The city’s backlog of infrastructure renewal needs has dropped $7 million since 2015, according to a just-released asset management plan.
The estimated unfunded renewal need is $126.5 million in total, a $7 million reduction from the previous report in 2015, even when considering factors related to improved inventory information resulting in a greater number of assets reported on, updated costing, and more formalized assessments.
This progress can be attributed primarily to a strong commitment focused on capital investment in asset renewal projects and related initiatives. In 2013, Council approved a 20 year financing plan which included the following:
Dedicated Infrastructure levy of 1.25% (up to 2022), reducing to 1% (2023-2033) and further reducing to 0.5% (2034 and beyond);
re-purposing the hospital levy in phases beginning in 2019.
Furthermore, the 2015 Asset Management Plan update also included the following:
$20 million phased over 4 years to directly assist with the renewal of the city’s roads infrastructure;
0.2% levy beginning in 2020 to address the renewal needs of a growing asset inventory.
The capital funding requirements for renewal needs will be brought forward in the spring of 2017 as part of the Asset Management Financing Plan update. The long-term (60 year) annual reinvestment need averages approximately $67.5 million.
Roadways represent the largest category of unfunded renewal needs, at $108 million.
The report will be on the agenda for the April 3 Committee of the Whole at City Hall, 1pm, Council Chambers. Recommendations from COW will go to City Council April 18 for a final decision. Register as a delegation to speak to committee about this item.
I was inspired to seek public office because I believe, like so many of you, “I can do something about that” on the issues we face. As councilor, my role is to take a stand on what’s best for residents and go to bat for it. Pushback is inevitable from those who don’t have the community’s interests at heart. I will stand with you and for you, to achieve the best interests of our city, without caving to unacceptable compromise in the name of consensus.