Marlborough District Council Roading Assets - Activity Management Plan 2015 - 2018 SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.6.8 Vehicle Crossings 1.6.8.1 Physical Description Vehicle crossings are provided for the passage of vehicles across road reserve, from the edge of the pavement to the property boundary. Urban vehicle crossing are generally concrete, constructed to Council standards, and rural vehicle crossings are generally of a sealed basecourse construction. Both form an integral part of the roading network. The quantum of this asset has not been accurately determined but is likely to be in the vicinity of around 12,000 (urban) and 2,500 (rural) based on rated properties. These assets have not been previously recognised and further work is required to detail and assess the management strategy for these assets. In the interim the estimated numbers have been used in developing this AMP. 1.6.8.2 Age and Current Condition There is no current complete database of vehicle crossings within the Council network, although there is limited, but inaccurate, data in the RAMM database. Due to the lack of data, the age and condition of existing vehicle crossings is unknown. However the majority of urban vehicle crossings have been constructed since 1970 in conjunction with the footpath network and are in reasonable condition. For the purpose of this AMP the age and condition of the urban crossings is assessed as being in parallel with the footpath network and a similar condition spread for the rural network crossings. 1.6.8.3 Level of Service A level of service for vehicle crossing condition needs to be developed. Council’s Code of Practice for Subdivision and Land Development does nominate a standard for new crossings. Currently maintenance of vehicle crossings is reactive from customer complaints and inspections completed by the maintenance contractors. The need for a management strategy is noted in the Improvement Plan in Section 14. The following options have been considered when setting future budgets for managing the vehicle crossings; i. Do Nothing Differently – i.e. continue with the existing budget and maintenance practices. Maintenance and renewal budgets are currently underfunded and will need to be increased to meet the current level of service. To continue this practice is not considered feasible as a large programme of deferred work will eventuate as the asset deteriorates. ii. Status Quo* – i.e. maintaining current level of service. As Council receives few complaints on vehicle crossings the existing level of service is meeting expectation. Maintenance and renewal budgets will need to be increased to continue with the current level of service as discussed below (+$12.5k/year and +$210k/year respectively). iii. Desired Level – i.e. increasing the level of service to meet higher expectations of council and/or consumers. The current level of service is meeting expectations and increasing funding to improve the level of service is not required and is not considered to add any value to the community. However if an increase in levels of service is desired, this may be provided by: Providing and maintaining an accurate asset database (estimated cost +$15k for first year and +$5k/year after that); Undertaking annual condition rating surveys and scheduling maintenance/renewals based on those surveys (estimated cost +$5k/year); and Engage specialist and council approved contractors under a separate maintenance/renewal contract (estimated cost +$25k/year). iv. Reduced Level – i.e. consider reducing the level of service to reduce costs. Vehicle crossings are an asset that would continue to deteriorate if the level of service and funding was further reduced, requiring an increase in future funding to bring the asset back to an acceptable standard. To reduce the funding further is not considered viable. Without an appropriate increase in the maintenance and renewal budget a reduced level of service would be inherited. The current Level of Service currently being practiced is Status Quo, where annual maintenance and renewals is driven by customer complaints. 30 September 2014 Page 98 of Section 1