Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-20-07 Agenda Item 2D, PMP Philosphy ~ ~ EN HILLS DATE: August 16, 2007 AGENDA ITEM 2.D MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Michelle Wolfe, City Administra:~A / Kristine Giga, Civil Engineer I'f-r Greg Hoag, Public Works Director FROM: SUBJECT: PMP Philosophy BACKGROUND Staff is working on the City's fIve-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) from 2008 to 2012, particularly with respect to the Pavement Management Program (PMP) projects. The purpose of this discussion is to receive feedback from the City Council on the PMP philosophy in order to proceed with CIP planning in a manner that the City Council supports. DISCUSSION Attached is a copy of the Pavement Management philosophy that was adopted by the City Council in 2001. Staff feels this document should be updated. In the last six years, standard maintenance strategies have evolved, and as a result, the City has modifIed its approach to the pavement management program. Listed below are factors that staff considers when recommending the annual PMP improvement projects. Some of these factors are currently included in the existing PMP policy; others are items staff would like to incorporate into a revised document. . Capture mill and overlays at the appropriate life of the pavement- not too late, but also not too early. . Consider other reasons for reconstruction: utility issues, storm water management, structural/sub-grade problems that cannot be solved by a mill and overlay. . Correct safety issues in deteriorated streets that may cause damage to vehicles, bicycles, or walkers in our neighborhoods. \\Metro-inctus\ardenhills\PR&PW\Engineering\2007\ Work _ Sessions\8-20-07 _Memo _PMP _Philosophy.doc CIP Discussion 8/16/2007 Page 2 . Improve neighborhood aesthetics, property owner's quality oflife, and property values. . Use the Pavement Condition Index (PC1) as a guideline to determine the appropriate maintenance strategy. . Neighborhood approach to annual maintenance/improvement projects where feasible. . Budget management- how the project is funded (Assessments, Municipal State Aid Funds, Enterprise Funds, etc.) In 2006, the City contracted with GoodPointe Technologies to develop a database for pavement management and perform a detailed, multi-year network level budget analysis on the City's pavement network. At the May 2006 Work Session, staff presented the results of GoodPointe's report; the meeting minutes are attached. Four scenarios were discussed: . Scenario 1: Spend $] million per year on street improvements. Over a 20 year period, the average pavement condition index (PCI) rating would increase from 64 to 77. . Scenario 2: Maintain current average PCl of 64. Over a 20 year period, this would cost $14.5 million. . Scenario 3: Increase the average PCI from 64 to 75, an average benchmark PCl for cities in the metro area. Over a 20 year period, this would cost $16 million. . Scenario 4 modeled the existing five year CIP, which resulted in a PCI rating of 65 after the fIve year period. The general consensus at the May 2006 Work Session was that Scenario 3 was the most desired option. Staff requests that the City Council discuss whether the consensus still exists and consider formalizing the 20-year goals as part of the PMP policy update. Scenario 3 included an aggressive approach, budgeting more projects in the fIrst five years to increase the PCI to 75, and then maintain that rating for the rest of the 20-year period with a lower budget. Stafflessened the intensity of the early "spike" in spending, and presented a revised Scenario 3 as the 2007 -20 II CIP, which was adopted in January, 2007. Staff had GoodPointe run the 2007-2011 CIP to see how it impacts the PC!. Based on the current CIP, the average PCI rating will increase from 64 to 72 by 2011, increasing to 75 in the next five years and then maintaining a rating of 75 to the end of the 20-year period. The cost of this scenario over a 20 year time frame is $19.9 million. CONCLUSION Staff is requesting questions and comments from the City Council regarding the PMP philosophy. Once we receive feedback, we will proceed with revising the 2001 PMP philosophy and bring it to the City Council for review and approval. ~ ~HILLS CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Pavement Manaf.!ement Philosophy The City of Arden Hills has the fIduciary and physical authority and responsibility for upkeep of approximately 30 miles of city streets within its boundaries. This includes seasonal maintenance activities such as snow removal, crack sealing, street patching, sweeping, as well as structural maintenance of the pavement. The City of Arden Hills has made a commitment to its residents to provide a systematic program of street rehabilitation and repair in order to assure that the City streets are serviceable, safe, functional, and provided at a reasonable cost to meet the needs of our residents and the traveling public. The City of Arden Hills Pavement Management Program strives to expend tax payer funds in a cost effective manner in order to ensure the most value for residents. New Street Desif.!n Standards The City has adopted a set of Design Standards for new street construction or reconstruction. The standards have been developed in conjunction with recommendations from the City Engineer, Public Works Director and staff, City residents and Council members. Street design standards address such things as street widths (which measure from curb face to curb face), pavement thickness, concrete curb and gutter and surface drainage. Thcre are four functional classifications of streets within the City of Arden Hills (not including highways and county roads). A brief description of each and the recommended standards follows: Community Street: Provide access to the residences, institutions and businesses on that strect, providing a route through the neighborhood or business district for residents of other neighborhoods. (6.0 miles throughout City) Street Width: Case SpecifIc, (32 ft. minimum) Neif.!hborhood Street: Provide access to residences on that street and provide a route through neighborhood for residents on other streets. A large proportion of trips have neither an origin or destination on that street. (4.5 miles throughout City) Street Width: 30 ft. minimum Residential Street: Primarily serve adjoining residents with little or no through traffic. Almost all trips have either an origin or destination on that street. (18.5 miles throughout City). Street Width: 28 ft. minimum City of Arden Hills Pavement Management Program Page I 4/12/2007 Special Cases: DefInition: Streets which do not fIt into any of the three above descriptions and have a very low usage, (1-3 residences), streets which provide secondary access (ie alleys) or streets defIned by extreme limitations due to narrow ROW, topography etc. (0.3 miles throughout City) Street Width: Case SpecifIc Additional Considerations for Street Width Determination Arden Hills is a community with a wide variety of neighborhoods, each with special conditions which must be taken into account when considering reconstruction of streets. The residential and neighborhood street widths listed above are desired goals but exceptions to these widths will be considered by the City Council on a case by case basis_ A number of factors in addition to street classification will be considered including: Topographical constraints (steep hills, lakes, etc.) Existing street widths Existing average daily traffic volumes Existing right-of-way width Existing trees Pedestrian use of the road All new street construction and street reconstruction in Arden Hills will include concrete curb and gutter for a number of reasons: Provide a stable maintenance edge for plowing and sweeping operations Reduce plow damage to yards and mailboxes Protect the edge of the bituminous surface from deteriorating Channel storm water runoff away from street Reduce erosion from boulevards/lawns All new street construction in Arden Hills will be structurally designed for 9 ton loading thereby eliminating the need for spring load restrictions (allowing year round access) and slowing the rate of deterioration of the pavement system. How Streets are Selected for Reconstruction or Overlav Work The City Council select streets for reconstruction based on a variety of factors starting with the Pavement Condition Index (PC!) of the pavement. The City Engineer conducts a field survey of streets about once every 2 years at which time a PCI rating is calculated for each street in the City. The PCl is a numeric reflection of the surface characteristics of the pavement including potholes, cracking, rutting, etc. Several other factors which will be considered in order to determine the best candidates for street reconstruction are, but not limited to, the following: Condition/effectiveness of existing surface drainage system Condition of underground water and sewer system Whether a street meets recommended standards for curb and gutter and width Opportunities to improve water quality oflakes downstream of street City of Arden Hills Pavement Management Program Pagel 4/12/2007 Available State and City funding Emergency cases County construction projects on adjacent roadways Reconstruction of adjacent City streets Major redevelopment projects within City Neighborhood petitions As much as possible, the City Council will determine a reconstruction project or overlay work for a particular area with as much advance notice as possible to the surrounding and impacted neighborhoods. The City Council does desire to allow for at least one year advance notice to the surrounding and impacted neighborhoods for improvement of the road or roads within that neighborhood. The City Council and Staff will set up a neighborhood meeting, if possible, in the neighborhood, to meet with surrounding and impacted properties to begin discussion about the issues, identifIcation of additional concerns and solutions to the road structure. The City Council does desire to have the neighborhood provide input into the choices it would like to make for the reconstruction or overlay work to be done on the roads within their neighborhood. The options provided for selection could include some variety in road width, curb and gutter section, aesthetics including lighting, sidewalk and trail construction, striping, and may include improvement of the subsurface water and sewer system and installation of a comprehensive and coordinated water drainage system. Process The City of Arden Hills will use a variety of media sources to communicate with the neighborhood about the intended roadway project. These communications may include, but not be limited to the following: City of Arden Hills Notes (City newsletter), Cable TV, local newspaper, articles in St. Paul Pioneer Press, individual flyers, and City website (ci.arden- hills.ITh'1.us). After meeting with the neighborhood, considering concerns identifying surrounding issues and discussing solutions, the City Council will then direct the City Engineer to begin preparation of a feasibility report. The neighborhood will still have input and process through the feasibility report brought forward to the City Council, the Public Hearing necessary according to Minnesota Statute 429 for public improvements, and prior to the City Council making a determination of whether to proceed with a street reconstruction or milling overlay work. \\RVNASI\AHdata$\PR&PW\Public Works\Pavement Management Program (PMP)\2001 PMP\2001 - PMP.doc City of Arden Hills Pavement Management Program Page 3 4/12/2007 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA ADOPTION PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The undersigned, being the duly qualifIed and acting City Administrator of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, hereby certifIes the following: The foregoing is a true and correct copy of the Pavement Management Program on f1le and of offIcial, publicly available record in the office of the City. Said program was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting of the Council held on October 29,2001 . Said meeting was duly called, regularly held, open to the public, and held at the place at which meetings of the Council are regularly held. WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE as the City Administrator of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, this 30th day of October, 200 I. JOSEPH P . LYNCH, CITY ADMINISTRATOR (SEAL) City of Arden Hills Pavement Management Program Page 4 4/11/2007 May 15,2006 5 Councilmember Pellegrin was excused from the meeting at 6:45 PM. CIP Discussion Civil Engineer Kris Giga provided the City Council with of an overview of the GoodPointe Technologies report. Ms. Giga also provided the City Council with an overview of the following street maintenance practices and procedures: Seal Coat-A seal coat is one of many types of surface treatment used in street maintenance. A seal coat is an application of asphalt emulsion followed immediately with an aggregate cover. Seal coat can waterproof the surface, provide low severity crack sealing, and restore surface friction. Seal coating can be performed at any time during the life of pavement and lasts an average of three to six years. The primary purpose of seal coating a street is to protect the street from deterioration caused by sun and water. A seal coat provides a waterproof membrane that keeps the pavement from becoming brittle and cracking. Mill and Overlay-There are several maintenance practices that involve milling. An edge mill typically consists of grinding the old bituminous surface along the outer eight feet of the street. This helps establish a uniform cross-section, especially in instances where the crown in the street is relatively flat. A full width mill or resurfacing is necessary when the upper surface layer of a pavement has deteriorated considerably. A full depth mill can be used on a street that has already been reconstructed with a good base section, but the pavement has deteriorated to a point where seal coating or a standard mill and overlay is not effective. A pavement section with significant cracking will end up reflecting through the new pavement. The full depth of the pavement is ground up and removed. This process may also involve some sub grade soil corrections and some removal of aggregate base, if it has been contaminated or is sub-standard. The street is paved with the same thickness of new asphalt. Reconstruction- When a street is fully reconstructed, the existing asphalt and base are completely removed and replaced. Reconstruction may also involve sub-grade soil corrections. For streets that do not meet current design standards for width, curb and gutter, and drainage, an upgrade may be necessary. Based upon the City's previous fIve year capital improvement program, GoodPointe Technologies provided the City with four fInancial analyses using the following scenarios: Scenario I-The City would spend $1 million dollars per year on street improvements over the next twenty years. The existing fIve year CIP has been incorporated into the first fIve years of the model. Over the next twenty years, the average PCI would increase from 64 to 77. Scenario 2-The City would try to maintain a PCI rating of 64 and project the level of funding over the next twenty years to maintain this rating. The streets are selected by the program for May 15,2006 6 maintenance on an as needed basis. The results of this scenario indicate that approximately $14.5 million will need to be budgeted for pavement management over the next 20 years. Scenario 3- A PCI value of 75 is an average benchmark for a number of cities in the metro area. In order to the City to maintain a PCI rating of 75, the City would invest approximately $16 million over the next twenty years for street improvements. Scenario 4- If the City adopted the existing CIP, the average PCI rate for the City would be 65 after the fIve year period. The projected results would be very similar to scenario number 2. Councilmember Grant asked what are the different types of seal coat that are available. Roseville Public Works Director Duane Schwartz stated that most communities use pea gravel and aggregate rock. Most cities use the aggregate rock because it wears better and is more economical. Councilmember Holden asked how long the top coat of a typical street lasts. Mr. Schwartz said that the top coat of a street will usually last three to six years. It is important for the City to develop a maintenance strategy to address street improvements, storm water drainage, curbs, gutters, utilities, and other maintenance issues. Typically pothole patching is a stop gap measure and not a permanent solution for repairing the roadways. Councilmember Holden asked why the software program did not recommend more streets for mill and overlay. Mr. Duane Schwartz noted that streets, that have curb and gutter may not be considered a candidate for an edge ruill and overlay. Councilmember Holden said that it would be more advantageous for the City to mill and overly streets if it is possible. City Adrninsitrator Wolfe said that the proposed CIP will change based upon the PCI ratings. It may be wise for the City to invest more money up-front to obtain a standard PCl rating for all of the City's streets. Councilmember Grant asked what Roseville's PCI goal is? Mr. Duane Schwartz said that Roseville's PCl goal is 75. The City began with a PCI rating of 55 at the beginning of its street maintenance program. On a yearly basis, the City would reconstruct four to fIve ruiles of street a year in order to bring the City's PCI rating up to 75. In the beginning for the City of Roseville to get their street maintenance program off the ground, the City bonded for street improvements in 1988. Recently the City of Roseville has not bonded for improvement projects and has been able to utilize the interest earned from the bonds to pay for future road improvements. May 15,2006 7 Councilmember Larson noted that the PCl information presented tonight was very helpful. He would be in favor of supporting option #3. Mayor Aplikowski agreed with Councilmember Larson that a number of streets are at their critical life point and need to have maintenance work. She would be in favor of researching the bonding proposal as supplement funding to the City's PMP budget. Councilmember Grant said that he is supportive of option #3, but not the idea of bonding for road improvement projects. Councilmember Holden said that she is supportive of option #3. She believes that the City should adopt a road maintenance policy before proceeding with a funding discussion. City Administrator Wolfe said that City staff will continue to research street improvements, MSA projects, and the capital equipment replacement schedule for the proposed five year CIP. Councilmember Holden asked if the City would continue to proceed with the neighborhood approach to PMP projects. City Administrator Wolfe said that the City will attempt to continue utilizing the neighborhood PMP approach. The City may not be able to utilize the neighborhood approach for all of the street improvement projects. Councilmember Holden said that the City needs to concentrate on maintaining the marginal streets that can be repaired using seal coats or mill and overlay. Councilmember Larson agrees with Councilmember Holden's street improvement philosophy. The City needs to fInd the necessary revenue needed to make these improvement projects a reality. Councilmember Holden requested that City staff prepare a road maintenance program for the City. City Adminsitrator Wolfe said that City staff will attempt to complete a draft program within the next six months. A draft CIP will be presented to the City Council at the work session meeting in July. Proposed Chanl!:es to the City's Website Members of the City Council reviewed the proposed changes to the City's web site and requested that this item be placed on the agenda at the next City Council meeting for further discussion. City Council Retreat Follow-up City Administrator Michelle Wolfe provided the City Council with a follow-up to the City Council's retreat in March. The following is the proposed list of goals for the City Council for 2006-2009: o > IiI @)~ g 1 0 ;:r::rl>' .....'" l-4 ~ r , r I CF. Illl!! ~qH ~II~! !i~1 !Win! tn ! =< CD jl) ~ o ~ U - N o o ~ I tv o ,.,J;, ".J,. - ,>:> '\) ~t!;; "\,,,{Gl ~~~f'.)~~ ~g&:ggO _ . --.J -.J .. ~ ?? ::0 "w - ,~ (!l (l) ~ 5 g g ~ g~~g~ - 2" :::;- ~ < g 9. ~ o o. '< ~ ~ II " lP H 19 ! ~; z[> <;~<~ ~ rv N tv ~ ::=: ~ ~ o if '" w " o w ;u ro " o ~ " c " " ~ ;u ro " o ~ " c " " ~ 0<> o < ~ .- ~ , ,0 ,0 .. " 1~ t~ CLEVELAND AVE N , I i I I j '\ I :f f2:'BLQl;t~.i~~- ! ~ I. ; f ~ j1> .~ !:; , 1 "">;< \ I , .--;>'---- h '" '" ~! 1: " -I" '?ri -j~ :t~ ~O '" 1;;; \"'-'\ y.<,:~~\ LAKE JOHANNA BLVD l, ~o .> ! /~ / ' ~ ~ASgtJRY AVEN -J'" (g ~ ,. o . ~'\., ';, ;;: . 0 > -?0>." 1;0.. 7 WOQDRD rii r ';r ~ N ~CSHOIf. $ LEXINGTONAVEN " . i1 ,~ eJ~ ~" ~ , 1. , f I -~ ,>::; :~ ~; ')\l!\? II-O~" " , ! t I I\l -t j ! j -.1 ~ I" , ~ . ~ > I: , ~ -,- , <' . ." " SIEMScr J~ '" :.. q~ 1;1l'l5 ,,' ,0 " -?b~.",( , , NEW BRIGHTON fiG o o o , , > ~ o . t:t: ,0 +0 c}t j' ~., JO ;~\ '-'k, ~o \ ~ ~I I I \ , > &j ~1 ~I " r~ " 0) ~ '\ ~.", /' i ,,' / -! \ ' NORM) ~i'l y) /.//'~ . / GALECIR;!! ,/ J /l ~ (5" / I /RM" OR ~ ~~! ' ,~! ~ / Y F II ",,,,l"7lfo"",,,, I ! ~ ~Jr~l ifT ! 1f/ ill$; ,~ ' II .. , ~ -( ."" fa ,. '"" .;:-. ~-< -l.'" N3^1I9f'11113NS gl ~~! 1\ ~k1SCAL ->.~~ O~'f;VE"f,j~~ 0 +'" '.. Ei ,j~ RoPH- ~:F 1i: jOAKSDR...",-t ~~ i -.;~"__.;.,i<': I R o g ~ . .~ o " , LEXINGTONAVEN "' - I m ~ r I t I ! t I /1.{TEl/srATE "w o o ~ NEw BRIGHTON I/O ;" . o " , , : j"vVl'dJ. ROllING l""'1 I /':~"" J \ ,b :; , \~ ~ @~,~:~IRVlEWAVE.N n\ 10 ~ ~l r -.~~ ~'\ ~ ~ 01 10""; ~\ i" F k,:,w,wl~ ! H 0\ T ~:.;L\Ii..EW J Q' "~ l:jh; >~."'o " / " ~\\"''':<f . \ \~ ",./"-., ~~ \ ~~ ~$ \~ \ '-.,,{l'{'? "'i, ~=----i:''Jj ,4>""~ ~'" "SIV~V~ ...'lI'II~ ~""C; n, 4YE/V I /"" ;,1 .. , '" ~ Rt,>(! '^, \; '\" ,4> f"'< ,. j'if ," -" " -po; t~ In, t-~ } t ~ I~I I~I ,., 1.1 I I I I~ ~i /8 J f [~'-~-"-,;, :i :n.. . ,-J>: { l~ i-" ~-l) ,...., / o o " < . . , o . ~ ~ '~ , , o . ~ o r i I ;!lilt 3 r ~ -~ ~ ~ 0' , ~ t ~~. y?f . . . . ! . o g ~ > ~ o > , ;,,,,. ff," "" I !.EK/NGroNAVEN INTERSTAHEJ5 I , f-i.+f~tH-H+i+'i++" R~~ \~! ~1 ~ ,1" ~l ~I ., ;:i Jf ""~ II <),~ /;{} $/ I ::P ~ 0/ I i j ! ~ tEITr1SDlJlDR "4 .11 11-+++1 ! I , ! I I ; , I I I I I en I SN"I.-LING AVE N ;$; ~ '\ ~ll\"+ .-~ ~ ?';\tlS~ ~ ,. ~ -... l~ "0 l' i , "-'-----" i , .. ~/ c ." A.Ml.1NE-~_ . :~ '< \~ t~ ~ /I~ l:!: .' ~ ., 1';; !1ifII~" · t~?4~ I //l~ Ie" 0' ~ Ei "'E ~ ~ ~ /. 6'.."" g ....EIlSANT , \ p"J '~~~)I>f1l-1!>IV)l n ~I ~l ,