Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Council presses Streets on how paving is prioritized amid PRISM limits and 60‑day SLAs
Loading...
Summary
Councilors sought clearer public guidance on how streets are chosen for paving, what residents can expect after a 3‑1‑1 report, and how PRISM and new AI/video pilots will change the five‑year paving list; Streets described a 60‑day service window for scheduled paving jobs and promised better communication.
Council members questioned the Streets Department on how pavement priorities are set, how residents can request inclusion in the five‑year paving plan, and what service‑level expectations neighborhoods should be given.
Agency officials explained the department uses PRISM, an older analytic system that estimates street life based on construction details and traffic, combined with citywide visual inspections and volume/condition metrics to rank streets for resurfacing. An agency official said PRISM is "very coarse" and the department is piloting video and AI tools to add better real‑time condition assessments. The department said it typically resurfaces roughly 100 miles per year while the city has about 2,000 miles overdue for pavement.
Service levels and resident requests: Streets officials said there is a 60‑day service‑level agreement for a paving job once a street is scheduled in a given year. For individual neighbor reports to 311, officials said those calls are used to identify maintenance work and to add contingency paving work where contracts allow, but the scale of deferred maintenance makes one‑off inclusion in the five‑year plan unlikely without a demonstrated network need.
Communication and technology: Councilmember Landau (chair of the technology committee) asked about Street Smart PHL, the city's GIS permit and project viewer. Streets said paving layers for the upcoming season have been loaded and the department is working with IT to improve permit granularity and real‑time accuracy. Officials agreed to provide clearer, graphical guidance for residents and to coordinate with council offices on notifications.
Developer accountability: Council members raised concerns that private development work sometimes leaves streets unrepaved. Streets described private paving agreements that require developers to repave when they excavate, but officials also said they see legal and practical loopholes when developers reincorporate or create separate LLCs. The department said it is preparing proposals for impact‑fee or impact‑program approaches to pool funds for district repair when developer accountability fails.
What to expect next: Streets committed to returning to council with improved public guidance on service levels and a written update on PRISM and the AI pilot work. The department will also follow up with reconciled carry‑forward and fund‑balance data where requested.
