Water System - Woodstock
The County’s drinking water Quality Management System demonstrates continued compliance with drinking water regulations and the County’s commitment to continual improvement in the provision of a safe, dependable, and sustainable supply of drinking water for its residents and businesses. The Woodstock water system consists of four water treatment plants (WTP), each housing high lift pumps, monitoring equipment and treatment equipment for the production wells. Each WTP also includes varying types of disinfection and filtration treatment specific for each location. The water distribution network transports potable drinking water to homes and businesses. The distribution network consists of watermains, services, hydrants, valves, meters, pressure boosting stations, reservoirs, and water towers.
Inventory
The replacement cost valuation for the linear assets in this portfolio are based on current tender prices, where available. The replacement cost valuation for vertical components is based on the latest information available, which includes current replacement costs, insurance valuations, inflation, and valuations from studies / assessments completed in prior years. Quantity changes are attributed to new assets and refinements and updates made to the inventory, ensuring more accurate and current data.
| Asset Component | Unit | Current Inventory | Replacement Costs |
| Production Well and Water Treatment Plant | site | 10 | $19,456,233 |
| Storage Structures | bldg | 8 | 39,963,574 |
| Other Assets | each | 19 | 6,079,421 |
| Equipment | total | N/A | 12,757,468 |
| Watermain (﹤416mm) | metre | 288,224 | 213,121,803 |
| Watermain (﹥=416mm) | metre | 10,305 | 15,131,642 |
| Water Service Connection | each | 17,530 | 56,516,720 |
| Hydrant | each | 1,415 | 20,374,585 |
| Valve | each | 2,773 | 16,228,519 |
| Water Meter | each | 17,034 | 8,139,811 |
| Total Replacement Cost | $407,769,776 | ||
Condition
The percentage of assets in poor or critical condition has increased from 21% as reported in the 2024 AMP to 23%. The percentage of assets in good or excellent condition has decreased from 58% as reported in the 2024 AMP to 56%.
Key Performance
The water distribution network transports potable drinking water to homes and businesses. It is intended that all water assets will be maintained, rehabilitated, and replaced to perform the same function and manage the same capacity as they are currently designed to do. To ensure levels of service are maintained, staff monitor impacts from changes to capacity demands to plan for changes to current practices and budget requirements.
| Key Service Attribute | Performance Measure | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| Safety | % of properties within the system boundary connected to the municipal water system | 98% | 98% | 98% |
| Reliability | The number of connection-days per year where a boil water advisory notice is in place compared to the total number of properties connected to the municipal water system. | 0 connection-days compared to 15,378 connections | 0 connection-days compared to 16,579 connections | 0 connection-days compared to 16,805 connections |
| The number of connection-days per year due to watermain breaks compared to the total number of properties connected to the municipal water system. | 15 connection-days compared to 15,378 connections | 9 connection-days compared to 16,579 connections | 16 connection-days compared to 16,805 connections |
Proposed Levels of Service Review
Information on the scenarios reviewed is contained within the AMP document. As the system’s reserve balance and proposed funding under all scenarios are sufficient to fund the short-term needs, the average expected condition of the portfolio is the same under all scenarios for approximately 60 years, which aligns with the 2025 Budget Survey responses where 72% of respondents indicated that the service level related to municipal water and wastewater services in Woodstock should be maintained. Drinking water systems have stricter regulatory requirements that must be adhered to, resulting in a lower risk tolerance.
Based on the analysis, staff are recommending Scenario C. The proposed level of service target is to fund the system at 80% of overall lifecycle needs. The use of PVC pipes for linear started becoming popular in the 1970’s; their useful life of 90 years is theoretical as this material has not been in use long enough to confirm the lifespan. Staff also identified an improvement area in 2024, to look at the lifecycle strategies for process assets as it may be beneficial in the long-term to incorporate various strategies and not anticipate a run-to-failure strategy on some of these assets. Once incorporated this may result in reductions to the annual investment required, as such staff feel it is not prudent to target the fully funded scenario at this time. Staff will continue monitoring asset conditions and risks to ensure the proposed service level does not negatively impact on the overall health and safety of residents through the operations of this service.
| Annual Investment | Average Condition | Average Risk | % of assets in poor or critical condition | |
| Scenario A | $4,564,000 | Fair | Minor | 38% |
| Scenario B | 5,883,000 | Fair | Minor | 33% |
| Scenario C | 4,706,000 | Fair | Minor | 37% |
| Scenario D | 5,444,000 | Fair | Minor | 34% |
Funding Gap Analysis
Planned Investment Level
An estimated inflationary rate is used in the table below as the inflation rate used for the 2026 Budget is based on the rate as of June 30, 2025. The planned investment includes re-investing funds used towards debenture payments as the total obligation declines. Although interest rates are declining, the reserve balance will continue to earn interest and contribute to the planned investment for this portfolio. Additional contributions to the reserve because of growth have not been explicitly shown in the table, however will naturally help towards the long-term sustainability of this portfolio.
Proposed Investment Change
Aside from the inflationary increase, staff are not proposing any further increases to the contribution level for the 2026 budget.
Comparison of required investment to proposed investment (millions)
| 2025 | 2026 | 2027 | 2028 | 2029 | 2030 | 2031 | 2032 | 2033 | 2034 | 2035 | |
| Required Investment | $4.63 | $4.80 | $4.92 | $5.05 | $5.17 | $5.30 | $5.45 | $5.59 | $5.73 | $5.87 | $6.02 |
| Planned Investment Level | 4.31 | 3.95 | 4.13 | 4.33 | 4.53 | 4.66 | 4.75 | 4.86 | 4.95 | 5.14 | 5.39 |
| Proposed Investment Change | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Unfunded Requirement | 0.31 | 0.85 | 0.78 | 0.72 | 0.64 | 0.65 | 0.70 | 0.72 | 0.78 | 0.73 | 0.63 |