The City of Novi analyzed its road network and funding levels using RoadSoft software and the PASER rating system. At the current $3.2 million annual funding level, the average road condition would decline over 10 years. Doubling funding to $5 million annually would maintain roads in good condition, reconstruct some roads, slightly reduce roads in poor condition, improve the average PASER rating, and be the optimal funding level. The analysis evaluated different funding scenarios and their impact on road condition over a 10-year period.
Repurposing LNG terminals for Hydrogen Ammonia: Feasibility and Cost Saving
Road Asset Management Funding Analysis
1. City of Novi
Road Asset Management & Funding
Analysis
March 12, 2012
Page 1 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
2. Pavement Asset Management,
RoadSoft-GIS, and the PASER System
In 2002, Public Act 499 was signed into law defining
asset management as “an ongoing process of
maintaining, upgrading, and operating physical assets
cost-effectively, based on a continuous physical
inventory and condition assessment”
RoadSoft software was introduced in 1993, and since
that time, yearly funding from MDOT has enabled
LTAP at Michigan Tech to continue to refine
development and provide technical support.
The Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER)
methodology is used to collect road surface condition
data. PASER is a visual assessment system that rates
the road surface on a scale of 1-10. Where 10 is new
construction and 1 is totally failed.
Page 2 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
3. Maintaining An Asset
The PASER rating, and subsequent classification to ‘Good’, ‘Fair’, & ‘Poor’,
corresponds to an associated Remaining Service Life (RSL).
It is much more cost effective to perform preventative maintenance while
the condition is still good.
Pavement Deterioration Curve
10
9
8
PASER Rating
7
6
5 Critical Distress
4 Point - PASER 4
3 Remaining
2 Service Life
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Years Since Construction
Page 3 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
4. Pavement Life Cycle – Mix of Fixes
$2.70/syd/year over life of pavement – 36 years
Average condition rating = 7
Life Cycle Curve - Mix of Fixes
10
9
8
PASER Rating
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Year
Page 4 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
5. Pavement Life Cycle – No Maintenance
$3.30/syd/year over life of pavement – 36 years
Average condition rating = 6
Life Cycle Curve - No Maintenance
10
9
8
PASER Rating
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Year
Page 5 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
6. Road Network Condition Evaluation
Process Steps
Field Survey – Collect Data
Database Creation / Data Quality Assurance
Maintenance Alternative Selection and Cost
Assignment
Preliminary Network Analysis
Identify Funding Level
Refined Network Analysis – Selecting
Segments/Neighborhoods
Track Maintenance and Reconstruction
Projects
Update Database / Adjust Analysis
Page 6 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
7. City Road Network Status
Approximately 172 miles of City-owned roads
100 Miles Asphalt
70 Miles Concrete
2 Miles Gravel
Condition
19 Miles Poor (PASER 1-3)
Reconstruction Candidates
98 Miles Fair-Good (PASER 4-5)
Major Rehabilitation Candidates
55 Miles Good-Very Good (Paser 6-10)
Light Preventative Maintenance Candidates
Page 7 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
8. Strategy Evaluation and Optimization
Roadsoft uses the following parameters to select
the appropriate maintenance and capital
procedures
Specific Preventative Maintenance, Rehabilitation, and
Reconstruction alternatives
Costs for these alternatives
Expected deterioration curves (rates)
Budget
Duration (5-year plan, 10-year plan, etc)
Roadsoft does not
Pick specific segments
Consider other capital projects (utility, etc)
Page 8 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
11. Results
Analysis was performed at several funding levels
Funding levels were evaluated for programs with
consistent budgets, as well as ‘front loaded’
The following graphs summarize the findings
Page 11 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
12. Side-by-side Projected Condition
Comparison
Projected Condition Distribution 2022
100%
90%
32% 26%
80%
70% 56%
% of Network
69%
60% 23% 79% Good
50% Fair
40% 57% Poor
16%
30%
50% 12%
20%
28% 12%
10% 19%
11% 9%
0%
Current Condition $5M - Recon- $3.2M - Current $4M $5M
struction Only Funding Level
Funding Level / Year
Page 12 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
13. Side-by-side Projected PASER Comparison
8.5
8
$5M/Yr - Mix of Fixes
7.5
$4M/Yr - Mix of Fixes
7
PASER
6.5
$3.2M/Yr - (Current Funding)
6
$5M/Yr - RC Only
5.5
5
2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Years
Figure 1: Projected Paser Rating At Various Funding Levels
Page 13 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
14. Side-by-side Projected RSL Comparison
8
7
$5M/Yr - Mix of Fixes
Years Until PASER = 4
6
5
$4M/Yr - Mix of Fixes
4
3
$3.2M/Yr - (Current Funding)
2 $5M/Yr - RC Only
1
2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Years
Figure 2: Projected Average years until PASER = 4
Page 14 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
15. Centerline Miles Receiving Treatment
Total Miles
Reconstructed
(RC), 20, 5%
Total Miles
Rehabilitated (RH),
50, 13%
Total Miles
Preventative
Maintenance (PM),
330, 82%
Figure 3: $5 Million / Year - 10 Year Program: Centerline Miles Receiving Treatment
Page 15 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
16. Funding Allocation
Preventative
Maintenance (PM),
$5,000,000, 10%
Reconstruction
(RC), $20,000,000,
40%
Rehabilitation (RH),
$25,000,000, 50%
Figure 4: $5 Million / Year - 10 Year Program: Total $ Spent Over 10 Year Program
Page 16 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
17. Conclusions
Current Funding Level - $3,200,000 is not sufficient to
maintain the average PASER condition over ten years.
Funding the road program at $4,000,000 per year improves
the average condition of the system, however more streets
would be in poor condition
An investment of $5,000,000 per year
Provides ample funding to maintain roads currently in
good/fair condition (protect previous investments)
Provides ample funding for road program to incorporate a
reconstruction component
Roads in ‘Poor’ category are slightly reduced over 10 year
period
Provides improved overall average PASER rating of system
(From 6.5 to 7.5) after 10 years
Page 17 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
18. Road Network Condition Evaluation
Process Steps
Field Survey – Collect Data
Database Creation / Data Quality Assurance
Maintenance Alternative Selection and Cost
Assignment
Preliminary Network Analysis
Identify Funding Level
Refined Network Analysis – Selecting
Segments/Neighborhoods
Track Maintenance and Reconstruction
Projects
Update Database / Adjust Analysis
Page 18 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
19. City of Novi
Road Asset Management & Funding
Analysis
Questions / Discussion
Page 19 of 19 Road Asset Management and Funding Analysis Presentation March 2012
