service
life.
Rehabilitate with a single lift surface
treatment when PCI is less than 70
No
Change
Rehabilitate with a double lift surface
treatment when PCI is less than 65
No
Change
Surface
Treatment: LCB
Local Roads
Rehabilitation of the
road to provide a
good driving surface
and extend service
life.
Rehabilitate with a single lift surface
treatment when PCI is less than 65
No
Change
Rehabilitate with a double lift surface
treatment when PCI is less than 60
No
Change
Reconstruct and
pave high-
volume gravel
roads
Reconstruct high-
volume gravel roads
to HCB pavement to
improve service,
safety and reduce re-
graveling
maintenance costs
Consider reconstruction to HCB when
traffic volumes exceed approximately
125 vehicles per day.
Proposed
Increase the
platform width
of narrow gravel
roads
Widen gravel roads
where 2-way traffic
flow is constrained.
Consider widening narrow gravel
roads where traffic flows are being
impeded and there are safety
concerns.
Proposed
Roads Needs
Study
A visual assessment of
existing roadway
conditions and
deficiencies.
Reviewed every 5 years.
No
Change
6.2 Bridges and Major Culverts
Table 6.2.1 outlines the bridges and major culvert lifecycle activities to maintain Township's TLOS.
There are no changes proposed to the current lifecycle strategies or TLOS
2024 Asset Management Plan - 6.0 Asset Lifecycle Strategies
61
Table 6.2.1: The Township's Lifecycle Management Strategies for Bridges Major Culverts
Lifecycle Activity
Description
Requirements to Maintain Current and
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
TLOS
Status
Bridge and
Major Culvert
Rehabilitations
and
Replacements
Reconstruction,
rehabilitation or
replacement of poor
structures or
structural elements.
Reconstruct, rehabilitate or replace
structures or structural elements as
recommended by OSIM inspections.
No
Change
Bridge Deck
Washing
Removal of salt and
sediments to reduce
corrosion potential.
Once a year
No
Change
Spall Repairs
Minor repairs to
peeling concrete
surfaces.
As required to meet Minimum
Maintenance Standards (O. Reg
239/02)
No
Change
Structure
Inspections
A visual assessment of
existing structural
conditions and
deficiencies.
Biannual Inspections of 100% of
Structures per the Public
Transportation and Highway
Improvement Act.
No
Change
6.3 Stormwater Management
Tables 6.3.1 and 6.3.2 outline the storm sewer and minor culvert lifecycle activities that maintain
the Township's current TLOS and what is required to achieve proposed (target) TLOS.
Table 6.3.1: The Township's Current and Proposed Lifecycle Management Strategies for Storm
Sewers
Lifecycle Activity
Description
Requirements to Maintain Current and
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
TLOS
Status
Catch Basin and
Catch Basin
Manhole
Cleaning
Cleaning of
sediments and
debris from catch
basins to maintain
system capacity.
Every 10 years.
Current
Every 5 years.
Proposed
Storm Sewer
Flushing
Cleaning of
sediments and
debris from pipes to
maintain system
capacity.
Every 10 years.
Current
Every 5 years.
Proposed
Spot Repairs
Minor repairs to
pipes and catch
basins to maintain
system integrity.
Not available.
Current
As required.
Proposed
2024 Asset Management Plan - 6.0 Asset Lifecycle Strategies
62
Lifecycle Activity
Description
Requirements to Maintain Current and
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
TLOS
Status
Storm Sewer
Relining
Relining storm
sewers pipes to
maintain system
capacity and
structural integrity.
Not available.
Current
When feasible and practical, reline
pipes when PACP Rating = 4.
Proposed
Storm Sewer
Replacement
Full replacement of
storm sewers and
catch basins to
maintain system
capacity and
structural integrity.
Replace pipe when PACP Rating = 5.
No
Change
CCTV Inspections
Visual inspections
and assessments of
pipe conditions
using closed circuit
television cameras.
Every 10 years.
No
Change
Every 10 years.
Table 6.3.2: The Township's Current and Proposed Lifecycle Management Strategies for Minor
Culverts
Lifecycle Activity
Description
Requirements to Maintain Current and
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
TLOS
Status
Culvert Cleaning
Cleaning of
sediments and
debris from culverts
to maintain road
right-of-way
drainage capacity.
Not available.
Current
As required.
Proposed
Culvert
Replacements
Replacement of
minor culverts to
maintain road right-
of-way drainage
capacity.
Replace worst first ('Very Poor'
culverts) according to available
funding.
Current
Replace when culverts are 'Poor'.
Proposed
Culvert
Inspections
A visual assessment
of existing culvert
conditions and
deficiencies.
Every 5 years
No
Change
2024 Asset Management Plan - 6.0 Asset Lifecycle Strategies
63
6.4 Fleet and Equipment
Tables 6.4.1 outlines the fleet and equipment lifecycle activities to maintain the Township's TLOS.
There are no changes proposed to the current lifecycle strategies or TLOS.
Table 6.4.1: The Township's Current Lifecycle Management Strategies for Fleet and Equipment
Service
Division
Lifecycle
Activity
Description
Requirements to Maintain
Current and Proposed Technical
Levels of Service
TLOS
Status
Roads
Operations
and Building
Department
Operations
Vehicle or
Equipment
Replacement
Replace asset
prior to asset
failure.
Replace vehicle or equipment
when condition reaches 'Poor'
(>1 year remaining useful
service life).
No
Change
Roads
Operations
Rust
Protection
Apply
protection to
snowplow
trucks.
Annual applications.
No
Change
Roads
Operations
Annual Safety
Certifications
Certification
of Large
Trucks per
the MTO
Highway
Traffic Act.
Annual recertifications.
No
Change
Landfill
Operations
Vehicle or
Equipment
Replacement
Replace asset
prior to asset
failure.
Replace vehicle or equipment
when condition reaches
'Poor/Very Poor' (<1 year
remaining useful service life).
No
Change
All
Regular
Maintenance
Activities
such as
inspections,
changing
fluids and
tires.
As required to maintain vehicles
in sound working condition and
meet safety and maintenance
requirements.
No
Change
2024 Asset Management Plan - 7.0 Climate Change
64
7 Climate Change
Ontario's climate is changing, and the Township needs to prepare for the potential of hotter
temperatures, increasingly strong and more frequent storms, and more freezing rain events. All
these impacts pose potential risks to the Township's assets, and the ability to continue to provide
residents with the levels of service that they expect. Adapting to climate change will require
financing to modify assets to be more resilient and to increase the frequency of operations and
maintenance to address the extra stresses being put on assets and services.
Some of the potential effects of climate change are summarized in this section of the report. The
proposed TLOS targets in Section 4.0 and proposed changes to lifecycle activities in Section 6.0
are not intended specifically for climate change adaptation, although some of the proposed levels
of service and lifecycle activity improvements will partially mitigate some effects of climate
change. Implementation of additional measures to make assets and services more resilient to
climate change will require additional operating and capital investments.
Since the effects of climate change are so broad, complex, and long ranging, it is recommended
that a study be undertaken to develop a climate change adaptation strategy that identifies
additional actions and costs to combat the effects of climate change on the community, the
services, and the infrastructure. It is also recommended that the risks, actions, and costs
identified in this study be incorporated into future versions of the Township's asset management
plan.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 7.0 Climate Change
65
7.1 Roads
Table 7.1.1 outlines how the risks stemming from climate change could affect the Township's roads and the services they support.
The "Increased Lifecycle Actions" column summarizes the operating and capital related lifecycle activities that will likely increase over
the long term to mitigate the effects of climate change. These increases would be in addition to the increases to lifecycle activities
already proposed in Section 6.0 of the AMP.
Table 7.1.1: Potential Impacts of Climate Change to Roads Assets and Services
Climate Change Risks
Impacts to Assets
Impacts to Services
Increased Lifecycle Actions
Extreme and/or more
frequent heat events
- Softening of asphalt and
increased damage under
loads.
- Pavement buckling.
- Accelerated pavement
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
- Decreased driving quality.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary road
closures for repairs.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Rehabilitation of pavement
surfaces
o Pavement spot repairs
o Crack sealing
Extreme and/or more
frequent rain events
- Overland flooding of road
surfaces
- Undermining and
destabilization of road bases
and reduced load bearing
capacity.
- Road settlements.
- Potential of road washouts.
- Accelerated road
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary road
closures. caused by flooding
and/or for repairs.
- Decreased driving quality.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Rehabilitation of pavement
surfaces
o Pavement spot repairs
o Crack sealing
o Re-gravelling unpaved
roads
o Gravel patching
- Ditch cleaning and regrading
- Shoulder brushing and
maintenance
- Repairs to, or additional
erosion protection
- Tree removals
2024 Asset Management Plan - 7.0 Climate Change
66
Climate Change Risks
Impacts to Assets
Impacts to Services
Increased Lifecycle Actions
Increased freeze and
thaw cycles
- Increased road structure
destabilization and decreasing
load bearing capacity.
- Road settlements.
- Accelerated road
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
- Road closures to truck
traffic.
- Decreased driving quality.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary road
closures for repairs.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Rehabilitation of pavement
surfaces
o Pavement spot repairs
o Crack sealing
o Re-gravelling unpaved
roads
o Gravel patching
Increased frequency
of freezing rain events
- More frequent de-icing (pre-
wetting) of road surfaces.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Pre-wetting asphalt surfaces
Increased erosion and
debris from more
frequent heavy
rainfall and/or sudden
thaw events
- More blockages of ditches
and culverts leading to
increased potential of road
flooding and localized
washouts.
- Erosion and destabilization of
ditch embankments and
potential road and shoulder
washouts.
- Road and/or shoulder
settlements.
- Accelerated road
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary road
closures for repairs.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Rehabilitation of pavement
surfaces
o Pavement spot repairs
o Crack sealing
o Gravel patching
- Ditch cleaning and regrading
- Shoulder brushing and
maintenance
- Repairs to, or additional
erosion protection
Increased volumes of
water from heavy
rainfall and/or sudden
thaw events
- Overland flooding of road
surfaces
- Undermining and
destabilization of road bases
- More service interruptions
due to temporary road
closures for repairs.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Rehabilitation of pavement
surfaces
o Pavement spot repairs
o Crack sealing
2024 Asset Management Plan - 7.0 Climate Change
67
Climate Change Risks
Impacts to Assets
Impacts to Services
Increased Lifecycle Actions
and reduced load bearing
capacity.
- Road settlements.
- Potential of road washouts.
- Accelerated road
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
o Re-gravelling unpaved
roads
o Gravel patching
- Ditch cleaning and regrading
- Shoulder brushing and
maintenance
- Repairs to, or additional
erosion protection
- Tree Removals
7.2 Bridges and Major Culverts
Table 7.2.1 outlines how the risks stemming from climate change could affect the Township's bridges and major culverts and the
services they support.
The "Increased Lifecycle Actions" column summarizes the operating and capital related lifecycle activities that will likely increase over
the long term to mitigate the effects of climate change. These increases would be in addition to the increases to lifecycle activities
already proposed in Section 6.0 of the AMP.
Table 7.2.1: Potential Impacts of Climate Change to Bridge and Major Culvert Assets and Services
Climate Change Risks
Impacts to Assets
Impacts to Services
Increased Lifecycle Actions
Extreme and/or more
frequent heat events
- Softening of asphalt and
increased damage under
loads.
- Pavement buckling.
- Accelerated pavement
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
- Decreased driving quality.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary bridge
closures for repairs.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Repairs and rehabilitations
of pavement surfaces
- Repairs to underlying deck
surfaces
2024 Asset Management Plan - 7.0 Climate Change
68
Extreme and/or more
frequent rainfall
events
- Flooding of bridge surfaces
- Saturation of soils and
undermining and
destabilization of bridge
foundations, footings,
approaches, abutments and
wing walls.
- Accelerated bridge
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary bridge
closures for repairs.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Repairs and rehabilitations
of bridge and major culvert
elements
- Repairs to, or additional
erosion protection
Increased freeze and
thaw cycles
- Accelerated concrete
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary bridge
closures for repairs.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Repairs and rehabilitations
of bridge and major culvert
elements
- Spot repairs of concrete
spalling and pavement
Increased frequency
of freezing rain events
- More frequent de-icing (pre-
wetting) of bridge surfaces.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Pre-wetting (de-icing) of
bridge riding surfaces
Increased erosion
from more frequent
heavy rainfall and/or
sudden thaw events
- Destabilization of
embankments around
bridges.
- Increased rehabilitation
and/or erosion protection.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Repairs to, or additional
erosion protection
7.3 Stormwater Management
Table 7.3.1 outlines how the risks stemming from climate change could affect the Township's stormwater management assets and the
services they support.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 7.0 Climate Change
69
The "Increased Lifecycle Actions" column summarizes the operating and capital related lifecycle activities that will likely increase over
the long term to mitigate the effects of climate change. These increases would be in addition to the increases to lifecycle activities
already proposed in Section 6.0 of the AMP.
Table 7.3.1: Potential Impacts of Climate Change to Stormwater Management Assets and Services
Climate Change Risks
Impacts to Assets
Impacts to Services
Increased Lifecycle Activities
More frequent and/or
extreme rainfall
events
- Overwhelming of system
capacity causing overland
flooding of roads and
property.
- Undermining and
destabilization of road bases
and reduced load bearing
capacity.
- Soil saturation, undermining
and destabilization of road
bases and reduced load
bearing capacity.
- Road settlements.
- Road washouts.
- Accelerated road
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary road
closures caused by flooding
and/or for repairs.
- Property damage.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary road
closures. caused by flooding
and/or for repairs.
- Decreased driving quality.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Increased sizing of storm
sewers and minor culverts to
increase flow capacity
- Rehabilitation of pavement
surfaces
o Pavement spot repairs
o Crack sealing
o Re-gravelling unpaved
roads
o Gravel patching
- Ditch cleaning, regrading
and enlarging
- Shoulder brushing and
maintenance
- Tree removals
Increased erosion and
debris from more
frequent heavy
rainfall and/or sudden
thaw events
- More blockages of ditches
and culverts leading to
increased potential of road
flooding and localized
washouts.
- Erosion and destabilization of
ditch embankments and
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Rehabilitation of pavement
surfaces
o Pavement spot repairs
o Crack sealing
o Gravel patching
- Ditch cleaning and regrading
2024 Asset Management Plan - 7.0 Climate Change
70
potential road and shoulder
washouts.
- Road and/or shoulder
settlements.
- Accelerated road
deterioration.
- Shoulder brushing and
maintenance
- Storm sewer flushing
- Catch basin cleaning
Increased volumes of
water from heavy
rainfall and/or sudden
thaw events
- Overwhelming of system
capacity causing overland
flooding of roads and
property.
- Undermining and
destabilization of road bases
and reduced load bearing
capacity.
- Soil saturation, undermining
and destabilization of road
bases and reduced load
bearing capacity.
- Road settlements.
- Road washouts.
- Accelerated road
deterioration.
- More frequent repairs or
rehabilitations.
- More service interruptions
due to temporary road
closures for repairs.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Property damage.
- Increased sizing of storm
sewers and minor culverts
to increase flow capacity
- Rehabilitation of pavement
surfaces
o Pavement spot repairs
o Crack sealing
o Re-gravelling unpaved
roads
o Gravel patching
- Ditch cleaning, regrading
and enlarging
- Shoulder brushing and
maintenance
- Tree removals
7.4 Fleet and Equipment
Table 7.4.1 outlines how the risks stemming from climate change could affect the Township's fleet and equipment assets and the
services they support.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 7.0 Climate Change
71
The "Increased Lifecycle Actions" column summarizes the operating and capital related lifecycle activities that will likely increase over
the long term to mitigate the effects of climate change. These increases would be in addition to the increases to lifecycle activities
already proposed in Section 6.0 of the AMP.
Table 7.4.1: Potential Impacts of Climate Change to Fleet and Equipment Assets and Services
Climate Change Risks
Impacts to Assets
Impacts to Services
Increased Lifecycle Actions
More frequent and/or
extreme heat events
- More frequent use and higher
wear of vehicles and
equipment to make more
frequent road, bridge and
stormwater management
repairs or rehabilitations
- Reduced vehicle and
equipment lifespans
- Shortages of fleet and
equipment inventory to
handle higher frequency of
calls, repairs and emergencies
- Decreased response times
and longer service
interruptions.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Maintenance and servicing
of vehicles and equipment.
- Replacements of vehicles
and equipment
- Addition of new vehicles and
equipment
More frequent and/or
extreme rain events
- More frequent use and higher
wear of vehicles and
equipment to make more
frequent road, bridge and
stormwater management
repairs or rehabilitations
- Reduced vehicle and
equipment lifespans
- Shortages of fleet and
equipment inventory to
handle higher frequency of
calls, repairs and emergencies
- Decreased response times
and longer service
interruptions.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Maintenance and servicing
of vehicles and equipment.
- Replacements of vehicles
and equipment
- Addition of new vehicles and
equipment
2024 Asset Management Plan - 7.0 Climate Change
72
Increased frequency
of freezing rain events
- Shortages of fleet and
equipment inventory to
handle higher frequency of
calls, and emergencies
- Decreased response times
and longer service
interruptions.
- Higher servicing costs.
- Potential safety issues.
- Addition of new vehicles and
equipment
2024 Asset Management Plan - 8.0 Financial Strategy
73
8 Financial Strategy
Good financial management is required for sustainable assets and services, and the achievement
of strategic goals. Reg 588/17: Asset Management for Municipal Infrastructure requires
municipalities to outline its financial strategy and include a 10-year operating and capital plan in
the AMP. The overall objective of the Township's financial strategy is to maintain sustainable
services and assets at affordable rates to the residents and businesses of Drummond/North
Elmsley. Figure 8.1 illustrates the key components of the Township's Financial Strategy, which
guides development of the AMP's 10-year operating and capital plan.
Figure 8.1: Components of Township's Financing Strategy
2024 Asset Management Plan - 8.0 Financial Strategy
74
8.1 The Long-Term Financial Plan
Financial sustainability depends on setting tax rates that address today's infrastructure needs so
that it will not burden the next generation of citizens. To achieve that outcome, the Long-Term
Financial Plan (LTFP) is founded on three pillars:
1. Financial Sustainability
Providing and maintaining desired services and state of infrastructure levels without
resorting to unplanned increases in rates or disruptive cuts to services.
2. Financial Vulnerability
Managing the Township's dependency on outside funding sources that it does not
control.
3. Financial Flexibility
Maintaining the ability to adjust debt levels or taxes to meet financial obligations and the
amount of dependency the Township has on outside funding sources that it does not
control.
Creating a LTFP that connects the AMP's financial plan and the annual budget and forecast
ensures that the Township can financially adapt to the changing infrastructure needs and
maintain the sustainability of assets and services to acceptable levels.
8.2 Growth
Residential and commercial growth generates wealth within the community and provides
additional tax revenues to the Township to fund its future infrastructure needs. Township growth
is driven by new residents to the community and from the conversion of seasonal dwellings to
year-round dwellings.
At the time of this report, the Township was in the process of updating its Development Charges
Background Study and reviewing new growth projections. Therefore, the new projections were
unavailable at the time of drafting this report. Until such time as the new growth projections are
available, the 2024 AMP will continue to rely on the growth projections from the 2019
Background Study.
The 2019 Development Charges Background Study projected a growth rate for the Township
between 2019 to 2028 of 0.75% annually. This average falls below the averages for the Province
and Lanark County which grew between 2011 and 2016 at a rate of about 0.92% annually. The
Township's growth projections for 2024 are not anticipated to change significantly from the 2019
projections.
Because of the low growth projections, the infrastructure needs identified in the asset
management plan are not anticipated to be impacted or changed due to growth. There are,
however, implications to the Township's revenues to sustain the financial plan outlined in this
report. The low growth rate will result in a relatively flat revenue stream over the coming 10-year
2024 Asset Management Plan - 8.0 Financial Strategy
75
period which means the increasing financial burden for increasing infrastructure needs will need
to be supported by a relatively static population base.
8.3 The Financial Strategy - Overview
Table 8.3.1 sums up the 10-year operating and capital requirements to maintain Current TLOS
and achieve Proposed TLOS. The total 10-year infrastructure funding gap is the difference
between:
- The infrastructure needs to achieve the Current and Proposed TLOS (not including
property assets)
- The Township's historical 6-year average of annual capital investments plus the 2024
operating investments projected over the next 10 years (in 2024 values).
As Table 8.3.1 summarizes, the Township's historical levels of spending fall short of meeting both
Current TLOS and Proposed TLOS by $6.2 million and $27.7 million respectively. Affordably
achieving the Proposed TLOS is not feasible in the 10-year timeframe; however, the Township is
close to being able to financially sustain its Current TLOS.
The Sustainability Index (SI), which measures the adequacy of the Township's historical spending
averaged over the next 10 years, is currently at 0.8. To financially sustain its infrastructure
targets, a municipality should achieve a minimum Sustainability Index of 0.9.
The full 10-year funding gap to sustain Current TLOS can be attributed to shortfalls in average
capital investments. Operating investment levels are adequate. Therefore, if the Township
increases its historical levels of capital investments to reduce its 10-year gap by at least $5.6
million, then the Township could achieve the minimum sustainability target of 0.9 (excluding
building and property needs). The Township should, however, continue working toward or
utilizing some Proposed TLOS where matters of safety, efficiency and better service, and asset
management outcomes are evident.
Table 8.3.1: 10-year Financing Needs to Meet Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
LOS
Targets
10-year
Operating
Needs
10-year
Capital
Needs
Total
10-year
Needs
Historical
Investments1
Total 10-year
Infrastructure
Funding Gap2
Var.3
SI4
Current
LOS
$16.2M
$20.5M
$36.7M
$30.6M
$6.2M
16.8%
0.8
Proposed
LOS
$21.1
$47.1M
$68.2M
$30.6M
$27.7M
40.7%
0.6
Notes:
1. Historical investments are based on the Township's 6-year average of annual capital
investments plus the 2024 operating investments projected over the next 10 years (in 2024
values).
2024 Asset Management Plan - 8.0 Financial Strategy
76
2. The 10-year infrastructure funding gap is the difference between the required expenditures
to meet Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service and the Township's historical 6-
year average projected over 10 years.
3. The infrastructure funding gap measured as a % variance.
4. The Sustainability Index (S.I.) measures the adequacy of the Township's historical 6-year
average projected over 10 years to sustain the current and proposed levels of service. To be
sustainable, a municipality should achieve a minimum index of 0.9.
Since the outcome of Township's financial strategy is to achieve a balance between good services
and good assets that are affordable at acceptable levels of risk, the Township's financing strategy
will prioritize closing the infrastructure funding gap to maintain Current TLOS.
The Township's challenge to even meet Current TLOS is mainly driven by the capital investments
required to maintain the roads and bridges in their currently "Good" state. How the Township's
infrastructure arrived a generally "Good" state stems from staff's sound management practices,
the optimized use of grants and loans, and Council's support in making the necessary
investments.
The Township's good management practices will continue; however, moving forward the
Township will prioritize maintaining Current TLOS and close the financing gap to these current
service levels. The Township's strategy will be guided by four key principles:
1. Sustain current service levels to the community
2. Maintain affordability for the taxpayer
3. Maximize asset value for services
3. Prioritize safe assets and services
The actions to support the key principles include:
- Gradual, responsible, and affordable increases to taxes and user fees.
- Advocate to the provincial and federal governments for additional grants based on
sound justifications.
- When necessary, use targeted and sensible borrowing to address specific asset needs.
- Employ sound asset and financial management practices
- Utilize the Township's risk management strategy and practices to continuously assess
risks to assets and services to prioritize asset management actions
- Continuously adapt the Township's financial planning to the infrastructure needs and
affordability to the taxpayer by continuously updating the annual budget and forecast
and AMP.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 8.0 Financial Strategy
77
8.3.1 Capital Investment Forecast
Although the Township's financial strategy is centered on sustaining the Current TLOS, Table
8.3.1.1 and Figure 8.3.1.1 provide an overview of the capital requirements to sustain both
Current and Proposed TLOS.
It is estimated that annual capital investments of $2.1 million are required to sustain the Current
TLOS which equates to an infrastructure reinvestment rate of 0.5%. Based on the Township's 6-
year historical capital investment levels, this would equate to an annual capital infrastructure
funding gap of $0.6 million.
The annual capital investments to achieve Proposed TLOS are estimated at $4.7 million which
equates to a reinvestment rate of 1.2%. Based on the Township's 6-year historical capital
investment levels, this would equate to an annual capital infrastructure funding gap of $2.3
million.
Table 8.3.1.1: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
Technical Levels of Service
Targets
Required
Annual Investments
($,000)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual Capital
Infrastructure
Funding Gap
($,000)
Current Levels of Service
$2,050.2
0.5%
$630.8
Proposed Levels of Service
$4,707.7
1.2%
$2,297.0
Figure 8.3.1.1: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
8.3.2 Operating Maintenance Investment Forecast
Again, Table 8.3.2.1 and Figure 8.3.2.1 provides an overview of the operating requirements to
sustain both Current and Proposed TLOS despite the Township's financial strategy moving toward
sustaining Current TLOS.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 8.0 Financial Strategy
78
It is estimated that annual operating investments of $1.6 million are required to sustain the
Current TLOS which equates to an infrastructure reinvestment rate of 0.4%. Based on the
Township's 2024 operating investments levels, this would equate to an annual operating funding
surplus of $0.01 million.
The annual operating investments to achieve Proposed TLOS are estimated at $2.1 million which
equates to a reinvestment rate of 0.5%. Based on the Township's 2024 operating investments
levels, this would equate to an annual operating funding gap of $0.5 million.
Table 8.3.2.1: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service
Technical Levels of Service
Targets
Required Annual
Investments
($,000)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual
Operating
Infrastructure
Funding Gap
($,000)
Current Levels of Service
$1,623.7
0.4%
($13.7)
Proposed Levels of Service
$2,114.7
0.5%
$477.4
Figure 8.3.2.1: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service
8.3.3 Revenue Forecast
The revenue forecast focuses solely on what is required to sustain the Township's Current TLOS.
The Township annually collects approximately $1.4 million in revenue for the capital renewal
program. The annual capital investment requirements are $2.1 million to sustain Current TLOS,
thus creating an annual deficit of approximately $0.6 million.
2024 Asset Management Plan - 8.0 Financial Strategy
79
Table 8.3.3.1: Forecasted Revenue for Capital Funding
Annual Investment
Requirements*
($,000)
Annual Forecasted Revenue
Funding Available
($,000)
Surplus/(Deficit)
($,000)
$2,050.2
$1,419.3
($630.8)
*Based on typical asset lifecycles
8.3.4 Capital Reserves
Reserves play a critical role in long-term financial planning. Currently the Township has a $0.6
million in the Capital Reserves. The Capital Reserves are primarily used for:
- Stabilizing tax rates
- Financing one-time or short-term investments
- Accumulating funding for future infrastructure investments
- Funding infrastructure funding shortfalls
- Managing the use of debt
Table 8.3.4.1: Current Reserve Balances
Asset Category
Balance on December 31, 2023
($,000)
Roads
$375.3
Structures
$53.3
Fleet and Equipment
$195.8
Total
$624.3
8.3.5 The Infrastructure Funding Gap
The infrastructure funding gap represents the financial shortfall between what the municipality
can currently afford to fund versus what it should be funding to achieve desired infrastructure
conditions and community services.
The Annual Capital Funding Gap
To meet capital replacement and rehabilitation needs to sustain assets and maintain Current
TLOS, the Township will require average annual capital investments of approximately $2.1
million. As Table 8.3.5.1 summarizes, the Township has historically invested $1.4 million towards
capital projects per year and has approximately $0.6 million in capital reserves leaving an annual
funding gap of $0.6 million.
Table 8.3.5.1: Annual Capital Funding Gap
Annual Investment
Requirements*
($,000)
Annual Revenue
Funding
($,000)
Reserve Funding
($,000)
Surplus/(Deficit)
($,000)
$2,050.2
$1,419.3
$624.3
($568.4)
*Based on typical asset lifecycles
2024 Asset Management Plan - 8.0 Financial Strategy
80
The Annual Operating Funding Gap
Repairs and maintenance to extend and maximize the use and life of assets are funded from the
operating budget. The Township's maintenance needs to sustain assets and maintain Current
TLOS is approximately $1.6 million. As Table 8.3.5.2 summarizes, the Township has historically
invested $1.6 million towards maintaining the assets each year and has approximately $0.3
million ($300,000) in operating reserves to fund infrastructure related operating expenditures,
leaving an annual surplus funding gap of approximately $263,904.1.
Table 8.3.5.2: Annual Operating Funding Gap
Operations &
Maintenance Investment
Requirements
($,000)
Annual Revenue
Funding
($,000)
Reserve Funding
($,000)
Surplus/(Deficit
($,000)
$1,623.7
$1,637.34
$263.9
$263.9
8.4 Next Steps in the Financial Strategy
The Township's objective is to reduce the infrastructure funding gap by at least $5.6 million over
10 years to financially sustain its Current TLOS. The funding gap does not include the investments
for buildings and property. The Township has a framework to move forward with a strategy that
would cover all assets including facilities, and in the coming months the Township intends to
complete the strategy that would consider a mix of options including affordable revenue
increases, borrowing, and seeking grants from the provincial and federal governments.
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
81
Appendices
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
82
APPENDIX I - STATE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND O. REG 588/17 REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
i.
Roads
Table AI.i.1: The Township of Drummond/North Elmsley's Road Inventory
Asset
Category
Asset Class
Inventory
Replacement Value
(2024 Dollars in
Millions)
Paved Roads
HCB Semi-Urban Local Roads
0.5 km
$0.9
HCB Rural Collector Roads
58.2 km
$90.8
HCB Rural Local Roads
73.2 km
$114.1
LCB Rural Collector Roads
7.0 km
$11.0
LCB Rural Local Roads
3.8 km
$5.9
Sub-Total
142.7 km
$222.6
Unpaved
Roads
Collector Gravel Roads
8.1 km
$10.3
Local Gravel Roads
113.4 km
$143.1
Sub-Total
121.5 km
$153.4
Roads
Total
264.3 km
$376.0
State of the Roads Infrastructure (Current Levels of Service)
The Township updates its Roads Needs Study every five years to assess the current state of road
condition and performance. The most recent Roads Needs Study was completed in 2022, the
results of which are summarized on Table AI.i.2. Overall, the state of the Township's roads is
rated "Good."
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
83
Table AI.i.2: Current Condition and Performance of the Roads Assets
Asset Category
Asset Condition
Asset Performance
HCB (Paved) Semi-
Urban Local Roads
HCB (Paved) Rural
Collector Roads
HCB (Paved) Rural
Local Roads
LCB (Paved) Rural
Collector Roads
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
84
Asset Category
Asset Condition
Asset Performance
LCB (Paved) Rural
Local Roads
Collector Gravel
Roads
Local Gravel Roads
Summary:
Total Paved Roads
Inventory
Summary:
Total Unpaved
Roads Inventory
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
85
Asset Category
Asset Condition
Asset Performance
Summary: Total
Roads Inventory
Capital Investment Forecast
Capital investments are needed to resurface and reconstruct roads to maintain state-of-good
repair. The Township has analyzed the annual costs to generally maintain the roads as they are
(Current Technical Levels of Service) and the costs to improve the general state of the roads in
line with industry norms and best practices (Proposed Technical Levels of Service). Table AI-i-3
and Figure AI.i.3 summarize the annual capital investment requirements to achieve both
Technical Levels of Service targets.
Table AI.i.3: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
Technical Levels of Service
Annual Investment
($,000)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual Funding Gap
($,000)
Current Technical Levels of Service
$1,145.1
0.3%
$2,850.0
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
$3,995.1
1.1%
Figure AI.i.3: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
Operating Investment Forecast
Operating investments are needed to repair and maintain the roads, including activities like
clearing snow, sealing cracks, patching holes, and grading gravel roads and ditches. The Township
has analyzed the annual costs to keep maintenance practices as they are and remain compliant
$0.0M
$2.0M
$4.0M
$6.0M
$8.0M
$10.0M
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
Current Levels of Service
Proposed Levels of Service
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
86
with regulations (Current Technical Levels of Service) and the costs to increase maintenance
practices to improve public services and asset lifespans (Proposed Technical Levels of Service).
Table AI.i.4 and Figure AI.i.4 summarize the annual operating investment requirements to
achieve both Technical Levels of Service targets.
Table AI.i.4: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
Technical Levels of Service
Annual
Investment
($,000)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual Funding
Gap
($,000)
Current Technical Levels of Service
$1,418.9
0.5%
$316.1
Proposed Technical Levels of
Service
$1,735.0
0.5%
Figure AI.i.4: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
O. Reg. 588/17 Reporting: Levels of Service
Table AI.i.5 below shows the Community and Technical LOS that are required by the O. Reg.
588/17 to report.
Table AI.i.5: O. Reg. 588/17 Requirements
Community Levels of Service
Technical Levels of Service
Service Attribute: Scope
1. Description, which may
include maps, of the road
network in the
municipality and its level
of connectivity.
Please refer to Page 83 for
the map of the existing
road network
1. Number of lane-
kilometres of each
of the arterial
roads, collector
roads and local
roads as a
proportion of the
square kilometres
1.436 km2
$0.0M
$1.0M
$2.0M
$3.0M
$4.0M
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
Current Levels of Service
Proposed Levels of Service
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
87
of the land area of
the municipality.
Service Attribute: Quality
1. Description or images
that illustrate the
different levels of road
class pavement condition
For Pavement Rating Scale
please refer to the section
on 'Condition Measure'
above, Pages 78-80.
1. For paved roads in
the municipality,
the average
pavement condition
index value.
70.3
2. For the unpaved
roads in the
municipality, the
average surface
condition (e.g.,
excellent, good, fair,
or poor).
Good
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
88
Figure Al.i.1: Drummond/North Elmsley Road Network
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
89
Figure Al.i.2: Drummond/North Elmsley Road Conditions
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
90
ii.
Bridges and Major Culverts
Table AI-i-1: The Township of Drummond/North Elmsley's Road Inventory
Table AI.ii.1: The Township of Drummond/North Elmsley's Bridge and Major Culvert Inventory
Asset Category
Inventory
Replacement Value
(2024 Dollars in $,000)
Bridges
5
$7,053.2
Major Culverts (>3 metres wide)
9
$4,511.9
Structures Total
14
$11,565.0
State of the Bridges and Major Culverts Infrastructure (Current Levels of Service)
Assessing the condition of bridges and major culverts is based on visual assessments of the
structural elements for deficiencies such as cracking, spalling, corrosion, scouring,
barrier/guardrail damage, and erosion per the Ministry's Ontario Structure Inspection Manual
(OSIM).
The Township has set a target BCI of 70 for all bridges and major culverts which corresponds to
a "Good" condition. Currently, the average BCI rating for Bridges is 81.2 (Very Good) and the
average BCI rating for Major Culverts is 67.7 (Fair).
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
91
Table AI.ii.2: Current Condition and Performance of the Bridges and Major Culverts
Asset Category
Asset Condition
Asset Performance
Bridges
Major Culverts
Summary:
Structures
Capital Investment Forecast
Capital investments are needed to refurbish and replace bridges and major culverts to maintain
state-of-good repair. Because the safety of these structures is critical, the Township fully invests
what is required to maintain state-of-good repair. As Table AI-ii-3 and Figure AI-ii-3 illustrate
there is no difference between Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service.
Table AI.ii.3: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
Technical Levels of Service Targets
Annual
Investment
($,000's)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual
Funding Gap
($,000's)
Current Technical Levels of Service
$110.3
1.0%
$0.0
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
$110.3
1.0%
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
92
Figure AI.ii.3: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
Operating Investment Forecast
Operating investments are needed to repair and maintain the bridges and major culverts,
including activities like clearing snow, washing deck surfaces, repairing cracks, spalling concrete,
and guardrails. Again, because the safety of these structures is critical, the Township fully invests
what is required to maintain state-of-good repair. As Table AI-ii-4 and Figure AI-ii-4 illustrate
there is no difference between Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service.
Table AI-ii-4: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service
Technical Levels of Service Targets
Annual
Investment
($,000's)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual
Funding Gap
($,000's)
Current Levels of Service
$3.7
0.03%
$0.0
Proposed levels of Service
$3.7
0.03%
Figure AI.ii.4: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service
$0.0M
$0.3M
$0.5M
$0.8M
$1.0M
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
Current Levels of Service
Proposed Levels of Service
$-
$2,000.00
$4,000.00
$6,000.00
$8,000.00
$10,000.00
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
Operating Investments
Current Levels of Service
Proposed Levels of Service
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
93
O. Reg. 588/17 Reporting: Levels of Service
Table AI-ii-5: below shows the Community and Technical LOS that are required by the O. Reg.
588/17 to report.
Table AI.ii.5: O. Reg. 588/17 Requirements
Community Levels of Service
Technical Levels of Service
Service Attribute: Scope
1. Description of the traffic
that is supported by
municipal bridges (e.g.,
heavy transport vehicles,
motor vehicles,
emergency vehicles,
pedestrians, cyclists).
The Township's bridges
support:
- heavy transport
vehicles
- motor vehicles
- emergency vehicles
- pedestrians
- cyclists, and
- farm equipment
1. Percentage of
bridges in the
municipality with
loading or
dimensional
restrictions.
Loading = 0%
Dimensional
= 0%
Service Attribute: Quality
1. Description or images of
the condition of bridges
and how this would affect
use of the bridges.
The Township rates the
condition of bridges using
the OSIM inspections
Bridge Condition Index.
1. For bridges in the
municipality, the
average bridge
condition index
value. in the
municipality, the
average pavement
condition index
value.
81.2
2. Descriptions or images of
the condition of culverts
and how this would affect
use of the culverts.
The Township rates the
condition of major
culverts using the OSIM
inspections Bridge
Condition Index.
2. For structural
culverts in the
municipality, the
average bridge
condition index
value.
67.7
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
94
`
Figure Al.ii.1: Bridges and Major Culverts
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
95
Figure Al.ii.2: Bridges and Major Culverts
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
96
Figure Al.ii.3: Bridges and Major Culverts
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
97
iii.
Stormwater Management
Table AI.iii.1: The Township of Drummond/North Elmsley's Stormwater Management Inventory
Asset Category
Inventory
Replacement Value
(2024 Dollars in $,000)
Storm Sewers
843 m
$514.2
Minor Culverts (<3 metres wide)
680 m
$2,921.0
Stormwater Management Total
1523 m
$3,435.2
State of the Roads Infrastructure (Current Levels of Service)
The Township conducts regular visual inspections of the storm sewers, catch basins, and minor
culverts, the results of which are summarized on Table AI.iii.2. Overall, the state of the Storm
Sewers is rated "Fair," and the Minor Culverts are rated "Good."
Table AI.iii.2: Current Condition and Performance of the Stormwater Management Assets
Asset Category
Asset Condition
Asset Performance
Storm Sewers
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
98
Minor Culverts
Summary:
Stormwater
Management
Assets
Capital Investment Forecast
Capital investments are needed to replace sewer pipes and catch basins to maintain state-of-
good repair. Minor culvert replacements are financed from the operating budget. As Table AI.iii.3
and Figure AI.iii.4 summarize, there is no difference in Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service or investment requirements over the next 10-years.
Table AI.iii.3: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
Asset
Category
Technical Levels of Service Targets
Annual
Investment
($,000's)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual
Funding Gap
($,000's)
Storm
Sewers
Current Technical Levels of Service
$32.7
6.4%
$0.0
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
$32.7
6.4%
Figure AI.iii.3: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service
Operating Investment Forecast
$0.0M
$0.5M
$1.0M
$1.5M
$2.0M
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
Current Levels of Service
Proposed Levels of Service
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
99
Operating investments are needed to clean and replace minor culverts and to clean and inspect
storm sewers and catch basins. The Township has analyzed the annual costs to keep maintenance
practices as they are (Current Technical Levels of Service) and the costs to increase maintenance
practices to improve state-of-good repair for minor culverts and storm water management
service reliability (Proposed Technical Levels of Service). Table AI.iii.4 and Figure AI.iii.4
summarizes the annual operating investment requirements to achieve both Technical Levels of
Service targets.
Table AI.iii.4: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service
Asset
Category
Technical Levels of Service Targets
Annual
Investment
($,000's)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual
Funding Gap
($,000's)
Storm
Sewers
Current Technical Levels of Service
$2.4
0.5%
$1.4
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
$3.8
0.7%
Minor
Culverts
Current Technical Levels of Service
$49.2
1.7%
$173.6
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
$222.8
7.6%
Figure AI.iii.4: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service
O. Reg. 588/17 Reporting: Levels of Service
Table AI.iii.5 below shows the Community and Technical LOS that are required by the O.Reg.
588/17 to report.
$-
$500,000.00
$1,000,000.00
$1,500,000.00
$2,000,000.00
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
Current Levels of Service
Proposed Levels of Service
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
100
Table AI.iii.5: O. Reg. 588/17 Requirements
Community Levels of Service
Technical Levels of Service
Service Attribute: Scope
1. Description, which may
include maps, of the user
groups or areas of the
municipality that are
protected from flooding,
including the extent of
the protection provided
by the municipal
stormwater management
system.
Please refer to Map
AI.iii.1 for floodplain
mapping
1. Percentage of
properties in
municipality
resilient to a 100-
year storm.
89.4%
2. Percentage of
properties in
municipality
resilient to a 5-year
storm.in the
municipality, the
average pavement
condition index
value.
100%
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
101
Figure Al.iii.1: Floodplain mapping
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
102
Figure Al.iii.2: Innisville North Storm Sewers
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
103
Figure Al.iii.3: Innisville North Storm Sewers
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
104
Figure Al.iii.4: Innisville North Storm Sewers
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
105
iv.
Fleet and Equipment
Table AI.iv.1: The Township of Drummond/North Elmsley's Fleet and Equipment Inventory
Asset Category
Inventory
Replacement Value
(2024 Dollars in $,000)
Road Operations Accessory Equipment
11
$263.1
Road Operations Heavy Equipment
6
$2,254.4
Road Operations Small Trucks
5
$355.0
Road Operations Large Trucks
7
$2,460.0
Landfill Accessory Equipment
2
$101.3
Landfill Heavy Equipment
2
$665.0
Landfill Large Truck
1
$385.0
Building Department Small Truck
1
$75.0
Total
35
$6,558.7
State of the Fleet and Equipment Infrastructure (Current Levels of Service)
The Township's Fleet and Equipment are essential to maintaining service operations. The
condition of vehicles and equipment are monitored daily with "circle checks" and regularly
inspected and serviced. Replacement of vehicles or equipment depends on the age of the asset,
its amount of use, and servicing history. Overall, the state of the Township's fleet and equipment
assets is rated "Fair."
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
106
Table AI.iv.2: Current Condition and Performance of the Fleet and Equipment Assets
Asset Category
Asset Condition
Asset Performance
Road Operations
Accessory
Equipment
Road Operations
Heavy Equipment
Road Operations
Small Trucks
Road Operations
Large Trucks
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
107
Landfill Accessory
Equipment
Landfill Heavy
Equipment
Landfill Large
Truck
Building
Department Small
Truck
Summary:
Total Fleet and
Equipment
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
108
Capital Investment Forecast
Capital investments are needed to replace old and failing vehicles for safe operations. The
Township is exceeding its current levels of service primarily driven by the recent purchases of
large trucks. With the Proposed Technical Levels of Service, the Township's anticipated Fleet and
Equipment investments have been marginally reduced over the next 10 years as summarized in
Table AI.iv.3 and Figure AI.iv.3.
Table AI.iv.3: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed technical Levels of Service
Technical Levels of Service Targets
Annual
Investment
($,000's)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual
Funding Gap
($,000's)
Current Technical Levels of Service
$762.1
6.6%
($192.5)
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
$569.6
4.9%
Figure AI.iv.3: Capital Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed technical Levels of Service
Operating Investment Forecast
Operating investments are needed to service the vehicles and equipment and make repairs.
These activities ae essential to keep the vehicles operational so that prompt and reliable services
can be provided. Due to the importance of having reliable vehicles and equipment there is no
difference between Current and Proposed Technical Levels of Service and the financing to do so
as summarized in Table AI.iv.4 and Figure AI.iv.4.
Table AI.iv.4: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service
Technical Levels of Service Targets
Annual
Investment
($,000's)
Reinvestment
Rate
Annual
Funding Gap
($,000's)
Current Technical Levels of Service
$149.5
1.3%
$0.0
Proposed Technical Levels of Service
$149.5
1.3%
$0.0M
$0.5M
$1.0M
$1.5M
$2.0M
$2.5M
$3.0M
$3.5M
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
Current Levels of Service
Proposed Levels of Service
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
109
Figure AI.iv.4: Operating Requirements to Achieve Current and Proposed Technical Levels of
Service
$-
$50,000.00
$100,000.00
$150,000.00
$200,000.00
$250,000.00
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
Current Levels of Service
Proposed Levels of Service
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
110
APPENDIX II - INFRASTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT VALUES
HCB Collector Roads
$90.8M
LCB Collector Roads
$11.0M
HCB Local Roads
$114.1M
HCB Semi-
Urban Local
Roads...
LCB Local Roads
$5.9M
Collector Gravel
Roads (High Volume)
$33.4M
Local Gravel Roads
(Low Volume)
$119.9M
Bridges
$7.1M
Major Culverts
$4.5M
Minor Culverts
$2.9M
Storm Sewers
$0.5M
Accessory Equipment
$0.3M
Heavy Equipment
$2.3M
Small Trucks
$0.4M
Large Trucks
$2.5M
Landfill Accessory
Equipment
$0.1M
Landfill Heavy
Equipment
$0.7M
Landfill Large Truck
$0.4M
Building Dept Small
Truck
$0.1M
Facilities
$10.5M
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
111
APPENDIX III - ASSET LEVELS OF SERVICE OUTCOMES
Asset Levels of
Service
Predominant Community Service Outcomes
Health &
Safety
Reliability Quality Quantity Efficiency Accessibility
Condition
X
X
X
X
X
X
Operational Functionality
X
X
X
X
X
Capacity to Meet
Demands
X
X
X
X
X
X
Operational Resiliency
X
X
X
Environmental Resiliency
X
X
X
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
112
APPENDIX IV - THE TOWNSHIP'S RISK MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS
i.Consequences of Failure Table
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
113
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
114
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
115
ii.Asset Class Risk Profile
iii.Condition Asset Level of Service Risk Profile
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
116
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
117
iv.
Performance Asset Level of Service Risk Profile
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
118
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
119
v.Current Risk Priorities
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
120
Asset Class
ALOS
Type
ALOS Description
ALOS
Target
Current ALOS
Current
State
Risk
Current State Risk
Priority Ranking
(Higher Number =
Higher Priority)
Major Culverts
C
Structure Condition
BCI = 70
BCI <40
100
1
HCB Rural Local Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 65
PCI <40
75
2
Gravel Collector Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Very Poor
75
2
Major Culverts
C
Structure Condition
BCI = 70
BCI = 40 - 59
80
4
HCB Semi-Urban Local
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 65
PCI <40
65
5
Gravel Local Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Very Poor
65
5
Road Operations - Heavy
Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Condition =
Fair
Very Poor
90
7
HCB Rural Local Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 65
PCI = 40 - 45
60
8
Gravel Collector Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Poor
60
8
Road Operations - Heavy
Equipment
P
Operational Resiliency
Fair
Very Poor
70
10
HCB Rural Local Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Poor
52
11
Minor Culverts
C
Structure Condition
Fair
Very Poor
60
12
Storm Sewers
C
Pipe Condition
PACP = 3
(Fair)
PACP = 5 (Fail
in 1-5 yrs)
48
12
HCB Semi-Urban Local
Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Poor
44
14
Road Operations -
Accessory Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Condition =
Fair
Very Poor
55
14
Major Culverts
C
Structure Condition
BCI = 70
BCI = 60 - 69
60
16
Landfill Operations -
Large Trucks
C
Fleet Condition
Adequate
Very Poor
45
17
Landfill Operations -
Heavy Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Adequate
Very Poor
45
17
Landfill Operations -
Accessory Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Adequate
Very Poor
45
17
HCB Rural Collector
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI=70
PCI = 51 - 69
51
20
Gravel Collector Roads
C
Surface Condition
PCI = 70
PCI = 45 - 69
51
20
Landfill Operations -
Heavy Equipment
P
Operational Resiliency
Fair
Very Poor
40
22
HCB Rural Collector
Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
45
23
HCB Rural Local Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 65
PCI = 46 - 64
45
23
LCB Rural Collector
Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
45
23
Gravel Collector Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
45
23
Bridges
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
45
23
Major Culverts
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
45
23
Road Operations - Heavy
Equipment
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
45
23
Road Operations - Heavy
Equipment
P
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Fair
45
23
Road Operations - Small
Trucks
C
Truck Condition
Condition =
Fair
Very Poor
35
31
Asset Class
ALOS
Type
ALOS Description
ALOS
Target
Current ALOS
Current
State
Risk
Current State Risk
Priority Ranking
(Higher Number =
Higher Priority)
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
121
Road Operations - Large
Trucks
C
Truck Condition
Condition =
Fair
Poor
56
31
HCB Rural Local Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
39
33
Gravel Local Roads
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
39
33
Road Operations - Large
Trucks
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
39
33
Minor Culverts
C
Structure Condition
Fair
Poor
48
36
Road Operations -
Accessory Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Condition =
Fair
Poor
44
37
Storm Sewers
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
30
38
Road Operations -
Accessory Equipment
P
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Fair
30
38
Gravel Local Roads
P
Capacity to Meet Demands
Good
Fair
27
40
Minor Culverts
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
27
40
Road Operations -
Accessory Equipment
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
27
40
Road Operations -
Accessory Equipment
P
Operational Resiliency
Fair
Poor
36
40
Road Operations - Small
Trucks
C
Truck Condition
Condition =
Fair
Poor
28
45
Road Operations - Small
Trucks
C
Truck Condition
Condition =
Fair
Poor
28
45
Road Operations - Small
Trucks
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
18
47
Road Operations - Small
Trucks
P
Operational Functionality
Good
Fair
18
47
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
122
vi.Ten-year Asset Level of Service Priorities
Asset Class
ALOS
Type
ALOS Description
ALOS Target
10 Year ALOS
10-
Year
Risk
10-Year Risk Priority
Ranking
(Higher Number =
Higher Priority)
Major Culverts
C
Structure Condition
BCI = 70
BCI <40
100
1
Road Operations -
Heavy Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Condition = Fair
Very Poor
90
2
HCB Rural Collector
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI=70
PCI <45
85
3
LCB Rural Collector
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 70
PCI <45
85
3
Gravel Collector
Roads
C
Surface Condition
PCI = 70
PCI <35
85
3
Bridges
C
Structure Condition
BCI = 70
BCI = 40 - 59
80
6
HCB Rural Local
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 65
PCI <40
75
7
Gravel Collector
Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Very Poor
75
7
Road Operations -
Heavy Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Condition = Fair
Poor
72
9
Gravel Local Roads
C
Surface Condition
PCI = 65
PCI <30
70
10
Road Operations -
Large Trucks
C
Truck Condition
Condition = Fair
Very Poor
70
10
Road Operations -
Heavy Equipment
P
Operational Resiliency
Fair
Very Poor
70
10
HCB Rural Collector
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI=70
PCI = 45 - 50
68
13
LCB Rural Collector
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 70
PCI = 45 - 50
68
13
HCB Semi-Urban
Local Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 65
PCI <40
65
15
Gravel Local Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Very Poor
65
15
HCB Rural Local
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 65
PCI = 40 - 45
60
17
Gravel Collector
Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Poor
60
17
Bridges
C
Structure Condition
BCI = 70
BCI = 60 - 69
60
17
Major Culverts
C
Structure Condition
BCI = 70
BCI = 60 - 69
60
17
Minor Culverts
C
Structure Condition
Fair
Very Poor
60
17
Storm Sewers
C
Pipe Condition
PACP = 3 (Fair)
PACP = 5 (<1yr
or failed)
60
17
Road Operations -
Large Trucks
C
Truck Condition
Condition = Fair
Poor
56
23
Road Operations -
Accessory
Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Condition = Fair
Very Poor
55
24
HCB Rural Local
Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Poor
52
25
Asset Class
ALOS
Type
ALOS Description
ALOS Target
10 Year ALOS
10-
Year
Risk
10-Year Risk Priority
Ranking
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
123
(Higher Number =
Higher Priority)
HCB Rural Collector
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI=70
PCI = 51 - 69
51
26
Minor Culverts
C
Structure Condition
Fair
Poor
48
27
HCB Rural Collector
Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
45
28
HCB Rural Local
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 65
PCI = 46 - 64
45
28
LCB Rural Collector
Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
45
28
LCB Rural Local
Roads
C
Pavement Condition
PCI = 65
PCI = 46 - 64
45
28
Gravel Collector
Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
45
28
Bridges
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
45
28
Major Culverts
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
45
28
Road Operations -
Heavy Equipment
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
45
28
Road Operations -
Heavy Equipment
P
Capacity
to
Meet
Demands
Good
Fair
45
28
Landfill Operations
- Large Trucks
C
Fleet Condition
Adequate
Very Poor
45
28
Landfill Operations
- Heavy Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Adequate
Very Poor
45
28
Landfill Operations
- Accessory
Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Adequate
Very Poor
45
28
HCB Semi-Urban
Local Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Poor
44
40
Road Operations -
Accessory
Equipment
C
Equipment Condition
Condition = Fair
Poor
44
40
Landfill Operations
- Heavy Equipment
P
Operational Resiliency
Fair
Very Poor
40
42
HCB Rural Local
Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
39
43
Gravel Local Roads
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
39
43
Road Operations -
Large Trucks
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
39
43
Road Operations -
Accessory
Equipment
P
Operational Resiliency
Fair
Poor
36
46
Road Operations -
Small Trucks
C
Truck Condition
Condition = Fair
Very Poor
35
47
Storm Sewers
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
30
48
Asset Class
ALOS
Type
ALOS Description
ALOS Target
10 Year ALOS
10-
Year
Risk
10-Year Risk Priority
Ranking
(Higher Number =
Higher Priority)
2024 Asset Management Plan - Appendices
124
Road Operations -
Accessory
Equipment
P
Capacity
to
Meet
Demands
Good
Fair
30
48
Gravel Local Roads
P
Capacity
to
Meet
Demands
Good
Fair
27
50
Minor Culverts
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
27
50
Road Operations -
Accessory
Equipment
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
27
50
Road Operations -
Small Trucks
P
Operational
Functionality
Good
Fair
18
53