14b Staff Report - Street Repair and Resurfacing Program for FY 2004-05
MEETING DATE: 12/6/04 ITEM NO. "it B COUNCIL/AGENCY AGENDA REPORT DATE: DECEMBER 2, 2004 DEBRA J. FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER/E CTOR MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL! CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY FROM: TO: SUBJECT: ACCEPT REPORT ON THE STREET REPAIR AND RESURFACING PROGRAM FOR FY 2004-05 AND PROVIDE DIRECTION ON EXPLORING ONGOING FUNDING SOURCES RECOMMENDATION: Accept
report on the Street Repair and Resurfacing Program for FY 2004-05 and provide direction on exploring ongoing funding sources. BACKGROUND: This report is intended to provide the Council
with an update on the street· repair and resurfacing program that has taken place over the past 3 years, provide some options Jor the FY 04/05 street resurfacing program, and to discuss
the issue .of lack of ongoing funding for the street repair program. The Town of Los Gatos uses the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) StreetSaver Pavement Management Software
(PMS) as do mostBayArea cities. MTC uses this PMS program to document and monitor the street pavement condition in the Bay Area. The Pavement Management Program is a tool that can be
used by the Town to assist in the decision making process about how scarce resources should be applied towards the maintenance and enhancement of the Town's street system. The program
is designed to determine the most cost effective manner in which to address street maintenance, particularly when the budget for doing so is limited. The MTC StreetSaver PMS assigns
a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) value to each street in the Town. These values are derived either from visual inspection or, if that isn't available, an extrapolation from the last
rehabilitation or construction done to the street, using a standard deterioration curve. A brand new street would have a PCI of 100. The PCI values are broken down into three categories:
-Jtr-1/\/\, \..-Cwt, f...-ts (P6J) PREPARED BY: JOHN E. CURTIS Director of Parks and Public Works Reviewed by: \(f> Assistant Town Manager --OtL)Own Attorney __Clerk Administrator
__Community Development Revised: 12/2/04 4:50 pm Reformatted: 5/30/02 N:\B&E\COUNCIL REPORTS\Street Repair Resurfacing Program 04.wpd
PAGE 2 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL! CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SUBJECT: ACCEPT REPORT ON THE STREET REPAIR AND RESURFACING PROGRAM FOR FY 2004-05 DECEMBER 2, 2004 • . Classification
I -Very Good (PCI 70 to 100) have little or no distress, with the possible exception ofutility patching in good condition, or signs of light cracking that may be slightly weathered.
Classification II and III -Good (PCI 50 to 69) have severe weathering, moderate levels of distress, limited patching, and non-load-related cracking. • Classification IV -Poor (PCI 26
to 49) have moderate to severe levels of distress including load related types, such as alligator cracking. Classification V -Very Poor (PCI 0 to 25) have severe levels of distress,
large quantities of distortion or alligator cracking; pavement failures past possible rehabilitation activities. The MTC's overall goal is that every city will have an overall PCI in
the low to mid 80's. In Fiscal Year 2000-2001, the Town Council acknowledged the importance of improving the condition of Town streets and approved a multi-year street improvement program
to achieve this objective. The Town Council aimed to raise the average PCI from 64 to 75. DISCUSSION: Progress to Date The amount ofwork done since September 2000 includes 18 centerline
miles ofasphalt overlay, 25 centerline miles of slurry, and 4 centerline miles of reconstruction. In total, this work represents approximately 46% of all the streets in the Town. This
has been an aggressive program to address some ofthe deficiencies that we have had in repair and resurfacing ofTown streets, with the results showing a much improved PCI. During this
period $8.9 million has been spent to improve the Town's streets. The street repair and resurfacing project commenced in 2001 with a $15 million one-time appropriation. At that time,
the PCI for the Town streets was 64 and we have made steady progress to improve the condition ofTown streets. The rehabilitation work that has gone into the streets is reflected in achieving
a high of75 earlier this year. This figure has been reduced during this year to 72. The Town now faces the challenge of maintaining the streets improved so far in addition to the need
to improve remaining streets in Town, all in a time offiscal constraint. Typically, when streets are designed, the estimated life ofthe street is 20 years without any major maintenance.
The life cycle of a street, however, can be greatly affec;;ted by a number of factors, including: 1. Preventative maintenance, or lack thereof 2. Volume/type of traffic (especially truck
traffic) 3. Construction materials/techniques 4. Sub-grade condition
PAGE 3 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL! CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SUBJECT: ACCEPT REPORT ON THE STREET REPAIR AND RESURFACING PROGRAM FOR FY 2004-05 DECEMBER 2, 2004
Environment (differential temperature) 6. Water intrllsion from rain and landscaping 7. Frequency of trench cuts in the roadway Each ofthese factors can contribute to the premature deterioration
of street surfaces, impacting the street section's structural integrity and leading to its early failure. Once the street has failed, the only effective remedy is to reconstruct the
street section at a significant cost. Experience has shown that regularly scheduled preventative maintenance can significantly extend the life of a street. An aggressive preventative
maintenance program can delay the point in time when a street needs to be overlaid by many years. The cost of a preventative maintenance program generally depends upon when the program
starts in relationship to the age and condition ofthe street section. We have much more control control over a new section ofstreet versus a street that has already deteriorated with
age. The older the street section, the more extensive the required maintenance activities, with the resultant increase in annual preventative maintenance costs. No matter what point
in time the preventative maintenance program is initiated, however, it will still prove in time the most economical way to extend pavement life versus waiting until streets have deteriorated
to the point at which an overlay or reconstruction is needed. For example, if a street that is recommended to have maintenance work done this year is pushed forward into the deferred
maintenance program for next year, the 'cost ofthat maintenance work would increase and continue to increase each year that the maintenance work is deferred. It is most cost-effective
in the long run to eliminate the deferred maintenance bacldog as quickly as possible. Additional TI.lllding is needed to maintain this level of condition throughout the Town's network.
Poorly maintained streets will degrade overtime at an increasingly rapid rate to a point where costly reconstructive measures will be required to keep the road from completely failing
and falling into an unusable condition. FY 2004/05 and FY 2005/06 For FY 2004/05 and FY 2005/06, approximately $900,000 has been budgeted for each fiscal year for the Town wide street
repair and reconstruction program. An additional $1.6 million has been budgeted with Redevelopment Agency nmds for downtown work which has already been earmarked for the reconstruction
ofSouth Santa Cruz Avenue and West Main Street. The goal ofthe proposed Street Program is to utilize the funds to maintain the overall PCI of 72 or as close to it as possible and to
ensure that the all the work in the past few years has not been lost. Using formulas for relating the cost of maintaining roads to the PCI, Los Gatos would need to commit $1.5 million
per year to street rehabilitation proj ects. Unless a mechanism is found to provide that funding level, staffmust continue to examine ways to extend the available budget in the most
effective way. In order to stretch the budget to as many miles ofroad as possible, staffhasinvestigated the option of using Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (RAC) Cape Seal process as an
alternative to overlay. The material is made from crumb rubber which is grounded or granulated rubber particles derived from
PAGE 4 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL! CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SUBJECT: ACCEPT REPORT ON THE STREET REPAIR AND RESURFACING PROGRAM FOR FY 2004-05 DECEMBER 2, 2004 auto,
light truck, or other sources that use a high content of natural rubber. It is important to understand that this Cape Seal process is not a Rubberized Asphalt Overlay, which has also
been in used by the Town, Caltrans, and other agencies. Chip seals have always been viewed as a maintenance tool. They have been used to seal the pavement, provide an improved skid resistance,
and extend the pavement life. However, when using conventional binders and most polymer modified binders, the pavementmust be relatively crack free or require significant surface preparation
prior to placement of the binders in order to obtain an adequate service life. However, because an RAC binder has the unique property of resisting reflection cracking, the surface preparation
prior to placement of asphalt rubber chip seals is significantly reduced or even even eliminated in most cases. A Cape Seal is simply a rubber chip seal followed by an application of
a slurry seal as the final surfacing. It results in a thin pavement surfacing that provides improved resistance to reflective cracking and better overall ride. This strategy can provide
significant cost savings when compared to conventional overlay strategies. We expect to get a 10 year life span from applications of Cape Seal. Resurfacing Alternatives for FY 04/05
The staffproposes three alternative scenarios for FY 04/05 Street Repair and Resurfacing Program: 1. Staffhas reviewed and refined the list ofstreets generated by the PMS program. Taking
into consideration the streets that the program considers the most important, staff has targeted work arolU1d those areas thus saving on mobilization and traffic control costs. The program
generates a PCI for each street based on projected deterioration. However, street performance varies greatly and may deviate from the average because oftraffic volume, type of usage,
condition of road work, trenching, and any number of other factors. In order to accolU1t for this, staffhas conducted in-field observations ofeach street to determine the best treatment
for that pmiicular street. The overall PCI with this scenario becomes 71. The cost of construction for this scenario is estimated at $770,000. It is expected that. with construction
mmlagement, contingencies, and cost of design work in-house, the full budget allocated for FY 2004-05 will be used. 2. Target the selected streets that the PMS program generated. The
program has used a weighed formula to select work on the streets that would have the most impact. However, the disadvantage to this scenario is that the program has selected streets
(and portions of streets) that are dispersed in little segments all through town. This causes an increase in cost due to mobilization and traffic control. With the work so dispersed
around Town, staff predicts that there will be resident questions regarding the reasoning behind choosing a celiain street adjacent to theirs and not their street. The overall PCI with
this scenario will also be reduced to 71.
PAGES MAYOR ANDTOWN COUNCIL! CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SUBJECT: ACCEPT REPORT ON THE STREET REPAIR AND RESURFACING PROGRAM FOR FY 2004-05 DECEMBER 2, 2004 3. Staffhas
selected two streets that are in very bad condition and requires reconstruction (Oak Hill Way and Jackson Street). Because ofthe high cost ofreconstruction, the work for these two streets
alone will use the majority of the budget. The consequence is that there is less money to spend on preventative maintenance. The overall PCI with this scenario will drop to 70. SCENARIO
CHART Scenario Street Miles in Percentage of Town Cost of Post-Work Overall Scenario Streets Construction PCI 1 7.7 7.6% $ 770,000.00 71 2 7.8 7.6% $ 770,000.00 71 "J 3.4 3.4% $ 760,000.00
70 Maintain 72 PCI 16.7 16.5% $ 1,500,000.00 72 Do Nothing 0.0 0.0% $ ° 69 Even though the program has proven invaluable in taking into account many factors such as giving arterials
and collectors a heavier weight in factoring what streets should be targeted, it falls short when it comes to determining a project specific list. There are numerous non-numerical factors
that need to be taken into account, including minimizing disturbance to residents and businesses and coordination of construction activities that is not accounted for in the list the
program generates. Thus, staffrecommends that Council approve Scenario 1. Staff will use the overhead proj ector to present maps of recommended streets in the paving project at the Council
Meeting. Future Needs and Options The Town has made significant progress in raising the quality of the roadway infrastructure in the past few years. Allocation of funds in order to maintain
this infrastructure should continue to be a main priority. As shown in the Scenario Chart, the cost to maintain our current road infrastructure condition (at a PCI of 72) would be in
the order of $1.5 million annually. The lack oflong term funding for street improvements remains a major challenge to most agencies in the Bay area. Los Gatos has not had a consistent
source of funds for street improvements. In good economic times, excess revenues had been allocated for such capital projects. The Town cannot rely on economic cycles to nmd street improvements
and should have a strategy for on-going funding. Some of the approaches used by other agencies include: issuing bonds, implementation of Town wide Assessment District, allocation ofGeneral
Funds, and increasing taxes for the purpose ofstreet improvements. Staff can investigate each of the above funding alternatives and report back to the Council with specific information
on each funding option if directed by the Council.
PAGE 6 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL! CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SUBJECT: ACCEPT REPORT ON THE STREET REPAIR AND RESURFACING PROGRAM FOR FY 2004-05 DECEMBER 2, 2004 In August
2004, the Town applied for a Surface Transportation Program (STP) grant from Caltrans. As of October 2004, conversations with Caltrans st;:lffhas revealed that the proposed project (which
includes street rehabilitation for Lester Lane, National Avenue, and Los Gatos-Almaden Road) has been approved and is awaiting programming into the FY 2005-06 budget. The grant will
become available approximately in October 2005. Staffwill be creating a separate project for this STP grant and will include it in the FY 2005-06 Town budget. We will continue to pursue
all future grant opportlmities for street work for Los Gatos. Even though staffmay have success in obtaining grant funding for road rehabilitation projects, this is not a dependable
source offtmding. The Town will need to develop a stable strategy to fund $1.5 million in road work aIlliually if it is to adequately maintain the existing road infrastructure. The City
ofMonte Sereno has informed staff that they would like to join the Town in our FY 04-05 paving project with their list of streets and would contribute their share of expenditures. This
coordinated work is a result of our ongoing efforts to work with other local agencies on joint projects. A laI°ger project may result in lower unit costs of construction, but that CaImot
be known until the proj ect is bid. CONCLUSION: The Town of Los Gatos has made significant progress in improving the conditions of the community's roadways, raising the average PCI from
64 to 72. Effective pavement management practices seek to maintain roadways in good condition or better to avoid the higher unit costs of reconstruction in the longer term. Staffrecommends
that Council approve Scenario 1 for the FY 04/05 Streets Repair and Resurfacing Program. Staff further seeks direction from Council in researching a stable funding mechanism to yield
$1.5 1.5 million in road rehabilitation funds aIlliually If directed, staff would investigate bond funding in its various forms and repOli back to Council with its findings. ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENTS: It is a project defined under CEQA but is Categorically Exempt. A Notice of Exemption will not be filed.
PAGE 7 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL! CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SUBJECT: ACCEPT REPORT ON THE STREET REPAIR AND RESURFACING PROGRAM FOR FY 2004-05 DECEMBER 2, 2004 FISCAL
IMPACT: The 2004/05 approved Capital Improvement Program budget allocated $659,243 in Project 400/4800352, Street Repair and Resurfacing Project. A total of$l,790,595 will be available
in Project 9300217, Downtown Street Reconstruction Project. !FY2002/03 Adopted Budget i $ ITotal RDA Downtown Street Reconstruction 930-0217! $ 1,960,000 1,960,000 $ 169,405 1 $ 1,790,595
: $ 169,405 ! $ 1,790,595: L... .. .." . IFY2004/05 Carry Forward ..""...._...,.... 1,790,595 1 $ 240,637· 1Total
RDADowntown Street Reconstruction 930-0217: $ 1,790,595 i $ 240,637 i $ 1,549,958 : �
� Budget! Or Planned To Date Balance ·FY2003/04 Adopted Budget •• $ 8,421,100 i $8,303,857 . $ 117,243 610,343 15,626 $ 48,900 : $ • $ 8,421,100
1·$ 8,303,857 : $ 117,243· .FY2004/05 NewAllocation 400-0352 :Total Street Repair & Resurfacing 400/480-0352 L_.. ..... .. 4/05 IFY2004/05 Carr Forward
400-0352 ITotal Street Repair & Res urfacing 400/480-0352