ASS ET This page intent/ona?y /ef[ b/ank CITY OF PORTLAND BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION Steve Novick, Commissioner Leah Treat, Director Alissa Mahar, Executive Director of Finance + Business Operations PREPARED BY: Jamie Waltz, Transportation Asset Manager Shoshana Cohen, Asset Management, Legislative + Resource Development Analyst Kim-Chi Harrell, Senior Financial Analyst Felicity J. Mackay, Graphic Design + Photography Information current through June 2014. Published July 2015 The Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the ADA Title II, and related statutes and regulations and activities. For accommodations, complaints and information, call (503) 823-5185, City TTY (503) 823-6868, or use Oregon Relay Service: 711. Table of Contents Chapter Title Page Introduction 1 Aerial Tram 2 Bridges + Structures 3 Parking Garages 4 Parking Meter System 5 Pavement Markings 6 Pavement System 7 Roadside Barriers 8 Sidewalk System 9 Street Lights 10 Street Signs 11 Portland Streetcar 12 Traffic Signal System 13 Data Table Appendix A 5 6 10 16 20 24 30 38 42 48 54 58 62 69 72 Introduction The Asset, Status and Condition report is an asset management tool for tracking the physical assets owned by the Portland Bureau of Transportation – specifically, their condition, any unmet funding needs for proper maintenance, and the major accomplishments that were completed in each asset category in the previous fiscal year. The Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) manages transportation assets worth $9.7 billion. Portland’s transportation system helps move people, goods, freight and emergency response vehicles through the City. Motor vehicles, mass transit, bicyclists and pedestrians all benefit from the development, operations and maintenance of Portland’s infrastructure. Portland’s transportation system is a network of streets, sidewalks, bike lanes, bridges, traffic control devices, parking facilities, streetcars and an aerial tram. These combined assets make Portland one of the most livable cities in the country. The Asset Status and Condition report is a tool for tracking the physical assets owned by the Portland Bureau of Transportation – specifically, their condition, any unmet funding needs for proper maintenance, and the major accomplishments that were completed in each asset category in the previous fiscal year. The report also highlights how we prioritize the maintenance and operations out in the field. With insufficient resources to meet all the maintenance work of the infrastructure, prioritizing maintenance needs ensures that we address the highest-risk assets first. This report contains data from July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2014. The goal of asset management is to provide a targeted level of service and performance for various assets within the transportation network, in a cost-effective manner, by making the right amount of investment for the right asset in the right location at the right time. PBOT’s approach to asset management allows us to monitor asset status and condition, determine level of service, measure performance, and determine unmet need. By using good data and information, we can better plan how to maintain, rehabilitate and replace assets through a timely and cost-effective management program. We can also better allocate limited resources where they provide the highest return on investment. The focus of this report is on maintenance and operations – ensuring the right operations and maintenance treatment, at the right location, at the right time to maintain the transportation system that we currently have in place. What is not included, is the additional costs to fill in missing gaps and develop a complete, safe and efficient transportation system. However, the City’s June 2015 adoption of Vision Zero highlights the need to document system development goals in parallel with our documentation of maintenance and operation’s needs. The need for continued investment to complete a healthy, safe and accessible transportation is great. The following numbers provide some idea of the scale of additional need: 1. The cost of paving unpaved local streets is approximately $600 million. 2. The cost of completing all of the projects and programs described in the current update of Transportation System Plan is more than $2 billion. These projects would bring the City’s Transportation System Network up to a safe and efficient standard. As will be discussed in the chapters which follow, with limited resources, PBOT continues to develop strategies for ensuring that our operations and maintenance initiatives support our efforts to develop a safe, efficient, and complete transportation network. STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 5 "The Tram eliminates the need for an estimated 2 million vehicle miles annually, thereby saving 93,000 gallons of gas and reducing greenhouse emissions by more than 1,000 tons." Portland Aerial Tram Portland Aerial Tram The Aerial Tram is Portland’s public transportation link connecting the South Waterfront with Marquam Hill and OHSU’s campus. It opened to the public in January 2007, it’s owned by the City of Portland and operated by OHSU. The tram plays a vital role in the development and growth of the South Waterfront. The Portland Aerial Tram opened to the public in January 2007, it is owned by the City of Portland and operated by OHSU. The tram plays a vital role in the development and growth of the South Waterfront. The University’s decision to expand to the riverfront, which hinged on construction of the Tram, provided the catalyst for some $2 billion in investments in the South Waterfront after years of failed efforts by private developers. The district is rapidly taking shape as a dynamic new neighborhood of high-rise condominiums with a greenway along the river and access to the Portland Streetcar. The Tram also represents another pioneering step in Portland’s march toward a sustainable future. The Tram links seamlessly to the energy-efficient Condition Three types of inspections are conducted on the Tram and its components. Every two years the lower and upper stations and tower are inspected for structural integrity. Every year the control systems and ropes are inspected to assess their current condition. Based on the inspection results, any necessary maintenance is prioritized and addressed. Currently, all the tram components are in good condition, as the tram is relatively new. Over time, the condition of some of the “non-essential” components of the structures (e.g. paint) may deteriorate below fair; however, major maintenance will always be prioritized to ensure that the system is safe for all users. Streetcar which, in turn, provides a connection to the rest of the city and other public transit options. “The goal for managing the Tram components is that 95% of the tram system will be in fair or better condition. Currently, PBOT is exceeding that goal, as 100% of the tramway and related structures are in fair or better condition.” STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 7 Goal The goal for managing the tram components is that 95% of the tram system will be in fair or better condition. Currently, PBOT is exceeding that goal, as 100% of the tramway and related structures are in fair or better condition. Another goal is to minimize the time during which the tram is not operable. There are instances when the tram must be shut down to maintain the safety of the passengers, generally due to weather or other unforeseen events. Maintenance to the tram is usually conducted during the hours it is closed for business. PBOT exceeded its service target in the past year; the tram was inoperable less than 1% of the time during operating hours. Unmet Need There is no unmet need for the Aerial Tram. Maintenance costs are covered by the revenues generated by tram fares. Approximately $225,000 each year is set aside for addressing maintenance needs identified in the routine inspections. Accomplishments Tram ridership surpassed $10.8 million riders since the tram opened. The tram has covered over 236,070 miles to date – equivalent to 99% of the average distance between Earth and the moon!  Portland Aerial Tram STATUS Tramway Haul Rope (Linear Feet) Tramcars Annual Ridership Replacement Value* 2013 2014 1 1 7,150 7,150 2 2 1.6 M 1.7 M $54.3 M $56.2 M *Confidence level of replacement value: High LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 % of time Tram is inoperable due to maintenance issues/needs 1% 0.02% % of Tram system in fair or better condition (tramway and related structures only) 95% 100% TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE CONDITION VG Aerial Tram* 1 $56,225,421 G 100% F P TOTAL UNMET NEED VP $0 *Tramway and related structures, equipment, upper station, tower, lower station, and rolling stock (including cables) STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 9 “How old are our City Bridges? Ten of PBOT's bridges are 100 years or older and 36 bridges are 75 years or older. Five bridges are five years old or less.” Bridges + Structures Bridges & Structures The City of Portland owns and maintains 156 bridges which are located throughout Porltand's neighborhoods and industrial districts. All of the bridges are a vital part of the City’s infrastructure, providing passage for travelers and freight over highways, bodies of water, and other obstacles. “Bridge City” is famous for the many considered to be in poor condition. recognizable spans that cross the Willamette River. However, these The overall bridge condition bridges are not owned or maintained improved as a result of making by the City of Portland’s Bureau of improvements to the Balch Gulch Transportation. They are owned Bridge at NW Thurman Street. by Multnomah County, the State of (For condition definitions, see Oregon, or Union Pacific Railroad. Appendix A.) The City of Portland owns and How many bridges are weight-restricted? maintains 156 bridges which are Many of PBOT’s older bridges were located throughout Porltand's designed for traffic loads that no neighborhoods and industrial districts. longer meet modern freight demands. All of the bridges are a vital part of the Consequently, PBOT has weight City’s infrastructure, providing passage restricted the use of these bridges to for travelers and freight over highways, prevent premature structure failure or bodies of water, and other obstacles. excessive damage, which would require costly rehabilitation. Currently, 22 of Condition How old are our bridges? The design life of a bridge is recognized as 75 years. Many of PBOT’s bridges exceed this age, but are still in use. Ten of PBOT's bridges are 100 years or older and 36 bridges are 75 years or older. Five bridges are five years old or less. Are our bridges in good shape? PBOT’s bridges are continually exposed to harsh weather as well as pounding traffic from trucks and buses. This continual wear and tear causes the bridges to deteriorate over time, necessitating routine and preventive maintenance. Eighty-four percent of PBOT’s bridges are in fair or PBOT’s bridges are weight restricted, which represents 14% of the inventory. Weight restrictions on bridges The Gibbs St. Pedestrian Bridge shown below opened on July 14, 2012. The eastern end is accessed by an elevator tower. negatively affect the movement of freight and goods throughout the City. Beyond the economic impacts, freight drivers must find alternate routes, which extends travel time, uses more fuel and harms our environment. How often are the Bridges inspected? PBOT’s bridges are inspected every two years by certified bridge inspectors. PBOT engineers utilize the inspection reports to prioritize maintenance work, and Maintenance Operations crews conduct superstructure and deck repairs. better condition while 16% are STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 11 chapter 2 How would an earthquake affect City bridges? million spread over ten years. bridges every two years. Recent earthquakes that Portland has This includes capital (non-maintenance) The prioritization list reflects experienced have been relatively minor in needs to address 25 distressed maintenance needs rather than capital magnitude. Most of PBOT’s older bridges bridges requiring replacement, 59 replacement needs, seismic upgrades, were not designed to resist earthquakes bridges requiring some degree of or functional deficiencies (weight and could collapse in a moderate quake seismic rehabilitation and 3 historic restrictions, bicycle/pedestrian access). event, even if they are structurally in good bridges requiring rehabilitation, condition. Almost half of the City's bridge including Vista Bridge which requires inventory, or 80 bridges, require seismic a permanent safety screen. This upgrades of some kind. However, in figure does not include recurring some cases, if the bridge is also weight costs required to perform routine restricted and/or lacking bike and and preventive maintenance. pedestrian facilities it is a wiser investment to replace the bridge. PBOT has also Unmet need is defined as the amount written a Post-Earthquake Bridge Inspection of additional funding and resources Response Plan, which outlines a systematic, needed to bring a given asset class efficient, and prioritized inspection to a fair or better condition and of all bridges after an earthquake. to maintain it at that condition. For bridges, seismic upgrades, Goal rehabilitation, and replacement PRIORITIZATION FOR BRIDGE MAINTENANCE  Critical Safety issue, structural capacity or prioritized programming  Urgent Structural capacity, deterioration or serviceability issues  Routine Serviceability issues or asset preservation  Monitor Monitor for changing conditions  No Action No current PBOT maintenance recommendations needs factor into the unmet need. PBOT aims to reduce the percentage of weight restricted bridges below PBOT has created a Risk Assessment 5%. Bridges serve an important Deficiency Ranking system to identify function in Portland’s economy. which bridges are in greatest need of Timely maintenance and replacement repairs, rehabilitation, or replacement. of bridges reduces long-term costs This allows PBOT to prioritize funding and ensures safety. Preserving requests and existing resources the structural integrity of the while managing the condition of bridges is important for PBOT its entire bridge inventory. as well as the freight, transit and emergency response providers. Unmet Need Prioritization Bridges are a priority for Maintenance and Operations work. Bridges What would it cost to fix the major are assigned to a category using problems for all of PBOT’s bridges? the scoring tool from the National The unmet need for deficient Bridge Health Index. The State of bridges is estimated at $151.9 Oregon inspects all City-owned 12 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Bridges + Structures Accomplishments PBOT’s bridge maintenance crews work year round to improve the condition of the bridges through routine and preventive maintenance in addition to minor and major structural repairs. This work can Balch Gulch Bridge at NW Thurman Street In spring 2014, PBOT began the rehabilitation of the historic 110 year-old bridge that spans an entrance to Macleay Park. The NW Thurman Street Bridge is the oldest intact bridge in the State of Oregon and eligible to prolong the service life of the bridges. be placed on the National Register of Below is a list of some of the major the wooden bridge deck and riveted maintenance projects PBOT’s maintenance crews have undertaken during fiscal year 2013-2014. Historic Places. Prior to the project, steel superstructure were rated in very poor condition and weight restricted. A complete replacement would have cost in excess of $8 milion, but PBOT was able to rehabilitate the bridge using Federal funds for $4 million. In spring 2014, PBOT began the rehabilitation of the Balch Gulch Bridge at NW Thurman Street, the historic 110 year-old bridge that spans an entrance to Macleay Park. MAJOR MAINTENANCE PROJECTS DURING FY 13-14 STRUCTURE PROJECT DESCRIPTION N. Lombard St. Conn. Deck overlay SW Vista Bridge Safety screen maintenance N. Columbia Blvd. over BNSF Steel girders strengthening Steel Bridge Esplanade Gate repairs SW Vista to Mill Terrace Stairs Repairs and reconstruction NW Irving Westover to 24th Place Stairs Reconstruction of aged stairs SW Bancroft Retaining Wall Reconstruction of failing wall STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 13 chapter 2 The SW Vista Bridge safety screen was installed in 2013. To date the screen has saved at least 4 lives. PBOT is responsible for maintaining stairways, retaining walls, the harbor wall, the floating dock, the China Gate and culverts. BRIDGE CONDITION 50% 45% 40% CONDITION % 35% 30% 25% 20% 2011 2012 2013 2014 15% 10% 5% 0% VERY GOOD GOOD FAIR 14 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 POOR JULY 2015 VERY POOR Bridges + Structures STATUS 2013 2014 Bridges 157 156 Retaining Walls 557 565 Stairways 188 190 5,134 ft 5,134 ft 1 1 $691.2 M $903.2 M** Harbor Wall Elevators Replacement Value* * Confidence level of replacement value: high ** Increase in Replacement Value reflects changes to value calculations which more accurately reflect real market costs. LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 5% 14% % of bridges that are weight restricted TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE STRUCTURES STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE CONDITION TOTAL UNMET NEED VG G F P VP Bridges 156 $610,721,752 8% 41% 35% 16% 0% $151,952,899 Retaining Walls 565 $ 100,339,035 71% 19% 8% 2% 0% $5,421,740 Stairways 190 $4,759,553 12% 61% 26% 1% 0% $918,603 5,134 ft $186,835,056 1 $500,000 Harbor Wall Elevator 100% 100% $903,155,396 $0 TBD $ 158,293,242 STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 15 “The SmartPark garages support the economic vitality of the Central City by providing an affordable system of parking garages which primarily meets the short-term needs of shoppers, visitors and business clients.” Parking Garages Parking Garages Our mission Is to support the economic viability of the Central City by providing an affordable system of parking garages which primarily meets the short-term needs of shoppers, visitors and business clients. The City owns and operates six SmartPark all the major maintenance on the garages Garages, with a mission to support the as well as preventative maintenance to economic viability of the Central City ensure that they are in good working by providing an affordable system of order. Keeping with its goal of maintaining parking garages which primarily meets garages in good or very good condition, the short-term needs of shoppers, visitors PBOT participated in a process with and business clients. The SmartPark Facilities Services to establish a third party rate structure is set up to encourage vendor to conduct building condition short-term turnover, however several and assessment reports. Assessments garages do allow monthly parking should be done within the next year. permits in an effort to maximize revenue potential. While the hourly rates are below market, the monthly parking rates are at market rate except in the Goal It is realistic to expect that all six retail core garages where the monthly parking garages stay in good or rates are set above market rate as an better condition. The customers who incentive to encourage short-term use. park in the garages expect to find Revenues from the garages support them safe, clean, and maintained. maintenance and operations of those facilities, and any additional revenue is used to support PBOT’s operations and maintenance programs. Unmet Need There is no unmet need for the parking garages. Maintenance costs are covered by the revenues generated Condition by the garages. Approximately $5 The majority of the garages (4 out of 6) million is transferred annually from are in good condition. Two of the garages the Parking Facilities Fund to the are in fair condition. The City 's Facilities Transportation Operating Fund to Services staff conducts yearly inspections support PBOT’s operational activities. of the garages to identify maintenance needs. Facilities Services performs “Maintenance costs are covered by the revenues generated by the garages. Approximately $5 million is transferred annually from the Parking Facilities Fund to the Transportation Operating Fund to support operational activities.” STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 17 chapter 3 Accomplishments Worked with the City's operating contractor to market the SmartPark Program, focusing on quality customer service and improving the image and recognition of the SmartPark brand. Such efforts included implementing an Ambassador Program to assist parking customers at exit areas of garages, participating at events such as Flicks on the Bricks, Tree Lighting Ceremony, etc., and improving the program with a goal of minimizing repair and maintenance expenses on the new automated garage equipment and ensure the useful life of the assets. Worked closely with the City's operating contractor to meet all EPA requirements for power washing parking decks and pressure washing stairwells and to ensure all water is captured and not allowed to drain in to the storm water system.  implementation of the SmartPark Validation Program for downtown merchants, increasing the number of participating merchants from 200 in 2012 to almost 350 by July 2014. Adjusted the SmartPark rates in an effort to target 85% occupancy and ensure the program is focused on its mission of supporting the economic viability of the Central City by providing an affordable system of parking garages which primarily meets the short-term needs of shoppers, visitors and business clients and generates revenues that directly support downtown marketing and events. Implemented the newly restructured Garage Equipment Maintenance Contract in order to improve accountability, ensure budget predictability, and clarify PCI (Payment Card Industry) Compliance responsibilities. Worked with the City's operating contractor to monitor the 18 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Downtown Portland SmartPark Garage Parking Garages STATUS Garages # of parking spaces Heliport Square feet of retail space Replacement Value* 2013 2014 6 6 3,765 3,765 1 1 71,800 71,800 $108.6 M $116.2 M * Confidence level of replacement value: high LEVEL OF SERVICE % of garages in good or better condition. Includes inspections TARGET FY 13-14 100% 67% of the structure and the surface coating. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE CONDITION VG Parking Garages 6 $116,260,846 G F 67% 33% P TOTAL UNMET NEED VP STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 $0 JULY 2015 19 “The purpose of the on-street parking meter system is to encourage turnover, reduce traffic congestion and provide convenient access to adjacent businesses and facilities in the Central Business District (CBD) and in Portland’s vibrant neighborhoods.” Parking Meter System Parking Meter System By metering parking spaces or requiring permits, more people can access the parking spaces throughout the day. Revenues collected through the parking system are used to fund the City’s transportation system. The purpose of the on-street parking The “back office” software system meter system is to encourage which supports, tracks and reports on turnover, reduce traffic congestion individual pay station performance and provide convenient access to and pay station status and activity. adjacent businesses and facilities in the Central Business District (CBD) and in  A business process for maintaining Portland’s vibrant neighborhoods. By and operating the equipment, metering parking spaces or requiring interfacing with customers for permits, more people can access enforcement, maintaining the assets, the parking spaces throughout the coordinating with adjacent land users day. Revenues collected through and providing customer service. the parking system are used to fund the City’s transportation system. PBOT currently uses two types of meters: single meters and multi- Enforcement of the parking system space pay stations. The single meters supports retail and commercial are coin-operated. The multi-space businesses and enhances neighborhood pay stations accept credit or debit livability. Parking enforcement cards, and coins. Pay stations issue officers refer to parking control signs time-stamped receipts which must and pavement markings to monitor be displayed in the vehicle’s curbside turnover and access and ensure that window. Pay stations control about parking regulations are observed. 95% of the paid parking spaces in the Central Business District (CBD), The parking meter system which includes the Pearl and South has three aspects: Waterfront Districts.  The physical equipment – meters, parking control signs and pavement markings. “Pay stations have an estimated ten-year life expectancy. However, replacement of pay stations is scheduled when it is no longer cost effective to maintain them or when the technology becomes significantly outdated.” STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 21 chapter 4 Condition All of the pay stations are in good condition. This is the result of a pay station replacement plan that started in July 2009. With current pay station technology, the machines are PBOT’s target is for no more than 20% Gas tax revenues are currently of the pay station system to be near the being set aside to pay for the end of its useful life (8 years or older, future replacement needs of given the 10 year industry estimate the existing pay stations. of lifespan). A replacement program Accomplishments was completed in August 2011. Upgraded 2G modems to able to send electronic notification of meter problems directly to the 3G modems in 200 parking meter technicians, reducing the Unmet Need amount of time during which a What do we need to improve wireless communications. machine is not operating properly. the parking meter system? Performed preventative Currently there is no unmet need maintenance and software upgrades Pay stations have an estimated for pay stations as all machines on parking meters as scheduled. ten-year life expectancy. However, are still within their useful life.  Completed 42 work orders to install, replacement of pay stations is PBOT developed a five-year remove, or reinstall 70 parking meters. scheduled when it is no longer replacement plan for older pay stations Completed 16,650 service/repair cost effective to maintain them (first installed in 2002) which were no calls for pay stations and 1,677 service/ or when the technology becomes longer cost effective to maintain.  The repair calls for single space meters. significantly outdated. second year of the replacement plan Began planning for implementation was completed in June 2010 and of paid parking in NW Portland, the Parking sign and pavement marking the replacement program was city's newest parking meter district. maintenance is performed by completed in August 2011.  meters to improve machine PBOT's Maintenance Operations. Signs and pavement markings help manage turnover, maintain uniform parking space lengths, and allow 80% Customers expect that pay stations 70% will be in working order so that 60% they can purchase parking receipts 50% expects pay stations to function 40% perform less reliably. The goal is to maximize reliability of service. condition % during hours of operation. PBOT nearing the end of their life, might GOOD 90% Goal revenue. Older pay station machines, FAIR 100% for enforcement of the system. to manage turnover and generate VERY GOOD  PAY STATION CONDITION 30% 20% 10% 0% 22 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 2011 JULY 2015 2012 2013 2014 Parking Meter System STATUS Single Pay Stations Replacement Value* 2013 2014 410 404 1,343 1,343 $11.6 M $11.6 M * Confidence level of replacement value: high LEVEL OF SERVICE % of pay stations with less than 2 years of remaining service life TARGET FY 13-14 20% 5% TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE VG PARKING METERS Single Pay Station CONDITION 404 $331,280 1,343 $11,235,538 1,747 $11,566,818 85% G F P TOTAL UNMET NEED VP 100% $0 15% $0 $0 STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 23 “Pavement markings are an important communication tool for road users. They help guide drivers and bicyclists by indicating when passing is allowed and warning of upcoming road conditions. Crosswalk markings help pedestrians cross the street more safely.” Pavement Markings Pavement Markings Pavement markings employ a uniform and recognizable system of colors, patterns, widths, symbols, and words to communicate their message. Because markings are located on the roadway, directly in line with the travel path, they are a highly visible safety device. Pavement markings are an important communication tool for road users. They help guide drivers and bicyclists by indicating when passing is allowed and warning of upcoming road conditions. Crosswalk markings help pedestrians cross the street more safely. Pavement markings employ a uniform and recognizable system of colors, patterns, widths, symbols, and words to communicate their message. Because markings are located on the roadway, directly in line with the travel path, they are a highly visible safety device. The pavement marking system is comprised of longitudinal lines (parallel to traffic), transverse lines (across traffic lanes), words (“Only,” “Bus,” “Bike,” etc.) Condition Painted markings can last six months to a year. Since a majority of the streets are repainted on an annual basis, condition monitoring is not conducted. Stripes are a key safety feature for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. Not all lines need to be restriped each year, but maintenance crews prioritize striping on centerlines, fog lines, and bike lanes. PBOT is improving the system for tracking crosswalk maintenance. A prioritization plan for crosswalk repairs is now in place. and symbols (arrows, railroad). The number of pavement markings and amount of striping will change as improvements are made to the system. These improvements include removing or installing pavement markings for functions such as new bike lanes, new crosswalks, and other safety improvements. For instance, Goal The goal is to restripe painted lines at least two times per year. The lines that receive two new coats in a year - or sometimes more contribute to an annual restriping rate that is greater than 200%. recent reductions in centerline miles have been offset by an increase in bike lane miles. “Stripes are a key safety feature for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. Not all lines need to be restriped each year, but maintenance crews prioritize striping on centerlines, fog lines and bike lanes." STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 25 chapter 5 Unmet Need What do we need to improve our pavement marking system? An additional $5.6 million beyond what is currently budgeted is needed in the next 10 years to bring all pavement markings to fair or better condition. Many pavement markings, especially crosswalks, are faded, incomplete, or in need of replacement. Prioritization Due to a limited budget and the seasonality of striping work, which restricts the amount of time maintenance can be conducted, pavement striping is prioritized according to safety needs. This also ensures efficient use of resources. Center lines, traffic lane lines, bike lanes, and fog lines are and the amount of paint striping included in these considerations. increased. Although the daily cost for paint striping and thermoplastic A prioritization process also exists striping are about the same, to guide the use of expensive paint can be applied much more thermoplastic. Thermoplastic efficiently than thermoplastic, markings are prioritized for use on which helps optimize crew hours. roads such as high crash corridors. Thermoplastic has a longer service The application of thermoplastic life and needs to be replaced less striping is now limited to new frequently than paint; however, it is a pavement and locations where narrow costlier application. Not all lines can or winding roadways with high traffic or should be restriped and maintained volumes present a safety concern. with this material. For example, High-volume arterials that experience older pavement requires additional significant wear to their lane striping surface preparation that may include are also a priority for thermoplastic grinding out of existing striping and/ lines. The remainder of the striping is or the application of additional done with paint. This balances the high primer to ensure good adhesion. cost/higher durability option against the low cost/lower durability option In the last year, the amount of to optimize overall striping costs. thermoplastic striping decreased PRIORITIZATION FOR LONGITUDINAL MARKING ACTIVITIES *Striping will still follow pavement projects as the first priority  High crash corridors and streets with safety issues: High crash corridors; streets where First within the Streets of Citywide Significance (SCS) engineering judgment indicates higher and then non-SCS streets. This includes bike lanes number of crashes; and streets identified Life safety routes that are on curvy roads: through various crash data elements. Sam Jackson; Terwilliger; Germantown Streets with tight curves and narrow alignments.  Arterial/collector roads with high volume The streets of citywide significance map that traffic (transit, freight, vehicle, bike) outlines the prioritization for pavement work Follow pavement prioritization for SCS streets Includes bike lanes Curvy roads will be utilized to determine which arterial/ 26 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 collector roads will be striped first. Streets with tight curves and narrow alignments. Pavement Markings Accomplishments Of the nine High Crash Corridors maintained by PBOT, eight were restriped using paint and one was or in some cases three coats on some streets and only one on others. maintained using thermoplastic. Equipment and Recognizing the generally poor purchased to equip and condition of crosswalks city-wide, PBOT emphasized refurbishing crosswalks city-wide and tracked the number of crosswalks maintained. This information will help inform managers and supervisors about the effectiveness of software license was test real-time GPS and production monitoring. With only one striper with the equipment installed, this continues to be a proof of concept. The oldest paint striper is up for replacement and this maintenance priorities and policies. monitoring equipment will be part of the The total miles of longitudinal striping type and detailed information on line (“long lines”) continues to grow at a similar pace as previous years, reflecting the effectiveness of policies and priorities and work management improvements. Total accomplishment measurements in this area show that the equivalent of 236% of the inventory was striped, indicating at least a double-coat of paint on most streets, A striping crew repainting double yellow lines new striper. This will allow position, stripe thickness, vehicle speed, color and pattern to be captured. This information can then be mapped over the striping inventory to provide location and productivity information. The ultimate goal is to reduce paper entry and/or double-entry of striping data as well as to monitor striping progress throughout the year. PAVEMENT MARKING OUTPUTS FY 13-14 Pass-Miles of Lines Painted Pass-Miles of Thermoplastic Lines Striped 3,880 67 Total Square Feet of Words & Symbols Maintained 83,390 Square Feet of Crosswalks Maintained 68,939 # of Parallel Line Crosswalks Maintained 1,960 # of Ladderbar Crosswalks Maintained 700 Square Feet of Words + Symbols Maintained 2,072 Est. Number of Words & Symbols Maintained 125 Square Feet of All Other Markings 1,617 STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 27 chapter 5 STATUS 2013 2014 Center Lines (pass mile)* 729 pass-miles 697 pass-miles Traffic Lane Lines (pass mile) 100 pass-miles 110 pass-miles Bike Lane Lines (pass mile) 563 pass-miles 590 pass-miles Edge Lines (pass mile) 272 pass-miles 276 pass-miles Crosswalks 4,617 4,887 Stop Bars 2,696 2,910 Symbols & Words 20,489 21,103 558 837 2,269 2,389 $8.9 M $10.7 M *** Island Markings Parking Replacement Value** * Pass mile is a continuous 4" wide line, one mile in length ** Confidence level of replacement value: moderate *** Replacement value increase reflects changes in materials, reporting methodology, ODOT standards, and equipment expense LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 % of crosswalks maintained on an annual/biannual basis with paint or with thermoplastic TBD 54% % of lines restriped on an annual/biannual basis with paint or with thermoplastic 100% 236% TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE CONDITION VG PAVEMENT MARKINGS G TOTAL UNMET NEED F P VP Center Lines 697 pass-miles $668,346 50% 50% $334,173 Traffic Lane Miles 110 pass-miles $209,382 50% 50% $104,691 Bike Lane Lines 590 pass-miles $1,124,071 50% 50% $562,036 Edge Lines 276 pass-miles $525,075 50% 50% $262,537 Crosswalks 4,887 $2,939,223 50% 50% $1,469,611 Stop Bars 2,910 $333,642 20% 80% $266,914 Symbols and Words 21,103 $2,075,308 30% 70% $1,452,715 837 $2,148,127 70% 30% $644,438 2,389 $661,458 25% 75% $496,094 Island Markings Parking $10,684,631 28 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 $5,593,209 “PBOT's pavement maintenance policy is to carry out the right treatment in the right place, at the right time. This means prioritizing early-stage repairs that can keep the roadway from falling into poor or very poor condition.” Pavement System Pavement System The Portland Bureau of Transportation is responsible for maintaining 4,834 lane miles of paved roads, of which approximately sixty percent are local roads and forty percent are collector and arterial streets. The purpose of Portland’s pavement some bus and freight routes. system is to move people, goods and services safely and efficiently through  Arterial streets: Streets that serve the City. The system must balance the major city centers and have the highest requirements of motor vehicles, transit volume of traffic. Arterials carry the buses, freight, pedestrians, bicyclists, majority of traffic entering, leaving, and light rail and streetcars to meet the moving across the City. These streets needs of the entire community. also carry mass transit and freight. The Portland Bureau of Transportation  Unpaved roads: Streets not built is responsible for maintaining to City standards and therefore not 4,834 lane miles of paved roads, of maintained by the Portland Bureau of which approximately 60 percent Transportation. Once upgraded through are local roads and 40 percent are the Local Improvement District process or collector and arterial streets. another mechanism, these roads become the City’s maintenance responsibility.  Local streets: Streets with a low volume of traffic and low speeds. These streets do not contain bus routes, but provide neighborhood access to larger streets. Most people live on local streets, which are also called neighborhood or residential streets.  Collector streets: Streets with a higher volume of traffic than neighborhood streets. Collectors provide access from local/ neighborhood streets to arterials. These streets may contain “The system must balance the requirements of motor vehicles, transit, buses, freight, pedestrians, bicylists, light rail and streetcars to meet the needs of the entire community.” STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 31 chapter 6 STATUS 2013 2014 4,827 lane miles* 4,834 lane miles 1,865 lane miles 1,866 lane miles 2,962 lane miles 2,968 lane miles 56.8 centerline miles 56.4 centerline miles $4.8 B $6.2 B Paved Streets Arterial/Collector Local Unpaved Street Replacement Value** *Lane miles are computed by multiplying street length by the number of lanes in the street. For example, one mile of four-lane street equals four lane miles. ** Confidence level of replacement value: moderate. The large change in the replacement value of the pavement system is due to data updates. During the economic downturn, there was a decline in construction prices, but with the rebound of the economy, construction prices have been on the rise. Condition PBOT uses the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Pavement Condition Index (PCI) methodology to assess the state of Portland’s streets. This is a visual rating methodology used to score each street segment on a scale of 0-100 (worst to best). A PCI of 65 or higher translates to a condition of “fair” or better. A PCI below 40 represents very poor condition. (See Appendix A for a rating scale and definitions.) ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR PAVEMENT CONDITION By targeting a low threshold for 40% 2013 2014 35% 30% % of system Goal poor condition, PBOT aims to prevent more streets from falling into the most expensive category of repair 25% or replacement. When the 20% desired goals are achieved, 15% the roadway system will be at a condition at which the 10% roadways are most cost effective 5% 0% the percentage of streets in very to maintain. PBOT lacks funding to meet its targets VERY GOOD GOOD FAIR POOR condition 32 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 VERY POOR for pavement condition. Pavement System LOCAL PAVEMENT CONDITION 45% 2013 2014 40% 35% % of system 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% VERY GOOD GOOD FAIR POOR VERY POOR condition Unmet Need What do we need to improve our pavement system? A gap exists between the current road condition and PBOT’s goals. To determine what it would take to reach these goals, each repair type for pavement defects is assigned a dollar figure. These figures are incorporated into a formula that calculates how much money is needed over a ten-year period to bring the pavement condition up to the desired level. To meet the condition targets set for arterial and collector streets (80% in fair or better and no more than 2% in very poor condition) it will take $71.6 million per year for ten years. To meet the target level of service for local roads (70% in fair or better and no more than 11% in very poor condition) will require $47.1 million per year for the next ten years. LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 % of pavement with a PCI of 65 and above — equivalent to fair or better condition 80% 51% Maximum % of pavement system which will be tolerated below a PCI of 40 (very poor) 2% 14% % of pavement with a PCI of 65 and above — equivalent to fair or better condition 70% 44% Maximum % of pavement system which will be tolerated below a PCI of 40 (very poor) 11% 17% ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR PAVEMENT LOCAL PAVEMENT STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 33 chapter 6 UNMET NEED DOLLARS NEEDED EACH YEAR FOR 10 YEARS TO ACHIEVE THE DESIRED LEVELS OF SERVICE. FY 13-14 Unmet Need: Arterial/Collectors $71.6 M Unmet Need: Local $47.1 M Total Unmet Need $118.7 M Due to insufficient funding for appropriate pavement management Collectors and arterials carry freight and transportation maintenance and However, if we make the recommended public transit vehicles and are heavily operations, City Council passed a policy investment of $118.7 million per year used by citizens as they travel through in 2009 that eliminated all paving work in the pavement system over the the City. These streets deteriorate on local streets. This stayed in effect next 10 years, we will be able to keep more rapidly than local streets due to until May of 2013 when the policy was a significant number of streets from their heavy loads, and their failures reversed. During this time the 2,968 falling into very poor condition. This tend to be deeper and may affect lane miles of local roads, approximately translates into future cost savings. the base structure and therefore 60% of the pavement system, received require more expensive fixes. little more than basic pothole patching. Since May 2013, PBOT has once again been able to maintain local streets in accordance with the bureau's policy of prioritizing preventative maintenance. We now face two scenarios. PBOT's pavement preservation budget is $11.2 million in FY 14-15 General Transportation Revenue. This funds paving activities that go toward improving the pavement condition index, as well as indirect costs to reflect the full costs in the program. If that $11.2 million funding level remains the same for the next ten years, we will see the condition of the pavement system decline. Under this scenario, the amount of arterial and collector streets in very poor (or failed) condition will increase from 14% to 35%. The amount of local roads in very poor condition will increase from 17% to 44%. This decline would happen because not enough money would be invested in Prioritization Despite funding and resource challenges, PBOT is prioritizing the available maintenance funds Local streets have very little loading and show signs of distress primarily from environmental impacts (weathering and oxidation) on the asphalt. Deterioration to maximize effectiveness. tends to occur on the surface, so PBOT’s pavement maintenance policy surface is usually an adequate fix. is to carry out the right treatment in the right place at the right time. This means prioritizing early-stage repairs that can keep the roadway from falling into poor or very poor condition. As shown in the “Cost of Deferred Street Maintenance” illustration, it costs ten times more to rebuild a road that has fallen into very poor condition than to carry out renovations while the road sealing the cracks and rejuvenating the Lower-traffic roads are the main targets of PBOTs’ new fog seal program. In 2012, PBOT began testing fog sealant, a paving material that protects the road surface at a significantly lower cost than grinding up old asphalt and repaving. Applying fog sealant costs only $10,000 - $12,500 per mile, compared to is still in the fair to good stage. approximately $150,000 per mile for a The type and frequency of required up of a liquid layer of asphalt, recycled maintenance is different for local streets than for collectors and arterials. 34 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 5 JULY 2015 traditional grind and pave job. Made tires, and grit, fog seal is sprayed onto clean pavement where it hardens as Pavement System it dries, protecting the roadway from because the scope of resources needed weathering for an estimated 3-5 years. to maintain transportation infrastructure greatly exceeds resources available. During the 2013-2014 pavement season, PBOT refined the crack seal and fog seal program and became more efficient. This more outreach to keep pedestrians Pavement Priorities for Determining Preventive Maintenance and Capital Rehabilitation and vehicles from entering the work The following table illustrates area while the sealant dries. Fog seal is the methodology that was used not the right treatment for busy streets to determine which streets are because the higher traffic volumes would Streets of Citywide Significance. was achieved by increasing the amount of prep work done ahead of the fog seal treatment. PBOT also conducted quickly cause the treatment to wear off. PBOT aims to complete 40 lane miles of Fog Seal/Crack Seal on local streets. When it comes to more extensive maintenance, PBOT chooses which streets to repair first based on "Streets PRIORITIZATION CATEGORY FOR STREETS OF CITYWIDE SIGNIFICANCE Transit Trips > 75 Trips + Freight Buses > 300 Trips SCS are travel corridors whose high traffic Freight Only motor vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles) Total miles improved: 110.77 lane miles. Conducted street preservation activities (grind and pave) on approximately 46.61 lane miles of roadways. Fixed localized damaged roadway areas (digout and base repair) on 160 different street locations, which equates to 3.59 lane miles. Constructed 7.72 lane miles of Citywide Significance" (SCS) mapping. volume across all modes (freight, transit, Accomplishments of major rehab under the capital paving program. Completed 52.85 lane miles of Fog Seal/Crack Seal treatments on local roads. Buses 151 - 300 Trips makes them especially critical to the Buses 75 - 150 Trips system. The prioritization is necessary Neighborhood Greenways The  Cost  of  Deferred  Street  Maintenance Pavement Life Cycle Excellent Good $1 to Renovate HERE 40% Drop in Quality Fair 75% Poor 12% Very Poor Failed Source: American Public Works Association $10 to Renovate HERE Time   Source: American Public Works Association STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 35 chapter 6 250 7 200 6 5 150 4 100 3 2 50 00 lane miles # of Base Repair Projects BASE REPAIR PROJECTS AND LANE MILEAGE 1 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 # OF PROJECTS LANE MILES TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE PAVEMENT CONDITION TOTAL UNMET NEED VG G F P VP Arterial/Collector 1,866 Lane miles $3,165,171,840 16% 17% 18% 35% 14% $716,000,000 Local 2,968 Lane miles $3,038,737,225 7% 18% 19% 39% 17% $471,000,000 Unpaved Streets 56.4 Centerline miles N/A 100% N/A $6,203,909,065 36 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 $1,187,000,000 N PH DE LP E RD W EG N OS BLVD NW N CO SW SUNSET HWY IN E STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 RD SW TAYLORS FERRY RD ER TT D NS BE AV E RD SW BA TO RB LS UR NH IL Y RD ER ON HW RN SID ET PA TT SU SW SW LV W BU EB SW VERMONT ST SW MULTNOMAH BLVD SS ME BL LE VD DA BLVD ST T H RD W Y FR SWNI BO ON O N T ST YR SW N ST RR SO FE ER ES JE FF W BURNSIDE SW SW NW NW LOVEJOY ST SW STEPHENSON ST HW Y N L SE EL SU RN SW E LAI NW NICO AV N LOMBARD ST NW VAUGHN ST ON CO YE NW NW BIA N WILLIS BLVD LU M VD LE ILLA D R D AN TL N CO D N INTERSTATE AVE AV CL AY E ST NW N AIT N GOING ST O N IO N C T PK Y CENT N FAILING ST N KILLINGSWORTH ST N ROSA PARKS WAY U NE LO MB AR D NE 33RD AVE SE HOLGATE BLVD SE TENINO ST SE STEELE ST SE DIVISION ST SE HAWTHORNE BLVD SE BELMONT ST SE STARK ST NE BROADWAY ST NE KLICKITAT ST NE PRESCOTT ST SE MORRISON ST ST NECN NE HOLMAN ST NE WEIDLER ST SE TACOMA ST AV SW AY AW NPNS M BI SW CAMERON RD SW FLORIDA ST SK YL ST E AV RR N BU E NW IT H LU N M SW POMONA ST SW GARDEN HOME RD "Streets of Citywide Significance" (SCS) are travel corridors PBOT prioritizes for expenditures due to their high traffic volume across all modes (freight, transit, motor vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles). Safety is a key element that factors into the SCS designation. The prioritization is necessary because the scope of resources needed to maintain transportation infrastructure greatly exceeds resources available. These established priorities guide how Maintenance Operations crews do the work to maintain the infrastructure. ELL NW CORN AV ON RD H IA MPS NW THO NWNW ILA N SM N PO R SW DOSCH RD O AV SW 62ND AVE N GREELEY AVE BL VD SW 4TH AVE INE RD CK TU AT SH SW N DENVER AVE SW 6TH AVE SK YL SW TERWILLIG ER BLVD Y PK IT O NA SW SW HOOD AVE SW VIRGINIA AVE NE MARTIN LUTHER KING BLVD NW SE GRAND AVE NE 42ND AVE SE KNAPP ST NE HALSEY ST NE FREMONT ST NE PRESCOTT ST TH OR BU RN SE CLATSOP ST SE FLAVEL ST SE OGDEN ST SE WOODSTOCK BLVD SEUL SE POWELL BLVD SE ST NE GLISAN ST NE SACRAMENTO ST CNN NE CO LUM BIA LA ND BLV D HW Y NE KILLINGSWORTH ST NE PO RT NE 82ND AVE NE 82ND AVE SE WASHINGTON ST SE MT SC OT T NE PRESCOTT ST I BL VD NE WEIDLER ST NE SA ND EPNO SE CLATSOP ST SE FOSTER RD 0.5 Y BL VD SE STARK ST E BURNSIDE ST 0 Miles AIRP OR TW AY NE HALSEY ST NE SE CLATSOP ST Revision Date 7-31-2012 (High Crash Corridors on State Highways including Barbur Blvd., Powell Blvd., and 82nd Avenue are not shown on Map) High Crash Corridors Priority Bikeways Fixed Rail Transit (Regional/Priority/Major Truck Streets) Both Transit & Freight (Regional/Priority/Major Truck Streets) NE 122ND AVE D DR SE 12TH AVE Transit Only (Bus Trips >= 75) SE 122ND AVE AR SE 11TH AVE SE 13TH AVE NE 21ST AVE NE 21ST AVE NE 20TH AVE SE 20TH AVE Freight Only NE 148TH AVE RG SW 45TH AVE Y BL DA HW SE 17TH AVE NW 23RD AVE T CA OL SE MA P IT SW CA N BLVD SW SU SE MCLOU GHLIN AVE SW 49TH AVE D SE 162N SW 35TH AVE SW SE 28TH AVE SE CESAR E CHAVEZ BLVD SE CESAR E CHAVEZ BLVD AY W ND 82 NE Map Legend SE 148TH AVE N BU SE 52ND AVE VD BL Y LL CU NE VD SE 60TH AVE BL SE 60TH AVE E SE 62ND AVE IN SE 76TH AVE YL SE 72ND AVE SK SE 82ND AVE NW RD SE 92ND AVE E NE 102ND AVE AV NS NE 102ND AVE E SE 102ND AVE G LE SE 112TH AVE ID HE SE 111TH AVE BR ST SE 50TH AVE SE 112TH AVE NW NW NW 18TH AVE SE 130TH AVE ER SE 136TH AVE LU TH SE 129TH AVE RT IN BL VD NE 162ND AVE N LOMBARD ST MA JR SE 162ND AVE NE KING SE 160TH AVE Streets of Citywide Significance Pavement System SE MILWAUKIE AVE E JULY 2015 37 “Maintenance occurs primarily in response to police reports of crashes that have damaged barriers, citizen complaints, or reports from field crews of barriers in need of maintenance." Roadside Barriers Roadside Barriers Roadside barriers consist of guardrails and attenuators and are an important component of roadway safety. The presence of guardrails helps slow down and redirect vehicles that stray from a travel lane. Roadside barriers consist of guardrails and attenuators and are an important component of roadway safety. The presence of guardrails helps to slow down and redirect vehicles that stray from the travel lane, in addition to protecting vehicles and their occupants from steep slopes and other hazards beyond the barricade. Attenuators (e.g. the striped part of the barrier shown at right) provide protection from a point or “spear-like” hazard, where a longitudinal barrier like a guardrail is not as effective. Roadside barriers also protect property, such as buildings and bridges, by slowing or stopping a moving vehicle before a structure is hit. Due to budget cuts, the Portland Bureau Condition Monitoring of guardrail condition commenced in Fall 2012 and continued through FY 2013-2014. More condition information about the roadside barrier system will be available once this information has been completely collected and analyzed. When crews repair damaged guardrail, they replace it at a level that is equal to or better than what was there. Where guardrail is damaged more frequently, engineers and maintenance staff assess the cause of the damage and the guardrail installation. This may result in having the guardrail redesigned or adding reflectors to increase visibility. of Transportation does not have a preventive maintenance program for guardrails and attenuators. Currently, only reactive maintenance is conducted on barriers. This maintenance occurs primarily in response to police reports of crashes that have damaged barriers, citizen complaints, or reports from field crews of barriers in need of maintenance. “Guardrails are an important element for roadway safety. Roadside barriers also protect property, such as buildings and bridges, by slowing or stopping a moving vehicle before a structure is hit.” STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 39 chapter 7 Goal on guardrail repairs and recovered Roadside barriers are key safety features for the transportation system and users of the roadway rely on them. A goal of $9,304 from insurance companies of individuals who collided with guardrails. maintaining 100% of attenuators in fair Accomplishments or better condition is reasonable given Installed and repaired 0.5 miles that the City owns and maintains 19 units. of guardrail in FY 2013-2014 A target of 90% of guardrails in fair or better condition is comparable with other Continued guardrail assessment municipalities and, given appropriate that was begun in Fall 2014. levels of funding, is a realistic target. Unmet Need Currently, the unmet need for guardrail and attenuators is not calculated, but PBOT hopes to develop these financial calculations once the condition monitoring has been completed. In fiscal year 2013-2014 PBOT spent $72,304 MILES OF GUARDRAIL REPAIRED 2 miles 1.5 1 1.6 0.61 0.5 0 1.28 0.34 0.7 0.61 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 40 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 0.5 FY 10-11 JULY 2015 FY 11-12 FY 12-13 FY 13-14 Roadside Barriers STATUS 2013 2014 26 centerline miles 26 center line miles Attenuators 26 units 19 units** Replacement Value* $6.8 M $5.6 M Guardrail * Confidence level of replacement value: low ** Due to intersection reengineering, PBOT has reduced the attenuator inventory A striping crew repainting double yellow lines LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 % of traffic attenuators in fair or better condition 100% TBD % of guardrail in fair or better condition 90% TBD TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE VG ROADSIDE BARRIERS Guardrails 26 centerline miles CONDITION $5,628,480 G F P TOTAL UNMET NEED VP TBD STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 TBD JULY 2015 41 “The Americans with Disability Act (ADA) mandates that the Portland Bureau of Transportation upgrade the sidewalk system with accessible corners. PBOT builds new ramps as part of the City paving process.” Sidewalk System Sidewalk System Portland’s sidewalk system is made up of sidewalks, corners, and curbs. The system provides pedestrians with a safe way to access transit, neighborhood businesses, parks, and schools. With Portland's 2,442 miles of sidewalks, you could walk from Portland to Atlanta, Georgia! Portland’s sidewalk system is made up of sidewalks, corners, and curbs. The system provides pedestrians with a safe way to access transit, neighborhood businesses, parks, and schools. Curbs not only mark the edge of the pedestrian network, but also channel water to the drainage system, which helps preserve street pavement. Per City code, property owners are responsible for constructing, reconstructing, maintaining and repairing the sidewalks abutting their property. The Americans with Disability Act (ADA) mandates that the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) upgrade the sidewalk system with accessible corners. PBOT schedules construction of these ramps by citizen request and also as part of City paving projects. Corners in poor condition or in need of enhanced pedestrian access receive priority. Sidewalk inspectors identify hazardous Condition With proper maintenance and renewal, sidewalks and corners last about 40 years and curbs about 60 years. Due to budget constraints, the inspection of sidewalks is limited to following up on all trip and fall complaints and bad sidewalk complaints from citizens, as resources allow. Bureau inspectors assess sidewalks and notify the property owner of needed repairs (a process called posting). Business and residential property owners must repair any posted deficiencies that make the sidewalk unsafe. For condition definitions, see Appendix A. Condition of sidewalks is influenced by several factors: tree roots which can cause damage, PBOT's ability to identify repair needs and notify (post) property owners of repairs, and property owner's response to notification of needed sidewalk improvements. corners that need maintenance. “With proper maintenance and renewal, sidewalks and corners last about 40 years and curbs 60 years. Curbs not only mark the edge of the pedestrian network, but also channel water to the drainage system, which helps preserve street pavement.” STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 43 chapter 8 876 The City’s ADA Transition Plan aims to figure does not include the cost of build 700 to 1,000 ADA compliant corners building sidewalks where none exist. each year. ADA compliance changes The cost to bring all corners into over time as new standards are adopted. ADA compliance will be $97.3 million When these standards change, PBOT over the next ten years. To bring changes the building standards to stay in the 38% of curbs that are in fair to compliance. In total, 48% of the sidewalk poor condition up to good condition system has corner ramps, constructed to would cost an additional $130 meet the ADA requirements of their day. million over the next ten years. The budget for the curb repair program was eliminated in fiscal year 2006-2007 and a small budget was only added back In FY 2013-2014, PBOT built 483 ADA-compliant corner ramps. 2.2 miles of sidewalks were built through the Capital Improvement Program and 0.2 mile was built by Maintenance Operations. 2,818 properties were inspected Prioritization for sidewalk deficiencies. Of those, 1,896 were posted for repairs.  While working towards the target of this year. Between fiscal year 2006- constructing 700-1,000 ADA compliant 2007 and 2013-2014 no maintenance curb ramps each year, these ramps was conducted. The current budget are routinely installed as part of only allows for very bad curb to be City paving projects. ADA compliant repaired. Current estimates rate 78% curb ramps may also be installed of curbs in fair or better condition. to replace existing ramps that are Substandard curbs impact drainage into hazardous. Citizens can request a new the sewer system and allow for water corner ramp through the “Ramps By to infiltrate the street bed, impairing Request” program. There is limited the integrity of the paved roadway. funding for this program and requests must be prioritized in accordance Unmet Need Accomplishments with the guidelines outlined in the Prioritization chart on the next page. What do we need to improve the sidewalk system? An additional $227 million is needed to bring the curbs and corners into fair or better condition. Although sidewalks are typically in the public right-of-way and owned by the City, adjacent property owners are financially responsible for construction and repairs. Similarly, developers are responsible for building or repairing sidewalks at the time of construction. The unmet need 44 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Installing an ADA compliant curb ramp in Northwest Portland. Sidewalk Systems PRIORITIZATION Citizen ADA requests for Address requests that are received through the PBOT Citizen ADA Request curb ramps made by people Curb Ramp Program, from citizens who use mobility devices, or on their who use mobility devices behalf, to provide specific accessible routes based on their location and travel needs. Priority given to providing access to one’s residence, place of work, government offices and facilities, places of public accommodations, and transit. Existing curb ramps that present Address existing curb ramps reported by inspectors or citizens and posted a hazard or barrier to passage as trip and fall hazards or barriers to safe passage by people who use mobility devices. These locations will be filled in on an as-received basis. They may also be incorporated into the work orders for routes identified in the categories below if along the route or in the nearby vicinity.  High pedestrian crash locations  High Pedestrian Use Areas Build curb ramps in areas where there are clusters of pedestrian related crashes, especially marked crosswalks without ramps. Proxy measures: 1. Central Business District. 2. Other Central City sub-districts. 3. Pedestrian Districts Citywide. 4. Arterial streets with any commercial zoning, high density zoning or Central Employment (EX) zoning. 5. Transit routes (bus and fixed rail): > 300 trips 150 – 300 trips 75 – 150 trips 6. Routes leading to High Capacity Transit stations.  Places with higher concentration Measures: Based on location of services for people with disabilities or of people with disabilities where greater numbers of seniors and people with disabilities reside based on US Census data, location of accessible housing units and other sources.  Fill in remaining gaps in the Provide accessible routes from point A to B around the following locations: priority pedestrian network hospitals, schools, neighborhood greenways with pedestrian traffic, senior centers to serve key destinations community centers, business/commercial centers Equity (Racial, Under-served While the above categories and criteria shall first inform curb ramp location populations and Geographic) priorities, consideration should then be given to equitably distributing curb ramps. First address curb ramp disparities in areas with higher concentrations of people of color and other historically under-served populations. Then, consider an equitable distribution in terms of serving all districts of the City. ✸ These categories will be addressed first. After those corners are constructed, the remaining corners will be built based upon the prioritized outlined. STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 45 chapter 8 STATUS 2013 2014 8,869,556 square yards or 2,520 miles 8,883,140 square yards or 2,442 miles* 37,886 corners 37,884 corners 47% of corners have ramps 48% of corners have ramps Curbs 3,263 miles 3,265 miles Replacement Value** $1.8 Billion $1.7 Billion Sidewalks Corners * The sidewalk mileage reporting methodolgy has been improved. Sidewalk length is now estimated using the centerline of the polygon sidewalk and corner features which represent the sidewalk network in the Bureau's GIS. Previously, the linear extent of the sidewalk network was approximated by dividing the area of the sidewalk polygons by the typical sidewalk width (6 ft). This method tended to overstate sidewalk coverage where sidewalk widths exceeded 6 ft and understate it in areas with narrower sidewalks. Overall, the old methodology overstated sidewalk mileage by 3-4%. ** Confidence level of replacement value: moderate LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 % of corners in the City with corner ramps 100% 48% % of sidewalks in fair or better condition (based on hazards) 65% 65% TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE SIDEWALK SYSTEM Sidewalks Curbs Improved CONDITION TOTAL UNMET NEED VG G F P VP 8,883,140 sq yds $1,074,859,940 10% 25% 30% 25% 10% N/A 3,265 centerline miles $499,936,800 12% 50% 16% 12% 10% $129,983,568 37,884 $160,022,016 10% 18% 17% 28% 27% $97,327,841 18,055 N/A N/A $1,734,818,756 $227,311,409 Corners Corners w/ Ramps 46 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Sidewalk System CONDITION OF SIDEWALKS condition percent 2011 2012 2013 2014 VERY GOOD GOOD FAIR POOR VERY POOR CONDITION OF CORNERS condition percent 2011 2012 2013 2014 VERY GOOD GOOD FAIR POOR VERY POOR % of corners with ramps CURBS EQUIPPED WITH CURB RAMPS 35% 34% 41% 39% 37% 42% 45% 47% 48% 30% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 47 “Street lighting is a public service that contributes to neighborhood livability and security. Street lighting illuminates hazards in the right-of-way, improving safety for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians.” Street Lights Street Lights PBOT provides street lighting to public streets within the City limits according to City lighting standards. Portland General Electric (PGE) contractually provides electricity for all 55,654 city-owned street lights. Street lighting is a public service that include luminaires, also called “cobra contributes to neighborhood livability heads,” as well as “ornamental lights” that and security. Street lighting illuminates provide character to a neighborhood hazards in the right-of-way, improving or commercial area. PBOT uses safety for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians. three types of efficient lighting: high Street lights are also important for the pressure sodium vapor, induction, security of Portland’s neighborhoods, as and light emitting diodes (LED). they can deter crime. Portland Bureau of Transportation partners with the Office Street light inventory has increased 50% in of Neighborhood Involvement (ONI) the last thirty-five years. Before 1954, only to install street lighting in areas where about a quarter of Portland’s paved streets ONI has identified and evaluated the had lights that met national standards. need for lighting as a crime prevention The advance of Portland’s street lights tool. Local businesses also benefit from 1954 to 1990 was due to street light when street lighting illuminates their levies. However, with the passage of frontages at night and makes them more Measure 5 in 1990, which limits property visible and welcoming to customers. tax revenue for all local governments, City lights are “Dark Sky” friendly, which means that they minimize the amount of light pollution emitted at night. the City Council cancelled the last street PBOT provides street lighting to public light levy and began to transition the streets within the City limits according to street light program to General Fund City lighting standards. Portland General support. Even with restricted funding, Electric (PGE) contractually provides the number of Portland’s street lights electricity for all 55,654 city-owned street has grown by almost 30% since 1990. lights, and maintains 79% of City-owned street lights (“Option B” lights). PBOT maintains the remaining 21% of the system (“Option C”). Street lights “City Council has approved the conversion of the old high pressure sodium (HPS) lights to LEDs. The energy and maintenance savings associated with LEDs will be used to finance the LED conversion and reserve funding to sustain the City's street light program.” STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 49 chapter 9 Condition Street Light condition is evaluated based on age and during field inspections, with employees tracking the kind of luminaire and type of wiring system (underground vs. above ground). Approximately 17% of the street light system is in good or very good condition. Thirty-six percent of lights are in fair condition and the remaining 47% are in poor or very poor condition. of the old high pressure sodium When complete in FY 2016-2017, it (HPS) lights to LEDs. The energy and will reduce total carbon emissions maintenance savings associated with from all City operations by 10%. LEDs will be used to finance the LED conversion and reserve funding to sustain the City’s street light program. PBOT is currently converting to LEDs. Installation has begun in a number of locations and a plan is in development For condition definitions, see Appendix A for converting the remainder of One factor affecting the condition of the conversation schedule, PBOT consulted lighting system is the nature of the street light cables. The cable running under much of the Central Business District is directburial lead-encased cable. This cable is over seventy years old, rapidly deteriorating, and located at depths varying from the City’s lights. When creating the with the Coalition for a Livable Future to undertake an equity assessment of the relamping and LED replacement strategy. This replacement program is also the single largest energy efficiency project the City has ever undertaken. Goal Condition targets reflect the customer expectations that street lights function. Businesses and residents rely on street lights to deter crime and create a sense of safety. A light that is in poor or very poor condition has a high risk of failure, which PBOT aims to minimize. Portland General Electric maintains the City-owned Option B lights per a maintenance agreement and Tariff-Schedule 91. six inches to four feet. Approximately four miles of cable need to be replaced with a maintainable conduit system. LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 80% 78% 80% 46% 100% 25% 90% 95% 100% 90% Cast iron twin ornamentals that were erected in the 1920’s are still in use. % of Option C (City owned and maintained) A replacement program should be lights that are in fair or better condition established, as these lights are past % of Option B lights (City owned and PGE their useful life and have the potential maintained) that are in fair or better condition to fall and cause damage or injury. Many of the City's street light luminaires were replaced in the early 1980's when mercury vapor lights were converted to high pressure sodium light. These luminaires are now reaching the end of their useful life, estimated at 30 years, and will need to be replaced. City Council has approved the conversion % of Option C lights relamped according to the set relamping schedule of 3-5 years. (Programmatic) % of time met set response time of 14 days to respond to option B & C light outages. (Programmatic) % of Option B lights relamped according to the set relamping schedule of 5 years. (Programmatic) 50 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Street Lights Many of these lights are nearing the end of their useful life and will be replaced with the LEDs over the next few years. Once replaced, these lights will be maintained by the City. LEDs last four times longer than the high pressure sodium lamps. Established price agreements for LED luminaire purchase and for field installation to replace the majority of street lights over the next three years. These contracts also include a cooperative agreement clause, allowing other public agencies to purchase off the price agreements Unmet Need for a 1% administrative fee, thus helping to promote energy efficiency With current conditions total in the Portland metropolitan unmet need is almost $60 region and throughout the state. million. However, this figure will Installed LED street lights in a change significantly once the number of locations throughout conversation to LEDs is complete. the City. Locations were chosen using the Equity framework that Accomplishments Installations included the following: Converted 86 street lights to LED in New Columbia Village in North Portland Installed 40 new LED ornamental lights, converted 17 existing ornamental lights and converted 12 cobra head street lights to LED on Foster/Woodstock from SE 87th to SE 101st Ave. Converted 538 street lights to LED in subdivisions in Southeast Portland.  Newly installed LED luminaire was developed in conjunction with the Coalition for a Livable Future. Completed the South Auditorium District Lighting Project, which upgraded 540 ornamental street lights to LED and replaced a 40year old underground system. Maintenance crews at work STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 51 chapter 9 STATUS 2013 2014 44,076 lights 44,027 lights Option C (City owned and Maintained) 11,401 lights 11,627 lights Total 55,477 lights 55,654 lights $196 M $202 M Option B (City owned and PGE Maintain) Replacement Value* *Confidence level of replacement value: low TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE STREET LIGHTS CONDITION TOTAL UNMET NEED VG G F P VP Option B 44,027 $28,001,172 6% 6% 34% 36% 18% $20,671,620 Option C 11,627 $174,405,000 8% 26% 44% 8% 13% $39,104,024 $55,654 $202,406,172 *1% of the Option C lights are condition TBD 52 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 $59,775,644 Street Lights STREET LIGHT INVENTORY 60,000 50, # of lights 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 - 1980 1986 1990 1995 2000 2005 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 CONDITION OF OPTION B + C STREET LIGHTS 70% condition % 60% 2011 2012 2013 2014 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% VERY GOOD GOOD FAIR POOR VERY POOR STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 53 “Street signs are an important safety feature to direct and regulate motor vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. PBOT maintains approximately 163,000 signs.” Street Signs Street Signs Street signs are an important safety feature to direct and regulate motor vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. PBOT maintains approximately 163,000 signs. Street signs are an important safety feature to direct and regulate motor vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. PBOT maintains about 163,000 signs, including regulatory signs (these include black and white speed limit, one-way street, and other notices as well as warning signs for curves or road hazards), street names, and parking signs. Design and placement of signs is regulated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Regulations are published in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Parking signs help manage the availability of parking spots for businesses and residents. In the Central Business District, parking signs for metered spaces help generate revenue for the Bureau of Transportation. All City signs are on sign mounts. The majority of the sign mounts are steel pipe or wood post and are maintained by PBOT’s traffic maintenance crews. The remaining mounts are owned by PBOT’s Street Lighting or Traffic Signals Divisions or by Condition Street signs have a service life of approximately 12-15 years and the sign mounts about 20 years. Many of the signs must be replaced earlier due to vandalism, theft, or damage from crashes. The majority of street name signs and half of parking signs are in poor condition. One emergency crew responds yearround to reports of sign damage (i.e. graffiti, knock-downs, or theft). The crew either replaces or repairs the damaged sign or post. During the winter season there is an increase in sign repair activity since crews are not engaged in other types of tasks that require dry weather, such as striping or pavement maintenance. PBOT conducted a pilot project to assess and monitor the condition of regulatory and warning signs. Going forward, PBOT aims to design a more comprehensive condition assessment program and provide criteria for utility companies. “Design and placement of signs is regulated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Regulations are published in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).” STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 55 chapter 10 preventive maintenance. Such work will play an important part in helping PBOT meet the retroreflectivity standards mandated by the FHWA. Retroflectivity refers to a sign’s ability to reflect light from headlights back towards the vehicle operator, making the sign easier to read in dark conditions. A sample of 400 regulatory signs and warning signs (Stop signs and black and white signs) was evaluated in summer/fall of 2011. Another 527 warning/school/pedestrian/bike and street name signs were inspected in the summer of 2012. This work will continue as PBOT determines the most efficient method of inspecting signs in order to meet federal standards and improve overall sign condition. Goal Regulatory signs including stop signs must be properly positioned and visible both day and night to ensure safety. PBOT’s target of 100% of signs meeting retroreflectivity standards is in accordance with the federal mandate for sign visibility. Unmet Need What do we need to improve Street Signs? An additional $8.9 million will be Prioritization Due to limited funding for sign maintenance, PBOT has established a prioritization plan for replacing and are also prioritized for maintenance by type, in the following order: Regulatory (e.g.. stop signs, fixing signs, based on their location. black and white signs) Signs on high crash corridors and on Warning streets with known safety issues are School/Bike/Ped at the top of the priority list, starting Street name with those recognized as Streets of Parking Citywide Significance (SCS). The next Guide signs to be maintained are those on arterials and collectors (first those on SCS streets, then on non-SCS streets), and finally, signs on local roads (particularly those on Neighborhoods Greenways, or at an intersection with an arterial or collector street). Signs ACCOMPLISHMENTS Sign maintenance occured on 9 out of 10 High Crash Corridors OUTPUTS FY 11-12 FY 12-13 FY 13-14 # Signs Maintained* - - 24,857 # Signs Maintained Per Day - - 1,042 # Sign Locations Maintained 21,983 13,203 - 31 24 - Inspection Hours 1,650 1,215 1,895 # Regulatory Signs Maintained 10,988 7,790 12,767 Avg. # Sign Locations Maintained Per Day needed during the next ten years (Traffic Control) to bring the City’s street signs # Parking Signs Maintained 7,006 8,213 6,987 # Street Name Signs Maintained 6,444 5,385 5,466 # of Posts Repaired, 1,067 1,701 2,818 into fair or better condition. Unmet need is defined as the amount of additional funding and resources needed to bring a given asset class to a fair or better condition and to maintain it at that condition. Straightened or Plumbed *The primary accomplishment was changed in FY 13-14 to number of signs maintained in order to provide a more precise measurement. 56 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Street Signs STATUS 2013 2014 Street Names 39,826 39,347 Parking 56,192 57,449 Regulatory (traffic control) 55,387 56,357 14,885 14,948 Guide Signs 9,758 10,231 Sign Mounts 78,179 69,577 $24.2 M $23.2 M Stop Signs Only Replacement Value* * Confidence level of replacement value: low LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 90% 65% (avg.) % of signs in fair or better condition: Traffic (warning and regulatory) Stop Signs 80% Black & White (e.g. lane control, speed, etc) 38% School/Ped/Bike 90% % of signs meeting retroreflectivity standards Traffic (warning and regulatory) 100% 97%* * Of the sample described in the narrative TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE STREET SIGNS CONDITION TOTAL UNMET NEED VG G F P VP 3% 14% 21% 26% 36% 25% 25% 50% Street Name 39,347 $4,800,334 Parking 57,449 $1,972,278 Regulatory (Traffic Control) 56,357 $3,895,493 20% 27% 18% 25% 10% $2,064,611 14,948 — 22% 30% 28% 13% 7% $562,872 Guide Signs 10,231 $735,951 25% 25% 50% Sign Mounts 69,577 $11,773,438 Stop Signs Only $3,984,277 $1,479,209 TBD $23,177,494 STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 $551,963 $859,779 $8,939,839 JULY 2015 57 “The North-South Portland Streetcar line provides service from Good Samaritan Hospital in Northwest Portland to South Waterfront, while the Central Loop line travels from downtown Portland through the Pearl District and across the Willamette on the Broadway Bridge to the Lloyd District and the Central Eastside.” Portland Streetcar Portland Streetcar The City partners with TriMet, the regional transit agency, and contracts with Portland Streetcar, Inc., a private non-profit corporation governed by a volunteer Board, for assistance with the planning, design, construction and operation of the streetcar. The Streetcar System provides transit circulation services to the Central City, Central Eastside, and other close-in neighborhoods. The Portland Streetcar is owned and from Downtown Portland through the operated by the City of Portland through Pearl District and across the Willamette its Bureau of Transportation. The City on the Broadway Bridge to the Lloyd partners with TriMet, the regional transit District and the Central Eastside. agency, and contracts with Portland Streetcar, Inc., a private non-profit Expansion: In September 2012, the corporation governed by a volunteer Portland Streetcar Loop Project extended Board, for assistance with the planning, streetcar service to the east side of the design, construction and operation Willamette River in support of residents of the streetcar. The Streetcar System and workers in the Oregon Convention provides transit circulation services District, Lloyd District, Central Eastside and to the Central City, Central Eastside, in the OMSI area. The expansion added and other close-in neighborhoods. 4.5 centerline miles of track and three new streetcar vehicles. The Project was Streetcar Mission: To provide comfortable, funded in part by the Small Starts Program convenient connections between of the Federal Transit Administration. housing, employment, educational institutions, services and recreation, In September 2015, the Portland Streetcar encourage local shopping and dining will begin operating across TriMet's to support neighborhoods, reduce Tilikum Crossing Bridge. This will begin automobile dependence for a cleaner Full Loop service, circling the Central future; compliment other transit City in each direction and fulfilling the service by providing the last mile vision from Portland's 1972 Downtown connection and circulator service, and Plan, knitting together the east and support a denser urban environment west banks of the Willamette River. with walkable neighborhoods and healthier communities. Service Characteristics: The North-South streetcar line provides service from Good Samaritan Hospital in Northwest Portland to the South Waterfront, while the Central “In September 2015, the Portland Streetcar will begin operating across TriMet's Tilikum Crossing Bridge. This will begin Full Loop service, circling the Central City in each direction and fulfilling the vision from Portland's 1972 Downtown Plan, knitting together the east and west banks of the Willamette River.” Loop line travels STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-15 JULY 2015 59 c h a p t e r 1 1 Condition Streetcar system condition: Several double-track at SW 4th Avenue and of the traction and electrification SW Montgomery to replace the last components of the system are integral single track section in anticipation to safety and must be maintained of Full Loop operations in 2015. at 100% in fair or better condition. Completed the first annual The threshold for maintaining the inventory audit using the newly tracks and platform is not as high deployed Enterprise Asset because many of the components Management system which tracks span of the cars can be extended. serve a purely aesthetic purpose. inventory, spare parts, and work orders Condition assessments of Streetcars System Reliability: PBOT aims for the Currently all streetcars and tracks are in good or very good condition. The maintenance facilities are also in very good condition. TriMet estimates that the average life span of a streetcar is 30 years, yet with proper monitoring and timely maintenance, the life are conducted on a routine basis. Software on the cars alert maintenance crews to issues that need to be addressed. in the Maintenance program. Streetcar system to provide ontime performance at least 80% of the time during stated operational hours. This is a customer expectation as well as an internal goal. Preventive maintenance is conducted at regular intervals, and as with automobiles, is based upon mileage Unmet Need or time elapsed. The maintenance The unmet need is meant to reflect facility conducts maintenance on the capital replacement needs of the all the electrical, software and streetcars and tracks over a 30 year hardware components. Most period. Although this equipment electronic components have a is in good or better condition, it will lifespan of about 10 years before the need to be replaced at the end of the technology needs modernization. streetcars’ useful life, which TriMet estimates to be 30 years. Currently, PBOT is reassessing the methodology Goal Streetcar condition: For both safety and customer expectations, the condition of the streetcars must be in 100% fair or better condition. If by which the unmet need for the Streetcar is calculated, which is why the unmet need is shown as “to be determined" in the following table. the car condition falls below that Accomplishments level, there is a great safety risk to the Added two US-made vehicles passengers. The cars are composed of to the Streetcar fleet, bringing multiple components including trucks, the total to 16 vehicles. the body, and electrical equipment. Began construction of the Streetcar 60 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Portland Streetcar STATUS 2013 2014 13 16 14.5 centerline miles 14.5 centerline miles 17,871 sq ft 17,871 square feet $122 M $134 M Streetcars Tracks Maintenance Facilities Replacement Value* * confidence level of replacement value: moderate LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 % of streetcars in fair or better condition 100% 100% % of streetcar system in fair or better condition 100% 100% % of on-time performance 80% 80% TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE PORTLAND STREETCAR Streetcars Tracks (centerline miles) Maintenance Facilities CONDITION VG G F TOTAL UNMET NEED P VP 16 $62,489,920 56% 54% TBD 14.5 $66,409,200 52% 48% TBD 17,871 sq ft $4,688,772 100% TBD $133,587,892 STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 61 “Signal synchronization reduces stop-and-go traffic, which lowers greenhouse gas emissions and helps prevent crashes. ” Traffic Signal System Traffic Signal System Traffic signals exist to move people in the City safely and efficiently. Transit, freight and travelers of all modes depend upon traffic signals for safe crossings at intersections. The Portland Bureau of Transportation the Signals, Street Lighting, & ITS Division maintains and operates a traffic signal conduct routine maintenance to ensure system that includes hardware, an that the components of the system are operating system that regulates signal functioning properly. They also respond timing, and the Intelligent Transportation to emergencies, which include all-way red System (ITS), which monitors demand flashing or power outages. Each individual on the system and provides real-time component is integrated to ensure a traveler information on select corridors. functioning and well-timed system. Traffic signals exist to move people in the City safely and efficiently. Transit, freight and travelers of all modes depend Condition The condition of Traffic Signal hardware upon traffic signals for safe crossings and controllers is based upon both age at intersections. In addition to 916 and inspections. Engineers conduct City-owned signalized intersections, condition assessments as needed. PBOT owns other traffic control devices Over half of the City's signals hardware including flashing beacons, overhead was recently inspected. Sixty-nine crosswalk signs, island lights, and school percent of signal hardware is in fair or beacons. These devices control traffic better condition. The remaining 31% speeds or help people safely cross is in poor or very poor condition. For intersections by triggering a flashing condition definitions, see Appendix A. light to alert motorists to stop. A traffic signal failure jeopardizes traffic Engineers respond to citizen complaints safety and the environment. It can lead about safety and determine appropriate to rear-end collisions and hinder the changes to traffic signals or the other movement of freight and emergency devices involved. Signal synchronization response vehicles. Furthermore, reduces stop-and-go traffic, which carbon output increases when lowers greenhouse gas emissions and congestion and idling time is extended. helps prevent crashes. Maintenance and Operations technicians with “In addition to 916 city-owned signalized intersections, PBOT owns other traffic control devices, including: Flashing beacons, overhead crosswalk signs, island lights, and school beacons." STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 63 chapter 12 In 2010, federal stimulus funding improve and maintain the traffic was used to upgrade 11% of signals, but not all of the preventive signal controllers within the City maintenance and replacement needs (mostly on state-owned routes). for the system are being met. Many of the remaining controllers are still operating with 1980s Enhancements for pedestrian technology and need upgrading. crossings, such as rectangular rapid flash beacons, are constructed at the The Signals Division has set standards request of the Traffic Investigations for response time associated with or Capital Project Management critical maintenance of the system. groups. The Signals, Street Lighting, It is PBOT’s goal to respond to & ITS Division lacks the resources traffic signal requests within 48 to add new devices based purely hours and to emergencies within on requests they receive. two hours. These response times are met 98% of the time. Prioritization Limited funds and work hours make Goal The signal system condition target of 80% of signal hardware in fair or better condition was set based upon safety considerations and expectations of system users. If the signal system is in fair or better condition, then outages and delays should be minimized. it necessary to prioritize repairs on the traffic signal system. A prioritization guideline has been created to direct the work of maintenance crews. Traffic signals will be repaired in the following order: First, traffic signal indications in a condition that presents a hazard, i.e. when there is not a redundant red indication at a traffic signal (in Unmet Need What do we need to improve traffic signals? An additional $133 million, over ten years, is needed to bring traffic signals (hardware and controllers) and other equipment into good condition. Unmet need is defined as the amount of additional funding and resources needed to bring a given asset class to a fair or better condition and to maintain it at that condition. other words, a state that may lead to injury or property damage). Second, traffic signals that create a “critical” condition, causing problems that could dramatically affect traffic flow (e.g. light rail signal in flashing state or preemption not working). Finally, all other traffic signal problems neither hazardous nor critical (e.g. pedestrian indication burned out on one side of an intersection). PBOT invests $229,000 per year to 64 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Accomplishments Activated new traffic signal detection confirmation lights at key crossing locations for the bikeways network.  Updated several new traffic signals with low cost improvements to reduce potential for failure. Implemented new traffic signals in support of the Portland to Milwaukie Light Rail Line. Traffic Signal System PBOT OWNED SIGNALS 920 900 # of signals 880 860 840 820 800 780 760 740 1995 4 % - 2005 2010 CONDITION OF SIGNAL HARWARE 2014 2011 2012 2013 2014 0 40% % 35 35% % 30 30% 2 % condition % 5 25% 220% 0% % 15% 15 % 10% 10 5% 5% 0% 0% VERY GOOD GOOD FAIR POOR VERY POOR STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 65 chapter 12 STATUS 2013 2014 Signalized traffic intersections 923 916 Other Equipment (beacons, hawk signals, overhead crosswalk signs, island lights) 298 305 1,225 1,263 Fiber Optic/Copper Cables 288 miles 302 miles Replacement Value* $273.3 M $272.4 M ITS Equipment (cameras, variable message signs, speed reader boards, central computer system, Traffic Operations Center) * Confidence level of replacement value: moderate LEVELS OF SERVICE TARGET FY 13-14 % of signal system in fair or better condition as measured by signal inspections (hardware) 80% 69% Percentage of traffic signal intersections with no failures within the past year 97% 93% TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATUS, CONDITION + VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE TRAFFIC SIGNALS CONDITION TOTAL UNMET NEED VG G F P VP Hardware 916 $247,038,788 32% 17% 20% 11% 20% $125,726,631 Controllers 916 $18,320,000 50% 13% 15% 8% 14% $6,780,000 Equipment (flashing beacons, overhead crosswalk, island lights) 305 TBD 1,263 $1,707,919 91% 0% 9% 0% 0% $153,713 302 miles $5,382,221 50% 42% 0% 0% 8% $0 ITS Equipment Fiber Optic/ Copper Cables TBD $272,448,928 66 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 $132,660,344 .517 . . -. . . . .. . . . “PBOT manages transportation assets worth $9.7 billion. These assets make up the transportation system that helps move people, goods, freight and emergency response vehicles through the City.” Portland Transportation System Status, Condition, and Value FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE PAVEMENT Improved Street - Arterial/Collector Improved Street - Local Unpaved Streets 1,866 lane miles 2,968 lane miles 56.4 centerline miles CONDITION* TOTAL UNMET NEED** VG G F P VP $3,165,171,840 16% 17% 18% 35% 14% $716,000,000 $3,038,737,225 7% 18% 19% 39% 17% $471,000,000 100% N/A N/A TBD $6,203,909,065 SIDEWALK SYSTEM Sidewalks Curbs $1,187,000,000 VG G F P VP $1,074,859,940 10% 25% 30% 25% 10% $499,936,800 12% 50% 16% 12% 10% $129,983,568 37,884 $160,022,016 10% 18% 17% 28% 27% $97,327,841 18,055 N/A 8,883,140 sq yds 3,265 centerline miles TBD N/A Corners Improved Corners Corners with Ramps N/A $1,734,818,756 BICYCLE NETWORK Bikeways $227,311,409 VG 338 centerline miles (included with pavement) STRUCTURES G F P VP TBD 100% TBD VG G F P VP TBD Bridges 156 $610,721,752 8% 41% 35% 16% 0% $151,952,899 Retaining Walls 565 $100,339,035 71% 19% 8% 2% 0% $5,421,740 Stairways 190 $4,759,553 12% 61% 26% 1% 0% $918,603 Guardrails 26 centerline miles $5,628,480 1 $500,000 5,134 feet $186,835,056 Elevator Harbor Wall x TBD 100% TBD 100% $0 $908,783,876 TRAFFIC SIGNALS $158,293,242 VG G F P VP TBD Hardware 916 $247,038,788 32% 17% 20% 11% 20% $125,726,631 Controllers 916 $18,320,000 50% 13% 15% 8% 14% $6,780,000 Equipment (flashing beacons, overhead crosswalk, island lights) 305 TBD 1,263 $1,707,919 91% 0% 9% 0% 0% $153,713 302 miles $5,382,221 50% 42% 0% 0% 8% $0 ITS Equipment Fiber Optic/Copper Cables x $272,448,928 TBD $132,660,344 STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 69 chapter 13 STATUS, CONDITION, AND VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE STREETCAR Streetcars Tracks Maintenance Facilities 16 14.5 centerline miles 17,871 square feet CONDITION* F P TOTAL UNMET NEED** VG G VP TBD $62,489,920 56% 44% TBD $66,409,200 52% 48% TBD $4,688,772 100% TBD $133,587,892 AERIAL TRAM Tramway and Related Structures/ VG 1 $56,225,421 G F P VP TBD 100% $0 Equipment - Upper Station, Tower, Lower Station and Rolling Stock (including Cables) TRAFFIC CALMING Calming Devices 1663 $3,776,600 STREET LIGHTS VG G F P VP 15% 70% 10% 5% VG G F P VP $564,990 Option B (City Own & PGE Maintain) 44,027 $28,001,172 6% 6% 34% 36% 18% Option C (City Own & Maintain) 11,627 $174,405,000 8% 26% 44% 8% 13% 55,654 $202,406,172 STREET SIGNS Street Name 39,347 $4,800,334 Parking 57,449 $1,972,278 Traffic Control 56,357 $3,895,493 Stop Signs Only 14,948 Guide Signs 10,231 $735,951 Sign Mounts 69,577 $11,773,438 TBD TBD $20,671,620 1% $59,775,644 VG G F P VP TBD 3% 14% 21% 26% 36% 25% 25% 50% 20% 27% 18% 25% 10% $2,064,611 22% 30% 28% 13% 7% $562,872 25% 25% 50% $3,984,277 $1,479,209 $551,963 x $23,177,494 $859,779 $8,939,839 VG PAVEMENT MARKINGS $39,104,024 G F P VP TBD Center Lines 697 pass-miles $668,346 50% 50% $334,173 Traffic Lane Lines 110 pass-miles $209,382 50% 50% $104,691 Bike Lane Lines 590 pass-miles $1,124,071 50% 50% $562,036 Edge Lines 276 pass-miles $525,075 50% 50% $262,537 Crosswalks 4,887 $2,939,223 50% 50% $1,469,611 Stop Bars 2,910 $333,642 20% 80% $266,914 Symbols & Words 21,103 $2,075,308 30% 70% $1,452,715 837 $2,148,127 70% 30% $644,438 2,389 $661,458 25% 75% $496,094 Island Markings Parking $10,684,631 70 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 $5,593,209 Portland Transportation System STATUS, CONDITION, AND VALUE FACILITY STATUS REPLACEMENT VALUE PARKING METERS Single Pay Station VG 404 $331,280 1,343 $11,235,538 1,747 $11,566,818 PARKING FACILITIES Parking Garages CONDITION* 85% $116,260,846 VG BUILDINGS F P VP TBD 100% $0 15% $0 $0 VG 6 G TOTAL UNMET NEED** G F 67% 33% G F P VP TBD $0 P VP TBD Albina Yard - Bldg A 1,520 square feet $190,827 100% $95,414 Albina Yard - Bldg B 5,921 square feet $665,992 100% $332,996 Albina Yard - Bldg C 12,037 square feet $832,906 100% $208,227 Albina Yard - Bldg D 9,703 square feet $1,358,439 100% $339,610 Albina Yard - Bldg E 10,917 square feet $1,063,298 Albina Yard - Bldg F 9,835 square feet $915,076 Albina Yard - Slurry Shed 480 square feet $88,621 100% $44,311 Stanton Yard - Kerby Bldg 54,318 square feet $4,540,998 100% $2,270,499 Stanton Yard - Tin Shed 6,000 square feet $443,105 100% $110,776 Valvoline Bldg 7,394 square feet $545,780 100% $136,445 Sunderland Yard - Bldg 1 6,360 square feet $392,734 100% $98,184 Sunderland Yard - Bldg 2 2,470 square feet $126,584 Sunderland Yard - Bldg 3 2,760 square feet $169,860 Sunderland Yard - Bldg 4 3,588 square feet $552,857 Sunderland Yard - Bldg 5 864 square feet $37,703 Sunderland Yard - Bldg 6 360 square feet $225,894 10,470 square feet $3,268,386 Materials Testing Lab FACILITIES SUBTOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY TOTAL 2,050 centerline miles 100% $531,649 100% $228,769 100% $63,292 100% $42,465 100% $276,429 100% $5,661 100% $169,463 100% TBD $15,419,061 $4,954,188 $9,693,055,560 $1,785,092,865 $7,514,036,640 $0 $17,207,092,200 $1,785,092,865 *Not all assets are categorized using a 5-level condition assessment **The unmet need is defined as the amount of additional funding and resources needed to bring (restore) a given asset class to a fair or better condition and to maintain it at that condition. NOTE: N/A= Not Applicable, TBD = To Be Determined, VG= Very Good, G= Good, F= Fair, P= Poor, VP= Very Poor STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 71 Appendix A BRIDGES * NOTE: Pictures of bridge rail are representative of condition described, but may not reflect the overall condition of the bridge to which it is attached. DESCRIPTION NBI CONDITION RATING 2014 CONDITION 8-9 8% 7 41% (Items 58, 59 & 60) VERY GOOD No problems noted. SE Foster Rd over Johnson Creek (Rail) GOOD Some minor problems  N Vancouver Ave over Railroad (Rail) *Derived from FHWA Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation's Bridges **The lowest rating for any of these critical structural elements indicates the rating for the entire bridge. 72 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Asset Condition Definitions FY 13-14 BRIDGES CONT. * NOTE: Pictures of bridge rail are representative of condition described, but may not reflect the overall condition of the bridge to which it is attached. DESCRIPTION NBI CONDITION RATING 2014 CONDITION 5-6 35% 4 16% 0-3 0% (Items 58, 59 & 60) FAIR Primary structural elements are sound but may have minor cracking or spalling.  N Vancouver Ave over Columbia Slough (Rail) – This bridge was rebuilt; however, the picture is representative of fair condition. POOR Deterioration of structural elements and/or weight restricted.  SW Vista Ave over Jefferson Ave (Rail) VERY POOR Serious deterioration of primary structural elements. Local failures are possible.  SW Capitol Hwy over Bertha Blvd (Rail) – This railing was replaced, but this picture is representative of very poor condition. STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 73 SIDEWALKS DESCRIPTION 2014 CONDITION VERY GOOD Newer concrete at correct slope and grade. No cracking beyond control joints. No step separations, spalls, or openings. 10%   GOOD Correct slope and grade. Some cracking beyond control joints. No step separations, spalls, or openings. 25%   FAIR Correct slope and grade. Some step separations, spalls, and openings less than ½ inch.   74 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 30% Asset Condition Definitions FY 13-14 SIDEWALKS CONT. DESCRIPTION 2014 CONDITION POOR Some raised and/or sunken areas. Step separations, spalls, and openings greater than ½ inch. 25%   VERY POOR Some raised and/or sunken areas more than 4 inches from original grade. Step separations, spalls, and openings greater than ½ inch. Some areas of sidewalk missing. 10%   STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 75 CURBS DESCRIPTION 2014 CONDITION VERY GOOD Newer curb on correct slope and grade. No cracking beyond control joints. No spalls or openings. 12%   GOOD On correct slope and grade. Some cracking beyond control joints. No spalls or openings. 50%   FAIR On correct slope and grade. Some cracking beyond control joints. Some spalls and openings less than ½ inch.   76 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 16% Asset Condition Definitions FY 13-14 CURBS CONT. DESCRIPTION 2014 CONDITION POOR Some vertical and horizontal move off original grade evident. Some cracking beyond control joints. Some spalls and openings greater than ½ inch. 12% VERY POOR Some vertical and horizontal movement off original grade with breakage. Cracking, spalling, and openings greater than ½ inch. Areas of curb broken off and/or missing. STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 10% JULY 2015 77 CORNERS DESCRIPTION 2014 CONDITION VERY GOOD Newer corner ramps with tactile warning to current ADA standards. No cracks, step separations, or openings. 10% GOOD Corner ramps without tactile warnings. Correct slope and grade. Some cracks, step separations, and openings less than ½ inch. 18% FAIR Accessible corner ramps without tactile warnings. Slope and grade not to current ADA standards. Some cracks, step separations, and openings less than ½ inch. 78 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 17% Asset Condition Definitions FY 13-14 CORNERS CONT. DESCRIPTION 2014 CONDITION POOR No accessible ramps. Some heaving and/or sunken area(s). Cracks, step separations, and openings less than ½ inch. 28% VERY POOR No accessible ramps. Some heaving and/or sunken areas. Cracks, step separations, and openings greater than ½ inch. STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 27% JULY 2015 79 STREET LIGHTS OPTION B: City Owned and PGE Maintained OPTION C: City Owned and Maintained DESCRIPTION VERY GOOD The street light is in new/near new condition. Everything is working properly. Age: less than 5 years 2014 CONDITION Option C: 8% Option B: 6% Ornamental – Option C Light GOOD Scheduled preventive maintenance will keep the street light operational for the expected design life. Tree trimming around street lights may be necessary so that light is not obstructed from the roadway surface. Option C: 26% Option B: 6% Age: 6 - 15 years Ornamental – Option C Light FAIR The luminaire, pole, and control systems require regular preventive maintenance to keep the street light in operational status. Tree trimming around street lights may be necessary so that light is not obstructed from the roadway surface. Option C: 44% Option B: 34% Age: 16 - 25 years Ornamental – Option C Light POOR Poor = The street lighting system is near to the end of operational design life. Failures have increased due to luminaire, wiring, poles, and/ or control system problems. Preventive maintenance will not reasonably extend the life much longer. Age: 26 - 30 years Ornamental – Option C Light 80 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 Option C: 8% Option B: 36% Asset Condition Definitions FY 13-14 STREET LIGHTS CONT. DESCRIPTION 2014 CONDITION VERY POOR The entire street lighting infrastructure has reached its intended design life and is in need of replacement. Replacement includes the luminaire, supporting arm, pole, wiring, and control systems. Option C: 13% Option B: 18% Age: Over 30 years  Ornamental – Option C Light   Anchor Bolt Deterioration Twin Ornamentals (Option C) blocked by tree branches – reducing effectiveness of lighting. EXAMPLES OF OPTION B LIGHTING:   STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 81 TRAFFIC SIGNAL HARDWARE DESCRIPTION 2014 CONDITION VERY GOOD The signal is in new/near new condition. Everything is working properly. Preventive maintenance of the traffic signal cabinet is the major requirement, but examination of the hardware to be sure everything is nominal is the primary preventive maintenance activity for the hardware. 32% Age: less than 7 years   GOOD Normally scheduled preventive maintenance will keep the signal operational for the expected design life. Timing should be examined and altered to be sure that it meets the operational needs of the intersection. 17% Age: 8 - 14 years FAIR The hardware infrastructure needs regular preventive maintenance to keep the signal in operational status. The signal controller is most likely at the end of its useful life, but a change out of the traffic signal cabinet or a partial replacement of the controller is likely to be needed. Age: 15 - 25 years   82 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 JULY 2015 20% Asset Condition Definitions FY 13-14 TRAFFIC SIGNAL HARDWARE CONT. DESCRIPTION 2014 CONDITION POOR The hardware infrastructure is close to the end of its useful design life. Operational failures have increased due to wiring and support hardware problems. Preventive maintenance can't reasonably extend the life much longer. 11% Age: 26 - 35 years VERY POOR The hardware infrastructure has reached its intended design life and is in need of replacement. Replacement includes the supporting pole and/or span wire as well as the display hardware and signal wiring. 20% Age: 36 - 59 years STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 83 PAVEMENT SYSTEM * NOTE: The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is based upon visual inspection of City streets using the Metropolitan Transportation Commission methodology. DESCRIPTION PCI (0-100) 2014 CONDITION VERY GOOD Pavement structure is stable with no cracking, no patching, no deformation evident. Streets in this condition are fairly new. Riding qualities are excellent. Nothing would improve the street at this time. 85-100 Arterials and Collectors: 16% Locals: 7%   GOOD Pavement structure is stable, but may have surface erosion or minor cracking, minor patching and minor deformation. Riding qualities are very good. Some routine maintenance or rejuvenation of the wearing surface is all that is required.       Locals: 18% FAIR Pavement structure is generally stable with minor areas of structural weakness evident. Cracking is easier to detect. Although riding qualities are good, deformation is more pronounced and easily noticed. Seal coating or nonstructural overlays are required to preserve pavement integrity. 84 S T A T U S A N D C O N D I T I O N R E P O R T F Y 1 3 - 1 4 75-84 Arterials and Collectors: 17% 65-74 Arterials and Collectors: 18% Locals: 19% POOR Street has areas of instability, marked evidence of structural deficiency, large crack patterns, alligatoring, heavy and numerous patches, and very noticeable deformation. Riding qualities range from acceptable to poor. Base repair, grinding, and structural overlays may be required. JULY 2015 40-64 Arterials and Collectors: 35% Locals: 39% Asset Condition Definitions FY 13-14 PAVEMENT SYSTEM CONT. DESCRIPTION PCI (0-100) 2014 CONDITION VERY POOR Cracking and pavement deformation has progressed to the point that pavement is no longer structurally sound. The cost of rehabilitating the existing pavement will likely equal or exceed the cost of complete reconstruction. 0-39 Arterials and Collectors: 14% Locals: 17%   UNPAVED Unpaved streets which are graded and are either dirt or gravel but for which there is no pavement or drainage. 75-84 The City does not maintain these streets. Street improvements are made through the LID process. 56.4 centerline miles   STATUS AND CONDITION REPORT FY 13-14 JULY 2015 85