Decision Making and

Investment Planning

Innovations and Best Practices

Potable Water

Multi-discipline
Storm and Wastewater

Roads and Sidewalks

Environmental
Protocols

National Guide to Sustainable

Municipal Infrastructure
Transit

www.infraguide.ca

AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF MUNICIPAL ROAD, SEWER AND WATER NETWORKS

AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF MUNICIPAL ROAD, SEWER AND WATER NETWORKS

Multi-discipline

An Integrated Approach to
Assessment and Evaluation
of Municipal Road, Sewer
and Water Networks
This document is the second in a series of multidiscipline best practices which have been
developed with the combined efforts of various
Technical Committees. For titles of other best
practices in this and other series, please refer to
www.infraquide.ca.

National Guide to
Sustainable Municipal
Infrastructure

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal

Road, Sewer and Water Networks
Issue No. 1.0
Publication Date: November 2003
Copyright National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure 2003
ISBN 1897094566
The contents of this publication are presented in good faith and are intended as general
guidance on matters of interest only. The publisher, the authors and the organizations to
which the authors belong make no representations or warranties, either express or implied,
as to the completeness or accuracy of the contents. All information is presented on the
condition that the persons receiving it will make their own determinations as to the
suitability of using the information for their own purposes and on the understanding that
the information is not a substitute for specific technical or professional advice or services.
In no event will the publisher, the authors or the organizations to which the authors belong,
be responsible or liable for damages of any nature or kind whatsoever resulting from the
use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

Introduction

INTRODUCTION

InfraGuide

InfraGuide Innovations and Best Practices

Why Canada Needs InfraGuide

A Knowledge Network of Excellence

Canadian municipalities spend $12 to $15 billion

InfraGuides creation is made possible through

annually on infrastructure but it never seems to

$12.5 million from Infrastructure Canada, in-kind

be enough. Existing infrastructure is ageing while

contributions from various facets of the industry,

demand grows for more and better roads, and

technical resources, the collaborative effort of

improved water and sewer systems responding

municipal practitioners, researchers and other

both to higher standards of safety, health and

experts, and a host of volunteers throughout the

environmental protection as well as population

country. By gathering and synthesizing the best

growth. The solution is to

Canadian experience and

change the way we plan,

knowledge, InfraGuide

design and manage

helps municipalities get the

infrastructure. Only by doing

maximum return on every

so can municipalities meet

dollar they spend on

new demands within a

infrastructurewhile

fiscally responsible and environmentally sustainable

being mindful of the social and environmental

framework, while preserving our quality of life.

implications of their decisions.

This is what the National Guide to Sustainable

Volunteer technical committees and working

Municipal Infrastructure: Innovations and Best

groupswith the assistance of consultants and

Practices (InfraGuide) seeks to accomplish.

other stakeholdersare responsible for the research

In 2001, the federal government, through its

Infrastructure Canada Program (IC) and the National
Research Council (NRC), joined forces with the
Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) to
create the National Guide to Sustainable Municipal
Infrastructure (InfraGuide). InfraGuide is both a new,
national network of people and a growing collection of
published best practice documents for use by decision
makers and technical personnel in the public and
private sectors. Based on Canadian experience and
research, the reports set out the best practices to
support sustainable municipal infrastructure decisions

Innovations and
Best Practices

and publication of the best practices. This is a system

of shared knowledge, shared responsibility and
shared benefits. We urge you to become a part of
the InfraGuide Network of Excellence. Whether you
are a municipal plant operator, a planner or a
municipal councillor, your input is critical to the
quality of our work.

Please join us.

Contact InfraGuide toll-free at 1-866-330-3350 or visit
our Web site at www.infraguide.ca for more
information. We look forward to working with you.

and actions in six key areas: 1) municipal roads and

sidewalks 2) potable water 3) storm and wastewater
4) decision making and investment planning
5) environmental protocols and 6) transit. The best
practices are available on-line and in hard copy.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

The InfraGuide Best Practices Focus

Multidiscipline best practices are relevant to two or more Infrastructure sectors. The current
best practice combines Potable Water, Storm and Wastewater, and Roads and Sidewalks.

Potable Water
Potable water best practices address various approaches to enhance a municipalitys or
water utilitys ability to manage drinking water delivery in a way that ensures public
health and safety at best value and on a sustainable basis. Issues such as water
accountability, water use and loss, deterioration and inspection of distribution systems,
renewal planning and technologies for rehabilitation of potable water systems and
water quality in the distribution systems are examined.

Storm and Wastewater

Ageing buried infrastructure, diminishing financial resources, stricter legislation for
effluents, increasing public awareness of environmental impacts due to wastewater and
contaminated stormwater are challenges that municipalities have to deal with. Storm
and wastewater best practices deal with buried linear infrastructure as well as end of pipe
treatment and management issues. Examples include ways to control and reduce inflow
and infiltration; how to secure relevant and consistent data sets; how to inspect and assess
condition and performance of collections systems; treatment plant optimization; and
management of biosolids.

Municipal Roads and Sidewalks

Sound decision making and preventive maintenance are essential to managing municipal
pavement infrastructure cost effectively. Municipal roads and sidewalks best practices
address two priorities: front-end planning and decision making to identify and manage
pavement infrastructures as a component of the infrastructure system; and a preventive
approach to slow the deterioration of existing roadways. Example topics include timely
preventative maintenance of municipal roads; construction and rehabilitation of utility
boxes; and progressive improvement of asphalt and concrete pavement repair practices.

Decision Making and Investment Planning

Elected officials and senior municipal administrators need a framework for
articulating the value of infrastructure planning and maintenance, while balancing
social, environmental and economic factors. Decision-making and investment planning
best practices transform complex and technical material into non-technical principles
and guidelines for decision making, and facilitate the realization of adequate funding
over the life cycle of the infrastructure. Examples include protocols for determining
costs and benefits associated with desired levels of service; and strategic benchmarks,
indicators or reference points for investment policy and planning decisions.

Environmental Protocols

Transit

Environmental protocols focus on the interaction

of natural systems and their effects on human
quality of life in relation to municipal infrastructure
delivery. Environmental elements and systems
include land (including flora), water, air (including
noise and light) and soil. Example practices include
how to factor in environmental considerations
in establishing the desired level of municipal
infrastructure service; and definition of local
environmental conditions, challenges and
opportunities with respect to municipal
infrastructure.

Urbanization places pressure on an

eroding, ageing infrastructure, and
raises concerns about declining air
and water quality. Transit systems
contribute to reducing traffic gridlock
and improving road safety. Transit best
practices address the need to improve
supply, influence demand and make
operational improvements with the least
environmental impact, while meeting
social and business needs.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.3 Task 3 Condition Assessment . . . . . . . . .23

Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.3.1 Condition Rating Systems . . . . . . . . .23

3.3.2 Capacity Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

3.3.3 Compliance with Current Service

Level Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

1.2 Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

3.3.4 Technology Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

1.2.1 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

3.4 Task 4 Performance Evaluation . . . . . . .25

1.2.2 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

1.3 How to Use This Document. . . . . . . . . . .14

3.5 Task 5 Rehabilitation/

Replacement Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

1.4 Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

4. Applications and Limitations . . . . . . . . . 27

2. Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4.1 Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

2.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

4.2 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

2.1.1 Common Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

5. Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

2.1.2 Collateral Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

2.2 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

2.3 Risks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

3. Work Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

FIGURE
Figure 31: Integrated approach to
assessment and evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

3.1 Task 1 Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

3.1.1 Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
3.1.2 Data Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
3.1.3 Integration of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
3.2 Task 2 Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
3.2.1 Critical Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
3.2.2 Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
3.2.3 Sewers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
3.2.4 Water Mains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
3.2.5 Inspection Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The dedication of individuals who volunteered their
time and expertise in the interest of the National

Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure is

acknowledged and much appreciated.
This best practice was developed by stakeholders
from Canadian municipalities and specialists from
across Canada, based on information from a scan of
municipal practices and an extensive literature review
conducted by the Centre for Expertise and Research
on Infrastructures in Urban Areas (CERIU). The
following members of the National Guides technical
committees provided guidance and direction in the
development of this best practice. They were assisted
by the Guide Directorate staff, CERIU and by R.V.
Anderson Associates Limited.

Municipal Roads Technical Committee:

Acknowledgements

Storm and Wastewater Technical Committee:

John Hodgson, Chair
City of Edmonton, Alberta
Andr Aubin
City of Montral, Quebec
Richard Bonin
City of Qubec, Quebec
David Calam
City of Regina, Saskatchewan
Kulvinder Dhillon
Province of Nova Scotia, Halifax, Nova Scotia
Tom Field
Delcan Corporation, Vancouver, British Columbia
Wayne Green
City of Toronto, Ontario
Salvatore Morra
Ontario Sewer and Watermain Construction
Association, Mississauga, Ontario

Mike Sheflin, Chair

Former CAO, Regional Municipality of
Ottawa-Carleton, Ontario

Peter Seto
National Water Research Institute,
Environment Canada, Burlington, Ontario

Brian Anderson
Ontario Good Roads Association, Chatham, Ontario

Timothy Toole
Town of Midland, Ontario

Vince Aurilio
Ontario Hot Mix Producers Association,
Mississauga, Ontario

Bilgin Buberoglu
Technical Advisor, NRC

Don Brynnildsen
City of Vancouver, British Columbia
Al Cepas
City of Edmonton, Alberta
Brian Crist
City of Whitehorse, Yukon
Michel Dion
Axor Experts-Conseils, Montral, Quebec
Cluny Matchim
Town of Gander, Newfoundland and Labrador
Abe Mouaket
IM Associates, Toronto, Ontario
Tim Smith
Cement Association of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario
Sylvain Boudreau
Technical Advisor, NRC

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

Potable Water Technical Committee:

Acknowledgements

Carl Yates, Chair

Halifax Regional Water Commission,
Halifax, Nova Scotia

Brian Crist
City of Whitehorse, Yukon
Michel Dion
Axor Experts-Conseil, Montral, Quebec

Fred Busch
Mayor, District of Sicamous, British Columbia

Paul Gardon
Bureau de normalisation du Quebec, Quebec

Sukhi Cheema
Government of the Northwest Territories

John Hodgson
City of Edmonton, Alberta

Normand DeAgostinis
Ductile Iron Research Pipe Association, Anjou, Quebec

Brad Johns
Town of Dryden, Ontario

Tim Dennis
City of Toronto, Ontario

Gregory Kozhushner
City of Calgary, Alberta

David Green
Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario

David Krywiak
Stantec, Edmonton, Alberta

Gordon Lefort
IPEX Inc., Langley, British Columbia

Pierre Lamarre
Ville de Laval, Quebec

Andre Proulx
Delcan Corporation, Ottawa, Ontario

Paul Marsh
Delcan, Toronto, Ontario

Diane Sacher
City of Winnipeg, Manitoba

Brendan OConnell
City of St. Johns, Newfoundland and Labrador

Piero Salvo
WSA Trenchless Consultants Inc., Ottawa, Ontario

Marek Pawlowski
UMA Engineering Ltd., British Columbia

Ernie Ting
Town of Markham, Ontario

Michael Rich
CATT, University of Waterloo, Ontario

Michael Tobalt
Technical Advisor, NRC

Mike Sheflin
Former CAO, Regional Municipality of
Ottawa-Carleton, Ontario

Working Group:
In addition, the three technical committees would like
to thank the following individuals for their participation
in working groups.
Brian Anderson
Ontario Good Roads Association,
Chatham, Ontario
Gerry Bauer
R.V. Anderson Associates Ltd.,
Ottawa, Ontario
Don Brynildsen
City of Vancouver, British Columbia

Veso Sobot
IPEX Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Vincent Tam
Government of the Northwest Territories
Roger Tanguay
Colmatec Inc., Quebec
Ernie Ting
Town of Markham, Ontario
Carl Yates
Halifax Regional Water Commission,
Halifax, Nova Scotia

Al Cepas
City of Edmonton, Alberta
Ken Chua
City of Edmonton, Alberta
Ken Collicott
R.V. Anderson Associates Ltd.,
Toronto, Ontario

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

This and other best practices could not have been

developed without the leadership and guidance of
the Project Steering Committee and the Technical
Steering Committee of the National Guide to

Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure, whose members

are as follows.

Project Steering Committee:

Mike Badham, Chair
City Councillor, Regina, Saskatchewan

Technical Steering Committee:

Don Brynildsen
City of Vancouver, British Columbia
Al Cepas
City of Edmonton, Alberta
Andrew Cowan
City of Winnipeg, Manitoba
Tim Dennis
City of Toronto, Ontario

Stuart Briese
Portage la Prairie, Manitoba

Kulvinder Dhillon
Province of Nova Scotia, Halifax,
Nova Scotia

Bill Crowther
City of Toronto, Ontario

Wayne Green
City of Toronto, Ontario

Jim DOrazio
Greater Toronto Sewer and Watermain
Contractors Association, Ontario

John Hodgson
City of Edmonton, Alberta

Derm Flynn
Mayor, Appleton, Newfoundland and Labrador
David General
Cambridge Bay, Nunavut
Ralph Haas
University of Waterloo, Ontario
Barb Harris
Whitehorse, Yukon

Acknowledgements

Bob Lorimer
Lorimer and Associates, Whitehorse, Yukon
Betty Matthews-Malone
Haldimand County, Ontario
Umendra Mital
City of Surrey, British Columbia
Anne-Marie Parent
City Councillor, City of Montral, Quebec

Robert Hilton
Office of Infrastructure, Ottawa, Ontario

Piero Salvo
WSA Trenchless Consultants Inc.,
Ottawa, Ontario

Joan Lougheed
City Councillor, Burlington, Ontario
Stakeholder Liaison Representative

Mike Sheflin
Former CAO, Regional Municipality
of Ottawa-Carleton, Ontario

Saeed Mirza
McGill University, Montral, Quebec

Konrad Siu
City of Edmonton, Alberta

Ren Morency
Rgie des installations olympiques
Montral, Quebec

Carl Yates
Halifax Regional Water Commission,
Nova Scotia

Lee Nauss
City Councillor, Lunenburg, Nova Scotia
Ric Robertshaw
Region of Halton, Ontario
Dave Rudberg
City of Vancouver, British Columbia
Van Simonson
City of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Basile Stewart
Mayor, Summerside, Prince Edward Island
Serge Thriault
Department of Environment and Local
Government, Fredericton, New Brunswick
Alec Waters
Alberta Transportation, Edmonton, Alberta
Wally Wells
Dillon Consulting Ltd., Toronto, Ontario

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

10

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In many Canadian municipalities, the road
renewal program has driven renewal planning
for sewer and water systems. In some cases,
a condition assessment and performance
evaluation of the existing sewers and water
mains were not completed and it was
assumed that old sewers and water mains
should be replaced when the roads were
reconstructed. At the other extreme, some
road work has been carried out without
examining the condition of the piping below
(putting the roadway investment at risk).
However, in light of shrinking financial
resources and the publics demand for a more
transparent decision-making process, it is
becoming more important for municipalities to
plan the renewal of their road, sewer, and
water systems using an integrated approach.
A systematic and proactive method should be
used to ensure renewal programs are based
on sound data and are adequately funded.
A five-phase approach is proposed for
assessment and evaluation of these systems.
Task 1 Inventory
Municipalities should compile a detailed
inventory of their road, sewer, and water
systems following the guidelines presented
in the Best Practices for Utility-Based Data
(NGSMI, 2003e). The inventory for each
system must be structured to permit
cross-referencing among the systems.
The inventories should also be linked to a
geographic information system (GIS) to
facilitate spatial analysis. The format and
content of the inventories will vary among
municipalities. However, each municipality
should adopt a plan for data collection and
storage that will eventually allow the
municipality to manage its systems
proactively and in an integrated manner.

Executive Summary

Task 2 Investigation
An inspection program should be developed
for the road, sewer, and water systems to
ensure the renewal programs are proactive
in nature, based on sound data and are
adequately funded. The frequency of
inspection of each component depends on
its expected condition and importance.
The results of each inspection should be
documented to allow comparisons with
subsequent inspections so, over time,
reasonable estimates of deterioration rates
can be made. Critical components should
be dealt with more proactively than noncritical components.
Task 3 Condition Assessment
Condition rating systems should be used
to identify and prioritize the renewal
requirements for road, sewer, and water
systems. The number of performance
indicators in a condition rating system will
vary depending on the size of the municipality,
the available data and the specific conditions
within each system. The condition rating
system should incorporate information on the
need to increase the capacity of the road,
sewer, and water systems as well as address
non-standard components. Some discussion
is provided on condition rating systems
developed in-house as well as proprietary
and non-proprietary systems.
Task 4 Performance Evaluation
Once the condition of each component has
been determined, a performance evaluation
should be conducted to project the investment
required over the next 10 to 20 years. Ideally,
the performance level should be linked to
the annual investment tracking both planned
(proactive) and unplanned (reactive) to
optimize the renewal program for each system.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

11

Task 5 Renewal Plan

Once it has been established that a system
component should be rehabilitated or
replaced, an economic analysis should be
used to select the most cost-effective method
of renewal and the timing for its renewal.
An economic analysis typically compares the
renewal alternatives in terms of their present
worth. The renewal alternatives should also
account for socio-economic impacts, risk,
growth needs, changing regulations and
policies, adjacent infrastructure condition
as well as emerging technologies.

Executive Summary

Evaluation
Several measures can be used to evaluate
the effectiveness of the practices used in
a municipality for renewal planning of road,
sewer, and water systems, such as tracking
unplanned (reactive) spending, monitoring
the data collection program, conducting
pilot studies and, periodically, updating the
renewal plan.

Applications and Limitations

All municipalities across Canada should
implement an integrated approach to
assessment and evaluation of road, sewer,
and water systems. The practices must be
tailored to each municipality to reflect the
size, age, and condition of the systems.
Municipalities may be challenged to complete
an integrated system assessment and
evaluation due to lack of data, tools,
resources, and a standard approach. It is
recommended that existing publications
(related to products, technologies,
specifications or best practices) from
recognized organizations be referred to
by municipalities when applying this best
practice.

12

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

1. General

1. General

1.1 Introduction
1.2 Purpose and Scope

1.1

Introduction

In the fall of 2001, the National Guide to

Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure
(InfraGuide) conducted a survey of
municipalities, public utilities, and private
companies across Canada to identify the
best practices used to inspect, assess, and
evaluate the structural condition and capacity
of roads, sewers, and water mains.
This survey revealed a wide range of practices
in use across Canada. It also revealed the
need for a network level approach to
infrastructure assessment and evaluation.
Furthermore, it also became apparent the best
practice for managing these networks should
treat them as an integrated system to
better coordinate the renewal programs.
A coordinated renewal program would
minimize disruption to the public and minimize
costs to the municipality. It should also be
noted that some communities have a formal
coordinating group to plan out capital
upgrades on streets such that restoration
costs and social impacts on the community
are minimized by consideration of one upgrade
for all of the surface and underground
systems. This group typically includes all
municipal utility services and well as hydro,
telecom, cable and gas entities.
This document outlines the best practice
for assessing and evaluating municipal road,
sewer, and water networks using an
integrated approach.

1.2

Purpose and Scope

Many larger municipalities have separate

departments1 responsible for road, sewer,
and water systems. Furthermore, in some
large municipalities, there may be separate
departments responsible for planning, design,
construction, and maintenance of each

system. In smaller municipalities, there may

be only one or two persons responsible for
managing the entire municipal infrastructure.
These factors create a significant challenge
for municipalities in managing their systems
effectively in an integrated manner.
It should also be noted that the sewers and
water mains on a given section of road
typically have a longer life expectancy than
the road itself. In addition, sewers and water
mains typically have a different service life
expectancy. This further increases the
challenge of managing these systems in an
integrated manner. Municipalities should
recognize that decisions made at any stage
in the life cycle of one group of assets could
affect the other assets.

1.2.1 Purpose
The best practice for assessment and
evaluation of each system is generally well
documented. Unfortunately, there is limited
information available on the integrated
planning for renewal2 of road, sewer, and
water systems. Integration provides an
opportunity to exploit potential economies of
scale when more than one infrastructure
element requires renewal. This can maximize
economic and social benefits to the area
served by the infrastructure. This document
presents an integrated approach to
assessment and evaluation of these three
systems.

An integrated
approach to
renewal planning
will help maintain
a high level of
service while
minimizing life
cycle costs,
impacts on the
environment, and
disruption to the
community.

An integrated approach to renewal planning

will help maintain a high level of service while
minimizing life cycle costs, impacts on the
environment, and disruption to the community.
In simple terms, the goal of every municipality
should be to spend the right amount of money,
on the right things, at the right time. This is
consistent with the InfraGuides sustainable

1. In some cases, a utility or private company may be responsible for one or more of the municipal systems.
2. For the purposes of this document, renewal includes both rehabilitation and replacement/reconstruction.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

13

1. General
1.2 Purpose and Scope
1.3 How to Use
This Document
1.4 Glossary

municipal infrastructure principles of full life

cycle costs applied across social, economic
and environmental dimensions in the pursuit of
sustainable infrastructure to minimize overall
intended and unintended costs both today and
for future generations.
1.2.2 Scope
This best practice focuses on the integrated
assessment and evaluation of the road, sewer,
and water systems at a network level. More
detailed investigation will be required to
assess the condition and evaluate the needs
at a project level. It should also be noted that
this best practice focuses on the linear
systems only and does not address structures,
such as bridges, pumping stations, treatment
plants, and reservoirs. Furthermore, this
document primarily focuses on the process
used to develop an integrated renewal plan.
It does not specifically address operation and
maintenance practices.

1.3

How to Use This Document

Section 2 outlines potential benefits and risks

of implementing this best practice. Section 3
presents a five-step process for assessment
and evaluation that is applicable to all types of
municipal infrastructure. Section 4 presents
some of the applications and limitations of this
best practice. Finally, Section 5 describes
measures that can be used to evaluate the
effectiveness of this best practice in a
municipality.
Readers should be aware that InfraGuide has
published two other best practices that are
relevant to integrated renewal planning of
road, sewer, and water systems. These are
briefly described as follows.
Coordinating Infrastructure Works outlines

the best practice for coordinating

infrastructure works. Five service delivery
areas are addressed: coordination
practices, corridor upgrades, restrictive
practices, approval processes/better
communication, and technical
considerations.

14

Planning and Defining Municipal

Infrastructure Needs outlines the best

practice for planning and defining municipal
infrastructure needs using five methods:
strategic planning, information
management, building public support
and acceptance, exploring new and
innovative methods for continuous
improvement, and prioritization models.

1.4

Glossary

Assessment The process used to describe

the condition and/or performance of a system
component.
Critical Component Those components
of the system where failure is not an
acceptable risk.
Evaluation The process used (after the
assessment is completed) to determine the
remedial measures necessary to improve the
condition and/or performance of a system
component at the least cost to the community.
Full Cost Accounting A system that
includes all costs (including capital
investment, financing, renewal and
rehabilitation, decommissioning, and
operational) across social, economic and
environmental dimensions.
Life cycle cost Costs over the full life
cycle of an asset, from construction, through
operation, maintenance and rehabilitation,
to replacement/reconstruction.
Rehabilitation Upgrading the condition
or performance of an asset to extend its
service life.
Renewal Restoring the condition of an
asset by rehabilitation or replacement/
reconstruction.
Replacement Replacing an asset that has
reached the end of its service life.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

2. Rationale

2. Rationale

2.1 Background

2.1

Background

Best practices for assessing and evaluating

road, sewer, and water systems are generally
well documented. The Transportation
Association of Canada (TAC) has published the
Pavement Design and Management Guide that
presents information on the best practices for
programming and optimizing pavement
investments, in-service evaluation, structural
design, construction, and maintenance.
InfraGuide has published Timely Preventive
Maintenance for Municipal Roads A Primer
and Priority Planning and Budgeting Process
for Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation.
For sewer systems, many municipalities
across Canada have adopted the sewer
condition rating system developed by the
Water Research Centre (WRc) in the United
Kingdom. In addition, the Water Environment
Federation (WEF) and the American Society
of Civil Engineers (ASCE) have published a
manual of practice entitled Existing Sewer
Evaluation and Rehabilitation.
For water systems, InfraGuide has published
Developing a Water Distribution System
Renewal Plan. The American Water Works
Association (AWWA) and the American Water
Works Research Foundation (AwwaRF) have
also published several technical reports on
water distribution system renewal.
A formal process for assessment and
evaluation of these systems will identify the
short-term renewal requirements. Over time, it
should be possible to monitor the deterioration
rate for the system components to facilitate
longer-term planning. An integrated approach
to assessment and evaluation of the road,
sewer, and water systems will further enhance
renewal planning.

2.1.1 Common Practices

The condition of municipal roads is more
readily apparent than the condition of buried
sewer and water systems. As a result,
pavement management systems are generally
better developed than management systems
for sewer and water systems. Furthermore,
the service life of roads is generally shorter
than that for the sewer and water systems.
Consequently, in many municipalities, the road
renewal program has driven the renewal
planning for the sewer and water systems.
Municipalities have not always made sound
engineering decisions regarding the timing
for renewal of sewers and water mains.
This shortcoming stems from the fact that
condition of the sewers and water mains is
difficult to ascertain since they are buried.
As a result, in some cases, sewers and water
mains have been replaced when the road
was reconstructed even though the existing
sewers and water mains were still in good
condition. This conservative approach has
been adopted by some municipalities to avoid
the potential embarrassment of having to
excavate the road shortly after it was
reconstructed to repair a sewer or water main.
These municipalities also argue that replacing
the underground services when the road is
reconstructed will achieve cost savings and
minimize disruption to local traffic and
residents.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

Over time, it
should be possible
to monitor the
deterioration rate
for the system
components to
facilitate longerterm planning.

15

In other cases, municipalities did not replace

deteriorated sewers and water mains when a
road was reconstructed. Such a decision may
lead to unnecessary costs and disruption
when the underground services had to be
repaired or replaced while the road was still in
good condition. Municipalities should conduct
a detailed assessment of the sewers and
water mains to determine the optimum timing
for their renewal.

2. Rationale
2.1 Background

In light of shrinking financial resources and

the publics demand for a more transparent
decision-making process, it is becoming more
important for municipalities to plan the
renewal of their road, sewer, and water
systems using an integrated approach.
2.1.2 Collateral Impacts
One system may impact the other systems in
various ways.
Water main leaks and breaks can

undermine adjacent sewers and the road

structure leading to premature failure of
these systems.
Sewer deterioration can undermine

adjacent water mains and the road

structure leading to premature failure
of these systems.
Inadequate compaction around valve boxes,

valve chambers, maintenance holes, and

catch basins can result in premature failure
of the road at these locations.

If the road profile is lowered during

reconstruction, the sewers and water mains

are more susceptible to freezing, and live
loads may also exceed design loading for
the buried infrastructure.
Road salt can accelerate the corrosion of

metallic pipes and fittings as well as steel

reinforcement in concrete pipes.
Stray electrical currents can accelerate

electrolytic corrosion of metallic water

mains, force mains and appurtenances.
Some trenchless technologies for sewer

and water main construction could damage

roads if the technology is not well suited for
a particular application or if it is not
correctly applied.
Improperly sized or maintained storm

drainage could result in flooding and the

resulting detrimental impact on roads.
Differential frost heave can occur if the

trench backfill is a different material than

the road sub-grade.
Excavation within a roadway for

construction/repair of a sewer or water

main can lead to premature failure of
the road if the backfill is not adequately
compacted or the pavement is not
properly restored.
Different pavement structures can

significantly impact future rehabilitation

costs of buried infrastructure.

Vibrations generated during road

resurfacing/reconstruction and excavations

can break deteriorated water mains.
If the road profile is raised significantly

during reconstruction, earth loads on the

sewers and water mains are increased,
potentially exceeding design loading and
increasing the risk of collapse.

16

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

2.2

Benefits

2.3

Risks

There are several benefits in an integrated

approach to assessing and evaluating road,
sewer, and water systems in a municipality.

The potential risks of an integrated approach

include the following.

The approach minimizes life cycle costs,

conduct an integrated assessment and

evaluation of the systems.

impacts on the environment, and disruptions

to local traffic and residents.
Infrastructure management is more

proactive, and a high level of service can

be maintained.
Coordination among municipal departments

is improved with increased opportunities for

cross-training of municipal staff, and easier
staff transfers or changes.
Ensures that municipal services with split

jurisdictions are identified and considered.

Road, sewer, and water system work can

be coordinated with growth-related needs.

Full cost accounting is improved.
Integration provides a consistent repeatable

approach to infrastructure management.

Long-range planning is also improved in
terms of technical, financial, and risk
management.
Decision making takes into account both

intended and unintended costs to the public

and communities.

2. Rationale
2.2 Benefits
2.3 Risks

Additional resources will be required to

Renewal costs could be high in the short

term if the renewal programs were

underfunded in the past. Municipalities
may not fully appreciate that an integrated
renewal plan should help minimize life
cycle costs.
There could be a lack of support for an

integrated renewal plan from stakeholders

(e.g., operators, politicians, and the public)
in those systems that have not experienced
significant problems.
Cost-sharing formulas that disadvantage

one or more infrastructure elements could

reduce support for an integration program
(i.e., to be effective, financial benefits and
costs should be determined in an open,
transparent manner).
Staff support may be lost if there is an

expectation that the condition rating

systems and other analytical tools can
generate an optimum plan without input
from the municipal staff.
Assumptions made on infrastructure

condition could be wrong. Deterioration

and condition data for some infrastructure
components is currently insufficient or
unavailable.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

Integration provides
a consistent
repeatable approach
to infrastructure
management.
Long-range
planning is also
improved in terms
of technical,
financial, and risk
management.
Additional
resources will be
required to conduct
an integrated
assessment and
evaluation of the
systems.

17

18

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

3. Work Description

3. Work Description

Figure 31:
Integrated approach to

A systematic and proactive method should be

used to plan the renewal of municipal road,
sewer, and water systems in an integrated
manner. Figure 31 illustrates a pragmatic
approach for assessing and evaluating these
systems. Although the inventory, investigation,
condition assessment, and performance

evaluation can be completed independently

for the road, sewer, and water systems,
significant efficiency can be achieved if the
renewal alternatives are evaluated taking into
consideration coordination of works over the
life cycle of each element.

assessment and evaluation

Figure 31: Integrated approach to assessment and evaluation

Integrated Approach to
Assessment and Evaluation
Task 1 Inventory
data management
data requirements

Task 2 Investigation
critical components
preliminary assessment
detailed investigation

Update
data

Task 3 Condition Assessment

structural capacity
service
efficiency compliance
importance

Task 4 Performance Evaluation

deterioration rates
prioritization of needs
level of service
available funding
timeframe for renewal

Task 5 Renewal Plan

economic analysis
coordination with growth needs
regulations
risk management

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

19

These phases are not necessarily distinct

and do not always have to be conducted
sequentially. For example, a detailed
investigation of roads may not be done
until after the condition assessment and
performance evaluation has been completed.
In other cases, the inventory is compiled
along with the inspection.

3. Work Description
3.1 Task 1
Inventory

It should also be noted that critical

components should be dealt with separately
from the non-critical components throughout
all phases of the process. All components of
infrastructure should be examined at a
frequency that is shorter than half of its
expected life. Critical components should
receive a more thorough inspection and
condition assessment on an increased
frequency. Similarly, critical components
should be treated with a higher priority in
the evaluation and renewal planning phases.

3.1

Task 1 Inventory

3.1.1 Data Management

This phase includes the compilation of an
inventory of the road, sewer, and water
systems. The inventory should include the
physical attributes of each component as
well as significant other features such as
meteorological and environmental data.
InfraGuide has published a document entitled
Best Practices for Utility-Based Data that
presents a foundation and guide for
identifying, storing, and managing sewer
and water system data. This best practice
can be adapted for roads and other utilities.

The Best Practices for Utility-Based Data

recommends the use of a documented data
model/data structure, data collection
standards, standard data units, and standard
location referencing. It makes suggestions
for collecting and maintaining data, properly
storing data, and effectively managing that
data. The best practice also recommends
maintaining meta data.3

The data management plan should be updated

periodically to reflect changing needs, new
technologies, and new opportunities. In some
cases, pilot tests can be completed to confirm
the feasibility and costs of some data
collection and management technologies.
In light of the significant amount of data
required to conduct a detailed assessment
and evaluation of road, sewer, and water
systems, municipalities should compile the
inventories in relational databases. Ideally,
the databases should be linked to a
geographic information system (GIS) to
facilitate spatial analysis of the systems.
In addition, these inventories should be
coordinated with other applications, such
as maintenance management systems, to
share the inventory.
3.1.2 Data Requirements

Best Practices for Utility-Based Data identified

several key data groups for sewer and
water systems, including system attributes,
operations and maintenance, performance,
and meteorological, environmental, customer,
and financial data.
The format and content of the databases will
vary among municipalities depending on such
factors as the size of the municipality, the
available funding, the severity of the problems
or apparent inefficiencies, and the capabilities
of the municipal staff. In some cases, it may
take several years for a municipality to
compile a comprehensive inventory of its
systems. However, each municipality should
adopt a plan for data collection and
management that will eventually allow the
municipality to manage its systems proactively
in a cost-effective manner.

3. Meta data describe the source and accuracy of the inventory data as well as information on when data were entered and by whom,
and how the data were acquired, etc.

20

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

3.1.3 Integration of Data

The database for each system must be
structured so the information tables can be
cross-referenced with each other as well as
with the databases for the other systems.
Typically, the roads are divided into segments
bounded by intersections. The sewers and
water mains should be linked to the road
segments to facilitate an integrated
assessment and evaluation.
When all the data for the roads, sewers, and
water mains have been entered into a map
environment (preferably on GIS), it is possible
to use spatial analysis to pull all the data
together. This methodology eliminates the
need to tie each facility into the exact same
reference points.

3.2

Task 2 Investigation

3.2.1 Critical Components

The inventory can provide much needed
information to help identify critical
infrastructure. Consideration can be given
to size, age, infrastructure function, inspection
history, maintenance history, operator
observations and other important factors in
a systematic way to establish integrated
inspection and assessment programs.
Arterial roads are more critical than collector
and local roads since arterial roads have
higher traffic volumes. Similarly, water
transmission mains are more critical than
water distribution mains, and trunk sewers are
more critical than collector and local sewers.
The importance of each component should be
indicated in the inventory. Several factors can
be used to identify critical components, such
as traffic volumes on roads, diameter of
sewers and water mains, potential costs of
failure (in terms of repair costs and damages
to property and the environment), and impacts
of service disruption on customers.

The primary objective of a renewal plan for

non-critical roads, sewers, and water mains
is to minimize the life cycle costs recognizing
that occasional repairs are tolerable. On the
other hand, the primary objective of a renewal
plan for critical roads, sewers, and water
mains is to minimize failures. As a result,
renewal planning for critical components
must be more proactive than that for noncritical components.
Furthermore, the renewal planning for the
sewers and water mains located under critical
roads should be proactive recognizing that
sewer collapses and water main breaks
should be minimized under critical roads.
It should be noted that critical infrastructure
service life should be a prime consideration
in the planning and design stages for new
infrastructure. This concept is important in
the planning of replacement cycles.
3.2.2 Roads
The Pavement Design and Management
Guide (TAC, 1997) outlines several methods
for investigating and assessing the structural
capacity, condition, roughness, and safety of
roads. The following paragraphs summarize
methods used to quantify the condition and
performance of roads. More detailed
information is provided in the Pavement
Design and Management Guide.

3. Work Description
3.1 Task 1
Inventory
3.2 Task 2
Investigation

The primary
objective of a
renewal plan for
non-critical roads,
sewers, and water
mains is to
minimize the life
cycle costs
recognizing that
occasional repairs
are tolerable.

Structural Capacity
The structural capacity of a pavement is
typically determined using field tests, such as
the Benkelman Beam, the Dynaflect, and the
Falling Weight Deflectometer. These tests
measure pavement deflections under a load.
Condition
Visual surveys are commonly used to measure
pavement distress. Pavement condition
surveys should include the type of distress
as well as its extent, severity, and location.
Surface defects, permanent deformation and
distortion, cracking, and patching are the
most common types of distress.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

21

Roughness
Pavement roughness is a primary indicator of
serviceability. The Riding Comfort Index (RCI)
is commonly used in Canada as a measure of
serviceability. The International Roughness
Index (IRI) has recently been gaining industry
acceptance as well. A panel would drive along
a road, and their opinions on the roadway
would form the RCI. In recent years, several
mechanical tools have been developed to
measure pavement roughness.

3. Work Description
3.2 Task 2
Investigation

An inspection
program should be
developed for the
road, sewer, and
water systems to
ensure renewal
programs are based
on sound data and
are adequately
funded.

Safety
Pavement safety can be quantified in terms
of skid resistance, ruts, light reflectivity of
the pavement surface, and lane demarcation.
There are several methods used to measure
skid resistance. Visual inspections are
commonly used to assess ruts, light
reflectivity, and lane demarcation.
3.2.3 Sewers
Deterioration of sewers is manifested as:
structural defects (e.g., cracks, fracture,

sags, deformation, open joints, displaced

joints);
service defects (e.g., protruding laterals,

tree roots, silt, grease, encrustation,

obstructions);
system surcharges and sewer backups; and
a high groundwater infiltration rate in

sanitary sewer systems.

Closed-circuit television (CCTV) is commonly
used to inspect sewers. Many Canadian
municipalities have adopted the scoring
system developed by the Water Research
Centre (WRc, 1986) to quantify the structural
condition and functional adequacy of sewers.
The National Research Council has published
a guideline (NRC, 2000) for condition
assessment and rehabilitation of sewers
that are larger than 900 mm in diameter.
This guideline also describes several other
inspection techniques for large sewers
(e.g., sonar, stationary camera, visual).
(http://irc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/catalogue/uir.html)

22

Some municipalities use flow monitoring

and computer modelling to quantify
groundwater infiltration in sanitary sewer
systems and to determine if there is spare
capacity. InfraGuide has published a best
practice, Infiltration/Inflow Control/Reduction
for Wastewater Collection Systems (NGSMI,
2003h). It describes the techniques commonly
used to assess the structural condition and
hydraulic capacity of sewer systems.
3.2.4 Water Mains
Deterioration of water mains is evident with
one or more of the following manifestations:
frequent breaks;
reduced hydraulic capacity;
a high leakage rate; and
impaired water quality.

Water main break records and hydraulic

roughness tests are commonly used to
quantify the condition of water mains.
InfraGuide has published Deterioration and
Inspection of Water Distribution Systems
Best Practice (2003g). It uses a two-phase
approach. The first phase involves a
preliminary assessment of the water
distribution system using data that should
be collected by every municipality on a
routine basis (e.g., water main break records,
customer complaints, water quality).
The second phase involves a more detailed
investigation of specific problems based on
findings of the preliminary assessment.
3.2.5 Inspection Program
An inspection program should be developed
for the road, sewer, and water systems to
ensure renewal programs are based on
sound data and are adequately funded.
The frequency of inspection for each system
component depends on its expected condition
and importance. The results of each
inspection should be documented to allow
comparisons with subsequent inspections
so, over time, reasonable estimates of
deterioration rates can be made.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

3.3

Task 3 Condition Assessment

3.3.1 Condition Rating Systems

Condition rating systems should be used
to identify and prioritize the renewal
requirements for roads, sewers, and water
mains. Several performance indicators can
be used to assess their structural condition
and functional adequacy. The following
tabulation summarizes the general categories
of performance indicators:
Roads

Sewers

Water Mains

Structural/
Structural
bearing capacity defects
Condition/distress

Structural/
break rates

Volume/capacity
ratio

Hydraulic
capacity

Hydraulic
capacity

Roughness/
rideability

Infiltration

Leakage

Safety

Service defects Water quality

Importance

Importance

Importance

The number of indicators to be included in

a condition rating system will vary among
municipalities depending on the size of the
municipality, the data available, and the
specific conditions for each system.
Condition rating systems typically include a
point scoring system for each performance
indicator. Weighting factors can be applied to
each performance indicator to generate a total
score for each component. The total scores
for the components on a street segment can
then be added (with appropriate weighting
factors) to generate an overall score for each
street segment.

The total scores for each system can be

ranked so the components in the poorest
condition are easily identified. Similarly, the
overall scores for the street segments can
be ranked. A sensitivity analysis should be
conducted to assess the relative significance
of each performance indicator. Ideally, the
condition rating systems should be linked to
a GIS to more easily assess any spatial trends
in the ratings for each system.

3. Work Description
3.3 Task 3
Condition
Assessment

3.3.2 Capacity Analysis

Traffic studies should be conducted
periodically to identify the need to upgrade
the roads in a municipality to accommodate
projected traffic volumes.
Hydraulic analyses should be conducted for
sewer and water systems to provide input to
the development of a renewal plan. In some
cases, it may be necessary to expedite the
renewal of sanitary and combined sewers
experiencing high rates of infiltration to
reduce the risk of basement flooding and
overflows.

Condition rating
systems should be
used to identify and
prioritize the renewal
requirements for
roads, sewers, and
water mains.

Similarly, it may be necessary to rehabilitate

an unlined water main that is heavily
tuberculated in order to supply adequate
water pressures and fire flows. In some cases,
it may be necessary to replace a water main
with a larger diameter pipe if it does not have
adequate capacity, even if it was rehabilitated.
Master plans based on community plans
which outline future growth should be
prepared and updated periodically to identify
the need for improvements to the road, sewer,
and water systems to service projected
development/redevelopment. For complex
larger systems, computer models of the
system are helpful in the preparation of the
master plans. Ideally, the computer models for
each system should be linked to the inventory
to facilitate periodic updates of the models
and the assignment of capacity ratings.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

23

3.3.3 Compliance with Current Service

Level Requirements

3. Work Description
3.3 Task 3

An existing sewer or water main may not

meet current service level requirements.
In these cases, it is not practical to
rehabilitate the pipe, and replacement is
necessary. The timing for replacement of
non-standard components will depend on
available funding and whether the nonstandard component poses a major risk to
the municipality. Ideally, non-standard sewers
and water mains should be considered for
replacement when the road is reconstructed
to minimize costs, and disruption to local
traffic and residents.

Condition
Assessment

A comprehensive renewal plan should also

consider risk management issues as well as
the possibility of implementing more stringent
regulations.
3.3.4 Technology tools
Condition rating systems may be classified
as proprietary, non-proprietary, or those
developed in-house.
Systems Developed In-House
These systems are designed to make use of
existing data and reflect the specific needs
of a municipality. In-house systems are best
suited for assessment of systems when only
a few parameters are considered. These
systems are usually limited in terms of the
sophistication of the rating system, the
graphical user interface, and the data
standards. It is difficult to compare the
condition ratings generated using an inhouse system with the ratings generated
using other systems. Nevertheless, in-house
systems are often used as a stepping stone
toward more sophisticated systems if such
is required.

24

Proprietary Systems
Several proprietary systems are available for
rating the condition of roads, sewers, and
water mains. The sophistication and cost
of these systems varies over a wide range.
Some can be customized to better reflect
the needs of a municipality. Municipalities
should carefully review their current and
future information technology (IT) needs
before selecting a proprietary system. In
some cases, the condition rating system
is an add-on module to a maintenance
management system. The selection of a
proprietary system should be based on a
review of cost for software and upgrades,
as well as other factors such as technical
support, vendors track record, and cost
for customization.
Non-Proprietary Systems
Several agencies and organizations have
developed condition rating systems that
reflect the experience of many experts.
Some provincial transportation departments
have developed condition rating systems
for roads, and the American Public Works
Association (APWA) has developed a system
(known as Paver) that has become a standard
condition rating system for roads. Similarly,
the Water Research Centre (WRc) in the
United Kingdom and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) have developed
condition rating systems for sewers. Currently,
there is no Canadian standard for condition
rating of water mains.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

3.4

Task 4 Performance Evaluation

Once the condition of the road, sewer,

and water systems has been quantified, a
performance evaluation should be conducted
for each system to project the investment
required over the next 10 to 20 years.
The cost to renew the system components that
are in poor condition (i.e., those that exceed a
threshold) can be estimated. Consequently, the
time frame for renewal of these components
depends on the funding available each year.
Several scenarios can be considered to
evaluate the trade-offs between the level of
service (i.e., the condition rating), the annual
investment, and the time frame for renewal of
the components that are in poor condition.
Renewal plans that are developed using this
network-level evaluation should be checked
using a top-down approach to ensure the
investment will be sufficient to sustain the
systems over the long term. The long-term
average annual renewal cost for a system
can be estimated using the top-down
approach by dividing the total replacement
cost for a system by its estimated life
expectancy.

3.5

Task 5 Rehabilitation/
Replacement Plan

Once it has been established that a system

component should be rehabilitated or
replaced, an economic analysis should be
used to select the most cost-effective method
of renewal. An economic analysis typically
compares the renewal alternatives in terms
of their present worth.4

3. Work Description
3.4 Task 4
Performance
Evaluation
3.5 Task 5
Rehabilitation/
Replacement Plan

The following list describes some examples

where an economic analysis should be used.
Is it more cost effective to replace a water

main rather than continue to repair it?

Is it more cost effective to replace a sewer

rather than complete several spot repairs?

Is it more cost effective to rehabilitate a

sewer or water main (to extend its service

life) rather than replace it now?
Is it more cost effective to overlay a road

to extend its service life rather than

reconstruct it now?
Is it more cost effective to replace a

sewer or water main in conjunction with a

planned road reconstruction or defer the
replacement of the sewer or water main
as long as possible?

If sufficient information were available to

estimate the deterioration rate for each
system component, then it would be possible
to refine the projected renewal needs. In any
event, the performance evaluation should be
updated periodically to reflect current
conditions.

An economic analysis should account for

intended and unintended socio-economic
impacts (e.g., disruption to traffic, business
activity and residents). Several sources,
including the USDOT (1997) and the AwwaRF
(2002) identify a method for quantifying
socio-economic impacts.

More sophisticated performance appraisal

systems include an assessment of the
probability of the individual component
reaching its intended service life.

InfraGuide has published two documents

that summarize the best practice for
selecting technologies for rehabilitation
and replacement of sewers and water mains
(NGSMI, 2003a,b). Similarly, the Pavement
Design and Management Guide (TAC, 1997)
outlines an approach for optimizing investment
in roads.

The long-term
average annual
renewal cost for a
system can be
estimated using the
top-down approach
by dividing the total
replacement cost
for a system by its
estimated life
expectancy.

4. Present worth analysis is a technique used to compare alternative schemes that have different costs over a certain planning period.
The present worth represents the current investment that would have to be made at a specific discount (or interest) rate to pay for
the initial and future cost of the works.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

25

3. Work Description
3.5 Task 5
Rehabilitation/
Replacement Plan

The selection of the preferred renewal

strategy for a component should not be based
strictly on the economic analysis. The renewal
plan should also account for other factors,
such as risk, growth needs, environmental
impacts and changing regulations and
policies, as well as emerging technologies.

To maximize social and economic benefits,

infrastructure needs should be examined to
identify areas where integrated renewal
activities could be concentrated:
geographic areas with significant renewal

needs could result in neighbourhood

renewal programs; and
links requiring renewal work for several

infrastructure elements could result in

corridor upgrades.
Ideally, municipalities should use an integrated
decision support system to facilitate the
renewal planning of road, sewer, and water
systems. Currently, there are only a few
proprietary systems available in Canada.

26

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

4. Applications and Limitations

4. Applications and
Limitations
4.1 Applications

4.1

Applications

All municipalities across Canada should

implement an integrated approach to
assessment and evaluation of municipal road,
sewer, and water systems. The practices must
be tailored to each municipality to reflect the
size and age (i.e., condition) of the systems.
An integrated approach is particularly
important for those municipalities that have
a significant backlog of renewal work to be
completed. Furthermore, an integrated
renewal plan is critical for those municipalities
expecting a decline in population and revenue
base. For those municipalities that are not
experiencing significant problems, an
integrated renewal plan should identify
opportunities for improving the management
of their systems.
All municipalities should recognize that
integrated planning of the renewal needs for
road, sewer, and water systems is an ongoing
process of continuous improvement and not
simply a one-time event. It might take several
years to compile detailed inventories and
inspections of the infrastructure. However,
during this period, systems will likely be
expanded, some elements will be replaced,
and the other elements will have deteriorated.

The renewal plans should be updated every

year or so to reflect current information. Over
time, as more information becomes available,
the renewal plans will become more refined
and better integrated.
Municipalities should develop a plan for
integrated assessment and evaluation of their
infrastructure. This plan should identify both
short- and long-term goals. The short-term
plan should recognize the realities of the
municipalitys current resources whereas
the long-term plan should strive for a fully
integrated renewal plan.

4.2

Limitations

Municipalities may be challenged to complete

an integrated assessment and evaluation of
their road, sewer, and water systems due to
the lack of data, tools, resources, and a
standard approach. Ongoing education of
all stakeholders is necessary to develop
and maintain an integrated renewal plan.
Municipalities should strive to maintain an
adequate complement of qualified and highly
motivated staff to manage their systems.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

4.2 Limitations

All municipalities
should recognize
that integrated
planning of the
renewal needs for
road, sewer, and
water systems is
an ongoing process
of continuous
improvement and
not simply a
one-time event.

27

28

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

5. Evaluation

5. Evaluation
The following points describe several
measures that can be used to evaluate the
effectiveness of the practices outlined in
Section 3.
Track both planned and unplanned

spending and disruptions to confirm that

the integrated approach is effective.
Tracking should provide evidence that
there are sufficient resources to manage
unplanned work and that planned renewal
activities are more cost effective. It is
commonly accepted that preventive
maintenance of municipal infrastructure
is generally more cost effective than
reactive maintenance.

Update the performance evaluation and

renewal plan every five to ten years to

reflect the current conditions as well as
account for the effectiveness of the various
renewal technologies.
Track and compare the planned versus

actual life cycles of the various

infrastructure elements. This provides
useful data, which either validates the
assumptions made or provides more
accurate information for input into an
updated assessment. It may also provide
information to affect change in design and
construction practices, which ultimately
result in improved infrastructure life cycles.

Develop a plan to compile the inventory

and conduct the investigations. This plan

should outline a schedule and budget for
completion of these activities. Review
these activities periodically to ensure
compliance with the plan.

It is commonly
accepted that
preventive
maintenance of
municipal
infrastructure
is generally more
cost effective than
reactive
maintenance.

Conduct pilot studies to confirm the

approach to the data collection and

inspection activities as well as to assess
the effectiveness of the renewal
technologies.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

29

30

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

References

References
AwwaRF (American Water Works Association

____, 2003h. Infiltration/Inflow Control/Reduction for

Research Foundation), 2002. Costs of Infrastructure

Wastewater Collection Systems Best Practice.

Failure. Denver, Colorado

Ottawa, Ontario.

NGSMI (National Guide to Sustainable Municipal

NRC (National Research Council of Canada), 2000.

Infrastructure), 2003a. Selection of Technologies for

Guidelines for Condition Assessment and

Sewer Rehabilitation and Replacement Best

Rehabilitation of Large Sewers. Ottawa, Ontario.

Practice. Ottawa, Ontario.

TAC (Transportation Association of Canada), 1997.

NGSMI, 2003b. Selection of Technologies for the

Pavement Design and Management Guide. Toronto,

Rehabilitation or Replacement of Sections of a Water

Ontario.

Distribution System Best Practice. Ottawa, Ontario.

United States, DOT (Department of Transportation),

____, 2003c. Co-ordination of Infrastructure Works to

1997. The Value of Saving Travel Time: Departmental

Minimize Disruption and Maximize Value. Ottawa,

Guidance for Conducting Economic Evaluation.

Ontario.

Washington, D.C.

____, 2003d. Planning and Defining Municipal

WEF (Water Environment Federation) and ASCE

Infrastructure Needs Best Practice. Ottawa, Ontario.

(American Society of Civil Engineers), 1994. Existing

____, 2003e. Best Practices for Utility-Based Data.

Ottawa, Ontario.
____, 2003f. Developing a Water Distribution System

Renewal Plan Best Practice. Ottawa, Ontario.

Sewer Evaluation and Rehabilitation (Second Edition).

Alexandria, VA.
WEF Manual of Practice FD-6 et ASCE Manuals and
Reports on Engineering Practice No. 62. Alexandria,
VA.

____, 2003g. Deterioration and Inspection of Water

Distribution Systems Best Practice. Ottawa, Ontario.

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003

31

Notes

32

An Integrated Approach to Assessment and Evaluation of Municipal Road, Sewer and Water Networks November 2003