2012 Business Plan
Operations and Development Services
2011 Successes
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
North Lougheed Land Use Study
New Zoning Bylaw
Secondary Suites Legalization
Adaptable Housing Policy & Regulation
New Pesticide Bylaw
New ½ time Bylaw Enforcement Officer
Water Meter Replacement/Upgrades Initiated
South Bonson Land Sale EOI
Lougheed Highway Sound Fence
Haney Main No. 1 abandoned
Synchronization of traffic signals with CP rail crossing
Speed Reader signs
2011 Successes cont’d
Speed Reader Signs
Park Road
Readings
Covert
Display On
Average
40 km/hr
38 km/hr
85th Percentile
55 km/hr
45 km/hr
Highest
95 km/hr
85 km/hr
Significant Issues & Trends
• Transportation
– Harris and Lougheed Intersection
– Pedestrian & cycling safety
– Accessibility
– Shifting traffic volumes
Significant Issues & Trends cont’d
Regional Plan Compliance
SWMP
RGS
North Lougheed Special
Study Area
Garden/Secondary
Suites
Housing Action Plan
New Regional Context
Statement
LWMP
Disposal Costs/Tipping Fees
Diversion Rates
Treatment Costs
Organics
Private sewer lateral
inspections
Wood waste
Rates and charges
EPR
Significant Issues & Trends cont’d
• Development – Construction Value 2002-2012
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Significant Issues & Trends cont’d
• Development – Planning Revenue 2006-2012
70000
60000
50000
Permits
40000
Subdivision
Rezoning
30000
20000
10000
0
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Significant Issues & Trends cont’d
• Enforcement Revenue 2002 - 2012
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Significant Issues
& Trends cont’d
• Storm Drainage Utility
– Vegetation Management
• Aquatic Invasive species
– Aging Infrastructure
– Grants
– Public Expectations
Significant Issues & Trends cont’d
Katzie
Slough
Significant Issues & Trends cont’d
• Storm Drainage Utility
Significant Issues
& Trends cont’d
• Water Utility
–
–
–
–
–
Consumption
Metering/Billing
Rates/Life Cycle Costing
Backflow Prevention
Quality Control
Significant Issues
& Trends cont’d
• Sewer Utility
– Wet Weather
Infiltration
– Fats, Oils & Grease
Build Up
– Regional Treatment
Plant Upgrades
– Regional Treatment
Costs
2012 Actions
•
•
•
•
•
North Lougheed Land Use Plan
Rannie Road Negotiations
Urban Bee Keeping Policy Review
RFP for South Bonson Land Sale
Cross Connection Control Program Roll out
(multi-year)
• Fleet Management Policy
• Garden/Secondary Suite Program Roll Out
(multi-year)
2012 Actions
16
• Regional Plan Compliance Related Actions
– Housing Action Plan
– Regional Context Statement
– Organics Collection/Solid Waste Education
– Garbage & Recycling Development Permit Area
Guidelines for MF
– Private Sewer Lateral Inspection Process
– Demo & Building Permit Recycling Regulations
2012 Actions
17
• Capital Highlights
– Drainage
•
•
•
•
•
McKechnie Drainage Area Improvements – Carry Forward
Baynes Road Pump (1) Replacement
Katzie Slough Environmental Review/Slough Cleaning Protocol (Multi-year)
Design for Pump Station No. 4 Replacement
GEB Culvert Deficiencies - Ongoing
– Fleet
• Utility Truck Replacement
• Service Truck Replacement
• John Deere Mower Replacement
– Sanitary Sewer
• 114B Sewer Lift Station Replacement
• Sanitary Sewer Condition Video
• SCADA Upgrades (Multi-year)
2012 Actions
18
• Capital Highlights
– Roads
• Kennedy Road Repave (Lougheed to Ferry Slip Road)
• Thompson Road Bridge Replacement
– Water
•
•
•
•
•
Blakely Road Water Main Replacement (120B to 119th St)
Rural Water Meter Replacements (Multi-year)
Ford Road Water Main Replacement (191B to 188th Avenue)
Sheridan Hill Booster Station Replacement
Unilateral flushing modeling software
Proposed Operating Budget
2011
Projected
Actual
2011
Budget
2012
Budget
2013
Budget
2014
Budget
2015
Budget
2016
Budget
Operating:
Revenues
Bylaw Enforcement
Animal Control
Development Services
Operations - Transportation
Equipment - Internal Charges
Dyking Levies
Total Revenues
$
178,000 $ 142,600 $ 161,000 $ 161,000 $ 161,000 $ 161,000 $ 161,000
23,000
23,000
23,000
23,000
23,000
23,000
23,000
396,000
267,676
284,578
288,749
293,004
297,345
301,772
510,000
370,200
395,200
395,200
395,200
395,200
395,200
533,700
593,000
596,434
599,631
612,780
621,431
638,728
18,000
18,600
18,600
18,600
18,600
18,600
18,600
1,658,700
1,415,076
1,478,812
1,486,180
1,503,584
1,516,576
1,538,300
$ Change $
% Change
Expenditures
Bylaw Enforcement
Animal Control
Development Services
Operations - Administration
Operations - Transportation
Equipment Maintenance
Dyking Maintenance
Total Expenditures
119,000
11,400
1,159,000
197,600
967,300
351,000
177,000
2,982,300
142,600
11,648
1,220,479
208,372
967,014
389,947
180,250
3,120,310
$ Change $
% Change
Net Operating Expenditures
63,736 $
4.5 %
152,491
11,881
1,246,622
213,372
973,086
396,110
181,003
3,174,565
54,255 $
1.7 %
7,368 $
0.5 %
155,416
12,118
1,268,303
217,641
991,550
396,074
184,624
3,225,726
51,161 $
1.6 %
17,404 $
1.2 %
158,399
12,360
1,288,880
221,993
1,010,380
403,998
188,317
3,284,327
58,601 $
1.8 %
12,992 $
0.9 %
161,441
12,606
1,309,866
226,433
1,029,589
412,076
192,083
3,344,094
59,767 $
1.8 %
21,724
1.4 %
164,554
12,859
1,331,270
230,960
1,049,180
420,321
195,925
3,405,069
60,975
1.8 %
$ 1,323,600 $ 1,705,234 $ 1,695,753 $ 1,739,546 $ 1,780,743 $ 1,827,518 $ 1,866,769
$ Change $
% Change
(9,481) $
(0.6)%
43,793 $
2.6 %
41,197 $
2.4 %
46,775 $
2.6 %
39,251
2.1 %
Decision Packages
• Pedestrian Activated Signal
$80,000
– Harris Rd/Civic Centre
• Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan $35,000
Decision Packages Cont’d
Weekly Curbside Organics Collection
Option 1
Contractor provides carts
$21 per
household
Option 2
City provides the carts
$23 per
household
Option 3
Status Quo
(no organics)
$14 per
household
Option 4
Bi-weekly Garbage
City provides the Carts
$2 per
household
Assumptions: mid-year start in 2012; carts amortized over
10 years; no longer subsidize drop–off green waste
Solid Waste Disposal Costs
• Disposal
– Regional tipping fees - $223,100/year
Regional Tipping Fee Forecast
2008 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
$68 $97 $107 $121 $153 $182 $205
Decision Packages Cont’d
Organics Collection
• ISWRMP
Develop and implement
work plan for diversion
of organics including
food waste from all
sectors by:
SF
2012
MF & ICI
2015
ISWRMP
Vision
TODAY
2012
2015?
Cost Scenarios for Residential Organics
• Collection - Scenario 1
– Weekly Garbage/ Recycling/Organics
•
•
•
•
•
•
Contractor provides totes and delivers
2 year contract extension required
Disposal costs reduced due to diversion
Green waste disposal no longer subsidized
Includes enhanced public education budget
Mid year start up in 2012
• An additional $21 per household per year
Cost Scenarios for Residential Organics
• Collection - Scenario 2
– Weekly Garbage/ Recycling/Organics
•
•
•
•
•
•
City purchases totes and contractor delivers
Capital cost of totes amortized over 10 years
No contract extension – new contract 2014
Green waste disposal no longer subsidized
Includes enhanced public education budget
Mid year start up in 2012
• An additional $23 per household per year
Cost Scenarios for Residential Organics
• Collection - Scenario 3
– Status Quo – No Curbside Organics Collection
•
•
•
•
Service levels remain the same
No offset for cost of disposal
Green waste drop–off subsidy continues
New contract in 2014
• An additional $14 per household per year
Cost Scenarios for Residential Organics
• Collection - Scenario 4
– Bi-weekly Garbage; weekly Recycling/Organics
•
•
•
•
•
•
City purchases totes and contractor delivers
Capital cost of totes amortized over 10 years
No contract extension
Disposal costs reduced due to diversion
Green waste disposal no longer subsidized
Includes enhanced public education budget
• An additional $2 per household per year
Decision Packages Cont’d
Weekly Curbside Organics Collection
Option 1
Contractor provides carts
$21 per
household
+ $5
Option 2
City provides the carts
$23 per
household
+ $5
Option 3
Status Quo
(no organics)
$14 per
household
Option 4
Bi-weekly Garbage
City provides the Carts
$2 per
household
+ $5
Assumptions: mid-year start in 2012; carts amortized over
10 years; no longer subsidize drop–off green waste
To continue to subsidize green waste drop-off would need to charge an additional $5 per household
Discussion