FINAL Public Works Asset Management...

ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC WORKS

\

5/30/2014 ST. CLAIR TOWNSHIP –Public Works AMP

PW AMP Execu%ve Summary

ES Page 1

ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN S T. C L A I R T OWN S H I P – P U B L I C WO R K S A M P

EXECUTIVESUMMARY

The Governments of Ontario and Canada require Municipali%es seeking capital funding to u%lize an Asset

Management Plan (AMP) to iden%fy and priori%ze long term needs of their infrastructure. In 2012, the

Province ini%ated the Municipal Infrastructure Investment Ini%a%ve (MIII) program to assist Municipali%es

in reaching their best prac%ce goals. The Township of St. Clair received funding towards the development of

a comprehensive Asset Management Plan to meet this requirement. Adop%on of this AMP as a whole for

implementa%on and con%nuous improvement, thereby meets the new requirement for applying for capital

funding, by demonstra%ng project priori%za%on on a standardized and consistent level.

In 2007, ini%al asset data collec%on and inventory for Road,

Sewer and Watermain networks were stored in the Cartegraph

work management database and integrated with ESRI GIS

mapping. Con%nuous data cleaning is ongoing. Bridge

repor%ng is currently maintained in an Access database stored

on the Township’s network server. Prepara%on has begun on

bridge and streetlight inventories for migra%on into

CarteGraph with GIS integra%on. CarteGraph is the source for

the majority of inventory repor%ng.

Es%mated condi%on assump%ons were completed based upon

known or es%mated install dates during ini%al inventory import. Ongoing condi%on informa%on is collected

on assets during rou%ne inspec%on and maintenance ac%vi%es. Paved Road segment condi%on assessment

is carried out using a computerized SCT Simple Segment Inspec%on system based on the Ministry of

Transporta%on of Ontario methodology. Newly assumed assets are ini%ally given an assumed perfect

condi%on ra%ng.

67%

20%

13%

Bridge Network

Condition

Good Fair Poor

Network Inventory

Network Type Inventory

Roads (Paved) 229 km

Roads (Gravel) 329 km Bridges/Culverts 92 Sidewalk/Trails 37km

Streetlights/Traffic 1325 Water 465 km

Sewers 232 km

1% 12%

31%56%

Paved Road Network

Condition

Very Poor

Poor

Acceptable

Good


ES Page 2

* Typically, gravel roads are maintained rather than rehabilitated, therefore they were not included in the development of the capital

improvement plan but they still have a replacement cost of over $24M.

^ Not included in financial analysis using the Harfan application.

For the Township, the distribu%on of asset value by class based upon replacement cost es%ma%on is shown

above. With a Total Network Replacement Value of $447,816,731, the Township should theore%cally

allocate over $13M per year to ensure future sustainability of its assets. This represents the industry

recommenda%on of 2% -4% yearly investments in renewal ac%vi%es.

To make the most cost-effec%ve decisions with regard to rehabilita%on of infrastructure assets, an

integrated approach is required to acknowledge the close proximity and high level of interac%on between

the infrastructure networks. In simple terms, it is essen%al to look at the condi%on of all components of

infrastructure within a road segment before selec%ng a repair strategy.

The advanced use of the “Windows of Opportunity” concept can be used to coordinate the %ming for repair

with other components of infrastructure reducing the total cost of repairing the assets. The following figure

illustrates the concept of “Windows of Opportunity”.

Windows of Opportunity

23%

6%

12%

32%

9%

9%

1%6%

1% 1%

Asset ValueRoads (Paved HCB &

LCB)*Roads (Gravel)

Bridges/Culverts

Water

Sanitary Sewer

Storm Sewer

Water Tower &

EquipmentWWTP, Lagoons,& PS’s^

Streetlights


ES Page 3

When the level of needs on the underground assets is minimal, as is the case in the Township, a manual

approach using GIS tools to coordinate the repairs is usually as effec%ve.

Based on the results of the condi%on assessment it was possible to iden%fy the immediate needs for Paved

Road and Bridge Networks requiring aJen%on. The following Table summarizes the results.

Network Needs IMMEDIATE Year 1

Network Type % in Needs Cost

Roads (Paved) 15% $26,970,865

Bridge Structures 1% $750,000

It is understood that an “Unlimited Budget” scenario is not a realis%c op%on; however, it is oMen analyzed

to determine the current and short term level of needs and corresponding costs to address these needs.

The following Table summarizes the total es%mated cost of repairs that have been iden%fied in the next 5

and 10 years.

Repair Costs for Next 5 -10Years

Network Type Estimated Cost of Repair

Next 5 Years

Estimated Cost of Repair

Next 10 Years

Paved Roads $36,271,230 $49,079,850

Bridge Structures $3,264,600 $6,061,350

* Repair Costs for other assets have not been identified.

Actual Funding by Network

Network Type Funding Allocations

Paved Roads $1,380,000^

Bridge Structures $156,000

* Funding Allocations for other assets have not been provided.

^ Includes Third Party Funding (AMO Federal Gas Taxes)

Considering that the immediate Paved Road network needs have been es%mated at over $26M, the current

yearly funding will result in a dras%c deteriora%on of the road network over the next decade. It should be

understood that this condi%on will also result in significant increases in maintenance ac%vi%es which may

no longer be cost-effec%ve due to poor condi%on of the roadways. It is clear that the current level of

funding for the Paved Road network is not adequate to sustain the assets into the future.

Based on the 10 year needs for Bridge Structures, an annual expenditure of approximately $6M would be

required to address the iden%fied improvements within a 10 year %meframe.


ES Page 4

PAVED ROAD NETWORK - BUDGET SCENARIOS

As part of this assignment, mul%ple budget scenarios were analyzed to assess different investment

strategies to determine the short and long term effects on the overall Paved Road network asset

performance.

Council has received and reviewed several Paved Road budget scenarios and will discuss further during the

2015 budge%ng process. For the past six years the Township has experienced significant financial

headwinds with the yearly reduc%on in Provincial opera%ng funds, loss in OPG Lambton Genera%ng Sta%on

property tax revenues, increases in OPP costs, etc.

Infrastructure asset management is the combina�on of management, financial, economic, engineering, and

other prac�ces applied to physical assets with the objec�ve of providing the required Level of Service in the

most cost-effec�ve manner. It includes the management of the whole life cycle (design, construc�on,

commissioning, opera�ng, maintaining, repairing, modifying, replacing and decommissioning/disposal) of

physical and infrastructure assets. Opera�ng and sustainment of assets in a constrained budget

environment require some sort of priori�za�on scheme.1

1 hJp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asset_manager

Public Works Asset Management Plan

Glossary Page 1

GLOSSARY

AGL – Applied GeoLogics Inc. (CarteGraph Support Service Provider)

AMP – Asset Management Plan

Asset Managers – Municipal staff responsible for the decisions and outcomes from the AMP

BCI – Bridge Condi%on Index (Ontario Ministry of Transporta%on standardized bridge condi%on ra%ng)

Bridge (Structures) – shall infer Bridges and Culverts greater than 3m in Span (>3m)

Cartegraph/CMMS –SoMware for Computerized Maintenance Management System

CCTV – Closed-Circuit Television (used for sewer pipe inspec%on)

CIP - Capital Improvement Plan

ESRI/GIS – SoMware for Geographic Informa%on System

DWQMS – Drinking Water Quality Management System

HCB – High Class Bituminous (eg. Asphalt Paved Road)

KPI’s - Key Performance Indicators

LCB – Low Class Bituminous (eg. Surface Treatment Paved Road)

LOS – Level of Service

MMS – Minimum Maintenance Standard

Municipality – shall infer The Corpora%on of the Township of St. Clair

OCI – Overall Condi%on Index

PACP – Pipeline Assessment and Cer%fica%on Program (standardized defect coding)

SCT – St. Clair Township

Sewers – shall infer both Sanitary Sewers and Storm Sewers

TCA – Tangible Capital Assets

Township – shall infer The Corpora%on of the Township of St. Clair

PW Asset Management Plan Public Works Asset Management Plan

Issued 30-MAY-2014

Revision 000 30-MAY-2014

Page 1 of 12

PW AMP

Document is Uncontrolled when Printed

1 ASSETMANAGEMENTPLAN

1.1 INTRODUCTION

St. Clair Township is a lower %er municipality located in the County of Lambton in the Province of Ontario,

Canada. The Township is commiJed to providing efficient, effec%ve, and economical services to our

taxpayers. We are located immediately south of the City of Sarnia and just across the St. Clair River from

Eastern Michigan. A short drive to either the 24/7 Interna%onal Bridge crossing in Point Edward, ON or

Ferry Service within the Municipality to the United States of America. The current popula%on is

approximately 15,000 2people.

2 Statistics Canada In 2011, St. Clair (Township) had a population of 14,515.

Figure 1 - Loca%on St. Clair Township


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 2 of 12

PW AMP


1.1.1 Background

This is the first Asset Management Plan (AMP) to be implemented in the Township of St. Clair. Dillon

Consul%ng Limited in associa%on with Monteith & Sutherland Limited, ASI Technologies Inc. and Harfan

Technologies Inc. was retained by the Township of St. Clair in August 2005 to undertake the

implementa%on of an Asset Management System (AMS) to assist the Township in managing municipal

infrastructure. Final reports from the Dillon 2007 plan were never adopted or implemented, but are the

basis for this AMP.

In October 2012, the Municipality applied for and obtained funding under the Ontario Municipal

Infrastructure Investment Ini%a%ve (MIII) to improve asset management planning following the Ontario’s

Ministry of Infrastructure guide Building Together: Guide for Municipal Asset Management Plans.

September 2013, Council supported the recommenda%on from the finance commiJee, that Council adopt

the AMP as an input into the budget process for decision making and the asset management strategies be

updated from %me to %me in accordance with best prac%ces, technology changes, financial constraints and

condi%on assessment outcomes.

Adop%on of this AMP as a whole for implementa%on and con%nuous improvement, thereby meets the new

requirement for applying for any provincial capital funding by demonstra%ng project priori%za%on on a

standardized and consistent level.

1.1.2 Goals and Objectives of the AMP

The 2013 objec%ve was to concentrate on geWng the Paved Road network and Bridge Structures

implemented to meet the new industry standard and review the remaining assets over the next 3 years.

This would address the immediate needs within the %me constraints, as soMware versioning issues are a

road block to our ability to fully incorporate other Public Works assets into an updated comprehensive

capital planning module at this %me.

Buildings and Fleet are managed outside of this plan. Their AMP has been received by Council.

The AMP shall include the short term Implementa%on plans and long term Life Cycle plans for Public Works

assets.

There is a need to obtain a framework, providing clear direc%on and consistency to those engaged in the

process of Asset Management. To manage in an informed and transparent decision making process to

deliver op%mized services at reduced cost and risk.

One of the goals of this plan is to improve the prac%ces currently followed by decision makers at the

Township to manage the infrastructure assets and make decisions on improvement plans in a %mely and

cost-effec%ve manner.


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 3 of 12

PW AMP


Maintain

inventory of

assets

Undertake

condition

assessments

Lead capital

planning

Project Long-

term funding

requirements

Collaborate

with

Operations to

formalized

record

keeping and

transition to a

more pro-

active

maintenance

and

inspection

focus

Foster

collaboration

between

Engineering,

Operations,

Planning,

and Finance

Implement

technology as a

key enabler of

more effective

and efficient

means of

conducting

business that

supports

business

decisions.

To properly accomplish this goal, it is essen%al to have an accurate knowledge and understanding of the

physical and opera%onal characteris%cs of the Township’s infrastructure networks and be able to iden%fy

and provide recommenda%ons to address deficiencies in the system to ensure an acceptable Level of

Service to the residents.

1.1.3 Development of the AMP

The AMP Steering CommiJee determined our Asset Management Plan (AMP) would be completed in-

house.

Without the existence of a current Official Plan (2000) or Strategic Plan (1995), development of this AMP

lacked clear direc%ves and goals. Both Plans are prior to amalgama%on of the former Township of Moore

and the former Township of Sombra that formed The Township of St. Clair in 2001.

CarteGraph is our work management system and is the source for most Infrastructure repor%ng.

Finance provides actual and es%mated budge%ng and valua%on data through the Tangible Capital Asset

Accoun%ng processes using PSAB 3150 Guidelines in 2009.

1.1.4 Benefits of Implementing an Asset Management Plan

An effec%ve Asset Management Plan based on an integrated approach will ensure the ongoing integrity and

sustainability of the infrastructure assets. Many benefits can be achieved from a full implementa%on.

Informed and %mely decisions will help municipali%es op%mize investments, save money in the long run,

and beJer manage risks. Improved municipal asset management will ensure financial sustainability and

direct limited provincial resources to the most cri%cal needs.

The AMP will assist the decision makers in the prepara%on of short term Capital Improvement Plans (CIP)

and predic%on of long term Life Cycle Plans. It will also contribute to improved day to day opera%ons

through efficiencies.


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 4 of 12

PW AMP


It should be understood, however, that an AMP is only a network tool to assist in the prepara%on of a

Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). It should be used by decision makers in reaching educated decisions,

supported by reliable and objec%ve technical data, for the infrastructure to be repaired. An AMP will help

the user in comparing asset condi%on throughout the network on the same basis. It will provide a

consistent approach in comparing the performance of each element of the infrastructure networks and

iden%fy components of the networks in need of rehabilita%on. An AMP is a powerful tool to assist decision

makers in iden%fying where they should concentrate their efforts and money. It is a network-level

instrument which, when u%lizing an integrated approach, will determine and priori%ze where renewal

ac%vi%es should be carried out at the network level. However, input will s%ll be required by the decision-

makers to finalize the CIP.

The final decision on capital improvement work is, in most cases, based on factors that are difficult to

incorporate into an AM model. (“Poli%cal” issues or socio-economic considera%ons from public

stakeholders are examples of such factors.) As is always the case, prac%cal engineering exper%se is essen%al

in the decision-making process. Typically, before the final decision is made, more detailed inves%ga%ve

work will be required to confirm the results.

Implementa%on will ensure the Township can meet new demands in a fiscally responsible and

environmentally sustainable framework while preserving the Townships’ quality of life.


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 5 of 12

PW AMP


1.2 STATE OF INFRASTRUCTURE

1.2.1 Asset Inventory

Asset data collec%on for Roads, Sewers and Watermains were

ini%ally inventoried in 2007. Inventory for these assets are

stored in the CarteGraph work management database and

integrated with ESRI GIS mapping. Bridge Structure repor%ng

is currently maintained in an Access database stored on the

Township network server. Prepara%on has begun on Bridge

and Street Light inventories, currently maintained in

spreadsheets, for importa%on into CarteGraph with GIS

Integra%on. Con%nuous data cleaning is ongoing. CarteGraph

is the source for most inventory repor%ng.

1.2.2 Asset Value

The Township asset values are based on the replacement cost es%ma%on detailed in APPENDIX A.1 - Asset

Values, which shows the distribu%on of these values. Based on the results and the recommended 2% to 4%

yearly investments in maintenance, the Township should theore%cally allocate over $13 M per year to

ensure future sustainability of its assets.

Asset Values

Infrastructure Network Length (km) / Count

Estimated Replacement Cost 2013

Estimated Replacement Cost 2007

% of Total Assets

Roads (Paved HCB & LCB) 229km $103,098,918 $80,772,000 23%

Roads (Gravel) 329km $24,682,477 $21,087,400 6%

Bridge Structures 92 $54,358,000 $33,513,000 12%

Sidewalk/Trails 37km $6,071,000 $6,009,957 1%

Street Lights/Traffic Signals 1325 $1,650,750 $1,471,000 1%

Water 465km $142,847,977 $141,530,000 32%

Sanitary Sewer 118km $42,427,492 $30,873,000 9%

Storm Sewer 114km $39,954,851 $33,358,000 9%

Water Tower & Equipment $4,307,460 $19,000,000

1%

WWTP, Lagoons,& PS’s $28,417,806 6%

Total Asset Value $447,816,731 $367,614,357 100%

Table 2 – Asset Values

Before managing an asset, it is important to know the value of the asset to determine if the improvement

dollars spent are jus%fied to protect it. Based upon replacement unit prices, approxima%ons of the total

value of the assets were calculated. All assets have a limited life expectancy. Replacement costs and

lifecycle management is outlined in APPENDIX A.2 - TCA Procedures & AssumpCons.

Network Inventory

Network Type Inventory

Roads (Paved) 229 km

Roads (Gravel) 329 km

Bridges/Culverts 92

Sidewalk/Trails 37km

Streetlights/Traffic 1325

Water 465 km

Sewers 232 km

Table 1 – Network Inventory


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 6 of 12

PW AMP


Project Priority Indicate High/Medium/Low

Health or Safety Issues

Cost Saving/Paybacks

Asset Maintenance/Replacement

Growth Related Needs

Service Enhancement

Other

Table 3 - Project Priority Risks

1.2.3 Asset Condition

Es%mated condi%on assump%ons were developed based on known or es%mated install dates upon ini%al

inventory import. Ongoing condi%on informa%on is collected on assets during rou%ne inspec%on and

maintenance ac%vi%es, or during contracted inspec%on services. Paved Road segment condi%on

assessment is carried out using a computerized SCT Simple Segment Inspec%on system based on the

Ministry of Transporta%on of Ontario methodology. Newly constructed assets are ini%ally given an

assumed perfect condi%on ra%ng.

Appropriate condi%on monitoring reduces the likelihood of cri%cal asset failure.

1.2.4 Asset Risk

Most issues are addressed as per MMS. The Water network has its own risk analysis within the

Municipali%es DWQMS.

Budget considera%ons include project

priori%es, as well as other priori%es in

rela%on to need or environment.

Assets should be managed in a proac%ve

manner with considera%on to the

probability of failure and the consequence

of failure.

1.3 LEVELS OF SERVICE (LOS)

Current Service Levels are considered acceptable and are based on historical infrastructure management

prac%ces. Asset Managers at the Township recognize that to con%nue to provide an adequate Level of

Service to their ratepayers, it is essen%al to first develop a strategy that would ensure the sustainability of

those assets. Levels of Service are currently undocumented. The approach to address this is to develop in-

house KPI’s (key performance indicators).

Our asset performance is compared against other municipali%es as part of the annual Municipal

Performance Measurement Program Repor%ng. This report can be found on the Municipality’s’ website

www.twp.stclair.on.ca.

Service is oMen directly related to finances, regula%ons, and Council direc%on term by term.


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 7 of 12

PW AMP


1.4 ASSET MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

Decisions are presently made on the renewal of assets to replace, rehabilitate or con%nue with current

maintenance ac%vi%es based on Council/Poli%cal direc%ons within short electoral terms, instead of over

long term life-cycle management of the asset.

Our goal is to move Roads, Water, Sewer analysis to an Op%mized Life/Minimal Cost method. This method

u%lizes a calcula%on to allocate funding to the assets which will see the greatest increase in life, for the

minimal amount of funds. This favors performing treatments on assets at op%mized life cycle points. This

means that some assets which are in poor condi%on may be allowed to deteriorate further un%l the benefit

of replacement is sufficient to divert funds from preserva%on and rehabilita%on ac%vi%es.

The implementa%on of an AMP is to ensure adequate financial reserves are set aside for the preserva%on,

rehabilita%on and replacement of aging and expanding infrastructure assets, including features and

facili%es, for Paved Roads, Bridges, Water and Sewers.

The majority of the gravel road network is considered to be in very good condi%on. Maintenance

improvements are carried out on the en%re Gravel Road Network over 2 years. Therefore, there is no

medium to long term capital plans in the network. These improvements are usually funded through the

opera%ng budget.

To es%mate an infrastructure's remaining service life, it is essen%al to know its actual state and the

projected service life of its family type. The remaining service life es%mates will assist staff in the

determina%on of “when” and “how much” to invest in immediate and long term scenarios, to counter the

effects of deteriora%on and to ensure the %mely renewal of infrastructure. These assump%ons are

documented in APPENDIX A.2 - Tangible Capital Asset Procedures & AssumpCons.

There is an extensive list of planned and unplanned maintenance and repair ac%vi%es incorporated into

CarteGraph and associated to assets through the Work Order system. Some of these ac%vi%es are being

associated to the individual asset history for further evalua%on of asset condi%on and behaviors to assist in

iden%fying and priori%zing improvement needs. This is best done on assets associated to Work Orders

through planned maintenance. We are striving to be more effec%ve in this area as the organiza%on is s%ll

growing at different levels of u%lizing the CarteGraph Work Order management system.

Considera%on of alterna%ve procurement methods and new technologies should be given to reduce costs

of addressing infrastructure needs. The current Municipality’s procurement policy is provided in APPENDIX

A.3 - Procurement Policy.


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 8 of 12

PW AMP


Figure 2 - Sample of CarteGraph Work Order Ac%vi%es

1.4.1 Integrated Approach

To make the most cost-effec%ve decisions with regard to renewal of infrastructure assets, an integrated

approach to acknowledge the close proximity and high level of interac%on between the infrastructure

networks. In simple terms, it is essen%al to look at the condi%on of all components of infrastructure within

a road segment before selec%ng an improvement strategy.


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 9 of 12

PW AMP


The advanced use of the “Windows of Opportunity” concept can be used to coordinate the %ming for repair

with other components of infrastructure reducing the total cost of repairing the assets. The following figure

illustrates the concept of “Windows of Opportunity”.

Figure 3 – “Windows of Opportunity” Concept

When the level of needs on the underground assets is minimal, as it is the case in the Township, a manual

approach using GIS tools to coordinate the repairs is usually as effec%ve.

The next step is to priori%ze the improvements, determine when they should take place, establish what

kind of improvement should be applied and determine how much it would cost.

1.4.2 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)

In 2007, a 50 year CIP for all assets based mostly on the condi%on of the assets, was provided. For

budge%ng purposes, a 5 Year Capital Program for all assets was developed but never adopted.

Renewal forecasts are developed based on expected remaining life of assets using a number of composite

factors. The remaining life of an asset may be based on some or all of the following drivers:

• CondiCon

• Capacity

• Risk

• Maintenance & Repair

• Conformance to Standards

• Design Life

A proposed 10 year Capital Improvement Plan, based on the Actual Budget Scenario is included in

APPENDIX B.3 - CIP Paved Roads.

Burgess Engineering Inc. developed the OSIM Biennial Inspection Report that provides a 10 year Capital

Improvement Plan. The 2013 Report is summarized in APPENDIX C.1 - Bridge Report Summary.


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 10 of 12

PW AMP


1.5 FINANCING STRATEGY

1.5.1 Sources of Funding

Funding comes from a variety of sources including property taxes, user fees, debt issuance, 3rd party

contribu%ons and drawing on reserves.

• Tax levy

• User Fees

• Debt Financing

• 3rd Party Contribu%ons

• Reserves

1.5.2 Funding Strategy

Typically, Unlimited and Actual budget scenarios are analyzed along with mul%ple “What if” Scenarios for

comparison.

It is very important for a municipality to determine if the current level of funding is appropriate to con%nue

to provide an adequate Level of Service to its residents. It is also essen%al to allocate adequate funding to

ensure sustainability of the assets in the future. It is oMen suggested in literature that 2% to 4% of the value

of an asset should be spent yearly to ensure sustainability of the assets. Based on the asset replacement

cost es%ma%on of $447,816,731, the Township should theore%cally allocate over $13M per year to ensure

future sustainability

Funding remains the biggest challenge in reaching sustainability. Par%cularly with property tax funded core

services such as Roads and Bridges.

Taxa%on and user rates have historically fallen short of recognizing the true life-cycle cost of infrastructure

assets resul%ng in a growing list of deferred capital projects. Further shorYalls can be contributed to the

yearly reduc%ons in provincial funding, the loss of OPG property tax revenues, increases in policing and

other costs to maintain the same levels for other tax based services.

There has not been a formal commitment to address Long Term Capital Investment needs at this %me.


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 11 of 12

PW AMP


1.6 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

The Township of St. Clair has historically been in a reac%ve, worst-first environment. With the increase in

communica%on and understanding of our systems, our direc%on is moving towards a proac%ve, op%mized

life management of our assets. There is the need to look ahead long term with our financial strategies

instead of to the past.

Levels of Service and Key Performance Indicators need to be decided and documented to benchmark our

plan.

To con%nue good asset management, the Township should consider reviewing current prac%ces for

poten%al costs savings and op%mized asset improvement in our opera%onal methods

Further considera%ons should be given to mul%-year contracts and seeking partnerships with neighboring

municipali%es.

Recommenda%ons for funding include the u%liza%on of third party contribu%ons and the dedica%on of the

AMO Gas Tax to Paved Roads. It is further recommended to increase our tax levy to address the iden%fied

funding short fall.

Communica%on of our progress can be posted on our Municipal website ( www.twp.stclair.on.ca ) and in

our St. Clair Beacon household flyer.

As part of this assignment, mul%ple budget scenarios were analyzed to assess different improvement

strategies to determine the short and long term effects on the overall Paved Road network performance.

Recommenda%ons were presented to Council and included in APPENDIX A.5 - Conclusions and

RecommendaCons.

1.7 PLAN IMPROVEMENT AND MONITORING

The Township of St. Clair has taken worthy ini%a%ve with the introduc%on and integra%on of the

CarteGraph Asset Management System to manage our asset inventory and condi%ons. The Township has

considerable investment in this system and is dedicated to upda%ng, maintaining and progressing with the

u%liza%on of this resource for assessing and priori%zing asset needs and incorpora%ng Levels of Service and

risk tolerance. Con%nuous dedica%on and improvement is necessary for advancement.


Issued 30-MAY-2014


Page 12 of 12

PW AMP


The Asset Management Plan is an integral living document. To ensure it remains useful and relevant, the

following reviews are to be performed.

Asset Management Plan

AMP WHOLE / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Review Cycle 5 Years

INTRODUCTION Review Cycle 5 Years

ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN OVERVIEW Review Cycle 3 Years

PAVED ROADS Review Cycle 3 Years

BRIDGE STRUCTURES Review Cycle 3 Years

SIDEWALK / TRAILS Review Cycle 3 Years

STREET LIGHTS / TRAFFIC SIGNALS Review Cycle 3 Years

WATER NETWORK Review Cycle 3 Years

SEWER NETWORK Review Cycle 3 Years

APPENDIX Review Cycle 5 Years

Table 4 - Document Review Cycle

The Asset Management Plan, as a whole, is expected to be updated and communicated to Council every

five years. The Execu%ve Summary will be rewriJen at the same %me. Individual sec%ons should be

updated as new rela%ve data and informa%on become available.

Future reviews should include a look at other suppor%ng plans and policies within the context of this AMP.

Date post:	17-Mar-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

FINAL Public Works Asset Management...

Documents