ONTARIO'S BRIDGES - BRIDGING THE GAP - Complete ... - rccao

• Allocation-based funding programs based on objective need rather than competitionamong municipalities;• Funding commitments made early in the budget cycle to take advantage of theconstruction season;• Multi-year commitments; and• Need for sustainable revenue stream.Northumberland County provides a good example of funding problems experienced byOntario municipalities. The County does not have sufficient funds to maintain its road andbridge infrastructure. It has an inventory of 112 bridges including 48 bridges and 64 culvertsgreater than 3m span. The age of the structures ranges from those constructed in 1913 toothers put in place in 1999. Eighty one percent were built between 1950 and 1979. To addto their problems, the province downloaded 150 km of roads and 29 bridges to the County in1998.Because of the age of most of the County’s structures, it is facing a major challenge to fund itsrehabilitation needs. If bridge repair/rehabilitation is not performed in a timely manner, therate of deterioration increases exponentially. In 2004, detailed bridge condition surveys werecompleted and $7 million in urgent needs were identified for 11 bridges. The County madeapplications for COMRIF funding and was successful in securing funding in 2004 and 2006but not in 2005. In order to finance its one-third share of the COMRIF program, it made anapplication to OSIFA for a debenture of $2.27 million. The debenture payment on the OSIFAloan is $270,000 per year for the next 10 years. The County’s annual capital bridge repairbudget is $450,000 leaving only $180,000 to address all of their other yearly bridge needs.The County further estimates that in today’s dollars they still have about $4 million of bridgeneeds to be addressed.The County of Northumberland is not alone or the exception. Another significant municipalitywest of Toronto has similar issues. Eighty percent of its bridges were built more than 30 yearsago and even though it is in an area of relatively robust growth it is facing the same fundingconcerns. Its bridge and culvert rehabilitation Now needs have been estimated to be close to$14 million.Although the ability to fund infrastructure projects is most acute in smaller municipalities,larger municipalities have similar difficulties. The 2007 City of Toronto budget report identifiesa five year strategic plan for improving the repair backlog for bridges, roads, sidewalks, andexpressways and estimates the associated cost at $301 million. On November 7, 2007, theCity of Mississauga passed a resolution supporting the implementation of a 5% surtax to keepMississauga’s infrastructure (all types) in good condition. The City estimates that it needsabout$1.5 billion over the next 20 years to eliminate its infrastructure deficit - an additional$75 million more per year. It is clear that both large and small Ontario municipalities have totake strong measures to address this mounting problem.If bridge repair/rehabilitation is not performed in a timely manner, the rateof deterioration increases exponentially.RCCAO | IIC | Ontario Bridges Bridging the GapMMM Group | November 2007 D16-0707611