TAMRMS#: B06
10.2
title
Asset Management Programs - Special Event Criteria
Notice given by: Councillor Killick
label
PROPOSED MOTION(S):
recommendation
That special event criteria be added to the prioritization factors to inform priorities of response and appropriate methodology of repair, maintenance, or replacement in the City’s asset management programs.
body
ADMINISTRATION’S UNDERSTANDING OF THE INTENT OF THE MOTION
Administration understands that the intent of the motion is to consider permitted special events in the City, and incorporate additional criteria in determining the re-prioritization and response to the appropriate methodology of repair, maintenance, or replacement (RMR) of all City assets that the permitted special events may influence in any given year. This will include but not be limited to a review of the current state of prioritization methodologies and policies, and investigate options to enhance the service levels or methodologies through policy amendment, including resource implications of the option(s) found.
PURPOSE OF REPORT
The purpose of this report is to present a motion for which Councillor Killick gave notice on June 18, 2024.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
The City permits over 90 special events with the community each year. These events vary in size, complexity, community reach, and can be held in locations throughout the City. Not all events occur annually, and event locations can change based on event needs and site availability.
As per City Council Policy, C-CS-19_Special Event Permits, “Special Event” is defined as an event to be held in a Public Place which meets the following criteria:
• celebrates a specific theme;
• has a pre-determined set date/time; and
• is generally available to the community at large.
This policy provides the guidance of these permitted events on an annual basis, with the application for permitting to be received at minimum 60 days in advance to sometimes 120 days in advance if the event is considered major and causes traffic flow disruption or closures. It is to be noted that the Special Event Permits policy is a use-based policy and does not influence infrastructure decisions directly.
As per Traffic Bylaw 18/2005, “Public Place” means any Highway, parkland, public bridge, roadway, lane, footway, square, court, alley or passage, whether a thoroughfare or not, and includes any open space to which the public have or are permitted to have access, whether by payment or otherwise, to City land.
Should the proposed motion pass, administration understands that some of the special events recur on an annual basis and could influence the City’s current RMR program prioritization methodology, for all asset classes that fall within the “Public Place” definition.
Annual approval of the special event is not in alignment with the RMR process. There is an additional challenge with accommodating events to influence future year RMR program, as it may alter the level of service defined for the primary use/objective of that particular asset, especially if the asset renewal is planned outside the immediate two-year window of the occurrence of Special Events. For example, the primary objective of a road asset is for multimodal mobility and accessibility. Special events accommodation is a secondary objective.
The proposed motion requires further clarification, to the specific boundaries on scope, scale, timeline, and budget considerations under which the current applied condition-based criteria for prioritization of asset specific RMR program be further influenced by the special event occurrence or recurrence.
Current State RMR program prioritization:
The Council Asset Management Policy (C-P&E-07) sets high-level guidelines for asset management practices and procedures; however, it does not include specific criteria for asset prioritization.
Currently, there are 25 asset stewarding groups that each follow their own process for asset prioritization. In general, condition-based criteria are applied to City assets in developing its annual RMR program. This process may vary based on the nature of the asset being considered, and other requirements as noted below. For example, transportation assets are prioritized based on engineering best practices and condition-based assessments. In contrast, park amenities such as park benches or waste receptacles may be prioritized based on age only.
As noted, several corporate assumptions are considered when initiating each capital RMR charter program:
• Assessment of impact or risk to community relating to public health, safety, legal obligations, or regulatory requirements;
• Annual detailed review of lifecycle and replacement plans;
• Staff resources and capacity during project implementation;
• The effect of potential operational impacts and long-term requirements; and
• Federal, Provincial, and Reserve funds available.
Special events that are significantly influenced by the condition of the asset are currently being considered in the prioritization of the asset if safety and compliance is a factor, and if the asset renewal is in the two-year (short-term) plan. This is done in an informal way, in collaboration between asset stewards on an as-needed basis, after the asset RMR plan is determined based on condition and engineering assessment.
To further elaborate, the consideration and influence of special events when prioritizing asset management response and programming would best occur for assets within the short-term or project level delivery timeline; within the 1- to 2-year candidate listing. This equates to a list of candidate assets that are of similar priority for public safety impact, asset condition levels that reflect potential need or treatment response, economic impacts, and potential coordinated project delivery that can be further reviewed to have a secondary level of prioritization. These then could help capture the best investment for the City for locations that have social benefits such as special event supports, or sites that are in proximity to senior centers, school sites, or other locations of special demographic support. These are considerations that could influence the planned RMR work if the asset is completed within the existing or next program year. This action is completed by the Administration currently, but may or may not be documented, and is not formally associated with scoring criteria or weighting factors.
The most recent example is a request from the event organizers of the Soap Box Derby, an event that is held annually on the St. Vital Avenue hill from Madonna Drive to Muir Drive. The section of roadway is not within the short-term candidate listing, as it is currently planned within the 5-year time frame for RMR response; to which this timeline and planned date could change due to updated condition assessment results. In this example, it may not be considered for jumping priority level ahead of planned 2024 or 2025 candidate sites, however, as new information is recorded and the timeline reduces to the 1- to 2-year period, then the consideration of the benefit to the special event may occur and the roadway may be a candidate in 2026 (ahead of current RMR planned work).
Future State RMR program prioritization:
As the City continues its asset management (AM) maturity journey, AM improvements are being planned at the strategic asset level, of which a review of the Asset Management (AM) policy, creation of an Asset Management Strategy (AMS), and Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP) are of primary importance in the short-term (i.e. less than 2 years). At the tactical level, Asset Management Plans (AMP) for each asset stewarding group will be developed shortly thereafter, which then will replace the current RMR capital program. AMPs will enable a consistent corporate-wide prioritization for all assets on a planned Enterprise Maintenance Management-Asset Management (EMM-AM) software platform which is currently in procurement for a staged implementation in 2025-2030. The City’s Integrated Risk Management Framework shall be incorporated in the decision-making process for creation of AMPs, and will form part of the SAMP.
Special events provide social value to the community which cannot be easily quantified and incorporated as a criterion in the prioritization of the RMR program. Additionally, this criterion influence may become insignificant against the standards that are currently being applied, that is condition-based assessment and prioritization. Therefore, corporate-wide stakeholder consultation is envisioned as administration plans to work through the strategic asset management implementation journey.
In the interim, given the current state and outlook, Administration is presenting alternatives as noted below.
Alternative Options:
Alternative 1: Do nothing
In this scenario, special events will continue to be considered as a secondary influence towards determining the finalized asset specific RMR program in the short-term.
For example, assume a number of roads have been rated equally in the life-cycle prioritization. If financial resources are limited to service all of them, the decision to re-prioritize one road over another could be influenced if one or more of the roads involve a special event occurrence.
Note that the consideration of special events will come at the cost of time and money.
Alternative 2: Modify Asset Management Policy C-P&E-07
Council may consider an alternative motion that implies revision to the current AM policy to include the provision of special events in the standards section of the policy.
In terms of how the policy may be implemented at the tactical level, administration considers introducing lessons learned with City’s Internal stakeholders each year, and incorporate any asset specific requirements to subsequent two years of RMR program, if feasible.
In the standard section of the AM policy C-P&E-07, the following can be added:
“Stakeholder engagement may be considered in determining social value, which would include special events, to influence the prioritization of future RMR program levels of service.”
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATIONS OR ENGAGEMENT
Internal collaboration with City departments occurred in providing response to the proposed council motion. The alternative recommendations and background information is provided based on the initial collaboration.
IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION(S)
Financial:
None at this time. While updates to the prioritization methodology may impact the project budget allocation within the RMR program in the short term, the funding for the overall RMR program may have long-term budget implications.
Compliance & Legal:
None at this time.
Program or Service:
The proposed motion could likely affect all 25 asset groups. The RMR program implementation could get complicated as special events could recur.
Organizational:
Resources will be impacted by including Special Event as a primary criterion in asset management prioritization. Asset stewarding groups will be impacted from additional resource time, as the criteria to be developed may differ between assets.
Risks
Strategic - Creates additional work that may influence various programs within the city including Capital Projects Office work planned, City’s Financial Planning, City’s approved RMR program, etc.
Culture - Potentially affect City’s approach to Special Events Permitting.
Assets and Asset Management - Bringing forth projects not due for investment may jeopardize financial, resourcing, and reputational sustainability.
Financial - Investment in assets before lifecycle maintenance is required will likely result in an increase to the overall RMR budget.
People - Increased workload to an already maximized resource capacity.
Stakeholders - May affect how City engages with future Special Events stakeholders or community members.
ALIGNMENT TO PRIORITIES IN COUNCIL’S STRATEGIC PLAN
In Strategic Priority Five: Financial Sustainability section (page 10), implement Centralized Asset Management - Explore centralized model for asset management, its benefits to the City and impacts on resourcing.
ALIGNMENT TO LEVELS OF SERVICE DELIVERY
Under Business and Financial Management, sub-program G.1 Asset Management, all program service levels may be impacted by considering Special Events.
G.1.5 Public Art Collection - Facilitate procurement and maintenance of the City’s Public Art Collection.
G.1.6 Recreation Asset Management and Maintenance - Maintenance of the City's recreation assets including indoor and outdoor facilities and amenities.
G.1.7 Transit Fixed Asset Management Maintenance - Maintenance and upgrade of transit fixed assets to ensure safe, well-maintained, well-functioning assets for residents' enjoyment.
G.1.8 Transportation Network Asset Management and Maintenance - Management and stewardship of the City's asset management program. This includes the establishment of the corporate asset management framework, the strategic asset management plans and the operational processes required to maintain existing assets. Additionally, asset stewards work to maintain city assets to city standards.
All aspects of asset maintenance, risk, depreciation, and field observations are incorporated into asset management practices to ensure a consistent forecasting approach is maintained throughout the City of St. Albert.
ALIGNMENT TO COUNCIL DIRECTION OR MANDATORY STATUTORY PROVISION
On September 22, 2014, Council passed the following motion:
C463-2014
That City Council Policy C-P&E-07, Asset Management, provided as Attachment 1 to the September 22, 2014, agenda report “Asset Management Policy”, be approved.
IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
If Council does not wish to support the proposed motion, the following alternatives could be considered:
Alternative 1: Do Nothing
That Administration continues to apply the secondary influence of special events informally, to the prioritization of the asset specific Repair, Maintain, and Replace (RMR) program.
Financial:
None.
Compliance & Legal:
No additional impacts.
Program or Service:
No additional impacts.
Organizational:
None.
Risks
There are no additional risks. However, risks are highly dependent on the proposed Special Event, and can vary. This alternative provides the City with the ability to accept, avoid, mitigate, or share the risk depending on its approval. The City can suggest other locations, timeframes, or temporary provisions, if applicable.
If Council desires to expedite funds for the amendment towards the AM policy and creation of other corporate strategic AM documents as outlined earlier in this report, alternatives 2 or 3 could be considered.
Alternative 2: Asset Management Policy Modifications with the inclusion of Special Events
1. That administration amend the existing Asset Management Policy C-P&E-07 to include the provision of special events in the standards section along with other necessary amendments and present to Council for approval no later than Q4 2025, and
2. That $60,000 be approved from the stabilization reserve for procurement of an external resource for the review of the Asset Management (AM) policy, and other related AM strategic plans.
Financial:
While an update to the Asset Management policy and the creation of an Asset Management Strategy (AMS) and Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP) are planned for 2026 through outsourcing, there is no current internal capacity or expertise to complete these documents in concert, as these documents need to be in alignment with each other. Therefore, this requires the work to be done by an external consultant at an estimated cost of $60,000. This will also require multiple internal workshops.
Compliance & Legal:
None at this time.
Program or Service:
Should this motion be approved, administration may have to re-prioritize the AM policy amendment and timelines in concert with other ongoing AM maturity programs such as EMM-AM implementation and AM governance to establish roles and responsibilities and resources requirement for all related AM functions. EMM-AM is one of the AM functions defined within the governance framework.
Organizational:
Existing resource allocation has to be revisited to support the AM policy review process including coordination of the consulted work with internal stakeholders.
Risks
Strategic - None at this time. This is an opportunity where accelerating the AM policy amendment will advance the City’s Strategic Plans.
Assets and Asset Management - May introduce financial unsustainability in how special events’ influence get manifested through the policy. At the same time, this would propel AM maturity journey.
Stakeholders - If the amended policy is not administered properly, there is risk to stakeholder engagement or sentiment, including community expectations. This may cause reputational risk to the City.
Alternative 3: Asset Management Policy Modifications without the inclusion of Special Events
1. That administration amends the existing Asset Management Policy C-P&E-07 to include all necessary amendments excluding Special Events and present to Council for approval no later than Q4 2025, and
2. That $60,000 be approved from the stabilization reserve for procurement of an external resource for the review of the Asset Management (AM) policy, and other related AM strategic plans.
Financial:
While an update to the Asset Management (AM) policy and the creation of an Asset Management Strategy (AMS) and Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP) are planned for 2026 through outsourcing, there is no current internal capacity or expertise to complete these documents in concert, as these documents need to be in alignment with each other. Therefore, this requires the work to be done by an external consultant at an estimated cost of $60,000. This will also require multiple internal workshops.
Compliance & Legal:
None at this time.
Program or Service:
Should this motion be approved, administration may have to re-prioritize the AM policy amendment and timelines in concert with other ongoing AM maturity programs such as EMM-AM implementation and AM governance to establish roles and responsibilities and resources requirement for all related AM functions. EMM-AM is one of the AM functions defined within the governance framework.
Organizational:
Existing resource allocation has to be revisited to support the AM policy review process including coordination of the consulted work with internal stakeholders.
Risks
Strategic - None at this time. This is an opportunity where accelerating the AM policy amendment will advance the City’s Strategic Plans.
Assets and Asset Management - None at this time. It may accelerate the AM maturity journey.
Stakeholders - If the amended policy is not administered properly, there is risk to stakeholder engagement or sentiment, including community expectations. This may cause reputational risk to the City.
body
Report Date: July 16, 2024
Author: Dean Schick, Manager, Transportation Engineering, Suzanne Findlay, Manager, Financial Services, Lorraine Doblanko, Senior Asset Management Specialist, Craig Cameron, Manager, Parks and Community Partnerships
Department: Engineering, Finance, Recreation and Parks
Department Director: Dawny George, Anne Victoor, Daniele Podlubny
Managing Director: Diane McMordie/Diane Enger/Adryan Slaght
Chief Administrative Officer: William Fletcher