Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTrans 2008-10-28 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETI. Current Agenda Review I. IL Presentation(s) III. Business Agenda A. Pavement Maintenance Management Program Update Draft 2008 Report B. Third Quarter Report IV. Old Business City of Tukwila Transportation committee Pam Linder, Chair Dennis Roberts on De'Sean Quinn AGENDA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2008 Time: 5:00 PM Place: Conference Room #1 II. IV. Distribution: P. Under D. Robertson D. Quinn Mayor Haggerton J. Duffie V. Griffin R. Berry K. Matej D. Speck C. O'Flaherty M. Hart S. Norris A. Information Only B. Information Only Future Agendas: Next Scheduled Meeting: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 S The Gty of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities Please contact the Public Works Department at 206-433 -0179 for assistance. J. Morrow N. Olivas B. Giberson S. Kerslake F. Iriarte M. Miotke P. Brodin C.'Parrish G. Labanara B. Arthur C. Knighton File Copy R. Tischmak Single side t P. Lau 3 Extra Copies M. Mathia S. Anderson e-mail to B.Saxton S. Hunstock C. O'Flaherty, M. J. Pace Hart, K. Narog, S. J. Harrison Norris and S. Kirby ecammenc Pg. 1 Pg. 11 INFORMATION MEMO To: Mayor Haggerton From: Public Works DirectoY� Date: October 22, 2008 11 Subject: Pavement Maintenance Manaeement Program Project No. 08 -RWO1 Update on Draft 2008 Report ISSUE What funding level is required to eliminate the backlog of deferred maintenance for roadway overlay? What funding level is required to keep pace with the normal deterioration of roadway pavement? BACKGROUND Because Tukwila owns, operates, and maintains paved asphalt roadways, Public Works monitors the condition of each roadway segment in the City. Tukwila uses a pavement monitoring program called PMSPro developed by Pavement Engineers. The program relies upon regularly updated data for each street segment that describes the condition of the pavement in terms of deterioration and distress signs such as cracking, rutting, surface wear, humps, bumps, and sags. A map of rehabilitation strategies is shown on Figure 11 of the Draft Report (Exhibit 1). This information is then used to prioritize maintenance activities, develop a rehabilitation schedule, and plan multi -year budget strategies. Pavement Engineers has examined each street using visual inspection and computerized data entry and measurement to provide an updated roadway condition survey in 2008 for all of Tukwila's streets. Citywide Pavement Condition Rating is scored as shown in Figure 12 of the Draft Report (Exhibit 2). The higher the score, the better the condition of the roadway. Portions of the draft report have been attached. ANALYSIS The overall condition of Tukwila's streets is good, but increased funding is needed. With 5 years of zero growth budgets and skyrocketing costs for asphalt, the repair of city roadways has not kept pace with normal deterioration; i.e. deferred maintenance is growing. Ideally Tukwila should be repairing its roadways at the same rate that they deteriorate. Several questions need to be answered: Ouestion 1: What impact does the current funding level proposed in the 2009 -2010 Budget have on the condition of the roadways? The current proposed budget keeps the funding at the same amount as previous years, $1,250,000 per year; however, this funding level produces approximately $860,000 in new asphalt because of the need to fund design, provide a 10% contingency, and have project management oversight. This amount could be even less if we need new catch basins, curbs, driveway ramps, etc. The proposed $2,500,000 for 2009 -2010 is broken down as follows: P:\PROJECTS\A- RW RS Projects`08RWO1 2008 Overlay Repair\Info Memo PMS.doc Response: The roadways will deteriorate faster than they can be repaired and the backlog of deferred maintenance (number of roadway sections needing repair) will continue to grow. Note: Because the price of asphalt has gone from approximately $35 a ton to $90 a ton in three years without a commensurate increase in funding overlays, the City can only repair 40% of the roadway surface that we could in 2006 for the same dollar amount. Ouestion 2: What single year funding level would be needed to eliminate the backlog of deferred maintenance? 2009. Design: 200,000 Construction: $1,825,000 Contingency: 175,000 Const. Mg nt: 300,000 Total: $2,500,000 Response: The City would need an overlay budget of approximately $5,100,000 for Ouestion 3: What annual funding profile would be required to eliminate the backlog of deferred maintenance over a 5 -year period? Response: The overlay budget would need a funding profile as follows: Note: the first year's amount has been increased 9% per year to account for changes in the price of asphalt and labor. Year 1 $1,500,000 $1,630,000 $1,750,000 RECOMMENDATION Year 2 Year 3 Year 6 P:\PROJECTS\A- RAT RS Projects\08RW01 2008 Overlay Repair\Info Memo PMS.doc Year 4 Year 5 $1,900,000 $2,100,000 $1,750,000 Increase funding levels to eliminate the backlogged deferred maintenance within 5 years. Following the elimination of the deferred maintenance backlog, annually fund the overlay program such that maintenance and repairs match the rate of roadway deterioration. Attachmetst: Draft Pavement Maintenance Management Program Report Exhibit 1 Map of Rehabilitation Strategies Exhibit 2 Map of Current Pavement Condition Ratings City of Tukwila Pavement Maintenance Management Program Prepared for City of Tukwila August 11, 2008 15226 12 Drive S.E. Mill Creek, WA 980125 -6084 (425) 337-5222 PAVEMENT ENGINEERS August 0, 2008 lvIr. Robin Tischmak, PE Senior Transportation Engineer City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 -2544 Re: Pavement Maintenance Management Program Dear Mr. Tischmak: This report provides our fourth evaluation of the streets in the City of Tukwila. The scope of this project included the visual examination of the pavements throughout the City; to calculate a condition score for each street segment: to develop a rehabilitation schedule and multi -year budget plan for their maintenance; and to integrate the information into an Arc View map. Breakdown Pavements for Evaluation Our previous surveys divided the street network into logical sample units for evaluation. This survey followed that breakdown. Briefly, the streets were divided into segments based on pavement type, age, functional class and primary cross streets. The segments were defined with a unique eleven (11) character field called "Proj_Seg The first seven (7) characters is called the "Project Number" The last three characters of the "Proj_Seg" field are from the "Segment Number" field. This number, starting from the south or west edge of the City typically started at 100 and incremented by 10 for each succeeding segment. These two fields are separated by an underscore character to create the "Proj_seg" number such as "bbb1070 100 The letter "b" denotes a blank space. WBE# W2F4707915 1 5226 12 Drive SE Mill Creek, WA 98012 (425) 337 -5222 (425) 337 -6084 Field Survey The pavement segments were evaluated using the distress criteria described in the manual Pavement Surface Condition Rating Manual published by the Northwest Technology Transfer Center, WSDOT. The original manual dated March 1992 describes the distresses and methods of measurement used by the state for their pavement management program. Recently, a committee from the Northwest Pavement Management Systems Users Group, submitted a set of recommended changes to this document to conform more closely to the needs and desires of local agencies. This draft document was used as the reference for this survey. Condition data was collected using a vehicle mounted distance meter connected to a computer running our PIbISPro field program. At the beginning of each pavement segment, the distance meter is set to zero (0). As the vehicle moves forward, the Evaluator clicks on the screen to describe the condition of the pavement immediately in front of the vehicle. For distresses that run parallel to the length of the segment (i.e. longitudinal and fatigue cracking), the distress "button" remains on to record the length of the distress. For transverse cracking, the event button is pushed to count its existence. The length of a transverse crack is recorded in lengths of 1/4 the width of the pavement segment. Pavement Maintenance/Management Program City of Tukwila, Washington We also determined the severity of the distresses in terms of "low "medium and "high" as described in the manual. Upon reaching the end of the segment, the distance meter was stopped and the data was saved. During the saving process, the field program calculates the percent distress for each severity level and allows the Evaluator to review the data for accuracy. This data is later uploaded into the main P]ISPro computer program for calculation of a PCR value, and determination of a rehabilitation strategy. Approximately 259 lane -miles of pavement were evaluated. Calculate Pavement Condition Score PMSPro contains several methods of calculating a condition score that describes the overall condition of the pavement. The methods included in PMSPro are PE -PCR, WSDOT -PSC, PAVER PCI, FAA -PCI, and S"1'EP -PCR. The manual for the program provides an in -depth description of these methods which will not be re- stated here. However, a brief description follows. The PE -PCR, Pavement Engineers Pavement Condition Rating, method is flexible and changeable by the user. The user is able to define continuous curves that apply different weight factors for each distress type and severity. This approach allows the agency to select the types of distresses or characteristics that are most important for consideration. The WSDOT -PSC and STEP -PCR methods follow the guidelines from the Washington State Department of Transportation. The STEP -PCR method is the older method that was formulated in the early 1960's and assigned deduct values over broad ranges of extent. This is gradually being replaced by a more accurate method called WSDOT -PSC, Pavement Structural Condition. This method uses continuous curves to assign a deduct value to distresses. The problem with using these State established methods at the local level is the weight factors given to the different distresses. For instance, the State defines longitudinal cracking as the "low alligator cracking in the wheelpath They do not measure longitudinal cracking between lanes. In fact, the State only looks at the inner 10 feet of a 12 foot lane. Distresses outside this width are ignored. For highway traffic that is highly channelized, this approach works. For local agencies, this approach does not work. Cross traffic, lane changing, left -turn and right -turn lanes, and parking lanes all contribute to the movement of traffic across all lanes. Longitudinal cracking between lanes becomes important. As a result, we recorded all cracking across the entire width of pavement. Another problem is using the State definition of patching. The State does not assign a deduct value based the condition of a patch; they assign a deduct value based on the type of patch (Chip Seal Repair, Blade Repair, and Dig -out Full -depth Repair). Recent changes by the PMS User Group has accepted different definitions for these types of distresses. Therefore, the condition scores calculated by the two State methods should be used with caution. Two additional methods are provided in the program: PAVER -PCI, FAA -PCI. Both methods were developed by the Corps of Engineers. The PCI, Pavement Condition Index, uses continuous curves to assign deduct values. To use these methods correctly requires a different method of data collection not currently being used by other local agencies in the State of Washington. Pavement Maintenance/Management Program City of Tukwila, Washington For this report, the PE -PCR method was used to prioritize the street segments. Project Level Evaluation and Rehabilitation Recommendations The Decision Trees discussed in our original report were applied to all the pavement segments. PMSPro is capable of established a unique set of decision trees for each pavement type and functional class. This ability allows a higher criteria to be applied to primary street network (Arterials and Collectors) than to neighborhood streets. Figures 1 -3 provide a summary of this evaluation. Figure 1 is a bar chart, sorted by PE -PCR value (worst first), showing the type, severity, extent of distresses, and recommended rehabilitation strategy for segments. Figure 2 is the Pavement Condition Report for S. 142 Street from Military Road to East cul -de -sac is provided for reference. This report indicates approximately 36% of the pavement surface has low severity alligator (fatigue) cracking, 93% raveling and 176 ft/station of medium longitudinal cracking. PMSPro lists three strategies to correct the distresses: Fill Cracks, Slurry Seal and Thin Overlay. PMSPro then selects the most appropriate strategy, Thin Overlay, to correct all the problems. Next, a cost of $10,130 is calculated to apply the thin overlay as well as crack filling prior to placement of the overlay. Please realize this recommendation is not a design but rather a general recommendation and cost to upgrade the street. Additional engineering should be done to finalize the repair. Figure 3 is a printout of costs for the pavement segments sorted by PCR value for the entire set of streets and is 11 pages long. This report indicates approximately $2.73 million is needed to correct all pavement problems noted. Typical costs for overlays, crack filling and other items were provided by the City and were used as the basis for calculating these costs. Since these data files used in this report were provided to the City, these costs can be updated for future analysis. The cost used in this report The costs for any specific segment should be verified by an engineer before applying for funds or going to contract. Please realize the recommended rehabilitation strategies and costs are general in nature and are intended to provide a relative indication of pavement conditions and costs. Additional engineering analysis is required to verify the actual rehabilitation strategy selected and the cost of repair, is required. Network Level Evaluation and Recommendations PMSPro contains a Network Level evaluation procedure that uses a set of simplified decision trees and costs to establish an annual budget level to maintain pavements. The decision trees for this level of evaluation is contained in our previous report and can be viewed by running the program. The Network Level analysis is independent from the Project Level evaluation procedures discussed above and is intended to provide a method of understanding the impact of different funding levels on the condition of the entire street network over several years. However, some common information is required to insure the costs at both levels of analysis are reasonably close. First, the calculated PCR values at the Project Level are used as the initial values at the Network Level. Deterioration Curves that define of rate of deterioration of these values are used to calculate future PCR values. Second, the Average Cost Report, Figure 4, uses the actual conditions of the streets in Mount Vernon and their costs for their repair to calculate the lowest, average, and highest costs for each Functional Class and Pavement Maintenance/Management Program City of Tukwila, Washington Pavement Type. Typically, the average costs from this report are then used to update the costs in the Network Level Analysis screen. One of the primary differences between the Project Level Analysis and the Network Level Analysis is the method used to select the appropriate Rehabilitation Strategy. At the Project Level, the selected rehabilitation strategy is based on the actual condition of the street. The PCR number is only used to prioritize the different streets. At the Network Level, only the PCR value is used to select the appropriate Rehabilitation Strategy. For this reason, the recommendations from the Network Level Analysis will probably be different than the recommendations at the Project Level. We consider the recommendations at the Project Level to be the more accurate for specific projects. The Network Level Analysis should only be used to determine an appropriate annual budget and not rehabilitation strategies for specific projects. Four levels of annual funding were evaluated to determine the best approach for the City; $600,000, $800,000, $1,000,000 and $1,200,000 in order to determine the optimum, least cost, funding level. Figures 5 8 display the results of this analysis over a 10 year period. This period of time was used to determine the long term impact of different funding levels. This analysis only evaluates major rehabilitation strategies such as overlays and reconstruction. Minor preventative maintenance activities such as patching and crack filling are not part of this analysis and should be funded separately. This amount and cost of minor maintenance can be determined at the Project Level. Figures 5a 8a presents the six budget ceilings for the six funding levels and the deferred maintenance due to inadequate funds. At the $600,000 level, the deferred maintenance continues to climb over $6.5 million at the end of 10 years. At the $800,000 level, Figure 6a, the deferred maintenance levels off at about $3 million in 2009 and starts dropping in 2010 until it reaches $0 in 2018. At a funding levels of $1.0 million, deferred maintenance drops to $0 in 2014, Figure 7a, and for $1.2 million, deferred maintenance drops to $0 in 2013, Figure 8a. In other words, a budget level of $800,000 or greater is able to get ahead the rehabilitation requirements and eventually drops to a very low level. Figures 5b 8b provide a set of bar charts that indicate the percentage of the street network in different condition levels. The green bars (PCR 80) indicate streets in Good to Excellent condition. The red bars (PCR 20) are streets that considered to have Failed and require reconstruction. At the $600,000 /year level, Figure 5b, the number of streets with a PCR 20 is initially low but begins to grow after 2014. At the same time the percentage of streets that have a PCR greater than 80 gradually falls from a high of about 86% to a low of about 65 At $800,000 /year and greater, the good streets continue to grow to over 90% throughout the 10 year period. Optimum Budget Ceiling Choosing the optimum budget level can be a difficult proposition especially with limited budgets available to the City. Obviously it would be nice to select the $1.2 million budget level, or higher, and have perfect streets for the traveling public. However, the most fiscally responsible decision should be to select that budget level that will cost the least amount over the analysis period. Figure 9 is provided to compare the amount of funds spent over the 10 year analysis period. Unfunded or Deferred Maintenance is not considered in this figure. It is interesting to note Pavement Maintenance /Management Program City of Tukwila, Washington that at the $1.0 million/year or greater level, the actual amount of money spent levels off at approximately $7.0 million. Budgets less than $1.0 million/year indicate the money required continues to grow beyond $7 million. This can be explained by considering Unfunded or Deferred Maintenance. Figure 10 provides a more important comparison between the different funding levels. Here the unfunded or Deferred Maintenance requirements are added to the expended funds to show the total obligation to the City. With a funding level of $600,000 /year, the total obligation climbs to over $12 million in year 2018. At $800,000 /year and greater the total obligation levels off at approximately $7.5 million. The least cost alternative is at the $1.2 million/year which levels off at just below the other funding levels. These charts are based on constant dollars over the analysis period. That is, interest rates and marginal rates are not considered. ArcView Mapping An added task to this study was the integration of the PMSPro data files into a GIS map using Arc View. Two maps were generated from this program and provided in this report: Recommended Rehabilitation, Figure 11; and PCR Ranges, Figure 12. CLOSING This report was prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering principles and practice. There is no other warranty, either expressed or implied. Should you have any questions regarding the findings or recommendations, please do not hesitate to contact D Chi LAVES 7 1. Project Priority Report 2. Pavement Condition Report for S 142 St. 3. Project Cost Report 4. Average Cost Report 5. a. Budget vs. Deferred Maintenance for $600,000 budget; b. Health of Network 6. a. Budget vs. Deferred Maintenance for $800,000 budget; b. Health of Network 7. a. Budget vs. Deferred Maintenance for $1.0 million budget; b. Health of Network 8. a. Budget vs. Deferred Maintenance for $1.2 million budget; b. Health of Network 9. Accumulated Money Spent at four Budget Levels 10. Accumulated Budget Plus Deferred Maintenance Costs for Four Budget Levels 11. Recommended Rehabilitation Strategies Map 12. Range of PCR Values Rehabilitation CO NOTK\G ..0000000 0S TIO STONY PATCH SLURRY Sw 'R'. OVLY 00 OYY R_CON5T City of Tukwila m Fgure 11 Pavement Engineers. Inc. Pavement Condition Rating titASTER.EvAI- pCR 22 0 -40 4i -00 65 SO 0 -100 Figure 12 City of Tukwila pavement En3ineer% Inc. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT THIRD QUARTER REPORT TO COUNCIL July 1 September 30, 2008 Prepared for Transportation Committee 3 QUARTER SIGNIFICANT ISSUES Completed the Tukwila 205 Levee, Site 5 Retaining Wall. Awarded construction contracts for 2008 Overlay Program, Standby Power Upgrades Year One, 2008 Small Drainage Program, Interurban Ave S. Waterline. Received WA State right -of -way certification for Tukwila International Boulevard Phase II Ill. Significant staff time is required to respond to request for public records which reduces our ability to complete goals in a timely manner. BUDGET PROGRAM GOALS Public Works Administration 1. Review the Local Improvement District for the ouroose of fundina the Tukwila Urban Access Proiect at Klickitat and Southcenter Parkway: Ongoing. Waiting on completion of right -of -way negotiations for three properties to finalize the preliminary assessment roll for the LID. 2. Evaluate future arant funding options available and propose a course of action to fund transportation projects: Ongoing process. 3. Assess the City's Emeraencv Manaaement Plan using the National Emergency Manaaement Accreditation Program Standard as the guideline: Effort stopped because continual changes to guidelines and requirements from Department of Homeland Security. 4. Provide auarterlv reports on emeraencv manaaement issues: Ongoing process. 5. Hold quarterly community informational meetings: Ongoing. Business Services 1. Create a more effective. cost efficient department projecting and monitoring department cost: seeing more cost effective purchasing aareements with vendors: preparina the department's operation. maintenance and capital facilities budaet using a 'needs- basis' approach: Ongoing process. City Administrator approved the Vehicle Replacement Guideline Procedures. 2. Review a program that effectively and efficiently administers Council- approved Local Improvement Districts (LIDs): Goal met. First proposal for a neighborhood LID indicated there was insufficient benefit to property owners to warrant the project. LID for TUC Access (Klickitat) continues. 3. Review "rate model" for establishina appropriate rates for water. sewer and surface water enterprise funds: Ongoing process as part of the budget. Maintenance Administration 1. Analyze operational and standby needs for potential future expansion of shop facilities: Pending due to seismic study. 2. Implement recurrent technical training and operational safety programs to maintain employee certification levels: Recurring goal met. 3. Implementation of maintenance tracking system for facilities and City resources: Goal met. A centralized reporting and tracking system was implemented for inventory maintenance of city signs and to record and control graffiti. Engineering Administration 1. Continue to assess standardized contracting procedures for construction and repair projects: Ongoing effort. The use of cost- loaded networks for managing contracts will be expanded. 2. Annual update of transportation mitiaation fee system: Reviewing and updating the system. 2008 Third Quarter Report to Council Prepared for Transportation Committee Page 2 Development General: 1. Maintain and improve the turn- around time for permit review and approval: Ongoing process. 2. Work with and support DCD to improve permit processes: Ongoing process. Performance: 1. Zero backloas of permits waitina for more than 30 days to be reviewed: Goal being met. 2. Permits for sinale familv residences issued within 30 days: Goal being met. Facility Maintenance General: 1. Maintain a record keeping system trackina each facility for allocation of work order resources: Ongoing effort. Centralized system implemented for reporting and tracking efforts associated with graffiti removal. 2. Implement the business plan for facility maintenance: Ongoing. Performance: 1. Advertise and award 90% of active Fund 303 Proiects no later than June 1 Goal not met. Project list had to be revised several times in order to include several emergent high priority repair projects. 2. Reduce facility maintenance costs by 10% through efficiencies: Mixed results. Efficiencies were achieved but were offset by inflation and therefore less maintenance was accomplished for the same budgeted dollars. 3. Develop and implement a custodial satisfaction survey and performance coals: The facility maintenance work order form on Tuknet is sufficient to identify customer needs. Street Maintenance /General Admin General: 1. Participate in pavement management for the multi -year street overlay proaram: Goal met. Successful 2008 Overlay Program accomplished. 2. Assess the Traffic Operations Center (TOM effectiveness: Ongoing process. Value of the TOC was shown during the Mall Opening signal timing at intersections was quickly adjusted to compensate for the increased traffic. Timing plans are routinely evaluated and adjusted to compensate for changes in traffic patterns. Performance: 1. Repair City -owned streetliahts within 72 hours. For Seattle City Liaht/Puaet Sound Enemy streetliahts. report within 24 hours: Ongoing process, goal being met. 2. Correct all traffic signal problems within 24 hours: Ongoing process, goal being met. 3. Perform auarterlv preventative maintenance on all City -owned traffic sianals: Ongoing process, goal being met. 4. Evaluate reflectivity of all sians once a year: Ongoing process, goal being met. 5. City street cleaning: Ongoing process, other demands reduce street cleaning levels. a. Residential 100 percent of the streets, twice a year. b. Arterial residential and commercial/industrial roads six times a year. c. Arterial commerciaVindustrial roads eight times a year. 6. Potholes shall be repaired within 48 hours of notification: Ongoing process, goal being met. Residential Streets General Engineering 1. Prioritize. budget. and schedule list of residential street improvement projects for inclusion into the City's Capital Improvement Proaram: Reviewing list of traffic calming requests to determine eligible locations, followed by prioritization. Report to Committee in fourth quarter. 2. Annual update of pavement manaaement system: Consultant has updated pavement data and completed a new report for the entire City. Rating results expected to be presented to Council in fourth quarter. Bridges Streets General Engineering 1. Onaoina construction of Phase II Ill of Tukwila International Blvd. Improvement Proiect: Right -of- Way certification completed; obligated construction funds, advertise in fourth quarter. 2008 Third Quarter Report to Council Prepared for Transportation Committee Page 3 2. Award construction contract for Tukwila Urban Access (Klickitat) Project: Right -of -Way acquisition underway, to be followed by the completion of the LID Preliminary Assessment Roll by early 2009. 3. Award construction contract for Southcenter Parkway Project: Project has been placed on hold pending completion of the negotiations for the Development Agreement. Equipment Rental General: 1. Use monthly maintenance manaaement trackina reports to recommend a 10 percent reduction in fleet maintenance costs: Ongoing with mixed results. Fuel costs continued to rise throughout the year and these additional costs more than offset the savings achieved. Performance: 1. Complete 85 percent of the 2008 budget capital equipment purchases by June 30` Goal met. 2. Return 100 percent of vehicles for preventive maintenance and checkup within the 30 -day timeframe: Being completed for nearly all departments but requires cooperation from those using fleet. 3. Keep 90 percent of safety vehicles (Police and Fire) available for use: Being implemented to the best of City's ability given the resources and shop space available.