HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-13-2016 TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDACITY OF AUBURN
TRANSPORTATION
ADVISORY BOARD
SEPTEMBER 13, 2016
AGENDA
I.CALL TO ORDER – 5:30 P.M.COMMUNITY CENTER (910 9TH STREET SE)
II.CONSENT AGENDA
A.APPROVAL OF MINUTES*
III.DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION
A.ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE CITY COUNCIL (Staff)
B.DRAFT ANNUAL STATE OF OUR STREETS REPORT* (Staff)
C.DRAFT ADA TRANSITION PLAN (Staff)
D. CURRENT TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM FUNDING (Staff)
E.MEETING SCHEDULE
IV.ADJOURNMENT
*Denotes attachments included in the agenda packet.
Page 1 of 26
CITY OF AUBURN
TRANSPORTATION
ADVISORY BOARD
March 24, 2016
DRAFT MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Community Development and Public Works Director Kevin Snyder called the meeting to order at
5:35 p.m. in Council Chambers, located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 W Main Street,
Auburn, Washington. Committee members present were: Pamela Gunderson, Barb Atrops, Tyler
Cushing, Andrew Serr, Jeanette Miller, Ronald Riley, Michael Harbin Jr, Steve Carstens, Dennis
Moore, Dezarae Hayes, Roger Gillette, Katie Chalmers, Dennis Grad and Jim Wilson. Also present
during the meeting were: Assistant Director/City Engineer Ingrid Gaub, Transportation Manager
Pablo Para, Traffic Engineer James Webb, City Attorney Dan Heid, Director of Administration Dana
Hinman, Administrative Assistant Molly Mendez and Office Assistant Angie Sherwin.
II. INTRODUCTIONS AND ORIENTATION
A. PUBLIC RECORDS/OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT TRAINING (HEID)
City Attorney Heid presented training on the rules and regulations for the Public Records Act
and the Open Public Meetings Act.
B. ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES AND FORMAT OF THE MEETINGS (SNYDER/GAUB)
The format for future meetings will be for the board, working with City staff, to set the agenda,
generate discussions and present recommendations and advice to the City Council on
transportation topics.
III. ACTION
A. ELECTION OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
Assistant Director/City Engineer Gaub explained the roles for Chair and Vice Chair. Currently
the term for Chair and Vice Chair is 2 years. Without any additional questions from the board,
Director of Community Development and Public Works Snyder brought to motion the
nomination or volunteer for the TAB Chair and Vice Chair positions. Jim Wilson volunteered for
Chair. Motion carried. Pamela Gunderson volunteered for Vice Chair. Motion carried.
IV. DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION
A. TRANSPORTATION GROUP ORGANIZATIONAL BRIEFING (PARA)
Transportation Manager Para presented an overview of the transportation department; staffing,
responsibility, functions, area coverage, neighborhood safety, Comprehensive Transportation
Plan, funding and development review. Para then opened the floor for questions. There was a
group discussion regarding the annexation of Lea Hill, Traffic Impact Fees/Fund, Mitigation
fees, and the overall project/work load for current and long term transportation issues. Assistant
Director/City Engineer Gaub explained the Funding for the Traffic Impact Fee program; which is
city wide, not area level. The Transportation Department will be requesting another FTE in the
next budget to assist in handling the increasing level of transportation staffing needs specifically
related to traffic signal management, operations and maintenance. The staffing budget comes
from the general fund and not transportation project funding or grants. Because of additional
Page 2 of 26
funding concerns, Assistant Director/City Engineer Gaub clarified information from an article in
the Auburn Reporter about revenue from Auburn W ay South, Dogwood to Hemlock project.
B. SEASONAL EVENT TRAFFIC PLANNING (PARA)
Transportation Manager Para spoke of the traffic impacting events occurring this year; the rules
and restrictions during concerts, July 4th, etc. Staffing and scheduling considerations are made
to assist with keeping traffic moving.
C. 2017 – 2022 TIP UPDATE (WEBB)
Each member received an emailed electronic file or hard copy of the 2016-2021 Transportation
Impact Plan, the 2017-2022 Transportation Improvement Program Summary, the 2016 Summer
Traffic Event Dates, the Auburn City Code Chapter 2.94 – Auburn Transportation Advisory
Board and the Transportation Section PowerPoint.
Traffic Engineer Webb discussed a general overview of the TIP, funding, Traffic Impact Fee,
the cost of some projects, and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The topic of pass
through traffic and the potential of a usage fee in the future and other pilot programs were
discussed. If state highway improvements are made, the benefit will be the reduction in through
traffic using city streets. Ideas mentioned for potential revenue; car tab or state sales tax used
for roadway funding.
The Sound Transit garage also attracts pass through traffic. The commuter garage is currently
free to use with a potential future fee. City of Auburn residents can purchase off-street permit
parking in the vicinity of the parking garage. A second garage is currently 7 or more years out
from completion. Several outlying areas that may use the Sounder are not making tax based
contributions to fund Sound Transit. Funding for pedestrian and bike use is a priority for the
City, with a number of improvement projects included in the TIP. Examples of many projects
were given. TIP program 31, 32 and 33 are specific to this concern. Generating revenue
through a bike fee is not possible because currently the state legislature does not allow a fee
for licensing bicycle users.
D. ADA TRANSITION PLAN PROCESS (WEBB)
Agencies are required to have an ADA Transition plan that describes the needs of the
community within the public right-of-ways for addressing ADA barriers and concerns and
includes the policies and priorities for addressing these needs over time.
Traffic Engineer Webb discussed inventory (ramps, lights, etc.), strategy for improvements and
greatest needs. The identification of these priority locations will most likely be, for example;
around schools, libraries, the hospital, etc.
In closing, Director of Community Development and Public Works Snyder gave a summary
reminding the board of the purpose of the group. Transportation Manager Para and Traffic
Engineer Webb will be the person(s) of contact for additional questions.
E. NEXT MEETING SCHEDULE
There was a group discussion on availability for the next meeting. The group agreed that
Tuesday, September 13th, at 5:30 pm would be kept tentative for the next quarterly meeting.
Page 3 of 26
V. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Transportation Advisory Board, the meeting
was adjourned at 7:46 p.m.
Approved this _______ day of _________________________, 2016.
Jim Wilson Angie Sherwin
Chairman Engineering Office Assistant
Page 4 of 26
2015
STATE OF OUR STREETS REPORT
Mayor Nancy Backus
Council members
Claude DeCorsi
John Holman
Wayne Osborne
Bill Peloza
Yolanda Trout
Rich Wagner
Largo Wales
25 West Main St.
Auburn, WA 98001
Page 5 of 26
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This purpose if this report is to document the pavement preservation programs process, current
infrastructure conditions, program progress, and forecasted needs of the approximately 245
centerline miles of paved roadways owned and maintained by the City. City owned paved alleys
and gravel roads are maintained by the Maintenance & Operations service area and are not
included in this report.
The City manages the roadway pavement infrastructure through two separate programs. The
Arterial Street Preservation Program covers the “classified” roadways consisting of
approximately 70 centerline miles of Arterials and 30 centerline miles of Collectors. The Local
Street Preservation Program is responsible for the “unclassified” roadways consisting or
approximately 145 centerline miles of residential and non-residential local streets.
The State of our Streets overall has improved over the past several years and will continue to see
gains with improved resourcing. Recent City success in securing federal grants have helped
leverage existing city funds for increased preservation capacity of the Arterial Street Program;
however, without additional resourcing in the Arterial program many more lane miles of roads
are at risk of failure. The local street system continues to see positive gains overall.. In 2015,
roadway improvements and preservation projects accounted for approximately $6.3 million
dollars of investment in city road infrastructure. The current estimated street conditions including
improvements made during 2015 are shown in Table 1.
Table 1 – Current System Pavement Ratings
2013
Pavement
Rating
Including 2015
Improvements*
Miles
Average
Weighted
PCI
Average
Weighted PCI
Change
in
Average
Weighted
PCI
All Streets in
System 245 61 65 4
Arterial Streets 70 55 59 4
Collector Streets 30 57 64 7
Local Streets 145 67 69 2
*numbers do not factor in pavement degradation from 2013 to 2016
Page 6 of 26
PRESERVATION PROGRAM PROCESS
PAVEMENT INVENTORY & RATING
The pavement condition survey that is conducted by the City’s service providers every few years
is a semi-autonomous process where technicians drive over each road in the street system to rate
the condition. The vehicle is equipped with high grade Global Positioning System (GPS)
equipment as well as a laser measuring device to measure the depth of rutting present in each
lane and to measure the roughness of the ride. All of this is done as one of the technicians
visually rates each segment of pavement based on the amount of surface distress that is present,
the amount of damage and distress is called the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), while the GPS
is used to tie all of the data collected in the field to the street network maps of the City of
Auburn’s Geographic Information System (GIS). The PCI ratings, rut depths, and roughness of
ride are all measures that help to determine when a stretch of pavement is due for rehabilitation
or replacement. The three metrics are used to rate a pavement segment as very good, good, fair,
poor, or very poor. A good condition pavement is smooth with few defects while a poor
condition pavement is characterized by cracking, patching, rutting and roughness. Pavement
segments are prioritized for rehabilitation based on the condition survey, along with input from
several of the City’s departments to determine which streets are packaged into a particular street
project.
The City of Auburn, like most cities, utilizes a Pavement Management Database to track
pavement condition, and manage the street system on a Citywide basis. City staff has evaluated
the data, and have noted that there has been a downward movement in the pavement ratings
between the survey completed in 2006/2008 and the most recent survey completed in 2013.
There are several reasons for the downward movement in pavement conditions. The previous
pavement management software that the City employed used the 2006/2008 pavement rating
survey data to forecast pavement conditions in subsequent years, and with only one data point in
the system it did not do an adequate job of predicting the actual rate of decline for each street
over the years since 2006/2008. Additionally, the pavement rating data collected in 2013 was far
more comprehensive than previous surveys. In the 2006/2008 survey, a typical street was rated
on the condition of an approximate 1,000 square foot area, and then that rating was applied to
the entire length and width of a street segment. Because of the advancements in the technology
available for this type of work, the 2013 pavement condition rating survey used a more
automated process for collecting the pavement conditions over the entire length and width of
each street segment. Essentially, the 2013 survey rated more square yards of actual pavement
rather than rating a 1,000 square foot “representative” area. There are several other factors that
play a role in pavement degradation. Including the pavement age, thickness, base materials, and
traffic loading.
In the case of the Arterial and Collector street conditions, we are aware that many of our aging
Arterial and Collector Streets, while constructed to the standards at the time, are inadequate for
the amount of vehicle loading that they carry today. Having more accurate information allows us
to make better projections of future conditions and budget needs for long range planning.
Page 7 of 26
SETTING THE BAR
The goal for the preservation programs is to maintain the entire street network at a Pavement
Condition Index (PCI) Score of 70 or greater. The PCI of a street is an estimated measure of the
amount of visible cracking, rutting and roughness of a particular segment of roadway. Every
street in the network is rated periodically, and those scores are used to indicate when a particular
street is in need of some sort of preservation, rehabilitation, or replacement. Pavement rating
surveys should be completed every two to three years. The most recent comprehensive Street
Rating Survey was done in 2013 with another underway in 2016.
WHAT DO THE NUMBERS MEAN?
The City measures pavement condition using the PCI for each street in the network. PCI values
represent pavement condition based on a scale from 0 to 100 with 100 being newly constructed
pavement and 0 indicating a pavement that has failed. The City’s goal is to maintain a Citywide
PCI at or above 70.
PCI values generally indicate surface condition and are useful in indicating the best time to
repair the pavement. The most cost effective time to preserve pavements is when the PCI ratings
are in the 50-70 range, because the pavement repair typically requires relatively less expensive
treatments that preserve the existing pavement. Additionally, pavement condition tends to
diminish at an accelerated rate after they have reached a PCI range of 50-70. Pavements with
moderate to low PCI values usually require more expensive rehabilitative treatments. Pavements
with very low PCI values are often unsalvageable and have to undergo a very expensive rebuild.
Table 2 below shows the various pavement preservation treatments used for different PCI
ranges, and the typi cal life span and approximate cost of each treatment.
Page 8 of 26
Table 2 - Pavement Preservation Treatments
Pavement
Condition Typical Treatment
Typical
Life of
Treatment*
Typical
Cost
PCI 90 - 100
Like-New
Condition
No Treatment Needed N/A N/A
PCI 70 - 89
Good
Condition
Seal Cracks – Cracks are sealed with liquid asphalt to
prevent water from penetrating the pavement and weakening
the base material that forms the foundation for the pavement.
3 - 5
years
$0.75
per square
yard
PCI 50 - 69
Fair
Condition
Patching and Thin Overlay – Broken pavement is
replaced (patched) to renew the load carrying ability of the
existing pavement. Then the road is overlaid with a thin layer
of pavement (1.5 inch or less in depth) to preserve the existing
pavement and provide a smooth driving surface.
15 years
$25 to $30
per square
yard
Chip Seal – A thin layer of liquid asphalt is sprayed over the
entire pavement surface and then covered with a thin layer of
aggregate. Chip seals typically do not last as long as a thin
overlay nor do they provide as smooth of a driving surface.
3 - 10
years
$5 to $7
per square
yard
PCI 25 - 49
Poor
Condition
Extensive Patching and Overlay – Same treatment as
above only more extensive patching is typically required.
(Some streets in this condition require a thicker overlay of 2
inches or greater).
15 - 20
years
$35 to $45
per square
yard
Double Chip Seal – A thin layer of liquid asphalt is sprayed
over the entire pavement surface and then covered with a thin
layer of aggregate, then this process is repeated a second
time. Based on experience, the City has found that double
chip seals typically last longer than single chip seals,
especially when the existing pavement is in poor condition.
3 - 10
Years
$10 - $15
per square
yard
PCI 0 - 24
Very Poor
Condition
Rebuild Pavement – Existing pavement is completely
removed and a new road is constructed.
20
years
$160 to
$210
per square
yard
*Life of treatment will vary based on the traffic volume and type of vehicles that use the street, the strength of the pavement and
underlying soil, the age of the existing pavement, and the amount of vehicle turning/stopping movements on the street.
Page 9 of 26
International Roughness Index (IRI)
The International Roughness Index (IRI) was developed by the World Bank in the 1980s. IRI is
used to define the characteristic ride of a traveled wheel path and constitutes a standardized
roughness measurement. The commonly used units are inches per mile (in/mi) or meters per
kilometer (m/km). The IRI is based on a standardized vehicle’s accumulated suspension motion
(in inches, mm, etc.) divided by the distance traveled by the vehicle during the measurement
(in/mi, m/km, etc.).
Roughness is an important pavement characteristic because it affects not only ride quality but
also vehicle delay costs, fuel consumption and maintenance costs; also, the general public
perception of a good road is one that provides a smooth ride. The citywide map showing
deficient ride quality is shown on Map 8. In the pavement rating survey that was completed in
2013, IRI data was collected and recorded on a zero to one hundred scale. Several State agencies
actually use IRI as a parameter for street selection for improvement projects. The City of
Auburn has not established a policy on the use of IRI data for managing the street system;
however, citizens do comment on the ride quality of many of our city streets and it helps to be
able to anticipate issues that may arise in the future.
Rating Rank Description
80 – 100 Excellent Very smooth
60 – 80 Good Smooth with a few bumps or depressions
40 – 60 Fair Comfortable with intermittent bumps or depressions
20 – 40 Poor Uncomfortable with frequent bumps or depressions
0 – 20 Very Poor Uncomfortable with constant bumps or depressions
Pavement Rut Depth Measurement
The City measures pavement Rut Depth with an automated laser rut measuring device. The rut
depth is measured for each lane of each street in the network, and then averaged over the length
of each street segment. Pavement rutting can create safety issues if the depth of the rut is deep
enough to interrupt the flow of water across the cross slope of the road. These issues directly
affect a vehicles ability to handle and stop in normal traffic situations. The Washington State
Department of Transportation considers a rut depth of greater than 0.5-inch to be a maximum
threshold before it triggers a pavement maintenance operation to be performed. The maximum
threshold value makes sense for WSDOT since the highway system has a much greater average
speed limit than a regular surface road, and WSDOT’s standard cross slope for a road is 2%.
The City of Auburn Arterial roads typically have a range of speeds between 30 mph and 45 mph,
with a Standard design cross slope of 3%. A 3% cross slope and the lower speeds of City streets
results in lower risk of hydroplaning. The rut depth information that was collected during the
last pavement rating survey is illustrated on Map 9. The Arterial and Collector roadways that
have rut depths that are between 0.25-0.5-inch range and the roads that exceed the 0.5-inch
threshold are shown on the map. Local Streets are not shown due to their low speeds and low
traffic volumes.
Page 10 of 26
AUBURN’S STREET SELECTION PROCESS
The City surveys Auburn’s street system and rates each street segment as discussed in the
previous section. Since the repair costs for the overall system far exceed what the City can fund
in any given year, the City then prioritizes, narrows and selects a limited number of streets for
each of the annual street preservation programs.
There are many factors the City must consider when determining which streets to rebuild and or
rehabilitate each year. One of the most important factors the City considers when choosing
which streets to rebuild is the availability of utility funds to pay for any needed utility
replacement or rehabilitation work. Many of the water, sewer and storm drainage utility mains
that exist under the City’s roadways need to be replaced due to condition, age of pipes, pipe
material type, or there may be a need for a system upgrade. Replacing the utility mains at the
same time as street restoration is more economical and disturbs the neighboring residences only
once. Additionally, it prevents a newly restored or treated surface from being damaged by
trenching that’s needed to replace underground utilities following new roadway construction.
Consultation with the City’s maintenance staff is also done when selecting streets to restore or
rebuild. Maintenance and Operations staff help to identify streets that are beyond what they can
adequately maintain themselves or where excessive staff time is being spent on temporary
repairs. Streets that require more attention by staff are given a higher priority. Streets with
significant drainage problems and poor ride quality are also given consideration. Additionally
City staff consider the volume of vehicles per day, businesses and residents being served by the
street; coordination with third party utility companies; and coordination with private property
developments when selecting streets to improve each year.
Page 11 of 26
PRESERVATION PROGRAMS OVERVIEW
ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION PROGRAM
The Arterial and Collector Preservation program is responsible for maintaining the overall
condition of nearly 100 centerline miles of roadway that are vital to our City. These roads carry
the vast majority of our citizens, goods and services to and from our regional growth center and
connect our communities to the greater Puget Sound Region. The Arterial Street Preservation
Program has focused almost exclusively on preservation treatments given the lack of funding to
complete much needed major reconstruction projects. However, the appropriation of surplus
Real Estate Excise tax (REET) funding by the City Council, favorable bids on several recent
projects, and the successful acquisition of federal grant funds have generated sufficient capacity
in the existing budget to program the reconstruction of B Street NW between 37th St NW and S
277th St which is the worst arterial street segment in the network.
The goal of the Arterial Preservation program is to improve the Arterial and Collector network to
an overall PCI of 70 (out of 100 scale rating). The current condition of the Arterial and Collector
roadway network is in fair condition (PCI Rating of 60). Over the next several years the City has
secured federal grant funding for several projects which will help leverage existing city funds to
better improve the system health. The current Arterial and Collector Street network PCI
conditions are shown on Map 2. The currently funded 2016 through 2020 Arterial Street
preservation projects are shown on Map 1.
LOCAL STREET PROGRAM
The Local Street Preservation Program is responsible for maintaining the pavement on
approximately 145 miles of roadways throughout the city. Each year that number grows with the
construction of development driven projects. In the beginning years of the Local Street
Preservation Program, formerly the “Save Our Streets Program”, the program focused on
preserving streets in fair to poor condition. In 2009, after making significant progress on these
roads the City refocused the program to rebuilding streets that were in very poor condition.
The goal of the Local Street Preservation Program is to improve the Local Street system to an
overall PCI rating of 70 (out of 100 scale rating). The current condition of the Local Street
network is in fair condition (PCI Rating of 69). The Local Street Preservation Program is very
close to achieving its goal and with the increase in private construction over the last couple of
years resulting in additional funds being available for the program, we feel that we can reach our
goal. The current Local Street network PCI conditions are shown on Map 3. Local Street
Improvements scheduled for 2016 and 2017 are shown in Map 7.
Page 12 of 26
PRESERVATION PROGRAMS FUNDING
ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUNDING
The Arterial Street Preservation Program is funded by a 1% utility tax which has supported
annual budgets of approximately $1.8 Million over that past few years. This funding has
remained relatively stable however, is insufficient to complete the reconstruction work needed to
reach the overall system PCI maintenance goal. Beginning in 2012, the City has successfully
obtained federal grant funding for 7 projects leveraging City funds spent on preserving our
arterial system. However, these federal funds are subject to competitive selection and should not
be relied upon as a stable source of funding. The grant funded street and preservation projects
starting in 2016 through 2020, are shown on Map 2 and detailed below in Table 2:
TABLE 2 - GRANT FUNDED STREET PROJECTS
Year Project Title From To City
Funding
Grant
Funding
Total
Project
Investment
2016
West Main Street Multi-Modal
Corridor and ITS Improvements
Project
West
Valley
Highway
Interurban
Trail $676,060 $3,774,340 $4,450,400
2016-
17
S 277th St Corridor Capacity & Non-
motorized Trail Improvement Project
Auburn
Way N Green River $607,386 $5,020,700 $5,628,086
2017 Auburn Way North Preservation
Project
22nd St
NE 45th St NE $875,000 $875,000 $1,750,000
2017 Lake Tapps Parkway Preservation
Project (Pierce County) City Limits
Lakeland
Hills Way
SE
$212,850 $750,000 $962,850
2017 15th Street NW/NE and Harvey Rd
Preservation Project SR167 8th St NE $917,500 $817,500 $1,735,000
2018 Auburn Way North Preservation
Project Phase 2
8th St NE
Vic. 22nd St NE $618,280 $889,720 $1,508,000
2019 Auburn Way North Preservation
Project Phase 3 SR18 8th St NE
Vic. $975,140 $975,194 $1,950,333
2020 A Street SE Preservation Project East Main
St 17th St SE $881,798 $881,798 $1,763,596
TOTALS-> $5,764,014 $13,984,252 $19,748,265
Page 13 of 26
LOCAL STREET PRESERVATION FUNDING
In 2004 Auburn Citizens approved a property tax levy to fund local street preservation projects
under the “Save Our Streets” program. Property taxes continued as the primary funding source
for the Local Street Preservation Program until 2012. Starting in 2013 City Council changed the
primary funding source to sales tax on new construction. Over the last several years of funding
available has varied between $1.8 to $2.6 Million Dollars. 2017-2018 programs are currently
forecast to be funded at approximately $2.5 Million dollars in each of the budget years.
Page 14 of 26
WORKING HARD
The City of Auburn had three major paving projects in construction in 2015 which were funded
by the Arterial and Collector Street Preservation and Local Street Preservation funds. The 2014
Citywide Arterial Pavement Patching and Overlay Project, Map 4, was carried forward to Spring
2015 in order to complete the project
in better weather conditions and to
take advantage of a more favorable
bidding period. The 2015 Citywide
Arterial Pavement Patching and
Overlay Project, Map 5, was
awarded in the Summer of 2015 and
completed construction in early
2016. Lastly, the 2015 Local Street
Pavement Reconstruction Project,
Map 6, was constructed during the
Summer and Fall of 2015. These
projects and a couple utility projects
that had pavement restoration
components accounted for
preservation or reconstruction of over 11 miles of Auburn roadways including; 0.9 miles of
pavement reconstruction; 2.4 miles of pavement patching and overlay; 4.8 miles of pavement
grind and overlay; and 3.4 miles of extensive pavement patching.
2015 PRESERVATION PROJECTS
2014 Citywide Pavement Patching and Overlay Project
This project improved City Streets by grind and overlay of 1 mile of Arterial and Collector
streets, pavement patching on 9.5 lane-miles of arterial and collector streets; thick overlay of 0.4
lane-miles of Arterial and Collector streets; and thin overlay of 1 lane-mile of local residential
streets as part of the Save Our Streets Program; and replacement of 30 curb ramps to be
compliant with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements in the project area as
shown on Map 4. This work was funded by Local Street and Arterial Street Preservation
Program funds.
2015 Citywide Pavement Patching and Overlay Project
This project preserved and enhanced City streets by grinding and overlaying approximately 1
mile of arterial and collector streets, patching pavement on approximately 2 miles of arterial and
collector streets, and applying a thin overlay to over 3/4 miles of local residential streets as
shown on Map 5. The project also replaced 28 curb ramps at the various project sites so they are
compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. This work was funded
by Local Street and Arterial Street Preservation Program funds.
2015 Local Street Pavement Reconstruction Project
Figure 1: XXX Street Grind & Overlay
Page 15 of 26
This project reconstructed 0.9 miles of Local Streets including; 7th Street SE between A St SE
and Auburn Way S; D Street SE between Auburn Way S and 12th St SE; D Street SE between
37th St SE and 41st St SE; and the east half of K Street SE between 17th St SE and 21st St SE. The
Project also installed 1,365 lineal feet of sanitary sewer main, 3,563 lineal feet of 8-inch water
main, new side sewer services for 33 residents, and new water services for 51 residents along the
project streets, and replaced a total of 41 curb ramps at the project sites so they are compliant
with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The streets are shown on the
Map 6. This work was funded by the Local Street Preservation Program, Water Utility Funds,
and Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds.
2016 PRESERVATION PROJECTS
2016 Local Street Reconstruction and Preservation Project
The planned improvements to be completed in 2016 include reconstruction of 0.6 miles and
overlay of 0.7 miles of local streets. The Project will also install over 2,600 lineal feet of storm
drainage mains, approximately 2,700 lineal feet of new water mains, new water services for 70
residents along the project streets, and will replace a total of 36 curb ramps at the project sites so
they are compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The streets
are shown on the attached Map 7. This work is funded by the Local Street Preservation Program
and Water Utility Funds.
2016 Arterial Preservation Projects
Projects in design or construction using Arterial and Collector Street Preservation Program funds
include:
2016
•West Main Street Multimodal Corridor and ITS Improvements
•37th Street SE and A Street SE Traffic Signal Safety Improvement Project
•S 277th St Corridor Capacity & Non-motorized Trail Improvement Project
Page 16 of 26
FUTURE PLANNED PRESERVATION PROJECTS
2017
• Auburn Way North Preservation Project, Phase 1 – 45th St NE to 22nd St NE
(Delayed due to poor bids)
• B Street NW Reconstruction Project – 37th St NW to S 277th ST
• 15th Street NW/NE and Harvey Rd Preservation Project – SR-167 to 8th St
NE
• M Street SE, E Main to 3rd St SE Improvement Project
• Lake Tapps Parkway Preservation Project Construction Lakeland Hills Way
to Western City Limits
• 2017 Local Street Reconstruction Project Construction
2018
• Auburn Way North Preservation Project, Phase 2 – 22nd St NE to 8th St NE
2019
• Auburn Way North Preservation Project, Phase 3 – 8th St NE to 4th St SE
2020
• A Street SE Preservation Project – 3rd St SE to 17th ST SE
Staff will be conducting street selection processes for the Arterial and Local Street Programs to
identify additional streets that need to be addressed, and to prepare a long range plan to meet
those needs in budget years 2017, 2018 and 2019. Those streets will be prioritized and packaged
together in projects for each year. At the time of this report, the Local Street Program has
identified project streets for reconstruction and thin overlay for the 2017 budget year and the
Arterial Street Preservation Program has won several competitive grants for budget years 2016
through 2020.
Page 17 of 26
FUTURE NEEDS
Moving forward, we anticipate several issues that will need to be addressed and managed. One
issue is that the data from the latest pavement rating survey in 2013, when compared to the
previous pavement rating surveys, suggests that as the pavement ages the condition of the
pavement is degrading at an accelerated
rate. Since the previous pavement
ratings are from 2006, and 2008, it is
difficult to draw this conclusion
accurately. The need for additional
data is key to managing the City’s
pavement network. We need to be able
to focus our energy on the correct
projects at the correct times to
maximize the use and benefit of our
funding. Staff has contracted for a
2016 pavement rating survey that is
currently underway. That data should
be available for use by November of
2016. At that time we’ll be able to analyze the data and determine if we are focusing our limited
resources in the most appropriate locations. If the data shows that the pavement is in fact
degrading at an accelerated rate, then additional funding to preserve more of the existing
pavements may be needed to obtain the City’s desired goal of a average PCI rating of 70.
Another issue is that as we continue to improve the streets that can be preserved by conventional
methods, we have more Arterial and Collector streets that are in various states of disrepair and
will need to be reconstructed in the next several years. Many of our Arterial and Collector
streets don’t have adequate pavement structure to endure the current level of traffic that uses
them, so preserving these roads may not result in good long term performance. The reduced
structure for these major roads may also contribute to an accelerated decline in pavement
condition. The cost of rebuilding one of these roadways requires combining several years of
funding, at the current funding levels. Additional funding streams will need to be identified to
address the larger issues on our Arterial and Collector street network. The longer we wait to
reconstruct a street means greater costs to maintain the street; additional complaints from the
travelling public; and greater strain on existing funding sources to address these issues.
With the progress that has been made on reconstructions over the past several years the Local
Street preservation program will shift resources towards preserving more roads in good
condition. The list of Local Streets that need to be reconstructed is shrinking and will be
prioritized to align with those of the City utilities planned replacement programs. This approach
will continue to improve the condition of the Local street network overall without creating an
undue burden on the City Utility funds.
Figure 2: Grind & Overlay XXX St SE
Page 18 of 26
Page 19 of 26
L A K E
L A K ETA P P S
TA P P S
TS18
TS18
S 277TH ST
24TH ST E
SE 274TH ST
PACIFIC AVE SJOVITABLVDE 132ND AVE SEELLINGSON RD SW
SE 272ND ST
8TH ST E
WESTVALLEYHWY140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST
WEST VALLEY HWY S108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NWM
I
L
I
T
A
R
Y
R
D
S
STEWART RD SWWEST
VALLEYHWYEVALENTINE AVE SE68TH AVE S124TH AVE SE116TH AVE SE142NDAVEESTEWART RD SE A ST SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE 272ND ST
WEST
V
A
L
L
EYHWYSS 2 7 7T H S T
124TH AVE SE12TH ST EMILITARY RD S182ND AVE EAUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE9THST E
S 288TH ST
2
1
0
T
H
A
V
E
E
16TH ST E
S2
72N
D
WAY
214TH AVE EA
U
B
U
R
N-E
N
U
M
C
L
A
W
R
D
SAUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167
TS167
A ST SEI ST NEAU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE51ST AVE S124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST
C ST NW15TH ST SW
W MAIN ST
15TH ST NW
SE 304TH ST
E MAIN ST
LAK E T A P PSPKW YS E
29TH ST SE
SE 312TH ST
KER
SEYWAYSE
8TH ST NE
37TH ST NW
LA
K
E
L
A
N
DHI
LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST
P
E
A
S
L
EYCANYON RD S DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST
321ST ST S
AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SED ST NE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ESE304THWAYSE 281ST ST
17TH ST SE
6TH ST SE SE30 4 T H ST112TH AVE SEA ST SEC ST NE2ND ST E
STUCK RIVER D R SE
53RD ST SE
SE 288TH ST
37TH ST SE M ST NE4 1 ST ST SE
22ND ST NE
17TH ST SE
S 296TH ST
25TH ST SE
12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SE55TH AVE SEAST BLVDA
C
A
D
E
M
Y
DRSE110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE
E
N
RIVERRDSE
N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST
SCENIC
D
R
S
E
62NDST SE56TH AVE SA ST NEK ST SE144THAVESEEVERGRE E N W A Y S ED ST NEF ST SET ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE ST NEBRIDGET AVE SEH ST SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1
0
5
THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE
56TH ST SE
S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNW54TH AVE S28TH ST NE
E MAIN ST
30TH ST NE
51S T S T N E
26TH ST SE
3 5 T H W A Y S E
S 300TH ST
B ST NE36T HSTSEO
L
I
V
EAVESES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y
29TH ST NW
ASTE
24TH ST SE
SE 298TH PL
HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G E D R SE23RD ST SE 22ND ST SE85TH AVE SG ST NES 288TH ST
O ST SESE 282ND S T
64TH AVE S111THPLSE49TH ST NE
58TH AVE S20 TH ST SE
SE 286TH ST
108THAVESEHICR EST D RNW1
0
4
T
H
P
L
S
E
16TH ST SE
148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE
73RD ST SE
3 7 T H W A YSET ST NW57TH ST SES292NDST
SE 285TH ST
ELM ST SESE312T
H
W
AY61ST STSE GINKGOSTSE15TH ST SET ST NE45TH S T NE
S 303RD PL
19TH ST SE
S 302ND PL
21ST ST SE
33RD ST SE
55TH ST SE
RANDALL AVE SE63R D P L S E WARD AVE SE107TH PL SE55THWAYSE
43RD ST NE
63RD PL S59TH AVE S133RD AVE SEFIR ST SES 326TH CT 66TH AVE SSE 314TH PL
S 328TH ST
S 321ST ST
S ST SE65TH ST SEJ PL NE56TH AVE SB ST SE57TH ST SEF ST SEK ST SE118TH AVE SEN ST NES 292ND ST
R ST NEGSTSE56TH AVE S17T H S T S E
EVERGREENWAYSEM U C K L E S H O O T
M U C K L E S H O O TC A S I N O
C A S I N O
T H E
T H E
O U T L E T
O U T L E T
C O L L E C T I O N
C O L L E C T I O N
K E N T
K E N T
K I N G
K I N GC O U N T Y
C O U N T Y
P I E R C E
P I E R C EC O U N T Y
C O U N T Y
PA C I F I C
PA C I F I C
S U M N E R
S U M N E R
E D G E W O O D
E D G E W O O D
A L G O N A
A L G O N A
Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy.
Printed On: 7/15/2016Map ID: 4756
Arterial and Collector Pavement Conditions
Pavement Condition Index (PCI)
0 - 25
26 - 50
51 - 69
70 - 100 Page 20 of 26
L A K E
L A K ETA P P S
TA P P S
TS18
TS18
S 277TH ST 132ND AVE SEWESTVALLEYHWYS24TH ST E
SE 274TH ST
JOVITABLVDE
SE 272ND ST
PACIFIC AVE SEASTVALLEYHWYELLINGSON RD SW
WESTVALLEYHWY8TH ST EMI
L
I
T
A
R
Y
R
D
S
SEKENT-KANGLE
Y
R
D68TH AVE S140TH AVE E136TH AVE E124TH AVE SE116TH AVE SES 272ND ST
108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NW142ND AVE ESTEWART RD SW
VALENTINE AVE SECENTRAL AVE SA ST SE124TH AVE SEWEST
V
A
L
L
EYHWYSSE 272ND ST
S 2 7 7T H S T
12TH ST EMILITARY RD S182ND AVE EAUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE
9THST E
S 288TH ST
FOREST C A NYONRDE 214TH AVE E2
1
0
T
H
A
V
E
E
16TH ST E
A
U
B
U
R
N
-E
N
U
M
C
L
A
W
RDS
S2
7
2N
D
WAY
MILITARYRDSTS167
TS167
A ST SEI ST NEAU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE51ST AVE S124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST
C ST NW15TH ST SW
W MAIN ST
15TH ST NW
SE 304TH ST
E MAIN ST
LAK E T A P PSPKW YS E
29TH ST SE
SE 312TH ST
KE
R
SEYWAYSE
8TH ST NE
37TH ST NW
LA
K
E
L
A
N
DHI
LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST
P
E
A
S
L
E
YCANYON RD S DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST
3 2 1ST ST S
AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SEDSTNE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ESE304THWAYSE 281ST ST
17TH ST SE
6TH ST SE SE30 4 T H ST112TH AVE SEA ST SEC ST NE2ND ST E
STUCK RIVER D R SE
53RD ST SE
SE 288TH ST
37TH ST SE M ST NE4 1 ST ST S E
22ND ST NE
17TH ST SE
S 296TH ST
25TH ST SE
12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SE55TH AVE SEAST BLVDA
C
A
D
E
M
Y
DRSE110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEN ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST
SCENIC
D
R
S
E
62ND S T SE56TH AVE SA ST NEK ST SE144THAVESED ST NEF ST SET ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEBRIDGET AVE SEH ST SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1
0
5
THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE4 3 RD S T N E
52ND AVE S47TH ST SE
56TH ST SE
S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNW54TH AVE S28TH ST N E
E MAIN ST
30TH ST NE
51ST S T N E
26TH ST SE
35 T H W A Y S E
S 300TH ST
36 T H ST SE64TH ST SE
O
L
I
V
EAVESES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y
29TH ST NW
AST E HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G ED R SE23RD ST SE 22ND ST S E85TH AVE SG ST NES 288TH ST
OSTSE64TH AVE S111THPLSE49TH ST NE
58TH AVE S108THAVESEHICR E S T D RNW1
0
4
T
H
P
L
S
E
16TH ST SE
148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE
73RD ST SE
37 T H W A Y SET ST NW57TH ST SES292NDST
S E 285TH ST
ELM ST SESE312T
H
W
AYGINKGO STSE15TH ST SET ST NE45TH S T NE
S 303RD PL
19TH ST SE
S 302ND PL
21ST ST SE
33RD ST SE
55TH ST SE
RANDALL AVE SEWARD AVE SE63RD PL S59TH AVE SS 326TH CT 66TH AVE SS 328TH ST
S 321ST ST
S ST SE65TH ST SE
57TH ST SEF ST SE56TH AVE S118TH AVE SER ST NE56TH AVE SN ST NEGSTSER ST NEM U C K L E S H O O T
M U C K L E S H O O TC A S I N O
C A S I N O
K E N T
K E N T
K I N G
K I N GC O U N T Y
C O U N T Y
P I E R C E
P I E R C EC O U N T Y
C O U N T Y
PA C I F I C
PA C I F I C
S U M N E R
S U M N E RE D G E W O O D
E D G E W O O D
A L G O N A
A L G O N A
Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. TheCity of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy.
Printed On: 7/21/2016Map ID: 4755
Local Road Pavement Condition
Pavement Condition Index (PCI)
0 - 25.99
26.00 - 50.99
51.00 - 69.99
70.00 - 100.00 Page 21 of 26
Page 22 of 26
Page 23 of 26
Page 24 of 26
Page 25 of 26
L A K E
L A K ETA P P S
TA P P S
TS18
TS18
S 277TH ST
24TH ST E
SE 274TH ST
PACIFIC AVE SJOVITABLVDE 132ND AVE SEELLINGSON RD SW
SE 272ND ST
8TH ST E
WESTVALLEYHWY140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST
WEST VALLEY HWY S108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NWM
I
L
I
T
A
R
Y
R
D
S
STEWART RD SWWEST
VALLEYHWYEVALENTINE AVE SE68TH AVE S124TH AVE SE116TH AVE SE142NDAVEESTEWART RD SE A ST SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE 272ND ST
WEST
V
A
L
L
EYHWYSS 2 7 7T H S T
124TH AVE SE12TH ST EMILITARY RD S182ND AVE EAUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE9THST E
S 288TH ST
2
1
0
T
H
A
V
E
E
16TH ST E
S2
72N
D
WAY
214TH AVE EA
U
B
U
R
N-E
N
U
M
C
L
A
W
R
D
SAUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167
TS167
A ST SEI ST NEAU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE51ST AVE S124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST
C ST NW15TH ST SW
W MAIN ST
15TH ST NW
SE 304TH ST
E MAIN ST
LAK E T A P PSPKW YS E
29TH ST SE
SE 312TH ST
KER
SEYWAYSE
8TH ST NE
37TH ST NW
LA
K
E
L
A
N
DHI
LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST
P
E
A
S
L
EYCANYON RD S DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST
321ST ST S
AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SED ST NE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ESE304THWAYSE 281ST ST
17TH ST SE
6TH ST SE SE30 4 T H ST112TH AVE SEA ST SEC ST NE2ND ST E
STUCK RIVER D R SE
53RD ST SE
SE 288TH ST
37TH ST SE M ST NE4 1 ST ST SE
22ND ST NE
17TH ST SE
S 296TH ST
25TH ST SE
12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SE55TH AVE SEAST BLVDA
C
A
D
E
M
Y
DRSE110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE
E
N
RIVERRDSE
N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST
SCENIC
D
R
S
E
62NDST SE56TH AVE SA ST NEK ST SE144THAVESEEVERGRE E N W A Y S ED ST NEF ST SET ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE ST NEBRIDGET AVE SEH ST SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1
0
5
THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE
56TH ST SE
S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNW54TH AVE S28TH ST NE
E MAIN ST
30TH ST NE
51S T S T N E
26TH ST SE
3 5 T H W A Y S E
S 300TH ST
B ST NE36T HSTSEO
L
I
V
EAVESES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y
29TH ST NW
ASTE
24TH ST SE
SE 298TH PL
HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G E D R SE23RD ST SE 22ND ST SE85TH AVE SG ST NES 288TH ST
O ST SESE 282ND S T
64TH AVE S111THPLSE49TH ST NE
58TH AVE S20 TH ST SE
SE 286TH ST
108THAVESEHICR EST D RNW1
0
4
T
H
P
L
S
E
16TH ST SE
148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE
73RD ST SE
3 7 T H W A YSET ST NW57TH ST SES292NDST
SE 285TH ST
ELM ST SESE312T
H
W
AY61ST STSE GINKGOSTSE15TH ST SET ST NE45TH S T NE
S 303RD PL
19TH ST SE
S 302ND PL
21ST ST SE
33RD ST SE
55TH ST SE
RANDALL AVE SE63R D P L S E WARD AVE SE107TH PL SE55THWAYSE
43RD ST NE
63RD PL S59TH AVE S133RD AVE SEFIR ST SES 326TH CT 66TH AVE SSE 314TH PL
S 328TH ST
S 321ST ST
S ST SE65TH ST SEJ PL NE56TH AVE SB ST SE57TH ST SEF ST SEK ST SE118TH AVE SEN ST NES 292ND ST
R ST NEGSTSE56TH AVE S17T H S T S E
EVERGREENWAYSEM U C K L E S H O O T
M U C K L E S H O O TC A S I N O
C A S I N O
T H E
T H E
O U T L E T
O U T L E T
C O L L E C T I O N
C O L L E C T I O N
K E N T
K E N T
K I N G
K I N GC O U N T Y
C O U N T Y
P I E R C E
P I E R C EC O U N T Y
C O U N T Y
PA C I F I C
PA C I F I C
S U M N E R
S U M N E R
E D G E W O O D
E D G E W O O D
A L G O N A
A L G O N A
A r t e r i a l a n d C o l l e c t o r R o a d w a y s R u t A v e r a g e
Inform ation show n is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exactgeographic or cartographic data as m apped. The City of Auburn m akes no warranty as to its accuracy.
Printed O n: 7/21/2016Map ID: 4762
Rut
0.25"-0.49"
0.50" - Above
Page 26 of 26