City Council Planning Sessions

1. City Council Planning Agenda Documents: 2016-02-22 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING AGENDA.PDF 2. City Council Planning Pavement Management Report - 2015 Ps05 Documents: 2016-02-22 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT - 2015 PS05.PDF 3. City Council Planning Minutes Documents: 2016-02-22 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING MINUTES.PDF 4. City Council Planning Draft 2016-02-08 Minutes Ps02 Documents: 2016-02-22 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING DRAFT 2016-02-08 MINUTES PS02.PDF 5. City Council Planning Downtown Wheaton Association 2016-17 Budget Ps04 Documents: 2016-02-22 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING DOWNTOWN WHEATON ASSOCIATION 2016-17 BUDGET PS04.PDF  WHEATON CITY COUNCIL PLANNING SESSION WHEATON CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS 303 W. WESLEY STREET, WHEATON, ILLINOIS MONDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2016 - 7:00 P.M. AGENDA I. Call to Order II. Approval of Minutes – February 8, 2016 III. Public Comment IV. Downtown Wheaton Association 2016/17 Budget V. 2015 Pavement Management Report VI. City Council/Staff Comments VII. Adjournment During the Public Comment portion of the agenda, the presiding officer shall recognize any person requesting to be heard on any of the planning session agenda items only. Persons speaking during Public Comment shall not speak longer than three (3) minutes and shall be permitted to speak only once. Visitors must remain quiet and not engage in behavior that interferes with the Planning Session. The presiding officer may, or upon a majority vote of the council, request any visitor who violates any provision of this paragraph to leave the council chambers, and such visitor shall thereupon leave. Any person providing public comment shall address the presiding officer only and shall not proceed with remarks until recognized. When recognized, the person shall state his or her name and address. Cross floor discussions are prohibited. If a member of the City Council has questions of any person who has provided public comment, that person may address the specific question. Memorandum Pau’ G. Redman, P.E.J Director of EngineeringjLtl To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: February 17, 2016 Subject: 2015 Pavement Management Report Background A key performance indicator for City Strategic Goal 2D regarding Quality Infrastructure is to maintain an average pavement condition rating of “Good” for all City streets. Staff has recommended that in order to effectively measure City pavement conditions, and place pavement conditions on the same base line for analysis, a pavement evaluation needs to be performed on a routine schedule. In 2012, the City hired MDS Technologies, Inc. to perform a pavement evaluation and financial forecast analysis for the City street system. This pavement evaluation concluded that the average pavement condition index for all City streets was calculated to be 68 on a scale of 0 to 100. This rating was deemed to have met the key performance indicator. In an effort to monitor performance of City street maintenance efforts and measure current pavement conditions, the City again hired MDS Technologies in 2015 to perform a pavement evaluation for the City street system. The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the findings of the 2015 Pavement Management Report prepared by MDS Technologies dated January 2016, attached for your review. Pavement Condition Evaluation Pavement evaluation begins with an inspection of all street segments of the system and entering the inspection data into a data-base software program. The City uses Lucity for public works asset management. MDS Technologies collected pavement data by geo-referenced digital imaging from vehicle mounted video cameras. This allows the data to be collected in a matter of weeks as opposed to months or longer. Technicians are then able to review and record condition data on street segments directly into the pavement management software program. The pavement management software calculates a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score between 0 and 100. PCI scores are grouped into six general categories from “Serious/Failed” to “Good”. A summary of the City’s current pavement condition of all 166 miles of streets is as follows. Approximately 44% of the City’s streets have a PCI above 71; Good and Satisfactory. Streets in this category generally require no immediate pavement maintenance. Approximately 15% of the City’s streets have a PCI between 55 and 70; Fair. Streets in the higher end of this category are similar to that above in that they do not generally require immediate pavement maintenance. However, streets in the lower end of this category may be candidates for surface patching or resurfacing depending on their surface condition due to traffic volumes. Approximately 17% of the City’s streets have a PCI between 40 and 55; Poor. Streets in this category are candidates for pavement resurfacing. Approximately 23% of the City’s streets have a PCI less than 40; Very Poor and Serious/Failed. Streets in this category are candidates for pavement rehabilitation (full depth patching and resurfacing) and towards the lower end, full pavement reconstruction. Approximately 40% of the City’s streets are below a PCI of 55 which is the general cutoff Engineering staff uses to develop the five-year annual road program street list. The 2015 average pavement condition index for all City streets is 68.7. In 2012, this index was 68.0. This result indicates that we are maintaining City streets to the level established by the City Strategic Goal for Quality Infrastructure. In reviewing the distribution of the six ranges of pavement condition indexes from 2012 and 2015, we can see a change in the distribution that may be of concern for the City moving forward with the current practices of the annual road program. Percentage of Total Road Area by Pavement Condition Range Year 2012 2015 +1- % Change Serious/Failed 0-25 12.08 13.98 1.9 15.73 Very Poor 25-40 8.63 9.16 0.53 6.14 Poor4O-55 11.29 17.15 5.86 51.90 Fair 55-70 13.96 15.39 1.43 10.24 Satisfactory7o-85 21.72 11.24 -10.48 -48.25 Good 85-100 32.31 33.07 0.76 2.35 Side by side comparison of the pavement condition ranges from 2012 and 2015 indicate that over the past three years streets in the Satisfactory range have decreased nearly 50% and streets in the Poor range have increased by more than 50%. This is not a positive trend for maintaining City streets and staff will need to make adjustments in the five-year annual road program street selection process to maximize the amount of pavement maintenance per year for the funds allocated in the City budget. Financial Analysis MDS Technologies has provided a budget analysis utilizing the pavement management software program and assumptions provided by staff. These assumptions included average unit costs for pavement maintenance work types (resurfacing, rehabilitation, and reconstruction) and a percent of annual expenditures for each pavement maintenance type. The analysis was carried over a 10-year period with different funding levels to provide a range of options for consideration. According to the financial analysis, in order to maintain the current PCI average score of 68.7, the City will need to budget $2.58 million annually. The analysis assumes a projected expenditure breakdown for street maintenance type of 10% for reconstruction, 35% for rehabilitation (patching and resurfacing), and 55% for resurfacing. In order to show the effect of different annual budget expenditures on the average pavement condition index of the next 10 years, MDS performed additional analysis for five budget amounts from zero to $3.5 million. The result of this analysis is shown in the report by Table 3 on page 8 and by Figure 2 on page 9. This analysis provides support for budgeting $2.58 million annually for City street maintenance. Pavement Reconstruction vs. Pavement Maintenance Pavement maintenance principles and strategies adopted by many pavement management agencies, and supported by research performed by leading engineering universities, reflect performing low cost maintenance practices while a pavement is at a relatively high pavement condition score. These strategies maximize the area of pavement that is treated for the lowest cost and extends the life of the pavement the most. This is sometimes referred to as, “The right treatment for the right street at the right time.” Unfortunately, these practices do not effectively address pavements with condition indexes in the low end of the range, specifically below 25. As shown earlier in this memorandum, approximately 14% of City streets fall in the Serious/Failed category having a pavement condition below 25. These streets are most likely candidates for reconstruction as they do not have the structural integrity to support surface maintenance any longer. The budget analysis allocates 10% of the recommended annual budget to pavement reconstruction. However, pavement reconstruction costs are over ten times the cost of resurfacing, and 10% or $250,000 per year does not accomplish much pavement reconstruction and will not significantly reduce the pavement reconstruction backlog over the long term. Allocating a higher percentage of the annual budget for pavement reconstruction will reduce the reconstruction backlog over time, but will also lower the average pavement condition index. This is shown in the report by Figure 3 on page 11. A recommendation to reduce the pavement reconstruction backlog while maintaining the average pavement condition of the City street system is to provide additional funding solely for pavement reconstruction. Recommendations The Engineering staff recommends to the City Council the following. • Increase the annual street maintenance expenditure to $2.6 million based on a 55/35/10 split of funding for resurfacing, rehabilitation and reconstruction, respectfully. • Budget additional funds annually for pavement reconstruction to effectively reduce the reconstruction backlog; those streets in the Serious/Failed category. • Continue to perform a pavement condition evaluation every 3 years to measure progress in meeting the key performance indicator for average pavement condition of the City street system. 3  2015 Pavement Management Report The City of Wheaton Engineering Department ‘ Prepared by: MDS Technologies, Inc. 350 S. Northwest Highway, Suite 300 Park Ridge, IL 60068 January 2016 City of Wheaton Engiheerüig Department 2015 Pavement Management Report Executive Summary The City of Wheaton maintains an extensive road network consisting of approximately 166.01 center-line miles of roads. This road network is a major asset that requires ongoing maintenance and rehabilitation to provide a desirable level of service to the traveling public. The basic premise behind the pro-active management of pavement assets is illustrated below. If a relatively small amount of money is not spent when a pavement begins to exhibit signs of distress, a much larger downstream expenditure will ultimately be required. Because the deterioration rate of a pavement tends to accelerate as it ages, the time lapse from the smaller expenditure to the larger expenditure is relatively short. Performing maintenance before deterioration begins to accelerate provides the best value to the City in the long term. Long Term Cost Benefits of Timely Maintenance 0 V C 0 C-, 1- C a) E a) 0 Time (years) A systematic evaluation of the condition all 166.01 centerline miles of the City’s road network was performed. The road network was divided into a number of segments, each typically one block long. The resulting data was used to calculate a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score for each segment. PCI scores can range from 100 (excellent condition) to zero (serious/failed condition). MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS City of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report The result of this analysis (excluding 1.81 centerline miles of alleys) is summarized below. Some . % of the City’s road network is in Good to Satisfactory condition. 44 3 About 32.6% of the network is in Fair to Poor condition, and 23.1% of the network is in Very Poor to Serious/Failed condition. The overall average condition of the road network as measured by PCI is 68.7. The City’s alleys, with a few exceptions, either have a PCI score less than 40 (Very Poor to Failed condition), or above 70 (Satisfactory to Good condition). Pavement Condition Distribution 35 33.07 30 25 • Serious/Failed •Very Poor 0 20 Poor 4-, 0 17,15 I— Fair I’-. 15.39 0 13.98 •Satisfactory 15 - bfJ CD 4-, •Good C a) 10 5 0 0-25 25-40 40-55 55-70 70-85 85-100 PCI Score Budget Analysis was also performed to estimate the effect that various funding scenarios would have on the condition of the City’s road network. The result of this analysis is summarized in the Figure below. The analysis shows that an annual budget of approximately $2.58 Million is required to maintain the City’s road network at the current condition level of 68.7 over the upcoming 10 year period. Analysis was performed on several other budget streams for comparison purposes. Annual budgets of less than $2.58 Million lead to a decrease in the network average PCI. Analysis indicates that a Zero Expenditure budget would lead to a network average PCI of 45.0 after ten years. This is a 34.5 percent decrease from current levels. A $1.5 Million budget would lead to a network average PCI of 59.3 after ten years (a 13.9 percent decrease from the current level), and a $2.0 Million budget would lead to a 63.9 PCI (a 7.0 percent decrease). MD5 Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS Oty of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report III Conversely, expenditures above $2.58 Million annually should lead to improved road conditions over time. A $3.5 Million budget would lead to a network average PCI of 75.4 after ten years, which is a 9.8 percent increase from the current level. The analysis of the $2.58 Million annual budget was configured so that a maximum of 10 percent of the budget could be expended on reconstruction projects which is consistent with the City’s past practices. It is important to note that while this budget does maintain the average PCI of the road network at its current level, it does little to address the large backlog of pavements that are candidates for reconstruction. Analysis shows that if 50 percent of the budget is allocated to reconstruction, the network average PCI would fall to 61.3 (a 10.8 percent reduction in overall PCI). Additional funding is required to maintain the road network at its current level and reduce the backlog of pavements requiring reconstruction. Note that this analysis has been performed using today’s dollars and does not take the effects of inflation into account. Note also that these budget figures only cover major rehabilitation activities such as overlays and reconstruction. They do not include routine maintenance activities such as crack sealing and patching. They also do not include any costs related to curb replacement or replacement of underground utilities. Estimated Future Condition of Wheaton Roads for Various Funding Scenarios 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 ——$1.5M Annually 50.0 ———$2.0M Annually ——$2.58M Annually —4—$3.5M Annually 40.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Year MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS City of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report I Table of Contents Executive Summary Table of Contents 1 1.0 Introduction 2 2.0 Field Data Collection 2 3.0 Office-Based Condition Assessment 3 4.0 Current Pavement Condition 3 4.1 Condition of Alleys 5 5.0 Future Condition 5 6.0 Budget Analysis 6 6.1 Analysis Inputs 6 6.1.1 Rehabilitation Strategies, Unit Costs, PCI Ranges, and Breakpoint PCI 6 6.1.2 Budget Composition 7 6.1.3 Selection Priority 7 6.1.4 Inflation Rates 8 6.2 Budget Analysis 8 6.3 Effect of Budget Percentage Allocated to Reconstruction 9 MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS CYty of W/ieaton Engiheering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 2 1.0 Introduction The City of Wheaton maintains an extensive road net:work consisting of approximately 166.01 center-line miles of roads. This road network is a major City asset that requires ongoing maintenance and rehabilitation to provide a desirable level of service to the traveling public. The City uses software developed by Lucity, Inc. to help City staff manage its pavement network. The City’s road network is defined as a series of discrete segments in this system. Each segment is tagged with descriptive information such as Street Name and From/To descriptors to indentify the location of the segment. Important attributes such as segment length, width, pavement type, and functional classification are stored for each segment. This system provides the means to systematically evaluate pavement condition, develop rehabilitation programs, and estimate the impact that various funding scenarios would have on the condition of the City’s road network. The City commissioned MDS Technologies, Inc. (MDST) to update the pavement inspection data in the Lucity system and to use the system to estimate the budget required to meet the City’s long term pavement condition objectives. MDST performed a similar study in 2012. The processes used to implement the City’s pavement management system are described below. Key outputs of the system are also provided and discussed in this report. 2.0 Field Data Collection An important component of the pavement management analysis is the inspection of each road segment. These inspections provided the data required to assess the condition of the City’s roads. MDST used a vehicle-based approach to collect geo-referenced digital images of City maintained streets. Roof mounted cameras were used to capture sequential images of each pavement segment. A two camera system was used. One of the cameras was used to acquire forward looking, pavement-oriented images capturing a general streetscape view. The second camera was mounted at the rear of the vehicle and was used to capture a downward looking, detailed pavement view. Images were captured at approximately 10 foot intervals so that the entire pavement surface could be evaluated when the images are viewed sequentially. The image capture process was monitored in real time by the vehicle operator to ensure that the quality of the captured images met the required standard for downstream condition assessment work in the office. Positioning data for each image was acquired though GPS technology. The positioning data allows pavement condition data to be extracted from the images and assigned to the corresponding pavement segment. MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping • GIS City of Wheaton Engi’ieering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 3 3O Office-Based Condition Assessment The geo-referenced pavement images were loaded into a software application so that a ‘virtual drive’ of City streets could be performed in an office environment. The adjacent image shows typical forward and downward images obtained from the data collection vehicle. MDST staff viewed the sequential images from both cameras to determine the severity and extent of the distresses that existed on a road segment. This data was then loaded into the pavement management database and used to calculate a numeric score representing the condition of each road segment. 4.0 Current Pavement Condition The condition of each road segment is reflected in its Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score. This index is calculated by the Lucity system based on the severity and extent of surface distresses that exist on a road surface. The Lucity system considers up to nineteen (19) types of distress for both asphalt and concrete pavements. Distresses are typically caused by load-related and/or climate-related factors. The PCI model is used to calculate a numeric score on a scale of one hundred (100) to zero (0). A score of 100 indicates that a pavement is exhibiting no distress and a score of 0 indicates that a pavement is very heavily distressed. A PCI score is calculated for each road segment. The PCI score for a road segment can be easily accessed through the Lucity system, or a computer report can be generated that lists the PCI score for all of the City’s road segments. Such reports can be sorted and/or filtered as required. The Lucity system is linked to the City’s GIS, so it is also possible to map pavement condition and other useful information on an electronic map. The results of the current condition analysis for the City’s roads are discussed below. This analysis excludes the City’s 1.81 centerline miles of alleys. The alleys represent a unique class of pavements that carry low volumes of traffic at low speed. Although they are valuable assets that require periodic maintenance and/or rehabilitation, they are subject to a different condition standard and were excluded from this analysis so as not to skew the results. It is important to note that the PCI score of each segment represents its condition at the time that the condition data was collected. MDST staff captured this data over several days in mid-July 2015. Also, since the road segments vary in size, simple arithmetic MD5 Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS City of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 4 averages do not accurately represent the overall road conditions. The summary data presented in this report is weighted by segment area to address this issue. Pavement Condition Distribution 35 30 - CD a) 25 •Scrious/Failocl . CD IVery Poor 0 20 Poor CD 0 17.15 Fair 15,39 0 a) 15 • Satisfactory an CD 4-. •Good C a) ci 10 a) 5 0 0-25 25-40 40-55 55-70 70-85 85-100 PCI Score Figure 1: Current Condition of City Roads The condition of the City’s roads is summarized in Figure 1. A significant number — 23.14 percent of the City’s roads had a PCI score of 40 or less. A PCI score of 40 or - less indicates that a road segment falls into the Very Poor, Serious, or Failed category. Pavements that fall into these categories (particularly those in the low end of this range) are typically candidates for partial or full reconstruction as resurfacing strategies are often not effective in this case. An additional 17.15 percent of the City’s roads had a PCI score in the 40 to 55 range. Pavements with PCI scores in this range are considered to be in Poor condition. These pavements are typically candidates for some form of major rehabilitation such as mill and overlay. A slightly smaller percentage of roads 15.39 percent are considered to be in Fair — — condition with PCI score in the range of 55 to 70. Roads in this condition may be candidates for major rehabilitation if a functional or structural deficiency exists, or they may be candidates for a non-structural rehabilitation or preventative maintenance MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS U’ of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 5 treatment that temporarily halts or slows deterioration. These pavements are at a critical point in their service lives. The cost to administer an effective maintenance/rehabilitation strategy to these pavements is still relatively low. However, if continued deterioration is allowed, the cost to rehabilitate these pavements can be expected to increase significantly. A large percentage of the City’s pavements 44.31 percent have a PCI score above 70 — - and are considered to be in Good or Satisfactory condition. Pavements that fall into these categories exhibit little or no distress and typically do not require rehabilitation. However, pavement sections in the low end of this range may be candidates for preventative maintenance. Overall, the City’s Iavements have an average PCI score of 68.7 out of 100. 4.1 Condition ofAlleys The City maintains approximately 1.8 miles of alleys, of which 1.7 miles are paved with either an Asphalt or Portland Cement Concrete surface. The alleys represent a unique class of pavements that carry low volumes of traffic at low speed. These pavements are subject to a different condition standard compared to other City owned pavements, so the condition of the alleys is discussed separately here. The majority of the alleys 6 (5 . 7 % ) have a PCI score less than 40 meaning that they are in Very Poor, Serious, or Failed condition. An additional 9.0 percent are in Poor condition (PCI from 40 to 55), and 3.0 percent are in Fair condition (PCI from 55 to 70). A significant percentage of the alleys 30.4 percent have a PCI score above 70, meaning that they are considered - — to be in Good or Satisfactory condition. 5.0 Future Condition The Lucity system has the ability to estimate future PCI scores for pavements. To do this, pavement deterioration models are required that reflect the conditions in the City of Wheaton. These models were previously developed as part of the original pavement evaluation project done in 2012. At that time, MDST acquired historical construction data from City staff and used this in conjunction with the current condition data to develop pavement deterioration tables within Lucity that model the deterioration of PCI over time. While there was considerable variation in deterioration rates from segment to segment, Asphaltic Concrete (AC) pavements were found to deteriorate to a PCI score of 50 after fifteen years, and a PCI score of 20 after thirty years. A previously developed model was used for Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) surfaced pavements because there was not sufficient data to develop a reliable City-specific model. In this model, PCC pavement deteriorates to a PCI score of 50 after 36 years, and a PCI score of 20 after 58 years. MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS City of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 6 6.0 Budget Analysis The Lucity system was used to estimate the effect that various pavement rehabilitation budgets would have on the overall condition of the City’s road network. This analysis was performed over a ten (10) year time frame. Also, analysis was performed to assess the impact that varying the percentage of the budget available for reconstruction would have on the overall condition of the road network. 6.1 Analysis Inputs Inputs to the rehabilitation programming/budget analysis were set so that the analysis matched the policies and practices of the City to the greatest extent possible. These inputs are discussed below. 6.11 Rehabilitation Strategies, Unit Costs, PCI Ranges, and Breakpoint PCI The pavement rehabilitation strategies and associated unit costs used by the City are shown below in Table 1. These were supplied by City staff. The PCI Range sets the limits for the PCI score required for the program to consider the associated strategy. For example, if a segment has a PCI score of 30, it is a candidate for Patching and Resurfacing. The Breakpoint PCI settings are also shown. A segment is treated as a higher priority when its PCI score falls between the Minimum PCI and the Breakpoint PCI. This increases the likelihood that the segment will be selected for inclusion in the program before its PCI falls below the minimum for that strategy, thus avoiding a more costly strategy later. The unit costs do not include the costs for any curb and/or sidewalk replacement that the City might consider desirable or required on any particular project. They also do not include the cost to replace other infrastructure such as water lines, storm sewer, or sanitary sewer. Table 1 Rehabilitation Activities and Unit Costs Rehabilitation Strategy Unit PCI Breakpoint Cost Range PCI ) ($/yd 2 Resurfacing 18.00 40 to 55 45 Patching & Resurfacing 25.50 10 to 45 40 Reconstruction 140.00 0 to 20 10 MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS City of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 7 6.1.2 Budget Composition A port:ion of each budget was allocated to three rehabilitation strategies as shown in Table 2. The budget analysis was configured so that a maximum of 10 percent of the available budget in any year could be spent on reconstruction projects. Similarly, a maximum of 35 percent of the budget was allocated to Patching and Resurfacing. The remaining 55 percent was made available for Resurfacing projects. Also, if there were not enough Reconstruction or Patching and Resurfacing projects in the pool to use the allotted budget, more could be spent on Resurfacing in order to use the entire available budget. This approach recognizes that the City has pavements that fall into all three categories and allocates a percentage of the budget to each one. While allocating some funds for reconstruction is necessary, limiting the resources available for reconstruction is consistent with the principles of good pavement management since this maximizes the amount of work done on pavements whose life can be extended through lower cost rehabilitation options. 6.1.3 Selection Priority In the Lucity system, each rehabilitation strategy that can be considered by the program is assigned a Maintenance Sequence number. The lower the number, the higher the priority. For example, by assigning the lowest Maintenance Sequence number to Reconstruction, this option is favored over Resurfacing and Patching when the PCI of a segment is such that both options can be considered. This was done to help the program spend the entire portion of the budget allocated to the Reconstruction and Patching and Resurfacing strategies. Table 2 Budget Allocation and Selection Priority Rehabilitation Strategy Budget Maint. Percentage Sequence Resurfacing 55+ Highest Patching and Resurfacing 35 Middle Reconstruction 10 Lowest MD5 Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management systems • Right of Way Asset Management systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS City of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 8 6.1.4 Inflation Rates All analysis was performed in today’s dollars. The potential effect of inflation is not considered due to the inherent difficulties in predicting future prices of construction materials. To be consistent with this approach, it was assumed that future budget figures would not be inflated either. For example, $2.5M in 2016 has the same buying power as $2.5M in 2025 (10 years later). 6.2 Budget Analysis The Lucity system was used to assess the impact that various pavement rehabilitation funding scenarios will have on the condition of the road network. Several 10-year budget scenarios were analyzed as discussed below. The result of this analysis is summarized in tabular form in Table 3 and graphically in Figure 2. An annual budciet of arroximately $2.58 million is reciuired to maintain the City’s road network in its current overall condition of 68.7. Budget analysis was also performed for a zero expenditure/”do-nothing” budget, and $1.5, $2.0, and $3.5 million annual budgets for comparison purposes. The Zero Expenditure budget leads to a rapid and large decrease in the overall PCI of the network, falling from the current level of 68.7 to 45.0 after ten years. A $1.5 million annual budget leads to an overall PCI of 59.3, which is a 13.7 percent decrease from current levels. A $2.OM annual budget leads to an overall PCI of 63.9 after ten years which is a 7.0 percent decrease from the current level. Conversely, analysis indicates that a $3.5 million annual budget would result in an overall PCI of 75.4, a 9.8 percent increase compared to the current level. Table 3 Estimated Overall PCI for Various Funding Scenarios Year Zero $1.5M $2.OM $2.58M $3.5M Budget Annually Annually Annually Annually 2015 68.7 68.7 68.7 68.7 68.7 2016 65.9 67.7 68.2 68.8 69.9 2017 63.1 66.6 67.6 68.8 70.8 2018 60.3 65.4 67.0 68.8 71.6 2019 57.6 64.3 66.4 68.7 72.3 2020 55.0 63.2 65.9 68.7 73.0 2021 52.5 62.3 65.4 68.6 73.7 2022 49.9 61.3 64.9 68.7 74.4 2023 47.5 60.3 64.4 68.7 74.9 2024 45.0 59.3 63.9 68.7 75.4 MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS C/fr of Wheaton Eng/neer/ng Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 9 90.0 80.0 . 700 60.0 C 0 U —í $i,5MAnnually 50.0 —52.OM Annually .—$2.58M Annually ——$3.5M Annually 40.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Year Figure 2: Estimated Effect of Various Funding Scenarios on Overall Road Condition 6.3 Effect of Budget Percentage Allocated to Reconstruction The principles of pavement management indicate that the most cost effective way to maintain a road network is to rehabilitate pavements with relatively light duty strategies while the PCI score is relatively high and before a pavement experiences accelerated deterioration. This extends the life of the pavement at a relatively low cost and maximizes the area of pavement that can be treated for a given budget. However, in our experience it is very common that municipalities own pavement networks that range widely in terms of pavement condition. The City of Wheaton falls into this category. For pavements with low PCI scores, application of a lower cost strategy that does not address structural or other deficiencies would not be appropriate. MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS City of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 10 A more robust rehabilitation strategy or reconstruction should be considered in these cases. Also, pavements in poor condition require a disproportionate amount of reactive maintenance to maintain a minimum acceptable level of service. This uses staff time and maintenance dollars that could be used elsewhere. For these reasons, City staff feels that it is appropriate to allocate a portion of the pavement rehabilitation budget to reconstruction. However, the cost of reconstruction can be over ten times the cost of other forms of rehabilitation. This means that as more dollars are allocated to reconstruction, there is a marked decrease in the area of pavement that can be treated with lower cost rehabilitation options. The effect of altering the percentage of the budget allocated for reconstruction is shown in Figure 3. An annual budget of $2.58 million maintains the network at its current state when the analysis is configured so that a maximum of 10 percent of the budget can be used for reconstruction. However, maintaining the overall network PCI at its current level does not tell the full story since 14 percent of the City’s road network falls into the Serious/Failed category. Pavements in this category are likely candidates for reconstruction. A budget of $2.58 Million with 10% earmarked for reconstruction is not sufficient to address the reconstruction backlog in a timely fashion. Increasing the reconstruction allotment to 50 percent will help with the reconstruction backlog, but has a detrimental effect on the overall condition of the network as time goes on. After 10 years, the overall PCI decreases to 61.3, a 10.8 percent decrease compared to the 10 percent reconstruction scenario. This is due to the fact that less money is being spent on overlays that can be applied to a much larger number of roads. However, the City would be addressing the reconstruction backlog in a more timely fashion. Over time, this approach would also reduce the amount of staff time and money directed toward reactive maintenance. The driving experience and perception of pavement quality of the traveling public would also be positively affected. In summary, funding above the $2.58 Million level is needed to maintain the network at its current overall condition and begin to begin addressing the reconstruction backlog. The effect of a slight change in the reconstruction allocation for a $2.0 million annual budget is also shown in Figure 3. If the Reconstruction portion of the budget is reduced from 10 percent of the total budget to five percent and the Patching and Resurfacing Budget is increased to make up the difference, the overall PCI of the network increases slightly over time. This is as expected, but it should be noted that the program is unable to consider some reconstruction projects because the cost would exceed the available budget. MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS City of Wheaton Engineering Department 2015 Pavement Management Report 11 80.0 70.0 0 0 C 0 0 g 60.0 —*-$2 58M-RC1O% —+—$2 53M RC 50% - ——$2.0M RC10%/Pt. & ResurI3S% - —$2.0M RC5%/Pat. & Resurl. 30% - 50.0 - - —- —-—-- ---— -—---—, —-—-.-————--.- Th- -— 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Year Figure 3: Effect of Budget Percentage Allocated to Reconstruction MDS Technologies, Inc. Pavement Management Systems • Right of Way Asset Management Systems • Mobile Mapping. GIS  MEMORANDUM TO: Record FROM: Susan Bishel, Public Relations Coordinator SUBJECT: Feb. 22, 2016 City Council Planning Session Minutes DATE: Feb. 23, 2016 CC: Mayor and City Council, City Manager, City Clerk, Department Heads The Planning Session took place in the Council Chambers, Wheaton City Hall, 303 W. Wesley St., Wheaton, Illinois. Those attending the Planning Session included: Mayor Gresk, Councilwoman Fitch, Councilman Rutledge, Councilman Saline, Councilman Scalzo and Councilman Suess. Councilman Prendiville was absent. Also in attendance were City Manager Rose, Assistant City Manager Dzugan, Director of Human Resources Duguay, Director of Planning & Economic Development Kozik, Director of Engineering Redman, Senior Project Engineer Lagvankar and Public Relations Coordinator Bishel. The session began at 7:00 p.m. and concluded at 8:34 p.m. The following items were discussed: I. Call to Order The Wheaton City Council Planning Session was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Gresk. II. Approval of Feb. 8, 2016 Planning Session Minutes The Council approved the Feb. 8, 2016 Planning Session Minutes. III. Public Comment There were no public comments. IV. Downtown Wheaton Association 2016/17 Budget City Manager Rose stated the City’s operating agreement with the Downtown Wheaton Association (DWA) requires the organization to submit an annual budget for the City Council’s review and approval. The DWA submitted two options for the Council’s consideration, one of which requests additional City funding. Paula Barrington, Executive Director of the Downtown Wheaton Association stated in fiscal year 2015-16, the City had allocated $40,000 more than the previous year. She reviewed how this funding was spent, including funding for the Sidewalk Sale, Bike Fest, and additions to the Ice Fest and Dickens of a Christmas events. Ms. Barrington stated the proposed fiscal year 2016-17 budget retains the $40,000 in City funding. The funds would support increases to the Dickens of a Christmas events, publishing another edition of Living Wheaton magazine, increasing the branding budget and purchasing new street banners. Dick O’Gorman, vice president of the DWA board, spoke about how the new events have brought a substantial amount of business into the downtown. In response to a Council question, Ms. Barrington stated commercial property owners within the downtown Special Service Area are automatically DWA members, but downtown businesses that are leasing a space can join the DWA for $125 annually to help support the organization. In response to a question about how the DWA is helping businesses south of the railroad tracks, Ms. Barrington stated businesses are included in events like the Chili Cook-off, and this area will be a key part of the strategic plan for downtown improvements. In response to a Council question, Ms. Barrington stated at the end of the year, the DWA will have approximately $37,000 in its reserves. In response to a Council question about how the City can help market DWA events, Ms. Barrington stated the City’s Communications Department has helped promote community events through its website, videos and emails. Three Council members expressed support for providing the $40,000 requested funding. Three Council members expressed the desire not to provide the entire $40,000 funding request. City Manager Rose stated the item would appear on the next City Council meeting agenda for the Council’s formal consideration. V. 2015 Pavement Management Report City Manager Rose stated in 2012, an outside firm performed the first citywide analysis of pavement conditions done all at one time. The City also decided this type of analysis should be performed every few years to help identify priorities for road work. Director of Engineering Redman stated the Council set a strategic goal of maintaining an overall average rating of “good” for City streets. The results from the 2015 analysis showed an average pavement condition index (PCI) of 68.7, which falls within the “good” category and is slightly higher than the 2012 PCI rating of 68.0. The financial analysis concluded that in order to maintain the 68.7 PCI rating, the City will need to spend $2.58 million annually, which is slightly higher than the current budgeted amount of $2.5 million. The analysis also looked at the percentage of City streets that fall into the various PCI categories compared to the 2012 analysis. This showed an increase of approximately 50% in the streets in the “poor” category and a decrease of approximately 50% in the streets in the “satisfactory” category. Director of Engineering Redman reviewed the long-term cost benefits of timely maintenance, stating that it is much more costly to wait until pavement is in very poor condition before doing any maintenance work, whereas earlier maintenance prolongs the life of the road. In response to a Council question, Director of Engineering Redman stated the average life of a road is approximately 20 years if no resurfacing is done, but resurfacing greatly reduces the rate of deterioration. 2/22/16 Planning Session 2 Director of Engineering Redman reviewed several different scenarios, including projected outcomes if the City diverted more of its road program efforts to reconstruction. This analysis showed that taking money away from more minor pavement resurfacing would actually lower the overall average street condition citywide. Based on this analysis, the Engineering Department recommends increasing the annual budget to $2.6 million (from $2.5 million), continuing to evaluate pavement citywide every three years, and devoting additional funding specifically for pavement reconstruction. In response to a Council question, Director of Engineering Redman stated the cost of reconstruction is approximately $2 million per mile. Due to the high costs, the City would want to spread this work over a decade or more, with the goal of ensuring that the number of streets in the serious/failing category does not increase. The Engineering Department suggested the City devote $1 million per year for three years for additional reconstruction work and then evaluate the outcome. Director of Engineering Redman responded to a Council question about sealants by stating the City is trying a new type of sealant product that is applied in the first year after resurfacing and can prolong the road’s condition. City Manager Rose answered a question about whether the proposed increase of $1 million per year is included in the draft budget by stating the Council will be seeing some proposed changes to the capital projects fund, which could fund this work. In response to a Council question, Director of Engineering Redman stated all of Wheaton’s streets are safe to use, as the Public Works Department performs spot repairs as needed to make the roads safe. VI. City Council/Staff Comments Councilman Scalzo stated he believes the Council has a consensus in areas that are a priority to residents, such as road repairs. VII. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:34 p.m. 2/22/16 Planning Session 3  MEMORANDUM TO: Record FROM: Susan Bishel, Public Relations Coordinator SUBJECT: Feb. 8, 2016 City Council Planning Session Minutes DATE: Feb. 10, 2016 CC: Mayor and City Council, City Manager, City Clerk, Department Heads The Planning Session took place in the Council Chambers, W ton City Hall, 303 W. Wesley St., Wheaton, Illinois. Those attending the Planning Sessio d: Councilwoman Fitch, Councilman Prendiville, Councilman Rutledge, Councilm ne, Councilman Scalzo and Councilman Suess. Mayor Gresk was absent. Also in were City Manager Rose, Assistant City Manager Dzugan, Fire Chief Schi -i Resources Duguay and Public Relations Coordinator Bishel. The se concluded at 7:22 p.m. The following items were discussed: I. Call to Order The Wheaton City Council Plannii 7:00 p.m. .ayor Pro Tern Suess. II. Approval of Jan. 11,2016 PI The Council approved Ill. Public Comi There were no public IV. El lance Man duriny oTjncil’s Jan. 11 discussion regarding em ical sei nce service fees, the Council requested more staff 1o ires that would advance the current revenue/cost ratio from 100% usir in the 2016-17 proposed budget. Assistant City Man uzugan mmarized two options staff developed for the Council’s review. Option 1 provi a rate ructure that would cover 100% of the estimated expenses. This option would not ha ea difference in cost of services for residents and nonresidents. Option 2 analyzed the rates’Wheaton charges for EMS/ambulance service fees compared with rates of surrounding communities and estimated that charging a proposed “average” rate structure would cover approximately 90% of the program’s costs. Medical service level rates would differentiate between residents and nonresidents because local taxes would be necessary to fund part of EMS/ambulance services. Assistant City Manager Dzugan stated caps on Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement to the City and the difficulty collecting fees from users without insurance also affect the program’s costs. In response to Council questions, Assistant City Manager Dzugan stated approximately 40% of service calls are for nonresidents. Approximately 11% of residents served are uninsured, while approximately 39% of nonresidents are uninsured. In response to Council questions, City Manager Rose stated the contract for EMS/ambulance services was a competitive bidding process for a 3-year contract with a 2-year extension option. The bid selected was the lowest bidder. In response to Council questions, Fire Chief Schultz stated this contract includes an option to reduce staffing during very low call volume periods. However, this would mean that during these low call volume periods, only two of the City’s three fire statio .ould be staffed with ambulances, which could increase response times for so S of the city. Some City Council members expressed concern with increases for users in Option 1. The City Council expressed an ie City is more in line with other communities in ambulance/EMS s ireater percentage of the service costs. V. City Council/Staff Comments There were no City Council/staff VI. Adjournment The 2/8/16 Planning Session 2  Donald B. Rose City Manager TO: The Honorable Mayor & City Council DATE: February 18, 2016 SUBJECT: Downtown Wheaton Association — 2016/17 Budget Paragraph 7 of the agreement between the Downtown Wheaton Association and the City relating to Special Service Area #7 requires that the Downtown Wheaton Association provide its approved annual budget to the City Council for approval, prior to the expenditure of funds. The Downtown Wheaton Association has submitted their 2016/17 budget, which I am attaching to this memorandum for your review. As you will note, the attachment offers two budgets for consideration by the City. The first budget notes the income and expenditures without supplemental funding from the City. The second budget reflects income and expenditures based upon the Downtown Wheaton Association receiving supplemental funding in the amount of $40,000. This item appears on this evening’s agenda for your review and comments. If you approve of one of the budget options, the City staff will place this matter on a regular City Council agenda for formal approval by the Council. Attachment Cc: Paula Barrington  108 E. Wesley Street ASSOCIATION Wheaton, Illinois 60187 (630) 682-0633 Office (630) 682-0762 Fax www.downtownwheato n corn December 30, 2015 Don Rose, City Manager City of Wheaton 303 West Wesley Street Wheaton, Illinois 60187 Dear Mr. Rose, Enclosed please find the 20 16-17 budget for the Downtown Wheaton Association. This document offers up two budgets for consideration by the City of Wheaton. The first budget notes the income and expenditures without supplemental funding from the City of Wheaton. The budget noted in the second column reflects income and expenditures based on the Downtown Wheaton Association receiving supplement funding from the City in the amount of $40,000.00. The Downtown Wheaton Association requests the opportunity to present both budgets to the City during the budget hearings to discuss the benefits of supplementing the budget to allow for more holiday street decor, expanded market reach and the continued publication of ‘Living Wheaton’ Magazine as a means of branding the Downtown Wheaton commercial district. Paula Barrington Executive Director  AIBICIDJEIFIGI H I J K L Downtown_Wheaton Association 2 Profit & Loss Budget Overview 3 May 2016 through April 2017 Accrual Basis 1 5 Without City Funding May ‘16-Apr17 May 16-Apr.’17 With City Funding 6 Ordinary lncomelExpense 7 Income 4000 Income 8 9 4600 Membership Dues 6,000.00: 6,000.00 10 4800 Event Income (Loss) 11 4801 ‘Wine Festival 5,000.00 5,000.00 12 . 4810 Gift Certificate Sales 0.00 - F 4811 4th July events -i,2000 -1200.00 14 i4815 Dickens Christmas -5,000.00 -18000.00 — . 4820 Chili Cook Off 12,000.00 12,000.00 4825 Halloween -1,000.00 -1000.00 ‘4826’ Restaurant Week 3,000.00 3,000.00 4827 Wedding Walk -2,000.00 -2000.00 4828 Easter -1,000.00 -1000.00 .4829’ Taste of Wheaton -2,00000 -2000.00 I 4832 Vintage Rides -4,000.00 -4000.00 4834 Art Walk -300.00 -300.00 I 23 24 25 Back to School- Wheaton Collegc j36 Ice Fest 4837 Sidewalk Sale -200.00 -2,000.00 -3,500.00, 1 -200.00 -2000.00 -3500.00 26 4838’ Bike Wheaton -3,000.00 -3000.00 27 Total 4800’ Event Income (Loss) -5,200.00 -18700.00 28 4830’ Sponsorship -650.00 -650.00 29 30 Total 4000 Income 150.00 -13350.00 L - — - — 31 4150 SSA7 Income Page 1 of 5  A sic: D1EIFIGI H I ‘ K I L 4 5 Without City Funding May’16-Aprl7 May ‘16-Apr. ‘17 With City Funding 32 - 4152 SSA #7 General 82,860.00 82,860.00 33 -___ 4155 TIF #1 Income________ 21,446.00 21,446.00 34 I 4160 TIF #2 Income 65,341.00 65,341.00 s 4161 City Funding Agree -3,733.OO -3733.00 36 Total 4150 SSA7 Income L 165,914.00 165,914.00 — 37 9102• City Marketing Funding 0.00: 40,000.00 38 91 03 Living Wheaton Magazine 0.00 13,000.00 39 Total Income 166,064.00 205,564.00 1 166,064.00, — 205,564.00 40 Gross_Profiti 41 — — - — — I + 42 —--________ 43Jpenses 44 5700 Economic Development Activity I s T 5702_Signage for new_business 1,000.00 1,000.00 46 .5703• Economic Development Prhting 200.00; 200.00 47 1,000.00 1,000.00 . 15704. Broker’s Walk 48 Total 5700• Economic Development Activity 2,200.00 2,200.00 49 50 ‘6000 Administration Expenses — 51 Administrative Printing 500.00 500.00 — 52 Graphic Design 300.00 300.00 53 Postage and delivery 500.00 500.00 55 —____ 6400 Office Expenses 56 6405 Annual meeting 57 Annual Meeting ) 58 : 6410 Awards ) 59 Total 6405 Annual meetin 2,200.00 Page 2 of 5  H I I I i I K L Without City Funding May’16-Aprl7 May ‘16-Apr. ‘17 With City Funding 6420 Equipment Rental 1,000.00; 1,000.00 6425Bank&CCProcessingFees Line of Credit Payments 27500; 275.00 6425 Bank & CC Processing Fees - 1,400.00 1,400.00 Total 6425 Bank & CC Processing Fees 1,675.00 1,675.00 6430 Dues 400.00 400.00 6450 Professional Fees 6451 ‘Accounting 1600.00 1,600.00 6452’ Legal 300.00 300.00 2 , 1 L 0000 — 1,200.00 6453 IT Consulting 6454 Website Maintenance 6,000.00: 6,000.00 Total 6450 Professional Fees 9,100.00 9,100.00 5,000.00: - 6480’ Insurance 6485’ Parking 600.00 600.00 6520 Telephone & Internet 3,800.00 3,800.00 6525 Office Supplies____ 3,000.00 3,000.00 6560 Travel l00.00 100.00 6565’ Meals & Entertainment Board and Committee Meetings 500.00 500.00 Chamber luncheons and dinners 1,100.00 1,100.00 Prayer Breakfast 300.00 300.00 Total 6565’ Meals & Entertainment 1,900.00 1,9p9.o0 Total 6400 ‘Office Expenses 28,775.00 28,775.00 Page 3 of 5  Al BIcIDI El FIGI H I ‘ K L 4 5 Without City Funding 17 May ‘16-Apr. ‘17 With City Funding 90 6438 Marketing I 92 Advertising Chamber Directory Advertising 500O —- 500.00 93 94 DWA App License i,qg 1,700.00 951 Event Postcard 500.00 500.00 Kiosk i 500.00 500.00 — -— Photography 500 00 500.00 — 3,700.00 EEEEE Total_Advertising 3,700.O0 DWA Branding and Marketing 10,000.OOt 24,000.00 - 2,000.004 — 2,000.00 100 E-shoppper Newsletter 101 Living Wheaton Magazine 0.00 26,000.00 102 Shoppers Guide 800.0& 800.00 103 Total 6438__Marketing 1 16,500.00, 56,500.00 105 6475 Subscriptions 450.00 106 6800 Occupancy 107 6811 Rent 18,000.001 18,000.00 108 Total 6800 Occupancy 18,000.00 18,000.00 109 6900 Depreciation Expense 300.00 300.00 110 Total600O Administration Expenses 65,325.00 105,325.00 111 I-. 112 7000 Payroll Expenses 113 711 OWages&Salaries 7111 Salaries Exec- 61,000.00 61,000.00 115 - 7112 Salaries Non Exec 25,000.00 25.000.00 Total 7110 Wages & Salaries 86,000.00 86,000.00 I 7 Payroll Taxes -- Page4of5  A B[CIDI E] FIGI H I I I I K I L 4 - - - - 5 — - Without City Funding May’16 Apr17 May ‘16-Apr. ‘17 With City Funding 119 7131 FICAIMC 5,700.00 5,700.00 120 7132 Fed Unemployment 75.00 75.00 —-- -[ 140.00 - 1400 121 — — J!133 IL Unemployment 122 Total 7130 Payroll Taxes 5,915.00 5,915.00 --- 7150 Employee Benefits - 124 125 I 7152 Health Insurance 4,500.00 4,500.00 --j- 127 Total 7150 Employee Benefits 4,500.00 4,500.00 128 7180 Temporary Labor 200.00: 200.00 —— 129 -____ — 7190 Payroll Processing Fees 1,000.00: 1,000.00. 130 131 Total 7000 Payroll Expenses 97,615.00 97,615.00 132 Total Expense 165,140.00 ]ià5,140.00 — - 133 NetOrdinaryincome 92400 — 42400 134 Other lncomelExpense 135 - 136 Net Incom 92400 — 42400 Page 5of5