2019 City Wide Development Charges Background Study

2019 City-Wide Development Charges Background Study

Version for Public Consultation

HEMSON C o n s u l t i n g L t d.

March 15, 2019 Table of Contents

List of Acronyms ...... 1 Executive Summary ...... 2 A. Purpose of 2019 Development Charges (DC) Background Study .. 2 B. City-Wide and Area-Specific DCs Have Been Calculated ...... 3 C. Development Forecast ...... 4 D. Public Transit Ridership Forecast ...... 5 E. Calculated Development Charges ...... 5 F. Cost of Growth Analysis ...... 6 G. Development Charges Administration & Policy Considerations ...... 7 I Purpose of 2019 Development Charges Background Study ...... 8 A. Introduction and Background ...... 8 B. Legislative Context ...... 9 C. The 2019 DC Study is Intended to be an Interim Update ...... 9 D. Consultation And Approval Process ...... 9 E. Key Steps In Determining DCs for Future Development-Related Projects ...... 10 F. Long-Term Capital and Operating Impacts and Asset Management Plan Legislative Requirements ...... 15 G. Specific Requirements for Public Transit Services ...... 16 II City-Wide and Area-Specific Development Charges are Proposed 18 A. Proposed Methodology Aligns Development-Related Costs and Benefits ...... 18 B. City-Wide and Area-Specific Development Charges are Calculated ...... 18 III Development Forecast & Public Transit Ridership Forecast ...... 21 A. Applicable Planning Horizons and Benefitting Periods ...... 21 B. Key Assumptions ...... 21 C. Residential and Non-Residential Development Forecast ...... 21 D. Public Transit Ridership Forecast ...... 24 IV Summary of Historical Service Levels for Applicable Services ...... 25 V The Development-Related Capital Forecast and Planned Level of Service for Public Transit Services ...... 28 A. A Development-Related Capital Forecast is Provided for Council’s Approval ...... 28 B. Planned Level of Service for Public Transit ...... 28 C. The Development-Related Capital Forecast for All City Services . 29 VI Calculated Development Charges ...... 32

HEMSON A. Overview of Development Charges Calculations ...... 32 B. Total DC Recoverable Share of the Net Capital Forecast ...... 32 C. City-Wide Residential ($/Capita) and Non-Residential ($/Square Metre) DCs ...... 34 D. Proposed Development Charges: City-Wide and Area-Specific Residential and Non-Residential DCs (IGB, OGB and Rural) ...... 34 E. Comparison of Proposed and Existing DCs for City-Wide and Area- Specific DCs (IGB, OGB and Rural)...... 43 F. Calculated Area-Specific DCs: Special Area Charges ...... 43 VII Cost of Growth Analysis ...... 50 A. Public Transit ...... 50 B. All Other Services (Excluding Public Transit) ...... 50 C. Projects are Deemed to be Financially Sustainable ...... 51 VIII Development Charges Administration & Policy Considerations .... 52 A. Development Charges Consultation and Approval Process ...... 52 B. City-Wide vs. Area-Specific Charges ...... 52 C. Other Policy Considerations ...... 52 D. Summary of Preliminary Recommendations ...... 53

HEMSON List of Appendices

A.1 Development Forecast ...... 55 A.2 Public Transit Ridership Forecast ...... 88 B. Public Transit Technical Appendix ...... 97 C.1 Protection ...... 115 C.2 Parks Development ...... 130 C.3 Recreation Facilities ...... 141 C.4 Libraries ...... 152 C.5 Paramedic Services ...... 163 C.6 Affordable Housing ...... 175 C.7 Corporate Studies ...... 183 D.1 Millennium Park (District Park) ...... 194 D.2 Village of Manotick (Sanitary Sewer & Water) ...... 201 D.3 Village of Richmond (Sanitary Sewer) ...... 214 D.4 Provence Avenue (Sanitary Sewer & Roads) ...... 223 D.5 Flag Station Road (Roads) ...... 231 D.6 Trillium Line Extension (Public Transit) ...... 239 E.1 Roads and Related ...... 252 E.2 Sanitary (Waste Water) ...... 275 E.3 Water ...... 286 E.4 Stormwater Drainage ...... 296 F. Reserve Fund Balances ...... 302 G. Public Transit Services Cost of Growth Analysis ...... 307 H. Cost of Growth Analysis – All Services Excluding Public Transit ...... 344 I. 2019 Draft DC By-law (Available Under Separate Cover) ...... 394

HEMSON 1

I LIST OF ACRONYMS

AMP Asset Management Plan

BTE Benefit to Existing

BRT Bus Rapid Transit

COG Cost of Growth

DCA Development Charges Act

DC Development Charges

LRT Light Rapid Transit

LRFP Long Range Financial Plan

IGB Inside the Greenbelt

IMP Infrastructure Master Plan

OGB Outside the Greenbelt

PPB Post-period Benefit

PPU Persons Per Unit

SWM Stormwater Management

TMP Transportation Master Plan

HEMSON 2

Executive Summary

A. Purpose of 2019 Development Charges (DC) Background Study

1. Legislative Context

This City of Ottawa 2019 City-wide Development Charges (DC) Background Study (herein referred to at the “2019 DC Study”) is presented as part of the process to lead to the approval of new DC by-laws in compliance with the Development Charges Act, 1997 (DCA). The study is prepared in accordance with the DCA and associated regulations, including the amendments that came into force on January 1, 2016.

2. The 2019 City-wide DC Background Study is intended to be an Interim Update

The analysis contained herein is generally consistent with the projects and calculation methodologies included in the 2014 and 2017 DC Background Studies. The City has not completed a comprehensive update to the 2013 Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and Infrastructure Master Plan (IMP), and as such the capital costs and development forecasts are generally consistent with these documents which were used as the basis for the City’s past DC Background Studies.

It is anticipated that the City’s next DC Background Study will be completed once relevant master plans and capital planning documents have been updated.

3. Key Steps in Determining Future Development-Related Projects

In accordance with the DCA and associated regulation, several key steps are required to calculate development charges. This includes preparing a development forecast, establishing historical service levels, determining the increase needs for services arising from development and appropriate shares of costs, attribution to development types (i.e. residential and non-residential). For some services, the final adjustment to the calculated rate of a cash flow analysis.

4. DC Eligible and Ineligible Costs

Development charges are intended to pay for the initial round of capital costs needed to service new development over an identified planning period. This is based on the overlaying principle that “growth pays for growth”. However, the DCA and associated regulation includes several statutory adjustments and

HEMSON 3

deductions that prevent these costs from fully being recovered by growth. Such adjustments include, but are not limited to, ineligible costs, including operating and maintenance costs; ineligible services, including, tourism facilities, parkland acquisition, etc.; statutory ten per cent discount for “soft” or general services; deductions for costs that exceed historical service level caps; and statutory exemptions for specific uses (i.e. industrial expansions).

5. The Development-Related Capital Forecast is Subject to Change

It is recommended that Council adopt the development-related capital forecast developed for the purposes of the 2019 DC Study. However, it is recognized that the 2019 DC Study is a point-in-time analysis and is subject to changes in project timing, scope, and costs through the City’s capital budgeting review process and in conjunction with the affordable funding envelopes

B. City-wide and Area-Specific DCs have been Calculated

Consistent with the City’s historical practices, both City-wide and area-specific DCs have been calculated. The City has four primary benefiting areas: City- wide, Inside the Greenbelt (IGB), Outside the Greenbelt (OGB) and Rural as well as six special area charges. An overview of the services included in each of these areas is identified below.

1. City-wide Development Charges

 Roads and Related Services  Parks Development  Sanitary (Waste Water)  Recreation Facilities  Water  Libraries  Stormwater Drainage  Paramedic Services  Protection  Affordable Housing  Public Transit  Corporate Studies

2. Area-Specific Development Charges: Inside Greenbelt, Outside Greenbelt and Rural

 Roads and Related Services  Parks Development  Sanitary (Waste Water)  Recreation Facilities  Water  Libraries  Protection  Corporate Studies  Public Transit

3. Area-Specific Development Charges: Special Area Charges

HEMSON

 Millennium Park (District  Provence Ave (Roads & Parks) Sanitary Sewer)  Village of Manotick (Sanitary  Flag Station Road (Roads) Sewer & Water)  Trillium Line Extension  Village of Richmond (Public Transit) (Sanitary Sewer)

C. Development Forecast

1. City-wide Residential and Non-Residential

The table below provides a summary of the anticipated residential and non- residential growth over the 2019-2029 and 2029-2031 planning periods. The development forecast is further discussed in Appendix A.1. The forecast is expressed in mid-year estimates.

General Services Engineered Services 2019 mid-2019 to mid-2029 mid-2029 to 2031 Development Forecast Estimate Total at Total at Growth Growth 2029 2031

Residential Development Forecast Total Occupied Dwelling Units 425,126 59,102 484,228 71,874 497,000 Population In New Dwellings 149,110 181,332

Total Population City Population 996,294 115,000 1,111,294 139,546 1,135,840

Non-Residential Development Forecast

Employment 616,700 74,000 690,700 86,300 703,000

Non-Residential Building Space (sq.m.) 3,261,733 3,803,862 Non-Residential Building Space (sq.ft) 35,109,000 40,944,430

2. Area-Specific: Inside Greenbelt, Outside Greenbelt and Rural

A summary of the area-specific forecasts for IGB, OGB and Rural areas is presented in Appendix A.1. Additional information on the Rural serviced and unserviced areas are also included in Appendix A.1.

3. Area-Specific: Special Area Charges

A summary of the area-specific forecasts for each of the City’s identified special area charges is presented in Appendix D.

HEMSON

D. Public Transit Ridership Forecast

For the purposes of the Public Transit services development charges calculation, a ridership forecast for the 2011 to 2036 planning period was completed. The ridership forecast represents an increase in AM peak period person trips. The ridership forecast is further discussed in Appendix A.2.

Person Trip Projections, AM Peak Period 700,000

600,000 615,100 587,600 500,000 569,200 477,500 477,400 400,000 2031 = 23.0% 300,000 2034 = 23.6% 2011 = 21.5% 2029 = 22.6% Estimated Trips 200,000 2019 = 20.2% 145,000 100,000 135,300 102,500 96,400 128,800 0 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Horizon year Total Person Trips

E. Calculated Development Charges

The following tables summarize the proposed residential and non-residential DCs for Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural serviced and unserviced areas. The rates presented for these areas are inclusive of the calculated City-wide DCs.

Residential Apartment Dwelling, Back to Area Single and Semi- Multiple, Row and Apartment (less Back and Stacked detached Mobile Dwelling than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms) Inside the Greenbelt$ 31,014 $ 24,800 $ 17,126 $ 12,176 Outside the Greenbelt$ 36,691 $ 28,761 $ 19,708 $ 14,009 Rural - Serviced$ 26,620 $ 20,741 $ 14,438 $ 10,265 Rural - Unserviced$ 24,251 $ 18,871 $ 13,154 $ 9,352

HEMSON

Non-Residential

Area Industrial Non-Industrial Industrial Non-Industrial (per square foot) (per square foot) (per square metre) (per square metre)

Inside the Greenbelt$ 10.23 $ 25.57 $ 109.95 $ 275.26 Outside the Greenbelt $ 10.23 $ 25.57 $ 109.95 $ 275.26 Rural - Serviced $ 10.23 $ 25.57 $ 109.95 $ 275.26 Rural - Unserviced $ 9.26 $ 23.20 $ 99.56 $ 249.68

F. Cost of Growth Analysis

On overview of the long-term capital and operating costs as well as the asset management-related annual provisions for capital facilities and infrastructure to be included in the DC by-law is provided in the 2019 DC Study. This examination is required as one of the provisions of the DCA. Additional details on the cost of growth analysis, including asset management analysis, for Public Transit services is included in Appendix G. The analysis for all other services is included in Appendix H.

1. Public Transit Services

The City of Ottawa evaluates the fiscal impacts of capital works including an examination of the full range of costs – initial capital, operating and the long- term repair, maintenance and replacement of infrastructure. A detailed analysis of the asset management and financial strategies for the various transit asset groups is described in detail in Appendix G.

The analysis concludes that the City can afford to invest and operate transit infrastructure over the ten-year and long-term planning period. Importantly, the City’s ongoing asset management and Long Range Financial Plans will ensure that the projects included in the 2019 DC Study are financially sustainable over their full life cycle.

2. All Other Services

The calculated annual provisions identified are also considered to be financially sustainable as it is expected that the increased capital asset management requirements can be absorbed by the tax and user base over the long-term.

Appendix H summarizes the relevant City documents and asset management requirements for these services.

HEMSON

G. Development Charges Administration & Policy Considerations

1. Consultation and Approval Process

It is intended that following the release of the 2019 DC Study, consultation will continue with the public and development industry stakeholders prior to the passage of the new 2019 DC By-laws in spring 2019.

2. City-wide vs Area-Specific DCs

As required by the Development Charges Act (DCA), consideration was given to the use of area rating. Consistent with the City’s historical practice, the infrastructure identified for the majority of general and engineered services has been calculated on both a City-wide and area-specific basis. However, categories relating to Public Transit, Affordable Housing, Paramedic Services and Stormwater Drainage are only calculated on a City-wide basis.

3. Local Service Guidelines

The provision of local services is considered to be a direct developer responsibility under s.59 of the DCA and will (or may) be recovered under other agreement(s) with the landowner or developer. Local Service Guidelines for infrastructure identified in the 2019 DC Study is based on the City’s prevailing practices.

4. 2019 Draft DC By-laws Available Under Separate Cover

The new 2019 DC by-laws will be made available under separate cover at least two weeks in advance of the statutory public meeting in accordance with the requirements of the DCA.

HEMSON

I Purpose of 2019 Development Charges Background Study

A. Introduction and Background

The 2019 City-wide DC Background Study (herein referred to as the 2019 DC Study) for Ottawa is presented as part of the process to lead to the approval of new DC by-laws in compliance with the DCA. The DCA and O. Reg. 82/98 require that a DC Background Study be prepared with reference to:

 A forecast of the amount, type and location of housing units, population and non-residential development anticipated in the City;

 The average capital service levels provided in the City over the ten- year period immediately preceding the preparation of the background study;

 A review of capital works in progress and anticipated future capital projects, including an analysis of gross expenditures, funding sources, and net expenditures incurred or to be incurred by the City or its local boards to provide for the expected development, including the determination of the growth and non-development-related components of the capital projects; and

 An examination of the long-term capital and operating costs for the capital infrastructure required for each service to which the DC by-laws would relate.

The 2019 DC Study presents the results of the review which determines the development-related net capital costs attributable to development that is forecast to occur in the community. These development-related net capital costs are then apportioned among various types of development (residential and non-residential) in a manner that reflects the increase in the need for each service attributable to each type of development. The 2019 DC Study ultimately arrives, therefore, at proposed DCs for various types of development.

The DCA provides for a period of public review and comment regarding the proposed DCs. The Study reflects the DC rates that will be used to inform the public consultation process.

HEMSON

B. Legislative Context

The study is prepared in accordance with the DCA and associated regulations, including the amendments that came into force on January 1, 2016. Several of these amendments resulted in changes to the calculation methodology used for Public Transit services including the removal of the ten per cent statutory deduction and the use of a forward looking “ten-year planned” level of service rather than the “ten-year historical” level of service.

In particular, an asset management plan that deals with all assets whose capital costs are proposed to be funded under the DC By-law, which demonstrates that all such assets mentioned are financially sustainable over their full life cycle, must also be included as part of the background study. The DC background study must also include consideration for the use of area- rated or area-specific development charges.

C. The 2019 DC Study is Intended to be an Interim Update

The analysis contained herein is generally consistent with the projects and calculation methodologies included in the 2014 and 2017 DC Background Studies. The City has not completed a comprehensive update to the 2013 Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and Infrastructure Master Plan (IMP), as such the capital costs and development forecasts are generally consistent with these documents which were used as the basis for the City’s past DC Background Studies. For example, the planning horizon once again ends in 2031.

It is anticipated that the City’s next DC Background Study will be completed once relevant master plans and capital planning documents have been updated. This may result in the DC Study being revised in advance of the anticipated expiry of the new 2019 DC By-laws.

D. Consultation and Approval Process

The following provides a summary of the consultation and approval process to complete the 2019 DC Study. It is intended that following the release of the 2019 DC Study, consultation will continue with the public and development industry stakeholders prior to the passage of the new 2019 DC By-laws in spring 2019.

HEMSON

Activity Timeline Initiate 2019 DC Background Study Spring 2018 Process Meetings with Staff, Stakeholders & Ongoing Council Sponsors Public Release 2019 DC March 15, 2019 Background to Public Hold Statutory Public Meeting Spring 2019 Pass 2019 DC By-laws Spring 2019

E. Key Steps In Determining DCs for Future Development- Related Projects

Several key steps are required in calculating DCs for future development- related projects. These are summarized below and shown schematically in Figure 1.

HEMSON

Figure 1: Statutory Requirements of Development Charge Calculation and Study Process

Anticipated amount, type and Development Forecast s.5(1)1 location of development must be estimated

Increase in Need for Service s.2(1), s.5(1)2 Increase in need may not exceed average level of service Transit Requirements are Calculate ten‐year immediately preceding based on a forecasted ten‐ Historical Service Level background study year Service Level s.5(1)4 s 5.2 (2)

Consideration of Available Increase in the need for Requires funding from Excess Capacity service attributable to the s.5(1)5 non‐DC sources (i.e. anticipated development property tax, user must be estimated

Identify Ineligible Identify Development‐ Services Related Capital Costs s.52(4) s.5(1)7

Grants/Other Replacement/ Required Service Post‐Period Local Services Contributions Benefit‐to‐Existing Discount Benefit s.59 s.5(2) s.5(1)6 s.5(1)8 s.5(1)4

Costs Eligible Other Requirements for Recovery of DC Background DC Polices and Rules Study

Residential Sector Non‐Residential Sector (per m2 of Long‐term Capital and (Unit Type) GFA) Rules for DCs Payable Operating Impacts s.5(1)9 s.10(1)(c)

Consideration for Restrictions on rules Area Rating s.5(6) s.2(9)(10)(11), s.10(1)(c.1)

Asset Discounts, reductions, Management Plan exemptions s.10(3) s.5(1)10

HEMSON

1. Growth Forecast

The first step in the calculation process requires a development forecast to be prepared for the ten-year study period, 2019–2029, for general services and transit and the long-term study period, 2019-2031, for the engineered services. It should be noted that all planning horizons are mid-year estimates consistent with the 2014 and 2017 DC Background Studies.

The forecast of the future residential and non-residential development by location is based on growth anticipated to occur within approved Official Plan designated urban areas. The residential forecast reflects Official Plan targets, 2016 Census data, and recent development activity. The non-residential forecast reflects 2016 Census data, 2016 Ottawa Employment Survey data, and recent development activity. The forecast targets identified in the 2019 DC Study are consistent with those used in previous studies.

For the residential portion of the forecast, the net population growth and population growth in new building permits are estimated. Net population growth equals the population in new housing units reduced by the decline in the population in the existing base anticipated over the ten-year period and to build-out due to reduce household sizes as the community ages. Net population is used in the calculation of the DC funding envelopes. In calculating the per capita DC, however, the population in new units is used.

The non-residential portion of the forecast estimates the gross floor area (GFA) of building space to be developed over the ten-year period, 2019–2029 and the long-term timeframe from 2019-2031. The forecast provides estimates for three categories: commercial, industrial and institutional. The forecast of GFA is based on the employment forecast for the City. Factors for floor space per worker by category are used to convert the employment forecast into GFA for the purposes of the 2019 DC study.

Consistent with the City’s historical practices, area-specific development forecasts have been prepared for the: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural areas and are discussed in Appendix A.1. In particular, several smaller area-specific development forecasts are prepared for the “Special Area Charges” as discussed in Appendix D.

2. Service Categories and Historical Service Levels

The DCA provides that the increase in the need for service attributable to anticipated development:

... must not include an increase that would result in the level of service exceeding the average level of that service provided in the municipality over the ten-year period immediately preceding the preparation of the background study...(s. 5. (1) 4.)

HEMSON

Historical ten-year average service levels thus form the basis for DCs. A review of the City’s capital service levels for buildings and vehicles has therefore been prepared as a basis for the calculation so that the portion of future capital projects that may be included in the DC can be determined. The historical service levels used in the 2019 DC Study have been calculated based on the previous 2009–2018 time period.

For certain engineered services, namely Water, Sanitary (Waste Water) and Stormwater Drainage, historical service levels are based on the City’s engineering standards as well as provincial health and environmental requirements. In the case of Public Transit services, a ten-year “planned” level of service is used and is no longer subject to historical average service levels.

3. Development-related Capital Program and Analysis of Net Capital Costs to be Included in the DCs

A development-related capital forecast has been prepared based on input from previous DC Background Studies, existing master plans and City staff as part of the present study. The forecast identifies development-related projects and their gross and net costs, after allowing for capital grants, subsidies or other contributions as required by the DCA (s. 5. (2)). The City has received, or is anticipated to receive, from other levels of government, funding for some projects, mainly related to Public Transit services. For these projects, grants and contributions have been netted off the gross project costs thus reducing the City’s net capital costs. The capital program provides another cornerstone upon which DCs are based. The DCA requires that the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development may include an increase:

... only if the council of the municipality has indicated that it intends to ensure that such an increase in need will be met. (s. 5. (1) 3.)

In conjunction with the DCA, s. 5. (1) 4. referenced above, these sections require that the DC be calculated on the lesser of the historical ten-year average service levels or the service levels embodied in future plans of the City. The development-related capital program prepared for the 2019 DC Study ensures that DCs are only imposed to help pay for projects that have been or are intended to be purchased or built in order to accommodate future anticipated development. It is not sufficient in the calculation of DCs merely to have had the service in the past. There must also be a demonstrated commitment to continue to emplace facilities or infrastructure in the future. In this regard, Ontario Regulation 82/98, s. 3 states that:

HEMSON

forms part of an official plan, capital forecast or similar expression of the intention of the council and the plan, forecast or similar expression of the intention of the council has been approved by the council.

For some projects in the development-related capital program, a portion of the project may confer benefits to existing residents. As required by the DCA, s. 5. (1) 6., these portions of projects and their associated net costs are the funding responsibility of the City from non-DC sources. The amount of City funding for such non-growth shares of projects is also identified as part of the preparation of the development-related capital forecast. A discussion on the methodology for each service is include in the detailed appendices, as identified in the “replacement and benefit to existing shares” section.

There is also a requirement in the DCA to reduce the applicable DC by the amount of any “uncommitted excess capacity” that is available for a service. Such capacity is available to partially meet the future servicing requirements. Adjustments are made in the analysis to meet this requirement of the DCA.

Finally, in calculating DCs, the development-related net capital costs must be reduced by ten per cent for all services except Water, Sanitary (Waste Water), Stormwater Drainage, services related to highways, protection services and Public Transit (the DCA, s. 5. (1) 8.). The ten per cent discount is applied to the other services, e.g. Parks, Indoor Recreation, Libraries, Affordable housing etc. and the resulting City funding responsibility from non- DC sources is identified.

4. Attribution to Different Benefitting Areas

Consistent with the City’s historical practices, the capital costs are allocated on a City-wide and area-specific basis. This includes Inside the Greenbelt (IGB), Outside Greenbelt (OGB) and Rural areas as well as six defined special area charges.

5. Attribution to Types of Development

The next step in the determination of DCs is the allocation of the development-related net capital costs between the residential and the non- residential sectors. This is done by using different apportionments for different services in accordance with the demands which the two sectors would be expected to place on the various services and the different benefits derived from those services.

Where reasonable data exist, the apportionment is based on the expected demand for, and use of, the service by each sector (e.g. shares of population and employment, water and sanitary (wastewater) demand etc.).

HEMSON

Finally, the residential component of the DC is applied to different housing types on the basis of average occupancy factors. The non-residential component is differentiated and applied on the basis of gross building space for the industrial and non-industrial sectors.

6. Final Adjustments: Prior Growth/ Available DC Reserves

The final determination of the DC results from adjustments made to development-related net capital costs for each service and sector resulting from the application of any unallocated development-related reserve fund balances for general and engineered services that are available to finance the development-related costs in the capital forecast. The application of the available reserves are further discussed in Appendix F.

7. Average Cost Methodology and Cash Flow Analysis

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, the majority of City’s development charges are calculated using an average cost methodology. For example, the average cost method for residential development is calculated by dividing the in-period DC eligible residential costs by the anticipated residential population in new units over the applicable planning period. This arrives at a $/capita amount. A similar approach is used for non-residential development; however, the non-residential costs are divided by the total industrial and non-residential gross floor area identified over the planning period.

For area-specific Roads and Related and City-wide Public Transit costs, a cash flow analysis is undertaken to account for the timing of projects and receipt of DCs. Interest earnings or borrowing costs are therefore accounted for in the calculation as allowed under the DCA. This is consistent with the City’s historical practice.

F. Long-term Capital and Operating Impacts and Asset Management Plan Legislative Requirements

Section 10 of the DCA identifies what must be included in a DC Background Study, namely:

s.10 (2) The development charge background study shall include, (c) an examination, for each service to which the development charge by- law would relate, of the long term capital and operating costs for capital infrastructure required for the service; (c.2) an asset management plan prepared in accordance with subsection (3);

Asset management plan

HEMSON

(3) The asset management plan shall, (a) deal with all assets whose capital costs are proposed to be funded under the development charge by-law; (b) demonstrate that all the assets mentioned in clause (a) are financially sustainable over their full life cycle; (c) contain any other information that is prescribed; and (d) be prepared in a prescribed manner.

The requirement to include an Asset Management Plan (AMP) was part of the DCA amendments that came into effect on January 1, 2016. A key function of the AMP is to demonstrate that all assets proposed to be funded under the development charges by-law are financially sustainable over their full life cycle. For simplicity, the section of the 2019 DC Study that deals with the operating and capital cost impacts and AMP is called the “cost of growth analysis”. Separate cost of growth analyses are prepared for Public Transit and all other services.

G. Specific Requirements for Public Transit Services

1. Planned Level of Service

As per the new requirements of the DCA and associated regulation that came into effect on January 1, 2016, Public Transit services must be treated as a “discrete” service. Generally, it is understood that this provision is intended to preclude combining the Roads and Public Transit services into a broader "Transportation" category.

The DCA (s.5.2 (3)) requires that in estimating the increase in need for Public Transit services the increased need “shall not exceed the planned level of service over the ten-year period immediately following the preparation of the background study”.

The definition of planned level of service is not defined in the DCA. For the purposes of the development charge calculations, the “planned level of service” is considered the ten-year development-related capital forecast in the 2019 DC Study, as informed by various sources including the City’s 2017 Public Transit Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) and Transit Affordability model. The transit projects are generally consistent with the infrastructure identified in the most recent studies, however, the list of eligible projects, anticipated grants, benefit to existing and post-period benefit calculations have been updated as part of the 2019 DC Study.

HEMSON

In addition, any DC Background Study that incorporates Transit services into the calculation must now include the following:

 An assessment of ridership forecast for all modes of transit and whether ridership is generated from existing or planned development (O.Reg. 82/98 s.8(2)4).

 An assessment of ridership capacity for all modes of transit over the 10-year forecast period (O. Reg. 82/98 s.8(2)4).

2. Public Transit AMP Requirements

In addition to the AMP requirements set out in section 10 of the DCA, O. Reg. 82/98, identifies additional direction on the contents of the asset management strategy for Public Transit services to be addressed in a DC Background Study. This includes an AMP as well as an asset and financial strategy. However, it is noted that the regulations are silent with respect to the AMP requirements for the DC Background Study for any services other than Public Transit.

HEMSON

II City-Wide and Area-Specific Development Charges Are Proposed

A. Proposed Methodology Aligns Development-Related Costs and Benefits

Several key steps are required in calculating a DC. However, unique circumstances arise in each municipality which must be reflected in the calculation. The approach to the calculated DCs is focused on providing a reasonable alignment of development-related costs with the growth that necessitates them. This is achieved through a process that identifies the portion of growth-related works within the planning horizon that is attributable to the development in the study period, and then further allocates the benefit between various servicing areas as well as residential and non-residential components of growth. The 2019 DC Study calculates charges on a City-wide and area-specific basis, consistent with the City’s current DC by-laws and practices.

B. City-Wide and Area-Specific Development Charges Are Calculated

The City provides a wide range of services to the community it serves and has an extensive inventory of facilities, land, infrastructure, vehicles and equipment. The DCA provides municipalities with flexibility to define services that will be included in DC by-laws, provided that the other provisions of the DCA and its associated regulations are met. The DCA also requires that the by-laws designate the areas within which the DC rates shall be imposed. The DCs may apply to all lands in the municipality or to other designated development areas as specified in the by-laws.

HEMSON

1. City-wide Development Charges

The following services are included in the City-wide DC calculation:

2. Area-Specific Development Charges: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, area-specific development charges are calculated for the following areas: Inside the Greenbelt (IGB), Outside the Greenbelt (OGB) and Rural.

The following services are included in the Area-Specific DC calculation:

 Roads and Related  Parks Development  Sanitary (Waste Water)  Recreation Facilities  Water  Libraries  Protection  Corporate Studies  Public Transit

HEMSON

Details on how these services are allocated between the benefitting areas is described in Appendix C and E. Figure 2 below provides a map of the IGB, OGB and Rural servicing areas. This map is proposed to be included in the City-wide 2019 DC By-law.

Figure 2: Map of Three Servicing Areas: IGB, OGB and Rural

3. Area-Specific Development Charges: Special Area Charges

The City also has several “special area charges” which are area-specific development charges within defined locations. In total, six special area charges are included in the 2019 DC Study. The development forecast, capital costs, DC calculations and map of the identified benefitting areas are discussed in Appendix D.

 Millennium Park (District Park)  Village of Manotick (Sanitary Sewer & Water)  Village of Richmond (Sanitary Sewer)  Provence Avenue (Roads & Sanitary Sewer)  Flag Station Road (Roads)  Trillium Line Extension (Public Transit)

HEMSON

III Development Forecast & Public Transit Ridership Forecast

A. Applicable Planning Horizons and Benefitting Periods

The DCA requires the City to estimate “the anticipated amount, type and location of development” for which development charges may be imposed. The development forecast must cover both residential and non-residential development and be specific enough with regards to quantum, type, location and timing of development to allow the City to prepare a reasonable development-related capital forecast.

A ten-year development forecast, from 2019 to 2029, has been used for the purpose of the general services development charges calculation. For engineered services, a portion of the capital forecast is deemed to benefit growth occurring over a long-term planning horizon to 2031. It should be noted that the population and employment estimates discussed in the following sections represent mid-year estimates.

B. Key Assumptions

The City-wide and area-specific development forecasts are based on the forecasts prepared for the City as part of the 2014 DC Background Study. Adjustments have been made to account for recent development trends and changes to the forecast unit mix arising from demographic changes, notably the aging population. However, the 2031 housing, population and employment projections, as included in the 2014 DC Background Study, have been used for the purposes of the 2019 DC Study.

C. Residential and Non-Residential Development Forecast

The following provides a summary of the City-wide residential and non- residential development forecast and the area-specific residential forecasts for IGB, OGB and Rural area for the ten year and long term planning period to 2031. Additional information on the City-wide and area-specific development forecast, including estimated growth within the Rural serviced and unserviced

HEMSON

areas is included in Appendix A.1. Area-specific forecasts for the City’s special area charges are discussed in Appendix D.

1. City-wide Development Forecast

A summary of the City-wide residential and non-residential development forecast for the ten-year and long-term planning period to 2031 is presented in Table 1 below.

TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA SUMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FORECAST CITY-WIDE

General Services Engineered Services 2019 mid-2019 to mid-2029 mid-2029 to 2031 Development Forecast Estimate Total at Total at Growth Growth 2029 2031

Residential Development Forecast Total Occupied Dwelling Units 425,126 59,102 484,228 71,874 497,000 Population In New Dwellings 149,110 181,332

Total Population City Population 996,294 115,000 1,111,294 139,546 1,135,840

Non-Residential Development Forecast

Employment 616,700 74,000 690,700 86,300 703,000

Non-Residential Building Space (sq.m.) 3,261,733 3,803,862 Non-Residential Building Space (sq.ft) 35,109,000 40,944,430

2. Area-Specific Development Forecast: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural

Table 2 provides a summary of the residential and non-residential development based on the IGB, OGB and Rural areas for the ten year and long-term planning period to 2031. Additional details relating to the area- specific forecast for each of these areas is provided in Appendix A.1.

HEMSON

23 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA SUMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL & NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FORECAST AREA-SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT FORECAST

General Services Engineered Services 2019 mid-2019 to mid-2029 mid-2029 to 2031 AREA-SPECIFIC Estimate Total at Total at Growth Growth 2029 2031 Inside the Greenbelt Residential Development Forecast Occupied Dwellings Total Occupied Dwelling Units 254,162 24,939 279,101 30,328 284,490 % of City-wide Dwelling Units 42% 42% Population Population In New Dwellings 45,992 55,993 Total Population 542,240 41,445 583,685 50,291 592,531 % of City-wide Population 36% 36%

Non-Residential Development Forecast Employment 484,359 29,292 513,650 34,160 518,519

Outside the Greenbelt Residential Development Forecast Occupied Dwellings Total Occupied Dwelling Units 136,613 29,091 165,704 35,378 171,991 % of City-wide Dwelling Units 49% 49% Population Population In New Dwellings 86,973 105,695 Total Population 343,710 62,150 405,860 75,415 419,126 % of City-wide Population 54% 54%

Non-Residential Development Forecast Employment 101,506 41,008 142,514 47,825 149,330

Rural Occupied Dwellings Total Occupied Dwelling Units 34,351 5,072 39,423 6,168 40,519 % of City-wide Dwelling Units 9% 9% Population Population In New Dwellings 16,031 19,496 Total Population 110,344 11,405 121,749 13,839 124,183 % of City-wide Population 10% 10%

Non-Residential Development Forecast Employment 30,835 3,700 34,535 4,315 35,150

HEMSON 24

D. Public Transit Ridership Forecast

The ridership forecast for Public Transit services is consistent with the approach used in the 2017 Amendment DC Study for Public Transit services. The analysis has been informed by the City’s 2013 TMP, ridership results prepared by AECOM to support the preliminary design of the Stage 2 LRT and further analysis completed by City staff. Additional details on the Public Transit ridership forecast is provided in Appendix A.2.

Table 3 provides a summary of the ridership allocations used to inform the Public Transit services DC calculation for the purposes of the 2019 DC Study.

Table 3-1 Allocation of Ridership Forecast Public Transit Projects AM Peak Period Allocation % of Allocation Ridership Benefit to Existing 16,100 33.13% In-Period 16,300 33.54% Post-Period Benefit 16,200 33.33% Total 48,600 100.00%

For projects with outstanding debenture payments, the post-period benefit shares were calculated based on shares of transit ridership growth over the 2019-2029 and 2029-2034 periods. Recognizing that only the development charge eligible costs are included in the outstanding debenture payments, no benefit to existing deductions were made. As such, the post-period benefit calculation for these projects is as follows:

Table 3-2 Allocation of Ridership Forecast Public Transit Debentures AM Peak Period Allocation % of Allocation Ridership In-period 16,300 50.15% Post-Period Benefit 16,200 49.85% Total 32,500 100.00% .

HEMSON

IV Summary of Historical Service Levels for Applicable Services

The DCA and O.Reg. 82/98 require that the DCs be set at a level no higher than the average service level provided in the municipality over the ten-year period immediately preceding the preparation of the background study, on a service-by-service basis. As a result, development charges only maintain, not exceed, existing service levels as the City develops.

For general services (Protection, Libraries, Parks Development, Recreation Facilities etc.), the legislative requirement is met by documenting historical service levels for the preceding ten years, in this case, for the period from 2009-2018. Typically, service levels for general services are measured as a ratio of inputs per capita (or per population plus employment). With engineered services such as Water, Sanitary (Waste Water), and Stormwater Drainage engineering and legislated environmental and health standards are used in lieu of inputs per capita.

O. Reg. 82/98 requires when determining historical service levels both quantity and quality of service be taken into consideration. In most cases, the service levels are initially established in quantitative terms. For example, service levels for buildings are presented in terms of square feet per capita. The qualitative aspect is introduced by the consideration of the monetary value of the facility or service. In the case of buildings, for example, the cost would be shown in terms of $/square foot to replace or construct a facility of the same quality. This approach helps to ensure that the development-related capital facilities that are to be charged to new growth reflect not only the quantity (number and size) but also the quality (value or replacement cost) of service provided historically by the City. Both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of service levels used in the present analysis are based on information provided by staff based on historical records and their experience with costs to acquire or construct similar facilities, equipment and infrastructure.

Table 4 summarizes service levels for all general City-wide services included in the DC calculation (excluding Public Transit, Roads and Related Services, Water, Sanitary (Waste Water) and Stormwater Drainage engineering services). Appendix C provides detailed historical inventory data upon which

HEMSON

the calculation of service levels is based for general services and Appendix E.1 provides details on historical service level data for Roads and Related services.

HEMSON

27 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA SUMMARY OF 10-YEAR HISTORICAL SERVICE LEVELS 2009-2018

Average Service Service Level 1 Protection (Police And Fire) $445.76 / pop & emp. 2 Parks Development $2,071.19 / capita 3 Recreation Facilities $2,177.67 / capita 4 Libraries $318.81 / capita 5 Paramedic Service $47.67 / pop. & emp. 6 Affordable Housing Program $900.08 / pop. & emp. Note: Roads and Related historical average service level is described in Appendix E.1

HEMSON 28

V The Development-Related Capital Forecast and Planned Level of Service for Public Transit Services

The DCA requires the Council of a municipality to express its intent to provide future capital facilities at the level incorporated in the DC calculation. As noted above in Section II, O.Reg. 82/98, s. 3 states that:

For the purposes of paragraph 3 of subsection 5 (1) of the Act, the council of a municipality has indicated that it intends to ensure that an increase in the need for service will be met if the increase in service forms part of an official plan, capital forecast or similar expression of the intention of the council and the plan, forecast or similar expression of the intention of the council has been approved by the council.

A. A Development-Related Capital Forecast is Provided for Council’s Approval

Based on the growth forecasts detailed in Appendix A.1, the 2019 DC Study’s development-related capital forecast sets out those projects that are required to service anticipated growth. For all general services including Public Transit, the capital plan covers the ten-year period from 2019-2029. For engineered services the long-term planning period continues to be to 2031.

As part of the 2019 DC Study Council will adopt the development-related capital forecast developed for the purposes of the DC calculation. It is assumed that future capital budgets and forecasts will continue to bring forward the development-related projects contained herein that are consistent with the growth occurring in the City. It is acknowledged that changes to the forecast presented herein may occur based on various factors that are reviewed annually during the City’s capital budgeting process and in conjunction with the affordable funding envelopes.

B. Planned Level of Service for Public Transit

For Public Transit, the DCA requires that the estimate in the increase in need for service shall not exceed the planned level of service over the ten-year period immediately following the DC Background Study. For the purposes of the study, the ten-year period for the planned level of service is 2019-2029.

HEMSON

For Public Transit services, the “planned level of service” is considered the development-related capital forecast contained in the 2019 DC Study, which has been informed by various sources as discussed in Appendix B.

C. The Development-Related Capital Forecast for All City Services

1. Eligible Capital Costs

Eligible capital costs as per s. 5(3) of the DCA include:

 Costs to acquire land or an interest in land, including a leasehold interest  Costs to improve land  Costs to acquire, lease, construct or improve buildings and structures  Costs to acquire, lease, construct or improve facilities including  Rolling stock with an estimated useful life of seven years or more  Furniture and equipment, other than computer equipment, and  Materials acquired for circulation, reference or information purposes by a library board as defined in the Public Libraries Act.  Costs to undertake studies in connection with any of the matters referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4.  Costs of the development charge background study required under section 10.  Interest on money borrowed to pay for costs described in paragraphs 1 to 4. 1997, c. 27, s. 5(3)

2. Ineligible Costs

It is not implied that all of these costs are to be recovered from new development by way of DCs. Portions of the capital forecast not recoverable from DCs in the Study generally include:

 Operating, capital maintenance and lifecycle costs;  Capital infrastructure needed to service the existing community that has no benefit to future development;  Costs addressing existing service deficiencies;  Costs benefiting growth anticipated to occur beyond the 2019-2029 and 2019-2031 planning periods;  Ten per cent of various general and “soft” services as mandated by s. 5(1)8. of the DCA;  Capital infrastructure that increase the City's service levels; and  Ineligible capital costs (e.g. tourism facilities, parkland acquisition, etc.) as determined by the regulations.

HEMSON

A summary of the net development-related capital forecast for all services is presented in Table 5. As shown, the total gross ten year capital program cost amounts to $4.73 billion, in contrast the capital expenditures over the longer term planning period to 2031 amounts to $2.86 billion. Of particular importance, $2.09 billion is identified in grants, subsidies and other recoveries which relates to upper levels of funding for Public Transit infrastructure.

Additional adjustments are required to be made to the DC eligible capital expenditures in accordance with the requirements of the DCA. Such adjustments include a reduction for replacement and benefit to existing shares, statutory ten per cent discount and post-period benefit. Available DC reserve funds or prior growth have also been applied to the DC capital costs. A discussion of these adjustments is provided in Appendix B for Public Transit services, Appendix C for general services, Appendix D for special area charges and Appendix E for engineered services.

HEMSON

31 TABLE 5

CITY OF OTTAWA SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM CAPITAL PROGRAM BY SERVICE (in $000s)

Development-Related Capital Program 2019-2029 Service Gross Grants/ Net Share of Project Subsidies/Other Costs Net Cost Recoveries Costs 1 Protection (Police And Fire) $155,709.8 $0.0 $155,709.8 5.9% 2 Parks Development $104,033.0 $0.0 $104,033.0 3.9% 3 Recreation Facilities $208,663.0 $0.0 $208,663.0 7.9% 4 Libraries $46,569.6 $0.0 $46,569.6 1.8% 5 Paramedic Service $12,510.0 $0.0 $12,510.0 0.5% 6 Affordable Housing Program $46,494.1 $0.0 $46,494.1 1.8% 7 Corporate Studies $13,991.7 $0.0 $13,991.7 0.5% 8 Public Transit $4,141,415.6 $2,088,164.0 $2,053,251.5 77.7% TOTAL $4,729,386.8 $2,088,164.0 $2,641,222.7 100.0%

Development-Related Capital Program 2019-2031 Service Gross Grants/ Net Share of Project Subsidies/Other Costs Net Cost Recoveries Costs 1 Roads & Related Services $1,584,186.7 $0.0 $1,584,186.7 55.3% 2 Sanitary (Waste Water) $1,054,609.8 $0.0 $1,054,609.8 36.8% 3 Water $216,360.7 $0.0 $216,360.7 7.6% 4 Stormwater Drainage $7,532.9 $0.0 $7,532.9 0.3% TOTAL $2,862,690.1 $0.0 $2,862,690.1 100.0%

TOTAL 2019-2029 and 2019-2031 $7,592,076.9 $2,088,164.0 $5,503,912.9

HEMSON 32

VI Calculated Development Charges

A. Overview of Development Charges Calculations

This section summarizes the calculation of DCs for each service category and the resulting total DC by type of development. For residential development, the total per capita amount is then converted to a variable charge by housing unit type using various unit occupancy factors. For non-residential development, the rate per employee is divided by the related floor space per worker (FSW) assumption to arrive at a $/square metre. The non-residential charge is proposed to be differentiated between industrial and non-industrial building space.

B. Total DC Recoverable Share of the Net Capital Forecast

Table 6 provides a summary of the residential and non-residential in-period DC eligible capital costs for general and engineered services for the following areas: City-wide, IGB, OGB and Rural. Consistent with the City’s historical practice, the residential non-residential cost allocations arising from the area- specific residential calculations are recovered on a City-wide basis but is currently being examined.

In total, $1.02 billion in DC eligible costs are included in the DC calculation for general services and $1.44 billion is included for engineered services.

The total DC recoverable share of net capital costs for the area-specific special area charges is summarized and discussed in Appendix D.

HEMSON

TABLE 6

CITY OF OTTAWA SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM CAPITAL PROGRAM BY SERVICE

(in $000s)

Residential Non-Residential (1) Total DC Eligible Costs 10-Year General Services Inside the Outside the Non- City-wide Rural Industrial Non-Industrial Uniform (2) Residential Total Greenbelt Greenbelt Residential

1 Protection (Police And Fire) $24,224.7 $0.0 $19,682.5 $0.0 $3,896.2 $23,257.5 $0.0 $43,907.2 $27,153.7 $71,060.9 2 Parks Development $34,993.1 $31,119.3 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $3,479.6 $66,112.4 $3,479.6 $69,592.0 3 Recreation Facilities $9,469.6 $17,011.0 $57,186.7 $1,349.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4,474.6 $85,016.9 $4,474.6 $89,491.5 4 Libraries $15,079.3 $1,517.7 $3,188.0 $658.1 $0.0 $0.0 $1,076.0 $20,443.1 $1,076.0 $21,519.0 5 Paramedic Service $4,655.5 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $429.8 $2,565.9 $0.0 $4,655.5 $2,995.7 $7,651.2 6 Affordable Housing Program $7,932.7 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $7,932.7 $0.0 $7,932.7 7 Corporate Studies $2,594.1 $0.0 $1,085.2 $321.1 $369.4 $2,204.8 $0.0 $4,000.4 $2,574.1 $6,574.5 8 Public Transit $451,531.7 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $41,690.1 $248,860.7 $0.0 $451,531.7 $290,550.9 $742,082.6 TOTAL $550,480.8 $49,648.0 $81,142.4 $2,328.7 $46,385.5 $276,888.9 $9,030.1 $683,599.9 $332,304.5 $1,015,904.5

Residential Non-Residential (1) Total DC Eligible Costs 12-Year Engineered Services Inside the Outside the Non- City-wide Rural Industrial Non-Industrial Uniform Residential Total Greenbelt Greenbelt Residential

1 Roads & Related Services $500,652.2 $9,596.7 $99,226.5 $14,004.0 $54,385.0 $324,636.7 $0.0 $623,479.3 $379,021.7 $1,002,501.0 2 Sanitary (Waste Water) $111,614.9 $45,643.4 $106,272.7 $0.0 $9,489.3 $56,643.6 $0.0 $263,531.1 $66,132.8 $329,663.9 3 Water $10,147.7 $4,577.8 $78,226.4 $0.0 $1,594.4 $9,517.2 $0.0 $92,951.8 $11,111.5 $104,063.4 4 Stormwater Drainage $3,233.5 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $286.9 $1,712.8 $0.0 $3,233.5 $1,999.7 $5,233.2 TOTAL $625,648.3 $59,817.9 $283,725.6 $14,004.0 $65,755.6 $392,510.2 $0.0 $983,195.7 $458,265.8 $1,441,461.5

TOTAL 2019-2029 and 2019-2031 $1,666,795.7 $790,570.3 $2,457,366.0 (1) Non-Residential costs are calculated on a City-wide basis (2) Uniform non-residential charges are only calculated for Parks Development, Recreation Facilities and Libraries, consistent with the 2014 DC Background Study

HEMSON 34

C. City-Wide Residential ($/capita) and Non-Residential ($/square metre) DCs

The calculated residential $/capita and non-residential industrial and non- industrial charges $/square metre are shown in Appendix B for Public Transit services, Appendix C for general services, Appendix D for special area charges and Appendix E for engineered services.

An average cost calculation methodology has been used for all services with the exception of area-specific Roads and Related costs and Public Transit. For area-specific Roads and Related Services and City-wide Public Transit costs, a cash flow analysis is undertaken to account for the timing of projects and receipt of DCs. Interest earnings or borrowing costs are therefore accounted for in the calculation as allowed under the DCA. This is consistent with the City’s historical DC calculation practices.

D. Proposed Development Charges: City-Wide and Area- Specific Residential and Non-Residential DCs (IGB, OGB and Rural)

Residential DCs are proposed to vary by dwelling unit type to reflect different occupancy factors and resulting demand for services. The proposed residential DCs are shown in Table 7. These rates are applied to all development occurring in the City. Table 8 includes the non-residential industrial and non-industrial City-wide rates. Table 9 shows the applicable non-residential City-wide rate for development occurring in the Rural unserviced area.

Consistent with the City’s current practices, the non-residential rate is calculated on a City-wide basis, as such only residential development charges are proposed to vary by benefitting area (e.g. IGB, OGB and Rural). The remainder of the rate tables include the following:

Table 10: IGB calculated residential rates Table 11: OGB calculated residential rates Table 12: Rural (Serviced) calculated residential rates Table 13: Rural (Unserviced) calculated residential rates

HEMSON

The calculated rates vary by unit type and benefitting area based on the development and services occurring within in each area.

HEMSON

36 TABLE 7

CITY OF OTTAWA CITY-WIDE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1)

Service Apartment Charge Per Dwelling, Back to Singles & Multiple, Row and Apartment (less Capita Back and Stacked Semis Mobile Dwelling than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms)

Protection (Police And Fire) $133.59 $449 $354 $243 $173 Parks Development $234.68 $788 $622 $427 $304 Indoor Recreation $63.51 $213 $168 $116 $82 Libraries $101.13 $340 $268 $184 $131 Paramedic Service $31.22 $105 $83 $57 $40 Affordable Housing Program $53.20 $179 $141 $97 $69 Corporate Studies $17.40 $58 $46 $32 $23 Public Transit $3,121.93 $10,485 $8,276 $5,685 $4,041 SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $3,756.66 $12,617 $9,958 $6,841 $4,863 Roads & Related Services $2,760.97 $9,273 $7,319 $5,027 $3,574 Sanitary (Waste Water) $646.59 $2,172 $1,714 $1,177 $837 Water $58.79 $197 $156 $107 $76 Stormwater Drainage $17.83 $60 $47 $32 $23 SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $3,484.18 $11,702 $9,236 $6,343 $4,510 TOTAL CITY-WIDE CHARGE $7,240.83 $24,319 $19,194 $13,184 $9,373

(1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.36 2.65 1.82 1.29

HEMSON 37 TABLE 8

CITY OF OTTAWA CITY-WIDE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

Industrial Non-Industrial

Service Per Square Metre Per Square Foot Per Square Metre Per Square Foot of GFA of GFA of GFA of GFA

Protection (Police And Fire) $3.42 $0.32 $8.73 $0.81 Parks Development $1.07 $0.10 $1.07 $0.10 Indoor Recreation $1.37 $0.13 $1.37 $0.13 Libraries $0.33 $0.03 $0.33 $0.03 Paramedic Service $0.44 $0.04 $1.12 $0.10 Affordable Housing Program $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Corporate Studies $0.38 $0.04 $0.96 $0.09 Public Transit $44.00 $4.09 $112.25 $10.43 SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $51.01 $4.75 $125.84 $11.69 Roads & Related Services $48.29 $4.49 $123.20 $11.45 Sanitary (Waste Water) $8.90 $0.83 $21.90 $2.03 Water $1.49 $0.14 $3.68 $0.34 Stormwater Drainage $0.25 $0.02 $0.64 $0.06 SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $58.94 $5.48 $149.42 $13.88 TOTAL CITY-WIDE CHARGE $109.95 $10.23 $275.26 $25.57

HEMSON 38 TABLE 9

CITY OF OTTAWA RURAL (UNSERVICED) DEVELOPMENT CHARGES NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES PER SQUARE METRE

Industrial Non-Industrial

Service Per Square Metre Per Square Foot Per Square Metre Per Square Foot of GFA of GFA of GFA of GFA

Protection (Police And Fire) $3.42 $0.32 $8.73 $0.81 Parks Development $1.07 $0.10 $1.07 $0.10 Recreation Facilities $1.37 $0.13 $1.37 $0.13 Libraries $0.33 $0.03 $0.33 $0.03 Paramedic Service $0.44 $0.04 $1.12 $0.10 Affordable Housing Program $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Corporate Studies $0.38 $0.04 $0.96 $0.09 Public Transit $44.00 $4.09 $112.25 $10.43 SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $51.01 $4.75 $125.84 $11.69 Roads & Related Services $48.29 $4.49 $123.20 $11.45 Sanitary (Waste Water) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Water $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Stormwater Drainage $0.25 $0.02 $0.64 $0.06 SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $48.55 $4.51 $123.84 $11.51 TOTAL CITY-WIDE CHARGE $99.56 $9.26 $249.68 $23.20

HEMSON 39 TABLE 10

CITY OF OTTAWA INSIDE THE GREENBELT DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1)

Service Apartment Charge Per Dwelling, Back to Singles & Multiple, Row and Apartment (less Capita Back and Stacked Semis Mobile Dwelling than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms)

Protection (Police And Fire) $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Parks Development $676.62 $2,092 $1,752 $1,232 $876 Recreation Facilities $369.87 $1,144 $958 $673 $479 Libraries $33.00 $102 $85 $60 $43 Paramedic Service $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Affordable Housing Program $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Corporate Studies $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Public Transit $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $1,079.49 $3,338 $2,795 $1,965 $1,398 Roads & Related Services $188.73 $584 $489 $344 $244 Sanitary (Waste Water) $815.16 $2,520 $2,110 $1,484 $1,055 Water $81.76 $253 $212 $149 $106 Stormwater Drainage $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $1,085.65 $3,357 $2,811 $1,977 $1,405 TOTAL IGB CHARGE $2,165.14 $6,695 $5,606 $3,942 $2,803

(1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.09 2.59 1.82 1.29

TOTAL CITY-WIDE CHARGE $7,240.83 $24,319 $19,194 $13,184 $9,373 TOTAL CHARGE IGB $9,405.98 $31,014 $24,800 $17,126 $12,176

HEMSON 40 TABLE 11

CITY OF OTTAWA OUTSIDE THE GREENBELT DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1)

Service Apartment Charge Per Dwelling, Back to Singles & Multiple, Row and Apartment (less Capita Back and Stacked Semis Mobile Dwelling than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms)

Protection (Police And Fire) $186.22 $643 $497 $339 $241 Parks Development $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Recreation Facilities $657.52 $2,271 $1,756 $1,197 $851 Libraries $36.65 $127 $98 $67 $47 Paramedic Service $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Affordable Housing Program $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Corporate Studies $12.48 $43 $33 $23 $16 Public Transit $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $892.87 $3,084 $2,384 $1,626 $1,155 Roads & Related Services $943.90 $3,260 $2,521 $1,719 $1,222 Sanitary (Waste Water) $1,005.47 $3,472 $2,685 $1,831 $1,301 Water $740.11 $2,556 $1,977 $1,348 $958 Stormwater Drainage $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $2,689.48 $9,288 $7,183 $4,898 $3,481 TOTAL OGB CHARGE $3,582.35 $12,372 $9,567 $6,524 $4,636

(1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.45 2.67 1.82 1.29

TOTAL CITY-WIDE CHARGE $7,240.83 $24,319 $19,194 $13,184 $9,373 TOTAL CHARGE OGB $10,823.19 $36,691 $28,761 $19,708 $14,009

HEMSON 41 TABLE 12

CITY OF OTTAWA RURAL (SERVICED) DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1)

Service Apartment Charge Per Dwelling, Back to Singles & Multiple, Row and Apartment (less Capita Back and Stacked Semis Mobile Dwelling than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms)

Protection (Police And Fire) $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Parks Development $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Recreation Facilities $84.18 $281 $189 $153 $109 Libraries $41.05 $137 $92 $75 $53 Paramedic Service $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Affordable Housing Program $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Corporate Studies $20.03 $67 $45 $36 $26 Public Transit $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $145.26 $485 $326 $264 $188 Roads & Related Services $543.64 $1,816 $1,221 $990 $704 Sanitary (Waste Water) $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Water $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 Stormwater Drainage $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $543.64 $1,816 $1,221 $990 $704 TOTAL RURAL SERVICED CHARGE $688.91 $2,301 $1,547 $1,254 $892

(1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.34 2.25 1.82 1.29

TOTAL CITY-WIDE CHARGE $7,240.83 $24,319 $19,194 $13,184 $9,373 TOTAL CHARGE RURAL SERVICED $7,929.74 $26,620 $20,741 $14,438 $10,265

HEMSON 42 TABLE 13

CITY OF OTTAWA RURAL (UNSERVICED) DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1)

Service Apartment Charge Per Dwelling, Back to Singles & Multiple, Row and Apartment (less Capita Back and Stacked Semis Mobile Dwelling than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms)

(1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.34 2.25 1.82 1.29

TOTAL CITY-WIDE CHARGE (LESS WATER AN $6,535.46 $21,950 $17,324 $11,900 $8,460 TOTAL CHARGE RURAL UNSERVICED $7,224.36 $24,251 $18,871 $13,154 $9,352

HEMSON 43

E. Comparison of Proposed and Existing DCs for City-wide and Area-Specific DCs (Inside Greenbelt, Outside Greenbelt and Rural)

Tables 14 to 19 provide a comparison of the current verses calculated development charges by service and benefitting area. A brief description of these tables is provided below:

Table 14: Non-residential industrial rates Table 15: Non-residential non-industrial rates Table 16: IGB residential rates Table 17: OGB residential rates Table 18: Rural (Serviced) residential rates Table 19: Rural (Unserviced) residential rates

F. Calculated Area-Specific DCs: Special Area Charges

A summary of the calculated special area development charges as well as a comparison of the current rates are provided in Appendix D.

HEMSON

44 TABLE 14

CITY OF OTTAWA CITY-WIDE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES COMPARISON

Service Industrial $/square metre Industrial $/square foot Current Current Difference Difference Calculated Calculated as of Aug 1, as of Aug 1, $ % Total Total 2018 2018 Protection (Police And Fire) $3.44 $3.42 $0.32 $0.32 $0.00 0% Parks Development $0.11 $1.07 $0.01 $0.10 $0.09 900% Recreation Facilities $2.69 $1.37 $0.25 $0.13 ($0.12) -48% Libraries $0.65 $0.33 $0.06 $0.03 ($0.03) -50% Paramedic Service $0.32 $0.44 $0.03 $0.04 $0.01 33% Affordable Housing Program $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0% Corporate Studies $0.75 $0.38 $0.07 $0.04 ($0.03) -43% Public Transit $38.64 $44.00 $3.59 $4.09 $0.50 14% SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $46.60 $51.01 $4.33 $4.75 $0.42 10% Roads & Related Services $42.95 $48.29 $3.99 $4.49 $0.50 13% Sanitary (Waste Water) $9.58 $8.90 $0.89 $0.83 ($0.06) -7% Water $1.72 $1.49 $0.16 $0.14 ($0.02) -13% Stormwater Drainage $0.22 $0.25 $0.02 $0.02 $0.00 0% SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICE $54.47 $58.94 $5.06 $5.48 $0.42 8% TOTAL CITY-WIDE CHARGE $101.07 $109.95 $9.39 $10.23 $0.84 9%

Note: Sanitary (Waste Water) and Water rates do not apply in the Rural unserviced area

HEMSON 45 TABLE 15

CITY OF OTTAWA CITY-WIDE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES NON-INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES COMPARISON

Service Non-Industrial $/square metre Non-Industrial $/square foot Difference Difference Current Calculated Current Calculated $ % as of Aug 1, 2018 Total as of Aug 1, 2018 Total

Protection (Police And Fire) $8.83 $8.73 $0.82 $0.81 ($0.01) -1% Parks Development $0.11 $1.07 $0.01 $0.10 $0.09 900% Recreation Facilities $2.69 $1.37 $0.25 $0.13 ($0.12) -48% Libraries $0.65 $0.33 $0.06 $0.03 ($0.03) -50% Paramedic Service $0.97 $1.12 $0.09 $0.10 $0.01 11% Affordable Housing Program $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0% Corporate Studies $1.83 $0.96 $0.17 $0.09 ($0.08) -47% Public Transit $98.49 $112.25 $9.15 $10.43 $1.28 14% SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $113.57 $125.84 $10.55 $11.69 $1.14 11% Roads & Related Services $94.83 $123.20 $8.81 $11.45 $2.64 30% Sanitary (Waste Water) $19.70 $21.90 $1.83 $2.03 $0.20 11% Water $3.77 $3.68 $0.35 $0.34 ($0.01) -3% Stormwater Drainage $0.43 $0.64 $0.04 $0.06 $0.02 50% SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $118.73 $149.42 $11.03 $13.88 $2.85 26% TOTAL CITY-WIDE CHARGE $232.30 $275.26 $21.58 $25.57 $3.99 18%

Note: Sanitary (Waste Water) and Water rates do not apply in the Rural unserviced area

HEMSON 46 TABLE 16

CITY OF OTTAWA INSIDE THE GREENBELT DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES COMPARISON

Service $/Single & Semi-Detached Difference ($) Difference (%) Difference ($) Difference (%) Difference ($) Difference (%) Total Current Current Current Calculated Calculated Calculated Current vs. Calc. Current vs. Calc. Current vs. Calc. as of Aug 1, City-wide IGB City-Wide IGB IGB Total City-wide Inisde GB Total 2018 Protection (Police And Fire) $492 $0 $492 $449 $0 $449 ($43) -9% $0 0% ($43) -9% Parks Development $0 $286 $286 $788 $2,092 $2,880 $788 0% $1,806 631% $2,594 907% Recreation Facilities $91 $912 $1,003 $213 $1,144 $1,357 $122 134% $232 25% $354 35% Libraries $284 $247 $531 $340 $102 $442 $56 20% ($145) -59% ($89) -17% Paramedic Service $100 $0 $100 $105 $0 $105 $5 5% $0 0% $5 5% Affordable Housing Program $233 $0 $233 $179 $0 $179 ($54) -23% $0 0% ($54) -23% Corporate Studies $113 $0 $113 $58 $0 $58 ($55) -49% $0 0% ($55) -49% Public Transit $9,074 $0 $9,074 $10,485 $0 $10,485 $1,411 16% $0 0% $1,411 16% SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $10,387 $1,445 $11,832 $12,617 $3,338 $15,955 $2,230 21% $1,893 131% $4,123 35% Roads & Related Services $7,227 $703 $7,930 $9,273 $584 $9,857 $2,046 28% ($119) -17% $1,927 24% Sanitary (Waste Water) $2,498 $2,412 $4,910 $2,172 $2,520 $4,692 ($326) -13% $108 4% ($218) -4% Water $192 $201 $393 $197 $253 $450 $5 3% $52 26% $57 15% Stormwater Drainage $48 $0 $48 $60 $0 $60 $12 25% $0 0% $12 25% SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $9,965 $3,316 $13,281 $11,702 $3,357 $15,059 $1,737 17% $41 1% $1,778 13% TOTAL IGB CHARGE $20,352 $4,761 $25,113 $24,319 $6,695 $31,014 $3,967 19% $1,934 41% $5,901 23%

HEMSON 47 TABLE 17

CITY OF OTTAWA OUTSIDE THE GREENBELT DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES COMPARISON

Service $/Single & Semi-Detached Difference ($) Difference (%) Difference ($) Difference (%) Difference ($) Difference (%) Total Current Current Current Calculated Calculated Calculated Current vs. Calc. Current vs. Calc. Current vs. Calc. as of Aug 1, City-wide OGB City-Wide IGB IGB Total City-wide Outside GB Total 2018 Protection (Police And Fire) $492 $553 $1,045 $449 $643 $1,092 ($43) -9% $90 16% $47 4% Parks Development $0 $253 $253 $788 $0 $788 $788 0% ($253) -100% $535 211% Recreation Facilities $91 $4,206 $4,297 $213 $2,271 $2,484 $122 134% ($1,935) -46% ($1,813) -42% Libraries $284 $374 $658 $340 $127 $467 $56 20% ($247) -66% ($191) -29% Paramedic Service $100 $0 $100 $105 $0 $105 $5 5% $0 0% $5 5% Affordable Housing Program $233 $0 $233 $179 $0 $179 ($54) -23% $0 0% ($54) -23% Corporate Studies $113 $103 $216 $58 $43 $101 ($55) -49% ($60) -58% ($115) -53% Public Transit $9,074 $0 $9,074 $10,485 $0 $10,485 $1,411 16% $0 0% $1,411 16% SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $10,387 $5,489 $15,876 $12,617 $3,084 $15,701 $2,230 21% ($2,405) -44% ($175) -1% Roads & Related Services $7,228 $3,747 $10,975 $9,273 $3,260 $12,533 $2,045 28% ($487) -13% $1,558 14% Sanitary (Waste Water) $2,498 $2,278 $4,776 $2,172 $3,472 $5,644 ($326) -13% $1,194 52% $868 18% Water $192 $3,180 $3,372 $197 $2,556 $2,753 $5 3% ($624) -20% ($619) -18% Stormwater Drainage $48 $0 $48 $60 $0 $60 $12 25% $0 0% $12 25% SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $9,966 $9,205 $19,171 $11,702 $9,288 $20,990 $1,736 17% $83 1% $1,819 9% TOTAL OGB CHARGE $20,353 $14,694 $35,047 $24,319 $12,372 $36,691 $3,966 19% ($2,322) -16% $1,644 5%

HEMSON 48 TABLE 18

CITY OF OTTAWA RURAL (SERVICED) DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES COMPARISON

Service $/Single & Semi-Detached Difference ($) Difference (%) Difference ($) Difference (%) Difference ($) Difference (%) Total Current Current Current Calculated Calculated Calculated Current vs. Calc. Current vs. Calc. Current vs. Calc. as of Aug 1, City-wide Rural Serviced City-Wide IGB IGB Total City-wide Rural Serviced Total 2018 Protection (Police And Fire) $492 $215 $707 $449 $0 $449 ($43) -9% ($215) -100% ($258) -36% Parks Development $0 $0 $0 $788 $0 $788 $788 0% $0 0% $788 0% Recreation Facilities $91 $497 $588 $213 $281 $494 $122 134% ($216) -43% ($94) -16% Libraries $284 $616 $900 $340 $137 $477 $56 20% ($479) -78% ($423) -47% Paramedic Service $100 $0 $100 $105 $0 $105 $5 5% $0 0% $5 5% Affordable Housing Program $233 $0 $233 $179 $0 $179 ($54) -23% $0 0% ($54) -23% Corporate Studies $113 $135 $248 $58 $67 $125 ($55) -49% ($68) -50% ($123) -50% Public Transit $9,074 $0 $9,074 $10,485 $0 $10,485 $1,411 16% $0 0% $1,411 16% SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $10,387 $1,463 $11,850 $12,617 $485 $13,102 $2,230 21% ($978) -67% $1,252 11% Roads & Related Services $7,227 $477 $7,704 $9,273 $1,816 $11,089 $2,046 28% $1,339 281% $3,385 44% Sanitary (Waste Water) $2,498 $0 $2,498 $2,172 $0 $2,172 ($326) -13% $0 0% ($326) -13% Water $192 $0 $192 $197 $0 $197 $5 3% $0 0% $5 3% Stormwater Drainage $48 $0 $48 $60 $0 $60 $12 25% $0 0% $12 25% SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $9,965 $477 $10,442 $11,702 $1,816 $13,518 $1,737 17% $1,339 281% $3,076 29% TOTAL RURAL (SERVICED) $20,352 $1,940 $22,292 $24,319 $2,301 $26,620 $3,967 19% $361 19% $4,328 19%

HEMSON 49 TABLE 19

CITY OF OTTAWA RURAL (UNSERVICED) DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES COMPARISON

Service $/Single & Semi-Detached Difference ($) Difference (%) Difference ($) Difference (%) Difference ($) Difference (%) Current Total Current Current Calculated Calculated Calculated Current vs. Calc. Current vs. Calc. Current vs. Calc. Rural as of Aug 1, City-wide City-Wide IGB IGB Total City-wide Rural Unserviced Total Unserviced 2018 Protection (Police And Fire) $492 $215 $707 $449 $0 $449 ($43) -9% ($215) -100% ($258) -36% Parks Development $0 $0 $0 $788 $0 $788 $788 0% $0 0% $788 0% Recreation Facilities $91 $497 $588 $213 $281 $494 $122 134% ($216) -43% ($94) -16% Libraries $284 $616 $900 $340 $137 $477 $56 20% ($479) -78% ($423) -47% Paramedic Service $100 $0 $100 $105 $0 $105 $5 5% $0 0% $5 5% Affordable Housing Program $233 $0 $233 $179 $0 $179 ($54) -23% $0 0% ($54) -23% Corporate Studies $113 $135 $248 $58 $67 $125 ($55) -49% ($68) -50% ($123) -50% Public Transit $9,074 $0 $9,074 $10,485 $0 $10,485 $1,411 16% $0 0% $1,411 16% SUB-TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $10,387 $1,463 $11,850 $12,617 $485 $13,102 $2,230 21% ($978) -67% $1,252 11% Roads & Related Services $7,227 $477 $7,704 $9,273 $1,816 $11,089 $2,046 28% $1,339 281% $3,385 44% Sanitary (Waste Water) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0% $0 0% $0 0% Water $0$0$0$0$0$0$00%$00%$00% Stormwater Drainage $48 $0 $48 $60 $0 $60 $12 25% $0 0% $12 25% SUB-TOTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES $7,275 $477 $7,752 $9,333 $1,816 $11,149 $2,058 28% $1,339 281% $3,397 44% TOTAL RURAL (UNSERVICED) $17,662 $1,940 $19,602 $21,950 $2,301 $24,251 $4,288 24% $361 19% $4,649 24%

HEMSON 50

VII Cost of Growth Analysis

This section provides a brief examination of the long-term capital and operating costs as well as the asset management related annual provisions for the capital facilities and infrastructure to be included in the 2019 DC By- laws. This examination is required as one of the provisions of the Development Charges Act. Additional details on the cost of growth analysis, including asset management analysis, for transit services is included in Appendix G. The analysis for all other services is included in Appendix H.

A. Public Transit

Appendix G provides details on the Public Transit Cost of Growth (COG) analysis.

Long-term capital and operating impacts have been examined for all Public Transit services included in the 2019 DC Background Study. Relevant City documents relied upon to complete this analysis include:

 Stage 2 Light Rail Transit Implementation – Project Definition and Procurement Plan, Report ACS2017-TSD-OTP-0001  Long Range Financial Plan Transit, Report ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002

The Public Transit AMP is generally informed based on the following documents:

 City of Ottawa Financial Reports and Statements  City of Ottawa 2017 Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) V Transit  Comprehensive Asset Management (CAM) Policy  2017 State of Assets Report (SOAR)  2017 Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP)

The analysis contained in Appendix G provides identifies the relevant sections of these documents that relates to the requirements of the DCA. Importantly, a detailed “checklist” is included which identifies how each section of the legislation, as it relates to Public Transit services, is being addressed.

B. All Other Services (Excluding Public Transit)

Appendix H details on the COG analysis for all other services excluding Public Transit.

HEMSON

The long term capital and operating impacts associated with the infrastructure for all services (except Public Transit) included in the 2019 DC Study. Relevant documents relied upon to complete this analysis include:

1. City of Ottawa 2018 Budget 2. City of Ottawa 2019 Budget 3. Long Range Financial Plan V- Tax Supported Capital 4. 2013 Transportation Master Plan 5. Long Range Financial Plan V - Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Supported Programs

Similar to Public Transit services, the analysis provides the calculated annual asset management contribution for both the gross capital expenditures and the share related to the DC recoverable portion. The calculated annual provisions for the different types of assets are as follows:

 General Services (City-wide and area-specific): $8.29 million per annum (2030)

 Engineered Services (City-wide and area-specific): $56.73 million per annum (2032)

 Engineered Services (special area charges): $960,000 per annum

C. Projects are Deemed to be Financially Sustainable

The calculated annual provisions identified in Appendix G and H have already been or will be fully integrated in the City’s AMP and the LRFPs discussed in these appendices.

The annual provisions are considered to be financially sustainable, as it is expected that the increased capital asset management requirements can be absorbed by the LRFP forecasted tax and user rate increases over the planning periods. Importantly, the City’s annual budget analysis will allow staff to continue to monitor and implement mitigating measures should the program become less sustainable.

HEMSON

VIII Development Charges Administration & Policy Considerations

A. Development Charges Consultation and Approval Process

The 2019 DC Study is intended to be used for the purposes of public consultation and fully satisfies all requirements of the DCA and associated regulation.

Following the public release of the 2019 DC Study, consultation will continue with various stakeholders, staff, councillors and the Council sponsors leading up to the passage of the new 2019 DC By-laws. Any adjustments to the development charge rates and policies will be incorporated into the finalized amended DC By-law and was provided to Council for their formal approval.

B. City-Wide vs. Area-Specific Charges

1. Consideration for Area Rating

As required by the Development Charges Act (DCA), consideration was given to the use of area rating. Consistent with the City’s historical practice, the infrastructure identified for the majority of general and engineered services has been calculated on an area-specific basis. Categories relating to Public Transit, Affordable Housing, Paramedic Services and Stormwater Drainage are calculated on a City-wide basis.

C. Other Policy Considerations

1. Statutory and Non-Statutory Policies

Statutory policies as required by the DCA will be included in the new 2019 DC By-laws. Non-statutory policies, which are provided at the discretion of the municipality, will also be identified in the 2019 DC By-laws.

2. Local Service Guidelines

The City also has Local Service Guidelines. The purpose of establishing these definitions is to determine the eligible capital costs for inclusion in the development charges (DC) calculation for the City of Ottawa. Functions or services deemed to be local in nature are not to be included in the determination of the development charge rates. The provision of local

HEMSON

services is considered to be a direct developer responsibility under s.59 of the DCA and will (or may) be recovered under other agreement(s) with the landowner or developer. Local Service Guidelines for infrastructure identified in the 2019 DC Study is based on the City’s prevailing practices.

3. 2019 Draft DC By-laws

The new 2019 DC by-laws will be made available under separate cover at least two weeks in advance of the statutory public meeting in accordance with the requirements of the DCA.

D. Summary of Preliminary Recommendations

The following provides a summary of the preliminary recommendations relating to the implementation of the new DC By-laws. These recommendations will be finalized prior to Council approval of the 2019 DC Study.

 That present practices regarding collection of DCs and by-law administration continue to the extent possible, having regard to any requirements of the DCA;

 That under the DCA, the City should codify any rules regarding application of the by-laws and exemptions within the DC by-laws proposed for adoption;

 That the City continue to use front-ending agreements or developer agreements (or services-in-lieu arrangements), whichever are practical and desirable by the development industry and the City;

 That the by-law permit the payment of DCs in cash or through services-in-lieu agreements. The City is not obligated to enter into services-in-lieu agreements;

 That Council adopt the development-related capital forecasts, and the increase in the need for services attributable to the anticipated development, as included in the 2019 DC Study, subject to annual review during the City’s capital budgeting process and in conjunction with the affordable funding envelopes;

 That Council intends to undertake the adopted capital forecast to ensure that the increase in need for service will be met.

 That Council determine that the future excess capacity identified in the 2019 DC Study shall be paid for by the development charges contemplated in the said 2019 DC Study, or other similar charges.

HEMSON

 That Council give consideration of the use of more than one development charge by-law to reflect different needs for services in different areas, also known as area rating or area-specific DCs, and determined that for the services, and associated infrastructure proposed to be funded by DCs under the DC by-law, that the charges be calculated on either a city-wide or area-specific basis.

 That Council adopt the Public Transit development-related capital program, as included in the 2019 DC Study, as the “planned level of service”, and in doing so, indicate that it intends to ensure that the increase in need for Public Transit will be met.

 That Council approve the Cost of Growth analysis, including the Asset Management Plan, that deals with all assets whose capital costs are intended to be funded under the development charge by-law and that such assets are considered to be financially sustainable over their full life cycle.

HEMSON

Appendix A.1

City of Ottawa Development Forecast

HEMSON 56

Appendix A.1

Development Forecast

This appendix provides details of the development forecast used to prepare the 2019 DC calculations. It is important to note that the 2019 DC Study is intended to be an interim update. As such, the underlying methodology and assumptions utilized in the 2014 and 2017 DC Background Studies have generally been carried forward into the 2019 DC Study.

The forecast method and key assumptions are discussed and the results of the forecasts are presented in the following tables:

Historical Development

Table 1 Historical Population, Occupied Households and Employment Summary Table 2 Historical Building Permit Data Table 3 Historical Occupied Dwellings Table 4 Historical Growth in Occupied Dwellings Table 5 Historical Households by Period of Construction Showing Household Size (City-wide) Table 6 Historical Households by Period of Construction Showing Household Size (Inside the Greenbelt) Table 7 Historical Households by Period of Construction Showing Household Size (Outside the Greenbelt) Table 8 Historical Households by Period of Construction Showing Household Size (Rural) Table 9 Historical Place of Work Employment (Includes No Fixed Place of Work and Work at Home Employment

City-wide Forecast Development

Table 10 Total Population, Household and Employment Forecast Summary Table 11 Forecast of Annual Growth in Occupied Households by Unit Type Table 12 Forecast Population in New Households by Unit Type Table 13 Forecast Total Employment (Includes No Fixed and Work at Home Employment) Table 14 Non-Residential Space Forecast (Includes No Fixed and Work at Home Employment)

HEMSON 57

Area-Specific Forecast Development

Table 15 Area-Specific Population Forecast Summary Table 16 Area-Specific Household Summary Table 17 Area-Specific Residential Unit Type and Population in New Units Forecast Table 18 Area-Specific Employment Forecast Summary (Includes No Fixed and Work at Home Employment) Table 19 Area-Specific Rural Serviced and Unserviced Population and Dwellings Forecast Table 20 Area-Specific Rural Serviced and Unserviced Non-Residential Employment and Space Forecast (Mid-2019 to Mid-2029) Table 21 Area-Specific Rural Serviced and Unserviced Non-Residential Employment and Space Forecast (Mid-2019 to Mid-2031)

The population, housing and employment forecasts, include both City-wide and specific areas within Ottawa. As discussed in the following sections, the forecast is largely consistent with the growth forecast identified in the 2014 and 2017 Background Studies and has been updated to reflect data from recent housing completions and demographic trends. The results of the forecasts are provided in the detailed appendix tables. For the purposes of the development forecast, all figures represent mid-year targets.

A. FORECAST APPROACH, KEY ASSUMPTIONS AND DEFINITIONS

The development forecast is based on the forecasts prepared for the City as part of its 2014 DC Study. Adjustments have been made to account for recent development trends and changes to the forecast unit mix arising from demographic changes, notably the aging population. The 2031 housing,

HEMSON 58

population and employment projections, as included in the 2014 DC Study, have been used for the purposes of the 2019 DC Study. A comparison of the unit mix between the 2014 Study for the 2014-2024 and 2014-2031 period and the 2019-2029 and 2019-2031 planning periods (as included in the 2019 DC Study) is provided below:

Comparison of 2014 Development Charges Study and 2019 Development Charges Study Residential Unit Mix 10-year Singles Semi Row Apartments Total Growth 2014-2024 34.5% 4.0% 27.0% 34.5% 100.0% 2019-2029 32.7% 3.8% 26.0% 37.5% 100.0% Long-Term Singles Semi Row Apartments Total Growth 2014-2031 32.7% 3.8% 26.0% 37.5% 100.0% 2019-2031 32.7% 3.8% 26.0% 37.5% 100.0%

It is important to note when comparing the 2014 and 2019 DC Studies that the “long-term” planning period has changed. In 2014, the long-term planning period was based on 2014-2031 (17-years); however for the purposes of the 2019 DC Study, the long-term planning period is now 2019-2031 (12-years).

The development forecast is based on estimates of growth occurring within the City’s approved development areas, specifically within the Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and the Rural serviced and unserviced areas. The forecasts are premised on the City achieving population, housing and employment targets established in Figure 2.2 of the Council approved Official Plan (for 2031). This is consistent with Provincial regulations that require development charges forecasts be based on areas approved for development in a municipality’s Official Plan.

Consistent with the approach employed in the 2014 DC Study, the “Total Employment” figures presented include both employees with no fixed place of work and those classified as work-at-home employees.

B. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY

The City has experienced steady and sustained population, household and employment growth for many years. Similar to many other municipalities,

HEMSON 59

Ottawa is experiencing an aging demographic trend. This is affecting the pattern of household growth in particular, housing growth has been outpacing population. With respect to employment, Ottawa has a unique economy owing to the presence of federal employment and as such, employment has changed somewhat differently than other municipalities in Ontario.

1. Historical Residential Development

Historical population and housing figures presented in Tables 1 to 9 and are derived from Statistics Canada Census data and data provided by the City of Ottawa. Consistent with the 2014 DC Study, the historical population is based on estimates produced by City staff.

Table 1 demonstrates that population growth across the City has remained steady at an average of 1.0 per cent per annum over the historical period from 2008 to 2018. Over the same period, the number of housing units in the City has grown at a slightly higher rate than population at an average rate of 1.5 per cent per annum.

The City’s population increased from approximately 894,650 people in 2008 to 985,470 in 2018. This represents an increase of ten per cent. The number of occupied dwelling units in the City also experienced an increase during the ten-year historical period, increasing from roughly 363,640 in 2008 to 419,630 occupied households in 2018, a 15 per cent increase. The decline in average household size associated with an aging population means that housing growth out-paces growth in population. The result is that fewer residents are housed within the City’s existing housing base.

Table 2 provide details on historical residential building permit activity in Ottawa . Building permit data represents permits issued for different residential unit types within the City area over the historical period. For the purposes of the development forecast, this analysis was completed for the 2008 to 2018 period. Since 2009, the City has issued an average of approximately 6,500 permits annually.

As shown in Table 3, the market shares of singles, rows and apartment units have had minor fluctuations over the ten-year historical period. However, the built form in Ottawa has remained primarily dominated by ground-related dwelling units such as singles and semi-detached and rows. This is further

HEMSON 60

supported in Table 4, which details the historical growth in occupied dwellings. As shown in the table ground-related units (e.g. singles, semis and rows) comprised 67 per cent of the historical household development over the last ten years.

Table 5 provides details on historical occupancy patterns on a City-wide basis. The overall average occupancy level in Ottawa for a single detached and semi-detached units is 3.36 persons per housing unit (PPU). In keeping with the City’s historical practice, occupancy levels for recently constructed units over the historical 15-year planning period between 2001 and 2016 have generally been used in the development charges calculation. The average PPUs for recently constructed unit types have been updated from the assumptions used in the 2014 DC Study to reflect 2016 Census data. Tables 6 to 8 provide the historical PPU data for the City’s three area-specific benefiting areas: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural areas. The table below provides an overview of these assumptions.

2019 DC Background Study PPU Assumptions Inside the Outside the Unit Type City-wide Rural Greenbelt Greenbelt Singles 3.43 3.29 3.52 3.20 Semis 2.76 2.51 2.87 2.65 Singles & Semis 3.36 3.09 3.45 3.34 Rows & Other Multiples 2.65 2.59 2.67 2.25 Apartment - Large 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 Apartment - Small 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 Apartments (Overall) 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62

Consistent with the approach employed in the 2014 DC Study, the City-wide PPU for apartments is applied to all areas in the City. Similarly, due to the smaller sample size of units in the Rural area, the PPUs for semi-detached units have been estimated. This is consistent with the approach used in the 2014 DC Study. As such, the PPU estimates shown above may not match Tables 5 through 8.

2. Historical Non-Residential Development

Ottawa has seen fewer growth fluctuations compared to other Ontario municipalities. Its unique economy, owning to the presence of federal employment, has experienced employment change somewhat differently than

HEMSON 61

other municipalities in Ontario. As a result, relatively steady employment growth in the last decade is attributable to the City’s continued growth in the federal employment sector, while many municipalities in Ontario that relied on industrial employment sectors declined as a result of the 2008 recession. Contrarily, the strong reliance on federal government employment made Ottawa more susceptible to recent reductions in the federal employment sector, thus the rate of employment growth in the City has declined since 2012.

Historical employment figures are also shown in Table 1 and Table 9 and are informed by the City’s historical employment survey information. Consistent with the approach used in the 2014 DC Study, the employment figures used for development charges calculations include employees with no fixed work place of work and work at home employment.

After growing at a steady rate of 1.4 per cent per annum over the 2006-2011 period, the City’s employment growth declined to 1.2 per cent over the 2012- 2018 period. Overall, the City’s employment has increased over the last ten years from approximately 535,400 in 2008 to 609,200 in 2018, this represents an increase of 14 per cent.

Table 9 summarizes the growth in historical employment in Ottawa between 2006 and 2018. Historically, commercial growth has accounted for much of the non-residential development in the City. Over the 2008 to 2018 period, the commercial sector grew by 50,200 employees which accounts for 68 per cent of employment growth over the historical ten year period.

C. FORECAST METHOD AND RESULTS

This section describes the method used to establish the ten year development charges forecast for the period 2019 to 2029 and the long-term forecast periods from 2019 to 2031.

Development charges are levied on residential development as a charge per new unit. Therefore, for the residential forecast, a projection of both the population growth as well as the population in new housing units is required.

 The population growth determines the need for additional facilities and provides the foundation for the development-related capital program.

HEMSON 62

 When calculating the development charge, however, the development- related net capital costs are spread over the total additional population that occupy new housing units. This population in new units represents the population from which development charges will be collected.

Development charges are levied on non-residential development as a charge per unit of gross floor area (GFA). As with the residential forecast, the non- residential forecast requires both a projection of employment growth as well as a projection of the employment growth associated with new floorspace in the City.

1. City-wide Residential Development Forecast

The residential development forecast incorporates forecasts of population, households, and housing units by type. The population and household forecast is consistent with the 2014 DC Study and is anchored on the 2031 population forecast of 1,135,800 and a household target of 497,000 as established by the City’s current Official Plan1. For the purposes of this study, the 2031 targets have been extrapolated for the ten year forecast period to 2029.

As detailed in Table 10, the City’s population is forecast to grow from approximately 996,290 in 2019 to 1,111,300 in 2029. The ten year population growth of 115,000 persons represents a 12 per cent increase over the existing base. Over the long-term planning period to 2031, the City anticipates adding a total of approximately 139,550 persons.

Over the ten year planning period from 2019 to 2029, the number of occupied housing units is forecast to increase from approximately 425,130 in 2019 to 484,230 in 2029. The overall ten year growth represents a 14 per cent (59,100 units) increase in occupied dwelling units. Over the long-term planning period to 2031, the City will add approximately 71,870 units.

A breakdown of anticipated housing in the City by unit type is shown in Table 11. The housing forecast shows that the City’s housing market will continue to be characterized by ground-related unit types (including singles, semi and row units), with an increase share of the market being represented by non-ground

1 See Table CW1 in the 2014 DC Background Study

HEMSON 63

related units such as apartments. This pattern of housing unit growth represents somewhat higher density housing than the pattern experienced in the City over the last ten years. The forecast reflects anticipated changes in unit mix such as aging population and City planning policies.

As shown in Table 12, the City-wide population growth in the new units is estimated by applying the following PPUs to the housing unit growth: 3.43 for single-detached units; 2.76 for semi-detached units; 2.65 for rows; and 1.62 for apartments. The PPUs were based on 15-year historical Census data from 2001 to 2016. The forecast of population expected to reside in new housing units over the 2019 to 2029 period is 149,110 additional persons. Over the long-term planning period to 2031, the population growth in new housing units is approximately 181,330 persons.

For reference, the table below provides a comparison of the anticipated City- wide residential development between the 2014-2024 and 2014-2031 planning period, as identified in the 2014 DC Study, and 2019-2029 and 2019-2031 planning period included in the 2019 DC Study.

Comparison of 2014 Development Charges Study and 2019 Development Charges Study Residential Forecasts Occupied Population in 10-Year Growth Population Dwellings New Units 2014-2024 115,175 60,019 149,903 2019-2029 115,000 59,102 149,110 Occupied Population in Long-Term Growth Population Dwellings New Units 2014-2031 186,960 96,711 237,102 2019-2031 139,546 71,874 181,332

2. City-wide Non-Residential Development Forecast

Table 13 illustrates the forecast total employment growth in Ottawa by employment category to 2031. Non-residential development charges are calculated on a per unit of gross floor area (GFA) basis. Therefore, as required by the DCA, a forecast of future non-residential building space has also been developed. As with the residential forecast, the employment and GFA forecasts cover the ten year period from 2019 to 2029 and long-term period from 2019 to 2031.

HEMSON 64

As detailed in Table 13, three categories of employment are distinguished for the purposes of determining non-residential employment and floorspace growth: commercial, industrial and institutional.

An assumed floorspace per worker (FSW) for each category is applied to the employment forecast in order to estimate the amount of associated GFA. These assumptions are consistent with the 2014 DC Study non-residential space forecast. The following FSW assumptions are used:

Commercial 35.8 m2 (385 sq.ft.) per employee Industrial 92.0 m2 (990 sq.ft.) per employee Institutional 37.2 m2 (400 sq.ft.) per employee

The non-residential floorspace forecast for the City is summarized in Table 14. The total floorspace growth is forecast at 3,261,730 square metres (35,109,000 sq.ft.) over the ten year period of which the largest component relates to commercial development, 1,800,830 square metres (19,383,980 sq.ft.) or 55 per cent, followed by industrial development, 976,580 square metres (10,511,820 sq.ft.) or 30 per cent, and institutional development 484,320 square metres (5,213,200 sq.ft.) or 15 per cent. Over the long-term planning period to 2031, the City will grow by 3,803,860 square metres (40,944,430 sq.ft.). The allocation of growth between the commercial, industrial and institutional sectors is anticipated to remain consistent with the ten year planning period (e.g. 55 per cent commercial, 30 per cent industrial and 15 per cent institutional) over the planning period to 2031.

For reference, a comparison of the anticipated City-wide non-residential growth between the 2014-2024 and 2014-2031 planning period, as identified in the 2014 DC Study, and the 2019-2029 and 2019-2031 planning period included in the 2019 DC Study has been provided in the table below. 65

Comparison of 2014 Development Charges Study and 2019 Development Charges Study Non-Residential Forecasts Non-Residential GFA 10-Year Growth Employment Growth1 (sq.ft.) 2014-2024 74,043 34,483,184 2019-2029 74,000 35,109,000 Non-Residential GFA Long-Term Growth Employment Growth1 (sq.ft.) 2014-2031 117,298 53,859,858 2019-2031 86,300 40,944,430 1 Consistent with the 2014 Background Study, the employment forecast includes no fixed and work at home employment

3. Area-Specific Forecasts: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural

Tables 15 to 18 describe the area-specific residential and non-residential forecasts for the Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural servicing areas. The distribution of growth between these areas is consistent with the growth distribution identified in the 2014 DC Study over the long-term planning period to 2031. The total growth occurring within these three areas matches the City-wide growth shown in Tables 10 to 14 on an annual basis.

A summary of the growth distribution between each area is shown in the Table below. This distribution is applied to the ten year and long-term (12- year) planning periods.

Summary of Area-Specific Growth Distribution 2019 DC Background Study Inside the Outside the Rural Total Greenbelt Greenbelt Population 2019-2031 36% 54% 10% 100% Dwelling Units 2019-2031 42% 49% 9% 100% Employment 2019-2031 40% 55% 5% 100%

4. Area-Specific Forecasts: Rural Serviced and Unserviced

Tables 19 to 21 describe the area-specific residential and non-residential forecasts for the Rural serviced and unserviced areas. Similar to the other 66

area-specific forecasts, the distribution of growth between the areas is consistent with the growth distribution identified in the 2014 DC Study over the long-term planning period to 2031. The total growth occurring within these three areas matches the Rural growth shown in Tables 15 to 18 on an annual basis.

The tables provide a forecast of growth occurring within the following areas:

 Rural Serviced Water Area  Rural Serviced Sewer Area  Rural Serviced Water and Sewer Area  Rural Unserviced

The “Total Rural Serviced” areas include the serviced “Water Area”. “Sewer Area”, “Water and Sewer Area”. These areas are consistent with the defined boundaries identified in the 2014 DC Study. 67 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 1 CITY OF OTTAWA HISTORICAL POPULATION, OCCUPIED HOUSEHOLDS & EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY

Population Annual Occupied Annual Av. Household Total Emp. Annual Mid-Year Growth Households Growth Size (PPU) Survey Growth Activity Rate 2005-06 870,760 351,212 2.48 520,741 59.8% 2006-07 881,150 10,390 356,902 5,690 2.47 528,022 7,281 59.9% 2007-08 894,650 13,500 363,640 6,738 2.46 535,403 7,381 59.8% 2008-09 899,300 4,650 366,639 2,999 2.45 542,888 7,485 60.4% 2009-10 911,990 12,690 373,940 7,301 2.44 550,478 7,590 60.4% 2010-11 922,050 10,060 379,781 5,842 2.43 558,173 7,695 60.5% 2011-12 931,730 9,680 385,729 5,948 2.42 565,977 7,804 60.7% 2012-13 935,270 3,540 388,169 2,440 2.41 572,960 6,983 61.3% 2013-14 944,900 9,630 394,302 6,133 2.40 580,028 7,068 61.4% 2014-15 957,150 12,250 401,271 6,970 2.39 587,184 7,156 61.3% 2015-16 963,860 6,710 406,379 5,107 2.37 594,429 7,245 61.7% 2016-17 974,190 10,330 412,825 6,447 2.36 601,762 7,333 61.8% 2017-18 985,470 11,280 419,628 6,803 2.35 609,186 7,424 61.8% Growth 2009-2018 90,820 55,988 73,783 Source: City of Ottawa

HEMSON 68 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 2 CITY OF OTTAWA HISTORICAL BUILDING PERMIT DATA

Building Permits Shares By Unit Type Year Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total 2006 2,206 321 1,707 688 4,922 45% 7% 35% 14% 100% 2007 2,884 287 2,371 1,153 6,695 43% 4% 35% 17% 100% 2008 2,725 201 2,573 1,239 6,738 40% 3% 38% 18% 100% 2009 2,179 276 2,353 1,600 6,408 34% 4% 37% 25% 100% 2010 1,999 327 2,185 2,188 6,699 30% 5% 33% 33% 100% 2011 1,380 343 2,166 2,480 6,369 22% 5% 34% 39% 100% 2012 2,009 338 2,288 1,548 6,183 32% 5% 37% 25% 100% 2013 1,467 304 1,432 1,988 5,191 28% 6% 28% 38% 100% 2014 1,954 236 2,408 2,412 7,010 28% 3% 34% 34% 100% 2015 1,558 157 1,113 1,557 4,385 36% 4% 25% 36% 100% 2016 1,942 192 1,936 2,918 6,988 28% 3% 28% 42% 100% 2017 1,956 245 2,033 2,474 6,708 29% 4% 30% 37% 100% 2018 2,283 257 2,243 3,939 8,722 26% 3% 26% 45% 100% Growth 2009-2018 18,727 2,675 20,157 23,104 64,663 29% 4% 31% 36% 100% Source: Statistics Canada

HEMSON 69 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 3 CITY OF OTTAWA HISTORICAL OCCUPIED DWELLINGS

City of Ottawa Occupied Dwellings Shares By Unit Type Mid-Year Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total 2005-06 151,016 20,458 66,638 113,100 351,212 43% 6% 19% 32% 100% 2006-07 153,227 20,772 68,450 114,453 356,902 43% 6% 19% 32% 100% 2007-08 156,029 21,015 71,184 115,412 363,640 43% 6% 20% 32% 100% 2008-09 157,619 21,108 73,142 114,769 366,639 43% 6% 20% 31% 100% 2009-10 159,779 21,370 75,720 117,071 373,940 43% 6% 20% 31% 100% 2010-11 161,581 21,687 78,121 118,392 379,781 43% 6% 21% 31% 100% 2011-12 163,235 21,974 80,368 120,153 385,729 42% 6% 21% 31% 100% 2012-13 164,385 22,322 82,229 119,233 388,169 42% 6% 21% 31% 100% 2013-14 165,745 22,627 83,816 122,113 394,302 42% 6% 21% 31% 100% 2014-15 167,503 22,851 86,173 124,744 401,271 42% 6% 21% 31% 100% 2015-16 168,638 22,993 87,072 127,675 406,379 41% 6% 21% 31% 100% 2016-17 170,262 23,182 88,580 130,802 412,825 41% 6% 21% 32% 100% 2017-18 171,998 23,425 90,447 133,758 419,628 41% 6% 22% 32% 100% Source: City of Ottawa 2018

HEMSON 70 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 4 CITY OF OTTAWA HISTORICAL GROWTH IN OCCUPIED DWELLINGS

City of Ottawa Growth in Occupied Dwellings Shares By Unit Type Mid-Year Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total 2005-06 2006-07 2,211 314 1,812 1,353 5,690 39% 6% 32% 24% 100% 2007-08 2,802 243 2,734 959 6,738 42% 4% 41% 14% 100% 2008-09 1,590 93 1,958 (643) 2,999 53% 3% 65% (21%) 100% 2009-10 2,160 262 2,578 2,302 7,301 30% 4% 35% 32% 100% 2010-11 1,802 317 2,401 1,321 5,842 31% 5% 41% 23% 100% 2011-12 1,654 287 2,247 1,761 5,948 28% 5% 38% 30% 100% 2012-13 1,150 348 1,861 (919) 2,440 47% 14% 76% (38%) 100% 2013-14 1,360 305 1,587 2,880 6,133 22% 5% 26% 47% 100% 2014-15 1,758 224 2,357 2,630 6,970 25% 3% 34% 38% 100% 2015-16 1,134 142 899 2,931 5,107 22% 3% 18% 57% 100% 2016-17 1,625 188 1,507 3,126 6,447 25% 3% 23% 48% 100% 2017-18 1,735 244 1,868 2,956 6,803 26% 4% 27% 43% 100% Growth 2009-2018 15,969 2,410 19,263 18,346 55,988 29% 4% 34% 33% 100% Source: City of Ottawa 2018

HEMSON 71 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 5 CITY OF OTTAWA HISTORICAL HOUSEHOLDS BY PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION SHOWING HOUSEHOLD SIZE CITY-WIDE

Period of Construction Period of Construction Summaries Dwelling Unit Type Pre 1945 1946-1960 1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2010 2011-2016 2001-2016 2006-2016 Total

Singles & Semis Household Population 39,370 56,920 62,745 60,695 91,345 28,620 37,690 53,270 50,320 35,725 139,315 86,045 516,700 Households 14,945 23,005 24,455 22,685 31,760 9,165 11,935 15,955 14,790 10,735 41,480 25,525 179,430 Household Size 2.63 2.47 2.57 2.68 2.88 3.12 3.16 3.34 3.40 3.33 3.36 3.37 2.88

Rows Household Population 4,680 6,800 15,710 39,295 34,830 18,980 18,385 23,340 26,205 22,415 71,960 48,620 210,640 Households 1,735 2,215 5,465 15,055 13,565 7,070 7,185 8,840 9,590 8,715 27,145 18,305 79,435 Household Size 2.70 3.07 2.87 2.61 2.57 2.68 2.56 2.64 2.73 2.57 2.65 2.66 2.65

Apartments (incl. Duplexes) Household Population 19,185 21,015 31,745 43,240 27,935 9,040 6,630 7,310 9,605 12,950 29,865 22,555 188,655 Households 10,970 12,870 19,765 26,960 16,755 5,330 3,810 4,370 5,870 8,225 18,465 14,095 114,925 Household Size 1.75 1.63 1.61 1.60 1.67 1.70 1.74 1.67 1.64 1.57 1.62 1.60 1.64

All Units Household Population 63,235 84,735 110,200 143,230 154,110 56,640 62,705 83,920 86,130 71,090 241,140 157,220 915,995 Households 27,650 38,090 49,685 64,700 62,080 21,565 22,930 29,165 30,250 27,675 87,090 57,925 373,790 Household Size 2.29 2.22 2.22 2.21 2.48 2.63 2.73 2.88 2.85 2.57 2.77 2.71 2.45

Note: Population and household values in this table are based on response rates and may differ from Census values Source: Statistics Canada "Period of Construction Data" from 2016 Census

HEMSON 72 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 6 CITY OF OTTAWA HISTORICAL HOUSEHOLDS BY PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION SHOWING HOUSEHOLD SIZE INSIDE THE GREENBELT

Period of Construction Period of Construction Summaries Dwelling Unit Type 1920 or before 1921 to 1945 1946-1960 1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2010 2011-2016 2001-2016 2006-2016 Total

Singles & Semis Household Population 15,070 16,805 51,005 47,510 25,230 22,770 5,510 6,555 6,330 5,225 4,260 15,815 9,485 206,270 Households 5,715 6,350 20,505 18,310 9,390 7,845 1,750 2,145 1,995 1,745 1,375 5,115 3,120 77,125 Household Size 2.64 2.65 2.49 2.59 2.69 2.90 3.15 3.06 3.17 2.99 3.10 3.09 3.04 2.67

Rows Household Population 2,775 1,805 6,540 14,755 31,350 21,400 7,450 8,470 7,625 4,020 1,805 13,450 5,825 107,995 Households 1,085 560 2,105 5,085 11,830 8,070 2,665 3,270 2,925 1,585 685 5,195 2,270 39,865 Household Size 2.56 3.22 3.11 2.90 2.65 2.65 2.80 2.59 2.61 2.54 2.64 2.59 2.57 2.71

Apartments (incl. Duplexes) Household Population 10,325 8,515 20,405 30,910 41,895 25,580 8,365 5,970 5,840 6,950 8,400 21,190 15,350 173,155 Households 5,585 5,125 12,550 19,295 26,135 15,235 4,890 3,370 3,460 4,275 5,475 13,210 9,750 105,395 Household Size 1.85 1.66 1.63 1.60 1.60 1.68 1.71 1.77 1.69 1.63 1.53 1.60 1.57 1.64

All Units Household Population 28,170 27,125 77,950 93,175 98,475 69,750 21,325 20,995 19,795 16,195 14,465 50,455 30,660 487,420 Households 12,385 12,035 35,160 42,690 47,355 31,150 9,305 8,785 8,380 7,605 7,535 23,520 15,140 222,385 Household Size 2.27 2.25 2.22 2.18 2.08 2.24 2.29 2.39 2.36 2.13 1.92 2.15 2.03 2.19

Note: Population and household values in this table are based on response rates and may differ from Census values Source: Statistics Canada "Period of Construction Data" from 2016 Census

HEMSON 73 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 7 CITY OF OTTAWA HISTORICAL HOUSEHOLDS BY PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION SHOWING HOUSEHOLD SIZE OUTSIDE THE GREENBELT

Singles & Semis Household Population 135 185 1,830 7,825 21,275 51,200 16,395 25,090 37,430 37,195 26,815 101,440 64,010 225,375 Households 80 70 725 3,070 7,765 17,755 5,185 7,765 10,915 10,605 7,855 29,375 18,460 71,790 Household Size 1.69 2.64 2.52 2.55 2.74 2.88 3.16 3.23 3.43 3.51 3.41 3.45 3.47 3.14

Rows Household Population 10 30 230 915 7,940 13,385 11,410 9,870 15,445 22,010 20,220 57,675 42,230 101,465 Households 20 0 85 385 3,170 5,465 4,330 3,875 5,765 7,930 7,900 21,595 15,830 38,925 Household Size 0.50 #DIV/0! 2.71 2.38 2.50 2.45 2.64 2.55 2.68 2.78 2.56 2.67 2.67 2.61

Apartments (incl. Duplexes) Household Population 50 65 345 670 855 2,015 705 655 1,510 2,765 4,640 8,915 7,405 14,275 Households 10 40 180 285 530 1,260 410 385 860 1,595 2,795 5,250 4,390 8,350 Household Size 5.00 1.63 1.92 2.35 1.61 1.60 1.72 1.70 1.76 1.73 1.66 1.70 1.69 1.71

All Units Household Population 195 280 2,405 9,410 30,070 66,600 28,510 35,615 54,385 61,970 51,675 168,030 113,645 341,115 Households 110 110 990 3,740 11,465 24,480 9,925 12,025 17,540 20,130 18,550 56,220 38,680 119,065 Household Size 1.77 2.55 2.43 2.52 2.62 2.72 2.87 2.96 3.10 3.08 2.79 2.99 2.94 2.86

Note: Population and household values in this table are based on response rates and may differ from Census values Source: Statistics Canada "Period of Construction Data" from 2016 Census

HEMSON 74 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 8 CITY OF OTTAWA HISTORICAL HOUSEHOLDS BY PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION SHOWING HOUSEHOLD SIZE RURAL

Singles Household Population 5,885 1,200 3,965 7,020 13,360 17,065 6,535 5,990 9,385 7,855 4,515 21,755 12,370 82,775 Households 515 1,755 2,890 5,125 5,985 2,195 1,995 2,980 2,420 1,455 2,245 6,120 3,700 29,560 Household Size 11.43 0.68 1.37 1.37 2.23 7.77 3.28 2.01 3.88 5.40 2.01 3.55 3.34 2.80

Semis Household Population 35 0 70 130 125 65 55 25 55 35 75 165 110 670 Households 10 0 40 50 50 35 15 20 60 10 40 110 50 330 Household Size 3.50 n/a 1.75 2.60 2.50 1.86 3.67 1.25 0.92 3.50 1.88 1.50 2.20 2.03

Singles & Semis Household Population 5,920 1,200 4,035 7,150 13,485 17,130 6,590 6,015 9,440 7,890 4,590 21,920 12,480 83,445 Households 525 1,755 2,930 5,175 6,035 2,230 2,010 3,000 2,480 1,465 2,285 6,230 3,750 29,890 Household Size 11.28 0.68 1.38 1.38 2.23 7.68 3.28 2.01 3.81 5.39 2.01 3.34 3.33 2.79

Rows Household Population 10 0 40 20 25 50 130 40 280 170 370 820 540 1,135 Households 0 0 10 10 35 10 45 20 170 85 110 365 195 495 Household Size #DIV/0! n/a 4.00 2.00 0.71 5.00 2.89 2.00 1.65 2.00 3.36 2.25 2.77 2.29

Apartments (incl. Duplexes) Household Population 95 40 90 245 330 315 50 125 35 30 10 75 40 1,365 Households 45 40 70 125 160 260 20 30 20 0 10 30 10 780 Household Size 2.11 1.00 1.29 1.96 2.06 1.21 2.50 4.17 1.75 #DIV/0! 1.00 2.50 4.00 1.75

All Units Household Population 6,025 1,240 4,165 7,415 13,840 17,495 6,770 6,180 9,755 8,090 4,970 22,815 13,060 85,945 Households 570 1,795 3,010 5,310 6,230 2,500 2,075 3,050 2,670 1,550 2,405 6,625 3,955 31,165 Household Size 10.57 0.69 1.38 1.40 2.22 7.00 3.26 2.03 3.65 5.22 2.07 3.44 3.30 2.76

Note: Population and household values in this table are based on response rates and may differ from Census values Source: Statistics Canada "Period of Construction Data" from 2016 Census

HEMSON 75 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 9 CITY OF OTTAWA HISTORICAL PLACE OF WORK EMPLOYMENT INCLUDES NO FIXED PLACE OF WORK AND WORK AT HOME EMPLOYMENT

Annual Annual Annual Employment Annual Commercial Industrial Institutional Mid-Year Growth Growth Growth Forecast Growth 2005-06 354,301 74,724 91,717 520,741 2006-07 359,254 4,953 75,769 1,045 92,999 1,282 528,022 7,281 2007-08 364,276 5,022 76,828 1,059 94,299 1,300 535,403 7,381 2008-09 369,369 5,093 77,902 1,074 95,617 1,318 542,888 7,485 2009-10 374,533 5,164 78,991 1,089 96,954 1,337 550,478 7,590 2010-11 379,769 5,236 80,095 1,104 98,309 1,355 558,173 7,695 2011-12 385,078 5,309 81,215 1,120 99,684 1,375 565,977 7,804 2012-13 389,829 4,751 82,217 1,002 100,914 1,230 572,960 6,983 2013-14 394,638 4,809 83,231 1,014 102,159 1,245 580,028 7,068 2014-15 399,507 4,869 84,258 1,027 103,419 1,260 587,184 7,156 2015-16 404,436 4,929 85,298 1,040 104,695 1,276 594,429 7,245 2016-17 409,425 4,989 86,350 1,052 105,987 1,292 601,762 7,333 2017-18 414,476 5,051 87,415 1,065 107,295 1,308 609,186 7,424 Growth 2009-2018 50,200 10,587 12,996 73,783 Source: Statistics Canada, Census of Canada, City of Ottawa Employment Survey

HEMSON 76 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 10 CITY OF OTTAWA TOTAL POPULATION, HOUSEHOLD AND EMPLOYMENT FORECAST SUMMARY

Population Annual Occupied Annual Av. Household Employment Annual

Mid-Year Growth Households Growth Size (PPU) Forecast Growth Activity Rate 2010-11 922,050 379,781 2.43 558,173 60.5% 2011-12 931,730 9,680 385,729 5,948 2.42 565,977 7,804 60.7% 2012-13 935,270 3,540 388,169 2,440 2.41 572,960 6,983 61.3% 2013-14 944,900 9,630 394,302 6,133 2.40 580,028 7,068 61.4% 2014-15 957,150 12,250 401,271 6,970 2.39 587,184 7,156 61.3% 2015-16 963,860 6,710 406,379 5,107 2.37 594,429 7,245 61.7% 2016-17 974,190 10,330 412,825 6,447 2.36 601,762 7,333 61.8% 2017-18 985,470 11,280 419,628 6,803 2.35 609,186 7,424 61.8% 2018-19 996,294 10,824 425,126 5,498 2.34 616,700 7,514 61.9% 2019-20 1,007,237 10,943 430,696 5,570 2.34 623,729 7,029 61.9% 2020-21 1,018,300 11,063 436,339 5,643 2.33 630,837 7,108 62.0% 2021-22 1,029,485 11,185 442,056 5,717 2.33 638,027 7,190 62.0% 2022-23 1,040,793 11,308 447,848 5,792 2.32 645,298 7,271 62.0% 2023-24 1,052,225 11,432 453,716 5,868 2.32 652,652 7,354 62.0% 2024-25 1,063,782 11,557 459,661 5,945 2.31 660,090 7,438 62.1% 2025-26 1,075,466 11,684 465,684 6,023 2.31 667,612 7,522 62.1% 2026-27 1,087,279 11,813 471,785 6,101 2.30 675,221 7,609 62.1% 2027-28 1,099,221 11,942 477,966 6,181 2.30 682,916 7,695 62.1% 2028-29 1,111,294 12,073 484,228 6,262 2.29 690,700 7,784 62.2% 2029-30 1,123,500 12,206 490,572 6,344 2.29 696,823 6,123 62.0% 2030-31 1,135,840 12,340 497,000 6,428 2.29 703,000 6,177 61.9% Growth mid-2019-2029 115,000 59,102 74,000 Growth mid-2029-2031 24,546 12,772 12,300 Growth mid-2019-2031 139,546 71,874 86,300 Source: City of Ottawa Employment includes no fixed place of work and work at home

HEMSON 77 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 11 CITY OF OTTAWA FORECAST OF ANNUAL GROWTH IN OCCUPIED HOUSEHOLDS BY UNIT TYPE

Annual Growth in Occupied Households Shares By Unit Type Mid-Year Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total Singles Semis Rows Apts. Total 2018-19 1,799 207 1,431 2,061 5,498 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2019-20 1,822 210 1,450 2,088 5,570 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2020-21 1,846 213 1,469 2,115 5,643 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2021-22 1,870 216 1,488 2,143 5,717 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2022-23 1,895 218 1,507 2,171 5,792 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2023-24 1,920 221 1,527 2,200 5,868 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2024-25 1,945 224 1,547 2,229 5,945 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2025-26 1,970 227 1,568 2,258 6,023 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2026-27 1,996 230 1,588 2,287 6,101 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2027-28 2,022 233 1,609 2,317 6,181 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2028-29 2,049 236 1,630 2,347 6,262 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2029-30 2,076 239 1,651 2,378 6,344 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% 2030-31 2,103 242 1,673 2,410 6,428 33% 4% 26% 37% 100% Growth mid-2019-2029 19,336 2,228 15,382 22,156 59,102 33% 4% 26% 37% 100.0% Growth mid-2029-2031 4,178 482 3,324 4,788 12,772 33% 4% 26% 37% 100.0% Growth mid-2019-2031 23,514 2,710 18,706 26,944 71,874 33% 4% 26% 37% 100.0% Source: City of Ottawa

HEMSON 78 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 12 CITY OF OTTAWA FORECAST POPULATION IN NEW HOUSEHOLDS BY UNIT TYPE

Forecast Population in New Households Mid-Year Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total 2018-19 6,172 572 3,793 3,334 13,871 2019-20 6,253 579 3,843 3,377 14,053 2020-21 6,335 587 3,893 3,421 14,237 2021-22 6,418 595 3,944 3,466 14,424 2022-23 6,502 602 3,996 3,512 14,613 2023-24 6,588 610 4,049 3,558 14,804 2024-25 6,674 618 4,102 3,605 14,999 2025-26 6,762 626 4,155 3,652 15,196 2026-27 6,849 635 4,209 3,699 15,392 2027-28 6,939 643 4,264 3,748 15,594 2028-29 7,030 651 4,320 3,797 15,799 2029-30 7,122 660 4,377 3,847 16,005 2030-31 7,216 669 4,435 3,897 16,217 Growth mid-2019-2029 66,351 6,147 40,777 35,835 149,110 Growth mid-2029-2031 14,339 1,328 8,812 7,744 32,223 Growth mid-2019-2031 80,690 7,475 49,588 43,579 181,332 Source: City of Ottawa and Hemson Consulting Based on person per unit: 3.43 2.76 2.65 1.62

HEMSON 79 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 13 CITY OF OTTAWA FORECAST TOTAL EMPLOYMENT INCLUDES NO FIXED AND WORK AT HOME EMPLOYMENT

Annual Annual Annual Total Annual Commercial Industrial Institutional Mid-Year Growth Growth Growth Employment Growth 2010-11 379,769 80,095 98,309 558,173 2011-12 385,078 5,309 81,215 1,120 99,684 1,375 565,977 7,804 2012-13 389,829 4,751 82,217 1,002 100,914 1,230 572,960 6,983 2013-14 394,638 4,809 83,231 1,014 102,159 1,245 580,028 7,068 2014-15 399,507 4,869 84,258 1,027 103,419 1,260 587,184 7,156 2015-16 404,436 4,929 85,298 1,040 104,695 1,276 594,429 7,245 2016-17 409,425 4,989 86,350 1,052 105,987 1,292 601,762 7,333 2017-18 414,476 5,051 87,415 1,065 107,295 1,308 609,186 7,424 2018-19 419,589 5,113 88,494 1,079 108,618 1,323 616,700 7,514 2019-20 424,371 4,782 89,502 1,008 109,856 1,238 623,729 7,029 2020-21 429,207 4,836 90,522 1,020 111,108 1,252 630,837 7,108 2021-22 434,099 4,892 91,554 1,032 112,374 1,266 638,027 7,190 2022-23 439,046 4,947 92,597 1,043 113,655 1,281 645,298 7,271 2023-24 444,050 5,004 93,652 1,055 114,950 1,295 652,652 7,354 2024-25 449,111 5,061 94,719 1,067 116,260 1,310 660,090 7,438 2025-26 454,229 5,118 95,798 1,079 117,585 1,325 667,612 7,522 2026-27 459,406 5,177 96,890 1,092 118,925 1,340 675,221 7,609 2027-28 464,642 5,236 97,994 1,104 120,280 1,355 682,916 7,695 2028-29 469,937 5,295 99,112 1,118 121,651 1,371 690,700 7,784 2029-30 474,103 4,166 99,991 879 122,729 1,078 696,823 6,123 2030-31 478,305 4,202 100,877 886 123,817 1,088 703,000 6,177 Growth mid-2019-2029 50,348 10,618 13,033 74,000 Growth mid-2029-2031 8,368 1,765 2,166 12,300 Growth mid-2019-2031 58,716 12,383 15,199 86,300 Source: City of Ottawa, Hemson Consulting

HEMSON 80 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 14 CITY OF OTTAWA NON-RESIDENTIAL SPACE FORECAST INCLUDES NO FIXED AND WORK AT HOME EMPLOYMENT

Employment Density Assumptions Commercial 35.8 m2 per employee Industrial 92.0 m2 per employee Institutional 37.2 m2 per employee

Non-Residential Space Total Total Commercial Commercial Industrial Industrial Institutional Institutional Employment Employment Square Metres Square Feet Square Metre Square Feet Square Metres Square Feet Mid-Year Square Metres Square Feet 2018-19 182,880 1,968,505 99,240 1,068,210 49,164 529,200 331,284 3,565,915 2019-20 171,041 1,841,070 92,710 997,920 46,006 495,200 309,756 3,334,190 2020-21 172,972 1,861,860 93,813 1,009,800 46,526 500,800 313,312 3,372,460 2021-22 174,975 1,883,420 94,917 1,021,680 47,046 506,400 316,939 3,411,500 2022-23 176,943 1,904,595 95,929 1,032,570 47,604 512,400 320,475 3,449,565 2023-24 178,981 1,926,540 97,033 1,044,450 48,124 518,000 324,138 3,488,990 2024-25 181,020 1,948,485 98,136 1,056,330 48,681 524,000 327,838 3,528,815 2025-26 183,059 1,970,430 99,240 1,068,210 49,239 530,000 331,538 3,568,640 2026-27 185,169 1,993,145 100,436 1,081,080 49,796 536,000 335,401 3,610,225 2027-28 187,280 2,015,860 101,539 1,092,960 50,353 542,000 339,172 3,650,820 2028-29 189,390 2,038,575 102,827 1,106,820 50,948 548,400 343,165 3,693,795 2029-30 149,008 1,603,910 80,845 870,210 40,060 431,200 269,913 2,905,320 2030-31 150,296 1,617,770 81,489 877,140 40,431 435,200 272,216 2,930,110 Growth mid-2019-2029 1,800,831 19,383,980 976,580 10,511,820 484,322 5,213,200 3,261,733 35,109,000 Growth mid-2029-2031 299,304 3,221,680 162,334 1,747,350 80,491 866,400 542,129 5,835,430 Growth mid-2019-2031 2,100,135 22,605,660 1,138,914 12,259,170 564,813 6,079,600 3,803,862 40,944,430 Source: City of Ottawa, Hemson Consulting

HEMSON 81 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 15 CITY OF OTTAWA AREA-SPECIFIC POPULATION FORECAST SUMMARY

Inside the AnnualOutside the Annual Annual Total Total Rural Greenbelt Greenbelt Mid-Year Growth Growth Growth City-wide Growth 2018-19 542,240 3,901 343,710 5,850 110,344 1,073 996,294 10,824 2019-20 546,183 3,944 349,624 5,914 111,429 1,085 1,007,237 10,943 2020-21 550,170 3,987 355,603 5,979 112,526 1,097 1,018,300 11,063 2021-22 554,201 4,031 361,648 6,045 113,636 1,109 1,029,485 11,185 2022-23 558,277 4,075 367,759 6,111 114,757 1,121 1,040,793 11,308 2023-24 562,397 4,120 373,937 6,178 115,891 1,134 1,052,225 11,432 2024-25 566,562 4,165 380,183 6,246 117,037 1,146 1,063,782 11,557 2025-26 570,773 4,211 386,497 6,314 118,196 1,159 1,075,466 11,684 2026-27 575,030 4,257 392,882 6,384 119,367 1,172 1,087,279 11,813 2027-28 579,334 4,304 399,335 6,454 120,552 1,184 1,099,221 11,942 2028-29 583,685 4,351 405,860 6,525 121,749 1,197 1,111,294 12,073 2029-30 588,084 4,399 412,457 6,597 122,960 1,211 1,123,500 12,206 2030-31 592,531 4,447 419,126 6,669 124,183 1,224 1,135,840 12,340 Growth mid-2019-2029 41,445 62,150 11,405 115,000 Growth mid-2029-2031 8,846 13,265 2,434 24,546 Growth mid-2019-2031 50,291 75,415 13,839 139,546 Source: City of Ottawa

HEMSON 82 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 16 CITY OF OTTAWA AREA-SPECIFIC HOUSEHOLD SUMMARY

Inside the AnnualOutside the Annual Annual Total Total Rural Greenbelt Greenbelt Mid-Year Growth Growth Growth City-wide Growth 2018-19 254,162 2,320 136,613 2,706 34,351 472 425,126 5,498 2019-20 256,512 2,350 139,355 2,742 34,829 478 430,696 5,570 2020-21 258,894 2,381 142,132 2,778 35,313 484 436,339 5,643 2021-22 261,306 2,412 144,946 2,814 35,804 491 442,056 5,717 2022-23 263,750 2,444 147,797 2,851 36,301 497 447,848 5,792 2023-24 266,226 2,476 150,685 2,888 36,805 504 453,716 5,868 2024-25 268,735 2,509 153,612 2,926 37,315 510 459,661 5,945 2025-26 271,276 2,541 156,576 2,965 37,832 517 465,684 6,023 2026-27 273,850 2,574 159,579 3,003 38,355 524 471,785 6,101 2027-28 276,458 2,608 162,622 3,042 38,886 530 477,966 6,181 2028-29 279,101 2,642 165,704 3,082 39,423 537 484,228 6,262 2029-30 281,778 2,677 168,827 3,123 39,968 544 490,572 6,344 2030-31 284,490 2,712 171,991 3,164 40,519 552 497,000 6,428 Growth mid-2019-2029 24,939 29,091 5,072 59,102 Growth mid-2029-2031 5,389 6,287 1,096 12,772 Growth mid-2019-2031 30,328 35,378 6,168 71,874 Source: City of Ottawa

HEMSON 83 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 17 CITY OF OTTAWA AREA-SPECIFIC RESIDENTIAL UNIT TYPE AND POPULATION IN NEW UNITS FORECAST

Inside the Greenbelt Residential Forecast Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total

Growth in Units 2019-2029 850 778 3,642 19,668 24,939 Pop in New Households 2,798 1,953 9,430 31,811 45,992 Growth in Units 2019-2031 1,072 946 4,429 23,880.82 30,328 Pop in New Households 3,527 2,375 11,467 38,624 55,993 Based on ppu: 3.29 2.51 2.59 1.62

Outside the Greenbelt Residential Forecast Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total

Growth in Units 2019-2029 13,633 1,426 11,544 2,488 29,091 Pop in New Households 48,027 4,092 30,830 4,024 86,973 Growth in Units 2019-2031 16,542 1,735 14,038 3,063 35,378 Pop in New Households 58,272 4,976 37,492 4,955 105,695 Based on ppu: 3.52 2.87 2.67 1.62

Rural Residential Forecast Singles Semis Rows Apartments Total

Growth in Units 2019-2029 4,852 24 196 - 5,072 Pop in New Households 15,526 64 441 - 16,031 Growth in Units 2019-2031 5,901 29 239 - 6,168 Pop in New Households 18,882 78 536 - 19,496 Based on ppu: 3.20 2.65 2.25 1.62

HEMSON 84 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 18 CITY OF OTTAWA AREA-SPECIFIC TOTAL EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY INCLUDES NO FIXED AND WORK AT HOME EMPLOYMENT

Inside the AnnualOutside the Annual Annual Total Total Rural Greenbelt Greenbelt Mid-Year Growth Growth Growth City-wide Growth

2018-19 484,359 2,974 101,506 4,164 30,835 376 616,699 7,514 2019-20 487,141 2,782 105,401 3,895 31,186 351 623,728 7,029 2020-21 489,955 2,814 109,340 3,939 31,541 355 630,836 7,108 2021-22 492,801 2,846 113,325 3,984 31,901 360 638,026 7,190 2022-23 495,679 2,878 117,354 4,029 32,264 364 645,297 7,271 2023-24 498,590 2,911 121,429 4,075 32,632 368 652,651 7,354 2024-25 501,534 2,944 125,551 4,122 33,004 372 660,089 7,438 2025-26 504,511 2,977 129,720 4,168 33,380 376 667,611 7,522 2026-27 507,523 3,012 133,936 4,217 33,761 380 675,220 7,609 2027-28 510,569 3,046 138,201 4,264 34,145 385 682,915 7,695 2028-29 513,650 3,081 142,514 4,314 34,535 389 690,699 7,784 2029-30 516,074 2,424 145,907 3,393 34,841 306 696,822 6,123 2030-31 518,519 2,445 149,330 3,423 35,150 309 703,000 6,177 Growth mid-2019-2029 29,292 41,008 3,700 74,000 Growth mid-2029-2031 4,869 6,816 615 12,300 Growth mid-2019-2031 34,160 47,825 4,315 86,300 Source: City of Ottawa

HEMSON 85 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 19 CITY OF OTTAWA AREA-SPECIFIC RURAL SERVICED AND UNSERVICED POPULATION AND DWELLINGS FORECAST

Population Growth

Rural Serviced Rural Serviced Rural Serviced Total Rural Total Rural Mid-Year Water and Sewer Total Rural Water Sewer Serviced Unserviced Area

2019 2,410 5,419 7,255 15,084 95,260 110,344 2029 2,686 6,508 14,720 23,915 97,834 121,749 2031 2,745 6,741 16,314 25,800 98,384 124,183 Growth 2019-2029 276 1,090 7,465 8,831 2,574 11,405 Growth 2019-2031 335 1,322 9,059 10,716 3,123 13,839

Dwelling Units Growth

Rural Serviced Rural Serviced Rural Serviced Total Rural Total Rural Mid-Year Water and Sewer Total Rural Water Sewer Serviced Unserviced Area

2019 727 1,736 2,218 4,680 29,671 34,351 2029 811 2,093 4,581 7,485 31,938 39,423 2031 829 2,170 5,092 8,092 32,428 40,519 Growth 2019-2029 84 358 2,364 2,806 2,267 5,072 Growth 2019-2031 103 435 2,875 3,412 2,756 6,168

Population in New Dwelling Units Growth

Rural Serviced Rural Serviced Rural Serviced Total Rural Total Rural Mid-Year Water and Sewer Total Rural Water Sewer Serviced Unserviced Area

Growth 2019-2029 267 1,130 7,471 8,867 7,164 16,031 Growth 2019-2031 324 1,374 9,086 10,784 8,712 19,496 Growth 2019-2029 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 Growth 2019-2031 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16

Employment Growth

Rural Serviced Rural Serviced Rural Serviced Total Rural Total Rural Mid-Year Water and Sewer Total Rural Water Sewer Serviced Unserviced Area

2019 3,409 1,243 2,516 7,169 23,666 30,835 2029 3,990 1,379 2,954 8,324 26,211 34,535 2031 4,087 1,402 3,027 8,515 26,634 35,150 Growth 2019-2029 581 137 437 1,155 2,545 3,700 Growth 2019-2031 677 159 510 1,347 2,968 4,315 Notes: 1) Rural Serviced Water Area is defined as the serviced portion of South Gloucester and the the villages of Notre-Dame-de-Champs, Carlsbad Springs, Vars and Marionville. 2) Rural Serviced Sewer Area is defined as the parts of the village of Richmond not included in (3). 3) Rural Serviced Water and Sewer Area is defined as the serviced portion of Manotick and the villages of Munster and Carp and parts of the village of Richmond (Western Development lands and King's Landing). 4) Non-residential employment growth includes no fixed place of work employment and work at home

HEMSON 86 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 20 CITY OF OTTAWA AREA-SPECIFIC RURAL SERVICED AND UNSERVICED NON-RESIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT AND SPACE FORECAST INCLUDES WORK AT HOME AND NO-FIXED PLACE OF WORK MID-2019 to MID-2029

Employment Density Assumptions Commercial 35.8 m2 per employee Industrial 92.0 m2 per employee Institutional 37.2 m2 per employee

Non-Residential Forecast by Rural Area Commercial Industrial Institutional Total Rural Serviced Water

Employees 296 277 7 581 GFA (sq.m) 10,603 25,497 265 36,364 GFA (sq.ft.) 114,127 274,449 2,848 391,424 Rural Serviced Sewer Area

Employees 137 - - 137 GFA (sq.m) 4,882 - - 4,882 GFA (sq.ft.) 52,554 - - 52,554 Rural Serviced Water and Sewer Area

Employees 375 50 12 437 GFA (sq.m) 13,430 4,556 463 18,449 GFA (sq.ft.) 144,564 49,037 4,986 198,587 Total Rural Serviced Area

Employees 808 327 20 1,155 GFA (sq.m) 28,916 30,053 728 59,696 GFA (sq.ft.) 311,244 323,486 7,834 642,565 Total Rural Unserviced

Employees 1,721 680 144 2,545 GFA (sq.m) 61,563 62,552 5,349 129,464 GFA (sq.ft.) 662,654 673,304 57,580 1,393,538 Total Rural

Employees 2,530 1,007 164 3,700 GFA (sq.m) 90,478 92,605 6,077 189,160 GFA (sq.ft.) 973,898 996,790 65,415 2,036,102 Notes: 1) Rural Serviced Water Area is defined as the serviced portion of South Gloucester and the the villages of Notre-Dame-de- Champs, Carlsbad Springs, Vars and Marionville. 2) Rural Serviced Sewer Area is defined as the parts of the village of Richmond not included in 4). 3) Rural Serviced Water and Sewer Area is defined as the serviced portion of Manotick and the villages of Munster and Carp and parts of the village of Richmond (Western Development lands and King's Landing). 4) Total Employment Growth includes No Fixed Place of Work and Work at Home Employment. HEMSON 87 APPENDIX A.1 - TABLE 21 CITY OF OTTAWA AREA-SPECIFIC RURAL SERVICED AND UNSERVICED NON-RESIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT AND SPACE FORECAST INCLUDES WORK AT HOME AND NO-FIXED PLACE OF WORK MID-2019 to MID-2031

Employment Density Assumptions Commercial 35.8 m2 per employee Industrial 92.0 m2 per employee Institutional 37.2 m2 per employee

Non-Residential Forecast by Rural Area Commercial Industrial Institutional Total Rural Serviced Water

Employees 371 298 9 677 GFA (sq.m) 13,256 27,378 335 40,969 GFA (sq.ft.) 142,691 294,693 3,605 440,989 Rural Serviced Sewer Area

Employees 159 - - 159 GFA (sq.m) 5,694 - - 5,694 GFA (sq.ft.) 61,289 - - 61,289 Rural Serviced Water and Sewer Area

Employees 437 57 16 510 GFA (sq.m) 15,625 5,274 595 21,494 GFA (sq.ft.) 168,187 56,768 6,406 231,361 Total Rural Serviced Area

Employees 967 355 25 1,347 GFA (sq.m) 34,575 32,652 930 68,157 GFA (sq.ft.) 372,167 351,461 10,012 733,639 Total Rural Unserviced

Employees 2,003 785 180 2,968 GFA (sq.m) 71,650 72,189 6,697 150,536 GFA (sq.ft.) 771,232 777,035 72,084 1,620,351 Total Rural

Employees 2,970 1,140 205 4,315 GFA (sq.m) 106,225 104,841 7,627 218,693 GFA (sq.ft.) 1,143,399 1,128,496 82,095 2,353,990 Notes: 1) Rural Serviced Water Area is defined as the serviced portion of South Gloucester and the the villages of Notre-Dame- de-Champs, Carlsbad Springs, Vars and Marionville. 2) Rural Serviced Sewer Area is defined as the parts of the village of Richmond not included in 4). 3) Rural Serviced Water and Sewer Area is defined as the serviced portion of Manotick and the villages of Munster and Carp and parts of the village of Richmond (Western Development lands and King's Landing). 4) Total Employment Growth includes No Fixed Place of Work and Work at Home Employment. HEMSON 88

Appendix A.2

Public Transit Ridership Forecast

HEMSON 89

Appendix A.2

Public Transit Ridership Forecast

This appendix provides details of the ridership forecast used to prepare this Background Study for the City of Ottawa. The forecast method and key assumptions are discussed and the results of the forecasts are presented in the following sections.

A. Requirements of the Development Charges Act

As per the new requirements of the Development Charges Act and associated regulation that came into effect on January 1, 2016, transit services must be treated as a “discrete” service. Generally, it is understood that this provision is intended to preclude the inclusion of roads and related services and transit services in the same category for the purposes of the development charge calculation.

In accordance with the Development Charges Act, transit services must be based on a “planned level of service” rather than the more restrictive “10-year historical average level of service”. Any background study that incorporates transit services into the calculation must now include the following:

 An assessment of ridership forecast for all modes of transit and whether ridership is generated from existing or planned development (O.Reg. 82/98 s.8(2)4).

 An assessment of ridership capacity for all modes of transit over the 10-year forecast period (O. Reg. 82/98 s.8(2)4).

The ridership forecast for the purposes of this Background Study has been informed by the City’s 2013 Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and updated to reflect recent ridership forecast modelling completed by the City’s consultant AECOM1 and further refinements made by the City’s transportation staff. The forecast and ridership estimates are consistent with the City’s Affordability Model. Generally speaking, the analysis contained in this appendix is

1 Retained as part of the Capital Transit Partners consortium to support the preliminary design of the City's Stage 2 LRT project.

HEMSON 90

consistent with the approach and assumptions used in the 2017 DC Amendment Background Study for Transit and Roads and Related services.

The results of the forecast are discussed in the following sections.

B. Transit Service Delivery in the City of Ottawa

As demonstrated in Appendix A.1, Ottawa has historically experienced steady population and employment growth which is anticipated to continue over the forecast period. The infrastructure requirements relating to the increased need for transit services arising from new development in the city have been informed by the 2013 TMP.

As the city continues to develop, so will the need to provide adequate levels of transit service. Prior to the implementation of the 2013 TMP, Council endorsed a number of transit projects including the construction of the Confederation Line and O-Train expansion, double-decker bus acquisition, PRESTO card implementation, and access to real-time customer information2. The TMP also identified the implementation of the rapid transit network, including light rail transit (LRT) and bus rapid transit (BRT)3.

Importantly, the TMP also recommended the use of an “Affordable Road and Transit Network Model” (herein referred to as the “2031 Affordable Network”) to maximize gains in transit ridership within the City’s available funding resources. The Affordable Road and Transit Network, along with further ridership analysis completed by AECOM and City staff, have been used to inform the mode share estimates and corresponding ridership forecast for this Background Study.

For the purposes of determining the “planned level of service” for Transit, the City’s transit service capital program has been informed by the 2013 TMP and the Affordability Model. The City’s Affordability Model summarizes the transit operating and capital needs over a long range financial planning horizon, and assesses the affordability of the capital plan within forecast sources of revenue from fares, transit taxes, and other sources. These forecasts are

2 2013 TMP. Section 6.0 Transform Ottawa’s Transit System, page 53 3 2013 TMP. Section 6.1 Expand the Rapid Transit and Transit Priority Network, page 54

HEMSON 91

based on a variety of factors including population, ridership and assessment growth projections.

In late February 2019, City Council announced that the scope of work and associated costs for Stage 2 LRT had increased. On March 4, 2019, City Council approved the 2019 Budget and the increased scope of work for the Stage 2 LRT that will expand the O-Train by 44 kilometres to the south, east and west, and add 24 new stations4. However, these additional costs have not yet been included in the Transit development charges calculation. The City has undertaken an initial update to the Transit Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) as submitted to Council in February 20175 to reflect the new Stage 2 cost increases. It is anticipated that these costs will be incorporated into future Development Charges Background Studies as permissible under the legislation.

The purpose of the transit ridership forecast is to inform the allocation of development and non-development related costs for the transit development charge calculation.

C. Forecast Methodology and Key Assumptions

The 2013 TMP estimates have been adjusted to reflect the TMP Affordable Road and Transit networks (plus LRT extensions). The City’s forecast has been informed by model results prepared by AECOM to support the preliminary design for the Stage 2 LRT and further analysis completed by City staff. The forecast detailed in the following sections includes 2011 actual ridership numbers as estimated from the latest 2011 National Capital Region Origin-Destination (OD) survey, forecast models and 2031 forecast ridership estimates from the Regional Transportation Model as of August 2018. The interim modal share for 2019 (base year) and 2029 (the end of the 10-year forecast period) were developed from these estimates. Consistent with the ridership analysis included in the 2013 TMP, AM peak period ridership has been used for the purposes of updating the development charges ridership forecast.

4 See item 16 Contract Award of Ottawa Stage 2 LRT Projects and Related Matters 5 See report ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002

HEMSON 92

The majority of AM trips originate at a residential development and end at a non-residential destination. For the purposes of the analysis, only one trip is counted and reported between the origin and destination. However, both the origin and destination uses are responsible for “generating” these trips.

D. Ridership Forecast

As required by the Development Charges Act, the anticipated ridership forecast includes an assessment of all modes (collectively) of transit proposed to be funded by development charges over the forecast period. The forecast includes both bus and rapid rail transit.

1. Anticipated Ridership

As shown in Figure 1 (Exhibit 2.12 from the 2013 TMP), the morning peak period 2031 mode shares illustrate a shift away from traditional forms of transportation (i.e. automobile trips) to other forms of travel such as walking, cycling and transit. The TMP identified a 26 per cent transit mode share to be achieved by 2031.

As part of the TMP analysis, two adaptations of the proposed transit network were examined; the “2031 Network Concept” and the “2031 Affordable Network”. The transit infrastructure required to achieve the TMP targets was based on the “2031 Network Concept” whereas the “2031 Affordable Network” was designed to ensure the affordability of the proposed infrastructure over the planning period.

Figure 1: 2013 TMP Mode Share Targets (Source: 2013 TMP)

Since the completion of the TMP, new ridership forecast information has become available. Based on the proposed 2031 Affordable Network and the revised model estimates provided by AECOM, it was determined that the 2031 transit mode share of 26 per cent would not be achieved at the end of

HEMSON 93

the planning period. Rather, the revised model anticipates that a transit mode share of 23.6 per cent will be achieved by 2031 instead of the 26 per cent. The outputs of the most recent ridership modelling are shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Revised 2031 Mode Share Estimates from Transportation Model (Unadjusted)

2011 Model Estimates 2031 Model Estimates Modes of Travel Person Trips Mode Share Person Trips Mode Share Walking/Cycling 65,000 13.1% 92,300 15.0% Transit 106,100 21.5% 145,000 23.6% Auto Person 323,200 65.4% 377,800 61.4% Total Person Trips 494,300 100.0% 615,100 100.0% Notes: * Includes trips to, from, and within Ottawa (excluding external and commercial trips) * 2011 walking/cycling demand estimated based on mode share observations from 2011 OD Survey * 2011 forecasts based on Model Version 1.11; 2031 forecasts based on Model Version 1.13 (updated August 2018) * 2031 walking/cycling demand estimated based on mode share targets from 2013 TMP * 2031 forecasts correspond to TMP Affordable Road and Transit networks (plus LRT extensions)

The revised ridership estimates shown in Figure 2 were post-processed by the City’s transportation staff to confirm the reasonableness of the model outputs in light of recent trends and develop annual projections which reflect the opening of Stage 1 and 2 LRT. From this work, it was determined that the model estimate of 145,000 transit person trips by 2031 would likely not be achieved. Instead, staff estimate that the proposed transportation infrastructure will achieve the forecast transit person trips by 2034. Based on the adjusted ridership forecast, it is estimated that a transit mode share of 22.6 per cent will be achieved by 2029. This revised ridership forecast is used for the purposes of the Transit development charges calculation and is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Person Trip Projections by Mode for Key Horizon Years

Total Person Walking / Auto Person Transit Mode Year Motorized Trips Transit Trips Trips Cycling Trips Trips Share 2011 477,500 62,800 414,700 102,500 312,200 21.5% 2019 477,400 63,800 413,600 96,400 317,200 20.2% 2029 569,200 82,800 486,400 128,800 357,600 22.6% 2031 587,600 86,600 501,000 135,300 365,700 23.0% 2034 615,100 92,300 522,800 145,000 377,800 23.6% Notes: * Assumes 2031 model estimates delayed until 2034 (for all modes) * Auto person trips assumed to grow at 0.2% per year between 2011 & 2019 (based on fuel sales data for 2011 to 2016) * Walk ing/cycling trips in 2019 estimated using the same growth rate as for auto person trips (assume impacted by similar factors) * Transit ridership in 2019 based on 2017 observed ridership, with no change in 2018 and 2% growth in 2019 when Stage 1 opens * Transit ridership in 2029 and 2031 based on linear interpolation between 2019 and 2034 values * Person trips in 2029 & 2031 based on linear interpolation between 2019 and 2034 values * Linear interpolation also used to estimate walking/cycling trips in intermediate horizon years

HEMSON 94

Figure 4 provides an overview of the ridership forecast from 2011 to 2034, including the interim years of 2019 and 2029. As demonstrated, the total transit person trips are anticipated to increase from 96,400 in 2019 to 128,800 in 2029, achieving a transit mode share of 22.6 per cent.

Figure 4: Anticipated Ridership for Transit and Total Person Trips

Person Trip Projections, AM Peak Period 700,000

600,000 615,100 587,600 500,000 569,200 477,500 477,400 400,000 2031 = 23.0% 300,000 2034 = 23.6% 2011 = 21.5% Estimated Trips 200,000 2019 = 20.2% 2029 = 22.6% 145,000 100,000 135,300 102,500 96,400 128,800 0 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Horizon year Total Person Trips

2. Assessment of Ridership Capacity

The proposed transit infrastructure included in the Transit capital program is required to achieve the total transit person trips of 145,000 and transit mode share estimate of 23.6 per cent by 2034. However, recognizing that only 128,800 transit person trips will be achieved in 2029, a portion of the capital costs have been deemed a post-period benefitting share relating to infrastructure improvements required to achieve the planned level of service to 2034.

E. Transit Development Charges Capital Program Allocations

The benefit to existing (BTE) and post-period benefit shares were calculated based on the anticipated ridership from existing and planned development. A summary of the forecast is provided below:

1. Benefit to Existing Share Calculation

Figure 5 provides commentary on the scenarios used to arrive at the BTE share calculations. The scenarios are differentiated by currently available

HEMSON 95

infrastructure versus future networks over the planning horizon. As shown below, Scenario A corresponds to the existing “base” development as of 2019 and the existing road and transit networks. Scenario B provides an estimate of how the existing population would change their travel behaviour once the future road and transit networks are provided. Finally, Scenario C provides an estimate of what ridership will be generated by existing and planned development in 2034 based on the future road and transit networks.

This analysis does not account for differences in the mode share between existing and new development. Consistent with the approach employed in the 2014 and 2017 Background Studies, the analysis assumes all development will have the same future modal share even though there is some evidence that new development could have higher transit shares than existing built up areas. The City will continue to review transit ridership data, based on location and development pattern, to determine if usage is different. Subsequent development charge updates may reflect different transit mode shares between existing and new development.

Figure 5: Scenario Description for BTE Share Calculation

Scenario Scenario No. Comment Description 2019 Demand – A Refer to Figure 3 Estimated Apply estimated 2034 city-wide 2019 Demand mode shares to estimated 2019 total B with 2034 Modal person trips to estimate the increase Shares in transit ridership due to modal shift within the existing population 2034 Demand - C Refer to Figure 3 Estimated

Figure 6 uses the results of the three scenarios described in Figure 5 to estimate the new transit demand generated by the existing population due to the modal shift (shown as the difference between Scenario A and B) and the new transit demand triggered by new development (shown as the difference between Scenario B and C).

Based on the estimated travel demand, the calculated benefit to existing share is 33.1 per cent. This share accounts for the benefit that will be received by existing development in achieving the identified total transit person trips and revised mode share of 23.6 per cent at the end of the planning horizon.

HEMSON 96

Figure 6: BTE Calculation Results

Proportion of New Transit Demand Allocated to Existing Person Trips by Mode of Travel and New Development Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Existing New Mode of Travel Total 2019 Base 2019 Adjusted 2034 Base Development Development Walking/Cycling 63,800 71,600 92,300 Scen B-Scen A Scen C-Scen B Scen C-Scen A Transit 96,400 112,500 145,000 16,100 32,500 48,600 Auto Person 317,200 293,200 377,800 33% 67% Total Person Trips 477,400 477,300 615,100

Mode Share Mode Share: Trips Generated by New Development Mode of Travel Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Mode of Travel Trips Mode Share Walking/Cycling 13.4% 15.0% 15.0% Walking/Cycling 20,700 15.0% Transit 20.2% 23.6% 23.6% Transit 32,500 23.6% Auto Person 66.4% 61.4% 61.4% Auto Person 84,600 61.4% Total Person Trips 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total Person Trips 137,800 100.0%

2. Post-Period Benefit Calculation

For the proposed development-related transit projects, the post-period benefit calculation was based on the increased AM transit trips over the 2029 to 2034 planning period.

Increase in AM transit trips 2029-2034 = 16,200 (145,000 – 128,800)

Total new AM transit trips 2019-2034 = 48,600 (145,000 – 96,400)

Post-period benefit calculation = 33.3% (16,200 / 48,600)

For projects with outstanding debenture payments, the post-period benefit shares were calculated based on shares of transit growth over the 2019-2029 and 2029-2034 periods. Recognizing that only the development charge eligible costs are included in the outstanding debenture payments, no benefit to existing deductions have been made. As such, the post-period benefit calculation for these projects is as follows:

Restated 2019 AM transit trips (Scenario B 2019 Adjusted) = 112,500

Increase in AM transit trips from 2019 to 2034 = 32,500 (145,000 – 112,500)

Increase in AM transit trips from 2019 to 2029 = 16,300 (128,800 – 112,500)

Increase in AM transit trips from 2029 to 2034 = 16,200 (145,000 – 128,800)

Post-period benefit calculation = 49.8% (16,200 / 35,500)

HEMSON 97

Appendix B

Transit Technical Appendix

HEMSON 98

Appendix B

Transit Technical Appendix

This appendix provides the detailed analysis undertaken to establish the amended development charge rates for Transit services in the City of Ottawa. The appendix addresses the requirements of the legislation for calculating transit development charges.

A. Planned Level of Service

The Development Charges Act (s.5.2 (3)) requires that in estimating the increase in need for Transit services the increased need “shall not exceed the planned level of service over the 10-year period immediately following the preparation of the background study”. For the purposes of the development charge calculations, the “planned level of service” is considered the City Council approved 10-year capital program (2019-2029) as informed by the 2014 and 2017 Development Charges Background Study and the City’s 2017 Transit Long-Range Financial Plan. Through its approval of the program, Council has indicated that it intends to ensure that the increase in need in Transit service will be met. Council has also determined that the construction, operation and maintenance of the transit infrastructure is financially sustainable.

B. Description of Projects Included in the Capital Program

Table 1 provides details on the 2019-2029 development-related capital program for Transit services. The capital program includes projects associated with the development of the Stage 2 Light Rail Transit (LRT) including studies, park and ride facilities, rail construction and vehicle acquisition. As permitted by the Development Charges Act (DCA), the Transit capital program also includes the recovery of past commitments as well as debt and finance related costs.

Consistent with the Minutes of Settlement (MOS) arising from an appeal of the 2014 Background Study, no additional transit projects were added to the Transit development charge calculation included in the 2017 Amendment DC Study. In accordance with the MOS, the 2017 Transit capital program identified future transit projects that would be recovered in subsequent DC

HEMSON 99

Background Studies, these costs were identified as “to be determined” (TBD) and related to Stage 2 infrastructure. As part of the 2019 DC Background Study update, these costs, as shown in the 2017 Amendment DC Study, are now included in the Transit development charges calculation.

As discussed in Appendix A.2, in late February 2019, City Council announced that the scope of work and associated costs for Stage 2 LRT had increased. On March 4, 2019, City Council approved the 2019 Budget and the increased scope of work for the Stage 2 LRT that will expand the O-Train by 44 kilometres to the south, east and west, and add 24 new stations1. However, these additional costs have not yet been included in the Transit development charges calculation. The City has undertaken an initial update to the Transit Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) as submitted to Council in February 20172 to reflect the new Stage 2 cost increases. It is anticipated that these additional costs will be incorporated into future Development Charges Background Studies as permissible under the legislation.

1. Recovery of Negative DC Reserve Fund Balance

The City’s Public Transit DC reserve fund is currently in a deficit position of $27.83 million. This balance relates to the funding of development-related capital infrastructure that will service development over the identified planning period.

2. Transit Projects

The identified transit projects are generally consistent with the infrastructure identified in the 2014 and 2017 DC Background Studies. However, as part of this study, the project costs, anticipated grants, benefit to existing and post- period benefit calculations have been updated.

3. Recovery of Past Commitments (Post-Period Capacity Debt)

In accordance with the DCA, eligible capital expenditures include costs incurred or to be incurred by a municipality and can include interest on money borrowed (s.5(3)). This category includes projects identified in previous Development Charge By-laws with committed funding that are completed or will be completed in the future. The costs related to these projects are considered to be entirely related to new development and are net of benefit to existing allocations.

1 See item 16 Contract Award of Ottawa Stage 2 LRT Projects and Related Matters 2 See report ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002

HEMSON 100

4. Current Debt Payments – Principle and Interest

The City has debenture costs for transit related infrastructure identified under previous Development Charge By-laws. These costs relate to projects that have already been constructed and include transitway infrastructure, transit corridor protection measures, vehicle acquisition etc. As only the development charge eligible portion of these projects were included in the debenture costs, no benefit to existing deduction has been made.

5. New Public Transit Projects

As part of the City’s 2017 Amendment DC Background Study, several new transit projects relating to the proposed Stage 2 LRT were identified in the capital program. However, these costs were excluded from the 2017 Transit development charges calculation consistent with the MOS arising from the appeal of the 2014 DC Background Study.

These costs are now included in the 2019 Transit calculation. Consistent with the other transit projects, as part of this study, the project costs, anticipated grants, benefit to existing and post-period benefit calculations have been updated.

C. Summary of Capital Program Costs and Allocations

The following provides a summary of the 2019 Transit capital program costs. The detailed costs and allocations for the various projects are shown in Table 1. As stated previously, the current summary of capital costs does not include the recent scope of work changes to Stage 2 LRT as announced in late February 2019 and approved by Council on March 4, 2019.

Gross Costs • Includes Stage 2 LRT projects, recovery of past committements as well as debt $4.14 billion and finance related costs

Grants and Subsidies • Anticipated grants identifed for Stage 2 related projects is removed from the $2.09 billion gross costs • The net municipal capital program Net Municipal Costs amounts to the total gross costs ($4.14 $2.05 billion billion) less anticipated grants ($2.09 billion)

HEMSON 101

1. Allocation of Net Municipal Cost: Development and Non- Development Related

The net municipal costs are then allocated between benefit to existing (BTE) and development-related shares. It should be noted that under the amended DCA, transit is now a service for which the ten per cent statutory reduction no longer applies. Therefore, only the BTE and development-related allocations are discussed below.

•Ridership forecast discussed in Appendix Benefit to Existing (BTE) A.2 has been used to inform the BTE shares $582.88 million •This amount cannot be recovered by development charges

Development-Related •The net municipal cost less the BTE share allocation results in the development- $1.47 billion related share of the capital program

2. Allocation of Development-Related Costs: In-Period Recovery and Post-Period Benefit

The total $1.47 billion in development-related eligible costs is then allocated between in-period and post-period recovery periods. For most of the Transit investments, a portion of the capital program will service development that will not occur until after 2029. This portion of the capital program is deemed to be “pre-built” service capacity and is considered as committed excess capacity to be considered in future development charges studies. The analysis that supports the post-period share allocations is discussed further in Appendix A.2.

• In-period costs are eligible for recovery In-Period (2019-2029) through development charges and $742.08 million collected against development over the ten-year period • Ridership forecast discussed in Appendix A.2 has been used to inform Post-Period (Post-2029) the post-period shares $728.29 million • This amount will be considered for recovery in future development charges studies 3. Allocation of Costs Eligible for Recovery

The in-period development-related cost of $742.08 million has been allocated to the benefitting residential, industrial and non-industrial sectors. The costs

HEMSON 102 have been allocated based on shares of net population and employment growth.

Residential (61%) • Allocated based on shares of net $451.53 million population growth

Industrial (6%) • Allocated based on shares of net $41.69 million industrial employment growth

Non-Industrial (34%) • Allocated based on shares of net non- $248.86 million industrial employment growth

D. Cash Flow Analysis

A cash flow analysis is also undertaken to account for the timing of projects and receipt of development charges. Interest earnings or borrowing costs are accounted for in the calculation as allowed under the DCA. Based on the development forecast, the analysis calculates the development charges rate that is required to finance the net development-related capital spending plan including provisions for any borrowing costs or interest earnings on the reserve funds. The cash flow analysis is designed so that the closing cash balance at the end of the planning period is as close to nil as possible.

In order to determine appropriate development charges rates reflecting borrowing and earnings necessary to support the net development-related funding requirement, assumptions are used for the inflation rate and interest rate. An inflation rate of 2.50% is used for the funding requirements, and interest rates of 3.75% (negative balance) and 1.25% (positive balance) are used for borrowing/earnings on the funds.

Table 2 displays the results of the cash flow analysis and provides the adjusted or final per capita residential and per square foot (of GFA) non- residential development charges. As shown in Table 2, debenture finance interest are not inflated and the principle repayment charge (related to outstanding debenture payments) will not be indexed.

After considering interest and borrowing rates the adjusted residential and non-residential development charges are as follows:

HEMSON 103

 Residential = $3,121.93 per capita

 Non-Residential (Industrial) = $44.00 per square metre

 Non-Residential (Non-Industrial) = $112.25 per square metre

HEMSON 104 APPENDIX B TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED PROGRAM PUBLIC TRANSIT

Gross Grants/ Net Ineligible Costs Total DC Eligible Costs Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Replacement 0% DC Eligible Prior mid-2019 Post Cost Recoveries Cost % & BTE Shares Reduction Costs Growth mid-2029 mid-2029

1.1 Recovery of Negative Reserve Balance Reserve Fund Balance as of December 31, 2018 2020 - 2020$ 27,832,833 $ -$ 27,832,833 0%-$ $ -$ 27,832,833 $ -$ 27,832,833 $ - A Subtotal Recovery of Negative Reserve Balance $ 27,832,833 $ - $ 27, 832,833 $ - $ - $ 27,832,833 $ - $ 27,832,833 $ -

1.2 Transit Projects 2.09E+04 Light Rail Transit Phase 2 - Vehicles 2020 - 2020$ 544,487,400 $ 347,200,000 $ 197,287,400 33% $ 65, 356,526 $ - $ 131,930,874 $ - $ 131,930,874 $ - 2.1394 Origin-destination Survey 2020 - 2020 $ 424,800 $ - $ 424,800 33% $ 140,726 $ - $ 284,074 $ - $ 284,074 $ - 2.0194 Western Transitway (Bayshore-Moodie) 2020 - 2020$ 17,954,172 $ - $ 17, 954,172 33% $ 5,947,781 $ - $ 12,006,391 $ - $ 12,006,391 $ - 2.0014 Baseline Transit Corridor (Baseline Station-Heron Station) 2020 - 2022$ 112,741,920 $ 74, 409,667 $ 38, 332,253 33% $ 12, 698,545 $ - $ 25,633,708 $ - $ 25,633,708 $ - O-Train Extension-Greenboro to Bowesville & New Stations- 2.089A4 2020 - 2023$ 185,637,600 $ 116,900,000 $ 68, 737,600 33% $ 22, 771,098 $ - $ 45,966,502 $ - $ 45,966,502 $ - Gladstone & Walkley 2.089B4 Orleans Light Rail Transit Phase 2 - Blair to Place d'Orleans 2020 - 2023$ 497,122,200 $ 313,100,000 $ 184,022,200 33% $ 60, 962,087 $ - $ 123,060,113 $ - $ 123,060,113 $ - 2.089C4 Western Light Rail Transit Phase 2 - Tunney's Pasture to Baseline 2020 - 2023$ 861,175,800 $ 575,954,375 $ 285,221,425 33% $ 94, 486,933 $ - $ 190,734,492 $ - $ 190,734,492 $ - 2.089D4 Western Light Rail Transit Phase 2 - Lincoln Fields to Bayshore 2020 - 2023$ 540,876,600 $ 340,600,000 $ 200,276,600 33% $ 66, 346,775 $ - $ 133,929,825 $ - $ 51,238,783 $ 82,691,042 2.0994 Transit Vehicles 2020 - 2024$ 60,109,200 $ - $ 60, 109,200 33% $ 19, 912,719 $ - $ 40,196,481 $ - $ - $ 40,196,481 2.0244 Rapid Transit Environmental Assessment Studies 2020 - 2029$ 1,998,684 $ - $ 1,998,684 33% $ 662,115 $ - $ 1,336,569 $ - $ - $ 1,336,569 2.0844 Transit Corridor Protection 2020 - 2029$ 16,640,478 $ - $ 16, 640,478 33% $ 5,512,586 $ - $ 11,127,892 $ - $ - $ 11,127,892 2.5444 Park and Ride Facilities 2020 - 2029$ 14,837,202 $ - $ 1 4,837,202 33% $ 4,915,205 $ - $ 9,921,997 $ - $ - $ 9,921,997 2.0024 TMP Transit Priority Network 2020 - 2029$ 1,961,514 $ - $ 1,961,514 33% $ 649,802 $ - $ 1,311,712 $ - $ - $ 1,311,712 2.1494 TRANS Model Projects 2022 - 2022$ 1,423,080 $ - $ 1,423,080 33% $ 471,432 $ - $ 951,648 $ - $ - $ 951,648 2.1394 Origin-destination Survey 2024 - 2024 $ 488,520 $ - $ 488,520 33% $ 161,835 $ - $ 326,685 $ - $ - $ 326,685 2.1494 TRANS Model Projects 2027 - 2027$ 1,274,400 $ -$ 1,274,400 33% $ 422,178 $ -$ 852,222 $ -$ -$ 852,222 B Subtotal Transit Projects $ 2,859,153,569 $ 1,768,164,042 $ 1, 090,989,527 $ 361,418,343 $ - $ 729,571,184 $ - $ 580,854,937 $ 148,716,247

1.3 Recovery of Past Commitments 906933 CLS*2013 Transit Corridor Protection 2020 - 2020 $ 60,000 $ - $ 60,000 0% $ - $ - $ 60,000 $ - $ 60,000 $ - 907045 CLS*S37 Hickory St Pedestrian Pathway 2020 - 2020 $ 69,000 $ - $ 69,000 0% $ - $ - $ 69,000 $ - $ 69,000 $ - 906968 CLS*Miscellaneous Vehicle Growth 2020 - 2020 $ 4,525 $ - $ 4,525 0% $ - $ - $ 4,525 $ - $ 4,525 $ - 907201 O-OTM Civic Works - Cash Allowances 2021 - 2021 $ 90,000 $ -$ 90,000 0%-$ $ -$ 90,000 $ -$ -$ 90,000 C Subtotal Recovery of Past Commitments $ 223,525 $ - $ 223,525 $ - $ - $ 223,525 $ - $ 133,525 $ 90,000

1.4 Current Debt Payments - Principle and Interest Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Principal Payments 2020 - 2029$ 22,685,495 $ - $ 22, 685,495 0% $ - $ - $ 22,685,495 $ - $ 11,377,648 $ 11,307,847 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Interest Payments 2020 - 2029$ 57,340,214 $ - $ 57, 340,214 0% $ - $ - $ 57,340,214 $ - $ 28,758,323 $ 28,581,891 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Principal Payments - 903273 - 905176 - 2020 - 2029$ 77,615,444 $ - $ 77, 615,444 0% $ - $ - $ 77,615,444 $ - $ 38,927,130 $ 38,688,314 908650 - 904684 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Interest Payments 2020 - 2029$ 108,063,877 $ -$ 108,063,877 0%-$ $ -$ 108,063,877 $ -$ 54,198,191 $ 53,865,686 D Subtotal Current Debt Payments - Principle and Interest $ 265,705,030 $ - $ 265,705,030 $ - $ - $ 265,705,030 $ - $ 133,261,292 $ 132,443,738

HEMSON 105 APPENDIX B TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED PROGRAM PUBLIC TRANSIT

1.5 New Public Transit Projects 2.0144 Transportation Master Plan 2020 - 2029$ 1,911,600 $ - $ 1,911,600 33% $ 633,267 $ - $ 1,278,333 $ - $ - $ 1,278,333 2.0007 West Transitway (March Road to Terry Fox Drive) 2020 - 2029$ 123,192,000 $ - $ 123,192,000 33%$ 40,810,519 $ - $ 82,381,481 $ - $ - $ 82,381,481 O-Train Extension CL West - Bayshore to Moodie 2020 - 2029$ 74,340,000 $ - $ 74,340,000 33%$ 24,627,037 $ - $ 49,712,963 $ - $ - $ 49,712,963 2.0017 LRT Maintenance Service Facilities - Moodie, Walkley & Belfast 2020 - 2029$ 276,120,000 $ - $ 276,120,000 33%$ 91,471,852 $ - $ 184,648,148 $ - $ - $ 184,648,148 2.0027 Light Rail Transitway - Extension to Trim Road 2020 - 2029$ 168,327,000 $ 160,000,000 $ 8,327,000 33%$ 2,758,533 $ - $ 5,568,467 $ - $ - $ 5,568,467 2.0037 Light Rail Transitway - Extension to Airport 2020 - 2029$ 164,610,000 $ 160,000,000 $ 4,610,000 33%$ 1,527,181 $ - $ 3,082,819 $ - $ - $ 3,082,819 Provision for Future Growth Related Transit Projects 2020 - 2029$ 180,000,000 $ -$ 180,000,000 33% $ 59,629,630 $ -$ 120,370,370 $ -$ -$ 120,370,370 E Subtotal New Public Transit Projects $ 988,500,600 $ 320,000,000 $ 668,500,600 $ 221,458,019 $ - $ 447,042,581 $ - $ - $ 447,042,581

Total Negative Reserve Fund Balance (A) $ 27,832,833 $ - $ 27,832,833 $ - $ - $ 27,832,833 $ - $ 27,832,833 $ - Total Transit Projects with BTE Share (B) $ 2,859,153,569 $ 1,768,164,042 $ 1,090,989,527 $ 361,418,343 $ - $ 729,571,184 $ - $ 580,854,937 $ 148,716,247 Total Recovery of Past Commitments (C) $ 223,525 $ - $ 223,525 $ - $ - $ 223,525 $ - $ 133,525 $ 90,000 Total Debenture Costs - Principle & Interest (D) $ 265,705,030 $ - $ 265,705,030 $ - $ - $ 265,705,030 $ - $ 133,261,292 $ 132,443,738 Total New Public Transit Projects (E) $ 988,500,600 $ 320,000,000 $ 668,500,600 $ 221,458,019 $ - $ 447,042,581 $ - $ - $ 447,042,581

TOTAL $ 4,141,415,557 $ 2,088,164,042 $ 2,053,251,515 $ 582,876,362 $ - $ 1,470,375,153 $ - $ 742,082,587 $ 728,292,566

COST ALLOCATION - CITY-WIDE Residential Development Charge Calculation Transit Cost Allocations - Transit Projects Residential Share of mid-2019 - mid-20299 DC Eligible Costs 61% $451,531,733 Ridership Allocation 10-Year Growth in Population in New Units 149,110 Benefit to Existing 16,100 33.13% In-period 16,300 33.54% Development Charge Per Capita $3,028.19 Post-Period Benefit 16,200 33.33% Development Charge Per Single & Semi-Detached Unit 3.36 $10,170 Total 48,600 100.00%

Non-Residential Development Charge Calculation Transit Cost Allocations - Debentures Industrial Ridership Allocation Non-Residential Share of mid-2019 - mid-2029 DC Eligible Costs 6% $41,690,121 In-period 16,300 50.15% 10-Year Growth in Square Metres 976,580 PPB Share for Debt Payments 16,200 49.85% Development Charge Per Square Metre $42.69 Total 32,500 100.00% Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of mid-2019 - mid-2029 DC Eligible Costs 34% $248,860,733 10-Year Growth in Square Metres 2,285,153 Development Charge Per Square Metre $108.90

HEMSON 106 APPENDIX B TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA CASHFLOW AND DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE PUBLIC TRANSIT

CITY-WIDE CHARGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGE (in $000)

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 PUBLIC TRANSIT 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 TOTAL

OPENING CASH BALANCE $0.0 ($139,110.4) ($176,822.6) ($216,050.1) ($251,125.6) ($217,662.0) ($181,099.4) ($141,250.8) ($97,928.4) ($50,917.2)

2017-2027 RESIDENTIAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS - Public Transit Services: Non Inflated $172,489.19 $67,718.9 $67,718.9 $62,519.8 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $370,446.8 - Public Transit Services: Inflated $172,489.19 $69,411.9 $71,147.2 $67,327.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $380,375.2 - Public Transit Infrastructure: Debenture Finance Interest (1) $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $50,476.2 - Public Transit (Inflated + Debenture Financed) $177,536.8 $74,459.5 $76,194.8 $72,374.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $5,047.6 $430,851.4

NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - Population Growth in New Units 14,053 14,237 14,424 14,613 14,804 14,999 15,196 15,392 15,594 15,799 149,110

REVENUE - DC Receipts: Inflated $40,986.7 $42,562.0 $44,198.1 $45,897.4 $47,662.1 $49,494.8 $51,397.7 $53,364.9 $55,416.3 $57,546.1 $488,526.2

INTEREST - Interest on Opening Balance $0.0 ($5,216.6) ($6,630.8) ($8,101.9) ($9,417.2) ($8,162.3) ($6,791.2) ($5,296.9) ($3,672.3) ($1,909.4) ($55,198.7) - Interest on In-year Transactions ($2,560.3) ($598.1) ($599.9) ($496.4) $266.3 $277.8 $289.7 $302.0 $314.8 $328.1 ($2,476.1)

TOTAL REVENUE $38,426.4 $36,747.3 $36,967.3 $37,299.1 $38,511.3 $41,610.2 $44,896.2 $48,370.0 $52,058.8 $55,964.8 $430,851.4

CLOSING CASH BALANCE ($139,110.4) ($176,822.6) ($216,050.1) ($251,125.6) ($217,662.0) ($181,099.4) ($141,250.8) ($97,928.4) ($50,917.2) $0.0

2019 Principle Repayment Charge (2) $ 205.28 2019 Adjusted Capital Cost & Finance Interest Charge Per Capita $ 2,916.65 Allocation of Capital Program Total Charge per Capita $ 3,121.93 Residential Sector 60.8% Industrial 5.6% Single & Semi 3.36 Non-Industrial 33.5% Charge per SDU after cash flow analysis $ 10,485 Rates Notes: Inflation Rate 2.50% (1) Debenture finance interest are not inflated Interest Rate on Positive Balances 1.25% (2) Principle Repayment Charge will not be indexed Interest Rate on Negative Balances 3.75%

HEMSON 107 APPENDIX B TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA CASHFLOW AND DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE PUBLIC TRANSIT

CITY-WIDE CHARGE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGE (in $000)

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 PUBLIC TRANSIT 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 TOTAL

OPENING CASH BALANCE $0.00 ($12,816.65) ($16,273.85) ($19,874.67) ($23,101.16) ($20,005.79) ($16,631.91) ($12,963.74) ($8,980.20) ($4,668.18)

2017-2027 NON-RESIDENTIAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS - Public Transit Services: Non Inflated $15,926.00 $6,252.52 $6,252.52 $5,772.48 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $34,203.5 - Public Transit Services: Inflated $15,926.0 $6,408.8 $6,569.0 $6,216.3 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $35,120.2 - Public Transit Infrastructure: Debenture Finance Interest (1) $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $4,660.5 - Public Transit (Inflated + Debenture Financed) $16,392.05 $6,874.88 $7,035.10 $6,682.38 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $466.05 $39,780.7

NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - Growth in Square Metres 92,710 93,813 94,917 95,929 97,033 98,136 99,240 100,436 101,539 102,827 976,580

REVENUE - DC Receipts: Inflated $3,811.3 $3,953.1 $4,099.6 $4,246.9 $4,403.1 $4,564.5 $4,731.3 $4,908.0 $5,085.9 $5,279.2 $45,082.8

INTEREST - Interest on Opening Balance $0.0 ($480.6) ($610.3) ($745.3) ($866.3) ($750.2) ($623.7) ($486.1) ($336.8) ($175.1) ($5,074.4) - Interest on In-year Transactions ($235.9) ($54.8) ($55.0) ($45.7) $24.6 $25.6 $26.7 $27.8 $28.9 $30.1 ($227.8)

TOTAL REVENUE $3,575.4 $3,417.7 $3,434.3 $3,455.9 $3,561.4 $3,839.9 $4,134.2 $4,449.6 $4,778.1 $5,134.2 $39,780.7

CLOSING CASH BALANCE ($12,816.6) ($16,273.8) ($19,874.7) ($23,101.2) ($20,005.8) ($16,631.9) ($12,963.7) ($8,980.2) ($4,668.2) ($0.0)

2019 Principle Repayment Charge (2) $ 2.89 Allocation of Capital Program 2019 Adjusted Capital Cost & Finance Interest Charge Per Square M$ 41.11 Residential Sector 60.8% Total Charge per Square Metre $ 44.00 Industrial 5.6% Non-Industrial 33.5%

Rates Inflation Rate 2.50% Notes Interest Rate on Positive Balances 1.25% (1) Debenture finance interest are not inflated Interest Rate on Negative Balances 3.75% (2) Principle Repayment Charge will not be indexed

HEMSON 108 APPENDIX B TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA CASHFLOW AND DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE PUBLIC TRANSIT

CITY-WIDE CHARGE NON-INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGE (in $000)

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 PUBLIC TRANSIT 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 TOTAL

OPENING CASH BALANCE $0.00 ($76,494.82) ($97,133.94) ($118,637.21) ($137,888.40) ($119,404.82) ($99,256.78) ($77,349.85) ($53,576.06) ($27,830.91)

2017-2027 NON-RESIDENTIAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS - Public Transit Services: Non Inflated $95,067.04 $37,323.13 $37,323.13 $34,457.67 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $204,171.0 - Public Transit Services: Inflated $95,067.0 $38,256.2 $39,212.6 $37,107.1 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $209,643.0 - Public Transit Infrastructure: Debenture Finance Interest (1) $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $27,819.8 - Public Transit (Inflated + Debenture Financed) $97,849.0 $41,038.2 $41,994.6 $39,889.1 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $2,782.0 $237,462.8

NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - Growth in Square Metres 217,047 219,498 222,022 224,546 227,105 229,701 232,298 234,965 237,633 240,338 2,285,153

REVENUE - DC Receipts: Inflated $22,762.1 $23,594.7 $24,462.6 $25,359.3 $26,289.5 $27,254.7 $28,251.9 $29,290.7 $30,363.8 $31,477.2 $269,106.4

INTEREST - Interest on Opening Balance $0.0 ($2,868.6) ($3,642.5) ($4,448.9) ($5,170.8) ($4,477.7) ($3,722.1) ($2,900.6) ($2,009.1) ($1,043.7) ($30,284.0) - Interest on In-year Transactions ($1,407.9) ($327.1) ($328.7) ($272.4) $146.9 $153.0 $159.2 $165.7 $172.4 $179.3 ($1,359.6)

TOTAL REVENUE $21,354.2 $20,399.1 $20,491.3 $20,637.9 $21,265.6 $22,930.0 $24,688.9 $26,555.8 $28,527.1 $30,612.9 $237,462.8

CLOSING CASH BALANCE ($76,494.8) ($97,133.9) ($118,637.2) ($137,888.4) ($119,404.8) ($99,256.8) ($77,349.8) ($53,576.1) ($27,830.9) $0.0

2019 Principle Repayment Charge (2) $ 7.38 Allocation of Capital Program 2019 Adjusted Capital Cost & Finance Interest Charge Per Square Metre $ 104.87 Residential Sector 60.8% Total Charge per Square Metre $ 112.25 Industrial 5.6% Non-Industrial 33.5%

Notes Rates (1) Debenture finance interest are not inflated Inflation Rate 2.50% (2) Principle Repayment Charge will not be indexed Interest Rate on Positive Balances 1.25% Interest Rate on Negative Balances 3.75%

HEMSON 109

Appendix C

General Services Technical Appendix

HEMSON 110

Appendix C

General Services Technical Appendix Introduction and Overview

The following appendix provides the detailed analysis undertaken to establish the development charge rates for each of the services in the City of Ottawa.

Appendix C.1 Protection Services Appendix C.2 Parks Development Appendix C.3 Recreation Facilities Appendix C.4 Library Services Appendix C.5 Paramedic Services Appendix C.6 Affordable Housing Appendix C.7 Corporate Studies Every service, with the exception of Corporate Studies, contains two sets of tables. The tables provide the background data and analysis undertaken to arrive at the calculated development charge rates for that particular service. An overview of the content and purpose of each of the tables is given below.

Historical Inventory Analysis and Funding Envelope Calculation

Table 1 presents the data used to determine the ten-year historical service level. The DCA and O. Reg. 82/98 require that development charges be set at a level no higher than the average service level provided in the City over the ten-year period immediately preceding the preparation of the background study, on a service-by-service basis. For the purpose of this study, the historical inventory period has been defined as 2009 to 2018.

O. Reg. 82/98 requires that when defining and determining historical service levels, both the quantity and quality of service be taken into consideration. In most cases, the service levels are initially established in quantitative terms. For example, service levels for buildings are presented in terms of square feet. The qualitative aspect is introduced by considering the monetary value of the facility or service. In the case of buildings, for example, the cost is shown in terms of cost per square foot to replace or construct a facility of the same quality. This approach helps to ensure that the development-related capital

HEMSON 111

facilities that are to be funded by new growth reflect not only the quantity (number and size) but also the quality (replacement value or cost) of service provided by the City in the past. Both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of service levels used in the current analysis are based on information provided by municipal staff. This information is generally based on historical records and experience with costs to acquire or construct similar facilities, equipment and infrastructure. Consistent with the practices used in the City’s prior development charge background studies, the replacement cost related to land has been excluded from the historical inventory calculations.

The final page of Table 1 shows the calculation of the “maximum allowable” funding envelope, net of uncommitted excess capacity and the legislated ten per cent reduction (for all applicable services except Protection Services). The maximum allowable funding envelope is defined as the ten-year historical service level (expressed as either $/capita or $/population & employment) multiplied by the forecast increase in net population, or net population and employment growth, over the planning period. The resulting figure is the value of capital infrastructure that must be constructed for that particular service so that the ten-year historical service level is maintained.

The existing facilities have been examined and consideration has been given to whether “excess capacity” exists within the City’s infrastructure that may be available to partially meet future servicing requirements. It has been determined that no “uncommitted excess capacity” exists within the City’s general services, and as such, no adjustments have been made to the service level calculations.

Development-Related Capital Program: City-wide and Area-Specific

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, the general services capital programs calculate applicable development charges on a City-wide and area- specific basis. The benefitting area for each project is shown in Table 2.

The DCA requires that Council express its intent to provide future capital facilities to support future growth. Based on the development forecasts presented in Appendix A.1, Hemson Consulting, in collaboration with City staff, has created a development-related capital program which sets out the projects required to service anticipated development for the ten-year period from mid-2019 to mid-2029 and mid-2019 to mid-2031 for Protection services.

HEMSON 112

To determine the share of the development-related capital program eligible for recovery through development charges, the project costs are reduced by any anticipated grants, “replacement” shares, and the legislated “ten per cent reduction” for any eligible services.

A replacement share occurs when a new facility will, at least in part, replace a facility that has been demolished, redeployed or will otherwise not be available to serve its former function. The replacement share of the capital program is not deemed to be development-related and is therefore removed from the development charge calculation. The capital cost for replacement will require funding from non-development charge sources, typically property taxes or user fees.

When calculating development charges, the development-related net capital cost must be reduced by ten per cent for all services except protection services, transit services and engineered services (DCA s.5.(1)8.). The ten per cent discount is therefore applied to all general services considered in this appendix with the exception of Protection Services. As with replacement shares, the ten per cent mandatory reduction must be funded from non- development charge sources.

The capital program less any replacement or benefit to existing shares and ten per cent discount, yields the development-related costs. Although deemed development-related, not all of the net development-related capital program may be recoverable from development charges in the period. For some of the services, a portion of the capital program will service growth beyond 2029 (2031 for Protection services). This portion of the capital program is either deemed “pre-built” service capacity to be considered as committed excess capacity and recovered under future development, or is a service level increase.

The remaining portion of the net capital program represents the development- related cost that may be included in the development charge. In all cases, as required, this amount is equal to or less than the maximum allowable capital amount as calculated on the final page of Table 1. The result is the discounted development-related net capital cost that is eligible for recovery against development over the period from mid-2019 to mid-2029 and mid- 2019 to mid-2031 for Protection services.

HEMSON 113

For the purposes of the 2019 DC study calculations, the existing reserve funds are assumed to be paying for space, and/or servicing capacity related to development that has paid development charges, prior to the passage of the 2019 DC by-law (“prior growth”). This includes development that has paid DCs but the associated servicing capacity (facility) has yet to be constructed.

Calculation of Development Charge Rates: City-wide and Area-Specific

The section below the capital program displays the calculation of the applicable development charge rates. Consistent with the City’s historical DC practices, for the services included in this appendix, an average cost methodology is used to calculate the applicable rates.

City-wide Residential and Non-Residential DCs

The first step when determining the development charge rate is to allocate development-related net capital cost between the residential and non- residential sectors. Projects that provide a City-wide benefit have been apportioned based on shares of City-wide net population and employment growth. For City-wide projects, the development-related costs have been apportioned as approximately 61 per cent residential and 39 per cent non- residential.

Consistent with the City’s historical approach, the non-residential development charges for General Services is calculated on a uniform, City- wide basis. For services with a nominal 5 per cent cost allocation (e.g. Libraries, Recreation Facilities and Parks) a uniform non-residential charge has been calculated while Protection, Paramedic and Corporate Studies have been calculated on an industrial and non-industrial basis. Finally, Affordable Housing is allocated 100 per cent to residential development.

Area-Specific DCs

For all services with the exception of Affordable Housing and Paramedics, area-specific projects have been identified for the following defined areas in the City: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural. Projects identified for these areas are recovered against residential growth occurring in these respective areas while the residual non-residential costs are recovered on a City-wide basis.

HEMSON 114

Calculated Development Charges

Once costs have been apportioned between the benefitting areas, the residential share of DC eligible costs are divided by the forecast population growth in new units occurring in each area to yield the residential charge per capita.

The non-residential share of DC eligible costs are divided by the forecast increase in non-residential gross floor area (GFA) to yield the non-residential charge. For Libraries, Recreation Facilities and Parks, the non-residential DC eligible costs are divided by the forecast City-wide increase in GFA while Protection, Paramedic and Corporate Studies have been calculated on anticipated City-wide industrial and non-industrial non-residential growth.

HEMSON 115

Appendix C.1 Protection

HEMSON 116

Appendix C.1

Protection Technical Appendix

Protection services includes Ottawa Fire and Police Services which provides a wide range of protection services through facilities across the City. For example, Fire Services is responsible for fire suppression and response, hazardous material response and technical rescues (e.g. water, auto extraction and/or confined spaces).

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Protection services, 2019–2031 development-related capital forecast and calculation of development charges. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast are largely based on the projects identified in the 2014 DC Background Study, and adjusted to account for expenditures and increases in project costs (i.e. indexing). The projects are further informed based on the proposed and Council-approved capital budgets.

Historically, Protection services has been calculated on a 10-year planning period. For the purposes of the 2019 DC Background Study, Protection services is proposed to be calculated on a long-term benefitting period from 2019-2031. This is in recognition that the projects identified in the capital program are intended to benefit growth occurring over a longer development period.

The following discusses the individual components included in the Protection service category. The analysis is set out in the tables which follow and include:

Table 1 Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Level

Table 2 2019–2031 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

HEMSON 117

A. Benefitting Area

The City’s Protection development charges is calculated on both a City-wide and area-specific basis. The smaller benefitting areas are defined as: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural area.

B. Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Levels and Maximum Allowable Charges

Protection services are currently provided through various fire halls, police stations and ancillary buildings valued at $549.09 million in 2018. The building replacement unit cost includes the cost of the building itself (including design, site servicing, and construction) and also the cost of replacing furniture, furnishings and equipment. Consistent with the City’s prior DC Background Studies, no land has been included in the historical inventory calculation.

Vehicles and all police equipment were also included in the level of service calculation. The vehicles add $26.96 million to the inventory and equipment adds another $14.65 million. Similarly, fire vehicles adds $80.95 million and fire related equipment adds $24.54 million to the historical inventory calculation.

Table 1 provides a summary of the level of service and the calculation of the ten-year historical service level. The calculation of the maximum allowable funding envelope is summarized as follows:

12-Year Funding Envelope Calculation Year Average Service Level (2009 – 2018) $445.76 Net Population Growth (2019 – 2031) 225,846 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $100,673,113 Less: Ten per cent Legislated Reduction $0 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $100,673,113

The existing facilities have been examined and consideration has been made with regard to whether “excess capacity” exists within the City’s infrastructure that may be available to partially meet future servicing requirements. It has been determined that no “uncommitted excess capacity” exists within the City’s Protection infrastructure, and as such, no adjustments have been made to the service level calculations.

HEMSON 118

C. The Development-Related Capital Program

The projects identified in the capital forecast will result, in whole or in part, in increased capacity to meet the servicing needs of new development. The 2019–2031 development-related capital forecast includes for the development of a Fire Training facility that will provide a City-wide benefit as well as the construction of new or the expansion of existing stations.

In particular, the capital program also includes for the recovery of past expenditures (e.g. principal and interest payments as well as negative reserve fund balances) for Protection facilities. In accordance with the DCA, eligible capital expenditures include costs incurred or to be incurred by a municipality and can include interest on money borrowed (s.5(3)). This category includes projects identified in previous Development Charge By-laws with committed funding that are completed or will be completed in the future. The total gross cost of this capital forecast is $155.71 million.

Paragraph 5 of s.s.5(1) of the DCA requires a deduction from the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development that can be met using the City’s “excess capacity” that is “uncommitted”. “Excess capacity” is undefined in the DCA, but is considered to relate to the capacity available to meet some or all of the increase in need for service in order to potentially represent a deduction. It is recognized that no “surplus” of capacity exists within Protection services as the deduction of uncommitted excess capacity would occur as part of conceptual planning and feasibility work associated with planning new facilities.

D. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Protection services. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

HEMSON 119

Generally speaking, shares have been deducted from the net cost of projects that account for portions of the project that relate to state of good repair or the replacement or reconstruction of existing facilities. Those projects that are completely new are deemed to be entirely growth-related and no replacement shares have been deducted from the net cost.

The benefit to existing and replacement shares are based on the increased servicing capacity arising from the proposed facilities, vehicles and equipment. In total, $70.07 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share and is removed from the DC calculation.

3. Legislated Ten Per Cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required.

4. Prior Growth

Available DC reserves have been applied to projects occurring within the identified planning period. Table 2 provides details on the available DC reserve fund balance, the amount used and the amount of funding remaining.

In total, $11.15 million in available DC reserves have been removed from City-wide DC eligible costs and $280,000 has been removed from Rural DC eligible costs.

5. Post-2031 Benefit

The DC eligible costs included in the Protection services capital program is well below the maximum permissible funding envelope of $100.67 million (shown in Table 1 and 2). However, in recognition that the Fire Training Replacement Facility will benefit development occurring beyond 2031, a share of the facility, $3.15 million, is deemed to be a post-period benefit and will be recovered in subsequent DC studies.

6. 2019-2031 In-Period Eligible Costs

After adjustments, a total of $71.06 million is included in the development charge calculation.

HEMSON 120

E. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The discounted development-related costs have been allocated 62 per cent to residential development and 38 per cent to the non-residential sector. This sector allocation is based upon future shares of City-wide population growth (139,546) and employment growth (86,300). The non-residential allocation of 38 per cent for Protection Services is further allocated between the industrial (5 per cent) and non-industrial (33 per cent) sectors based on shares of City- wide employment growth over the 12-year planning period to 2031. This approach is consistent with the City’s historical practice.

The table below provides a summary of the DC eligible costs that are deemed to benefit development occurring City-wide, Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural areas. The “residual” shown in the area-specific non- residential summary represents the sum of the costs remaining once the residential allocations have been made for Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential Inside the Greenbelt 62% $0 Outside the Greenbelt 62% $19,682,488 Rural 62% $0 City-wide 62% $24,224,699 Subtotal Residential $43,907,187 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific Residual $1,746,580 City-wide 38% $2,149,646 Non-Residential – Non-Industrial Area-Specific Residual $10,425,741 City-wide 38% $12,831,733 Subtotal Non-Residential $27,153,700

Total $71,060,888

F. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for the City’s general services included in this appendix.

HEMSON 121

The following table provides a summary of the residential and non-residential Protection Services development charges for each of the identified benefitting areas.

It should be noted that there is no Rural residential $/capita calculation, as the available DC reserve fund balance is sufficient enough to fund the identified capital costs for this area (Table 2). There is also no dedicated Inside the Greenbelt residential $/capita calculation as no projects have been identified for this area over the planning period.

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential Inside the Greenbelt $/capita $0.00 Outside the Greenbelt $/capita $186.22 Rural $/capita $0.00 City-wide $/capita $133.59 Total Residential $/capita $319.81 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific $/square metre $1.53 City-wide $/square metre $1.89 Total Non-Res. Indus. $/m2 $3.42 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific $/square metre $3.91 City-wide $/square metre $4.82 Total Non-Res. Indus. $/m2 $8.73

HEMSON 122 APPENDIX C.1 TABLE 1 CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE) POLICE 2019 BUILDINGS # of Square Feet UNIT COST Station Name 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/sq. ft.) Elgin Street Head Quarters - Office Space (1) 151,875 151,875 151,875 151,875 151,875 151,875 151,875 151,875 151,875 151,875 $620 Greenbank - West Division 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 $500 St. Joseph - East Division 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 $500 Leitrim - Division and Quarter Master 22,816 22,816 22,816 22,816 22,816 22,816 22,816 22,816 22,816 22,816 $500 Swansea - Property Facility 30,800 30,800 30,800 30,800 30,800 30,800 30,800 30,800 30,800 30,800 $500 Algonquin College - Training Facility 36,711 36,711 36,711 36,711 36,711 36,711 36,711 36,711 36,711 36,711 $500 Elgin Street - Courts Section 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 $500 Youth Centre 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 $250 Airport Policing Office 2,215 2,215 2,215 2,215 2,215 2,215 2,215 2,215 2,215 2,215 $250 Concourse Gate 4,691 4,691 4,691 4,691 4,691 4,691 4,691 4,691 4,691 4,691 $250 Community Police Centres 16,995 16,995 16,995 13,317 13,317 13,317 13,317 13,317 13,317 13,317 $250 Huntmar - West Division 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 $500 Fairmont 26,031 26,031 26,031 26,684 26,684 26,684 26,684 26,684 26,684 26,684 $250 Queensview (Records) - - - - 33,870 33,870 33,870 33,870 33,870 33,870 $250

Total (sq.ft.) 440,339 440,339 440,339 437,314 471,184 471,184 471,184 471,184 471,184 471,184 Total ($000) $223,786.5 $223,786.5 $223,786.5 $223,030.3 $231,497.8 $231,497.8 $231,497.8 $231,497.8 $231,497.8 $231,497.8 (1) Underground parking facility totalling 145k sq ft has been excluded from Elgin Street Figure

HEMSON 123 APPENDIX C.1 TABLE 1 CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE) POLICE 2019 VEHICLES # of Vehicles UNIT COST Vehicle Type 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/vehicle) POLICE PATROL VEHICLES # of Sworn Officers 1,356 1,371 1,377 1,363 1,339 1,334 1,334 1,351 1,376 1,399

Vehicles/Sworn Officer Ratio 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% Total # of Vehicles 452 457 459 454 446 445 445 450 459 466 $53,500

SPECIALTY VEHICLES

#01001-54 Freightliner Truck $178,860 $178,860 $178,860 $178,860 $178,860 $178,860 $178,860 $178,860 $178,860 $178,860 #01002-54 Freightliner Truck $365,000 $365,000 $365,000 $365,000 $365,000 $365,000 $365,000 $365,000 $365,000 $365,000 #03662-13 Ford E450 $75,500 $75,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #03663-13 Ford E450 $85,380 $85,380 $85,380 $85,380 $85,380 $85,380 $85,380 $85,380 $85,380 $85,380 #09951-13 Chev Cube Van $24,000 $24,000 $24,000 $24,000 $24,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #03664-B5 Ford F450 $105,000 $105,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #03665-B5 Ford F450 $118,000 $118,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #03666-C5 Ford E450 $108,000 $108,000 $108,000 $108,000 $108,000 $108,000 $108,000 $108,000 $108,000 $108,000 #03667-B5 Ford F450 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 Surveillance Aircraft $1,071,000 $1,071,000 $1,071,000 $1,071,000 $1,071,000 $1,071,000 $1,071,000 $1,071,000 $1,071,000 $1,071,000 #03668-B5 Ford F450 (Old Box) $58,231 $58,231 $58,231 $58,231 $58,231 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #03668-B5 Ford F450 (New Box) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $106,000 $106,000 $106,000 $106,000 $106,000 #0995-60 Chevy Express $30,100 $30,100 $30,100 $30,100 $30,100 $30,100 $30,100 $30,100 $30,100 $30,100

Total (#) 452 457 459 454 446 445 445 450 459 466 Total ($000) $26,467.07 $26,734.6 $26,543.1 $26,293.4 $25,865.4 $25,800.0 $25,800.0 $26,103.2 $26,549.0 $26,959.2

2019 EQUIPMENT # of Items UNIT COST Equipment Type 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/item) New Officer Upfit (# of Officers) 1,356 1,371 1,377 1,363 1,339 1,334 1,334 1,351 1,376 1,399 $4,050 Portable Radios 1,166 1,166 1,215 1,406 1,407 1,407 1,407 1,449 1,474 1,497 $6,000

Total (#) 2,522 2,537 2,592 2,769 2,746 2,741 2,741 2,800 2,850 2,896 Total ($000) $12,487.8 $12,548.6 $12,866.9 $13,956.2 $13,865.0 $13,844.7 $13,844.7 $14,165.6 $14,416.8 $14,648.0

HEMSON 124 APPENDIX C.1 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE) FIRE 2019 BUILDINGS # of Square Feet UNIT COST Station Name 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/sq. ft.) Charlemagne - Station #53 - Fallingbrook 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 $609 Cumberland Village - Station #72 - Old Montreal Road 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 $609 Vars - Station #73 - Rockdale Avenue 7,970 7,970 7,970 7,970 7,970 7,970 7,970 7,970 7,970 7,970 $609 Navan - Station #71 - Colonnial Road 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 $609 Barrhaven - Station #44 - Greenbank Road 20,724 20,724 20,724 20,724 20,724 20,724 20,724 20,724 20,724 20,724 $609 Bells Corners - Station #43 - Richmond Road 8,334 8,334 8,334 8,334 8,334 8,334 8,334 8,334 8,334 8,334 $609 Viewmount - Station #24 -Viewmount Drive 9,706 9,706 9,706 9,706 9,706 9,706 9,706 9,706 9,706 9,706 $609 Knoxdale - Station #25 - Knoxdale Road 6,130 6,130 6,130 6,130 6,130 6,130 6,130 6,130 6,130 6,130 $609 Leitrim - Station #32 - Leitrim Road 9,548 9,548 9,548 9,548 9,548 9,548 9,548 9,548 9,548 9,548 $609 South Urban - Station #37 - Earl Armstrong 12,546 12,546 12,546 12,546 12,546 12,546 12,546 12,546 12,546 12,546 $609 Blair - Station #55 - Blair Road 21,889 21,889 21,889 21,889 21,889 21,889 21,889 21,889 21,889 - $609 Orleans - Station #52 - 6213 Jean D'Arc 7,724 7,724 7,724 7,724 7,724 7,724 7,724 7,724 7,724 7,724 $609 Blackburn - Station #54 - Old Innes Road 13,369 13,369 13,369 13,369 13,369 13,369 13,369 13,369 13,369 13,369 $609 Teron - Station #42 - Teron Road 7,208 7,208 7,208 7,208 7,208 7,208 7,208 7,208 7,208 7,208 $609 Eagleson - Station #41 - Eagleson Road 7,645 7,645 7,645 7,645 7,645 7,645 7,645 7,645 7,645 7,645 $609 Riddell - Station #45 - Riddell Drive 3,727 3,727 3,727 3,727 3,727 3,727 3,727 3,727 3,727 3,727 $609 Stittsville - Station #81 - Main Street 12,460 12,460 12,460 12,460 12,460 12,460 12,460 12,460 12,460 12,460 $609 Richmond - Station #82 - Perth Street 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 $609 Metcalfe - Station #91 - Victoria Road 8,236 8,236 8,236 8,236 8,236 8,236 8,236 8,236 8,236 8,236 $609 Osgoode - Station #92 - Nixon Drive 4,298 4,298 4,298 4,298 4,298 4,298 4,298 4,298 4,298 4,298 $609 Greely - Station #93 - Parkway Road 5,670 5,670 5,670 5,670 5,670 5,670 5,670 5,670 5,670 5,670 $609 Manotick - Station #94 - Main Street 8,106 8,106 8,106 8,106 8,106 8,106 8,106 8,106 8,106 8,106 $609 Carling - Station #23 - Carling Avenue 21,030 21,030 21,030 21,030 21,030 21,030 21,030 21,030 21,030 21,030 $609 O'Connor - Station #12 - O'Connor Street 11,673 11,673 11,673 11,673 11,673 11,673 11,673 11,673 11,673 11,673 $609 Lincoln Fields - Station #22 - Richmond Road, Ottawa 13,858 13,858 13,858 13,858 13,858 13,858 13,858 13,858 13,858 13,858 $609 King Edward - Station #13, King Edward 11,235 11,235 11,235 11,235 11,235 11,235 11,235 11,235 11,235 11,235 $609 Woodroffe - Station #21 - Woodroffe Avenue 13,029 13,029 13,029 13,029 13,029 13,029 13,029 13,029 13,029 13,029 $609 Preston - Station #11- Prestion Street 12,383 12,383 12,383 12,383 12,383 12,383 12,383 12,383 12,383 12,383 $609 Conroy - Station #31 - Conroy Road 19,447 19,447 19,447 19,447 19,447 19,447 19,447 19,447 19,447 19,447 $609 McCarthy - Station #33 - McCarthy Road 13,609 13,609 13,609 13,609 13,609 13,609 13,609 13,609 13,609 13,609 $609

HEMSON 125 APPENDIX C.1 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE) FIRE 2019 BUILDINGS # of Square Feet UNIT COST Station Name 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/sq. ft.) Brookfield - Station #34 - Brookfield Dr. 14,571 14,571 14,571 14,571 14,571 14,571 14,571 14,571 14,571 14,571 $609 Dispatch - 1423 Randall Avenue 4,550 4,550 4,550 4,550 4,550 4,550 4,550 4,550 4,550 4,550 $609 Alta Vista - Station #35 - Alta Vista Drive 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 $609 Training Centre / Fire Prevention Office - Industrial Rd 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 31,854 $609 Industrial - Station #36 - Industrial 31,254 31,254 31,254 31,254 31,254 31,254 31,254 31,254 31,254 31,254 $609 Montreal - Station #51 - Montreal Road 13,934 13,934 13,934 13,934 13,934 13,934 13,934 13,934 13,934 13,934 $609 Coventry - Station #56 - Overbrook 13,084 13,084 13,084 13,084 13,084 13,084 13,084 13,084 13,084 13,084 $609 Beechwood - Station #57 - Beechwood Avenue 15,280 15,280 15,280 15,280 15,280 15,280 15,280 15,280 15,280 15,280 $609 North Gower - Station #84 3,400 3,400 3,400 3,400 3,400 3,400 3,400 3,400 3,400 3,400 $609 Outbuilding - North Gower 80 80 80 80 80 80 - - - - $609 Troop Line Bldg 3,440 3,440 3,440 3,440 3,440 3,440 3,440 3,440 3,440 3,440 $609 Kinburn - Station #61 - Kinburn Side Road 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 $609 Fitzroy - Station #62 - Harbour Street 2,204 2,204 2,204 2,204 2,204 2,204 2,204 2,204 2,204 2,204 $609 Fitzroy Out Building 704 704 704 704 704 704 704 704 704 704 $609 Constance Bay - Station #63 - Woodlawn 4,176 4,176 4,176 4,176 4,176 4,176 4,176 4,176 4,176 4,176 $609 Carp - Station #64 - Donald B. Munro 4,773 4,773 4,773 4,773 4,773 4,773 4,773 4,773 4,773 4,773 $609 Dunrobin - Station #66 - Dunrobin Road 1,930 1,930 1,930 1,930 1,930 1,930 1,930 3,789 3,789 3,789 $609 Dunrobin Out Building 144 144 144 144 144 - - - - - $609 Corkery - Station #84 - Old Almonte Road 2,896 2,896 2,896 2,896 2,896 2,896 2,896 2,896 2,896 2,896 $609 Stittsville - Station #46 - Iber Rd - - 13,133 13,133 13,644 13,644 13,644 13,644 13,644 13,644 $609 Barhaven - Station #47 - Greenbank Rd - - 13,133 13,133 14,498 14,498 14,498 14,498 14,498 14,498 $609 Orleans - Station #55 - Portobello Blvd ------11,000 $609 Cyrville - Station #36 - Cyrville Road ------11,000 $609

Total (sq.ft.) 460,354 460,354 486,620 486,620 488,496 488,352 488,272 490,131 490,131 521,496 Total ($000) $280,355.6 $280,355.6 $296,351.6 $296,351.6 $297,494.1 $297,406.4 $297,357.6 $298,489.8 $298,489.8 $317,591.1

HEMSON 126 APPENDIX C.1 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE) FIRE 2019 VEHICLES # of Vehicles UNIT COST Vehicle Type 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/vehicle)

71-Hazmat 777777 7 4 6 6 $1,185,800 74-Pumper 63 69 69 69 69 47 47 47 47 47 $705,100 75-Aerial Platform 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 $1,347,200 76-Aerial 888888 8 8 8 8 $1,243,600 79-Tanker 26 26 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 $440,800 54-Command 111111 1 1 1 1 $1,120,800 Fire Safety House 222222 2 2 2 2 $104,300

Total (#) 120 126 127 127 127 105 105 102 104 104 Total ($000) $92,974.5 $97,205.1 $97,645.9 $97,645.9 $97,645.9 $82,133.7 $82,133.7 $78,576.3 $80,947.9 $80,947.9

2019 EQUIPMENT # of Equipped Firefighters UNIT COST 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/vehicle) Fire Fighters Career Fire Fighters 856 872 917 906 903 863 905 864 857 848 $11,300 Volunteer Fire Fighters 450 450 498 486 470 487 517 546 562 474 $11,300 Other Equiopment Portable Radios 514 514 567 544 544 558 555 555 576 494 $2,600 Mobile Radios 144 144 144 170 170 180 180 180 180 101 $2,600 Base Stations 76 76 76 76 76 76 78 78 78 63 $2,700 Repeaters 61 61 61 78 78 78 82 82 82 60 $12,800 Portable DVR 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $15,200 Pagers/Paging System 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 $350 Defibrillators 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 84 84 $3,000 Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) 535 535 535 535 535 650 650 650 650 650 $6,000 2nd set of Bunker Gear ------848 $1,600 Thermal Imaging Cameras 17 17 37 92 107 99 99 99 99 99 $5,750 MDT (Mobile Data Terminal) 26 26 26 26 26 42 184 208 208 208 $3,400

Total (#) 3,661 3,677 3,843 3,895 3,891 4,015 4,232 4,244 4,277 4,830 Total ($000) $21,424.0 $21,604.8 $22,908.5 $23,190.2 $23,061.8 $23,562.7 $24,907.9 $24,853.9 $25,019.2 $24,539.2

HEMSON 127 APPENDIX C.1 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF SERVICE LEVELS PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE)

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Historic Population 899,300 911,990 922,050 931,730 935,270 944,900 957,150 963,860 974,190 985,470 Historic Employment 542,888 550,478 558,173 565,977 572,960 580,028 587,184 594,429 601,762 609,186 Total Population & Employment 1,442,188 1,462,468 1,480,223 1,497,707 1,508,230 1,524,928 1,544,334 1,558,289 1,575,952 1,594,656

INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000)

Police $262,741.4 $263,069.6 $263,196.4 $263,279.8 $271,228.1 $271,142.5 $271,142.5 $271,766.5 $272,463.6 $273,104.9 Fire $394,754.0 $399,165.4 $416,905.9 $417,187.7 $418,201.7 $403,102.7 $404,399.2 $401,919.9 $404,456.8 $423,078.1 Total ($000) $657,495.4 $662,235.1 $680,102.3 $680,467.5 $689,429.8 $674,245.2 $675,541.7 $673,686.4 $676,920.4 $696,183.0

Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/pop & emp) Service Level Police $182.18 $179.88 $177.81 $175.79 $179.83 $177.81 $175.57 $174.40 $172.89 $171.26 $176.74 Fire $273.72 $272.94 $281.65 $278.55 $277.28 $264.34 $261.86 $257.92 $256.64 $265.31 $269.02 Total ($/pop & emp) $455.90 $452.82 $459.46 $454.34 $457.11 $442.15 $437.43 $432.32 $429.53 $436.57 $445.76

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE)

10-Year Funding Envelope Calculation 10 Year Average Service Level 2009 - 2018 $445.76 Net Population & Employment Growth 2019 - 2031 225,846 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $100,673,113 Less: 10% Legislated Reduction $0 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $100,673,113

HEMSON 128 APPENDIX C.1 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE)

Gross Grants/ NetIneligible Costs Total DC Elgible Costs Project Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement 0% DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Number Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Reduction Costs Growth 2031 2031

1.0 PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE)

1.1 City-wide Facilities 1.1.1 Fire Training Replacement Facility 4.CW01 2023 - 2026$ 84,000,000 $ - $ 84,000,000 75% $ 63, 000,000 $ - $ 21,000,000 $ - $ 17, 850,000 $ 3, 150,000 City-wide 1.1.2 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Principal Payments - 903447 4.CWD1 2020 - 2031$ 15,009,000 $ - $ 15,009,000 0% $ - $ - $ 15,009,000 $ 11, 148,922 $ 3,860,078 $ - City-wide 1.1.3 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Interest Payments 4.CWD2 2020 - 2031$ 17,496,000 $ -$ 17,496,000 0%-$ $ -$ 17,496,000 $ -$ 17,496,000 $ -City-wide

Subtotal City-wide Facilities $ 116,505,000 $ - $ 116,505,000 $ 63,000,000 $ - $ 53,505,000 $ 11,148,922 $ 39,206,078 $ 3,150,000

1.2 Area-Specific Facilities 1.2.1 Recovery of Negative Reserve Fund Balance 2020 - 202$ 1,617,810 $ - $ 1, 617,810 0% $ - $ - $ 1, 617,810 $ - $ 1, 617,810 $ - OGB 1.2.2 Kanata North Fire Station 4.AS01 2020 - 2021$ 9,500,000 $ - $ 9, 500,000 10% $ 950,000 $ - $ 8, 550,000 $ - $ 8, 550,000 $ - OGB 1.2.3 Fire Rural Water Supply 4.AS02 2020 - 2025$ 400,000 $ - $ 400,000 30% $ 120,000 $ - $ 280,000 $ 280,000 $ - $ - Rural 1.2.4 South Ottawa Fire Station 4.AS03 2027 - 2028$ 10,500,000 $ - $ 10,500,000 10% $ 1, 050,000 $ - $ 9, 450,000 $ - $ 9, 450,000 $ - OGB 1.2.5 Fire Vehicles & Equipment 4.AS04 2022 - 2030$ 4,500,000 $ - $ 4, 500,000 10% $ 450,000 $ - $ 4, 050,000 $ - $ 4, 050,000 $ - OGB 1.2.6 Station Expansion - West 4.AS05 2023 - 2023$ 3,000,000 $ - $ 3, 000,000 50% $ 1, 500,000 $ - $ 1, 500,000 $ - $ 1, 500,000 $ - OGB 1.2.7 Station Expansion - South 4.AS06 2024 - 2024$ 3,000,000 $ - $ 3, 000,000 50% $ 1, 500,000 $ - $ 1, 500,000 $ - $ 1, 500,000 $ - OGB 1.2.8 Station Expansion - East 4.AS07 2026 - 2026$ 3,000,000 $ - $ 3, 000,000 50% $ 1, 500,000 $ - $ 1, 500,000 $ - $ 1,500,000.00 $ - OGB 1.2.9 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Principal Payments - 903157 - 903448 4ASD2 2020 - 2031$ 2,196,000 $ - $ 2, 196,000 0% $ - $ - $ 2, 196,000 $ - $ 2,196,000 $ - OGB 1.2.10 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Interest Payments 4.ASD3 2020 - 2031$ 1,491,000 $ -$ 1,491,000 0%-$ $ -$ 1,491,000 $ -$ 1,491,000 $ -OGB

Subtotal Area-Specific Facilities $ 39,204,810 $ - $ 39,204,810 $ 7, 070,000 $ - $ 32,134,810 $ 280,000 $ 31,854,810 $ -

HEMSON 129 APPENDIX C.1 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE)

TOTAL PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE) $ 155,709,810 $ - $ 155,709,810 $ 70,070,000 $ - $ 85,639,810 $ 11,428,922 $ 71,060,888 $ 3,150,000

Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Residential Calculation Available DC Reserve Fund Balance Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Total Amount Used Remaining Residential Share of Eligible Costs 62% $ - City-wide $11,148,922 $11,148,922 $0 12 Year Population Growth 55,993 IGB $0 $0 $0 Charge per Capita $0.00 OGB ($1,617,810) $0 $0 Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Rural $410,099 $280,000 $130,099 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 62%$ 19,682,488 12 Year Population Growth 105,695 Charge per Capita $186.22 Rural Residential Calculation 2019 - 2031 Net Funding Envelope $100,673,113 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 62% $ - 12 Year Population Growth 19,496 Charge per Capita $0.00 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 38% $12,172,321 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 5% $1,746,580 12 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 1,138,914 Charge per Square Metre $1.53 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 33% $10,425,741 12 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,664,948 Charge per Square Metre $3.91

City-wide Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 62% $ 24,224,699 12 Year Population Growth 181,332 Unadjusted Per Unit Charge $133.59 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 38% $ 14,981,379 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 5% $ 2,149,646 12 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 1,138,914 Charge per Square Metre $1.89 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 33% $ 12,831,733 12 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,664,948 Charge per Square Metre $4.82

HEMSON 130

Appendix C.2 Parks Development

HEMSON 131

Appendix C.2

Parks Development Technical Appendix

A. Disclaimer

The Urban Parks (Inside the Greenbelt) capital project list contained in the 2019 DC Background Study is currently under review by City staff. It is anticipated that adjustments will be made to the capital projects and underlying assumptions concerning the timing of construction, which will better align with anticipated development, leading up to the passage of the City’s new 2019 DC By-law.

B. Introduction

Parks are provided to residents in the City through a network of developed parkland, park amenities and special facilities.

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Parks services, the 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast and calculation of the development charges. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast have been provided by City staff and are based on proposed and Council-approved capital budgets.

As part of the 2019 DC Background Study, the infrastructure included in the Parks Development capital program has been updated to reflect new funding arrangements. For example, the 2014 DC Background Study included Non- District Parks (e.g. neighbourhood parks and parkettes) – these projects have been removed from the DC capital program as this infrastructure is now deemed to be a developer responsibility. In particular, the capital program now includes for Urban Parks which are recovered from development occurring Inside the Greenbelt and Destination Parks which are recovered on a larger, City-wide benefitting area.

The following discusses the individual components included in the Parks Development service category. The analysis is set out in the tables which follow and include:

HEMSON 132

Table 1 Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Level

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

C. Benefitting Area

Parks Development DCs are calculated on both a City-wide and area-specific basis Inside the Greenbelt. Costs relating to District Parks are calculated on a City-wide basis and costs relating to Urban Parks are calculated on an area- specific basis Inside the Greenbelt.

D. Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Levels and Maximum Allowable Charges

The replacement cost for hectares of parkland have been calculated based on park classification. For instance:

 Passive District Parks have a replacement cost of $194,000 per hectare;  Active District Parks have a replacement cost of $618,000 per hectare;  Urban Parks (Inside the Greenbelt) have a replacement cost of $1,529,300; and  Community Trails has a replacement cost of $441,200 per kilometre of developed trail.

It should be noted that only District and Urban parks are included in the historical inventory as Community, Neighbourhood Parks and Parkettes are no longer included in the DC capital program and therefore do not form part of the historical service level calculation.

Table 1 provides a summary of the level of service and the calculation of the ten-year historical service level. The calculation of the maximum allowable funding envelope is summarized as follows:

HEMSON 133

Ten-Year Funding Envelope Calculation Ten-Year Average Service Level (2009 – 2018) $2,071.19 Net Population Growth (2019 – 2029) 115,000 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $238,186,850 Less: Ten per cent Legislated Reduction $23,818,685 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $214, 368,165

Existing facilities have been examined and consideration has been given to whether “excess capacity” exists within the City’s infrastructure that may be available to partially meet future servicing requirements. It has been determined that no “uncommitted excess capacity” exists within the City’s Parks infrastructure, and as such, no adjustments have been made to the service level calculations.

E. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast includes a variety of projects for the provision of Parks Development services in the City and amounts to a total gross cost of $104.03 million. The projects identified in the capital forecast will result, in whole or in part, in increased capacity to meet the servicing needs of new development over the planning period.

The capital program provides for a range of Urban and District parks in various locations across the City. Where possible, a park’s location and/or neighbourhood is identified. It should be noted that the proposed Lebreton Flats – Urban Park (5.UP01) valued at $4.03 million is not included in the DC capital program, as the project funding and scope is currently being finalized. However, costs associated with this project may be included in subsequent DC studies.

Paragraph 5 of s.s.5(1) of the DCA requires a deduction from the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development that can be met using the City’s “excess capacity” that is “uncommitted”. “Excess capacity” is undefined in the DCA, but is considered to relate to the capacity available to meet some or all of the increase in need for service in order to potentially represent a deduction. It is recognized that no “surplus” of capacity exists within Parks Development services, as the deduction of uncommitted

HEMSON 134

excess capacity would occur as part of the conceptual planning and feasibility work associated with planning new facilities.

F. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Parks Development. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

Generally speaking, the benefit to existing share for Urban Parks ranges from 5-10 per cent with the exception of the Urban Parks Manual (5.UP27) which has a BTE share of 15 per cent. In contrast, District Parks have a BTE share of 10 per cent applied.

In total, $9.37 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share. These costs will not be funded from development charges.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is not identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs, less the replacement/benefit to existing shares, is made to each project.

In total, $9.47 million is identified as the ten per cent reduction share.

4. Prior Growth

The available Inside the Greenbelt reserve fund balance of $1.11 million has been applied to Urban Parks projects which are deemed to provide a benefit to this area.

In particular, approximately $7.02 million in available reserves have been applied against the Riverside South Community - North District Park - Active

HEMSON 135

(5.DP02) project. The $7.02 million is comprised of the following: City-wide DC reserve fund balance of $76,700, Rural DC reserve balance of $2.53 million and a portion of the Outside Greenbelt available reserve balance of $4.42 million1. The use of available reserve funds from the City-wide, Rural and Outside the Greenbelt reserve funds reflects the changes in the Parks Development calculation methodology included in this study.

5. Post-2029 Benefit

The DC eligible costs included in the Parks Development capital program is well below the maximum permissible funding envelope of $214.37 million (shown in Table 1 and 2). However, in recognition that a portion of the parks projects occurring over the 2025-2029 planning period are designed to benefit growth occurring beyond 2029, a post-period allocation of 40 per cent of the total DC eligible costs have been attributed to these projects.

As such, $7.48 million of the development-related costs is deemed to be post- period benefit. These costs will be examined in future DC by-laws for recovery, subject to service level limitations.

6. 2019-2029 In-Period Eligible Costs

After adjustments and discounts, a total of $69.59 million is included in the development charge calculation.

G. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The discounted development-related costs have generally been allocated 95 per cent to residential development, as these facilities are primarily provided and planned for the residential community. A nominal 5 per cent allocation is made for non-residential development recognizing that park facilities are used by employees working within the City of Ottawa.

1 Note the total available reserve fund balance for Outside the Greenbelt is $11.10 million

HEMSON 136

residential summary represents the sum of the costs remaining once the residential allocations have been made to the benefitting areas.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential Inside the Greenbelt 95% $31,119,304 Outside the Greenbelt 95% $0 Rural 95% $0 City-wide 95% $34,993,126 Subtotal Residential $66,112,430 Non-Residential Area-Specific Residual $1,637,858 City-wide 5% $1,841,743 Subtotal Non-Residential $3,479,601

Total $69,592,031

H. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for the City’s general services included in this appendix.

The following table provides a summary of the residential and non-residential Parks Development services development charges for each of the identified benefitting areas.

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential Inside the Greenbelt $/capita $676.62 Outside the Greenbelt $/capita $0.00 Rural $/capita $0.00 City-wide $/capita $234.68 Total Residential $/capita $911.30 Non-Residential Area-Specific $/square metre $0.50 City-wide $/square metre $0.56 Total Non-Residential $/m2 $1.07

HEMSON 137 APPENDIX C.2 TABLE 1 CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS DEVELOPMENT 2019 TRAILS # of km of Developed Trails UNIT COST Description 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/km) Community Trails 110 110 110 110 110 111 112 112 113 113 $441,200

Total (sq.ft.) 110 110 110 110 110 111 112 112 113 113 Total ($000) $48,673.2 $48,673.2 $48,673.2 $48,673.2 $48,673.2 $48,973.2 $49,414.4 $49,414.4 $49,855.6 $49,855.6

2019 PARKLAND # of Hectares of Developed Area UNIT COST Park Name 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/ha)

District Parks - Passive 534 534 534 534 534 534 543 559 559 559 $194,000 District Parks - Active 487 487 487 487 487 492 492 492 492 492 $618,000 Urban Parks (Inside Greenbelt) 974 976 976 976 976 976 977 977 977 985 $1,529,300

Total (ha) 1,995.00 1,997.00 1,997.00 1,997.00 1,997.00 2,002.00 2,012.00 2,028.00 2,028.00 2,036.00 Total ($000) $1,894,100.2 $1,897,158.8 $1,897,158.8 $1,897,158.8 $1,897,158.8 $1,900,248.8 $1,903,524.1 $1,906,628.1 $1,906,628.1 $1,918,862.5 Note: Only District and Urban parks are included in the historical inventory as community, neighbourhood parks and parkettes and not recovered in the DC capital program

HEMSON 138 APPENDIX C.2 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF SERVICE LEVELS PARKS DEVELOPMENT

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Historic Population 899,300 911,990 922,050 931,730 935,270 944,900 957,150 963,860 974,190 985,470

INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000)

Trails $48,673.2 $48,673.2 $48,673.2 $48,673.2 $48,673.2 $48,973.2 $49,414.4 $49,414.4 $49,855.6 $49,855.6 Parkland $1,894,100.2 $1,897,158.8 $1,897,158.8 $1,897,158.8 $1,897,158.8 $1,900,248.8 $1,903,524.1 $1,906,628.1 $1,906,628.1 $1,918,862.5 Total ($000) $1,942,773.4 $1,945,832.0 $1,945,832.0 $1,945,832.0 $1,945,832.0 $1,949,222.0 $1,952,938.5 $1,956,042.5 $1,956,483.7 $1,968,718.1

Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/pop) Service Level Trails $54.12 $53.37 $52.79 $52.24 $52.04 $51.83 $51.63 $51.27 $51.18 $50.59 $52.11 Parkland $2,106.19 $2,080.24 $2,057.54 $2,036.17 $2,028.46 $2,011.06 $1,988.74 $1,978.12 $1,957.14 $1,947.15 $2,019.08 Total ($/pop) $2,160.32 $2,133.61 $2,110.33 $2,088.41 $2,080.50 $2,062.89 $2,040.37 $2,029.38 $2,008.32 $1,997.75 $2,071.19

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PARKS DEVELOPMENT

10-Year Funding Envelope Calculation 10 Year Average Service Level 2009 - 2018 $2,071.19 Net Population Growth 2019 - 2029 115,000 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $238,186,850 Less: 10% Legislated Reduction $23,818,685 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $214,368,165

HEMSON 139 APPENDIX C.2 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM PARKS DEVELOPMENT

Gross Grants/ Net Ineligible Costs Total DC Elgible Costs Project Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement 10% DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Number Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Reduction Costs Growth 2029 2029

2.0 PARKS DEVELOPMENT

2.1 Urban Parks (Inside the Greenbelt) 2.1.1 Train Lands Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Area - 2 Urban Parks 5.UP02 2020 - 2029$ 465,000 $ - $ 465,000 5% $23,250 $44,175 $ 397,575 $ 397,575 $ - $ - IGB 2.1.2 St. Charles Park 5.UP04 2020 - 2024$ 279,000 $ - $ 279,000 10% $27,900 $25,110 $ 225,990 $ 225,990 $ - $ - IGB 2.1.3 1770 Heatherington Road - Urban Park 5.UP06 2020 - 2024$ 621,000 $ - $ 621,000 10% $62,100 $55,890 $ 503,010 $ 439,470 $ 63,540 $ - IGB 2.1.4 Rockhurst Parkette 5.UP05 2020 - 2024$ 499,000 $ - $ 499,000 10% $49,900 $44,910 $ 404,190 $46,758 $ 357,432 $ - IGB 2.1.5 552 Booth Street - Urban Park 5.UP07 2020 - 2024$ 465,000 $ - $ 465,000 10% $46,500 $41,850 $ 376,650 $ - $ 376,650 $ - IGB 2.1.6 190 Richmond Road - Urban Park 5.UP08 2020 - 2024$ 428,000 $ - $ 428,000 10% $42,800 $38,520 $ 346,680 $ - $ 346,680 $ - IGB 2.1.7 Preston-Carling District Community Design Plan (CDP) 5.UP11 2020 - 2029$ 2,523,000 $ - $ 2,523,000 10% $ 252,300 $ 227, 070 $ 2,043,630 $ - $ 2, 043,630 $ - IGB 2.1.8 Scott Street Community Design Plan (CDP) 5.UP12 2020 - 2029$ 4,858,000 $ - $ 4,858,000 10% $ 485,800 $ 437,220 $ 3,934,980 $ - $ 3, 934,980 $ - IGB 2.1.9 Westgate Secondary Plan - Urban Park 5.UP13 2020 - 2029$ 613,000 $ - $ 613,000 10% $61,300 $55,170 $ 496,530 $ - $ 496,530 $ - IGB 2.1.10 Elmvale Acres - Urban Park 5.UP14 2020 - 2029$ 489,000 $ - $ 489,000 10% $48,900 $44,010 $ 396,090 $ - $ 396,090 $ - IGB 2.1.11 Heron Gate - 2 Urban Parks 5.UP15 2020 - 2029$ 4,655,000 $ - $ 4,655,000 10% $ 465,500 $ 418,950 $ 3,770,550 $ - $ 3, 770,550 $ - IGB 2.1.12 Gladstone Station Community Design Plan 5.UP16 2020 - 2029$ 1,404,000 $ - $ 1,404,000 10% $ 140,400 $ 126,360 $ 1,137,240 $ - $ 1, 137,240 $ - IGB 2.1.13 Blair Station Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Area - 3 Urban Parks 5.UP17 2020 - 2024$ 1,552,000 $ - $ 1,552,000 5% $77,600 $ 147,440 $ 1,326,960 $ - $ 1,326,960 $ - IGB 2.1.14 Old Ottawa East CDP - Greystone Village - 3 Urban Parks 5.UP18 2020 - 2024$ 3,638,000 $ - $ 3,638,000 5% $ 181, 900 $ 345,610 $ 3,110,490 $ - $ 3, 110,490 $ - IGB 2.1.15 1354-1376 Carling Avenue Urban Parkette 5.UP20 2020 - 2024$ 214,000 $ - $ 214,000 10% $21,400 $19,260 $ 173,340 $ - $ 173,340 $ - IGB 2.1.16 Cyrville Station TOD Area - 3 Urban Parks 5.UP22 2020 - 2024$ 2,017,000 $ - $ 2,017,000 5% $ 100,850 $ 191,615 $ 1,724,535 $ - $ 1, 724,535 $ - IGB 2.1.17 Bayview Station District Community Design Plan 5.UP25 2020 - 2024$ 2,482,000 $ - $ 2,482,000 5% $ 124,100 $ 235,790 $ 2,122,110 $ - $ 2, 122,110 $ - IGB 2.1.18 Urban Parks Manual 5.UP27 2020 - 2024$ 214,000 $ - $ 214,000 15% $32,100 $18,190 $ 163,710 $ - $ 163,710 $ - IGB 2.1.19 Hurdman Station TOD Area - 5 Urban Parks 5.UP26 2025 - 2029$ 4,655,000 $ - $ 4,655,000 5% $ 232,750 $ 442,225 $ 3,980,025 $ - $ 2, 388,015 $ 1, 592,010 IGB 2.1.20 Bank Street CDP South Keys to Blossom - 5 Urban Parks 5.UP09 2025 - 2029$ 6,206,000 $ - $ 6,206,000 10% $ 620,600 $ 558,540 $ 5,026,860 $ - $ 3,016,116 $ 2,010,744 IGB 2.1.21 Bank Street CDP Riverside to CN Rail Line - Linear Park 5.UP10 2025 - 2029$ 2,140,000 $ - $ 2,140,000 10% $ 214,000 $ 192,600 $ 1,733,400 $ - $ 1, 040,040 $ 693,360 IGB 2.1.22 Bayswater / Lebreton Street Park 5.UP03 2025 - 2029$ 514,000 $ - $ 514,000 5% $25,700 $48,830 $ 439,470 $ - $ 263,682 $ 175,788 IGB 2.1.23 Cleary Station & New Orchard Station TOD - 7 Urban Parks 5.UP19 2025 - 2029$ 856,000 $ - $ 856,000 5% $42,800 $81,320 $ 731,880 $ - $ 439,128 $ 292,752 IGB 2.1.24 Pinecrest-Queensview TOD Area - 3 Urban Parks 5.UP21 2025 - 2029$ 3,451,000 $ - $ 3,451,000 10% $ 345,100 $ 310,590 $ 2,795,310 $ - $ 1, 677,186 $ 1, 118,124 IGB 2.1.25 St. Laurent Station TOD Area - 4 Urban Parks 5.UP23 2025 - 2029$ 2,328,000 $ - $ 2,328,000 5% $ 116,400 $ 221,160 $ 1,990,440 $ - $ 1, 194,264 $ 796,176 IGB 2.1.26 Tremblay Station TOD Area - 4 Urban Parks 5.UP24 2025 - 2029$ 2,328,000 $ -$ 2,328,000 5% $ 116,400 $ 221,160 $ 1,990,440 $ -$ 1,194,264 $ 796,176 IGB

Subtotal Urban Parks (Inside the Greenbelt) $ 49,894,000 $ - $ 49,894,000 $ 3, 958,350 $ 4,593,565 $ 41,342,085 $ 1, 109,793 $ 32,757,162 $ 7, 475,130

HEMSON 140 APPENDIX C.2 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM PARKS DEVELOPMENT

2.2 District Parks (City-wide) 2.2.1 East Urban Community District Park - Active 5.DP01 2025 - 2029$ 4,942,000 $ - $ 4, 942,000 10% $ 494,200 $ 444,780 $ 4,003,020 $ - $ 4, 003,020 $ - City-wide 2.2.2 Riverside South Community - North District Park - Active 5.DP02 2025 - 2029$ 8,732,000 $ - $ 8, 732,000 10% $ 873,200 $ 785,880 $ 7,072,920 $ 7, 017,721 $ 55,199 $ - City-wide 2.2.3 Fernbank Community District Park - Active 5.DP03 2025 - 2029$ 17,290,000 $ - $ 17,290,000 10% $ 1, 729,000 $ 1, 556,100 $ 14,004,900 $ - $ 14, 004,900 $ - City-wide 2.2.4 Kanata West Commumnity District Park - Active 5.DP04 2025 - 2029$ 8,700,000 $ - $ 8, 700,000 10% $ 870,000 $ 783,000 $ 7,047,000 $ - $ 7,047,000 $ - City-wide 2.2.5 Jock River District Park - Passive 5.DP05 2025 - 2029$ 14,475,000 $ -$ 14,475,000 10% $ 1,447,500 $ 1,302,750 $ 11,724,750 $ -$ 11,724,750 $ -City-wide

Subtotal District Parks (City-wide) $ 54,139,000 $ - $ 54,139,000 $ 5,413,900 $ 4, 872,510 $ 43,852,590 $ 7, 017,721 $ 36,834,869 $ -

TOTAL PARKS DEVELOPMENT $ 104,033,000 $ - $ 104,033,000 $ 9, 372,250 $ 9, 466,075 $ 85,194,675 $ 8, 127,514 $ 69,592,031 $ 7,475,130

(1) Lebretton Flats has been removed from the DC capital project list and will be considered in subsequent DC Studies

Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Residential Calculation Available DC Reserve Fund Balance Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Total Amount Used Remaining Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 31,119,304 City-wide $76,707 $76,707 $0 10 Year Population Growth 45,992 IGB $1,109,793 $1,109,793 ($0) Charge per Capita $676.62 OGB $11,104,611 $4,415,267 $6,689,343 Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Rural $2,525,747 $2,525,747 $0 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95% $ - 10 Year Population Growth 69,877 (1) Portion of OGB and Rural available reserve fund balance is applied to City- Charge per Capita $0.00 wide projects Rural Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95% $ - 2019 - 2029 Net Funding Envelope $214,368,165 10 Year Population Growth 16,031 Charge per Capita $0.00 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $1,637,858 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 3,261,733 Charge per Square Metre $0.50

City-wide Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 34,993,126 10 Year Employment Growth 149,110 Unadjusted Per Unit Charge $234.68

Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 5%$ 1,841,743 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 3,261,733 Charge per Square Metre $0.56

HEMSON 141

Appendix C.3 Recreation Facilities

HEMSON 142

Appendix C.3

Recreation Facilities Technical Appendix

Recreation is provided to residents in the City through a range of facilities including recreation complexes; community centres and buildings; fieldhouses; indoor pool, ice pad and soccer facilities, outdoor skate parks and pools; stadiums and a sportsfield.

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Recreation Facilities services, the 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast and calculation of the development charges. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast are largely based on the projects identified in the 2014 DC Background Study, adjusted to account for expenditures and increases in project costs (i.e. indexing). The projects are further informed based on proposed and Council-approved capital budgets.

The following discusses the individual components included in the Recreation Facilities service category. The analysis is set out in the tables which follow and include:

Table 1 Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Level

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

A. Benefitting Area

The City’s Recreation Facilities development charges is calculated on both a City-wide and area-specific basis. The smaller benefitting areas are defined as: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural area.

B. Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Levels and Maximum Allowable Charges

The replacement costs for Recreation Facilities are based on recent estimates provided by City staff. Consistent with the 2014 DC Background

HEMSON 143

Study, the replacement cost of land has been excluded from the historical service level analysis.

Table 1 provides a summary of the level of service and the calculation of the ten-year historical service level. The calculation of the maximum allowable funding envelope is summarized as follows:

Ten-Year Funding Envelope Calculation Ten-Year Average Service Level (2009 – 2018) $2,177.67 Net Population Growth (2019 – 2029) 115,000 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $250,432,050 Less: Ten per cent Legislated Reduction $25,043,205 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $225,388,845

The existing facilities have been examined and consideration has been given to whether “excess capacity” exists within the City’s infrastructure that may be available to partially meet future servicing requirements. It has been determined that no “uncommitted excess capacity” exists within the City’s parks infrastructure, and as such, no adjustments have been made to the service level calculations.

C. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast includes a variety of projects for the provision of Recreation Facilities in the City and amounts to a total gross cost of $208.66 million. The projects identified in the capital forecast will result, in whole or in part, in increased capacity to meet the servicing needs of new development over the planning period.

The capital program provides for new outdoor aquatic facilities, indoor skate parks and studies that will provide a benefit to development occurring on a City-wide basis. Consistent with the City’s historical practice, smaller recreation facilities that provide a more localized benefit (e.g. community centres) are recovered based on smaller geographic areas.

The capital program also includes for the recovery of principal and interest payments related to the construction of Recreation Facilities. In accordance with the DCA, eligible capital expenditures include costs incurred or to be incurred by a municipality and can include interest on money borrowed

HEMSON 144

(s.5(3)). This category includes projects identified in previous Development Charge By-laws with committed funding that are completed or will be completed in the future.

Paragraph 5 of s.s.5(1) of the DCA requires a deduction from the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development that can be met using the City’s “excess capacity” that is “uncommitted”. “Excess capacity” is undefined in the DCA, but is considered to relate to the capacity available to meet some or all of the increase in need for service in order to potentially represent a deduction. It is recognized that no “surplus” of capacity exists within Recreation Facilities services as the deduction of uncommitted excess capacity would occur as part of the conceptual planning and feasibility work associated with planning new facilities.

D. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Recreation Facilities. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The benefit to existing shares are generally consistent with the approach utilized in the 2014 DC Background Study. For example, a minimum of a 5 per cent BTE share has been applied to new community centre space. For larger facilities that are intended to meet both existing and future needs, a higher BTE share has been applied. It should be noted that the identified debenture payments are considered to be entirely related to new development.

The Riverside South Recreation Complex Construction (6.AS01) reflects a 0 per cent BTE share whereas the 2014 DC Study included a 10 per cent deduction. For the purposes of the DC study calculations, the existing reserve funds are assumed to be paying for space and/or servicing capacity, which is in addition to this requirement and relates to development that occurred prior to the passage of the 2019 DC by-law (“prior growth”) that has paid DCs but

HEMSON 145

has yet to receive new facilities. As such, a significant portion of the Riverside South Recreation Complex ($51.79 million) is funded from the City’s available reserve fund balance for Outside the Greenbelt.

In total, $38.23 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share. These costs will not be funded from development charges.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is not identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs, less the replacement/benefit to existing shares, is made to each project. As the identified principal and interest payments are already net of the statutory 10 per cent adjustment, no deduction has been made to those projects.

In total, $14.48 million is identified as the ten per cent reduction share.

4. Prior Growth

In total, $12.27 million in available DC reserves have been removed from City-wide DC eligible costs, $1.14 million has been removed from Inside the Greenbelt DC eligible costs and $1.26 million has been removed from Rural DC eligible costs.

5. Post-2029 Benefit

The DC eligible costs included in the Recreation Facilities capital program is well below the maximum permissible funding envelope of $225.39 million (shown in Table 1 and 2) and all of the projects identified in the DC capital program are related to servicing needs arising from new development over the planning period. As such, no post-period adjustment has been applied to the calculation.

6. 2019-2029 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $89.49 million is included in the development charge calculation.

HEMSON 146

E. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The discounted development-related costs have generally been allocated 95 per cent to residential development, as these facilities are primarily provided and planned for the residential community. A nominal 5 per cent allocation is made for non-residential development recognizing that Recreation Facilities are used by employees working within the City of Ottawa.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential Inside the Greenbelt 95% $17,010,988 Outside the Greenbelt 95% $57,186,736 Rural 95% $1,349,531 City-wide 95% $9,469,644 Subtotal Residential $85,016,900 Non-Residential Area-Specific Residual $3,976,171 City-wide 5% $498,402 Subtotal Non-Residential $4,474,574

Total $89,491,474

F. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for the City’s general services included in this appendix.

The following table provides a summary of the residential and non-residential Recreation Facilities development charges for each of the identified benefitting areas.

HEMSON 147

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential Inside the Greenbelt $/capita $369.87 Outside the Greenbelt $/capita $657.52 Rural $/capita $84.18 City-wide $/capita $63.51 Total Residential $/capita $1,175.08 Non-Residential Area-Specific $/square metre $1.22 City-wide $/square metre $0.15 Total Non-Residential $/m2 $1.37

HEMSON 148 APPENDIX C.3 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS RECREATION FACILITIES

2019

BUILDINGS # of Square Feet UNIT COST ($/sq. ft.) Facility Name 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Recreation Complex 1,681,168 1,681,168 1,696,238 1,696,238 1,819,220 1,819,220 2,119,220 2,119,220 2,130,320 2,130,320 $500

Community Centre 882,000 898,250 914,400 922,220 922,220 922,220 922,220 927,720 928,900 932,200 $510

Community Building 52,863 52,863 52,863 52,863 55,875 55,875 55,875 55,875 56,650 56,650 $510

Fieldhouse 180,683 180,683 183,912 183,912 183,912 183,912 183,912 184,287 184,287 184,287 $440

Indoor Pool 502,680 506,575 506,575 506,575 506,575 506,575 506,575 506,575 506,575 506,575 $500

Indoor Ice Pad 56,725 56,725 56,725 56,725 56,725 56,725 56,725 56,725 75,405 75,405 $410

Indoor Soccer 142,200 142,200 142,200 142,200 142,200 142,200 142,200 142,200 142,200 142,200 $100

Outdoor District Skateboard Park 39,720 39,720 39,720 39,720 51,850 59,650 59,650 69,850 69,850 69,850 $30

Outdoor Pool 10,835 10,835 10,835 10,835 10,835 10,835 10,835 10,835 10,835 10,835 $190

Stadium 440,420 440,420 440,420 440,420 440,420 440,420 440,420 440,420 440,420 440,420 $530

Sportsfield (Lansdowne) 72,647 72,647 72,647 72,647 72,647 72,647 72,647 72,647 72,647 72,647 $50

Total (sq.ft.) 4,061,941 4,082,086 4,116,535 4,124,355 4,262,479 4,270,279 4,570,279 4,586,354 4,618,089 4,621,389

Total ($000) $1,925,987.1 $1,936,222.1 $1,953,414.4 $1,957,402.6 $2,020,793.6 $2,021,027.6 $2,171,027.6 $2,174,303.6 $2,188,509.4 $2,190,192.4

HEMSON 149 APPENDIX C.3 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF SERVICE LEVELS RECREATION FACILITIES

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Historic Population 899,300 911,990 922,050 931,730 935,270 944,900 957,150 963,860 974,190 985,470

INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000)

Buildings $1,925,987.1 $1,936,222.1 $1,953,414.4 $1,957,402.6 $2,020,793.6 $2,021,027.6 $2,171,027.6 $2,174,303.6 $2,188,509.4 $2,190,192.4

Total ($000) $1,925,987.1 $1,936,222.1 $1,953,414.4 $1,957,402.6 $2,020,793.6 $2,021,027.6 $2,171,027.6 $2,174,303.6 $2,188,509.4 $2,190,192.4

Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/pop) Service Level

Buildings $2,141.65 $2,123.07 $2,118.56 $2,100.83 $2,160.65 $2,138.88 $2,268.22 $2,255.83 $2,246.49 $2,222.49 $2,177.67

Total ($/pop) $2,141.65 $2,123.07 $2,118.56 $2,100.83 $2,160.65 $2,138.88 $2,268.22 $2,255.83 $2,246.49 $2,222.49 $2,177.67

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE RECREATION FACILITIES

10-Year Funding Envelope Calculation

10 Year Average Service Level 2009 - 2018 $2,177.67

Net Population Growth 2019 - 2029 115,000

Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $250,432,050

Less: 10% Legislated Reduction $25,043,205

Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $225,388,845

HEMSON 150 APPENDIX C.3 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM RECREATION FACILITIES

Gross Grants/ NetIneligible Costs Total DC Elgible Costs Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement 10% DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Reduction Costs Growth 2029 2029

3.0 RECREATION FACILITIES

3.1 City-wide Facilities 3.1.1 Outdoor Aquatic Facility 2020 - 2024$ 2,232,000 $ - $ 2,232,000 79% $ 1,763,280 $ 46,872 $ 421,848 $ 421,848 $ - $ - City-wide 3.1.2 Outdoor Aquatic Facility 2025 - 2029$ 2,232,000 $ - $ 2,232,000 10% $ 223,200 $ 200,880 $ 1,807,920 $ 1,807,920 $ - $ - City-wide 3.1.3 Indoor Skateboard Park Partnership 2020 - 2024$ 3,225,000 $ - $ 3,225,000 80% $ 2,580,000 $ 64,500 $ 580,500 $ 580,500 $ - $ - City-wide 3.1.4 Indoor Major Aquatic Facility (50M Pool) 2020 - 2029$ 39,000,000 $ - $ 39,000,000 45% $ 17,550,000 $ 2,145,000 $ 19,305,000 $ 9,457,373 $ 9,847,627 $ - City-wide 3.1.5 Recreation Planning Studies 2020 - 2029$ 446,000 $ -$ 446,000 70% $ 312,200 $ 13,380 $ 120,420 $ -$ 120,420 $ -City-wide

Subtotal City-wide Facilities $ 47,135,000 $ - $ 47,135,000 $ 22,428,680 $ 2,470,632 $ 22,235,688 $ 12,267,641 $ 9,968,047 $ -

HEMSON 151 APPENDIX C.3 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM RECREATION FACILITIES

3.2 Area-Specific Facilities 3.2.1 Community Building - Rural East (3,000 SF) 2020 - 2024$ 1,803,000 $ - $ 1,803,000 45% $ 811,350 $ 99,165 $ 892,485 $ 892,485 $ - $ - Rural 3.2.2 Community Building - Rural South (3,000 SF) 2020 - 2024$ 1,803,000 $ - $ 1,803,000 45% $ 811,350 $ 99,165 $ 892,485 $ 364,411 $ 528,074 $ - Rural 3.2.3 Riverside South Recreation Complex Construction 2025 - 2029$ 66,440,000 $ - $ 66,440,000 0% $ - $ 6,644,000 $ 59,796,000 $ 51,793,936 $ 8,002,064 $ - OGB 3.2.4 Pinecrest Community Centre Expansion (12,000 SF) 2025 - 2029$ 7,778,000 $ - $ 7,778,000 70% $ 5,444,600 $ 233,340 $ 2,100,060 $ 1,142,897 $ 957,163 $ - IGB 3.2.5 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Principal Payments 2020 - 2029$ 3,559,000 $ - $ 3,559,000 0% $ - $ - $ 3,559,000 $ - $ 3,559,000 $ - OGB 3.2.6 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Interest Payments 2020 - 2029 $ 4,148,000 $ - $ 4,148,000 0% $ - $ - $ 4,148,000 $ - $ 4,148,000 $ - OGB 3.2.7 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Principal Payments - 902168 - 903625 - 9034 2020 - 2029$ 11,457,000 $ - $ 11,457,000 0%$ - $ - $ 11,457,000 $ - $ 11,457,000 $ - IGB/OGB 3.2.8 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Interest Payments 2020 - 2029$ 6,465,000 $ - $ 6,465,000 0%$ - $ - $ 6,465,000 $ - $ 6,465,000 $ - IGB/OGB

3.2.9 Community Centre - East (EUC) 2025 - 2029$ 10,500,000 $ - $ 10,500,000 5%$ 525,000 $ 997,500 $ 8,977,500 $ - $ 8,977,500 $ - OGB 3.2.10 Community Centre - South (Riverside South CC - 21,000 SF) 2020 - 2024$ 10,500,000 $ - $ 10,500,000 5%$ 525,000 $ 997,500 $ 8,977,500 $ - $ 8,977,500 $ - OGB 3.2.11 Community Centre - West (21,000 SF) 2020 - 2024$ 10,500,000 $ - $ 10,500,000 5%$ 525,000 $ 997,500 $ 8,977,500 $ - $ 8,977,500 $ - OGB 3.2.12 Community Centre - Central (Ottawa East - 21,000 SF) 2020 - 2024$ 10,500,000 $ - $ 10,500,000 5%$ 525,000 $ 997,500 $ 8,977,500 $ - $ 8,977,500 $ - IGB 3.2.13 Community Building - Rural West (3,000 SF) 2025 - 2029$ 1,803,000 $ - $ 1,803,000 45%$ 811,350 $ 99,165 $ 892,485 $ - $ 892,485 $ - Rural 3.2.14 Community Centre Space Upgrades - Sawmill Creek & Alexander 2020 - 2024$ 12,772,000 $ - $ 12,772,000 45%$ 5,747,400 $ 702,460 $ 6,322,140 $ - $ 6,322,140 $ - IGB 3.2.15 Field House - Wateridge Village 2020 - 2024$ 1,500,000 $ -$ 1,500,000 5% $ 75,000 $ 142,500 $ 1,282,500 $ -$ 1,282,500 $ -IGB

Subtotal Area-Specific Facilities $ 161,528,000 $ - $ 161,528,000 $ 15,801,050 $ 12,009,795 $ 133,717,155 $ 54,193,728 $ 79,523,427 $ -

TOTAL RECREATION FACILITIES $ 208,663,000 $ - $ 208,663,000 $ 38,229,730 $ 14,480,427 $ 155,952,843 $ 66,461,369 $ 89,491,474 $ -

Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Residential Calculation Available DC Reserve Fund Balance Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Total Amount Used Remaining Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 17,010,988 City-wide $12,267,641 $12,267,641 $0 10 Year Population Growth 45,992 IGB $1,142,897 $1,142,897 $0 Charge per Capita $369.87 OGB $51,793,936 $51,793,936 $0 Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Rural $1,256,896 $1,256,896 $0 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 57,186,736 10 Year Population Growth 86,973 Charge per Capita $657.52 Rural Residential Calculation 2019 - 2029 Net Funding Envelope $225,388,845 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 1,349,531 10 Year Population Growth 16,031 Charge per Capita $84.18 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $ 3,976,171 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 3,261,733 Charge per Square Metre $1.22

City-wide Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 9,469,644 10 Year Employment Growth 149,110 Unadjusted Per Unit Charge $63.51

Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 5%$ 498,402 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 3,261,733 Charge per Square Metre $0.15

HEMSON 152

Appendix C.4 Libraries

HEMSON 153

Appendix C.4

Libraries Technical Appendix

Libraries are operated by the Ottawa Public Library (OPL) which provides library services through 34 branches, two mobile libraries as well as more unconventional “vending machine-style” lending services across the City. The OPL is North America’s largest bilingual public library system.

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Libraries, the 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast and calculation of the development charges. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast are largely based on the projects identified in the 2014 DC Background Study, adjusted to account for expenditures and increases in project costs (i.e. indexing). The projects are further informed based on proposed and Council-approved capital budgets.

The following discusses the individual components included in the Libraries service category. The analysis is set out in the tables which follow and include:

Table 1 Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Level

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

A. Benefitting Area

The City’s Libraries development charge is calculated on both a City-wide and area-specific basis. The smaller benefitting areas are defined as: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural area.

B. Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Levels and Maximum Allowable Charges

An average replacement cost of $423 per square foot of library space has been applied to all branches in the City and a replacement cost of $55 per

HEMSON 154

unit has been applied to library collection materials (e.g. books and other reference materials). Library equipment has also been included in the historical inventory and is based on the replacement cost of each asset. Consistent with the City’s historical practice, the replacement cost of land has been excluded from the analysis.

Table 1 provides a summary of the level of service and the calculation of the ten-year historical service level. The calculation of the maximum allowable funding envelope is summarized as follows:

Ten-Year Funding Envelope Calculation Ten-Year Average Service Level (2009 – 2018) $318.81 Net Population Growth (2019 – 2029) 115,000 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $36,663,150 Less: Ten per cent Legislated Reduction $3,666,315 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $32,996,835

Existing facilities have been examined and consideration has been given to whether “excess capacity” exists within the City’s infrastructure that may be available to partially meet future servicing requirements. It has been determined that no “uncommitted excess capacity” exists within the City’s library infrastructure, and as such, no adjustments have been made to the service level calculations.

C. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast includes a variety of projects for the provision of Libraries in the City and amounts to a total gross cost of $46.57 million. Such projects include the construction of new libraries in Riverside South, East Urban, North Gower and Barrhaven South communities. The capital program also includes for the recovery of past commitments (e.g. negative reserve fund balance relating to library facilities constructed Inside the Greenbelt) as well as principal and interest payments related to the construction of Libraries. In accordance with the DCA, eligible capital expenditures include costs incurred or to be incurred by a municipality and can include interest on money borrowed (s.5(3)). This category includes projects identified in previous Development Charge By-laws with committed funding that are completed or will be completed in the future. The projects

HEMSON 155

identified in the capital forecast will result, in whole or in part, in increased capacity to meet the servicing needs of new development over the planning period.

Paragraph 5 of s.s.5(1) of the DCA requires a deduction from the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development that can be met using the City’s “excess capacity” that is “uncommitted”. “Excess capacity” is undefined in the DCA, but is considered to relate to the capacity available to meet some or all of the increase in need for service in order to potentially represent a deduction. It is recognized that no “surplus” of capacity exists within Libraries as the deduction of uncommitted excess capacity typically occurs as part of the conceptual planning and feasibility work associated with planning new facilities.

D. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Libraries. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The replacement and benefit to existing shares have been examined on a project-by-project basis and the nature of each project determined the rationale for reductions. The identified benefit to exiting shares include costs that meet the needs of existing development, including past development. The benefit to existing shares are generally consistent with the approach applied in the 2014 DC Background Study (e.g. library collection material has a 5 per cent deduction and new library facilities have a 10 per cent deduction).

In total, $2.68 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share. These costs will not be funded from development charges.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is not identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs, less the replacement/benefit to existing shares, is made to each project. The only exception is the recovery of the negative DC reserve fund balance as this amount is already net of the statutory ten per cent discount.

HEMSON 156

In total, $4.23 million is identified as the ten per cent reduction share.

4. Prior Growth

In total, $4.78 million in available DC reserves have been removed from City- wide DC eligible costs, $12.44 million has been removed from Outside the Greenbelt DC eligible costs and $927,300 has been removed from Rural DC eligible costs. The available reserve fund balance of $12.44 million for Outside the Greenbelt has been applied to projects that are deemed to benefit both the Outside the Greenbelt and Rural areas.

5. Post-2029 Benefit

The DC eligible costs included in the Libraries capital program is below the maximum permissible funding envelope of $33.00 million (shown in Table 1 and 2) and all of the projects identified in the DC capital program are related to servicing needs arising from new development over the planning period. As such, no post-period adjustment has been applied to the calculation.

6. 2019-2029 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $21.52 million is included in the development charge calculation.

E. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The discounted development-related costs have generally been allocated 95 per cent to residential development, as these facilities are primarily provided and planned for the residential community. A nominal 5 per cent allocation is made for non-residential development recognizing that library facilities are used by employees working within the City of Ottawa.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

HEMSON 157

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential Inside the Greenbelt 95% $1,517,696 Outside the Greenbelt 95% $3,187,980 Rural 95% $658,085 City-wide 95% $15,079,335 Subtotal Residential $20,443,096 Non-Residential Area-Specific Residual $282,303 City-wide 95% $793,649 Subtotal Non-Residential $1,075,952

Total $21,519,048

F. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for the City’s general services included in this appendix.

The following table provides a summary of the residential and non-residential Libraries development charges for each of the identified benefitting areas.

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential Inside the Greenbelt $/capita $33.00 Outside the Greenbelt $/capita $36.65 Rural $/capita $41.05 City-wide $/capita $101.13 Total Residential $/capita $211.83 Non-Residential Area-Specific $/square metre $0.09 City-wide $/square metre $0.24 Total Non-Residential $/m2 $0.33

HEMSON 158 APPENDIX C.4 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS LIBRARIES

2019 BUILDINGS # of Square Feet Grants/ UNIT COST Branch Name 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/sq.ft.) Alta Vista 15,198 15,198 15,198 15,198 15,198 15,198 15,198 15,198 15,198 15,198 $423 Beaverbrook 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 23,896 23,896 23,896 $423 Blackburn Hamlet 7,333 7,333 7,333 7,333 7,333 7,333 7,333 7,333 7,333 7,333 $423 Carlingwood 19,690 19,690 19,690 19,690 19,690 19,690 19,690 19,690 19,690 19,690 $423 Carp 5,773 5,773 5,773 5,773 5,773 5,773 5,773 5,773 5,773 5,773 $423 Centennial 9,744 9,744 9,744 9,744 9,744 9,744 9,744 9,744 9,744 9,744 $423 Constance Bay 519 519 519 519 519 519 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 $423 Cumberland 24,500 24,500 24,500 24,500 24,500 24,500 24,500 24,500 24,500 24,500 $423 Elmvale Acres 7,493 7,493 7,493 7,493 7,493 7,493 7,493 7,493 7,493 7,493 $423 Emerald Plaza 5,644 5,644 5,644 5,644 10,528 10,528 10,528 10,528 10,528 10,528 $423 Fitzroy Harbour 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 $423 Greely 946 946 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 $423 Greenboro 29,000 29,000 29,000 29,000 29,000 29,000 29,000 29,000 29,000 29,000 $423 Hazeldean 9,713 9,713 9,713 9,713 9,713 9,713 9,713 9,713 9,713 9,713 $423 Main Branch 90,418 90,418 90,418 90,418 90,418 90,418 90,418 90,418 90,418 90,418 $423 Manotick 4,629 4,629 4,629 4,629 4,629 4,629 4,629 4,629 4,629 4,629 $423 Metcalfe 1,468 1,468 1,468 1,468 1,468 1,468 1,468 1,468 1,468 1,468 $423 Munster 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 $423 Nepean Centrepointe 36,940 36,940 36,940 36,940 36,940 36,940 36,940 36,940 36,940 36,940 $423 North Gloucester 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 $423 North Gower 2,364 2,364 2,364 2,364 2,364 2,364 2,364 2,364 2,364 2,364 $423 Orléans 17,182 17,182 17,182 17,182 17,182 17,182 17,182 17,182 17,182 17,182 $423 Osgoode 3,412 3,412 3,412 3,412 3,412 3,412 3,412 3,412 3,412 3,412 $423 Richmond 2,804 2,804 2,804 2,804 2,804 2,804 2,804 2,804 2,804 2,804 $423 Rideau 7,277 7,277 7,277 7,277 7,277 7,277 7,277 7,277 7,277 7,277 $423 Rockcliffe Park 3,005 3,005 3,005 3,005 3,005 3,005 3,005 3,005 3,005 3,005 $423 Rosemount 6,089 6,089 6,089 6,089 6,089 6,089 6,089 6,089 6,089 6,089 $423 Ruth E. Dickinson 17,100 17,100 19,000 19,000 19,000 19,000 19,000 19,000 19,000 19,000 $423 Stittsville 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 $423 St-Laurent 13,540 13,540 13,540 13,540 13,540 13,540 13,540 13,540 13,540 13,540 $423 Sunnyside 12,014 12,014 12,014 12,014 12,014 12,014 12,014 12,014 12,014 12,014 $423 Vanier 7,308 7,308 7,308 7,308 7,308 7,308 7,308 7,308 7,308 7,308 $423 Vernon 1,366 1,366 1,366 1,366 1,366 1,366 1,366 1,366 1,366 1,366 $423

Total (sq.ft.) 401,142 401,142 405,096 405,096 409,980 409,980 410,561 424,457 424,457 424,457 Total ($000) $169,683.1 $169,683.1 $171,355.6 $171,355.6 $173,421.5 $173,421.5 $173,667.3 $179,545.3 $179,545.3 $179,545.3

HEMSON 159 APPENDIX C.4 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS LIBRARIES

2019 MATERIALS # of Collection Materials UNIT COST Type of Collection 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/item) Collection Materials 2,245,266 2,387,235 2,355,859 2,331,407 2,322,094 2,284,581 2,279,852 2,049,706 2,014,891 2,014,891 $55

Total (#) 2,245,266 2,387,235 2,355,859 2,331,407 2,322,094 2,284,581 2,279,852 2,049,706 2,014,891 2,014,891 Total ($000) $122,883.4 $130,653.4 $128,936.2 $127,597.9 $127,088.2 $125,035.1 $124,776.3 $112,180.4 $110,275.0 $110,275.0

2019 EQUIPMENT # of Items UNIT COST Type of Equipment 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/item) 60 Watt Laser Cutter ------1 1 1 1 $23,900 Assitive Work Stations - 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 $5,545 Automated Materials Handling System - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $1,546,300 Bar Code - De/Resensitizer 28 34 48 49 49 42 24 19 6 - $5,986 Bar Code Reader 24 19 19 19 19 19 8 8 5 5 $7,231 Colour 3D Printer, With Oven, Wash Station ------1 1 1 1 $20,000 Colour 3D Printer, No Oven, Wash Station ------1 1 1 1 $17,304 Dual Aisle Security Gates - 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 $12,975 Emergency Generator Main Library - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 $37,437 OPL - External Book Return (Mobile) ------1 1 $7,020 Service Kiosk Book Dispensing System - 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $18,679 Microfilm Reader 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 - - - $10,652 Microfilm Scanner ------8 8 $5,592 Photocopier 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - $13,000 RFID Automated Materials Sorting System - - - 1 2 5 9 11 11 12 $247,189 RFID AV Holds Dispenser ------1 1 1 1 $34,470 RFID Book Drop ------2 2 2 2 $10,000 RFID Dual Aisle Security Gates - - - - 2 2 7 12 14 14 $8,891 RFID Holds Locker ------1 1 1 1 $26,000 RFID LS Transit Bins ------30 54 76 76 $5,383 RFID Return Bin ------6 11 18 $12,010 RFID Self Checkout - - - - 6 21 51 68 87 102 $9,126 RFID Handheld Device ------3 $500 Security Gate 15 16 14 14 14 10 10 5 4 7 $9,457 Self Checkout 18 29 30 31 30 25 9 5 - - $21,300 Self Checkout Built-In Model - - 6 6 6 3 3 3 - - $18,650 Service Point Desk ------2 - - - $11,860 Single Aisle Security Gate - - 1 2 2 1 1 - - - $11,138 Single Point of Service Height Adjustable Desk ------5 9 16 $16,302 Techlogic Smart Bins ------4 4 $5,816 Vendcard Kiosk - - - 3 4 5 5 19 18 18 $7,861

Total (#) 94 144 167 175 183 182 215 262 301 331 Total ($000) $964.6 $1,439.6 $1,687.7 $3,543.2 $3,836.5 $4,494.0 $5,599.8 $6,391.1 $6,621.7 $7,197.9 HEMSON 160 APPENDIX C.4 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF SERVICE LEVELS LIBRARIES

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Historic Population 899,300 911,990 922,050 931,730 935,270 944,900 957,150 963,860 974,190 985,470

INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000)

Buildings $169,683.1 $169,683.1 $171,355.6 $171,355.6 $173,421.5 $173,421.5 $173,667.3 $179,545.3 $179,545.3 $179,545.3 Materials $122,883.4 $130,653.4 $128,936.2 $127,597.9 $127,088.2 $125,035.1 $124,776.3 $112,180.4 $110,275.0 $110,275.0 Equipment $964.6 $1,439.6 $1,687.7 $3,543.2 $3,836.5 $4,494.0 $5,599.8 $6,391.1 $6,621.7 $7,197.9 Total ($000) $293,531.1 $301,776.0 $301,979.5 $302,496.7 $304,346.3 $302,950.6 $304,043.4 $298,116.8 $296,442.0 $297,018.2

Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/pop) Service Level Buildings $188.68 $186.06 $185.84 $183.91 $185.42 $183.53 $181.44 $186.28 $184.30 $182.19 $184.77 Materials $136.64 $143.26 $139.84 $136.95 $135.88 $132.33 $130.36 $116.39 $113.20 $111.90 $129.67 Equipment $1.07 $1.58 $1.83 $3.80 $4.10 $4.76 $5.85 $6.63 $6.80 $7.30 $4.37 Total ($/pop) $326.40 $330.90 $327.51 $324.66 $325.41 $320.62 $317.65 $309.29 $304.30 $301.40 $318.81

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE LIBRARIES

10-Year Funding Envelope Calculation 10 Year Average Service Level 2009 - 2018 $318.81 Net Population Growth 2019 - 2029 115,000 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $36,663,150 Less: 10% Legislated Reduction $3,666,315 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $32,996,835

HEMSON 161 APPENDIX C.4 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM LIBRARIES

Gross Grants/ Net Ineligible CostsTotal DC Elgible Costs Project Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement 10% DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Number Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Reduction Costs Growth 2029 2029

4.0 LIBRARIES

4.1 Area-Specific - Recovery of Negative Reserve Fund Balance 4.1.1 Recovery of Negative Reserve Fund Balance 2020 - 2020$ 1,597,575 $ -$ 1,597,575 0%-$ $ -$ 1,597,575 $ -$ 1,597,575 $ -IGB

Subtotal Area-Specific - Recovery of Negative Reserve Fund Balance $ 1,597,575 $ - $ 1,597,575 $ - $ - $ 1,597,575 $ - $ 1,597,575 $ -

4.2 Area-Specific - Buildings and Facilities 4.2.1 Riverside South Library - 904629 7.AS01 2020 - 2024$ 9,962,000 $ - $ 9,962,000 10% $ 996,200 $ 896,580 $ 8, 069,220 $ 8, 069,220 $ - $ - OGB/Rural 4.2.2 East Urban Community Library 7.AS02 2020 - 2024$ 2,747,952 $ - $ 2,747,952 10% $ 274,795 $ 247,316 $ 2, 225,841 $ 2, 225,841 $ - $ - OGB/Rural 4.2.3 North Gower Library 7.AS03 2025 - 2029$ 2,000,000 $ - $ 2,000,000 10% $ 200,000 $ 180,000 $ 1, 620,000 $ 927,279 $ 692,721 $ - Rural 4.2.4 Barrhaven South Library 7.AS04 2025 - 2029$ 6,750,000 $ -$ 6,750,000 10% $ 675,000 $ 607,500 $ 5,467,500 $ 2,111,732 $ 3,355,768 $ - OGB

Subtotal Area-Specific - Buildings and Facilities $ 21,459,952 $ - $ 21,459,952 $ 2,145,995 $ 1,931,396 $ 17,382,561 $ 13,334,072 $ 4,048,490 $ -

4.3 Area-Specific - Debt Payments 4.3.1 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Principal Payments - 904628 7.ASD1 2020 - 2029 $ 17,000 $ - $ 17,000 0% $ - $ 1,700 $ 15,300 $ 15,300 $ - $ - OGB/Rural 4.3.2 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Interest Payments - 904628 7.ASD2 2020 - 2029 $ 19,000 $ -$ 19,000 0%-$ $ 1,900 $ 17,100 $ 17,100 $ -$ - OGB/Rural

Subtotal Area-Specific - Debt Payments $ 36,000 $ - $ 36,000 $ - $ 3,600 $ 32,400 $ 32,400 $ - $ -

4.4 City-wide - Debt Payments 4.4.1 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Principal Payments - 909293 7.CWD1 2020 - 2029$ 5,776,000 $ - $ 5,776,000 0% $ - $ 577,600 $ 5, 198,400 $ - $ 5,198,400 $ - City-wide 4.4.2 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Interest Payments - 909293 7.CWD2 2020 - 2029$ 7,063,000 $ -$ 7,063,000 0%-$ $ 706,300 $ 6,356,700 $ -$ 6,356,700 $ -City-wide

Subtotal City-wide - Debt Payments $ 12,839,000 $ - $ 12,839,000 $ - $ 1,283,900 $ 11,555,100 $ - $ 11,555,100 $ -

4.5 City-wIde Collection Materials 4.5.1 Library Materials and Collections 7.CW01 2020 2024$ 2,043,976 $ - $ 2,043,976 5% $ 102,199 $ 194,178 $ 1,747,600 $ 1,747,600 $ - $ - City-wide 4.5.2 Library Materials and Collections 7.CW02 2020 2024$ 2,064,571 $ - $ 2,064,571 5% $ 103,229 $ 196,134 $ 1,765,208 $ 1,765,208 $ - $ - City-wide 4.5.3 Library Materials and Collections 7.CW03 2020 2029$ 2,120,370 $ - $ 2,120,370 5% $ 106,018 $ 201,435 $ 1,812,916 $ 1,263,990 $ 548,926 $ - City-wide 4.5.4 Library Materials and Collections 7.CW04 2020 2029$ 2,176,169 $ - $ 2,176,169 5% $ 108,808 $ 206,736 $ 1,860,625 $ - $ 1,860,625 $ - City-wide 4.5.5 Library Materials and Collections 7.CW05 2020 2029$ 2,231,968 $ -$ 2,231,968 5% $ 111,598 $ 212,037 $ 1,908,333 $ -$ 1,908,333 $ -City-wide

Subtotal City-wIde Collection Materials $ 10,637,054 $ - $ 10,637,054 $ 531,853 $ 1,010,520 $ 9,094,681 $ 4,776,798 $ 4,317,884 $ -

HEMSON 162 APPENDIX C.4 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM LIBRARIES

TOTAL LIBRARIES $ 46,569,582 $ - $ 46,569,582 $ 2, 677,848 $ 4, 229,416 $ 39,662,318 $ 18,143,269 $ 21,519,048 $ -

Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Residential Calculation Available DC Reserve Fund Balance Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Total Amount Used Remaining Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 1,517,696 City-wide $4,776,798 $4,776,798 $0 10 Year Population Growth 45,992 IGB ($1,597,575) $0 $0 Charge per Capita $33.00 OGB $12,439,193 $12,439,193 $0 Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Rural $927,279 $927,279 $0 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 3,187,980 10 Year Population Growth 86,973 Charge per Capita $36.65 Rural Residential Calculation 2019 - 2029 Net Funding Envelope $32,996,835 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 658,085 10 Year Population Growth 16,031 Charge per Capita $41.05 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $ 282,303 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 3,261,733 Charge per Square Metre $0.09

City-wide Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 95%$ 15,079,335 10 Year Employment Growth 149,110 Unadjusted Per Unit Charge $101.13

Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 5%$ 793,649 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 3,261,733 Charge per Square Metre $0.24

HEMSON 163

Appendix C.5 Paramedic Services

HEMSON 164

Appendix C.5

Paramedic Services Technical Appendix

Ottawa Paramedic Services delivers medical treatment for medical emergencies and also provides supportive care and safety training for residents across the City of Ottawa.

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Paramedics Services, the 2019–2019 development-related capital forecast and calculation of the development charges. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast are largely based on the projects identified in the 2014 DC Background Study, adjusted to account for expenditures and increases in project costs (i.e. indexing). The projects are further informed based on proposed and Council-approved capital budgets.

The following discusses the individual components included in the Paramedic service category. The analysis is set out in the tables which follow and include:

Table 1 Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Level

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

A. Benefitting Area

The City’s Paramedic Services development charges is calculated on a City- wide basis.

B. Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Levels and Maximum Allowable Charges

A replacement cost of $390 per square foot has been applied to all Paramedic facilities across the City. Approximately 130 vehicles are currently used to provide paramedic services which includes emergency response vehicles, special support and various paramedic support and response fleet. Communications and various medical equipment are also included in the

HEMSON 165

historical service level calculation. Consistent with the City’s prior DC Background Studies, no land has been included in the historical inventory calculation.

Table 1 provides a summary of the level of service and the calculation of the ten-year historical service level. The calculation of the maximum allowable funding envelope is summarized as follows:

12-Year Funding Envelope Calculation Year Average Service Level (2009 – 2018) $47.67 Net Population Growth (2019 – 2029) 189,000 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $9,009,630 Less: Ten per cent Legislated Reduction $900,963 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $8,108,667

The existing facilities have been examined and consideration has been made with regard to whether “excess capacity” exists within the City’s infrastructure that may be available to partially meet future servicing requirements. It has been determined that no “uncommitted excess capacity” exists within the City’s Paramedics services infrastructure, and as such, no adjustments have been made to the service level calculations.

C. The Development-Related Capital Program

The projects identified in the capital forecast will result, in whole or in part, in increased capacity to meet the servicing needs of new development. The 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast includes for the development of a Paramedic Annex, four Paramedic Post facilities, land and emergency response vehicles that will provide a City-wide benefit. The total gross cost of this capital forecast is $12.51 million.

Paragraph 5 of s.s.5(1) of the DCA requires a deduction from the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development that can be met using the City’s “excess capacity” other than excess capacity which is “committed”. “Excess capacity” is undefined in the DCA, but is considered to relate to the capacity available to meet some or all of the increase in need for service in order to potentially represent a deduction. It is recognized that no “surplus” of capacity exists within Paramedic services as the deduction of

HEMSON 166

uncommitted excess capacity occurs as part of the conceptual planning and feasibility work associated with planning new facilities.

D. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Paramedic Services. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The replacement and benefit to existing shares have been examined on a project-by-project basis and the nature of each project determined the rationale for reductions. The identified benefit to exiting shares include costs that meet the needs of existing development, including past development. Generally speaking, shares have been deducted for portions of projects that relate to state of good repair or the replacement or reconstruction of existing facilities. Projects that are completely new are deemed to be entirely growth- related and no replacement shares have been deducted from the net cost.

The benefit to existing and replacement shares are based on the increase servicing capacity arising from the proposed facilities, vehicles and equipment. In total, $1.64 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share and is removed from the DC calculation.

3. Legislated Ten Per Cent Reduction

As this service is identified in the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is required. Therefore, $1.09 million is identified as the legislated ten per cent reduction share.

4. Prior Growth

In total, $2.13 million in available DC reserves have been removed from City- wide DC eligible costs.

5. Post-2029 Benefit

The DC eligible costs included in the Paramedic Services capital program is below the maximum permissible funding envelope of $8.11 million (shown in

HEMSON 167

Table 1 and 2). Therefore, no post-2029 benefit has been identified for this service.

6. 2019-2029 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $7.65 million is included in the development charge calculation.

E. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

Consistent with the 2014 DC Background Study, Paramedic Services are calculated on a City-wide basis. The discounted development-related costs have been allocated 61 per cent to residential development and 39 per cent to the non-residential sector. This sector allocation is based upon future shares of City-wide population growth (115,000) and employment growth (74,000). The non-residential allocation of 39 per cent for Paramedic Services is further allocated between industrial (6 per cent) and non-industrial (34 per cent) sectors based on shares of City-wide employment growth over the ten-year planning period to 2029.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential City-wide 61% $4,655,515 Subtotal Residential $4,655,515 Non-Residential – Industrial City-wide 6% $429,846 Non-Residential – Non-Industrial City-wide 34% $2,565,877 Subtotal Non-Residential $2,995,723

Total $7,651,238

F. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for the City’s general services included in this appendix.

HEMSON 168

The following table provides a summary of the residential and non-residential Paramedic Services development charges for each of the identified benefitting areas.

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential City-wide $/capita $31.22 Total Residential $/capita $31.22 Non-Residential – Industrial City-wide $/square metre $0.44 Total Non-Res. Indus. $/m2 $0.44 Non-Residential – Non-industrial City-wide $/square metre $1.12 Total Non-Res. Non-Indus. $/m2 $1.12

HEMSON 169 APPENDIX C.5 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARAMEDIC SERVICE 2019 BUILDINGS # of Square Feet UNIT COST Station Name 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/sq. ft.) 3207 Vance Road, Osgoode 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 $390 738 Gladstone Avenue 3,479 3,479 3,479 3,479 3,479 3,479 3,479 3,479 3,479 3,479 $390 911 Industrial Road 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 $390 631 Main Street, Stittsville 2,600 2,600 2,600 2,600 2,600 2,600 2,600 2,600 2,600 2,600 $390 360 Hunt Club Road 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 $390 75 Donald B Munro, Carp 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 $390 6280 Perth Street, Richmond 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 $390 5669 Main Street, Manotick 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 $390 8011 Victoria Street, Metcalfe 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 $390 1246 Colonial Road, Navan 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 $390 2465 Don Reid Drive (Exclude Admin) 85,242 85,242 85,242 85,242 85,242 85,242 85,242 85,242 85,242 85,242 $390 2475 Don Reid Drive (Exclude Admin) 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 $390 2445 Old Montreal Rd, Cumberland 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 $390 5670 Carp Road, Kinburn 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 $390 200 Montreal Road 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 $390 384 St. Patrick Street 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 $390 105 Catherine Street (Closed) 1,830 1,830 1,830 ------$390 103 Catherine Street - - 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 $390 2851 St. Joseph Blvd 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 $390 50 Lord Byng Way 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 $390 20 Bexley Place, Unit 106 2,150 2,150 2,150 2,150 2,150 2,150 2,150 2,150 2,150 2,150 $390 1075 Greenbank Road 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 $390

Total (sq.ft.) 129,021 129,021 130,851 129,021 129,021 129,021 129,021 129,021 129,021 129,021 Total ($000) $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $51,031.9 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2

HEMSON 170 APPENDIX C.5 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARAMEDIC SERVICE 2019 VEHICLES # of Vehicles UNIT COST Vehicle Type 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/vehicle) Emergency Response Vehicles (ERV) - Cars 27 27 27 27 22 25 26 26 26 37 $56,700

Emergency Support Vehicles (ESU) - Pick-up Truck - F-450 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 $324,400 Special Service Vehicles - All Terrain Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $82,800

Special Support Vehicle (MCI Trailers/Shelters/CBRN):

Enclosed Trailers 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 $129,400 Flat Bed Trailer 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $11,000 Trailer with Generator 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 $70,000

Treatment Rehabilitation Unit - Bus 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $829,100 Paramedic Units - Ambulance 76 76 76 76 76 78 77 76 77 78 $168,300 Paramedic Support Vehicle (Logistics) Ford F-450 - Truck - - - 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 $89,200 Paramedic Response Vehicle (PTU) Interceptor - Tahoes - - - - 9 10 11 11 11 4 $70,400

Total (#) 113 113 114 115 120 125 126 125 126 131 Total ($000) $16,180.0 $16,180.0 $16,191.0 $16,280.2 $16,954.7 $17,226.6 $17,126.0 $16,957.7 $17,126.0 $17,425.2

HEMSON 171 APPENDIX C.5 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARAMEDIC SERVICE

EQUIPMENT Total Value of Equipment ($) UNIT COST Description 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/unit)

Portable Radios 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 200 $2,550 Mobile Radios ------3 $2,550 Base Stations-radios ------3 $2,700 CF 19 documentation and mapping toughbook 125 125 125 125 ------$4,500 FZG1 documentation and mapping tablet - - - - 259 259 259 259 259 259 $2,350 Defibrillators, Zoll E 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 - - $21,600 Defibrillators, Lifepack 15 ------130 130 $18,100 Ferno ProflexX 112 112 112 112 112 114 117 117 60 60 $4,400 Stryker Power Stretchers (power pro) ------60 60 $18,400 Stryker Power Stretchers (XPS) ------3 3 $20,300 Stryker power load system ------55 55 $25,100 Stair Chairs 90 90 90 90 96 96 96 96 96 101 $3,000 CPR Assist Device - - - - 12 12 19 19 19 19 $8,750 Scoop stretcher 114 114 114 128 128 128 128 143 143 143 $1,000 Impact portable suction unit 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 106 $830

Total (#) 801 801 801 815 967 969 979 994 1,054 1,142 Total ($000) $4,670.5 $4,670.5 $4,670.5 $4,684.5 $4,853.7 $4,862.5 $4,936.9 $4,951.9 $6,769.9 $6,997.0

HEMSON 172 APPENDIX C.5 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF SERVICE LEVELS PARAMEDIC SERVICE

INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000)

Buildings $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $51,031.9 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2 $50,318.2

Vehicles $16,180.0 $16,180.0 $16,191.0 $16,280.2 $16,954.7 $17,226.6 $17,126.0 $16,957.7 $17,126.0 $17,425.2

Equipment $4,670.5 $4,670.5 $4,670.5 $4,684.5 $4,853.7 $4,862.5 $4,936.9 $4,951.9 $6,769.9 $6,997.0

Total ($000) $71,168.7 $71,168.7 $71,893.4 $71,282.9 $72,126.6 $72,407.3 $72,381.1 $72,227.8 $74,214.1 $74,740.4

Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/pop & emp) Service Level

Buildings $34.89 $34.41 $34.48 $33.60 $33.36 $33.00 $32.58 $32.29 $31.93 $31.55 $33.21

Vehicles $11.22 $11.06 $10.94 $10.87 $11.24 $11.30 $11.09 $10.88 $10.87 $10.93 $11.04

Equipment $3.24 $3.19 $3.16 $3.13 $3.22 $3.19 $3.20 $3.18 $4.30 $4.39 $3.42

Total ($/pop & emp) $49.35 $48.66 $48.57 $47.59 $47.82 $47.48 $46.87 $46.35 $47.09 $46.87 $47.67

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PARAMEDIC SERVICE

10-Year Funding Envelope Calculation

10 Year Average Service Level 2009 - 2018 $47.67

Net Population & Employment Growth 2019 - 2029 189,000

Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $9,009,630

Less: 10% Legislated Reduction $900,963

Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $8,108,667

HEMSON 173 APPENDIX C.5 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM PARAMEDIC SERVICE

5.0 PARAMEDIC SERVICE

5.1 City-Wide Buildings and Facilities 5.1.1 New Paramedic Annex - P3 Option 2020 - 2021$ 3,500,000 $ - $ 3, 500,000 25% $ 875,000 $ 262,500 $ 2, 362,500 $ 388,237 $ 1,974,263 $ - City-wide

5.1.2 Paramedic Post - West (excludes land costs) 2023 - 2023$ 1,000,000 $ - $ 1, 000,000 10% $ 100,000 $ 90,000 $ 810,000 $ - $ 810,000 $ - City-wide 5.1.3 Paramedic Post - East (excludes land costs) 2025 - 2025$ 1,030,000 $ - $ 1, 030,000 10% $ 103,000 $ 92,700 $ 834,300 $ - $ 834,300 $ - City-wide 5.1.4 Paramedic Post - South (excludes land costs) 2027 - 2027$ 1,060,000 $ - $ 1, 060,000 10% $ 106,000 $ 95,400 $ 858,600 $ - $ 858,600 $ - City-wide 5.1.5 Paramedic Post - West (excludes land costs) 2027 - 2027$ 1,095,000 $ -$ 1,095,000 10% $ 109,500 $ 98,550 $ 886,950 $ -$ 886,950 $ -City-wide

Subtotal City-Wide Buildings and Facilities$ 7,685,000 $ - $ 7,685,000 $ 1, 293,500 $ 639,150 $ 5,752,350 $ 388,237 $ 5,364,113 $ -

5.2 City-wide Vehicles

5.2.1 Emergency Response Vehicles 2020 - 2027$ 2,675,000 $ -$ 2,675,000 5% $ 133,750 $ 254,125 $ 2,287,125 $ -$ 2,287,125 $ -City-wide

Subtotal City-wide Vehicles $ 2,675,000 $ - $ 2,675,000 $ 133,750 $ 254,125 $ 2,287,125 $ - $ 2,287,125 $ -

HEMSON 174 APPENDIX C.5 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM PARAMEDIC SERVICE

5.3 City-wide Land

5.3.1 Paramedic Posts - Future Land Costs - West, East, & South 2023 - 2027$ 2,150,000 $ -$ 2,150,000 10% $ 215,000 $ 193,500 $ 1,741,500 $ 1,741,500 $ -$ -City-wide

Subtotal City-wide Land $ 2,150,000 $ - $ 2,150,000 $ 215,000 $ 193,500 $ 1,741,500 $ 1,741,500 $ - $ -

TOTAL PARAMEDIC SERVICE $ 12,510,000 $ - $ 12,510,000 $ 1,642,250 $ 1,086,775 $ 9,780,975 $ 2,129,737 $ 7,651,238 $ -

Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Residential Calculation Available DC Reserve Fund Balance Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Total Amount Used Remaining Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0%$ - City-wide $2,129,737 $2,129,737 $0 10 Year Population Growth 45,992 IGB $0 $0 $0 Charge per Capita $0.00 OGB $0 $0 $0 Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Rural $0 $0 $0 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0%$ - 10 Year Population Growth 86,973 Charge per Capita $0.00 Rural Residential Calculation 2019 - 2029 Net Funding Envelope $8,108,667 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0%$ - 10 Year Population Growth 16,031 Charge per Capita $0.00 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0% $0.00 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0% $0.00 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 976,580 Charge per Square Metre $0.00 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0% $0.00 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,285,153 Charge per Square Metre $0.00

City-wide Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 61%$ 4,655,515 10 Year Employment Growth 149,110 Unadjusted Per Unit Charge $31.22 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 39% $ 2,995,723 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 6% $ 429,846 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 976,580 Charge per Square Metre $0.44 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 34% $ 2,565,877 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,285,153 Charge per Square Metre $1.12

HEMSON 175

Appendix C.6

Affordable Housing

HEMSON 176

Appendix C.6

Affordable Housing Technical Appendix

The City of Ottawa's Affordable Housing Unit aims to increase development of affordable housing in the City by working with private and not-for-profit sectors to meet the objectives in the City’s 10 Year Housing and Homelessness Plan.

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Affordable Housing, the 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast and calculation of the development charges. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast are largely based on the projects identified in the 2014 DC Background Study, adjusted to account for expenditures and increases in project costs (i.e. indexing).

The following discusses the individual components included in the Affordable Housing service category. The analysis is set out in the tables and include:

Table 1 Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Level

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

A. Benefitting Area

The City’s Affordable Housing development charges is calculated on a City- wide basis.

B. Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Levels and Maximum Allowable Charges

An average replacement cost of $39,100 per affordable housing unit has been applied to all units in the City. Consistent with the City’s historical practice, the replacement cost of land has been excluded from the analysis.

Table 1 provides a summary of the level of service and the calculation of the ten-year historical service level. The calculation of the maximum allowable funding envelope is summarized as follows:

HEMSON 177

Ten-Year Funding Envelope Calculation Ten-Year Average Service Level (2009 – 2018) $900.08 Net Population Growth (2019 – 2029) 115,000 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $103,509,200 Less: Ten per cent Legislated Reduction $10,350,920 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $93,158,280

The existing facilities have been examined and consideration has been given to whether “excess capacity” exists within the City’s infrastructure that may be available to partially meet future servicing requirements. It has been determined that no “uncommitted excess capacity” exists within the City’s affordable housing infrastructure, and as such, no adjustments have been made to the service level calculations.

C. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast includes provisions for additional affordable housing units in the City and amounts to a total gross cost of $46.49 million.

Paragraph 5 of s.s.5(1) of the DCA requires a deduction from the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development that can be met using the City’s “excess capacity” that is “uncommitted”. “Excess capacity” is undefined in the DCA, but is considered to relate to the capacity available to meet some or all of the increase in need for service in order to potentially represent a deduction. It is recognized that no “surplus” of capacity exists within Affordable Housing as the deduction of uncommitted excess capacity occurs as part of the conceptual planning and feasibility work associated with planning new facilities.

D. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Affordable Housing. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

HEMSON 178

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The replacement and benefit to existing shares have been examined on a project-by-project basis and the nature of each project determined the rationale for reductions. The identified benefit to exiting shares include costs that meet the needs of existing development, including past development. The benefit to existing shares are generally consistent with the approach applied in the 2014 DC Background Study (e.g. affordable housing units have a 75 per cent reduction).

In total, $34.87 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share. These costs will not be funded from development charges.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is not identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs, less the replacement/benefit to existing shares, is made to each project.

In total, $1.16 million is identified as the ten per cent reduction share.

4. Prior Growth

In total, $2.53 million in available DC reserves have been removed from City- wide DC eligible costs.

5. Post-2029 Benefit

The DC eligible costs included in the Affordable Housing capital program is well below the maximum permissible funding envelope of $93.16 million (shown in Table 1 and 2) and all of the projects identified in the DC capital program are related to servicing needs arising from new development over the planning period. As such, no post-period adjustment has been applied to the calculation.

6. 2019-2029 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $7.93 million is included in the development charge calculation.

HEMSON 179

E. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

Consistent with the 2014 DC Background Study, the discounted development- related costs have been allocated 100 per cent to residential development, as these facilities are provided and planned for the residential community.

The table below provides a summary of the DC eligible costs that are deemed to benefit development occurring City-wide.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential City-wide 100% $7,932,718 Subtotal Residential $7,932,718 Non-Residential City-wide 0% $0 Subtotal Non-Residential $0

Total $7,932,718

F. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for the City’s general services included in this appendix.

The following table provides a summary of the residential Affordable Housing development charges.

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential City-wide $/capita $53.20 Total Residential $/capita $53.20

HEMSON 180 APPENDIX B.6 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM 2019 HOUSING UNITS # of Housing Units UNIT COST Description 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ($/unit)

Social Housing Units 20,180 20,180 20,180 20,131 20,131 20,131 20,131 20,131 20,131 20,131 $39,100 New Affordable Housing Units 746 1,077 1,280 1,421 1,516 1,573 1,698 1,868 2,076 2,216 $39,100

Total (unit) 20,926 21,257 21,460 21,552 21,647 21,704 21,829 21,999 22,207 22,347 Total ($000) $818,206.6 $831,148.7 $839,086.0 $842,683.2 $846,397.7 $848,626.4 $853,513.9 $860,160.9 $868,293.7 $873,767.7

HEMSON 181 APPENDIX B.6 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF SERVICE LEVELS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Historic Population 899,300 911,990 922,050 931,730 935,270 944,900 957,150 963,860 974,190 985,470

INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000)

Housing Units $818,206.6 $831,148.7 $839,086.0 $842,683.2 $846,397.7 $848,626.4 $853,513.9 $860,160.9 $868,293.7 $873,767.7 Total ($000) $818,206.6 $831,148.7 $839,086.0 $842,683.2 $846,397.7 $848,626.4 $853,513.9 $860,160.9 $868,293.7 $873,767.7

Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/pop & emp) Service Level Housing Units $909.83 $911.36 $910.02 $904.43 $904.98 $898.11 $891.72 $892.41 $891.30 $886.65 $900.08 Total ($/pop) $909.83 $911.36 $910.02 $904.43 $904.98 $898.11 $891.72 $892.41 $891.30 $886.65 $900.08

CITY OF OTTAWA CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM

10-Year Funding Envelope Calculation 10 Year Average Service Level 2009 - 2018 $900.08 Net Population Growth 2019 - 2029 115,000 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $103,509,200 Less: 10% Legislated Reduction $10,350,920 Discounted Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $93,158,280

HEMSON 182 APPENDIX C.6 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM

Gross Grants/ NetIneligible Costs Total DC Elgible Costs Project Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement 10% DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Number Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Reduction Costs Growth 2029 2029

6.0 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM

6.1 Housing Units 6.1.1 Additional Affordable Housing Units - 907943 22.0022 2020 - 2024$ 5,481,714 $ - $ 5, 481,714 75% $ 4, 111,286 $ 137,043 $ 1, 233,386 $ 1, 233,386 $ - $ - City-wide 6.1.2 Additional Affordable Housing Units 22.0023 2020 - 2024$ 5,858,917 $ - $ 5, 858,917 75% $ 4, 394,188 $ 146,473 $ 1, 318,256 $ 1, 295,076 $ 23,181 $ - City-wide 6.1.3 Additional Affordable Housing Units 22.0024 2020 - 2024$ 5,858,917 $ - $ 5, 858,917 75% $ 4, 394,188 $ 146,473 $ 1, 318,256 $ - $ 1,318,256 $ - City-wide 6.1.4 Additional Affordable Housing Units 22.0025 2025 - 2029$ 5,858,917 $ - $ 5, 858,917 75% $ 4, 394,188 $ 146,473 $ 1, 318,256 $ - $ 1,318,256 $ - City-wide 6.1.5 Additional Affordable Housing Units 22.0026 2025 - 2029$ 5,858,917 $ - $ 5, 858,917 75% $ 4, 394,188 $ 146,473 $ 1, 318,256 $ - $ 1,318,256 $ - City-wide 6.1.6 Additional Affordable Housing Units 22.0027 2025 - 2029$ 5,858,917 $ - $ 5, 858,917 75% $ 4, 394,188 $ 146,473 $ 1, 318,256 $ - $ 1,318,256 $ - City-wide 6.1.7 Additional Affordable Housing Units 22.0028 2025 - 2029$ 5,858,917 $ - $ 5, 858,917 75% $ 4, 394,188 $ 146,473 $ 1, 318,256 $ - $ 1,318,256 $ - City-wide 6.1.8 Additional Affordable Housing Units 22.0029 2025 - 2029$ 5,858,917 $ -$ 5,858,917 75% $ 4,394,188 $ 146,473 $ 1,318,256 $ -$ 1,318,256 $ -City-wide

Subtotal Housing Units $ 46,494,132 $ - $ 46,494,132 $ 34,870,599 $ 1,162,353 $ 10,461,180 $ 2,528,461 $ 7,932,718 $ -

TOTAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM $ 46,494,132 $ - $ 46,494,132 $ 34,870,599 $ 1,162,353 $ 10,461,180 $ 2,528,461 $ 7,932,718 $ -

Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Residential Calculation Available DC Reserve Fund Balance Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Total Amount Used Remaining Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0%$ - City-wide $2,528,461$ 2,528,461 $0 10 Year Population Growth 45,992 IGB $0 $0 $0 Charge per Capita $0.00 OGB $0 $0 $0 Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Rural $0 $0 $0 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0%$ - 10 Year Population Growth 86,973 Charge per Capita $0.00 Rural Residential Calculation 2019 - 2029 Net Funding Envelope $93,158,280 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0%$ - 10 Year Population Growth 16,031 Charge per Capita $0.00 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $0.00 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 3,261,733 Charge per Square Metre $0.00

City-wide Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 100%$ 7,932,718 10 Year Employment Growth 149,110 Unadjusted Per Unit Charge $53.20

Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0%$ - 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 3,261,733 Charge per Square Metre $0.00

HEMSON 183

Appendix C.7 Corporate Studies

HEMSON 184

Appendix C.7

Corporate Studies Technical Appendix

Development-related studies are eligible to be included in the calculation of development charges as long as they are permitted under the legislation. Consistent with s.5(1)7 of the DCA, the eligible development-related capital costs for the provision of studies are reduced by ten per cent when calculating development charges.

This appendix provides an outline of the 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast and calculation of the development charges for Corporate Studies. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast are largely based on the projects identified in the 2014 DC Background Study, adjusted to account for expenditures and increases in project costs (i.e. indexing). The projects are further informed based on proposed and Council- approved capital budgets.

The following discusses the individual components included in the Corporate Studies service category. The analysis is set out in the following table:

Table 1 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

A. Benefitting Area

The City’s Corporate Studies development charges is calculated on both a City-wide and area-specific basis. The smaller benefitting areas are defined as: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural area. It should be noted that no capital costs are identified for Corporate Studies occurring Inside the Greenbelt.

B. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The 2019–2029 development-related capital forecast includes a variety of projects for the provision of Corporate Studies for the City and amounts to a total gross cost of $13.99 million. Such projects include a development charges by-law review, community design plans, community infrastructure

HEMSON 185

plans and area-specific studies related to servicing and groundwater studies. The projects identified in the capital forecast will result, in whole or in part, in increased capacity to meet the servicing needs of new development over the planning period.

C. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Corporate Studies. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The replacement and benefit to existing shares have been examined on a project-by-project basis and the nature of each project determined the rationale for reductions. The identified benefit to exiting shares include costs that meet the needs of existing development, including past development. The benefit to existing shares are generally consistent with the approach applied in the 2014 DC Background Study (e.g redevelopment studies have a 50 per cent reduction, community infrastructure plans have a 10 per cent reduction, servicing studies are reduced by 10 per cent, etc.).

In total, $3.32 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share. These costs will not be funded from development charges.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is not identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs, less the replacement/benefit to existing shares, is made to each project.

In total, $1.07 million is identified as the ten per cent reduction share.

4. Prior Growth / Available DC Reserves

In total, $1.16 million in available DC reserves have been removed from City- wide DC eligible costs, $649,000 has been removed from Outside the Greenbelt DC eligible costs and $1.22 million has been removed from Rural DC eligible costs.

HEMSON 186

5. Post-2029 Benefit

All of the projects identified in the DC capital program are related to servicing needs arising from new development over the planning period. As such, no post-period adjustment has been applied to the calculation.

6. 2019-2029 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $6.57 million is included in the development charge calculation.

D. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The discounted development-related costs have generally been allocated 61 per cent to residential development. A 39 per cent allocation is made for non- residential development recognizing that corporate studies are used by employees working within the City of Ottawa.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

HEMSON 187

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential Inside the Greenbelt 61% $0 Outside the Greenbelt 61% $1,085,176 Rural 61% $321,125 City-wide 61% $2,594,058 Subtotal Residential $4,000,360 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific Residual $129,844 City-wide 39% $239,511 Non-Residential – Non-Industrial Area-Specific Residual $775,080 City-wide 39% $1,429,710 Subtotal Non-Residential $2,574,145

Total $6,574,505

E. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for the City’s general services included in this appendix.

The following table provides a summary of the residential and non-residential Corporate Studies development charges for each of the identified benefitting areas.

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential Inside the Greenbelt $/capita $0.00 Outside the Greenbelt $/capita $12.48 Rural $/capita $20.03 City-wide $/capita $17.40 Total Residential $/capita $49.91 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific $/square metre $0.13 City-wide $/square metre $0.25 Total Non-Res. Indus. $/m2 $0.38 Non-Residential – Non- Industrial Area-Specific $/square metre $0.34 City-wide $/square metre $0.63 Total Non-Res. Non-Indus. $/m2 $0.96

HEMSON 188 APPENDIX C.7 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM CORPORATE STUDIES

Gross Grants/ Net Ineligible Costs Total DC Elgible Costs Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement 10% DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Reduction Costs Growth 2029 2029

7.0 CORPORATE STUDIES

7.1 City-wide Studies 7.1.1 Development Charges By-law Review - 905384 - 907880 2020 - 2029$ 529,585 $ - $ 529,585 0% $ - $ 52,959 $ 476,627 $ 476,627 $ - $ - City-wide 7.1.2 Redevelopment Studies - Community Design Plans 2020 - 2029$ 2,064,571 $ - $ 2,064,571 50% $ 1,032,285 $ 103,229 $ 929,057 $ 688,343 $ 240,713 $ - City-wide 7.1.3 Community Infrastructure Plans 2020 - 2029$ 3,180,555 $ - $ 3,180,555 10% $ 318,055 $ 286,250 $ 2,576,249 $ - $ 2,576,249 $ - City-wide 7.1.4 Greenfield Studies - Community Design Plans 2020 - 2029$ 1,785,575 $ -$ 1,785,575 10% $ 178,557 $ 160,702 $ 1,446,315 $ -$ 1,446,315 $ -City-wide

Subtotal City-wide Studies $ 7,560,285 $ - $ 7,560,285 $ 1,528,898 $ 603,139 $ 5,428,248 $ 1,164,970 $ 4,263,278 $ -

7.2 Area-Specific Studies 7.2.1 Servicing Studies - Development - 907870 2020 - 2029$ 3,003,113 $ - $ 3,003,113 10% $ 300,311 $ 270,280 $ 2,432,522 $ 649,058 $ 1,783,464 $ - OGB 7.2.2 Groundwater Studies 2020 - 2025$ 1,339,181 $ - $ 1,339,181 50% $ 669,590 $ 66,959 $ 602,631 $ 602,631 $ - $ - Rural

7.2.3 Rural Village Servicing Assessment 2020 - 2029$ 1,115,984 $ - $ 1,115,984 30% $ 334,795 $ 78,119 $ 703,070 $ 613,220 $ 89,850 $ - Rural 7.2.4 Rural Servicing Strategy - 906629 - 908622 - 909132 - 908244 2020 - 2029$ 973,138 $ -$ 973,138 50% $ 486,569 $ 48,657 $ 437,912 $ -$ 437,912 $ -Rural

Subtotal Area-Specific Studies $ 6,431,417 $ - $ 6,431,417 $ 1,791,266 $ 464,015 $ 4,176,135 $ 1,864,909 $ 2,311,226 $ -

HEMSON 189 APPENDIX C.7 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM CORPORATE STUDIES

Gross Grants/ Net Ineligible CostsTotal DC Elgible Costs Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement 10% DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Reduction Costs Growth 2029 2029

TOTAL CORPORATE STUDIES $ 13,991,702 $ - $ 13,991,702 $ 3,320,164 $ 1,067,154 $ 9,604,384 $ 3,029,879 $ 6,574,505 $ -

Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Residential Calculation Available DC Reserve Fund Balance Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Total Amount Used Remaining Residential Share of Eligible Costs 61% $ - City-wide $1,164,970 $1,164,970 $0 10 Year Population Growth 45,992 IGB $0 $0 $0 Charge per Capita $0.00 OGB $649,058 $649,058 $0 Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Rural $1,215,851 $1,215,851 $0 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 61%$ 1,085,176 10 Year Population Growth 86,973 Charge per Capita $12.48 Rural Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 61%$ 321,125.34 10 Year Population Growth 16,031 Charge per Capita $20.03 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 39% $904,924.65 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 6% $129,844.46 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 976,580 Charge per Square Metre $0.13 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 34% $775,080.19 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,285,153 Charge per Square Metre $0.34

City-wide Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 61%$ 2,594,058 10 Year Employment Growth 149,110 Unadjusted Per Unit Charge $17.40 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 39% $ 1,669,220 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 6% $ 239,511 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 976,580 Charge per Square Metre $0.25 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 34% $ 1,429,710 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,285,153 Charge per Square Metre $0.63

HEMSON 190

Appendix D

Special Area Charges Technical Appendix

HEMSON 191

Appendix D

Special Area Charges Technical Appendix Introduction and Overview

The following appendix provides the detailed analysis undertaken to establish special area charges in the City of Ottawa. In total, six special area charges are included in the 2019 DC Study.

Appendix D.1 Millennium Park (Parks) Appendix D.2 Village of Manotick (Sanitary Sewer & Water) Appendix D.3 Village of Richmond (Sanitary Sewer) Appendix D.4 Provence Avenue (Sanitary Sewer & Roads and Related) Appendix D.5 Flag Station (Roads and Related) Appendix D.6 Trillium Line Extension (Transit) Every service contains three sets of tables and a map of the identified benefitting area. The tables provide the background data and analysis undertaken to arrive at the calculated development charge rates for the defined area. An overview of the content and purpose of each of the tables is given below.

The special area charges contained in this appendix are generally consistent with the City’s existing charges with the exception of Trillium Line Extension (Transit). This is a new special area development charge introduced through the 2019 DC Study.

Table 1 Development Forecast Summary

Table 1 provides a summary of the residential and non-residential development potential of each defined special area development charge boundary. The development forecast identifies the development potential of the area over a defined benefitting period (e.g. 2019-2029 or 2019-2031, expressed as mid-year estimates).

HEMSON 192

Table 2 Area-Specific Development-Related Capital Program & Calculation of Area-Specific Development Charges

The DCA requires that Council express its intent to provide future capital facilities to support future growth. To determine the share of the development- related capital program eligible for recovery through development charges, the project costs are reduced by any anticipated grants, “replacement” shares, and the legislated “ten per cent reduction” for any eligible services. These deductions are consistent with the approach described in Appendix C of this Study.

The summary table below the capital program displays the calculation of the applicable special area charge rates. Consistent with the City’s historical DC practices, for the services included in this appendix an average cost methodology is used to calculate the applicable rates. Capital costs are allocated based on shares of residential and non-residential growth identified within each benefitting area, unless otherwise specified.

Table 3 Calculated Development Charges

Table 3 provides an overview of the calculated special area rates. A comparison of the current and calculated rates is provided following the rate table.

Figure 1: Map of Benefitting Area

Finally, a map has been included in each appendix which identifies the benefitting area that is subject to the calculated special area charges.

HEMSON 193

Appendix D.1 Millennium Park (District Park)

HEMSON 194

Appendix D.1

Millennium Park (District Park) Technical Appendix

The following discusses the individual components included in the Millennium Park special area charge. The analysis is set out in in the following tables:

Table 1 Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

Table 3 Summary of Calculated Development Charges

Table 4 Summary of Current vs Calculated Development Charges

Figure 1 Map of Benefitting Area

Consistent with the approach applied in the City’s 2014 DC Background Study, the historical service level for Millennium Park is included within the City-wide Parks Development funding envelope calculation. For further details, refer to Appendix C.1 of the 2019 DC Study.

A. Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 1 provides a summary of the residential development forecast for Millennium Park over the mid-2019 to mid-2029 planning period. The capital costs for Millennium Park are 100 per cent allocated to residential development, as such, no development forecast is prepared for non- residential development.

As Millennium Park is located within the Inside the Greenbelt area, the following person per unit (PPU) assumptions have been applied to arrive at the population in new units forecast:

 Singles = 3.52  Semis = 2.87  Towns/Rows = 2.67  Apartments = 1.62

HEMSON 195

Table 1 Residential Development Forecast Summary (Mid-2019 to Mid-2019) Towns/ Singles Semis Apts Total Rows Growth (2019-2029) 2,100 100 3,100 700 6,000 Pop in New Units 7,398 287 8,279 1,132 17,096

B. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development forecast for Millennium Park is based on a ten-year planning horizon. The development forecast includes for the recovery of an outstanding debenture related to the construction of the Park ($3.81 million) and a negative reserve fund balance ($351,900).

C. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Millennium Park. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The identified debenture payment and recovery of negative DC reserve fund balance is net of any replacement and/or benefit to existing shares. As such, no deduction is made.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

The identified debenture payment and recovery of negative DC reserve fund balance is net of the legislated ten per cent reduction. As such, no deduction is made.

4. Prior Growth

The Millennium Park DC reserve fund is in a negative position, therefore no reduction to the DC eligible costs have been made.

5. Post-2029 Benefit

The capital costs are related to development occurring over the 2019-2029 planning period. In particular the DC eligible costs identified for Millennium Park are below the maximum permissible funding envelope calculated for

HEMSON 196

Parks Development (see Appendix C.1). The total DC eligible costs for all Parks infrastructure is $73.75 million ($4.16 million for Millennium Park and $69.59 million for Parks Development) which is well below the funding envelope of $214.37 million.

6. 2019-2029 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $4.16 million is included in the development charge calculation.

D. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The discounted development-related costs have been allocated 100 per cent to residential development. These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

E. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for Millennium Park.

Table 3 provides a summary of the residential development charges for Millennium Park.

Table 4 provides a summary of the current versus calculated development charges.

F. Map of Benefitting Area

Figure 1 shows the boundary of the identified benefitting area.

HEMSON 197 APPENDIX D.1 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM PARKS DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PARKS - OUTSIDE THE GREENBELT, MILLENNIUM PARK AREA ONLY

Gross Grants/ Net Ineligible Costs Total DC Elgible Costs Project Benefiting Area Project Description Number Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement 10% DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Reduction Costs Growth 2029 2029

1.0 Millennium Park

1.1 Recovery of Negative Reserve Fund Balance 1.1.1 Balance as of December 31, 2018 2020 - 2020$ 351,884 $ -$ 351,884 0%-$ $ -$ 351,884 $ -$ 351,884 $ - Millennium Park

Subtotal Recovery of Negative Reserve Fund Balance$ 351,884 $ - $ 351,884 $ - $ - $ 351,884 $ - $ 351,884 $ -

1.2 Recovery of Outstanding Debenture 1.2.1 Principle Payment 2020 - 2029$ 3,623,574 $- $ 3,623,574 0% $- $- $ 3,623,574 $- $ 3,623,574 $ - Millennium Park 1.2.2 Principle Interest 2020 - 2029$ 185,755 $ -$ 185,755 0%-$ $ -$ 185,755 $ -$ 185,755 $ - Millennium Park

Subtotal Recovery of Outstanding Debenture $ 3,809,330 $ - $ 3,809,330 $ - $ - $ 3,809,330 $ - $ 3,809,330 $ -

TOTAL Millennium Park $ 4,161,213 $ - $ 4,161,213 $ - $ - $ 4,161,213 $ - $ 4,161,213 $ -

Millennium Park Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 100%$ 4,161,213 Available DC Reserve Fund Balance 10 Year Population Growth (Millennium Park Only) 17,096 Total Amount Used Remaining Unadjusted Per Unit Charge $243.40 Millennium Park ($351,884)$ - $0

Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0% $- 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 3,261,733 2019 - 2029 Net Funding Envelope $214,368,165 Charge per Square Metre $0.00

HEMSON 198 APPENDIX D.1 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

MILLENNIUM PARK

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1) Apartment Dwelling, Back to Adjusted Charge Singles & Multiple, Row and Back and Apartment (less Per Capita Semis Mobile Dwelling Stacked than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms) Millennium Park Area $243.40 $841 $650 $443 $315 (1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.45 2.67 1.82 1.29 * Based on PPUs for OGB

HEMSON 199 APPENDIX D.1 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUMMARY OF CURRENT VS. CALCULATED DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

Millennium Park Residential Charges (By Unit Type) Non-Residential Charges (Per Square Foot) Apartment Dwelling, Single and Semi- Multiple, Row and Back to Back and Apartment (less Industrial Non-Industrial detached Mobile Dwelling Stacked Townhouse than 2 bedrooms) (2+ bedrooms) Current Charge (Aug 1, 2018) $619 $466 $327 $242 N/A N/A Calculated $841 $650 $443 $315 N/A N/A Difference $ $222 $184 $116 $73 Difference % 36% 39% 35% 30%

HEMSON 200

Figure 1 Millennium Park Benefitting Area

HEMSON 201

Appendix D.2 Village of Manotick (Sanitary Sewer & Water)

HEMSON 202

Appendix D.2

Village of Manotick (Sanitary Sewer & Water) Technical Appendix

The following discusses the individual components included in the Village of Manotick (herein referred to as “Manotick”) special area charges calculation. The analysis is set out in the following tables:

Table 1 Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

Table 3 Summary of Calculated Residential Development Charges

Table 4 Summary of Calculated Non-Residential Development Charges

Table 5 Summary of Current vs. Calculated Development Charges

Figure 1 Map of Benefitting Area

A. Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 1 provides a summary of the residential development forecast for Manotick over the mid-2019 to mid-2031 planning period. The development forecast for Manotick is based on the forecast included in the 2014 DC Background Study and adjusted for known developments.

As Manotick is located within the Rural area, the following person per unit (PPU) assumptions have been applied to arrive at the population in new units forecast:

 Singles = 3.20  Semis = 2.65  Towns/Rows = 2.25  Apartments = 1.62

HEMSON 203

Table 1-1 Residential Development Forecast Summary (Mid-2019 to Mid-2031) Towns/ Singles Semis Apts Total Rows Unit Growth 1,301 153 77 0 1,530 Pop in New Units 4,162 405 172 0 4,739

Table 1-2 Non-Res. Development Forecast Summary (Mid-2019 to Mid-2031) Non- Industrial Total Industrial Emp. Growth 64 895 959 Non-Res GFA (m2) 2,363 19,517 21,880

B. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development forecast for Manotick is based on a 12-year planning horizon. Two separate capital programs are provided for this service: Sanitary Sewer and Water. The total gross cost for Sanitary Sewer amounts to $29.50 million and the total gross cost for Water relates to $14.6 million.

C. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Manotick. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The replacement and benefit to existing shares have been examined on a project-by-project basis and the nature of each project determined the rationale for the reductions. The identified benefit to exiting shares includes costs that meet the needs of existing development, including past development. Generally speaking, shares have been deducted from the net cost of projects that account for portions of the project that relate to state of good repair or the replacement or reconstruction of existing facilities. Those projects that are completely new are deemed to be entirely growth-related and no replacement shares have been deducted from the net cost.

In total, $7.84 million has been identified for Sanitary Sewer infrastructure and $5.83 million has been identified for Water infrastructure as a benefit to existing share is removed from the total DC eligible costs.

HEMSON 204

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required. No shares are identified as the legislated ten per cent reduction share.

4. Prior Growth

Both the Sanitary Sewer and Water DC reserve funds for Manotick are in a negative position of $12.31 million and $828,600, respectively. These costs relate to past commitments and have been included in the DC calculation.

5. Post-2031 Benefit

In total, $730,300 in post-period shares have been identified for Water infrastructure in Manotick and is removed from the calculation. No post-period allocations have been made for Sanitary Sewer infrastructure.

6. 2019-2031 In-Period DC Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $21.66 million is included in the Sanitary Sewer development charge calculation and $7.60 million is included in the Water development charge calculation.

D. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The capital costs for Manotick are allocated 83 per cent residential and 17 per cent non-residential (1 per cent industrial and 16 per cent non-industrial). These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

E. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for Manotick.

Table 3 provides a summary of the residential development charges.

Table 4 provides a summary of the non-residential development charges for Manotick.

HEMSON 205

Table 5 provides a comparison of the current and calculated development charges.

F. Map of Benefitting Area

The following figures show the boundary of the identified benefitting area. Consistent with By-law 2018-48 some areas pay Sanitary Sewer or Water and some pay both. A description of the benefitting areas is provided for each map.

HEMSON 206 APPENDIX D.2 TABLE 2-1

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM SANITARY (WASTE WATER) SPECIAL AREA CHARGE - VILLAGE OF MANOTICK

Gross Grants/ Net Ineligible Costs Total DC Eligible Costs Project Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Number Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Costs Growth 2031 2031

1.0 SANITARY SEWER (VILLAGE OF MANOTICK)

1.1 Recovery of Past Commitments 1.1.1 Negative Reserve Fund Balance as of December 31, 2018 2020 - 2020$ 12,312,902 $ -$ 12,312,902 0%-$ $ 12,312,902 $ -$ 12,312,902 $ -Rural

Subtotal Recovery of Past Commitments $ 12,312,902 $ - $ 12,312,902 $ - $ 12,312,902 $ - $ 12,312,902 $ -

1.2 Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure 1.2.1 Manotick Pump Station and Forcemain 10.1AM4 2020 - 2020$ 14,507,794 $ - $ 14,507,794 48% $ 6,963,741 $ 7,544,053 $ - $ 7,544,053 $ - Rural 1.2.2 Stonebridge Sanitary Sewer Oversizing 10.1BM4 2020 - 2020$ 108,250 $ - $ 108,250 48% $ 51,960 $ 56,290 $ - $ 56,290 $ - Rural 1.2.3 Gravity Sanitary Sewer 10.20M4 2020 - 2020$ 2,566,764 $ -$ 2,566,764 32% $ 821,364 $ 1,745,399 $ -$ 1,745,399 $ -Rural

Subtotal Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure $ 17,182,808 $ - $ 17,182,808 $ 7,837,066 $ 9,345,742 $ - $ 9,345,742 $ -

TOTAL SANITARY SEWER (VILLAGE OF MANOTICK) $ 29,495,710 $ - $ 29,495,710 $ 7,837,066 $ 21,658,644 $ - $ 21,658,644 $ -

Area-Specific Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 83%$ 18,013,338 Reserve Fund Balance ($12,312,902) 12-Year Population Growth 4,739 Charge per Capita $3,801.15 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 17%$ 3,645,307 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 1%$ 243,274 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,363 Charge per Square Metre $102.96 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 16%$ 3,402,033 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 19,517 Charge per Square Metre $174.31

HEMSON 207 APPENDIX D.2 TABLE 2-2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM WATER SPECIAL AREA CHARGE - VILLAGE OF MANOTICK

2.0 WATER (VILLAGE OF MANOTICK)

2.1 Recovery of Past Commitments 2.1.1 Manotick Supply Watermain 2020 - 2020$ 828,570 $ -$ 828,570 0%-$ $ 828,570 $ -$ 828,570 $ -Rural

Subtotal Recovery of Past Commitments $ 828,570 $ - $ 828,570 $ - $ 828,570 $ - $ 828,570 $ -

2.2 Water Infrastructure 2.2.1 Manotick Supply Watermain 11.0694 2020 - 2024$ 11,159,842 $ - $ 11,159,842 48% $ 5,356,724 $ 5,803,118 $ - $ 5,222,806 $ 580,312 Rural 2.2.2 Manotick Feedermain (Supply) 11.0694 2020 - 2024$ 1,785,575 $ - $ 1,785,575 16% $ 285,692 $ 1,499,883 $ - $ 1,349,894 $ 149,988 Rural 2.2.3 Manotick EA Study 11.10M4 2020 - 2024$ 390,594 $ -$ 390,594 48% $ 187,485 $ 203,109 $ -$ 203,109 $ -Rural

Subtotal Water Infrastructure $ 13,336,011 $ - $ 13,336,011 $ 5,829,901 $ 7,506,109 $ - $ 6,775,809 $ 730,300

TOTAL WATER (VILLAGE OF MANOTICK) $ 14,164,581 $ - $ 14,164,581 $ 5,829,901 $ 8,334,680 $ - $ 7,604,380 $ 730,300

Area-Specific Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 83%$ 6,324,508 Reserve Fund Balance ($828,570) 12-Year Population Growth 4,739 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $1,334.59 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 17%$ 1,279,872 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 1%$ 85,414 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,363 Charge per Square Metre $36.15 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 16%$ 1,194,458 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 19,517 Charge per Square Metre $61.20

HEMSON 208 APPENDIX D.2 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

VILLAGE OF MANOTICK

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1) Apartment Dwelling, Back to Adjusted Charge Singles & Multiple, Row and Back and Apartment (less Per Capita Semis Mobile Dwelling Stacked than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms) Manotick (Sanitary Sewer) $3,801.15 $12,696 $8,540 $6,921 $4,920 Manotick (Water) $1,334.59 $4,458 $2,998 $2,430 $1,727 TOTAL $5,135.74 $17,154 $11,538 $9,351 $6,647 (1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.34 2.25 1.82 1.29

HEMSON 209 APPENDIX D.2 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES PER SQUARE METRE

VILLAGE OF MANOTICK

Industrial Non-Industrial

Per Square Metre Per Square Foot Per Square Metre Per Square Foot of GFA of GFA of GFA of GFA

Manotick (Sanitary Sewer) $102.96 $9.56 $174.31 $16.19 Manotick (Water) $36.15 $3.36 $61.20 $5.69 TOTAL $139.10 $12.92 $235.52 $21.88

HEMSON 210 APPENDIX D.2 TABLE 5

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE SUMMARY OF CURRENT VS. CALCULATED DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

Village of Manotick Residential Charges (By Unit Type) Non-Residential Charges (Per Square Foot) (Sanitary Sewer & Water) Apartment Dwelling, Single and Semi- Multiple, Row and Back to Back and Apartment (less Industrial Non-Industrial detached Mobile Dwelling Stacked Townhouse than 2 bedrooms) (2+ bedrooms) Current Charge (Aug 1, 2018) $11,379 $7,392 $6,531 $4,811 $6.16 $15.64 Calculated $17,154 $11,538 $9,351 $6,647 $12.92 $21.88 Difference $ $5,775 $4,146 $2,820 $1,836 $6.76 $6.24 Difference % 51% 56% 43% 38% 110% 40%

HEMSON 211

Figure 1 Manotick Benefiting Area (grey indicates areas with both water supply and sanitary service)

HEMSON 212

Figure 2 Manotick Benefiting Area (grey indicates sanitary only service areas)

HEMSON 213

Figure 3 Manotick Benefitting Area (grey indicates water supply only service areas)

HEMSON 214

Appendix D.3 Village of Richmond (Sanitary Sewer)

HEMSON 215

Appendix D.3

Village of Richmond (Sanitary Sewer) Technical Appendix

The following discusses the individual components included in the Village of Richmond (herein referred to as “Richmond”) special area charges calculation. The analysis is set out in the following tables:

Table 1 Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

Table 3 Summary of Calculated Residential Development Charges

Table 4 Summary of Calculated Non-Residential Development Charges

Table 5 Summary of Current vs. Calculated Development Charges

Figure 1 Map of Benefitting Area

A. Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 1 provides a summary of the residential development forecast for Richmond over the mid-2019 to mid-2031 planning period. The development forecast for Richmond is based on the forecast included in the 2014 DC Background Study and adjusted for known developments. For the residential forecast, only single-detached units have been identified over the forecast period. As Richmond is located within the Rural area, the following person per unit (PPU) assumptions have been applied to arrive at the population in new units forecast: Singles (3.20 PPU).

Table 1 Residential & Non-Residential Development Forecast Summary (Mid-2019 to Mid-2031) Residential Units (Single-Detached) 1,825 Pop in New Units 5,840 Non-Residential Employment 340 Non-Res GFA (m2) 14,950

HEMSON 216

B. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development forecast for Richmond is based on a 12-year planning horizon. The capital forecast includes for the recovery of a negative reserve fund balance of $2.63 million and the Richmond Pump Station and Forcemain Expansion valued at $30.69 million. The total gross cost of the capital program is $33.32 million.

C. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Richmond. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

In total, $7.67 million has been identified for Sanitary Sewer infrastructure as a benefit to existing share is removed from the total DC eligible costs.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required. No shares are identified as the legislated ten per cent reduction share.

4. Prior Growth

The development charge reserve funds for Richmond are in a negative position of $2.63 million. These costs relate to past commitments required to service new development and have been included in the DC calculation.

HEMSON 217

5. Post-2031 Benefit

In total, $5.75 million in post-period shares have been identified for Sanitary Sewer infrastructure in Richmond and is removed from the calculation. These costs will be considered for recovery in subsequent DC studies.

6. 2019-2031 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $19.90 million is included in the Richmond Sanitary Sewer calculation.

D. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The capital costs for Richmond are allocated 94 per cent residential and 6 per cent non-residential. The industrial and non-residential charge was weighted based on allocations presented in the 2014 DC Background Study.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

E. Development Charge Calculation

An average cost methodology has been used to calculate development charges for Richmond. This is different then the approach presented in the 2014 DC Background Study which applied a cash flow analysis to the calculation. Importantly, the non-residential charge is calculated on a village- wide basis.

Table 3 provides a summary of the residential development charges.

Table 4 provides a summary of the non-residential development charges for Richmond.

Table 5 provides a summary of the current versus calculated development charges.

F. Map of Benefitting Area

Figure 1 shows the boundary of the identified benefitting area.

HEMSON 218 APPENDIX D.3 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM SANITARY (WASTE WATER) SPECIAL AREA CHARGE - VILLAGE OF RICHMOND

3.0 SANITARY SEWER (VILLAGE OF RICHMOND)

3.1 Recovery of Past Commitments 3.1.1 Negative Reserve Fund Balance 2020 - 2020$ 2,632,801 $ -$ 2,632,801 0%-$ $ 2,632,801 $ -$ 2,632,801 $ -Rural

Subtotal Recovery of Past Commitments$ 2,632,801 $ - $ 2,632,801 $ - $ 2,632,801 $ - $ 2,632,801 $ -

3.2 Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure 3.2.1 Richmond Pump Station and Forcemain Expansion - Phase 2 10.508B4 2020 - 2031$ 30,689,564 $ -$ 30,689,564 25% $ 7,672,391 $ 23,017,173 $ -$ 17,263,173 $ 5,754,000 Rural

Subtotal Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure $ 30,689,564 $ - $ 30,689,564 $ 7,672,391 $ 23,017,173 $ - $ 17,263,173 $ 5,754,000

TOTAL SANITARY SEWER (VILLAGE OF RICHMOND) $ 33,322,366 $ - $ 33,322,366 $ 7,672,391 $ 25,649,975 $ - $ 19,895,975 $ 5,754,000

Area-Specific Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 94%$ 18,801,374 Reserve Fund Balance ($2,632,801) 12-Year Population Growth 5,840 Charge per Capita $3,219.41 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 6%$ 1,094,601 Non-Residential GFA 14,950 Charge per Square Metre $73.22

Industrial - Charge Per Square Metre $34.84

Non-Industrial - Charge Per Square Metre $88.73

HEMSON 219 APPENDIX D.3 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

VILLAGE OF RICHMOND

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1) Apartment Dwelling, Back to Adjusted Charge Singles & Multiple, Row and Back and Apartment (less Per Capita Semis Mobile Dwelling Stacked than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms) Richmond (Sanitary Sewer) $3,219.41 $10,753 $7,233 $5,862 $4,167 (1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.34 2.25 1.82 1.29

HEMSON 220 APPENDIX D.3 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

VILLAGE OF RICHMOND

Industrial Non-Industrial

Per Square Metre Per Square Foot Per Square Metre Per Square Foot of GFA of GFA of GFA of GFA

Richmond (Sanitary Sewer) $34.84 $3.24 $88.73 $8.24

HEMSON 221 APPENDIX D.3 TABLE 5

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUMMARY OF CURRENT VS. CALCULATED DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

Village of Richmond Residential Charges (By Unit Type) Non-Residential Charges (Per Square Foot) Apartment Dwelling, Single and Semi- Multiple, Row and Back to Back and Apartment (less Industrial Non-Industrial detached Mobile Dwelling Stacked Townhouse than 2 bedrooms) (2+ bedrooms) Current Charge (Aug 1, 2018) $8,817 $5,728 $5,060 $3,727 $1.42 $3.64 Calculated $10,753 $7,233 $5,862 $4,167 $3.24 $8.24 Difference $ $1,936 $1,505 $802 $440 $1.82 $4.60 Difference % 22% 26% 16% 12% 128% 126%

HEMSON 222

Figure 1 Richmond Benefitting Area

HEMSON 223

Appendix D.4 Provence Avenue (Sanitary Sewer & Roads)

HEMSON 224

Appendix D.4

Provence Avenue (Sanitary Sewer & Roads) Technical Appendix

The following discusses the individual components included in the Provence special area charges calculation. The analysis is set out in the following tables:

Table 1 Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

Table 3 Summary of Calculated Residential Development Charges

Table 4 Summary of Current vs Calculated Development Charges

Figure 1 Map of Benefitting Area

A. Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 1 provides a summary of the residential development forecast for Provence Avenue over the mid-2019 to mid-2031 planning period. The development forecast for Provence is based on the forecast included in the 2014 DC Background Study and adjusted for known developments. Consistent with the 2014 DC Background Study, no non-residential development is forecast to occur in this area.

As Provence Avenue is located Outside the Greenbelt, the following person per unit (PPU) assumptions have been applied to arrive at the population in new units forecast:

 Singles = 3.52  Semis = 2.87  Towns/Rows = 2.67  Apartments = 1.62

HEMSON 225

Table 1: Residential Development Forecast (mid-2019 to mid-2031) Towns/ Singles Apts Total Rows Growth (2019-2031) 336 300 112 748 Pop in New Units 1,184 801 181 2,166

B. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development forecast for Provence Avenue is based on a 12-year planning horizon to 2031. The capital forecast includes $1.06 million in Roads and Related infrastructure and approximately $199,100 in Sanitary Sewer infrastructure. The total gross cost of the capital program is $1.26 million.

C. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Provence Avenue. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

As the infrastructure identified in the capital program is entirely related to development over the identified planning period, no benefit to existing share is identified.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required. No shares are identified as the legislated ten per cent reduction share.

HEMSON 226

4. Prior Growth

The Provence Avenue DC reserve fund is currently $0. As such, no adjustments have been made to the calculation.

5. Post-2031 Benefit

As the costs identified in the capital program are entirely related to development occurring over the planning period, no post-period deduction has been made.

6. 2019-2031 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $1.26 million is included in the Provence Avenue calculation.

D. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The capital costs for Provence Avenue are allocated 100 per cent to residential development consistent with the approach used in the 2014 DC Background Study.

The costs allocation and DC rate calculation are presented in Table 2.

E. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s past DC Background Studies, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate the residential development charges for Provence Avenue.

Table 3 provides a summary of the residential development charges for Provence Avenue.

Table 4 provides a summary of the current versus calculated development charges.

F. Map of Benefitting Area

Figure 1 shows the boundary of the identified benefitting area.

HEMSON 227 APPENDIX D.4 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM ROADS AND RELATED SERVICES AREA-SPECIFIC CHARGE PROVENCE AVENUE

Gross Grants/ Net Ineligible Costs Total DC Eligible Costs Project Benefiting Area Project Description Number Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Costs Growth 2031 2031

5.0 PROVENCE AVENUE INFRASTRUCTURE

5.1 Provence Avenue Infrastructure 5.1.1 Roads and Related Infrastructure 2020 - 2031$ 1,059,750 $ - $ 1, 059,750 0% $ - $ 1,059,750 $ - $ 1,059,750 $ - Provence Avenue 5.1.2 Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure 2020 - 2031$ 199,072 $ -$ 199,072 0%-$ $ 199,072 $ -$ 199,072 $ - Provence Avenue

Subtotal Provence Avenue Infrastructure$ 1,258,822 $ - $ 1,258,822 $ - $ 1,258,822 $ - $ 1,258,822 $ -

TOTAL PROVENCE AVENUE INFRASTRUCTURE $ 1,258,822 $ - $ 1,258,822 $ - $ 1,258,822 $ - $ 1,258,822 $ -

Area-Specific Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 100%$ 1,258,822 Reserve Fund Balance $0 12-Year Population Growth 2,166 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $581.17 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0% 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) - Charge per Square Metre $0.00

HEMSON 228 APPENDIX D.4 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

PROVENCE AVENUE

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1) Apartment Dwelling, Back to Adjusted Charge Singles & Multiple, Row and Back and Apartment (less Per Capita Semis Mobile Dwelling Stacked than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms) Provence Avenue (Roads and Related $581.17 $2,007 $1,552 $1,058 $752 (1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.45 2.67 1.82 1.29 * Based on PPUs OGB

HEMSON 229 APPENDIX D.4 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

SUMMARY OF CURRENT VS. CALCULATED DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

Roads and Related (Provence Avenue) Residential Charges (By Unit Type) Non-Residential Charges (Per Square Foot) Apartment Dwelling, Single and Semi- Multiple, Row and Back to Back and Apartment (less Industrial Non-Industrial detached Mobile Dwelling Stacked Townhouse than 2 bedrooms) (2+ bedrooms) Current Charge (Aug 1, 2018) $2,928 $2,210 $1,595 $1,174 N/A N/A Calculated $2,007 $1,552 $1,058 $752 N/A N/A Difference $ -$921 -$658 -$537 -$422 Difference % -31% -30% -34% -36%

HEMSON 230

Figure 1 Provence Avenue Benefitting Area

HEMSON 231

Appendix D.5 Flag Station Road (Roads)

HEMSON 232

Appendix D.5

Flag Station Road (Roads) Technical Appendix

The following discusses the individual components included in the Provence special area charges calculation. The analysis is set out in the following tables:

Table 1 Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

Table 3 Summary of Calculated Residential Development Charges

Table 4 Summary of Current vs Calculated Development Charges

Figure 1 Map of Benefitting Area

A. Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 1 provides a summary of the residential development forecast for Flag Station Road over the mid-2019 to mid-2031 planning period. The development forecast for Provence is based on the forecast included in the 2014 DC Background Study and adjusted for known developments. Consistent with the 2014 DC Background Study, no non-residential development is forecast to occur in this area.

As Flag Station Road is located within the Rural area, the following person per unit (PPU) assumptions have been applied to arrive at the population in new units forecast: Single-Detached (3.20 PPU). For the residential forecast, only single-detached units have been identified.

Table 1 Residential Development Forecast Summary (Mid-2019 to Mid-2031) Residential Units (Single-Detached) 17 Pop in New Units 54

HEMSON 233

B. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development forecast for Flag Station Road is based on a 12-year planning horizon to 2031. The capital forecast includes approximately $60,700 in road related infrastructure.

C. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Flag Station Road. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

As the infrastructure identified in the capital program is entirely related to development over the identified planning period, no benefit to existing share is identified.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required. No shares are identified as the legislated ten per cent reduction share.

4. Prior Growth

The Flag Station Road DC reserve fund is currently $0. As such, no adjustments have been made to the calculation.

HEMSON 234

5. Post-2031 Benefit

As the costs identified in the capital program are entirely related to development occurring over the planning period, no post-period deduction has been made.

6. 2019-2031 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $60,700 is included in the Flag Station Road calculation.

D. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The capital costs for Flag Station Road are allocated 100 per cent to residential development consistent with the approach used in the 2014 DC Background Study.

The costs allocation and DC rate calculation are presented in Table 2.

E. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the City’s past DC Background Studies, an average cost methodology has been used to calculate the residential development charges for Flag Station Road.

Table 3 provides a summary of the residential development charges for Flag Station Road.

Table 4 provides a summary of the current versus calculated development charges.

F. Map of Benefitting Area

Figure 1 shows the boundary of the identified benefitting area.

HEMSON 235 APPENDIX D.5 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM ROADS AND RELATED SERVICES AREA-SPECIFIC CHARGE FLAG STATION

6.0 FLAG STATION INFRASTRUCTURE

6.1 Flag Station Infrastructure 6.1.1 Roads and Related Infrastructure 2020 - 2031$ 60,654 $ -$ 60,654 0%-$ $ 60,654 $ -$ 60,654 $ - Flag Station

Subtotal Flag Station Infrastructure$ 60,654 $ - $ 60,654 $ - $ 60,654 $ - $ 60,654 $ -

TOTAL FLAG STATION INFRASTRUCTURE $ 60,654 $ - $ 60,654 $ - $ 60,654 $ - $ 60,654 $ -

Area-Specific Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 100%$ 60,654 Reserve Fund Balance $0 12-Year Population Growth 54 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $1,123.22 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0% 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) - Charge per Square Metre $0.00

HEMSON 236 APPENDIX D.5 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

FLAG STATION ROAD

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1) Apartment Dwelling, Back to Adjusted Charge Singles & Multiple, Row and Back and Apartment (less Per Capita Semis Mobile Dwelling Stacked than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms) Roads & Related (Flag Station) $1,123.22 $3,879 $3,000 $2,045 $1,454 (1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.34 2.25 1.82 1.29 * Based on PPUs Rural Area

HEMSON 237 APPENDIX D.5 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

SUMMARY OF CURRENT VS. CALCULATED DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

Roads and Related (Flag Station) Residential Charges (By Unit Type) Non-Residential Charges (Per Square Foot) Apartment Dwelling, Single and Semi- Multiple, Row and Back to Back and Apartment (less Industrial Non-Industrial detached Mobile Dwelling Stacked Townhouse than 2 bedrooms) (2+ bedrooms) Current Charge (Aug 1, 2018) $5,410 $4,082 $2,948 $2,170 N/A N/A Calculated $3,879 $3,000 $2,045 $1,454 N/A N/A Difference $ -$1,531 -$1,082 -$903 -$716 Difference % -28% -27% -31% -33%

HEMSON 238

Figure 1 Flag Station Road Benefitting Area

HEMSON 239

Appendix D.6 Trillium Line Extension (Public Transit)

HEMSON 240

Appendix D.6

Trillium Line Extension (Public Transit) Technical Appendix

The following discusses the individual components included in the Trillium Line Extension special area charges calculation. The analysis is set out in the following tables:

Table 1 Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 2 2019–2029 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

Table 3 Summary of Calculated Residential Development Charges

Table 4 Summary of Calculated Non-Residential Development Charges

Table 5 Summary of Current vs Calculated Development Charges

Figure 1 Map of Benefitting Area

A. Area-Specific Development Forecast

Table 1 provides a summary of the residential development forecast for Trillium Line Extension over the mid-2019 to mid-2031 planning period. The development forecast for Trillium Line Extension is based on the Riverside South Storm Water Management (SWM) benefitting area (Area S-1). It should be noted that the Trillium Line Extension forecast is based on a ten year planning period consistent with the requirements of the DCA, and the SWM forecast

As Trillium Line Extension is located within the Outside the Greenbelt area, the following person per unit (PPU) assumptions have been applied to arrive at the population in new units forecast:

 Singles = 3.52  Semis = 2.87  Towns/Rows = 2.67  Apartments = 1.62

HEMSON 241

Table 1-1 Residential Development Forecast Summary (Mid-2019 to Mid-2029) Towns/ Singles Semis Apts Total Rows Unit Growth 1,870 270 1,500 1,988 5,627 Pop in New Units 6,587 773 4,005 3,215 14,580

Table 1-2 Non-Res. Development Forecast Summary (Mid-2019 to Mid-2031) Non- Industrial Total Industrial Emp. Growth 929 582 1,511 Non-Res GFA (m2) 85,435 21,252 106,688

B. The Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development forecast for Trillium Line Extension is based on a ten year planning horizon. The capital program includes costs relating to the Public Transit - Trillium Line Extension Annual Debt Servicing which amounts to a total gross capital cost of $23.81 million.

C. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Trillium Line Extension. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

No benefit to existing shares have been identified for the Trillium Line Extension. As such, no adjustment is made.

3. Legislated Ten per cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5(5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required. No shares are identified as the legislated ten per cent reduction share.

HEMSON 242

4. Prior Growth

Trillium Line Extension is a new special area charge, therefore no development charge reserve funds exists.

5. Post-2031 Benefit

In total, $9.52 million is identified as a post-period share and is removed from the DC eligible costs included in the calculation. The post-period shares include costs related to other development and may be recovered from other funding sources.

6. 2019-2029 In-Period Eligible Costs

After these adjustments and discounts, a total of $14.29 million is included in the Trillium Line Extension calculation.

D. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Residential and Non-Residential Allocation

The capital costs for Trillium Line Extension are allocated 91 per cent residential and 9 per cent non-residential (6 per cent industrial and 4 per cent non-industrial). These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2.

E. Development Charge Calculation

The development charges for the Trillium Line Extension are calculated using an average cost methodology consistent with the City’s other special area charges calculations.

Table 3 provides a summary of the residential development charges.

Table 4 provides a summary of the non-residential development charges for Trillium Line Extension.

Table 5 provides a summary o the current versus calculated development charges.

HEMSON 243

F. Map of Benefitting Area

Figure 1 shows the boundary of the identified benefitting area.

HEMSON 244 APPENDIX D.6 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM TRANSIT SERVICES SPECIAL AREA CHARGE TRILLIUM LINE EXTENSION

Gross Grants/ Net Ineligible Costs Total DC Eligible Costs Project Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Number 1 2 Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Costs Growth 2029 2029

5.0 SPECIAL AREA CHARGE TRILLIUM LINE EXTENSION

5.1 Special Area Charge Trillium Line Extension 5.1.1 Public Transit - Trillium Line Extension Annual Debt Servicing 2020 - 2029$ 23,810,000 $ -$ 23,810,000 0%-$ $ 23,810,000 $ -$ 14,286,000 $ 9,524,000 Riverside South

Subtotal Special Area Charge Trillium Line Extension $ 23,810,000 $ - $ 23,810,000 $ - $ 23,810,000 $ - $ 14,286,000 $ 9,524,000

TOTAL SPECIAL AREA CHARGE TRILLIUM LINE EXTENSION $ 23,810,000 $ - $ 23,810,000 $ - $ 23,810,000 $ - $ 14,286,000 $ 9,524,000

1 Riverside South Transit Services charge is a new ASDC. Therefore, no reserve fund balances exists 2 Post-period allocations include costs related to other development and may be recovered from other funding sources Area-Specific Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 91%$ 12,944,478 Reserve Fund Balance $0 10-Year Population Growth 14,580 Charge per Capita $887.84

Calculated Rate per Single & Semi-Detached Unit 3.45 $3,066

Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 9% $ 1,341,522 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 6% $ 824,800 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 85,435 Charge per Square Metre $9.65 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 4% $ 516,721 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 21,252 Charge per Square Metre $24.31

HEMSON 245 APPENDIX D.6 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY UNIT TYPE

TRANSIT (RIVERSIDE SOUTH)

Residential Charge By Unit Type (1) Apartment Dwelling, Back to Adjusted Charge Singles & Multiple, Row and Back and Apartment (less Per Capita Semis Mobile Dwelling Stacked than 2 bedrooms) Townhouse (2+ bedrooms) Transit (Riverside South) $887.84 $3,066 $2,371 $1,617 $1,149 (1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of: 3.45 2.67 1.82 1.29

HEMSON 246 APPENDIX D.6 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

TRANSIT (RIVERSIDE SOUTH)

Industrial Non-Industrial

Per Square Metre Per Square Foot Per Square Metre Per Square Foot of GFA of GFA of GFA of GFA

Transit (Riverside South) $9.65 $0.90 $24.31 $2.26

HEMSON 247 APPENDIX D.6 TABLE 5

CITY OF OTTAWA SPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

SUMMARY OF CURRENT VS. CALCULATED DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

Transit (Riverside South) Residential Charges (By Unit Type) Non-Residential Charges (Per Square Foot) Apartment Dwelling, Single and Semi- Multiple, Row and Back to Back and Apartment (less Industrial Non-Industrial detached Mobile Dwelling Stacked Townhouse than 2 bedrooms) (2+ bedrooms) Current Charge (Aug 1, 2018) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Calculated $3,066 $2,371 $1,617 $1,149 $0.90 $2.26 Difference $ $3,066 $2,371 $1,617 $1,149 $0.90 $2.26 Difference % N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

HEMSON 248

Figure 1 Trillium Line Extension Benefitting Area

HEMSON 249

Appendix E

Engineered Services Technical Appendix

HEMSON 250

Appendix E

Engineered Services Technical Appendix Introduction and Overview

The following appendix provides the detailed analysis undertaken to establish the development charge rates for each of the services in the City of Ottawa.

Appendix E.1 Roads and Related Appendix E.2 Sanitary (Waste Water) Appendix E.3 Water Appendix E.4 Stormwater Drainage Every service, with the exception of Stormwater Drainage, contains two sets of tables. The tables provide the background data and analysis undertaken to arrive at the calculated development charge rates for that particular service. An overview of the content and purpose of each of the tables is given below.

Development-Related Capital Program: City-wide and Area-Specific

Consistent with the City’s historical practice, the engineering services capital programs calculate applicable development charges on a City-wide and area- specific basis. The exception being Stormwater Drainage which is calculated on a City-wide basis. Infrastructure that benefits site-specific stormwater management is discussed in the 2019 SWM ASDC Background Study.The benefitting area for each project is shown in the capital program.

The DCA requires that Council express its intent to provide future capital facilities to support future growth. Based on the development forecasts presented in Appendix A, Hemson Consulting, in collaboration with City staff, have identified development-related capital program which sets out the projects required to service anticipated development over the long-term planning period to 2031. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast have been provided by City staff and are generally based on the capital projects identified in the City’s existing Infrastructure Master Plan, 2013 Transportation Master Plan and the 2014 DC Background Study and adjusted to account for recent expenditures and indexing.

HEMSON 251

Calculation of Development Charge Rates: City-wide and Area-Specific

City-wide Residential and Non-Residential DCs

The first step when determining the development charge rate is to allocate development-related net capital cost between the residential and non- residential sectors. The apportionment between these sectors varies based on the identified benefitting area (e.g. City-wide, Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural area). The approach used to allocate costs is discussed in each appendix.

It should be noted that consistent with the City’s historical approach, the non- residential development charges are calculated on a City-wide basis.

Area-Specific DCs

For all services with the exception of Stormwater Drainage area-specific projects have been identified for the following defined areas in the City: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural. Projects identified for these areas are recovered against residential growth occurring in these respective areas. Consistent with the City’s historical approach to calculating DCs, the residual non-residential costs are recovered on a City-wide basis.

HEMSON 252

Appendix E.1

Roads and Related

HEMSON 253

Appendix E.1

Roads and Related Services Technical Appendix

Capital infrastructure contained in the Roads and Related service category includes roads, environmental assessment studies, pedestrian facilities, cycling facilities, multi-use pathways, transportation programs, public works facilities, area-specific roads programs and a provision for intersection control measures. Additionally, the DCA permits a municipality to use DCs for the acquisition of land for DC-eligible services such as roads.

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Roads and Related services, the projects that will benefit development occurring over the mid-2019 to mid-2031 development-related capital forecast, the calculation of the “unadjusted” DC, and the calculated charge after cash flow considerations. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast have been provided by City staff and are generally based on the capital projects identified in the City’s 2013 Transportation Master Plan and Long Range Financial Plan as reflected in 2014 DC Background Study and adjusted to account for recent expenditures and indexing.

The following discusses the individual components included in the Roads and Related service category. The analysis is set out in the tables which follow. The tables include:

Table 1 Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Level

Table 2 Morning Peak Hour Vehicles Kilometre Travelled (VKT) by Residents Only

Table 3 2019-2031 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

Table 4 Development Charge Calculation: Cash Flow Analysis for Roads Area-Specific Development Charges

HEMSON 254

A. Benefitting Area

The City’s Roads and Related development charges is calculated on both a City-wide and area-specific basis. The smaller benefitting areas are defined as: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural area.

B. Historical Service Levels and Calculation of Ten-Year Average Service Levels and Maximum Allowable Charges

1. Quantity and Quality Service Level Measures

Consistent with the approach employed in the City’s 2014 DC Background Study, the quantity level of service measurement for Roads and Related services is based on road volume/capacity by screenline for 2019 to 2031 (Table 1-1) and the quality level of service measure is based on road costs assumptions provided by IBI Group (dated September 2013) and indexed to current day dollars (Table 1-2). For transparency, the 2014 unit costs have been shown for reference.

As the 2019 DC Background Study is intended to be an interim update to the analysis contained within the 2014 DC Background Study, these historical service level measures are reasonable and meet the requirements of the DCA.

2. Consideration of Excess Capacity

The existing facilities have been examined and consideration has been given to whether or not “excess capacity” exists within the City’s infrastructure that may be available to partially meet the future servicing requirements. It has been determined that no “uncommitted excess capacity” exists within the roads and related network, and as such, no adjustments have been made to the service level calculations.

C. Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development-related capital forecast that will benefit development occurring over the mid-2019 to mid-2031 period includes a variety of projects for the provision of roads-related services in the City and amounts to a total gross cost of $1.58 billion, as shown in Table 3.

HEMSON 255

As part of the City’s 2017 DC Amendment Background Study for Transit and Roads and Related services, the capital costs for arterial roads were reduced by 25 per cent. Following the release of 2017 Amendment Study, it was determined that the 25 per cent reduction understated that cost of these roads segments. As such, the arterial roads included in the 2019 DC Background Study are no longer reduced by 25 per cent.

D. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Roads and Related Services. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The replacement and benefit to existing shares have been examined on a project-by-project basis and the nature of each project determined the rationale for the reductions. The identified benefit to exiting shares includes costs that meet the needs of existing development, including past development. Decisions were based on a variety of factors including the population and employment growth over the ten-year base, rehabilitation costs and input from City staff.

New projects are deemed to be entirely growth-related and no replacement shares have been deducted from the net cost. For projects that were identified in the 2014 DC Background Study, the prior benefit to existing shares have largely been maintained.

In total, $133.64 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share over the planning period.

3. Legislated ten per cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5 (5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required.

4. Prior DC Funding / Available DC Reserve Funds

Prior DC funding relates to portions of projects which have had DCs collected and applied against a portion of the DC eligible project costs. These amounts are removed from the capital forecast and not brought forward into the development charge calculation. Table 3 provides details on the available DC reserve fund balance by benefitting area.

HEMSON 256

In total, the $39.35 million identified in the City-wide Roads and Related reserve fund has been reduced from the total City-wide DC eligible capital costs. Similarly, the $175,100 identified in the Rural Roads and Related reserve fund has been applied to these projects.

The City’s Inside the Greenbelt and Outside the Greenbelt Roads and Related DC reserve funds are in a deficient position. As such, these costs have been included in the DC eligible costs as it relates to committed excess capacity that will benefit growth over the identified planning period.

5. Post-2031 Benefit

Approximately $443.79 million in post-period DC shares has been identified and are reduced from the total DC eligible costs. These shares of projects will be considered for recovery as part of subsequent development charges studies.

6. 2019-2031 DC Eligible Development Related Costs

The total in-period DC eligible costs shown in Table 3 amounts to $1.01 billion after adjustments for benefit to existing and post-period benefits. After deductions for available DC reserve fund balances the in-period DC eligible cost is reduced to $1.00 billion (shown in the DC cost allocation summary at the bottom of Table 2).

E. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

The discounted development-related City-wide costs have been allocated based on shares of population and employment growth over the 2019-2031 benefitting period. The discounted development-related area specific costs are allocated based on share of Vehicles Kilometres Travelled (VKT) data shown in Table 2.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 3. The total costs shown below reflect the total costs brought forward to the DC calculation after adjusting for DC reserves.

HEMSON 257

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential Inside the Greenbelt 60% $9,596,660 Outside the Greenbelt 61% $99,226,499 Rural 76% $14,003,975 City-wide 62% $500,652,192 Subtotal Residential $623,479,328 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific Residual $9,958,245 City-wide 5% $44,426,756 Non-Residential – Non-Industrial Area-Specific Residual $59,443,075 City-wide 33% $265,193,614 Subtotal Non-Residential $379,021,691

Total $1,002,501,018

F. Development Charge Calculation: Average Cost Methodology

Consistent with the approach used in the City’s 2014 DC Study, the City-wide Roads and Related development charge is calculated using an average cost methodology.

The following table provides a summary of the calculated per capita and per square metre of industrial and non-industrial space City-wide.

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential City-wide $/capita $2,760.97 Total Residential $/capita $2,760.97 Non-Residential – Industrial City-wide $/square metre $39.01 Total Non-Res. Indus. $/m2 $39.01 Non-Residential – Industrial City-wide $/square metre $99.51 Total Non-Res. Non-Indus. $/m2 $99.51

G. Cash Flow Analysis

Consistent with the approach used in the City’s 2014 DC Study, the development charges for the Roads and Related projects relating to Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural area has been calculated

HEMSON 258

using a cash flow analysis. A cash flow analysis is undertaken to account for the timing of projects and receipt of DCs. Interest earnings or borrowing costs are, therefore, accounted for in the calculation as allowed under the DCA. Based on the development forecast, the analysis calculates the DC rate required to finance the discounted development-related capital spending plan including provisions for any borrowing costs or interest earnings on the reserve funds. The cash flow analysis is designed so that the closing cash balance at the end of the planning period is as close to nil as possible.

In order to determine appropriate DC rates reflecting borrowing and earnings necessary to support the discounted development-related funding requirement, assumptions are used for the inflation rate and interest rate. An inflation rate of 2.5 per cent is used for the funding requirements, an interest rate of 1.25 per cent is used for positive opening balances, and a rate of 3.75 per cent is used for negative opening balances.

Table 4 displays the results of the cash flow analysis and provides the adjusted or final per capita residential and per employees in new non- residential DCs. For residential development charges a per capita amount has been calculated for development occurring Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and the Rural area. A City-wide charge has been calculated for the residual industrial and non-industrial shares of the program. Debenture interest is not inflated in the cash flow analysis and the principal repayment charge is not indexed.

HEMSON 259

Summary of Unadjusted and Adjusted Area-Specific Roads Cash Flow Analysis Benefitting Area Unadjusted Charge Adjusted Charge Residential Inside the Greenbelt ($/capita) $188.73 Outside the Greenbelt ($/capita) $943.90 Rural ($/capita) $543.64

Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific ($/m2) $9.29

Non-Residential – Non-Industrial Area-Specific ($/m2) $23.69

HEMSON 260 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 1-1

CITY OF OTTAWA 2019 DC BACKGROUND STUDY - MAJOR SCREENLINES LEVEL OF SERVICE

2011 (base) 2031 (affordable) Post Identified Solution to v/c deficiencies V C V ADD C C v/c Planning Screenline v/c Benefit to at Screenlines V/C V/C <0.9 >0.9 Existing Capacity (lanes per direction) SOUTHEAST +1 lane on Airport #13 CNR East 8,268 9,200 0.90 N 6% 8,668 1,200 10,400 0.83 Y 7% Parkway (+1200)

#8 Leitrim 4,641 5,200 0.89 N 0 6,593 - 5,200 1.27 N 0 none provided SOUTHWEST

#12 CNR West 10,536 12,000 0.88 N 0 11,466 - 12,000 0.96 N 0 none provided +1 lane on Prince of #9 Fallowfield 9,333 11,400 0.82 N 0 10,762 1,000 12,400 0.87 Y 24% Wales Drive (+1000) EAST

#16 Green's Creek 10,470 8,800 1.19 Y 0 11,570 - 8,800 1.31 N 0 none provided +1 lane on Brian 6,790 8,000 0.85 N 0 7,653 800 8,800 0.87 Y 18% Coburn Boulevard #45 Bilberry Creek (+800) WEST

#10a Eagleson (north) 7,911 8,800 0.90 N 0 9,254 - 8,800 1.05 N 0 none provided

+1 lane of Hope Side Road, Old Richmond #10b Eagleson (south) 2,718 3,800 0.72 N 0 4,251 800 4,600 0.92 N 22% Road and West Hunt Club Road (+800) 50% with +2 lanes on Campeau Hwy 417; (+1600) and 2 lanes on #44 Terry Fox 5,731 10,400 0.55 N 0 7,686 5,200 15,600 0.49 Y excluding Hwy 417 (+3600) Hwy 417 is 35%

HEMSON 261 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 1-2

CITY OF OTTAWA ROADS AND RELATED SERVICES - REPLACEMENT COSTS

Unit Cost 2014 Unit Cost 2019 Type Existing Cross-Section Proposed Cross-Section ($Millions) ($Millions) New Construction - 2 Lane Rural, Undivided $4.09 / km $4.56 / km 2 Lane Urban, Undivided $7.44 / km $8.30 / km 4 Lane Urban, Divided $9.50 / km $10.60 / km 6 Lane Urban, Divided $10.88 / km $12.14 / km 4 Lane Rural, Undivided (ref. B1) $5.41 / km $6.04 / km 4 Lane Rural, Divided $6.03 / km $6.73 / km 2 Lane Rural, Undivided 4 Lane Urban, Undivided (ref. B2) $8.02 / km $8.95 / km 4 Lane Urban, Divided (ref. B3) $9.60 / km $10.71 / km Widening 6 Lane Urban, Divided (ref. B4) $11.37 / km $12.69 / km 2 Lane Urban, Undivided 4 Lane Urban, Undivided $7.06 / km $7.88 / km 4 Lane Urban, Divided $8.62 / km $9.62 / km 4 Lane Rural, Divided 6 Lane Rural, Divided (ref. B5) $5.51 / km $6.15 / km 4 Lane Urban, Divided 6 Lane Urban, Divided $6.15 / km $6.86 / km Source: IBI GROUP FINAL DRAFT: ROAD NETWORK DEVELOPMENT REPORT THE CITY OF OTTAWA, Exhibit 5-2: Summary of Benchmark Costs for Roadway Projects Notes: (1) Preliminary cost estimates include: Property – 10%; Engineering-15%; Project Management – 10%; Miscellaneous Soft Costs (Permits, Public Art, etc.) –5%; and Project Contingency – 40%. (2) Typical roadway cross-sections (identified as ref. B1-B5 above) are provided in Appendix B.

HEMSON 262 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA TRANS Model (V1.13) Morning Peak Hour VKT by residents only

Increase in Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT) Auto Mode

Vehicle Km Travelled (VKT) % distribution of DC Cost From To % growth Allocation 2011 2031 change change

Inside Greenbelt Everywhere 500,500 500,700 200 0.04% Inside Greenbelt 0% 0%

Orleans Everywhere 198,700 239,400 40,700 20% 16% Riverside South and Everywhere 34,000 79,400 45,400 134%Outside 17% Leitrim 91% Greenbelt South Nepean Everywhere 128,000 190,300 62,300 49% 24% Kanata-Stittsville Everywhere 191,400 280,700 89,300 47% 34% Rural Everywhere 284,300 307,600 23,300 8% Rural 9% 9% Total 1,336,900 1,598,100 261,200 20% 100% 100%

HEMSON 263 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

1.0 ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

1.1 City-wide Road Network 1.1.1 Airport Parkway (Brookfield Road and Hunt Club Road) 2020 - 2024$ 35,041,902 $ - $ 35,041,902 6% $ 2,102,514 $ 32,939,388 $ - $ 30,633,631 $ 2,305,757 City-wide

1.1.2 Airport Parkway (Hunt Club Road - Realigned Airport Parkway) 1.00014 2030 - 2031$ 9,497,025 $ - $ 9,497,025 6% $ 569,822 $ 8,927,204 $ - $ 8,302,299 $ 624,904 City-wide

1.1.3 Airport Parkway Realignment (Airport Parkway to Uplands Drive) 1.00024 2030 - 2031$ 30,946,241 $ - $ 30,946,241 6% $ 1,856,774 $ 29,089,466 $ - $ 27,053,204 $ 2,036,263 City-wide

1.1.4 Bank Street (Leitrim Road - Findlay Creek) (now Shuttleworth) 1.08144 2020 - 2024$ 35,000,000 $ - $ 35,000,000 5% $ 1,750,000 $ 33,250,000 $ - $ 33,250,000 $ - City-wide

1.1.5 Bank Street (Shutteworth - Blais Road) (now DunSkipper) 1.00034 2030 - 2031$ 10,000,000 $ - $ 10,000,000 5% $ 500,000 $ 9,500,000 $ - $ 9,500,000 $ - City-wide

1.1.6 Blackburn Hamlet Bypass Extension (Navan Road - Orléans Boulevard Extension) 1.0049A4 2020 - 2024$ 9,017,152 $ - $ 9,017,152 5% $ 450,858 $ 8,566,294 $ - $ 8,566,294 $ - City-wide

1.1.7 Blackburn Hamlet Bypass Extension (Innes Road - Orléans Boulevard Extension) 1.0049B4 2025 - 2029$ 10,601,849 $ - $ 10,601,849 5% $ 530,092 $ 10,071,757 $ - $ 10,071,757 $ - City-wide

1.1.8 Blair Road (Meadowbrook Road - Innes Road) 1.00044 2030 - 2031$ 6,037,474 $ - $ 6,037,474 5% $ 301,874 $ 5,735,601 $ - $ 4,875,260 $ 860,340 City-wide

1.1.9 Campeau Drive (Huntmar Drive & N/S Arterial - Didsbury Road) - 903196 - 909180 1.1234A4 2030 - 2030$ 1,083,621 $ - $ 1,083,621 5% $ 54,181 $ 1,029,440 $ - $ 875,024 $ 154,416 City-wide

1.1.10 Carp Road (Hazeldean Road - Highway 417) 1.01194 2025 - 2029$ 19,317,686 $ - $ 19,317,686 5% $ 965,884 $ 18,351,801 $ - $ 18,351,801 $ - City-wide

1.1.11 Coventry Road (Belfast Road - West of St. Laurent Centre) 1.08544 2025 - 2029$ 6,952,581 $ - $ 6,952,581 5% $ 347,629 $ 6,604,952 $ - $ 5,614,209 $ 990,743 City-wide

1.1.12 Eagleson Road (Cadence Gate - Hope Side Road) 1.08744 2025 - 2029$ 14,383,920 $ - $ 14,383,920 5% $ 719,196 $ 13,664,724 $ - $ 13,664,724 $ - City-wide

1.1.13 Earl Armstrong Road (Limebank Road - Bowesville Road) 1.0884A4 2030 - 2031$ 23,606,413 $ - $ 23,606,413 5% $ 1,180,321 $ 22,426,092 $ - $ 19,062,178 $ 3,363,914 City-wide

1.1.14 Earl Grey Drive Underpass (Extension Under Terry Fox) 1.01594 2020 - 2024$ 9,151,070 $ - $ 9,151,070 5% $ 457,554 $ 8,693,517 $ - $ 8,693,517 $ - City-wide

1.1.15 Greenbank Road Extension (Jockvale Road - Cambrian Road) 1.0924B4 2020 - 2024$ 87,141,623 $ - $ 87,141,623 5% $ 4,357,081 $ 82,784,541 $ - $ 82,784,541 $ - City-wide

1.1.16 Hope Side Road (Eagleson Road - Old Richmond Road) 1.0944B4 2030 - 2031$ 27,031,368 $ - $ 27,031,368 5% $ 1,351,568 $ 25,679,800 $ - $ 21,827,830 $ 3,851,970 City-wide Huntmar Drive (Campeau Drive Ext - Cyclone Taylor Blvd and Palladium - Maple Grove) - 1.1.17 1.1304A4 2030 - 2031$ 62,334,522 $ - $ 62,334,522 5% $ 3,116,726 $ 59,217,796 $ - $ 50,335,127 $ 8,882,669 City-wide 909182 (2026) 1.1.18 Jockvale Road (Cambrian Road - Prince of Wales) - 909201 1.10144 2025 - 2029$ 37,628,754 $ - $ 37,628,754 5% $ 1,881,438 $ 35,747,316 $ - $ 35,747,316 $ - City-wide

1.1.19 Kanata Avenue (Campeau Drive - Highway 417) 1.00074 2020 - 2024$ 8,671,197 $ - $ 8,671,197 5% $ 433,560 $ 8,237,637 $ - $ 8,237,637 $ - City-wide

1.1.20 Stittsville North South Arterial (Fernbank Road - Abbott Street) Front-ended - 904996 1.01894 2020 - 2024$ 13,336,011 $ - $ 13,336,011 5% $ 666,801 $ 12,669,210 $ - $ 12,669,210 $ - City-wide

1.1.21 Stittsville North South Arterial (Abbott Street - Palladium Drive) 1.1344A4 2020 - 2024$ 49,462,650 $ - $ 49,462,650 5% $ 2,473,132 $ 46,989,517 $ - $ 46,989,517 $ - City-wide

1.1.22 Lester Road (Airport Parkway - Bank Street) 1.00094 2025 - 2029$ 18,703,894 $ - $ 18,703,894 6% $ 1,122,234 $ 17,581,661 $ - $ 16,350,944 $ 1,230,716 City-wide

1.1.23 Mer Bleue Road (Brian Coburn Boulevard - Renaud Road) 1.0134-01744 2020 - 2024$ 3,114,712 $ - $ 3,114,712 5% $ 155,736 $ 2,958,976 $ - $ 2,958,976 $ - City-wide

1.1.24 Palladium Drive Realignment (Huntmar Road - New North/South Arterial) - 909181 (2026) 1.13144 2030 - 2031$ 2,084,100 $ - $ 2,084,100 5% $ 104,205 $ 1,979,895 $ - $ 1,682,911 $ 296,984 City-wide

1.1.25 Preston Street (Albert Street - Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway) 1.00011 2030 - 2031$ 14,954,188 $ - $ 14,954,188 5% $ 747,709 $ 14,206,478 $ - $ 12,075,507 $ 2,130,972 City-wide

1.1.26 Prince of Wales Drive (Merivale Road to Hunt Club Road) 1.1104A4 2030 - 2031$ 49,136,782 $ - $ 49,136,782 5% $ 2,456,839 $ 46,679,943 $ - $ 39,677,952 $ 7,001,991 City-wide

HEMSON 264 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

1.1 City-wide Road Network Continued 1.1.27 Strandherd Drive Phase 2 (Maravista Drive - Jockvale Road) - 907405 1.1154B4 2020 - 2024$ 28,088,205 $ - $ 28,088,205 5% $ 1,404,410 $ 26,683,795 $ - $ 26,683,795 $ - City-wide

1.1.28 Tenth Line Road (Harvest Valley Road - South of Wall) - 908345 1.000124 2025 - 2029$ 9,382,079 $ - $ 9,382,079 5% $ 469,104 $ 8,912,975 $ - $ 8,912,975 $ - City-wide

1.1.29 City-wide DC Transition Costs 1.CWA02 2020 - 2020$ 10,000,000 $ - $ 10,000,000 0% $ - $ 10,000,000 $ - $ 10,000,000 $ - City-wide

1.1.30 Cambrian Road (New Greenbank - Jockvale) Oversizing 1.CWA01 2020 - 2024$ 3,351,000 $ - $ 3,351,000 0% $ - $ 3,351,000 $ - $ 3,351,000 $ - City-wide

1.1.31 174 Widening from Trim Road to Cardinal Creek Drive 1.CWA03 2032 - 2032$ 8,321,000 $ - $ 8,321,000 0% $ - $ 8,321,000 $ - $ - $ 8,321,000 City-wide

1.1.32 Borrisokane Road Widening from Cambrian Road to Strandherd Road 1.CWA04 2032 - 2032$ 11,457,000 $ - $ 11,457,000 0% $ - $ 11,457,000 $ - $ - $ 11,457,000 City-wide

1.1.33 Brian Coburn Blvd. Tenth Line to Mer Bleue Road. 1.CWA05 2032 - 2032$ 15,536,000 $ - $ 15,536,000 0% $ - $ 15,536,000 $ - $ - $ 15,536,000 City-wide

1.1.34 Cambrian Road Widening from Borrisokane Road to New Greenbank Road 1.CWA06 2032 - 2032$ 6,232,000 $ - $ 6,232,000 0% $ - $ 6,232,000 $ - $ - $ 6,232,000 City-wide

1.1.35 Cambrian Road Widening from Old Greenbank Road to New Greenbank Road 1.CWA07 2032 - 2032$ 6,501,000 $ - $ 6,501,000 0% $ - $ 6,501,000 $ - $ - $ 6,501,000 City-wide

1.1.36 Greenbank Road Urbanization from Kilbirnie to Barnsdale Road - South 1.CWA08 2032 - 2032$ 1,200,000 $ - $ 1,200,000 0% $ - $ 1,200,000 $ - $ - $ 1,200,000 City-wide

1.1.37 Mer Bleue Road Widening from Renaud Rd. to New Mer Bleue UEA Collector Road 1.CWA09 2032 - 2032$ 3,325,000 $ - $ 3,325,000 0% $ - $ 3,325,000 $ - $ - $ 3,325,000 City-wide

1.1.38 Old Montreal Road Widening from Trim Road to Ted Kelly 1.CWA10 2032 - 2032$ 13,387,000 $ - $ 13,387,000 0% $ - $ 13,387,000 $ - $ - $ 13,387,000 City-wide

1.1.39 Spratt Road Urbanization (Cambie Road to Urban Boundary) 1.CWA11 2032 - 2032$ 4,400,000 $ - $ 4,400,000 0% $ - $ 4,400,000 $ - $ - $ 4,400,000 City-wide

1.1.40 Limebank Road Widening (Earl Armstrong Road to Rideau Road) 2032 - 2032$ 11,820,000 $ - $ 11,820,000 0% $ - $ 11,820,000 $ - $ - $ 11,820,000 City-wide

1.1.41 Tenth Line Road and Mer Bleue Road - Stormwater Management Costs 2032 - 2032$ 1,493,000 $ - $ 1,493,000 0% $ - $ 1,493,000 $ - $ - $ 1,493,000 City-wide

1.1.42 March Road (Old Carp Road to Urban Boundary) 1.000X1 2032 - 2032$ 24,585,131 $ - $ 24,585,131 0% $ - $ 24,585,131 $ - $ - $ 24,585,131 City-wide

1.1.43 Innes-Walkley-Hunt Club Link (Innes Road to Walkley Road) 1.000X2 2032 - 2032$ 75,284,291 $ - $ 75,284,291 0% $ - $ 75,284,291 $ - $ - $ 75,284,291 City-wide

1.1.44 Blackburn Hamlet Bypass (Innes Road to Blackburn Hamlet Bypass Extension) 1.000X3 2032 - 2032$ 14,150,679 $ - $ 14,150,679 0% $ - $ 14,150,679 $ - $ - $ 14,150,679 City-wide

1.1.45 Alta Vista Transportation Corridor (Ottawa Health Sciences Centre & Wakley Road) 1.000X4 2032 - 2032$ 38,836,249 $ - $ 38,836,249 0% $ - $ 38,836,249 $ - $ - $ 38,836,249 City-wide

1.1.46 Terry Fox Drive (Wincester Drive to Eagleson Road at Hope Side Road) 1.000X5 2032 - 2032$ 38,992,486 $ - $ 38,992,486 0% $ - $ 38,992,486 $ - $ - $ 38,992,486 City-wide

1.1.47 Prince of Wales (Colonnade Road and Fisher Avenue) 1.000X6 2032 - 2032$ 13,726,605 $ - $ 13,726,605 0% $ - $ 13,726,605 $ - $ - $ 13,726,605 City-wide

1.1.48 Ottawa Road 174 (Highway 417 to Jeanne d'Arc Boulevard) 1.000X7 2032 - 2032$ 44,951,842 $ - $ 44,951,842 0% $ - $ 44,951,842 $ - $ - $ 44,951,842 City-wide

1.1.49 Hunt Club Road (Riverside Drive to Bank Street) 1.000X8 2032 - 2032 $ 30,176,212 $ - $ 30,176,212 0% $ - $ 30,176,212 $ - $ - $ 30,176,212 City-wide

1.1.50 Ottawa Road 174 (Jeanne d'Arc Boulevard to Trim Road) 1.000X9 2032 - 2032 $ 33,858,959 $ -$ 33,858,959 0% $ - $ 33,858,959 $ -$ -$ 33,858,959 City-wide

Subtotal City-wide Road Network $ 1,043,292,472 $ - $ 1,043,292,472 $ 32,527,242 $ 1,010,765,230 $ - $ 578,799,137 $ 431,966,093

HEMSON 265 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

1.2 Environmental Assessment Studies

1.2.1 Environmental Assessment Studies - Arterial and Major Collector Roads - 907873 - 907995 1.02494 2020 - 2031$ 33,828,828 $ - $ 33,828,828 5% $ 1,691,441 $ 32,137,386 $ - $ 27,316,778 $ 4,820,608 City-wide

1.2.2 Origin-destination Survey 1.22214 2020 - 2020$ 892,787 $ - $ 892,787 50% $ 446,394 $ 446,394 $ - $ 446,393.66 $ - City-wide

1.2.3 Origin-destination Survey 1.22224 2026 - 2026$ 892,787 $ - $ 892,787 50% $ 446,394 $ 446,394 $ - $ 446,393.66 $ - City-wide

1.2.4 Transit Priority Programs and Measures - 908363 2.109X4 2020 - 2031 $ 40,114,050 $ -$ 40,114,050 32% $ 12,836,496 $ 27,277,554 $ -$ 27,277,554 $ -City-wide

Subtotal Environmental Assessment Studies $ 75,728,453 $ - $ 75,728,453 $ 15,420,725 $ 60,307,728 $ - $ 55,487,120 $ 4,820,608

1.3 Pedestrian Facilities

1.3.1 Pedestrian Facilities Standalone Capital Projects - Phase 2 1.15644 2020 - 2025$ 10,073,989 $ - $ 10,073,989 75% $ 7,555,492 $ 2,518,497 $ - $ 2,518,497 $ - City-wide

1.3.2 Pedestrian Facilities Standalone Capital Projects - Phase 3 1.15644 2026 - 2031 $ 9,810,617 $ -$ 9,810,617 75% $ 7,357,963 $ 2,452,654 $ -$ 2,084,756 $ 367,898 City-wide

Subtotal Pedestrian Facilities $ 19,884,606 $ - $ 19,884,606 $ 14,913,454 $ 4,971,151 $ - $ 4,603,253 $ 367,898

1.4 Cycling Facilities

1.4.1 Cycling Facilities Standalone Capital Projects - Phase 2 (see attachment) 1.14544 2020 - 2025$ 11,159,842 $ - $ 11,159,842 51% $ 5,691,519 $ 5,468,322 $ - $ 5,468,322 $ - City-wide

1.4.2 Cycling Facilities Standalone Capital Projects - Phase 3 (see attachment) 1.14544 2026 - 2031 $ 26,705,501 $ -$ 26,705,501 51% $ 13,619,805 $ 13,085,695 $ -$ 11,326,795 $ 1,758,900 City-wide

Subtotal Cycling Facilities $ 37,865,342 $ - $ 37,865,342 $ 19,311,325 $ 18,554,018 $ - $ 16,795,118 $ 1,758,900

1.5 Multi-Use Pathway Structures

1.5.1 Multi-use Pathway Structures - Rideau River Footbridge - Phase 1 - 907848 - 908670 1.000144 2020 - 2025$ 5,536,397 $ - $ 5,536,397 57% $ 3,155,747 $ 2,380,651 $ - $ 2,380,651 $ - City-wide

1.5.2 Multi-use Pathway Structures - Prince of Wales Bridge - Phase 2 1.000144 2026 - 2031$ 3,124,756 $ - $ 3,124,756 57% $ 1,781,111 $ 1,343,645 $ - $ 1,343,645 $ - City-wide

1.5.3 Multi-use Pathway Structures - Other - Phase 3 1.000144 2026 - 2031 $ 15,623,778 $ -$ 15,623,778 57% $ 8,905,554 $ 6,718,225 $ -$ 5,815,225 $ 903,000 City-wide

Subtotal Multi-Use Pathway Structures $ 24,284,931 $ - $ 24,284,931 $ 13,842,411 $ 10,442,520 $ - $ 9,539,520 $ 903,000

1.6 Transportation Programs

1.6.1 Transportation Demand Management - 907877 - 908217 - 908561 - 909060 1.14944 2020 - 2031$ 6,222,728 $ - $ 6,222,728 50% $ 3,111,364 $ 3,111,364 $ - $ 3,111,364 $ - City-wide

1.6.2 Area Traffic Management - 905414 - 905931 - 908218 - 909061 1.14444 2020 - 2031$ 4,817,704 $ - $ 4,817,704 84% $ 4,022,782 $ 794,921 $ - $ 794,921 $ - City-wide

1.6.3 Development Sidewalks - 907875 - 908053 - 908237 - 909059 - 909059 1.16444 2020 - 2031 $ 1,119,332 $ -$ 1,119,332 5% $ 55,967 $ 1,063,366 $ -$ 1,063,366 $ -City-wide

Subtotal Transportation Programs $ 12,159,763 $ - $ 12,159,763 $ 7,190,113 $ 4,969,650 $ - $ 4,969,650 $ -

HEMSON 266 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

1.7 Public Works

1.7.1 Lifecycle Renewal - Traffic Monitoring Systems - 907706 - 908407 - 908879 1.15544 2020 - 2031$ 2,064,571 $ - $ 2,064,571 80% $ 1,651,657 $ 412,914 $ - $ 412,914 $ - City-wide

1.7.2 Parking Studies - 909123 - 908402 1.15744 2020 - 2031$ 398,406 $ - $ 398,406 80% $ 318,725 $ 79,681 $ - $ 79,681 $ - City-wide

New Traffic Control Signals - 909807 - 907707 - 903601 - 907946 - 908048 - 908320 - 1.7.3 908321 - 908322 - 908324 - 909224 - 908812 - 908886 - 908413 - 908810 - 908811 - 1.15444 2020 - 2031$ 27,554,765 $ - $ 27,554,765 20% $ 5,510,953 $ 22,043,812 $ - $ 22,043,812 $ - City-wide 909221 - 909222 - 909223 - 907632 - 908886

1.7.4 Safety Improvement Program - 907712 - 908049 - 908414 - 908890 1.14244 2020 - 2031$ 12,668,652 $ - $ 12,668,652 50% $ 6,334,326 $ 6,334,326 $ - $ 6,334,326 $ - City-wide

1.7.5 Traffic Incident Management - 907713 - 908055 - 908415 - 908885 1.20094 2020 - 2031$ 5,217,226 $ - $ 5,217,226 20% $ 1,043,445 $ 4,173,781 $ - $ 4,173,781 $ - City-wide

1.7.6 Advanced Traffic Management Program - 907708 - 908204 - 908408 - 908887 1.20194 2020 - 2031$ 4,856,763 $ - $ 4,856,763 20% $ 971,353 $ 3,885,410 $ - $ 3,885,410 $ - City-wide

1.7.7 Audible Signal Program - 908205 - 908409 - 908888 1.15244 2020 - 2031$ 496,613 $ - $ 496,613 80% $ 397,290 $ 99,323 $ - $ 99,323 $ - City-wide

1.7.8 New Street Lighting - 908201 - 908405 1.14744 2020 - 2031$ 3,794,346 $ - $ 3,794,346 80% $ 3,035,477 $ 758,869 $ - $ 758,869 $ - City-wide

1.7.9 Vehicle & Equipment 8.03440 2020 - 2031$ 16,976,351 $ - $ 16,976,351 15% $ 2,546,453 $ 14,429,898 $ - $ 14,429,898 $ - City-wide

1.7.10 Various Works Yard Facilties - 907254 - 908380 8.00240 2020 - 2024$ 25,357,950 $ - $ 25,357,950 15% $ 3,803,692 $ 21,554,257 $ - $ 21,554,257 $ - City-wide

1.7.11 Huntley Yard Facility Expansion 8.05940 2020 - 2020$ 2,946,198 $ - $ 2,946,198 15% $ 441,930 $ 2,504,268 $ - $ 2,504,268 $ - City-wide

1.7.12 Winter Material Storage Facility - Maple Grove, Trim & Antares 8.05440 2020 - 2024$ 2,946,198 $ - $ 2,946,198 15% $ 441,930 $ 2,504,268 $ - $ 2,504,268 $ - City-wide

1.7.13 Antares Snow Disposal Facility Design & Construction 8.07940 2020 - 2020 $ 4,687,133 $ -$ 4,687,133 28% $ 1,312,397 $ 3,374,736 $ -$ 3,374,736 $ -City-wide

Subtotal Public Works $ 109,965,173 $ - $ 109,965,173 $ 27,809,628 $ 82,155,545 $ - $ 82,155,545 $ -

HEMSON 267 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

1.8 Debt Payments 1.8.1 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Principal Payments 1.CWD1 2020 - 2031$ 15,876,000 $ - $ 15,876,000 0% $ - $ 15,876,000 $ - $ 15,876,000 $ - City-wide

1.8.2 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Interest Payments 1.CWD2 2020 - 2031$ 15,881,000 $ - $ 15,881,000 0% $ - $ 15,881,000 $ - $ 15,881,000 $ - City-wide

Summary of Issued DC Debt - Principal Payments - 900635 - 903171 - 903176 - 903217 - 1.8.3 1.CWD3 2020 - 2031$ 15,538,000 $ - $ 15,538,000 0% $ - $ 15,538,000 $ - $ 15,538,000 $ - City-wide 903219 - 905215 - 903502 - 906427 - 907447

1.8.4 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Interest Payments 1.CWD4 2020 - 2031$ 22,061,000 $ - $ 22,061,000 0% $ - $ 22,061,000 $ - $ 22,061,000 $ - City-wide

1.8.5 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Principal Payments - 900429 - 903891 - 901182 - 903194 1.ASD3 2020 - 2031$ 6,998,000 $ - $ 6,998,000 0% $ - $ 6,998,000 $ - $ 6,998,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.8.6 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Interest Payments 1.ASD4 2020 - 2031 $ 8,505,000 $ -$ 8,505,000 0% $ - $ 8,505,000 $ -$ 8,505,000 $ -IGB/OGB/Rural

Subtotal Debt Payments $ 84,859,000 $ - $ 84,859,000 $ - $ 84,859,000 $ - $ 84,859,000 $ -

1.9 Area-Specific Roads Projects

1.9.1 Goulbourn Force Road (Additional Costs) - Front-ending Agreement - 908777 1.X1444 2020 - 2020$ 1,000,000 $ - $ 1,000,000 10% $ 100,000 $ 900,000 $ - $ 900,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.9.2 Chapman Mills Drive - Woodroffe to Longfields - South (FEA - Oversizing Component 45%) 1.AS009 2020 - 2024$ 1,364,000 $ - $ 1,364,000 0% $ - $ 1,364,000 $ - $ 1,364,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.9.3 Chapman Mills Drive (Longfields Drive - Strandherd Drive) 1.04644 2020 - 2024$ 3,125,000 $ - $ 3,125,000 5% $ 156,250 $ 2,968,750 $ - $ 2,968,750 $ - OBG

1.9.4 Country Club Road (Golf Club Way - Jenkinson Road) 1.00054 2020 - 2024$ 2,556,000 $ - $ 2,556,000 5% $ 127,800 $ 2,428,200 $ - $ 2,428,200 $ - OBG

1.9.5 Cyrville Road (Star Top Road - St. Laurent Boulevard) 1.00064 2030 - 2031$ 8,721,000 $ - $ 8,721,000 5% $ 436,050 $ 8,284,950 $ - $ 7,042,200 $ 1,242,750 OBG

1.9.6 Goulbourn Forced Road from Walden to Walden 1.X1444 2030 - 2031$ 2,445,000 $ - $ 2,445,000 10% $ 244,500 $ 2,200,500 $ - $ 2,200,500 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.9.7 Goulbourn Forced Road Grade Separation at Railway Track 1.X1444 2030 - 2031$ 6,000,000 $ - $ 6,000,000 10% $ 600,000 $ 5,400,000 $ - $ 5,400,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.9.8 Stittsville Main Street Extension (Palladium - Maple Grove) 1.50194 2030 - 2031$ 12,454,000 $ - $ 12,454,000 5% $ 622,700 $ 11,831,300 $ - $ 10,056,650 $ 1,774,650 OBG

1.9.9 Tremblay Road (Pickering Place - St. Laurent Boulevard) 1.000134 2030 - 2031 $ 6,713,000 $ -$ 6,713,000 5% $ 335,650 $ 6,377,350 $ -$ 5,420,800 $ 956,550 OBG

Subtotal Area-Specific Roads Projects $ 44,378,000 $ - $ 44,378,000 $ 2,622,950 $ 41,755,050 $ - $ 37,781,100 $ 3,973,950

HEMSON 268 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

1.10 Multi-use Pathway Construction - West Urban Community

1.10.1 Terry Fox Drive to Fernbank Road - Multi-Use Pathway 1.OMB1 2020 - 2024$ 279,000 $ - $ 279,000 0% $ - $ 279,000 $ - $ 279,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.10.1 Fernbank Road and Terry Fox Drive - Multi-use Pathway 1.OMB2 2020 - 2024 $ 2,790,000 $ -$ 2,790,000 0% $ - $ 2,790,000 $ -$ 2,790,000 $ -IGB/OGB/Rural

Subtotal Multi-use Pathway Construction - West Urban Community $ 3,069,000 $ - $ 3,069,000 $ - $ 3,069,000 $ - $ 3,069,000 $ -

1.11 Provision for Intersection Control Measures & Network Modifications

1.11.1 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2020 - 2020$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.2 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2021 - 2021$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.3 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2022 - 2022$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.4 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2023 - 2023$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.5 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2024 - 2024$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.6 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2025 - 2025$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.7 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2026 - 2026$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.8 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2027 - 2027$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.9 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2028 - 2028$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.1 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2029 - 2029$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.1 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2030 - 2030$ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - $ 10,725,000 $ - IGB/OGB/Rural

1.11.1 Intersection Control Measures (Traffic Signals, Roundabouts & Turning Lanes) 2031 - 2031 $ 10,725,000 $ -$ 10,725,000 0% $ - $ 10,725,000 $ -$ 10,725,000 $ -IGB/OGB/Rural

Subtotal Provision for Intersection Control Measures & Network Modifications$ 128,700,000 $ - $ 128,700,000 $ - $ 128,700,000 $ - $ 128,700,000 $ -

HEMSON 269 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

TOTAL ROADS & RELATED SERVICES $ 1,584,186,739 $ - $ 1,584,186,739 $ 133,637,846 $ 1,450,548,893 $ - $ 1,006,758,444 $ 443,790,449

(1) Prior growth funds are adjusted through the cost allocation analysis shown below

Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Reserve Fund Balance Residential Calculation Total Cost Reserve Adjs DC Rate Total Residential Non-Residential Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation City-wide $39,349,381 $24,313,243 $15,036,138 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 60% $0 ($9,596,660) $9,596,660 IGB ($16,115,185) ($9,596,660) ($6,518,525) 12-Year Population Growth 55,993 55,993 OBG ($19,151,891) ($11,719,792) ($7,432,098) Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $0.00 $171.39 Rural $175,120 $133,497 $41,624 Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 61%$ 87,506,707 ($11,719,792) $99,226,499 12-Year Population Growth 105,695 105,695 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $827.92 $938.80 Rural Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 76%$ 14,137,472 $133,497 $14,003,975 12-Year Population Growth 19,496 19,496 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $725.15 $718.30 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $55,492,321 ($13,909,000) $69,401,320 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $7,962,473 ($1,995,772) $9,958,245 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 1,138,914 1,138,914 Charge per Square Metre $6.99 $8.74 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $47,529,848 ($11,913,227) $59,443,075 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,664,948 2,664,948 Charge per Square Metre $17.84 $22.31

City-wide Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Total Cost Reserve Adjs DC Rate Residential Share of Eligible Costs 62% $524,965,436 $24,313,243 $500,652,192 12-Year Population Growth 181,332 181,332 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $2,895.05 $2,760.97 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 38% $324,656,508 $15,036,138 $309,620,370 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 5% $46,584,259 $2,157,503 $44,426,756 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 1,138,914 1,138,914 Charge per Square Metre $40.90 $39.01 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 33% $278,072,249 $12,878,635 $265,193,614 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,664,948 2,664,948 Charge per Square Metre $104.34 $99.51

TOTAL DC ELIGIBLE COSTS 2019-2031 AFTER ADJUSTMENT FOR AVAILABLE DC RESERVE FUNDS $ 1,002,501,018

HEMSON 270 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA CASHFLOW AND DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

CITY-WIDE CHARGE INSIDE GREENBELT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGE INSIDE THE GREENBELT (in $000)

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 ROADS & RELATED SERVICES 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 TOTAL

OPENING CASH BALANCE ($9,596.66) ($9,070.40) ($8,502.25) ($7,890.09) ($7,231.70) ($6,524.76) ($5,766.85) ($4,955.47) ($4,087.96) ($3,161.59) ($2,173.48) ($1,120.66)

2019-2028 RESIDENTIAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS - Roads & Related Services: Non Inflated $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 - Roads & Related Services: Inflated $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 - Roads & Related Services Infrastructure: Debenture Finance Interest (1) $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 - Roads & Related Services (Inflation + Debenture Financed) $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0

NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - Growth in Population in New Units 4,666 4,666 4,666 4,666 4,666 4,666 4,666 4,666 4,666 4,666 4,666 4,666 55,993

REVENUE - DC Receipts: Inflated $880.6 $902.6 $925.2 $948.3 $972.1 $996.4 $1,021.3 $1,046.8 $1,073.0 $1,099.8 $1,127.3 $1,155.5 $12,148.8

INTEREST - Interest on Opening Balance ($359.9) ($340.1) ($318.8) ($295.9) ($271.2) ($244.7) ($216.3) ($185.8) ($153.3) ($118.6) ($81.5) ($42.0) ($2,628.1) - Interest on In-year Transactions $5.5 $5.6 $5.8 $5.9 $6.1 $6.2 $6.4 $6.5 $6.7 $6.9 $7.0 $7.2 $75.9

TOTAL REVENUE $526.3 $568.1 $612.2 $658.4 $706.9 $757.9 $811.4 $867.5 $926.4 $988.1 $1,052.8 $1,120.7 $9,596.7

CLOSING CASH BALANCE ($9,070.4) ($8,502.3) ($7,890.1) ($7,231.7) ($6,524.8) ($5,766.9) ($4,955.5) ($4,088.0) ($3,161.6) ($2,173.5) ($1,120.7) $0.0

2019 Principle Repayment Charge (2) $ - Allocation of Capital Program 2019 Adjusted Capital Cost & Finance Interest Charge Per Capita $ 188.73 Residential 59.6% Total Charge per Capita $ 188.73 Non-Residential 40.4%

Rates for 2019 Inflation Rate 2.50% Interest Rate on Positive Balances 1.25% Notes Interest Rate on Negative Balances 3.75% (1) Debenture finance interest are not inflated (2) Principle Repayment Charge will not be indexed

HEMSON 271 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA CASHFLOW AND DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

CITY-WIDE CHARGE OUTSIDE GREENBELT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGE OUTSIDE THE GREENBELT (in $000)

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 ROADS & RELATED SERVICES 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 TOTAL

OPENING CASH BALANCE ($11,719.79) ($11,528.52) ($10,787.45) ($9,979.32) ($9,100.64) ($8,147.76) ($6,554.76) ($4,844.62) ($3,011.53) ($1,049.41) $1,048.11 $528.93

2019-2028 RESIDENTIAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS - Roads & Related Services: Non Inflated $6,967.5 $6,466.3 $6,466.3 $6,466.3 $6,466.3 $5,972.6 $5,972.6 $5,972.6 $5,972.6 $5,972.6 $8,088.9 $8,088.9 $78,873.3 - Roads & Related Services: Inflated $6,967.5 $6,628.0 $6,793.7 $6,963.5 $7,137.6 $6,757.4 $6,926.4 $7,099.5 $7,277.0 $7,458.9 $10,354.4 $10,613.3 $90,977.2 - Roads & Related Services Infrastructure: Debenture Finance Interest (1) $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $394.7 $4,736.3 - Roads & Related Services (Inflation + Debenture Financed) $7,362.2 $7,022.7 $7,188.4 $7,358.2 $7,532.3 $7,152.1 $7,321.0 $7,494.2 $7,671.7 $7,853.6 $10,749.1 $11,008.0 $95,713.5

NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - Growth in Population in New Units 8,808 8,808 8,808 8,808 8,808 8,808 8,808 8,808 8,808 8,808 8,808 8,808 105,695

REVENUE - DC Receipts: Inflated $7,989.0 $8,188.8 $8,393.5 $8,603.3 $8,818.4 $9,038.9 $9,264.8 $9,496.5 $9,733.9 $9,977.2 $10,226.6 $10,482.3 $110,213.2

INTEREST - Interest on Opening Balance ($439.5) ($432.3) ($404.5) ($374.2) ($341.3) ($305.5) ($245.8) ($181.7) ($112.9) ($39.4) $13.1 $6.6 ($2,857.4) - Interest on In-year Transactions $3.9 $7.3 $7.5 $7.8 $8.0 $11.8 $12.1 $12.5 $12.9 $13.3 ($9.8) ($9.9) $77.5

TOTAL REVENUE $7,553.5 $7,763.7 $7,996.5 $8,236.9 $8,485.2 $8,745.1 $9,031.2 $9,327.3 $9,633.8 $9,951.1 $10,229.9 $10,479.1 $107,433.3

CLOSING CASH BALANCE ($11,528.5) ($10,787.4) ($9,979.3) ($9,100.6) ($8,147.8) ($6,554.8) ($4,844.6) ($3,011.5) ($1,049.4) $1,048.1 $528.9 ($0.0)

2019 Principle Repayment Charge (2) $ 36.87 Allocation of Capital Program 2019 Adjusted Capital Cost & Finance Interest Charge Per Capita $ 907.03 Residential 61.2% Total Charge per Capita $ 943.90 Non-Residential 38.8%

HEMSON 272 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA CASHFLOW AND DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

CITY-WIDE CHARGE RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGE RURAL (in $000)

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 ROADS & RELATED SERVICES 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 TOTAL

OPENING CASH BALANCE $133.50 $70.50 $70.80 $72.31 $75.08 $79.16 $153.81 $232.47 $315.24 $402.28 $493.70 $250.86

2019-2028 RESIDENTIAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS - Roads & Related Services: Non Inflated $858.1 $796.4 $796.4 $796.4 $796.4 $735.6 $735.6 $735.6 $735.6 $735.6 $996.2 $996.2 $9,713.9 - Roads & Related Services: Inflated $858.1 $816.3 $836.7 $857.6 $879.1 $832.2 $853.0 $874.4 $896.2 $918.6 $1,275.2 $1,307.1 $11,204.6 - Roads & Related Services Infrastructure: Debenture Finance Interest (1) $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $48.6 $583.3 - Roads & Related Services (Inflation + Debenture Financed) $906.7 $864.9 $885.3 $906.2 $927.7 $880.8 $901.6 $923.0 $944.8 $967.2 $1,323.8 $1,355.7 $11,787.9

NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - Growth in Population in New Units 1,625 1,625 1,625 1,625 1,625 1,625 1,625 1,625 1,625 1,625 1,625 1,625 19,496

REVENUE - DC Receipts: Inflated $843.2 $864.3 $885.9 $908.1 $930.8 $954.1 $977.9 $1,002.4 $1,027.4 $1,053.1 $1,079.4 $1,106.4 $11,633.0

INTEREST - Interest on Opening Balance $1.7 $0.9 $0.9 $0.9 $0.9 $1.0 $1.9 $2.9 $3.9 $5.0 $6.2 $3.1 $29.4 - Interest on In-year Transactions ($1.2) ($0.0) $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.5 $0.5 $0.5 $0.5 $0.5 ($4.6) ($4.7) ($7.9)

TOTAL REVENUE $843.7 $865.2 $886.8 $909.0 $931.7 $955.5 $980.3 $1,005.8 $1,031.9 $1,058.7 $1,081.0 $1,104.9 $11,654.4

CLOSING CASH BALANCE $70.5 $70.8 $72.3 $75.1 $79.2 $153.8 $232.5 $315.2 $402.3 $493.7 $250.9 $0.0

2019 Principle Repayment Charge (2) $ 24.62 Allocation of Capital Program 2019 Adjusted Capital Cost & Finance Interest Charge Per Capita $ 519.03 Residential 76.2% Total Charge per Capita $ 543.64 Non-Residential 23.8%

HEMSON 273 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA CASHFLOW AND DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

CITY-WIDE CHARGE NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGE INDUSTRIAL (in $000)

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 ROADS & RELATED SERVICES 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 TOTAL

OPENING CASH BALANCE ($1,995.77) ($1,950.00) ($1,838.46) ($1,706.71) ($1,554.23) ($1,378.67) ($1,124.23) ($840.11) ($523.40) ($173.04) $215.16 $105.34

2019-2028 NON-RESIDENTIAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS - Roads & Related Services: Non Inflated $672.4 $624.0 $624.0 $624.0 $624.0 $576.4 $576.4 $576.4 $576.4 $576.4 $780.6 $780.6 $7,611.5 - Roads & Related Services: Inflated $672.4 $639.6 $655.6 $672.0 $688.8 $652.1 $668.4 $685.1 $702.3 $719.8 $999.2 $1,024.2 $8,779.5 - Roads & Related Services Infrastructure: Debenture Finance Interest (1) $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $38.1 $457.1 - Roads & Related Services (Inflation + Debenture Financed) $710.5 $677.7 $693.7 $710.1 $726.9 $690.2 $706.5 $723.2 $740.3 $757.9 $1,037.3 $1,062.3 $9,236.6

NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - Growth in Non-Res Industrial GFA 92,710 93,813 94,917 95,929 97,033 98,136 99,240 100,436 101,539 102,827 80,845 81,489 1,138,914

REVENUE - DC Receipts: Inflated $830.3 $861.2 $893.1 $925.2 $959.3 $994.4 $1,030.8 $1,069.3 $1,108.0 $1,150.1 $926.9 $957.6 $11,706.3

INTEREST - Interest on Opening Balance ($74.8) ($73.1) ($68.9) ($64.0) ($58.3) ($51.7) ($42.2) ($31.5) ($19.6) ($6.5) $2.7 $1.3 ($486.7) - Interest on In-year Transactions $0.7 $1.1 $1.2 $1.3 $1.5 $1.9 $2.0 $2.2 $2.3 $2.5 ($2.1) ($2.0) $12.7

TOTAL REVENUE $756.2 $789.2 $825.4 $862.6 $902.4 $944.6 $990.6 $1,039.9 $1,090.7 $1,146.1 $927.5 $957.0 $11,232.4

CLOSING CASH BALANCE ($1,950.0) ($1,838.5) ($1,706.7) ($1,554.2) ($1,378.7) ($1,124.2) ($840.1) ($523.4) ($173.0) $215.2 $105.3 $0.0

2019 Principle Repayment Charge (2) $ 0.33 Allocation of Capital Program 2019 Adjusted Capital Cost & Finance Interest Charge Per M2 $ 8.96 Industrial Sector 14.35% Total Charge per m2 $ 9.29 Non-Industrial Sector 85.65%

HEMSON 274 APPENDIX E.1 TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA CASHFLOW AND DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE ROADS & RELATED SERVICES

CITY-WIDE CHARGE NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGE NON-INDUSTRIAL (in $000)

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 ROADS & RELATED SERVICES 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 TOTAL

OPENING CASH BALANCE ($11,913.23) ($11,637.41) ($10,971.91) ($10,187.24) ($9,275.01) ($8,225.57) ($6,704.78) ($5,006.30) ($3,116.75) ($1,023.96) $1,285.93 $627.28

2019-2028 NON-RESIDENTIAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS - Roads & Related Services: Non Inflated $4,013.6 $3,724.9 $3,724.9 $3,724.9 $3,724.9 $3,440.5 $3,440.5 $3,440.5 $3,440.5 $3,440.5 $4,659.6 $4,659.6 $45,434.7 - Roads & Related Services: Inflated $4,013.6 $3,818.0 $3,913.5 $4,011.3 $4,111.6 $3,892.6 $3,989.9 $4,089.7 $4,191.9 $4,296.7 $5,964.6 $6,113.8 $52,407.1 - Roads & Related Services Infrastructure: Debenture Finance Interest (1) $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $227.4 $2,728.3 - Roads & Related Services (Inflation + Debenture Financed) $4,241.0 $4,045.4 $4,140.8 $4,238.7 $4,338.9 $4,120.0 $4,217.3 $4,317.0 $4,419.3 $4,524.1 $6,192.0 $6,341.1 $55,135.4

NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - Growth in Non-Res Non-Industrial GFA 217,047 219,498 222,022 224,546 227,105 229,701 232,298 234,965 237,633 240,338 189,068 190,727 2,664,948

REVENUE - DC Receipts: Inflated $4,959.0 $5,140.4 $5,329.5 $5,524.9 $5,727.5 $5,937.8 $6,155.1 $6,381.4 $6,615.2 $6,857.8 $5,529.7 $5,717.7 $69,876.0

INTEREST - Interest on Opening Balance ($446.7) ($436.4) ($411.4) ($382.0) ($347.8) ($308.5) ($251.4) ($187.7) ($116.9) ($38.4) $16.1 $7.8 ($2,903.4) - Interest on In-year Transactions $4.5 $6.8 $7.4 $8.0 $8.7 $11.4 $12.1 $12.9 $13.7 $14.6 ($12.4) ($11.7) $76.1

TOTAL REVENUE $4,516.8 $4,710.9 $4,925.5 $5,150.9 $5,388.4 $5,640.7 $5,915.7 $6,206.6 $6,512.0 $6,833.9 $5,533.4 $5,713.8 $67,048.7

CLOSING CASH BALANCE ($11,637.4) ($10,971.9) ($10,187.2) ($9,275.0) ($8,225.6) ($6,704.8) ($5,006.3) ($3,116.7) ($1,024.0) $1,285.9 $627.3 $0.0

2019 Principle Repayment Charge (2) $ 0.84 Allocation of Capital Program 2019 Adjusted Capital Cost & Finance Interest Charge Per Employee $ 22.85 Industrial Sector 14.35% Total Charge per Employee $ 23.69 Non-Industrial Sector 85.65%

HEMSON 275

Appendix E.2 Sanitary (Waste Water)

HEMSON 276

Appendix E.2

Sanitary (Waste Water) Technical Appendix

Capital infrastructure contained in the Sanitary (Waste Water) service category includes plant expansions and expansion and upgrades of linear sanitary sewer infrastructure.

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Sanitary (Waste Water) services, the projects that will benefit development occurring over the 2019 to 2031 development-related capital forecast. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast have been provided by City staff and are generally based on the capital projects identified in the City’s existing Infrastructure Master Plan and the 2014 DC Study and adjusted to account for recent expenditures and indexing.

Table 1: Forecast Wastewater Demand by Area

Table 2: 2019-2031 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

A. Benefitting Area

The City’s Sanitary (Waste Water) development charges is calculated on both a City-wide and area-specific basis. The smaller benefitting areas are defined as: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural area.

B. Historical Service Level Analysis

Sanitary (Waste Water) facilities included in the DC capital forecast are required to achieve health and safety standards as identified in relevant legislation including Provincial regulations, other relevant legislation as well as City standards. As such, in accordance with section 4(3) of O.Reg. 82/98, the ten-year historical service level does not apply.

HEMSON 277

C. Forecast Wastewater Demand by Area

Consistent with the approach included in the 2014 DC Study, the residential and non-residential allocations have been based on average flows required by these types of development (shown in Table 1).

Sanitary treatment projects including plant expansions are allocated based on the total demand for all areas (77 per cent residential and 22 per cent non- residential). The residential and non-residential split for linear infrastructure is based on the location of the assets and is identified in Table 1.

D. Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development-related capital forecast that will benefit development occurring over the 2019 to 2031 period includes a variety of projects for the provision of Sanitary (Waste Water) services in the City and amounts to a total gross cost of $360.12 million, as shown in Table 2.

E. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Sanitary (Waste Water) Services. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The replacement and benefit to existing shares have been examined on a project-by-project basis and the nature of each project determined the rationale for the reductions. The identified benefit to exiting shares includes costs that meet the needs of existing development, including past development. Decisions were based on a variety of factors including the population and employment growth over the ten-year base, rehabilitation costs and input from City staff.

HEMSON 278

In total, $576.58 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share over the planning period.

3. Legislated ten per cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5 (5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required.

4. Prior DC Funding / Available DC Reserve Funds

Prior DC funding relates to portions of projects which have had DCs collected and applied against a portion of the DC eligible project costs. These amounts are removed from the capital forecast and not brought forward into the development charge calculation. Table 2 provides details on the available DC reserve fund balance by benefitting area.

In total, the $45.85 million identified in the City-wide Sanitary (Waste Water) reserve fund has been reduced from the total City-wide DC eligible capital costs. Similarly, $5.27 million is identified in the Inside the Greenbelt and $21,900 in the Rural Sanitary (Waste Water) DC reserve funds have been applied to projects occurring in this area.

In contrast, the City’s Outside the Greenbelt Sanitary (Waste Water) DC reserve fund is in a deficient position ($20.69 million). As such, these costs have been included in the DC eligible costs as it relates to committed excess capacity that will benefit growth over the identified planning period.

5. Post-2031 Benefit

Approximately $117.92 million in post-period DC shares has been identified and are reduced from the total DC eligible costs. These shares of projects will be considered for recovery as part of subsequent development charges studies.

6. 2019-2031 DC Eligible Development Related Costs

The total in-period DC eligible costs shown in Table 2 amounts to $360.12 million after adjustments for benefit to existing and post-period benefits. After deductions for available DC reserve fund balances the in-period DC eligible cost is reduced to $329.66 million (shown in the DC cost allocation summary at the bottom of Table 2).

HEMSON 279

F. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

The discounted development-related costs have been allocated based on shares of forecast demand for each area over the 2019-2031 benefitting period.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2. The total costs shown below reflect the total costs brought forward to the DC calculation after adjusting for DC reserves.

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential Inside the Greenbelt 70% $45,643,428 Outside the Greenbelt 88% $106,272,720 Rural 0% $0 City-wide 78% $111,614,908 Subtotal Residential $263,531,056 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific Residual $4,955,615 City-wide 3% $4,533,638 Non-Residential – Non-Industrial Area-Specific Residual $29,581,216 City-wide 19% $27,062,337 Subtotal Non-Residential $66,132,806

Total $329,663,863

G. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the approach used in the City’s 2014 DC Study, the Sanitary (Waste Water) development charges are calculated using an average cost methodology.

The following table provides a summary of the calculated per capita and per square metre of industrial and non-industrial space City-wide.

HEMSON 280

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential Inside the Greenbelt $/capita $815.16 Outside the Greenbelt $/capita $1,005.47 Rural $/capita $0.00 City-wide $/capita $646.59 Total Residential $/capita $2,467.2 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific $/square metre $4.65 City-wide $/square metre $4.25 Total Indus. $/m2 $8.90 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific $/square metre $11.44 City-wide $/square metre $10.46 Total Non- Indus. $/m2 $21.90

HEMSON 281 APPENDIX E.2 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA WASTEWATER DEMAND BY AREA

Residential no Outdoor Water Demand (OWD) Res Growth in Non-Res Wastewater Residential - Mld ICI Mld Total - Mld Res Growth Component of Demand Growth Growth 2019 2031 2019 2031 2019 2031 Mld Mld Mld %

HEMSON 282 APPENDIX E.2 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM SANITARY SEWER

2.0 SANITARY SEWER

2.1 R.O. Pickard Plant Expansion

2.1.1 Waste Activated Sludge (WAS) Pumps 10.4A2 2020 - 2022$ 468,713 $ - $ 468,713 0% $ - $ 468,713 $ - $ 445,713 $23,000 City-wide

2.1.2 Aeration Blowers 10.4A3 2020 - 2022$ 4,707,221 $ - $ 4, 707,221 0% $ - $ 4,707,221 $ - $ 4,488,221 $ 219,000 City-wide

2.1.3 Sludge Thickening Centrifuges 10.4A4 2020 - 2022$ 17,023,222 $ - $ 17,023,222 0% $ - $ 17,023,222 $ - $ 15,757,222 $ 1,266,000 City-wide

2.1.4 Short Term Accommodations 10.4A5 2021 - 2023$ 1,732,007 $ - $ 1, 732,007 40% $ 692,803 $ 1,039,204 $ - $ 864,204 $ 175,000 City-wide

2.1.5 Primary Clarifiers 10.4A6 2023 - 2025$ 63,801,930 $ - $ 63,801,930 0% $ - $ 63,801,930 $ - $ 55,855,930 $ 7,946,000 City-wide

2.1.6 Chlorine Contact Tank 10.4A7 2023 - 2025$ 16,775,474 $ - $ 16,775,474 0% $ - $ 16,775,474 $ - $ 14,911,474 $ 1,864,000 City-wide

2.1.7 New Raw Sewage Pump Station 10.4A8 2024 - 2026$ 41,000,142 $ - $ 41,000,142 0% $ - $ 41,000,142 $ - $ 31,154,142 $ 9,846,000 City-wide

2.1.8 Coarse Screen for New - Raw Sewage Pump Station (RSPS) 10.4A9 2024 - 2026$ 322,519 $ - $ 322,519 0% $ - $ 322,519 $ - $ 162,519 $ 160,000 City-wide

2.1.9 Disinfection System 10.4A10 2024 - 2026$ 2,662,738 $ - $ 2, 662,738 10% $ 266,274 $ 2,396,464 $ - $ 1,070,464 $ 1,326,000 City-wide

2.1.10 Outfall 10.4A11 2027 - 2029$ 33,083,350 $ - $ 33,083,350 0% $ - $ 33,083,350 $ - $ 14,733,350 $ 18,350,000 City-wide

2.1.11 Dewatering Centrifuge Polymer Pumps 10.4A12 2032 - 2032$ 352,651 $ - $ 352,651 0% $ - $ 352,651 $ - $ - $ 352,651 City-wide

2.1.12 New Storage/Warehouse Building 10.4A13 2032 - 2032$ 8,981,440 $ - $ 8, 981,440 0% $ - $ 8,981,440 $ - $ - $ 8,981,440 City-wide

2.1.13 Fine Screens 10.4A14 2032 - 2032$ 17,413,817 $ - $ 17,413,817 0% $ - $ 17,413,817 $ - $ - $ 17,413,817 City-wide

2.1.14 Aeration Tanks 10.4A15 2032 - 2032$ 37,133,257 $ - $ 37,133,257 0% $ - $ 37,133,257 $ - $ - $ 37,133,257 City-wide

2.1.15 Substation 1 (West) 10.4A16 2032 - 2032$ 2,112,558 $ - $ 2, 112,558 0% $ - $ 2,112,558 $ - $ - $ 2,112,558 City-wide

2.1.16 Digester Gas Flare System - 907383 10.5B1 2020 - 2022 $ 1,116 $ - $1,116 50% $ 558 $ 558 $ - $ 558 $ - City-wide

2.1.17 Aeration Blowers 10.5B2 2020 - 2022$ 4,707,221 $ - $ 4, 707,221 67% $ 3,153,838 $ 1,553,383 $ - $ 1,553,383 $ - City-wide

2.1.16 Main Electrical Feed 10.5B3 2023 - 2025$ 2,100,282 $ - $ 2, 100,282 50% $ 1,050,141 $ 1,050,141 $ - $ 1,050,141 $ - City-wide Wet Weather Program/ORAP Wet Weather Flow Reduction - 908184 - 908514 - 908983 - 2.1.17 10.CW01 2020 - 2025$ 8,783,911 $ - $ 8, 783,911 87% $ 7,642,003 $ 1,141,908 $ - $ 1,141,908 $ - City-wide 909136 2.1.16 Wet Weather Program/ORAP Wet Weather Flow Reduction 10.CW02 2026 - 2031$ 24,551,651 $ - $ 24,551,651 87% $ 21,359,937 $ 3,191,714 $ - $ 3,191,714 $ - City-wide

2.1.17 Integrated Program/Infrastructure Assessment and Data Collection 10.CW03 2020 - 2025$ 11,249,120 $ - $ 11,249,120 87% $ 9,786,735 $ 1,462,385 $ - $ 1,462,385 $ - City-wide

2.1.18 Integrated Program/Infrastructure Assessment and Data Collection 10.CW04 2026 - 2031 $ 24,685,569 $ -$ 24,685,569 87% $ 21,476,445 $ 3,209,124 $ -$ 3,209,124 $ -City-wide

Subtotal R.O. Pickard Plant Expansion $ 323,649,912 $ - $ 323,649,912 $ 65,428,734 $ 258,221,178 $ - $ 151,052,455 $ 107,168,723

HEMSON 283 APPENDIX E.2 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM SANITARY SEWER

2.2 Expansion and Upgrade Projects 2.2.1 Tri-Township/March Ridge Collector Replacement - 904986 10.00940 2020 - 2024$ - $ - $ - 59%$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - OGB 2.2.2 South Nepean Collector Phase 3 10.02940 2020 - 2024$ 8,593,078 $ - $ 8,593,078 0% $ - $ 8,593,078 $ - $ 8,593,078 $ - OGB

2.2.3 March Road Off-site Sanitary Trunk Sewer - West 10.ASAX1 2020 - 2024$ 11,945,000 $ - $ 11,945,000 0% $ - $ 11,945,000 $ - $ 11,945,000 $ - OGB

2.2.4 Kanata West Trunk Sewers - 905425 10.03940 2020 - 2024$ 10,727,956 $ - $ 10,727,956 0% $ - $ 10,727,956 $ - $ 10,727,956 $ - OGB

2.2.5 Fernbank Collector Sewer - Front-ending Agreement - 904987 10.04940 2020 - 2020$ 5,244,000 $ - $ 5,244,000 0% $ - $ 5,244,000 $ - $ 5,244,000 $ - OGB

2.2.6 Shea Road Pump Station - Front-ending Agreement - West - 907840 Motion 2020 - 2020$ 208,000 $ - $ 208,000 0% $ - $ 208,000 $ - $ 208,000 $ - OGB

2.2.7 Campeau Road Oversized Sanitary Sewer - West Existing 2020 - 2024$ 456,000 $ - $ 456,000 0% $ - $ 456,000 $ - $ 456,000 $ - OGB

2.2.8 Signature Ridge Pump Station and Forcemain Expansion 10.50240 2025 - 2029$ 5,021,929 $ - $ 5,021,929 0% $ - $ 5,021,929 $ - $ 5,021,929 $ - OGB

2.2.9 Stittsville Pump Station Gravity Connection and Decommissioning 10.50340 2020 - 2024$ 1,673,976 $ - $ 1,673,976 70% $ 1,171,783 $ 502,193 $ - $ 502,193 $ - OGB

2.2.10 Acres Road Pump Station Upgrade - 907107 10.50440 2025 - 2029$ 3,498,610 $ - $ 3,498,610 0% $ - $ 3,498,610 $ - $ 3,498,610 $ - OGB

2.2.11 Pump Stations Capacity Increase - Replacement 10.50740 2020 - 2031$ 1,673,976 $ - $ 1,673,976 0% $ - $ 1,673,976 $ - $ 1,673,976 $ - OGB

2.2.12 Conroy Road Collector Twinning 10.50640 2030 - 2031$ 2,120,370 $ - $ 2,120,370 0% $ - $ 2,120,370 $ - $ 2,120,370 $ - OGB 2.2.13 Mer Bleue UEA New Wastewater Pumping Station and Forcemain (including land) 10.ASA05 2030 - 2031$ 8,816,000 $ - $ 8,816,000 0% $ - $ 8,816,000 $ - $ 8,816,000 $ - OGB

2.2.14 Tenth Line Pumping Station and Overflows - Upgrades 10.ASA07 2030 - 2031$ 971,000 $ - $ 971,000 0% $ - $ 971,000 $ - $ 971,000 $ - OGB

2.2.15 Tenth Line Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer 10.ASA08 2030 - 2031$ 6,753,000 $ - $ 6,753,000 0% $ - $ 6,753,000 $ - $ 6,753,000 $ - OGB

2.2.16 O'Connor Flood Control Works 10.50740 2020 - 2031$ 64,727,081 $ - $ 64,727,081 90% $ 58,254,373 $ 6,472,708 $ - $ 6,472,708 $ - IGB

2.2.17 Rideau River Collector Upgrade 10.50740 2028 - 2028$ 2,008,771 $ - $ 2,008,771 0% $ - $ 2,008,771 $ - $ 200,877 $ 1,807,894 IGB

2.2.18 Rideau River Collector Twinning 10.50740 2028 - 2028$ 9,932,259 $ - $ 9,932,259 0% $ - $ 9,932,259 $ - $ 993,226 $ 8,939,033 IGB Wastewater System Renewal Program - Intensification Areas - 906735 - 906879 - 906882 - 2.2.19 10.20040 2020 - 2024$ 37,510,236 $ - $ 37,510,236 97% $ 36,384,929 $ 1,125,307 $ - $ 1,125,307 $ - IGB 906900 - 907788 - 908582 - 909012 2.2.20 Wastewater System Renewal Program - Intensification Areas 10.20040 2025 - 2031 $ 477,401,281 $ -$ 477,401,281 87% $ 415,339,114 $ 62,062,167 $ -$ 62,062,167 $ -IGB

Subtotal Expansion and Upgrade Projects $ 659,282,523 $ - $ 659,282,523 $ 511,150,199 $ 148,132,324 $ - $ 137,385,397 $ 10,746,927

2.3 East Urban Community 2.3.1 Neighbourhood 5 Sanitary Pumping Sation Overflow - Upgrades - 907807 10.00X1 2020 - 2020$ 939,000 $ - $ 939,000 0%$ - $ 939,000 $ - $ 939,000 $ - OGB

2.3.2 Avalon South N4 Trunk Sewers 10.00X2 2025 - 2029$ 216,501 $ - $ 216,501 0%$ - $ 216,501 $ - $ 216,501 $ - OGB

2.3.3 Cumberland Trunk Sewers 10.00X3 2020 - 2024$ 1,004,386 $ - $ 1,004,386 0%$ - $ 1,004,386 $ - $ 1,004,386 $ - OGB

2.3.4 EUC Sanitary Sewer System 10.00X6 2025 - 2029$ 459,785 $ - $ 459,785 0%$ - $ 459,785 $ - $ 459,785 $ - OGB 2.3.5 Cardinal Creek Sanitary Sewers - 907808 - 907897 10.00X7 $ - $ -$ -0% $ - $ -$ -$ -$ -OGB Subtotal East Urban Community $ 2,619,672 $ - $ 2,619,672 $ - $ 2,619,672 $ - $ 2,619,672 $ -

HEMSON 284 APPENDIX E.2 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM SANITARY SEWER

2.4 South Urban Community

2.4.1 SUC Nepean Sewer Oversizing South of Jock 10.00X9 2020 - 2024$ 463,133 $ - $ 463,133 0%$ - $ 463,133 $ - $ 463,133 $ - OGB

2.4.2 Leitrim Sanitary Sewer System 10.00X10 2020 - 2024$ 88,163 $ - $ 88,163 0%$ - $ 88,163 $ - $ 88,163 $ - OGB

2.4.3 Leitrim Sanitary Pump Station Expansion - 909072 10.00X11 2020 - 2024$ 299,084 $ - $ 299,084 0%$ - $ 299,084 $ - $ 299,084 $ - OGB 2.4.4 SUC Riverside South - 905423 10.00X12 2025 - 2029 $ 1,999,844 $ -$ 1,999,844 0% $ - $ 1,999,844 $ -$ 1,999,844 $ -OGB Subtotal South Urban Community $ 2,850,224 $ - $ 2,850,224 $ - $ 2,850,224 $ - $ 2,850,224 $ -

2.5 West Urban Community

2.5.1 Kanata Lakes North 10.00X13 2025 - 2029$ 6,696 $ - $ 6,696 0%$ - $ 6,696 $ - $ 6,696 $ - OGB 2.5.2 Jackson Trail Pumping Station and Sewer Oversizing - 905964 10.00X17 2020 - 2024 $ 26,784 $ -$ 26,784 0% $ - $ 26,784 $ -$ 26,784 $ -OGB Subtotal West Urban Community $ 33,480 $ - $ 33,480 $ - $ 33,480 $ - $ 33,480 $ -

2.6 Debt Payments 2.6.1 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Principal Payments - 903095 10.CWD3 2020 - 2031$ 10,848,000 $ - $ 10,848,000 0% $ - $ 10,848,000 $ - $ 10,848,000 $ - City-Wide

2.6.2 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Interest Payments 10.CWD4 2020 - 2031$ 27,158,000 $ - $ 27,158,000 0% $ - $ 27,158,000 $ - $ 27,158,000 $ - City-Wide Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Principal Payments - 904981 - 904297 - 904973 - 2.6.3 10.ASD1 2020 - 2031$ 5,135,000 $ - $ 5,135,000 0% $ - $ 5,135,000 $ - $ 5,135,000 $ - OGB 903345 - 904984 - 904985 - 904988 - 907107 - 905964 - 907807 - 907840 - 905991 2.6.4 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Interest Payments 10.ASD2 2020 - 2031$ 5,137,000 $ - $ 5,137,000 0% $ - $ 5,137,000 $ - $ 5,137,000 $ - OGB Summary of Issued DC Debt - Principal Payments - 903345 - 906965 - 904984 - 904985 - 2.6.5 10.ASD3 2020 - 2031$ 7,131,000 $ - $ 7,131,000 0% $ - $ 7,131,000 $ - $ 7,131,000 $ - OGB 904988 - 905423 - 907114 - 904987 - 904752 - 903346 2.6.6 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Interest Payments 10.ASD4 2020 - 2031 $ 10,765,000 $ -$ 10,765,000 0% $ - $ 10,765,000 $ -$ 10,765,000 $ -OGB

Subtotal Debt Payments $ 66,174,000 $ - $ 66,174,000 $ - $ 66,174,000 $ - $ 66,174,000 $ -

HEMSON 285 APPENDIX E.2 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM SANITARY SEWER

TOTAL SANITARY SEWER $ 1,054,609,811 $ - $ 1,054,609,811 $ 576,578,933 $ 478,030,878 $ - $ 360,115,228 $ 117,915,650

Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Reserve Fund Balance Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Reserve Adjs DC Rate Total Residential Non-Residential Residential Share of Eligible Costs 70% $49,316,169 $3,672,741 $45,643,428 City-wide $45,847,572 $35,732,428 $10,115,144 12-Year Population Growth 55,993 55,993 IGB $5,276,757 $3,672,741 $1,604,016 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $880.76 $815.16 OBG ($20,694,886) ($18,191,477) ($2,503,409) Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Rural $21,922 $0 $21,922 Residential Share of Eligible Costs 88% $88,081,243 ($18,191,477) $106,272,720 12-Year Population Growth 105,695 105,695 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $833.35 $1,005.47 Rural Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs 0% $0 $0 $0 12-Year Population Growth 19,496 19,496 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $0.00 $0.00 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $33,659,361 ($877,470) $34,536,831 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $4,829,709 ($125,906) $4,955,615 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 1,066,725 1,066,725 Charge per Square Metre $4.53 $4.65 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $28,829,652 ($751,564) $29,581,216 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,586,601 2,586,601 Charge per Square Metre $11.15 $11.44 *Residential and non-residential share of costs are based on forecast demand for each area City-wide Cost Allocations (Residential and Non-Residential) Residential Calculation Reserve Adjs DC Rate Residential Share of Eligible Costs 78% $147,347,336 $35,732,428 $111,614,908 12-Year Population Growth 172,620 172,620 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $853.59 $646.59 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 22% $41,711,120 $10,115,144 $31,595,975 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 3% $5,985,038 $1,451,400 $4,533,638 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 1,066,725 1,066,725 Charge per Square Metre $5.61 $4.25 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 19% $35,726,081 $8,663,744 $27,062,337 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,586,601 2,586,601 Charge per Square Metre $13.81 $10.46

TOTAL DC ELIGIBLE COSTS 2019-2031 AFTER ADJUSTMENT FOR AVAILABLE DC RESERVE FUNDS $ 329,663,863

HEMSON 286

Appendix E.3

Water

HEMSON 287

Appendix E.3

Water Technical Appendix

Capital infrastructure contained in the Water service category includes plant expansions and expansion and upgrades of linear Water infrastructure.

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Water services, the projects that will benefit development occurring over the mid- 2019 to mid-2031 development-related capital forecast. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast have been provided by City staff and are generally based on the capital projects identified in the City’s existing Infrastructure Master Plan and the 2014 DC Study and adjusted to account for recent expenditures and indexing.

Table 1 Forecast Wastewater Demand by Area

Table 2 2019-2031 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

A. Benefitting Area

The City’s Water development charges is calculated on both a City-wide and area-specific basis. The smaller benefitting areas are defined as: Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural area.

B. Historical Service Level Analysis

Water facilities included in the DC capital forecast are required to achieve health and safety standards as identified in relevant legislation including Provincial regulations, other relevant legislation as well as Ottawa Water and standards. As such, in accordance with section 4(3) of O.Reg. 82/98, the ten- year historical service level does not apply.

HEMSON 288

C. Forecast Water Demand by Area

Consistent with the approach included in the 2014 DC Study, the residential and non-residential allocations have been based on average flows required by these types of development (shown in Table 1).

Water supply and treatment facilities are based on the allocations (by servicing area) shown in Table 1. City-wide projects are based on the total average flow for residential and non-residential development. This results in an allocation of 78 per cent residential and 22 per cent non-residential.

D. Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development-related capital forecast that will benefit development occurring over the 2019 to 2031 period includes a variety of projects for the provision of Water services in the City and amounts to a total gross cost of $216.36 million, as shown in Table 2.

E. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Water Services. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The replacement and benefit to existing shares have been examined on a project-by-project basis and the nature of each project determined the rationale for the reductions. The identified benefit to exiting shares includes costs that meet the needs of existing development, including past development. Decisions were based on a variety of factors including the population and employment growth over the ten-year base, rehabilitation costs and input from City staff.

New projects are deemed to be entirely growth-related and no replacement shares have been deducted from the net cost. For projects that were identified in the 2014 DC Study, the prior benefit to existing shares have largely been maintained.

HEMSON 289

In total, $55.16 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share over the planning period.

3. Legislated ten per cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5 (5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required.

4. Prior DC Funding / Available DC Reserve Funds

Prior DC funding relates to portions of projects which have had DCs collected and applied against a portion of the DC eligible project costs. These amounts are removed from the capital forecast and not brought forward into the development charge calculation. Table 2 provides details on the available DC reserve fund balance by benefitting area.

In total, the $3.63 million identified in the City-wide Water reserve fund has been reduced from the total City-wide DC eligible capital costs.

The City’s DC reserve funds for Inside the Greenbelt ($16.5 million), Outside the Greenbelt ($10.71 million) and Rural ($70,500) are all in a negative position. As such, these costs have been included in the DC eligible costs as it relates to committed excess capacity that will benefit growth over the identified planning period.

5. Post-2031 Benefit

Approximately $65.94 million in post-period DC shares has been identified and are reduced from the total DC eligible costs. These shares of projects will be considered for recovery as part of subsequent development charges studies.

6. 2019-2031 DC Eligible Development Related Costs

The total in-period DC eligible costs shown in Table 2 amounts to $95.27 million after adjustments for benefit to existing and post-period benefits. After deductions for available DC reserve fund balances the in-period DC eligible cost is increased to $104.06 million (shown in the DC cost allocation summary at the bottom of Table 2). The increase is the result of the negative DC reserve fund balances.

HEMSON 290

F. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

The discounted development-related costs have been allocated based on shares of forecast demand for each area over the 2019-2031 benefitting period.

These costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 2. The total costs shown below reflect the total costs brought forward to the DC calculation after adjusting for DC reserves.

HEMSON 291

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential Inside the Greenbelt 75% $4,577,769 Outside the Greenbelt 92% $78,226,361 Rural 0% $0 City-wide 78% $10,147,704 Subtotal Residential $92,951,835 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific Residual $1,182,186 City-wide 3% $412,185 Non-Residential – Non-Industrial Area-Specific Residual $7,056,743 City-wide 19% $2,460,429 Subtotal Non-Residential $11,111,544

Total $104,063,379

G. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the approach used in the City’s 2014 DC Background Study, the Water development charges are calculated using an average cost methodology.

The following table provides a summary of the calculated per capita and per square metre of industrial and non-industrial space City-wide.

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential Inside the Greenbelt $/capita $81.76 Outside the Greenbelt $/capita $740.11 Rural $/capita $0.00 City-wide $/capita $58.79 Total Residential $/capita $880.66 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific $/square metre $1.11 City-wide $/square metre $0.39 Total Indus. $/m2 $1.49 Non-Residential – Industrial Area-Specific $/square metre $2.73 City-wide $/square metre $0.95 Total Non- Indus. $/m2 $3.68

HEMSON 292 APPENDIX E.3 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA WATER DEMAND BY AREA

Residential no Outdoor Water Demand (OWD) Res Growth in Non-Res Water Residential - Mld ICI Mld Total - Mld Res Growth Component Demand Growth of Growth 2019 2031 2019 2031 2019 2031 Mld Mld Mld %

Inside the Greenbelt 115.0 126.8 67.4 72.5 182.4 199.4 17.0 11.8 5.2 69.60% Outside the Greenbelt 63.5 76.6 9.4 11.3 73.0 87.9 14.9 13.1 1.9 87.40% West Urban Community 22.6 27.8 5.1 5.6 27.7 33.4 5.7 5.2 0.5 91.23% South Urban Community 20.3 24.7 2.0 2.7 22.3 27.5 5.1 4.4 0.7 86.51% East Urban Community 20.7 24.0 2.3 3.0 23.0 27.0 4.1 3.4 0.7 83.13% Total 178.6 203.4 76.8 83.8 255.3 287.3 31.9 24.9 7.0 77.94% Pressure Zone E1 19.1 22.6 10.5 11.6 29.7 34.2 4.5 3.5 1.0 76.98% Pressure Zone 2C 30.6 33.8 30.4 32.0 61.0 65.7 4.7 3.1 1.6 66.63% leitrim with Russell 4.6 5.7 0.5 0.6 5.1 6.3 1.2 1.1 0.1 88.70% manotick 1.0 1.5 0.1 0.2 1.2 1.8 0.6 0.5 0.1 86.38% Montreal Rd 2.9 5.2 0.8 1.0 3.7 6.2 2.5 2.3 0.2 91.33%

Residential includes Outdoor Water Demand (OWD) no No Revenue Water (NRW) Res Growth in Non-Res Component Water Residential - Mld ICI Mld Total - Mld Demand Res Growth Growth of Growth 2019 2031 2019 2031 2019 2031 Mld Mld Mld %

Inside the Greenbelt 198.2 214.8 67.4 72.5 265.5 287.3 21.8 16.6 5.2 76.34% Outside the Greenbelt 147.7 180.9 9.4 11.3 157.2 192.2 35.0 33.2 1.9 94.63% West Urban Community 56.0 69.0 5.1 5.6 61.1 74.6 13.5 13.0 0.5 96.27% South Urban Community 46.5 58.3 2.0 2.7 48.5 61.1 12.6 11.9 0.7 94.47% East Urban Community 45.2 53.6 2.3 3.0 47.5 56.5 9.0 8.3 0.7 92.39% Total 345.9 395.7 76.8 83.8 422.7 479.5 56.8 49.8 7.0 87.61% Pressure Zone E1 36.4 41.3 10.5 11.6 46.9 52.9 5.9 4.9 1.0 82.49% Pressure Zone 2C 57.9 62.7 30.4 32.0 88.3 94.7 6.4 4.9 1.6 75.62% leitrim with Russell 14.6 17.5 0.5 0.6 15.2 18.1 3.0 2.8 0.1 95.43% manotick 3.0 4.5 0.1 0.2 3.2 4.7 1.6 1.5 0.1 94.81% Montreal Rd 3.9 6.3 0.8 1.0 4.7 7.3 2.6 2.4 0.1 94.48% HEMSON 293 APPENDIX E.3 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM WATER

Gross Grants/ NetIneligible Costs Total DC Eligible Costs Project Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Number Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Costs Growth 2031 2031

3.0 WATER

3.1 Expansion and Upgrade Projects 3.1.1 WPP Development Plan Winter Capacity Expansion (Lemieux) - 907008 11.0244 2020 - 2024$ 55,910,806 $ - $ 55,910,806 25%$ 14,164,070.87 $ 41,746,735 $ - $ 4,639,735 $ 37,107,000 City-wide 3.1.2 WPP Development Plan Winter Capacity Expansion (Britannia) 11.1344 2025 - 2031$ 48,322,114 $ - $ 48,322,114 35%$ 16,693,093.87 $ 31,629,020 $ - $ 9,979,020 $ 21,650,000 City-wide 3.1.3 Britannia WPP Discharge Valving Upgrade 11.0024 2020 - 2020$ 557,992 $ - $ 557,992 49% $ 274,203.42 $ 283,789 $ - $ 96,893 $ 186,896 City-wide 3.1.4 Kanata West Feedermain (FEA) - 904916 - 908749 11.0094 2020 - 2024$ 6,692,557 $ - $ 6,692,557 10% $ 669,256 $ 6,023,301 $ - $ 5,420,971 $ 602,330 OGB 3.1.5 Strandherd Drive Watermain - 900632 11.1944 2020 - 2024$ 235,473 $ - $ 235,473 10% $ 23,547 $ 211,925 $ - $ 190,733 $ 21,193 OGB 3.1.6 Greenbank Road Watermain - 907467 11.0194 2020 - 2024$ 2,850,224 $ - $ 2,850,224 10% $ 285,022.35 $ 2,565,201 $ - $ 2,308,681 $ 256,520 OGB 3.1.7 Orleans Watermain East Link 11.2344 2024 - 2024$ 10,537,122 $ - $ 10,537,122 83%$ 8,742,690.08 $ 1,794,432 $ - $ 1,614,989 $ 179,443 OGB

3.1.8 March Road Pipe Upgrade (Zone 2W West Feedermain) 11.0494 2025 - 2029$ 2,455,165 $ - $ 2,455,165 10% $ 245,517 $ 2,209,649 $ - $ 1,988,684 $ 220,965 OGB 3.1.9 Limebank Road Feedermain - 904918 11.0894 2020 - 2024$ 5,720,535 $ - $ 5,720,535 10% $ 572,053.48 $ 5,148,481 $ - $ 4,633,633 $ 514,848 OGB 3.1.10 Ottawa South Pump Station Expansion - 902206 11.2744 2020 - 2024$ 669,590 $ - $ 669,590 49% $ 328,099.34 $ 341,491 $ - $ 307,342 $ 34,149 OGB 3.1.11 New Brittany Drive Pump Station 11.3444 2020 - 2024$ 3,794,346 $ - $ 3,794,346 58%$ 2,200,720.75 $ 1,593,625 $ - $ 1,434,263 $ 159,363 IGB 3.1.12 Glen Cairn Pump Station Upgrade 11.1694 2025 - 2029$ 3,459,551 $ - $ 3,459,551 10% $ 345,955.09 $ 3,113,596 $ - $ 2,802,236 $ 311,360 OGB 3.1.13 Ottawa South Reservoir Expansion 11.1894 2020 - 2024$ 14,842,589 $ - $ 14,842,589 10% $ 1,484,259 $ 13,358,330 $ - $ 12,022,497 $ 1,335,833 OGB 3.1.14 Glen Cairn Reservoir Expansion 11.1994 2020 - 2024$ 14,619,392 $ - $ 14,619,392 10%$ 1,461,939.24 $ 13,157,453 $ - $ 11,841,708 $ 1,315,745 OGB 3.1.15 Hurdman Bridge Pump Station Zone 2C Upgrade - 907455 11.2494 2020 - 2024$ 3,682,748 $ - $ 3,682,748 50%$ 1,841,373.85 $ 1,841,374 $ - $ 1,657,236 $ 184,137 IGB 3.1.16 New Riverside South Elevated Tank - 907101 11.2594 2020 - 2024$ 14,492,170 $ - $ 14,492,170 10% $ 1,449,217 $ 13,042,953 $ - $ 11,738,658 $ 1,304,295 OGB 3.1.17 Off-site Reliability Links O/S - 907862 - 909071 11.1244 2020 - 2031$ 2,244,244 $ - $ 2,244,244 10% $ 224,424.41 $ 2,019,820 $ - $ 1,817,838 $ 201,982 OGB 3.1.18 Kanata West Transmission Mains O/S - 908257 11.2944 2020 - 2024$ 237,705 $ - $ 237,705 10% $ 23,770.46 $ 213,934 $ - $ 192,541 $ 21,393 OGB 3.1.19 North Island Link (Manotick) ¹ - 907456 11.00040 2020 - 2024$ 3,647,036 $ - $ 3,647,036 10% $ 364,703.62 $ 3,282,333 $ - $ 2,954,099 $ 328,233 OGB 3.1.20 Mer Bleue Watermain-Brian Coburn South of Renaud Road 11.00X4 2020 - 2024$ 1,960,784 $ - $ 1,960,784 10% $ 196,078.42 $ 1,764,706 $ - $ 1,764,706 $ - OGB 3.1.21 Palladium to Hazeldean Watermain 11.00Y4 2020 - 2024$ 1,627,105 $ -$ 1,627,105 63%$ 1,025,076.08 $ 602,029 $ -$ 602,029 $ -OGB

Subtotal Expansion and Upgrade Projects $ 198,559,248 $ - $ 198,559,248 $ 52,615,071 $ 145,944,178 $ - $ 80,008,492 $ 65,935,686

HEMSON 294 APPENDIX E.3 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM WATER

Gross Grants/ NetIneligible Costs Total DC Eligible Costs Project Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Number Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Costs Growth 2031 2031

3.2 Studies 3.2.1 Infrastructure Master Planning (Water) - 907482 21.03440 2020 - 2031$ 2,373,698 $ - $ 2,373,698 89%$ 2,122,086.27 $ 251,612 $ - $ 251,612 $ - City-wide 3.2.2 Water & Wastewater EA Studies - 907863 21.05440 2020 - 2031$ 2,104,746 $ -$ 2,104,746 20% $ 420,949 $ 1,683,797 $ -$ 1,683,797 $ -City-wide

Subtotal Studies $ 4,478,444 $ - $ 4,478,444 $ 2,543,035 $ 1,935,409 $ - $ 1,935,409 $ -

3.3 Debt Payment 3.3.1 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Principal Payments 11.ASD1 2020 - 2031$ 2,282,000 $ - $ 2,282,000 0% $ - $ 2,282,000 $ - $ 2,282,000 $ - OGB 3.3.2 Summary of Authorized DC Debt - Interest Payments 11.ASD2 2020 - 2031$ 2,282,000 $ - $ 2,282,000 0% $ - $ 2,282,000 $ - $ 2,282,000 $ - OGB Summary of Issued DC Debt - Principal Payments - 903295 - 907455 - 901138 - 901139 - 3.3.3 11.ASD3 2020 - 2031$ 567,000 $ - $ 567,000 0% $ - $ 567,000 $ - $ 567,000 $ - IGB 901141 - 904975 - 904980 - 905429 - 904973 3.3.4 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Interest Payments 11.ASD4 2020 - 2031$ 808,000 $ - $ 808,000 0% $ - $ 808,000 $ - $ 808,000 $ - IGB Summary of Issued DC Debt - Principal Payments - 903295 - 907455 - 901138 - 901139 - 3.3.5 11.ASD3 2020 - 2031$ 4,462,000 $ - $ 4,462,000 0% $ - $ 4,462,000 $ - $ 4,462,000 $ - OGB 901141 - 904975 - 904980 - 905429 - 904973 3.3.6 Summary of Issued DC Debt - Interest Payments 11.ASD4 2020 - 2031$ 2,922,000 $ -$ 2,922,000 0%-$ $ 2,922,000 $ -$ 2,922,000 $ -OGB

Subtotal Debt Payment $ 13,323,000 $ - $ 13,323,000 $ - $ 13,323,000 $ - $ 13,323,000 $ -

HEMSON 295 APPENDIX E.3 TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM WATER

Gross Grants/ NetIneligible Costs Total DC Eligible Costs Project Project Description Timing Project Subsidies/Other Municipal BTE Share Replacement DC Eligible Prior 2019- Post Benefiting Area Number Cost Recoveries Cost ( % ) & BTE Shares Costs Growth 2031 2031

TOTAL WATER $ 216,360,693 $ - $ 216,360,693 $ 55,158,106 $ 161,202,587 $ - $ 95,266,901 $ 65,935,686

Residential Cost Allocation By Benefitting Area Reserve Fund Balance Inside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Reserve Adjs DC Rate Total Residential Non-Res. Residential Share of Eligible Costs* 75% $3,343,495 ($1,234,274) $4,577,769 City-wide $3,630,738 $2,829,704 $801,033 12-Year Population Growth 55,993 55,993 IGB ($1,648,839) ($1,234,274) ($414,565) Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $59.71 $81.76 OBG ($10,707,873) ($9,871,145) ($836,728) Outside the Greenbelt Residential Calculation Rural ($70,504) $0 ($70,504) Residential Share of Eligible Costs* 92% $68,355,216 ($9,871,145) $78,226,361 12-Year Population Growth 105,695 105,695 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $646.72 $740.11 Rural Residential Calculation Residential Share of Eligible Costs* 0% $0 $0 $0 12-Year Population Growth 19,496 19,496 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $0.00 $0.00 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $6,917,133 ($1,321,796) $8,238,929 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $992,524 ($189,662) $1,182,186 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 1,066,725 1,066,725 Charge per Square Metre $0.93 $1.11 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs $5,924,609 ($1,132,135) $7,056,743 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,586,601 2,586,601 Charge per Square Metre $2.29 $2.73 *Residential share of costs are based on forecast demand for each area City-wide Cost Allocations Residential Calculation Reserve Adjs DC Rate Residential Share of Eligible Costs 78% $12,977,409 $2,829,704 $10,147,704 12-Year Population Growth 172,620 172,620 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $75.18 $58.79 Non-Residential Calculation Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 22% $3,673,648 $801,033 $2,872,615 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 3% $527,124 $114,939 $412,185 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 1,066,725 1,066,725 Charge per Square Metre $0.49 $0.39 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 19% $3,146,524 $686,095 $2,460,429 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,586,601 2,586,601 Charge per Square Metre $1.22 $0.95

TOTAL DC ELIGIBLE COSTS 2019-2031 AFTER ADJUSTMENT FOR AVAILABLE DC RESERVE FUNDS $ 104,063,379

HEMSON 296

Appendix E.4 Stormwater Drainage

HEMSON 297

Appendix E.4

Stormwater Drainage Technical Appendix

Capital infrastructure contained in the Stormwater Drainage service category includes plant expansions and expansion and upgrades of linear Stormwater Drainage infrastructure.

This appendix provides a brief outline of historical service levels for Stormwater Drainage services, the projects that will benefit development occurring over the mid-2019 to mid-2031 development-related capital forecast. The cost, quantum and timing of the projects identified in the forecast have been provided by City staff and are generally based on the capital projects identified in the City’s existing Infrastructure Master Plan and the 2014 DC Study and adjusted to account for recent expenditures and indexing. The analysis is set-out in the following table.

Table 1: 2019-2031 Development-Related Capital Forecast and Calculation of the Discounted Growth-Related Net Capital Costs

A. Benefitting Area

The Stormwater Drainage infrastructure identified in the 2019 City-wide DC Study is intended to be provide a City-wide benefit and is therefore recovered on that basis. Infrastructure that benefits site-specific stormwater management is discussed in the 2019 SWM ASDC Background Study.

B. Historical Service Level Analysis

Stormwater Drainage facilities included in the DC capital forecast are required to achieve health and safety standards as identified in relevant legislation including Provincial and Conservation Authority regulations, the Planning Act, the Ontario Water Resources Act and the Municipal Act. As such, in accordance with section 4(3) of O.Reg. 82/98, the ten-year historical service level does not apply.

HEMSON 298

C. Development-Related Capital Forecast

The development-related capital forecast that will benefit development occurring over the 2019 to 2031 period includes a variety of projects for the provision of Stormwater Drainage services in the City and amounts to a total gross cost of $7.53 million, as shown in Table 1.

D. Calculation of Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

1. Grants, Subsidies and Other Recoveries

No grants, subsidies or other recoveries have been identified for Stormwater Drainage. Therefore, no deduction is made to the DC eligible costs.

2. Replacement and Benefit to Existing Shares

The replacement and benefit to existing shares have been examined on a project-by-project basis and the nature of each project determined the rationale for the reductions. The identified benefit to exiting shares includes costs that meet the needs of existing development, including past development. Decisions were based on a variety of factors including the population and employment growth over the ten-year base, rehabilitation costs and input from City staff.

In total, $4.95 million is identified as the replacement and benefit to existing share over the planning period.

3. Legislated ten per cent Reduction

As this service is identified in Section 5 (5) of the DCA, a ten per cent reduction to the net municipal costs is not required.

4. Prior DC Funding / Available DC Reserve Funds

Prior DC funding relates to portions of projects which have had DCs collected and applied against a portion of the DC eligible project costs. These amounts are removed from the capital forecast and not brought forward into the development charge calculation. Table 1 provides details on the available DC reserve fund balance by benefitting area.

HEMSON 299

The City’s Stormwater Drainage DC reserve fund is in a deficit position, as such, this cost has been included for recovery in the DC calculation.

5. Post-2031 Benefit

The DC eligible costs identified in the capital program are intended to benefit growth occurring over the 2019 to 2031 planning period. As such, no post- period benefit adjustments are made.

6. 2019-2031 DC Eligible Development Related Costs

The total in-period DC eligible costs shown in Table 1 amounts to $2.58 million after adjustments for benefit to existing and post-period benefits. After deductions for available DC reserve fund balances the in-period DC eligible cost is increased to $5.23 million (shown in the DC cost allocation summary at the bottom of Table 1). The increase is the result of the negative DC reserve fund balances.

E. Calculation of Residential and Non-Residential Discounted Development-Related Capital Costs

The discounted development-related costs have been allocated based on shares of City-wide population and employment growth over the 2019-2031 benefitting period.

The table below provides a summary of the DC eligible costs that are deemed to benefit development occurring City-wide. The costs allocations and DC rate calculations are presented in Table 1. The total costs shown below reflect the total costs brought forward to the DC calculation after adjusting for DC reserves.

Residential and Non-Residential Cost Allocations Benefitting Area % Allocation Total Cost ($) Residential City-wide 62% $3,233,509 Subtotal Residential $3,233,509 Non-Residential – Industrial City-wide 5% $286,934 Non-Residential – Non-Industrial City-wide 33% $1,712,778 Subtotal Non-Residential $1,999,712

Total $5,233,221

HEMSON 300

F. Development Charge Calculation

Consistent with the approach used in the City’s 2014 DC Background Study, the Stormwater Drainage development charge are calculated using an average cost methodology.

The following table provides a summary of the calculated per capita and per square metre of industrial and non-industrial space City-wide.

Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges Benefitting Area Measure Calculated DC Residential City-wide $/capita $17.83

Non-Residential – Industrial City-wide $/square metre $0.25

Non-Residential – Industrial City-wide $/square metre $0.64

HEMSON 301 APPENDIX E.4 TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM STORMWATER DRAINAGE

4.0 STORMWATER DRAINAGE

4.1 Buildings and Facilities 4.1.1 Stormwater Management Facilities - Environmental Compliance - 905757 3.0544 2020 - 2031$ 4,742,933 $ -$ 4,742,933 75% $ 3,557,199 $ 1,185,733 $ -$ 1,185,733 $ -City-wide

Subtotal Buildings and Facilities $ 4,742,933 $ - $ 4,742,933 $ 3,557,199 $ 1,185,733 $ - $ 1,185,733 $ -

4.2 Studies 4.2.1 Stormwater Infrastructure Master Planning Studies 21.0444 2020 - 2031$ 2,789,960 $ -$ 2,789,960 50% $ 1,394,980 $ 1,394,980 $ -$ 1,394,980 $ -City-wide

Subtotal Studies $ 2,789,960 $ - $ 2,789,960 $ 1,394,980 $ 1,394,980 $ - $ 1,394,980 $ -

TOTAL STORMWATER DRAINAGE $ 7,532,893 $ - $ 7,532,893 $ 4,952,180 $ 2,580,713 $ - $ 2,580,713 $ -

City-wide Cost Allocations Reserve Fund Balance Residential Calculation Reserve Adjs DC Rate Total Residential Non-Residential Residential Share of Eligible Costs 62% $1,594,574 ($1,638,934) $3,233,509 City-wide ($2,652,507) ($1,638,934) ($1,013,573) 12-Year Population Growth 181,332 181,332 IGB $0 $0 $0 Unadjusted Per Charge per Capita $8.79 $17.83 OBG $0 $0 $0 Non-Residential Calculation Rural $0 $0 $0 Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 38% $986,139 ($1,013,573) $1,999,712 Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 5% $141,499 ($145,435) $286,934 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 1,138,914 1,138,914 Charge per Square Metre $0.12 $0.25 Non-Industrial Non-Residential Share of Eligible Costs 33% $844,640 ($868,138) $1,712,778 10 Year Non-Residential Growth in GFA (m2) 2,664,948 2,664,948 Charge per Square Metre $0.32 $0.64

TOTAL DC ELIGIBLE COSTS 2019-2031 AFTER ADJUSTMENT FOR AVAILABLE DC RESERVE FUNDS $ 5,233,221

HEMSON 302

Appendix F

Reserve Fund Balances

HEMSON 303

Appendix F

Development Charges Reserve Fund Unallocated Balances

The DCA requires that a reserve fund be established for each service for which development charges are collected. Tables 1 through 3 present the uncommitted reserve fund balances that are available to help fund the growth- related net capital costs identified in the 2019 DC Study. The balances of the development charges reserve funds as of December 31, 2018 have been adjusted to account for current commitments to reserve fund projects. All of the available reserve fund balances are therefore accounted for in the study.

The DC reserves are shown by benefitting area – City-wide, Inside the Greenbelt, Outside the Greenbelt and Rural. The column entitled “DC Reserve Fund Balance” is the cumulative total of these individual reserves. The application of the available uncommitted balance in each of the reserve funds is discussed in the appendix section related to each service. The funds are assigned to projects in the initial years of the capital program for each service. This has the effect of reducing and deferring capital costs brought forward to the development charges calculation and the cash flow analysis.

HEMSON 304

APPENDIX F TABLE 1

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT CHARGE RESERVE FUNDS ENGINEERING SERVICES & TRANSIT (in $000) For the year ending of December 31, 2018

DC Reserve Fund Service City-wide Inside GB Outside GB Rural Balance ROADS & RELATED SERVICES $ 4,257,425 $ 39,349,381 $ (16,115,185) $ (19,151,891) $ 175,120 SANITARY SEWER $ 30,451,365 $ 45,847,572 $ 5,276,757 $ (20,694,886) $ 21,922 WATER $ (8,796,478) $ 3,630,738 $ (1,648,839) $ (10,707,873) $ (70,504) STORMWATER DRAINAGE $ (2,652,507) $ (2,652,507) $ - $ - $ - PUBLIC TRANSIT $ (9,832,833) $ (9,832,833) $ - $ - $ -

HEMSON 305

APPENDIX F TABLE 2

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT CHARGE RESERVE FUNDS GENERAL SERVICES (in $000) For the year ending of December 31, 2018

DC Reserve Fund Service City-wide Inside GB Outside GB Rural Balance PROTECTION (POLICE AND FIRE) $ 9,941,211 $ 11,148,922 $ - $ (1,617,810) $ 410,099 PARKS DEVELOPMENT $ 14,816,857 $ 76,707 $ 1,109,793 $ 11,104,611 $ 2,525,747 INDOOR RECREATION $ 66,461,369 $ 12,267,641 $ 1,142,897 $ 51,793,936 $ 1,256,896 LIBRARIES $ 16,545,694 $ 4,776,798 $ (1,597,575) $ 12,439,193 $ 927,279 PARAMEDIC SERVICE $ 2,129,737 $ 2,129,737 $ - $ - $ - AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM $ 2,528,461 $ 2,528,461 $ - $ - $ - CORPORATE STUDIES $ 3,029,879 $ 1,164,970 $ - $ 649,058 $ 1,215,851

HEMSON 306

APPENDIX F TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA DEVELOPMENT CHARGE RESERVE FUNDS SPECIAL AREA CHARGES (in $000) For the year ending of December 31, 2018

DC Reserve Fund Service City-wide Inside GB Outside GB Rural Balance PARKS DEVELOPMENT - MILLENNIUM $ (351,884) $ - $ - $ - $ - SANITARY SEWER - MANOTICK $ (12,312,902) $ - $ - $ - $ - SANITARY SEWER - RICHMOND $ (2,632,801) $ - $ - $ - $ - WATER - MANOTICK $ (828,570) $ - $ - $ - $ - ROADS AND RELATED (PROVENCE) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROADS AND RELATED (FLAG STATION RD) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

HEMSON 307

Appendix G

Public Transit Services Cost of Growth Analysis

HEMSON 308

Appendix G

Public Transit Services Cost of Growth Analysis

This appendix addresses the capital, operating and asset management plan DC Background Study requirements for Public Transit services.

A. Operating & Capital Cost Impacts and Asset Management Plan Legislative Requirements

Section 10 of the Development Charges Act identifies what must be included in a Development Charges Background Study, this appendix deals with two of those requirements for Public Transit services, namely:

Asset management plan

The requirement to include an Asset Management Plan (AMP) was part of the Development Charges Act amendments that came into effect on January 1, 2016. A key function of the Asset Management Plan is to demonstrate that all assets proposed to be funded under the development charges by-law are financially sustainable over their full life-cycle.

In addition to the requirements set out in section 10 of the Development Charges Act, the regulations to the Act, Ontario Regulation 82/98, identifies additional direction on the contents of the asset management strategy for Public Transit services, to be addressed in a Development Charges Background Study. However, it is noted that the Regulations are silent with respect to the AMP requirements for the DC Background Study for transportation services, or any other services.

HEMSON 309

B. Relevant Analysis and City Documents

The City of Ottawa undertakes extensive evaluations of the fiscal impacts of capital works; these analyses include an examination of the full range of costs – initial capital, operating and the long-term repair, maintenance and replacement of infrastructure. The following are key, and interrelated, documents central to the City’s fiscal evaluation:

The key objective of these studies is to ensure the City’s financial sustainability. In addition, the City’s annual budget process implements and manages the year-to-year expenditure needs and revenue requirements.

C. Public Transit Asset Management Plan Requirements

The following provides an overview of the relevant documents and analysis that fulfills the AMP and long-term capital and operating cost requirements of the legislation.

1. Long Range Financial Plan for Public Transit Services

At the February 24, 2017 meeting of the City of Ottawa Finance and Economic Development Committee meeting, two important staff reports regarding the City’s transit services were considered and approved:

1. Stage 2 Light Rail Transit Implementation – Project Definition and Procurement Plan, Report ACS2017-TSD-OTP-0001

2. Long Range Financial Plan Transit, Report ACS2017-CSD-FIN- 00021

For reference, report ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002 is attached to this appendix.

1 This report is also referenced in Section B of this appendix

HEMSON 310

The 2017 LRFP for transit specifically examines the long-term operating and capital costs associated with delivering transit services.2 As noted in the staff report, the LRFP – Public Transit is a financial model that “includes both operating and capital needs for the bus and light rail system over a 32-year time period to 2048, which covers the full contract period of the Confederation Line and Stage 2 of the Light Rail Transit (Stage 2 LRT).”

The City’s LRFP and the separate Public Transit LRFP (sources of funding are dedicated to transit and cannot be used to fund other services) are structured to examine affordability and fiscal sustainability of transit infrastructure.

The City defines affordability from the point of view of current and future taxpayers and transit users. The parameters to determine affordability include:

 Public Transit taxes and transit fares will increase at the same rate as transit operating costs.  Annual debt servicing will not exceed provincial and city limits.  Debt used to purchase an asset will be fully retired before the end of the asset’s useful life.  The city can operate, maintain in a good state of repair and expand the service to meet future needs.  The future transit expansion as defined in the 2013 Transportation Master Plan (TMP) will be completed to service growth needs.

The results of the Public Transit LRFP determined that delivering, operating and maintaining the transit system is financially sustainable. Affordability and sustainability is based on the following key elements:

 Public Transit taxes and transit fares will increase at the same rate as transit costs.  Contributions of two-thirds funding from other levels of government for LRT and BRT projects.  Interest rates remain below 6 per cent.

These reports, and associated analysis, illustrate that the City, and City Council, have fully evaluated and consider the full fiscal costs of undertaking the proposed transit capital program and determined that it is financial sustainable. The following sections provide an overview summary of the key components of the reports in the context of the DC Background Study.

2 The City has a transit Affordability Model which is used as a tool to inform the Transit LRFP.

HEMSON 311

Section F of this appendix references the requirements of the DCA and the Regulations and the various sections of this Background Study and source documents.

Since the release of the ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002 report, the City has completed an update to the Transit Affordability Model to reflect the increased scope of work and costs associated with the Stage 2 LRT infrastructure as announced in February 2019. On March 6, 2019 City Council received a report entitled LRFP Transit Update which provided an update to the 2017 analysis. However, as these costs are not included in the 2019 DC Background Study, the analysis contained in this appendix relies on the 2017 Public Transit LRFP as shown in the ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002 report. However, February 2019 update of the Transit Affordability Model reinforces that the City has financially planned for the transit infrastructure proposed to be DC funded under this study and the assets are financial sustainable.

2. Gross Capital Costs Have Been Used for the Purposes of the AMP Analysis

It is important to note that the Public Transit LRFP and related Affordability Model include the total cost of all transit infrastructure including development charge eligible and ineligible costs.

3. Public Transit Assets: Condition Ratings & Useful Lives

Section 8(3) of the Regulations deal with the types of assets used to deliver the transit services and the state of existing local infrastructure. This section of the Regulations also address the principles, policies and approaches used by the municipality in asset management planning.

The City’s Comprehensive Asset Management (CAM) address all of these issues fully. The CAM is an integrated business approach involving the different disciplines of planning, finance, engineering, maintenance and operations to effectively manage existing and new infrastructure. The objective of this integrated approach to infrastructure management are to maximize benefits, reduce risk and provide safe and reliable levels of service to community users in a socially, culturally, environmentally and economically conscious manner.

As noted on the City’s website, the CAM Program encompasses all aspects of the management of each asset through its lifecycle in that it:

 Integrates with the Corporate Planning Framework to complement the strategic objectives of the City, other key business systems, legislation, and regulations;

HEMSON 312

 Creates a framework that establishes the mechanism for a clear line of sight between our AMP program and corporate objectives and strategies; and

 Commits to providing approved levels of service for present and future customers and communities, in the most effective and efficient way, through the planning, design, construction, acquisition, operation and maintenance, renewal, and disposal of assets.

In 2012 the City completed its first comprehensive report on the state of the City’s physical assets, referred to as the 2012 State of Assets Report (SOAR). In 2017, the City completed an update to this document which is referenced in Section B of this report.

The 2017 SOAR (beginning on page 16) identified that the transit infrastructure has a replacement value of approximately $1.98 billion ($2017) with the majority of the assets rated as being in good or fair condition. Figure 1 shown below provides an excerpt from the 2017 SOAR which identifies the conditions of transit assets.

HEMSON 313

Figure 1: 2017 SOAR Condition of Transit Assets (pg. 17)

A summary of the future City-owned assets and estimated useful life assumptions considered under this Background Study is outlined in Table 1 for various types of transit assets. Although all capital assets considered in this Background Study have been identified, not all assets necessitate future replacement or ongoing maintenance activities. Some exceptions apply and the justification is as follows:

 Some projects do not relate to the emplacement of a tangible capital asset– some examples include the acquisition of land or the undertaking of development-related studies. These projects/costs do not necessarily require future replacement or ongoing maintenance. Such projects are identified as “not infrastructure” in the table.

HEMSON 314

It should be noted that the capital cost estimates prepared for each of the projects identified in this Background Study include grouped costs of various individual elements, which, as a stand-alone item, may have its own useful life (i.e. new buildings include: HVAC, structural elements, roof, etc.). Accordingly, the average useful life assumptions noted below are applicable to all project components.

Table 1 Summary of Conventional Assets Considered and Useful Life Assumptions Estimated Useful Life Type of Assets Not Infrastructure Land, Studies 15 years Vehicles, including buses but excluding LRT vehicles 20 years LRT Vehicles 30 years LRT rail and related infrastructure, Park and Ride facilities 50 years Transit way stations, maintenance facilities 75 years Overpasses, underpasses, bridges and other similar structures including Transitway infrastructure

4. Summary of Capital Program

Table 2 provides a summary of future the transit projects identified in the capital program. The capital costs and 2019-2029 development charge recoverable shares are based on the analysis included in Appendix B Table 2.

Table 2 Summary of Development-Related Capital Program 2019-2029 Development Capital Project Description Gross Cost Charge Recoverable Recovery of Negative DC Reserve $27.83 million $27.83 million Fund Balance

Transit Projects1 $2.86 billion $580.85 million

Recovery of Past Commitments $224,000 $134,000

Current Debt Payments – $265.71 million $133.26 million Principle and Interest

New Public Transit Projects $988.50 million $0.00 million

Total $4.14 billion $742.08 million

1) Capital costs do not include financing costs

HEMSON 315

5. Annual Provision

Table 3 provides a summary of the calculated annual reserve fund contributions based on the identified useful lives of the various assets and projects. As shown in the table below, the total DC recoverable 2030 contribution is $37.93 million. The year 2030 has been included to calculate the annual contribution for the 2019-2029 period as the expenditures in 2029 will not trigger asset management contributions until 2030.

Table 3 Summary of Calculated Full Life Cycle Annual Contributions ($Millions) at 2030 2019-2029 DC Gross Cost 2030 Capital Project Description Recoverable 2030 Contribution Contribution Recovery of Negative DC Reserve Fund Balance $0.00 $0.00 Transit Projects1 $147.90 $37.93 Recovery of Past Commitments $0.00 $4.02 Current Debt Payments – Principle and Interest $0.00 $0.00 New Public Transit Projects $0.00 $0.00 Total $147.90 $37.93

It should be noted that the City’s Transit Affordability Model is used as a tool to inform the Transit LRFP. The Affordability Model is a highly integrated fiscal impact model that incorporates the full range of operating, capital and lifecycle costs. The Affordability Model includes an analysis of a long-term planning horizon to from 2030 to 2048.

D. Transit Long-Term Capital and Operating Impacts

This section provides a brief examination of the long-term operating costs for the capital facilities and infrastructure to be included in the Development Charges By-law for Public Transit services. This examination is a requirement of the Development Charges Act, 1997. Similar to the AMP analysis, the operating cost impacts for transit infrastructure has been addressed through the outputs of the City’s Public Transit LRFP analysis and related Affordability Model and is discussed below.

1. Forecasted Revenue and Operating Costs

As stated in the Finance and Economic Development Committee Report ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002:

“Transit operations are primarily funded from two sources, fares and taxes. Additionally, some revenues are received from advertising and

HEMSON 316

provincial gas tax revenue is applied towards operations annually. It is assumed that transit fares and transit tax rates will increase in keeping with the assumed 2.5% increase in transit costs. The model reflects the recent Provincial announcement to double gas tax contributions from $35 million in 2017 to $70 million by 2021 and is held constant thereafter. In the model, $16 million of the annual provincial gas tax is applied to operating costs and the remainder is used as capital funding” (page 9)

Based on growth in assessment, ridership and inflationary increases to taxes and fares, the model also accounts for anticipated revenue. Table 4 below provides an excerpt of the forecast revenue and costs related to transit infrastructure over the 2011-2031 and 2032-2048 planning periods as identified in the staff report.

Table 4 Summary of Forecasted Revenue and Costs ($billions) Period 1 Period 2 Total (2011-2031) (2032-2048) Total Funds Available $10.4 $20.7 $31.1 Bus Costs $5.2 $9.7 $14.9 Rail Costs $2.1 $5.5 $7.6 All Other Costs $1.7 $2.9 $4.6 Total Operating Costs $9.0 $18.1 $27.1 Total Tax and Fare Revenue $1.4 $2.6 $4.0 Available for Capital Source: Report ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002 page 13

2. Capital Revenue Sources and Assumptions

Public Transit infrastructure in the City of Ottawa is funded from a number of different sources including property taxes, federal and provincial funding, federal and provincial gas tax and development charges. Details of the assumed capital revenue sources is provided in pages 13-15 of staff report ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002.

3. Use of Debt

The City’s 2017 Public Transit LRFP also includes debenture assumptions where the cost of capital investment exceeds the amount of funds available from other revenue sources. Criteria including the useful life of the asset and debt servicing limits are used in the determination of the amount and term of the debt. The City will continue to utilize long-term debt to finance transit capital needs when deemed efficient and within the financial policies of the City.

HEMSON 317

E. Summary

In summary, the analysis completed through the City’s Public Transit LRFP demonstrates that the City can afford to invest and operate transit infrastructure over the ten year and long-term planning period.

Through the Public Transit LRFP analysis, it was concluded that the transit system will continue to be affordable if the following assumptions are built into the model and maintained going forward:

 Public Transit taxes and transit fares will increase at the same rate as transit costs at 2.5 per cent (page 9 of Report ACS2017-CSD- FIN-0002).  Contributions of two-thirds funding from other levels of government for LRT and BRT projects.  Interest rates remain below 6 per cent.

F. AMP Checklist

The following checklist provides an overview of how the AMP analysis for Public Transit services, as required by the provisions of the Development Charges Act, has been addressed.

HEMSON 318

O.Reg. 82/98 Public Transit DC Requirements

Background Study

8.(2) Any background study by the municipality under section 10 of the Act that incorporates the cost of transit services shall set out the following:

O.Reg. 82/98 Section Comments and Relevant Sections of this DC Background Study 1. The calculations that were used to prepare the Appendix B provides details on this estimate for the planned level of service for the calculation. transit services, as mentioned in subsection 5.2 (3) of the Act. The City’s transit planned level of service is the provision of a higher order transit system (bus and light rail transit), integrated with the existing, which is to be expanded, as well as a bus transit system for the residents and businesses of the City of Ottawa. 2. An identification of the portion of the total Appendix A.1 provides details on the estimated capital cost relating to the transit anticipated development over the 10-year services that would benefit, planning period. i. the anticipated development over the 10-year period immediately following the preparation of the Appendix A.2 provides details as it relates to background study, or transit ridership over the ten year planning ii. the anticipated development after the 10-year period. period immediately following the preparation of the background study. 3. An identification of the anticipated excess Appendix A.2 provides details on the excess capacity that would exist at the end of the 10-year capacity calculation. period immediately following the preparation of the background study. The analysis arising from the ridership forecast is applied to the Public Transit 4. An assessment of ridership forecasts for all development charge calculations is contained modes of transit services proposed to be funded by in Appendix B. the development charge over the 10-year period immediately following the preparation of the background study, categorized by development types, and whether the forecasted ridership will be from existing or planned development. 5. An assessment of the ridership capacity for all Appendix A.2 provides details on the ridership modes of transit services proposed to be funded by capacity calculation. the development charge over the 10-year period immediately following the preparation of the background study. O. Reg. 428/15, s. 4.

HEMSON 319

Assessment Management Plan

8. (3) If a council of a municipality proposes to impose a development charge in respect of transit services, the asset management plan referred to in subsection 10 (2) (c.2) of the Act shall include the following in respect of those services:

1. A section that sets out the state of local infrastructure and that sets out,

O.Reg. 82/98 Section Comments and Relevant Sections of this Development Charges Background Study i. the types of assets and their Appendix G provides a discussion of the AMP requirements quantity or extent and how they are met.

ii. the financial accounting valuation Relevant City documents that also address these and replacement cost valuation for requirements include: all assets,  City of Ottawa Financial Reports and Statements iii. the asset age distribution and  City of Ottawa 2017 Long Range Financial Plan asset age as a proportion of (LRFP) V Transit expected useful life for all assets, Comprehensive Asset Management (CAM) Policy and   2017 State of Assets Report (SOAR) iv. the asset condition based on  2017 Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP) standard engineering practices for all assets

HEMSON 320

2. A section that sets out the proposed level of service and that,

O.Reg. 82/98 Section Comments and Relevant Sections of this Development Charges Background Study i. defines the proposed level of Appendix A.2 and Appendix B provide details on the service through timeframes and proposed level of service in the City of Ottawa and current performance measures, ridership performance relatives to targets.

ii. discusses any external trends or Relevant City documents that also address these issues that may affect the proposed requirements include: level of service or the municipality’s  City’s Public Transit Long Range Financial Plan ability to meet it, and

iii. shows current performance The City’s Affordability Model is used to analysis external relative to the targets set out. trends such as changes in the rate of development, transportation mode shares and fiscal/financing changes.

The transit system is part of the City’s overall transportation planning. The provision of the planned transit infrastructure and service is a critical component of achieving the City’s growth management targets. Investment in transit infrastructure, together with other strategies, is required to reduce private automobile usage, increase use of public transit, and encourage more active transportation options.

HEMSON 321

3. An asset management strategy that,

O.Reg. 82/98 Section Comments and Relevant Sections of this Development Charges Background Study i. sets out planned actions that will Appendix G provide details on the actions to implement a enable the assets to provide the sustainable transit system. proposed level of service in a sustainable way, while managing risk, Relevant City documents that also address these at the lowest life cycle cost, requirements include:  City’s Public Transit Long Range Financial Plan ii. is based on an assessment of potential options to achieve the proposed level of service, which assessment compares, A. life cycle costs, B. all other relevant direct and indirect costs and benefits, and C. the risks associated with the potential options, iii. contains a summary of, in relation to Appendix G provide details on the actions to implement a achieving the proposed level of service, sustainable transit system. A. non-infrastructure solutions B. maintenance activities, Relevant City documents that also address these C. renewal and rehabilitation requirements include: activities,  City’s Public Transit Long Range Financial Plan D. replacement activities, E. disposal activities, and In particular, disposal activities are addressed through F. expansion activities, vehicles replacement/management – no revenue is generated from vehicles that are disposed of.

Appendix B provides details on expansion plans. iv. discusses the procurement Appendix G (including report ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002) measures that are intended to achieve provides details on the procurement measures for Stage the proposed level of service 2 LRT infrastructure.

Relevant City documents that also address these requirements include:  City’s annual budget  RFP policies and practices v. includes an overview of the risks Appendix G provides details on the Public Transit Long associated with the strategy and any Range Financial Plan and Affordability Model analysis. actions that will be taken in response to those risks Ottawa uses an Affordability Model to guide capital program decision and to ensure that projects are financial sustainable. The model summarizes transit operating and capital needs over a long-range financial planning horizon, and assesses the affordability of the capital plan within forecast sources of revenue from fares, transit taxes, and other sources. These forecasts are based on a variety of factors including population, ridership and assessment growth projections. This allows the City to mitigate financial risks. The model is also updated regularly and allows for staff/Council to make informed capital program decisions.

HEMSON 322

4. A financial strategy that,

O.Reg. 82/98 Section Comments and Relevant Sections of this Development Charges Background Study i. shows the yearly expenditure forecasts that are Appendix G provide details on the relevant proposed to achieve the proposed level of service, expenditure forecasts, where applicable. categorized by, A. non-infrastructure solutions, Relevant City documents that also address B. maintenance activities, these requirements include: C. renewal and rehabilitation activities,  City’s Public Transit Long Range D. replacement activities, Financial Plan E. disposal activities, and  Corporate Asset Management Plan F. expansion activities, In particular, disposal activities are addressed through the Corporate Asset Management and are generally minimal. ii. provides actual expenditures in respect of the This information is not available and has not categories set out in sub-subparagraphs i A to F been provided. from the previous two years, if available, for comparison purposes, iii. gives a breakdown of yearly revenues by source Appendix G (table 4) provide details on the yearly revenues.

Relevant City documents that also address this requirement includes:  City’s Public Transit Long Range Financial Plan iv. discusses key assumptions and alternative Alternative scenarios have not been examined scenarios where appropriate, and and is therefore not applicable. v. identifies any funding shortfall relative to Appendix G provides details on funding financial requirements that cannot be eliminated by sources. revising service levels, asset management or financing strategies, and discusses the impact of The City’s Affordability Model is intended to the shortfall and how the impact will be managed. address revenue shortfalls. This analysis is then used to inform the findings of the City’s LRFP.

Relevant City documents that also address these requirements include:  City’s Public Transit Long Range Financial Plan

8 (4) For the purposes of subsection (3), the proposed level of service may relate to a time after the 10-year period immediately following the preparation of the background study. O. Reg. 428/15, s. 4.

HEMSON 323

Report to Rapport au:

Finance and Economic Development Committee Comité des finances et du développement économique 24 February 2017 / 24 février 2017

and Council et au Conseil 8 March 2017 / 8 mars 2017

Submitted on February 17, 2017 Soumis le 17 février 2017

Submitted by Soumis par: Marian Simulik, General Manager, Corporate Services and City Treasurer / Directrice générale et Trésorière municipal, Services généraux

Contact Person Personne ressource: Isabelle Jasmin, Deputy City Treasurer Corporate Finance / Trésorière municipale adjointe, Finances municipales 613-580-2424 ext./poste 21312, [email protected]

Ward: CITY WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA File Number: ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0002 VILLE SUBJECT: LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN TRANSIT

OBJET: PLAN FINANCIER À LONG TERME DU TRANSPORT EN COMMUN

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Finance and Economic Development Committee recommend Council receive this report for information.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité des finances et du développement économique recommande que le Conseil municipal prenne connaissance de ce rapport à titre d’information. 324 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Within each term of Council the Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) is updated to reflect the City’s long term operating and capital requirements, ensuring consistency with recommendations of the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and the City’s Fiscal Framework. A separate LRFP for Transit is developed, as Transit’s sources of funding are dedicated to that purpose and cannot be used to fund other services.

The City defines affordability from the point of view of current and future taxpayers and transit users. The parameters to determine affordability include:

• Transit taxes and transit fares will increase at the same rate as transit operating costs

• Annual debt servicing will not exceed provincial and city limits

• Debt used to purchase an asset will be fully retired before the end of the asset’s useful life

• The city can operate, maintain in a good state of repair and expand the service to meet future needs

• The future transit expansion as defined in the TMP will be completed to service growth needs.

In order to test these parameters a financial model was constructed that includes both operating and capital needs for the bus and light rail system over a 32 year time period to 2048, which covers the full contract period of the Confederation Line and Stage 2 of the Light Rail Transit (Stage 2 LRT). Assumptions built into the model are generally conservative, in that increases in revenue are constrained while increases in cost are not. The model assumes that any transit taxes raised that are not required for operating and maintaining the system are available to fund capital works. In total $27.1 billion of operating costs are forecast over the 32 year timeframe with transit revenue of $15.6 billion available for capital.

In total $13.9 billion in capital investments is forecast to be required including the transit capital projects identified in the TMP. As the timing of the revenue inflows for capital does not match the spending required in the capital plan the City will need to issue $4.3 billion in debt to make up the difference. This debt is repaid from federal/provincial gas tax revenues, development charges and transit taxation. 325 3

The model shows that with the debt required to fund the transit capital plan, the debt servicing limits set by the Province and the City are respected. A sensitivity analysis was performed on the various assumptions to determine their impact on the affordability of the plan. The analysis showed that the plan is affordable only with the continued contributions from senior levels of government which in the model includes two-thirds funding of rapid transit projects, 100% funding of the Trim and Airport extensions, 50% Federal government funding for Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) transit projects and that transit taxes and fares need to increase at the same rate as transit operating costs, which is assumed at 2.5% in the model. The model also estimates a higher level of transit development charges consistent with the recent changes to Development Charge (DC) legislation which eliminated the 10% statutory reduction and the historical service level cap requirements. The recently announced increase to the Provincial gas tax, which will double their contribution by 2021, has also been included in the model.

Costs to pay for principal and interest on debt will increase during the TMP time frame to 2031 however, the City’s 7.5% debt policy limit that caps the amount of taxation revenues that can be used to service debt, will be adhered to. Given the transit component of the TMP to 2031 proposes a significant and advanced investment in new Light Rail and Bus Rapid Transit initiatives, the City’s post 2031 investment in transit growth projects is limited to $3.0 billion in order to retain debt at manageable levels. Debt servicing costs will remain well below the Provincial threshold of 25% of own source revenues throughout the period from 2017 to 2048.

RÉSUMÉ

Au cours de chaque mandat du Conseil, on met à jour le plan financier à long terme afin qu’il corresponde aux besoins de la Ville en matière d'exploitation et d'immobilisations, en veillant à ce qu’il soit conforme aux recommandations du Plan directeur des transports (PDT) et au cadre financier de la Ville. Un plan financier à long terme distinct a donc été élaboré pour le transport en commun, car les sources de financement du transport en commun sont affectées exclusivement au transport en commun et ne peuvent être utilisées pour financer d’autres services.

La Ville détermine la capacité financière du point de vue des contribuables actuels et futurs et des usagers du transport en commun. Les paramètres utilisés pour déterminer la capacité financière sont :

• Les taxes servant à financer le transport en commun et des tarifs est lier augmentent au même taux d’escalade que les couts d'exploitation du service de transport en commun; 326 4

• Le montant du service annuel de la dette ne doit pas excéder les limites fixées par la province et la Ville;

• Les emprunts contractés pour l’achat d’un bien sont entièrement remboursés avant la fin de la vie utile du bien;

• La Ville peut exploiter le service, le maintenir en bon état de fonctionnement et l’agrandir pour répondre aux besoins futurs;

• L’expansion future du transport en commun, définie dans le PDT, sera effectuée de manière à répondre à la croissance des besoins.

Afin de vérifier ces paramètres, on a construit un modèle financier incluant les besoins en matière d'exploitation et d'immobilisations pour le réseau d’autobus et de train léger sur 32 ans, ce qui couvre la période entière du contrat de la Ligne de la Confédération et de l’Étape 2 du système de train léger rapide (TLR) jusqu’en 2048. Les hypothèses émises dans le modèle sont généralement conservatrices et tiennent compte d’une croissance limitée des revenus, et d’une augmentation sans limites des coûts. Le modèle pose comme hypothèse que toutes les taxes imposées au titre du transport en commun qui ne sont pas nécessaires à l’exploitation et à l’entretien du réseau peuvent servir au financement de travaux d’immobilisations. Au total, on prévoit que les coûts d’exploitation s’élèveront à 27,1 milliards de dollars sur la période de 32 ans, et que la somme de 15,6 milliards de dollars en revenus perçus au titre du transport en commun sera disponible pour les immobilisations.

On prévoit que les dépenses en immobilisations s’élèveront à 13,9 milliards de dollars, cette somme comprend les projets d’immobilisations présentés dans le PDT. Puisqu’au moment d’engager les dépenses requises dans le plan d’immobilisations, les entrées de revenus affectés aux immobilisations ne seront pas suffisantes, la Ville devra émettre 4,3 milliards de dollars en titres de créances pour combler l’écart. La dette est remboursée grâce aux revenus générés par les taxes sur l’essence provinciale et fédérale, les redevances d’aménagement et l’imposition au titre du transport en commun.

Le modèle indique que, compte tenu des emprunts nécessaires pour financer le plan d’immobilisations du transport en commun, il n’y aura pas de problème à respecter les limites établies pour le service de la dette par le gouvernement provincial et l’administration municipale. Une analyse de sensibilité a été effectuée concernant les différentes hypothèses afin d’en déterminer l’incidence sur la capacité financière du plan. L’analyse indique que le plan est abordable seulement s’il y a un apport continu 327 5 des instances supérieures des administrations publiques, ce qui, dans le modèle, comprend les deux tiers du financement des projets transport en commun rapide, 100 pour cent du financement du prolongement du chemin Trim et de celui de l’aéroport, 50 pour cent du financement du gouvernement fédéral pour les projets de transport en commun au titre du fonds pour les infrastructures du transport en commun, et que les taxes perçues au titre du transport en commun et les tarifs doivent augmenter au même taux que les coûts d’exploitation, estimé à 2,5 %. Le modèle suppose aussi des redevances d’aménagement affectées au transport en commun plus élevées, conformes aux changements apportés récemment à la législation sur les redevances d’aménagement, qui permettent à la Ville d’exclure les projets de train léger de l’application du plafonnement fondé sur les niveaux historiques de service et des exigences de réduction de 10 % prévues par la loi. Les augmentations qui viennent d’être annoncées à la taxe provinciale sur l’essence doublant leur contribution d’ici à 2021, ont également été prises en compte dans le modèle.

Les coûts requis pour payer le capital et les intérêts sur la dette augmenteront pendant la période couverte par le PDT, jusqu’en 2031; cependant, la Ville respectera sa politique d’endettement de 7,5 %, qui limite le pourcentage des recettes fiscales qu’elle peut consacrer au service de la dette. Étant donné que le volet transport en commun du PDT jusqu’en 2031 propose un investissement important accéléré pour les nouvelles initiatives de train léger sur rail et de transport en commun rapide par autobus, la Ville devra limiter ses investissements à 3,0 milliards dans des projets de croissance du transport en commun après 2031, et ce, afin de maintenir un niveau d’endettement gérable. Les coûts du service de la dette resteront très inférieurs au seuil provincial de 25 % des recettes autonomes de la Ville pour toute la période allant de 2017 à 2048.

BACKGROUND

Within each term of Council the Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) is updated to reflect any changes to the City’s long term operating and capital requirements, ensuring consistency with recommendations of the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and the City’s Fiscal Framework. The LRFP is divided into three parts, reflecting the funding categories that exist within the City: Tax, Rate and Transit. Transit is an area-specific tax so the funds raised from that levy cannot be used for any purpose other than Transit. Similarly, the gas taxes and development charges used to fund transit capital projects are only available for transit purposes. For that reason a separate LRFP for transit is being presented. The previous Transit LRFP was submitted to Council in 2011 and was updated in 2013 to reflect the revised 2013 TMP. A summary of these previous transit affordability plans is as follows: 328 6

Long Range Financial Plan Transit (July 2011) (ACS2011-CMR-FIN-0039):

An affordability model for transit projects was prepared which looked at the cost of the transit capital plan for the next 38 years to ensure the resources are in place to not only construct but run the system envisioned in the 2008 TMP. The report concluded that the City could afford to invest and operate the transit system as detailed in the 2008 TMP, including the first increment of the Light Rail Transit system. The analysis showed that the plan was affordable with continued contributions from senior levels of government and with transit taxes and fares increasing at the rate of transit’s inflation.

Design, Build, Finance and Maintenance of Ottawa’s Light Rail Transit (OLRT) Project (December 2012) (ACS2012-ICS-RIO-0004) :

In preparation for the consideration of the award of the contract for the Confederation Line, the July 2011 Transit Affordability Model was updated in November 2012 to reflect the financial requirements associated with the award of the OLRT contract. All other assumptions regarding revenue sources and post OLRT capital project requirements remained constant. The update of the plan also looked at the total debt servicing requirements for the City.

Affordability of the Transportation Master Plan, Ottawa Pedestrian Plan and Ottawa Cycling Plan (October 2013) (ACS2013-CMR-FIN-0038):

This report discussed the affordability of the new TMP, Cycling Plan and Pedestrian plans, which cover the period 2014 to 2031. The report also looked at the future debt profile and capacity to fund transit projects in the period from 2031 to 2048 in order to assess the impact of the TMP recommendations on the future financial profile of the City. The recommended Transit network was determined to be affordable assuming continued two-thirds funding from senior levels of government and with transit taxes and fares increasing at the rate of transit’s cost increases. Costs to pay for principal and interest on debt would increase during the TMP time frame to 2031. However, the City would need to limit its post 2031 investment in transit growth projects in order to retain debt at manageable levels.

A comprehensive and sophisticated financial model was used to assess the affordability of the transit financial plan. The model has the capability to test multiple assumptions and conduct sensitivity scenarios. The 2011 model included an assessment of transit funding and costs for operations, maintenance and capital development, for transit from 329 7

2011 to 2048, including the Confederation Line. In 2013, the City updated the transit affordability model to reflect the transit component of the 2013 TMP, including incorporation of Stage 2 of the Ottawa Light Rail Transit project (Stage 2 LRT).

For this 2017 Transit LRFP report, the financial model was updated to reflect the most current financial and operational results, include the recent refinements to Stage 2 LRT functional design and construction timing described in the Report “Stage 2 Light Rail Transit Implementation – Project Definition and Procurement Plan”, and revise projections of the key drivers of transit operating costs and revenues, ridership, fleet plan, service levels and funding sources. Inputs to the model have been provided by Transit, O-Train Planning, O-Train Construction, Transportation Planning, Infrastructure Services and Finance.

The model covers a 32 year period which covers the full contract period of the Confederation Line and Stage 2 LRT to 2048 and includes the transit capital works identified in the 2013 TMP. By going out 32 years the impacts of these capital investments on operations can be modeled.

DISCUSSION

How does the City define Affordability?

In order to come to a conclusion as to whether the City can afford the capital plan identified in the TMP, including the Stage 2 LRT, the meaning of affordable had to be defined. As a public service, affordability has to be defined from the perspective of current and future taxpayers and transit riders. This section outlines all the parameters that need to be met in order to be considered affordable.

Transit taxes are area-specific and therefore cannot be used for any other purpose, they form part of the overall property tax bill, but must increase with transit operating costs, in order for the long term transit plan to be affordable. Consistent with the approach adopted by Council the affordability parameter with respect to taxation was defined as:

• Transit taxes will increase at the same rate as transit operating costs.

Similar to taxation there is a limit as to how much transit fares can increase before the service is considered unaffordable. To be consistent with taxation the affordability parameter with respect to transit fares was defined as:

• Transit fares will increase at the same rate as transit operating costs. 330 8

Net cash flow remains positive when transit taxes and fare revenue, plus all other sources of funding (government funding, gas tax, development charges and other revenue) are greater than the City’s transit costs (operating, capital expenditures and debt charges). Another criterion of affordability is:

• Net cash flow generated by the transit plan must be greater than or equal to zero.

Once cash flows fall below zero, the City must issue debt to pay for capital works. Another key affordability principle is that debt cannot be issued to pay for annual debt servicing. The debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), which is defined as the amount of annualized capital funding divided by the City’s annual debt charges, is measured to ensure that revenue is always sufficient to meet annual debt charges:

• The DSCR cannot drop below 1.0 in any given year.

Furthermore, the City has a provincially imposed limit on the total debt that can be issued and Council has set other limits on debt, these parameters also need to be respected. In addition, while debt is an appropriate financing tool to use for assets that benefit multiple generations, the use of debt needs to be controlled so that future generations are not paying for assets that are no longer in service. The parameters for affordability with respect to debt are therefore defined as:

• The total City cost of servicing debt will not exceed the annual Provincial Debt Servicing limit of 25% of own source revenues

• The amount of debt servicing funded from transit taxation will never exceed 7.5% of City own source revenues

• The debt issued for any capital work will be fully retired before the end of the asset’s expected service life.

The last affordability parameter deals with duration and capacity. Decisions on capital investments result in increased operating and maintenance costs which, if not accounted for, can affect the ability to expand services in the future. Affordability cannot be just one point in time as the City must be able to afford to operate the system, maintain the system assets at an appropriate level and expand the system over time to meet the needs of future residents. In the case of Transit, this is particularly important as this involves a network that must be coordinated to ensure it operates both effectively and efficiently across the network. The TMP identifies all of Council’s current 331 9 transit priorities so these projects must be included within the plan’s timeframe. The affordability parameter for duration and capacity is defined as:

• The future expansion of the transit system, as defined in the TMP, will be completed to service growth needs

• The City will be able to operate and maintain the transit system; and, expand the system to meet future needs.

The Financial Affordability Model

The model covers the full contract period of the Confederation Line, including Stage 2 of the LRT to 2048 and allows for all of the required transit capital works identified in the TMP to be included.

The costs of operating and maintaining the transit and light rail systems were also incorporated in the model so that the affordability of the entire system could be assessed. A number of assumptions were adjusted to reflect current operating forecasts, inflationary estimates and include the refinements provided by the recent Stage 2 preliminary engineering designs, construction, maintenance and lifecycle cost estimates. All of the assumptions were then tested for sensitivity to determine how much they could change before they negated one or more of the affordability parameters. The revenue and expenditure inputs and assumptions built into the model are described below.

Operating Revenues and Cost Assumptions

A key assumption in the model is that transit operations are funded first, and any funds not required are then used to fund capital. For this reason the model starts with the development of the operating costs and revenues.

Transit operations are primarily funded from two sources, fares and taxes. Additionally, some revenues are received from advertising and provincial gas tax revenue is applied towards operations annually. It is assumed that transit fares and transit tax rates will increase in keeping with the assumed 2.5% increase in transit costs. The model reflects the recent Provincial announcement to double gas tax contributions from $35 million in 2017 to $70 million by 2021 and is held constant thereafter. In the model, $16 million of the annual provincial gas tax is applied to operating costs and the remainder is used as capital funding. 332 10

Transit taxes will also increase by growth to the assessment base. The forecasted assessment growth in the model is conservatively estimated at 1.3% per year, reflecting recent trends and then levelling out to 1% post 2025.

Table 1 - Forecasted Assessment Growth

Period 2017 - 2025 2026 - 2048 Rate of Growth [1] 1.3% 1.0%

[1]Average increase per annum

Transit fare revenue also increases as ridership increases. The forecast number of riders is determined by looking at population growth projections, employment projections, and transit service offered. The ridership projections used in this model have been adjusted to reflect the most current estimates:

Figure 1 - Forecasted Ridership Growth

200,000,000

150,000,000

100,000,000

Rides per Annum per Rides 50,000,000

- 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 2042 2047 Ridership (2017 Estimate) Ridership (2014 Estimate)

Higher ridership increases are anticipated in the period 2019 to 2027 as the opening of light rail line will remove constraints on transit ridership that are currently being caused by the restricted capacity, extended travel times and unreliability of the bus service operating on downtown streets. It is estimated that system-wide transit ridership will grow by 2% in 2019 and 6% in 2024. These ridership assumptions were reviewed by ridership forecasting experts in order to confirm their validity.

Applying the growth in assessment, ridership and the inflationary increases to taxes and fares, the model shows operating revenue for transit purposes as follows. 333 11

Table 2 - Forecasted Revenue

Period 1 Period 2 Total (2017-2031) (2032-2048) $Billions $Billions $Billions Transit Fare Revenue 4.4 9.4 13.8

Other Operating Revenue 0.3 0.4 0.7

Transit Taxes 5.7 10.9 16.6

Total Funds 10.4 20.7 31.1

The LRFP includes the costs to operate the existing transit system and then reflects the changes in the cost structure as the City moves key segments from a bus system to a rail system. The first 3 years of the operating projections are based on the 2017 budget and Transit financial plans for the next two years. The operating cost estimates take into consideration all the proposed components of the Stage 2 refined design for East, West and South LRT, including Trim, Airport and Moodie extensions and Moodie MSF.

The cost of running the transit system is largely a function of the number of service hours required to accommodate ridership. Service hours are calculated based on the projected ridership, route length, and the size and speed of the bus or train, and the composition of the transit fleet placed in service (i.e. regular 40 foot bus, high capacity bus, O-Train, light rail train). Service hours included in the model are shown in the following figure with reductions in service hours when Stage 1 and Stage 2 LRT are operational. 334 12

Figure 2 - Bus Service Hours

2,700,000

2,500,000 2,300,000 2,100,000 1,900,000 1,700,000 Service Hours per Annum per Hours Service 1,500,000 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 2042 2047 Bus Service Hours

As can be seen in the figure the number of service hours increases as ridership increases. The number of service hours decrease as transitions are made to high- capacity light rail trains. Some changes in service hour projections are also based on the faster speed of light rail than buses through downtown, the slower speed of the overall bus system as the transitway is gradually converted to rail, and by the retirement of some high-capacity buses as rail takes over from buses on the main corridors and buses are increasingly used on feeder services. Some bus growth is included in the next few years to address capacity and reliability needs and for other service improvements.

The cost of a service hour is different between rail and bus type but includes: costs for operators, energy source (diesel fuel or electricity), and maintenance. Operators and maintenance hourly rates are expected to increase at an assumed 2.5% rate of inflation. Fuel costs, which have seen significant decreases in the last few years, are estimated to inflate at the same rate of 2.5%, whereas in the previous model fuel inflation was estimated at 4.7%.

Increases to all other transit costs such as overhead and administration have also been increased by the general rate of inflation assumed at 2.5%.

The result of this modeling shows the costs to run the transit system can be accommodated within inflationary increases to revenue while providing sufficient funding to contribute to the capital program. The analysis also shows that the amount 335 13 of taxes required to subsidize operating costs declines over time. This moves the Revenue/Cost ratio slightly above the City’s 55% target. This should be expected as the City grows, ridership rises and productivity increases with LRT.

Transit revenue, including the portion of Provincial gas taxes dedicated to operations, are first used to fund transit operations. Any revenue in excess of the operating costs form part of the capital formation envelope available to fund capital and debt servicing charges in a given year.

Table 3 - Summary of Forecasted Revenue and Costs

Period 1 Period 2 Total (2011-2031) (2032-2048) $ Billions $Billions $Billions Total Funds Available 10.4 20.7 31.1

Bus Costs 5.2 9.7 14.9

Rail Costs 2.1 5.5 7.6

All Other Costs 1.7 2.9 4.6

Total Operating Costs 9.0 18.1 27.1

Total Taxes and Fare 1.4 2.6 4.0 Revenue Available for Capital

There is a total projected capital spend of $13.9 billion from 2017 to 2048 and $4.0 billion available from transit operations, which means that the remaining $9.9 billion must be funded by other sources of capital revenue and with debt.

Capital Revenue Sources and Assumptions

Capital sources of revenue include gas tax from both levels of government. The federal gas tax is approximately $55 M per year and the provincial gas tax is $35M of which $16M is contributed towards operating costs. Federal gas taxes are assumed to inflate each year by an assumed Canadian Price Index (CPI) of 2 per cent. The provincial gas tax doubles by 2021 but then remains fixed over the life of the financial model as it is not currently indexed. This increase in provincial gas tax helps to supplement the net 336 14 capital funding available to reduce reliance on additional debt and provide a sustainable funding source for future transit capital works. As a result the future LRT projects in this update (post 2031) have increased to $3.0 billion from the $850 million projected in the previous Transit LRFP.

Assumed in the model is a combined two-thirds funding from the senior levels of government on all major new transit system infrastructure. This excludes the purchase of growth buses and other supporting infrastructure such as park and rides etc., but includes rail vehicle purchases related to openings of new rail segments. The first increment of LRT has a fixed Federal and Provincial subsidy of $1.2 billion, which represents 57% of the estimated cost of $2.1 billion. The Stage 2 LRT has a fixed Federal and Provincial subsidy $2.5 billion which includes two-thirds funding of eligible Stage 2 LRT costs and 100 per cent funding of the Airport and Trim extensions. The model also includes funding for the recently approved Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) projects.

The City collects development charges (DC) from new construction to pay for the capital investments required by the City to service new development. Transit is one of 15 services that are included in the overall DC. Separate charges are established for: inside the greenbelt, outside the greenbelt, rural, and non-residential. In each of these four DC areas, the size of the transit component varies. For “inside the greenbelt” the transit component of the charge is 25%, whereas for “outside the greenbelt” the transit component is 15% of the charge. Council has over the years repeatedly endorsed policy statements that growth is to pay for itself.

Due to the recent changes in DC regulation, the percentage of growth capital works that are to be funded by DC’s has been increased. This reflects the elimination of the statutory 10% reduction and service level cap. For major transit projects, 2/3 funding is provided from senior levels of government leaving the remaining municipal share at 1/3. Growth related capital requirements of $8.2 billion are projected over the 32 year planning timeframe. With corresponding senior government funding of $5.1 billion, this leaves $3.1 billion of transit growth projects to be funded from municipal sources. The model estimates a total of $2.4 billion in DC’s to pay for growth.

Using the assumptions for all of the various sources of capital revenue generates the following amounts within the model.

337 15

Table 4 - Forecasted Capital Funds

Period 1 Period 2 Total (2017-2031) (2032-2048) $ Billions $ Billions $ Billions City of Ottawa available for capital 1.4 2.6 4.0

Canadian and Provincial Governments 3.4 1.7 5.1

Federal and provincial gas tax 1.7 2.4 4.0

Development charges 1.0 1.4 2.4

Total 7.5 8.1 15.6

Capital Costs and Assumptions

The most recent TMP, issued in 2013, identified a variety of bus rapid transit (BRT), LRT and transit priority capital projects for the next 15 years or to 2031. All of these projects have been included in the model. In addition growth needs beyond this period to 2048 have also been considered to accommodate anticipated ridership numbers in light of extended population and employment projections to 2048.

The model includes the cashflow estimates for the remaining construction costs of the Stage 1 LRT to 2018 and recent refinements of the Stage 2 LRT functional design for Confederation Line and Trillium, including Aiport, Trim and Moodie extensions, Moodie MSF and transit-related bundled projects. Approximately $42 million for the costs of disruption during the construction period has also been identified and included in the model. These costs include the need for additional buses to maintain service levels while the transitway is closed.

The costs required to renew the system assets, both those that exist today or are planned for the future, were developed with the objective to maintain them in a good state of repair.

On average, capital project costs were inflated to year of spend estimates. Specific escalation factors were used in the estimates for Stage 2 LRT construction.

In summary, capital project investments required for Transit and included in the model are identified in the following table. 338 16

Table 5 - Forecast of Capital Investments

Period 1 Period 2 Total (2011 – 2031) (2032-2048) $ Billions $Billions $Billions Growth 5.2 3.0 8.2

Renewal 2.4 3.3 5.7

Total 7.6 6.3 13.9

Use of Debt

Debt is an appropriate financing tool for assets that benefit multiple generations, like LRT as it allows future generations to contribute towards the cost. Municipalities can only use debt for capital works. In the first 15 year period ending in 2031, the required capital investments, including the conversion to light rail, exceeds the amount of funds available from all sources to fund capital. Essentially, investment is required at the front end of the period to secure the shift from bus to train operations. This requires the use of debt to pay for any cash shortfall.

The amount of transit capital investment, capital funding, and corresponding amount of debt to be issued is detailed by period in the following table.

Table 6 - Comparison of Capital Funds vs Capital Investments

Period 1 Period 2 (2011 – 2031) (2032-2048) $ Billions $Billions Capital Funds 7.5 8.1

Capital Investments 7.6 6.3

Debt to be Issued 2.1 2.2

The debt servicing costs per funding source for each period is detailed in the following table. 339 17

Table 7 - Sources of Debt Servicing (Principal and Interest)

Period 1 Period 2 (2017 – 2031) (2032-2048) $ Billions $Billions Federal and Provincial Gas Taxes 0.8 1.6

Development Charges 0.5 0.9

Transit Taxes 0.8 1.5

Total Debt Servicing 2.1 4.0

Additional criteria are normally considered in establishing the amount and term of debt issued and these have been applied in the model. These include the useful life of the asset, and debt servicing limits established by the Province and by Council’s own policy.

(a) Useful life of asset – Council has established a policy regarding debt which states that the term of the debt should be less than the useful life of the asset which it is intended to finance. This ensures that the generations that benefit from the use of the asset share in paying for its cost. Also, since longer debt terms mean more interest is paid, any flexibility that exists to shorten the term of the debt is considered and made at the time of each debt issue. The City has debt terms that range from 10 to 40 years in keeping with varied useful lives of assets. Interest rates differ depending on the debt term. The rates have been assumed at 4.5% for a 10 year term, 4.75% for a 20 year term and 5% for a 30 year term. Lower interest rates were assumed over the first five years of the forecast period, to reflect recent debt issues that have ranged between 3.0 – 3.2 per cent in the last several years. As most of the assets for transit will last 30 years or more, the most common debt term used is 30 years.

(b) Debt servicing limits – Province - Long-term debt for a municipality is restricted by the Municipal Act. Long term debt can only be used to fund capital works, and the City is limited in how much debt servicing (repayment of principle and interest) it can enter into by the provincially established Annual Debt Servicing Limit. The annual debt servicing limit is 25% of own source revenues, which is defined as all revenues other than those provided by the senior levels of government or from the value of contributed assets. At the end of 2015 the City was at 7.5% of the 25% limit and could issue an additional $6.0 billion of debt for 30 years at 5% before the limit would be exceeded. 340 18

(c) Debt servicing limits – City Policy - Council has established a secondary set of criteria to ensure that debt is well managed in the City. Council’s concern is focused on the amount of debt that is serviced from taxes and fees it collects. Council has established a limit of 7.5 % of the amount raised from taxes and fees that can be used for debt servicing. The difference between the two limit values are that the City’s limit considers debt solely repaid from taxes and fees whereas the provincial limit also considers debt repaid by development charges and gas taxes.

In order to assess against the provincial limits the debt servicing requirements identified in the model has been added to an estimate of the total amount of City debt servicing required for all of the remaining City’s capital requirements that are known at this time. The estimate for other City debt servicing was developed by inflating the current amount of debt (excluding transit) by 2.0% every year and by the percentage increase in assessment. City own source revenues have also been calculated using the same escalation rate. The results in the figure below show that the debt issued for these transit projects and all other city programs reaches a maximum of 11.9% of own source revenues compared to the 25% provincial limit. The figure also shows that the debt servicing funded from taxation reaches a maximum of 6.1% compared to Council’s 7.5% limit.

Figure 3 - Debt Servicing Limits Analysis

341 19

Of particular importance is that the model results indicate that the amount of transit debt declines over the period analyzed, confirming that the City is more than capable of meeting its annual debt servicing requirements in each year through to 2048.

Figure 4 - Debt Continuity Schedule

Conclusion

The results of the modelling exercise show that the City can afford to invest and operate the transit system in keeping with the strategic directions established in the current TMP including Stage 2 of the Light Rail Transit system. The transit systems will continue to be affordable as long as the following assumptions built into the affordability model are maintained going forward:

• Transit taxes and transit fares will increase at the same rate as transit’s cost increase.

• Contributions of two-thirds funding from other levels of government for LRT and BRT projects.

• Interest rates remain below 6%

Any deviation from these assumptions will require a reassessment of the operating and capital cost plans going forward.

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

Not applicable. 342 20

CONSULTATION

Not applicable.

COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR(S)

Not applicable.

ADVISORY COMMITTEE(S) COMMENTS

Not applicable.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no legal impediments to receiving the information in this report.

RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

There are no risk impediments to implementing the recommendations in this report.

ASSET MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

The information documented in this report is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Asset Management (CAM) Program (City of Ottawa Comprehensive Asset Management Program) objectives. Undertaking long term financial analysis of operating and capital renewal asset requirements as outlined assists to fulfil the City’s obligation to deliver quality services to the community, in a way that balances service levels, risk, and affordability.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

As outlined in the report.

ACCESSIBILITY IMPACTS

There are no accessibility impact implications with this report.

TERM OF COUNCIL PRIORITIES

FS1 – Demonstrate sound financial management

FS2 – Align strategic priorities to Council’s financial targets

TM5 – Ensure reliable, safe, accessible and affordable transit services 343 21

DISPOSITION

Not applicable. 344

Appendix H

Cost of Growth Analysis – All Services Excluding Public Transit

HEMSON 345

Appendix H Cost of Growth Analysis – All Services Excluding Public Transit

This appendix satisfies the long-term capital and operating costs and asset management plan requirements as required by subsections 10(1)(c) and 10(3) of the DCA for all services excluding transit.

The DCA requires an examination of the long term capital and operating costs related to the capital infrastructure proposed to be funded from development charges. Furthermore, the DCA also requires that a DC Background Study include an asset management plan (AMP) for all assets proposed to be funded from development charges. The following appendix provides a discussion of the Cost of Growth (COG) Analysis addressing these DCA requirements and includes all eligible services with the exception of transit services. The AMP requirement for transit, as set out in the regulations to the DCA, are more extensive than for other services, and as such, the Public Transit COG analysis has been undertaken separately and is included in Appendix G.

Section A provides an overview of the City’s approach to long range financial planning and the comprehensive COG impact analysis undertaken. Section B addresses the AMP analysis, the results of which have been or will be incorporated into the City’s long range financial plan analysis and annual budgets.

A. Cost of Growth Analysis

Long-Term Capital and Operating Impacts

Since the regional amalgamation in 2002, the City has maintained a comprehensive long range financial plan (LRFP). The LRFP, developed in the context of Council’s strategic plans and sound financial planning practices, ensures utilization of the full range of funding strategies to operate city services, construct necessary municipal infrastructure and provide for the renewal and maintenance of the City’s existing asset base in a state of good repair. There are effectively three LRFPs; one for utility services (water, sewer and storm water), one for transit services and one for all other property tax supported services. Furthermore the three LRFPs are examined concurrently and cumulatively to ensure the overall fiscal sustainability of the City. The

HEMSON 346

LRFPs are updated with each new term of Council and are used to inform and guide the annual budget process.

The most recent update to the LRFPs was undertaken in 2017 and directly informed the 2018 Budgets. The capital projects included in 2019 DC Study are based on the City’s 2018 and 2019 approved capital budgets and are available on the City’s website. The budget documents are critical inputs to the DC Background Study and the Cost of Growth analysis.

1. City of Ottawa 2018 Budget 2. City of Ottawa 2019 Budget

The critical documents for the COG analysis discussed in this appendix are:

1. Long Range Financial Plan V- Tax Supported Capital 2. 2013 Transportation Master Plan 3. Long Range Financial Plan V - Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Supported Programs

The staff reports associated with LRFP V for tax and utility supported assets have been included herein. These reports clearly identify the fiscal impacts (operating, capital and state of good report) of funding and operating City facilities and infrastructure, including infrastructure proposed to funded, in whole or part, from development charges included in this DC Background Study.

Tax Supported Capital

The analysis contained within the Long Range Financial Plan V- Tax Supported Capital staff report includes an analysis of the ten-year property tax supported capital requirements for the delivery of City services.

A critical input to the 2019 DC Study is the 2013 Transportation Master Plan (TMP). The TMP has not been updated since the 2014 DC Study and continues to be the basis of the Roads Capital Program included in the 2019 DC Study. The 2013 TMP includes an analysis of the “2031 Affordability Road Network”, which is the basis of the DC Roads Program and the Property Tax Supported LRFP.

Utility Rate Supported Capital

Included herein are minutes from the City’s Environment and Climate Protection Committee meeting of September 27, 2017. This Committee meeting dealt with the LRFP V for Water, Wastewater and Stormwater and

HEMSON 347 included Motion No. 16/01 of the Committee, subsequently approved by Council. The minutes provide the 2018-2019 rate increases for water, wastewater, stormwater and property tax supported services and are shown in Table 10, 11 and 12 of the attached staff report.

The LRFP and the resulting forecast rates address the long-term capital and operating costs related to the capital infrastructure proposed to be funded from development charges under this Background Study.

B. Asset Management Plan

The DCA requires that municipalities complete an AMP before passing a development charges by-law. A key function of the AMP is to demonstrate that all assets proposed to be funded under the development charges by-law are financially sustainable over their full life cycle. The AMP requirements discussed in this study are aligned with the City’s ongoing policies and practices.

Relevant Analysis and City Documents

The City of Ottawa undertakes extensive evaluations of the fiscal impacts of capital works; these analyses include an examination of the full range of costs – initial capital, operating and the long-term repair, maintenance and replacement of infrastructure. The following are three key, and interrelated, documents central to the City’s AMP fiscal evaluation:

 Comprehensive Asset Management (CAM) Policy  2017 State of Assets Report (SOAR)  2017 Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP)

Useful Life Assumptions

A summary of future City-owned assets and estimated useful life assumptions for eligible DC services considered as part of this study are outlined in Table 1 and 2 below. Where possible, useful life assumptions align with the City’s AMP policies and practices.

HEMSON 348

Although all capital assets considered in the study have been identified, not all assets necessitate future replacement or ongoing maintenance activities. The exception and the justification is as follows:

 Some of the works identified may represent one-time expenditures and may be temporary in nature. Therefore, the assets would not be required to be replaced and no ongoing operation and maintenance costs exist. Such assets are identified as “not a long-term asset” in the table.

 For debenture payments where the assets have been constructed, is it assumed that the annual contribution associated with the ongoing repair and replacement of these assets is already included within the City’s existing asset management policies.

It should be noted that the capital cost estimates prepared for each of the projects identified in this section include grouped costs of various individual elements, which, as a stand-alone item, may have its own useful life (ex. New buildings include: HVAC, structural elements, roof, etc.). Accordingly, the average useful life assumptions noted below are applicable to all project components.

HEMSON 349

Table 1: Summary of Municipal Assets Considered City-wide General Services (Excluding Public Transit) Service and Amenities Estimated Useful Life Protection Services  Equipment and buildings 8-85 years Parks Development  Park amenities 20 years Indoor Recreation  Various indoor recreation facilities 40-85 years Libraries  Collection materials and buildings 7-85 years Paramedics  Equipment, vehicles and facilities 8-85 years Affordable Housing  Buildings 85 years Corporate Studies  Development-related studies 0 years

Table 2: Summary of Municipal Assets Considered Engineered Services Capital Project Description Estimated Useful Life Roads and Related  Traffic control and signalization, road 20-50 years infrastructure, rail grade separations, buildings and works yards Water  Mains, plant, pumping stations and trunk 50-85 years infrastructure Sanitary Sewer  Mains, plant, pumping stations and trunk 50-85 years infrastructure Stormwater Management  Management facilities 70 years

No annual provisions have been identified for Corporate Studies as the development-related studies are not infrastructure and therefore have no long-term financial requirements.

Calculated Annual Provision

When assets require rehabilitation or are due for replacement, the source of funds is limited to reserves or contributions from operating. Capital expenditures to carry out the rehabilitation and replacement of aging infrastructure are not growth-related and are therefore not eligible for funding through development charge revenues or other developer contributions.

Based on the information obtained from City staff regarding useful life assumptions and the capital cost of acquiring and/or emplacing each asset, a provision for infrastructure replacement has been calculated for both the

HEMSON 350 general and engineered services, excluding transit related infrastructure. Provisions for infrastructure replacement are initially calculated for each asset based on their useful life and the anticipated cost of replacement. The aggregate of all individual provisions form the required annual capital provision. In calculating the annual provisions, a number of assumptions are made to account for inflation (2.0 per cent) and interest (3.5 per cent).

Consistent with the requirements of the DCA, assets that are proposed to be funded under the development charges by-law have been included in the analysis. As a result, the total calculated annual provision for development charge related infrastructure has been netted down to consider the replacement of existing infrastructure or benefit-to-existing development. However, for reference, the annual replacement provisions associated with the non-development charge funded costs, including costs related to the ten per cent statutory discount, benefit-to-existing and post-period benefit have also been calculated.

Tables 3 to 6 provide the calculated annual asset management contribution for both the gross capital expenditures and the share related to the DC recoverable portion. The year 2030 and 2032 have been included to calculate the annual contribution for the 2019-2029 and 2019-2031 periods as the expenditures in 2029 and 2031 will not trigger asset management contributions until 2030 and 2032, respectively.

Table 3 identifies that the City will need to fund an additional $8.29 million per annum in order to properly fund the full life cycle costs of the new assets related to City-wide general services supported under the development charges by-law. As shown in Table 4, no contributions are identified for DC eligible costs related to the Millennium Park debenture payment, as Millennium Park is a special area development charge (discussed in Appendix D) and is shown separately for transparency.

Table 5 provides an analysis of the annual provisions required for the City- wide engineered services capital program to 2031. As shown in Table 5, the annual provision in 2032 amounts to $56.73 million. Table 6 provides the annual provision required for special area charges that have engineering infrastructure (e.g. Village of Manotick, Village of Richmond, Provence Avenue, Flag Station Road) that in 2031 would amount to $960,000.

HEMSON 351

Financial Sustainability of the Program

The calculated annual provisions identified in Tables 3 to 6 are already or will be fully integrated in the City’s Corporate Asset Management Planning and the LRFPs discussed above. The annual provisions are considered to be financially sustainable, as it is expected that the increased capital asset management requirements can be absorbed by the LRFP forecasted tax and user increases over the planning periods. Importantly, the City’s annual budget analysis will allow staff to continue to monitor and implement mitigating measures should the program become less sustainable.

HEMSON 352 APPENDIX H TABLE 3

CITY OF OTTAWA GENERAL SERVICES - CITY-WIDE CHARGES CALCULATED ANNUAL PROVISION BY 2029

2019 - 2029 Calculated AMP Annual Capital Program Provision by 2030 Service DC Recoverable Non-DC Funded DC Related Non-DC Related Protection (Police And Fire) $ 82,490,000 $ 73,220,000 $ 2,548,000 $ 4,631,000 Parks Development $ 86,355,000 $ 17,678,000 $ 718,000 $ 47,000 Recreation Facilities $ 170,433,000 $ 38,230,000 $ 2,519,000 $ 806,000 Libraries $ 43,892,000 $ 2,678,000 $ 1,409,000 $ 115,000 Paramedic Service $ 10,868,000 $ 1,642,000 $ 832,000 $ 99,000 Affordable Housing Program $ 11,624,000 $ 34,871,000 $ 261,000 $ 784,000 Corporate Studies $ 10,672,000 $ 3,320,000 $ - $ - Total $ 416,334,000 $ 171,639,000 $ 8,287,000 $ 6,482,000 *Transit analysis provided in a separate appendix

HEMSON 353 APPENDIX H TABLE 4

CITY OF OTTAWA GENERAL SERVICES - SPECIAL AREA CHARGES CALCULATED ANNUAL PROVISION BY 2029

2019 - 2029 Calculated AMP Annual Capital Program Provision by 2030 Service DC Recoverable Non-DC Funded DC Related Non-DC Related Millenium Park (Parks) $ 4,161,000 $ - $ - $ - Total $ 4,161,000 $ - $ - $ -

HEMSON 354 APPENDIX H TABLE 5

CITY OF OTTAWA ENGINEERED SERVICES - CITY-WIDE CHARGES CALCULATED ANNUAL PROVISION BY 2031

2019 - 2031 Calculated AMP Annual Capital Program Provision by 2032 Service DC Recoverable Non-DC Funded DC Related Non-DC Related Roads & Related Services $ 1,006,758,000 $ 577,428,000 $ 41,176,000 $ 3,200,000 Sanitary (Waste Water) $ 360,115,000 $ 694,495,000 $ 11,652,000 $ 6,752,000 Water $ 95,267,000 $ 121,094,000 $ 3,901,000 $ 4,469,000 Stormwater Drainage $ 2,581,000 $ 4,952,000 $ - $ - Total $ 1,464,721,000 $ 1,397,969,000 $ 56,729,000 $ 14,421,000

HEMSON 355 APPENDIX H TABLE 6

CITY OF OTTAWA ENGINEERED SERVICES - SPECIAL AREA CHARGES CALCULATED ANNUAL PROVISION BY 2031

2019 - 2031 Calculated AMP Annual Capital Program Provision by 2031 Service DC Recoverable Non-DC Funded DC Related Non-DC Related Manotick (Sanitary Sewer) $ 21,659,000 $ 7,837,000 $ 515,000 $ 432,000 Richmond (Sanitary Sewer) $ 19,896,000 $ 13,426,000 $ - $ - Manotick (Water) $ 7,604,000 $ 6,560,000 $ 445,000 $ 387,000 Provence Avenue (Roads and Related) $ 1,259,000 $ - $ - $ - Flag Station Rd (Roads and Related) $ 61,000 $ - $ - $ - Total $ 50,479,000 $ 27,823,000 $ 960,000 $ 819,000

HEMSON 356 1

Report to Rapport au:

Finance and Economic Development Committee Comité des finances et du développement économique 6 June 2017 / 6 juin 2017

and Council et au Conseil 14 June 2017 / 28 juin 2017

Submitted on May 29, 2017 Soumis le 29 mai 2017

Submitted by Soumis par: Marian Simulik, City Treasurer / Trésorière municipale

Contact Person Personne ressource: Isabelle Jasmin, Deputy City Treasurer / Trésorière adjointe municipale 613-580-2424 ext./poste 21312 [email protected]

Ward/Quartier : CITY WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE

File Number/No de dossier : ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0017

SUBJECT: LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN V – TAX SUPPORTED CAPITAL

OBJET: PLAN FINACIER À LONG TERME V – IMMOBILISATIONS FINANCÉES PAR LES TAXES

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Finance and Economic Development Committee recommend that Council approve that in order to address the funding target as recommended in the Comprehensive Asset Management Program report, the following funding strategies be approved for consideration as part of future budgets: 357 2

1. That the use of debt for tax supported capital works continue to correspond to the amount of debt retiring and funded from the City Wide property taxation; 2. That the contribution from taxation for the renewal of existing assets be increased by inflation (Construction Price Index) and an additional $10.5 million in the 2018 budget , as a priority within Council’s approved tax targets; 3. That the annual contribution from taxation for the renewal of existing assets be increased annually by inflation and an additional $7.8 million per year starting in the 2019 budget for 9 years as outlined in this report; 4. That staff continue to pursue permanent stable funding from the federal and provincial governments for the renewal of existing assets.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité des finances et du développement économique recommande au Conseil d’approuver pour permettre l’atteinte de l’objectif de financement recommandé dans le rapport sur le Programme de gestion intégrale des actifs, les stratégies suivantes soient prises en compte dans le cadre des prochains budgets.

1. Que les dettes découlant des travaux d’immobilisations financés par les taxes continuent de correspondre à celles qui seront acquittées et financées par la taxe foncière prélevée sur l’ensemble du territoire municipal; 2. Que la contribution des recettes fiscales au renouvellement des infrastructures soit augmentée en fonction de l’inflation (selon l’indice des prix de la construction) et d’un montant supplémentaire de 10,5 millions de dollars dans le budget de 2018, et que cette mesure soit jugée prioritaire parmi les objectifs en matière de taxation approuvés par le Conseil; 3. Que la contribution annuelle des recettes fiscales aux projets d’immobilisations soit augmentée en fonction de l’inflation et d’un montant supplémentaire de 7,8 millions de dollars par année, à compter du budget de 2019 et pour une durée de 9 ans comme le précise le présent rapport; 4. Que le personnel continue de solliciter auprès des gouvernements fédéral et provincial des fonds stables et permanents pour le renouvellement de ses infrastructures.

BACKGROUND

Long range financial plans (LRFP) are a hallmark of good financial planning. These plans are updated at regular intervals to reflect new information such as changed 358 3 priorities, adjusted pricing and any new legislated requirements. This is the fifth long range financial plan since amalgamation.

The last Long Range Financial Plan IV (2012) identified a need to increase the amount of tax supported funding for capital renewal projects. At the time, the increase (in 2012 dollars) was estimated to be $800 million over a ten year period. Strategies to address the funding gap included;

 maintain funding provided for in existing capital budget forecasts increased by inflation (Construction Price Index);  added funding of $4.5M annually to support capital asset renewal for existing assets from the City’s tax target. In addition $1.0 million on a yearly basis was added to account for growth in the asset base;  redirect $15M per year from strategic initiatives to the renewal program;  to seek $25 million in permanent annual funding senior governments, and in the absence of such new funding implementing an infrastructure levy at the rate of one quarter of one percent.

This is the second report in a series of long range financial plan reports prepared during this term of Council that taken together, are considered as the fifth long range financial plan (LRFP V). Council has considered the Transit Long Range Plan along with the Stage 2 Light Rail Implementation and will receive the Rate Long Range Plan update in September of this year. With these financial strategies, Ottawa will be able to maintain its critical transportation, community infrastructure, and water and wastewater infrastructure, while continuing to undertake a major change in how it delivers transit services through the light rail transit.

The funding strategies identified in this report are consistent with the principles regarding the use of debt adopted by Council in the 2007 Fiscal Framework. These principles are as follows:

 Council has established a limit of 7.5 % of the amount raised from taxes and fees that can be used for the repayment of principal and interest (debt servicing). This criteria applies to debt service costs funded from taxation, user fees and transit fares.  The term of the debt should match the useful life of the related asset. This ensures that the generations that benefit from the use of the asset share in paying for its cost. Also, since longer debt terms mean more interest is paid, any flexibility that exists to shorten the term of the debt is considered and made at the time of each 359 4

debt issue. The City has debt terms that range from 10 to 40 years in keeping with the various useful lives of assets.

The objective of this report is to present a ten year outlook of the property tax supported capital requirements for the delivery of City services. In particular, this report focuses on the funding strategies that are required to provide for the renewal and maintenance of the City’s existing asset base in a state of good repair, as discussed in the Comprehensive Asset Management Program report. The objective of the proposed asset management program and policy is to apply the right intervention, on the right asset, at the right time in a manner that considers affordability and risk.

The Police Services Board, Library Board and Housing Authority will prepare separate capital plans for the assets under their mandates. The renewal component of library facilities is funded from City Wide tax and is included with the CAM report.

DISCUSSION

The Comprehensive Asset Management Program report identified the challenge the City of Ottawa faces to bring its investment in tax supported capital assets to a good state of repair level. This is a challenge being faced by all other Canadian municipalities. The following examples identify the size of the challenge and strategies a few other cities are adopting.

 Mississauga: Identified a $275 million infrastructure gap based on replacement cost as a result of aging infrastructure. Council has approved a 2% infrastructure levy and a forecast showing a similar requirement for the next 10 years. The use of debt was also approved.  Winnipeg: The Financial Management Plan adopted by Council showed a $3.5 billion current infrastructure deficit forecast to grow to $7.4 billion over 10 years. The largest portion of deficit relates to existing and new unfunded road infrastructure. The report indicates that incremental debt issuance will likely be required to fund renewal but will be managed by setting targets for debt servicing and total debt issued.  Hamilton: The 2017 Capital Budget shows a current infrastructure gap is estimated at $195 million per year, Council endorsed a 0.95% Capital Levy. Other strategies include strategically allocating the balance of funding not used for rehabilitation of assets, including debt capacity, towards those growth projects which leverage assessment growth and other City-building qualities. 360 5

The City currently owns assets that cost $19.4 billion to build or purchase, with a depreciated value of $14.5 billion at the end of 2016. It is estimated that these assets have a replacement value close to $42 billion.

The capital works that are funded either in whole or in part by property taxation include the following:

 Renewal of transportation infrastructure, buildings and parks as detailed in the Comprehensive Asset Management Program report;  Renewal of other City assets such as equipment and technology infrastructure;  The City’s share of growth supported works funded from property tax that are included in the Development Charge Background study;  Strategic Initiative projects that implement the various City master plans or enhance services currently provided to residents, implement new legislative requirements, and respond to changes in demand for service.

The details of the growth related capital program are contained within the DC Background study and the category is not examined in significant detail in this report as the DC by-law is updated every five years and considers affordability in the Transportation Master Plan that precedes the DC study. The next DC by-law update is in 2019 and at that time any difference in the City funding required, from what is included in this report, will be identified and funding strategies presented.

Council has established its priorities for the funding of strategic initiatives for the period 2015 to 2018. Funding for Strategic Initiatives projects will be determined in the next Term of Council Priorities report.

Current capital budgets and forecasts show that the City will spend approximately $125 million per year on the renewal of the tax supported assets, an increase of $51 million since 2012 as detailed in the table 1 below:

Table 1 Increase to Annual Contribution from 2013 to 2017

Increase to Annual Contribution 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total ($Millions)

Annual increase within tax target 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 22.5

Growth in asset base 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 4.5

SI re-allocation - - 15.0 - - 15.0 361 6

Permanent funding from other levels of ------government

Total Increase net of inflation 5.4 5.4 20.4 5.4 5.4 42.0

Inflation 1.6 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.6 9.0

Total increase with inflation 7.0 7.4 22.4 7.2 7.0 51.0

The Comprehensive Asset Management Program (CAM) report identifies a need to increase the funding for renewal of tax supported assets to a level of $224 million per year in 2017. The $224 million includes $29 million of Rate funded spending on infrastructure in the Integrated Roads, Water & Sewer Program. This spending has been removed for the purposes of developing a Long Range Financial Plan for tax and will be presented with the Long Range Financial Plan for the Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs in September 2017. Table 2 below identifies the need by major asset category for tax supported assets:

Table 2 Major Asset Category for Tax Supported Assets

Renewal Requirement by Asset Category ($Millions) Need Current Funding

Transportation Infrastructure

Roads 91.7

Structures 32.0

Buildings 40.3

Parks 12.0

Sub Total 176.0 109.0

Other Assets

Other Facility/Park assets (field houses, salt domes, 3.7 parks, etc)

Emergency & Protective Services equipment (Fire, 5.3 Paramedic, Bylaw & Emergency Management) 362 7

Renewal Requirement by Asset Category ($Millions) Need Current Funding

Transportation equipment (street lighting, traffic 5.4 monitoring & controls)

Technology infrastructure 4.6

Sub Total 19.0 16.0

Total 195.0 125.0

There is an average annual funding gap of $70 million for the renewal of tax-supported capital based on the current need identified in the most recent CAM report. In developing strategies that would address this funding target the following principles were used:

 Maintain Council’s approved conservative debt strategy and enforce the limits on principal and interest expenses at 7.5% of annual revenues to keep debt within the actual borrowing capacity of the city;  The target annual funding level, from tax supported funding sources, required to maintain City assets in a good state of repair of $195 million should be achieved by the end of the 10 year planning period;  The City will continue to provide for inflation on capital contributions each year set at the rate of inflation in the infrastructure construction price index.  Tax funding for renewal at the “good state of repair” level should take priority over new or enhanced capital and operating budget requirements;  Senior Governments should provide for a permanent source of funding to assist municipalities with infrastructure renewal; and,  Other “non-financial” strategies should be explored to reduce the overall need for additional funding.

Senior Government Funding for Infrastructure

The federal and provincial governments have been making some exciting new investments in municipal infrastructure and services. In addition to the federal gas tax funds, both the federal and provincial governments have announced new one-time program funding for transit, for water and wastewater and for housing.

These funds enable the City to move forward on Council’s long-term plans and address some unforeseen, immediate needs. For example, Ottawa has received commitments 363 8 for $227.3 million in new or enhanced transit projects, $115.3 million in water and wastewater projects, and $35.4 million in affordable and social housing projects – all of which must be completed by the end of March 2018.

These new funding streams have been welcome, but it is important to note that the priorities for the funding reflect those of the government funder which is generally not for asset renewal and sometimes require staff to realign priorities to optimize funding for all of the City’s projects and priorities. In order to improve overall planning and make the largest impact municipalities continue to ask for permanent and predictable funding for renewal programs from the two senior levels of government.

Funding Strategies:

The funding strategy to achieve the $195 million (in 2017 dollars) targeted annual tax supported funding level for the renewal of existing tax supported assets in the Comprehensive Asset Management Program by the year 2027 requires the following:

 $125 million already provided for in existing capital budget forecasts be maintained;  $4.5 million on a yearly basis from within Council’s target tax continue to be added to support capital asset renewal for existing assets;  $5 million in 2018 from strategic initiates to be redirected to the renewal program;  $2.3 million per year added to the continuing $4.5 million increase from within Council’s tax target, beginning in 2019.

In order to help reduce the pressure of increased funding each year, other non-financial strategies should also be considered including but not limited to asset rationalization and renewal strategy effectiveness analysis. These non-financial strategies will be presented to Council next term, as recommended in the CAM report. The Long Range Financial Plan will be updated to reflect the financial impact of implementing any of the recommended non-financial strategies, after they are implemented.

As the amount identified in the Comprehensive Asset Management Program was only for the assets that the city owns at this time, an amount should also be added to the contribution to capital to reflect the growth in the asset base. An asset management approach directs more cost effective investments to assets that are in fair condition in order to extend the life of the assets before more costly interventions are required. Analysis of asset growth by year and asset class along with the timing of cost effective interventions would establish what an appropriate contribution should be. This report is recommending $1 million be maintained every year for growth in the asset base. When the next LRFP is presented there will be more information available to quantify the 364 9 appropriate level of contribution.

Increasing the contribution to capital within the tax targets Council by $4.5 million in 2018 and $6.8 million starting in 2019 combined with the redirection of $5 million from Council Priorities in 2018, will ensure that the targeted funding level of $195 million is reached by year 10 (2027), as shown in Figure 1:

Figure 1 Funding Strategy with Tax Target Allocations and the Council Approved Priority funding

Renewal Funding for Tax Supported Assets $000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Good State of Repair Funding Level Current Projected Funding Revised Funding Strategy

Future Debt

This report recommends that the funding of capital renewal works be made from increased contributions to capital from taxation and that the debt limits for tax supported capital works continue to be limited to the amount of debt retiring within the year. Council should reserve the use of incremental debt for what has been defined as legacy projects. Legacy projects are considered one of a kind and contribute towards the quality of life in the city over many generations, such as the New Central Library. This is consistent with Council’s approved debt principles.

Figure 2 shows the forecasted debt servicing costs against the limits imposed by the Province and by Council. Council has previously received a similar assessment of the debt profile against the Provincial debt servicing limits in the March 2017 Transit LRFP and since this Tax LRFP recommends limiting debt be limited to the amount of debt retiring within the year, the Tax LRFP does not add any additional debt pressure than what was report in March. The Transit LRFP provided an assessment of the impact of 365 10 the transit plan including Stage 2 Light Rail, on the total debt profile of the City and concluded that debt servicing was still within manageable levels. The results in the figure below show that the debt issued for all city programs reaches a maximum of 11.9% of own source revenues compared to the 25% provincial limit. The figure also shows that the debt servicing funded from taxation, including transit, reaches a maximum of 6.1% compared to Council’s 7.5% limit.

Figure 2 Debt Servicing Limits

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

This report applies to City-wide assets. Transportation infrastructure, buildings and parks are important assets serving the City’s rural area.

CONSULTATION

The public consultation process will be incorporated with the review process for annual budgets.

COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR(S)

This is a City-wide report.

ADVISORY COMMITTEE(S) COMMENTS

Not applicable 366 11

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no legal impediments to approving the recommendations in this report.

RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

There are no risk management implications.

ASSET MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

The recommendations documented in this report are based on the background and updated needs assessment documented in the Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update report tabled June 6, 2017. The requirements are consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Asset Management (CAM) Program (City of Ottawa Comprehensive Asset Management Program) objectives

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Financial implications are identified in the report.

ACCESSIBILITY IMPACTS

Maintaining assets in a good state of repair supports all accessibility objectives of the City.

TECHNOLOGY IMPLICATIONS

Funding requirements associated with technology are identified during the annual budget cycles.

TERM OF COUNCIL PRIORITIES

Recommendations in this report support priority FS2 to implement a strategy to address the asset renewal funding gap identified in the Long Range Financial Plan IV in order to maintain the City’s assets in a good state of repair.

DISPOSITION

Information contained in this report will be utilized during the annual budget setting process. 367

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 1 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

1. LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN V – WATER, WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER SUPPORTED PROGRAMS

PLAN FINANCIER À LONG TERME V – PROGRAMMES RELATIFS À L’EAU, AUX EAUX USÉES ET AUX EAUX PLUVIALES FINANCÉS PAR LES TARIFS

REFERRED TO COUNCIL:

That Council consider the following:

REPORT RECOMMENDATION:

That the Environment and Climate Protection Committee recommend Council receive and adopt the strategy described in this report, as amended.

RENVOYÉE AU CONSEIL :

Que le Conseil examine la question suivante :

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT :

Que le Comité de l’environnement et de la protection climatique recommande au Conseil d’accueillir et approuver la stragégie comme décrit dans le rapport, tel que modifié.

DIRECTION TO STAFF:

That staff make available the Motion or wording that was provided in reference to Committee discussions during its consideration of the Recommended Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Rate Structure (ECPC meeting of 18 October 2016, ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0008) that spoke to the need for public engagement with regard to any proposed increases in rates (please see extract of draft Minute).

368

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 2 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

INSTRUCTIONS AU PERSONNEL :

Que le personnel rende accessible la motion ou le libellé fourni en lien avec les discussions du Comité pendant son étude du barème de redevances recommandé pour l’eau, les eaux usées et les eaux pluviales (réunion du Comité de l’environnement et de la protection climatique du 18 octobre 2016, ACS2017- CSD-FIN-0008), qui soulignait la nécessité de consulter la population sur toute augmentation des redevances proposée (veuillez voir l’extrait de l’ébauche du procès-verbal).

DOCUMENTATION/DOCUMENTATION

1. Deputy City Treasurer’s Report, Corporate Finance Service, dated 12 September 2017 (ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0023)

Rapport de la Trésorière adjointe municipale, Direction Services financiers, daté le 12 septembre 2017 (ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0023)

2. Extract of draft Minutes, Environment and Climate Protection Committee, 19 September 2017.

Extrait de l’ébauche du procès-verbal, Comité de l’environnement et de la protection climatique, le 19 septembre 2017.

369

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 3 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Report to Rapport au:

Environment and Climate Protection Committee Comité de l’environnement et de la protection climatique 19 September 2017 / 19 septembre 2017

and Council et au Conseil 27 September 2017 / 27 septembre 2017

Submitted on 12 September 2017 Soumis le 12 septembre 2017

Submitted by Soumis par: Isabelle Jasmin, Deputy City Treasurer / Trésorière adjointe municipale 613-580-2424 ext./poste 21312 [email protected]

Contact Person Personne ressource: Brian Flynn, Manager, Financial Services, Corporate Finance Service / Gestionnaire, Services financiers / Direction Services financiers 613-580-2424 ext./poste 21839 [email protected]

Ward/Quartier : CITY WIDE / À File Number/No de dossier : ACS2017- L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE CSD-FIN-0023

SUBJECT: LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN V – WATER, WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER SUPPORTED PROGRAMS

OBJET: PLAN FINANCIER À LONG TERME V – PROGRAMMES RELATIFS À L’EAU, AUX EAUX USÉES ET AUX EAUX PLUVIALES FINANCÉS PAR LES TARIFS 370

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 4 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

That the Environment and Climate Protection Committee recommend Council receive and adopt the strategy described in this report.

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de l’environnement et de la protection climatique recommande au Conseil d’accueillir et approuver la stragégie comme décrit dans le rapport.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Consistent with Council’s strategic plan, and in keeping with sound financial planning practices, this report establishes a long range financial plan (LRFP) for water, wastewater and storm water capital investment needs. The report provides a series of financing strategies that balance the need to maintain and build capital assets with the need to manage debt, reserve balances and rate increases. The strategy reflects the capital intensive nature of delivering these services with assets that last for multiple generations. The City’s net book value for water, wastewater and storm water assets is over $5.1 billion with an estimated replacement value of more than $20.9 billion. This includes, but is not limited to 8,500 kilometers of water, sanitary and storm sewer pipes; two water purification plants (Lemieux and Britannia); the Robert O. Pickard Environmental Centre (ROPEC), the City’s sewage treatment plant; 92 pump stations; and over 5,800 culverts.

The forecast capital requirements for the next ten years in this 2017 Rate LRFP V, are consistent with the those identified in the 2012 LRFP IV. As described in the companion report, Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update – Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs”, the condition of the City assets has remained relatively stable - in Fair to Good condition. The current requirement is $310 million per year (in 2017$), which includes renewal, growth and strategic initiatives. The value of growth projects was forecasted based on the Development Charge Background study and strategic initiatives include Council approved initiatives or those resulting from new or changes to regulatory requirements.

The Capital Investment Requirements and the Capital Financing Plans throughout this report will be presented on a “net” City rate requirement basis. External revenue 371

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 5 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

sources and development charges are excluded. Therefore, the “net” City rate Capital Investment requirement is $260 million per year (in 2017$). The capital investment requirements have increased slightly since 2012, and actual revenues from 2012 to 2016 were lower than what was forecast in the 2012 LRFP, primarily due to reductions in per capita water consumption. Therefore, the funding plan has been adjusted to reflect this change in forecast consumption and other key considerations. The funding plan was developed using the following principles:

 Debt servicing charges (principal and interest) for such a capital intensive program are set at a maximum 15% of the annual rate revenues, a level which is greater than the current Council limit of 7.5% for other City services;  Debt will be issued for terms that match the life of the assets they are funding, which not only reduces the annual operating impact of debt issuance but also ensures that infrastructure investments are paid for by future generations that will benefit from these assets;  Operating and Capital needs were allocated separately for each Service - Water, Wastewater and Stormwater to calculate the estimated cost of service for each service for cost recovery purposes and align expenditures with the new rate structure;  Required rate increases were forecasted by Service and will be minimized as much as possible and will be smoothed over the 10 year forecast period in order to provide predictability for ratepayers; and  Reserve fund balances are increased annually to maintain a recommended minimum balance as per the Reserve & Reserve Fund report scheduled for Council in October.

In total, the proposed Capital Funding Plan being proposed would be $2.6 billion over the next ten years. The plan which will be reflected in the 2018 draft budget, uses a combination of reserves and debt to fund the capital investment while maintaining debt servicing within Council’s limit of 15% of own source revenues and maintaining reserve balances to effectively manage year over year fluctuations in spending. Rate increases required to support the plan differ by Service with an overall average of 5.2% in the first five years and, 4.4% in the last five years. These projected rate increases include inflation. 372

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 6 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Council will review and adopt the operating and capital budgets on an annual basis. Future plans will reflect Council’s annual reviews. It should also be noted that spending needs and financing plans may also be adjusted in the future as a result of legislative requirements; as a result of the City’s planning process; and, initiatives to be approved in the September 19 Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update – Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs. CAM update to Council ((ACS2017-PIE-IS-0010) to balance financial and non-financial strategies to bring sustainable practices for managing our assets in a way that supports service expectations.

SOMMAIRE

Conformément au plan stratégique du Conseil ainsi qu’aux saines pratiques de planification financière, le présent rapport établit un plan financier à long terme (PFLT) pour les besoins en matière d’investissement dans le secteur de l’eau, des eaux usées et des eaux pluviales. Le rapport propose une série de stratégies de financement qui concilient la nécessité de maintenir et de construire des immobilisations et la nécessité de gérer la dette, les soldes des réserves et les hausses de tarifs. La stratégie tient compte des importants besoins de capitaux qui découlent de la prestation de ces services à l’aide d’actifs qui dureront pendant de multiples générations. La valeur comptable nette des ressources de la Ville relatives à l’eau, aux eaux usées et aux eaux pluviales est supérieure à 5,1 G$, et leur valeur de remplacement est estimée à plus de 20,9 G$. Cela comprend, sans s’y limiter, 8 500 kilomètres de conduites d’égouts, d’égouts sanitaires et d’égouts pluviaux; deux usines de traitement des eaux (Lemieux et Britannia); le Centre environnemental Robert-O.-Pickard, l’usine de traitement des eaux d’égout de la Ville; 92 stations de pompage et plus de 5 800 ponceaux. Les besoins en capitaux prévus pour les 10 prochaines années dans le PFLT V 2017 sont conformes à ceux indiqués dans le PFLT IV 2012. Tel qu’indiqué dans le rapport complémentaire intitulé « Mise à jour sur le Programme de gestion intégrale des actifs – programmes financés à partir des redevances d’eau et d’égouts», l’état des actifs de la Ville est demeuré relativement stable, à savoir de « Passable » à « Bon ». Un examen des niveaux de financement nécessaires pour le maintien en bon état des actifs financés par les tarifs a été effectué pendant l’exercice 2016-2017. À l’heure actuelle, les besoins s’élèvent à 310 M$ par année (en dollars de 2017), ce qui comprend le renouvellement, la croissance et les initiatives stratégiques. La valeur des projets de 373

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 7 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

croissance a été prévue en fonction de l’étude contextuelle des redevances d’aménagement et des initiatives stratégiques, notamment les initiatives approuvées par le Conseil municipal ou celles découlant de nouvelles exigences réglementaires ou de changements apportés aux exigences réglementaires. Tout au long du présent rapport, les exigences en matière d’investissement en capital et les plans de financement des immobilisations seront présentés selon l’exigence d’un tarif municipal « net ». Les sources de revenus externes et les redevances d’aménagement sont exclues. Par conséquent, les investissements en capitaux provenant d’un tarif municipal « net » nécessaires s’élèvent à 260 M$ par année (en dollars de 2017). Les besoins en capitaux ont augmenté légèrement depuis 2012; les revenus réels de 2012 à 2016 ont été inférieurs à ceux prévus dans le PFLT de 2012, principalement en raison de la réduction de la consommation d’eau par habitant. Le plan de financement a donc été rajusté en fonction de cette modification de la consommation prévue et d’autres considérations clés. Le plan de financement a été élaboré selon les principes suivants :

 les frais de service de la dette (capital et intérêts) pour un programme nécessitant autant de capitaux sont fixés à un maximum de 15 % des revenus annuels, ce qui est supérieur à la limite actuelle de 7,5 % fixée par le Conseil municipal pour les autres services de la Ville;  les dettes seront émises selon une durée qui correspondra à la durée prévue de l’actif financé, ce qui réduit les répercussions annuelles de l’émission des dettes sur les opérations et fait en sorte que les investissements relatifs aux infrastructures soient remboursés par les futures générations, qui profiteront de ces biens;  les besoins relatifs au fonctionnement et aux immobilisation ont été attribués séparément pour chaque service – eau, eaux usées et eaux pluviales, afin d’estimer le coût du service pour chaque service aux fins du recouvrement des coûts et d’harmoniser les dépenses avec la nouvelle structure tarifaire;  les hausses de tarifs requises ont été prévues par le Service; elles seront minimisées et harmonisées autant que possible pendant la période de prévision de 10 ans afin d’assurer la prévisibilité pour les abonnés; 374

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 8 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

 les soldes des fonds de réserve sont augmentés annuellement pour maintenir un solde minimal recommandé conformément au rapport sur la réserve et le fonds de réserve qui doit être présenté au Conseil municipal en octobre.

Au total, le plan de financement des immobilisations proposé serait de 2,6 G$ au cours des 10 prochaines années. Le plan de financement, qui sera appliqué dans le budget provisoire de 2018, se fonde sur une combinaison de réserves et d’endettement pour financer les investissements en capitaux tout en maintenant le service de la dette en deçà de la limite de 15 % de la source de revenus, tel qu’exigé par le Conseil, et en maintenant les soldes des réserves afin de gérer avec efficacité les fluctuations des dépenses d’une année à l’autre. Les hausses de tarifs requises pour soutenir le plan varient selon les Services, avec une moyenne globale de 5,2 % au cours des cinq premières années et de 4,4 % au cours des cinq dernières années. Ces hausses de tarifs projetées tiennent compte de l’inflation. Le Conseil examinera et adoptera annuellement les budgets de fonctionnement et d’immobilisations. Les plans futurs tiendront compte des examens annuels du Conseil. Il convient également de noter que les besoins découlant des dépenses et les plans de financement peuvent également être rajustés à l’avenir en fonction des exigences législatives, à la suite du processus de planification de la Ville et en fonction des initiatives à approuvées le 19 Septembre dans le rapport « Mise à jour sur le Programme de gestion intégrale des actifs – programmes financés à partir des redevances d’eau et d’égouts” au Conseil municipal (ACS2017-PIE-IS-0010) afin d’équilibrer les stratégies financières et non financières en vue d’assurer un équilibre durable de la gestion de nos actifs de manière à soutenir les attentes en matière de services.

BACKGROUND

Long range financial plans (LRFP) are a hallmark of good financial planning. These plans are updated at regular intervals to reflect new information such as changed priorities, adjusted economic factors and any new legislated requirements. This is the fifth long range financial plan since amalgamation.

375

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 9 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Since the last Rate LRFP in 2012, the City has:

 approved a new Rate Structure for water and wastewater services that provides for a fixed and variable component and greater revenue stability;  approved a new fixed stormwater fee that is no longer based on water consumption but rather on the type of property, also providing much greater revenue stability for these services;  experienced lower than forecast revenues due to per capita reductions in water consumption; and,  received funding approval from the federal government from the CWWF.

The following table provides a summary of the revenue and capital investments forecast in the 2012 LRFP IV and the actual results for the years 2012 to 2016:

Table 1 – Comparison of 2012 LRFP forecast and Actuals

$Millions 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

Revenue

LRFP 4 264.3 284.8 304.9 327.1 350.1 1,531.2 (inflated)

Actual 254.0 256.7 272.6 286.5 314.0 1,383.7

Revenue -10.3 -28.2 -32.3 -40.7 -36.1 -147.5 Shortfall

Net Capital Requirement

Annual 333.0 164.4 226.1 213.3 200.4 1137.3 Budget

LRFP 4 332.9 149.5 197.6 178.7 187.2 1045.9 (Inflated) 376

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 10 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Increased 0.1 14.9 28.5 34.6 13.2 91.4 Capital Requirement

More debt was authorized each year, than originally planned in LRFP IV, to compensate for the increased net capital requirement but while remaining within the 15% limit for debt servicing as a percentage of revenue, established by Council.

This is the final report in a series of long range financial plan reports prepared during this term of Council that taken together, are the City’s fifth long range financial plan (LRFP V). Council received the Long Range Financial Plan Transit (ACS2017-CSD- FIN-0002) in March and the Long Range Financial Plan V – Tax Supported Capital (ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0017) in June.

The funding strategies identified in this report are consistent with the principles regarding the use of debt adopted and amended by Council in the 2007 Fiscal Framework. These amended principles are as follows:

 Council has established a limit of 15% of the amount raised from rate revenues that can be used for the repayment of principal and interest (debt servicing).

 The term of the debt should match the useful life of the related asset. This ensures that the generations that benefit from the use of the asset share in paying for its cost.

The objective of this report is to present a ten-year outlook of the rate supported capital requirements for the delivery of water, wastewater and stormwater services. In particular, this report focuses on the funding strategies that are required to provide for the renewal and maintenance of the City’s existing asset base in a state of good repair, as discussed in the Comprehensive Asset Management Program report. The objective of the proposed asset management program and policy is to apply the right intervention, on the right asset, at the right time in a manner that considers affordability and risk.

DISCUSSION

Rate supported capital works are mainly funded from contributions to capital and from debt financing which is repaid along with related interest over the life of the asset. 377

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 11 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Capital works and operating costs are funded on a cost recovery basis from the fees charged to users of the City’s water, wastewater and stormwater services. Growth related projects are also funded from development charges collected from new development. Senior government funding may also be received in relation to specific approved projects. All figures quoted within this report refer to the City’s share of capital investments or net capital investment required, meaning that figures exclude development charges collected and senior government funding. The objective of this report is to determine:

 Net Capital investment needs for the period 2018 to 2027;  An appropriate funding strategy that will meet those needs and reflects the capital intensive nature of delivering these services through long lived assets that serve multiple generations.

Capital Asset Profile

The City’s net book value for water, wastewater and storm water assets is over $5.1 billion with an estimated replacement value of more than $20.9 billion. This includes, but is not limited to 8,500 kilometers of water, sanitary and storm sewer pipes; two water purification plants (Lemieux and Britannia); the Robert O. Pickard Environmental Centre (ROPEC), the City’s sewage treatment plant; 92 pump stations; and over 5,800 culverts.

For financial reporting purposes, and in accordance with accounting policies prescribed by the Public Accounting Standard Board, these capital assets are stated at historical cost and are amortized over their useful life. However, the Capital Investment Requirements are based on the cost of replacing these assets today. A breakdown of these assets by Service is as follows:

Table 2 Approximate Replacement Value $000

Assets Total %

Water $7,465,000 36%

Wastewater $7,193,000 34% 378

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 12 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Stormwater $6,296,000 30%

Total $20,954,000 100%

Capital Investment Requirements

Investment requirements are a function of: renewal of existing assets to ensure they remain in a state of good repair and comply with current service level standards; growth related to new development and redevelopment; strategic initiatives established by Council; or new regulatory requirements.

To quantify the investment required over the next ten years, City staff have analysed the inventory of existing water and sewer assets; reviewed forecasted growth projects; and referenced strategic initiatives and regulatory requirements to the extent known.

Both the Capital Investment Requirements and the Capital Financing Plan plans have been presented on a “net” City requirement basis. External revenue sources such as those received from other levels of government and development charges collected in relation to growth projects are excluded. This provides a clear view of the City’s own financial responsibility with respect to developing a funding strategy specifically for rate- supported services.

A total net investment of $2.6 billion is required in this ten-year timeframe for water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure which equates to an annual investment of approximately $240 - $280 million in most years.

379

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 13 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

A summary by Service is as follows:

Table 3 Water

$Millions 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total

Renewal 53.7 68.6 92.1 94.1 92.6 105.6 119.5 118.0 125.6 117.1 986.9

Growth 0.5 15.9 1.5 2.4 10.0 8.8 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.4 41.2

Strategic/Regulatory 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 4.0

Total 54.6 84.9 94.0 97.0 103.0 114.8 120.9 118.8 126.2 117.9 1,032.0

Table 4 Wastewater

$Millions 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total

Renewal 55.2 72.9 80.5 87.4 92.7 92.7 103.8 119.1 107.7 96.6 908.8

Growth 12.1 5.9 2.7 4.8 0.4 - 0.2 0.4 0.2 2.4 29.2

Strategic/Regulatory 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 12.0

Total 68.6 80.0 84.4 93.4 94.3 93.9 105.2 120.7 109.2 100.3 950.0

Table 5 Stormwater

$Millions 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total

Renewal 80.8 55.5 62.7 58.7 60.9 62.2 64.0 63.5 67.4 61.7 637.4

Growth 0.2 ------0.2

Strategic/Regulatory 2.3 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 10.1

Total 83.2 56.5 63.7 59.8 61.8 63.0 64.8 64.3 68.1 62.5 647.7

380

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 14 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Table 6 Total Rate

$Millions 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total

Renewal 189.8 196.9 253.3 240.2 246.1 260.6 287.2 300.7 300.7 275.4 2,533.1

Growth 12.8 21.8 4.2 7.2 10.4 8.8 1.2 0.8 0.4 2.9 70.5

Regulatory 3.9 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 26.1

Total 206.4 221.4 242.2 250.1 259.1 271.7 290.8 303.8 303.5 280.7 2,629.7

RENEWAL

As described in the companion report, “Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update – Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs”, the condition of the City assets has remained relatively stable - in Fair to Good condition and the report articulated the activities and the approaches that are applied daily by staff to maintain rate-funded assets in a state of good repair. Staff continue to apply recognised asset management practices founded on integrated asset planning practices, risk-based assessments, prioritization, and service-centric decision making. Of the $2.6 billion total net capital investment needed to maintain assets in a state of good repair, the vast majority or $2.5 billion is for renewal.

GROWTH

The capital growth needs were prepared based on projects that have been identified in the Development Charge Background study. Only projects that have a development charge component that is greater than 30% of the total authority requested have been categorized as growth related. Projects where the development charge component is 30% or less are usually classified as renewal projects with replacement assets’ capacity expanded to service growth. These are captured in the renewal category.

STRATEGIC INITIATIVES/REGULATORY

The strategic initiatives category includes Council-directed initiatives identified in the City Corporate Plan. Strategic initiatives include projects that implement the various City master plans or enhance services currently being provided to residents, implement new legislative requirements, and respond to changes in demand for service. 381

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 15 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Initiatives included in this ten-year forecast may be subject to change. Council reviews and approves operating and capital budgets on an annual basis. Capital investment requirements and related financing plans may also be adjusted in the future as a result of legislative requirements; as a result of the City’s planning process; and, initiatives to be approved in the September 19 Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update – Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs CAM update to Council (ACS2017-PIE- IS-0010) to balance financial and non-financial strategies to bring sustainable practices for managing our assets in way that supports service expectations.

Capital Financing Strategy, Goals and Assumptions

Currently, the City’s operating revenues provide capital funding of approximately $196 million annually; $134 million as cash contributions towards new water, wastewater and stormwater capital investments; and $62 million in debt authority. With a forecast of approximately $260 million on average per year for capital investment requirements, this leaves approximately $64 million per year to be financed through a combination of rate increases and new debt authority.

The funding strategy aims to strike the optimal balance between these sources and is guided by the following principles:

 Debt servicing levels will not exceed 15% of the amount raised from rate revenues to reflect the more capital intensive nature of water, wastewater and stormwater services.  Longer terms for debt financing will be established for water, wastewater and stormwater projects to better match the life of the assets they are funding. This will result in lower annual debt service payments that will be funded over a longer time period by both the current and future residents benefiting from these assets.  Capital reserves minimum balance levels will be established from a long term perspective with the intention that they be achieved over a period of several years.  Rate increases required to fund water, wastewater and stormwater services will be minimized as much as possible and smoothed over the 10 year forecast period. This will provide ratepayers with some predictability of what increases they can anticipate from year to year.

382

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 16 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Capital Financing Plan

The funding strategy allows the City to invest $2.6 billion in water, wastewater and stormwater assets over the ten-year period through a combination of operating revenues and debt financing. This funding level is based on the adoption of the funding strategies outlined in this document.

Table 7 2018 – 2027 Financing Plan for Rate Supported Capital

$Millions 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022- Total 2027

Capital Investment

Water 54.6 84.9 94.0 97.0 701.6 1,032.0

Wastewater 68.6 80.0 84.4 93.4 623.6 950.0

Stormwater 83.2 56.5 63.7 59.8 384.4 647.7

Total 206.4 221.4 242.2 250.1 1,709.6 2,629.7 Capital Investment

Reserves (145.3) (162.0) (173.7) (178.8) (1,368.8) (2,028.7)

Debt (61.1) (59.3) (68.5) (71.3) (340.8) (601.0) Authority

Total 206.4 221.4 242.2 250.1 1,709.6 2,629.7

Of the proposed $2.630 billion investment program, $2.029 billion of funding will be raised from water, wastewater and stormwater revenues and $601 million to be funded from issuing new debt.

Based on the above plan, annual debt servicing costs as a percentage of rate supported operating revenues will average 14.0% over the forecast period. 383

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 17 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

In the initial years, the timing of investments will be need to be managed, while maintaining service levels and continuing to maintain assets in a state of good repair. The City has and will continue to put in place risk-based financial and non-financial strategies to manage the timing of these investments but the funding plan does fund the total net requirement of $2.6 million over the ten-year plan. The following graph compares the Capital Investment Requirement to the recommended Capital Funding Plan over the ten-year period:

Debt Servicing Targets

Current debt service costs of $42 million per year will increase to approximately $77 million or 14.1% of the annual rate revenues by 2027.

Table 8 Debt Servicing Costs ($ millions) / As a Percent of Rate Revenues

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

48.3 48.2 52.4 62.9 62.7 66.8 69.7 72.7 77.4 77.0

13.3% 12.6% 13.0% 14.9% 14.2% 14.5% 14.5% 14.5% 14.8% 14.1% 384

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 18 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

The Fiscal Framework (2007) Targets for Debt, amended and approved in LRFP IV, allow for principal and interest on rate supported debt to be limited to no more than 15% of rate supported revenues. This differs from the existing fiscal framework for tax supported debt service charges which are limited to no more than 7.5% of revenues.

Water and wastewater services are primarily delivered through substantial capital investments that are used by many generations. To limit the amount of debt that can be used to purchase or renew these assets puts a huge burden on current day ratepayers. The unique nature of these services necessitate a separate debt servicing level from those of other city services that are more labour rather than capital intensive. This is consistent with other utilities. For instance, a 2014 Survey: Opportunities and Challenges in Clean Water Utility Financing and Management was published by the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (US) and showed that debt service represented 26% of 2013 utility expenditures. The city’s proposed plan remains well below such debt service levels.

Reserve Fund Levels

Water and Wastewater reserve balances are forecasted to be $52 million at the end of 2017.

The funding strategy sets a target for the reserve funds balances to reach a minimum balance as determined and recommended in the Reserve & Reserve Fund Report anticipated in October of this year. The report recommends that the minimum target balance equate to the ten-year trend in year-end budget performance and that the maximum should be augmented by 1.5 times as per GFOA’s best practise guidelines.

This is a long-term target with the intention that it be achieved over a period of years and provides flexibility in the annual use of reserves to fund needed capital projects to proceed without delay.

Table 9 Projected Year End Reserve Fund Balances ($ millions)

Reserve 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 385

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 19 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Water 34.6 35.1 35.6 36.1 36.6 37.1 37.5 38.0 38.5 39.0

Wastewater 12.5 12.7 12.9 13.0 13.2 13.4 13.6 13.8 14.0 14.2

Stormwater 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.0 6.1

Total 52.4 53.2 53.9 54.7 55.5 56.2 57.0 57.7 58.5 59.3

Currently, the Water and Sewer reserves are managed separately and there is no Stormwater reserve. Staff will be recommending in the up coming Reserve & Reserve Fund Report, that a Stormwater Reserve be created and the Sewer Reserve balance be divided proportionally between separate wastewater and a stormwater reserve funds. Staff have reviewed the projected spending needs for wastewater and stormwater and have assumed a 70% wastewater and 30% stormwater split of the existing Sewer Reserve balance for this funding strategy. This transfer will provide funding for each program to meet their projected investment requirements.

Projected Revenue Increases

The funding strategy contemplates a continued need to increase water, wastewater and stormwater revenues over the 10-year program. These increases are smoothed over the period so that there is some predictability for the public on the expected rate increase from one year to the next.

The new rate structure approved by Council in 2016 provides much greater flexibility to match increases to the specific service and the fixed and variable components of the rate. The LRFP provides a framework for overall revenue increase requirements based on a 10-year plan. However, individual rate increases will be established each year as part of the budgeting process, using the overall revenues requirements established by the LRFP as the target.

The Water and Wastewater rates are established based on the overall revenue target and forecast consumption for the upcoming budget year. 20% of the revenue is calculated as a fixed charge per water meter account and the remaining 80% is calculated based on the forecast consumption for the upcoming budget year. There is 386

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 20 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

also the possibility to increase the 20% fixed portion up to a maximum of 35% over time, if required. If for example, capital costs increase as a proportion of total expenditures, then there is a cost recovery basis for increasing the fixed portion of the fee.

The Stormwater fee is a fixed fee based on the property type for residential properties and assessment value for Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) properties. The fee for stormwater will be calculated based on the target revenue amount divided by the number of residential units and ICI properties (based on assessment value) from the most recent MPAC rolls.

The most significant difference between LRFP IV and LRFP V is that we now need to show the rate increases per service rather than as an overall average, due to the new rate structure. The funding requirements for each service varies and since the fees are based on a full cost recovery basis, it is important to differentiate the revenue requirements for each. Based on the operating and capital requirements for each service, the increases will be lower for water services and wastewater services than what was forecast in 2012, but will be higher for stormwater. However, the overall rate increase is reduced over the ten-year period.

The following table shows the projected rate increases by Service over the ten-year period. It is important to note that the projected rate increases include inflation.

PROJECTED ANNUAL RATE % INCREASES / ANNUAL RATE REVENUES ($ MILLIONS)

Table 10 Water

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

173.7 180.5 185.9 191.4 197.2 201.3 205.5 209.8 214.2 218.7

REVISED Table 11 Wastewater (as amended by Motion NO ECPC 16/01, ECPC Meeting of 19 September 2017)

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 387

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 21 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%

139.1 145.9 153.1 159.1 165.4 170.3 175.4 180.6 185.9 191.5

Table 12 Stormwater

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

13% 13% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 10% 10%

50.3 56.7 63.5 71.1 79.5 89.0 99.7 111.6 122.7 134.9

REVISED Table 13 TOTAL RATE SUPPORTED (as amended by Motion NO ECPC 16/01, ECPC Meeting of 19 September 2017)

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

5.6% 5.5% 5.0% 4.8% 4.9% 4.2% 4.3% 4.4% 4.2% 4.2%

363.1 383.1 402.4 421.6 442.0 460.5 480.4 501.8 522.6 544.8

Rate increases required to support the plan differ by Service with an overall average of 5.2% in the first five years and, 4.4% in the last five years. The 2012 LRFP IV projected rate increases for all services at a higher rate than what is recommended in this revised LRFP V report. In 2012 the average rate increase over 10 years was 5.7% and the average rate increase over ten years is now forecast to be 4.8%.

By comparison, in Ontario, Toronto has approved a rate increase of 8% for 2017 and York has approved a rate increase of 9.0%. The 2014 NACWA Survey mentioned above states that the average fixed rate has increased 6% over the past three years and the average volume rate for residential customers (when combined with a flat charge) has increased 5.4% from 2001 to 2013.

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

This report applies to City-wide assets. Water, Wastewater and Stormwater are important assets serving the City’s rural area. 388

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 22 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

CONSULTATION

The public consultation process will be incorporated with the review process for annual budgets.

COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR(S)

This is a City-wide report.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no legal impediments to receiving the information in this report.

RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

There are no risk management implications.

ASSET MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

The recommendations documented in this report are based on the background and updated needs assessment documented in the September 19 Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update – Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs CAM update to Council (ACS2017-PIE-IS-0010). The requirements are consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Asset Management (CAM) Program (City of Ottawa Comprehensive Asset Management Program) objectives.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Financial implications are identified in the report.

ACCESSIBILITY IMPACTS

Maintaining assets in a good state of repair supports all accessibility objectives of the City.

TECHNOLOGY IMPLICATIONS

Funding requirements associated with technology are identified during the annual budget cycles. 389

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 23 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

TERM OF COUNCIL PRIORITIES

Recommendations in this report support various objectives under Council’s priority of Financial Responsibility under the City Strategic Plan. The LRFP contributes directly to the achievement of Objective FS1 – Demonstrate sound financial management priorities and to Performance Measure 63-A as one of the components of the City’s Fiscal Framework update.

DISPOSITION

Information contained in this report will be utilized during the annual budget setting process. 390 ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 24 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

EXTRACT OF DRAFT EXTRAIT DE L’ÉBAUCHE DU ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE PROCÈS-VERBAL 16 DU PROTECTION COMMITTEE COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET MINUTES 16 DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE 19 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 19 SEPTEMBRE 2017

LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN V – WATER, WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER SUPPORTED PROGRAMS

ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0023 CITY WIDE

REPORT RECOMMENDATION:

That the Environment and Climate Protection Committee recommend Council receive and adopt the strategy described in this report.

Please note: This item was considered in conjunction with ECPC Council Report 15, Item No. 2, Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update – Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs (ACS2017-PIE-IS-0010).

At the outset, Mr. Alain Gonthier, Director, Infrastructure Services, Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development Department (PIEDD), introduced Mr. Kelly Martin, Manager, Asset Management, PIEDD, Ms. Shelley McDonald, Manager, Asset Management, PIEDD and Ms. Isabelle Jasmin, Deputy City Treasurer, Corporate Finance, Corporate Services Department.

Ms. McDonald spoke to a detailed PowerPoint slide presentation which served to provide an overview of the Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update – Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs report (ACS2017-PIE-IS-0010). Ms. Jasmin spoke to a detailed PowerPoint slide presentation overview of the Long Range Financial Plan V – Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Supported Programs report (ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0023). A copy of both presentations is held on file with the City Clerk).

Staff had earlier noted errors contained within Tables 11 and 13 of the report, and requested that they be corrected. Councillor Chiarelli moved the following:

391 ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 25 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

MOTION NO ECPC 16/01

Moved by Councillor R. Chiarelli:

WHEREAS Report ACS2017-CSD-FIN-0023 includes numerous tables to highlight financial information, and;

WHEREAS errors have been discovered in Table 11 (Wastewater), on page 18 of the report, and;

WHEREAS errors have been discovered in Table 13 (Total Rate Supported), on page 18 of the report;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, to correct the errors noted above, the Environment and Climate Protection Committee approve the substitution of the original Table 11 and Table 13 of the report with the following revised tables:

REVISED TABLE 11 - WASTEWATER

REVISED TABLE 13 – TOTAL RATE SUPPORTED

CARRIED

Members raised a number of concerns and requests for information with regard to the Long Range Financial Plan V - Water, Wastewater and Stormwater 392 ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE 26 COMITÉ DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT ET PROTECTION COMMITTEE DE LA PROTECTION CLIMATIQUE REPORT 15 RAPPORT 15 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 LE 27 SEPTEMBRE 2017

Supported Programs report, touching upon the issuance of debentures; requests for greater clarity regarding actual dollar figure amounts represented by the percentages referenced within report tables; and budgeting methodology, along with concerns raised by Councillor Moffatt with respect to the stormwater rate. A Direction to Staff was also provided, as noted further below.

Councillor Chiarelli indicated that he was moving referral of the matter to Council so that these issues could be addressed. As this report was considered in conjunction with the Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update – Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs report, that report would also be deferred to the Council meeting of 27 September 2017.

MOTION NO ECPC 16/02

Moved by Councillor R. Chiarelli:

That the Environment and Climate Protection Committee refer Items 2 (Long Range Financial Plan V - Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Supported Programs) as amended, and 3 (Comprehensive Asset Management Program Update – Water and Sewer Rate Supported Programs) to City Council.

CARRIED

DIRECTION TO STAFF:

From the ECPC meeting of 18 October 2016:

Recommended Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Rate Structure (ACS2016-CSD-FIN-0008), ECPC Agenda 11, Item 3

DIRECTION TO STAFF:

Staff has indicated that they will undertake a regular review of the rate structure as part of future long-range financial plans. Given the importance of public participation in this review, that staff take as direction, and commit to undertaking a similar public engagement process if they are going to recommend any future, non-administrative changes to the rate structure.

394

Appendix I 2019 Draft DC By-law (Available Under Separate Cover)

HEMSON