Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pavement Management Deferred Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears Streetsaver briefing; members press for targeted spending to address deferred road maintenance
Summary
Nichols Consulting Engineers presented how the StreetSaver pavement-management system evaluates pavement condition and cost trade-offs. Council members cited local data showing many road segments overdue for maintenance and urged options for targeted, budget-constrained treatments.
Get email alerts on the Pavement Management Deferred Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nichols Consulting Engineers presented the StreetSaver pavement-management system to the Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council on Dec. 1, explaining how the software converts observable pavement distresses into a 0–100 Pavement Condition Index (PCI), forecasts deterioration, and models the long-term cost implications of different maintenance targets.
Margo Yap, president of Nichols Consulting Engineers, described the system as a decision‑making tool that answers which streets need work next year, over five years or ten years, and what the financial impacts will be. "Good roads cost a lot less to repair," Yap said, adding that preventive treatments such as micro‑surfacing and slurry seals (about $5.50 per square yard) extend pavement life and reduce the need for far more expensive reconstruction, which she estimated in the $64–$76 per square yard range for paving-only work.
Yap said StreetSaver produces maps and network analyses that show condition by street class and help prioritize repairs. She described an example where a network's PCI stabilized only when significant investment was made, and cautioned that insufficient funding increases an "unfunded backlog" of deferred maintenance. She also outlined the planned countywide survey under the Measure X/TAMSI effort and said field work would likely start in early spring with reports available by the end of summer; the company can then produce Carmel‑specific five‑ and ten‑year scenarios.
Council members pressed staff on how data are collected and updated. Staff said consultant vehicles equipped with cameras and laser sensors record conditions during field work and that Public Works updates the database after resurfacing so treated streets are set back to a PCI of 100 in the system. Staff also confirmed the city can run budget‑constrained optimization scenarios that prioritize particular streets or set aside money to address complaint-driven repairs.
A council member who compiled Carmel-specific Streetsaver data told the council he obtained a spreadsheet of 234 segments covering roughly 27 miles. He reported that 44% of the city's roads have a projected PCI of 69 or below and that about 48% of segments have not received a maintenance treatment in more than 25 years. He said the current conglomerate paving project addresses approximately 7,600 linear feet, roughly 5% of the network, and argued the roughly $1,000,000 annual street-treatment budget may be insufficient to prevent some streets from “falling off the cliff.” "We have an absolute deferred maintenance problem," he said, urging the council to consider targeting funds to bring the worst segments up rather than relying solely on an optimization that emphasizes network averages.
Yap said microseal/slurry treatments can typically be applied two to three cycles (about 5–6 years per cycle) before a structural overlay or reconstruction is warranted. She said StreetSaver can model scenarios where the city front-loads investment (for example, spending more in the first two years) to reduce 10‑year costs.
Council members requested that Nichols provide a Carmel‑specific 10‑year analysis showing the effect of different funding levels and targets. Staff also noted that several streets in the northeast section of town are scheduled for resurfacing next fiscal year and that Guadalupe will receive dig‑outs and a slurry seal under the current contract.
Provenance: StreetSaver presentation introduced at SEG 252; presentation and council Q&A span SEG 272–SEG 1355. The council requested Carmel-specific follow-up and scheduling in subsequent meetings.

