The URL can be used to link to this page

01 - February 7, 2022 Connectivity Committee Agenda Package�uuuuumppppiuuwv ° �� m,ou ddK a� Pn,,agrrnsvvby N afllerl;: Corporation of the County of Elgin Connectivity Committee AGENDA For Thursday, February 17, 2022, 2:00 P.M 1St Meeting Called to Order 2nd Approval of the Agenda 3rd Adoption of Minutes — December 16, 2021 4t" Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest 5t" Delegations 6t" Reports 1) Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis Recommendations — Director of Information Technology Services 7t" Other Business 1) Final Committee Review and Discussion on IBI Final Report titled "Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and Proposed Solutions" — Director of Information Technology Services 8t" Correspondence 9t" Date of Next Meeting 10t" Adjournment VIRTUAL MEETING: IN -PERSON PARTICIPATION RESTRICTED NOTE FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC: Please click the link below to watch the Council Meeting: Accessible formats available upon request. 1 rv�"YUl)i)f)f///C �^� ^AA111�I�IIIII �� 000 1.;1, J In Meeting: Connectivity Committee Date: December 16, 2021 Time: 1:00 P.M. Location: Council Chambers/Webex The meeting was held in a hybrid in-person/electronic format with Committee Members and staff participating as indicated below. Attendees: Tom Marks, Deputy Warden and Committee Chair (in -person) Dominique Giguere, Councillor and Committee Vice Chair (electronic) Duncan McPhail, Councillor (in -person —joined the meeting in progress) Mike Andrews, Community Member (electronic) Justin Pennings, Community Member (electronic) Joshua Kiirya, Community Member (electronic —joined the meeting in progress) Staff: Julie Gonyou, Chief Administrative Officer (in -person) Brian Lima, General Manager of Engineering, Planning & Enterprise (in - person) Jeff Brock, Director of Information Technology Services (in -person) Jeremy Sharkey, IT Coordinator (electronic) Cecil Coxen, IT Manager — Township of Malahide (electronic) Katherine Thompson, Supervisor of Legislative Services (in -person) Carolyn Krahn, Legislative Services Coordinator (in -person) MINUTES 1. Call to Order The Connectivity Committee met this 16t" day of December, 2021. The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. 2. Approval of Agenda Moved by: Councillor Giguere Seconded by: Mike Andrews RESOLVED THAT the agenda be approved. `a rv�"YUl)i)f)f///C �^� ^AA111�I�IIIII �� 000 J In Recorded Vote Yes No Mike Andrews Yes Councillor Gi ubre Yes Justin Pennin s No Deputy Warden Marks Yes - 3 1 - Motion Carried. 3. Adoption of September 9, 2021 Minutes Moved by: Mike Andrews Seconded by: Councillor Giguere RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the previous meeting be adopted. Recorded Vote Yes No Mike Andrews Yes Councillor Gigubre Yes Justin Pennin s No De ut Warden Marks Yes 3 1 - Motion Carried. 4. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof None. 5. Presentation — IBI Engagement — Director of ITS The Director of ITS provided an overview of IBI Group's work to date and presented next steps with respect to IBI Group's Final Report, Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and Proposed Solutions. 3 rv�"YUl)i)f)f///C �^� ^AA111�I�IIIII �� 000 J In 6. Presentation — Elgin County Broadband Recommendations — IBI IBI Group presented an overview of technical and funding options and provided information on the Ontario Connects program. IBI also presented recommendations for the Committee's consideration. The Committee provided feedback to IBI, and the Chief Administrative Officer reported that the recommendations have been sent to the local administrators for their review. The feedback from the Committee and local administrators will be incorporated into the Final Report. The final draft of the Report will be sent to the Committee for their review. Moved by: Councillor McPhail Seconded by: Councillor Giguere RESOLVED THAT the Connectivity Committee's recommended changes be incorporated into the Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and Proposed Solutions report from IBI Group; THAT the recommendations contained in the report be presented to the Budget Committee and/or County Council for consideration; and THAT staff be directed to provide a report that explores best practices related to Option One (Advocacy, Strategic Purchasing & ISP Coordination), including key responsibilities, costs associated with the position, examples of best practices, and sources of funding, for review by the Committee. Recorded Vote Yes No Mike Andrews Yes Councillor Gi uere Yes Councillor McPhail Yes Joshua Kiir a No Deputy Warden Marks Yes - 4 1 Motion Carried. rv�"YUl)i)f)f///C �^�000 ^AA111�I�IIIII �� 7. Correspondence a. Email from Gwen Tracey regarding SWIFT project in Middlesex County The Committee received the correspondence from Gwen Tracey. 8. New Business None. 9. Date of Next Meeting The Committee will meet next at the call of the chair. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 2:25 p.m. Julie Gonyou, Tom Marks, Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk. Chair. REPORT TO CONNECTIVITY COMMITTEE FROM: Jeff Brock, Director of Information Technology t`n71 Services Iluumouuu�^° 0.�� Brian Lima, General Manager Engineering, Planning & Enterprise / Deputy CAO DATE: February 11, 2022 SUBJECT: Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis Recommendations RECOMMENDATION: THAT the report titled "Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis Recommendations" from the Director of Information Technology Services and General Manager of Engineering, Planning & Enterprise / Deputy CAO, dated February 11, 2022, be received and filed for information; and, THAT staff be directed to present the final report prepared by IBI Group Inc. titled "Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and Proposed Solutions" to Elgin County Council at its next regularly scheduled meeting; and further, THAT the Chair be directed to provide Elgin County Council with a summary of the Connectivity Committee's recommended next steps with respect to the final report prepared by IBI Group Inc. The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the recommendations included within the final report provided by IBI Group Inc. ("IBI Group") titled "Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and Proposed Solutions" along with additional information regarding IBI Group's Recommendation #1: Advocacy, Strategic Purchasing & ISP Coordination and suggested next steps. In 2021, Elgin County Council engaged IBI Group to complete a study including "Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and Proposed Solutions"' ("Study"). The Study provides a series of actions that are intended to advance connectivity in the County, while acknowledging the importance of partnerships and advocacy efforts. It recognizes the importance of broadband as an indispensable part of modern infrastructure. At the December 16t" 2021 Connectivity Committee ("Committee") meeting, IBI Group presented its final report which included recommendations to advance the access to affordable ' IBI Group Inc. Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and Proposed Solutions can be accessed here: I rf icyid "I `r� :ol r�r�r� iaer,r�rr�l per 10 2 and reliable high-speed internet in Elgin County. For ease of reference, IBI Group's recommendations are included within the next section of this report. The Committee carefully considered all recommendations presented by IBI Group and requested that staff provide additional information regarding Recommendation #1: Advocacy, Strategic Purchasing & ISP Coordination. 1.0101110 1 L1 IMUMMI�9 The Committee reviewed and discussed the following recommendations presented by IBI Group: Recommendation #1: Advocacy, Strategic Purchasing & ISP Coordination As a best practice, it is recommended that the County takes on a role of facilitating and advocating for investment in broadband infrastructure both from private industry as well as other levels of government. The County does not make a direct financial contribution to constructing infrastructure under this recommendation, but rather looks to encourage cooperation, partnerships, and facilitate the investment through approaches such as the facilitation of economic development and collaboration forums, removing financial or municipal approval challenges to planning, and permitting of fibre optic and radio tower infrastructure, as well as leveraging and coordinating the current connectivity requirements. Budgetary Costs: 1 senior staff FTE salary Underserved Premises Connected: N/A Expected Timing: Immediately Impact of Ontario Connects program: This recommendation is aligned and an important action as the Ontario Connects program proceeds through various stages of funding allocations and ISP selections(s). Recommendation #2: Long Term Vision — Fibre to the Home/Business It is recommended that the County adopt a long-term vision of achieving a fibre to the home infrastructure for its residents and business. This vision provides the best long-term benefits for residents and businesses and strategically positions the County for economic development growth, attracting and retaining businesses and residents. IBI recognizes that this vision may not be immediately affordable to the County and may take many years to budget and implement. The Ontario Connects program may provide a significant benefit to advance the implementation of this recommendation. Budgetary Costs: $107,074,000 Underserved Premises Connected: 7120 Expected Timing: 5-10 years, depending on timing of available funding Impact of Ontario Connects program: This recommendation is aligned with the long-term strategy and expected outcomes of the Ontario Connects program and it would be expected 3 that significant funding could be secured through this program to accomplish this recommendation. Recommendation #3: Initial Fibre Build to Radio Towers IBI has identified several options in each municipality for the County to invest in a hybrid fibre/ wireless approach to improve broadband connectivity in the County. This hybrid approach would involve the implementation of a fibre optic infrastructure from high density areas (e.g. served) extending along roadways to connect radio towers and residents along the fibre route to high speed services. A further analysis of the County's existing water tower infrastructure indicates that these towers may be a suitable substitute to colocation on some third -party towers or any new radio tower construction. This approach is the recommended first step for the County to prioritize improving broadband connectivity, subject to the outcomes that will be achieved by the Ontario Connects program. Budgetary Costs: $7,033,120 Underserved Premises Connected: 7120 Expected Timing: 3 years Impact of Ontario Connects program: The Ontario Connects program would supersede the expected outcomes of this recommendation and therefore the implementation of this program should be deferred until outcomes of the Ontario Connects program are further understood, in mid -year 2022. Recommendation #4: Extend Fibre Connectivity to Areas of Interest / Municipal Locations This recommendation builds on recommendation 3 and would provide for additional fibre optic connectivity to residents and businesses along the proposed fibre path, as well as achieving connectivity to municipal locations and land identified for future development to support specific economic development objectives. Please refer to the maps provided in Appendix A for additional details regarding this recommendation. Budgetary Costs: $3,728,000 Underserved Premises Connected: 7120 Additional Premises Connected: 785 Expected Timing: 1-3 years Impact of Ontario Connects program: The Ontario Connects program would supersede the expected outcomes of this recommendation and therefore the implementation of this program should be deferred until outcomes of the Ontario Connects program are further understood, in mid -year 2022. 2 MUNICIPAL EXAMPLE — Town of East Gwillimbury: At the time this report was drafted, staff were only able to connect with one (1) municipality. Efforts to connect with other municipalities who are undertaking broadband and advocacy work are ongoing. Making connections has been difficult as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Elgin County staff met with staff members from the Town of East Gwillimbury (Town) who support the municipality's Broadband Working Group to learn more about the work they are undertaking to support connectivity in their community. Context The Town of East Gwillimbury is located in the Regional Municipality of York and serves a community of approximately 24,000 residents covering an area of 245 km2. By contrast, Elgin County serves a population of 52,000 residents and covers an area of 1845 km2. Staff Support The Town does not have a dedicated Broadband Advocacy position; rather, this function resides within the profile of the Town's Director of Economic Development. The Director of Economic Development dedicates approximately '/z day per week on connectivity activities. This equates to approximately 0.1 of an FTE. Overview To build and facilitate relationships with Internet Service Providers (ISPs), the Town developed Non -Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) for execution by Members of the Broadband working group and ISPs. Town staff cited effective two-way communication between ISPs and staff as beneficial as information about current service availability and projects, along with prospective projects is made available and shared with the Broadband Working Group. According to Town staff, relationships with ISPs have been developed with varying degrees of success, and efforts are ongoing. They noted that they have been successful establishing a productive relationship with one of the large ISPs who is currently undertaking work in the municipality. Efforts to engage other large ISPs have not been successful to date. The municipality also indicated that they worked collaboratively with ISPs to streamline the municipal consent process in an effort to reduce approval times, whenever possible, to two weeks or less. The Broadband Working Group's efforts include: • working with the community to educate residents on their internet service options; • acting as a liaison between the ISPs and residents, ensuring that residents' concerns are heard and understood by the ISPs; • projects are reviewed monthly and action items are prioritized; and, • supporting the development of business cases when required to address concerns. Municipal staff suggested that time and energy is required at the onset to draft the NDA and develop relationships with the ISPs and community groups. Broadband Working Group - Composition M The Town of East Gwillimbury's Broadband Working Group is an extension of its Economic Development Committee. The Broadband Working Group is comprised of mainly community advocates, with at least 2 having a strong background in, and understanding of, the telecommunications and broadband industry. The balance of Members have business experience and/or a deeper understanding of the business/local community. There is an appointed Council Liaison (Councillor) and a Staff Liaison represented by the Director of Economic Development. The Chair of the Working Group is the former Vice President of one of the large communications carrierS2 and has extensive experience working with ISPs. The Chair's experience has proven to be beneficial when connecting with ISPs. ELGIN COUNTY: IBI's Recommendation #1 — Advocacy, Strategic Purchasing and ISP Coordination suggests that the County support facilitating and advocating for investment in broadband infrastructure (senior government / private sector). This recommendation did not include a direct financial contribution to supporting infrastructure, but rather recommends that the County find ways to support cooperation and partnerships with local ISPs and find ways to improve processes and eliminate challenges ISPs are facing when planning or undertaking work in Elgin County. The following recommendations are presented in response to the Connectivity Committee's request for options associated with the aforementioned recommendation. Leverage Existing Resources For the balance of 2022, it is recommended that, under the direction of the Chief Administrative Officer and as advised by the Connectivity Committee, the combined efforts of the Director of Information Technology Services, Manager of Economic Development, Business Enterprise Facilitator, Manager of Administrative Services, and Marketing and Communications Coordinator be leveraged to support Recommendation #1 including: • Continue to support the Connectivity Committee and County Council in their advocacy efforts; • Gather information directly from ISPs about barriers and recommend ways for the Committee to problem -solve and support local ISPs in non -monetary ways; • Research and develop innovative ways for the Connectivity Committee to connect with local ISPs (both large and small), including the possible development of an NDA; • Develop a robust online presence with ISP contact information along with a communications strategy; • Build relationships with local ISPs and prospective ISPs; and • Share status updates with the Committee regarding the SWIFT Project and projects currently underway within Elgin's partner municipalities for the Committee's review. 2 A telecornmuniicatiions carrier network its the coHectiion of devices and underiying infrastructure used to tranismiit data frorn one location to aniothier. ilf A • Engage with all local ISPs and prospective ISPs to encourage investment throughout the County and facilitate discussion amongst applicable approval agencies. Committee Opportunities • Consider reviewing the Committee Terms of Reference to assess composition and opportunities to recommend changes to County Council with respect to Membership/Composition( perhaps include more ISP representation, or representation from Elgin's LMPs); • Make recommendations to County Council regarding ways to advocate to private / senior government for funding; and • With the support of staff, and together with ISPs, develop resources (including educational materials) to enhance community awareness of available ISPs and associated costs. NEXT STEPS: Leveraging existing resources will provide the County with the opportunity to collect data about needs and resources and carefully evaluate how to best support ISPs through advocacy, strategic purchasing and coordination. In August 2022, staff will provide an interim report to the Connectivity Committee with information about initiatives supported, metrics collected, and recommended next steps. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Metrics will be collected to support a careful evaluation of the effectiveness of the strategy proposed to support Recommendation #1. While staff are confident that the team's combined efforts will meet the initial needs identified for this strategy, it is important to note that capacity currently does not exist within one (1) position alone. There are costs associated with supporting this work, however these costs are already included in the forecasted budget for 2022. is N ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PRIORITIES: Serving Elgin ® Ensuring alignment of current programs and services with community need. ® Exploring different ways of addressing community need. ® Engaging with our community and other stakeholders. Growing Elgin ® Planning for and facilitating commercial, industrial, residential, and agricultural growth. ❑ Fostering a healthy environment. ® Enhancing quality of place. Investing in Elgin ® Ensuring we have the necessary tools, resources, and infrastructure to deliver programs and services now and in the future. ❑ Delivering mandated programs and services efficiently and effectively. As part of the 2020-2022 Elgin County Strategic Plan, Council prioritized Quality of Place which includes a focus on rural connectivity. The Connectivity Committee and County Council are working hard on behalf of our residents to ensure our community has access to high speed internet regardless of where they live. We know that the future of Elgin's economy, our prosperity and our society depend on access to reliable and affordable high-speed internet. Council LOCAL MUNICIPAL PARTNER IMPACT: It is critical that ongoing discussions with Elgin's Local Municipal Partners (LMPs) occur. Doing so will ensure processes (including municipal consents) are streamlined as much as possible. LMPs can actively participate in the Committee's advocacy efforts and help remove barriers to entry for ISPs thereby encouraging their work within Elgin County. COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS: The IBI Report, along with Committee recommendations and associated Council resolutions will be shared with Local Municipal Partners. Additionally, the IBI Report will be featured on the County's website, on the Engage Elgin Connectivity Project site, featured on County Social Media, sent in a newsletter to those who have signed up to receive more information about connectivity in Elgin, and shared through the Council highlights document. CONCLUSION: Elgin County recognizes the importance of reliable and affordable broadband for the well-being and economic competitiveness of the County's residents, businesses, and institutions. Building strong relationships with these parties, as well as ISPs through education and advocacy, will im �3 ensure that the concerns and needs of the public are communicated effectively to the appropriate parties. County staff are pleased to help explore options and coordinate local efforts with ISPs and local connectivity projects. Staff recognize that partnerships and collaboration will be essential to defining, developing and continuing to grow a broadband network to serve all of Elgin County. All of which is Respectfully Submitted Jeff Brock Director of Information Technology Services Brian Lima General Manager Engineering, Planning & Enterprise / Deputy CAO All of which is Respectfully Submitted Julie Gonyou Chief Administrative Officer 13 Appendix A: Maps of Fibre Connectivity to Areas of Interest and Municipal Locations 14 10 11 IV 12 17 13 18 14 15 K 16 Q «o,... �p ll! H III�ry E I g ll!. DRAFT Report for Council Review Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and Proposed Solutions Prepared for Elgin County I B I by IBI Group L ll February 10, 2022 W Disclaimer This document was prepared by IBI Group Professional Services (Canada) Inc. ("IBI") forthe benefit of Elgin County. (the "Client") pursuant to a Consulting Services Agreement dated May 12, 2021 regarding Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and proposed Solutions forthe County of Elgin (the "System"). IBI has performed its services to the level customary for performing such services at the time and place where the services to our Client were provided. IBI makes or intends no other warranty, express or implied. This document, the information contained herein and any statements contained within are all based upon information provided to IBI, observations at the site, and publicly available information or sources referenced herein. IBI provides no assurance as to the accuracy and completeness of any third -party information. Certain statements in this document may constitute "forward -looking" statements which involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the System, to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such statements. When used in this document, these statements reflect IBI's interpretation or assessment of information and factors as of the date of this document and it should be noted that factors influencing the accuracy and completeness of the forward -looking statements will exist that are outside of the purview of IBI and that new risk factors may arise after the date of this document. Given these risks and uncertainties, the Client should not place undue reliance on forward -looking statements as a prediction of actual results. Although the forward -looking statements contained in this document are based upon what IBI believes to be reasonable assumptions, IBI cannot assure the Client that actual results will be consistent with these forward -looking statements and IBI makes no representations or warranty that the information in the document is sufficient to provide all the information, evaluations and analyses necessary to satisfy the needs of the Client. The use of and reliance on this document by any person or entity other than the Client is not authorized. Unless you are the Client, or a party to a fully executed Reliance Letter Agreement with IBI concerning this document, this document is provided for information purposes only and such unauthorized user by its acceptance or use of this document, releases IBI from any liability for direct, indirect, consequential, or special loss or damage whether arising in contract, warranty, express or implied, tort or otherwise Disclaimer Cost Estimate Accuracy Conceptual level planning and cost estimation has been performed forthe purposes of identifying options. This is a `Class D' estimate, with little or no site information, that indicates the approximate magnitude of cost of the proposed projects, based on broad requirements. This overall cost estimate is derived from unit costs in a similar area fora similar project. It is to be used to obtain approval in principle and for discussion purposes. 24 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Document Control Page CLIENT: Elgin County PROJECT NAME: Elgin County Internet Connectivity REPORT TITLE: Internet Connectivity and Broadband Analysis, Assessment, and Proposed Solutions IBI REFERENCE: 134843 VERSION: 1.0 DIGITAL MASTER: SharePOint ORIGINATOR: Jason McBeath, Ian Nelson, Keith Ponton, John George REVIEWER: Keith Ponton AUTHORIZATION: Keith Ponton CIRCULATION LIST: Client Project Team HISTORY: 0.1 —Initial Draft (Current State Assessment) 2021-07-13 0.2 — Revised Draft (Options) 2021-08-18 0.3 — Revised Draft (Recommendations) 2021-10-01 1.0 — Draft for Connectivity Committee Review 1.1 —Draft for Council Review 2022-02-10 February 10, 2022 25 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary...................................................................................................4 CurrentState...................................................................................................4 Options5 Recommendations........................................................................................... 5 Recommendation 1: Advocacy, Strategic Purchasing & ISP Coordination........... 5 Recommendation 2: Long term vision: Fibre to the Home/ Business .................. 6 Recommendation 3: Initial Fibre Build to Radio Towers ...................................... 7 Recommendation 4: Extend fibre connectivity to areas of interest / municipal locations.............................................................................................. 7 FundingOptions..............................................................................................8 GuidingPrinciples............................................................................................8 2 Current State Assessment....................................................................................... 10 2.1 Summary of Data Sources.............................................................................. 10 2.2 Analysis Methodology.................................................................................... 11 2.2.1 Overview........................................................................................... 11 2.2.2 Data Deficiencies............................................................................... 11 2.3 Data Review.................................................................................................. 12 2.3.1 Internet Service Providers & Technologies ........................................... 12 2.3.2 Fixed Wireless Radio Towers.............................................................. 13 2.3.3 Served and Underserved Premises ..................................................... 13 3 Options Analysis and Recommendations................................................................ 25 3.1 Technical Options..........................................................................................25 3.1.1 County Wide Fibre Deployment........................................................... 25 3.1.2 Fibre Backbone to Fixed Wireless Locations ........................................ 28 3.1.1 Cost Summary ................................................................................... 32 3.2 Recommendations.........................................................................................32 Summary of Recommendations...................................................................... 33 Recommendation 1: Advocacy, Strategic Purchasing & ISP Coordination......... 33 Recommendation 2: Long term vision: Fibre to the Home/ Business ................ 34 February 10, 2022 26 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Table of Contents (continued) Recommendation 3: Initial Fibre Build to Radio Towers .................................... 35 Recommendation 4: Extend fibre connectivity to areas of interest / municipal locations............................................................................................ 38 3.3 Governance / Funding Options....................................................................... 39 3.3.1 Ontario Connects: Ontario's Accelerated High -Speed Internet Program 39 3.3. 2 County Owned................................................................................... 40 3.3.3 P3 approach...................................................................................... 41 3.3.4 Direct Subsidy Approach.................................................................... 41 3.3.5 Facilitate Private Sector Investment.................................................... 42 3.3.6 Status Quo........................................................................................ 42 3.4 Guiding Policies.............................................................................................43 3.4.1 Guiding Policies: ................................................................................ 43 3.4.2 Technology Options Analysis.............................................................. 43 List of Figures Figure 2-1: Elgin County Fixed Wireless Towers..........................................................13 Figure 2-2: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within West Elgin ........................15 Figure 2-3: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within West Elgin 16 Figure 2-4: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Dutton Dunwich.................17 Figure 2-5. Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Dutton Dunwich....................................................................................................17 Figure 2-6: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Southwold .........................18 Figure 2-7: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Southwold.19 Figure 2-8. Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Central Elgin.....................20 Figure 2-9: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Central Elgin ................................................................................................................20 Figure 2-10. Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Malahide .........................21 Figure 2-11: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Malahide.22 Figure 2-12: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Bayham ..........................23 Figure 2-13: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Bayham ..23 February 10, 2022 27 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Table of Contents (continued) List of Appendices Appendix A — In -Process/ Potential Fibre Builds in Elgin County Appendix B — Internet Service Providers and Technologies Appendix C — Maps of Fibre Connectivity to Areas of interest / municipal locations February 10, 2022 28 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County 1 Executive Summary Access to the internet is driving social and economic progress on a transformational scale. Elgin County residents rely on access to reliable, affordable, high-speed internet to participate in essential aspects of society. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for internet access to support personal and professional communications, to allow residents to apply for jobs, receive education and do homework and to access government services. Businesses need reliable and affordable high speed internet access in orderto grow and flourish, and the County has taken an active role, through the Connectivity Committee to focus on challenges that need to be addressed relating to (i) Availability, (ii) Affordability, (iii) Speed and (iv) Awareness. This report provides an in-depth assessment of the current state of internet access within the County and goes on to explore several options forthe County to consider as steps to address the challenges that currently exist. Technical options, namely fibre optic and wireless infrastructure are presented along with conceptual cost estimates related to investing in this infrastructure are presented. Recommendations have been provided in terms of appropriate next steps forthe County to considerto address the connectivity challenges that have been identified. It is noted that as this report was being finalized the Ontario government has launched the provincial Ontario Accelerated High Speed Internet Program (OAHSIP), also know as Ontario Connects. Details regarding the specific details and timing of the Ontario Connects program are emerging as this report is being finalized (December 2021). This program, and outcomes of planned reverse auctions planned for mid 2022 to allocate provincial broadband subsidies have the potential to substantially impact the recommendations presented in this report. We have provided commentary regarding the expected impact of the Ontario Connects program with each recommendations. Current State The current state assessment detailed herein reviews available information and datasets relating to ISP and Internet speeds in Elgin County. Best efforts have been made to collect as much data as possible within the project scope and time frame, with independent 3rd party data sources used to provide a composite picture of the current state of broadband infrastructure in the County over the time period of June and July, 2021. The initial current state review finds that 53.4% of premises are served, while 32.1% are underserved based on the CRTC minimum broadband speeds of 50 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload. Roughly 14.5% of premises require further investigation. While just over half of County premises are served with minimum broadband speeds, the gap to meet minimum speeds for underserved areas is challenging with roughly 1,500 km of underserved road segments, or roughly 71% of County road segments. The following Table 1-1 summarizes the key broadband metrics forthe County: February 10, 2022 29 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Table 1-1 Elgin County Broadband Key Metrics �IIIUI IUIIII��IIIIII/�uUf�io� f�11DD+f++Rf+ �U111�aIIIIIl1�IIlI� � / IIII�I!!lIIIIIrjfU�JJJJIIIN l��llllll � Served 9884 53% 442 20% Underserved 5940 32% 1563 71% Further 2673 15% 188 9% Investigation Total: 18497 100% 2193 100% Options County Wide Fibre Deployment The County -Wide Fibre Deployment option involves the deployment of buried and aerial backbone fibre along all County roads in un/underserved areas of the County, with drops installed to each premise, (home/business), connecting to the network. The benefits of this infrastructure are primarily that premises are connected via fibre optic cable, providing a secure access, with highest possible speeds, and that the connection is future - proofed, to the extent that with updated electronics in the future, speeds could be further increased. Based on the performance and longevity of existing fibre optic infrastructure that has been deployed globally, it would be expected that a fibre optic infrastructure would have a useful life of 30 years or greater. The drawbacks of this option are primarily related to the option's high costs, estimated to be between $100M and $107M. Fibre Backbone and Fixed Wireless This option is comprised of deploying fibre backbone to connect 12 tower sites across the County that would provide suitable wireless coverage, and then utilizing radio technology to connect premises within each tower's coverage area. Premises along the fibre paths would be served with fibre. The benefits of such an approach are primarily financial, with costs in the $3.6 to $7M range underscored by shorter deployment timelines. The drawbacks relate to upgradability of the system to higher speeds in the future, as well as the potential forsignal degradation based on the density of foliage as well as other environmental factors. Recommendations [All recommendations are presented here in draft subject to review and feedback from the Elgin County Connectivity Committee] Recommendation 1: Advocacy, Strategic Purchasing & ISP Coordination As a best practice, it is recommended that the County takes on a role of facilitating and advocating for investment in broadband infrastructure both from private industry as well as other levels of government. The County does not make a direct financial contribution to constructing infrastructure under this recommendation, but rather looks to encourage cooperation, partnerships and facilitate the investment through approaches such as the facilitation of economic development and collaboration forums, removing financial or municipal approval challenges to planning and permitting of fibre optic and radio tower infrastructure, as well as leveraging and coordinating the current connectivity requirements. February 10, 2022 30 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County It is expected that 1 additional senior staff full time equivalent (FTE) would be required from the County to provide strategic leadership, facilitate coordination and collaboration forums, and lead the advocacy initiatives with other levels of government. While a staff role is preferred, this role could also be assumed by a contractor/ consultant until recruitment and hiring can take place. Impact of Ontario Connects program: This recommendation is aligned and an important action as the Ontario Connects program proceeds through various stages of funding allocations and ISP selections(s). Budgetary Costs: 1 senior staff FTE salary Underserved Premises Connected: N/A Expected Timing: Immediately Recommendation 2: Long term vision: Fibre to the Home/ Business We recommend the County adopt a long term vision of achieving a fibre to the home infrastructure for its residents and business. This vision provides the best long term benefits for residents and businesses and strategically positions the County for economic development growth, attracting and retaining businesses and residents. We recognize that this vision may not be immediately affordable the County and may take many years to budget and implement. The Ontario Connects program may provide a significant benefit to advance the implementation of this recommendation. Budgetary Costs: $107,074,000 Underserved Premises Connected: 7120 Expected Timing: 5-10 years, depending on timing of available funding Impact of Ontario Connects program: This recommendation is aligned with the long term strategy and expected outcomes of the Ontario Connects program and it would be expected that significant funding could be secured through this program to accomplish this recommendation February 10, 2022 31 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Recommendation 3: Initial Fibre Build to Radio Towers We have identified several options in each municipality forthe County to invest in a hybrid fibre/ wireless approach to improve broadband connectivity in the County. This hybrid approach would involve the implementation of a fibre optic infrastructure from high density areas (e.g. served) extending along roadways to connect radio towers and residents along the fibre routeto high speed services. A further analysis of the County's existing water tower infrastructure indicates that these towers may be a suitable substitute to colocation on some 3rd party towers or any new radio tower construction. This approach is the recommended first step forthe County to prioritize to improve broadband connectivity, subject to the outcomes that will be achieved by the Ontario Connects program. Impact of Ontario Connects program: The Ontario Connects program would supersede the expected outcomes of this recommendation and therefore the implementation of this program should be deferred until outcomes of the Ontario Connects program are further understood, in mid- year 2022. Budgetary Costs: $7,033,120 Underserved Premises Connected: 7120 Expected Timing: 3 years Recommendation 4: Extend fibre connectivity to areas of interest / municipal locations This recommendation builds on recommendation 3 above and would provide for additional fibre optic connectivity to residents and businesses along the proposed fibre path, as well as achieving connectivity to municipal locations and land identified forfuture development to support specific economic development objectives. Please referto the maps provided in Appendix C for additional details regarding this recommendation Impact of Ontario Connects program: The Ontario Connects program would supersede the expected outcomes of this recommendation and therefore the implementation of this program should be deferred until outcomes of the Ontario Connects program are further understood, in mid- year 2022. Budgetary Costs: $10,761,120 Underserved Premises Connected: 7120 Underserved Premises Connected: 785 Expected Timing: 1-3 years February 10, 2022 32 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Funding Options This report identifies a number of federal and provincial grant funding options, along with various project structures (County Owned, Direct Subsidy, P3 with private investment) that may be considered to facilitate and manage the investment in broadband infrastructure. All of the funding options identified in this report are somewhat superseded by the announcement of the provincial Ontario Accelerated High Speed Internet Program (OAHSIP), [Ontario Connects Program]. Note that at the time of writing this report, the Ontario Connects program was initially announced with program objectives as follows: • Facilitate speed of delivery of high-speed internet services and 100% coverage at a minimum service level of 50/10 Mbps for approximately 700,000 unserved or underserved homes by the end of 2025 • Leverage existing utility infrastructure and rights of way to reduce required subsidies and compress delivery timelines • Attract broad market participation of quality counterparties that is inclusive of smaller and local players • Ensuring infrastructure lasts and can be upgraded as needed The program has committed $413 to connect every region in Ontario to reliable, high speed internet by the end of 2025. It is expected to support accelerated broadband expansion in the Province. While little detailed information is known, the Province has stated that the process will enable Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to bid for provincial subsidies through a series of reverse auction events, with winning bids meeting the defined coverage and deployment requirements at the most reasonable price. The program in very early stages of formulation, and fewdetaiIs are known regarding the eligibility forISPs and/ormunicipalities to participate directly in the program. Benefits and Risks The program announcement represents the most amount of funding that any provincial government has committed to improving broadband connectivity. The reverse auction process that is described would tend to favor incumbent ISPs with existing infrastructure in the County that can cost-effectively compete for subsides in a reverse auction subsidy format. If successful, the program would provide a significant incentive to existing ISPs to invest in infrastructure to serve all underserved areas of the County. Risks of the program include the ability of the program to have sufficient budget fund connectivity to all underserved areas in the County, the ability of small and medium size local ISPs to participate in the program due to the level of financial commitments from ISPs that are required, as well as the province's ability to execute on the program in the stated timeframe. Since little detailed information regarding this program is known, we continue to describe other funding solutions in the following sections, assuming that they may be required in a coordinated and complementary fashion to fund areas within the County where the Ontario Connects program may not be eligible or have sufficient funding budget to adequately address. Guiding Principles It is recommended that the County adopt a set of guiding principles that will help shape recommendations and next steps. These guiding principles would include: February 10, 2022 33 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County 1. The County does not want to duplicate the investments of the private sector and will therefore look to make investments in geographic areas where the private sector has not invested and has no short-term plans to invest. 2. The County will work collaboratively with private ISPs that operate, or plan to operate within the County to ensure that investment barriers within the County's control are removed, and that the County's objectives with respect to improved connectivity for residents and business is know and understood by all parties. 3. The County will work closely with all levels of government, both lowertier and upper tier to ensure that strategies with respect to grant funding to support infrastructure investment in the County are aligned and coordinated. 4. The County's investments are utilized to remove the barriers of investment and market entry for all ISPs and create a level playing field that encourages retail competition. All ISPs will be able to access County funded investments on equal open access terms and conditions. The County has several alternatives to consideras it considers next steps. It is important to keep in mind that the County must make some determinations on the degree it can afford to invest, while at the same time weighing the socio-economic benefits of investment and benefits to the County in terms of economic development, attraction and retention of businesses and residents. While a county wide fibre optic infrastructure is the long-term vision, this may need to be considered over many years to be affordable as a direct investment by the County. February 10, 2022 34 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County 2 Current State Assessment This section of the report provides an overview and understanding of the current state of broadband in Elgin County. 2.1 Summary of Data Sources Data forthis analysis was sourced from federal, provincial, and local agencies. The agencies and their respective datasets are identified and explained below: A. Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) — Federal — Governmental ISED maintains the datasets used for evaluation of broadband service across the country. The data extracted forthis report was available in two formats, hexagonal polygons and road segment polylines. The hexagonal data was used to show coverage maps of Internet Service Providers and the technologies they used. The road segment data gave more detailed insight into Data Speed Classification throughout the county, mapping each road in 250m sections. The following data was reviewed from ISED: a. Data Speed Classification— Hexagon b. Data Speed Classification —250m Road Segments C. Internet Service Provider (ISP) provided data d. Available Communication Technologies B. Ontario Data Catalogue — Provincial - Governmental The Province of Ontario maintains an extensive GIS database. For this report, point address, municipal border, road and highways, railway, land use classification and other broad economic data was used to verify data from othersources. C. County of Elgin —Local —Governmental The County provided an extensive dataset forthe purpose of this report. Administrative Boundaries, Roads and Highways, Railways, Existing telecommunication lines and tower infrastructure (Partial), Municipal Buildings, Land -Use Types, Parcel Map, Civic Address Points. Additionally, the result dataset of a local broadband survey that was completed in 2020 was provided foranalysis. The County also provided a list of In-Process/Potential Fibre Builds in Elgin County. See Appendix A fora complete list recently updated in July 2021. While this list is not exhaustive, it is understood to capture most of the known or planned activity as of the date received. D. Southwestern Integrated Fibre Technology (SWIFT) — Local/Regional initiative funded by three levels of government SWIFT provided insight into current and future broadband projects that are planned within the County borders. This information is also available on their website at: https://swiftruralbroad band, ca/Droiects/approved -Droiects/ E. Regional and Rural Broadband — (R2132) — Federal - Non -Profit R2132 provided summaries of their historic broadband related survey results from the region. Notably, itwas not in a spatially presented format dueto data privacy barriers. F. Local Resources February 10, 2022 35 10 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Various sets of data and information were shared from local residents. This data includes a visually conducted inventory of radio towers with estimated ranges and anecdotal reports of known and lacking infrastructure. The information was interpreted and used to estimate current state, for use when classifying broadband status by County. All available data noted above was used in the review of the County's current state assessment. 2.2 Analysis Methodology 2.2.1 Overview The datasets were collected and applied to a spatial project for evaluation, data verification, and analysis. The datasets were vetted forduplication of attributes, over -complexity, and accuracy. If multiple datasets were available with overlapping data, they were cross verified to confirm validity and one "master' dataset was selected. Once the data was deemed acceptable, a review and analysis were performed. 2.2.2 Data Deficiencies There is a level confidence in the data used for review and analysis. However, it is important to note that not all the data provided will be accurate. The following potential shortcomings have been noted: ISED Hexagons There are industry known limitations to the ISED published hexagon data. If there is one data point within the predefined polygon then it becomes a positive data point. For example, if all residents have <50Mbps download, but one resident within the polygon has 50Mbps+ download, then the polygon is counted as served. For this reason, the road network level data for Internet speeds is used foranalysis. Forall other datasets (such as provider or technology data) the hexagon is used. Internet Speed Tests County residents were asked to confirm Internet speeds as part of the County's broadband survey. The results provided by residents were independent and cannot be confirmed to be accurate. A challenge with these self tests is that there could be limitations unknowingly imposed by the resident to limit speeds. For example, residents may be running their test device off a home Wi-Fi network that limits speeds or perhaps not set up in a favourable location. Number of Speed Test 205 speed test results were received. Given there are 21,116 premises on record in Elgin County, this translates to less than a 1% response rate. This is a low rate when considering an analysis. There is an ongoing follow up Internet speed test survey to supplement this report. It is anticipated to be complete by August 6, 2021. Fixed Wireless Radio Towers Fixed wireless solutions have provided many with access to broadband. However, fixed wireless comes with limitations and is generally not consider an ultimate solution to meet CRTC standards. Limitations include the following: Radio transmission challenges across varying topology and existing foliage within the County may limit data transmission rates; - Towers may not have high capacity backhaul to support all users from a single tower; Number of active users on a single radio tower often create bottle necks for network equipment at the tower location. February 10, 2022 36 11 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County As such, tower location and advertised subscriber data rates cannot be taken at full value and presents it challenging to confirm broadband information forthosewho have access to fixed wireless radio solutions. 2.3 Data Review The following section provides a summary of the relevant data and information gathered from the data sources noted above. The current state of broadband within Elgin County was evaluated by assessing the available data and correlating the data for a detailed look at what areas of the County are served and what areas of the County are not served. The Canadian Radio -television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has set a target of 50 Mbps upload and 10 Mbps download forfixed Internet service to be classified as served. For purposes of this report, this target also applies. Anything less is deemed to be underserved. The following table provides further clarity. Table 2-1: Broadband Classification Less than orequal to 50 Mbps Less than orequal to 10 Mbps ttJlf� I�I110111N11 �O�i��l��%lllllUlll� , Underserved Less than orequal to 50 Mbps Greater than orequal to 10 Mbps Underserved Greater than orequal to 50 Mbps Less than orequal to 10 Mbps Underserved Greater than orequal to 50 Mbps Greater than orequal to 10 Mbps Served The following sections provide a summary of findings and analysis that will be used in determining next steps. 2.3.1 Internet Service Providers & Technologies The following Table lists Internet Service Providers operating within the county and their respective technologies for broadband delivery, based on ISED data: Table 2-2: ISP and Associated Available Technologies Fixed Wireless High Capacity Transport Services Bell Mobile Wireless DSL Fibre to the home Cogeco Connexion Fibre to the home Coaxial Cable Eastlink High Capacity Transport Services DSL Execulink Fixed Wireless Falcon Internet Services Fixed Wireless Freedom Mobile Mobile Wireless KWIC Internet Fixed Wireless NFTC Fibre to the home February 10, 2022 37 12 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Present High Capacity Transport Services High Capacity Transport Services Rogers Coaxial Cable Mobile Wireless TekSavvy Solutions Fixed Wireless TekSavvy Solutions High Capacity Transport Services Telus Mobile Wireless Xplornet Fixed Wireless Satellite See Appendix B ford etailed maps of IS and Technology coverage by provider and type. While these maps should not be considered to be an exhaustive representation, it is deemed to be reliable as of the date of the information provided by Industry Science and Economic Development Canada 2.3.2 Fixed Wireless Radio Towers There are several fixed -wireless radio towers within the borders of Elgin County. Mobile wireless towers are not considered in this review because this is a considered a separate function and not within the classification of fixed broadband solutions. This dataset was compiled from various sources and the tower transmission range should be used for illustration purposes only, as it does not factor any environmental conditions. 1 1;rA11111 �//O rw�r7kF /lV" � F f PP �ll "M PryLdCdIICGFwA01lW OFjj a, r� roa /auwwwra r 0� vu° aALNV'V'At' T`r OF wMzsi ¢IIruNr �o F,F„ `k fer„ I M IUMC'fP A.LIITY OF II3JeYIMl m m rr r Figure 2-1: Elgin County Fixed Wireless Towers 2.3.3 Served and Underserved Premises The following maps and commentary are broken out by each lower -tier municipality. The details provided include: February 10, 2022 38 13 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County - Current understanding of fixed wireless tower infrastructure; - Current understanding of known fibre optic cable infrastructure; - ISED road classification compared to Internet speed survey results; - Confirmed premises meeting CRTC minimum broadband speed standards; - Current understanding of served and underserved areas based on road segments; - Numbers and percentages of served and underserved based on premises and road segment lengths. Discussion on each municipality follows the figures. Key metrics to be carried over into subsequent sections of this report are the number and percentage of premises and road segment lengths considered served versus underserved. This information will enable an understanding of the magnitude of the broadband challenge, help provide cost estimates, and ultimately strategies on how to address the gaps. It is understood that the most effective way to validate the various datasets is to have local site - specific data speed tests. The previously completed survey results have been used to validate the datasets. By validating Elgin County survey results against ISED road segments, a picture of the true broadband status throughout the county has been developed. A percentage has been identified as requiring further investigation. Reasons forthis include the following: - Conflicting known infrastructure data, ISED data, and local Internet speed test results; - Conflicting data regarding current or future infrastructure in the area; - Actual ability of infrastructure owners to provide services along "backhaul" or "feeder" routes; - Anecdotal reports of lacking service or lacking infrastructure. Municipality of West Elgin February 10, 2022 39 14 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Figure 2-2: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within West Elgin February 10, 2022 40 15 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Figure 2-3: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within West Elgin West Elgin primarily has fibre optic infrastructure in and between the communities of West Lorne, Rodney, and New Glasgow. There area number of fixed wireless towers in and just west of the municipality that serve residences and businesses as well. Correlating ISED and Internet speed test data, premises along the path of fibre infrastructure are confirmed to meet CRTC broadband minimum speeds. Future SWIFT funded NFTC fibre build is considered to meet the minimum speeds as well. Areas theoretically covered by fixed wireless towers do not meet the CRTC speed minimums. This is validated with local speed test results. For perceived underserved areas in the municipality, ISED data is confirmed against the local survey data that properly represents the underserved area. Confirmed served premises account for 67.7% of total premises, while underserved premises represent 32.1% of total premises. 0.2% requires further investigation. Based on road segment lengths, 21.6% is considered served while 77.8% is considered underserved. 0.6% requires further investigation. February 10, 2022 41 16 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Municipality of Dutton Dunwich Figure 2-4: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Dutton Dunwich Figure 2-5: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Dutton Dunwich February 10, 2022 42 17 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Dutton Dunwich primarily has fibre optic infrastructure in and between the communities of Dutton and Wallacetown. There is additional fibre that extends out from these communities, and includes committed fibre builds funding by SWIFT. There are several fixed wireless towers in and just west of the municipality that serve residences and businesses as well. Correlating ISED and Internet speed test data, premises along the path of fibre infrastructure provide confidence that residences and business have access to CRTC broadband minimum speeds. Areas theoretically covered by fixed wireless towers do not meet the CRTC speed minimums. This is validated with local speed test results. For perceived underserved areas in the municipality, ISED data is confirmed against the local survey data that properly represents the underserved area. Confirmed served premises account for 62.6% of total premises, while underserved premises represent 37.4% of total premises. 0% requires further investigation. Based on road segment lengths, 20.6% is considered served while 79.4% is considered underserved. 0% requires further investigation. Township of Southwold Figure 2-6: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Southwold February 10, 2022 43 18 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County , r:'NtJhtCIwok1 0i`uoacl�s Total Road Length (Knn) . Served 67,5 M2% Under -Served 264.E 75.4% Rewires Invest gatiorr i9.p.... 6.4°✓0 Figure 2-7: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Southwold There is limited broadband within the boundaries of Southwold. Connectivity primarily is comprised of fixed wireless radio towers of which there is no premises with minimum Internet speeds confirmed. There is committed SWIFT funded fibre infrastructure being built around Iona, Iona Station, and Lawrence Station. Correlating ISED and Internet speed test data, there are pockets of areas considered served outside of St. Thomas and Port Stanley. There is conflicting data in communities of Fingal and Shedden. Areas theoretically covered by fixed wireless towers do not meet the CRTC speed minimums. This is validated with local speed test results. Confirmed served premises account for 38.4% of total premises, while underserved premises represent 39.6% of total premises. 22.0% requires further investigation. Based on road segment lengths, 19.2% is considered served while 75.4% is considered underserved. 5.4% requires further investigation. February 10, 2022 44 19 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Municipality of Central Elgin Figure 2-8: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Central Elgin Central Elgin Premise e Total Premise Count ......... SS20 ................................................................................................................................................................................... Served — -- ------------------ 3q7 72.0% ......- ---- - Und,er_Served' 129E 2.3.5% Requires Invesfgaton 249 4.�5% ..... ..... ......... ......... Central Elgin Roads Total Road Length (KI",� � 3 8 9 2 Served 109.2 281n � Under Served 263.5 67.7% Requires Invesflg;a�tion 16.5 4.2% Figure 2-9: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Central Elgin February 10, 2022 45 20 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Central Elgin primarily has physical broadband infrastructure in and between the communities of Port Stanley, Union, heading into St. Thomas. There is also infrastructure east -west between Lawton's Corner and Sparta. Correlating ISED and Internet speed test data, premises along the path of physical broadband infrastructure provide confidence that residences and business have access to CRTC broadband minimum speeds. Areas theoretically covered by fixed wireless towers do not meet the CRTC speed minimums. This is validated with local speed test results. For perceived underserved areas in the municipality, ISED data is confirmed against the local survey data that properly represents the underserved area. Confirmed served premises account for 72.0% of total premises, while underserved premises represent 23.5% of total premises. 4.5% requires further investigation. Based on road segment lengths, 28.1% is considered served while 67.7% is considered underserved. 4.2% requires further investigation. Township of Malahide ISED Rating J� y� ��f fir`/ m0011001�I I�1 �M� ICI rPrnp o�i ap��fmiy �l l OIIN\MJI\MW 2OM&UOWN PMB WP `� SOMP POYJNiRMP VF ISED Road Classification with County Survey Results Test Sites Achieving the 50f10 Mbps Fedleral (Broadband Minimum Figure 2-10: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Malahide February 10, 2022 46 21 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County /r a; Premise Distribution in Malahide ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ilallahide Premise Total Premise Count Served Under -Served 3830 846 22.1°% 1639 42. % Requires Investigation 1345 ....................__Malahllde Roads 35.1% Total hoed Length, (Km) 436.1 Served 35.4 8.1% Under-Served Requires Investigation 296.7 104.1, 68.0% 23.9% Figure 2-11: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Malahide The Township of Malahide has fibre optic infrastructures purring out of Aylmer. Notably infrastructure down into Port Bruce, into Fairview, and up into Lyons. There are several fixed wireless towers in and around the Township that serve residences and businesses as well. Correlating ISED and Internet speed test data, premises along the path of fibre infrastructure provides minimal confidence that residences and business have access to CRTC broadband minimum speeds. Areas theoretically covered by fixed wireless towers do not meet the CRTC speed minimums. This is validated with local speed test results. For perceived underserved areas in the municipality, ISED data is confirmed against the local survey data that properly represents the underserved area. Confirmed served premises account for22.1% of total premises, while underserved premises represent 42.8% of total premises. 35.1% requires further investigation. Based on road segment lengths, 8.1% is considered served while 68.0% is considered underserved. 23.9% requires further investigation. February 10, 2022 47 22 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Municipality of Bayham Figure 2-12: Current State of Broadband Infrastructure within Bayham Figure 2-13: Current Understanding of Served and Underserved Areas within Bayham February 10, 2022 48 23 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County The Municipality of Bay ham primarily has fibre optic infrastructure in and between the communities of Port Burwell, Vienna, and Straffordville. There is additional fibre that extends out from these communities as well. SWIFT has a confirmed funded fibre build in and around North Hall and Corinth. There are several fixed wireless towers in and around the municipality that serve residences and businesses as well. Correlating ISED and Internet speed test data, premises along the path of fibre infrastructure provide confidence in some areas that residences and business have access to CRTC broadband minimum speeds. The exception here is the route between Vienna and Straffordville and the fibre path running west out of Straffordville. Internet speed test data conflicts ISED road network data in these cases. Areas theoretically covered by fixed wireless towers do not meet the CRTC speed minimums. This is validated with local speed test results. For perceived underserved areas in the municipality, ISED data is confirmed against the local survey data that properly represents the underserved area. Confirmed served premises account for62.6% of total premises, while underserved premises represent 37.4% of total premises. 0% requires further investigation. Based on road segment lengths, 20.6% is considered served while 79.4% is considered underserved. 0% requires further investigation. County Summary Premises served vs. underserved and served area by road segments are two key metrics to further review. The following table provides a summary of served and underserved premises in Eglin County. West Elgin j �N 1 �11111 ��II I � U� I I ii(�IU UU lllilll DIIIIII �� IIIII�� J l �1 L fir` w 1 1655 67.7% ��I �IIIIIIIIIIIIII !11 Illl!!! 1111!!!11 11 I 1 1 l i i f i .III � u, I III 11 � � � ii(�IU VU Ifl(III �DIIIIII I�� III�� w f fir` I - I 1 785 32.1% 11 ))ak�l��llll lll,l I1R!!(8 l�llllllll y 1 ! vl I f II 111 kN lll�A��l 11111 l�881f � III 111�11f111111 ii 1 1 I 1 1 1 , f 1 I JJ 1 �>' U IIiiP�IU VU Ifl(III �DIIIIII III Il�l�y!! D�U) I�111 r 6 0.2% Dutton Dunwich 1194 62.6% 712 37.4% 0 0.0% Southwold 787 38.4% 811 39.6% 450 22.0% Central Elgin 3975 72.0% 1296 23.5% 249 4.5% Malahide 846 22.1% 1639 42.8% 1345 35.1% Bayham 1427 51.9% 697 25.4% 623 22.7% County Total 9884 1 53.4% 1 5940 32.1% 1 2673 14.51/6 *Totals do not equal 100% because there are areas that have been identified as requiring further investigation. February 10, 2022 49 24 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County The following table provides a summary of served and underserved areas of the County based on length of road segment. West Elgin I du U>I 111 Ifff ul III1I1! 111 lii� 1r 111It >1 y�jll� I �I 1U Ilf II ll�lll 1. l l �1 I�Il�l�tlllll�rll�l� !t , rirr 79.3 km 21.6% i Il�u yy 111 fill i a II1 111 ii1111r IIII!!! fffff D� ` I� II Il llllll 1 I y l �� I��llillllrrlll�� !t rr� 286.5 km 77.8% iJ 6rr rii�aio (1111 l��rrrfl i�111 `�o Biuu�» »�l ii irrrr lllrrifi I 1 b � � l I I � 1t 1 l w , I� Il �� ,I lllllllllllllllll� It IIIIIIIII U ol�� Itl Illl�ll� I 2.2 km 0.6% Dutton Dunwich 69.7 km 20.6% 268.4 km' 79.4% 0.0 km 0.0% Southwold 67.5 km 19.2% 264.6 km 75.4% 19.0 km 5.4% Central Elgin 109.2 km 28.1% 263.5 km 67.7% 16.5 km 4.2% Malahide 35.4 km 8.1% 296.7 km 68.0% 104.1 km 23.9% Bayham 81.0 km 26.1 % 183.3 km 59.1 % 46.0 km 14.8% County Total 442.1 km 20.2% 1563.0 km 71.3% 187.8 km 8.6% The abovetwo tables indicatethat roughly 53.4% of the County has access to Internet speeds of at least 50 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload. Onthe other hand, roughly 32.1% of County premises do not have access to minimum broadband speeds. In contrast, roughly one third of premises underserved account for more than 70% of the County geographic area as represented by length of road. This is reflective of the rural broadband challenges that the County is facing. The Township of Aylmer was reviewed for broadband services and deemed to be served. 3 Options Analysis and Recommendations 3.1 Technical Options 3.1.1 County Wide Fibre Deployment Further investigation of the suspect areas enabled the requalification of all road segments and premises to either "Served" or "Under -Served". The County -Wide Fibre Deployment option involves the deployment of buried and aerial backbone fibre along all County roads in un/underserved areas of the County, with drops installed to each premise, (home/business), connecting to the network. The benefits of this infrastructure are primarily that premises are connected via fibre optic cable, providing a secure access, with highest possible speeds, and that the connection is future - proofed, to the extent that with updated electronics in the future, speeds could be further increased. Based on the performance and longevity of existing fibre optic infrastructure that has been deployed globally, it would be expected that a fibre optic infrastructure would have a useful life of 30 years or greater. The cons of such an approach are primarily related to the option's cost. February 10, 2022 50 25 J' } Z 0 Z m 0 O rr m 0 z H T U c z o o Z U O C a w li o 0 Z o � � N U Lu (o H m z a` 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO It CO (D O) I- d� 0000 a) ti O ti ti a w1y. J �Elll tid'OOcMO) v" OO 00 CO 4 6 00 u»lr�rt�°w I, O O ti N c'O U� N N N N N c'q IIIIIIII balll ;� v 1011� urAb 0 0 0 0 0 OUI Hi o ll l" puul pi LO O N 'It M ON pm} N N N N N M I-- - O O N O O Lti ch T- I- I- O CO CO O O O O O O O N ct O N ct 6`yl M � N � u" CM LO �EIII 00NNNOO WN 00 T- 0 m N O ;:;;:, I- ti O M M O miuiol u»uu� °SG�' N o 0 0 0 0 0 00 CO O 00 O CO _ °m»mf O O LO Il- LO ch 00 II' (D 00 Il- � LO M d N N N „md O T- d CO ji+Iu jjjj N�llr ilul»ll� .3 � a O cnu O m co � O to ti L w O to 0 O N ti w co M O N ti LA O ti ti M r O O � O C O <09- U Q. O -a a) :0 a) C U) O M Y O a) a) a) O "a C O — U U (n � 2 O U U n3 O O a) E O c � O O -0 0 0 O U a) a) O a) a) Qc O Y a) a) � n3 a) a) :3 :3 M M �--C O a) �1 U) C 'U a) O � Y O O a) I o O Q N 0- 0 w LL. . C: O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 N_ N N O CO N �u O O O O O O ul (D 't � � o 0 Kl ✓' LO LO m ch M w Il- O N m O cF ��m �rlllTu Uu))l ��I m�U uulll Ef3 Ef3 Ef3 Ef3 Ef3 Ef3 »mil I ^nl O O O O O O WRIIIII m d O O O M un»u��"I�"y;' �N8101 eu' M Eft M Eft ch Eft CO Eft CO Eft O Eft 00 N N N O CO ,,�11 00 O (3 N O of"CIO ptt`;s, ul I- ti O) C ) C ) O N .. ........ I� 1 �m i O O O O O O O O O O w O O O I- O O O O O O ul� �-� N LO m r M it I- M d' ,° I� O Lti CO M O �� W1UUu wu» mm uwi �l; i i O r cn i GOi E CO a� O O O d co O d' O O O N ti O O O LD 0) a a) a) a) O U) E a) a) C � y c Q. U � C a) C 0- 0-0 O m fn 1 O U a) E c a) a) O U a) c U Y U o 0 CDO O U O a) 2 c ~O U � c a) M m C E O X O O Y i- m 0- -0 m c a) Y 62 0- 0 a) O Y ^, � U -Q O y O M U) z z 0 z H o 15 LL' - Z o Z ' 0 0 Z Lu (o m z U) 0 00 CD 00 CY) CL U) > E 2 U) C: U) 0 .LD m m a) E ac) E 0 0 0 0 E a) " a) 0- a) Q. E ip 0 0 a) 0 a) Q. ac: E a) U) C: 0 0 0 0 U") a) o CD CD a) CD E— a It co a [,- co a CN a -If .1i L6 I- CO Q r- C, It C) CN LO C) 0') LO I1111111111 C� G� 00 CN cl (D CN IND C) rl- rl- C, m r,- CN m (D CN cl C) eui wi C) rl_ LO C) CN co C) Itt co (60 T-- (D C) O ,V- 6 E 0 E 0 aCL 2 =r.L (_O) is m - o4a L o 0 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County 3.1.2 Fibre Backbone to Fixed Wireless Locations This option is comprised of deploying fibre backbone to connect 12 tower sites across the County that would provide suitable wireless coverage, and then utilizing radio technology to connect premises within each tower's coverage area. Premises along the fibre paths would be served with fibre. The benefits of such an approach are primarily financial, underscored by shorter deployment timelines. The cons relate to upgradability of the system to higher speeds in the future, as well as the potential forsignal degradation based on the density of foliage as well as other environmental factors. For evaluation purposes, the ISED database was scanned to provide a list of all towers within Elgin County. The data provided tower height, spatial position, and owner. It was assumed that towers owned by service providers such as TekSavvy, Xplornet, and others are likely used to provide wireless broadband, and therefore, to position new antennas on those towers, would not have any impact on advancing towards the goal of expanding broadband coverage. 12 cellular towers (detailed in the following table), dispersed across the county, were then selected from which to model wireless broadband coverage. Total Percent Owner Tower Owner Google Earth Tower Antenna Antenna Antennas Tower I D. i' Latitude Longitude s Height Structure Type 1Company Count Counl on Tow 3 42.55138889 -81.76555556 60m KDSS Rogers Communications Canada Inc. 2 2 1 6 42.58972222 -81.67583333 60m Guyed Rogers Communications Canada Inc. 8 8 1 10 42.62986111 -81.37727778 65m KDSS Rogers Communications Canada Inc. 2 2 1 12 42.63944444 -81.55611111 61m KDSS Rogers Communications Canada Inc. 2 2 1 13 42.66111111 -80.78194444 90m Guyed Rogers Communications Canada Inc. 8 12 0.6667 15 42.66472222 -81.00027778 80m KDSS Rogers Communications Canada Inc. 2 2 1 19 42.67833333 -81.235 80m Silo Rogers Communications Canada Inc. 2 2 1 23 42.70666667 -81.52 62 m Guyed Bell Mobility Inc. 8 8 1 31 42.76111111 -80.93388889 80 m Guyed CHPD RADIO 1 1 1 38 42.77202778 -81.00161111 45m Monopole Rogers Communications Canada Inc. 4 4 1 52 42.79066667 -81.27952778 91 m Guyed Bell Mobility Inc. 6 6 1 55 42.79527778 -80.8075 90m Guyed Rogers Communications Canada Inc. 18 18 1 The towers were then connected, via fibre optic connections, run from the nearest served area, and premises counted along the serving fibre routes, as identified in the following table. February 10, 2022 53 28 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County I Sri - IIII U�� III��Yal �ll�llll Tower 03 �i�i'(! 111tl11( lDalllllll 'fir �fi�p" � IIIII� �fi y° III I, ��,.", r ( f �� I� 6,795 11111 ��II U�)'Vy)Jlii+ III �flfllJJ�11JJ111 � N II��'�r�fi +II1111U111 / 0111111�11111111111��111�//�l1 r� lll))!1� IIIIIIIII� 11�1111111�1111111) lllli�7 �II�I��IIIIIII��II 20 West Elgin Tower 06 2,129 7 West Elgin Tower 10 7,634 20 Dutton/Dunwich Tower 12 4,392 17 Dutton/Dunwich Tower 13 1,630 2 Bayham Tower 15 158 0 Malahide Tower 19 3,159 0 Southwold Tower 23 5,797 10 Dutton/Dunwich Tower 31 4,802 107 Malahide Tower 38 1,677 0 Malahide Tower 52 8,143 116 Southwold Tower 55 3,686 17 Bayham TOTAL 50,002 316 A conservative RF propagation model was built, based on 5.8GHz radios, with omni-directional antennas placed at the tops of the towers, forsimplicity. Coverage predictions were then run, using the Radio Mobile online tool, with receive omni-directional, 9 dBi antennas mounted at an elevation of 5m, simulating rooftop antenna mounts. QN100S Em February 10, 2022 54 29 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Coverage from the 12 towers was found to blanket the majority of the County, with the exception of the far north end of Malahide, and the Belmont area. By finding as uitable site in the Belmont area, and establishing a 13th tower, coverage of the county was significantly enhanced. For the purposes of this report, a new tower in close proximity to the Belmont water tower site was chosen, with a 32m tower modeled, as depicted below. February 10, 2022 55 30 a ) z U_ O_ z J O CO CO 0 w w [If CO w O z 0 - o w a O 0 CO z ¢ ¢ w 0_ H ¢ z O w > � � w > cn U ¢ w C/)- z - z } O J U ¢ w z o ¢ 0] 0 w z LL m O 0 CO ¢ M O � m i 0 U z X 0 � z j a �7 T d U 5 ¢ w m z U N z 0] c N � m IL a w 7 7 L o ��of 0 0 w Q m m z a >o U) a) O C U U m oa) E a) >, `- a) a) U -0 c � � O cn y a)uE O H �Q a) N � N o w a) 0 (6 -0 -a C u O -a m +J a) a) 0 a) E > E2 O N a) a) O > U O O2 -a M 0. (6 .E a) - c � a) +J�E 0 0 N � 0 � O O N O- � O .O O (��6 N O 0.0.2 2 N a) a) U U) > a) O a) .0 U > N O F O n3 O U) -0 a) C: �� a) I a) U a) a) �O C C a) a) U) — O O Q (6 O C O U a) N 0. y O O O a) 6c� c O a) O a) E Q. O a) O_ 0-0 0. � O U) y U) O m U w a) o ~ CD O O E 6 O U) M�LO N O O 6 a) a) U) m o a) E U) a) U) O O O N U) - O a) O n3 E= a) O O � o U) O a) U) 0 O 2- O U a) :3 " � . Z 0— O � LL — m a) 0- CD O O a) E U) a) N a) O a) C a) U) N a) U c � O U a) w a) E a) a) 0- a) a) U C 0 O U) � U) a) U) O O U � C �- O c a) O C ' C a) O � U � C O O Q. a) O 0- O i � c a) O O m a) — C E c: O O O O O O O LO LO O O LO LO 0') 0') CO 0') CO O I- O O O LO p,.. ch co LO Cfl Cfl O r��ll � O O O O O O Rig,�� LO LO O O LO LO N O M N O LO Lo � LO w M a, i a"" co w �1WmD uuuum m° m uenll a ti ti o ti N 111 LL� co ai �t co �r o0 O co LO ch co N I°�Ir »I»I1D11 nw �IllUt O O O O O O LO LO O O LO LO I` m m CO m CO u' N d0 M LO w w O 7V O O O O O O °Uu O G "tzt CO N LO O w N M ch w T— auim Eft Ko Eft Eft Eft Eft 1' nlll h ' I Lo c�CO � » CO O 00 O O N 9„ I- O (P cM O) CO CO CO ti m� �IllllA N N N N N N COO co mwuo t W O O ti m O r O N CN CO ti � 00 C) M O 9° u r M �uum lllll� OD � T— LO co w- V �_ 3 E 'nm p a) m ccCl) U W m 0 0 N 0 N 0 0 co ti M [La 0 N LA T- M M M N IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Summarizing all costs by Take Rate, including fibre to connect towers and premise connection costs, it can be seen in the following table, that the cost of connecting all underserved areas ranges from $3.7M @ 10% take rate, to approximately $7.1M @ 100% take rate. More dynamically, and perhaps at a rate more meaningful to individual constituents, the cost per premise -connected varies from $5,178, to $988, as the take rate increases from 10% to 100%. Total Capital Cost Total Capital Cost/km Total Capital Cost/Premise 3.1.1 Cost Summary Cost estimates for both options are compared in the table below, with the more robust option carrying the higher price tag. Total Capital Cost Total Capital Cost/km Total Capital Cost/Premise Total Capital Cost Total Capital Cost/km Total Capital Cost/Premise piu�,U�,��u �l(((IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII puiu�uyyii�u uuiu�uo;l�u �ipuuuvua�� $100,666,000 $103,514,000 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII $104,938,000 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII $107,074,000 $ 60,427 $ 62,137 $ 62,992 $ 64,274 $ 141,385 $ 29,077 $ 21,055 $ 15,038 uu uilliiiil�liuiiiililui (Illuililuiu uiuiluilf a =OEM $ 3,686,920 $ 5,174,120 $ 5,917,720 $ 7,033,120 $ 2,213 $ 3,106 $ 3,552 $ 4,222 $ 5,178 $ 1,453 $ 1,187 $ 988 Regardless of which option orcombination of options is chosen, an additional 10% of total capital should be planned fordesign and project management. 3.2 Recommendations [All recommendations are presented here in draft subject to review and feedback from the Elgin County Connectivity Committee] Preface: Impact of Ontario Connects program Details regarding the specific details and timing of the Ontario Connects program are emerging as this report is being finalized (December, 2021). We have provided commentary regarding the expected impact of the Ontario Connects program with each recommendation. February 10, 2022 57 32 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Summary of Recommendations The following table is provided to summarize the recommendations provided in this section, with additional details provided regarding each recommendation: Ilul I� llllll I(II Ili�lllllll�ll I I a IIIIIII liii�l�IlllNllllllui �1111�/ J 1 f a° r 1161 �� Illllllll111 III�� Ill��l � I II r r �� II III IllJll�lllllll IJl 1118flffflfff IIrl11(1(��l��lllllllii �1117111� IIIIIlllll +77fi11>'ll III 1 1 I I� 1 Advocacy, 1 Senior N/A Immediately Aligned — will Strategic Staff FTE provide Purchasing & ISP maximum value Coordination to the County during this program 2 Fibre to the Home/ $107M 7120 5-10 yrs. Aligned: This Business program could advice timing and provide funding 3 Initial Fibre Build to $7.OM 7120 3 yrs. Overlap may Radio Towers need — delay or cancel this initiative pending auction results 4 Extend fibre $10.8M 7120 3 yrs. Overlap may connectivity to need — delay or areas of interest / cancel this municipal locations initiative pending auction results Recommendation 1: Advocacy, Strategic Purchasing & ISP Coordination As a best practice, it is recommended that the County takes on a role of facilitating and advocating for investment in broadband infrastructure both from private industry as well as other levels of government. The County does not make a direct financial contribution to constructing infrastructure under this recommendation, but rather looks to encourage cooperation, partnerships and facilitate the investment through approaches such as the facilitation of economic development and collaboration forums, removing financial or municipal approval challenges to planning and permitting of fibre optic and radio tower infrastructure, as well as leveraging and coordinating the current connectivity requirements and spending of the (i) the County, (ii) lower tier municipalities and (iii) MUSH sector agencies with service providers. This coordination approach through procurement and strategic negotiations can help the County achieve its long term broadband goals without direct financial investment in infrastructure or subsidy programs. It is expected that 1 additional senior staff full time equivalent (FTE) would be required from the County to provide strategic leadership, facilitate coordination and collaboration forums, and lead Impact of Ontario Connects program: This recommendation is aligned and an important action as the Ontario Connects program proceeds through various stages of funding allocations and ISP selections(s). February 10, 2022 58 33 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County the advocacy initiatives with other levels of government. While a staff role is preferred, this role could also be assumed by a contractor/ consultant until recruitment and hiring can take place. Budgetary Costs: 1 senior staff FTE salary Underserved Premises Connected: N/A Expected Timing: Immediately Recommendation 2: Long term vision: Fibre to the Home/ Business We recommend the County adopt a long term vision of achieving a fibre to the home infrastructure for its residents and business. This vision provides the best long term benefits for residents and businesses and strategically positions the County for economic development growth, attracting and retaining businesses and residents. We recognize that this vision may not be immediately affordable the County and may take many years to budget and implement. There is the opportunity with coordinated infrastructure planning and construction to cost share the construction cost of fibre optic infrastructure with other County linear infrastructure such as roads and municipal water/ wastewater systems in order to offset some of the construction costs identified. The County should actively pursue all forms of advocacy both with ISPs as well as higher tier levels of government in order to identify grant funding programs that will help accelerate the implementation of this long term vision. The Ontario Connects program may provide a significant benefit to advance the implementation of this recommendation. Impact of Ontario Connects program: This recommendation is aligned with the long term strategy and expected outcomes of the Ontario Connects program and it would be expected that significant funding could be secured through this program to accomplish this recommendation Budgetary Costs: $107,074,000 Underserved Premises Connected: 7120 Expected Timing: 5-10 years, depending on timing of available funding February 10, 2022 59 34 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Recommendation 3: Initial Fibre Build to Radio Towers We have identified several options in each municipality for the County to invest in a hybrid fibre/ wireless approach to improve broadband connectivity in the County. This hybrid approach would involve the implementation of a fibre optic infrastructure from high density areas (e.g. served) extending along roadways to connect radio towers and residents along the fibre route to high speed services. A further analysis of the County's existing water tower infrastructure indicates that these towers may be a suitable substitute to colocation on some 3rd party towers or any new radio tower construction. Elgin County Water Towers Coverage predictions based on placing radios and antennas on the seven water towers, show reduced coverage areas from those of the colocation towers, due to the reduced relative height of the towers. February 10, 2022 60 35 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Gs TO sm RG unu When overlaying coverage from the water towers on that from the previously proposed colocation towers, it can be seen that by deploying radios on existing water towers, (typically within served areas with connectivity readily available), the number of colocation towers required to fill out coverage could be reduced by approximately 50%. The following depiction shows coverage areas from water towers (W) and colocation towers (C). February 10, 2022 61 36 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County As part of the detailed design phase, coverage predictions should be verified, based on radio and antenna technologies selected. Coverage and signal strength will vary, based on the radio technology, frequencies and use of higher -gain directional antennas, better focusing signals to where they are needed. The reduction of colocation towers, reduces the monthly fees related to tower space leases. This approach is the recommended first step forthe County to prioritize to improve broadband connectivity, subject to the outcomes that will be achieved by the Ontario Connects program. Impact of Ontario Connects program: The Ontario Connects program would supersede the expected outcomes of this recommendation and therefore the implementation of this program should be deferred until outcomes of the Ontario Connects program are further understood, in mid- year 2022. Budgetary Costs: $7,033,120 Underserved Premises Connected: 7120 Expected Timing: 3 years February 10, 2022 62 37 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Recommendation 4: Extend fibre connectivity to areas of interest / municipal locations This recommendation builds on recommendation 3 above and would provide for additional fibre optic connectivity to residents and businesses along the proposed fibre path, as well as achieving connectivity to municipal locations and land identified forfuture development to support specific economic development objectives. Please referto the maps provided in Appendix C for additional details regarding this recommendation Impact of Ontario Connects program: The Ontario Connects program would supersede the expected outcomes of this recommendation and therefore the implementation of this program should be deferred until outcomes of the Ontario Connects program are further understood, in mid- year 2022. Budgetary Costs: $10,761,120 Underserved Premises Connected: 7120 Note that there are $3,728,000 incremental fibre costs relative to Recommendation 3 as identified in the table below: �I ly 1, II 1 1 1 �1 UDIP! 111�11 � �>I � 1111101 rf� JI( U II� I I 1 YY I i 1 (IIII IIII i I UU1' Malahide Aylmer— Richmond 74 5.57 $408,200 Malahide Aylmer- Springfield 79 7.98 $557,800 Malahide St. Thomas - Aylmer 68 2.54 $220,400 Central St. Thomas - Aylmer 172 9.66 $751,600 Elgin Central Fairview Rd - Sparta 136 7.26 $571,600 Elgin Southwold Shedden — St. Thomas 128 8.02 $609,200 Southwold Shedden — Talbotville Royal 128 8.02 $609,200 Totals 785 49.05 $3,728,000 Underserved Premises Connected: 785 Expected Timing: 1-3 years February 10, 2022 63 38 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County 3.3 Governance/ Funding Options The following sections describe the governance and funding options available forthe County as summarized in the figure below. We begin this summary with some preliminary information regarding the Ontario Connects program Direct Facilitate County P3 Approach Subsidy Private Owned Approach Sector Fibre Backbone + '....... Approach to support Wiroloss is affordalble '.. longer term vision of '.. and allows for a faster '.. larger fibre Advocate for Ontario '... Initiate work stream of deployment deployment in the Connects program ISP coordination and `.,.,�.. County in vestments in Elgin advocacy with higher levels of government Utilize other capital '.. programs (roads, Smaller partner could utilities) to fund 1i (participate tin fixed conduit an a long term wireless strategies basis Coordinate with Seek opportunities to MUSH sector partners Supportfibre Support connectivity to expand SWIFT's to focus procurement on County's strategic connectiviity to other public sector other public. sector current scope un Elgin broadband organizations (MUSH organizations (MUSH improvement Sector) Sector) outcomes INot a recommenced op ran. Can, cupato a Ilariger terra disadww tape Relative to ineaglilhorung. irrunicipahtle5 3.3.1 Ontario Connects: Ontario's Accelerated High -Speed Internet Program Note that at the time of writing this report, the Ontario Connects program was initially announced with program objectives as follows: • Facilitate speed of delivery of high-speed internet services and 100% coverage at a minimum service level of 50/10 Mbps for approximately 700,000 unserved or underserved homes by the end of 2025 • Leverage existing utility infrastructure and rights of way to reduce required subsidies and compress delivery timelines • Attract broad market participation of quality counterparties that is inclusive of smaller and local players • Ensuring infrastructure lasts and can be upgraded as needed The program has committed $413 to connect every region in Ontario to reliable, high speed internet by the end of 2025. It is expected to support accelerated broadband expansion in the Province. While little detailed information is known, the Province has stated that the process will enable Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to bid for provincial subsidies through a series of reverse auction events, with winning bids meeting the defined coverage and deployment requirements at the most reasonable price. The program in very early stages of formulation, and few details are known regarding the eligibility forISPs and/ormunicipalities to participate directly in the program. Benefits and Risks The program announcement represents the most amount of funding that any provincial government has committed to improving broadband connectivity. The reverse auction process that is described would tend to favor incumbent ISPs with existing infrastructure in the County that can cost-effectively compete forsubsides in a reverse auction subsidy format. If successful, February 10, 2022 64 39 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County the program would provide a significant incentive to existing IS Ps to invest in infrastructure to serve all underserved areas of the County. Risks of the program include the ability of the program to have sufficient budget fund connectivity to all underserved areas in the County, as well as the province's ability to execute on the program in the stated timeframe. Since little detailed information regarding this program is known, we continue to describe other funding solutions in the following sections, assuming that they may be required in a coordinated and complementary fashion to fund areas within the County where the Ontario Connects program may not be eligible or have sufficient funding budget to adequately address. 3.3.2 County Owned This scenario sees the County taking the initiative in making an investment in building fibre optic networks to provide universal connectivity to all residents and business that are currently underserved. The County would seek grant funding from higher levels of government (e.g. Ontario and Canada) through programs such as ICON (Improving Connectivity for Ontario) and the UBF (Universal Broadband Fund). The County would be expected to contribute a percentage of project costs directly (usually 25% to 50%) as part of the conditions of the grant funding program. Recent (August 2021) funding announcements from the governments of Ontario and Canada related to the ICON and UBF programs have committed the following amounts to fund $1.344B in broadband projects. It is unclear of the amounts of funding provided from Ontario and Canada, nor if the Ontario contribution is part of the $413 funding announced under the Ontario Connects program. North East Ontario M $170 North West Ontario $148 Eastern Ontario $362 Golden Horseshoe Region $73 Central Ontario $230 Telesat (Satellite) $109 South West Ontario $252 Total $1,344 It is unclear at the time of writing the amount of funding that has been allocated for projects within Elgin County. Using County and lower -tier municipal operational connectivity requirements as will as working closely with other public sector organizations, commonly referred to as the MUSH sector (Municipalities, Universities, Schools and Hospitals) as a network anchor / backbone client, these organizations could recover some of the upfront capital costs of construction through long term savings on connectivity costs currently paid to 3rd party providers. By installing additional conduit and fibre capacity at the time of construction, incremental extensions to the municipal network can be made. The County would facilitate retail service deliver through partnerships February 10, 2022 65 40 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County with retail and wholesale Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to enable the delivery of retail telecommunications services to business and residents. Benefits and Risks This option provides the benefit of stimulating and increasing competition for broadband services at a retail level. Incumbents may respond in the form of additional network investments and capacity to maintain their existing market share. The County retains local control over its assets. This model may not stimulate the wholesale / reseller telecommunications market (even if wholesale services are offered at reasonable discounted rates) as some resellers may be wary of trying to compete with the County for commercial and residential clients. Risks with this model are both financial and operational. There is a high degree of risk in securing grant funding from higher levels of government as the process to apply forgrants is highly competitive and available funding forgrants is highly oversubscribed by the requests forgrant funding that are received. The cost of construction presents a risk that can be managed through diligent procurement and construction management, however there is a longerterm risk of demand for retail services not meeting initial forecasts, or competitive forces creating price pressure on retail services. This may result in underutilized or stranded network investment in the longer term. The County does not have the expertise to operate retail telecommunications services, so there is some risk in terms of creating operational partnerships with ISPs willing to take on this role. 3.3.3 P3 approach Under this scenario, the County would engage potential partners in the investment and operations of the network by publishing long range plans and soliciting partner interest through a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. Potential partners could participate in the form of providing financing, construction and/or operational expertiseto build and operate the network. Depending on the nature of the partnership, the County may contribute to the partnership in the form of capital contribution, long term commitments to purchase telecommunications services or a combination of both. This model is more expensive than direct ownership of assets since private sector partners will want to receive a return (prof it) f rom their investments. Benefits and Risks This option has the benefit of leaving options open for the County that is unwilling to commit to a build program or lacks the available capital to invest in broadband infrastructure. Partners may bring needed construction and/ or operational expertise that the County may require for such a network. This model creates a shared risk reward scenario forthe County and the partner. Risks involved with this approach include the ability to attract a suitable partner forvarious reasons (size of the investment, market conditions, etc), as well as the risk of losing some local control overthe implementation of the network, uneven network coverage, etc. Since these arrangements are normally over a period of 10 to 30 years in order to allow for investment recovery and profit, it is important to ensure that long term vision of the partner is aligned with the County to prevent partnership conflicts. Exit strategies for both the County and the partner must be carefully thought through as part of forming the partnership. 3.3.4 Direct Subsidy Approach This approach, modeled afterthe SWIFT program that is currently active in Elgin County would have the County look to contribute one time funding to provide capital subsidies to existing ISPs as an incentive to invest in the construction of broadband infrastructure that would connect areas of the County that are currently underserved. In this model, the County would allocate funds to be provided to service providers through a procurement process that is focused on specific outcomes in geographic areas (e.g. premises served, fibre route meters deployed). February 10, 2022 66 41 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Benefits and Risks This model differs from the County Owned model in that the County does not retain long term ownership of the assets, nor has the obligations to maintain the assets over their asset life. Risks of this approach include the County not having a long term control and little influence or ability to ensure that service levels to residents and businesses are provided and affordable pricing is maintained in the long term. In order to ensure that the Municipal Act is followed in terms of unfairly biasing orsubsidizing a private sector organization, this subsidy approach would need to be done through an arms length origination such as SWIFT, of which Elgin County is already a participating member. It should be noted that the Ontario Connects program appears take a very similar approach with the reverse auction subsidy model, with 7 year financial holdback provisions to have some trailing influence to ensure that ISPs maintain commitments to service quality and pricing. 3.3.5 Facilitate Private Sector Investment In this approach, the County takes on a role of facilitating and advocating for investment in broadband infrastructure both from private industry as well as other levels of government. The County does make a direct financial contribution, but rather looks to encourage cooperation, partnerships and facilitatethe investment through approaches such as the facilitation of economic development and collaboration forums, removing financial or municipal approval challenges to planning and permitting of fibre optic and radio tower infrastructure, as well as leveraging and coordinating the current connectivity requirements and spending of the (i) the County, (ii) lower tier municipalities and (iii) MUSH sector agencies with service providers, providing this committed revenue stream as a mechanism to encourage ISP investment in underserved areas. This coordination approach through procurement and strategic negotiations can help the County achieve its long term broadband goals without direct financial investment in infrastructure orsubsidy programs. Benefits and Risks The primary benefit of this approach is that it can be executed with minimal incremental costs and should be undertaken as a best practice from a strategic procurement as well as a County economic development and advocacy perspective. Risks with this approach include that without direct investment from the private sector and higher levels of government this approach is unlikely to be successful, or result in a short term improvement. The County has little direct influence or control of outcomes, service levels ortimelines with this approach. 3.3.6 Status Quo Under this scenario, the County would take a passive role, leaving investment in broadband infrastructure to the private sectorwith any grant subsidies the private sector is able to secure from higher levels of government. The County would continue to purchase the services it requires from commercial telecommunications providers, at the broadband speeds and prices currently available in the current marketplace without coordinating procurement efforts with other public sector entities. Benefits and Risks This option has the benefit of no investment being required, however there is a risk that places the County at comparative disadvantage in the long run if commercial telecommunications providers do not make investments in fibre optic infrastructure to support the needs of the County as well as local businesses and residents. February 10, 2022 67 42 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County 3.4 Guiding Policies [All recommendations/ policies are presented as draft subject to review and feedback by County Administration and the Elgin County Connectivity Committee] In order to develop recommendations, it is important to ensure that there is a policy framework to guide the recommendations and next steps that the County will undertake in order to improve broadband connectivity for its residents and businesses. The following guiding policies are recommended to provide the basis of recommendations and next steps. 3.4.1 Guiding Policies: It is recommended that the County adopt a set of guiding principles that will help shape recommendations and next steps. These guiding policies would include: 5. The County does not want to duplicate the investments of the private sector and will therefore look to make investments in geographic areas where the private sector has not invested and has no short-term plans to invest. 6. The County will work collaboratively with private ISPs that operate, or plan to operate within the County to ensure that investment barriers within the County's control are removed, and that the County's objectives with respect to improved connectivity for residents and business is know and understood by all parties. 7. The County will work closely with all levels of government, both lowertier and upper tier to ensure that strategies with respect to grant funding to support infrastructure investment in the County are aligned and coordinated. The County's investments are utilized to remove the barriers of investment and market entry forall ISPs and create a level playing field that encourages retail competition. All ISPs will be able to access County funded investments on equal open access terms and conditions. The County has several alternatives to consideras it considers next steps. It is important to keep in mind that the County must make some determinations on the degree it can afford to invest, while at the same time weighing the socio-economic benefits of investment and benefits to the County in terms of economic development, attraction and retention of businesses and residents. While a county wide fibre optic infrastructure is the long-term vision, this may need to be considered over many years to be affordable as a direct investment by the County. 3.4.2 Technology Options Analysis The following table summarizes the technology options available to the County to consider as strategies to improve broadband connectivity to residents and businesses. These options must also be reviewed with the governance/ funding options that are presented. February 10, 2022 68 43 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County i Option 1 Fibre Optic 0 High capacity 0 High Cost Infrastructure (Fibre to 0 Lon g useful life • Longer time to the Home/ businesses) (30 years) implement • Scalable to support faster speeds in the future • Supports future 5G wireless deployments • Eligible forgrant funding under many programs Option 2 Fibre Optic 0 Lower Cost 0 Lower capacity Infrastructure to Fixed Homes/ that fibre to the Wireless Tower Businesses along home/ business i Locations; Wireless t fibre path benefit Not scalable due connections homes/ businesses from fibre to limited radio connection spectrum • Shorter time to 0 Shorter useful life implement (5 yrs.) • Achieves CRTC 0 Some restrictions minimum service on grant funding standard forall eligibility forsome residents/ wireless businesses technology • Can utilize some existing County water towers to reduce costs to build new towers and/or collocate on 3rd party radio towers • Wireless technology can be redeployed at different locations as req ui red (as fibre infrastructure increases) Option 3 Option 2 plus fibre 0 Serves additional Higher cost than extensions to connect residents/ Option 2 population centers and businesses with February 10, 2022 69 44 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County i additional residents fibre along fibre path infrastructure • Provides for connectivity for Co unty operations between population centers • Provides fora progressive path to Option 1 (over time) February 10, 2022 70 45 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Appendix A — In -Process/ Potential Fibre Builds in Elgin County February 10, 2022 71 46 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Municipality of Bayham North Frontenac Telephone Company (NFTC) is in the midst of a project installing fibre along Plank Rd from our north end (New England) through to Port Burwell. NFTC is currently working with the County and Municipality to ensure documents are in order. • Xplornet has received municipal concurrence for 2 towers in Bayham on private lands. • Execulink Telecom has approved a project for Corinth/North Hall. Expected completion Dec 2022 as noted on the SWIFT website. Municipality of Central . Uplink Communications is planning for a fibre build Elgin in the New Sarum area Municipality of Dutton . There are no in -process or proposed fibre builds Dunwich that Dutton Dunwich is aware of at this time. • TekSavvy is proposing to install a tower in north Dunwich Town of Aylmer . Two ISP's — EastLink and NetFox • Fiber installed to Town Hall • Examining potential of broadening fiber through SCADA RFP Township of Malahide . Malahide has had a few queries from third -party wireless ISPs. • Uplink Wireless has approached Malahide to install fibre in Avon and along some rural roads in order to feed future towers when developed • Malahide itself had initiated an RFP in January for a feasibility study on a Township lead wireless project. It was to consider the installation of 3-5 towers in different areas of the Township, specifically on land the Township of Malahide is owner. Determination of height requirements and associated costs were to be detailed for these sites. In addition to this, a preferred solution of municipal tower use only (i.e. connect municipal sites) or one where this could be accomplished along with providing opportunity for a third party provider access for new services in this area. This was report has been delayed but expected to be available in the next few weeks. Township of Southwold February 10, 2022 72 47 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Municipality of West Elgin NFTC completed work in 2019 to install Fiberoptic lines in the most condensed areas of West Lorne and Rodney. Just recently, in August-2020 a new wireless service provider installed wireless equipment and offered services to rural residents. • We received information that NFTC is now extending fiber service to the residents in New Glasgow along Furnival Road. North Frontenac Telephone . The Warden provided NFTC Company with a letter Company (NFTC) of support for their application to the Universal Broadband Fund Rapid Response Stream on January 15, 2021. • This application is in regards to an area near Rodney, towards the southwest corner of Elgin County. Xplornet . Elgin County will consider providing a letter of support to Xplornet for their application to the Universal Broadband Fund due on February 14, 2021. • This application is in regards to the proposed building of hundreds of kilometres of new fibre, establishing a robust backbone forXplornet's 5G wireless broadband network, with existing sites in Elgin County connected to fibre. Once completed, this project will enable rural households in communities such as North Hall, Corinth, New Sarum, Iona Station and Crinan to enjoy affordable and accessible 1 Gbps fibre services Bell Canada . Bell has no fibre projects planned in Elgin at this time. Bell has decided that if they are unable to connect at least 100 houses with their new builds that they are not worth the investment. This even relates to the proposed ICON application that Elgin County provided a letter of support for in August. February 10, 2022 73 48 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Appendix B —Internet Service Providers and Technologies February 10, 2022 74 49 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Note to reader: These maps should not be considered to be an exhaustive representation, however they are deemed to be reliable as of the date of the information provided by Industry Science and Economic Development Canada as of the date indicated. February 10, 2022 75 50 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County February 10, 2022 76 51 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County eeu . .. Bell ,Bell Bell Bell BeII�k1l Bell Bell •. Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell .,.. Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell _-Bell Bell Bell Belt/ Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell (Bell. Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell. Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell \j Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell .Bell Bell Bell Bell. Bell Bell Bell. Bell Bell Bell Bell Boll. Bell Bell ' Bell Bell .Bell Bell Bell ' Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Bell Hell Bell Bell Bell Cogeco Connexion February 10, 2022 77 52 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County . Eastlink .,.. ..... Eastlink : EaAllnk ..:.. .Eastlink Eastlink ,.,.. Eastlink- ,_ ... Eastlink Eastlink Eastlink (Eastlink Eastlink 'Eastlink Ea5tllnk Eastlink Eastlink EastVink Eastlnk Eastlink Eastknk .Eastlink Eastlink Eastlink Easdmk E-dink Eastlink Eastink ' Eastlink. Eastlink Eastlink Eastlink.: Eastllnkl Eastlink EastRnk Eastlink Eastlink Eastlnk Eastlink Eastlink. Eastlink, Eastlink Eastlink .Eastlink Eastlink Eastlink Eastlink EasYllnk Eastlink Eastlink Eastlink. ...... IExeCulink Execulink Execul nk - Execulnk Execuliq�y -- E.—Mk hY ExeCul nk E—Ank ExeculinkE E—uyyylll,,,iink'. Execulmk xeculink Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulnk Execulmk Execulink -Execulmk ' Execulmk Eeeculink3 Execulink Execulink ' ` Exemknk Execulmk Execulnk Exewlnk Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink ` Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulmk Execulmk Execulink Execulmk Execulink ' Execulink Execulink Ekeculmk Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink S Execulink Execulink Execulmk Execulink Execulink 'Execulnk Execulink Execulmk Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink Execulink. Execulink Execulink February 10, 2022 78 53 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County .' Frezdom'Mobllz -_ 5 .M - - Freedom�Mobile - Freedom Mobil /�.. FreetlOm Mobile Freedom Mobile .Freedom Mobile f' Freedom Mobile dom NOo/6/lle��\. Freedom Mobile 5r`eetlam Mobile Frtetlom Mobile—FYee— dom Moblle Freedom Mohille—F/recdOm Moblle - Freedom Mobile ! \ —Freedom Mobile- Freei Mob le /. Freedom Mo e— ' Freedom Mobil —Freedom Mobile —Freedom Mobile —Freedom M --Freedom Mobile —Freedom Mobile —Freedom edom Mobile— eF er Mob le_4 Freedom Moble.,�r....� dom Mobile Freedom Mobile February 10, 2022 79 54 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County NFTC NFTC .NFTC NFTC NFTC NFTC NFTC NFTC NFTC NFTC ..NFTC. NFTC NFTC NFTC NFTC NFTC NFTC NFTC February 10, 2022 80 55 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County ...... RoliF S Rogers.. Rogers j} - Rogers Rogers } .Rogers Rogers Rogers /yY Rogers g - Rgers a Rrers ggers .,.. '. Rogers. Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Re , Rogers Roger Rogers Roger Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Roger, ... Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers RN—, Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers \j R Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Roger Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers gers Rogers: Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Roger$ Roger Rogers YS.. Rogers Rogers Roger Rogers Rogers :Rogers Rogers Rogiers. Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers February 10, 2022 81 56 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County TeksE rl TekSa� TekSaw\yj Solutions T&Sd' 'S.lutions Te\may vW -T-a-y SolOons TekS'avvy SgluOons. ,. f February 10, 2022 82 57 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County ...... Tel Us Telus Telus -- - Telus Telus Teius Teld us ^ 7elus Telus ... Telus `Telus Telus Telus Telus ,.. Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus elus T Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus +' TzWu TQlus Telus Telus Tdp s Telus Telus Telus Telus TeluS Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Tdfiu Telus Telus Telus— TQIuS \j Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus v Telus Telus Telus TQlus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus TeVUS TeIWs Tell Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus . Telus Telus Telus . TNII Telus Telus Telus Telus Telus. Telus Selus Telu5 Telus TEu5 Telus Telus Telus " Xplor'met Xpll Xplornet}- Xplornet : Xplornet Xplornet " lornet X lornet p 'Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplamet ,.. Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet . Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplamet Xplamet .Xplornet +' +Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet- Xplomet Xplornet .Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet. Xplornet Xplornet` '. Xplornet Xplornet.. Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet tXplornet. Xplomet Xplornet S .Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet 'Xplornet. _,,.. xplomet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet lornet .Xplomet Xplornetet Xplornet Xplomet Xplornet ' Xplornet '. Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplomet Xplornet Xplornet Xplamet " Xplornet Xplamet Xplornet Xplornet 'Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplornet Xplomet Xplornet Xplornet February 10, 2022 83 58 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County Appendix C — Maps of Fibre Connectivity to Areas of interest/ municipal locations February 10, 2022 84 59 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County February 10, 2022 85 60 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County February 10, 2022 86 61 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County February 10, 2022 87 62 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County February 10, 2022 88 63 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County February 10, 2022 89 64 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County February 10, 2022 90 65 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County February 10, 2022 91 66 IBI GROUP INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AND BROADBAND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Prepared for Elgin County February 10, 2022 92 67