HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-11-2018 AgendaCITY OF AUBURN
TRANSPORTATION
ADVISORY BOARD
September 11, 2018
AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER – 5:30 P.M.,
CITY HALL 25 W MAIN STREET
II. INTRODUCTIONS & NEW MEMBERS
III. CONSENT AGENDA
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE MEETING ON MARCH 13, 2018*
B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE MEETING ON JUNE 12, 2018*
IV. ACTION
A. ELECTION OF A NEW CHAIR*
V. DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION
A. CITY DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES (Gaub)
B. SR164 EAST AUBURN ACCESS PROJECT
C. F STREET SE NON-MOTORIZED IMPROVEMENTS (Wickstrom)
D. ROUNDABOUT DISCUSSION (Webb)
E. 2016/2017 STATE OF OUR STREETS REPORT (Carter)*
VI. ADJOURNMENT
Denotes attachments included in the agenda packet.
1
Page 1
CITY OF AUBURN
TRANSPORTATION
ADVISORY BOARD
Date March 13, 2018
DRAFT MINUTES
I.CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Jim Wilson 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, Jeanette Miller, Michael Harbin, Jr., Dezerae Hayes, Dennis Grad, and
David Jensen. Also present during the meeting were Community Development and Public Works
Interim Director/City Engineer Ingrid Gaub, Traffic Engineer James Webb, Traffic Operations
Engineer Scott Nutter, Transportation Planner Joe Welsh, Office Assistant Angie Sherwin and
Graydon Newman, Transportation Planner for King County Metro.
II.CONSENT AGENDA
A.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes were moved by David Jensen, seconded by Michael Harbin, Jr. that the
Committee approve the Transportation Advisory Board minutes for September 12, 2017. Motion
carried.
The minutes were moved by David Jensen, seconded by Michael Harbin, Jr. that the
Committee approve the Transportation Advisory Board Special Session minutes for September
27, 2017. Motion carried.
III.DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION
Metro Connects Long Range Plan Presentation and Discussion – Metro
Graydon Newman, Transportation Planner for King County Metro Transit, discussed Metro Connects
Develop Program (MCDP) via a PowerPoint presentation.
Metro Connect Long Range Plan
Metro Connects is King County’s 25 year long range vision. 73% of resident within ½ miles of
frequent service and 87% of low income and 77% of minority residents. Rapid Ride would
expand to 26 lines
13 new Rapid Ride by 2025
7 new Rapid Ride by 2040
Development Program Overview
MCDP) Metro Connects
Organizational Capacity - Help build our internal capacity to deliver
METRO CONNECTS
External Collaboration - Facilitate collaboration with jurisdictions and
agencies to develop a regional project schedule to deliver METRO
CONNECTS
Policy Needs - Ensure that we have the right policy guidance to effectively implement METRO
CONNECTS
2
Page 2
More information is available at kcmetrovision.org or contact Graydon Newman at
graydon.newman@kingcounty.gov or (206) 477-5861.
Traffic Signal System Overview and Demonstration – Nutter
Scott Nutter, Traffic Operations Engineers presented an overview of the signal system. The following
items are part of the equipment for the central system:
95 signaled intersections
6 pedestrian beacons
4 fire station signals
77 signals controlled by the central system communication
57 hand tilt zoom camera (ITS)
58 battery backups on the 95 signaled intersections
48 school zone flashers
RRFB (Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon) Crosswalk and radar feedback sign
2 dynamic signs
Each year, additional signals are being added and the system is building.
Scott Nutter demonstrated the central signal system that provides real time conditions. Accessing the
system remotely and making a change while reviewing a current situation, without having to go out into
the field to make the adjustment, is one of the biggest benefits of the system. AM and PM timing plans
balance traffic, adjustments for accidents, etc., are examples of tools and automation designs of the
system.
A few of the 57 camera were shown as examples. Several of the camera are available for the public to
view on the City website, with camera frames refreshing every 30 seconds. A seven day loop of video
and still frame is available for review by Auburn PD for investigations.
Additional examples of signal timing for impacted intersections throughout the City were discussed.
Nutter explained the rules or regulations for those signal constraints and managing the traffic queues.
Transportation Improvement Program 2019-2024 Annual Update – Webb
James Webb, Traffic Engineer presented the Annual update for the 2019-2024 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) The Six-Year TIP is required to be amended annually as required by
RCW 35.77.010 by June 30, 2018. The TIP is a multiyear planning tool and document for the near
term development of transportation facilities within the City and does not represent a financial
commitment by the City.
Projects removed from the current TIP - Completed in 2018
TIP 14: A Street SE Signal Safety and Traffic Operations
TIP 21: W Main St & C St NW Traffic Signal Upgrade
TIP 53: Auburn Way S & 12th St SE Intersection Improvements
TIP 55: Auburn Way S Sidewalk Improvements
TIP 71: 15th St NE/NW Preservation (SR-167 to 8th St NE)
3
Page 3
Additions to the TIP - The following projects are proposed to be added to the updated TIP
TIP 14 A Street SE Preservation Phase 2 (17th St SE to Lakeland Hills Way) (TBD)
TIP 21 C Street SW Preservation (W Main St to Ellingson Rd SW) (TBD)
TIP 22 Auburn Way N/S Sidewalk Improvements - ADA upgrades, fill sidewalk gaps and install an
RRFB. The City received Grant funding in 2017 for this project
TIP 53 Lakeland Hills Way Preservation (TBD)
TIP 55 Lea Hill Safe Routes to Schools (TBD)
TIP 58 S 277th St Preservation (AWN to SR-167) grind and overlay the existing pavement and upgrade
ADA facilities. The City received Grant funding in 2017 for this project
TIP 71 Auburn Way S Sidewalk (17th Street SE to MIT Plaza south side) (TBD)
TIP 75 Auburn Way S at Poplar Street Safety Improvements (TBD)
TIP 76 SE 320th St and 116th Ave SE Roundabout (TBD)
Current and Next Steps
Staff will continue to develop the 2019-2024 TIP update in coordination with the City Capital Facilities
Plan update process and the 2019-2020 budget development.
The next Transportation Advisory Board meeting will be held June 12, 2018 at 5:30 PM.
IV. ADJOURNMENT –
There being no further business to come before the Transportation Advisory Board, the meeting was
adjourned at 7:16 PM.
Approved this 11th day of September 2018.
Angie Sherwin
Chairman Engineering Services Office Assistant
4
Page 4
CITY OF AUBURN
TRANSPORTATION
ADVISORY BOARD
June 12, 2018
DRAFT MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Jim Wilson called the meeting to order at 5:30 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, Ronald Riley, Dezarae Hayes and Dennis Grad. Also present during the
meeting were Acting Director/City Engineer Ingrid Gaub, Traffic Engineer James Webb, Project
Engineer Kim Truong and Office Assistant Angie Sherwin.
II. CONSENT AGENDA
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE MEETING ON MARCH 13, 2018
The Minutes were tabled until the next regular meeting due to a quorum not being met.
III. DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION
A. 2018 TIP UPDATE – INITIAL DISCUSSION (Webb)*
Short term plan 6 year plan (3 year are financially constrained, years 4, 5, 6 are not financially
constrained) updated each year and adopted by council.
Deletions: The following projects are planned to be removed from the updated TIP:
TIP 2: A St Traffic Signal Improvements
TIP 12: Grade Separated Crossing of the BNSF Railyard
TIP 14: A Street SE Signal Safety and Traffic Operations
TIP 15: 8th Street NE Widening
TIP 19: Auburn Way N/1st St NE Signal Improvements
TIP 21: W Main St & C St NW Traffic Signal Upgrade
TIP 24: Academy Drive Multi-Use Trail
TIP 53: Auburn Way S & 12th St SE Intersection Improvements
TIP 55: Auburn Way S Sidewalk Improvements
TIP 71: 15th St NE/NW Preservation
New Numbering Convention: The development of a new numbering system for the projects
has been implemented as part of this year’s annual update. The TIP number for each project
now identifies the project type, making individual projects easier to find, making future updates
easier, and making the document more user friendly. The new numbering convention is as
follows:
I-X: Intersection, Signal and ITS projects
N-X: Non-Motorized and Transit projects
P-X: Preservation projects
R-X: Roadway projects
S-X: Study and Monitoring projects
5
Page 5
Additions: The following projects are proposed to be added to the updated TIP:
TIP I: Signal Replacement Program
TIP I-7: SE 320th St/116th Ave SE Roundabout
TIP I-11: Auburn Way S/6th Street SE
TIP N-7: Auburn Way S Sidewalk – Southside
TIP N-11: Lea Hill Safe Routes to School
TIP P-10: A Street SE Preservation
TIP P-11: C Street SW Preservation
TIP P-12: Lakeland Hills Way Preservation
TIP R-15: Auburn Way S at Poplar Street Safety Improvements
Other Modifications:
Other changes proposed to be made as part of the annual update are to revise certain project
descriptions, cost estimates, and anticipated funding sources to be more representative of
project scopes and available funding sources.
Current Status and Next Steps:
Staff will continue to develop the 2019-2024 TIP update in coordination with the City Capital
Facilities Plan update process and the 2019-2020 budget development. The Transportation
Advisory Board and City Council comments will be addressed and adoption is anticipated as
follows in the schedule below.
JUNE 11, 2018: SECOND COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
JUNE 12, 2018: SECOND TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD DISCUSSION
JUNE 18, 2018: PUBLIC HEARING & RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION
B. LEA HILL ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY DISCUSSION (Webb/Truong)
The Lea Hill Road Corridor Study will begin in early July 2018. The study will cover over a mile
from 8th Street SE & Harvey Road to Lea Hill Road. The study will cover the entire corridor, the
design and construction phases will be done in segments.
Important issue and challenges are:
Existing Infrastructure
1st Segment – 8th Street SE & Harvey Road to 104th Street SE
Steep Slopes and Landslides Hazards
2nd Segment - 104th Street SE to 112th Street SE
Wetlands, Streams and Riparian Area
3rd Segment - 112th Street SE to 124th Street SE
To ensure the public and stakeholder needs are meet for the Lea Hill corridor, a public outreach
plan will include:
6
Page 6
Open Houses, physical, and or digital social media
Project Webpage at auburnwa.gov
A Stakeholder Coordination to include
o King County Metro
o Green River College
o Auburn School District
o Other stakeholders
The study objective: Design alternatives for the corridor
Cost effective
Relieve congestion
Accommodate future growth
Accommodate pedestrian facilities
Accommodate facilities for non-motorized vehicles
Accommodate existing and future transit use
Project Schedule:
Corridor Study July 2018-2019
Segment 1 Design & ROW 2022
Segment 1 Construction 2024-2025
The corridor study will prepare the City for the next grant cycle in 2020.
C. MEETING SCHEDULE
September 11, 2018 at 5:30 PM for the next regular meeting.
IV. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Transportation Advisory Board, the meeting
was adjourned at __6:09___ p.m.
Approved this 11th day of September 2018.
Angie Sherwin
Chairman Engineering Services Office Assistant
7
Page 7
Memorandum
To: Transportation Advisory Board Members
From: Jai Carter, Street Systems Engineer, P.E.
Date: September 5, 2018
Re: Draft 2016-2017 State of Our Streets Report
The State of Our Streets Report (SOS Report) is an annual report that details the
improvements that were made to our Street System over the previous year. The report
also discusses the Street Preservation Programs in detail (Arterial and Local
Preservation Programs). In years past the report only covered improvements in the
Local Street Preservation Program (formerly known as the Save Our Street Program).
In 2015, the report was expanded to include the Arterial and Collector Preservation
Program, and cover all of the streets in the City of Auburn. The 2016 report was
delayed and subsequently combined into the 2017 SOS Report.
The 2016 – 2017 SOS Report also contain various mapping that show projects from
2016 and 2017, and future projects that are planned through 2021. Another set of
interesting maps show the pavement conditions and the ride quality of all of the Roads
in the system. The maps are a simple way to monitor the health of the street system
and help program managers with street selection for packaging streets into projects.
For any additional information or questions you may have please contact Jai Carter at
JCarter@auburnwa.gov, or by phone at 253-804-5086.
8
Page 8
Memorandum
Public Works Department
To: Transportation Advisory Board Members
From: Ingrid Gaub, Public Works Director
Date: September 6, 2018
Re: Election of a New Board Chair
Staff previously notified the Board that Jim Wilson, who was the Chair of our Board, is
no longer with the Auburn Chamber of Commerce and because that was the
organization that he represented on the Board, he is no longer able to be on the
Board. The Chamber is currently working on a replacement member, however, in the
meantime we will be electing a new Board Chair at the September 11th meeting.
Staff solicited nominations via email from the Board through 5:00PM on Friday, August
31st and received nominations for two members as follows:
Mike Harbin, Jr., representing Local Business
Dennis Grad, representing the Auburn School District
At the September 11, 2018 meeting an action item on the agenda will be to confirm that
the nominees wish to accept their nominations, allow any additional nominations to be
made from the floor and then a vote of the Board will be conducted to elect a new Board
Chair.
9
Page 9
DRAFT 2016-17 STATE OF OUR STREETS REPORT
Mayor Nancy Backus
Council members
Bob Baggett
Larry Brown
Claude DaCorsi
John Holman
Yolanda Trout-Manuel
Bill Peloza
Largo Wales
25 West Main St.
Auburn, WA 98001
10
Page 10
1
Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2
A Work in Progress ..................................................................................................................... 2
Keeping Auburn Moving ............................................................................................................ 3
The State of our Streets ............................................................................................................... 3
Next steps? .................................................................................................................................. 4
Project Spot Light and Roadway Preservation Programs ............................................................... 5
2017 Project Roster ..................................................................................................................... 5
2016 Project Roster ..................................................................................................................... 7
Preservation Programs Overview ................................................................................................... 8
Arterial Street Preservation Program .......................................................................................... 8
Arterial Street Preservation funding ........................................................................................... 8
Planned Arterial Street Preservation Projects ........................................................................... 10
Moving Forward ....................................................................................................................... 10
Local Street Preservation Program ........................................................................................... 11
Local Street Preservation Funding ............................................................................................ 11
Planned Local Street Preservation Projects .............................................................................. 12
Moving Forward ....................................................................................................................... 13
11
Page 11
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A Work in Progress
This report is to document the progress of the Arterial and Local Street Pavement Preservation
Programs for the City, including reporting on the updated pavement condition ratings that were
collected in the Summer of 2017, provide a current overview of the programs, and provide
recommendations on program needs and challenges. City owned paved alleyways and gravel
roads are maintained by the Maintenance & Operations Division and are not included in this
report.
Streets are classified based on the type of traffic they are intended to support. Major streets that
are intended to support a large amount of traffic traveling to neighboring jurisdictions, to state
highways and across the City of Auburn (City) are typically classified as arterial streets. Streets
that are intended to support a moderate amount of traffic and connect neighborhoods and
industrial/commercial areas to arterial streets or to other neighborhoods and
industrial/commercial areas are generally classified as collector streets. Streets that are intended
to support a low volume of traffic and connect local residences and businesses to an arterial or
collector street are generally classified as local streets.
The City manages the pavement infrastructure through two separate programs, the Arterial
Streets Preservation Program and Local Streets Preservation Program. The Arterial Street
Preservation Program is currently funded at approximately $1.6 to $1.8 million annually, and
covers the Arterial and Collector roadways in the City. These major streets consist of
approximately 69 centerline miles (201 lane miles) of Arterials and 34 centerline miles (71 lane
miles) of Collectors roadways. The Local Street Preservation Program is funded at
approximately $1.5 to $2.3 million annually, and is responsible for the non-arterial roadways,
consisting of approximately 146 centerline miles (292 lane miles) of residential and non-
residential local streets.
The goal for the preservation programs is to maintain the entire street network at a Pavement
Condition Index (PCI) Score of 70 or greater on a 1-100 basis with 100 being new pavement. An
average score of 70 was chosen because it provides for the most cost effective balance for the
long term preservation of the roadway system where the majority of streets are at or above 70.
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 reconstruction. Please see Appendix A for more detail. The
City’s street system was rated in the Summer of 2017, and the results showed an overall increase
in the pavement condition versus the 2013 pavement rating survey. An increase in pavement
condition rating was expected as a result of all the investments made into the street system
network since 2013. The City worked on several miles of streets in our network with City and
grant funds used to complete much needed work.
The pavement rating data is the best metric to approximate the overall street system health, and
helps inform decisions on when and where to invest to keep the City’s streets in good condition.
The other metrics used in rating the City’s pavements are rutting, and roughness. These are used
12
Page 12
3
to help prioritize and differentiate between candidate streets during a selection process (please
see Appendix A for more detail).
Keeping Auburn Moving
It is anticipated that further improvements to the street network will be realized after a number of
grant funded paving projects are completed over the next several years through the year 2020.
The City has been successful in securing federal grants to help the Arterial Street Preservation
program improve the condition of many of the City’s major Arterials and this additional funding
represents a major investment in the City’s Federally classified roadway infrastructure. The City
has also completed the reconstruction of past problematic streets in the City’s street system,
specifically B Street NW between 37th St NW and S 277th St; West Main Street between West
Valley Highway and the Interurban Trail; and S 277th Street between Auburn Way N and L St
NE. These streets were all previously in failing conditions and the City pooled funding and
secured federal grants to address these major roads. Additionally, 2017 saw two other major
grant funded paving projects be completed: Auburn Way North Preservation Project Phase I, and
Lake Tapps Parkway Preservation Project; as well as the City Funded 2017 Local Street
Reconstruction and Preservation Project.
The State of our Streets
Arterial and Collector Street Preservation Program
The State of the Arterial and Collector Streets has improved with the investment in the
infrastructure from these programs. In the next few years, many of the largest and most used
corridors will be preserved, and the City will continue to see overall system improvement (see
Table 1 below for recent pavement condition rating scores). The grant funding that has been
secured through 2020 will help the City leverage existing funding and complete additional work
that could not have otherwise been done. However in the long term, if budget levels continue at
the current level of funding (approximately $1.6-1.8M/ year not including grant funding) the
Pavement Management Database models predict that the City will lose ground as more of the
Arterial and Collector streets that are in poor condition slide into the failure category and other
streets that are currently in good condition degrade into fair condition. There are several major
projects that will need to be completed within the next ten years for the City to maintain the
condition of the network at its current average. Failing Arterial and Collector streets are
extremely expensive to replace and will require several years’ worth of budget, at the current
funding levels, to complete the reconstruction of a single project street. While many of the other
major streets degrade into fair condition and will be in need of preservation.
Local Street Preservation Program
The State of Our Local Streets is improving steadily and shows that the City has adequately
funded this portion of the preservation program. The Local Street Preservation Program
provides for rebuilding as many streets with the available funding, and uses any remaining funds
to preserve, by overlay, other streets in the Local Street Network. The backlog of local streets
that need to be reconstructed is decreasing. If funding continues at its current level, the Local
Street Preservation Program will have completed reconstruction of all streets that are currently
rated as failing over the next 10 to 13 years, however a number of streets that are rated in poor
condition that are not being worked on will begin to fail within that time frame and will need to
be reconstructed as well.
13
Page 13
4
2013
Pavement
Rating
2015
Improvements
2017
Pavement
Rating
Centerline
Miles
Lane
Miles
Average Weighted PCI
PCI
Change
All Streets in
System
249 564 61 65 70 +5
Arterial &
Collector Streets
Combined
103 272 55 60 63 +3
Arterial Streets 69 201 55 59 61 +2
Collector Streets 34 71 57 64 70 +6
Local Streets 146 292 67 69 77 +8
Table 1 - Pavement Rating Data by Road Classification
Next steps?
In the next three to four years, the Street Preservation Programs will continue to deliver quality
projects, and improve the street system health. In the next five to ten years, the road map to
success will include pursuing additional funding for the Arterial and Collector Preservation
Program which may include:
Continuing to compete for grant funding as available;
Consider options for additional funding as needed; and
Revising the City’s pavement management goals.
The Pavement Management Database model predicts that the Arterial and Collector street system
will need to be funded at approximately $3.5M to $3.9M annually to simply maintain the
existing condition of the street network. The condition of the Arterial roads has improved
slightly since 2013 due to the additional funding obtained through grants from 2013 to 2017.
The models indicate that the condition of the street system will degrade faster than we can
preserve it after the current secured grant funds have been expended.
Currently, the Local Street Preservation is funded appropriately to improve the street network
condition steadily. The Local Street Preservation fund will continue to rebuild as many streets
that are identified as failing as funding allows and use any additional funds to do thin overlay
treatments on streets that are in fair condition. The program has achieved an average rating that
exceeds the program goal of 70 PCI and is currently at 77 PCI. Therefore the program will be
transitioning to continue to maintain the network at or above the average of 70 PCI.
14
Page 14
5
PROJECT SPOT LIGHT AND ROADWAY PRESERVATION PROGRAMS
The City had several major paving projects in construction in 2016 and 2017, which were funded
by the Local Street Preservation fund, Arterial Street Preservation fund, and other sources of City
funds, as well as federal grant funds. are shown on Map 1 – 2017 Roadway Construction
Projects Map.
2017 Project Roster
2017 was an incredibly busy year for roadway work in the City as we were able to address
several of the worst streets. Overall, 9.48 lane-miles of pavement were reconstructed and 15.36
lane-miles of pavement were overlayed in 2017. This was a highly successful year of executing
long standing plans for repairing and restoring the City of Auburn Streets. The major projects
that were completed during 2017:
West Main Street Multi-Modal Corridor and ITS Improvements Project
This project was a multiyear project that rebuilt and repurposed the existing four lane
section of W Main St between W Valley Highway and the Interurban Trail. The project
rebuilt 1.38 lane miles of pavement. The four lane roadway was narrowed down to
accommodate two through lanes, a two-way turn lane, and bike lanes in each direction.
The project also provided Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) improvements along
W. Main Street., West Valley Hwy, 15th Street SW, and C Street SW. This work was
funded by Arterial Streets funds, federal grant funding, and Arterial Preservation funds.
Construction of this project started in 2016, and was completed in the summer of 2017.
S 277th Street Corridor Capacity & Non-motorized Trail Improvement Project
This project was a multiyear project and completed the widening and reconstruction of
2.92 lane miles of S 277th Street from the intersection of Auburn Way North to L Street
NE, including the construction of a pedestrian trail, relocation of the floodway along S
277th Street, as well as installing a fish passage structure. This work was funded by
Arterial Street funds, developer contributed funds, federal and Transportation
Improvement Board grant funds, and Arterial Preservation funds.
B Street NW Reconstruction Project
The B Street NW Reconstruction Project rebuilt 1.64 lane miles of B Street NW between
37th Street NW and 49th Street NW vicinity, replaced sanitary sewer main along 49th
Street SW and installed new sewer main along B Street NW. This Project also repaired
damaged sidewalk, curb and gutter, upgraded several driveways to be compliant with
ADA requirements, replaced curb ramps to be compliant with ADA requirements, and
addressed drainage issues along the corridor. This work was funded by Arterial
Preservation funds.
Lake Tapps Parkway Preservation Project
The purpose of this project was to rehabilitate and preserve the existing pavement on
Lake Tapps Parkway between the Western City Limit near 8th Street E and Lakeland
15
Page 15
6
Hills Way. The project completed a grind and overlay of 7.11 lane miles of pavement,
upgraded eight curb ramps to meet current ADA standards, and upgraded vehicle
detection loops. This work was funded by Arterial Preservation funds and federal grant
funds.
Auburn Way N Preservation Project, Phase 1
The Auburn Way North Preservation Project (22nd Street NE to 45th Street NE) included
grinding and overlaying 7.25 lane miles of asphalt pavement, replacement of curb/gutter
and concrete flatwork, upgraded 26 curb ramps to meet current ADA standards,
construction of storm drain pipe and structures, removal and replacement fire hydrant
assemblies, installation of a new traffic signal at 37th Street NE, modifications to existing
traffic and pedestrian signals, channelization, installation of induction loops, traffic
control, right-of-way restoration, and signage. This work was funded by Arterial
Preservation funds and federal grant funds.
M Street SE Utility Improvement Project
The M Street SE Improvements (3rd St SE to East Main St) project constructed roadway
and utility improvements on M Street SE from 3rd Street SE to East Main Street. Project
improvements included 0.62 lane miles of new asphalt concrete pavement, cement
concrete sidewalks and curb and gutter, installation of new storm drainage and sanitary
sewer pipes, new water services, and ITS improvements. This work was funded by
Arterial Preservation funds, Water Utility funds, Sewer Utility funds, and Storm Utility
funds.
2017 Local Street Reconstruction and Preservation Project
The 2017 Local Street Reconstruction and Preservation Project included constructing
street, storm drainage, and water main improvements – including excavation of existing
roadway pavement and subgrade; 1.38 lane miles of reconstructed asphalt roadway
pavement and subgrade; 1.00 lane miles of street overlay; curb and gutter reconstruction;
driveway reconstruction; partial sidewalk reconstruction; replaced 16 curb ramps;
installed new storm drainage collection, conveyance, treatment and infiltration systems;
water main and residential service replacement; and other appurtenances. This work was
funded by Local Street Preservation funds, Water Utility funds, and Storm Utility funds.
16
Page 16
7
2016 Project Roster
The City had two major paving projects in 2016, and several others that involved significant
pavement restoration, as shown on Map 2 – 2016 Roadway Construction Projects Map:
Auburn Way South Flooding Improvements, Phase 2 Project
The purpose of this project was to relieve stormwater flooding issues on Auburn Way
South near the State Route 18 underpass by diverting stormwater flows from the flooding
area to the existing storm drainage ponds located at 21st Street SE (near D Street SE) and
17th Street SE (west of A St SE). This project constructed a new storm line on 17th
Street SE between A Street SE and K Street SE to divert stormwater to the pond on 17th
Street SE. This project also replaced the deteriorate water main and sewer line on 17th
Street SE between A Street SE and K Street SE, rebuilt the north half of the roadway and
grind and overlayed the entire roadway which preserved 1.22 lane miles of roadway,
replaced a total of 23 curb ramps, and expanded the existing storm pond on 17th Street
SE to accommodate the increase in storm drainage flows. This work was funded by the
Water, Sewer and Storm Utility funds.
2016 Local Street Pavement Reconstruction Project
This project reconstructed 1.18 lane miles of Local Streets including; 21st Street NE
between I Street NE and Auburn Way N; F Street SE between East Main St and 4th Street
SE; and 25th Street SE between M Street SE and R Street SE; as well as thin overlayed
1.40 lane miles of streets in the Westhill area. The Project also installed 2,741 lineal feet
of 12-inch and 8-inch water mains, 2,589 lineal feet of 12-inch stormwater drainage
main, new water services for 70 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. This work was funded by the Local Street
Preservation Program and Water Utility funds.
30th Street NE Storm Improvement Project, Phase 1A
This project replaced a 30-inch storm drainage line with a 42-inch line between the North
west corner of the Auburn Airport and Auburn Way N. This project rebuild the trench
limit, patched pavement and overlayed the full width of 30th Street NE – preserving 1.38
lane miles of roadway, and replaced a total of 6 curb ramps. This work was funded by
the Storm Drainage Repair Program and Arterial Preservation Program funds.
The City had several projects in 2016 delayed for various reasons as indicated below. Also, the
order in which the federally funded grant projects will be delivered was updated to reflect the
regional funding availability through the Puget Sound Regional Council. The Auburn Way
North Preservation project, Phase 1 was moved from 2016 to 2017 because the initial bids in
2016 came in higher than the available budget. B Street NW was delayed in 2016 due to the
need for additional funding to complete the project. To address this, the project was re-designed
to use an innovative method of construction to rebuild the roadway at a much cheaper cost than
estimated in 2016.
17
Page 17
8
PRESERVATION PROGRAMS OVERVIEW
Arterial Street Preservation Program
The Arterial and Collector Preservation program is responsible for maintaining the overall
condition of approximately 103 centerline miles (272 lane miles) of roadway that are vital to the
City. These roads carry the vast majority of citizens, goods and services to and from the
Regional Growth Center and connect the community 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,
favorable bids on several past projects, and the successful acquisition of federal grant funds
generated sufficient capacity in the existing budget to program the reconstruction of B Street NW
between 37th Street NW and 300 feet north of 49th Street NW, which was the worst arterial street
segment in the network. Additionally other grant funds were secured for two other major
reconstruction projects in the City that were constructed in 2017: The S 277th Street Corridor
Capacity & Non-motorized Trail Improvements Project; and the West Main Street Multi-Modal
Corridor and ITS Improvements Project. The Arterial and Collector Street Pavement Condition
Indexes as of 2017 are shown on Map 3 – Arterial & Collector Pavement Conditions Map.
The goal of the Arterial Preservation program is to improve the Arterial and Collector network to
an average 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 61). 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 health of the arterial street system.
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 since 2008. Figure 1 below shows the Arterial
funding since the inception of the preservation program.
18
Page 18
9
Figure 1: Arterial Street Funding through the years
The City has successfully obtained federal grant funding for seven major preservation projects
leveraging City funds for preserving our arterial system through 2020. The seven grant funded
projects include the Auburn Way North Preservation phase 1, phase 2 and phase 3 projects; A
Street SE Preservation Project; 15th Street NW/NE Preservation Project; South 277th Street
Preservation Project; and Lake Tapps Parkway Preservation Project. Federal grant funds are
subject to competitive selection and cannot be relied upon as a stable source of funding beyond
the currently funded projects. Also, there are a limited number of streets that are federally
classified, and thus eligible for grant funding - limiting our potential for more grants in the
future. The grant administrators in the region continue to discuss if preservation projects are the
best use of their funds and are considering reprogramming the money to roadway capacity
projects. The amount of City funding in the Arterial Preservation Program has remained
relatively unchanged, and at its current level is insufficient to complete the reconstruction work
needed to, not only reach the average system PCI goal of 70, but also maintain the current PCI
rating of 61.
1,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
4,000,000.00
5,000,000.00
6,000,000.00
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
560K
1.64M
750K
993K
1.75M
1.51M
1.58M
1.28M
1.47M
1.64M
223K
4.01M
795K
3.42M
2.75M
2.01M
2.32M
1.52M
Arterial Preservation Spending
Fund 105
Grant Funds City Funds
2.20M Total
5.06M Total
3.50M
Total
3.00M
Total
4.07M
Total
19
Page 19
10
Planned Arterial Street Preservation Projects
The grant funded street reconstruction and preservation projects that start in 2018 and are
expected to be completed through 2020, are detailed below in Table 2 – Future Grant Funded
Street Projects, and City Funded projects are shown in Table 3 – City Funded Arterial Street
Projects below. All of the future Arterial Preservation project streets are shown on Map 4 –
Planned Preservation Projects
Staff will be conducting street selection processes for the Arterial Street Preservation Program to
identify additional streets that need to be addressed and to prepare a long range plan to meet
those needs in budget years 2019 and 2020. Those streets will be prioritized and packaged each
year. Additionally staff will be applying for additional federal grants in 2018 for potentially
funding a project in 2021.
TABLE 3 - CITY FUNDED ARTERIAL STREET
PROJECTS
Year Project Title From To 105 Funding
Total Project
Investment
2018 2018 Citywide Patch and Overlay Project Various Locations $1,700,000 $2,550,000
2018 2018 Arterial Crack Seal Project Various Locations $200,000 $200,000
TOTALS $1,900,000 $2,750,000
Moving Forward
The City anticipates several issues that will need to be addressed and managed in the future. The
pavement management database predicts the arterial system needs to be funded between $3.4M
to $3.9M per year to maintain the current condition (PCI of 61) of Arterial/Collector roadways.
TABLE 2 - FUTURE GRANT FUNDED STREET
PROJECTS
Year Project Title From To
105
Funding
Grant
Funding
Total Project
Investment
2018
15th Street NW/NE and Harvey
Rd Preservation Project
Originally 2017)
SR167 8th St NE $1,525,000 $815,000 $2,533,500
2018 S 277th Street Preservation Project SR167
Auburn W
N Vicinity $
662,380 $662,380 $1,324,760
2019 A Street SE Preservation Project
East Main
St
17th St SE $882,000 $882,000 $1,764,000
2020
Auburn Way North Preservation
Project Phase 2
8th St NE
Vicinity
22nd St NE $618,280 $889,720 $1,508,000
2020
Auburn Way North Preservation
Project Phase 3
SR18
8th St NE
Vicinity $
975,000 $975,000 $1,950,000
2021
Lakeland Hills Way Preservation
Project*
Lake Tapps
Parkway
Pierce
County
Line
352,000* $748,000* $1,200.000*
TOTALS $5,014,660 $4,972,100 $9,986,760
20
Page 20
11
If City funding levels remain at the current level of $1.6 to $1.8 million per year, the condition of
the arterial and collector street system will begin to lose ground faster than can be preserved,
once the available grant funding has been expended in 2020.
Another concern, is that as the City continues to improve the streets that can be preserved by
conventional methods (i.e. grind and overlay), there are more and 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 the Arterial and Collector streets do not have adequate pavement structure to
withstand the current level of traffic loading that uses them, so preserving these roads by overlay
treatments only may not result in good long term performance. The lack of adequate pavement
structure for these major roads likely contributes to an accelerated decline in pavement condition.
The cost of rebuilding one of these roadways would require combining several years of funding
in the Arterial and Collector Program at the current funding levels. Additional funding will need
to be identified and prioritization of reconstruction of these major roadways will be needed to
address the larger issues within the Arterial and Collector street network.
Future pavement ratings and additional testing measures will become necessary in the next
couple of years as well. System wide, the pavement rating survey results are one of the most
useful tools to track the general condition of the street system as a whole, however a need for
more advanced testing will be needed to evaluate the arterial and collector streets for their
structural integrity.
Local Street Preservation Program
The Local Street Preservation Program is responsible for maintaining the pavement on
approximately 146 centerline miles (292 lane 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 that were 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 to failing condition.
The goal of the Local Street Preservation Program is to improve the Local Street system to an
average PCI rating of 70 (out of 100 scale rating). As of 2017, the Local Street Preservation
Program achieved its goal with an average PCI of 77. In reaching and exceeding this goal, the
focus for this program continues to rebuild the local roadways that are in very poor to failed
condition (PCI 0 to 25) as funding allows, and to maintain the average PCI level of 70 on the rest
of the local street network. The Local street Pavement Condition Index scores are shown
graphically on Map 5 – Local Street Pavement Conditions Map. The Pavement Management
Database models indicate that $2.4M in needed annually to maintain the system at the goal of an
average PCI of 70 or better. Local Street Improvements that are scheduled for 2018 and 2019
are also shown on Map 4 – Planned Preservation Projects.
Local Street Preservation Funding
In 2004 the public expressed concern over the condition of local streets, however funding for
local streets had dropped dramatically in the preceding years and the City could not afford to
21
Page 21
12
make the needed improvements (see Figure 2 below). In response to the situation, the City
proposed a funding measure which was approved by Auburn citizens in the November 2004
General Election. The original funding measure allowed the City’s property tax levy to generate
additional revenue for a dedicated local street fund which was used solely to fund a local street
preservation and improvement program, formerly called the Save Our Streets (SOS) Program.
At the end of 2012, the practice of funding the SOS Program from property taxes ended. In
2013, the City Council earmarked sales taxes from new construction to be dedicated to the Local
Street Preservation Program, and all property taxes were retained in the General Fund.
In 2005, the City had approximately 59 miles of local streets that were in need of repair (this
mileage included streets that were later annexed into the City in 2008). Since 2005, the Program
has improved the condition of 52 miles of those City streets, however as time passes other streets
in the network age and their condition continues to deteriorate. In the next few years, additional
streets will need to be maintained and/or rebuilt to keep the street system healthy.
Planned Local Street Preservation Projects
Projects in design or construction using Local Street Preservation Program funds are included
below in Table 4.
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
1.07M
652K
550K
560K
150K $150K
1.2M
1.8M
2.1M
2.6M
2.2M
1.5M
2.0M $2.0M
2,5M
1,8M
2,4M $2.36M
2.866M
2.55M$2.55M
1.50M $1.50M
Figure 2: Local Street Funding through the years
2000: Loss of Motor
Vehicle Excise Tax
Initiative 695)
2003 Loss of $15
Local Option Vehicle
Excise Tax
Initiative 776)
2005 SOS
Established
Future Years
22
Page 22
13
TABLE 4 - CITY FUNDED LOCAL STREET
PROJECTS
Year Project Title From To 103 Funding
Total Project
Investment
2018 2018 Citywide Patch and Overlay Project Various Locations $850,000 $2,550,000
2018 2018 Local Street Reconstruction Project Various Locations $1,700,000 $1,900,000
2019 2019 Local Street Reconstruction Project Various Locations $1,680,000 $3,545,000
2019 2019 Annual Pavement Project - TBD Various Locations $320,000 TBD
TOTALS-
1,900,000 $2,750,000
Moving Forward
The list of Local Streets that need to be reconstructed is shrinking and will be prioritized to align
with the City’s limited funding for associated public utility improvements. A lot of progress has
been made on street reconstructions over the past several years under the Local Street
preservation program. The program will transition its focus to a more balanced approach of
rebuilding one or two local streets annually and preserving more segments of streets than in prior
years. This more balanced approach between street reconstruction and street preservation
overlays will continue to maintain and potentially continue to improve the condition of the Local
Street network overall.
23
Page 23
L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS
TS18
TS18
S 277TH ST
24TH ST E
SE 274TH ST
PACIFIC
AVE
SJOVITABLVD E 132ND
AVE SEELLINGSON RD
SW SE 272ND
ST 8TH ST
E
WESTVALLEYHWY140TH
AVE
E136TH
AVE
ES
272ND
ST WESTVALLEY HWY S108TH AVE
SEWEST VALLEY HWY
NWMI
L I T AR Y RD S
STEWART RDSWWESTVALLEYHWYEVALENTINEAVE
SE68TH AVE S124TH
AVE
SE116TH
AVE
SE142NDAVEESTEWART
RD
SE
A ST SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE
272ND
ST
WESTVAL
LEYHWYSS
2
7
7T
H
S
T
124TH
AVE
SE12TH
ST
EMILITARY
RD
SAUBURN-
BLACKDIAMONDRDSE182ND
AVEE9THSTE
S
288TH
ST
2
1
0
TH
A
V
E
E
16TH ST E
S 2 72ND
W AY 214TH
AVE EA U
B U R
N E N
U MC L A WR D SAUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEB
ST NWI ST
NEA U B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
S
C ST SWM
ST SEAUBURN WAY
NR
ST
SE124TH
AVE
SEWEST VALLEYHWYNS277THST
C ST
NW15TH ST SW
W MAIN ST
15TH ST NW
SE 304TH ST E MAIN ST LAK
E T A
P P S P
K W Y
S E 132ND
AVE SE51ST AVE
S29TH
ST
SE
SE
312TH
ST K E R S
EY W AYSE
8TH ST NE
37TH ST NW
L A K
ELANDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH
STDSTNW104THAVESE
WESTVALLEYHWYSS
316TH
ST
D ST NE112TH
AVE
SEEAST
VALLEY
HWY
EAuburn
AveSE304THWA Y
SE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE
6TH ST SE 112TH
AVE SESE 3 0 4 T HST
A ST SEC
ST
NE2ND
ST
E STUCK RIVER
DR SE 53RD
ST SE SE
288TH ST 37TH
ST SE M
ST NE4 6TH
P L S 4 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
BLVD56TH
AVE S110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE
E N RIVERRDSE
N
ST NEW ST
NWS 287TH ST
SCENIC D R S E 62NDST
SE 4 9 T HST NE K ST
SE58TH AVE SS
331ST S T
144THAVESEEVERGREE N W
A Y S
EF ST SEACADEMYDRSET
ST
SEDOGWOOD
ST
SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE
ST
NEBRIDGET
AVE
SEH
ST
SEG ST SE57THPLSS
324TH ST B
ST SEFOSTER AVE
SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE10 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND
AVE S47THST
SE 56TH ST
SE
S
305TH
ST USTNW54TH
AVE S28THST
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
3
2 N D
S T SE
36T HSTSEOL I
VEAVESES E 3
1 8 T
H WAY29THST
NW ASTE 24TH
ST SE SE
298TH PL HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G E DR SE23RDSTSE22NDSTSE85THAVES4THSTSES288TH
ST SE 282ND ST O STSE64THAVES111THPLSE20THSTSE
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 ELM
ST SESE 285TH STSE312THWAY61ST
STSE GINKGOSTSE15TH ST SETSTNE45THST
NE S 303RD PL S 322NDST19THSTSE21STST
SE 33RD ST SE 55TH STSERANDALLAVESE63RDP
L S E WARD AVE SE107THPLSE55THWAYSE43RDSTNE63RD
PL S59TH AVE S133RD AVE SEFIRSTSE66THAVESSE314THPL
S 328TH ST S 329TH PLS321STSTSSTSE65THSTSEJPLNE57THSTSE17THSTSE56THAVESGSTSE49THSTNEBSTSES292NDSTEVERGREENWAYSEK
ST SEN ST NER ST NE118THAVESEMUCKL
E S H O O T M U C K L E
S H O O T C 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 TCOL
L
E C
L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS
TS18
TS18
S 277TH ST
24TH ST E
SE 274TH ST
PACIFIC
AVE
SJOVITABLVD E 132ND
AVE SEELLINGSON RD
SW SE 272ND
ST 8TH ST
E
WESTVALLEYHWY140TH
AVE
E136TH
AVE
ES
272ND
ST WESTVALLEY HWY S108TH AVE
SEWEST VALLEY HWY
NWMI
L I T AR Y RD S
STEWART RDSWWESTVALLEYHWYEVALENTINEAVE
SE68TH AVE S124TH
AVE
SE116TH
AVE
SE142NDAVEESTEWART
RD
SE
A ST SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE
272ND
ST
WESTVAL
LEYHWYSS
2
7
7T
H
S
T
124TH
AVE
SE12TH
ST
EMILITARY
RD
SAUBURN-
BLACKDIAMONDRDSE182ND
AVEE9THSTE
S
288TH
ST
2
1
0
TH
A
V
E
E
16TH ST E
S 2 72ND
W AY 214TH
AVE EA U
B U R
N E N
U MC L A WR D SAUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEB
ST NWI ST
NEA U B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
S
C ST SWM
ST SEAUBURN WAY
NR
ST
SE124TH
AVE
SEWEST VALLEYHWYNS277THST
C ST
NW15TH ST SW
W MAIN ST
15TH ST NW
SE 304TH ST E MAIN ST LAK
E T A
P P S P
K W Y
S E 132ND
AVE SE51ST AVE
S29TH
ST
SE
SE
312TH
ST K E R S
EY W AYSE
8TH ST NE
37TH ST NW
L A K
ELANDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH
STDSTNW104THAVESE
WESTVALLEYHWYSS
316TH
ST
D ST NE112TH
AVE
SEEAST
VALLEY
HWY
EAuburn
AveSE304THWA Y
SE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE
6TH ST SE 112TH
AVE SESE 3 0 4 T HST
A ST SEC
ST
NE2ND
ST
E STUCK RIVER
DR SE 53RD
ST SE SE
288TH ST 37TH
ST SE M
ST NE4 6TH
P L S 4 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
BLVD56TH
AVE S110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE
E N RIVERRDSE
N
ST NEW ST
NWS 287TH ST
SCENIC D R S E 62NDST
SE 4 9 T HST NE K ST
SE58TH AVE SS
331ST S T
144THAVESEEVERGREE N W
A Y S
EF ST SEACADEMYDRSET
ST
SEDOGWOOD
ST
SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE
ST
NEBRIDGET
AVE
SEH
ST
SEG ST SE57THPLSS
324TH ST B
ST SEFOSTER AVE
SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE10 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND
AVE S47THST
SE 56TH ST
SE
S
305TH
ST USTNW54TH
AVE S28THST
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
3
2 N D
S T SE
36T HSTSEOL I
VEAVESES E 3
1 8 T
H WAY29THST
NW ASTE 24TH
ST SE SE
298TH PL HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G E DR SE23RDSTSE22NDSTSE85THAVES4THSTSES288TH
ST SE 282ND ST O STSE64THAVES111THPLSE20THSTSE
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 ELM
ST SESE 285TH STSE312THWAY61ST
STSE GINKGOSTSE15TH ST SETSTNE45THST
NE S 303RD PL S 322NDST19THSTSE21STST
SE 33RD ST SE 55TH STSERANDALLAVESE63RDP
L S E WARD AVE SE107THPLSE55THWAYSE43RDSTNE63RD
PL S59TH AVE S133RD AVE SEFIRSTSE66THAVESSE314THPL
S 328TH ST S 329TH PLS321STSTSSTSE65THSTSEJPLNE57THSTSE17THSTSE56THAVESGSTSE49THSTNEBSTSES292NDSTEVERGREENWAYSEK
ST SEN ST NER ST NE118THAVESEMUCKL
E S H O O T M U C K L E
S H O O T C 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 TCOL
L
E C
L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS
TS18
TS18
S 277TH ST
24TH ST E
JOVITA
BLVDE
SE 274TH ST
PACIFIC AVE S132ND
AVE
SESE
272ND
ST MI LI
TARYRDS ELLINGSON RD
SW 8TH ST
E WESTVALLEYHWY140THAVE E136TH AVE ES
272ND ST WEST
VALLEY HWY S108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY
NWSTEWART RDSWWEST
VALLEYHWYEVALENTINE AVE SE68TH
AVE S124TH
AVE
SE116TH
AVE
SE142NDAVEESTEWART
RD SE A
ST
SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE
272ND
ST
WESTVALLEYHWYSS
2
7
7T
H
S
T
124TH
AVE
SE12TH
ST
EMILITARYRDS182ND
AVE
EAUBURN-
BLACKDIAMONDRDSES 288TH ST
9THST
E
2
1
0
TH
AVE
E
16TH
ST
E
S
2 72ND W
AY A U
B U RN-
E N U
MC L A
WR D S
214TH AVE ES 272ND ST AUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST
NWI ST NEA
U B U
R
N
W
A
Y
S
C
ST SWM ST
SEAUBURN WAY NR
ST
SE51ST
AVE
S124TH
AVE SEWEST VALLEY
HWY
N132ND
AVE
SES 277TH ST
C ST NW15TH
STSW W MAIN
ST
15TH STNW
SE 304TH
ST E MAIN
ST LAK E
T A P
P S P K WY
S E 29TH
ST SE SE312TH ST
K E R
S EY W
AYSE 8TH ST
NE 37TH ST NW L
A K ELANDHI
LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST
PEASL E Y
CANYON RD S
DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST
3
21ST
ST
S
AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD
SED
ST
NE112TH
AVE
SEEAST
VALLEYHWY
ESE304THWA Y SE 281ST ST 17TH
ST SE 6TH ST SE SE 30
4
TH
ST112TH
AVE SEA ST
SEC ST NE2ND
ST E STUCK
RIVER D R
SE 53RD ST
SE SE 288TH
ST37TH 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
BLVD56TH AVE S110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE
SEGRE E N
RIVERRDSE
N ST NEW
ST NWS 287THST
SCENIC D R S E 62NDST SEA
ST NE4 9 T HST
NE K ST
SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEEVERGRE
EN W A Y
S EF ST
SEACADEMYDRSET ST SEDOGWOOD
ST
SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE
ST
NEBRIDGET
AVE
SEH
ST
SEG
ST
SE57THPLSB ST SEFOSTER
AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0
5 THPLSE140TH AVE
SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH
ST SES
305TH ST USTNW54TH
AVE
S28TH
ST
NE E
MAIN ST30TH
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 NE3 2 N
D
S T SE
36T HSTSEO L
I V EAVESES
E 3 1
8 TH
W A Y
29TH ST NW
ASTE 24TH ST
SE SE 298TH P L HEMLOCK
ST SEFOREST R
ID G E D R SE23RD ST SE 22ND ST SE85THAVESS288THSTOSTSESE282NDST64THAVE
S111THPLSE20 TH ST S E SE286THST108THAVESEHICRESTDRNW1
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 STSETSTNE45THS
T NE S 303RDPL19THSTSE
S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE33RDSTSE55THSTSE
RANDALL AVE SE63R D P LSEWARDAVESE55THWAYSE43RD
ST NE 63RD PL S59TH AVES133RDAVESEFIRSTSE66THAVE
SSE 314TH PL S 328TH STS321STSTSSTSE65TH
ST SEJ PL NEK ST SESE282NDSTBSTSE57THSTSES292NDSTRSTNE56THAVES17THSTSEGSTSE118THAVE
SE49TH ST NE N ST NEEVERGREENWAYSEMUCKLES
H O O T M U C K L E S H O O T C 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 INGKING
C O U
N T Y
C O U N
T
Y P
L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS
TS18
TS18
S 277TH ST
24TH ST E
SE 274TH ST
PACIFIC
AVE
SJOVITABLVD E 132ND
AVE SEELLINGSON RD
SW SE 272ND
ST 8TH ST
E
WESTVALLEYHWY140TH
AVE
E136TH
AVE
ES
272ND
ST WESTVALLEY HWY S108TH AVE
SEWEST VALLEY HWY
NWMI
L I T AR Y RD S
STEWART RDSWWESTVALLEYHWYEVALENTINEAVE
SE68TH AVE S124TH
AVE
SE116TH
AVE
SE142NDAVEESTEWART
RD
SE
A ST SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE
272ND
ST
WESTVAL
LEYHWYSS
2
7
7T
H
S
T
124TH
AVE
SE12TH
ST
EMILITARY
RD
SAUBURN-
BLACKDIAMONDRDSE182ND
AVEE9THSTE
S
288TH
ST
2
1
0
TH
A
V
E
E
16TH ST E
S 2 72ND
W AY 214TH
AVE EA U
B U R
N E N
U MC L A WR D SAUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEB
ST NWI ST
NEA U B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
S
C ST SWM
ST SEAUBURN WAY
NR
ST
SE124TH
AVE
SEWEST VALLEYHWYNS277THST
C ST
NW15TH ST SW
W MAIN ST
15TH ST NW
SE 304TH ST E MAIN ST LAK
E T A
P P S P
K W Y
S E 132ND
AVE SE51ST AVE
S29TH
ST
SE
SE
312TH
ST K E R S
EY W AYSE
8TH ST NE
37TH ST NW
L A K
ELANDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH
STDSTNW104THAVESE
WESTVALLEYHWYSS
316TH
ST
D ST NE112TH
AVE
SEEAST
VALLEY
HWY
EAuburn
AveSE304THWA Y
SE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE
6TH ST SE 112TH
AVE SESE 3 0 4 T HST
A ST SEC
ST
NE2ND
ST
E STUCK RIVER
DR SE 53RD
ST SE SE
288TH ST 37TH
ST SE M
ST NE4 6TH
P L S 4 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
BLVD56TH
AVE S110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE
E N RIVERRDSE
N
ST NEW ST
NWS 287TH ST
SCENIC D R S E 62NDST
SE 4 9 T HST NE K ST
SE58TH AVE SS
331ST S T
144THAVESEEVERGREE N W
A Y S
EF ST SEACADEMYDRSET
ST
SEDOGWOOD
ST
SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE
ST
NEBRIDGET
AVE
SEH
ST
SEG ST SE57THPLSS
324TH ST B
ST SEFOSTER AVE
SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE10 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND
AVE S47THST
SE 56TH ST
SE
S
305TH
ST USTNW54TH
AVE S28THST
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
3
2 N D
S T SE
36T HSTSEOL I
VEAVESES E 3
1 8 T
H WAY29THST
NW ASTE 24TH
ST SE SE
298TH PL HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G E DR SE23RDSTSE22NDSTSE85THAVES4THSTSES288TH
ST SE 282ND ST O STSE64THAVES111THPLSE20THSTSE
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 ELM
ST SESE 285TH STSE312THWAY61ST
STSE GINKGOSTSE15TH ST SETSTNE45THST
NE S 303RD PL S 322NDST19THSTSE21STST
SE 33RD ST SE 55TH STSERANDALLAVESE63RDP
L S E WARD AVE SE107THPLSE55THWAYSE43RDSTNE63RD
PL S59TH AVE S133RD AVE SEFIRSTSE66THAVESSE314THPL
S 328TH ST S 329TH PLS321STSTSSTSE65THSTSEJPLNE57THSTSE17THSTSE56THAVESGSTSE49THSTNEBSTSES292NDSTEVERGREENWAYSEK
ST SEN ST NER ST NE118THAVESEMUCKL
E S H O O T M U C K L E
S H O O T C 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 TCOL
L
E C
L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS
TS18
TS18
S 277TH ST
24TH ST E
JOVITA
BLVDE
SE 274TH ST
PACIFIC AVE S132ND
AVE
SESE
272ND
ST MI LI
TARYRDS ELLINGSON RD
SW 8TH ST
E WESTVALLEYHWY140THAVE E136TH AVE ES
272ND ST WEST
VALLEY HWY S108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY
NWSTEWART RDSWWEST
VALLEYHWYEVALENTINE AVE SE68TH
AVE S124TH
AVE
SE116TH
AVE
SE142NDAVEESTEWART
RD SE A
ST
SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE
272ND
ST
WESTVALLEYHWYSS
2
7
7T
H
S
T
124TH
AVE
SE12TH
ST
EMILITARYRDS182ND
AVE
EAUBURN-
BLACKDIAMONDRDSES 288TH ST
9THST
E
2
1
0
TH
AVE
E
16TH
ST
E
S
2 72ND W
AY A U
B U RN-
E N U
MC L A
WR D S
214TH AVE ES 272ND ST AUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST
NWI ST NEA
U B U
R
N
W
A
Y
S
C
ST SWM ST
SEAUBURN WAY NR
ST
SE51ST
AVE
S124TH
AVE SEWEST VALLEY
HWY
N132ND
AVE
SES 277TH ST
C ST NW15TH
STSW W MAIN
ST
15TH STNW
SE 304TH
ST E MAIN
ST LAK E
T A P
P S P K WY
S E 29TH
ST SE SE312TH ST
K E R
S EY W
AYSE 8TH ST
NE 37TH ST NW L
A K ELANDHI
LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST
PEASL E Y
CANYON RD S
DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST
3
21ST
ST
S
AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD
SED
ST
NE112TH
AVE
SEEAST
VALLEYHWY
ESE304THWA Y SE 281ST ST 17TH
ST SE 6TH ST SE SE 30
4
TH
ST112TH
AVE SEA ST
SEC ST NE2ND
ST E STUCK
RIVER D R
SE 53RD ST
SE SE 288TH
ST37TH 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
BLVD56TH AVE S110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE
SEGRE E N
RIVERRDSE
N ST NEW
ST NWS 287THST
SCENIC D R S E 62NDST SEA
ST NE4 9 T HST
NE K ST
SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEEVERGRE
EN W A Y
S EF ST
SEACADEMYDRSET ST SEDOGWOOD
ST
SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE
ST
NEBRIDGET
AVE
SEH
ST
SEG
ST
SE57THPLSB ST SEFOSTER
AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0
5 THPLSE140TH AVE
SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH
ST SES
305TH ST USTNW54TH
AVE
S28TH
ST
NE E
MAIN ST30TH
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 NE3 2 N
D
S T SE
36T HSTSEO L
I V EAVESES
E 3 1
8 TH
W A Y
29TH ST NW
ASTE 24TH ST
SE SE 298TH P L HEMLOCK
ST SEFOREST R
ID G E D R SE23RD ST SE 22ND ST SE85THAVESS288THSTOSTSESE282NDST64THAVE
S111THPLSE20 TH ST S E SE286THST108THAVESEHICRESTDRNW1
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 STSETSTNE45THS
T NE S 303RDPL19THSTSE
S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE33RDSTSE55THSTSE
RANDALL AVE SE63R D P LSEWARDAVESE55THWAYSE43RD
ST NE 63RD PL S59TH AVES133RDAVESEFIRSTSE66THAVE
SSE 314TH PL S 328TH STS321STSTSSTSE65TH
ST SEJ PL NEK ST SESE282NDSTBSTSE57THSTSES292NDSTRSTNE56THAVES17THSTSEGSTSE118THAVE
SE49TH ST NE N ST NEEVERGREENWAYSEMUCKLES
H O O T M U C K L E S H O O T C 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 IONKENT
K E N
T K I
N G K I
N
G C
L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS
TS18
TS18
S 277TH ST
24TH ST E
JOVITA
BLVDE
SE 274TH ST
PACIFIC AVE S132ND
AVE
SESE
272ND
ST MI LI
TARYRDS ELLINGSON RD
SW 8TH ST
E WESTVALLEYHWY140THAVE E136TH AVE ES
272ND ST WEST
VALLEY HWY S108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY
NWSTEWART RDSWWEST
VALLEYHWYEVALENTINE AVE SE68TH
AVE S124TH
AVE
SE116TH
AVE
SE142NDAVEESTEWART
RD SE A
ST
SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE
272ND
ST
WESTVALLEYHWYSS
2
7
7T
H
S
T
124TH
AVE
SE12TH
ST
EMILITARYRDS182ND
AVE
EAUBURN-
BLACKDIAMONDRDSES 288TH ST
9THST
E
2
1
0
TH
AVE
E
16TH
ST
E
S
2 72ND W
AY A U
B U RN-
E N U
MC L A
WR D S
214TH AVE ES 272ND ST AUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST
NWI ST NEA
U B U
R
N
W
A
Y
S
C
ST SWM ST
SEAUBURN WAY NR
ST
SE51ST
AVE
S124TH
AVE SEWEST VALLEY
HWY
N132ND
AVE
SES 277TH ST
C ST NW15TH
STSW W MAIN
ST
15TH STNW
SE 304TH
ST E MAIN
ST LAK E
T A P
P S P K WY
S E 29TH
ST SE SE312TH ST
K E R
S EY W
AYSE 8TH ST
NE 37TH ST NW L
A K ELANDHI
LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST
PEASL E Y
CANYON RD S
DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST
3
21ST
ST
S
AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD
SED
ST
NE112TH
AVE
SEEAST
VALLEYHWY
ESE304THWA Y SE 281ST ST 17TH
ST SE 6TH ST SE SE 30
4
TH
ST112TH
AVE SEA ST
SEC ST NE2ND
ST E STUCK
RIVER D R
SE 53RD ST
SE SE 288TH
ST37TH 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
BLVD56TH AVE S110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE
SEGRE E N
RIVERRDSE
N ST NEW
ST NWS 287THST
SCENIC D R S E 62NDST SEA
ST NE4 9 T HST
NE K ST
SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEEVERGRE
EN W A Y
S EF ST
SEACADEMYDRSET ST SEDOGWOOD
ST
SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE
ST
NEBRIDGET
AVE
SEH
ST
SEG
ST
SE57THPLSB ST SEFOSTER
AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0
5 THPLSE140TH AVE
SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH
ST SES
305TH ST USTNW54TH
AVE
S28TH
ST
NE E
MAIN ST30TH
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 NE3 2 N
D
S T SE
36T HSTSEO L
I V EAVESES
E 3 1
8 TH
W A Y
29TH ST NW
ASTE 24TH ST
SE SE 298TH P L HEMLOCK
ST SEFOREST R
ID G E D R SE23RD ST SE 22ND ST SE85THAVESS288THSTOSTSESE282NDST64THAVE
S111THPLSE20 TH ST S E SE286THST108THAVESEHICRESTDRNW1
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 STSETSTNE45THS
T NE S 303RDPL19THSTSE
S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE33RDSTSE55THSTSE
RANDALL AVE SE63R D P LSEWARDAVESE55THWAYSE43RD
ST NE 63RD PL S59TH AVES133RDAVESEFIRSTSE66THAVE
SSE 314TH PL S 328TH STS321STSTSSTSE65TH
ST SEJ PL NEK ST SESE282NDSTBSTSE57THSTSES292NDSTRSTNE56THAVES17THSTSEGSTSE118THAVE
SE49TH ST NE N ST NEEVERGREENWAYSEMUCKLES
H O O T M U C K L E S H O O T C 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 ECTIONKENTKEN
T K I N G K I N G
C O U N T Y C O U
N T Y P I E R C E P
I E R C E
C
O U
APPENDIX A
1
PAVEMENT INVENTORY & RATING
Pavement condition surveys that are conducted by the consulting service providers every few
years use 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.
A caveat to street ratings is that
there are always several streets that
do not receive any pavement
treatments between when
pavement ratings are completed,
and these streets show an increase
in PCI scoring despite not having
work done on them. There are
always variations between ratings
that can result in a several PCI
point increase from one rating to
the next. Different pavement
rating technicians will look at a
segment of pavement and have
differing opinions about the
condition of the roadway. Also something as simple as an overcast day may affect the way a
pavement is rated visually, because the flat light makes it difficult to see hairline cracking, and
other distresses.
The pavement rating process has been automated to record a lot of the distresses that factor into a
pavement score, however there are several distresses that are continue to be rated visually by a
technician. That makes the process somewhat subjective and dependent upon a person’s
judgment. Ratings can be skewed by something as simple as rating pavements during an overcast
day while the low light level makes it much more difficult to distinguish pavement distresses
such as hairline cracking) that would normally be seen in full daylight. Additionally, there will
always be variation in what different pavement rating technicians see and how they quantify
severity of different pavement distresses. Additionally the way pavement rating services rate
30
Page 30
APPENDIX A
2
chip seal streets has changed. They modified their protocol for the way they performed their
survey to be more consistent with industry standards and practice. The pavement rating service
no longer factors in pavement “raveling” as a distress in chip seal pavements. The existing chip
seal pavements were rated more harshly than they should have been in 2013, and showed a large
increase in PCI rating (approximately 15 PCI points) in 2017 as a result of that different rating
methodology.
The City of Auburn, like most cities, utilizes a Pavement Management Database to track
pavement condition, manage the street system, and model overall system performance. 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.
HOW WILL THE CITY IMPROVE IN THE FUTURE?
Additional testing methods to test the strength of the pavements in the network will be used to
determine the structure of the pavements in the street system. These tests may include:
Falling Weight Deflectometer testing to test pavement strength and subsoil bearing
capacity.
Ground Penetrating Radar to determine network pavement thicknesses on a mass scale.
The City has learned expensive lessons on recent projects where the project was intended
to grind and overlay a section of roadway only to discover that the pavement was
extremely thin, and needed to be completely rebuilt instead. This could have been
planned for if we had known the pavement structure in advance of the project.
Core sample testing for streets to determine if the pavement structure is adequate for the
existing pavement loading. Core samples are collected with a special drill that allows a
cylindrical sample of the pavement to be extracted from the roadway. This is especially
useful because we will be able to excavate to see what the underlying pavement
foundation consists of.
Additionally, the use of a pavement rating service provider that employs a fully automated
pavement rating process would be beneficial to have all of the load related pavement distresses
rated objectively, and would provide City staff with a data set that can be relied upon. Using a
more objective pavement rating method would create more assurance in the data set, and be a
more reliable starting point in the street selection process. The City needs to be able to focus
energy on the correct projects at the correct times to maximize the use and benefit of available
funding.
WHAT DO THE NUMBERS MEAN?
Pavement Condition Index (PCI)
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 for the Arterial Street
31
Page 31
APPENDIX A
3
Preservation Program and Local Street Preservation Program is to reach and maintain a 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 60-70 range, because the pavement repair typically requires relatively less expensive
treatments that preserve the existing pavement and extend the useful life of the pavement.
Additionally, pavement condition tends to diminish at an accelerated rate after they have reached
a PCI range of 50-60. 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.
International Roughness Index (IRI)
The International Roughness Index (IRI) was developed b y 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 the ride
quality rating that was collected in 2017 for all of the streets in the City is shown on Map 6 –
Citywide Ride Quality Rating. In the pavement rating surveys that were completed in 2013
and 2017, 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 an official policy on the use of IRI data for managing the street
system; however, the roughness of a roadway segment can be a tie breaker between similarly
rated streets (PCI rating) to be included in a project. Ride quality is a frequent comment that we
receive from our citizens, so having this data helps to be able to track and anticipate issues that
may arise in the future. Additionally, in the future after we have conducted more pavement
rating surveys and have a chance to analyze the trends in pavement roughness, then IRI may
become a factored metric in the street selection process for the City. Table 5 below shows how
the numerical ratings correspond with the rider experience.
Table 5 - IRI Ratings
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 depression
Pavement Rut Depth Measurement
The City’s pavement rating service provider measured pavement Rut Depth with an automated
laser rut measuring device. The rut depth is measured for each street in the network, and then
32
Page 32
APPENDIX A
4
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 and standard cross slope for a highway 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 much
lower risk of hydroplaning, however standing water negatively affects a vehicle’s ability to stop.
Although the City does not have a policy on the use of rut depth as a trigger to preserve
roadways, the data is useful to monitor and track the condition of roads. If an otherwise intact
piece of pavement is showing extreme rutting, then that is an indication that either the pavement
subgrade is failing or the roadway is extremely overloaded by heavy vehicles. These instances
would be clear indications that something needs to be done to correct these rutting issues, and
could serve as proper justification for including a particular street in a project.
AUBURN’S STREET SELECTION PROCESS
The City contracts with service providers to rate Auburn’s street system periodically and rates
each street segment as discussed in the previous section. Since the repair costs for the overall
system far exceeds 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 considers when determining which streets to rebuild and or
rehabilitate each year. Staff uses the Pavement Management Database to produce a list of street
segments that are in the PCI range for the type of project that is being programmed: a
reconstruction or preservation project. It is worth pointing out that the pavement ratings alone do
not determine which streets will be included in a particular project; they are simply a tool that
focuses staff on streets that are an issue. The engineering staff performs a site review of
perspective streets that may be shortlisted for inclusion into a project. With all of the moving
parts involved with the street selection process; between the street issues, utility priorities,
maintenance and operation requirements, traffic volumes, and budgets to balance; the priority of
a particular stretch of street being included in a project rises and falls with consideration of each
of these parameters. The underlying message is that the PCI of a street is not the only factor
used in street selection, but is one of a host of deliberations that occur to package a project
together. City staff confirm the ratings, compile site specific data, take pictures, etc. Next staff
will estimate the rough cost to do the work at each site. One of the most important factors the
City considers when choosing which streets to rebuild or improve is City owned Utility input. If
there is a need to improve a utility along with improving the street, then staff takes into account
the availability of Utility funds and balances the budgetary needs of both City programs. If the
City Utilities have a long range plan to improve their infrastructure in the street but lack
immediate funding, then that would be a suitable reason to delay working on a particular
roadway. Replacing the utility mains at the same time as street restoration is much more
economical and disturbs the neighboring residences only once. Additionally, it prevents newly
33
Page 33
APPENDIX A
5
reconstructed or treated roadway surfaces from being damaged by trenching to replace
underground utilities.
The City’s Maintenance and Operations Division are consulted during street selection processes,
because they have knowledge about problem streets where excessive resources are being spent
on temporary repairs. Streets that require more regular maintenance, streets with significant
drainage issues and streets will poor ride quality are all given a high level of priority.
Additionally the volume of vehicles per day, number of businesses and residents being served by
a street are also factors in street selection. Other deliberations include coordination with third
party utility companies and with private development projects when selecting streets to improve
each year. Finally, the cost of the improvements need to be right sized for the available
preservation budget, and will limit the amount of pavement work that can be accomplished in a
given year. Table 6 below shows the various pavement preservation treatments used for
different PCI ranges, and the typical life span and approximate cost of each treatment type.
34
Page 34
APPENDIX A
6
Table 1 – 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.
2 - 4
years
0.75
per square
yard
PCI 50 - 69
Fair
Condition
Patching and 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 – 2 inches) to preserve the existing pavement and provide a
smooth driving surface.
15 – 20
years
30 to $41
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
8 to $12
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
40 to $46
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 - $17
per square
yard
PCI 0 - 24
Very Poor
Condition
Rebuild Pavement – Existing pavement is completely removed
and a new road is constructed.
20 to 30
years
143 to $293
per square
yard
Life of treatment will vary based on the traffic volume and type of vehicles that use the street, the structure of the pavement and
underlying soil, the age of the existing pavement, and the amount of vehicle turning/stopping movements on the street.
The typical cost of pavement treatments are based on recent bid history from City projects and other jurisdictions that were done in
2016 and 2017.
35
Page 35