HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 33 - Measure M2 Funding Eligibility 2024 RenewalPublic Works Agency
www.santa-ana.org/public-works
Item # 33
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701
Staff Report
June 4, 2024
TOPIC: Measure M2 Funding Eligibility 2024 Renewal
AGENDA TITLE
Resolution to Maintain Measure M2 Funding Eligibility by Approving a Pavement
Management Plan Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt a resolution confirming the status and providing an update of the Pavement
Management Plan (PMP) per Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) 2024-25
Measure M2 eligibility requirements.
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XXX entitled A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SANTA ANA CONCERNING THE STATUS AND UPDATE OF THE
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE MEASURE M2 PROGRAM
GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES: No
DISCUSSION
In November 1990, Orange County voters approved Measure M, a one-half cent sales
tax increase for 20 years, to fund transportation projects in Orange County. Sixteen
years later, in November 2006, the voters approved the renewal of Measure M, referred
to as M2, for an additional 30 years, effective in April 2011. The net revenues generated
by M2 contribute to two types of grant funding: Local Fair Share (LFS) and competitive.
All Orange County cities are eligible for LFS funding, which is distributed on a formula -
based allocation determined by population, number of existing Master Plan of Arterial
Highways centerline miles, and taxable sales. Under the competitive component of M2
funding, cities must compete and demonstrate support of regional transportation to
successfully qualify for grant monies. Fulfilling M2 eligibility requirements also allows the
City to qualify for other regional competitive OC Go M2 grant funding opportunities.
The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) determines annual eligibility for
M2 funds based upon specific criteria that cities must meet prior to June 30 of every
year. In order to maintain M2 eligibility for Fiscal Year 2024-25 (FY 24-25), the City must
update, and adopt via resolution, a Pavement Management Plan (PMP) biennially
(Exhibit 1). The PMP is the City's strategic plan to manage the preservation,
Measure M2 Funding Eligibility 2024 Renewal
June 4, 2024
Page 2
rehabilitation, and maintenance of paved roads by analyzing pavement life cycles,
assessing overall system performance costs, and determining alternative strategies and
necessary costs to improve paved roads (Exhibit 2). A copy of the PMP with a
certification must be submitted to OCTA by June 30, 2024. Adoption of the proposed
resolution maintains the City's eligibility to receive M2 Funds for FY 2024-25.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact at this time. The recommended actions will maintain the City's
eligibility to receive Measure M2 funds. Upon meeting OCTA eligibility requirements, the
City of Santa Ana is anticipated to receive an estimated $6.4 million in Local Fair Share
funds and an undetermined amount in M2 competitive funds for FY 2024-25.
If the recommended action is not taken, the City will lose Measure M2 local fair share
revenue and eligibility to apply for various future OCTA comprehensive funding
programs.
EXHIBIT(S)
1. Resolution — Pavement Management Plan
2. 2024 Pavement Management Plan
Submitted By: Nabil Saba, P.E., Executive Director — Public Works Agency
Approved By: Alvaro Nunez, Acting City Manager
EXHIBIT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-xxx
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
ANA CONCERNING THE STATUS AND UPDATE OF THE
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE MEASURE M2
PROGRAM
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and
declares as follows:
A. The City of Santa Ana is required to meet eligibility requirements and submit
eligibility verification packages to the Orange County Transportation Authority
("OCTA") in order to remain eligible to receive Measure M2 funds.
B. On a biennial basis, the City of Santa Ana is required to adopt and update a
Pavement Management Plan ("PMP"), using the required format, regarding the
status of road pavement conditions and implementation of the PMP.
C. The City of Santa Ana is required to provide a plan that manages the
preservation, rehabilitation, and maintenance of paved roads by analyzing
pavement life cycles, assessing overall system performance costs, and
determining alternative strategies and costs necessary to improve paved roads.
Section 2. The City Council hereby declares that the PMP is in conformance with
the PMP Submittal Template provided in the Countywide Pavement Management Plan
Guidelines.
Section 3. The City of Santa Ana hereby adopts a PMP and has provided an
updated PMP report, using the required format, to OCTA.
Section 4. The City Council authorizes the Executive Director of the Public Works
Agency, the City Engineer, or his or her designee to sign the PMP certification form.
Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by
the City Council, and the City Clerk shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this
Resolution.
ADOPTED this 4th day of June, 2024.
Valerie Amezcua
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
By:
Ky'l.: Nellesen
Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, City Clerk do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2024-XXX to
be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana
on
Date:
City Clerk
City of Santa Ana
Resolution 2024-xxx
Page 2 of 2
le
SANTA ANA
im;-- . ';
C
1
ai
IW
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................ i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................................................................................
E-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1-1
2.0 METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................2-1
2.1 Inventory........................................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Planning.........................................................................................................................2-2
2.3 Data Collection...............................................................................................................2-2
2.4 Data Entry......................................................................................................................2-2
2.5 Analysis..........................................................................................................................2-2
3.0 PAVEMENT NETWORK.....................................................................................................3-1
3.1 Functional Classifications...............................................................................................3-2
3.2 Pavement Condition Index.............................................................................................3-4
3.3 Existing Pavement Condition.........................................................................................3-5
4.0 MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION STRATEGIES..................................................4-1
4.1 Treatment Types and Associated Costs........................................................................4-1
4.2 Funding..........................................................................................................................4-5
4.3 Budget Alternatives.......................................................................................................4-6
4.3.1 Existing Funding....................................................................................................4-7
4.3.2 Alternative Funding Levels Required To Maintain Existing PCI ..........................4-10
4.3.3 Alternative Funding Levels Required To Improve PCI........................................4-13
APPENDIX A:
ENTIRE PAVEMENT NETWORK PCI REPORT
APPENDIX B:
ARTERIAL STREETS 7-YEAR M&R PLAN
APPENDIX B:
ARTERIAL STREETS 7-YEAR M&R PLAN
APPENDIX C:
OCTA PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE REPORT 2024
- Pavement Management Plan Certification
- Quality Assurance / Quality Control Plan
- Executive Summary
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program
Table Of Contents
FIGURES
Figure E-1: PCI Distribution for 2020, 2022 and 2024..............................................................
E-1
Figure 2-1: Sample Pavement Deterioration Curve...................................................................2-3
Table 3-1: Entire Pavement Network Summary.........................................................................3-1
Figure3-3: Arterial Street...........................................................................................................3-2
Figure3-4: Local Street.............................................................................................................3-3
Figure 3-5: Current PCI Distribution (Entire Pavement Network)..............................................3-6
Figure 3-6: Current PCI Distribution (Arterial Network)..............................................................3-7
Figure 3-7: Current PCI Distribution (Local Network)................................................................3-8
TABLES
Table E-1: Funding Alternatives Summary............................................................................... E-4
Error! Reference source not found ................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 3-1: Pavement Condition Index and Treatment Type......................................................3-4
Very Good 86-100
42-5% 46.1% 40.9%
26.7% 22-5% 262%
52.1% 54.5%
45-8%
............................................................................................................................
Good 75-85
......................................................._........
_.........................................................................................................................................................._
19.6% 20.9% 27.6%
.................... d.............................................................................1......................................................................
............................................................................_
16.3% 18.1% 23.5%
..............................................................................
21.7% 21.8%
d..............................................................................
29.5%
Fair 60-74
............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................:..............................................................................................................................................................
20-6% _6.5% 15.4%
33.0% 332% 27.0%
12.9% 10.5%
10-7%
Poor 41-59
.................................................................................................................................
102% ' _.1°re" 10.9%
.....................................................................................................;..............................................................................................................................................................;.......................................
............5.53,6
16.7% 22-9% 20.0%
6-3% 6.9%
7.1%
Very Poor C-AC
7.1% 5.2%
7.4% 3.3% 3.3%
7.0% 6.3%
5.9",
Table 3-2: PCI Distribution Comparison (2020, 2022 vs. 2024)...............................3-5
Table 3-3: PCI Distribution.........................................................................................................3-9
Table 4-1: Cost by Condition (Arterial Network)........................................................................4-3
Table 4-2: Cost by Condition (Local Network)...........................................................................4-3
Table 4-3: Existing Funding (Entire Pavement Network)...........................................................4-8
Table 4-4: Existing Funding (Arterial Network)..........................................................................4-8
Table 4-5: Existing Funding (Local Network).............................................................................4-9
Table 4-6: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Maintain Existing PCI
(Entire Pavement Network)....................................................................................4-11
Table 4-7: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Maintain Existing PCI
(Arterial Network)...................................................................................................4-11
Table 4-8: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Maintain Existing PCI
(Local Network)......................................................................................................4-12
Table 4-9: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Improve PCI
(Entire Pavement Network)....................................................................................4-14
Table 4-10: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Improve PCI
(Arterial Network)...................................................................................................4-14
Table 4-11: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Improve PCI
(Local Network)......................................................................................................4-15
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program ii
ACRONYMS
AC
Asphalt Concrete
ASTM
American Society of Testing Materials
AV
Avenue
BLVD
Boulevard
CDBG
Community Development Block Grant
CIP
Capital Improvement Program
CIR
Circle
CIR
Cold In -Place Recycling
City
City of Santa Ana
COMM
Common
CT
Court
CTB
Cement Treated Base
DR
Drive
EB
East Bound
FDR
Full Depth Reconstruction
FWY
Freeway
FY
Fiscal Year
GIS
Geographical Information System
GN
Glen
GPCE
General Plan Circulation Element
HUTA
Highway Users Tax Account
LN
Lane
M&R
Maintenance and Rehabilitation
MPAH
Master Plan of Arterial Highways
NB
North Bound
OCTA
Orange County Transportation Authority
PCC
Portland Cement Concrete
PCI
Pavement Condition Index
PClaw
Average Area -Weighted Pavement Condition Index
PDC
Pavement Deterioration Curve
PL
Place
PMP
Pavement Management Program
RD
Road
RR
Railroad
RSRP
Residential Street Repair Program
SB
South Bound
SF
Square Feet
ST
Street
WB
West Bound
WY
Way
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Santa Ana (City) Public Works Agency utilizes StreetSaver and geographical
information system (GIS) to develop the Pavement Management Program (PMP) to provide an
accurate inventory of the current and projected pavement condition of all public roadways and to
implement a seven-year roadway maintenance and rehabilitation (M&R) program to maximize the
return from available existing funding for street pavement. The PMP's ultimate goal is to
effectively strategize short and long-term usages of current and future limited funding to restore
and maintain the entire street pavement network at "Good" condition or better.
The City currently manages 454 miles of streets for a total of approximately 93.4 million square
feet (SF) of paved surfaces. To be consistent with the City General Plan Circulation Element
Master Plan of Streets and Highways and the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA)
Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH), the entire street pavement network is organized into
two networks (arterial and local) depending on its functional classifications (i.e. major, primary,
secondary, and collector arterial streets; residential and non-residential local streets). There are
129.3 miles (28% of entire pavement network) in the arterial network and 324.6 miles (72% of
entire pavement network) in the local network. To assist planning maintenance needs, the streets
are also arranged into over 4,174 sections and classified by surface types — Asphalt Concrete
(AC) or Portland Cement Concrete (PCC).
Figure E-1: PCI Distribution for 2020, 2022 and 2024
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program E-1
Executive Summary
Pavement condition inspections are performed biennially for both the arterial and local networks.
Figure E-1 shows a comparison of the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) distribution between the
2020, 2022 and 2024 inspections. The PCI is a numerical value ranging from 0 for deteriorated
pavement with virtually no remaining life to 100 for new or recently rehabilitated pavement.
Generally, the PCI value is expressed as an area -weighted PCI (PCIaW) to provide a more
representative value. A PCI value is computed for each street section based on the pavement
distresses found within that section during an inspection. Inspections provide the data utilized in
analysis and surface treatment recommendations for each street section; however, the PCI values
shall be utilized for planning purposes in determining the surface treatment types and are not
intended to replace sound engineering judgment. In general, the City's strategies involve the
utilization of surface seals, such as crack sealing or slurry sealing for preventive maintenance and
rehabilitation (M&R) of streets in "Good" condition and major M&R plans typically consist of
overlays, such as thin overlays, for "Fair" condition streets; resurfacing, such as structural
overlays or cold -in -place recycling (CIR), for "Poor" condition streets; and reconstruction, such as
cement -treated base (CTB) or full depth reconstruction (FDR), for "Very Poor" condition streets.
A fully integrated PMP has had a positive effect on improving the City's entire pavement network
by developing efficient M&R strategies and analyzing the effect of various funding alternatives on
the pavement conditions. The strategies include forecasting optimal time for M&R needs,
providing cost-effective alternatives for halting the deterioration of existing pavement, improving
the overall condition of the entire pavement network, and reducing the backlog of M&R work over
the next seven years. To carry forward one of the City's main objectives in providing a safe,
reliable, efficient, and comfortable driving environment, this PMP report analyzes various M&R
strategies, the effect of the City's existing Capital Improvement Program (CIP) funding on the
street pavement system, and projected funding to both maintain and improve existing PCIaW over
a seven-year plan.
With existing funding of just under $114 million for the entire pavement network over the seven-
year period from Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 through FY 2030/31, the entire pavement network
existing PCIaW of 75.5 is projected to decrease by one (1) percent to 75.2 at the end of the seven-
year cycle under existing funding levels. Individually, the arterial and local networks are projected
to experience a positive and negative result in existing PCIaW, one (1) percent arterial increase
and three (3) percent local decrease. Furthermore, the backlog for the entire pavement network
is projected to increase by 20 percent from $314.1 million in the first year to $376.7 million in the
seventh year.
If the existing PCIaW of 75.5 were to be maintained at the end of the seven-year cycle, a total of
$9.1 million in additional funds calculated at about $1.3 million annually would be required; thus
providing for a total alternative funding level of just over $122.8 million through FY 2028/29. The
additional funding would be applied to both the arterial and local networks at 73 percent ($6.6
million) and 27 percent ($2.5 million), respectively. Furthermore, with this additional funding, the
backlog for the entire pavement network is projected to increase by 16 percent from $314.9 million
in the first year to $365.0 million in the seventh year.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program E-2
Executive Summary
If the existing PClaw were to be improved by 1 point to 77.0 at the end of the seven-year cycle, a
total of $15.6 million in additional funds calculated at about 2.5 million annually would be required;
thus providing for a total alternative funding level of over $129.3 million through FY 2028/29. The
additional funding would be applied to both the arterial and local networks at 30 percent ($4.6
million) and 70 percent ($10.9 million), respectively. Furthermore, with this additional funding, the
backlog for the entire pavement network is projected to increase by 14 percent from $314.1 million
in the first year to $358.1 million in the seventh year.
Overall, the conclusion drawn from this PMP report is that the backlog for the entire pavement
network is evenly distributed across both the arterial and the local network. Additionally, existing
funding levels in the City CIP will not keep pace with rehabilitation needs over the next seven
years. Since preserving street condition and performance should be a priority to provide motorists
with safety assurances, the City's goal over the next seven years is to acquire sufficient pavement
M&R funding to sustain the entire street pavement network at "Good" condition or better. By
achieving this goal, the City will remain eligible for the reduced local match requirements for the
renewed Measure M2 Competitive grant until FY 2030/31.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program E-3
Executive Summary
Table E-1: Funding Alternatives Summary
Existing Funding
Alternative Funding
Alternative Funding
(Maintain Existing PCI)
(Improve Projected PCI)
Entire
Pavement
Arterial
Local
Entire
Pavement
Arterial
Local
Entire
Pavement
Arterial
Local
Network
Network
Network
Network
Network
Network
Network
Network
Network
2024 PClaw with
Existing Funding'
76
70
78
76
70
78
76
70
78
2031 PClaw with
75
71
77
Existing Fundin 2
2031 PClaw with
76
71
78
77
72
80
Alternative Fundin s
FY 2024/25 Backlog4
$314,135
$125,654
$188,481
$314,954
$125,654
$188,481
$314,135
$125,654
$188,481
FY 2030/31 Backlog4
$376,683
$150,673
$226,010
$365,046
$144,018
$221,028
$358,124
143,249
$214,875
7-yr Preventive M&R
5
$28,000
$10,500
$17,500
$28,000
$10,500
$17,500
$28,000
$10,500
$17,500
Existing Fundin
7-yr Major M&R&R Existin Fun
$85,662
$57,691
$27,697
$85,662
$57,691
$27,697
$85,662
$57,691
$27,697
7-yr Total
7
$113,662
$68,191
$45,467
$113,662
$68,191
$45,467
$113,662
$68,191
$45,467
Existing Fundin
7-yr Major M&R
$
$9,125
$4,065
$5,007
$15,625
$4,560
$10,965
Additional Funding
7-yr Total
9
$ 122,788
$72,256
$50,474
$129,287
$72,851
$56,432
Alternative Fundin
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
1. 2024 PCI w Existing Funding: PCI yielded as a result of M&R work (existing PCI).
2. 2031 PCI w/ Existing Funding: PCI yielded at the end of the 7-year plan as a result of M&R work using existing funding.
3. 2031 PCI w/ Alternative Funding: PCI yielded @ the end of the 7-year plan as a result of M&R work using alternative funding.
4. Backlog: Total estimated M&R work left unfunded during the listed fiscal year.
5. 7-yr Preventive M&R Existing Funding: Existing funding for preventive M&R work from FY 2024/25 to FY 2030/31.
6. 7-yr Major M&R Existing Funding: Existing funding for major M&R work from FY 2024/25 to FY 2030/31.
7. 7-yr Total Existing Funding: Sum of existing funding from FY 2024/25 to FY 2030/31.
8. 7-yr Major M&R Additional Funding: Additional funding needed for major M&R work to reach the listed goal from FY 2024/25 to FY 2030/31.
9. 7-yr Total Alternative Funding: Sum of existing & additional funding needed required to reach the listed goal from FY 2024/25 to FY 2030/31.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program E-4
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Since public streets are utilized for moving people and freight and they are vital to the City of
Santa Ana (City) economy, preserving their condition and performance should be a priority. The
City Public Works Agency has developed the Pavement Management Program (PMP) to monitor
and maintain the City street system utilizing StreetSaver and geographic information system
(GIS). The City's PMP has been developed to assist City personnel generate a solid and reliable
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) based on the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of the streets
to sustain a desirable level of pavement performance on a network scale. The PMP's ultimate
goal is to effectively strategize short and long-term usages of current and future limited funding to
restore and maintain the entire pavement network at "Good" condition or better. Additionally,
StreetSaver was selected as the pavement management software to be utilized by the Orange
County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and all member agencies in Orange County; therefore,
with the City of Santa Ana's ongoing management of StreetSaver, the City's PMP is in compliance
with this OCTA requirement.
The purpose of the PMP is to:
• Provide an accurate current inventory and pavement conditions of all public roadways;
• Predict future pavement condition with and without work;
• Develop a roadway maintenance program;
• Prioritize and recommend the most cost-effective roadway repairs;
• Implement a 7-year roadway maintenance and rehabilitation (M&R) program;
• Maximize the return from available funding for street pavement.
Pavement is a dynamic structure where deterioration is constantly occurring. Therefore, as part
of the development of the PMP, a survey of the City street pavement condition must be conducted
on a regular basis to identify the type of severity and quantity of pavement distresses (refer to
Section 2.0 Methodology and Error! Reference source not found. Error! Reference source not found.).
The pavement management database needs to be updated frequently to reflect the changes in
pavement conditions and pavement maintenance histories. Upon completion of the survey and
database updates, StreetSaver generates a new PCI value, which assists in the selection of the
most cost-effective roadway M&R strategy. The PCI value, which was developed by US Army
Construction Engineering Research Laboratory and adopted as standard procedure by the
American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) and the American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials, has been utilized by numerous municipalities nationwide.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 1-1
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 INVENTORY
All streets within the City are categorized as either arterial or local streets and are grouped as
such into their respective networks; collectively they comprise the entire pavement network.
Within each network, the streets are ranked based on their functional classifications (refer to
Section 3.0 Pavement Network) and are assigned a letter that corresponds with the rank. In the
case of the arterial network, the letter `B' is assigned to major arterial streets, the letter 'P' is
assigned to primary arterial streets, the letter `S' is assigned to secondary arterial streets, and the
letter `C' is assigned to collector arterial streets. In the case of the local network, the letters `E'
and `I' are assigned to residential and non-residential streets, respectively.
Each street, or branch, is divided into segments, or sections, at intersecting streets and railroads.
For example, Main Street from First Street to Second Street and Grand Avenue from Railroad to
Chestnut Avenue. Additionally, a section break is introduced where a change in pavement surface
is encountered mid -block. For example, if the pavement surface were to change from Asphalt
Concrete (AC) to Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) at any point along Main Street from First
Street to Second Street, then the resulting sections would be Main Street from First Street to AC-
PCC Transition and Main Street from AC-PCC Transition to Second Street; where one section
has an AC surface and the other has a PCC surface.
In an effort to help identify and sort the streets efficiently, identifying numbers are assigned to
each branch and section. A Branch ID is a six -digit number assigned to each branch and is
numbered increasingly with numbered streets listed first followed by the remainder of the streets
listed in alphabetical order. A Section ID is a four -digit number assigned to each section and is
numbered increasingly based on geography from west to east and from south to north. For
example, the westernmost or southernmost section of a branch would have a Section ID with the
lowest number and the easternmost or northernmost section of a branch would have a Section
ID with the highest number. Furthermore, the four -digit Section ID number may be followed by a
letter such as N, S, E, or W that denotes the direction of travel (north, south, east, and west,
respectively) along a street. This letter is used to differentiate between the two halves of a street
when it is divided as such. For example, Section ID 1100N and Section ID 1100S would denote
the northbound and southbound sides of a section, respectively.
Additionally, other sort features are available to assist in further grouping segments with similar
characteristics. For example, to identify streets within pre -defined geographical areas, each
section is labeled with a number that corresponds to either a neighborhood or a non -neighborhood
area. A neighborhood area, which is typically comprised of churches, schools, and residential
properties, is defined as the boundary established through a collaboration of the City's Community
Development Agency (CDA) and local residents based on both geographic and social
components. Currently, there are 64 neighborhoods established in the City, which meet with CDA
staff regularly to develop strategies to shape it for the better and sustain it for the long term. A
non -neighborhood area refers to the zone located outside of the established neighborhood
boundaries comprising of mostly commercial and industrial uses.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 2-1
2.0 Methodology
2.2 PLANNING
Preparation prior to performing pavement surveys involves three major components: inspector
training, survey type selection, and identifying sample units.
• Inspector Training - In order to be familiar with the inspection guidelines, inspectors are
prompted to read the StreetSaver Asphalt & Concrete Distress Manuals, complete the
web -based Pavement Management software training and learn the data input application
for the StreetSaver program prior to inspecting. Additionally, the inspection routes are
planned in a time -efficient manner to efficiently capture the pavement data.
• Survey Types - There are two types of surveys allowable: "windshield" and "walking"
surveys. A windshield survey consists of examining the pavement from a vehicle moving
at no more than 10 miles per hour (MPH), while a walking survey allows an inspector to
examine from the pavement surface itself. Although, for safety reasons, walking surveys
on arterial roadways may be performed from a safe place adjacent to the pavement such
as a sidewalk, center median, or shoulder.
• Sample Units - Random areas, known as sample units, within a street section are
inspected as a representative of the whole segment. A sample unit for an asphalt street
section contains a total area of 2500 square feet (SF) ±1000 SF, and a sample unit for a
PCC street section contains a total number of 20 slabs ±8 slabs.
2.3 DATA COLLECTION
The pavement distresses found within a sample unit are identified by type, classified by severity,
measured/counted, and recorded as they are encountered in the field. A number of sample units
are randomly selected for re -inspection to assure consistent and accurate results among
inspectors.
Refer to Error! Reference source not found. Error! Reference source not found. for further details on
quality control/quality assurance.
2.4 DATA ENTRY
The collected pavement distress data is input into StreetSaver, creating an inspection record for
each sample unit.
2.5 ANALYSIS
Based on the latest inspection data and several other factors, including surface type, functional
classifications, last construction date, and PCI, pavement deterioration curves (PDCs) or
pavement condition prediction models are generated separately for the local and arterial
networks. These curves are imperative for a complete PMP to predict future pavement
performance and determine maintenance and rehabilitation (M&R) requirements. Figure 2-1
shows a sample PDC with the appropriate M&R.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 2-2
2.0 Methodology
Figure 2-1: Sample Pavement Deterioration Curve
100
Very Good \
85 — — — — — —
Good
75 — — — — — —
Fair
60+-----------------------`-
Poor
40�----
Very Poor
0
Pavement Life (yrs)
Do Nothing
— — — — — — Surface Seal —
Overlay
Resurfacing
Reconstruction
To develop an accurate PDC, "suspicious" data / anomalies outside of the maximum and
minimum envelopes generated from StreetSaver are filtered out. For example, data with PCI
increase significantly with age (recording error) or lack of past inspection data must be removed
because pavements are load carrying structures, which degrade over time due to the combined
action of environmental and traffic. This data filtering processing is critical because pavements
with unusual performance would have substantial impact on the PDC behavior and the pavement
life cycle consequently.
The final PDCs illustrate that the rate of deterioration is fairly slow in the early years of the
pavement's design life. During the first 65 percent to 75 percent of a pavement's design life,
which varies based on functional classifications and surface type, a pavement deteriorates
approximately 40 percent of its quality, i.e. from a PCI of 100 ("Very Good" condition) to a PCI of
60 ("Fair" condition). However, the rate of deterioration starts to increase rapidly with age after a
pavement reaches this point in its life cycle. Typically, a pavement can deteriorate 40 percent in
its quality (PCI quickly drops from 60 ("Fair" condition) to 20 ("Very Poor" condition)) in the next
15 percent to 25 percent of its design life. Although the local and arterial networks have different
design life spans, both PDCs share similar characteristics because the pavement will crack and
these cracks will propagate out and become severe with continued traffic loadings and weathering
without any M&R treatment. Therefore, a PCI of 60 is assigned as the critical PCI for both the
arterial and local networks. The critical PCI is defined as the PCI value after which a pavement
section is expected to deteriorate rapidly with age or where the rate of PCI loss increases
significantly with time.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 2-3
3.0 PAVEMENT NETWORK
Currently, the City's entire street pavement network has approximately 454 miles consisting of
approximately 93.4 million square feet of paved surfaces. To assist planning maintenance needs,
the entire pavement network is organized into two networks (arterial and local) depending on their
importance in the whole roadway system. The arterial and local networks include 129.3 miles (28
percent) and 324.6 miles (72 percent), respectively. To be consistent with the City General Plan
Circulation Element Master Plan of Streets and Highways and the Orange County Transportation
Authority (OCTA) Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH), the streets in each network are
ranked based on their functional classes; the arterial network is comprised of Major, Primary,
Secondary arterial streets and Collector Streets, and the local network is comprised of Residential
and Non -Residential streets. Additionally, these streets are classified by surface types —Asphalt
Concrete (AC) or Portland Cement Concrete (PCC); and they are divided into 4,174 sections
(refer to section 2.0 Methodology) for ease of tracking their pavement conditions, pavement
history and M&R requirements. Error! Reference source not found. and Table 3-1 summarize the
current City pavement networks information.
Table 3-1: Entire Pavement Network Summary
Jetwork
Surface Type
Area (SF)
Mileage
Arter-a
........................................
AC
....................................... ;.......................................
33.130.507 :.......................................
125.5
Arter-a
PCC
.....................................................................................................................
484.500
3.9
Lora
...............................................................................a.......................................:.......................................
AC
55.177.336
300.1
Lora
PCC
4.590.069
24.5
Entire Pavement Network
93,382,912
453.4
Figure 3-2: Entire Pavement Network Summary
Pavement Area Distribution (SF) by Street Classification
Local AC;
55,177,936; 5
Local FCC;
4,540,064; 5%
■ Arterial AC ■ Arterial PCC -LocalAC ■ LocaI PCC
Arterial AC;
;,130,507; 35%
rial PCC;
540; 1%
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 3-1
3.0 Pavement Network
3.1 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS
One of the critical factors affecting the roadbeds and pavement deterioration rate is the quantity
and associated vehicle weight of traffic utilizing the streets. The volume and type of vehicular
usage for the abovementioned arterial network's four functional classifications are:
• Major Arterial — Generally consists of a six -travel lane, divided roadway connecting
various parts within the City of Santa Ana and adjacent cities. A major arterial is designed
to accommodate between 30,000 and 50,600 vehicle trips daily. This facility type
comprises approximately 58 centerline miles or 55.2 percent of City arterial network.
• Primary Arterial — Generally consists of a four -lane, divided roadway serving as a major
access route to regional destinations (such as downtown and similar major focal points
within the City). A primary arterial is designed to accommodate between 20,000 and
30,000 vehicle trips daily. This facility type comprises approximately 9 centerline miles or
8.6 percent of City arterial network.
• Secondary Arterial — Generally consists of a four -lane, undivided roadway serving intra-
city mobility. A secondary arterial is designed to accommodate between 10,000 and
20,000 vehicle trips daily. This facility type comprises approximately 35 centerline miles
or 33.3 percent of City arterial network.
• Collector Street — Generally consists of a two-lane, undivided roadway. A collector street
is designed to accommodate between 7,500 and 10,000 vehicle trips daily. This facility
type comprises approximately 3 centerline miles or 2.9 percent of City arterial network.
Figure 3-3: Arterial Street
The local network is comprised of two functional classifications as described below:
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 3-2
3.0 Pavement Network
• Non -Residential Street — Generally a low -speed two-lane, undivided roadway with
parking allowed on both sides of the street. Businesses are located on both sides of the
street. A non-residential street is designed to accommodate less than 6,000 vehicle trips
daily. This facility type comprises approximately 32 centerline miles or 10 percent of City
local network.
• Residential Street — Generally a low -speed and low -volume two-lane, undivided roadway
providing access to individual properties in a neighborhood. A residential street is
designed to accommodate less than 6,000 vehicle trips daily. This facility type comprises
approximately 285 centerline miles or 90 percent of City local network.
Figure 3-4: Local Street
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 3-3
3.0 Pavement Network
3.2 PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX
The City utilizes PCI output from StreetSaver as the rating mechanism to describe the City street
pavement condition. This numerical index ranges from PCI of "0" for a failed and/or badly
deteriorated pavement with virtually no remaining life to PCI of "100" for a pavement in perfect
condition. A street section with proper engineering design and construction begins its life cycle
as a new or recently rehabilitated street with a PCI of "100". As the condition of the street surface
begins to deteriorate, the PCI decrease reflects the surface deterioration based on the signs of
distress noted during the field surveys (refer to Section 2.0 Methodology and Error! Reference
source not found. Error! Reference source not found.). Although the surface treatment
recommendation for each street section utilizes the PCI value as the basis, the PCI values shall
be used for planning purposes only and are not intended to replace sound engineering judgment.
An engineering review of the pavement condition shall take place prior to any actual construction
work at a particular street section because the review may indicate that a particular pavement
section needs attention earlier than the other street sections in its localized area.
In general for planning and budgeting purposes, the correlation among the PCI, pavement quality
and signs of distresses are summarized in Table 3-1:
Table 3-1: Pavement Condition Index and Treatment Type
Pavement
Quality
PCI
Pavement Description
The pavement is new or almost new with very little or no roughness
Very Good
86-100
and surface distress (except utility patches if any), including
minimal hairline cracks and/or weathering. The pavement structure
is sound and no oxidation occurs.
The pavement has minor roughness and little to slight surface
Good
75-85
distresses (except utility patches if any), including slight cracking,
slight to moderate weathering. The pavement structure is sound
and no oxidation occurs.
The pavement may have noticeable roughness and slight to
Fair
60-74
moderate distresses are surfacing, including severe weathering,
non -load -related cracking, depressions, and material loss. The
pavement structure is becoming deficient minimal base failure).
The pavement has noticeable roughness (significant surface
distortion) and moderate to severe surface distresses, including
Poor
41-59
severe weathering, load -related cracking (such as alligator
cracking), depressions, material loss. The pavement structure is
deficient (up to one-third base failure).
The pavement has severe surface distresses, including large
Very Poor
0-40
quantities of distortion and major and unsafe cracking (alligator
cracking). The pavement structure is inadequate (over one-third
failure).
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 3-4
3.0 Pavement Network
3.3 EXISTING PAVEMENT CONDITION
Based on the inspections and data processing procedures mentioned in Section 2.0 Methodology,
the majority of the local street's pavements (46 percent) currently have a PCI of at least 86 or in
"Very Good" condition; this indicates that the City's local network continues to demonstrate high
conditional values. Furthermore, the arterial network shows a slight improvement from 2022,
these results show a slight increase in the entire network since the City's 2022 update due to
sustaining of condition in the local network (refer to
........................... ............................_...............................
2020
.......................................
2022
....................................._.............................................................................
2024
2020
2022
.......................................
2024
.......................................
2020
.......................................
2022
........................................
2024
.......................................
Very Good
........................................................;
86-100
...................................................................
42.5% _..........................................................................................................................................................
46.Y%
4D.9%
26.7%
22.5% _....................................................................................................................
2fi2%
52.Y%
54.5% a.......................................
45.8%
Good
.......................................................
75-95
_........................................................................................................................................................................................_i...................................................................................................................................................................................................
19.6%
20.8%
27.6%
Y6.3%
YS.1%
23.5%
21.7%
21.8%
29.596
Fair
........................................................;.....................................................................:......................................;......................................................................................................................:..............................................................................:...............................................................................
60-74
20.6%
16.5%
15.4%
33.0%
33.2%
27.0%
12.9%
10.5%
10.7%
Poor
41-59
10.2%
11.1%
10.9%
16.7%
22.9%
20.0%
6.3%
6.9%
7.1%
................................................................................................................................;.......................................;......................................................................................................................>..............................................................................;.......................................!.......................................
Very Poor
0-40
7.1%
5.5%
5.2%
7.4%
3.3%
33%
7.0%
6.3%
5.9%
Table 3-2 for PCI distribution in 2020, 2022 compared to 2024).
Good 75-95 19.6% 20.9% 27.6% 16.3% 19.1% 23.5% 21.7% 21.9% 29.5%
F r.........................60-7 ..................20.6% 16.5% 15.4% ..........33.0%......... ..........33.2%......... ..........27.0%......... ..........12.9%......... ..........10.5%......... ..........Y0.7%
..................................;...........................................................................................;..................................... ................ .. ... ............ .. ... .............. .. ..... .......... ..... .... ................... ..........
Poor 41-59 10.2% 11.1% 10.9% 16.7% 22.9% 20.0% 6.3% 6.9% 7.1%
...................................:....................................................................................5.5%.................................................................................................................................,....................................................................................................................................................
ry•Poor 0-40 7.1% 5.2% 7.4% 3.3% 3.3% 7.0% 6.3% 5.9%
Table 3-2: PCI Distribution Comparison (2020, 2022 vs. 2024)
With the proper maintenance and rehabilitation application of the local and arterial streets, the
majority of the entire pavement network is currently in "Very Good" condition (41 percent) with a
PCI of at least 86, which is similar to the results from the previous update in 2022. Figure 3-5
summarizes the current PCI distribution for the entire pavement network.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 3-5
3.0 Pavement Network
Figure 3-5: Current PCI Distribution (Entire Pavement Network)
Fair, 15A%
Current PCi Distribution (Ent ire Network)
Very Poor, 5.2%
Poor, 10.9%
Good, i7.6%_
■ Very Goad . Goad ■ Fair . Poor . Very Poor
y Good, 40.936
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 3-6
3.0 Pavement Network
As shown in
Pavernent Quality
PICI
Entire Network
Arterial
Network
Local Network
.......................................................
_...............................
2424
............ d
2422
....................................._............................................................................
2424
2424 _.......................................1..............................................................................
2422
2424
2424 d..............................................................................
2422
2424
Very Good
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
861CC
42-576
46.1%
40.9%
26.7%
22.5%
26.2%
52.1%
54.5%
45.8%
Good
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
75-85
19-6°%
20.9%
27.6%
163%
19.1%
23.5%
21.7%
21.9%
29.5?�
Farr
........................................................;.....................................................................:.......................................;........
60-74
20.6%
16.5%
15.4%
............ ...
33.496
.................. ..............................................
33.2%
27.0%
12.9%
............ .....
10.5%
.... ......... ....
YC.7'.n
..... ........ .... ............. .....
Poor
41-59
10.2?6
11.Y%
1D.9%
Y6.7%
22.9%
20.0%
6-3%
6.9%
7.1?�
..........................................................
Very Poor
......................................................................;....................................._............................................................................._':.......................................;..............................................................................,.......................................'.......................................
0-40
7.1%
5.5%
5.2%
7.4%
3.3%
3.3%
7.0%
6.3%
5.97�
Table 3-2, the majority of arterial streets' pavements are currently either in "Fair" (27.0 percent),
"Good" (23.5 percent), or "Very Good" (26.2 percent) conditions. These results, which show a
condition stabilization (no significant increase or decrease) in the top three condition categories
of "Fair", "Good", and "Very Good" from 2022 to the current year (77 percent for all three
categories), indicate that the City has been performing proper and timely maintenance and
rehabilitation strategies for the arterial streets to maintain the percentage of streets in the top
three condition categories (refer to
Pavement Quality
PICI
Entire Network
Arterial
Network
Local Network
............................................................................................................................................................._............................................................................_....................................................................................................................................................................
2020
2022
2024
2020
2422
2024
2020
2022
2024
.. . ............................
Very Good
86-100
42.5%
46.Y%
4D.9%
26.7%
22.5%
26.2%
52.Y%
54.5%
45.8%
........................................................;
Good
.......................................................
...................................................................
75-95
_..........................................................................................................._............................................................................_...................................................................................................................................................................................................
_...................
19.6%
....................
20.8%
.......................................
27.6%
................... ....................
16.3%
....................................._...........................................................................................................................................................
18.1%
23.5%
21.7%
21.9%
29.5%
Fair
........................................................o............................................................................................................................................................................................o.......................................:.....................................................................................................................o.......................................
6D-74
20.6%
16.5%
15.4%
33.0%
33.2%
27.0%
12.9%
10.5%
Y0.7%
Poor
..............................................................................................................................;.......................................:..............................................................................;.......................................;..............................................................................;.......................................;.......................................
41-59
10.2%
11.1%
1D.9%
16.-M
22.9%
20.0%
63%
6.9°%
7.1%
Very Poor
0-40
7.1%
5.5%
5.2%
7.4%
3.3%
3.3%
7.0%
6.3%
5.9%
Table 3-2 for the comparison). The sustaining in arterial street pavement conditions can be
attributed to local funding and various funding sources from Orange County Transportation
Authority, County of Orange, State of California, and other various agencies that the City has
received in past years. Figure 3-6 shows the current PCI distribution of the arterial network.
Figure 3-6: Current PCI Distribution (Arterial Network)
Pa
Fair, 27A
Current PCI Distribution (Arterial Network)
very Poor. 33%
vpry r,rmwl. )6-7%
. Very Goad ■ Good . Fair ■ Poor ■ Very Poor
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 3-7
3.0 Pavement Network
The sustainment in the condition of the local pavement network in recent years resulted largely
from the annual Local Street Preventative Maintenance Program, which commenced in 2014.
Figure 3-7 shows the current PCI distribution of the local network.
Figure 3-7: Current PCI Distribution (Local Network)
Current PCI Distribution (Local Network)
PGor, 7.1%
Fair, 50.7X
Goad, 243%_
Very Poor, 5.9%
- Very Good - Good - Fair - Poor - Very Poor
Very Good, 45.3%
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 3-8
3.0 Pavement Network
Table 3-3 shows the breakdown of PCI distribution of the entire pavement network, and the arterial
and local pavement networks individually, based on area and section mileage.
Table 3-3: PCI Distribution
Miles
Area �So
Miles
Area �Sn
Miles
Area (SPA
VeryGood
.........................................................................................................................1........
(86-1CC)
34.J
7.563,222
.... ..........................................................................a..............
151.7
27,5C1,218
... ................... .................................
185.7
... ..............a...........................................
35,C64,440
od
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................._[...........................................
(75 85)
3C.1
8,457,dd2
95.3
17,271,24C
125.4
25,728,2=2
-r
............................_...........................................................................................>......................................................................................;...............................................................................or
(6C-74)
34.9
9,378,043
34.9
6.593.557
69.8
15,971,6CC
(4159j
26.d
7,189,700
23.3
41667.957
49.3
11,857,657
...............Ver, Poor..............;................(C
44�................................4.3...........................1,Ci7,d4d........................19................._.........3,733,933........................23.}.............._,.........4,76.
.3.......
The pavement condition is generally measured by a weighted index (typically by area), referred
to as Average Area -Weighted Pavement Condition Index (PCIaW), which is determined as follows:
Where,
n 1(PCIi x Al)
PCIaw — n
�i=1 Ai
PClaw = Average area -weighted PCI
PCIi = PCI of pavement section number i
Ai = Area of section number i
n = Total number of pavement sections
Based on the formula above, the City's current entire pavement network is in "Good" condition
with a PCIaW Of 75.5.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 3-9
4.0 MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION STRATEGIES
With 454 miles and 4,174 street sections, the City develops a comprehensive, fully -integrated
PMP utilizing the inventory data along with the inspection information, M&R options and their
associated costs, and predictions about future pavement condition from StreetSaver to determine
optimal time for maintenance and rehabilitation needs. Due to limited available fiscal resources,
the City needs to perform cost-effective M&R strategies to maintain the pavement networks.
Additionally, pavement preservation, which is an important aspect of the PMP considering the
limited funding, will be included in the overall decision -making process.
4.1 TREATMENT TYPES AND ASSOCIATED COSTS
The pavement preservation and M&R considerations utilized by the City are categorized into
localized, global and major M&R. Localized M&R can be applied as a stop -gap measure or a
preventive measure, including routine maintenance such as crack -filling and pothole repairs.
Global M&R, which is cost effective when applied as a preventive measure, are methods applied
to the entire pavement sections to slow the rate of deterioration and improve current PCI, including
applying slurry seal to the existing pavement surface. Major M&R, which is often economically
applicable to deteriorated pavements, pavements deteriorating at a rapid rate, and pavements
subjected to a change in traffic loading, refer to methods correcting or improving structural and
functional requirements, including cold -milling and overlay, cold -in -place recycling, cement
treated base, and/or full depth reconstruction. The City currently utilizes the following M&R
treatment methods:
• Crack Seal — Crack Seal is applicable for newer pavements with cracks beginning to form.
Since water is the most destructive element to a roadway pavement, this treatment utilizes
asphalt materials bonding to the crack walls to restrict water penetration into the
underlying base and sub -base layers to reduce further pavement deterioration. This
preventive M&R treatment, which will extend the pavement life by three to five years,
saves money by delaying the expense of major reconstructive pavement work.
• Slurry Seal — Slurry Seal, which applies to pavement with minimal surface distress, such
as minor/low severity cracks, provides a new wearing surface to extend the pavement life.
This treatment is a mix blend of high -quality crushed aggregates (sand -like), asphalt
emulsion, water and mineral fillers, spreading over the entire pavement surface. The layer
of slurry seal (ranging from 1/8" to 3/8" thick) prevents further oxidization and water from
further deteriorating the asphalt concrete surface and subgrade, corrects raveling, and
improves skid resistance.
• Thin Overlay — Thin Overlay is a maintenance overlay applicable to pavement with
moderate cracking where preventive M&R is no longer effective. This treatment involves
partially milling or grinding the edge of shoulder (typically 6 feet), sealing the cracks to
retard reflective cracking, and placing a thin layer of hot -mixed asphalt concrete (up to two
inches for streets in both arterial and local networks) over the existing pavement
surface. The thin layer of AC improves the skid resistance and roadway's performance,
and corrects the crown and drainage features.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-1
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
• Structural Overlay — Structural Overlays, which applies to moderate to severe pavement
cracking with little or no deficiency in the foundation layers, entails cold -milling / grinding
the surface to a depth of up to three inches for arterial streets and two inches for local
streets, removing localized failed areas, and placing a thick layer of hot -mixed AC
(typically four to five inches for arterial streets and three to four inches for local streets).
The new AC pavement section smooth the ride performance, improves skid resistance,
correct the crown and drainage features, increases pavement structural capacity.
• Cold -In -Place Recycling (CIR) — CIR, which applies to moderate to severe pavement
cracking with little or no deficiency in the pavement structure, is a process rehabilitating
pavement by recycling it in place. The top layer of pavement is removed with a milling
(grinding) machine to a specified depth (typically three to four inches). The removed
material is then crushed, sorted and mixed with a specially formulated asphalt emulsion.
This emulsion mixes with the milled pavement and acts as a binder to form the new CIR
pavement. This new mixture is placed on the roadway by a paver and compacted as a
new and more durable asphalt base course. Finally, a thin overlay of conventional asphalt
pavement is placed over the CIR to seal it and provide a new wear to improve ride
performance and drainage features and increase pavement structural capacity.
• Cement -Treated Base (CTB) — CTB is applicable when the distress evidence at the
surface indicates failure in the pavement structure or subgrade (the roadway completely
failed with crumbling surface pavement), which is not correctable by less extensive
construction. Due to its long curing time, this treatment method typically should be applied
to low -moderate traffic areas and/or moderate traffic areas with more than one lane per
direction with a low volume of large vehicles. CTB involves grinding the existing roadway
surface and base into pieces to a prescribed depth (typically 14 to 20 inches for arterial
streets and 8 to 11 inches for local streets), which are mixed with cement and water to be
used as a base course. A thin overlay of conventional asphalt pavement is then placed
over the CTB base to provide a new wear for improving ride performance and drainage
features and increase pavement structural capacity.
• Full Depth Reconstruction (FDR) — FDR is applicable when the distress evidence at the
surface indicates failure in the pavement structure or subgrade (the roadway completely
failed with crumbling surface pavement), which is not correctable by less extensive
construction. This treatment involves removal of existing layers of asphalt AC, PCC,
and/or base to a prescribed depth recommended by geotechnical engineering pavement
analysis and placement of conventional flexible pavement section. In general, local
residential and non-residential streets are removed to depths of six inches and eight
inches, respectively; a depth of 10 inches are removed on secondary arterial and collector
streets; a depth of 12 inches are removed on primary arterial streets; and a depth of 16
inches are removed on major arterial streets. The actual depth depends on anticipated
traffic loading, soil conditions, and roadway functional classifications. This treatment is by
far the most expensive form of M&R strategies to increase pavement structural capacity.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-2
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
Table 4-1: Cost by Condition (Arterial Network)
Condition
PCI
Functional
Classification
Surface
Cost
$/SF
75 - 85
Secondary / Collector
Primary
Major
AC
$2.61
60 - 74
Secondary / Collector
AC
$3.05
41 - 59
Secondary / Collector
AC
$5.58
Primary
AC
$6.19
Major
AC
$6.80
41-59
Secondary / Collector
PCC
$25.25
0-40
Secondary / Collector
AC
$19.88
Primary
AC
$23.72
Major
AC
$31.40
Secondary / Collector
PCC
$25.25
Table 4-2: Cost by Condition (Local Network)
Condition
PCI
Functional
Classification
Surface
Cost ($/SF)
75 - 85
Residential
Non -Residential
AC
$1.27
60 - 74
Residential
Non -Residential
AC
$2.32
Residential
AC
$4.66
41 - 59
Non -Residential
AC
$4.66
Residential
AC
$10.77
Non -Residential
AC
$10.77
0-40
Residential/Non-Res
PCC
$22.82
Residential
Non -Residential
PCC
$7.43
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-3
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
It is imperative for the City to receive the proper amount and type of funding to perform the M&R
strategies as a plan to preserve the roadway pavement system in good condition. The plan is to
apply a slurry seal coat to new or recently rehabilitated streets at regular intervals, usually seven
to ten years. After a couple slurry seal coats, maintenance (thin) overlay or structural overlay
shall be utilized to address structural issues. Every street will fail eventually or reach a point
where it is more cost-effective to reconstruct than to repair. The roadway functional classification
(refer to Section 3.0 Pavement Network) and the original design life of a particular street section
will determine the intervals and treatment types. Additionally, streets with higher speeds, traffic
volumes, and/or loads, will demand a larger pavement section.
To account for the differences in pavement section across the spectrum of streets within the entire
pavement network, the streets are grouped into M&R families according to their functional
classification and/or surface type and a cost by condition is applied. The cost by condition for the
arterial and local networks is shown in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2, respectively. These unit costs
per SF include the soft costs of design, inspection, and construction engineering and are compiled
utilizing current projects as a basis for costs.
As the pavement ages, the PMP is designed to predict the roadway pavement's PCI based on
the deterioration curves (refer to Section 2.0 Methodology). Additionally, the PMP, which is a tool
to assist the City in making decisions when planning pavement M&R, involves scheduling
pavement maintenance and rehabilitation before pavements deteriorate to a condition where
reconstruction is the only solution. Based on Figure 2-1 in Section 2.0 Methodology showing how
pavement generally deteriorates and the relative M&R cost (refer to Table 4-1 and Table 4-2) at
various times throughout the pavement life, the critical PCI is established at 60. The critical PCI
is defined as the PCI value after which the pavement section is expected to deteriorate rapidly
with age, or the rate of PCI loss increases significantly with time, and the unit cost of repair greatly
increases; therefore, the threshold for M&R decisions are considered at the critical PCI value
since the cost of maintaining the pavement above the critical PCI value before the deterioration
occurs is much less compared to maintaining pavements after substantial deterioration has
occurred. Planned M&R strategies, essentially preventing pavements from reaching deteriorated
conditions, helps the City stretch and maximize the use of City budgets and prolong the life of the
pavements. StreetSaver utilizes the inventory database combined with the inspection
information, M&R options along with their associated costs, and the deterioration curves
predicting future pavement condition to calculate the chosen budget activity to reflect the best
pavement management practices and costs.
The City's PMP goal is to maintain a pavement system network with an optimal PCI of 75 ("Good"
Condition) or better. The City's pavement system currently has 68 percent of the pavement
sections in "Good" or "Very Good" condition (refer to Section 3.0 Pavement Network). The PMP
will recommend priority list of maintenance treatments annually to bring all City streets to at least
"Good" condition. The preventive M&R treatments, which are inexpensive treatments to extend
pavement life cycle, have minimal costs since they are applied prior to pavement deterioration to
"Poor" and "Very Poor" conditions.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-4
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
4.2 FUNDING
The City has estimated total funding amounts of $68.8 million and $44.9 million for the pavement
expenditures of the arterial and local networks, respectively, for the next seven years (refer to City
CIP on a separate document for further details). Generally, the future revenues for City street
preventive and major M&R programs are from the following funding sources:
• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) — The Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974 returns income tax funds to cities and counties to develop viable
urban communities, primarily for the benefit of low and moderate income people. This
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development program gives priority to activities
that help to eliminate blight, with emphasis on residential areas. CDBG projects are carried
out by several operating departments with the City and by sub -agents. Public hearings
are held to plan projects for each fiscal fear. The selected projects are recommended by
citizens, commissioners, and staff.
• Gas Tax — Gas Tax funds are derived from the Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax (or Highway Users
Tax Account (HUTA)). Motorists pay a tax for fuel consumption. It is apportioned to cities
according to population and can only be utilized in the maintenance and construction of
the street system.
• Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA—Streets and Highways Code
Sec 2030 et sec.) includes funds from the following taxes enacted by Senate Bill 1 Road
Repair and Accountability Act of 2017: the 12 cent gasoline excise tax, 20 cent diesel fuel
excise tax, transportation improvement fees. These new gas tax funding sources
contribute funding on an annual basis.
• Local Street Bond Fund — In 2007, the City issued a $60 million bond as a certificate of
participation (COP) against Gas Tax revenue to create the Residential Street Repair
Program to repair and rehabilitate neighborhood streets Citywide.
• Measure M2 — On November 7, 2006, voters approved the renewal of the Measure M
half -cent sales tax (Measure M2), extending the program over a 30-year period beginning
in 2011. In addition to the original three program components, this generation of the
Measure M Transportation Plan expands the program to include Environmental Cleanup
and Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits. To receive revenues from the one -half -cent sales
tax, cities and the County of Orange must coordinate their land use and transportation
decisions, establish cooperative transportation planning programs with neighboring
jurisdictions, develop Growth Management programs, and guarantee that transportation
funds are used for transportation purposes only.
• Measure M2 — Competitive — The competitive portion of the Measure M2 consists of the
following programs: Regional Capacity Program (RCP), Regional Traffic Signal
Synchronization Program (TSSP), and several transit programs.
• Measure M2 — Fairshare — This local fair share program returns a portion of the Measure
M2 Streets and Roads revenues to the cities and the County of Orange once specific
program requirements are met. Disbursement amounts are based on a formula that
accounts for population, street mileage, and sales tax collected.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-5
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
• Refuse Collection — Funds received in the course of business for the public collection
and disposal of refuse. The City adopted a Vehicle Impact Fee program to provide funding
for necessary improvements to the City's streets to offset the wear and tear impact of
heavy vehicle travel.
4.3 BUDGET ALTERNATIVES
Having determined the needs of the City local and arterial networks and the City fiscal -year budget
for the next seven years, the City utilizes StreetSaver to evaluate impacts of various budget
alternatives — existing budget in City CIP, budget to maintain the current PCI,w over a seven year
plan, and budget to improve the current PCI,v, by one point or better over a seven-year plan.
StreetSaver has the capability of forecasting the effects of different budget alternatives on PCI
and deferred maintenance (backlog). By examining the effects of these indicators, these "what -
if' analyses clearly identify the advantages and disadvantages of different funding levels and
preventive and major M&R strategies.
The following guide is provided for interpreting the individual output in Budget Analysis tables
below.
• PCI w/o Existing Funding — PCI yielded as a result of no preventive or major M&R work
during the listed fiscal year. This value is provided for comparison purposes and is
intended to be used as the baseline PCI.
• PCI w/ Existing Funding — PCI yielded as a result of preventive and major M&R work
with existing funding during the listed fiscal year.
• PCI w/ Alternative Funding — PCI yielded as a result of preventive and major M&R work
with existing plus additional funding during the listed fiscal year.
• Preventive M&R Existing Funding — Existing funding for preventive M&R work during
the listed fiscal year.
• Major M&R Existing Funding — Existing funding for major M&R work during the listed
fiscal year.
• Major M&R Additional Funding — Additional funding for major M&R work required to
reach the listed goal during the listed fiscal year.
• Total Existing Funding — Sum of existing funding during the listed fiscal year.
• Total Alternative Funding — Sum of existing funding plus additional funding required to
reach the listed goal during the listed fiscal year.
• Backlog — Total estimated M&R work left unfunded during the listed fiscal year.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-6
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
4.3.1 EXISTING FUNDING
This alternative represents the impacts of the City's current CIP budget on the entire pavement
network, and the arterial and local pavement networks independently, for the next seven years.
Currently, there are approximately $68.8 million and $44.9 million for the pavement expenditures
in the arterial and local networks, respectively, for the next seven years. The City's main objective
is keeping street sections from falling into the reconstruction category ("Very Poor" condition), at
which point typically costs three to four times more per SF than resurfacing. Therefore, the
selection of streets for M&R treatments during each fiscal year involves StreetSaver output,
engineering judgment and experience, and available budget.
With a limited existing budget over the next seven years from FY 2024/25 to FY 2030/31, the
entire pavement network will change from "Good" to "Fair" condition by deteriorating from a PCIaW
of 76.0 to a PCIaW of 74.9. Not only does the pavement condition deteriorate, but the entire
pavement network's backlog will increase by 18 percent by FY 2030/31 as shown in Table 4-3.
This information indicates that the City is facing the challenge of securing adequate, sustainable
funding for the M&R program to keep up with the increasing rate of deteriorating streets.
Although the arterial and local networks, independently, will improve the PCIaW by at least one
point during each of the next seven FYs with the existing budgeted funding as compared to the
baseline alternative (without any funding), the pavement will deteriorate in a similar fashion to the
entire pavement network. Furthermore, the local network will remain in "Good" condition, while
the arterial network will change from "Good" to "Fair" condition from FY 2024/25 to FY 2030/31
with the existing funding amount as shown in Table 4-4 and Table 4-5. Additionally, the current
level of funding is insufficient to stabilize the backlog since the unfunded deferred M&R projects
will increase by 43 percent for the arterial network, increase by 35 percent for the local network
by FY 2030/31 and 20% for the entire network.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-7
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
Table 4-3: Existing Funding (Entire Pavement Network)
Fiscal
Year
PCIaW w/o
Existing
Funding
PCIaW w/
Existing
Funding
Preventive M&R
Existing
Funding
Major M&R
Existing
Funding
Total
Existing
Funding
Backlog
Present
76
-
-
-
-
2024/25
74
77
$4,000
$16,422
$20,422
$314,135
2025/26
72
79
$4,000
$10,866
$14,866
$270,417
2026/27
70
78
$4,000
$11,126
$15,126
$266,836
2027/28
68
77
$4,000
$11,396
$15,396
$298,322
2028/29
66
76
$4,000
$11,666
$15,666
$352,565
2029/30
64
75
$4,000
$11,946
$15,946
$363,965
2030/31
62
75
$4,000
$12,236
$16,236
$376,683
TOTAL
$28,000
$85,662
$113,662
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
Table 4-4: Existing Funding (Arterial Network)
Fiscal
Year
PCIaW w/o
Existing
Funding
PCIaW w/
Existing
Funding
Preventive M&R
Existing
Funding
Major M&R
Existing
Funding
Total
Existing
Funding
Backlog
Present
76
-
2024/25
69
73
$1,500
$10,753
$12,253
$125,654
2025/26
66
75
$1,500
$7,419
$8,919
$108,167
2026/27
64
74
$1,500
$7,575
$9,075
$106,734
2027/28
62
72
$1,500
$7,737
$9,237
$119,329
2028/29
61
71
$1,500
$7,899
$9,399
$141,026
2029/30
59
71
$1,500
$8,067
$9,567
$145,586
2030/31
57
71
$1,500
$8,241
$9,741
$150,673
TOTAL
$10,500
$57,691
$68,191
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-8
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
Table 4-5: Existing Funding (Local Network)
Fiscal
Year
PClaw w/o
Existing
Funding
PCIaW w/
Existing
Funding
Preventive M&R
Existing
Funding
Major M&R
Existing
Funding
Total
Existing
Funding
Backlog
Present
76
-
-
2024/25
75
81
$2,500
$5,669
$8,169
$188,481
2025/26
72
82
$2,500
$3,447
$5,947
$162,250
2026/27
70
81
$2,500
$3,551
$6,051
$160,102
2027/28
68
78
$2,500
$3,659
$6,159
$178,993
2028/29
66
78
$2,500
$3,767
$6,267
$211,539
2029/30
65
77
$2,500
$3,879
$6,379
$218,379
2030/31
64
77
$2,500
$3,995
$6,495
$226,010
TOTAL
$17,500
$27,967
$45,467
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-9
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
4.3.2 ALTERNATIVE FUNDING LEVELS REQUIRED To MAINTAIN EXISTING PCI
With existing funding of just under $114 million for the entire pavement network over the seven-
year period from FY 2024/25 through FY 2030/31, additional funding is required to maintain the
existing PCI,w of 76.0. This alternative provides an available prioritized list of streets with
recommended M&R treatment to allow the City to hand select if unforeseen funds become
available at some point in the future. As illustrated in Table 4-6, a total of $9.1 million in additional
funds calculated at about $1.3 million annually would be needed; thus, providing for a total
alternative funding level of just over $122.8 million over the seven-year period. Furthermore, with
this additional funding, the backlog for FY 2024/25 of $314.9 million would be increased by about
16 percent to $365.0 million for FY 2030/31.
Demonstrated in Table 4-7 and Table 4-8, 45 percent ($4.1 million) of the additional funding ($9.1
million) would be applied to the arterial network and 55 percent ($5.0 million) would be applied to
the local network. As a result, the existing PClaw would be maintained at 76.0; 71 and 78 for the
arterial and local networks, respectively.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-10
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
Table 4-6: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Maintain Existing PCI (Entire Pavement Network)
Fiscal
Year
PCIaW w/o
Existing
Funding
PCIaW w/
Alternative
Funding
Preventive
M&R Existing
Funding
Major M&R
Existing
Funding
Additional
Funding
Total
Alternative
Funding
Backlog
Present
76
-
-
-
2024/25
74
77
$4,000
$16,422
$0
$20,422
$314,954
2025/26
72
79
$4,000
$10,866
$0
$14,866
$271,134
2026/27
70
78
$4,000
$11,126
$1,573
$16,700
$285,999
2027/28
68
77
$4,000
$11,396
$1,403
$16,800
$296,075
2028/29
66
76
$4,000
$11,666
$1,833
$17,500
$348,188
2029/30
64
76
$4,000
$11,946
$2,053
$18,000
$356,326
2030/31
62
76
$4,000
$12,236
$2,263
$18,500
$365,046
TOTAL
$28,000
$85,662
$9,125
$122.788
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
Table 4-7: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Maintain Existing PCI (Arterial Network)
Fiscal
Year
PCIaW w/o
Existing
Funding
PCIaW w/
Alternative
Funding
Preventive
M&R Existing
Funding
Major M&R
Existing
Funding
Additional
Funding
Total
Alternative
Funding
Backlog
Present
76
-
-
-
-
-
-
2024/25
69
73
$1,500
$10,753
$0
$12,253
$125,654
2025/26
66
75
$1,500
$7,419
$0
$8,919
$108,167
2026/27
64
74
$1,500
$7,575
$543
$9,618
$114,400
2027/28
62
72
$1,500
$7,737
$702
$9,939
$118,430
2028/29
61
72
$1,500
$7,899
$730
$10,129
$139,275
2029/30
59
72
$1,500
$8,067
$940
$10,507
$142,530
2030/31
57
71
$1,500
$8,241
$1,150
$10,891
$144,018
TOTAL
$10,500
$57,691
$4,065
$72,256
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-11
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
Table 4-8: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Maintain Existing PCI (Local Network)
Fiscal
Year
PCIaW w/o
Existing
Funding
PCIaW w/
Alternative
Funding
Preventive
M&R Existing
Funding
Major M&R
Existing
Funding
Additional
Funding
Total
Alternative
Funding
Backlog
Present
76
-
-
-
-
-
2024/25
75
81
$2,500
$5,669
$0
$8,169
$188,481
2025/26
72
82
$2,500
$3,447
$0
$5,947
$162,250
2026/27
70
81
$2,500
$3,551
$1,030
$7,081
$171,599
2027/28
68
78
$2,500
$3,659
$701
$6,860
$177,645
2028/29
66
77
$2,500
$3,767
$1,103
$7,370
$208,913
2029/30
65
77
$2,500
$3,879
$1,060
$8,409
$213,796
2030/31
64
78
$2,500
$3,995
$1,113
$7,608
$221,028
TOTAL
$17,500
$27,967
$5,007
$50,474
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-12
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
4.3.3 ALTERNATIVE FUNDING LEVELS REQUIRED TO IMPROVE PCI
With existing funding of just under $114 million for the entire pavement network over the seven-
year period from FY 2024/25 through FY 2030/31, additional funding is required to improve the
existing PCI,w for FY 2024/25 of 76.0 by one point or better. As illustrated in Table 4-9, a total of
$15.6 million in additional funds calculated at about $2.2 million annually would be needed; thus
providing for a total alternative funding level of over $129.3 million over the seven-year period.
Furthermore, with this additional funding, the backlog for FY 2024/25 of $314.1 million would
increase about 14 percent to $358.1 million for FY 2030/31.
Demonstrated in Table 4-10 and Table 4-11, 30 percent ($4.6 million) of the additional funding
($15.6 million) would be applied to the arterial network and 70 percent ($11.0 million) would be
applied to the local network. As a result, the existing PClaw would be improved to 72.0 and 80.0
for the arterial and local networks, respectively. Additionally, the backlog from FY 2024/25 to FY
2030/31 would remain about the same for the arterial network and increase by almost 15 percent
for the local network.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-13
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
Table 4-9: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Improve PCI (Entire Pavement Network)
Fiscal
Year
PCIaW w/o
Existing
Funding
PCIaW w/
Alternative
Funding
Preventive
M&R Existing
Funding
Major M&R
Existing
Funding
Additional
Funding
Total
Alternative
Funding
Backlog
Present
76
-
-
2024/25
74
77
$4,000
$16,422
$0
$20,192
$314,135
2025/26
72
79
$4,000
$10,866
$0
$14,866
$270,417
2026/27
70
78
$4,000
$11,126
$2,373
$17,500
$285,199
2027/28
68
78
$4,000
$11,396
$3,103
$18,500
$293,539
2028/29
66
78
$4,000
$11,666
$3,333
$19,000
$344,075
2029/30
64
77
$4,000
$11,946
$3,553
$19,500
$350,576
2030/31
62
77
$4,000
$12,236
$3,263
$19,500
1 $358,124
TOTAL
$28,000
$85,662
$15,625
$129,288
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
Table 4-10: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Improve PCI (Arterial Network)
Fiscal
Year
PCIaW w/o
Existing
Funding
PCIaW w/
Alternative
Funding
Preventive
M&R Existing
Funding
Major M&R
Existing
Funding
Additional
Funding
Total
Alternative
Funding
Backlog
Present
76
-
--
-
-
--
2024/25
69
73
$1,500
$10,753
$0
$12,253
$125,654
2025/26
66
75
$1,500
$7,419
$0
$8,919
$108,167
2026/27
64
74
$1,500
$7,575
$650
$9,725
$114,079
2027/28
62
73
$1,500
$7,737
$800
$10,037
$117,415
2028/29
61
73
$1,500
$7,899
$850
$10,249
$137,630
2029/30
59
72
$1,500
$8,067
$1,020
$10,587
$140,230
2030/31
57
72
$1,500
$8,241
$1,340
$11,081
$143,249
TOTAL
$10,500
$57,691
$4,560
$72,851
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-14
4.0 Maintenance And Rehabilitation Strategies
Table 4-11: Alternative Funding Levels Required To Improve PCI (Local Network)
Fiscal
Year
PCIaW w/o
Existing
Funding
PCIaW w/
Alternative
Funding
Preventive
M&R Existing
Funding
Major M&R
Existing
Funding
Additional
Funding
Total
Alternative
Funding
Backlog
Present
76
-
-
2024/25
75
81
$2,500
$5,669
$0
$8,169
$188,481
2025/26
72
82
$2,500
$3,447
$0
$5,947
$162,250
2026/27
70
81
$2,500
$3,551
$1,723
$7,774
$171,120
2027/28
68
80
$2,500
$3,659
$2,303
$8,462
$176,124
2028/29
66
80
$2,500
$3,767
$2,483
$8,750
$206,445
2029/30
65
80
$2,500
$3,879
$2,533
$8,912
$210,346
2030/31
64
80
$2,500
$3,995
$1,923
$8,418
$214,875
TOTAL
$17,500
$27,967
$10,965
$56,432
Note: Cost figures are rounded to nearest $1,000.
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program 4-15
APPENDIX A: ENTIRE PAVEMENT NETWORK PCI REPORT
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program
APPENDIX B: ARTERIAL STREETS 7-YEAR M&R PLAN
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program
APPENDIX C: LOCAL STREETS 7-YEAR M&R PLAN
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program
APPENDIX D: OCTA PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT
COMPLIANCE REPORT - 2024
City of Santa Ana 2024 Pavement Management Program