1. Paving for Progress Aaron D. Granquist, Project Manager, HR Green, Inc. Doug Wilson, Capital Improvement Project Manager, Cedar Rapids Handouts and presentations are available online at www.iowaleague.org.

2. 10-yr Capital Improvement Plan

5. 1 year for replacing 4 swimming pools – Approved 4 years for flood recovery – Approved 20 years for flood mitigation and streets – Failed 10 years for flood mitigation – Failed 10 years for streets – Passed by voters in Nov. 2013 History of Local Option Sales Tax initiatives

6. 2014 Local Option Sales Tax A proactive approach 1% local option sales tax Effective July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2024 Estimated to generate approximately $18M per year 100% of the revenues generated going toward the maintenance, repair, construction and reconstruction of public streets.

7. Launching the Program: First Years Projects with minimal underground utilities, no right- of-way needs Ability to show progress immediately

8. Community Outreach & Branding Program name: “Paving for Progress” Signage on construction sites Public open houses to communicate plan Farmer’s Market, CR Kernels Game, other public events Program specific URL, website and social media presence

9. Desire for Comprehensive Pavement Management Plan Highest and best use of taxpayer dollars. Prioritization that is data driven, impartial, and measurable. Answers the need to reconstruct and rehabilitate poor roads while also maintaining good roads. Measurement and accountability

10. Developing the Plan Iowa Pavement Management Program (IPMP) delivered first round of pavement condition data in early 2014 Pavement condition collected on 600 miles of roadways Pavement condition data were collected by a Fugro Roadware Automatic Road Analyzer (ARAN). Roads categorized: Very Poor to Very Good, with PCI PCI identifies appropriate treatment methods and strategy. Plan was under development by Spring 2014.

11. Inventory/Condition Assessment Collects: -texture -pavement distress -rutting -roughness Automated roadway data collection system

12. Analysis on Cedar Rapids’ roadways Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor

13. Treatment Methods Reconstruction: The complete removal and replacement of a pavement section Rehabilitation: Asphalt resurfacing, concrete patching, surface profiling Maintenance: Chip seal, crack filling and sealing, diamond grinding Reconstruction Rehabilitation Maintenance

14. Pavement Condition Thresholds Apply the right treatment to the right road at the right time Maintenance, Repair, Restoration Rehabilitation Reconstruction Renovating a pavement in fair condition will usually cost less than 25% of what it takes to reconstruct a failing pavement.

15. Data Preparation Over 6000 individual roadway segments Inconsistencies between City’s roadway geographic data and the data supplied by IPMP – Street names – Need to add intersection points to define project limits History of individual streets was sparse and unreliable Assumed pavement condition curves for each treatment (not much long-term research to draw from) ARAN vehicle did not collect data on curbs or storm intakes Not aware of any other infrastructure prioritization efforts of this magnitude. Someone has to do it first.

16. Prioritization Methodology Used Deighton’s Total Infrastructure Asset Management Software (dTIMS) Extrapolates remaining life cycle curve for all segments Assumes various treatment methods with associated costs Optimizes treatment plan for entire network within constraints: – Funding estimates per year – Location of segments (equitable distribution across City) – Allocation between residential and arterial/collector roads

17. Initial CIP Details Phased prioritization of projects Recommendations for treatment Investing approximately $18 million a year Improvements to 150 miles of roadway (50 miles reconstructed) Funding split between high traffic & residential (40/60) Tool for projecting future performance of road network Plan was presented to community in May 2015

18. Road Outlook Without Paving for Progress Without this program, 90% of the Cedar Rapids road network would likely fall below the “Poor” condition threshold sometime in the next 10 years.

19. Road Outlook With Paving for Progress

20. Progress at a Glance Projects completed to date for life of program 33 Projects completed to date for this construction season 16 Projects still underway this construction season 10 Miles impacted to date11.3 Dollars invested FY’15$16.5M

21. Challenges Why not address worst roads first? The model recommendations have gaps (ex. 42 nd Ave NE) Streets with roll-curbs are not appropriate for overlay treatments ADA compliance Implementing City’s new “Complete Streets” policy Are signals and bridges eligible items for LOST funding? How to integrate underground utility needs? City and Consultant capacity to manage & design projects

22. Next Steps Creation of City Portal –Reporting of performance metrics –Recording completed project data –Documenting underground utility needs Update to CIP in Winter 2015-16 –Refine model errors –Re-prioritize model based on completed projects and as-built costs –Incorporate underground utility constraints

23. Thank You www.CityofCR.com/PavingforProgress d.wilson@cedar-rapids.org pavingforprogress@cedar-rapids.org agranquist@hrgreen.com