Professional Documents
Culture Documents
pm l e
P r e s u r f a c i n g
pa ve me
n th
s r e e
C i t
o
n o=
C i ty of Los An g e l e s
L.A. Str e e ts :
Roa d to the Fu tu r e
u l y 31, 2014
- - ,ONI GALP ERIN
Los An g e l e s C i ty C on tr ol l e r
c on tr ol e r .l a dty.or g
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND 1
AUDIT FINDINGS 21
SECTION I:EFFECTIVE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 21
SECTION II:SYSTEMS, TOOLS AND TECHNOLOGY 49
SECTION III:EFFICIENT PAVEMENT PROCESSES AND OUTCOMES 54
SECTION IV:EFFECTIVE MONITORING OF PAVEMENT PRESERVATION
ACTIVITIES 72
GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS 85
APPENDIX I:AUDIT ACTION PLAN 90
APPENDIX II:FINANCIAL SCORECARD 99
APPENDIX III:SCOPE &METHODOLOGY 102
APPENDIX IV:STREET PAVING ACTIVITIES -BENCHMARKING AND COMPARISONS
AMONG CITIES 104
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1:Department of Public Works; and BSS Organizational Chart 1
EXHIBIT 2: Other Public Works Bureau Responsibilities Affecting Street
Pavement Maintenance and Resurfacing 2
EXHIBIT 3 &4:Select and Local Streets Resurfaced and Receiving
Maintenance 4
EXHIBIT 5:Example Images of Pavement Distresses 5
EXHIBIT 6: Total Resurfacing Miles and Pothole Repair Goals 6
EXHIBIT 7:Citywide Pavement Preservation Plan Funding 7
ExHIInT 8: BSS Survey Van 8
EXHIBIT 9: BSS Pavement Distress Workstation 9
EXHIBIT 10: Selected Cities' Relative Street Condition and Additional
Annual Vehicle Operating Costs (VOC), per 2013 TRIP report 11
EXHIBIT 11: Street
Conditions and Maintenance Needs
12
EXHIBIT 12: Factors Relating to Pavement
Distress Contributing to PCI
EXHIBIT 13: Process for Selecting Streets for Resurfacing/Maintenance .14
EXHIBIT 14: Pavement Treatment Types, Purpose, and Reported Costs
16
EXHIBIT 15: Street Damage Restoration Fee Schedule, Slurry Sealed
Streets 18
EXHIBIT 16: Street Damage Restoration Fee Schedule and Resurfaced
Streets 18
EXHIBIT 17: Proportional
Condition of City's
Street Network
22
EXHIBIT 18: Direct Labor Utilization for Resurfacing and Reconstruction
Activities 25
EXHIBIT 19: Current and Projected Operating Costs for City-Produced
Asphalt at APi 30
EXHIBIT 20: Comparative Costs of Producing vs. Purchasing Asphalt 31
EXHIBIT 21: Estimated Capital Costs for APi Replacement 32
EXHIBIT 22: Citywide Pavement Preservation Plan Budgeted Funding by
Source 34
EXHIBIT 23: BSS Total Budgeted Funding
EXHIBIT 24:
EXHIBIT 25:
EXHIBIT 26:
EXHIBIT 27:
EXHIBIT 28:
EXHIBIT 29:
Fees
EXHIBIT 30:
EXHIBIT 31:
BSS Funding Allocated but Returned for Reprogramming
Square Feet Excavated and Fees Collected
35
36
40
Projected SDRF Revenue Based on Total Square Feet Cut 41
Millions of Square Feet Cut, with SDRF payments 42
Caltrans Asphalt Concrete Price Inflation 44
Impact of Unit Price Fees; Caltrans Price Index and Adopted
45
SDRF Losses due to Inflationary Fee Adjustment 46
Pavement Management System Comparisons 55
EXHIBIT 32: Street Segments that were Resurfaced in October 2012 and
subsequently Slurry Sealed in April 2013 66
EXHIBIT 33: Pavement Preservation Goals and Completed Miles
Combined Total 69
EXHIBIT 34: Pavement Preservation Goals and Completed Miles
Resurfacing & Reconstruction 69
EXHIBIT 35: Pavement Preservation Goals and Completed Miles -Slurry
Seal 70
EXHIBIT 36: Pavement Preservation Goals and Completed Miles -Crack
Seal 70
EXHIBIT 37: PCI for Entire Street System 73
EXHIBIT 38: Pothole Formation Process 76
EXHIBIT 39: Pothole Equivalent Goals, Reported Outputs and Costs 77
EXHIBIT 40: Pothole Goals, Reported Outputs, and Differences 78
The Bureau of Street Services (BSS) of the Department of Public Works
maintains, repairs, resurfaces, and cleans the roadways in Los Angeles's
street network, which, with approximately 6,500 centerline miles of
dedicated public roadways (28,000 lane miles) and 800 miles of alleys, is the
largest municipal street network in the nation.'
In the City's 2011 State of the Streets Report, BSS's own assessment rated
the majority of LA's streets at a less than satisfactory grade. A 2013 report
by TRIP, a private nonprofit organization that researches, evaluates and
distributes economic and technical data on surface transportation issues,
offers its own assessment. TRIP reported that 90% of streets in the Los
Angeles Urban Area were in "poor" and "mediocre" condition.2 In addition,
the LA area had the highest percentage of pavement in poor condition
(64%) of all the areas studied with
populations of 500,000 or
greater.
Further, TRIP reported that the average motorist in the Los Angeles area
spends the most ($832) in additional annual vehicle operating costs as a
result of driving on roads in need of repair, since driving on poor roads
accelerates vehicle deterioration, increases the need for frequent
maintenance, and requires additional fuel consumption.3 This amount is
71% higher than the $486 average additional annual vehicle cost found in
the 75 large urban areas studied.
This performance audit was undertaken to assess BSS' management and
oversight of street maintenance and resurfacing activities, to evaluate
whether the Bureau effectively and efficiently uses its resources to maximize
the number of streets that are adequately paved and maintained, and to
reduce deferred maintenance costs over time. This audit focused on the
activities of the Bureau of Street Services, since more than 80% of City
resources dedicated to pavement preservation are allocated to BSS.
The City develops a Pavement Preservation Plan each year which identifies
funding and establishes the number of centerline street miles that should be
'According to BSS, a lane mile is defined as "..an 11 foot wide lane that is one mile long. Area = 11'x
5,280' = 58,080 square feet. For example, a roadway that is 64' wide and 1,000' long,
2Comprised of the cities of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Santa Ana and surrounding suburban areas.
3 TRIP cites that the additional annual vehicle costs were calculated in the Highway Development and
Management (HDM) model, which is recognized by the U.S. Department of Transportation and 100
other countries, by taking the average number of miles driven annually by a region's driver,
calculating the current vehicle operating costs based on AAA 2012 vehicle operating costs and the
using the HDM model to estimate the additional vehicle operating costs being paid by drivers as a
result of substandard roads.
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
Summary
maintained and resurfaced. The funding and associated goals related to
streets and pavement in recent years have maintained the status quo
condition of the City's street network-which is currently rated, by the
Bureau's own estimation, as a "C minus." From fiscal year 2010-11 through
2012-13, the City budgeted increasing amounts from various funding
sources for its Pavement Preservation Plan, from $90.8 million to $131.9
million, to be used primarily by BSS to maintain and resurface streets.4 This
fiscal year, the City has turned its attention to fund the deferred
maintenance of streets that are in significant disrepair. A recent estimate
presented to policymakers indicated it will take 20 years and cost $3.86
billion to rehabilitate the 8,200 lane miles of currently rated "D" and "F"
streets (which are considered "poor" or "failed"), plus 500 lane miles of
streets that may become "D" or "F" rated during the decades it will take to
complete the project.5 This capital investment would be in addition to the
approximately $3 billion the City will need to continue to spend on its
Pavement Preservation Plan over that same 20-year period--money
necessary to keep even more streets from failing.6
I. Overall Assessment
While BSS generally met its annual performance goals for street
preservation activities, those goals fall short of maintaining streets that are
satisfactory by any standard. Industry standards call for maintaining all
improved streets, alleys, and related throughways in a perpetually "good to
excellent" condition (i.e., rated as "A" or "B"); however, the City has
struggled to keep an overall average rating of "C minus" for its street
network. The lack of adequate resources and process deficiencies, including
under-collections of fees for street cuts identified by this audit, have
contributed to the poor quality of the City's streets.
4 For purposes of this report, street maintenance is comprised of small asphalt/pothole
repairs and slurry and crack sealing. Street resurfacing is comprised of asphalt overlays,
including resurfacing and reconstruction.
5 February 2014 report prepared by Bureau of Engineering and Harris & Associates, in response to CF
13-1300-S1, the "Save Our Streets Los Angeles" Program, summarized in February 28, 2014 report
from City Engineer.
6 March 17, 2014 correspondence to Council from CAO/CLA re: Save Our Streets LA Ballot Measure,
page 6
Page
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
II. Key Points
While Best
Management
Practices
recommend that
street system
infrastructure be
maintained at an
average
condition level of
"B" or better, the
City falls
significantly
below that, with
an overall
average of "C
minus."
Within
geographical
regions, BSS
does not
prioritize street
repair activities
based on traffic
volume, heavy
vehicle loads, or
mass transit
passenger load.
Summary
BSS' resurfacing goals have focused primarily on
maintaining the condition of "B" and "C" streets,
through slurry seal or crack seal rather than improving
poor and failed streets, which are much more costly.
As a result, the worst streets are generally not
repaved or reconstructed. Over recent years, the
majority of miles completed under the Pavement
Preservation Plan relate to slurry sealing, which is
considered a maintenance activity to extend the street
life, but does not improve or change the street's
Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating.
BSS' practices to allocate funding to geographical
regions is based, in part, on traffic activity in that
area. However, within those regions, streets are not
prioritized based on vehicle traffic or loads. BSS
prioritizes street repair activities on the condition level
of the street, and available resources and plans;
however, traffic activity and respective loads are not
considered in the prioritization process. Each street's
condition level is assessed every three years by a BSS'
survey van.
By not prioritizing pavement repairs based on traffic
flow or vehicle loads, the City may be missing
opportunities to use resources that will provide a
greater benefit to more of the public. Additionally, the
City may be neglecting streets with a higher
propensity to degrade, resulting in more costly
reconstruction repairs in the future.
Pagel iii
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
BSS' current
pavement
management
system is not
integrated with
other pavement
management
databases and
City systems,
requiring
additional staff
efforts. Further,
while it is used to
assess pavement
conditions, it is
not a
comprehensive
asset
management
system that
provides an
inventory or
condition
assessment of
other street-
related
infrastructure,
such as street
lights, medians,
signs, storm
drains,
sidewalks, etc.
Summary
Given the size of the street network, the City requires
a robust software system that can sufficiently run a
large amount of data to determine PCI and provide
various scenarios to help determine the best strategy
for repairing and maintaining streets with available
funding. The pavement management system should
also be reliable, and as fully integrated and user-
friendly as possible, requiring minimal staff/developer
intervention, manual processing and reliance on
additional systems. An integrated system could be
used for mapping and provide the condition of other
infrastructure assets, such as street lights, sidewalks,
etc. to support analysis and decision-making.
BSS has utilized MicroPAVER for more than 15 years
and believes it is the only system that can handle the
significant data volume that results from having such a
large street network. Given the significant
technological advancements in the last decade,
including geo-based integrated solutions, it may be
time to consider alternatives.
Considering the challenges that municipalities face
with ensuring coordination and oversight of street
activities, the City has taken steps to improve
coordination within the Department of Public Works.
For example, all of the bureaus utilize GIS systems
developed by the Bureau of Engineering to
communicate respective projects electronically. The
Bureau of Contract Administration also subscribes to
monthly BSS street resurfacing and maintenance
project notifications to ensure it is aware of where it
needs to enforce the street cut moratorium and to
inspect curb-to-curb resurfacing activities by
contractors. It is also testing a smartphone system,
which would allow inspectors to close out projects on
the spot, cutting the time by four days.
While the Department of Public Works has taken some
important steps to improve coordination, its efforts
could be enhanced in a comprehensive system that
increases communication, interrelated systems, and/or
automated alerts to responsible parties that would
Page I iv
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
BSS
management has
no target for an
expected direct
labor utilization
rate; and almost
half of the
resurfacing and
reconstruction
salary costs are
for costs other
than direct repair
work.
The unit costs
associated with
resurfacing and
reconstruction
used by
MicroPAVER and
BSS are
outdated, which
result in an
unrealistic
estimate of total
cost for deferred
maintenance.
Su mma ry
help to improve coordination and enhance the quality
of data related to the City's infrastructure assets.
Well-managed private and public entities that focus on
maximizing the utilization of their most significant
resource (their employees) generally have an
expectation and goal for direct labor utilization, as
number of hours or a percentage, which is monitored
to identify trends or necessary remediation.
In common practice for government agencies,
compensated time off encompasses no more than 15%
of available work hours, while general work tasks such
as training, administration, etc. may account for an
additional 10%, leaving 75-80% of compensated time
as available for direct work related to an entity's core
activities. However, the Resurfacing and
Reconstruction Division's direct labor utilization for its
core activities has averaged 57.3% over the audit
period.
BSS' 2011 State of the Streets Report estimated that
to bring the City's average network PCI up to 80 over
the next ten years would require an investment of
$2.43 billion over 10 years (while an additional $19
million per year would be needed for preventive
maintenance). However, the unit costs used by
MicroPAVER to determine the costs of resurfacing and
reconstruction work, upon which these estimates were
derived, are out of date and may not reflect actual
costs. Based on a recent consultant prepared estimate
as part of the 2013 "Save Our Streets LA" proposal,
the Bureau of Engineering reported that the program
cost is estimated at $3.86 billion if it is desired to have
a reasonable assurance that all "D" and "F" streets
would be improved under the 20-year program.
Unless the City is expecting to hire a consultant to
perform ongoing reconstruction estimates and contract
out all resurfacing and reconstruction work indefinitely,
BSS still needs to track and maintain accurate unit
cost information in its MicroPAVER system for City staff
Page I v
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
BSS' cost
accounting
system does not
track costs at a
program activity
level (i.e.,
resurfacing,
slurry seal, crack
seal, etc,) as
defined in the
City's Pavement
Preservation
Plan. As a result,
management
does not use
actual cost data
for managing its
costs and
analyzing
resource
utilization.
Summary
or contractors to do this work. This will ensure that
accurate projections and budget scenarios related to
resurfacing and reconstruction work are provided to
policymakers.
Without an accurate estimate of deferred maintenance
costs, BSS cannot determine its funding needs and
enable policymakers and the public to make informed
decisions.
BSS does not track costs at a program activity level
associated with its specific goals for resurfacing and
maintenance activities; therefore, management cannot
utilize actual cost data to analyze resource utilization.
A prior audit recommended that BSS adopt a system
that incorporated activity-based accounting and utilize
cost information to measure efficiency. However, we
found many of the same issues identified 13 years ago
still exist.
While BSS tracks costs at a work order level and the
system contains rich and detailed data, the program
does not enable aggregating costs by a program
activity as defined in the Pavement Preservation Plan.
As a result, actual costs cannot be readily linked to the
program goals established in the Plan (number of
miles resurfaced, number of miles with slurry or crack
sealing, number of potholes repaired). The deficiency
in BSS' cost accounting system was also raised in the
Controller's October 2011 Blueprint for a Transition to
Performance-Based Budgeting, which noted this
limitation that BSS work orders did not contain coding
for program activities.
Without ongoing tracking of costs (resources utilized)
for each of the Plan's key activities, BSS is not able to
identify opportunities to deliver resurfacing and
maintenance more efficiently and cost effectively.
Page I vi
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
Street Damage
Restoration Fees,
which were
established to
recover the
annual
resurfacing costs
associated with
the shortened
lifespan of City
streets due to
the street cuts,
were based on
an inflated
assumption of
annual
excavation work.
As a result, total
collections have
been
undercharged by
as much as $190
million since the
fee was
implemented.
A subsequent
adjustment to
the SDRF fees
did not
reconsider the
total costs to be
recovered or the
expected number
of annual street
cuts. Rather, an
inflationary
Summary
Street cuts are primarily performed by utilities, or
telecommunication companies to access their assets
buried below the pavement. Though the cuts must be
refilled at the excavators' expense, regardless of the
quality of the fill, the cuts cause the pavement to
degrade at a faster rate, affecting the quality of the
street network.
The City's Street Damage Restoration Fees (SDRF)
were developed "...to recover the annual cost of the
damage from street cuts." In 1996, BSS estimated
the additional cost to the City to maintain streets that
had been cut was $16.4 million per year due to the
shortened lifespan of streets with cuts, and
approximately 3 million square feet of cuts were
expected annually, which was used to derive a unit
fee. BSS proposed graduated fee schedules that
charged a higher fee for cutting a street that had been
more recently resurfaced than an older street.
Excavations into streets more than 25 years old, which
include cement concrete streets, are not charged a
SDRF.
The estimate used for annual street cuts was
substantially higher than the actual square footage of
street cuts noted on BOE permits, and due to this
inflated assumption, the total revenue associated with
SDRF fees collected since inception of the fee in 1998
is $190 million less than it should have been.
The underlying assumptions regarding citywide street
cuts have not been reassessed, nor has the estimated
additional annual maintenance cost of $16.4 million
been recalculated or adjusted, despite the fact that the
City has recovered far less than that amount since the
fee was established.
Rather than conducting a new study or using actual
annual updated costs and street cut data, Council
Page I vii
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
adjustment was
applied in 2006;
however, the
rates used were
understated,
resulting in $31
million in
additional missed
revenue
opportunities.
Budgeted funds
have not been
fully utilized by
BSS for
pavement
activities and
more than $21
million was
returned to
various funding
sources for
reprogramming.
BSS' reported
number of
repaired potholes
may not be
accurate, as a
reliable audit trail
does not exist.
Summary
approved a BSS-proposed update to the SDRF
amounts using Caltrans' Construction Price Index to
adjust for inflation. In 2006, BSS applied the
percentage change in asphalt prices on an annual
basis, from 1996 through 2005, to reach a revised
2006 amount for the fees. However, BSS did not use
the appropriate 2004 or 2005 year-end cost for
asphalt concrete, which resulted in lower percentage
changes and a lower adopted SDRF. Using the actual
Caltrans prices in a consistent manner, the cumulative
price adjustment from 1996 through 2005 should have
been 101.06%. Applying the impact of the average
fee increase to actual excavations since 2006 when the
SDRF was updated, we determined that BSS missed an
opportunity to collect $31.6 million.
According to BSS, more funding would lead to more
street repairs and a potential increase in the City's
Pavement Condition Index ratings. However, during
our audit period, from the funding sources included in
the Pavement Preservation Plan that were allocated to
BSS, $14.14 million (4% of the total amount) and
$7.43 million in front-funded ARRA monies was
reverted back to the funding source because BSS did
not fully utilize the funding.
When a lack of funding is cited as the primary reason
why only a limited number of streets can be repaired,
BSS should not be in a situation where budgeted funds
are left unused. BSS should have had the ability to
reprogram the funds internally to repair more streets,
including consideration of contracting out resurfacing
activities, if necessary, due to a lack of internal
resources.
During the audit period, BSS spent a total of $23.8
million on small asphalt repairs, and reported that it
completed from 297,561 to 354,125 in pothole
equivalents, exceeding the Plan goal in all three years.
However, BSS was unable to provide source
documentation attesting to the accuracy of the
reported pothole repairs completed.
Page I viii
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
The City has no
moratorium for
excavating
streets that have
recently received
slurry seal
treatment.
Summary
Crews complete daily work sheets for small asphalt
repairs denoting the type of repairs made (skin patch,
pothole, alley or sidewalk) and the dimensions. The
repair dimensions are converted to square footage on
the daily sheet, which are then summarized on a
biweekly small asphalt repair report area.
Our review of the biweekly small asphalt repair reports
disclosed differences between the Fiscal Year totals
from the biweekly reports, to what BSS has reported
annually. The internal summary reports appear to
indicate many more asphalt repairs were made than
what was reported. These variances reveal a broader
concern regarding the accuracy of reported results.
Comparison of program outcomes against a stated
goal is critical for measuring program performance.
To minimize damage to recently resurfaced streets the
City adopted a one-year moratorium on street cuts
(excavations) into those streets; however, there is no
moratorium on cuts for recently slurry sealed streets.
The cities of San Diego and San Jose have
moratoriums for both resurfaced and slurry-sealed
streets.
In 2004, the City Council considered this issue, but no
action was taken as BSS and BOE suggested that "a
second moratorium would only make the street work
in general more difficult to schedule, manage and
coordinate". Instead, a Slurry Seal Damage
Restoration Fee (SSDRF) was imposed, and it was
envisioned that the fees would be placed in a special
account that would solely be utilized by the BSS to re-
slurry those specific trenched areas.
Over our three-year audit period, only a small amount
in SSDRF was collected --approximately $250,000,
averaging less than $84,000 annually. These fees are
combined with the much greater amount of SDRF in a
special fund; however, the collected fees are not fully
dedicated to BSS for specific resurfacing or re-slurry
work.
Page I ix
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
Summary
III. Significant Recommendations
City Policymakers should identify and prioritize significant new funding
to improve the overall condition of the City's street network, as well as
require BSS to improve processes and management oversight.
Present to policymakers the unit costs supporting the proposed Street
Damage Restoration Fee based on a full cost recovery model that
considers the average actual square feet cut annually, as reported by
the Bureau of Engineering.
Periodically analyze actual miles completed compared to goals for each
component of the Pavement Preservation Plan, along with the
associated costs to identify trends in declining performance and/or
increased costs that warrant management intervention.
The Department of Public Works should continue to proactively identify
opportunities and implement strategies to enhance systems
technology to better coordinate activities among Bureaus/Divisions
with responsibilities over Street Preservation. For example, the
Department should consider using readily available online street view
technology, as well as possible crowd sourcing applications, to
populate a geo-coded citywide integrated system on a real-time basis
that manages all activities, such as street cuts, resurfacing and
maintenance work.
IV. Review of the Report
On June 19, 2014, a draft report was provided to BSS management. We
held an exit conference on June 26, 2014 and BSS representatives and the
President of the Public Works' Commission. We considered their comments
provided at the exit conference as we finalized the report.
While BSS acknowledged the audit's overall assessment, management
representatives disagreed with several of the audit issues and related
recommendations. For example, BSS disagreed with the need to measure
direct labor utilization. They also indicated that the current cost accounting
system adequately meets their needs, and no value would be added by
accumulating costs by key activity. It is our opinion that both of these are
important management tools that BSS should implement to measure its
effectiveness.
Page Ix
L.A. Streets: Road to the Future
Sum m aSum m ary
Regarding the audit's projected under-collection of SDRF fees, BSS
representatives stated that the fee's purpose was not to recover costs, but
to change behavior by reducing street cuts. Based on the ordinance
establishing the fee, the inform ation presented by BSS to justify the fee, the
City 's financial policies relative to fees, and the absence of a Council decision
or acknowledgem ent that the fee would be subsidized, this audit finding is
appropriate as presented and the recom m endation to "present to
policy m akers the unit costs. . . based on a full cost recovery m odel" is valid.
We acknowledge that Council m ay choose to adopt a lower fee; however,
policy m akers m ust be presented with full and accurate inform ation to inform
their legislative actions.
We also added som e clarify ing language and additional supporting
inform ation to address BSS' concerns.
Page xi
4
, !
.
L
;
;
,
,
,
,,
.
.,
.
.
.
Q
,
w
_
r
r
/
I
:
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
1
W
h
i
l
e
B
e
s
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
t
h
a
t
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
b
e
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
e
d
a
t
a
n
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
l
e
v
e
l
o
f
"
B
"
o
r
b
e
t
t
e
r
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
f
a
l
l
s
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
l
y
b
e
l
o
w
t
h
a
t
,
w
i
t
h
a
n
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
o
f
"
C
m
i
n
u
s
.
"
2
1
1
.
1
C
i
t
y
P
o
l
i
c
y
m
a
k
e
r
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
a
n
d
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
z
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
n
e
w
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
t
o
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
'
s
s
t
r
e
e
t
n
e
t
w
o
r
k
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
B
S
S
t
o
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
s
a
n
d
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
.
2
3
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
/
M
a
y
o
r
/
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
P
u
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
A
2
B
S
S
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
h
a
s
n
o
t
a
r
g
e
t
f
o
r
a
n
e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d
d
i
r
e
c
t
l
a
b
o
r
u
t
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
r
a
t
e
;
a
n
d
a
l
m
o
s
t
h
a
l
f
o
f
t
h
e
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
a
n
d
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
a
l
a
r
y
c
o
s
t
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
c
o
s
t
s
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
d
i
r
e
c
t
r
e
p
a
i
r
w
o
r
k
.
2
3
2
.
1
2
.
2
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
D
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
a
n
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
d
i
r
e
c
t
l
a
b
o
r
u
t
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
r
a
t
e
f
o
r
e
a
c
h
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
t
o
s
t
r
e
e
t
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
.
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
t
h
e
d
i
r
e
c
t
l
a
b
o
r
u
t
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
r
a
t
e
s
f
o
r
i
t
s
s
t
r
e
e
t
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
o
n
a
p
e
r
i
o
d
i
c
b
a
s
i
s
;
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
r
e
a
s
o
n
s
f
o
r
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
s
f
r
o
m
g
o
a
l
s
a
n
d
a
r
e
a
s
f
o
r
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
.
2
6
2
6
B
S
S
B
S
S
AA
T
h
e
C
i
t
y
h
a
s
n
o
t
m
a
d
e
t
h
e
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
t
o
u
p
g
r
a
d
e
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
P
l
a
n
t
1
(
A
P
1
)
t
o
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
i
e
s
f
r
o
m
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
m
e
t
h
o
d
s
.
H
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
e
v
e
n
w
i
t
h
a
$
1
7
.
7
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
'
s
a
s
p
h
a
l
t
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
'
c
o
s
t
s
w
o
u
l
d
o
n
l
y
b
e
c
o
m
p
a
r
a
b
l
e
t
o
w
h
a
t
B
S
S
p
a
y
s
2
7
3
.
1
T
h
e
C
A
O
a
n
d
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
p
u
r
s
u
i
n
g
a
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
f
o
r
t
h
e
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
/
u
p
g
r
a
d
e
o
f
A
P
1
,
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
`
t
o
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
a
n
d
c
o
s
t
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
o
v
e
r
t
h
e
l
o
n
g
t
e
r
m
.
3
3
C
A
O
B
S
S
A
P
a
g
e
9
0
.
.
-
;
4
-
2
,
,
4
1
,
)
Y
.
1
o
l
d
1
6
-
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
v
e
n
d
o
r
s
.
A
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
c
o
u
l
d
h
e
l
p
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
l
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
a
n
d
c
o
s
t
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
.
4
B
u
d
g
e
t
e
d
f
u
n
d
s
h
a
v
e
n
o
t
b
e
e
n
f
u
l
l
y
3
3
B
S
S
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
d
b
y
B
S
S
a
n
d
m
o
r
e
t
h
a
n
$
2
1
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
w
a
s
r
e
t
u
r
n
e
d
t
o
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
f
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
i
n
g
.
4
.
1
W
o
r
k
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
C
A
O
t
o
r
e
t
a
i
n
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
f
u
n
d
s
t
o
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
u
t
p
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
p
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
c
a
n
n
o
t
b
e
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
e
d
b
y
C
i
t
y
s
t
a
f
f
.
3
7
B
S
S
A
B
S
S
A
4
.
2
W
o
r
k
w
i
t
h
B
C
A
t
o
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
o
v
e
r
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
e
d
w
o
r
k
a
n
d
c
h
a
n
g
e
o
r
d
e
r
s
i
f
s
t
r
e
e
t
r
e
p
a
i
r
w
o
r
k
i
s
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
e
d
o
u
t
.
3
7
B
C
A
4
.
3
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
t
h
e
n
e
c
e
s
s
i
t
y
o
r
a
d
d
e
d
v
a
l
u
e
o
f
d
e
s
i
g
n
p
l
a
n
s
t
o
m
a
n
a
g
e
t
h
e
c
o
s
t
s
o
f
s
t
r
e
e
t
r
e
p
a
i
r
w
o
r
k
,
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
i
t
i
s
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
e
d
b
y
C
i
t
y
f
o
r
c
e
s
o
r
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
.
3
7
B
S
S
B
5
S
t
r
e
e
t
D
a
m
a
g
e
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
F
e
e
s
,
3
8
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
w
h
i
c
h
w
e
r
e
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
t
o
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
t
h
e
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
c
o
s
t
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
h
o
r
t
e
n
e
d
l
i
f
e
s
p
a
n
o
f
C
i
t
y
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
d
u
e
t
o
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
,
w
e
r
e
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
a
n
i
n
f
l
a
t
e
d
a
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
n
n
u
a
l
e
x
c
a
v
a
t
i
o
n
w
o
r
k
.
A
s
a
r
e
s
u
l
t
,
t
o
t
a
l
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
u
n
d
e
r
c
h
a
r
g
e
d
b
y
a
s
m
u
c
h
a
s
$
1
9
0
5
.
1
P
r
e
s
e
n
t
t
o
p
o
l
i
c
y
m
a
k
e
r
s
t
h
e
u
n
i
t
c
o
s
t
s
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
D
a
m
a
g
e
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
F
e
e
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
a
f
u
l
l
c
o
s
t
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
m
o
d
e
l
t
h
a
t
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
s
t
h
e
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
c
u
t
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
,
a
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
B
u
r
e
a
u
o
f
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
.
4
2
B
S
S
A
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
i
n
c
e
t
h
e
f
e
e
w
a
s
4
2
B
S
S
B
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
.
5
.
2
R
e
p
o
r
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
i
c
a
l
l
y
t
o
p
o
l
i
c
y
m
a
k
e
r
s
o
n
t
h
e
d
a
m
a
g
e
t
o
C
i
t
y
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
t
h
a
t
i
s
c
a
u
s
e
d
b
y
P
a
g
e
I
9
1
.
1 ,
[
:
o
.
1
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
a
n
d
h
e
a
v
y
l
o
a
d
c
a
r
r
i
e
r
s
,
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
a
m
o
u
n
t
s
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d
f
o
r
d
a
m
a
g
e
s
a
n
d
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
,
i
f
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
.
6
A
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
a
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
S
D
R
F
f
e
e
s
d
i
d
n
o
t
r
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
t
h
e
t
o
t
a
l
c
o
s
t
s
t
o
b
e
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
o
r
t
h
e
e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
a
n
n
u
a
l
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
.
R
a
t
h
e
r
,
a
n
i
n
f
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
a
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
w
a
s
a
p
p
l
i
e
d
i
n
2
0
0
6
;
h
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
t
h
e
r
a
t
e
s
u
s
e
d
w
e
r
e
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
t
e
d
,
r
e
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
i
n
$
3
1
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
i
n
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
m
i
s
s
e
d
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
.
4
3
6
.
1
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
R
e
v
i
e
w
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
u
p
d
a
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
S
D
R
F
f
e
e
o
n
a
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
b
a
s
i
s
,
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
u
s
e
o
f
a
n
a
c
c
e
p
t
e
d
i
n
f
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
i
n
d
e
x
.
4
6
B
S
S
A
7
S
t
r
e
e
t
D
a
m
a
g
e
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
F
e
e
s
w
e
r
e
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
c
o
s
t
s
f
o
r
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
b
y
B
S
S
i
n
1
9
9
6
,
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
o
n
a
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
b
a
s
i
s
a
n
d
a
n
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
;
h
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
n
o
t
a
l
l
f
e
e
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
d
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
B
S
S
f
o
r
s
t
r
e
e
t
r
e
p
a
i
r
w
o
r
k
.
4
7
7
.
1
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
e
w
f
e
e
s
t
u
d
y
t
h
a
t
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
s
u
n
d
e
r
l
y
i
n
g
a
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
a
t
o
t
a
l
c
o
s
t
b
a
s
i
s
t
h
a
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
t
h
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
c
o
s
t
s
o
f
a
l
l
d
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
i
n
v
o
l
v
e
d
w
i
t
h
s
t
r
e
e
t
r
e
p
a
i
r
s
(
B
S
S
,
G
S
D
,
D
O
T
a
n
d
B
O
E
)
.
4
8
B
S
S
G
S
D
B
O
E
A
P
a
g
e
9
2
-
-
_
1
,
t
,-
1
r
d
-
--
:
,
I
_
1
-,
,
I
c
)
r
.
4
4
,
1
1
4
,4,
4
-,
L
I-
74
:
4
-
1
=
i
,
,
i
1
.
'
'
i
'
"
-
i
T
r
i
t
=
,
'7
,
,
.
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
I
:
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
,
T
o
o
l
s
a
n
d
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
8
B
S
S
'
c
o
s
t
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
s
y
s
t
e
m
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
5
0
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
t
r
a
c
k
c
o
s
t
s
a
t
a
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
l
e
v
e
l
(
i
.
e
.
,
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
,
s
l
u
r
r
y
s
e
a
l
,
c
r
a
c
k
s
e
a
l
,
e
t
c
.
)
a
s
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
'
s
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
.
A
s
a
r
e
s
u
l
t
,
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
u
s
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
c
o
s
t
d
a
t
a
f
o
r
m
a
n
a
g
i
n
g
i
t
s
c
o
s
t
s
a
n
d
a
n
a
l
y
z
i
n
g
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
u
t
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
.
8
.
1
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
a
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
t
o
c
o
d
e
w
o
r
k
o
r
d
e
r
s
b
y
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
.
T
h
i
s
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
c
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
e
d
b
y
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g
a
n
u
m
b
e
r
s
c
h
e
m
a
t
h
a
t
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
l
y
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
s
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
,
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
s
l
u
r
r
y
s
e
a
l
,
c
r
a
c
k
s
e
a
l
a
n
d
p
o
t
h
o
l
e
r
e
p
a
i
r
w
o
r
k
,
w
h
i
l
e
a
l
s
o
r
e
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
t
h
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
-
b
a
s
e
d
w
o
r
k
o
r
d
e
r
c
o
d
i
n
g
.
5
2
B
S
S
A
8
.
2
U
t
i
l
i
z
e
c
o
s
t
d
a
t
a
b
y
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
t
o
m
a
n
a
g
e
i
t
s
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
u
t
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
d
e
l
i
v
e
r
i
n
g
s
t
r
e
e
t
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
l
y
a
n
d
c
o
s
t
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
t
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
d
e
s
i
r
e
d
o
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
a
r
e
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
d
.
5
3
B
S
S
A
9
B
S
S
'
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
p
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
5
3
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
s
n
o
t
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
o
t
h
e
r
p
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
d
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
s
a
n
d
C
i
t
y
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
,
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
a
f
f
e
f
f
o
r
t
s
.
F
u
r
t
h
e
r
,
w
h
i
l
e
i
t
i
s
u
s
e
d
t
o
a
s
s
e
s
s
p
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
,
i
t
i
s
n
o
t
a
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
a
s
s
e
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
y
s
t
e
m
t
h
a
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
a
n
9
.
1
E
x
p
l
o
r
e
t
h
e
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
f
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
p
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
t
h
a
t
e
x
c
e
e
d
M
i
c
r
o
P
A
V
E
R
'
s
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
a
n
d
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
u
s
e
f
u
l
n
e
s
s
.
T
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
P
u
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
5
7
B
S
S
B
i
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
o
f
o
t
h
e
r
s
t
r
e
e
t
-
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
s
t
r
e
e
t
l
i
g
h
t
s
,
m
e
d
i
a
n
s
,
s
i
g
n
s
,
s
t
o
r
m
d
r
a
i
n
s
,
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
,
e
t
c
.
9
.
2
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
x
p
a
n
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
c
a
p
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
o
f
B
S
S
'
p
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
y
s
t
e
m
t
o
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
s
y
s
t
e
m
f
o
r
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
'
s
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
5
7
B
P
W
B
P
a
g
e
1
9
3
i
v
-
f
e
...:4
.
s
t
i
,
,
,
,
j
-
-w
-
-
,
w
t
:
u
_2
_L
t
i
,
,
,,.
.
2
"
L
o
4,
w
i
4
4
.
V
.
0
1
,
4
.
!
A
L
k
1
0
B
S
S
u
s
e
s
a
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
y
s
t
e
m
(
M
i
c
r
o
P
A
V
E
R
)
w
i
t
h
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
f
u
l
l
y
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
a
l
l
o
f
i
t
s
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
.
5
8
1
0
.
1
B
S
S
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
W
o
r
k
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
o
f
M
i
c
r
o
P
A
V
E
R
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
t
h
e
i
s
s
u
e
s
n
o
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
b
e
t
a
e
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
r
e
p
o
r
t
c
u
s
t
o
m
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
r
e
v
i
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
a
l
g
o
r
i
t
h
m
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
p
a
v
e
d
o
v
e
r
w
i
t
h
a
s
p
h
a
l
t
.
5
9
B
S
S
A
1
1
B
S
S
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
h
a
v
e
a
d
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
u
n
i
t
/
s
t
a
f
f
i
n
g
t
o
p
r
o
a
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
s
e
e
k
o
u
t
n
e
w
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
,
e
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
o
r
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
.
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
i
z
e
d
"
P
o
t
h
o
l
e
K
i
l
l
e
r
"
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
w
a
s
p
u
t
i
n
t
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
2
0
0
0
b
u
t
w
a
s
d
i
s
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
a
f
t
e
r
a
f
e
w
y
e
a
r
s
,
e
v
e
n
t
h
o
u
g
h
i
t
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
a
h
i
g
h
l
y
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
a
n
d
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
t
o
p
o
t
h
o
l
e
r
e
p
a
i
r
b
y
s
e
v
e
r
a
l
c
i
t
i
e
s
.
6
0
1
1
.
1
T
h
e
C
i
t
y
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
a
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
a
n
d
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
u
n
i
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
B
S
S
t
o
(
a
)
f
o
c
u
s
o
n
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g
n
e
w
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s
t
o
m
e
e
t
C
i
t
y
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
p
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
(
b
)
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
n
e
w
e
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
t
o
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
t
h
e
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
a
n
d
c
o
s
t
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
6
2
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
a
y
o
r
C
A
O
B
S
S
B
P
a
g
e
I
9
4
7
r
r
7
-
;
,
7
i
4
7
1
'
-
-
e
'7
-
-
-
,
1
.
=
4
-
7
:
)
1
,-
--7 .
=
i
t
,
,
,(
-
'
,
7
j-
1
;
]
z
1
--,
_
,,1
:,,
.
.
e
r
-
.
7
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
I
I
:
E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
s
a
n
d
O
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
1
2
W
i
t
h
i
n
g
e
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
a
l
r
e
g
i
o
n
s
,
B
S
S
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
z
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
r
e
p
a
i
r
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
v
o
l
u
m
e
,
h
e
a
v
y
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
l
o
a
d
s
,
o
r
m
a
s
s
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
p
a
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
l
o
a
d
.
6
3
1
2
.
1
1
2
.
2
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
W
o
r
k
w
i
t
h
D
O
T
o
n
a
n
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
b
a
s
i
s
t
o
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
w
i
t
h
h
i
g
h
e
r
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
a
n
d
l
o
a
d
s
a
n
d
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
e
w
h
i
c
h
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
c
a
n
b
e
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
e
d
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
i
n
c
u
r
r
i
n
g
h
i
g
h
e
r
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
c
o
s
t
s
.
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
l
l
o
c
a
t
i
n
g
a
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
t
o
w
a
r
d
s
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
w
i
t
h
h
i
g
h
e
r
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
f
l
o
w
a
n
d
l
o
a
d
s
;
o
r
a
t
a
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
,
w
h
e
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
s
a
r
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
,
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
z
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
w
i
t
h
h
i
g
h
e
r
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
f
l
o
w
a
n
d
l
o
a
d
s
,
f
o
r
t
h
o
s
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
P
C
I
.
6
4
6
4
B
S
S
D
O
T
B
S
S
AB
1
3
B
S
S
l
a
c
k
s
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
y
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
o
f
f
i
e
l
d
c
r
e
w
s
a
t
t
e
s
t
i
n
g
t
o
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
p
a
v
i
n
g
w
o
r
k
,
p
e
r
t
h
e
i
r
p
o
l
i
c
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
J
o
b
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
.
6
4
1
3
.
1
1
3
.
2
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
E
n
s
u
r
e
s
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
s
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
l
y
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
f
i
e
l
d
c
r
e
w
s
t
o
m
a
k
e
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
t
h
a
t
w
o
r
k
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
e
d
m
e
e
t
s
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
,
a
n
d
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
t
h
a
t
p
a
v
i
n
g
w
o
r
k
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
i
s
a
c
c
e
p
t
a
b
l
e
b
y
c
o
n
f
i
r
m
i
n
g
i
t
i
n
t
h
e
J
o
b
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
.
P
e
r
i
o
d
i
c
a
l
l
y
r
e
v
i
e
w
c
l
o
s
i
n
g
p
a
c
k
e
t
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
f
i
r
m
J
o
b
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
d
a
n
d
a
c
c
u
r
a
t
e
l
y
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
t
h
e
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
o
f
w
o
r
k
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
e
d
.
6
6
6
7
B
S
S
B
S
S
AA
P
a
g
e
1
9
5
1
4
T
h
e
C
i
t
y
h
a
s
n
o
m
o
r
a
t
o
r
i
u
m
f
o
r
e
x
c
a
v
a
t
i
n
g
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
t
h
a
t
h
a
v
e
r
e
c
e
n
t
l
y
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
s
l
u
r
r
y
s
e
a
l
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
.
6
7
1
4
.
1
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
P
r
o
a
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
w
o
r
k
w
i
t
h
p
o
l
i
c
y
m
a
k
e
r
s
t
o
r
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
n
e
x
c
a
v
a
t
i
o
n
m
o
r
a
t
o
r
i
u
m
f
o
r
r
e
c
e
n
t
l
y
s
l
u
r
r
y
s
e
a
l
e
d
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
.
6
8
L
t
t
.
2
7
,
1
'
1
B
S
S
A
1
5
B
S
S
i
s
f
a
c
i
n
g
c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
s
i
n
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
g
o
a
l
s
f
o
r
r
e
p
a
i
r
i
n
g
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
u
n
i
t
c
o
s
t
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
r
e
p
a
i
r
s
a
r
e
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
6
8
1
5
.
1
B
S
S
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
P
e
r
i
o
d
i
c
a
l
l
y
a
n
a
l
y
z
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
m
i
l
e
s
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
c
o
m
p
a
r
e
d
t
o
g
o
a
l
s
f
o
r
e
a
c
h
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
,
a
l
o
n
g
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
c
o
s
t
s
t
o
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
t
r
e
n
d
s
i
n
d
e
c
l
i
n
i
n
g
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
a
n
d
/
o
r
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
c
o
s
t
s
t
h
a
t
w
a
r
r
a
n
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
i
n
t
e
r
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
.
7
1
B
S
S
A
P
a
g
e
9
6
S
1
1
1
,
'
;
1
w
f
.
6
/
:
:
;
9
,
"
.
r
r
l
i
.7
i
-
r
:
.
4
0
J
0
.
1
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
V
:
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
o
f
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
1
6
T
h
e
C
i
t
y
'
s
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
f
o
r
p
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
p
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
l
y
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
d
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
b
y
d
e
f
i
n
i
n
g
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
g
o
a
l
s
f
o
r
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
o
r
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
n
g
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
i
n
p
o
o
r
o
r
f
a
i
l
e
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
.
7
2
1
6
.
1
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
U
p
o
n
c
o
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
f
o
r
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
n
g
"
D
"
a
n
d
"
F
"
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
,
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
a
n
d
d
i
s
t
i
n
c
t
g
o
a
l
s
f
o
r
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
w
o
r
k
a
n
d
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
w
o
r
k
,
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
t
o
b
e
t
t
e
r
t
r
a
c
k
o
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
a
n
d
c
o
s
t
s
.
7
3
B
S
S
A
1
7
T
h
e
u
n
i
t
c
o
s
t
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
a
n
d
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
u
s
e
d
b
y
M
i
c
r
o
P
A
V
E
R
a
n
d
B
S
S
a
r
e
o
u
t
d
a
t
e
d
,
w
h
i
c
h
r
e
s
u
l
t
i
n
a
n
u
n
r
e
a
l
i
s
t
i
c
e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
o
f
t
o
t
a
l
c
o
s
t
f
o
r
d
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
.
7
4
1
7
.
1
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
E
n
s
u
r
e
d
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
n
e
e
d
s
a
r
e
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
a
c
c
u
r
a
t
e
u
n
i
t
c
o
s
t
s
.
7
5
B
S
S
A
1
8
B
S
S
'
r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
r
e
p
a
i
r
e
d
p
o
t
h
o
l
e
s
m
a
y
n
o
t
b
e
a
c
c
u
r
a
t
e
,
a
s
a
r
e
l
i
a
b
l
e
a
u
d
i
t
t
r
a
i
l
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
e
x
i
s
t
.
7
5
1
8
.
1
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
E
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
a
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
t
o
c
o
n
f
i
r
m
t
h
e
a
c
c
u
r
a
c
y
o
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d
d
a
t
a
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
t
o
s
m
a
l
l
a
s
p
h
a
l
t
r
e
p
a
i
r
s
,
w
h
i
c
h
w
i
l
l
e
n
a
b
l
e
B
S
S
t
o
b
e
t
t
e
r
m
a
n
a
g
e
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
a
n
d
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
.
7
9
B
S
S
A
1
9
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
h
o
l
d
s
c
a
n
i
n
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
e
l
y
d
e
l
a
y
p
l
a
n
n
e
d
s
t
r
e
e
t
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
.
7
9
1
9
.
1
B
S
S
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
n
g
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
n
-
p
e
r
s
o
n
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
(
s
)
w
i
t
h
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
s
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r
s
t
o
r
e
v
i
e
w
a
n
d
c
o
n
f
i
r
m
p
l
a
n
n
e
d
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
w
o
r
k
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
l
i
n
e
s
,
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
t
o
b
e
t
t
e
r
a
l
i
g
n
t
h
e
i
r
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
a
c
t
u
a
l
w
o
r
k
t
o
b
e
d
o
n
e
b
y
d
e
v
e
b
p
e
r
s
a
n
d
u
t
i
l
i
t
y
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
.
8
0
B
S
S
B
P
a
g
e
1
9
7
M
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
C
i
t
y
e
n
t
i
t
i
e
s
a
r
e
i
n
v
o
l
v
e
d
i
n
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
n
g
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
w
h
i
c
h
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
t
h
e
r
i
s
k
o
f
p
o
o
r
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
o
r
u
n
p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d
e
x
c
a
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
8
0
2
0
.
1
T
h
e
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
P
u
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
:
C
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
t
o
p
r
o
a
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
a
n
d
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
t
o
e
n
h
a
n
c
e
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
t
o
b
e
t
t
e
r
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
a
m
o
n
g
B
u
r
e
a
u
s
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
w
i
t
h
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
o
v
e
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
.
F
o
r
e
x
a
m
p
l
e
,
t
h
e
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
u
s
i
n
g
r
e
a
d
i
l
y
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
o
n
l
i
n
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
v
i
e
w
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
c
r
o
w
d
s
o
u
r
c
i
n
g
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
t
o
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
e
a
g
e
o
-
c
o
d
e
d
c
i
t
y
w
i
d
e
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d
s
y
s
t
e
m
o
n
a
r
e
a
l
-
t
i
m
e
b
a
s
i
s
t
h
a
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
s
a
l
l
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
,
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
w
o
r
k
.
8
3
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
P
u
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
R
a
n
k
i
n
g
C
o
d
e
s
:
A
-
H
i
g
h
P
r
i
o
r
i
t
y
:
T
h
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
t
a
i
n
s
t
o
a
s
e
r
i
o
u
s
o
r
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
l
y
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
a
u
d
i
t
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
o
r
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
w
e
a
k
n
e
s
s
.
D
u
e
t
o
t
h
e
s
e
r
i
o
u
s
n
e
s
s
o
r
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
m
a
t
t
e
r
,
i
m
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
i
v
e
a
c
t
i
o
n
i
s
w
a
r
r
a
n
t
e
d
.
B
-
M
e
d
i
u
m
P
r
i
o
r
i
t
y
:
T
h
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
t
a
i
n
s
t
o
a
m
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
l
y
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
o
r
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
s
e
r
i
o
u
s
a
u
d
i
t
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
o
r
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
w
e
a
k
n
e
s
s
.
R
e
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
y
p
r
o
m
p
t
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
i
v
e
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
t
a
k
e
n
b
y
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
t
h
e
m
a
t
t
e
r
.
T
h
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
s
i
x
m
o
n
t
h
s
.
C
-
L
o
w
P
r
i
o
r
i
t
y
:
T
h
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
t
a
i
n
s
t
o
a
n
a
u
d
i
t
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
o
r
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
w
e
a
k
n
e
s
s
o
f
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
l
y
m
i
n
o
r
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
o
r
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
.
T
h
e
t
i
m
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
i
v
e
a
c
t
i
o
n
i
s
l
e
f
t
t
o
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
'
s
d
i
s
c
r
e
t
i
o
n
.
P
a
g
e
1
9
8
T
h
e
C
i
t
y
h
a
s
n
o
t
m
a
d
e
t
h
e
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
t
o
u
p
g
r
a
d
e
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
P
l
a
n
t
1
(
A
P
1
)
t
o
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
i
e
s
f
r
o
m
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
m
e
t
h
o
d
s
.
H
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
e
v
e
n
w
i
t
h
a
$
1
7
.
7
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
'
s
a
s
p
h
a
l
t
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
c
o
s
t
s
w
o
u
l
d
o
n
l
y
b
e
c
o
m
p
a
r
a
b
l
e
t
o
w
h
a
t
B
S
S
p
a
y
s
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
v
e
n
d
o
r
s
.
A
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
c
o
u
l
d
h
e
l
p
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
l
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
a
n
d
c
o
s
t
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
.
2
7
C
o
s
t
S
a
v
i
n
g
s
T
h
e
C
i
t
y
c
o
u
l
d
r
e
d
u
c
e
i
t
s
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
a
s
p
h
a
l
t
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
c
o
s
t
s
b
y
$
2
5
p
e
r
t
o
n
,
e
q
u
a
t
i
n
g
t
o
s
a
v
i
n
g
s
o
f
m
o
r
e
t
h
a
n
$
3
.
5
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
v
o
l
u
m
e
.
4
B
u
d
g
e
t
e
d
f
u
n
d
s
h
a
v
e
n
o
t
b
e
e
n
f
u
l
l
y
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
d
b
y
B
S
S
a
n
d
m
o
r
e
t
h
a
n
$
2
1
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
w
a
s
r
e
t
u
r
n
e
d
t
o
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
f
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
i
n
g
.
3
3
C
o
s
t
a
v
o
i
d
a
n
c
e
T
h
e
s
e
f
u
n
d
s
c
a
n
n
o
t
b
e
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
,
b
u
t
t
h
e
B
u
r
e
a
u
m
a
y
b
e
a
b
l
e
t
o
u
s
e
f
u
t
u
r
e
,
l
e
f
t
o
v
e
r
f
u
n
d
s
f
o
r
s
t
r
e
e
t
p
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
s
t
e
a
d
o
f
r
e
t
u
r
n
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
t
o
C
i
t
y
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
.
B
a
s
e
d
o
n
p
r
i
o
r
r
e
t
u
r
n
s
,
t
h
e
d
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
m
a
y
h
a
v
e
u
p
t
o
$
7
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
m
o
r
e
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
t
o
u
s
e
o
n
s
t
r
e
e
t
p
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
.
P
a
g
e
l
9
9
5
S
t
r
e
e
t
D
a
m
a
g
e
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
F
e
e
s
,
w
h
i
c
h
w
e
r
e
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
t
o
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
t
h
e
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
c
o
s
t
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
h
o
r
t
e
n
e
d
l
i
f
e
s
p
a
n
o
f
C
i
t
y
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
d
u
e
t
o
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
,
w
e
r
e
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
a
n
i
n
f
l
a
t
e
d
a
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
n
n
u
a
l
e
x
c
a
v
a
t
i
o
n
w
o
r
k
.
A
s
a
r
e
s
u
l
t
,
t
o
t
a
l
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
u
n
d
e
r
c
h
a
r
g
e
d
b
y
a
s
m
u
c
h
a
s
$
1
9
0
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
i
n
c
e
t
h
e
f
e
e
w
a
s
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
.
3
8
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
D
u
e
t
o
f
a
u
l
t
y
a
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
a
n
n
u
a
l
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
u
s
e
d
t
o
d
e
r
i
v
e
t
h
e
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
f
e
e
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
h
a
s
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d
a
n
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
o
f
$
4
.
5
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
r
a
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
a
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
$
1
6
.
4
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
.
B
y
a
d
j
u
s
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
f
e
e
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
t
h
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
o
f
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
,
e
v
e
n
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
e
f
f
e
c
t
o
f
a
2
0
0
6
i
n
f
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
a
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
(
F
i
n
d
i
n
g
#
6
)
o
r
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
n
g
a
n
e
w
a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
,
S
D
R
F
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
w
o
u
l
d
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
b
y
$
1
1
.
9
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
.
6
A
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
a
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
S
D
R
F
f
e
e
s
d
i
d
n
o
t
r
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
t
h
e
t
o
t
a
l
c
o
s
t
s
t
o
b
e
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
o
r
t
h
e
e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
a
n
n
u
a
l
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
.
R
a
t
h
e
r
,
a
n
i
n
f
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
a
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
w
a
s
a
p
p
l
i
e
d
i
n
2
0
0
6
;
h
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
t
h
e
r
a
t
e
s
u
s
e
d
w
e
r
e
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
t
e
d
,
r
e
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
i
n
$
3
1
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
i
n
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
m
i
s
s
e
d
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
.
4
3
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
D
u
e
t
o
i
n
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
i
n
f
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
a
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
a
p
p
l
i
e
d
,
t
h
e
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d
S
D
R
F
u
n
i
t
c
o
s
t
i
s
$
3
.
5
4
l
e
s
s
t
h
a
n
w
h
a
t
i
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
.
A
p
p
l
y
i
n
g
t
h
i
s
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
t
o
t
h
e
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
o
f
a
n
n
u
a
l
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
u
t
s
,
S
D
R
F
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
w
o
u
l
d
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
b
y
a
n
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
$
3
.
5
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
.
P
a
g
e
0
0
C
o
s
t
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
:
M
o
n
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
m
a
y
b
e
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
a
b
l
e
.
C
o
s
t
S
a
v
i
n
g
s
a
n
d
E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
i
e
s
:
C
o
s
t
s
a
v
i
n
g
s
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
a
n
d
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
C
o
s
t
A
v
o
i
d
a
n
c
e
:
M
o
n
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
l
o
s
t
b
u
t
a
r
e
a
v
o
i
d
a
b
l
e
i
n
t
h
e
f
u
t
u
r
e
.
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
.
W
a
s
t
e
d
F
u
n
d
s
:
M
o
n
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
l
o
s
t
a
n
d
n
o
t
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
a
b
l
e
d
u
e
t
o
r
e
c
k
l
e
s
s
a
c
t
o
r
m
i
s
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
f
u
n
d
s
.
W
e
s
t
r
i
v
e
t
o
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
a
n
d
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
r
e
s
u
l
t
i
n
r
e
a
l
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
i
m
p
a
c
t
,
w
h
e
r
e
b
y
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
c
a
n
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
l
y
m
o
r
e
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
c
o
s
t
s
a
v
i
n
g
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
c
o
s
t
o
f
t
h
e
a
u
d
i
t
f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
e
a
b
o
v
e
d
o
l
l
a
r
e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
s
a
r
e
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
u
p
o
n
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
s
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
f
u
l
l
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
u
d
i
t
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
s
h
o
u
l
d
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
a
s
g
u
a
r
a
n
t
e
e
d
a
m
o
u
n
t
s
.
P
a
g
e
l
1
0
1
This performance audit was conducted to assess the extent to which the
Bureau of Street Services effectively and efficiently utilizes its resources to
maximize the number of streets that are adequately paved, and reduce
deferred maintenance costs over time.
The audit focused on the existence and adequacy of internal controls for the
accounting of expenditures and the selection of streets for maintenance and
repairs. Additionally, the audit assessed the City's plan to upgrade one of
its owned asphalt plants. We also evaluated the City's funding and cost
recovery measures for funds dedicated to pavement preservation, to
safeguard financial resources and maintain street assets.
In connection with our audit objectives, we examined the impact on
deferred maintenance and the long-term costs associated with street
repairs. Lastly, we reviewed the extent to which City departments and
private utilities coordinate work that affects street conditions, resurfacing,
and maintenance. In order to evaluate these issues, we reviewed
information regarding activities conducted from Fiscal Years 2010-11
through 2012-13; however, for Street Damage Restoration Fees, we also
reviewed the basis for setting the fees and the extent of fee collections
since inception.
METHODOLOGY
To accomplish our audit objectives, we performed the following procedures:
Obtained and reviewed a data export of costs recorded in BSS' cost
accounting system related to Pavement Preservation Plan activities;
Obtained and reviewed data exports from BSS' MicroPAVER and
Resurfacing Management System for all Pavement Preservation Plan
activities to obtain total performance outputs;
Interviewed key personnel at BSS, Bureau of Engineering, Bureau of
Contract Administration, the Office of the Mayor, and City Attorney;
Researched street paving practices of other cities through public
information and/or interviews with management officials. Surveys
were conducted with representatives from Atlanta, Nashville, Raleigh,
Pagel 102
Sarasota, Houston and San Diego, while general information was
obtained from Orlando, Chicago and New York City;
Selected a sample of 75 resurfacing projects, including documentation
related to 25 completed projects to determine PCI scores, verify
completed lengths, and determine current pavement conditions;
Reviewed a sample of crack seal completion reports to verify accuracy
and reliability of information reported by BSS;
Reviewed biweekly management reports for small asphalt repairs and
evaluated numbers against those reported to the Mayor in BSS'
performance output reports;
Obtained a data extract of Street Damage Restoration Fee cuts and
payments dating back to 1998;
Reviewed inflationary reports from Caltrans and evaluated rates used
by BSS to determine the 2006 Street Damage Restoration Fee
update;
Reviewed literature on pavement management and asset
management systems;
Evaluated prior reports on asphalt plant upgrade proposals made by
BSS;
Reviewed utility hold data exports; and
Reviewed and evaluated Controller information in the FMIS and FMS
financial systems related to BSS funding and reversions.
The audit was performed in accordance with Generally Accepted
Government Auditing Standards, and generally covered activities over a
three-year period, ending on June 30, 2013. This was expanded prior or
subsequent to this period when deemed necessary.
Audit fieldwork was primarily conducted from March through May 15, 2014.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the
evidence obtained provides reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Pagel 103
To inform our audit process, we sought to identify best practices and
industry standards related to different cities' approaches to managing and
preserving their respective inventories of street and pavement assets. One
available source of national comparative data is the most recent (10/3/13)
report published by TRIP of Washington, DC, a nonprofit organization that
researches, evaluates and distributes economic and technical data on
transportation issues. The report indicates that more than a quarter of the
nation's major urban roadways are in poor condition, and notes that the Los
Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana Urban Area has the greatest share of major
roads and highways that are in poor condition, and provide for a rough ride.
The top ten urban regions with a population of 500,000 or more with the
highest share of pavements in poor condition include the following:
Rank
Urban Area(includes the major City and its
neighboring or surrounding suburban areas)
Pct Poor
1 Los Angeles - Long Beach - Santa Ana 64%
2 San Francisco - Oakland 60%
3 San Jose 56%
4 San Diego 55%
5 Tucson 53%
6 New York City - Newark 510/0
7 Bridgeport - Stamford 51%
8 Milwaukee 48%
9 New Orleans 47%
10 Oklahoma City 470/0
The TRIP report also presents an average additional vehicle operating cost
because of road conditions, and cites the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana
area with the highest amount.
Using the information presented for large urban areas with mild climates
who had significantly better pavement conditions, we selected several cities
for a comparative survey of their paving operations and practices.
Representatives of the following cities agreed to participate: Atlanta, GA;
Nashville, TN; Raleigh, NC; and Sarasota, FL. Representatives from
Houston, TX and San Diego, CA also participated in the survey. In addition,
we obtained information through selected interviews and publicly available
information for Orlando, FL; Chicago, IL; New York City; Washington, DC;
and San Francisco, CA; however, not all requested information was available
or provided. While some noteworthy and general practices are cited within
the body of this report, the following pages of this Appendix present a
summary for each City's general practice. Comparative cost data for
resurfacing and maintenance activities among cities was not available; the
Pagel 104
cities we contacted did not track or report costs per unit for their internal
work, and many used outside vendors for all resurfacing activities.
TRIP notes that transportation agencies can reduce pavement life cycle costs
by adopting a pavement preservation approach that emphasizes making
initial repairs to pavement surfaces while they are still in good condition, and
using higher-quality paving materials. However, it cites a 2010 Federal
Highway Administration report noting that over-reliance on short-term
repairs will fail to provide the long-term structural integrity needed to
guarantee the future performance of a paved road, and that agencies that
focus only on current pavement surface conditions will eventually face a
street network with an overwhelming backlog of pavement rehabilitation and
replacement needs. This appears to be the case in Los Angeles.
TRIP's primary recommendations are contingent on adequate funding to
allow transportation agencies to implement the following:
Implement and adequately fund a pavement preservation program
that performs initial maintenance on road surfaces while they are still
in good condition, postponing the need for significant rehabilitation.
Consider using pavement materials and designs that will provide a
longer-lasting surface when critical routes are constructed or
reconstructed.
Resurface roads in a timely fashion using pavement materials that are
designed to be the most durable, given local climate and the level and
mix of traffic on the roadway.
Invest adequately to insure that 75% of local road surfaces are in
Good condition (as compared to "Fair," Mediocre," or
"Substandard/Poor").
Pagel 105
The following pages provide a high-level summary of comparative cities.
The source for the relative Pavement Condition and Additional annual Vehicle
Cost was the TRIP report, which reported uniform standard pavement
conditions as gathered by the Federal Highway Administration, based on
International Roughness Index (IRI) or Present Serviceability Rating (PSR),
as noted below:
Rating IRI PSR
Substandard (Poor) Above 170 2.5 or less
Mediocre 120-170 2.6 - 3.0
Fair 95-119 3.1 - 3.4
Good 0 - 94 3.5 or higher
TRIP cites that the additional annual vehicle operating costs were calculated
in the Highway Development and Management (HDM) model, which is
recognized by the US Department of Transportation and 100 other countries,
by taking the average number of miles driven annually by a region's driver,
calculating the current vehicle operating costs based on AAA 2012 vehicle
operating costs and then using the HDM model to estimate the additional
vehicle operating costs being paid by drivers as a result of substandard
roads.
Pagel 106
Los Angeles, California
Street Network: 6,500 centerline miles; 28,000 lane miles
Pavement Conditions:
Add'l Vehicle Cost: $832
Poor Mediocre Fair Good
64% 26%
5% 5%
Primary Agency: Dept of Public Works -Bureau of Street Services (BSS)
Functional Responsibilities: BSS primarily responsible for prioritization and selection of streets;
communication of plan for input; actual repaving and repairs; quality control for internal projects;
permits for right-of-way. BOE responsible for design work for major projects and issuing permits for
street excavation. BCA inspects road work by outside contractors; DOT performs road striping.
Condition Assessment of Streets: Performed by City staff with one survey van equipped with
cameras and sensors, measuring distresses. Continuous cycle to cover entire network over a 3-year
period. Data reviewed and fed into the pavement management system.
Pavement Management System: Heavily customized version of MicroPAVER .
Use of Outside Vendors/Contractors: Resurfacing and maintenance work conducted by City forces,
vendors supply and deliver a large portion of the material for overlay projects.
Houston, Texas
Street Network: 5,700 centerline miles; 16,000 lane miles.
Pavement Conditions:
Add'I Vehicle Cost: $506
Poor Mediocre Fair Good
25% 31% 25% 19%
Primary Agency: Public Works & Engineering Department -Street & Drainage Division
Functional Responsibilities: Street Maintenance Branch (SDD) is the designated process owner, and
performs resurfacing / overlay which includes milling. Engineering and Construction Division (ECD) and
contractors for major thoroughfares and reconstruction, Traffic Operations Division (TOD) handles
striping, and Planning & Development Division oversees permits and enforcement.
Condition Assessment of Streets: Performed by SSD via a Street Surface Assessment Vehicle (SSAV)
with several lasers and cameras measure roughness, rutting, cracking, and other street conditions.
Pavement Condition Rating scores are used to prioritize future capital projects and street maintenance
decisions. Street assessments are gathered every 2-3 years
Pavement Management System: No separate pavement management system. The SSAV measures
rutting and roughness, producing Pavement Rating scores (PCR) only.
Use of Outside Vendors/Contractors: Engineering and Construction Division (ECD) contract out some
of the large reconstruction projects. All asphalt is purchased from a vendor.
Pagel 107
Atlanta, Georgia
Street Network: 1,700 centerline miles; 7,500 lane miles
Pavement Conditions:
Add'l Vehicle Cost: $201
Poor Mediocre Fair Good
1%
35%
5%
59%
Primary Agency : Department of Public Works - Office of Transportation
Functional Responsibilities: DOT is responsible for assessing the street condition, prioritization,
contract services, quality control and providing permits, some street maintenance (potholes) and milling
operations.
Condition Assessment of Streets: Currently done by individual inspectors based on visual
assessment; currently considering an automated system to generate particular data quickly and
efficiently.
Pavement Management System: Does not have one; just the individual condition assessment.
Use of Outside Vendors/Contractors: City forces do small asphalt repairs and the milling in
preparation of resurfacing. All resurfacing projects are performed by contracted vendor(s), with DOT
inspectors sign-off for quality.
Nashville, Tennessee
Street Network: 2,300 centerline miles; 5,800 lane miles
Pavement Conditions:
Add'l Vehicle Cost: $254
Poor Mediocre Fair Good
10% 21% 10 % 59%
Primary Agency : Public Works Engineering Department - Paving Office
Functional Responsibilities: Paving Office oversees all aspects of street resurfacing by directly
conducting or contracting activities related to plan, survey, maintenance/resurfacing, Q/C; striping,
permits and enforcement.
Condition Assessment of Streets: Nashville contracts out the pavement condition survey to a vendor
who uses vans with multiple cameras and lasers, collecting images every 20 feet. Updates assessment
every 2 years.
Pavement Management System: Cartegraph. The vendor performing the survey for condition
assessment must collect images/data that are compatible with this system.
Use of Outside Vendors/Contractors: Contractors conduct all resurfacing activities (5 areas put out
to bid; primes utilize subs for some activities, e.g., striping, utility adjustments, etc.) City forces are
used for alleys, greenways and emergency projects only.
Page 108
Raleigh, North Carolina
Street Network: 1,055 centerline miles; 2,500 lane miles
Pavement Conditions:
Add'l Vehicle Cost: $283
Poor Mediocre Fair Good
14% 11% 19% 56%
Primary Agency: Department of Public Works -Transportation Field Services
Functional Responsibilities: Transportation Field Services oversees all activities related to street
maintenance, street resurfacing, bridgework and storm water. Public Works' Transportation Operations
Division issues permits for street cuts and street closures. Right of way permits are issued by Planning
Department.
Condition Assessment of Streets: City inspectors drive the streets and conduct a visual survey of
the street conditions every 2 years. They use set criteria to determine and rate the pavement condition
rating (PCR) of each street segment.
Pavement Management System: None. Assessment from windshield survey is used for
prioritization.
Use of Outside Vendors/Contractors: Potholes are repaired using City forces, but all resurfacing
and reconstruction work is contracted out. The City prohibits slurry or crack sealing to repair streets,
and currently uses 4" depth reclamation for all resurfacing to ensure a longer street life
Sarasota, Florida
Street Network: 232 centerline miles; 464 lane miles
Pavement Conditions:
Addi Vehicle Cost: $178
Poor Mediocre Fair Good
7%
11% 14% 68%
Primary Agency: Department of Public Works - Engineering/Capital Projects Division
Functional Responsibilities: Public Works oversees all activities related to maintaining public
infrastructure, including streets. Contacted vendors perform the assessment and all street resurfacing
work; DPW Superintendent of Streets is responsible for quality control.
Condition Assessment of Streets: Vendor, Transmap uses a van with cameras and lasers, collecting
information on street conditions/ratings and other infrastructure assets which is directly overlaid onto
GIS map. Reassessed every 5 years.
Pavement Management System: Transmap is the pavement (and asset) management system for
the City.
Use of Outside Vendors/Contractors: All resurfacing work is contracted out to a prime vendor who
is responsible for mobilization/milling/asphalt/paint & striping/loop segments for streetlights/utility
covers, etc. No slurry or crack seal is used; hot patch used for small asphalt repairs.
Pagel 109
Orlando, Florida
Street Network: unknown centerline miles; 1,100 lane miles.
Pavement Conditions:
Add'I Vehicle Cost: $254
Poor Mediocre Fair Good
13% 12% 15% 60%
Primary Agency: Public Works Department - Streets and Stormwater Division
Functional Responsibilities: All activities related to maintaining and operating the City's roadways
and rights-of-way to achieve their maximum design life and to ensure the continuation of efficient and
safe transit on all City streets and pedestrian ways.
Condition Assessment of Streets: Conducted by a vendor, unknown frequency.
Pavement Management System: MicroPaver
Use of Outside Vendors/Contractors: All resurfacing work is contracted out, while all potholes are
repaired by City Staff. A vendor also assesses the street condition.
Chicago, Illinois
Street Network: 4,000 centerline miles; 9,456 lane miles.
Pavement Conditions:
Addil Vehicle Cost: $567
Poor Mediocre Fair Good
33% 39% 14% 14%
Primary Agency : Chicago Dept. of Transportation (CDOT)
Functional Responsibilities: CDOT is responsible for public way infrastructure, including planning,
design, construction, maintenance and management. CDOT's Public Right of Way Permit Office is
responsible for issuing permits, while the CDOT Office of Underground Coordination is responsible for all
requests regarding existing utility information and the review/approval of construction work in or
adjacent to the Public Way.
Condition Assessment of Streets: No information provided.
Pavement Management System: No information provided.
Use of Outside Vendors/Contractors: Construction is performed by both in-house construction
crews and private contractors. No additional information provided.
Pagel 110