local government - ningapi.ning.com/files/tbtkckfumvovbvwu3f6i-prlswb9zx4dyd0ucbwyqyuwxdv…costs...

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

1.1 a) Operating costs for governance and

corporate management as a

percentage of total municipal

operating costs.

1.9% 1.9% 5.4% 3.6% 11.9%

1.1 b) Total costs for governance and

corporate management as a

percentage of total municipal costs.1.6% 1.7% 4.8% 3.5%

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient local government.

Township of Sables-Spanish Rivers

REFERENCE:

● The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses

consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total

costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long term debt, less revenue

received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.

NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:

Local Government

Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) ● 2013 RESULTS

Questions about MPMP results should be addressed to:

Title: Treasurer

Name: Patricia Deline Phone: 705-865-2646 ext. 225

Municipality: Township of Sables-Spanish Rivers

Email: [email protected]

1.1 GENERAL GOVERNMENT - EFFICIENCY

1

Township of Sables-Spanish RiversMunicipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) ● 2013 RESULTS

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

2.1 a) Operating costs for fire services per

$1,000 of assessment. 0.93$ 0.93$ 1.01$ 1.24$ 1.03$

2.1 b) Total costs for fire services per

$1,000 of assessment. 1.16$ 1.28$ 1.35$ 1.46$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

2.2 Number of residential fire related

civilian injuries per 1,000 persons. 0.325 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.690


civilian injuries averaged over 5 years

per 1,000 persons.0.000 0.325 0.000 0.140 0.270

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009


civilian fatalities per 1,000 persons. 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000


civilian fatalities averaged over 5

years per 1,000 persons.0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

2.6 Number of residential structural fires

per 1,000 households. 2.722 2.180 7.726 6.125 5.011

Fire Services

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient fire services.


2.1 FIRE SERVICES - EFFICIENCY

2.2 & 2.3 CIVILIAN FIRE RELATED INJURIES - EFFECTIVENESS



OBJECTIVE:

Minimize the number of civilian injuries in residential fires.

REFERENCE:






2.6 NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURAL FIRES - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Minimize the number of residential structural fires.

2.4 & 2.5 CIVILIAN FIRE RELATED FATALITIES - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Minimize the number of civilian fatalities in residential fires.

2


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

3.1 a) Operating costs for police services

per person. 305.55$ 292.81$ 294.39$ 318.38$ 270.84$

3.1 b) Total costs for police services per

person. 305.55$ 292.81$ 294.39$ 318.38$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

3.2 Violent crime rate per 1,000 persons.9.1 9.8 13.7 11.3 8.2

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

3.3 Property crime rate per 1,000

persons. 24.4 25.0 20.8 26.1 31.6

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

3.4 Total crime rate per 1,000 persons

(Criminal Code offences, excluding

traffic). 42.0 40.7 38.0 41.2 45.4

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

3.5 Youth crime rate per 1,000 youths. 62.7 27.5 15.9 25.4 15.9


This municipality receives service from the Ontario Provincial Police.

3.2 VIOLENT CRIME RATE - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Safe communities.



REFERENCE:






3.4 TOTAL CRIME RATE - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Safe communities.

3.5 YOUTH CRIME RATE - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Safe communities.

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient police services.

Police Services

3.1 POLICE SERVICES - EFFICIENCY

3.3 PROPERTY CRIME RATE - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Safe communities.


3


2013

4.1 a) Operating costs for building permits

and inspection services per $1,000 of

construction activity, averaged over

three years (based on permits

issued).

10.15$

4.1 b) Operating costs for building permits

and inspection services per $1,000 of

construction activity, averaged over

three years (based on permits

issued).

10.71$

2013 2012 2011

4.2

a) Category 1: Houses

(houses not exceeding 3 storeys/600

square metres).

Reference: provincial standard is 10

working days.

2 3 3

b) Category 2: Small Buildings

(small commercial/industrial not

exceeding 3 storeys/600 square

metres).


working days.

1 7 4

c) Category 3: Large Buildings

(large residential/commercial/

industrial/ institutional).


working days.

0 0 0

d) Category 4: Complex buildings

(post disaster buildings, including

hospitals, power/water,

fire/police/EMS, communications).


working days.

0 0 0

Median number of days to review a complete building permit application and issue a

permit or not issue a permit, and provide all reasons for refusal:

OBJECTIVE:

Complete building permit applications are processed quickly and accurately.


OBJECTIVE:

Efficient building permits and inspection services.

REFERENCE:

● In 2013, the formula for the denominator of the MPMP efficiency measures for building permits and inspection

services was changed to a three year average for total construction activity, divided by $1,000.

Building Permits & Inspection Services

4.1 BUILDING PERMITS & INSPECTION SERVICES - EFFICIENCY

4.2 REVIEW OF COMPLETE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS - EFFECTIVENESS


Categories 3 and 4 are not applicable in this municipality for this year.

REFERENCE:

● The effectiveness measure reporting the number of working days to review complete building permit applications

was introduced in 2011.

4


2013

4.3 a)

# 11

4.3 a)

% 100%

4.3 b)

# 0

4.3 b)

% 0%

4.3 c) The subtotal for the number of

complete and incomplete building

permit applications.# 11

2013

4.3 a)

# 0

4.3 a)

% 0%

4.3 b)# 0

4.3 b)

% 0%




REFERENCE:

● Financial Information Return: 92 1265 07.

OBJECTIVE:

Safe communities.

4.3 Building Permits and Inspection Services - Effectiveness

Category 2:

Small Buildings (small commercial/industrial not exceeding 3 storeys/600 square metres)

The number and percentage of

building permit applications which

are submitted and accepted by the

municipality as complete

applications.




municipality as incomplete

applications.



Category 1: Houses

(houses not exceeding 3 storeys/600 square metres)





applications.


REFERENCE:

● Financial Information Return: 92 1265 07.● In 2013, effectiveness measures were introduced that record the number and percentage of complete and

incomplete building permit applications, by category.





applications.

OBJECTIVE:

Safe communities.

● In 2013, effectiveness measures were introduced that record the number and percentage of complete and


5


2013

4.3 a)# 0

4.3 a)% 0%

4.3 b)# 0

4.3 b)% 0%




2013

4.3 a)

# 0

4.3 a)

% 0%

4.3 b)

# 0

4.3 b)

% 0%




2013

4.4 The total number of building permit

applications submitted and accepted

by the municipality (all categories)

11


Category 3:

Large Buildings (large residential/commercial/ industrial/ institutional)





applications.





applications.


Category 4: Complex buildings (post disaster buildings, including hospitals, power/water,

fire/police/EMS, communications)

● Introduced in 2013.





applications.

REFERENCE:

● Financial Information Return: 92 1265 07.


OBJECTIVE:

Safe communities.


REFERENCE:







applications.

OBJECTIVE:

Safe communities.NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:

REFERENCE:



OBJECTIVE:

Safe communities.

6


2013 2012 2011 2010

5.1 a) Operating costs for paved (hard top)

roads per lane kilometre.1 234.11$ 430.68$ 416.30$ 228.72$

5.1 b) Total costs for paved (hard top) roads

per lane kilometre. 234.11$ 430.68$ 416.30$ 228.72$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

5.2 a) Operating costs for unpaved (loose

top) roads per lane kilometre. 735.79$ 830.11$ 927.28$ 1,450.48$ 590.81$

5.2 b) Total costs for unpaved (loose top)

roads per lane kilometre. 735.79$ 830.11$ 927.28$ 1,450.48$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

5.3 a) Operating costs for bridges and

culverts per square metre of surface

area.15.31$ 15.09$ 19.58$ 9.15$ 10.14$

5.3 b) Total costs for bridges and culverts

per square metre of surface area. 15.31$ 15.09$ 19.58$ 9.15$

REFERENCE:





5.3 BRIDGES AND CULVERTS - EFFICIENCY

5.2 UNPAVED ROADS - EFFICIENCY

REFERENCE:






OBJECTIVE:

Efficient maintenance of unpaved roads.

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient maintenance of bridges and culverts.


REFERENCE:

● 1 The formulas for efficiency measures for paved roads were revised in 2010 to net out revenue received from

utilities for utility cut repairs.

● The total cost measure was also revised in 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus

amortization and interest on long term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient maintenance of paved roads.

Roads

5.1 PAVED ROADS - EFFICIENCY


7


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

5.4 a) Operating costs for winter

maintenance of roadways per lane

kilometre maintained in winter.607.43$ 463.26$ 379.75$ 280.92$ 494.87$

5.4 b) Total costs for winter maintenance of

roadways per lane kilometre

maintained in winter.607.43$ 463.26$ 379.75$ 280.92$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

5.5 Percentage of paved lane kilometres

where the condition is rated as good

to very good.1

75% 74% 46% 35% 37%

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

5.6 Percentage of bridges and culverts

where the condition is rated as good

to very good.1

100% 100% 96% 89% 100%

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

5.7 Percentage of winter events where

the response met or exceeded locally

determined municipal service levels

for road maintenance.

100% 100% 100% 100% 92%

5.4 WINTER MAINTENANCE OF ROADS - EFFICIENCY

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient winter maintenance of roads.

5.5 ADEQUACY OF PAVED ROADS - EFFECTIVENESS


REFERENCE:

● 1 Pavement condition is rated using a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) such as the Index used by the Ontario Good

Roads Association (OGRA) or the Ministry of Transportation’s Roads Inventory Management System (RIMS).

REFERENCE:





OBJECTIVE:

Safe bridges and culverts.

5.6 ADEQUACY OF BRIDGES AND CULVERTS - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Pavement condition meets municipal objectives.


5.7 WINTER EVENT RESPONSES - EFFECTIVENESS

REFERENCE:

● The effectiveness measure for bridges and culverts was introduced in 2009.

● 1

A bridge or culvert is rated as being in good to very good condition if distress to the primary components is

minimal, requiring only maintenance. Primary components are the main load carrying components of the structure,

including the deck, beams, girders, abutments, foundations, etc.


OBJECTIVE:

Response to winter storm events meets locally determined service levels for winter road maintenance.


8


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

7.1 a) Operating costs for the

collection/conveyance of wastewater

per kilometre of wastewater main.2,674.24$ 1,539.12$ 1,464.40$ 10,418.80$ 8,464.40$

7.1 b) Total costs for the

collection/conveyance of wastewater

per kilometre of wastewater main.3,146.00$ 2,010.88$ 1,936.16$ 10,418.80$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

7.2 a) Operating costs for the treatment and

disposal of wastewater per megalitre. 129.08$ 605.31$ 241.55$ 101.08$ 78.40$

7.2 b) Total costs for the treatment and

disposal of wastewater per megalitre. 151.16$ 630.50$ 289.60$ 101.08$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

7.3 a) Operating costs for the

collection/conveyance, treatment, and

disposal of wastewater per megalitre

(integrated system).

1,683.40$ 1,625.52$ 1,283.77$ 1,145.40$ 716.74$

7.3 b) Total costs for the

collection/conveyance, treatment, and

disposal of wastewater per megalitre

(integrated system).

1,979.68$ 1,963.41$ 1,646.57$ 1,145.40$


OBJECTIVE:

Efficient municipal wastewater treatment and disposal.

REFERENCE:





7.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL - EFFICIENCY


OBJECTIVE:

Efficient municipal wastewater system (integrated system).

REFERENCE:





Wastewater (Sewage)

7.1 WASTEWATER COLLECTION/CONVEYANCE - EFFICIENCY

7.3 WASTEWATER INTEGRATED SYSTEM - EFFICIENCY


REFERENCE:





OBJECTIVE:

Efficient municipal wastewater collection/conveyance.

9


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

7.4 Number of wastewater main backups

per 100 kilometres of wastewater

main in a year.0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

7.5 Percentage of wastewater estimated

to have by-passed treatment. 0.000% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000%

7.5 WASTEWATER BYPASSES TREATMENT - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Municipal sewage management practices prevent environmental and human health hazards.

7.4 WASTEWATER MAIN BACKUPS - EFFECTIVENESS


OBJECTIVE:

Municipal sewage management practices prevent environmental and human health hazards.


10


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

8.1 a) Operating costs for urban storm water

management (collection, treatment,

disposal) per kilometre of drainage

system.

3,148.49$ 3,448.00$ 3,295.00$

8.1 b) Total costs for urban storm water

management (collection, treatment,

disposal) per kilometre of drainage

system.

3,148.49$ 14,558.00$ 14,405.00$

Storm Water

8.1 URBAN STORM WATER MANAGEMENT - EFFICIENCY


OBJECTIVE:

Efficient urban storm water management.

REFERENCE:





11


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

9.1 a) Operating costs for the treatment of

drinking water per megalitre. 1,761.59$ 2,018.20$ 1,174.38$ 956.20$ 909.36$

9.1 b) Total costs for the treatment of

drinking water per megalitre. 2,656.77$ 2,018.20$ 1,263.63$ 1,804.46$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

9.2 a) Operating costs for the distribution/

transmission of drinking water per

kilometre of water distribution pipe.1,874.73$ 1,207.30$ 5,298.70$ 7,701.13$ 9,426.00$

9.2 b) Total costs for the distribution/

transmission of drinking water per

kilometre of water distribution pipe.1,874.73$ 4,211.43$ 5,701.03$ 7,701.13$

9.1 DRINKING WATER TREATMENT - EFFICIENCY


9.2 DRINKING WATER DISTRIBUTION/TRANSMISSION - EFFICIENCY

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient municipal water treatment services.

REFERENCE:





REFERENCE:






OBJECTIVE:

Efficient municipal water distribution/transmission services.

Drinking Water

12


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

9.3 a) Operating costs for the treatment and

distribution/transmission of drinking

water per megalitre (integrated

system).

2,226.15$ 2,357.45$ 2,652.74$ 1,630.05$ 1,658.30$

9.3 b) Total costs for the treatment and

distribution/transmission of drinking

water per megalitre (integrated

system).

3,121.32$ 3,201.63$ 2,854.25$ 2,478.31$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

9.4 Weighted number of days when a boil

water advisory issued by the medical

officer of health, applicable to a

municipal water supply, was in effect.

0.0000 48.0000 5.4167 3.0000 1.0000

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

9.5 Number of water main breaks per 100

kilometres of water distribution pipe in

a year.0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.67

REFERENCE:





9.4 BOIL WATER ADVISORIES - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Water is safe and meets local needs.



OBJECTIVE:

Efficient municipal water system (integrated system).

OBJECTIVE:

Improve system reliability.

9.5 BREAKS IN WATER MAINS - EFFECTIVENESS

9.3 DRINKING WATER INTEGRATED SYSTEM - EFFICIENCY


13


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

10.1 a) Operating costs for garbage

collection per household. 62.06$ 62.18$ 60.50$ 57.58$ 53.53$

10.1 b) Total costs for garbage collection per

household. 62.06$ 62.18$ 60.50$ 57.58$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

10.2 a) Operating costs for garbage disposal

per household. 84.54$ 95.83$ 77.77$ 97.53$ 80.18$

10.2 b) Total costs for garbage disposal per

household. 84.54$ 95.85$ 77.79$ 97.64$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

10.3 a) Operating costs for solid waste

diversion per household.52.77$ 50.52$ 55.20$ 48.94$ 36.16$

10.3 b) Total costs for solid waste diversion

perhousehold. 52.77$ 50.52$ 55.20$ 48.94$



REFERENCE:





OBJECTIVE:

Efficient municipal garbage disposal services.

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient municipal garbage collection services.

10.2 GARBAGE DISPOSAL - EFFICIENCY


Solid Waste Management (Garbage)

REFERENCE:





OBJECTIVE:

Efficient solid waste diversion (recycling) services.

10.3 SOLID WASTE DIVERSION (RECYCLING) - EFFICIENCY

10.1 GARBAGE COLLECTION - EFFICIENCY

REFERENCE:





14


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

10.4 a) Average operating costs for solid

waste management (collection,

disposal and diversion) per

household.

199.36$ 208.53$ 193.47$ 204.06$ 169.70$

10.4 b) Average total costs for solid waste

management (collection, disposal and

diversion) per household. 199.36$ 208.55$ 193.49$ 204.17$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

10.5 Number of complaints received in a

year concerning the collection of

garbage and recycled materials per

1,000 households.

49.5 0.0 28.7 13.4 13.4

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

10.6 Total number of solid waste

management facilities owned by the

municipality with a Ministry of

Environment certificate of approval.

2 2 2 2 2

REFERENCE:





10.4 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT (INTEGRATED SYSTEM) - EFFICIENCY

10.5 COMPLAINTS - COLLECTION OF GARBAGE AND RECYCLED MATERIALS

EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Improved collection of garbage and recycled materials.



10.6 NUMBER OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES

EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient solid waste management (integrated system).


OBJECTIVE:

Context for solid waste management facility compliance measure.

15


10.7

FIR

line #

Days

2013

Days

2012

Days

2011

Days

2010

Days

2009

3553 0 0 0 0 0

3554 0 0 0 0 0

3555

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

10.8 Percentage of residential solid waste

diverted for recycling. 75% 12% 13% 9% 9%

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

10.9 Percentage of residential solid waste

diverted for recycling (based on

combined residential and ICI

tonnage).

12% 13% 9% 9%

OBJECTIVE:

Municipal solid waste services do not have an adverse impact on environment.

Separation of residential from ICI tonnage now in place.

OBJECTIVE:

Municipal solid waste reduction programs divert waste from landfills and/or incinerators.

REFERENCE:

● ICI means Industrial/Commercial/Institutional.


OBJECTIVE:

Municipal solid waste reduction programs divert waste from landfills and/or incinerators.

Number of days per year when a Ministry of Environment compliance order for remediation concerning an air or

groundwater standard was in effect for a municipally owned solid waste management facility, by facility.


10.9 DIVERSION OF RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE

(Based on Combined Residential and Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Tonnage)

EFFECTIVENESS

Facility Name

Tennyson Landefill Site

Webbwood Landfill Site

10.7 FACILITY COMPLIANCE - EFFECTIVENESS

10.8 DIVERSION OF RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE

EFFECTIVENESS

16


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

11.1 a) Operating costs for parks per person.5.54$ 5.51$ 3.87$ 5.22$ 4.19$

11.1 b) Total costs for parks per person.8.21$ 8.18$ 6.54$ 5.22$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

11.2 a) Operating costs for recreation

programs per person. 0.80$ 1.07$ 1.41$ 2.50$ 1.89$

11.2 b) Total costs for recreation programs

per person. 0.80$ 1.07$ 1.41$ 2.50$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009


facilities per person. 98.99$ 90.13$ 85.08$ 96.01$ 76.27$

11.3 b) Total costs for recreation facilities per

person. 108.02$ 101.30$ 95.53$ 106.29$

11.1 PARKS - EFFICIENCY


OBJECTIVE:

Efficient operation of parks.

REFERENCE:





REFERENCE:





Parks and Recreation

REFERENCE:





11.3 RECREATION FACILITIES - EFFICIENCY

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient operation of recreation programs.

11.2 RECREATION PROGRAMS - EFFICIENCY



OBJECTIVE:

Efficient operation of recreation facilities.

17


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009


programs and recreation facilities per

person (Subtotal).99.79$ 91.20$ 86.49$ 98.51$ 78.16$

11.4 b) Total costs for recreation programs

and recreation facilities per person

(Subtotal).108.82$ 102.37$ 96.94$ 108.79$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

11.6 Hectares of open space (municipally

owned). 1 1 1 3 3

11.6 Hectares of open space per 1,000

persons (municipally owned). 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.0 1.0

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

11.7 Total participant hours for recreation

programs per 1,000 persons. 24,168.8 24,322.6 9,554.5 3,773.2 4,123.0

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

11.8 Square metres of indoor recreation

facilities (municipally owned). 6,192 6,192 6,192 6,192 6,192

11.8 Square metres of indoor recreation

facilities per 1,000 persons

(municipally owned).2,013.7 2,013.7 2,013.7 2,027.8 2,127.8



11.6 OPEN SPACE - EFFECTIVENESS


11.4 RECREATION PROGRAMS AND RECREATION FACILITIES (SUBTOTAL)

EFFICIENCY

11.8 INDOOR RECREATION FACILITY SPACE - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Indoor recreation facility space is adequate for population.

OBJECTIVE:

Open space is adequate for population.

OBJECTIVE:

Recreation programs serve needs of residents.

11.7 PARTICIPANT HOURS FOR RECREATION PROGRAMS

EFFECTIVENESS


OBJECTIVE:

Efficient operation of recreation programs and facilities.

REFERENCE:





18


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

12.1 a) Operating costs for library services

per person. 56.86$ 50.84$ 66.38$ 46.10$ 50.60$

12.1 b) Total costs for library services per

person. 56.86$ 50.84$ 66.38$ 46.10$

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

12.2 a) Operating costs for library services

per use.1 4.64$ 3.07$ 2.30$ 4.22$ 4.14$

12.2 b) Total costs for library services per

use. 4.64$ 3.07$ 2.30$ 4.22$

REFERENCE:





● 1 The calculation of electronic library uses was updated in 2009 to include the number of people using the public

library wireless connection. In 2011 three additional categories of reference transactions were added to the definition

of library uses. This may affect the comparability of 2011 results with earlier years.

12.2 LIBRARY COSTS PER USE - EFFICIENCY



Libraries

12.1 LIBRARY COSTS PER PERSON - EFFICIENCY

REFERENCE:





OBJECTIVE:

Efficient library services.

OBJECTIVE:

Efficient library services.

19


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

12.3 Library uses per person.1

12.25 16.57 28.80 10.93 12.22

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

12.4 Electronic library uses as a

percentage of total library uses.1 10% 10% 25% 11% 12%

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

12.5 Non-electronic library uses as a

percentage of total library uses.1 90% 90% 75% 89% 88%

OBJECTIVE:

Better information on library usage.

REFERENCE:




12.5 NON - ELECTRONIC LIBRARY USES - EFFECTIVENESS


12.3 LIBRARY USES - EFFECTIVENESS

REFERENCE:




12.4 ELECTRONIC LIBRARY USES - EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Better information on library usage.


REFERENCE:





OBJECTIVE:

Increased use of library services.

20


2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

13.1 Percentage of new residential units

located within settlement areas. 27% 87% 17% 17% 25%

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

13.2 Percentage of land designated for

agricultural purposes which was not

re-designated for other uses during

the reporting year.

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

13.3 Percentage of land designated for

agricultural purposes which was not

re-designated for other uses relative

to the base year of 2000.

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

13.4 Number of hectares of land originally

designated for agricultural purposes

which was re-designated for other

uses during the reporting year.

0 0 0 0 0

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

13.5 Number of hectares of land originally

designated for agricultural purposes

which was re-designated for other

uses since January 1, 2000.

0 0 0 0 0

13.1 LOCATION OF NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - EFFECTIVENESS


OBJECTIVE:

New residential development is occurring within settlement areas.

13.5 CHANGE IN NUMBER OF AGRICULTURAL HECTARES SINCE 2000

EFFECTIVENESS

OBJECTIVE:

Preservation of agricultural land.

OBJECTIVE:




OBJECTIVE:



13.3 PRESERVATION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND RELATIVE TO 2000

EFFECTIVENESS

13.2 PRESERVATION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND DURING REPORTING YEAR

EFFECTIVENESS


OBJECTIVE:


13.4 CHANGE IN NUMBER OF AGRICULTURAL HECTARES DURING REPORTING YEAR

EFFECTIVENESS

Land Use Planning

CONTACT PERSON FOR LAND USE PLANNING:

21

local government - ningapi.ning.com/files/tbtkckfumvovbvwu3f6i-prlswb9zx4dyd0ucbwyqyuwxdv…costs...

Documents