WATER SERVICING DEVELOPMENT CHARGE UPDATE 2008 …€¦ · WATER SERVICING DEVELOPMENT CHARGE...

WATER SERVICING DEVELOPMENT CHARGE UPDATE 2008

FINAL REPORT

Prepared for:

The Corporation of the City of London

Prepared by:

AECOM 285 King Street, Suite 300

London, Ontario N6B 3M6

April 2009 Project No. 100875

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................1

1.1. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS..............................................................................................................................1 1.2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION .......................................................................................................................3

2. EXISTING WATER SYSTEM REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ..........................................................6

2.1. CITY OF LONDON WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS .................................................................6 2.2. RECENT REGULATORY OR OTHER WATERWORKS ........................................................................................8 2.3. STORAGE IMPLICATIONS ...............................................................................................................................9

3. DESIGN CRITERIA/FUTURE DEMAND DETERMINATION ................................................................10

3.1. SERVICE LEVEL/DESIGN CRITERIA DETERMINATION..................................................................................10 3.2. RECOMMENDED SERVICE LEVEL/DESIGN CRITERIA ...................................................................................12 3.3. FUTURE GROWTH INFORMATION ................................................................................................................12 3.4. WATER SYSTEM DEMAND DETERMINATION...............................................................................................12

4. CITY WATER SYSTEM MODELING..........................................................................................................13

4.1. MODEL DEVELOPMENT...............................................................................................................................13 4.2. DEMAND MODEL UPDATE ..........................................................................................................................14 4.3. FUTURE GROWTH MODELING .....................................................................................................................14

5. FUTURE WORK REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................16

5.1. PIPE RELATED WORKS................................................................................................................................16 5.1.1. Existing System Reinforcements ........................................................................................................17 5.1.2. North London ....................................................................................................................................18 5.1.3. Veterans Memorial Parkway East Area ............................................................................................19 5.1.4. Southeast London ..............................................................................................................................19 5.1.5. South London.....................................................................................................................................20 5.1.6. West London......................................................................................................................................21

5.2. FACILITY RELATED WORKS........................................................................................................................22 5.2.1. Wickerson Pumping Station Expansion.............................................................................................24 5.2.2. Uplands Pumping Station..................................................................................................................24 5.2.3. Hyde Park Pumping Station ..............................................................................................................24 5.2.4. Southeast Pumping Station and Reservoir ........................................................................................25 5.2.5. Arva Pumping Station Upgrades.......................................................................................................26

5.3. WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM WORKS................................................................................................................27 5.3.1. Elgin Area Water Supply System.......................................................................................................27 5.3.2. Lake Huron Water Supply System Works ..........................................................................................28

6. DEVELOPMENT CHARGE IMPLICATIONS............................................................................................30

6.1. POLICY IMPLICATIONS ................................................................................................................................30 6.2. GROWTH/NON-GROWTH DETERMINATION .................................................................................................31 6.3. RES/ICI ALLOCATIONS ...............................................................................................................................33 6.4. OVERSIZING................................................................................................................................................35 6.5. DEVELOPMENT CHARGE CALCULATION .....................................................................................................35

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................37

7.1. CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................................................................................37 7.2. RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................................39

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Urban Growth Areas Figure 2.1 Lake Huron Water Supply System Figure 2.2 Elgin Area Water Supply System Figure 2.3 City of London Existing Water Distribution System and Facilities Figure 3.1 Population/ICI Forecast Summary Figure 5.1 Water Works to Year 2028 Figure 5.2 Water Works to Build-out Figure 5.3 Preliminary Southeast Service Zone Requirements

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Service Level/Criteria Confirmation Table 3.2A 2007 Control Tables Table 3.2B 2008 Revised Control Tables Table 3.3 Water Demand Determination Table 5.1 Recommended Low Level System Watermains Table 5.2 High Level System Watermain Components Table 5.3A City Water Distribution/Facility Components Table 5.3B Preliminary Water Supply System Components Table 5.4 EAWSS/LHWSS Expansion Requirements (July 29, 2004) Table 5.5 Future Arva Pumping Station Operation Revisions Table 6.1 Growth Needs Summary/Development Charges (to 2028)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Regulatory Requirements Appendix A1 Revised City Water System – Certificate of Approval Appendix A2 2007 Compliance Report

Appendix B Future Growth Information Figure B1: 2007 Existing Residential Populations Figure B2: 2017 Residential Growth Figure B3: 2027 Residential Growth Figure B4: 2031 Residential Growth Figure B5: Institutional Growth Figure B6: Industrial Growth Figure B7: Commercial Growth

Water Servicing Development Charge Update 2008 Page 1

The Corporation of the City of London AECOM

Project No. 100875

1. INTRODUCTION AECOM was retained to undertake the London Water Servicing Development Charge (DC) Update 2008

for the City’s Water distribution system and facilities. Included are the City’s water supply systems from

Lake Huron and Lake Erie. The City of London last completed a Water Master Plan Update in 2003, in

support of the Development Charges implemented that year. Given the requirements to update

Development Charges on a 5-year basis, the City of London initiated this Water DC Update 2008 to

support a Development Charge 2009 By-law amendment. The intent was to reconfirm growth-related

components for the City’s water distribution and supply systems on a 5-year incremental basis over a 20-

year period (2009 to 2028), to support Development Charges for future residential, institutional,

commercial and industrial development.

1.1. Project Requirements The project required updating of the City’s Water System works completed over the last five years. This

was needed not only for water engineering planning purposes to provide servicing to new growth areas as

per current service levels, but to also support an update of the Development Charges By-law for

residential, institutional, commercial and industrial growth purposes. There were significant technical

and financial aspects related to this work, both of which were reviewed by City and development

community personnel to ensure the basis for these works, the actual works themselves and their related

costs were fairly determined and apportioned to residential, institutional, commercial and industrial

growth components. As such, consultation was needed to not only ensure a complete understanding of

the work completed, but also obtain consensus and approval amongst the Development Community and

the City of London to move forward with DC implementation on an agreed upon basis.

The City of London relies on its water infrastructure to deliver high quality service to its ratepayers

(future and existing). The tragic events of Walkerton underscored the importance of adequate investment

in water systems, however, such investments must be done in a fiscally responsible manner. Recent

legislation (the SDWA and Bill 175), is moving municipalities toward prioritized planning and full cost

recovery for their water systems. The effective management and planning of water infrastructure requires

a well-considered and planned approach that is focused on providing the appropriate level of service to

the customer, while ensuring system reliability and long term sustainability. Necessary funding from

growth, and non-growth, related sources must therefore be co-ordinated to meet this need fairly, and in a

responsible manner, to ensure no one party or group pays more than its fair share.



Project No. 100875

To quantify and justify infrastructure expenditures, cities must carefully consider the condition and

performance of their water infrastructure based on regulatory requirements and realistic service levels.

Master Planning and hydraulic modeling remain invaluable tools in the identification of water

infrastructure needs from a performance perspective, and has gained greater relevance in the larger

context of Development Charge and more recent regulatory requirements. As such, the objectives of the

project were as follows:

• Update the City’s Water system needs to identify growth related requirements on a 5-year

incremental basis for 20 years, keeping in mind ultimate 50 year plus requirements. (City Low/High

pressure water distribution mains, pumping and storage systems, and Lake Huron Water Supply and

Elgin Area Water Supply Systems (LHWSS/EAWSS)).

• Confirm service levels based on past work, more recent regulatory and future anticipated regulatory

requirements, and historical demand patterns for residential, institutional, commercial and industrial

users in the City of London.

• Confirm costs to 2009 for required growth works, growth/non-growth components, and appropriate

residential, institutional, commercial and industrial allocations for both the City’s water distribution

system and facilities, and those components of the water supply systems from Lakes Huron and Erie

respectively.

• Take into consideration ultimate Build-out requirements to ensure appropriate distribution system

components and facilities are identified and post 2028 development can be determined.

• Co-ordinate with DC updates for Sanitary Servicing, Transportation and Stormwater

Management/Servicing being completed at the same time. This included support and assistance in

development of the City’s Growth Management Implementation Strategy (GMIS).

• Consultation with the City of London’s Environmental and Engineering Services Department,

Finance Department and Development Charges personnel at key stages of the project to reduce

potential cost and time implications, and obtain agreement with the results of the work to develop the

City’s GMIS.



Project No. 100875

Being a DC update exercise we were to match works to needs for the 20-year growth period used for DC

application purposes, and assist in developing the City’s GMIS. Redundancies were to be removed where

applicable amongst various water, sanitary, storm and/or road related works. For work determination

purposes, major facilities, and watermains greater than or equal to 400 mm in diameter (16 in), were

included as per past Development Charges and design policy. The intent was to ensure funding for future

growth related works, and/or portions thereof, was provided for both the City’s water distribution and

supply components. The latter has historically been paid for via water rates.

1.2. Background Information The following background information was provided and reviewed/utilized for project purposes.

• National Benchmarking Partnership 2001: City of London Water Supply, City of London in Partnership with Earth Tech, Submitted 2006.

• City of London Water Master Plan Update, Earth Tech Canada Inc. (2004)

• MOEE Certificate of Approval 8869-5TDKBH, Municipal Drinking Water System, City of London, January 14, 2004 (see Appendix A1).

• City of London 2007 Annual Drinking Water Compliance Report (see Appendix A2).

• Water By-law W-1 – Consolidated, City of London, July 2, 2002.

• Hyde Park Water Pumping Station EA and Pre-Design Report, Earth Tech Canada Inc. (2001).

• Uplands Pumping Station EA and Pre-Design Report, Earth Tech Canada Inc. (2002).

• Southeast London Terminal Reservoir and Pumping Station, Final Pre-Design Report, Dillon, February, 2003.

• City of London Water Supply Reliability Assessment, Dillon, April, 2002 and related staff recommendations for emergency well decommissioning.

• Joint Master Plan Update, Dillon 2001 (updated in 2004 by separate Master Plans for each Water Supply System by Stantec Consulting).

• Summaries of billed water consumption information by customer classification to 2002.

• Summary of land use area classifications from the City’s Planning Department.

• Water System related Capital works completed over the past 4 years.

• Terms of Reference for the 2004 Development Charges By-law Steering Committee.



Project No. 100875

• The City’s H2ONET master model (Version 3.1), initially developed by AECOM (formerly Earth Tech). (Later updated as part of the Hyde Park and Uplands Pumping Station projects and Water Master Plan Update, 2004).

• ARCINFO GIS files of existing water system information. (WIMS database 300 mm dia. or greater). Also provided was the latest OBM information.

• Latest Community Planning Study information (Riverbend, Hyde Park, Fox Hollow, Sunningdale, Uplands North and South, Stoney Creek, Killaly North and South, North Talbot, Lambeth, Bostwick, Longwoods, Old Victoria, Airport Road and Cheapside).

• City of London Water Master Plan Update, AECOM (formerly Earth Tech), 2004.

• The latest plan showing the City’s defined growth areas including the areas added in response to OMB decisions. See Figure 1.1.

• Springbank Pumping Station Pre-Design Report, Dillon 2003.

• Wickerson Road Pumping Station Class EA (Schedule B) Servicing Report, Development Engineering, 2002.

• Water Supply Study for the City of London, Environmental Study Report (ESR), Dillon, 1994.

• Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station Design Report, AECOM (formerly Earth Tech) 2004.

Our work was to only identify all growth related works for the City in the future. The modeling

completed however identified growth, and some non-growth aspects from a hydraulic capacity

perspective.

The primary basis for the work to be completed was the 2004 Water Master Plan Update. The

information provided by this study was confirmed, updated and enhanced as needed to meet the

objectives of this project. This included addressing the objectives outlined in Section 1.1, and doing so in

an open and transparent manner so consensus could be won, and the results accepted by the Development

Community and the City for fair and effective implementation.

In addition to the background information outlined herein, other key information items were as follows:

• Master planning for the Lake Huron and Elgin Area Water Supply Systems was not included as part of this assignment. A separate Water DC update for each system was completed by Stantec Consulting, October 2004.



Project No. 100875

• The City’s INFOWATER model was utilized for project completion purposes as per the latest model development and calibration work completed as part of the City’s Water Model development project (December 2007).

• Population and Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) growth information was provided by growth area and transportation system zones (256), in 5-year increments from 2008 to 2038 (2008, 2013 2018, 2023, 2028, 2033, 2038). These timelines determined growth area priorities. (See Appendix B).

• The service level for reservoir storage requirements continued to be based on the Reliability Assessment work completed, updated as per the emergency wells decommissioned.

• Updated unit costs to 2007 were provided by the City of London based on recent tender information. An inflation and/or index factor was applied for 2009 project cost determination purposes.

• For ultimate Build-out, the planning and population information used for the City’s previous Transportation Plan Update (2004), and for Sewerage System planning (2003), was utilized (population and ICI), to confirm future distribution system requirements beyond the urban growth boundary.

• The requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act (Bill 195), and Bill 175 were to be addressed at this time. The latest C of A for the City’s Water Distribution System is included in Appendix A1.

All of the information outlined herein forms the basis for this project.



Project No. 100875

2. EXISTING WATER SYSTEM REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS With the crisis in Walkerton, Ontario in 2000, the water industry has been undergoing tremendous

change. New regulations have been put in place to: protect and enforce drinking water standards

(Regulation 459 and the new Safe Drinking Water Act); ensure proper planning and financial recovery for

water/wastewater infrastructure (Bill 175 Sustainable Water and Sewage System Act and PSAB); and

promote a renewed emphasis on watershed protection (Nutrient Removal Protection Measures Act, etc.).

As a result, all of the water systems in Ontario have been intensely reviewed, with upgrades needed in

most instances to meet these new requirements. As such, the City of London’s water distribution and

supply systems, along with other systems, have been undergoing upgrades that impacts day-to-day water

provision and emergency supply requirements that carry forward for new capacity applications.

2.1. City of London Water Supply and Distribution Systems The City of London receives water from the LHWSS via the John Gillies (Arva) Pumping Station, and

from the EAWSS via the Elgin-Middlesex Booster Station. The LHWSS provides approximately 85% of

the City’s water supply. This supply system has a current rated treatment capacity of 340 MLD, of which

154 MLD is used on an average day basis, and 262 MLD is used on a Maximum Day basis.1 Water is

provided from the treatment facility at Grand Bend via partially twinned transmission mains 1200 mm in

diameter. At the mid point, transmission pressure is boosted and some storage is provided at the Ausable

Booster Station. London’s storage is provided via reservoirs (4 cells) in Arva (109 ML capacity). Figure

2.1 shows the Lake Huron Water Supply System.

From this point, most of the City’s low pressure system is fed by the Arva Pumping Station (Maximum

day capacity 3680 l/s). System pressures are maintained from this point to the City’s low level system, to

fill the Springbank reservoirs (3, total rated capacity 209 ML), and feed the City’s high pressure systems

(Uplands, Hyde Park, Springbank, Westmount, Wickerson and Pond Mills Booster Pumping Stations

(BPS’s)). The Pond Mills BPS service area will be reduced upon implementation of the proposed

Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station.

From the south, water is provided by the EAWSS, which has a rated capacity of 91 MLD (Limited to 80

MLD due to transmission main capacity from Lake Erie to St. Thomas), of which 48 MLD is used on an

1 Lake Huron Water Treatment Plant 2007 Compliance Report



Project No. 100875

average day basis and 64 MLD is used on a Maximum Day basis. 2 For the City of London, the average

day demand from the EAWSS is approximately 23 MLD and the maximum day capacity is capped at 36

MLD. This is based on London’s current water supply agreement with the EAWSS which calls for

London to take a minimum of 22.7 MLD (5 MIGD) per day, and a maximum of 36.3 MLD (8 MIGD) per

day. This is also being done to delay future expansion of the EAWSS, with the Maximum Day capacity

from the EAWSS that would normally be used by London (currently provided by the LHWSS), being

utilized by Elgin Area users to serve growth in their service area.

The EAWSS consists of a treatment facility just east of Port Stanley at Lake Erie, and a 750 mm dia.

transmission main to St. Thomas, which constrains capacity to 80 MLD. At this point distribution

pumping and storage is provided for the St. Thomas and Aylmer Secondary Systems, and to London via

the Elgin-Middlesex Pumping Station. The reservoir facility has a storage capacity of 27 ML for London,

27 ML for the St. Thomas and Aylmer secondary users. From this point a 1050 mm dia. transmission

main continues north and enters the City of London water distribution system directly in the Highbury

Avenue/Dingman Drive area. Pressure Reducing Valves (PRV’s), are positioned in three locations

(Castleton and Jackson), to create a small pressure zone fed by the Elgin-Middlesex Pump Station.

Additional supply can be provided to the City’s east side in response to maximum day and peak hour use,

and to balance system pressures along the east side of the City via the Jackson/Commissioners Road PRV

when the EMPS is running. Figure 2.2 shows the Elgin Area Water Supply System.

In the future, the proposed Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station will be located on the east side of

Highbury Avenue, just south of Westminster Drive as shown on Figure 2.2. Once in place, operation of

the Elgin-Middlesex Pumping Station will revert to supply and transmission only, versus providing

system pressure and meeting water demand requirements. These would then be met by the proposed

Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station with a new pressure zone being created, including the formerly

served area by the City’s low level system south of Southdale Road, and possibly the area currently

serviced by the Pond Mills Pumping Station (High pressure system), south of Commissioners Road and

east of Wellington Road.

Also part of the City’s water distribution system are four existing high pressure service zones. These are:

2 Elgin Area Water Treatment Plant 2007 Compliance Report



Project No. 100875

• The pressure zone serviced by the Springbank, Westmount and Pond Mills Pumping Stations. This is essentially the area south of Commissioners Road, and north of Southdale Road between Byron and Highbury Avenue. The Springbank Pumping Station was expanded in 2004 to better service future growth south of Southdale Road in the Talbot Community Planning Area, and to the west along Southdale Road (north and south sides), to Boler Road.

• A new pressure zone was also created in west London served by the Wickerson Pumping Station. This services the area generally bounded by Oxford Street to the north, Westdel Bourne Road to the west, Southdale Road to the south (i.e., the Wickerson and Springbank pumping stations will in the future work in parallel), and to the east just east of Wickerson Road along the existing built up portions of the City;

• An existing small high pressure area in old Uplands, just east of Richmond Street and south of Sunningdale Road. Due to growth in the Uplands and Sunningdale areas, the service zone was expanded as part of implementation of the new Uplands Pumping Station. This high pressure zone services the Uplands and existing Richmond Hill areas, north of Fanshawe Park Road to approximately Sunningdale Road west of Richmond Street, and the areas south of Sunningdale Road, and north to the City limit, east of Richmond Street.

• The fourth pressure zone was newly created via construction of the Hyde Park Pumping Station. This involved servicing the area previously served by the Lawson Pumping Station generally bounded by Wonderland Road to the east, Gainsborough Road to the north, the existing City built up area to the west, and Sarnia Road to the south. To this was added the White Hills area previously serviced by the City’s low pressure system, and new growth areas in Hyde Park west of the built up portion of the City to approximately Hyde Park Road. In the future, this pumping station will also service higher ground areas northwest of the Fanshawe Park Road/Hyde Park intersection. See Figure 2.3 for the existing London Water Distribution System.

2.2. Recent Regulatory or Other Waterworks As per the City’s most recent Compliance Report included in Appendix A2 and current growth, the

following works have recently been completed relative to the City’s water distribution system and

facilities. Works relative to the Lake Huron and Elgin Area Water Supply Systems are outlined in the

Master Plans currently being updated for each system.

• Construction and the placement into operation of the Hyde Park Pumping Station;

• Innovation Drive from Hamilton Road to the Concept Drive.

• Commissioners Road from Jackson Road to Veterans Memorial Parkway.

• Gainsborough Road from Hyde Park Road to Coronation Drive.

• Hyde Park Road from Gainsborough Road to South Carriage Road

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(.

WATER SERVICINGDC UPDATE 2008

FIGURE 2.3

Existing Water Distribution System and Facilities

SCALE: N.T.S

DATE: FEB 2009 PN: 100875

ARVA PS & RESERVOIR

UPLANDS PS

WESTMOUNT PSSPRINGBANK PS & RESERVOIR

WICKERSON PS

HYDE PARK PS

PROPOSED SOUTHEAST PS& RESERVOIR

Legend

Existing Watermains > 300 mm Dia.

Future Southeast Service Area

Waterways

Pump Station!(

Exising High Pressure Zone

Elgin-Middlesex (Future SE)

Urban Growth Boundary

Existing Built Out City (Sept 2006)

City Boundary

Major Roads

PONDMILLS PS



Project No. 100875

• Construction and the placement into operation of the Uplands Pumping Station in 2004.

• High pressure watermain on Sunningdale Road. (Richmond Street to the Uplands development), and

on Richmond Street (Sunningdale south to Plane Tree), in 2004, serviced by the Uplands PS.

• High pressure watermain on Wickerson Road, 425 m south of the Wickerson Pump Station in 2004.

• High pressure watermain on Southdale between Tillman Road and Bostwick Road.

• Veteran’s Memorial Parkway from the Thames River to Commissioners.

No other existing water distribution system related works were identified by City personnel.

2.3. Storage Implications As outlined in Section 2.1, the City of London currently relies on terminal and distribution storage at the

Arva, Springbank and Elgin-Middlesex Reservoirs. The Water Supply Reliability Assessment Final

Report dated April 2002 reviewed various emergency scenarios to identify how the City’s supply and

water distribution systems, and storage facilities, could address different emergency situations with

varying degrees of risk of occurrence. Those of most concern were:

1. Lake Huron water supply system off line for one maximum day and one average day; 2. Same as above with a water demand 1.3 times average day, plus two average days.

Based on these scenarios, the City’s current one day storage deficit is 60 ML. This current deficit will

have to be overcome by the provision of additional storage capacity, which is intended to be provided by

the proposed Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station. Scenario 1 translates to a 115 ML storage deficit

over 2 days. Scenario 2 translates to a 130 ML storage deficit over 3 days. The City’s current total

reservoir capacity is 318 ML.3 Additional storage is also required to accommodate new growth in the

future.

3 City of London 2007 Annual Drinking Water Compliance Report



Project No. 100875

3. DESIGN CRITERIA/FUTURE DEMAND DETERMINATION Before future growth related works could be identified, the design criteria were confirmed and future

population and Institutional/Commercial/Industrial (ICI), growth information provided. Both pieces of

information were confirmed and then utilized to determine water system demands for the City of London

over a 20 year growth and ultimate (675,000 population), basis. The criteria confirmed and recommended

for use and the growth information provided by the City of London utilized to determine water system

demands on which to base future work requirements are outlined herein.

3.1. Service Level/Design Criteria Determination Table 3.1 outlines the service level/design criteria reviewed as part of the Water Master Plan Update 2003

leading to recommendations for those used for project purposes. Previously shown is the following:

• Design standards used by the City of London based on the “City of London General Requirements,

Specifications and Standard Drawings for Water Distribution Systems 2003, Updated 2005”, and the

MOE Design Manual. We would point out the MOE Design Guidelines are not enforcement

standards.

• Planning criteria used as part of past projects. Included is the criteria used for the Waterworks Master

Plan Update in 2003.

Various design and/or planning criteria is shown as follows:

• Minimum peak hour, maximum day plus fire flow and maximum/minimum system pressure criteria.

• Maximum velocities and headlosses for watermains greater than or equal to 400 mm in diameter.

(Cut-off for major feeder or transmission mains. Also cut-off for Development Charge recovery

purposes).

• Existing water system operational information was used as a basis for previous study efforts and for

this project. For the purposes of this project, the base Winter Average Day Demand (ADDw), to be

used as a starting point for the assessment was determined to be 148.2 ML/d. This was based on the

City of London 2007 Annual Drinking Water Compliance Report.



Project No. 100875

Maximum Day Demand (MDD), and Peak Hour Demand (PHD), was then determined, using the

City’s agreed upon peaking factors for planning application purposes (i.e., globally across the City),

shown by Table 3.1. In this instance design criteria varies significantly from planning criteria. The

City design criteria is applied on a development by development basis. Therefore higher max day and

peak hour peaking factors are used for design purposes.

• For new growth unit demand application purposes, average day use was defined as winter day.

AECOM reviewed water consumption and pumpage information as part of the previous Water Master

Plan Update 2003 which resulted in a design standard of 270 Lpcd being used for project purposes.

The same criteria was used for Institutional, Commercial and Industrial (ICI) usage on a litres per

hectare per day (L/ha/d) basis, established as part of the Water Master Plan Update 2003. Again

global peaking factors were used as per the information provided in Table 3.1. In the future, the City

hopes to be able to apply peaking factors on a diurnal basis for each land use class. This cannot be

completed until:

a) The City’s water model is expanded to include all of the City’s water distribution system which

has been done;

b) The City’s billing record classifications are consistent with the City’s planning land use

classifications (still to be done); and

c) Sufficient data is obtained, based on the above, to map diurnal curves and then determine

specific land use peaking factors (this has been done to some extent). In the past this had been

done on a hypothetical basis.

A global approach is consistent with the approach used as part of previous study and development

charge determination work.

• Fire flows for residential and ICI land uses were identified as per City and MOE criteria. City criteria

were used in each instance.

• Storage Capacity from a distribution and terminal perspective was identified in 1994 and further in

1999/2000. This deficit has increased based on outputs of the City’s Water Reliability Assessment

P:\P

RO

JEC

TS\1

0087

5 Ld

n W

ater

DC

Upd

ate\

Gen

Cor

\Rep

orts

\Fin

al R

epor

t\Tab

les\

Tabl

e 3.

1 Se

rvic

e Le

vel_

Crit

eria

Con

firm

atio

n.do

c

TA

BL

E 3

.1

CIT

Y O

F L

ON

DO

N

WA

TE

R S

ER

VIC

ING

DC

UPD

AT

E 2

008

SER

VIC

E L

EV

EL

/CR

ITE

RIA

CO

NFI

RM

AT

ION

(R

evis

ed J

anua

ry 2

3, 2

009)

Item

D

esig

n St

anda

rds

Plan

ning

Cri

teri

a R

ecom

men

ded

C

ity1

MO

E2

1994

3 19

994

2000

5 20

0815

Min

imum

pea

k ho

ur

pres

sure

(kPa

) 27

5 (3

10 fo

r ind

ustri

al)

275

275

(310

for i

ndus

trial

) 27

5 (3

10 fo

r ind

ustri

al)

275

(310

for i

ndus

trial

) 27

5 (3

10 fo

r in

dust

rial

)

Min

imum

max

imum

day

pl

us fi

re fl

ow p

ress

ure

(kPa

)

140

140

140

140

140

140

M

axim

um/M

inim

um

syst

em p

ress

ure

(kPa

) 69

0/27

5 70

0/27

5 (D

esig

n to

550

/350

fo

r nor

mal

ope

ratin

g co

nditi

ons u

nder

max

. flo

w)

700/

275

690/

275

690/

275

690/

275

M

axim

um v

eloc

ity (m

/s)

3.0

Not

Iden

tifie

d 3.

0 3.

0 3.

0 3.

0 (m

ains

> 4

00 m

m in

dia

)

M

axim

um h

eadl

oss (

m/k

m)

2.3

Not

Iden

tifie

d 2.

3 2.

3 2.

3 2.

3 (m

ains

> 4

00 m

m in

dia

)

Ex

istin

g sy

stem

ope

ratio

n •

Win

ter A

DD

(ML/

D)6

• M

DD

(ML/

D)6

-Glo

bal p

eaki

ng fa

ctor

•

PHD

(ML/

D)6

- Glo

bal p

eaki

ng fa

ctor

15

5-19

8 (4

70-6

00

Lcpd

)7

3.

58

7.88

N

ot A

pplic

able

150

300 2

450 3

15

5 28

7 1.

85

43

6 2.

81

14

8 28

9 1.

95

46

2 3.

12

14

816

28

9 1.

9510

46

2 3.

1210

P:\P

RO

JEC

TS\1

0087

5 Ld

n W

ater

DC

Upd

ate\

Gen

Cor

\Rep

orts

\Fin

al R

epor

t\Tab

les\

Tabl

e 3.

1 Se

rvic

e Le

vel_

Crit

eria

Con

firm

atio

n.do

c

TA

BL

E 3

.1

CIT

Y O

F L

ON

DO

N

WA

TE

R S

ER

VIC

ING

DC

UPD

AT

E 2

008

SER

VIC

E L

EV

EL

/CR

ITE

RIA

CO

NFI

RM

AT

ION

(R

evis

ed J

anua

ry 2

3, 2

009)

Item

D

esig

n St

anda

rds

Plan

ning

Cri

teri

a R

ecom

men

ded

C

ity1

MO

E2

1994

3 19

994

2000

5 20

0815

New

gro

wth

are

as A

DD

6

•

Res

iden

tial (

Lpcd

)

- Max

. day

fact

or

- P

eak

hour

fact

or

•

Com

mer

cial

(L/h

a/D

)

- Max

. day

fact

or

- P

eak

hour

fact

or

•

Inst

itutio

nal (

L/ha

/D)

- M

ax. d

ay fa

ctor

- Pea

k ho

ur fa

ctor

• In

dust

rial (

L/ha

/D)

- M

ax. d

ay fa

ctor

- Pea

k ho

ur fa

ctor

27

09,14

3.

5 7.

8 25

,000

– 5

0,00

0

Not

pro

vide

d

Not

pro

vide

d

27

0 –

450

1.5

– 2.

7511

2.25

– 4

.1311

28,0

00

Not

Pro

vide

d

1.5

- 4

90

0 –

1,80

0 (L

/bed

/day

)

70 –

140

(L

/stu

dent

/day

) 35

,000

– 5

5,00

0 N

ot P

rovi

ded

2 –

4

23

0 2

24

0 2 3 15

,000

1.

33

2.11

15,0

00

1.33

1.

69

35

,000

1.

33

1.65

24

0 1.

95

3.12

10,4

50

1.95

3.

12

14

,850

1.

95

3.12

17,2

70

1.95

3.

12

27

09,14

1.

9510

3.12

10

7,

2009

1.95

10

3.12

10

14

,700

9 1.

9510

3.

1210

16,2

009

1.95

10

3.12

10

Fi

re fl

ows

• R

esid

entia

l (L/

s)

• IC

I (L/

s)

76

151

30

12

3012

76

151

76

151

76

151

76

151

St

orag

e ca

paci

ty

• D

istri

butio

n (M

L)

(D

efic

it)

• Te

rmin

al (M

L)

(D

efic

it)

N

/A

(B

ased

on

App

endi

x N

, M

OE

Des

ign

Gui

delin

es)

10

3 (6

1)

(4

6)

(4

6)

(4

3-60

)13

P:\P

RO

JEC

TS\1

0087

5 Ld

n W

ater

DC

Upd

ate\

Gen

Cor

\Rep

orts

\Fin

al R

epor

t\Tab

les\

Tabl

e 3.

1 Se

rvic

e Le

vel_

Crit

eria

Con

firm

atio

n.do

c

Not

es: 1

City

of L

ondo

n G

ener

al R

equi

rem

ents

, Spe

cific

atio

ns a

nd S

tand

ard

Dra

win

gs fo

r the

Wat

er D

istri

butio

n Sy

stem

, 200

3, U

pdat

ed 2

005.

2

MO

E M

anua

l. T

he in

form

atio

n id

entif

ied

is p

rese

nted

as d

esig

n gu

idel

ines

, not

enf

orce

men

t sta

ndar

ds.

3 W

ater

wor

ks M

aste

r Pla

n U

pdat

e to

201

6, D

illon

Con

sulti

ng, 1

994.

4

Wat

erw

orks

for C

ity G

row

th A

rea

Rep

ort,

Proc

tor &

Red

fern

(now

Ear

th T

ech)

, 199

9.

5 R

evie

w o

f Wat

er D

eman

d Fo

reca

stin

g, E

arth

Tec

h C

anad

a In

c., 2

000.

6

Mod

el S

cena

rios A

DD

= W

inte

r Ave

rage

Dai

ly D

eman

d; M

DD

= M

axim

um D

ay D

eman

d; P

HD

= P

eak

Hou

r Dem

and.

7

330,

000

peop

le u

sed

for c

onve

rsio

n pu

rpos

es.

8 Pe

akin

g fa

ctor

s app

licab

le to

smal

ler d

evel

opm

ent a

reas

ver

sus t

he C

ity a

s a w

hole

, or l

arge

are

as.

9 C

onfir

med

afte

r th

e re

view

of

2000

and

200

1 bi

lling

dat

a, a

nd 2

000,

200

1 an

d 20

02 p

umpa

ge in

form

atio

n.

Am

ende

d by

200

2 w

ater

pum

page

info

rmat

ion

from

A

mer

ican

Wat

er.

Subj

ect t

o co

nfirm

atio

n.

10

As p

er th

e m

emo

pres

ente

d to

the

Dev

elop

men

t Cha

rges

Join

t Tec

hnic

al S

teer

ing

Com

mitt

ee, F

ebru

ary

24, 2

003.

11

A

ctua

l fac

tor i

s det

erm

ined

by

popu

latio

n of

new

serv

ice

area

, (A

ppen

dix

L, M

OE

Des

ign

Gui

delin

es 1

984)

. 12

M

inim

um fl

ow fo

r the

ent

ire sy

stem

whi

le si

mul

tane

ousl

y sa

tisfy

ing

the

max

imum

day

dem

and.

13

W

ater

Sup

ply

Rel

iabi

lity

Ass

essm

ent R

epor

t, D

illon

Con

sulti

ng, 2

002.

Sub

ject

to u

pdat

e ba

sed

on w

ell r

emov

als i

n re

spon

se to

SD

WA

requ

irem

ents

. 14

C

onfir

med

as,

per c

apita

flow

s in

new

er a

reas

dev

elop

ed a

fter 1

996.

May

16,

200

3 C

ity m

emo.

15

A

s per

Wat

er M

aste

r Pla

n U

pdat

e, A

ECO

M (f

orm

erly

Ear

th T

ech)

, 200

4.

16

City

of L

ondo

n, 2

007

Ann

ual D

rinki

ng W

ater

Com

plia

nce

Rep

ort



Project No. 100875

Report, Dillon, 2002. Details were provided in Section 2.3. This information was utilized as the

basis for storage capacity deficit and available capacity determination purposes.

3.2. Recommended Service Level/Design Criteria Table 3.1 also presents the criteria recommended for use on a planning basis for the development of water

demand projections for future residential, commercial, institutional and industrial land uses as part of the

Water Master Plan Update 2003. These are shown to the far right of the table in bold and are

recommended for project use again as per the rational outlined above.

3.3. Future Growth Information Future water system demands were determined using the above service level/design criteria information,

and the population and land use projection information provided by the City of London in hard copy and

digital form as discussed herein.

The City of London developed future population growth information for the period from 2009 to 2028 in

5-year increments (2013, 2018, 2023). See Table 3.2. Additional years were added to 2032 to address

potential oversizing needs, and further information was provided to 2037 to compare directly to

Institutional, Commercial and Industrial (ICI) employment growth information provided by Clayton

Research for ICI purposes (2007). Clayton’s work also verified the City’s population growth

information, with related amendments for net and gross populations included in the digital information

provided by the City to AECOM in January 2008. This information, plus later updates and/or

amendments, formed the basis for the planning work completed for all services. This included reducing

industrial areas to an amount consistent with the City’s Industrial Development Strategy and the Clayton

Forecast to 2007 as was done previously, and confirming those portions of the City to be serviced over

the 20 year planning period as per GMIS development. This information was used to define the works

required for each population projection and area, and related oversizing (if applicable), for each service

assessed. See Figure 3.1 for existing population, 20-year growth, Urban Growth Boundary and Build-out

information.

3.4. Water System Demand Determination Table 3.3 shows the water demand forecasts developed from the population and ICI information provided

by the City, using the design criteria summarized at the bottom of the table. The table shows calculated

2007

Con

trol

Tot

als

avg

ppu

in 2

007

2.23

Res

iden

tial G

row

th F

orec

asts

avg

ppu

in 2

037

2.13

Tota

ls B

ased

on

Traf

fic Z

one

Bre

ak-o

uts

Pop

ulat

ion

Pop

. Gro

wth

Res

. Uni

tsU

nit G

row

th20

0735

5,67

5

15

9,78

7

2012

371,

805

16,1

30

17

0,61

0

10,8

23

20

1738

8,60

1

16

,796

181,

433

10

,823

2022

405,

300

16,6

99

19

1,28

9

9,85

6

2027

421,

200

15,9

00

19

9,81

6

8,52

7

sub

tota

l - 2

027

65,5

25

40

,029

2032

434,

995

13,7

95

20

7,03

8

7,22

2

2037

455,

444

20,4

49

21

3,45

1

6,41

3

tota

l to

2037

99,7

69

53

,664

Con

trol

Tot

als

Indu

stria

l/Com

mer

cial

/Inst

itutio

nal F

orec

ast s

Gro

wth

of S

pace

- 20

07-2

037

(2)

Em

ploy

men

t Gro

wth

- 20

07-2

037

(1)

Indu

stria

l s

q.m

Com

mer

cial

sq.

mIn

stitu

tiona

l sq.

m.

Indu

stria

l Em

p.C

omm

erci

al E

mp.

Inst

itutio

nal E

mp.

At H

ome/

Oth

erTo

tal E

mpl

2007

2012

190,

451

125,

415

11

1,48

4

2,56

3

2,90

3

1,08

1

510

7,

057

2017

190,

451

125,

415

11

1,48

4

2,56

3

2,90

3

1,08

1

510

7,

057

2022

190,

451

125,

415

11

1,48

4

2,26

5

2,30

6

1,71

4

220

6,

505

2027

120,

774

106,

835

65

,032

1,43

6

1,96

4

1,00

0

220

4,

621

2032

120,

774

106,

835

65

,032

1,43

6

1,96

4

1,00

0

220

4,

621

2037

120,

774

106,

835

65

,032

1,43

6

1,96

4

1,00

0

220

4,

621

933,

675

696,

750

529,

548

11,7

0014

,005

6,87

71,

900

34,4

81

Floo

r Are

a R

atio

(3)

23.0

%25

.0%

42.0

%

Gro

wth

of S

pace

- 20

07-2

037

(4)

Not

es:

Indu

stria

l (h

a)C

omm

erci

al (h

a)In

stitu

tiona

l (ha

)(1

) Em

ploy

men

t gro

wth

fore

cast

by

Cla

yton

Res

earc

h A

ssoc

iate

s Lt

d20

07(2

) Flo

or s

pace

con

vers

ions

by

Cla

yton

Res

earc

h A

ssoc

iate

s Lt

d.20

1283

50

27

(3

) Flo

or a

rea

ratio

bas

ed o

n C

ity o

f Lon

don

GIS

cal

cula

tion

of e

xist

ing

spac

e (2

006-

2007

)20

1783

50

27

(4

) C

onve

rsio

n ba

sed

on fl

oor a

rea

ratio

ass

umpt

ion s

2022

83

50

27

2027

53

43

15

300.

9219

3.23

95.1

2

2032

53

43

15

2037

53

43

15

405.

9527

8.70

126.

08

(Rev

ised

Jan

uary

23,

200

9)

TA

BL

E 3

.2A

CIT

Y O

F L

ON

DO

NW

AT

ER

SE

RV

ICIN

G D

C U

PDA

TE

200

820

07 C

ON

TR

OL

TA

BL

ES

2007

Con

trol

Tot

als

avg

ppu

in 2

008

2.35

Res

iden

tial G

row

th F

orec

asts

avg

ppu

in 2

033

2.23

Tota

ls B

ased

on

Traf

fic Z

one

Bre

ak-o

uts

Pop

ulat

ion

Pop

. Gro

wth

Res

. Uni

tsU

nit G

row

th20

08*

358,

863

152,

533

20

13*

375,

160

16,2

97

16

2,92

6

10,3

93

20

18*

391,

940

16,7

80

17

2,76

6

9,84

0

2023

*40

8,48

0

16

,540

181,

745

8,

979

20

28*

423,

960

15,4

80

18

9,47

3

7,72

9

2033

*43

7,09

0

13

,130

196,

141

6,

668

Con

trol

Tot

als

Indu

stria

l/Com

mer

cial

/Inst

itutio

nal F

orec

ast s

Gro

wth

of S

pace

- 20

08-2

028

(2)

Em

ploy

men

t Gro

wth

- 20

08-2

028

(1)

Indu

stria

l s

q.m

Com

mer

cial

sq.

mIn

stitu

tiona

l sq.

m.

Indu

stria

l Em

p.C

omm

erci

al E

mp.

Inst

itutio

nal E

mp.

At H

ome/

Oth

erTo

tal E

mpl

2008

-201

3*19

0,45

1

12

5,41

5

111,

484

2,

562

2,

903

1,

081

51

0

7,05

7

20

13-2

018*

190,

451

125,

415

11

1,48

4

2,49

7

2,76

1

1,16

7

452

6,

877

2018

-202

3*17

6,51

6

12

1,69

9

102,

194

2,

099

2,

239

1,

571

22

0

6,13

0

20

23-2

028*

120,

774

106,

835

65

,032

1,43

6

1,96

6

1,00

0

220

4,

622

678,

192

479,

364

390,

194

8,59

59,

869

4,82

01,

402

24,6

86

Floo

r Are

a R

atio

(3)

23.0

%30

.0%

42.0

%

Gro

wth

of S

pace

- 20

07-2

037

(4)

Not

es:

Indu

stria

l (h

a)C

omm

erci

al (h

a)In

stitu

tiona

l (ha

)* i

nter

pola

tion

of C

layt

on 2

007

Upd

ate

to 2

006

Empl

oym

ent,

Popu

latio

n, H

ousi

ng a

nd

2008

* N

on-r

esid

entia

l Con

stru

ctio

n Pr

ojec

tions

(200

6) U

pdat

e St

udy

to m

atch

tim

e ho

rizon

of

2013

*83

42

27

2

009

DC

Bac

kgro

und

Stud

y520

18*

83

42

27

(1)

Empl

oym

ent g

row

th fo

reca

st b

y C

layt

on R

esea

rch

Ass

ocia

tes

Ltd

2023

*77

41

24

(2

) Flo

or s

pace

con

vers

ions

by

Cla

yton

Res

earc

h A

ssoc

iate

s Lt

d.20

28*

53

36

15

(3) F

loor

are

a ra

tio c

alcu

latio

ns b

ased

on

City

of L

ondo

n La

nd N

eeds

Bac

kgro

und

Stud

y

dat

ed M

ay, 2

007

295

160

93(4

) C

onve

rsio

n ba

sed

on fl

oor a

rea

ratio

ass

umpt

ions

(5)

'Pop

ulat

ion

grow

th' ,

'Uni

t Gro

wth

' and

'uni

t den

sity

ass

umpt

ions

' orig

inal

ly p

rovi

ded

by

Cla

yton

Stu

dy (2

006)

. Th

e st

udy

was

upd

ated

by

Cla

yton

in 2

007

and

the

upda

ted

figur

es

wer

e us

ed to

inte

rpol

ate

the

grow

th fo

reca

sts

refle

cted

abo

ve.

2008

RE

VIS

ED

CO

NT

RO

L T

AB

LE

S(R

evis

ed J

anua

ry 2

3, 2

009)

TA

BL

E 3

.2B

CIT

Y O

F L

ON

DO

NW

AT

ER

SE

RV

ICIN

G D

C U

PDA

TE

200

8

ADD MDD PHD ADD MDD PHD ADD MDD PHD ADD MDD PHD ADD MDD PHD ADD MDD PHD2007 355,6752012 371,805 16,130 4.4 8.5 13.6 82.8 1.3 2.6 4.2 50.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 26.5 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.1 2.2 3.5 7.6 14.8 23.62017 388,601 16,796 4.5 8.8 14.1 82.8 1.3 2.6 4.2 50.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 26.5 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.1 2.2 3.5 7.8 15.1 24.22022 405,300 16,699 4.5 8.8 14.1 82.8 1.3 2.6 4.2 50.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 26.5 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.1 2.2 3.5 7.7 15.1 24.12027 421,200 15,900 4.3 8.4 13.4 52.5 0.9 1.7 2.7 42.7 0.3 0.6 1.0 15.5 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 2.2 3.5 6.8 13.3 21.22032 434,995 13,795 3.7 7.3 11.6 52.5 0.9 1.7 2.7 42.7 0.3 0.6 1.0 15.5 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 2.2 3.5 6.2 12.2 19.52037 455,444 20,449 5.5 10.8 17.2 52.5 0.9 1.7 2.7 42.7 0.3 0.6 1.0 15.5 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 2.2 3.5 8.0 15.7 25.1

Total 2007 - 2027 421,200 65,525 17.7 34.5 55.2 300.9 4.9 9.5 15.2 193.2 1.4 2.7 4.3 95.1 1.4 2.7 4.4 4.5 8.8 14.0 36.1 70.4 112.6Total 2007 - 2037 455,444 99,769 26.9 52.5 84.0 405.9 6.6 12.8 20.5 278.7 2.5 4.9 7.8 126.1 3.1 6.1 9.7 4.5 8.8 14.0 59.6 116.1 185.8

(1) Source - City of London/Clayton, 2007(2) Source - City of London/Clayton, 2007(3) Industrial add-In based on total 1.0 MIGD ADDw (20 years) and 1.5 MIGD ADDw (30 years) as per Sanitary Sewer DC Update, 2008

Global Peaking Factors - Applied to ADDMDD 1.95PHD 3.12

Unit Demand Factors - Based on ADDwResidential 270 l/c/dIndustrial 16,200 l/Ha/dCommercial 7,200 l/Ha/dInstitutional 14,700 l/Ha/d

P:\PROJECTS\100875 Ldn Water DC Update\GenCor\Reports\Final Report\Tables\[Table 3.3-Jan23'09.xls]Water Demand

Total Population

Growth (Pop'n)

Growth Demands (ML/d) Growth (Ha)

Growth Demands (ML/d) Growth (Ha)

Growth Demands (ML/d)

Growth (Ha)

(Revised Jan 23, 2009)

Year Residential (1) Industrial (2) Commercial (2) Institutional (2) Industrial Add-In (3) Total Growth Demands (ML/d)Growth Demands

(ML/d)Growth Demands

(ML/d)

TABLE 3.3CITY OF LONDON

WATER SERVICING DC UPDATE 2008WATER DEMAND DETERMINATION

CITY OF LONDON BOUNDARY

HIG

HBU

RY

AVE S

River

Dingman

HAMILTON RD

DUNDAS ST

HY

DE

PAR

K R

D

Thames

CP RAIL

Creek

Pottersburg

CO

LON

EL TALB

OT R

D

River

Thames

WO

ND

ER

L AN

D R

D N

Medway

WINDERMERE RD

Creek

FANSHAWE PARK RD W

WES

TER

N R

D

SOUTHDALE RD W

WO

ND

ER

LAN

D R

D S

WH

AR

NC

LIFFE R

D N

River

Thames

HIG

HB

UR

Y AV

E N

OXFORD ST E

AD

ELA

IDE

ST N

Thames

HURON ST

TRAFALGAR ST

CR

UM

LIN S

IDE

RD

AIR

PO

RT R

D

CP RAIL

River

SUNNINGDALE RD W

RIC

HM

ON

D S

TRE

ET

FANSHAWE PARK RD E

River

Thames

CLA

RK

E R

D

LONDON

CN RAIL

AIRPORT

SPRINGBANK DR

OXFORD ST W

Stoney

SUNNINGDALE RD E

CN RAIL

Creek

WELLIN

GTO

N R

D

Creek

CN

RAIL

SOUTHDALE RD E

BRADLEY AVE

COMMISSIONERS RD W

AD

ELA

IDE

ST S

COMMISSIONERS RD E

DINGMAN DR

WESTMINSTER DR

SCOTLAND DR

WH

ITE O

AK R

D

OLD

VIC

TOR

IA RD

WO

ND

ER

LAN

D R

D S

GLANWORTH DR

WELLIN

GTO

N R

D S

HIG

HBU

RY AV

E S

DUNDAS ST

WHARNCLIFFE RD S

MANNING DR

HWY 401HWY 402

AIRPORT RD

.

ULTIMATE BUILDOUTPeople: 319,375 (Gross)

IND: 5401 haCOM: 604 haINS: 390 ha

Includes Infill andIntensification

URBAN GROWTHBOUNDARY

People: 166,950(Gross)

IND: 2662 haCOM: 520 haINS: 390 ha

Includes Infill andIntensification

EXISTING POPULATIONPeople: 355,675

IND: 2163 haCOM: 1505 ha

INS: 995 ha

2028 POPULTATIONWITHIN THE GMIS BOUNDARY

People: 421,200 (Gross)Net: 65,525

IND: 301 haCOM: 193 ha

INS: 95 ha


FIGURE 3.1

POPULATION/ICI FORECASTSUMMARY

SCALE: N.T.S

DATE: FEB 2009

Legend

Ultimate Build Out Boundary (675,000 Population) (Net Area 9030 ha)

Urban Growth Boundary (Net Area 4737 ha)

Existing Built Out City Sept 2006 (Area 18931 ha)

PN: 100875

0 2 4 6 81Kilometres

City Boundary

Major Roads RoadwaysWaterwaysGMIS Boundary



Project No. 100875

water demands for Average Day Demand (ADDw), for each land use type by year (2008, 2013, 2018,

2023, 2028, 2032, 2037), along with total growth and water system demands for average day, maximum

day and peak hour use. In addition, an industrial demand add-in equivalent to 4.5 MLD (1.0 MIGD), over

the 20-year growth period, primarily in the core area of the City, was added as provided by the City of

London through the Sanitary DC Update. This was done as part of the previous DC Update work. No

other allowances were put in place, although pipe sizing for industrial growth areas in the City, primarily

in the southeast portion of the City, were assessed based on the use of design industrial flows, versus the

planning flow figures shown in Table 3.3. Although some increased pipe sizing was warranted, pipe

sizing was left as per the planning needs and the criteria outlined. Pipe reinforcement via some of the

“Build-out” works identified would be required for growth flows in excess of planning needs.

4. CITY WATER SYSTEM MODELING The City’s InfoWater model was used as the basis for our work. The existing water system model was

expanded to a full water system model complete with field calibration and validation as part of the City’s

model project. This was further expanded upon with future water demands being added for various

growth scenarios provided and included (UGB/Build-out scenario) as part of the Water Master Plan

Update 2003. Watermains greater than 400 mm (16”) in diameter were added to the model to service

future growth areas for Development Charge determination purposes. Water system needs below this

service level will be determined on a case-by-case basis as development areas proceed to construction.

4.1. Model Development The City’s water system master model (InfoWater) was used as the basis for the work to be completed for

this project. It includes:

• all City watermains (high and low pressure); • the primary pumping stations at Arva and St. Thomas (Elgin-Middlesex); • the Arva, Springbank and Elgin-Middlesex reservoirs; • the high pressure water pumping stations in Westmount, Springbank, Pond Mills, Uplands,

Wickerson and Hyde Park and the future Southeast PS (reservoir also); and • all key control valves and/or points.

Model calibration was updated as part of the London Water Model project using the latest SCADA

data, and flow/pressure/storage level information provided by the City (2008 data), for a Max day

event.



Project No. 100875

• The Master model was further expanded to include works completed over the past 2 years since the

2006 full system model set-up was completed by AECOM.

4.2. Demand Model Update Existing water system demands were updated in the model as developed through the London Water

Model project. We then added future demand information based on the 20 year growth projections

provided by the City, allocated as per the previous Water Master Plan Update 2003.

Modeled water demands for each node were then determined based on unit demand factors for

Residential, Industrial, Institutional and Commercial uses as per the criteria outlined in Table 3.1. Water

demands were calculated on an average winter day basis for each model year. Maximum day and peak

hour demands were calculated based on the peaking factors outlined in Table 3.1.

4.3. Future Growth Modeling The City’s InfoWater Model updated to January, 2008 was used for works determination purposes. Some

key watermains 300 mm (12”) in diameter and all trunk watermains greater than or equal to 400 mm in

diameter were included in the model, along with Pumping Stations and reservoirs to service growth areas

of the City, and the water demands to be met over the next 20 years and beyond as per Table 3.3. Both

low and high level water system conditions were modeled separately and collectively using InfoWater.

Given the smaller area serviced by the City’s High Level water systems, peaking factors of 2.5 max day

and 5.0 peak hour were used as per the Water Master Plan 2003. The following conditions were modeled

for works determination purposes:

• Average Day • Average Day Extended Period Simulation (EPS) • Maximum Day (EPS) • Maximum Day plus Fire Flow • Peak Hour

Peak hour demands are generally the critical flow used for trunk watermain design. However, once pipe

sizes were determined, the water system was checked using a 24 hour EPS run for Average and

Maximum Day Demand to examine distribution characteristics for facility and operational optimization

purposes. Input and output information will be provided to the City of London in digital form, along with

the latest InfoWater model inputs and outputs, under separate cover. Modeling was completed for the

following growth scenarios:



Project No. 100875

• 2008, 2012, 2022 and 2028; • Full Build-out of the City’s Urban Growth Boundary (and Modified via the removal of industrial land

area). • Ultimate Build-out for a future population of 675,000 people.

The hydraulic analysis included the following evaluation of each scenario operation:

• Each model run was assessed to ensure maximum and minimum pressure criteria was maintained throughout the City’s water system;

• Existing and proposed mains were assessed to ensure maximum headloss gradient and velocities were within design criteria;

• Storage balancing and filling was assessed to ensure adequate operation; • Pump operation was assessed to ensure pumps operated within a reasonable range of flow and Total

Dynamic Head (TDH). Based on the model results, new mains were added to either upsize (or twin) existing watermains, to

provide looping, to add or upgrade facilities, or to service new growth areas. System analysis was

completed for each of the above scenarios as follows.

• An analysis was initially completed for the year 2037 water demands. Required works were then

identified to satisfy design constraints, and for input to the model;

• Assessed works were then staged for the 20 year period up to 2028 by assessing the scenarios in

the order identified above and defining the timing of each required work item. Works in 5 year

increments were then interpolated from this; and

• Removing those works within the Modified UGB not included as part of the City’s GMIS which

was used as the basis for DC purposes. In those instances where works were to be extended in

the future to service the UGB, sizing was maintained as per previous modeling outputs. Those

works necessary to service the UGB are shown separately in tables and figures for future

inclusion as time passes.

With this information in place, the analysis was completed for both the Year 2028 and Ultimate Build-

out demand scenarios on a phased basis. Growth and non-growth related demand information, complete

with related Residential and ICI allocations are available from the model on this basis. Oversizing needs

for the next 20 years and beyond were also determined in this manner (if significant). Upsizing of a

minor nature was not identified for post period benefit given at most a 10% cost difference for pipe size

differential occurs, with all other aspects (trenching, consistent depth, road restoration, etc.) being equal.



Project No. 100875

5. FUTURE WORK REQUIREMENTS Based on the modeling analyses outlined above, the following pipe related works were identified for

existing deficiency rectification and/or future growth purposes to 2028 within the City’s GMIS Boundary,

and for Build-out (675,000 population). Details are shown by Figures 5.1 and 5.2.

5.1. Pipe Related Works The pipe related waterworks required to service the population and ICI information provided by the City

to 2028 within the City’s GMIS boundary, within the urban growth area, and for Build-out (675,000

population), were determined based on the water system demands and modeling outputs outlined herein.

Although future system requirements were the focus of this work, any existing water system works

required to service growth, or failing to meet the criteria summarized in Table 3.1, were also identified.

Tables 5.1 and 5.2 identify the future low and high level watermains required respectively for future 2028

and Build-out conditions. Each table shows:

• Location (Growth area, component ID, street and from/to), and applicable details (diameter [mm];

length [m]), for each watermain;

• Estimated cost information (pipe, construction, road restoration, engineering, contingency

oversizing).

Also shown are project implementations in annual or 5 year increments as per GMIS outputs, with the

City’s Water Capital Budget project accounts as provided. All works are identified by timing based on

either Year 2028 or Build-out demand conditions, with Residential and ICI growth, and non-growth

components to 2028, and only growth/non-growth for Build-out for oversizing purposes.

Watermain costs are based on updated pipe and construction tendered costs over the last 4 years to 2007.

Road restoration costs are those used for the London Sanitary DC Update for one lane replacement in

urban and/or rural environments to 2009. Redundancies with other transportation, storm drainage or

sanitary sewer works were removed where applicable. To these costs, engineering at 15% and

contingency at 20%, and indexing from 2007 to 2009 at 5.0% per year was added. Details follow by

growth area with references to Tables 5.1 and 5.2.

City Project Growth Street From To Diam Length W/M (1) Sub-total Plus 35% Total % $ % $ % $ % $ % $ % $Number Area (mm) (m) $/m (2) (3) (3)

EW3692 2014 Existing System (A1) (New Pipe) Medway Road Arva PS Wonderland 1500 915 3,150$ 2,882,250$ 1,008,788$ 3,891,038$ 1,297,013$ 2,594,025$ 0% -$ 100% 2,594,025$ 89% 2,308,682$ 4% 103,761$ 5% 129,701$ 2% 51,880$

EW3692 2014 Existing System (A2) (New Pipe) Wonderland Medway Road City Limit 1500 720 3,150$ 2,268,000$ 793,800$ 3,061,800$ 1,020,600$ 2,041,200$ 0% -$ 100% 2,041,200$ 89% 1,816,668$ 4% 81,648$ 5% 102,060$ 2% 40,824$

EW3692 2015 Existing System (A3) (New Pipe) Wonderland City Limit Sunningdale 1500 710 3,150$ 2,236,500$ 782,775$ 3,019,275$ 1,006,425$ 2,012,850$ 0% -$ 100% 2,012,850$ 89% 1,791,437$ 4% 80,514$ 5% 100,643$ 2% 40,257$

EW3666 2010 Existing System (A4) (New Pipe) Wonderland Aldersbrook Road Black Acres Blvd. 600 775 1,400$ 1,085,000$ 379,750$ 1,464,750$ -$ 1,464,750$ 55% 805,613$ 45% 659,138$ 83% 547,084$ 0% -$ 11% 72,505$ 6% 39,548$

EW3666 2013 Existing System (A8) (Upsizing) Wonderland Sunningdale Aldersbrook 600 1,610 1,400$ 2,254,000$ 788,900$ 3,042,900$ -$ 3,042,900$ 55% 1,673,595$ 45% 1,369,305$ 83% 1,136,523$ 0% -$ 11% 150,624$ 6% 82,158$

EW3695 2014 Existing System (A9) (Upsizing) Hyde Park Royal York Sarnia 750 1,020 1,650$ 1,683,000$ 589,050$ 2,272,050$ -$ 2,272,050$ 65% 1,476,833$ 35% 795,218$ 89% 707,744$ 0% -$ 6% 47,713$ 5% 39,761$

EW3666 2010 Existing System (A10) (Upsizing) Wonderland Black Acres Gainsborough 600 420 1,400$ 588,000$ 205,800$ 793,800$ -$ 793,800$ 45% 357,210$ 55% 436,590$ 83% 362,370$ 0% -$ 11% 48,025$ 6% 26,195$

EW3685 2013 River Bend (A28) (Upsizing) Oxford Hyde Park Sanitorium 600 1,250 1,400$ 1,750,000$ 612,500$ 2,362,500$ -$ 2,362,500$ 25% 590,625$ 75% 1,771,875$ 89% 1,576,969$ 0% -$ 6% 106,313$ 5% 88,594$

EW3712 2010 Existing System (B5) (Upsizing) White Oak Dingman Exeter 750 1,385 1,650$ 2,285,250$ 799,838$ 3,085,088$ -$ 3,085,088$ 65% 2,005,307$ 35% 1,079,781$ 5% 53,989$ 67% 723,453$ 15% 161,967$ 13% 140,371$

EW3609 2019 Veterans Memorial Parkway (A13) Gore Sovereign Crumlin 450 150 1,050$ 157,500$ 55,125$ 212,625$ -$ 212,625$ 0% -$ 100% 212,625$ 42% 89,303$ 57% 121,196$ 1% 2,126$ 0% -$

EW3609 2019 Veterans Memorial Parkway (A14) (Upsizing) Crumlin Gore River 600 1,300 1,400$ 1,820,000$ 637,000$ 2,457,000$ -$ 2,457,000$ 25% 614,250$ 75% 1,842,750$ 42% 773,955$ 57% 1,050,368$ 1% 18,428$ 0% -$

EW3666 2021 Existing System (ADD 2) Wonderland Gainsborough Lawson 600 770 1,400$ 1,078,000$ 377,300$ 1,455,300$ -$ 1,455,300$ 55% 800,415$ 45% 654,885$ 83% 543,555$ 0% -$ 11% 72,037$ 6% 39,293$

EW3666 2021 Existing System (ADD 3) Wonderland Lawson Sarnia 600 610 1,400$ 854,000$ 298,900$ 1,152,900$ -$ 1,152,900$ 55% 634,095$ 45% 518,805$ 83% 430,608$ 0% -$ 11% 57,069$ 6% 31,128$

EW3606 2009 Veterans Memorial Parkway (A16) Innovation Drive Concept Bradley 400/600 780 634,000$ -$ 634,000$ 0% -$ 100% 634,000$ 16% 101,440$ 84% 532,560$ 0% -$ 0% -$

EW3606 2009 Veterans Memorial Parkway (A18) Bradley Jackson Innovation Park Ph4 600 3,600 4,460,000$ -$ 4,460,000$ 16% 713,600$ 84% 3,746,400$ 16% 599,424$ 84% 3,146,976$ 0% -$ 0% -$

EW3606 2009 Veterans Memorial Parkway (A23) Phase 1 Innovation East Bradley Innovation Park Ph 4 450/600 900 1,272,000$ -$ 1,272,000$ 0% -$ 100% 1,272,000$ 16% 203,520$ 84% 1,068,480$ 0% -$ 0% -$

EW3606 2012 Veterans Memorial Parkway (A23) Phase 2 Innovation East Innovation Park Ph 4 Hamilton 450 1,240 1,357,000$ -$ 1,357,000$ 0% -$ 100% 1,357,000$ 16% 217,120$ 84% 1,139,880$ 0% -$ 0% -$

ID2171 2009 Skyview Industrial Park (A24) Phase 1 Robin's Hill Road Existing Stub 75m extension 75 400 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ 0% -$ 100% 50,000$ 0% -$ 100% 50,000$ 0% -$ 0% -$

ID2171 2012 Skyview Industrial Park (A24) Phase 2 Robin's Hill Road 75m extension Huron Street 505 400 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ 0% -$ 100% 300,000$ 0% -$ 100% 300,000$ 0% -$ 0% -$

EW3606 2015 Veterans Memorial Parkway (B17) VMP Hwy 401 Bradley 600 1,000 1,400$ 1,400,000$ 490,000$ 1,890,000$ -$ 1,890,000$ 0% -$ 100% 1,890,000$ 16% 302,400$ 84% 1,587,600$ 0% -$ 0% -$

EW3611 2014 Existing System (B3) (New additional pipe) Highbury SE Reservoir Dingman 900 1,920 2,050$ 3,936,000$ 1,377,600$ 5,313,600$ 1,425,600$ 3,888,000$ 0% -$ 100% 3,888,000$ 29% 1,127,520$ 61% 2,371,680$ 7% 272,160$ 3% 116,640$

EW3711 2022 Hyde Park (A19) Gainsborough Wonderland Hyde Park 600 2,450 1,400$ 3,430,000$ 1,200,500$ 4,630,500$ -$ 4,630,500$ 0% -$ 100% 4,630,500$ 97% 4,491,585$ 0% -$ 3% 138,915$ 0% -$

Year 2028 TOTAL 48,178,125$ 4,749,638$ 43,428,487$ 20% 9,671,542$ 70% 33,756,945$ 57% 19,181,894$ 37% 12,358,116$ 4% 1,480,285$ 2% 736,651$

City Project

Number>20 Arva main Reinforcement Easterly (B1) Medway Arva Adelaide 1050 4,020 2,300$ 9,246,000$ 2,311,500$ 11,557,500$ 0% -$ 100% 11,557,500$

>20 Arva main Reinforcement Easterly (B2) Adelaide Medway North Boundary 1050 1,010 2,300$ 2,323,000$ 580,750$ 2,903,750$ 0% -$ 100% 2,903,750$

>20 Uplands North / Northeast (B14) Adelaide North Boundary Sunningdale 1050 725 2,300$ 1,667,500$ 416,875$ 2,084,375$ 0% -$ 100% 2,084,375$

>20 Uplands/Stoney Creek (B15) Adelaide Philbrook Sunningdale 900 1,040 2,050$ 2,132,000$ 533,000$ 2,665,000$ 10% 266,500$ 90% 2,398,500$

>20 Arva main Reinforcement to Chamber 13 (A11) Adelaide Fanshawe Park Road Philbrook 900 410 2,050$ 840,500$ 210,125$ 1,050,625$ 45% 472,781$ 55% 577,844$

>20 Arva main Reinforcement to Chamber 13 (A12) Adelaide Fanshawe Park Road Huron 900 2,750 2,050$ 5,637,500$ 1,409,375$ 7,046,875$ 25% 1,761,719$ 75% 5,285,156$

>20 Arva main Reinforcement to Chamber 13 (A12) Huron Adelaide Chamber 13 900 550 2,050$ 1,127,500$ 281,875$ 1,409,375$ 45% 634,219$ 55% 775,156$

>20 Northwest (B6) West Boundary Sunningdale Fanshawe Park Road 600 1,475 1,400$ 2,065,000$ 516,250$ 2,581,250$ 0% -$ 100% 2,581,250$

>20 Northwest (B7) West Boundary Fanshawe Park Road Gainsborough 600 1,395 1,400$ 1,953,000$ 488,250$ 2,441,250$ 0% -$ 100% 2,441,250$

>20 Northwest (B13) Sunningdale Hyde Park West Boundary 600 2,030 1,400$ 2,842,000$ 710,500$ 3,552,500$ 0% -$ 100% 3,552,500$

>20 Veterans Memorial Parkway (B16) Wilton Grove Jackson (Ext.) Hwy. 100 (Ext) 600 2,890 1,400$ 4,046,000$ 1,011,500$ 5,057,500$ 0% -$ 100% 5,057,500$

>20 Lambeth (B18) Westdel Bourne Longwoods/Lambeth Southdale 400 6,210 1,000$ 6,210,000$ 1,552,500$ 7,762,500$ 0% -$ 100% 7,762,500$

>20 Lambeth (B19) Westdel Bourne Southdale Baseline 600 1,700 1,400$ 2,380,000$ 595,000$ 2,975,000$ 0% -$ 100% 2,975,000$

>20 River Bend (B20) Westdel Bourne River Bend Grid Gainsborough 600 1,270 1,400$ 1,778,000$ 444,500$ 2,222,500$ 0% -$ 100% 2,222,500$

>20 River Bend (B22) Gainsborough West Boundary River Bend Grid Ext. 600 1,775 1,400$ 2,485,000$ 621,250$ 3,106,250$ 0% -$ 100% 3,106,250$

EW3694 >20 Existing System (A5) (Upsizing) Clarke Side Road Oxford Dundas 900 1,390 2,050$ 2,849,500$ 997,325$ 3,846,825$ 45% 1,731,071$ 55% 2,115,754$

EW3694 >20 Existing System (A6) (Upsizing) Clarke Side Road Dundas Trafalgar 900 1,450 2,050$ 2,972,500$ 743,125$ 3,715,625$ 45% 1,672,031$ 55% 2,043,594$

EW3694 >20 Existing System (A7) (Upsizing) Clarke Side Road Trafalgar Gore 750 1,380 1,650$ 2,277,000$ 569,250$ 2,846,250$ 65% 1,850,063$ 35% 996,188$

>20 Existing System (B4) (Upsizing) Dingman White Oak Castleton 1050 3,300 2,300$ 7,590,000$ 1,897,500$ 9,487,500$ 50% 4,743,750$ 50% 4,743,750$

EW3698 >20 Longwoods (A20) Dingman Wonderland White Oak 900 2,350 2,050$ 4,817,500$ 1,204,375$ 6,021,875$ 0% -$ 100% 6,021,875$

EW3698 >20 Lambeth (A21) Wonderland Dingman Exeter 750 1,410 1,650$ 2,326,500$ 581,625$ 2,908,125$ 0% -$ 100% 2,908,125$

EW3698 >20 Lambeth (A22) Hamlyn Wonderland Lambeth 600 1,305 1,400$ 1,827,000$ 456,750$ 2,283,750$ 0% -$ 100% 2,283,750$

EW3697 >20 Lambeth (A25) Wonderland Wharncliffe Southdale 600 1,775 1,400$ 2,485,000$ 869,750$ 3,354,750$ 25% 838,688$ 75% 2,516,063$

>20 Hyde Park (B21) Gainsborough Hyde Park West Boundary 600 1,920 1,400$ 2,688,000$ 672,000$ 3,360,000$ 20% 672,000$ 80% 2,688,000$

>20 SE London (B8) Dingman Drive Highbury Old Victoria Road 600 3,035 1,400$ 4,249,000$ 1,062,250$ 5,311,250$ 0% -$ 100% 5,311,250$

>20 SE London (B9) Old Victoria Road Dingman Wilton Grove 600 1,375 1,400$ 1,925,000$ 481,250$ 2,406,250$ 0% -$ 100% 2,406,250$

Build-Out TOTAL 103,958,450$ 14% 14,642,821$ 86% 89,315,629$

(1) As provided by the City of London and updated to 2009 dollars assuming 5% inflation costs for 2008 and 2009. 1/2 Road reconstruction costs included. (2) Plus 35% For Engineering (15%), Contingency (20%)(3) Non-growth/Growth determination based on pipe cross-sectional area for existing pipe upsizing to new. Where existing pipe systems do not exist, based on current model demands vs. futu(4) If oversizing is considered, a 1050mm dia. pipe would meet 2028 growth needs. The resulting growth cost would be reduced to $6,648,075; with Res/ICI allocations of Res $5,916,787; Ind $265,923; Comm $332,404; and Inst. $132,962.(5) If oversizing is considered, a 750mm dia. pipe would meet 2028 growth needs. The resulting growth cost would be reduced to $3,888,000; with Res/ICI allocations of Res $1,127,520; Ind $2,371,680; Comm $272,160; and Inst. $116,640.(6) Works combined with Transportation Works. A restoration cost of $580.89/m has been deducted from the Transportation DC Update(7) As per GMIS timing(8) As per City of London Water Capital Budget

P:\PROJECTS\100875 Ldn Water DC Update\GenCor\Reports\Final Report\Tables\[Updated Water Tables-Feb23'09.xls]Table6.1 Summary

Comm.



WATER SERVICING DC UPDATE 2008RECOMMENDED LOW LEVEL SYSTEM WATERMAINS

Implemen- tation Year (7)

Watermains Required for Build-out Demands

Residential IndustrialPost Period Benefit (4) (5)

2028 Total

Non Growth Growth

Watermains Required for Year 2028 Demands

Estimated Construction Cost Instit.

Added works to those identified in 2003

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

Revised Timing

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

CITY PROJECT NUMBER

IMPL'T YEAR (5)

GROWTH AREAS COMPONENT STREET FROM TO DIAM LENGTH (%)(3) $ (%)(3) $

(mm) (m)W'main (2)

$/m Sub-Total Plus 35% TotalPost Period

Benefit 2028 Total %(1) $ %(1) $ %(1) $ %(1) $

2011 2018 Byron Baseline Wickerson Westdel Bourne 450 656 $ 1,050 $ 688,800 $ 241,080 $ 929,880 $ - $ 929,880 0% -$ 100% 929,880$ 99% 920,581$ 0% -$ 1% 9,299$ 0% -$

EW3652 2011 River Bend 2019 Westdel Bourne Byron Baseline Mid. Westdel Bourne 450 792 $ 1,050 $ 831,600 $ 291,060 $ 1,122,660 $ - $ 1,122,660 0% -$ 100% 1,122,660$ 99% 1,111,433$ 0% -$ 1% 11,227$ 0% -$

2011 2020 Westdel Bourne Mid Westdel Bourne Oxford 400 752 $ 1,000 $ 752,000 $ 263,200 $ 1,015,200 $ - $ 1,015,200 0% -$ 100% 1,015,200$ 99% 1,005,048$ 0% -$ 1% 10,152$ 0% -$

2017 2021/2022 Oxford Westdel Bourne Kains 400 868 $ 1,000 $ 868,000 $ 303,800 $ 1,171,800 $ - $ 1,171,800 0% -$ 100% 1,171,800$ 99% 1,160,082$ 0% -$ 1% 11,718$ 0% -$

2016 2028 Sarnia West of Deer Ridge Hyde Park 400 720 $ 1,000 $ 720,000 $ 252,000 $ 972,000 $ - $ 972,000 0% -$ 100% 972,000$ 97% 942,840$ 0% -$ 3% 29,160$ 0% -$

2015 2032 Hyde Park Sarnia South Carriage 450 850 $ 1,050 $ 892,500 $ 312,375 $ 1,204,875 $ - $ 1,204,875 0% -$ 100% 1,204,875$ 97% 1,168,729$ 0% -$ 3% 36,146$ 0% -$

2022 2033 Gainsborough Coronation Aldersbrook 600 360 $ 1,400 $ 504,000 $ 176,400 $ 680,400 $ - $ 680,400 0% -$ 100% 680,400$ 97% 659,988$ 0% -$ 3% 20,412$ 0% -$

Year 2028 Totals 5,256,900$ 1,839,915$ 7,096,815$ -$ $7,096,815 0% -$ 100% 7,096,815$ 98% $6,968,701 0% -$ 2% 128,114$ 0% -$

Watermains Required for Build-out and Ultimate Build-out Demands

EW3699 >20 South London 2017 Boler Southdale Pack 450 2,057 $ 1,050 $ 2,159,850 $ 755,948 $ 2,915,798 0% -$ 100% 2,915,798$ 0% -$ 100% 2,915,798$ 0% -$ 0% -$

EW3699 >20 South London 2004/2005 Southdale Bramblewood Wickerson 450 1,050 $ 1,050 $ 1,102,500 $ 385,875 $ 1,488,375 0% -$ 100% 1,488,375$ 99% 1,473,491$ 0% -$ 1% 14,884$ 0% -$

EW3652 >20 River Bend 2006 Wickerson Southdale Mid Wickerson 450 970 $ 1,050 $ 1,018,500 $ 356,475 $ 1,374,975 0% -$ 100% 1,374,975$ 99% 1,361,225$ 0% -$ 1% 13,750$ 0% -$

Buildout Totals 4,280,850$ 1,498,298$ 5,779,148$ 0% -$ 100% 5,779,148$ 49% 2,834,717$ 50% 2,915,798$ 0% 28,634$ 0% -$

(1) From City of London Water Master Plan Update. Reconfirmed as part of this work. (2) Costs updated from (1) with latest tender unit cost information (2007, inflated to 2009 dollars), plus Engineering and Contingency at 35%. 1/2 Road restoration costs included.(3) Based on Existing Versus Future Service Area Demand and/or Pipe Size Cross-Sectional Area Differential (whichever is more applicable).(4) Works combined with Transportation Works. A restoration cost of $526.89/m has been deducted from the Transportation DC Update(5) As per GMIS timing


ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST Commercial

NON GROWTH GROWTH

Institutional

Hyde ParkEW3651


WATER SERVICING DC UPDATE 2008HIGH LEVEL SYSTEM WATERMAIN COMPONENTS


Residential Industrial

REQUIRED WATERWORKS (1)

Revised Timing

(4)

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(.


FIGURE 5.1

WATER WORKSTO YEAR 2028

SCALE: N.T.S

DATE: FEB 2009 PN: 100875

1500

1500

1500

600

750

600

900

600

600

450

400

400

450

450

400

600

750

600

600

]

LHWSS SUPPLY

450

]EAWSS SUPPLY

(91/182 MLD)

ARVA PS & RESERVOIR

UPLANDS PS

WESTMOUNT PS

SPRINGBANK PS & RESERVOIRWICKERSON PS

HYDE PARK PS

PROPOSED SOUTHEAST PS& RESERVOIR

A1

A2

A3

A8

A4

A10

2028

2033

2032

A9

A28

2021/2022

2020

2019

2018

B5

B3

A18

B17

A13

A19600

LegendMajor Roads

City Boundary

WatermainsLow Pressure ZoneHigh Pressure Zone

GMIS Boundary


Existing Watermains > 300 mm Dia.

Southeast Zone


Watermain DiameterComponent ID

900

2020/A25

Waterways

Existing Built Out City

A23 45

0

600

600

AD

D3

AD

D2

A14

600

Pump Station!(

PONDMILLS PS

600

A16

400A

24

600

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

PONDMILLS PS

ARVA PS & RESERVOIR

UPLANDSPS

PROPOSED SOUTHEAST PSAND RESERVOIR

WESTMOUNT PS

WICKERSON PS

HYDE PARK PS

SPRINGBANK PS & RESERVOIR


FIGURE 5.2

WATER WORKS TO BUILD OUT(675,000 Population)

SCALE: N.T.S

DATE: FEB 2009 PN: 100875

LegendMajor Roads

City Boundary

Existing Built Out City



.

600

750

900

900

1500

1500

1500

600

750

600

900

600

600

600

450

450

450

40040

0

450

450

450

450

450

400

600

600

600

600

600

600

600

400

400

600400

9001050

750

600

A12

A12

A11

/B15

B14

B21050

900

600

600

600

600

LHWSS SUPPLY

EAWSS SUPPLY(91/182 MLD)

Component IDWatermain Diameter900

2020/A25

A1

A2

A3

A8

A4

A10

2032

2033

2028

B13

B6

B7

B21B22

B20

A9

A28

2021/2022

2020

2019

2018

2006

2005/2004

B19

B18

B18

B18 A22

2017

A20

B4

B5A21

A25

B3

B16

A18

B17

A14

A13

A7

A6

A5

B1

1050

1050

900

900

900

A12

WatermainsLow Pressure ZoneHigh Pressure ZoneBuild Out - Low Pressure ZoneSoutheast ZoneExisting Watermains > 300 mm Dia.

600 A19

600

B8 B9

600

Waterways

Ultimate Build Out Boundary(675,000 Population)

GMIS Boundary

]

]

A23 45

0

600

600 A

DD

2A

DD

3

400A16

400

A24

600



Project No. 100875

Growth/Non-Growth determinations and Res/ICI allocations are discussed in Section 6. Most of the

works required to 2028 and Build-out are as per those identified in the 2003 Water Master Plan Update

completed by AECOM (formerly Earth Tech). Additions as a result of this work are highlighted in grey

in Tables 5.1 and 5.2.

5.1.1. Existing System Reinforcements

Several of the watermain replacements required (upsizing and/or twinning), were identified in the Water

Master Plan Update 2003 previously. These include:

Year 2028

• Medway Road, and Wonderland Road to Sunningdale Road from the Arva Pumping Station (Items A1, A2 and A3). Each are required to service future growth needs 100%.

• Wonderland Road – Sunningdale Road to Gainsborough Road (Items A4, A8 and A10). Each of these works require upsizing (or twinning), of the existing watermains in place due to growth (A8 and A10), or to address existing deficiencies (A4), to allow A8, A10, ADD2 and ADD3 to service future growth.

• Gainsborough Road – Wonderland Road to Hyde Park (Item A19). This watermain is needed to service future growth 100% due to transfer of the existing low level watermain to high pressure servicing. Although low level servicing is provided early on in the period, due to the transfer, it cannot be sustained over the long term as growth in the Hyde Park area and West London continues.

• Skyview Industrial Park – Robin’s Hill Road from the existing stub to Huron Street (Item A24) to complete watermain looping for the Skyview Industrial Park and required to service future growth needs 100%.

• Highbury Avenue – A new additional pipe from the proposed Southeast PS and Reservoir to Dingman Drive (Item B3), is required. This is required to service future growth (100%), in the last 10 years of the growth period.

• White Oak Road – Dingman Drive to Exeter Road (Item B5). Upsizing (or twinning), of the existing watermain is required to service future growth.

Pressure and/or headloss criteria problems were also identified through modeling within the existing

watermains on Highbury Avenue between Dundas Street and Huron Street. These do not appear to be

driven by growth needs, but rather by existing conditions and C-factor degradation. This information was

relayed to the City of London for them to follow-up with regards to the Infrastructure Needs Study.



Project No. 100875

Deficiencies were also noted within the City’s high pressure water system in the Wonderland

Road/Viscount Road area of the City (Items 3000 to 3005). These watermains require upsizing (or

twinning), to rectify existing deficiencies in this service area. They are therefore 100% non-growth

related. See Table 5.2 for details.

Build-out

Arva Main Reinforcement (East) – Medway Road (Arva PS to Adelaide Street), and Adelaide Street

(Medway Road to Sunningdale Road) (Items B1, B2 and B14). These are 100% growth driven.

Arva main reinforcing on Adelaide Street – Sunningdale Road to Huron Street – Chamber 13 (Items

A11, A12 and B15). Upsizing (or twinning), of the existing watermains are required to service

future growth.

Dingman Drive – Caselton to White Oak Road (Item B4). Upsizing (or twinning), of the existing

watermains is required to service future growth.

Clarke Road – Oxford Street to Gore Road (Items A5, A6 and A7). Upsizing (or twinning), of the

existing watermain is required to service future growth.

5.1.2. North London

The Fox Hollow, Sunningdale, Uplands, Stoney Creek and Kilally Community planning areas (North and

South), and Northeast and Northwest London are expected to consist primarily of residential

development.

For the Year 2028, north London will be serviced via the existing trunk watermain on Sunningdale Road.

Based on the Community Planning information provided to date, these areas can be serviced internally via

watermains less than 400 mm (16”) in diameter.

Northwest London was considered further as part of the Build-out scenario. Under these conditions, a

new trunk watermain along Sunningdale Road from Hyde Park Road west (Item B13), and then south to

the future Gainsborough Road extension (Items B6 and B7), discussed in Section 5.1.6, is required. The

need for these works will depend upon future internal servicing for this area specifically. Watermains

400 mm (16”) in diameter or greater may be needed to accomplish the objective of supplying water to

west London, to approximately Southdale Road from the Arva PS.



Project No. 100875

Watermain sizing to the City’s Northeast and Northwest was reduced to the extent possible based on the

premise that internal servicing between Sunningdale Road and the City boundary via watermains less than

400 mm (16”) in diameter can be provided. This will assist in the supply of flows to the City’s east and

west sides. This should be confirmed once servicing for those areas north of Sunningdale Road to

the City limit has been identified.

Portions of north London are also at high elevation and receive boosted pressure servicing via the

previously expanded Uplands Pumping Station. Details were initially provided in the City of London

Community Plans Water Services Supply Study Report for Fox Hollow, Sunningdale, Uplands and

Stoney Creek completed by Knowles Engineering Inc. (2000). This was confirmed and updated as part of

the Uplands PS EA and Pre-Design report by AECOM (formerly Earth Tech) in 2002.

The Kilally North and East areas can be serviced from the existing watermains in place on Highbury

Avenue and Fanshawe Road. It has been assumed that internal watermains less than 400 mm (16”) in

diameter can service these areas as per the Kilally North and South community planning reports. The

same applies in the Cheapside and Skyway areas in the City’s northeast also, as per the servicing reports

for these areas.

5.1.3. Veterans Memorial Parkway East Area

This area is primarily industrial in nature where little growth is projected. This area can be serviced from

existing watermains on Clarke Road. It has been assumed that internal servicing can be provided via

watermains less than 400 mm (16”) in diameter for this area to avoid the need for major works.

5.1.4. Southeast London

This area is expected to be primarily industrial in nature (Veterans Memorial Parkway, Highbury/401),

with the exception of the Commissioners Road/Jackson Road area (Summerside East), which is expected

to be residential. This area is to be serviced by the proposed Southeast Pumping Station and Reservoir.

Using the service level/design criteria outlined in Table 3.1, and that utilized for design purposes in small

areas, modeling for specific scenarios to service this area was completed. This included:

• Servicing from the existing low level watermain systems in the area to the extent possible;

• Servicing via high pressure servicing from the Elgin-Middlesex and Pond Mills Pumping Stations; and



Project No. 100875

• Future servicing based on construction and operation of the Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station, were reviewed.

The outputs formed the basis for the watermain needs identified for this area to 2028, and for Build-out.

To 2028, watermains will be required: on Commissioners Road, Jackson Road to Veterans Memorial

Parkway; on Veterans Memorial Parkway from the Thames River south to Highway 401; on Crumlin

Road, north of the Thames River to Gore Road; and on Bradley Avenue between Jackson Road and

Veterans Memorial Parkway. A small portion of new watermain on Gore Road between Crumlin Road

and Sovereign Court would be needed to service some growth potential north of the Thames River, east of

Veterans Memorial Parkway (Item No’s A13, A14, A16, A18, A23 and B17). All are 100% growth

related to serve primarily proposed industrial development in Southeast London.

For Build-out, watermains will be required: on Veterans Memorial Parkway south of the 401; on Wilton

Grove Road, from Veterans Memorial Parkway to Cheese Factory Road: on Dingman Drive from Old

Victoria Road to Highbury Avenue; and on Old Victoria Road from Wilton Grove Road to Dingman

Drive. (Items B8, B9, B16 and the rest of B17). Each of these work are 100% growth driven.

Some or all of these watermain components may have to be accelerated to some extent in the event:

a) a heavy water user is located in the Veterans Memorial Parkway south study area; or

b) servicing is to be provided to Thames Centre via either watermain extensions east along Commissioners Road, or east along Bradley Avenue.

This is based on the premise of providing 7.8 MLD (MDD), to Thames Centre as per the information they

provided dated May 17, 2004.

5.1.5. South London

The Brockley, Longwoods, Bostwick, Talbot and existing Lambeth areas are located in south London.

They are expected to consist of a mixture of residential, commercial and industrial land uses. These areas

will for the most part, be serviced from the future Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station. The

northern portion of the Talbot planning area is/will continue to be serviced by the Springbank PS.

The Brockley area can be serviced from the existing trunk watermain on Dingman Drive to 2028.

The Dingman Drive watermain would be extended from White Oak Road to Lambeth to service the

southern portion of the Longwoods area (Item A20), and existing Lambeth (looped supply) under Build-



Project No. 100875

out conditions. The watermains proposed on Wonderland Road and Hamlyn Street (Items A21 and A22),

and on Longwoods Road and Westdel Bourne to Baseline Road (Items B18 and B19) will also supply

water to Southwest London for the Build-out scenario. It will also allow for the transfer of flows between

the Arva and Southeast supplied systems under emergency conditions.

The watermain proposed on Wonderland Road from Wharncliffe to Southdale Road (Item A25) will

service internal portions of the Bostwick and Longwoods areas to the west and east for Build-out.

Growth projected to 2028 for the Longwoods, Bostwick and Lambeth areas can be serviced by the

existing watermains in this area, with the exception of a portion of the Talbot planning area (east side).

This area would be serviced by the City’s high level system from the Springbank Pumping Station. The

southern portion of the Talbot planning area can be serviced from the existing watermains on Colonel

Talbot Road and Southdale Road. An extension to Boler Road from Colonel Talbot, Southdale Road

from Bramblewood Place to Wickerson Road and Wickerson Road from Southdale Road to the exisiting

on Wickerson Road (Items 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2017) are required under the Build-out scenario to link

the existing Springbank PS and future Wickerson PS high pressure service areas.

5.1.6. West London

The RiverBend, Wickerson Road and Hyde Park Road areas are expected to be primarily residential in

nature.

The RiverBend area will be serviced to 2028 by the existing watermain on Westdel Bourne Road from

Baseline Road to Shore Road, and the upsizing (or twinning), required on Oxford Street from Hyde Park

Road to Sanitorium Road (Item A28), and on Hyde Park Road from Sarnia Road to Oxford Street (Item

A9). For Build-out, this watermain extension would continue north to Gainsborough Road to complete

looping and provide additional supply capacity from Arva to west London (Items B20, B21 and B22),

connecting to Item B7 and Hyde Park Road. These works are all 100% growth driven.

The southern portion of the RiverBend and the Wickerson area are serviced by the Wickerson Pumping

Station and related high level watermains to be constructed on Wickerson Road, from Base Line Road to

Southdale Road; on Southdale Road from Wickerson Road east to Bramblewood Road; on Base Line

Road from Wickerson Road to Westdel Bourne; on Westdel Bourne between Base Line and Oxford

Street, and on Oxford Street east to Commissioners Road (Items 2018 to 2022). All of these watermains

are 100% growth driven.



Project No. 100875

Growth in the Hyde Park area would be serviced by the City’s high level system fed by the Hyde Park

Pumping Station. This includes high level watermains on Gainsborough Road from Fanshawe Park Road

to Aldersbrook; on Hyde Park Road from Gainsborough Road to Sarnia Road; and on Sarnia Road from

Hyde Park Road to Barrydale (Items 2028, 2032 and 2033).

5.2. Facility Related Works In addition to the watermain related works, facility related works are also required for the City’s water

distribution system, and for the EAWS/EMW and LHWS Systems. The City water system includes

implementation of the Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station.

Master planning for the LHWS/EAWS systems was last completed in 2003 and is currently being

updated. The 2003 report was used as an input to this update along with City budget updates.

These details are subject to review and confirmation by the Joint Board of Management for each

water system and the general public through consultation.

Table 5.3 A/B identifies the facility related works required for the City, Elgin and Lake Huron water

systems. Identified is the facility by name; approximate implementation year as per our work or GMIS

outputs; existing rated capacity and current flows (2007); future flow requirements to 2028; and

new/expansion capacity information; and estimated costs from study, other report or City budget/GMIS

sources. City facility related costs were updated to 2009 to which engineering at 15% and contingency at

20% were added. For the LHWSS/EAWSS components, City provided budget information was used.

City project numbers are identified as provided. Also shown are the non-growth and growth components

applicable to City of London and/or to Elgin Area/Lake Huron water system users. Residential and ICI

allocations are also shown. Details are discussed in Section 6 of the report.

Current and future flow requirements developed as part of the Water Master Plan Update 2003 for the

Elgin Area and Lake Huron Water Supply Systems are outlined in Table 5.4. This summarizes outputs

from the Elgin Area and Lake Huron Master Plan updates completed by Stantec Consulting. Identified

are average day winter (ADDw), and Max Day Demands (MDD) in 2002, and future demands (ADDw

and MDD) to 2024. Max Day use was determined utilizing the 1.95 peaking factor for the City of

London. The water demands were determined using the City’s criteria outlined in Section 3 of this report.

Also shown is the net demand increase for a given system or scenario, and the related system capacities in

place, or required to be put in place to address, and any over/under amounts that result. Given the Elgin

CITYGROWTH TO

2028 (11)GROWTH

BEYOND 2028(11)

PROJECT No. FACILITY

IMPLEMENTATION YEAR ADDw MAX DAY ADDw MAX DAY ADDw MAX DAY ADDw MAX DAY PEAK % $ % $ % $ % $ $ % $ % $ % $ % $ $ % $ % $ % $ % $

EW3653 Wickerson PS 2011 0 0 0 0 48L/s 93L/s 57L/s 142L/s 830,000$ 830,000$ 0% -$ 100% 830,000$ 830,000$ 100% 830,000$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$

EW3590 Uplands PS (12) 2015 30L/s 60L/s 40L/s 45L/s 40.0 45.0 280,000$ 280,000$ 0% -$ 100% 280,000$ 280,000$ 99% 277,200$ 0% -$ 1% 2,800$ 0% -$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$

EW3591 Hyde Park PS (13) 2015 210L/s 320L/s 300L/s 460L/s 90L/s 140L/s 550,000$ 550,000$ 0% -$ 100% 550,000$ 550,000$ 100% 550,000$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$

1,660,000$ -$ 1,660,000$ 0% -$ 100% 1,660,000$ 1,660,000$ 100% 1,657,200$ 0% -$ 0% 2,800$ 0% -$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$

EW3614 Southeast PS (3) 287 L/s (4) 279 l/s 279 l/s 718 l/s 1401 l/s 920 L/s 1794 L/s 2210 L/s 29,600,000$ 94% 27,798,000$ 1,802,000$ 0% -$ 100% 1,802,000$ 1,405,560$ 40% 562,224$ 49% 688,724$ 6% 84,334$ 5% 70,278$ 396,440$ 29% 114,968$ 61% 241,828$ 7% 27,751$ 3% 11,893$ EW3614 Reservoir -43 M/L (5) -60 M/L (5) 113 ML 26,100,000$ 94% 24,530,000$ 1,570,000$ 0% -$ 100% 1,570,000$ 1,570,000$ 56% 879,200$ 32% 502,400$ 5% 78,500$ 7% 109,900$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

EW3628Southeast Pressure Zone (14) 2009-2016 2,700,000$ 2,700,000$ 60% 1,620,000$ 40% 1,080,000$ 1,080,000$ 56% 604,800$ 32% 345,600$ 5% 54,000$ 7% 75,600$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

58,400,000$ 52,328,000$ 6,072,000$ 27% 1,620,000$ 73% 4,452,000$ 4,055,560$ 50% 2,046,224$ 38% 1,536,724$ 5% 216,834$ 6% 255,778$ 396,440$ 29% 114,968$ 61% 241,828$ 7% 27,751$ 3% 11,893$

EW3654 Arva PS 2020 3680 L/s (6) 5266 L/s (6) 2,600,000$ $ 2,600,000 50% 1,300,000$ 50% 1,300,000$ 1,300,000$ 89% 1,157,000$ 5% 65,000$ 5% 65,000$ 1% 13,000$ -$ 89% -$ 5% -$ 5% -$ 1% -$

2,600,000$ 2,600,000$ 50% 1,300,000$ 1,300,000$ 1,300,000$ 89% 1,157,000$ 5% 65,000$ 5% 65,000$ 1% 13,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

62,660,000$ 52,328,000$ 10,332,000$ 28% 2,920,000$ 72% 7,412,000$ 7,015,560$ 69% 4,860,424$ 23% 1,601,724$ 4% 284,634$ 4% 268,778$ 396,440$ 29% 114,968$ 61% 241,828$ 7% 27,751$ 3% 11,893$

CITYGROWTH TO

2028(11)GROWTH

BEYOND 2028(11)

PROJECT No. FACILITY

IMPLEMENTATION YEAR ADDw MAX DAY ADDw MAX DAY ADDw MAX DAY ADDw MAX DAY PEAK % $ % $ % $ % $ $ % $ % $ % $ % $ $ % $ % $ % $ % $

EAWSS/EMWS(7)

EA4020 Low Lift PS 2018 42 MLD 91 MLD 24.1+24=48.1 MLD 47+47=94 MLD 32.2+34.9=67.1 MLD 62.8+68.1=130.9 MLD 91 MLD 182 MLD 3,000,000$ 3,000,000$ 0% -$ 52% 1,560,000$ 48% 1,440,000$ 1,036,800$ 29% 300,672$ 61% 632,448$ 7% 72,576$ 3% 31,104$ 403,200$ 29% 116,928$ 61% 245,952$ 7% 28,224$ 3% 12,096$

EA4021Raw Water Transmission Main 2018 42 MLD 91 MLD 24.1+24=48.1 MLD 47+47=94 MLD 32.2+34.9=67.1 MLD 62.8+68.1=130.9 MLD 91 MLD 182 MLD 3,000,000$ 3,000,000$ 0% -$ 52% 1,560,000$ 48% 1,440,000$ 1,036,800$ 29% 300,672$ 61% 632,448$ 7% 72,576$ 3% 31,104$ 403,200$ 29% 116,928$ 61% 245,952$ 7% 28,224$ 3% 12,096$

EA4022 Water Treatment Plant 2018 42 MLD 91 MLD 24.1+24=48.1 MLD 47+47=94 MLD 32.2+34.9=67.1 MLD 62.8+68.1=130.9 MLD 91 MLD 182 MLD 55,000,000$ 55,000,000$ 0% -$ 52% 28,600,000$ 48% 26,400,000$ 19,008,000$ 29% 5,512,320$ 61% 11,594,880$ 7% 1,330,560$ 3% 570,240$ 7,392,000$ 29% 2,143,680$ 61% 4,509,120$ 7% 517,440$ 3% 221,760$

EA4023Residue Management Plant 2011 0 0 24.1+24=48.1 MLD 47+47=94 MLD 32.2+34.9=67.1 MLD 62.8+68.1=130.9 MLD 91 MLD 182 MLD 13,250,000$ 57% 7,552,500$ 5,697,500$ 15% 828,125$ 30% 1,689,375$ 56% 3,180,000$ 2,289,600$ 29% 663,984$ 61% 1,396,656$ 7% 160,272$ 3% 68,688$ 890,400$ 29% 258,216$ 61% 543,144$ 7% 62,328$ 3% 26,712$

EA4024Treated Water Transmission Main (New) 2011 42 MLD 82 MLD 24.1+24=48.1 MLD 47+47=94 MLD 32.2+34.9=67.1 MLD 62.8+68.1=130.9 MLD 91 MLD 182 MLD 23,150,000$ 57% 13,195,500$ 9,954,500$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 100% 9,954,500$ 7,167,240$ 29% 2,078,500$ 61% 4,372,016$ 7% 501,707$ 3% 215,017$ 2,787,260$ 29% 808,305$ 61% 1,700,229$ 7% 195,108$ 3% 83,618$

97,400,000$ 20,748,000$ 76,652,000$ 828,125$ 33,409,375$ 42,414,500$ 30,538,440$ 8,856,148$ 18,628,448$ 2,137,691$ 916,153$ 11,876,060$ 3,444,057$ 7,244,397$ 831,324$ 356,282$

Elgin Middlesex PS >20 68 MLD 24.1+24=48.1 MLD 47+47=94 MLD 32.2+34.9=67.1 MLD 62.8+68.1=130.9 MLD 158 MLD 2,130,000$ 2,130,000$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 100% 2,130,000$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 2,130,000$ 29% 617,700$ 61% 1,299,300$ 7% 149,100$ 3% 63,900$

2,130,000$ -$ 2,130,000$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 100% 2,130,000$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 2,130,000$ 29% 617,700$ 61% 1,299,300$ 7% 149,100$ 3% 63,900$

EAWSS Sub-Total 99,530,000$ 20,748,000$ 78,782,000$ 1% 828,125$ 34% 33,409,375$ 45% 44,544,500$ 30,538,440$ 29% 8,856,148$ 61% 18,628,448$ 7% 2,137,691$ 3% 916,153$ 14,006,060$ 29% 4,061,757$ 61% 8,543,697$ 7% 980,424$ 3% 420,182$

LHWSS (8)

LH1902

Residue Management Facility 2012 0 0 118.9+9.6=128.5 MLD 231.9+18.7=250.6 MLD 152.6+21.2=173.8 MLD 297.5+41.3=338.8 MLD 173 MLD 340 MLD 10,250,000$ 57% 5,842,500$ 4,407,500$ 41% 1,810,390$ 5% 239,610$ 53% 2,357,500$ 2,357,500$ 89% 2,098,175$ 5% 117,875$ 5% 117,875$ 1% 23,575$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$

LH1305Transmission Main Twinning Completion 2013-2016 (15) 173 MLD 340 MLD 118.9+9.6=128.5 MLD 231.9+18.7=250.6 MLD 152.6+21.2=173.8 MLD 297.5+41.3=338.8 MLD 204 MLD 400 MLD 47,000,000$ 33% 15,447,000$ 31,553,000$ 73% 23,103,414$ 6% 2,009,586$ 20% 6,440,000$ 6,440,000$ 89% 5,731,600$ 5% 322,000$ 5% 322,000$ 1% 64,400$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$

LH1326 Additional Standby Power 2010 100 MLD 118.9+9.6=128.5 MLD 231.9+18.7=250.6 MLD 152.6+21.2=173.8 MLD 297.5+41.3=338.8 MLD 200 MLD 7,200,000$ 57% 4,104,000$ 3,096,000$ 63% 1,961,379$ 6% 198,621$ 30% 936,000$ 936,000$ 89% 833,040$ 5% 46,800$ 5% 46,800$ 1% 9,360$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$

64,450,000$ 25,393,500$ 39,056,500$ 42% 26,875,183$ 4% 2,447,817$ 15% 9,733,500$ 9,733,500$ 89% 8,662,815$ 5% 486,675$ 5% 486,675$ 1% 97,335$ -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$ 0% -$

163,980,000$ 46,141,500$ 117,838,500$ 17% 27,703,308$ 22% 35,857,192$ 33% 54,278,000$ 40,271,940$ 44% 17,518,963$ 47% 19,115,123$ 7% 2,624,366$ 3% 1,013,488$ 14,006,060$ 29% 4,061,757$ 61% 8,543,697$ 7% 980,424$ 3% 420,182$

(1) London+LHWSS or EAWSS = TOTAL. From City provided growth and modelling demand information. Carried forward from 2004

(2) Estimated costs from background reprots or as provided by the City of London.

(3) From City of London, Southeast Terminal Reservoir and Pumping Station, Preliminary and Detailed design info (Earth Tech) and 2009 City Budget.

(4) Existing Pond Mills PS rated capacity possibly replaced

(5) From London Water Reliability Assessment Final Report; Dillon 2002.

(6) From City of London Water Works Master Plan Update to 2016, Dillon, November 1994.

(7) From EAPWSS Master Plan Update, Stantec Draft July 30, 2003 or per City provided information.

(8) From LHPWSS Master Plan Update, Stantec Draft July 30, 2003 or per City provided information.

(9) Remainder to EAWSS or LHWSS users.

(10) The table reflects expected grant funding, based on best estimates available at the time of preparation of this table. Funding reduced from London-Non Growth and Elgin/LHWSS Users first, then London-Growth.

(11) 2028 flow requirements as a percentage of capacity provided. Difference to Growth Buildout.

(12) Uplands PS Design Brief, 2003

(13) Hyde Park PS Design Brief, 2002 (20yr/Full Buildout components work deleted)

(14) Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station Design Report, 2005 Table 15.1

(15) Assumed that project will be built in 3 equal phases, more details will be provided once a detailed design is complete.


PRELIMINARY WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM COMPONENTS

GROWTH BEYOND 2028 (POST PERIOD BENEFIT) (11)GROWTH TO 2028

OTHER/PREVIOUS FUNDING (10)

NET COST $ INSTITUTIONAL

INSTITUTIONAL 2028

LONDON GROWTH

RESIDENTIAL 2028

INDUSTRIAL 2028

Southeast Sub-Total

FUTURE FLOWS (2028) (1)

Arva PS Sub-Total

High Level PS Sub-Total

EXISTING RATEDCURRENT FLOWS

(2004 TO 2007) (1)

2009-2011

RESIDENTIAL

WATER SERVICING DC UPDATE 2008

LONDON NON-GROWTH

CITY TOTAL TO 2028

CITY OF LONDON

ESTIMATED COST (2)

$EXPANSION / NEW ESTIMATED CAPACITY

NET COST $

OTHER/PREVIOUS FUNDING (10)

TABLE 5.3B

COMMERCIAL 2028

INSTITUTIONAL 2028EAWSS/LHWSS USERS

LONDON GROWTH

ESTIMATED COST (2)

LONDON NON-GROWTH EAWSS/LHWSS USERS

(Revised Feb 23, 2009)

RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL

2028

LHWSS Sub-Total

SUPPLY SYSTEM TOTAL

EAWSS TOTAL TO 2028

EXISTING RATEDCURRENT FLOWS

(2004 TO 2007) (1) FUTURE FLOWS (2028) (1) EXPANSION / NEW ESTIMATED CAPACITY

EAWSS TOTAL >20

TABLE 5.3ACITY OF LONDON

WATER SERVICING DC UPDATE 2008CITY WATER DISTRIBUTION / FACILITY COMPONENTS


REQUIRED NEW / UPGRADING OF FACILITIES

COMMERCIAL INSTITUTIONAL INDUSTRIAL

2028

CAPACITY / FLOW INFORMATION GROWTH TO 2028 GROWTH BEYOND 2028 (POST PERIOD BENEFIT)

INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIAL

2028

Added works to those identified in 2003

TA

BL

E 5

.4

CIT

Y O

F L

ON

DO

N

WA

TE

R S

ER

VIC

ING

DC

UPD

AT

E 2

008

EA

WSS

/LH

WSS

EX

PAN

SIO

N R

EQ

UIR

EM

EN

TS

(Jul

y 29

, 200

4)

Use

rs

Cur

rent

Dem

and

2002

-A

DD

w/M

ax. M

L/d

Fu

ture

Dem

and

2024

-A

DD

w/M

ax. M

L/d

(A

)

Dem

and

Incr

ease

M

L/d

Sy

stem

Cap

aciti

es

ML

/d

(B)

(-) O

ver/

(+

) Und

er

ML

/d

(B-A

) EA

WSS

(w/o

Lon

don)

(1

) 24.0

/47.

0(2)

34.9

/68.

1(3)

10.9

/21.

1

EA

WSS

Lon

don

(Opt

. 1)

(1) 2

4.1/

24.1

(8)

(4) 2

7.1/

52.8

(8)

3/28

.7 (8

)

EA

WSS

Lon

don

(Opt

. 3)

(1) 2

4.1/

24.1

(8)

32.2

/62.

8(5) (

8)

8.1/

38.7

(8)

EAW

SS T

otal

(Opt

. 1)

48.1

/71.

1 (8

) 62

/120

.9

13.9

/49.

8 (8

) 18

2(1)

+61.

1 EA

WSS

Tot

al (O

pt. 3

) 48

.1/7

1.1

(8)

67.1

/130

.9

19/4

9.8

(8)

182(1

) +5

1.1

LHW

SS (w

/o L

ondo

n)

(1) 9

.6/1

8.7

(2)

21.2

/41.

3 (3

) 11

.6/2

2.6

LHW

SS L

ondo

n (O

pt. 1

) (6

) 118.

9/25

4.8

(8)

(7) 1

57.7

/307

.5 (8

) 38

.8/5

2.7

(8)

LHW

SS L

ondo

n (O

pt. 3

) (6

) 118.

9/25

4.8

(8)

(7) 1

52.6

/297

.5 (5

) (8)

33

.7/4

2.7

(8)

LHW

SS T

otal

(Opt

. 1)

128.

5/27

3.5

(8)

178.

4/34

8.8

(8)

49.9

/75.

3 (8

) 34

0 (1

) -8

.8

LHW

SS T

otal

(Opt

3)

128.

5/27

3.5

(8)

173.

8/33

8.8

(8)

45.3

/75.

3 (8

) 34

0 (1

) +1

.2

Tot

als 1

17

6.6/

344.

6 24

0.9/

469.

7 64

.3/1

25.1

52

2 +5

2.3

(1

) Fr

om E

APW

SS/L

HPW

SS M

aste

r Pla

n U

pdat

es, S

tant

ec, 2

004.

Med

ian

proj

ectio

ns.

(2)

Usi

ng C

ity o

f Lon

don

peak

ing

fact

or o

f 1.9

5 fo

r Max

. Day

. (3

) Fr

om (1

), pr

o-ra

ted

to 2

024

from

202

1.

(4)

As p

rovi

ded

by C

ity o

f Lon

don.

(5

) 10

ML/

D a

dded

to o

ffse

t nee

d fo

r LH

WSS

exp

ansi

on in

200

4-20

24 p

erio

d.

(6)

2002

Wat

er d

eman

d m

inus

(1)

(7)

2024

wat

er d

eman

d pr

ojec

tion

min

us (4

). (8

) M

axim

um c

apac

ity th

at sh

ould

be

avai

labl

e fo

r the

City

(47.

0 M

L/d

vs 2

4.1

MLD

/d) f

rom

the

EAW

SS, i

s util

ized

by

EAW

SS g

row

th (L

ondo

n no

t in

clud

ed),

until

the

Elgi

n W

TP is

exp

ande

d. M

ax. c

apac

ity to

Lon

don

is p

rovi

ded

by th

e LH

WSS

dur

ing

this

tim

e pe

riod.

Onc

e EA

WSS

cap

acity

is

exce

eded

due

to E

AW

SS g

row

th,

or L

HW

SS c

apac

ity is

exc

eede

d du

e to

Lon

don

grow

th, E

AW

SS e

xpan

sion

is n

eede

d to

mee

t the

“Fu

ture

Dem

and

2024

” fl

ows.

P:\P

RO

JEC

TS\1

0087

5 Ld

n W

ater

DC

Upd

ate\

Gen

Cor

\Rep

orts

\Fin

al R

epor

t\Tab

les\

Tabl

e 5.

4_EA

WSS

_LH

WSS

Exp

ansi

on R

equi

rem

ents

.doc

TA

BL

E 5

.4 N

OT

ES

CIT

Y O

F L

ON

DO

N

WA

TE

R D

C U

PDA

TE

200

8 E

AW

SS/L

HW

SS E

XPA

NSI

ON

OPT

ION

S (J

uly

29, 2

004)

1. M

aint

ain

27.1

ML

/d (A

vg. a

nd M

ax. D

ay)

C

onsi

sten

t in

part

with

Dill

on E

SR re

com

men

datio

n th

at e

xpan

sion

of t

he E

AW

SS (2

017)

, is m

ore

cost

eff

ectiv

e th

an

expa

ndin

g th

e LH

WSS

. Lo

ndon

cos

t sha

re 4

4%,

EAW

SS c

ost s

hare

56%

bas

ed o

n cr

editi

ng L

ondo

n fo

r the

22.

9 M

L/d

in m

axim

um d

ay c

apac

ity u

sed

by E

AW

SS g

row

th u

ntil

the

EAW

SS is

exp

ande

d (s

ee n

ote

8).

U

tiliz

es m

ost a

vaila

ble

capa

city

but

nec

essi

tate

s som

e LH

WSS

exp

ansi

on, o

r opt

imiz

atio

n, fo

r app

roxi

mat

ely

8.8

ML/

d. (m

ax.).

Lo

ndon

cos

t sha

ring

for E

AW

SS 4

4%, (

as p

er th

e fir

st b

ulle

t), p

lus t

he c

ost t

o ex

pand

/opt

imiz

e th

e LH

WSS

in 2

022.

(b

ased

on

stra

ight

line

nee

d) (s

ay $

10M

)

2. P

reve

nt E

AW

SS E

xpan

sion

N

ot c

onsi

sten

t with

Dill

on E

SR re

com

men

datio

ns.

Ren

ders

the

Sout

heas

t Res

ervo

ir an

d PS

use

less

.

Le

aves

the

EAW

SS o

n th

eir o

wn.

No

Lond

on d

eman

d or

cos

t sha

ring.

N

eces

sita

tes e

xpan

sion

of t

he L

HW

SS b

y ab

out 6

3 M

L/d

at 1

00%

Lon

don’

s cos

t. (a

ppro

x. $

63M

.).

3. M

axim

ize

EA

WSS

Exp

ansi

on

C

onsi

sten

t with

Dill

on E

SR re

com

men

datio

n th

at e

xpan

sion

of t

he E

AW

SS is

mor

e co

st e

ffec

tive

than

exp

andi

ng th

e LH

WSS

.

B

est u

tiliz

es th

e av

aila

ble

tota

l cap

acity

, pre

vent

ing

the

need

for e

xpan

sion

of t

he L

HW

SS in

the

20 y

ear p

lann

ing

perio

d.

R

equi

res E

AW

SS e

xpan

sion

by

2012

(bas

ed o

n st

raig

ht li

ne n

eed

and

assu

min

g Lo

ndon

mai

ntai

ns 2

7.1

ML/

d (m

ax.)

to

2012

to a

llow

Elg

in g

row

th to

con

tinue

unt

il LH

WSS

cap

acity

is c

ompl

etel

y ut

ilize

d as

per

Opt

ion

1 an

d no

te 8

). 2

015

with

Sou

thea

st R

eser

voir

in p

lace

. Lon

don’

s ove

rall

cost

shar

e 48

%, E

AW

SS u

sers

52%

.

P:\P

RO

JEC

TS\1

0087

5 Ld

n W

ater

DC

Upd

ate\

Gen

Cor

\Rep

orts

\Fin

al R

epor

t\Tab

les\

Tabl

e 5.

4 N

otes

.doc



Project No. 100875

Area/Lake Huron Supply System Master Plan information only went to 2021, the results were

extrapolated and pro-rated to 2024 between the 2021 and 2026 information provided.

We would also point out that the City of London maintains a constant amount of flow, regardless of

average day and/or max day use, from the Elgin Area Water Supply System. Although the proper

maximum day capacity for London to be supplied by the EAWSS is shown on Table 5.4, the MDD –

ADDw difference for London is currently utilized by Elgin Area Water Supply System users to address

their growth requirements, and extend the need for expanding the Elgin Water Treatment Plant into the

future. (See Note 8 on Table 5.4). As a result, the current Max Day capacity for London is addressed by

the Lake Huron Water Supply System at this time.

Once capacity for the EAWSS is exceeded due to Elgin users growth, or LHWSS capacity is exceeded

due to London’s growth, primarily expansion of the EAWSS is needed in the 2013 to 2018 timeframe to

meet future 2028 demand requirements for both City of London and Elgin Area users. An approximate

10 MLD transfer of flows over the 2009 to 2028 period from the LHWSS to the EAWSS is needed to

prevent the need for further expansion of the LHWSS during this time period. This means that over the

time period to 2028, the EAWSS begins to compensate somewhat for London’s growth needs, as

currently is the case for Elgin Area user needs. This is the most efficient alternative for the provision of

water to both users. Beyond 2028 this could continue for some time to further delay expansion needs

relative to the LHWSS. Details of the sharing of growth capacity should be confirmed between the

City of London and Elgin Area water users approaching and beyond 2028.

The information in Table 5.3 was used to confirm work requirements, and in turn determine growth/non-

growth components between the City of London and Elgin Area or Lake Huron Water Supply System

users. The notes on Table 5.3 explain this for Options 1 and 3. Option 2 was not identified in the table

since it is not realistic. This information was provided to explain the impact of further delaying and/or

preventing expansion of the Elgin Area Water Supply System well into the future.

The required pipe works to service each of the intended growth areas to be serviced by the facilities

outlined herein were included in the works discussed in Section 5.1. On this basis the following facilities

related works were identified.



Project No. 100875

5.2.1. Wickerson Pumping Station Expansion

This pumping station services the Wickerson development area, and in the future the southern portion of

the RiverBend planning area. Class EA and preliminary conceptual design details were completed in

2003 and confirmed by City personnel. Pre, detailed design activities and construction for the first phase

of the future Wickerson Road Pumping Station located on Wickerson Road, approximately 250 south of

the Wickerson Road/Base Line Road (Byron) intersection were completed in 2004. The pumping station

will eventually provide a maximum day capacity of 142 l/s. The first phase initially serves the Wickerson

area to the south. Later phases will work in concert with the Springbank Pumping Station to service areas

north of Southdale Road, west of Boler Road. Future watermain connections to the north will allow the

southern portion of the RiverBend area to be serviced by the second phase of the PS. This facility is

100% growth driven.

5.2.2. Uplands Pumping Station

Class EA, pre-design, detailed design and construction was completed for this project in 2003/2004. This

new station replaced the existing Uplands Pumping Station and provides a maximum day capacity of 145

l/s. The pumping station also services areas previously serviced by the City’s low pressure system, (the

Richmond Hill area, on the east side of the Sunningdale planning area). High pressure watermains are

required on Sunningdale Road (west) and Richmond Street (south) to service existing and future growth

areas, primarily in the Uplands and Sunningdale community planning areas. Details were discussed in

Section 5.1.2. Both growth and non-growth components are driving the need for this facility.

Growth/Non-growth costs were determined but later removed as per City direction since this work

was completed and paid for in 2004.

5.2.3. Hyde Park Pumping Station

The Hyde Park Pumping Station was placed into operation in late 2003. This is a new pumping station

providing a max day capacity of 320 l/s. It services the area formerly serviced by the Lawson Pumping

Station, and those areas of White Hills previously serviced by the City’s low level system. In addition, it

is intended to service new growth in the Hyde Park Community Planning area, the southeast portion of

the Fox Hollow Community Planning area, and future Build-out to the City’s northwest.



Project No. 100875

5.2.4. Southeast Pumping Station and Reservoir

The City water system includes the implementation of upgrades and/or pump additions to the Wickerson

BPS, Hyde Park BPS, Uplands BPS, Arva PS and the Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station.

Implementation of the Southeast Pumping Station and Reservoir was first recommended as part of the

Water Supply Study ESR completed in 1992. This was confirmed as part of the initial Water Master Plan

completed by Dillon in 1994, by the Waterworks for Growth Study completed by AECOM (formerly

Earth Tech) in 1999 and by the Water Demand Forecasting Report in 2000. Implementation was again

confirmed as part of the work completed for the Water Master Plan Update, 2003 to provide required

water flows and system pressures to southeast London initially, and later south and southwest London,

and to provide the reservoir capacity needed to accommodate growth and address the current storage

deficit identified by the Water Reliability Study completed by Dillon in 2002. This is further needed

because of the decommissioning of a number of the City’s emergency supply wells to meet SDWA and

Certificate of Approval requirements. Confirmation of these PRV/interconnection points, handling of the

existing PRV points now and in the future, and phasing over the next 20 years, were being confirmed as

part of the Value Engineering and the design activities completed for the project.

The latest Design Report for the Southeast project was completed in 2006. It identifies the provision of

113 ML of storage capacity and a maximum day pumping capacity of 1794 l/s. The estimated cost of the

project is $55.7 M as currently budgeted (2009) by the City of London, confirmed by contractor estimate.

This includes engineering (9%) and contingencies (7%). The need to separate portions of the City’s low

and high level systems in order to establish a third pressure zone served exclusively by the Southeast

Pumping Station is estimated at $2.7 M. The proposed service zone is shown by Figure 5.3, and is based

on the Build-out population of 675,000 confirmed through modeling.

Based on the work being completed for the Innovation Park Industrial development, the Southeast PS will

also be needed early on to ensure adequate water supply and pressure is provided. The intent is to

initially service southeast London and provide interconnection to the City’s low level system for peak

flow or emergency conditions. Later, the Southeast PS will service those areas currently serviced by the

City’s low level system in south London to free-up growth servicing capacity for the LHWSS to north

London. This could include possible decommissioning of the Pond Mills BPS from the City’s high level

system. Generally, those areas north of Southdale Road to Commissioners Road and west of Wellington

Road would redefine the boundary of the City’s high level system serviced by the Springbank and

Westmount pumping stations. Servicing would eventually be provided further to the west of Wellington

!

!

!

!

!

SOUTHEAST PSAND RESERVOIR

WESTMOUNT PS

WICKERSON PS

POND MILLS PS(POSSIBLY TO BE DECOMMISSIONED)

SPRINGBANK PS & RESERVOIR


FIGURE 5.3

PRELIMINARY SOUTHEASTSERVICE ZONE REQUIREMENTS

SCALE: N.T.S

DATE: FEB 2009 PN: 100875

.

600

900

600

600 400

600

400

400

600400

900

105075

0

600

600

600

]EAWSS SUPPLY(91/182 MLD)

B19

B18

B18

B18 A22

A20

B4

B5A21

A23

A25

B3

B16

A18

A16

B17

600

B8 B9

600

!(

!(

")

")

")

#* #*

#*

#*#*

#*

") ")

#*

P5 I2

P7

BP1

BP2

I5

I3 I4 I6

P2P6

P1

!(BP3

P4P3

LegendMajor Roads

City Boundary


Component IDWatermain Diameter900

2020/A25

WatermainsFuture Southeast Zone - Phase 1Future Southeast Zone - Phase 2Future Southeast Zone - Phase 3Existing Watermains > 300 mm Dia.

Waterways

PRV: Southeast / Low Zone (2008)Existing PRV Bypass (2018)

#*

!(Possible Pond Mills High/Southeast ZoneInterconnection (2018)

")

PRV: Southeast / Low Zone (Build-Out)#*

Existing High Pressure Zones

Future High Pressure Zones

Elgin-Middlesex /Future SE

Phase 2 Service Area (2018)


P1

BP1

I1

P7


P:\P

RO

JEC

TS\7

3315

-SE

\DW

GS

\GIS

Dat

a an

d M

aps\

7331

5 S

outh

east

- Fi

gure

14_

2 - N

ov 2

004.

mxd

600

A23



Project No. 100875

Road (existing areas), south of Southdale Road and west of White Oak Road (new growth areas), as

needed bringing these areas off the City’s low and/or high pressure systems as warranted to the Southeast

Reservoir and PS pressure zone. Implementation of the Southeast Reservoir and PS also delays the need

for the EAWSS expansion by approximately 5 years based on current daily use and future growth

projections.

Added watermain capacity from the proposed pumping station and reservoir site into the City’s water

distribution grid will also be needed to establish the service area. This includes the required 900 mm dia.

watermain twinning on Highbury Avenue, north to Dingman Drive in 5 to 10 years.

The current flows shown by Table 5.4 for the pumping station component, represent the non-growth

component for the project. Although existing areas of the proposed Southeast service zone are currently

served by the Lake Huron Water Supply System via the City’s low level system, it will eventually be

transferred to the Southeast PS over time. This frees-up available capacity for the Lake Huron system to

service growth on the north side of the City. Therefore, the capacity transferred is viewed a growth item,

in addition to the future growth driven by the population and ICI information provided by the City of

London. Details re: Growth/Non-Growth determination and Res/ICI allocations are discussed in Section

6. For the reservoir component, the deficit that currently exists represents a non-growth component with

the added storage provided in response to growth requirements being growth related.

Of the $55.7 M cost for the project, $29.6 M is applicable to the PS component and site works, with the

remaining $26.1 M applicable to the reservoir component.

5.2.5. Arva Pumping Station Upgrades

The Water Master Plan Update 2003 identified upgrade requirements at the Arva Pumping Station and

Reservoir beyond the 20 year growth period reviewed. A Max Day capacity of 5,266 l/s was

recommended to be provided. Given the City’s current population and ICI growth projections this work

is now required late within the 20 year planning period to 2028. It is identified in Table 5.3, complete

with estimated costs and Growth/Non-Growth and Res/ICI components identified.

The required work involves pump replacements to provide the Maximum Day capacity outlined above.

As part of this, some operational changes should be made at the Arva Pumping Station to address

future growth requirements and operate in concert with new works added to the system (i.e., the



Project No. 100875

Uplands and Hyde Park Pumping Stations and the proposed Southeast Reservoir and Pumping

Station).

These changes involve pump operation to supply the system for future years and as the Southeast

Pumping Station pressure zone comes on line. Arva PS pump operation for the Maximum Day demand

condition is assumed as follows:

Table 5.5

Future Arva Pumping Station Operation Revisions

Pump

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6

2004 Yes Yes Yes Yes-25% of time


Yes-15% of time


Yes-25% of time

5.3. Water Supply System Works In addition to the City’s water distribution system related works required as outlined in Sections 5.1 and

5.2, a number of supply system related works are also required as identified by the Master Plan updates

completed for each system.

5.3.1. Elgin Area Water Supply System

The next major expansion for the supply of water to the City of London is to come from the EAWSS via

the Elgin-Middlesex Water System (EMWS), as outlined in the Water Supply Study ESR (1992), and

previous master planning work in 1994 and 1999.

These studies recommended the capacity of the Elgin Water Treatment Facility be doubled and the related

raw water supply and potable transmission main components be increased to accommodate. This

expansion would bring the maximum capacity from 91 ML/d (20 MIGD) to 182 ML/d (40 MIGD) as

currently outlined in Class EA/Master Planning reports. The expansion is required in years 5 to 10,

(assuming the Southeast Reservoir and PS is implemented).



Project No. 100875

Of the 91 ML/d (20 MIGD) expansion, 131 MLD (29 MIGD), will be needed to 2028 to service both

Elgin Area and City of London water users (63 MLD/14 MIGD for London and 68 MLD/15 MIGD for

Elgin area users). This represents a 48% share for the City of London and a 52% share for Elgin Area

water users. This would apply to the 40 MLD added to the existing 91 MLD capacity to meet 2028

requirements. The remainder would be oversizing shared on the same percentage basis. Based on work

completed as part of the last Regional Water Master Plan, approximately 20 to 25% of the

expansion cost could be staged to reduce cost and oversizing impacts. Oversizing has been shown on

this basis for now based on the percentage of 2028 flow requirements versus the rated capacity provided.

The work to be completed as part of the expansion required is identified in Table 5.3B. These are based

on outputs from the LHWSS/EAWSS Master Plan updates. Timing is also consistent with that driven by

current and future flow requirements and needs for EAWSS users as per the same. Some components are

specifically part of the future expansion (i.e., the low lift pumping station, raw water transmission main,

and water treatment plant works). Other components such as the Residual Management facility, existing

transmission main upgrades, the new transmission main and the provision of standby power are works

required to upgrade the existing facilities and/or service future growth. Expansion of the Elgin-Middlesex

Pumping Station was identified as a requirement as part of previous reports (Waterworks for Growth

Report and the earlier Master Plan), but this is not needed in the next 20 years with the Southeast

Reservoir and Pumping Station in place.

5.3.2. Lake Huron Water Supply System Works

Although no capacity expansion works are identified for the LHWSS over the 20 year planning period to

2028, this is predicated on:

• the transfer of demand from the Lake Huron system (10 MLD Max Day), being accommodated

by the EAWSS over the last 5 years of the planning period;

• no works at the Arva Pumping Station other than operational changes.

There are however, some works required to meet regulatory requirements, which to some extent address

certain growth requirements. This includes the implementation of a Residual Management facility and

the provision of standby power. In addition, the Joint Board for the LHWSS is reviewing the potential

benefits that would be obtained by completing twinning of the transmission main between Grand Bend to

London. This is currently identified in the LHWSS Master Plan as an emergency response and security of



Project No. 100875

supply issue. What available supply can be provided should be confirmed to prevent the need to

transfer the 10 MLD Max Day demand to the Elgin Area Water Supply System over the last 5

years of the planning period, or to further extend into the future the need to upgrade the LHWSS.

This work need and timing is therefore subject to verification.



Project No. 100875

6. DEVELOPMENT CHARGE IMPLICATIONS The impetus for completing the Water Servicing DC Update 2008 was the need to identify those works

required to satisfy future water demands driven by growth over a 20 year period from 2009 to 2028

consistent with the GMIS and boundary. These works were also sized to address future requirements

based on the growth information provided by the City. Growth/Non-Growth determination and Res/ICI

allocations were shown in Tables 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3A/B previously. Table 6.1 summarizes the total costs;

non-growth costs; 2028 growth costs complete with Res/ICI allocations; and the Build-out growth costs

complete with Res/ICI allocations for the City’s water distribution system (Low level watermains, High

level watermains, High level pumping stations, Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station), Arva PS and

Water Supply Systems (EAWSS/LHWSS).

6.1. Policy Implications Notwithstanding the City is reviewing growth needs over a 20 year planning period, the Development

Charges Act allows for water system planning to be completed over any time period. As a result,

additional growth information was provided by the City to 2032 and 2037 in detailed form, along with

Build-out information to a 675,000 population, complete with Res/ICI components. From this we were

able to identify/determine water demand needs for these time periods and/or under these conditions.

Therefore, any of these time periods and/or conditions could be used to identify the works required and

then determine Growth/Non-Growth and Res/ICI components. Notwithstanding this, the City elected to

utilize growth information for the 20 year planning period from 2009 to 2028 for Growth/Non-Growth

determination and Res/ICI allocation purposes. As a result, the following was completed.

• All watermains required to service development in the future less than 400 mm (16 inches) in

diameter are considered local services to be provided by development proponents.

• Oversizing (Post period benefit) aspects beyond 2028 were identified on a case-by-case basis for pipe

sizes 750 mm in diameter or greater only. Pipe size differential represents the only significant added

cost since installation and restoration would be the same regardless of size.

• For facility related components, the water demand information to 2028 was used to determine future

work requirements.

Item Component Other/Previous Net Cost London EAWSS/LHWSSTotal Cost Funding Non-Growth Non-Growth/Growth Growth Residential Industrial Comm. Instit. Growth Residential Industrial Comm. Instit.

Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost

Low Level Watermains (Table 5.1) 48,178,125$ -$ 48,178,125$ 9,671,542$ 33,756,945$ 19,181,894$ 12,358,116$ 1,480,285$ 736,651$ 4,749,638$ 3,371,818$ 1,002,578$ 265,994$ 109,249$

High Level Watermains (Table 5.2) 7,096,815$ -$ 7,096,815$ -$ -$ 7,096,815$ 6,968,701$ -$ 128,114$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

High Level Pumping Stations (Table 5.3A) 1,660,000$ -$ 1,660,000$ -$ -$ 1,660,000$ 1,657,200$ -$ 2,800$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Southeast PS and Reservoir (Table 5.3A) 58,400,000$ 52,328,000$ 6,072,000$ 1,620,000$ -$ 4,055,560$ 2,046,224$ 1,536,724$ 216,834$ 255,778$ 396,440$ 114,968$ 241,828$ 27,751$ 11,893$

Arva Pumping Stations (Table 5.3A) 2,600,000$ -$ 2,600,000$ 1,300,000$ -$ 1,300,000$ 1,157,000$ 65,000$ 65,000$ 13,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

City Subtotal 117,934,940$ 52,328,000$ 65,606,940$ 12,591,542$ -$ 47,869,320$ 31,011,019$ 13,959,840$ 1,893,032$ 1,005,429$ 5,146,078$ 3,486,785$ 1,244,406$ 293,745$ 121,142$

EAWSS (Table 5.3B) 97,400,000$ 20,748,000$ 76,652,000$ 828,125$ 33,409,375$ 30,538,440$ 8,856,148$ 18,628,448$ 2,137,691$ 916,153$ 11,876,060$ 3,444,057$ 7,244,397$ 831,324$ 356,282$

LHWSS (Table 5.3B) 64,450,000$ 25,393,500$ 39,056,500$ 26,875,183$ 2,447,817$ 9,733,500$ 8,662,815$ 486,675$ 486,675$ 97,335$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Supply Subtotal 161,850,000$ 46,141,500$ 115,708,500$ 27,703,308$ 35,857,192$ 40,271,940$ 17,518,963$ 19,115,123$ 2,624,366$ 1,013,488$ 11,876,060$ 3,444,057$ 7,244,397$ 831,324$ 356,282$

Total 279,784,940$ 98,469,500$ 181,315,440$ 40,294,850$ 35,857,192$ 88,141,260$ 48,529,982$ 33,074,964$ 4,517,398$ 2,018,917$ 17,022,138$ 6,930,843$ 8,488,803$ 1,125,069$ 477,424$

Notes:

Costs are in 2009 dollars as tendered/indexed or as per City/GMIS provided information.P:\PROJECTS\100875 Ldn Water DC Update\GenCor\Reports\Final Report\Tables\[Updated Water Tables-Feb23'09.xls]Table6.1 Summary

City of London Beyond 2028 (Post Period Benefit)


City of London to 2028


WATER SERVICING DC UPDATE 2008GROWTH NEEDS SUMMARY/DEVELOPMENT CHARGES (to 2028)



Project No. 100875

• Water demand information (based on City growth and GMIS information), was used to determine

work needs to 2028. Oversizing aspects beyond that would have to be financed initially, with

recovery during the 2009 to 2028 planning period, and debt being carried beyond was also

determined based on this.

In addition to these implications, further policy aspects were identified by our subconsultant, Watson and

Associates Ltd., who peer reviewed our work. These are as follows:

• They noted some assumptions are made regarding a local service policy (i.e., watermains sized to 400

mm or greater are included in DC). This policy may need to be further expanded to provide clarity on

how these works would be constructed or cost shared with developing landowners. For example:

If a landowner needs to build a 400 mm watermain through his development, it is 100% a DC item

(i.e., no cost for the watermain is paid for by the landowner). This may not be equitable compared to

another landowner who must place services of a lesser size. Hence a policy which considers only the

oversized cost to be a DC item may be warranted (and this may affect the costs used in the DC

calculations).

6.2. Growth/Non-Growth Determination The proportion of Growth/Non-Growth components and Residential, Industrial, Commercial, and

Institutional allocations were determined as follows:

• Growth/Non-Growth splits for watermains:

- City allocated their growth forecast (Res/ICI) across the City’s transportation planning zones

(i.e., IBI Trans Model).

- ETA sub-divided the transportation zones by water service areas and tied to existing or new

watermain nodes in the water model.

When it came to determining Growth/Non-Growth components for any given work, the following

procedures were followed.

• For pipe related works where upsizing (or twinning) was required, the existing cross-sectional area of

the pipe in place versus the future pipe size cross-sectional area required was used to determine



Project No. 100875

growth and non-growth components. In cases where a deficiency was identified (i.e., Wonderland

Road between Blackacres and Aldersbrook), the pipe size that would address the deficiency was

identified, and then the above procedure was used to determine growth/non-growth components.

• For new pipe works driven by growth needs, non-growth components were 0% and growth

components were 100%. This was applied for works up to 2028, and for Build-out, using the two sets

of data provided by the City, and the water demands determined for each scenario.

• For City facility related components, facility expansion requirements were driven by engineering

reports of a pre-design nature in each instance (conceptual for the Arva Pumping Station).

Growth/Non-Growth was then determined by confirming flows to 2007 for each facility, and future

flow requirements to 2028. The current flow represented the non-growth component and the future

flow represented the growth component. Growth/Non-Growth determination for the Arva Pumping

Station was assumed given that it fell outside of the 2028 growth period.

• Growth oversizing was determined by comparing the future flow requirement to 2028 and the

installed capacity to be provided. Separate Growth to 2028 and Build-out columns are shown in

Tables 5.1 and 5.3 (A/B) where applicable. Both debt carry over and financing beyond the 20 year

planning period would have to be recovered as discussed in Section 6.1 for growth aspects beyond

2024.

• For the Southeast Reservoir, the non-growth component was based on the current storage deficit to be

overcome, with growth representing the remainder compared to the installed capacity. This capacity

will be utilized over the 20 year planning period, initially to offset expansion needs for the Elgin Area

Water Supply System, and later on to provide the same level of servicing for growth projected to

2028.

• Non-Growth for the Southeast Pumping Station component was based on the current 23.0 MLD (5.0

MIGD), provided by the EMWS since the remaining existing area currently serviced by the LHWSS,

to be serviced by Southeast in the future, frees-up capacity within the Lake Huron system to service

growth in the north end of the City. The 473 l/s (752 l/s for the flows currently fed from the Arva

Pumping Station minus the 279 l/s currently serviced by the EMPS), is the capacity freed-up. The

resulting Growth/Non-Growth splits are 16% and 84% respectively for existing vs. future growth

over the 20 year period.



Project No. 100875

• For the Elgin Area Water Supply System, current flow versus future flow requirements were again

utilized for growth/non-growth determination purposes for those components to be included as part of

the next major expansion needed. Oversizing was determined based on the expanded capacity versus

the future flow requirement to 2028. Each was apportioned between the City of London and Elgin

Area users as shown in Table 5.3 (A/B). For the Residue Management facility, standby power

provision and the existing transmission main upgrades, growth/non-growth components were

determined based on current versus future flows with zero as the starting point. These facilities are

sized to either meet the existing rated capacity of the EAWSS, or are sized for future capacity.

Growth/Non-Growth was determined on this basis. No oversizing aspects are applicable to these

works.

• For the Lake Huron Water Supply System, no expansion works were required, but residue

management and added standby power provisions are required from current flows to the rated

capacity of the facility. A preliminary growth/non-growth determination was made for the

transmission main twinning based on information provided by Stantec. Further details are to be

provided by the City to confirm the growth benefiting component and how this may impact the

two water supply systems and Growth/Non-Growth determination. Again, Lake Huron Water

System user aspects are identified separately in Table 5.3 (A/B).

6.3. Res/ICI Allocations Residential/Institutional/Commercial/Industrial allocations for growth components were identified as

follows.

• For facility related works, the water demands to be met to 2028 within the GMIS Boundary by a

given facility, segregated by residential and ICI demands in each service area from modeled outputs,

were identified. This applied to the Wickerson Road PS and service area watermains; the Uplands PS

and service area watermains; the Southeast Pumping Station and service area watermains; and the

Hyde Park service area watermains.

• For the Southeast Reservoir, water demands for the City as a whole were utilized based on Res/ICI

demand requirements given the reservoir services the entire City. This results in a 56% Non-growth,

44% Growth split for the Reservoir component reflecting the storage deficiency that currently exists,

and a Res/ICI split of: 56% residential; 32% industrial; 5% commercial; and 8% institutional.



Project No. 100875

• For the Southeast PS, the Res/ICI water demand allocations from the model relative to the 473 L/s

capacity made available as a result of the LHWSS switch were: 56% residential; 32% industrial; 5%

commercial; and 8% institutional for growth over the 20 year period. The remainder of the proposed

Southeast PS service zone is: 29% residential; 61% industrial; 7% commercial; and 3% institutional,

based on future growth within the intended service area over the 20 year period. Combining the two

for the SEPS results in a blended 40% residential, 49% industrial, 6% commercial, and 5%

institutional Res/ICI split being utilized.

• For the Elgin Area Water Supply System, the Res/ICI growth demands in the area to be serviced by

the Southeast Pumping Station were utilized.

• For the Lake Huron Water Supply System, the Res/ICI water demands for the growth areas serviced

by the Lake Huron System were utilized.

• For high pressure watermain works, we used the same Res/ICI demands as the service areas for the

pumping stations feeding these mains (i.e., Wickerson, Uplands and Hyde Park).

• For watermain works identified in the previous DC (2003 Master Plan), existing water demand were

based on 2003 model outputs on a node by node basis and aggregated by project description to

determine the Non-Growth component. The remaining Growth and Res/ICI splits were determined

based on the growth information provided as contained within those water service areas linked to a

particular project within the GMIS boundary. The percentage was determined based on applying

design criteria for Residential and ICI water demands. We therefore have a true characterization of

existing and new water demands subdivided by Res/ICI components.

• For new watermain works added as part of this DC update, existing water demands were determined

based on 2007 flow information within the GMIS Boundary and then Non-Growth/Growth and

Res/ICI splits were determined as above based on the growth information provided.

• For oversizing components, Res/ICI allocations were based on Build-out percentages rather than the

GMIS or urban growth boundary percentages used for all of the above items. The same principle was

applied for facility and pipe related works, and supply systems, but now Build-out water demand

allocations were used versus the GMIS and/or Urban Growth Area water demand allocations for

Res/ICI uses.



Project No. 100875

6.4. Oversizing As part of our work, we were asked to determine oversizing aspects for growth beyond 2028, into the

GMIS and/or Urban Growth Boundary, and/or into the Build-out area. The procedures outlined in

Sections 6.2 and 6.3 were used for this purpose. Growth was therefore subdivided for those works needed

to serve population/ICI growth to 2028 and beyond as shown in Tables 5.1 and 5.3 (A/B).

The only oversizing works in Table 5.1 are the watermains on Medway Road and Wonderland Road to

Sunningdale. Items A1, A2, A3 and the proposed additional watermain on Highbury Avenue north of the

Southeast Reservoir to Dingman Drive (Item B3). Cost differences have been shown for pipe size only

since installation costs will remain the same. Details are provided in Notes 4 and 5 in Table 5.1. No

oversizing aspects apply to the works outlined in Table 5.2. In Table 5.3 (A/B) oversizing is applicable to

the Wickerson PS, and the Southeast PS. Details are provided in Table 5.3A. Oversizing is also

applicable to the expansion components of the Elgin Area Water Supply System shown in Table 5.3B.

For now, oversizing has been determined based on future flow requirements to 2028 versus the expansion

or new capacity to be provided. In the case of the Southeast Pumping Station, this is representative given

the earlier staging work completed as part of the 1999 Waterworks for Growth Study. For Elgin, this may

be less applicable. Staging opportunities and costs should be identified by Stantec as part of their

Master Plan work to confirm the oversizing component to see that it is not greater than it should

be.

Once separated, Res/ICI allocations were determined using the different Res/ICI demand percentages

within the GMIS within the Urban Growth Area, and within the Build-out area. The City should

recognize that oversizing aspects will be constructed as part of initial implementation of the works

identified. Therefore some party will have to carry the debt required, with financing being cost

recoverable via Development Charges.

6.5. Development Charge Calculation From a Development Charge calculation perspective, growth related costs relative to the City’s Low level

watermain needs, High level watermain needs, High level pumping stations, and the Southeast Reservoir

and Pumping Station, all part of the City’s water distribution system, and growth related components

relative to the Elgin Area and Lake Huron Water Supply Systems, can all be recovered under the Act.



Project No. 100875

Table 6.1 summarizes the total costs; non-growth costs; 2028 growth costs complete with Res/ICI

allocations; and the Build-out growth costs complete with Res/ICI allocations for the City’s water

distribution system only (Low level watermains, High level watermains, High level pumping stations,

Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station).

Implementation of the GMIS has resulted in a more affordable plan as a basis for Development Charge

determination purposes. The policy considerations outlined above are/should be addressed as part of this.



Project No. 100875

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following conclusions have been reached and recommendations made as a result of our work in

completing the Water Servicing DC Update 2008.

7.1. Conclusions The conclusions reached as a result of our work are as follows:

• Considerable water system related works have been completed over the last 5-year period since

the previous Water Master Plan Update 2003 was completed for the City of London, and for the

Lake Huron and Elgin Area Water Supply Systems. As a result, future water system requirements

have been reduced.

• Service levels and design criteria have been maintained as per the Water Master Plan Update

2003. Amendments were made for more recent regulatory requirements (Safe Drinking Water

Act, Clean Water Act, Sustainable Water and Sewer Systems Act, Public Sector Accounting

Board, etc.).

• For work determination purposes, watermains greater than 400 mm (16” in diameter), were

included as per past Development Charges and Design Policy.

• Given average day water use within the City’s consistent with or just above 2003 levels, the City’s

storage deficit has not increased significantly from previous (60 ML).

• All future works are based on the population projections provided by the City of London from

2009 to 2028, with oversizing considerations assessed versus the information provided for 2032

and 2037. This included residential and commercial/industrial/institutional growth information.

• In addition to growth requirements, an industrial add-in equivalent to 4.5 MLD (1 MIGD) was

included as per the previous Water DC Update (9 MLD/2 MIGD previously). This was primarily

located in Southeast London. If realized, additional watermain works part of Build-out needs

would have to be implemented to facilitate.



Project No. 100875

• Future work needs were determined based on utilization of the City’s updated InfoWater model

calibrated to the extent completed as part of a separate project for the City (Water Model

Development project).

• Servicing needs in 5 year increments from 2009 to 2028 were determined, along with full Build-

out of the City’s Urban Growth Boundary. Any further definition was provided as a result of the

City’s GMIS outputs where applicable.

• Based on tender costs to 2007 and indexing at 5% per annum for 2008 and 2009. All costs are in

2009 dollars. All costs include Engineering at 15% and Contingency at 20%.

• All works for the next 20 year period takes into account future Build-out requirements with

significant oversizing aspects (post period benefits) identified. Facilities were phased to the extent

possible to minimize this.

• Facility works for the City of London have been shown separately from the Elgin Area and Lake

Huron Water Supply Systems since the latter two were not included as part of the last DC Update,

which may or may not be the case this time.

• The need for this Southeast Reservoir Pumping Station has increased as a result of industrial

development in Innovation Park, and emergency supply reductions as the result of SDWA

requirements. The 2009 estimated cost for this item is $55.7 M which includes 9% Engineering

and 7% Contingency.

• Factoring in updated City growth (2009 to 2028), and growth previously identified for the

EAWSS (2003), expansion of the EAWSS may be needed in the 2013 – 2018 timeframe. In

addition, expansion of the LHWSS may be required in the later period of the 20 year timeframe

unless EAWSS treatment expansion has been implemented and the 10 MLD shortfall by 2028 can

be accommodated by it, rather than having to expand the LHWSS. (This is subject to

confirmation as part of the current EAWSS Master Plan Update being completed, along with the

identification of phasing opportunities for the expansion of this facility).

• The works identified are to service the GMIS boundary as established by the City of London.

Growth/Non-Growth and Res/ICI splits are based on model outputs for watermain and/or pumping



Project No. 100875

station components based on existing (2003) percentages for works carried over from the previous

Water Master Plan Update 2003. For new works new percentages were identified based on 2008

demand for existing conditions and Growth/Non-Growth and Res/ICI determination.

• All required works were co-ordinated with Sanitary Servicing, Transportation and Stormwater

Management/Servicing, and are consistent with the City’s Growth Management Implementation

Strategy (GMIS). Redundancies were removed where applicable.

• Consultation with the City of London’s Environmental and Engineering Services Department,

Finance Department, Development Charges personnel and the London Development Institute was

undertaken through project completion.

7.2. Recommendations The following recommendations are made as a result of the work completed for the Water Servicing DC

Update 2008.

• The watermain works highlighted in Table 5.1 and Table 5.2 be implemented within the

timeframes noted and utilized for Development Charge Determination/Allocation purposes.

• The facility works outlined in Table 5.3A and Table 5.3B be implemented within the timeframes

noted and utilized for Development Charge Determination/allocation purposes.

• The 2009 estimated costs shown in Tables 5.1, 5.2, 5.3A and 5.3B were used as a basis for

Growth/Non-Growth determination and Residential/Institutional/Commercial/Industrial allocation

within the 20 year growth period, and beyond for oversizing (post period benefit), purposes.

• The City of London make a determination with respect to the inclusion of Elgin Area and Lake

Huron Water Supply works (or not), for the facilities component of the work (Table 5.3B).

• The Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station be implemented to meet current City needs and further

defer required works for the Elgin Area Water Supply System at the treatment facility.

• The City of London confirm Elgin Area and Lake Huron Water Supply System requirements

based on the Master Plan Updates currently being completed for each. This includes: growth

sharing impacts with the City of London; timing for expansion of the Elgin Water Treatment Plant



Project No. 100875

and phasing opportunities related thereto to reduce or defer costs in the future; and being able to

utilize whatever added capacity is implemented at the Elgin WTP to offset the need for expansion

works for the Lake Huron Water Supply System to beyond the 2028 period.

WATER SERVICING DEVELOPMENT CHARGE UPDATE 2008 …€¦ · WATER SERVICING DEVELOPMENT CHARGE...

Documents

Transcript of WATER SERVICING DEVELOPMENT CHARGE UPDATE 2008 …€¦ · WATER SERVICING DEVELOPMENT CHARGE...