Committee - Operations Agenda Preview — May 21, 2026

Summary

One-sentence summary: On May 21, 2026 at 5:30 PM, the committee will consider: - **Emergency Sewer and Infrastructure Repairs:** Replacing corroded storm pipe on 27th Street West, cleaning and expanding the Kenny Drain Storm Pond, and reviewing emergency purchases for a vertical paddle wheel flocculator.

The City Operations Committee meets at 5:30 PM on May 21, 2026, to consider a sanitary sewer flow monitoring initiative designed to mitigate liability from basement backups and comply with Clean Water Act reporting requirements. Concurrently, the committee will review a proposal to adjust 2026 water rates by roughly 3.1% to fund essential repairs of aging infrastructure without raising property taxes. A particularly urgent matter involves the replacement of a failing vertical paddle wheel flocculator; staff will discuss activating emergency purchasing powers to install a proven system immediately, avoiding delays that could trigger water shortages during the spring melt. Additionally, the agenda includes a business case for replacing obsolete sand domes at the Public Works Yard to stop leaking brine. The committee will also review a revised road resurfacing strategy that expands asphalt work to four segments. Furthermore, the committee will deliberate on expanding the Kenny Drain Pond to safeguard water quality for approximately 10,000 residents and review emergency repairs for a collapsed storm sewer near a school.

Top Newsworthy Developments

Key Topics & Sections

Full Transcript

1 The Operations committee requests that following the 2026 municipal election Owen Sound strike acrash analysis working group for 2027;

The Operations committee requests that following the 2026
municipal election Owen Sound strike a crash analysis working
group for 2027;

2 CALL FOR ADDITIONAL BUSINESS

CALL FOR ADDITIONAL BUSINESS

3 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
4.a
Minutes of the Operations Committee meeting held on April 23, 2026

Page 5 of 165

4.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
4.a

Minutes of the Operations Committee meeting held on March 19, 2026
OP-260423-001
"THAT the Operations Committee approves the minutes of the meeting held
on March 19, 2026."

5.

DEPUTATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
There were no deputations or presentations.

6.

PUBLIC FORUM
6.a

Laura Campbell, Owen Sound resident
Ms. Campbell provided comments respecting the 4th Avenue West reconstruction
project, highlighting the benefits of including a multi-use path for increased
accessibility and safety.

6.b

Kenneth Paul Thompson, Owen Sound resident
Mr. Thompson provided comments respecting speeding concerns along 4th
Avenue West, noting the importance of clear speed limit markers and keeping the
roadway a reasonable width. He added concerns respecting a deteriorating tree
on the boulevard adjacent to his property and the need for it to be addressed.

6.c

Rachel Paterson, Grey Bruce Pride and Block Party Planning Committee
Ms. Paterson provided comments opposing the new event fees in the proposed
2026 operations fees and charges schedules, noting how they would negatively
affect the parade and block party events due to rising costs, as well as impacts to
other volunteer and non-profit led events.

6.d

Kate Bester, Owen Sound resident
Ms. Bester provided comments supporting the inclusion of a multi-use path and
decrease of road width in the 4th Avenue West reconstruction project as they
would provide additional safety for pedestrians and cyclists, especially as there
are numerous daycares and schools within the neighbourhood.

6.e

Cory Campbell, Owen Sound resident
Mr. Campbell provided comments respecting the current safety issues for
pedestrians along 4th Avenue West and supporting the addition of a multi-use
path to help mitigate these issues. He noted concerns about the City redesigning
the proposed plans as outlined on the agenda and the possible associated costs.

2

Page 6 of 165

7.

CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FOR WHICH DIRECTION IS REQUIRED
There were no correspondence items presented for consideration.

8.

REPORTS OF CITY STAFF
8.a

General
8.a.1 Report CR-26-040 from the Deputy Treasurer Re: 2026 Operations Fees
and Charges Update
The Deputy Treasurer provided an overview of the report.
In response to a question from Committee, the Director of Public Works
and Engineering noted that the goal of many of the new proposed fees is
to recover costs as closely as possible to actual staff and material costs.
In response to a question from Committee, the Manager of Public Works
and Engineering clarified that the fee respecting downtown snow removal
in front of storefronts has been in the Fees and Charges By-law for many
years and is not applied regularly as snow removal is conducted by staff in
the mornings on downtown sidewalks.
In response to a question from Committee, Ms. Widdifield noted that the
servicing fees are changing to differ between single family homes and
more complex processes, so that contracts for single family homes will not
be required to enter into the same complex agreements that a large-scale
development would.
In response to a question from Committee, Ms. Widdifield noted that the
responsibility for hiring a contractor to install servicing for smaller sites and
single family homes is on the property owner, instead of being completed
by City staff.
In response to a question from Committee, Mr. Crane noted that there
were not previously fees in place for event road closure set ups, and the
associated costs for these have typically been absorbed by the
department's operating budget and therefore subsidized by the tax base.
In response to a question from Committee, Ms. Widdifield noted that if
there is a specific request for fees to be waived by an individual or group,
Council approval is required for the request to be approved.
OP-260423-002
"THAT in consideration of Staff Report CR-26-040 respecting the
2026 Operations Fees and Charges Update, the Operations
Committee recommends that City Council receive the report for
information purposes."
3

Page 7 of 165

Amendment:
OP-260423-003
addition of a note to the Event Fees (items 16 through 21) in
Schedule J to clarify that these fees are only charged to for-profit
events."
Main Motion as Amended:
OP-260423-002a
"THAT in consideration of Staff Report CR-26-040 respecting the
2026 Operations Fees and Charges Update, the Operations
Committee recommends that City Council receive the report for
information purposes with the following amendment to the proposed
fees and charges schedules:
1. Addition of a note to the Event Fees (items 16 through 21) in
Schedule J., to clarify that these fees are only charged to forprofit events."
8.b

Engineering
8.b.1 Report OP-26-021 from the Director of Public Works and Engineering Re:
4th Avenue West Reconstruction (15th St to 20th St) Request for Direction
The Director of Public Works and Engineering provided an overview of the
report.
In response to a question from Committee, Ms. Widdifield noted that traffic
counts and speed testing have been conducted in the area and that they
will be conducted again once the project is complete to inform how the
project has influenced traffic patterns. A satisfaction survey could also be
conducted post-construction to evaluate if the project is meeting its
objectives.
In response to a question from Committee, Ms. Widdifield noted that staff
will work with Hydro One to determine the exact number of hydro poles
that will need relocated to accommodate the multi-use path, and that the
number is expected to be between five and ten. She added that if there
was not a multi-use path, there would still be a number of hydro poles that
would need to be relocated along the curb.
4

Page 8 of 165

OP-260423-004
"THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-012 respecting the
preliminary design options for the 4th Avenue West reconstruction
(15th St to 20th St), the Operations Committee recommends that City
Council approve Option 3, integrating a multi-use path, as the best
combination of value for investment due to its positive impact on
active transportation, safety and ease of maintenance."
8.c

Water and Wastewater
8.c.1 Report OP-26-010 from the Manager of Water and Wastewater Re: Bulk
Water Sales and Application
The Manager of Water and Wastewater provided an overview of the
report.
In response to a question from Committee, Mr. McDonald noted that the
City does not intend to track potable water haulers as the City does not
guarantee potability past the backflow prevention device.
In response to a question from Committee, Mr. McDonald noted that the
fees for bulk water sales will be reviewed in the coming years once the
new application process is implemented.
OP-260423-005
"THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-010 respecting Bulk
Water Sales and Application, the Operations Committee recommends
that City Council receive the report for information purposes."
8.c.2 Report OP-26-019 from the Manager of Water and Wastewater Re:
Frozen Water - Levels of Service
The Manager of Water and Wastewater provided an overview of the
report.
In response to a question from Committee, Mr. McDonald noted that water
provided through temporary lines during construction projects is tested
and verified for potability to ensure that the water isn't moving through
something that may interfere with it. He added that once water travels
through one private residence to another, this cannot be verified.

5

Page 9 of 165

In response to a question from Committee, Mr. McDonald noted that in
instances of frozen services, a work order is issued and staff time is
tracked accordingly.
In response to a question from Committee, Ms. Widdifield noted that an
emergency is declared in consultation with the Municipal Emergency
Control Group and added that items such as shower facilities may be
provided in instances where there is not an official emergency declared.
In response to a question from Committee, Mr. McDonald noted that the
specialized equipment previously used in instances of frozen services will
be kept on hand and staff will remain trained in how to operate it, even if it
isn't used frequently.
OP-260423-006
"THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-019 respecting Frozen
Water – Levels of Service, that the Operations Committee
recommends that City Council direct staff to create and update any
related procedures to include the recommended defined service
levels for frozen water as outlined in the report."
8.d

Environment
None.

8.e

Public Works
None.

8.f

Transit
None.

9.

MATTERS POSTPONED
There were no matters postponed.

10.

MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE WAS PREVIOUSLY GIVEN
There were no motions for which notice was previously given.

11.

CORRESPONDENCE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATION
There were no correspondence items presented for information.

6

Page 10 of 165

12.

DISCUSSION OF ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
12.a

YouTube Video Featuring Owen Sound Transit
Vice Chair Farmer highlighted that there has been a video posted to YouTube
which follows a couple who take the Guelph Owen Sound Transit from Hamilton
to Owen Sound. He added that the video notes the benefits of the transit service
and celebrates the amenities that Owen Sound has to offer.

12.b

Volunteer Week
Member Anderson noted that Volunteer Week runs from April 19 to 25 and
thanked all volunteers in the City for everything they do, as well as the members
who volunteer their time to sit on the Committee.

12.c

International Guide Dog Day
Member Anderson noted that April 29 is International Guide Dog Day, which is a
day to recognize guide dogs and their users across the world.

12.d

16th Avenue East Construction Update
Member Jordan asked staff to provide an update on the 16th Avenue East
construction project.
In response to a question from Committee, the Manager of Public Works and
Engineering noted that exploratory work has been taking place this week and
work should be commencing again soon to get the project completed before
summer.

13.

NOTICES OF MOTION
13.a

Vice Chair Farmer Re: Crash Analysis Working Group
Vice Chair Farmer presented the following Notice of Motion that was supported
by Member Hawkins:
"WHEREAS the City of Owen Sound receives annual collision statistics
identifying the intersections with the highest numbers of collisions;
AND WHEREAS it is widely accepted by organizations ranging from the Ontario
Society of Professional Engineers, to Strong Towns, and the Owen Sound Police
Service that street design is a contributing factor to rates of collision and injury;
AND WHEREAS the City of Owen Sound currently has no mechanism by which
to examine the common design or operational factors that contribute to higher
numbers of collisions at certain intersections or to identify possible safety
interventions;
AND WHEREAS Strong Towns has developed a tool called the Crash Analysis
Studio to assist municipalities and individuals in identifying and addressing
patterns and contributing factors to crashes;
7

Page 11 of 165

AND WHEREAS the City of Owen Sound has updated the board and committee
structure for the next term of Council to simplify the striking of working groups to
assess and bring recommendations to address specific problems on set
timelines;
NOW THEREFORE IT BE RESOLVED THAT:
1. The Operations committee requests that following the 2026 municipal
election Owen Sound strike a crash analysis working group for 2027;
2. The working group consist of 3-5 members;
3. The working group analyze contributing factors and identify potential
safety interventions for the three intersections with the highest numbers of
reported collisions in 2025:
a. 10th Street/9th Avenue East (15 collisions);
b. 16th Street/9th Avenue East (14 collisions);
c. 10th Street/4th Avenue East (14 collisions);and
4. The working group deliver their final report to the September 2027
committee meeting."
14.

ADJOURNMENT
The business contained on the agenda having been completed, Chair Greig adjourned
the meeting at 6:57 p.m.

8

Page 12 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

OP-26-028

Subject:

Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative

Recommendations:
THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-028 respecting the Sanitary
Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative, the Operations Committee recommends
that City Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:









Extraneous flow into the sanitary sewer system limits capacity in
the system and increases liability for basement backups and
potential damage to the environment.
Flow monitoring is an invaluable tool in the toolbox to determine
the nature and location of the extraneous flow.
Staff have put forward a capital project to begin undertaking a
multi-year initiative to reduce Inflow and Infiltration (I/I)
extraneous flow sources to the wastewater collection system, within
which flow monitoring plays a critical role.
It will be important to address extraneous flows as they impact the
capacity of the City’s conveyance and treatment systems, which
increases liability for sewage backups and will ultimately impact
development capacity if not attenuated.
Wastewater overflows and Bypasses must be recorded, reported to
the MECP and posted for the public on the City’s website. Under
CLI-ECA requirements, overflow sites must be signed for public
awareness.

Staff Report OP-26-028: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative
Page 1 of 7

Page 13 of 165



Public Health undertakes water quality sampling as they pertain to
the need to close beaches.

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: The recommendation contributes to core service
delivery or a corporate initiative that enables service delivery for one or more
strategic priorities. Chiefly:




Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s environmental,
social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the climate
crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and
infrastructure to support healthy lifestyles.
Prosperous City – Supporting initiatives that increase competitive
economic advantages for current and new businesses and their
employees.

By freeing up wet weather capacity in the wastewater collection and
treatment system, the City maintains a competitive position for ongoing
development opportunities. Failure to develop a plan to address extraneous
flows may also result in financial and/or environmental liability or legislated
corrective actions.

Previous Report/Authority:
When the Capital Budget was presented in late 2025, Wastewater Project
26O.7, I & I Flow Monitoring, with a budget of $60,000, was removed from
the funded project list, pending further details being presented to the
Operations Committee and Council.
Related dialogue is being presented concurrently in report CR-26-052
relating to the 2026 water and wastewater rate update.
Allocating resources to these projects demonstrates the City’s commitment
and due diligence to the requirements of its Consolidated Linear
Infrastructure Environmental Compliance Approvals (CLI-ECAs).

Background:
The City of Owen Sound has an extraneous flow problem. Extreme increases
in sewage flow relative to precipitation or snow melt events indicate that
ground and/or surface water is entering the sanitary collection system
through some mechanism. This is termed either Infiltration (slow, gradual
Staff Report OP-26-028: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative
Page 2 of 7

Page 14 of 165

seepage, such as a leaky pipe) or Inflow (directly connected sources such as
a sanitary-storm cross-connection or catchbasin). These are collectively
referred to as I/I.
The City has been undertaking some coarse flow monitoring within the
interceptor sewer system for two years now (monitoring devices are located
in the overflow structures to record when the wastewater system is
overflowing to the storm system).
Additional sanitary sewer flow monitoring was undertaken in 2025 as part of
a model calibration exercise required to adjust the assumption of risk
associated with the proposed hotel development on 16th Avenue East
adjacent to the Heritage Place Mall. The City’s wastewater model, when
calibrated based on the interceptor flow monitors only, was too coarse to
distribute the experienced flows with any confidence in the upper reaches of
each sub-catchment (the area draining to each flow monitor). As the model
made assumptions, it was showing results that suggested that the sewers in
the industrial park would be surcharging to the surface. As Staff knew that
was not the case, it was determined an additional three (3) flow monitors
were required in the industrial park area to determine where the storm
response was primarily originating from. The three possibilities in that case
were from south of 16th Street, from the industrial park itself, possibly from
some partially abandoned infrastructure that had not been capped or
separated properly, or from the residential area west of 9th Avenue East but
above the escarpment. The flow metering results indicated that the likely
origin of the overwhelming I/I response in that sub catchment was the
residential area, which made sense as well, as the construction vintage
would hint at foundation drainage systems being connected to the sanitary
sewer, leaky old sewer pipes and potentially some nominally-separated
sewers (partially combined sewers).
Staff and the engineering consultant then used the monitoring results to
calibrate the sewer network model, which yielded more realistic conclusions;
the pipes in question were no longer surcharging in the theoretical modelling
iterations, as the source of the extraneous flow was now assigned to the
correct pipe segments.

Analysis and Options:
Current Staff are well-versed in executing I/I investigations, and Staff
strongly believe that the most financially responsible solution is to eliminate
Staff Report OP-26-028: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative
Page 3 of 7

Page 15 of 165

the extraneous flow at the source rather than constructing holding tanks (like
the West Side Pumping Station “equalization tank”).
The same principles and iterative process described in the Background
section would be followed for other catchments and sub-catchment areas,
working from the interceptor sewer upstream, to determine if a particular
neighbourhood or type of extraneous flow is to be targeted. The biggest
impacts are typically gained by finding cross-connections and isolating
overflows (they can sometimes flow in the wrong direction if the storm is
surcharged; the storm will begin to dump into the sanitary sewer) and
catchbasins connected to the sanitary sewer. Often, these are relatively lowcost solutions as well, unless the sewer is combined because a proper storm
sewer is far away or impractical to connect.
A great benefit can also be gained from replacing or relining sewer and
sealing or grouting maintenance holes. Infiltration through manholes may
seem insignificant, but a constant seep adds up in aggregate and over time.
Grouting manholes with hydrophobic or hydrophilic grout also fills voids and
can extend the lifespan of the structure.
Lastly, but it should absolutely not be understated, is the importance of
addressing I/I originating from the private side. Foundation drains and
downspouts connected to the sanitary sewer are not only a hazard for the
overall system, causing surcharging, environmental discharges and
unnecessary treatment costs, but often cause localized backups within the
individual property; in effect, they flood themselves out. Implementing a
sewage water reduction subsidy program would be a valuable next step, for
not only the health and welfare of the City’s residents, but also reducing
overall treatment costs and liability claim exposure due to mainline
surcharging causing property damage.
Remain Status Quo
This approach is not advisable and will likely result in negative environmental
impacts, equipment stress and failure, potential environmental noncompliance and unnecessary treatment costs, as thousands of cubic metres
of diluted sewage must still be treated through the same processes as the
City’s average wastewater.
Investment in Inflow and Infiltration Monitoring
This approach, as discussed previously, would allow Staff to monitor specific
sections of the sanitary collection system to quantify the severity of the I&I
Staff Report OP-26-028: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative
Page 4 of 7

Page 16 of 165

in the subcatchment. This would allow the development of site-specific plans
to address the issues, and enable the focus to be organized, rational and
logically directed to the best return on investment activities. Options that
may be considered based on monitoring and investigation might include
sanitary main replacement, manhole rehabilitation, lining, or reviewing
private infrastructure connections; these plans cannot be developed, or at
least not effectively, without being informed by comprehensive monitoring.
This is the option recommended by Staff.
Investment in Facility Storage Capacity
This approach comes with an extremely high cost and level of uncertainty.
Staff would focus on plant and facility storage tank construction and/or
improvements as a buffer to avoid plant bypasses or overflows at the
pumping stations or along the interceptor sewers. The physical footprint of
the City’s wastewater treatment plant and existing lift stations would make
this extremely challenging and costly, while at the same time, not addressing
the root cause. Staff do not recommend this option at this time.

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
The wastewater operating budget as proposed includes an additional $75,000
in annual funding associated with inflow and infiltration (I/I) management
and ongoing condition assessment activities including:




Flow monitoring;
CCTV inspection and flushing programs; and
Manhole rehabilitation and benching activities.

These activities support long-term asset management planning, condition
assessment, regulatory compliance and the prioritization of future
infrastructure replacement needs. For example, CCTV and flow monitoring
will assist in directing precious budget dollars toward the most impactful
areas and measures; the proverbial “low-hanging fruit”.
These activities have been funded intermittently in the past, if at all, as
capital projects, despite more accurately fitting the definition of operational
activities and expenses.
The proposed water rate structure also reflects the increasing concerns
relating to inflow and infiltration within the wastewater system. Wet weather
events continue to produce significant spikes in flows, contributing to
Staff Report OP-26-028: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative
Page 5 of 7

Page 17 of 165

historically high overflow and bypass volumes. Ongoing monitoring and
inspection programs are intended to assist the City in identifying and
prioritizing remediation efforts throughout the collection system.
An additional $75,000 annually has also been incorporated into the forecast
horizon in future years, bringing the total annual funding allocation for these
programs to approximately $150,000 annually as of 2027.
The budget for I & I flow monitoring should be a multi-year approach
designed to target high flow events in spring and fall. The data would be
collected and analyzed to help identify specific capital infrastructure
improvement projects. Funding for the I&I monitoring will be from
wastewater user rates.

Human Resources
Current staffing has the capacity to identify areas of focus for monitoring. A
consultant would typically be retained to install specialized flow monitoring
equipment and provide access to the hyetographs (rainfall intensity over
time graphs) and hydrographs (sewer flow graphs) and/or technical review
and analysis of the data. Based on the results, Staff will determine the
appropriate action and develop a capital budget sheet for a specific project
and Council approval. The Project would typically be managed by
Engineering staff with support from Wastewater and Public Works.

Time and Scheduling
The timeline and scheduling would be based on the availability and scale of
approved funding. There are specific times of the year that should be
targeted for certain activities; for example, flow monitoring and CCTV are
best undertaken either during the spring melt or in late summer/early fall, in
order to ensure antecedent moisture conditions are saturated, and to target
peak potential flows (i.e. snow melt plus rain or severe late summer storms).
Saturated soil is also desirable for CCTV when assessing for the potential of
I/I through defects in the pipe and from the private side; if there is a stream
or trickle of clear water coming from lateral connections, it has a high
probability of being groundwater.

Technology and Infrastructure
No technology or other resources are identified at this time as the
expectation is that the flow monitoring devices would be obtained through a
consultant/service provider.
Staff Report OP-26-028: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative
Page 6 of 7

Page 18 of 165

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
The recommendation supports both the City's Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan and the City's Climate Mitigation Plan.
Climate change, extreme weather events and growth demands require
immediate action to understand the chief areas of focus and to prioritize
future capital improvement projects.

Communication and Engagement:
Communications would primarily pertain to public notifications for
direct impacts to any residents/property owners.
Public communication will play a major role in any roll-out of a private side
initiative, such as downspout inspections/disconnections, foundation drain
disconnection, or sewage water reduction programming.

Report Developed in Consultation With:






Manager of Water and Wastewater
Wastewater Superintendent
Engineering Services team
Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer
Director of Strategic Initiatives and Operational Effectiveness

Attachments:
Attachment 1 – Sewer System Flow Response Example to 99mm (3.9in.) of
Precipitation on April 12-15, 2026, plus Saturated Ground Conditions. This
hydrograph spans from April 5th, 2026, through May 5th, 2026.
Submitted by:
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Lara Widdifield, Director
of Public Works and Engineering at lwiddifield@owensound.ca or 519-3764440, ext. 1201.
Staff Report OP-26-028: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative
Page 7 of 7

Page 19 of 165

Rapid rise indicates
Inflow, i.e. directly
connected sources
of rainwater

Note Peak Flow approx. 1200 L/s, about 4x the Average Daily Peak Flow.
This peak corresponds to a treatment plant bypass of 3,441 cubic metres
over 5.1 hours and 6,120cu.m. overflowed from the sewer system over 26h
at the West Side pumping station over 8h.

Extended drawdown indicates
Infiltration, i.e. slow seeping
into sewer system

Average Daily Flow Pattern:
between 150-300 L/s

Total Overflows & Bypasses from this Rain Event:
West Side Sewage Pumping Station - 10,243 cu.m.
Overflows along Collection System - 16,042 cu.m.
Treatment Plant Bypass Channel - 3,441 cu.m.
Total - 29,726 cubic metres
That's almost exactly 12 Olympic Swimming Pools!
* If the ground was relatively dry leading up to the event, it would have been able to absorb
some of the precipitation. Due to preceeding events from Apr 5-10, there was no capacity left.

Attachment 1:

Sewer System Reaction to 99mm (3.9in.)
of Precipitation on April 12-15, 2026 plus
Saturated Ground Conditions*
Page 20 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Kate Allan, Director of Corporate Services

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

CR-26-052

Subject:

2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update

Recommendations:
THAT in consideration of Staff Report CR-26-052 respecting the 2026 Water
Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update, the Operations Committee recommends
that City Council direct staff to:
1.

2.

Include in the 2026 Fees and Charges By-law, to take effect for the
July 2026 billing cycles:
a.

A five percent (5%) increase to water rates;

b.

A reduction of the sewer surcharge from 124% to 120%; and

Provide notice of the water rate updates in accordance with the
City’s Notice By-law.

Highlights:






The proposed 2026 rate update includes a five percent (5%)
increase to water rates and a reduction in the wastewater
surcharge from 124% to 120%, resulting in an estimated total bill
increase of approximately 3.1% for a typical residential customer.
The updated financial model continues to support full cost recovery
for water and wastewater operations while maintaining positive
reserve balances to address ongoing infrastructure renewal and
future system pressures.
The proposed rates balance affordability considerations with the
need to prepare for significant future infrastructure requirements.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 1 of 11

Page 21 of 165

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s
environmental, social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the
climate crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and infrastructure
to support healthy lifestyles.

Previous Report/Authority:
CR-25-043 2025 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
OP-26-002 2025 Drinking Water Annual Report
Rate updates are provided annually in conjunction with the fees and charges
review.

Background:
Water treatment and distribution and wastewater collection and treatment
services are essential to the health and safety of Owen Sound residents and
businesses. The City is responsible for maintaining a significant municipal
water and wastewater network with an estimated replacement value
approaching $1 billion.
These services are funded entirely through user fees rather than property
taxation. This user-pay model ensures that only system users pay for the
services they receive, consistent with provincial legislation under the Safe
Drinking Water Act, 2002 and Ontario Regulation 453/07.
The City is required to maintain financially sustainable water systems as part
of the municipal drinking water licensing requirements under the Safe
Drinking Water Act, 2002. In support of these requirements, the City
periodically completes comprehensive water and wastewater financial
planning studies to evaluate long-term operating requirements, capital
infrastructure needs, reserve balances, debt obligations, projected growth
and anticipated water usage trends.
In 2025, the City engaged Hemson Consulting Ltd. to complete a
comprehensive Water and Wastewater Rate Study and update the City’s
long-term financial plan. The Hemson study reviewed the City’s existing and
projected operating and capital requirements over a ten-year horizon and
established projected rate requirements intended to support full cost
recovery and long-term financial sustainability of both systems.
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 2 of 11

Page 22 of 165

The Hemson study incorporated:







Updated operating forecasts;
Multi-year capital plans;
Existing and forecasted debt obligations;
Reserve and reserve fund continuity projections;
Historical and projected water consumption trends; and
Forecasted infrastructure replacement requirements for both water
and wastewater systems.

As part of the 2026 rate update, staff have updated the City’s financial model
using revised operating budgets, updated capital forecasts, current reserve
balances, debt projections and updated usage data. While a new
comprehensive rate study was not undertaken for 2026, the updated
analysis continues to rely on the financial planning framework established
through the Hemson study and the City’s long-term infrastructure planning
assumptions.
The 2026 operating forecasts generally reflect status quo operations with
limited service level changes. The water operating budget includes the
addition of a Quality Management System (QMS) position beginning in 2027
as previously discussed by Council through Report OP-26-002.
The wastewater operating budget also includes additional funding related to
ongoing inflow and infiltration (I/I) monitoring and condition assessment
activities including CCTV inspection, flow monitoring and manhole
rehabilitation programs. These activities support long-term asset
management planning, condition assessment, regulatory compliance and the
prioritization of future infrastructure replacement needs.
The City’s long-term capital planning continues to reflect significant
investment requirements associated with aging water and wastewater
infrastructure, treatment facilities and linear underground systems. In
addition to projects currently identified within the ten-year capital plan,
future studies currently underway or planned — including the Capital Needs
Study for treatment facilities and the Water and Wastewater Master Plan —
are expected to further inform long-term infrastructure replacement
requirements and future investment needs.

Analysis and Options:
Staff updated the City’s water and wastewater financial model using the
current operating budgets, updated ten-year capital plans, reserve balances,
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 3 of 11

Page 23 of 165

debt repayment schedules, historical consumption trends and projected
future usage assumptions.
The Hemson study completed in 2025 recommended annual increases of five
percent (5%) to water rates through 2035 in order to support long-term
financial sustainability, significant reserve accumulation and future
infrastructure replacement requirements. The study projected reserve
balances after five years of approximately $12.7 million for water and $16.3
million for wastewater.
As part of the 2026 update, staff reviewed the current operating and capital
requirements against the assumptions used in the Hemson study and
identified that many of the assumptions remain generally consistent.
However, several refinements and updates have been incorporated into the
model.
Operating Budget Updates
The water operating budget generally reflects status quo operations with the
addition of a Quality Management System (QMS) position beginning in 2027.
The wastewater operating budget includes an additional $75,000 in annual
funding associated with inflow and infiltration (I/I) management and ongoing
condition assessment activities including:




Flow monitoring;
CCTV inspection and flushing programs; and
Manhole rehabilitation and benching activities.

These activities support long-term asset management planning, condition
assessment, regulatory compliance and the prioritization of future
infrastructure replacement needs. Historically, several of these activities
were funded intermittently through capital projects despite representing
recurring operational requirements more appropriately funded through
operations.
The updated model also reflects increasing concern regarding inflow and
infiltration within the wastewater system. Wet weather events continue to
produce significant spikes in flows, contributing to historically high overflow
and bypass volumes. Ongoing monitoring and inspection programs are
intended to assist the City in identifying and prioritizing remediation efforts
throughout the collection system.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 4 of 11

Page 24 of 165

An additional $75,000 annually has also been incorporated into the forecast
horizon in future years, bringing the total annual funding allocation for these
programs to approximately $150,000 annually as of 2027.
Capital Plan Considerations
The City’s current ten-year capital plans remain generally consistent with the
assumptions utilized in the Hemson study. However, several projects
continue to experience inflationary and construction-related pressures
including:





Water Filtration Plant upgrades;
Walking Beam Flocculator replacement;
Transformer replacement projects; and
Other treatment-related infrastructure upgrades.

In addition, several future studies currently underway or planned are
expected to identify infrastructure needs in future water and wastewater
capital forecasts, particularly in the years six through ten of the capital plan.
These include:




The Water and Wastewater Capital Needs Study;
The Water and Wastewater Master Plan / East Side Master Servicing
review; and
Future linear infrastructure replacement planning.

These studies are expected to better define future infrastructure replacement
requirements associated with treatment equipment, underground
infrastructure, water storage capacity, pressure management, servicing
optimization and long-term system resiliency.
Potential future requirements identified through these studies may include:







Significant treatment facility reinvestment;
Water storage infrastructure such as a standpipe or water tower;
Watermain and sanitary sewer replacement programs;
Pressure reducing valves and pressure zone modifications;
System looping and servicing improvements; and
Additional linear infrastructure replacement requirements.

While many of these future projects are not yet sufficiently developed to fully
incorporate into the ten-year forecast, staff believe it is prudent to continue
allowing reserves to accumulate in order to provide flexibility and mitigate
future rate volatility as those requirements become better defined.
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 5 of 11

Page 25 of 165

Water Consumption Trends
The financial model continues to assume modest long-term declines in water
consumption associated with water conservation efforts and increasing
efficiency of plumbing fixtures and appliances.
At the time of the 2025 Hemson study, there was some anticipation that the
City-wide water meter replacement program would result in increased
recorded consumption due to improved meter accuracy. However, this
increase in billed consumption has not materialized. In fact, overall recorded
water consumption in 2025 declined by approximately 3% compared to 2024
despite an increasing number of active meters. It should also be noted that
the new meter technology has been in service for less than a year, and
additional time will be required to fully understand its longer-term impacts
on recorded consumption and water billing. There are a variety of factors
that can influence this trend including consumption habits, weather impacts
and technology innovations. Changes to usage patterns are continuously
being monitored which is assisted by the new meter technology.
Despite the year over year trend, the updated model assumes only a modest
annual decline in consumption moving forward while continuing to account
for gradual growth in the number of equivalent connections within the
system.
Proposed Rate Changes
Based on the updated financial model, staff are recommending:



A five percent (5%) increase to water rates; and
A reduction in the wastewater surcharge from 124% to 120% of the
water rate.

The proposed water rates with these changes can be found in Attachment 8,
Proposed 2026 Water and Wastewater Rates.
This approach allows the City to:





Continue addressing increasing pressures within the water system
where significant capital and operational risks remain;
Continue progressing wastewater surcharge levels closer toward a
long-term 1:1 relationship with water rates;
Maintain positive reserve balances throughout the forecast period;
and
Moderate near-term impacts to users relative to the reserve
accumulation targets contemplated in the Hemson study.
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 6 of 11

Page 26 of 165

Collectively, the proposed changes result in an estimated total invoice
increase of approximately 3.1% for a typical residential customer.
The updated model forecasts reserve balances after five years of
approximately:



$2.9 million for water reserves; and
$6.2 million for wastewater reserves.

These reserve balances are significantly lower than those contemplated in
the Hemson study, reflecting a deliberate effort to balance affordability
considerations with the need to maintain financially sustainable systems and
prepare for future infrastructure obligations.

Water Reserve Forecast
$14,000,000
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$2025

2026

2027

Reserve Balance

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

Asset Management Plan target

Waste Water Reserve Forecast
$9,000,000
$8,000,000
$7,000,000
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$2025

2026

Reserve Balance

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

Asset Management Plan target

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 7 of 11

Page 27 of 165

While the proposed reserve balances are lower than those projected through
the Hemson study, staff believe they remain reasonable given the currently
identified operating and capital requirements, together with the substantial
infrastructure uncertainties that exist beyond the currently developed
planning horizon as identified in the City’s approved asset management plan.
The following comparison provides estimated total annual water and
wastewater charges for comparable municipalities within Grey and Bruce
Counties based on a typical residential customer using approximately 200
cubic metres annually prior to the 2026 increases.

While Owen Sound’s rates remain higher than some comparator
municipalities, they are also substantially below several surrounding
municipalities with significant water and wastewater infrastructure
requirements.
Note that the total annual invoice presented in the BMA study captures the
2024 rates from January to July with 2025 Rates from July to December
while the estimated annual bill noted previously in the report reflects the
annualized cost from July to June of the following year when the rates take
effect.
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 8 of 11

Page 28 of 165

For a typical residential customer using approximately 200 cubic metres
annually, the proposed changes are estimated to result in an overall annual
bill increase of approximately 3.1%. bringing the total estimated bill from
$1,664 to $1,716. An increase of $52 annually or $13.00 per billing period.
Forecasted Total Water Bill for Residential Users 2025 to 2032
$2,500

$2,000

$1,500

$1,000

$500

$2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
An increase of 1% to the water rates generates approximately $73,000 in
additional revenue annually. The 5% increase to water rates will generate
approximately $365,000 in additional water revenue in the year ending June
30, 2027. Conversely, decreasing the wastewater surcharge by 4% reduces
total wastewater revenues by $252,517.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 9 of 11

Page 29 of 165

The net impact to a typical property using 200m3, paying both the water rate
and sewer surcharge is a net increase of 3.1% broken down as follows:
2025/26
quarterly
invoice

2026/27
quarterly
invoice

Water
Usage

1.80 / m3

$90 .00

1.89 / m3

$94.50

Water
Service
Charge

31.90 /
month

$95.70

$33.50 /
month

$100.49

Sewer
Surcharge

124%

$230.27

120%

$233.98

Total
Quarterly
Invoice

$415.97

Total
Quarterly
Invoice

$428.97

Annual
Charges

$1,664

Annual
Charges

$1,716

Human Resources
The new rate structure will be implemented by the Water Billing Coordinator.

Time and Scheduling
New rates will be included in the 2026 Fees and Charges By-law and come
into effect for billing cycles starting after July 1, 2026.

Technology and Infrastructure
No additional technology or infrastructure is required to implement new
rates.

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
The recommendation supports both the City's Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan and the City's Climate Mitigation Plan.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 10 of 11

Page 30 of 165

Communication and Engagement:
Notice of rate changes will be provided in line with the City’s notice
provisions.
Updated rates will be posted to the City’s website.

Report Developed in Consultation With:
Director of Public Works and Engineering
Water and Wastewater Manager
Water Billing Coordinator
Asset Management Coordinator

Attachments:
1.

Attachment 1 - Billed Consumption 2020 to 2025

2.

Attachment 2 - Multi Year Water Operating Forecast

3.

Attachment 3 - Multi Year Wastewater Operating Forecast

4.

Attachment 4 - Multi Year Capital Plan for Water, Wastewater and
Combined Engineering

5.

Attachment 5 – Capital Detail Sheets – Water

6.

Attachment 6 – Capital Detail Sheets – Wastewater

7.

Attachment 7 – Capital Detail Sheets – Water and Wastewater
Combined

8.

Attachment 8 – 2026 Proposed Water and Wastewater Rates

Reviewed by:
Kate Allan, Director of Corporate Services
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Kate Allan, Director of
Corporate Services at kallan@owensound.ca or 519-376-4440 ext. 1238.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 11 of 11

Page 31 of 165

2020-01-01 to 2025-12-31
Note: These figures include rural consumption
1. Total Consumption

From Raw Data - Block 1

Total

From Raw Data - Block 2

Total

2. Rural Consumption

From Raw Data - Block 1

Total

From Raw Data - Block 2

Total

3. City Consumption

From Raw Data - Block 1

Total

From Raw Data - Block 2

Total

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Total

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Total

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

122,757
124,871
116,772
114,362
133,339
141,170
753,271

18,511
15,104
15,223
14,302
3,778
6,465
73,383

Cycle 1

Cycle 1

-

-

205,606
202,377
194,491
196,178
254,439
237,593
1,290,684

67,896
61,995
53,464
61,074
43,598
52,469
340,496

4,333
4,074
3,409
4,545
7,145
5,328
28,834

15,799
23,467
6,607
2,599
1,555
50,027

132,521
132,494
134,311
130,539
172,019
157,144
859,028

33,363
38,574
54,322
50,114
18,064
26,285
220,722

-

-

284,114
282,218
181,554
292,606
377,486
358,578
1,776,556

177,150
167,973
163,100
204,640
104,775
84,075
901,713

Cycle 4

1,320
1,320
1,320
1,320
1,320
990
7,590

Cycle 4

19,535
23,125
20,164
29,386
18,532
9,170
119,912

214,490
212,983
213,080
206,793
264,907
266,602
1,378,855

76,063
90,659
82,201
87,662
32,684
24,656
393,925

15,448
15,552
14,830
14,920
12,027
13,231
86,008

Cycle 5
-

77

143,061
142,418
137,961
134,540
162,422
157,084
877,486

41,563
49,819
46,563
48,451
25,828
19,537
231,761

Cycle 6

56
149
1,412
1,694

-

-

217,890
216,629
210,520
197,930
257,959
269,061
1,369,989

24,963
25,025
20,988
19,656
4,758
22,059
117,449

21,612
20,286
19,246
18,779
17,787
20,779
118,489

Cycle 7
-

73

6,411
5,672
54,284
70,655
39,148
28,969
205,139

165,325
128,202
79,286
46,269
65,673
66,261
551,016

Cycle 9

73

-

-

Total

Total

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Total

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Total

122,757
124,871
116,772
114,362
133,339
141,170
753,271

18,511
15,104
15,223
14,302
3,778
6,465
73,383

201,273
198,303
191,082
191,633
247,294
232,265
1,261,850

52,097
38,528
46,857
58,475
43,598
50,914
290,469

132,521
132,494
134,311
130,539
172,019
157,144
859,028

33,363
38,574
54,322
50,114
18,064
26,285
220,722

282,794
280,898
180,234
291,286
376,166
357,588
1,768,966

157,615
144,848
142,936
175,254
86,243
74,905
781,801

199,042
197,431
198,250
191,873
252,880
253,371
1,292,847

75,986
90,659
82,145
87,513
32,684
23,244
392,231

143,061
142,418
137,961
134,540
162,422
157,084
877,486

41,563
49,819
46,563
48,451
25,828
19,537
231,761

196,278
196,343
191,274
179,151
240,172
248,282
1,251,500

24,890
25,025
20,988
19,656
4,758
22,059
117,376

6,411
5,672
54,284
70,655
39,148
28,969
205,139

165,325
128,202
79,286
46,269
65,673
66,261
551,016

1,326,850
1,319,662
1,242,973
1,343,603
1,661,719
1,616,201
8,511,008

604,834
577,351
515,147
532,168
299,158
301,807
2,830,465

42,713
41,232
38,805
39,564
38,279
40,328
240,921

35,484
46,592
26,827
32,134
18,532
12,137
171,706

1,284,137
1,278,430
1,204,168
1,304,039
1,623,440
1,575,873
8,270,087

569,350
530,759
488,320
500,034
280,626
289,670
2,658,759

Page 32 of 165

TABLE 1
CITY OF OWEN SOUND
2025 WATER & WASTEWATER RATE STUDY
WATER USER RATES - BUDGET FORECAST
CITY OF OWEN SOUND
Adjustment

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

Factor

Budget

Projected

Projected

Projected

Projected

Projected

3%
2%
4%

$ 2,425,595
$ 1,059,364
$
222,500
$
135,000
$
406,300

A
$ 2,585,578
$ 1,080,551
$
231,400
$
135,000
$
426,615

$ 2,663,145
$ 1,102,162
$
240,656
$
135,000
$
447,946

$ 2,743,040
$ 1,124,206
$
250,282
$
135,000
$
470,343

$ 2,825,331
$ 1,146,690
$
260,294
$
135,000
$
493,860

$ 2,910,091 updated to 3%. Includes Direct staff and allocated overhead
$ 1,169,623
$
270,705
$
135,000
$
518,553

Subtotal Operating Costs

$ 4,248,759

$ 4,459,144

$ 4,588,909

$ 4,722,871

$ 4,861,174

$ 5,003,973

Budgeted Debt Service Costs
Subtotal Debt

$
$

387,684
387,684

$ 1,247,755
$ 1,247,755

$ 1,247,755
$ 1,247,755

$ 1,247,755
$ 1,247,755

$ 1,143,361
$ 1,143,361

$ 4,248,759

$ 4,459,144

$ 4,588,909

$ 4,722,871

$ 4,861,174

$ 1,143,361 Add 2027 debentures for:
$ 1,143,361 Water Meter Conversion
Filter Replacement Treatement Plant
$ 5,003,973 9th Ave E Watermain

POST 2024 BUDGET FORECAST

Notes/Source Documents:

Operating Expenditures
Annual Gross Operating Expenditures
Salaries and Benefits
Parts/Materials/Repairs
Contracted Services/Insurance
Equipment Reserve Transfers
Hydro/Utilities

5%

A - added QMS coordinator

Debt

Subtotal Annual Gross Expenditures
Non User-Rate Revenue
Non User-Rate Revenues
Total Annual Non-Metered Rate Revenues
TOTAL NET OPERATING EXPENDITURES

0%

$
$

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,188,759

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,399,144

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,528,909

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,662,871

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,801,174

(60,000)
(60,000)

$ 4,943,973

Page 33 of 165

TABLE 1
CITY OF OWEN SOUND
2025 WATER & WASTEWATER RATE STUDY
WASTEWATER USER RATES - BUDGET FORECAST
CITY OF OWEN SOUND
POST 2020 BUDGET FORECAST

Adjustment

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

Factor

Budget

Projected

Projected

Projected

Projected

Projected

Notes/Source Documents:

Operating Expenditures
Annual Gross Operating Expenditures
Salaries and Benefits
Parts/Materials/Repairs
Contracted Services/Insurance
Hydro/Utilities
Subtotal Operating Costs

3%
2%
4%
5%

$
$
$
$
$

1,861,434
1,125,161
639,000
532,500
4,158,095

$
$
$
$
$

1,917,277
1,147,664
739,560
559,125
4,363,626

$
$
$
$
$

1,974,795
1,170,618
769,142
587,081
4,501,636

$
$
$
$
$

2,034,039
1,194,030
799,908
616,435
4,644,412

$
$
$
$
$

2,095,060
1,217,910
831,904
647,257
4,792,132

$
$
$
$
$

2,157,912 updated to 3%
1,242,269
865,181
679,620
4,944,981

$
$

1,490,396
1,490,396

$
$

749,315
749,315

$
$

673,116
673,116

$
$

673,116
673,116

$
$

591,352
591,352

$
$

591,352
591,352

$

5,555,198

$

5,112,942

$

5,174,752

$

5,317,528

$

5,383,484

$

5,536,333

$
$

-

$
$

$

5,555,198

$

Debt
Budgeted Debt Service Costs
Subtotal Debt
Total Annual Gross Operating Expenditures
Non-User Rate Revenue
Non-User Rate Revenue
Total Annual Non-User Rate Revenues
TOTAL NET OPERATING EXPENDITURES

2%

-

$
$

5,112,942

$

-

$
$

5,174,752

$

-

$
$

5,317,528

$

-

$
$

5,383,484

$

5,536,333

Page 34 of 165

Water Capital
Project Description

9th Ave E - Superior St to 10th St E Watermain Replacement
4th Ave W - 15th St W to 20th St W - Reconstruction
9th Ave E - 20th to 23rd St E - Engineering - Construction
3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 10th St E to 12th St E - Phase 1

2027
$

2028

13,000

$

13,000

$

11,000

$

11,000

$

553,265
$

120,000

3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 12th St E to 14th St E - Phase 2

2029

$

1,200,000

$

8,000

$

120,000

$

1,200,000

$

8,000

$

240,000

$

2,400,000

$

15,000

$

150,000

$

100,000

$

20,000

$

50,000

$

30,000

15th St. E. - 3rd Ave. E to 6th Ave.
Water System Model Update and Training
Cathodic Protection Rehab
Condition Assessment Municipal Reservoir

$

80,000

$

800,000

$

270,000

$

300,000

Leak Detection Survey
Confined Space Equipment
Fire Hydrant Painting
Fire Hydrant Flow Testing
Water Distribution System New Valve Chambers
Major Pump Replacement (Industrial Pump 3 in 2023)
Valve Replacement*
Instrumentation Replacement WTP*

$

90,000

$

50,000

$

250,000

$

40,000

SCADA Computer and Software Upgrade

Water Rate Study

$

25,000

$

20,000

$

10,000

$

100,000

$

40,000

$

90,000

$

2,500,000

$

50,000

475,200

Bulk Water Fill Station
WTP Storage Facility

$

1,832,465

$

1,274,000

$

4,155,000

8,000

90,000

30,000

WTP Transformer Replacement
Water Treatment Plant Roof Replacement

$

$

$

2031

$

3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 14th St E to 18th St E - Phase 3 (includes intersection improvements at 15th St E)
Moores Hill Road and Retaining Walls - Reconstruction
2nd Ave E/Grey Road 5-1st St E (HP Road) to 1st St SW-Selected Watermain Replacement

2030

$

93,500

$

50,000

$

200,000

$
$

50,000
1,746,500

$
$

150,000
3,116,000

Page 35 of 165

Waste Water Capital
Project Description

9th Ave E - Superior St to 10th St E Watermain Replacement
4th Ave W - 15th St W to 20th St W - Reconstruction
3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 10th St E to 12th St E - Phase 1

2027

2028

$

1,000

$

11,000

3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 12th St E to 14th St E - Phase 2

$

2029

2030

2031

1,000

$

11,000

$

120,000

$

1,200,000

$

8,000

$

$

120,000

$

1,200,000

$

8,000

$

240,000

$

2,400,000

$

5,000

3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 14th St E to 18th St E - Phase 3 (includes intersection improvements at 15th St E)
Moores Hill Road and Retaining Walls - Reconstruction
15th St. E. - 3rd Ave. E to 6th Ave.
2nd Ave E Reconstruction - Phase 1 - 11th St E to 13th St E (future)
Digester Cleanout

8,000

$

50,000

$

100,000

$

300,000

Storage Tank Biosolids Cleanout

$

150,000

$

150,000

WWTP Instrumentation/SCADA

$

150,000

$

40,000

$

350,000

$

350,000

$

50,000

$

200,000

$

2,043,000

$

3,416,000

Storm Water Separation Program
Collection System Capital Reinvestment

$

4th St Pumping Station - Minor Pumping Station Rehab
I & I Flow Monitoring

$
$

200,000

$

100,000

350,000

300,000

27th St. Pumping Station Standby Generator
10th St. Overflow Weir Modification

$

612,000

$

432,000

$

1,670,000

Page 36 of 165

Engineering - 9th Avenue East - 20th
St E to 23rd St E Reconstruction
25P.12
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0053

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2025

Priority
Score:

74.10

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Spencer Hammill
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
25P.12 The budget in 2025 and 2026 includes Engineering design and approvals to be completed by a Consulting Engineer for engineering services related to the full scope of the
reconstruction and upgrading of 9th Avenue East road and sidewalk infrastructure from 20th Street East (including intersection improvements) to 23rd Street "A" East as well as
other required existing storm water management infrastructure upgrades. Note: The budget cost estimate does not include traffic signals installation at the 20th St E intersection, if
warranted. The Consulting Engineer will be retained by to mid-2025 with design and approvals completed in 2026 to allow for tendering in early 2028, should the City be successful
in obtaining Housing Enabling Core Servicing Stream grant funding, anticipated to be 50% of road and road related eligible costs.
This project's scope (tentatively planned for 2027 construction) is as follows:
1. Reconstruct 9th Avenue East from 20th St E to 23rd St E to the approved collector road cross-section including two vehicle lanes, two bike lanes (no on-street parking), concrete
curb and gutter, concrete sidewalk on both sides of the road and potential upgrading of street lighting (not included in budget estimate).
2. Upgrade the 9th Ave E/20th St E and 9th Ave E/23rd St E intersections to improve traffic control, pedestrian use/accessibility and cycling facility.
3. Replace 175 m of existing AC Industrial Pressure Zone (IPZ) watermain from 20th St E to 21st St E and 160 m of existing AC IPZ watermain south of 23rd St E (intervening
watermain was replaced in 2022).
4. Upgrade the storm sewer on 9th Ave E from 23rd St E to 23rd St "A" E.
5. Upgrade the storm sewer on 8th Ave E from Odawa Heights to 21st St E.
7. Construct temporary storm water infiltration trench, if required, on 23rd St E, west of 8th Ave E. Alternatively, construct storm sewer on 23rd St E from 8th Ave E, westerly, then
southerly along 6th Ave W to the existing road terminus, at developer's expense (as part of a subdivision development) with City to pay storm sewer oversizing cost. Note: The
budget cost estimate does not include this cost as it is unknown which alternative will be available at the time of construction.
8. Construct a concrete sidewalk on 8th Ave E - 20th St E to 23rd St E.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2025

2026

2027

$350,000.00

$350,000.00

$797,000.00

$30,000.00

$30,000.00
$5,000.00

$30,000.00
$5,000.00
$8,144,875.00

$380,000.00

$385,000.00

$8,976,875.00

Costs Incurred to 2024 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$9,741,875.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2025
12/31/2028

Page 37 of 165

Funding Sources:
Grant
Water Rates
Development Charges
OCIF Formula
Reserves
Total

$4,559,305.00
$613,265.00
$211,550.00
$4,061,780.00
$295,975.00
$9,741,875.00

Page 38 of 165

Engineering - 9th Avenue East - 20th
St E to 23rd St E Reconstruction
25P.12
Justification for Matrix
Values

CAP-26-0053

Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

3

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

4
4

4

Year:

2025

Priority
Score:

74.10

Justification / Rationale for Rating
This project will impact commuters, schools near 9th Ave E and local
residents combined. It will also enable new housing units in the East Hill
Bluffs Planning Area under the City's Official Plan.
Road is in poor condition and lacks City infrastructure such as sidewalk,
bike lanes, curbs, gutters and storm sewers to improve road safety. Multiple
injuries may result.
Project completion ensures the City is in compliance with legislation for
minimum maintenance and accessibility standards.
Road surface is identified for replacement. It has failed and should have
safer road cross section with AODA sidewalks. Moderate consequences
resulting.
Major improvements to operational performance would be achieved with the
completion of this project in terms of road repairs, water main repairs and
localized drainage. Financial savings will be achieved once project is
completed.

2

Housing Enabling Core Servicing Stream funding at 50% or eligible road
and road related costs is assumed to allow this project to proceed in the
noted timeline.
Storm water infrastructure will be improved and prevent further detriment.
Improved road with bike lanes and sidewalks will result in reduced
emissions.
This project maintains an existing public space.

2

Project does not impact the aesthetic value of the impacted asset.

3

Improving road condition has been identified in the Strategic Plan to
improve the road's PCI.
This project has been mentioned informally through public engagements.
Specifically local residents and developers and an approved cross-section
has been adopted.

5

2

2

Page 39 of 165

Engineering - 2nd Avenue East
Watermain Replacement 23N.2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0135

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

68.70

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Lara Widdifield
Location/Coordinates:

100

Description:
23N.2 In 2024 it is proposed to replace the watermain on 2nd Ave East (Grey Road 5) in conjunction with road reconstruction planned by the county. Recall that in the winter of
2014/2015 a short portion of pipe (80m) was replaced on this section since it had frozen. It is intended to preserve this section but that is a small portion of the total 505m.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$880,000.00

$880,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$880,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$880,000.00
$880,000.00

Page 40 of 165

Engineering - 2nd Avenue East
Watermain Replacement 23N.2
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-26-0135
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

5
4

5
4

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

68.70

Justification / Rationale for Rating
Typically just the area of a break, but excavating new asphalt is always best
avoided. This is a significant trunk main.
Watermain breaks carry some risk of Adverse Conditions, though this risk is
mitigated by good procedures.
Safe Drinking Water Act (specifically Adverse Condition provisions of the
regulation)
Locations are older main identified as such in the plan.

4

Would avoid watermain breaks in newly paved areas, and coordinate
resources properly with County.

2

Reserves

1

No significant Environmental Impact

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N:A : Core Service

1

None

Page 41 of 165

Water - Water System Model Update
& Training
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.1

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

59.60

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The City's Engineering Department maintains a working computer model of the water distribution system
This is typically used to assess the impact of proposed changes, whether permanent, or temporary due to construction.
It is common practice to recalibrate and/or confirm model accuracy on a regular basis. Since it is not a program or technology staff intimately use training or refreshers are likely
required to understand models capabilities and limitations.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$25,000.00

$25,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$25,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$25,000.00
$25,000.00

Page 42 of 165

Water - Water System Model Update
& Training
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.1
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

5
3

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

59.60

Justification / Rationale for Rating
Accurate modeling of the water system is important to ensure the impact of
changes on fire flows in the City are understood.
There is some probability of a modeling error resulting in an issue with fire
flows.

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

3

A failure to accurately assess fire flows can result in mischaracterization (ie
colour coding) of individual hydrants, which could cause the fire department
to select the "wrong" hydrant.

1

Reserves

1

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not a relevant factor for
this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 43 of 165

Watermains Cathodic Protection
Rehab 27N.4
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0062

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
30

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

66.10

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Annual Replacement of Cathodic Protection on large diameter critical ductile iron trunk watermains. This slows/eliminates corrosion via an electrochemical process whereby the
anode decays instead of the main. The City continues to follow the multi year program to protect watermains as laid out in 2013.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$270,000.00

$270,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$270,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$270,000.00
$270,000.00

Page 44 of 165

Watermains Cathodic Protection
Rehab 27N.4
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0062
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

66.10

Justification / Rationale for Rating

4

Watermain failures can affect a significant area

5

Watermain breaks can damage property and result in poor water quality

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

The intent is to extend the useful life of water infrastructure

3

Failure to do this could result in vastly increased watermain breaks as older
watermain rots in place

2

Water Rates

3

Watermain breaks can affect environment : chlorinated water in receiving
water

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

1

Watermain Projects generally are not.

Page 45 of 165

Water - Cathodic Protection Rehab
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

28N.1

Year:
Priority
Score:

2028

66.10

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
30

Description:
Replacement of Cathodic Protection on large diameter critical ductile iron trunk watermains. This slows/eliminates corrosion via an electrochemical process whereby the anode
decays instead of the main. However, the anodes were all installed in the early 1990’s and are now at the end of their useful life, as determined by a cathodic protection survey
undertaken in 2013 which measured the remaining electrochemical protection. In some cases the trunk main can be cathodically protected without disturbing asphalt but in many
cases some limited asphalt disturbance will be required.
The City continues to follow the multi year program to protect watermains as laid out in 2013. Annual project.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2028

$300,000.00

$300,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2027 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$300,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2028
12/31/2028

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$300,000.00
$300,000.00

Page 46 of 165

Water - Cathodic Protection Rehab
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

28N.1

2028

66.10

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

4

Watermain failures can affect a significant area

5

Watermain breaks can damage property and result in poor water quality

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

The intent is to extend the useful life of water infrastructure

3

Failure to do this could result in vastly increased watermain breaks as older
watermain rots in place

2

Water Rates

3

Watermain breaks can affect environment : chlorinated water in receiving
water

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

1

Watermain Projects generally are not.

Page 47 of 165

Water - Condition Assessment
Municipal Reservoir
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City
5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

64.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
As per the City's DWQMS Operational Plan, the reservoir is due for inspection every 8 years. This is completed using a remotely operated vehicle to inspect the inside of the
reservoir, without having to drain it. The walls, columns, and floor are inspected for any abnormalities and a report is provided on the overall condition.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031
$20,000.00

$20,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$20,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$20,000.00
$20,000.00

Page 48 of 165

Water - Condition Assessment
Municipal Reservoir
Justification for Matrix
Values

Score 0 - 5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

64.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

5

Legislation Score

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?

5

To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

Climate change trends indicate that average surface water temperatures
are rising. Diurnal temperature swings during the shoulder seasons may be
more variable. This freeze-thaw affects the frost penetration and can
increase the failure rate (breakage rate) of metallic pipe. If more water is
sediment or biological loading (from higher intake water temperatures), with
the expected population growth, it will become even more critical to have
storage capacity in the reservoir. In fact, an additional storage facility is
expected to be required at some point in the future. It is imperative to
ensure the reservoir is maintained to the best possible degree.
No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

Core Service

0

None

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

This affects the City's primary drinking water system water reservoir. Failure
of this infrastructure would affect the drinking water for the entire City, and
fire suppression (as it provides storage capacity for fire protection) for the
entire municipal system.
If failure led to contamination of the drinking water this could be
characterized as a serious public health and safety risk.
Structural failure up to and including collapse would have a catastrophic
impact on the water supply, as the reservoir allows the treatment plant to
"make" water 24 hours a day, despite water consumption being primarily
during the day and evening. Further, the reservoir provides storage to
supplement the distribution system under fire flow conditions (i.e. when
hydrants are drawing water faster than the plant can supply it).
Safe Drinking Water Act

1

Maintenance activity; however, not recommended to be deferred as
reservoir is critical to system operations.

2

Reservoir issues resulting in low chlorine residual or high turbidity could
result in Boil Water Advisories.
Deterioration of structural condition without the City's understanding of that
degradation would leave the City unprepared for end-of-service life
expenses, and would increase risk of failure.
Re-occurring, low impact on resources

5

1

Page 49 of 165

Water - Leak Detection Survey
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.5

Year:
Priority
Score:

2029

70.80

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City

Description:
The City undertakes a leak detection survey of the water distribution system every 3 years.
It has been established that the 3 year interval is optimal in terms of discovering new leaks in a timely manner.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$20,000.00

$20,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$20,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$20,000.00
$20,000.00

Page 50 of 165

Water - Leak Detection Survey
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.5

2029

70.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

The entire City distribution system is surveyed

5

Leaks left undetected can fail suddenly and could be a risk to health and
safety and the delivery of drinking water to the customer

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

5

This program has been identified on the 10 year plan

4

Failure of a major watermain could result in loss of service to a portion of
the community

1

Reserves

1

Not relevant to this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 51 of 165

Water - Confined Space Entry
Equipment
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.6

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

70.40

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The City Water and Wastewater departments have confined space entry equipment, including tripod, winch, harnesses, and associated equipment. This equipment is required in
order to safely enter confined spaces in accordance with the regulations.
In 2018 this equipment was standardized across the Water and Wastewater groups.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$10,000.00
$10,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$10,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$10,000.00
$10,000.00

Page 52 of 165

Water - Confined Space Entry
Equipment
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.6
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

70.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

3

Water and Wastewater Staff

5

Confined Space Entry, done improperly, with improper equipment, kills a
number of people in Ontario yearly.

5

Occupational Health and Safety Act

5

Identified in Asset Management Plan

5

Confined Space Entries will not be possible.

1

Reserves

1

Not Applicable

1

Not Applicable

1

Not Applicable

1

Core Service

1

None

Page 53 of 165

Year:
Priority
Score:

Hydrant Painting (2027) 27N.1
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

2027

57.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City
5

Description:
Refresh hydrant paint approximately every five years. Hydrants are painted entirely yellow (except for the black cap shown) and the colour coding will be achieved via removable
reflective rings on the side ports.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$90,000.00

$90,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$90,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$90,000.00
$90,000.00

Page 54 of 165

Year:
Priority
Score:

Hydrant Painting (2027) 27N.1
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

57.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

2027

5

Entire City Water Distribution System

5

Poorly maintained hydrants can fail.

2

No legislation, but this is a best practice in the industry.

5

Part of required maintenance of the assets

3

Adversely affects hydrant life if not done.

1

Funded through water rates.

1

No impact on the environment

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

N/A

1

N/A: Core Service

1

N/A

Page 55 of 165

Water - Hydrant Painting (2030)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30N.5

Year:
Priority
Score:

2030

57.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City
5

Description:
Historically the Water Utility has refreshed hydrant paint approximately every five years. Hydrants are painted entirely yellow (except for the black cap shown) and the colour coding
will be achieved via removable reflective rings on the side ports.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

$90,000.00

$90,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$90,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$90,000.00
$90,000.00

Page 56 of 165

Water - Hydrant Painting (2030)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30N.5

2030

57.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

Entire City Water Distribution System

5

Poorly maintained hydrants can fail.

2

No legislation, but this is a best practice in the industry.

5

Part of required maintenance of the assets

3

Adversely affects hydrant life if not done.

1

Funded through water rates.

1

No impact on the environment

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

N/A

1

N/A: Core Service

1

N/A

Page 57 of 165

Hydrant Flow Testing (2027) 27N.2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0063

Year:
Priority
Score:

2027

63.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City

Description:
Required to re-test the fire flow capacity of the system to update hydrant capacities to provide the correct colour coding on the hydrants, in accordance with the National Fire
Protection Association procedures.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$50,000.00

$50,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$50,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$50,000.00
$50,000.00

Page 58 of 165

Hydrant Flow Testing (2027) 27N.2
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0063

2027

63.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

Entire City Water Distribution System

4

Mischaracterising hydrant capacity can lead to the use of the incorrect
hydrant by emergency services

5

NFPA 291

5

Part of required testing of the assets

3

Can result in incorrect fire flow estimations which can affect fire protection
for existing and new development.

1

Funded through water rates

1

No impact on the environment

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

N/A

1

N/A : Core Service

1

N/A

Page 59 of 165

Water - Fire Hydrant Flow Testing
(2031)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

61.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
With development continuing, the City's water system will have undergone considerable changes. It is required to re-test the fire flow capacity of the system to update hydrant
capacities to provide the correct colour coding on the hydrants; in accordance with the National Fire Protection Association procedures. 

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031

$50,000.00

$50,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$50,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$50,000.00
$50,000.00

Page 60 of 165

Water - Fire Hydrant Flow Testing
(2031)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

61.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

Entire City Water Distribution System

3

Mischaracterising hydrant capacity can lead to the use of the incorrect
hydrant by emergency services

5

NFPA 291

5

Part of required testing of the assets

2

Can result in incorrect fire flow estimations which can affect fire protection
for existing and new development.

3

Meets 3 resource categories

1

No impact on the environment

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

N/A

1

N/A : Core Service

0

N/A

Page 61 of 165

Water Distribution New Valve
Chambers for BGCSB 28N.6
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0066

Asset Management - New Asset / Expansion
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

53.70

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
These funds will be used to support planned watermain zone connection that will be completed during the BGCSB (New school) project on 28th Street connecting the East Hill
Pressure Zone to the Industrial Zone in the general area of 28th Ave E and 16th Street E. These funds will also be used to address a handful of water services that will be
completed during the project.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$250,000.00

$250,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$250,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$250,000.00
$250,000.00

Page 62 of 165

Water Distribution New Valve
Chambers for BGCSB 28N.6
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0066
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

53.70

Justification / Rationale for Rating

4

Proper Operation of the Valve Chambers affects the entire pressure zone

3

Failure to feed between zones can lead to low pressure and backflow
events and reduced fire flow

5

Safe Drinking Water Act (specifically Adverse Condition provisions of the
regulation)
N/A : New Assets to be coordinated with development

1

3

Interconnecting valve chambers improve fire flows, as well as system
circulation which improves chlorine residuals

2

Possible Contributions from Development Charges

1

No significant Environmental Impact

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 63 of 165

Water - Major Pump Replacement
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.7

Year:
Priority
Score:

2029

70.30

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
100

Description:
Industrial High Lift Pump P3 at the Water Treatment Plant has a performance issue. In the absence of a variable frequency drive, it creates pressure surges which could damage
watermains. It therefore is not used as part of duty rotation due to the risk. This reduces the high lift capacity which adversely affects available fire flows.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$100,000.00

$100,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$100,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$100,000.00
$100,000.00

Page 64 of 165

Water - Major Pump Replacement
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.7

5
4

5
5

2029

70.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

A failure of the high lift pump could affect the whole City under certain
circumstances
There are risks of Adverse Conditions which could be created by pump
failure.
Safe Drinking Water Act (specifically Adverse Condition provisions of the
regulation)
It was in the plan. But recent issues have compelled sooner action.

4

Improvements to the pump will improve reliability of operation, reduce the
probability of failure, and reduce operating costs.

2

Reserves

1

No significant Environmental Impact

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A: Core Service

0

Has not been identified by the public.

Page 65 of 165

Water Valve Replacements 2027
26N.3
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0101

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

64.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mark Hill
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
26N.3 This project is for the installation of a 12" check valve at East hill booster station and 8" raw water drain valve

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$40,000.00

$40,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$40,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$40,000.00
$40,000.00

Page 66 of 165

Water Valve Replacements 2027
26N.3
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-26-0101
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

64.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the Water Treatment Process which can affect the entire City

5

Valve failure could be a risk to health and safety and the delivery of drinking
water to the customer

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

3

Failure of a significant valve in the water treatment plant could reduce water
treatment production.

1

Reserves

1

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not a relevant factor for
this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 67 of 165

Water - Valve Replacements (2029)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.3

Year:
Priority
Score:

2029

64.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Description:
There are a number of valves and components associated with valves such as actuators in the water plant that range in size and age from fairly new to 55 years old (original).
For proper operation of the plant, these valves need to open and close on a very frequent basis, to prevent backflow, control flow or pressure for proper operation of the plant
process. Valve replacements usually are incorporated into larger scale projects such as piping rehabilitation or can be isolated to a particular pipe.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$40,000.00

$40,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$40,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$40,000.00
$40,000.00

Page 68 of 165

Water - Valve Replacements (2029)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.3

2029

64.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

This affects the Water Treatment Process which can affect the entire City

5

Valve failure could be a risk to health and safety and the delivery of drinking
water to the customer

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

3

Failure of a significant valve in the water treatment plant could reduce water
treatment production.

1

Reserves

1

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not a relevant factor for
this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 69 of 165

Water - Instrumentation Replacement
(2028)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

28N.4

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
15

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

64.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Instrumentation within the facility ranges from computer related components to analog input/output cards, digital input and output cards, PLC processors, network cards, network
cabling, fibre optics, power supplies, relays, and backup power (UPS).
These devices are important for meeting regulatory requirements and keeping equipment within its lifecycle is critical. To change out everything at the same time can be a
challenge, so staged approaches to change out components is a preferred option. The main Plant PLC was upgraded in 2012, including a number of associated components. For
the continued ongoing success with the computer architecture, these components will need to be replaced as needed.
Low lift chlorine analyzer and Beattie chlorine analyzer

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2028

$30,000.00

$30,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2027 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$30,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2028
12/31/2028

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$30,000.00
$30,000.00

Page 70 of 165

Water - Instrumentation Replacement
(2028)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

28N.4
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

64.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the Water Treatment Process which can affect the entire City

5

Instrumentation failure could be a risk to health and safety and the delivery
of drinking water to the customer

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

3

Failure of a significant instrument could reduce water treatment production.

1

Reserves

1

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not a relevant factor for
this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 71 of 165

Water - WTP Instrumentation
Replacement (2031)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
20

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

62.20

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Instrumentation within the facility ranges from computer related components to analog input/output cards, digital input and output cards, PLC processors, network cards, network
cabling, fibre optics, power supplies, relays, and backup power (UPS).  These devices are important for meeting regulatory requirements and keeping equipment within its
lifecycle is critical.   To change out everything at the same time can be a challenge, so staged approaches to change out components is a preferred option.  The main
Plant PLC was upgraded in 2012, including a number of associated components.  For the continued ongoing success with the computer architecture, these components will
need to be replaced as needed.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031

$30,000.00
$30,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$30,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$30,000.00
$30,000.00

Page 72 of 165

Water - WTP Instrumentation
Replacement (2031)
Justification for Matrix
Values

Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?

3

Socio-Economic Factors Score

To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?

1

Aesthetic Value Score

To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

62.20

Justification / Rationale for Rating
These components are critical to the automation and functioning of the
Water Treatment Plant. Eventually, due to obsolescence, replacement parts
become unavailable, so it is important to maintain relatively current
technology. Failure of these parts without readily available replacements
will affect the entire City's water supply.
Instrumentation failure could be a risk to health and safety through the
delivery of drinking water to the customer and provision of water for fire
suppression purposes.
Safe Drinking Water Act

2

The asset is required to provide an essential service and has either:
• failed and requires replacement; or
• requires imminent maintenance to prevent failure
Failure of a significant instrument could reduce water treatment production.

3

Superintendent and operators to purchase and install

1

2

Climate change's effect on the water system is primarily increased usage
during summer months due to increased duration and severity of heat and
drought between extreme precipitation events. It is expected that the water
system would be affected by increased demands during these periods.
Typically, these conditions also contribute to poor intake water quality due
to sediment loading (erosion during extreme rainfall and due to soil
moisture conditions preventing the absorption of precipitation prior to runoff)
and organic content (algae and bacterial growth accelerate with warmer
temperatures).
No public spaces adversely impacted, however reduced capacity for water
treatment could result in the need for mandatory water conservation
measures.
No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

0

None

5

Page 73 of 165

Water - SCADA Computer and
Software Upgrade WTP
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.10

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

62.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The City's remote locations (Beattie St, East Hill Booster Station, the reservoir and the Genoe Leachate monitoring system.) require PLC upgrades due to age (20 years), planned in
2024. Additional funds will be budgeted for 2029 with specific needs addressed closer to delivery date.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$90,000.00

$90,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$90,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$90,000.00
$90,000.00

Page 74 of 165

Water - SCADA Computer and
Software Upgrade WTP
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.10
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

62.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the water source for the entire City

3

Network system failures can result in SCADA failures and an inability to
treat and/or pump water

4

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

Yes. The SCADA is a high priority item in the 10-year plan

4

This will ensure reliable operation of the SCADA system. It includes some
programming changes to optimize treatment, as well.

2

Water Rates

1

Not a direct link

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 75 of 165

Water - WTP Transformer
Replacement
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

72.80

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The existing on-site transformer at the Water Treatment Plant is original equipment (late 1960's) and is due for replacement due to several ESA and safety concerns. Failure of the
on-site transformer at this location would create a serious issue due to the long lead time to get a replacement.  The plant would have to use the diesel generators for an
extended period of time.In 2019, a voltage fluctuation event highlighted the vulnerability of the Water Treatment Plant to transformer failure.  No damage occurred to the
transformer in that instance, but at first that seemed like a real possibility.A consultant will work to specify a new transformer suitable for the Water Treatment Plant as well as
placement location that is in line with ESA requirementsThe critical time path for acquiring a new transformer is the ordering, fabrication, and delivery process, due to supply chain
issues.  Current delivery estimate is 12 months. The transformer was serviced in 2025 and minor ESA non-compliances where addressed. Annual servicing will continue to
maintain reliability.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029
$250,000.00

$2,250,000.00

$2,500,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$2,500,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$2,500,000.00
$2,500,000.00

Page 76 of 165

Water - WTP Transformer
Replacement
Justification for Matrix
Values

Score 0 - 5

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

72.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

4

Legislation Score

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.

5

How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?

3

This is an attempt at being proactive and sourcing and installing a
transformer before the current one fails permanently. Without electricity
from the grid, the plant would have to run on a generator that would have to
be brought in. The emergency backup generator is not intended for
sustained use, as in that situation, there is no backup power supply. Loss of
power means loss of water treatment to the entire city and external areas
fed by the OS system.
The inability to treat water would be an adverse condition. Even if pressure
could be maintained in the system without the plant transformer that powers
the main lift pumps in both the municipal and industrial systems, the inability
to treat the water would prompt a massive and sustained boiled water
advisory, with extensive effort and wasted water required to recommission
the system once power is restored. This has impacts primarily on human
health and those that may be difficult to communicate with in order to
trucks rather than pumpers (that use the hydrants). This may have a ripple
effect on the surrounding rural fire services as they offset each other's
deficits to help the City, if the City does not have adequate tanker inventory.
Safe Drinking Water Act (specifically Adverse Condition provisions of the
regulation)
The asset is required to provide an essential service and has either:
• failed and requires replacement; or
• requires imminent maintenance to prevent failure
The new transformer will be properly sized for the current plant with room to
expand in the future. The existing transformer is original to the plant, and is
completely obsolete. The project also includes modifications within the plant
to accept the new transformer, to bring the installation to current electrical
and safety codes. Modern technology and materials will be used, and the
area around the transformer will be prepared fresh, with appropriate
groundcover and fencing.
Project meets 3 resource categories.

1

No significant Environmental Impact

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

The project does not impact the aesthetic value of the impacted asset.

1

Supports core service

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score

5

4

Page 77 of 165

Public Input Score

Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

0

Has not been identified by public

Page 78 of 165

Water Treatment Plant Facility
Maintenance i/c Roof 27N.3
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0067

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

63.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Shawn Dubosq
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Replacement of Roof Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$475,200.00
$475,200.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$475,200.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$475,200.00
$475,200.00

Page 79 of 165

Water Treatment Plant Facility
Maintenance i/c Roof 27N.3
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0067
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

63.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the water treatment for the entire City

5

Roof failure could affect water quality and staff safety

4

Safe Drinking Water Act

5

This is identified in the 10-year plan

3

Ultimately roof failure could cause leakage and damage to important
treatment components; equipment and mechanical and electrical.

1

Reserves

1

Not a direct link

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

1

None

Page 80 of 165

Water - Water Treatment Plant Facility
Maintenance i/c Roof
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30N.7

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

63.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The City's 2024 Roof Inspection Program has recommended the replacement of the following roof sections at the Water Treatment Plant:
Roof Section 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.
Roof section 8 is recommended for replacement in 2025 but will be deferred to 2027, while roof sections 1 and 2 are recommended for replacement in 2028/29. All remaining
sections are recommended for replacement in 2027. Staff are recommending combining all of the roof sections into one project for 2027 to minimize disruption at the facility and to
achieve economies of scale by reducing the number of mobilization and demobilizations at the facility.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

$93,500.00
$93,500.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$93,500.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$93,500.00
$93,500.00

Page 81 of 165

Water - Water Treatment Plant Facility
Maintenance i/c Roof
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30N.7
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

63.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the water treatment for the entire City

5

Roof failure could affect water quality and staff safety

4

Safe Drinking Water Act

5

This is identified in the 10-year plan

3

Ultimately roof failure could cause leakage and damage to important
treatment components; equipment and mechanical and electrical.

1

Reserves

1

Not a direct link

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

1

None

Page 82 of 165

Water - Water Rate Study
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.8

Year:
Priority
Score:

2029

54.60

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Study / Assessment / Plan
Green and Resilient City

Description:
The Water Rate Study and associated Financial Plan are regular scheduled requirements for the City to update its Drinking Water Licence and Drinking Water Works Permit.
The approved Financial Plan is one of the criteria to renew these documents, in addition to:
-Accredited Operating Authority
-Permit to Take Water

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029
$50,000.00

$50,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$50,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$50,000.00
$50,000.00

Page 83 of 165

Water - Water Rate Study
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.8

2029

54.60

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

This affects the entire system

2

This is a regulatory requirement, ultimately a lack of a financial plan could
jeopardize the system

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

5

It is a recurring requirement in the 10-year plan

2

Not particularly applicable to operational performance unless a lack of
funding arose.

1

Reserves/Water Rates

1

N/A

1

No adverse impact on public spaces

1

N/A

1

Core Service

1

None

Page 84 of 165

Water - Bulk Water Fill Station
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30N.1

Year:
Priority
Score:

2030

58.90

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - New Asset / Expansion
Green and Resilient City
50

Description:
The installation of a new bulk water fill station would allow for 24/7 operation and eliminate congestion and conflicts at the operations yard. The fill station would also provide
improved customer service through accessibility and fill rate speed, increase water revenues, promote development, prevent unauthorized hydrant usage and improve local water
quality. The current bulk water fill station that is located at the operations yard creates operational challenges due to traffic and congestion, fill line sizing and hours of operation.
The new skid mount preassembled fill station would ideally be located in commercial/industrial area with easy access for large, construction type equipment.
Careful consideration will need to be given on location to ensure sufficient water supply, sewer availability and traffic flows are considered.
2030 - Feasibility and Design
2031 - Supply and Install

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

$50,000.00

$200,000.00

$50,000.00

$200,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$250,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$250,000.00
$250,000.00

Page 85 of 165

Water - Bulk Water Fill Station
Justification for Matrix
Values

30N.1
Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

3

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Year:
Priority
Score:

4
1

2030

58.90

Justification / Rationale for Rating
This service primarily benefits contractors but has an indirect benefit to all
residents when it come to accessing bulk water for a variety of purposes
including construction, events, pool filling, drinking water cisterns and other.
Traffic congestion and control is a concern at the Public Works yard.
Relocation of this service will allow for proper/safe vehicle staging and
filling.
Modernized air gap fill system will eliminate cross contamination risk
associated with truck hose connections.
I don't believe this asset is currently identified, but will be include in future
capital needs assessment.

5

Failure to proceed with modernizing and relocating the bulk water fill station
will have significant impacts on both the water distribution crew and public
works crew. Current congestion and traffic flow negatively impacts
operations.

0

Not that I am aware of at this time.

3

1

The responsible supply and management of fresh water is becoming more
critical with climate change. This project will allow for more responsible
management of that resource.
Creates greater accesses to bulk water

2

Create a modernized, professional customer service point.

3

Service Excellence - Delivers a level of customer service expected by a
municipality of our size
No as of yet.

0

Page 86 of 165

Water - WTP Storage Facility
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30N.2

Year:
Priority
Score:

2030

59.20

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - New Asset / Expansion
Green and Resilient City

Description:
With many modification and additions over the years adequate storage has become limited. As more equipment and components get shoe-horned into spaces they were not
originally designed to be placed staff are running out of space for maintenance workshop, critical parts, chemicals and emergency supplies. On-site storage is critical for efficient,
safe operations. Having a dedicated space that will not be overtaken by process equipment is crucial for sustained safe operations.
2030- Location selection, site prep and design
2031- Construction

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

$50,000.00

$150,000.00

$50,000.00

$150,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$200,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$200,000.00
$200,000.00

Page 87 of 165

Water - WTP Storage Facility
Justification for Matrix
Values

30N.2

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?

4

Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

Legislation Score

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

3

2030

59.20

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5

People

Year:
Priority
Score:

The entire population many be affected if we fail to store critical parts and
supplies on-site that could result in a plant shut-down as we source
supplies.
There is a significant H&S risk related to the improper storage of parts and
materials. From hazardous or dangerous goods to general housekeeping to
prevent trips and fall organized storage is critical for operations
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act we are required to keep the drinking
water system in a fit state of repair. Part of that is ensure we maintain
adequate supplies in case of emergency.
Not specifically identified, but limited space has been noted.

5

As previously mentioned this project is critical for operational continuity and
ensuring adequate resources in case of emergency.

0

Not that I am aware of

3

0

Potentially. With climate change come more severe weather events
resulting in stresses on our treatment plant processes. Have adequate
storage space will allow for more emergency supplies.
N/A

0

N/A

3

Service Excellence. Being a to provide a more reliable treatment process
and supply.
Not as of yet.

0

Page 88 of 165

Wastewater - WWTP Digester
Cleanout
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City
6
$350,000.00

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

35.70

Priority Level: Moderate - Score 21-48
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The digester, with a capacity of about 2000 cubic metres receives the biosolids from the clarifiers at the WWTP, and provides additional treatment, and produces biogas, prior to
being stored on site in the two storage tanks, then land applied. Approximately every five years deletrious materials in the digester must be cleaned out to allow for proper tank
operation, especially the biosolids pumps and mixing system. Otherwise rags and other materials begin to clog those components, which could result in digester failure. During the
down time of the digester the gas compressor should be refurbished or replaced. Budget was adjusted according to to accommodate this recommendation Currently such clogging
events are accelerating in frequency.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031

$250,000.00
$50,000.00

$300,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$300,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$300,000.00
$300,000.00

Page 89 of 165

Wastewater - WWTP Digester
Cleanout
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Score 0 - 5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

35.70

Justification / Rationale for Rating

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

4

Affects entire city

2

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

2

Protects public health. Failure of system components increases the
possibility of bypass or overflows of untreated or partially treated sewage to
the environment, causing pollution, degrading fish habitat and exposing the
City to potential fines or other reprimands from failing to adhere to
regulations.
Ensure environmental compliance

1

Maintains critical asset

1

Ensures operations

3

Managed by internal staff. Ready to execute

1

Protects environment

0

No direct impact on public users

1

Asset has no aesthetic value (i.e. is underground, is not visible).

1

Project supports core service delivery.

0

Has not been identified by the public.

Page 90 of 165

WWTP Storage Tank Biosolids
Cleanout (2027) 27O.1
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0060

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50
$2,000,000.00

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

69.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Removal of sediment and debris, and requires a cleaning for proper operation (occurs every 3 years)

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027
$150,000.00

$150,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$150,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$150,000.00
$150,000.00

Page 91 of 165

WWTP Storage Tank Biosolids
Cleanout (2027) 27O.1
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0060
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

69.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This is the biosolids storage for the entire City

5

Storage tank mixing or pumping failure could create adverse reactions in
the tank, which could create dangerous and oderous gases.

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

3

This is a recurring requirement for asset maintenance

4

This is a necessary regular activity in order to allow proper operation of the
biosolids treatment train.

2

Funded through wastewater rates

1

Increased flows do not necessarily translate to increased biosolids
production.

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

3

Prevent a possible severe odour problem.

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 92 of 165

Wastewater - Storage Tank Biosolids
Cleanout (2030)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30O.3

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50
$2,000,000.00

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

69.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The biosolids storage tank (pictured) at the Wastewater Treatment Plant receives digested biosolids after treatment, and stores them for seasonal land application.
In time the tank accumulates sediment and debris and requires a cleaning for proper operation; especially mixing and pumping.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

$150,000.00

$150,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$150,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$150,000.00
$150,000.00

Page 93 of 165

Wastewater - Storage Tank Biosolids
Cleanout (2030)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30O.3
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

69.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This is the biosolids storage for the entire City

5

Storage tank mixing or pumping failure could create adverse reactions in
the tank, which could create dangerous and oderous gases.

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

3

This is a recurring requirement for asset maintenance

4

This is a necessary regular activity in order to allow proper operation of the
biosolids treatment train.

2

Funded through wastewater rates

1

Increased flows do not necessarily translate to increased biosolids
production.

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

3

Prevent a possible severe odour problem.

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 94 of 165

WWTP Instrumentation/SCADA (2027)
27O.2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0061

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
7

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

66.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Replacement of electrical and SCADA equipment including PLC's, computers, software upgrades, and various instrumentation and networking equipment.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$150,000.00

$150,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$150,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$150,000.00
$150,000.00

Page 95 of 165

WWTP Instrumentation/SCADA (2027)
27O.2
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0061
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

66.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This can affect the wastewater treatment train which affects the entire City

4

PLC failure poses a considerable risk to proper sewage treatment

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

4

PLC failure would result in the plant control system "Crashing" and sewage
treatment could partially or entirely cease, (There are alarms in place to
alert the operators of this outcome)

1

Funded through wastewater rates

2

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not as relevant a factor
for this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

No adverse affect

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 96 of 165

Wastewater - WWTP
Instrumentation/SCADA (2030)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30O.4

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
7

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

66.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
There is a need to regularly replace electrical and SCADA equipment which have a short lifespan.
This especially includes PLC's, computers, software upgrades, and various instrumentation and networking equipment.
IT Conversations

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

$40,000.00

$40,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$40,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$40,000.00
$40,000.00

Page 97 of 165

Wastewater - WWTP
Instrumentation/SCADA (2030)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30O.4
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

66.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This can affect the wastewater treatment train which affects the entire City

4

PLC failure poses a considerable risk to proper sewage treatment

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

4

PLC failure would result in the plant control system "Crashing" and sewage
treatment could partially or entirely cease, (There are alarms in place to
alert the operators of this outcome)

1

Funded through wastewater rates

2

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not as relevant a factor
for this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

No adverse affect

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 98 of 165

Wastewater - Collection System
Capital Reinvestment
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29O.2

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

61.60

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This project is to continue with the rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer infrastructure with a focus on sanitary sewers, as well as manhole rehabilitation. This rehabilitation will be
conducted through “cured in place pipe” (CIPP) technology. The city is planning to re-tender a 3 year contract to continue to rehabilitate sanitary sewer and manholes.
Specific locations and privatization is expected to change based on operational input, inspection programs, other infrastructure renewal project, etc.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

2030

2031

$350,000.00

$350,000.00

$700,000.00

$350,000.00

$350,000.00

$700,000.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$1,400,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$1,400,000.00
$1,400,000.00

Page 99 of 165

Wastewater - Collection System
Capital Reinvestment
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29O.2
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

5

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

61.60

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This would typically affect people in the project area which is usually one
block at a time. But the program is City-wide
Sewer bypasses from collapsed sewer have resulted.

3

Ontario Water Resources Act

3

This has been identified in the 10 year plan, as part of a multi-year program.

4

Sewer backups consume considerable public sector and private sector
resources.

1

No

3

Wet weather flows are now more frequent; this is a somewhat relevant
factor for this project

1

N/A

1

N/A

1

N/A: Core Service

1

N/A

Page 100 of 165

Wastewater - 4th St Pumping Station
- Minor Pumping Station Rehab
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

28O.1

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
59

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

61.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This project demonstrates our continual investment into pumping system upgrades a rehabilitation. 4th St. Pumping Station is due for end of life mechanical upgrade and minor
design improvements to increase operational efficiencies. The station also required access improvements for safe confined space entry.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2028

$300,000.00

$300,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2027 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$300,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2028
12/31/2028

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$300,000.00
$300,000.00

Page 101 of 165

Wastewater - 4th St Pumping Station
- Minor Pumping Station Rehab
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

28O.1
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

61.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating

2

This would typically affect people in the project area

5

Sewer bypasses and backups from failed pumps

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

3

This has been identified in the 10 year plan, as part of a multi-year program

4

This station requires frequent callouts to pull the pump for maintenance;
since there is only one pump, any issue must be addressed quickly and
often on overtime.

1

No

2

Wet weather flows are now more frequent; this is only a somewhat relevant
factor for this project

1

N/A

1

None

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 102 of 165

Infiltration & Inflow Monitoring of
Wastewater Collection System 26O.7
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0059

Asset Management - Study / Assessment / Plan
Green and Resilient City
5

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

61.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Spencer Hammill
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Flow monitoring study will allow us to identify key areas of Infiltration and Inflow to plan and prioritize collections system maintenance and upgrades.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027
$50,000.00

$150,000.00

$200,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$200,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$200,000.00
$200,000.00

Page 103 of 165

Infiltration & Inflow Monitoring of
Wastewater Collection System 26O.7
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0059
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

61.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

Impact entire city when in context of treatment plant capacity

3

Overflows/by-passes are detrimental to the public and environment

4

CLI-ECA

5

Identify future improvements

3

Operational efficiencies will be achieved as a result of the project.

2

Wastewater rates

3

The project will moderately improve the natural environment and/or prevent
further detriment.

0

N/A

1

N/A

1

City that Grows

0

N/A

Page 104 of 165

Wastewater - 27th St. Generator
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30O.1

Year:
Priority
Score:

2030

50.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - New Asset / Expansion
Green and Resilient City
25

Description:
Sewage lift stations are critical wastewater infrastructure used to move sewage from lower elevations to higher elevations. Often critical times for this infrastructure is during
inclement weather when hydro outages are a higher concern. The installation of a standby generator would ensure reliable operations during power outages reducing the likelihood
of by-pass incidents.
2030 - Budget used for preliminary design, sizing, acoustic and dispersion modeling
2031 - Supply and install

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

$50,000.00

$200,000.00

$50,000.00

$200,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$250,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$250,000.00
$250,000.00

Page 105 of 165

Wastewater - 27th St. Generator
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30O.1

4
4

3
1

2030

50.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

Although the catchment zone for the pump station is relatively small the
impacts of by-pass events have the potential to affect many
By-pass event present a significant public health risk

A generator would likely reduce our by-pass events and elevate regulatory
reporting and further legal issues
No, but it adds a critical component to an existing asset

3

Generator will need to be maintained and ran monthly for testing. Low
hours of operation are expected, so maintenance cost should be minimal.

0

N/A

5

0

Yes, climate change has drastically impacted the number of severe weather
events we see. This will make our system more resilient and minimize bypass events to the natural environment.
No

0

No

3

This project aligns with both "Green City" and "Service Excellence"

1

No

Page 106 of 165

10th St. Overflow Weir Modification
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0058

Year:
Priority
Score:

2027

65.10

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
30

Description:
The 10th St. overflow weir modification was identified by wastewater operations to improve the West Side Pumping Station's performance. By adjusting the overflow weir height and
altering the weir design, pumps can operate at higher flow rates and avoid or eliminate bypass events. This project will be funded by wastewater but led by engineering staff.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027
$10,000.00

$90,000.00

$100,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$100,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$100,000.00
$100,000.00

Page 107 of 165

10th St. Overflow Weir Modification
Justification for Matrix
Values

Year:
Priority
Score:

CAP-27-0058

2027

65.10

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?

3

Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

3

Helps eliminate harmful overflow events. While the MECP understands that
overflows will occur in nominally separated systems such as the City's, to
continue to meet our regulatory objectives, the occurrence of these events
must be minimized, and progress must be demonstrated towards reducing
them over time.
Renewal/improvement of critical asset

4

Vastly increases operational performance

3

Relatively simple project to be managed through existing resources

4

Project will provide immediate benefit to the environment

2

Keeps our waterways clean and protects water quality at local beaches

1

Buried infrastructure

1

Aligns with Green City

0

Not required

Legislation Score

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

4

Impacts all residents and users of our local water resources. Raw sewage
or partially treated overflows to the environment degrade environmental
water quality, damage fish habitat and recreational shorelines. Loss of use
or degradation of these assets directly affects tourism and the area's
economic prosperity.
Impacts public health and water quality. Untreated overflows or bypasses
could result in beach closures.

Page 108 of 165

Engineering - 9th Avenue East Phase
1 Rehabilitation - Superior Street to
6th Street East 25P.10
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0008

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
100

Year:

2025

Priority
Score:

66.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Spencer Hammill
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
25P.10 This project involves replacing existing City infrastructure together with rehabilitating or reconstructing the 9th Avenue East (Highway 6/10) road. The primary focus of the
project is to improve municipal water security of supply to part of the East Hill Pressure Zone and all of the East Hill Reduced Pressure Zone as well as improve the roadway
infrastructure. Before the watermain on 9th Avenue East can be replaced, the new East Hill Pressure Zone "looping" watermain will have been constructed in two phases on an
existing City owned corridor and private property easements east of 9th Avenue East first (Project 22P.7). Phase 1 (existing corridor) was completed in 2023. Phase 2 (easements)
was completed in 2024.
The project Design or Engineering would be completed in 2025 with construction in 2026. This project has received Connecting Link Intake 9 funding approval. The intended scope
is as follows:
- Replace the existing municipal watermain and appurtenances
- Construct a new sidewalk on the east side of 9th Ave E from Superior St to the existing end of sidewalk
- Replace/repair deficient sanitary sewer
The following components would be Connecting Link funding eligible:
- Replace the existing storm sewer or rehabilitate, if appropriate
- Rehabilitate the road and road related structures, replace existing sidewalk as required and replace storm water infrastructure
In-house Engineering and Design or Engineering budget in 2025 is addition to $125,000 approved in 2024. Water and wastewater related costs and In-house Engineering are not
eligible for CL funding. The funding sources for the total of $250,000 in Engineering cost will be: Taxation - $120,000, Water - $120,000, Wastewater - $10,000.
Design or Engineering, Construction and Contingency budget amounts in 2026 are for construction contract administration, inspection and materials testing costs during the
construction period. These are the Connecting Link (Intake 9) eligible costs with the exception of water and waste water related costs.
In-house and Design or Engineering budget amounts in 2027 are for the two-year maintenance period and would be incurred in 2027 and 2028. These costs will not be CL funding
eligible.
The Engineering design was started in 2024 after the CL funding was confirmed and will advance through 2025 to have the project tender ready for construction in 2026 as the CL
Intake 9 eligibility period ends 31 March 2027.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

Costs Incurred to 2024 Year
End

2025

2026

2027

$120,000.00

$350,000.00

$50,000.00

$5,000.00

$20,000.00

$10,000.00

$4,935,300.00

$125,000.00

$530,000.00
$5,835,300.00

$60,000.00

$125,000.00

Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$6,145,300.00

Schedule:

Page 109 of 165

Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2025
12/31/2028

Funding Sources:
Tax Levy
Grant
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$549,000.00
$2,700,000.00
$2,808,000.00
$88,300.00
$6,145,300.00

Page 110 of 165

Engineering - 9th Avenue East Phase
1 Rehabilitation - Superior Street to
6th Street East 25P.10
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-26-0008

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

4
3

3
4

Year:

2025

Priority
Score:

66.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating
Project benefits many road users,significant number of water customers.
This is the basis of the number of people affected.
Road is in poor condition and City infrastructure has reached the end of its
useful life. Pressure loss could be experienced in parts of water distribution
system during watermain failure.
Project completion ensures the City is in compliance with legislation for
minimum maintenance standards for roads and underground infrastructure.
This section of road has multiple assets with poor condition ratings with
significant impacts if it was to fail.

4

Major improvements to operational performance would be achieved with the
completion of this project due to replacing the water main and resurfacing
the road. Financial savings will be achieved one project is completed.
Watermain breaks and road repairs/patching will be avoided.

3

Funding for the road aspect of the rehabilitation would be covered by
Connecting Link funding.

2

Minor impact will be realized from this project by improving storm water and
improving road surface (better fuel efficiency).

1

The Project does not eliminate an existing public space.

3
3

Pending the final road design inclusion of boulevard trees will be reviewed
to improve the streetscape.
Improving road condition has been identified in the Strategic Plan

2

Has been mentioned informally through public engagements.

Page 111 of 165

Engineering - 4th Avenue West
Reconstruction - 15th St W to 20th St
W 25P.2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0054

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

59.20

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Sofin Lalani
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
25P.2 This project involves reconstructing 4th Avenue West from 15th Street West to 17th Street West, 16th Street West - 400 block and 17th Street West - 400 block. This will be
first phase of two phases of the 4th Avenue West reconstruction project.
This project will include reconstruction of the 4th Avenue West roadway, replacing all the failing municipal underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing curbs/gutters and
sidewalks. The budget also reflects significant infrastructure upgrading in the 400 blocks of 16th St W and 17th Street West. 16th Street West is subject to frequent overland
flooding events and storm water management problems that should be addressed as part of this project.
An RFP to retain an engineering consultant will be issued in 2025 to produce a detailed design for the entire project. The design of Phase 1 and Phase 2 are reflected in the 2025
Engineering cost.
An RFT is anticipated for Phase 1 construction in 2027. The second phase of construction is planned in 2028 (17th St W to 20th St W).
The 2028 column costs include Engineering administration costs during the two-year maintenance period.
Phase 2 Construction has been identified as a separate project and detail sheet.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

2028

2029

$15,000.00

$6,000.00

$30,000.00
$45,000.00

$39,000.00
$45,000.00

$582,664.00
$15,000.00
$8,502,356.00

$9,100,020.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$9,190,020.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2026
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
OCIF Formula

$22,000.00
$22,000.00
$9,146,000.00

Page 112 of 165

Total

$9,190,000.00

Page 113 of 165

Engineering - 4th Avenue West
Reconstruction - 15th St W to 20th St
W 25P.2
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-26-0054

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

4

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

59.20

Justification / Rationale for Rating

1

This will impact pedestrian and vehicular traffic on a collector road servicing
a school.
Minor injuries may result if this project does not proceed due to trip hazards.

1

No known legislative/regulatory compliance requirement.

5

All the infrastructure under the road is currently past its life expectancy and
is in need of replacement.

5

Improvements on the underground infrastructure and road will greatly
reduce the amount of staff time and operational costs, as well we reduce
liability due to flooding in the area

4

This project is funded through OCIF.

1

Little or no impact on environment as a result of the project.

2

This project will maintain existing public infrastructure.

3

This project will look at improving the aesthetic value of the road street
scape by including boulevard trees where appropriate and feasible.
This project supports core service delivery.

1
2

Has been mentioned informally through public engagements on the
condition of the road.

Page 114 of 165

Reconstruction of 3rd Ave E/GR 15 10th St E to 12th St E - Phase 1 28P.7
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-28-0010

Asset Management - Replacement
A City That Moves
50 years (roads) - 100 years (mains and services)

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

56.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This is the first phase of a proposed three phase project that involves reconstructing 3rd Avenue East from 10th Street East to 18th Street East. The first phase is the 10th Street
East to 12th Street East segment. This project will be coordinated in conjunction with the County of Grey Road reconstruction. This project will include reconstruction of 3rd Avenue
East roadway, replacing all the failing municipal underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing curbs/gutters and sidewalks.
The costs shown are for City related costs only. This includes watermain, sanitary sewer, sidewalk replacement, existing storm sewer replacement or new construction water
replacement (cost shared by City and County) and boulevard landscaping including planting new trees. Not included are the County's costs such as road reconstruction, curb and
gutter replacement, partial stormwater cost.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2028

2029

2030

$280,000.00

$280,000.00

$15,000.00

$20,000.00

$20,000.00

$5,000.00

$2,500,000.00

$300,000.00

$200,000.00
$3,000,000.00

$20,000.00

Costs Incurred to 2027 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$3,320,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2028
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
OCIF Formula
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$668,000.00
$1,326,000.00
$1,326,000.00
$3,320,000.00

Page 115 of 165

Reconstruction of 3rd Ave E/GR 15 10th St E to 12th St E - Phase 1 28P.7
Justification for Matrix
Values

CAP-28-0010
Score 0 - 5

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

56.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

It is estimated that 5,000 to 9,999 people will be directly impacted as a
result of this project. This will impact pedestrian and vehicular traffic on a
collector road servicing a school.
Minor injuries may result if this project does not proceed due to trip hazards.

1

No known legislative/regulatory compliance requirement.

4

All the infrastructure under the road is currently past its life expectancy and
is in need of replacement.

5

Improvements on the underground infrastructure and road will greatly
reduce the amount of staff time and operational costs, as well we reduce
liability due to flooding in the area

3

This project is partially funded by OCIF (less than 50%), plus a partnership
cost component with Grey County.

3

Little or no impact on environment as a result of the project.

2

This project will maintain existing public infrastructure.

4

This project will look at improving the aesthetic value of the road street
scape by including boulevard trees where appropriate and feasible.
This project supports core service delivery.

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

1
2

Has been mentioned informally through public comments on the condition
of the road.

Page 116 of 165

Engineering - 3rd Avenue East/GR 15
- 12th St E to 14t St E - Phase 2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29P.4

Asset Management - Replacement
A City That Moves
50 years (roads), 80-100 years (mains and services)

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

55.90

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This is the second phase of a proposed three phase project that involves reconstructing 3rd Avenue East from 10th Street East to 18th Street East.
The second phase is the 12th Street East to 14th Street East segment.
This project will be coordinated in conjunction with the County of Grey Road reconstruction. This project will include reconstruction of 3rd Avenue East roadway, replacing all the
failing municipal underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing curbs/gutters and sidewalks.
The costs shown are for City related costs only. This includes watermain, sanitary sewer, sidewalk replacement, existing storm sewer replacement or new construction water
replacement (cost shared by City and County) and boulevard landscaping including planting new trees.
Not included are the County's costs such as road reconstruction, curb and gutter replacement, partial stormwater cost.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$0.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
OCIF Formula
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$660,000.00
$1,330,000.00
$1,330,000.00
$3,320,000.00

Page 117 of 165

Engineering - 3rd Avenue East/GR 15
- 12th St E to 14t St E - Phase 2
Justification for Matrix
Values

29P.4
Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

55.90

Justification / Rationale for Rating
It is estimated that 5,000 to 9,999 people will be directly impacted as a
result of this project. This includes the local residents and businesses as
well as the travelling public.
Minor injuries may result if the project does not proceed due to sidewalk trip
hazards.

1

There is no known legislative/regulatory compliance requirement.

4

There is a high probability of failure of underground services with moderate
consequences.

5

Replacing the underground and surface infrastructure will result in
operational cost savings related to attending to sidewalk trip hazards, road
patching and repairs, sewer blockages and repairs and watermain break
avoidance.

3

The project has confirmed OCIF funding at less than 50% of the cost, plus
includes a partnership cost component with Grey County.

3

The project will slightly improve the natural environment and prevent further
detriment.

2

The project maintains an existing public space.

3
1

The project will improve the aesthetic value of the street scape by replacing
the road and sidewalk with enhancements including tree planting.
The project supports core service delivery.

2

The project has been mentioned informally through public comments.

Page 118 of 165

Engineering - 3rd Avenue East/GR 15
- 14th St E to 18th St E - Phase 3
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30P.3

Asset Management - Replacement
A City That Moves
50 years (roads), 80-100 years (watermains and sewers)

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

56.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This is the third phase of a proposed three phase project that involves reconstructing 3rd Avenue East from 10th Street East to 18th Street East.
The third phase is the 14th Street East to 18th Street East segment.
This project will be coordinated in conjunction with the County of Grey Road reconstruction. This project will include reconstruction of 3rd Avenue East roadway, replacing all the
failing municipal underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing curbs/gutters and sidewalks.
The costs shown are for City related costs only. This includes watermain, sanitary sewer, sidewalk replacement, existing storm sewer replacement or new construction water
replacement (cost shared by City and County) and boulevard landscaping including planting new trees.
Not included are the County's costs such as road reconstruction, curb and gutter replacement, partial stormwater cost.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

$580,000.00

$250,000.00

$20,000.00

$20,000.00
$5,000,000.00

$600,000.00

$730,000.00
$6,000,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$6,600,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
OCIF Formula
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$1,320,000.00
$2,640,000.00
$2,640,000.00
$6,600,000.00

Page 119 of 165

Engineering - 3rd Avenue East/GR 15
- 14th St E to 18th St E - Phase 3
Justification for Matrix
Values

30P.3
Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

56.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating
It is estimated that 5,000 to 9,999 people will be directly impacted as a
result of this project. This includes the local residents and businesses as
well as the travelling public.
Minor injuries may result if the project does not proceed due to sidewalk trip
hazards.

1

There is no known legislative/regulatory compliance requirement.

4

There is a high probability of failure of underground services with moderate
consequences.

5

Replacing the underground and surface infrastructure will result in
operational cost savings related to attending to sidewalk trip hazards, road
patching and repairs, sewer blockages and repairs and watermain break
avoidance.

3

The project has confirmed OCIF funding at less than 50% of the cost, plus
includes a partnership cost component with Grey County.

3

The project will slightly improve the natural environment and prevent further
detriment.

2

The project maintains an existing public space.

4
1

The project will improve the aesthetic value of the street scape by replacing
the road and sidewalk with enhancements including tree planting.
The project supports core service delivery.

2

The project has been mentioned informally through public comments.

Page 120 of 165

Engineering - Moores Hill Road and
Retaining Walls- Reconstruction
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30P.2

Asset Management - Replacement
A City That Moves
75
$22,500,000.00

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

45.50

Priority Level: Moderate - Score 21-48
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates: 499 Moore's Hill, Owen Sound

Description:
This project involves the reconstruction of the road and adjacent earth retaining walls. It also includes the replacement of the existing sidewalk, possible improvements to the
geometry of the 2nd Avenue West and 4th Avenue West intersections and pedestrian crossings, streetlighting improvements, replacement of the existing storm sewer and
associated storm water management infrastructure under Moores Hill road and replacement of the existing watermain and sanitary sewer on 2nd Avenue West within the limits of
construction.
The existing retaining walls are gabion basket stone-filled structures that have shown signs of constant gradual movement and deterioration that is causing continual problems with
road buckling and repairs on the south side of the road and gabion basket encroachment and repairs into the sidewalk on the north side. These structures would be replaced with
reinforced concrete retaining walls or an "engineered" stable slope design with proper surface and sub-drainage systems to assist in managing problematic groundwater and
seepage.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

2032

$200,000.00

$190,000.00

$12,000.00

$20,000.00

$10,000.00

$3,000.00

$1,600,000.00

$220,000.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$200,000.00
$2,000,000.00

$15,000.00

$0.00
$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$2,235,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2033

Funding Sources:
Tax Levy
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$2,220,000.00
$172,000.00
$58,000.00
$2,450,000.00

Page 121 of 165

Engineering - Moores Hill Road and
Retaining Walls- Reconstruction
Justification for Matrix
Values

30P.2
Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

3

Legislation Score

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?

1

To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

3

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score

Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

3

3

1

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

45.50

Justification / Rationale for Rating
Based on 2016 traffic counts, approximately 2,500 vehicles travel on
Moores Hill daily. Including an assumed 200 pedestrians using the
sidewalk and two persons per vehicle, this equates to approximately 5,200
persons relying on this transportation link every day.
Multiple injuries may result if the project does not proceed. The slope
stability is a concern in this area. There is movement taking place as
evidenced by the embankment or existing gabion baskets encroaching on
the road and sidewalk, respectively.
There is no legislation mandating this project.
There is a moderate probability of failure with moderate consequences.
This project involves replacing three classes of critical infrastructure roadway, sidewalks and retaining walls.
Operational efficiencies will be achieved by reducing the required repairs to
the road as a result of slope movement causing buckling road surfaces,
sidewalk encroachment by the gabion baskets that have to be adjusted and
repaired regularly and the impairment of winter control activities
(inadequate sidewalk width).
There is no opportunities for partnership or grant funding at the present time
but future funding opportunities may be possible.

2

This project will slightly improve the natural environment and prevent further
damage to the environment.

2

The project will maintain an existing public space. The project will involve
replacing and widening the sidewalk to enable snow storage and improved
accessibility, thereby encouraging pedestrian and possible other active
transportation usage.
The upgraded retaining walls, roadway and sidewalk will have an improved
appearance.
This project supports core service delivery.

1
2

The condition of Moores Hill has been noted informally by some members
of the public as requiring some upgrading.

Page 122 of 165

Engineering - 15th Street E - 3rd Ave
E to 6th Ave E - Reconstruction
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

70.30

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This project involves reconstructing 15th Street East from 6th Avenue East to 3rd Avenue East (St. Mary's Hill). Will involve slope stabilization, replacing all failing municipal
underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing the road, curbs/gutters, and sidewalks. May include streetlight upgrades. Additionally, as there currently is no storm sewer on the
hill, this will be added. Will also include modification of the watermain to eliminate redundant lines and improve pressure on the side streets.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031

2032

$450,000.00
$50,000.00

$25,000.00
$5,050,000.00

$500,000.00

$5,075,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$5,575,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Tax Levy
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$3,330,000.00
$1,110,000.00
$1,110,000.00
$5,550,000.00

Page 123 of 165

Engineering - 15th Street E - 3rd Ave
E to 6th Ave E - Reconstruction
Justification for Matrix
Values
People

Score 0 - 5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

70.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

4

5,000 to 9,999 people will be directly impacted as a result of this project.

1

Legislation Score

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?

5

Asset Management Score

Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

4

Minor injuries not requiring medical attention may result if the project does
not proceed. Currently the storm drainage on the hill is very poor, resulting
in overland flow shedding throughout the pavement surface. This increases
the likelihood of ice formation and risk of slip and vehicular traction loss
incidents. The improvement of geometric design will enable accessibilityrelated upgrades.
Completion of the project will achieve full legislative/regulatory compliance.
Chiefly, the elimination of sections of combined sewer through installation of
new storm sewer system on the hill. This will also result in lower flows at the
plant by removing a known source of extraneous flow; this is an objective
the MECP expects the City to make progress on over time. The
reconstruction work will also make it easier for City forces to maintain an
ice-free surface on the hill.
Asset has reached its useful life and needs to be planed and scheduled for
replacement to not affect essential water services (i.e. trunk watermain)

Health & Safety Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

5

Staff expect to get operational efficiency by completing the project, treating
less stormwater at the wastewater plant, icing issues on the road, etc.

3

Project can be completed on the scheduled timeframe by staff and
consultants and have scheduling and technological resources

4

The project has a demonstrated impact on mitigating or adapting to climate
change.

0
2

Increased accessibility provisions will be implemented wherever
possible/appropriate.
The project does not impact the aesthetic value of the asset

3

The project meets at least one Strategic goal

0

Not identified by the public to date

Page 124 of 165

Schedule K. - Tax, Water Finance
Service or Activity

2025

2026

2027

2028

By-law No. 2026-XXX

Unit

Applicable
Tax

Notes

Unit

Applicable
Tax

Notes

Review Cycle

Residential Consumption Rates (*For all accounts unless deemed otherwise as a large consumption user by the City)
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.

2025
Water Monthly Consumption Charges

Water Monthly Service Charges

2026

$

1.80

$

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

2.02
31.90
38.85
50.26
73.38
143.00
234.99
350.38
465.76
696.54

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

124%

2027

2028

Usage 0 - 110 m3 per month

1.89
2.12
33.49
40.80
52.78
Water and
Water and
77.05 waste water waste water
150.15
rates are
rates are
246.74 reviewed and reviewed and
367.90 set annually set annually
489.05
731.37
120%

Usage >110 m3 per month
15 mm (5/8") / per month
18 mm (3/4") / per month
25 mm (1") / per month
38 mm (1.5") / per month
50 mm (2") / per month
75 mm (3") / per month
100 mm (4") / per month
150 mm (6") / per month
200 mm (8") / per month
of Total Water Charges

Exempt

1 cubic metre (m3) = 1,000 litres (L)

Exempt

Based on Water Meter Diameter

Exempt

Total Water Charges = Water Monthly Consumption
Charges + Water Monthly Service Charges

55.

Wastewater Charges

56.
57.

All rates shown are for properties within the boundaries of the City of Owen Sound. Rates for properties outside of the City boundaries are double the amounts shown above.
The billing rate for outstanding manual-meter accounts is based on the prior year's average monthly consumption.

59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.

Large Consumption Rates (*Only for grandfathered accounts deemed as a large consumption user by the City of Owen Sound)
2025
2026
2027
2028
Unit
Applicable TaxNotes
3
$
1.80 $
1.89
Usage 0 - 110 m per month
Water Monthly Consumption Charges
Exempt
1 cubic metre (m3) = 1,000 litres (L)
$
2.02 $
2.12
Usage >110 m3 per month
$
126.10 $ 132.41
50 mm (2") / per month
Water and
Water and
$
207.22 $ 217.58
75 mm (3") / per month
waste water waste water
Water Monthly Service Charges
Exempt
Based on Water Meter Diameter
$
308.97 $ 324.42
100
mm (4") / per month
rates are
rates are
$
410.72 $ 431.25 reviewed and reviewed and
150 mm (6") / per month
$
614.24 $ 644.96 set annually set annually
200 mm (8") / per month

65.

Wastewater Charges

66.

All rates shown are for properties within the boundaries of the City of Owen Sound. Rates for properties outside of the City boundaries are double the amounts shown above.

67.
68.

Ratepayers shall pay fixed service charges (monthly water service charge + associated sewer surcharge), regardless of if water service has been turned off at the curb.
The billing rate for outstanding manual-meter accounts is based on the prior year's average monthly consumption.

58.

102%

102%

of Total Water Charges

Schedule K. - Tax, Water Finance

Exempt

Total Water Charges = Water Monthly Consumption
Charges + Water Monthly Service Charges

Page 125 ofPage
1654 of 5

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Bryce McDonald, Manager of Water and Wastewater

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

OP-26-023

Subject:

Walking Beam Flocculator Update

Recommendations:
THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-023 respecting the Walking
Beam Flocculator Update, the Operations Committee recommends that City
Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:











The design and construction of the replacement unit (approved
through OP-23-010) has been unreliable, experiencing repeated
structural failures.
Several attempts have been made to reinforce the unit, but it only
appears to shift the failure points while the bracing increases
overall weight.
Downtime of this equipment significantly impacts the plant’s ability
to treat water, especially during times of poorer intake water
quality.
After exhausting all other avenues, Staff recommend full
replacement with proven, reliable vertical paddle wheel technology.
Section 35 of By-law 2020-002 – By-law Respecting the
Procurement of Goods and Services for the City (Purchasing Bylaw) includes provisions for the emergency purchase of goods or
services.
There is some remaining budget from the initial flocculator
replacement, but additional funds are expected to be required.

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 1 of 6

Page 126 of 165

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s
environmental, social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the
climate crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and infrastructure
to support healthy lifestyles.

Previous Report/Authority:
Report OP-23-010 from the Director of Public Works and Engineering Re:
Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement

Background:
On January 31, 2023, it was discovered that several suspension rods holding
up one of the City’s walking beam flocculators were damaged. One of the
connection points snapped, causing catastrophic damage. Staff drained the
tank, and a local metal fabricator removed wreckage. Staff made numerous
attempts to secure replacement parts from the original manufacturer. The
manufacturer no longer provides parts and services outside of the USA and
would not warranty installation by others. Based on staff recommendation,
Council supported the procurement of a local consultant to design a
replacement unit and have a local mechanical fabricator complete the build
and installation. Due to legislated design criteria for materials in contact with
drinking water in the City’s Municipal Drinking Water Works Permit, the
resulting design was simultaneously much heavier and had different buoyant
properties than the original. The integration of the new equipment with
existing supports, motor and drive arm resulted in unforeseen stress points
and repeated structural failures. After multiple attempts to strengthen and
modify the design, it was deemed fundamentally and irretrievably flawed,
and thus, a new direction is recommended.

Analysis and Options:
Flocculation is a critical process step in water treatment. The plant is
designed with limited redundancy, and during periods of poorer source water
quality, the production rate is reduced, which can lead to capacity
challenges. The City has invested significant resources trying to render the
new design viable and stable; it is now apparent that unreliable service in
exchange for ongoing modifications and retrofits is not sustainable. The
options considered to date are as follows.
Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 2 of 6

Page 127 of 165

Attempt to repair existing unit
Since installation nearly two years ago, Staff have struggled with structural
failures caused by the new unit’s weight and buoyancy. Any additional
reinforcement to repair the failure points only increases weight and shifts
stress to the original drive arm, mounts and motor. Proceeding with
additional reinforcement and repair is not recommended.
Traditional competitive procurement
This option would drastically lengthen the project timeline and increase risks
of water shortages during prolong incidents of poor source water quality.
This pathway involves drafting a terms of reference (Request for Proposal),
evaluating the proposals, and awarding the contract (with or without Council
involvement, depending on the contract value). Once a consultant is
selected, tasks prior to construction include: the design, specifications,
competitive procurement (tendering), tender award (again, with or without
Council, depending on the contract value), shop drawing review and
approvals and equipment delivery time.
This process would likely span up to two years, which means the plant would
be down a flocculator for two more spring thaws and run-off events (in 2027
and 2028). Considering the extensive consulting and design component with
this option, cost savings justifying the additional risk and timeline are not
expected.
Emergency purchase
Based on the criticality of this equipment and the risks associated with delays
staff have elected to procure through Section 35 of By-law 2020-002 – Policy
Respecting the Procurement of Goods and Services for the City (Purchasing
Policy) includes provisions for the emergency purchase of goods or services.
The situations are generally related to unforeseen conditions that impact
public health and safety, maintenance of essential services, welfare of
persons or public property, or the security of the City’s interests. These types
of purchases are generally related to the repair or replacement of assets,
allowing them to continue providing services to the Community. When an
emergency purchase is required, the Purchasing Agent (Manager of
Corporate Services) has the authority to issue a Purchase Order or
agreement for the necessary services. When the value of the emergency
purchase exceeds $100,000, the Purchasing Agent shall provide a report to

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 3 of 6

Page 128 of 165

the Council as soon as practicable. An information report will be brought
forward to Council following completion of the project.

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
The estimated financial resources associated with the project are as follows:
1.

Removal and disposal/recycling of existing custom built flocculator
by Krueger Custom Steel and Machining Ltd. at a cost of
$17,000.00

2.

Supply and installation of two (2) flocculators (mixing paddles)
manufactured by JMS (represented by ProAqua) at a cost of
$463,000.00

3.

Supply and installation of one (1) FRP baffle wall manufactured by
NEFCO (represented by ProAqua) at a cost of $104,000.00

4.

Cleaning and disinfection of flocculator tank after installation at a
cost of $6500.00

5.

$10,000 contingency for systems integration, consultant support for
shop drawing review, contract administration and site inspection as
required

All for an estimated total of $600,500 exclusive of applicable HST. ($611,068
including the non-refundable portion of HST).
There is some budget remaining in the original Flocculator Replacement
Project, 23N.20, of $485,000, which can be utilized for this project, leaving
$126,069 deficit needing a funding source. Staff propose this could be
funded from 2027 through reprioritization of capital projects funded from
water rates.
Upon project completion of the project, staff will prepare an information
report for Council outlining the final financial resources associated with the
project.

Human Resources
Managing complex treatment plant process projects is always challenging,
but this design build is expected to ease some of the technical specification
development and project management burden. This project is not expected
to require any additional staff resources.

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 4 of 6

Page 129 of 165

Time and Scheduling
Timeline and schedule are critical factors and a real driver for emergency
procurement in this case. The two timelines below outline the expected
milestones for each, highlighting the risky delays.
Standard Competitive Procurement
1.

Develop terms of reference for Request for Proposal, advertise bid
opportunity, evaluate proposal submissions and award consulting
contract (3 months)

2.

Consultant develops detailed design and equipment specifications
(4-6 months)

3.

Work with Consultant to develop tender package, post, close tender
and award construction contract (3 months)

4.

Contract execution and project initiation (2 months)

5.

Shop drawing review and approval (2-3 months)

6.

Equipment order/delivery time (6 months)

7.

Construction and commissioning (3 months)

Total – approximately 24-26 months
Emergency Procurement
1.

Preliminary design-build package and cost estimate (0 months,
already complete)

2.

Contract preparation and execution (2 months)

3.

Shop drawing review and approval (1 month)

4.

Equipment order/delivery time (6 months)

5.

Construction and commissioning (3 months)

Total - 12 months

Technology and Infrastructure
The technology and equipment being proposed is proven, readily available,
and utilized throughout the world. Several equipment suppliers and
contractors have reviewed and verified that the City’s facility is suitable for
this equipment and modifications. Programming changes are expected to be
minimal.

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 5 of 6

Page 130 of 165

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
This supports the objectives of the City’s Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan by strengthening the resiliency of City infrastructure or
services.

Communication and Engagement:
Public communication is not required from the perspective of awareness, as
the work will be internal to the plant, completed in coordination with the
City’s water treatment staff and will not result in water production
disruptions during the project.

Report Developed in Consultation With:
Troy Pelletier, Superintendent of Water Treatment

Attachments:
Attachment 1 – March 2023 Report OP-23-010 Re Walking Beam Flocculator
Emergency Replacement
Reviewed by:
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Bryce McDonald at
bmcdonald@owensound.ca or 519-376-4274 Ext 3224.

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 6 of 6

Page 131 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering

Meeting Date:

March 16, 2023

Report Code:

OP-23-010

Subject:

Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement

Recommendations:
THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-23-010 respecting the Walking
Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement, the Operations Committee
recommends that City Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:








On January 31, 2023, it was discovered that several suspension
rods holding up one of the City’s walking beam flocculators were
damaged. One of the connection points snapped, causing
catastrophic damage.
Staff has drained the tank, and a local metal fabricator has begun
to remove the wreckage. A quote for the replacement of the
equipment is being sought.
The City’s water treatment plant has two identical walking beam
flocculators, both original to the plant (circa the 1960s). There is
partial redundancy within the plant’s process via the two newer
flocculators added in the early 1980s; however, not replacing the
flocculator is not viable.
Once the remediation costs and costs to replace the damaged
flocculator are better known, Staff will submit a further report on
logistics and financial impacts. It is prudent to consider also
replacing the other walking beam flocculator of the same vintage.

Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 1 of 5

Page 132 of 165

Strategic Plan Alignment:
This report supports the delivery of Core Service.

Previous Report/Authority:
None.

Background:
The Owen Sound Water Treatment Plant was originally built in the 1960s. It
was equipped with twin flocculation tanks coupled with filter tanks.
Flocculators are used to remove fine particulate matter from the raw water.
Those that have maintained a pool may be familiar with flocculation; a
flocculant is added to the water to cause the fine particles to clump together,
making them more accessible for the filters to remove. To ensure optimum
dispersion of the flocculant and creation of the floc (the clumped-together
particles), agitation is necessary. There are several flocculators, some that
spin like paddle wheels, others that are impeller-like discs, but the type
installed in the water plant's original part are called walking beam
flocculators. They resemble an oil derrick with a main axle upon which two
beams are mounted that rock back and forth like a seesaw, and the mixing
paddle assemblies are suspended. As the beam rocks, the assemblies are
lifted and lowered in the water column, creating turbulence and mixing the
water.
On the morning of January 13th, a routine inspection revealed that during the
night, one of the connection points of the paddle assembly of the walking
beam flocculator in cell 1 had corroded through, causing the paddle assembly
to swing underneath the assembly on the other side of the tank. This caused
the paddle assemblies to crash and consequently twisted and snapped the
support rods that kept the paddle assemblies suspended from the walking
beams. As a result, the paddle assemblies now lie on the tank’s floor,
partially submerged and irretrievable without specialized confined space
equipment. The tank and associated filter have been taken offline, and the
water level has gradually drawn down to prepare for the remediation efforts.

Analysis:
At approximately 60 years of age, the walking beam flocculators are beyond
their useful life. They have been repaired multiple times and should have
Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 2 of 5

Page 133 of 165

been in the capital forecast for replacement over a decade ago, if not longer.
As a result, although this equipment failure should have been predicted, it is
now an unbudgeted expense.
Staff have done their best to mitigate the impacts of the treatment cell being
out of commission. They have also arranged for a local steel fabricator
familiar with the plant to remove the wreckage, which must be removed with
a davit arm-mounted hoist. The availability of such equipment is fortunate,
as the plant’s design did not incorporate convenient access to the bottom of
the flocculation tanks; the under-deck access hatch is remote and requires
deep horizontal penetration confined space entry, a situation that
significantly increases the complexity of the operation. The davit arm hoist
is in transit when writing this report. Upon arrival, it will be mounted to the
concrete plant deck, and debris removal can begin.
Another corporation has succeeded the company that initially installed the
walking beams, and Staff is hopeful that their archived files will contain the
original schematics for the flocculators. Walking beam flocculators are still
manufactured today and are considered the gold standard for floc
production. However, it is anticipated that the flocculators are made-to-order
and will likely have an extensive delivery time. As such, this cell is expected
to be out of commission for several months at a minimum.
Staff considered installing a more readily available flocculator system, such
as the type in cells 3 and 4. However, this would require an amendment to
the Environmental Compliance Approval for the water plant, which would not
significantly save time due to MECP review and processing timelines.
Further, in any decision tree, one must consider the “do nothing” approach.
To this, Staff recommend that it is not a viable option to defer/decline the
replacement for the following reasons:






The second walking beam flocculator is identical in vintage and
condition as the one that failed. There is a high probability that a
similar failure could occur in the short term.
Bearing in mind that a failure in the remaining walking beam is a
distinct possibility and that the second and third flocculators are
also aged at approximately 40 years old, the risk of a critical loss of
redundancy, if not total filtration functionality, is significant.
While the plant maintains adequate capacity under typical
conditions with the elimination of cell 1, during wet-weather
conditions such as spring thaw, the plant requires its total capacity

Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 3 of 5

Page 134 of 165



as the raw water supply typically bears more suspended sediment.
The loss of one or more flocculators will impact the plant’s
functionality.
The Capital Plan for 2023 already planned to temporarily take cells
3 and 4 out of service for a filter upgrade. That cannot be
undertaken with cells 1 and 2 being non-functional.

Financial Implications:
The Director of Corporate Services has been consulted concerning the
procurement process in emergencies and a discussion on the availability of
funds in the Water Reserve to cover these unplanned expenses. The
wreckage removal has begun; however, the costs for this remediation are
challenging to predict and, as such, are proceeding on a time and materials
cost basis. Once the remediation and subsequent replacement costs are
known, verification of funding and approval as required under the Purchasing
Policy shall be undertaken. As this is considered an emergency expense,
Staff intends to proceed in the most economical manner possible; however,
the replacement (and therefore expenditure) is unavoidable if the
functionality of the water plant is to be maintained.

Communication Strategy:
There has not been, nor will there be, any impact on the quality or safety of
the City’s water due to this equipment failure. It is essential that any time
this project is discussed, this fact be emphasized.

Consultation:
Staff have contacted the local Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and
Parks team for guidance and to keep them apprised of our efforts to remedy
the situation.

Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 4 of 5

Page 135 of 165

Attachments:
Walking Beam Flocculator Photos
Recommended by:
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Lara Widdifield, Director
of Public Works and Engineering, at lwiddifield@owensound.ca or 519-3764440 ext. 1201.

Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 5 of 5

Page 136 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Manan Monga, Engineering Technologist

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

OP-26-024

Subject:

2026 Road Resurfacing Program

Recommendations:
THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-024 respecting the 2026 Road
Resurfacing Program, the Operations Committee recommends that City
Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:









As part of the 2025 Capital Budget Deliberations, Council requested
that Staff provide a list and map of the proposed road resurfacing
locations to be undertaken. Proposed resurfacing locations for 2025
and 2026 were provided in OP-25-006 on March 20, 2025.
Winter of 2025-2026 was very hard on the City’s road network, so
some adjustments were required to the proposed rehabilitation
locations.
The approved 2026 Road Rehabilitation budget was $700,000.
Based on the successful outcome of joining Grey County’s road
resurfacing tender in previous years, the City participated again in
2026 to obtain lower unit costs and improved project timelines.
The successful bidder, IPAC Paving Limited, is available very early this
year, and as such, is preparing to begin as soon as weather permits.

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: A City that Moves – Facilitating sustainable
transportation options and creating community connectivity.
Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 1 of 6

5 DEPUTATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS There are no deputations or presentations.

DEPUTATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
There are no deputations or presentations.

6 PUBLIC FORUM

PUBLIC FORUM

7 CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FOR WHICH DIRECTION IS REQUIRED There are no correspondence items being presented for consideration.

CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FOR WHICH DIRECTION IS REQUIRED
There are no correspondence items being presented for consideration.

8 REPORTS OF CITY STAFF 8.a

REPORTS OF CITY STAFF
8.a
8.b
Water and Wastewater

8.a Report OP-26-028 from the Director of Public Works and Engineering Re: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative

1
Report OP-26-028 from the Director of Public Works and
Engineering Re: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative

THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-028 respecting the Sanitary
Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative, the Operations Committee recommends
that City Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:









Extraneous flow into the sanitary sewer system limits capacity in
the system and increases liability for basement backups and
potential damage to the environment.
Flow monitoring is an invaluable tool in the toolbox to determine
the nature and location of the extraneous flow.
Staff have put forward a capital project to begin undertaking a
multi-year initiative to reduce Inflow and Infiltration (I/I)
extraneous flow sources to the wastewater collection system, within
which flow monitoring plays a critical role.
It will be important to address extraneous flows as they impact the
capacity of the City’s conveyance and treatment systems, which
increases liability for sewage backups and will ultimately impact
development capacity if not attenuated.
Wastewater overflows and Bypasses must be recorded, reported to
the MECP and posted for the public on the City’s website. Under
CLI-ECA requirements, overflow sites must be signed for public
awareness.

Staff Report OP-26-028: Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring Initiative
Page 1 of 7

Page 13 of 165



Public Health undertakes water quality sampling as they pertain to
the need to close beaches.

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: The recommendation contributes to core service
delivery or a corporate initiative that enables service delivery for one or more
strategic priorities. Chiefly:




Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s environmental,
social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the climate
crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and
infrastructure to support healthy lifestyles.
Prosperous City – Supporting initiatives that increase competitive
economic advantages for current and new businesses and their
employees.

By freeing up wet weather capacity in the wastewater collection and
treatment system, the City maintains a competitive position for ongoing
development opportunities. Failure to develop a plan to address extraneous
flows may also result in financial and/or environmental liability or legislated
corrective actions.

Previous Report/Authority:
When the Capital Budget was presented in late 2025, Wastewater Project
26O.7, I & I Flow Monitoring, with a budget of $60,000, was removed from
the funded project list, pending further details being presented to the
Operations Committee and Council.

THAT in consideration of Staff Report CR-26-052 respecting the 2026 Water
Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update, the Operations Committee recommends
that City Council direct staff to:
1.

2.

Include in the 2026 Fees and Charges By-law, to take effect for the
July 2026 billing cycles:
a.

A five percent (5%) increase to water rates;

b.

A reduction of the sewer surcharge from 124% to 120%; and

Provide notice of the water rate updates in accordance with the
City’s Notice By-law.

Highlights:






The proposed 2026 rate update includes a five percent (5%)
increase to water rates and a reduction in the wastewater
surcharge from 124% to 120%, resulting in an estimated total bill
increase of approximately 3.1% for a typical residential customer.
The updated financial model continues to support full cost recovery
for water and wastewater operations while maintaining positive
reserve balances to address ongoing infrastructure renewal and
future system pressures.
The proposed rates balance affordability considerations with the
need to prepare for significant future infrastructure requirements.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 1 of 11

Page 21 of 165

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s
environmental, social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the
climate crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and infrastructure
to support healthy lifestyles.

Previous Report/Authority:
CR-25-043 2025 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
OP-26-002 2025 Drinking Water Annual Report
Rate updates are provided annually in conjunction with the fees and charges
review.

Background:
Water treatment and distribution and wastewater collection and treatment
services are essential to the health and safety of Owen Sound residents and
businesses. The City is responsible for maintaining a significant municipal
water and wastewater network with an estimated replacement value
approaching $1 billion.
These services are funded entirely through user fees rather than property
taxation. This user-pay model ensures that only system users pay for the
services they receive, consistent with provincial legislation under the Safe
Drinking Water Act, 2002 and Ontario Regulation 453/07.
The City is required to maintain financially sustainable water systems as part
of the municipal drinking water licensing requirements under the Safe
Drinking Water Act, 2002. In support of these requirements, the City
periodically completes comprehensive water and wastewater financial
planning studies to evaluate long-term operating requirements, capital
infrastructure needs, reserve balances, debt obligations, projected growth
and anticipated water usage trends.
In 2025, the City engaged Hemson Consulting Ltd. to complete a
comprehensive Water and Wastewater Rate Study and update the City’s
long-term financial plan. The Hemson study reviewed the City’s existing and
projected operating and capital requirements over a ten-year horizon and
established projected rate requirements intended to support full cost
recovery and long-term financial sustainability of both systems.
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 2 of 11

Page 22 of 165

The Hemson study incorporated:







Updated operating forecasts;
Multi-year capital plans;
Existing and forecasted debt obligations;
Reserve and reserve fund continuity projections;
Historical and projected water consumption trends; and
Forecasted infrastructure replacement requirements for both water
and wastewater systems.

As part of the 2026 rate update, staff have updated the City’s financial model
using revised operating budgets, updated capital forecasts, current reserve
balances, debt projections and updated usage data. While a new
comprehensive rate study was not undertaken for 2026, the updated
analysis continues to rely on the financial planning framework established
through the Hemson study and the City’s long-term infrastructure planning
assumptions.
The 2026 operating forecasts generally reflect status quo operations with
limited service level changes. The water operating budget includes the
addition of a Quality Management System (QMS) position beginning in 2027
as previously discussed by Council through Report OP-26-002.
The wastewater operating budget also includes additional funding related to
ongoing inflow and infiltration (I/I) monitoring and condition assessment
activities including CCTV inspection, flow monitoring and manhole
rehabilitation programs. These activities support long-term asset
management planning, condition assessment, regulatory compliance and the
prioritization of future infrastructure replacement needs.
The City’s long-term capital planning continues to reflect significant
investment requirements associated with aging water and wastewater
infrastructure, treatment facilities and linear underground systems. In
addition to projects currently identified within the ten-year capital plan,
future studies currently underway or planned — including the Capital Needs
Study for treatment facilities and the Water and Wastewater Master Plan —
are expected to further inform long-term infrastructure replacement
requirements and future investment needs.

Analysis and Options:
Staff updated the City’s water and wastewater financial model using the
current operating budgets, updated ten-year capital plans, reserve balances,
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 3 of 11

Page 23 of 165

debt repayment schedules, historical consumption trends and projected
future usage assumptions.
The Hemson study completed in 2025 recommended annual increases of five
percent (5%) to water rates through 2035 in order to support long-term
financial sustainability, significant reserve accumulation and future
infrastructure replacement requirements. The study projected reserve
balances after five years of approximately $12.7 million for water and $16.3
million for wastewater.
As part of the 2026 update, staff reviewed the current operating and capital
requirements against the assumptions used in the Hemson study and
identified that many of the assumptions remain generally consistent.
However, several refinements and updates have been incorporated into the
model.
Operating Budget Updates
The water operating budget generally reflects status quo operations with the
addition of a Quality Management System (QMS) position beginning in 2027.
The wastewater operating budget includes an additional $75,000 in annual
funding associated with inflow and infiltration (I/I) management and ongoing
condition assessment activities including:




Flow monitoring;
CCTV inspection and flushing programs; and
Manhole rehabilitation and benching activities.

These activities support long-term asset management planning, condition
assessment, regulatory compliance and the prioritization of future
infrastructure replacement needs. Historically, several of these activities
were funded intermittently through capital projects despite representing
recurring operational requirements more appropriately funded through
operations.
The updated model also reflects increasing concern regarding inflow and
infiltration within the wastewater system. Wet weather events continue to
produce significant spikes in flows, contributing to historically high overflow
and bypass volumes. Ongoing monitoring and inspection programs are
intended to assist the City in identifying and prioritizing remediation efforts
throughout the collection system.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 4 of 11

Page 24 of 165

An additional $75,000 annually has also been incorporated into the forecast
horizon in future years, bringing the total annual funding allocation for these
programs to approximately $150,000 annually as of 2027.
Capital Plan Considerations
The City’s current ten-year capital plans remain generally consistent with the
assumptions utilized in the Hemson study. However, several projects
continue to experience inflationary and construction-related pressures
including:





Water Filtration Plant upgrades;
Walking Beam Flocculator replacement;
Transformer replacement projects; and
Other treatment-related infrastructure upgrades.

In addition, several future studies currently underway or planned are
expected to identify infrastructure needs in future water and wastewater
capital forecasts, particularly in the years six through ten of the capital plan.
These include:




The Water and Wastewater Capital Needs Study;
The Water and Wastewater Master Plan / East Side Master Servicing
review; and
Future linear infrastructure replacement planning.

These studies are expected to better define future infrastructure replacement
requirements associated with treatment equipment, underground
infrastructure, water storage capacity, pressure management, servicing
optimization and long-term system resiliency.
Potential future requirements identified through these studies may include:







Significant treatment facility reinvestment;
Water storage infrastructure such as a standpipe or water tower;
Watermain and sanitary sewer replacement programs;
Pressure reducing valves and pressure zone modifications;
System looping and servicing improvements; and
Additional linear infrastructure replacement requirements.

While many of these future projects are not yet sufficiently developed to fully
incorporate into the ten-year forecast, staff believe it is prudent to continue
allowing reserves to accumulate in order to provide flexibility and mitigate
future rate volatility as those requirements become better defined.
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 5 of 11

Page 25 of 165

Water Consumption Trends
The financial model continues to assume modest long-term declines in water
consumption associated with water conservation efforts and increasing
efficiency of plumbing fixtures and appliances.
At the time of the 2025 Hemson study, there was some anticipation that the
City-wide water meter replacement program would result in increased
recorded consumption due to improved meter accuracy. However, this
increase in billed consumption has not materialized. In fact, overall recorded
water consumption in 2025 declined by approximately 3% compared to 2024
despite an increasing number of active meters. It should also be noted that
the new meter technology has been in service for less than a year, and
additional time will be required to fully understand its longer-term impacts
on recorded consumption and water billing. There are a variety of factors
that can influence this trend including consumption habits, weather impacts
and technology innovations. Changes to usage patterns are continuously
being monitored which is assisted by the new meter technology.
Despite the year over year trend, the updated model assumes only a modest
annual decline in consumption moving forward while continuing to account
for gradual growth in the number of equivalent connections within the
system.
Proposed Rate Changes
Based on the updated financial model, staff are recommending:



A five percent (5%) increase to water rates; and
A reduction in the wastewater surcharge from 124% to 120% of the
water rate.

The proposed water rates with these changes can be found in Attachment 8,
Proposed 2026 Water and Wastewater Rates.
This approach allows the City to:





Continue addressing increasing pressures within the water system
where significant capital and operational risks remain;
Continue progressing wastewater surcharge levels closer toward a
long-term 1:1 relationship with water rates;
Maintain positive reserve balances throughout the forecast period;
and
Moderate near-term impacts to users relative to the reserve
accumulation targets contemplated in the Hemson study.
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 6 of 11

Page 26 of 165

Collectively, the proposed changes result in an estimated total invoice
increase of approximately 3.1% for a typical residential customer.
The updated model forecasts reserve balances after five years of
approximately:



$2.9 million for water reserves; and
$6.2 million for wastewater reserves.

These reserve balances are significantly lower than those contemplated in
the Hemson study, reflecting a deliberate effort to balance affordability
considerations with the need to maintain financially sustainable systems and
prepare for future infrastructure obligations.

Water Reserve Forecast
$14,000,000
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$2025

2026

2027

Reserve Balance

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

Asset Management Plan target

Waste Water Reserve Forecast
$9,000,000
$8,000,000
$7,000,000
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$2025

2026

Reserve Balance

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

Asset Management Plan target

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 7 of 11

Page 27 of 165

While the proposed reserve balances are lower than those projected through
the Hemson study, staff believe they remain reasonable given the currently
identified operating and capital requirements, together with the substantial
infrastructure uncertainties that exist beyond the currently developed
planning horizon as identified in the City’s approved asset management plan.
The following comparison provides estimated total annual water and
wastewater charges for comparable municipalities within Grey and Bruce
Counties based on a typical residential customer using approximately 200
cubic metres annually prior to the 2026 increases.

While Owen Sound’s rates remain higher than some comparator
municipalities, they are also substantially below several surrounding
municipalities with significant water and wastewater infrastructure
requirements.
Note that the total annual invoice presented in the BMA study captures the
2024 rates from January to July with 2025 Rates from July to December
while the estimated annual bill noted previously in the report reflects the
annualized cost from July to June of the following year when the rates take
effect.
Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 8 of 11

Page 28 of 165

For a typical residential customer using approximately 200 cubic metres
annually, the proposed changes are estimated to result in an overall annual
bill increase of approximately 3.1%. bringing the total estimated bill from
$1,664 to $1,716. An increase of $52 annually or $13.00 per billing period.
Forecasted Total Water Bill for Residential Users 2025 to 2032
$2,500

$2,000

$1,500

$1,000

$500

$2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
An increase of 1% to the water rates generates approximately $73,000 in
additional revenue annually. The 5% increase to water rates will generate
approximately $365,000 in additional water revenue in the year ending June
30, 2027. Conversely, decreasing the wastewater surcharge by 4% reduces
total wastewater revenues by $252,517.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 9 of 11

Page 29 of 165

The net impact to a typical property using 200m3, paying both the water rate
and sewer surcharge is a net increase of 3.1% broken down as follows:
2025/26
quarterly
invoice

2026/27
quarterly
invoice

Water
Usage

1.80 / m3

$90 .00

1.89 / m3

$94.50

Water
Service
Charge

31.90 /
month

$95.70

$33.50 /
month

$100.49

Sewer
Surcharge

124%

$230.27

120%

$233.98

Total
Quarterly
Invoice

$415.97

Total
Quarterly
Invoice

$428.97

Annual
Charges

$1,664

Annual
Charges

$1,716

Human Resources
The new rate structure will be implemented by the Water Billing Coordinator.

Time and Scheduling
New rates will be included in the 2026 Fees and Charges By-law and come
into effect for billing cycles starting after July 1, 2026.

Technology and Infrastructure
No additional technology or infrastructure is required to implement new
rates.

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
The recommendation supports both the City's Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan and the City's Climate Mitigation Plan.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 10 of 11

Page 30 of 165

Communication and Engagement:
Notice of rate changes will be provided in line with the City’s notice
provisions.
Updated rates will be posted to the City’s website.

Report Developed in Consultation With:
Director of Public Works and Engineering
Water and Wastewater Manager
Water Billing Coordinator
Asset Management Coordinator

Attachments:
1.

Attachment 1 - Billed Consumption 2020 to 2025

2.

Attachment 2 - Multi Year Water Operating Forecast

3.

Attachment 3 - Multi Year Wastewater Operating Forecast

4.

Attachment 4 - Multi Year Capital Plan for Water, Wastewater and
Combined Engineering

5.

Attachment 5 – Capital Detail Sheets – Water

6.

Attachment 6 – Capital Detail Sheets – Wastewater

7.

Attachment 7 – Capital Detail Sheets – Water and Wastewater
Combined

8.

Attachment 8 – 2026 Proposed Water and Wastewater Rates

Reviewed by:
Kate Allan, Director of Corporate Services
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Kate Allan, Director of
Corporate Services at kallan@owensound.ca or 519-376-4440 ext. 1238.

Staff Report CR-26-052: 2026 Water Rate and Sewer Surcharge Update
Page 11 of 11

Page 31 of 165

2020-01-01 to 2025-12-31
Note: These figures include rural consumption
1. Total Consumption

From Raw Data - Block 1

Total

From Raw Data - Block 2

Total

2. Rural Consumption

From Raw Data - Block 1

Total

From Raw Data - Block 2

Total

3. City Consumption

From Raw Data - Block 1

Total

From Raw Data - Block 2

Total

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Total

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Total

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

122,757
124,871
116,772
114,362
133,339
141,170
753,271

18,511
15,104
15,223
14,302
3,778
6,465
73,383

Cycle 1

Cycle 1

-

-

205,606
202,377
194,491
196,178
254,439
237,593
1,290,684

67,896
61,995
53,464
61,074
43,598
52,469
340,496

4,333
4,074
3,409
4,545
7,145
5,328
28,834

15,799
23,467
6,607
2,599
1,555
50,027

132,521
132,494
134,311
130,539
172,019
157,144
859,028

33,363
38,574
54,322
50,114
18,064
26,285
220,722

-

-

284,114
282,218
181,554
292,606
377,486
358,578
1,776,556

177,150
167,973
163,100
204,640
104,775
84,075
901,713

Cycle 4

1,320
1,320
1,320
1,320
1,320
990
7,590

Cycle 4

19,535
23,125
20,164
29,386
18,532
9,170
119,912

214,490
212,983
213,080
206,793
264,907
266,602
1,378,855

76,063
90,659
82,201
87,662
32,684
24,656
393,925

15,448
15,552
14,830
14,920
12,027
13,231
86,008

Cycle 5
-

77

143,061
142,418
137,961
134,540
162,422
157,084
877,486

41,563
49,819
46,563
48,451
25,828
19,537
231,761

Cycle 6

56
149
1,412
1,694

-

-

217,890
216,629
210,520
197,930
257,959
269,061
1,369,989

24,963
25,025
20,988
19,656
4,758
22,059
117,449

21,612
20,286
19,246
18,779
17,787
20,779
118,489

Cycle 7
-

73

6,411
5,672
54,284
70,655
39,148
28,969
205,139

165,325
128,202
79,286
46,269
65,673
66,261
551,016

Cycle 9

73

-

-

Total

Total

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Total

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

Cycle 6

Cycle 7

Cycle 9

Total

122,757
124,871
116,772
114,362
133,339
141,170
753,271

18,511
15,104
15,223
14,302
3,778
6,465
73,383

201,273
198,303
191,082
191,633
247,294
232,265
1,261,850

52,097
38,528
46,857
58,475
43,598
50,914
290,469

132,521
132,494
134,311
130,539
172,019
157,144
859,028

33,363
38,574
54,322
50,114
18,064
26,285
220,722

282,794
280,898
180,234
291,286
376,166
357,588
1,768,966

157,615
144,848
142,936
175,254
86,243
74,905
781,801

199,042
197,431
198,250
191,873
252,880
253,371
1,292,847

75,986
90,659
82,145
87,513
32,684
23,244
392,231

143,061
142,418
137,961
134,540
162,422
157,084
877,486

41,563
49,819
46,563
48,451
25,828
19,537
231,761

196,278
196,343
191,274
179,151
240,172
248,282
1,251,500

24,890
25,025
20,988
19,656
4,758
22,059
117,376

6,411
5,672
54,284
70,655
39,148
28,969
205,139

165,325
128,202
79,286
46,269
65,673
66,261
551,016

1,326,850
1,319,662
1,242,973
1,343,603
1,661,719
1,616,201
8,511,008

604,834
577,351
515,147
532,168
299,158
301,807
2,830,465

42,713
41,232
38,805
39,564
38,279
40,328
240,921

35,484
46,592
26,827
32,134
18,532
12,137
171,706

1,284,137
1,278,430
1,204,168
1,304,039
1,623,440
1,575,873
8,270,087

569,350
530,759
488,320
500,034
280,626
289,670
2,658,759

Page 32 of 165

TABLE 1
CITY OF OWEN SOUND
2025 WATER & WASTEWATER RATE STUDY
WATER USER RATES - BUDGET FORECAST
CITY OF OWEN SOUND
Adjustment

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

Factor

Budget

Projected

Projected

Projected

Projected

Projected

3%
2%
4%

$ 2,425,595
$ 1,059,364
$
222,500
$
135,000
$
406,300

A
$ 2,585,578
$ 1,080,551
$
231,400
$
135,000
$
426,615

$ 2,663,145
$ 1,102,162
$
240,656
$
135,000
$
447,946

$ 2,743,040
$ 1,124,206
$
250,282
$
135,000
$
470,343

$ 2,825,331
$ 1,146,690
$
260,294
$
135,000
$
493,860

$ 2,910,091 updated to 3%. Includes Direct staff and allocated overhead
$ 1,169,623
$
270,705
$
135,000
$
518,553

Subtotal Operating Costs

$ 4,248,759

$ 4,459,144

$ 4,588,909

$ 4,722,871

$ 4,861,174

$ 5,003,973

Budgeted Debt Service Costs
Subtotal Debt

$
$

387,684
387,684

$ 1,247,755
$ 1,247,755

$ 1,247,755
$ 1,247,755

$ 1,247,755
$ 1,247,755

$ 1,143,361
$ 1,143,361

$ 4,248,759

$ 4,459,144

$ 4,588,909

$ 4,722,871

$ 4,861,174

$ 1,143,361 Add 2027 debentures for:
$ 1,143,361 Water Meter Conversion
Filter Replacement Treatement Plant
$ 5,003,973 9th Ave E Watermain

POST 2024 BUDGET FORECAST

Notes/Source Documents:

Operating Expenditures
Annual Gross Operating Expenditures
Salaries and Benefits
Parts/Materials/Repairs
Contracted Services/Insurance
Equipment Reserve Transfers
Hydro/Utilities

5%

A - added QMS coordinator

Debt

Subtotal Annual Gross Expenditures
Non User-Rate Revenue
Non User-Rate Revenues
Total Annual Non-Metered Rate Revenues
TOTAL NET OPERATING EXPENDITURES

0%

$
$

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,188,759

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,399,144

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,528,909

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,662,871

(60,000) $
(60,000) $

$ 4,801,174

(60,000)
(60,000)

$ 4,943,973

Page 33 of 165

TABLE 1
CITY OF OWEN SOUND
2025 WATER & WASTEWATER RATE STUDY
WASTEWATER USER RATES - BUDGET FORECAST
CITY OF OWEN SOUND
POST 2020 BUDGET FORECAST

Adjustment

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

Factor

Budget

Projected

Projected

Projected

Projected

Projected

Notes/Source Documents:

Operating Expenditures
Annual Gross Operating Expenditures
Salaries and Benefits
Parts/Materials/Repairs
Contracted Services/Insurance
Hydro/Utilities
Subtotal Operating Costs

3%
2%
4%
5%

$
$
$
$
$

1,861,434
1,125,161
639,000
532,500
4,158,095

$
$
$
$
$

1,917,277
1,147,664
739,560
559,125
4,363,626

$
$
$
$
$

1,974,795
1,170,618
769,142
587,081
4,501,636

$
$
$
$
$

2,034,039
1,194,030
799,908
616,435
4,644,412

$
$
$
$
$

2,095,060
1,217,910
831,904
647,257
4,792,132

$
$
$
$
$

2,157,912 updated to 3%
1,242,269
865,181
679,620
4,944,981

$
$

1,490,396
1,490,396

$
$

749,315
749,315

$
$

673,116
673,116

$
$

673,116
673,116

$
$

591,352
591,352

$
$

591,352
591,352

$

5,555,198

$

5,112,942

$

5,174,752

$

5,317,528

$

5,383,484

$

5,536,333

$
$

-

$
$

$

5,555,198

$

Debt
Budgeted Debt Service Costs
Subtotal Debt
Total Annual Gross Operating Expenditures
Non-User Rate Revenue
Non-User Rate Revenue
Total Annual Non-User Rate Revenues
TOTAL NET OPERATING EXPENDITURES

2%

-

$
$

5,112,942

$

-

$
$

5,174,752

$

-

$
$

5,317,528

$

-

$
$

5,383,484

$

5,536,333

Page 34 of 165

Water Capital
Project Description

9th Ave E - Superior St to 10th St E Watermain Replacement
4th Ave W - 15th St W to 20th St W - Reconstruction
9th Ave E - 20th to 23rd St E - Engineering - Construction
3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 10th St E to 12th St E - Phase 1

2027
$

2028

13,000

$

13,000

$

11,000

$

11,000

$

553,265
$

120,000

3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 12th St E to 14th St E - Phase 2

2029

$

1,200,000

$

8,000

$

120,000

$

1,200,000

$

8,000

$

240,000

$

2,400,000

$

15,000

$

150,000

$

100,000

$

20,000

$

50,000

$

30,000

15th St. E. - 3rd Ave. E to 6th Ave.
Water System Model Update and Training
Cathodic Protection Rehab
Condition Assessment Municipal Reservoir

$

80,000

$

800,000

$

270,000

$

300,000

Leak Detection Survey
Confined Space Equipment
Fire Hydrant Painting
Fire Hydrant Flow Testing
Water Distribution System New Valve Chambers
Major Pump Replacement (Industrial Pump 3 in 2023)
Valve Replacement*
Instrumentation Replacement WTP*

$

90,000

$

50,000

$

250,000

$

40,000

SCADA Computer and Software Upgrade

Water Rate Study

$

25,000

$

20,000

$

10,000

$

100,000

$

40,000

$

90,000

$

2,500,000

$

50,000

475,200

Bulk Water Fill Station
WTP Storage Facility

$

1,832,465

$

1,274,000

$

4,155,000

8,000

90,000

30,000

WTP Transformer Replacement
Water Treatment Plant Roof Replacement

$

$

$

2031

$

3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 14th St E to 18th St E - Phase 3 (includes intersection improvements at 15th St E)
Moores Hill Road and Retaining Walls - Reconstruction
2nd Ave E/Grey Road 5-1st St E (HP Road) to 1st St SW-Selected Watermain Replacement

2030

$

93,500

$

50,000

$

200,000

$
$

50,000
1,746,500

$
$

150,000
3,116,000

Page 35 of 165

Waste Water Capital
Project Description

9th Ave E - Superior St to 10th St E Watermain Replacement
4th Ave W - 15th St W to 20th St W - Reconstruction
3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 10th St E to 12th St E - Phase 1

2027

2028

$

1,000

$

11,000

3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 12th St E to 14th St E - Phase 2

$

2029

2030

2031

1,000

$

11,000

$

120,000

$

1,200,000

$

8,000

$

$

120,000

$

1,200,000

$

8,000

$

240,000

$

2,400,000

$

5,000

3rd Ave E/GR 15 - 14th St E to 18th St E - Phase 3 (includes intersection improvements at 15th St E)
Moores Hill Road and Retaining Walls - Reconstruction
15th St. E. - 3rd Ave. E to 6th Ave.
2nd Ave E Reconstruction - Phase 1 - 11th St E to 13th St E (future)
Digester Cleanout

8,000

$

50,000

$

100,000

$

300,000

Storage Tank Biosolids Cleanout

$

150,000

$

150,000

WWTP Instrumentation/SCADA

$

150,000

$

40,000

$

350,000

$

350,000

$

50,000

$

200,000

$

2,043,000

$

3,416,000

Storm Water Separation Program
Collection System Capital Reinvestment

$

4th St Pumping Station - Minor Pumping Station Rehab
I & I Flow Monitoring

$
$

200,000

$

100,000

350,000

300,000

27th St. Pumping Station Standby Generator
10th St. Overflow Weir Modification

$

612,000

$

432,000

$

1,670,000

Page 36 of 165

Engineering - 9th Avenue East - 20th
St E to 23rd St E Reconstruction
25P.12
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0053

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2025

Priority
Score:

74.10

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Spencer Hammill
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
25P.12 The budget in 2025 and 2026 includes Engineering design and approvals to be completed by a Consulting Engineer for engineering services related to the full scope of the
reconstruction and upgrading of 9th Avenue East road and sidewalk infrastructure from 20th Street East (including intersection improvements) to 23rd Street "A" East as well as
other required existing storm water management infrastructure upgrades. Note: The budget cost estimate does not include traffic signals installation at the 20th St E intersection, if
warranted. The Consulting Engineer will be retained by to mid-2025 with design and approvals completed in 2026 to allow for tendering in early 2028, should the City be successful
in obtaining Housing Enabling Core Servicing Stream grant funding, anticipated to be 50% of road and road related eligible costs.
This project's scope (tentatively planned for 2027 construction) is as follows:
1. Reconstruct 9th Avenue East from 20th St E to 23rd St E to the approved collector road cross-section including two vehicle lanes, two bike lanes (no on-street parking), concrete
curb and gutter, concrete sidewalk on both sides of the road and potential upgrading of street lighting (not included in budget estimate).
2. Upgrade the 9th Ave E/20th St E and 9th Ave E/23rd St E intersections to improve traffic control, pedestrian use/accessibility and cycling facility.
3. Replace 175 m of existing AC Industrial Pressure Zone (IPZ) watermain from 20th St E to 21st St E and 160 m of existing AC IPZ watermain south of 23rd St E (intervening
watermain was replaced in 2022).
4. Upgrade the storm sewer on 9th Ave E from 23rd St E to 23rd St "A" E.
5. Upgrade the storm sewer on 8th Ave E from Odawa Heights to 21st St E.
7. Construct temporary storm water infiltration trench, if required, on 23rd St E, west of 8th Ave E. Alternatively, construct storm sewer on 23rd St E from 8th Ave E, westerly, then
southerly along 6th Ave W to the existing road terminus, at developer's expense (as part of a subdivision development) with City to pay storm sewer oversizing cost. Note: The
budget cost estimate does not include this cost as it is unknown which alternative will be available at the time of construction.
8. Construct a concrete sidewalk on 8th Ave E - 20th St E to 23rd St E.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2025

2026

2027

$350,000.00

$350,000.00

$797,000.00

$30,000.00

$30,000.00
$5,000.00

$30,000.00
$5,000.00
$8,144,875.00

$380,000.00

$385,000.00

$8,976,875.00

Costs Incurred to 2024 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$9,741,875.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2025
12/31/2028

Page 37 of 165

Funding Sources:
Grant
Water Rates
Development Charges
OCIF Formula
Reserves
Total

$4,559,305.00
$613,265.00
$211,550.00
$4,061,780.00
$295,975.00
$9,741,875.00

Page 38 of 165

Engineering - 9th Avenue East - 20th
St E to 23rd St E Reconstruction
25P.12
Justification for Matrix
Values

CAP-26-0053

Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

3

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

4
4

4

Year:

2025

Priority
Score:

74.10

Justification / Rationale for Rating
This project will impact commuters, schools near 9th Ave E and local
residents combined. It will also enable new housing units in the East Hill
Bluffs Planning Area under the City's Official Plan.
Road is in poor condition and lacks City infrastructure such as sidewalk,
bike lanes, curbs, gutters and storm sewers to improve road safety. Multiple
injuries may result.
Project completion ensures the City is in compliance with legislation for
minimum maintenance and accessibility standards.
Road surface is identified for replacement. It has failed and should have
safer road cross section with AODA sidewalks. Moderate consequences
resulting.
Major improvements to operational performance would be achieved with the
completion of this project in terms of road repairs, water main repairs and
localized drainage. Financial savings will be achieved once project is
completed.

2

Housing Enabling Core Servicing Stream funding at 50% or eligible road
and road related costs is assumed to allow this project to proceed in the
noted timeline.
Storm water infrastructure will be improved and prevent further detriment.
Improved road with bike lanes and sidewalks will result in reduced
emissions.
This project maintains an existing public space.

2

Project does not impact the aesthetic value of the impacted asset.

3

Improving road condition has been identified in the Strategic Plan to
improve the road's PCI.
This project has been mentioned informally through public engagements.
Specifically local residents and developers and an approved cross-section
has been adopted.

5

2

2

Page 39 of 165

Engineering - 2nd Avenue East
Watermain Replacement 23N.2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0135

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

68.70

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Lara Widdifield
Location/Coordinates:

100

Description:
23N.2 In 2024 it is proposed to replace the watermain on 2nd Ave East (Grey Road 5) in conjunction with road reconstruction planned by the county. Recall that in the winter of
2014/2015 a short portion of pipe (80m) was replaced on this section since it had frozen. It is intended to preserve this section but that is a small portion of the total 505m.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$880,000.00

$880,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$880,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$880,000.00
$880,000.00

Page 40 of 165

Engineering - 2nd Avenue East
Watermain Replacement 23N.2
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-26-0135
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

5
4

5
4

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

68.70

Justification / Rationale for Rating
Typically just the area of a break, but excavating new asphalt is always best
avoided. This is a significant trunk main.
Watermain breaks carry some risk of Adverse Conditions, though this risk is
mitigated by good procedures.
Safe Drinking Water Act (specifically Adverse Condition provisions of the
regulation)
Locations are older main identified as such in the plan.

4

Would avoid watermain breaks in newly paved areas, and coordinate
resources properly with County.

2

Reserves

1

No significant Environmental Impact

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N:A : Core Service

1

None

Page 41 of 165

Water - Water System Model Update
& Training
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.1

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

59.60

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The City's Engineering Department maintains a working computer model of the water distribution system
This is typically used to assess the impact of proposed changes, whether permanent, or temporary due to construction.
It is common practice to recalibrate and/or confirm model accuracy on a regular basis. Since it is not a program or technology staff intimately use training or refreshers are likely
required to understand models capabilities and limitations.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$25,000.00

$25,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$25,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$25,000.00
$25,000.00

Page 42 of 165

Water - Water System Model Update
& Training
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.1
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

5
3

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

59.60

Justification / Rationale for Rating
Accurate modeling of the water system is important to ensure the impact of
changes on fire flows in the City are understood.
There is some probability of a modeling error resulting in an issue with fire
flows.

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

3

A failure to accurately assess fire flows can result in mischaracterization (ie
colour coding) of individual hydrants, which could cause the fire department
to select the "wrong" hydrant.

1

Reserves

1

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not a relevant factor for
this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 43 of 165

Watermains Cathodic Protection
Rehab 27N.4
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0062

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
30

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

66.10

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Annual Replacement of Cathodic Protection on large diameter critical ductile iron trunk watermains. This slows/eliminates corrosion via an electrochemical process whereby the
anode decays instead of the main. The City continues to follow the multi year program to protect watermains as laid out in 2013.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$270,000.00

$270,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$270,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$270,000.00
$270,000.00

Page 44 of 165

Watermains Cathodic Protection
Rehab 27N.4
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0062
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

66.10

Justification / Rationale for Rating

4

Watermain failures can affect a significant area

5

Watermain breaks can damage property and result in poor water quality

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

The intent is to extend the useful life of water infrastructure

3

Failure to do this could result in vastly increased watermain breaks as older
watermain rots in place

2

Water Rates

3

Watermain breaks can affect environment : chlorinated water in receiving
water

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

1

Watermain Projects generally are not.

Page 45 of 165

Water - Cathodic Protection Rehab
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

28N.1

Year:
Priority
Score:

2028

66.10

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
30

Description:
Replacement of Cathodic Protection on large diameter critical ductile iron trunk watermains. This slows/eliminates corrosion via an electrochemical process whereby the anode
decays instead of the main. However, the anodes were all installed in the early 1990’s and are now at the end of their useful life, as determined by a cathodic protection survey
undertaken in 2013 which measured the remaining electrochemical protection. In some cases the trunk main can be cathodically protected without disturbing asphalt but in many
cases some limited asphalt disturbance will be required.
The City continues to follow the multi year program to protect watermains as laid out in 2013. Annual project.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2028

$300,000.00

$300,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2027 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$300,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2028
12/31/2028

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$300,000.00
$300,000.00

Page 46 of 165

Water - Cathodic Protection Rehab
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

28N.1

2028

66.10

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

4

Watermain failures can affect a significant area

5

Watermain breaks can damage property and result in poor water quality

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

The intent is to extend the useful life of water infrastructure

3

Failure to do this could result in vastly increased watermain breaks as older
watermain rots in place

2

Water Rates

3

Watermain breaks can affect environment : chlorinated water in receiving
water

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

1

Watermain Projects generally are not.

Page 47 of 165

Water - Condition Assessment
Municipal Reservoir
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City
5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

64.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
As per the City's DWQMS Operational Plan, the reservoir is due for inspection every 8 years. This is completed using a remotely operated vehicle to inspect the inside of the
reservoir, without having to drain it. The walls, columns, and floor are inspected for any abnormalities and a report is provided on the overall condition.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031
$20,000.00

$20,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$20,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$20,000.00
$20,000.00

Page 48 of 165

Water - Condition Assessment
Municipal Reservoir
Justification for Matrix
Values

Score 0 - 5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

64.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

5

Legislation Score

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?

5

To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

Climate change trends indicate that average surface water temperatures
are rising. Diurnal temperature swings during the shoulder seasons may be
more variable. This freeze-thaw affects the frost penetration and can
increase the failure rate (breakage rate) of metallic pipe. If more water is
sediment or biological loading (from higher intake water temperatures), with
the expected population growth, it will become even more critical to have
storage capacity in the reservoir. In fact, an additional storage facility is
expected to be required at some point in the future. It is imperative to
ensure the reservoir is maintained to the best possible degree.
No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

Core Service

0

None

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

This affects the City's primary drinking water system water reservoir. Failure
of this infrastructure would affect the drinking water for the entire City, and
fire suppression (as it provides storage capacity for fire protection) for the
entire municipal system.
If failure led to contamination of the drinking water this could be
characterized as a serious public health and safety risk.
Structural failure up to and including collapse would have a catastrophic
impact on the water supply, as the reservoir allows the treatment plant to
"make" water 24 hours a day, despite water consumption being primarily
during the day and evening. Further, the reservoir provides storage to
supplement the distribution system under fire flow conditions (i.e. when
hydrants are drawing water faster than the plant can supply it).
Safe Drinking Water Act

1

Maintenance activity; however, not recommended to be deferred as
reservoir is critical to system operations.

2

Reservoir issues resulting in low chlorine residual or high turbidity could
result in Boil Water Advisories.
Deterioration of structural condition without the City's understanding of that
degradation would leave the City unprepared for end-of-service life
expenses, and would increase risk of failure.
Re-occurring, low impact on resources

5

1

Page 49 of 165

Water - Leak Detection Survey
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.5

Year:
Priority
Score:

2029

70.80

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City

Description:
The City undertakes a leak detection survey of the water distribution system every 3 years.
It has been established that the 3 year interval is optimal in terms of discovering new leaks in a timely manner.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$20,000.00

$20,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$20,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$20,000.00
$20,000.00

Page 50 of 165

Water - Leak Detection Survey
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.5

2029

70.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

The entire City distribution system is surveyed

5

Leaks left undetected can fail suddenly and could be a risk to health and
safety and the delivery of drinking water to the customer

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

5

This program has been identified on the 10 year plan

4

Failure of a major watermain could result in loss of service to a portion of
the community

1

Reserves

1

Not relevant to this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 51 of 165

Water - Confined Space Entry
Equipment
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.6

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

70.40

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The City Water and Wastewater departments have confined space entry equipment, including tripod, winch, harnesses, and associated equipment. This equipment is required in
order to safely enter confined spaces in accordance with the regulations.
In 2018 this equipment was standardized across the Water and Wastewater groups.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$10,000.00
$10,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$10,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$10,000.00
$10,000.00

Page 52 of 165

Water - Confined Space Entry
Equipment
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.6
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

70.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

3

Water and Wastewater Staff

5

Confined Space Entry, done improperly, with improper equipment, kills a
number of people in Ontario yearly.

5

Occupational Health and Safety Act

5

Identified in Asset Management Plan

5

Confined Space Entries will not be possible.

1

Reserves

1

Not Applicable

1

Not Applicable

1

Not Applicable

1

Core Service

1

None

Page 53 of 165

Year:
Priority
Score:

Hydrant Painting (2027) 27N.1
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

2027

57.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City
5

Description:
Refresh hydrant paint approximately every five years. Hydrants are painted entirely yellow (except for the black cap shown) and the colour coding will be achieved via removable
reflective rings on the side ports.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$90,000.00

$90,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$90,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$90,000.00
$90,000.00

Page 54 of 165

Year:
Priority
Score:

Hydrant Painting (2027) 27N.1
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

57.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

2027

5

Entire City Water Distribution System

5

Poorly maintained hydrants can fail.

2

No legislation, but this is a best practice in the industry.

5

Part of required maintenance of the assets

3

Adversely affects hydrant life if not done.

1

Funded through water rates.

1

No impact on the environment

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

N/A

1

N/A: Core Service

1

N/A

Page 55 of 165

Water - Hydrant Painting (2030)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30N.5

Year:
Priority
Score:

2030

57.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City
5

Description:
Historically the Water Utility has refreshed hydrant paint approximately every five years. Hydrants are painted entirely yellow (except for the black cap shown) and the colour coding
will be achieved via removable reflective rings on the side ports.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

$90,000.00

$90,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$90,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$90,000.00
$90,000.00

Page 56 of 165

Water - Hydrant Painting (2030)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30N.5

2030

57.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

Entire City Water Distribution System

5

Poorly maintained hydrants can fail.

2

No legislation, but this is a best practice in the industry.

5

Part of required maintenance of the assets

3

Adversely affects hydrant life if not done.

1

Funded through water rates.

1

No impact on the environment

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

N/A

1

N/A: Core Service

1

N/A

Page 57 of 165

Hydrant Flow Testing (2027) 27N.2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0063

Year:
Priority
Score:

2027

63.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City

Description:
Required to re-test the fire flow capacity of the system to update hydrant capacities to provide the correct colour coding on the hydrants, in accordance with the National Fire
Protection Association procedures.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$50,000.00

$50,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$50,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$50,000.00
$50,000.00

Page 58 of 165

Hydrant Flow Testing (2027) 27N.2
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0063

2027

63.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

Entire City Water Distribution System

4

Mischaracterising hydrant capacity can lead to the use of the incorrect
hydrant by emergency services

5

NFPA 291

5

Part of required testing of the assets

3

Can result in incorrect fire flow estimations which can affect fire protection
for existing and new development.

1

Funded through water rates

1

No impact on the environment

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

N/A

1

N/A : Core Service

1

N/A

Page 59 of 165

Water - Fire Hydrant Flow Testing
(2031)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

61.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
With development continuing, the City's water system will have undergone considerable changes. It is required to re-test the fire flow capacity of the system to update hydrant
capacities to provide the correct colour coding on the hydrants; in accordance with the National Fire Protection Association procedures. 

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031

$50,000.00

$50,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$50,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$50,000.00
$50,000.00

Page 60 of 165

Water - Fire Hydrant Flow Testing
(2031)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

61.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

Entire City Water Distribution System

3

Mischaracterising hydrant capacity can lead to the use of the incorrect
hydrant by emergency services

5

NFPA 291

5

Part of required testing of the assets

2

Can result in incorrect fire flow estimations which can affect fire protection
for existing and new development.

3

Meets 3 resource categories

1

No impact on the environment

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

N/A

1

N/A : Core Service

0

N/A

Page 61 of 165

Water Distribution New Valve
Chambers for BGCSB 28N.6
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0066

Asset Management - New Asset / Expansion
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

53.70

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
These funds will be used to support planned watermain zone connection that will be completed during the BGCSB (New school) project on 28th Street connecting the East Hill
Pressure Zone to the Industrial Zone in the general area of 28th Ave E and 16th Street E. These funds will also be used to address a handful of water services that will be
completed during the project.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$250,000.00

$250,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$250,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$250,000.00
$250,000.00

Page 62 of 165

Water Distribution New Valve
Chambers for BGCSB 28N.6
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0066
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

53.70

Justification / Rationale for Rating

4

Proper Operation of the Valve Chambers affects the entire pressure zone

3

Failure to feed between zones can lead to low pressure and backflow
events and reduced fire flow

5

Safe Drinking Water Act (specifically Adverse Condition provisions of the
regulation)
N/A : New Assets to be coordinated with development

1

3

Interconnecting valve chambers improve fire flows, as well as system
circulation which improves chlorine residuals

2

Possible Contributions from Development Charges

1

No significant Environmental Impact

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 63 of 165

Water - Major Pump Replacement
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.7

Year:
Priority
Score:

2029

70.30

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
100

Description:
Industrial High Lift Pump P3 at the Water Treatment Plant has a performance issue. In the absence of a variable frequency drive, it creates pressure surges which could damage
watermains. It therefore is not used as part of duty rotation due to the risk. This reduces the high lift capacity which adversely affects available fire flows.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$100,000.00

$100,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$100,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$100,000.00
$100,000.00

Page 64 of 165

Water - Major Pump Replacement
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.7

5
4

5
5

2029

70.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

A failure of the high lift pump could affect the whole City under certain
circumstances
There are risks of Adverse Conditions which could be created by pump
failure.
Safe Drinking Water Act (specifically Adverse Condition provisions of the
regulation)
It was in the plan. But recent issues have compelled sooner action.

4

Improvements to the pump will improve reliability of operation, reduce the
probability of failure, and reduce operating costs.

2

Reserves

1

No significant Environmental Impact

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A: Core Service

0

Has not been identified by the public.

Page 65 of 165

Water Valve Replacements 2027
26N.3
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0101

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

64.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mark Hill
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
26N.3 This project is for the installation of a 12" check valve at East hill booster station and 8" raw water drain valve

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$40,000.00

$40,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$40,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$40,000.00
$40,000.00

Page 66 of 165

Water Valve Replacements 2027
26N.3
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-26-0101
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

64.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the Water Treatment Process which can affect the entire City

5

Valve failure could be a risk to health and safety and the delivery of drinking
water to the customer

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

3

Failure of a significant valve in the water treatment plant could reduce water
treatment production.

1

Reserves

1

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not a relevant factor for
this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 67 of 165

Water - Valve Replacements (2029)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.3

Year:
Priority
Score:

2029

64.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Description:
There are a number of valves and components associated with valves such as actuators in the water plant that range in size and age from fairly new to 55 years old (original).
For proper operation of the plant, these valves need to open and close on a very frequent basis, to prevent backflow, control flow or pressure for proper operation of the plant
process. Valve replacements usually are incorporated into larger scale projects such as piping rehabilitation or can be isolated to a particular pipe.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$40,000.00

$40,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$40,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$40,000.00
$40,000.00

Page 68 of 165

Water - Valve Replacements (2029)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.3

2029

64.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

This affects the Water Treatment Process which can affect the entire City

5

Valve failure could be a risk to health and safety and the delivery of drinking
water to the customer

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

3

Failure of a significant valve in the water treatment plant could reduce water
treatment production.

1

Reserves

1

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not a relevant factor for
this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 69 of 165

Water - Instrumentation Replacement
(2028)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

28N.4

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
15

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

64.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Instrumentation within the facility ranges from computer related components to analog input/output cards, digital input and output cards, PLC processors, network cards, network
cabling, fibre optics, power supplies, relays, and backup power (UPS).
These devices are important for meeting regulatory requirements and keeping equipment within its lifecycle is critical. To change out everything at the same time can be a
challenge, so staged approaches to change out components is a preferred option. The main Plant PLC was upgraded in 2012, including a number of associated components. For
the continued ongoing success with the computer architecture, these components will need to be replaced as needed.
Low lift chlorine analyzer and Beattie chlorine analyzer

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2028

$30,000.00

$30,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2027 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$30,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2028
12/31/2028

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$30,000.00
$30,000.00

Page 70 of 165

Water - Instrumentation Replacement
(2028)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

28N.4
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

64.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the Water Treatment Process which can affect the entire City

5

Instrumentation failure could be a risk to health and safety and the delivery
of drinking water to the customer

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

3

Failure of a significant instrument could reduce water treatment production.

1

Reserves

1

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not a relevant factor for
this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 71 of 165

Water - WTP Instrumentation
Replacement (2031)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
20

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

62.20

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Instrumentation within the facility ranges from computer related components to analog input/output cards, digital input and output cards, PLC processors, network cards, network
cabling, fibre optics, power supplies, relays, and backup power (UPS).  These devices are important for meeting regulatory requirements and keeping equipment within its
lifecycle is critical.   To change out everything at the same time can be a challenge, so staged approaches to change out components is a preferred option.  The main
Plant PLC was upgraded in 2012, including a number of associated components.  For the continued ongoing success with the computer architecture, these components will
need to be replaced as needed.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031

$30,000.00
$30,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$30,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$30,000.00
$30,000.00

Page 72 of 165

Water - WTP Instrumentation
Replacement (2031)
Justification for Matrix
Values

Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?

3

Socio-Economic Factors Score

To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?

1

Aesthetic Value Score

To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

62.20

Justification / Rationale for Rating
These components are critical to the automation and functioning of the
Water Treatment Plant. Eventually, due to obsolescence, replacement parts
become unavailable, so it is important to maintain relatively current
technology. Failure of these parts without readily available replacements
will affect the entire City's water supply.
Instrumentation failure could be a risk to health and safety through the
delivery of drinking water to the customer and provision of water for fire
suppression purposes.
Safe Drinking Water Act

2

The asset is required to provide an essential service and has either:
• failed and requires replacement; or
• requires imminent maintenance to prevent failure
Failure of a significant instrument could reduce water treatment production.

3

Superintendent and operators to purchase and install

1

2

Climate change's effect on the water system is primarily increased usage
during summer months due to increased duration and severity of heat and
drought between extreme precipitation events. It is expected that the water
system would be affected by increased demands during these periods.
Typically, these conditions also contribute to poor intake water quality due
to sediment loading (erosion during extreme rainfall and due to soil
moisture conditions preventing the absorption of precipitation prior to runoff)
and organic content (algae and bacterial growth accelerate with warmer
temperatures).
No public spaces adversely impacted, however reduced capacity for water
treatment could result in the need for mandatory water conservation
measures.
No adverse impact on aesthetic value

1

N/A : Core Service

0

None

5

Page 73 of 165

Water - SCADA Computer and
Software Upgrade WTP
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.10

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

62.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The City's remote locations (Beattie St, East Hill Booster Station, the reservoir and the Genoe Leachate monitoring system.) require PLC upgrades due to age (20 years), planned in
2024. Additional funds will be budgeted for 2029 with specific needs addressed closer to delivery date.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

$90,000.00

$90,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$90,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$90,000.00
$90,000.00

Page 74 of 165

Water - SCADA Computer and
Software Upgrade WTP
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.10
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

62.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the water source for the entire City

3

Network system failures can result in SCADA failures and an inability to
treat and/or pump water

4

Safe Drinking Water Act

4

Yes. The SCADA is a high priority item in the 10-year plan

4

This will ensure reliable operation of the SCADA system. It includes some
programming changes to optimize treatment, as well.

2

Water Rates

1

Not a direct link

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 75 of 165

Water - WTP Transformer
Replacement
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

72.80

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The existing on-site transformer at the Water Treatment Plant is original equipment (late 1960's) and is due for replacement due to several ESA and safety concerns. Failure of the
on-site transformer at this location would create a serious issue due to the long lead time to get a replacement.  The plant would have to use the diesel generators for an
extended period of time.In 2019, a voltage fluctuation event highlighted the vulnerability of the Water Treatment Plant to transformer failure.  No damage occurred to the
transformer in that instance, but at first that seemed like a real possibility.A consultant will work to specify a new transformer suitable for the Water Treatment Plant as well as
placement location that is in line with ESA requirementsThe critical time path for acquiring a new transformer is the ordering, fabrication, and delivery process, due to supply chain
issues.  Current delivery estimate is 12 months. The transformer was serviced in 2025 and minor ESA non-compliances where addressed. Annual servicing will continue to
maintain reliability.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029
$250,000.00

$2,250,000.00

$2,500,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$2,500,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$2,500,000.00
$2,500,000.00

Page 76 of 165

Water - WTP Transformer
Replacement
Justification for Matrix
Values

Score 0 - 5

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

72.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

4

Legislation Score

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.

5

How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?

3

This is an attempt at being proactive and sourcing and installing a
transformer before the current one fails permanently. Without electricity
from the grid, the plant would have to run on a generator that would have to
be brought in. The emergency backup generator is not intended for
sustained use, as in that situation, there is no backup power supply. Loss of
power means loss of water treatment to the entire city and external areas
fed by the OS system.
The inability to treat water would be an adverse condition. Even if pressure
could be maintained in the system without the plant transformer that powers
the main lift pumps in both the municipal and industrial systems, the inability
to treat the water would prompt a massive and sustained boiled water
advisory, with extensive effort and wasted water required to recommission
the system once power is restored. This has impacts primarily on human
health and those that may be difficult to communicate with in order to
trucks rather than pumpers (that use the hydrants). This may have a ripple
effect on the surrounding rural fire services as they offset each other's
deficits to help the City, if the City does not have adequate tanker inventory.
Safe Drinking Water Act (specifically Adverse Condition provisions of the
regulation)
The asset is required to provide an essential service and has either:
• failed and requires replacement; or
• requires imminent maintenance to prevent failure
The new transformer will be properly sized for the current plant with room to
expand in the future. The existing transformer is original to the plant, and is
completely obsolete. The project also includes modifications within the plant
to accept the new transformer, to bring the installation to current electrical
and safety codes. Modern technology and materials will be used, and the
area around the transformer will be prepared fresh, with appropriate
groundcover and fencing.
Project meets 3 resource categories.

1

No significant Environmental Impact

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

2

The project does not impact the aesthetic value of the impacted asset.

1

Supports core service

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score

5

4

Page 77 of 165

Public Input Score

Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

0

Has not been identified by public

Page 78 of 165

Water Treatment Plant Facility
Maintenance i/c Roof 27N.3
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0067

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

63.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Shawn Dubosq
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Replacement of Roof Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$475,200.00
$475,200.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$475,200.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$475,200.00
$475,200.00

Page 79 of 165

Water Treatment Plant Facility
Maintenance i/c Roof 27N.3
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0067
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

63.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the water treatment for the entire City

5

Roof failure could affect water quality and staff safety

4

Safe Drinking Water Act

5

This is identified in the 10-year plan

3

Ultimately roof failure could cause leakage and damage to important
treatment components; equipment and mechanical and electrical.

1

Reserves

1

Not a direct link

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

1

None

Page 80 of 165

Water - Water Treatment Plant Facility
Maintenance i/c Roof
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30N.7

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

63.40

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The City's 2024 Roof Inspection Program has recommended the replacement of the following roof sections at the Water Treatment Plant:
Roof Section 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.
Roof section 8 is recommended for replacement in 2025 but will be deferred to 2027, while roof sections 1 and 2 are recommended for replacement in 2028/29. All remaining
sections are recommended for replacement in 2027. Staff are recommending combining all of the roof sections into one project for 2027 to minimize disruption at the facility and to
achieve economies of scale by reducing the number of mobilization and demobilizations at the facility.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

$93,500.00
$93,500.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$93,500.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$93,500.00
$93,500.00

Page 81 of 165

Water - Water Treatment Plant Facility
Maintenance i/c Roof
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30N.7
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

63.40

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This affects the water treatment for the entire City

5

Roof failure could affect water quality and staff safety

4

Safe Drinking Water Act

5

This is identified in the 10-year plan

3

Ultimately roof failure could cause leakage and damage to important
treatment components; equipment and mechanical and electrical.

1

Reserves

1

Not a direct link

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

Not significant aesthetic impact

1

N/A: Core Service

1

None

Page 82 of 165

Water - Water Rate Study
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29N.8

Year:
Priority
Score:

2029

54.60

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Study / Assessment / Plan
Green and Resilient City

Description:
The Water Rate Study and associated Financial Plan are regular scheduled requirements for the City to update its Drinking Water Licence and Drinking Water Works Permit.
The approved Financial Plan is one of the criteria to renew these documents, in addition to:
-Accredited Operating Authority
-Permit to Take Water

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029
$50,000.00

$50,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$50,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$50,000.00
$50,000.00

Page 83 of 165

Water - Water Rate Study
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29N.8

2029

54.60

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

5

This affects the entire system

2

This is a regulatory requirement, ultimately a lack of a financial plan could
jeopardize the system

5

Safe Drinking Water Act

5

It is a recurring requirement in the 10-year plan

2

Not particularly applicable to operational performance unless a lack of
funding arose.

1

Reserves/Water Rates

1

N/A

1

No adverse impact on public spaces

1

N/A

1

Core Service

1

None

Page 84 of 165

Water - Bulk Water Fill Station
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30N.1

Year:
Priority
Score:

2030

58.90

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - New Asset / Expansion
Green and Resilient City
50

Description:
The installation of a new bulk water fill station would allow for 24/7 operation and eliminate congestion and conflicts at the operations yard. The fill station would also provide
improved customer service through accessibility and fill rate speed, increase water revenues, promote development, prevent unauthorized hydrant usage and improve local water
quality. The current bulk water fill station that is located at the operations yard creates operational challenges due to traffic and congestion, fill line sizing and hours of operation.
The new skid mount preassembled fill station would ideally be located in commercial/industrial area with easy access for large, construction type equipment.
Careful consideration will need to be given on location to ensure sufficient water supply, sewer availability and traffic flows are considered.
2030 - Feasibility and Design
2031 - Supply and Install

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

$50,000.00

$200,000.00

$50,000.00

$200,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$250,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$250,000.00
$250,000.00

Page 85 of 165

Water - Bulk Water Fill Station
Justification for Matrix
Values

30N.1
Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

3

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Year:
Priority
Score:

4
1

2030

58.90

Justification / Rationale for Rating
This service primarily benefits contractors but has an indirect benefit to all
residents when it come to accessing bulk water for a variety of purposes
including construction, events, pool filling, drinking water cisterns and other.
Traffic congestion and control is a concern at the Public Works yard.
Relocation of this service will allow for proper/safe vehicle staging and
filling.
Modernized air gap fill system will eliminate cross contamination risk
associated with truck hose connections.
I don't believe this asset is currently identified, but will be include in future
capital needs assessment.

5

Failure to proceed with modernizing and relocating the bulk water fill station
will have significant impacts on both the water distribution crew and public
works crew. Current congestion and traffic flow negatively impacts
operations.

0

Not that I am aware of at this time.

3

1

The responsible supply and management of fresh water is becoming more
critical with climate change. This project will allow for more responsible
management of that resource.
Creates greater accesses to bulk water

2

Create a modernized, professional customer service point.

3

Service Excellence - Delivers a level of customer service expected by a
municipality of our size
No as of yet.

0

Page 86 of 165

Water - WTP Storage Facility
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30N.2

Year:
Priority
Score:

2030

59.20

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - New Asset / Expansion
Green and Resilient City

Description:
With many modification and additions over the years adequate storage has become limited. As more equipment and components get shoe-horned into spaces they were not
originally designed to be placed staff are running out of space for maintenance workshop, critical parts, chemicals and emergency supplies. On-site storage is critical for efficient,
safe operations. Having a dedicated space that will not be overtaken by process equipment is crucial for sustained safe operations.
2030- Location selection, site prep and design
2031- Construction

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

$50,000.00

$150,000.00

$50,000.00

$150,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$200,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Total

$200,000.00
$200,000.00

Page 87 of 165

Water - WTP Storage Facility
Justification for Matrix
Values

30N.2

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?

4

Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

Legislation Score

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

3

2030

59.20

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5

People

Year:
Priority
Score:

The entire population many be affected if we fail to store critical parts and
supplies on-site that could result in a plant shut-down as we source
supplies.
There is a significant H&S risk related to the improper storage of parts and
materials. From hazardous or dangerous goods to general housekeeping to
prevent trips and fall organized storage is critical for operations
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act we are required to keep the drinking
water system in a fit state of repair. Part of that is ensure we maintain
adequate supplies in case of emergency.
Not specifically identified, but limited space has been noted.

5

As previously mentioned this project is critical for operational continuity and
ensuring adequate resources in case of emergency.

0

Not that I am aware of

3

0

Potentially. With climate change come more severe weather events
resulting in stresses on our treatment plant processes. Have adequate
storage space will allow for more emergency supplies.
N/A

0

N/A

3

Service Excellence. Being a to provide a more reliable treatment process
and supply.
Not as of yet.

0

Page 88 of 165

Wastewater - WWTP Digester
Cleanout
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Maintenance
Green and Resilient City
6
$350,000.00

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

35.70

Priority Level: Moderate - Score 21-48
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The digester, with a capacity of about 2000 cubic metres receives the biosolids from the clarifiers at the WWTP, and provides additional treatment, and produces biogas, prior to
being stored on site in the two storage tanks, then land applied. Approximately every five years deletrious materials in the digester must be cleaned out to allow for proper tank
operation, especially the biosolids pumps and mixing system. Otherwise rags and other materials begin to clog those components, which could result in digester failure. During the
down time of the digester the gas compressor should be refurbished or replaced. Budget was adjusted according to to accommodate this recommendation Currently such clogging
events are accelerating in frequency.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031

$250,000.00
$50,000.00

$300,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$300,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$300,000.00
$300,000.00

Page 89 of 165

Wastewater - WWTP Digester
Cleanout
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Score 0 - 5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

35.70

Justification / Rationale for Rating

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

4

Affects entire city

2

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

2

Protects public health. Failure of system components increases the
possibility of bypass or overflows of untreated or partially treated sewage to
the environment, causing pollution, degrading fish habitat and exposing the
City to potential fines or other reprimands from failing to adhere to
regulations.
Ensure environmental compliance

1

Maintains critical asset

1

Ensures operations

3

Managed by internal staff. Ready to execute

1

Protects environment

0

No direct impact on public users

1

Asset has no aesthetic value (i.e. is underground, is not visible).

1

Project supports core service delivery.

0

Has not been identified by the public.

Page 90 of 165

WWTP Storage Tank Biosolids
Cleanout (2027) 27O.1
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0060

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50
$2,000,000.00

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

69.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Removal of sediment and debris, and requires a cleaning for proper operation (occurs every 3 years)

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027
$150,000.00

$150,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$150,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$150,000.00
$150,000.00

Page 91 of 165

WWTP Storage Tank Biosolids
Cleanout (2027) 27O.1
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0060
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

69.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This is the biosolids storage for the entire City

5

Storage tank mixing or pumping failure could create adverse reactions in
the tank, which could create dangerous and oderous gases.

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

3

This is a recurring requirement for asset maintenance

4

This is a necessary regular activity in order to allow proper operation of the
biosolids treatment train.

2

Funded through wastewater rates

1

Increased flows do not necessarily translate to increased biosolids
production.

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

3

Prevent a possible severe odour problem.

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 92 of 165

Wastewater - Storage Tank Biosolids
Cleanout (2030)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30O.3

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50
$2,000,000.00

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

69.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
The biosolids storage tank (pictured) at the Wastewater Treatment Plant receives digested biosolids after treatment, and stores them for seasonal land application.
In time the tank accumulates sediment and debris and requires a cleaning for proper operation; especially mixing and pumping.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

$150,000.00

$150,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$150,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$150,000.00
$150,000.00

Page 93 of 165

Wastewater - Storage Tank Biosolids
Cleanout (2030)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30O.3
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

69.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This is the biosolids storage for the entire City

5

Storage tank mixing or pumping failure could create adverse reactions in
the tank, which could create dangerous and oderous gases.

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

3

This is a recurring requirement for asset maintenance

4

This is a necessary regular activity in order to allow proper operation of the
biosolids treatment train.

2

Funded through wastewater rates

1

Increased flows do not necessarily translate to increased biosolids
production.

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

3

Prevent a possible severe odour problem.

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 94 of 165

WWTP Instrumentation/SCADA (2027)
27O.2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0061

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
7

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

66.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Replacement of electrical and SCADA equipment including PLC's, computers, software upgrades, and various instrumentation and networking equipment.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

$150,000.00

$150,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$150,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$150,000.00
$150,000.00

Page 95 of 165

WWTP Instrumentation/SCADA (2027)
27O.2
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0061
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

66.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This can affect the wastewater treatment train which affects the entire City

4

PLC failure poses a considerable risk to proper sewage treatment

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

4

PLC failure would result in the plant control system "Crashing" and sewage
treatment could partially or entirely cease, (There are alarms in place to
alert the operators of this outcome)

1

Funded through wastewater rates

2

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not as relevant a factor
for this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

No adverse affect

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 96 of 165

Wastewater - WWTP
Instrumentation/SCADA (2030)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30O.4

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
7

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

66.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
There is a need to regularly replace electrical and SCADA equipment which have a short lifespan.
This especially includes PLC's, computers, software upgrades, and various instrumentation and networking equipment.
IT Conversations

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

$40,000.00

$40,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$40,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$40,000.00
$40,000.00

Page 97 of 165

Wastewater - WWTP
Instrumentation/SCADA (2030)
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30O.4
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

66.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This can affect the wastewater treatment train which affects the entire City

4

PLC failure poses a considerable risk to proper sewage treatment

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

4

These are identified on the 10 year plan

4

PLC failure would result in the plant control system "Crashing" and sewage
treatment could partially or entirely cease, (There are alarms in place to
alert the operators of this outcome)

1

Funded through wastewater rates

2

Wet weather flows are now more frequent but this is not as relevant a factor
for this project

1

No public spaces adversely impacted

1

No adverse affect

1

N/A: Core Service

0

None

Page 98 of 165

Wastewater - Collection System
Capital Reinvestment
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29O.2

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

61.60

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This project is to continue with the rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer infrastructure with a focus on sanitary sewers, as well as manhole rehabilitation. This rehabilitation will be
conducted through “cured in place pipe” (CIPP) technology. The city is planning to re-tender a 3 year contract to continue to rehabilitate sanitary sewer and manholes.
Specific locations and privatization is expected to change based on operational input, inspection programs, other infrastructure renewal project, etc.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2029

2030

2031

$350,000.00

$350,000.00

$700,000.00

$350,000.00

$350,000.00

$700,000.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$1,400,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$1,400,000.00
$1,400,000.00

Page 99 of 165

Wastewater - Collection System
Capital Reinvestment
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

29O.2
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

5

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

61.60

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

This would typically affect people in the project area which is usually one
block at a time. But the program is City-wide
Sewer bypasses from collapsed sewer have resulted.

3

Ontario Water Resources Act

3

This has been identified in the 10 year plan, as part of a multi-year program.

4

Sewer backups consume considerable public sector and private sector
resources.

1

No

3

Wet weather flows are now more frequent; this is a somewhat relevant
factor for this project

1

N/A

1

N/A

1

N/A: Core Service

1

N/A

Page 100 of 165

Wastewater - 4th St Pumping Station
- Minor Pumping Station Rehab
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

28O.1

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
59

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

61.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This project demonstrates our continual investment into pumping system upgrades a rehabilitation. 4th St. Pumping Station is due for end of life mechanical upgrade and minor
design improvements to increase operational efficiencies. The station also required access improvements for safe confined space entry.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2028

$300,000.00

$300,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2027 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$300,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2028
12/31/2028

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$300,000.00
$300,000.00

Page 101 of 165

Wastewater - 4th St Pumping Station
- Minor Pumping Station Rehab
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

28O.1
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

61.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating

2

This would typically affect people in the project area

5

Sewer bypasses and backups from failed pumps

5

Ontario Water Resources Act

3

This has been identified in the 10 year plan, as part of a multi-year program

4

This station requires frequent callouts to pull the pump for maintenance;
since there is only one pump, any issue must be addressed quickly and
often on overtime.

1

No

2

Wet weather flows are now more frequent; this is only a somewhat relevant
factor for this project

1

N/A

1

None

1

N/A : Core Service

1

None

Page 102 of 165

Infiltration & Inflow Monitoring of
Wastewater Collection System 26O.7
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0059

Asset Management - Study / Assessment / Plan
Green and Resilient City
5

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

61.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Spencer Hammill
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
Flow monitoring study will allow us to identify key areas of Infiltration and Inflow to plan and prioritize collections system maintenance and upgrades.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027
$50,000.00

$150,000.00

$200,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$200,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$200,000.00
$200,000.00

Page 103 of 165

Infiltration & Inflow Monitoring of
Wastewater Collection System 26O.7
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-27-0059
Score 0 - 5

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

61.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating

5

Impact entire city when in context of treatment plant capacity

3

Overflows/by-passes are detrimental to the public and environment

4

CLI-ECA

5

Identify future improvements

3

Operational efficiencies will be achieved as a result of the project.

2

Wastewater rates

3

The project will moderately improve the natural environment and/or prevent
further detriment.

0

N/A

1

N/A

1

City that Grows

0

N/A

Page 104 of 165

Wastewater - 27th St. Generator
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30O.1

Year:
Priority
Score:

2030

50.80

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - New Asset / Expansion
Green and Resilient City
25

Description:
Sewage lift stations are critical wastewater infrastructure used to move sewage from lower elevations to higher elevations. Often critical times for this infrastructure is during
inclement weather when hydro outages are a higher concern. The installation of a standby generator would ensure reliable operations during power outages reducing the likelihood
of by-pass incidents.
2030 - Budget used for preliminary design, sizing, acoustic and dispersion modeling
2031 - Supply and install

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

$50,000.00

$200,000.00

$50,000.00

$200,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$250,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$250,000.00
$250,000.00

Page 105 of 165

Wastewater - 27th St. Generator
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

30O.1

4
4

3
1

2030

50.80

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

Year:
Priority
Score:

Although the catchment zone for the pump station is relatively small the
impacts of by-pass events have the potential to affect many
By-pass event present a significant public health risk

A generator would likely reduce our by-pass events and elevate regulatory
reporting and further legal issues
No, but it adds a critical component to an existing asset

3

Generator will need to be maintained and ran monthly for testing. Low
hours of operation are expected, so maintenance cost should be minimal.

0

N/A

5

0

Yes, climate change has drastically impacted the number of severe weather
events we see. This will make our system more resilient and minimize bypass events to the natural environment.
No

0

No

3

This project aligns with both "Green City" and "Service Excellence"

1

No

Page 106 of 165

10th St. Overflow Weir Modification
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0058

Year:
Priority
Score:

2027

65.10

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Bryce McDonald
Location/Coordinates:

Asset Management - Renewal / Rehabilitation
Green and Resilient City
30

Description:
The 10th St. overflow weir modification was identified by wastewater operations to improve the West Side Pumping Station's performance. By adjusting the overflow weir height and
altering the weir design, pumps can operate at higher flow rates and avoid or eliminate bypass events. This project will be funded by wastewater but led by engineering staff.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027
$10,000.00

$90,000.00

$100,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$100,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Waste Water Rates
Total

$100,000.00
$100,000.00

Page 107 of 165

10th St. Overflow Weir Modification
Justification for Matrix
Values

Year:
Priority
Score:

CAP-27-0058

2027

65.10

Justification / Rationale for Rating

Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?

3

Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

3

Helps eliminate harmful overflow events. While the MECP understands that
overflows will occur in nominally separated systems such as the City's, to
continue to meet our regulatory objectives, the occurrence of these events
must be minimized, and progress must be demonstrated towards reducing
them over time.
Renewal/improvement of critical asset

4

Vastly increases operational performance

3

Relatively simple project to be managed through existing resources

4

Project will provide immediate benefit to the environment

2

Keeps our waterways clean and protects water quality at local beaches

1

Buried infrastructure

1

Aligns with Green City

0

Not required

Legislation Score

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

4

Impacts all residents and users of our local water resources. Raw sewage
or partially treated overflows to the environment degrade environmental
water quality, damage fish habitat and recreational shorelines. Loss of use
or degradation of these assets directly affects tourism and the area's
economic prosperity.
Impacts public health and water quality. Untreated overflows or bypasses
could result in beach closures.

Page 108 of 165

Engineering - 9th Avenue East Phase
1 Rehabilitation - Superior Street to
6th Street East 25P.10
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0008

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
100

Year:

2025

Priority
Score:

66.00

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Spencer Hammill
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
25P.10 This project involves replacing existing City infrastructure together with rehabilitating or reconstructing the 9th Avenue East (Highway 6/10) road. The primary focus of the
project is to improve municipal water security of supply to part of the East Hill Pressure Zone and all of the East Hill Reduced Pressure Zone as well as improve the roadway
infrastructure. Before the watermain on 9th Avenue East can be replaced, the new East Hill Pressure Zone "looping" watermain will have been constructed in two phases on an
existing City owned corridor and private property easements east of 9th Avenue East first (Project 22P.7). Phase 1 (existing corridor) was completed in 2023. Phase 2 (easements)
was completed in 2024.
The project Design or Engineering would be completed in 2025 with construction in 2026. This project has received Connecting Link Intake 9 funding approval. The intended scope
is as follows:
- Replace the existing municipal watermain and appurtenances
- Construct a new sidewalk on the east side of 9th Ave E from Superior St to the existing end of sidewalk
- Replace/repair deficient sanitary sewer
The following components would be Connecting Link funding eligible:
- Replace the existing storm sewer or rehabilitate, if appropriate
- Rehabilitate the road and road related structures, replace existing sidewalk as required and replace storm water infrastructure
In-house Engineering and Design or Engineering budget in 2025 is addition to $125,000 approved in 2024. Water and wastewater related costs and In-house Engineering are not
eligible for CL funding. The funding sources for the total of $250,000 in Engineering cost will be: Taxation - $120,000, Water - $120,000, Wastewater - $10,000.
Design or Engineering, Construction and Contingency budget amounts in 2026 are for construction contract administration, inspection and materials testing costs during the
construction period. These are the Connecting Link (Intake 9) eligible costs with the exception of water and waste water related costs.
In-house and Design or Engineering budget amounts in 2027 are for the two-year maintenance period and would be incurred in 2027 and 2028. These costs will not be CL funding
eligible.
The Engineering design was started in 2024 after the CL funding was confirmed and will advance through 2025 to have the project tender ready for construction in 2026 as the CL
Intake 9 eligibility period ends 31 March 2027.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

Costs Incurred to 2024 Year
End

2025

2026

2027

$120,000.00

$350,000.00

$50,000.00

$5,000.00

$20,000.00

$10,000.00

$4,935,300.00

$125,000.00

$530,000.00
$5,835,300.00

$60,000.00

$125,000.00

Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$6,145,300.00

Schedule:

Page 109 of 165

Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2025
12/31/2028

Funding Sources:
Tax Levy
Grant
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$549,000.00
$2,700,000.00
$2,808,000.00
$88,300.00
$6,145,300.00

Page 110 of 165

Engineering - 9th Avenue East Phase
1 Rehabilitation - Superior Street to
6th Street East 25P.10
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-26-0008

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

4
3

3
4

Year:

2025

Priority
Score:

66.00

Justification / Rationale for Rating
Project benefits many road users,significant number of water customers.
This is the basis of the number of people affected.
Road is in poor condition and City infrastructure has reached the end of its
useful life. Pressure loss could be experienced in parts of water distribution
system during watermain failure.
Project completion ensures the City is in compliance with legislation for
minimum maintenance standards for roads and underground infrastructure.
This section of road has multiple assets with poor condition ratings with
significant impacts if it was to fail.

4

Major improvements to operational performance would be achieved with the
completion of this project due to replacing the water main and resurfacing
the road. Financial savings will be achieved one project is completed.
Watermain breaks and road repairs/patching will be avoided.

3

Funding for the road aspect of the rehabilitation would be covered by
Connecting Link funding.

2

Minor impact will be realized from this project by improving storm water and
improving road surface (better fuel efficiency).

1

The Project does not eliminate an existing public space.

3
3

Pending the final road design inclusion of boulevard trees will be reviewed
to improve the streetscape.
Improving road condition has been identified in the Strategic Plan

2

Has been mentioned informally through public engagements.

Page 111 of 165

Engineering - 4th Avenue West
Reconstruction - 15th St W to 20th St
W 25P.2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-26-0054

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

59.20

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Sofin Lalani
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
25P.2 This project involves reconstructing 4th Avenue West from 15th Street West to 17th Street West, 16th Street West - 400 block and 17th Street West - 400 block. This will be
first phase of two phases of the 4th Avenue West reconstruction project.
This project will include reconstruction of the 4th Avenue West roadway, replacing all the failing municipal underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing curbs/gutters and
sidewalks. The budget also reflects significant infrastructure upgrading in the 400 blocks of 16th St W and 17th Street West. 16th Street West is subject to frequent overland
flooding events and storm water management problems that should be addressed as part of this project.
An RFP to retain an engineering consultant will be issued in 2025 to produce a detailed design for the entire project. The design of Phase 1 and Phase 2 are reflected in the 2025
Engineering cost.
An RFT is anticipated for Phase 1 construction in 2027. The second phase of construction is planned in 2028 (17th St W to 20th St W).
The 2028 column costs include Engineering administration costs during the two-year maintenance period.
Phase 2 Construction has been identified as a separate project and detail sheet.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027

2028

2029

$15,000.00

$6,000.00

$30,000.00
$45,000.00

$39,000.00
$45,000.00

$582,664.00
$15,000.00
$8,502,356.00

$9,100,020.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$9,190,020.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2026
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
OCIF Formula

$22,000.00
$22,000.00
$9,146,000.00

Page 112 of 165

Total

$9,190,000.00

Page 113 of 165

Engineering - 4th Avenue West
Reconstruction - 15th St W to 20th St
W 25P.2
Justification for Matrix
Values
People
Health & Safety Score

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

CAP-26-0054

Score 0 - 5
How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

4

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

59.20

Justification / Rationale for Rating

1

This will impact pedestrian and vehicular traffic on a collector road servicing
a school.
Minor injuries may result if this project does not proceed due to trip hazards.

1

No known legislative/regulatory compliance requirement.

5

All the infrastructure under the road is currently past its life expectancy and
is in need of replacement.

5

Improvements on the underground infrastructure and road will greatly
reduce the amount of staff time and operational costs, as well we reduce
liability due to flooding in the area

4

This project is funded through OCIF.

1

Little or no impact on environment as a result of the project.

2

This project will maintain existing public infrastructure.

3

This project will look at improving the aesthetic value of the road street
scape by including boulevard trees where appropriate and feasible.
This project supports core service delivery.

1
2

Has been mentioned informally through public engagements on the
condition of the road.

Page 114 of 165

Reconstruction of 3rd Ave E/GR 15 10th St E to 12th St E - Phase 1 28P.7
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-28-0010

Asset Management - Replacement
A City That Moves
50 years (roads) - 100 years (mains and services)

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

56.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This is the first phase of a proposed three phase project that involves reconstructing 3rd Avenue East from 10th Street East to 18th Street East. The first phase is the 10th Street
East to 12th Street East segment. This project will be coordinated in conjunction with the County of Grey Road reconstruction. This project will include reconstruction of 3rd Avenue
East roadway, replacing all the failing municipal underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing curbs/gutters and sidewalks.
The costs shown are for City related costs only. This includes watermain, sanitary sewer, sidewalk replacement, existing storm sewer replacement or new construction water
replacement (cost shared by City and County) and boulevard landscaping including planting new trees. Not included are the County's costs such as road reconstruction, curb and
gutter replacement, partial stormwater cost.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2028

2029

2030

$280,000.00

$280,000.00

$15,000.00

$20,000.00

$20,000.00

$5,000.00

$2,500,000.00

$300,000.00

$200,000.00
$3,000,000.00

$20,000.00

Costs Incurred to 2027 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$3,320,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2028
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
OCIF Formula
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$668,000.00
$1,326,000.00
$1,326,000.00
$3,320,000.00

Page 115 of 165

Reconstruction of 3rd Ave E/GR 15 10th St E to 12th St E - Phase 1 28P.7
Justification for Matrix
Values

CAP-28-0010
Score 0 - 5

Year:

2028

Priority
Score:

56.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

It is estimated that 5,000 to 9,999 people will be directly impacted as a
result of this project. This will impact pedestrian and vehicular traffic on a
collector road servicing a school.
Minor injuries may result if this project does not proceed due to trip hazards.

1

No known legislative/regulatory compliance requirement.

4

All the infrastructure under the road is currently past its life expectancy and
is in need of replacement.

5

Improvements on the underground infrastructure and road will greatly
reduce the amount of staff time and operational costs, as well we reduce
liability due to flooding in the area

3

This project is partially funded by OCIF (less than 50%), plus a partnership
cost component with Grey County.

3

Little or no impact on environment as a result of the project.

2

This project will maintain existing public infrastructure.

4

This project will look at improving the aesthetic value of the road street
scape by including boulevard trees where appropriate and feasible.
This project supports core service delivery.

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

1
2

Has been mentioned informally through public comments on the condition
of the road.

Page 116 of 165

Engineering - 3rd Avenue East/GR 15
- 12th St E to 14t St E - Phase 2
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

29P.4

Asset Management - Replacement
A City That Moves
50 years (roads), 80-100 years (mains and services)

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

55.90

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This is the second phase of a proposed three phase project that involves reconstructing 3rd Avenue East from 10th Street East to 18th Street East.
The second phase is the 12th Street East to 14th Street East segment.
This project will be coordinated in conjunction with the County of Grey Road reconstruction. This project will include reconstruction of 3rd Avenue East roadway, replacing all the
failing municipal underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing curbs/gutters and sidewalks.
The costs shown are for City related costs only. This includes watermain, sanitary sewer, sidewalk replacement, existing storm sewer replacement or new construction water
replacement (cost shared by City and County) and boulevard landscaping including planting new trees.
Not included are the County's costs such as road reconstruction, curb and gutter replacement, partial stormwater cost.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2028 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$0.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2029
12/31/2029

Funding Sources:
OCIF Formula
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$660,000.00
$1,330,000.00
$1,330,000.00
$3,320,000.00

Page 117 of 165

Engineering - 3rd Avenue East/GR 15
- 12th St E to 14t St E - Phase 2
Justification for Matrix
Values

29P.4
Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Year:

2029

Priority
Score:

55.90

Justification / Rationale for Rating
It is estimated that 5,000 to 9,999 people will be directly impacted as a
result of this project. This includes the local residents and businesses as
well as the travelling public.
Minor injuries may result if the project does not proceed due to sidewalk trip
hazards.

1

There is no known legislative/regulatory compliance requirement.

4

There is a high probability of failure of underground services with moderate
consequences.

5

Replacing the underground and surface infrastructure will result in
operational cost savings related to attending to sidewalk trip hazards, road
patching and repairs, sewer blockages and repairs and watermain break
avoidance.

3

The project has confirmed OCIF funding at less than 50% of the cost, plus
includes a partnership cost component with Grey County.

3

The project will slightly improve the natural environment and prevent further
detriment.

2

The project maintains an existing public space.

3
1

The project will improve the aesthetic value of the street scape by replacing
the road and sidewalk with enhancements including tree planting.
The project supports core service delivery.

2

The project has been mentioned informally through public comments.

Page 118 of 165

Engineering - 3rd Avenue East/GR 15
- 14th St E to 18th St E - Phase 3
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30P.3

Asset Management - Replacement
A City That Moves
50 years (roads), 80-100 years (watermains and sewers)

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

56.30

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This is the third phase of a proposed three phase project that involves reconstructing 3rd Avenue East from 10th Street East to 18th Street East.
The third phase is the 14th Street East to 18th Street East segment.
This project will be coordinated in conjunction with the County of Grey Road reconstruction. This project will include reconstruction of 3rd Avenue East roadway, replacing all the
failing municipal underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing curbs/gutters and sidewalks.
The costs shown are for City related costs only. This includes watermain, sanitary sewer, sidewalk replacement, existing storm sewer replacement or new construction water
replacement (cost shared by City and County) and boulevard landscaping including planting new trees.
Not included are the County's costs such as road reconstruction, curb and gutter replacement, partial stormwater cost.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

$580,000.00

$250,000.00

$20,000.00

$20,000.00
$5,000,000.00

$600,000.00

$730,000.00
$6,000,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$6,600,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2030

Funding Sources:
OCIF Formula
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$1,320,000.00
$2,640,000.00
$2,640,000.00
$6,600,000.00

Page 119 of 165

Engineering - 3rd Avenue East/GR 15
- 14th St E to 18th St E - Phase 3
Justification for Matrix
Values

30P.3
Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

1

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

56.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating
It is estimated that 5,000 to 9,999 people will be directly impacted as a
result of this project. This includes the local residents and businesses as
well as the travelling public.
Minor injuries may result if the project does not proceed due to sidewalk trip
hazards.

1

There is no known legislative/regulatory compliance requirement.

4

There is a high probability of failure of underground services with moderate
consequences.

5

Replacing the underground and surface infrastructure will result in
operational cost savings related to attending to sidewalk trip hazards, road
patching and repairs, sewer blockages and repairs and watermain break
avoidance.

3

The project has confirmed OCIF funding at less than 50% of the cost, plus
includes a partnership cost component with Grey County.

3

The project will slightly improve the natural environment and prevent further
detriment.

2

The project maintains an existing public space.

4
1

The project will improve the aesthetic value of the street scape by replacing
the road and sidewalk with enhancements including tree planting.
The project supports core service delivery.

2

The project has been mentioned informally through public comments.

Page 120 of 165

Engineering - Moores Hill Road and
Retaining Walls- Reconstruction
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

30P.2

Asset Management - Replacement
A City That Moves
75
$22,500,000.00

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

45.50

Priority Level: Moderate - Score 21-48
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates: 499 Moore's Hill, Owen Sound

Description:
This project involves the reconstruction of the road and adjacent earth retaining walls. It also includes the replacement of the existing sidewalk, possible improvements to the
geometry of the 2nd Avenue West and 4th Avenue West intersections and pedestrian crossings, streetlighting improvements, replacement of the existing storm sewer and
associated storm water management infrastructure under Moores Hill road and replacement of the existing watermain and sanitary sewer on 2nd Avenue West within the limits of
construction.
The existing retaining walls are gabion basket stone-filled structures that have shown signs of constant gradual movement and deterioration that is causing continual problems with
road buckling and repairs on the south side of the road and gabion basket encroachment and repairs into the sidewalk on the north side. These structures would be replaced with
reinforced concrete retaining walls or an "engineered" stable slope design with proper surface and sub-drainage systems to assist in managing problematic groundwater and
seepage.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2030

2031

2032

$200,000.00

$190,000.00

$12,000.00

$20,000.00

$10,000.00

$3,000.00

$1,600,000.00

$220,000.00

Costs Incurred to 2029 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$200,000.00
$2,000,000.00

$15,000.00

$0.00
$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$2,235,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2030
12/31/2033

Funding Sources:
Tax Levy
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$2,220,000.00
$172,000.00
$58,000.00
$2,450,000.00

Page 121 of 165

Engineering - Moores Hill Road and
Retaining Walls- Reconstruction
Justification for Matrix
Values

30P.2
Score 0 - 5

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

4

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

3

Legislation Score

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?

1

To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

3

Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score

Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

3

3

1

Year:

2030

Priority
Score:

45.50

Justification / Rationale for Rating
Based on 2016 traffic counts, approximately 2,500 vehicles travel on
Moores Hill daily. Including an assumed 200 pedestrians using the
sidewalk and two persons per vehicle, this equates to approximately 5,200
persons relying on this transportation link every day.
Multiple injuries may result if the project does not proceed. The slope
stability is a concern in this area. There is movement taking place as
evidenced by the embankment or existing gabion baskets encroaching on
the road and sidewalk, respectively.
There is no legislation mandating this project.
There is a moderate probability of failure with moderate consequences.
This project involves replacing three classes of critical infrastructure roadway, sidewalks and retaining walls.
Operational efficiencies will be achieved by reducing the required repairs to
the road as a result of slope movement causing buckling road surfaces,
sidewalk encroachment by the gabion baskets that have to be adjusted and
repaired regularly and the impairment of winter control activities
(inadequate sidewalk width).
There is no opportunities for partnership or grant funding at the present time
but future funding opportunities may be possible.

2

This project will slightly improve the natural environment and prevent further
damage to the environment.

2

The project will maintain an existing public space. The project will involve
replacing and widening the sidewalk to enable snow storage and improved
accessibility, thereby encouraging pedestrian and possible other active
transportation usage.
The upgraded retaining walls, roadway and sidewalk will have an improved
appearance.
This project supports core service delivery.

1
2

The condition of Moores Hill has been noted informally by some members
of the public as requiring some upgrading.

Page 122 of 165

Engineering - 15th Street E - 3rd Ave
E to 6th Ave E - Reconstruction
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

Asset Management - Replacement
Green and Resilient City
50

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

70.30

Priority Level: Very High - Score 70+
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
This project involves reconstructing 15th Street East from 6th Avenue East to 3rd Avenue East (St. Mary's Hill). Will involve slope stabilization, replacing all failing municipal
underground infrastructure and fully reconstructing the road, curbs/gutters, and sidewalks. May include streetlight upgrades. Additionally, as there currently is no storm sewer on the
hill, this will be added. Will also include modification of the watermain to eliminate redundant lines and improve pressure on the side streets.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2031

2032

$450,000.00
$50,000.00

$25,000.00
$5,050,000.00

$500,000.00

$5,075,000.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2030 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$5,575,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2031
12/31/2031

Funding Sources:
Tax Levy
Water Rates
Waste Water Rates
Total

$3,330,000.00
$1,110,000.00
$1,110,000.00
$5,550,000.00

Page 123 of 165

Engineering - 15th Street E - 3rd Ave
E to 6th Ave E - Reconstruction
Justification for Matrix
Values
People

Score 0 - 5

Year:

2031

Priority
Score:

70.30

Justification / Rationale for Rating

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?
What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?

4

5,000 to 9,999 people will be directly impacted as a result of this project.

1

Legislation Score

Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?

5

Asset Management Score

Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

4

Minor injuries not requiring medical attention may result if the project does
not proceed. Currently the storm drainage on the hill is very poor, resulting
in overland flow shedding throughout the pavement surface. This increases
the likelihood of ice formation and risk of slip and vehicular traction loss
incidents. The improvement of geometric design will enable accessibilityrelated upgrades.
Completion of the project will achieve full legislative/regulatory compliance.
Chiefly, the elimination of sections of combined sewer through installation of
new storm sewer system on the hill. This will also result in lower flows at the
plant by removing a known source of extraneous flow; this is an objective
the MECP expects the City to make progress on over time. The
reconstruction work will also make it easier for City forces to maintain an
ice-free surface on the hill.
Asset has reached its useful life and needs to be planed and scheduled for
replacement to not affect essential water services (i.e. trunk watermain)

Health & Safety Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

5

Staff expect to get operational efficiency by completing the project, treating
less stormwater at the wastewater plant, icing issues on the road, etc.

3

Project can be completed on the scheduled timeframe by staff and
consultants and have scheduling and technological resources

4

The project has a demonstrated impact on mitigating or adapting to climate
change.

0
2

Increased accessibility provisions will be implemented wherever
possible/appropriate.
The project does not impact the aesthetic value of the asset

3

The project meets at least one Strategic goal

0

Not identified by the public to date

Page 124 of 165

Schedule K. - Tax, Water Finance
Service or Activity

2025

2026

2027

2028

By-law No. 2026-XXX

Unit

Applicable
Tax

Notes

Unit

Applicable
Tax

Notes

Review Cycle

Residential Consumption Rates (*For all accounts unless deemed otherwise as a large consumption user by the City)
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.

2025
Water Monthly Consumption Charges

Water Monthly Service Charges

2026

$

1.80

$

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

2.02
31.90
38.85
50.26
73.38
143.00
234.99
350.38
465.76
696.54

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

124%

2027

2028

Usage 0 - 110 m3 per month

1.89
2.12
33.49
40.80
52.78
Water and
Water and
77.05 waste water waste water
150.15
rates are
rates are
246.74 reviewed and reviewed and
367.90 set annually set annually
489.05
731.37
120%

Usage >110 m3 per month
15 mm (5/8") / per month
18 mm (3/4") / per month
25 mm (1") / per month
38 mm (1.5") / per month
50 mm (2") / per month
75 mm (3") / per month
100 mm (4") / per month
150 mm (6") / per month
200 mm (8") / per month
of Total Water Charges

Exempt

1 cubic metre (m3) = 1,000 litres (L)

Exempt

Based on Water Meter Diameter

Exempt

Total Water Charges = Water Monthly Consumption
Charges + Water Monthly Service Charges

55.

Wastewater Charges

56.
57.

All rates shown are for properties within the boundaries of the City of Owen Sound. Rates for properties outside of the City boundaries are double the amounts shown above.
The billing rate for outstanding manual-meter accounts is based on the prior year's average monthly consumption.

59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.

Large Consumption Rates (*Only for grandfathered accounts deemed as a large consumption user by the City of Owen Sound)
2025
2026
2027
2028
Unit
Applicable TaxNotes
3
$
1.80 $
1.89
Usage 0 - 110 m per month
Water Monthly Consumption Charges
Exempt
1 cubic metre (m3) = 1,000 litres (L)
$
2.02 $
2.12
Usage >110 m3 per month
$
126.10 $ 132.41
50 mm (2") / per month
Water and
Water and
$
207.22 $ 217.58
75 mm (3") / per month
waste water waste water
Water Monthly Service Charges
Exempt
Based on Water Meter Diameter
$
308.97 $ 324.42
100
mm (4") / per month
rates are
rates are
$
410.72 $ 431.25 reviewed and reviewed and
150 mm (6") / per month
$
614.24 $ 644.96 set annually set annually
200 mm (8") / per month

65.

Wastewater Charges

66.

All rates shown are for properties within the boundaries of the City of Owen Sound. Rates for properties outside of the City boundaries are double the amounts shown above.

67.
68.

Ratepayers shall pay fixed service charges (monthly water service charge + associated sewer surcharge), regardless of if water service has been turned off at the curb.
The billing rate for outstanding manual-meter accounts is based on the prior year's average monthly consumption.

58.

102%

102%

of Total Water Charges

Schedule K. - Tax, Water Finance

Exempt

Total Water Charges = Water Monthly Consumption
Charges + Water Monthly Service Charges

Page 125 ofPage
1654 of 5

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Bryce McDonald, Manager of Water and Wastewater

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-023 respecting the Walking
Beam Flocculator Update, the Operations Committee recommends that City
Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:











The design and construction of the replacement unit (approved
through OP-23-010) has been unreliable, experiencing repeated
structural failures.
Several attempts have been made to reinforce the unit, but it only
appears to shift the failure points while the bracing increases
overall weight.
Downtime of this equipment significantly impacts the plant’s ability
to treat water, especially during times of poorer intake water
quality.
After exhausting all other avenues, Staff recommend full
replacement with proven, reliable vertical paddle wheel technology.
Section 35 of By-law 2020-002 – By-law Respecting the
Procurement of Goods and Services for the City (Purchasing Bylaw) includes provisions for the emergency purchase of goods or
services.
There is some remaining budget from the initial flocculator
replacement, but additional funds are expected to be required.

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 1 of 6

Page 126 of 165

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s
environmental, social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the
climate crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and infrastructure
to support healthy lifestyles.

Previous Report/Authority:
Report OP-23-010 from the Director of Public Works and Engineering Re:
Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement

Background:
On January 31, 2023, it was discovered that several suspension rods holding
up one of the City’s walking beam flocculators were damaged. One of the
connection points snapped, causing catastrophic damage. Staff drained the
tank, and a local metal fabricator removed wreckage. Staff made numerous
attempts to secure replacement parts from the original manufacturer. The
manufacturer no longer provides parts and services outside of the USA and
would not warranty installation by others. Based on staff recommendation,
Council supported the procurement of a local consultant to design a
replacement unit and have a local mechanical fabricator complete the build
and installation. Due to legislated design criteria for materials in contact with
drinking water in the City’s Municipal Drinking Water Works Permit, the
resulting design was simultaneously much heavier and had different buoyant
properties than the original. The integration of the new equipment with
existing supports, motor and drive arm resulted in unforeseen stress points
and repeated structural failures. After multiple attempts to strengthen and
modify the design, it was deemed fundamentally and irretrievably flawed,
and thus, a new direction is recommended.

Analysis and Options:
Flocculation is a critical process step in water treatment. The plant is
designed with limited redundancy, and during periods of poorer source water
quality, the production rate is reduced, which can lead to capacity
challenges. The City has invested significant resources trying to render the
new design viable and stable; it is now apparent that unreliable service in
exchange for ongoing modifications and retrofits is not sustainable. The
options considered to date are as follows.
Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 2 of 6

Page 127 of 165

Attempt to repair existing unit
Since installation nearly two years ago, Staff have struggled with structural
failures caused by the new unit’s weight and buoyancy. Any additional
reinforcement to repair the failure points only increases weight and shifts
stress to the original drive arm, mounts and motor. Proceeding with
additional reinforcement and repair is not recommended.
Traditional competitive procurement
This option would drastically lengthen the project timeline and increase risks
of water shortages during prolong incidents of poor source water quality.
This pathway involves drafting a terms of reference (Request for Proposal),
evaluating the proposals, and awarding the contract (with or without Council
involvement, depending on the contract value). Once a consultant is
selected, tasks prior to construction include: the design, specifications,
competitive procurement (tendering), tender award (again, with or without
Council, depending on the contract value), shop drawing review and
approvals and equipment delivery time.
This process would likely span up to two years, which means the plant would
be down a flocculator for two more spring thaws and run-off events (in 2027
and 2028). Considering the extensive consulting and design component with
this option, cost savings justifying the additional risk and timeline are not
expected.
Emergency purchase
Based on the criticality of this equipment and the risks associated with delays
staff have elected to procure through Section 35 of By-law 2020-002 – Policy
Respecting the Procurement of Goods and Services for the City (Purchasing
Policy) includes provisions for the emergency purchase of goods or services.
The situations are generally related to unforeseen conditions that impact
public health and safety, maintenance of essential services, welfare of
persons or public property, or the security of the City’s interests. These types
of purchases are generally related to the repair or replacement of assets,
allowing them to continue providing services to the Community. When an
emergency purchase is required, the Purchasing Agent (Manager of
Corporate Services) has the authority to issue a Purchase Order or
agreement for the necessary services. When the value of the emergency
purchase exceeds $100,000, the Purchasing Agent shall provide a report to

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 3 of 6

Page 128 of 165

the Council as soon as practicable. An information report will be brought
forward to Council following completion of the project.

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
The estimated financial resources associated with the project are as follows:
1.

Removal and disposal/recycling of existing custom built flocculator
by Krueger Custom Steel and Machining Ltd. at a cost of
$17,000.00

2.

Supply and installation of two (2) flocculators (mixing paddles)
manufactured by JMS (represented by ProAqua) at a cost of
$463,000.00

3.

Supply and installation of one (1) FRP baffle wall manufactured by
NEFCO (represented by ProAqua) at a cost of $104,000.00

4.

Cleaning and disinfection of flocculator tank after installation at a
cost of $6500.00

5.

$10,000 contingency for systems integration, consultant support for
shop drawing review, contract administration and site inspection as
required

All for an estimated total of $600,500 exclusive of applicable HST. ($611,068
including the non-refundable portion of HST).
There is some budget remaining in the original Flocculator Replacement
Project, 23N.20, of $485,000, which can be utilized for this project, leaving
$126,069 deficit needing a funding source. Staff propose this could be
funded from 2027 through reprioritization of capital projects funded from
water rates.
Upon project completion of the project, staff will prepare an information
report for Council outlining the final financial resources associated with the
project.

Human Resources
Managing complex treatment plant process projects is always challenging,
but this design build is expected to ease some of the technical specification
development and project management burden. This project is not expected
to require any additional staff resources.

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 4 of 6

Page 129 of 165

Time and Scheduling
Timeline and schedule are critical factors and a real driver for emergency
procurement in this case. The two timelines below outline the expected
milestones for each, highlighting the risky delays.
Standard Competitive Procurement
1.

Develop terms of reference for Request for Proposal, advertise bid
opportunity, evaluate proposal submissions and award consulting
contract (3 months)

2.

Consultant develops detailed design and equipment specifications
(4-6 months)

3.

Work with Consultant to develop tender package, post, close tender
and award construction contract (3 months)

4.

Contract execution and project initiation (2 months)

5.

Shop drawing review and approval (2-3 months)

6.

Equipment order/delivery time (6 months)

7.

Construction and commissioning (3 months)

Total – approximately 24-26 months
Emergency Procurement
1.

Preliminary design-build package and cost estimate (0 months,
already complete)

2.

Contract preparation and execution (2 months)

3.

Shop drawing review and approval (1 month)

4.

Equipment order/delivery time (6 months)

5.

Construction and commissioning (3 months)

Total - 12 months

Technology and Infrastructure
The technology and equipment being proposed is proven, readily available,
and utilized throughout the world. Several equipment suppliers and
contractors have reviewed and verified that the City’s facility is suitable for
this equipment and modifications. Programming changes are expected to be
minimal.

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 5 of 6

Page 130 of 165

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
This supports the objectives of the City’s Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan by strengthening the resiliency of City infrastructure or
services.

Communication and Engagement:
Public communication is not required from the perspective of awareness, as
the work will be internal to the plant, completed in coordination with the
City’s water treatment staff and will not result in water production
disruptions during the project.

Report Developed in Consultation With:
Troy Pelletier, Superintendent of Water Treatment

Attachments:
Attachment 1 – March 2023 Report OP-23-010 Re Walking Beam Flocculator
Emergency Replacement
Reviewed by:
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Bryce McDonald at
bmcdonald@owensound.ca or 519-376-4274 Ext 3224.

Staff Report OP-26-023: Walking Beam Flocculator Update
Page 6 of 6

Page 131 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering

Meeting Date:

March 16, 2023

Report Code:

OP-23-010

Subject:

Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement

Recommendations:
THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-23-010 respecting the Walking
Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement, the Operations Committee
recommends that City Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:








On January 31, 2023, it was discovered that several suspension
rods holding up one of the City’s walking beam flocculators were
damaged. One of the connection points snapped, causing
catastrophic damage.
Staff has drained the tank, and a local metal fabricator has begun
to remove the wreckage. A quote for the replacement of the
equipment is being sought.
The City’s water treatment plant has two identical walking beam
flocculators, both original to the plant (circa the 1960s). There is
partial redundancy within the plant’s process via the two newer
flocculators added in the early 1980s; however, not replacing the
flocculator is not viable.
Once the remediation costs and costs to replace the damaged
flocculator are better known, Staff will submit a further report on
logistics and financial impacts. It is prudent to consider also
replacing the other walking beam flocculator of the same vintage.

Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 1 of 5

Page 132 of 165

Strategic Plan Alignment:
This report supports the delivery of Core Service.

Previous Report/Authority:
None.

Background:
The Owen Sound Water Treatment Plant was originally built in the 1960s. It
was equipped with twin flocculation tanks coupled with filter tanks.
Flocculators are used to remove fine particulate matter from the raw water.
Those that have maintained a pool may be familiar with flocculation; a
flocculant is added to the water to cause the fine particles to clump together,
making them more accessible for the filters to remove. To ensure optimum
dispersion of the flocculant and creation of the floc (the clumped-together
particles), agitation is necessary. There are several flocculators, some that
spin like paddle wheels, others that are impeller-like discs, but the type
installed in the water plant's original part are called walking beam
flocculators. They resemble an oil derrick with a main axle upon which two
beams are mounted that rock back and forth like a seesaw, and the mixing
paddle assemblies are suspended. As the beam rocks, the assemblies are
lifted and lowered in the water column, creating turbulence and mixing the
water.
On the morning of January 13th, a routine inspection revealed that during the
night, one of the connection points of the paddle assembly of the walking
beam flocculator in cell 1 had corroded through, causing the paddle assembly
to swing underneath the assembly on the other side of the tank. This caused
the paddle assemblies to crash and consequently twisted and snapped the
support rods that kept the paddle assemblies suspended from the walking
beams. As a result, the paddle assemblies now lie on the tank’s floor,
partially submerged and irretrievable without specialized confined space
equipment. The tank and associated filter have been taken offline, and the
water level has gradually drawn down to prepare for the remediation efforts.

Analysis:
At approximately 60 years of age, the walking beam flocculators are beyond
their useful life. They have been repaired multiple times and should have
Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 2 of 5

Page 133 of 165

been in the capital forecast for replacement over a decade ago, if not longer.
As a result, although this equipment failure should have been predicted, it is
now an unbudgeted expense.
Staff have done their best to mitigate the impacts of the treatment cell being
out of commission. They have also arranged for a local steel fabricator
familiar with the plant to remove the wreckage, which must be removed with
a davit arm-mounted hoist. The availability of such equipment is fortunate,
as the plant’s design did not incorporate convenient access to the bottom of
the flocculation tanks; the under-deck access hatch is remote and requires
deep horizontal penetration confined space entry, a situation that
significantly increases the complexity of the operation. The davit arm hoist
is in transit when writing this report. Upon arrival, it will be mounted to the
concrete plant deck, and debris removal can begin.
Another corporation has succeeded the company that initially installed the
walking beams, and Staff is hopeful that their archived files will contain the
original schematics for the flocculators. Walking beam flocculators are still
manufactured today and are considered the gold standard for floc
production. However, it is anticipated that the flocculators are made-to-order
and will likely have an extensive delivery time. As such, this cell is expected
to be out of commission for several months at a minimum.
Staff considered installing a more readily available flocculator system, such
as the type in cells 3 and 4. However, this would require an amendment to
the Environmental Compliance Approval for the water plant, which would not
significantly save time due to MECP review and processing timelines.
Further, in any decision tree, one must consider the “do nothing” approach.
To this, Staff recommend that it is not a viable option to defer/decline the
replacement for the following reasons:






The second walking beam flocculator is identical in vintage and
condition as the one that failed. There is a high probability that a
similar failure could occur in the short term.
Bearing in mind that a failure in the remaining walking beam is a
distinct possibility and that the second and third flocculators are
also aged at approximately 40 years old, the risk of a critical loss of
redundancy, if not total filtration functionality, is significant.
While the plant maintains adequate capacity under typical
conditions with the elimination of cell 1, during wet-weather
conditions such as spring thaw, the plant requires its total capacity

Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 3 of 5

Page 134 of 165



as the raw water supply typically bears more suspended sediment.
The loss of one or more flocculators will impact the plant’s
functionality.
The Capital Plan for 2023 already planned to temporarily take cells
3 and 4 out of service for a filter upgrade. That cannot be
undertaken with cells 1 and 2 being non-functional.

Financial Implications:
The Director of Corporate Services has been consulted concerning the
procurement process in emergencies and a discussion on the availability of
funds in the Water Reserve to cover these unplanned expenses. The
wreckage removal has begun; however, the costs for this remediation are
challenging to predict and, as such, are proceeding on a time and materials
cost basis. Once the remediation and subsequent replacement costs are
known, verification of funding and approval as required under the Purchasing
Policy shall be undertaken. As this is considered an emergency expense,
Staff intends to proceed in the most economical manner possible; however,
the replacement (and therefore expenditure) is unavoidable if the
functionality of the water plant is to be maintained.

Communication Strategy:
There has not been, nor will there be, any impact on the quality or safety of
the City’s water due to this equipment failure. It is essential that any time
this project is discussed, this fact be emphasized.

Consultation:
Staff have contacted the local Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and
Parks team for guidance and to keep them apprised of our efforts to remedy
the situation.

Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 4 of 5

Page 135 of 165

Attachments:
Walking Beam Flocculator Photos
Recommended by:
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Lara Widdifield, Director
of Public Works and Engineering, at lwiddifield@owensound.ca or 519-3764440 ext. 1201.

Staff Report OP-23-010: Walking Beam Flocculator Emergency Replacement
Page 5 of 5

Page 136 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Manan Monga, Engineering Technologist

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

Page 137 of 165

Previous Report/Authority:
Report OP-25-006 from Manager of Engineering Services Re: 2025-2026
Road Rehabilitation Locations
Report OP-25-016 from the Manager of Engineering Services Re: Roads
Condition Update
2026 Approved Capital Projects Budget Link: Summary of 2025-2029
Projects - Dec Update.xlsx (Please note that this budget item appears as
“Asphalt and Concrete Replacement – Annual Program.”)
Report CR-26-032 Award of City of Owen Sound Component of Grey County
Joint Tender RFT-TS-20-26 Milling and Hot Mix Asphalt Paving – April 13,
2026

Background:
City Council has pre-approved an annual budget allocation of $700,000 for
road rehabilitation for 2026. The pre-approved annual allocation of $700,000
continues until 2029, with any fluctuations attributed to pre-spending the
next year's budget allocation or under-spending the previous year's approved
budget.
As part of the 2025 Capital Budget Deliberations, Council requested that
Staff provide a list and map of the proposed road resurfacing locations. This
prompted report OP-25-006, which was presented to the Operations
Committee on March 20, 2025. The report also proposed the list of roads for
2026. All road segments were based on the 2024 Pavement Condition Index.
The index primarily considers the type, severity, and extent of pavement
distress, along with factors such as pavement age. OP-25-006 also proposed
the 2026 list of resurfacing road segments.
The project was published for contractor procurement as part of Grey
County’s road resurfacing tender to obtain lower unit costs and improved
project delivery timelines. IPAC Paving Limited was the successful bidder on
the project. The purchasing department presented a report to the council
regarding the contract award on April 13, 2026.
Purchasing presented a report to Council on April 13, 2025, recommending
the award of the contract to IPAC Paving Limited. Due to the early tender
date, it was not possible to present a list of locations and a map to
Committee prior to the tender award report.
Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 2 of 6

Page 138 of 165

Winter 2025-2026 was severe on the City’s road network, so some
adjustments were required to the proposed rehabilitation locations.
Additionally, the tendered bid prices were more competitive than expected,
which allowed slightly more surface area to be added.

Analysis and Options:
Due to the favourable pricing and a reprioritization of road segments to be
resurfaced, Staff are in the process of adding four (4) more road segments
to the project through a change order, and two (2) locations have been
removed.
The process followed to reevaluate the road segments to be resurfaced
followed a process of elimination analysis. Using the Pavement Condition
Assessment of 2024, first, any locations that have already been rehabilitated
or reconstructed and those identified in the multi-year capital forecast for
future reconstruction were eliminated. Public Works and Engineering staff
met to review the remaining priority road segment candidates for
rehabilitation. Other factors such as watermain cathodic protection, water
valve repair, sanitary sewer rehabilitation, storm sewer and related structure
repairs were considered. Through this process, the list of locations was
derived.
Staff have made minor adjustments to the initial list that was presented to
the Operations Committee on March 20, 2026, based on a reassessment of
resurfacing priorities and competitive pricing received after the bid process.
Two (2) previously identified roadways were replaced, and four roadways are
to be added to the list through a change order.
The road segments identified for rehabilitation in 2026 are documented in
the attached list.
In 2024, Grey County offered lower-tier municipalities the opportunity to
partner with their road resurfacing/rehabilitation tender. Since that time, the
City has participated in this programme to obtain lower unit prices and
improved project delivery timelines through the combined purchasing power
of the County and its lower-tier municipal partners.
At the time of writing this report, the following are the tentative key
milestone dates for the project:



May 19, 2026 – City and County Work to Commence
June 6, 2026 - City Work to be Completed
Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 3 of 6

Page 139 of 165

The contractor is prepared to begin immediately, pending favourable weather
to ensure the temperature of the hot mix asphalt is able to be maintained
during transit, placement and compaction.
Work is scheduled to begin on May 19, 2026, and is expected to be
completed by June 6, 2026. The project includes adjustments to
underground infrastructure, milling of existing pavement, installation of new
hot mix asphalt, improvements to drainage, and the application of new
pavement markings.

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
The tender price submitted by IPAC Limited was $540,002.95 including nonrebateable HST. This will be adjusted upward slightly as discussed, in order
to make full use of the available budget of $700,000.
Funding will be provided from the approved 2026 Road Rehabilitation budget
in the amount of $700,000, funded primarily through Canada – Community
Building Fund (formerly Federal Gas Tax).
Staff are currently processing a change order to include the four additional
road segments. Following the inclusion of these additional locations, an
estimated contingency of approximately $85,000 will remain within the
approved budget.
It should be noted that asphalt paving costs are expected to increase due to
recent increases in commodity prices, especially bituminous materials and
fuel. In accordance with OPSS 310, deviations in the asphalt price index
(MTO Performance-Graded Asphalt Cement Price Index, PGAC) may result in
price adjustments applicable to the final cost of the project.

Human Resources
As noted in report CR-26-032, Contract administration for the 2026 Road
Rehabilitation Program will be managed internally by the City’s Engineering
Technologist with an external-facing engineering consultant to oversee
contract administration. This dedicated resource helps mitigate risks
associated with deficiencies and cost-related issues, ultimately protecting the
City’s interests, enhancing accountability by ensuring all work performed
meets municipal standards and providing long-term value to the City’s
infrastructure network.
Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 4 of 6

Page 140 of 165

Time and Scheduling
Due to the early tendering timeline, the specified mandatory substantial
completion date is July 17, 2026. The contractor is ready to proceed
immediately, as long as the ambient and ground temperatures are warm
enough to maintain the asphalt hot mix target temperatures. As the work is
expected to take three (3) weeks to complete, the work should be finished
well ahead of the mandatory deadline.

Technology and Infrastructure
No additional technology or infrastructure needs are required.

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
The recommendation supports the City's Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan.
A smooth road surface reduces the fuel consumption of vehicles travelling
over that surface.

Communication and Engagement:
This report satisfies communication with Council requested during previous
meetings when this topic was discussed.
The Public has been notified through a Media Release on May 6, 2026.
Further notifications will occur in areas affected by the work.

Report Developed in Consultation With:
The following were involved in preparing the list of locations identified for
rehabilitation in 2025 and 2026.








Director of Public Works and Engineering
Manager of Engineering Services
Manager of Water and Wastewater
Public Works Superintendent
Water Distribution Supervisor
Engineering Technologist – Traffic and Construction
Engineering Technologist – Infrastructure

Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 5 of 6

Page 141 of 165

Attachments:
1.

Attachment 1 – 2026 Asphalt Resurfacing Locations List

2.

Attachment 2 – 2026 Asphalt Resurfacing Locations Map

Reviewed by:
Mason Bellamy, Manager of Public Works and Engineering Services
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Manan Monga,
Engineering Technologist, at mmonga@owensound.ca or 519-376-4440 ext.
3408.

Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 6 of 6

Page 142 of 165

2026 Road Rehabilitation Loactions
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Project
4th St E
28th Av E
7th Ave E
6th Ave E
7th St E
8th St "A" E
15th St "A" E
14th St E
5th Ave E
5th Ave E
11th St E
13th Ave E
7th Ave W
11th St E
28th St W
17th St E
11th Ave E
12th St E
Total - 2026

From

To

4th Ave E
5th Ave E
18th St E
20th St E
7th St 'A' E
8th St E
100 Block
200 Block
7th Ave E
8th Ave E
7th Ave E
Cul-de-sac
8th Ave E
9th Ave E
2nd Ave E
4th Ave E
18th St E
North End
4th St E
6th St E
10th Ave E
11th Ave E
11th St E
15th St 'B' E
14th St W
Bridge
12th Ave E
13th Ave E
3rd Ave W
4th Ave W
1815 17th St E 20th St E
12TH St E
Cul-de-sac
11th Ave E
12th Ave E

Length
(m)

Width
(m)

108
400
110
405
180
130
130
226
645
411
145
190
70
85
112
145
100
110

6.5
7.0
8.0
8.6
8.0
7.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.5
7.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
7.5
11.2
8.0

City of Owen Sound- Engineering Services
Depth
Area
Tonnes
(0.05
Remarks
Classification
(m2)
(2.45/m3)
m/lift)
702
0.05
86.00 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
2800 0.05
343.00 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
880
0.05
107.80 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
3483 0.05
426.67 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1440 0.05
176.40 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
910
0.05
111.48 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1170 0.05
143.33 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1808 0.05
221.48 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
4515 0.05
553.09 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
2480 0.05
303.80 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1088 0.05
133.22 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1615 0.05
197.84 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
595
0.12
174.93 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
723
0.05
88.51 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
952
0.05
116.62 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1088 0.05
133.22 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1120 0.05
137.20 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
880
0.05
107.80 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local

PCI (2024)

Comments

30/38
27
54
28/33
25
26
30
30/29
28
30/37
36
35
29
28
30
32
52
52

Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender

Approval in Process

Page 143 of 165

±

Ave
E
9th

Ba

28th Ave E

st
Ea

E
Av
e
h

7th

20th Ave E

E

E

E

Ave

E

23rd St E

9th

tA

8th
Ave

tE

Ave
E

E

E
Ave

Ave
6th

5th

hS

18t

tE

hS

tE

hS

20th St E

tE

E

1st St W

11th Ave E

10th Ave E

28th Ave E

8th Ave E

6th St E

Sideroad 15

Concession 11

8th Ave E

Superior St

8th Ave A E

E

4th St A E
4th St E

9th Ave E

5th St E

2nd St E

1st St E

Road Resurfacing

2026 Road Rehabilitation Locations
Approval in Process

0

Grey Road 5

0.28 0.55

Forest Hill Dr

2nd A
venue

SE

4th Ave SW

18th Ave E

Ave

E
Av
e
8th

8th

E

4th St E

St

7th St SW
1.1
Kilometers

26

7th St E

Highway 6 & 10

1st St SW

Av
e

5th Ave E
4th Ave E

5th St E

Highway

10th Concession South

1st St A W 1st St W

8th St E

6th St A E

5th Ave E

2nd St W
2nd St W

8th St A E

6th St E

4th St W
3rd St A W

3rd St W Beattie St
2nd St A W

9th St A E

7th St A E
7th St E

5th

16th St E

15th St B E
12th St E
11th St E
10th St E
10th St E

9th St E

7th Ave E

W

17th St E

E

dA
ve

3r

E

E

6th Ave E

St

St

5th Ave E

St

7th St E

3rd Ave E

est
Street W

19t

17t

4th

11
th

4th St A E

4th St A W

6th Ave W

7t

3rd

Eddie Sargent Parkway

2nd Ave W

h
6t

5th St W

4th

12
th

9th St E

3rd Ave W

4th Ave W

6th Ave W

tE

1st Ave W

2nd Ave W

3rd Ave W

&
6
ys
wa
gh
Hi

6th St W

th
S

17th St E 17th
16 St E
th
St
14
E
th
St
E

E

7th St W

18

9th Ave A E

8th St W

t St

hS
tE

1st Ave

7th Ave W

9th St W

tS

21s
20t

5th Ave A E

21

W

9th St A W

tE

dS

E

e
Av
10th St W

23r

St

W

h

9t

11th St W

hS

th

e
Av

12th St W

4th Ave A W

8th
a
ph
Al

13th St W

Sideroad 21

26th St E

25t

15

Grey Road 17B

2nd Avenue West

tW

tE
27th St E

21s

tW

13th St A W

St

th
S

tW

St W

Ave
hS

5th

Ave
W

18t

hS

W
15th St

14th St W

28

tW

St
W
23r
dS

W

tW

St W

17t

tW

24t
hS

1st
Ave
E

hS

St W

tW

32nd St E

16th Ave E

8th

23r
d

4th

rso
nS
t
Ave
W

8th

Ave
W

W
Ave

6th

Ave
W
7th

20t

18th

8th

W
St

14t
hS
tW

13
th

hS

22n
d

19t
h

6th
Ave
W

Ave
W

den
Fin

ney
And
e

on

tW

ers

tW

16t
hS

And

15t
hS

St

Fin

den

St

Car

hS
tW

hS

tW

7th

St

Som

ers
Par

kS

t

19t

29t

28t
hS

26t

8th
Ave
Ave
W
W

tW

St

24t
hS

tE

yS

tW

St

Par

kS

t

We
st

St

hS

St W

Ave
W
2nd
Ave
W

29t

27t
h

32n
dS

ho
re
Ro
ad

St

2nd Ave E

30t
hS
tW
Edm
ons
ton
e

Ran
ge

Rd

Grey
Ro

ad 1

2026 Road Rehabilitation Locations

Story Book Park Rd

Page 144 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

OP-26-027

Subject:

27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement

Recommendations:
THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-026-027 respecting 27th Street
West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement, the Operations Committee
recommends that City Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:









The storm sewer along 27th Street West between the shoreline and
4th Avenue West has failed in several locations.
This report satisfies the requirement under the Corporate
Purchasing Policy for Staff to notify Council as soon as possible of
an emergency procurement under Section 35 of By-law 2020-002 –
By-law Respecting the Procurement of Goods and Services for the
City (Purchasing By-law).
This project has been approved as project 24P.20 in the Capital
Program; however, it had not yet been started due to Staff
vacancies. Unfortunately, it must now be prioritized.
Despite qualifying for emergency procurement, for transparency
purposes, Staff sought three (3) quotes for the engineering portion
of the project, and three (3) bids for the construction through a
Tender by invitation.
Clearwater Shores Inc. of Shallow Lake was the successful
consultant for the project, with an estimated engineering cost of
$26,610 inclusive of non-rebateable HST plus a $21,000 allowance
for geotechnical and material testing services.

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 1 of 6

Page 145 of 165



MacDonnell Excavating of Owen Sound had the lowest bid meeting
the City’s needs, at a cost of 697,003 inclusive of non-refundable
HST, provisional items and contingency.

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s
environmental, social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the
climate crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and infrastructure
to support healthy lifestyles.

Previous Report/Authority:
2025-2029 Capital Budget (Refer to project 24P.20)

Background:
The 27th Street West Storm Sewer Replacement was approved as Project
24P.20. The intended project timing was for the engineering design to be
completed in 2025 and construction in 2026. The project had not been
initiated on time due to staff vacancies and the unplanned 16th Avenue East
Sanitary Sewer Replacement project. The project had subsequently been
planned for further deferral to 2027 as part of the workload lightening
process SLT undertook in early 2026. Recent significant pipe failures, causing
very large sinkholes, have accelerated its initiation.
This project involves replacing approximately 265m of failing storm sewer
from the outfall westward to 4th Avenue West. There is an extensive history
of sinkholes and pipe repairs along this length; multiple emergency repairs
have proven that this section of storm sewer is constructed of corrugated
steel pipe and has deteriorated prematurely due to corrosion. The segment
of pipe under 3rd Avenue West/Grey Road 1 is at risk of collapse, which
would cause a significant road failure and potential traffic hazard, requiring a
lengthy traffic interruption and detour.
This spring, Staff identified a small sinkhole on 27th Street West just west of
3rd Avenue, which was subsequently scheduled for repair. While waiting for
utility locates, the City experienced significant wet weather events, and the
initial sinkhole expanded into a large 1m (3ft) diameter hole. Another hole
also formed at 27th Street West and 2nd Ave West.

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 2 of 6

Page 146 of 165

Staff were dispatched to make the area safe by closing the section of road
and to collect information. Upon further assessment, it was noted that the
existing 1200mm diameter storm pipe, constructed of overlapping riveted
caused by sections of the pipe collapsing into itself and being washed away
during high flows. This type of failure on a 1200mm diameter pipe is
extremely difficult to repair or patch, as there is no good material to attach
to; as such, it typically requires full replacement.
This situation is considered unstable and therefore poses a significant safety
concern. More sections could fail, causing hidden pedestrian and vehicle
safety concerns. 27th Street is used by buses and children attending KeppelSarawak junior school, as well as older students accessing school bus stops.
Staff initiated the project on an emergency basis on April 14th, 2026. Capital
Budget from the same project, which had been deferred to 2028, was
brought forward to fund the project.

Analysis:
27th Street has several challenges and conflicts, and a Consulting Engineer
was selected to assist the city in preparing a preliminary design and contract
administration.
Despite having the ability to direct award under the emergency procurement
procedures in the Corporate Purchasing Policy, Staff selected a consulting
Engineer from a pool of three (3) Quotes requested by the City. The selection
was based on the proponent’s availability and quoted cost to complete the
works.
A preliminary design was completed, and a closed Tender (Tender by
invitation) was issued to three (3) local, qualified contractors. Within the
bids, each proponent had to confirm they had the availability to complete the
work as soon as possible and at a competitive cost.
Construction is expected to begin on May 15th. The project involves the
replacement of 265m of large-diameter storm pipe between the shoreline
and 4th Avenue West. The remainder of the storm sewer along this branch
was replaced in 1981.
Based on modern construction techniques and the size of the pipe being
installed, conflicts are expected with nearby sanitary and water
infrastructure. It is unknown whether the existing pipe is transected or if it
Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 3 of 6

Page 147 of 165

was deflected around it (neither of which is acceptable by today’s standards),
but to address the conflicts, three (3) structures and a new outlet have been
included.

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
The lowest bid for the proposed work is from MacDonnell Excavating of Owen
Sound for $684,948 plus non-rebateable HST ($697,003 inclusive of nonrefundable HST), including provisional items and contingency.
The work is largely like-for-like replacement, plus some adjustments to
conform to the City’s CLI-ECA and to improve constructability. Due to the
logistics and potential detour coordination required for the road crossing (3rd
Avenue West/Grey Road 1), the preliminary estimated construction cost of
$670,000 is higher than what would normally be expected for the 265 m of
pipe replacement. In addition to this, additional structures (maintenance
holes) will be added compared to the existing condition.
Clearwater Shores Inc. was the successful consultant for the project, with an
estimated engineering cost of $26,150 excluding HST ($26,610 including
non-refundable HST) plus a $21,000 allowance for geotechnical and material
testing services.
This cost covers the following tasks: survey, design, schedule of unit prices,
contract administration and inspection over four (4) weeks of construction
and generation of as-constructed drawings.
The $21,000 allowance for Geotechnical/material testing and soil
characterization will guide the design, determine whether bedrock will be a
concern during construction, and will ensure adequate compaction is
achieved in bedding, backfill and the road structure.
The total bid prices for this project are $744,613 including tax and all
contingency items. The project has a budget of $740,000, funded from the
capital levy.

Human Resources
As Staff are utilizing an Engineering Consultant to provide inspection and
contract administration, and a contractor will be executing the construction,
minimal human resources are required for this project.

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 4 of 6

Page 148 of 165

Time and Scheduling
The 27th Street West Storm Sewer Replacement was approved as Project
24P.20. Engineering design to be completed in 2025 and construction in
2026. Unfortunately, the project had been paused as there were several
vacant positions in the department at the time, and an additional unplanned
project had arisen that took priority. As it had been deferred that long
already, the project had been planned for further deferral to 2027 as part of
the workload calibration process SLT undertook in early 2026. Unfortunately,
the project is now urgent, so it is being pulled forward from 2027 to fasttrack its completion in Q2 of 2026.
Despite the unplanned rapid deployment of the project, it did fortunately
have an approved budget, and Staff did still allow for a transparent
procurement process, albeit somewhat compressed.
Construction is expected to begin on May 15th and will take approximately
four weeks.

Technology and Infrastructure
No additional technology or such resources are required for this project.

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
The recommendation supports the City's Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan.

Communication and Engagement:
The residents in the affected area have been or will shortly be notified of the
work. The School Bus Consortium and emergency services will be notified
through a posting on Municipal 511.

Report Developed in Consultation With:







Purchasing and Claims Coordinator
Manager of Public Works and Engineering
Manager of Corporate Services
Senior Leadership Team
Grey County
Grey Sauble Conservation Authority

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 5 of 6

Page 149 of 165

Attachments:
None
Submitted by:
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Lara Widdifield, Director
of Public Works and Engineering at lwiddifield@owensound.ca or 519-3764440, ext. 1201.

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 6 of 6

Page 150 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

OP-26-029

Subject:

Kenny Drain Pond Cleanout and Expansion

Recommendations:
THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-029 respecting the Kenny Drain
Pond Cleanout and Expansion, the Operations Committee recommends that
City Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:










Council-directed follow-up on Kenny Drain was completed
through Report OP-24-022 Re: Kenny Drain Long Term Works Plan,
presented on May 16, 2024.
The Kenny Drain Storm Pond has been filled with sediment for
several years, so it no longer functions to remove suspended solids
from 380 hectares of drainage.
This is a risk to the drinking water supply as discharges from the
Kenny Drain interfere with the Water Treatment Plant intake zone.
This was a factor in the Precautionary Boil Water Advisory in March
2026, alongside heavy surface ice, making the project critical for
protecting source water quality during future spring thaw and rain
events.
A major retrofit and expansion is proposed. The recommended
solution is to clean, enlarge, and retrofit the stormwater
management facility.
The project estimate is $1.946M, to be funded from the Stormwater
Reserve.

Staff Report OP-26-029: Kenny Drain Pond Cleanout and Expansion
Page 1 of 5

THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-024 respecting the 2026 Road
Resurfacing Program, the Operations Committee recommends that City
Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:









As part of the 2025 Capital Budget Deliberations, Council requested
that Staff provide a list and map of the proposed road resurfacing
locations to be undertaken. Proposed resurfacing locations for 2025
and 2026 were provided in OP-25-006 on March 20, 2025.
Winter of 2025-2026 was very hard on the City’s road network, so
some adjustments were required to the proposed rehabilitation
locations.
The approved 2026 Road Rehabilitation budget was $700,000.
Based on the successful outcome of joining Grey County’s road
resurfacing tender in previous years, the City participated again in
2026 to obtain lower unit costs and improved project timelines.
The successful bidder, IPAC Paving Limited, is available very early this
year, and as such, is preparing to begin as soon as weather permits.

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: A City that Moves – Facilitating sustainable
transportation options and creating community connectivity.
Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 1 of 6

Page 137 of 165

Previous Report/Authority:
Report OP-25-006 from Manager of Engineering Services Re: 2025-2026
Road Rehabilitation Locations
Report OP-25-016 from the Manager of Engineering Services Re: Roads
Condition Update
2026 Approved Capital Projects Budget Link: Summary of 2025-2029
Projects - Dec Update.xlsx (Please note that this budget item appears as
“Asphalt and Concrete Replacement – Annual Program.”)
Report CR-26-032 Award of City of Owen Sound Component of Grey County
Joint Tender RFT-TS-20-26 Milling and Hot Mix Asphalt Paving – April 13,
2026

Background:
City Council has pre-approved an annual budget allocation of $700,000 for
road rehabilitation for 2026. The pre-approved annual allocation of $700,000
continues until 2029, with any fluctuations attributed to pre-spending the
next year's budget allocation or under-spending the previous year's approved
budget.
As part of the 2025 Capital Budget Deliberations, Council requested that
Staff provide a list and map of the proposed road resurfacing locations. This
prompted report OP-25-006, which was presented to the Operations
Committee on March 20, 2025. The report also proposed the list of roads for
2026. All road segments were based on the 2024 Pavement Condition Index.
The index primarily considers the type, severity, and extent of pavement
distress, along with factors such as pavement age. OP-25-006 also proposed
the 2026 list of resurfacing road segments.
The project was published for contractor procurement as part of Grey
County’s road resurfacing tender to obtain lower unit costs and improved
project delivery timelines. IPAC Paving Limited was the successful bidder on
the project. The purchasing department presented a report to the council
regarding the contract award on April 13, 2026.
Purchasing presented a report to Council on April 13, 2025, recommending
the award of the contract to IPAC Paving Limited. Due to the early tender
date, it was not possible to present a list of locations and a map to
Committee prior to the tender award report.
Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 2 of 6

Page 138 of 165

Winter 2025-2026 was severe on the City’s road network, so some
adjustments were required to the proposed rehabilitation locations.
Additionally, the tendered bid prices were more competitive than expected,
which allowed slightly more surface area to be added.

Analysis and Options:
Due to the favourable pricing and a reprioritization of road segments to be
resurfaced, Staff are in the process of adding four (4) more road segments
to the project through a change order, and two (2) locations have been
removed.
The process followed to reevaluate the road segments to be resurfaced
followed a process of elimination analysis. Using the Pavement Condition
Assessment of 2024, first, any locations that have already been rehabilitated
or reconstructed and those identified in the multi-year capital forecast for
future reconstruction were eliminated. Public Works and Engineering staff
met to review the remaining priority road segment candidates for
rehabilitation. Other factors such as watermain cathodic protection, water
valve repair, sanitary sewer rehabilitation, storm sewer and related structure
repairs were considered. Through this process, the list of locations was
derived.
Staff have made minor adjustments to the initial list that was presented to
the Operations Committee on March 20, 2026, based on a reassessment of
resurfacing priorities and competitive pricing received after the bid process.
Two (2) previously identified roadways were replaced, and four roadways are
to be added to the list through a change order.
The road segments identified for rehabilitation in 2026 are documented in
the attached list.
In 2024, Grey County offered lower-tier municipalities the opportunity to
partner with their road resurfacing/rehabilitation tender. Since that time, the
City has participated in this programme to obtain lower unit prices and
improved project delivery timelines through the combined purchasing power
of the County and its lower-tier municipal partners.
At the time of writing this report, the following are the tentative key
milestone dates for the project:



May 19, 2026 – City and County Work to Commence
June 6, 2026 - City Work to be Completed
Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 3 of 6

Page 139 of 165

The contractor is prepared to begin immediately, pending favourable weather
to ensure the temperature of the hot mix asphalt is able to be maintained
during transit, placement and compaction.
Work is scheduled to begin on May 19, 2026, and is expected to be
completed by June 6, 2026. The project includes adjustments to
underground infrastructure, milling of existing pavement, installation of new
hot mix asphalt, improvements to drainage, and the application of new
pavement markings.

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
The tender price submitted by IPAC Limited was $540,002.95 including nonrebateable HST. This will be adjusted upward slightly as discussed, in order
to make full use of the available budget of $700,000.
Funding will be provided from the approved 2026 Road Rehabilitation budget
in the amount of $700,000, funded primarily through Canada – Community
Building Fund (formerly Federal Gas Tax).
Staff are currently processing a change order to include the four additional
road segments. Following the inclusion of these additional locations, an
estimated contingency of approximately $85,000 will remain within the
approved budget.
It should be noted that asphalt paving costs are expected to increase due to
recent increases in commodity prices, especially bituminous materials and
fuel. In accordance with OPSS 310, deviations in the asphalt price index
(MTO Performance-Graded Asphalt Cement Price Index, PGAC) may result in
price adjustments applicable to the final cost of the project.

Human Resources
As noted in report CR-26-032, Contract administration for the 2026 Road
Rehabilitation Program will be managed internally by the City’s Engineering
Technologist with an external-facing engineering consultant to oversee
contract administration. This dedicated resource helps mitigate risks
associated with deficiencies and cost-related issues, ultimately protecting the
City’s interests, enhancing accountability by ensuring all work performed
meets municipal standards and providing long-term value to the City’s
infrastructure network.
Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 4 of 6

Page 140 of 165

Time and Scheduling
Due to the early tendering timeline, the specified mandatory substantial
completion date is July 17, 2026. The contractor is ready to proceed
immediately, as long as the ambient and ground temperatures are warm
enough to maintain the asphalt hot mix target temperatures. As the work is
expected to take three (3) weeks to complete, the work should be finished
well ahead of the mandatory deadline.

Technology and Infrastructure
No additional technology or infrastructure needs are required.

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
The recommendation supports the City's Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan.
A smooth road surface reduces the fuel consumption of vehicles travelling
over that surface.

Communication and Engagement:
This report satisfies communication with Council requested during previous
meetings when this topic was discussed.
The Public has been notified through a Media Release on May 6, 2026.
Further notifications will occur in areas affected by the work.

Report Developed in Consultation With:
The following were involved in preparing the list of locations identified for
rehabilitation in 2025 and 2026.








Director of Public Works and Engineering
Manager of Engineering Services
Manager of Water and Wastewater
Public Works Superintendent
Water Distribution Supervisor
Engineering Technologist – Traffic and Construction
Engineering Technologist – Infrastructure

Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 5 of 6

Page 141 of 165

Attachments:
1.

Attachment 1 – 2026 Asphalt Resurfacing Locations List

2.

Attachment 2 – 2026 Asphalt Resurfacing Locations Map

Reviewed by:
Mason Bellamy, Manager of Public Works and Engineering Services
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Manan Monga,
Engineering Technologist, at mmonga@owensound.ca or 519-376-4440 ext.
3408.

Staff Report OP-26-024: 2026 Road Resurfacing Program
Page 6 of 6

Page 142 of 165

2026 Road Rehabilitation Loactions
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Project
4th St E
28th Av E
7th Ave E
6th Ave E
7th St E
8th St "A" E
15th St "A" E
14th St E
5th Ave E
5th Ave E
11th St E
13th Ave E
7th Ave W
11th St E
28th St W
17th St E
11th Ave E
12th St E
Total - 2026

From

To

4th Ave E
5th Ave E
18th St E
20th St E
7th St 'A' E
8th St E
100 Block
200 Block
7th Ave E
8th Ave E
7th Ave E
Cul-de-sac
8th Ave E
9th Ave E
2nd Ave E
4th Ave E
18th St E
North End
4th St E
6th St E
10th Ave E
11th Ave E
11th St E
15th St 'B' E
14th St W
Bridge
12th Ave E
13th Ave E
3rd Ave W
4th Ave W
1815 17th St E 20th St E
12TH St E
Cul-de-sac
11th Ave E
12th Ave E

Length
(m)

Width
(m)

108
400
110
405
180
130
130
226
645
411
145
190
70
85
112
145
100
110

6.5
7.0
8.0
8.6
8.0
7.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.5
7.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
7.5
11.2
8.0

City of Owen Sound- Engineering Services
Depth
Area
Tonnes
(0.05
Remarks
Classification
(m2)
(2.45/m3)
m/lift)
702
0.05
86.00 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
2800 0.05
343.00 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
880
0.05
107.80 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
3483 0.05
426.67 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1440 0.05
176.40 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
910
0.05
111.48 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1170 0.05
143.33 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1808 0.05
221.48 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
4515 0.05
553.09 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
2480 0.05
303.80 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1088 0.05
133.22 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1615 0.05
197.84 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
595
0.12
174.93 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
723
0.05
88.51 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
952
0.05
116.62 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1088 0.05
133.22 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
1120 0.05
137.20 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local
880
0.05
107.80 Mill 50 mm and single lift overlay 50mm HL3
Local

PCI (2024)

Comments

30/38
27
54
28/33
25
26
30
30/29
28
30/37
36
35
29
28
30
32
52
52

Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender
Grey County Mill & Pave Tender

Approval in Process

Page 143 of 165

±

Ave
E
9th

Ba

28th Ave E

st
Ea

E
Av
e
h

7th

20th Ave E

E

E

E

Ave

E

23rd St E

9th

tA

8th
Ave

tE

Ave
E

E

E
Ave

Ave
6th

5th

hS

18t

tE

hS

tE

hS

20th St E

tE

E

1st St W

11th Ave E

10th Ave E

28th Ave E

8th Ave E

6th St E

Sideroad 15

Concession 11

8th Ave E

Superior St

8th Ave A E

E

4th St A E
4th St E

9th Ave E

5th St E

2nd St E

1st St E

Road Resurfacing

2026 Road Rehabilitation Locations
Approval in Process

0

Grey Road 5

0.28 0.55

Forest Hill Dr

2nd A
venue

SE

4th Ave SW

18th Ave E

Ave

E
Av
e
8th

8th

E

4th St E

St

7th St SW
1.1
Kilometers

26

7th St E

Highway 6 & 10

1st St SW

Av
e

5th Ave E
4th Ave E

5th St E

Highway

10th Concession South

1st St A W 1st St W

8th St E

6th St A E

5th Ave E

2nd St W
2nd St W

8th St A E

6th St E

4th St W
3rd St A W

3rd St W Beattie St
2nd St A W

9th St A E

7th St A E
7th St E

5th

16th St E

15th St B E
12th St E
11th St E
10th St E
10th St E

9th St E

7th Ave E

W

17th St E

E

dA
ve

3r

E

E

6th Ave E

St

St

5th Ave E

St

7th St E

3rd Ave E

est
Street W

19t

17t

4th

11
th

4th St A E

4th St A W

6th Ave W

7t

3rd

Eddie Sargent Parkway

2nd Ave W

h
6t

5th St W

4th

12
th

9th St E

3rd Ave W

4th Ave W

6th Ave W

tE

1st Ave W

2nd Ave W

3rd Ave W

&
6
ys
wa
gh
Hi

6th St W

th
S

17th St E 17th
16 St E
th
St
14
E
th
St
E

E

7th St W

18

9th Ave A E

8th St W

t St

hS
tE

1st Ave

7th Ave W

9th St W

tS

21s
20t

5th Ave A E

21

W

9th St A W

tE

dS

E

e
Av
10th St W

23r

St

W

h

9t

11th St W

hS

th

e
Av

12th St W

4th Ave A W

8th
a
ph
Al

13th St W

Sideroad 21

26th St E

25t

15

Grey Road 17B

2nd Avenue West

tW

tE
27th St E

21s

tW

13th St A W

St

th
S

tW

St W

Ave
hS

5th

Ave
W

18t

hS

W
15th St

14th St W

28

tW

St
W
23r
dS

W

tW

St W

17t

tW

24t
hS

1st
Ave
E

hS

St W

tW

32nd St E

16th Ave E

8th

23r
d

4th

rso
nS
t
Ave
W

8th

Ave
W

W
Ave

6th

Ave
W
7th

20t

18th

8th

W
St

14t
hS
tW

13
th

hS

22n
d

19t
h

6th
Ave
W

Ave
W

den
Fin

ney
And
e

on

tW

ers

tW

16t
hS

And

15t
hS

St

Fin

den

St

Car

hS
tW

hS

tW

7th

St

Som

ers
Par

kS

t

19t

29t

28t
hS

26t

8th
Ave
Ave
W
W

tW

St

24t
hS

tE

yS

tW

St

Par

kS

t

We
st

St

hS

St W

Ave
W
2nd
Ave
W

29t

27t
h

32n
dS

ho
re
Ro
ad

St

2nd Ave E

30t
hS
tW
Edm
ons
ton
e

Ran
ge

Rd

Grey
Ro

ad 1

2026 Road Rehabilitation Locations

Story Book Park Rd

Page 144 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 1 of 6

Page 145 of 165



MacDonnell Excavating of Owen Sound had the lowest bid meeting
the City’s needs, at a cost of 697,003 inclusive of non-refundable
HST, provisional items and contingency.

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s
environmental, social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the
climate crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and infrastructure
to support healthy lifestyles.

Previous Report/Authority:
2025-2029 Capital Budget (Refer to project 24P.20)

Background:
The 27th Street West Storm Sewer Replacement was approved as Project
24P.20. The intended project timing was for the engineering design to be
completed in 2025 and construction in 2026. The project had not been
initiated on time due to staff vacancies and the unplanned 16th Avenue East
Sanitary Sewer Replacement project. The project had subsequently been
planned for further deferral to 2027 as part of the workload lightening
process SLT undertook in early 2026. Recent significant pipe failures, causing
very large sinkholes, have accelerated its initiation.
This project involves replacing approximately 265m of failing storm sewer
from the outfall westward to 4th Avenue West. There is an extensive history
of sinkholes and pipe repairs along this length; multiple emergency repairs
have proven that this section of storm sewer is constructed of corrugated
steel pipe and has deteriorated prematurely due to corrosion. The segment
of pipe under 3rd Avenue West/Grey Road 1 is at risk of collapse, which
would cause a significant road failure and potential traffic hazard, requiring a
lengthy traffic interruption and detour.
This spring, Staff identified a small sinkhole on 27th Street West just west of
3rd Avenue, which was subsequently scheduled for repair. While waiting for
utility locates, the City experienced significant wet weather events, and the
initial sinkhole expanded into a large 1m (3ft) diameter hole. Another hole
also formed at 27th Street West and 2nd Ave West.

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 2 of 6

Page 146 of 165

Staff were dispatched to make the area safe by closing the section of road
and to collect information. Upon further assessment, it was noted that the
existing 1200mm diameter storm pipe, constructed of overlapping riveted
caused by sections of the pipe collapsing into itself and being washed away
during high flows. This type of failure on a 1200mm diameter pipe is
extremely difficult to repair or patch, as there is no good material to attach
to; as such, it typically requires full replacement.
This situation is considered unstable and therefore poses a significant safety
concern. More sections could fail, causing hidden pedestrian and vehicle
safety concerns. 27th Street is used by buses and children attending KeppelSarawak junior school, as well as older students accessing school bus stops.
Staff initiated the project on an emergency basis on April 14th, 2026. Capital
Budget from the same project, which had been deferred to 2028, was
brought forward to fund the project.

Analysis:
27th Street has several challenges and conflicts, and a Consulting Engineer
was selected to assist the city in preparing a preliminary design and contract
administration.
Despite having the ability to direct award under the emergency procurement
procedures in the Corporate Purchasing Policy, Staff selected a consulting
Engineer from a pool of three (3) Quotes requested by the City. The selection
was based on the proponent’s availability and quoted cost to complete the
works.
A preliminary design was completed, and a closed Tender (Tender by
invitation) was issued to three (3) local, qualified contractors. Within the
bids, each proponent had to confirm they had the availability to complete the
work as soon as possible and at a competitive cost.
Construction is expected to begin on May 15th. The project involves the
replacement of 265m of large-diameter storm pipe between the shoreline
and 4th Avenue West. The remainder of the storm sewer along this branch
was replaced in 1981.
Based on modern construction techniques and the size of the pipe being
installed, conflicts are expected with nearby sanitary and water
infrastructure. It is unknown whether the existing pipe is transected or if it
Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 3 of 6

Page 147 of 165

was deflected around it (neither of which is acceptable by today’s standards),
but to address the conflicts, three (3) structures and a new outlet have been
included.

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
The lowest bid for the proposed work is from MacDonnell Excavating of Owen
Sound for $684,948 plus non-rebateable HST ($697,003 inclusive of nonrefundable HST), including provisional items and contingency.
The work is largely like-for-like replacement, plus some adjustments to
conform to the City’s CLI-ECA and to improve constructability. Due to the
logistics and potential detour coordination required for the road crossing (3rd
Avenue West/Grey Road 1), the preliminary estimated construction cost of
$670,000 is higher than what would normally be expected for the 265 m of
pipe replacement. In addition to this, additional structures (maintenance
holes) will be added compared to the existing condition.
Clearwater Shores Inc. was the successful consultant for the project, with an
estimated engineering cost of $26,150 excluding HST ($26,610 including
non-refundable HST) plus a $21,000 allowance for geotechnical and material
testing services.
This cost covers the following tasks: survey, design, schedule of unit prices,
contract administration and inspection over four (4) weeks of construction
and generation of as-constructed drawings.
The $21,000 allowance for Geotechnical/material testing and soil
characterization will guide the design, determine whether bedrock will be a
concern during construction, and will ensure adequate compaction is
achieved in bedding, backfill and the road structure.
The total bid prices for this project are $744,613 including tax and all
contingency items. The project has a budget of $740,000, funded from the
capital levy.

Human Resources
As Staff are utilizing an Engineering Consultant to provide inspection and
contract administration, and a contractor will be executing the construction,
minimal human resources are required for this project.

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 4 of 6

Page 148 of 165

Time and Scheduling
The 27th Street West Storm Sewer Replacement was approved as Project
24P.20. Engineering design to be completed in 2025 and construction in
2026. Unfortunately, the project had been paused as there were several
vacant positions in the department at the time, and an additional unplanned
project had arisen that took priority. As it had been deferred that long
already, the project had been planned for further deferral to 2027 as part of
the workload calibration process SLT undertook in early 2026. Unfortunately,
the project is now urgent, so it is being pulled forward from 2027 to fasttrack its completion in Q2 of 2026.
Despite the unplanned rapid deployment of the project, it did fortunately
have an approved budget, and Staff did still allow for a transparent
procurement process, albeit somewhat compressed.
Construction is expected to begin on May 15th and will take approximately
four weeks.

Technology and Infrastructure
No additional technology or such resources are required for this project.

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
The recommendation supports the City's Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan.

Communication and Engagement:
The residents in the affected area have been or will shortly be notified of the
work. The School Bus Consortium and emergency services will be notified
through a posting on Municipal 511.

Report Developed in Consultation With:







Purchasing and Claims Coordinator
Manager of Public Works and Engineering
Manager of Corporate Services
Senior Leadership Team
Grey County
Grey Sauble Conservation Authority

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 5 of 6

Page 149 of 165

Attachments:
None
Submitted by:
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Lara Widdifield, Director
of Public Works and Engineering at lwiddifield@owensound.ca or 519-3764440, ext. 1201.

Staff Report OP-26-027: 27th Street West Storm Sewer Emergency Replacement
Page 6 of 6

Page 150 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-029 respecting the Kenny Drain
Pond Cleanout and Expansion, the Operations Committee recommends that
City Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:










Council-directed follow-up on Kenny Drain was completed
through Report OP-24-022 Re: Kenny Drain Long Term Works Plan,
presented on May 16, 2024.
The Kenny Drain Storm Pond has been filled with sediment for
several years, so it no longer functions to remove suspended solids
from 380 hectares of drainage.
This is a risk to the drinking water supply as discharges from the
Kenny Drain interfere with the Water Treatment Plant intake zone.
This was a factor in the Precautionary Boil Water Advisory in March
2026, alongside heavy surface ice, making the project critical for
protecting source water quality during future spring thaw and rain
events.
A major retrofit and expansion is proposed. The recommended
solution is to clean, enlarge, and retrofit the stormwater
management facility.
The project estimate is $1.946M, to be funded from the Stormwater
Reserve.

Staff Report OP-26-029: Kenny Drain Pond Cleanout and Expansion
Page 1 of 5

Page 151 of 165

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s
environmental, social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the
climate crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and infrastructure
to support healthy lifestyles.

Previous Report/Authority:
CR-23-080 Multi-Year Capital Plan (2024-2028), Sept. 25, 2023
Staff committed, per feedback received from Council during the Capital
Budget Deliberations, to present “a report to the Operations Committee in
2024 respecting the Kenny Drain Stormwater Management System,
including:






Background information;
Amount of expenditures;
Clean out costs;
Future capital costs; and
Derived benefits.”

This was submitted as report OP-24-022 Kenny Drain Long Term Works Plan,
May 16, 2024 (select appendices below)





Report OP-24-022
Overall Watershed Plan
Kenny Drain Works Plan 2024 Update (shows pond cleanout 2027-28)
Capital Project Sheet from 2024 (proposed 2027 project)

Background:
The Kenny Drain Storm Pond is located at the downstream end of a 380hectare stormwater system that runs from 8th Street East at 9th Avenue East
northward through private and public property to the outfall at East Bayshore
Road between addresses 2875 and 3195. The pond itself is an offline Quality
Control pond located on the Kiwanis soccer complex property.
The Stormwater Management Master Plan was planned for completion in
2025 but is still underway, as additional ancillary studies were required as
part of the Master Plan process. Like Municipal Class B Environmental
Assessments, Master Plans must follow a prescribed process and must
include a suite of studies as may be required by the circumstances. In this
Staff Report OP-26-029: Kenny Drain Pond Cleanout and Expansion
Page 2 of 5

Page 152 of 165

case, the City was required to execute City-wide Archaeological and
Environmental studies, which substantially extended the Master Plan’s
timeline.
The Kenny Drain pond is currently not functioning. It is filled with sediment
and, likely, refuse, having washed in from upstream development projects,
roadsides and from the erosion of the channel itself. Every rain and
snowmelt event carries sediment plumes into the Sound, rather than
capturing the suspended solids within the pond. The pond requires cleaning
and should be enlarged to meet water quality objectives.
Discharges from this pond outlet interfere with the Water Treatment Plant's
water supply intake zone. Council will recall the Precautionary Boil Water
Advisory in March 2026, which was a direct result of sediment-laden flows
from the Kenny Drain, together with massive surface ice. This project is
critical to mitigating water quality concerns and potential issues in future
spring thaws.

Analysis and Options:
As part of this project, the existing Stormwater Management Facility (SWMF)
would be retrofitted to improve water quality treatment for the Kenny Drain.
The proposed retrofit would increase the extended detention volume
provided by enlarging the Pond’s footprint by approximately 100% (6,500
m2), and consequently, the permanent pool volume would be increased. A
forebay would also be constructed to improve sediment removal, and the
outlet structures would be adjusted to optimize the Quality Control function.
The outlet would be retrofitted by enlarging the existing orifices at the
permanent pool level. This will allow the quality control storm (25mm in 4
hour) storm within the extended detention portion of the SWMF and allow
the larger return frequency storms to discharge via a secondary outlet. This
will allow all storms to receive some treatment while preventing scouring of
the accumulated debris and sediment resuspension and transport under
major storm conditions.
The proposed SWMF expansion would provide approximately 10,000 m3 of
permanent pool volume and 11,000 m3 of extended detention storage to
improve water quality treatment.
The total active storage volume provided in the SWMF would approximately
triple compared to existing (5,950 m3 to 16,800 m3).

Staff Report OP-26-029: Kenny Drain Pond Cleanout and Expansion
Page 3 of 5

Page 153 of 165

The proposed extended detention volume would exceed the required storage
volume for Enhanced-level treatment for wetland-type SWMFs as specified
by the then Ministry of the Environment’s 2003 Stormwater Management
Pond Design Manual.
The permanent pool volume would be within 5% of the Design Manual
requirement for Enhanced-level treatment.
It should be noted that the proper functioning of this stormwater quality
facility is crucial in protecting a viable intake water supply for the Water
Treatment Plant. High sediment loading occurs regularly from the Kenny
Drain as the existing facility is filled to capacity with sediment, causing
sediment to be scoured or bypassed through the pond with each precipitation
or snowmelt event. This played a major factor in the Precautionary Boiled
Water Advisory that the City implemented in March 2026.

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
As part of OP-24-022, a Capital Detail Sheet was completed. At that time,
the estimated cost was $1.32M.
Due to a better understanding of the necessary scope, the addition of pond
expansion and modification, and the increasing cost of fuel, the estimated
cost is now $1.946M.
This is to be funded from the Stormwater Reserve.

Human Resources
This project is relatively low maintenance for internal project management
support and can therefore be managed through a consultant, contractor and
existing internal resources.
Arrangements will need to be made for continued maintenance (i.e. mowing,
structure inspections) after construction.

Time and Scheduling
It is critical that this project proceed in 2027. Design may begin in 2026 to
prepare to construct in summer 2027 (dry conditions are desired).

Technology and Infrastructure
N/A
Staff Report OP-26-029: Kenny Drain Pond Cleanout and Expansion
Page 4 of 5

Page 154 of 165

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
The recommendation supports both the City's Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan and the City's Climate Mitigation Plan.

Communication and Engagement:
Communications would primarily pertain to public notifications for
direct impacts to residents/property owners.
Open procurement is expected for any contracts associated with this project.

Report Developed in Consultation With:





Manager of Water and Wastewater
Manager of Public Works and Engineering
Engineering Services team
Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer

Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Amended Capital Detail Sheet CAP-27-014
Reviewed by:
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager
For more information on this report, please contact Lara Widdifield, Director
of Public Works and Engineering at lwiddifield@owensound.ca or 519-3764440, ext. 1201.

Staff Report OP-26-029: Kenny Drain Pond Cleanout and Expansion
Page 5 of 5

Page 155 of 165

Kenny Drain Pond Clean Out and
Expansion (3005 9th Ave E)
Rationale
Strategic Plan Alignment
Estimated Useful Life (years):
Future Replacement Cost:

CAP-27-0014

Asset Management - New Asset / Expansion
Green and Resilient City
25

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

63.90

Priority Level: High - Score 49-69
Department: Public Works and Engineering
Staff Contact: Mason Bellamy
Location/Coordinates:

Description:
As part of this project, the existing SWMF would be retrofitted to improve water quality treatment for the Kenny Drain. The proposed retrofit would increase the extended detention
volume provided by enlarging the SWMF footprint by approximately 100% (6,500 m2), and consequently, the permanent pool volume would be expanded. A forebay would also be
constructed to improve sediment removal, and the outlet structures would be adjusted to optimize the SWMF function. The outlet would be retrofitted by enlarging the existing
orifices to provide a 350 mm diameter orifice and a 300 mm diameter orifice at the permanent pool level. The proposed outlet would control the 25mm storm within the
extended detention portion of the SWMF and allow the larger return frequency storms to discharge via the secondary outlet.  The proposed SWMF expansion would provide
approximately 10,000 m3 of permanent pool volume and 11,000 m3 of extended detention storage to improve water quality treatment. The total active storage volume provided in
the SWMF would be approximately tripled (5,950 m3 to 16,800 m3) from existing conditions. The proposed extended detention volume would exceed the required storage volume
for Enhanced level treatment for wetland type SWMFs as specified by the MOE 2003 SWMPDM. The permanent pool volume would be within 5% of the SWMPDM requirement for
Enhanced level treatment.  It should be noted that the proper functioning of this stormwater quality facility is crucial in protecting a viable intake water supply for the Water
Treatment Plant. High sediment loading occurs regularly from the Kenny Drain as the existing facility is filled to capacity with sediment, causing sediment to be scoured or bypassed
through the pond with each precipitation or snowmelt event. This played a major factor in the Precautionary Boiled Water Advisory that the City implemented in March 2026.

Cash Flow Projection:
Consulting including Design &
Studies
In House Engineering
Communication / Signage
Construction / Contractor
Materials
Equipment Purchases
Contingency
Total

2027
$245,000.00
$5,000.00
$1,696,000.00

$1,946,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

Costs Incurred to 2026 Year
End
Impact on Operating Budget:
Total Project Budget:

$1,946,000.00

Schedule:
Construction Start Date:
Substantial Completion or
Purchase Date:

01/01/2027
12/31/2027

Funding Sources:
Reserves
Total

$1,946,000.00
$1,946,000.00

Page 156 of 165

Kenny Drain Pond Clean Out and
Expansion (3005 9th Ave E)
Justification for Matrix
Values

CAP-27-0014
Score 0 - 5

Year:

2027

Priority
Score:

63.90

Justification / Rationale for Rating

People

How many people will be directly
impacted by the project?

5

Health & Safety Score

What is the risk to the health and safety of
the public or Staff if the project does not
proceed?
Is the project required for
legislative/regulatory compliance?
Is the project a high priority for
replacement in the asset management
plan?
If the project proceeds (or fails to
proceed), what will be the impact on
operational performance? Comment on
any impact on operating costs, staff time
and maintenance.
How many resources are ready? Financial
resources, Human resources, Scheduling
feasibility, Technology/resources.
Environment ScoreDoes the project
address needs impacted by climate
change?
To what degree does the project support
diversity and inclusion initiatives?
To what degree is the aesthetic value of
the asset improved?
Does the project help to meet a Key
Result in the Strategic Plan?
Has the project been identified through
public engagement?

0

10,000 people will be directly impacted as a result of this project. Upon
completion of the project staff anticipate that source water quality will
improve coming into WTP
The project will have no impact on health and safety.

5

Completion of the project will gain full legislative/regulatory compliance.

5

The asset is not functioning as designed and is close to imminent failure of
function.

3

Operational efficiencies will be achieved as a result of the project

3

Financially funded from reserves, and can be completed with the assistance
of Consultants

3

The project has a demonstrated impact on mitigating or adapting to climate
change.

0

The project will have no impact

2

The project does not impact the aesthetic value of the impacted asset

3

This projects supports one City Strategic Priority

2

The project has been mentioned informally through public feedback

Legislation Score
Asset Management Score

Operational Performance Score

Project Readiness (Resourcing)
Score
Environment Score

Socio-Economic Factors Score
Aesthetic Value Score
Strategic Plan Score
Public Input Score

Page 157 of 165

Staff Report
Report To:

Operations Committee

Report From:

Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering

Meeting Date:

May 21, 2026

Report Code:

THAT in consideration of Staff Report OP-26-026 respecting the Business
Case for the Sand Dome Replacement, the Operations Committee
recommends that City Council receive the report for information purposes.

Highlights:








The City’s salt and sand domes at the Public Works Yard are
nearing their end of service life and are considered obsolete.
The structures are not up to current standards, and any new
facilities must conform with current regulations.
Salt use, storage and handling is overseen by Environment Canada,
under the “Code of Practice for the Environmental Management of
Road Salts”.
The City is required to file a report annually with the Government of
Canada, through the Road Salts Reporting Dashboard. The report
includes information on the City’s operational conformance with its
Road Salt Management Plan, the currency of the Road Salt
Management Plan, the quantity and type of salt consumed, and the
method of storage, among other criteria.
Staff have assessed the eventuality of replacing the current domes
with a tarp-over-steel skeleton prefabricated structure to maximize
cost efficiency while meeting all regulatory requirements.

Staff Report OP-26-026: Business Case for Sand Dome Replacement
Page 1 of 6

Page 158 of 165

Vision 2050 - Strategic Plan Alignment:
Strategic Plan Priority: The recommendation contributes to core service
delivery or a corporate initiative that enables service delivery for one or more
strategic priorities. Chiefly:




Green and Resilient City - Strengthening the City’s environmental,
social, and economic ability to mitigate and adapt to the climate
crisis. Also, leveraging the city’s natural resources and
infrastructure to support healthy lifestyles.
A City that Moves – Facilitating sustainable transportation options
and creating community connectivity.

Previous Report/Authority:
None

Background:
The City’s salt and sand domes at the Public Works Yard are nearing the end
of their service life. They are in relatively poor condition but more
importantly, are no longer suited to the City’s operations.
The existing structures, to current Staff’s estimate, pre-date the construction
of the Public Works building in the early 1990's. The current structures are
undersized, as they do not have sufficient interior room to allow for filling
indoors/within the structure. Both domes have leaking roofs, which would
require replacement if the structures are not completely replaced. Neither
dome has operational lighting, and the openings and doors were designed for
smaller equipment and trucks, causing numerous operational issues when
filling the structures and loading and unloading equipment.
Further, as they are open to the environment at the doorway, precipitation
can come in contact with salt and salt-treated sand. This brine subsequently
runs over the ground to the surface drainage system on site, posing a
disposal and environmental concern.
Lastly, the above practices are not up to current standards. The City is not
required at this time to replace the domes or overhaul current practices.
However, as the existing domes require replacement in the near-to mediumterm horizon, once they are “touched,” it will be compulsory to bring the
facilities into conformance with current regulations.

Staff Report OP-26-026: Business Case for Sand Dome Replacement
Page 2 of 6

Page 159 of 165

Salt use, storage and handling are overseen by Environment Canada, under
the “Code of Practice for the Environmental Management of Road Salts.” The
City is required to file an annual report with the Government of Canada
through the Road Salts Reporting Dashboard. The report includes information
on the City’s operational conformance with its Road Salt Management Plan,
the currency of the Road Salt Management Plan, the quantity and type of salt
consumed, and the method of storage, among other criteria.
Best practices for salt management include the supply being fully contained
and covered by a building with an impermeable floor (i.e. concrete or
asphalt), and loading is completed inside the containment area. Loading does
not necessarily need to be done inside, but it must be confined/captured (i.e.
with a curbed area) and conveyed to a stormwater management facility
capable of reducing the release of chlorides into the environment.
Staff have also identified a need to update the City’s Salt Management Plan
and have been working on this initiative.
The City typically stores approximately 1,500 to 3,000 tonnes of material in
the sand dome year-round and 250-300 tonnes at a time in the salt dome
and is further delivered on an as-needed basis. Walker Industries stores the
City’s allocated salt supply and delivers it as needed on behalf of Cargil,
which currently holds the City’s current treated salt provision contract in
conjunction with Grey County.

Analysis and Options:
Despite not needing to conform to current standards unless the City is
replacing the domes anyway, a potential concern is whether the salt supplier
will continue to be able to accommodate the City’s “as-needed” delivery
arrangement. It is possible that once re-tendered, or if the current supplier’s
processes change, the City may be required to take possession of the entire
allocation at one time. Currently, this is impossible as there is insufficient
temporary storage to house 6,000 tonnes of treated salt.
Staff investigated the potential options for replacing the existing sand and salt
domes. For sizing purposes, Staff have used a storage capacity of 10,000
tonnes. This is based on a current need of 6,000 tonnes of salt and 1,500 to
3,000 tonnes of sand. A small allowance for growth was also applied.
The resulting building size, based on a single, tarp-on-steel skeleton
prefabricated structure type of building, would be approximately 100 feet by
Staff Report OP-26-026: Business Case for Sand Dome Replacement
Page 3 of 6

Page 160 of 165

160 feet (30.5 metres by 48.8 metres) with 12' (3.7m) concrete walls and a
concrete floor. A concrete block gravity wall would separate the sand and salt
in the combined facility.
The facility would also feature overhead doors and a drive-through
configuration to allow plows to drive in one end and out the other as well as
maneuvering space for a front-end loader, thereby permitting the interior
loading of de-icing/grit material.

Resource Alignment:
Financial Resources
Cost estimates for budgetary planning purposes indicate that the structure
would have an approximate construction cost of $1.6M plus approximately
$250,000 for associated site works. In addition, staff estimate that
engineering, design, approvals, and related professional services would total
approximately $185,000.
At this time, the project is not currently funded within the approved Capital
Plan. The project has been identified within the City’s longer-range unfunded
capital horizon, currently anticipated in the 2029 timeframe, subject to
future capital prioritization and funding availability.
Staff will continue to evaluate potential funding opportunities, reserve
strategies, and long-term capital financing approaches to support the
eventual replacement of the facility while balancing broader corporate
infrastructure pressures and affordability considerations.

Human Resources
Once this project is funded and scheduled, it will be able to be managed with
internal resources, using consultant and contractor support as may be
appropriate.

Time and Scheduling
Once the project is funded, prioritized, and formally scheduled within the
Capital Program, timing will be critical as construction must be substantially
completed between the end of one winter control season and the
commencement of the next season’s material deliveries.
Based on the current conceptual approach, the prefabricated tarp-style
structure would provide the most efficient construction timeline compared to
similarly sized pole barn or dome-style alternatives. Subject to future
Staff Report OP-26-026: Business Case for Sand Dome Replacement
Page 4 of 6

Page 161 of 165

scheduling and approvals, the anticipated sequence would include demolition
of the existing structures following the winter season, completion of site
works and concrete works in early summer, followed by structure installation
through the summer months in order to support operational readiness prior
to the subsequent winter control season.

Technology and Infrastructure
N/A

Climate and Environmental Impacts:
The recommendation supports the City's Corporate Climate Change
Adaptation Plan.
The Public Works Yard is located inside Intake Protection Zone 2 (as
identified on the Source Protection Information Atlas), and therefore, is
subject to a Risk Management Plan and review by the Grey Sauble
Conservation Authority.

Communication and Engagement:
As this initiative is primarily internal facing, public communication would be
limited to the approval of the Capital Budget.

Report Developed in Consultation With:





Manager of Public Works and Engineering
Transportation Superintendent
Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer
Manager of Corporate Services

Attachments:
None
Submitted by:
Lara Widdifield, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Submission approved by:
Tim Simmonds, City Manager

Staff Report OP-26-026: Business Case for Sand Dome Replacement
Page 5 of 6

Page 162 of 165

For more information on this report, please contact Lara Widdifield, Director
of Public Works and Engineering at lwiddifield@owensound.ca or 519-3764440, ext. 1201.

Staff Report OP-26-026: Business Case for Sand Dome Replacement
Page 6 of 6

Page 163 of 165

Memo
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:

Grey County Member Municipal CAOs and Waste Management Contact
Niall Lobley, Deputy CAO, Grey County
May 6th, 2026
Waste Management Service Review

In 2025, Grey County established a Joint Municipal Services Committee, reporting to
Grey County Council. The Committee was created to identify and advance opportunities to
improve service delivery where efficiencies could be achieved collaboratively between
member municipalities, with support from Grey County. Several priority areas were
identified for further review, including waste management.
Grey County has coordinated and participated in a Community of Practice (COP) on
Waste Management with member municipalities for several years. The COP was
established in response to two key drivers:
1. Going Green in Grey
Grey County Council endorsed Going Green in Grey, a strategic framework to guide
a county-wide response to climate change and environmental pressures. The
framework identifies both community-wide and corporate actions to be led,
coordinated, or facilitated by Grey County to reduce environmental impacts. Waste
management was identified as a significant community climate pressure.
2. Need for a Regional Review of Waste Management
In 2020, Grey County identified the need for a regional review of waste management
services. While this work was not completed at the time, it remained a budget priority
in successive years.
The COP was formed to improve coordination among member municipalities, better
understand shared pressures, and support knowledge-sharing and resource collaboration
related to waste management services.
The work of the COP has resulted in improved collaboration and a shared understanding of
current challenges. Through this work, potential opportunities for greater coordination and
efficiency have been identified; however, exploring these opportunities in detail requires
external expertise.
Accordingly, the 2026 Grey County budget included a supported capital request to retain
an external consultant to undertake a comprehensive review of waste management
Grey County: Colour It Your Way

Page 164 of 165

services delivered by member municipalities across Grey County. The review will examine
opportunities to improve efficiency, including:
•
•
•

Shared delivery of specific services;
Shared or coordinated waste collection contracts; and
Potential full or partial uploading of waste management services to the County.

The review will assess waste management services from service, environmental, and
cost perspectives, drawing on best practices and experiences from other two-tier
municipalities. The anticipated outcome is a set of potential future service delivery scenarios
for consideration by Grey County Council.
In early 2026, Grey County issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to qualified proponents.
The RFP was developed with input from the COP and was reviewed by COP members prior
to award. Dillon Consulting Limited (Dillon) was selected as the successful proponent and
has been retained to complete the work.
An initial project kickoff meeting was held in late April 2026. Through spring and early
summer, Dillon will work with COP members to gather background information.
Engagement with the Joint Municipal Services Committee is anticipated in summer 2026.
Background work will include:
•

•
•
•

A comprehensive review of municipal waste management resources, including
customer service staffing, management roles, landfill operations, contracts, and
in-house service delivery models (where applicable);
A review of closed and active landfill sites to assess remaining capacity and
management pressures across Grey County;
A review of current waste management costs, budgets, contracts, and service levels;
and
A review of relevant environmental plans, climate action studies, and strategic
frameworks at both the County and municipal levels that may inform future service
delivery options.

Grey County gratefully acknowledges the ongoing support of COP members, including their
contributions to background information, knowledge-sharing, and continued assistance in
supporting Dillon’s work.
A draft report which will include initial recommendations, is anticipated in late 2026, with a
final report expected in early 2027. An interim update on background information gathering
is expected to be shared with the Joint Municipal Services Committee in summer 2026.
The primary Grey County staff contact for this work is Niall Lobley (niall.lobley@grey.ca).

Grey County: Colour It Your Way

Page 165 of 165

9 MATTERS POSTPONED There are no matters postponed.

MATTERS POSTPONED
There are no matters postponed.

10 MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE WAS PREVIOUSLY GIVEN

MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE WAS PREVIOUSLY GIVEN
10.a
Motion for Which Notice was Previously Given by Councillor Farmer at
the April 23, 2026 Operations Committee Meeting Re: Crash Analysis

11 CORRESPONDENCE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATION 11.a

CORRESPONDENCE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATION
11.a

12 Memo from Grey County Re: Waste Management Service Review

Memo from Grey County Re: Waste Management Service Review
DISCUSSION OF ADDITIONAL BUSINESS

13 NOTICES OF MOTION

NOTICES OF MOTION

14 ADJOURNMENT

ADJOURNMENT

16 th Street/9th Avenue East (14 collisions); c.

th Street/9th Avenue East (14 collisions);
c.