This is the exact embedded text of the captured official document.
Snapshot 10c0439d2482 · verified 2026-06-09 ·
original document ·
archived snapshot ·
unofficial consolidation, the official version is held by the municipal clerk.
2024
ASSET MANAGEMENT
PLAN
This Asset Management Program was prepared by:
Empowering your organization through advanced
asset management, budgeting & GIS solutions
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
i | P a g e
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................... 1
About this Document ...................................................................................... 3
An Overview of Asset Management................................................................... 5
Portfolio Overview ........................................................................................ 13
Financial Strategy ........................................................................................ 24
Recommendations and Key Considerations ...................................................... 29
Appendix A: Road Network ............................................................................ 31
Appendix B: Bridges & Culverts ..................................................................... 40
Appendix C: Storm Sewer Network ................................................................ 47
Appendix D: Buildings .................................................................................. 52
Appendix E: Machinery & Equipment .............................................................. 58
Appendix F: Vehicles .................................................................................... 64
Appendix G: Condition Assessment Guidelines ................................................. 70
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria .................................................................... 72
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
ii | P a g e
List of Figures
Figure 1: Service Life Remaining Calculation...................................................... 7
Figure 2 Standard Condition Rating Scale .......................................................... 8
Figure 3 Lifecyle Management Typical Interventions ........................................... 9
Figure 4 Risk Equation .................................................................................. 10
Figure 5 Asset Portfolio Replacement Value ..................................................... 15
Figure 6 Forecasted Capital Requirements ....................................................... 16
Figure 7 Overall Asset Risk Breakdown ........................................................... 18
Figure 8 Service Delivery Values .................................................................... 18
Figure 9 Average Annual Capital Requirements vs. Actual Capital Reinvestment by
Category ..................................................................................................... 20
Figure 10 Population Dependency Ratios ......................................................... 22
Figure 11 Population vs Employment Numbers................................................. 23
Figure 12 Road Network Replacement Value by Segment .................................. 31
Figure 13 Road Network Average Age vs Average EUL ...................................... 32
Figure 14 Road Network Condition Breakdown ................................................. 32
Figure 15 LCB Road Lifecycle Model ................................................................ 34
Figure 16 Gravel Road Lifecycle Model ............................................................ 34
Figure 17 Road Network Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements ............. 35
Figure 18 Road Network Risk Breakdown ........................................................ 36
Figure 19 Road Network Map ......................................................................... 39
Figure 20 Bridges & culverts Replacement Cost ................................................ 40
Figure 21 Bridges & culverts average age vs average EUL ................................. 41
Figure 22 Bridges & culverts condition breakdown ............................................ 41
Figure 23 Bridge & culvert condition images .................................................... 42
Figure 24 Bridges & culverts forecasted capital replacement requirements .......... 44
Figure 25 Bridges & culverts risk breakdown ................................................... 45
Figure 26 Storm Sewer Network Replacement Cost .......................................... 47
Figure 27 Storm Sewer Network Average Age vs Average EUL ........................... 47
Figure 28 Storm Sewer Network Condition Breakdown ...................................... 48
Figure 29 Storm Sewer Network Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements .. 49
Figure 30 Storm Sewer Network Risk Breakdown ............................................. 50
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
iii | P a g e
Figure 31 Buildings Replacement Cost ............................................................ 52
Figure 32 Buildings Average Age vs Average EUL ............................................. 53
Figure 33 Buildings Condition Breakdown ........................................................ 53
Figure 34 Buildings Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements .................... 55
Figure 35 Buildings Risk Breakdown ............................................................... 56
Figure 36 Machinery & Equipment Replacement Costs ...................................... 58
Figure 37 Machinery & Equipment Average Age vs Average EUL ......................... 59
Figure 38 Machinery & equipment condition breakdown .................................... 59
Figure 39 Machinery & Equipment Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements 61
Figure 40 Machinery & Equipment Risk Breakdown ........................................... 62
Figure 41 Vehicle Replacement Costs .............................................................. 64
Figure 42 Vehicles Average Age vs Average EUL .............................................. 65
Figure 43 Vehicles Condition Breakdown ......................................................... 65
Figure 44 Vehicle Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements ....................... 67
Figure 45 Vehicles Risk Breakdown ................................................................. 68
List of Tables
Table 1 Ontario Regulation 588/17 Requirements and Reporting Deadlines ........... 3
Table 2 Asset Classifications ............................................................................ 6
Table 3 Huron Shores & Ontario Census Information ........................................ 21
Table 4 Algoma District Population Projections ................................................. 23
Table 5 Road Network Annual Capital Requirement Comparison ......................... 25
Table 6 Average Annual Capital Requirements ................................................. 26
Table 7 Current Funding Position vs Required Funding ...................................... 27
Table 8 Phasing in Annual Tax Increases ......................................................... 27
Table 9 Premiums for Debt Financing Projects ................................................. 28
Table 10 Asphalt Road Current Lifecycle Strategy ............................................. 33
Table 11 Surface Treated Road Current Lifecycle Strategy ................................. 33
Table 12 Road Network System-generated 10-Year Capital Costs ....................... 36
Table 13 Road Network Community Levels of Service ....................................... 37
Table 14 Road Network Technical Levels of Service .......................................... 38
Table 15 Bridges & culverts Current Lifecycle Strategy ...................................... 43
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
iv | P a g e
Table 16 Bridges & culverts system-generated 10-year capital costs .................. 44
Table 17 Bridges & culverts community levels of service ................................... 46
Table 18 Bridges & culverts Technical Levels of Service .................................... 46
Table 19 Storm Sewer Network Current Lifecycle Strategy ................................ 48
Table 20 Storm Sewer Network System-generated 10-Year Capital Costs............ 50
Table 21 Storm Sewer Network Community Levels of Service ............................ 51
Table 22 Storm Sewer Network Technical Levels of Service ............................... 51
Table 23 Buildings Current Lifecycle Strategy .................................................. 54
Table 24 Buildings System-Generated 10-Year Capital Costs ............................. 56
Table 25 Buildings Community Levels of Service .............................................. 57
Table 26 Buildings Technical Levels of Service ................................................. 57
Table 27 Machinery & equipment current lifecycle strategy ................................ 60
Table 28 Machinery & Equipment System-Generated 10-Year Capital Costs ......... 62
Table 29 Machinery & Equipment Community Levels of Service .......................... 63
Table 30 Machinery & Equipment Technical Levels of Service ............................. 63
Table 31 Vehicles current lifecycle strategy ..................................................... 66
Table 32 Vehicles System-Generated 10-Year Capital Costs............................... 67
Table 33 Vehicles Community Levels of Service ............................................... 69
Table 34 Vehicles Technical Levels of Service .................................................. 69
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
1 | P a g e
Executive Summary
Municipal infrastructure provides the foundation for the economic, social,
and environmental health and growth of a community through the delivery
of services. The goal of asset management is to balance delivering critical
services in a cost-effective manner. This involves the development and
implementation of asset management strategies and long-term financial
planning.
The overall replacement cost of the asset categories owned by Huron Shores
total $181 million. 87% of all assets analysed are in fair or better condition
and assessed condition data was available for 95% of all assets. For the
remaining assets, assessed condition data was unavailable, and asset age
was used to approximate condition - a data gap that persists in most
municipalities. Generally, age misstates the true condition of assets, making
assessments essential to accurate asset management planning, and a
recurring recommendation.
The development of a long-term, sustainable financial plan requires an
analysis of whole lifecycle costs. Using a combination of proactive lifecycle
strategies (roads) and replacement only strategies (all other assets) to
determine the lowest cost option to maintain the current level of service, a
sustainable financial plan was developed.
To meet capital replacement and rehabilitation needs for existing
infrastructure, prevent infrastructure backlogs, and achieve long-term
sustainability, the Municipality's average annual capital requirement totals
$3.31 million. Based on a historical analysis of sustainable capital funding
sources, the Municipality is committing approximately $1.85 million towards
capital projects or reserves per year. As a result, the Municipality is funding
56% of its annual capital requirements. This creates a total annual funding
deficit of $1.46 million.
Addressing annual infrastructure funding shortfalls is a difficult and long-
term endeavour for municipalities. Considering the Municipality's current
funding position, it will require many years to reach full funding for current
assets. Short phase-in periods to meet these funding targets may place too
high a burden on taxpayers too quickly, whereas a phase-in period beyond
20 years may see a continued deterioration of infrastructure, leading to
larger backlogs.
To close annual deficits for capital contributions from tax revenues for asset
needs, it is recommended the Municipality review the feasibility of
implementing a 1.9% increase in revenues annually over a 15-year phase-in
period, to be allocated to capital in addition to the $1.85 million allocated.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
2 | P a g e
In addition to annual needs, there is also an infrastructure backlog of $2.2
million, comprising assets that remain in service beyond their estimated
useful life. It is highly unlikely that all such assets are in a state of disrepair,
requiring immediate replacements or full reconstruction. This makes
targeted and consistent condition assessments integral to refining long-term
replacement and backlog estimates.
Risk frameworks and levels of service targets can then be used to prioritize
projects and help select the right lifecycle intervention for the right asset at
the right time--including replacement or full reconstruction. The Municipality
has developed preliminary risk models which are integrated with its asset
register. These models can produce risk matrices that classify assets based
on their risk profiles.
Most municipalities across Canada continue to struggle with meeting
infrastructure demands. This challenge was created over many decades and
will take many years to overcome. To this end, several recommendations
should be considered, including:
-
Continuous and dedicated improvement to the Municipality's
infrastructure datasets, which form the foundation for all analysis,
including financial projections and needs.
-
Continuous refinements to the risk and lifecycle models as
additional data becomes available. This will aid in prioritizing
projects and creating more strategic long-term capital budgets.
-
Development of key performance indicators for all infrastructure
programs to establish benchmark data to calibrate levels of service.
The Municipality has taken important steps in building its asset management
program, including developing a more complete and accurate asset
register--a substantial initiative. Continuous improvement to this
inventory will be essential in maintaining momentum, supporting long-term
financial planning, and delivering affordable service levels to the community.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
3 | P a g e
About this Document
The Municipality of Huron Shores Asset Management Plan (AMP) was
developed by PSD Citywide Ltd. in accordance with Ontario Regulation
588/17 ("O. Reg 588/17"). It contains a comprehensive analysis of the
Municipality's infrastructure portfolio. This is a living document that should
be updated regularly as additional asset and financial data becomes
available.
Ontario Regulation 588/17
As part of the Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act, 2015, the Ontario
government introduced Regulation 588/17 - Asset Management Planning for
Municipal Infrastructure. Along with creating better performing
organizations, more livable and sustainable communities, the regulation is a
key, mandated driver of asset management planning and reporting. It places
substantial emphasis on current and proposed levels of service and the
lifecycle costs incurred in delivering them.
Table 1 Ontario Regulation 588/17 Requirements and Reporting Deadlines
Requirement
2019 2022 2024 2025
Strategic Asset Management Policy
✓
✓
Asset Management Plans
✓
✓
⚫
State of infrastructure for core assets
✓
State of infrastructure for all assets
✓
⚫
Current levels of service for core assets
✓
Current levels of service for all assets
✓
Proposed levels of service for all assets
⚫
Lifecycle costs associated with current
levels of service
✓
✓
Lifecycle costs associated with proposed
levels of service
⚫
Growth impacts
✓
✓
⚫
Financial strategy
⚫
Scope
The scope of this document is to identify the current practices and strategies
that are in place to manage public infrastructure and to make
recommendations where they can be further refined. Through the
implementation of sound asset management strategies, the Municipality can
ensure that public infrastructure is managed to support the sustainable
delivery of municipal services.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
4 | P a g e
Asset Category
Source of Funding
Road Network
Tax Levy
Bridges & Culverts
Tax Levy
Storm Sewer Network
Tax Levy
Buildings
Tax Levy
Machinery & Equipment
Tax Levy
Vehicles
Tax Levy
Limitations and Constraints
The asset management program development required substantial effort by
staff. It was developed based on best-available data, and is subject to the
following broad limitations, constraints, and assumptions:
-
The analysis is highly sensitive to several critical data fields,
including an asset's estimated useful life, replacement cost,
quantity, and in-service date. Inaccuracies or imprecisions in any of
these fields can have substantial and cascading impacts on all
reporting and analytics.
-
User-defined and unit cost estimates, based typically on staff
judgment, recent projects, or established through completion of
technical studies, offer the most precise approximations of current
replacement costs. When this isn't possible, historical costs incurred
at the time of asset acquisition or construction can be inflated to
present day. This approach, while sometimes necessary, can
produce inaccurate estimates.
-
In the absence of condition assessment data, age was used to
estimate asset condition ratings. This approach can result in an
over- or understatement of asset needs. As a result, financial
requirements generated through this approach can differ from those
produced by in-field assessments.
-
The risk models are designed to support objective project
prioritization and selection. However, in addition to the inherent
limitations that all models face, they also require availability of
important asset attribute data to ensure that asset risk ratings are
valid, and assets are properly stratified within the risk breakdown.
Missing attribute data can misclassify assets.
These limitations have a direct impact on most of the analysis presented,
including condition summaries, age profiles, long-term replacement and
rehabilitation forecasts, and shorter term, 10-year forecasts that are
generated from the Municipality's primary asset management system.
These challenges are quite common and require long-term commitment and
sustained effort by staff. As the Municipality's asset management program
evolves and advances, the quality of future AMPs and other core documents
that support asset management will continue to increase.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
5 | P a g e
An Overview of Asset Management
Municipalities are responsible for managing and maintaining a broad portfolio
of infrastructure assets to deliver services to the community. The goal of
asset management is to minimize the lifecycle costs of delivering
infrastructure services, manage the associated risks; while maximizing the
value and levels of service the community receives from the asset portfolio.
Lifecycle costs can span decades, requiring planning and foresight to ensure
financial responsibility is spread equitably across generations. An asset
management plan is critical to this planning, and an essential element of the
broader asset management program. The industry-standard approach and
sequence to developing a practical asset management program begins with
a Strategic Plan, followed by an Asset Management Policy and an Asset
Management Strategy, concluding with an Asset Management Plan (AMP).
This industry standard, defined by the Institute of Asset Management (IAM),
emphasizes the alignment between the corporate strategic plan and various
asset management documents.
Foundational Documents
In the municipal sector, 'asset management strategy' and 'asset
management plan' are often used interchangeably. Other concepts such as
'asset management framework', 'asset management system', and 'strategic
asset management plan' further add to the confusion; lack of consistency in
the industry on the purpose and definition of these elements offers little
clarity. To make a clear distinction between the policy, strategy, and the
plan, see the following sections for detailed descriptions of the document
types.
Strategic Plan
The strategic plan has a direct, and cascading impact on asset management
planning and reporting, making it a foundational element. Developing
alignment with corporate goals and objectives through to service delivery
and lifecycle management ensures the Municipality has line of sight to
achieve their strategic objectives.
Asset Management Policy
An asset management policy represents a statement of the principles
guiding the Municipality's approach to asset management activities as well
as their commitment. It aligns with the organization and provides clear
direction to municipal staff on their roles and responsibilities.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
6 | P a g e
Asset Management Strategy
An asset management strategy outlines the translation of organizational
objectives into asset management objectives and provides a strategic
overview of the activities required to meet these objectives. It provides
greater detail than the policy on how the Municipality plans to achieve its
asset management objectives through planned activities and decision-
making criteria.
Key Technical Concepts
Effective asset management integrates several key components, including
data management, lifecycle management, risk management, and levels of
service.
Asset Hierarchy and Data Classification
Asset hierarchy illustrates the relationship between individual assets and
their components, and a wider, more expansive network and system. How
assets are grouped in a hierarchy structure can impact how data is
interpreted. Key category details are summarized at the asset segment
level.
Table 2 Asset Classifications
AM Category
AM Segment
Core
Roads Network
Asphalt Roads
Gravel Roads
Surface Treated Roads
Streetlights
Bridges and Culverts
Structural Culverts
Non-Structural Culverts
Bridges
Storm Sewer System
Mains
Non-Core
Vehicles
General Government
Planning and Development
Protection Services
Recreation and Cultural Services
Transportation Services
Machinery & Equipment
General Government
Planning and Development
Protection Services
Recreation and Cultural Services
Transportation Services
Buildings
General Government
Planning and Development
Protection Services
Recreation and Cultural Services
Transportation Services
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
7 | P a g e
Replacement Costs
There are a range of methods to determine the replacement cost of an
asset, and some are more accurate and reliable than others. The two
methodologies are:
-
User-Defined Cost and Cost/Unit: Based on costs provided by
municipal staff which could include average costs from recent
contracts; data from engineering reports and assessments; staff
estimates based on knowledge and experience
-
Cost Inflation/CPI Tables: Historical cost of the asset is inflated
based on Consumer Price Index or Non-Residential Building
Construction Price Index
User-defined costs based on reliable sources are a reasonably accurate and
reliable way to determine asset replacement costs. Cost inflation is typically
used in the absence of reliable replacement cost data. It is a reliable method
for recently purchased and/or constructed assets where the total cost is
reflective of the actual costs that the Municipality incurred. As assets age,
and new products and technologies become available, cost inflation becomes
a less reliable method.
Estimated Useful Life and Service Life Remaining
The estimated useful life (EUL) of an asset is the period over which the
Municipality expects the asset to be available for use and remain in service
before requiring replacement or disposal. The EUL for each asset was
assigned according to the knowledge and expertise of municipal staff and
supplemented by existing industry standards when necessary.
By using an asset's in-service date and its EUL, the Municipality can
determine the service life remaining (SLR) for each asset. Using condition
data and the asset's SLR, the Municipality can more accurately forecast
when it will require replacement. The SLR is calculated as follows:
Figure 1: Service Life Remaining Calculation
Asset Condition
An incomplete or limited understanding of asset condition can mislead long-
term planning and decision-making. Accurate and reliable condition data
helps to prevent premature and costly rehabilitation or replacement and
ensures that lifecycle activities occur at the right time to maximize asset
value and useful life.
A condition assessment rating system provides a standardized descriptive
framework that allows comparative benchmarking across the Municipality's
EUL
SLR
In Service
Date
Current
Year
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
8 | P a g e
asset portfolio. The figure below outlines the condition rating system used to
determine asset condition for all assets in Huron Shores.
Figure 2 Standard Condition Rating Scale
The analysis is based on assessed condition data as available. In the
absence of assessed condition data, asset age is used as a proxy to
determine asset condition. Appendix G: Condition Assessment Guidelines
includes additional information on the role of asset condition data and
provides basic guidelines for the development of a condition assessment
program.
Lifecycle Management Strategies
The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. This
process is affected by a range of factors including an asset's characteristics,
location, utilization, maintenance history and environment. Asset
deterioration has a negative effect on the ability of an asset to fulfill its
intended function, and may be characterized by increased cost, risk and
even service disruption.
To ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meeting the
needs of customers, it is important to establish a lifecycle management
strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration.
There are several field intervention activities that are available to extend the
life of an asset. These activities can be generally placed into one of three
categories: maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement. The Figure 3
provides a description of each type of activity and the general difference in
cost.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
9 | P a g e
Depending on initial lifecycle management strategies, asset performance can
be sustained through a combination of maintenance and rehabilitation, but
at some point, replacement is required. Understanding what effect these
activities will have on the lifecycle of an asset, and their cost, will enable
staff to make better recommendations.
The Municipality's approach to lifecycle management is described within each
asset category. Developing and implementing a proactive lifecycle strategy
will help staff to determine which activities to perform on an asset and when
they should be performed to maximize useful life at the lowest total cost of
ownership.
Figure 3 Lifecyle Management Typical Interventions
Lifecycle
Activity
Description
Example
(Roads)
Cost
Maintenance
Activities that prevent defects
or deteriorations from
occurring
Crack Seal
$
Rehabilitation/
Renewal
Activities that rectify defects
or deficiencies that are already
present and may be affecting
asset performance
Mill &
Re-surface
$$$$
Replacement/
Reconstruction
Asset end-of-life activities that
often involve the complete
replacement of assets
Full
Reconstruction
$$$$$$
Risk Management Strategies
Municipalities generally take a 'worst-first' approach to infrastructure
spending. Rather than prioritizing assets based on their importance to
service delivery, assets in the worst condition are fixed first, regardless of
their criticality. However, not all assets are created equal. Some are more
important than others, and their failure or disrepair poses more risk to the
community than that of others. For example, a road with a high volume of
traffic that provides access to critical services poses a higher risk than a low
volume rural road. These high-value assets should receive funding before
others.
By identifying the various impacts of asset failure and the likelihood that it
will fail, risk management strategies can identify critical assets, and
determine where maintenance efforts, and spending, should be focused.
Qualitative Approach to Risk
The qualitative risk assessment involves the documentation of risks to the
delivery of services that the municipality faces given the current state of the
infrastructure and asset management strategies. These risks can be
understood as corporate level risks.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
10 | P a g e
Quantitative Approach to Risk
Asset risk is defined using the following formula:
Figure 4 Risk Equation
The probability of failure relates to the likelihood that an asset will fail at a
given time. The probability of failure focuses on two highly imperative
impacts for risk assessment - structural and functional impacts. Structural
impacts are related to the structural aspects of an asset such as load
carrying capacity, condition, or breaks; whereas the functional impacts can
include parameters, slope, traffic count, and other impacts that can affect
the performance of an asset.
The consequence of failure describes the overall effect that an asset's failure
will have on an organization's asset management goals. Consequences of
failure can range from non-eventful to impactful.
Each asset has been assigned a probability of failure score and consequence
of failure score based on available asset data. These risk scores can be used
to prioritize maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement strategies for
critical assets.
Levels of Service
A level of service (LOS) is a measure of what the Municipality is providing to
the community and the nature and quality of that service. Within each asset
category, technical metrics and qualitative descriptions that measure both
technical and community levels of service have been established and
measured as data is available.
These metrics include the technical and community level of service metrics
that are required as part of Ontario Regulation 588/17 as well as additional
performance measures that the Municipality has selected in accordance with
best practices. The Municipality measures the level of service provided at
two levels: Community Levels of Service, and Technical Levels of Service.
Community Levels of Service
Community levels of service are a simple, plain language description or
measure of the service that the community receives. The Municipality has
determined the qualitative descriptions that will be used to determine the
community level of service provided. These descriptions can be found in the
Levels of Service subsection within each asset category.
Risk
Probability
of Failure
Consequence
of Failure
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
11 | P a g e
Technical Levels of Service
Technical levels of service are a measure of key technical attributes of the
service being provided to the community. These include mostly quantitative
measures and tend to reflect the impact of the Municipality's asset
management strategies on the physical condition of assets or the
quality/capacity of the services they provide.
Current and Proposed Levels of Service
The Municipality is focused on measuring the current level of service
provided to the community. Once current levels of service have been
measured, the Municipality plans to establish proposed levels of service over
a 10-year period, in accordance with Ontario Regulation 588/17.
Proposed levels of service should be realistic and achievable within the
timeframe outlined by the Municipality. They should also be determined with
consideration of a variety of community expectations, fiscal capacity,
regulatory requirements, corporate goals, and long-term sustainability. Once
proposed levels of service have been established, and prior to July 2025, the
Municipality must identify a lifecycle management and financial strategy
within which these targets can be achieved.
Climate Change
Climate change can cause severe impacts on human and natural systems
around the world. The effects of climate change include increasing
temperatures, higher levels of precipitation, droughts, and extreme weather
events. In 2019, Canada's Changing Climate Report (CCCR 2019) was
released by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC).
The report revealed that between 1948 and 2016, the average temperature
increase across Canada was 1.7°C; moreover, during this period, Northern
Canada experienced a 2.3°C increase. The temperature increase in Canada
has doubled that of the global average. If emissions are not significantly
reduced, the temperature could increase by 6.3°C in Canada by the year
2100 compared to 2005 levels. Observed precipitation changes in Canada
include an increase of approximately 20% between 1948 and 2012.
By the late 21st century, the projected increase could reach an additional
24%. During the summer months, some regions in Southern Canada are
expected to experience periods of drought at a higher rate. Extreme weather
events and climate conditions are more common across Canada. Recorded
events include droughts, flooding, cold extremes, warm extremes, wildfires,
and record minimum arctic sea ice extent.
The changing climate poses a significant risk to the Canadian economy,
society, environment, and infrastructure. Physical infrastructure is vulnerable
to damage and increased wear when exposed to these extreme events and
climate variabilities. Canadian municipalities are faced with the responsibility
to protect their local economy, citizens, environment, and physical assets.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
12 | P a g e
Integration Climate Change and Asset Management
Asset management practices aim to deliver sustainable service delivery - the
delivery of services to residents today without compromising the services
and well-being of future residents. Climate change threatens sustainable
service delivery by reducing the useful life of an asset and increasing the risk
of asset failure. Desired levels of service can be more difficult to achieve
because of climate change impacts such as flooding, high heat, drought, and
more frequent and intense storms.
To achieve the sustainable delivery of services, climate change
considerations should be incorporated into asset management practices. The
integration of asset management and climate change adaptation observes
industry best practices and enables the development of a holistic approach
to risk management.
Impacts of Growth
The demand for infrastructure and services will change over time based on a
combination of internal and external factors. Understanding the key drivers
of growth and demand will allow the Municipality to plan for new
infrastructure more effectively, and the upgrade or disposal of existing
infrastructure. Increases or decreases in demand can affect what assets are
needed and what level of service meets the needs of the community.
As growth-related assets are constructed or acquired, they should be
integrated into Huron Shores' asset management program. While the
addition of residential units will add to the existing assessment base and
offset some of the costs associated with growth, the Municipality will need to
review the lifecycle costs of growth-related infrastructure. These costs
should be considered in long-term funding strategies that are designed to, at
a minimum, maintain the current level of service.
Reinvestment Rate
As assets age and deteriorate, they require additional investment to
maintain a state of good repair. The reinvestment of capital funds, through
asset renewal or replacement, is necessary to sustain an adequate level of
service. The reinvestment rate is a measurement of available or required
funding relative to the total replacement cost. By comparing the actual vs.
target reinvestment rate the Municipality can determine the extent of any
existing funding gap.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
13 | P a g e
Portfolio Overview
Community Profile
The Municipality of Huron Shores is a single-tier municipality, part of the
Algoma District, which is located along the North Channel of Lake Huron in
Northern Ontario.
Huron Shores was incorporated on January 1, 1999, as part of a province-
wide initiative in Ontario to streamline and strengthen local governance. This
incorporation involved merging the Corporation of the Villages of Iron
Bridge, The Corporation of the Township of Thessalon, The Corporation of
the Township of Thompson, The Corporation of Townships of Day and Bright
Additional, along with portions of the geographic township of Bright and the
geographic township of Gladstone. The amalgamation aimed to reduce
administrative costs and improve the delivery of services by consolidating
smaller municipalities into larger, more financially viable entities.
The Municipality of Huron Shores is characterized by its expansive natural
landscapes, which include a mix of forested areas, lakes, and a shoreline
stretching along Lake Huron. This geographical diversity supports a variety
of wildlife and offers various recreational opportunities, making it an
attractive destination for outdoor enthusiasts. The Municipality benefits from
its scenic routes, which are popular for hiking, biking, and scenic drives,
particularly during the summer and fall seasons. Additionally, the area's
historic sites and cultural landmarks enhance its rural charm.
Economic demand in Huron Shores is largely driven by tourism, particularly
with visitors attracted to the area's natural settings and recreational
opportunities. This boosts local businesses and seasonal industries.
Additionally, real estate is a significant factor, as the scenic beauty and
tranquility of the area draw people looking for vacation homes or peaceful
permanent residences. The Municipality's focus on maintaining its
environmental assets and quality of life also attracts retirees and families
seeking a quieter lifestyle away from urban centers.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
14 | P a g e
State of the Infrastructure
Replacement Cost
All Huron Shores' asset categories have a total replacement cost of $181
million based on available inventory data. This total was determined based
on a combination of user-defined costs and historical cost inflation. This
estimate reflects replacement of historical assets with similar, not
necessarily identical, assets available for procurement today.
Asset
Category
Replacement
Cost
Asset
Condition
Financial Capacity
Road
Network
$114,913,898
Fair
(52%)
Annual Requirement:
$1,232,485
Funding Available:
$1,089,498
Annual Deficit:
$142,987
Bridges &
Culverts
$33,400,638
Fair
(58%)
Annual Requirement:
$982,387
Funding Available:
$590,000
Annual Deficit:
$392,387
Storm
Sewer
Network
$1,746,065
Fair
(48%)
Annual Requirement:
$23,281
Funding Available:
$0
Annual Deficit:
$23,281
Buildings
$25,625,252
Good
(74%)
Annual Requirement:
$588,978
Funding Available:
$100,710
Annual Deficit:
$488,268
Machinery &
Equipment
$1,545,601
Fair
(51%)
Annual Requirement:
$142,241
Funding Available:
$18,725
Annual Deficit:
$123,516
Vehicles
$4,242,879
Good
(78%)
Annual Requirement:
$341,132
Funding Available:
$46,695
Annual Deficit:
$294,437
Overall
$181,474,333
Fair
(57%)
Annual Requirement:
$3,310,504
Funding Available:
$1,845,628
Annual Deficit:
$1,464,876
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
15 | P a g e
Figure 5 Asset Portfolio Replacement Value
Forecasted Capital Requirements
Aging assets require maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement. Figure 6
below illustrates the cyclical short-, medium- and long-term infrastructure
replacement requirements for all asset categories analyzed. On average,
$3.3 million is required each year to remain current with capital replacement
needs for Huron Shores' asset portfolio (red dotted line).
Although actual spending may fluctuate substantially from year to year, this
figure is a useful benchmark for annual capital expenditure targets (or
allocations to reserves) to ensure projects are not deferred and replacement
needs are met as they arise. This figure relies on age and available condition
data. Based on the current replacement cost of the portfolio, estimated at
$181 million, this represents an annual target reinvestment rate of 1.8%.
$1.5m
$1.7m
$4.2m
$25.6m
$33.4m
$114.9m
$50m
$100m
$150m
Machinery & Equipment
Storm Sewer Network
Vehicles
Buildings
Bridges & Culverts
Road Network
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
16 | P a g e
Figure 6 Forecasted Capital Requirements
The chart also illustrates a backlog of $2.2 million, comprising assets that remain in service beyond their estimated useful life. It is unlikely
that all such assets are in a state of disrepair, requiring immediate replacements or major renewals. This makes targeted and consistent
condition assessments integral.
Risk frameworks, proactive lifecycle strategies, and levels of service targets can then be used to prioritize projects, continuously refine
estimates for both backlogs and ongoing capital needs and help select the right treatment for each asset
$3.3m
$2.2m
$22.5m
$19.8m
$20.2m
$8.3m
$11.6m
$10.4m
$28.6m
$17.7m
$13.0m
$9.3m
$7.8m
$10.0m
$35.6m
$15.9m
$9.6m
$6.2m
$9.5m
$22.9m
$37.4m
$17.8m
$0
$5m
$10m
$15m
$20m
$25m
$30m
$35m
$40m
Forecasted Capital Requirements
Bridges & Culverts
Buildings
Machinery & Equipment
Road Network
Storm Sewer Network
Vehicles
Annual Requirement
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
17 | P a g e
Condition of Asset Portfolio
The current condition of the assets is central to all asset management
planning. Collectively, 87% of assets in Huron Shores are in fair or better
condition. This estimate relies on both age-based and field condition data.
Assessed condition data is available for the inventory in the road network,
bridges and culverts as well as buildings; for the remaining portfolio, age is
used as an approximation of condition. Assessed condition data is invaluable
in asset management planning as it reflects the true condition of the asset
and its ability to perform its functions.
Service Life Remaining
Based on asset age, available assessed condition data and estimated useful
life, 23% of the Municipality's assets will require rehabilitation / replacement
within the next 10 years. Details of the capital requirements are identified in
each asset section.
Risk & Criticality
Huron Shores has noted key trends, challenges, and risks to service delivery
that they are currently facing:
Capital Funding Strategies
Major capital rehabilitation and replacement projects are often
entirely dependant on the availability of grant funding
opportunities. When grants are not available, rehabilitation
and replacement projects are often deferred.
Lifecycle Management Strategies & Aging Infrastructure
The current lifecycle management strategy for all asset
categories is considered more reactive than proactive. It is a
challenge to find the right balance between maintenance,
capital rehabilitation, and the replacement of assets. Staff
hope to develop better defined strategies that will extend asset
lifecycles and result in a lower total cost to the Municipality.
Climate Change & Extreme Weather
Asset deterioration is accelerated due to extreme weather,
which in some cases can cause unexpected failures. Freeze-
thaw cycles, ice jams, and surface flooding from extreme
rainfall have been experienced by the Municipality in recent
years. These events make long-term planning difficult and can
result in a lower level of service.
Growth
Growth is a lessor concern it is the changing demographics;
rural community is changing to retirees and former city
residents with different service expectations.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
18 | P a g e
The overall asset risk breakdown for Huron Shores asset inventory is
portrayed in the figure below.
Figure 7 Overall Asset Risk Breakdown
Reviewing the list of very high-risk assets to evaluate how best to mitigate
the level of risk the Municipality is experiencing will help advance Huron
Shores asset management program.
Levels of Service
Levels of service are a measure of the quality and scope of the services that
municipal infrastructure provides to the community. Both quantitative and
qualitative metrics are used to measure the current level of service.
Strategic Plan
Huron Shores strategic plan is currently in development in conjunction with a
Recreation Master Plan. The strategic plan will focus on a five-year horizon,
providing the Municipality's vision and key directions to shape the programs
and services of Huron Shores.
Service Delivery Values
As a guide to developing and measuring service delivery, service delivery
values were identified that align staff work practices with community
expectations.
Figure 8 Service Delivery Values
All the community and technical levels of service will meet regulatory
requirements for each asset category outlined in the appendix.
1 - 4
5 - 7
8 - 9
10 - 14
15 - 25
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
$14,038,809
$23,807,282
$73,502,043
$30,777,060
$39,349,139
(8%)
(13%)
(41%)
(17%)
(22%)
-The assets that are used to provide services
to the community and how they are defined
Scope
-Services are provided with minimal
disruption and are available to customers in
line with needs and expectations.
Quality
-Services are designed to be used efficiently
and long-term plans are in place to ensure
that they are available to all customers into
the future.
Performance
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
19 | P a g e
Huron Shores Climate Profile
The Municipality of Huron Shores is in Northern Ontario within the Algoma
District. The Municipality is expected to experience notable effects of climate
change which include higher average annual temperatures, an increase in
total annual precipitation, and an increase in the frequency and severity of
extreme events. According to Climatedata.ca - a collaboration supported by
Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) - the Municipality of Huron
Shores may experience the following trends:
Higher Average Annual Temperature:
- Between the years 1971 and 2000 the annual average temperature
was 4.9 ºC
- Under a high emissions scenario, the annual average temperatures are
projected to increase by 4.8 ºC by the year 2050 and over 6.5 ºC by
the end of the century.
Increase in Total Annual Precipitation:
- Under a high emissions scenario, Huron Shores is projected to
experience an 12% increase in precipitation by the year 2051 and a
16% increase by the end of the century.
Increase in Frequency of Extreme Weather Events:
- It is expected that the frequency and severity of extreme weather
events will change.
- In some areas, extreme weather events will occur with greater
frequency and severity than others especially those impacted by Great
Lake winds.
Lake Huron
The Great Lakes are one of the largest sources of fresh water on earth,
containing 21 percent of the world's surface freshwater. There are 35 million
people living in the Great Lakes watershed and Lake Huron is the second
largest of the Great Lakes. The area of Lake Huron Watershed is
approximately 131,100 km2. The physical impacts of climate change are
most noticeable from: flooding, extreme weather events such as windstorms
and tornados, and/or rising water levels eroding shorelines and natural
spaces. Erosion and flooding pose a threat to the surrounding built
infrastructure such as park assets, bridges, and roads.
Communities located in the Great Lakes region may experience more severe
windstorms or tornados because of climate change, causing damage to both
the natural and built environment.
Public health and safety depend on the stability and predictability of the
ecosystem in the Great Lakes watershed. The quality of water is threatened
by anthropogenic climate change because of blue-green algae blooms, soil
erosion, and agricultural, stormwater, and wastewater runoff. The safety of
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
20 | P a g e
the public is threatened by the physical impacts of flooding such as flooding
and erosion. In some cases, homeowners located near the lakeshore are
already at risk of losing their homes.
Reinvestment Rate
The graph below depicts funding gaps or surpluses by comparing target vs
actual reinvestment rate. To meet the long-term replacement needs, the
Municipality is recommended to be allocating approximately $3.3 million
annually, for a target reinvestment rate of 1.8%. Actual annual spending on
infrastructure totals approximately $1.8 million, for an actual reinvestment
rate of 1.0%.
Figure 9 Average Annual Capital Requirements vs. Actual Capital Reinvestment by Category
Impacts of Growth
The demand for infrastructure and services will change over time based on a
combination of internal and external factors. Understanding the key drivers
of growth and demand will allow the Municipality to more effectively plan for
new infrastructure, and the upgrade or disposal of existing infrastructure.
Increases or decreases in demand can affect what assets are needed and
what level of service meets the needs of the community.
$19k
$47k
$101k
$590k
$1.1m
$23k
$142k
$341k
$589k
$982k
$1.2m
$500k
$1m
$2m
Storm Sewer Network
Machinery & Equipment
Vehicles
Buildings
Bridges & Culverts
Road Network
Average Annual Requirements
Actual Reinvestment Rate
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
21 | P a g e
Table 3 Huron Shores & Ontario Census Information
Huron Shores Official Plan (December 2011)
The purpose of the Official Plan for the Municipality of Huron Shores,
approved with modifications on December 16, 2011, is to outline goals,
objectives, policies, and implementation measures for development over the
next 20 years, from 2007 to 2027. It aims to consider the impacts on the
social, economic, and natural environments of the municipality. This plan
serves as a comprehensive guide for sustainable community development,
ensuring that growth is managed in a way that balances development needs
with environmental preservation and social well-being.
The Official Plan focuses on maintaining an adequate land supply for diverse
uses, providing a range of housing options to meet demographic needs, and
designating land uses for optimal community benefit. It emphasizes
servicing developments adequately with infrastructure and public services,
protecting sensitive land uses from conflicts, and conserving natural
heritage. Additionally, the plan promotes economic growth by supporting
existing businesses and encouraging new small enterprises. It also includes
environmental efforts to clean up and repurpose contaminated sites,
ensuring growth is both balanced and sustainable.
The strategic approach detailed in Huron Shores' development guidelines
concentrates growth within established settlement areas, along lakefronts,
and in rural areas. This strategy is designed to leverage the existing
infrastructure and public services to accommodate a stable or slightly
growing population. By focusing development in these areas, the plan aims
to enhance the community's resource base, expand outdoor recreational and
tourism opportunities, and broaden the housing options available. This
targeted growth approach helps maintain the Municipality's rural character
while ensuring that development is both manageable and sustainable,
preventing unplanned sprawl and maximizing the use of land already
supported by necessary amenities. The Official Plan for the Municipality of
1 Statistics Canada. 2023. (table). Census Profile. 2021 Census of Population. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 98-
316-X2021001. Ottawa. Released November 15, 2023. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca /census-
ecensement/2021/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E (accessed September 7, 2024).
Census Characteristic1
Huron Shores
Ontario
Population 2021
1,860
14,223,942
Population Change 2016-2021
11.8%
5.8%
Total Private Dwellings
1,171
5,929,250
Population Density
4.1/km2
15.9/km2
Land Area
451.87 km2
892,411.76 km2
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
22 | P a g e
Huron Shores projects that the population will increase to between 1,800
and 2,000 residents over the next 20 years.
Regional Growth
In 2021 the Come North Conference Report was produced by FedNor and the
Government of Canada. The document describes short, medium, and long-
term objectives for all communities in Northern Ontario as it relates to
population growth.
According to the report all 11 Census Districts in Northern Ontario (Nipissing,
Parry Sound, Manitoulin, Sudbury, Greater Sudbury, Timiskaming, Algoma,
Thunder Bay, Rainy River, Kenora) are currently experiencing the following
trends: population decline, population aging, or labour shortages. The report
highlights a risk of these communities becoming economically unsustainable
unless population retention and attraction numbers improve. The risk is the
result of the dependency ratio increasing. The dependency ratio is the ratio
of people unable to support themselves without assistance; people between
the ages of 0 and 14 and 64 and older.
The goal is to achieve a dependency ratio of 0.5. In 1996, every Census
District was at or near the goal by 2016; there were no districts that were
below and more than half had a ratio more than 0.6. The following graph
displays the dependency ratio for each Census District in 1996 and 2016
along with a projected ratio for the year 2036.
Figure 10 Population Dependency Ratios
The Municipality of Huron Shores is found in the Algoma district, which is
expected to reach a dependency ratio of 0.89. The population trends overall
in the Algoma District are in decline. The following graph from the 2019
Northern Projections Algoma District Human Capital Series report by the
Northern Policy Institute, displays the population trends from 1986 to 2016.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
23 | P a g e
Figure 11 Population vs Employment Numbers
The following table, found in the same report, shows population projections
in the Algoma District for the years 2013 to 2041.
Table 4 Algoma District Population Projections
Year
Ages 0-19
Ages 20-64
Ages 65+
Total
2021
22,134
62,834
30,235
115,203
2026
22,011
57,265
33,958
113,234
2031
21,493
53,390
36,393
111,276
2036
20,820
51,849
36,718
109,387
2041
20,332
51,375
35,974
107,681
The most recent census data from 2021, shows a slight increase in the
population, reaching a total of 113,777. According to census data, a
significant population increase is seen in the population of 65 and older and
a decrease within the population of ages 20 to 64; thus further increasing
the dependency ratio.
Impact of Growth on Lifecycle Activities
By July 1, 2025, the Municipality's asset management plan must include a
discussion of how the assumptions regarding future changes in population
and economic activity informed the preparation of the lifecycle management
and financial strategy.
Planning for forecasted population growth may require the expansion of
existing infrastructure and services. As growth-related assets are
constructed or acquired, they should be integrated into the Municipality's
AMP. While the addition of residential units will add to the existing
assessment base and offset some of the costs associated with growth, the
Municipality will need to review the lifecycle costs of growth-related
infrastructure. These costs should be considered in long-term funding
strategies that are designed to, at a minimum, maintain the current level of
service.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
24 | P a g e
Financial Strategy
Financial Strategy Overview
Each year, the Municipality of Huron Shores makes important investments in
its infrastructure's maintenance, renewal, rehabilitation, and replacement to
ensure assets remain in a state of good repair. However, spending needs
typically exceed fiscal capacity. In fact, most municipalities continue to
struggle with annual infrastructure deficits. Achieving full-funding for
infrastructure programs will take many years and should be phased-in
gradually to reduce burden on the community.
This financial strategy is designed for the Municipality's existing asset
portfolio and is premised on two key inputs: the average annual capital
requirements and the average annual funding typically available for capital
purposes. The annual requirements are based on the replacement cost of
assets and their serviceable life, and where available, lifecycle modeling.
This figure is calculated for each individual asset and aggregated to develop
category-level values.
The annual funding typically available is determined by averaging historical
capital expenditures on infrastructure, inclusive of any allocations to
reserves for capital purposes. For Huron Shores, the proposed capital
allocations in 2024, for the tax funded projections and for water, were used
to project available funding.
Only reliable and predictable sources of funding are used to benchmark
funds that may be available on any given year. The funding sources include:
- Revenue from property taxation allocated to reserves for capital
purposes
- The Canada Community Benefits Fund (CCBF), formerly the Federal
Gas Tax Fund
- The Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund (OCIF)
Although provincial and federal infrastructure programs can change with
evolving policy, these are considered as permanent and predictable.
Annual Capital Requirements
The annual requirements represent the amount the Municipality should
allocate annually to each asset category to meet replacement needs as they
arise, prevent infrastructure backlogs, and achieve long-term sustainability.
For most asset categories the annual requirement has been calculated based
on a "replacement only" scenario, in which capital costs are only incurred at
the construction and replacement of each asset.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
25 | P a g e
However, for the road network, lifecycle management strategies have been
developed to identify costs that are realized through strategic rehabilitation
and renewal. The development of these strategies allows for a comparison of
potential cost avoidance.
The following table compares two scenarios:
Replacement Only Scenario: Based on the assumption that assets
deteriorate and - without regularly scheduled maintenance and
rehabilitation - are replaced at the end of their service life.
Lifecycle Strategy Scenario: Based on the assumption that lifecycle
activities are performed at strategic intervals to extend the service life
of assets until replacement is required.
Table 5 Road Network Annual Capital Requirement Comparison
Asset
Segment
Annual
Requirements
(Replacement Only)
Annual
Requirements
(Lifecycle
Strategy)
Difference
Asphalt Roads
$7,478
$7,478
$0
Surface Treated
Roads
$2,734,507
$1,105,456
$1,629,051
Streetlights
$119,551
$119,551
$0
Total
$2,861,536
$1,232,485
$1,629,051
The implementation of a proactive lifecycle strategy for surface treated
roads, leads to a potential annual cost avoidance of approximately $1.6
million. This represents a 57% reduction of the annual capital requirement
for the Road Network.
Gravel roads lifecycle costs are not considered capital and with the
maintenance performed on the roads. They are considered to never require
replacement. As such they are not included in the calculations for the annual
requirements.
Table 6 outlines the total average annual capital requirements for existing
assets in each asset category. Based on a replacement cost of $181 million,
annual capital requirements total approximately $3.3 million for all the asset
categories analysed.
The table also illustrates the system-generated, equivalent target
reinvestment rate (TRR), calculated by dividing the annual capital
requirements by the total replacement cost of each category. The cumulative
target reinvestment for these categories is estimated at 1.8%.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
26 | P a g e
Table 6 Average Annual Capital Requirements
Asset Category
Replacement
Cost
Annual Capital
Requirements
Target
Reinvestment
Rate
Road Network
$114,913,898
$1,232,485
1.07%
Bridges & Culverts
$33,400,638
$982,387
2.94%
Storm Sewer Network
$1,746,065
$23,281
1.33%
Buildings
$25,625,252
$588,978
2.30%
Machinery & Equipment
$1,545,601
$142,241
9.20%
Vehicles
$4,242,879
$341,132
8.04%
Total
$181,474,333
$3,310,504
1.8%
Although there is no industry standard guide on optimal annual investment
in infrastructure, the Target Reinvestment Rates above provide a useful
benchmark for organizations. In 2016, the Canadian Infrastructure Report
Card (CIRC) produced an assessment of the health of municipal
infrastructure as reported by cities and communities across Canada. The
CIRC remains a joint project produced by several organizations, including
the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), the Canadian Society of
Civil Engineers (CSCE), the Canadian Network of Asset Managers (CNAM),
and the Canadian Public Works Association (CPWA).
The 2016 version of the report card also contained recommended
reinvestment rates that can also serve as benchmarks for municipalities. The
CIRC suggest that, if increased, these reinvestment rates can "stop the
deterioration of municipal infrastructure." The report card contains both a
range for reinvestment rates that outlines the lower and upper
recommended levels, as well as current municipal averages.
Current Funding Levels
Table 7 summarizes how current capital funding levels compare with funding
required for each asset category. At existing levels, the Municipality is
funding 56% of its annual capital requirements for all infrastructure
analyzed. This creates a total annual funding deficit of $1.46 million.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
27 | P a g e
Table 7 Current Funding Position vs Required Funding
Asset Category
Annual
Capital
Requirements
Annual
Funding
Available
Annual
Deficit
Funding
Level
Road Network
$1,232,485
$1,089,498
$142,987
88%
Bridges & Culverts
$982,387
$590,000
$392,387
60%
Storm Sewer
Network
$23,281
$0
$23,281
0%
Buildings
$588,978
$100,710
$488,268
17%
Machinery &
Equipment
$142,241
$18,725
$123,516
13%
Vehicles
$341,132
$46,695
$294,437
14%
Total
$3,310,504
$1,845,628 $1,464,876
56%
Closing the Gap
Eliminating annual infrastructure funding shortfalls is a difficult and long-
term endeavor for municipalities. Considering the Municipality's current
funding position, it will require many years to reach full funding for current
assets.
This section outlines how the Municipality of Huron Shores can close the
annual funding deficits using own-source revenue streams, i.e., property
taxation and without the use of additional debt for existing assets.
Full Funding Requirements Tax Revenues
In 2024, Huron Shores will have an annual tax revenue of $4.4 million. As
illustrated in the following table, without consideration of any other sources
of revenue or cost containment strategies, full funding would require a
33.1% tax change over time.
To achieve this increase, several scenarios have been developed using
phase-in periods ranging from five to twenty years. Shorter phase-in periods
may place too high a burden on taxpayers, whereas a phase-in period
beyond 20 years may see a continued deterioration of infrastructure, leading
to larger backlogs.
Table 8 Phasing in Annual Tax Increases
Total % Increase Needed
in Annual Property
Taxation Revenues
Phase-in Period
5 Years
10 Years 15 Years 20 Years
33.1%
5.9%
2.9%
1.9%
1.4%
Funding 100% of annual capital requirements ensures that major capital
events, including replacements, are completed as required. Under this
scenario, projects are unlikely to be deferred to future years. This delivers
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
28 | P a g e
the highest asset performance and customer levels of service. Reallocating
debt payments as they become available is a financial strategy that Huron
Shores has considered utilizing once their loans have been paid.
Use of Debt
For reference purposes, the following table outlines the premium paid on a
project if financed by debt. For example, a $1M project financed at 3.0%
over 15 years would result in a 26% premium or $260,000 of increased
costs due to interest payments. For simplicity, the table does not consider
the time value of money or the effect of inflation on delayed projects.
Table 9 Premiums for Debt Financing Projects
Interest
Rate
Number of Years Financed
5
10
15
20
25
30
7.0%
22%
42%
65%
89%
115%
142%
6.5%
20%
39%
60%
82%
105%
130%
6.0%
19%
36%
54%
74%
96%
118%
5.5%
17%
33%
49%
67%
86%
106%
5.0%
15%
30%
45%
60%
77%
95%
4.5%
14%
26%
40%
54%
69%
84%
4.0%
12%
23%
35%
47%
60%
73%
3.5%
11%
20%
30%
41%
52%
63%
3.0%
9%
17%
26%
34%
44%
53%
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
29 | P a g e
Recommendations and Key
Considerations
Financial Strategies
Review feasibility of adopting a full-funding scenario that achieves 100% of
average annual requirements for the asset categories analyzed. This
involves:
- implementing a 1.9% annual tax increase over a 15-year phase-in
period and allocating the full increase in revenue towards capital
funding
- continued allocation of OCIF and CCBF funding as previously outlined
- using risk frameworks and staff judgement to prioritize projects,
particularly to aid in elimination of existing infrastructure backlogs
NOTE: Although difficult to capture inflation costs, supply chain issues, and
fluctuations in commodity prices will also influence capital expenditures.
Asset Data
1. Continuously review, refine, and calibrate lifecycle and risk profiles to
better reflect actual practices and improve capital projections. In
particular:
- the timing of various lifecycle events, the triggers for treatment,
anticipated impacts of each treatment, and costs
- the various attributes used to estimate the likelihood and
consequence of asset failures, and their respective weightings
2. Asset management planning is highly sensitive to replacement costs.
Periodically update replacement costs based on recent projects, invoices,
or estimates, as well as condition assessments, or any other technical
reports and studies. Material and labour costs can fluctuate due to local,
regional, and broader market trends, and substantially so during major
world events. Accurately estimating the replacement cost of like-for-like
assets can be challenging. Ideally, several recent projects over multiple
years should be used. Staff judgement and historical data can help
attenuate extreme and temporary fluctuations in cost estimates and keep
them realistic.
3. Like replacement costs, an asset's established serviceable life can have
dramatic impacts on all projections and analyses, including long-range
forecasting and financial recommendations. Periodically reviewing and
updating these values to better reflect in-field performance and staff
judgement is recommended.
Huron Shores Asset Management Plan
30 | P a g e
Risk and Levels of Service
1. Risk models and matrices can play an important role in identifying high-
value assets, and developing an action plan which may include repair,
rehabilitation, replacement, or further evaluation through updated
condition assessments. As a result, project selection and the
development of multi-year capital plans can become more strategic and
objective. Initial models have been built into Citywide for all asset
groups. As the data evolves and new attribute information is obtained,
these models should also be refined and updated.
2. Data on current performance should be centralized and tracked to
support any calibration of service levels ahead of O. Reg's 2025
requirements on proposed levels of service.
3. Staff should monitor evolving local, regional, and environmental trends
to identify factors that may shape the demand and delivery of
infrastructure programs. These can include population growth, and the
nature of population growth; climate change and extreme weather
events; and economic conditions and the local tax base. This data can
also be used to review and revise service level targets.
Appendix A: Road Network
31 | P a g e
Appendix A: Road Network
State of the Infrastructure
Huron Shores' road network comprises the largest share of its infrastructure
portfolio, with a current replacement cost of $114.9 million, distributed
primarily between asphalt, surface treatment, and gravel roads.
The state of the infrastructure for the road network is summarized below.
Replacement Cost
Condition
Financial Capacity
$114.9 million
Fair (52%)
Annual
Requirement:
$1,232,485
Funding Available:
$1,089,498
Annual Deficit:
$142,987
Inventory & Valuation
The figure below displays the replacement cost of each asset segment in the
Municipality's road inventory.
Figure 12 Road Network Replacement Value by Segment
Each asset's replacement cost should be reviewed periodically to determine
whether adjustments are needed to more accurately represent realistic capital
requirements.
$201k
$1.3m
$41.0m
$72.4m
$20m
$40m
$60m
$80m
Asphalt Roads
Streetlights
Surface Treated Roads
Gravel Roads
Appendix A: Road Network
32 | P a g e
Asset Condition & Age
The graph below identifies the average age, and the estimated useful life for
each asset segment. It is all weighted by replacement cost.
Figure 13 Road Network Average Age vs Average EUL
The analysis shows that, based on in-service dates, all assets continue to
remain in operation beyond their expected useful life. The graph below visually
illustrates the average condition for each asset segment on a very good to very
poor scale.
Figure 14 Road Network Condition Breakdown
To ensure that Huron Shores' roads continue to provide an acceptable level of
service, the Municipality should monitor the average condition of all assets. If
the average condition declines, staff should re-evaluate their lifecycle
management strategy to determine what combination of maintenance,
rehabilitation, and replacement activities is required to increase the overall
condition of the roads.
Each asset's estimated useful life should also be reviewed periodically to
determine whether adjustments need to be made to better align with the
observed length of service life for each asset type.
133.3
115.9
34.6
113.8
30
15
11.1
10
0
50
100
150
Asphalt Roads
Surface Treated
Roads
Streetlights
Gravel Roads
Number of Years
Weighted Average Age
Weighted Average EUL
$213k
$3.0m
$31k
$28.8m
$5.2m
$21k
$43.2m
$19.7m
$149k
$13.1m
$1.0m
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Gravel Roads
Streetlights
Surface
Treated Roads
Asphalt Roads
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Appendix A: Road Network
33 | P a g e
Current Approach to Condition Assessment
Accurate and reliable condition data allows staff to determine the remaining
service life of assets and identify the most cost-effective approach to managing
assets. The Municipality is currently developing their approach to assessing
their road assets in the field. The condition scale for roads utilized is from 0 to
100 from Very Poor to Very Good.
Lifecycle Management Strategy
The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. This
process is affected by a range of factors including an asset's characteristics,
location, utilization, maintenance history and environment.
The following lifecycle strategies shown in the tables below have been
developed as a proactive approach to managing the lifecycle of municipally
owned roads. Instead of allowing the roads to deteriorate until replacement is
required, strategic rehabilitation is expected to extend the service life of roads
at a lower total cost.
Table 10 Asphalt Road Current Lifecycle Strategy
Activity Type
Description of Current Strategy
Maintenance
- Routine street sweeping and road assessments are
performed by internal staff.
- Pothole patching yearly from spring to fall seasons as
needed.
Rehabilitation /
Replacement
- Conversion of asphalt roads to surface treated roads
through milling and strengthening the road base
Table 11 Surface Treated Road Current Lifecycle Strategy
Activity Type
Description of Current Strategy
Maintenance
- Routine street sweeping and road assessments are
performed by internal staff.
- Road study is conducted by external consultant every
five years.
- Pothole patching yearly from spring to fall as needed.
- Chip sealing is performed periodically.
Rehabilitation
- Milling and strengthening of road base is performed
when the roads past the asset life span.
- Single surface treatment is performed when the roads
reach fair condition after mill and pave.
- double surface treatment may be performed based on
the traffic count and type of traffic.
Replacement
- Reconstruction is considered with signs of surface
failures or to meet increased traffic requirements.
Appendix A: Road Network
34 | P a g e
Figure 15 LCB Road Lifecycle Model
Figure 16 Gravel Road Lifecycle Model
Activity Type
Description of Current Strategy
Maintenance
- Re-gravelling is applied annually as needed.
- Calcium Chloride is applied as dust suppressant annually.
- Grading is performed multiple times per year as needed.
- Ditching/mowing/brushing are performed annually over a
period of 5 years.
- 2 inches of gravel is applied every 4 years on each road
segment
Rehabilitation
- Gravel roads are perpetually maintained.
Replacement
- Gravel roads generally do not require conventional asset
replacement events.
Forecasted Capital Requirements
Figure 17 illustrates the cyclical short-, medium- and long-term infrastructure
rehabilitation and replacement requirements for the Municipality's road
network. This analysis was run until 2123 to capture at least one iteration of
replacement for the longest-lived asset in the asset register.
Huron Shores' average annual requirements (red dotted line) total $1.2 million
for all assets in the road network. Although actual spending may fluctuate
substantially from year to year, this figure is a useful benchmark value for
annual capital expenditure targets (or allocations to reserves) to ensure
projects are not deferred and replacement needs are met as they arise. The
chart illustrates capital needs through the forecast period in 5-year intervals.
The projections are designed to provide a long-term, portfolio-level overview of
capital needs and should be used to support long-term financial planning.
They are based on asset replacement costs, age analysis, and condition data
when available, as well as lifecycle modeling (roads only identified above).
Appendix A: Road Network
35 | P a g e
Figure 17 Road Network Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements
Table 12 below summarizes the projected cost of lifecycle activities (rehabilitation and replacement) that
may need to be undertaken over the next 10 years to support current levels of service. These projections
are generated in Citywide and rely on the data available in the asset register.
These projections can be different from actual capital forecasts. Consistent data updates, especially
condition, will improve the alignment between the system-generated expenditure requirements, and the
Municipality's capital expenditure forecasts.
$1.2m
$1.0m
$4.6m
$9.4m
$6.1m
$2.0m
$2.5m
$544k
$13.0m
$5.5m
$3.5m
$2.4m
$1.9m
$4.6m
$10.5m
$4.8m
$3.3m
$1.4m
$1.7m
$13.2m
$20.9m
$8.2m
$0
$5m
$10m
$15m
$20m
$25m
Forecasted Capital Requirements
Asphalt Roads
Surface Treated Roads
Streetlights
Annual Requirement
Total
Appendix A: Road Network
36 | P a g e
Table 12 Road Network System-generated 10-Year Capital Costs
Segment
Backlog
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031 2032 2033
Asphalt Roads
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
$18k
Surface Treated
Roads
-
-
-
-
$816k
$3.7m
$3.4m
$666k
$4.1m $963k $276k
Streetlights
$1.0m
$23k
-
-
-
$113k
-
$8k
-
$8k
$12k
Total
$1.0m
$23k
-
-
$816k
$3.8m
$3.4m
$674k
$4.1m $970k $305k
Risk & Criticality
The following risk breakdown provides a visual representation of the relationship between the probability of
failure and the consequence of failure for the assets within this asset category based on available inventory
data. See Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria for the criteria used to determine the risk rating of each asset.
Figure 18 Road Network Risk Breakdown
This is a high-level model developed by municipal staff and it should be reviewed and adjusted to reflect an
evolving understanding of both the probability and consequences of asset failure.
The identification of critical assets allows the Municipality to determine appropriate risk mitigation
strategies and treatment options. Risk mitigation may include asset-specific lifecycle strategies, condition
assessment strategies, or simply the need to collect better asset data.
1 - 4
5 - 7
8 - 9
10 - 14
15 - 25
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
$263,507
$10,551,461
$67,172,950
$23,256,740
$13,669,240
(<1%)
(9%)
(58%)
(20%)
(12%)
Appendix A: Road Network
37 | P a g e
Levels of Service
The following tables identify the Municipality's metrics to identify their
current level of service for the roads. By comparing the cost, condition and
risk year-over-year, Huron Shores will be able to evaluate how their
services/assets are trending. The Municipality will use this data to set a
target level of service. The tables that follow summarize Huron Shores'
current levels of service.
Community Levels of Service
The following table outlines the qualitative descriptions that determine the
community levels of service provided by the road network.
Table 13 Road Network Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Qualitative
Description
Current LOS
Scope
Description, which may
include maps, of the
road network in the
Municipality and its level
of connectivity
The Municipality currently owns
and manages 10.7 lane-km of
asphalt, 161.85 lane-km of
surface treated roads, and 283.6
lane-km of gravel roads. The
Municipality is connected to
Highway 17/Trans-Canada
Highway. See Figure 18 for road
network map.
Quality
Description or images
that illustrate the
different levels of road
class pavement
condition.
See condition data in Figure 2
Huron Shores' road network
comprises only local roads (MMS
Class 5 and 6).
Performance
General
Services will be provided to
ensure sustainability for the
Municipality
Technical Levels of Service
The following table outlines the quantitative metrics that determine the technical
level of service provided by the road network.
Appendix A: Road Network
38 | P a g e
Table 14 Road Network Technical Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Technical Metric
Current LOS
Scope
Lane-km of arterial roads (MMS classes 1
and 2) per land area (km/km2)
0
Lane-km of collector roads (MMS classes
3 and 4) per land area (km/km2)
0
Lane-km of local roads (MMS classes 5
and 6) per land area (km/km2)
1.01
Quality
Average pavement condition for paved
roads in the Municipality
63%
Average surface condition for unpaved
roads in the Municipality (e.g. excellent,
good, fair, poor)
Fair
Performance
% Risk that is High and Very High
32%
Actual capital reinvestment rate
0.95%
Appendix A: Road Network
39 | P a g e
Figure 19 Road Network Map
Appendix B: Bridges & Culverts
40 | P a g e
Appendix B: Bridges & Culverts
State of the Infrastructure
Bridges & culverts represent a critical portion of the transportation services
provided to the community. The state of the infrastructure for bridges &
culverts is summarized in the following table.
Replacement
Cost
Condition
Financial Capacity
$33.4 million
Fair (58%)
Annual
Requirement:
$982,387
Funding Available:
$590,000
Annual Deficit:
$392,387
Inventory & Valuation
The figure below displays the replacement cost of each asset segment in the
Municipality's bridges & culverts inventory.
Figure 20 Bridges & Culverts Replacement Cost
Each asset's replacement cost should be reviewed periodically to determine
whether adjustments are needed. This can be included in the Ontario
Structures Inspection Manual (OSIM) inspections as the replacement cost is
part of the calculation for the bridge condition index (BCI).
Asset Condition & Age
The graph below identifies the average age and the estimated useful life for
each asset segment in the bridges & culverts inventory. The values are
weighted based on replacement cost.
$74k
$3.2m
$30.1m
$10m
$20m
$30m
$40m
Non - Structural Culverts
Structural Culverts
Bridges
Appendix B: Bridges & Culverts
41 | P a g e
Figure 21 Bridges & Culverts Average Age vs Average EUL
The graph below visually illustrates the average condition for each asset
segment on a very good to very poor scale.
Figure 22 Bridges & Culverts Condition Breakdown
To ensure that the Municipality's bridges & culverts continue to provide an
acceptable level of service, the staff should monitor the average condition of
all assets. Each asset's estimated useful life should also be reviewed
periodically to determine whether adjustments need to be made to better
align with the observed length of service life for each asset type.
Current Approach to Condition Assessment
Accurate and reliable condition data allows staff to determine the remaining
service life of assets and identify the most cost-effective approach to
managing assets. Huron Shores' current approach is to assess all bridges
and structural culverts every 2 years in accordance with the Ontario
Structure Inspection Manual (OSIM). The most recent assessment was
64.8
5
17.5
37
30
50
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Bridges
Non - Structural
Culverts
Structural Culverts
Number of Years
Weighted Average Age
Weighted Average EUL
$2.7m
$74k
$2.5m
$10.4m
$13.9m
$474k
$2.5m
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Structural
Culverts
Non - Structural
Culverts
Bridges
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Appendix B: Bridges & Culverts
42 | P a g e
completed in 2023 by Tulloch Engineering. The condition scale for bridges
and culverts utilized is from 0 to 100 from Very Poor to Very Good.
Figure 23 Bridge & Culvert Condition Images
Municipal Structure #6 - Midway Bridge (BCI - 96 Very Good)
Municipal Structure #17 - Potomac Bridge (BCI - 34 Poor)
Municipal Structure #16 - Cameron Culvert (BCI - 87 Very Good)
Municipal Structure #20 - Dayton Road Culvert #1 (BCI - 30 Poor)
Appendix B: Bridges & Culverts
43 | P a g e
Lifecycle Management Strategy
The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. To
ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meeting the
needs of customers, it is important to establish a lifecycle management
strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration. The following table
outlines the current lifecycle strategy utilized by Huron Shores.
Table 15 Bridges & Culverts Current Lifecycle Strategy
Activity Type
Description of Current Strategy
Maintenance
- Sweeping, mowing and deck washing is performed
annually.
Rehabilitation/
Replacement
- All lifecycle activities are driven by the
recommendations of the Ontario Structure Inspection
Manual; however, bridge type, location and type of
traffic are taken into consideration as well.
- Replacement prioritization is based on the risk
associated to the condition assessed by OSIM, the
service life, the availability of detour, length of detour
and type of traffic.
Forecasted Capital Requirements
Figure 24 illustrates the cyclical short-, medium- and long-term infrastructure
rehabilitation and replacement requirements for the Municipality's bridges &
culverts. These projections are based on asset replacement costs and age
analysis. They are designed to provide a long-term, portfolio-level overview
of capital needs and should be used to support improved financial planning
over several decades.
The analysis was run until 2073 to capture at least one iteration of
replacement for the longest-lived asset in the asset register. Huron Shores'
average annual requirements (red dotted line) for bridges & culverts total
$982 thousand. Although actual spending may fluctuate substantially from
year to year, this figure is a useful benchmark value for annual capital
expenditure targets (or allocations to reserves) to ensure projects are not
deferred and replacement needs are met as they arise.
Appendix B: Bridges & Culverts
44 | P a g e
Figure 24 Bridges & Culverts Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements
Table 16 below summarizes the projected cost of lifecycle activities (as previously described) that may need
to be undertaken over the next 10 years to support current levels of service. These are represented at the
major asset level.
Table 16 Bridges & Culverts System-Generated 10-year Capital Costs
Segment
Backlog
2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033
Bridges
$407k $2.3m $1.7m $7.4m $1.1m
- $2.8m
- $1.9m
- $1.4m
Non-Structural Culverts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Structural Culverts
-
- $237k $237k
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total
$407k $2.3m $2.0m $7.6m $1.1m
- $2.8m
- $1.9m
- $1.4m
These projections are generated based on the data available in the asset register. Assessed condition data
and replacement costs were used to assist in forecasting replacement needs for bridges and structural
culverts.
$982k
$407k
$13.0m
$6.2m
$7.5m
$1.4m
$4.5m
$74k
$9.9m
$7.2m
$4.6m
$693k
$0
$2.0m
$4.0m
$6.0m
$8.0m
$10.0m
$12.0m
$14.0m
Backlog
2024 -
2028
2029 -
2033
2034 -
2038
2039 -
2043
2044 -
2048
2049 -
2053
2054 -
2058
2059 -
2063
2064 -
2068
2069 -
2073
Forecasted Capital Requirements
Bridges
Non - Structural Culverts
Structural Culverts
Annual Requirement
Total
Appendix B: Bridges & Culverts
45 | P a g e
Risk & Criticality
The risk breakdown provides a visual representation of the relationship
between the probability of failure and the consequence of failure for the
assets within this asset category based on available inventory data. See
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria for the criteria used to determine the risk
rating of each asset.
This is a high-level model developed by municipal staff and should be
reviewed and adjusted to reflect an evolving understanding of both the
probability and consequences of asset failure.
Figure 25 Bridges & Culverts Risk Breakdown
Levels of Service
The following tables identify the Municipality's metrics to identify their
current level of service for the bridges and culverts. By comparing the cost,
condition and risk year-over-year, Huron Shores will be able to evaluate how
their services/assets are trending. The Municipality will use this data to set
a target level of service and determine proposed levels for the regulation by
2025.
Community Levels of Service
The following table outlines the qualitative descriptions that determine the
community levels of service provided by bridges & culverts.
1 - 4
5 - 7
8 - 9
10 - 14
15 - 25
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
$592,159
$4,769,158
$4,995,000
-
$23,044,321
(2%)
(14%)
(15%)
(0%)
(69%)
Appendix B: Bridges & Culverts
46 | P a g e
Table 17 Bridges & Culverts Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Qualitative Description
Current LOS
Scope
Description of the traffic that is supported
by municipal bridges (e.g., heavy
transport vehicles, motor vehicles,
emergency vehicles, pedestrians,
cyclists).
Most of the Municipality's bridges support all
traffic types. However, some bridges carry
load restrictions (see below), and others are
limited to pedestrian traffic (structure #18).
Quality
Description or images of the condition of
bridges and culverts and how this would
affect use of the bridges and culverts.
See Figure 23 Bridge and Culvert Condition
Images
Performance
General
Services will be provided to ensure
sustainability for the Municipality
Technical Levels of Service
The following table outlines the quantitative metrics that determine the technical level of service provided
by bridges & culverts.
Table 18 Bridges & Culverts Technical Levels of Service
Service Attribute Technical Metric
Current LOS
Scope
Percentage of bridges in the Municipality with
loading or dimensional restrictions.
34%, based on 8 bridges and
culverts with load restrictions
Quality
For bridges in the Municipality, the average bridge
condition index value.
Fair (55%)
For structural culverts in the Municipality, the
average bridge condition index value.
Very Good (87%)
Performance
% Risk that is High and Very High
69%
Actual capital reinvestment rate
1.77%
Appendix C: Storm Sewer Network
47 | P a g e
Appendix C: Storm Sewer Network
State of the Infrastructure
The Municipality is responsible for approximately 2.16 kilometres of storm
sewer mains. The state of the infrastructure for the storm sewer network is
summarized in the following table.
Replacement
Cost
Condition
Financial Capacity
$1.7 million
Fair (48%)
Annual Requirement:
$23,281
Funding Available:
$0
Annual Deficit:
$23,281
Inventory & Valuation
The figure below displays the replacement cost of each asset segment in the
Municipality's storm sewer network inventory.
Figure 26 Storm Sewer Network Replacement Cost
Each asset's replacement cost should be reviewed periodically to determine
whether adjustments are needed.
Asset Condition & Age
The graph below identifies the average age and the estimated useful life for
each asset segment in the storm sewer network. The values are weighted
based on replacement cost.
Figure 27 Storm Sewer Network Average Age vs Average EUL
$1.7m
$500k
$1m
$2m
$2m
Storm Mains
26.5
75
0
20
40
60
80
Storm Mains
Number of Years
Weighted Average Age
Weighted Average EUL
Appendix C: Storm Sewer Network
48 | P a g e
The graph below visually illustrates the average condition for each asset
segment on a very good to very poor scale.
Figure 28 Storm Sewer Network Condition Breakdown
To ensure that the Municipality's storm sewer network continues to provide
an acceptable level of service, the staff should monitor the average condition
of all assets. Each asset's estimated useful life should also be reviewed
periodically to determine whether adjustments need to be made to better
align with the observed length of service life for each asset type.
Current Approach to Condition Assessment
Accurate and reliable condition data allows staff to determine the remaining
service life of assets and identify the most cost-effective approach to
managing assets. The Municipality is planning to perform CCTV assessments
every five years. However, assessments are currently conducted on an as-
needed basis. Age-based condition is utilized for asset management
purposes. The condition scale for storm sewer assets is from 0 to 100 from
Very Poor to Very Good.
Lifecycle Management Strategy
The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. To
ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meeting the
needs of customers, it is important to establish a lifecycle management
strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration. The following table
outlines the current lifecycle strategy utilized by Huron Shores.
Table 19 Storm Sewer Network Current Lifecycle Strategy
Activity Type
Description of Current Strategy
Maintenance
Storms sewers are flushed as needed and when budget
allows
Rehabilitation/
Replacement
-
Most sewer main replacement are reactive, when
failures occur, or if warranted by the main's defect
history.
-
The strategy for corrugated steel pipes is end-of-life
replacement.
$1.7m
$34k
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Storm Mains
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Appendix C: Storm Sewer Network
49 | P a g e
Forecasted Capital Requirements
Figure 29 illustrates the cyclical short-, medium- and long-term infrastructure rehabilitation and replacement
requirements for the Municipality's storm sewer network. These projections are based on asset replacement
costs and age analysis. They are designed to provide a long-term, portfolio-level overview of capital needs
and should be used to support improved financial planning over several decades.
The analysis was run until 2093 to capture at least one iteration of replacement for the longest-lived asset
in the asset register. Huron Shores' average annual requirements (red dotted line) for the storm sewer
network total $23 thousand. Although actual spending may fluctuate substantially from year to year, this
figure is a useful benchmark value for annual capital expenditure targets (or allocations to reserves) to
ensure projects are not deferred and replacement needs are met as they arise.
Figure 29 Storm Sewer Network Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements
$23k
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$34k
$642k
$367k
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$703k
$0
$100k
$200k
$300k
$400k
$500k
$600k
$700k
$800k
Forecasted Capital
Requirements
Storm Mains
Annual Requirement
Total
Appendix C: Storm Sewer Network
50 | P a g e
Table 20 below summarizes the projected cost of lifecycle activities (as
previously described) that may need to be undertaken over the next 10
years to support current levels of service. These are represented at the
major asset level.
Table 20 Storm Sewer Network System-generated 10-Year Capital Costs
Segment Backlog2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033
Storm Mains
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Total
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
These projections are generated based on the data available in the asset
register. Aged-based condition data and replacement costs were used to
assist in forecasting replacement needs for the storm sewer network.
Risk & Criticality
The risk breakdown provides a visual representation of the relationship
between the probability of failure and the consequence of failure for the
assets within this asset category based on available inventory data. See
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria for the criteria used to determine the risk
rating of each asset.
This is a high-level model developed by municipal staff and should be
reviewed and adjusted to reflect an evolving understanding of both the
probability and consequences of asset failure.
Figure 30 Storm Sewer Network Risk Breakdown
Levels of Service
The following tables identify the Municipality's metrics to identify their
current level of service for the storm sewer network. By comparing the cost,
condition and risk year-over-year, Huron Shores will be able to evaluate how
their services/assets are trending. The Municipality will use this data to set
a target level of service and determine proposed levels for the regulation by
2025.
Community Levels of Service
The following table outlines the qualitative descriptions that determine the
community levels of service provided by the storm sewer network.
1 - 4
5 - 7
8 - 9
10 - 14
15 - 25
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
$703,139
$272,789
-
$770,137
-
(40%)
(16%)
(0%)
(44%)
(0%)
Appendix C: Storm Sewer Network
51 | P a g e
Table 21 Storm Sewer Network Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Qualitative Description
Current LOS
Scope
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.
The existing storm water
collection system is located on
Clarissa, John, East, King,
Bridge Street, Chiblow Lake
Road and Warnock Road. The
current storm sewer system is
sized based on a twenty-five
(25) year design storm using
the Iron Bridge storm data.
Quality
Description of the
condition of the storm
sewer system
Condition Description
- Very Good - Fit for the future
- Good - Adequate for now
- Fair - Requires attention
- Poor - Increased potential of
affecting service
- Very Poor - Unfit for sustained
service"
Performance
General
Services will be provided to
ensure sustainability for the
Municipality
Technical Levels of Service
The following table outlines the quantitative metrics that determine the
technical level of service provided by the storm sewer network.
Table 22 Storm Sewer Network Technical Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Technical Metric
Current
LOS
Scope
Percentage of properties in municipality
resilient to a 100-year storm.
100%
Percentage of the municipal stormwater
management system resilient to a 5-year
storm.
100%
Quality
Average condition
Fair (48%)
Performance
% Risk that is High and Very High
44%
Capital reinvestment rate
0%
Appendix D: Buildings
52 | P a g e
Appendix D: Buildings
State of the Infrastructure
Huron Shores owns and maintains several buildings that provide key
services to the community. These include:
- Community Centres and Halls
- 2 Fire Stations
- Town Hall
- Waste Sites
- Public Works Storage
- Library, museum and parks buildings
The state of the infrastructure for the buildings is summarized in the
following table.
Replacement
Cost
Condition
Financial Capacity
$25.6 million
Good (74%)
Annual Requirement:
$588,978
Funding Available:
$100,710
Annual Deficit:
$488,268
Inventory & Valuation
The graph below displays the total replacement cost of each asset segment
in Huron Shores' buildings inventory. As the Municipality had a complete
componentization of their buildings in 2023 their inventory tracks buildings
as components individual replacement.
Figure 31 Buildings Replacement Cost
Each asset's replacement cost should be reviewed periodically to determine
whether adjustments are needed to represent capital requirements more
accurately.
$16k
$2.5m
$2.7m
$4.5m
$15.9m
$10m
$20m
Environmental Services
Transportation Services
General Government
Protection Services
Recreation and Cultural Services
Appendix D: Buildings
53 | P a g e
Asset Condition & Age
The graph below identifies the average age, and the estimated useful life for
each asset segment. The values are weighted based on replacement cost.
Figure 32 Buildings Average Age vs Average EUL
The graph below visually illustrates the average condition for each asset
segment on a very good to very poor.
Figure 33 Buildings Condition Breakdown
To ensure that the municipal buildings continue to provide an acceptable
level of service, the Municipality should monitor the average condition of all
assets. If the average condition declines, staff should re-evaluate their
lifecycle management strategy to determine what combination of
maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement activities is required to increase
the overall condition of the buildings.
23
40.3
31.1
31.2
39.4
80
52.5
53.9
54.1
53.5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Environmental
Services
General
Government
Protection
Services
Recreation and
Cultural
Services
Transportation
Services
Number of Years
Weighted Average Age
Weighted Average EUL
$1.3m
$5.7m
$3.0m
$16k
$396k
$2.0m
$592k
$742k
$150k
$5.9m
$547k
$727k
$671k
$2.3m
$422k
$957k
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Transportation
Services
Recreation and
Cultural Services
Protection
Services
General
Government
Environmental
Services
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Appendix D: Buildings
54 | P a g e
Each asset's estimated useful life should also be reviewed to determine
whether adjustments need to be made to better align with the observed
service life.
Current Approach to Condition Assessment
Accurate and reliable condition data allows staff to determine the remaining
service life of assets and identify the most cost-effective approach to
managing assets. Full condition assessment and componentization of the
inventory was completed by ABSI in 2023.
Lifecycle Management Strategy
To ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meeting the
needs of customers, it is important to establish a lifecycle management
strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration. The following table
outlines the Municipality's current lifecycle management strategy.
Table 23 Buildings Current Lifecycle Strategy
Activity Type
Description of Current Strategy
Maintenance and
Preventative
Maintenance
- The Municipality's building maintenance staff
performs monthly visual inspections.
- Building assets are maintained by the buildings
staff on routine basis or as needed.
- Visual inspections related to fire extinguishers,
HVAC, and firehalls are carried out on monthly
basis, considering the health and safety measures.
- The community centres, the museum, and library
are subjected to monthly health and safety
inspections and continual cleaning.
- Sprinkler systems in the community centres are
inspected every six months.
- Elevators as inspected on monthly basis.
Rehabilitation/
Replacement
- Assessments are completed strategically and based
on the condition and performance of the asset,
recommending component upgrades and
replacements.
- Replacement/rehabilitation is prioritized,
considering costs, health and safety, life
expectancy, and its usefulness for the Municipality.
- Building management is primarily reactive.
Appendix D: Buildings
55 | P a g e
Forecasted Capital Requirements
The annual capital requirement represents the average amount per year that Huron Shores should allocate
towards funding rehabilitation and replacement needs. The following graph identifies capital requirements
over the next 70 years. This projection is used as it ensures that every asset has gone through one full
iteration of replacement. The forecasted requirements are aggregated into 5-year bins and the trend line
represents the average capital requirements at $589 thousand.
Figure 34 Buildings Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements
Table 24 below summarizes the projected cost of lifecycle activities (capital activities only) that may need
to be undertaken over the next 10 years to support current levels of service.
$589k
$0
$2.9m
$2.3m
$4.1m
$2.4m
$2.3m
$7.1m
$2.8m $2.9m
$1.9m
$3.7m
$2.9m
$1.3m
$2.6m
$2.3m
$0
$1m
$2m
$3m
$4m
$5m
$6m
$7m
$8m
Forecasted Capital Requirements
Environmental Services
General Government
Protection Services
Recreation and Cultural Services
Transportation Services
Annual Requirement
Total
Appendix D: Buildings
56 | P a g e
Table 24 Buildings System-Generated 10-Year Capital Costs
Segment
Backlog 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033
Environmental
Services
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
General Government
-
$244k $26k
$44k
$11k
$23k
$9k
$100k $18k
$9k
$46k
Protection Services
-
$249k $105k $74k
$28k
$25k
$28k $123k $25k $103k $74k
Recreation & Cultural
Services
-
$818k $230k $231k $44k $158k $17k $352k $244k $100k $952k
Transportation
Services
-
$455k
-
$95k
-
$24k
-
$78k
-
$14k
$33k
Total
-
$1.8m $361k $444k $84k $230k $53k $652k $287k $227k $1.1m
These projections rely on the data available in the asset register, which was limited to asset age,
replacement cost, and useful life.
Risk & Criticality
The risk breakdown provides a visual representation of the relationship between the probability of failure
and the consequence of failure for the assets within this asset category based on available inventory data.
See Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria for the criteria used to determine the risk rating of each asset.
Figure 35 Buildings Risk Breakdown
This is a high-level model that has been developed based on information currently available and should be
reviewed and adjusted to reflect an evolving understanding of both the probability and consequences of
asset failure.
The identification of critical assets allows the Municipality to determine risk mitigation strategies and
treatment options. Risk mitigation may include asset-specific lifecycle strategies, condition assessment
strategies, or simply the need to collect better asset data.
1 - 4
5 - 7
8 - 9
10 - 14
15 - 25
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
$11,016,764
$4,799,121
$1,334,093
$6,479,074
$1,996,200
(43%)
(19%)
(5%)
(25%)
(8%)
Appendix D: Buildings
57 | P a g e
Levels of Service
By comparing the cost, condition and risk year-over-year, the Municipality
will be able to evaluate how their services/assets are trending.
Community Levels of Service
The following table outlines the qualitative descriptions that determine the
community levels of service provided by buildings.
Table 25 Buildings Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Qualitative
Description
Current LOS
Scope
Description of
the services
being provided
Buildings that provide services to the
community include:
- 4 Community Centres and halls
- 2 Fire Stations
- Town Hall
- Waste Sites
- Public Works Storage
- Library, museum and parks buildings
Quality
Description of
the condition of
municipal
buildings
Condition Description
- Very Good - Fit for the future
- Good - Adequate for now
- Fair - Requires attention
- Poor - Increased potential of affecting
service
- Very Poor - Unfit for sustained service
Performance
General
Services will be provided to ensure
sustainability for the Municipality
Technical Levels of Service
The following table outlines the quantitative metrics that determine the
technical level of service provided by municipal buildings.
Table 26 Buildings Technical Levels of Service
Service Attribute
Technical Metric
Current LOS
Scope
Quantity (square feet)
67,257
Quality
Average condition
Good (74%)
Performance
% Risk that is High and Very High
33%
Capital reinvestment rate
0.39%
Appendix E: Machinery & Equipment
58 | P a g e
Appendix E: Machinery & Equipment
State of the Infrastructure
To maintain the quality stewardship of Huron Shores' infrastructure and
support the delivery of services, the municipality owns and employs various
types of equipment. This includes:
-
General government services (office and IT) equipment
-
Fire services equipment
-
Transportation services equipment
-
Recreation services equipment
-
Planning and development services equipment
The state of the infrastructure for equipment is summarized in the following
table.
Replacement
Cost
Condition
Financial Capacity
$1.5 million
Fair (51%)
Annual Requirement:
$142,241
Funding Available:
$18,725
Annual Deficit:
$123,516
Inventory & Valuation
The graph below displays the total replacement cost of each asset segment
in the Huron Shores' equipment inventory.
Figure 36 Machinery & Equipment Replacement Costs
Each asset's replacement cost should be reviewed periodically to determine
whether adjustments are needed to more accurate represent capital
requirements.
$96k
$204k
$234k
$373k
$639k
$200k
$400k
$600k
Planning and Development
Transportation Services
General Government
Recreation and Cultural Services
Protection Services
Appendix E: Machinery & Equipment
59 | P a g e
Asset Condition & Age
The graph below identifies the average age and the estimated useful life for
each asset segment. The values are weighted based on replacement cost.
Figure 37 Machinery & Equipment Average Age vs Average EUL
Each asset's estimated useful life should also be reviewed periodically to
determine whether adjustments need to be made to better align with the
observed length of service life for each asset type. The graph below visually
illustrates the average condition for each asset segment on a very good to
very poor scale.
Figure 38 Machinery & Equipment Condition Breakdown
To ensure that the Municipality's equipment continues to provide an
acceptable level of service, Huron Shores should continue to monitor the
average condition. If the average condition declines, staff should re-evaluate
their lifecycle management strategy to determine what combination of
maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement activities is required to increase
the overall condition.
$95k
$82k
$410k
$13k
$37k
$47k
$51k
$83k
$29k
$62k
$211k
$147k
$197k
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Transportation
Services
Recreation and
Cultural Services
Protection Services
Planning and
Development
General Government
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
15.4
14.9
9
12.2
7.4
8.4
21.7
14
11.1
13.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
General
Government
Planning and
Development
Protection
Services
Recreation and
Cultural
Services
Transportation
Services
Number of Years
Weighted Average Age
Weighted Average EUL
Appendix E: Machinery & Equipment
60 | P a g e
Current Approach to Condition Assessment
Accurate and reliable condition data allows staff to determine the remaining
service life of assets and identify the most cost-effective approach to
managing assets. The current approach is varied because of the broad range
of types of equipment included in this category.
Lifecycle Management Strategy
The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. To
ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meet the
needs of customers, it is important to establish a lifecycle management
strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration.
Table 27 Machinery & Equipment Current Lifecycle Strategy
Activity Type
Description of Current Strategy
Maintenance
- Public works snowplows are maintained and inspected
on an annual basis. This includes replacement of chutes,
blades, pins, and other components.
- Bunker gear is inspected routinely by staff, and every
six months by the manufacturer, as per NFPA standards.
Monthly night maintenance is performed as issues are
identified.
- Generators, portable pumps, are tested annually for
certification. Generator's gas is checked once a month.
Cylinders and cascade cylinders are tested every five
years for certification.
- Defibrillators are checked monthly to ensure proper
functioning.
- Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) have an
annual inspection and are hydrostatically tested. Staff
perform visual inspections monthly.
- Radio equipment is inspected during use and issues are
reported as they arise.
- CO2 testers and the air filling machines are tested and
sampled every six months to ensure proper working
order.
- Computer maintenance is usually done in-house, outside
consultants mostly act as support.
Rehabilitation/
Replacement
- Most of the machinery and equipment assets are
replaced at end of life, unless defects or issues warrant
earlier replacements.
- The replacement of these assets is based on the service
life remaining and available budget.
Appendix E: Machinery & Equipment
61 | P a g e
Forecasted Capital Requirements
The following graph identifies capital requirements over the next 40 years. This projection is used as it
ensures that every asset has gone through one full iteration of replacement. The forecasted requirements
are aggregated into 5-year bins and the trend line represents the average annual capital requirements at
$142 thousand.
Figure 39 Machinery & Equipment Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements
Table 28 below summarizes the projected cost of lifecycle activities (capital replacement only) that may
need to be undertaken over the next 10 years to support current levels of service. These projections are
generated in Citywide and rely on the data available in the asset register.
$142k
$611k
$244k
$767k
$618k
$637k
$894k
$579k
$823k
$529k
$100k
$200k
$300k
$400k
$500k
$600k
$700k
$800k
$900k
$1.0m
Backlog
2024 -
2028
2029 -
2033
2034 -
2038
2039 -
2043
2044 -
2048
2049 -
2053
2054 -
2058
2059 -
2063
Forecasted Capital Requirements
General Government
Planning and Development
Protection Services
Recreation and Cultural Services
Transportation Services
Annual Requirement
Total
Appendix E: Machinery & Equipment
62 | P a g e
Table 28 Machinery & Equipment System-Generated 10-Year Capital Costs
Segment
Backlog
2024
2025
2026 2027
2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033
General
Government
$197k
-
-
-
$11k
$25k
-
-
- $155k
-
Planning &
Development
-
-
-
-
-
-
$10k
$44k
-
$39k
$2k
Protection Services
$147k
-
-
$39k
$8k
$8k
$27k $277k
$16k
$2k
$21k
Recreation and
Cultural Services
$204k
$7k
$16k
$19k
$4k
$93k
$31k
-
$65k
$20k
$10k
Transportation
Services
$62k
-
-
$8k
-
$4k
$47k
-
-
-
-
Total
$611k
$7k
$16k
$66k
$23k $130k $115k $321k
$81k $217k
$33k
As no assessed condition data was available for the equipment, only age was used to determine
forthcoming replacement needs. These projections can be different from actual capital forecasts.
Consistent data updates, especially condition, will improve the alignment between the system-generated
expenditure requirements, and the Municipality's capital expenditure forecasts.
Risk & Criticality
The risk breakdown provides a visual representation of the relationship between the probability of failure
and the consequence of failure for the assets within this asset category based on available inventory data.
See Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria for the criteria used to determine the risk rating of each asset.
This is a high-level model that has been developed based on information currently available and should be
reviewed and adjusted to reflect an evolving understanding of both the probability and consequences of
asset failure.
Figure 40 Machinery & Equipment Risk Breakdown
1 - 4
5 - 7
8 - 9
10 - 14
15 - 25
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
$927,607
$617,994
-
-
-
(60%)
(40%)
(0%)
(0%)
(0%)
Appendix E: Machinery & Equipment
63 | P a g e
Levels of Service
By comparing the cost, condition and risk year-over-year, Huron Shores will
be able to evaluate how their services/assets are trending. The Municipality
will use this data to set a target level of service and determine proposed
levels for the regulation by 2025.
Community Levels of Service
The qualitative descriptions that determine the community levels of service
provided by equipment are outlined below:
Table 29 Machinery & Equipment Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Qualitative
Description
Current LOS
Scope
Description of the
services provided
by machinery and
equipment
The municipality owns and employs various
types of equipment. This includes:
- General government services (office and
IT) equipment
- Fire services equipment
- Transportation services equipment
- Recreation services equipment
- Planning and development services
equipment
Quality
Description of the
condition of
machinery and
equipment
Condition Description
- Very Good - Fit for the future
- Good - Adequate for now
- Fair - Requires attention
- Poor - Increased potential of affecting
service
- Very Poor - Unfit for sustained service
Performance General
Services will be provided to ensure
sustainability for the Municipality
Technical Levels of Service
The following table outlines the quantitative metrics that determine the
technical level of service provided by equipment.
Table 30 Machinery & Equipment Technical Levels of Service
Service Attribute Technical Metric
Current LOS
Scope
Quantity
136
Quality
Average condition
Fair (51%)
Performance
% Risk that is High and Very High
0%
Capital reinvestment rate
1.21%
Appendix F: Vehicles
64 | P a g e
Appendix F: Vehicles
State of the Infrastructure
Vehicles allow staff to efficiently deliver municipal services and personnel.
Municipal vehicles are used to support several service areas, including:
-
Protection Services
-
Transportation vehicles
The state of the infrastructure for the vehicles is summarized in the
following table.
Replacement
Cost
Condition
Financial Capacity
$4.2 million
Good (78%)
Annual Requirement:
$341,132
Funding Available:
$46,695
Annual Deficit:
$294,437
Inventory & Valuation
The graph below displays the total replacement cost of each asset segment
in the vehicle inventory.
Figure 41 Vehicle Replacement Costs
Each asset's replacement cost should be reviewed periodically to determine
whether adjustments are needed to represent capital requirements more
accurately.
Asset Condition & Age
The graph below identifies the average age and the estimated useful life for
each asset segment. The values are weighted based on replacement cost.
$2.0m
$2.2m
$500k
$1.0m
$1.5m
$2.0m
$2.5m
Protection Services
Transportation Services
Appendix F: Vehicles
65 | P a g e
Figure 42 Vehicles Average Age vs Average EUL
Each asset's estimated useful life should also be reviewed periodically to
determine whether adjustments need to be made to better align with the
observed length of service life for each asset type.
The graph below visually illustrates the average condition for each asset
segment on a very good to very poor scale.
Figure 43 Vehicles Condition Breakdown
To ensure that the Municipality's vehicles continue to provide an acceptable
level of service, the Municipality should monitor the average condition of all
assets. If the average condition declines, staff should re-evaluate their
lifecycle management strategy to determine what combination of
maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement activities is required to
increase the overall condition of the vehicles.
Current Approach to Condition Assessment
Accurate and reliable condition data allows staff to determine the remaining
service life of assets and identify the most cost-effective approach to
managing assets. The Municipality doesn't have a formal condition
assessment program in place to assess the condition of the vehicle assets.
Age is used to guide spending decisions, including identifying candidates for
further review and inspections.
13.5
7.5
23
18
0
10
20
30
Protection Services
Transportation Services
Number of Years
Weighted Average Age
Weighted Average EUL
$1.8m
$946k
$225k
$271k
$459k
$310k
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Transportation
Services
Protection
Services
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Appendix F: Vehicles
66 | P a g e
Lifecycle Management Strategy
The condition or performance of assets will deteriorate over time. To ensure
vehicles are performing as expected, it is important to establish a lifecycle
management strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration.
Table 31 Vehicles current lifecycle strategy
Activity Type Description of Current Strategy
Maintenance
- Maintenance is done externally based on vehicle
mileage or when an issue arises.
- Tire changes, fluid top up, minor component changes,
such as wipers, are completed externally on an as
needed basis. Certain specialty parts, such as
electronics or sensors, have been cited to be scarce at
times.
- Commercial Vehicle Operator's Registration (CVOR)
vehicles are inspected and maintained by an external,
certified mechanic. Oil changes occur when required,
mileage is typically used as an indicator.
- Non-CVOR vehicles have routine oil changes based on
mileage. A mechanic completes a 50-point inspection
during this time and recommends repairs, such as
replacing brakes or tires.
- Fire apparatus on trucks have annual pump testing
from emergency vehicle technicians. Pump
functionality is tested on a weekly basis in house.
Rehabilitation/
Replacement
- Most fleet have a replacement cycle of 10 years,
generally considering the condition of the vehicle.
- Condition and budget are the main considerations
when prioritizing replacements. Consistent and known
mechanical issues are also factored in.
- The Municipality employs a combination of proactive
maintenance, utilize internal staff, and contracted
work.
Forecasted Capital Requirements
The annual capital requirement represents the average amount per year
that the Municipality should allocate towards funding rehabilitation and
replacement needs. The following graph identifies capital requirements over
the next 20 years. This projection is used as it ensures that every asset has
gone through one full iteration of replacement. The forecasted requirements
are aggregated into 5-year bins and the trend line represents the average
annual capital requirements at $341 thousand.
Appendix F: Vehicles
67 | P a g e
Figure 44 Vehicle Forecasted Capital Replacement Requirements
Table 32 below summarizes the projected cost of lifecycle activities (capital replacement only) that may
need to be undertaken over the next 10 years to support current levels of service. These projections rely
on the data available in the asset register.
Table 32 Vehicles System-Generated 10-Year Capital Costs
Segment
Backlog 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033
Protection
Services
$93k
- $440k
-
$59k $329k
$49k
-
-
$67k $225k
Transportation
Services
$46k $137k $271k $137k $137k $210k $183k
- $137k $262k $210k
Total
$139k $137k $711k $137k $196k $539k $232k
- $137k $330k $435k
As no assessed condition data was available for the vehicles, only age was used to determine forthcoming
replacement needs. These projections can be different from actual capital forecasts. Consistent data
updates, especially condition, will improve the alignment between the system-generated expenditure
requirements, and the Municipality's capital expenditure forecasts.
$341k
$139k
$1.7m
$1.1m
$1.9m
$2.0m
$1.3m
$0
$500k
$1m
$2m
$2m
$3m
Backlog
2024 - 2028
2029 - 2033
2034 - 2038
2039 - 2043
2044 - 2048
Forecasted Capital
Requirements
Protection Services
Transportation Services
Annual Requirement
Total
Appendix F: Vehicles
68 | P a g e
Risk & Criticality
The risk breakdown provides a visual representation of the relationship
between the probability of failure and the consequence of failure for the
assets within this asset category based on available inventory data. See
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria for the criteria used to determine the risk
rating of each asset.
This is a high-level model that has been developed based on information
currently available and should be reviewed and adjusted to reflect an
evolving understanding of both the probability and consequences of asset
failure.
The identification of critical assets allows the Municipality to determine
appropriate risk mitigation strategies and treatment options. Risk mitigation
may include asset-specific lifecycle strategies, condition assessment
strategies, or simply the need to collect better asset data.
Figure 45 Vehicles Risk Breakdown
Levels of Service
By comparing the cost, condition and risk year-over-year, the Municipality
will be able to evaluate how their services/assets are trending. The
Municipality will use this data to set a target level of service and determine
proposed levels for the regulation by 2025.
Community Levels of Service
The qualitative descriptions that determine the community levels of service
provided by vehicles are outlined below:
1 - 4
5 - 7
8 - 9
10 - 14
15 - 25
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
$535,633
$2,796,759
-
$271,109
$639,378
(13%)
(66%)
(0%)
(6%)
(15%)
Appendix F: Vehicles
69 | P a g e
Table 33 Vehicles Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Qualitative Description Current LOS
Scope
Description of the services
provided by municipal
vehicles
Vehicles allow staff to efficiently
deliver municipal services and
personnel.
Quality
Description of the
condition of machinery
and equipment
Condition Description
- Very Good - Fit for the future
- Good - Adequate for now
- Fair - Requires attention
- Poor - Increased potential of
affecting service
- Very Poor - Unfit for sustained
service
Performance General
Services will be provided to ensure
sustainability for the Municipality
Technical Levels of Service
The following table outlines the quantitative metrics that determine the
technical level of service provided by vehicles.
Table 34 Vehicles Technical Levels of Service
Service Attribute
Technical Metric
Current LOS
Scope
Quantity
21
Quality
Average condition
Good (78%)
Performance
% Risk that is High and Very High
21%
Capital reinvestment rate
1.1%
Appendix G: Condition Assessment Guidelines
70 | P a g e
Appendix G: Condition Assessment
Guidelines
The foundation of good asset management practice is accurate and reliable
data on the current condition of infrastructure. Assessing the condition of an
asset at a single point in time allows staff to have a better understanding of
the probability of asset failure due to deteriorating condition.
Condition data is vital to the development of data-driven asset management
strategies. Without accurate and reliable asset data, there may be little
confidence in asset management decision-making which can lead to
premature asset failure, service disruption and suboptimal investment
strategies. To prevent these outcomes, the Municipality's condition
assessment strategy should outline several key considerations, including:
-
The role of asset condition data in decision-making
-
Guidelines for the collection of asset condition data
-
A schedule for how regularly asset condition data should be
collected
Role of Asset Condition Data
The goal of collecting asset condition data is to ensure that data is available
to inform maintenance and renewal programs required to meet the desired
level of service. Accurate and reliable condition data allows municipal staff to
determine the remaining service life of assets, and identify the most cost-
effective approach to deterioration, whether it involves extending the life of
the asset through remedial efforts or determining that replacement is
required to avoid asset failure.
In addition to the optimization of lifecycle management strategies, asset
condition data also impacts the Municipality's risk management and financial
strategies. Assessed condition is a key variable in the determination of an
asset's probability of failure. With a strong understanding of the probability
of failure across the entire asset portfolio, the Municipality can develop
strategies to mitigate both the probability and consequences of asset failure
and service disruption. Furthermore, with condition-based determinations of
future capital expenditures, the Municipality can develop long-term financial
strategies with higher accuracy and reliability.
Guidelines for Condition Assessment
Whether completed by external consultants or internal staff, condition
assessments should be completed in a structured and repeatable fashion,
according to consistent and objective assessment criteria. Without proper
Appendix G: Condition Assessment Guidelines
71 | P a g e
guidelines for the completion of condition assessments there can be little
confidence in the validity of condition data and asset management strategies
based on this data.
Condition assessments must include a quantitative or qualitative assessment
of the current condition of the asset, collected according to specified
condition rating criteria, in a format that can be used for asset management
decision-making. As a result, it is important that staff adequately define the
condition rating criteria that should be used and the assets that require a
discrete condition rating. When engaging with external consultants to
complete condition assessments, it is critical that these details are
communicated as part of the contractual terms of the project.
There are many options available to the Municipality to complete condition
assessments. In some cases, external consultants may need to be engaged
to complete detailed technical assessments of infrastructure. In other cases,
internal staff may have sufficient expertise or training to complete condition
assessments.
Developing a Condition Assessment Schedule
Condition assessments and general data collection can be both time-
consuming and resource intensive. It is not necessarily an effective strategy
to collect assessed condition data across the entire asset inventory. Instead,
the Municipality should prioritize the collection of assessed condition data
based on the anticipated value of this data in decision-making. The
International Infrastructure Management Manual (IIMM) identifies four key
criteria to consider when making this determination:
-
Relevance: every data item must have a direct influence on the
output that is required
-
Appropriateness: the volume of data and the frequency of updating
should align with the stage in the assets life and the service being
provided
-
Reliability: the data should be sufficiently accurate, have sufficient
spatial coverage and be appropriately complete and current
-
Affordability: the data should be affordable to collect and maintain
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria
72 | P a g e
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria
Risk Definitions
Risk
Integrating a risk management framework into your asset management program
requires the translation of risk potential into a quantifiable format. This will allow
you to compare and analyze individual assets across your entire asset portfolio.
Asset risk is typically defined using the following formula:
Risk = Probability of Failure (POF) x Consequence of Failure (COF)
Probability of
Failure (POF)
The probability of failure relates to the likelihood that an asset will fail at a given
time. The current physical condition and service life remaining are two commonly
used risk parameters in determining this likelihood.
POF - Structural
The likelihood of asset failure due to aspects of an asset such as load carrying
capacity, condition or breaks
POF - Functional
The likelihood of asset failure due to its performance
POF - Range
1 - Rare 2 - Unlikely 3 - Possible 4 - Likely 5 - Almost Certain
Consequences of
Failure (COF)
The consequence of failure describes the overall effect that an asset's failure will
have on an organization's asset management goals. Consequences of failure can
range from non-eventful to impactful: a small diameter water main break in a
subdivision may cause several rate payers to be without water service for a short
time. However, a larger trunk water main may break outside a hospital, leading to
significantly higher consequences.
COF - Financial
The monetary consequences of asset failure for the organization and its customers
COF - Social
The consequences of asset failure on the social dimensions of the community
COF - Environmental The consequence of asset failure on an asset's surrounding environment
COF - Operational
The consequence of asset failure on the Municipality's day-to-day operations
COF - Health &
safety
The consequence of asset failure on the health and well-being of the community
COF - Economic
The consequence of asset failure on strategic planning
COF - Range
1 - Insignificant 2 - Minor 3 - Moderate 4 - Major 5 - Severe
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria
73 | P a g e
Risk Frameworks - Road Network
Probability of Failure
Criteria
Sub-Criteria
Value/ Range
Score
Structural (80%)
Condition
0-19
5 - Almost Certain
20-39
4 - Likely
40-59
3 - Possible
60-79
2 - Unlikely
80-100
1 - Rare
Functional (20%)
Service Life Remaining
(50%)
<10%
5 - Almost Certain
10 - 20%
4 - Likely
20 - 30%
3 - Possible
30 - 40%
2 - Unlikely
40%+
1 - Rare
Traffic Range (V.P.D.)
(50%)
0 - 49
2 - Unlikely
50 - 199
3 - Possible
200 - 399
4 - Likely
Consequence of Failure
Criteria
Sub-Criteria
Value/Range
Score
Economic (65%)
AMP Segment
Gravel Roads
2 - Minor
Asphalt and Surface Treated Roads
4 - Major
Social (20%)
Road Class
Class 1
5 - Almost Certain
Class 2
4 - Likely
Class 3
3 - Possible
Class 4
2 - Unlikely
Class 5 & 6
1 - Rare
Health and Safety (15%)
Speed Limit
0-19
1 - Rare
20-39
2 - Unlikely
40-59
3 - Possible
60-79
4 - Likely
80-100
5 - Almost Certain
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria
74 | P a g e
Risk Frameworks - Bridges & Culverts, Machinery & Equipment, Vehicles
Probability of Failure
Criteria
Sub-Criteria
Value/ Range
Score
Structural (60%)
Condition
0-19
5 - Almost Certain
20-39
4 - Likely
40-59
3 - Possible
60-79
2 - Unlikely
80-100
1 - Rare
Functional (40%)
Service Life Remaining
<10%
5 - Almost Certain
10 - 20%
4 - Likely
20 - 30%
3 - Possible
30 - 40%
2 - Unlikely
40%+
1 - Rare
Consequence of Failure
Criteria
Sub-Criteria
Value/Range
Score
Economic (100%)
Replacement Cost
$300,000+
5 - Severe
$225,000 - $299,999
4 - Major
$150,000 - $224,999
3 - Moderate
$75,000 - $149,999
2 - Minor
< $75,000
1 - Insignificant
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria
75 | P a g e
Risk Frameworks - Storm Sewer Network
Probability of Failure
Criteria
Sub-Criteria
Value/ Range
Score
Structural (60%)
Condition
0-19
5 - Almost Certain
20-39
4 - Likely
40-59
3 - Possible
60-79
2 - Unlikely
80-100
1 - Rare
Functional (40%)
Service Life Remaining
<10%
5 - Almost Certain
10 - 20%
4 - Likely
20 - 30%
3 - Possible
30 - 40%
2 - Unlikely
40%+
1 - Rare
Consequence of Failure
Criteria
Sub-Criteria
Value/Range
Score
Economic (100%)
Diameter
900 mm
5 - Severe
600 - 750 mm
4 - Major
400 - 500 mm
3 - Moderate
350 - 375 mm
2 - Minor
Appendix H: Risk Rating Criteria
76 | P a g e
Risk Frameworks - Buildings
Probability of Failure
Criteria
Sub-Criteria
Value/ Range
Score
Structural (80%)
Condition
< 1.10
5 - Almost Certain
1.10 - 2.10
4 - Likely
2.10 - 3.10
3 - Possible
3.10 - 4.10
2 - Unlikely
4.10+
1 - Rare
Functional (20%)
Service Life Remaining
<10%
5 - Almost Certain
10 - 20%
4 - Likely
20 - 30%
3 - Possible
30 - 40%
2 - Unlikely
40%+
1 - Rare
Consequence of Failure
Criteria
Sub-Criteria
Value/Range
Score
Economic (50%)
Replacement Cost
$300,000+
5 - Severe
$225,000 - $299,999
4 - Major
$150,000 - $224,999
3 - Moderate
$75,000 - $149,999
2 - Minor
< $75,000
1 - Insignificant
Operational (50%)
Surface Type
Equipment & Furnishings 2 - Minor
Interiors, Special
construction and
demolition, Sitework
3 - Moderate
Shell, Services
4 - Major
Substructure
5 - Severe