New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
COE Road Fund Efficiency Review
COE
>
PW
>
Admin
>
Finance
>
Operating
>
2009
>
COE Road Fund Efficiency Review
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2010 12:54:13 PM
Creation date
11/18/2008 12:49:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Operating
PW_Document_Type_ Operating
Reports
Fiscal_Year
2001
PW_Division
Maintenance
GL_Fund
131
GL_ORG
9410
External_View
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Genera I Maintenance <br /> Description of the function: <br /> It's called general maintenance for a reason. This is the category in which cities lump a <br /> variety of activities including everything from day to day maintenance to minor roadway <br /> construction. Typically it includes functions that are separated in this report for <br /> individual analysis such as street sweeping, alley maintenance, bridge and culvert <br /> maintenance, litter pickup and landscape maintenance. <br /> In this analysis we consider the cost of routine patching and crack sealing as well as <br /> pothole repair and other miscellaneous maintenance. To allow anapples-to-apples <br /> comparison with other cities, we have also included Eugene's sidewalk/concrete <br /> maintenance cost and maintenance-related administrative cost in the city's total general <br /> maintenance cost <br /> Comparison to others: <br /> This function depends on so many sateen " • fq,~ <br /> things that comparison with other ~c, co,u~ ~'I <br /> cities always requires at least two sower <br /> asterisks. The chart shown on the s~~~ <br /> right is no exception. The chart Varxower <br /> numbers are based on the assumption E~e~ <br /> that if the budget amounts for all the $o ~z;ooo $a,ooo $s,ooa $a,ooo $to;oao <br /> other functions are eliminated, the Adj°~ea ~~~0u <br /> remainder is what each city spends on **muitiple data differences described in text <br /> general maintenance. <br /> However, what is done with the money is different in each city. For example, Vancouver <br /> does crack sealing mainly as preparatory work in advance of the slurry seal contract work <br /> .done each summer. In Eugene, crack sealing is done as a means of extending the life of <br /> the roadway and more of it is done for a longer period of time. Sunnyvale has <br /> performance measures for most everything but only a general category of preventive <br /> maintenance performed to measure this function. <br /> Cost Factor Analysis: <br /> Much of the work done under this function is done to preserve and extend the life of <br /> <br /> .pavement that is not receiving regular resurfacing treatments. As such, the level of effort <br /> could be reduced if an annual resurfacing program were in place for several years. <br /> Contracting Options: <br /> Private contractors routinely do crack sealing and minor overlay work. The city will <br /> always need a crew to do immediate response work and the small jobs that are not <br /> economically done by contract. <br /> 15 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.