Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Street Resurfacing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stonecrest committee hears detailed update on street resurfacing funding, selection and 2025 list
Summary
Engineering staff reviewed the city’s resurfacing history, funding sources including state supplemental grants, the 2025 paving list and how Pavement Condition Index (PCI) and subdivision averages affect which streets receive work.
The Stonecrest Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety (TIPS) Committee received a detailed briefing June 11 on the city’s street resurfacing program, past contract payments and the streets the city intends to resurface in 2025.
Chari Khan, engineering staff, told the committee the council previously approved a contract covering 20.37 lane miles for 2025 and walked members through past years’ lane-mile payments and contract amounts, including packages awarded in 2022 and payment variances in 2021–2024. He also reviewed funding sources and the city’s recent supplemental state grant submissions.
Khan said the city has tracked lane miles paid every year since 2019 and that “the last date to submit the application is 06/15/2025.” He described three distinct figures that often appear in staff materials: the council budget line, the contract award amount and the final paid amount after change orders and invoice reconciliations.
Why it matters: Committee members pressed staff on how streets are selected and why some streets with low PCI scores do not appear on a given year’s paving list. Khan explained the selection uses both an individual-street PCI and a subdivision-average PCI; in some cases a poor individual street sits inside a subdivision whose overall average pushes that location lower in priority. He said staff can prepare a supplemental list of additional segments should the council allocate more funds and that the quickest way to add work once a contract is under way is by issuing a contractor change order.
Key details reported by staff included historic contract and payout examples (package awards in 2022 split into four packages; earlier years’ budgeted and final payments), and that the city submitted a supplemental state grant application earlier in June. Khan identified the supplemental state program as a local maintenance supplement (referred to during the briefing as an LMA/LME supplemental) and said the city’s supplemental allotments listed in his slides were $7,776,000 (2024 supplemental) and $790,000 for the 2025 supplement referenced in the presentation. Khan said the 2025 supplemental application page in the packet lists the street segments, estimated costs and that the city had submitted its LMA/LME application on June 5, 2025.
Committee members asked whether PCI updates after work is completed are reflected on the public map and how the map shows paid segments. Khan said staff maintain an interactive map layer that updates when jobs are completed and that staff will add a new PCI column reflecting post‑construction scores where available.
Discussion points included whether to prioritize full-street rebuilds versus segmental resurfacing (several members noted some subdivisions require reconstruction before resurfacing), the financial strategy of bonding and timing relative to market conditions, and whether midyear budget adjustments could add streets. Khan and members agreed the council controls any rollover or reallocation of remaining resurfacing funds after a job is completed; Khan identified fund balances as a finance office question for an exact figure.
Ending: Staff offered to produce an updated list that shows district boundaries, post-construction PCI values, and a supplemental priority list that the council can use when determining midyear budget adjustments or approving change orders.
