This is the exact embedded text of the captured official document.
Snapshot e36a250d175c · verified 2026-06-09 ·
original document ·
archived snapshot ·
unofficial consolidation, the official version is held by the municipal clerk.
Final-Report.pdf"
municipality_ids:
- gx-001763
content_type: "application/pdf"
captured_at: "2026-06-10T22:36:29+00:00"
normalize_method: "pdf-pymupdf"
normalize_version: "0.2"
needs_ocr: false
char_count: 188630
---
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
905-272-3600
February 6, 2026
[email protected]
Asset Management Plan
Township of Southwold
________________________
Final Report
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
Table of Contents
Page
1.
Introduction ..................................................................................................................1-1
1.1
Overview .............................................................................................................1-1
1.2
Legislative Context for the Asset Management Plan...................................1-2
1.3
Asset Management Plan Development .........................................................1-3
2.
State of Local Infrastructure and Levels of Service ..........................................2-1
2.1
Transportation ....................................................................................................2-1
2.1.1
State of Local Infrastructure ..............................................................2-1
2.1.2
Condition ..............................................................................................2-6
2.1.3
Levels of Service.............................................................................. 2-15
2.2
Tax-funded Facilities...................................................................................... 2-18
2.2.1
State of Local Infrastructure ........................................................... 2-18
2.2.2
Condition ........................................................................................... 2-20
2.2.3
Levels of Service.............................................................................. 2-21
2.3
Tax-funded Fleet and Equipment ................................................................ 2-23
2.3.1
State of Local Infrastructure ........................................................... 2-23
2.3.2
Condition ........................................................................................... 2-24
2.3.3
Levels of Service.............................................................................. 2-26
2.4
Parks and Recreation .................................................................................... 2-28
2.4.1
State of Local Infrastructure ........................................................... 2-28
2.4.2
Condition ........................................................................................... 2-29
2.4.3
Levels of Service.............................................................................. 2-31
2.5
Stormwater ...................................................................................................... 2-32
2.5.1
State of Local Infrastructure ........................................................... 2-32
2.5.2
Condition ........................................................................................... 2-33
2.5.3
Levels of Service.............................................................................. 2-35
2.6
Water ................................................................................................................ 2-37
2.6.1
State of Local Infrastructure ........................................................... 2-37
2.6.2
Condition ........................................................................................... 2-38
2.6.3
Levels of Service.............................................................................. 2-40
Table of Contents (Cont'd)
Page
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
2.7
Wastewater ..................................................................................................... 2-42
2.7.1
State of Local Infrastructure ........................................................... 2-42
2.7.2
Condition ........................................................................................... 2-43
2.7.3
Levels of Service.............................................................................. 2-45
2.8
Population and Employment Growth........................................................... 2-47
3.
Lifecycle Management Strategies ..........................................................................3-1
3.1
Introduction.........................................................................................................3-1
3.2
Transportation ....................................................................................................3-2
3.3
Tax-funded Facilities.........................................................................................3-5
3.4
Tax-funded Fleet and Equipment ...................................................................3-7
3.5
Parks and Recreation .......................................................................................3-9
3.6
Stormwater ...................................................................................................... 3-11
3.7
Water ................................................................................................................ 3-11
3.8
Wastewater ..................................................................................................... 3-14
4.
Financial Strategy .......................................................................................................4-1
4.1
Introduction.........................................................................................................4-1
4.2
Assets Funded by the General Tax Levy ......................................................4-2
4.2.1
Annual Capital Expenditure Forecast ..............................................4-2
4.2.2
Annual Capital Financing Forecast ..................................................4-4
4.2.3
Current Annual Lifecycle Funding Target & Infrastructure
Funding Gap ........................................................................................4-5
4.2.4
Overall Financial Forecast and Estimated Impact on Tax
Levy.......................................................................................................4-8
4.2.5
Estimated Impact on Tax Bills (2026-2035) ................................ 4-13
4.3
Assets Funded by Water and Wastewater Rates ..................................... 4-17
4.3.1
Annual Capital Expenditure Forecast ........................................... 4-17
4.3.2
Annual Capital Financing Forecast ............................................... 4-19
4.3.3
Current Annual Lifecycle Funding Target & Infrastructure
Funding Gap ..................................................................................... 4-20
4.3.4
Overall Financial Forecast and Estimated Impact on Tax
Levy.................................................................................................... 4-23
4.4
Assets Funded by Stormwater Rates ......................................................... 4-25
5.
Recommendations and Next Steps ........................................................................5-1
5.1
Recommendations ............................................................................................5-1
5.2
Next Steps ..........................................................................................................5-1
Appendix A Financial Strategy Tables for Tax-funded Assets.................................. A-1
Appendix B Financial Strategy Tables for Water and Wastewater Assets............. B-1
Report
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
Chapter 1
Introduction
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 1-1
1. Introduction
1.1 Overview
The main objective of an asset management plan (AMP) is to use a municipality's best
available information to develop a long-term plan for capital assets. In addition, the plan
should provide a sufficiently documented framework that enables continual
improvement and updates, ensuring its relevancy over the long term.
The Township of Southwold (Township) retained Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
(Watson) to assist in developing a comprehensive AMP. The AMP covers all of the
Township's infrastructure assets, with a focus on identifying proposed levels of service
and developing a financial strategy to support the plan's implementation, and brings the
Township into compliance with the July 1, 2025 requirements of Ontario Regulation (O.
Reg.) 588/17.
The estimated current replacement cost of the Township's infrastructure assets is
$283.2 million. The three largest asset categories in terms of replacement cost,
accounting for approximately 88% of the total, are transportation assets ($140.5 million;
50%), water system assets ($85.2 million; 30%), and tax-funded facilities ($23.8 million;
8%). The remainder of the Township's assets are valued at $33.7 million, accounting for
the remaining 12% of the total replacement cost valuation.
A breakdown of the replacement cost by asset category is provided in Table 1-1 and is
further illustrated in Figure 1-1.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 1-2
Table 1-1: Distribution of Replacement Cost by Asset Category
Asset Category
Current Replacement Cost
Transportation
$140,544,000
Water
$85,217,000
Wastewater
$12,124,000
Stormwater
$8,562,000
Tax-funded Facilities
$23,768,000
Tax-funded Fleet and Equipment
$10,812,000
Parks and Recreation
$2,173,000
Total
$283,200,000
Figure 1-1: Distribution of Replacement Cost by Asset Category
Transportation, $140.5M, 50%
Water,
$85.2M,
30%
Wastewater,
$12.1M, 4%
Stormwater,
$8.6M, 3%
Tax-funded Facilities,
$23.8M, 8%
Tax-funded Fleet
and Equipment,
$10.8M, 4%
Parks and
Recreation,
$2.2M, 1%
$283.2
million
1.2 Legislative Context for the Asset Management Plan
Asset management planning in Ontario has evolved significantly over the past decade.
Prior to 2009, it was common municipal practice to expense capital assets in the year of
their acquisition or construction. Consequently, this meant that many municipalities did
not have appropriate tracking of their capital assets, especially with respect to any
changes that capital assets may have undergone (i.e. betterments, disposals, etc.).
Furthermore, this also meant that many municipalities had not yet established
inventories of their capital assets, both in their accounting structures and financial
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 1-3
statements. As a result of revisions to Section 3150 - Tangible Capital Assets of the
Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) handbook, which came into effect for the 2009
fiscal year, municipalities were forced to change this long-standing practice and
capitalize their tangible capital assets over the term of the asset's expected useful
service life. In order to comply with this revision, municipalities needed to establish
asset inventories, if none previously existed.
In 2012, the Province launched the Municipal Infrastructure Strategy, which required
municipalities and local service boards seeking provincial funding to demonstrate how
any proposed project fits within a broader asset management plan. In addition, asset
management plans encompassing all municipal assets needed to be prepared by the
end of 2016 to meet Federal Gas Tax (now the Canada Community-Building Fund)
agreement requirements. To help define the components of municipal asset
management plans, the Province produced a document entitled Building Together:
Guide for Municipal Asset Management Plans. This document outlined the information
and analyses that were required to be included in municipal asset management plans
under this initiative.
The Province's Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act, 2015 (IJPA) was proclaimed
on May 1, 2016. This legislation detailed principles for evidence-based and sustainable
long-term infrastructure planning. The IJPA also gave the Province the authority to
guide municipal asset management planning by way of regulation. In late 2017, the
Province introduced O. Reg. 588/17 under the IJPA. The intent of O. Reg. 588/17 is to
establish standard content for municipal asset management plans. Specifically, the
regulation requires that asset management plans be developed that define levels of
service, identify the lifecycle activities that will be undertaken to achieve those levels of
service, and provide a financial strategy to support the levels of service and lifecycle
activities.
1.3 Asset Management Plan Development
The development of this asset management plan was guided by asset management
strategies identified through discussions with the Township's asset managers,
information gleaned through reviews of long-term planning documents and studies,
service-level objectives and their impacts on the management of assets identified
through engagements with both staff and Council, and detailed analyses of the
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 1-4
Township's capital asset and financial data. The key steps in the development process
of this asset management plan are summarized below:
1. Compile and update underlying asset data such as quantities, ages, condition
ratings, useful service life expectations, replacement cost valuations, lifecycle
activity costing, etc.
2. Develop a level of service framework which sets targets for the service levels the
Township proposes to provide to the public over the long term through
workshops held with staff. As part of these workshops, changes to existing
lifecycle management strategies to support the proposed level of service were
identified. This step resulted in the development of 10-year forecasts of capital
and significant operating expenditures to achieve and sustain the proposed
levels of service.
3. Determine the level of capital funding that should be provided to assets on an
annual basis to sustain the proposed levels of service over the long term.
4. Analyze the Township's financial data and develop a financial strategy model to
identify the funding expected to be available to undertake the capital and
significant operating expenditures identified previously. The financial strategy
model was also utilized to determine the financial impacts associated with
providing the proposed levels of service (i.e., estimated annual tax levy and tax
rate increases to achieve a sustainable level of annual capital funding, additional
debt requirements, impact on reserve and reserve fund balance, etc.).
5. Present the proposed levels of service and their associated financial impacts to
Council in a workshop setting. The feedback received from Council was critical to
ensuring that the proposed levels of service are appropriate for the Township and
in further refining the financial strategy.
6. Document the asset management plan in a formal report to inform future
decision-making and to communicate planning to the public.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
Chapter 2
State of Local Infrastructure
and Levels of Service
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-1
2. State of Local Infrastructure and Levels of
Service
2.1 Transportation
2.1.1 State of Local Infrastructure
The Township owns and manages a variety of transportation assets that enable the
safe and efficient passage of vehicular and pedestrian traffic and contribute to the
overall level of service provided by the Township. These assets comprise the
Township's roads, bridges, culverts, and various road-related assets such as guiderails,
sidewalks and streetlights. The estimated current replacement cost of the Township's
transportation assets is $140.5 million.
The Township's road network comprises roads with three surface types: asphalt,
surface treatment, and gravel. The estimated current replacement cost of the
Township's roads is $125.2 million. Surface treated roads represent the largest share of
replacement cost at $47.0 million (38%), followed by gravel roads at $42.8 million
(34%), and lastly, asphalt roads at $35.4 million (28%). The average age of the
Township's roads is 18.1 years.
Table 2-1 summarizes the length, average age, and estimated current replacement cost
of the Township's roads by surface type. This information is further illustrated in Figure
2-1.
Table 2-1: Roads - Length, Average Age, and Replacement Cost by Surface Type
Surface Type
Length
Average Age[1]
Current
Replacement Cost
Gravel
136.8 km
18.3 years
$42,790,000
Surface Treated
71.3 km
19.9 years
$46,955,000
Asphalt
29.0 km
8.7 years
$35,406,000
Total
237.1 km
18.1 years
$125,151,000
[1]Weighted average utilizing the surface area of road segments as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-2
Figure 2-1: Roads - Length, Average Age, and Replacement Cost by Surface Type
Length
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
18.3 years
19.9 years
8.7 years
Gravel
Surface
Treated
Asphalt
Gravel, $42.8M, 34%
Surface Treated, $47M, 38%
Asphalt, $35.4M, 28%
million
Gravel (136.8km)
Surface Treated (71.3km)
Asphalt (29km)
kilometres
237.1
$125.2
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-3
The Township's transportation network is also supported by 26 structures comprising
seven bridges and 19 culverts. The estimated current replacement cost of the
Township's structures is $12.2 million, with culverts accounting for 57% of this
replacement cost (i.e., $7.0 million) and bridges accounting for the remaining 43% (i.e.,
$5.2 million). The average age of the Township's structures is 33.4 years.
Table 2-2 summarizes the quantity, average age, and estimated current replacement
cost of the Township's structures by structure type. This information is further illustrated
in Figure 2-2.
Table 2-2: Structures - Quantity, Average Age, and Replacement Cost by Structure
Type
Structure Type
Quantity
Average Age[1]
Current
Replacement Cost
Bridges
7
40.3 years
$5,234,000
Culverts
19
28.2 years
$6,972,000[2]
Total
26
33.4 years
$12,206,000
[1]Weighted average utilizing the replacement cost of each structure as weights.
[2]It is noted that since the Township's Iona Road culvert is located on a municipal boundary, for which
lifecycle costs are 50% shared with the Municipality of Dutton/Dunwich, the replacement costs presented
in Table 2-2 include 50% of the replacement value of this culvert.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-4
Figure 2-2: Structures - Quantity, Average Age, and Replacement Cost by Structure Type
Quantity
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
40.3 years
28.2 years
Bridges
Culverts
Bridges, $5.2M, 43%
Culverts, $7M, 57%
Bridges (7)
Culverts (19)
26
$12.2
structures
million
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-5
Lastly, the Township also owns and manages a variety of road-related assets which
play a vital role in supporting its broader transportation network. These assets comprise
guiderails, sidewalks, and streetlights located on the road right-of-way. The estimated
current replacement cost of the Township's road-related assets is $3.2 million.
Sidewalks represent the largest share of replacement cost at $2.1 million (65%),
followed by streetlights at $560,000 (18%), and lastly, guiderails at $548,000 (17%).
The average age of the Township's road-related assets is 20.3 years.
Table 2-3 summarizes the quantity, average age, and estimated current replacement
cost of the Township's road-related assets by asset type. This information is further
illustrated in Figure 2-3.
Table 2-3: Road-related Assets - Quantity, Average Age, and Replacement Cost by
Asset Type
Asset Type
Quantity
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
Guiderails
5.80 km
27.1 years[1]
$548,000
Sidewalks
9.99 km
N/A[2]
$2,079,000
Streetlights
230 streetlights
13.7 years[3]
$560,000
Total
20.3 years[4]
$3,187,000
[1]Weighted average utilizing the length of each guiderail as weights.
[2]The year of construction of the Township's sidewalks is not readily available. As such, the weighted
average age of these assets cannot be calculated at this time.
[3]Weighted average utilizing the replacement cost of each streetlight as weights.
[4]Weighted average utilizing the total replacement cost of each asset type as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-6
Figure 2-3: Road-related Assets - Average Age and Replacement Cost by Asset Type
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
27.1 years
N/A
13.7 years
Guiderails
Sidewalks
Streetlights
Guiderails, $548k, 17%
Sidewalks, $2.1M, 65%
Streetlights, $560k, 18%
$3.2
million
2.1.2 Condition
The Township periodically completes condition assessments on its road network to
evaluate the frequency and severity of observed base-related pavement distresses
(e.g., rutting, fatigue cracking, etc.) and surface-related pavement distresses (e.g.,
raveling, shoving, etc.). Each assessed road segment is subsequently assigned a
surface condition rating utilizing a 10-point rating scale. To better communicate the
condition of the Township's roads, surface condition ratings have been segmented into
qualitative condition states as summarized in Table 2-4.
Table 2-4: Roads - Definition of Qualitative Condition States
Surface
Condition Rating
Condition State
Description of Expected Ride Quality[1]
9 < Rating ≤ 10
Very Good
No ride discomfort expected at speed limit
6 < Rating ≤ 9
Good
Minor ride discomfort expected at speed
limit
3 < Rating ≤ 6
Fair
Increased ride discomfort expected at
speed limit; may need to reduce speed due
to safety concerns
0 ≤ Rating ≤ 3
Poor
Unable to travel at speed limit due to
significant ride discomfort and safety
concerns
[1]Descriptions are adapted from the Township's 2024 Road Needs Study completed by CD Watters
Engineering Ltd.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-7
The Township most recently assessed the surface condition of its roads as part of its
2024 Road Needs Study. Based on the results of this assessment, the Township's
paved (i.e., surface treated and asphalt) roads were assessed to have an average
surface condition rating of 7.1. This would indicate that the Township's paved roads
were in an overall 'Good' condition state (on average) at the time of the assessment and
can be expected to provide a comfortable ride quality, with some minor discomfort
expected when travelling at the posted speed limit.
The Township's 2024 Road Needs Study also assigned surface condition ratings to its
unpaved (i.e., gravel) road segments based on their observed physical state to provide
a numeric representation of their condition. The Township's unpaved roads were
assessed to have an average surface condition rating of 5.8, indicating that gravel roads
were in an overall 'Fair' condition state at the time of the assessment. Based on this
assessment, users may experience increased discomfort when travelling at the posted
speed limit on gravel roads.
It is noted that the condition of gravel roads can change rapidly and unpredictably due
to factors such as weather conditions and recency of maintenance activities (e.g., re-
grading, application of dust suppressant, spot applications of granular, etc.). Therefore,
the current condition of the Township's gravel roads may be significantly different from
what was observed as part of the 2024 Road Needs Study's assessment (and is
presented herein).
Table 2-5 summarizes the average surface condition rating and associated condition
states of the Township's roads by surface type.
Table 2-5: Roads - Average Surface Condition Rating and Associated Condition States
by Surface Type
Surface Type
Average Surface
Condition Rating[1]
Condition State
Asphalt
8.1
Good
Surface Treated
6.6
Good
Average (Paved)
7.1
Good
Gravel
5.8
Fair
Average (Overall)
6.3
Good
[1]Weighted average utilizing the surface area of road segments as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-8
The distribution (surface area) of the Township's roads by condition state and surface
type is illustrated in Figure 2-4 and the distribution (surface area) of the Township's
roads by condition rating range is illustrated in Figure 2-5.
Figure 2-4: Roads - Distribution (by surface area) of Roads by Condition State and
Surface Type
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Gravel
Surface
Treated
Asphalt
Percentage of Surface Area (m2)
Surface Type
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Figure 2-5: Roads - Distribution (by surface area) of Roads by Condition Rating Range
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Surface Area (m2)
Condition Rating Range
In accordance with Ontario Regulation 104/97: Standards for Bridges (O. Reg. 104/97),
the Township completes biennial inspections of its bridges based on the Ontario
Structure Inspection Manual (OSIM). To provide an overall measure of condition, Bridge
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-9
Condition Index (BCI) ratings are calculated by assigning weighted values to the
condition of various structural (e.g., deck, foundation, superstructure, substructure,
girders/beams, bearings, etc.) and non-structural elements (e.g., sidewalks, curbs,
handrails, barriers, signage, etc.). BCI ratings are typically represented on a scale of 0
to 100, with 100 being a bridge in new or as-new condition.
To better communicate the condition of the Township's structures, BCI ratings have
been segmented into qualitative condition states as summarized in Table 2-6.
Table 2-6: Structures - Definition of Qualitative Condition States
BCI Rating
Range
Condition
State
Description
70 ≤ BCI ≤ 100
Good
Repair and/or rehabilitation activities are typically
not required to be completed within the next five
years. Routine maintenance activities (e.g.,
sweeping, cleaning, washing, etc.) are still
recommended.
50 ≤ BCI < 70
Fair
Repair and/or rehabilitation activities are typically
required to be completed within the next five years.
Structures in this condition state are ideal
candidates for scheduling major lifecycle activities
as further deterioration in condition often leads to
uneconomical increases in repair and/or
rehabilitation costs.
0 ≤ BCI < 50
Poor
Repair and/or rehabilitation activities are typically
required to be completed within the next year.
However, if it is determined that replacing the
structure would be a more viable, practical, or
economical solution, the structure can be identified
for continued monitoring and scheduled for
replacement within the short-to-medium term.
Based on its 2024 OSIM Inspection Report, the Township's structures have an average
BCI rating of 75.9, indicating that, on average, structures are in a 'Good' condition state.
Table 2-7 summarizes the average BCI rating and associated condition states of the
Township's structures.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-10
Table 2-7: Structures - Average BCI Ratings and Condition States by Structure Type
Structure Type
Average BCI Rating[1]
Condition State
Bridges
77.9
Good
Culverts
74.4
Good
Total
75.9
Good
The distribution (replacement cost) of the Township's structures by condition state and
structure type is illustrated in Figure 2-6 and by BCI rating range is illustrated in Figure
2-7.
Figure 2-6: Structures - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets by Condition State
and Structure Type
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Bridges
Culverts
Percentage of Replacement Cost
Structure Type
Good
Fair
Poor
Unknown
[1]Weighted average utilizing the replacement cost of structures as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-11
Figure 2-7: Structures - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets by BCI Rating
Range
3 bridges
2 culverts
1 culvert
4 culverts
3 culverts
1 culvert
1 bridge
4 culverts
1 bridge
2 culverts
1 bridge
2 culverts
1 bridge
$0.0M
$0.5M
$1.0M
$1.5M
$2.0M
$2.5M
$3.0M
Replacement Cost
BCI Rating Range
Similar to its roads, the Township periodically completes condition assessments on its
sidewalks and assigns each assessed sidewalk segment a condition rating using a 10-
point rating scale based on the frequency and severity of observed defects. To better
communicate the condition of the Township's sidewalks, condition ratings have been
segmented into qualitative condition states as summarized in Table 2-8.
Table 2-8: Sidewalks - Definition of Qualitative Condition States
Condition Rating
Condition State
8 < Rating ≤ 10
Excellent
7 < Rating ≤ 8
Very Good
5 < Rating ≤ 7
Good
4 < Rating ≤ 5
Fair
2 < Rating ≤ 4
Poor
1 < Rating ≤ 2
Very Poor
Rating = 1
Failed
The Township most recently assessed the condition of its sidewalks as part of its 2024
Road Needs Study. Based on the results of this assessment, the Township's sidewalks
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-12
were assessed to have an average condition rating of 6.6[1]. This would indicate that the
Township's sidewalks were in an overall 'Good' condition state (on average) at the time
of the assessment, with some general defects such as scaling, spalling, and hairline-to-
medium sized cracking observed.
The distribution (length) of the Township's sidewalks by condition rating is illustrated in
Figure 2-8.
Figure 2-8: Sidewalks - Distribution (by length) of Assets by Condition Rating Range
0.0 km
1.0 km
2.0 km
3.0 km
4.0 km
5.0 km
6.0 km
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Length of Sidewalks (km)
Condition Rating Range
Lastly, the condition of the Township's guiderails and streetlights has not been directly
assessed through physical condition assessments. For the purposes of this asset
management plan, condition ratings have been assigned to these assets based on their
ages relative to their respective useful service life expectancies (i.e., based on the
percentage of useful service life consumed (ULC%)). A brand-new asset would have a
ULC% of 0%, indicating that none of the asset's life expectancy has been utilized.
Conversely, an asset that has reached the end of its life expectancy would have a
ULC% of 100%. It is possible for assets to have a ULC% greater than 100%, which
occurs if the asset has exceeded its typical life expectancy but continues to be in
service. This is not necessarily a cause for concern; however, it must be recognized that
assets near or beyond their typical useful service life expectancy are likely to require
[1]Weighted average utilizing the length of each sidewalk segment as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-13
replacement or rehabilitation in the near term, may exhibit reduced reliability, and may
have increasing repair and maintenance costs.
To better communicate the condition of assets, ULC% ratings have been segmented
into qualitative condition states, as summarized in Table 2-9. The scale is set to show
that if assets are replaced at the end of their expected useful service life, they would be
in a "Fair" condition state. For assets that remain in service beyond their useful service
life expectancies (i.e., ULC% > 100%), their probabilities of failure are assumed to have
increased to a point where these assets would be characterized as being in a "Poor" or
"Very Poor" condition state.
Table 2-9: Definition of Condition States based on ULC% Ranges
ULC%
Condition State
0% ≤ ULC% ≤ 45%
Very Good
45% < ULC% ≤ 90%
Good
90% < ULC% ≤ 100%
Fair
100% < ULC% ≤ 125%
Poor
125% < ULC%
Very Poor
The Township's guiderails and streetlights have an average ULC% of 100.0%,
indicating that they are currently in a 'Fair' condition state, on average. Table 2-10
summarizes the average ULC% and associated condition states of these assets by
asset type.
Table 2-10: Streetlights and Guiderails - Average ULC% and Condition States by Asset
Type
Asset Type
Average ULC%[1]
Condition State
Guiderails
131.9%
Very Poor
Streetlights
68.8%
Good
Average
100.0%[2]
Fair
[1]Weighted average utilizing the length of each guiderail and the replacement cost of each streetlight as
weights.
[2]Weighted average utilizing the total replacement cost of each asset type as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-14
It is noted that an age-based condition assessment (as presented above) may not
always be an accurate proxy for the condition of guiderails, as they can be maintained
in adequate condition for an extended period through the completion of maintenance
and repair activities, which are typically conducted in coordination with planned road
work.
The distribution (length) of the Township's guiderails by ULC% rating range is illustrated
in Figure 2-9.
Figure 2-9: Guiderails - Distribution (by length) of Assets by ULC% Rating Range
0.0 km
0.5 km
1.0 km
1.5 km
2.0 km
2.5 km
3.0 km
3.5 km
4.0 km
4.5 km
5.0 km
Length of Guiderails (km)
ULC% Rating Range
The distribution (replacement cost) of the Township's streetlights by ULC% rating range
is illustrated in Figure 2-10.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-15
Figure 2-10: Streetlights - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets by ULC% Rating
Range
$0K
$75K
$150K
$225K
$300K
$375K
$450K
Replacement Cost
ULC% Rating Range
2.1.3 Levels of Service
The levels of service currently provided by the Township's transportation assets are, in
part, a result of the state of local infrastructure presented above. The levels of service
framework presented in this subsection identifies both the levels of service that assets
are currently providing as well as the proposed levels of service (i.e., target
performance) that the Township is striving towards. The levels of service frameworks
presented in this asset management plan were developed by identifying service aspects
that would be of interest to end users (and more broadly, the general public) and in
consideration of available data.
The Township's levels of service frameworks are organized in tables, which are
structured as follows:
- The 'Service Attribute' column in Table 2-11 indicates the high-level attribute
being addressed;
- The 'Community Levels of Service' column in Table 2-11 explains the Township's
intent in plain language and provides additional information about the service
being provided;
- The 'Performance Measure' column in Table 2-12 describes the performance
measure(s) connected to the identified service attribute;
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-16
- The 'Current Performance' column in Table 2-12 identifies the current level of
service with respect to each performance measure based on the best available
data; and
- The 'Target Performance' column in Table 2-12 identifies the proposed level of
service with respect to each performance measure.
Table 2-11: Transportation Assets - Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Community Levels of Service
Scope
The Township's transportation assets enable the safe and efficient
movement of people and goods within the Township and provide
connectivity to regional roads. In addition to passenger vehicles, the
Township's transportation assets also support commercial truck
traffic, movement of agricultural equipment, and reliable emergency
vehicle access to all areas of the Township. The broader
transportation network also supports active transportation modes
such as walking and cycling.
Quality
The Township strives to maintain its transportation assets at a level
that supports the safe and efficient passage of vehicular and
pedestrian traffic.
To aid in interpreting the condition of transportation assets,
descriptions of different condition states are summarized in Section
2.1.2. General descriptions of how each condition state affects the
use of assets is also provided in therein.
Table 2-12: Transportation Assets - Technical Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Performance Measure
Current
Performance
Target
Performance
Scope
Number of lane-kilometres of arterial
roads as a proportion of square
kilometres of land area of the
Township.
Not
Applicable[1]
Not
Applicable
Number of lane-kilometres of
collector roads as a proportion of
square kilometres of land area of the
Township.
0.23 km/km²
0.23 km/km²
[1]The Township does not currently own and maintain any arterial roads within its road network.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-17
Service
Attribute
Performance Measure
Current
Performance
Target
Performance
Number of lane-kilometres of local
roads as a proportion of square
kilometres of land area of the
Township.
0.55 km/km²
0.55 km/km²
Percentage of bridges in the
Township with loading or dimensional
restrictions.
0%
0%
Percentage (by length) of roads with
an asphalt surface.
12%
12%
Percentage (by length) of roads with
surface treatment.
30%
41%[1]
Percentage (by length) of roads with
a gravel surface.
58%
47%[1]
Quality
For paved roads in the municipality,
the average Pavement Condition
Index value.
71[2]
Maximize
For unpaved roads in the Township,
the average surface condition.
Fair
Good to Fair
For bridges in the Township, the
average bridge condition index value.
78
Maximize
For structural culverts in the
Township, the average bridge
condition index value.
74
Maximize
Average condition rating (and
condition state) of sidewalks.
6.6 (Good)
Maximize
Percentage (by length) of sidewalks
in a 'Fair' or better condition state.
93%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
streetlights in a 'Fair' or better
condition state.
90%
Maximize
[1]The Township plans to convert approximately 26.7 km of its gravel roads to surface treatment over the
next 10 years.
[2]As mentioned in Section 2.1.2, the Township assesses the condition of its road segments utilizing a 10-
point rating scale as summarized in Table 2-4. The average surface condition rating of paved roads has
been multiplied by a factor of 10 to provide an estimate of the average pavement condition index value,
which is typically reported on a scale of 0 to 100.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-18
2.2 Tax-funded Facilities
2.2.1 State of Local Infrastructure
The Township owns and manages 27 facilities that support the provision of the various
municipal services that are funded by the general tax levy. The inventory includes
administrative facilities (municipal office, medical centre, and library at Keystone
complex), fire stations (Shedden and Talbotville fire stations), public works facilities
(e.g., Public Works garage, salt and sand storage building, etc.), and recreation facilities
(e.g., Keystone complex, park pavilions, concession booths, etc.).
The estimated current replacement cost of Township's facilities is $23.8 million. Public
works facilities represent the largest share of replacement cost at $6.9 million (29%),
followed by recreation facilities at $6.6 million (28%), fire stations at $5.9 million (25%),
and lastly, administrative facilities at $4.3 million (18%). The average age of the
Township's facilities is 16.5 years.
Table 2-13 summarizes the quantity, gross floor area, average age, and estimated
current replacement cost of the Township's facilities by service area. This information is
further illustrated in Figure 2-11.
Table 2-13: Facilities - Quantity, Gross Floor Area, Average Age, and Replacement
Cost by Service Area
Service Area
Quantity
Gross
Floor Area
Average
Age[1]
Current
Replacement Cost
Administration
3 facilities
11,300 ft2
32.6 years
$4,299,000
Fire Services
2 facilities
14,500 ft2
7.8 years
$5,943,000
Public Works
5 facilities
35,000 ft2
11.4 years
$6,905,000
Recreation & Culture
17 facilities
26,900 ft2
20.8 years
$6,621,000
Total
27 facilities
87,600 ft2 16.5 years
$23,768,000
[1]Weighted average utilizing the gross floor area of each facility as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-19
Figure 2-11: Facilities - Gross Floor Area, Average Age, and Replacement Cost by Service Area
Gross Floor Area
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
32.6 years
7.8 years
11.4 years
20.8 years
Administration
Fire
Public Works
Recreation
and Culture
Administration,
$4.3M, 18%
Fire, $5.9M,
25%
Public Works, $6.9M, 29%
Recreation and
Culture, $6.6M, 28%
$23.8
million
Administration (11,260 sq.ft)
Fire
(14,500
sq.ft)
Public Works (34,950 sq.ft)
Recreation and
Culture (26,900 sq.ft)
87,600
square feet
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-20
2.2.2 Condition
The condition of the Township's facilities has not been formally assessed through
physical condition assessments. For the purposes of this asset management plan,
condition ratings have been assigned to the various building elements comprising each
facility based on each element's age relative to its respective useful service life (i.e.
based on the percentage of useful service life consumed (ULC%))[1]. Please refer to
Section 2.1.2 for further information on this condition assessment methodology.
Calculated ULC% ratings of each facility's respective building elements were
subsequently averaged to provide a high-level indicator of each facility's overall
condition. To better communicate the condition of facilities, these average ULC%
ratings were segmented into qualitative condition states as summarized previously in
Table 2-9.
The average ULC% of the Township's facilities is 30.1%, indicating that, on average,
building elements are currently in a 'Very Good' condition state. Table 2-14 summarizes
the average ULC% and associated condition states of the facilities by service area.
Table 2-14: Facilities - Average ULC% and Condition States by Service Area
Service Area
Average ULC%[2]
Condition State
Administration
37.7%
Very Good
Fire Services
22.9%
Very Good
Public Works
22.3%
Very Good
Recreation and Culture
41.0%
Very Good
Average
30.1%
Very Good
The distribution (gross floor area) of the Township's facilities by condition state and
service area is illustrated in Figure 2-12 and by ULC% rating range is illustrated in
Figure 2-13.
[1]It is noted that the inventory of building elements comprising each facility is based on the Township's
Citywide database. Consequently, any building elements not inventoried in the Township's Citywide
database are excluded from the condition assessment presented herein.
[2]Weighted average using replacement cost of each asset as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-21
Figure 2-12: Facilities - Distribution (by gross floor area) of Assets by Condition State
and Service Area
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Administration
Fire
Public Works
Recreation and
Culture
Percentage of Gross Floor Area
Service Area
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Figure 2-13: Facilities - Distribution (by gross floor area) of Assets by ULC% Rating
Range
3 facilities
2 facilities
1 facility
2 facilities
1 facility
1 facility
1 facility
3 facilities
1 facility
2 facilities
1 facility
1 facility
1 facility
0 sq.ft
4,000 sq.ft
8,000 sq.ft
12,000 sq.ft
16,000 sq.ft
20,000 sq.ft
24,000 sq.ft
Gross Floor Area
ULC% Rating Range
2.2.3 Levels of Service
This subsection presents the Township's levels of service framework for facilities. Table
2-15 presents the Service Attributes and Community Levels of Service while Table 2-16
presents the Technical Levels of Service (i.e., performance measures). Please refer to
section 2.1.3 for further details on the Township's levels of service framework.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-22
Table 2-15: Facilities - Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Community Levels of Service
Capacity
The Township strives to align the capacity of its facilities with the
service demands of its community.
Quality
The Township strives to maintain its facilities in adequate condition to
continue effectively supporting the provision of municipal services.
Table 2-16: Facilities - Technical Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Performance Measure
Current
Performance
Target
Performance
Capacity
Gross floor area (square footage) of
administrative facilities per 100
residents.
205 ft2 / 100
residents[1]
177 ft2 / 100
residents[1]
Gross floor area (square footage) of
fire stations per 100 residents.
263 ft2 / 100
residents[1]
228 ft2 / 100
residents[1]
Gross floor area (square footage) of
public works facilities per kilometre
of roads.
147 ft2 /
kilometre
147 ft2 /
kilometre
Gross floor area (square footage) of
recreation facilities per 100
residents.
489 ft2 / 100
residents[1]
422 ft2 / 100
residents[1]
Quality
Percentage (by gross floor area) of
administrative facilities in a 'Fair' or
better condition state.
100%
Maximize
Percentage (by gross floor area) of
fire stations in a 'Fair' or better
condition state.
100%
Maximize
Percentage (by gross floor area) of
public works facilities in a 'Fair' or
better condition state.
100%
Maximize
Percentage (by gross floor area) of
recreation facilities in a 'Fair' or
better condition state.
100%
Maximize
[1]Based on population projections provided in the Township's 2020 Development Charges Background
Study.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-23
2.3 Tax-funded Fleet and Equipment
2.3.1 State of Local Infrastructure
The Township's inventory of fleet and equipment assets comprises vehicles ranging
from light-duty pickup trucks to larger vehicles such as plow trucks, graders, and fire
fleet assets such as tankers and pumpers. The inventory also includes various pieces of
equipment that support public works operations, administrative functions, and fire-
fighting activities.
The estimated current replacement cost of the Township's fleet and equipment assets is
$10.8 million. Public works fleet assets represent the largest share of replacement cost
at $5.9 million (55%), followed by fire fleet assets at $2.7 million (25%), fire-fighting
equipment at $1.1 million (11%), public works equipment at $688,000 (6%), general
administrative equipment (including IT assets) at $292,000 (3%), and lastly, vehicles
belonging to Building and Community Services (BCS) at $91,000 (1%). The average
age of the Township's fleet and equipment assets is 6.9 years.
Table 2-17 summarizes the average age and estimated current replacement cost of the
Township's fleet and equipment assets by asset type. This information is further
illustrated in Figure 2-14.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-24
Table 2-17: Fleet and Equipment - Average Age and Replacement Cost by Asset Type
Asset Type
Examples
Average
Age[1]
Current
Replacement
Cost
Fire Equipment
Radios, SCBAs, bunker
gear etc.
4.8 years
$1,136,000
Fire Vehicles
Pumpers, tankers, rescue
vehicles, etc.
9.3 years
$2,659,000
Public Works Equipment
Generators, mowers,
cardlock fuel system, etc.
18.7 years
$688,000
Public Works Fleet
Plows, pickup trucks,
loaders, backhoes, etc.
4.9 years
$5,946,000
Administrative Equipment IT hardware, office
furniture, etc.
7.6 years
$292,000
Building and Community
Services Vehicles
Pickup trucks (2)
3.0 years
$91,000
Total
6.9 years
$10,812,000
Figure 2-14: Fleet and Equipment - Average Age and Replacement Cost by Asset Type
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
4.8 years
9.3 years
18.7 years
4.9 years
7.6 years
3.0 years
Fire Equipment
Fire Vehicles
Public Works
Equipment
Public Works Fleet
Administrative
Equipment
BCS Fleet
Fire Equipment,
$1.1M, 11%
Fire
Vehicles,
$2.7M,
25%
Public Works
Equipment,
$688k, 6%
Public Works Fleet, $5.9M, 55%
Administrative
Equipment,
$292k, 3%
BCS Fleet, $91k, 1%
$10.8
million
2.3.2 Condition
The condition of the Township's fleet and equipment assets has not been directly
assessed through physical condition assessments. For the purposes of this asset
management plan, condition ratings have been assigned to assets based on age
[1]Weighted average utilizing the replacement cost of each asset as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-25
relative to useful service life (i.e. based on the percentage of useful service life
consumed (ULC%)). To better communicate the condition of these assets, ULC%
ratings have been segmented into qualitative condition states as summarized previously
in Table 2-9. Please refer to Section 2.1.2 for further information on this condition
assessment methodology.
The Township's fleet and equipment assets have an average ULC% of 48.3%,
indicating that, on average, assets are currently in a 'Good' condition state. Table 2-18
summarizes the average ULC% and associated condition states of the fleet and
equipment assets by asset type.
Table 2-18: Fleet and Equipment - Average ULC% and Condition States by Asset Type
Asset Type
Average
ULC%[1]
Condition State
Fire Equipment
49.2%
Good
Fire Vehicles
47.8%
Good
Public Works Equipment
123.4%
Poor
Public Works Fleet
36.3%
Very Good
Administrative Equipment
118.9%
Poor
Building and Community Services Vehicles
42.9%
Very Good
Average
48.3%
Good
The distribution (replacement cost) of the Township's fleet and equipment assets by
condition state and asset type is illustrated in Figure 2-15 and by ULC% rating range is
illustrated in Figure 2-16.
[1]Weighted average using replacement cost of each asset as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-26
Figure 2-15: Fleet and Equipment Assets - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets
by Condition State and Asset Type
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Fire Equipment
Fire Vehicles
Public Works Equipment
Public Works Fleet
Administrative Equipment
BCS Fleet
Percentage of Replacement Cost
Asset Type
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Figure 2-16: Fleet and Equipment Assets - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets
by ULC% Rating Range
$0.0M
$0.2M
$0.4M
$0.6M
$0.8M
$1.0M
$1.2M
$1.4M
$1.6M
Replacement Cost
ULC% Rating
2.3.3 Levels of Service
This subsection presents the Township's levels of service framework for fleet and
equipment assets. Table 2-19 presents the Service Attributes and Community Levels of
Service, while Table 2-20 presents the Technical Levels of Service (i.e., performance
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-27
measures). Please refer to section 2.1.3 for further details on the Township's levels of
service framework.
Table 2-19: Fleet and Equipment - Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Community Levels of Service
Reliability
The Township strives to minimize the number and impact of
unplanned repair/maintenance activities performed on its fleet and
equipment assets.
Table 2-20: Fleet and Equipment - Technical Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Performance Measure
Current
Performance
Target
Performance
Reliability
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
fire-fighting equipment in a 'Fair' or
better condition state.
95%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
fire fleet assets in a 'Fair' or better
condition state.
87%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
public works equipment assets in a
'Fair' or better condition state.
24%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
public works fleet assets in a 'Fair' or
better condition state.
97%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
general administrative equipment
assets in a 'Fair' or better condition
state.
68%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
Building and Community Services
vehicles in a 'Fair' or better condition
state.
100%
Maximize
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-28
2.4 Parks and Recreation
2.4.1 State of Local Infrastructure
The Township owns and manages a variety of parks and recreation assets comprising
ball diamonds and sport courts, lighting and fencing assets, play equipment, parking
lots, and other miscellaneous equipment assets such as picnic tables, chairs,
audio/video equipment, kitchen appliances, etc.
The estimated current replacement cost of the Township's parks and recreation assets
is $2.2 million. Lighting and fencing assets represent the largest share of this
replacement cost at $881,000 (41%), followed by play equipment at $539,000 (25%),
ball diamonds and sport courts at $313,000 (14%), miscellaneous equipment assets at
$308,000 (14%), and lastly, parking lots at $132,000 (6%). The average age of the
Township's parks and recreation assets is approximately 9.8 years.
Table 2-21 summarizes the average age and estimated current replacement cost of the
Township's parks and recreation assets by asset type and this information is further
illustrated in Figure 2-17.
Table 2-21: Parks and Recreation - Average Age and Replacement Cost by Asset Type
Asset Type
Average Age[1]
Current
Replacement Cost
Ball Diamonds and Sport Courts
10.8 years
$313,000
Lighting and Fencing
9.5 years
$881,000
Play Equipment
9.4 years
$539,000
Parking Lots
7.4 years
$132,000
Misc. Equipment
11.5 years
$308,000
Total
9.8 years
$2,173,000
[1]Weighted average utilizing the replacement cost of each asset as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-29
Figure 2-17: Parks and Recreation - Average Age and Replacement Cost by Asset
Type
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
10.8 years
9.5 years
9.4 years
7.4 years
11.5 years
Ball Diamonds and
Sport Courts
Lighting and
Fencing
Play Equipment
Parking Lots
Misc. Equipment
Ball Diamonds and Sport
Courts, $313k, 14%
Lighting and Fencing,
$881k, 41%
Play Equipment, $539k, 25%
Parking Lots,
$132k, 6%
Misc. Equipment, $308k, 14%
$2.2
million
2.4.2 Condition
The condition of the Township's parks and recreation assets has not been directly
assessed through physical condition assessments. For the purposes of this asset
management plan, condition ratings have been assigned to assets based on age
relative to useful service life (i.e. based on the percentage of useful service life
consumed (ULC%)). To better communicate the condition of these assets, ULC%
ratings have been segmented into qualitative condition states as summarized previously
in Table 2-9. Please refer to Section 2.1.2 for further information on this condition
assessment methodology.
The Township's parks and recreation assets have an average ULC% of 69.5%,
indicating that, on average, assets are currently in a 'Good' condition state. Table 2-22
summarizes the average ULC% and associated condition states of the parks and
recreation assets.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-30
Table 2-22: Parks and Recreation - Average ULC% and Condition State by Asset Type
Asset Type
Average ULC%[1]
Condition State
Ball Diamonds and Sport Courts
62.0%
Good
Lighting and Fencing
59.9%
Good
Play Equipment
62.5%
Good
Parking Lots
74.1%
Good
Misc. Equipment
114.8%
Poor
Average
69.5%
Good
The distribution (replacement cost) of the Township's parks and recreation assets by
condition state and asset type is illustrated in Figure 2-18 and by ULC% rating range is
illustrated in Figure 2-19.
Figure 2-18: Parks and Recreation - Distribution (replacement cost) of Assets by
Condition State and Asset Type
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ball Diamonds and Sport
Courts
Lighting and Fencing
Play Equipment
Parking Lots
Misc. Equipment
Percentage of Replacement Cost
Asset Type
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
[1]Weighted average using replacement cost of each asset as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-31
Figure 2-19: Parks and Recreation - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets by
ULC% Rating Range
$0K
$50K
$100K
$150K
$200K
$250K
$300K
$350K
$400K
Replacement Cost
ULC% Range
2.4.3 Levels of Service
This subsection presents the Township's levels of service frameworks for its parks and
recreation assets. Table 2-23 presents the Service Attributes and Community Levels of
Service, while Table 2-24 presents the Technical Levels of Service (i.e., performance
measures). Please refer to section 2.1.3 for further details on the Township's levels of
service framework.
Table 2-23: Parks and Recreation - Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Community Levels of Service
Reliability
The Township strives to maintain its parks and recreation assets in
adequate condition to continue providing a satisfactory user
experience.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-32
Table 2-24: Parks and Recreation - Technical Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Performance Measure
Current
Performance
Target
Performance
Reliability
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
ball diamonds and sport courts in a
'Fair' or better condition state.
80%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
lighting and fencing assets in a 'Fair'
or better condition state.
82%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
play equipment assets in a 'Fair' or
better condition state.
79%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
parking lots in a 'Fair' or better
condition state.
62%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
miscellaneous equipment assets in a
'Fair' or better condition state.
80%
Maximize
2.5 Stormwater
2.5.1 State of Local Infrastructure
The Township's stormwater system supports the management of stormwater runoff,
provides flood protection, manages the rate of groundwater discharge while helping to
recharge groundwater reserves, and helps stop contaminants from entering the water
supply. The system is supported by 8.6 km of stormwater mains and numerous catch
basins and manholes.
The estimated current replacement cost of the Township's stormwater system assets is
$8.6 million. Stormwater mains represent the largest share of the replacement cost at
$8.1 million (95%), followed by catch basins at $259,000 (3%), and manholes at
$176,000 (2%). The average age of the Township's stormwater system assets is 2.1
years.
Table 2-21 summarizes the average age and estimated current replacement cost of the
Township's stormwater system assets by asset type and this information is further
illustrated in Figure 2-17.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-33
Table 2-25: Stormwater - Average Age and Replacement Cost by Asset Type
Asset Type
Average Age[1]
Current
Replacement Cost
Catch Basins
2.4 years
$259,000
Manholes
2.3 years
$176,000
Stormwater Mains
2.0 years[2]
$8,127,000
Total
2.1 years[3]
$8,562,000
Figure 2-20: Stormwater - Average Age and Replacement Cost by Asset Type
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
2.4 years
2.3 years
2.0 years
Catchbasins
Manholes
Stormwater
Mains
Catchbasins, $259k, 3%
Manholes, $176k, 2%
Stormwater Mains, $8.1M, 95%
$8.6
million
2.5.2 Condition
The condition of the Township's stormwater system assets has not been directly
assessed through physical condition assessments. For the purposes of this asset
management plan, condition ratings have been assigned to assets based on age
relative to useful service life (i.e. based on the percentage of useful service life
consumed (ULC%)). To better communicate the condition of these assets, ULC%
ratings have been segmented into qualitative condition states as summarized previously
[1]Weighted average utilizing the length of stormwater mains and replacement cost of other assets as
weights.
[2]It is noted that the ages of approximately 75% (by length) of the Township's stormwater mains are not
readily available. As such, these assets are excluded from the calculation of average age presented
herein.
[3]Weighted average utilizing the total replacement cost of each asset type as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-34
in Table 2-9. Please refer to Section 2.1.2 for further information on this condition
assessment methodology.
The Township's stormwater assets have an average ULC% of 2.7%, indicating that, on
average, assets are in a 'Very Good' condition state. Table 2-26 summarizes the
average ULC% and associated condition states of stormwater assets.
Table 2-26: Stormwater - Average ULC% and Condition States by Asset Type
Asset Type
Average ULC%[1]
Condition State
Catch Basins
3.2%
Very Good
Manholes
3.1%
Very Good
Stormwater Mains
2.7%[2]
Very Good
Average
3.2%[3]
Very Good
The distribution (replacement cost) of the Township's stormwater assets by condition
state and asset type is illustrated in Figure 2-21 and by ULC% rating range is illustrated
in Figure 2-22.
[1]Weighted average utilizing the length of stormwater mains and replacement cost of other assets as
weights.
[2]As noted earlier in Section 2.5.1, the ages of approximately 75% (by length) of the Township's
stormwater mains are not readily available. As such, ULC% rating cannot be calculated for these assets
at this time and these assets are excluded from the calculation of weighted average ULC%.
[3]Weighted average utilizing the replacement cost of assets as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-35
Figure 2-21: Stormwater - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets by Condition
State and Asset Type
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Catchbasins
Manholes
Stormwater
Mains
Percentage of Replacement Cost
Asset Type
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Figure 2-22: Stormwater - Distribution (replacement cost) of Assets by ULC% Rating
Range
$0.0M
$0.5M
$1.0M
$1.5M
$2.0M
$2.5M
Replacement Cost
ULC% Range
2.5.3 Levels of Service
This section presents the Township's levels of service framework for stormwater assets.
Table 2-27 presents the Service Attributes and Community Levels of Service, while
Table 2-28 presents the Technical Levels of Service (i.e., performance measures).
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-36
Please refer to section 2.1.3 for further details on the Township's levels of service
framework.
Table 2-27: Stormwater - Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Community Levels of Service
Scope
The stormwater management system enables collection and retention
of stormwater within the Township.
Reliability
The Township strives to maintain its stormwater system assets in
adequate condition to reliably provide flood protection to properties
and roads, manage the rate of groundwater discharge, and assist in
reducing the level of contamination entering the natural environment.
Table 2-28: Stormwater - Technical Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Performance Measure
Current
Performance
Target
Performance
Scope
Percentage of properties in
municipality resilient to a 100-year
storm.
15%
15%
Percentage of the municipal
stormwater management system
resilient to a 5-year storm.
48%
100%
Reliability
Percentage (by length) of stormwater
mains in a 'Fair' or better condition
state.
100%[1]
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
catch basins in a 'Fair' or better
condition state.
100%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
manholes in a 'Fair' or better
condition state.
100%
Maximize
[1]As noted earlier in Section 2.5.2, an age-based condition assessment cannot be completed for
approximately 75% (by length) of the Township's stormwater mains due to data limitations. As such,
these assets have been excluded from the calculation of the current performance of this measure.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-37
2.6 Water
2.6.1 State of Local Infrastructure
The Township's water distribution system provides potable water for residential and
business consumption, fire suppression needs, and also for the Township's own
maintenance operations and facilities. The system is supported by 245.9 km of
watermains, a number of water meters, a pickup truck, and water facilities that support
secondary disinfection and pressure boosting. It is noted that primary disinfection is
undertaken by the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply system, which provides treated
water to the Township's water distribution system. It is further noted that while the
Township owns all water system assets and is responsible for funding their lifecycle
requirements, the operation of the Township's water distribution system is contracted to
the Ontario Clean Water Agency (OCWA).
The estimated current replacement cost of the Township's water system assets is $85.2
million. Watermains represent the largest share of this replacement cost at $82.7 million
(97%), followed by water meters at $1.3 million (2%), water facilities at $1.2 million
(1%), and lastly, the pickup truck at $63,000 (0.1%). The average age of the Township's
water system assets is 20.8 years.
Table 2-29 summarizes the quantity, average age, and estimated current replacement
cost of the Township's water system assets and this information is further illustrated in
Figure 2-23.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-38
Table 2-29: Water - Quantity, Average Age, and Replacement Cost by Asset Type
Asset Type
Quantity
Average
Age[1]
Current
Replacement Cost
Watermains
245.9 km
20.7 years
$82,679,000
Water Meters
1,752 meters
14.4 years
$1,314,000
Fleet Assets
1 pickup truck
2.0 years
$63,000
Facilities
2 facilities
38.1 years
$1,161,000
Total
20.8 years[2]
$85,217,000
Figure 2-23: Water - Average Age and Replacement Cost by Asset Type
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
20.7 years
14.4 years
2.0 years
38.1 years
Watermains, $82.7M, 97%
Water Meters,
$1.3M, 2%
Fleet Assets, $63k, 0.1%
Facilities,
$1.2M, 1%
$85.2
million
20.7 years
14.4 years
2.0 years
38.1 years
Watermains
Water
Meters
Fleet Assets
Facilities
2.6.2 Condition
The condition of the Township's water system assets has not been directly assessed
through physical condition assessments. For the purposes of this asset management
plan, condition ratings have been assigned to assets based on age relative to useful
service life (i.e. based on the percentage of useful service life consumed (ULC%)). To
better communicate the condition of assets, ULC% ratings have been segmented into
qualitative condition states, as summarized previously in Table 2-9. Please refer to
Section 2.1.2 for further information on this condition assessment methodology.
[1]Weighted average utilizing the length of watermains and the replacement cost of other assets as
weights.
[2]Weighted average utilizing the total replacement cost of each asset type as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-39
The Township's water system assets have an average ULC% of 29.2%, indicating that,
on average, assets are in a 'Very Good' condition state. Table 2-30 summarizes the
average ULC% ratings and associated condition states of the Township's water system
assets by asset type.
Table 2-30: Water - Average ULC% and Condition States by Asset Type
Asset Type
Average ULC%[1]
Condition State
Watermains
27.6%
Very Good
Water Meters
71.8%
Good
Fleet Assets
28.6%
Very Good
Facilities
90.4%
Fair
Average
29.2%[2]
Very Good
The distribution (replacement cost) of the Township's water system assets by condition
state and asset type is illustrated in Figure 2-24 and the distribution (length) of the
Township's watermains by ULC% rating range is illustrated in Figure 2-25.
Figure 2-24: Water - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets by Condition State
and Asset Type
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Watermains
Water Meters
Fleet Assets
Facilities
Percentage of Replacement Cost
Asset Type
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
[1]Weighted average utilizing the length of water mains and the replacement cost of other assets as
weights.
[2]Weighted average utilizing the total replacement cost of each asset type as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-40
Figure 2-25: Watermains - Distribution (by length) of Assets by ULC% Rating Range
0 km
10 km
20 km
30 km
40 km
50 km
60 km
70 km
80 km
90 km
Length of Watermains (km)
ULC% Range
2.6.3 Levels of Service
This subsection presents the Township's levels of service frameworks for its water
assets. Table 2-31 presents the Service Attributes and Community Levels of Service
while Table 2-32 presents the Technical Levels of Service (i.e., performance measures).
Please refer to section 2.1.3 for further details on the Township's levels of service
framework.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-41
Table 2-31: Water - Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Community Levels of Service
Scope
The Township's water distribution system provides potable water for
residential and business consumption, as well as for the Township's
own maintenance and fire-fighting operations and its facilities. The
system provides fire flow to most connected properties.
Reliability
The Township manages its water distribution system with the goal of
reliably delivering clean drinking water while also minimizing service
interruptions and occurrences of adverse water quality events.
Boil water advisories can be triggered by adverse water quality
reports from routine water testing or from ad hoc tests done after
events that may have allowed contaminants into the system (e.g.,
watermain breaks).
Service interruptions can be caused by routine municipal work,
including watermain replacements, water system repairs, service
connection repairs, and maintenance of water system facilities.
Table 2-32: Water - Technical Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Performance Measure
Current
Performance
Target
Performance
Scope
Percentage of properties connected
to the municipal water systems.
90%[1]
90%
Percentage of properties where fire
flow is available.
69%[2]
69%
Reliability
The number of connection-days per
year where a boil water advisory
notice is in place compared to the
total number of properties connected
to the municipal water systems.
3.96
connection
days /
connection[3]
0 connection
days /
connection
[1]Based on the best available data, 1,850 properties out of a total of 2,059 properties in the Township are
connected to the municipal water system.
[2]It is noted that watermain segments under 150 mm (6 inch) diameter, representing approximately 24%
of the Township's watermain network, do not have fire hydrants installed. As such, it is estimated that an
equivalent percentage of connected properties (24% or approx. 439 properties) do not have fire flow
available.
[3]The Township issued one boil water advisory (BWA) in 2025, which was caused by a watermain break.
The BWA lasted approximately four days, and all connected properties were affected.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-42
Service
Attribute
Performance Measure
Current
Performance
Target
Performance
The number of connection-days per
year lost due to water main breaks
compared to the total number of
properties connected to the municipal
water systems.
0.33
connection
days /
connection[1]
0 connection
days /
connection
Percentage (by length) of watermains
in a 'Fair' or better condition state.
100%
Maximize
2.7 Wastewater
2.7.1 State of Local Infrastructure
The Township's wastewater collection and treatment system services primarily
residential customers but also some light commercial and industrial customers in the
settlement area of Talbotville. The system is supported by 2.4 km of wastewater mains
and a wastewater treatment plant. It is noted that, similar to the water distribution
system, while the Township owns all wastewater system assets and is responsible for
funding their lifecycle requirements, the operation of the system is contracted to the
Ontario Clean Water Agency (OCWA).
The estimated current replacement cost of the Township's wastewater system is $12.1
million, with wastewater mains accounting for 53% of this replacement cost (i.e., $6.4
million) and the wastewater treatment plant accounting for the remaining 47% (i.e., $5.7
million). The average age of the Township's wastewater system assets is 19.2 years.
Table 2-33 summarizes the average age and estimated current replacement cost of the
Township's wastewater system assets and this information is further illustrated in Figure
2-26.
[1]The Township experienced one watermain break in 2025, which affected all connected properties and
lasted a total of eight hours. It is noted that not all properties were impacted for the entire eight-hour
duration, as the break was isolated during the course of repairs.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-43
Table 2-33: Wastewater - Average Age, and Replacement Cost
Asset Type
Average
Age[1]
Current
Replacement Cost
Wastewater Mains
30.5 years
$6,425,000
Wastewater Treatment Plant
6.5 years
$5,699,000
Total
19.2 years[2]
$12,124,000
Figure 2-26: Wastewater - Average Age, and Replacement Cost
Average Age
Current Replacement Cost
30.5 years
6.5 years
Wastewater Mains
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
Wastewater Mains, $6.4M, 53%
Wastewater Treatment Plant, $5.7M, 47%
$12.1
million
30.5 years
6.5 years
Wastewater
Mains
Wastewater
Treatment
Plant
2.7.2 Condition
The condition of the Township's wastewater system assets has not been directly
assessed through physical condition assessments. For the purposes of this asset
management plan, condition ratings have been assigned to assets based on age
relative to useful service life (i.e. based on the percentage of useful service life
consumed (ULC%)). To better communicate the condition of assets, ULC% ratings have
been segmented into qualitative condition states, as summarized previously in Table
2-9. Please refer to Section 2.1.2 for further information on this condition assessment
methodology.
The Township's wastewater system assets have an average ULC% of 28.1, indicating
that, on average, assets are in a 'Very Good' condition state. Table 2-34 summarizes
[1]Weighted average utilizing the length of wastewater mains and replacement cost of wastewater
treatment plant components as weights.
[2]Weighted average utilizing the total replacement cost of each asset type as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-44
the average ULC% ratings and associated condition states of the Township's
wastewater system assets by asset type.
Table 2-34: Wastewater - Average ULC% and Condition States by Asset Type
Asset Type
Average ULC%[1]
Condition State
Wastewater Mains
40.7%
Very Good
Wastewater Treatment Plant
14.0%
Very Good
Average
28.1%[2]
Very Good
The distribution (replacement cost) of the Township's wastewater assets by condition
state and asset type is illustrated in Figure 2-27.
Figure 2-27: Wastewater Assets - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets by
Condition State and Asset Type
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Wastewater Mains
Wastewater Treatment
Plant
Percentage of Replacement Cost
Asset Type
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
The distribution of the Township's wastewater mains and wastewater treatment plant
components by ULC% rating range is illustrated in Figure 2-28 and Figure 2-29,
respectively.
[1]Weighted average utilizing the length of wastewater mains and the replacement cost of wastewater
treatment plant components as weights.
[2]Weighted average utilizing the total replacement cost of each asset type as weights.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-45
Figure 2-28: Wastewater Mains - Distribution (by length) of Assets by ULC% Rating
Range
0.0 km
0.2 km
0.4 km
0.6 km
0.8 km
1.0 km
1.2 km
1.4 km
1.6 km
1.8 km
Length of Wastewater Mains (km)
ULC% Rating Range
Figure 2-29: Wastewater Treatment Plant - Distribution (by replacement cost) of Assets
by ULC% Rating Range
$0.0M
$0.5M
$1.0M
$1.5M
$2.0M
$2.5M
$3.0M
$3.5M
$4.0M
$4.5M
$5.0M
Replacement Cost
ULC% Rating Range
2.7.3 Levels of Service
This subsection presents the Township's levels of service frameworks for wastewater
assets. Table 2-35
Table 2-35 presents the Service Attributes and Community Levels of Service while
Table 2-36 presents the Technical Levels of Service (i.e., performance measures).
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-46
Please refer to section 2.1.3 for further details on the Township's levels of service
framework.
Table 2-35: Wastewater - Community Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Community Levels of Service
Scope
The Township's wastewater collection and treatment system services
primarily residential customers and some light commercial and
industrial customers in the settlement area of Talbotville. The
Township anticipates additional wastewater system demand in the
settlement areas of Shedden and Fingal in the short-to-medium term.
The Township plans to address this demand by constructing a new
wastewater treatment plant in Shedden within the next five years.
Reliability
The Township's wastewater collection system is separated, meaning
that sanitary and stormwater flows are carried in different mains to
different destinations. At times, however, infiltration or inflow of both
groundwater and stormwater can enter the wastewater collection
system through numerous sources such as cracks in pipes, weeping
tile connections, cross connections, catch basins, etc. The Township
currently has sufficient wastewater treatment capacity to address the
potential minor inflow and infiltration of groundwater and stormwater
into its wastewater collection network.
Effluent discharge is typically defined as water pollution and can be
caused by outflows from wastewater treatment facilities. Effluent
discharges have documented compliance limits for criteria related to
flow rates, suspended solids, Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD),
phosphorous, ammonia, and E. coli. The Township's wastewater
treatment facility is operated in accordance with the Environmental
Compliance Approval (ECA) issued by the Ministry of Environment,
Conservation and Parks. A description of the effluent that is
discharged from the wastewater treatment facility is provided in ECA
No. 4845-ARSJ4R, issued January 11, 2023.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-47
Table 2-36: Wastewater - Technical Levels of Service
Service
Attribute
Performance Measure
Current
Performance
Target
Performance
Scope
Percentage of properties connected
to the municipal wastewater system.
27%[1]
27%
Reliability
The number of events per year where
combined sewer flow in the municipal
wastewater system exceeds system
capacity compared to the total
number of properties connected to
the municipal wastewater system.
Not
Applicable[2]
Not
Applicable
The number of connection-days per
year due to wastewater backups
compared to the total number of
properties connected to the municipal
wastewater system.
0 connection
days /
connection
0 connection
days /
connection
The number of effluent violations per
year due to wastewater discharge
compared to the total number of
properties connected to the municipal
wastewater system.
0 violations /
connection 2
0 violations /
connection
Percentage (by length) of wastewater
mains in a 'Fair' or better condition
state.
100%
Maximize
Percentage (by replacement cost) of
wastewater treatment plant
components in a 'Fair' or better
condition state.
100%
Maximize
2.8 Population and Employment Growth
Based on its 2020 Development Charges Background Study, the Township's population
is expected to increase at a rate of approximately 1.47% annually, growing to
approximately 6,850 residents by mid-2040. Furthermore, the same study also projects
[1]Based on the best available data, 555 properties out of a total of 2,059 properties in the Township are
connected to the municipal wastewater system.
[2]The Township's does not own and maintain any combined sewers. Its wastewater and stormwater flows
are carried in separate mains.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 2-48
employment within the Township to increase at a rate of approximately 1.49% annually,
growing to approximately 2,400 employees by mid-2040.
Continued population and employment growth will result in incremental service
demands that are expected to impact levels of service. Service impacts resulting from
growth have been incorporated into the proposed levels of service targets presented
earlier in this chapter. The Township assesses these service impacts through master
plans and development charges background studies and imposes development charges
on new development to fund growth-related infrastructure expansion and upgrades.
Utilizing development charges helps alleviate the financial burden these growth-related
expenditures would otherwise place on existing taxpayers.
As mentioned earlier in Section 2.7.3, the Township anticipates additional wastewater
system demand in the settlement areas of Shedden and Fingal in the short-to-medium
term due to growth. The Township plans to address this demand by constructing a new
wastewater treatment plant in Shedden within the next five years. The estimated cost of
this growth-related infrastructure investment has been incorporated into the forecasts of
upcoming lifecycle activities for wastewater assets presented in Section 3.8 and the
financial strategy for water and wastewater assets presented later in Section 4.3.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
Chapter 3
Lifecycle Management
Strategies
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-1
3. Lifecycle Management Strategies
3.1 Introduction
The lifecycle management strategies in this asset management plan identify the
lifecycle activities that would need to be undertaken to achieve and sustain the
proposed levels of service presented in Chapter 2. Within the context of this asset
management plan, lifecycle activities are the specified actions that can be performed on
an asset in order to ensure it is performing adequately, and/or to extend its service
life[
F1]. These actions can be carried out on a planned schedule in a prescriptive manner,
or through a dynamic approach where the lifecycle activities are only carried out when
specified conditions are met.
In accordance with O. Reg. 588/17, the lifecycle activities and associated costs
presented in this chapter consider the full lifecycle of assets. In general terms, an
asset's lifecycle starts with its initial planning and acquisition (or construction), includes
both the capital and significant operating/maintenance activities the asset is expected to
undergo throughout its life, and ends with its eventual disposal. The lifecycle
management strategies presented in this asset management plan have been developed
with the aim of identifying the set of lifecycle activities that can be undertaken at the
lowest cost to achieve and sustain target service levels.
The following subsections summarize the ten-year forecasts of lifecycle activities and
associated costs that would be required for the Township to provide the proposed levels
of service. Brief descriptions of the methods and data sources utilized to develop the
forecasts are also provided in the following subsections.
It is noted that the ten-year forecasts of lifecycle expenditures presented in this chapter
do not account for unforeseen circumstances that may introduce additional costs (e.g.,
natural disasters, etc.). There is a level of inherent uncertainty in lifecycle forecasts,
reinforcing the need to review and update this asset management plan on a regular
basis.
[1]The full lifecycle of an asset includes activities such as initial planning and maintenance which are
typically addressed through master planning studies and maintenance management, respectively.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-2
3.2 Transportation
This section presents an estimate of costs associated with providing the proposed
levels of service for the Township's transportation assets presented earlier in Section
2.1.3.
In general terms, the proposed levels of service involve maintaining road surfaces in
adequate quality to provide a satisfactory user experience, maintaining structures in
adequate condition to enable the safe and efficient passage of vehicular and pedestrian
traffic, maintaining culverts in adequate condition to efficiently convey hydraulic flows
while safely supporting overlying traffic loads, and maintaining road-related assets so
that they can effectively support the broader transportation network.
The lifecycle expenditure forecast for the Township's paved roads was derived based
on the recommendations contained in its 2024 Road Needs Study, which were further
refined through staff consultations. The Township's 2024 Road Needs Study identified
upcoming lifecycle activities for its paved roads by considering several factors, including
surface condition, structural adequacy of the underlying road base, maintenance
demand, average daily traffic volumes, etc. Several lifecycle activities were considered
as part of the road improvement strategy, including:
- Micro-surfacing;
- Resurfacing of surface treated roads (single surface treatment and double
surface treatment with pulverization);
- Resurfacing of asphalt roads (asphalt resurfacing, milling and asphalt
resurfacing, asphalt resurfacing with pulverization, and cold in-place recycling
and resurfacing); and
- Full-depth reconstruction for both rural and urban roads.
Additionally, gravel-to-paved surface road upgrades were also considered as part of the
Township's 2024 Road Needs Study. Through consultations with Township staff, it was
determined that the Township plans to upgrade approximately 26.7 km of gravel roads
to surface treatment within the next 10 years. The lifecycle expenditure forecast
presented in this section includes the costs associated with these road surface
upgrades.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-3
The Township expects to maintain its remaining gravel roads through the timely
completion of regular maintenance activities (e.g., dust suppressant applications,
periodic re-grading, periodic re-application of granular, etc.), which are funded through
its annual operating budgets. These activities are expected to maintain the Township's
gravel roadways in adequate condition over the long term, with no capital lifecycle
expenditures expected over the 10-year forecast horizon of this asset management
plan. As such, the annual cost of gravel road maintenance is excluded from the lifecycle
expenditure forecast presented in this section.
The Township's 2024 Road Needs Study recommended an increase to its annual gravel
road maintenance budget to enable the Township to improve the condition of its gravel
road network. As such, the operating budget forecast presented later in Section 4.2.4
has been adjusted to incorporate these recommendations. Additional adjustments were
made to account for the expected reduction in the quantity of gravel roads following the
completion of the aforementioned gravel-to-paved surface road upgrades.
The capital expenditure forecast for the Township's structures was derived based on the
recommendations contained in its most recent (2024) OSIM inspection report, which
seek to ensure the timely completion of maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement
activities.
Lastly, the Township undertakes the replacement or reconstruction of its road-related
assets in coordination with planned road work. The lifecycle expenditure forecast
presented in this section includes an annual allowance to address the
reconstruction/replacement requirements of road-related assets when road work is
being completed. As such, the allowance varies annually based on the length of roads
that are expected to be rehabilitated or reconstructed in that year.
The 10-year lifecycle expenditure forecast for the Township's transportation network is
illustrated in Figure 3-1 and provided in tabular form in Table 3-1. Average annual
expenditures over the forecast period have been estimated at $2.3 million.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-4
Figure 3-1: Transportation Assets - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
$0.0M
$1.0M
$2.0M
$3.0M
$4.0M
$5.0M
$6.0M
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Roads
Structures
Road-related Assets
Table 3-1: Transportation Assets - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
Asset Type
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Roads
$ 4,421,000 $ 1,985,000 $ 1,822,000 $ 817,000 $ 888,000 $ 1,139,000 $ 1,250,000 $ 803,000 $ 1,589,000 $ 1,957,000
Structures
$ 541,000 $ 627,000 $ 989,000 $ 154,000 $ 287,000 $ 204,000 $ 303,000 $ 57,000 $ 272,000 $ 316,000
Road-related Assets
$ 719,000 $ 313,000 $ 418,000 $ 123,000 $ 47,000 $ 213,000 $ 321,000 $ 24,000 $ 289,000 $ 274,000
Total Capital Expenditures
5,681,000
$
2,925,000
$
3,229,000
$
1,094,000
$
1,222,000
$
1,556,000
$
1,874,000
$
884,000
$
2,150,000
$
2,547,000
$
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-5
3.3 Tax-funded Facilities
This section presents an estimate of costs associated with providing the proposed
levels of service for the Township's tax-funded facilities presented earlier in Section
2.2.3.
In general terms, the proposed levels of service involve ensuring that the current
capacity of facilities (i.e., gross floor area) is sufficient to meet the service demands of
its community as well as ensuring that facilities are maintained in adequate condition to
continue effectively supporting the provision of municipal services.
The lifecycle expenditure forecast for the Township's facilities presented in this section
includes the cost associated with the replacement of the various building elements
comprising each facility based on current best estimates of their respective remaining
useful service lives[1]. It is recommended that the Township consider completing
Building Condition Assessments (BCAs) on its facilities in the near future to formally
assess their upcoming lifecycle requirements. This would enable future iterations of this
asset management plan to incorporate the updated lifecycle expenditure forecasts to
refine the forecast presented in this section as well as the financial strategy presented
later in Chapter 4.
The 10-year lifecycle expenditure forecast for the Township's facilities is illustrated in
Figure 3-2 and provided in tabular form in Table 3-2. Average annual expenditures over
the forecast period have been estimated at $31,000.
[1]It is noted that the inventory of building elements comprising each facility is based on the Township's
Citywide database. Consequently, any building elements not inventoried in the Township's Citywide
database are excluded from the lifecycle expenditure forecast presented herein.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-6
Figure 3-2: Facilities - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
$0K
$20K
$40K
$60K
$80K
$100K
$120K
$140K
$160K
$180K
$200K
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Administration
Fire
Public Works
Recreation and Culture
Table 3-2: Facilities - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
Service Area
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Administration
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Fire
-
$
77,000
$
24,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Public Works
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Recreation and Culture
-
$
-
$
16,000
$
-
$
186,000
$
-
$
8,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Total Capital Expenditures
-
$
77,000
$
40,000
$
-
$
186,000
$
-
$
8,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-7
3.4 Tax-funded Fleet and Equipment
This section presents an estimate of costs associated with providing the proposed
levels of service for the Township's fleet and equipment assets presented earlier in
Section 2.3.3.
In general terms, the proposed levels of service for fleet and equipment assets involve
maintaining assets in adequate condition to continue performing as expected and
reliably support the provision of municipal services. The Township will accomplish this
by undertaking timely replacements of ageing and poorly performing assets and through
the completion of regular maintenance activities. The lifecycle expenditure forecast
presented in this section includes the costs associated with the replacement of assets
based on current best estimates of their useful service lives.
The 10-year lifecycle expenditure forecast for the Township's fleet and equipment
assets is illustrated in Figure 3-3 and provided in tabular form in Table 3-3. Average
annual expenditures over the forecast period have been estimated at $834,000.
The current backlog of the Township's fleet and equipment assets has been estimated
to be approximately $1.4 million. This represents the estimated replacement value of all
fleet and equipment assets that are currently in service beyond their expected useful
service lives. The current backlog is forecasted to be addressed gradually over the next
five years (i.e., from 2026 to 2030).
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-8
Figure 3-3: Fleet and Equipment - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
$0.0M
$0.5M
$1.0M
$1.5M
$2.0M
$2.5M
$3.0M
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Current Backlog
Annual Capital Expenditures
Table 3-3: Fleet and Equipment - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Fire Equipment
13,000
$
75,000
$
36,000
$
67,000
$
267,000
$
111,000
$
70,000
$
96,000
$
71,000
$
588,000
$
Fire Vehicles
-
$
-
$
71,000
$
-
$
-
$
457,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
603,000
$
Public Works Equipment
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
27,000
$
-
$
3,000
$
106,000
$
275,000
$
Public Works Fleet
-
$
640,000
$
597,000
$
25,000
$
343,000
$
303,000
$
270,000
$
31,000
$
291,000
$
989,000
$
Administrative Equipment
21,000
$
16,000
$
25,000
$
5,000
$
136,000
$
11,000
$
16,000
$
38,000
$
5,000
$
150,000
$
BCS Fleet
-
$
-
$
-
$
91,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Annual Allowance to Address Current Backlog
280,000
$
280,000
$
280,000
$
280,000
$
280,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Total Capital Expenditures
314,000
$
1,011,000
$
1,009,000
$
468,000
$
1,026,000
$
909,000
$
356,000
$
168,000
$
473,000
$
2,605,000
$
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-9
3.5 Parks and Recreation
This section presents an estimate of costs associated with providing the proposed
levels of service for the Township's parks and recreation assets presented earlier in
Section 2.4.3.
Similar to fleet and equipment assets, the proposed levels of service for the parks and
recreation assets aim to maintain assets in adequate condition to continue providing a
satisfactory user experience. The Township will accomplish this by undertaking timely
replacements of ageing and poorly performing assets and through the completion of
regular maintenance activities. The lifecycle expenditure forecast presented in this
subsection includes the costs associated with the replacement of these assets based on
current estimates of their remaining service lives.
The 10-year lifecycle expenditure forecast for the Township's parks and recreation
assets is illustrated in Figure 3-4 and provided in tabular form in Table 3-4. Average
annual expenditures over the forecast period have been estimated at $147,000.
The current backlog of the Township's parks and recreation assets has been estimated
to be approximately $400,000. This represents the estimated replacement value of all
parks and recreation assets that are currently in service beyond their expected useful
service lives. The current backlog is forecasted to be addressed gradually over the next
five years (i.e., from 2026 to 2030).
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-10
Figure 3-4: Parks and Recreation - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
$0K
$50K
$100K
$150K
$200K
$250K
$300K
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Current Backlog
Annual Capital Expenditures
Table 3-4: Parks and Recreation - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Ball Diamonds and Sport Courts
7,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
29,000
$
63,000
$
-
$
-
$
Lighting and Fencing
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
197,000
$
-
$
26,000
$
12,000
$
Play Equipment
-
$
-
$
90,000
$
-
$
-
$
81,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
133,000
$
Parking Lots
13,000
$
13,000
$
13,000
$
13,000
$
13,000
$
13,000
$
13,000
$
13,000
$
13,000
$
13,000
$
Misc. Equipment
7,000
$
98,000
$
82,000
$
7,000
$
27,000
$
13,000
$
-
$
11,000
$
-
$
60,000
$
Annual Allowance to Address Current Backlog
80,000
$
80,000
$
80,000
$
80,000
$
80,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Total Capital Expenditures
107,000
$
191,000
$
265,000
$
100,000
$
120,000
$
107,000
$
239,000
$
87,000
$
39,000
$
218,000
$
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-11
3.6 Stormwater
This section presents an estimate of costs associated with achieving the proposed
levels of service for the Township's stormwater system assets presented earlier in
Section 2.4.3.
In general terms, the proposed levels of service for the Township's stormwater system
assets involve maintaining assets in adequate condition to reliably provide flood
protection, manage the rate of groundwater discharge, and assist in reducing the level
of contamination entering the natural environment. The Township will accomplish this by
ensuring the timely replacement of ageing and poorly performing assets and through
the completion of regular maintenance activities.
It is noted, however, that based on their current age profiles, the Township's stormwater
system assets are not expected to require any capital lifecycle activities over the 10-
year forecast horizon of this asset management plan.
3.7 Water
This section presents an estimate of costs associated with providing the proposed
levels of service for the Township's water system assets presented earlier in Section
2.6.3.
In general terms, the proposed levels of service for the Township's water system assets
include maintaining assets in adequate condition to reliably support the provision of safe
drinking water while minimizing service interruptions and occurrences of adverse water
quality events. The Township will accomplish this by ensuring the timely replacement of
ageing and poorly performing assets and through the completion of regular
maintenance activities.
As noted earlier in Section 2.6.1, the operation of the Township's water distribution
system is contracted to OCWA, which also identifies upcoming lifecycle expenditure
requirements for the Township's water facilities[1]. As such, the lifecycle expenditure
forecast presented in this section for water facilities is based on OCWA's most recent
[1]The forecast of upcoming lifecycle requirements for the Township's water facilities is provided as part of
OCWA's annual major maintenance forecast.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-12
(2025) forecast. The lifecycle expenditure forecast presented in this subsection for other
water system assets (i.e., watermains, water meters, and fleet assets) includes the
costs associated with the replacement of assets based on current estimates of their
remaining service lives.
The 10-year lifecycle expenditure forecast for the Township's water system assets is
summarized in Figure 3-5 and provided in tabular form in Table 3-5. Average annual
expenditures over the forecast period have been estimated at approximately $116,000.
The current backlog of the Township's water system assets comprises water meters
that are currently in service beyond their expected useful service lives and has been
estimated to be approximately $635,000[1]. The current backlog is forecasted to be
addressed gradually over the next 10 years (i.e., from 2026 to 2035).
[1]It is noted that 846 water meters, representing approximately 48% of the Township's total quantity of
water meters, are currently in service beyond their useful life expectancies.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-13
Figure 3-5: Water - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
$0K
$50K
$100K
$150K
$200K
$250K
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Current Backlog
Watermains
Water Meters
Fleet Assets
Facilities
Table 3-5: Water - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Watermains
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Water Meters
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,000 $ - $ 45,000 $ 68,000
Fleet Assets
$ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Facilities
$ 36,000 $ 23,000 $ 36,000 $ 33,000 $ 26,000 $ 31,000 $ 31,000 $ 31,000 $ 31,000 $ 31,000
Annual Allowance to Address Current Backlog
$ 63,500 $ 63,500 $ 63,500 $ 63,500 $ 63,500 $ 63,500 $ 63,500 $ 63,500 $ 63,500 $ 63,500
Total Capital Expenditures
99,500
$
86,500
$
99,500
$
196,500
$
89,500
$
94,500
$
101,500
$
94,500
$
139,500
$
162,500
$
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-14
3.8 Wastewater
This section presents an estimate of costs associated with providing the proposed
levels of service for the Township's wastewater system assets presented earlier in
Section 2.7.3.
In general terms, the proposed levels of service for the Township's wastewater system
assets include maintaining assets in adequate condition to reliably support the efficient
collection and treatment of sanitary flows, minimizing occurrences of wastewater
backups due to failure of municipal infrastructure, and minimizing occurrences of
effluent violations. The Township will accomplish this by ensuring the timely
replacement of ageing and poorly performing assets and through the completion of
regular maintenance activities.
As noted earlier in Section 2.7.1, the operation of the Township's wastewater collection
and treatment system is contracted to OCWA, which also identifies upcoming lifecycle
expenditure requirements for the Talbotville Wastewater Treatment Plant[1]. As such,
the lifecycle expenditure forecast presented in this section for this treatment facility is
based on OCWA's most recent (2025) forecast. The lifecycle expenditure forecast
presented in this subsection for wastewater mains includes the costs associated with
the replacement of main segments based on current estimates of their remaining
service lives. It is noted, however, that based on their current age profile, none of the
Township's wastewater mains are expected to require replacement over the 10-year
forecast horizon of this asset management plan.
As noted earlier in Section 2.7.3, the Township anticipates additional wastewater
system demand in the settlement areas of Shedden and Fingal in the near term and
plans to address this by constructing a new wastewater treatment plant in Shedden.
The lifecycle expenditure forecast presented in this section includes the cost associated
with the construction of this treatment plant, which is currently planned to occur in two
phases over 2026 and 2027. This cost estimate was prepared as part of the Township's
2025 One Water Rate Study, completed by WT Infrastructure, which also estimated
[1]The forecast of upcoming lifecycle requirements for the Talbotville Wastewater Treatment Plant is
provided as part of OCWA's annual major maintenance forecast.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-15
future lifecycle expenditure requirements for the plant. These future lifecycle
expenditure requirements are also included in the forecast presented herein.
The 10-year lifecycle expenditure forecast for the Township's wastewater system assets
is summarized in Figure 3-6 and provided in tabular form in Table 3-6. Average annual
expenditures over the forecast period have been estimated at approximately $4.0
million.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 3-16
Figure 3-6: Wastewater - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
$0.0M
$5.0M
$10.0M
$15.0M
$20.0M
$25.0M
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Wastewater Mains
Talbotville WWTP
Shedden WWTP
Table 3-6: Wastewater - Lifecycle Expenditure Forecast (2025$)
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Wastewater Mains
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Talbotville WWTP
$ 134,000 $ 119,000 $ 127,000 $ 119,000 $ 124,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000
Shedden WWTP
$ 20,533,000 $ 16,936,000 $ 82,000 $ 92,000 $ 82,000 $ 82,000 $ 82,000 $ 82,000 $ 92,000 $ 365,000
Total Capital Expenditures
20,667,000
$
17,055,000
$
209,000
$
211,000
$
206,000
$
207,000
$
207,000
$
207,000
$
217,000
$
490,000
$
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
Chapter 4
Financial Strategy
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-1
4. Financial Strategy
4.1 Introduction
The financial strategy that supports this asset management plan is designed to fulfill the
following key objectives:
- Identify the sources and levels of capital financing available to undertake the
lifecycle activities presented previously in Chapter 3, which respond to the
Township's proposed levels of service outlined earlier in Chapter 2; and
- Develop a strategy to achieve financial sustainability and intergenerational equity
as it relates to the Township's infrastructure assets over the long term.
In support of these objectives, a comprehensive financial strategy model was developed
utilizing the Township's financial data, which included:
- 2025 operating budget;
- 2025 capital budget;
- Reserve and reserve fund continuity schedules; and
- Debt continuity schedules.
Subsequent sections of this chapter identify how the Township will fund the forecasts of
lifecycle activities presented in Chapter 3. This chapter also identifies the level of
sustainable funding that should be provided to assets on an annual basis to maintain
the proposed levels of service over the long term (i.e., the annual lifecycle funding
target). Relative to the funding target, the Township's current annual infrastructure
funding gap is identified based on the level of capital funding that was included in the
Township's 2025 budget. Lastly, this chapter also identifies the financial impacts of
gradually eliminating the current annual infrastructure funding gap on both the
Township's financial position as well as on taxpayers and ratepayers.
The following sections of this chapter related to the Township's tax-funded assets
examine the financial outlook and impact on taxpayers associated with the following two
scenarios:
- Scenario 1: Eliminating the current annual infrastructure funding gap over a 10-
year period (i.e., by 2035); and
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-2
- Scenario 2: Eliminating the current annual infrastructure funding gap over a 15-
year period (i.e., by 2040).
It is noted that the financial strategies presented herein are suggested approaches
which should be examined and re-evaluated as part of the annual budgeting process to
ensure continual alignment with the Township's changing financial position and evolving
asset management environment.
4.2 Assets Funded by the General Tax Levy
4.2.1 Annual Capital Expenditure Forecast
This section summarizes the expenditures associated with undertaking the lifecycle
activities identified earlier in Chapter 3 for the Township's infrastructure assets that are
funded through its general tax levy (i.e., transportation assets, tax-funded facilities, fleet
and equipment assets, and parks and recreation assets).
Capital expenditures over the 10-year forecast horizon are expected to total $33.3
million, an average of $3.33 million annually, in current (2025) dollars (i.e., uninflated).
Inflation on capital costs has been estimated based on the historical 20-year annual
average rate of inflation as witnessed in the Statistics Canada Non-residential Building
Construction Price Index and is expected to be approximately 4.50% annually. Once
inflationary impacts are incorporated, lifecycle expenditures over the next 10 years are
expected to total $42.0 million.
Figure 4-1 presents the inflated capital expenditure forecast for the Township's tax-
funded assets and this information is provided in tabular form in Table 4-1.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-3
Figure 4-1: Tax-funded Assets - Overall Capital Expenditure Forecast (Inflated)
$0M
$1M
$2M
$3M
$4M
$5M
$6M
$7M
$8M
$9M
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Parks & Recreation
Tax-funded Fleet &
Equipment
Structures
Tax-funded Facilities
Roads & road-related
Assets
Table 4-1: Tax-funded Assets - Overall Capital Expenditure Forecast (Inflated)
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Capital Expenditures for Roads & Road-related Assets
5,372,000
$
2,510,000
$
2,557,000
$
1,121,000
$
1,165,000
$
1,761,000
$
2,139,000
$
1,177,000
$
2,792,000
$
3,466,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Structures
565,000
$
685,000
$
1,129,000
$
184,000
$
358,000
$
266,000
$
412,000
$
81,000
$
404,000
$
491,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Tax-funded Facilities
-
$
84,000
$
46,000
$
-
$
232,000
$
-
$
11,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Capital Expenditures for Tax-funded Fleet and Equipment Assets
328,000
$
1,104,000
$
1,152,000
$
558,000
$
1,279,000
$
1,184,000
$
485,000
$
239,000
$
703,000
$
4,047,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Parks and Recreation Assets
112,000
$
209,000
$
302,000
$
119,000
$
150,000
$
139,000
$
325,000
$
124,000
$
58,000
$
339,000
$
Total Annual Capital Expenditures
6,377,000
$
4,592,000
$
5,186,000
$
1,982,000
$
3,184,000
$
3,350,000
$
3,372,000
$
1,621,000
$
3,957,000
$
8,343,000
$
Capital Expenditures
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-4
4.2.2 Annual Capital Financing Forecast
This section summarizes the recommended strategy to finance the capital expenditures
identified in Section 4.2.1. Lifecycle expenditures are expected to be financed from the
following sources:
- Annual Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund (OCIF) formula-based funding. It
is noted that the Ministry of Infrastructure announced a temporary increase to
province-wide OCIF support in 2022, effectively doubling investment in Ontario's
infrastructure for a five-year period ending in 2027. Correspondingly, it is
assumed that the Township's annual OCIF funding will be reduced by 50%
beginning in 2027, declining from approximately $265,000 in 2026 to
approximately $132,500 in 2027 and held constant thereafter. It is further noted
that the Ministry of Infrastructure recently shifted from using historical costs to
using replacement costs in the formula used for calculating annual OCIF funding
allocations. As a result of this formula change, the Township's OCIF allocation
may continue to change in the coming years. The amount of OCIF funding will
need to be monitored by Township staff and, if a significant variance occurs
relative to the estimate provided in this asset management plan, the financial
strategy may need to be updated;
- Annual Canada Community-Building Fund (CCBF) funding. CCBF funding is
expected to be a stable and long-term funding source for eligible capital projects.
Annual funding estimates are based on the Township's allocations for 2026 to
2028, with 4% increases for every two-year period thereafter. As such, the
Township's annual CCBF funding is expected to increase from approximately
$159,000 in 2026 to approximately $193,000 by 2035;
- Funds projected to be available in capital reserves and reserve funds. To
manage risks associated with unexpected capital expenditures that may arise,
the financial strategy maintains a minimum balance in capital reserve and
reserve funds. The minimum balance was set at 10% of average annual capital
expenditures over the forecast period, approximately $420,000; and
- Proceeds from external debt financing. The financial strategy for Scenario 1
proposes approximately $414,000 in additional debt financing to fund forecasted
capital expenditures, while the financial strategy for Scenario 2 proposes $1.07
million in additional debt.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-5
Table 4-2 summarizes the capital financing forecast for the Township's tax-funded
infrastructure assets under Scenario 1, while Table 4-3 summarizes the same under
Scenario 2.
Table 4-2: Scenario 1 - Capital Financing by Source (2026-2035)
Capital Financing Source
Total Capital
Financing
Transfer Payment Revenues (i.e., OCIF + CCBF)
$3,212,000
Contributions from Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds
$38,338,000
Proceeds from External Debt Financing
$414,000
Total
$41,964,000
Table 4-3: Scenario 2 - Capital Financing by Source (2026-2035)
Capital Financing Source
Total Capital
Financing
Transfer Payment Revenues (i.e., OCIF + CCBF)
$3,212,000
Contributions from Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds
$37,678,000
Proceeds from External Debt Financing
$1,074,000
Total
$41,964,000
4.2.3 Current Annual Lifecycle Funding Target & Infrastructure
Funding Gap
An annual lifecycle funding target represents the level of funding that would be required
annually to fully finance a lifecycle management strategy over the long term. By
planning to achieve this annual funding level, the Township would theoretically be able
to fully fund capital works as they arise. In practice, however, capital expenditures are
characterized by peaks and valleys and often fluctuate year-to-year based on the
lifecycle activities being undertaken. By planning to achieve the lifecycle fundin g target
over the long term, the periods of relatively low capital needs would allow for the
building up of lifecycle reserve funds that could be drawn upon in times of relatively high
capital needs.
Table 4-4 summarizes the modelling approaches that have been utilized to derive the
annual lifecycle funding target for tax-funded assets.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-6
Table 4-4: Modelling Approaches Utilized to Determine Annual Lifecycle Funding
Targets by Asset Category
Asset Category
Modelling Approach
Transportation
Roads: Based on lifecycle management strategy
recommended in 2024 Road Needs Study and 2022 Asset
Management Plan.
Bridges & Culverts: Annual reinvestment rate equal to
1.70% of current replacement cost
Road-related Assets: Useful life analysis (i.e., determined by
dividing the current replacement cost of each asset by its
expected useful service life)
Facilities
Annual reinvestment rate equal to 2.1% of current
replacement cost
Fleet and Equipment
Useful life analysis (i.e., determined by dividing the current
replacement cost of each asset by its expected useful
service life)
Parks and Recreation
The annual lifecycle funding target for the Township's tax-funded assets is $5.77 million
(in 2025 dollars). A breakdown of the lifecycle funding target by asset category for
illustrated in Figure 4-2 and provided in tabular form in Table 4-5.
Figure 4-2: Tax-funded Assets - Annual Lifecycle Funding Target (2025$) by Asset
Category
Transportation,
$4.25M, 74%
Tax-funded
Facilities,
$499k, 9%
Tax-funded
Fleet &
Equipment,
$874k, 15%
Parks & Recreation,
$143k, 2%
$5.77
million
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-7
Table 4-5: Tax-funded Assets - Annual Lifecycle Funding Target (2025$) by Asset
Category
Asset Category
Annual Lifecycle Funding
Target (2025$)
Transportation
$4,253,000
Tax-funded Facilities
$499,000
Tax-funded Fleet & Equipment
$874,000
Land Improvements
$143,000
Total
$5,769,000
Relative to this annual lifecycle funding target, the Township allocated approximately
$3.70 million in its 2025 budget towards capital-related needs for tax-funded assets.
This allocation comprised approximately $3.24 million in contributions to capital
reserves and reserve funds and approximately $453,000 in ongoing transfer payment
revenues (i.e., OCIF and CCBF).
A breakdown of the capital funding budgeted in the Township's 2025 Council-approved
budget for tax-supported assets is illustrated in Figure 4-3 and provided in tabular form
in Table 4-6.
Figure 4-3: Tax-funded Assets - Capital Funding Included in 2025 Budget
Transfer
Payment
Revenues
(OCIF +
CCBF),
$453K, 12%
Transfer to
Capital
Reserves,
$3.24M, 88%
$3.70
million
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-8
Table 4-6: Tax-funded Assets - Capital Funding Allocated in 2025 Budget
Capital Funding Source
Capital Funding Budgeted
in 2025
Transfer Payment Revenues (OCIF & CCBF)
$453,000
Contributions to Capital Reserves & Reserve Funds
$3,244,000
Total
$3,697,000
The difference between the annual lifecycle funding target and the currently budgeted
capital funding represents the Township's annual infrastructure funding gap for its tax-
funded assets. Based on this analysis, the Township is facing a tax-based annual
infrastructure funding gap of $2.07 million.
4.2.4 Overall Financial Forecast and Estimated Impact on Tax Levy
4.2.4.1 Scenario 1: 10-year AMP Phase-in Period
This section presents the overall impacts on the Township's financial position of
gradually eliminating the funding gap by 2035.
As noted earlier in Section 4.2.2, the capital financing forecast proposes additional debt
financing of approximately $414,000 over the forecast period under Scenario 1.
Furthermore, annual repayments on external debt (i.e., principal and interest payments)
utilized to fund the tax-supported portion of construction costs of the new public works
facility are expected to commence in 2026. As such, annual repayments on external
debt are expected to rise from approximately $368,000 in 2026 to approximately
$406,000 by 2035.
The Township is expected to have approximately $5.3 million in its capital reserves and
reserve funds at the end of 2025. By 2035, that balance is expected to grow to
approximately $20.9 million. A detailed continuity schedule of capital reserves and
reserve funds can be found in Appendix A.
It is noted that the Township's tax levy is expected to decrease from 2025 to 2026 due
to an anticipated reduction in the assessed value of a major commercial property,
pending the outcome of an ongoing property assessment appeal. Following this
decrease, in order to fund the recommended lifecycle management strategy and
gradually eliminate the infrastructure funding gap by 2035, the Township's tax levy
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-9
would need to increase by 8.85% annually from 2027 to 2035. The tax levy is
forecasted to rise from the current level of approximately $7.2 million in 2025 to
approximately $14.0 million by 2035.
The taxation impacts identified above include inflationary adjustments to the Township's
operating costs and revenues as identified in its 2025 budget (i.e., general operating
inflation of 2.22% annually).
Figure 4-4 illustrates the overall financial forecast for the Township under Scenario 1.
Full details of the financial strategy are provided in Appendix A.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-10
Figure 4-4: Scenario 1 - Overall Financial Forecast (Inflated)
$0M
$5M
$10M
$15M
$20M
$25M
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Year-end balance in
capital reserves
Capital Expenditures
Debt Payments
Net Operating
Expenditures
Tax Levy
Debt Proceeds
Transfer Payments
(OCIF + CCBF)
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-11
4.2.4.2 Scenario 2: 15-year AMP Phase-in Period
This section presents the overall impacts on the Township's financial position of
gradually eliminating the funding gap by 2040.
As noted earlier in Section 4.2.2, the capital financing forecast proposes additional debt
financing of approximately $1.07 million over the forecast period under Scenario 2.
Furthermore, as noted earlier in Section 4.2.4.1, annual repayments on external debt
(i.e., principal and interest payments) utilized to fund the tax-supported portion of
construction costs of the new public works facility are expected to commence in 2026.
As such, annual repayments on external debt are expected to rise from approximately
$368,000 in 2026 to approximately $467,000 by 2035.
As noted earlier in Section 4.2.4.1, the Township is expected to have approximately
$5.3 million in its capital reserves and reserve funds at the end of 2025. By 2035, that
balance is expected to grow to approximately $12.0 million in this scenario. A detailed
continuity schedule of capital reserves and reserve funds can be found in Appendix B.
As noted earlier in Section 4.2.4.1, the Township's tax levy is expected to decrease
from 2025 to 2026 due to an anticipated reduction in the assessed value of a major
commercial property, pending the outcome of an ongoing property assessment appeal.
Following this decrease, in order to fund the recommended lifecycle management
strategy and gradually eliminate the infrastructure funding gap by 2040, the Township's
tax levy would need to increase by 7.25% annually from 2027 to 2040. The tax levy is
forecasted to rise from the current level of approximately $7.2 million in 2025 to
approximately $12.1 million by 2035, and further rise to approximately $17.1 million by
2040.
The taxation impacts identified above include inflationary adjustments to the Township's
operating costs and revenues as identified in its 2025 budget (i.e., general operating
inflation of 2.22% annually).
Figure 4-5 illustrates the overall financial forecast for the Township under Scenario 2.
Full details of the financial strategy are provided in Appendix B.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-12
Figure 4-5: Scenario 2 - Overall Financial Forecast (Inflated)
$0M
$2M
$4M
$6M
$8M
$10M
$12M
$14M
$16M
$18M
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Year-end balance in
capital reserves
Capital Expenditures
Debt Payments
Net Operating
Expenditures
Tax Levy
Debt Proceeds
Transfer Payments
(OCIF + CCBF)
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-13
4.2.5 Estimated Impact on Tax Bills (2026-2035)
4.2.5.1 Scenario 1: 10-year AMP Phase-in Period
This section presents the estimated impact resulting from Scenario 1 on the annual tax
bill of a typical single-family detached house in the Township with a current value
assessment of $282,000[1].
As noted in Section 4.2.4.1, the Township would need to increase its tax levy from
approximately $7.2 million in 2025 to approximately $14.0 million by 2035. Layering on
assessment increases resulting from new assessment growth, assumed to be 1.39%
annually over the forecast period, the impact on the municipal portion of individual
property tax bills would be increases of 7.35% annually from 2026 to 2035. A typical
single-family detached house in the Township with a current value assessment of
$282,000 would see the municipal portion of its tax bill rise from approximately $1,648
as of 2025 to approximately $3,352 by 2035.
Figure 4-6 illustrates the estimated impact on the municipal portion of the tax bill for a
typical single-family detached house with a current value assessment of $282,000
under Scenario 1.
[1]Current Value Assessment is determined by MPAC for taxation purposes and is not reflective of
average market value.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-14
Figure 4-6: Scenario 1 - Estimated Impact on the Municipal Portion of the Tax Bill for Typical Single-family Detached
House Assessed at $282,000 (2025-2035)
+$121.23
(7.35%)
+$130.15
(7.35%)
+$139.72
(7.35%)
+$150.
(7.35%)
+$161.03
(7.35%)
+$172.87
(7.35%)
+$185.59
(7.35%)
+$199.24
(7.35%)
+$213.89
(7.35%)
+$229.62
(7.35%)
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
$4,000
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Addition to Tax Bill
Required to
Immediately Eliminate
Annual Infrastructure
Funding Gap
(Township Portion)
Tax Bill Allocation for
Capital-related Costs
(Township Portion)
Tax Bill Allocation for
Net Operating Costs
(Township Portion)
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-15
4.2.5.2 Scenario 2: 15-year AMP Phase-in Period
This section presents the estimated impact resulting from Scenario 2 on the annual tax
bill of a typical single-family detached house in the Township with a current value
assessment of $282,000[1].
As noted in Section 4.2.4.2, the Township would need to increase its tax levy from
approximately $7.2 million in 2025 to approximately $17.1 million by 2040. Layering on
assessment increases resulting from new assessment growth, assumed to be 1.39%
annually over the forecast period, the impact on the municipal portion of individual
property tax bills would be increases of 5.78% annually from 2026 to 2040. A typical
single-family detached house in the Township with a current value assessment of
$282,000 would see the municipal portion of its tax bill rise from approximately $1,648
as of 2025 to approximately $2,891 by 2035, and further increase to approximately
$3,828 by 2040.
Figure 4-7 illustrates the estimated impact on the municipal portion of the tax bill for a
typical single-family detached house with a current value assessment of $282,000
under Scenario 2.
[1]Current Value Assessment is determined by MPAC for taxation purposes and is not reflective of
average market value.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-16
Figure 4-7: Scenario 2 - Estimated Impact on the Municipal Portion of the Tax Bill for Typical Single-family Detached
House Assessed at $282,000 (2025-2035)
+$95.24
(5.78%)
+$100.74
(5.78%)
+$106.56
(5.78%)
+$112.71
(5.78%)
+$119.23
(5.78%)
+$126.12
(5.78%)
+$133.4
(5.78%)
+$141.11
(5.78%)
+$149.26
(5.78%)
+$157.89
(5.78%)
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
$4,000
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Addition to Tax Bill
Required to
Immediately Eliminate
Annual Infrastructure
Funding Gap
(Township Portion)
Tax Bill Allocation for
Capital-related Costs
(Township Portion)
Tax Bill Allocation for
Net Operating Costs
(Township Portion)
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-17
4.3 Assets Funded by Water and Wastewater Rates
4.3.1 Annual Capital Expenditure Forecast
This section summarizes the expenditures associated with undertaking the lifecycle
activities identified earlier in Chapter 3 for the Township's water and wastewater assets.
Capital expenditures over the 10-year forecast horizon are expected to total $40.8
million, an average of $4.1 million annually, in current (2025) dollars (i.e., uninflated).
Inflation on capital costs has been estimated based on the historical 20-year annual
average rate of inflation as witnessed in the Statistics Canada Non-residential Building
Construction Price Index and is expected to be approximately 4.50% annually. Once
inflationary impacts are incorporated, lifecycle expenditures over the next 10 years are
expected to total $44.4 million.
Figure 4-8 presents the inflated capital expenditure forecast for the Township's water
and wastewater assets and this information is provided in tabular form in Table 4-7.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-18
Figure 4-8: Water & Wastewater - Overall Capital Expenditure Forecast (Inflated)
$0M
$5M
$10M
$15M
$20M
$25M
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Shedden WWTP
Construction
Wastewater
Water
Table 4-7: Water & Wastewater - Overall Capital Expenditure Forecast (Inflated)
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Capital Expenditures for Water Assets
104,000
$
94,000
$
114,000
$
234,000
$
112,000
$
123,000
$
138,000
$
134,000
$
207,000
$
252,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Wastewater Assets
140,000
$
130,000
$
239,000
$
252,000
$
257,000
$
270,000
$
282,000
$
294,000
$
323,000
$
761,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Shedden WWTP Construction - Phase 1
21,458,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Capital Expenditures for Shedden WWTP Construction - Phase 2
-
$
18,496,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Total Annual Capital Expenditures
21,702,000
$
18,720,000
$
353,000
$
486,000
$
369,000
$
393,000
$
420,000
$
428,000
$
530,000
$
1,013,000
$
Capital Expenditures
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-19
4.3.2 Annual Capital Financing Forecast
This section summarizes the recommended strategy to finance the capital expenditures
identified in Section 4.3.1. Lifecycle expenditures are expected to be financed from the
following sources:
- Funds projected to be available in capital reserves and reserve funds. To
manage risks associated with unexpected capital expenditures that may arise,
the financial strategy maintains a minimum balance in capital reserve and
reserve funds. The minimum balance was set at 10% of average annual capital
expenditures over the forecast period, approximately $444,000;
- Grant funding received from the Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund
(HEWSF) for the construction of the Shedden Wastewater Treatment Plant. As
per HEWSF's cost-sharing rules, it is expected that 73% of the overall
construction costs for this project will be funded through the grant. In total,
approximately $29.2 million in HEWSF grant funding is expected to be received
for this project; and
- Revenues from future connection fees. The Township anticipates funding the
remaining 27% of costs associated with the construction of the Shedden
Wastewater Treatment Plant through future connection fee revenues. In total,
approximately $10.8 million in future connection fee revenues is expected to be
required to fund this project.
As noted above, the Township expects to fund 27% of the Shedden Wastewater
Treatment Plant's construction costs from future connection fee revenues. Depending
on the timing of construction-related payments (i.e., progress payments) relative to
connection fee revenues, the Township may need to temporarily finance construction
costs from other internal sources (e.g., existing reserves and reserve funds) or external
borrowing. These cashflow matters have not been considered in the financial strategy
presented herein.
Table 4-8 summarizes the capital financing forecast for the Township's water and
wastewater assets.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-20
Table 4-8: Water and Wastewater - Capital Financing by Source (2026-2035)
Capital Financing Source
Total Capital
Financing
Contributions from Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds
$4,460,000
Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund Grant
$29,166,000
Connection Fee Revenues
$10,788,000
Total
$44,414,000
4.3.3 Current Annual Lifecycle Funding Target & Infrastructure
Funding Gap
The current annual lifecycle funding target for the Township's water and wastewater
assets is $1.44 million (in 2025 dollars). As noted earlier in Section 2.7.3 and Section
3.8, the Township anticipates additional growth-related wastewater system demand in
the settlement areas of Shedden and Fingal in the near term and plans to address this
by constructing a new wastewater treatment plant in Shedden. The construction of this
plant is currently planned to occur in two phases over 2026 and 2027. Following the
construction of this plant, the annual lifecycle funding target for the water and
wastewater assets is estimated to rise by $868,000 to $2.31 million (in 2025 dollars).
Please refer to Section 4.2.3 for further information on annual lifecycle funding targets.
Table 4-9 summarizes the modelling approaches that have been utilized to derive the
annual lifecycle funding target for water and wastewater assets.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-21
Table 4-9: Modelling Approaches Utilized to Determine Annual Lifecycle Funding
Targets by Asset Category
Asset Category
Modelling Approach
Water
Watermains: Useful life analysis (i.e., determined by dividing
the current replacement cost of each watermain segment by a
75-year expected useful service life)
Water Treatment Facilities: Useful life analysis (i.e.,
determined by dividing the current replacement cost of
various building elements and treatment components by their
respective useful service life expectancies)
Other Assets: Useful life analysis (i.e., determined by dividing
the current replacement cost of assets by their respective
useful service life expectancies)
Wastewater
Wastewater Mains: Useful life analysis (i.e., determined by
dividing the current replacement cost of each wastewater
main segment by a 75-year expected useful service life)
Talbotville WWTP: Useful life analysis (i.e., determined by
dividing the current replacement cost of various building
elements and treatment components by their respective
useful service life expectancies)
Shedden WWTP: Estimated based on the annual lifecycle
funding target for the Talbotville WWTP, considering relative
increases to plant size/capacity
A breakdown of the lifecycle funding target by asset category is illustrated in Figure 4-9
and provided in tabular form in Table 4-10.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-22
Figure 4-9: Water and Wastewater - Annual Lifecycle Funding Target (2025$) by Asset
Category
Water, $1.22M, 53%
Wastewater,
$218k, 9%
Shedden
WWTP,
$868k, 38%
$2.31
million
Table 4-10: Water and Wastewater - Annual Lifecycle Funding Target (2025$) by Asset
Category
Asset Category
Annual Lifecycle Funding
Target (2025$)
Water
$1,221,000
Wastewater
$218,000
Shedden Wastewater Treatment Plant
$868,000
Total
$2,307,000
The Township allocated approximately $458,000 million towards capital-related needs
in its 2025 budget for water and wastewater assets, which comprised contributions
made into the Township's water and wastewater rate-funded capital reserves and
reserve funds. The difference between the annual lifecycle funding target and the
currently budgeted capital funding represents the Township's annual infrastructure
funding gap for its water and wastewater assets.
Based on this analysis, the Township is currently facing a water and wastewater rate-
based annual infrastructure funding gap of approximately $981,000 (in 2025 dollars).
Once the annual lifecycle funding needs of the Shedden WWTP are incorporated into
the funding target, the annual infrastructure funding gap rises to approximately $1.85
million (in 2025 dollars).
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-23
4.3.4 Overall Financial Forecast and Estimated Impact on Tax Levy
This section presents the overall impacts on the Township's financial position of
gradually eliminating the $1.85 million funding gap by 2035.
The capital financing forecast for water and wastewater assets does not require any
additional debt financing over the 10-year forecast period. Furthermore, annual
repayments on external debt (i.e., principal and interest payments) utilized to fund the
water and wastewater portion of construction costs of the new public works facility are
expected to commence in 2026. As such, annual repayments on external debt are
expected to remain stable at approximately $62,000 for the next 10 years. As noted
previously in Section 4.3.2, there may be some debt financing required for the Shedden
WWTP. However, this has not been included in the financial strategy presented herein.
The Township is expected to have approximately $5.2 million in its water and
wastewater rate-funded capital reserves and reserve funds at the end of 2025. By 2035,
this balance is expected to grow to approximately $16.6 million. A detailed continuity
schedule of water and wastewater rate-funded capital reserves/reserve funds can be
found in Appendix B
In order to fund the recommended lifecycle management strategy and eliminate the
infrastructure funding gap for water and wastewater assets, the Township's water and
wastewater rate revenues would need to increase by 10.62% annually from 2026 to
2035[1]. Rate revenues are forecasted to rise from the current level of approximately
$2.7 million to approximately $7.4 million by 2035.
The identified rate-revenue impacts include inflationary adjustments to the Township's
operating costs and revenues as identified in its 2025 budget (i.e., general operating
inflation of 2.22% annually).
Figure 4-10 illustrates the overall financial forecast for the Township's rate-funded
assets, with full details of the Financial Strategy provided in Appendix B.
[1]Please note that this may not necessarily lead to an equivalent increase in the water and wastewater
rates that are charged to users. The Township's water and wastewater rates are determined as part of its
annual budgeting process and are dependent on other factors (such as the total number of customers
and metered consumption), which are outside the scope of the analysis presented herein.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-24
Figure 4-10: Water & Wastewater - Overall Financial Forecast (Inflated)
$0M
$5M
$10M
$15M
$20M
$25M
$30M
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Year-end balance in
capital reserves
Capital Expenditures
Debt Payments
Net Operating
Expenditures
Debt Proceeds
HEWSF Grant
Connection Fees
Rate Revenue
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 4-25
4.4 Assets Funded by Stormwater Rates
The Township implemented stormwater rates in July 2025 to provide a dedicated
funding source for stormwater management services. Stormwater rates have been set
as per the recommendations provided in the Township's 2024 One Water Rate Study[1],
with the intent to, over time, fully fund the cost of providing stormwater management
services from stormwater rate revenues.
Due to the recency of the implementation of stormwater rates within the Township, there
is currently insufficient data to develop an accurate and robust financial strategy for
stormwater assets. In order to support the development of such a financial strategy in
future iterations of this asset management plan, it is recommended that the Township:
- Refine and update its current inventory of stormwater assets; and
- Update stormwater revenue and operating cost projections based on data
collected from the on-going implementation phase.
[1]The Township's 2024 One Water Rate Study was completed by WT Infrastructure.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
Chapter 5
Recommendations and Next
Steps
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 5-1
5. Recommendations and Next Steps
5.1 Recommendations
The following recommendations are provided for the Township's consideration:
- That the Township of Southwold Asset Management Plan be received and
approved by Council based on one of the following financial strategy scenarios
for tax-funded assets:
o Scenario 1: Eliminating the current annual infrastructure funding gap over
a 10-year period (i.e., by 2035); or
o Scenario 2: Eliminating the current annual infrastructure funding gap over
a 15-year period (i.e., by 2040)
- That consideration be made as part of the annual budgeting process to ensure
sufficient capital funding is available to implement the asset management plan.
As noted earlier in Section 4.4, due to the recency of the implementation of stormwater
rates within the Township, there is currently insufficient data to develop an accurate and
robust financial strategy for stormwater assets. As such, it is further recommended that
the Township continue its data collection efforts from the on-going implementation
phase to:
- Refine and update its current inventory of stormwater assets; and
- Update its stormwater revenue and operating cost projections.
5.2 Next Steps
Following the approval of this asset management plan by Council, the Township's asset
management journey will transition from developing the plan to its operationalization.
The Township will need to establish processes and implement systems to keep asset
information (e.g., condition, replacement costs, etc.) updated and relevant, so that it can
be relied on to identify capital priorities and inform the annual budget process.
To ensure ongoing compliance with O. Reg. 588/17, the Township will need to start
conducting annual reviews of the progress being made towards implementing the asset
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE 5-2
management plan, with the first review required to be conducted prior to July 1, 2027.
The annual reviews must identify any factors preventing progress towards full
implementation and outline a strategy to address those impeding factors. Following the
completion of this asset management plan, the Township should shift its focus to
developing the format and content of these annual reviews to enable informed decision -
making by Council and staff.
Furthermore, O. Reg. 588/17 requires updates to this asset management plan to be
conducted at a minimum every five years. To maximize the reliability of the updated
analyses, the Township should proactively plan to conduct updates of background
studies and underlying asset data in a timely manner prior to undertaking an update of
this asset management plan. The Township should also plan to proactively update the
underlying data utilized to inform the current performance of the included level of
service measures on a regular basis. Tracking the current performance of included
measures over time relative to their targeted performance provides a key measure of
success in fully implementing the asset management plan.
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE A-1
Appendix A
Financial Strategy Tables for
Tax-funded Assets
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE A-2
Table A-1: Tax-supported Capital Budget Forecast for Scenario 1 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Capital Expenditures for Roads & Road-related Assets
5,372,000
$
2,510,000
$
2,557,000
$
1,121,000
$
1,165,000
$
1,761,000
$
2,139,000
$
1,177,000
$
2,792,000
$
3,466,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Structures
565,000
$
685,000
$
1,129,000
$
184,000
$
358,000
$
266,000
$
412,000
$
81,000
$
404,000
$
491,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Tax-funded Facilities
-
$
84,000
$
46,000
$
-
$
232,000
$
-
$
11,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Capital Expenditures for Tax-funded Fleet and Equipment Assets
328,000
$
1,104,000
$
1,152,000
$
558,000
$
1,279,000
$
1,184,000
$
485,000
$
239,000
$
703,000
$
4,047,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Parks and Recreation Assets
112,000
$
209,000
$
302,000
$
119,000
$
150,000
$
139,000
$
325,000
$
124,000
$
58,000
$
339,000
$
Total Annual Capital Expenditures
6,377,000
$
4,592,000
$
5,186,000
$
1,982,000
$
3,184,000
$
3,350,000
$
3,372,000
$
1,621,000
$
3,957,000
$
8,343,000
$
Transfer Payment Revenues (OCIF + CCBF)
424,000
$
298,000
$
298,000
$
304,000
$
304,000
$
311,000
$
311,000
$
318,000
$
318,000
$
326,000
$
Debt Proceeds
-
$
-
$
414,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Contribution from Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds
5,953,000
$
4,294,000
$
4,474,000
$
1,678,000
$
2,880,000
$
3,039,000
$
3,061,000
$
1,303,000
$
3,639,000
$
8,017,000
$
Total Annual Capital Financing
6,377,000
$
4,592,000
$
5,186,000
$
1,982,000
$
3,184,000
$
3,350,000
$
3,372,000
$
1,621,000
$
3,957,000
$
8,343,000
$
Capital Expenditures
Capital Financing
Table A-2: Tax-supported Schedule of Debt Payments for Scenario 1 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Year
Principal Borrowed
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
2026
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2027
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2028
414,000
$
38,000
$
38,000
$
38,000
$
38,000
$
38,000
$
38,000
$
38,000
$
2029
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2030
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2031
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2032
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2033
-
$
-
$
-
$
2034
-
$
-
$
2035
-
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
Existing
Total Annual Debt Repayments
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE A-3
Table A-3: Tax-supported Schedule of Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds Continuity for Scenario 1 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Opening Balance
5,252,000
$
2,212,000
$
1,186,000
$
420,000
$
2,903,000
$
4,791,000
$
7,169,000
$
10,240,000
$
15,863,000
$
20,064,000
$
Add: Transfer from Operating
2,745,000
$
3,155,000
$
3,606,000
$
4,065,000
$
4,611,000
$
5,210,000
$
5,865,000
$
6,583,000
$
7,368,000
$
8,229,000
$
Add: Interest Earned
168,000
$
113,000
$
102,000
$
96,000
$
157,000
$
207,000
$
267,000
$
343,000
$
472,000
$
572,000
$
Less: Transfer to Fund Capital Expenditures
5,953,000
$
4,294,000
$
4,474,000
$
1,678,000
$
2,880,000
$
3,039,000
$
3,061,000
$
1,303,000
$
3,639,000
$
8,017,000
$
Closing Balance
2,212,000
$
1,186,000
$
420,000
$
2,903,000
$
4,791,000
$
7,169,000
$
10,240,000
$
15,863,000
$
20,064,000
$
20,848,000
$
Minimum Reserve Balance Theshold (10% of avg. inflated CAPEX)
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE A-4
Table A-4: Tax-supported Operating Budget Forecast for Scenario 1 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Council
132,000
$
135,000
$
138,000
$
141,000
$
144,000
$
147,000
$
150,000
$
153,000
$
156,000
$
159,000
$
Administration
892,000
$
912,000
$
932,000
$
953,000
$
974,000
$
996,000
$
1,018,000
$
1,041,000
$
1,064,000
$
1,088,000
$
Police
736,000
$
752,000
$
769,000
$
786,000
$
803,000
$
821,000
$
839,000
$
858,000
$
877,000
$
896,000
$
Conservation Authority
118,000
$
121,000
$
124,000
$
127,000
$
130,000
$
133,000
$
136,000
$
139,000
$
142,000
$
145,000
$
By-law, Canine, Livestock
59,000
$
60,000
$
61,000
$
62,000
$
63,000
$
64,000
$
65,000
$
66,000
$
67,000
$
68,000
$
Waste Management
384,000
$
393,000
$
402,000
$
411,000
$
420,000
$
429,000
$
439,000
$
449,000
$
459,000
$
469,000
$
Cemeteries
23,000
$
24,000
$
25,000
$
26,000
$
27,000
$
28,000
$
29,000
$
30,000
$
31,000
$
32,000
$
Fire Department
874,000
$
893,000
$
913,000
$
933,000
$
954,000
$
975,000
$
997,000
$
1,019,000
$
1,042,000
$
1,065,000
$
Building
377,000
$
385,000
$
394,000
$
403,000
$
412,000
$
421,000
$
430,000
$
440,000
$
450,000
$
460,000
$
Municipal Property
138,000
$
141,000
$
144,000
$
147,000
$
150,000
$
153,000
$
156,000
$
159,000
$
163,000
$
167,000
$
Keystone
129,000
$
132,000
$
135,000
$
138,000
$
141,000
$
144,000
$
147,000
$
150,000
$
153,000
$
156,000
$
Parks
308,000
$
315,000
$
322,000
$
329,000
$
336,000
$
343,000
$
351,000
$
359,000
$
367,000
$
375,000
$
Roads (not including loosetop maintenance)
2,135,000
$
2,182,000
$
2,230,000
$
2,279,000
$
2,330,000
$
2,382,000
$
2,435,000
$
2,489,000
$
2,544,000
$
2,600,000
$
Loosetop Maintenance
502,000
$
563,000
$
632,000
$
709,000
$
796,000
$
893,000
$
1,002,000
$
1,124,000
$
1,262,000
$
1,416,000
$
Planning
325,000
$
332,000
$
339,000
$
347,000
$
355,000
$
363,000
$
371,000
$
379,000
$
387,000
$
396,000
$
Drainage
174,000
$
178,000
$
182,000
$
186,000
$
190,000
$
194,000
$
198,000
$
202,000
$
206,000
$
211,000
$
Fee Waivers/Grants
35,000
$
36,000
$
37,000
$
38,000
$
39,000
$
40,000
$
41,000
$
42,000
$
43,000
$
44,000
$
Transfer to Operating Reserve
77,000
$
79,000
$
81,000
$
83,000
$
85,000
$
87,000
$
89,000
$
91,000
$
93,000
$
95,000
$
Adjustment for Equipment Internal Charges
355,000
-$
360,000
-$
365,000
-$
370,000
-$
375,000
-$
380,000
-$
385,000
-$
390,000
-$
395,000
-$
400,000
-$
Sub-total: Operating Expenditures
7,063,000
$
7,273,000
$
7,495,000
$
7,728,000
$
7,974,000
$
8,233,000
$
8,508,000
$
8,800,000
$
9,111,000
$
9,442,000
$
Transfer to Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds
2,745,000
$
3,155,000
$
3,606,000
$
4,065,000
$
4,611,000
$
5,210,000
$
5,865,000
$
6,583,000
$
7,368,000
$
8,229,000
$
Debt Repayment
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
406,000
$
Sub-total: Capital-related Expenditures
3,113,000
$
3,523,000
$
3,974,000
$
4,471,000
$
5,017,000
$
5,616,000
$
6,271,000
$
6,989,000
$
7,774,000
$
8,635,000
$
Total Annual Expenditures
10,176,000
$
10,796,000
$
11,469,000
$
12,199,000
$
12,991,000
$
13,849,000
$
14,779,000
$
15,789,000
$
16,885,000
$
18,077,000
$
Tax Levy
6,531,000
$
7,108,000
$
7,737,000
$
8,422,000
$
9,167,000
$
9,978,000
$
10,860,000
$
11,821,000
$
12,867,000
$
14,005,000
$
Administration
97,000
$
99,000
$
101,000
$
103,000
$
105,000
$
107,000
$
109,000
$
111,000
$
113,000
$
116,000
$
Waste Management
71,000
$
73,000
$
75,000
$
77,000
$
79,000
$
81,000
$
83,000
$
85,000
$
87,000
$
89,000
$
Fire Department
234,000
$
239,000
$
244,000
$
249,000
$
255,000
$
261,000
$
267,000
$
273,000
$
279,000
$
285,000
$
Building
377,000
$
385,000
$
394,000
$
403,000
$
412,000
$
421,000
$
430,000
$
440,000
$
450,000
$
460,000
$
Municipal Property
100,000
$
102,000
$
104,000
$
106,000
$
108,000
$
110,000
$
112,000
$
114,000
$
117,000
$
120,000
$
Keystone
44,000
$
45,000
$
46,000
$
47,000
$
48,000
$
49,000
$
50,000
$
51,000
$
52,000
$
53,000
$
Parks
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
Roads
421,000
$
431,000
$
441,000
$
450,000
$
460,000
$
470,000
$
481,000
$
492,000
$
502,000
$
515,000
$
Planning
195,000
$
199,000
$
203,000
$
208,000
$
213,000
$
218,000
$
223,000
$
228,000
$
233,000
$
238,000
$
Drainage
99,000
$
101,000
$
103,000
$
105,000
$
107,000
$
109,000
$
111,000
$
113,000
$
116,000
$
119,000
$
Interest Income
153,000
$
156,000
$
159,000
$
163,000
$
167,000
$
171,000
$
175,000
$
179,000
$
183,000
$
187,000
$
PILs
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
Penalty & Interest
77,000
$
79,000
$
81,000
$
83,000
$
85,000
$
87,000
$
89,000
$
91,000
$
93,000
$
95,000
$
Supplemental Taxation
87,000
$
89,000
$
91,000
$
93,000
$
95,000
$
97,000
$
99,000
$
101,000
$
103,000
$
105,000
$
OMPF
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
Total Annual Revenues
10,176,000
$
10,796,000
$
11,469,000
$
12,199,000
$
12,991,000
$
13,849,000
$
14,779,000
$
15,789,000
$
16,885,000
$
18,077,000
$
Operating Revenues
Operating Expenditures
Capital-related Expenditures
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE A-5
Table A-5: Tax Levy Forecast for Scenario 1 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Prior-year Tax Levy
7,153,000
$
6,531,000
$
7,108,000
$
7,737,000
$
8,422,000
$
9,167,000
$
9,978,000
$
10,860,000
$
11,821,000
$
12,867,000
$
Add: Tax Revenues from Incremental Assessment Growth
1,070,000
-$
91,000
$
99,000
$
108,000
$
117,000
$
127,000
$
139,000
$
151,000
$
164,000
$
179,000
$
Add: Tax Revenues from Existing Assessment Base
448,000
$
486,000
$
530,000
$
577,000
$
628,000
$
684,000
$
743,000
$
810,000
$
882,000
$
959,000
$
Total Tax Levy
6,531,000
$
7,108,000
$
7,737,000
$
8,422,000
$
9,167,000
$
9,978,000
$
10,860,000
$
11,821,000
$
12,867,000
$
14,005,000
$
Tax Levy Increase %
-8.71%
8.85%
8.85%
8.85%
8.85%
8.85%
8.85%
8.85%
8.85%
Tax Rate Increase %
7.35%
7.35%
7.35%
7.35%
7.35%
7.35%
7.35%
7.35%
7.35%
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE A-6
Table A-6: Tax-supported Capital Budget Forecast for Scenario 2 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Capital Expenditures for Roads & Road-related Assets
5,372,000
$
2,510,000
$
2,557,000
$
1,121,000
$
1,165,000
$
1,761,000
$
2,139,000
$
1,177,000
$
2,792,000
$
3,466,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Structures
565,000
$
685,000
$
1,129,000
$
184,000
$
358,000
$
266,000
$
412,000
$
81,000
$
404,000
$
491,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Tax-funded Facilities
-
$
84,000
$
46,000
$
-
$
232,000
$
-
$
11,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Capital Expenditures for Tax-funded Fleet and Equipment Assets
328,000
$
1,104,000
$
1,152,000
$
558,000
$
1,279,000
$
1,184,000
$
485,000
$
239,000
$
703,000
$
4,047,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Parks and Recreation Assets
112,000
$
209,000
$
302,000
$
119,000
$
150,000
$
139,000
$
325,000
$
124,000
$
58,000
$
339,000
$
Total Annual Capital Expenditures
6,377,000
$
4,592,000
$
5,186,000
$
1,982,000
$
3,184,000
$
3,350,000
$
3,372,000
$
1,621,000
$
3,957,000
$
8,343,000
$
Transfer Payment Revenues (OCIF + CCBF)
424,000
$
298,000
$
298,000
$
304,000
$
304,000
$
311,000
$
311,000
$
318,000
$
318,000
$
326,000
$
Debt Proceeds
-
$
-
$
1,074,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Contribution from Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds
5,953,000
$
4,294,000
$
3,814,000
$
1,678,000
$
2,880,000
$
3,039,000
$
3,061,000
$
1,303,000
$
3,639,000
$
8,017,000
$
Total Annual Capital Financing
6,377,000
$
4,592,000
$
5,186,000
$
1,982,000
$
3,184,000
$
3,350,000
$
3,372,000
$
1,621,000
$
3,957,000
$
8,343,000
$
Capital Expenditures
Capital Financing
Table A-7: Tax-supported Schedule of Debt Payments for Scenario 2 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Year
Principal Borrowed
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
2026
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2027
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2028
1,074,000
$
99,000
$
99,000
$
99,000
$
99,000
$
99,000
$
99,000
$
99,000
$
2029
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2030
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2031
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2032
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2033
-
$
-
$
-
$
2034
-
$
-
$
2035
-
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
Existing
Total Annual Debt Repayments
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE A-7
Table A-8: Tax-supported Schedule of Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds Continuity for Scenario 2 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Opening Balance
5,252,000
$
2,115,000
$
875,000
$
420,000
$
2,348,000
$
3,495,000
$
4,920,000
$
6,794,000
$
10,940,000
$
13,343,000
$
Add: Transfer from Operating
2,649,000
$
2,948,000
$
3,270,000
$
3,520,000
$
3,897,000
$
4,302,000
$
4,735,000
$
5,202,000
$
5,703,000
$
6,241,000
$
Add: Interest Earned
167,000
$
106,000
$
89,000
$
86,000
$
130,000
$
162,000
$
200,000
$
247,000
$
339,000
$
398,000
$
Less: Transfer to Fund Capital Expenditures
5,953,000
$
4,294,000
$
3,814,000
$
1,678,000
$
2,880,000
$
3,039,000
$
3,061,000
$
1,303,000
$
3,639,000
$
8,017,000
$
Closing Balance
2,115,000
$
875,000
$
420,000
$
2,348,000
$
3,495,000
$
4,920,000
$
6,794,000
$
10,940,000
$
13,343,000
$
11,965,000
$
Minimum Reserve Balance Theshold (10% of avg. inflated CAPEX)
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
420,000
$
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE A-8
Table A-9: Tax-supported Operating Budget Forecast for Scenario 2 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Council
132,000
$
135,000
$
138,000
$
141,000
$
144,000
$
147,000
$
150,000
$
153,000
$
156,000
$
159,000
$
Administration
892,000
$
912,000
$
932,000
$
953,000
$
974,000
$
996,000
$
1,018,000
$
1,041,000
$
1,064,000
$
1,088,000
$
Police
736,000
$
752,000
$
769,000
$
786,000
$
803,000
$
821,000
$
839,000
$
858,000
$
877,000
$
896,000
$
Conservation Authority
118,000
$
121,000
$
124,000
$
127,000
$
130,000
$
133,000
$
136,000
$
139,000
$
142,000
$
145,000
$
By-law, Canine, Livestock
59,000
$
60,000
$
61,000
$
62,000
$
63,000
$
64,000
$
65,000
$
66,000
$
67,000
$
68,000
$
Waste Management
384,000
$
393,000
$
402,000
$
411,000
$
420,000
$
429,000
$
439,000
$
449,000
$
459,000
$
469,000
$
Cemeteries
23,000
$
24,000
$
25,000
$
26,000
$
27,000
$
28,000
$
29,000
$
30,000
$
31,000
$
32,000
$
Fire Department
874,000
$
893,000
$
913,000
$
933,000
$
954,000
$
975,000
$
997,000
$
1,019,000
$
1,042,000
$
1,065,000
$
Building
377,000
$
385,000
$
394,000
$
403,000
$
412,000
$
421,000
$
430,000
$
440,000
$
450,000
$
460,000
$
Municipal Property
138,000
$
141,000
$
144,000
$
147,000
$
150,000
$
153,000
$
156,000
$
159,000
$
163,000
$
167,000
$
Keystone
129,000
$
132,000
$
135,000
$
138,000
$
141,000
$
144,000
$
147,000
$
150,000
$
153,000
$
156,000
$
Parks
308,000
$
315,000
$
322,000
$
329,000
$
336,000
$
343,000
$
351,000
$
359,000
$
367,000
$
375,000
$
Roads (not including loosetop maintenance)
2,135,000
$
2,182,000
$
2,230,000
$
2,279,000
$
2,330,000
$
2,382,000
$
2,435,000
$
2,489,000
$
2,544,000
$
2,600,000
$
Loosetop Maintenance
502,000
$
563,000
$
632,000
$
709,000
$
796,000
$
893,000
$
1,002,000
$
1,124,000
$
1,262,000
$
1,416,000
$
Planning
325,000
$
332,000
$
339,000
$
347,000
$
355,000
$
363,000
$
371,000
$
379,000
$
387,000
$
396,000
$
Drainage
174,000
$
178,000
$
182,000
$
186,000
$
190,000
$
194,000
$
198,000
$
202,000
$
206,000
$
211,000
$
Fee Waivers/Grants
35,000
$
36,000
$
37,000
$
38,000
$
39,000
$
40,000
$
41,000
$
42,000
$
43,000
$
44,000
$
Transfer to Operating Reserve
77,000
$
79,000
$
81,000
$
83,000
$
85,000
$
87,000
$
89,000
$
91,000
$
93,000
$
95,000
$
Adjustment for Equipment Internal Charges (Transfer to Reserve)
355,000
-$
360,000
-$
365,000
-$
370,000
-$
375,000
-$
380,000
-$
385,000
-$
390,000
-$
395,000
-$
400,000
-$
Sub-total: Operating Expenditures
7,063,000
$
7,273,000
$
7,495,000
$
7,728,000
$
7,974,000
$
8,233,000
$
8,508,000
$
8,800,000
$
9,111,000
$
9,442,000
$
Transfer to Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds
2,649,000
$
2,948,000
$
3,270,000
$
3,520,000
$
3,897,000
$
4,302,000
$
4,735,000
$
5,202,000
$
5,703,000
$
6,241,000
$
Debt Repayment
368,000
$
368,000
$
368,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
467,000
$
Sub-total: Capital-related Expenditures
3,017,000
$
3,316,000
$
3,638,000
$
3,987,000
$
4,364,000
$
4,769,000
$
5,202,000
$
5,669,000
$
6,170,000
$
6,708,000
$
Total Annual Expenditures
10,080,000
$
10,589,000
$
11,133,000
$
11,715,000
$
12,338,000
$
13,002,000
$
13,710,000
$
14,469,000
$
15,281,000
$
16,150,000
$
Tax Levy
6,435,000
$
6,901,000
$
7,401,000
$
7,938,000
$
8,513,000
$
9,130,000
$
9,792,000
$
10,501,000
$
11,262,000
$
12,078,000
$
Administration
97,000
$
99,000
$
101,000
$
103,000
$
105,000
$
107,000
$
109,000
$
111,000
$
113,000
$
116,000
$
Waste Management
71,000
$
73,000
$
75,000
$
77,000
$
79,000
$
81,000
$
83,000
$
85,000
$
87,000
$
89,000
$
Fire Department
234,000
$
239,000
$
244,000
$
249,000
$
255,000
$
261,000
$
267,000
$
273,000
$
279,000
$
285,000
$
Building
377,000
$
385,000
$
394,000
$
403,000
$
412,000
$
421,000
$
430,000
$
440,000
$
450,000
$
460,000
$
Municipal Property
100,000
$
102,000
$
104,000
$
106,000
$
108,000
$
110,000
$
112,000
$
114,000
$
117,000
$
120,000
$
Keystone
44,000
$
45,000
$
46,000
$
47,000
$
48,000
$
49,000
$
50,000
$
51,000
$
52,000
$
53,000
$
Parks
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
21,000
$
Roads
421,000
$
431,000
$
441,000
$
450,000
$
461,000
$
471,000
$
480,000
$
492,000
$
503,000
$
515,000
$
Planning
195,000
$
199,000
$
203,000
$
208,000
$
213,000
$
218,000
$
223,000
$
228,000
$
233,000
$
238,000
$
Drainage
99,000
$
101,000
$
103,000
$
105,000
$
107,000
$
109,000
$
111,000
$
113,000
$
116,000
$
119,000
$
Interest Income
153,000
$
156,000
$
159,000
$
163,000
$
167,000
$
171,000
$
175,000
$
179,000
$
183,000
$
187,000
$
PILs
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
1,168,000
$
Penalty & Interest
77,000
$
79,000
$
81,000
$
83,000
$
85,000
$
87,000
$
89,000
$
91,000
$
93,000
$
95,000
$
Supplemental Taxation
87,000
$
89,000
$
91,000
$
93,000
$
95,000
$
97,000
$
99,000
$
101,000
$
103,000
$
105,000
$
OMPF
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
501,000
$
Total Annual Revenues
10,080,000
$
10,589,000
$
11,133,000
$
11,715,000
$
12,338,000
$
13,002,000
$
13,710,000
$
14,469,000
$
15,281,000
$
16,150,000
$
Operating Revenues
Operating Expenditures
Capital-related Expenditures
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE A-9
Table A-10: Tax Levy Forecast for Scenario 2 (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Prior-year Tax Levy
7,153,000
$
6,435,000
$
6,901,000
$
7,401,000
$
7,938,000
$
8,513,000
$
9,130,000
$
9,792,000
$
10,501,000
$
11,262,000
$
Add: Tax Revenues from Incremental Assessment Growth
1,070,000
-$
89,000
$
96,000
$
103,000
$
110,000
$
118,000
$
127,000
$
136,000
$
146,000
$
156,000
$
Add: Tax Revenues from Existing Assessment Base
352,000
$
377,000
$
404,000
$
434,000
$
465,000
$
499,000
$
535,000
$
573,000
$
615,000
$
660,000
$
Total Tax Levy
6,435,000
$
6,901,000
$
7,401,000
$
7,938,000
$
8,513,000
$
9,130,000
$
9,792,000
$
10,501,000
$
11,262,000
$
12,078,000
$
Tax Levy Increase %
-10.05%
7.25%
7.25%
7.25%
7.25%
7.25%
7.25%
7.25%
7.25%
Tax Rate Increase %
5.78%
5.78%
5.78%
5.78%
5.78%
5.78%
5.78%
5.78%
5.78%
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE B-1
Appendix B
Financial Strategy Tables for
Water and Wastewater Assets
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE B-2
Table B-1: Water and Wastewater Capital Budget Forecast (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Capital Expenditures for Water Assets
104,000
$
94,000
$
114,000
$
234,000
$
112,000
$
123,000
$
138,000
$
134,000
$
207,000
$
252,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Wastewater Assets
140,000
$
130,000
$
239,000
$
252,000
$
257,000
$
270,000
$
282,000
$
294,000
$
323,000
$
761,000
$
Capital Expenditures for Shedden WWTP Construction - Phase 1
21,458,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Capital Expenditures for Shedden WWTP Construction - Phase 2
-
$
18,496,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Total Annual Capital Expenditures
21,702,000
$
18,720,000
$
353,000
$
486,000
$
369,000
$
393,000
$
420,000
$
428,000
$
530,000
$
1,013,000
$
Contribution from Connection Fees
5,794,000
$
4,994,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
HEWSF Grant
15,664,000
$
13,502,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Contribution from Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds
244,000
$
224,000
$
353,000
$
486,000
$
369,000
$
393,000
$
420,000
$
428,000
$
530,000
$
1,013,000
$
Total Annual Capital Financing
21,702,000
$
18,720,000
$
353,000
$
486,000
$
369,000
$
393,000
$
420,000
$
428,000
$
530,000
$
1,013,000
$
Capital Expenditures
Capital Financing
Table B-2: Water and Wastewater Schedule of Debt Payments (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Year
Principal Borrowed
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
2026
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2027
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2028
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2029
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2030
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2031
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2032
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2033
-
$
-
$
-
$
2034
-
$
-
$
2035
-
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
Existing
Total Annual Debt Repayments
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE B-3
Table B-3: Water and Wastewater Schedule of Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds Continuity (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Opening Balance
5,159,000
$
5,105,000
$
5,188,000
$
5,255,000
$
5,511,000
$
6,251,000
$
7,391,000
$
8,982,000
$
11,112,000
$
13,755,000
$
Add: Transfer from Operating
85,000
$
202,000
$
309,000
$
624,000
$
980,000
$
1,380,000
$
1,827,000
$
2,332,000
$
2,893,000
$
3,524,000
$
Add: Interest Earned
105,000
$
105,000
$
111,000
$
118,000
$
129,000
$
153,000
$
184,000
$
226,000
$
280,000
$
346,000
$
Less: Transfer to Fund Capital Expenditures and Operating Expenditu
244,000
$
224,000
$
353,000
$
486,000
$
369,000
$
393,000
$
420,000
$
428,000
$
530,000
$
1,013,000
$
Closing Balance
5,105,000
$
5,188,000
$
5,255,000
$
5,511,000
$
6,251,000
$
7,391,000
$
8,982,000
$
11,112,000
$
13,755,000
$
16,612,000
$
Minimum Reserve Balance Theshold (10% of avg. inflated CAPEX)
444,000
$
444,000
$
444,000
$
444,000
$
444,000
$
444,000
$
444,000
$
444,000
$
444,000
$
444,000
$
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
PAGE B-4
Table B-4: Water and Wastewater Operating Budget Forecast (Inflated)
Township of Southwold
Description
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
Water
2,187,000
$
2,236,000
$
2,285,000
$
2,336,000
$
2,388,000
$
2,441,000
$
2,495,000
$
2,550,000
$
2,607,000
$
2,664,000
$
Wastewater
646,000
$
660,000
$
675,000
$
690,000
$
705,000
$
721,000
$
737,000
$
753,000
$
770,000
$
787,000
$
Shedden Wastewater System
377,000
$
523,000
$
712,000
$
728,000
$
744,000
$
761,000
$
778,000
$
795,000
$
813,000
$
831,000
$
Sub-total: Operating Expenditures
3,210,000
$
3,419,000
$
3,672,000
$
3,754,000
$
3,837,000
$
3,923,000
$
4,010,000
$
4,098,000
$
4,190,000
$
4,282,000
$
Transfer to Capital Reserves and Reserve Funds
85,000
$
202,000
$
309,000
$
624,000
$
980,000
$
1,380,000
$
1,827,000
$
2,332,000
$
2,893,000
$
3,524,000
$
Debt Repayment
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
62,000
$
Sub-total: Capital-related Expenditures
147,000
$
264,000
$
371,000
$
686,000
$
1,042,000
$
1,442,000
$
1,889,000
$
2,394,000
$
2,955,000
$
3,586,000
$
Total Annual Expenditures
3,357,000
$
3,683,000
$
4,043,000
$
4,440,000
$
4,879,000
$
5,365,000
$
5,899,000
$
6,492,000
$
7,145,000
$
7,868,000
$
Water and Wastewater Rate Revenue
2,994,000
$
3,312,000
$
3,664,000
$
4,053,000
$
4,483,000
$
4,959,000
$
5,486,000
$
6,068,000
$
6,712,000
$
7,425,000
$
Other Revenue - Water
263,000
$
269,000
$
274,000
$
280,000
$
287,000
$
294,000
$
299,000
$
307,000
$
314,000
$
321,000
$
Other Revenue - Wastewater
100,000
$
102,000
$
105,000
$
107,000
$
109,000
$
112,000
$
114,000
$
117,000
$
119,000
$
122,000
$
Total Annual Revenues
3,357,000
$
3,683,000
$
4,043,000
$
4,440,000
$
4,879,000
$
5,365,000
$
5,899,000
$
6,492,000
$
7,145,000
$
7,868,000
$
Operating Revenues
Operating Expenditures
Capital-related Expenditures