utilities kingston infrastructure report_2010

Kingston Roads and Utilities Infrastructure Program 2008 – 2010

As the 2010 construction season comes to a close, Utilities Kingston and the City of Kingston are

successfully completing an unprecedented three-year roads and utilities capital infrastructure program. Subsequent to budget approval and through a combined and co-operative effort from Utilities Kingston, the City of Kingston Engineering Department, and the Department of Public Works, the initiative delivered road and utilities infrastructure improvements throughout the entire amalgamated City of Kingston with greatly enhanced efficiency.

The program met its goals of completing all roads and utilities projects on time, on budget, while providing excellent customer service, and was able to effectively apply additional funding opportunities throughout the three-year

period to accomplish upgrades not initially included in the original plan. The efficiency of the program satisfied and exceeded expectations of even its most ardent supporters, due to clear lines of communication between departments and stakeholders and careful consideration of potential projects.

“Our submission was very detailed and we asked for approval not only

in principle but for an approved budget to proceed,” stated Jim Keech, President and CEO of Utilities Kingston.

In the autumn of 2007, Utilities Kingston and the City’s Department of Engineering, which falls under Mr. Keech’s supervision, together approached Kingston City Council with an ambitious plan – an unprecedented municipal proposal designed to complete a defined grouping of roads and utilities infrastructure projects for the next three years. The unique and detailed program was designed to chart the course for infrastructure renewal and expansion in the City of Kingston with partnerships, vision, and achievements in a manner never before attempted by this municipality.

Success required both approval of the Kingston Road and Utilities Infrastructure

Program and final budget approval for 2008, 2009, and 2010. Although traditionally a multi-year approved capital infrastructure budget is extremely rare, on 18 December 2007, the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kingston enacted By-Law 2008-25, authorizing the capital budget for the next three fiscal years, ushering in a new era of asset

planning, and continuing the City’s proud history of innovation and leadership at all levels.

The long-range concept required a major revision in municipal budgeting which typically allocates funds on an annual basis, however incorporating three years and several municipal entities working in harmony delivered superior results.

Staging civil infrastructure upgrades in a deliberate manner while working closely with all stakeholders was the key to success. Many other elements were critical including com-munications with contractor groups, external agencies, and impacted residents, retailers, and community groups.

At the end of the program, the City of Kingston and Utilities Kingston invested more than $120 million ($90 million in the initial City approved budget plus an additional $30 million in provincial grants) in 213 road segment and utility projects.

An ad hoc task-force consisting of representatives from Utilities Kingston, the City’s Engineer-ing Department, and Public Works chose streets targeted for capital budget expen-ditures utilizing A Criteria for Road Selection (See Appendix B for the full document).

“We recognize there are a lot of roads and utilities requiring attention throughout the city,” noted Mark VanBuren, Director of Engineering, Public Works Services.

“We made objective decisions to prioritize projects based on engineering principles as opposed to subjective criteria.”

While detailed condition assessment objectivity is paramount, Mr. VanBuren readily acknowl-edges other factors such as the City’s promotion

See Appendix A for a complete listing, encapsulated as follows:

✓ 136 infrastructure projects including water and gas mains, road reconstruction, surface treatment, resurfacing, microsurfacing, widening, and traffic calming

✓ 31 new and reconstructed sidewalks

✓ 26 sidewalk access ramps

✓ 15 new or upgraded traffic signals

✓ 5 bridge reconstructions (the La Salle Causeway, although a vital river crossing link, is owned by Public Works and Government Services Canada and is not included in the program)

From 2008 to the end of 2010, the three-year program addressed:

✓ 21 kilometres of road work including 8 kilometres of reconstructed road surfaces and 13 kilometres of road overlays and surface treatments

✓ 11 kilometres of new and rebuilt sidewalks

✓ Completion of improvements to Division Street between John Counter Boulevard and Highway 401

✓ Development of a detailed design for the John Counter Boulevard Project, which includes widening the road to four lanes and a grade separation at the CN line

✓ Continuation of the trunk sewer remediation program, including cleaning and repair of major sewers to restore capacity and eliminate infiltration into sewers which is a primary cause of combined sewer overflows

✓ System separation work at the Earl Street catchment area designed to reduce combined sewer overflows

✓ Sewer investigation and rehabilitation to resolve sewer back ups and basement flooding in the Strathcona Park, Palace Road, Runnymede, and Queen Mary Road drainage areas

Kingston Roads and Utilities Infrastructure Program 2008 - 2010

of active forms of transportation including cycling and walking facilities have formed a prominent part of the three-year plan. In addition, traffic calming projects have become an important part of the plan as the City works towards addressing the is-sues of speeding traffic and short-cutting through residential neighbourhoods.

“Transparency in the decision-making process and the continual message City and Utilities Kingston staff are focused on maximizing the taxpayer and rate payer investment in municipal infrastructure is key to having council and the public endorsing multi-year plans,” emphasises Mr. VanBuren.

One of the many challenges arose from finding an appropriate combination of projects – with the ultimate goal to combine road reconstruction with sewer and watermain upgrades, thus achieving maximum benefits for a neighbourhood with one contract.

Wherever possible, as in the case with the Willingdon area and Princess Street reconstruction, combined sewers were separated, new watermains installed, and the entire roads rebuilt as a shared effort between Utilities Kingston and the City’s Engineering Department.

Prior to adopting a multi-year plan, the Engineering Department and Utilities Kingston planned contracts based on their individual needs, making all reasonable attempts to combine efforts whenever possible, but with a year-to-year budget process and a limited construction season well underway prior to fiscal approval, this was virtually impossible to co-ordinate.

“It made it difficult to focus our efforts efficiently,” said Damon Wells, Director, Public Works Department. “When Jim Keech became responsible for Public Works and Engineering, in addition to his duties as president and CEO of Utilities Kingston, he was able to bring the two engineering groups – Utilities Kingston and the City – together.”

Mr. VanBuren concurs, “Mr. Keech was able to bring together all of the groups involved in the planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of road and utilities infrastructure.”

“We now have monthly meetings to discuss issues and opportunities,” continued Mr. Wells. “We have input into capital planning and we’re able to pass on what we’ve identified as needs on a regular basis due to this solid line of communication.”

The three-year program and the resulting commu-nication between municipal entities delivered significant benefits. “Once Public Works knows where the work is being done, we can plan our maintenance both in terms of location and substance. As well, since both of our supervisors come from the private sector with years of experience in road and asphalt technologies,

engineering can avail themselves of a high degree of practical in-house expertise in these areas.”

Mr. Wells stresses the importance of Utilities Kingston, Engineering, and Public Works co-ordinating the planning of projects. “Working together reduces maintenance costs,” he

explained. “In 2006, we needed to mitigate a problem in the downtown core. We were constantly patching Princess Street between Division

and Bagot and in the winter, the ploughs would peel it off. We knew the Downtown Action Plan was in the works and the next two blocks should be reconstructed within a few years so we recommended resurfacing from Division to Bagot, which freed up Public Works time and resources for other areas.”

Kingston’s downtown core is undeniably historic. While restoring the dome on City Hall a few years ago, Nick Mather of Roof Tile Management, an international firm specializing in heritage restoration, named Kingston one of the top four most interesting heritage cities in Ontario, comparing it with Ottawa, the old city of York, and London.

Often the quaintness of history is lost on those charged with maintaining old streets. “Two blocks on Brock Street were at the point where we could no longer maintain them,” continued Mr. Wells. “The surface was coming off in huge chunks making patching almost impossible. There were no clear lines between patches. The chunks were the size of a desktop.”

Knowing it would be quite some time before the Downtown Action Plan could address this issue and utility work was only scheduled for farther up Brock Street, Public Works recom-mended resurfacing these two blocks aswell to

provide a better surface and eliminate wasted maintenance. “This is why it so important to have not only a multi-year plan, but also an approved multi-year budget. We know what each department is planning, we can work with or plan around each other, and we can tell people what’s happening. It’s not only important to be able to recognize callers’ concerns about poor road conditions but also to be able to tell them when their road may be resurfaced or rebuilt. The ability to communicate our plans beyond the current construction season means so much to our customers and our staff. It gives them answers to their concerns and some peace of mind.”

Long range planning means all stakeholders can provide valuable input into engineering, scheduling, and priorities, and as Mr. Wells noted, often the most basic approach combined

“We live in a harsh climate, so there are

challenges…”Mark Campbell, City of Kingston Construction Manager, Engineering

Department


with a multi-year plan can result in surprising efficiencies. “We were sending three men out to Lee Road three times a week to fix potholes. It was incredibly inefficient but the road needed constant maintenance. With the three-year plan, we identified and shared the problem, scheduled it for reconstruction, and instead of patching potholes, we removed the asphalt and simply graded it every few weeks because we knew a permanent solution was only a few months away. It allowed us to target our resources in other areas. The benefit goes beyond any single department – the more efficiently money is spent in Public Works, the more available for road reconstruction and utilities.”

There are myriad benefits of a multi-year plan, and Mr. Wells considers the

first three-year program a solid and successful but basic beginning. “Hopefully the next step is to get a five-year plan, and eventually work up to a 10-year plan with multi-year budget

approvals for each term of council. With that, we can tailor the capital plan for everyone because it forces excellent communication and forces and provides for very long range capital planning; without it, we can’t plan ahead, we can’t be as efficient in spending, and we can’t co-ordinate projects and maintenance.”

While Engineering, Public Works, and Utilities Kingston strived to combine efforts for several years prior to the three-year plan, working year-to-year significantly limited the best of intentions. “Each department had its list of priorities, but we were always waiting for budget approval,” explained Mr. VanBuren. “By the time each department had approval, we weren’t able to properly co-ordinate each project, so we’d reconstruct a road just to have Utilities Kingston install new sewer lines a few years later, or Public Works would expend resources repairing a city street and we’d rebuild it the next year. It was obviously frustrating to residents and commuters, and not the most efficient utilization of our capital budget.”

With a multi-year plan approved and budgeted, Public Works was able to focus on roads and streets not slated for reconstruction, particularly in Kingston’s suburban area.

“Many roads and streets with low speeds and low traffic volumes are also very old and in need of repair, but due to traffic volumes they may not meet

“Early tenders receive the best prices, the best people,

and the best planning.”Doug Haight, General Manager,

Taggart Construction

engineering criteria, or they may not have underground service needs from Utilities Kingston’s perspective,” continued Mr. Wells. “Public Works can provide improved maintenance to these types of roads and streets because the multi-year program has provided efficiencies allowing us to reallocate our resources. Engineering was able to resurface several roads in rural areas that were constant problems for us and we were able to put our resources into some suburban area streets requiring extra attention. We found our efficiency improved with each year of the program and efficiencies realized elsewhere allowed us to respond to maintenance and repair requests and concerns from residents and ward councillors for areas not on engineering’s radar.”

“Surface treatment is an important element of our program,” concurred Mr. VanBuren. “Rural roads are a significant percentage of our road network and were given considerable weight in our project selection. Typical treatment is

macadam or tar and chip and with smaller dollar amounts invested we can treat and improve substantial sections.”

The importance of the multi-year plan was immediately apparent, despite the realities of the situation. “We’re always going to have a first year of a program, where we are waiting for approvals, whether it covers three or five or ten years,” explained Mark Campbell, Construction Manager for the City of Kingston. “As soon as we have budgeting authorization, we can mobilize shovel-ready projects and we can begin the

design, engineering, and tendering process for the remainder of the program term.”

Both contractors and city staff agree – a multi-year program is critical to the success of municipal infrastructure project management, due in part to a fiscal year ending in December, budget approval announcements coming well into the new year,

and equal importance on the vagaries of the Canadian climate.

“We typically seek approval for $1.5 to $2 million each year for resurfacing, which is a vital part of our road network efforts. With a year-to-year budget, we get approval in April and then begin the tendering process. By then, many contractors have already committed to the season’s

workload and we’re in a position of expecting them to respond to our tenders. We may not be getting the best value for our money because we’re late out of the gate,” continued Mr. Campbell.

Doug Haight, general manager of Taggart Construction’s Kingston office concurs. “The

“With a three-year program we spend

less time on administration because we are able

to tender two or three larger contracts

rather than six or seven smaller contracts...”

Mark Campbell


three-year plan lets contractors have an approximation of pending work volume. The Kingston Construction Association (KCA) has encouraged Utilities Kingston, Public Works, and the Engineering Department for years to call tenders early.”

A respected civil contractor, Taggart Construction responds to many civil infrastructure tenders and Mr. Haight is an active director of the KCA’s civil infrastructure group. “Each contractor has a limit on the amount of work we can handle,” he said. “We’re aggressive in our pricing early in the season but as we get busier, our bid prices increase because we have to spend more time arranging additional resources and scheduling becomes difficult. Early tenders receive the best prices, the best people, and the best planning.”

Mr. Haight further notes with the three-year program Utilities Kingston and the City’s Engineering Department “can issue tenders earlier in the second and third years and receive better pricing because

we can offer greater ef-ficiency. We lose cost efficiency by not getting the tenders early.”

Using the Princess Street contract as an example, Mr. Haight stated, “We knew we had to wait until the frost came out in late March or early April, but we were able to plan the previous November.”

For city officials and contractors, planning is

paramount to success.

Mr. Haight described his company’s response to a tender. “We bid electronically with a computerized estimating package. The average municipal tender takes an

in-house estimator over a week to go over every item in the job. If the contract calls for 1,000 metres of watermain, we count every bend, connector, tee, nut, and bolt. There may be 150 items in the specifications and we do this for every single one of them,

including granular, asphalt, watermains, storm sewers, and sanitary sewers.

After the estimator completes the itemization, Mr. Haight spends at least half a day quantifying the production schedule, staffing, and equipment. “A typical municipal tender ties up $4,000 to $5,000 on average, and we’ll often respond to four or five tenders each week during the construction season.”

“Tenders issued earlier in the second and third

years of a three-year program receive better

pricing because we can offer greater efficiency. We lose cost efficiency

by not getting the tenders early.”

Doug Haight

Again, using the Princess Street contract as an example, Mr. Haight explained the added investment required for a Request for Proposal (RFP). “Princess Street was the first RFP called by the City or Utilities Kingston for straight road reconstruction work, and it was appropriate given the specific applications for this contract. We had to understand the requirements and they were covered quite well. The Princess Street RFP let the contractor have creative input on the job. That said, responding to an RFP increases our investment by about 500 per cent over a tender call, or in this case, probably $25,000.” Taggart Construction, due to other commitments, eventually decided to not respond to the RFP, but respects the process and acknowledges the three-year plan assisted in the decision.

“It lets everyone plan ahead, including contractors and the engineering staff. In the past, they wouldn’t com mit resources to a project because they didn’t have budget approval and therefore when approvals arrived, design and engineering staff had to rush to get documents and plans in place. Typically, based on a year-to-year approval process, tenders weren’t called until the end of May or June and by then we’ve lost a lot of the construction season. Contractors are committed to other work, and the efficiency is lost.”

Praising the City of Kingston for its preparedness, Mr. Haight stresses the importance of the three-year program and its economic impact on contractors. His branch of the family-run Taggart Construction

has 50 employees with an annual payroll of $25 million. It’s a union shop, and whenever possible, they like to source work locally. “We live here, we shop here, and as a company, we want to work close to home because it’s more efficient. If we

work more than 40 km from the office, we pay each employee an additional $45 per day, so there is a huge incentive to work in Kingston.”

Mr. Haight acknowledged the expertise necessary in acquiring a significant portion of infrastructure stimulus funds. “Kingston did very well with the program. The engineering staff and leadership have a good handle on what they’re

doing and always seem to be prepared with shovel-ready projects for stimulus dollars. This is a very progressive administration for getting infrastructure projects engineered, funded, and completed and a three- or four-year roads and utilities program is a necessity to make everyone’s life workable.

Technology, too, often requires a longer lead time. “Our surface treatment road work should be completed by mid-August in this climate,” explained Mr. Campbell. “It requires dry heat and

“There’s a comfort factor knowing there is good work

flow ahead. It helps with resource allocation, from

staffing to specialty training to equipment acquisitions

for our member firms.”Harry Sullivan, Executive Director,

Kingston Construction Association


traffic to properly settle and cure, to drive the granular into the emulsion to create a better road that will last longer. Generally asphalt plants don’t open until mid-May so construction typically has to start six weeks prior, meaning we need contractors on-site by the first of April. With the old system, we’d have to wait for budget approval in April and May, overwhelm the designers and engineers with demands to create plans and documents, call a tender, and hopefully have it going by mid-summer.”

Weather is an issue at both shoulder seasons, requiring careful monitoring of conditions. “We look for oppor-tunities, and get projects out early, but we have to be realistic,” continued Mr. Campbell. “We are limited by frost, freezing, and the availability and application of asphalt, which must be laid when the temperature is above freezing and rising, with

no standing water. Whenever we work on a water or sewer utility, we have to divert it above ground, so again, low temperatures are a factor.”

Once again, the three-year program helped with the ability to schedule projects less impacted by weather – sidewalk upgrades or construction – around these questionable periods because funding was approved.

The multi-year plan enabled city staff to group more individual projects under fewer contracts, while lowering resource consumption. “Typically sidewalk repair and reconstruction is tendered as a package but under the program we were able to increase the size of the contract and issue a second contract due to additional available funding,” said Mr. Campbell. “Prior to this term of council, we normally invest about $200,000 in sidewalk work each year but with the support of this council we’ve spent almost $1 million per year under the program. Due to aggressive pricing from the contractors, realized because we had projects out for tender much earlier in

the second and third year, we had a significant budget surplus and were able to add and complete several additional projects.”

“With a three-year program we spent less time on administration because we were able to tender two or three larger

“Virtually all of our road projects over the last three years

were done by members of the Kingston Construction Association,

with the exception of specific surface treatments contracted to Ottawa-area contractors.”

Mark VanBuren, Director of Engineering, City of Kingston

contracts rather than six or seven smaller projects,” continued Mr. Campbell. “We group by technology and weight it with geographical data. Kingston essentially has five major east-west routes in the urban area – Highway 401, Princess Street, Taylor-Kidd Boulevard/John Counter Boulevard, Bath Road, and Front Road - and when we can confirm scheduling over a number of years, we can phase projects and attempt to minimize impacts to cross-city traffic on all of them at the same time.”

An unanticipated benefit of the multi-year program is the ability to work closely with external entities to co-ordinate infrastructure upgrades. In a city known for its large institutions - Queen’s University, Canadian Forces Base Kingston, and the Royal Military College of Canada - choreography is paramount, as is co-ordinating with Bell Canada, Union Gas, Via Rail, CN Railway, Cogeco, and Hydro One. Canada’s busiest trade route skirts the top of Kingston, and the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) Eastern Region is committed to widening Highway 401 to six lanes, which means upgrading interchanges as well.

“The MTO is currently working on the Division Street-Highway 401 interchange which involves shaving the steep hill on

Division north of the 401 to comply with sight line requirements. Although it’s an MTO project, it’s on a main north-south route and a good example of how we can schedule work on other north-south routes or highway access corridors to minimize impact on drivers,” said Mr. Campbell.

“When working with an approved multi-year budget, so we can take the lead on advising them of our proposed projects and start a dialogue about their plans year-by-year. We sense a certain degree of respect and appre ciation from external groups because we have this multi-year approved

and budgeted plan. We’re able to interact with them, understand their projects, and co-ordinate much more frequently to manage traffic flow.”

A multi-year plan addresses all of these concerns. “Designers can work all winter after initial approval, adding value throughout the entire year without subjecting them to the peaks and valleys between budget approvals and construction season. They are very engaged in this program, and it allows us to keep as much work in-house as possible. With a multi-year plan, we can complete pre-engineering, permits, and tendering earlier and contractors can plan their season long before it starts. We can award tenders for spring starts in January and February and achieve greater efficiency, which results in the possibility of budget savings which allow us to do more projects without additional fund allocation.”

Harry Sullivan, executive director of the Kingston Construction Association (KCA) stressed

“We group by technology and

weight it with geographical data.”

Mark Campbell


the benefits of clear lines of communication and a long-term approved infrastructure program. “There’s a comfort factor for the civil and infrastructure groups knowing there’s good work flow ahead. It helps with resource allocation, from staffing to specialty training to equipment acquisition. The multi-year program helps our members tremendously.”

The 400 member firms of the KCA employ more than 3,800 people. There are 20 contracting firms in the civil and infrastructure group, and the collective

works of these companies has literally grown the City of Kingston. “Our members are all members of the community and engaged with Kingston’s future,” said Mr. Sullivan. “As the region grows, the companies grow too. There is a lot of risk and responsibility and consequently, through their historic association with each other and the KCA, there is a lot of mutual support. If one of our contractors needs a piece of equipment, they’ll most likely first

turn to another member for help.”

The spirit of co-operation has led to respect outside the ranks of the KCA. “There is a mutual trust evident between Utilities Kingston, the Engineering Department, and

the KCA,” continued Mr. Sullivan. “We meet every quarter with the City of Kingston and Utilities Kingston to discuss pending projects and we pass along this information to our members. They’re able to anticipate when tenders will be released.”

In conversations with representatives from other municipalities, Mr. Sullivan discussed the three-year program and found it unique to Kingston, as are the lines of communication. “Often other municipalities wonder if there is capacity in the work force to meet their needs. The communication between Utilities Kingston, the Engineering Department, and the KCA is equally unique and mutually bene-ficial. With a three-year

approved program, the City can stage its projects with confidence our members will accommodate their needs, and our contractors know they’ll receive exceptionally well prepared tenders and documents and their bids will be treated with genuine respect and professionalism.”

Mr. Sullivan praised the vision of staff at Utilities Kingston and the City’s Engineering Department. “This is a

“A multi-year program is the only way we can achieve immediate and necessary benefits from

our construction projects.”Chris Phippen, Utilities Engineer,

Technical Services

very organized group who has helped build a great relationship with KCA based on mutual respect. They excel at communicating their needs and plans, enacting programs to move forward efficiently, fast-track and consume funding responsibly, and allocate resources within their departments which helps our members do the same.”

Of equal value was inherent flexibility in the program and the ability of engineering and utilities management to capitalize on it. “After committing to an unprecedented number of roads and utilities projects in a brand new format, they were able to maintain flexibility by incorporating new opportunities into the program,” continued Mr. Sullivan.

“Utilities Kingston and the Engineering Department accomplished additional projects over the last 15 months they probably didn’t have allocated until the next three-year program. They know where to look and they submit well-prepared funding requests through such avenues as the federal Infrastructure Stimulus Fund and the provincial Economic Action Plan.”

While many of the projects engineered and completed under the three-year program are high profile and visually appealing, perhaps one of the most widely beneficial undertakings remains invisible to the thousands of Kingston residents whose quality of life it improved.

In 1956, the Harbourfront Trunk Interceptor Sewer was installed to capture 23 combined sewers draining directly into Lake Ontario, as was the norm of the day. It was part of a larger project which included the construction of Kingston’s first wastewater treatment plant five kilometres east of the Cataraqui River. Now known as Ravensview, it also underwent a $106 million expansion and upgrade concurrent to but not part of the roads and utilities program.

From 1956 to 2004, the trunk line was forgotten – it worked, sewage was flowing from the catchment area to Ravensview, and there were many other priorities to address. For many years, Kingston, as with most other modern cities with municipal utilities, experienced occasional combined sewer surcharges resulting in overflows to the lake during periods of heavy rain. Combined sewage overflows (CSO) are often the result of the lesser of two evils – either the system overflows or backs up into basements.

This is something Utilities Kingston takes very seriously, and is why it has invested millions into separating sanitary and storm sewers and increasing treatment capacity. CSOs are mitigated by proper eavestrough and sump pump drainage, and reported diligently to authorities. Still, they happen - although with rapidly decreasing regularity in Kingston.


The 2004 examination of the Harbourfront Trunk Interceptor Sewer provided not only answers but oppor-tunity. Using a floating sonar camera, investigation showed the 60-year-old sewer was structurally in good shape but had lost more than 50 per cent of its capacity due to accumulated sand and sediment.

The trunk line runs from Kingston Penitentiary to the River Street pumping station and services the entire downtown core and the old city, plus a significant amount of newer neighbourhoods and developments. Recovering the lost capacity represented a tremendous opportunity.

The challenge of achieving benefits during a one-year project was over-whelming. “We knew we needed to clean the trunk line first and then make repairs to joints, and we needed to maintain oper-ations during most of this work,” explained Chris Phippen, an engineer with Utilities Kingston’s Technical Services.

Existing domestic technology dictated a full diversion of the system during the cleaning and repair process. A diversion is an above ground temporary sewer

snaking its way through neighbourhoods along the 3.1 kilometre route of the trunk line for months at a time, at a cost of up to $100,000 per week – just for the diversion, for several summers in a row, with mixed results. To satisfy Ministry of the Environment recommendations, the diversion would have to be designed to allow flow to immediately return to the trunk sewer in the event of a breach or pump failure, and this just wasn’t a sensible approach considering the length of the trunk line and its location.

“If we clean upstream, it makes matters worse when the flow hits the debris field downstream, so it was paramount to have the entire trunk line cleaned at once. We don’t have the option of taking the line out of operation and we have no redundancies for the interceptor. We needed technology which allowed for ongoing operation during the cleaning process.”

Mr. Phippen found his company – in Texas. Utilities Kingston entered into an open-ended and flexible RFP renewable each year based on meritorious performance. “The Texas company was the

only contractor with equipment and expertise to clean the trunk line in one season while the sewer remained operational,” said Mr. Phippen. “It was an innovative approach and the first time the technology was deployed in Canada. We had delegations visit from many Canadian municipalities.”

In the first season, using 600 horse power specialized pressure washers, the contractor cleaned the entire 1.2 metre diameter trunk line along its 3.1 kilometre length, using no-dig technology.

At the end of the season, more than 850 tonnes of debris (dry-weight) were removed. Very little of the debris was organic; most was sand, gravel, construction debris, small boulders, and a bicycle.

“We restored a whack of capacity,” simplified Mr. Phippen.

Most of the Harbourfront Trunk Interceptor Sewer is below the level of Lake Ontario, and further examination showed many of the joints required repair. One breach “was like a fire hose; we were slowly draining and treating Lake Ontario.”

Repairs were then scheduled and completed over a two-year period, working carefully around tourist seasons, and designing one kilometre diversions as required because while the contractor could clean the sewers while operational, repairs required a drastic reduction in flow.

“We simply could not have accomplished this without a three-year plan,” stressed Mr. Phippen. “A major portion of the expense involved transporting the equipment and expertise from Texas and the economies of scale over several years with a committed contractor agreeing to a flexible RFP made it possible. I don’t know how we could have achieved such effective and immediate benefits working on year-to-year budget approval. We have returned to full capacity with a very solid trunk line servicing the City of Kingston.

We were able to do this because we could assure a contractor in great demand three years of approved and budgeted work.”

Similarly, Chantal Chiddle, also an engineer with Utilities Kingston Technical Services, found success elusive on a waterline relining project outside of the three-year plan. Only one company in Ontario – Fer-Pal – specializes in this field and is booked well in advance. With the three-year plan, once again Utilities Kingston was able to enter into a flexible contract renewable based on performance.

“Many of Kingston’s watermains require repair sooner than later,” said Mr. Phippen. “Fer-Pal is hard to get and its no-dig technology is crucial to our plans.”

First, corks are robotically inserted into the customer’s line leading from the watermain. Next, a liner similar in appearance to a large fire hose is saturated with two-part epoxy then pulled through an existing watermain and inflated into place with hot water. A robotic drill then senses the corks and removes them, and a new secure watermain is once again servicing customers. “Instead of ripping up streets, we have a desk-sized access point every 100 metres,” explained Mr. Phippen.

“If we wait for budget approval year-to-year, we’re going to be waiting a long time for the contractor; if we can commit to $1 million of


watermain relining each of three years, we get their attention, great pricing, and a solid commitment.”

Again, Mr. Phippen who, like his colleagues spends his days cho-reographing large and intricate projects, sums up the necessity of an innovative utilities and roads program.

“A multi-year program is the only way we can achieve immediate and necessary benefits from our construction projects making a difference to the residents of this city.”

Looking forward, senior members of Utilities Kingston and the City of Kingston Engineering Department speak of on-going plans awaiting funding and budget approval, and recognized 2011 will be the first year again, but design and e ngi neering staff are ready. They have identified high priority projects for 2011 and beyond awaiting budget approval. In the longer term there are plans to expand John Counter Boulevard to four lanes and include a grade separation at the CN tracks. It is already on the books awaiting funding

and ties in with the third crossing of the Cataraqui River which will provide another east-west route, illustrating the importance of obtaining council’s approval for the next multi-year plan.

Utilities Kingston President and CEO Jim Keech concurs. “We achieved significant success, created great efficiencies, and communicated well internally and externally with the three-year plan and now we need to look forward again and build upon this accomplishment. We need to continue to expand and build these lines of communication with all stakeholders as we look at ways to improve the next multi-year plan. Success and efficiencies quantified early in the program showed the necessity of renewing a multi-year plan and we have been very focused on this effort for the past nine months.”

At the end of the first multi-year road and utilities infrastructure program in Kingston’s municipal history, those involved in its inception remain impressed and often surprised by the benefits. They speak of

quantifiable results, fiscal gains through aggressive pricing, immediate benefits, and efficiencies spanning departments, projects, external entities, and the infrastructure projects designed and completed to improve the quality of life for residents of the City of Kingston.

NoteS:

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Kingston Roads and Utilities Infrastructure Program 2008 - 2010 page 17

UTILITIES KINGSTON 2008 2009 2010 BudgetGas $2,300,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $6,500,000Water $15,700,000 $18,800,000 $14,000,000 $48,500,000Sewer $9,300,000 $10,900,000 $14,800,000 $35,000,000TOTAL $27,300,000 $31,800,000 $30,900,000 $90,000,000

CITY OF KINGSTON ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 2008 2009 2010 Budget Traffic management general $782,000 $500,000 $700,000 $1,982,000Traffic calming measures $280,000 $82,000 $84,000 $446,000Engineering Capital Program –

unallocated $1,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $10,000,000

Bridges and culverts $1,200,000 $1,260,000 $1,900,000 $4,360,000City/CN Right of way management $0 $100,000 $110,000 $210,000Downtown revitalization $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,600,000 $3,400,000Infrastructure design $0 $100,000 $100,000 $200,000Overlay/surface treatment $1,800,000 $1,890,000 $2,000,000 $5,690,000Reconstruction (including storm

sewer and street lighting) $4,200,000 $4,410,000 $4,800,000 $13,410,000

Shoreline protection $850,000 $250,000 $260,000 $1,360,000Sidewalks and pararamps

(new and reconstruction) $900,000 $945,000 $990,000 $2,835,000

Storm systems improvement (right of way) $150,000 $158,000 $170,000 $478,000

Street lighting $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 $159,000County roads (amalgamation

agreement) $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 $1,950,000

City wide intersection and corridor improvements $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $390,000

Total $12,792,000 $15,528,000 $18,550,000 $46,870,000

CITY OF KINGSTON ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ADDITIONS FOR 2010 BUDGET 2010 BudgetSidewalks and Pararamps (new and reconstruction) $1,000,000 $1,000,000Street lighting $300,000 $300,000Total $1,300,000 $1,300,000

In addition to approved budgets, Utilities Kingston and the City of Kingston received a grant from the Province of Ontario under the Municipal Infrastructure Investment Initiative (MIII) for the City of Kingston’s combined sewer separation and road rehabilitation project in the Earl Street area of $7,682,000 ($4.2 million to the City of Kingston and $3.482 million to Utilities Kingston).

The Province also provided one-time funding to Kingston of $2,333,251 for municipal road and bridge infrastructure.

The Infrastructure Stimulus Fund assisted with a number of projects in the water master plan including reservoirs, booster stations, and trunk watermains with a grant of $22 million ($11 million from the province, $11 million from the federal government, and $11 million in matching funds from the City of Kingston).

BUDGET AND ADDITIONAL FUNDING


PROJECT SNAP SHOT – The Princess Street Reconstruction

The Princess Street Reconstruction, from façade to façade, included:

✓ 200 metres of sanitary sewers

✓ 250 meters of storm sewer

✓ 340 metres of watermain

✓ 4,600 square metres of asphalt

✓ 2,100 square meters

✓ 600 metres granite curb

✓ 200 square metres of granite pavers

✓ 9 planters

✓ 10 trees

✓ 7 benches

Pre-Project Studies included:

✓ Environmental review by City staff

✓ Archeological Stage 1 for project area including ground-penetrating radar (GPR) investigation in archaeological sensitive areas (i.e. old shoreline) and on site monitoring throughout the project by licensed archeologist

✓ MOE certificate of approval (standard for all projects of this nature)

✓ As part of the RFP the contractor conducted pre-construction test holes and investigation to minimize conflicts during construction

✓ Utilities Kingston conducted an inspection of area water and gas valves to ensure in good working order

Unique Project Considerations:

✓ Located in the heart of downtown Kingston, Princess Street is a vibrant commercial area and the challenge of this complete building face to building face reconstruction was to retain unimpeded access to businesses as all sidewalks, asphalt, underground utilities, lighting, and streetscape was reconstructed in a two-month period.

✓ ➢Princess Street is part of the original core of the old city of Kingston, and its existing infrastructure reflected this civil legacy. Before installing new water, sewer,

and utilities, the contractor had to first remove the stone box combined sewer.

✓ Finishing touches such as benches, planters, trees, granite pavers, and curbs were included

✓ A streetprint product - asphalt impressed with a plastic product to resemble pavers was utilized to enhance the crosswalks

✓ A very positive relationship between the contractor, the City, and Utilities Kingston was maintained through a partnering workshop, and a value engineering workshop. The contractor was allowed to assume a leadership role in public relations with the affected businesses by providing area businesses with updates. A community liaison initiative with the City, the contractor, and the merchants allowed a mutual understanding of the need to assist in managing deliveries, garbage removal, and pedestrian and vehicular traffic, while adhering to the construction schedule under strict timelines without compromising safety. Regular communications and meetings with Downtown Kingston enabled rapid dissemination of the information. The contractor also provided signage to enable public to access businesses and on-site staff provided assistance to public in accessing commercial establishments and the general area. The City provided public relations personnel to co-ordinate with the contractor.

✓ The project was completed on time and on budget and unencumbered access to the area was restored by the end of June 2010.

✓ Success was measured in many ways, but it was achieved because the project was tendered early and all stakeholders committed to internal and external lines of communication.

PROJECT SNAP SHOT – Willingdon and Area Reconstruction

✓ Willingdon, Union, MacDonnell, Hill, Hillcroft and Traymoor

✓ $7.6 million received from the Municipal Infrastructure Investment Initiative used for separating sewers in this area. The funding enabled the City and Utilities Kingston to include full reconstruction of sewers in the Charles/Rideau/Cataraqui streets area in its schedule

✓ Reconstruction of sewer, watermain, and roads on Willingdon, Union, MacDonnell, Hill, Hillcroft, and Traymoor including:

• 2,193metresofsanitarysewers

• 2,125metresofwatermain

• 1,835metresofstormsewer

• 3,800cubicmetresofrockexcavation

• 13,645cubicmetresofearthexcavation

• 21,810squaremetresofasphaltpavement

• 5,470squaremetresofconcretesidewalk

• 1,420metresofconcretecurb

Pre-Project Studies

• MOEcertificateofapproval(standardforall projects of this nature)

• UtilitiesKingstonconducted an inspection of area water and gas valves to ensure in good working order

Unique Items

• Muchlargerprojectthanwastypicallyissued by the City ( at least the size of two projects)

• Twoyearconstructionperiod

• WillingdonasignificantprojectfromaUtilities Kingston perspective because more than 90 per cent of the sewers in the old city area are combined. Separating them individually without a direct connection for sanitary sewers to the trunk line and for storm sewers to a treatment cell and outfall doesn’t add benefit immediately. Willingdon achieved separation with appropriate flow to the proper treatment sites


PROJECT SNAP SHOT –

History

✓ Originally installed in 1956 as part of Kingston’s efforts to intercept 23 combined sewers draining directly into Lake Ontario

✓ Harbourfront Trunk Interceptor Sewer runs 3.1 km along the waterfront, mostly below the level of Lake Ontario, from Kingston Penitentiary to the River Street Pumping Station

✓ Built at the same time as what is now known as the Ravensview Wastewater Treatment Plant.

✓ The trunk line had not been inspected since its initial construction in 1956 until six years ago in 2004

✓ Inspectors using a floating sonar camera determined the sewer was structurally in good shape, however more than 50 per cent of its capacity was lost due to accumulated sediment and debris.

✓ Utilities Kingston determined piecemeal cleaning would be ineffective and a longer-term approach was necessary to properly restore hydraulic capacity.

Project particulars and challenges

✓ As one of Kingston’s major sewer line installations, maintaining operations of this trunk line was imperative, with a minimum of diversion, which are expensive, inconvenient, and more susceptible to risk.

✓ Utilities Kingston identified three segments to the remediation – cleaning during the first year, followed by two years of joint repair. Only one company responded with acceptable technology allowing full operation of the trunk line during the cleaning phase, which would last an entire season. Diversions were necessary only during repairs, which required significant reductions in flow.

✓ The general contractor brought in a company from Texas under the authority of an open-ended performance based RFP. It was an innovative approach and the first time this equipment and technology was deployed in Canada.

✓ Several municipalities sent delegations to Kingston to witness the procedure.

✓ In the first year, the entire 3.1 km length of 1.2 m sewer was completely cleaned, removing a dry-weight equivalent of more than 850 tonnes of debris, including construction materials, gravel, sand, sediment, street garbage, and a bicycle.

✓ Joint repair consumed the following two years, and the trunk line was diverted in one kilometre sections. At one joint, water infiltration was significant. “Since the trunk line is mostly below lake level, we were slowly draining and treating Lake Ontario,” said Utilities Engineer Chris Phippen. “Water was flowing in like a fire hose.”

Necessity of multi-year budget approval

✓ The three year budget allowed Utilities Kingston to enter into an open-ended multi-year flexible RFP renewable based on performance and cancellable at the end of each component. With committed funding for three years, Utilities Kingston was able to stage the remediation to achieve beneficial results at the close of each portion of the RFP.

✓ Three years of stable funding delivered three years of excellent work as renewals were contractually linked to meritorious performance and the terms of the RFP protected Utilities Kingston’s interests while encouraging excellent delivery of services.

✓ Three-year plan allowed Utilities Kingston to plan around the downtown tourist season which brings increased traffic to the targeted area.

✓ Economies of scale for the three year program were necessary for the efficiency

Harbourfront Trunk Interceptor Sewer Remediation

of this project. Only with an open-ended three year commitment could Utilities Kingston, through the general contractor, bring in the only company in North America to clean the sewers while operational and effect repairs over the next two years.

✓ A major portion of the expense involved transporting specialty equipment and expertise from Texas, which would have been prohibitive on a year to year basis.

✓ Without the specialty equipment, cleaning could only be performed with a complete diversion of the sewer, at a cost of up to $100,000 per week, major inconvenience to neighbourhoods, and considerable environmental risk. Diverting for cleaning would have exponentially increased the cost.

✓ Imperative to clean the sewer completely

at one time, while operational. “If we clean only a section upstream, then it creates undesirable actions once the flow hits the uncleaned section,” said Mr. Phippen. “Cleaning downstream first is not logical as the sediment from upstream would just redeposit in the freshly cleaned pipe. We had to clean it all at once for maximum benefit and we could only do this with the three year plan.”

✓ Little value in doing the remediation piecemeal and incredible value in doing this all at once, and this was only possible due to a multi-year budget and program.


THREE-YEAR UTILITIES AND ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS StReet FRoM to WoRK YeAR Abdo Road Castell Road South to end Watermain 2010Abbey Dawn Road Highway 2 Middle Road Surface treatment 2010Albert Street Mack Street South of Princess St. Reconstruction 2010Audrey Street Floyd Avenue Jesse Cres. Resurfacing 2008Barrack Street Ontario Street Wellington Street Resurfacing 2008Barrie Street William Street Princess Street Reconstruction 2010Bath Road Coronation Blvd. 170m W of Sycamore Watermain 2010Bath Road Centennial Dr. Armstrong Road Road widening for bike lanes 2011Battersea Road Aragon Road Unity Road Resurfacing 2009Battersea Road Thompson Crescent River Ridge Road Resurfacing 2009Bayridge Dr. Coverdale Dr. Acadia Dr. Watermain 2010Bayridge Dr. Lincoln Dr. Cataraqui Woods Dr. Watermain 2010Bayridge Dr. Sierra Avenue Creekford Road Watermain 2010Byron Crescent Norman Rogers Dr. Norman Rogers Dr. Watermain/Gas 2010Bishop Street Front Road Crescent Dr. Watermain 2008Benson Street Division Street Markers Crescent Gas 2008Brock Street Division Street Alfred Street Reconstruction 2009Brock Street Division Street Clergy Street East Reconstruction 2009Bur Brook Road Perth Road Cole Hill Road Resurfacing 2009Castell Road McEwen Dr. Days Road Watermain 2010Casterton Avenue Norman Rogers Dr. South leg of Dedrick Watermain 2010Cataraqui Street Bagot Street The Cataraqui River Reconstruction 2010Cataraqui Woods West of Gardiners Rd. East of Clyde Court Road widening for bike lanes 2010Centenial Drive Taylor-Kidd Blvd. Princess Street Road widening for bike lanes 2010Charles Street Patrick Street Rideau Street Reconstruction 2010Churchill Crescent College Street South College Street North Reconstruction 2008 - 2009Clergy Street East Earl Street Princess Street Reconstruction 2008Cole Hill Road Bur Brook Road Unity Road Resurfacing 2009Conacher Dr. Sutherland Dr. Sutherland Dr. Watermain 2010Creekford Road Bayridge Dr. Cloggs Road Watermain 2010College Street Hill Street Johnson Street Reconstruction 2008 - 2009

APPeNDIX A

THREE-YEAR UTILITIES AND ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

StReet FRoM to WoRK YeAR Crescent Dr. Crerar Blvd. Montgomery Blvd. Watermain 2008County Road 2 Gabion Wall Reinforced Slope 2008County Road 2 Highway 15 East end of CFB Watermain 2008Dalton Avenue Division Street Cattail Place Gas 2009Dalton Avenue Division Street Warne Crescent Resurfacing 2009Earl Street University Street Division Street Reconstruction 2011Farleigh Street MacClement Dr. Southwood Dr. Watermain 2009/2010Flanigan Road Kepler Road Sydenham Road Surface Treatment 2009Floyd Avenue Sunnyside Road Audey Street Resurfacing 2008Front Road Beeman Avenue Bayridge Dr. Watermain 2010Gordon Street Lakeshore Blvd. Northerly to end Watermain 2008Gore Road Easterly Bend Northerly to end Surface Treatment 2008Gore Road Easterly Bend Northerly to end Surface Treatment 2010Harpell Road Highway #38 South limit Surface Treatment 2009Hartman Street Sunnyside Road East end Surface Treatment 2009Herchmer Crescent Byron Crescent Byron Crescent Gas 2010Hill Street MacDonnell Street College Street Reconstruction 2009/2010Holland Crescent Casterton Avenue Casterton Avenue Watermain 2010Hillcroft Dr. Union Street Northerly to Circle Reconstruction 2009Highway 15 Highway 2 Main Street Microsurfacing 2010Highway 2 Treasure Island City Limits Microsurfacing 2010Homeward Avenue Bath Road MacClement Dr. Resurfacing/Watermain 2009-2010James Street Montreal Street Patrick Street Reconstruction 2009Jesse Crescent Mildred Street East end Resurfacing 2009Johnson Street Sir John A. Macdonald Portsmouth Avenue Reconstruction 2008Jorene Dr. Redden Street Lakeshore Blvd. Watermain 2009Kepler Road Sydenham Road Babcock Road Surface Treatment 2008Keys Street Point Crescent Sunny Acres Road Watermain 2008King Street East Queen Street Place D’Armes Resurfacing 2010King Street East Princess Street Brock Street Reconstruction 2010Kirkwood Road Castell Road South to end Watermain 2010


THREE-YEAR UTILITIES AND ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS StReet FRoM to WoRK YeAR Lakeland Point Dr. All Watermain 2008Lakeshore Blvd. Crear Blvd. Jorene Dr. Watermain 2010Lakeview Avenue Henderson Blvd. North end Watermain 2008Lakeview Avenue Redden Street Lakeshore Blvd. Watermain 2008Lee Road Babcock Road the west limit Surface Treatment 2009Latimer Road Sydenham Road City Limits Resurfacing 2010MacClement Dr. Homeward Avenue Maple Ridge Dr. Watermain 2009/2010MacClement Dr. Homeward Avenue Maple Ridge Dr. Resurfacing 2009/2010MacDonnell Street Union Street Earl Street Reconstruction 2009/2010Mack Street Frontenac Street Alfred Street Reconstruction 2010Maple Ridge Dr. MacClement Dr. Bath Road Watermain/Resurfacing 2009McEwen Dr. Bath Road Castell Road Watermain 2010Morenze Crescent Conacher Dr. Conacher Dr. Watermain 2010Meadowcrest Blvd. Henderson Blvd. North end Watermain 2008Midland Avenue Cataraqui Woods Northern Limit Resurfacing 2010Mildred Street Sunnyside Road Jesse Crescent Resurfacing 2008Montreal Street Charles Street 75 m N of James Reconstruction 2009Mowat Avenue Churchill Street Forsythe Avenue Reconstruction 2010Nelson Street Concession Street Fifth Avenue Gas 2010Norman Rogers Dr. Roden Street Sir John A. Macdonald Gas 2009Norman Rogers Dr. Roden Street Van Order Dr. Gas/Water 2010Patterson Road Battersea Road Mount Chesney Road Surface Treatment 2009Perth Road Highway 401 McAdoo’s Lane Gas 2010Place D’Armes Ontario Street Wellington Street Resurfacing 2008Princess Street King Street East East end Reconstruction 2010Princess Street Bagot Street Division Street Resurfacing 2008Princess Street Ambassador Hotel Sydenham Road Watermain 2009/2010Princess Street Anderson Dr. At intersection Intersection Improvements 2010Purdy’s Mill Road Purdy’s Court Northerly to the end Surface Treatment 2009Rideau Street Raglan Road At intersection Traffic Calming 2009Rigney Street John Counter Blvd. North end of Road Watermain 2010

THREE-YEAR UTILITIES AND ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

StReet FRoM to WoRK YeAR Roden Street Norman Rogers Dr. Johnson Street Gas/Water 2009/2010Seabrook Road Boundary Bend Highway 15 Treatment 2011Southwood Dr. Homeward Avenue Maple Ridge Dr. Watermain/Resurfacing 2009/2010Southwood Dr. Fairleigh Street Homeward Avenue Watermain 2010Spooner Road Perth Road To east end Surface Treatment 2008Sunny Acres Road Front Road Dale Street Watermain 2010Sunnyside Road West end Sydenham Road Surface Treatment 2009Taylor-Kidd Blvd Princess Street Gardiners Road Resurfacing 2009Taylor-Kidd Blvd. Progress Avenue Left turn lane 2010Taylor-Kidd Blvd. Old Colony Road Left turn lane 2010Theresa Crescent Kirkpatrick Street North end Watermain 2010Traymoor Street Kensington Avenue Livingston Street Reconstruction 2009/2010Union Street MacDonnell Street Livingston Street Reconstruction 2009/2010Unity Road Collins Creek Raise road/resurface 2008University Avenue Brock Street Princess Street Reconstruction 2009Van Order Dr. Metcalfe Avenue Norman Rogers Dr. Gas 2009Van Order Dr. Metcalfe Avenue Norman Rogers Dr. Watermain 2010Van Order Dr. East end Highway 38 Surface Treatment 2008Warne Crescent Dalton Avenue Northwest end Gas 2008Willingdon Avenue Union Street Johnson Street Reconstruction 2009/2010Willingdon Avenue Earl Street Hill Street Reconstruction 2010Windsor Street Jorene Dr. Lakeview Avenue Watermain 2008Woodbine Road Collins Bay Road Bayridge Dr. Traffic Calming 2009Woodburn Road Highway 15 City Limits Surface Treatment 2010


UTILITIES KINGSTON FACILITY PROJECTS LoCAtIoN SeRVICe DeSCRIPtIoN YeAR

Weller and Division Gas Regulator Station 2008Elliot and Division Gas Regulator Station 2008Division and Dalton Gas Regulator Station 2009City Gate Gas Station Upgrades 2008O’Connor Drive Water Water Reservoir 2010O’Connor Drive Water Water Booster Station 2010Cana Water Water Treatment Plant 2008Ravensview Sewer Sewage Treatment Plant 2009

CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SIDEWALKS StReet SIDe FRoM to YeAR Bath Road North Tanner Drive Gardiners Road 2008

Bath Road South Sir John A. Macdonald Blvd. West 300m 2010

Bath Road South Gardiners Road East of Canatara Court 2010Blackburn Mews East Taylor-Kidd Blvd. North end 2010Centennial Drive West Waterloo Drive Davis Drive S. 2008Glengarry Road North Portsmouth Avenue Westmoreland Road 2009Gore Road South Grenadier Drive Rose Abbey Drive 2008Henderson Boulevard North Roosevelt Drive Glen Castle Road 2008INVISTA Centre - Fortune Crescent South Gardiners Road Easterly along frontage 2008

INVISTA Centre - Gardiners Road East Fortune Crescent North Fortune Crescent South 2008

Main St. (Barriefield) East James Street Regent Street 2009/2010Portsmouth Avenue East King Street West Johnson Street 2010Tanner Drive East Bath Road Northerly 100m 2009Taylor Kidd Blvd. North Gardiners Road 160m E of Bexley Gate 2010Taylor-Kidd Blvd. North Bayridge Drive Milford Drive 2010Taylor-Kidd Blvd. South Progress Avenue Old Colony Road 2010Union Street South Gardiner Street West Campus Lane 2010

RECONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS StReet SIDe FRoM to YeAR Albert Street West Queen’s Crescent Union Street 2010Basswood Place East Cedarwood Drive N. Leg Basswood Place 2010Bath Road North Collins Bay Road Easterly 201m 2010Brant Avenue East Oak Street Ruskin Street 2008Brant Avenue West Oak Street Northerly 312m 2008Castell Road South McEwen Drive Days Road 2010College Street East Carruthers Avenue Northerly 145m 2008Ellice Street North Vine Street Westerly 69m 2008Ellice Street South Division Street Easterly 77m 2008Front Road North Welbourne Avenue Chelsea Road 2010Helen Street East 30m s. Park Street Southerly 48m 2008Hillendale Avenue East Phillip Street Princess Street 2009McEwen Drive West Castell Road Northerly 152m 2010Phillip Street South Portsmouth Avenue Gilmour Avenue 2009Pinewood Crescent East Cedarwood Drive Northerly 187m 2010Pinewood Place East Cedarwood Drive South leg 2010Pinewood Place South All All 2010Pinewood Place East South Leg Cedarwood Drive 2010Prince Charles Drive South Highgate Park Drive Westerly 261m 2010Princess Street South MacDonnell Street Westerly 110m 2009Princess Street North MacDonnell Street Tower Street 2009Queen Mary Road East Notch Hill Road 110m east of Old Oak Road 2010Robert Wallace Drive West Johnson Street N. Leg Richardson Drive 2009Union Street North Albert Street Alfred Street 2010Vine Street West Ellice Street Raglan Road 2008Weller Avenue South Baker Street Ford Street 2008Weller Avenue South Butler Street Wiley Street 2008Weller Avenue South Ford Street Wilson Street 2008Wellington Street West Johnson Street Clarence Street 2009Westdale Ave East Franklin Place Southerly 55m 2008Whiteoak Crescent South Pinewood Crescent Easterly 106m 2010


CONCRETE SIDEWALK ACCESS RAMPS 2010 LoCAtIoN QUADRANt Taylor Kidd Boulevard at Gardiners Road NortheastAlwington Place at King Street West NortheastCollingwood Street at Johnson Street Southwest

CONCRETE SIDEWALK ACCESS RAMPS 2009 LoCAtIoN QUADRANt Brock Street at Wellington Street NortheastBrock Street at Wellington Street SouthwestChapman Street at Queen Street NorthwestChapman Street at Queen Street NortheastClergy Street at Ordnance Street SoutheastClergy Street at Ordnance Street SouthwestQueen Street north of Montreal Street EastRideau Street at Ordnance Street NortheastVictoria Street at Johnson Street NortheastWellington Street at Clarence Street NortheastYonge Street at King Street Southeast

CONCRETE SIDEWALK ACCESS RAMPS 2008 LoCAtIoN QUADRANt Brock Street at Montreal Street WesterlyEllice Street at Main Street SouthwestEllice Street at Main Street NorthwestEllice Street at Vine Street NortheastKing Street at Clarence Street SouthwestMain Street at Raglan Road SouthwestMain Street at Raglan Road NorthwestNorman Rogers Drive at Moore School CrossingPrincess Street at Albert Street NortheastPrincess Street at Albert Street NorthwestPrincess Street at Chatham Street NorthwestSir John A Macdonald at Bath Northwest

NEW AND UPGRADED TRAFFIC SIGNALSLoCAtIoN WoRK YeAR Bayridge Drive at Hudson Drive Upgrade 2008Bayridge Drive at Lincoln Drive New Signals 2010Centennial Drive at Waterloo Drive New Signals 2008Coverdale Drive at Stoneridge Drive New Signals 2009Division Street and Weller Avenue Upgrade 2008Division Street and First Capital Place New Signals 2008Gardiners Road north of Golden Mile Road New Signals 2010Gardiners Road, between O’Connor Drive and Norris Court New Signals 2010Highway 15 at Biscayne Avenue New Signals 2008Montreal Street at Charles Street Rebuild 2010Princess Street at King Street East Rebuild 2010Princess Street at Ontario Street Rebuild 2010Sir John A. Macdonald Blvd. and Johnson Street Rebuild 2009Taylor Kidd Boulevard at Old Colony Road New Signals 2010Wellington Street at Johnson Street New Signals 2010

BRIDGE WORK LoCAtIoN YeAR Burbrook Road at Jackson Mills Road (culvert) 2010La Salle Causeway (Public Works and Government Services Canada) N/APrincess Street at Collins Creek 2009/2010Seabrook at City limit (culvert) 2010Unity Road at Glenvale Creek 2009/2010Woodbine Road at Collins Creek 2010Also in 2010 at various locations: Barrier improvements, annual cleaning and maintenance and bi-annual inspections 2010


Arising from the budget presentations on November 28th, several questions were raised regarding the process utilized to establish the selection of streets that are targeted for capital budget expenditures.

Streets identified for activity undergo a careful evaluation and analysis prior to selection to ensure that limited financial resources are utilized in the most efficient and effective manner. Relative to the infrastructure, industry wide standards/criteria are employed in the evaluation. Decisions regarding the selection of streets are reached after careful evaluation undertaken by qualified engineers with expertise in evaluating the appropriate infrastructure type.

The following is a summary of the information used in evaluating the infrastructure warranting capital expenditure:

RoADS

1. A detailed roads condition survey was performed by IMS (Infrastructure Management Services) in 2005 which forms the basis for evaluation.

2. Data captured is imported into a pavement management system (Cartegragh) and used to evaluate road segments against 12 condition categories (i.e. alligator and longitudinal cracking, vehicle ride, pot holes and rutting)

3. An overall condition index (OCI) score is calculated for each road segment.

4. Project/road selection is based on OCI and road classification with emphasis placed on higher road classifications including arterial and collector roads due to higher traffic volumes.

5. Project/road selection is also based on maintaining a target split between road reconstruction and overlay program. This recognizes that an asphalt overlay of a road is an important step in maximizing the service life a road before full reconstruction is required.

SeWeRS

1. Currently 12-14 Km of sewers undergo closed circuit television work (CCTV) each year. Sanitary sewers are then evaluated by staff certified by the ‘North American Association of Pipeline Inspectors’ in the sewer condition classification rating methodology. This condition rating method provides an internationally accepted rating scheme for classifying the sewer condition based on type, length and location of cracks, condition of joints, degree of deflection in pipes, crushed sewers etc. Sewers achieving the worst scoring are prioritized for construction activity.

2. Sewers are also evaluated on their potential for complete sewer separation. Recognizing that sewer separation in any given drainage area is a multi year endeavour, sewers located in drainage areas that have potential for complete near term removal of storm water from the sanitary system are ranked higher due to the immediate benefit derived. This enables a greater return on the investment by reducing both the frequency and volume of combined sewer overflows.

APPeNDIX B: Three-year roads budget – criteria for selection

page 31

WAteR

1. Operations records are reviewed each year relative to break history on watermains. Those watermains with frequent repair activity are prioritized for replacement.

2. Operations records are reviewed for trends in serviceability complaints. This would include issues around low water pressure, discolouration of water etc. This information contributes in determining water main replacement or rehabilitation activity.

3. Other factors which contribute to the evaluation are age of infrastructure and undersized infrastructure (by today’s standard)

4. An estimation of the ability of the watermains to withstand other related construction activity. Watermains will be scheduled for replacement if the integrity of the main will be compromised by other proposed construction activity.

GAS

1. Operations records are reviewed each year relative to leak detection surveys on gas mains. Those gas mains with frequent repair activity are prioritized for replacement.

2. Operations records are reviewed for trends in serviceability complaints. This information contributes in determining gas main replacement or rehabilitation.

3. The age of the gas mains is also a factor in determining replacement.

All of the forgoing elements become part of the overall evaluation in selecting streets warranting infrastructure replacement, rehabilitation, or renewal. In some cases the selected streets represent a confluence of criteria whereby all categories are present. In other cases streets may have high rankings in one or more of the criteria but lesser scores in others (i.e. high sewer ranking but lower road surface ranking). The infrastructure still requires action but the relative rankings within each infrastructure class may differ. It is important to note that the criteria should not be considered mutually exclusive of each other. In the aforementioned example, a street with a high sewer ranking but lower road surface ranking typically requires replacement or rehabilitation of the road surface if the sewers are replaced. The selection of streets is undertaken against the back drop of financial and personnel resources available to complete the project work program.

Although criteria are employed to identify streets/projects the current condition of the asset (road surface, sewer pipe) determines the nature of the activity. For example total failure of a sewer pipe or road would dictate total replacement while linear cracks in pipes would suggest sewer relining. Therefore various techniques are utilized depending on the current condition of the asset.

Prepared for: Jim Keech, President & CEO,

Utilities Kingston, 85 Lappans Lane, PO Box 790, Kingston, ON K7L 4X7

Written by: Catherine Stutt, [email protected]

Layout by: Schellé Holmes, www.the-holmestead.com

Photo credit for Princess Street construction photos: Paul Wash, www.photosavedigital.com

December 2010

utilities kingston infrastructure report_2010

Documents

kingston roads

ceo of utilities kingston

kingston city council

utilities projects

capital budget

initial city approved

infrastructure renewal

detailed program