Asset Management Plan - St. Clair Township (Non-Core Assets)

TOWNSHIP OF ST. CLAIR
Asset Management Plan for Non-Core Assets
Supplement to 2021 AMP (Public Works)

April 2025 – 24-7467

Table of Contents

Glossary
Revision and Review
Executive Summary

1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Context of Asset Management at St. Clair Township 1
1.1.1 Asset Management Policy 1
1.1.2 Our Asset Management Journey 1
1.1.3 Organizational Plans and Policies 2
1.1.4 Budgeting 2
1.2 Development of the Asset Management Plan 2
1.2.1 State of Infrastructure 3
1.2.2 Levels of Service 5
1.2.3 Asset Management Strategy 6
1.2.4 Financial Strategy 12
1.3 Conclusions & Recommendations 15
1.4 Plan Improvement and Monitoring 15
2.0 Parks and Recreation 17
2.1 State of Infrastructure – Parks and Recreation 17
2.1.1 Asset Inventory 17
2.1.2 Expected Useful Life 17
2.1.3 Asset Value 17
2.1.4 Asset Condition 18
2.2 Levels of Service (LoS) 19
2.3 Asset Management Strategy 20
2.3.1 Lifecycle Management – Parks and Recreation 20
2.4 Financial Strategy 21
2.4.1 Sources of Funding 21
2.4.2 Funding Strategy 21
2.4.3 Parks and Recreation assets in Need Now 22
2.4.4 Scenario Analysis 23
2.4.5 Addressing the Funding Gap 24
3.0 Building Facilities 25
3.1 State of Infrastructure – Building Facilities 25
3.1.1 Asset Inventory 25
3.1.2 Expected Useful Life 26
3.1.3 Asset Value 26
3.1.4 Asset Condition 26
3.2 Levels of Service – Buildings Facilities 28
3.3 Asset Management Strategy – Building Facilities 28
3.3.1 Lifecycle Management – Building Facilities 29
3.3.2 Lifecycle Costing 30
3.4 Financial Strategy 30
3.4.1 Sources of Funding 30
3.4.2 Funding Strategy 31
3.4.3 Building Facility assets in Need Now 31
3.4.4 Scenario Analysis 32
3.4.5 Addressing the Funding Gap 33
4.0 Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 35
4.1 State of Infrastructure – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 35
4.1.1 Asset Inventory 35
4.1.2 Expected Useful Life 36
4.1.3 Asset Value 36
4.1.4 Asset Condition 37
4.2 Levels of Service – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 38
4.3 Asset Management Strategy 38
4.4 Lifecycle Activities – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 39
4.4.1 Lifecycle Costing – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 39
4.4.2 Replacement Schedule 40
4.5 Financial Strategy – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 41
4.5.1 Sources of Funding 41
4.5.2 Funding Strategy 42
4.5.3 Scenario Analysis 43
4.5.4 Addressing the Funding Gap 44
5.0 Cemeteries 46
5.1 State of Infrastructure – Cemeteries 46
5.1.1 Asset Inventory 46
5.1.2 Expected Useful Life 46
5.1.3 Asset Value 46
5.1.4 Asset Condition 47
5.2 Levels of Service – Cemeteries 47
5.3 Asset Management Strategy 47
5.4 Lifecycle Activities – Cemeteries 48
5.4.1 Construction/Acquisition 48
5.4.2 Maintenance 48
5.4.3 Renewal/Rehabilitation 48
5.4.4 Disposal/Decommissioning 49
5.5 Financial Strategy – Cemeteries 49
6.0 References 50
Figures
Figure ES-1: Distribution of Non-Core Asset Valuation by Service Area ix
Figure ES-2: Percentage of Assets in Good to Excellent Condition x
Figure ES-3: Overall Asset Condition x
Figure ES-4: Sources of Funding for Non-core Asset Acquisition and Renewal xi
Figure ES-5: 10-year Projection for Non-Core Assets xii
Figure ES-6: Relationship of Valuation for all Municipal Assets xii
Figure 1-1: Population Statistics from Statistics Canada (2021) 1
Figure 1-2: Overall Condition Index Mapping 5
Figure 1-3: Windows of Opportunity, (City of Barrie, Pavement Management) 9
Figure 1-4: Asset and Non-Asset based Solutions (Municipal Finance Officers’
Association of Ontario, 2018 MFOA) 11
Figure 1-5: Total Cost of Ownership Example 14
Figure 2-1: Distribution of Current Replacement Value by Service Area 18
Figure 2-2: FCI Condition Distribution by Site 18
Figure 2-3: Condition Ranges and Descriptions 19
Figure 2-4: Sample Excerpt from LOS Appendix 19
Figure 2-5: Total Annual LCC for Parks and Recreation (2.5% Reinvestment Rate) 21
Figure 2-6: Operations and Capital Now Needs from the 2023 Facilities Report 22
Figure 2-7: Scenario Analysis – Parks and Recreation 23
Figure 3-1: Distribution of Current Replacement Value by Service Area 26
Figure 3-2: Distribution of Site Conditions by Service Area 27
Figure 3-3: Condition Ranges and Descriptions 27
Figure 3-4: Sample Excerpt from LOS Appendix 28
Figure 3-5: Total Annual LCC for Building Facilities (2.5% Reinvestment Rate) 30
Figure 3-6: Operations and Capital Repair Needs from the 2023 Facilities Report 32
Figure 3-7: Projected Works for Building Facilities 33
Figure 4-1: Distribution of CRV’s Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 36
Figure 4-2: Distribution of Fleet Conditions by Service Area (excluding Miscellaneous Machinery & Equipment) 37
Figure 4-3: Sample Excerpt from LOS Appendix 38
Figure 4-4: Total Annual LCC for Typical $100k Vehicle 40
Figure 4-5: 30-year Replacement Projection for Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 41
Figure 4-6: Distribution of Budget $ by Service Area – Fleet, Machinery and
Equipment 42
Figure 4-7: 10-year Projection for Fleet, Machinery and Equipment. 43
Figure 4-8: 30-year Projection for Fleet, Machinery and Equipment. 44

Tables
Table 1-1: Budget Template for Project Priority Risks 10
Table 2-1: Summary of Parks and Recreation State of Infrastructure 17
Table 2-2: Parks and Recreation Budgets 22
Table 2-3: Funding Scenario Outcomes Parks and Recreation 24
Table 3-1: Summary of Building Facilities State of Infrastructure 25
Table 3-2: Building Facilities Budgets 31
Table 3-3: Scenario Outcomes Building Facilities 33
Table 4-1: Summary of Fleet, Vehicles and Machinery 35
Table 4-2: Summary of Miscellaneous Machinery and Equipment 35
Table 4-3: CRV Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 36
Table 4-4: Condition Index and Ratings based on Expected Useful Life 37
Table 4-5: Fleet, Machinery & Equipment Budgets 42
Table 4-6: Funding Scenario outcomes for Fleet, Machinery & Equipment 44
Appendices
A Levels of Service

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
Cartegraph (OMS) –Software for Computerized Asset and Operations Management
CIP – Capital Improvement Plan
CRV – Current Replacement Value
ESRI/GIS – Software for Geographic Information System
EUL – Expected Useful Life
FCI – Facility Condition Index
IIMM – International Infrastructure Management Manual (Globally acclaimed)
KPI’s – Key Performance Indicators
LAMC – Lambton Asset Management Committee
LCC – Life Cycle Costing
LOS – Level of Service
MMS – Minimum Maintenance Standard
Municipality – shall infer The Corporation of the Township of St. Clair
OCI – Overall Condition Index
OMS – Operations Management System (Cartegraph)
SCT – St. Clair Township
TCA – Tangible Capital Assets
Township – shall infer The Corporation of the Township of St. Clair

Revision and Review

Revision Number Section Details Completed By Adopted By Date

000 Non-core AMP Whole First Non-core AMP SCT/Dillon Consulting Council – Corporation of the Township of St. Clair Mar 3, 2025
001 ES, Bldg & Facilities Removal of Courtright Hall SCT/Dillon Consulting N/A April 2025

Executive Summary
The following Asset Management Plan for Non-Core Assets is a supplement to the previous 2021 Asset Management Plan (Core Assets). This report includes Township-owned non-core (as defined in O. Reg. 588/17) assets summarized as:
• Parks and Recreation
• Building Facilities
• Fleet, Machinery and Equipment
• Cemeteries
Key Statistics Non-Core Portfolio

A summary of the non-core assets is in Table ES-1.
Table ES-1: State of Infrastructure Summary for Non-core Assets

Service Area
Count Current Replacement Value (CRV) Average Age (years) Average Condition Rating
Parks and Recreation (Sites) 43 $53,255,000 50 Good
Building Facilities (Sites) 23 $120,200,000 49 Fair to Good
Fleet, Machinery and Equipment (Assets) 365 $40,817,384 11 Average
Cemeteries* – – – –
*There are currently no metrics for Cemeteries identified.

Asset inventories are captured within the Cartegraph OMS operations management system. Most non-core asset inventories are still being captured.
Asset valuation is determined by using estimated Current Replacement Values (CRV’s). Approaches can be varied depending on availability of costing information.

Figure ES-1: Distribution of Non-Core Asset Valuation by Service Area
Asset condition ratings were determined using predictive estimations based on type and age or as a percentage of asset in need of repair.
Percentage of Assets in ‘Good’ to ‘Excellent’ condition by service area is shown in Figure ES-2.

Figure ES-2: Percentage of Assets in Good to Excellent Condition

A summary of the overall condition for each Service Area is shown in Figure ES-3.

• Good
• Fair to Good
• Average
• Not Available
Figure ES-3: Overall Asset Condition
Levels of Service mandated under O.Reg. 588/17, does not define LOS for non-core assets. Therefore, The Township has established LOS parameters, targets and responses in line with core definitions for Community and Technical expectations. These can be found in Appendix A Levels of Service.
The Asset Management Strategy aims to maximize asset lifespan by operating, maintaining and renewing or upgrading them efficiently to meet community needs and ensure compliance with regulations. The key components utilized to achieve responsible asset management are:
• Lifecycle Management
• Risk Management

The Financial Strategy focuses on ensuring sustainable funding and resource allocation. The key components towards achieving long-term fiscal responsibility are:
• Funding Sources
• Financial Planning and Forecasting
• Investment Prioritization
• Sustainable Funding Levels
Both strategies are essential for the efficient and sustainable operation of municipalities and providing reliable services to the community.
This Asset Management Plan for Non-core reviewed the current allocations or budgets and identified any surplus or shortfall in funding based on reasonable projections.

Figure ES-4: Sources of Funding for Non-core Asset Acquisition and Renewal
With a Total Non-core Current Replacement Value (CRV) of $214 million, the Township should theoretically allocate over $5.4 million per year to approach future sustainability of these assets. This represents a 2.5% reinvestment rate well within the industry recommendation of 1.7% -4% yearly investments for renewal and replacement activities.
Based on a historical analysis the Township is committing approximately $3.3 million towards non-core projects per year. This has created an abundance of assets in Need Now at a cost of
$16 million.

Figure ES-5: 10-year Projection for Non-Core Assets
The Municipality has a significant responsibility in managing its assets through renewal and replacements to maintain the infrastructure and services that the community relies on.
Looking at the big picture, with both Core and Non-core having a (CRV) of $1.4 billion the recommended annual reinvestment should be closer to $34 million.

Figure ES-6: Relationship of Valuation for all Municipal Assets

Current practices and strategies are outlined in this AMP to manage public infrastructure with recommendations where they can be further refined.
This AMP represents a snapshot in time and is based on the best available processes, data, and information at the Township. The evaluation of the above items and further development of a data-driven, best-practice approach to asset management is recommended to ensure the Township is providing optimal value through its management of infrastructure and delivery of services.

1.0 Introduction

St. Clair Township is a lower tier municipality located in the County of Lambton and regulated under the Province of Ontario, Canada. Home to over 14,000 residents in Southwestern Ontario.

Figure 1-1: Population Statistics from Statistics Canada (2021)
1.1 Context of Asset Management at St. Clair Township
Amendments to the current 2021 AMP are shown here.
1.1.1 Asset Management Policy
The Township established an asset management policy, in accordance with requirements of O.Reg. 588/17, most recently revised in July 2024 (Strategic Asset Management Policy (Revision 002 30-July 2024)).
1.1.2 Our Asset Management Journey
January 2024-Present. Creation of supplemental asset management plan to meet requirements of O.Reg. 588/17 for non-core assets.
Timing of Regulation (Government of Ontario)
The Asset Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure Regulation (O. Reg. 588/17 as amended by O. Reg. 193/21) was made under the Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act, 2015, and it came into force on January 1, 2018. The regulation was amended on March 15, 2021, to extend regulatory timelines for phases 2, 3 and 4 by one year.

O. Reg. 588/17 helps municipalities better understand what important services need to be supported over the long term, while identifying infrastructure challenges and opportunities, and finding innovative solutions.
Phase-in Schedule
July 1, 2019: Date for municipalities to have a finalized strategic asset management policy that promotes best practices and links asset management planning with budgeting, operations, maintenance and other municipal planning activities.
July 1, 2022: Date for municipalities to have an approved asset management plan for core assets (roads, bridges and culverts, water, wastewater and stormwater management systems) that identifies current levels of service and the cost of maintaining those levels of service.
July 1, 2024: Date for municipalities to have an approved asset management plan for all municipal infrastructure assets that identifies current levels of service and the cost of maintaining those levels of service.
July 1, 2025: Date for municipalities to have an approved asset management plan for all municipal infrastructure assets that builds upon the requirements set out in 2024. This includes an identification of proposed levels of service, what activities will be required to meet proposed levels of service, and a strategy to fund these activities.
1.1.3 Organizational Plans and Policies
Additional strategic planning and asset management documents:
• 2021 Asset Management Plan
1.1.4 Budgeting
Department level budget submissions prepared by each Divisional Department will be reviewed and evaluated by the CAO and Treasurer in the preparation of the Municipality’s annual budget.
1.2 Development of the Asset Management Plan
Development of this Asset Management Plan focuses on non-core assets, including:
• Parks and Recreation
• Building Facilities
• Fleet, Machinery and Equipment
• Cemeteries
We note that the categories above are inclusive of Information Technology and Fire services assets.

Our first AMP was developed for Core Assets, which was approved by Council in 2021. This 2024 non-core AMP shall be considered a supplement to the 2021 Plan, to broaden the scope to all assets. To properly accomplish this goal, it is essential to have an accurate knowledge and understanding of the physical and operational characteristics of the Township’s infrastructure networks and be able to identify and provide recommendations to address deficiencies in our ability to meet stakeholder expectations.
The following sections set out the scope and methodology used in the development of this plan.
1.2.1 State of Infrastructure
1.2.1.1 Asset Inventory
Most asset data is stored in the Cartegraph OMS operations management system and some integrated with ESRI GIS mapping and/or integrated with Vadim Financial Reporting.
Data capture, refining and cleaning is an ongoing process and requires continuous review as assets are further understood. Cartegraph OMS is the source for most inventory reporting.
1.2.1.2 Asset Value
The asset valuations are based on estimated current replacement values (CRV) and assumptions. The Current Replacement Values (CRVs) and methodologies are captured in AMP Supporting Docs outside of Plan for review, and/or built into OMS inventory. It is assumed these values include all costs directly attributable to the procurement, acquisition, construction or development of the tangible capital asset. Examples of directly attributable costs include:
• Asset purchase or construction
• Site preparation costs
• Initial delivery and handling costs
• Installation and assembly costs
• Specialized Training required to operate or maintain the acquisition
• Costs related to any testing and commissioning for asset assumption
• Professional fees (e.g. design, legal, etc.) and
• Other (e.g. service continuity costs).
Approaches used for determining CRV’s can be varied depending on availability of costing information. The Municipality has moved away from using inflated historical or insurance costing and are building benchmarks for improved accuracy and planning.
• Parks and Recreation is determined on a site-by-site basis inclusive of all asset components.

• Building Facilities is determined on a site-by-site basis inclusive of all asset components.
• Fleet, Machinery and Equipment is determined on an asset-by-asset basis.
• Cemeteries are not currently valued or included.
1.2.1.3 Asset Condition
The Township undertakes some formal and informal asset condition or inspection programs. Outcomes from these programs can be used to inform inventoried asset conditions. Actual conditions documented against the individual assets in the OMS inventory will reset their deterioration and estimated Overall Condition and Act before date, utilizing asset parameters built into the system. Where actual condition information is unavailable, aged based estimated condition is used based on EUL or Operational knowledge. Newly acquired assets are given an assumed excellent condition rating.
Appropriate condition monitoring reduces the likelihood of critical asset failure.
• Parks and Recreation conditions were determined by site, utilizing a combination of the 2023 Facilities report $ Now Needs in relation to the CRV, and operational knowledge review. Measured against the SCT OCI Rating Scale. Assumptions are documented in AMP Supporting Docs outside of Plan.
• Building Facilities conditions were determined by site, utilizing a combination of the 2023 Facilities report $ Now Needs in relation to the CRV, and operational knowledge review. Measured against the SCT FCI Rating Scale. Assumptions are documented in AMP Supporting Docs outside of Plan.
• Fleet, Machinery and Equipment conditions are asset by asset, a straight-line deterioration based on age and EUL by equipment classiﬁcation. Measured against the SCT OCI Rating Scale. Assumptions are documented in AMP Supporting Docs outside of Plan.
• Cemeteries conditions have not been determined.
FCI is obtained by aggregating the total cost of any lifecycle improvement needs of a building compared to the CRV of the building. It is a ratio of ‘need’ to ‘replacement value’ expressed as a percentage. Land value is not considered when evaluating.

SCT OCI FCI (%)
Index Value SCT OCI
Rating Index Value FCI Rating
100 5
Excellent 100 0 to 10 Good
90 4.5 90 11 to
25 Fair to
Good
80 4 80

26 to
60

Poor to Fair
70 3.5
Good 75

60 3 60

50 2.5
Average 50

40 2 40

60+

Critical

30 1.5 Fair 30
20 1 20

10 0.5 Poor 10

0 Failed
Figure 1-2: Overall Condition Index Mapping
1.2.2 Levels of Service
Ontario Regulation 588/17 requires municipalities to establish and document levels of service (LOS) for their infrastructure assets, including non-core assets. Municipalities must define both current and proposed LOS using qualitative descriptions and technical metrics. For non-core assets, municipalities are responsible for developing their own metrics to measure and report service levels.
• Current service levels
• Proposed service levels
o When establishing the proposed levels of service for each of the next 10 years, the municipality must explain why the proposed levels of service are appropriate.
• Metrics
o Metrics can describe scope, quality, availability, and capacity of the services addressed
1.2.2.1 Current Levels of Service (LOS)
Current LOS refers to the present levels of service being achieved for an asset or service. These are determined using:
• Community Levels of Service: These describe the scope and quality of services from the
perspective of the community. For example, how residents experience the service.

• Technical Levels of Service: These are quantitative measures that describe the performance
of the asset. For example, the number of service disruptions per year.
The Township has established levels of service (LOS) indicators to measure and track service quality for ratepayers, allowing adjustments to ensure sustainability. Asset Managers emphasize maintaining adequate service levels. Current and proposed LOS targets are based on minimum maintenance standards, current service levels, risk tolerance, and ratepayer input, aligning with O.Reg. 588/17. LOS must be tracked and evaluated annually, with adjustments made to meet expectations, evolving regulations, best practices, or funding limits. Enhanced tracking of some LOS metrics is needed to establish precise targets.
1.2.2.2 Proposed Levels of Service (LOS)
Proposed LOS refers to the target levels of service that a municipality aims to achieve in the future. These targets are set to guide asset management planning and ensure compliance with O.Reg. 588/17. Proposed LOS must be:
• Appropriate and Realistic: Based on the municipality’s goals, ﬁnancial capacity, and sustainability to meet proposed LOS.
• Time-Bound: Typically, with speciﬁc targets to be achieved in 10 years (e.g.,2024- 2033).
Municipalities must explain why the proposed levels of service are appropriate and how they plan to achieve them. This involves considering different funding scenarios and their impact on service levels, such as maintaining, increasing, or decreasing funding (Government of Ontatio).
These definitions help municipalities plan and manage their infrastructure assets effectively, ensuring sustainable service delivery and alignment with regulatory requirements.
Additional information on Current and Proposed Levels of Service including the indicators, definitions and values are included in Appendix A Levels of Service.
1.2.3 Asset Management Strategy
The Ontario “Building Together Guide for Municipal Asset Management Plans” defines an asset management strategy as:
The set of planned actions that will enable the assets to provide the desired levels of service in a sustainable way, while managing risk, at the lowest lifecycle cost.
The asset management strategy aims to efficiently achieve expected service levels and maximize asset lifespan cost-effectively. An integrated approach coordinates all municipal departments and resources to manage assets, maximizing benefits, reducing risks, and ensuring sustainable community service levels.

1.2.3.1 Lifecycle Management
Lifecycle costing (LCC), as defined by the International Infrastructure Management Manual (IIMM), is:
The total cost of an asset throughout its life, including planning, design, construction, acquisition, operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, and disposal costs.
A lifecycle management approach also considers how the asset performs over its life.
Lifecycle Activities
Lifecycle activities encompass all planning, engineering, and design work associated with an asset’s useful life. These activities include:
• Construction / Acquisition: Acquiring assets through construction, purchase, or donation of
new or used assets.
• Operations / Maintenance: Regular inspections and maintenance, signiﬁcant repairs, and activities related to unexpected events.
• Renewal / Rehabilitation: Signiﬁcant repairs designed to extend the asset’s life, such as lining iron watermains to defer replacement.
• Replacement: Activities expected once an asset reaches the end of its useful life and renewal, or rehabilitation is no longer viable.
• Disposal / Decommissioning: Activities associated with disposing of an asset once it is no
longer needed or has reached the end of its useful life.
Additional activities include:
• Non-Infrastructure Solutions: Actions or policies that lower costs or extend asset life, such as integrated infrastructure planning, demand management, insurance, process optimization, and managed failures.
• Expansion Activities: Planned activities required to extend services to previously un- serviced areas or to meet growth or new functional demands.
Lifecycle Costing
Lifecycle costing (LCC) is extensively utilized across industries such as construction, manufacturing, and public infrastructure to ensure that investments remain financially viable and sustainable in the long term.
• Identify Costs: Determine all relevant costs associated with the asset, including initial, recurring, rehabilitation, replacement, and disposal costs.

• Timing of Lifecycle Events: Estimate when each cost will occur over the asset’s lifespan. This includes scheduling regular maintenance and predicting when major repairs or replacements will be needed.
• Calculate Total Lifecycle Cost: Sum all present value costs to determine the total lifecycle cost of the asset. This provides a comprehensive view of the asset’s ﬁnancial impact over its entire life.
LCC can be estimated using typical percentages for each category. While specific percentages can vary.
Example of Lifecycle Costing
Let’s consider an example of purchasing a new piece of machinery:
• Useful Life: 20 years
• Initial Cost: $100,000 (purchase and installation)
• Annual Operating Cost: $5,000
• Annual Maintenance Cost: $2,000
• Major Overhaul Cost: $20,000 (occurs every 10 years)
• Disposal Cost: $5,000
The total lifecycle cost for the given example is approximately $265,000.
This calculation represents the budget dollars needed to manage the singular asset over its entire 20 year expected life.
Window of Opportunity Concept
Optimized Life/Minimal Cost can be furthered by utilizing the “Windows of Opportunity” concept, which looks at the coordination and planning of Lifecycle events.
Aspects of the “Window of Opportunity” Concept are:
• Optimal Timing
o Identifying the best times to perform maintenance or upgrades to minimize lifecycle costs and disruptions while maximizing asset performance and lifespan.
• Coordination of Activities
o Synchronizing maintenance and repair activities across diﬀerent assets and systems to reduce overall costs and improve eﬃciency. For example, if a road needs resurfacing, it might be cost-eﬀective to upgrade underground utilities at the same time.

• Cost-Eﬀectiveness
o Performing actions during the window of opportunity can prevent more signiﬁcant, costly repairs or replacements later. This proactive approach helps in managing the total cost of ownership of assets.
• Risk Management
o Executing LC activities before they become critical issues. By acting within the window of opportunity, municipalities can mitigate the risk of asset failures and ensure continuous service delivery.

Figure 1-3: Windows of Opportunity, (City of Barrie, Pavement Management)
1.2.3.2 Risk Management
Beyond Lifecycle Management, a risk-based approach should be used to ensure that assets are within acceptable risk tolerances. Where risk falls outside of tolerances there is a need to mitigate the risk.
• Risk Assessment:
o Identifying, rating and addressing both corporate and asset risks.
• Risk Mitigation
o Identify strategies and actions to reduce or eliminate the impact of identiﬁed risks,
along with their associated costs.

• Prioritization
o Risk Ranking: Rank assets based on the severity and likelihood of risks.
o Critical Assets: Identify assets that are critical to public safety and essential services,
giving them higher priority.
o Budgeting: Allocate funds and resources eﬃciently to address the most critical risks.
The Township currently integrates risk into its asset management program through the following methods:
• Asset Criticality Factors: Assets within the OMS inventory are assigned criticality factors, where a factor of 1.1 indicates a 10% increase in importance and priority over the default value of 1.
• Subjective Project Priorities and Risks: Current budgeting practices consider subjective project priorities and risks. The evaluation metric is detailed in Table 1-1, and other priorities such as need, or environmental concerns can also be noted.
Table 1-1: Budget Template for Project Priority Risks

Health or Safety Issues
Cost Saving/Paybacks
Asset Maintenance/Replacement
Growth Related Needs
Service Enhancement
Other

Assets should be managed proactively, considering both the probability and consequences of failure.
There is a continuous improvement objective to incorporate an asset risk matrix against OMS Inventory by asset category. Optimal Goal would be to incorporate this calculated risk into the budgeting priority process for corporate consistency.

1.2.3.3 Decision-Making
A decision-making framework for asset and non-asset-based solutions (sourced from Municipal Finance Officers’ Association of Ontario, 2018 MFOA) is presented below.

Figure 1-4: Asset and Non-Asset based Solutions (Municipal Finance Oﬃcers’ Association
of Ontario, 2018 MFOA)

The following should be considered to assist in evaluating disposal versus replacement of an asset:
• impact on service delivery
• utilization of the asset
• public opinion/input
• funding and staﬀ availability
If the asset cannot be sufficiently maintained throughout its expected useful life and the level of service cannot be met due to budget or staffing constraints, disposal and non-replacement should be considered.
1.2.4 Financial Strategy
The financial strategy for managing non-core assets involves a multi-faceted approach to ensure sustainable funding and effective allocation of resources. The key components of this strategy are described below.
1.2.4.1 Funding Sources
• Municipal Budget Allocations: Annual budget allocations from the Township’s general revenue are a primary source of funding for asset management activities. This includes both operating and capital budgets.
• Grants and Subsidies: The Township actively seeks grants and subsidies from provincial and federal governments, as well as other agencies, to support speciﬁc projects and initiatives related to asset management.
• User Fees and Charges: Revenue generated from user fees and charges for services provided by non-core assets (e.g., park rentals, recreation programs) contribute directly to operational expenses. Any potential surplus would be placed in reserves towards capital improvements.
• Development Charges: Fees collected from developers for new developments help fund the expansion and enhancement of infrastructure to accommodate growth.
• Reserves and Reserve Funds: The Township maintains reserves and reserve funds speciﬁcally earmarked for asset management. These funds are accumulated over time and used for planned capital expenditures and unexpected repairs.
• Debt Financing: When necessary, the Township may use debt ﬁnancing to fund large-scale capital projects. This approach spreads the cost over the useful life of the asset, aligning payment with the beneﬁts received.

1.2.4.2 Financial Planning and Forecasting
• Long-Term Financial Planning: The Township develops long-term ﬁnancial plans that align with the asset management strategy. These plans consider projected revenues, expenditures, and funding gaps over a 10 or 30-year horizon.
• Lifecycle Cost Analysis: Financial planning incorporates lifecycle cost analysis to ensure that all costs associated with an asset, from acquisition to disposal, are considered. This helps in making informed decisions about asset investments and maintenance.
• Risk Management: The ﬁnancial strategy should include risk management practices to prioritize budget initiatives and identify, assess, and mitigate ﬁnancial. This ensures that the Township is prepared for unexpected events and can cost eﬀectively maintain service levels.
1.2.4.3 Investment Prioritization
• Prioritization Framework: A prioritization framework is used to allocate funds to projects and activities based on criteria such as asset condition, criticality, risk, and community and LOS impact. This ensures that the most urgent and important needs are addressed ﬁrst.
• Performance Monitoring: Regular monitoring and reporting on the performance of assets and the eﬀectiveness of the ﬁnancial strategy are conducted. This includes tracking key performance indicators (KPIs) and adjusting as needed to meet LOS.
• Community Engagement: The Township engages with the community to gather input on priorities and preferences for asset management. This helps ensure that the ﬁnancial strategy aligns with community needs and expectations.
1.2.4.4 Sustainable Funding Levels
• Reinvestment Rates: The Township aims to maintain reinvestment rates within industry recommendations (1.7% to 4% of asset value annually) to ensure the long-term sustainability of non-core assets.
• Cost Recovery Models: Where applicable, cost recovery models are implemented to ensure that the costs of providing services are covered by the revenues generated from those services.
• Levels of Service: Ensure realistic and sustainable LOS that aligns with community expectations.
• Eﬃciency Improvements: Continuous improvement initiatives are undertaken to enhance the eﬃciency of asset management practices, reducing costs and maximizing the value of investments.

By implementing this comprehensive financial strategy, the Township ensures that it can effectively manage its non-core assets, maintain service levels, and support the community’s needs both now and in the future.
The financial component of the strategy must include the estimated costs of the identified lifecycle activities to achieve the proposed levels of service, and appropriate funding available, for the 10-year forecast.
It is very important for a municipality to determine if the current level of funding is appropriate to continue to meet Levels of Service targets. It is also essential to allocate adequate funding to ensure future sustainability. It is often suggested in literature that 1.7% to 4% reinvestment rate of asset CRV should be made annually.
Funding remains the biggest challenge in reaching sustainability.
Taxation and user rates have historically fallen short of recognizing the true life-cycle costs, resulting in a growing list of deferred capital projects. Additional contributing shortfalls could come from reductions in government funding or development charges, loss of large property tax revenues, inflated cost increases.
1.2.4.5 Understanding the Total Cost of Ownership
The key to sustainability is understanding the total cost of ownership over an asset’s life. The acquisition cost typically represents a small portion, as represented in Figure 1-5.

Figure 1-5: Total Cost of Ownership Example
Considerations must be made for the total cost of ownership, including the cost for acquisition, the lifecycle operations, maintenance and rehabilitation, and finally the cost to dispose of an asset.

1.3 Conclusions & Recommendations
The Township of St. Clair has historically been in a reactive, worst-first environment. With the increase in communication and understanding of our systems, our direction is moving towards a proactive, optimized life management of our assets. There is the need to look ahead long term with our financial strategies.
Levels of Service and Key Performance Indicators need to be tracked to benchmark our plan.
To continue good asset management, the Township should consider reviewing current practices for potential costs savings and optimized asset improvement in our operational methods
Further considerations should be given to multi-year contracts and seeking partnerships with neighboring municipalities.
External communication of our progress can be posted on our Municipal website (www.stclairtownship.ca).
1.4 Plan Improvement and Monitoring
The Township of St. Clair has taken initiative with the introduction and integration of the Cartegraph Operations Management System to manage our assets. The Township has considerable investment in this system and is dedicated to updating, maintaining, and progressing with the utilization of this resource for assessing and prioritizing asset needs, incorporating Levels of Service and risk tolerance, as well as integrating with the financial system. Continuous dedication, investment and improvement is necessary for advancement.
The Asset Management Plan is an integral living document.
The Township’s asset management plans and supplements are to be combined into one fulsome Corporate Asset Management Plan, inclusive of all municipal assets. The Asset Management Plan as a whole, is expected to be updated and communicated to Council every five years. The Executive Summary will be rewritten at the same time. Individual sections should be updated as new relative data and information become available.
Continuous Improvement
Continuous improvement is an ongoing process requiring dedicated resources and commitment. The following is planned actions and recommendations to advance our Asset Management practice.

Key Actions for State of Infrastructure:
• Expand and Enhance Asset Inventory: Include all assets and break down complex ones.
o Review and validate asset data.
o Implement an asset risk matrix.
• Asset Valuation: Formalize costing with documentation and approvals; periodically update cost estimates.
• Condition Assessments: Formalize and incorporate condition assessment strategies.
• Review and Document Asset Parameters: Implement CRV, EUL, and ESL for major assets.
• Levels of Service (LoS):
o Use recent data for establishing current LoS.
o Determine and include costs for current and proposed LoS.
o Consider future adjustments based on increased understanding.
o Maintain and track LoS targets from 2024 to 2034.
o Identify proposed levels of service by July 1, 2025.
Key Actions for Asset Management Systems and Strategies:
• Consolidate AMPs: Merge individual AMPs into a single Corporate AMP.
• Consider Master Plans: Master plans for Service Areas to guide obtainable objectives for
future planning.
• Review and Update Policies: Ensure asset parameters and policies reﬂect current decisions.
• Risk Assessments: Perform and document Risk Assessments for Critical Assets.
• Risk/Criticality models: Use in decision making for asset management and budget
prioritization.
• Enhance Funding Strategy:
o Create a 10+ year capital plan and incorporate a risk module (all Asset Types).
o Stricter ﬁscal policies (reserve fund management, debt management, alternative
revenue sources).
o Ensure annual capital contributions match annual depreciation.
o Document risk-based decision-making.
o Continuously review and develop lifecycle management strategies.
o Incorporate lifecycle costs in budgets for new acquisitions.
o Align budgets to LoS and AM strategies.
• Cemeteries: Heritage committee to review the Cemeteries section, including inventory improvements. work around cemeteries continues to evolve the details in each section such as “State of Infrastructure” will be further developed.

2.0 Parks and Recreation
2.1 State of Infrastructure – Parks and Recreation
Parks and Recreational sites include parks, campgrounds, and a golf course that are public open spaces, operated and maintained by the Township. Table 2-1 describes the current state of the Parks and Recreation sites.
Table 2-1: Summary of Parks and Recreation State of Infrastructure

Service Area Average Site Age (years) Total Count Total Area (Ha.) Current Replacement Value (CRV) % in Need (FCI) Average Condition Rating (FCI)

Campgrounds 53 3 33 $ 5,000,000 32% Poor to Fair
Parks 50 39 69 $ 28,255,000 7% Good
Golf Courses 54 1 94 $ 20,000,000 1% Good

50 43 196 $ 53,255,000 9% Good
2.1.1 Asset Inventory
The parks and recreational sites are complex, and include multiple asset types, depending on the type and usage of the site. Typical major components under parks and recreation include:

Site Improvements (parking, fencing, etc.)
Buildings & Park Structures
Athletic Spaces Playgrounds & Play Equipment Parks Amenities & Benches Trees & Landscape Areas
The Township is currently undertaking an inventory capture of the parks and recreation assets.
2.1.2 Expected Useful Life
Default EUL values are currently being identified by asset types, as the asset inventory is being captured. Default asset parameters will be documented outside of this plan.
2.1.3 Asset Value
The current valuation for parks and recreation assets was determined by the Township on a site-by-site basis and is inclusive of all asset components. The Current Replacement Values (CRVs) are documented outside of this plan.

Parks can be further categorized as a community park, major open space, minor open space, or a neighbourhood park.

Figure 2-1: Distribution of Current Replacement Value by Service Area
Note that Parks represent only 35% of Open Space Land Use, yet they carry 53% of the total current replacement value.
2.1.4 Asset Condition
A summary of asset condition by type and percentage of total area is shown in Figure 2-2.

Figure 2-2: FCI Condition Distribution by Site

The determination of asset condition descriptor based on FCI is shown in Figure 2-3.

Figure 2-3: Condition Ranges and Descriptions
Without individual asset condition capture, the overall condition for Parks and Campgrounds is assumed to be ‘Fair to Good’, based on operational knowledge. This is reflective of the known backlog of major components in need of repair.
The Golf Course, with recent significant course improvements and major Clubhouse renovations, is in ‘Good’ Condition.
The Township intends to collect more formalized condition data as inventory for the parks and recreation assets is expanded. Currently, Poor asset condition or maintenance needs are identified during formal and informal eyes-on assessments as well as from internal or external concerns/complaints.
2.2 Levels of Service (LoS)
Levels of service (current and proposed), and performance measures are defined by the Township. LOS information can be found in Appendix A.

Figure 2-4: Sample Excerpt from LOS Appendix
Note: Sample excerpt from Appendix A LoS Levels of Service Non

2.3 Asset Management Strategy
The asset management strategy for parks and recreation aims to achieve cost-effective and sustainable management through lifecycle activities. These activities will vary based on the asset’s components, condition, and services provided.
2.3.1 Lifecycle Management – Parks and Recreation
2.3.1.1 Lifecycle Activities
Lifecycle activities for parks and recreation assets involve a series of steps to ensure their effective and sustainable management. These activities typically include:
• Condition Assessment: Regularly evaluate the condition of assets to determine maintenance and replacement needs. This helps in planning and prioritizing lifecycle activities.
• Maintenance: Implement routine and preventive maintenance schedules to keep assets in good working condition and extend their useful life.
• Repairs: Address any immediate issues or damage to prevent further deterioration and ensure safety and functionality.
• Upgrades and Renewals: Replace or upgrade assets that are no longer eﬃcient, safe, or meeting the community’s needs. This includes incorporating new technologies and materials.
These activities help maintain the quality, safety, and sustainability of parks and recreation assets, ensuring they continue to serve the community effectively.
2.3.1.2 Lifecycle Costing
Life cycle costing (LCC) for Parks and Recreation with a total Current Replacement Value (CRV) of $53,255,000 involves evaluating the total cost of ownership over the asset’s life, including initial acquisition, operations, maintenance, renewal, and disposal costs. Here’s an estimated breakdown using typical percentages:
• Operations (0.5% of CRV annually):
o 0.5%×53,255,000=266,275 per year
• Maintenance (0.3% of CRV annually):
o 0.3%×53,255,000=159,765 per year
• Renewal (1.7% of CRV annually):
o 1.7%×53,255,000=905,335 per year

• Disposal (0.1% of CRV at the end of the life cycle):
o 0.1%×53,255,000=53,255 at the end of the life cycle
These calculations provide an annual estimate for operations, maintenance, and renewal, along with a one-time disposal cost at the end of the asset’s life cycle.

2.5% Reinvestment Rate
Acquistion (CRV) Operation (0.5%) Maintenance (0.3%) Renewal (1.7%) Disposal (0.1%)
$ 53,255,000 $ 266,275 $ 159,765 $ 905,335 $ 53,255
Total Annual LCC of Acquistions $ 1,331,375
Figure 2-5: Total Annual LCC for Parks and Recreation (2.5% Reinvestment Rate)
2.4 Financial Strategy
The financial strategy for Parks and Recreation assets considers current funding sources and projected requirements, using analysis and existing mechanisms to identify any funding surpluses or shortfalls. The Township can leverage these insights to prioritize funding and asset management strategies.
2.4.1 Sources of Funding
Funding for Parks and Recreation comes from the following sources:
• Tax Revenue (may include Debt)
• Environment & Education Reserves
• Development Charges
• Payments-In-Lieu of Parkland
• Provisions for Reserves
2.4.2 Funding Strategy
The Acquisition/Renewal/Disposal activities for Parks and Recreation assets are funded through several sources. The baseline funding sources with purpose are summarized in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2: Parks and Recreation Budgets

Budget Name Avg. Budget Service Area Source

Capital
$660,000 $300,000 Parks Tax Revenue
$360,000 Parks Environment & Education Reserves

Operating
$288,000 $20,000 Parks Development Charges
$8,000 Parks Payments-In-Lieu of Parkland
$70,000 Campgrounds Provision for Reserves
$190,000 Golf Course Provision for Reserves
2.4.3 Parks and Recreation Assets in Need Now
The 2023 Facilities Report (taken to Council on February 21, 2023) was generated based on required renewal expenditures known at that time. The Now Needs in this AMP reflects the omission of significant 2024 Golf Clubhouse renovations yet does include other Now Needs ($) known to Operations since the 2023 report. Now Needs are reflective of a 2.5% reinvestment.
The purpose of the report was to illustrate the current financial burden to sustain our parks and recreation assets, to continue providing the current service level to the community in the short term.
The interpretation of the report is summarized in Figure 2-6.

Figure 2-6: Operations and Capital Now Needs from the 2023 Facilities Report

2.4.4 Scenario Analysis
Scenario Analysis uses the following assumptions:
• 10-year timeframe, beginning in the next calendar year
• 2.5% reinvestment used to project 10-year capital expenditures
• Year Zero accounts for actual budget spend and backlog on Now Needs
• Actual budget is reﬂective of current funding practice
• Reinvestment percentages used are % of total CRV
• These projections are used in absence of a Long -term Capital Replacement Plan
To address all Now and projected needs of Parks & Recreation, scenarios were run to address the gap. Scenarios are shown in Figure 2-7.

Figure 2-7: Scenario Analysis – Parks and Recreation

2.4.5 Addressing the Funding Gap
The reinvestment scenarios reviewed for parks and recreation assets are shown in Table 2-3. Table 2-3: Funding Scenario Outcomes Parks and Recreation

$53,255,000 Actual Budget $948,000 $5,749,541
1.70% $905,335 $6,176,191
2.50% $1,331,375 $1,915,791
Close Gap $1,522,954 $0

Closing the funding gap for Parks and Recreation can be challenging, but there are several strategies our municipality can consider:
• Collaborate with Local Entities: Partner with businesses, non-proﬁts, and community
organizations for ﬁnancial support and resources.
• Government Funding: Apply for grants and utilize government funding to boost the budget.
• Creative Funding Models: Combine resources from diﬀerent public agencies for multi-sector
projects.
• Reserve Contributions: Request increased contributions to Parks & Recreation reserves.
• Gradual Tax Increases: Implement gradual tax increases to avoid overburdening taxpayers.
• User Fees: Increase or implement fees for recreational services, such as community events,
park rentals, splash pads, boat launches, campgrounds, and golﬁng.
• Lower Target LOS: Reduce the number of park amenities to lower investment needs.
• Debt Financing: Use debt ﬁnancing within allowable limits for lifecycle activities.
• Community Fundraising: For Municipally approved Projects, Engage in crowdfunding, local events, and volunteer programs.
• Philanthropic Donations: Seek donations from private foundations and individuals for
Municipally approved signiﬁcant projects.
Combining these strategies can help ensure well-maintained and accessible parks and recreation facilities.

3.0 Building Facilities
3.1 State of Infrastructure – Building Facilities
Buildings facilities under this plan are Township owned and support a multitude of service areas. A summary of the current state of Building Facility sites are in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1: Summary of Building Facilities State of Infrastructure

Service Area Average Age (years) Total Count Total Area (Ha.) Current Replacement Value (CRV) % in Need (FCI) Average Condition Rating (FCI)

Gen Government 33 1 2.7 $ 4,000,000 17% Fair to Good
Health Services 11 1 1.0 $ 900,000 26% Poor to Fair
Fire Services 46 6 5.1 $ 30,000,000 0% Good
Police 84 1 0.5 $ 5,000,000 26% Poor to Fair
Libraries 62 4 1.3 $ 4,800,000 26% Poor to Fair
Museums 37 3 0.3 $ 3,500,000 46% Poor to Fair
Public Works 46 2 21.5 $ 4,000,000 0% Good
Sports Complex 55 1 3.9 $ 60,000,000 11% Fair to Good
Community Halls 73 4 1.1 $ 8,000,000 29% Poor to Fair
49 23 37 $ 120,200,000 19% Fair to Good
3.1.1 Asset Inventory
Building facility sites are complex and include multiple components, depending on the type and usage of the site. Typical major components under Building Facilities include:

Site Improvements (parking, fencing, etc.)
Buildings & Spaces Building Equipment & Systems HVAC,
Plumbing & Electrical Systems Communications & Instrumentation Processes & Process Equipment

The Township is currently undertaking an inventory capture of the building facilities assets.

3.1.2 Expected Useful Life
The default expected useful life (EUL), for the purpose of this AMP, is 50 years for all buildings. Default EUL values are currently being identified by component, as the asset inventory is being captured. Default asset parameters will be documented outside of this plan.
3.1.3 Asset Value
The current valuation for building facilities within this plan was determined by the Township on a site-by-site basis and is inclusive of all asset components. The Current Replacement Values (CRVs) for sites are documented outside of this plan.
See Figure 3-1 below for a breakdown of Total Building Facilities CRVs by service area.

Figure 3-1: Distribution of Current Replacement Value by Service Area
3.1.4 Asset Condition
The condition of building facilities was determined using a combination of SCT FCI rating a calculated condition based on Now building needs from the 2023 Facilities Report, and Operational knowledge review where other needs and conditions are known.

Figure 3-2: Distribution of Site Conditions by Service Area
The determination of asset condition descriptor based on FCI is shown in Figure 3-3.

Figure 3-3: Condition Ranges and Descriptions
Without individual asset condition capture, the overall condition for Building Facilities is assumed to be ‘Fair to Good’, based on operational knowledge. This is reflective of the known backlog of major components in need of repair.

The Township intends to collect more formalized condition data as inventory for the building facilities assets is expanded. Currently, Poor asset condition or maintenance needs are

identified during formal and informal eyes-on assessments as well as from internal or external concerns/complaints.
The actual condition of the building facilities can be determined through a formal or informal facility condition assessment (FCA), often undertaken visually. The condition assessment can be done on the building or facility as a whole asset and can also include components to the level of detail preferred by the Township. This information can be incorporated into condition assessments when assets are componentized.
3.2 Levels of Service – Buildings Facilities
Levels of service (current and proposed), and performance measures are defined by the Township. LOS information can be found in Appendix A.

Figure 3-4: Sample Excerpt from LOS Appendix
Note: Sample excerpt from Appendix A LoS Levels of Service Non-core
3.3 Asset Management Strategy – Building Facilities
The asset management strategy for building facilities focuses on achieving cost-effective and sustainable management through tailored lifecycle activities, which vary based on the asset’s components, condition, and services provided. Strategic planning and data-driven decision- making are essential to ensure these buildings continue to meet community needs over time.

3.3.1 Lifecycle Management – Building Facilities
Lifecycle management involves managing the asset components of the entire building structure and systems from design to decommissioning to maximize lifespan and functionality while minimizing costs and environmental impact.
3.3.1.1 Lifecycle Activities
Lifecycle activities for building facilities encompass several key phases to ensure effective management and sustainability:
Construction/Acquisition

• Planning and Design
o Architectural Design
o Engineering Fees
o Permits and Approvals
• Operations and Maintenance
o Annual Maintenance and Inspections
o Reactive Minor or Major Repairs
o Utilities (Electricity, Water, etc.)
o Cleaning Services
o Property Maintenance
• Disposal/Decommissioning:
o Demolition
o Waste Disposal
o Abatement

• Construction
o Site Preparation
o Building Construction
o Utilities Installation
• Renewal/Rehabilitation:
o Minor Renovations
o Major Upgrades

Throughout these phases, continuous management and coordination are essential to address any issues and ensure buildings are managed effectively throughout their entire life.
This approach helps in optimizing the total cost of ownership and extending the facility’s lifespan.
When a facility reaches the end of its useful life, it may undergo significant renovations, be demolished to make way for new construction or serve a new purpose. This can include Safely removing hazardous materials, demolishing a structure, and recycling or disposing of debris

3.3.2 Lifecycle Costing
Life cycle costing (LCC) for buildings with a total Current Replacement Value (CRV) of
$120,200,000 involves evaluating the total cost of ownership over the asset’s life, including initial acquisition, operations, maintenance, renewal, and disposal costs. Here’s an estimated breakdown using typical percentages: 1,2
• Operations Costs: 0.5% of CRV annually.
o 120,200,000×0.005= $601,000 per year.
• Maintenance Costs: 0.3% of CRV annually.
o 120,200,000×0.003=$360,600 per year.
• Renewal Costs: 1.7% of CRV annually.
o 120,200,000×0.017=$2,043,400 per year.
• Disposal Costs: 0.1% of CRV.
o 120,200,000×0.001=$120,200 per year.
These calculations provide an annual estimate for operations, maintenance, and renewal, along with a one-time disposal cost at the end of the asset’s life cycle.

2.5% Reinvestment Rate
Acquisition (CRV) Operation (0.5%) Mainteinance (0.3%) Renewal (1.7%) Disposal (0.1%)
$ 120,200,000 $ 601,000 $ 360,600 $ 2,043,400 $ 120,200
Total Annual LCC of Acquisitions $3,005,000
Figure 3-5: Total Annual LCC for Building Facilities (2.5% Reinvestment Rate)
3.4 Financial Strategy
The financial strategy for Buildings & Facilities assets considers current funding sources and projected requirements, using analysis and existing mechanisms to identify any funding surpluses or shortfalls. The Township can leverage these insights to prioritize funding and asset management strategies.
3.4.1 Sources of Funding
Funding for Buildings & Facilities comes from the following sources:
• Government Grant (OMPF) • Lifecycles Reserves
• Tax Revenue (may include debt) • Development Charges

1 (What are the on-going building lifecycle costs of a new building?)
2 (Whole Life Cycle Costing)

3.4.2 Funding Strategy
The Acquisition/Renewal/Disposal activities for Building Facility assets are funded through several sources. The baseline funding sources with purpose are summarized in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2: Building Facilities Budgets

Budget Name Avg. Budget Service Area Source

Capital
$ 987,000 $50,000 Complex Facilities OMPF Grant
$150,000 Complex Facilities Lifecycle Reserve Contribution
$330,000 Complex Facilities Tax Revenue
$50,000 Recreational Facilities OMPF Grant
$100,000 Recreational Facilities Lifecycle Reserve Contribution
$70,000 Recreational Facilities Tax Revenue
$50,000 Fire Facilities Lifecycle Reserve Contribution
$55,000 Fire Facilities Tax Revenue
$120,000 Public Works Facilities Tax Revenue
$12,000 Museums Tax Revenue

Operating
$42,500 $20,000 Recreational Facilities Development Charges
$15,000 Public Works Facilities Development Charges
$7,500 Police – Emergency Services Building Development Charges
3.4.3 Building Facility assets in Need Now
The Township generated a Facilities Report in 2023 (taken to Council on February 21, 2023). The report provides details on known renewal expenditures required at facilities across the Township. The purpose of the report was to illustrate the current financial burden of maintaining our Municipal Building Facilities, to continue providing service to the community in the short term (noting that this report did not report on Public Works facilities).
These Now Needs for building facilities, across departments is shown in Figure 3-6.

Figure 3-6: Operations and Capital Repair Needs from the 2023 Facilities Report The large expenditure of backlog shown in the Facilities Report is consistent with the expectation of large backlog from the age-based assessment of the assets. The 2023 Facility
Report was generated using operational knowledge and reflect the known needs of the
facilities. It is expected that these needs should be addressed as suggested, and a more detailed condition assessment be undertaken on the facilities to assess remaining useful life and plan capital works to manage our building facilities.
3.4.4 Scenario Analysis
Scenario Analysis uses the following assumptions:
• 10-year timeframe, beginning in the next calendar year
• 2.5% reinvestment used to project 10-year capital expenditures
• Year Zero accounts for actual budget spend and backlog on Now Needs
• Actual budget is reﬂective of current funding practice
• Reinvestment percentages used are % of total CRV
• These projections are used in absence of a Long -term Capital Replacement Plan

Figure 3-7: Projected Works for Building Facilities
Public Works Buildings were not included in the 2023 Facilities report and no significant unfunded projects identified in 2024.
3.4.5 Addressing the Funding Gap
The reinvestment scenarios reviewed for parks and recreation assets are shown in Table 3-3. Table 3-3: Scenario Outcomes Building Facilities

$120,200,000 Actual Budget $1,029,500 $24,547,923
1.70% $2,043,400 $14,408,923
2.50% $3,005,000 $4,792,923
Close Gap $3,484,292 $0
To address this funding gap, the Township can:
• Utilize third-party funding sources, such as grants or government funding, to increase the available budget. Increasing this annual contribution would help alleviate the funding gap.
• Consider requesting increased contributions to the Building & Facilities Reserves that are
experiencing current or future funding gaps.

• Consider increasing fees for various recreational facilities services, such as hall rentals, pool
admissions, and arena fees.
• Consider lowering the target LOS, which would reduce the investment required to meet the revised goal. This could include reducing the number of buildings the Township is required to maintain.
• Consider debt ﬁnancing as a last option to fund selected lifecycle activities within allowable
debt servicing limit.
• Consider gradual tax increases to close the funding gap without placing excessive burden on the taxpayers.

4.0 Fleet, Machinery and Equipment
4.1 State of Infrastructure – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment
Fleet, machinery and equipment assets under this plan are Township owned and support a multitude of service areas. A summary of the state of these assets are provided in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2.
Table 4-1: Summary of Fleet, Vehicles and Machinery

Service Area
Count
Current Value Average Age (years) AVG. Estimated Condition

Protection Services 33 $ 22,727,000 11 Average
Public Works 56 $ 10,064,000 12 Average
Community Services 172 $ 5,314,000 10 Average
Corporate Administration 1 $ 65,000 19 Failed

262 $38,170,000 11 Average
Table 4-2: Summary of Miscellaneous Machinery and Equipment

Service Area
Count
Current Value Average Age (years) AVG. Estimated Condition

Protection Services 20 $ 770,316 12 Average
Public Works 36 $ 1,107,468 10 Average
Community Services 47 $ 769,600 9 Fair

103 $2,647,384 11 Average
4.1.1 Asset Inventory
Fleet represents the inventory of resource vehicles and machinery of varied classifications ranging from fire apparatus to mowers and golf carts.

Vehicle Light Vehicle Heavy Trailers Vehicle Special Vehicle Unlicensed Machinery Heavy Machinery Light
Miscellaneous ‘machinery and equipment’ is a separate inventory. It is recognized as being incomplete and types are varied ranging from Computer Hardware to Floor Sweepers.

4.1.2 Expected Useful Life
The Expected Useful Life for the assets varies by equipment classification. The Township has established an Expected Useful Life and Performance Life for their fleet, machinery and equipment. Asset parameters are in supporting documents outside of this plan.
4.1.3 Asset Value
Asset Valuation for all fleet, machinery, and equipment assets is the currently approved CRV, determined on an asset-by-asset basis.
Table 4-3: CRV Fleet, Machinery and Equipment

Service Area
Fleet Vehicles Fleet Machinery Miscellaneous Machinery & Equipment
Total

Protection Services $22,727,000 $770,316 $23,497,316
PW Public Works $5,193,000 $4,871,000 $1,107,468 $11,171,468
Community Services $2,984,000 $2,330,000 $769,600 $6,083,600
Corporate Administration $65,000 $65,000

Total $30,969,000 $7,201,000 $2,647,384 $40,817,384

Figure 4-1: Distribution of CRV’s Fleet, Machinery and Equipment

4.1.4 Asset Condition
The Township uses the OMS system to calculate the condition of fleet, machinery, and equipment based on inventory and straight-line deterioration. This estimation follows the Expected Useful Life (EUL) age-based replacement strategy. The Performance Life is 80% of the EUL, with a minimum condition trigger at 20% of life remaining, generating an ‘Act Before’ date for planned lifecycle activities. This approach helps reduce the risk of asset failure as they near the end of their useful life.
The condition index ranges, percentage of useful life used, and corresponding condition rating are shown in Table 4-4.
Table 4-4: Condition Index and Ratings based on Expected Useful Life

% of Useful Life Used
Condition Index Condition Rating

>100 <0 Failed 81-100 0-20 Poor 61-80 21-40 Fair 41-60 41-60 Average 21-40 61-80 Good 0-20 81-100 Excellent The estimated overall condition index for each asset in the Fleet Vehicles and Machinery was distributed by service area in Figure 4-2. Figure 4-2: Distribution of Fleet Conditions by Service Area (excluding Miscellaneous Machinery & Equipment) 4.2 Levels of Service – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment Levels of service (current and proposed), and performance measures are defined by the Township. LOS information can be found in Appendix A. Figure 4-3: Sample Excerpt from LOS Appendix Note: Sample excerpt from Appendix A LoS Levels of Service Non-core 4.3 Asset Management Strategy The Township’s strategy for managing fleet, machinery and equipment assets is driven by their age and performance. These assets can be purchased new or used with varied remaining life. When a vehicle, machinery, or equipment asset reaches the end of its useful life and has been adequate for service delivery, it may be replaced with a like-for-like asset. It's important to note that new software purchases are generally subscription-based and part of the operating budget, whereas hardware, such as servers or computers, are considered acquisitions due to their capital costs. The Municipality also recognizes protection services prioritize the critical nature of their assets leading to less flexibility in maintenance and replacement timing. Fire apparatus (special vehicles) are replaced as they reach the end of its recognized service period (to insurance standards) or when a vehicle reaches obsolescence. The Township maintains a replacement plan for Fire Services vehicles and aims to create a similar plan for rescue tools and equipment. Regular replacements are necessary to keep fire services assets up to date with technology and capabilities. The Township should regularly review the usage of fleet, machinery and equipment assets to ensure adequate service delivery. Routine assessments and monitoring of asset condition and performance are necessary to inform maintenance or replacement needs. The responsibility for monitoring asset condition spans multiple departments due to the varied services they provide. 4.4 Lifecycle Activities – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment Lifecycle activities for fleet, machinery, and equipment involve several key stages to ensure optimal performance and longevity: • Acquisition: Assess the organization's needs and determine the best equipment to meet those needs. This includes evaluating alternatives and involving stakeholders. Procure, coordinate delivery, installation, and training. Ensure the new equipment is added to the inventory system. • Maintenance: Implement regular maintenance schedules based on manufacturer guidelines and local conditions. This includes preventive maintenance to extend the equipment's lifespan 3 • Repairs: Address any issues promptly to minimize downtime and maintain operational eﬃciency. Can be in-house but is typically contracted. • Disposal: When equipment reaches the end of its useful life, dispose of it responsibly. This may involve selling high-value items or following environmental and regulatory guidelines for disposal 4 By following these stages ensures fleet, machinery and equipment are managed effectively, maximizing return on investment and minimizing operational disruptions. 4.4.1 Lifecycle Costing – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment The annual reinvestment rate for large vehicles, such as trucks, typically range from 5% to 10% of the vehicle's Current Replacement Value (CRV). This rate accounts for major overhauls, upgrades, and replacements necessary to maintain the vehicle's performance and extend its lifespan Below is an estimated breakdown of the typical life cycle costs (LCC) for a $100,000 vehicle in Ontario. • Operations Costs: These include fuel, energy, and operator costs. For a high-value vehicle, annual fuel costs can range from $2,000 to $3,000, depending on usage and fuel eﬃciency. 3 (Equipment Lifecycle Management: Best Practices to Maximize ROI and Productivity, n.d.) 4 (Equipment Lifecycle, n.d.) • Maintenance Costs: Routine maintenance such as oil changes, tire rotations, and brake replacements can average around $1,000 to $2,000 per year. This includes both scheduled maintenance and unexpected repairs. • Renewal Costs: Major overhauls or upgrades to extend the vehicle's life, such as engine or transmission replacements, can be signiﬁcant. These costs may unexpectedly occur and can range from $5,000 to $10,000 over the vehicle's life. Total LCC for Typical $100k Vehicle 10yr life Acquistion (CRV) Operation (20%) Maintenance (10%) Renewal (5%) $ 100,000 $ 20,000 $ 10,000 $ 5,000 Total LCC of Acquistion $ 135,000 Figure 4-4: Total Annual LCC for Typical $100k Vehicle These estimates can vary based on the specific type of vehicle, its usage patterns, and maintenance practices. 4.4.2 Replacement Schedule The projection of replacements for fleet is reoccurring replacements using asset EUL parameters over 30years. Year zero (2024) is reflective of assets currently at or past EUL. Miscellaneous machinery and equipment are one replacement using asset EUL parameters. Year zero (2024) is reflective assets currently at or past EUL. This is simplified for the short term due to complexity of EUL and incomplete inventory. These projections are used in absence of a Long -term Capital Replacement Plan. Projected expenditure can be refined by the Township to eliminate significant peaks (where appropriate) through review of the projections, inventory and adjusting the replacement years using actual condition and usage information. Figure 4-5: 30-year Replacement Projection for Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 4.5 Financial Strategy - Fleet, Machinery and Equipment The financial strategy for all Fleet, Machinery and Equipment assets takes into account current funding sources and projected requirements, using analysis and existing mechanisms to identify any funding surpluses or shortfalls. The Township can leverage these insights to prioritize funding and asset management strategies. 4.5.1 Sources of Funding Funding comes from the following sources: • Government Grant (OMPF) • Lifecycle Reserves • Provision for Reserves • Development Carges • Tax Revenue (may include debt) 4.5.2 Funding Strategy The Acquisition/Renewal/Disposal activities for Fleet, Machinery & Equipment assets are funded through several sources. The baseline funding sources with purpose are summarized in Table 4-5 below, and the distribution of budget value by service area shown in Figure 4-6. Table 4-5: Fleet, Machinery & Equipment Budgets Budget Name Avg. Budget Service Area Source Capital $ 882,580 $100,000 Fire Fleet OMPF Grant $452,080 Fire Fleet Lifecycle Reserve Contribution $110,000 Fire Machinery & Equipment Lifecycle Reserve Contribution $25,000 Fire Machinery & Equipment Tax Revenue $70,000 General Government Machinery & Equipment Tax Revenue $35,500 Parks Fleet, Machinery & Equipment OMPF Grant $90,000 Parks Fleet, Machinery & Equipment Lifecycle Reserves Operating $ 400,000 $15,000 Fire Fleet Development Charges $385,000 Public Works Fleet, Machinery & Equipment Provision for Reserves Figure 4-6: Distribution of Budget $ by Service Area – Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 4.5.3 Scenario Analysis Scenario Analysis uses the following assumptions: • 10-year timeframe, beginning in the next calendar year • 30-year timeframe, beginning in the next calendar year • Year Zero (2024) includes assets at and past their EUL • Actual budget is reﬂective of current funding practice • Projected Expenditures are individual Replacements of assets in today CRVs • Reinvestment percentages used are % of total CRV • These projections are used in absence of a Long -term Capital Replacement Plan Figure 4-7: 10-year Projection for Fleet, Machinery and Equipment Figure 4-8: 30-year Projection for Fleet, Machinery and Equipment 4.5.4 Addressing the Funding Gap The reinvestment scenarios reviewed for parks and recreation assets are shown in Table 4-6. Table 4-6: Funding Scenario outcomes for Fleet, Machinery & Equipment $40,817,384 Actual Budget $1,282,580 $12,378,464 $25,867,420 1.70% $693,896 $18,265,309 $52,049,938 2.50% $1,020,435 $14,999,918 $42,253,766 Close Gap 10 $2,520,426 $0 N/A Close Gap 30 $2,428,893 $915,329 $0 With the 1.7% and 2.5% Reinvestment less than Actual Budget, further funding strategies should be explored to address the Funding Gap. To address this funding gap, the Township can consider multiple options: • Utilize third-party funding sources, such as grants or government funding, to increase the available budget. Increasing this annual contribution would help alleviate the funding gap. • Consider requesting increased contributions to Reserves. • Consider debt ﬁnancing as a last option to fund selected lifecycle activities within allowable debt servicing limit. • Consider gradual tax increases to close the funding gap without placing excessive burden on the taxpayers. Consider lowering the target LOS, which would reduce the investment required to meet the revised goal. This could involve reducing the size of inventory or extending the duration that assets are retained in inventory 5.0 Cemeteries The Township has ownership over several active and inactive cemetery assets. Additionally, several private cemeteries exist within Township limits. Heritage St. Clair developed and presented a report to Council in September 2023 that summaries the Township’s current understanding of cemeteries. Per the report, the Township is currently working to recognize the ownership and expected obligations associated with cemeteries. The information summarized in this section is general and the Township intends to expand on it as the inventory and understanding of cemeteries obligations increases. 5.1 State of Infrastructure - Cemeteries The Town is currently establishing their State of Infrastructure for cemeteries assets. Site age, total count, total area, and current value are not currently available. 5.1.1 Asset Inventory There are currently two cemeteries which are actively managed by the Township: Bradshaw Cemetery and Zion Cemetery. The Moore Union Cemetery is managed by an independent Board of Directors. While not actively looked after, St. Mary’s Cemetery and Froomfield Cemetery have been recently improved. A complete inventory of active and abandoned cemetery assets under ownership of the Township is not currently available. Township staff, in partnership with Heritage St. Clair, is in the process of improving inventory. 5.1.2 Expected Useful Life Default EUL values are currently being identified as the asset inventory is being captured. Default EUL will be documented outside of this plan. 5.1.3 Asset Value The valuation for cemeteries assets major components is not identified. 5.1.4 Asset Condition As inventory for the cemeteries is expanded, so will their condition. Poor asset condition or maintenance needs can be identified during informal assessments as well as from concerns/complaints received. Heritage St. Clair has identified needs of cemeteries assets and reports to the Township. Cemeteries with high risk or Poor condition/performance components should be prioritized. 5.2 Levels of Service – Cemeteries Levels of service (current and proposed), and performance measures are defined by the Township. LOS information can be found in Appendix A. 5.3 Asset Management Strategy Progression through building an asset management strategy should be in consideration of multiple factors, including the following: • Comprehension of Cemetery State of Infrastructure. Inventory of major asset components, count, condition, value etc. • Impact on Service Delivery: How essential is the asset to the services provided? Assess how the absence of the asset will impact operations, and how it could beneﬁt from a newer or more eﬃcient option. • Public Opinion/Input: For assets that are public-facing, public sentiment can be a major determinant. Seek input from community members or conduct a public survey to gauge their opinion. • What Lifecycle activities need to be implemented, at what cost, for LoS satisfaction. As these assets are somewhat passive in nature, it is expected that throughout the lifecycle of the asset, maintenance will be the primary activity implemented. • Funding and Staﬀ Availability: The availability of funding and staﬀ to replace and continue to maintain the asset is crucial in determining if an asset should be replaced. Budget constraints and funding sources need to be clearly explored before making any decision. 5.4 Lifecycle Activities – Cemeteries 5.4.1 Construction/Acquisition The initial lifecycle activity for cemeteries asset is typically land acquisition, and can sometimes include minor construction activities such as erecting a perimeter fence, laneways etc. Land acquisition for cemeteries can occur through the abandonment process outlined in the current Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act Section 101.1. Through this process, if an order declaring that a cemetery is abandoned is registered with the appropriate land registry office, the local municipality (in this case the Township) becomes the owner of the cemetery with all the rights and obligations in respect of the cemetery and the assets, trust funds and trust accounts. 5.4.2 Maintenance Maintenance activities for active cemeteries are performed according to the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act Section 5. Maintenance activities include regular informal inspections for condition and recording of maintenance activities undertaken. Some of these regular maintenance activities can include but are not limited to: • Digging of interment plots • Mowing and trimming of grass • Weed control • Headstone and monument cleaning; and, • Seasonal leaf, snow, and ice clearing 5.4.3 Renewal/Rehabilitation Renewal is major capital work which does not significantly alter the original service provided by the asset, but restores, rehabilitates, or replaces an existing asset to its original service potential. Note that renewal works that alters (expands) the service delivery is considered an acquisition while replacement of a component would be considered a rehabilitation at the component level. 5.4.4 Disposal/Decommissioning Asset Disposal activities can include the removal from service through disposal, relocation, or sale of an asset. Once an asset has reached the end of its useful life or has been found to be in very poor condition and can not be rehabilitated or repaired, consideration should be given to whether that asset should be disposed of and replaced in order to continue providing the same level of service or if an asset should be disposed of and not replaced in order to reallocate labour and budget elsewhere. 5.5 Financial Strategy - Cemeteries Cemeteries generally rely on tax dollars, user fees (such as for cremations, burials, etc.), and donations for sources of Funding. There has been a rare and unique endowment donation with limitations. 6.0 References David Barth, P. C. (n.d.). A New Approach to Parks and Recreation System Planning. Retrieved from National Park and Recreation Association: https://www.nrpa.org/parks-recreation- magazine/2020/november/a-new-approach-to-parks-and-recreation-system-planning/ Equipment Lifecycle. (n.d.). Retrieved from aspentech: https://www.aspentech.com/en/cp/equipment-lifecycle Equipment Lifecycle Management: Best Practices to Maximize ROI and Productivity. (n.d.). Retrieved from Heavy Vehicles Inspection and Maintenance: https://heavyvehicleinspection.com/blog/post/equipment-lifecycle-management-best- practices Government of Ontatio. (n.d.). Municipal asset management planning. Retrieved from https://www.ontario.ca/page/municipal-asset-management-planning https://amontario.ca. (n.d.). Whole Life Cycle Costing - A Workshop based on the AMA Diploma Course. Retrieved from https://amontario.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/WLC- Workshop-Module-V2-11-19-18.pdf John Messner, T. P. (n.d.). 1.2: The Lifecycle of a Building Project. Retrieved from https://workforce.libretexts.org: https://workforce.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Construction/Fundamentals_of_Building_C onstruction_Management_%28Messner%29/01%3A_Chapters/1.02%3A_The_Lifecycle_o f_a_Building_Project Municipal Finance Officers' Association of Ontario. (2018 MFOA). Asset Management Framework. MFOA. Retrieved from https://mfoa- amp.ca/AMF/AMF_05.html#_Toc507357514 National Park and Recreation Association. (n.d.). Active Parks! Implementation Guide. Retrieved 2024, from https://www.nrpa.org/: https://www.nrpa.org/publications-research/best- practice-resources/active-parks-implementation-guide-increasing-physical-activity- through-parks-trails-and-greenways/ Palter, J. (2023). Proven Strategies for Effective Equipment Lifecycle Management. Retrieved from www.realtimenetworks.com: https://www.realtimenetworks.com/blog/equipment- lifecycle-management-strategies Penn State University. (n.d.). Fundamentals of Building Construction Management. Retrieved from The Lifecycle of a Building Project: https://psu.pb.unizin.org/buildingconstructionmanagement/chapter/lifecycle/ SPM Assets. (2020). What are the on-going building lifecycle costs of a new building? Retrieved from https://www.spmassets.com/ suma.org. (n.d.). Retrieved from suma.org: https://suma.org/pub/sumaorg/uploads/documents/asset_management_getting_started _guide.pdf Susan Clarke, T. R. (2024). Optimizing Building Management with a Lifecycle Approach. Retrieved from Knowledge Library: https://knowledgelibrary.ifma.org/optimizing- building-management-with-a-lifecycle-approach/ Appendix A Levels of Service Levels of Service (LOS) The Township has defined levels of service indicators that measure how service is being provide to ratepayers, and allows the Township to track, compare and adjust the Levels of Service as required. Asset Managers at the Township recognize that to continue to provide an adequate Level of Service to their ratepayers, it is essential to first develop a strategy that would ensure the sustainability of those assets. Levels of Service are currently established by the Township and documented and tracked on an annual basis. As required by O.Reg. 588/17, the current levels of service are deﬁned for two diﬀerent audiences as follows: • Community Levels of Service: intended to be customer-focused, provide a qualitative description of scope and quality • Technical Levels of Service: provide technical metrics for scope and quality. The following appendix provides a summary of the definitions and current values of levels of service for non-core assets at the Township. Proposed LOS The Proposed LOS are the levels of service indicators that provide targets for the Township for measuring service delivery, set for 2034. Township staff indicated that the current LOS are generally sufficient and appropriate to maintain as the proposed LOS targets and will be tracked accordingly. The proposed LOS (2034) are consistent with the current values summarized in the tables below (2024). Where opportunities to enhance the LOS are identified, they are noted within the relevant asset category section. Township of St. Clair Appendix A - Supplement to 2021 AMP (Public Works) Parks and Recreation The Township engages in proactive and reactive maintenance to ensure a wide array of Parks and Recreation facilities are available for use by the community. Community levels of service for Parks and Recreation established by the Township are described in Table A-1, and technical levels of service are described in Table A-2. Table A-1: Community Levels of Service - Parks & Recreation Parks & Recreation Community Levels of Service (Qualitative Descriptions) Response Scope Description, which may include maps of parks and recreation locations. Parks and recreation sites are located throughout the Township, many of which are located on the shore of the St. Clair River, linked by the St. Clair River Trail to provide access for all residents. The locations of the parks and recreation sites throughout the Township are shown in Figure A1. Quality Description of hours of operation and available services. The Township operates community Parks and Recreation facilities at appropriate hours according to their service delivery. Hours of operation are available online at the Township’s website. Number of ‘complaints’ of unacceptable Playground Condition. The Township does not currently track the number of complaints of playground condition but plans to implement tracking procedures before the next Asset Management Plan update. Availability Number of cancellations due to poor field conditions. The Township currently tracks the number of cancellations due to poor field conditions (weather related) as part of other usage tracking processes. This will be separated out as an individual indicator for tracking before the next Asset Management Plan update. Number of park closures due to significant weather events including duration to have it back in service. The Township does not currently track the number of park closures due to weather but plans to implement tracking procedures before the next Asset Management Plan update. Capacity Number of residential units within 1 km distance. The number of residential units within a 1 km distance of each parks and recreation asset will be determined before the next Asset Management Plan update. Water usage at each Splash Pad Park. The Township does not currently track the water usage at each Splash Pad park but plans to implement tracking procedures before the next Asset Management Plan update. Township of St. Clair Levels of Service - Supplement to 2021 AMP (Public Works) .......a·•···.............. ===..=...;· ! Offl ! ! !- ! ST. CLAIR AMP UPDATE 2024 ! -- OVERVIEW - PARKS & RECREATION FIGURE# - Railway [I ii Open Space - Parks & Rec Municipality Boundary SCALE 1: 130,000 0 1.5 3 6 KM (� i- MAP DRAWING INFORMATION: DATA PROVIDED BY MNRF MAP CREATED BY: LMM MAP CHECKED BY: MAP PROJECTION: GCS WGS 1984 ........................................ = , ...... ,: !o! ► f ....................... . ► Table A-2: Technical Levels of Service - Parks and Recreation Parks & Recreation Technical Levels of Service (Technical Metrics) Response Scope Number of parks and recreations sites per population There are 43 parks and recreation sites located throughout the Township. Based on a total population of 14,659 people, this equates to 1 site per 340 people. Quality Legal/Regulatory/Local Standards Legal/regulatory/local standards include: • Grass cutting/maintenance guidelines (length and/or frequency, golf course vs. park) o Sports ﬁelds cut weekly (minimum) o Weather dependent for other assets • Playground equipment annual inspection by a certiﬁed safety inspector • Splash pad maintenance (cleaning, ﬂushing activities, etc.) o Inspected daily, cleaned as required and at start of season • Public Washroom Maintenance (cleaning, restocking, etc.) o Cleaned and inspected daily Regulatory Inspection frequency Inspections are being completed in accordance with regulatory requirements, as well as monthly checks. Overall condition rating of parks and recreation assets Overall average condition (based on operations knowledge) is assumed to be ‘Fair’. Proposed LOS Consideration: target a ‘Fair’ condition, however, will be based on formalized condition assessment information. Considerations for Proposed LOS The Township can consider adjustments to the LOS for the parks and recreation assets. The current LOS statements have been established; however consistent tracking will be required for a more fulsome understanding of the service being provided. The Township currently experiences difficulties in maintaining the assets and providing the level of service they intend due to the quantity of assets and service delivery expectations. Measuring service delivery through the LOS may provide the Township with measurable information through which a change to LOS can be identified and implemented. Further, the Township intends to set a LOS target of an overall condition rating of ‘Fair’ for its parks and recreation assets. This is consistent with the current understanding of condition; however, the current condition is assumed based on operator knowledge (and regular maintenance-based inspections and repairs). The Township intends to have condition information available for the Parks and Recreation assets through a more formalized assessment process to inform the Proposed LOS going forward. Buildings and Facilities The Buildings and Facilities operated by the Township provide accessible and safe services to community members. Community levels of service for Buildings and Facilities established by the Township are described in Table A-3, and technical levels of service are described in Table A-4. Table A-3: Community Levels of Service - Buildings & Facilities Buildings & Facilities Community Levels of Service (Qualitative Descriptions) Response Scope Description, which may include maps of buildings and facilities Buildings and facilities are located throughout the township to provide access for all residents. Locations of Township Buildings and Facilities are shown in Figure A2. Quality Description of hours of operation and available services. The Township operates community buildings and facilities at appropriate hours according to their service delivery. Hours of operation are available online at the Township’s website. Office hours for the Civic Centre are 8:30-4:30 M-F. FILE LOCATION: K:\2024\247467\Product\Internal\Initial_Screenshots\Initial_Screenshots.aprx; 247467_Overview Facility ST. CLAIR AMP UPDATE 2024 OVERVIEW - FACILITY FIGURE# - Railway Facility Municipality Boundary SCALE 1: 130,000 0 1.5 3 6 KM MAP DRAWING INFORMATION: DATA PROVIDED BY MNRF MAP CREATED BY: LMM MAP CHECKED BY: MAP PROJECTION: GCS WGS 1984 Table A-4: Technical Levels of Service - Buildings & Facilities Buildings & Facilities Technical Levels of Service (technical metrics) Response Scope Number of buildings and facilities per capita by service area Based on a total population of 14,659 people (per 2021 Statistics Canada census), the following per capita values by department: • General Government (1): 1 per 14,659 • Public Health Services (1): 1 per 14,659 • Fire (6): 1 per 2,443 • Police (1): 1 per 14,659 • Library (4): 1 per 3,665 • Museum (3): 1 per 4,886 • Public Works (2): 1 per 7,330 • Community Halls & Misc. (4): 1 per 3,665 • Sports Complex (1): 1 per 14,659 Number of reports and calls for service per building or facility The Township does not currently track the number of calls for service to each building but plans to implement tracking procedures before the next Asset Management Plan update. Quality Overall condition rating of buildings and facilities Overall average condition is ‘Very Poor’ Proposed LOS Consideration: target a ‘Fair’ condition. Compliance with legal/regulatory/local standards The quality of buildings and facilities include the following legal, regulatory and local standards for the services provided: • Accessibility (AODA Standards) • Health and safety • Building and facilities on their own water system must be operated to meet MOE drinking water quality standards Buildings and facilities must comply with the Ontario Building Code Considerations for Proposed LOS The Township can consider adjustments to the LOS for the buildings and facilities assets, in particular as it relates to the Quality description in the Technical Levels of Service. The Township’s current LOS average condition rating of the buildings and facilities is ‘Very Poor’, however the Township intends to increase this LOS and target a value of ‘Fair’. The Township intends to conduct (detailed) condition assessments of the building and facility assets, and conduct reviews of the usage and viability of the assets in support of achieving this LOS target. Fleet and Equipment The Township’s Fleet and Equipment assets provide safe and reliable service to all members of the community. Community levels of service for Fleet and Equipment established by the Township are described in Table A-5 below, and technical levels of service are described in Table A-6. Table A-5: Community Levels of Service - Fleets & Equipment Fleet & Equipment Community Levels of Service (Qualitative Descriptions) Response Scope Description, which may include maps of locations where fleet is stored. Fleet assets are stored at differing locations across the Township, depending on service delivery requirements. Locations include: • Public Works Garages • Fire Hall • Golf Course • Sports complex • Campground Table A-6: Technical Levels of Service - Fleet & Equipment Fleet & Equipment Technical Levels of Service (Technical Metrics) Response Scope Breakdown of number of fleets by department providing service compared to the size of the community (geography or population). Based on a total population of 14,659 people (per 2021 Statistics Canada census), the following per capita values by department: • Fire Services: 1 per 252 • Parks and Recreation: 1 per 314 • Golf Course: 1 per 92 • Facilities – Other: 1 per 1409 • Campgrounds: 1 per 1409 • Public Works: 1 per 157 Quality Description of fleet condition (i.e., maintained in ‘good’ or better condition in order to provide reliability. • Overall average condition index is 45 and the corresponding condition rating is ‘Fair’ Safety Legal/regulatory/local standards. The fleet assets must adhere to applicable legal, regulatory and local standards, including: • Equipment in vehicle must meet Ontario Provincial Equipment Standards • Manufacturer’s recommendations or maintenance and life expectancy on equipment • Vehicle/equipment preventative maintenance program • Vehicle maintenance, safety Driver training, equipment functioning (negligence, risk management). Cemeteries The Township has actively been improving abandoned cemeteries within which are owned by the Township and within Township limits, such as St. Mary’s and Froomefield cemeteries. The Township strives to abide by provincial and federal regulations and engage in suitable maintenance practices. Community levels of service for cemeteries established by the Township are described in Table A-7, and technical levels of service are described in Table A-8. Table A-7: Community Levels of Service - Cemeteries Cemeteries Community Levels of Service (Qualitative Descriptions) Response Scope Description, which may include maps of locations where active and abandoned cemeteries are located. The Township will develop a map detailing all cemeteries within Township limits. Quality Description of cemetery condition and maintenance practices. The Township has improved several cemeteries in recent years, including St. Mary’s, Froomefield, and Reynolds cemeteries. Maintenance of cemeteries will be assigned to the property owner. Table A-8: Technical Levels of Service - Cemeteries Cemeteries Technical Levels of Service (Technical Metrics) Response Quality Legal standards The Township strives to abide by applicable provincial and federal regulation, including: • Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002, S.O. • General, O.Reg. 30/11, a regulation made under the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act. Quality Description of cemetery condition and maintenance practices. The Township has improved several cemeteries in recent years, including St. Mary’s, Froomefield, and Reynolds cemeteries. Maintenance of cemeteries will be assigned to the property owner.