Laserfiche WebLink
<br />This analysis was done based upon an ideal maintenance schedule, and it is not realistic to <br />assume that we would be able to generate the dollars necessary to fund such a program. This <br />matter is strictly dealing with a reconstruction policy, but we should not lose sight of the fact that <br />we need to actively rnaintain our roadways (sealcoat and overlay) so they can reach their <br />intended design life. The sealcoating assessment is being phased out over the next few years, <br />and we continue to fall behind on maintenance activities due to funding constraints; we always <br />seem to have more roads to maintain than available funding. We ultimately perform <br />maintenance activities based upon available funding and the road rating performed by public <br />works, with some improvements being extended into subsequent years. There are situations, <br />however, that we must forego necessary repairs due to the counter-petition process, which <br />eventually leads to increased costs in future years as the roadway may deteriorates faster. <br />Therefore we need to take a broader look at the overall longevity of our systern to include both <br />maintenance and reconstruction. <br /> <br />In simple terms we have approximately 178 miles of roadway in the City. Taking out 36 miles <br />of State Aid (MSA) roads that have their own funding source leaves 142 rniles of local roads, but <br />you may recall that we are also underfunding with regard to our planned MSA needs. If we were <br />reconstruct the local roadways every 40 years we would need $142M, or approximately $3.5M <br />annually. If you include sealcoating every 7 years at a price of$25,000/mile and an overlay <br />every 19 years (but only occurs once during the design life) at a price of $1 05,000/mile we <br />would need another $500,000 and $400,000 respectively, for a total of approximately $4.4M of <br />required funding each year for both maintenance and reconstruction. Currently the only revenue <br />options we have to offset these costs are assessments and the general fund. <br /> <br />Attachments: <br /> <br />Cost breakdown information <br />Graphic representation of roads constructed by year <br /> <br />Action Statement: <br />Based upon discussion <br /> <br />Reviewed by: <br /> <br /> <br />City Administrator ~ <br />Director of Public WorksIPrincipal City Engineer <br /> <br /> <br />CCWS: <br /> <br />6/15/2010 <br /> <br />o <br />