Marlborough District Council Roading Assets - Activity Management Plan 2015 - 2018 SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Installation of Guard Rails to isolate road hazards. This increase in the maintenance, renewal and capital budgets are steady to account for the increase in road length and level of service to meet the current specifications. 1.6.10.5 Life Cycle Management At least an annual re-mark of all road markings is undertaken as this is the maximum life of this asset. The life cycle of other Traffic Services cannot be precisely managed due to the reactive needs for renewal or replacement (due to vandalism, accidental damage, etc) and are generally replaced before the end of the assets life due to this. 1.6.10.6 Cost / Financial / FWP Maintenance The re-marking of painted markings and maintenance of signs is included in the current maintenance budget. Current maintenance budgets for Traffic Services are adequate to maintain the current condition of the asset. The current level of service for Traffic Services is considered the minimum requirement to maintain the asset and a reduced level of service is not considered appropriate due to safety concerns. Maintenance budgets have remained static over the past few years and are now adjusted with an increase to cater for the increasing amount of new signs placed on the network and an increase in the level of service standard. Maintenance of Traffic Services, with the exception of pavement marking, is generally reactive and there is currently minimal planned maintenance. Reactive or unplanned maintenance is undertaken in accordance with the Marlborough Roads Safety Management System Manual. The allowance for un-subsidised maintenance includes for maintenance of ‘off road’ signs and markings i.e. CBD and for temporary road closures for special events i.e. market days, ANZAC parades etc. Allowance has also been made for the biennial Air Show traffic management. Renewals There are a small number of Traffic Signs (e.g. Street Name blades) in the region that do not meet current MOTSAM standards, mainly due to reflectivity. There is no policy for these signs to be identified or replaced as it is considered they will eventually be replaced at the end of their service life. Current road standards recommend that roads carrying more than 1,000 vehicles per day should have edge marker posts and roads that carry more than 2,000 vehicles per day should have RRPM’s installed. Council does not currently meet these standards on a number of roads now carrying these traffic volumes. Generally the installation of edge marker posts and RRPM’s are initiated by Safety Audits and there is no current programme to install these on roads meeting the above criteria. All new Traffic Services are constructed in accordance with MOTSAM, which is a national standard, and any alternative standard would not be acceptable for safety reasons. Renewal budgets have remained constant over the last few years and have now been increased to allow for sufficient upgrading of the network to the desired level of service. Capital New roads constructed generally have the appropriate signage and pavement marking applied prior to acceptance by Council. Some new signs are required from time to time such as guide signs as a need is identified. 1.6.10.7 Traffic Services Issues/Risks Key issues/risks relating to Traffic Services are: Demand for new road markings is increasing as the volume of traffic increases and customers require an increased level of service; Reduced life spans of signs due to increasing vandalism and graffiti; Marker posts and RRPM’s to meet minimum standards for traffic volumes; and Minimum visibility and reflectivity are maintained. 30 September 2014 Page 109 of Section 1