The URL can be used to link to this page

88-320 �NHITE - C�TV CL RK PINK - FINANC COUnC1I �j GANARV - DEPART ENT G I TY O SA I NT PA U L �( BLUE - MAVOR File NO• �� " " O Counc 'l Resolution 15 Presented By Referr d To Committee: Date Out of ommittee By Date WHERF',AS, 18-year-old roadway stri�er currently awned by the Public Works Departtr�nt :is no lcazge cost effective to maintain, and - - WHF,RFAS, Public Works Departrnent wis s to replace this �iece of equi�am�nt in. o�ler to c ly with-Federal, state and �cal laws that require the city to maintain a system of roadway markings;.,in order t enhance the safety of City emplayees; and in o�er to de iver the sezvice in the most cost effective manner, and Wf��2EAS, Mayors pursuant to Section 0.07.1 of the City Charter, does certify that thexe e avaa.lable for app�opriati reve,nues in excess of th:ose est�mated in t1� 1988 budget; and WI�tEAS, 'I`h May�or reccgmierLds the follaw g changes to the 1988 budget: Current Amended ��I� _Budget __Changes___ Budget - ---------- ------------ � 240 Traff c, Siqnal, Lighting Maint ce �.irid 1200 Traff ic Maintenance Proj ect - -983 Use of Fund Balance 0 127,200 127,200 P,11 . tY�er Financing 3,735,832 0 3,735,832 - ---------- ------------ ------------ FINANCING 3,735,832 +127,200 3,863,032 . _ . . SPE�DING 240T12OQ -0848 Other Specialized Equi t 0 127,200 127,200 240 All - thex.Furid Speriding 3,735,832 -0 3,735,832 - - --- ---- -- ------------ ------------ 'I'O�I' SPEADING 3,735,832 +127,200 3,863,032 RESOLVID, t the City Council appraves these changes to the 1988 budget. Appr Rec ed ---- - � �-=x!6�' Budg Director COUNCIL ME BERS Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Dimond ub � -�+�° [n Fav r Goswitz Rettman B _ s�ne;be� � _ Against Y Sonnen Wilson � ,_ 3 Form Approve City Attor Adopted by Coun il: Date Certified Pa: ed by Council S etar BY i f By � � � Approved �Vlav r: a _ " Approv ayor for Submi '1 . By — PUSIiSNED �;;�,;: 1 �: 98$ �' .. . � _ ��a� - , ' . . . - � . �„� , �R�►: , - - �� 0.'0 0�8 5 5 , � , n �� .. .. .. �. .'. . .. � ..�Ml1'VO)t pil AeBIB7ANr) � " :M .. . ..�� . , �N �. .: �t�AMW10B1EM' ��ONECR7R _G -QRV CLEAIC �� : ii��' _ � .. � : . ' _ �u . "�� Bl�f#ET DMIC�TOR�� -� t • ��$9-8871_ � cm�Tror�r � . ,, _ . � . -.= To amend �he wudget fae �.9�8 �eci�,t Fu� Ac�ourit �raffic i��,�t � _, Projects. To increase t spenc��;�g. auth�;ty by $127�2�.fl0 ta a11�. . �e Cit of 'St. Paul to purchase an rban Ftc�y.3triping Ma<�tine. .Fhmc�s are avaiiab e froin the 240 fwui ba3ance. COUt1C1� R�SeBf C�1 ECt'!�i' . t��«�cfl�� cou�cr. �+onr: . v�+r+n�u crvw s�� wrE� � Ea. ��m�a� reo en scr�oo�eo�wo �_sr� `: aw�.� "s�s : ''°°L * �+n��w�o'� : �iioo� . _ . ��. E�E11��"D . aweoRrs w►aa�oan+c� k;:l,s �� - . 1, � R�C� F ��3 1 ��8 . FEB l N 1988 . �g 1 6 �P �,: .��;�� o��c E C I T Y A 7TC�t�i�� 3 �= et��r t��. ..M,.�o uKl.teb : ,Nh.e.,wM►: ,: .. � ;; 'ThS Cit� af . Pau1, Public Works nt eurrently owns a twec�ty year old i�operaR�.� `` x�aay ; �ip�r. In xeqae� yea�,s i.t as been very costly' �o :�gpair and ma3,�t�.,: It r�� c is akrie to be repaired used as dep�ndable ec��t. : �ia�ve=�r , city �s� �quirec�,�by Fa�eral. State local law to maintais rc�edwa�� aarki:�€�: s�e mus�t a replacea�ent Urban R ay Striping Machine. �1d►WOM " . _ �,n..uib�:_ . _ , . , ,. : . ,: � (SEF ATT�4H� T) _ , . . � ; . The atit� report shows the �� cost €ective and desirable means to �ri�e St. Paul ! - �y fs through the purcha�e af new one-pe�son .Ro�dWay Stripic� i�c�ir�e ,t�as�,gnec2 ` , . . 'for `rc�adw�ay uae: , . . - ; �, ° - ., � co�ur�s rr►,.r. ' ,«�ro.wna�: The� eonseque�,: e for non-ado�tion of�this r salution will be increased costs frt� maintt3sance of the sxisti equipment, possible vio�ati n of the legal mandate to dn stripi�g of :roadways, pc�s. �le :lewsnits due to law ;viol tioas, and. poesible in�nry a�r lo�� c�f life to city c pioge�s. . . . . - . .._. r�oer - . .coNs . � Contt with stripinq co�a��actor.a Explained in report. Lxpl.�ined in r�rt. �rac with another gov�rimedntal . ac� •. . . � City of S, Paul,along with every otl�': ma jor Minr�so�,a,city stripe t�ir o� cit� ;_ � equipa�ent y,perso�nel. roa:dwa� vi�t�. city owned cit - •uesa.�: . _ �here ;is .s i : obligation far the city to ma�ntain a ays� �f ro�d�y �naFki� a�oo�dir�g ta a�d��tate s€arx�rds. ; . ; � � �� . ;� � � . � � 1,��d � ' AN ANALYSIS OF PAVE ENT MARKINGS AND METHOD OF . APPLICAT ON, FOR ROADWAYS � IN THE CITY O SAINT PAUL MINNESOTA � . MA ERIAL TYPES Historically the city of Saint Pa I has always used paint for application of roadway markings. Such markings include lane lines, crosswalks, stop bars, and messages such as tu n indications. Now, in recent ye rs , new materials have become available. Public Works has experimente with two types of material, specifically liquid epox and durable tape material. EPO Y In 1984 Saint Paul received fed ral funds for the application of liquid epoxy marki gs. This material requires speci I application equipment which Saint Paul does not o n. A contract was awarded to S anston Equipment company of Fargo North Dako a. 88000 feet of material was ap lied. The contract cost was $0.22 per foot of 4 inch li e. The overall results were disapp inting. Markings have failed in a significant perce tage of locations. For the most part, failures occu ed in two categories. Where applied to concrete, hardl any sign of the markings remai one year later. We may assume the application is uns itable for concrete. Perhaps the bonding of epoxy is not compatible to portland ceme t and aggregate. Failure also occurred at various locations where markings where applied on asph It. The erratic manner in which t e applications on asphalt have failed leads us to believ that either the application meth d and/or the quality of the materials were below stand rd. Road surface conditions mu t be clean, dry, and free of all grease and oil. The temp rature must be a minimum of 50 egrees. This obviously limits the "application seaso " in Minnesota. Paint does not ave this restriction. We are able to paint, on a clean nd dry pavement, down to a te perature in the low 30's. Erratic failure probably occurred because of "time-to-no-track" for the material. Speci ications indicate the dry time to n acceptable no track condition is approximately 60 se onds. It was discovered that at s me locations, particularly near intersections, cones were strewn about and lines dri n over. When driven over before the material is suffici ntly hardened, the upper layer, hich is in effect the hardener, may be removed, leavin only the resin, which still show a bright mark. The line may look fine but actually has b en damaged. Consequently, the driven over portion of the mark totally wears off in a re atively short period of time (eve faster than paint). DUR BLE TAPE Since 1982 Saint Paul has been placing a tape marking material manufactured by the 3M Company under the trade na e of Sta Mark. The material, for the most part, has b en applied in conjunction with ro dway paving projects. This has a distinct advan age in that the tape can be imbe ded or inlayed in the final hot application of asphal . The exposed edges are minimi ed so durability should be improved. 1 � . . . ��.� � . • The.material is expensive. It h been paid for as a contract item under the pavi g projects and therefore has not mpacted on the traffic divisions maintenance budg t. Costs, to include material and application, have averaged about $1.10 per foot of 4 i ch wide line. Saint Paul now ha about 560,000 feet of Sta Mark in place. Results have been mixed. Lan lines, where vehicles to not drive over the mate ial, seem to hold up quite well. H wever, near intersections, where turning vehic es drive over the lines, they wea off quite quickly. Experience has shown that at thes locations the lines should be re one at least annually. Crosswalk applications of tape ave been unacceptable. Tire wear has been heav . In many cases lines have worn off as quickly as painted lines. Future costs to maintain Sta M rk are unknown. Certainly we could patch for a few y ars. But all Sta Mark has a limit d life expectancy; even the material which does not n ed to be repaired today. At pres nt this life expectancy is an unknown. Our limited expe 'ence with Sta Mark that has bee in place for a while (such as Snelling Ave), leads us to believe that total replacem nt should be done somewhere between 5 and 10 ye rs. Pavement recycling also ent rs into the picture. Many of our roadways are rene ed periodically by milling off the urface and applying a new bituminous surface. Obvi usly the pavement markings mu t be redone at that time. As an example Unive sity Avenue was resurfaced in 1 79 and again in 1986. Some may argue that a plus fo the use of Sta Mark is the appearance. Certainly a ne clean tape line looks nice. How ver applying tape in conjunction with asphalt pavin presents a problem with "tracki g" of fresh asphalt over the tape. This is difficult to cle n. Also, repair of Sta Mark with ta Mark results in some old and some new and theref re a patched unattractive final p oduct. PAIN Saint Paul has been painting ro dway markings for many years. Essentially two types f paint are available: alkyd and hlorinated rubber base. Rubber base is about 15% ore expensive than alkyd but ha greater durability. We have been using chlori ated rubber base paint exclusiv ly in recent years. In the 70's we used alkyd paint f r a few years because of budget limitations. Many ines wore off quickly, in fact so (especially cross walks), disappeared compl tely over the winter. We were p inting 2 and even 3 times a year in order to maint in lines. Now that we have been using chlorinated rubber paint for a few years, we ha e been able to build up a base nd cut back on the frequency of painting. Most locati ns now require only a single an ual application. Painting is a smooth and well de ined process. Costs are very reasonable. Long term c st studies show that we paint fo about $0.05 per foot of 4 inch line. Saint Paul just purchased a new airless crosswalk painting machine. Airless mean the paint is not "fogged" when it is applied resulting in a sharper, crisper, edge line. e will start using this new machi e in 1987 and our crosswalks should look much nicer. ur existing striper cannot do airl ss lane lines. A new rig would be needed. 2 . � � � ��'�'-�ad � OTH R PRODUCTS Many new products, such as th rmoplastic are being researched for possible use a roadway marking material. To d te literature shows that results have been less than cceptable, at least for Minnesota s climate. Saint Paul has not used any of these mater als. We will take a wait and see ttitude until research shows promise. QUA TITIES The City of Saint Paul maintain pavement markings totaling very close to 2 millio feet of 4 inch equivalent. Lines ider than 4 inches are adjusted to the 4 inch equiv lent. As an example, the linear f et of all 12 inch wide crosswalks are multiplied by 3 t arrive at the total. As of Decem er 1986 approximately two thirds of all pavement marki gs are paint with the other one t ird being epoxy or Sta Mark. STA MARK PAINT 28.19g 67.59g EPDXV 4.4% These totals reflect quantities f original application. Since the epoxy was appli d in 1984 a large portion has be n restored by painting over. It is expected that withi the next year or two essentially II of the 4.4% of epoxy lines will be redone with pai nt Sta Mark has been restored ostly by reapplying tape. However some resto ation has been done by painting The 28.1% quantity is down slightly due to paint ng. 3 _ � � . �� - COST -LANE LINES Prices for various types of lines vary significantly. The application cost for epoxy (labor and materials), is about 4 times s expensive as paint. Application of Sta Mark is over 2 times the cost of painting. The ife expectancy of the materials varies subst ntially. � $1 .t 0 / FOOT $1 .20 � $1 .00 $0.80 APP IC AT ION $0.60 COST ER FOOT $0.22 / FOOT 4"' L NE L INES $0.40 $0.05 / F OT .�. $0.20 {;, : •`�� . ; �.$ .;:;, ;;••,.j::,:. . ',;'�bv+ .,�.�;k�: �[ n rih+F: � :� ':..}+.•.:. .N:J} �O.00 PAINT EPDXY STA MARK ATERIAL TYPE A comparison of paint vs Sta M rk on a life cycle cost basis can be made. Assum the following assumptions: -1,500,000 linear feet of 4 i ch lane line are to be maintained. -The life cycle of Sta Mark I ne lines is 7 years. -3% of all Sta Mark lane lin s must be repaired annually with Sta Mark -If lane lines are painted, al lines would be painted annually ITEM STA MARK € PAINT .I.N.ITIA.L..P.LACEMENT..(.YEAR. 1.). .$1..,.65.0,�0_OO..o.,,,.......$.83.,.550„ . . . . . . . . .. ... .. . .MAI NTENANCE (YEARS 2-7) • ..,.,,,$2,97,,,00.0_.:........$.501,3.00,. .......................................................................... . .... ........ ................. .;..... .......................................................... ...:.................................. . .............................. TOTAL COST (7 YEARS) : $1 947 000 : $584 850 ANNUAL COST € 5278 143 : S83 550 0 on a life cycle basis Sta Mark I ne lines will cost almost 3 1/2 times as much as pain . epair of tape has been done in t o ways. Lane lines especially in the outlying areas, ave been repaired by painting o er the tape area. By the fact that the striping rig mus drive the whole roadway in orde to paint the lines that have failed near interse ions, repair costs have approac ed the cost of a complete painting application. 4 - . � ��..v�v � CO - CROSS WALKS The cost to apply Sta Mark cro s walks should be about the same as applying � lane ines. But cross walks are 12 inc es wide so the cost per linear foot would be $3.3 . Our documented cost to paint 2 inch wide crosswalks in 1986 was $0.243 per foot. / $3.30 / FOOT $3.50 r $3.00 $2.50 A PLICATION $2.00 OST PER FOOT $1 .50 12 " CROSSWALK$� 00 � $0. 4 / FOOT $0.50 $0.00 PAINT STA MARK ATERIAL TYPE But this is not the total picture. e performance of paint and Sta Mark are different. First, let us look at the cost of maintaining (repairing) in place Sta Mark cross alks. Repair of tape has been done in two ways. Crosswalks, mostly in the downtown area, ave been repaired by "spotting" n pieces of new tape. A detail cost study was done f tape repair during the summer f 1986. Labor and materials for 8,145 feet of 4 inch e uivalent repair averaged $1.09 er foot. Crosswalks are 12 inches wide so � cross alk repair would be $3.27 per lin ar foot. 6,630 of the 8,145 feet of 4 inch quivalent repair were downtown crosswalks. This tr nslates to 2,210 linear feet of 1 inch crosswalk. Saint Paul has 20,350 feet of 12 inch S a Mark crosswalk in place downt wn, thus 10.86% of the material was repaired in 198 . Suppose this downtown Sta Mar was repaired by the other method, ie painting. We w uld not "spot paint" but paint the ntire 20,350 feet of crosswalk. Our documented cost to paint 12 inch wide crosswalks is $0.243 per foot. Comparing the cost of Sta Mark repair i 1986, versus total painting rep ir shows Sta Mark to be 46% more expensive. 5 . . . ��,�a� , DOWN TOW CROSSWALK COMPARISON .............................................................................................................................. • ....................................................................:.........................................................:................................................ : S A MARK REPAI R :TOTAL PA1 NTI NG .................................................................,..... ... ..............,.... . .. .. .. ............................. . ........................................... IN 1986 ; EQUIYALENT ....................................................................:........................................................................................................... � ...................................................................;.........................................................;................................................ COST PER 12 INCH WIDE FT $3.270 $0.243 ...............................................................................................................................:................................................ PER CENT OF WALKS DONE € 10.869� 100.00� ..................,...... ......... ...................o............ ........... ................................................. .... .................. . . ...................... .. LI NEAR FEET DONE 2210 20350 ....................................................................:........ .................................................:................................................ ...................................................................;.........................................................e................................................ TOTAL COST S7 226.70 . S4 945.05 One must be careful in attemptin to extrapolate the costs experienced in 1986 to future ears. The cost to paint should r main relatively constant from year to year (with slight i creases for inflation). But it sho Id also drop somewhat initially when a new cross alk striper is put into use. Sta M rk repair probably will not be linear from year to year. Iso total replacement will probab y have to be done periodically. Paint vs Sta Mark crosswalks c n also be compared on a life cycle cost basis. The following assumptions are made: - 25,000 linear feet of 12 inch wide crosswalks are to be maintained downtown. This would be t e 20,350 feet presently in place plus anticipated new installation in 1987. -Annual repair of Sta Mark w uld be 10.86% of the total inplace amount -Total replacement of Sta�Ma k every 7 years either because of deterioration or roadway re urfacing. -Total crosswalk painting twic annually. ITEM ! � STA MARK : PAINT .I.NITIA.L P,LACEMENT .(.YEAR. 1..).�.. ..... $82�5.00..o..........$.1.2.,.1.5.0.. P'IAINTENANCE (YEARS 2-7�) `: $.43 360 � $72 900 ................................................................ o.. ....... .......�.............:.....................�............ . ... .. ...........................................................................'s...................................;.................................... TOTAL COST (7 YEARS) $125 860 : $85 050 ANNUAL COST S 17 980 : S 1 2 1 50 ainting therefore turns out to be 8% more economical than Sta Mark on a 7 year lif cycle. Of course there are other important considerations such as appearance which i difficult to quantify. Sta Mark wo Id be a patch situation while paint would be new an fresh twice a year. SUMM RY ased on cost alone there is no q estion on the type of material to be used for paveme t markings. That material would be paint. poxy appears to have some technical problems. While the material that sticks seems t wear quite well, there are som serious problems in application and adhesion. Quality ontrol is critical. 6 . ' C�� • Sta Mark wears off quickly in are s of tire contact. This certainly makes it undesi able for crosswalk use. Lane lin s seem to wear well except where there are turn m vements. At these locations (int rsections and driveways) lines disappear. Such locatio s are critical and must be restor d annually. Snow plow blades chip the material at irre ular locations. There seems to b a generat deterioration of Sta Mark with time and all material should be restored peri dically. RECO MENDATION The City of Saint Paul hould commence (revert to) a rogram of applying all pavem nt markings with chlorinated ubber base paint. The overwh Iming factor is application ost. Application and durabilit problems do not make it easible or fiscally responsible to use other materials at the resent time. New products sh uld be continually evaluated. It s reasonable and possible tha sometime in the future echnical improvements may r sult in a change in policy. PR SENT STRIPING oadway lane lines must be app ied with a special motor vehicle equipped with paint s orage tanks, compressors, spra nozzles, and the like. Saint Paul presently owns and op rates a 1968 model MB machin manufactured by the M-B Company Inc. of Chilton, Wisconsin. The unit has been odified several times during our ownership. survey was done of other muni ipalities who do their own striping. The average age of heir machines was 9 years old. aint Paul's machine is 18 years old. The rig is behind the times technologically. The c rrent state of repair is very poor. Work must be done o the striper before it could be us d again. REPAI S he following work must be done before the striper could possibly be used again i n 198 ITEM : ESTI MATED COST .............................................................................................................................................. B ra ke.Re�ai.r.................................................... :...............................$.,..,.0�.�.. . . . ............. ........�...................................... Front end work (ti.e..rods.. ...li nka�e)...:.....................................$800,. Front carraQe..assembl.y..r.wel.din,Q...._..�....................................$600 . ........................ ........ Cl utch re�ai r ......... ......... ...$400 . .................... ......... ......... . ................. ..... Electrical work $300 ....................................................................................... ..�.................................................... Exaust s�ste.m........................... . : ...$200 0 . .................. ............................................................ ......... Spray,gun & hose overhal € $2,50,0 .................. *....................,. ................................... ..........................................................................................:................................................... .,,....TOTAL� $5,.80.0„ .......................................................... ...,. ............................... . .............................................................. ..........................:................................................... � This work must be done annusll 7 - . ' �� The following work is needed a d probably should be done within the next two � years ITEM :ESTI MATED COST .............................................................................................................................. ..;...................................... .. � ...................................................... .................. .......... New com�ressor............... :..........................$12�0,00.. . ................. .................... ........ .E n9i ne ove r ha ul ..........o.............................$2.�.0�.�.. Transmission ove�rhau : $800 .............................................................................................................................. ...................................................... ....................;.................................................. TOTAL: $1 4 800 PER ORMANCE A number of features on our pr sent striper effect performance. Whereas they are diffic It to quantify in dollar amounts, t ey certainly should be considered. -The paint heater is sub tandard and does not give proper operating temperature for rapid drying of paint. At best we are getting 110 degrees at the heate and 180 degrees is needed for rapid dry. -The steering and shifti g are manual which makes the operation of the machine somewh t cumbersome. -The cabin heater is ina equate and the unit lacks air conditioning. -The engine is underpo ered. -Because of the additio al equipment that has been loaded on the machine, the weight istribution is uneven and the suspension has been taxed to th point where it probably should be replaced. DOW TIME From time to time the striper br aks down on the street. Equipment as well as labor time is lost. Records of down tim were kept in 1986. The striper was down for 46 hour . This is only time where the rig as on the street doing work and failed. As an example, a breakdown may occur at 2 PM and it is not possible to resume operation that day. hours of down time are recorde . This tabulation of down time do s not include scheduled time for repairs at the muni ipal garage. The striper was out f service for an additional 11.5 days for sche uled repairs. Records of labor loss in 1986 a a result of striper downtime were kept as well. This abulation only includes loss whe e it was impossible or impracticable to resc edule that employee to another j b or function immediately. 8 • - ' i N 00 �a� P r TITLE :TIME (H...S.).€ .HOURLY RATE �...:......DOLLARS..... • � ........................................... .............. e. .......................................... ............. .... .....................a............. ... .. ........................ .;................. ............... ....... . . ........ .... ...:... ..................... . .................. Pai nter Foreman 2l � $1 9.74 ; 39.48 ................................................:........................... ......;................................................................. . . ................... Painter 29 $20.12 € 583.48 ..;............................ . .:............................. ... .. ..,.................................... .............................................. ..., .... ... ...... Si.9.nme.n...........................€................9k........ : $15.90 : 143.10 .....,...................................................................................... .Utili.t�man.....................€ 29 : .......$13.85 : 401 .65 .... . o........................ . ................... ..................o................................. ................................................:................... .............:..................................................:.................................... � OTAL DOLLAR LOSS: s 1 167_71 ............................................e................ .. ..............................................o.........A...................... ................................................:................... ....... .....o. ..............................................'. ..... .................... �� I ncl udes 269� overhead Hourly rental rate for the stri ,er is $18.00 per hour.With down time of 46 hours the stripe loss due to rental was $828.00. Detail repair cost figures have b en kept for years. They fluctuate quite a bit from year t year so the best way to determi e annual loss is an average. Down time repair costs ave averaged $1655.01 for t�e ast 6 years. So the total dollar loss in 198�6 d e to striper failure was about $3650. ITEM DOLLARS ........................ ..... ............;........... .......... ...... .... ................................ Labor ' �..............$�.�.�.6.�:.7.�... ............................................................. .... Stri per Rental : $828.00 .... ..........,........... . ..... . ................................ Stri.�e.r..Repai.r ..... '•.............$�.,.65.5.:0.�... TOTAL DOLLAR L SS : =3 650.72 ADDIT ONAL SAVINGS I new striping machine should h ve less down time, and will have a cost savings due to mproved efficiency. ur present machine places pain that requires a fair amount of time to dry. Marker cones must be placed on the pa nted lines to prevent vehicles from driving on the pai t before it drys. Cone placemen requires a utilityman on the rear of the striper to place out the cones, and a following pic up truck with a utilityman on the rear to retrieve the co es when the paint is dry. ew striping machines are able t place paint that drys relatively quickly. No cone pl cement is required. Only a follo ing pickup truck is needed, to keep motorists off the aint for the few seconds needed to �ry. ew machines thus save the lab r time of two utilityman: the ones involved with the con placement operation. We also stimated that a new machine would improve the ove all efficiency by approximately 2 % by the fact that cone retrieval and waiting for drying t me is not needed. 9 . .� . � �� During 1986 our striper was in se 489 hours. Improved efficiency with a new mach ne would have saved over $19,0 0 � SAYI NGS TYPE ITEM :TI ME :HOURLY RATE: DOLLARS .............................................................:.............................. ...................................................................................................... ..o.................................;................;......................................;....................................... .......................................................... . N CONEING ;.Util.ityman , ; 978 : ...............$.1 3.85 ...,$.1 3,545:30 .............................................................. ... .... .... ............... ............ :.. ...... ..;.............................. ..e................e......................................e....................................... .......................................................... . I MPROVED EFFICI ENCY ;Pai nter : 98 : .$20:1 2 : ....$,1 ,971:76 ...... ...................................................................................... (BY 20�):Signman 98 $15 90 $1 558 20 ...... ........................... ........................e..... ....................... .,........ ...e...... ......... ......... e......... ,c......... ......... :Stri.P..er............. �....98 : $18.0.0 `• .......$�..�.76.4:.00.. .............................................................. ..... ..... ........................................ ...:... . ....................€Picku�.T,r.uc.. € 98 € $3.50 � $343.00 ........................................ o.............. ..e................,......................................o...................................... € : : SUBTOTAL.� $5,,.63.6:.96.. ....... .....................................................:...................................:.................. .... ................ ... .................... ..o.. .. .... ...............................:....................................:................:..................................... ..................................... EFFICIENCY SAYINGS ITH A NEW STRIPER;s19 182_26 TOTA ANNUAL SAVINGS A new striping machine should ut maintenance down time. We estimate an initial y duction of 80%. Total annual m intenance and efficiency savings should theref re be over$22,000. SAYI NGS TYPE DOLLARS ..............................................................................:..................................................... Mai nte na nce ............o.......................$2.�.9 2.�:.5 8.. ................................................................. .... Effici e nc.�.....................................................:....................$.�..9�.�..82:2.6.. TOTAL ANNUAL SAYI GS ? S22 1 02_84 SAFET ur present painting operation re uires a utilityman to be seated on the rear of both th striper and the following pickup ruck.They have no protection from following vehicle . Lane striping is an operation w ich interferes with the normal flow of traffic. Motoris do not expect it. The possibility of an accident is high.The utilitymen are extrem ly susceptible to injury if hit by a ollowing vehicle.To eliminate the coning operati n,( and the utilitymen on the rear of the vehicles), improves safety tremendously. RECO MENDATION The City of Saint Paul s ould retire its present r adway striping machine as so n as possible. Maintenance a d performance inefficiencies o longer make this machine c st effective. The machine also presents a serious safety c ncern. 10 . � � � �'P��a� ' STRIPI G ALTERNATIVES Roadway striping could contin e to be done by city traffic division personnel or contr cted out to other government or rivate concerns. PRIV TE CONTRACTORS Most government agencies do t eir own striping. Many small cities contract with their ounty for this work. Contracts wi h private contractors usually are for rural type road ays. We were only able to find o e contract for striping similar to the type of work (road ays), that we have in Saint Paul. That was the city of Hopkins. Hopkins pays $0.04 per 4 inch f ot of line for labor and equipment to apply mate ials supplied to the contractor by the city. Saint Paul pays $0.0221 per 4 inch foot for p int and beads. So total applied c st under this contract would be $0.0641 per 4 inch f ot. Saint Paul would have addition I expenses beyond the contract cost. Special drawi gs and plans would have to be repared for the contractors use and for the city to monit r his progress. Contract specific tions must be drafted. We estimate 0.3 FTE of techn cian time for this preparatory wo k. Additionally, we must remark roadways where lines ave been completely obliterated by winter action, as well as monitor the contr ctors field operations. This time s estimated as being the equivalent hours as actua striping time (Saint Paul spent 89 hours striping in 1986). Technician time is estim ted at $20.00 per hour (salary p us fringes). Preparation and monitoring cost woul add about 1 .5 cents per foot to t e cost. The total contract cost for contr ct striping would therefore be about $0.0773 per 4 inc line or 44% higher than the $0. 557 if done in house. Based on the quantity of stripin done in 1986, contract striping would cost over $32,0 0 more annually. CONTRACTI NG : PER F00 I N HOUSE : PER FOOT . .... ..................a........... ....... ....................................;......................................... ............ ...... . . ....................,....... .. .. . Contractor € $0.0400 � .....................................................................................................................................:............................................ Pai nt and beads € $0.0221 ..................o........................................... ..........................................,................................................. ..................... P,re�arati.°.n.............:..............$0:0087 � .... ...................................................................:............................................ ' � 0.0065 '• Mo m to ri.�9...............;..............$.................... ........... ............:..........................a........................................... TOTA.L........................ :...............$0.077.3. ..........TOTAL..................... ;...........$•0.0557.......... .......................................a.................................. ....... ........................... .o........................................ TOTAL COST� '• S1 1 5 60 TOTAL COST� : S83 299 � Based on 1 495 500 feet whic was done b cit crews in 1 986 11 . .� � . ' �� • The above analysis compares ntract costs with actual in-house costs for 1986. ' What would be the in-house cost with new striper? As shown on page 10, a new stripe will be more efficient. Annual s ings should be $22,102. But the hourly rental rate ill be higher. In 1986 we charge an unrealistically low rate of $18 per hour. We estim te the hourly rate for a new mac ine should be $32 per hour. This would recoup the c st of the striper in about seven y ars. Based on 489 hours of use, annual rental charg s should increase by $6,846. In reases in overhead, labor rates, etc should occur for bo h contracting and in house work nd are considered equal for purposes of this analy is. So efficiency outweighs increas d rental costs by $15,257. This equates to $.010 per 4 inch foot of line. Costs pe 4 inch foot for in house work wou�d therefore be $.045 or$68,045. annually resulting i an even greater savings over contract work. ANNUAL LA E LINE STRIPING COSTS $�20,000 �::>:r::::��,�.v � h•: {v' ' �'SC\ Lk:Lin $100 0�� •',,.•`°' � �i ' , ;•...�;.� �:w;^�••' '�r: �•.. ;x;?2 f:;:.,., �� {..�•;... ,� $80 �0� ��:?�'#� {�?:�i'�'.�,'+.�*,�' . ti*::�ir J,�{[/v"..�,.'. \.�. � y,K{.$:•,.;�+% �,+'^Y ++ �. 4'fF�.. :} �•�•:�ti �` +,�� '++/,�;• k` . •i."ti'n�: "•�i,�t4. ^� $60,000 � �'� `' �;�.Y� ;<;,rf,;y. •,^' ':;�.., f :::�•.} •f >. < $40,000 �'��•> $20,000 '� :``�'� ..,: :�,. .%�.�.• •'4� � �'.�:�:�k'$fi' .�.4. �O CONTR ACT ING, 1986 IN HOUSE, 1986 IN HOUSE-NEW ESTIMATE ACTUAL STRIPER, 1987 EST. OTHE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES nly one other government agen y has shown an interest in doing striping for Saint aul. That would be Ramsey Cou ty. Their rig is quite large and more adaptable to strai ht rural roadways. It could not f nction efficiently for our narrow urban lane lines and for the sharp painting radii that are und on such specialized striping as the painte turn slots so frequently used in t e city. ast season, Ramsey County Pa ks had asked Ramsey County to stripe a park roadw y that was newly opened to traffi . They were unable to do so because their striper ould not paint the lines on the ro dway without running over the wet paint. Saint Paul p inted this roadway for them. nother important consideration i response time. Contractors work for a number of cust mers and many are fooking for I ne lines as soon as possib�e in the spring. Saint P ul may not be able to have lines as quickly as when done in-house. Also, throughout the season painting is somet mes needed on short notice. Examples would be con truction detours or reopening of epaved roadways. Contractors may not be able to resp nd to such timing. It seems an o -going maintenance operation such as roadwa painting is best done by the ag ncy responsible for the roadway. 12 , , - - . . � ��ab . R�C MMENDATION The city of Saint Paul hould perform roadway painting with its own person el. The cost should be substantialiy less than contr cting. Coordination and -- timing shouid also be better. o do so will require the purchase of a new striping achine. STRIPER PURCHASE To the best of our knowledge, t e only corporation that produces a specialized strip r with the maneuverability neces ary for urban use such as Saint Paul, is Idaho Norl nd Corporation. They utilize the latest technology in airless striping equipment and t e quality of line produced is the best available. The City of Minneapolis has an Idah Norland striper and they highly ecommend the unit. The current production price of n Idaho Norland striper, equipped as we would desir would be approximately $105,0 0.(') Units are special made following plac ment of a confirmed order. Deliv ry can be expected within 60 days. The traffic division special fund 12005 has funds available for purchase of a strip r. This should be done and ownership of the vehicle should remain with the traffic divisi n. It is a highly specialized piec of equipment. The only division which would have n interest in its use would be tr ffic. The striper should be paid for (s ecial fund 12005 reimbursed) from rental char s. During 1986 our striper was sed 489 hours and the rental charge is $18.00 per h ur. This generates $8,802 annu Ily. The unit would be paid off in less than 12 years (neglecting inflation and interest . We feel that our rental rate is too low and we will b adjusting it in 1987 making the ayoff time even more attractive. s described above, the expect d annual operating savings with a new striper is $22,1 2. This provides an excellent re urn on investment of only 5 years. The 5 year return does not include the positives w ich are difficult to quantify such as utilityman safet and less disrupting to the motori g public. REC MMENDATION The City of Saint Paul hould purchase a new roadway striping machine as soon as possible. The vehicle should be urchased with traffic division funds and traffic should retai ownership. jws 1.87 revised 4.87 revised 5.87 (*) he manufactures estimated cost as of January 1988 is $120,000 plus % tax. 13