2024-10-23 Finance Committee Agenda Packet - Open Session
Finance Committee Meeting
Open Session
September 18, 2024
MINUTES OPEN SESSION FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING
SEPTEMBER 18, 2024 AT 4:30 PM
MEETING CONDUCTED BY ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION
Present: Mayor D. Noade Reardon
Councillor G. Sullivan
Councillor G. Norton
Councillor P. Radwan
Councillor D. Hickey
Also
Present: Chief Administrative Office B. McGovern
Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer K. Fudge
Fire Chief R. Nichol
General Counsel M. Tompkins
Commissioner Human Resources S. Hossack
Commissioner Utilities & Infrastructure I. Fogan
Commissioner Growth & Community Services A. Poffenroth
Director Transit & Fleet I. MacKinnon
Director Financial Services J. Forgie
Director Financial Services C. Lavigne
Intermediate Accountant V. Parikh
Director Corporate Performance S. Rackley-Roach
Director Engineering / Chief City Engineer M. Baker
Senior Manager Transit & Fleet K. Loughery
Manager Continuous Improvement E. Hatfield
Director Legislative Services / City Clerk J. Taylor
Administrative Assistant A. MacLean
Administrative Assistant K. Tibbits
1. Meeting Called to Order
Councillor Sullivan called the Finance Committee open session meeting to order.
2. Approval of Minutes
2.1 Minutes of August 28, 2024
Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the minutes of August 28, 2024 be approved.
MOTION CARRIED.
3. Approval of Agenda
Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Radwan:
RESOLVED that the agenda of September 18, 2024 be approved.
MOTION CARRIED.
4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest
No disclosures.
Finance Committee Meeting
Open Session
September 18, 2024
5. Consent Agenda
5.1 Request from Saint John Horticultural Association and Emera (Recommendation in Report)
Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the Finance Committee recommends Common Council approve and execute the
requested amendments to the Deed of Gift and execute the Resolution of the Administrators.
MOTION CARRIED.
6. Business Matters
6.1 Expression of Interest Canadian Public Transit Fund
Fund Expression of Interest
The new Canada Public Transit Fund will provide $3B annually for public transit and active
transportation infrastructure beginning in 2026-27. Son the
Baseline funding stream, which is intended to provide predictable, long-term funding to the
existing transit system and support routine capital and non-capital investments, with an expected
focus on projects that include public transit and active transportation system expansions,
improvements, and state of good repair. The first step is to file an Expression of Interest
th
Application, due September 30.
Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the submitted report
for information, and that any questions be directed to staff.
MOTION CARRIED.
6.2 Introduction to Service Based Budgeting
Commissioner Fudge stated that prior to introducing performance-based budgeting, which is a significant
cultural shift, it is necessary to reintroduce service-based budgeting back to the culture of the
organization.
E. Hatfield reviewed the submitted presentation Based Budgeting, noting that service-based
budgeting focuses on services rather than departments and also provides the cost of services to allow for
more focused funding decisions. Presenting service and budget information together improves budget
decision-making by focusing funding choices on outcomes.
Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that
MOTION CARRIED.
6.3 August 2024 Year-to-Date Financial Results
Director Lavigne August 31, 2024 Financial Results General and
Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that Year-to-Date Financial Results General and
MOTION CARRIED.
6.4 2025 Draft General Fund and Utility Fund Capital Budgets
M. Baker reviewed the submitted
Budgets
that occurred at the July meeting.
Finance Committee Meeting
Open Session
September 18, 2024
Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the Finance Committee approve the 2025 General Fund Capital Budget for $39,742,363
with a City Share of $20,940,000 and an Other Share of $18,802,363 and forward to the next meeting of
Common Council for receive and file; and further that the Finance Committee approve the 2025 Utility
Fund Capital Budget for $14,067,165 with a Utility Share of $8,343,000 and an Other Share of $5,724,165
and forward to the next meeting of Common Council for receive and file.
MOTION CARRIED.
7. Adjournment
Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Hickey:
RESOLVED that the Finance Committee meeting be adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED.
The Finance Committee open session meeting held on September 18, 2024, was adjourned at 5:40 p.m.
FINANCE COMMITTEEREPORT
M&C No.2023-
Report DateOctober 20, 2024
Meeting DateOctober 23, 2024
Service AreaStrategic Services
Chairman Gary Sullivan and Members of Finance Committee
SUBJECT: MOU Uptown Saint John Inc.
AUTHORIZATION
Primary AuthorCommissioner/Dept. HeadChief Administrative Officer
Kevin FudgeKevin FudgeJ. Brent McGovern
RECOMMENDATION
Finance Committee recommends Common Council approve and execute the
Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Saint John and Uptown Saint
John Inc.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Uptown Saint John Business Improvement Association is a not-for-profit that
represents the interests of 500+ businesses located within a designated
geographic boundary. Uptown Saint John Inc was established on May 15th, 1992.
Uptown Saint John is governed by a volunteer board of directors from the Uptown
BIA business community. The City of Saint John and Uptown Saint John are
proposing a Memorandum of Understanding that will allow the two entities to
partner to leverage funding from other levels of government to improve the
uptown area.
PREVIOUS RESOLUTION
REPORT
The Uptown Saint John Business Improvement Association is a not-for-profit that
represents the interests of 500+ businesses located within a designated
geographic boundary. Uptown Saint John Inc was established on May 15th, 1992.
Uptown Saint John is governed by a volunteer board of directors from the Uptown
BIA business community.
Uptown Saint John Inc. is eligible to apply for funding through Downtown New
The initiative
provides an opportunity for Uptown SJ to apply for, on an annual basis, up to
- 2 -
Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) for capital projects and Ten Thousand
Dollars ($10,000.00) for planning projects. Uptown Saint John is interested in
partnering with the City to provide matching funds for projects identified in
accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in a Memorandum of
Understanding (attached). The Board of Uptown Saint John Inc. has approved this
MOU.
The City and Uptown SJ will coordinate efforts to identify joint projects during the
agrees to cooperate with each other Party and to work together in good faith to
Uptown SJ agrees to make any necessary applications through Downtown NB
Projects:
(a) For Capital Projects, the Parties agree that all Approved Projects
will be for public spaces and within the boundary of the Business
Business
Improvement Area By-law; and
(b) For Planning Projects, the Parties agree that all Approved Projects
-term Strategic Plan.
If an Approved Project is selected for Funding, the City and Uptown SJ will each
seek approval from their respective Council and Board. If Council approves, the
City will contribute an amount equal to the funding awarded for the Approved
Project and establish which Party will be responsible for delivering on the Approved
Project, and how the funds will be administered.
Both the City and Uptown Saint John Inc. agree to make available the benefits of
its experience, knowledge, capabilities and resources (including adequate
personnel and the provision of such information as is reasonably necessary) to
enable the assessment of the viability of the Project.
Upon completion of any Approved Project, the City and Uptown SJ will jointly
complete an outcome report demonstrating the return on investment to be
presented to Council for the City. Each Party agrees the Project will be cancelled
if actual costs exceed budget unless funding can be secured from other sources.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES
- 3 -
The MOU will unlock funding for the City and Uptown Saint John to make
investments to improve the uptown BIA area.
INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS
Input was received from the Executive Director of Uptown Saint John.
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix A: MOU Between City of Saint John and Uptown Saint John Inc.,
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
This Memorandum of Understanding dated the day of , 2024 Effective Date.
AMONG
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, a body corporate formed by Royal
Charter, confirmed and amended by Acts of the Legislative
City
AND
UPTOWN SAINT JOHN INC., body corporate incorporated under
the Companies Act of New Brunswick (Uptown SJ, and together
with the PartiesParty)
WHEREAS
Initiative.
AND WHEREAS Uptown SJ may receive, on an annual basis, up to Twenty Thousand Dollars
($20,000.00) for capital projects and Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) for planning projects;
AND WHEREAS the City may provide matching funds for projects identified in accordance with
to the terms and conditions outlined in this Memorandum of Understanding;
AND WHEREAS the City and Uptown SJ wish to coordinate their efforts to identify joint projects
gic Plan and Council Priorities ;
AND WHEREAS the Parties wish to enter into this Memorandum of Understanding to set out their
mutual understandings of their respective commitments in selecting Approved Projects;
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and agreements
contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
is acknowledged by the Parties, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
PURPOSE
1.1 Purpose
(a) The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding is to set out the basic terms
by which the Parties intend to select Approved Projects, and if and when selected,
to subsequently financially cost share those projects, conditional upon the City
providing budget approval.
- 2 -
(b) This Memorandum of Understand does not, and is not intended to, impose any
legally binding obligations on the Parties.
ARTICLE 2
OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES
2.1 General Obligations
(a) Each Party agrees to cooperate with each other Party and to work together in good
faith to identify Approved Projects ;
(b)
Funding for Approved Projects:
(i) For Capital Projects, the Parties agree that all Approved Projects will be for
public spaces and within the boundary of the Business Improvement Area
Business Improvement Area By-law; and
(ii) For Planning Projects, the Parties agree that all Approved Projects must
-term Strategic Plan.
(c) If an Approved Project is selected for Funding, the City and Uptown SJ will each
seek approval from their respective Council and Board. If Council approves, the
City will contribute an amount equal to the funding awarded for the Approved
Project and establish which Party will be responsible for delivering on the Approved
Project, and how the funds will be administered.
(d) Upon completion of any Approved Project, the City and Uptown SJ will jointly
complete an outcome report demonstrating the return on investment to be
presented to Council for the City.
(e) Each Party agrees to make available the benefits of its experience, knowledge,
capabilities and resources (including adequate personnel and the provision of such
information as is reasonably necessary) to enable the assessment of the viability
of the Project.
(f) Each Party agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to meet the timelines
agreed by the Parties hereunder.
(g) Each Party agrees the Project will be cancelled if actual costs exceed budget
unless funding can be secured from other sources.
(h) Each Party agrees that the Project shall be developed on a transparent basis and
that all information submitted by a Party shall be shared with each other Party.
(i) The Parties further acknowledge that the success of the Approved Projects will
require the mutual commitment of all Parties and that, as a result, all commitments
will be mutually conditional on all other commitments.
- 3 -
ARTICLE 3
TERM
3.1 Term
This Memorandum of Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue in full
force and effect until the earlier of the execution of the Definitive Agreements or upon mutual
agreement evidenced in writing between the Parties.
ARTICLE 4
GOVERNING LAW
4.1 Governing Law
(a) The provisions of this Memorandum of Understanding shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of the province of New Brunswick and the
federal laws of Canada applicable therein by and against the Parties and their
respective successors and permitted assigns.
(b) The Parties hereby submit to the jurisdiction of the
Brunswick in any dispute arising in connection with this Memorandum of
Understanding.
ARTICLE 5
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
5.1 Public Announcements
(a) Subject to Section 5.1(b), no Party, without the prior written approval of the other
Parties, shall make any public announcements concerning the Project, or any
activities or actions under this Memorandum of Understanding or any connected
ancillary matter. Such approval shall not unreasonably be withheld or delayed.
(b) A Party may make an announcement if required by law, or any securities exchange
or regulatory or governmental body to which such Party is subject, provided that
the announcement is made only after consultation with the other Parties (where
practicable).
ARTICLE 6
CONFIDENTIALITY
6.1 Confidential Information
(a) The provisions of this Memorandum of Understanding and all information whether
written, oral or otherwise, and on whatever medium furnished, transmitted or
otherwise disclosed by any Party to another Party in connection with this
Memorandum of Understanding shall be deemed proprietary and confidential
Confidential Information
the recipient with the same degree of protection in respect of such Confidential
Information as such Party would apply to its own confidential information. The
- 4 -
receiving Party shall not copy or disclose Confidential Information to any third party
other than its affiliates or their respective officers, employees, directors,
consultants or advisors who is reasonably required to know such information in
connection with the Project and who is obligated to maintain the confidentiality of
Representatives
information other than for the pu
hereunder, except with the prior written consent of the other Parties; or unless such
Confidential Information:
(i)
the other Party to the recipient;
(ii) already is in the public domain;
(iii) becomes known to such Party from a third party, without breach of the
confidentiality obligation hereunder or breach of any other obligation of
confidentiality such third party has; or
(iv) is required to be disclosed by applicable law or regulation or judicial or
regulatory demand or securities exchange, process, or order of a
government official to disclose; provided that, other than where prohibited
by applicable law or where such disclosure is required in connection with
an examination by a governmental or regulatory agency, each Party shall
furnish the other Party with prompt prior written notification of any such
request in order to provide an opportunity for the other Party to exercise its
rights under applicable law to protect the Confidential Information from
disclosure.
(b) The confidentiality obligations under this Article 6 shall survive the termination or
expiration of this Memorandum of Understanding by two (2) years. A Party shall
be responsible for a breach of this Article 6 by any Representative in respect of
Confidential Information provided to such Representative by it.
ARTICLE 7
MISCELLANEOUS
7.1 Representations and Warranties
Each Party represents and warrants to the other Parties that:
(a) it is duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the
jurisdiction of its incorporation or formation; and
(b) it has all requisite power and authority to enter into and to perform all its obligations
under this Memorandum of Understanding and to consummate the transactions
contemplated hereby.
- 5 -
7.2 Compliance with Law
Each Party covenants and agrees to comply with all applicable laws and regulations in the
performance of its obligations hereunder.
7.3 Third Parties
None of the terms of this Memorandum of Understanding are intended to be enforceable by any
third party and nothing contained herein shall be construed to give any rights or benefits to anyone
other than the Parties hereto.
7.4 Entire Agreement
This Memorandum of Understanding constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties
concerning the subject matter of this Memorandum of Understanding and supersedes any
previous agreement between or representation by any Party to another concerning the subject
matter hereof.
7.5 Amendment; Waiver
This Memorandum of Understanding may not be amended, modified or supplemented except in
writing by all of the Parties hereto. No failure or delay on the part of any of the Parties in exercising
any right, power or privilege hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or
partial exercise of any right, power or privilege hereunder preclude any other or further exercise
thereof or the exercise of any other right, power or privilege hereunder. Any provision hereof which
is prohibited or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the
extent of such prohibition or unenforceability without invalidating the remaining provisions hereof
and without affecting the validity or enforceability of any provision in any other jurisdiction.
7.6 Successors and Assigns
(a) This shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their
respective successors and permitted assignees.
(b) No Party may assign this Memorandum of Understanding or otherwise transfer
any of its rights or obligations hereunder except with the prior written consent of all
other Parties.
7.7 Notices
Written notices required under this Memorandum of Understanding shall be delivered by email,
including electronic scan and transmission (e.g. Adobe Acrobat PDF format), courier or hand
delivery effective upon
delivery, and shall be sent to the attention of the Parties as follows:
(a) to the City:
- 6 -
Attention:
Email:
(b) to Uptown SJ
Attention:
Email:
7.8 Counterparts
This Memorandum of Understanding may be executed in several counterparts, each of which
shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same
Memorandum of Understanding.
\[Signature page follows\]
- 7 -
Dated at the City of Saint John the day and year first above written.
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
Per:
Per:
UPTOWN SAINT JOHN INC.
Per:
Per:
Millions
Total Replacement Value (2024$)
Millions
Total Replacement Value (2024$)
Millions
Capital Expenditure Forecast (2024$)
Millions
Total Replacement Value (2024$)
Millions
Total Replacement Value (2024$)
Millions
Capital Expenditure Forecast (2024$)
City of Saint John
2024 State of the Infrastructure
Summary Results Report
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John2of 13
SOTI Summary Results
City of Saint John
2024 State of the Infrastructure
Summary Results Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 3
2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................. 4
2.1 Saint John Water .................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 General Fund ......................................................................................................................... 7
3 COMPARING THE 2022 AND 2024 REPORTS .................................................. 10
APPENDIX 1 SAINT JOHN WATER DETAILED BREAKDOWN ........................... 11
APPENDIX 2 GENERAL FUND DETAILED BREAKDOWN................................... 12
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John3of 13
SOTI Summary Results
1 INTRODUCTION
The State of the Infrastructure (SOTI) Report summarizes the state of municipal infrastructure used to
support the delivery of municipal services in the City of Saint John. The report contains several key
indicators that allow staff and Council to compare infrastructure across different service areas and over
time as future SOTI reports are produced. The report also estimates long-term capital expenditures
needed to sustainably renew and replace existing infrastructure assets. At a high level, the SOTI report
helps answer the following questions:
1. What do we own?
2. What is it worth?
3. What condition is it in?
4. Which assets pose a significant risk of failure?
5. How much will it cost to sustain?
The SOTI report contains several indicators and graphics that facilitate the comparison of infrastructure
across different service areas:
Current Replacement Value
Infrastructure Deficit
Condition and Risk Distributions
20-Year Capital Expenditures Forecasts
Combined, these indicators provide insight into the current state of infrastructure repair and will support
staff and the Council in making informed, evidence-based decisions.
This report summarizes the 2024 State of the Infrastructure Report results and compares these to the
most recent SOTI report published in 2022.
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John4of 13
SOTI Summary Results
2 RESULTS
2.1 Saint John Water
Saint John Water supports the community in achieving its long-term vision and goal for safe and clean
drinking water. Services are delivered to enhance drinking water quality and protect the natural
environment with wastewater treatment. Major asset types include watermains, sanitary and combined
sewer mains, and water/wastewater treatment facilities. An overview of the assets included in this
service area, including their total replacement value and infrastructure deficit values, are listed in Table
1.
Table 1. Saint John Water Asset Overview
Replacement Infrastructure
Asset Type Quantity UOM Deficit %
Value Deficit
Drinking Water
Distribution Mains 386.2 km $1,247,631,234 $27,588,713 2%
Transmission Mains 96.1 km $901,229,474 $146,357,774 16%
Large Diameter Water Valves 121 # $11,240,742 $1,955,043 17%
PRVs 29 # $9,145,165 $1,314,893 14%
Water Treatment Facilities 2 # $126,121,495 $5,134,018 4%
Pumping Stations 9 # $31,219,986 $3,306,030 11%
Storage Reservoirs 10 # $39,423,856 $5,274,165 13%
Wells 6 # $15,804,736 $981,657 6%
Dam & Spillways 5 # $21,041,907 $8,515,447 40%
Industrial Water
Distribution Mains 34 m $104,607 $0 0%
Transmission Mains 22.8 km $358,741,835 $43,168,838 12%
Water Treatment Facilities 2 # $3,031,625 $3,031,625 100%
Pumping Stations 2 # $16,423,415 $7,578,180 46%
Dam & Spillways 2 # $6,302,844 $0 0%
Wastewater
Sanitary Sewer Lines 318 km $676,073,314 $47,294,989 7%
Combined Sewer Lines 75.9 km $197,740,445 $36,681,328 19%
Large Diameter Sewer Valves 20 # $1,307,509 $18,828 1%
Sanitary Forcemains 49.8 km $98,582,405 $0 0%
Wastewater Treatment Facilities 5 # $118,376,068 $4,205,523 4%
Sanitary Lift Stations 73 # $118,028,768 $24,416,886 21%
Operations
SCADA 14 # $1,158,694 $272,651 24%
Operations Facilities 2 # $144,529 $144,529 100%
Operations Fleet & Equipment 206 # $6,504,729 $783,450 12%
Total $4,005,379,381 $368,024,568 9%
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John5of 13
SOTI Summary Results
2.1.1Conditionand Risk
Condition
Most of 11%of assets
are estimated to be in a Poor or Very Poorcondition and will likely require renewal or replacement in
the shortterm to sustain service delivery. The distribution of asset conditionratingsfor Saint John
Water assets is presented in Figure 1. Appendix 1 presents a detailed breakdown of condition ratings
for each asset category.
Notable assets inPoor or Very Poor condition include Drinking Water Transmission Mains ($146 M),
Sanitary Sewers ($57.7 M), Drinking Water Distribution Mains ($56.7 M), and Combined Sewers ($45.8
M).
Risk
However, 5%of the utilitys assets currently exhibit an Extreme risk of failure and should be
investigated immediately. The distribution of risks for Saint John Water assets is presented in Figure 2.
Appendix1 presents adetailed breakdown of risk ratings for each asset category.
Notable assets with an Extreme risk rating include Drinking Water Transmission Mains ($141M),
Industrial Water Transmission Mains ($43.2M), Large Diameter Water Valves ($2.3 M), and Sanitary
Lift Stations ($2.0 M).
Figure 1. Condition DistributionFigure 2. Risk Distribution
Unknown
$1.3
$1.4
9%
$1.1
$1.2
Very Poor
9%
$1.0
Very Good
45%
Poor
$0.8
$0.7
2%
$0.6
$0.5
Fair
11%$0.4
$0.2
$0.2
$0.2
$0.0
Good
24%
Risk Category
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John6of 13
SOTI Summary Results
2.1.220-Year Capital Expenditures Forecast
Over the next 20-years, Saint John Water assets are estimated to require over $815millionin capital
renewal expenditures, resulting in a sustainable funding requirement of$40.8million per year. The
estimated annual capital expenditures over the next 20 years are presented in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Saint John Water Capital Expenditures Forecast
$400
$350
$300
$250
$200
$150
20Y Ave. Annual CapEx = $40.8 M /year
$100
$50
$0
Year
2.1.3Data Quality and Confidence
Overall, there is a Moderatelevel of confidence in the data and information presented for Saint John
Water. Most assets have likely been included in the report; however, several gaps remain, and
additional improvements inthe accuracy of asset conditionand riskestimates areneeded.
Accuracy
LowHigh
Completeness
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John7of 13
SOTI Summary Results
2.2 General Fund
The General Fund includes all municipal services except those provided by Saint John Water. Service
areas include Transportation & Public Works, Growth & Community, Fire & Emergency Management,
and Strategic & Corporate. The General Fund relies on various assets such as facilities, roadways,
road structures, parks, recreation, and fleet to support the delivery of services. An overview of the
assets included in this category, including their current replacement value and infrastructure deficits,
are listed in Table 2.
Table 2. General Fund Assets Overview
Replacement Infrastructure Deficit
Asset Type Quantity UOM
Value Deficit %
Transportation & Public Works
Roads 562.5 km $1,122,355,685 $70,252,830 6%
Stormwater Mains 329.3 km $670,348,605 $21,371,758 3%
Sidewalks 373.9 km $98,052,530 $2,772,265 3%
Curbs $75,304,939 $20,673,917 27%
Parks and Outdoor Recreation 67 fac. $58,201,746 $5,529,425 10%
Arenas 4 # $44,104,443 $3,916,255 9%
Pool & Swimming Facilities 1 # $44,011,800 $910,317 2%
Culverts 2,858 # $32,794,513 $0 0%
Other $230,597,993 $21,653,061 9%
Fire & Emergency Management
Fire Facilities 7 # $22,668,589 $1,672,360 7%
Fire Fleet 59 # $10,315,746 $673,253 7%
Police Facilities 1 # $44,379,390 $0 0%
Police Fleet 49 # $2,368,285 $71,437 3%
PSCC Equipment 6 # $154,689 $0 0%
Streetlights 1,050 fix. $10,668,442 $4,401,146 41%
Growth & Community
Market Square 1 # $197,118,457 $8,730,738 4%
TD Station 1 # $125,771,281 $4,963,380 4%
City Market 1 # $21,544,132 $6,248,649 29%
Harbour Passage 1 # $14,117,122 $203,479 1%
Sea Wall 1 # $8,759,293 $0 0%
Other $7,002,339 $1,313,933 19%
Strategic & Corporate
IT Equipment $3,456,479 $0 0%
Corporate Facilities 7 # $13,376,485 $1,908,080 14%
Total $2,857,472,983 $177,266,283 6%
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John8of 13
SOTI Summary Results
2.2.1Conditionand Risk
Condition
Most of the General Fundsassets are in a Fair or better condition. However, 22%of assets are
estimated to be in a Poor or Very Poor conditionand will likely require renewal or replacement in the
short-term to sustain service delivery. The distribution of asset condition is presented in Figure 4.
Appendix2presents adetailed breakdown of conditionratings for each asset category.
The asset types withthe highest replacement values in a Poor or Very Poor condition are Roads ($329
M), Market Square ($97.2 M), Stormwater Mains ($34.5M), and TD Station($25.7M).
Risk
Most of the General Fundsassets have a Moderate or better risk of failure due to deterioration.
However, 7%of assets currently exhibit an Extreme risk of failure and should be investigated
immediately. The distribution of risks for General Fundassets is presented in Figure 5. Appendix2
presents adetailed breakdown of riskratings for each asset category.
Notable assets with an Extreme risk rating include Market Square Critical Components($83.3 M),
Arterial Roads ($44.7M), TD Station Critical Components ($20.9 M),and Large Diameter Stormwater
Mains ($12.7M).
Figure 4. Condition DistributionFigure 5. Risk Distribution
$1.2
Unknown
Very Poor
$1.0
1%
$1.0
12%
$0.8
$0.8
Poor
Very Good
$0.6
10%
$0.6
38%
$0.4
$0.2
$0.2
$0.2
Fair
$0.1
14%
$0.0
Good
25%
Risk Category
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John9of 13
SOTI Summary Results
2.2.2Capital Expenditures Forecast
Over the next 20years,General Fundassets are estimated to require $749millionin capital renewal
expenditures, resulting in a sustainable funding requirement of $37.5million per year. The estimated
annual capital expenditures over the next 20 years are presented in Figure 6.
Figure 6.Capital Expenditures Forecast
$200
$180
$160
$140
$120
$100
$80
$60
20Y Ave. Annual CapEx = $37.5M /year
$40
$20
$0
Year
2.2.3Data Quality and Confidence
Overall, there is a Moderate to High confidencelevelin the data and information presented for General
Fund assets. The condition of most roadways, retaining walls, guiderails, and several buildingsis
based on documented observations. Mostassets are likelyincluded in the report; however, several
gaps remain regarding asset conditionand risk, with several opportunities for improvement.
Accuracy
LowHigh
Completeness
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John10of 13
SOTI Summary Results
3 COMPARING THE 2022 AND 2024 REPORTS
The 2024 SOTI Report highlights significant changes in the value and financial requirements to sustain
municipal infrastructure compared with the 2022 report. The total replacement value of all assets has
almost doubled, increasing from $3.64 billion to $6.87 billion. Additionally, the 20-year sustainable
funding requirements have increased by 50%, from $52.2 million annually to $78.2 million. These
increases are primarily attributed to significant inflationary increases following the COVID-19 pandemic
impacting the Canadian construction industry. The overall infrastructure state of repair has remained
relatively stable, with slight degradations observed for some asset groups. A summary of the
differences between the 2022 and 2024 results for the General Fund and Saint John Water are
presented below.
Table 3. Comparison of 2022 and 2024 SOTI Reports (General Fund)
Indicator 2022 2024 Difference
Current Replacement Value $1.85 B $2.86 B +$1.01 B
Infrastructure Deficit $99 M $177 M +$78 M
Infrastructure Deficit % 5.3% 6.2% +0.9%
% Poor / Very Poor Condition 20% 22% +2%
% High / Extreme Risk 15% 14% -1%
20Y Ave Annual CapEx $25.4 M $37.4 M +$12.0 M
Table 4. Comparison of 2022 and 2024 SOTI Reports (Saint John Water)
Indicator 2022 2024 Difference
Current Replacement Value $1.79 B $4.01 B +$2.22 B
Infrastructure Deficit $247 M $368 M +$121 M
Infrastructure Deficit % 13.8%* 9.0% -4.8%
% Poor / Very Poor Condition 11% 11% 0%
% High / Extreme Risk 8% 9% +1%
20Y Ave Annual CapEx $26.8 M $40.8 M +$14.0 M
* In 2022, it was assumed that all combined sewer lines were in a deficit position. This assumption is not made in
2024.
October 8, 2024
City of Saint John
2024 State of the Infrastructure
Technical Background Report
October 7, 2024
City of Saint John 2 of 39
2024 State of the Infrastructure
City of Saint John
2024 State of the Infrastructure
Technical Background Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 3
2 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................. 3
2.1 Asset Hierarchy ...................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Asset Valuation ...................................................................................................................... 5
2.3 Condition Assessment ............................................................................................................ 6
2.4 Risk Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 8
2.5 Capital Expenditures Forecast ............................................................................................... 9
APPENDIX 1 ASSET HIERARCHY .......................................................................... 11
APPENDIX 2 CONDITION DETAIL .......................................................................... 12
APPENDIX 3 CURRENT REPLACEMENT VALUES ............................................... 17
Appendix 3.1 Traffic Signal Cost Detail .......................................................................................... 23
Appendix 3.2 W&WW Facility Cost Detail ...................................................................................... 25
Appendix 3.3 Culvert Cost Detail ................................................................................................... 28
Appendix 3.4 PRV Cost Detail ....................................................................................................... 30
Appendix 3.5 Municipal Buildings Cost Detail ................................................................................ 31
APPENDIX 4 ESTIMATED USEFUL LIVES ............................................................. 33
APPENDIX 5 CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE .......................................................... 37
October 7, 2024
City of Saint John 3 of 39
2024 State of the Infrastructure
1 INTRODUCTION
The State of the Infrastructure (SOTI) Report summarizes the state of city assets used to support
municipal services in the City of Saint John. The report contains several key indicators that allow staff
and Council to compare infrastructure across different service areas and over time as future SOTI
reports are produced. The report also estimates long-term capital expenditures needed to maintain
existing infrastructure assets. At a high-level, the SOTI report helps answer the following questions:
1. What do we own?
2. What is it worth?
3. What condition is it in?
4. What do we need to do it?
5. When do we need to do it?
6. How much will it cost?
The SOTI report contains several indicators and graphics which facilitate the comparison of
infrastructure across different service areas:
Replacement Value
Infrastructure Deficit
Condition and Risk Charts
20-Year Capital Expenditures Forecasts
Combined, these indicators provide the reader with insight into the current state of infrastructure repair
and will support staff and Council in making informed, evidence-based decisions.
This report provides technical background information, outlining the data analysis methodology, data
sources, and key assumptions for generating the 2024 SOTI Report. It is intended as a reference
document to facilitate future developments of the SOTI and to provide readers with additional insights
into the methods used to generate the report.
2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Asset Hierarchy
The chierarchical structure, categorizing them into various service areas
and groups. The hierarchy ensures that asset data is reported in a manner that supports infrastructure
planning, budgeting, and decision-making.
Asset hierarchies can be arranged to reflect organizational structure (e.g., public works, fleet
maintenance, facilities management) or services provided (e.g., potable water, transportation,
recreation). A service-based asset hierarchy has been adopted to ensure consistency with city
budgeting practices.
hierarchy demonstrates a different degree of asset complexity/detail for a service area and provides the
reader with additional insight into the current state of infrastructure. Most assets included in the asset
October 7, 2024
City of Saint John 4 of 39
2024 State of the Infrastructure
inventory require 3 levels of complexity, while others, such as the Saint John Water assets, require an
additional level, for a total of 4. Additional levels of detail can be added to the hierarchy to improve
asset management decision-making or incorporate operational requirements. The top-level Service
Areas and Level 2 categories of the cpresented in Figure 1. A complete
breakdown of the asset hierarchy is found in Appendix 1.
The asset categories used in the 2024 SOTI Report have been adjusted from the 2022 SOTI report.
These changes are made to accommodate changes in asset inventory data. Changes made for the
2024 include:
Fire & Management Services
Fire Equipment combined into the Fire Fleet category.
Police Equipment combined into the Police Fleet category.
Saint John Water
Operations Equipment combined into Operations Fleet.
Large Diameter Valves renamed to Large Diameter Water Valves.
Added Large Diameter Sewer Valves to the Wastewater Linear category.
Transportation & Public Works
Parking Equipment renamed to Parking Meters.
Parks and Recreation combined into a single Level 2 category.
Outdoor Sports Fields & Facilities renamed to Outdoor Sports Buildings.
Parks & Public Spaces, Playgrounds, and Outdoor Sports Fields combined into Parks,
Playgrounds, and Outdoor Recreation.
Parks Equipment combined into Parks Fleet.
Operations Equipment combined into Operations Fleet.
Roadways Fleet and Equipment combined into Operations Fleet.
Sidewalks Fleet and Equipment combined into Operations Fleet.
Solid Waste Fleet combined into Operations Fleet.
Transit Equipment renamed to Bus Shelters.
Detention Ponds renamed to Stormwater Management Ponds.
October 7, 2024
City of Saint John 5 of 39
2024 State of the Infrastructure
Figure 1. Asset Hierarchy (Levels 0 - 2)
2.2 Asset Valuation
Every asset in the city is assigned a value based on its current replacement cost. These values are
primarily used to give a relative weight when reporting on the overall state of repair for a service area or
asset category. Replacement values represent the capital value of assets and are not an indicator of
their functional value. Additionally, the replacement value of an asset is not necessarily equal to the cost
needed to return the asset to a state of good repair. While some assets (e.g., vehicles) require a full
replacement once they have reached the end of their useful life, many others (e.g., roads) can often
undergo a more cost-effective rehabilitation strategy to improve their condition. Total replacement
values and the reports that rely on their use should be interpreted with this in mind.
Current replacement values of assets are estimated for each asset using several methods, such as:
1. Inflating original acquisition costs using a cost index, such as the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
2. Reviewing historical contracts or tenders.
3. Staff estimates.
October 7, 2024
City of Saint John 6 of 39
2024 State of the Infrastructure
All values in the SOTI Report are expressed in 2024 Canadian dollars. Appendix 3 provides a detailed
breakdown of each asset type's replacement cost estimates and methods.
2.3 Condition Assessment
The condition of each asset represents the current state of physical repair and is often used as an
indicator for the relative time until corrective action is required. The City has adopted a 5-point
corporate condition rating scale to align with industry best practices and provincial reporting
recommendations. The corporate-wide condition scale also allows for comparative benchmarking
between asset groups and is sufficiently detailed to support strategic decision-making and
infrastructure capital planning. Descriptions of each condition rating are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Condition Rating Scale
Condition Physical State of Repair Remaining Service Life
Excellent working condition. No signs
Very Good Like new.
of deterioration.
Good Minor signs of deterioration. Approaching or at mid-stage of life.
Some elements exhibiting major
Fair Beyond mid-stage of life.
deficiencies.
Significant deterioration with localized Needs to be replaced/repaired in the
Poor
areas of failure. short-term.
Asset is beyond repair and, generally, Needs to be replaced/repaired almost
Very Poor
has completed failed. immediately.
Unknown Insufficient information available to estimate condition.
The condition of assets in the city are determined using one of three methods:
1. Theoretical Condition estimated condition based on asset age and useful life
2. Operator Experience operator experience and knowledge of the asset
3. Documented Observations documented observations or inspections of the asset
2.3.1 Age-Based Condition Estimates
The condition of most assets in the SOTI report are based on Method #1: Theoretical Condition.
Theoretical conditions are calculated for all assets using a generalized asset deterioration curve, shown
in Figure 2. This curve is intended to mimic the accelerated rate of deterioration an asset experiences
towards the end of its useful life.
October 7, 2024
City of Saint John7of 39
2024State of the Infrastructure
Figure 2. Generalized Asset Deterioration Curve
Very Good
(100-60%)
Good
(60-30%)
Fair
(30-10%)
Poor
(10-1%)
Very Poor
(<= 0%)
100%80%60%40%20%0%
% Life Remaining (1 -Age / EUL)
2.3.2Documented Observations
The condition of severalassets hasbeen determined using Method #3: Documented Observations.
These estimates aremore reliable than age-based estimates,but require significantly moreresources
to inspect assets and collectdata. Condition ratings for these assets are often collected in a manner
that doesnot perfectly alignwith the 5-point corporate condition rating scale. As a result, inspection
results are translated to the 5-point scale using the assumptions described in Appendix 2.
In some instances, condition assessments have occurred several years ago, and additional
deterioration has likely occurred since the time of inspection. In these cases, condition ratings are
adjusted based on the number of years since the inspection occurred. This calculation isdetailed
below:
-First, apercentage oflife remainingvalue is estimated based on the inspection results. These
values -
presented in Figure 2.
Condition% Life Remaining
Very Good80%
Good45%
Fair20%
Poor5%
Very Poor0%
October 7, 2024
City of Saint John 8 of 39
2024 State of the Infrastructure
- Next, an increase in the percentage life remaining value is calculated by dividing the number of
years since the inspection occurred by estimated useful life. This results in an
adjusted life remaining value, which is converted to the 5-point condition rating scale using the
same thresholds provided in the generalized deterioration curve. An example of this calculation
is shown below:
Asset: Retaining Wall (RWL-2)
Estimated Useful Life: 80 years
Inspection Year: 2010
Inspection Result: Fair
% Life Remaining at Inspection Year: 20%
% Life Remaining Adjustment: -17.5% (14/80)
Adjusted % Life Remaining: 2.5% (20% - 17.5%)
Estimated Condition: Poor
2.4 Risk Analysis
A risk analysis is performed to identify assets which may pose a significant threat of failure, impacting
the delivery of services. Assets which are likely to fail and have a serious consequence of failure will
score a higher risk rating than assets which are not likely to fail and/or have a minor consequence of
failure.
A simple risk matrix evaluation technique is used for all assets in the SOTI Report to estimate the risk of
failure due to deterioration. The method is based on the ISO 31000 framework and accounts for both
the probability and consequence of failure of an asset, and calculates the risk rating of each asset using
the following equation:
Similar to condition, asset probability and consequence of failure ratings are scored on a 5-point scale.
These ratings (and their associated descriptions) are listed in Table 2. Multiplying the values for
probability and consequence of failure together yields a 5x5 risk matrix (Table 3) which can be used to
visualize how assets are classified as high or low risk.
Table 2. Probability and Consequence of Failure Ratings
Rating Probability of Failure Consequence of Failure
1 Improbable Insignificant
2 Unlikely Minor
3 Possible Moderate
4 Likely Major
5 Highly Probable Catastrophic
October 7, 2024
City of Saint John 9 of 39
2024 State of the Infrastructure
Table 3. Asset Risk Rating Matrix
Consequence
Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Catastrophic
Risk Category:
1 2 3 4 5
Improbable 1 2 3 4 5
1
Insignificant
Unlikely 2 4 6 8 10
2
Low
y
t
i
l
i
b
Possible 3 6 9 12 15
3
a
Moderate
b
o
r
P
Likely 4 8 12 16 20
4
High
Highly
5 10 15 20 25
5
Extreme
Probable
In the SOTI, the probability of asset failure due to deterioration is calculated by assuming it is equal to
its current condition rating. Consequence of failure ratings have been determined for each asset type
using a standardized consequence of failure guide. Consequence of failure ratings vary based on
certain asset characteristics, such as size or function, and the assumed ratings for city assets is
presented in Appendix 5.
2.5 Capital Expenditures Forecast
In addition to communicating the overall state of infrastructure repair, the SOTI Report presents a high-
level estimate of long-term capital expenditures needed to renew and replace existing infrastructure.
Long-term forecasts are generated to determine the average annual investment requirements over a
50-year period. A 50-year evaluation period is selected to ensure the replacement cycle of most assets
are captured. Previous iterations of the SOTI report presented a 100-year forecast, however this
forecast was deemed to be too long to support planning and decision-making in the city. An average
annual capital expenditure is calculated and
This value is the annual average investment requirement to maintain (replace/rehabilitate) all assets at
the end of their useful lives and address the infrastructure deficit.
Additionally, the capital expenditures forecast highlights the current infrastructure deficit the
estimated value of capital expenditures which are overdue or forecasted to occur in the current year.
The infrastructure deficit is presented throughout the report as a high-- or
backlog investment needs of each asset type.
It is important to note that the deficit for many assets is calculated with a simple assumption that the
necessary rehabilitation strategy to return the asset to a state of good repair is full replacement.
However, in many instances, the more cost-effective rehabilitation techniques can be used (e.g.,
trenchless pipelining for underground sewers). This assumption often results in an over-estimate of
infrastructure deficit and is a recognized area of improvement. An example long-term financial forecast
is shown in Figure 3.
October 7, 2024
City of Saint John10of 39
2024State of the Infrastructure
sare developedassuming a replacement like-for-
like strategy. This assumes an asset requires full replacement at the end of its useful life. Similarly, this
is a simplistic approach andcan sometimes result in an over-estimationof the actual lifecycle costs.
Secondly, the approach is highly sensitive to the estimated useful life assumptions for each asset type.
A detailed breakdown of the estimated useful life assumptions for each asset type are presented in
Appendix 4.
Figure 3. Example Long-Term Capital Expenditures Forecast
$6
Infrastructure
Sustainable FundingRequirement
Deficit = $5 million
= $2.1 million /year
$5
$4
$3
$2
$1
$0
Year
October 7, 2024
11 of 39
APPENDIX 1
ASSET HIERARCHY
12 of 39
APPENDIX 2
CONDITION DETAIL
13 of 39
Roads
Road surface condition is assessed annually using the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating
methodology (ASTM D6433-20). This assessment method results in a PCI rating for each road segment
between 0 and 100. PCI ratings are converted to the 5-point condition scale using the assumptions in
the table below.
PCI Rating Condition
100 90 Very Good
90 80 Good
80 70 Fair
70 55 Poor
0 55 Very Poor
Most road surface condition assessments were completed in 2023. As a result, the condition ratings are
assumed to be reasonably accurate, and no additional deterioration is calculated for the assets.
Municipal Buildings and Water and Wastewater Facilities
In 2021
an engineering consultant. The consultant established detail asset inventories for each facility and
assessed their condition using the corporate 5-point condition rating scale. As a result, no additional
current.
Gravity Sewers
Gravity sewers, including sanitary, combined, and storm, are inspected using CCTV cameras operated
by trained professionals. The operator notes and grades individual pipe defects using the NASSCO
PACP rating methodology. Several different approaches can be used to convert individual pipe defect
ratings to give an overall pipe condition estimate. The methodology used in this report is consistent with
Manual. This
Structural Quick Rating, and is summarized below.
If there are no defects observed, then the LoF is 1.0.
If there are no more than 9 occurrences of the highest defect grade, then the LoF is calculated
by dividing the first two digits of the structural quick rating by 10. For example, if the quick
rating is 4621 then the LoF will be 4.6.
If there are more than 9 occurrences of the highest defect grade, then the LoF is calculated by
taking the first digit of the structural quick rating and adding 1.0. For example, if the quick rating
is 4B24 then the LoF will 4.0 + 1.0 = 5.0.
LoF values are converted to the 5-point condition rating table using the assumptions in the table below.
14 of 39
LoF Value Condition
1.0 1.5 Very Good
1.5 2.5 Good
2.5 3.5 Fair
3.5 4.5 Poor
4.5 6.0 Very Poor
CCTV inspections have been regularly conducted by the city since 2015. As a result, additional
deterioration is expected, and condition estimates have been calculated for the asset using the
methodology detailed in Section 2.3.2.
Sidewalks
state of repair. These qualitative descriptions are converted to the 5-point condition scale using the
assumptions in the table below.
Inspection Condition
Excellent Very Good
Good Good
Fair Fair
Poor Poor
Serious Very Poor
Most sidewalk inspections were completed in 2021 or are unknown. As a result, no additional
deterioration is calculated, and the condition ratings in the GIS are assumed to be current.
Parks, Playgrounds, and Outdoor Sports Fields
City staff conducted a comprehensive condition assessment of all outdoor park and recreation facilities
in 2023 using a qualitative evaluation method that was consistent with the 5-point condition rating scale.
As a result, the condition ratings are assumed to be reasonably accurate, and no conversions or
additional deterioration are calculated for the assets.
Fleet
(ORP) methodology, as described in Saint John Policy #2017-012. The methodology uses a
combination of asset usage data-to-
maintenance costs, life-to-date usage (i.e., odometer reading), fuel usage, and overall mechanical
condition verified by visual inspection.
ORP ratings are converted to the 5-point condition rating scale using the assumptions outlined in the
table below. As shown in the table, ORP thresholds vary based on asset type.
15 of 39
SJFD Heavy
Pumper/Rescue, Sedans and Light Heavy Trucks and Light Equipment
Condition
Ladder, and Trucks Equipment and Trailers
Tanker Truck
Very Good 0 10 0 12 0 9
Not applicable.
Good 10 20 12 17 9 18
Assets rely on age-
Fair 20 30 17 23 18 27
based estimates
Poor 30 40 23 28 27 36
only.
Very Poor >= 40 >= 28 >= 36
Culverts
City staff conducted a comprehensive condition assessment of culverts at an unknown time using a
qualitative evaluation method that was consistent with the 5-point condition rating scale. As the time of
the assessments is unknown, no additional deterioration is calculated for the assets and the condition is
assumed to be current.
Retaining Walls
City staff have assessed retaining wall condition using a qualitative evaluation method that describes
are converted to the 5-point condition
scale using the assumptions in the table below.
Inspection Condition
Excellent Very Good
Good Good
Fair Fair
Poor Poor
Fail Very Poor
Most retaining wall inspections were completed in 2010 (74%) or 2018 (20%). As a result, additional
deterioration is expected, and condition estimates have been calculated for the asset using the
methodology detailed in Section 2.3.2.
Guiderails
City staff conducted a comprehensive condition assessment of guiderails in 2016 using a qualitative
evaluation method that was consistent with the 5-point condition rating scale. As the assessments were
conducted 8 years ago, additional deterioration is expected, and condition estimates have been
calculated for the asset using the methodology detailed in Section 2.3.2.
Traffic Signals
City staff conducted a comprehensive condition assessment of traffic signals at an unknown time using
a qualitative evaluation method that was consistent with the 5-point condition rating scale. As the time
16 of 39
of the assessments is unknown, no additional deterioration is calculated for the assets and the condition
is assumed to be current.
17 of 39
APPENDIX 3
CURRENT REPLACEMENT VALUES
18 of 39
Asset Type Replacement Values Notes
Diameter Unit Cost ($/m)
Watermains
Unit rates for common
100mm $2,937
watermain diameters provided
150mm $2,937
by Engineering.
200mm $2,937*
Linear interpolation and cost
250mm $3,673*
factors from previous SOTI
300mm $4,249*
were used to estimate the cost
350mm $4,794
of uncommon watermain
375mm $5,066
diameters.
400mm $5,339*
Watermains with a diameter of
450mm $5,672
less than 100mm are excluded
500mm $6,005*
from the analysis.
600mm $6,307*
Replacement cost includes all
750mm $9,032
minor appurtenances (valves,
900mm $11,757*
fittings, etc.)
975mm $13,271
1050mm $14,785
1200mm $19,239
1350mm $22,089
1500mm $25,295
1800mm $29,838
* Indicates value provided by Engineering. All other costs are
calculated using linear interpolation or cost factors from previous
SOTI reports.
Valve Type Diameter Unit Cost ($/ea)
Water and Sewer
Unit cost estimates calculated
500mm $18,828
Large Diameter
by inflating 2021 SOTI
600mm $26,224
Valves
estimates by a cost factor of
Butterfly 750mm $46,733
1.345.
900mm $54,129
Cost factor determined using
1050mm $81,362
the Non-Residential Building
Check 600mm $80,354
Construction Price Index table
500mm $72,957
for Moncton, NB CMA for Q2
600mm $110,948 2021 to Q2 2024.
750mm $204,750
Replacement cost of all small
Gate
900mm $256,863
diameter valves (< 500mm) are
1050mm $374,871
assumed to be included within
1500mm $428,328
the water or sewer main cost.
500mm $18,828
Air
600mm $26,224
Pressure
See Appendix 3.4 Cost estimated by inflating
Reducing Valves
historical acquisition cost to
2024 dollars using the Non-
Residential Building
Construction Price Index table
for Canada and Moncton, NB
CMA.
19 of 39
Asset Type Replacement Values Notes
Diameter Unit Cost ($/m)
Sanitary and
Unit rates for common sewer
100mm $1,738
Combined Gravity
diameters provided by
150mm $1,738
Sewers
Engineering.
200mm $1,738*
Linear interpolation and cost
225mm $1,986
factors from previous SOTI
250mm $1,987*
were used to estimate the cost
300mm $2,309*
of uncommon sewer diameters.
375mm $2,552*
Sewers with a diameter of less
400mm $2,624
than 100mm are excluded from
450mm $2,625*
the analysis.
500mm $2,673
Replacement cost includes all
525mm $2,673*
minor appurtenances
600mm $2,734*
(manholes, fittings, etc.)
750mm $2,916*
900mm $4,405*
1050mm $5,589*
1200mm $6,926*
1350mm $7,333
1500mm $7,792
1800mm $8,251
2100mm $8,709
2400mm $8,709
* Indicates value provided by Engineering. All other costs are
calculated using linear interpolation or cost factors from previous
SOTI reports.
Diameter Unit Cost ($/m)
Sanitary
Unit rates calculated by
100mm $1,738
Forcemains
applying a cost factor of 1.32 to
150mm $1,738
2022 SOTI estimates.
200mm $1,738
Cost factor is determined by
250mm $1,986
averaging the cost increases for
300mm $2,309
sanitary and combined
350mm $2,552
sewermains provided by
400mm $2,624
Engineering.
500mm $2,673
Replacement cost includes all
600mm $2,735
minor appurtenances (valves,
700mm $2,916
fittings, etc.)
Water and
See Appendix 3.2 Combination of staff estimates,
Wastewater
insurance valuations, consultant
Facilities
estimates, and totaling
individual asset component
valuations are used to
determine building replacement
values.
Previous 2021 estimates are
inflated to 2024 dollars using
the Non-Residential Building
Construction Price Index.
20 of 39
Asset Type Replacement Values Notes
Diameter Unit Cost ($/m)
Storm Gravity
Unit rates for common sewer
50mm $1,349
Sewers
diameters provided by
75mm $1,349
Engineering.
100mm $1,349
Linear interpolation and cost
150mm $1,349
factors from previous SOTI
200mm $1,349
were used to estimate the cost
225mm $1,547
of uncommon sewer diameters.
250mm $1,547
Sewers with a diameter of less
300mm $1,824*
than 50mm are excluded from
350mm $1,916
the analysis.
375mm $1,913*
Replacement cost includes all
400mm $2,190
minor appurtenances
450mm $2,187*
(manholes, catchbasins, fittings,
500mm $2,235
etc.)
525mm $2,232*
600mm $2,296*
675mm $2,276
750mm $2,328*
900mm $3,463*
1050mm $4,464*
1200mm $5,389*
1225mm $5,393
1350mm $5,710
1500mm $6,068
1800mm $6,424
2100mm $6,781
2400mm $6,781
* Indicates value provided by Engineering. All other costs are
calculated using linear interpolation or cost factors from previous
SOTI reports.
Culverts See Appendix 3.2
Unit cost estimates calculated
by inflating 2021 SOTI
estimates by a cost factor of
1.345.
Cost factor determined using
the Non-Residential Building
Construction Price Index table
for Moncton, NB CMA for Q2
2021 to Q2 2024.
2
Roads Road Surface = $49.89 / m
Unit rates provided by
2
Engineering.
Road Base/Subbase = $176.84 / m
Road base/subbase includes
asphalt base and subbase.
2
Sidewalks $216.67 / m Unit rates provided by
Engineering.
Assumes concrete surface type.
Curbs $325.50 / m Unit rates provided by
Engineering.
Assumes concrete material.
21 of 39
Asset Type Replacement Values Notes
2
Type Unit Cost ($/m)
Retaining Walls
Unit cost estimates calculated
Allan Block $659
by inflating 2021 SOTI
Amour Rock Embankment $834
estimates by a cost factor of
Concrete Block $834
1.345.
Concrete Crib $834
Cost factor determined using
Concrete Curb $3,604
the Non-Residential Building
Concrete Formed $3,604
Construction Price Index table
Concrete Lego $834
for Moncton, NB CMA for Q2
Gabion $498 2021 to Q2 2024.
Granite Block $834
Granite Curb $3,604
Serrascape $498
Stone $659
Timber $498
Component Material Unit Cost ($/ea)
Streetlights Unit cost estimates calculated
Fixture NA $3,127
by inflating 2021 SOTI
AL $3,564
estimates by a cost factor of
CO $2,589
1.345.
IR $6,422
Cost factor determined using
Pole
ST $3,261
the Non-Residential Building
WRC $2,589
Construction Price Index table
UNK $3,564
for Moncton, NB CMA for Q2
CO $3,564 2021 to Q2 2024.
SI $2,152
Foundation
ST $2,858
UNK $3,564
Traffic Signals See Appendix 3.1 Replacement cost estimates
provided by Traffic Signals
group for 2021 SOTI report.
2021 estimates inflated to 2024
dollars by a cost factor of 1.345.
Cost factor determined using
the Non-Residential Building
Construction Price Index table
for Moncton, NB CMA for Q2
2021 to Q2 2024.
Parking Meters Handicapped = $1,824
Unit cost estimates calculated
by inflating 2021 SOTI
Standard Meter = $1,824
estimates by a cost factor of
Pay by Plate = $10,885
1.140.
Cost factor determined using
the Canadian Consumer Price
Index for 2021 to 2024.
Guiderails $235.34 / m Unit cost estimates calculated
by inflating 2021 SOTI
estimates by a cost factor of
1.345.
Cost factor determined using
the Non-Residential Building
Construction Price Index table
for Moncton, NB CMA for Q2
2021 to Q2 2024.
22 of 39
Asset Type Replacement Values Notes
Trails Paved = $80.69 / m
Unit cost estimates calculated
by inflating 2021 SOTI
Wood = $275.69 / m
estimates by a cost factor of
Gravel = $47.07
1.345.
Stone = $275.69 / m
Cost factor determined using
Dirt = $0 / m
the Non-Residential Building
Construction Price Index table
for Moncton, NB CMA for Q2
2021 to Q2 2024.
Outdoor Parks
Varies by asset type. Estimates provided by Asset
and Recreation
Management Team.
SWM Ponds $2,760,977
Cost estimated by inflating
historical acquisition cost to
Shannex = $1,523,798
2024 dollars using the Non-
Honeysuckle = $1,484,446
Residential Building
Construction Price Index table
for Canada and Moncton, NB
CMA.
Fleet and
Varies by asset. Cost estimated by inflating
Equipment
historical acquisition cost to
2024 dollars using the Canadian
Consumer Price Index.
Municipal
See Appendix 3.5 Combination of staff estimates,
Buildings
insurance valuations, consultant
estimates, and totaling
individual asset component
valuations are used to
determine building replacement
values.
Previous 2021 estimates are
inflated to 2024 dollars using
the Non-Residential Building
Construction Price Index.
Misc. Varies by asset.
Cost estimated by inflating
historical acquisition cost to
SCADA
2024 dollars using the Non-
Landfills
Residential Building
IT Equipment
Construction Price Index table
PSCC
for Canada and Moncton, NB
Harbour
CMA or Consumer Price Index
Passage
for Canada for purchased
assets.
Parking Lots
Sea Wall
Bus Shelters
23 of 39
Appendix 3.1 Traffic Signal Cost Detail
Component Description Unit Cost ($/ea)
G Style Cabinet $15,876
M Style Cabinet $15,876
2 Wire CCU $5,379
Midblock Controller $4,203
Controller RA-5 Controller $939
4 Wire APS Control Unit $605
4 WIre APS Control Unit $605
Flasher Controller Cabinet $518
Flasher Unit $403
Blue Cannon $7,800
Iteris Camera $7,800
Pucks $1,345
Access Point $1,345
Motion Detector $1,163
Detector
Presence Detector $834
2 Wire APS Button $800
4 Wire APS Button $800
Reno Loop $453
BullDog Button $282
Power Hook Up $3,362
Electrical Disconnect $3,362
Electrical
Power Disconnect $2,017
Electrical Disconnect $1,345
APS RRFB System $7,397
Traffic Logix DFB $6,052
ITS DFB $6,052
RRFB System $3,564
Solar Flasher Kit $3,362
RA-5 Crosswalk Sign $2,807
4 Section Signal Head $631
4 Way Signal Light $631
4 Signal Light $631
3 Section Signal Head $537
Signal Head Pedestrian Combo Timer $487
Pedestrian Combo TImer $487
3 Section Signal Head $402
3 Way Signal Light $402
3 Signal Light $402
3 Section SIgnal Head $402
Novax $336
2 Signal Light $269
2 Section Head $266
300mm Ped Head $195
1 Signal Light $168
Concrete Base $13,448
M Style Base $13,448
Large Concrete Base $4,707
Structure
Large Concrete base $4,707
Large Concrte Base $4,707
Decorative Pole $3,614
Structure Small Concrete Base $3,362
24 of 39
Large Concrete Base$3,362
Steel Traffic Arm $2,690
19 Ft Pole Steel $2,690
Steel Pole $2,690
19 Ft Pole $1,564
33ft Truss Arm $1,547
30ft Truss Arm $1,393
15 Ft Pole $1,377
25ft Truss Arm $1,159
22ft Truss Arm $1,097
20ft Truss Arm $1,035
20Ft Truss Arm $1,035
17Ft Truss Arm $939
17ft Truss Arm $939
22ft Traffic Arm $856
15Ft Truss Arm $825
15ft Truss Arm $825
15ft Traffic Arm $731
TB-1 $731
12 Ft Pole $693
3 Meter Decorative Arm $677
Screw Base $672
10 Ft Pole $636
8 Ft Pole $619
5 Ft Pole $463
TB-1 $451
Astro Bracket $403
Span Wire $403
TB-2 $397
4 Way Span Wire Hanger $336
3 Way Span Wire Hanger $269
2 Way Span Wire Hanger $202
Signal Cushion Hanger $165
SIgnal Cushion Hanger $165
Adapter Plate $153
Elbow Kit $152
Signal Cushion Hanger $152
T Bracket $141
Post Top $134
1 Way Span Wire Hanger $134
Post Top $104
Telspar Pole $57
25 of 39
Appendix 3.2 W&WW Facility Cost Detail
Facility Type Facility ID Facility Name CRV
80 Spruce Lake Blue Storage Building $597,499
Depot / Garage - Works
81 Spruce Lake Garage $58,807
74 Robertson Lake Dam $7,234,922
205 McBrien Lake Dam $4,034,490
Drinking Water Dam &
212 Little River Reservoir Dam $2,017,245
Spillways
73 Latimer Lake Dam $166,596
204 Hunter Lake Dam and Fish Ladder $88,453
29 Spruce Lake Pumping Station $13,482,449
186 Lakewood Heights Pumping Station $2,518,020
28 Somerset Street Pump Station $1,985,004
184 Golden Grove Road Water Pumping Station $1,886,669
Drinking Water
32 University Avenue Pump Station $1,870,134
Pumping Station
188 Riverview Avenue West Pump Station $641,586
185 Highland Road Pumping Station $497,575
190 Thomas Avenue Pumping Station $490,278
191 Westmorland Pumping Station $457,166
199 Spruce Lake Water Tank $7,098,149
195 Lancaster Water Tank $5,997,735
193 Cottage Hill Water Tank $5,110,062
192 Churchill Heights Water Tank $4,875,269
21 Millidgeville Water Tank $4,704,990
Drinking Water Storage
Reservoir
196 Loch Lomond Tank 1 $3,734,698
197 Loch Lomond Tank 2 $3,734,698
198 Loch Lomond Tank 3 $3,734,698
194 Lakewood Heights Water Tank $2,586,565
27 Rockwood Park Water Tank $930,132
201 Loch Lomond Treatment Facility $101,099,683
Drinking Water
Treatment Facility
200 Latimer Lake Treatment Facility $17,591,563
89 Southbay Wellfield Wellhouse $10,240,444
84 Ocean Drive Pumping Station and Well $1,138,111
87 Southbay Wellfield Production Well 2 $1,053,293
Drinking Water Well
88 Southbay Wellfield Production Well 3 $1,053,293
86 Southbay Wellfield Production Well 1 $759,034
85 Seaward Crescent Pumping Station and Well $446,229
202 Spruce Lake Dam $4,500,245
Industrial Water Dam &
Spillways
206 Menzies Lake Dam $1,802,599
187 Musquash Pumping Station $9,490,826
Industrial Water
Pumping Station
213 Musquash Electrical Substation $3,132,224
207 Spruce Lake Screen Building $2,585,191
Industrial Water
Treatment Facility
180 Coleson Cove Screen Building $446,434
60 Thorne Ave Lift Station #4 $16,615,118
133 Harbour Station Lift Station #10 $3,244,904
169 Spar Cove Road Lift Station $3,160,576
18 Market Place Lift Station $3,127,388
127 Crown Street Lift Station #8 $2,824,531
5 Carpenter Place Lift Station $2,814,813
Sanitary Lift Station
6 Champlain Heights Pump Station $2,765,610
159 One Mile Lift Station $2,711,052
8 Churchill Boulevard Lift Station (2 Floors) $2,361,308
148 Lower Cove Loop Lift Station #9 $2,356,113
134 Hickey Road Lift Station $1,986,234
153 McAllister Industrial Park Lift Station $1,966,597
26 of 39
122Chesley Drive Lift Station #10A$1,922,465
24 Parks Street Pumping Station $1,815,614
1 Bayside Drive Lift Station 3 $1,570,139
155 Mill Street Lift Station # 31 $1,555,147
157 Monte Cristo Lift Station $1,530,668
168 Simpson Drive Lift Station $1,524,528
117 Bridge Street Lift Station #23 $1,413,349
165 Rothesay Avenue Lift Station #6 $1,412,180
141 Lift Station #2 $1,292,728
154 Milford Road Lift Station #32 $1,181,406
125 Crown Street Lift Station #7 $1,123,477
16 Lorneville Lift Station $1,046,554
143 Lift Station A $1,008,623
139 Kennedy Street Lift Station #24 $1,008,623
152 McAllister Drive Lift Station $1,008,623
172 Walter Street Lift Station $1,008,623
174 Westgate Lift Station $1,008,623
119 C Station Lift Station $1,008,623
149 Majors Brook Drive Lift Station $1,008,623
164 Riverview Drive Lift Station #28 $1,008,623
120 Cedar Point Lift Station $1,008,623
116 Beach Crescent Lift Station $1,008,623
137 Kennebecasis 1 Lift Station $1,008,623
163 Riverview Avenue Lift Station #30 $1,008,623
144 Lift Station X $1,008,623
138 Kennebecasis 2 Lift Station $1,008,623
135 Highland Road Lift Station #21 $1,008,623
136 Highland Road Lift Station #21A $1,008,623
173 West Side Estates Lift Station $1,008,623
145 Lift Station Y $1,008,623
126 Crown Street Lift Station #7A $1,008,623
170 Tilley Avenue Lift Station $1,008,623
128 Drury Cove Lift Station $1,008,623
156 Millidge Ave. Lift Station $1,008,623
161 Pokiok Road Lift Station $1,008,623
177 Y Station Lift Station $1,008,623
123 City Line Lift Station $1,008,623
150 Major's Brook Lift Station $1,008,623
140 Lift Station #1 $1,008,623
142 Lift Station #50 $1,008,623
121 Champlain Dr. South Lift Station $1,008,623
178 York Street Lift Station $1,008,623
118 Busby Lift Station $1,008,623
130 Fox Den Lift Station $1,008,623
167 Sea St. Lift Station $1,008,623
151 Manners Sutton Lift Station $1,008,623
114 A Station Lift Station $1,008,623
158 Moorings Lift Station $1,008,623
147 Lily Lake Pavilion Lift Station $1,008,623
131 Gault Road Lift Station $1,008,623
129 Fallsview Lift Station $1,008,623
115 B Station Lift Station $1,008,623
176 X Station Lift Station $1,008,623
124 Colpitts Lift Station $1,008,623
146 Lily Lake Interpretation Center/ Campground Lift Station $1,008,623
27 of 39
132Gilbert Street Lift Station #5$1,008,623
160 Pauline Street Lift Station $1,008,623
162 Ridgewood Lift Station $1,008,623
171 Tippet Drive Lift Station #33 $1,008,623
166 Rowanberry Lift Station $1,008,623
175 Woodlawn Park Lift Station $1,008,623
9 Eastern Wastewater Treatment Facility $69,497,014
20 Millidgeville Wastewater Treatment Facility $23,995,611
Wastewater Treatment
14 Lancaster Wastewater Treatment Facility $11,831,150
Facility
183 Morna Heights Wastewater Treatment Facility $2,056,730
181 Greenwood Wastewater Treatment Facility $1,959,013
28 of 39
Appendix 3.3 Culvert Cost Detail
Material Diameter (mm) Unit Cost ($/m)
Unknown $725
150 $725
200 $725
250 $725
300 $725
350 $775
375 $775
380 $775
400 $850
450 $850
500 $925
550 $925
600 $1,000
650 $1,250
700 $1,250
Concrete 750 $1,325
800 $1,450
850 $1,600
900 $1,600
950 $1,700
1000 $1,800
1050 $1,800
1100 $1,900
1200 $2,025
1250 $2,025
1400 $3,025
1450 $3,025
1500 $3,025
1800 $4,238
2000 $5,074
2500 $7,549
Unknown $525
150 $525
200 $525
250 $525
300 $550
350 $600
375 $600
380 $600
400 $600
450 $650
Metal
500 $709
550 $709
600 $828
900 $1,183
1000 $1,301
1300 $1,657
1400 $1,775
1500 $1,894
1800 $2,250
2000 $2,500
Plastic Unknown $525
29 of 39
150$525
200 $525
250 $525
300 $550
350 $600
375 $600
380 $600
400 $600
450 $650
500 $650
550 $750
600 $750
650 $850
700 $850
750 $950
850 $1,000
900 $1,100
2500 $7,549
Unknown $725
150 $725
200 $725
250 $725
300 $725
350 $775
375 $775
380 $775
Unknown
400 $850
450 $850
500 $925
550 $925
600 $1,000
650 $1,250
700 $1,250
1800 $4,238
Unknown $725
150 $725
200 $725
250 $725
300 $725
350 $775
375 $775
380 $775
Wood
400 $850
450 $850
500 $925
550 $925
600 $1,000
650 $1,250
700 $1,250
1800 $4,238
30 of 39
Appendix 3.4 PRV Cost Detail
Name CRV
PRV 100 Champlain Heights Pressure Reducing Valve $823,408
PRV 104 "A" Westmorland Road Pressure Reducing Valve $519,918
PRV 104 "B" Westmorland Road Pressure Reducing Valve $519,918
PRV 14 Woodward Avenue Pressure Reducing Valve $516,305
PRV 28 Lower Gault Road Pressure Reducing Valve $462,906
PRV 107 Metcalf Street Pressure Reducing Valve $454,962
PRV 109 Kennebecasis Drive Pressure Reducing Valve $417,456
PRV 05 Daniel Avenue Pressure Reducing Valve $357,710
PRV 08 Meadowbank Avenue Pressure Reducing Valve $336,843
PRV Marsh Street Pressure Reducing Valve $312,212
PRV 26 Church Avenue Pressure Reducing Valve $309,618
PRV 22 Prince Street (West) Pressure Reducing Valve $302,413
PRV 24 Gault Road Pressure Reducing Valve $302,413
PRV 27 Green Head Road Pressure Reducing Valve $288,575
PRV 12 Mountain Road Pressure Reducing Valve $271,532
PRV 15 Belgian Road Pressure Reducing Valve $269,660
PRV 103 Bonaccord Pressure Reducing Valve $269,660
PRV 02 Charlotte Street West Pressure Reducing Valve $255,779
PRV 01 - Dufferin Row Pressure Reducing Valve $254,993
PRV 10 Old Black River Pressure Reducing Valve $249,829
PRV 23 Pipe Line Road West Pressure Reducing Valve $248,171
PRV 101 McAllister Drive Pressure Reducing Valve $242,948
PRV 102 Westmorland Road Pressure Reducing Valve $239,961
PRV 06 Rothesay Avenue Pressure Reducing Valve $236,879
PRV 106 Mount Pleasant Avenue East Pressure Reducing Valve $234,292
PRV 105 Jarvis Park Pressure Reducing Valve $231,307
PRV 14 Cedar Point Pressure Reducing Valve $207,971
PRV 25A Thomas Avenue Pressure Reducing Valve $3,764
PRV 25B Thomas Avenue Pressure Reducing Valve $3,764
31 of 39
Appendix 3.5 Municipal Buildings Cost Detail
Facility Type Facility ID Facility Name 2024 CRV
59 Lord Beaverbrook Rink $16,542,941
23 Peter G. Murray Arena $8,287,039
Arena
30 Stewart Hurley Arena $6,346,761
7 Charles Gorman Arena $6,321,747
Arts & Culture Building 4 Carnegie Building $5,112,475
City Market 61 City Market $15,339,627
3 Carleton Community Centre $5,044,457
52 Nick Nicolle Community Centre $4,476,697
Community Centre 56 Shamrock Park Clubhouse $3,794,942
63 Lorneville Rec Centre $368,797
65 Seaside Lawn Bowling Clubhouse $111,949
49 Leisure Services Maintenance Garage $1,075,864
Depot / Garage - Parks
76 Forest Hills Maintenance Depot/Office $580,694
36 East Works Garage $6,059,300
17 Municipal Operations Garage (Main) $5,934,466
Depot / Garage - Works 83 Works West Storage/Salt Building $1,302,986
82 Works East Salt Building $850,230
77 Municipal Operations Gate House $97,538
10 Fire Station #1 $6,876,923
40 Fire Station #5 $4,058,025
42 Fire Station #7 $3,177,161
Fire Station
39 Fire Station #4 $2,958,626
38 Fire Station #2 $1,835,693
41 Fire Station #6 $1,815,521
Fire Training Centre 43 Fire Dept. Training Center $1,946,641
Market Square 19 Market Square Facilities $194,150,586
Office - Parks 50 Leisure Services Offices $3,362,075
Office - Police 25 Police Headquarters $44,379,390
Office - Water 72 Spruce Lake House $144,529
Office - Works 22 Municipal Operations Complex $8,584,749
54 Rainbow Park $3,808,096
45 Forest Hill Canteen $2,255,280
46 Rockwood Golf Country Club $1,849,141
44 Flemming Court Splash Pad $693,153
48 Lancaster Memorial Clubhouse $299,253
Outdoor Recreation 99 Lancaster Memorial Softball Field Scorers Booth $205,730
96 Allison Grounds Washrooms $201,698
98 Fallsview Park Washrooms $173,239
97 Dominion Park Clubhouse/Canteen $102,450
101 Lancaster Memorial Hardball Field Scorers Booth $85,262
100 Lancaster Memorial Storage Building $71,377
Parking Garage 210 Carlton Street Garage $30,507,773
47 Rockwood Park Interpretation Center $806,898
108 Rockwood Park Horse barn $418,060
107 Rockwood Park A Frame $404,791
78 Public Gardens Maintenance Building $201,482
110 Fort Howe Blockhouse $190,155
Parks
103 Kings Square Bandstand $139,586
75 Dominion Park Storage Building $98,726
109 Tilley Square Bandstand $75,598
104 Public Gardens Greenhouse A $61,647
105 Public Gardens Greenhouse B $61,647
32 of 39
106Public Gardens Greenhouse C$60,216
79 Rockwood Park Storage Building $55,865
55 Saint Patrick Street Pedway $4,558,637
57 TD Station Pedway $4,311,861
35 City Market Pedway $1,463,981
Pedway
33 Aquatic Center Pedway $1,452,416
51 Mercantile Pedway $903,726
34 Chipman Hill Pedway $685,863
Pool & Swimming 2 Canada Games Aquatic Centre $44,011,800
TD Station 12 TD Station $125,730,846
Tourism Building 66 Barbour's General Store $790,636
Transit Building 31 Transit Building $39,905,198
Visitor Information Centre 179 Tourist Information Centre West $1,099,228
33 of 39
APPENDIX 4
ESTIMATED USEFUL LIVES
34 of 39
Asset Type Estimated Useful Life (years) Notes
Watermains Copper = 40 Lined pipes have an EUL of 40
years
Asbestos Cement = 60
Brass = 60
Cast Iron = 80
Concrete = 80
Concrete Pressure Pipe = 80
Cross-Linked Polyethylene (PEXa) = 80
Ductile Iron = 80
High Density Polyethylene = 80
Polyvinyl Chloride = 80
Stainless Steel = 80
Steel = 40
Unknown = 80
Water and All = 40
Sewer Large
Diameter
Valves
Pressure Electrical = 20 Based on TCA amortization period
Reducing
Mechanical = 30
Valves
Structure = 40
Sanitary and Polyvinyl Chloride = 80
Combined
Concrete = 80
Gravity Sewers
Terracotta = 60
Sanitary
Asbestos Cement = 60
Forcemains
Corrugated Steel = 40
Storm Sewers
Ductile Iron = 80
Perforated Polyvinyl Chloride = 80
Cast Iron = 60
Brick = 40
Polyethylene = 80
High Density Polyethylene = 80
Stainless Steel = 80
Wood = 80
Steel = 80
Aluminum = 80
Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene = 80
Unknown = 80
Water and Combination of TCA amortization
Varies by asset type.
Wastewater
Facilities for facilities which have
undergone a condition
assessment
35 of 39
Asset Type Estimated Useful Life (years) Notes
Culverts Concrete = 80
Plastic = 60
Metal = 40
Wood = 40
Unknown = 60
Roads Local = 27
Rural = 27
Commercial Local = 20
Urban Collector = 20
Rural Collector = 20
Major Arterial = 16
Minor Arterial = 16
Unknown = 27
Sidewalks Concrete = 80
Asphalt = 25
Brick = 80
Cobblestone = 40
Miscellaneous = 40
Curbs Ranges from 12 to 80 years Based on TCA amortization period
Retaining Walls Allan Block = 80
Amour Rock Embankment = 80
Concrete Block = 80
Concrete Crib = 80
Concrete Curb = 80
Concrete Formed = 80
Concrete Lego = 80
Granite Block = 80
Granite Curb = 80
Serrascape = 40
Stone = 40
Timber = 40
Gabion = 30
Streetlights Fixture = 20
Pole = 40
Foundation = 40
Traffic Signals Structure = 40
Electrical = 40
Controller = 20
Signal Head = 10
Detector = 10
Parking Meters All = 10
Guiderails All = 50
36 of 39
Asset Type Estimated Useful Life (years) Notes
Trails Paved = 20 Dirt trails excluded from analysis
Wood = 20
Gravel = 10
Stone = 40
Outdoor Parks Varies by asset type.
and Recreation
Based on TCA amortization
SWM Ponds All = 50
period.
Fleet and Heavy Equipment = 12 Some individual assets may vary.
Equipment Most common EULs presented.
Heavy Trucks = 12
Light Equipment = 5
Light Trucks = 5
Sedans = 5
SJFD Heavy Ladder = 20
SJFD Heavy Pumper = 15
SJFD Heavy Tanker = 15
SJFD Light Truck = 10
SJFD Sedan = 7
SJPF Light Truck = 5
SJPF Sedan = 3
Trailers = 5
Municipal Varies by asset type. Combination of TCA amortization
Buildings
for facilities which have
undergone a condition
assessment
Based on TCA amortization
Misc. Varies by asset type.
period.
SCADA
Landfills
IT
Equipment
PSCC
Harbour
Passage
Parking Lots
Sea Wall
Bus
Shelters
37 of 39
APPENDIX 5
CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE
38 of 39
Asset Type Consequence of Failure Rating Notes
Watermains Water Distribution:
<= 300mm = 2
> 300mm = 3
Water Transmission:
<= 400 = 3
> 400 = 4
Water and Sewer
All = 4
Large Diameter
Valves
Pressure
Electrical = 3
Reducing Valves
Mechanical = 3
Structural = 4
Sanitary and <= 600mm = 2
Combined Gravity
> 600mm = 3
Sewers
Sanitary <= 200mm = 2
Forcemains
200-500mm = 3
> 500mm = 4
Storm Sewers <= 300mm = 2
300-600mm = 3
> 600mm = 4
Water and Varies by asset type.
Wastewater
Facilities
Culverts Cross = 3
Cross Twin = 3
Driveway = 1
Driveway Extended = 1
Open Storm = 3
Unknown = 3
Roads Local = 2
Rural = 1
Commercial Local = 3
Urban Collector = 3
Rural Collector = 2
Major Arterial = 4
Minor Arterial = 4
Unknown = 2
Sidewalks All = 2
Curbs All = 1
39 of 39
Asset Type Consequence of Failure Rating Notes
Retaining Walls Road = 4
Road Culvert Headwall = 4
Sidewalk = 4
Sidewalk and Street = 4
Street = 4
Street and Median = 4
Street Embankment = 4
Walkway = 4
Other = 2
Streetlights Fixtures = 1
Poles = 3
Foundation = 3
Traffic Signals All = 3
Parking Meters All = 1
Guiderails All = 4
Trails All = 2
Outdoor Parks Varies by asset type.
and Recreation
SWM Ponds All = 3
Fleet and
SJFD Heavy Pumper = 3
Equipment
SJFD Heavy Ladder = 3
SJFD Heavy Tanker = 3
SJFD Sedan = 2
Light Truck = 2
SJFD Light Truck = 2
SJPF Patrol Sedan = 2
Sedans = 2
SJPF Patrol Light Truck = 2
Heavy Equipment = 2
Heavy Trucks = 2
Trailers = 2
Light Equipment = 1
Municipal
Varies by asset type.
Buildings
Misc. SCADA = 4
Landfills = 4
SCADA
IT Equipment = 2
Landfills
PSCC = 5
IT Equipment
Harbour Passage = 2
PSCC
Parking Lots = 1
Harbour
Passage
Sea Wall = 5
Parking Lots
Bus Shelters = 1
Sea Wall
Bus Shelters
ŷĻ/źƷǤƚŅ{ğźƓƷWƚŷƓ
ЋЉЋЎDĻƓĻƩğƌCǒƓķ5ƩğŅƷhƦĻƩğƷźƓŭ.ǒķŭĻƷ
ЋЉЋЎЋЉЋЍ
.ǒķŭĻƷ.ǒķŭĻƷ
υυ
wĻǝĻƓǒĻƭ
PropertyTaxes156,979,105150,579,477
PILTAdjustment
Equalization&UnconditionalGrant12,773,57913,773,579
RegionalServicesGrant1,006,9971,009,640
Surplus2ndYearPreviousYear272,8582,335,841
TransferfromOperatingReserves841,0001,330,000
Growth&CommunityServices7,005,6504,505,063
PublicWorks&TransportationServices6,683,0796,378,970
PublicSafetyServices2,708,3131,992,113
Utilities&InfrastructureServices340,635316,000
StrategicServices4,515,9824,380,000
SaintJohnEnergyBenefits1,000,0001,200,000
ƚƷğƌwĻǝĻƓǒĻƭ 194,127,197187,800,682
9ǣƦĻƓķźƷǒƩĻƭ
Growth&CommunityServices22,580,10519,451,789
PublicWorks&TransportationServices48,856,05647,707,866
PublicSafetyServices65,372,90262,044,482
Utilities&InfrastructureServices5,403,3625,106,674
StrategicServices8,661,9558,610,102
CorporateServices8,350,5688,295,166
OtherCharges34,902,24936,584,604
ƚƷğƌ9ǣƦĻƓķźƷǒƩĻƭ 194,127,197187,800,682
Surplus(Deficit)
/źƷǤƚŅ{ğźƓƷWƚŷƓĬǤ{ĻƩǝźĭĻ
ЋЉЋЎDĻƓĻƩğƌCǒƓķ5ƩğŅƷhƦĻƩğƷźƓŭ.ǒķŭĻƷ
ЋЉЋЎЋЉЋЍ
.ǒķŭĻƷ.ǒķŭĻƷ
υυ
Growth&CommunityServices
Salaries7,082,1576,207,974
Goods&Services15,497,94813,243,814
TOTAL22,580,10519,451,789
PublicWorks&TransportationServices
Salaries17,912,38617,780,854
Goods&Services30,943,66929,927,012
TOTAL48,856,05647,707,866
PublicSafetyServices
Salaries53,373,39450,274,346
Goods&Services11,999,50811,770,136
TOTAL65,372,90262,044,482
Utilities&InfrastructureServices
Salaries3,253,6733,184,021
Goods&Services2,149,6891,922,653
TOTAL5,403,3625,106,674
StrategicServices
Salaries4,318,0144,353,217
Goods&Services4,343,9414,256,885
TOTAL8,661,9558,610,102
CorporateServices
Salaries5,985,9515,740,434
Goods&Services2,364,6172,554,732
TOTAL8,350,5688,295,166
OtherCharges
Goods&Services34,902,24936,584,604
34,902,24936,584,604
TOTALEXPENDITURES194,127,197187,800,682
ŷĻ/źƷǤƚŅ{ğźƓƷWƚŷƓ
ЋЉЋЎDĻƓĻƩğƌCǒƓķ5ƩğŅƷhƦĻƩğƷźƓŭ.ǒķŭĻƷ
ЋЉЋЎЋЉЋЍ
.ǒķŭĻƷ.ǒķŭĻƷ
υυ
wĻǝĻƓǒĻƭ
PropertyTaxes156,979,105150,579,477
PILTAdjustment
Equalization&UnconditionalGrant12,773,57913,773,579
RegionalServicesGrant1,006,9971,009,640
Surplus2ndYearPreviousYear272,8582,335,841
TransferfromOperatingReserves841,0001,330,000
Growth&CommunityServices7,005,6504,505,063
PublicWorks&TransportationServices6,683,0796,378,970
PublicSafetyServices2,708,3131,992,113
Utilities&InfrastructureServices340,635316,000
StrategicServices4,515,9824,380,000
SaintJohnEnergyBenefits1,000,0001,200,000
ƚƷğƌwĻǝĻƓǒĻƭ 194,127,197187,800,682
9ǣƦĻƓķźƷǒƩĻƭ
DƩƚǞƷŷε/ƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ
Growth&CommunityPlanningServices1,680,2621,826,081
DevelopmentEngineering391,301369,657
CommunityDevelopment528,505783,064
AnimalControl120,000109,250
DangerousandVacantBuildingProgram278,451468,954
MinimumPropertyStandards506,125492,521
HeritageConservationService207,018202,480
OtherByLaws297,552297,303
Permitting&InspectionServices1,459,8501,412,306
y3,087,5003,087,500
RegionalEconomicDevelopmentAgenc
MarketSquare2,500,0002,250,000
SaintJohnTrade&ConventionCentre156,543317,066
ImperialTheatre322,021308,048
SaintJohnAquaticCentre423,225421,418
SaintJohnArtsCentre128,549195,223
TDStation502,796491,949
Library544,839489,909
CityMarket1,316,6291,188,449
ŷĻ/źƷǤƚŅ{ğźƓƷWƚŷƓ
ЋЉЋЎDĻƓĻƩğƌCǒƓķ5ƩğŅƷhƦĻƩğƷźƓŭ.ǒķŭĻƷ
ЋЉЋЎ
ЋЉЋЍ
.ǒķŭĻƷ.ǒķŭĻƷ
υυ
Growth&CommunityServices(Continued)
Arts&CultureBoard70,00070,000
PROKids243,677175,057
LocalImmigrationPartnership62,83193,785
CarletonCommunityCenter193,167190,700
r45,00045,000
LochLomondCommunityCente
NorthEndCommunityCenter193,167190,313
RecreationProgramming1,222,380720,239
NeighbourhoodDevelopment172,000172,000
YMCAContractedServices155,564157,560
BoysandGirlsClubContractedServices144,181145,887
UnspecifiedGrants234,000284,000
AffordableHousingStrategy197,583217,660
Lifeguards233,908199,410
PlaySJ45,00045,000
LordBeaverbrookRink171,209167,764
BuildingIncentiveReserve350,000350,000
RegionalServicesCommission554,438343,299
CommunityServicesReserve558,266
HousingAcceleratorProgram2,731,253
GrowthDepartment709,579614,671
SaintJohnIndustrialParks400,000
ƚƷğƌDƩƚǞƷŷε/ƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ5ĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ 22,580,10519,451,789
tǒĬƌźĭ{ğŅĻƷǤ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ
FireRescueandSuppressionService25,278,93824,270,386
FireTraining3,00010,437
TechnicalRescueResponse47,48952,119
HazardousMaterials61,41774,774
FirePrevention970,571930,494
FireInvestigation67,74368,548
EmergencyManagementServices330,971356,233
WaterSupplyandHydrants2,500,0002,500,000
3,205,1183,184,017
PublicSafetyCommunicationsCentre
StreetLighting1,210,0001,060,000
SaintJohnPoliceCommission31,697,65429,537,474
ƚƷğƌtǒĬƌźĭ{ğŅĻƷǤ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ 65,372,90262,044,482
ŷĻ/źƷǤƚŅ{ğźƓƷWƚŷƓ
ЋЉЋЎDĻƓĻƩğƌCǒƓķ5ƩğŅƷhƦĻƩğƷźƓŭ.ǒķŭĻƷ
ЋЉЋЎ
ЋЉЋЍ
.ǒķŭĻƷ.ǒķŭĻƷ
υυ
tǒĬƌźĭƚƩƉƭεƩğƓƭƦƚƩƷğƷźƚƓ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ
SnowControlStreets5,568,9265,592,712
StreetCleaning1,656,6771,641,956
UtilityCuts1,227,6681,506,716
StreetServicesSurfaceMaintenance8,608,2648,445,799
SnowControlSidewalk1,202,0211,158,927
SidewalkMaintenance945,091913,129
Pedestrian&TrafficManagementService2,488,8372,555,863
SolidWasteManagement4,152,8944,082,708
LandscapeParks&OpenSpaces2,742,2412,182,304
k487,793527,829
RockwoodPar
UrbanForestry402,604414,439
SaintJohnHorticulturalAssociation60,00060,000
ArenaOperation&Maintenance1,497,2751,501,504
SportsfieldOperation&Maintenance1,406,7961,294,245
OtherFacilitiesOperation&Maintenance522,987461,845
TransitDebt1,411,0001,609,000
TransitSubsidy7,405,1726,651,541
FleetStockroom279,373363,333
StormwaterUrban/Rural4,311,5304,049,981
ParkingAdministration971,024953,960
PeelPlazaParkingGarage332,673405,697
MarketSquareParkingGarage169,538154,283
OffStreetParking1,005,6701,180,095
ƚƷğƌtǒĬƌźĭƚƩƉƭεƩğƓƭƦƚƩƷğƷźƚƓ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ 48,856,05647,707,866
Љ
ŷĻ/źƷǤƚŅ{ğźƓƷWƚŷƓ
.ǒķŭĻƷ
ЋЉЋЎDĻƓĻƩğƌCǒƓķ5ƩğŅƷhƦĻƩğƷźƓŭ.ǒķŭĻƷ
ЋЉЋЎЋЉЋЍ
.ǒķŭĻƷ.ǒķŭĻƷ
υυ
ƷźƌźƷźĻƭεLƓŅƩğƭƷƩǒĭƷǒƩĻ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ
Engineering1,406,9351,388,105
CarpenterShop404,336400,977
FacilitiesManagement1,763,0701,633,135
CityHallBuilding1,089,1231,021,696
GIS517,550442,364
Stockroom222,347220,396
ƚƷğƌ ƷźƌźƷźĻƭεLƓŅƩğƭƷƩǒĭƷǒƩĻ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ 5,403,3625,106,674
{ƷƩğƷĻŭźĭ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ
Finance1,422,6461,413,726
Assessment1,855,8681,837,897
SupplyChainManagement449,811446,624
InformationTechnology3,946,5683,782,930
CorporatePlanning263,735337,961
Insurance153,328215,965
LiabilityInsurance570,000575,000
ƚƷğƌ{ƷƩğƷĻŭźĭ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ 8,661,9558,610,102
/ƚƩƦƚƩğƷĻ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ
CityManager'sOffice808,249759,584
Mayor'sOffice218,638161,579
CommonCouncil583,959593,458
CommonClerk737,800742,413
HumanResources2,801,6782,379,426
LegalDepartment1,302,1421,150,316
RealEstate185,699186,004
SaintJohnIndustrialParks583,501
CustomerService956,699993,065
CorporateCommunications567,275527,882
ExternalRelations188,430217,937
ƚƷğƌ/ƚƩƦƚƩğƷĻ{ĻƩǝźĭĻƭ 8,350,5688,295,166
hƷŷĻƩ/ŷğƩŭĻƭ
FiscalCharges14,190,99915,420,430
LandfillClosure300,000300,000
SpecialPensionContributions10,611,25010,225,000
OtherMisc.Expenses/PILTAdjustment48,453
TransfertoCapital/OperatingReserves3,000,0003,790,721
CapitalfromOperating6,800,0006,800,000
ƚƷğƌhƷŷĻƩ/ŷğƩŭĻƭ 34,902,24936,584,604
ƚƷğƌ9ǣƦĻƓķźƷǒƩĻƭ 194,127,197187,800,682
{ǒƩƦƌǒƭΛ5ĻŅźĭźƷΜ
Service Outcomes
Activity Outputs
Budget Inputs
Services
The Community Development Service provides neighbourhood residents with tools and support to build resilient, healthy communities. It promotes and delivers community based projects and
programs that contribute to sustainable neighbourhoods and healthy communities through facilitation, partnerships, and access to City facilities. The service works with neighbourhood
groups and associations to obtain the funding to help ensure that a variety of opportunities are accessible and inclusive for all citizens.
TBD
Performance Measure
28.5
capacityinquiries
Bus stop
population
Revenue per cost: $0.45
Expense per rider: $5.34
60 Minutes - on time 85%30 Minutes - on time 85%
Service Level and Target
Cost per vehicle hour: $106.78
1250 Metres - within 85% of the
1600 Metres - within 800 metres
43 Seats - 130% of available seating
30 Minutes / 60 Minutes - on time 85%
15 Minutes / 30 Minutes - on time 85%
85% of the population within 800m of a
Ratio of annual ridership per population:
72 Hours - 90% of the time for non-urgent
SJAAC
$106.78OptiBus
CAD / AVL
Fleet Fit Up
20.57 / 24.5
of a Bus stop
Stantec Report
1,900,000 Kms
2,100,000 Rides
Collective Agreement
population: 27.75 / 28.5
2024 Activity Projected
Federal Application - CPTF
Ratio of annual ridership per
101,145 Annual Service Hours
Revenue per cost: $0.35 / $0.35Expense per rider: $5.73 / $5.34
Riders per revenue service hour: Cost per vehicle hour: $117.96 / Masabi - eFare Program Phase II
85% of the population within 800m
Technology
People and Process
22.4
TransitApp
Fare Policy
Fleet Fit Up
Stantec Report
1,937,659 Rides
population: 25.5
2023 Activity Actual
1,649,665 Kms driven
of a Bus stop - Achieved Revenue per cost: $0.43Expense per rider: $5.66
Federal Application - ZETF
Ratio of annual ridership per
86,509 Annual Service Hours
Spare App - On Demand Service
Cost per vehicle hour: $126.75
Riders per revenue service hour: Masabi - eFare Program Phase 1
85% of the population within 800m
Routes
Financials.
department.
Activity Measure
Bus Stops - Distance
Customer Service - Response
Peak Demand Capacity - Riders
Major Routes Location - Distance
Ridership Measurement - CAD/AVLMeasurement - CAD/AVL - OptiBusExpenses reported from Financials
On Demand Route Frequency - 3 Zones
Feeder Line Routes Frequency - 9 Routes
Driven Measurement - CAD/AVL - OptiBus
Service Hours collected electronically and
Currently manual - Canadian Urban Transit
compared to Population reported by Growth
compared to Revenue reported on Financials
Extra Line Routes Frequency (Peak) - 2 Routes
Revenue compared to Expenses reported from
Currently manual. 2025 - Automate Kilometers
Association (CUTA) multiplier. 2025 - Automate Main Line Route Frequency (Peak / Off Peak) - 3
compared to Expenses reported from Financials
Currently manual. 2025 - Automate Service Hour
Automated Ridership collected electronically and Automated Ridership collected electronically and
Manual Measurement - GIS and Validated Annually
Ridership collected electronically and compared to
$10,847,751.28
2024 Total Operating Budget
$4,196,210.38
2024 Revenue
2024 Subsidy
$6,651,541.00
$6,823,669.05
2024 Goods & Services
$4,024,082.23
2024 Wages & Benefits
81
2024 FTEs
Transit Service - 7 days per Week
The City of Saint John
2025 Utility Fund Draft Operating Budget
20252024
BudgetBudget
$$
Expenditures
Drinking Water Service
Watershed Management879,878 676,221
Water Treatment 9,577,589 9,122,364
Water Pumping & Storage 1,256,360 1,244,612
Transmission & Distribution 4,623,509 4,491,783
Customer Metering707,125 712,794
Internal Charges470,000 465,000
Other Charges575,142 562,486
Debt Servicing 3,275,335 3,676,774
T
Transfer to Capital Reserves180,673 -
Capital from Operating 4,293,658 1,715,622
F
Total Drinking Water Service25,839,26922,667,655
Wastewater Service
Wastewater Pumping 3,318,003 3,314,762
A
Wastewater Collection 3,368,216 3,110,344
Wastewater Treatment 6,046,572 6,225,206
Internal Charges470,000 465,000
R
Other Charges575,142 562,486
Debt Servicing 2,746,973 2,959,598
Transfer to Capital Reserves180,672 -
D
Capital from Operating 3,833,343 3,825,134
Total Wastewater Service20,538,91920,462,530
Infrastructure Management
Engineering Services 861,410 837,531
Total Expenditures47,239,59843,967,716
1
The City of Saint John
2025 Utility Fund Draft Operating Budget
20252024
BudgetBudget
$$
Revenues
Flat Rate Accounts 21,883,500 22,250,000
Meter Rate Accounts 19,229,500 15,732,057
Fire Protection Levy 2,500,000 2,500,000
Storm Sewer Levy 1,000,000 945,000
Other Revenues 1,692,000 1,455,581
Transfer from Reserves 750,000 750,000
Previous Year's Surplus 184,598 335,078
Total Revenues 47,239,598 43,967,716
T
Annual Flat Rate - Water and Sewerage $1,428$1,428
Meter Rates:/Cu.m.
F
Block 1 - First 100$1.9940$1.9940
Block 2 - Excess of 100$1.2700$1.2700
A
NOTE: Sewer Surcharge 80.35% of Water Charge
R
D
2