Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Item 5 CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA : ` ' MEMORANDUM Public Facilities&Services, 22 Bassett Si,. Petaluma CA 94952 ' (707) 778-4304 Fax(707) 778-4437 E-mail:, engineering@dLpetaluta.ca.us DATE: February 21, 2001 • TO: Richard Skladzien,.Director of Public Facilities and Services • FROM Mike Evert, Engineering Manager })Gam- __ SUBJECT: PavementManagement System Status Report The-City of Petaluma street:system is composed of approximately 140--miles of streets. This system is divided"into 35 miles,of arterials,25 miles of collectors,and180 miles of local streets. From 1994 to 1997, City personnel surveyed the condition Of the arterial and collector streets, and entered the data into a pavement management system'(PMS) provided by the Metropolitan • Transportation Commission (MTC). MTC-provides support for the software and training for the field survey,activity to insure consistency in the data entry. The program;is widely used by many • communities in the Bay, Area,(see Exhibit,A): A pavement management system, approved by MTC, is also required in order tooqualifyfor Federal.and State funds. •, The purpose of the PMS is to maintain an ongoing database of the.condition of the street network, followed by recommendedrepairs and/or maintenance, cost:of repairs, and a priority list based on various levels of funding. This:system is a very useful resource. However, it is a I. computer model that provides the'besfresults when analyzing largeresurfacing programs. Because of lack of resources, both'personnel:and financial, the,Cityo •Petaliima to date has surveyed.and entered data for the City's arterial and collector streets only. The City's local streets have never surveyed. The results:of the arterial/collector street system survey indicate that the average pavement condition index (PCI) for theCity's;arterial and collector streets is currently 41; a PCI rating of 100 wouldsbe pavement in the best condition, and 0 would be in the worst condition. MTC'lists the City:ofPetaluma's-PCI and PMS certification on page 5 of Exhibit-A. The last street survey performed by City personnel was on 6/27/2000. The City's PMS iscertified until 6/27/2002. In the last twelve months MTC has added:the requirement that all local streets be included in the pavement management system,survey, and-that.the-local streets be resurveyed every five years. The surveying of Petaluma's`arterials, collectors;.and local streets, is a major undertaking for the City. The Engineering Division has spoken to MTC about ideas on how the accomplish this task with the City's,limited personnel resources. MTC recommended using a consulting firm, and indicated that funds'may be available from MTC in 2001 to,hire a consultant. Engineering staff . will be submitting an application.'to MTC for the funds to survey the entire street system. MTC said.that they would let applicants know in April:or May 2001, which agencies will receive grants. The timeline for a consulting firm to start the survey, assuming that the City receives a said that they would let applicants know in April or May 2001, which agencies will receive grants. The timeline for=a consulting firm to start the survey, assuming,that the City receives a grant,maybe three to five months. The time required for a-consultant to-complete the survey of the City's>entire;street system, enter and analyze:the;data, is assumed`to bean additional two to ., • four months:. An alternative'to waiting for funds from MTC is forthe City to pay the cost'of hiring a consulting firm. The:estimated:cost for this serviceis:$40,000 to $50,000:. The timeline to complete the task.usingxCity funds could be two to-three months shorter,than.using IvITC's approach. The City's PMS recommends;spending,$3,500,000 annually-on the City's-collector and arterial streets in order to-keep the>"average.pavement=condition of these streets from deteriorating further. This•does not include the'cost'tmrehabilitateand maintain the City's local streets. Because of lack of funding, only$250,000 is currently available annually to resurface the City's streets. The lack of funds and associated maintenanceis+causing the.City's streets to deteriorate rapidly, and the resulting costs.of deferring the maintenance will become a major financial burden to the)Cityry. To understand how little work€can be done for$250,000 (a year's:budget), letus•consider the recent•:costs to resurface No McDowell.Blvd. $250,000 would resurface approximately 700 feet ofrthis'street, Of from Lauren Drive to East Madison Street.. For discussion purposes, sources of funds could beadditional State gas taxes oria;special,City tax. Either,would require 2/3.voter approval. Of;tlie two additional,State gas taxes,-of the magnitudeneeded, is unlikely since a statewide vote would be needed. Upon,completing the streets;,system survey, City staff will assemble-a-prograrn and present a • report to the City Council,,including-cost for overlays,continued maintenance, and funding options. We intend to submit a budget paper as part of the fiscal year..2001-2002 budget consideration_process,for,Council feedback and direction. Pavement.Management Progfarti/me-s • • • • •' • :Y1V1J l erttrication Listing • ! (■ l TC s L 1 S! l J Y .1 Pavement Management System Certification Listing :In accordance with section 201:811 of the,Streets atidH thway<.Code, IvITC requires cities and counties submitting pavement maintenance and,rehabilitation projects for funding to utilize-a Pavement Management System (PMS). • Section°2108.1 of the Streets and-Highway Codes says: ByJulv1, 1990, the City, County, State Cooperation Committee in the department shall develop,and adopt a pavement management program to be utilized'on.local.streets or highways;that receive funding under the°state transportation;improverrientprogram. The pa veinentmanagement program shall be transmitted to every county:or city for possible ;adoption orincorporation into an existing pavement management program. The City, County, State Cooperation Committeeshall solicit recommendations,from.transportation planning agencies and any other entity the committee deems appropriate Based on the recommendation of the joint City, County, State Cooperation Committee. MTC certifies ajurisdiction as an "active PMS user"when all of the following applies: • 1. The,paveinent management system used by the jurisdiction,is capable of completing all.the following,: • Storing inventory data thrall collector routes in,the jurisdiction • Assessing.the pavement condition based on distress information. • Identifying all pavement`sections that need rehabilitation or replacement. • Calculating budget,needsfor rehabilitating or repl acing'deficient.pavement sections. 2. The jurisdiction completes all the following: • • Reviews and updates the inventory information for all arterials and collectors every two years. • Completes inspection of pavement sections forarterial;and collector routes in the system every two wears, and residential routes every 5 yearn_. • Calculates budget needs for-rehabilitating or replacing deficient_pavement sections for the current year'and the:nextthree.years, MTC will post certification status.,of Bay Area jurisdictions on the MTC PMS web site The certification will have an expiration date two years from-the;last date of completing inspections of arterials and collectors in your network. If you are currently using MTC PMS, please,provide MTC with a copy of your pavement management database;.whenever it is'updated. 'If you are:not"usine;MTC PMS. MTC will need information from your jurisdiction pertaining+tbpaart I and 2 of the certification requirements. This can include'biochures abouttheisoftware:used.and,reports documenting completion of inspections and,determination of pavement,repair budget needs. The information:should be forwarded to your PMS"Contact. Click,here'for.your PMS Contact. If you are interested in more,infomration;aboutthe PMSysoftware, or if you;would like to know more about=MTCs certification process pursuant to-Section;01 81, please contact E I-I I b I t A.' http://www:mtcpnis:org/cert:html 2/9/01 PMS Certification Listing Page 2 of 5 your'pavement management coordinator. • Steve Heminger • • Deputy Executive Director' Last Updated: February 9,2001 Alameda County Contra"Costa_County Mann County"Napa.County San Francisco Count' San'Mateo:Ccunty: Santa Clara,County Solana County Sonoma County Alameda County Jurisdiction Y2K 'Last Major Inspection Certified Certification • PCI Expiration Pate 'County of Alameda 76 1.1/25/1998; Yes 11/25/2000 Alameda 75 03/1.2/2000 Yes 03/12/2002 • Albany - NottActive: - No Berkeley 64 . 08/01/2000 Yes 08/01/2002, Dublin 74 02101/2000: Yes 02/0112002 Emeryville 74 01%19/2000 Yes 01/19/2002 Fremont 76 05/25/1999 Yes 05/25/2001 Hayward 67 06/11'/1998 P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Livermore 76 06/01/1999 - Yes " 06/01/2001 , • Newark 77 01/1`5/1998 Pending Oakland n/a ' Non-MTC PMS User Yes* TBD Piedmont 76 02/0112000 • Yes 02/01/2002 Pleasanton 73 01701/2001 Yes 01'/01/2003 San,Leandro 70 01/01/1999'P-TAP 2 • Yes ' 06/0172002 Union City 64 01/25/2000 . Yes 01'%25/2002. * Conditionally Certified. • back to'top0 . Contra. Costa . • County Y2K - Certification Jurisdiction Last Major Inspection Certified PCI • .Expiration Date Contra Costa 75 10/13/1999 'Yes 10/13/2001 County -- P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01'/2002 ,Antioch 82 10/22/1998 • Yes 10/22/2000 Brentwood Pending =--- Clayton 78 02/26/2000 Yes y 02/26/2002 • Concord' • 79 • 07/0!1/2000 `Yes Q7/0.1/2002 Danville - 3.1 08/01/1999 Yes 08/0.1'1200,1 http://www.mtepms.org/cert.html 2/9/01 •MIS Certifieation-Listing Page 3 of 5 ti.cemto ,j5 u'r/Uiuuuu Yes Ul/Ut/LUUL Hercules 63 12/01/1999 Yes 12/01/2001 Lafayette 43 02/01/1995 P-TAP 2 Yes: 06/01/2002 Martinez 68 10/13/2000 Yes± 10/13/2002 Morava -- P-TAP 2 Yes, 06/01/2002 Oakley 53 11/25/1997 P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Orinda -- Non-MTC PMS User Pending Pinole 72 07/30/2000 Yes 07/30/2002 Pittsburg 66 10/01/1997 P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Pleasant Hill 69 07/01/1993 P-TAP'2 Yes 06/01/2002 Richmond. 64 - 03/01/2000, Yes 03/01/2002 San Pablo 76 01•/22/1999 Yes 01/22/2001 San Ramon -- Non-MTC PMS User Pending Walnut Creek back to tope • Marin County Jurisdiction Y2K Last Major Inspection Certified Certification PCI Expiration Date Marin.County 61 06/28/1998 Yes 06/28/2000 Belvedere 87 63/01/2000 Yes 03/01/2002 Corte Madera -- P-TAP 2 ' 'Yes. 06/01/2002 a Fairfax 45 02/04/2000 Yes 02/04/2002 , Larkspur -- 12/21/2000 P-TAP`2 Yes 12/21/2002 Mill Valley 67 04/20/2000 Yes 04/20/2002 • Novato 69 Non,MTC PMS User Yes 09/05/2002 • Ross 65 01/18/2000 Yes 01/18/2002 San Anseimo - P=TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 San Rafael -- Non-MTC PMS User Yes 07/0172002 Sausalito 58 0=1/15/1999 • Yes 04/15/2001 Tiburon -- P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 • back to tope Napa County Y2K Certification Jurisdiction Last Major Inspection Certified PCI Expiration Date.. Napa County - 03/10/2000 • Yes 03/10/2002 American Canyon . .72 02/12/1998 Pending Calistoga 55 02/04'/2000 Yes 02/04/2002 Napa 54 01/01/2001 Yes 01/01/2003 St. Helena -69 04/01/1998 Pending IP Yountville 75- 01/31/2000 Yes! 01/31/2002 back to tope http://www.mtcpms.org/cent htn91 2/9/01 PMS Certification Listing Page 4 of 5 an rranoisco County • Y2K ,Certification Jurisdiction • Last Major.Inspection. Certified iration-Date San Francisco n/a Non-MTC'PMS,'User Yes* 'TBD * Conditionally Certified back to,top®. San Mateo County Y2K Certification Jurisdiction PCI Last Major Inspection Certified Expiration Date San Mateo County 36 03/02/2000 Yes 03/02/2002 Atherton 69 06/15/2000 Yes 06/15/2002 Belmont 70 ' 03/01/2000 P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Brisbane. -- P-TAP`2 Yes 06/01/2002 Burlingame 66 09/01/2000 Yes 09/01/2002 Colma 56 "09/03/2000 P-TAP 2 Yes 09/08/2002 Daly City 76 05/12/2000` Yes 05/12/2002 . East Palo Alto 57 03/15/2000 Yes 03/15/2002 SI Foster City 82 07/15/1999 P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Half Moon Bay ' 49 10/15/1998 Yes 10/1`5/2000 Hillsborough 70 01/30/2000 Yes 01/30/2002 Menlo Park 70, 10%0Q/2000 Yes' 10/02/2002 Millbrae, -- 07/25/2000 Yes 07/25/2002 Pacifica -- P=TAP 2 Yes 0`6/01/2002 Portola Valley . 72 P'-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Redwood City . 68 06/01/1996 P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 San Bruno 54 01/09/2001 Yes 01/09/2003, San Carlos. 70 01/25/2000 Yes 01/25/2002, San-Mateo 58 12/01/2000 Yes 12/01/2007• South San Francisco 75 01/28/2000 Yes 01/28/2002 . Woodside 62 02/15/2000 Yes 02/15/2002. • back to top® • Santa Clara County , Y2K = Certification Jurisdiction Last Major Inspection Certified S PCI - Expiration Date Santa-Clara County 68 11/10/2000 Yes 1.1/10/2002 Campbell 57 04/01/1997 P-TAP- 2 Yes 06/01/2002 http://www.mtcprhs.orgicert.html 2/9/0.1 PMS Certification Listing Page 5 of 5 Curpertino 76 07/03%2000 P-TAP 2 • Yes 07/06/2002 Gilroy 76 06/15/1999 Yes 06/15/2001 Los Altos 82 08/01/1999'P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 11111 Los Altos Hills 62 03/15/2000 Yes 03/15/2002 Los,Gatos 65 06/15/2000 Yes 06/15/2002 Milpitas -- 08/15/1999 P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Monte Sereno -- 05/15/2000 Yes 05/15/2002 Morgan Hill 75 03/15/2000 P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Mountain View 77 06/07/1999 Yes 06/07/2001 Palo Alto -- Non-MTC'PMS User Pending San Jose 76 04/22/1999 Yes 04/22/2001 Santa Clara 78 04/01/94 Pending Saratoga -- Non-MTC:PMS User Pending Sunnyvale 72 04/01/1995 Pending back to top® Solano County Y2K Certification Jurisdiction PCI Last Major Inspection Certified Expiration Date Solano County 75 12/09/1999 Yes 12/09/2001 • Benicia 74 11/01/1999 Yes 11/01/2001 II Dixon 83 ,12/20/1999 Yes 12/20/2001 Fairfield 66 05/25/2000 Yes 05/25/2002 Rio Vista -- Not Active No Suisun City 72 01/27/2000 Yes 1/27/2002 Vacaville -- P=TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Vallejo 58 01/10/2000 Yes 01/10/2002 back to top® • Sonoma County • • Jurisdiction Y2K Last Major Inspection Certifed Certification PCI Expiration Date Sonoma County 49 05/01/1999 • Yes 05/01/2001 Cloverdale 48 01/01/1996 Pending Cotati -- P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 [-Iealdsburg 68 07/21/1999 Yes 07/21/2001 •Petaluma 41 06/27/2000 " Yes 06/27/2002`' C Rohnert Park 75 0/108/2000 Yes • 01/08/2002 Santa Rosa 72 10/26/1999 Yes 10/26/2001 Sebastopol -- P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 Sonoma 74 12/09/1999 Yes 12/09/2001 Windsor -- P-TAP 2 Yes 06/01/2002 hap://ww v.mtcpms.org/certihtml 2/9/01