January 11, 1999

To:Budget Committee

From:Barry H. Gutteridge, Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services

Subject:Deferral of Projects to Accommodate Requests

Made by Councillor Layton

Purpose:

To respond to the request from Councillor Layton that projects be identified which would have to be deferred to provide for one third of all the water services capital budget be spent on water efficiency measures, and at least half of the Storm Water Management Budget be spent on storm water prevention measures.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There are no financial implications arising from this report.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998, had before it a communication from Councillor Layton (December 3, 1998) forwarding comments, notes and possible recommendations on Works and Emergency Services, Water and Wastewater Services 1999-2003 Capital Works Budget. The Budget Committee requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to report on which projects would have to be deferred in order to accommodate the following as requested from Councillor Layton:

1.One third of all the water services capital budget should be spent on water efficiency measures, not $1.29 million of a $78 million budget; and

2.At least half of the Storm Water Management Budget should be spent on storm water prevention measures.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The recommended Capital Works Program budget for 1999 in the amount of $83 million is required to meet the needs of industrial, commercial and household water users in the City in terms of consumption flow, water quality and fire flow protection.

Diverting one-third of this expenditure ($26 million) to implement water efficiency measures would significantly impact the life expectancy of the aging water distribution system infrastructure. The budget includes several programs to continue ongoing efforts to rehabilitate and extend the remaining useful life of the system, 70 percent of which is older than 50 years. The present recommended expenditure provides for a distribution system renewal on an approximately 80-year renewal cycle. A redirection of one-third of the water system rehabilitation budget would increase the renewal cycle to approximately 125 years which is beyond the average life expectancy of a water system.

Similarly, redirecting one-third of the water production and trunk transmission system budget to water efficiency will impact the treatment plant upgrades required to resolve the taste and odour problems experienced over the past summer and the plant improvements necessary to maintain the high standard of water production.

Further, the recommended Capital expenditures include funding to improve the reliability of the aging trunk transmission systems and for the replacement of aging electrical equipment serving the production facilities. Redirection in Capital spending to water efficiency would also impact the opportunities to gain operating efficiencies through the Works Best Practices review.

The 1999 Capital Works Budget for the water distribution system comprises of three major components. The following summarizes the purpose of the components and the consequences of non-implementation.

The Department is preparing a Water Efficiency Plan which will identify water efficiency measures (e.g. low-flow toilet replacement and water conservation fixtures), that can be implemented cost-effectively. Through the implementation of the Plan, the Department is committed to achieving the 15 percent reduction target in average annual day demands by the year 2011, endorsed by the former Metro Council.

With respect to Item (2), the recommended Capital Works Program budget for 1999 includes a Stormwater Management Budget of $3.4 million (WP953) for projects to improve the quality of storm runoff and reduce the quantity of storm flows through infiltration programs. One such program is the Downspout Disconnection Program ($1.49 million) which will reduce the quantity of storm runoff through infiltration in front lawns and gardens. In addition, other Capital Works projects include stormwater infiltration practices where infiltration systems are technically feasible and soil conditions are favourable for infiltrating surface runoff. In this regard, approximately $0.2 million of the former City of Toronto - New Sewer Construction (Project S25003) has been allocated for the construction of infiltration systems in lane-ways in conjunction with the lane reconstruction program. In addition, $1.4 million from Project S25007 Etobicoke - New Sewer Construction may be used for the construction of storm sewer infiltration systems in lieu of conventional storm sewers on road reconstruction projects. These systems are designed to infiltrate stormwater into the surrounding soil and reduce the amount of stormwater discharged to watercourses or Lake Ontario.

In summary, these infiltration systems in the Water and Wastewater Capital Budget represent approximately 95 percent of the budgeted amount for Stormwater Management and greatly exceed the 50 percent request.

Conclusions:

Diverting one-third of the proposed 1999 Capital Budget allocated for rehabilitating and upgrading the water distribution and treatment systems would greatly impact the life expectancy, treatment quality and reliability of the water system production and consequently is not recommended.

An allowance of approximately $3.0 million has been made in the 1999 Water and Wastewater Capital Budget for infiltration systems.

Contact Name:

Mr. W. Green, P.Eng.

Director, Quality Control and System Planning

Telephone (416) 392-8242

Fax (416) 392-2974

E-Mail wgreen@toronto.ca

Michael A. Price, P.Eng., FICE

General Manager

Water and Wastewater Services

Barry H. Gutteridge

Commissioner

Works and Emergency Services

pcd/mda/wg/ea

projbud.wpd