The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMay 26, 2025 Council Meeting Agenda Electronic Meeting May 26, 2025 - 07:00 PM Chair: Mayor Ashe Please be advised that in accordance with Section 10.04 of the Procedure By-law, the City of Pickering is holding Council and Committee Meetings in an electronic format until further notice. Members of the public may observe the meeting proceedings by viewing the livestream. A recording of the meeting will also be available on the City's website following the meeting. How to Participate Individuals looking to make a verbal delegation may do so in accordance with the City’s Procedure By-law. In lieu of a verbal delegation, individuals may also submit written comments to clerks@pickering.ca. To register as a Delegation, please submit a Delegation Request Form by visiting pickering.ca/meetings. For inquiries related to accessibility, please contact Legislative Services Phone: 905.420.4611 | Email: clerks@pickering.ca Call to Order/Roll Call Playing of O Canada Moment of Reflection Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement Disclosure of Interest Adoption of Minutes Council Minutes, April 29, 2025 (includes Confdential In Camera Minutes provided under separate cover) Page 19 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 6.1 Executive Committee Minutes, May 5, 2025 Page 43 Presentations Delegations Glenn Brown, Pickering Resident Re: Raising Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) (Refer to Item 12.1) Shawna Stanleigh, Member, Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee (WVAC) Re: Corr. 07-25 Arnold Mostert, Manager, Landscape & Parks Development, City of Pickering Re: Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan (Refer to Item 9.4) Jade Schofield, Principal Consultant, Climate Compass Advisors (Available for questions if needed) Re: Report SUS 02-25 City of Pickering Community Climate Adaptation Plan 2025 - 2035 (Refer to Item 10.1) Correspondence Corr. 04-25 Page 52 Principles Integrity, Integrity Commissioner for the City of Pickering Re: Integrity Commissioner’s Annual Report City of Pickering Recommendation: That Corr. 04-25, from Principles Integrity, Integrity Commissioner for the City of Pickering, dated May 1, 2025, regarding the Integrity Commissioner’s Annual Report - City of Pickering, be received for information. 6.2 7. 8. 8.1 8.2 8.3 9. 9.1 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 2 - Corr. 05-25 Page 59 Jesse St. Amant, Coordinator, Cultural Services, City of Pickering Re: Cultural Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan Recommendation: That Corr. 05-25, from Jesse St. Amant, Coordinator, Cultural Services, City of Pickering, dated May 26, 2025, regarding the Cultural Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan, be received for information. Corr. 06-25 Page 63 Timothy Higgins, Accessibility Coordinator, City of Pickering Re: Accessibility Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan Recommendation: That Corr. 06-25, from Timothy Higgins, Accessibility Coordinator, City of Pickering, dated May 26, 2025, regarding the Accessibility Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan, be received for information. Corr. 07-25 Page 72 Arnold Mostert, Manager, Landscape & Parks Development, City of Pickering Re: Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan Recommendation: That Corr. 07-25 from Arnold Mostert, Manager, Landscape & Parks Development, City of Pickering, dated May 26, 2025, regarding the Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2024 Proposed Work Plan, be received for information. Corr. 08-25 Page 75 Amelia Jaggard, Deputy Clerk, Town of Tillsonburg Re: Tillsonburg Town Council Decision Letter - April 14, 2025 - Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 3 - That Corr. 08-25, from Amelia Jaggard, Deputy Clerk, Town of Tillsonburg, dated April 15, 2025, regarding Tillsonburg Town Council Decision Letter - April 14, 2025 - Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 09-25 Page 77 Luke Charbonneau, Mayor, Town of Saugeen Shores Re: Opposition to Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 09-25, from Luke Charbonneau, Mayor, Town of Saugeen Shores, dated April 14, 2025, regarding Opposition to Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 10-25 Page 79 Michael Prue, Mayor, Town of Amherstburg Re: Resolution# 20250414-011 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Amherstburg Recommendation: That Corr. 10-25, from Michael Prue, Mayor, Town of Amherstburg, dated April 15, 2025, regarding Resolution# 20250414-011 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Amherstburg, be received and endorsed. Corr. 11-25 Page 81 Angela Toole, Acting Manager of Municipal Governance/Clerk, Town of Kingsville Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers – Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 Recommendation: That Corr. 11-25, from Angela Toole, Acting Manager of Municipal Governance/Clerk, Town of Kingsville, dated April 16, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers – Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22, be received and endorsed. Corr. 12-25 Page 83 Township of Rideau Lakes Re: MSC (PW) Rec #78-2025 re: Strong Mayor Powers (for Council approval) 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 4 - Recommendation: That Corr. 12-25, from the Township of Rideau Lakes, dated April 16, 2025, regarding MSC (PW) Rec #78-2025 re: Strong Mayor Powers (for Council approval), be received and endorsed. Corr. 13-25 Page 86 Jamie McGarvey, Mayor, Town of Parry Sound Re: Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 13-25, from Jamie McGarvey, Mayor, Town of Parry Sound, dated April 22, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 14-25 Page 89 Jessica Walters, Clerk, Town of Greater Napanee Re: Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 14-25, from Jessica Walters, Clerk, Town of Greater Napanee, dated April 23, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 15-25 Page 91 Karen Martin, Clerk, Township of Zorra Re: Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 15-25, from Karen Martin, Clerk, Township of Zorra, dated April 24, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 16-25 Page 92 The Municipality of North Middlesex Re: Resolution of Council, Expansion of Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 16-25, form The Municipality of North Middlesex, dated April 23, 2025, regarding Resolution of Council, Expansion of Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. 9.10 9.11 9.12 9.13 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 5 - Corr. 17-25 Page 93 Joseph Malandruccolo, Director, Legal and Legislative Services/Clerk, Town of Essex Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers: Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 Recommendation: That Corr. 17-25, from Joseph Malandruccolo, Director, Legal and Legislative Services/Clerk, Town of Essex, dated April 28, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers: Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22, be received and endorsed. Corr. 18-25 Page 95 Gary Serviss, Mayor, Town of Petawawa Re: Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers and Duties to Additional Municipalities Recommendation: That Corr. 18-25, from Gary Serviss, Mayor, Town of Petawawa, dated April 29, 2025, regarding Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers and Duties to Additional Municipalities, be received and endorsed. Corr. 19-25 Page 99 Kendra Webster, Legislative & Licensing Coordinator, Municipality of South Huron Re: Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 19-25, from Kendra Webster, Legislative & Licensing Coordinator, Municipality of South Huron, dated April 30, 2025, regarding Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 20-25 Page 103 Chandra Alexander, Manager of Corporate Services/Clerk, Municipality of Bluewater Re: Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: 9.14 9.15 9.16 9.17 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 6 - That Corr. 20-25, from Chandra Alexander, Manager of Corporate Services/Clerk, Municipality of Bluewater, date April 28, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 21-25 Page 104 Jackie Mellon, Clerk, Town of Deep River Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Deep River in Response to the Province's Recent Proposal to Designate Deep River as a "Strong Mayor" Municipality, Effective May 1, 2025. Recommendation: That Corr. 21-25, from Jackie Mellon, Clerk, Town of Deep River, dated April 30, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Deep River in Response to the Province's Recent Proposal to Designate Deep River as a "Strong Mayor" Municipality, Effective May 1, 2025, be received and endorsed. Corr. 22-25 Page 108 Steven Dalley, Town Manager, Clerk/Treasurer, Town of Cobalt Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt Recommendation: That Corr. 22-25, from Steven Dalley, Town Manager, Clerk/Treasurer, Town of Cobalt, dated May 1, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt, be received and endorsed. Corr. 23-25 Page 110 Tatiana Dafoe, Clerk, City of Stratford Re: Resolution R2025-174 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the City of Stratford Recommendation: That Corr. 23-25, from Tatiana Dafoe, Clerk, City of Stratford, dated May 1, 2025, regarding Resolution R2025-174 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the City of Stratford, be received and endorsed. Corr. 24-25 Page 112 Dianne Gould-Brown, Executive Assistant – Deputy Clerk, Town of Plympton- 9.18 9.19 9.20 9.21 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 7 - Wyoming Re: Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 24-25, from Dianne Gould-Brown, Executive Assistant – Deputy Clerk, Town of Plympton-Wyoming dated April 30, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 25-25 Page 114 Sarah Carter, Acting Clerk/Legislative Services Supervisor, Municipality of North Perth Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers in the Municipality of North Perth Recommendation: That Corr. 25-25, from Sarah Carter, Acting Clerk/Legislative Services Supervisor, Municipality of North Perth, dated May 8, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers in the Municipality of North Perth, be received and endorsed. Corr. 26-25 Page 115 Cayla Reimer, Deputy Clerk, Township of Springwater Re: Resolution C195-2025 - Opposing Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 26-25, from Cayla Reimer, Deputy Clerk, Township of Springwater, dated May 8, 2025, regarding Resolution C195-2025 - Opposing Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Report EC 05-25 of the Executive Committee held on May 5, 2025 Director, City Development & CBO, Report SUS 02-25 City of Pickering Community Climate Adaptation Plan 2025 - 2035 [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Report SUS 02-25, regarding the City of Pickering Community Climate Adaptation Plan 2025 – 2035, as set out in Appendix I, be endorsed; 1. That recommendations from the Community Climate Adaptation Plan be 2. 9.22 9.23 10. 10.1 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 8 - considered, along with other municipal priorities, through future annual municipal plans and budget processes; That staff report back to Council on the progress of the Community Climate Adaptation Plan’s implementation at the end of year three, of the ten-year plan; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 4. Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report CLK 02-25 Approval of Voting Methods for the 2026 Municipal Election [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Report CLK 02-25 regarding the approval of voting methods for the 2026 Municipal Election be received; 1. That both internet voting and paper ballots, using vote tabulators, be approved as the voting methods for the 2026 Municipal Election and any by-elections that may occur during the 2026-2030 Term of Council; 2. That the draft By-law included as Attachment 1 to Report CLK 02-25 be approved and enacted; 3. That the City Clerk be directed to proceed with a Request for Proposal for the approved voting methods and associated services, and report back to Council to award the contract to the most appropriate vendor(s); and, 4. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to give effect to this report. 5. Director, Community Services, Report CS 04-25 Civic Awards Program Policy Update [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Council approve the updated Civic Awards Program Policy CUL 150, as set out in Attachment 1 to this report; and, 1. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the 2. 10.2 10.3 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 9 - necessary actions as indicated in this report. Director, Community Services, Report CS 05-25 Waterfront Paddle Sport Rental Service Frenchman’s Bay [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Report CS 05-25 regarding an update on waterfront paddle sport rental service on Frenchman’s Bay be received; 1. That Council approve the inclusion of facilities to accommodate paddle sport rental services in the design of Beachfront Park Revitalization - Phase 2; and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action as indicated in this report. 3. Director, Community Services, Report CS 07-25 Northern Community Halls Recommendations for Facility Renewal [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That staff be directed to investigate the option to sell Green River Community Centre, with Infrastructure Ontario being offered the first right of refusal to purchase for $2.00 as per the original sales agreement (Attachment 1), and then to explore options to sell the facility, and report back to Council with recommendations in Q1, 2026; 1. That staff be directed to investigate options to sell the former Greenwood Library back to the Durham District School Board first; and then to explore options to sell or lease the facility at a market rate and report back to Council with recommendations in Q1, 2026; 2. That staff be directed to renew the management agreement for the Mount Zion Community Centre with the Mount Zion Community Centre Association for a two year term from July 1 2025 to June 30 2026 returning said agreement to Council in Q2, 2025 for endorsement; and to investigate options to reduce the net capital cost of Mount Zion Community Centre by selling the facility, or leasing the facility at a market rate and report back to Council with 3. 10.4 10.5 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 10 - recommendations in Q1, 2026; That staff be directed to renew the management agreement for the Whitevale Community Centre and the Whitevale Arts and Culture Centre with the Whitevale and District Residents’ Association for a five-year term from July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2030 returning said agreement to Council in Q2, 2025 for endorsement; 4. That City Heritage staff evaluate the Mount Zion Community Centre (School Section #13 Schoolhouse) and Green River Community Centre (Green River Baptist Church) under Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act to determine whether the properties merit designation under Part IV of the Act, and report back to Council with recommendations in Q4, 2025; 5. That, as part of any open proposal to sell or lease the above properties, staff be directed to invite community groups to submit an expression of interest; and, 6. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. 7. Fire Chief, Report FIR 04-25 Fire Department Establishing and Regulating By-law [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Report FIR 04-25 regarding the Fire Department Establishing and Regulating By-law be received; 1. That the draft By-law included as Attachment 1 to Report FIR 04-25 be approved and enacted; 2. That By-Law 771/78 be repealed; and,3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take such actions as are necessary to give effect to the recommendations in this report. 4. New and Unfinished Business Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects, Report ECD 04-25 Page 117 Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre 10.6 11. 11.1 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 11 - Recommendation: That Council approve the acceptance of $1,000,000 from Dorsay Developments Corporation in exchange for the naming rights of Pickering’s new community centre, (previously called the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre) to be called Dorsay Community Centre, in accordance with the naming rights agreement (Attachment 1); 1. That Council approve the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation, set out in Attachment 1, subject to minor revisions acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer and City Solicitor; 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation; and, 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. 4. Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 10-25 Page 132 2025 Asset Management Plan Consultant Delegation: Elio Ibrahim, PSD Citywide (Available for questions if needed) Recommendation: That the 2025 Asset Management Plan, set out in Attachment 1 to this report, be received; 1. That Council endorse the use of the 2025 Asset Management Plan for financial planning purposes as it relates to the development of the Ten Year financial plan; and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 3. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 06-25 Page 384 Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project Scaled Down Schematic Design Recommendation: That Report CAO 06-25 regarding the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project be received; 1. 11.2 11.3 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 12 - That Council direct staff to complete additional design work for the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library at a cost not to exceed $250,000.00 funded from the project contingency that results in an alternative design and reduced project cost option not exceeding $200 million, and for the alternative design and reduced project cost option to be returned to Council in September, 2025; 2. That naming rights for any part of the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library project be deferred until Council has approved the final design and a construction contract for the project has been awarded; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 4. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 07-25 Page 390 Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program Project Update Recommendation: That Report CAO 07-25 regarding Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program be received; 1. That staff be directed to register the City of Pickering in the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program at the Corporate Membership Level; 2. That the expense for the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program, be charged to account General - Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (502240.9750) and the expense not to exceed $7,000.00; and, 3. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. 4. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 08-25 Page 396 Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce 2024 Year End Report and Proposed 2025 Workplan Recommendation: That Report CAO 08-25 regarding the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Workplan be received for information; 1. That Council approve the 2025 3rd Annual Community event in celebration of the International Day for People of African Descent, per ADM 040 Committees and Taskforces of Council Policy, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Director, Community Services and the Chief Administrative Officer; 2. 11.4 11.5 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 13 - That Council authorize staff to issue a park permit to the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce for the use of Esplanade Park, per CUL 070 Community Festivals and Events Policy, for the Community Event in celebration of the International Day for People of African Descent; and, 3. That Council approve the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce-led 2025 Black Joy Holiday Market event, per ADM 040 Committees and Taskforces of Council Policy, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Director, Community Services and the Chief Administrative Officer. 4. Director, Community Services, Report CS 08-25 Page 402 Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Roof and Skylight Replacement Second-Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5 Recommendation: That the quotation submitted by Solar Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd. in response to Second-Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5 for the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Roof (D, D1, I4) and Skylight Replacement, in the amount of $1,496,177.00 (net HST) or $1,661,439.00 (HST included) be accepted; 1. That the total gross project cost of $1,966,539.00 (HST included), including the amount of the tender, construction contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $1,770,929.00 (net HST) be approved; 2. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $1,770,929.00 to be funded from the Facilities Reserve and CCBF (FGT) Oblg RF as approved in the 2024 and 2025 Capital Budgets; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to approve consulting costs that may exceed $50,000.00 but not in excess of $65,000.00 to prevent any related risks of delays in construction; 4. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the CCDC-2, 2020 Stipulated Price Contract with Solar Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd. pursuant to Second Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5; and, 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. 6. Director, Community Services, Report CS 10-25 Page 406 General Contracting Services for Redman House Restoration Tender No. T2025-6 11.6 11.7 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 14 - Recommendation: That the bid submitted by Icon Builders Inc. in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-6 for General Contracting Services for Redman House Restoration, in the amount of $592,070.21 (net HST) or $657,467.90 (HST included) be accepted; 1. That the total gross project cost of $843,918.00 (HST included), including the amount of the tender, construction contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $759,974.00 (net HST) be approved; 2. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $759,974.00 to be funded as approved in the 2018, 2021, 2022 and 2024 Capital Budget as follows: The sum of $121,289.00 to be funded by the Rate Stabilization Reserve;a. The sum of $516,560.00 to be funded by the GICB grant;b. The sum of $88,000.00 to be funded by the Facilities Reserve;c. The sum of $34,125.00 to be funded by Property Taxes;d. 3. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the CCDC-2, 2020 Stipulated Price Contract with Icon Builders Inc. pursuant to Request for Tender No. T2025-6; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. 5. Director, City Infrastructure, Report INF 03-25 Page 410 Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Tender No. T2025-4 Recommendation: That the bid submitted by 1108575 Ontario LTD O/A Kon-Strutt Construction in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-4 for Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets, in the amount of $2,509,862.00 (net HST) or $2,787,091.00 (HST included) be accepted; 1. That the total gross project cost of $3,237,785.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, geotechnical investigation reports, material testing, contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $2,915,727.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 2. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $2,915,727.00 as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget from the 3. 11.8 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 15 - Building Faster Fund (BFF) Reserve Fund, on the condition that the City receives the grant funding related to achieving its 2024 housing targets; and the default funding strategy would have the projects funded by a transfer from Roads & Bridges Reserve Fund; and, That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. 4. Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 12-25 Page 421 Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings: ERO 025-0461, ERO 025-0462, ERO 025-0463, Bill 17: Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025 Regulatory Registry of Ontario Postings: 25-MMAH003 City of Pickering Comments on ERO and Regulatory Postings Recommendation: That Council endorse the comments contained in Report PLN 12-25, as the City of Pickering detailed comments on the ERO Postings ERO 025-0461, ERO 025-0462, ERO 025-0463, 25-MMAH003; and, 1. That Council authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to submit the Council endorsed comments on the identified ERO and Regulatory postings to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing website by the June 11 and 26, 2025, deadlines. 2. Motions and Notice of Motions Raising Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Cook WHEREAS individuals and families receiving income support through Ontario Works (OW) and the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) are facing increasing challenges in meeting basic needs due to rising costs of living; And Whereas Statistics Canada notes that people with disabilities have a higher poverty rate and a lower rate of employment than the overall population; And Whereas the annual income support for Ontario Works is currently $8,796.00 and $16,416.00 for Ontario Disability Support Program. These supports have not increased sufficiently to keep up with inflation and the cost of living. Such costs are anticipated to continue increasing; 11.9 12. 12.1 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 16 - And Whereas the low income measure for a single person in Greater Toronto Area is estimated to be approximately $27,343 annually, and the deep income poverty threshold is determined to be $20,508; And Whereas Food Banks, including our local Food Banks, provide a necessary service with increasing demands in our communities; And Whereas the Pickering Food Bank served 1,722 adults, and 1,054 children in February 2025; And Whereas food banks are already reducing their distribution capacity; and it is anticipated that due to developing economic circumstances, such as the current tariff war, there will be increased unemployment, increased food prices, and a heightened demand for food distribution, while donations continue to decline; And Whereas these economic trends will continue to erode the purchasing power of OW and ODSP recipients, increasing reliance on food banks and placing additional pressure on municipalities and community organizations; Now therefore it be resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering directs through the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer: That staff send a letter to the Premier of Ontario, Minister of Finance, Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, and the Minister for Seniors and Accessibility, to strongly urge that the Ontario Provincial Government significantly raise the payments of Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program and the increases be reflected in the upcoming Provincial Budget and that the increased amount aligns with inflationary costs and thereby decrease the pressure on food banks and the reliance on municipalities and taxpayers to supplement the gap in financial need; and, 1. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to all Members of Provincial Parliament (MPPs), the Regional Municipality of Durham, all Municipalities in the Province of Ontario, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) for their endorsement and advocacy. 2. By-laws By-law 8182/25 Page 441 Being a by-law to authorize the use of an alternative voting method for the 2026 Municipal Election. [Refer to Item 10.2 Report CLK 02-25] By-law 8183/25 Page 442 Being a by-law to establish and regulate the Pickering Fire Services Department. [Refer to Item 10.6 Report FIR 04-25] 13. 13.1 13.2 Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 17 - By-law 8184/25 Page 451 Being a by-law to exempt Lots 44, 65, and 106, Plan 40M-2671, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. Confidential Council - Public Report Regional Councillor Updates Other Business Confirmatory By-law Adjournment 13.3 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Council Meeting Agenda May 26, 2025 - 18 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 1 Present: Mayor Kevin Ashe Councillors: M. Brenner S. Butt L. Cook M. Nagy D. Pickles L. Robinson Also Present: M. Carpino - Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor B. Duffield - Director, City Infrastructure J. Eddy - Director, Human Resources L. Gibbs - Director, Community Services R. Holborn - Director, Engineering Services F. Jadoon - Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects S. Karwowski - Director, Finance & Treasurer S. Cassel - City Clerk V. Plouffe - Division Head, Facilities & Construction Management N. Robinson - Deputy Fire Chief R. Perera - Deputy Clerk J. Currie - Legislative Coordinator E. Knox - Community Safety & Well-Being Advisor 1. Call to Order/Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating electronically. 2. Playing of O Canada Mayor Ashe asked all Members of Council to rise for the playing of O Canada. 3. Moment of Reflection Mayor Ashe called for a silent moment of reflection. - 19 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 2 4. Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement Mayor Ashe read the Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement. 5. Disclosure of Interest 5.1 Councillor Brenner declared a conflict of interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act with respect to Item 15.2, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 129 Collective Bargaining Ratification, as he has a family member who is a member of CUPE Local 129. 5.2 Councillor Cook declared a conflict of interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act with respect to Item 15.2, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 129 Collective Bargaining Ratification, as she has a family member who is a member of CUPE Local 129. 6. Adoption of Minutes Resolution #701/25 Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Butt Council Minutes, March 24, 2025 Executive Committee Minutes, April 7, 2025 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, April 7, 2025 Special Council Minutes, April 22, 2025 Carried 7. Presentations There were no presentations. 8. Delegations 8.1 Andrew Scott, Mattamy Homes Re: Report PLN 09-25 Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2023-02 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 05/23 Seaton TFPM Inc. Part of Lots 21 and 22, Concession 5 Seaton Community - 20 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 3 Due to technical issues, this agenda item was heard during Item 11.1, Report PLN 09-25. 9. Correspondence 9.1 Corr. 03-25 Elaine Knox, Community Safety & Well-Being Advisor, City of Pickering Re: Community Safety and Well-Being Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan Resolution #702/25 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Nagy That Corr. 03-25 from Elaine Knox, Community Safety & Well-Being Advisor, City of Pickering, dated April 29, 2025, regarding the Community Safety and Well-Being Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan, be received for information. Carried 10. Report EC 04-25 of the Executive Committee held on April 7, 2025 10.1 Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 04-25 Community Safety and Well-Being Advisory Committee - Revised Terms of Reference Council Decision: 1. That Report CAO 04-25 regarding the approval of revised Terms of Reference for the Community Safety and Well-Being Advisory Committee be received; 2. That the revised Terms of Reference for the Community Safety and Well- Being Advisory Committee, as set out in Attachment #1 to this Report, be approved; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.3 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 05-25 - 21 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 4 Proposed All-way Stop Sapphire Drive and Azalea Avenue/Kingpeak Crescent Council Decision: 1. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule “6” and Schedule “7” to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of stop signs on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, specifically to address the proposed installation of an all-way stop control at the intersection of Sapphire Drive and Azalea Avenue/Kingpeak Crescent; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.4 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 06-25 Chickadee Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout and Dixie Estates 2 Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout Projects Consulting and Professional Services for Detailed Design Council Decision: 1. That Council approve retaining T.Y.Lin International Canada Inc. for consulting and professional services for the preparation of the detailed designs of the Chickadee Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout Project and the Dixie Estates 2 Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout Project, in accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 10.03 (c), as the assignment is above $50,000.00; 2. That the proposals submitted by T.Y.Lin International Canada Inc. for consulting and professional services for the preparation of the detailed design of the Chickadee Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout and the Dixie Estates 2 Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout projects, in the combined amount of $113,141.85 (net HST) or $125,639.05 (HST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $144,837.00 (HST included), including the fee amount and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $130,430.00 (net HST) be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $130,430.00 as follows: - 22 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 5 a) The sum of $60,000.00 to be funded from the Stormwater Management Reserve Fund as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget be increased to $65,375.00; b) The sum of $60,000.00 to be funded from the Stormwater Management Reserve Fund as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget be increased to $65,055.00; and, 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.6 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 08-25 Proposed Parking and Stopping Restrictions, Various Locations Amendment to the Traffic and Parking By-law 6604/05 Council Decision: 1. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule “1”, No Stopping, and Schedule “2”, No Parking, to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of stopping and parking restrictions on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, specifically to address the proposed installation of stopping and parking restrictions on portions of Alpine Lane, Beaton Way, Pebble Court and Tanzer Court; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 10.8 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 08-25 Authorization to Modify the Term of a Memorandum of Understanding Pre-Review of Design Drawings for Detached Additional Dwelling Units Council Decision: 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to modify the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Pickering and the Town of Whitby, by retroactively extending the term of the MOU to June 30, 2025, as set out in Appendix I to this report, for the sharing of resources to enable the preparation of pre-reviewed design drawings for detached Additional Dwelling Units, subject to minor revisions as may be required by the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, the Director, City Development & CBO, and the Chief Administrative Officer; - 23 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 6 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to further modify the term of the MOU between the City of Pickering and the Town of Whitby, as may be required in the future; and, 3. That appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take such action as is necessary to give effect to the recommendations in this report. Resolution #703/25 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Butt That Report EC 04-25 of the Executive Committee Meeting held on April 7, 2025 be adopted, save and except, Item 10.2, Report CS 03-25, Item 10.5, Report ENG 07-25, and Item 10.7, Report FIN 05-25. Carried 10.2 Director, Community Services, Report CS 03-25 Deaccession of Museum Artifacts 2025 Artifact Deaccession List A question and answer period ensued with staff regarding: • why issues cited during the 2023 deaccession process were still reoccurring; • whether the City had a pest control contractor and whether the pest control mechanisms being used were effective; • the current policy for handling duplicate artifacts; • who determined that restoration was not a viable option for the artifacts; • the percentage of artifacts that were included in the deaccession process in 2023; • how often artifacts were examined to see whether they qualified for deaccession; • whether deaccession was more cost effective than restoration; • the rationale for gathering artifacts with missing information; and, • protocols which would be in place moving forward to mitigate issues cited for deaccession. Resolution #704/25 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Butt - 24 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 7 1. That the deaccession of museum artifacts, as set out in Attachment 1, be endorsed; and, 2. That the staff be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. Carried 10.5 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 07-25 Urban Forest Study Update and Tree Canopy Cover Assessment A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: • when the findings of the study would be presented to Council and the next steps that would follow the completion of the study; • the timelines for tree planting and concerns that it was too far into the future; • how trees that were damaged during a storm were being tracked by the City; • ways to encourage residents to contact the City upon coming across a damaged tree to assist with tracking; • whether the staff report included any reference to protecting the rural characteristic of Cherrywood; • whether the study would look at Cherrywood; • whether the environmental findings from the study could justify rezoning or redevelopment in Cherrywood; • whether alternate price proposals were considered for the study and whether the cost was inflated; • whether any independent verification would be done on the work to be completed by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA); • whether the cost of the study would decrease if rural landowners denied access onto their properties; • whether the City already had baseline tree canopy information from satellite images and why that information was not reviewed first; • whether there was any evidence that climate change had damaged any trees; • why the work was not being done by staff or existing City consultants; • whether there was any guarantee that the rural character of Cherrywood would be maintained; • the importance of the study and consequences of not doing this study; - 25 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 8 • clarification regarding the intent of the study being to review the existing tree canopy; • clarification that any potential public consultation process would reiterate the information already presented in the staff report; and, • clarification that the study was looking to retain as many trees as possible. Resolution #705/25 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Butt 1. That Council approve retaining the services of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to update the Urban Forest Study and complete a Tree Canopy Cover Assessment, in accordance with the City’s Purchasing Policy, Appendix 1, item 8; 2. That the proposal submitted by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to update the Urban Forest Study and complete a Tree Canopy Cover Assessment, in the amount of $201,140.00 (HST included) be accepted; 3. That Council authorize staff to execute a letter of agreement with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to update the Urban Forest Study and complete a Canopy Cover Assessment, on such terms as are satisfactory to the Director, Engineering Services and the Director, Finance & Treasurer; 4. That the total gross project cost of $221,254.00 (HST included), including the fee amount and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $199,246.00 (net HST) be approved; 5. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $199,246.00 from the 2025 Current Budget, to be funded from Property Taxes; and, 6. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried on a Recorded Vote as Follows: Yes: Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councillor Cook No: Councillor Robinson - 26 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 9 Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Mayor Ashe 10.7 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 05-25 Asset Management Data Governance Policy & Procedure A brief question and answer period ensued with staff regarding: • whether the report was related to Seaton; • whether the report could be deferred since the Seaton Recreation Complex and Library project was recently paused; and, • whether the Seaton Recreation Complex and Library should be built prior to approving this report. Resolution #706/25 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Butt 1. That Report FIN 05-25, regarding the Asset Management Data Governance Policy & Procedure, be received; 2. That the Asset Management Data Governance Policy (FIN 120) & Procedure (FIN 120-001), set out in Attachments 1 and 2 respectively, be approved; 3. That the Chief Administrative Officer and the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to make any interpretations of the Asset Management Data Governance Policy & Procedure, make rulings that will allow the conduct of business to proceed, and to take any actions necessary to this effect; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 11. Report PD 03-25 of the Planning & Development Committee held on April 7, 2025 11.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 09-25 Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2023-02 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 05/23 Seaton TFPM Inc. Part of Lots 21 and 22, Concession 5 - 27 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 10 Seaton Community A. Scott, Mattamy Homes, appeared before Council via electronic connection and stated that he was available for questions regarding Report PLN 09-25. There were no questions from Members of Council. Resolution #707/25 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Nagy 1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2023-02, submitted by Seaton TFPM Inc., to permit a residential plan of subdivision on lands being Part of Lots 21 and 22, Concession 5, as shown on the Applicant’s Draft Plan of Subdivision, Attachment 4 to Report PLN 09-25, be endorsed; 2. That the conditions of draft plan of subdivision approval to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2023-02, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 09- 25, be endorsed; and, 3. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 05/23, submitted by Seaton TFPM Inc., to implement the Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2023-02 be approved, and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment, as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 09-25, be finalized and forwarded to Council for enactment. Carried 11.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 10-25 Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2022-03 Zoning By-law Amendment A 08/22 Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2022-04 The Brock Zents Partnership 2660, 2670 & 2680 Brock Road (Southwest corner of Brock Road and Zents Drive) Resolution #708/25 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Nagy - 28 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 11 1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2022-03, submitted by The Brock Zents Partnership, to establish one block for a residential condominium development, one environmental block, and one public road, as shown in Attachment 3 to Report PLN 10-25, and the implementing conditions of approval, as set out in Appendix I, be endorsed; and, 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 08/22, submitted by The Brock Zents Partnership, to permit a residential condominium development consisting of a mix of townhouse dwellings, on lands located at the southwest corner of Brock Road and Zents Drive, be approved, and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment, as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 10-25, be finalized and forwarded to Council for enactment prior to the Director, City Development & CBO issuing final site plan approval. Carried 12. Reports – New and Unfinished Business 12.1 Director, Community Services, Report CS 06-25 Consulting Services for Geotechnical and Hydrological Reports and Environmental Investigation for Seaton Recreation Complex & Library A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: • whether a soil test would be conducted when the Seaton Recreation Complex and Library were being constructed; • why the City was undertaking this work when the Seaton Recreation Complex and Library project was recently paused; • rationale for incurring costs to conduct studies for lands that the City did not currently own; • potential impact should Council decide not to move forward with the Seaton Recreation Complex and Library project; • the design work that was being conducted on the subject lands with Council not having approved the project; • whether the City would be liable if the fill added by the builder was not up to standard; • how conducting this work did not undermine Council’s decision to pause the Seaton Recreation Complex and Library project; • deferring the work to the same time the financial information pertaining to the Seaton Recreation Complex and Library project was being considered; - 29 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 12 • whether the land agreements that the City currently had pertaining to Seaton clarified that the land would be transferred to the City and whether it would be filled prior to the land transfer; • clarification that the purpose of the study was to ensure that the fill was appropriate to protect the City’s interests; • whether staff were in support of proceeding with the site preparation work; • next steps should the studies find unfavorable conclusions; and, • whether the land agreements included any provisions that would prevent the City from owning the lands. Resolution #709/25 Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Brenner 1. That the quotation submitted by DS Consultants Ltd. in response to Request for Quotation No. Q2025-9 for Geotechnical and Hydrological Reports and Environmental Investigation for the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library, in the amount of $130,253.00 (net HST) or $144,640.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $144,640.00 (HST included), including the amount of the proposal, contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $130,253.00 (net of HST rebate), be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $130,253.00 as approved in the 2020, 2021 and 2024 Capital Budget as follows: a. The sum of $76,884.00 to be funded by a transfer from the DC – Parks & Recreation Services Reserve Fund; b. The sum of $13,768.00 to be funded by a transfer from the DC – Library Reserve Fund; c. The sum of $39,601.00 to be funded by a transfer from the Seaton FIA Reserve Fund; 4. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the Form of Agreement with the above-mentioned consultant pursuant to Request for Quotation No. Q2025-9; and, - 30 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 13 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Carried on a Recorded Vote as Follows: Yes: Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councillor Cook Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Mayor Ashe No: Councillor Robinson 12.2 Director, Community Services, Report CS 09-25 New Vehicle Storage Shed at the Operations Centre Tender No. T2025-1 Resolution #710/25 Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Brenner 1. That the bid submitted by Gerr Construction Limited in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-1 for the construction of the New Vehicle Storage Shed at the Pickering Operations Centre, in the amount of $3,124,032.00 (net HST) or $3,469,100.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $4,011,500.00 (HST included), including the amount of the tender, construction contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $3,612,480.00 (net HST) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $3,612,480.00 to be funded from the Operations Centre Reserve Fund as approved in the 2023 and 2024 Capital Budgets; 4. That the Director, Operations be authorized to execute the CCDC-2, 2020 Stipulated Price Contract with the above-mentioned contractor pursuant to Request for Tender No. T2025-1; and, 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. - 31 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 14 Carried 12.3 Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects, Report ECD 03-25 Licence Agreement with Open Studio Art Café Seasonal Patio on City Owned Lands Resolution #711/25 Moved by Councillor Cook Seconded by Councillor Nagy 1. That Council approve the Draft Licence Agreement for the temporary use of City Property, adjacent to 617 Liverpool Road, to operate a seasonal patio between the City of Pickering and Open Studio Art Café, from May 1, 2025 until November 30, 2025; 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Licence Agreement between the City of Pickering and OSAC, in the form as attached to this report, subject to revisions as may be acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer, the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor and the Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 12.4 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 06-25 2025 Tax Rates and Final Tax Due Dates Resolution #712/25 Moved by Councillor Nagy Seconded by Councillor Cook 1. That Report FIN 06-25 regarding the 2025 tax rates and final tax due dates be received; 2. That the 2025 tax rates for the City of Pickering be approved as contained in Schedule “A” of the By-law attached hereto; - 32 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 15 3. That the tax levy due dates for the Final Billing for all taxable properties, excluding Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PIL) properties, be July 29, 2025 and October 29, 2025, thereby providing property owners one additional month to pay their taxes for the final two tax due dates without incurring late penalties or interest charges; 4. That the tax levy due dates for the Final Billing for all PIL properties be June 25, 2025 and September 25, 2025; 5. That staff be directed to write to Pickering’s MPP, requesting that the Education Act, as it relates to the timing of municipal levy payments to school boards, be amended to reflect those instances where municipalities decide to defer their property tax payment due date(s) as a result of the current economic uncertain environment, and that the deferral of property tax payments match the required municipal school board payments; 6. That the attached By-law be approved; 7. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes or undertake any actions necessary to comply with Provincial regulations including altering due dates or final tax rates to ensure that the property tax billing process is completed; and, 8. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. Carried 12.5 Director, City Infrastructure, Report INF 01-25 Wilson Bridge Replacement (Bridge 7002) Request for Tender No. T2025-2 A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: • whether signage would be placed on the site with details regarding timelines and the work that was being done; • whether barriers to the site would be installed; • the need for the signage to include a contact number to report issues related to construction; and, • next steps for the Joseph Street Reconstruction and Drainage Improvements project. Resolution #713/25 - 33 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 16 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt 1. That the bid submitted by Esposito Bros. Construction Ltd. in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-2 for Wilson Bridge Replacement, in the amount of $1,990,291.00 (net HST) or $2,210,129.43 (HST included), be accepted; 2. That Council award the contract administration and construction inspection for Request for Tender No. T2025-2 Wilson Bridge Replacement to Greer Galloway Group Inc. in the amount of $102,538.35 (HST included); in accordance with the Purchasing Policy Section 10.03 (c) as the assignment is above $50,000.00; 3. That the total gross project cost of $2,661,318.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, contract administration and inspection services, a contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $2,396,600.00 (net HST) be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $2,396,600.00 as follows: a. The sum of $2,000,000.00 as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget be increased to $2,396,600 and be funded from the Building Faster Fund Reserve Fund; and, 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 12.6 Director, City Infrastructure, Report INF 02-25 Joseph Street Reconstruction and Drainage Improvements Request for Tender No. T2025-3 Resolution #714/25 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt 1. That the bid submitted by Wyndale Paving Co. Ltd in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-3 for Joseph Street Reconstruction and Drainage - 34 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 17 Improvements, in the amount of $344,938.00 (net HST) or $383,039.49 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $555,214.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, a construction contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $499,987.00 (net HST) be approved; 3. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $499,987.00 as approved in the 2023 Roads Capital Budget, to be funded from the OCIF Reserve Fund; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 12.7 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 11-25 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) Reissue of Notice of Intention to Designate a Property under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act Resolution #715/25 Moved by Councillor Nagy Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That Council reaffirm its decision of November 25, 2024, to designate the property municipally known as 5113 Brock Road (Claremont), known as the G.M. Forsyth House, as a property of cultural heritage value or interest under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act; 2. That Council direct staff to reissue and serve a revised Notice of Intention to Designate the property in accordance with the notification requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act; 3. That should no Notice of Objection be received by the City Clerk within 30 days of the publication of the revised Notice, the designation by-law be brought forward to Council for enactment in accordance with Section 29(8) of the Ontario Heritage Act; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take such actions as necessary to give effect to this report. - 35 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 18 Carried 13. Motions and Notice of Motions 13.1 Pickering’s Response to U.S. Tariff Threats A discussion and a question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: • adverse effects of tariffs to the City, local businesses, and the entire community; • the need to advocate to exclude key materials from tariffs that municipalities rely on; • the need to form a united front with other municipalities and to strengthen efforts to reduce the reliance on imported goods; • the Motion being in keeping with views of both the Provincial and Federal governments; • the rationale for bypassing Council’s normal oversight when no formal directive was passed by the Federal or Provincial governments to municipalities; • whether there would be any financial impact to the City; • mechanisms that would be put in place to ensure public reporting and how over expenditures would be reported to Council; • concerns that the motion was retaliatory and that the City was embarking on expenditures without obtaining Council approval; and, • the importance of the Motion in protecting Canadian businesses. Resolution #716/25 Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Brenner WHEREAS, the trade between Canada and the United States (the “U.S.”) has driven decades of sustained economic growth, creating jobs and prosperity for Canadians; And Whereas, the tariffs previously announced by President Trump against Canada and the new tariffs announced by the U.S. administration on April 2, 2025, against 180 countries could have significant adverse effects on the global economy resulting in either decreased growth or a recession that in turn would have significant adverse effects on the local Pickering economy including possible job losses; - 36 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 19 And Whereas, the application of tariffs by the U.S. government and the reciprocal tariffs introduced by the Canadian Government will have negative results for the City of Pickering, particularly in terms of increased costs for goods sourced from the United States; And Whereas, local, provincial, and federal leaders are encouraging Canadians and Canadian municipalities to prioritize Canadian goods and services; And Whereas, the City of Pickering is committed to supporting local businesses and recognizing that the City of Pickering has significant purchasing power through its planned capital projects and planned projects and infrastructure investments which can be leveraged to support local and national businesses during the economic period of uncertainty; And Whereas, the City of Pickering remains committed to supporting local businesses and protecting jobs for Pickering residents; And Whereas, the City of Pickering recognizes the importance of adhering to current trade agreements signed by Canada, including the Canada European Trade Agreement (CETA) and other relevant international trade agreements; And Whereas, the Canada-United States-Mexico free trade agreement does not apply to municipal procurement, making it possible for municipalities to adopt strategies that prefer Canadian and other non-U.S. goods and services to those of the U.S.; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering requests: 1. That the City of Pickering align its procurement strategies with any legislation or direction to municipalities that may be issued formally by the federal or provincial government in response to tariffs imposed by the U.S., to support a unified, cross-Canada approach that effectively leverages the considerable buying power of municipalities to support a broader trade and economic strategy in Canada; 2. That the City of Pickering calls on the Federal and Provincial governments to take action to remove inter-provincial trade barriers between provinces as a response to U.S. tariffs and support Canadian businesses; 3. That Council directs staff to adopt procurement strategies that prioritize Canadian and other non-U.S. goods and services over those of the U.S., where feasible; - 37 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 20 4. That City Departments conduct a thorough review of purchased goods and services to ensure, where possible, Canadian or Non-American goods, services or product standards are adopted; 5. That the City of Pickering will engage, through the Economic Development & Strategic Projects Department, with local businesses and stakeholders to understand the potential impacts of proposed tariffs and to collaborate on strategies to strengthen the local economy; 6. That the Director Finance & Treasurer be directed to approve amendments to the City’s Purchasing Policy thresholds that would allow City staff more flexibility to support local businesses, particularly for low-dollar purchases of goods and services, and directly solicit bids from domestic suppliers, where applicable, while ensuring continued compliance with the Canadian Trade Agreements; 7. That the Director Finance & Treasurer be delegated authority to approve contract extensions in situations where negotiating an extension is favourable to obtaining bids, during this time of uncertainty, or where supply or pricing is likely to be impacted, and that this delegated authority be in effect for the duration of the 2025 budget year; 8. That the Director Finance & Treasurer be delegated authority to approve additional financing, specifically related to tariffs and retaliatory issues where current contracts or bids come in over budget or require an increase, that would otherwise require Council approval unless the additional funding relies on reserves or reserve funds, and that this delegated authority be in effect for the duration of the 2025 budget year; and, 9. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to The Right Honourable Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada, The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, all Durham MPs, all Durham MPPs, and Durham Region Council. Carried on a Recorded Vote as Follows: Yes: Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councillor Cook Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Mayor Ashe No: Councillor Robinson - 38 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 21 14. By-laws 14.1 By-law 8176/25 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. 14.2 By-law 8177/25 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. 14.3 By-law 8178/25 Being a By-law to amend City Consolidated Zoning By-law 8149/24, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, for land at Part Lots 21 and 22, Concession 5, City of Pickering (A 05/23) (Seaton TFPM Inc.) 14.4 By-law 8179/25 Being a by-law to adopt the estimates of all sums required to be raised by taxation for the year 2025 and to establish the Tax Rates necessary to raise such sums and to establish the final due dates for all realty tax classes. 14.5 By-law 8180/25 Being a by-law to amend the Municipal Accommodation Tax By-law 8161/25 Resolution #717/25 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Nagy That By-law Numbers 8176/25 through 8180/25 be approved. Carried 15. Confidential Council – Public Report - 39 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 22 Mayor Ashe stated that prior to the Regular Meeting of Council, an In-camera session was held at 5:45 pm in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act and Procedure By-law to receive advice subject to solicitor-client privilege, and to consider matters relating to a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality and labour relations or employee negotiations. The matters discussed pertained to a purchase of land and the collective bargaining ratification for CUPE Local 129. Carried 15.1 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Confidential Report LEG 04-25 Re: Purchase of Land required for a Multi-use Pedestrian Path and Fire Hydrant forming part of the Walnut Lane Extension Resolution #718/25 Moved by Councillor Nagy Seconded by Councillor Cook That the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor be authorized to proceed with the acquisition of Part 1, Plan 40R-32660, being a parcel of land adjacent to Walnut Lane, in accordance with the provisions contained in Confidential Report LEG 04-25. Carried on a Recorded Vote as Follows: Yes: Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councillor Cook Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Mayor Ashe No: Councillor Robinson Carried 15.2 Confidential Memorandum from the Director, Human Resources Re: Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 129 Collective Bargaining Ratification Having previously declared a conflict of interest, Councillor Brenner and Councillor Cook did not vote on the following item. Resolution #719/25 Moved by Councillor Robinson Seconded by Councillor Nagy - 40 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 23 That the Memorandum of Settlement, April 14, 2025, between The Corporation of the City of Pickering and the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 129 be ratified, and the Director, Human Resources be authorized to take the necessary actions. Carried 16. Regional Councillor Updates There were no Regional Councillor Updates. 17. Other Business 17.1 Councillor Pickles gave Notice of a Motion regarding increasing Ontario Works and Ontario disability support program payments. 17.2 Councillor Robinson gave Notice of a Motion regarding providing temporary parking allowance for St Paul's on the Hill Community Food Bank. 18. Confirmatory By-law By-law 8181/25 Councillor Nagy, seconded by Councillor Cook moved for leave to introduce a By-law of the City of Pickering to confirm the proceedings of April 29, 2025. Carried 19. Adjournment Moved by Councillor Robinson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 9:01 p.m. Dated this 29th day of April, 2025. - 41 - Council Meeting Minutes April 29, 2025 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Mayor Ashe 24 Kevin Ashe, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 42 - 1 Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Electronic Meeting May 05, 2025 - 02:00 PM Chair: Mayor Ashe Present: Mayor K. Ashe Councillor M. Brenner Councillor S. Butt Councillor L. Cook Councillor M. Nagy Councillor D. Pickles Councillor L. Robinson Regrets: None Also Present: M. Carpino - Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor B. Duffield - Director, City Infrastructure J. Eddy - Director, Human Resources L. Gibbs - Director, Community Services F. Jadoon - Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects S. Karwowski - Director, Finance & Treasurer S. Cassel - City Clerk V. Plouffe - Division Head, Facilities & Construction Management C. Whitaker - Manager, Sustainability & Strategic Environmental Initiatives N. Robinson - Deputy Fire Chief M. Edmund - Coordinator, Sustainability R. Perera - Deputy Clerk - 43 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes May 05, 2025 2 1. Call to Order/Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of the Committee were present and participating electronically. 2. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3. Delegations There were no delegations. 4. Matters for Consideration 4.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report SUS 02-25 City of Pickering Community Climate Adaptation Plan 2025 - 2035 J. Schofield, Principal Consultant, Climate Compass Advisors, appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to the City’s Community Climate Adaptation Plan (CCAP). Through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, J. Schofield spoke to the purpose of the Plan highlighting past extreme weather events such as the 2022 Derecho Storm and severe thunderstorms that occurred in 2024. J. Schofield provided details of the two approaches to climate action being climate adaptation and climate mitigation, stating that the purpose of the CCAP was to focus on adaptation efforts to enhance resilience. J. Schofield further provided details of the five phases of the CCAP, the five key areas of climate risk, and key findings from the public engagement process. J. Schofield spoke about climate equity adding that climate equity was a principle that emphasized fairness in addressing climate change and listed its co-benefits. J. Schofield also provided details of the CCAP’s vision statement, guiding principles, focus areas, implementation and reporting mechanisms. Discussion and a question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee, staff, and J. Schofield regarding: • whether the City needed to change its storm water management process as it related to the Seaton project; - 44 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes May 05, 2025 3 • whether the study analyzed the City’s wetlands; • concerns and questions as to why the climate change scenario Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 was used in the study when it had been discredited; • whether any components of the CCAP were rejected in response to feedback from the community; • the cost associated with each recommendation; • how equity and diversity directly related to climate resilience; • whether the program would help address basement flooding for certain neighbourhoods; • why the wildfire smoke event in 2023 was referenced in the Report when that climate event occurred outside of Pickering; • whether any components of the CCAP related to the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI); • whether the CCAP would mitigate costs related to pest control; • feedback from the community regarding climate equity and the importance of climate equity; • home energy retrofits related to the CCAP and whether this was feasible in Pickering; • whether staff had conducted research on the RCP 8.5 and concerns that it was based on unrealistic assumptions; • when the City signed on to ICLEI and whether the public was informed of the long-term implications noting concerns that the City had joined ICLEI without public consultation; and, • the community feedback demonstrating community support for the CCAP. Recommendation: Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Cook 1. That Report SUS 02-25, regarding the City of Pickering Community Climate Adaptation Plan 2025 – 2035, as set out in Appendix I, be endorsed; 2. That recommendations from the Community Climate Adaptation Plan be considered, along with other municipal priorities, through future annual municipal plans and budget processes; 3. That staff report back to Council on the progress of the Community Climate Adaptation Plan’s implementation at the end of year three, of the ten-year plan; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the - 45 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes May 05, 2025 4 necessary actions as indicated in this report. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 6 1 0 0 0 Carried on a Recorded Vote (6 to 1) 4.2 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report CLK 02-25 Approval of Voting Methods for the 2026 Municipal Election A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and staff regarding: • whether Voter Information Packages (VIPs) containing the elector Personal Identification Numbers (PINs) to log into the Internet Voting system would be mailed out again; • how new Pickering residents could ensure that they receive their VIPs to cast their vote; • why the City was recommending the use of Internet Voting when it was not used by the Provincial or the Federal government in their recent elections; • whether there was a mechanism to have a paper trail for each ballot that was cast using the Internet Voting system and how this could be utilized in the event of a recount; • whether staff were able to verify who voted and who did not; • whether there was a way to guarantee that there would not be any bandwidth issues with the use of Internet Voting during the 2026 Municipal Election; • names of Internet Voting providers currently in the market; • how staff could ensure that the Internet Voting system was administered properly; • whether there was any evidence of hacking or international interference of the - 46 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes May 05, 2025 5 Internet Voting system found during the last two municipal elections; • clarification that 79% of electors chose Internet Voting during the 2022 Municipal Election and the staff recommendation had been based on that information; and, • clarification that electors who receive their VIP still had the choice between casting their vote using paper ballot or Internet Voting. Recommendation: Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Cook 1. That Report CLK 02-25 regarding the approval of voting methods for the 2026 Municipal Election be received; 2. That both internet voting and paper ballots, using vote tabulators, be approved as the voting methods for the 2026 Municipal Election and any by-elections that may occur during the 2026-2030 Term of Council; 3. That the draft By-law included as Attachment 1 to Report CLK 02-25 be approved and enacted; 4. That the City Clerk be directed to proceed with a Request for Proposal for the approved voting methods and associated services, and report back to Council to award the contract to the most appropriate vendor(s); and, 5. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to give effect to this report. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 6 1 0 0 0 Carried on a Recorded Vote (6 to 1) - 47 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes May 05, 2025 6 4.3 Director, Community Services, Report CS 04-25 Civic Awards Program Policy Update Recommendation: Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Cook 1. That Council approve the updated Civic Awards Program Policy CUL 150, as set out in Attachment 1 to this report; and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 4.4 Director, Community Services, Report CS 05-25 Waterfront Paddle Sport Rental Service Frenchman’s Bay Recommendation: Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Cook 1. That Report CS 05-25 regarding an update on waterfront paddle sport rental service on Frenchman’s Bay be received; 2. That Council approve the inclusion of facilities to accommodate paddle sport rental services in the design of Beachfront Park Revitalization - Phase 2; and, 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action as indicated in this report. Carried 4.5 Director, Community Services, Report CS 07-25 Northern Community Halls Recommendations for Facility Renewal Mayor Ashe stated that a substitute motion for Report CS 07-25 was circulated to all - 48 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes May 05, 2025 7 Members of the Committee prior to the Meeting. A discussion ensued between Members of the Committee regarding: • groups in the community that had an interest in using the facilities for community events and providing the option to purchase to these groups; • clarification that the buildings would be reviewed by the City’s Heritage Advisory Committee for historical significance; • the community providing a number of suggested uses for the Green River Community Centre; and, • consideration of a possible amendment to make the intent of the motion clearer and the amended wording being presented at the May 26, 2025 Council Meeting. Recommendation: Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Butt 1. That staff be directed to investigate the option to sell Green River Community Centre, with Infrastructure Ontario being offered the first right of refusal to purchase for $2.00 as per the original sales agreement (Attachment 1), and then to explore options to sell the facility, and report back to Council with recommendations in Q1, 2026; 2. That staff be directed to investigate options to sell the former Greenwood Library back to the Durham District School Board first; and then to explore options to sell or lease the facility at a market rate and report back to Council with recommendations in Q1, 2026; 3. That staff be directed to renew the management agreement for the Mount Zion Community Centre with the Mount Zion Community Centre Association for a two year term from July 1 2025 to June 30 2026 returning said agreement to Council in Q2, 2025 for endorsement; and to investigate options to reduce the net capital cost of Mount Zion Community Centre by selling the facility, or leasing the facility at a market rate and report back to Council with recommendations in Q1, 2026; 4. That staff be directed to renew the management agreement for the Whitevale Community Centre and the Whitevale Arts and Culture Centre with the Whitevale and District Residents’ Association for a five-year term from July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2030 returning said agreement to Council in Q2, 2025 for endorsement; - 49 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes May 05, 2025 8 5. That City Heritage staff evaluate the Mount Zion Community Centre (School Section #13 Schoolhouse) and Green River Community Centre (Green River Baptist Church) under Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act to determine whether the properties merit designation under Part IV of the Act, and report back to Council with recommendations in Q4, 2025; 6. That, as part of any open proposal to sell or lease the above properties, staff be directed to invite community groups to submit an expression of interest; and, 7. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 4.6 Fire Chief, Report FIR 04-25 Fire Department Establishing and Regulating By-law A question and answer period ensued with staff regarding: • why Council was being removed from the decision-making process related to changes to core fire services; • whether Council would be able to reverse amendments to the By-law made through the delegated authority process should Council disagree with the changes; • whether a report on the financial impact of the By-law would be brought forward to Council in the future; • how Council would oversee budget increases related to this Report; • what recommendations of the Fire Master Plan were being enacted through the By-law; • clarification on how the By-law was flexible as noted in the staff report; and, • whether the By-law allowed any of the fire core services to be downgraded without Council approval. Recommendation: Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Nagy 1. That Report FIR 04-25 regarding the Fire Department Establishing and Regulating By-law be received; - 50 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes May 05, 2025 9 2. That the draft By-law included as Attachment 1 to Report FIR 04-25 be approved and enacted; 3. That By-Law 771/78 be repealed; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take such actions as are necessary to give effect to the recommendations in this report. Carried 5. Member Updates on Committees There were no updates from Members on Committees. 6. Other Business There was no other business. 7. Adjournment Moved By Councillor Nagy Seconded By Councillor Cook That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 4:03 p.m. - 51 - Principles Integrity May 1, 2025 Integrity Commissioner’s Annual Report City of Pickering The purpose of an Integrity Commissioner’s annual report is to provide the public with the opportunity to understand the ethical well-being of the City’s elected and appointed officials through the lens of our activities. Principles Integrity is pleased to submit this report, covering the period from April 1, 2024, the date of our last report, through April 30, 2025. About Us: Principles Integrity is a partnership focused on accountability and governance matters for municipalities. Principles Integrity currently serves as Integrity Commissioner (and as Lobbyist Registrar/Closed Meeting Investigator/Municipal Ombudsman for some clients) in over 60 Ontario municipalities and other public bodies. The Role of Integrity Commissioner, Generally: An Integrity Commissioner’s statutory role is to carry out, in an independent manner, the following functions: •Advice on ethical policy development •Education on matters relating to ethical behaviour •Providing on request, advice and opinions to Council, members of Council and members of Local Boards •Providing a mechanism to receive inquiries (often referred to as ‘complaints’) which allege a breach of ethical responsibilities •Resolving complaints informally, where appropriate, and •Investigating, reporting and making recommendations to Council on those complaints that cannot be resolved informally, while being guided by Council’s codes, policies and protocols. This might contrast with the popular yet incorrect view that the role of the Integrity Commissioner is primarily to hold elected officials to account; to investigate alleged transgressions and to recommend ‘punishment’. The better view is that Integrity Commissioners serve as an independent resource, coach, and guide, focused on enhancing the municipality’s ethical culture. The operating philosophy of Principles Integrity recites this perspective. We believe there is one overarching objective for a municipality in appointing an Integrity Commissioner, and that is to raise the public’s perception that its elected and appointed officials conduct themselves with integrity: The perception that a community’s elected representatives are operating with integrity Corr. 04-25 - 52 - Principles Integrity is the glue which sustains local democracy. We live in a time when citizens are skeptical of their elected representatives at all levels. The overarching objective in appointing an Integrity Commissioner is to ensure the existence of robust and effective p olicies, procedures, and mechanisms that enhance the citizen’s perception that their Council (and local boards) meet established ethical standards and where they do not, there exists a review mechanism that serves the public interest. The practical effect of achieving this objective is an increase in trust, respect and engagement in local and upper tier affairs. In carrying out our broad functions, the role falls into two principal areas. ‘Municipal Act’ functions, focused on codes of conduct and other policies relating to ethical behaviour, and ‘MCIA’ or Municipal Conflict of Interest Act functions. From an activity perspective, an Integrity Commissioner’s role can be depicted this way: The emphasis of Principles Integrity is to help municipalities enhance their ethical foundations and reputations through the drafting of effective codes of conduct and other policies governing ethical behaviour, to provide meaningful education related to such policies, and to provide pragmatic binding advice to Members seeking clarification on ethical issues. As noted in the graphic, we believe that the support we give to Members of Council increases the public’s perception of them, which in turn leads to greater trust, respect and engagement. Because the development of policy and the provision of education and advice is not in every case a full solution, the broad role of the Integrity Commissioner includes the function of seeking and facilitating resolutions when allegations of ethical transgressions are made, and, Generally not applicable Code Complaints TRUST, RESPECT, ENGAGEMENT Orientation, Annual or Specific Training, Annual Reports, Lessons Learned from Complaints Educational Independent triage, investigation, disposition and/or reporting Code Complaints Governance Advice Closed Meeting Investigations Advocacy As Assigned Assistance in the preparation and adoption of Codes of Conduct and Policies governing ethical behaviour Consulting The Key function of an Integrity Commissioner. Guidance can ‘bulletproof’ Advisory Address most allegations within the Code framework; potential for Court application Municipal Conflict of Interest Act Complaints Council Local Board Council Local Board Council Local Board Council Local Board Council Local Board Council Local Board Similar, however usually administered in groups Of similar importance for Local Board Members - 53 - Principles Integrity where it is appropriate and in the public interest to do so, conducting and reporting on formal investigations. This in our view is best seen as a residual and not primary role. Confidentiality: Much of the work of an Integrity Commissioner is done under a cloak of confidentiality. While in most cases secrecy is required by statute, the promise of confidentiality also encourages full disclosure by the people who engage with us. We maintain the discretion to release confidential information when it is necessary to do so for the purposes of a public report, but those disclosures would be limited and rare. City of Pickering Activity: During the period covered by this report, we have been engaged in a moderate level of activity as Integrity Commissioner which subdivides roughly into three categories: 1. Policy Development and Education During the period covered by this report we have not provided training for Members of Council or local boards. 2. Advice The advice function of the Integrity Commissioner is available to all Members of Council and where applicable their staff and Members of local boards on matters relating to the code of conduct, the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act and any other matter touching upon the ethical conduct of Members. Advice provided by the Integrity Commissioner is confidential and independent, and where all the relevant facts are disclosed, is binding upon the Integrity Commissioner. Our advice is typically provided in a short Advice Memorandum which confirms all relevant facts and provides with clarity our analysis and a recommended course of action. During the period covered by this report, we responded to four (4) such requests for advice. 3. Complaint Investigation and Resolution Our approach to reviewing complaints starts with a determination as to whether an inquiry to us is within our jurisdiction, is beyond a trifling matter, is not either frivolous or vexatious, and importantly, whether in its totality it is in the public interest to pursue. We always look to the possibility of informal resolution in favour of formal investigation and reporting. Once a formal investigation is commenced, the opportunity to seek informal resolution is not abandoned. Where we are able to resolve a matter without concluding a formal investigation, our practice is to provide a written explanation in the form of a Disposition Letter to the complainant to close the matter. Often the respondent Member is involved in preliminary fact-finding and will also be provided with a summary of the disposition. - 54 - Principles Integrity Where formal investigations commence, they are conducted under the tenets of procedural fairness and Members are confidentially provided with the name of the Complainant when that information is necessary to enable them to respond to the allegations raised. During the period covered by this report, we received forty-one (41) complaints. Of these, twenty-six (26) were able to be concluded without a report to Council, one (1) concluded in a public report, and fourteen (14) are ongoing. Observations from across Ontario With due regard to our obligation to maintain confidentiality, this report enables us to identify learning opportunities gleaned from our experience in municipalities across Ontario. Disclosure of confidential information from closed meeting sessions There have been some examples where elected or appointed officials fail to recognize the serious implications of disclosing confidential information, particularly information learned of through attendance in closed session. A Member’s obligation to maintain confidentiality is clear. They may not unilaterally decide to share confidential information, even if they believe the information should be publicly disclosed. This extends to releasing information even to their own leg al counsel to obtain a ‘second opinion’. We treat this breach of ethical responsibility as breach of a cardinal rule, and if an allegation in this regard is proved to be true, it tends to attract a recommended sanction at the upper end of the prescribed range. Left unchecked, a confidentiality breach undermines not only Council’s interests on the matter subject to the breach, but destroys the trust required of elected officials, and the staff that support them, to ensure that all relevant, and sensitive, information required to support the deliberation on a matter is freely supplied. Non-disparagement One area of prominence continues to be the failure of some Members of Council to adhere to rules against disparagement. Members of Council are entitled to, and indeed expected to, disagree on all manner of issues. However, one of the cornerstones to democracy must be the recognition that different opinions and perspectives are to be respected, and disagreement should not devolve into disrespect, disparagement and name -calling. Disrespectful interactions and/treatment of others can fall along a continuum which may manifest as occasional incivility and micro-aggressions, but when unchecked can culminate in bullying and harassment. Members of Council should be mindful to treat ea ch other, staff and the public with appropriate respect and professionalism at all times. Some Members of Council hold a view was that they are entitled to their freely express their opinion, even if that includes disparagement of others, and so long as they share it via personal email, and not on the municipal server, they are not constrained by any rules around - 55 - Principles Integrity decorum. This is incorrect. Members are bound by the Code provisions of respectful and non-disparaging communication, whether sharing views on their own email, social media, or elsewhere. Participation in social media discussions lends its own opportunity for attracting Code of Conduct complaints alleging disparagement. Members should be mindful that comments can be used or amplified in ways that bring municipal integrity into disrepute. It is important that Members be careful, accurate, and non-disparaging even as they attempt to offer what they see as a fair critique of municipal policy and actions. Municipal policy is advanced through the deliberations of Council and so wherever possible the focus should be on facilitating a discussion ‘in the Chamber’, and not in internet channels, so the general public, staff, and Council colleagues, can participate in the mechanisms through which a variety of important interests can be balanced and distilled into Council decisions made through democratic process. Regardless of the medium, regardless of the intended audience, and regardless of motive, we have observed several instances where Members of Council in municipalities around the province have been found to have breached ethical standards by saying or recording things they have come to regret. Recognizing and avoiding conflicts of interest Recognizing and appropriately avoiding conflicts of interest when they might arise is the topic of most advice requests we receive. As confirmed by the Collingwood Judicial Inquiry (November 2020) there can be a complex array of circumstances that can give rise to conflicts of interest, including those that though not covered by the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, are nevertheless covered by the common law In any event, obtaining clear and reliable advice from the Integrity Commissioner can help avoid costly and time-consuming investigations if there is any uncertainty about the application of the Rule. Staying in your lane One area of concern that continues to arise relates to members of Council overstepping their role, attempting to ‘take the reins’ to fix a constituent’s problem, or directing staff how to do their job. Members of Council serve an important role in putting constituents in touch with appropriate staff, and leading them to established processes, but it is important to strike the correct balance between guiding constituents and becoming their advocate. It continues to be the case that elected officials attempt to inject themselves in quasi-judicial matters such as by-law enforcement, or with respect to insurance claims. While it is important for Council to retain an oversight role, and have the ability to monitor how its by- laws and programs affect the community, file-level interference by individual elected officials must be avoided. On April 9, 2025, the Government of Ontario announced plans to expand Strong Mayor - 56 - Principles Integrity Powers to a further 169 municipalities. These changes are effective May 1, 2025. In municipalities subject to ‘stronger mayor powers 1’ the question arises as to whether a mayor with those powers can give direction to staff beyond the specific circumstances mentioned in the Act (essentially to carry out ‘Mayoral Decisions’ authorized by the Act, or to direct that staff conduct research and provide advice). For non-‘stronger mayors’ and for stronger mayors exceeding their jurisdiction, inappropriate interference arises because of a misinterpretation of the Municipal Act provision which identifies the role of the Head of Council as ‘Chief Executive Officer’. This provision has led to confusion and, occasionally, overreach by Heads of Council in erroneously perceiving a role in leading the municipality’s administration. Elected officials – even Heads of Council – have no role in the day-to-day administration of municipal government unless specifically authorized by statute. Failing to recognize this, stepping outside of their proper role as elected officials to ‘take the reins’ of administration, undermines staff and can be perceived as interfering with management. This overstepping of the proper role by Members, even Mayors , must be recognized as inappropriate under the Code of Conduct and the Council-Staff Relations Policy, both mandated under the Municipal Act. As always, obtaining clear and reliable advice can help avoid a costly and time -consuming investigation. Provincial Review of Code of Conduct/Integrity Commissioner System In December 2024, proposed amendments to the Municipal Act were introduced by the province in the form of Bill 241, titled ‘An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 2006 and the Municipal Act, 2001 in relation to codes of conduct ’. With the calling of the recent provincial election the Bill is no longer capable of adoption, although it signals the approach the government may take, having been returned to office. Code of Conduct development for various municipalities has been paused because the Bill contemplated a universal code of conduct for all municipalities in Ontario. No detail was provided with respect to the form or content of such a code, nor to the future role of the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario in developing training or in otherwise influencing the approach municipal integrity commissioners are to take in serving their client municipalities.2 What the Bill did specify is a mechanism to remove elected officials from office should a municipal integrity commissioner find after a complaint investigation: 1 The recent amendments to the Municipal Act which provide designated mayors to make unilateral decisions with respect to municipal organization and prescribed provincial interests is neither indicative of non -designated mayors being ‘weak’, nor representative of the extensive powers American ‘stron g mayors’ have, particularly in light of the role partisan politics plays in electing administrators there. 2 It should be noted that the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario does not currently have any role in the administration of municipal code of conduct/integrity commissioner matters. - 57 - Principles Integrity 1. The member has contravened the code of conduct. 2. The contravention is of a serious nature. 3. The member’s conduct that is the subject of the inquiry has resulted in harm to the health, safety or well-being of any person. 4. The penalties set out in subsection 223.4 (5) [reprimand or suspension of pay] are insufficient to address the contravention or to ensure that the contravention is not repeated. If such is the case, the municipal integrity commissioner will refer the matter to the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario who will conduct their own inquiry. Upon the completion of that inquiry the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario, if they agree the abov e criteria have been met, will report to the respective municipal council with a recommendation that the elected official be removed from office. Council must vote unanimously (the respondent elected official cannot vote and is not counted) in order to cause the member’s seat to become vacant. In our view the mechanism set out in the bill is lengthy, uncertain and expensive, and does not adequately deal with what might be done to achieve course correction while the process is underway, nor at the conclusion of a non-unanimous Council vote should the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario recommend that removal from office is appropriate. Regrettably the Bill represents a virtually single -minded approach to remedying the deficiencies of the current system by focusing on mechanisms leading to removal from office. It is hoped that there will be more fulsome consultations, including with prac ticing municipal integrity commissioners, prior to any further legislative action. Conclusion: We look forward to continuing to work with Members of Council to ensure a strong ethical framework. We embrace the opportunity to elevate Members’ familiarity with their obligations under the Code and to respond to emerging issues. As always, we welcome Members’ questions and look forward to continuing to serve as your Integrity Commissioner. It has been a privilege to assist you in your work by providing advice about the Code of Conduct and in resolving complaints. We recognize that public service is not easy and the ethical issues that arise can be challenging. The public rightly demands th e highest standard from those who serve them, and we congratulate Council for its aspirational objective to strive to meet that standard. Finally, we wish to thank the Clerk and the Chief Administrative Officer for their professionalism and assistance where required. Although an Integrity Commissioner is not part of the administrative hierarchy, the work of our office depends on the facilitation of access to information and policy in order to carry out the mand ate. This was done willingly and efficiently by the staff of the municipality. - 58 - Memo To: Mayor Ashe and May 26, 2025 Mem bers of Council From: Jesse St. Amant Coordinator, Cultural Services Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Community Services City Clerk Manager, Cultural Services Manager, Community services Administration & Strategic Initiatives Supervisor, Cultural Services Special Advisor, Community Initiatives Subject: Cultural Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan File: A-1410-008 Cultural Advisory Committee The Cultural Advisory Committee (CAC) is pleased to submit, for Council’s information, the 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Work Plan. A.2024 Year End Report In 2024, the CAC met eight times prior to the end of term on November 14, 2024. Highlighted achievements include but are not limited to the following: Reviewed and provided recommendation and endorsement of the following Public Art projects: •Gordon’s Guitar - Celebration of Gordon Lightfoot Public Art Commission in Ernie L. Stroud Park in the Steeple Hill Community by artist Geordie Lishman, to be installed in September/Fall 2025. •Ayukwenodih - Kingston Road Public Art Commission by artist Javid Jah, Alex Akbari and Catherine Tàmmaro (Wyandot artist). The artwork was unveiled on Friday, November 1, 2024. •Crimson Inflorescence - Remembrance Day Poppy Markers Public Art Commission in Esplanade Park along southeast walking path leading towards the Cenotaph, installed on 11 park light posts by artist Linfeng Zhou. The work was unveiled on October 25, 2024. Reviewed and provided recommendation and endorsement of the following Temporary Public Art projects: •Annual Community Banner Series by artists Serene Chan, Zuna Amir, and Sima Naseem located on Valley Farm Road and Kingston Road installed in December 2024. Corr. 05-25 - 59 - May 26, 2025 Page 2 of 4 Cultural Advisory Committee – 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan • Digital Artwork Display at Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex of a collection of works by artist Matthew James Catalano installed in August 2024. • Art Junction - Utility Box Wrap in Rick Johnson Memorial Park by artist Rainier Naomi Magtalas. The work was installed on October 22, 2024. • Seasonal Window Painting Murals at City Hall and Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex by Pickering local artist Jacob Headley. The work was installed on Tuesday, November 12, 2024 as part of Winter Nights, City Lights. • Migizi (Bald Eagle) Saves The World - Winter Nights, City Lights Art Installation by Nyle Miigizi Johnston at City Hall installed in November 2024. Reviewed and provided recommendations on monthly Pickering Museum Village reports that included, but were not limited to: • Gather and Grow – an outdoor program areas focusing on the ways food preparation and production has connected people and communities, across cultures and history. • Log House and Log Barn renovations and new programs. • Updates on the progress of the Pickering Heritage and Community Centre (PHCC) and future programming. Reviewed, consulted and discussed the following corporate projects and priorities: • Presentations were made to the committee regarding: o PHCC (construction and program development) o Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Strategy o Pickering Community Visitor Plan 2024-2027 o 2024 Events Schedule and CAC outreach opportunities o Post Manor Building (at 1970 Brock Road) feasibility study to convert the Heritage Building into an Art Gallery The CAC initiated their first sub-committee, the Pickering Arts Culture & Engagement (P.A.C.E.), in early 2024. This sub-committee is dedicated to coordinating opportunities for stakeholder and community engagement. Their objective is to engage each of Pickering's cultural communities by showcasing elements of their culture through arts, music, dance and food, to the community at large through new initiatives, activities and partnerships. Representatives from the CAC delegated twice at Council in 2024. Members of the CAC presented the CAC 2023 Achievements and 2024 Work Plan Report during the March 25, 2024 Council meeting. The second delegation to Council was in support of the Community Visitor Plan and Report at the May 6, 2024 Executive Council Meeting. The CAC was also represented at this year’s Cultural Fusion event that took place on Saturday, September 14, 2024 in Esplanade Park. The Chair of the CAC volunteered and acted as Master of Ceremony for the event. - 60 - May 26, 2025 Page 3 of 4 Cultural Advisory Committee – 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan B. 2025 Work Plan The Cultural Services Unit has several projects and initiatives planned for 2025 that will be presented to the CAC for consultation which include, but are not limited to: • Community Visitors Plan 2024-2027 – Progress Report • Cultural Strategic Plan - Renewal of the Plan • Pickering Museum Village Strategic Plan – Renewal of the Plan • Public Art Plan – Renewal of the Plan The Cultural Services Unit also has ongoing annual planning which will be presented to the CAC for consultation: • Public Art Projects, including but not limited to: o Commemorative Public Art for Sigrid Squire o Commemorative Public Art for Paul White o Celebration of Ernie Coombs (Mr. Dressup) o Commission for the PHCC o Commission for the Pickering Civic Complex Council Chambers (Dorsey James Project) o Commission of Artwork by Indigenous Artists on Metal Pannels at Beachfront Park • Temporary Public Art, including but not limited to: o Lest We Forget Remembrance Day Crosswalks o Community Banner Series o City Centre Banner Display Program o Digital Artwork Display at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex • Pickering Museum Village Annual Operating Plan, including but not limited to: o Deaccession Lists review o Provide feedback on Coach Tour business plan o Provide an update on the Miller Cole Gather and Grow Exhibit and related consultation o Review list of new program offerings o Provide update on Spine-Tingling Tour o Update on plans for the Redman House renovations o Update on Harvey House restoration plans • Pickering Events Plan Review: o Review 2025 Event list  CAC participation at the 2025 Cultural Fusion Fair. - 61 - May 26, 2025 Page 4 of 4 Cultural Advisory Committee – 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan The CAC has the following projects and initiatives planned to investigate further in 2025 which include, but are not limited to: • Continue the work of the P.A.C.E. sub-committee to engage Pickering’s Cultural Community and investigate their interest in hosting new events and festivals, and/or partnering with established events and festivals; that would give additional opportunities to showcase elements of their culture (arts, music, dance, handmade markets, food and drink) to the community at large through those new initiatives, activities and partnerships. Work of the CAC also includes: • Consult on public art and participate on the Public Art Jury to review and consult on public art submission, including the submission of a Terms of Reference. • Provide feedback to staff on the development of community engagement initiatives related to culture and provide feedback on existing cultural programs. • Act as cultural champions and look for opportunities through community engagement initiatives that focus on celebrating, and highlighting cultural assets, or that bring heritage recognition, and education to the forefront. • Connect community partners to the culture team, to deliver on goals listed in the Cultural Strategic Plan. • Provide feedback to staff on the development of entrepreneurial and economic development initiatives related to culture and provide feedback on existing programs. • Report to Council annually through the committee’s work plan. :jsa - 62 - Memo To: Mayor Ashe and May 26, 2025 Members of Council From: Timothy Higgins Accessibility Coordinator Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Division Head, Public Affairs & Corporate Communications Subject: Accessibility Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan File: S-1000 The Pickering Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) is pleased to submit, for Council’s information, its 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan. 2024 Year End Report In 2024, nine AAC meetings were held. The Committee continued to contribute to the goals of Pickering’s Five-Year Accessibility Plan for 2021-2025 in the following ways: A. AAC Membership, Training and Meetings Committee - Throughout 2024, the AAC was comprised of ten Council-appointed Committee members, two non-voting elected Councilors, and an Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade (APBOT) non-voting representative. The AAC approved the Committee’s 2024 schedule of hybrid meetings allowing attendance both virtually and in-person. Liaison - The role of Accessibility Coordinator, the AAC’s Staff Liaison, was moved to the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer and the function of Accessibility reassigned to the purview of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI). EDI - The Manager, People & Culture and the Senior Advisor, Equity, Diversity & Inclusion provided an update to the AAC regarding the City’s EDI Strategy and spoke to: •key learnings and themes uncovered through community consultations; •the vision, mission, and priority areas of focus for the City’s EDI strategy; and, next steps in the EDI Strategy process. Training -The Staff Liaison shared learning materials, and provided orientation and job-specific accessibility training to AAC Members relating to: •an accessibility overview of the Ontario Human Rights Code, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), and the Ontario Building Code; Corr. 06-25 - 63 - May 26, 2025 Accessibility Advisory Committee Page 2 of 9 • AccessForward, a provincial Accessibility training platform • Pickering’s 5 Year Accessibility Plan (2021-2025); • policies available on the Accessible Pickering Website including: o Accessibility Policy [ADM 090]; o Accessibility Standards for Customer Service [ADM 090 001]; and, o Hiring Policy [HUR 040]; • AODA reviews by David Onley and Rich Donovan; and, • federal government accessibility standards. Conferences - The Staff Liaison provided the Committee with a brief summary of the Ontario Network of Accessibility Professionals (ONAP) Conference, hosted by York Region in May, 2024 during National Accessibility Awareness Week. This Conference addressed, among other important accessibility matters, the topic of municipalities advocating effectively with developers to encourage building a greater number of accessible homes and increasing accessible residential accommodation options available to new home buyers. Awards - Former AAC Member M. Thorpe Ross received a 2024 Regional Accessibility Award recognizing her long service and valuable contributions to Pickering accessibility such as with respect to playground renovations and the inclusiveness of the City’s aquatics programs. B. Awareness Activities AODA Review - The AAC discussed the Independent 4th Review of the AODA authored by Rich Donovan dated June 5, 2023, and its findings. Mr. Donovan reported that the Province of Ontario is failing to achieve its accessibility commitments for 2025 and declared an “accessibility crisis”. The AAC endorsed the Summary of Recommendations outlined in the Independent 4th AODA Review and resolved that Pickering City Council: • endorse the Independent 4th AODA Review recommendations; • recognize the accessibility crisis in the Province of Ontario; and, • forward a resolution of Council to the Premier of Ontario and other applicable parties. Canada Day (evening) - The Manager, Cultural Services provided the AAC with an overview of the Canada Day event proposed site plan. She outlined a review of the event in prior years and proposed plans for 2024, highlighting increased efforts to make the event more accessible and welcoming. The AAC Provided input on the Canada Day evening event, specifically on a new proposed plan to improve accessibility and inclusion considerations and to make the event more welcoming. Canada Day (daytime) - The AAC delivered a “Tranquility Tent” exhibit at Pickering’s 2024 Canada Day celebrations, to offer cool, shaded, relaxing space for guests to unwind given rising mental health, economic anxiety, and social isolation issues. Pickering’s accessibility partner, the Pickering Football Club, provided inclusive sport/recreation activities. Website - The Supervisor, Public Affairs & Corporate Communications provided a presentation to the AAC to introduce the City of Pickering’s Website Redesign Project, a project that was supported by the City’s Digital Strategy. Informed by advice from the AAC, the City refreshed Pickering.ca website to improve the user experience and enhance the accessibility of online services for people of all abilities. - 64 - May 26, 2025 Accessibility Advisory Committee Page 3 of 9 Website - City Development staff informed the AAC that all documents prepared by City Development that are being made available to the public through the website are AODA- compliant. Best Practices - The AAC has continued to monitor local, provincial, national, and international emerging accessibility legislation, regulations, policies, best practices, products and services and has considered adaptations for use in the City of Pickering. For example, the Committee monitored recent accessibility standards developed by the Canadian federal government and kept informed about accessibility opportunities related to artificial intelligence (AI) adaptive technology advances. Grants & Awards - AAC continued to monitor and support potential submissions for municipal, regional, and provincial grants and awards to profile Pickering’s accessibility investments and achievements. For example, The Accessibility Advisory Committee endorsed a letter of support to accompany the City’s submission for grant funding for playground replacement at seven Pickering community parks with new, accessible playgrounds. C. Plans, Policies, Standards, and Implementation Reports - The 2023 Year End Report and 2024 Proposed Work Plan, having been endorsed by the AAC, and the Accessibility Core Staff Team (ACST) were approved in May 2024 by City Council and posted to Pickering.ca. Playgrounds – The Manager, Landscape & Parks Development provided periodic updates to the AAC regarding the City’s efforts to refurbish City playgrounds and enhance their accessibility. Through the Accessible Playground Reconstruction Project which focused on inclusive play, Pickering updated nine of its parks with universally designed playground features to help enhanced inclusive spaces and has extensively reconstructed four playgrounds in a way that profiles accessibility best practices. These upgrades were made to Progress Frenchman’s Bay East Park, Forestbrook Park, Southcott Park, and St. Mary Park. Transit - The AAC discussed service changes implemented by Durham Region Transit (DRT) on January 1, 2024, including the standardization of 800-meter distances between bus stops and the reduction of buses serving Pickering. Due to a lack of community consultation by DRT, the City received numerous complaints about this matter suggesting that DRT’s service changes had resulted in heightened barriers to elderly and disabled transit users. The AAC resolved that the service changes implemented by Durham Region Transit contravened the OHRC and the AODA and requested that Pickering Council reach out to the Region to request a reversal of service changes and further consultation with Pickering residents, especially those with disabilities. DRT subsequently committed to reviewing its service changes and follow-on discussions at a Durham Region Transit (DRT) Executive Committee meeting, as well as at a March 21, 2024 Town Hall on Transit were well attended by community advocates. Taxis – In light of public concerns regarding inadequate taxi services in Pickering and across Durham Region, the City of Pickering collaborated in an informative Region-wide survey of accessible taxi services. - 65 - May 26, 2025 Page 4 of 9 Accessibility Advisory Committee Lighting – The AAC advised Council of accessibility, safety and security concerns regarding exterior lighting at City Hall and the Pickering Public Library. Council endorsed an exterior lighting study of the City Centre and budget has been identified to obtain consulting services. Environment – City staff shared his lived experience with an environmental sensitivity to sound with the Committee, and discussed how a loud alarm system could be detrimental rather than helpful for someone who is neurodivergent. The staff member noted that this environmental issue was unfamiliar to many and pointed out that conventional alarms that meet Building Code Standards may not always effectively alert people who are neurodivergent. Other Updates - Updates were also provided to the AAC regarding the Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park project and the use of Pickering’s Let’s Talk platform to consult residents. In 2024, the AAC continuously monitored: • walkway reconstructions, sidewalk retrofits, new multi-use paths, installation of tactile plates at intersections, curb cuts, snow clearing, traffic light timing, parks, playgrounds, special event accessible parking, etc. For example, an AAC Member presented photos to the Committee highlighting examples of accessibility barriers in Valley View Park/City Hall area. The photos profiled a storm drain in disrepair, with cracks in the sidewalk; and, an old gate piece installation, protruding in the middle of a walkway. Consequently, a walkabout by several key City staff was arranged to confirm accessibility pathway and lighting deficiencies, and take timely remedial actions; • progress with respect to Pickering’s Five-Year Accessibility Plan for 2021-2025; • progress on implementing recommendations from the LEAD partnership initiative; • the City’s steps to ensure website accessibility commensurate with WCAG 2.0 Level AA AODA Information and Communication Standards; and, • the City’s staff and volunteer training process related to accessibility D. Consultation & Collaboration Accessible Housing - In 2024, AAC continued to review accessible housing issues raised by Pickering residents since new housing is often being designed and built without accessibility sufficiently in mind, while aging Pickering residents are growing increasingly uncomfortable in their homes. The AAC considered how best to incent builders to plan developments with accessibility at the forefront of their designs. The AAC also considered the effectiveness of Pickering’s site plan review process and concluded that addressing accessibility earlier in the application process would be a valuable enhancement. As a result of this, the AAC struck a Sub-Committee on March 20, 2024 and appointed C. Rudberg-Chin, B. Ferguson, and K. Sullivan as its members. This Sub-Committee, in collaboration with the Planning Division of the City Development Department is exploring potential partnerships, policies, procedures and accessibility standards that will incent and guide the inclusion of accessible design in City residential development projects. AAC representatives also met with the Manager, Sustainability & Strategic Environmental Initiatives, to learn how the City engaged the - 66 - May 26, 2025 Page 5 of 9 Accessibility Advisory Committee building community in the creation of the Integrated Sustainability Design Standards (ISDS) and the Sustainability Series Workshop. The Sub-Committee aims to develop an accessibility-focused site plan checklist, a potential accessibility orientation symposium for developers, and is exploring collaborations with like- minded advocacy groups such as the Accelerating Accessibility Coalition. This work is ongoing. Durham Abilities Centre – A collaboration of the City of Pickering and LEAD (Leading Equitable and Accessible Delivery) was initiated in 2023 and a series of improvement planning consultation workshops were held in the spring of 2023, culminating in a comprehensive 2024 report to the City. The LEAD report identified multiple opportunities to improve inclusion and accessibility at all organizational levels, and to enhance Pickering’s accessibility programs, policies, processes, and services. Follow-up actions are included in the AAC’s 2024 and 2025 annual work plans and longer-term recommendations will be carried forward to the new 2026-2030 Accessibility Five Year Plan. The LEAD Canada program is offered through the Durham Abilities Centre and is funded and endorsed by the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility (MSAA). LEAD is a methodology to help governments, public and private sector organizations collaboratively define and embed inclusion and accessibility into strategic planning, daily operations, program environments, and organizational culture. The LEAD process helps organizations to identify opportunities to improve and enhance inclusion and accessibility at all organizational levels. Workplace Mental Health – The Pickering Mental Wellness Committee hosted a range of initiatives to promote mental health and well-being in the workplace. Mental Health First Aid training was made available to City staff. Events included Facial and Fascia Stretch Therapy, mindfulness and healthy eating workshops, volleyball, pickleball, a Learn to Skate workshop, Improv in the Park, and visits from Therapeutic Paws of Canada. Community Mental Health – As previously discussed, the AAC delivered a third annual “Tranquility Tent” exhibit at Pickering’s 2024 Canada Day celebrations, to offer cool, shaded, relaxing space for City residents and guests to unwind in response to the pandemic’s tragic impact on mental health, anxiety, and social isolation. DRPS Children’s Games – Pickering supported the 40th Annual Durham Regional Police Children’s Games for approximately 80 disabled youth aged 5 to 18 on November 10, 2024 held at Durham College. Pickering has partnered annually with DRPS, Grandview Children’s Centre, and other community organizations since 1985 on this event. DRPS presented a plaque to the City to honour and celebrate the Pickering’s 40th consecutive year of partnership. Business - Through its APBOT representative, the AAC regularly exchanged accessibility information and collaborated with Durham Region businesses. Through the Committee’s Staff Liaison, the AAC was kept apprised of accessibility partner news, opportunities and events, including from: • Pickering’s Accessibility Core Staff Team; - 67 - May 26, 2025 Page 6 of 9 Accessibility Advisory Committee • Pickering’s Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Team; • Pickering’s Age Friendly Team; • Pickering’s Mental Wellness Committee; • Durham Region’s network of Accessibility Coordinators; • the Ontario Network of Accessibility Professionals; • the Ontario Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility; and, • Accessibility Standards Canada. E. Site Plan Reviews Site Plan Review for Municipal Developments - For new City buildings and parks, and renovations, AAC reviewed plans helping to ensure barrier-free accessibility. For example, the AAC provided advice to the Pickering Museum Village Log House and Log Barn Restoration project. The project included the replacement of the barrier-free access ramp to the log barn, addition of interior glass barrier-free doors, and the leveling of the building floor space. Other 2024 plans reviewed by the AAC included the Beachfront Park revitalization, Seaton Recreation Complex & Library, and the renovation of Council Chambers. Site Plan Review for Private Sector Developments - The AAC continued to work in collaboration with City planning staff through an ongoing site plan application review process. As required by the AODA, the AAC reviewed and provided accessibility advice with respect to the following site plan applications in 2024: • S14/23, DDSB elementary school & childcare centre at 1100 Azelea Ave., Seaton; • S15/23, Suncor Energy Inc. Petro Canada gas station at 1800 Brock Rd.; • S07/88 (R23), manufacturing and warehouse addition at 125 Squires Beach Rd.; • S13/23, hotel with access to Pickering Town Centre at 1355 Kingston Rd.; • S09/08(R24-1), NIVLOG Investments Ltd., 1635 Bayly St. – Day Care; • S09/08(R24-2) – JMPM Holdings Ltd. at 1635 Bayly St., Bldg “E” – Warehouse/Office Building; • S01/23 #2, Pickering Valley Developments Limited at1515 Pickering Parkway; • A 08/22, SP-2022-03 & CP-2022-04 at 2660, 2670 and 2680 Brock Rd.; • S08/98(R24), WO MV Realty Inc. at 1220-1280 Squires Beach Rd.; and, • Watson’s Glenn Golfclub house at 7th Concession and Lakeridge. - 68 - May 26, 2025 Page 7 of 9 Accessibility Advisory Committee 2025 Proposed Work Plan The AAC is pleased to present its 2025 Proposed Work Plan. The Plan, which outlines concrete actions the AAC will undertake to improve accessibility, includes, but is not limited to: F. 2025 Accessibility Priorities Vision: The City of Pickering’s long-term vision is to ensure that Pickering is a caring and responsive community known for its commitment to equity, inclusion, and accessibility as well as its related accessibility achievements. With the support of Members of Council, management, staff, the AAC, volunteers and community partners, barrier removal will continue to be a priority in Pickering. Accessibility is everyone’s responsibility and will be incorporated by design into the work of all City Departments. Multi-Year Accessibility Plan (MYAP) - Pickering’s 2021-2025 Five-Year Accessibility Plan sets out initiatives to meet Pickering’s commitment to an inclusive community where all residents and visitors have access to City services, programs and facilities in an integrated manner that promotes dignity and independence. The AAC will continue to comply with Ontario's accessibility standards. Further, the City is committed to going beyond legislated minimum requirements, where feasible, to ensure that barriers to accessibility are identified and removed. Based on Pickering’s 2021-2025 Five-Year Accessibility Plan, and informed by best practices, Pickering’s areas of priority in 2025 will include: • mental and physical wellness, particularly through recreation and sports • accessible and affordable housing options • community employment opportunities for people with disabilities • accessible parks, playgrounds, pedestrian and cyclist corridors, sidewalks, and trails • accessibility partnerships and collaboration • increasing support for service and support animals • website navigation and content accessibility • facilities signage and navigation • leveraging AI advances for accessibility • accessible transportation LEAD - The City’s accessibility journey will also be informed by outstanding recommendations from the Abilities Centre LEAD Project, identifying potential accessibility enhancements in the following areas: • Leadership; • Governance & Structure; • Strategy; • Financial Management; • Supplier-Partnership Management; • People Resources; • Program & Service Delivery; - 69 - May 26, 2025 Page 8 of 9 Accessibility Advisory Committee • Communications and Marketing; and, • Facility & Technology Support. MYAP Renewal – The AODA Multi-Year Accessibility Plan is a public-facing roadmap for meeting obligations under the AODA and preventing and removing barriers to accessibility across the organization. As prescribed by the AODA, the Multi-Year Accessibility Plan (MYAP) must be updated every five years and posted publicly on the organization’s website. A new Pickering MYAP will be developed, through public consultation, to take effect from January 1, 2026, to December 31, 2030. 2025 AODA Compliance Report - As prescribed by the AODA, municipalities must report on AODA compliance to the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility every two years. Pickering will need to submit a compliance report addressing both the City of Pickering and the Pickering Public Library by December 2025. G. Awareness Activities Canada Day - The AAC will host a fourth annual “Tranquility Tent” exhibit at Pickering’s Canada Day daytime celebrations, to offer a cool, shaded, relaxing space for people to unwind. In 2025, the AAC will continue to: • monitor local, provincial, national, and international accessibility legislation, regulations, policies, best practices, products, services, and networking opportunities. • foster/promote/support submissions for municipal, regional, and provincial awards and grants to profile Pickering’s accessibility investments and achievements. H. Plans, Policies, Standards, and Implementation In 2025, the AAC will continue to monitor: • progress on and completion of Pickering’s Five-Year Accessibility Plan for 2021-2025; • progress on implementing recommendations from the LEAD partnership initiative; • the City’s steps to ensure website accessibility commensurate with WCAG 2.0 Level AA AODA Information and Communication Standards; • walkway reconstructions, sidewalk retrofits, new multi-use paths, installation of tactile plates at intersections, curb cuts, traffic light timing, parks, playgrounds, special event accessible parking, etc.; and, • the City’s staff and volunteer training process related to accessibility. I. Consultation & Collaboration Accessible Housing – In 2025, the AAC Sub-Committee will continue its work to complete and pilot an accessibility-focused site plan checklist, a potential accessibility orientation symposium for developers in Durham Region, and is reaching out to exploring possible collaborations with like- - 70 - May 26, 2025 Page 9 of 9 Accessibility Advisory Committee minded advocacy groups such as the Accelerating Accessibility Coalition with a view to leveraging the Coalition’s substantial and established advocacy networks and resources. Pathways2Employment – Following on from Pickering’s successful partnership with the Durham Abilities Centre LEAD Program (discussed above), and in light of pervasive employment barriers encountered by Canadians living with disabilities, Pickering partnered once more in 2025 with the Abilities Centre for its Pathways2Employment program to offer meaningful,150-hour job placement opportunities for 2 Durham youth with disabilities. Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program – S. Moore, Legislative Specialist, Town of Ajax provided an overview of the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower program, why it was important, and how it had been implemented in the Town of Ajax. S. Moore provided a summary of items to consider when exploring the feasibility of implementation. J. Site Plan Reviews The AAC will continue to work in collaboration with City planning staff through an ongoing site plan application review process. In 2025, to the date of writing, the AAC has reviewed and provided accessibility advice with respect to the following private sector site plan applications: • S06/24, Ansar Medical Services Inc., at 2177 & 2185 Brock Rd.; • S06/88 (R24), 1900 Dixie Road - Garden Centre; and, • S05/98 (R24), Amendment #1, Pickering Islamic Centre at 2065 & 2071 Brock Rd. Submitted on behalf of the Pickering AAC Members: • Maurice Brenner, Regional Councillor • Dave Currie • Saima Fatima • Brian Ferguson • Katherine Hale • Ayesha Khan • Mara Nagy, City Councillor • Carla Rudberg-Chin • Dylan Schick • Michael Shackleton • Sam Snyders • Kevin Sullivan • Aaron Topper, Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade Representative TH:th - 71 - Memo To: Mayor Ashe and May 26, 2025 Members of Council From: Arnold Mostert Manager, Landscape & Parks Development Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Directors Subject: Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan The Pickering Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee (WVAC) is pleased to present its 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan. A.2024 Year End Report The Pickering Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee’s activities and achievements in 2024 are described below. Meetings •In 2024, the WVAC held two regular meetings on March 18th and November 18th. The regular meeting scheduled for June 17th was cancelled due to the lack of agenda items and September 16th meeting was cancelled due to lack of quorum. •One additional special meeting was held on April 15th to discuss previously unfinished business from the March 18th meeting agenda. Awareness Activities •An update on the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station refurbishment was provided by Analiese St. Aubin, Senior Manager, Corporate Relations & Projects, Pickering Nuclear. •Updates on the Beachfront Park Revitalization Plans were provided by Jana Joyce of The MBTW Group as well as City staff. •Staff provided the committee with updates on discussions between the City and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to explore investment and management opportunities for the City at Petticoat Creek Conservation Park. •Staff provided the committee with information regarding plans to engage the TRCA in a Coastal Assessment Study for the section of shoreline between West Shore Boulevard and Marksbury Road in order to construct a section of the Waterfront Trail. Corr. 07-25 - 72 - May 26, 2025 Page 2 of 3 WVAC 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan • Staff provided updates on the progress of reconstruction of the Waterfront Trail from Bruce Handscomb Memorial Park to Elvira Court. • Staff provided updates on the design and approvals for the reconstruction of Sandy Beach Road. • Staff provided updates on the Frenchman’s Bay Water Quality Characterization Report that was being undertaken by TRCA and the City’s weed management plans for Frenchman’s Bay for 2024. Consultation & Discussion Topics • An overview of the considerations given to selecting a viable location for Waterfront Paddlesport Rentals was provided by K. Coleman, Manager, Fitness, Courts & Aquatics, and the committee members were asked to provide comments on the various locations being considered. • An overview of the Community Visitor Plan 2024-2027 was given to the committee by A. Shah, Senior Advisor, Creative Industries & Tourism and J. St. Amant, Coordinator, Cultural Services. • An overview of the Community Climate Adaptation Project was given to the committee by M. Edmond, Coordinator, Sustainability. B. 2025 Proposed Work Plan The WVAC’s 2025 plans, as well as its accomplishments to April 2025, are noted below: Meetings & Membership • Members – the WVAC aims to maintain its full authorized complement of 14 members throughout 2025. • Meetings – to date, one regular meeting was held on March 17, 2025. The other meeting dates scheduled for 2025 are June 16th, September 15th and November 17th. Awareness Activities • A brief overview of the Frenchman’s Bay Water Quality Characterization Report was given by A. Wallace, TRCA. • A progress update was provided regarding the Shoreline Coastal Assessment Study – West Shore Boulevard to Marksbury Road, that is being undertaken by the TRCA. - 73 - May 26, 2025 Page 3 of 3 WVAC 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan In 2025, the WVAC will continue to: • promote awareness of, and advise on projects, information, and resources for waterfront related improvements and activities including: o Beachfront Park Revitalization o Shoreline Coastal Assessment Study – West Shore Boulevard to Marksbury Road Priorities for 2025 Priorities for the WVAC for 2025 include: • Advocate for the health of Frenchman’s Bay by working with City of Pickering and TRCA to initiate an Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy that looks at the environmental, recreational and physical aspects of the bay. • Promote Pickering’s waterfront as a tourist attraction through waterfront events, activities, and improved facilities. • Review and provide recommendations to increase the safety of our waterfront through on-site signage, 911 address/GPS coordinates, and life-saving equipment. • Review and provide recommendations on ways to improve public access to the waterfront through trail connections, parking/shuttle service, and public transit. • Look for opportunities to enhance the waterfront area through the installation of landscape features and to increase our tree canopy along the waterfront. Submitted on behalf of the Pickering Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee members: • Maurice Brenner, Regional Councillor, Ward 1 • Mara Nagy, City Councillor, Ward 2 • Gord MacPherson • Adam McGean • Amanda Small • Kelly Stott • Lynn Tidd • Shawna Stanleigh, Fairport Beach Neighbourhood Association • Xaine Kane, Pickering West Shore Community Association • Kay Dunlop, Alkame Dragon Boat Services • Andrea Zeeb, Frenchman’s Bay Yacht Club • Johanna Kyte, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority • Izsak Dewar, OPG • Amanda Bathe, Region of Durham AM:am - 74 - From:Clerks To:premier@ontario.ca; rob.flack@pc.ola.org; Ernie.Hardemanco@pc.ola.org; resolutions@amo.on.ca; roma@roma.on.ca Subject:Tillsonburg Town Council Decision Letter - April 14, 2025 - Strong Mayor Powers Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2025 8:41:03 AM Attachments:Outlook-cid_image0.png Hello, At the April 14, 2025, meeting of Tillsonburg Town Council, the following resolution was passed: Resolution # 2025-125 Moved By: Councillor Spencer Seconded By: Deputy Mayor Beres THAT Council receive item 12.8 Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Letter Re: Strong Mayor Powers, as information; WHEREAS the Ontario government has proposed expanding the "strong mayor" powers to 169 additional municipalities under the proposed legislation on May 1, 2025, which would grant mayors in these municipalities more authority, particularly concerning the control of municipal budgets, planning and operational decisions; AND WHEREAS this proposal has raised significant concerns regarding the centralization of power, erosion of local democracy, reduced accountability, and the potential for the abuse of power; AND WHEREAS the proposed expansion of strong mayor powers undermines the collaborative nature of municipal governance, and diminish the role of elected municipal councillors in representing the diverse interests of the community; AND WHEREAS concerns have been raised about the negative impacts on public trust, democratic participation, and municipal decision-making processes, if mayors are given the ability to bypass council decisions without adequate consultation or oversight; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Town of Tillsonburg; 1. Does not support the proposed strong mayor powers as currently outlined; 2. Supports specific powers to mayors as it pertains to identifiable decisions regarding housing, development, infrastructure and transit to provide tools that reduce obstacles that can stand in the way of new housing and infrastructure developments; 3. Strongly suggests that free reign of decision-making regarding hiring, firing, committees and so forth be removed from the proposed authority; 4. Strongly suggests that members of current Council were duly elected officials by Corr. 08-25 - 75 - citizens with the awareness of one vote per council member and majority votes are the democratic process; 5. Requests that the Provincial Strong Mayor Powers proposed to take effect on May 1, 2025, be deferred to allow for greater clarity and that the Province seek collaborative input from the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO); 6. Directs staff to forward this resolution immediately to Minister Flack, Premier Ford, MPP Hardeman, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), the Rural Ontario Municipal Association (ROMA), and all Ontario Municipalities before April 16, 2025. Regards, Amelia Jaggard Deputy Clerk Town of Tillsonburg 10 Lisgar Ave Tillsonburg, ON N4G 5A5 Phone: 519-688-3009 Ext. 4041 Ranked one of “Canada’s Top 25 Communities to Live and Work Remotely”(Maclean’s 2021 Best Communities) www.Tillsonburg.ca www.DiscoverTillsonburg.ca www.Facebook.com/TillsonburgON DISCLAIMER: This E-mail contains legally privileged information intended only for the individual or entity named in the message. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. If this communication was received in error, please notify us by reply E-mail and delete the original message. 3 Please consider the environment before printing this email. - 76 - Town of Saugeen Shores 600 Tomlinson Drive, P.O. Box 820 Port Elgin, ON N0H 2C0 T 519.832.2008 F 519.832.2140 saugeenshores.ca @SaugeenShoresON April 14, 2025 Honourable Rob Flack Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing 17th Floor, 777 Bay St. Toronto, ON M7A 2J3 rob.flack@pc.ola.org Dear Minister, RE: Opposition to Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers I am writing to express my opposition to the government’s proposed expansion of Strong Mayor powers to include the Town of Saugeen Shores. As the Mayor of Saugeen Shores, I am concerned about the implications of this policy change on our local governance. Please consider this letter as the Town of Saugeen Shores submission on O.Reg. 530/22 which is available for comment until April 16th. In my experience, the ‘Council Manager’ system of governance has always served our municipality well. Specifically, when it comes to advancing our shared priority of building more housing to serve our residents, Saugeen Shores Council has demonstrated flexible and determined leadership. Our Council has enabled housing by reducing red tape resulting in the construction of more than 600 multi-family residential units in the last two years alone. Given the strong and sustained commitment of our Council to these efforts, I do not see how the introduction of Strong Mayor powers will accelerate the construction of housing (or the pursuit of other priority areas) in any way. On the contrary, vesting these new powers in the Mayor threatens to disrupt long-established and effective processes, sidelining elected members of Council with effects that may be contrary to the interests of our residents. Saugeen Shores has thrived for decades on the principle of shared leadership. We have an effective team of elected representatives working in partnership with a professional staff to achieve goals that are transparently set out in our Strategic Plan and annual Business Plans. This approach to governance is foundational to building trust between the municipality and the residents that it serves. I fear that the unilateral decision-making enabled by Strong Mayor powers would erode this trust and disrupt the collaborative environment that has long been at the heart of the democratic tradition of our Council and community. I urge you to reconsider the expansion of Strong Mayor powers. If the government has a strong desire to advance these major changes to the governance of our municipality, I Corr. 09-25 - 77 - request that you engage in a thorough consultation process with our Council and the residents of our community before moving forward. It is crucial that any changes to local governance structures be made in close partnership with the communities they impact. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and hope that we can work together in the interest of ensuring strong local governance in Saugeen Shores. Sincerely, Luke Charbonneau, Mayor Town of Saugeen Shores cc. Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario Lisa Thompson, MPP, Minister of Rural Affairs Council, Town of Saugeen Shores All Ontario Municipalities - 78 - Town of Amherstburg OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Michael Prue, Mayor 519-736-0012  271 Sandwich Street South, Amherstburg, Ontario N9A 2A5  mprue@amherstburg.ca April 15, 2025 SENT VIA EMAIL Premier of Ontario Legislative Building Queens Park Toronto, ON, M7A 1A4 VIA EMAIL: premier@ontario.ca Attn: The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario Re: Resolution# 20250414-011 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Amherstburg At its regular meeting on April 14, 2025, Amherstburg Town Council passed Resolution 20250414-011 in response to the Province’s recent proposal to designate Amherstburg as a “Strong Mayor” municipality, effective May 1, 2025. WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has proposed to designate the Town of Amherstburg as a "Strong Mayor" community, granting enhanced powers to the Mayor effective May 1, 2025; and, WHEREAS the Strong Mayor powers significantly alter the balance of governance at the municipal level, undermining the role of Council in decision-making and weakening the fundamental democratic principle of majority rule; and, WHEREAS the Town of Amherstburg has a long history of collaborative, transparent, and accountable local governance built upon a foundation of Council-debate and shared decision- making; and, WHEREAS many municipally elected officials across the province and members of the public have expressed significant concern regarding the imposition of these powers; and, WHEREAS the Town of Amherstburg did not formally request or express a desire to be designated under the Strong Mayor framework; and, WHEREAS a growing number of municipalities and elected officials across Ontario are questioning the appropriateness of the Strong Mayor system and are calling for its reconsideration or repeal; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Amherstburg Town Council formally request that the Premier of Ontario and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing immediately remove the Town of Amherstburg from the list of municipalities designated under the Strong Mayor legislation; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, all regional Members of Provincial Corr. 10-25 - 79 - Town of Amherstburg OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Michael Prue, Mayor 519-736-0012  271 Sandwich Street South, Amherstburg, Ontario N9A 2A5  mprue@amherstburg.ca Parliament, all Ontario municipalities, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) for their awareness and support. We thank you for your attention to this matter and urge you to respect the democratic wishes of our Council and community. Sincerely, Michael Prue, Mayor Town of Amherstburg Cc: The Honourable Paul Calandra (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing) Regional Members of Provincial Parliament All Ontario Municipalities The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) - 80 - 2021 Division Road North Kingsville, Ontario N9Y 2Y9 Phone: (519) 733-2305 www.kingsville.ca April 16, 2025 Honourable Premier Doug Ford Via Email: premier@ontario.ca Honourable Rob Flack, Minitser of Municipal Affairs and Housing Via Email: rob.flack@ontario.ca Dear Premier Ford and Minister Flack, Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers – Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 Please be advised that at its Regular Meeting held Monday, April 14, 2025, the Council of the Town of Kingsville passed the following resolution respecting the matter referenced in the above subject line: 78-04142025 Moved By: Councillor Gaffan Seconded By: Deputy Mayor DeYong Whereas on April 9, 2025, the Government of Ontario (hereafter, the “Province”), led by Premier Doug Ford, announced a proposal to expand by “Strong Mayor Powers” as provided for by Part VI.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001, to the heads of council in 169 additional municipalities, including the Town of Kingsville, effective May 1, 2025; And whereas Strong Mayor Powers erode democratic process and have fundamentally altered the historic model of local governance, which has existed for almost two centuries, by: •providing the head of council with the authority to unilaterally give direction and make certain decisions without a consensus from a majority of the members of council; and, •creating a power imbalance by providing the head of council with special powers that other members do not generally have. And whereas the Province is undermining the local governance model and municipal independence by attempting to advance its priorities through municipalities, and downloading its responsibilities to the same. Corr. 11-25 - 81 - Now therefore be it resolved that: • The Council of the Corporation of the Town of Kingsville (“Council”) opposes the expansion of Strong Mayor Powers, as announced on April 9, 2025; • That Council requests that the proposed amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers and Duties to Additional Municipalities not include the Town of Kingsville; and; • That Council directs the Acting Manager of Municipal Governance/Clerk to forward a copy of this resolution to Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario; Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; All Four Local MPPs; AMCTO, AMO and All Ontario Municipalities Carried. Sincerely, Angela Toole, Acting Manager of Municipal Governance/Clerk Email: atoole@kingsville.ca Phone: 519-733-2305 ext. 223 cc. Anthony Leardi, MPP, Essex Trevor Jones, MPP, Chatham-Kent - Leamington Andrew Dowie, MPP, Windsor-Tecumseh Lisa Gretzky, MPP, Windsor West AMCTO AMO All Ontario Municipalities - 82 - YES: 5 NO: 2 ABSTAIN: 0 TOWNSHIP OF RIDEAU LAKES Special Council Meeting RESOLUTION 104-2025 Title:MSC (PW) Rec #78-2025 re: Strong Mayor Powers (for Council approval) Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2025 Moved by Councillor Dunfield Seconded by Deputy Mayor P. Banks WHEREAS at the Municipal Services Committee meeting held April 14, 2025, Recommendation #78-2025 was passed related to the recent announcement from the Government of Ontario on Strong Mayor Powers to an additional 169 municipalities effective May 1, 2025; AND WHEREAS said recommendation further requested that the Province remove Rideau Lakes from the Strong Mayor Powers Legislation; NOW THEREFORE be it resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the Township of Rideau Lakes concurs with MSC Recommendation #78-2025. YES: 5 NO: 2 ABSTAIN: 0 CONFLICT: 0 ABSENT: 1 Carried Deputy Mayor P. Banks Councillor J. Banks Councillor Carr Councillor Dunfield Councillor Hutchings Councillor Maxwell Councillor Pollard CONFLICT: 0 ABSENT: 1 Mayor Hoogenboom ______________________________________ Paula Banks, Deputy Mayor Corr. 12-25 - 83 - TOWNSHIP OF RIDEAU LAKES Municipal Services Committee (PW) RECOMMENDATION: 78-2025 Title: Ontario Proposing to Expand Strong Mayor Powers to 169 Additional Municipalities Date: Monday, April 14, 2025 Moved by Councillor Dunfield Seconded by Deputy Mayor P. Banks WHEREAS the Government of Ontario has announced an expansion of strong mayor powers to an additional 169 municipalities, effective May 1, 2025; AND WHEREAS these powers allow mayors to unilaterally override council decisions, appoint senior municipal staff, and set budgets without majority council approval, undermining the principles of democratic governance; AND WHEREAS municipal governance functions best through a collaborative decision-making process where elected councils, representing the collective voice of their communities, work alongside experienced municipal staff; AND WHEREAS there is no evidence to suggest that strong mayor powers have increased housing starts, contrary to the provincial government’s stated justification for their implementation; AND WHEREAS the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks, and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO) has raised concerns that strong mayor powers blur the lines between political leadership and administrative expertise, threatening the neutrality of municipal public service; AND WHEREAS the City of Orillia recently experienced a situation where its mayor unilaterally overturned a council decision regarding the hiring of a Chief Administrative Officer, demonstrating the potential for these powers to be misused; AND WHEREAS the Township of Rideau Lakes has also experienced governance challenges resulting from mayoral overreach, further highlighting the risks posed by concentrating authority in a single elected official; AND WHEREAS democratic principles require that municipal governance remain a system of "one person, one vote" rather than granting disproportionate power to a single individual; - 84 - NOW THEREFORE be it resolved that the Council of the Township of Rideau Lakes: 1. Strongly opposes the expansion of strong mayor powers to additional municipalities, including Rideau Lakes; 2. Calls on the Government of Ontario to reverse this decision and uphold the traditional balance of municipal governance; and 3. Directs the Clerk to send a copy of this resolution to: • The Honourable Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing • MPP Steve Clark • The Honourable Premier of Ontario Doug Ford • The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) • The Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks, and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO) • All Ontario municipalities for their consideration and support. AND FURTHER that the Province be requested to remove Rideau Lakes from the Strong Mayor Powers Legislation. YES: 5 NO: 3 ABSTAIN: 0 ABSENT: 0 Carried YES: 5 Councillor J. Banks Councillor Carr Councillor Dunfield Councillor Hutchings Deputy Mayor P. Banks NO: 3 Mayor Hoogenboom Councillor Maxwell Councillor Pollard - 85 - 52 Seguin Street, Parry Sound, Ontario P2A 1B4 Tel: (705) 746-2101  Fax: (705) 746-7461  www.parrysound.ca Office of the Mayor April 22, 2025 Honourable Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing College Park, 17th floor, 777 Bay St. Toronto ON M7A 2J3 Via email: minister.mah@ontario.ca Dear Minister Flack, On behalf of Council of the Town of Parry Sound, please accept my congratulations on your recent appointment as Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing. It’s an important Ministry and we look forward to working with you and Ministry staff. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing provided notice on April 9th that the Ministry was seeking comments regarding its intent to extend strong mayor powers to an additional 169 municipalities, including the Town of Parry Sound . The comment period was open until April 16th. These additional powers are not powers that I as Mayor believe are necessary and do not wish to exercise them. At our April 15th meeting, Council unanimously voted to reject strong mayor powers, request the province to repeal the legislation, or alternatively permit municipalities to opt out. We were disappointed that there was no previous communication before the April 9 th letter, with a comment period of only one week. Contrary to provincial claims that strong mayor powers will get homes and infrastructure built faster, reduce red tape and accelerate the delivery of key priorities, research by the Association of Municipal Clerks & Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO) has found no evidence to suggest this legislation has any impact on the number of housing starts in municipalities that have been granted the powers; and moreover the strong mayor powers have blurred the political-administrative authority between the roles of head of council and Chief Administrative Officers (CAOs) and senior staff, threatening the neutrality of the public service and politicizing local government leadership. We have seen very questionable use by mayors with strong mayor powers. …2 Corr. 13-25 - 86 - Our public expects a democratic process. Given the overwhelming use of executive orders by the current US President and multiple respected analysts’ concerns about the US slipping into authoritarianism, our country and its democratic institutions should be safeguarding these democratic principles that provide accountability to the public and not undermining them. We encourage the provincial government to repeal this legislation. Sincerely, Jamie McGarvey Mayor, Town of Parry Sound c.c. Premier Doug Ford MPP Graydon Smith Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) All Ontario Municipalities Members of Town of Parry Sound Council CAO Clayton Harris Clerk Rebecca Johnson - 87 - %¢% THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF PARRY SOUND RESOLUTION IN COUNCIL NO.2025 —04‘? DIVISION LIST YES NO DATE:April 15,2025 Councillor G.ASHFORD MOVED BY:L/’ Councillor J.BELESKEY Councillor P.BORNEMAN Councillor B.KEITH /,7/Councillor D.McCANN Councillor C.McDONALD 7 Mayor J.McGARVEY SECONDED BY' ///7 CARRIED:l/DEFEATED:Pos Whereas the Province has announced the expansion of strong mayor powers to another 169 municipalities as of May 1,2025 in addition to the 47 municipalities which currently have received strong mayor powers;and Whereas the Province claims that strong mayor powers will get homes and infra— structure built faster,reduce red tape,and accelerate the delivery of key priorities;and Whereas research from the Association of Municipal Clerks &Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO)has identified that:a)there is no evidence to suggest this legislation has any impact on the number of housing starts in municipalities that have been granted the powers;and b)strong mayor powers have blurred the political-administrative authority between the roles of head of council and chief administrative officers (CAOs), threatening the neutrality of the public service and politicizing local government leadership;and Whereas strong mayor powers is an erosion to the democratic process of an historically non—partisan municipal governance structure; Now Therefore the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Parry Sound hereby resolves to reject the strong mayor powers granted to it,and requests that the Province repeal the legislation,or offer the option to municipalities to opt out of strong mayor powers;and That this Resolution be fon/varded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs &Housing Rob Flack,Premier Doug Ford,MPP Graydon Smith,the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO),and all Ontario municipalities. yorJa ie cGarvey /r / t - 88 - Executive Services 99-A Advance Avenue, Napanee, ON K7R 3Y5 www.greaternapanee.com April 23, 2025 Township of Rideau Lakes 1439 County Road 8 Delta, ON K0E 1G0 Sent via email: mtruelove@rideaulakes.ca Re: Strong Mayor Powers To Whom It May Concern, Please be advised that the Council of the Town of Greater Napanee passed a resolution at its regular session meeting of April 22, 2025 in support of your correspondence regarding Strong Mayor Powers Legislation. A copy of the resolution is enclosed for your reference. Please do not hesitate to contact me at jwalters@greaternapanee.com if you require any further information with respect to this resolution. Sincerely, Jessica Walters Clerk cc: Honourable Premier Doug Ford Honourable Ric Bresee, MPP Hastings-Lennox and Addington Honourable Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing AMO AMCTO All Ontario municipalities Corr. 14-25 - 89 - RESOLUTION #194/25 Pinnell Jr., Norrie That the Town of Greater Napanee sends a letter of support to the Township of Rideau Lakes in regard to their opposition of Ontario Expanding Strong Mayor Powers to 169 Additional Municipalities, and that the Town of Greater Napanee also request to be excluded from the Strong Mayor Powers; And that a copy of the letter of support be sent to the Honorable Premier Doug Ford, the Honorable MPP Ric Bresee; the Honorable Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; the Association of Municipalities of Ontario; the Association of Municipa l Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario, and all other municipalities in Ontario for their consideration and support. For: 5 Opposed: 2 Abstained:0 Absent: 0 CARRIED. For: Councillor Schenk, Councillor Hicks, Councillor Pinnell Jr., Councillor Norrie, Councillor Martin Opposed: Mayor Richardson, Deputy Mayor Calver - 90 - Celebrating 50 years! 1975-2025 April 24, 2025 Hon. Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Via email: Premier@ontario.ca At the April 16, 2025 regular meeting of the Council of the Township of Zorra, the following resolution was passed: WHEREAS the Ontario government has proposed expanding the "strong mayor" powers to 169 additional municipalities under the proposed legislation, which would grant mayors in these municipalities more authority, particularly concerning the control of municipal budgets and planning decisions; AND WHEREAS this proposal has raised significant concerns regarding the centralization of power, erosion of local democracy, reduced accountability, and the potential for the abuse of power; AND WHEREAS the proposed expansion of strong mayor powers undermines the collaborative nature of municipal governance, and diminishes the role of elected municipal councillors in representing the diverse interests of the community; AND WHEREAS concerns have been raised about the negative impacts on public trust, democratic participation, and municipal decision-making processes, if mayors are given the ability to bypass council decisions without adequate consultation or oversight; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Township of Zorra opposes the expansion of Strong Mayor Powers; AND THAT the Council formally expresses its opposition to the Ontario government's proposal to expand Strong Mayor Powers to preserve local democracy, transparency, and accountability; AND THAT the Council encourages advocacy for democratic principles and for municipal governance systems that prioritize collaboration, inclusivity, and democratic engagement; FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT a copy of this motion be forwarded to the Ontario Premier, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, all Ontario municipalities, as well as the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) for further action. Disposition: Carried Yours truly, Karen Martin Clerk Township of Zorra 25-009 CC: Hon. Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing minister.mah@ontario.ca All Ontario Municipalities Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) resolutions@amo.on.ca Corr. 15-25 - 91 - North � Middlesex THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNCIPALITY OF NORTH MIDDLESEX RESOLUTION OF COUNCIL Member Present Councillor A. Cornelissen Councillor C. Daigle Councillor 8. Irwin Councillor S. Nirta Deputy Mayor P. Hodgins Mayor 8. Ropp RESULT: Carried YES NO DATE: APRIL 23,2025 MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: J \) /y,.O� WHEREAS the Province has announced the expansion of strong mayor powers to another 169 municipalities as of May 1, 2025 in addition to the 47 municipalities which currently have received strong mayor powers; and WHEREAS the Province claims that strong mayor powers will get homes and infra structure built faster, reduce red tape, and accelerate the delivery of key priorities; and Whereas research from the Association of Municipal Clerks & Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO) has identified that: a) there is no evidence to suggest this legislation has any impact on the number of housing starts in municipalities that have been granted the powers; and b) strong mayor powers have blurred the political-administrative authority between the roles of head of council and chief administrative officers (CAOs), threatening the neutrality of the public service and politicizing local government leadership; and WHEREAS strong mayor powers is an erosion to the democratic process of an historically non-partisan municipal governance structure; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the North Middlesex hereby resolves to reject the strong mayor powers granted to it, and requests that the Province repeal the legislation, or offer the option to municipalities to opt out of strong mayor powers; and THAT this Resolution be forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing Rob Flack, Premier Doug Ford, MPP Steve Pinsonneault, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), and all Ontario municipalities. Corr. 16-25 - 92 - BY EMAIL April 28, 2025 Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Legislative Building, Queen’s Park Toronto, ON M7A 1A1 Email: premier@ontario.ca Honourable Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing 17th Floor, 777 Bay St. Toronto, ON M7A 2J3 Email: rob.flack@ontario.ca Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers: Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 At its Regular Council Meeting held on April 22, 2025, Council discussed their opposition to the expansion of Strong Mayor Powers, as announced on April 9, 2025. Council of the Town of Essex requests that the proposed amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to expand Strong Mayor Powers and duties to additional municipalities not include the Town of Essex. Council accordingly passed the following resolution: R25-04-187 Moved By Mayor Bondy Seconded By Councillor Hammond Whereas on April 9, 2025, the Government of Ontario (hereafter, the “Province”), led by Premier Doug Ford, announced a proposal to expand “Strong Mayor Powers” as provided for by Part VI.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001, to the heads of council in 169 additional municipalities including the Town of Essex, effective May 1, 2025; And whereas Strong Mayor Powers erode democratic process and have fundamentally altered the historic model of local governance which has existed for almost two centuries, by: x Providing the head of council with the authority to give direction and make certain decisions without the usual consensus from a majority of the members of council; and, x Creating a power imbalance by providing the head of council with special powers that other members do not generally have. Corr. 17-25 - 93 - And whereas the Province is undermining the local governance model and municipal independence by attempting to advance its priorities through municipalities, and downloading its responsibilities to the same. Now there be it resolved that: x The Council of the Corporation of the Town of Essex (“Council”) formally opposes the expansion of Strong Mayor Powers, as announced on April 9, 2025; x Council requests that the proposed amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers and Duties to Additional Municipalities not include the Town of Essex; and x Council directs the Clerk to forward a copy of this resolution to the Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, Honourable Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Anthony Leardi, MPP, Essex, Lisa Gretzky, MPP Windsor West, Andrew Dowie, MPP Windsor-Tecumseh, Trevor Jone, MPP Chatham-Kent-Leamington, AMCTO, AMO and all Ontario Municipalities. Carried We trust you will find this satisfactory. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Yours truly, Joseph Malandruccolo Director, Legal and Legislative Services/Clerk jmalandruccolo@essex.ca cc: Anthony Leardi, MPP, Essex Lisa Gretzky, MPP Windsor West Andrew Dowie, MPP Windsor-Tecumseh Trevor Jones, MPP Chatham-Kent-Leamington Association of Municipal Managers Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO) Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) All Ontario Municipalities - 94 - DELIVERED ELECTRONICALLY Honorable Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing 777 Bay Street, 17th floor Toronto, Ontario M7A 2J3 April 29, 2025 RE: Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers and Duties to Additional Municipalities Dear Minister Flack, Thank you for your letter dated April 9, 2025, regarding the expansion of Strong Mayor Powers and Duties to the Town of Petawawa. Our Council discussed this issue in an open forum at our council meeting on April 23rd and are firmly of the belief that this effort undermines the value of collaboration between the Mayor, Councillors, and Staff. Increasing the powers of the Mayor to push forward Provincial Priorities would eliminate shared decision making, create divisiveness at the council table, and blur the lines between administrative and political roles. Our council believes that this would result in an erosion of the democratic process at the Municipal level, especially in a small city like Petawawa. Although we don’t always agree unanimously on all matters, our council works as a cohesive unit, firmly focused on the goals of advancing and encouraging growth and making our community a wonderful place in which to live and invest. Each of member of council brings their own set of skills, knowledge, values and perspectives to achieve these goals, and has worked extremely well together. Since it was sworn in, our Council has been collectively focused on advancing provincial priorities by delivering much needed housing, building infrastructure that supports community growth and the construction of new homes, including housing-enabling infrastructure such as water and wastewater. The largest community in Renfrew County, Petawawa has grown significantly over the last decade (roughly 25%) and added a large amount of new housing to meet market demands. In 2024, Petawawa increased the size of its planning department to Corr. 18-25 - 95 - reduce permit processing times, 120 new dwellings (Single Family Detached/Row Housing/Multi-family) were constructed, and there are many more dwellings underway: Structure type In Pre-Consultation or going through Planning Approvals Planning Approvals Complete (under construction) Single Family Detached 533 61 Row Housing 24 96 Apartment 348 60 Additional Residential Unit 0 44 Total Units 905 261 Further to this, Garrison Petawawa and Canadian Nuclear laboratories are reporting that they will need to house 1100 individuals and their families as they expand operations. Based on this need and other factors, our municipality is working with private sector and nonprofit developers to meet the demand for both market and affordable housing. To be forthright, where the municipality needs help the most to support housing development and foster densification is access to additional funding to extend utilities, such as water and wastewater services, to developable lands to meet future growth needs. Petawawa has faced a significant reduction in Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILT) over the past two fiscal years ($2.3 million over 2024 and 2025) due to the Business Education Tax discount as well as an annual reduction in Ontario Municipal Partnership Funding over the past decade which has hampered our ability to extend necessary water and wastewater infrastructure vital to delivering new homes. The community’s Ontario Community Infrastructure Funding was reduced in 2025 as well. In closing, our Council requests that the Ontario Government excludes the Town of Petawawa from its proposed amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers and Duties to Additional Municipalities, and work with the municipality to identify funding to support expansion of its storm, water and wastewater treatment systems to support future residential and commercial growth. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me through our offices if you wish to discuss this further. Sincerely, Gary Serviss Mayor of Petawawa Copied: Doug Ford, Premier Billy Denault, MPP, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke Enc. Resolution – Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Petawawa - 96 - April 28, 2025 Delivered Electronically Attn: The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario Re: Resolution - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Petawawa At its Council-In-Committee meeting on April 28, 2025, Petawawa Town Council passed a Resolution in response to the Province’s recent proposal to designate Petawawa as a “Strong Mayor” municipality, effective May 1, 2025. WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has proposed to designate the Town of Petawawa as a "Strong Mayor" community, granting enhanced powers to the Mayor effective May 1, 2025; and, WHEREAS the Strong Mayor powers significantly alter the balance of governance at the municipal level, undermining the role of Council in decision-making and weakening the fundamental democratic principle of majority rule; and, WHEREAS the Town of Petawawa has a long history of collaborative, transparent, and accountable local governance built upon a foundation of Council-debate and shared decision- making; and, WHEREAS many municipally elected officials across the province and members of the public have expressed significant concern regarding the imposition of these powers; and, WHEREAS the Town of Petawawa did not formally request or express a desire to be designated under the Strong Mayor framework; and, WHEREAS a growing number of municipalities and elected officials across Ontario are questioning the appropriateness of the Strong Mayor system and are calling for its reconsideration or repeal; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Petawawa Town Council formally request that the Premier of Ontario and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing immediately remove the Town of Petawawa from the list of municipalities designated under the Strong Mayor legislation; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, all regional Members of Provincial - 97 - Parliament, all Ontario municipalities, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) for their awareness and support. We thank you for your attention to this matter and urge you to respect the democratic wishes of our Council and community. Sincerely, Gary Serviss Mayor, Town of Petawawa (613) 687-5536 gserviss@petawawa.ca petawawa.ca CC: The Honourable Rob Flack (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing) Regional Members of Provincial Parliament All Ontario Municipalities The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) - 98 - CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTH HURON 322 Main Street South P.O. Box 759 Exeter Ontario N0M 1S6 Phone: 519-235-0310 Fax: 519-235-3304 Toll Free: 1-877-204-0747 www.southhuron.ca April 30, 2025 Via email: rob.flack@pc.ola.org Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing 17th Floor 777 Bay Street Toronto, ON M7A 2J3 Dear Hon. Rob Flack, Re: Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers Please be advised that South Huron Council passed the following resolution at their April 22, 2025 Regular Council Meeting: 176-2025 Moved By: Jim Dietrich Seconded by: Wendy McLeod-Haggitt That South Huron Council supports the April 14, 2025 correspondence of Town of Saugeen Shores regarding opposition to Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers; and That this supporting resolution and the originating correspondence be circulated to Premier Doug Ford, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Rob Flack, Lisa Thompson, MPP, Minister of Rural Affairs, AMO, Town of Saugeen Shores, and all municipalities in Ontario. Result: Carried Please find attached the originating correspondence for your reference. Respectfully, Kendra Webster, Legislative & Licensing Coordinator Municipality of South Huron kwebster@southhuron.ca 519-235-0310 x. 232 Corr. 19-25 - 99 - Encl. cc: Minister of Rural Affairs, MPP Lisa Thompson, lisa.thompson@pc.ola.org; AMO, resolutions@amo.on.ca ; Town of Saugeen Shores, clerk@saugeenshores.ca; and all municipalities in Ontario. - 100 - Town of Saugeen Shores 600 Tomlinson Drive, P.O. Box 820 Port Elgin, ON N0H 2C0 T 519.832.2008 F 519.832.2140 saugeenshores.ca @SaugeenShoresON April 14, 2025 Honourable Rob Flack Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing 17th Floor, 777 Bay St. Toronto, ON M7A 2J3 rob.flack@pc.ola.org Dear Minister, RE: Opposition to Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers I am writing to express my opposition to the government’s proposed expansion of Strong Mayor powers to include the Town of Saugeen Shores. As the Mayor of Saugeen Shores, I am concerned about the implications of this policy change on our local governance. Please consider this letter as the Town of Saugeen Shores submission on O.Reg. 530/22 which is available for comment until April 16th. In my experience, the ‘Council Manager’ system of governance has always served our municipality well. Specifically, when it comes to advancing our shared priority of building more housing to serve our residents, Saugeen Shores Council has demonstrated flexible and determined leadership. Our Council has enabled housing by reducing red tape resulting in the construction of more than 600 multi-family residential units in the last two years alone. Given the strong and sustained commitment of our Council to these efforts, I do not see how the introduction of Strong Mayor powers will accelerate the construction of housing (or the pursuit of other priority areas) in any way. On the contrary, vesting these new powers in the Mayor threatens to disrupt long-established and effective processes, sidelining elected members of Council with effects that may be contrary to the interests of our residents. Saugeen Shores has thrived for decades on the principle of shared leadership. We have an effective team of elected representatives working in partnership with a professional staff to achieve goals that are transparently set out in our Strategic Plan and annual Business Plans. This approach to governance is foundational to building trust between the municipality and the residents that it serves. I fear that the unilateral decision-making enabled by Strong Mayor powers would erode this trust and disrupt the collaborative environment that has long been at the heart of the democratic tradition of our Council and community. I urge you to reconsider the expansion of Strong Mayor powers. If the government has a strong desire to advance these major changes to the governance of our municipality, I - 101 - request that you engage in a thorough consultation process with our Council and the residents of our community before moving forward. It is crucial that any changes to local governance structures be made in close partnership with the communities they impact. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and hope that we can work together in the interest of ensuring strong local governance in Saugeen Shores. Sincerely, Luke Charbonneau, Mayor Town of Saugeen Shores cc. Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario Lisa Thompson, MPP, Minister of Rural Affairs Council, Town of Saugeen Shores All Ontario Municipalities - 102 - Municipality of Bluewater • 14 Mill Avenue, Zurich, ON N0M 2T0 1 of 1 P: 519.236.4351 • F: 519.236.4329 • W: municipalityofbluewater.ca April 28, 2025 The Honourable Doug Ford Legislative Building Queens Park TORONTO ON M7A 1A4 premier@ontario.ca Dear Premier Ford: At the Municipality of Bluewater’s regular Council meeting held on April 22, 2025, Council passed the following resolution: MOVED: Councillor Whetstone SECONDED: Councillor Hessel WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has proposed to expand Strong Mayor Powers to an additional 169 municipalities across Ontario, including the Municipality of Bluewater, effective May 1, 2025; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Corporation of the Municipality of Bluewater is in opposition to the addition of Strong Mayor Powers in the Municipality of Bluewater, and across the Province; AND FURTHER that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, all Ontario Municipalities, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) for their awareness and support. CARRIED Sincerely, Chandra Alexander Manager of Corporate Services/Clerk cc: The Honourable Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) All Ontario Municipalities Corr. 20-25 - 103 - THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF DEEP RIVER •�*========================* *-= P.O. BOX400 • 100 DEEP RIVER ROAD • DEEP RIVER, ONTARIO KOJ 1P0 Tel: (613) 584-2000 • www.deepriver.ca • Fax: (613) 584-3237 BY EMAIL The Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Legislative Building, Queen's Park Toronto, ON M7 A 1 A 1 Email: premier@ontario.ca April 30, 2025 The Honourable Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing 1 7th Floor, 777 Bay Street Toronto, ON M7 A 2J3 Email: rob.flack@ontario .ca Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Deep River in Response to the Province's Recent Proposal to Designate Deep River as a "Strong Mayor" Municipality, Effective May 1, 2025. At a Special Meeting of Council held on April 29, 2025, Council of the Town of Deep River passed the following resolution: RESOLUTION 2025 128 MOVED BY: Councillor Fitton SECONDED BY: Councillor Hughes WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has proposed to designate the Town of Deep River as a "Strong Mayor" community, granting enhanced powers to the Mayor effective May 1, 2025; and, WHEREAS the Strong Mayor powers significantly alter the balance of governance at the municipal level, undermining the role of Council in decision-making and weakening the fundamental democratic principle of majority rule; and, WHEREAS the Town of Deep River has a long history of collaborative, accountable local governance built upon a foundation of Council-debate and shared decision- making; and, WHEREAS many municipally elected officials across the province and members of the public have expressed significant concern regarding the imposition of these powers; and, WHEREAS the Town of Deep River did not formally request or express a desire to be designated under the Strong Mayor framework; and, WHEREAS a growing number of municipalities and elected officials across Ontario are questioning the appropriateness of the Strong Mayor system and are calling for its reconsideration or repeal; Corr. 21-25 - 104 - - 1 0 5 - - 1 0 6 - - 1 0 7 - May 1, 2025 Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Legislative Building, Queen’s Park Toronto, ON M7A 1A1 Email: premier@ontario.ca Honourable Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing 17th Floor, 777 Bay St. Toronto, ON M7A 2J3 Email: rob.flack@ontario.ca Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt At its Regular Council Meeting held on April 2 9, 2025, Council discussed their opposition to the expansion of Strong Mayor Powers, as announced on April 9, 2025. Council of the Town of Cobalt requests that the proposed amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to expand Strong Mayor Powers and duties to additional municipalities not include the Town of Cobalt. Council accordingly passed the following resolution: RESOLUTION No. 2025-057 MOVED BY: Councillor Lafleur SECONDED BY: Councillor Starchuk WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has proposed to designate the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt as a "Strong Mayor" community, granting enhanced powers to the Mayor effective May 1, 2025; and, WHEREAS the Strong Mayor powers significantly alter the balance of governance at the municipal level, undermining the role of Council in decision-making and weakening the fundamental democratic principle of majority rule; and, WHEREAS the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt has a long history of collaborative, transparent, and accountable local governance built upon a foundation of Council-debate and shared decision-making; and, WHEREAS many municipally elected officials across the province and members of the public have expressed significant concern regarding the imposition of these powers; and, Corr. 22-25 - 108 - WHEREAS the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt did not formally request or express a desire to be designated under the Strong Mayor framework; and, WHEREAS a growing number of municipalities and elected officials across Ontario are questioning the appropriateness of the Strong Mayor system and are calling for its reconsideration or repeal; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt Council formally request that the Premier of Ontario and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing immediately remove the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt from the list of municipalities designated under the Strong Mayor legislation; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, all regional Members of Provincial Parliament, all Ontario municipalities, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) for their awareness and support. CARRIED We trust you will find this satisfactory if you have any questions or concerns, please contact the undersigned. Kind Regards, Steven Dalley Town Manager, Clerk/Treasurer Tel: (705) 679-8877 Email: sdalley@cobalt.ca cc: John Vanthof, MPP Timiskaming-Cochrane All Ontario Municipalities Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) - 109 - 1 City of Stratford, Corporate Services Department Clerk’s Office City Hall, P. O. Box 818, Stratford, Ontario N5A 6W1 Tel: 519-271-0250, extension 5237 Email: clerks@stratford.ca Website: www.stratford.ca May 1, 2025 Sent via email: premier@ontario.ca The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario Legislative Building Queens Park Toronto, ON, M7A 1A4 Dear Premier Ford, Re: Resolution R2025-174 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the City of Stratford At the April 28, 2025, Regular meeting, Stratford City Council adopted the following resolution in response to the Province’s proposal to designate Stratford as a “Strong Mayor” municipality, effective May 1, 2025. WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has proposed to designate the City of Stratford as a "Strong Mayor" community, granting enhanced powers to the Mayor effective May 1, 2025; and, WHEREAS the Strong Mayor powers significantly alter the balance of governance at the municipal level, undermining the role of Council in decision-making and weakening the fundamental democratic principle of majority rule; and, Corr. 23-25 - 110 - 2 WHEREAS the City of Stratford has a long history of collaborative, transparent, and accountable local governance built upon a foundation of Council-debate and shared decision making; and, WHEREAS many municipally elected officials across the province and members of the public have expressed significant concern regarding the imposition of these powers; and, WHEREAS the City of Stratford did not formally request or express a desire to be designated under the Strong Mayor framework; and, WHEREAS a growing number of municipalities and elected officials across Ontario are questioning the appropriateness of the Strong Mayor system and are calling for its reconsideration or repeal; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Stratford City Council formally request that the Premier of Ontario and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing immediately remove the City of Stratford from the list of municipalities designated under the Strong Mayor legislation; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Member of Provincial Parliament, all Ontario municipalities, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) for their awareness and support. Sincerely, T. Dafoe Tatiana Dafoe, Clerk City of Stratford Cc: The Honourable Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Matthew Rae, Member of Provincial Parliament, Perth - Wellington All Ontario Municipalities The Association of Municipalities of Ontario - 111 - 546 Niagara Street, PO Box 250 | Wyoming, ON, N0N 1T0 | 519-845-3939 | www.plympton-wyoming.com April 30, 2025 Hon. Doug Ford Premier of Ontario premier@ontario.ca Hon. Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing rob.flack@pc.ola.org Mr. Bob Bailey, MPP Sarnia-Lambton bob.bailey@pc.ola.org Re: Strong Mayor Powers Please be advised that the Council of the Town of Plympton-Wyoming at its Regular Council meeting on April 30th, 2025, passed the following motion: Motion #14 Moved by Kristen Rodrigues Seconded by Alex Boughen WHEREAS the Government of Ontario announced on April 9th, 2025, that it will extend “Strong Mayor Powers” to an additional 169 Municipalities; AND WHEREAS the Province only accepted comments on the government’s intentions until April 16, 2025 with the new powers set to begin on May 1, 2025; AND WHEREAS the timeline for feedback from municipal councils was unreasonably short, especially when considering many of the impacted councils generally only meet one to two times monthly, with the added staff time required to prepare reports and provide more detaile d information on the impact of the provincial legislation; AND WHEREAS the intent of the legislation is to build more homes faster, The Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO), which has been tracking the use of strong mayor powers since they were first introduced in Toronto and Ottawa in 2022, said there is no evidence Corr. 24-25 - 112 - 546 Niagara Street, PO Box 250 | Wyoming, ON, N0N 1T0 | 519-845-3939 | www.plympton-wyoming.com to suggest this legislation has any impact on the number of housings starts in municipalities that have been granted the powers; AND WHEREAS the new powers include the ability to set budgets, veto bylaws, pass bylaws with just one-third of their council’s support, appoint senior civil servants, and solely delegate and oversee the CAO position, which further erodes the lines of an elected official’s position and impairs the ability of council to work as a whole on behalf of the community; NOW THEREFORE be it resolved that the council for the Town of Plympton -Wyoming fully supports the existing electoral process under which the residents duly elected all council members and value a collaborative and council-driven approach to decision making without impairment on any members of council; AND FURTHER That Council respects the province’s intent, but the imposition of Strong Mayor Powers results in an erosion of the democratic process and further deteriorates the promotion of diversity in municipal representation; AND FURTHER The Council of the Town of Plympton-Wyoming is formally opposed to the use of Strong Mayor Powers and requests that the province repeal the Strong Mayor Powers Legislation all together as a matter of upholding the democratic rights of all elected officials; AND FURTHER, that in the absence of a repeal, the Town of Plympton-Wyoming Council requests that the province allows municipalities the option to formally decline as a matter of record with the province. Carried. If you have any questions regarding the above motion, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Dianne Gould-Brown dgould-brown@plympton-wyoming.ca Executive Assistant – Deputy Clerk Town of Plympton-Wyoming cc: All Ontario Municipalities Association of Municipalities of Ontario - 113 - May 8, 2025 Hon. Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing 17th Floor, 777 Bay St. Toronto, ON M7A 2J3 Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers in the Municipality of North Perth Please be advised that the Council of the Municipality of North Perth passed the following resolution at their meeting on April 29, 2025: Moved by Doug Kellum Seconded by Dave Johnston THAT: The Council of the Municipality of North Perth expresses its desires to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to reverse the grant of Strong Mayor Powers to the Municipality of North Perth; AND THAT: The letter be circulated to Premier Doug Ford, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Rob flack, Perth Wellington MPP Matthew Ra e, Association of Municipality of Ontario (AMO) and all Ontario Municipalities. On behalf of the Council of the Municipality of North Perth, please accept this letter as an official request to have strong mayor powers removed from the Municipality of North Perth. Regards, Sarah Carter Acting Clerk/Legislative Services Supervisor Enclosure CC: The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario Matthew Rae, Perth Wellington MPP Association of Municipalities of Ontario All Ontario Municipalities Corr. 25-25 - 114 - Phone: 705-728-4784 Office of the Mayor Fax: 705-728-6957 www.springwater.ca 2231 Nursery Road Minesing, Ontario L9X 1A8 Canada Honourable Premier Doug Ford Doug.Fordco@pc.ola.org Sent via electronic mail May 8, 2025 Dear Honourable Premier Doug Ford At its Regular meeting on May 7, 2025, the Township of Springwater’s Council passed resolution C195-2025 opposing Strong Mayor Powers. Resolution C195-2025 Moved by: Cabral Seconded by: Fisher Whereas the Ontario government has expanded the "strong mayor" powers to 169 additional municipalities, which grants mayors in these municipalities more authority, particularly concerning the control of municipal budgets and planning decisions; and, Whereas this proposal has raised significant concerns regarding the centralization of power, erosion of local democracy, reduced accountability, and the potential for the abuse of power; and, Whereas the expansion of strong mayor powers undermines the collaborative nature of municipal governance, and diminishes the role of elected municipal councillors in representing the diverse interests of the community; and, Whereas concerns have been raised about the negative impacts on public trust, democratic participation, and municipal decision-making processes, if mayors are able to bypass council decisions without adequate consultation or oversight. Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of the Township of Springwater opposes the Strong Mayor Powers; and That the Council formally expresses its opposition to the Ontario government's expansion of the Strong Mayor Powers to preserve local democracy, transparency, and accountability. Further Be It Resolved That a copy of this motion be forwarded to the Ontario Premier, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, MPP Doug Downey, all Ontario municipalities, as well as the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) for further action. Carried The Clerk’s Department can be reached via email at clerks@springwater.ca or by phone at 705- 728-4784, Ext. 2304. Corr. 26-25 - 115 - Phone: 705-728-4784 Office of the Mayor Fax: 705-728-6957 Regards, Cayla Reimer Deputy Clerk, Township of Springwater cc: Hon. Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Hon. MPP Doug Downey All Ontario Municipalities Association of Municipalities of Ontario - 116 - Report to Council Report Number: ECD 04-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Fiaz Jadoon Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects Subject: Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre File: A-1440-001 Recommendation: 1. That Council approve the acceptance of $1,000,000 from Dorsay Developments Corporation in exchange for the naming rights of Pickering’s new community centre, (previously called the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre) to be called Dorsay Community Centre, in accordance with the naming rights agreement (Attachment 1); 2. That Council approve the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation, set out in Attachment 1, subject to minor revisions acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer and City Solicitor; 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the City of Pickering to enter into a naming rights agreement with Dorsay Developments Corporation (Dorsay) for the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre to be called Dorsay Community Centre at $1,000,000 for a period of 15 years. The Marketing Partnership and Advertising Policy (ADM 150) was approved by Council in September 2015 (Resolution #80/15). The Policy Objective states that “The Corporation of the City of Pickering welcomes and encourages marketing partnerships and advertising to assist in the provision of City programs, services, events, projects and facilities”. On January 18, 2024, Council authorized staff to pursue naming right revenues for both the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre (PHCC) and the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library (SRCL), via Report FIN 01-24 (Resolution #379/24). On May 14, 2024, the City of Pickering retained Sponsorship Canada Inc. to undertake a facility assessment and valuation for both the PHCC and SRCL. From a high-level perspective, the scope of work for Sponsorship Canada was to understand the current industry environment of the City’s two new facilities (PHCC & SRCL) and assess assets in similar ecosystems. - 117 - ECD 04-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre Page 2 CORP0227-07/01 revised The Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects has been engaged with Dorsay regarding the potential sponsorship for PHCC, due to their demonstrated interest in becoming part of the community and exploring opportunities to invest in facility naming rights. As a result of these conversations, City staff were able to secure this naming right agreement for $1,000,000 for a 15- year term. As set out in the attached naming rights agreement, Dorsay will be entitled to certain signage that consists of Dorsay Community Centre on the exterior front facade of the facility, Dorsay Meeting Room at the exterior entrance of an interior meeting room located on the second floor of the community centre, and an interior sponsor information sign to be located in a public area to be agreed upon by both parties. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Corporate Key of Good Governance/Customer Service Excellence; and Corporate Priorities of Champion Economic Leadership & Innovation; and Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community. Financial Implications: The sponsorship revenues, paid in equal annual instalments will help cover the City's annual debt costs for this facility, reducing expenses for Pickering taxpayers. This is the second significant sponsorship agreement with the City with the first agreement resulting in the rebranding of the City’s recreation complex to its current name of Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex. Dorsay is responsible to pay the City a cash contribution in the amount of $1,000,000.00, plus applicable HST. The contribution shall be paid by the Sponsor to the City in equal installments of $66,666.66, plus applicable HST. The first payment is due within thirty days of the agreement being signed. Subsequent payments are due within thirty days of the beginning of each year of the Term. The first payment shall be in the amount of $133,333.32, representing the first payment plus an additional $66,666.66 as security to cover the cost of sign replacement. If the City does not have to replace the exterior facility sign during the first four years of this agreement, the security deposit will either be returned to the Sponsor or applied as the Sponsor’s year five payment. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the City to enter into a naming rights agreement with Dorsay at $1,000,000 for a term of 15 years. The City of Pickering recognizes and supports sponsorship and naming right opportunities as a revenue generating tool that offsets costs associated with the construction and operation of City facilities. Naming rights also play a pivotal role in building stronger relationships and partnerships with key stakeholders in the community who are either operating a business and employing individuals, or building new communities in Pickering. For any corporation looking to invest in naming rights within a community, it elevates brand awareness and allows them to reach a broader demographic. Following the January 18th, 2024 Council meeting, staff retained subject matter expert Sponsorship Canada Inc. to assess and provide valuation for both the PHCC and SRCL. With the valuation provided by Sponsorship Canada Inc., City staff engaged with stakeholders who had - 118 - ECD 04-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre Page 3 CORP0227-07/01 revised expressed an interest in the past for naming right opportunities in Pickering. Due to the construction schedule of PHCC and the requirement to finalize facility signage in a timely manner, City staff reached out directly to prospective sponsors including Dorsay Development Corporation, who had previously expressed a strong interest in sponsoring the community centre. Upon reviewing the location and the features of the facility, Dorsay agreed to secure the naming rights of PHCC, to be called the Dorsay Community Centre, for a 15-year term. As set out in the attached naming rights agreement, Dorsay will be entitled to certain signage that consists of Dorsay Community Centre on the exterior front facade of the facility, Dorsay Meeting Room at the exterior entrance of an interior meeting room located on the second floor of the community centre, and an interior sponsor information sign to be located in a public area to be agreed upon by both parties. The City is in discussions with Dorsay Development Corporation regarding a cost sharing agreement for a prominent road sign which will reflect both the Dorsay Community Centre and the Pickering Museum Village. Any such agreement will be returned to Council for consideration and approval. The PHCC, located at 2365 6th Concession Road, is a 44,000 square-foot facility that brings a community centre, the Pickering Museum Village, and Pickering Public Library into one dynamic space. The new facility is Pickering’s first zero-carbon building, supporting Pickering’s journey of becoming one of the most sustainable cities in Canada, and in accordance with the City’s Corporate Energy Management Plan. The facility includes spaces for culture and recreation programs, events, exhibits, library services, and facility rentals. The PHCC replaces the aging Greenwood Community Centre and will serve Pickering’s growing community. Designed by award-winning architecture firm Hariri Pontarini, the facility will serve as a vibrant community hub and will be the City’s first new community centre built since George Ashe Library & Community Centre was constructed in 2001. Dorsay is a privately-held real estate development and investment firm based in Toronto, with over 27 years of experience in creating thoughtful, future-oriented communities across the Greater Toronto Area. Guided by a long-term approach to value creation, the company blends market opportunity with a strong commitment to community connection, environmental sustainability, and responsible growth. Over the past two decades, Dorsay has advanced a wide range of real estate projects through all phases of the development cycle, working collaboratively with multidisciplinary partners and municipalities to unlock complex sites and deliver well-integrated, high-performing communities. One such project is located in Northeast Pickering which sets out a vision to build a complete community with residential and employment neighborhoods. Attachment: 1. Naming Rights Agreement for the Dorsay Community Centre - 119 - ECD 04-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre Page 4 CORP0227-07/01 revised Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Fiaz Jadoon, Ec.D., CEcD, MPM, B.COMM Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects FJ:fj Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer Laura Gibbs MBA, MSc. Director, Community Services Cameron Murkar, City Solicitor, Corporate Services Original Signed By: Original Signed By: Original Signed By: Original Signed By: Original Signed By: - 120 - NAMING RIGHTS AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made as of this 1st day of XX, 2025. BETWEEN: Dorsay Development Corporation (the "Sponsor") And The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City") WHEREAS the City is constructing a community centre currently known as the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre located at 2365 6th Concession Road, Pickering (the "Community Centre") and the City desires to secure sponsorships for various components of the Community Centre; AND WHEREAS the Sponsor is agreeable to be the naming sponsor of the “Community Centre”, as identified on the drawing marked as Schedule B and excluding the components which are part of the Library, archival, or museum components, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; AND WHEREAS the Sponsor and the City are entering into this Agreement for the sponsorship of the Community Centre including by way of exterior and interior naming of the Community Centre; NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the promises and other mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows: Recitals 1.1 The foregoing recitals are true in substance and fact and are incorporated herein. Term 2.1 The term of this Agreement shall be fifteen (15) years commencing on June 1, 2025 (the "Commencement Date") and expiring on May 30, 2040, unless terminated earlier pursuant to the terms of this Agreement (the 'Term"). 2.2 Upon expiry of this Agreement, the parties will have no further obligation under this Agreement, except to complete any such promotional activities commenced prior to the expiration of the Term. 1 Attachment 1 to Report ECD 04-25 - 121 - Sponsorship 3.1 The Sponsor agrees to pay to the City a cash contribution in the amount of $1,000,000.00, plus applicable H.S.T. (the "Contribution"). 3.2 The Contribution shall be paid by the Sponsor to the City in equal annual instalments of $66,666.66, plus applicable H.S.T. The first payment is due within thirty (30) days of this agreement being signed. Subsequent payments are due within thirty (30) days of the beginning of each year of the Term. The first payment shall be in the amount of $133,333.32, representing the first payment as well as a “security.” In the event the Sponsor defaults, the security will cover costs incurred by the City requiring the removal of the Sponsor’s sign. Provided no such removal is required within the first four (4) years of this agreement, the City will either return the full amount of the security to the Sponsor or credit the amount toward the Sponsor’s payment obligation for the fifth (5th) year of the agreement. 3.3 In exchange for the Sponsor agreeing to make the Contribution, the City shall provide to the Sponsor the benefits set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto, including, without limitation, the exclusive right to designate and place a name on the exterior of the Community Centre and the City shall be required to use the Sponsor's designation exclusively as the name of the Community Centre. The design, location, and appearance of the signage will be controlled by the City. Trademark and Logo Use 4.1 Upon the request of the City, the Sponsor will provide its approved name and logo, and hereby grants to the City a non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited license to use (without any alterations or modifications thereof) the Sponsor's name and logo in accordance with the benefits set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto. 4.2 The City does not obtain any intellectual property rights under this Agreement in any of the Sponsor’s intellectual property, including, without limitation, any copyrighted material, link formats, technical specifications or guidelines, and graphical artwork. 4.3 The City's name and logo are intellectual property owned by the City and may be used only in strict accordance with this Agreement and applicable City policies. The use of the City's name or logo in conjunction with any sponsorship activity or materials provided by the Sponsor requires prior written approval by the City, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld. Such written approval shall be sought from the City's Representative set out in Section 12.2. Each of the City and the Sponsor represents and warrants that it is the sole owner of all legal rights to its name and logo. 4.4 Neither party shall receive any rights whatsoever from the use of the intellectual property of the other party, including any rights of trademark, service mark or - 122 - copyright. All such rights remain the sole and exclusive property of the registered owner. Option to Extend 5.1 Provided the Sponsor is not in default of its obligations under this Agreement, the parties may mutually agree to extend the Term of this Agreement for an additional fifteen (15) years upon terms and conditions to be agreed upon between the parties prior to the expiration of the Term. If, prior to the expiration of the Term, the parties are unable to agree to the terms and conditions of the extension term, then this Agreement shall terminate upon the expiration of the Term. 5.2 In the event the City and Sponsor do not extend the Term of this Agreement, the City shall exercise good faith efforts when securing future sponsorships for the Community Centre when considering the terms of the Agreement and the Contributions. Compliance with Laws 6.1 This Agreement and the rights and obligations of the parties hereto shall be subject to, and the parties hereby agree to comply with, all applicable federal and provincial laws, bylaws, and regulations, in force and as amended from time to time. The City warrants and represents that the rights granted by the City to the Sponsor pursuant to this Agreement comply with all applicable federal and provincial laws, by-laws, and regulations, in force and effect as at the date hereof. The City will not enact any by-laws which would negate or materially reduce the benefits or rights provided to the Sponsor in Schedule "A" attached hereto. Default 7.1 Each of the following events constitutes an event of default enabling the party not in default (the "Non-Defaulting Party"), subject to Section 7.2 hereof, to terminate this Agreement pursuant to the terms below: (a) either party's failure to perform any covenant, condition, or obligation contained in this Agreement (the "Defaulting Party"); (b) any event or communication arising out of or related to this Agreement, including, without limitation, disputes covering the performance of the parties' obligations or the interpretation of the terms and conditions of this Agreement under the direction or control of the City or the Sponsor (including by their respective representatives, officers, directors, Council members, employees or authorized agents), whether or not such event or statement accurately reflects the views and opinions of said party, that the other party, in its opinion, acting reasonably, considers immoral or offensive, or which may result in a negative public perception of such party; 3 - 123 - (c)any breach of any law, by-law or regulation applicable to this Agreement; and (d)either party becomes insolvent or goes into liquidation or has a receiver appointed in respect of its assets or is subject to any proceedings under the Bankruptcy Act and Insolvency Act (Canada), then such party shall be in breach of this Agreement. 7.2 Except as set out in Section 10.1, any breach of this Agreement that is not remedied by the Defaulting Party within thirty (30) days after delivery of written notice from the Non-Defaulting Party entitles the Non-Defaulting Party to terminate this Agreement. Termination due to Default 8.1 If any default for which written notice is received but not cured within the time stated in Section 7.2, this Agreement shall, at the option of the Non-Defaulting Party, terminate without any further notice, effective immediately upon expiration of the said notice period, and the Defaulting Party shall be fully liable for all costs, losses and damages incurred by the Non-Defaulting Party, and for all monies owing by the Defaulting Party under this Agreement. Indemnification 9.1 Each of the City and the Sponsor shall indemnify and hold harmless the other, including their respective directors, officers, employees, Council members and authorized agents, from and against any and all actions losses, damages, claims (including intellectual property claims), costs and expenses to which the party being indemnified shall or may become liable by reason of any breach, violation or non-performance by the party so indemnifying of any covenant, term or provision of this Agreement. Assignment 10.1 The Sponsor shall not transfer or assign this Agreement or any interest in this Agreement, either voluntarily or by operation of laws or otherwise, without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any attempted transfer or assignment by the Sponsor without the prior written consent of the City shall permit the City, at its option, to immediately terminate this Agreement and the Sponsor shall be fully liable for anything it owes under this Agreement, and all costs, losses and damages incurred by the City. 4 - 124 - Partnership 11.1 Nothing in this Agreement creates a relationship of agency, partnership, joint venture, or the like between the parties, and neither party shall be entitled to, or purport to, bind or represent the other party. Neither party shall do or allow any act which would imply apparent authority to act for the other party. Representatives 12.1 The Sponsor agrees to appoint Agnes Koc (Phone: 416.216.1352, Email: akoc@dorsay.ca as the Sponsor's Agreement manager (the "Sponsor's Representative") to liaise with the City on all matters relating to the fulfillment of the obligations set out in this Agreement. 12.2 The City agrees to appoint Fiaz Jadoon (Phone: 905.420.4660 ext. 2292, Email: fjadoon@pickering.ca as the City's Agreement manager (the "City's Representative") to liaise with the Sponsor on all matters relating to the fulfillment of the obligations set out in this Agreement. Notices 13.1 Any notice required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and may be given by serving personally or mailing same by registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or by sending same by email or other similar form of communication to the following: Email: and to the City at: Name: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Attention: Fiaz Jadoon Address: One The Esplanade, Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Title: Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects Phone: 905.420.4660 ext. 2292 Fax: 905.420.6064 Email: fjadoon@pickering.ca 5 ! To the Sponsor at: Name: Attention: Address: - 125 - and such notice shall be sufficiently given if addressed to the party's address as set out above. Insurance 14.1 The City, at its sole cost and expense, shall purchase and keep in full force and effect during the Term, comprehensive general liability insurance pertaining to the City and the Sponsor’s liability to others in respect of injury, death or damage to p roperty, occurring at the Dorsay Community Centre with coverage for any one occurrence or claim of not less than $10,000,000.00. The Sponsor shall be added to this policy as an additional insured. Further Acts 15.1 The parties hereto agree for themselves and their successors and assigns to execute any further documents and do such further acts as may be necessary or desirable to carry out the intent of this Agreement. Governing Law 16.1 This Agreement shall be governed by, subject to and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the Federal laws of Canada applicable therein and the parties hereto attorn exclusively to the jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of Ontario. Entire Agreement and Modifications 17.1 This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the parties hereto in reference to the subject matter hereof and no representation, inducement, promise or agreement, oral or otherwise, not embodied herein, shall be of any force or effect. This Agreement supersedes any and all prior agreements, negotiations, correspondence, undertakings, promises, covenants, arrangements, communications, representations, and warranties, whether oral or written, of any party to this Agreement. No change, modification or alteration of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and signed by all the parties hereto. Schedule "A" attached to this Agreement forms part of this Agreement. Binding Effect 18.1 This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and being binding upon the City and the Sponsor and their respective successors and permitted assigns. 6 - 126 - Waiver 19.1 The failure of any party to exercise any right, power or option or to enforce any remedy or to insist upon the strict compliance with the terms, conditions and covenants under this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of the terms, conditions and covenants herein with respect to that or any other or subsequent breach thereof nor a waiver by that party any time thereafter to require strict compliance with all terms, conditions and covenants hereof, including the terms, conditions and covenants with respect to which the party has failed to exercise such right, power or option. Nothing shall be construed or have the effect of a waiver except an instrument in writing signed by a duly authorized officer of the applicable party which expressly waives a right, power or option under this Agreement. General 20.1 Should any provision or provisions of this Agreement be illegal or not enforceable, it or they shall be considered separate and severable from this Agreement and its remaining provisions shall remain in force and be binding upon the parties hereto as though the said provision or provisions had never been included; provided that if the provision of this Agreement requiring the City to provide to the Sponsor the benefits set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto, including, without limitation, the exclusive right to designate the name of the Community Centre is illegal or deemed to be not enforceable, then the provisions of this Agreement requiring the Sponsor to make the Contribution shall also be deemed to be unenforceable. 20.2 The headings in this Agreement have, been inserted as a matter of convenience and for reference only and in no way define, limit or enlarge the scope of meaning of this Agreement nor any of the provisions hereof. 20.3 This Agreement and any information or documents that are provided hereunder may be released pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.M.56, as amended. This acknowledgement shall not be construed as a waiver of any right to object to the release of this Agreement or of any information or documents. 20.4 The Schedules to this Agreement form part of this Agreement. 20.5 Nothing in this Agreement restricts the use of temporary signs to promote or advertise specific events, or the sponsors of specific events, which may be taking place at the Community Centre Complex. (Balance of this page intentionally left blank.) 7 - 127 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the date noted herein. DATED this day of xxxxx, 2025 SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Name: Title: I/We have the authority to bind the Corporation. Dorsay Development Corporation Name: Title: I/We have the authority to bind the Corporation. 8 - 128 - Schedule "A" Benefits 1. Naming Rights (1) During the Term of this Agreement, the City grants the Sponsor the exclusive licence to name the Community Centre pursuant to the terms hereunder. As of the Commencement Date, the official name of the “Community Centre” will be the "DORSAY COMMUNITY CENTRE” (the "Name"). The Sponsor will be entitled to have certain signage or other forms of exposure of the Community Centre, provided such signage shall substantially consist of the Name. The appearance and location of all signage, including colours, shall be approved by the City. The signage shall consist of the following: (a) An exterior sign located on the Community Centre in a prominent location at the main front entrance naming and identifying the building; and (b) An interior sponsor information sign to be located in a public area to be agreed upon by both parties. (c) An interior sign located on the exterior of the Boardroom, with the official name of this room to be the “DORSAY MEETING ROOM” (d) Due to the City’s own standards regarding advertising, the City must review and approve all signs and materials that will be displayed by the Sponsor across the facility. Nothing herein shall prevent the City from accepting or acknowledging contributions from other sponsors relating to the Community Centre or activities occurring in the Community Centre by erecting plaques or signage, provided that such acknowledgements are of a size and format that do not detract from the prominence of the Name of the Community Centre. (2) No signage acknowledging contributions from other sponsors relating to the Community Centre shall be placed at the entrance to the Community Centre. The “entrance” is understood to be that area identified and labelled as "Entrance” on the drawing attached hereto marked as Schedule B and excludes the lobby area. (3) The name and logo of the City of Pickering, the Pickering Museum Village and the Pickering Public Library, which operate services in the Community Centre 9 - 129 - will be included in some site promotions and signage for the Dorsay Community Centre. Furthermore, nothing herein shall prevent the City from entering into any arrangements or agreements with other parties whereby such parties would financially compensate the City for the right to advertise or promote their company, business, or products by signage or other means on the condition that any such signage will not distract from the prominence of the name of the “Community Centre”. (4) In the event the Sponsor changes or causes a change of the Name or logo, the Sponsor agrees to pay all costs and expenses associated therewith, including, without limitation, the costs and expense of: (a) removing, destroying and/or discharging signage reflecting the prior Name and logo; (b) preparing, producing, replacing, mounting and installing new or altered signage to reflect the name and logo change with the City’s approval of the design, production and installation; (c) preparing, producing, replacing and distributing merchandise, equipment, print materials, and Branding and Collateral Materials reflecting the Name and logo change. 2. Branding and Collateral Materials (1) In connection with the naming rights of the Community Centre granted to the Sponsor hereunder, the City agrees to support the brand exposure of the Sponsor during the Term through the following branding channels (the "Branding and Collateral Materials"): (a) Website and Digital Media: As of the Commencement Date, the City will cause the Community Centre web page to contain information relating to the Sponsor. The City will maintain and have control of said web pages and content. (b) Public Service Announcements: The City agrees to make reasonable efforts to identify the complete Name in all written and oral references to the Community Centre with respect to any public service announcements, including, without limitation, all official documents, press releases and other public announcements. (2) The City will be responsible for the costs and expenses associated with the initial design, production and purchase of Branding and Collateral Materials reflecting the implementation of the Name for regular operations. Any Branding 10 - 130 - or Collateral materials that are requested by the sponsor will be at the sponsor’s cost. (3)This section does not include the Library or Museum’s website or materials. 11 - 131 - Report to Council Report Number: FIN 10-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer Subject: 2025 Asset Management Plan - File: F-1200-001 Recommendation: 1. That the 2025 Asset Management Plan, set out in Attachment 1 to this report, be received; 2. That Council endorse the use of the 2025 Asset Management Plan for financial planning purposes as it relates to the development of the Ten Year financial plan; and 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The City is required to have an updated Asset Management Plan (AMP) as per Ontario Regulation 588/17. Asset management is defined as the coordinated activity of an organization to realize value from assets. It considers all asset types, and includes all activities involved in the asset’s life cycle from planning and acquisition/creation; to operational and maintenance activities, rehabilitation, and renewal; to replacement or disposal and any remaining liabilities. Asset management is comprehensive and normally involves balancing costs, risks, opportunities and performance benefits to achieve the total lowest lifecycle cost for each asset. After months of preparation, staff have updated the City’s 2025 Asset Management Plan. With Council endorsing the 2025 AMP, the City has met the obligations for July 1, 2025, under this Regulation and the document will be posted on the City’s website. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Corporate Key:Good Governance/Customer Service Excellence. Financial Implications: The attached 2025 AMP provides a comprehensive summary of the City’s key assets, their current condition and investments required to maintain these assets in working condition. The AMP identifies the need for the City to increase its annual funding for the AMP categories by an additional levy increase of 2.8% per year. Discussion: Asset management builds on the Public Sector Account Board standard PS 3150, which required municipal government to account and report on their Tangible Capital - 132 - FIN 10-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: 2025 Asset Management Plan Page 2 Assets (TCA), effective with fiscal years starting January 1, 2009. The City, through its annual financial statements, reports on its TCA through Note 11. Following the development of FIN 050 Accounting for Tangible Assets Policy, the City developed FIN 080 Strategic Asset Management Policy, the first requirement of the Ontario Regulation 588/17. The next requirement of the Regulation was our 2020 AMP which met the requirements for July 1, 2022, and July 1, 2024. The attached 2025 AMP is the next requirement of the regulation in the progression of asset management. With Council endorsing the 2025 AMP, the City has met the obligations for July 1, 2025, under this Regulation and the document will be posted on the City’s website. The City of Pickering's 2025 AMP satisfies Ontario Regulation 588/17 requirements by addressing proposed levels of service, assessing asset conditions, analyzing lifecycle strategies, and developing a long-term financial plan. It enables Pickering to make informed decisions, optimize infrastructure investments, and ensure service reliability in the face of growth and climate change. AMP Key Points Pickering owns and manages a diverse asset portfolio valued at $2.1 billion, as shown in the chart below. Chart One Replacement Cost by Major Category (Millions) $0.0 $200.0 $400.0 $600.0 $800.0 $1,000.0 $1,200.0 Road Corridor Stormwater System Buildings & Facilities Parks Bridges & Culverts Other Infrastructure Cost - 133 - FIN 10-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: 2025 Asset Management Plan Page 3 The above chart shows the replacement cost of each major asset category. As expected, and based on the City’s geographical area, the road corridor would be the largest asset class. Chart two summarizes asset condition at the portfolio level. Chart two data is based on assessed conditions and aged based analysis. Approximately 60% of the City’s assets, excluding facilities and parks are in a “fair to very good” condition and the infrastructure backlog is estimated to be $85.9 million, reflecting overdue capital reinvestment needs. Chart Two Asset Portfolio Condition Assets that are in the “poor or very poor” condition, may require replacement or major rehabilitation in the near future. The above graph excludes Buildings & Facilities and Park assets, which are assessed using the Facilities Condition Index (FCI) and Parks Condition Index. The current City Facilities Condition Index is 25.68%. (A lower score is better.) This FCI indicates that, on average, 25.68% of the total replacement cost of facility assets is required to address current renewal and rehabilitation needs. This condition level is presented in the attached report as “Needs Improvement.” The Parks Condition Index is 12.08%. This reflects the ratio of identified parks repairs and renewal costs (over five years) to the total replacement cost of park assets. A score of 12.08% falls within the “Excellent” range suggesting that the majority of the parks portfolio is in good condition. The AMP document outlines an average annual capital need of $61.7M across asset classes: Asset Category Annual Need Available Funding Annual Gap Road Corridor $33.3M $10.4M $22.9M Stormwater System $6.6M $0.9M $5.7M Very Poor, $442,961,404 (27%) Poor, $217,021,815 (13%) Fair, $155,728,618 (10%) Good, $244,531,648 (15%) Very Good, $561,698,672 (35%) Overall Portfolio Condition - 134 - FIN 10-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: 2025 Asset Management Plan Page 4 Asset Category Annual Need Available Funding Annual Gap Other Assets $21.8M $17.5M $4.3M Total $61.7M $28.85M $32.8M There is currently an annual funding shortfall of $32.8 million. Addressing the $32.8 million annual infrastructure funding shortfall is an issue that needs to be addressed as part of the AMP. The AMP presents multiple tax levy phase-in strategies, recognizing the need to balance fiscal sustainability with affordability for residents. A structured and predictable funding approach is essential to avoid further erosion of critical infrastructure. The “For consideration scenario” is a 10-year phased tax levy increase of 2.8% annually that offers to some degree a strategic middle ground. It allows the City to address the funding gap within a reasonable period. In contrast, the 5-year option, while more aggressive, would be difficult to implement in these challenging economic times. The 15-year option, though more gradual, may expose the City to higher risks and escalating long-term costs due to deferred maintenance and rising asset failure rates. The scenarios outlined in the AMP document, were developed through rigorous modeling and reflect the funding required to maintain current levels of service, support sustainable growth, and respond to climate pressures. Importantly, these figures are exclusive of inflation, which will further increase future needs if not proactively addressed. Scenario Period Annual Increase 5-Year 2025–2029 5.7% 10-Year (For Consideration) 2025–2034 2.8% 15-Year 2027–2042 1.9% The AMP analysis, indicates that the current annual property tax funded capital investment falls short of the required sustainable levels, creating risks to infrastructure condition and service reliability over time. Implementing annual property tax levy increases over ten or fifteen years results in closing the infrastructure deficit while addressing to some degree, the affordability issue. Attachments: 1.2025 Asset Management Plan 2.Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act, 2015, Ontario Regulation 588/17 - 135 - FIN 10-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: 2025 Asset Management Plan Page 5 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Julie S. Robertson, CPA Stan Karwowski Senior Financial Analyst – Asset Director, Finance & Treasurer Management Coordinator SK:jsr Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original Signed By:Original Signed By: Original Signed By: - 136 - Asset Management Plan 2025 City of Pickering Asset Inventory Data is current as of January 31st, 2025 Annual Capital Funding includes the 2024 Capital Budget Attachment 1 to Report FIN 10-25 - 137 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 i This Asset Management Plan was prepared by: Empowering your organization through advanced asset management, budgeting & GIS solutions - 138 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 ii Key Statistics $2.1b 2025 Replacement Cost of Asset Portfolio $61k Replacement Cost of Infrastructure Per Household 60%Percentage of Assets in Fair or Better Condition 71%Percentage of Assets with Assessed Condition Data $32.8m Annual Capital Infrastructure Deficit 10 Years Recommended Timeframe for Eliminating Annual Infrastructure Deficit 3.03%Target Reinvestment Rate 1.56%Actual Reinvestment Rate - 139 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 iii Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary ............................................................................ 1 2. Introduction & Context ........................................................................ 4 3. Portfolio Overview – State of the Infrastructure ..................................... 30 Core Assets .......................................................................................... 41 4. Road Corridor .................................................................................. 42 5. Bridges and Culverts ......................................................................... 69 6. Stormwater System .......................................................................... 85 Non-Core Assets ................................................................................. 106 7. Buildings & Facilities ........................................................................ 107 8. Parks ............................................................................................. 134 9. Other Infrastructure ......................................................................... 153 Strategies ........................................................................................... 179 10. Growth .......................................................................................... 180 11. Financial Strategy ............................................................................ 194 12. Recommendations & Key Considerations ............................................. 206 Appendices ......................................................................................... 208 Appendix A – 10-Year Capital Requirements ............................................... 209 Appendix B – Level of Service Maps & Photos ............................................. 212 Appendix C – Risk Rating Criteria ............................................................. 225 Appendix D – Additional Asset Portfolio Breakdown by Sub-segments ............. 227 Appendix E – Facility Condition Indices ...................................................... 235 - 140 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 1 1. Executive Summary Municipal infrastructure delivers critical services that are foundational to the economic, social, and environmental health and growth of a community. The goal of asset management is to enable infrastructure to deliver an adequate level of service in the most cost-effective manner. This involves the ongoing review and update of infrastructure information and data alongside the development and implementation of asset management strategies and long-term financial planning. 1.1 Scope This Asset Management Plan (AMP) identifies the current practices and strategies that are in place to manage public infrastructure and makes recommendations where they can be further refined. Through the implementation of sound asset management strategies, the City can ensure that public infrastructure is managed to support the sustainable delivery of municipal services. This AMP includes the following asset categories: Figure 1 Core and Non-Core Asset Categories •Road Corridor •Bridges & Structural Culverts •Stormwater System Core Assets •Buildings & Facilities •Parks •Other Infrastructure Non-Core Assets - 141 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 2 1.2 O. Reg. 588/17 Compliance With the development of this AMP the Municipality has achieved compliance with July 1, 2025, requirements under O. Reg. 588/17. This includes requirements for proposed levels of service and inventory reporting for all asset categories. More details on compliance can be found in section 2.5.1 O. Reg. 588/17 Compliance Review. 1.3 Findings The overall replacement cost of the asset categories included in this AMP totals $2.1 billion. 60% of the assets analyzed in this AMP, based on replacement cost, are in fair or better condition. Additionally, condition data was available for 71% of the assets assessed. For the remaining 29% of assets, assessed condition data was unavailable, and asset age was used to approximate condition – a data gap that persists in most municipalities. Condition data is ideal for asset assessment, but when unavailable, asset age is used. Although asset age is less precise, it still provides valuable data. The development of a long-term, sustainable financial plan requires an analysis of whole lifecycle costs. This AMP uses a combination of proactive lifecycle strategies (paved roads, bridges and culverts, and stormwater ponds) and replacement strategies (all other assets) to determine the lowest cost option to maintain the current level of service. To meet capital replacement and rehabilitation needs for existing infrastructure, prevent infrastructure backlogs, and achieve long-term sustainability, the City’s average annual capital requirement totals $61.7 million. Based on a historical analysis of sustainable capital funding sources, the City is committing approximately $31.8 million towards capital projects or reserves per year. As a result, there is currently an annual funding gap of $32.8 million. It is important to note that this AMP represents a snapshot in time and is based on the best available processes, data, and information at the City of Pickering. Strategic asset management planning is an ongoing and dynamic process that requires continuous improvement and dedicated resources. - 142 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 3 1.4 Recommendations A financial strategy was developed to address the City’s annual capital funding gap. The following graphics illustrate the annual tax increase required to eliminate the City’s infrastructure deficit over a 10-year period. Closing the infrastructure gap within 10 years is essential to avoid the risks associated with continued asset deterioration and escalating costs. Extending the timeline beyond a decade would result in greater lifecycle costs due to deferred maintenance, reduced levels of service, and increased risk of service disruptions or emergency repairs. A 10-year horizon strikes a balance between fiscal responsibility and long-term sustainability, enabling the City to proactively manage its assets, stabilize future funding needs, and maintain safe, reliable services for the community: Figure 2 Proposed Tax Changes Tax-Funded ASSETS Average Annual Tax Change 2.8% - 143 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 4 2. Introduction & Context 2.1 Community Profile Figure 3: A Google Maps snapshot of the City of Pickering Pickering, located in Southern Ontario just east of Toronto, is a thriving City in Durham Region with a rich history and diverse community. As the gateway to the eastern Greater Toronto Area (GTA), Pickering is strategically positioned where Toronto, York, and Durham Regions converge. Recognized by The Globe and Mail as one of the most livable cities in Canada for two consecutive years, Pickering continues to grow both economically and residentially. Its award-winning municipality offers an exceptional quality of life for those who live, work, and play here. - 144 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 5 The dynamic City Centre has been designated by the Province of Ontario as both an Urban Growth Centre and Mobility Hub, positioning it as a key area for innovation and connectivity. Pickering is fast becoming a vibrant destination for creative learning, memorable events, and unique experiences, all set within a connected and engaged community. Table 1 provides census data for the City of Pickering and the Province of Ontario, obtained from the 2021 Statistics Canada (StatsCan). Census Characteristic City of Pickering Ontario Population 2021 99,186 14,223,942 Population Change 2016-2021 8.1% 5.8% Total Private Dwellings 34,327 5,929,250 Population Density 429.2/km2 15.9/km2 Land Area 231.1 km2 892,411.76 km2 Table 1 Census data: City of Pickering & the province of Ontario Pickering's history spans several distinct phases: it was a Township from 1811 to 1973, a Town from 1974 to 2000, and has been a City since 2000. Over the 19th century, small communities along key trade routes like Kingston Road contributed to Pickering’s growth, particularly in industries such as milling and agriculture. In the 20th century, the city experienced rapid urbanization, with suburban growth spreading southward. The establishment of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station in the 1970s became a major catalyst for economic development, solidifying Pickering’s role as an industrial and energy hub. Significant milestones in the city’s evolution include the creation of Durham Region in 1974 and its designation as a City in 2000. The population has continued to grow, driven by residential expansion and new developments such as the Seaton community in the 21st century. Modern projects, including high-rise condominiums and the Durham Live entertainment complex, have further shaped the city's identity as both a residential and entertainment destination. Durham Live is a key tourism hub, bringing in visitors from near and far with its vibrant mix of entertainment, dining, and leisure activities. Today, Pickering remains a blend of suburban and rural landscapes. While the southern part of the City is home to residential neighbourhoods and industrial sectors, the northern areas preserve their rural charm, with historic hamlets such as Claremont, Greenwood, and Whitevale. Pickering hosts a variety of businesses ranging from manufacturing to technology, contributing to its diverse and growing economy. The Pickering Nuclear Generating Station remains a major employer and a key player in the local economy. The City is well-connected through its transit infrastructure, including the Pickering GO Station and major highways such as 401 and 407, linking it to Toronto and the surrounding region. These transportation networks are essential to their role as a significant regional center. - 145 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 6 As Pickering continues to grow, plans for intensified development in the downtown core and the creation of new communities like Seaton are expected to fuel further expansion. Notable projects include new facilities at Durham Live, the development of residential and commercial spaces around key transit hubs, and improvements in transit, such as the planned Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system. With its rich history, modern developments, and robust infrastructure, Pickering is well-positioned to thrive in the years to come. 2.2 Climate Change Climate change has significant impacts on both human and natural systems globally, leading to rising temperatures, increased precipitation, droughts, and extreme weather events. Canada’s Changing Climate Report (CCCR 2019) highlights that from 1948 to 2016, Canada’s average temperature rose by 1.7°C, with Northern Canada warming 2.3°C—twice the global average. If emissions are not reduced, temperatures could rise by up to 6.3°C by 2100. Precipitation in Canada has increased by 20% since 1948 and could rise another 24% by the late 21st century. Some regions, especially in Southern Canada, may face more frequent summer droughts. Extreme weather-related events such as poor air quality from wildfires, extreme precipitation, and extreme temperature shifts are becoming more common. These changes present significant risks to Canada's economy, society, environment, and infrastructure. Climate-related extremes like droughts, floods, freeze-thaw cycles, wildfires, and heatwaves threaten infrastructure, increasing damage and wear. Municipalities are tasked with safeguarding local economies, citizens, and physical assets from these climate challenges. 2.2.1 Pickering Climate Profile The City of Pickering is located in proximity to Lake Ontario. The area is expected to experience notable effects of climate change which include higher average annual temperatures, an increase in total annual precipitation, and an increase in the frequency and severity of extreme weather-related events. In 2020, the Ontario Climate Consortium, in partnership with Durham Region, area municipalities and the five local conservation authorities, published a guidance document titled, Guide to Conducing a Climate Change Analysis at the Local Scale: Lessons Learned from Durham Region (2020) to present downscaled climate projections across Durham Region using an ensemble modelling approach. According to this document the City of Pickering may experience the following trends: Higher Average Annual Temperature: • Between the years 1971 and 2000 the annual average temperature was 7.0ºC • Under a high emissions scenario, the annual average temperatures are projected to increase to 8.5ºC by the year 2040 and about 12.2ºC by 2100. - 146 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 7 Increase in Total Annual Precipitation: • Under a high emissions scenario, Pickering is projected to experience a 12% increase in precipitation by the year 2040 and a 27% increase by 2100. 2.2.2 Impacts of Climate Change on Asset Management The City of Pickering, like many municipalities across Canada, is facing the increasing impacts of climate change on its infrastructure. Rising temperatures, shifting precipitation patterns, and more frequent extreme weather events pose significant risks to roads, stormwater systems, buildings, natural assets, and municipal services. These changes threaten not only infrastructure longevity but also the City's ability to provide consistent levels of service to residents. 2.2.2.1. Climate Risks to Pickering’s Infrastructure Climate change is expected to intensify existing vulnerabilities across various municipal asset classes. The risks associated with changing climate conditions include: Transportation & Road Infrastructure • Increased freeze-thaw cycles may accelerate pavement deterioration, pothole formation, and structural degradation of bridges and culverts. • More frequent and intense rainfall events can cause localized flooding, erosion, and washouts, particularly in areas with insufficient stormwater drainage capacity. • Increased temperature fluctuations can cause road surfaces to break down faster, increasing the frequency of resurfacing and maintenance requirements. Stormwater Management Systems • Extreme precipitation could overwhelm drainage networks, leading to increased flood risks, basement flooding, and erosion of public and private properties. • A higher frequency of high-intensity storms places additional stress on culverts, outfalls, and stormwater management systems, necessitating upgrades in capacity. • Warmer temperatures can lead to higher evaporation rates, reducing water availability in natural stormwater management areas. Municipal Buildings & Facilities • Increased cooling demands due to higher summer temperatures may strain HVAC systems, increasing energy costs and the risk of equipment failure. • Extreme weather events such as storms, heavy snowfall, and ice accumulation could damage municipal structures, increasing repair and maintenance costs. • Older facilities with insufficient insulation and inefficient heating/cooling systems may require extensive retrofits to meet evolving climate conditions. - 147 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 8 Parks, Natural Assets, and Green Spaces • Urban heat islands may become more pronounced, requiring expanded tree canopy coverage and green infrastructure to mitigate rising temperatures. • Changes in precipitation patterns can lead to soil degradation, reduced water retention, and increased maintenance needs for recreational spaces. • Biodiversity loss and ecosystem imbalances may affect tree health, pollination, and overall landscape resilience. Fleet, Equipment, and Municipal Operations • Rising fuel costs and new regulations on emissions reduction necessitate a greater shift toward electric and hybrid municipal vehicles, along with the use of alternate fuels such as renewable diesel, which can further reduce the carbon footprint and provide a transitional solution for fleets that may not yet be ready to fully electrify. • More frequent extreme weather events could disrupt municipal operations, requiring additional emergency response resources. • Increased mechanical wear due to extreme temperatures and humidity could shorten equipment lifespan and increase maintenance costs. 2.2.2.2. Approach: Integrating Climate Adaptation into Asset Management To proactively address these climate risks, Pickering is integrating climate resilience considerations into its asset management framework and decision-making, ensuring infrastructure investments align with both sustainability goals and regulatory requirements, including Ontario Regulation 588/17. This approach supports long- term financial sustainability, risk reduction, and enhanced service reliability. This integration will be structured around the following activities: Climate Risk Assessment & Data Integration • Utilize historical weather data and future climate projections to assess vulnerabilities in asset classes. • Conduct climate impact assessments in coordination with provincial and federal agencies. This includes agencies such as: o Impact Assessment Agency of Canada – Responsible for federal environmental impact assessments. o Environment & Climate Change Canada – Provides climate-related policies, programs, and data. o Ontario Provincial Climate Change Impact Assessment – Supports regional climate risk analysis and adaptation planning. o The Climate Risk Institute (formerly OCCIA) – Specializes in climate risk and adaptation research. • Align with risk-based asset management principles to prioritize high-risk infrastructure. - 148 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 9 Lifecycle Costing and Climate-Resilient Design • Evaluate the long-term cost implications of climate-related deterioration. • Promote the use of climate-adaptive materials (e.g., permeable pavements, high-albedo surfaces such as cool roofs, flood-resistant building materials). • Enhance the resilience of assets through modifications, upgrades, and alternative design standards. Alternative design standards are emerging to address climate resilience in infrastructure. While some standards have been well-documented and integrated into national and provincial guidelines, others are still undergoing research and validation. Below are key areas where alternative design standards are being explored: o High-Albedo Surfaces & Reflective Materials ▪ Proven: The use of cool roofs, reflective pavements, and light- colored building materials has been widely studied, with research indicating their effectiveness in reducing the urban heat island effect. Studies by the National Research Council Canada and CMHC provide data on the cooling benefits and energy savings of such materials. ▪ Reference: Government of Canada research on cool roofs and reflective pavements (e.g., NRCan studies on urban climate adaptation). o Flood-Resistant Infrastructure & Permeable Pavements ▪ Proven: Permeable concrete, bio-retention systems, and stormwater management solutions have been implemented in multiple Canadian municipalities to enhance flood resilience. ▪ Reference: The Ontario Provincial Climate Change Impact Assessment highlights best practices for integrating permeable infrastructure into urban planning. o Alternative Building Materials & Design Life Adjustments ▪ Proven: Research has been conducted on mass timber construction, insulated concrete forms (ICFs), and climate- resilient coatings to improve energy efficiency and withstand extreme weather events. ▪ Reference: Government of Canada’s National Research Council study on climate-based design life adjustments. o Wind and Storm Resilience ▪ Under Research: Enhanced building codes for hurricane-rated structures, impact-resistant windows, and aerodynamic roof designs are being tested in response to more frequent extreme weather patterns. ▪ Reference: The Canadian Standards Association (CSA) S478 on climate durability of buildings. - 149 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 10 Service Level Adjustments and Performance Monitoring • Define climate-adjusted levels of service (LOS) to guide investment and operational planning. • Establish performance indicators that reflect climate resilience, including flood management efficiency, road deterioration rates, and energy performance in buildings. • Implement a climate resilience monitoring framework to track adaptation efforts. Funding and Partnerships • Seek funding opportunities through federal and provincial programs, such as the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Green Municipal Fund. • Engage in regional collaboration with neighbouring municipalities to share best practices and cost-effective adaptation strategies. • Explore public-private partnerships to support innovative climate adaptation projects. 2.2.2.3. Municipal Climate Resilience Initiatives: Lessons for Pickering Many Canadian municipalities have successfully integrated climate adaptation into their infrastructure planning, providing valuable insights for Pickering. Examples include: • Toronto’s Green Street Selection Project: Uses GIS mapping to prioritize streets for climate-resilient infrastructure. • Vancouver’s Raincity Strategy: Implements permeable pavements and stormwater retention features to mitigate flooding risks. • Fredericton’s Flood Risk Management: Converts municipal parking areas into floodwater detention sites to prevent urban flooding. • Halton Hills’ Net-Zero Building Initiative: Ensures all new municipal buildings meet net-zero energy standards to enhance sustainability. • Aurora's Climate Change Adaptation Plan: Assesses and prioritizes infrastructure resilience against climate change by identifying risks and implementing actions like improving flood resilience in stormwater systems, ensuring sufficient cooling capacity in public buildings, and maintaining stormwater management ponds during dry summer conditions. An example for linear engineered assets is evaluating future projected precipitation impacts on the stormwater system and applying lot-level runoff controls to manage localized flooding. • Whitby’s Climate Emergency Response Plan Phase 1: Focuses on adapting to climate change by addressing key hazards such as flooding and heatwaves. Actions include shifting new development away from projected floodplains, using accurate floodplain mapping to guide zoning decisions, and improving culverts to prevent road flooding. Additionally, building retrofits for at-risk residents aim to enhance safety during heatwaves and reduce energy consumption, while developing public cooling strategies to protect vulnerable groups during extreme heat events. - 150 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 11 Pickering is currently finalizing the 2025-2035 Community Climate Adaptation Plan. In addition to that, Pickering can adapt these approaches to its own geographic, economic, and regulatory environment, ensuring local relevance and feasibility. 2.2.2.4. Challenges and Opportunities for Pickering Challenges Despite the benefits of climate adaptation, several barriers must be addressed: • Budget Constraints: Funding major climate adaptation projects requires upfront capital investment. • Data Gaps: Integrating climate risk data with existing asset condition assessments can be complex. • Limited Technical Capacity: Many adaptation strategies require specialized expertise, which may necessitate external consultants or new training programs. • Regulatory Compliance: Adapting to climate change must align with O. Reg. 588/17 and evolving federal/provincial sustainability policies. Opportunities By embedding climate resilience into asset management, Pickering can unlock significant long-term benefits: • Cost Savings: Investing in climate-adaptive infrastructure reduces maintenance costs and minimizes unexpected repairs. • Improved Service Delivery: Resilient infrastructure enhances reliability and reduces service disruptions. • Economic Growth: Climate-conscious planning can attract green technology investments and job creation. • Community Resilience: Public engagement and education can foster stronger community support for sustainability initiatives. Conclusion Integrating climate adaptation into Pickering’s Asset Management Plan will ensure the City is well-prepared for the impacts of climate change while continuing to provide high-quality municipal services. A structured, data-driven approach will help balance risk, service delivery, and financial sustainability. By implementing best practices, leveraging funding opportunities, and fostering regional collaboration, Pickering can proactively adapt its infrastructure to future climate conditions while ensuring long-term sustainability, economic resilience, and community well-being. - 151 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 12 2.3 Asset Management Overview Municipalities are responsible for managing and maintaining a broad portfolio of infrastructure assets to deliver services to the community. The goal of asset management is to minimize the lifecycle costs of delivering infrastructure services, manage the associated risks, while maximizing the value ratepayers receive from the asset portfolio. The acquisition of capital assets accounts for only 10-20% of their total cost of ownership. The remaining 80-90% comes from operations and maintenance. This AMP focuses its analysis on the capital costs to maintain, rehabilitate and replace existing municipal infrastructure assets. Figure 4 Total Cost of Asset Ownership These costs can span decades, requiring planning and foresight to ensure financial responsibility is spread equitably across generations. An asset management plan is critical to this planning, and an essential element of a broader asset management program. 2.3.1 Foundational Asset Management Documentation The industry-standard approach and sequence to developing a practical asset management program begins with a Strategic Plan, followed by an Asset Management Policy and an Asset Management Strategy, concluding with an Asset Management Plan. This industry standard, defined by the Institute of Asset Management (IAM), emphasizes the alignment between the corporate strategic plan and various asset management documents. The strategic plan has a direct, and cascading impact on asset management planning and reporting. - 152 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 13 Figure 5 Foundational Asset Management Documents Corporate Strategic Plan (2024-2028) Pickering's Corporate Strategic Plan (CSP) serves as a roadmap for the City’s growth, development, and governance over the next four years. It is designed to guide decision-making and resource allocation while ensuring alignment with community priorities. The plan was developed through extensive stakeholder engagement, including residents, businesses, and advisory committees. The CSP is structured around six strategic priorities and a Corporate Key: • Champion Economic Leadership & Innovation – Supporting business growth, job creation, and infrastructure development. • Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community – Enhancing safety, accessibility, and quality of life. • Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well- Serviced Community – Investing in sustainable urban planning and infrastructure. • Lead & Advocate for Environmental Stewardship, Innovation & Resiliency – Addressing climate resilience and sustainability. • Strengthen Existing & Build New Partnerships – Collaborating with governmental, business, and community stakeholders. • Foster an Engaged & Informed Community – Improving civic engagement and transparent governance. • The Corporate Key that underpins all priorities is a commitment to good governance, fiscal responsibility, and customer service excellence. Strategic Plan Asset Management Policy Asset Management Strategy Asset Management Plan - 153 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 14 Connection to Pickering’s 2025 Asset Management Plan The 2025 AMP will play a critical role in advancing several objectives of the CSP by ensuring infrastructure and municipal assets are effectively managed, renewed, and expanded to support Pickering’s growth and sustainability goals. Below are key linkages: 1. Infrastructure Investment & Renewal (Supports CSP Priorities 3 & 4) • The AMP will align with the CSP’s goal of responsible planning and sustainable growth, ensuring roads, bridges, sidewalks, and municipal facilities meet current and future needs. • The plan emphasizes climate resilience, ensuring infrastructure investments considering environmental sustainability. • Investments in cycling, pedestrian, and transportation networks (as outlined in the Integrated Transportation Master Plan) will be reflected in AMP funding priorities. 2. Fiscal Responsibility & Sustainable Asset Funding (Supports CSP Governance Goals) • The AMP will provide a long-term financial strategy to ensure Pickering remains fiscally sustainable while meeting infrastructure demands. • By linking asset renewal to Pickering’s strategic budget process, the AMP ensures alignment with the CSP’s commitment to transparent decision- making and responsible financial stewardship. 3. Environmental Resilience & Sustainability (Supports CSP Priority 4) • The AMP will incorporate sustainability objectives, supporting Pickering’s climate action and green infrastructure commitments. • Strategies such as green building standards, sustainable road design, and low-impact stormwater management will be integrated into asset management planning. 4. Community Well-Being & Accessibility (Supports CSP Priority 2) • The AMP will ensure that infrastructure investments support equitable access to services, including accessible public spaces and inclusive mobility networks. • Investments in parks, recreation, and municipal facilities will align with CSP’s focus on community health and safety. 5. Performance Measurement & Public Engagement (Supports CSP Priority 6) • The AMP will incorporate progress tracking and reporting mechanisms that align with CSP’s annual progress updates. • The Let’s Talk Pickering platform and other engagement tools will ensure the public remains informed and involved in infrastructure decision-making. - 154 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 15 Conclusion The 2025 Asset Management Plan will operationalize the Corporate Strategic Plan’s vision by ensuring infrastructure investments are data-driven, financially sustainable, and aligned with Pickering’s economic, environmental, and social priorities. By integrating asset renewal strategies with the City’s broader strategic framework, the AMP will help Pickering grow responsibly, optimize service delivery, and maintain fiscal sustainability. Asset Management Policy An asset management policy represents a statement of the principles guiding the City’s approach to asset management activities. It aligns with the organizational strategic plan and provides clear direction to municipal staff on their roles and responsibilities as part of the asset management program. The City adopted By-law No. 2018-47 “A By-law to Adopt an Asset Management Strategy Policy” on July 23rd, 2018, in accordance with Ontario Regulation 588/17. The objectives of the policy include: • Fiscal Responsibility • Delivery of Services/Programs • Public Input/Council Direction • Risk/Impact Mitigation Asset Management Strategy The City of Pickering adopted an Asset Management Action Plan in April 2023, which serves as its Asset Management Strategy. This plan translates organizational objectives into asset management objectives and provides a strategic overview of the activities required to achieve them. It outlines planned initiatives and decision- making criteria that support asset management objectives, offering greater detail than the Asset Management Policy. While the policy establishes an overarching framework, the Action Plan guides the City’s approach to implementing asset management practices and may be further refined in future updates. Asset Management Plan The Asset Management Plan (AMP) presents the outcomes of the City’s asset management program and identifies the resource requirements needed to achieve a defined level of service. The AMP typically includes the following content: • State of Infrastructure • Asset Management Strategies • Levels of Service • Financial Strategies The AMP is a living document that should be updated regularly as an additional asset and financial data becomes available. This will allow the City to re-evaluate the state of infrastructure and identify how the organization’s asset management and financial strategies are progressing. - 155 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 16 2.3.2 Key Concepts in Asset Management Effective asset management integrates several key components, including lifecycle management, risk & criticality, and levels of service. These concepts are applied throughout this asset management plan and are described below in greater detail. Lifecycle Management Strategies The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. This process is affected by a range of factors including asset’s characteristics, location, utilization, maintenance history and environment. Asset deterioration has a negative effect on the ability of an asset to fulfill its intended function, and may be characterized by increased cost, risk and even service disruption. To ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meeting the needs of customers, it is important to establish a lifecycle management strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration. There are several field intervention activities that are available to extend the life of an asset. These activities can be generally placed into one of three categories: maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement. The following table provides a description of each type of activity and the general difference in cost. Depending on initial lifecycle management strategies, asset performance can be sustained through a combination of maintenance and rehabilitation, but at some point, replacement is required. Understanding what effect these activities will have on the lifecycle of an asset, and their cost, will enable staff to make better recommendations. Lifecycle Activity Cost Typical Associated Risks Maintenance Activities that prevent defects or deteriorations from occurring $ • Balancing limited resources between planned maintenance and reactive, emergency repairs and interventions. • Diminishing returns are associated with excessive maintenance activities, despite added costs. • The intervention selected may not be optimal and may not extend the useful life as expected, leading to lower payoff and potential premature asset failure. - 156 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 17 Lifecycle Activity Cost Typical Associated Risks Rehabilitation/ Renewal Activities that rectify defects or deficiencies that are already present and may be affecting asset performance $$$ • Useful life may not be extended as expected. • May be costlier eventually when assessed against full reconstruction or replacement. • Loss or disruption of service, particularly for underground assets. Replacement/ Reconstruction Asset end-of-life activities that often involve the complete replacement of assets $$$$ $ • Incorrect or unsafe disposal of existing assets. • Costs associated with asset retirement obligations. • Substantial exposure to high inflation and cost overruns. • Replacements may not meet capacity needs for a larger population. • Loss or disruption of service, particularly for underground assets. Table 2 Lifecycle Management: Typical Lifecycle Interventions The City’s approach to lifecycle management is described within each asset category outlined in this AMP. Staff will continue to evolve and innovate current practices for developing and implementing proactive lifecycle strategies to determine which activities to perform on an asset and when they should be performed to maximize useful life at the lowest total cost of ownership. Risk & Criticality Asset risk and criticality are essential building blocks of asset management, integral in prioritizing projects and distributing funds where they are needed most based on a variety of factors. Assets in disrepair may fail to perform their intended function, pose substantial risk to the community, lead to unplanned expenditures, and create liability for the municipality. In addition, some assets are simply more important to the community than others, based on their financial significance, their role in delivering essential services, the impact of their failure on public health and safety, and the extent to which they support a high quality of life for community stakeholders. Failure to properly assess and manage these risks may also expose the municipality to legal liability, particularly if negligence in maintaining critical infrastructure leads to harm or service disruptions. - 157 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 18 Risk is a product of two variables: the probability that an asset will fail, and the resulting consequences of that failure event. It can be a qualitative measurement, (i.e., low, medium, high) or quantitative measurement (i.e., 1-5), that can be used to rank assets and projects, identify appropriate lifecycle strategies, optimize short- and long-term budgets, minimize service disruptions, and maintain public health and safety. Figure 6 Risk Equations The approach used in this AMP relies on a quantitative measurement of risk associated with each asset. The probability and consequence of failure are each scored from 1 to 5, producing a minimum risk index of 1 for the lowest risk assets, and a maximum risk index of 25 for the highest risk assets. Probability of Failure Several factors can help decision-makers estimate the probability or likelihood of an asset’s failure, including its condition, age, previous performance history, and exposure to extreme weather events, such as flooding and ice jams—both a growing concern for municipalities in Canada. Consequence of Failure Estimating criticality also requires identifying the types of consequences that the organization and community may face from an asset’s failure, and the magnitude of those consequences. Consequences of asset failure will vary across the infrastructure portfolio; the failure of some assets may result primarily in high direct financial cost but may pose limited risk to the community. Other assets may have a relatively minor financial value, but any downtime may pose significant health and safety hazards to residents. Table 3 illustrates the various types of consequences that can be integrated in developing risk and criticality models for each asset category and segments within. We note that these consequences are common, but not exhaustive. - 158 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 19 Type of Consequence Description Direct Financial Direct financial consequences are typically measured as the replacement costs of the asset(s) affected by the failure event, including interdependent infrastructure. Economic Economic impacts of asset failure may include disruption to local economic activity and commerce, business closures, service disruptions, etc. Whereas direct financial impacts can be seen immediately or estimated within hours or days, economic impacts can take weeks, months or years to emerge, and may persist for even longer. Socio-political Socio-political impacts are more difficult to quantify and may include inconvenience to the public and key community stakeholders, adverse media coverage, and reputational damage to the community and the Municipality. Environmental Environmental consequences can include pollution, erosion, sedimentation, habitat damage, etc. Public Health and Safety Adverse health and safety impacts may include injury or death, damage to property, or impeded access to critical services. Strategic These include the effects of an asset’s failure on the community’s long-term strategic objectives, including economic development, business attraction, etc. Legal Liability These include the financial and reputational impact of lawsuits, fines, and compensation claims resulting from asset failure, which could strain municipal resources and hinder the achievement of broader community objectives. Table 3 Risk Analysis: Types of Consequences of Failure This AMP includes a preliminary evaluation of asset risk and criticality. Each asset has been assigned a probability of failure score and consequence of failure score - 159 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 20 based on available asset data. These risk scores can be used to prioritize maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement strategies for critical assets. These models have been built in Citywide for continued review, updates, and refinements. Appendix C – Risk Rating Criteria provides a detailed breakdown of the risk rating criteria, organized by category, used in this AMP. Levels of Service A level of service (LOS) is a measure of the services that the City provides to the community and the nature and quality of those services. Within each asset category in this AMP, technical metrics and qualitative descriptions that measure both technical and community levels of service have been established and measured as data is available. The City measures the level of service provided at two levels: Community Levels of Service, and Technical Levels of Service. This AMP includes those LOS that are required under O. Reg. 588/17 as well as any additional metrics the City wishes to track. Community Levels of Service Community levels of service are a simple, plain language description or measure of the service that the community receives. For core asset categories as applicable (Roads, Bridges & Structural Culverts, and Stormwater), the province, through O. Reg. 588/17, has provided qualitative descriptions that are required to be included in this AMP. Technical Levels of Service Technical levels of service are a measure of key technical attributes of the service being provided to the community. These include mostly quantitative measures and tend to reflect the impact of the City’s asset management strategies on the physical condition of assets or the quality/capacity of the services they provide. For core asset categories as applicable (Roads, Bridges & Structural Culverts, and Stormwater) the province, through O. Reg. 588/17, has also provided technical metrics that are required to be included in this AMP. Current and Proposed Levels of Service This AMP focuses on evaluating the current level of service provided to the community. Existing service levels serve as a benchmark for establishing realistic and achievable service targets over the next 10 years, in compliance with O.Reg. 588/17. - 160 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 21 The proposed levels of service are designed to balance community expectations, financial capacity, regulatory requirements, corporate goals, and long-term sustainability. To support the development of the Levels of Service Framework, a comprehensive review of strategic documents was conducted. Key documents provided by the City of Pickering include: • Recreation & Parks Master Plan (2017) • Recreation and Parks Ten Year Plan (2024) • Integrated Transportation Master Plan (2021) • Asset Management Plan (2021) • IT Capability Assessment (2024) • Pickering Public Library Facilities Plan (2023 Update) • Facilities Renewal Study (2024) • Corporate Strategic Plan (2024) Levels of Service Framework The Levels of Service Framework is a structured approach designed to define, assess, and prioritize municipal service expectations. It ensures alignment with the City’s strategic objectives, operational capacity, and community needs. 1. Strategic Alignment The framework is grounded in key strategic plans that outline infrastructure priorities, service expectations, and long-term sustainability goals. 2. Defining Levels of Service A structured methodology identifies service areas requiring improvement and establishes clear distinctions between: • Acceptable levels of service (baseline requirements) • Excellent levels of service (enhanced performance targets) 3. Levels of Service Reporting To ensure accountability and transparency, a reporting structure is developed that defines: • Responsible departments for service tracking • Reporting methodology for performance measurement • Reporting frequency to monitor trends over time - 161 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 22 4. Impact-Based Prioritization Service areas are prioritized based on the risk of failing to meet acceptable standards. The framework evaluates five key impact areas: • Environmental (e.g., erosion control, flood prevention) • Operational (e.g., service reliability, efficiency) • Health & Safety (e.g., emergency access, road safety) • Financial (e.g., maintenance costs, capital planning) • Community Satisfaction (e.g., accessibility, public expectations) 5. Levels of Service Treatment Options A structured process is applied to evaluate and implement service improvements: • Baseline Analysis – Assessing current service levels • Risk Assessment – Identifying critical service gaps • Scenario Analysis – Projecting potential service outcomes • Implementation Planning – Developing cost-effective solutions 6. Public Engagement & Community Feedback The Community Levels of Service Survey (October–November 2024) collects feedback on service priorities, satisfaction levels, and willingness to support improvements. This public engagement initiative ensures that municipal decisions align with community expectations and regulatory requirements, including a meeting with the Accessibility Advisory Committee to gather input on accessibility- related service levels. 7. Integration with Asset Management Planning The framework supports long-term infrastructure investment by balancing cost, risk, and performance, ensuring sustainable service delivery in compliance with O.Reg. 588/17. This structured approach enables the City of Pickering to evaluate, prioritize, and enhance service levels effectively, promoting transparency, efficiency, and alignment with community needs. - 162 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 23 2.4 Scope & Methodology 2.4.1 Asset Categories for this AMP This asset management plan for the City of Pickering is produced in compliance with O. Reg. 588/17. The July 2025 deadline under the regulation—the third of three AMPs—requires analysis of core and non-core asset categories. The AMP summarizes the state of the infrastructure for the City’s asset portfolio, establishes proposed levels of service and the associated technical and customer- oriented key metrics, outlines lifecycle strategies for optimal asset management and performance, and provides financial strategies to reach sustainability for the asset categories listed below. Figure 7 Tax Funded Asset Categories 2.4.2 Data Effective Date It is important to note that this plan is based on data as of January 31, 2025; therefore, it represents a snapshot in time using the best available processes, data, and information at the Municipality. Strategic asset management planning is an ongoing and dynamic process that requires continuous data updates and dedicated data management resources. 2.4.3 Deriving Replacement Costs There are a range of methods to determine the replacement cost of an asset, and some are more accurate and reliable than others. This AMP relies on two methodologies: User-Defined Cost and Cost Per Unit Based on costs provided by municipal staff which could include average costs from recent contracts; data from engineering reports and assessments; staff estimates based on knowledge and experience. •Road Corridor •Bridges & Structural Culverts •Stormwater System •Buildings & Facilities •Parks •Other Infrastructure Tax Funded Assets - 163 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 24 Cost Inflation / CPI Tables Historical costs of the assets are inflated based on Consumer Price Index or Non-Residential Building Construction Price Index. User-defined costs based on reliable sources are a reasonably accurate and reliable way to determine asset replacement costs. Cost inflation is typically used in the absence of reliable replacement cost data. It is a reliable method for recently purchased and/or constructed assets where the total cost is reflective of the actual costs that the City incurred. As assets age, and new products and technologies become available, cost inflation becomes a less reliable method. 2.4.4 Estimated Useful Life & Service Life Remaining The estimated useful life (EUL) of an asset refers to the total period during which the City expects the asset to be available for use and remain in service before requiring replacement or disposal. It represents the asset's lifespan based on industry standards, historical data, and municipal expertise. In contrast, the service life remaining (SLR) indicates how much of the EUL is left at a given point in time, calculated primarily based on the asset’s age. However, when additional data is available, factors such as condition assessments and actual usage patterns can be incorporated to refine the estimate, providing a more accurate forecast of when the asset may require replacement. This allows for a proactive approach to asset management, ensuring timely interventions and optimal resource allocation. The SLR is calculated as follows: Figure 8 Service Life Remaining Calculation 2.4.5 Reinvestment Rate As assets age and deteriorate, they require additional investment to maintain a state of good repair. The reinvestment of capital funds, through asset renewal or replacement, is necessary to sustain an adequate level of service. The reinvestment rate is a measurement of available or required funding relative to the total replacement cost. The actual reinvestment rate represents the percentage of the asset portfolio's total replacement cost that the City is currently investing in renewal or replacement on an annual basis. The target reinvestment rate reflects the percentage that should - 164 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 25 be invested each year to ensure assets are maintained at an appropriate condition level, considering lifecycle needs and long-term sustainability. By comparing the actual vs. target reinvestment rate, the City can determine the extent of any existing funding gap and assess whether current investment levels are sufficient to prevent infrastructure deficits. The reinvestment rate is calculated as follows: Figure 9 Target Reinvestment Rate Calculation Figure 10 Actual Reinvestment Rate Calculation 2.4.6 Deriving Asset Condition An incomplete or limited understanding of asset conditions can mislead long-term planning and decision-making. Accurate and reliable condition data prevents costly rehabilitation or replacement, whether premature or delayed, and ensures that lifecycle activities occur at the right time to maximize asset value and useful life. A condition assessment rating system provides a standardized descriptive framework that allows comparative benchmarking across the City’s asset portfolio. The table below outlines the condition rating system used in this AMP to determine asset condition. This rating system is aligned with the Canadian Core Public Infrastructure Survey which is used to develop the Canadian Infrastructure Report Card. When assessed condition data is not available, service life remaining is used to approximate asset condition. The analysis in this AMP is based on assessed condition data only as available. In the absence of assessed condition data, asset age is used as a proxy to determine asset condition. - 165 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 26 Condition Description Criteria Service Life Remaining (%) Very Good Fit for the future Well-maintained, good condition, new or recently rehabilitated 80-100 Good Adequate for now Acceptable, generally approaching mid-stage of expected service life 60-80 Fair Requires attention Signs of deterioration, some elements exhibit significant deficiencies 40-60 Poor Increasing potential of affecting service Approaching end of service life, condition below standard, large portion of system exhibits significant deterioration 20-40 Very Poor Unfit for sustained service Near or beyond expected service life, widespread signs of advanced deterioration, some assets may be unusable 0-20 Table 4 Standard Condition Rating Scale Condition vs. Suitability It is important to note that condition is only one aspect of determining an asset’s suitability to providing the service intended. Other factors, such as capacity, should be considered on a category level. For example, the Town Hall Office Facility may be in good condition with sufficient service life remaining, but it only has office space for 20 employees. If the municipality requires office space for 30 employees, solutions should be considered which may include replacement amongst other alternatives such as secondary office space, remote work options, etc. As these considerations are nuanced for the specific asset, suitability factors may not be directly addressed as part of this Asset Management Plan. 2.5 Ontario Regulation 588/17 As part of the Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act, 2015, the Ontario government introduced Regulation 588/17 - Asset Management Planning for - 166 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 27 Municipal Infrastructure (O. Reg 588/17)1. Along with creating better performing organizations, more livable and sustainable communities, the regulation is a key, mandated driver of asset management planning and reporting. It places substantial emphasis on current and proposed levels of service and the lifecycle costs incurred in delivering them. Figure 11 below outlines key reporting requirements under O. Reg 588/17 and the associated timelines. Figure 11 O. Reg. 588/17 Requirements and Reporting Deadlines 2.5.1 O. Reg. 588/17 Compliance Review Ontario Regulation 588/17 - Asset Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure establishes mandatory requirements for municipalities to develop and maintain asset management plans that align with regulatory timelines. The regulation emphasizes the importance of evaluating and documenting both current 1 O. Reg. 588/17: Asset Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/170588 - 167 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 28 and proposed levels of service while ensuring that municipalities adopt long-term lifecycle and financial strategies to support infrastructure sustainability. The City of Pickering’s 2025 Asset Management Plan has been prepared in full compliance with the July 1, 2025, regulatory deadline, ensuring that all required components are included. This section provides an overview of compliance against the key regulatory requirements. Portfolio Overview – State of the Infrastructure The state of the infrastructure (SOTI) analysis in this AMP includes: • A detailed inventory of core and non-core asset categories. • Condition assessment data and, where unavailable, age-based estimates as a proxy. • Replacement cost estimates using the latest available data. • Asset hierarchy and classification structures to support strategic decision- making. This ensures compliance with O. Reg. 588/17’s requirements for asset inventory documentation. Current & Proposed Levels of Service The AMP evaluates current levels of service (LOS) across all asset categories, measuring both: • Community Levels of Service (CLOS): Qualitative descriptions of how infrastructure assets contribute to service delivery. • Technical Levels of Service (TLOS): Quantitative metrics such as asset condition, reinvestment rates, and regulatory compliance. For core assets, including roads, bridges, structural culverts, and stormwater infrastructure, the AMP provides both regulatory-mandated technical metrics and additional performance indicators tailored to Pickering’s needs. The proposed levels of service reflect a balance between: • Community expectations and feedback from public engagement. • Financial capacity and sustainable funding strategies. • Risk assessments and long-term infrastructure planning. This meets O. Reg. 588/17’s requirement for municipalities to establish target service levels for the next 10 years and outline a path to achieving them. - 168 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 29 Lifecycle Management Strategies The AMP outlines asset lifecycle strategies to extend asset service life and optimize costs. This includes: • Preventive maintenance strategies for key assets. • Rehabilitation and renewal schedules based on asset deterioration models. • Integration of condition assessment data into decision-making. By documenting these lifecycle strategies, the City ensures compliance with the requirement to analyze and optimize asset lifecycle costs. Financial Strategy & Sustainable Funding The financial strategy evaluates: • The total annual capital reinvestment required ($61.7M). Table 38 provides a detailed breakdown of the annual capital reinvestment required for each asset category. • The current reinvestment rate (1.56%), which highlights an existing funding gap. • Funding strategies to close the gap and ensure long-term sustainability. Pickering’s AMP includes a structured approach to financial planning, ensuring that funding needs align with service expectations. This satisfies the requirement to establish a financial strategy that supports infrastructure sustainability. Risk & Climate Change Considerations The AMP integrates risk-based asset management by: • Conducting a risk assessment that prioritizes critical assets. • Identifying climate-related risks (e.g., flood resilience, extreme weather events). • Recommending adaptation strategies to mitigate infrastructure vulnerabilities. This aligns with the requirement under O. Reg. 588/17 to consider risk and climate change impacts in asset planning. The City of Pickering’s 2025 AMP has been developed in accordance with O. Reg. 588/17 requirements. It provides a comprehensive evaluation of infrastructure conditions, proposed levels of service, lifecycle strategies, financial planning, and risk considerations. Through this plan, Pickering ensures compliance while adopting best practices for asset management and long-term sustainability. - 169 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 30 3. Portfolio Overview – State of the Infrastructure The state of the infrastructure (SOTI) summarizes the inventory, condition, age profiles, and other key performance indicators for the City’s infrastructure portfolio. These details are presented for all core and non-core asset categories. 3.1 Asset Hierarchy & Data Classification Asset hierarchy explains the relationship between individual assets and their components, and a wider, more expansive network and system. How assets are grouped in a hierarchy structure can impact how data is interpreted. Assets were structured to support meaningful, efficient reporting and analysis. Key category details are summarized at asset segment level. Figure 12 Asset Hierarchy and Data Classification •Roads •Roadside Appurtenances •Sidewalks •Streetlights •Traffic & Pedestrian Signals Road Corridor •Bridges •Structural Culverts Bridges & Structural Culverts •Drainage Channels •Storm Sewer Mains •Storm Ponds Storm System •Civic Complex •Community & Cultural Buildings •Fire Services •Operations Centre •Other •Recreation, Pools & Arenas Buildings & Facilities •Active Recreation Facilities •Amenities, Furniture & Utilities •Vehicular & Pedestrian Networks Parks •Furniture & Fixtures •Information Technology •Library Collection Materials •Machinery & Equipment •Vehicles Other Infrastructure - 170 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 31 3.2 Portfolio Overview 3.2.1 Total Replacement Cost of Asset Portfolio The six asset categories analyzed in this Asset Management Plan have a total current replacement cost of $2.1 billion. This estimate was calculated using user- defined costing, as well as unit costs derived from the most recent projects. This estimate reflects replacement of historical assets with like-for-like assets available for procurement today. Figure 13 illustrates the replacement cost of each asset category; at 55% of the total portfolio, the road corridor forms the largest share of the City’s asset portfolio, followed by the stormwater system at 18%. Figure 13 Current Replacement Cost by Asset Category 3.2.2 Target vs. Actual Reinvestment Rate The graph below depicts funding gaps by comparing the target to the current reinvestment rate. To meet the existing long-term capital requirements, the City requires an annual capital investment of $61.7 million, for a target portfolio reinvestment rate of 3.03%. Currently, the annual investment from sustainable revenue sources is $31.8 million, for a current portfolio reinvestment rate of 1.56%. Target and current re-investment rates by asset category are detailed below. $65.4m $79.9m $95.7m $316.9m $357.8m $1,119.5m $500m $1,000m $1,500m Other Infrastructure Bridges & Culverts Parks Buildings & Facilities Stormwater System Road Corridor Replacement Cost by Category - 171 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 32 Figure 14 Current Vs. Target Reinvestment Rate 3.2.3 Condition of Asset Portfolio Figure 15 Asset Condition: Portfolio Overview2 2 This graph excludes Buildings & Facilities and Parks assets, which are assessed using the Facilities Condition Index (FCI) and Parks Condition Index (Parks CI), respectively. 1.62% 3.98% 10.13% 4.20% 2.73%1.84%3.62%2.87% 8.52% 4.79% 0.78%0.25% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% Target Reinvestment Rate Actual Reinvestment Rate Very Poor, $442,961,404 (27%) Poor, $217,021,815 (13%) Fair, $155,728,618 (10%) Good, $244,531,648 (15%) Very Good, $561,698,672 (35%) Overall Portfolio Condition - 172 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 33 Figure 16 Asset Condition by Asset Category Figure 15 and Figure 16 summarize asset condition at the portfolio and category levels, respectively. Based on both assessed conditions and age-based analysis, 60% of the City’s infrastructure portfolio is in fair or better condition, with the remaining 40% in poor or very poor condition. Typically, assets in poor or worse condition may require replacement or major rehabilitation in the immediate or short-term. Targeted condition assessments may help further refine the list of assets that may be candidates for immediate intervention, including potential replacement or reconstruction. Similarly, assets in fair condition should be monitored for disrepair over the medium term. Keeping assets in fair or better condition is typically more cost-effective than addressing assets needs when they enter the latter stages of their lifecycle or decline to a lower condition rating, e.g., poor, or worse. Condition data was available for the majority of the asset categories, except other infrastructure assets. For other infrastructure assets, age was used as an approximation of condition for most of these assets. Age-based condition estimations can skew data and lead to potential under- or overstatement of asset needs. Source of Condition Data This AMP relies on assessed condition for 71% of assets, based on and weighted by replacement cost. For the remaining assets, age is used as an approximation of condition. Assessed condition data is invaluable in asset management planning as it $227.8m $322.4m $10.0m $70.8m $122.5m $10.8m $40.4m $106.3m $12.8m $23.7m $39.6m $153.4m $10.7m $13.6m $414.9m $21.1m 0%20%40%60%80%100% Stormwater System Road Corridor Other Infrastructure Bridges & Culverts Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor - 173 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 34 reflects the true condition of the asset and its ability to perform its functions. The table below identifies the source of condition data used throughout this AMP. Asset Category Asset Segment Asset Sub- segment % of Assets with Assessed Condition Source of Condition Data Road Corridor Roads Arterial 62% Assessed, 38% Age- based R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited - 2016 Road Corridor Roads Collector 80% Assessed, 20% Age- based R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited - 2016 Road Corridor Roads Local 89% Assessed, 11% Age- based R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited - 2016 Road Corridor Roadside Appurtenances Broadband 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Road Corridor Roadside Appurtenances Guide Rails 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Road Corridor Roadside Appurtenances Retaining Walls 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Road Corridor Sidewalks Sidewalks 0% Assessed3 100% Age- based Road Corridor Street Lights Head Luminaires 83% Assessed, 17% Age- based Staff Assessments Road Corridor Street Lights Poles & Assemblies 93% Assessed, 7% Age- based Staff Assessments 3 Staff evaluate the structural integrity of sidewalks—including cracking, spalling, and broken pieces—as well as safety concerns such as elevation differences; however, no official condition score is currently assigned. - 174 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 35 Asset Category Asset Segment Asset Sub- segment % of Assets with Assessed Condition Source of Condition Data Road Corridor Traffic & Pedestrian Signals Controllers 86% Assessed, 14% Age- based Staff Assessments Road Corridor Traffic & Pedestrian Signals Infrastructure 88% Assessed, 12% Age- based Staff Assessments Stormwater System Drainage Channels Drainage Channels 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Stormwater System Storm Sewers Catch Basin and Lead 88% Assessed, 12% Age- based Staff Assessments Stormwater System Storm Sewers Clean Water Collectors4 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Stormwater System Storm Sewers Inlet/Outlet Structures 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Stormwater System Storm Sewers Oil Grit Separators 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Stormwater System Storm Sewers Service Connections 93% Assessed, 7% Age- based Staff Assessments Stormwater System Storm Sewers Storm Sewer Mains 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Stormwater System Stormwater Ponds Dry Ponds 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Stormwater System Stormwater Ponds Wet Ponds 64% Assessed, 36% Age- based Staff Assessments 4 The 2020 Stormwater Management Facilities Asset Management Plan assesses 12 wet ponds and 6 dry ponds. At the time of the assessment, the City owned 14 wet ponds; however, two ponds were recently assumed and were not included in the evaluation. - 175 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 36 Asset Category Asset Segment Asset Sub- segment % of Assets with Assessed Condition Source of Condition Data Bridges & Structural Culverts Bridges Bridges 100% Assessed 2024 OSIM Inspections Bridges & Structural Culverts Structural Culverts Structural Culverts 99% Assessed 2024 OSIM Inspections Buildings & Facilities Civic Complex Civic Complex 100% Assessed VFA Database & Facilities Condition Index (FCIs) Buildings & Facilities Community & Cultural Buildings Community & Cultural Buildings 100% Assessed VFA Database & Facilities Condition Index (FCIs) Buildings & Facilities Fire Services Fire Services 100% Assessed VFA Database & Facilities Condition Index (FCIs) Buildings & Facilities Operations Centre Operations Centre 100% Assessed VFA Database & Facilities Condition Index (FCIs) Buildings & Facilities Recreation, Pools & Arenas Recreation, Pools & Arenas 100% Assessed VFA Database & Facilities Condition Index (FCIs) Parks Active Recreation Facilities Playground Equipment 100% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) Parks Active Recreation Facilities Sport Playing Surfaces 100% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) Parks Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Buildings 100% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) - 176 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 37 Asset Category Asset Segment Asset Sub- segment % of Assets with Assessed Condition Source of Condition Data Parks Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Electrical Lighting 100% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) Parks Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Site Furniture 100% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) Parks Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Site Structures 88% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) Parks Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Subsurface Infrastructure 100% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) Parks Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Waterfront Infrastructure 100% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) Parks Vehicular & Pedestrian Networks Parking Lots & Internal Roads 100% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) Parks Vehicular & Pedestrian Networks Pedestrian Corridors 100% Assessed VFA Database & Parks Condition Index (Parks CIs) Other Infrastructure Furniture & Fixtures Furniture & Fixtures 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Other Infrastructure Information Technology Information Technology 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Other Infrastructure Library Collection Materials Library Collection Materials 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Other Infrastructure Machinery & Equipment Major 0% Assessed 100% Age- based - 177 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 38 Asset Category Asset Segment Asset Sub- segment % of Assets with Assessed Condition Source of Condition Data Other Infrastructure Machinery & Equipment Minor 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Other Infrastructure Vehicles Fire Vehicles 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Other Infrastructure Vehicles Vehicles 0% Assessed 100% Age- based Table 5: Source of Condition Data 3.2.4 Risk Matrix Using the risk equation and preliminary risk models, Figure 17 shows how assets across the different asset categories are stratified within a risk matrix. Figure 17 Risk Matrix: All Assets The analysis shows that based on current risk models, approximately 16% of the City’s assets, with a current replacement cost of approximately $259 million, carry a risk rating of 15 or higher (red) out of 25. Assets in this group may have a high probability of failure based on available condition data and age-based estimates and were considered to be most essential to the city. As new asset attribute information and condition assessment data are integrated with the asset register, asset risk ratings will evolve, resulting in a redistribution of assets within the risk matrix. Staff should also continue to calibrate risk models. We caution that since risk ratings rely on many factors beyond an asset’s physical condition or age, assets in a state of disrepair can sometimes be classified as low risk, despite their poor condition rating. In such cases, although the probability of failure for these assets may be high, their consequence of failure ratings was determined to be low based on the attributes used and the data available. Similarly, assets with very high condition ratings can receive a moderate to high- risk rating despite a low probability of failure. These assets may be deemed as highly critical to the City based on their costs, economic importance, social 1 - 4 5 - 7 8 - 9 10 - 14 15 - 25 Very Low Low Moderate High Very High $499,352,463 $246,076,681 $138,979,061 $478,141,251 $259,924,669 (31%)(15%)(9%)(29%)(16%) - 178 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 39 significance, and other factors. Continued calibration of an asset’s criticality and regular data updates are needed to ensure these models more accurately reflect an asset’s actual risk profile. 3.2.5 Forecasted Capital Requirements Aging infrastructure assets require ongoing maintenance, rehabilitation, and eventual replacement. Figure 18 illustrates the cyclical short-, medium- and long- term infrastructure replacement requirements across all asset categories analyzed in this AMP over an 84-year time horizon. On average, approximately $61.7 million is required annually to remain current with capital replacement needs for the City's asset portfolio. This benchmark, represented by the red dotted line, serves as a guide for setting annual capital expenditure targets or allocating funds to reserves to prevent deferred maintenance and ensure timely asset replacement. While actual spending may fluctuate significantly due to varying infrastructure renewal cycles, this figure provides a reference point for sustainable financial planning. The forecasted capital requirements show periods of heightened investment needs, particularly in 2025-2029 ($360.5 million), 2055-2059 ($423.6 million), 2060-2064 ($417.7 million) and 2095-2099 ($416.9 million). Road corridors and stormwater systems account for the majority of capital expenditures, with other infrastructure categories contributing smaller portions. The analysis relies on asset age and available condition data to project future needs, highlighting the importance of proactive asset management strategies to smooth funding requirements and prevent financial strain during peak investment periods. The chart also highlights a backlog of approximately $85.9 million5, representing assets that have exceeded their estimated useful life but remain in service. While not all of these assets necessarily require immediate replacement, their continued use underscores the importance of targeted and consistent condition assessments. Expanding these assessments will help differentiate between assets in critical condition and those that can remain operational with maintenance or rehabilitation. A proactive approach incorporating risk frameworks, lifecycle strategies, and levels of service targets will allow for more effective prioritization of projects and refinement of both backlog and long-term capital needs. Additionally, improved asset segmentation, particularly in complex asset categories such as buildings and facilities, will enhance forecasting accuracy and support data-driven investment decisions. 5 Bridges were not included in the backlog total because many of the structures with limited remaining useful life are scheduled for future rehabilitation or maintenance under the OSIM program. However, these assets effectively represent immediate needs and should be closely monitored to ensure planned interventions proceed as scheduled. - 179 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 40 Figure 18 Capital Replacement Needs: Portfolio Overview 2025-21096. 6 This data is based solely on the current assets and does not account for future growth, upgrades, or the disposal of assets without replacement. $61.7m $85.9m $360.5m $221.7m $290.4m $243.8m $291.6m $316.9m $423.6m$417.7m $326.3m $273.4m $258.6m $212.8m $302.0m $281.4m $416.9m $252.8m $253.5m $0 $50m $100m $150m $200m $250m $300m $350m $400m $450m Fo r e c a s t e d C a p i t a l R e q u i r e m e n t s Bridges & Culverts Buildings & Facilities Other Infrastructure Parks Road Corridor Stormwater System Annual Requirement Total - 180 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 41 Core Assets - 181 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 42 4. Road Corridor The road corridor assets are critical components of the provision of safe and efficient transportation services and represent the highest value asset category in the City’s asset portfolio. It includes all municipally owned and maintained roadways in addition to supporting roadside infrastructure including sidewalks, multi-use paths, streetlights, traffic signals, guiderails, and retaining walls. The Operations Department provides roadway operational maintenance including patching, grading, sweeping, ditching as well as winter control activities such as sanding, salting, and plowing. Engineering Services Department is responsible for the design and construction of major roadway maintenance and rehabilitation activities such as crack seal, asphalt resurfacing, curb and sidewalk repair/replacement, and reconstruction. They are also responsible for the maintenance and repair of streetlights, traffic signals, and guide rails. Staff are working towards improving the accuracy and reliability of their road corridor inventory to assist with long-term asset management planning. 4.1 Inventory & Valuation Table 6 summarizes the quantity and current replacement cost of the City’s various road corridor assets as managed in its primary asset management register, citywide. Segment Sub-Segment Quantity Unit of Measure Replacement Cost Primary RC Method Roads Arterial 12,122 Metres $104,155,837 Cost/ Unit Roads Collector 37,495 Metres $120,629,199 Cost/ Unit Roads Gravel 102,645 Metres - Not Planned For Replacement Roads Local 267,920 Metres $694,223,564 Cost/ Unit Roadside Appurtenances Broadband 1,028 Metres $200,751 CPI - 182 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 43 Segment Sub-Segment Quantity Unit of Measure Replacement Cost Primary RC Method Roadside Appurtenances Guide Rails 9507 Metres $1,244,964 CPI Roadside Appurtenances Retaining Walls 7 Each $1,218,127 CPI Sidewalks Sidewalks 442,512 Square Meters $100,424,127 Cost/ Unit Streetlights LED Lights 8,121 Each $10,383,754 CPI Streetlights Poles & Assemblies 11,6608 Each $81,247,104 CPI Traffic & Pedestrian Signals Controllers 30 Each $972,825 CPI Traffic & Pedestrian Signals Infrastructure 50 Each $4,758,211 CPI Total $104,155,837 Table 6: Detailed Asset Inventory: Road Corridor 7 950m and two additional assets that are missing their length information. 8 Includes 35 km of wiring - 183 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 44 Figure 19: Road Corridor: Portfolio valuation by Segments 4.2 Asset Condition Figure 20 summarizes the replacement cost-weighted condition of the City’s road corridor. Based on a combination of field inspection data and age, 49% of assets are in fair or better condition; the remaining 51% of assets are in poor to very poor condition. Based on the total replacement cost of each asset category, condition assessments were completed for 88% of roads, 90% of streetlights, and 87% of traffic and pedestrian signals. This condition data was projected from inspection date to current year to estimate their condition today. No condition data was available for the remaining asset types. Figure 21 reveals a contrast in the condition of road corridor assets. While sidewalks and roadside appurtenances are mostly in good to very good condition, a significant portion of roads, streetlights, and signals are rated poor or very poor. Assets in poor or worse condition may be candidates for replacement in the short term; similarly, assets in fair condition may require rehabilitation or replacement in the medium term and should be monitored for further degradation in condition. $2.7m $5.7m $91.6m $100.4m $919.0m $400m $800m Roadside Appurtenances Traffic & Pedestrian Signals Streetlights Sidewalks Roads Replacement Cost by Segment - 184 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 45 Figure 20 Asset Condition: Road Corridor Overall Figure 21 Asset Condition: Road Corridor by Segment Very Poor, $414,882,824 (37%) Poor, $153,420,311 (14%) Fair, $106,282,643 (9%) Good, $122,521,794 (11%) Very Good, $322,350,891 (29%) $722k $8.6m $70.8m $574k $241.7m $34k $8.8m $26.1m $2.1m $85.4m $1.3m $20.1m $2.4m $82.4m $3.1m $9.5m $140.8m $496k $44.7m $1.1m $368.7m 0%20%40%60%80%100% Traffic & Pedestrian Signals Streetlights Sidewalks Roadside Appurtenances Roads Value and Percentage of Asset Segments by Replacement Cost Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor - 185 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 46 4.3 Age Profile An asset’s age profile comprises two key values: estimated useful life (EUL), or design life; and the percentage of EUL consumed. The EUL is the serviceable lifespan of an asset during which it can continue to fulfil its intended purpose and provide value to users, safely and efficiently. As assets age, their performance diminishes, often more rapidly as they approach the end of their design life. In conjunction with condition data, an asset’s age profile provides a more complete summary of the state of infrastructure. It can help identify assets that may be candidates for further review through condition assessment programs; inform the selection of optimal lifecycle strategies; and improve planning for potential long- term replacement spikes. Figure 22 illustrates the average current age of each asset type and its estimated useful life. Both values are weighted by the replacement cost of individual assets. Figure 22 Estimated Useful Life vs. Asset Age: Road Corridor Age analysis provides a general overview of all paved roads exceeding their expected useful lives. Figure 69 from Appendix D provides an additional breakdown of age analysis, where arterial and collector roads are within their expected useful lives. However, local roads have already exceeded their expected useful lives. Most of the city’s streetlights were replaced 10 years ago and are well within their expected lives. However, Streetlights poles & assemblies are quickly approaching their proposed end of life. Remaining assets are currently within their expected useful lives. 32 11.8 35.6 33.8 20 29.4 39.2 73 35.9 23 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Roads Roadside Appurtenances Sidewalks Streetlights Traffic & Pedestrian Signals Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL - 186 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 47 With the current and proposed lifecycle management strategies, the useful lives of paved roads can be extended well beyond their expected useful lives because of rehabilitation events. Although asset age is an important measurement for long-term planning, condition assessments provide a more accurate indication of actual asset needs. 4.4 Current and Proposed Approach to Lifecycle Management The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. This process is affected by a range of factors including asset’s characteristics, location, utilization, maintenance history and environment. 4.4.1 Current Lifecycle Management Activities The following table expands on maintenance and inspection activities for road corridor assets. Activity Type Description of Current Strategy Maintenance The City employs preventative maintenance programs to minimize the destructive impact of climate and traffic through the timely application of remedial treatments to the pavement. Maintenance Asphalt Roads – The crack sealing program, which is budgeted for annually, includes crack sealing/filling and spot base repairs (small area patching) Surface Treatment Roads – small area patching and drainage improvements Rehabilitation/ Replacement The most cost-effective expenditures for road rehabilitation can be achieved through the application of the right rehabilitation at the right time. This decision-making process relies primarily on the condition of the road surface. Rehabilitation/ Replacement The City’s current road rehabilitation methods include: • Grind and Overlay • Full depth surface replacement • Full reconstruction - 187 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 48 Activity Type Description of Current Strategy Rehabilitation/ Replacement Full road reconstruction may be required when substantial base repairs are necessary or when sub-surface infrastructure also requires replacement. Rehabilitation/ Replacement The City develops a 10-year capital forecast which includes a mix of named reconstruction projects and general budget allocations for road resurfacing projects. Table 7: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Road Corridor 4.4.2 Proposed Lifecycle Management Strategies The following lifecycle strategies have been developed as a proactive approach to managing the lifecycle of hard surfaced (asphalted) rural and urban roads as well as surface treated rural roads. Instead of allowing the roads to deteriorate until replacement is required, strategic rehabilitation is expected to extend the service life of roads at a lower total cost. Lifecycle management strategies were not developed for other road types9 within the City. 9 The City only owns and operates 500m of concrete roads (old gravel pit). Once this road reaches its end of service life, it will be replaced with asphalt. Gravel roads have low AADT and are inspected regularly. Grading is an important part of rural road maintenance and involves reshaping the roads. Public Works replaces gravel that has been either pushed off the road during winter operations and/or swept away during the spring thaw. - 188 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 49 Asphalt Roads (Urban & High Class) Event Name Event Class Event Trigger Crack Seal -1st event Preventative Maintenance 10 Years New Surface – Single Lift - 2nd event Rehabilitation 20-25 Years Crack Seal – 3rd event Preventative Maintenance 30 Years New Surface – Double Lift – 4th event Rehabilitation 38 Years Partial Base and Surface - Double Lift – 5th event Rehabilitation 50 Years Asset Replacement Replacement 40-45 PCI - 189 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 50 Asphalt Roads (Urban & High Class) Table 8: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Asphalt Roads (Urban & High Class) - 190 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 51 Asphalt Roads (Rural & Low Class) Event Name Event Class Event Trigger Crack Seal -1st event Preventative Maintenance 10 Years New Surface – Single Lift - 2nd event Rehabilitation 28 Years Crack Seal – 3rd event Preventative Maintenance 33 Years New Surface – Double Lift – 4th event Rehabilitation 42 Years Partial Base and Surface - Double Lift – 5th event Rehabilitation 55 Years Asset Replacement Replacement 40 PCI - 191 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 52 Asphalt Roads (Rural & Low Class) Table 9: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Asphalt Roads (Rural & Low Class) - 192 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 53 Surface Treated Roads (Rural) Event Name Event Class Event Trigger Spot Repair -1st event Maintenance 7.5 Years Surface Treatment – Double Lift – 1st event Rehabilitation 15 Years Spot Repair -2nd event Maintenance 22.5 Years Partial Base Repairs and Double Lift Rehabilitation 30 Years Spot Repair -3rd event Maintenance 37.5 Years Surface Treatment – Double Lift – 2nd event Rehabilitation 45 Years Asset Replacement Replacement 20 Condition - 193 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 54 Surface Treated Roads (Rural) Table 10: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Surface Treated Roads (Rural) - 194 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 55 4.5 Forecasted Long-Term Replacement Needs Figure 23 illustrates the cyclical short-, medium- and long-term infrastructure rehabilitation and replacement requirements for the City’s road corridor. This analysis was run until 2099 to capture at least one iteration of replacement for the longest-lived asset in Citywide Assets, the City’s primary asset management system and asset register. The City’s average annual requirements (red dotted line) total $30.5 million for all assets in the road corridor. Although actual spending may fluctuate substantially from year to year, this figure is a useful benchmark value for annual capital expenditure targets (or allocations to reserves) to ensure projects are not deferred and replacement needs are met as they arise. The chart illustrates substantial capital needs throughout the forecast period. It also shows a backlog of $56 million, dominated by roads. These projections are based on asset replacement costs, age analysis, and condition data when available, as well as lifecycle modeling (roads only). They are designed to provide a long-term, portfolio-level overview of capital needs and should be used to support improved financial planning over several decades. Figure 23 Forecasted Capital Replacement Needs: Road Corridor 2025-2099 $30.5m $56.1m $175.1m $132.9m $140.3m $85.6m $129.7m $148.1m $231.1m $207.2m $181.3m $128.6m $81.7m $90.9m $163.1m $149.1m $270.0m $0 $50m $100m $150m $200m $250m $300m Fo r e c a s t e d C a p i t a l R e q u i r e m e n t s Roads Roadside Appurtenances Sidewalks Streetlights Traffic & Pedestrian Signals Annual Requirement Total - 195 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 56 Often, the magnitude of replacement needs is substantially higher than most municipalities can afford to fund. In addition, most assets may not need to be replaced. However, quantifying and monitoring these spikes is essential for long- term financial planning, including establishing dedicated reserves. Regular pavement condition assessments and a robust risk framework will ensure that high- criticality assets receive proper and timely lifecycle intervention, including replacements. A detailed 10-year capital replacement forecast can be found in Appendix A – 10- Year Capital Requirements. 4.6 Risk Analysis The risk matrix below is generated using available asset data, including condition, surface material, design class, traffic data, and roadside environment. The risk ratings for assets without useful attribute data were calculated using only condition, service life remaining, and their replacement costs. The matrix stratifies assets based on their individual probability and consequence of failure, each scored from 1 to 5. Their product generates a risk index ranging from 1-25. Assets with the highest criticality and likelihood of failure receive a risk rating of 25; those with lowest probability of failure and lowest criticality carry a risk rating of 1. As new data and information is gathered, the City may consider integrating relevant information that improves confidence in the criteria used to assess asset risk and criticality. These risk models have been built into the City’s Asset Management Database (Citywide Assets). See Risk & Criticality section for further details on approach used to determine asset risk ratings and classifications. Figure 24 Risk Matrix: Road Corridor 4.6.1 Risk to Current Asset Management Strategies Asset Data & Information The maturity level of the available inventory data for the road corridor in this Asset Management Plan remains at a basic level. However, staff have made progress in addressing some data gaps since the 2021 plan. Efforts are ongoing to refine and consolidate asset data to enhance accuracy and reliability. These improvements will support the development of more data-driven strategies to address infrastructure 1 - 4 5 - 7 8 - 9 10 - 14 15 - 25 Very Low Low Moderate High Very High $339,736,781 $99,400,799 $88,598,351 $397,757,819 $193,964,714 (30%)(9%)(8%)(36%)(17%) - 196 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 57 needs. While advancements have been made, further improvements are still required to strengthen confidence in decision-making and long-term planning. Climate Change & Extreme Weather Events Due to climate change, the frequency of extreme weather events is expected to increase, leading to higher precipitation levels in Pickering. This increased rainfall can weaken the road base, exposing it over time, especially if the stormwater system is not designed to handle the greater volume of water. As a result, the focus is shifting to designing more resilient stormwater systems to prevent damage, rather than just the roadway design itself. Lifecycle Management Strategies The current lifecycle management strategy for roads is largely reactive rather than proactive. The City aims to defer costly and disruptive road reconstruction by implementing more strategic interventions. The proposed models in this Asset Management Plan were based on the 2016 Road Needs Study and staff notes. However, there is a need to develop updated lifecycle management strategies informed by the findings of the Road Needs Study, which is currently underway. This will help refine decision-making and improve the long-term sustainability of the road network. 4.7 Levels of Service The City of Pickering is committed to maintaining a high standard of road corridor service that is accessible, dependable, sustainable, and cost-effective for all residents. These corridors are designed to support the community’s traffic needs, ensuring safe and efficient transportation year-round, even under varying weather conditions. While the City effectively manages its roads, challenges arise with regional and provincial roads, which are outside the City’s direct control, complicating efforts to maintain consistent local standards. This highlights the need for public education to manage expectations regarding road maintenance and service quality. To keep roadways in a state of good repair, the City conducts regular inspections and maintenance, aiming to minimize unplanned disruptions and respond promptly to issues. Sustainability is also a priority, with initiatives supporting sustainable transportation options like cycling and walking to reduce the environmental impact of the road corridor. With an average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of 51, Pickering’s roads fall between "Needs Improvement" and "Acceptable." While maintenance efforts are ongoing, the City faces challenges in improving road conditions, particularly when compared to neighbouring municipalities. Setting realistic targets and benchmarks for road conditions and working with the public and neighbouring municipalities will be essential in achieving infrastructure goals and securing adequate funding. The following tables summarize the City’s current levels of service, including KPIs under Ontario Regulation 588/17 and additional performance measures selected for this AMP. - 197 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 58 4.7.1 Community Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Accessibility Description, which may include maps of the transportation system in the City and its level of connectivity. Including roads, sidewalks, as well as all supporting infrastructure such as bike lanes, bus stops, pathways etc.10 Acceptable The transportation system offers an acceptable level of service with well- maintained roads, and some sidewalks, at convenient locations. While there are some bike lanes, connections are limited, and not all modes of transportation are fully supported. Improvements are made as resources allow. Accessibility Traffic Flow and Congestion Management Needs Improvement Needs Improvement – The road corridor experiences congestion and delays due to limitations in network capacity and connectivity.11 10 Please refer to Appendix B – Level of Service Maps & Photos for maps of road corridors & sidewalk network classification maps, and road corridor adequacy maps within the city. 11 Some of the public feedback related to congestion may reflect confusion between City-maintained roads and Regional Roads, which are under the jurisdiction of the Region. This distinction will be clarified in future engagement efforts to ensure mor e accurate input regarding the City’s transportation network. - 198 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 59 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Description or images that illustrate the different levels of road class pavement condition Excellent Staff have a strong understanding of road classifications and pavement conditions, as well as the factors that impact road quality, such as traffic volume, climate, and soil type. This expertise allows them to make informed decisions about maintenance and repairs to ensure safe road conditions. Reliability & Performance Description of the compliance with the minimum maintenance standards for roads Excellent The City provides an excellent level of service, meeting or exceeding the minimum maintenance standards. Table 11: O. Reg. 588/17 Community Levels of Service: Road Corridor - 199 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 60 4.7.2 Technical Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Accessibility Bike lanes and multi-use paths KM per capita Acceptable The municipality is meeting best practices, providing 116 km of bike lanes and 12.5 km of multi-use paths per 100,000 population, similar to the quantity found in neighbouring communities. Accessibility The adequacy of accessible parking determined by evaluating whether the available spaces provide convenient and sufficient access for individuals with mobility challenges. Acceptable Accessible parking spaces are sufficiently available and conveniently located near entrances, meeting basic regulatory standards. Individuals with mobility challenges can generally access facilities with ease, though there may be room for improvement in the overall user experience or efficiency. Accessibility Lane-km of arterial roads (MMS classes 1 and 2) per land area (km/km2) Acceptable 0.24 Accessibility Lane-km of collector roads (MMS classes 3 and 4) per land area (km/km2) Acceptable 0.66 - 200 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 61 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Accessibility Lane-km of local roads (MMS classes 5 and 6) per land area (km/km2) Acceptable 3.35 Reliability & Performance Average pavement condition index for paved roads in the Municipality (Arterial) Acceptable The PCI is 71, based on condition scores provided by R.J. Burnside & Associates in 2016, staff updates, and age-based data. Reliability & Performance Average pavement condition index for paved roads in the Municipality (Collector) Needs Improvement The PCI is 54, based on condition scores provided by R.J. Burnside & Associates in 2016, staff updates, and age-based data. Reliability & Performance Average pavement condition index for paved roads in the Municipality (Local) Needs Improvement The PCI is 48, based on condition scores provided by R.J. Burnside & Associates in 2016, staff updates, and age-based data. Reliability & Performance Average surface condition for unpaved roads in the Municipality (e.g., excellent, good, fair, poor) Acceptable Based on staff input, the average surface condition of unpaved roads ranges from satisfactory to good. Reliability & Performance Percentage of roads in poor or worse condition (Arterial) Needs Improvement 30% of Arterial Roads are in poor or worse condition. - 201 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 62 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Percentage of roads in poor or worse condition (Collector) Needs Improvement 52% of Collector Roads are in poor or worse condition. Reliability & Performance Percentage of roads in poor or worse condition (Local) Needs Improvement 60% of Local Roads are in poor or worse condition. Affordability Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Needs Improvement The actual reinvestment rate is just over 10% of the target rate, highlighting a potential risk of infrastructure deterioration if reinvestment levels remain low. Sustainability Percentage of streetlights converted to LED Excellent Approximately 95%-98% of streetlights have been converted to LEDs, significantly improving energy efficiency and reducing maintenance costs. Table 12: O. Reg. 588/17 Technical Levels of Service: Road Corridor - 202 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 63 4.7.3 Proposed Levels of Service This section provides recommendations for maintaining and improving the road corridor based on the current Levels of Service (LOS) assessment, public engagement results, and risk analysis. The recommendations focus on addressing service deficiencies, sustaining acceptable performance levels, and evaluating risks associated with not meeting target service levels. 4.7.3.1. Pavement Condition and Road Rehabilitation Current LOS • Arterial Roads: Acceptable (PCI = 71) • Collector Roads: Needs Improvement (PCI = 54) • Local Roads: Needs Improvement (PCI = 48) • Unpaved Roads: Acceptable • Percentage of Roads in Poor or Worse Condition: o Arterial: 30% o Collector: 52% o Local: 60% Public Engagement Results • Road maintenance was the highest-ranked priority (67% of respondents). • 44.8% of respondents were satisfied with pavement conditions, while 21.7% expressed dissatisfaction. • 37% of respondents were willing to pay more for enhanced road maintenance and rehabilitation. Recommendations • Increase capital reinvestment in road rehabilitation, prioritizing collector, and local roads, where conditions are below acceptable levels. • Implement a proactive pavement management program to optimize asset life-cycle performance and minimize long-term costs. • Develop a communications strategy to improve public awareness of road rehabilitation efforts and planned investments. Risk of Not Providing Acceptable LOS • Heightened safety risks for road users due to poor surface conditions. • Decreased public trust and satisfaction with municipal service delivery. • Potential economic impact due to reduced accessibility for businesses and residents. - 203 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 64 The graph illustrates the projected condition of the City’s road corridor assets under three funding scenarios from 2025 to 2040: current, recommended, and optimal budgets. Under the current budget (green line), asset condition steadily declines from good to fair and approaches poor by 2040, highlighting the consequences of underinvestment. The recommended budget (purple line), aligned with a 10-year financial strategy, stabilizes condition levels around the mid-60% range, avoiding further deterioration. The optimal budget (blue line) maintains assets in the high "good" range, offering the best long-term performance. This underscores the importance of closing the infrastructure gap within 10 years to prevent costly service disruptions, rising rehabilitation expenses, and declining public satisfaction. - 204 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 65 Figure 25 A Comparison of Road Corridor Conditions Under Optimal vs. Current vs Recommended Budget Scenarios in Pickering - 205 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 66 4.7.3.2. Traffic Flow and Congestion Management Current LOS • Needs Improvement – The road corridor experiences congestion and delays due to limitations in network capacity and connectivity. Public Engagement Results • Traffic flow and congestion had the highest dissatisfaction rate (40.3%), highlighting a key concern. • Only 27.5% of respondents reported being satisfied, while 32.2% were neutral, indicating uncertainty or a lack of awareness of current efforts to reduce congestions. • 37.1% of respondents expressed willingness to pay for traffic management improvements. Recommendations • Implement congestion mitigation strategies, including traffic signal optimization and adaptive control systems. • Enhance network connectivity by addressing critical bottlenecks and improving intersection efficiency. • Conduct a corridor capacity study to evaluate long-term needs for roadway expansion or alternate transportation solutions. • Engage the public through targeted outreach to align congestion management strategies with community expectations. Risk of Not Providing Acceptable LOS • Longer travel times, increased commuter frustration, and reduced quality of life. • Higher emissions and environmental impacts due to increased idling and congestion. • Economic consequences, including reduced business activity and logistical inefficiencies. - 206 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 67 4.7.3.3. Pedestrian and Cyclist Infrastructure Current LOS • Bike lanes and multi-use paths per capita are within best practices but offer limited connectivity. • Accessible parking meets minimum standards but could be enhanced. Public Engagement Results • 78.1% of respondents rated pedestrian infrastructure as important, though neutrality (16%) suggests a lack of strong opinions. • 33.4% of respondents were unwilling to pay for additional pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure, the highest level of opposition across service categories. • Safety concerns were raised regarding pedestrian crossings and cyclist accessibility in certain areas. Recommendations • Focus investments on pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure on high-use areas, such as transit hubs, schools, and commercial corridors. • Improve pedestrian safety through enhanced crosswalk visibility and signal timing adjustments. • Pursue grant funding for active transportation projects to minimize direct financial impact on municipal budgets. Risk of Not Providing Acceptable LOS • Increased risk of pedestrian and cyclist accidents due to inadequate infrastructure. • Reduced accessibility for individuals with mobility challenges. • Potential non-compliance with evolving accessibility and sustainability regulations. 4.7.3.4. Sustainable Reinvestment in the Road Corridor Current LOS • Needs Improvement – Annual reinvestment is only 10% of the required sustainable funding level. Public Engagement Results • Public concern over infrastructure funding gaps is increasing. - 207 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 68 • Willingness to pay for road maintenance and rehabilitation is higher than for other transportation investments. • Neutral responses suggest a need for better communication on funding needs and long-term benefits. Recommendations • Secure sustainable funding through a combination of dedicated infrastructure levies, grants, and alternative revenue sources. • Develop a financial strategy that links road rehabilitation funding to long- term asset preservation benefits. • Increase transparency in budget allocations to reinforce public confidence in infrastructure investment planning. Risk of Not Providing Acceptable LOS • Accelerated infrastructure deterioration leading to costly emergency repairs. • Increased budget strain due to deferred maintenance and higher capital costs. • Reduced public trust in municipal decision-making regarding infrastructure investments. 4.7.3.5. Maintaining Strong Performance Areas Current LOS • Compliance with minimum maintenance standards: Excellent. • LED streetlight conversion: Excellent (95-98% of streetlights upgraded). Public Engagement Results • No major dissatisfaction was reported regarding road safety and lighting. • LED conversion is viewed as a positive infrastructure improvement. Recommendations • Maintain existing high-performing service areas through proactive monitoring and maintenance. • Complete LED lighting upgrades where feasible to further reduce long-term operational costs. • Ensure road safety compliance through ongoing performance assessments. Risk of Not Maintaining Current LOS • Potential decline in service quality over time due to reduced monitoring. • Loss of public confidence if previously well-performing services begin to deteriorate. - 208 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 69 5. Bridges and Culverts Bridges and structural culverts represent a critical portion of the transportation services provided to the community. Engineering Services is responsible (through the Capital Budget process) for any structure replacements or rehabilitation. The Operations Department is responsible for the maintenance of all bridges and culverts located across municipal roads with the goal of keeping structures in an adequate state of repair and minimizing service disruptions. This AMP is for bridges and culverts with a span of three meters or more. The City has many culverts with a span that is less than three meters, including driveway culverts, which are not included in this section. 5.1 Inventory & Valuation Table 13 summarizes the quantity and current replacement cost of bridges and culverts. The City owns and manages 27 bridges and 35 structural culverts. Segment Quantity Unit of Measure Replacement Cost Primary RC Method Bridges 2712 Quantity $54,921,000 User-Defined Structural Culverts 3513 Quantity $24,930,422 User-Defined Total 62 $79,851,422 Table 13: Detailed Asset Inventory: Bridges & Structural Culverts 12 The bridge quantity represents the total number of bridges with a span of 3 m and more, including 9 pedestrian bridges. 13 The culvert quantity represents the total number of culverts with a span of 3 m and more, including 1 pedestrian culvert. - 209 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 70 Figure 26 Portfolio Valuation: Bridges & Structural Culverts 5.2 Asset Condition Figure 27 summarizes the replacement cost-weighted condition of the City’s bridges and structural culverts. Based on the City’s recent Ontario Structures Inspection Manual (OSIM) assessments, 82% of bridges and structural culverts are in fair or better condition. Some elements or components of these structures may be candidates for replacement or rehabilitation in the medium term and should be monitored for further degradation in condition. At 17% of the total bridges and culverts portfolio, assets in poor or worse condition may require replacement in the immediate or short term. As bridges and structures reach a poor or worse rating (i.e., a bridge condition index of less than 40), they are not necessarily unsafe for regular use, individual circumstances must be considered. The OSIM ratings are designed to identify repairs needed to elevate condition ratings to fair or higher. $24.9m $54.9m $20m $40m $60m Structural Culverts Bridges - 210 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 71 Figure 27 Asset Condition: Bridges & Structural Culverts Overall Figure 28 Asset Condition: Bridges & Structural Culverts by Segment Very Poor, $600,201 (<1%) Poor, $13,563,000 (17%) Fair, $23,688,526 (30%) Good, $40,399,238 (51%) Very Good, $1,600,457 (2%) $7.3m $33.1m $12.2m $11.5m $4.2m $9.3m $600k 0%20%40%60%80%100% Structural Culverts Bridges Value and Percentage of Asset Segments by Replacement Cost Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor - 211 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 72 5.3 Age Profile An asset’s age profile comprises two key values: estimated useful life (EUL), or design life; and the percentage of EUL consumed. The EUL is the serviceable lifespan of an asset during which it can continue to fulfil its intended purpose and provide value to users, safely and efficiently. As assets age, their performance diminishes, often more rapidly as they approach the end of their design life. In conjunction with condition data, an asset’s age profile provides a more complete summary of the state of infrastructure. It can help identify assets that may be candidates for further review through condition assessment programs; inform the selection of optimal lifecycle strategies; and improve planning for potential replacement spikes. Figure 29 illustrates the average current age of each asset type and its EUL. Both values are weighted by the replacement cost of individual assets. Figure 29: Estimated Useful Life vs. Asset Age: Bridges and Structural Culverts Age analysis reveals that bridges & structural culverts are well under their respective Estimated Useful Lives. OSIM assessments should continue to be used in conjunction with age and asset criticality to prioritize capital and maintenance expenditures. 5.4 Current Approach to Lifecycle Management The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. To ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meeting the needs of 52.8 47.4 65.8 65.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Bridges Structural Culverts Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL - 212 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 73 customers, it is important to establish a lifecycle management strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration. The following table outlines the City’s current lifecycle management strategy. Activity Type Description of Current Strategy Rehabilitation / Replacement Biennial OSIM inspection reports including a Capital Needs List identifying recommended rehabilitation and replacement activities with estimated costs. Rehabilitation / Replacement The report also includes a 2-year priority report to assist the City with determining the timing and urgency of capital needs when developing budgets and capital plans. Maintenance Biennial OSIM inspections including a list of recommended maintenance activities that the City considers and completes according to cost and urgency. Maintenance Typical maintenance activities include: • Obstruction removal • Cleaning/sweeping • Erosion control • Brush/tree removal • Signage and roadside safety repair Table 14: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Bridges & Structural Culverts 5.5 Forecasted Long-Term Replacement Needs Figure 30 illustrates the cyclical short-, medium- and long-term infrastructure rehabilitation and replacement requirements for the City’s bridges and culverts. This analysis was run until 2099 to capture at least one iteration of replacement for the longest-lived asset in Citywide Assets, the City’s primary asset management system and asset register. The City’s average annual requirements (red dotted line) for bridges and culverts total $1.3 million. Although actual spending may fluctuate substantially from year to year, this figure is a useful benchmark value for annual capital expenditure targets (or allocations to reserves) to ensure projects are not deferred and replacement needs are met as they arise. - 213 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 74 Capital needs will rise between 2025-2029 at $18.4 million14, and peak at $25.3 million between 2045 and 2049 as assets reach the end of their useful life. These projections and estimates are based on asset replacement costs, age analysis, and condition data. They are designed to provide a long-term, portfolio-level overview of capital needs and should be used to support improved financial planning over several decades. Figure 30: Forecasted Capital Replacement Needs: Bridges & Structural Culverts 2025-2099 Often, the magnitude of replacement needs is substantially higher than most municipalities can afford to fund. In addition, most assets may not need to be 14 Many of the structures with limited remaining useful life are scheduled for future rehabilitation or maintenance under the OSIM program. However, these assets effectively represent immediate needs and should be closely monitored to ensure planned interventions proceed as scheduled. $1.3m$0 $18.4m $0 $1.1m $6.2m $25.3m $1.4m $3.0m $10.0m $2.6m $2.9m $22.1m $882k $1.3m $2.1m $2.9m $0 $5.0m $10.0m $15.0m $20.0m $25.0m $30.0m Fo r e c a s t e d C a p i t a l R e q u i r e m e n t s Bridges Structural Culverts Annual Requirement Total - 214 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 75 replaced. However, quantifying and monitoring these spikes is essential for long- term financial planning, including establishing dedicated reserves. OSIM condition assessments and a robust risk framework will ensure that high-criticality assets receive proper and timely lifecycle intervention, including replacements. A detailed 10-year capital replacement forecast can be found in Appendix A – 10- Year Capital Requirements. 5.6 Risk Analysis The risk matrix below is generated using available asset data, including condition and replacement costs. The matrix stratifies assets based on their individual probability and consequence of failure, each scored from 1 to 5. Their product generates a risk index ranging from 1-25. Assets with the highest criticality and likelihood of failure receive a risk rating of 25; those with lowest probability of failure and lowest criticality carry a risk rating of 1. As new data and information is gathered, the City may consider integrating relevant information that improves confidence in the criteria used to assess asset risk and criticality. These risk models have been built into the City’s Asset Management Database (Citywide Assets). See Risk & Criticality section for further details on approach used to determine asset risk ratings and classifications. Figure 30 Risk Matrix: Bridges & Structural Culverts 5.6.1 Risk to Current Asset Management Strategies Climate Change & Extreme Weather Events Changes to intensity, duration, and frequency of rainfall may impact the condition of bridges and culverts, increasing the risk of flooding. Although design standards have evolved over time to meet changing climate, older structures were designed to a different standard, and therefore not as resilient as newer structures. 1 - 4 5 - 7 8 - 9 10 - 14 15 - 25 Very Low Low Moderate High Very High $8,029,737 $10,044,303 $22,860,853 $22,115,076 $16,801,453 (10%)(13%)(29%)(28%)(21%) - 215 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 76 5.7 Levels of Service The City of Pickering is committed to maintaining high standards for its bridges and culverts, ensuring they are accessible and can efficiently accommodate local traffic needs. These essential infrastructure elements are designed to remain reliable under all weather conditions, providing a dependable transportation network for residents and visitors. Maintenance is conducted to minimize unplanned interruptions or closures, with a focus on safety and public well-being. The City balances the economic challenges of maintaining and repairing bridges and culverts with the need to manage costs responsibly, ensuring that expenditures are sustainable without placing an undue financial burden on the community. Pickering also adheres to internal traffic bylaws and provincial regulations, meeting both local and provincial standards. Although the City’s budget aligns with OSIM inspection recommendations, the current Bridge Condition Index (BCI) of 68.81% indicates room for improvement. In comparison, neighbouring municipalities such as Ajax, Oshawa, Whitby, and Durham maintain BCIs between 69% and 77%. Ongoing monitoring and robust asset management are critical to ensuring the safety and reliability of these structures. The following tables summarize the City’s current levels of service, including KPIs under Ontario Regulation 588/17 and additional performance measures selected for this AMP. - 216 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 77 5.7.1 Community Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Accessibility Description of the traffic that is supported by Municipal bridges (e.g., heavy transport vehicles, motor vehicles, emergency vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists) Acceptable Municipal bridges serve various traffic types, including heavy vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists. The analysis mainly covers rural bridges, like those in North Pickering, with ten underload limits and detour routes of 5 km or more. Bridges on gravel roads that can't support pedestrians or cyclists are excluded from some assessments. Urban bridges are rated excellent, while rural ones are generally ranked lower. Reliability & Performance Description or images of the condition of bridges & structural culverts and how this would affect use of the bridges & structural culverts Acceptable15 The City has a strong understanding of the condition and lifecycle needs of bridges and culverts. OSIM inspections are conducted following established guidelines, with recommendations from these inspections actively applied. 15 Please refer to Appendix B – Level of Service Maps & Photos for examples of Bridge & Culvert conditions. - 217 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 78 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Description of the compliance with the minimum maintenance standards for roads Excellent The City provides an excellent level of service, meeting and exceeding the minimum maintenance standards. Table 15: O. Reg. 588/17 Community Levels of Service: Bridges & Structural Culverts 5.7.2 Technical Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Percentage of bridges in the City with loading or dimensional restrictions Excellent In the City of Pickering, excluding rural bridges, 0% of bridges have loading or dimensional restrictions. Rural roads, as outlined in Schedule A of the Traffic & Parking Bylaw, are not designed to support heavy traffic loads. Reliability & Performance Average bridge condition index value for bridges in the City Acceptable 70% - Adjusted results based on the scores from the 2024 OSIM inspections. - 218 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 79 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Average bridge condition index value for structural culverts in the City Acceptable 66% - Adjusted results based on the scores from the 2024 OSIM inspections. Reliability & Performance Percentage of bridges in poor or worse condition Acceptable 17% - Adjusted results based on the scores from the 2024 OSIM inspections. Reliability & Performance Percentage of culverts in poor or worse condition Acceptable 19% - Adjusted results based on the scores from the 2024 OSIM inspections. Affordability Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Acceptable The funding received in recent years is intended to address the backlog of bridges with 0-4 years of EUL remaining. Table 16: O. Reg. 588/17 Technical Levels of Service: Bridges & Structural Culverts - 219 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 80 5.7.3 Proposed Levels of Service This section provides recommendations for maintaining and optimizing the bridges and culverts within the road corridor based on the current Levels of Service (LOS) assessment, public engagement results, and risk analysis. The recommendations focus on sustaining infrastructure condition, ensuring accessibility, and addressing service risks, while recognizing that current funding levels are sufficient to meet ongoing needs. 5.7.3.1. Structural Condition of Bridges and Culverts Current LOS • Average Bridge Condition Index (BCI): Acceptable (70%) • Average Structural Culvert Condition Index: Acceptable (66%) • Percentage of Bridges in Poor or Worse Condition: 17% • Percentage of Culverts in Poor or Worse Condition: 19% Public Engagement Results • Structural safety of bridges was the highest priority (89.3% of respondents). • Regular inspections and maintenance were also highly rated (81.7% public support). • Flood prevention through culvert maintenance was considered very important by 81.6% of respondents. • Satisfaction with bridge structural integrity was relatively high (57.9%). Recommendations • Continue utilizing required funding levels to implement planned rehabilitation and replacement projects, ensuring gradual improvements in condition over time. • Focus bridge and culvert investments on structures currently rated as poor, prioritizing those with the highest traffic volumes or strategic importance. In parallel, establish a preventative maintenance program to extend the service life of assets in fair or good condition, minimizing long-term costs and reducing the likelihood of sudden failures. • Monitor condition trends through ongoing OSIM inspections to validate the effectiveness of existing rehabilitation strategies. • Enhance public awareness of rehabilitation efforts to reinforce confidence in the municipality’s infrastructure management. - 220 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 81 Risk of Not Maintaining Current LOS • Delays in rehabilitation could slow overall condition improvements, leading to longer timelines for achieving an optimal state of good repair. • Public perception of deteriorating infrastructure, despite adequate funding, if improvements are not effectively communicated. • Increased maintenance costs if issues are not proactively addressed within planned timelines. 5.7.3.2. Accessibility and Network Availability Current LOS • Acceptable – Municipal bridges support various traffic types, including heavy vehicles, emergency vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists. • Urban bridges are in excellent condition, but rural bridges are generally ranked lower, with ten bridges under load restrictions requiring detours of 5 km or more. Public Engagement Results • 72.7% of respondents considered accessibility important, though 21.3% were neutral, indicating it is less of a concern compared to structural safety. • Accessibility had the highest share of lower-priority responses (6.0%), reflecting mixed public sentiment. • 50.5% of respondents were satisfied with accessibility, while 9.4% were dissatisfied. Recommendations • Maintain existing bridge and culvert accessibility levels while monitoring rural bridge usage to assess future needs. • Continue prioritizing investments in critical structures that impact emergency response times and essential goods movement routes. • Communicate the municipality’s strategy for balancing accessibility improvements with other infrastructure priorities. Risk of Not Maintaining Current LOS • Potential disruptions for rural road users if bridge accessibility issues are not addressed over time. • Reduced efficiency for emergency services and goods movement on load- restricted routes. • Public perception that accessibility issues are being overlooked, despite funding sufficiency. - 221 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 82 5.7.3.3. Culvert Functionality and Flood Prevention Current LOS • Needs Improvement – around 19% of culverts are in poor or worse condition. Public Engagement Results • Flood prevention effectiveness of culverts was ranked very important by 81.6% of respondents. • 43.3% of respondents were neutral regarding flood prevention, suggesting a need for better public communication. • Satisfaction with culvert maintenance effectiveness was 48.4%, but 8.2% of respondents were dissatisfied. Recommendations • Continue leveraging existing funding to systematically rehabilitate culverts with the highest flood risk exposure. • Monitor high-risk culverts and drainage structures to ensure adequate capacity for extreme weather events. • Enhance public awareness of culvert maintenance efforts and how they mitigate flooding risks. Risk of Not Maintaining Current LOS • Increased potential for localized flooding, impacting transportation and adjacent properties. • Higher maintenance costs if culvert deterioration is not proactively addressed within planned rehabilitation cycles. • Public perception that flood risk is not being adequately managed if maintenance efforts are not visible. 5.7.3.4. Inspection Frequency and Preventative Maintenance Current LOS • Acceptable – The municipality exceeds minimum maintenance standards and follows OSIM guidelines. • Regular inspections are conducted, but high neutral public response suggests a lack of visibility of these efforts. - 222 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 83 Public Engagement Results • Regular inspections and maintenance were ranked as important by 81.7% of respondents. • Satisfaction with inspection frequency was 55.9%, but 52.2% of respondents were neutral, suggesting limited public awareness. • 30.3% of respondents were unwilling to pay for increased inspection frequency, the highest resistance of any feature. Recommendations • Maintain current inspection cycles while exploring opportunities to enhance efficiency through technology (e.g., remote monitoring, predictive analytics). • Improve public communication about ongoing inspections to address neutral responses and reinforce trust in maintenance efforts. • Continue integrating OSIM inspection findings into long-term capital planning to ensure funding remains aligned with infrastructure needs. • Increase efforts and allocate additional funding toward preventative and routine operational maintenance for bridges and culverts to preserve asset condition, reduce lifecycle costs, and delay the need for costly rehabilitation or replacement. Risk of Not Maintaining Current LOS • Public misperception that inspections are not being conducted thoroughly, despite strong existing maintenance practices. • Reduced public trust in infrastructure management if inspection transparency is not improved. • Delayed detection of potential structural issues, increasing long-term rehabilitation costs. 5.7.3.5. Sustainable Infrastructure Investment Current LOS • Excellent – Capital reinvestment has exceeded average annual requirements in recent years. Public Engagement Results • 33.1% of respondents were willing to pay for structural upgrades to improve bridge safety. • However, 27.9% remained neutral, indicating an opportunity for public education on infrastructure investment benefits. • Willingness to pay for increased inspections was lower (21.3%), with 30.3% of respondents unwilling. - 223 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 84 Recommendations • Continue sustaining current funding levels to ensure long-term infrastructure resilience. • Increase transparency in budget allocations and infrastructure spending to reinforce public trust in the financial strategy. • Leverage grant funding opportunities where applicable to optimize capital reinvestment efficiency. Risk of Not Maintaining Current LOS • Potential misalignment between funding perceptions and actual infrastructure needs if spending is not clearly communicated. • Reduced public willingness to support long-term funding if infrastructure investments are not visible. • Risk of funding reductions in future budget cycles due to a lack of demonstrated need. - 224 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 85 6. Stormwater System The City owns and maintains a stormwater system consisting of storm sewer mains and other supporting infrastructure. Staff are working towards improving the accuracy and reliability of their Stormwater System inventory to assist with long- term asset management planning. 6.1 Inventory & Valuation Table 17 includes the quantity, replacement cost method and total replacement cost of each asset segment in the City’s Stormwater System inventory.16 Segment Sub- Segment Quantity Unit of Measure Replacement Cost4 Primary RC Method Drainage Channels Drainage Channels 839 Meters $4,925,552 CPI Storm Sewers Catch Basin and Lead 5,519 Each $22,793,470 Cost per Unit Storm Sewers Clean Water Collectors 6,265 Meters $1,532,910 CPI Storm Sewers Inlet/Outlet Structures 73 Each $2,351,091 CPI Storm Sewers Maintenance Holes 3,344 Each $32,296,930 Cost per Unit Storm Sewers Oil Grit Separators 37 Each $4,786,018 User- Defined 16 The level of maturity of the asset quantity data is still at a basic level. Staff plan to prioritize data refinement and consolidation efforts to increase confidence in the accuracy and reliability of asset data and information. - 225 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 86 Segment Sub- Segment Quantity Unit of Measure Replacement Cost4 Primary RC Method Storm Sewers Service Connection 16,895 Each $10,566,133 Cost per Unit Storm Sewers Storm Sewer Mains 213,470 Meters $250,428,399 Cost per Unit Storm Sewers Stormwater Wall 36 Meters $207,370 CPI Stormwater Ponds Access Roads 249 Square Meters $44,552 CPI Stormwater Ponds Dry Ponds 30,838 Cubic Meters $1,592,305 CPI Stormwater Ponds Fencing 424 Meters $88,230 CPI Stormwater Ponds Wet Ponds 187,150 Cubic Meters $26,194,976 User- Defined Total $357,807,936 Table 17: Detailed Asset Inventory: Stormwater System Figure 31 provides the portfolio valuation of the stormwater system by Segments. Moreover, these segments have been classified into further sub-segments. Replacement costs by subsegments are provided in the Appendix D – Additional Asset Portfolio Breakdown by Sub-segments. - 226 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 87 Figure 31: Portfolio Valuation: Stormwater System 6.2 Asset Condition Figure 32 summarizes the replacement cost-weighted condition of the City’s stormwater system assets. Based on age data only, approximately 13% of assets are in poor to very poor condition. These assets may be candidates for replacement in the short term; similarly, assets in fair condition may require rehabilitation or replacement in the medium term and should be monitored for further degradation in condition. Figure 32: Asset Condition: Stormwater System Overall $4.9m $27.9m $325.0m $100m $200m $300m $400m Drainage Channels Stormwater Ponds Storm Sewers Replacement Cost by Segment Very Poor, $6,375,794 (2%) Poor, $39,646,761 (11%)Fair, $13,219,145 (4%) Good, $70,785,086 (20%) Very Good, $227,781,150 (64%) - 227 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 88 Figure 33 summarizes the age-based condition of stormwater assets17. The analysis illustrates that the majority of stormwater mains are in fair or better condition. Figure 33: Asset Condition: Stormwater System by Segment 6.3 Age Profile An asset’s age profile comprises two key values: estimated useful life (EUL), or design life; and the percentage of EUL consumed. The EUL is the serviceable lifespan of an asset during which it can continue to fulfil its intended purpose and provide value to users, safely and efficiently. As assets age, their performance diminishes, often more rapidly as they approach the end of their design life. In conjunction with condition data, an asset’s age profile provides a more complete summary of the state of infrastructure. It can help identify assets that may be candidates for further review through condition assessment programs; inform the selection of optimal lifecycle strategies; and improve planning for potential replacement spikes. Figure 34 illustrates the average current age of each asset type and its estimated useful life. Both values are weighted by the replacement cost of individual assets. 17 A desktop assessment was completed by City staff. The results of the assessment were used along with Age-based ratings to calculate the average condition of assets. Desktop assessment ratings were given a weight of 50% compared to 50% for the age -based rating when performing the final condition calculation for Catch Basin and Leads. For Service Connections, the desktop assessments were given a weight of 55% compared t o 45% for the age-based rating when performing the final condition calculation. Age-based conditions were solely used when desktop assessments were not performed. $9.7m $213.1m $4.9m $69.5m $10.7m $28.9m $5.9m 0%20%40%60%80%100% Stormwater Ponds Storm Sewers Drainage Channels Value and Percentage of Asset Segments by Replacement Cost Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor - 228 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 89 Figure 34: Estimated Useful Life vs. Asset Age: Stormwater System Age analysis reveals that drainage channels & stormwater ponds are far from reaching their end of useful life. Moreover, storm sewers are midway through their expected useful life. 6.4 Current Approach to Lifecycle Management The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. This process is affected by a range of factors including asset’s characteristics, location, utilization, maintenance history and environment. The following lifecycle strategies have been developed as a proactive approach to managing the lifecycle of wet stormwater ponds. Instead of allowing stormwater ponds to deteriorate until replacement is required, strategic rehabilitation is expected to extend the service life of stormwater ponds at a lower total cost. 9.3 37.8 16.5 68.2 72 52.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Drainage Channels Storm Sewers Stormwater Ponds Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL - 229 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 90 Stormwater Ponds (Wet) Event Name Event Class Event Trigger Pond Cleanout 1st cycle Maintenance Year: 20 Pond Cleanout 2nd Cycle Maintenance Year: 40 Asset Replacement Replacement Condition: 0 Table 18: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Stormwater Ponds - 230 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 91 The following table outlines the City’s current lifecycle management strategy for Stormwater Management Facilities. Activity Type Description of Current Strategy Maintenance Regular inspections are completed across all facilities. When more detailed inspections were completed in 2020 this included: • Inspection of maintenance hole covers, control structures and access barriers • Bathymetric surveys and sediment depth measurements at wet ponds • Sediment quality sampling to determine proper disposal requirements Maintenance Staff are in the process of evaluating and implementing a proactive maintenance program which may include: • Debris cleanup • Repairs to outlets, grates, and fences Rehabilitation/ Replacement Sediment removal and disposal needs to occur on a regular basis (~ every 20 years). Rehabilitation/ Replacement The excavation and removal of sediment from ponds will require a sampling and analysis plan outlining frequency and testing parameters. Rehabilitation/ Replacement Due to the relatively young age of the City’s stormwater management facilities, there has not been a previous urgency or requirement to plan for reconstruction/retrofit needs. Table 19: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Stormwater Management Facilities The following table outlines the City’s current lifecycle management strategy for Storm Sewers. - 231 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 92 Activity Type Description of Current Strategy Maintenance The City’s annual maintenance program for storm sewer mains includes: • Storm sewer flushing and video inspection • Calcite blockage removal (reaming) • Catch basin cleaning Rehabilitation The City is in the process of refining its inventory data and collecting better condition data on linear storm sewer infrastructure. Once this process is completed staff will consider the benefits of trenchless sewer re-lining. Replacement Storm sewer replacement is aligned with road reconstruction programs. When a road is planned for reconstruction, CCTV inspections are completed to determine if the storm sewer needs repair or replacement. This project coordination ultimately leads to lower total project costs and reduces the impact of more frequent road reconstruction. Replacement The City develops a 9-year capital forecast which includes specific named projects Table 20: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Storm Sewers 6.5 Forecasted Long-Term Replacement Needs Figure 35 illustrates the cyclical short-, medium- and long-term infrastructure replacement requirements for the City’s stormwater system assets. This analysis was run until 2109 to capture at least one iteration of replacement for the longest- lived asset in Citywide Assets, the City’s primary asset management system and asset register. The City’s average annual requirements (red dotted line) total $6.6 million for all assets in the stormwater system. Although actual spending may fluctuate substantially from year to year, this figure is a useful benchmark value for annual capital expenditure targets (or allocations to reserves) to ensure projects are not deferred and replacement needs are met as they arise. - 232 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 93 Figure 35: Forecasted Long-Term Replacement Needs: Storm Sewers The largest replacement spike is forecasted to be $85.3 million in 2060-2064 followed by $68.5 million in 2055 - 2059 as assets reach the end of their expected design life. These projections and estimates are based on asset replacement costs and age analysis. They are designed to provide a long-term, portfolio-level overview of capital needs and should be used to support improved financial planning over several decades. Often, the magnitude of replacement needs is substantially higher than most municipalities can afford to fund. In addition, most assets may not need to be replaced. However, quantifying and monitoring these spikes is essential for long- term financial planning, including establishing dedicated reserves. In addition, a $6.6m $471k $29.1m $21.8m $35.5m $36.4m $15.8m $57.7m $68.5m $85.3m $27.5m $21.5m $39.6m $10.8m $15.1m $13.9m $34.2m $4.4m $5.2m $0 $10m $20m $30m $40m $50m $60m $70m $80m $90m Fo r e c a s t e d C a p i t a l R e q u i r e m e n t s Stormwater Ponds Storm Sewers Drainage Channels Annual Requirement Total - 233 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 94 robust risk framework will ensure that high-criticality assets receive proper and timely lifecycle intervention, including replacements. A detailed 10-year capital replacement forecast can be found in Appendix A – 10- Year Capital Requirements. 6.6 Risk Analysis The risk matrix below is generated using available asset data, including condition, service life remaining, pipe material, and replacement costs. As no additional attribute data was available for storm assets, the risk ratings for assets were calculated using only these asset fields. The matrix stratifies assets based on their individual probability and consequence of failure, each scored from 1 to 5. Their product generates a risk index ranging from 1-25. Assets with the highest criticality and likelihood of failure receive a risk rating of 25; those with lowest probability of failure and lowest criticality carry a risk rating of 1. As new data and information is gathered, the City may consider integrating relevant information that improves confidence in the criteria used to assess asset risk and criticality. These risk models have been built into the City’s Asset Management Database (Citywide Assets). See Risk & Criticality section for further details on approach used to determine asset risk ratings and classifications. Figure 36: Risk Matrix: Stormwater System 6.6.1 Risk to Current Asset Management Strategies Climate Change & Extreme Weather Events Changes to intensity, duration, and frequency of rainfall may impact the condition and performance of the Stormwater System. Design criteria can become outdated as Intensity, Duration, and Frequency (IDF) curves are updated. The City’s IDF curves were last updated in 2013 and were further analyzed in the Climate Change IDF Study, prepared for Durham Region in 2024. The study indicates a slight increase in intensity for short-duration events, with no significant change observed for long-duration events. The results suggest that the current design practices remain as adequate as they ever were, though continued monitoring is recommended. While this risk is industry-driven, the City’s current IDF curves are 1 - 4 5 - 7 8 - 9 10 - 14 15 - 25 Very Low Low Moderate High Very High $144,290,633 $126,383,874 $23,398,915 $48,027,393 $15,707,122 (40%)(35%)(7%)(13%)(4%) - 234 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 95 still considered relevant for design purposes, with future updates and monitoring suggested for ongoing accuracy. The forthcoming Community Climate Adaptation Plan—scheduled for Council consideration in May 2025—may introduce additional recommendations or direction for addressing long-term climate resilience. As the Plan is currently in draft form, future asset management updates may be required to align with its finalized objectives and actions once formally adopted. Installation Design guidelines have been updated to reflect new requirements around storm sewer sizing for new developments. Although newer subdivisions are being designed to meet overland flow requirements, this is not necessarily the case for all of the older developments. Currently, design standards for linear infrastructure are built to capture and convey the 1 in 5-year storm event. Infrastructure Re-investment Plans to maintain and rehabilitate ponds are entirely dependent on budget approvals. When adequate budgets are not available, these plans may be deferred or canceled. Lifecycle Management Strategies For storm sewers, inspections are not completed on a strategic level. Inspections are done on a geographic zone basis, not necessarily targeted towards areas of elevated need. The storm sewer age is relatively young north of Highway 401 (the majority) and getting older south of the Highway. It is rare that the City has to plan for full reconstruction/replacement. However, The City is looking to expand inspection programs to become more strategic as the average age of storm infrastructure increases. Furthermore, ponds within the City are relatively new and not at the end of their lifecycle. The City will be developing a robust lifecycle management strategy based on a recently completed asset management plan. - 235 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 96 6.7 Levels of Service The City of Pickering is committed to maintaining a high standard of service for its stormwater management system, ensuring it effectively meets the needs of the community while safeguarding the environment and public well-being. The system is designed with redundancies to manage high flow conditions and prevent overflows, ensuring reliability and minimizing service interruptions. This robust infrastructure plays a vital role in managing stormwater, reducing flood risks, and mitigating environmental impacts. The City strives to balance affordability with the necessary investments in stormwater infrastructure maintenance, and upgrades. While Pickering's stormwater system is relatively new, it requires financial reserves for future upkeep. Currently, 95% of properties are resilient to a 5-year storm, and 60% to a 100-year storm. However, neighbouring municipalities like Ajax, Whitby, and Durham report higher resiliency rates, highlighting the need for improved data collection and financial planning in Pickering. The following tables summarize the City’s current levels of service, including KPIs under Ontario Regulation 588/17 and additional performance measures selected for this AMP. - 236 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 97 6.7.1 Community Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Accessibility Description, which may include maps, of the user groups or areas of the City that are protected from flooding, including the extent of the protection provided by the Municipal stormwater management system Acceptable18 The zoning, dating back to the 1960s, lacks sufficient flood management infrastructure, particularly in the face of extreme weather events. While floodplain mapping is available online to highlight vulnerable areas, a detailed analysis of the storm sewer system is still missing. As a result, maintenance has been reactive and localized rather than proactive and planned. However, the City benefits from not having combined sewers, which can alleviate some stormwater management challenges. Engineering Services are working to address these issues through a more comprehensive approach, as outlined in their Level of Service Framework, effective as of March 14, 2024. Table 21: O. Reg. 588/17 Community Levels of Service: Stormwater System 18 Please refer to Appendix B – Level of Service Maps & Photos for stormwater system classification maps. - 237 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 98 6.7.2 Technical Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Percentage of inspected catch basins yearly Acceptable 27.8% Reliability & Performance Percentage of properties in Municipality resilient to a 100-year storm Needs Improvement 60%19 - The City assumes that the minor system in urban and estate development areas is designed to handle a 5-year event, while the major system is expected to manage a 100-year event without affecting buildings. However, further studies are needed to accurately assess the system's ability to handle these events without impacting infrastructure. Staff have started measuring asset performance against these metrics, with ongoing work that will provide a more accurate representation of the City’s Level of Service (LOS) in a future Asset Management Plan (AMP). 19 High level assumption. - 238 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 99 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Percentage of the Municipal stormwater management system resilient to a 5-year storm Acceptable 95% - The City assumes that the minor system in urban and estate areas is designed to handle a 5-year event, and the major system is built to manage a 100-year event without affecting buildings. Further studies are needed to accurately assess how well both systems perform. Staff are currently measuring asset performance against these standards, with a more precise Level of Service (LOS) assessment to be included in a future Asset Management Plan (AMP). Reliability & Performance Yearly Percentage of inspected and flushed pipes (urban areas) N/A20 The City conducts manual clean and flush programs annually, but the current quantity per year is insufficient to inspect the entire sewer system within five years. As a result, only a small percentage of pipes are inspected each year due to budget limitations. There is no specific policy guiding this process; instead, planning is determined by the available budget allocation. 20 For the current LOS that are marked as N/A (Not Available), the city will gather additional data to establish accurate values . - 239 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 100 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Yearly Percentage of inspected and flushed pipes (non-urban areas) N/A The City conducts manual clean and flush programs annually, but this quantity per year is insufficient to inspect the entire sewer system within five years. As a result, only a small percentage of pipes are inspected each year due to budget constraints. There is no dedicated policy for this process; instead, planning is based on the available budget allocation. Reliability & Performance Average condition of stormwater system assets Acceptable 70% – Based on the calculations from Citywide Reliability & Performance Percentage of storm network assets in poor or worse condition Acceptable 29% - Based on the calculations from Citywide Affordability Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Needs Improvement The actual reinvestment rate is just over 11% of the target rate, highlighting a potential risk of infrastructure deterioration if reinvestment levels remain low. Table 22: O. Reg. 588/17 Technical Levels of Service: Stormwater System - 240 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 101 6.7.3 Proposed Levels of Service This section provides recommendations for maintaining and improving the stormwater system within the road corridor based on the current Levels of Service (LOS) assessment, public engagement results, and risk analysis. The recommendations focus on addressing deficiencies in storm resiliency and funding sustainability, ensuring proactive maintenance, and improving public engagement. 6.7.3.1. Storm Resiliency and Flood Prevention Current LOS • Percentage of properties resilient to a 100-year storm: Needs Improvement (60%) • Percentage of the stormwater system resilient to a 5-year storm: Acceptable (95%) • Floodplain mapping is available, but a detailed storm sewer and overland flow system analysis for older neighbourhoods is lacking. • Maintenance has been reactive and localized rather than proactive and planned. Public Engagement Results • Flood prevention was rated as the highest priority (81.0% of respondents). • Satisfaction with flood prevention was the highest among stormwater features (45.8%). • Neutral responses about flood prevention were moderate (43.9%), indicating a lack of strong public awareness. Recommendations • Enhance flood resilience by investing in system-wide upgrades in flood-prone areas to improve capacity for extreme weather events. • Develop a detailed storm sewer system analysis to accurately assess vulnerabilities and prioritize upgrades. • Improve stormwater retention and drainage capacity in flood-prone areas. • Increase public education on floodplain mapping and household-level flood mitigation strategies. Risk of Not Improving Storm Resiliency • Increased flooding risk, leading to property damage and infrastructure failures. • Higher long-term costs due to emergency response and reactive repairs. • Reduced public trust in the municipality’s ability to manage extreme weather impacts. - 241 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 102 6.7.3.2. Stormwater System Maintenance and Inspection Frequency Current LOS • Yearly percentage of inspected catch basins: Acceptable (27.8%) • Yearly percentage of inspected and flushed pipes (urban areas): N/A (Budget- limited program, unable to complete all inspections within five years). • Yearly percentage of inspected and flushed pipes (non-urban areas): N/A (Budget-limited program, unable to complete all inspections within five years). • Average condition of stormwater system assets: Acceptable (70). • Percentage of storm network assets in poor or worse condition: Acceptable (29%). Public Engagement Results • Regular maintenance of stormwater components was highly rated (80.3% of respondents). • Satisfaction with maintenance was moderate (44.2%), but 46.1% of respondents were neutral, suggesting a lack of public awareness. • Willingness to pay for more frequent maintenance was lower (24.7%), with significant opposition (30.5%). Recommendations • Optimize maintenance scheduling to ensure system components are cleaned and inspected within a five-year cycle. • Implement a risk-based inspection strategy, prioritizing high-risk areas and aging infrastructure. • Increase public communication about ongoing maintenance efforts to address neutral perceptions. • Leverage technology, such as remote monitoring, to improve maintenance efficiency and reduce costs. Risk of Not Improving Maintenance and Inspection Frequency • Increased risk of blockages, backups, and localized flooding. • Deterioration of stormwater assets leading to premature replacement costs. • Public perception of poor infrastructure management, reducing willingness to support future funding. 6.7.3.3. Sustainable Capital Reinvestment and Funding Current LOS • Annual sustainable capital reinvestment rate: Needs Improvement (11% of the required funding). - 242 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 103 • Stormwater projects are currently constrained by budget limitations, leading to deferred maintenance and delayed system upgrades. Public Engagement Results • Willingness to pay for enhanced flood prevention was moderate (29.2%), with 29.0% of respondents neutral. • Willingness to pay for more frequent maintenance was lower (24.7%), with 30.5% unwilling. • Public prioritization favors flood prevention and maintenance over transparency and communication. Recommendations • Secure long-term, dedicated funding for stormwater infrastructure upgrades and rehabilitation. • Leverage available grants and alternative funding sources to supplement municipal investments. • Develop a financial strategy linking reinvestment levels to long-term cost savings and risk reduction. • Communicate the benefits of proactive reinvestment to increase public support for funding allocation. Risk of Not Securing Sustainable Funding • This graph illustrates the projected condition of the City’s stormwater system under three funding scenarios from 2025 to 2040: current, recommended, and optimal budgets. Under the current budget (green line), asset condition gradually declines, falling below 80% and trending downward, signaling a slow but steady deterioration. This decline increases the risk of system failures, local flooding, costly emergency repairs, and reduced resilience to climate-related events such as intense rainfall. In contrast, the recommended budget (purple line) helps stabilize condition above 80%, while the optimal budget (blue line) significantly improves condition, reaching the mid-90% range by 2040. Without increased investment, the City risks higher future costs, service disruptions, and greater vulnerability to extreme weather, making it essential to address the funding gap within the next decade. - 243 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 104 Figure 37: Projected Stormwater System Conditions in Pickering Under Optimal vs. Current vs Recommended Budget Scenarios" - 244 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 105 6.7.3.4. Communication and Transparency in Stormwater Management Current LOS • Public awareness of stormwater management practices is limited, with high neutral responses in engagement surveys. Public Engagement Results • Transparency and communication about stormwater management were the lowest-rated priority (67.7%). • Satisfaction with stormwater communication was the lowest of all categories (31.0%). • Dissatisfaction with communication was relatively high (27.0%), indicating a need for improvement. Recommendations • Develop an outreach strategy to educate residents on stormwater system functionality and its impact on community safety. • Improve accessibility of stormwater data, including maps and maintenance schedules, through an online portal. • Increase engagement through public meetings and stormwater management workshops. Risk of Not Improving Communication • Public misperceptions about the municipality’s stormwater management efforts. • Reduced willingness to support funding increases due to a lack of understanding of system needs. • Increased public frustration during storm events due to limited information availability. - 245 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 106 Non-Core Assets - 246 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 107 7. Buildings & Facilities The City owns and maintains a variety of facilities and recreation centers that provide essential services to the community. These buildings are categorized as follows: • Civic Complex • Community & Cultural Buildings • Fire Services • Operations Centre • Recreation, Pools & Arenas To effectively manage the operational data of these facilities, the City utilizes VFA, ensuring informed decision-making and strategic asset management. 7.1 Inventory & Valuation Table 23 includes the quantity, replacement cost method and total replacement cost of each asset segment in the City’s Buildings & Facilities asset inventory. Segment Quantity Unit of Measure Replacement Cost Primary RC Method Civic Complex 1 Buildings $39,442,725 User-Defined Community & Cultural Buildings 18 Buildings $55,798,059 User-Defined Fire Services 5 Buildings $27,242,565 User-Defined Operations Centre 5 Buildings $36,053,371 User-Defined Recreation, Pools & Arenas 11 Buildings $158,293,225 User-Defined Other 1 Buildings $63,858 CPI TOTAL $316,893,803 Table 23: Detailed Asset Inventory: Buildings & Facilities - 247 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 108 Figure 38: Portfolio Valuation: Buildings & Facilities 7.2 Asset Condition The City maintains a detailed breakdown of all facilities in its VFA/Facilities database, which compiles and summarizes information for the AMP, offering a more robust budgeting tool. This database is further refined through staff observations and supported by third-party consultant reviews. Appendix E – Facility Condition Indices presents the FCI scores of facilities, as outlined in the Facilities Renewal Study. A Facility Condition Index (FCI) score is a ratio of the total cost of identified building repairs and renewals (i.e., component replacement) over a defined period (the City uses 5 years) divided by the assets’ total estimated replacement cost. It is calculated using the formula: FCI = Requirement and Renewal Costs / Current Replacement Value An FCI of 0 percent indicates a facility in perfect condition with no outstanding capital investment backlog or deferred maintenance within the next five years. Low FCI values, typically below 20 percent, indicate good condition with minimal maintenance needs. Higher FCI values, above 40 percent, suggest significant maintenance backlogs and a potential need for major rehabilitation, replacement, or disposal. These thresholds were identified in the City's 2024 Facilities Renewal Study. $64k $27.2m $36.1m $39.4m $55.8m $158.3m $50m $100m $150m $200m Other Fire Services Operations Centre Civic Complex Community & Cultural Buildings Recreation, Pools & Arenas Replacement Cost by Segment - 248 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 109 The City maintains separate asset management software for its buildings, VFA Facilities, which reports an FCI of 25.68 percent for the entire facility portfolio. This suggests that the facility is at risk of accelerated deterioration, increased maintenance costs, and potential service disruptions. Immediate attention and strategic reinvestment are required to prevent further decline and ensure continued functionality. To ensure that the City’s Building & Facilities continue to provide an acceptable level of service, the City monitors the condition of all individual systems and assets in each of its facilities. As their condition declines, staff re-evaluate their lifecycle management and funding strategy to determine what combination of maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement activities is required to improve the overall condition of Buildings & Facilities. 7.3 Age Profile An asset’s age profile comprises two key values: estimated useful life (EUL), or design life; and service life remaining (SLR). EUL is the initial estimated serviceable lifespan of an asset during which it can continue to fulfil its intended purpose and provide value to users safely and efficiently. As assets age, their performance diminishes, often more rapidly as they approach the end of their design life. With proper care and maintenance, SLR can be extended beyond the initial EUL. In conjunction with condition data, an asset’s age profile provides a more complete summary of the state of infrastructure. It can help identify assets that may be candidates for further review through condition assessment programs; inform the selection of optimal lifecycle strategies; and improve planning for potential replacement spikes. Figure 39: Estimated Useful Life vs. Asset Age: Buildings & Facilities 31.2 35.3 23.6 6 3 30.230.3 29.5 26.2 26.4 25 28.9 0 10 20 30 40 Civic Complex Community & Cultural Buildings Fire Services Operations Centre Other Recreation, Pools & Arenas Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL - 249 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 110 Figure 39 illustrates the average current age of each asset type and its estimated useful life. Both values are weighted by the replacement cost of individual assets. Age analysis reveals that civic complex, community & cultural buildings, and recreation pools & arenas have exceeded their expected useful lives. On the contrary, operations centre, and other buildings are in the early stages of their expected useful lives. Moreover, fire services facilities are quickly approaching their useful lives. Age-based analysis would require intensive review of the over 10,000 assets represented in the VFA database, as each of these will have its own established EUL. Detailed analysis will be undertaken in regular updates to the City’s Facilities Renewal Study and as part of ongoing facilities management efforts. Data and analysis provided in the City’s broader asset management plan is limited to high level summaries of this information to demonstrate overall trends and conditions. 7.4 Current Approach to Lifecycle Management The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. To ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meeting the needs of stakeholders, it is important to establish a lifecycle management strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration. A number of City facilities are approaching the end of their serviceable lives and will compete with growth-related and other priorities for limited available capital funds. The City’s Facilities Renewal Study provides guidelines to help develop the required strategies, and feed into the City’s broader asset management objectives. Table 24 outlines the City’s current lifecycle management strategy. Activity Type Description of Current Strategy Maintenance City Facilities Maintenance staff develop preventative maintenance plans that are tailored for each facility. These plans include a variety of activities that are completed by both internal staff and external contractors including: • Routine health & safety inspections and general facility maintenance • Elevator & life safety systems testing • Utilities inspection & maintenance (e.g., generators, plumbing, HVAC) - 250 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 111 Activity Type Description of Current Strategy Rehabilitation Facility rehabilitation relies on determining the optimal time to replace systems to control costs and manage risks without jeopardizing facility safety and operational standards. Staff prioritize rehabilitation needs into three broad categories: • Primary: health & safety, roofs, HVAC • Secondary: Back of house areas, non-critical systems • Tertiary: cosmetics, lighting, cladding, flooring Rehabilitation In general terms, the City’s approach is reviewing facilities in terms of generational life cycles, with each cycle lasting roughly 25-30 years. A major renovation is typically required at that point to address the end of life of a broad number of building systems and consolidated into a single project for order of magnitude cost savings while minimizing overall down time. Most facilities have 2-3 generational cycles in them, leaning towards the lower number if each generation is stretched to 30+ years. Beyond this point, critical infrastructure like foundations require expensive repairs and operating costs can become prohibitive, as well as the increasing risks of unplanned closures. Replacement Determining facility replacement requirements involves analyzing several key sources of information, including: • Facility condition index & staff inspections • Maintenance and work order records. • Master Plans • Stakeholder input Replacement Staff aim to start evaluating and planning for facility replacements at least 10 years in advance of required capital works. The City’s Facilities Renewal Study is the current guiding document for these efforts, aligning objectives with the Parks and Recreation 10-Year Plan, Corporate Energy Management Plan, and other related policies and documents, all falling under the auspices of the City’s overall Strategic Plan. Table 24: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Buildings & Facilities - 251 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 112 7.5 Forecasted Long-Term Replacement Needs Funding needs for facilities assets can vary significantly from year to year. In 2025, there is a backlog of $13.8 million, which grows to $15.6 million in 2026. The highest funding requirement is shown in the latest capital budget forecast in 2027 at $33.5 million, likely due to major planned projects or deferred maintenance. Projected costs within the next five years often include deferred maintenance from previous years that have not yet been funded or approved. Beyond these specific expenditures, the City's capital budget estimates an average annual requirement of $12.6 million after 2034 to maintain facilities in good condition. These fluctuations underscore the importance of consistent and strategic funding. Without sufficient investment in high-need years, maintenance could be delayed, leading to higher long-term costs and a greater risk of asset failures. By leveraging data-driven planning, the City can allocate resources effectively, ensuring funding is available when needed, preventing costly emergency repairs, and keeping facilities safe and functional for the community. A detailed 10-year capital replacement forecast can be found in Appendix A – 10- Year Capital Requirements. 7.6 Risk Analysis This table, sourced from the City’s 2024 Facilities Renewal Study, highlights facility risk rankings based on both condition (FCI) and service criticality. It identifies priority buildings requiring attention, including several fire stations and community centres, and supports a risk-based approach to capital planning and reinvestment. - 252 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 113 Figure 40: Risk Scores vs FCI: Buildings & Facilities from the 2024 Facilities Renewal Study21 This table, sourced from the City’s 2024 Facilities Renewal Study, highlights facility risk rankings based on both condition (FCI) and service criticality. It identifies priority buildings requiring attention, including several fire stations and community centres, and supports a risk-based approach to capital planning and reinvestment. 7.6.1 Risk to Current Asset Management Strategies The following section summarizes key trends, challenges, and risks to service delivery that the City’s facilities are currently facing: 21 Footnote 1: Animal Shelter is a leased facility with no VFA data; however, the city is responsible for all capital upgrades and significant investment is required. Therefore, it is assumed that if there was an assessment the FCI score would be 50% or more and score of 5 would apply. Footnote 2: Historic pavilion structures are not included in the Museum FCI. This value only includes Redman House, the Conservation Building and Upper Site Storage Building. - 253 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 114 Climate Change & Extreme Weather Events Increasing temperatures place greater stress on HVAC systems. More frequent and severe windstorms, heavier snowfall and deluge precipitation can overwhelm the system design capacities of City facilities, especially older buildings designed to less stringent codes and requirements. Climate resiliency is already a key consideration in any discussion of new construction/retrofits - e.g., building roof curbs to allow additional insulation thickness at a later date. Infrastructure Design/Installation Futureproofing is already a key strategy for all City facility capital projects. The City acknowledges the need to build in as much resilience, durability, and flexibility as possible. The City wants to be able to keep up with technological advancements, and aging systems often become more difficult to maintain as parts and required expertise become sparse. Redundancy is key for critical systems, such as HVAC, electrical and life safety systems. The City’s 2024-2029 Corporate Energy Management Plan (CEMP) includes recommendations to develop a corporate building standard for City facilities that could address long term needs and resiliency to maintain an inventory of robust assets, which notably include emergency and post-disaster buildings. Aging Infrastructure Aging infrastructure poses a significant risk to the City of Pickering’s facilities, especially as essential structural systems reach the end of their serviceable lives. As buildings age, key components such as foundations, load-bearing walls, roofs, and mechanical systems deteriorate, increasing the likelihood of failures that could compromise safety, functionality, and service delivery. Structural degradation can lead to issues such as leaks, cracks, corrosion, and weakened load-bearing capacities, which, if left unaddressed, can escalate into costly emergency repairs or even facility closures. Once a facility’s key structural systems reach end of life, rehabilitation is rarely cost-effective, requiring full replacement or disposal of the building. 7.7 Levels of Service The City of Pickering is dedicated to providing exceptional services across all municipal facilities, with a strong focus on accessibility, sustainability, reliability, performance, and cost-effectiveness. The City strives to ensure that all residents and visitors to the community can access and benefit from its facilities, with accessible entrances, washrooms, and assistive technologies in place, exceeding minimum code requirements whenever possible. In addition, sustainable practices are integrated into the City’s procurement practices, building operations and capital - 254 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 115 project planning to minimize environmental impact, reinforced by the objectives of the City’s Corporate Energy Management Plan 2024-2029, Community Climate Adaptation Plan 2025-2035 and Corporate Strategic Plan 2024-2028. Regular inspections and maintenance ensure that these facilities remain safe, secure, and resilient, while also being reliably responsive to emergencies. Several City building assets already have Facility Condition Index (FCI ratings exceeding 40 percent, with low service life remaining. This will require significant attention over the short term. The renewal study should be further developed and inform the City's broader strategic objectives to ensure that target levels of service can be maintained over the long run. The City continuously strives to offer high- quality service to all visitors and stakeholders by regularly reviewing service delivery and actively seeking customer feedback to improve its offerings. Committed to affordability, the City ensures that its facilities remain accessible and enjoyable for all residents and visitors. The following tables summarize the City’s current levels of service, including KPIs under Ontario Regulation 588/17 and additional performance measures selected for this AMP. - 255 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 116 7.7.1 Community Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Accessibility Description of the availability of recreational and cultural services supported by municipal facilities to residents Acceptable The City’s Recreational and cultural services are primarily concentrated in South Pickering, providing good access. Central and North Pickering have more limited availability, requiring improvement. Issues include an insufficient number of facilities, several aging facilities set for decommissioning, and accessibility challenges like a lack of elevators in some buildings. Two new facilities (Pickering Heritage & Community Centre and Seaton Recreation Complex & Library) are planned but will not be completed until after 2025. Accessibility Description of the state of modernization of recreational facilities Needs Improvement As demographics shift and density increases, especially near existing facilities, aging buildings need modernization to meet evolving community needs. This should go beyond health and safety updates to include new features aligned with current trends, such as fitness classes and improved amenities, as outlined in the Recreation and Parks 10-Year Plan. A proactive approach will help ensure facilities stay - 256 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 117 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale relevant, accessible, and capable of serving a growing, diverse population. Accessibility Description of the state of modernization of Library Facilities Needs Improvement As demographics shift and density increases, aging buildings need modernization to meet evolving community needs. This should include updates beyond health and safety, incorporating current trends and upgraded amenities, as outlined in the Public Library Facilities Plan (2023). A proactive approach will ensure facilities stay relevant, accessible, and serve the diverse, growing population. Accessibility Description of any initiatives and plans to make buildings and facilities more accessible Acceptable Initiatives to improve building accessibility include documenting barriers in the work plan prepared by the City’s Accessibility Advisory Committee, which also reviews major capital projects through the lens of accessibility. City staff also conduct bi- annual accessibility reviews with recommendations sent to the province, and submitting compliance audits. An ad hoc staff accessibility committee oversees various audits and walkthroughs. - 257 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 118 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Accessibility Description of any initiatives and plans to make libraries more accessible Acceptable Library services in Pickering are currently considered accessible based on the availability of public transportation and existing facilities. However, the proximity analysis should be refined using KPIs such as ensuring 95% of residents are within 5 km of a library, achieving 15-minute walkability, and locating facilities along major bus routes. A new bookmobile outreach service was also launched in 2024, and two new facilities are planned to offer library services. Accessibility Description of the availability of the library services supported by municipal facilities to residents Acceptable Library services are concentrated in South Pickering, offering acceptable access, while Central and North Pickering have more limited availability, which needs improvement. Key issues include an insufficient number of facilities for the population. Two new facilities are planned for North of Finch (Pickering Heritage & Community Centre) and Central Pickering (Seaton Recreation Complex & Library), both featuring library amenities. However, these projects are not part of the current plan, as they will be completed after 2025. - 258 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 119 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Description of lifecycle management strategies and assessment programs applied to municipal facilities Acceptable Lifecycle management for municipal facilities includes a structured maintenance program, monthly inspections of fire alarms and systems, and energy management through automation controls. Honeywell Building Management Systems are implemented in 6 of 24 buildings. The City uses the VFA database for tracking and planning capital renewal activities, though there is no formal lifecycle management policy in place. The VFA database is regularly updated by staff inspections and third- party building condition assessments. Reliability & Performance Description of inspection programs applied to municipal facilities Acceptable Municipal building assessments include inspections by third parties and governing authorities, such as monthly compliance audits by the Electrical Safety Authority (ESA) and inspections by the Technical Standards and Safety Authority (TSSA) for elevators and valves. Health and safety inspections are conducted monthly, and condition reviews are done prior to budget planning to prioritize replacements or upgrades, with capital budgets forecasted for 10 years. Other assessments include HVAC inspections, roof and elevator checks, thermographic - 259 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 120 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale scans, non-destructive testing, and structural reviews. Inspection reports with recommendations are provided to relevant department stakeholders. Sustainability Description of any initiatives and plans to make municipal facilities more energy efficient Acceptable To improve energy efficiency in municipal buildings, the City targets performance improvements when replacing old equipment, leverages automation and controls to optimize energy use. Strategic goals are developed through the Corporate Energy Management Plan (CEMP), updated every 5 years. Annual reports track energy usage, efficiency gains, and regulatory compliance, while also leveraging incentive programs and grants to support energy-efficient upgrades. Table 25: Community Levels of Service: Buildings & Facilities - 260 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 121 7.7.2 Technical Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Average Facility Condition Index Needs Improvement 25.68 - The Facility Condition Index (FCI) is calculated and updated annually by the VFA database ensuring reference information remains current. Costs are linked to the RS, which means pricing database and adjusted to local Durham Region Costs by this system. Affordability Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Needs Improvement The City’s actual reinvestment rate is just over 58% of the target rate, highlighting a potential risk of infrastructure deterioration if reinvestment levels remain low. Table 26: Technical Levels of Service: Buildings & Facilities - 261 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 122 7.7.3 Proposed Levels of Service The condition of the City’s facilities plays a critical role in supporting community wellbeing, safety, and satisfaction. Current data shows that many municipal buildings, particularly recreational and cultural facilities, are aging and in need of modernization. With a Facility Condition Index (FCI) of 25.68% and capital reinvestment levels at just 58% of what is required, the City's ability to maintain service levels is increasingly challenged. Public engagement indicates strong support for the modernization and functionality of recreational assets, yet a relatively low willingness to fund such improvements. To understand the implications of various investment levels and guide future planning, five capital investment scenarios were developed and assessed, both with and without new construction. These scenarios highlight the importance of strategic reinvestment and reveal how metrics like the FCI can mask critical infrastructure gaps if not interpreted in context. 7.7.3.1. Facility Condition and Capital Reinvestment Current LOS • Facility Condition Index (FCI): Needs Improvement (25.68%) • Annual capital reinvestment rate: Needs Improvement (58% of required funding). • Aging buildings, particularly recreational and cultural facilities, require modernization to meet evolving community needs. Public Engagement Results • Condition and maintenance of municipal buildings was rated important (65.4%) but had high neutral responses (25.6%). • Modernity and functionality of recreational facilities were rated highly (74.3%), showing strong demand for modernization. • Willingness to pay for modernization was low (18.4%), with 36.0% unwilling to support funding increases. - 262 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 123 Scenario Analysis 1. Current Year Capital Budget Without New Construction • Trends: The capital budget is highest during 2027–2029 due to significant planned renovations. This spike aligns with the previously mentioned projects such as renovations at George Ashe Library & Community Centre, O’Brien Arena, and the Civic Complex. • FCI Decline: In this scenario, the FCI decreases over time, indicating better facility conditions overall. However, the decrease in FCI is driven by significant capital investments, which improve overall asset values. This does not necessarily mean that all facilities are in good condition—some buildings may still require major rehabilitation, but the average FCI improves due to targeted investments in specific assets. FCI, as a metric, also does not capture service life remaining, which may override any benefit to capital reinvestment. Figure 41: Capital Budget Forecast and FCI Trends (Excluding New Construction) 2. Maintain FCI Without New Construction • Capital Budget: This scenario assumes funding levels that keep the Facility Condition Index (FCI) steady, at the current level, over time. The budget fluctuates to ensure facilities do not fall below a certain condition level, mainly by addressing overdue maintenance and preventing further deterioration. While this approach may seem cost-effective, it is important to 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% $- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 $35,000,000 $40,000,000 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Current Year Capital Budget Without New Construction Capital Budget FCI - 263 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 124 understand that a stable FCI doesn’t mean every facility is in good shape, it simply means the overall metric is not getting worse. Some buildings may still be aging and in poor condition, but their impact is balanced out by maintenance efforts elsewhere. • Stability of FCI: Unlike the current budget scenario, where large investments lower the FCI significantly, this approach maintains the current condition levels without major improvements. However, it is crucial to understand what this stability actually means. If FCI is kept steady at a low level, it implies facilities see regular and timely reinvestment. But if it stabilizes at a lower level, it could mean that many buildings are aging without necessary upgrades. Readers should compare the actual FCI values in each scenario to see the full picture—without this context, the option with the lowest cost might seem like the best choice when, in reality, it could lead to bigger problems in the long run, such as higher repair costs, safety concerns, or even facility closures. Figure 42: Capital Budget Plan to Maintain FCI (Excluding New Construction) 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% $- $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Maintain FCI Without New Construction Capital Budget FCI - 264 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 125 3. Historical Funding Levels Without New Construction • Rising FCI: The FCI increases over time in this scenario, as the capital budget is insufficient to address growing deferred maintenance. • Budget Impact: This trend demonstrates that without adequate capital investment, the condition of facilities worsens, leading to compounding maintenance needs or costly emergency repairs. Figure 43: Historical Capital Funding and FCI Trends (Excluding New Construction) 4. Capital Budget With New Construction • Capital Budget Spikes: Similar to the first scenario, there are significant spikes in the budget during 2027–2029. However, additional funds for new construction, such as the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library, Animal Shelter, Northern Operations Depot and Fire Stations, are evident. • Steeper FCI Decline: The inclusion of newly constructed facilities, which are in excellent condition, significantly lowers the overall FCI by inflating the overall value of the portfolio. This reflects skewed averages rather than consistent improvements across all facilities. Some facilities may still be in poor condition but will reflect a smaller proportion of the whole. 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% $- $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 $8,000,000 $9,000,000 $10,000,000 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Historical funding Levels Without New Construction Capital Budget FCI - 265 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 126 Figure 44: Capital Budget and FCI Trends with New Construction 5. Historical Budget With New Construction • Capital Budget Trends: The budget remains relatively flat, insufficient to address both deferred maintenance and new construction demands. • FCI Plateau: While new facilities slightly improve the average FCI, the insufficient budget fails to curb the growth of deferred maintenance, causing the FCI to plateau around 15% over time. 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% $- $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000 $200,000,000 $250,000,000 $300,000,000 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Proposed Budget with New Construction Capital Budget New Construction Budget FCI - 266 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 127 Figure 45: Historical Capital Budget and FCI Trends with New Construction Impact of Increasing the Total Portfolio When new construction is added to the portfolio, the Total Replacement Cost (TRC) increases accordingly, and significantly for large-scale projects. Since new construction has little to no deferred maintenance, initially, the deferred maintenance as a proportion of the total TRC temporarily decreases, artificially lowering the FCI for the portfolio. This gives the impression that the overall portfolio is in better condition than it actually is. The actual dollar value of required capital investment across the portfolio actually remains unchanged. The same cost is simply being compared against a higher TRC. Key Reasons for Skewed Results 1. Dilution of Deferred Maintenance: • The new buildings have no backlog of deferred maintenance, or projected reinvestment needs within five years, so, their inclusion effectively "dilutes" the overall ratio. • For example, adding a new $250 million recreation complex with no deferred maintenance will significantly lower the FCI of an existing portfolio worth $300 million, even if other older buildings still have substantial repair needs. 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% $- $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000 $200,000,000 $250,000,000 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Historical Budget with New Construction Capital Budget New Construction Budget FCI - 267 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 128 2. Averaging Across Diverse Conditions: • Facilities challenged with serious or severe deterioration leading to end of respective component lifecycles may remain underfunded while new buildings in pristine condition lower the FCI. This distorts the reality of the older facilities' poor conditions. 3. Neglected Deferred Maintenance Backlogs: • Older facilities often have deferred maintenance costs that exceed their available capital budgets, as owners hesitate to see the value in ongoing investment. The focus on constructing new facilities can push these issues further down the priority list, exacerbating long-term deterioration. There is a threshold beyond which reinvestment is no longer cost-effective, and where divesting the City of severely deteriorated assets should be considered. • Disposing of assets in poor condition, where reinvestment is not possible or not deemed an effective use of limited available resources, should be considered a viable option and will likewise reduce the FCI of the overall portfolio by eliminating assets with high deferred maintenance costs. 4. Misleading Portfolio Trends: • Stakeholders might interpret a declining FCI as an indicator of overall portfolio improvement, even though only specific new assets are driving this decline, not the repair or maintenance of existing ones. • FCI, while a valuable metric, is also not the only guiding principle or indicator for facilities asset management, as demonstrated in the Facilities Renewal Study. Example from the Data22 In the "Current Budget With New Construction" scenario: • The inclusion of major new projects such as the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library ($253 million) and the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre ($60 million) drastically increases the Total Replacement Value. • As a result, the overall FCI of the portfolio decreases, but older facilities would still have unresolved maintenance backlogs. • Severe deterioration of older facilities could go unnoticed in FCI trends due to the disproportionately large impact of new construction on the overall index. Separate tracking of asset life consumption is required, in addition to monitoring FCI, to fully capture the true state of the portfolio. 22 Applicable to other scenarios with new construction. - 268 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 129 Implications for Asset Management 1. Focus on Core Condition Metrics: • Instead of relying solely on FCI, it is important to examine specific metrics for aging facilities, such as individual building condition scores or component-level assessments (e.g., roof, HVAC systems). The City addresses this by maintaining the VFA database with much higher levels of detail for individual systems and components within its facilities. • Certain building systems, such as foundations and other major structural components, are never fully replaced. As they approach the end of their serviceable life, or deteriorate beyond a point of cost-effective repair, full replacement may eventually be required. Long-term strategic planning for eventual building replacement must be considered. 2. Highlighting the Deferred Maintenance Gap: • The absolute value of deferred maintenance should be tracked separately from the FCI to avoid overshadowing critical repairs needed for older assets. 3. Portfolio Segmentation: • Separating the analysis of newly constructed facilities from legacy facilities provides a clearer picture of the challenges within older assets. The City is maintaining the VFA database with much higher levels of detail for individual systems and components within its facilities. 4. Strategic Resource Allocation: • A balanced investment strategy is needed to ensure older facilities receive adequate funding or are decommissioned, while accommodating new construction. • In addition to addressing the funding gap, establishing and maintaining a suitable reserve fund to address peaks and valleys in deferred maintenance trends will be essential to avoiding occasional demand spikes where multiple expensive assets come due for repair or replacement simultaneously. Conclusion While FCI is a useful metric, its reliance on aggregate values like deferred maintenance and TRV expose its limitations such as when large-scale new construction is added to the portfolio. To address this, asset management practices should prioritize transparency in reporting, using multiple metrics, and provide a nuanced analysis of individual facility conditions, ensuring that the true state of aging infrastructure is not masked by the addition of new assets or other factors. - 269 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 130 Recommendations • Optimize Facility Investments with a Rationalization Strategy: Implement a facility rationalization plan that prioritizes reinvestment in high-use, critical facilities while identifying aging assets that have surpassed their viable service life. Establish a "beyond-repair" policy to systematically assess when reinvestment is no longer cost-effective, allowing strategic disposal, repurposing, or consolidation of underutilized or deteriorated assets. This would help to ensure that financial resources are allocated efficiently and that new investments align with long-term community needs. • Balance New Construction with Deferred Maintenance: While new projects improve the overall FCI, and the health of the portfolio, they should not overshadow urgent capital renewal needs in older buildings. A structured funding approach should ensure that both existing and new assets receive timely and adequate resources. • Leverage Grant Funding and Alternative Financing: Explore external funding sources, including government grants and public-private partnerships, to supplement capital reinvestment and reduce reliance on municipal budgets. • Develop a Long-Term Modernization Strategy: Establish a phased plan for modernizing recreational and cultural buildings to meet evolving community expectations and new technologies while maintaining financial sustainability. • Enhance Public Awareness and Engagement: Improve communication about the need for lifecycle investments and the long-term impact of deferred maintenance to build public support for sustainable infrastructure funding. • Track Deferred Maintenance Separately: Implement reporting mechanisms that separate deferred maintenance values from overall FCI trends to ensure transparency in the true condition of aging assets. • Strategic Asset Disposal and Renewal: Identify severely deteriorated assets where reinvestment is no longer viable and consider divestment, replacement, or repurposing to optimize the portfolio. • Establish a Reserve Fund for Facility Lifecycle Costs: Create a dedicated reserve to manage fluctuations in deferred maintenance demands, preventing unexpected spikes in required funding and ensuring long-term sustainability. Risks of Not Addressing Facility Condition • Accelerated Infrastructure Deterioration: Without timely reinvestment, facilities will continue to degrade, leading to higher repair costs and potential service disruptions. • Public Dissatisfaction and Reduced Service Levels: Outdated, underperforming facilities, especially recreational and cultural spaces, could result in lower community engagement, declining usage, and increased pressure to build new assets instead of maintaining existing ones. • Increased Operational and Energy Costs: Older buildings with inefficient systems and outdated infrastructure will continue to incur higher maintenance and utility costs, straining operational budgets. - 270 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 131 • Hidden Risks in FCI Trends: A declining FCI due to new construction may give the false impression of improvement while older facilities remain in poor or critical condition, potentially leading to unexpected failures. • Strained Financial Resources: Insufficient funding for deferred maintenance could result in emergency repairs, forced closures, or expensive last-minute interventions, impacting long-term financial planning. • Equity and Accessibility Challenges: Facilities in poor condition may become less accessible, unsafe, or non-compliant with modern standards, disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations. 7.7.3.2. Accessibility and Availability of Services Current LOS • Municipal buildings are generally accessible, with ongoing audits and improvement initiatives. • Recreational and cultural services23 are concentrated in South Pickering, leaving Central and North Pickering underserved. • Two new facilities - Pickering Heritage & Community Centre is expected to be operational in 2026, and Seaton Recreation Complex and Library is currently being considered. Public Engagement Results • Accessibility of municipal buildings was rated highly (76.8%). • Physical availability of library • and recreational spaces was the most important feature (78.8%). • Moderate support for improving accessibility (24.1% willing to pay), but 30.3% were unwilling. Recommendations • Expand accessibility-focused renovations to improve compliance with evolving standards and user needs. • Implement interim service delivery solutions (e.g., mobile libraries or pop-up recreation programs) in underserved areas until new facilities are operational. • Improve transportation links and accessibility for residents in areas with limited facility availability. 23 Cultural services are currently offered at the Pickering Museum Village in Central Pickering (Greenwood). With the upcoming opening of the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre, it will become a major hub for cultural services. - 271 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 132 • Combine accessibility improvements with other capital renewals for greater cost effectiveness and to minimize down time with multiple separate projects. Risk of Not Addressing Accessibility and Availability • Barriers to facility use for residents with mobility challenges. • Reduced engagement in recreational and cultural activities, particularly in underserved areas. • Potential non-compliance with accessibility legislation and best practices. 7.7.3.3. Maintenance and Lifecycle Management Current LOS • Facility inspections are conducted regularly by third-party and regulatory bodies. • Lifecycle management is structured but lacks a formal policy to guide long- term planning. • VFA Facilities database is used for tracking and planning capital renewal activities. Public Engagement Results • Maintenance of municipal buildings was rated important (65.4%), but 25.6% were neutral, suggesting a lack of awareness. • Satisfaction with facility condition was moderate (48.5%), with 39.7% neutral responses. • Willingness to pay for more frequent maintenance was low (24.7%), with 30.5% unwilling. Recommendations • Develop a formal lifecycle management policy to guide proactive asset maintenance and renewal. • Improve public communication about maintenance efforts to address neutral perceptions and build support for preventative investment. • Optimize inspection cycles and asset tracking to enhance efficiency and reduce reactive maintenance costs. • Implement technology solutions to improve preventative maintenance tracking, scheduling, and reporting. Risk of Not Improving Lifecycle Management • Deferred maintenance leading to accelerated deterioration of facilities. • Higher long-term costs due to increased reliance on reactive repairs. - 272 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 133 • Reduced public confidence in the municipality’s ability to manage infrastructure assets effectively. 7.7.3.4. Energy Efficiency and Sustainability Current LOS • Energy efficiency upgrades are targeted during equipment replacements, but there is no dedicated energy management policy. • The Corporate Energy Management Plan (CEMP) monitors and report annual energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions and is updated every five years. • Six out of 24 municipal buildings use Honeywell Building Management Systems for energy control. Public Engagement Results • Energy efficiency was rated important (59.7%) but had the highest neutral response (29.6%). • Satisfaction with energy efficiency was the lowest-rated category (38.4%), with 52.4% neutral responses. • Willingness to pay for energy efficiency improvements was low (20.7%), with 33.3% unwilling. Recommendations • Expand the implementation of energy management systems across all municipal facilities to optimize energy use. • Improve public awareness of energy-saving initiatives to address high neutrality and build support for sustainability measures. • Seek funding opportunities for green building retrofits to reduce the financial impact of energy efficiency investments. • Implement the recommendations of the 2024 CEMP to enhance the City’s ability analyze and better strategically set and achieve energy management goals. Risk of Not Addressing Energy Efficiency • Higher operational costs due to inefficient energy use. • Increased environmental impact and failure to meet sustainability targets. • Missed opportunities to access funding incentives for green infrastructure upgrades. - 273 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 134 8. Parks The City owns and operates several assets that fall under the Parks assets category. These assets are essential for the Parks’ service delivery. The asset segments include24: • Active Recreation Facilities • Amenities, Furniture & Utilities • Vehicular and Pedestrian Networks 8.1 Inventory & Valuation Table 27 includes the quantity, replacement cost method and total replacement cost of each asset segment in the City’s Parks asset inventory. Segment Sub-Segment Quantity Unit of Measure Replacement Cost Primary RC Method Active Recreation Facilities Playground Equipment 86 Each $6,773,085 User-Defined Active Recreation Facilities Sport Playing Surfaces 125 Each $22,844,467 User-Defined Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Buildings 33 Each $6,299,299 User-Defined Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Electrical/ Lighting 549 Each $11,324,556 User-Defined Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Site Furniture 433 Each $1,508,671 User-Defined Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Site Structures 611 Each $11,138,550 User-Defined Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Subsurface Infrastructure 171 Each $2,541,826 Cost per Unit 24 The asset inventory includes only traditional tangible capital assets and does not include natural assets. - 274 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 135 Segment Sub-Segment Quantity Unit of Measure Replacement Cost Primary RC Method Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Waterfront Infrastructure 10 Each $13,047,086 User-Defined Vehicular & Pedestrian Networks Parking Lots & Internal Roads 51,320 Square Meters $4,996,721 User-Defined Vehicular & Pedestrian Networks Pedestrian Corridors 94,413 Square Meters $15,197,162 User-Defined TOTAL $95,671,423 Table 27: Detailed Asset Inventory: Parks Figure 46: Portfolio Valuation: Parks 8.2 Asset Condition The City maintains a full breakdown of all Parks in its VFA database, which compiles and feeds summarized information into the AMP, and provides a more robust budgeting tool. The VFA database is further refined by staff observations, supported by third party consultant reviews. VFA provides a Parks Condition Index (Parks CI) value, currently reported at 12.08% A Parks Condition Index (Parks CI) score is a ratio of the total cost of identified parks’ repairs and renewals (i.e., component replacement) over a defined period $20.2m $29.6m $45.9m $20m $40m Vehicular & Pedestrian Networks Active Recreation Facilities Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Replacement Cost by Segment - 275 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 136 (the City uses 5 years) divided by the assets’ total estimated replacement cost. It is calculated using the formula: Parks CI = Requirement and Renewal Costs / Current Replacement Value A Parks CI of 0% indicates a park in excellent condition, with no outstanding capital investment backlog or deferred maintenance within the next five years. Parks with a CI less than 15% are considered to be in excellent condition, while those below 30% are considered good, requiring only minor maintenance. CI values under 45% reflect fair condition, indicating moderate needs. Parks with a CI below 60% are considered to be in poor condition, and those above 60% may require full renewal or disposal due to significant deterioration or deferred investment. The City maintains separate asset management software, similar to Facilities using VFA which reports a Parks CI of 12.08%. This suggests that while most park assets are in relatively good condition, ongoing maintenance and targeted reinvestment are necessary to prevent long-term deterioration. Without proper funding, aging park infrastructure—such as playgrounds, trails, and recreational amenities—may experience accelerated wear, leading to increased repair costs and potential service disruptions. To ensure that the City’s parks and recreational spaces continue to meet acceptable service levels, condition data of all individual systems and assets are actively monitored, and lifecycle management strategies are regularly updated. As park infrastructure ages, staff evaluate whether a combination of maintenance, rehabilitation, or full replacement is required to sustain asset performance and community access. This proactive approach ensures that parks remain safe, functional, and aligned with community needs, while optimizing available funding for long-term sustainability. 8.3 Age Profile An asset’s age profile comprises two key values: estimated useful life (EUL), or design life; and the percentage of EUL consumed. The EUL is the serviceable lifespan of an asset during which it can continue to fulfil its intended purpose and provide value to users, safely and efficiently. As assets age, their performance diminishes, often more rapidly as they approach the end of their design life. In conjunction with condition data, an asset’s age profile provides a more complete summary of the state of infrastructure. It can help identify assets that may be candidates for further review through condition assessment programs; inform the selection of optimal lifecycle strategies; and improve planning for potential replacement spikes. - 276 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 137 Figure 47: Estimated Useful Life vs. Asset Age: Parks Figure 47 illustrates the average current age of each parks asset type and its estimated useful life. Both values are weighted by the replacement cost of individual assets. Age analysis reveals that Active Recreation Facilities have exceeded their expected useful lives. On the contrary, Amenities, Furniture & Utilities are in the early stages of their expected useful lives. Moreover, Vehicles & Pedestrian Networks are quickly approaching the end of their useful life cycles. Age-based analysis would require intensive review of thousands of parks assets represented in the VFA database, as each of these will have its own established estimated useful life (EUL). Detailed analysis will be undertaken in regular updates to the City’s Parks and Open Space Asset Renewal Plan and as part of ongoing facilities and parks management efforts. Data and analysis provided in the City’s broader asset management plan is limited to high-level summaries to demonstrate overall trends and conditions. 8.4 Current Approach to Lifecycle Management The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. To ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meeting the needs of stakeholders, it is important to establish a lifecycle management strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration. The following table further expands on the City’s current approach to lifecycle management: 19.9 20.5 22.717.7 44.6 25.7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Active Recreation Facilities Amenities, Furniture & Utilities Vehicular & Pedestrian Networks Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL - 277 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 138 Activity Type Description of Current Strategy Maintenance The City’s parks maintenance program is tailored to each park and includes activities such as: • Garbage disposal • Grass cutting • Park and playground inspections & repairs • Park lighting inspections & repairs • Irrigation system inspections & repairs Rehabilitation / Replacement Determining Parks Capital and maintenance requirements involve analyzing several key sources of information, including: • Parks Condition Index (Park CI) • staff inspections • Maintenance and work order records • Master Plans • Stakeholder input Rehabilitation / Replacement Parks staff also receive feedback from park users that informs the development of both maintenance and capital plans. Table 28: Lifecycle Management Strategy: Parks 8.5 Forecasted Long-Term Replacement Needs Park Rehabilitation relies on determining the optimal time to replace systems to control costs and manage risks without jeopardizing Parks and operational standards. According to VFA, funding requirements for parks fluctuate significantly from year to year. In 2024, including carryovers, the capital budget for parks is $4.35 million, followed by a decline to $2.7 million in 2025 and $2.4 million in 2027. The funding levels then fluctuate, with the lowest allocation occurring in 2031 at $1.6 million, before increasing to $5 million in 2034. Beyond these variations, VFA data projects a stable funding requirement of $4.018 million per year from 2035 onwards (based on a 10-year average from 2025) to sustain park infrastructure. While this provides predictability in future planning, the earlier fluctuations highlight the need for strategic reinvestment to avoid accumulating maintenance backlogs. Without consistent funding in high-need years, aging playgrounds, trails, and recreational facilities may deteriorate, leading to higher long-term costs, accessibility challenges, and service disruptions. By leveraging VFA’s data-driven insights, the City can proactively allocate resources to ensure parks remain safe, functional, and aligned with community needs. A well- planned funding strategy will help prevent emergency repairs and ensure that park facilities continue to support recreational and environmental benefits for residents. A detailed 10-year capital replacement forecast can be found in Appendix A – 10- Year Capital Requirements. - 278 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 139 8.6 Risk Analysis 8.6.1 Risk to Current Asset Management Strategies Climate Change & Extreme Weather Events Flooding can impact programs and activities (e.g., soccer fields). Waterfront is a major flood risk area (two record high flooding levels have been recorded in the past 4 years). Erosion has been an ongoing issue, causing damages to waterfront infrastructure such as the break-wall. Furthermore, the waterfront infrastructure is deteriorating and suffering from premature wear from flooding, and also the sandblasting effect caused by the City’s natural sandy beach and wind. Infrastructure Design/Installation There are concerns with contractors and installation practices (e.g., grading and their impact on drainage and safety with grass cutting). 8.7 Levels of Service The City of Pickering is committed to providing high-quality services through its municipal parks, focusing on accessibility, reliability, performance, and affordability. The City believes everyone in the community should have access to well- maintained, accessible public spaces, including those with disabilities. To achieve this, the City invests in its parks and public spaces, ensuring they are safe and welcoming for all. Regular inspections and maintenance are carried out to prevent hazards and minimize the risk of accidents, ensuring that parks remain safe for public use. Performance and affordability are central to the City’s park management strategy. The City monitors park usage to identify areas for improvement, ensuring that parks meet the evolving needs of residents. In addition, the City remains dedicated to offering affordable services while maintaining high standards. The following tables summarize the City’s current service levels. Although Ontario Regulation 588/17 does not prescribe specific KPIs for non-core assets, the City has selected performance measures for inclusion in its Asset Management Plan (AMP). - 279 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 140 8.7.1 Community Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Accessibility Description of the availability of the recreational services supported by municipal parks and trails to residents in urban area Acceptable Updates to the recreation & parks master plan have been approved by council in 2024. The update includes per capita metrics for amenities such as tennis courts, playgrounds, trails, splash pads, and parkland, and compares amenities with neighbouring regions like Ajax, Whitby, and Oshawa. Public engagement is ongoing, considering factors like population density and urban-rural differences. Playgrounds are being upgraded to meet accessibility standards as they reach the end of their lifecycle, though heavy use near schools reduces their lifespan. The plan is updated every five years, with input from various City departments and technical metrics. Safety & Regulatory Description of the inspection process applied to park equipment and playgrounds Acceptable The City’s inspection process meets Ontario’s minimum safety standards. Table 29: Community Levels of Service: Parks - 280 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 141 8.7.2 Technical Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Accessibility Acres of parkland per 1,000 people Acceptable The current score is 1.76, more than the target level of 1.5 Accessibility Linear meters of trails per capita Acceptable The City has over 40 Kms of recreational trails, contributing to the current score to 0.39, which is above target. Reliability & Performance Average Parks Condition Index Excellent 12.08, which is below 15 Affordability Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Acceptable The actual reinvestment rate is just over 91% of the target rate, highlighting an adequate financial contribution to parks. Table 30: Technical Levels of Service: Parks - 281 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 142 8.7.3 Proposed Levels of Service The condition of the City’s parks and trails plays a vital role in supporting quality of life, physical activity, and community enjoyment. Current data shows that while many assets are in fair condition, portions of the network—particularly active recreation areas and trail infrastructure—are aging and will require increased attention over time. With capital reinvestment levels currently at 91% of what is required, the City is generally able to sustain service levels; however, this leaves limited capacity to address deferred needs and proactively modernize aging assets. This section provides recommendations based on the current Levels of Service (LOS) assessment, public engagement feedback, and risk analysis. Public input indicates strong support for maintaining safe, accessible, and well-equipped parks, though funding priorities vary across user groups. The recommendations aim to balance reinvestment in existing infrastructure with targeted expansion to meet community growth and evolving recreational needs. This analysis highlights the importance of long-term planning and strategic investment to prevent service decline and address condition challenges as they emerge. 8.7.3.1. Park Condition and Capital Reinvestment Current LOS • Average Parks Condition Index: Acceptable (12.08) • Annual capital reinvestment rate: Acceptable (91% of required funding). Public Engagement Results • Availability and accessibility of parkland was the highest-rated feature (83.5%). • Condition and safety of playgrounds and park equipment was also highly rated (82.0%). • Willingness to pay for improved maintenance was moderate (37.5%), but 25.8% were unwilling. Scenario Analysis 1. Current Budget Without New Park Development • Trends: The capital budget for parks fluctuates significantly, with the highest allocations occurring in 2024 and 2034 due to major planned maintenance and upgrades. Funding remains relatively low between 2030 and 2032, with the lowest point at $1.6 million in 2031, suggesting a period of limited investment in park assets. • Parks CI Impact: The Parks Condition Index (Parks CI) increases over time in this scenario, indicating a decline in overall park conditions. While the - 282 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 143 capital budget provides funding for some deferred maintenance, it is not enough to sustain improvements across all parks. Targeted investments in specific parks may lower their individual Parks CI, but many others may continue to deteriorate due to limited resources. Without additional investment, aging park amenities—including trails, playgrounds, and sports fields—may require emergency repairs, leading to higher long-term costs and potential service reductions. Figure 48: Capital Budget and Parks CI Trends Without New Park Development 2. Maintain FCI Without New Park Development • Capital Budget: This scenario assumes funding levels that keep the FCI steady over time, meaning that investment is sufficient to prevent further deterioration but does not significantly improve overall park conditions. The budget fluctuates between $2.5 million and $4.9 million but is designed to address only the most critical maintenance needs while maintaining a consistent service level. • Stability of Parks CI: Unlike the current budget scenario, where aging infrastructure continues to degrade, this approach stabilizes park conditions. However, stability does not mean that all parks are in good condition, it only prevents further decline. Some parks may still require major rehabilitation, but their condition is maintained at a functional level through incremental maintenance efforts. While this scenario appears cost-effective, it does not address long-term modernization needs, which may become more expensive in future years if investment is not increased. 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% $- $1,000,000.00 $2,000,000.00 $3,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $6,000,000.00 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Current Budget without New Construction Capital Budget Parks CI - 283 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 144 Figure 49: Capital Budget Plan to Maintain Parks CI Without New Park Development 3. Historical Funding Levels Without New Park Development Figure 50: Historical Capital Funding and Parks CI Trends Without New Park Development • Rising FCI: In this scenario, Parks CI increases steadily over time because historical funding levels are insufficient to keep up with growing deferred 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% $- $1,000,000.00 $2,000,000.00 $3,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $6,000,000.00 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Maintain FCI without New Construction Capital Budget Parks CI 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% $- $1,000,000.00 $2,000,000.00 $3,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $6,000,000.00 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Historical Funding Levels without New Construction Capital Budget Parks CI - 284 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 145 maintenance needs. The capital budget remains relatively flat, while parks’ conditions worsen, leading to compounding maintenance backlogs. • Budget Impact: Without additional investment, this scenario leads to a continuous decline in parks’ conditions. Playgrounds, trails, and sports fields may experience damages, safety hazards, and reduced usability, forcing higher emergency repair costs and, in some cases, closures. 4. Current Budget With New Park Development Figure 51: Capital Budget and Parks CI Trends With New Park Development • Capital Funding Volatility: While this scenario follows a similar overall funding pattern to the "No New Development" scenario, it features major capital budget spikes in 2026 and 2027 to support the creation of new parks and recreational amenities. These investments include expansions to green spaces and the development of new park infrastructure. Outside of these peak years, capital funding remains relatively flat, limiting the City's ability to address aging infrastructure in the rest of the network. • Artificial Improvement in Parks CI: The introduction of newly constructed parks—initially in excellent condition—temporarily lowers the overall Parks Condition Index (CI). However, this masks the continued decline of older parks that face significant deferred maintenance needs. As a result, the average CI improves on paper, but the condition of existing assets continues 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% $- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 $35,000,000 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Capital Budget with New Park Development Capital Budget New Construction Budget Parks CI - 285 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 146 to worsen, presenting an uneven service experience and growing long-term reinvestment needs. 5. Historical Budget With New Park Development • Capital Budget Trends: This scenario reflects the addition of new parks to the City’s portfolio, supported by large spikes in new construction funding in 2026 and 2027. Despite these one-time investments, the ongoing capital budget for maintenance remains consistently low throughout the period. As a result, while the network expands, there is no corresponding increase in reinvestment capacity, leading to a growing backlog of maintenance needs over time. • Parks CI Increase: Initially, the development of new parks—typically in excellent condition—lowers the overall Parks Condition Index (Parks CI). However, this improvement is temporary and does not reflect upgrades to older infrastructure. As aging parks continue to deteriorate without sufficient reinvestment, the Parks CI begins to climb steadily from 2027 onward. This creates a high financial risk scenario, where the City must simultaneously fund the maintenance of a larger asset base while struggling to address the condition decline of existing facilities. Figure 52: Historical Capital Funding and Parks CI Trends With New Park Development 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% 16.00% $- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 $35,000,000 2024 and carry overs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Historical Funding Levels with New Park Development Capital Budget New Construction Budget Parks CI - 286 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 147 Impact of Expanding the Park Portfolio Effect on Total Replacement Cost (TRC): When new parks are added, the Total Replacement Cost (TRC) of park assets increases significantly. Since new parks have little to no deferred maintenance, the proportion of deferred maintenance relative to the total portfolio temporarily decreases, artificially lowering the overall Parks CI. However, this may create the illusion of improved overall parks’ conditions, when in fact the condition of older parks, some of which may still be in critical condition, remains unchanged. The actual dollar value of required capital investment across the portfolio does not change; rather, the same cost is being compared against a higher TRC. Key Reasons for Skewed Parks CI Trends in Parks 1. Dilution of Deferred Maintenance • Newly developed parks have no immediate maintenance backlogs, or projected reinvestment needs within 5 years effectively diluting the Parks CI of the entire portfolio. • For example, adding a $50 million new park with no maintenance needs will significantly lower the overall Parks CI, even if existing parks still require major repairs. 2. Averaging Across Diverse Conditions • Some parks with severe deterioration may remain underfunded, while newly built parks in pristine condition lower the overall Parks CI. • This distorts the true state of aging park assets, as some parks may still be at potential risk for reduced performance or service. 3. Neglected Deferred Maintenance Backlogs • Older parks may have deferred maintenance costs exceeding available budgets, making it difficult to justify reinvestment. • The focus on developing new parks can cause existing parks to fall behind in funding priorities. • Park assets that are beyond repair should be assessed for potential removal or repurposing to optimize resource allocation and community usage. - 287 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 148 4. Misleading Portfolio Trends • Stakeholders might interpret a declining Parks CI as an indicator of overall portfolio improvement, even though only specific new assets are driving this decline, not the repair or maintenance of existing ones. • Separate tracking of older parks is necessary to fully capture their true condition. To address this, Parks and playgrounds are inspected monthly. This information is captured in CityReporter and helps provide background information to VFA in updating overall Park Assets Conditions. Implications for Park Asset Management 1. Focus on Core Condition Metrics • Instead of relying solely on Parks CI, the City should examine specific metrics for older parks, such as playground conditions, trail safety, and field usability. Currently, Parks have dedicated staff that completes inspections at parks. 2. Highlighting the Deferred Maintenance Gap • The total deferred maintenance value should be tracked separately to avoid overshadowing critical repairs needed for aging parks. 3. Portfolio Segmentation • Separating the analysis of newly built parks from aging parks will provide a clearer picture of maintenance challenges. This will help ensure that newer parks do not skew the total deferred maintenance results for the overall portfolio. 4. Strategic Resource Allocation • A balanced investment strategy is necessary to ensure older parks receive adequate funding while accommodating the growth of new parks. • Establishing a dedicated reserve fund will help manage fluctuations in deferred maintenance needs. Conclusion While Parks CI is a useful metric, it should not be the only measure used to assess parks’ conditions. The reliance on aggregate values like deferred maintenance and TRV expose its limitations, such as when new parks are introduced into the portfolio. To address these challenges, the City must prioritize transparency in reporting, using multiple metrics to provide a comprehensive analysis of parks’ conditions. Ensuring that aging parks do not fall behind in funding while expanding the park system strategically will be critical for maintaining long-term service levels. - 288 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 149 Recommendations • Prioritize Funding for Aging Parks and Trails: Focus reinvestment on parks, playgrounds, and trails in the worst condition, prioritizing upgrades based on community usage, safety concerns, and accessibility needs. Parks that have deteriorated beyond cost-effective rehabilitation should be assessed for removal, repurposing, or consolidation to optimize resources. • Ensure Sustainable Capital Funding: Maintain at least 91% of the required reinvestment rate to prevent deferred maintenance from accumulating. Avoid funding gaps that could accelerate asset deterioration and increase future rehabilitation costs. • Develop a Strategic Lifecycle Management Plan: Establish a proactive renewal and rehabilitation framework that outlines predictable funding needs for parks and trails. This plan should consider asset aging trends, major component replacements (e.g., playgrounds, pathways, and sports fields), and service level expectations. • Improve Transparency in Asset Condition Reporting: Separate the analysis of newly developed parks from older assets to prevent misleading trends in the Parks Condition Index (Parks CI). Reporting should highlight deferred maintenance backlogs independently from total park portfolio growth. • Enhance Public Communication and Engagement: Strengthen outreach efforts to increase awareness of park maintenance efforts, ensuring residents understand the need for ongoing investment and lifecycle planning. This can help build public support for infrastructure funding. • Optimize Resource Allocation for Expansion and Maintenance: Ensure that funding for new park developments includes long-term maintenance considerations. Establish a dedicated reserve fund to manage fluctuations in deferred maintenance needs, preventing financial strain during high- investment years. Risks of Not Addressing Park Condition • Accelerated Asset Deterioration: Without sufficient reinvestment, playgrounds, trails, and recreational spaces will degrade, leading to increased safety hazards, reduced usability, higher repair costs, and potential service disruptions. • Escalating Long-Term Rehabilitation Costs: Delaying necessary maintenance will result in higher costs for emergency repairs and full-scale replacements, straining future budgets. • Public Dissatisfaction and Reduced Community Engagement: Aging park infrastructure may deter public use, leading to lower participation in recreational activities and decreased overall satisfaction with City-provided services. • Misleading Perception of Park Conditions: Without segmented reporting, stakeholders may misinterpret improvements in FCI as widespread progress, even if aging parks remain underfunded and in poor condition. - 289 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 150 • Inefficient Use of Limited Funding: Failing to strategically phase out or repurpose deteriorated parks could lead to inefficient spending, where underutilized or unmaintainable parks consume a disproportionate share of available resources. 8.7.3.2. Accessibility and Availability of Parkland Current LOS • Acres of parkland per 1,000 people: Acceptable (1.76, above the target of 1.5). • Linear meters of trails per capita: Acceptable (0.39, above target). • Recreational services are primarily concentrated in urban areas, with some gaps in accessibility for suburban and rural areas. Public Engagement Results • Availability of parkland was the highest-rated feature (83.5%). • Availability of multi-use paths and trails was also strongly rated (77.7%). • Willingness to pay for expanded parkland was the highest among all categories (43.8%). Recommendations • Prioritize expansion of parkland in areas with limited access, particularly in developing neighbourhoods. • Enhance trail connectivity by linking existing networks to improve access to recreational spaces. • Implement accessibility-focused upgrades to ensure compliance with evolving standards. • Combine accessibility improvements with other capital renewals for greater cost effectiveness and to minimize down time with multiple separate projects. Risk of Not Addressing Accessibility and Availability • Unequal access to recreational spaces, particularly for residents in underserved areas. • Increased demand pressures on existing parkland, leading to overuse and accelerated deterioration. • Missed opportunities to enhance community well-being and support active lifestyles. - 290 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 151 8.7.3.3. Park Safety and Playground Equipment Condition Current LOS • Park equipment and playgrounds meet Ontario’s minimum safety standards. • Upgrades to playgrounds occur as they reach the end of their lifecycle, but high usage near schools accelerates wear. Public Engagement Results • Condition and safety of playgrounds was a top priority (82.0%). • Satisfaction with playground safety was the highest-rated category (58.8%). • Neutral responses were moderate (28.8%), suggesting room for improved awareness. Recommendations • Increase frequency of inspections and proactive maintenance to address accelerated wear in high-use areas. • Enhance public communication on playground safety initiatives to reduce neutral responses and reinforce confidence. • Target improvements in parks serving high-density neighbourhoods to balance wear and tear. Risk of Not Addressing Park Safety • Increased risk of injuries due to aging or damaged equipment. • Higher liability exposure for the municipality if safety concerns are not addressed. • Reduced public confidence in the quality of recreational facilities. 8.7.3.4. Environmental Sustainability and Green Space Preservation Current LOS • The City’s Recreation and Parks Ten Year Plan adopted in 2024includes sustainability metrics. • Green spaces are well-maintained, but public engagement results indicate mixed perceptions about preservation efforts. Public Engagement Results • Quality of green spaces and natural areas was highly rated (82.1%). • Satisfaction with environmental preservation was moderate (51.0%), but neutral responses were high (32.4%). - 291 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 152 • Willingness to pay for environmental preservation was lower (35.8%), with 26.7% unwilling. Recommendations • Develop and implement a long-term environmental sustainability strategy for parks, focusing on native planting and biodiversity. • Enhance public engagement on conservation efforts to improve awareness and support for sustainability initiatives. • Leverage funding opportunities for ecological restoration projects to offset costs. Risk of Not Addressing Environmental Sustainability • Loss of biodiversity and ecological degradation in parks and natural areas. • Higher maintenance costs for non-native plantings and artificial landscapes. • Public perception that environmental efforts are insufficient, reducing support for future investments. - 292 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 153 9. Other Infrastructure The City owns and maintains several Other Infrastructure that provide key services to the community. These Other Infrastructure fall under the following categories: • Furniture & Fixtures • Information Technology • Library Collection Materials25 • Machinery & Equipment • Vehicles 9.1 Inventory & Valuation Table 31 includes the quantity, replacement cost method and total replacement cost of each asset segment in the City’s Other Infrastructure inventory. Segment Sub- Segment Quantity Unit of Measure Replacement Cost Primary RC Method Furniture &Fixtures Furniture& Fixtures 833 Assets $2,314,157 CPI Information Technology Information Technology 903 Assets $2,829,398 CPI Library Collection Materials Library Collection Materials 9 Assets $1,671,930 CPI Machinery& Equipment Major Machinery& Equipment 36 Assets $10,129,284 User- Defined Machinery& Equipment Minor Machinery& Equipment 1,534 Assets $9,916,874 CPI Vehicles Fire Vehicles 12 Assets $22,000,000 User- Defined Vehicles Vehicles 137 Assets $16,494,660 User- Defined Total $65,356,303 25 Through the Current Budget, the Library purchases an additional $300,000 per year in short term Library collection assets such as e-books and magazines that is not reflected in the above Library long term assets. - 293 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 154 Table 31: Detailed Asset Inventory: Other Infrastructure Figure 53: Portfolio Valuation: Other Infrastructure 9.2 Asset Condition Figure 54: Asset Condition: Other Assets Overall Figure 54 summarizes the replacement cost-weighted condition of the City’s portfolio. Based primarily on age-based data, 52% of assets are in fair or better condition, with the remaining 48% in poor or worse condition. These assets may be $1.7m $2.3m $2.8m $20.0m $38.5m $10m $20m $30m $40m $50m Library Collection… Furniture & Fixtures Information Technology Machinery & Equipment Vehicles Replacement Cost by Segment Very Poor, $21,092,585 (32%) Poor, $10,661,743 (16%) Fair, $12,808,304 (20%) Good, $10,827,497 (17%) Very Good, $9,966,174 (15%) - 294 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 155 candidates for replacement in the short term; similarly, assets in fair condition may require rehabilitation or replacement in the medium term and should be monitored for further degradation in condition. Figure 55 summarizes the condition of vehicles by each department. The majority of all vehicles across all asset segments are in poor or worse condition. Figure 55: Asset Condition: Other Assets by Segment 9.3 Age Profile An asset’s age profile comprises two key values: estimated useful life (EUL), or design life; and the percentage of EUL consumed. The EUL is the serviceable lifespan of an asset during which it can continue to fulfil its intended purpose and provide value to users, safely and efficiently. As assets age, their performance diminishes, often more rapidly as they approach the end of their design life. In conjunction with condition data, an asset’s age profile provides a more complete summary of the state of infrastructure. It can help identify assets that may be candidates for further review through condition assessment programs; inform the selection of optimal lifecycle strategies; and improve planning for potential replacement spikes. Figure 56 illustrates the average current age of each asset type and its estimated useful life. Both values are weighted by the replacement cost of individual assets. $5.3m $4.7m $6.5m $3.0m $221k $441k $662k $6.5m $4.2m $560k $909k $630k $6.4m $2.9m $287k $564k $577k $13.9m $5.3m $604k $917k $446k 0%20%40%60%80%100% Vehicles Machinery & Equipment Library Collection… Information Technology Furniture & Fixtures Value and Percentage of Asset Segments by Replacement Cost Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor - 295 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 156 Figure 56: Estimated Useful Life vs. Asset Age: Other Infrastructure Assets Age analysis reveals that, on average, most assets are in moderate stages of their expected life. 9.4 Current Approach to Lifecycle Management The condition or performance of most assets will deteriorate over time. To ensure that municipal assets are performing as expected and meeting the needs of customers, it is important to establish a lifecycle management strategy to proactively manage asset deterioration. The following section outlines the City’s current lifecycle management strategy. Fleet: Vehicles, Machinery, and Equipment • Maintenance: o Preventative and corrective maintenance is regularly performed to minimize downtime. o Vehicles undergo regular inspections, with CVOR vehicles inspected 3-4 times a year and non-CVOR vehicles inspected up to 4 times annually. o Fire trucks and emergency support vehicles comply with NFPA standards and undergo rigorous annual testing. o Equipment is maintained through a lifecycle strategy, with 4-10 pieces replaced and 3-5 new units added annually. 11.2 4.6 4.4 6.8 9 19.7 5.7 6.6 10.7 11.9 0 5 10 15 20 25 Furniture & Fixtures Information Technology Library Collection Materials Machinery & Equipment Vehicles Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL - 296 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 157 • Replacement: o Vehicles and equipment are replaced based on age, condition, repair costs, warranties, and total cost of ownership. o Residual values from disposed assets are reinvested into the reserve fund for future replacements. o A data-driven approach ensures optimal fleet performance, though challenges exist in funding sustainable capital reinvestment. • Inspection: o Fleet assets are closely monitored using digital platforms that track fuel consumption, idle time, mileage, and engine status. o Unplanned maintenance accounts for 20-25% of all vehicle repairs. o The City’s 7 pumper trucks undergo annual pump testing by external specialists. Information Technology (IT) Assets • Maintenance: o Strong cybersecurity measures, including Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA), ensure data security. o Regular updates and system monitoring help maintain performance. • Replacement: o Best practices recommend a five-year replacement cycle for IT hardware, but staffing limitations hinder implementation. o The IT department has requested additional resources to improve asset management. • Inspection: o Ongoing security assessments identify vulnerabilities and assess access control. Library Collection • Maintenance: o Managed in alignment with the Pickering Public Library Strategic Plan. o Routine assessments ensure accessibility and relevance of materials. - 297 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 158 • Replacement: o Library materials are periodically updated to maintain high service levels. o Funding constraints impact the ability to replace materials at the optimal rate. • Inspection: o Regular audits of library collections ensure compliance with public demand and accessibility standards. Furniture & Fixtures • Maintenance: o Municipal and library furniture is maintained to provide a comfortable and accessible environment. o Adjustable-height desks and AODA-compliant pathways enhance accessibility. • Replacement: o Accessibility improvements continue to be a priority, but funding limitations affect the rate of new acquisitions. • Inspection: o Periodic assessments identify areas for improvement, ensuring compliance with accessibility standards. 9.5 Forecasted Long-Term Replacement Needs Figure 57 illustrates the cyclical short-, medium- and long-term infrastructure replacement requirements for the City’s other infrastructure portfolio. This analysis was run until 2059 to capture at least one iteration of replacement for the longest- lived asset in Citywide Assets, the City’s primary asset management system and asset register. The City’s average annual requirements (red dotted line) total $6.6 million for all assets. Although actual spending may fluctuate substantially from year to year, this figure is a useful benchmark value for annual capital expenditure targets (or allocations to reserves) to ensure projects are not deferred and replacement needs are met as they arise. - 298 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 159 Replacement needs are expected to increase from 2025 with a forecasted peak of $37.1 million for the 2045-2049 period, as assets reach the end of their useful life. These projections and estimates are based on asset replacement costs and age analysis. They are designed to provide a long-term, portfolio-level overview of capital needs and should be used to support improved financial planning over several decades. Figure 57: Forecasted Capital Replacement Needs: Vehicles 2025-2059 Often, the magnitude of replacement needs is substantially higher than most municipalities can afford to fund. In addition, most assets may not need to be replaced. However, quantifying and monitoring these spikes is essential for long- term financial planning, including establishing dedicated reserves. In addition, a robust risk framework will ensure that high-criticality assets receive proper and timely lifecycle intervention, including replacements. A detailed 10-year capital replacement forecast can be found in Appendix A – 10- Year Capital Requirements. $6.6m $10.8m $27.2m $34.3m $30.4m $32.4m $37.6m $26.5m $37.8m $0 $5m $10m $15m $20m $25m $30m $35m $40m Backlog 2025 - 2029 2030 - 2034 2035 - 2039 2040 - 2044 2045 - 2049 2050 - 2054 2055 - 2059 Fo r e c a s t e d C a p i t a l R e q u i r e m e n t s Furniture & Fixtures Information Technology Library Collection Materials Machinery & Equipment Vehicles Annual Requirement Total - 299 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 160 9.6 Risk Analysis The risk matrix below is generated using available asset data, including condition, service life remaining, replacement costs, and department or service area. The risk ratings for assets without useful attribute data were calculated using only condition, service life remaining, and their replacement costs. The matrix stratifies assets based on their individual probability and consequence of failure, each scored from 1 to 5. Their product generates a risk index ranging from 1-25. Assets with the highest criticality and likelihood of failure receive a risk rating of 25; those with lowest probability of failure and lowest criticality carry a risk rating of 1. As new data and information is gathered, the Municipality may consider integrating relevant information that improves confidence in the criteria used to assess asset risk and criticality. These risk models have been built into the City’s Asset Management Database (Citywide Assets). See Risk & Criticality section for further details on approach used to determine asset risk ratings and classifications. Figure 58: Risk Matrix: Other Infrastructure Assets 9.7 Levels of Service The City of Pickering is dedicated to providing high-quality service through its fleet of municipal vehicles, machinery, equipment, and other assets. These resources are managed to ensure reliability, safety, and efficiency in delivering the services residents rely on. While current maintenance practices for vehicles, machinery, and equipment are effective, a thorough assessment of funding and resources is needed to meet future demands. This includes evaluating maintenance schedules, asset lifespans, and future City growth, ensuring that fleet operations remain efficient and capable of meeting evolving needs. Additionally, the City is committed to maintaining its IT systems, library collections, and municipal furniture and fixtures to high standards. Similarly, municipal furniture and fixtures are well-maintained, but long-term funding and resource allocation should be evaluated to ensure sustainability. The City’s library collection materials are managed in line with the Pickering Public Library Facilities Plan. The following tables summarize the City’s current levels of service, with KPIs reflecting performance measures for non-core assets as selected by the City. 1 - 4 5 - 7 8 - 9 10 - 14 15 - 25 Very Low Low Moderate High Very High $7,295,311 $10,247,705 $4,120,942 $10,240,964 $33,451,381 (11%)(16%)(6%)(16%)(51%) - 300 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 161 9.7.1 Community Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale Reliability & Performance Vehicles Description of lifecycle management strategies and assessment programs applied to municipal vehicles Acceptable The municipal fleet's lifecycle management strategy ensures optimal vehicle availability through advanced practices. With only 2.5% of the 200-vehicle fleet unserviceable, well below the 5% target, the strategy uses a comprehensive platform to monitor fuel consumption, idle time, mileage, and engine status for efficiency. Vehicle maintenance is closely tracked, with 20-25% being unplanned, while the fleet management program ensures timely regular and unplanned maintenance for various municipal services, minimizing downtime and extending vehicle lifespan. Table 32: Community Levels of Service: Vehicles - 301 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 162 9.7.2 Technical Levels of Service Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale26 Reliability & Performance (Vehicles) How many vehicles are unserviceable at any time Acceptable 2.5% - based on staff inputs Reliability & Performance (Vehicles) Average condition for municipal vehicles Needs Improvement 32 – Calculated from Citywide Reliability & Performance (Vehicles) Percentage of vehicles in poor or worse condition Needs Improvement 70% - Calculated from Citywide 26 The conditions calculated from citywide are strictly age-based and might not be reflective of a vehicle’s actual condition. - 302 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 163 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale26 Safety & Regulatory Compliance (Vehicles) Description of the municipal vehicle management and safety program Acceptable PMA (light service and safety inspection) and PMB (complete vehicle service) inspections and repairs are conducted 3-4 times a year for CVOR vehicles (GVW > 4,500 kg), typically with one vehicle inspected per week. Non-CVOR vehicles, such as passenger cars and SUVs, are inspected up to 4 times a year, with five vehicles inspected weekly. Fire trucks and support vehicles, including command and rescue trucks, are inspected and repaired every 18 months to meet NFPA standards. Additionally, the City’s 7 pumper trucks undergo annual pump testing, performed by Dependable22 in collaboration with the City’s mechanics, with the process taking up to three days. Affordability (Vehicles) Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Acceptable The actual reinvestment rate is just over 81% of the target rate. - 303 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 164 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale26 Reliability & Performance (Machinery & Equipment) Description of lifecycle management strategies and assessment programs applied to municipal machinery and equipment assets Acceptable The lifecycle management strategy replaces 4-10 pieces of equipment annually and adds 3-5 new units. Equipment is replaced based on factors like deterioration, repair costs, warranties, and total cost of ownership (TCO). Residual value from replaced equipment is reinvested into the reserve fund for future replacements. Growth-related needs are also considered in lifecycle management for expansion projects. Reliability & Performance (Machinery & Equipment) Average condition for municipal machinery and equipment Needs Improvement 32 – Calculated from Citywide Reliability & Performance (Machinery & Equipment) Percentage of machinery and equipment in poor or worse condition Needs Improvement 41% - Calculated from Citywide - 304 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 165 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale26 Affordability (Machinery & Equipment) Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Needs Improvement The actual reinvestment rate is just over 3% of the target rate, highlighting a potential risk of infrastructure deterioration if reinvestment levels remain low. Reliability & Performance (Information Technology) Description of the initiatives employed to maintain the services provided by information technology assets Needs Improvement The IT department faces staffing limitations, prompting a proposal to the council for additional resources. While best practices suggest replacing laptops every five years, the department struggles to meet this due to staffing constraints. Additionally, improvements are needed for security controls and equipment. On a positive note, cybersecurity measures are strong, with Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) effectively implemented. Overall, while there are strengths, improvements are needed, particularly in staffing, to meet operational standards and best practices. - 305 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 166 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale26 Affordability (Information Technology) Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Needs Improvement The actual reinvestment rate is just over 22% of the target rate, indicating a potential risk of infrastructure deterioration if reinvestment continues at these low levels. Reliability & Performance (Furniture & Fixtures) Description of the initiatives employed to make library furniture and fixtures more accessible Needs Improvement The library provides accessible features like adjustable-height desks, but more accessible furniture is needed. Pathways meet AODA standards with at least three feet of aisle space for mobility aids, and shelving is placed at varying heights with glare-reducing lighting. Ongoing assessments drive continuous improvements to enhance accessibility for all patrons. Affordability (Furniture & Fixtures) Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Acceptable The actual reinvestment rate is just over 76% of the target rate. - 306 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 167 Service Attribute Key Performance Indicator Current LOS (2024) Rationale26 Affordability (Library Collection Material) Annual sustainable capital reinvestment/required capital reinvestment rate Needs Improvement Material costs are increasing at a higher rate than funding, resulting in a need for further investment. Table 33: Technical Levels of Service: Other Infrastructure Assets - 307 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 168 9.7.3 Proposed Levels of Service This section provides recommendations for municipal vehicles, machinery & equipment, information technology (IT), furniture & fixtures, library collections, and fire services based on the current Levels of Service (LOS) assessment, public engagement results, and risk analysis. The recommendations focus on modernization, reliability, affordability, and accessibility, ensuring that these assets continue to support service delivery effectively while considering funding constraints and public priorities. 9.7.3.1. Municipal Vehicles Current LOS • Unserviceable Vehicles at Any Time: Acceptable (2.5% of fleet, below the 5% target). • Average Vehicle Condition: Needs Improvement (Score: 32). • Percentage of Vehicles in Poor or Worse Condition: Needs Improvement (70%). • Annual Sustainable Capital Reinvestment Rate: Acceptable (81% of the required funding). Public Engagement Results • Availability of services provided by municipal vehicles was the highest-rated feature (87.7%). • Environmental impact of municipal vehicle operations was rated important by 55.5%, but neutrality was high (27.1%). • Willingness to pay for environmentally friendly vehicle initiatives was low (18.4%), with 41.4% unwilling. Condition and Budget Scenarios This graph illustrates the projected condition of vehicle assets over time under two budget scenarios: the Optimal Budget (blue line) and the Current Budget (green line), which is 81% of the Optimal Budget. The vertical axis represents asset condition as a percentage, while the horizontal axis spans the years from 2025 to 2074. The background shading categorizes condition ranges, with green (80-100%) representing excellent condition, blue (60-80%) indicating good condition, yellow (40-60%) reflecting fair condition, orange (20-40%) signifying poor condition, and red (0-20%) marking critical condition. Under the Optimal Budget, vehicle condition gradually improves and stabilizes in the fair-to-good range, while the Current Budget scenario results in a lower trajectory, remaining mostly within the fair and poor condition zones. The fluctuations in both scenarios suggest periodic reinvestments, but the widening gap between the two highlights the long-term impact of constrained funding. Without additional investment, the Current Budget - 308 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 169 scenario leads to a gradual decline in asset condition, potentially increasing future replacement costs and reducing service reliability. In contrast, maintaining the Optimal Budget ensures a more stable and sustainable asset condition over the long term. - 309 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 170 Figure 59: Projected Vehicle Asset Condition Under Optimal vs. Current Budget Scenarios - 310 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 171 Recommendations • Prioritize replacement of vehicles in poor or worse condition while maintaining fleet availability. • Develop a dedicated capital reinvestment strategy to ensure long-term fleet sustainability. • Enhance public awareness of fleet modernization efforts to improve perceptions of efficiency and environmental impact. Risk of Not Addressing Vehicle Condition • Increased service disruptions and higher maintenance costs. • Reduced reliability of emergency and service vehicles, impacting municipal operations. • Negative public perception regarding environmental sustainability. 9.7.3.2. Municipal Machinery & Equipment Current LOS • Average Condition of Equipment: Needs Improvement (Score: 32). • Percentage of Equipment in Poor or Worse Condition: Needs Improvement (41%). • Annual Sustainable Capital Reinvestment Rate: Needs Improvement (3% of required funding). Public Engagement Results • Public awareness of machinery and equipment management was low. • No specific dissatisfaction was recorded, but neutrality was high, indicating limited public visibility. Condition and Budget Scenarios This graph illustrates the projected condition of Machinery & Equipment assets over time under two budget scenarios: the Optimal Budget (blue line) and the Actual Budget (green line), which is only 3% of the Optimal Budget. The vertical axis represents the asset condition as a percentage, while the horizontal axis spans the years from 2025 to 2074. The background shading categorizes condition levels: green (80-100%) represents excellent condition, blue (60-80%) indicates good condition, yellow (40-60%) reflects fair condition, orange (20-40%) signifies poor condition, and red (0-20%) marks critical condition. Under the Optimal Budget, the asset condition remains relatively stable within the fair-to-good range, ensuring a sustainable level of service. However, with the Actual - 311 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 172 Budget at only 3% of the Optimal Budget, the condition rapidly deteriorates, falling into the poor and critical ranges within the first decade. By 2035, the assets are essentially non-functional, with condition levels approaching 0%, indicating a complete failure. This dramatic decline highlights the severe consequences of insufficient funding, leading to accelerated deterioration, increased maintenance costs, and ultimately the need for premature replacements. Without a significant increase in investment, the current funding strategy is unsustainable and will likely result in equipment failures that compromise operational efficiency and service delivery. - 312 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 173 Figure 60: Projected Machinery & Equipment Asset Condition Under Optimal vs. Current Budget Scenarios - 313 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 174 Recommendations • Increase reinvestment in machinery and equipment to address funding gaps. • Ensure replacement cycles align with asset performance data to maintain efficiency. • Improve transparency in capital reinvestment planning to build public understanding. Risk of Not Addressing Equipment Condition • Higher lifecycle costs due to reactive maintenance. • Potential operational inefficiencies in municipal service delivery. • Increased safety risks for staff using outdated equipment. 9.7.3.3. Information Technology (IT) Current LOS • IT Performance: Needs Improvement (Staffing limitations impact replacement cycles). • Security & Reliability: Strong cybersecurity practices, but improvements needed in staffing and infrastructure. • Annual Sustainable Capital Reinvestment Rate: Needs Improvement (22% of required funding). Public Engagement Results • Reliability and security of IT systems were the highest-rated feature (77.7%). • Accessibility and user-friendliness of online services were also highly prioritized (76.9%). • Willingness to pay for improved IT services was low (24.5%), with 33.6% unwilling. Condition and Budget Scenarios This graph illustrates the projected condition of Information Technology (IT) assets over time under two budget scenarios: the Optimal Budget (blue line) and the Current Budget (green line), which is 22% of the Optimal Budget. The vertical axis represents the asset condition as a percentage, while the horizontal axis spans the years from 2025 to 2074. The background shading categorizes condition levels: green (80-100%) represents excellent condition, blue (60-80%) indicates good condition, yellow (40-60%) reflects fair condition, orange (20-40%) signifies poor condition, and red (0-20%) marks critical condition. - 314 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 175 Under the Optimal Budget, IT assets maintain a relatively stable condition within the fair-to-good range, ensuring adequate service levels. However, under the Current Budget, condition levels decline sharply, dropping into the poor and critical ranges within the first decade. By 2035, IT assets are operating at minimal functionality, with condition values remaining in the red zone, signifying an urgent need for replacement. The long-term impact of underfunding IT assets includes increased system failures, cybersecurity risks, and operational inefficiencies. Without increased investment, IT infrastructure will continue to degrade, leading to higher emergency costs, reduced performance, and potential service disruptions. - 315 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 176 Figure 61: Projected IT Asset Condition Under Optimal vs. Current Budget Scenarios - 316 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 177 Recommendations • Increase IT staffing levels to support service delivery and meet best practices. • Prioritize cybersecurity investments while improving system accessibility and performance. • Enhance public communication on IT upgrades to justify investment needs. Risk of Not Addressing IT Performance • Increased vulnerability to cybersecurity threats. • Reduced efficiency of municipal operations due to outdated systems. • Diminished public trust in digital municipal services. 9.7.3.4. Furniture & Fixtures (Library & Public Spaces) Current LOS • Accessibility: Needs Improvement (Additional accessible furniture required). • Annual Sustainable Capital Reinvestment Rate: Acceptable (76% of required funding). Public Engagement Results • Accessibility of library furniture was a moderate concern. • High neutrality in responses suggested a lack of public awareness of ongoing improvements. Recommendations • Continue replacing and upgrading furniture to enhance accessibility. • Ensure new acquisitions comply with accessibility legislation. • Increase public engagement on accessibility improvements. Risk of Not Addressing Accessibility in Furniture & Fixtures • Limited access for individuals with disabilities. • Potential non-compliance with accessibility regulations. • Public perception of municipal facilities is not inclusive. - 317 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 178 9.7.3.5. Library Collection Materials Current LOS • Annual Sustainable Capital Reinvestment Rate: Needs Improvement. Public Engagement Results • Availability and accessibility of library materials were rated highly important (70.9%). • Diversity and relevance of collections were moderately important (61.1%) but had the highest neutral responses (25.0%). • Willingness to pay for library collection expansion was low (27.4%), with 42.2% unwilling. Recommendations • Continue structured reinvestment in library collections to ensure diversity and relevance. • Improve outreach efforts to highlight the benefits of digital and physical collections. • Ensure ongoing alignment with evolving community needs. Risk of Not Addressing Library Collection Needs • Declining engagement with library services due to outdated materials. • Limited availability of digital and physical collections to support diverse community needs. • Public dissatisfaction with library resources. - 318 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 179 Strategies - 319 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 180 10. Growth The demand for infrastructure and services will change over time based on a combination of internal and external factors. Understanding the key drivers of growth and demand will allow the City to plan for new infrastructure more effectively, as well as upgrade or dispose of existing infrastructure. Increases or decreases in demand can affect what assets are needed and what level of service meets the needs of the community. 10.1 Pickering Official Plan Review Growth Management & Urban Structure Discussion Papers (November 2024) 10.1.1 Overview of Growth Trends The above-noted discussion paper quotes from the Durham Regional Official Plan, which was approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on December 13, 2024. The Region allocates the City of Pickering significant growth to 2051. Pickering’s population expected to increase from approximately 100,000 to 256,370 residents and employment reaching 93,790 jobs. This rapid growth necessitates careful planning and investment in infrastructure services to ensure sustainable development while maintaining high-quality services for residents and businesses. 10.1.2 Implications for Infrastructure Services As Pickering expands, the demand for infrastructure services—including transportation, regional water & wastewater, stormwater management, and community facilities—will increase. The City must ensure that its asset management strategies align with projected growth to support sustainable and efficient service delivery. • Transportation and Road Networks: The intensification of urban areas, particularly in Strategic Growth Areas such as the City Centre, Kingston Road Corridor, and Brock Road Node, will require enhanced road networks and transit services to support increased population density. Investment in road rehabilitation, bridge maintenance, and active transportation infrastructure will be critical to accommodate both residents and commercial growth. • Regional Water and Wastewater Services: With growth in Seaton and the planned Northeast Pickering expansion, the City must ensure the capacity and timing of Regional water and wastewater infrastructure, and other utility providers such as Enbridge gas, and hydro, are sufficient to support new residential and employment areas. Coordination with regional authorities and other utility providers will be essential to align long-term service strategies with expected population increases. - 320 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 181 • Stormwater and Climate Resilience: The intensification of Pickering’s urban areas will impact stormwater management systems, necessitating infrastructure upgrades to mitigate flooding risks and support climate resilience. The City’s asset management plan should incorporate green infrastructure solutions and enhanced drainage systems. • Community Facilities and Public Services: The rising population will increase the demand for recreational facilities, parks, libraries, and emergency services. Strategic planning will be needed to ensure adequate space, funding, and operational efficiency for these public services. 10.1.3 Employment Growth and Infrastructure Demand Employment in Pickering is expected to more than double by 2051, requiring expanded infrastructure to support economic growth. Employment growth will be concentrated on: • Innovation Corridor (Seaton): A major employment hub, requiring investment in road networks, transit access, and servicing capacity to attract businesses. • Northeast Pickering Employment Area: Pending provincial approvals, this area will need infrastructure investment to support industrial, commercial, and mixed employment uses. • Mixed-Use and Transit-Oriented Development Areas: The shift towards mixed-use developments in Strategic Growth Areas will necessitate infrastructure upgrades to support live-work environments, integrating commercial and residential spaces with reliable transit connections. 10.1.4 Asset Management Strategies for Growth To accommodate growth while maintaining fiscal responsibility, Pickering’s asset management strategies should include: • Data-Driven Planning: Utilizing updated growth forecasts on an annual basis to prioritize infrastructure investments, based on long-term needs. • Lifecycle Cost Analysis: Ensuring that new infrastructure investments consider long-term maintenance and renewal costs to optimize service delivery. • Integrated Planning with Regional Authorities: Aligning Pickering’s infrastructure investments with the Region of Durham’s Official Plan and the Region’s capital and infrastructure investment strategies. • Sustainable Infrastructure Solutions: Implementing green building practices, low-impact development (LID) for stormwater management, and energy- efficient infrastructure upgrades. - 321 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 182 10.1.5 Conclusion Pickering’s projected growth presents opportunities for economic development and enhanced community services, but it also brings challenges in maintaining infrastructure services. The City’s 2025 Asset Management Plan must proactively address these challenges by ensuring that infrastructure investments align with anticipated population and employment growth while maintaining service levels and financial sustainability. 10.2 Pickering Official Plan – Edition 9 (March 2022) In 1997, the City of Pickering (Corporation of the Town of Pickering, at the time) and the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham approved the Official Plan. The Official Plan lays the “foundation” for building a good community. As a foundation, it provides a vision of the City, identifies how the vision can be reached, and establishes a monitoring program for checking progress and making necessary adjustments. The last consolidation of the plan was in March 2022. This vision of the plan can be translated into the following set of guiding principles for Pickering’s future growth and development: A. To meet people’s needs while ensuring environmentally appropriate actions. B. To become more self-sufficient while seeking broader connections. C. To support individual rights while upholding community goals. D. To welcome diversity while respecting local context, and E. To manage change while recognizing uncertainty. Future growth in the City is centered principally around redevelopment and intensification in the Pickering City Centre and on lands along the Kingston Road Corridor and within the Specialty Retailing Node (located east of Brock Road, north of Highway 401 and south of Kingston Road), new development within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood and the Seaton Urban Area. 10.2.1 The City Centre The Pickering Official Plan supports growth in all portions of the City Centre and restricts new residential development in City Centre south of Highway 401 to 6,300 people or 3,400 units by 2031 until at least an additional 2,000 people or 1,100 new units have been developed on lands north of Highway 401 in the City Centre. Furthermore, the South Pickering Urban Area Employment Target Policy adopts an employment target for the City Centre of 13,500 jobs for the year 2031, which represents adding 8,800 jobs to the area. Moreover, the total population in the City Centre is expected to grow from 5,100 (2011) to 13,500 by 2031. - 322 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 183 10.2.2 The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node The Pickering Official Plan has been amended by the approval of Official Plan Amendment 38, providing a comprehensive policy framework for the redevelopment and intensification of the lands along the Kingston Road Corridor and within the Specialty Retailing Node, with the exception of a number of properties which, at the time of this report, were still the subject of site-specific appeals. The potential mix of uses and densities along the Corridor and within the Node is expected to yield a total of 22,000 population and 8,100 jobs by 2041. A map depicting the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan Area can be found below. - 323 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 184 Figure 62: Location Map - Kingston Road Corridor - 324 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 185 10.2.3 The Duffin Hights Neighbourhood The development of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood, located north of Third Concession Road and centered around Brock Road, kicked off in 2011. According to the City’s 20-year Detailed Population Forecast, the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood is forecasted to grow to 10,425 people and 2845 units by 2031. The following map presents the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood (Neighbourhood #15) as part of the South Pickering Urban Area Neighbourhoods Figure 63: Map of South Pickering Urban Area Neighbourhoods - 325 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 186 Table 34: Neighbourhood Number and Name Neighbourhood # Neighbourhood Name 1 Rosebank 2 West Shore 3 Bay Ridges 4 Brock Industrial 5 Rougemount 6 Woodlands 7 Dunbarton 8 City Centre 9 Village East 10 Highbush 11 Amberlea 12 Liverpool 13 Brock Ridge 14 Rouge Park 15 Duffin Heights - 326 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 187 10.2.4 The Seaton Urban Area According to the Seaton Urban Area Population and Employment Policy, City Council supports the development of an urban community that will accommodate 61,000 people by 2031 and be planned to accommodate up to 70,000 people through long- term intensification. The plan also includes the provision of high-quality employment opportunities that reflect the needs of the community with the identification of sufficient employment lands to generate approximately one job for every two residents with 30,500 jobs by 2031, and up to 35,000 jobs through long- term intensification. The following tables 35 and 36 provide a breakdown of the anticipated 2031 population forecast of the Seaton Urban Area based on Neighbourhood Plans approved in 2012. Current City population projections are available on the City’s website. The current projections show development is taking place at a slower rate than anticipated. Table 35: Population of Neighbourhoods in the Seaton Urban Area Neighbourhood Name and Number 2031 Population Lamoreaux 17,500 Brock-Taunton 5,000 Mount Pleasant 18,000 Wilson Meadows 15,000 Thompson’s Corners 5,500 Pickering Innovation Corridor 0 The following map exhibits the neighbourhood of the Seaton Urban Area listed above: - 327 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 188 Figure 64: Map of Seaton Area Neighbourhoods Table 36: Neighbourhood Number and Name Neighbourhood# Neighbourhood Name 16 Lamoreaux 17 Brock Taunton 18 Mount Pleasant 19 Wilson Meadows 20 Thompson’s Corners 21 Innovation Corridor - 328 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 189 10.3 Durham Regional Plan (2024) 10.3.1 Population and Employment Growth • The Province allocated 1.3 million people and 460,000 jobs to Durham Region by 2051. • Pickering’s allocation is: o 2021: 102,940 people, 33,430 households, 39,310 jobs o 2026: 125,830 people, 41,310 households, 47,000 jobs o 2051: 256,370 people, 88,590 households, 93,790 jobs • The Seaton Community in central Pickering is expected to accommodate 70,000 people and 35,000 jobs. • The region is planning for a 50% job-to-population ratio, meaning for every two residents, there should be one job. 10.3.2 Strategic Growth Areas and Urban Expansion • Seaton and other strategic growth areas will be prioritized for development. • Pickering’s Urban System will see high-density growth, supported by mixed- use developments.. 10.3.3 Infrastructure and Services to Support Growth • Durham is ensuring infrastructure aligns with intensification goals (50% of growth should occur in built-up areas). • Focus on: o Regional water and wastewater services to accommodate increased population. o Transit-oriented development, particularly around major transit stations and corridors. o Expanding the road network and improving goods movement corridors. o Green and resilient infrastructure, including climate adaptation measures. 10.3.4 Economic Development and Employment Growth • Key objectives include: o Supporting the Seaton Innovation Corridor as a major employment hub. o Leveraging Pickering’s proximity to Toronto and highway network. o Preparing for high-tech and knowledge-based industries. o Encouraging innovation hubs and commercial development. 10.3.5 Sustainability and Resilient Infrastructure • Growth to align with Durham and the City’s sustainability and climate change related policies and plans. • Expansion of tree canopy, stormwater management, and renewable energy projects. • Sustainable building and infrastructure development are priorities. - 329 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 190 10.4 Impact of Growth on Lifecycle Activities As Pickering experiences significant population and employment growth, the demand for municipal services will rise. The City will need to expand, maintain, and optimize its infrastructure and facilities to meet community needs while ensuring financial sustainability. Below is an analysis of the impact of growth on key services managed by the City, focusing on lifecycle activities such as capital investments, operational costs, human resource needs, and long-term sustainability. 10.4.1 Roads and Transportation Infrastructure Lifecycle Considerations: • Capital Costs: Expansion of road networks, rehabilitation of existing roads, intersection improvements, and investments in active transportation (sidewalks, cycling lanes). • Operational Costs: Increased road maintenance, snow removal, traffic signal operations, and road resurfacing programs. • Human Resources: Additional public works staff for road repairs, maintenance crews for winter operations, and transportation planners. Growth-Related Impacts: • Strategic Growth Areas like the City Centre, Kingston Road Corridor, and Brock Road will require road capacity upgrades and enhanced transit infrastructure. • New developments in Seaton and Northeast Pickering will necessitate new arterial and collector roads to support residential and employment growth. • Increased traffic volumes will drive the need for traffic signal upgrades, intersection improvements, and transit priority measures. 10.4.2 Stormwater Management and Climate Resilience Lifecycle Considerations: • Capital Costs: Upgrading drainage systems, implementing green stormwater infrastructure, and increasing stormwater retention capacity. • Operational Costs: Regular inspections, dredging of stormwater ponds, maintenance of culverts, and monitoring flood-prone areas. • Human Resources: More engineering and maintenance staff for stormwater asset management and climate adaptation planning. Growth-Related Impacts: - 330 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 191 • Urban intensification will increase impermeable surfaces, requiring investments in stormwater mitigation infrastructure such as bioswales, permeable pavements, and green roofs. • Increased precipitation events due to climate change will necessitate higher drainage system capacity and improved flood management strategies. • Development in Seaton and Northeast Pickering will require coordination with regional authorities for stormwater servicing. 10.4.3 Community Facilities and Recreational Services Lifecycle Considerations: • Capital Costs: Expanding or constructing new community centers, sports complexes, and public facilities. • Operational Costs: Increased facility maintenance, security, energy costs, and staffing for programming. • Human Resources: More staff for facility management, recreation programming, and customer service. Growth-Related Impacts: • New residential developments will drive demand for additional recreational spaces, pools, and gymnasiums. • Aging community centers will require major retrofits and accessibility improvements. • Higher population density in mixed-use areas will increase the need for multi- use recreational facilities. 10.4.4 Parks, Trails, and Open Spaces Lifecycle Considerations: • Capital Costs: Land acquisition for new parks, development of trails, playground installations, and natural habitat restoration. • Operational Costs: Ongoing maintenance, landscaping, waste collection, and tree management. • Human Resources: Additional park maintenance crews, arborists, and recreational programming staff. Growth-Related Impacts: • Increased population density will require more green spaces and parkland acquisitions. • Expansion of urban trails and pedestrian pathways will be necessary to support active transportation. - 331 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 192 • Higher usage of parks will lead to increased maintenance costs and more demand for sports fields and recreational amenities. 10.4.5 IT Infrastructure and Digital Services Lifecycle Considerations: • Capital Costs: Investments in broadband expansion, network security, smart city initiatives, and data centers. • Operational Costs: Software licensing, cybersecurity measures, and IT support services. • Human Resources: More IT specialists for system maintenance, data security, and smart infrastructure deployment. Growth-Related Impacts: • Expansion of digital services and smart city applications will be required for efficient service delivery. • More residents and businesses will increase demand for online municipal services, digital permitting, and virtual public engagement tools. • Cybersecurity risks will grow, requiring stronger IT governance and data protection measures. 10.4.6 Library Services Lifecycle Considerations: • Capital Costs: Expansion or renovation of library branches, technology upgrades, and digital resource investments. • Operational Costs: Staffing, book acquisitions, digital subscriptions, and program development. • Human Resources: Additional librarians, program coordinators, and IT support for digital literacy programs. Growth-Related Impacts: • Higher population densities will increase demand for new library branches, study spaces, and digital learning resources. • Growth in employment areas will require library services tailored to workforce needs, such as co-working spaces and career development programs. • Digital transformation will drive the need for expanded online resources and e-learning platforms. - 332 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 193 10.4.7 Fire and Emergency Services Lifecycle Considerations: • Capital Costs: Construction of new fire stations, procurement of fire trucks and emergency response equipment. • Operational Costs: Training programs, staffing, equipment maintenance, and emergency response planning. • Human Resources: Additional administration, firefighters, training, and fire prevention personnel. Growth-Related Impacts: • More residential and commercial developments will require new fire stations, apparatus, equipment, and updated emergency response plans. • Intensification areas will require enhanced fire prevention, fire code enforcement and public education measures. • Climate change-related risks (e.g., flooding, and extreme weather) will require expanded emergency preparedness and response efforts 10.4.8 Long-Term Financial and Asset Management Considerations To maintain financial sustainability, the City must: • Incorporate Lifecycle Cost Analysis: Ensure that new infrastructure considers not only capital costs but also long-term maintenance and renewal. • Develop Sustainable Funding Strategies: Balance capital expenditures with operating budgets and secure provincial/federal funding where possible. • Prioritize Infrastructure Investment Based on Growth Projections: Align infrastructure plans with population and employment forecasts. • Enhance Asset Management Practices: Utilize data-driven planning to optimize asset performance and service delivery. 10.4.9 Conclusion Pickering’s rapid growth presents both opportunities and challenges in managing its municipal infrastructure and services. By proactively addressing lifecycle activities— capital costs, operational expenses, and workforce requirements—the City can ensure that roads, stormwater systems, facilities, parks, IT, libraries, and emergency services continue to meet the needs of its expanding population while maintaining financial sustainability. - 333 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 194 11. Financial Strategy For an asset management plan to be effective and meaningful, it must be integrated with financial planning and multi-year capital forecasting. The development of a comprehensive financial plan will allow the City of Pickering to identify the financial resources required for sustainable asset management based on existing asset inventories, desired levels of service, and projected growth requirements. This report develops such a financial plan by presenting several scenarios for consideration and culminating with final recommendations. As outlined below, the scenarios presented model different combinations of the following components: 1. The financial requirements for: a. Existing assets b. Existing service levels c. Requirements of contemplated changes in service levels (none identified for this plan) d. Requirements of anticipated growth (none identified for this plan) 2. Use of traditional sources of municipal funds: a. Tax levies b. User fees c. Debt d. Development charges e. Reserve Funds 3. Use of non-traditional sources of municipal funds: a. Reallocated budgets b. Partnerships c. Procurement methods 4. Use of Senior Government Funds: a. Canada Community-Building Fund (CCBF) b. Annual grants Note: Periodic grants are normally not included due to Provincial requirements for firm commitments. However, if moving a specific project forward is wholly dependent on receiving a one-time grant, the replacement cost included in the financial strategy is the net of such grant being received. If the financial plan component results in a funding shortfall, the Province requires the inclusion of a specific plan as to how the impact of the shortfall will be managed. In determining the legitimacy of a funding shortfall, the Province may evaluate a City’s approach to the following: - 334 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 195 1. In order to reduce financial requirements, consideration has been given to revising service levels downward. 2. All asset management and financial strategies have been considered. For example: a. If a zero-debt policy is in place, is it warranted? If not the use of debt should be considered. b. Do user fees reflect the cost of the applicable service? If not, increased user fees should be considered. 11.1 Annual Requirements & Capital Funding 11.1.1 Annual Requirements The annual requirements represent the amount the City should allocate each year to each asset category to meet replacement needs as they arise, prevent infrastructure backlogs, and achieve long-term sustainability. In total, the City must allocate approximately $61.7 million annually to address capital requirements for the assets included in this AMP. Figure 65: Annual Capital Funding Requirements by Asset Category For most asset categories the annual requirement has been calculated based on a “replacement only” scenario, in which capital costs are only incurred at the construction and replacement of each asset. $1.3m $4.0m $6.6m $6.6m $12.6m $30.5m $10m $20m $30m $40m Bridges & Culverts Parks Stormwater System Other Infrastructure Buildings & Facilities Road Corridor Average Annual Capital Requirements by Category - 335 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 196 However, for the Road Corridor lifecycle management strategies have been developed to identify capital costs that are realized through strategic rehabilitation and renewal of the City’s roads. The development of these strategies allows for a comparison of potential cost avoidance if the strategies were to be implemented. The following table compares two scenarios for the Road Corridor: 1. Replacement Only Scenario: Based on the assumption that assets deteriorate and – without regularly scheduled maintenance and rehabilitation – are replaced at the end of their service life. 2. Lifecycle Strategy Scenario: Based on the assumption that lifecycle activities are performed at strategic intervals to extend the service life of assets until replacement is required. Asset Category Annual Requirements (Replacement Only) Annual Requirements (Lifecycle Strategy) Difference Road Corridor $36,120,000 30,550,000 $5,570,000 Table 37: Lifecycle Strategies Annual Savings The implementation of a proactive lifecycle strategy for roads leads to potential annual cost avoidance of $5.6 million for the road corridor. This represents an overall reduction of 15% in terms of annual requirements for the road corridor. As the lifecycle strategy scenario represents the lowest cost option available to the City, we have used these annual requirements in the development of the financial strategy. 11.1.2 Annual Funding Available Based on a historical analysis of sustainable capital funding sources, the City is currently committing approximately $31.8 million annually towards capital projects. However, this figure includes Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund (OCIF) contributions, which are expected to be discontinued in future years. With the anticipated loss of approximately $3 million in OCIF funding, the City’s sustainable capital funding will decline to about $28.8 million annually. Given the annual capital requirement of $61.7 million, this results in an increased funding gap of approximately $32.8 million per year. - 336 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 197 Figure 66: Annual Requirements vs. Capital Funding Available 11.2 Funding Objective We have developed a scenario that would enable Pickering to achieve full funding within 5-20 years for the following assets: • Tax Funded Assets: Road Corridor, Stormwater System, Bridges & Structural Culverts, Buildings & Facilities, Parks, and Other Infrastructure Note: For the purposes of this AMP, we have excluded gravel roads since they are a perpetual maintenance asset and end of life replacement calculations do not normally apply. If gravel roads are maintained properly, they can theoretically have a limitless service life. $2.9m $4.6m $900k $5.6m $9.1m $8.7m $1.3m $4.0m $6.6m $6.6m $12.6m $30.5m $10m $20m $30m $40m Bridges & Culverts Parks Stormwater System Other Infrastructure Buildings & Facilities Road Corridor Average Annual Capital Requirements vs. Actual Capital Reinvestment by Category Average Annual Requirements Actual Reinvestment Rate - 337 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 198 For each scenario developed we have included strategies, where applicable, regarding the use of cost containment and funding opportunities. 11.3 Financial Profile: Tax Funded Assets 11.3.1 Current Funding Position The following tables show, by asset category, Pickering’s average annual asset investment requirements, current funding positions, and funding increases required to achieve full funding on assets funded by taxes. Asset Category Avg. Annual Requirement Annual Funding Available Taxes Reserves/ Reserve Funds Gas Tax Casino Reserve Total Available Deficit Bridges & Culverts $1,296,000 $555,000 $555,000 $741,000 Buildings & Facilities $12,615,000 $145,000 $1,620,000 $650,000 $6,693,000 $9,108,000 $3,507,000 Other Infrastructure $6,621,000 $52,000 $4,175,000 $1,338,000 $5,565,000 $1,056,000 Parks $4,018,000 $721,000 $863,000 $325,000 $2,677,000 $4,586,000 ($568,000) Road Corridor $30,548,000 $3,185,000 $2,274,000 $2,677,000 $8,136,000 $22,412,000 - 338 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 199 Asset Category Avg. Annual Requirement Annual Funding Available Taxes Reserves/ Reserve Funds Gas Tax Casino Reserve Total Available Deficit Stormwater System $6,589,000 $900,000 $900,000 $5,689,000 Total $61,687,000 $918,000 $11,298,000 $3,249,000 $13,385,000 $28,850,000 $32,837,000 Table 38: Annual Available Funding for Tax Funded Assets The average annual investment requirement for the above categories is $61.7 million. The annual revenue currently allocated to these assets for capital purposes is $28.8 million, leaving an annual deficit of $32.8 million. Put differently, these infrastructure categories are currently funded at 46.8% of their long-term requirements. - 339 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 200 11.3.2 Full Funding Requirements In 2025, the City of Pickering budgeted annual tax revenues of approximately $103.7 million. As illustrated in the following table, without consideration of any other sources of revenue or cost containment strategies, full funding would require the following tax change over time: Asset Category Tax Change Required for Full Funding Bridges & Culverts 0.7% Buildings & Facilities 3.4% Other Infrastructure 1.0% Parks -0.5% Road Corridor 21.6% Stormwater System 5.5% Total 31.7% Table 39: Tax Increase Requirements for Full Funding Our scenario modeling includes capturing the above changes and allocating them to the infrastructure deficit outlined above. The table below outlines this concept and presents several options: 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years Infrastructure Deficit $32,837,000 $32,837,000 $32,837,000 $32,837,000 Change in Debt Costs N/A N/A N/A N/A - 340 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 201 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years Resulting Infrastructure Deficit: $32,837,000 $32,837,000 $32,837,000 $32,837,000 Tax Increase Required 31.7% 31.7% 31.7% 31.7% Annually: 5.7% 2.8% 1.9% 1.4% Table 40: Tax Increase Options 5-20 Years 11.3.3 Financial Strategy Recommendations Considering all the above information, we recommend the 10-year option. This involves full funding being achieved over 10 years by: a) increasing tax revenues by 2.8% each year for the next 10 years solely for the purpose of phasing in full funding to the asset categories covered in this section of the AMP. b) allocating the current revenue streams as outlined previously. c) reallocating appropriate revenue from categories in a surplus position to those in a deficit position. d) increasing existing and future infrastructure budgets by the applicable inflation index on an annual basis in addition to the deficit phase-in. Notes: • As in the past, periodic senior government infrastructure funding will most likely be available during the phase-in period. By Provincial AMP rules, this periodic funding cannot be incorporated into an AMP unless there are firm commitments in place. • We realize that raising tax revenues by the amounts recommended above for infrastructure purposes will be very difficult to do. However, considering a longer phase-in window may have even greater consequences in terms of infrastructure failure. Although this option achieves full funding on an annual basis in 10 years and provides financial sustainability over the period modeled, the recommendations do require prioritizing capital projects to fit the resulting annual funding available. It is recommended to start by addressing the critical assets that are within the City’s infrastructure backlog. - 341 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 202 Prioritizing future projects will require the current data to be replaced by condition- based data. Although our recommendations include no further use of debt, the results of the condition-based analysis may be required otherwise. 11.3.4 Other considerations. Scenario 1: Gradual and Steady Increases Over 15 Years This scenario proposes a longer phase-in period to reduce the annual burden on taxpayers. It involves: • 1% annual tax increases from 2027 to 2030, followed by • 2% annual increases from 2031 to 2042 This gradual approach allows the City to work toward full funding over 17 years while easing short-term financial pressures on the community. However, the slower increase in available funding means that critical infrastructure needs may not be addressed as quickly, and risks related to asset failure could increase in earlier years. • Target Year for Full Funding: 2042 • Annual Tax Impact: Low to Moderate • Key Trade-off: Affordability now vs. delayed sustainability Scenario 2: Lower Increases Now, Accelerated Catch-Up (10-Year Plan) Scenario 2 is designed to reach full funding by 2036, six years earlier than Scenario 1, while still providing near-term relief. It proposes: • 1% annual increases from 2027 to 2030, followed by • 4.82% annual increases from 2031 to 2035 This option defers most of the financial pressure to the second half of the funding window, allowing for a gentler transition in the short term while still meeting the recommended 10-year timeline for full funding. However, the steeper increases from 2031 onward could pose future challenges in terms of public and political support. • Target Year for Full Funding: 2036 • Annual Tax Impact: Low initially, then High • Key Trade-off: Short-term relief vs. steeper increases later - 342 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 203 Scenario 3: Moderate and Predictable Growth (12-Year Plan) Scenario 3 offers a balanced middle-ground approach between affordability and timely financial sustainability. It proposes: • 1.4% annual tax increases from 2027 to 2030, followed by • 2.8% annual increases from 2031 to 2038 This strategy aligns closely with the City’s original funding model but introduces a slightly gentler ramp-up in the first four years, easing the initial impact on ratepayers while still moving decisively toward full funding within a 12-year period. The plan achieves the funding target six years earlier than Scenario 1 and two years later than Scenario 2. Scenario 3 supports earlier reinvestment in aging infrastructure compared to Scenario 1, reducing the risk of unexpected failures while avoiding the sharp mid-period tax spikes seen in Scenario 2. • Target Year for Full Funding: 2038 • Annual Tax Impact: Moderate and consistent • Key Trade-off: Earlier infrastructure investment than Scenario 1, without the steep increases of Scenario 2 This scenario may be particularly appropriate for municipalities seeking predictability in budgeting, a moderate pace of infrastructure renewal, and greater public support through steady, manageable tax adjustments. These three alternatives offer more flexibility than the flat 2.8% increase model but come with trade-offs related to timing, risk, and long-term cost implications. These should be carefully considered alongside infrastructure condition data and public willingness to pay. 11.4 Use of Reserves 11.4.1 Available Reserves Reserves play a critical role in long-term financial planning. The benefits of having reserves available for infrastructure planning include: - 343 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 204 a) the ability to stabilize tax rates when dealing with variable and sometimes uncontrollable factors b) financing one-time or short-term investments c) accumulating the funding for significant future infrastructure investments d) managing the use of debt e) normalizing infrastructure funding requirement By asset category, the table below outlines the details of the reserves currently available to Pickering. Asset Category Balance on December 31, 2023 Bridges & Culverts $11,494,696 Facilities & Buildings $15,758,610 Other Infrastructure $3,209,648 Parks $1,250,320 Roads $13,621,166 Stormwater System $5,052,701 Total Tax Funded: $50,387,140 Table 41: Pickering Reserve Balances There is considerable debate in the municipal sector as to the appropriate level of reserves that a City should have on hand. There is no clear guideline that has gained wide acceptance. Factors that municipalities should consider when determining their capital reserve requirements include: a) breadth of services provided b) age and condition of infrastructure c) use and level of debt d) economic conditions and outlook e) internal reserve and debt policies. These reserves are available for use by applicable asset categories during the phase-in period to full funding. This coupled with Pickering’s judicious use of debt in - 344 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 205 the past, allows the scenarios to assume that, if required, available reserves and debt capacity can be used for high priority and emergency infrastructure investments in the short- to medium-term. 11.4.2 Recommendation To achieve the proposed levels of service goals outlined in this Asset Management Plan, the City must address the funding gap for tax-funded assets. The analysis indicates that the current annual tax-funded capital investment falls short of the required sustainable levels, creating risks to infrastructure condition and service reliability over time. To bridge this gap and maintain long-term financial sustainability, the following strategies should be considered: • Gradual tax levy increases to phase in additional funding for capital rehabilitation and replacement. A structured annual increase would help align funding with lifecycle needs while minimizing short-term financial strain. • Strategic reallocation of budget surpluses and reserve contributions to prioritize critical infrastructure needs and reduce reliance on debt financing. • Increased grant and partnership funding to support major capital investments while reducing the burden on taxpayers. The City should proactively apply for available provincial and federal funding programs such as the Canada Community-Building Fund (CCBF). • Enhanced asset lifecycle management strategies to extend the useful life of tax-funded assets and optimize long-term capital planning, reducing the immediate financial burden. Without these adjustments, the City will face continued infrastructure deterioration, increasing maintenance costs, and higher long-term financial risks. Proactive funding strategies will ensure that the City's tax-funded assets can meet service level expectations while maintaining fiscal responsibility. - 345 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 206 12. Recommendations & Key Considerations This section outlines key financial and asset management recommendations to ensure the City of Pickering can achieve long-term financial sustainability, service reliability, and infrastructure resilience. The focus is on aligning capital investment with service level expectations while accounting for growth impacts and the increasing complexity of asset management. 12.1 Financial Sustainability & Long-Term Funding Strategy To achieve the proposed levels of service goals, the City must address the $32.8 million annual funding gap for tax-funded assets. The following strategies should be considered: •Structured tax levy increases: Implementing a phased tax increase (e.g., 2.8% annually over 10 years) to close the infrastructure deficit while balancing affordability. •Reallocating existing revenue sources: Redirecting funding from asset categories with surpluses to those facing deficits. •Expanding the use of senior government grants: Prioritizing applications for funding programs such as the Building Faster Fund (BFF) and Canada Community-Building Fund (CCBF). •Evaluating debt financing for critical projects: While the City has historically limited debt use, targeted borrowing may or may not be available for high- priority infrastructure investments. •Adjusting future budgets for inflation: Ensuring annual infrastructure funding accounts for construction cost escalations and inflationary pressures. Failure to implement these strategies could result in accelerated asset deterioration, increased maintenance costs, and reduced service reliability, making long-term infrastructure sustainability difficult to achieve. 12.2 Growth-Related Financial Planning & Asset Rationalization As Pickering’s infrastructure portfolio expands, the City must account for the long- term cost of growth. While new development often brings additional tax revenue, it also creates new financial liabilities for maintenance, rehabilitation, and eventual replacement. To ensure sustainable expansion, the City should: •Develop a long-term growth cost model: Incorporate lifecycle funding requirements for new infrastructure in financial planning to avoid creating unfunded liabilities. - 346 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 207 •Assess the cost-benefit of new asset acquisitions: Before assuming ownership of new infrastructure, ensure that the long-term maintenance and replacement costs are accounted for. •Review opportunities for asset disposal: As the City’s portfolio grows, some underutilized or redundant assets may be candidates for divestment, reducing financial strain and allowing reinvestment in critical infrastructure. •Increase development charge allocations for infrastructure renewal: Ensuring that new developments contribute fairly to the cost of maintaining the overall infrastructure network. Without integrating growth planning into financial forecasting, the City risks accumulating infrastructure that cannot be adequately maintained without substantial future tax increases. 12.3 Improving Asset Data for Better Decision-Making To enhance capital planning and risk management, the City should: •Expand condition assessments across all asset classes to reduce reliance on age-based deterioration models. •Refine risk models to prioritize high-impact assets and optimize capital investment decisions. •Improve lifecycle cost modeling to identify cost-effective intervention points and maximize infrastructure longevity. •Leverage emerging technologies (e.g., GIS, IoT sensors) for real-time monitoring and predictive maintenance. Better data will enable more accurate funding requirements and support strategic reinvestment in the City’s growing asset base. 12.4 Conclusion Pickering’s infrastructure portfolio is not only expanding but also aging and deteriorating, and increasing financial pressures present significant challenges for effective management and maintenance. To maintain service reliability and compliance with O. Reg. 588/17, the City must commit to a phased financial strategy, integrate growth considerations, and optimize asset management practices. By implementing these recommendations, the City can balance infrastructure investment, financial sustainability, and community expectations, ensuring long- term resilience and responsible asset stewardship. - 347 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 208 Appendices Appendix A – 10-Year Capital Requirements Appendix B – Level of Service Maps & Photos Appendix C – Risk Rating Criteria Appendix D – Additional Asset Portfolio Breakdown by Sub-segments Appendix E- Facility Condition Indices - 348 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 209 Appendix A – 10-Year Capital Requirements The tables The tables below summarize the projected costs of lifecycle activities (rehabilitation and replacement) expected over the next 10 years to support the proposed levels of service. These projections are based on a 2.8% annual tax increase over 10 years and cover the road corridor, stormwater system, bridges and culverts, as well as specific budget figures for facilities and parks. The estimates are generated using Citywide and VFA, drawing from data in the asset register. Where available, condition assessments and replacement costs were used to forecast asset replacement needs. For assets lacking condition data, age-based estimates were applied. Projected needs were then compared to available funding, and any shortfalls are reflected as backlog—indicating overdue investment at the time of analysis. These projections may differ from actual capital forecasts. Ongoing updates to condition data, replacement costs, and lifecycle models will improve alignment between system-generated requirements and the City’s capital planning. Road Corridor Segment Backlog 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Roads $54.3m $8.0m $9.0m $9.7m $11.9m $13.7m $15.7m $17.8m $16.6m $23.4m $26.6m Roadside Appurtenances - - - - - - - - - - Sidewalks $1.1m $12k $269k - - - $40k $45k - - - Streetlights $223k - - - - $67k $51k $80k $3.8m $14k $12k Traffic & Pedestrian Signals $496k $138k $58k $934k $240k - $21k $93k $72k $44k $134k Total $56.1m $8.1m $9.3m $10.6m $12.1m $13.8m $15.8m $18.0m $20.5m $23.5m $26.8m - 349 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 210 Table 42: System Generated 10-Year Capital Replacement Forecast: Road Corridor Bridges & Structural Culverts Segment Backlog 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Bridges -27 $1.1m $362k - - - - - $168k - - Culverts - $102k $36k $108k - - - $777k $2.1m $500k $823k Total - $1.2m $398k $108k - - - $777k $2.3m $500k $823k Table 43: System Generated 10-Year Capital Replacement Forecast: Bridges & Structural Culverts Stormwater System Segment Backlog 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Drainage Channels - - - - - - - - - - - Storm Sewers $471k - - $454k $1.6m $2.0m $2.4m $3.0m $3.6m $4.4m $5.4m Stormwater Ponds - - $1.2m $1.6m - - - - - - - Total $471k - $1.2m $2.1m $1.6m $2.0m $2.4m $3.0m $3.6m $4.4m $5.4m Table 44: System Generated 10-Year Capital Replacement Forecast: Stormwater System 27 Many of the structures with limited remaining useful life are scheduled for future rehabilitation or maintenance under the OSIM program. However, these assets effectively represent immediate needs and should be closely monitored to ensure planned interventions proceed as scheduled. - 350 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 211 Buildings & Facilities Segment Backlog 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Total $13.8m $15.6m $7.9m $33.5m $26.7m $11.9m $2.9m $4.4m $832k $1.6m $8.1m Table 45: System Generated 10-Year Capital Replacement Forecast: Buildings & Facilities Parks Segment Backlog 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Total $4.7m $2.7m $2.9m $2.4m $3.6m $3.5m $2.2m $1.6m $2.5m $3.6m $5.0m Table 46: System Generated 10-Year Capital Replacement Forecast: Parks Other Infrastructure Segment Backlog 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Furniture & Fixtures - $65k $86k - $140k $122k $451k $77k $59k $287k $344k Information Technology - $622k $259k $247k $768k $748k $431k $538k $695k $737k $318k Library Collection Materials - - $354k $333k $277k $260k $314k $304k $74k $266k $338k Machinery & Equipment $2.8m $1.3m $1.4m $1.1m $1.9m $1.6m $2.4m $1.5m $897k $1.6m $2.9m Vehicles $7.9m $3.6m $3.6m $4.0m $2.7m $3.2m $2.5m $3.8m $4.6m $3.5m $2.6m Total $10.8m $5.6m $5.7m $5.8m $5.9m $6.0m $6.1m $6.2m $6.3m $6.4m $6.5m Table 47: System Generated 10-Year Capital Replacement Forecast: Other Infrastructure - 351 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 212 Appendix B – Level of Service Maps & Photos Road Corridor Classification Map – Part 1 - 352 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 213 Road Corridor Classification Map – Part 2 - 353 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 214 Sidewalk Network Classification Map – Part 1 - 354 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 215 Sidewalk Network Classification Map – Part 2 - 355 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 216 Bridges & Culverts Locations Map – Part 1 - 356 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 217 Bridges & Culverts Locations Map – Part 2 - 357 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 218 Images of a Bridge in Good Condition Palmer Bridge BCI Rating: Good Image 1: Pavement of the road going over the Bridge Image 2: View of the span structure from underneath the Bridge Image 3: View of the span structure from underneath the Bridge Image 4: Sideview of the bridge structure - 358 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 219 Images of a Bridge in Fair Condition Petticoat Bridge BCI Rating: Fair Image 1: Pavement of the road going over the bridge Image 2: Cracks in the pavement Image 3: Sideview of the bridge Image 4: Delamination in the bridge structure - 359 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 220 Images of a Culvert in Good Condition Palmer Culvert BCI Rating: Good Image 1: A stream flowing through the culvert Image 2: A stream flowing through the culvert Image 3: Structure of the culvert from the sideview Image 4: Structure of the culvert from underneath the bridge - 360 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 221 Images of a Culvert in Fair Condition Petticoat Culvert BCI Rating: Fair Image 1: Image overlooking the structure of the culvert Image 2: Image showing structure of the culvert Image 3: Image of a stream flowing through the culvert Image 4: Image of a stream flowing through the culvert - 361 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 222 Stormwater System Classification Map – Part 1 - 362 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 223 Stormwater System Classification Map – Part 2 - 363 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 224 Parks Inventory Map - 364 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 225 Appendix C – Risk Rating Criteria Probability of Failure Table 48: Probability of Failure Rating Criteria Asset Category Risk Criteria Criteria Weighting Value/Range Probability of Failure Score Road Corridor Condition 100% 0-40 5 Condition 100% 41-60 4 Condition 100% 61-75 3 Condition 100% 75-90 2 Condition 100% 91-100 1 Stormwater System (Main) Condition 90% 0-20 5 Condition 90% 21-40 4 Condition 90% 41-60 3 Condition 90% 61-80 2 Condition 90% 80-100 1 Pipe Material 10% Concrete 2 Pipe Material 10% Steel 3 All Other Assets Condition 100% 0-20 5 Condition 100% 21-40 4 Condition 100% 41-60 3 Condition 100% 61-80 2 - 365 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 226 Asset Category Risk Criteria Criteria Weighting Value/Range Probability of Failure Score Condition 100% 81-100 1 Consequence of Failure Table 49: Consequence of Failure Rating Criteria Asset Category Risk Classification Risk Criteria Road Corridor Economic (100%) Surface Material (20%) Economic (100%) Design Class (25%) Economic (100%) AADT Range (35%) Economic (100%) Roadside Environment (20%) Stormwater System (Main) Economic (100%) Replacement Cost (100%) All other Assets Economic (100%) Replacement Cost (100%) - 366 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 227 Appendix D – Additional Asset Portfolio Breakdown by Sub-segments Road Corridor – Portfolio Breakdown by Sub-segments Figure 67: Road Corridor: Portfolio Valuation by Sub-segments Figure 68: Road Corridor: Conditions by Sub-segments $201k $973k $1.2m $1.2m $4.8m $10.4m $81.2m $100.4m $104.2m $120.6m $694.2m $200m $400m $600m $800m Broadband Controllers Retaining Walls Guide Rails Infrastructure LED Lights Poles & Assemblies Sidewalks Arterial Collector Local Replacement Cost by Sub-Segment $606k $116k $6.9m $694k $70.8m $335k $201k $172.5m $32.1m $35.9m $8.8m $26.1m $1.2m $910k $46.3m $13.3m $27.1m $997k $339k $20.1m $3k $60.3m $12.2m $9.9m $3.1m $105.0m $17.4m $18.3m $496k $53.8m $310.1m $45.6m $12.9m 0%20%40%60%80%100% Infrastructure Controllers Poles & Assemblies LED Lights Sidewalks Retaining Walls Guide Rails Broadband Local Collector Arterial Value and Percentage of Asset Sub-Segments by Replacement Cost Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor - 367 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 228 Figure 69: Road Corridor: Average Age vs Average Estimated Useful Life (EUL) Figure 70: Road Corridor: Forecasted Capital Requirements (2025-2099) 22.2 24.9 34.7 6.0 10.2 14.4 8.0 37.1 16.6 20.7 30.0 30.0 29.2 30.0 40.0 40.0 19.7 38.0 13.0 25.0 051015202530354045 Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL $30.5m $56.1m $174.9m $132.8m $140.2m $85.6m $129.6m $148.1m $231.0m $207.1m $181.2m $128.5m $81.6m $90.8m $163.0m $148.9m $269.9m $0 $50m $100m $150m $200m $250m $300m Fo r e c a s t e d C a p i t a l R e q u i r e m e n t s Arterial Collector Local Broadband Guide Rails Retaining Walls Sidewalks LED Lights Poles & Assemblies - 368 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 229 Stormwater System – Portfolio Breakdown by Sub- segments Figure 71: Stormwater System: Portfolio Valuation by Sub-segments Figure 72: Stormwater System: Conditions by Sub-segments $45k $88k $207k $1.5m $1.6m $2.4m $4.8m $4.9m $10.6m $22.8m $26.2m $32.3m $250.4m $100m $200m $300m Access Roads Fencing Stormwater Wall Clean Water Collectors Dry Ponds Inlet/Outlet Structures Oil Grit Separators Drainage Channels Service Connections Catch Basin and Lead Wet Ponds Maintenance Holes Storm Sewer Mains Replacement Cost by Sub-Segment $9.6m $88k $45k $207k $179.5m $834k $3.6m $22.7m $1.2m $1.5m $3.5m $4.9m $1.3m $60.4m $590k $7.7m $763k $264k $590k $1.8m $286k $12.2m $9.7m $19.3m $4.4m 0%20%40%60%80%100% Wet Ponds Fencing Dry Ponds Access Roads Stormwater Wall Storm Sewer Mains Service Connections Oil Grit Separators Maintenance Holes Inlet/Outlet Structures Clean Water Collectors Catch Basin and Lead Drainage Channels Value and Percentage of Asset Sub-Segments by Replacement Cost Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor - 369 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 230 Figure 73: Stormwater System: Average Age vs Average Estimated Useful Life (EUL) 38.4 6.7 42.4 38.2 21.3 38.1 38.2 4 2 38.3 2.8 50 75 75 75 50 50 75 50 50 100 40 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL - 370 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 231 Figure 74: Stormwater System: Forecasted Capital Requirements (2025-2109) $6.6m $471k $29.1m $21.8m $35.5m$36.4m $15.8m $57.7m $68.5m $85.3m $27.5m $21.5m $39.6m $10.8m $15.1m $13.9m $34.2m $4.4m $5.2m $0 $10m $20m $30m $40m $50m $60m $70m $80m $90m Fo r e c a s t e d C a p i t a l R e q u i r e m e n t s Drainage Channels Catch Basin and Lead Clean Water Collectors Inlet/Outlet Structures Maintenance Holes Oil Grit Separators Service Connections Storm Sewer Mains Stormwater Wall Access Roads Dry Ponds Fencing Wet Ponds Annual Requirement Total - 371 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 232 Parks – Portfolio Breakdown by Sub-segments Figure 75: Parks: Portfolio Valuation by Sub-segments Figure 76: Parks: Weighted Average Age vs Weighted Average EUL $1.5m $2.5m $5.0m $6.3m $6.8m $11.1m $11.3m $13.0m $15.2m $22.8m $10m $20m $30m Site Furniture Subsurface Infrastructure Parking Lots & Internal Roads Buildings Playground Equipment Site Structures Electrical/Lighting Waterfront Infrastructure Pedestrian Corridors Sport Playing Surfaces Replacement Cost by Sub-Segment 15.7 21.2 17 29.5 19.7 20.9 30.2 12.3 30.1 20.2 15.4 18.4 34.6 22.6 15.9 36.3 33 81.3 24.1 26.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL - 372 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 233 Other Infrastructure – Portfolio Breakdown by Sub- segments Figure 77: Other Infrastructure: Portfolio Valuation by Sub-segments Figure 78: Other Infrastructure: Conditions by Sub-segments $1.7m $2.3m $2.8m $9.9m $10.1m $16.5m $22.0m $10m $20m Library Collection Materials Furniture & Fixtures Information Technology Minor Machinery & Equipment Major Machinery & Equipment Vehicles Fire Vehicles Replacement Cost by Sub-Segment $3.0m $2.3m $1.5m $3.2m $3.2m $3.3m $1.7m $1.3m $221k $441k $662k $1.6m $4.9m $2.0m $2.2m $560k $909k $630k $4.0m $2.4m $1.4m $1.6m $287k $564k $577k $4.8m $9.1m $3.2m $1.9m $604k $917k $446k 0%20%40%60%80%100% Vehicles Fire Vehicles Minor Machinery & Equipment Major Machinery & Equipment Library Collection Materials Information Technology Furniture & Fixtures Value and Percentage of Asset Sub-Segments by Replacement Cost Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor - 373 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 234 Figure 79: Other Infrastructure: Average Age vs Average EUL Figure 80: Other Infrastructure: Conditions by Sub-segments 11.2 4.6 4.4 5.3 8.2 11.4 6 19.7 5.7 6.6 10.2 11.2 15 7.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 Furniture & Fixtures Information Technology Library Collection Materials Major Machinery & Equipment Minor Machinery & Equipment Fire Vehicles Vehicles Nu m b e r o f Y e a r s Weighted Average Age Weighted Average EUL $6.6m $11.0m $26.4m $34.6m $29.9m $32.4m $37.1m $26.8m $37.0m $0 $5m $10m $15m $20m $25m $30m $35m $40m Backlog 2025 - 2029 2030 - 2034 2035 - 2039 2040 - 2044 2045 - 2049 2050 - 2054 2055 - 2059 Fo r e c a s t e d C a p i t a l R e q u i r e m e n t s Furniture & Fixtures Information Technology Library Collection Materials Major Machinery & Equipment Minor Machinery & Equipment Fire Vehicles Vehicles Annual Requirement Total - 374 - City of Pickering Asset Management Plan 2025 235 Appendix E – Facility Condition Indices Table 50: Facility Condition Indices Facility Name FCI (%) City of Pickering Scale (From Facilities Renewal Study) Fire Station #1 0 Excellent Operation Centre 2 Excellent Pickering Soccer Centre 2 Excellent Pickering Museum Village (Does not include historic pavilion structures) 14 Good Fire Station #6 20 Good Dunbarton Pool 22 Fair George Ashe Library & Community Centre 25 Fair Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex 26 Fair Dr. Nelson F. Thomlinson Community Centre 28 Fair Civic Complex 35 Poor West Shore Community Centre 36 Poor Fire Station #4 38 Poor Don Beer Arena 42 Disposal East Shore Community Centre and East Shore Senior Citizens Centre 43 Disposal Fire Station #2 49 Disposal Animal Services Shelter (FCI is assumed) 50 Disposal Fire Station #5 51 Disposal Greenwood Library 58 Disposal Mount Zion Community Centre 59 Disposal Whitevale Community Centre 76 Disposal Greenwood Community Centre 78 Disposal Brougham Hall 107 Disposal Whitevale Arts & Culture Centre 115 Disposal - 375 - Attachment 2 to Report FIN 10-25 - 3 7 6 - - 3 7 7 - - 3 7 8 - - 3 7 9 - - 3 8 0 - - 3 8 1 - - 3 8 2 - - 3 8 3 - Report to Council Report Number: CAO 06-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Marisa Carpino Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project Scaled Down Schematic Design File: A-1440-001 Recommendation: 1. That Report CAO 06-25 regarding the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project be received; 2. That Council direct staff to complete additional design work for the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library at a cost not to exceed $250,000.00 funded from the project contingency that results in an alternative design and reduced project cost option not exceeding $200 million, and for the alternative design and reduced project cost option to be returned to Council in September, 2025; 3. That naming rights for any part of the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library project be deferred until Council has approved the final design and a construction contract for the project has been awarded; and 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to obtain Council authorization to complete additional design work on the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library (SRCL) required to provide a scaled down reduced cost option for the project by September 2025. Spending on the project design was paused by Report CAO 05-25 (Resolution #698/25) in late April due to broad economic uncertainty. As per Resolution #698/25, staff were directed to provide a project update to Council, including the consolidated base program schematic design concept, updated financial information and project recommendations in September 2024. Council made it clear in approving Report CAO 05-25, that the SRCL project remained a high priority. Authorization is therefore requested to complete additional design work , spending $250,000.00 from the previously approved project consulting contingency budget to also provide for Council’s consideration in September 2025 with an alternative, scaled down schematic design concept that removes the twin pad arena. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Priorities to Champion Economic Leadership & Innovation; Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community; Advance Innovation & Responsible - 384 - CAO 06-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project Page 2 Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community; Lead & Advocate for Environmental Stewardship, Innovation & Resiliency; Strengthen Existing & Build New Partnerships; and Foster an Engaged & Informed Community. Financial Implications: The Consulting Services for the SRCL w ere awarded to Perkins & Will Canada Inc. in June, 2024 (Resolution #523/24) in the amount of $7,150,000.00 (HST excluded), with a total net project cost of $9,021,024.00 (net of HST rebate). The awarded project includes contingency of $700,000.00. Perkins & Will have confirmed the cost to develop a scaled down option that removes the twin-pad arena from the design, not to exceed $250,000.00 (net HST), including the development of an updated cost estimate for the scaled down option to be completed by August, 2025. This cost is funded from the approved project contingency. There are no new financial implications resulting from the recommendations in this report. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to obtain Council authorization to complete additional design work for the SRCL required to provide an alternative, reduced cost option for the project by September 2025, including related work . Spending on the project was paused by Report to Council CAO 05-25 (Resolution #698/25) in late April 2025 due to broad economic uncertainty and its potential impacts on the City’s ability to fund the project. 1. Decision History a. Report FIN 01-24 (Resolution #379/24) was presented to Council in January, 2024 regarding capital project priorities. The SRCL was approved as the first Capital Budget priority at an estimated total project cost of $242.97 million (design, construction, and furniture & fixtures). b. Report OPS 12-24 (Resolution #523/24) was presented to Council in June, 2024 to award the consulting services for the SRCL to Perkins & Will, with a total net project cost for design of the SRCL of $9,021,024.00. c. Report CAO 06-24 (Resolution #632/24) was presented to Council for information in December, 2024 and provided a semi-annual project update including an update on site works and land acquisition, completed community engagement activities, and the operating budget and programming model. By December, 2024, three schematic design options were developed by Perkins & Will Inc. A community engagement campaign was launched for a five-week period to collect feedback on the three schematic design options. d. Report CAO 05-25 (Resolution #698/25) was presented to Council in April, 2025 and paused the approval and further development of proposed design of the project due to a challenging economic climate. In addition, the City’s Treasurer also identified the high level of debt and corresponding high annual debt charges that the City would be responsible for when considering this project and other debt financed - 385 - CAO 06-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project Page 3 projects within the next ten years. The findings of the completed public engagement process were also provided. e. Report CS 06-25 (Resolution #709/25) awarded consulting services for geotechnical and hydrological reports and environmental investigation for the SRCL to DS Consultants Ltd. Backfill operations of 25-acre site where the SRCL will be located commenced in 2024. Rough grading, bearing performing targets and soil quality requirements were provided by Perkins & Will and issued to the contractor completing the backfill work. The geotechnical and hydrological reports and environmental investigation services are required to ensure the quality of the site materials and was timely as site backfilling had begun. 2. While a project pause was approved in April (Resolution #698/25), staff recommend further design work be completed to present a scaled down option to Council in September . At the April 22, 2025 Special Council Meeting, Council approved pausing further design of the SRCL Project. A project pause was recommended due to the ongoing tariff war between Canada and the United States which may result in significant economic repercussions. A short-term pause can help mitigate risks associated with the unknown potential impacts of tariffs and other economic disruptors. The pause also allows the City to reassess the project design and construction plans in light of the economic environment and corresponding high cost and debt charges. Staff indicated in Report CAO 05-25 that limited expenditures related to time-sensitive site preparations, including geotechnical and hydrological studies would proceed to ensure that the SRCL site is transferred to the City in a suitable condition for construction without requiring extensive and expensive re-work. Perkins & Will were awarded consulting services for SRCL, per Report OPS 12-24, and are best positioned to help the City develop the alternative design as part of their existing contract. Much of the design work on SRCL completed to date can be re-used, including stakeholder consultation results. It is equally important to note that the existing pool at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex (CHDRC) is also nearing the end of its serviceable life, with major renovations expected to be required in five years. Should construction of SRCL not be completed by that time, the City risks a significant potential reduction in aquatic programming, as Dunbarton Pool is too small and also at capacity, preventing it from accommodating any displaced demand if the CHDRC pool were to close. If design work for the SRCL project were to be deferred beyond 2025, it would be unlikely that the new facility could be opened in time. This request for authorization to proceed with an alternative, reduced scope option, aims to avoid that scenario. 3. A reduced scope option with a total project budget of $200 million for SRCL is proposed to be presented as part of the Report to Council for September, 2025. Report CAO 05-25 recommended a total pause to the project in light of the looming threat of tariffs, potential impacts to international trade, and the corresponding rising risk of economic - 386 - CAO 06-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project Page 4 recession. Council agr eed with the pause, but m ade it clear that the SRC L project remains a high priority, including revising recommendation 4 of that report to advanc e the scheduled update report from Q 4 , 2025 to September 2024. As per Resolution #698/25, staff w ere directed to provide a project update to Council, including the consolidated base program schematic design concept, updated financial information and project recommendations in September 2024. At this time, authorization is requested to undertak e further design and ex pend up to $250,000.00 from the previously approv ed project consulting budget, per Report OPS 12-24 (Resolution #523/24), enabling staff to provide an alternate, scaled down and less costly design option for the project for Council’s consideration in September 2024. 4. The scaled down option will remove the twin pad arena from the facility amenities Removing the twin-pad arenas from the SRCL sc ope of w ork is the most likely means to reduc e the project’s cost, that in turn, reduces property tax levy funded annual debt charges. (An estimated levy increase of 5.20% was required to fund the annual debt charges for the ice pads.). However, employing this strategy will require Don Beer Arena to remain open. Don Beer Arena was recommended to close w hen SRCL opened, in keeping with the recommendations of the Parks & Recreation 10-Year Plan. The City has been limiting capital reinvestment in this aging facility as its older rinks near their anticipated end of life, with Rink 1 having been constructed in 1970, and Rink 2 in 1973. In April 2025, through Report CAO 05-25, staff pr ovided a summary of the SRC L project based on a total project cost of $241,396,829. The project cost is comprised of $167,142,223 funded from Development Charges, or 69.24 percent of the total funding and $74,254,606 funded from the City, or 30.76 percent of the total funding. The total cost of the two NHL-sized ice pads, estimated at $68.5 m illion, are 100 percent taxpayer funded sinc e the construction of the arena is not considered a growth project as it is assum ed to replac e the D on Beer Arena. An increase to property taxes to fund the SRC L would be largely driv en by the debt charges associated with the two twin pads. In 2024, the City completed an Arena Strategy that was approv ed by Council (Resolution #514/24). The strategy identified that based on current use and demand, that a provision of four indoor ic e pads is required currently and a total of fiv e ic e pads is required by 2034. As the City has fiv e ic e pads presently, there is a surplus of ic e available. This strategy con firm ed that the construction of tw o new ic e pads at the SRC L would not be growth related, rather intended to replac e the aging D on Beer Arena. The fact that the arenas are not related to new growth makes them ineligible for D evelopment Char ge funding. Without the new twin-pad arena at the SRCL, the City will need to operate Don Beer Arena to continue to provide the existing level of service. The continued operations of D on Beer Arena includes an annual net operating expense of around $594,000, and an estimated $19,451,248 in deferr ed maintenanc e capital cost required over the next ten years. These costs are based on like-f or-lik e replacement of the existing assets and exclude any potential upgrades that m ay be requested or required. - 387 - CAO 06-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project Page 5 5.It is recommended that facility naming be explored during the construction stage of the project In addition to the considerations above, at the Council meeting on September 3, 2024, Report CS 26-24 was submitted to recommend that staff be directed to explore the naming of the gymnasium at the future Seaton Community Centre and Library as the Wayne Arthurs gymnasium. Resolution #473/24, included direction for staff to: 1)explore the naming of the gymnasium in the Seaton Community Centre and Library as the Wayne Arthurs gymnasium subject to undertaking the work outlined in the City Property Naming Procedure (ADM 110-006) and report back with the final recommendations in Q2, 2025; and 2)that Council grant staff the authority to solicit public comment on the proposed name, as set out in section 03.02 of City Property Naming Procedure (ADM 110-006). Due to the pause to the project, staff recommend deferring any community engagement regarding the City Property Naming for SRCL until such time that the final design has been approved and construction has started. This will allow the community to give a more informed response as well as become re-engaged with the project. Attachment: None. Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Vince Plouffe, OAA, MRAIC Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Division Head, Facilities Management Director, Finance & Treasurer & Construction Original Signed By Laura Gibbs, MBA, MSc. Director, Community Services M C:vp - 388 - CAO 06-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project Page 6 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 389 - Report to Council Report Number: CAO 07-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Marisa Carpino Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program Project Update File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CAO 07-25 regarding Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program be received; 2. That staff be directed to register the City of Pickering in the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program at the Corporate Membership Level; 3. That the expense for the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program, be charged to account General - Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (502240.9750) and the expense not to exceed $7,000.00); and 4. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program. In accordance with Resolution #672/25, from the February 24, 2025 Council Meeting, staff were directed to research the appropriate level of Hidden Disabilities Sunflower membership including associated costs and report back to Council no later than Q2 2025. After careful consideration, staff determined that the corporate membership level would be the most appropriate membership level for the City of Pickering. Corporate membership allows businesses, public spaces, and transportation services to show their commitment to support people with hidden disabilities. Steps to join the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program include registration, training and awareness, lanyards and badges, commitment to accessibility, and ongoing support and evaluation. To retain active membership, 80 per cent of City staff must be trained on the program. The internal program launch date is scheduled for May 27, 2025 which aligns with National Accessibility Week, which runs from May 25th to May 31st. The external program launch date is set for July 2025. - 390 - CAO 07-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program Page 2 Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report align with the Pickering Strategic Plan Priorities of Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community; and Strengthen Existing & Build New Partnerships. Financial Implications: The cost of corporate membership is $2,940.00 per year. In addition, wearer and supporter materials will cost approximately $3,500.00 in year one. Wearer and supporter materials include lanyards, decals, and one corporate starter pack for internal trainers. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program. In accordance with Resolution #672/25, from the February 24, 2025 Council Meeting, staff were directed to research the appropriate level of Hidden Disabilities Sunflower membership including associated costs and report back to Council no later than Q2 2025. Staff initially considered training would be undertaken by a select group of frontline staff (Customer Care Centre and front counter staff) in the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program. However, further discussions, including consultation with the Town of Ajax who are already members of the program, highlighted the need to broaden the initiative, ensuring that all employees, including camp counsellors and firefighters, receive the program training. This expanded scope serves two key purposes: maintaining a consistent level of service for residents with hidden disabilities, regardless of which City staff person they may interact with, and fostering a culture of accessibility and inclusion among all employees. There are no additional membership costs incurred by this expanded scope. A. Membership Level: The Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program is a global initiative that aims to raise awareness and improve accessibility for individuals with hidden disabilities. The core value of the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower is inclusion. The program strives to create inclusive environments where people with hidden disabilities can access services and participate without facing discrimination or undue challenges, ensuring they do not feel self-conscious when seeking assistance. Corporate membership allows businesses, public spaces, and transportation services to show their commitment to support people with hidden disabilities. Steps to join the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program include registration, training and awareness, lanyards and badges, commitment to accessibility, and ongoing support and evaluation. Registration: Businesses, organizations, and service providers must first complete a registration process through the official Sunflower Scheme website. This includes providing details about the organization and its commitment to ensuring accessibility and inclusivity. Training and Awareness: Once registered, the corporate member is expected to undergo training related to hidden disabilities, understanding the needs of individuals with these - 391 - CAO 07-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program Page 3 conditions, and how to offer appropriate support. This training is provided as part of a partnership with the Sunflower Program. The intent is to provide training to all City staff where practicable. The training program commitment is a one-time, thirty minute training session. In order to remain active members, a minimum 80 percent of City staff must be trained on the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program at all times. Lanyards and Badges: Upon completing the registration and training, corporate members receive sunflower lanyards and/or badges for wearers and supporters, which can be distributed to employees and/or displayed in prominent locations. The lanyards serve as a signal for those who may need assistance due to a hidden disability. Commitment to Accessibility: Corporate members must also commit to making reasonable adjustments within their organizations or spaces to improve accessibility. This may include providing clearer signage, adjusting communication methods, or offering additional support when needed. Ongoing Support and Evaluation: Corporate members are encouraged to continue evaluating their practices, ensuring they remain in line with the principles of the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program. B: Launch Date: The internal program launch date is scheduled for May 27, 2025, in line with National Accessibility Week, which is taking place from May 25th to May 31st for the purpose of both celebrating the contributions of persons with disabilities in Canada and highlighting past and continuing work towards the identification and removal of barriers to accessibility in Canada. The external program launch date is set for July 2025. This allows approximately two months from the internal to external launch date for staff training to meet the corporate membership requirement of having and maintaining a minimum of 80 percent of City staff trained on the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program. Attachment: Resolution #672/25 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Justine Wallace, Ph.D(c) Mark Guinto (Acting) Supervisor, Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Division Head, Public Affairs & Corporate Communications MG:jw Original Signed By:Original Signed By: - 392 - CAO 07-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program Page 4 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original Signed By: - 393 - Legislative Services Division Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum February 28, 2025 To: Marisa Carpino Chief Administrative Officer From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on February 24, 2025 Supporting Hidden Disabilities - Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program Council Decision Resolution #672/25 WHEREAS, many Canadians live with hidden disabilities, the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower program was created to encourage inclusivity, acceptance, and understanding; And Whereas, the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower program provides support to individuals living with hidden disabilities by providing a simple and discrete tool that allows individuals to voluntarily identify their needs without disclosing a particular condition; And Whereas, the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower program provides an opportunity to recognize that someone may need a helping hand, understanding or more time in public spaces. Some disabilities, conditions, or chronic illnesses are not immediately obvious to others; And Whereas, other municipalities and corporations such as the Town of Ajax, Durham Region Transit, Billy Bishop and Toronto Pearson Airports, and Metrolinx are also members of the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower program; And Whereas, participation in this program provides for staff training, and aligns with the City of Pickering Multi-Year Accessibility Goal of working toward removing existing barriers for persons with disabilities; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering directs through the Office of the CAO: 1. That the City of Pickering will join the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower program and continue to explore new ways to make the City of Pickering’s customer experience more inclusive for all; 2. That staff research the appropriate level of Hidden Disabilities Sunflower membership including associated costs and report back to Council no later than the end of Q2 2025; and, Attachment 1 to Report CAO 07-25 - 394 - Please take any action deemed necessary. SC:am 3. That a copy of this resolution be sent to John Henry, Chair of the Regional Municipality of Durham, the Durham Region Health and Social Services Committee, Durham Ontario Health Team, Community Care Durham, Durham Mental Health Services, and the Pickering Accessibility Advisory Committee. - 395 - Report to Council Report Number: CAO 08-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Marisa Carpino Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce 2024 Year End Report and Proposed 2025 Workplan File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1.That Report CAO 08-25 regarding the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce 2024 Year End Report and Proposed 2025 Workplan be received for information; 2.That Council approve the 2025 3rd Annual Community event in celebration of the International Day for People of African Descent, per ADM 040 Committees and Taskforces of Council Policy, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Director, Community Services and the Chief Administrative Officer; 3.That Council authorize staff to issue a park permit to the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce for the use of Esplanade Park, per CUL 070 Community Festivals and Events Policy, for the Community Event in celebration of the International Day for People of African Descent; and 4.That Council approve the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce-led 2025 Black Joy Holiday Market event, per ADM 040 Committees and Taskforces of Council Policy, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Director, Community Services and the Chief Administrative Officer. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to provide the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce (PABRT) 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Workplan to Council. The report also seeks Council’s endorsement of PABRT-led signature events, including the 2025 Black Joy Holiday Market event and the 2025 3rd Annual Community event in celebration of the International Day for People of African Descent. Additionally, it requests authorization for staff to issue a park permit in Esplanade Park for the 3rd Annual Community event. The Committees and Taskforces of Council Policy (ADM 040) requires that PABRT seek Council approval to hold public events. Per section 04.03 and 18.01 of ADM 040, this report includes information about the month in which the event will be held, the purpose of the event, budget and any other confirmed details. Additionally, the Community Festivals and Events Policy (CUL 070) outlines the criteria, guidelines and processes by which requests to host events in City parks are received and considered for approval. Per section 04.01 of CUL 070, as a “Signature Park”, community event requests for Esplanade Park must be approved by Council. - 396 - CAO 08-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce Page 2 Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community; and Foster an Engaged & Informed Community. Financial Implications: For 2025, PABRT has an approved operating budget of $85,000. These funds will be allocated to the action area indicated below. Action Area Description Budget Consultation Strategic visioning around the anti-Black racism initiatives and impacts in the community $60,000 Community engagement, events, and partnerships Collaborations with community partners through events, meetings, and other initiatives $12,500 Marketing and promotions Supplies and materials to support and promote community engagements (e.g., signage, literature, reports, printing) $10,000 Contingency For unanticipated expenses $2,500 TOTAL $85,000 Discussion: The following list provides a summary of initiatives and activities that PABRT members have engaged in 2024. A. 2024 Year End Report: Together We Rise Durham: Black History, Intersectionality and Joy (February 1, 2024): The 2024 Together We Rise Durham: Black History, Intersectionality and Joy Black History Month celebration was hosted by the Region of Durham, in partnership with Durham Regional Police Service, Canadian Jamaican Club of Oshawa, City of Oshawa, City of Pickering, Congress of Black Women Whitby/Oshawa, DurhamONE, Lakeridge Health, Municipality of Clarington, Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, PABRT, The Township of Brock, Town of Ajax and Town of Whitby. The celebration took place at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex, bringing communities across Durham Region together for an uplifting evening of music, dance and a panel discussion featuring Debbie Miles -Senior, Dr. Andrew Bernard Thomas, Liza Arnason, and Shellene Drakes -Tull. Cultural Expressions 17th Annual Black History Month Celebration (February 3, 2024): PABRT partnered with Cultural Expressions Art Gallery to host the 17th Annual Durham Black History Month celebration at J. Clarke Richardson Collegiate in Ajax, celebrating the beauty of Black culture and the diversity of the Black experience in Durham Region. PABRT provided an information table as part of the community networking portion of the event to engage event attendees and raise awareness about PABRT. - 397 - CAO 08-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce Page 3 Pride Durham Annual Pride Parade & Festival (June 2, 2024): PABRT members and the City of Pickering were proud partners in the 2024 Pride Durham Annual Pride Parade hosted in the Town of Ajax. With support from more than 15 City staff members from various departments, volunteer community members, family and friends, the City of Pickering was well represented while walking alongside the community. International Day for People of African Descent Community Celebration (August 31, 2024): PABRT hosted the 2nd Annual International Day for People of African Descent Community Celebration in partnership with Durham Family Cultural Centre (DFCC), Durham One, and Ifarada Centre for Excellence in Pickering’s Esplanade Park. The day included a Vendor Market with over 25 Black-Owned local businesses, a community Basketball tournament, cultural games and activities, and a painting workshop with local artist, Lois on Canvas. Durham Region Municipal DEI Symposium (October 26, 2024): Members of PABRT participated in the Durham Region Municipal DEI Symposium, hosted by the Durham Region Anti-Racism Taskforce in partnership with the Municipality of Clarington, City of Oshawa, City of Pickering, and Town of Ajax. Local committees, taskforces and working groups joined for a day of connecting, collaborating, and strategizing to share goals, plan for longer term sustainability and success, and work to collaborate more intentionally. 3rd Annual Black Joy Holiday Market and Afro-Caribbean Food Basket Initiative (November 15, 23, 24, 2024): PABRT partnered with the DFCC to join the City of Pickering’s first night of Winter Nights, City Lights Festival and Santa Claus Parade weekend, bringing the Black Joy Holiday Market to the community as a 3-day initiative beginning on November 15 and concluding with an independent wee kend on November 23 and 24 at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex. Open to all community members, the holiday pop -up market included over 90 Black-owned local businesses, artists, and performers, and had more than 4,000 people attend over its three days. The event coincided with a holiday food basket drive that provided Black families with culturally significant, Afro-Caribbean diasporic food baskets. A total of 340 food baskets were distributed to families experiencing financial hardship and/or food insecurity in the Durham Region. Community Presentations and Consultations: The Taskforce welcomed several community partners throughout the year to deliver presentations about various community initiatives and engage in consultation. These included: City of Pickering - Community Services Department (public art installations, museum exhibits, etc.), Ifarada Institute (Programs and Initiatives for Black Communities), PFLAG Canada, Durham Region (Programs and Events), and Cultural Expressions Art Gallery (Black History Month). Several of these presentations resulted in community collaborations, including the work plan. B. 2025 Workplan PABRT members have developed a new work plan for 2025 to build on existing successes and advance their mandate to: enhance the shared experience and opportunities of Black residents; implement tangible and sustainable actions to support the prevention, reduction, and response to systemic and institutional anti-Black racism in Pickering; foster transparency and accountability in identifying and addressing systemic and institutional anti-Black racism within - 398 - CAO 08-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce Page 4 Pickering; identify and coordinate opportunities for community engagement; and, celebrate, conserve, and promote the Black community and Black culture, heritage, and history. Action Area Description Deliverables Consultation Strategic visioning surrounding anti- black racism initiatives and impacts in the community. • Initiate and develop a final report with recommendations to address Anti-Black racism and anti-oppression in Pickering, for Council’s consideration. • Conduct community engagement and consultation with residents, organizations, and municipal leaders. Community engagements, events, and partnerships Collaborations with community partners through events, meetings, and other initiatives • Nurture and develop new partnerships with City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Cultural Expressions, Durham Family Cultural Centre, Ifarada, Durham One and other municipalities and service organizations. • Plan and implement signature events: Annual Community event in celebration of the International Day for People of African Descent and Black Joy Holiday Market. • Continued partnership in community events such as those in support of Black History Month (i.e. Together We Rise Annual Black History Month Celebration and Cultural Expressions Black History Month Celebration), Emancipation Day and City of Pickering events (i.e. Artfest, Cultural Fusion, Winter Nights City Lights). Marketing and promotions Supplies and materials to support and promote community engagements • Event signage, educational resources, and other promotional and printed materials. • Event supplies for activations and information tables at community events. Per section 04.03 and 11.01 of the Committees and Taskforces of Council Policy (ADM 040), “taskforces must seek Council approval to hold an event and each request to Council must include the complete details of the event (e.g., budget, approximate number of staff required, month the event would be held in, and purpose of the event).” The policy also requires that the proposed event is in accordance with the Terms of Reference and mandate of the group. - 399 - CAO 08-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce Page 5 While discussions with PABRT are still ongoing to finalize event participation, and Council approval is required before these events can officially proceed. 3rd Annual Community Celebration for the International Day for People of African Descent Date: August, 2025 Location: Esplanade Park Budget allocation: $4,000 Description: The International Day for People of African Descent commemorates the adoption of the first declaration of the rights of people of African descent on August 31,1920, in New York. In celebration of this historic milestone, PABRT, in partnership with the City of Pickering, will host a community gathering in Esplanade Park. The event will provide a platform for Anti - Black racism community groups and Black-led service organizations to network and engage with community members around programs, service and other initiatives. It will also be used to advance PABRT’s strategic visioning initiative. 4th Annual Black Joy Holiday Market Date: November 14 &15, 2025 Location: Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Budget allocation: $6,000 Description: In collaboration with the DFCC, PABRT will host its third annual Black Joy Holiday Market as a holiday pop-up market that showcases local Black-owned businesses. Following last year’s success, the event will be integrated into the existing “Winter Nights, City Lights” community festival hosted by the City of Pickering. This event will coincide with a holiday food basket drive coordinated by the DFCC to address food insecurity, alleviate financial hardship, and promote Black culture through the provision of culturally relevant items. City of Pickering staff from applicable departments support the events, in principle, subject to various event requirements being met by PABRT during the event planning process. The requirements may include, but are not limited to, the following: • permit for rental facility (if applicable) • proof of liability insurance (if applicable) • rentals of event equipment and supplies • submission of site plan and emergency response plan • pre-registration that does not exceed capacity • adherence to the City’s Emergency Weather Standard Operating Procedure • hiring of site security and police officers to monitor event operations (if applicable) City of Pickering Events: PABRT will participate in the City of Pickering’s community events for Artfest (May 24 & 25, 2025) and Cultural Fusion (September 13, 2025) by providing information booths with small interactive activities to engage event attendees and raise community awareness around the PABRT initiatives. - 400 - CAO 08-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce Page 6 Attachment: None. Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Justine Wallace, Ph.D(c) Mark Guinto (Acting) Supervisor, Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Division Head, Public Affairs and Corporate Communications MG:jw Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original Signed By:Original Signed By: Original Signed By: - 401 - Report to Council Report Number: CS 08-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Laura Gibbs Director, Community Services Subject: Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Roof and Skylight Replacement Second-Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5 File: A-1440-001 Recommendation: 1. That the quotation submitted by Solar Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd. in response to Second- Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5 for the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Roof (D, D1, I4) and Skylight Replacement, in the amount of $1,496,177.00 (net HST) or $1,661,439.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $1,966,539.00 (HST included), including the amount of the tender, construction contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $1,770,929.00 (net HST) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $1,770,929.00 to be funded from the Facilities Reserve and CCBF (FGT) Oblg RF as approved in the 2024 and 2025 Capital Budgets; 4. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to approve consulting costs that may exceed $50,000.00 but not in excess of $65,000.00 to prevent any related risks of delays in construction; 5. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the CCDC -2, 2020 Stipulated Price Contract with Solar Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd. pursuant to Second Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5; and 6. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to award a construction contract and related work for the replacement of roof areas D, D1, I4 and related skylights at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex (CHDRC), located at 1867 Valley Farm Road. The purpose of this work is to provide all labour, machinery, tools, apparatus, materials, equipment, and other means of construction for the replacement of the roof s (D, D1 and I4), roughly corresponding to the area supported by the space frame structure visible over the lobby , banquet hall, fitness area and adjacent spaces inside the building, and related - 402 - CS 08-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Roof and Skylight Replacement Page 2 components at CHDRC as quoted through RFQQ2025-5. These roof s and skylights have reached the end of their serviceable life and require replacement. Second-Stage Quotation Request No. RFQQ2025-5 through the Ontario Education Collaborative Marketplace (OECM) agreement was published on the City’s bids&tenders portal to 13 pre-qualified contractors on March 11, 2025, and closed on April 2, 2025. Bids submissions were received from five contractors. All pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document have been reviewed and approved. The lowest compliant quotation submitted by Solar Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd. in the amount of $1,496,177.00 (net HST) or $1,661,439.00 (HST included), is recommended for approval. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $1,966,539.00 (HST included) and the total net project cost is estimated at $1,770,929.00 (net of HST rebate). Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community . Financial Implications: 1. Second Stage Quote Amount RFQQ2025-5 $1,470,300.00 HST (13%) 191,139.00 Total Gross Quotation Cost $1,661,439.00 2. Estimated Project Costing Summary RFQQ2025-5 $1,470,300.00 Testing and Inspection Costs Consulting Costs 30,000.00 65,000.00 Contingency (12%) 175,000.00 Total Project Cost $1,740,300.00 HST (13%) 226,239.00 Total Gross Project Costs $1,966,539.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (195,610.00) Total Net Project Cost $1,770,929.00 - 403 - CS 08-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Roof and Skylight Replacement Page 3 3. Approved Source of Funds – Community Services Capital Budget Approved Code Source of Funds Funds Available Funds Required C10225.2406 CCBF (FGT) Oblg RF $2,600,000.00 $1,770,929.00 C10225.2406 Facilities Reserve 40,000.00 0.00 Discussion: The purpose of this report is to award a construction contract and related work for the replacement of roof areas D, D1, I4 and related skylights at the CHDRC, located at 1867 Valley Farm Road. The existing roof s and skylights within areas D, D1 and I4, generally located above the existing space frame over the main lobby , banquet hall, fitness area and adjoining spaces, are at end of life and require replacement. Most were installed in 2002 and have already seen extensive localized repairs. Full replacement is now required. Work will proceed gradually over the course of the summer and be coordinated to minimize disruptions to existing programming. Some short term, isolated shutdowns will be required as the skylights are replaced, and to ensure the safety of building occupants below. Advance notice will be provided prior to any temporary service disruptions. As this is exterior work, weather will also be a factor. Consulting costs included in the project cost estimate include design and related fees already awarded, as well as an allowance for additional site visits to ensure a high degree of oversight and quality control. This is a critical roof for the ongoing operation of the CHDRC, and extra site inspections will help ensure that all work is completed in accordance with the contract documents. Second-Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5 through the OECM agreement was published on the City’s bids&tenders portal to 13 pre-qualified contractors on March 11, 2025, and closed on April 2, 2025. Bids submissions were received from five contractors. In accordance with the Purchasing Policy, Item 13.01, the Manager may enter into arrangements with municipalities, local boards and other public bodies on a cooperative or joint venture basis where there are economic advantages and where the best interests of the City would be served. All pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document have been reviewed and approved. The top-ranked response submitted by Solar Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd. in the amount of $1,496,177.00 (net HST) or $1,661,439.00 (HST included), is recommended for approval. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $1,966,539.00 (HST included) and the total net project cost is estimated at $1,770,929.00 (net of HST rebate). Attachment: None. Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $869,071.00 - 404 - CS 08-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Roof and Skylight Replacement Page 4 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Vince Plouffe, OAA, MRAIC Laura Gibbs, MBA, MSc. Division Head, Facilities Management Director, Community Services & Construction Original SIgned ByOriginal Signed By Dennis Yip, P.Eng., PMP®, CEM, LEED® AP Cathy Bazinet, CPPB, NIGP-CPP Manager, Facilities Capital Projects Manager, Procurement Original Signed By Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer VP:dy Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 405 - Report to Council Report Number: CS 10-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Laura Gibbs Director, Community Services Subject: General Contr acting Services for Redman House Restoration Tender No. T2025-6 File: A-1440-001 Recommendation: 1.That the bid submitted by Icon Builders Inc. in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-6 for General Contracting Services for Redman House Restoration, in the amount of $592,070.21 (net HST) or $657,467.90 (HST included) be accepted; 2.That the total gross project cost of $843,918.00 (HST included), including the amount of the tender, construction contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $759,974.00 (net HST) be approved; 3.That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $759,974.00 to be funded as approved in the 2018, 2021, 2022 and 2024 Capital Budget as follows: a.The sum of $121,289.00 to be funded by the Rate Stabilization Reserve; b.The sum of $516,560.00 to be funded by the GICB grant; c.The sum of $88,000.00 to be funded by the Facilities Reserve; d.The sum of $34,125.00 to be funded by Property Taxes; 4.That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the CCDC-2, 2020 Stipulated Price Contract with Icon Builders Inc. pursuant to Request for Tender No. T2025-6; and 5.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to award General Contract Services for Redman House Restoration, located on the lower site of the Pickering Museum Village at 3550 Greenwood Road. The restoration work includes restoration of architectural elements, building envelope, reconstruction of the existing barrier-free access ramp, structural repairs, interior work, demolition, mechanical, electrical, and information technology as tendered through T2025-6. Renovation is required to maintain the Redman House as a public program space, with renovated amenities including a program kitchen, program room, public washrooms, and to provide office and break room space for staff that run programs at the museum . Renovation work will maintain the aesthetic of the historic character of the building. - 406 - CS 10-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: General Contracting Services for Redman House Renovation Page 2 Request for Tender No. T2025-6 was advertised on the City’s Bids & Tenders portal on March 19, 2025, and closed on April 22, 2025. Bid submissions were received from 11 contractors. All required pre-conditions of the award have been received and approved; therefore, the lowest compliant bid submitted by Icon Builders Inc. in the amount of $592,070.21 (net HST) or $657,467.90 (HST included), is recommended for approval. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $843,918.00 (HST included), and the total net project cost is estimated at $759,974.00 (net of HST rebate). A significant portion of the total project cost is funded by the Green and Inclusive Community Buildings (GICB) federal grant program. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community . Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount Tender T2025-6 $518,830.00 Tender T2025-6 (Optional Prices) 63,000.00 HST (13%) 75,637.90 Total Gross Tender Cost $657,467.90 2. Estimated Project Costing Summary Tender T2025-6 including Optional Prices $581,830.00 Testing and Inspection Costs Additional Consulting and Costs 20,000.00 25,000.00 Contingency (20%) 120,000.00 Total Project Cost 746,830.00 HST (13%) 97,088.00 Total Gross Project Costs $843,918.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (83,944.00) Total Net Project Cost $759,974.00 3. Approved Source of Funds – Community Services Capital Budget Approved Code Source of Funds Funds Available Funds Required C10250.2210 Rate Stabilization $85,519.00 $85,519.00 C10250.2210 GICB Grant 516,560.00 516,560.00 C10250.2210 Facilities Reserve 88,000.00 88,000.00 C10250.2106 Property Taxes 34,125.00 34,125.00 C10250.2104 Rate Stabilization 358,800.00 35,770.00 Total $1,083,004.00 $759,974.00 - 407 - CS 10-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: General Contracting Services for Redman House Renovation Page 3 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $ 323,030.00 All project costs will be allocated and consolidated under C10250.2210 (Redman House Restoration). The funding from C10250.2104 (PHCC Site Preparation) and C10250.2106 (Museum Site Accessibility) will be consolidated under C10250.2210. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to award General Contract Services for Redman House Restoration, located on the lower site of the Pickering Museum Village at 3550 Greenwood Road. The Redman House Program Centre serves as the main facility on the lower site of the museum property for delivery of programs and amenities, including washroom s, kitchen, eating and meeting spaces. Half of the building is of heritage construction (ca. 1840). It was renovated and expanded with an addition in 2004. Having served as the heart of museum operations since that time, many major components of the building are heavily worn and require restoration or replacement. Staff submitted an application to the Green and Inclusive Community Buildings (GICB) program in accordance with Report CS 28-21 (Resolution #629/21) securing $516,560.00 in funding for the project. Conditions of the GICB grant require general energy efficiency retrofits to the building. These will be achieved through upgrades to both mechanical and electrical systems and components, roof replacement and localized improvements to building assemblies. Accessibility improvements will prioritize replacement of the existing ram p, which must be relocated to prevent further damage to the building’s foundations. Energy improvements for this facility also align with targets set by the City’s Corporate Energy Management Plan. Work will commence in July and be coordinated to minimize disruptions to the lower museum site with a target completion date in January 2026. Funding agreements with GICB were extended due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the original project schedule, but all funds must be expended by March 2026. As this project includes exterior work, weather will also be a factor. Additional c onsulting costs have been included in the project cost estimate as an allowance for additional site visits to ensure a high degree of oversight and quality control during the work, and in case concealed conditions are discovered. A higher-than-normal construction contingency has also been included due to the heritage construction nature of the building. It is common to encounter unforeseen and non-standard materials and assemblies in historic buildings. The additional funds will avoid any potential project delays should such conditions be encountered. Request for Tender No. T2025-6 was advertised on the City’s Bids & Tenders portal on March 19, 2025, and closed on April 22, 2025. Bid submissions were received from 11 contractors. Icon Builders Inc. is the lowest compliant bid and is recommended for award in the amount of $592,070.21 (net HST) or $657,467.90 (HST included), subject to the receipt and approval of all pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $843,918.00 (HST included), and the total net project cost is estimated at $759,974.00 (net of HST rebate). - 408 - CS 10-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: General Contracting Services for Redman House Renovation Page 4 Attachment: None. Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Vince Plouffe, OAA, MRAIC Cathy Bazinet, CPPB, NIGP-CPP Division Head, Facilities Management Manager, Procurement & Construction Original Signed ByOriginal Signed By Dennis Yip, P.Eng., PMP®, CEM, LEED® AP Laura Gibbs, MBA, MSc. Manager, Facilities Capital Projects Director, Community Services Original Signed By Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer LG :dy Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 409 - Report to Council Report Number: INF 03-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Brian Duffield Director, City Infrastructure Subject: Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Tender No. T2025-4 File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That the bid submitted by 1108575 Ontario LTD O/A Kon-Strutt Construction in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-4 for Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets, in the amount of $2,509,862.00 (net HST) or $2,787,091.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $3,237,785.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, geotechnical investigation reports, material testing, contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $2,915,727.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $2,915,727.00 as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget from the Building Faster Fund (BFF) Reserve Fund, on the condition that the City receives the grant funding related to achieving its 2024 housing targets; and the default funding strategy would have the projects funded by a transfer from Roads & Bridges Reserve Fund; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to award Request for Tender No. T2025-4 for Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets. As part of the 2025 Engineering Roads Capital Budget, the following ten locations were approved for asphalt resurfacing: • Creekview Circle – from Downland Drive to Petticoat Lane • Rosebank Road – from Gillmoss Road to Dahlia Crescent • Sunrise Avenue – from West Shore Boulevard to Breezy Drive • Storrington Street – from Walnut Lane to Listowell Crescent • Echo Point Court – from Glenanna Road to North Terminus • Greenburn Place – from Fifth Concession Road to North Terminus • Linwood Street – from Bridle Path (west leg) to Parkdale Street • Lodge Road – from Fieldlight Boulevard to Poppy Lane • Fairview Avenue – from Browning Avenue to South Terminus • Vistula Drive – from Batory Avenue to Elvira Court - 410 - INF 03-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 2 • Garvolin Avenue – from Modlin Road to Krosno Boulevard Fairvew Avenue was reconstructed in 2023 and the surface lift of asphalt from Browning Avenue to South Terminus was included in the 2025 Engineering Capital Budget. This work was included in Request for Tender No. T2025-4 due to similarity in scope. Request for Tender No. T2025-4 was advertised on the City’s Bids&Tenders portal on March 12, 2025, and closed on April 11, 2025 with six bids submitted. The lowest compliant bid submitted by 1108575 Ontario LTD O/A Kon-Strutt Construction in the amount of $2,466,451.90 (net HST) or $2,787,090.65 (HST included), is recommended for approval. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $3,237,785.00 (HST included), and the total net project cost is estimated at $2,915,727.00 (net of HST rebate). Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount Tender T2025-4 $2,466,451.90 HST (13%) 320,638.75 Total Gross Tender Cost $2,787,090.65 2. Estimated Project Costing Summary Tender No. T2025-4 $2,466,452.00 Geotechnical Investigation Reports 31,400.00 Materials Testing Provincial Building Faster Fund (BFF) Sponsor Signage 69,297.80 2,173.00 Contingency (12%) 295,974.00 Total Project Cost 2,865,296.80 HST (13%) 372,489.00 Total Gross Project Costs $3,237,785.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (322,059.00) Total Net Project Cost $2,915,727.00 - 411 - INF 03-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 3 3. Approved Source of Funds – Engineering Services Capital Budget Expenditure Account Source of Funds Funds Available Funds Required C10570.2505 C10570.2506 C10570.2508 C10570.2509 C10570.2511 C10570.2512 C10570.2513 C10570.2514 C10570.2515 C10570.2516 C10570.2517 Total Funds BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund BFF Reserve Fund 498,333.98 450,080.18 477,405.53 341,320.38 202,664.68 586,556.64 425,381.29 557,695.99 73,090.93 421,752.45 466,036.62 $4,500,318.67 361,439.00 356,083.00 184,274.00 257,437.00 117,946.00 326,838.00 310,150.00 380,039.00 31,639.00 227,624.00 362,258.00 $2,915,727.00 Net project cost (over) under approved funds $1,584,591.67 When Finance staff were developing the funding strategy for the 2025 Capital Budget, BFF dollars were introduced to reduce the funding challenges for 2025 and capital forecast. During the budget development stage, finance staff analyzed the City’s current housing target activity in comparison to the Provincial housing target. Based on this analysis, finance staff introduced the use of BFF dollars for the 2025 Capital Budget. This funding strategy was explained in the 2025 Financial Housekeeping Report (FIN 02-25). The Province has not yet announced the City's BFF allocation, but it's expected in the coming weeks with the announcement of 2024 BFF grant funding recipients. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to award Request for Tender No. T2025-4 for Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets to 1108575 Ontario LTD O/A Kon-Strutt Construction. As part of the 2025 Engineering Roads Capital Budget, the following asphalt resurfacing locations were approved as construction projects: • Creekview Circle – from Downland Drive to Petticoat Lane • Rosebank Road – from Gillmoss Road to Dahlia Crescent • Sunrise Avenue – from West Shore Boulevard to Breezy Drive • Storrington Street – from Walnut Lane to Listowell Crescen • Echo Point Court – from Glenanna Road to North Terminus • Greenburn Place – from Fifth Concession Road to North Terminus • Linwood Street – from Bridle Path (west leg) to Parkdale Street • Lodge Road – from Fieldlight Boulevard to Poppy Lane - 412 - INF 03-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 4 • Fairview Avenue – from Browning Avenue to South Terminus • Vistula Drive – from Batory Avenue to Elvira Court • Garvolin Avenue – from Modlin Road to Krosno Boulevard As part of the 2016 Road Needs Study endorsed by Council through Resolution #374/17, these streets have been identified and recommended for resurfacing improvements. The 2016 Road Needs Study is used by staff as a resource document for identifying and planning maintenance, rehabilitation and reconstruction strategies, programs and projects for all Pickering roads. The roads selected for asphalt resurfacing in 2025 align with the priorities of the 2016 Road Needs Study. Request for Tender No. T2025-4 was advertised on the City’s Bids&tenders portal on Wednesday, March 12, 2025, and closed on Friday, April 11, 2025 with six bids submitted. The lowest compliant bid of $2,509,861.00 (net HST) or $2,787,090.00 (HST included) submitted by 1108575 Ontario LTD O/A Kon-Strutt Construction is recommended for approval. The total gross project cost which includes the tendered amount, a construction contingency, and other associated costs is estimated at $3,237,785.00 (HST included) with an estimated total net project cost of $2,915,727.00 (net HST). Through RFSQ2023-1 Roster Category of Geotechnical Investigation and Inspection Services Master Framework Agreement, the geotechnical investigation and inspection services under associated costs have been awarded to GHD. Reference for 1108575 Ontario LTD O/A Kon-Strutt Construction have been reviewed and are deemed acceptable by the Division Head, Capital Projects & Infrastructure. In conjunction with staff’s review of the Contractor’s previous work experience, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of all tenders and relevant documents received, the City Infrastructure Department recommends acceptance of the lowest compliant bid submitted by 1108575 Ontario LTD O/A Kon-Strutt Construction for RFT No. T2025-4 in the amount of $2,787,090.65 (HST included), and that the total net project cost of $2,915,727.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved. Attachment: 1. Location Map Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Original Signed By: Kevin Heathcote, P.Eng. Brian Duffield Division Head, City Infrastructure Director, City Infrastructure - 413 - INF 03-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 5 Original Signed By: Cathy Bazinet, CPPB, NIGP-CPP Manager, Procurement Original Signed By: Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer KH:bd Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 414 - T2025-4 – Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 1 of 6 Location Maps Project Area No. 1 – Creekview Circle Creekview Circle – from Downland Drive to Petticoat Lane. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. Existing concrete curbs and gutters and sidewalks that are deficient shall be removed and replaced as required. Project Area No. 2 – Rosebank Road Rosebank Road – from Gillmoss Road to Dahlia Crescent. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. Existing concrete curbs and gutters and sidewalks that are deficient shall be removed and replaced as required. Attachment 1 to Report INF 03-25 - 415 - T2025-4 – Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 2 of 6 Project Area No. 3 – Sunrise Avenue Sunrise Avenue – from West Shore Boulevard to Breezy Drive. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. All existing concrete barrier curbs shall be removed and replaced with new concrete curbs and gutters. Project Area No. 4 – Storrington Street Storrington Street – from Walnut Lane to Listowell Crescent. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. Existing concrete curbs and gutters and sidewalks that are deficient shall be removed and replaced as required. - 416 - T2025-4 – Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 3 of 6 Project Area No. 5 – Echo Point Court Echo Point Court – from Glenanna Road to North Terminus. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. Existing concrete curbs and gutters and sidewalks that are deficient shall be removed and replaced as required. Project Area No. 6 – Greenburn Place Greenburn Place – from Fifth Concession Road to North Terminus. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. Existing concrete curbs and gutters that are deficient shall be removed and replaced as required. - 417 - T2025-4 – Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 4 of 6 Project Area No. 7 – Linwood Street Linwood Street – from Bridle Path (west leg) to Parkdale Street. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. Existing concrete curbs and gutters and sidewalks that are deficient shall be removed and replaced as required. Project Area No. 8 – Lodge Road Lodge Road – from Fieldlight Boulevard to Poppy Lane. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. All existing concrete barrier curbs shall be removed and replaced with new concrete curbs and gutters. - 418 - T2025-4 – Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 5 of 6 Project Area No. 9 – Fairview Avenue Fairview Avenue – from Browning Avenue to South Terminus. The proposed work includes concrete curb, maintenance hole and catch basin frame adjustments, surface asphalt placement and pavement markings. Project Area No. 10 – Vistula Drive Vistula Drive – from Batory Avenue to Elvira Court. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. All existing concrete barrier curbs shall be removed and replaced with new concrete curbs and gutters. - 419 - T2025-4 – Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Page 6 of 6 Project Area No. 11 – Garvolin Avenue Garvolin Avenue – from Modlin Road to Krosno Boulevard. The proposed work includes asphalt resurfacing. All existing concrete barrier curbs shall be removed and replaced with new concrete curbs and gutters. - 420 - Report to Council Report Number: PLN 12-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings: ERO 025-0461, ERO 025-0462, ERO 025-0463, Bill 17: Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025 Regulatory Registry of Ontario Postings: 25-MMAH003 City of Pickering Comments on ERO and Regulatory Postings File: L-1100-068 Recommendation: 1. That Council endorse the comments contained in Report PLN 12-25, as the City of Pickering detailed comments on the ERO Postings ERO 025-0461, ERO 025-0462, ERO 025-0463, 25-MMAH003; and 2. That Council authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to submit the Council endorsed comments on the identified ERO and Regulatory postings to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing website by the June 11 and 26, 2025, deadlines. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to inform Council of proposed changes in legislation from Bill 17, seek Council’s endorsement of staff’s comments on these changes, and authorize the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to submit formal comments to the Province on the proposed legislative changes. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community. Financial Implications: While there are no immediate costs to the City as a result of the proposed changes, the long-term financial implications are unknown at this time. The potential need for the City to absorb the cost of undertaking peer reviews of technical studies to assist in the review of development applications, and the impact from proposed changes to development charges, will likely result in future costs to the City unless the Province offers alternatives to make municipalities whole. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to inform Council of proposed changes in legislation from Bill 17 (Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025), seek Council’s endorsement of staff’s comments on these changes, and authorize the CAO to submit formal comments to the Province on the proposed legislative changes. - 421 - PLN 12-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings Page 2 1. Background On May 12, 2025, the Province released Bill 17: Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025, for comment on the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO) and the Regulatory Registry. This Bill includes proposed changes to various pieces of legislation, regulations, and policies, with the purpose of making it easier and faster to build new homes, and infrastructure like transit, roads, and water and wastewater systems. The following postings were listed on the ERO for either a 30 or a 45-day commenting period concluding on June 11 and 26, 2025, respectively. The ERO Postings are summarized below: 2. ERO Postings 2.1 ERO 025-0461 Proposed Planning Act and City of Toronto Act, 2006 Changes (Schedules 3 and 7 of Bill 17: Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025): Minor Variances, Minister’s Zoning Orders, Study Requirements, and Planning for Schools. 2.1.1 As-of-right setback variations The Province is proposing that variations to zoning by-law regulations be permitted “as of right” if a proposal is within a prescribed percentage of the required setback (the minimum distance a building or structure must be from a property line or other protected area) on specified lands. Specified lands would include parcels of urban residential lands outside of the Greenbelt Area, and exclude areas such as hazardous lands, and lands near shorelines and railways. This would mean that appearing before a municipal committee of adjustment would not be necessary for proposals that otherwise comply with zoning by-laws but need variations from setback requirements no greater than the prescribed percentage (see also related ERO 025-0463 below). 2.1.2 Minister’s Zoning Orders with conditions The Province is proposing to allow the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to impose conditions (i.e., on municipalities or proponents) that must be met before a use permitted by a Minister’s Zoning Order comes into effect. 2.1.3 Limit complete application requirements The Province is proposing to limit complete application requirements to the studies currently identified in the City’s Official Plans. Any new or revised requirements would have to be approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. - 422 - PLN 12-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings Page 3 The Province is also proposing to specify the certified professionals from whom municipalities would be required to accept studies without question or peer review. 2.1.4 Permit Schools Broadly The Province proposes to exempt the placement of all portable classrooms at public school sites from site plan control. Currently, public schools built prior to January 1, 2007, are exempt from site plan control when adding a portable classroom. This change would extend the exemption to all school sites. The Province is also proposing to amend the Planning Act to explicitly allow the use of Kindergarten to Grade 12 public schools and ancillary uses (such as associated childcare) on urban land zoned for residential uses “as-of-right." 2.2 ERO 025-0462 Proposed Regulations – Reducing the number and type of studies for Complete Applications The Province is proposing regulation-making authority that would enable the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to reduce the number and type of studies comprising a complete application. As proposed, municipalities would no longer be permitted to require the following studies as part of a complete planning application: • Sun/Shadow: Reviews the impact of shadows cast by a proposed development on the subject land and surrounding lands, including streets and parks. • Wind: Reviews the potential wind condition at the pedestrian level and on properties adjacent to tall buildings. • Urban Design: Reviews how the massing, layout, materials, and design of a building and site align with municipal urban design guidelines or policies. • Lighting: Reviews lighting levels, including the location and type of lighting fixtures proposed on the exterior of the building and on the site. In cases where an exception is required to enable additional studies, municipalities would have to seek approval from the ministry. 2.3 ERO 025-0463 Proposed Regulation– As-of-right Variations from Setback Requirements Schedule 7 of Bill 17 proposes to amend the Planning Act to provide regulation-making authority to reduce planning applications for minor variances. If passed, Bill 17 would enable the Minister, by regulation, to permit variation to a zoning by-law to be “as of right” if a proposal is within a prescribed percentage of the required setback (the minimum distance a building or structure must be from a property line) on specified lands. - 423 - PLN 12-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings Page 4 The ERO posting also states that the proposed changes would work with Ontario Regulation 299/19: Additional Residential Units to help create additional residential units, such as basement suites, by eliminating additional barriers related to setbacks. While it specifically refers to required setbacks, the ERO posting also requests comments on the application of “as-of-right” variations to additional performance standards (e.g., height, lot coverage). 3. Regulatory Registry Posting 25-MMAH003 The government has proposed amendments to standardize the rules in the Development Charges Act, 1997 and enhance cost predictability for new developments. The proposed changes are intended make it easier and faster for new homes and infrastructure to be built. A detailed review of the changes proposed to the Development Charges Act were provided by Watson & Associates and are contained in Attachment 1. Staff are unable to provide a thorough review of the proposed changes to the Development Charges Act within the timeframe of this report and will continue to monitor the proposed changes and inform Council of potential impacts to municipalities as it moves through the legislative process. 4. Staff comments on the proposed changes to the Planning Act 4.1 As-of-right setback variations As described earlier, permitting setback variations “as-of-right” would apply to all forms of development (residential and non-residential). It would apply to both new construction as well as additions to existing buildings even though the ERO posting suggests that this permission would work to promote and expedite the construction of additional dwelling units (ADUs). At this time, staff are not aware that existing setback requirements are creating a barrier to the construction of safe ADUs. Setbacks within municipal zoning by-laws are written to achieve a variety of intents such as: • accommodate space for building, fence, and property line maintenance • avoid roof drainage onto neighbouring properties • permit access to side yards • preserve private amenity space in rear yards, and • create consistent streetscapes - 424 - PLN 12-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings Page 5 The proposed change would be subject to a regulation in the Planning Act that would identify the amount of variance that would be permitted (i.e., 5%, 10%, etc.). At this time, it is not known what value may be implemented in a future regulation. As a result, it is difficult to anticipate all outcomes of permitting setback variations “as-of-right”. Staff do not support permitting setback variations “as-of-right”. Zoning setbacks are already designed to be minimum standards necessary to achieve responsible development in keeping with the Official Plan designation for the neighbourhood. These setbacks provide a consistent framework to guide developers and property owners on where development can occur. These setbacks also give confidence to neighbouring property owners that new development and expansions will not create conditions that require trespass or encroachment onto their property. Under the current regulations in the Planning Act, the public can seek variances where it is demonstrated that the site- specific circumstances warrant a modification. Based on the manner and type of construction, the Ontario Building Code (OBC) also requires separation distances for new buildings from property lines. However, zoning setbacks account for scenarios not addressed by the OBC. For example, if approved, “as-of-right” variations could reduce the 1.2 metre minimum path of travel required to access ADUs constructed in rear yards. This could compromise the ability for emergency services personnel from reaching occupants of ADUs with necessary equipment (i.e., stretchers). The proposed as-of-right variations to zoning standards do not appear to provide a useful tool in Pickering. A review of the 32 City of Pickering applications for side yard variances over the last 6 months found that only one would have met a 10% as-of-right variation, as put forward by the Province for consultation. Further, it is noted that Committee of Adjustment applications are most frequently associated with the construction of replacement dwellings, as opposed to construction of dwellings adding to the City’s complement of units. Where a variance may be required for a dwelling adding to the City’s complement of units, there would not be a significant delay as Pickering’s Committee of Adjustment meets once a month. The proposed as-of-right variations for side yards, and building height, lot coverage, or other zoning provision is not recommended. It would create a second zoning standard to be checked by staff, and from which, presumably, a variance could still be applied for. Committees of Adjustment serve the function to consider minor changes to a zoning by-law, taking into consideration a number of site specific factors about the proposed development, the site itself, the abutting development and context, and make a decision, which is then appealable by various parties. The Committee of Adjustment should be the body that determines variances, not a zoning review officer identifying a prescribed zoning variation by provincial regulation with no local context. - 425 - PLN 12-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings Page 6 4.2 Minister’s Zoning Orders with conditions Currently, Minister's Zoning Orders (MZOs) are approved with no conditions. This means that properties receiving an MZO have demonstrated, to the Minister’s satisfaction, that the approved use is appropriate and that the corresponding zoning regulations are satisfactory to support development. The Province is proposing to permit MZOs that could be subject to conditions imposed by the Minister. It is unclear what these conditions would include (i.e., conditions related to the phasing of development, completion of required studies, or the provision of infrastructure). As a result of this uncertainty, staff cannot provide comments on this proposed change. More information is needed on the nature of conditions that may be imposed in order for municipalities to be able to comment. 4.3 Limit complete application requirements 4.3.1 Listing required studies in the Official Plan Staff agree that potential studies necessary for a complete application should be listed in a municipal Official Plan. Appendix I to Report 12-25 contains a list of potential studies from the Pickering Official Plan that the City has deemed appropriate for a complete application in the City of Pickering. 4.3.2 Accepting studies from certified professionals Staff strongly oppose the proposal that the City should accept and implement studies from certified professionals without review and oversight by appropriate municipal staff, peer review consultants on behalf of City staff where required, and outside agencies. Submission of a study by a certified professional does not automatically ensure that the document is without error. Part of the oversight conducted by the municipal review of an application is to identify any factual and contextual errors or omissions that may occur in a study. The basis of this proposed change is that municipalities would accept the conclusions of studies, prepared by certified professionals, as infallible and not requiring amendment or revision. This would place Council in a position of relying on, and making decisions on, studies even if the information they contain is identified by staff as being inaccurate or incomplete. It is unclear who would bear liability (the certified professional or Council) for decisions made by Council in these circumstances. This could lead to Council denying more applications. The inevitable resubmissions or appeals may be more costly and longer than the existing application review process. 4.3.3 Prohibit Sun/Shadow, Wind, Urban Design, and Lighting studies as part of a complete application Staff strongly oppose the proposal to restrict the studies noted above. Sun/shadow and wind studies are vital to determining the comfort and enjoyment resulting from a - 426 - PLN 12-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings Page 7 development on surrounding public and private spaces. No one enjoys sitting in a park that is cast in shadow all day. No one enjoys walking along a sidewalk or sitting at a restaurant patio in excessively windy conditions. These conditions impact comfort and mental well-being when they limit the enjoyment of the amenity spaces within a development. Urban design studies are requested from developers to ensure their proposal reflects relevant design policies and adheres to any Council-approved urban design guidelines. These studies ensure that a proposed development fits well within its surrounding context and contributes positively to the public realm. They assess key elements such as building height, massing, and the relationship to adjacent streets and buildings while addressing connectivity and walkability. Urban design studies provide visuals to communicate design intent to Council and the public, and support design excellence. Municipalities review lighting studies to ensure public safety and avoid nuisance concerns. For example, a lighting study ensures sufficient illumination is provided at driveway entrances so that motorists can clearly see pedestrians walking at night. Lighting studies also ensure that all outdoor common areas are effectively illuminated to promote safety and discourage illicit behaviour. The results of a lighting study are also used to identify where light shields are required to avoid unwanted light projecting onto neighbouring properties. If municipalities are no longer permitted to request these studies from developers, Council may find themselves in the position of contracting these studies, at the City’s expense, to achieve a thorough review of an application. It is unknown how often this approach would be warranted and what the cost to the City would be from this action. Requiring these studies from developers will help ensure that new developments continue supporting livability, safety, and high-quality urban environments. 4.4 Permit schools broadly Staff have no objection to the proposed removal of Site Plan Control for school portables. School sites are generally large enough to accommodate portables, and school boards have the necessary resources to ensure that portables will not impact on- site drainage, parking and traffic. As temporary structures, portables can also be relocated as needed. Staff also support allowing new schools (K-12) “as-of-right" on urban land zoned for residential uses. As long as the site is of adequate size, land that is suitable for new home construction is also suitable for new schools. 5. Other Bill 17 proposed changes not included in any ERO postings Bill 17 also proposes a variety of legislative and regulatory changes not contained in one of the ERO postings, including restricting the ability of municipalities to request green building standards that exceed the minimum requirements of the Ontario Building Code. - 427 - PLN 12-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings Page 8 5.1 Pickering’s Integrated Sustainable Design Standards Bill 17 would significantly restrict the City of Pickering’s ability to enforce its Integrated Sustainable Design Standards (ISDS). The ISDS is a framework that supports the City’s commitment to sustainable growth, environmental stewardship, and the development of inclusive and healthy communities. Developed through extensive engagement with residents, stakeholders, the development community, including a Pickering focused building advisory panel, the ISDS is based on best practices for integrating sustainability into new development. Since January 1, 2023, the ISDS checklist has been applied to all new planning applications. In late 2023, Council strengthened the standards by approving an Official Plan Amendment, requiring all new developments to meet ISDS criteria (see Resolution #332/23, Attachment 2). Importantly, Pickering’s ISDS have not delayed approvals or hindered provincial housing targets, countering concerns that sustainability standards slow development. Although the ISDS supports many existing initiatives, such as the 2024-2028 Corporate Strategic Plan, Community Climate Adaptation Plan (anticipated for Council approval in May as of this writing), and the Durham Community Energy Plan, proposed Bill 17 would weaken the authority to enforce aspects of key performance measures. These measures include: • Urban Heat Island Reduction • Building Energy Performance and Emissions • Renewable Energy • Building Resilience • Criteria related to accessibility and community safety • Light Pollution Reduction • Common Outdoor Amenity Space • Bird-Friendly Design • Electric Vehicle Rough-in/Ready • Indoor Bicycle Parking and Storage • Construction Waste Reduction • Stormwater Management • Water Efficiency It is unclear whether the Province will be seeking comments on any of the changes listed in Section 5 of this Report through future ERO postings. 6. Conclusion Staff do not support the following changes proposed by Bill 17: the establishment of as- of-right variations to zoning standards; restrictions to the type and number of supporting studies municipalities may request in support of development applications; and - 428 - PLN 12-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings Page 9 requirements for municipalities to accept supporting studies prepared in support of development applications without a peer review. Staff do not support restrictions being imposed on municipalities from requiring developers to adhere to Council-approved green development standards. It is recommended Council endorse the comments contained in Report PLN 12-25, as the City of Pickering’s detailed comments on the ERO Postings ERO 025-0461, ERO 025-0462, ERO 025-0463, 25-MMAH003, and that Council authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to submit the Council endorsed comments on the identified ERO and Regulatory postings to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing website by the June 11 and 26, 2025, deadlines. Appendix: Appendix I Potential studies required as part of a complete application Attachments: 1.Preliminary Assessment of Bill 17 (Watson & Associates) 2.Resolution 332-23 Official Plan Amendment for ISDS Prepared By: Original Signed By Paul Wirch, RPP Principal Planner, Policy Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO PW:ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 429 - Appendix I to Report No. PLN 12-25 Potential Studies Required as part of a Complete Application - 430 - Potential studies required as part of a complete Required Study planning rationale report transportation study shadow study wind study statement of compliance with heritage conservation designation or conservation district policies archaeology assessment functional servicing study drainage and stormwater management study flood plain impact engineering study agricultural report site suitability study environmental report natural heritage evaluation hydrological evaluation hydrogeology and water budget study watershed/subwatershed study impact study on potential aggregate extraction aggregate extraction assessment study assessment of lands within 500 metres of a known waste disposal site environmental site assessment (Phase I, Phase II, and Record of Site Condition) contamination management plan containment management plan waste disposal community impact study noise study vibration study dust and/or odour study lighting study retail impact study sustainable development report rental housing conversion study urban design brief financial impact study architectural design study railway corridor safety study groundwater impact study water balance study information and communication technologies implementation plan salt management plan facility fit plan office demand study affordable housing brief - 431 - 2233 Argentia Rd. Suite 301 Mississauga, Ontario L5N 2X7 Office: 905-272-3600 Fax: 905-272-3602 www.watsonecon.ca Attachment 1 to Report PLN 12-25 May 15, 2025 To our Municipal Clients: Re: Assessment of Bill 17 (Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025) In our continued efforts to keep our clients up to date on legislative changes that may impact them, we are writing to inform you that Bill 17, Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025 (herein referred to as Bill 17) was tabled in the Ontario Legislature on May 12, 2025. This letter provides a summary of the proposed changes to the Development Charges Act, 1997 (D.C.A.) and commentary on the proposed changes to the growth management framework. As the Bill progresses through the legislative process, we will continue to advise of any amendments and associated impacts. Note that the Province is seeking comments via the Environmental Registry of Ontario at the following link: https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/025-0504. We will be submitting our comments prior to the deadline of June 12, 2025. 1.Overview Commentary The Province has stated that a goal of this Bill is to simplify and streamline development, while reducing barriers, including development fees. In this regard, the Bill proposes to amend various acts with the intent of building more homes faster in Ontario to address the current housing crisis. In addition to changes to the D.C.A., changes are proposed to the following Acts: •Building Code Act, 1992; •Building Transit Faster Act, 2020; •City of Toronto Act, 2006; •Metrolinx Act, 2006; •Ministry of Infrastructure Act, 2011; •Planning Act; and •Transit-oriented Communities Act, 2020. In addition to the legislative changes proposed, the Province has announced that they are exploring the use of a public utility model, which may include establishing municipal service corporations for water and wastewater systems. These changes could have significant impacts on the costs and delivery of water and wastewater services in Ontario. While this may serve to reduce the funding obligations from development charges (D.C.s), funding these costs from a broader pool of existing rate payers would likely result in higher water and wastewater rates. - 432 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2 2. Proposed Changes to the Development Charges Act The following provides a summary of the proposed changes to the D.C.A., along with commentary on the potential impacts to municipalities. 1. Exemption for long-term care homes • Currently, D.C.s imposed on long-term care homes are subject to annual instalments under section 26.1 of the D.C.A. • The proposed change would exempt long-term care homes from the payment of D.C.s. • This exemption would apply to any future D.C. instalments on long-term care home developments. • The D.C.A. does not allow reductions in D.C.s to be funded by other types of development. As such, the exemption will have to be funded from other municipal revenue sources. 2. Definition of capital costs, subject to regulation • The proposed change would add the words “subject to the regulations” to section 5 (3) of the D.C.A. o The proposed amendment expands the scope of the Province’s authority to limit eligible capital costs via regulation. o The D.C.A. currently provides this ability to limit the inclusion of land costs. o The Province intends to engage with municipalities and the development community to determine potential restrictions on what costs can be recovered through D.C.s. • Commentary from organizations in the development community suggests these discussions may continue to focus on limiting the inclusion of land costs in the D.C. calculations. The proposed amendment, however, provides broad authority for limiting eligible capital costs (i.e., the scope of regulatory authority is not restricted to land). • Reductions in D.C.-eligible capital costs will have to be funded from other municipal revenue sources. Changes to the definition of capital costs through regulation will require municipalities to adjust funding for capital projects swiftly without the legislative amendment process. 3. Simplified D.C. by-law process to reduce charges • Proposed change to section 19 (1.1) of the D.C.A. to allow a simplified process to amend a D.C. by-law for the following reasons: o Repeal or change a D.C. by-law expiry date (consistent with current provisions); o Repeal a D.C. by-law provision for indexing or amend to provide for a D.C. not to be indexed; and - 433 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3 o Decrease the amount of a D.C. for one or more types of development. • The simplified process includes passing of an amending by-law and providing notice of passing of the amending by-law. There will be no requirement to prepare a D.C. background study, undertake public consultation, and no ability to appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal. • Limiting the simplified D.C. by-law amendment process to situations where the amount of a D.C. for a type of development is being reduced would appear to allow municipalities to adjust the charges for changes in assumptions (e.g., reductions in capital cost estimates, application of grant funding to reduce the recoverable amount), adding exemptions for types of development, and phasing the imposition of a D.C. • It is unclear if the simplified process would apply where exemptions are being provided for purposes other than development type, as specified in the amendment. For example, where a municipality is exempting a geographic area, such as an industrial park, downtown core, major transit station area, etc. • While administratively expedient, eliminating the statutory public process for reductions in D.C.s will not provide the general public with an opportunity to delegate Council on the matter and will reduce transparency. 4. Deferral of D.C. payment to occupancy for residential development • Proposed changes to section 26.1 of the D.C.A. provide that a D.C. payable for residential development (other than rental housing developments, which are subject to payment in instalments) would be payable upon the earlier of the issuance of an occupancy permit, or the day the building is first occupied. • Only under circumstances prescribed in the regulations may the municipality require a financial security. o The Province has noted its intent to mitigate risk for municipalities. As such, the prescribed circumstances may allow for securities when no occupancy permit is required. • Municipalities will not be allowed to impose interest on the deferral of D.C. payment to occupancy. • It appears those municipalities that have elected to utilize subsection 26 (2) of the Act (i.e., water, wastewater, services related to a highway, and stormwater charges payable at the time of subdivision agreement) may no longer be able to utilize this section for residential subdivisions or consents. • Deferring the timing of payment for all residential development to occupancy will have cashflow implications for municipalities. The impacts may include additional financing costs for capital projects, increased - 434 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4 administrative costs associated with administering securities and occupancies, and potential delays in capital project timing. 5. Removal of interest for legislated instalments • Proposed changes to section 26.1 of the Act would remove the ability to charge interest on instalments for rental housing and institutional development. • This would also apply to future instalments for existing deferrals once Bill 17 receives Royal Assent. • The repeal of subsection 26.1 (9) of the D.C.A. removes the municipality’s ability to require immediate payment of all outstanding insta lments when a development use changes from rental housing or institutional to another use. • This proposed amendment has the same cashflow impacts for municipalities as noted in item 4 above, although it is more limited in scope. 6. Ability for residential and institutional development to pay a D.C. earlier than a by-law requires • Currently, if a person wishes to waive the requirement to pay their D.C. in instalments as per section 26.1, an agreement under section 27 of the D.C.A. (early payment agreement) is required. • The proposed changes state that, “For greater certainty, a person required to pay a development charge under this section may pay the charge before the day it is payable even in the absence of an agreement under section 27.” • This wording achieves its intent to allow a person to waive the requirement to pay in instalments. It also appears, however, to allow residential and institutional D.C.s to be paid earlier than required in a D.C. by-law, absent municipal agreement. • This is problematic for municipalities, as the development community may elect to pay D.C.s before indexing or before municipalities pass a new D.C. by-law where a publicly available D.C. background study may be indicating a potential increase in the charges. 7. Lower charge for rate freeze • Section 26.2 of the D.C.A. requires that, for developments proceeding through a site plan or zoning by-law amendment application, the D.C. be determined based on the rates that were in effect when the planning application was submitted to the municipality. • In some instances, the D.C. that would be imposed at the time of building permit issuance may be lower than that in place at the time of planning application. - 435 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5 •Where rates have been frozen as per section 26.2 of the D.C.A., the proposed amendments would require municipalities to apply either the “frozen” or the current rate, whichever is lower, in such instances. o Note, interest charges for the D.C. determined at planning application may still be imposed. •These proposed changes are positive as developers would not be charged in excess of current rates (where lower) and developers who proceed in a timely manner are not penalized with additional interest costs. 8.Grouping of services for the purposes of using credits •Section 38 of the D.C.A. allows a person to construct growth-related works on a municipality’s behalf, subject to an agreement. The person receives a credit against future D.C.s payable for the service(s) to which the growth-related works relate. •A municipality can agree to allow the credits to be applied to other services in the D.C. by-law. •The proposed amendments would allow the Province to, through regulation, deem two or more services to be one service for the purpose of applying credits. •This proposed change appears to remove the municipality’s discretion to combine services by agreement in certain instances. •Combining services for the purposes of credits would have cashflow implications for municipalities, where funds held in a reserve fund for a service not included under the section 38 agreement would be reduced. This could delay the timing of capital projects for these impacted services and/or increase financing costs. 9.Defining local services in the regulations •Section 59 of the D.C.A. delineates between charges for local services and, by extension, those that would be considered in a D.C. by-law. •Municipalities typically establish a local service policy when preparing a D.C. background study to establish which capital works will be funded by the developer as a condition of approval under section 51 or section 53 of the Planning Act (i.e., local service) and which will be funded by the D.C. by-law. •The proposed amendments would allow the Province to make regulations to determine what constitutes a local service. o Although the Province has noted that this will be defined through consultations, there may be unintended impacts. For example, if the definition of a local service is too broad, it may lower the D.C. but increase the direct funding requirements on one particular developer. If the definition is too narrow, the opposite would result, - 436 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6 whereby local services would be broadly included in D.C. funding, thereby increasing D.C. rates. o Additionally, what is deemed a local service in one municipality may vary from what is deemed a local service in another, depending on the size, density, and types of development. Most of the changes above would come into effect upon Royal Assent of Bill 17. The changes with respect to deferral of payment to occupancy for residential development would come into effect upon the date proclaimed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. 3. Noted Areas for Future Changes to Development Charges In the Province’s announcement, they indicated additional changes that are anticipated to follow proposed regulatory changes and/or ongoing consultations. The Province has indicated the intent to add the Statistics Canada Non -Residential Building Construction Price Index for London to the prescribed indexes in the regulations. This would allow municipalities west of London and those that are closer to London than Toronto, to utilize the London series for indexing purposes. The Province also indicated the intent to consult on a potential standardization of the approaches to benefit to existing deductions. Currently there are best practices to follow, however, there is no standardized approach across all municipalities. Providing a standardized approach may be problematic, as capital projects in different municipalities may be unique in scope and capital cost requirements. Lastly, the announcement included commentary on expanding the Annual Treasurer’s Statement reporting requirements. Currently for services related to a highway, water, and wastewater services, municipalities must allocate 60% of monies in their D.C. reserve funds to projects. The Province may consider expanding this requirement to more services. 4. Proposed Changes to the Growth Management Framework The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) has been reviewing the Official Plans of Ontario’s 50 largest and fastest-growing municipalities against the Ministry of Finance’s (M.O.F.) updated population forecasts released in October 2024. Where the Ministry finds that current Official Plan forecasts are lower than updated provincial or upper-tier projections, the MMAH will undertake targeted outreach to affected municipalities. In these cases, municipalities will be required to update their Official Plans to reflect the higher of the M.O.F. projection or the applicable upper-tier forecast. These updates will be guided by a forthcoming revision to the Projection Methodology Guideline – the first since 1995 – to ensure consistency in how growth is planned across the Province. It is the MMAH’s goal that these updated projections and methods - 437 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7 will help municipalities more accurately align land needs, servicing strategies, and capital planning with long-term provincial growth priorities. To support this, the Province is also exploring improvements to planning data systems and digital tools, including standardizing how municipalities track and report land use planning and permitting activity. Enhanced access to consistent, digitized data will help inform future forecasting, monitor implementation, and increase transparency across jurisdictions. For municipalities directed by the Province to update their Official Plans, this requirement carries several implications. As a starting point, it is important to note that the M.O.F. forecasts are only available at the Census Division level, which typically represents upper-tier municipalities, including separated municipalities and large urban single-tier municipalities. This poses potential complexities for lower-tier municipalities to directly apply, allocate, and coordinate the M.O.F. population projections as part of their respective Official Plan Review. Furthermore, the M.O.F. population projections are released annually and are subject to considerable fluctuation. On the other hand, the municipal Official Plan Review process, which includes a comprehensive assessment of long-term population growth and urban land needs, is required to be carried out at a minimum every 10 years for new Official Plans and five years regarding Official Plan updates. Accordingly, it will be important for municipalities to monitor their respective Official Plans within the context of changing long-term M.O.F. projections. It is currently unclear to what extent Ontario municipalities will be required to update their respective Official Plans and associated background studies, such as needs assessments, servicing plans, and financial strategies, to ensure alignment with the updated M.O.F. projections. It is clear, however, that Ontario municipalities will require improved processes and tools to monitor their Official Plans in a manner that allows decision makers more flexibility to address and respond to anticipated change. In parallel, the Province is also proposing changes to inclusionary zoning policies, which could influence housing delivery outcomes within protected major transit station areas. Specifically, the Act proposes capping the affordable housing set -aside rate at 5% and limiting the affordability period to 25 years. While these measures may enhance project feasibility and encourage more market-based residential development near transit, they may also constrain the long-term supply and stability of affordable units delivered through inclusionary zoning policies. Municipalities will need to consider how these changes affect their broader housing strategies, particularly in areas where protected major transit station areas are a central tool for delivering mixed-income communities. 5.Concluding Remarks Based on the proposed changes, municipalities may experience a reduction in overall D.C. revenue. The impacts of some of the potentially more significant changes (i.e., changes to the definition of capital cost, grouping of credits, defining local services , and methodology for benefit to existing will not be known until the release of the draft regulations for consultation. By moving legislative guidance to the regulations, as - 438 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 8 opposed to the Act itself, the Province will have the ability to change the rules set out therein without the requirement of passing a Bill through the legislative process. This reduces transparency and the required consultation should the Province wish to change these rules in the future. We will continue to monitor the proposed changes and will inform you of potential impacts to municipalities. As noted, we will be submitting further comments to the Province via the Environmental Registry of Ontario. Should you have any questions, please contact the undersigned or send an email to info@watsonecon.ca. Yours very truly, WATSON & ASSOCIATES ECONOMISTS LTD. Andrew Grunda, MBA, CPA, CMA, CEO Peter Simcisko, BA (Hons), MBE, Managing Partner Sean-Michael Stephen, MBA, Managing Partner Daryl Abbs, BA (Hons), MBE, PLE, Managing Partner Jamie Cook, MCIP, RPP, PLE, Managing Partner Jack Ammendolia, BES, PLE, Managing Partner - 439 - Legislative Services Division Attachment 2 to Report PLN 12-25 Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum December 4, 2023 To: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on November 27, 2023 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 34-23 City Initiated Official Plan Amendment 50 Changes to policies to recognize and reinforce the new Pickering Integrated Sustainable Design Standards File: OPA 23-005/P Council Decision Resolution #332/23 Please take any action deemed necessary. Susan Cassel Copy: Chief Administrative Officer 1.That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 23-005/P, initiated by the City of Pickering, to amend existing policies related to the review of Planning Act applications to recognize and reinforce the new Pickering Integrated Sustainable Design Standards, as set out in Exhibit ‘A’ to Appendix I to Report PLN 34-23 be approved; and, 2.That the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 50 to the Pickering Official Plan, to amend existing policies to recognize and reinforce the new Pickering Integrated Sustainable Design Standards, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 34-23, be enacted. - 440 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No.8182/25 Being a by-law to authorize the use of an alternative voting method for the 2026 Municipal Election Whereas Section 42(1) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c. 32 (the “MEA”), provides that the council of a local municipality may pass by-laws: (a)authorizing the use of voting and vote-counting equipment such as voting machines, voting recorders or optical scanning vote tabulators; (b)authorizing electors to use an alternative voting method, such as voting by mail or by telephone that does not require electors to attend at a voting place in order to vote. And Whereas Section 42(5) of the MEA provides when a by-law authorizing the use of an alternative voting method is in effect, sections 43 (advance votes) and 44 (voting proxies) apply only if the by-law so specifies; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.That the use of internet voting, paper ballots and vote tabulators be authorized for the 2026 Municipal Election and for any by-elections in the 2026-2030 Term of Council; 2.That the Clerk be authorized to use internet voting and/or paper ballots during any advance voting period and on Voting Day for the 2026 Municipal Election and for any by-elections in the 2026-2030 Term of Council; 3.That in accordance with the MEA, and due to the authorization of an alternative voting method, proxy voting provisions shall not be applicable for the 2026 Municipal Election or for any by-elections in the 2026-2030 Term of Council; and, 4.That By-law 7846/21 is hereby repealed. By-law passed this 26th day of May, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 441 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8183/25 Being a by-law to establish and regulate the Pickering Fire Services Department. Whereas By-law 771/78 was passed to establish and regulate the Pickering Fire Services Department was enacted on March 6, 1978; Whereas the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended, provides that a municipality has the capacity, rights, powers, and privileges of a natural person for the purpose of exercising its authority under the Municipal Act; And Whereas the Municipal Act provides that Sections 8 and 11 shall be interpreted broadly so as to confer broad authority on municipalities to (a) enable municipalities to govern their affairs as they consider appropriate and, (b) enhance their ability to respond to municipal issues; Whereas, the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 4, as amended, (the “Act”) requires every municipality to establish a program in the municipality which must include public education with respect to fire safety and certain components of fire prevention and to provide such other Fire Protection Services as it determines may be necessary in accordance with its needs and circumstances; And Whereas, the Act permits a municipality, in discharging these responsibilities, to establish a fire department; And Whereas, the Act permits a Council of a municipality to establish, maintain, and operate a Fire Department for all or any part of the municipality; And Whereas, the Act requires a municipality that establishes a Fire Department to provide fire suppression services and permits the Fire Department to provide other Fire Protection Services in the municipality; And Whereas, the Act requires a municipality that establishes a Fire Department to appoint a Fire Chief; And Whereas, the Act authorizes a council of a municipality to pass by-laws under the Act to regulate fire prevention, to regulate the setting of open-air fires and to designate private roads as fire routes; And Whereas, The Occupational Health and Safety Act R.S.O., c. O.1, Reg. 714/94, requires the municipality to provide firefighters with the required protective equipment; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.Appendix “A” to By-law No. XXXX/25 Appendix “A” to By-law No. XXXX/25, attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon are hereby declared to be part of this By-law.- 442 - By-law No. 8183/25 Page 2 2.Definitions In this By-law; 2.1. “Approved” means approved by Council. 2.2. “Automatic Aid” means any agreement under which a municipality agrees to provide an initial response to fires, rescues and emergencies that may occur in a part of another municipality where a fire department is capable of responding more quickly than any fire department situated in the other municipality; or a municipality agrees to provide a supplemental response to fires, rescues and emergencies that may occur in a part of another municipality where a fire department in the municipality is capable of providing the quickest supplemental response to fires, rescues and emergencies occurring in the part of another municipality; 2.3. “CAO” means the Chief Administrative Officer for the City of Pickering. 2.4. “CEPCP” means the Central East Prehospital Care Program. A division of Lakeridge Health that provides continuing medical education, training, continuous quality improvement programs, and delegation and oversight for the performance of controlled medical acts to Pickering Fire Services. 2.5. “Chief Fire Official” means the Assistant to the Fire Marshal who is the Municipal Fire Chief or a member or members of the Fire Department appointed by the Municipal Fire Chief under the FPPA or a person appointed by the Fire Marshal under the FPPA-Fire Code Div.C1.1. 2.6. “Collective Agreement” means an agreement between the Corporation and the full-time Pickering Professional Firefighters’ Association made under the provisions of the FPPA. 2.7. “Community Emergency Management Coordinator (“CEMC”)” –means a position identified in the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, 1990, c. E.9, as amended (“EMCPA”) as being responsible for the development, implementation, review and maintenance of the Community Emergency Management Plan for the City of Pickering. 2.8. “Corporation” means The Corporation of the City of Pickering. 2.9. “Council” means the Council of the Corporation. 2.10. “Deputy Fire Chief” is second in command and shall act as Fire Chief in the case of an absence or a vacancy in the office of the Fire Chief. Where the Fire Chief designates a member to act in the place of an officer, such member when acting shall have all the powers and shall perform duties of the officer replaced. 2.11. “Division” means a Division of the Fire Services as provided for in this By-law or determined by the Fire Chief. - 443 - By-law No. 8183/25 Page 3 2.12. “Firefighters’ Association” means the labour union representing The Pickering Professional Firefighters. 2.13. “Fire Chief” means the person appointed by Council to act as Fire Chief for the Corporation and is ultimately responsible to Council as defined in the FPPA. 2.14. “Fire Coordinator” means the person appointed by the Fire Marshal, under the authority of the FPPA to co-ordinate the Regional mutual aid plans, or the person appointed by the Fire Marshal to act in the absence of the Fire Coordinator. 2.15. “Fire Department” means the Corporation’s Fire Department (also referred to as Pickering Fire Services). 2.16. “Fire Marshal” means a position with specific authorities and responsibilities under the FPAA, including ensuring that fire departments throughout Ontario provide adequate levels of service to their communities, providing support to fire departments, and administering the FPPA. Also identified as the Office of the Fire Marshal. 2.17. “FPPA” means the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, S.O., c 4, as may be amended from time to time, or any successor legislation, and any regulation made there under. 2.18. “Fire Protection Agreement” is a contract between municipalities or other agencies that clearly defines the responsibilities, terms, conditions, and all other aspects of the fire services provided and/or required. 2.19. “Fire Protection Services” includes fire suppression, fire prevention, fire safety education, dispatching, administration services, training of persons involved in the provision of Fire Protection Services, rescue and emergency services and the delivery of all those services. 2.20. “Head of Council” means the person elected at large by voters in the City of Pickering, identified formally as the Mayor. 2.21. “Medical Director” means the person or persons directly responsible under the CEPCP for medical guidelines, oversight, and direction. 2.22. “Member” means any defined Firefighter or Officer as per the FPPA and/or any person employed in or appointed to the Fire Services Division and assigned to undertake Fire Protection Services. 2.23. “Municipal Act” means the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended from time to time, or any successor legislation, and any regulation made there under. 2.24. “Mutual Aid” means a program to provide/receive assistance in the case of an emergency in a municipality, community or area where resources in a municipality, community or area have been depleted, but does not include Automatic Aid. - 444 - By-law No. 8183/25 Page 4 2.25. “NFPA” means codes, standards, recommended practices, and guides as developed and amended by the National Fire Protection Association. These standards are amended from time to time. 2.26. “Officer” means any member with the rank of Captain or higher. 2.27. “Regional” means the Regional Municipality of Durham being the upper tier level of government in a two-tier system. 2.28. “Specialty Rescue” means rescue response as specified to high angle/low angle rope rescue, ice/water rescue, auto extrication, and hazardous materials response, etc. in accordance with available resources, and/or in accordance with an approved specialty rescue service agreement. 2.29. “Tiered Response Agreement” means a formal written document negotiated between Durham Regional Police Services, Region of Durham Paramedic Services, and Pickering Fire Services to establish local protocols for a multi- agency response to a life threatening or public safety incident. The Agreement outlines the capabilities, expectations and limitations of each agency and defines the criteria for participation. 3. Establishment 3.1. A department for the Corporation, to be known as the Pickering Fire Services Department, is hereby established and continued under this By-law and the head of this Department shall be known as the Fire Chief. 4.Composition 4.1. The Fire Services Department shall consist of the Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Chiefs, Divisional Chiefs including Platoon Chiefs, Chief Training Officer, and Chief Fire Prevention Officer, Captains, Fire Fighters, Fire Prevention Officers, Training Officers, Fire Prevention Inspectors, administrative personnel, and any other person(s) as may be authorized or considered necessary from time to time by Council or by the CAO on recommendation from the Fire Chief for the Fire Services Department to perform Fire Protection Services. 4.2. There shall be one Fire Chief appointed by Council. 5.Terms and Conditions of Employment 5.1. Subject to the FPPA and the Collective Agreement, the remuneration and other terms and conditions of employment or appointment of the members that comprise the Fire Department shall be determined by Council or by the CAO acting in accordance with policies and programs established or approved by Council. - 445 - By-law No. 8183/25 Page 5 6.Organization 6.1. The Fire Department shall be organized into Divisions such as Administration, Suppression, Training, Fire Prevention and Public Education. 6.2. The Fire Chief may assign or re-assign such Members to a Division to assist him in the administration and operation of that Division. Each division of the Fire Services Department is the responsibility of the Fire Chief, or a member designated. Designated members shall report to the Fire Chief on divisions and activities under their supervision and shall carry out all orders of the Fire Chief. 7.Core Services 7.1. The core services of the Fire Department shall be those contained in Appendix “A”. 8.Responsibilities and Authority of Fire Chief 8.1. The Fire Chief shall be the head of the Fire Services Department and is ultimately responsible to Council, through the CAO, for proper administration and operation of the Fire Services including the delivery of Fire Protection Services. 8.2. The Fire Chief (or Deputy Fire Chief if designated by the Fire Chief) shall report to the CAO and will perform the duties of the CEMC under the authority of the EMCPA. 8.3. The Fire Chief shall be authorized to make such general orders, policies, procedures, rules and regulations and to take such other measures as the Fire Chief may consider necessary for the proper administration, efficient operation of the Fire Services Department, and the effective management of fire protection services for the Corporation and for the prevention, control and extinguishment of fires, the protection of life and property and the management of emergencies and without restricting the generality of the foregoing; a)for the care and protection of all property belonging to the Fire Services Department; b)for arranging for the provision and allotment of strategic staffing and facilities, apparatus, equipment, materials, services and supplies for the Fire Services Department; c) for the development and implementation of automatic aid, mutual aid and other fire protection and emergency service agreements within the Corporation’s borders and/or within the municipal borders of adjoining municipalities upon the approval of Council; d)for determining and establishing the qualifications and criteria for employment or appointment, and the duties of, all members of the Fire Services Department; e)for the conduct and the discipline of members of the Fire Services Department; - 446 - By-law No. 8183/25 Page 6 f)for keeping an accurate record of all fires, rescues and emergencies responded to by the Fire Department and reporting of same to the Office of the Fire Marshal; g)for keeping such other records as may be required by Council, the Corporation and the FPPA; h)for preparing and presenting an annual report of the Fire Services Department to Council; and i)for exercising control over the budget approved by Council for the Fire Services Department. 8.4. The Fire Chief (or Deputy Fire Chief) is authorized to perform the duties of Regional Fire Coordinator as required. 9.Supervision – General Duties and Responsibilities 9.1. The Deputy Fire Chief(s) shall be the second ranking officer of the Fire Services Department and shall be subject to and shall perform such duties as are assigned by the Fire Chief and shall act on behalf of the Fire Chief in case of absence or vacancy in the office of Fire Chief. 10.Emergency Responses outside Limits of the City of Pickering 10.1. The Fire Services Department shall not respond to a call with respect to a fire or an emergency incident outside the limits of the City of Pickering except with respect to a fire or an emergency: a)that in the opinion of the Fire Chief threatens property in the City of Pickering or property situated outside the City of Pickering that is owned or occupied by the Corporation; b)in a municipality with which an agreement has been entered into to provide fire protection services; c)on property with respect to which an agreement has been entered into with any person or corporation to provide fire protection ; d)at the discretion of the Fire Chief, to a municipality authorized to participate in the Durham Region Mutual Aid plan established by the Regional Fire Coordinator appointed by the Ontario Fire Marshal, emergency fire service plan and program or any other organized plan or program on a reciprocal basis; e)on those highways that are under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transportation or other agency within the City of Pickering for which an automatic aid agreement has been entered into; f)on property beyond the City of Pickering border where the Fire Chief or his or her designate determines that immediate action is necessary to preserve and protect life and/or property and the correct department is - 447 - By-law No. 8183/25 Page 7 notified to respond and/or assumes command or establishes alternative measures acceptable to the Fire Chief or designate; or g)response due to a request for special assistance as required through a declaration of a provincial or federal emergency and such request has been approved by the Fire Chief, the CAO and the Head of Council. 11.Enforcement and Penalties 11.1. Inspections arising from complaint, request, retrofit, or self-initiated and fire investigations shall be provided in accordance with the FPPA and the City’s Fire Prevention Policy, municipal bylaws, or other legislative authority as applicable. 11.2. Any person who violates any provisions of this By-law is, upon conviction, guilty of an offence and shall be liable to a fine, subject to the provisions of the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.33, as amended. 12.Limited Services 12.1. The Corporation shall accept no liability for the provision of a limited service by the Pickering Fire Services Department, as reasonably necessary. Service may not be available to some structures or locations where accessibility is restricted or unavailable due to road conditions, weather, obstructions, or other factors beyond the control of the Fire Services Department. It is the responsibility of the property owner to ensure access for Fire Services apparatus and personnel. 13.Cost Recovery 13.1. If as the result of a Fire Services response to a fire, rescue, or other emergency, or other attendance, the Chief Administrative Officer, the Fire Chief, or the highest ranking Officer in charge determines that it is necessary to retain a private contractor, rent special equipment, or use consumable materials other than water in order to suppress or extinguish a fire, preserve property, prevent a fire from spreading, remove hazardous materials, assist in or otherwise conduct an investigation to determine the cause of a fire, or otherwise control or eliminate an emergency situation, the Corporation shall recover the costs incurred by the fire department for taking such actions from the owner of the property on which the fire or other emergency occurred. 14.Delegated Authority 14.1. The core services listed in Appendix “A” may be updated from time to time based upon operational needs and circumstances with the approval of the Fire Chief and the Chief Administrative Officer. Any changes to the core services will be communicated to Council in writing from the Fire Chief copying the Chief Administrative Officer and the City Clerk. 15.Administration 15.1. By-law 771/78 is hereby repealed. - 448 - By-law No. 8183/25 Page 8 15.2. The short title of this By-law is the “Fire Department Establishing and Regulating By-law". By-law passed this 26th day of May, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 449 - Appendix “A” to By-law No. 8183/25 Core Services Fire Suppression and Emergency Response Suppression 1.Fire suppression response and services shall be delivered and shall include exterior attack, interior attack, rescue, forcible entry, ventilation, protection of exposures, salvage, and overhaul as required. 2.Emergency pre-hospital care response and services shall be delivered in accordance with the CEPCP as determined by the Medical Director. Services shall include first aid, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, other patient care protocols and medical acts such as defibrillation, administration of epinephrine, and administration of naloxone. Emergency pre-hospital care responses shall be determined as per protocol as instituted in accordance with the Tiered Response Services Agreement. •Hazardous material emergency response and services shall be delivered as recommended by the Fire Chief and approved by Council. •Specialized technical rescue response and services, including, but not limited to vehicle extrication, elevator rescue, rope rescue, surface water rescue, ice water rescue, structural collapse, confined space, heavy vehicle rescue, trench rescue, and swift water rescue shall be delivered as recommended by the Fire Chief and approved by Council. Specialized equipment required to provide these services shall be approved by the Fire Chief. Training 1.Members designated by the Fire Chief shall be trained and certified to meet the applicable requirements stated in the Ontario Regulation for Provincial Firefighter Certification based on the level of service delivery as established. 2.Members designated by the Fire Chief shall be trained and certified as an Emergency Medical Responder under the CEPCP. 3.The NFPA Standards and other related industry standards and resources shall be used as training reference guides as approved by the Fire Chief. 4.All training will comply with the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1190, c. O.1, as amended and applicable provincial legislation. Fire Prevention 1.Inspections arising from complaint; request; retrofit; self-initiated; fire investigations; or examination and review of fire protection elements of building permit plans shall be provided in accordance with the FPPA, Municipal by-laws, and Departmental policies. 2.The Ontario Fire Service Standards the NFPA 1031, the NFPA 1035, and other applicable NFPA codes and standards and the City’s Fire Prevention Policy shall be used as a reference guide for Fire Prevention training and Public Education. Fire and Life Safety Education 1.Public education programs shall be administered in accordance with the FPPA and Departmental policies. - 450 - Memo To: Susan Cassel City Clerk May 16, 2025 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Copy: Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Request for Part Lot Control By-law -Owner: 1133373 Ontario Inc. -Lots 44, 65 and 106, Plan 40M-2671 File: PLC.40M-2671.17 Lots 44, 65 and 106, Plan 40M-2671 are being developed in accordance with the appropriate Subdivision Agreement in such a manner to allow for the construction of 6 semi-detached dwelling units. On January 22, 2024, Council passed By-law 8077/24, enactment of which exempted the subject lands from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990. We have been advised that, due to a delay in the Owner’s construction schedule, some of the dwelling units will not be completed and ready for private conveyance by the expiry date set out in By-law 8077/24 (June 22, 2025). Accordingly, a further by-law should be enacted, extending the expiry date to May 26, 2026. Attached is a location map and a draft by-law, enactment of which will exempt these lands from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. This draft by-law is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for May 26, 2025. PB:ca Attachments Location Map Draft By-law - 451 - - 4 5 2 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8184/25 Being a by-law to exempt Lots 44, 65, and 106, Plan 40M- 2671, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act Whereas pursuant to the provisions of section 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended, the Council of a municipality may by by-law provide that section 50(5) of the Act does not apply to certain lands within a plan of subdivision designated in the by-law Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.Section 50(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended shall cease to apply to Lots 44, 65, and 106, Plan 40M-2671. 2.This by-law shall remain in force and effect for a period of one year from the date of the passing of this by-law and shall expire on May 26, 2026. By-law passed this 26th day of May, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 453 -