2017 road asset valuation - gisborne districtpo box 13-052, armagh, christchurch 8141 tel +64 6 873...

2017 ROAD ASSET VALUATION Prepared for Gisborne District Council

July 2017

Appendix 1

Status: Final July 2017 Project number: 80507996 Our ref: GDC Valuation 2017 - FINAL

This document has been prepared for the benefit of Gisborne District Council. No liability is accepted by this company or any employee or sub-consultant of this company with respect to its use by any other person.

This disclaimer shall apply notwithstanding that the report may be made available to other persons for an application for permission or approval to fulfil a legal requirement.

QUALITY STATEMENT

PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT TECHNICAL LEAD

Pauline True Pauline True

PREPARED BY

………………………………............... 17/07/2017 Lachlan Crawford

CHECKED BY

………………………………............... 18/07/2017 Pauline True

REVIEWED BY

………………………………............... 20/07/2017 Brian Smith

APPROVED FOR ISSUE BY

………………………………............... 25/07/2017 Pauline True

HAWKES BAY

1st Floor, 100 Warren Street South, Hastings 4122

PO Box 13-052, Armagh, Christchurch 8141

TEL +64 6 873 8900, FAX +64 6 873 8901

REVISION SCHEDULE

Rev No.

Date Description

Signature or Typed Name (documentation on file)

Prepared by

Checked by

Reviewed by

Approved by

1 17/07/2017 Draft for Review L Crawford P True B Smith P True

2 25/07/2017 Final L Crawford P True B Smith P True


Gisborne District Council

2017 Road Asset Valuation

CONTENTS 1 Declaration of Valuation ....................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Summary of Asset Valuation Results ..................................................................................... 1

2 Disclosure Requirements ..................................................................................................... 3

3 Comparison ........................................................................................................................ 4

3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 4

3.2 Comparison by Asset Type ................................................................................................... 5

3.2.1 Land under Roads ......................................................................................................... 5

3.2.2 Formation ..................................................................................................................... 5

3.2.3 Sealed Pavement Surface .............................................................................................. 5

3.2.4 Sealed Pavement Layers ............................................................................................... 6

3.2.5 Unsealed Pavement Layers ............................................................................................ 6

3.2.6 Drainage ....................................................................................................................... 6

3.2.7 Surface Water Channels ................................................................................................ 7

3.2.8 Footpaths...................................................................................................................... 7

3.2.9 Traffic Facilities ............................................................................................................. 7

3.2.10 Minor Structures ............................................................................................................ 7

3.2.11 Signs ............................................................................................................................ 8

3.2.12 Railings ........................................................................................................................ 8

3.2.13 Car Parks...................................................................................................................... 8

3.2.14 Street Lights .................................................................................................................. 9

3.2.15 Bridges and Bridge Culverts ........................................................................................... 9

4 Valuation Methodology ...................................................................................................... 10

4.1 Scope ............................................................................................................................... 10

4.2 Network Statistics .............................................................................................................. 12

4.3 Valuation Process .............................................................................................................. 13

4.3.1 Data Sources .............................................................................................................. 13

4.3.2 Data Verification .......................................................................................................... 13

4.3.3 Significant Assumptions ............................................................................................... 13

4.3.4 Obsolescence ............................................................................................................. 14

4.3.5 Impairment .................................................................................................................. 14

4.3.6 Unit Replacement Costs ............................................................................................... 14

4.3.7 Total Useful Lives ........................................................................................................ 14


4.3.8 Residual Lives ............................................................................................................. 14

4.3.8.1 Footpaths ..................................................................................................... 14

4.3.8.2 Pavement Subbase ....................................................................................... 14

4.3.9 Minimum Remaining Useful Lives ................................................................................. 15

4.3.10 Restoration/Dismantling/Removal ................................................................................. 15

4.3.11 Activity Management Plan Review ................................................................................ 15

4.3.11.1 Activity Management Plan .............................................................................. 15

4.3.11.2 2015/25 Long Term Plan ................................................................................ 16

4.3.12 Quality Assurance Process........................................................................................... 16

4.3.13 Borrowing Costs during Construction Period .................................................................. 16

4.3.14 Asset Inspections ........................................................................................................ 16

5 Breakdown by Differential Rating Area ................................................................................ 17

5.1 DRA 1 ............................................................................................................................... 17

5.2 DRA 1A ............................................................................................................................. 18

5.3 DRA 2 ............................................................................................................................... 19

5.4 DRA 3 ............................................................................................................................... 20

5.5 DRA 4 ............................................................................................................................... 21

5.6 DRA 5 ............................................................................................................................... 22

6 Land ................................................................................................................................. 23

7 Formation ......................................................................................................................... 24

8 Pavement Surfacing .......................................................................................................... 25

9 Sealed Pavement Layer Structure ...................................................................................... 26

10 Unsealed Pavements Layers .............................................................................................. 28

11 Drainage ........................................................................................................................... 29

12 Surface Water Channels .................................................................................................... 31

13 Footpaths ......................................................................................................................... 32

14 Traffic Facilities ................................................................................................................. 33

15 Minor Structures ................................................................................................................ 34

16 Signs ................................................................................................................................ 35

17 Railings ............................................................................................................................ 36

18 Street Lights ..................................................................................................................... 37

19 Bridges and Bridge Culverts ............................................................................................... 38

20 Car Parks ......................................................................................................................... 39

21 Recommended Improvement Actions .................................................................................. 40

22 Completed Improvement Actions ........................................................................................ 41

23 Glossary ........................................................................................................................... 42

24 References ....................................................................................................................... 43


LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1: Summary of 2016/2017 Asset Valuation as at 30 June 2017 ............................................... 1

Table 3-1: Summary of 30 June 2016 Asset Valuation ....................................................................... 4

Table 3-2: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Valuation Comparison ..................................................... 4

Table 3-3: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Land Under Roads Results .............................................. 5

Table 3-4: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Formation Results ........................................................... 5

Table 3-5: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Sealed Pavement Results ................................................ 5

Table 3-6: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Sealed Pavement Layers Results ..................................... 6

Table 3-7: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Unsealed Pavement Layers ............................................. 6

Table 3-8: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Drainage Results ............................................................ 6

Table 3-9: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Surface Water Channel Results ....................................... 7

Table 3-10: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Footpath Results ........................................................... 7

Table 3-11: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Traffic Facility Results ................................................... 7

Table 3-12: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Minor Structure Results ................................................. 7

Table 3-13: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Signs Results ................................................................ 8

Table 3-14: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Railing Results .............................................................. 8

Table 3-15: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Car Parks Results ......................................................... 8

Table 3-16: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Streetlights Results ....................................................... 9

Table 3-17: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Bridge and Bridge Culvert Results .................................. 9

Table 4-1: Data Confidence ........................................................................................................... 11

Table 4-2: Network Statistics as at 30 June 2017 (by pavement type) ............................................... 12

Table 4-3: Network Statistics as at 30 June 2017 (by pavement use) ................................................ 12

Table 4-4: Network Statistics as at 30 June 2017 (by ONRC Category) ............................................. 12

Table 4-5: Assets to be Valued ....................................................................................................... 13

Table 4-6: Minimum Remaining Useful Lives ................................................................................... 15

Table 4-7: Comparison of useful lives; 2017 Valuation to 2015-25 LTP.............................................. 16

Table 5-1: Summarised valuation results for DRA 1 ......................................................................... 17

Table 5-2: Summarised valuation results for DRA 1A ....................................................................... 18





Table 6-1: Valuation Parameters and Results for Land ..................................................................... 23

Table 7-1: Formation Extra Widths for Each Formation Type ............................................................ 24

Table 7-2: Valuation Parameters and Results for Formation ............................................................. 24

Table 8-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Pavement Surfacing ............................... 25

Table 9-1: Matrix for Estimating Sealed Pavement Structure ............................................................ 26

Table 9-2: Sealed Roads Extra Width Allowances ............................................................................ 26

Table 9-3: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Sealed Pavement Layers ........................ 27


Table 10-1: Matrix for Estimating Unsealed Pavement Depth ............................................................ 28

Table 10-2: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Unsealed Pavements ............................ 28

Table 11-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Drainage Assets ................................... 30

Table 12-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Surface Water Channels ....................... 31

Table 13-1: Footpath Depreciation .................................................................................................. 32

Table 13-2: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Footpath Assets ................................... 32

Table 14-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Traffic Facility Assets ............................ 33

Table 15-1: Ford Structures ........................................................................................................... 34

Table 16-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Sign Assets .......................................... 35

Table 17-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Railings Asset ...................................... 36

Table 18-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Street Lights ......................................... 37

Table 19-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for the Bridge and Bridge Culvert Asset ....... 38

Table 20-1: Car Parks Valuation Parameters and Valuation Summary ............................................... 39

Table 21-1: Recommended Improvement Actions ............................................................................ 40

Table 22-1: Completed Improvement Actions .................................................................................. 41

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 9-1: Effective Width for Sealed Pavement Structure Volumes ................................................. 27

GISBORNE DISTRICT COUNCIL


Status: Final July 2017 Project No.: 80507996 Page 1 Our ref: GDC Valuation 2017 - FINAL

1 Declaration of Valuation

MWH New Zealand Ltd (MWH) was commissioned by Gisborne District Council (GDC) to value its roading infrastructure assets as at 30 June 2017.

We certify that the valuations summarised below have been completed in accordance with the following:

• NZ Infrastructure Asset Valuation and Depreciation Guidelines – Version 2.0;

• Accounting Standards PBE IPSAS 17 and PBE IPSAS 21, and

• The Local Government Act 2002.

1.1 Summary of Asset Valuation Results

Table 1-1 shows the total valuation results for all assets. This shows an annual depreciation cost of $10,800,479.

Table 1-1: Summary of 2016/2017 Asset Valuation as at 30 June 2017

Asset Description Replacement

Cost

Total Accumulated Depreciation

Depreciated Replacement

Cost

Annual Depreciation

Land $745,709,300 $0 $745,709,300 $0

Formation $400,188,338 $0 $400,188,338 $0

Sealed Pavement Surface $42,644,828 $25,009,090 $17,635,738 $2,789,836

Sealed Pavement Layers $180,507,218 $56,133,543 $124,373,675 $2,800,592

Unsealed Pavement Layers $37,591,086 $8,548,322 $29,042,764 $650,966

Drainage $50,021,554 $24,163,438 $25,858,116 $716,919

Surface Water Channels $41,163,812 $18,307,941 $22,855,871 $548,851

Footpath $43,958,809 $17,624,550 $26,334,259 $609,906

Traffic Facilities $14,158,529 $7,241,971 $6,916,558 $240,258

Minor Structures $173,258 $86,629 $86,629 $2,166

Signs $1,494,281 $1,001,934 $492,348 $122,974

Railings $6,531,039 $4,973,186 $1,557,853 $264,309

Street Lights $5,528,181 $2,481,199 $3,046,982 $300,891

Car Parks $1,774,870 $887,435 $887,435 $43,935

Bridges and Major Culverts $127,608,855 $81,686,383 $45,922,472 $1,708,877

Total $1,699,053,956 $248,145,619 $1,450,908,338 $10,800,479

We are not aware of any reason why GDC auditors should not place reliance in the valuation prepared.

The valuations are based on accurate and substantially complete asset registers and appropriate replacement costs and effective lives. The basis of the data inputs used is described in detail in the report.




(a) The lives are generally based upon NZ Infrastructure Asset Valuation and Depreciation Guidelines – Version 2.0. In specific cases these have been modified where, in the opinion of MWH and GDC, a different life is appropriate. The changes are justified in the valuation report.

(b) The component level of the data used for the valuation is sufficient to calculate depreciation

separately for those assets that have different useful lives.

The following personnel with relevant experience in road engineering completed this valuation:

Name Role Qualifications Years of Relevant

Experience

Lachlan Crawford Valuation Technician DipEng (Civil) 9

Pauline True Valuer BBS Economics, PGDipArts (GIS) 19

Brian Smith Peer Review B Com CA 30

Signatures of Valuers:

……………………………………… ………………………………………….. Pauline True Brian Smith

………………………………………

Lachlan Crawford




2 Disclosure Requirements

Consistent with NZ Infrastructure Asset Valuation and Depreciation Guidelines – Version 2.0, Section 6.2.1, it is prohibited to publish any of the following without the written approval of the valuer as to the form and context in which it is to appear:

• The report in whole or in part or any reference thereto.

• The valuation figures contained within the report.

• The names and professional affiliations of the valuers.

The valuation has been prepared in accordance with appropriate guidelines and standards, that the engagement was performed independently and without bias towards the clients or others.




3 Comparison

3.1 Introduction

This section shows the comparison between the 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 valuations with a summary comparison and an individual comparison of each asset type with explanations for the differences.

Table 3-1 shows the results from the 30 June 2016 valuation for all assets.

Table 3-1: Summary of 30 June 2016 Asset Valuation

Asset Description Replacement Cost Depreciated

Replacement Cost Annual Depreciation

Land $730,942,439 $730,942,439 $0

Formation $386,207,940 $386,207,940 $0

Sealed Pavement Surface $41,341,974 $17,149,811 $2,676,215

Sealed Pavement Layers $175,303,125 $124,158,416 $2,720,042

Unsealed Pavement Layers $36,109,771 $27,372,897 $644,721

Drainage $48,328,400 $24,999,027 $692,656

Surface Water Channels $39,745,413 $22,089,470 $529,939

Footpath $41,562,888 $25,093,470 $577,247

Traffic Facilities $19,700,447 $9,648,907 $311,129

Minor Structures $167,513 $83,756 $2,094

Signs $1,355,288 $474,885 $112,668

Railings $4,055,454 $383,585 $101,356

Street Lights $5,410,239 $3,030,176 $295,016

Car Parks $1,718,888 $859,444 $42,717

Bridges and Major Culverts $120,851,660 $44,730,671 $1,626,702

Total $1,652,801,441 $1,417,224,892 $10,332,501

Table 3-2: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Valuation Comparison

Valuation Replacement Cost Depreciated Replacement Cost Annual Depreciation

30 June 2016 $1,652,801,441 $1,417,224,892 $10,332,501

30 June 2017 $1,699,053,956 $1,450,908,338 $10,800,479

% Change 2.80% 2.38% 4.53%

In summary the 2017 RAMM valuation aligns well with the 2016 RAMM valuation, with some notable exceptions that will be explained in this report. Council continues to better utilise RAMM, continuing to grow and invest time in collection and auditing of assets. This year Council have undertaken major data collection and validation on both the retaining walls and railing tables. This investment helps to better manage their network with a more robust understanding of the assets they are responsible for. With better field validations and data collection, Council can have additional confidence in the valuation process, making adjustments to the lives of assets based on robust information and local knowledge. This relates the 2017 valuation more closely with current design practices and council procedures. It is also important for Council to monitor these changes as they have had a significant impact on the value of their assets.




3.2 Comparison by Asset Type

3.2.1 Land under Roads

Table 3-3: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Land Under Roads Results


30 June 2016 $730,942,439 $730,942,439 $0

30 June 2017 $745,709,300 $745,709,300 $0

% Change 2.02% 2.02%

The increases in Replacement Cost and Depreciated Replacement Cost are due to an increase in land values in the Gisborne Region, and a small increase in land quantity.

3.2.2 Formation

Table 3-4: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Formation Results


30 June 2016 $386,207,940 $386,207,940 $0

30 June 2017 $400,188,338 $400,188,338 $0

% Change 3.62% 3.62%

The increases in Replacement Cost and Depreciated Replacement Cost are due to an increase in unit rates and a small increase in formation quantity.

3.2.3 Sealed Pavement Surface

Table 3-5: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Sealed Pavement Results


30 June 2016 $41,341,974 $17,149,811 $2,676,215

30 June 2017 $42,644,828 $17,635,738 $2,789,836

% Change 3.15% 2.83% 4.25%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for resealing.




3.2.4 Sealed Pavement Layers

Table 3-6: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Sealed Pavement Layers Results


30 June 2016 $175,303,125 $124,158,416 $2,720,042

30 June 2017 $180,507,218 $124,373,675 $2,800,592

% Change 2.97% 0.17% 2.96%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates pavement, and are offset by a small decrease in quantity through data validation.

3.2.5 Unsealed Pavement Layers

Table 3-7: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Unsealed Pavement Layers


30 June 2016 $36,109,771 $27,372,897 $644,721

30 June 2017 $37,591,086 $29,042,764 $650,966

% Change 4.10% 6.10% 0.97%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for unsealed pavement layers, and an increase in the unsealed road network. The increase in Annual Depreciation is much lower than the increase in Replacement Cost and Depreciated Replacement Cost due to Unsealed Wearing Course exceeding its assigned useful life.

3.2.6 Drainage

Table 3-8: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Drainage Results


30 June 2016 $48,328,400 $24,999,027 $692,656

30 June 2017 $50,021,554 $25,858,116 $716,919

% Change 3.50% 3.44% 3.50%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for drainage, and a small increase in quantity.




3.2.7 Surface Water Channels

Table 3-9: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Surface Water Channel Results


30 June 2016 $39,745,413 $22,089,470 $529,939

30 June 2017 $41,163,812 $22,855,871 $548,851

% Change 3.57% 3.47% 3.57%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for surface water channel, and a small increase in quantity.

3.2.8 Footpaths

Table 3-10: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Footpath Results


30 June 2016 $41,562,888 $25,093,470 $577,247

30 June 2017 $43,958,809 $26,334,259 $609,906

% Change 5.76% 4.94% 5.66%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for footpaths, and an increase in quantity largely due to the construction of the Wainui and Oneroa Cycle and Walkways.

3.2.9 Traffic Facilities

Table 3-11: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Traffic Facility Results


30 June 2016 $19,700,447 $9,648,907 $311,129

30 June 2017 $14,158,529 $6,916,558 $240,258

% Change -28.13% -28.32% -22.78%

The decreases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to the data collection and validation of the retaining walls table, which has resulted in a decrease in quantity.

3.2.10 Minor Structures

Table 3-12: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Minor Structure Results


30 June 2016 $167,513 $83,756 $2,094

30 June 2017 $173,258 $86,629 $2,166

% Change 3.43% 3.43% 3.44%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for minor structures.




3.2.11 Signs

Table 3-13: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Signs Results


30 June 2016 $1,355,288 $474,885 $112,668

30 June 2017 $1,494,281 $492,348 $122,974

% Change 10.26% 3.68% 9.15%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for signs, and an increase in the quantity of signs in the network.

3.2.12 Railings

Table 3-14: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Railing Results


30 June 2016 $4,055,454 $383,585 $101,356

30 June 2017 $6,531,039 $1,557,853 $264,309

% Change 61.04% 306.13% 160.77%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to the data collection and validation of the railing table, which has resulted in significant increase in quantity.

3.2.13 Car Parks

Table 3-15: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Car Parks Results

Valuation Replacement Cost Depreciated Replacement

Cost Annual

Depreciation

30 June 2016 $1,718,888 $859,444 $42,717

30 June 2017 $1,774,870 $887,435 $43,935

% Change 3.26% 3.26% 2.85%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for surface and pavement.




3.2.14 Street Lights

Table 3-16: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Streetlights Results


30 June 2016 $5,410,239 $3,030,176 $295,016

30 June 2017 $5,528,181 $3,046,982 $300,891

% Change 2.18% 0.55% 1.99%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for streetlights, offset by a small decrease in quantity of streetlights and their components.

3.2.15 Bridges and Bridge Culverts

Table 3-17: 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2017 Bridge and Bridge Culvert Results


30 June 2016 $120,851,660 $44,730,671 $1,626,702

30 June 2017 $127,608,855 $45,922,472 $1,708,877

% Change 5.59% 2.66% 5.05%

The increases in Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation are due to an increase in the unit rates for bridges, as well as a pedestrian bridge that has been added to the database and a bridge replacement.




4 Valuation Methodology

4.1 Scope

The scope of this valuation is to determine the replacement cost, depreciated replacement cost, and annual depreciation cost associated with GDC’s roading assets as at 30 June 2017. The valuation of the roading network has been completed to the appropriate component level.

The general components under which the assets have been valued are: • Land • Formation • Pavement (Structure and Surfacing) • Drainage • Surface Water Channels • Footpaths • Traffic Facilities • Minor Structures • Signs • Railings • Street Lights • Bridges and Bridge Culverts • Car Parks

The majority of the information for valuing the above components was sourced from the Road Assessment and Maintenance Management (RAMM) database. Enhancements have needed to be made to the various tables within the database so that the valuation software would run smoothly. Where data is missing, assumptions have been made to enable the valuation to be completed. These enhancements and assumptions are discussed further in the detail sections of this report.

GDC has utilised the RAMM Administrations Asset Valuation Module (RAVM) for the majority of components for this valuation. See Table 4-1 for a summary in data confidence.




Table 4-1: Data Confidence

Asset Description Confidence Comments

Land B – Reliable The land uses an assumed reserve width where this is not available.

Formation B – Reliable The formation valuation uses assumed pavement extra width allowances that have been calculated based on local engineering knowledge.

Sealed Pavement Surface

A – Highly Reliable No assumptions have been made.

Sealed Pavements B – Reliable The sealed pavement valuation uses assumed pavement depths and extra width allowances that have been calculated based on local engineering knowledge. 58% of pavements use the default construction date (50% of TUL) as they have no construction information.

Unsealed Pavements B – Reliable The unsealed pavement valuation uses assumed pavement and wearing course depths that have been calculated based on local engineering knowledge.

Drainage B – Reliable Some issues with the classification of bridge culverts.

Surface Water Channels

B – Reliable 97% of surface water channels use the default construction date (50% of TUL) as they have no construction information.

Footpaths A – Highly Reliable No assumptions have been made.

Traffic Facilities C – Uncertain Some data provided by others. Uncertain of accuracy.

Minor Structures B – Reliable These assets were added in 2003 and 2011 when better data collection processes were in place. However no construction dates have been recorded.

Signs B – Reliable 30% of signs use the default construction date (50% of TUL) as they have no installation information.

Railings B – Reliable 5% of railings use the default construction date (50% of TUL) as they have no construction information.

Street Lights B – Reliable 96% of streetlight poles brackets and lamps use the default construction date (50% of TUL) as they have no construction information.

Bridges and Bridge Culverts

B – Reliable Some issues with the classification of bridge culverts (see notes on Drainage). 18% of bridges and 99% of bridge culverts use the default construction date (50% of TUL) as they have no construction information.

Car Parks C – Uncertain 100% of car parks use the default construction date (50% of TUL) as they have no construction information.

Based on NZ Infrastructure Asset Valuation and Depreciation Guidelines – Version 2.0, Table 4.3.1: Data confidence grading system.

A – Highly Reliable Data based on sound records, procedure, investigations and analysis which is properly documented and recognised as the best method of assessment.

B – Reliable Data based on sound records, procedures, investigations and analysis which is properly documented but has minor shortcomings.

C – Uncertain Data based on sound records, procedures, investigation and analysis which is incomplete or unsupported, or extrapolation from limited sample for which grade A or B data is available.

D – Very Uncertain Data based on unconfirmed verbal report and/or cursory inspection and analysis.




4.2 Network Statistics

The following statistics summarise the GDC’s roading network as at 30 June 2017. This information has been obtained from the treatment length table of the RAMM database.

The lengths are calculated as the sum of the end displacement minus the start displacement (rather than the sum of the lengths). While this effectively double count the areas at intersections, it is considered to be offset by the intersection flares, which are not included.

Network statistics are based on this method to allow for direct comparison with the treatment length table, which also uses the end displacements minus the start displacements. These statistics can then be used to confirm the lengths in the Formation, Surfacing and Pavement valuations. These tables do include bridges that have their own treatment length; these are excluded when calculating formation and pavement.

Table 4-2: Network Statistics as at 30 June 2017 (by pavement type)

Pavement Type Urban (km) Rural (km) Total (km)

Sealed 227.884 617.036 844.92

Unsealed 9.433 1028.341 1037.774

Major Bridges 0.304 1.122 1.426

Total 237.621 1646.499 1884.12

Table 4-3: Network Statistics as at 30 June 2017 (by pavement use)

Pavement Use Urban Rural Total

1 ADT < 100 24.526 1114.19 1138.716

2 ADT 100-500 122.131 432.454 554.585

3 ADT 500-2000 48.862 92.31 141.172

4 ADT 2000-4000 16.595 4.49 21.085

5 ADT 4000-10000 14.337 3.055 17.392

6 ADT 10000-20000 11.17 0 11.17

7 ADT > 20000 0 0 0

Total 237.621 1646.499 1884.12

Table 4-4: Network Statistics as at 30 June 2017 (by ONRC Category)

ONRC Category Sealed Unsealed Major Bridges Total

Arterial 15.784 0 0.048 15.832

Primary Collector 48.477 0 0.156 48.633

Secondary Collector 306.232 16.554 0.057 322.843

Low Volume 141.061 731.68 0.932 873.673

Access 332.684 288.87 0.233 621.787

Not Assigned 0.682 0.67 0 1.352

Total 844.92 1037.774 1.426 1884.12




4.3 Valuation Process

These values have been calculated to define this roading asset valuation Optimised Replacement Cost, Depreciated Replacement Cost and Annual Depreciation. These are defined in the Glossary (see Section 20).

4.3.1 Data Sources

The general categories under which the road components are to be valued are outlined in Table 4-5 below.

Table 4-5: Assets to be Valued

Component RAMM Table Data Source

Land Treatment Length RAMM

Formation Treatment Length RAMM

Pavements

• Sealed Pavement Structure Treatment Length RAMM

• Unsealed Pavement Structure Treatment Length RAMM

• Sealed Surfaces Treatment Length RAMM

Drainage Drainage RAMM

Surface Water Channels Surface Water Channel RAMM

Footpaths Footpath RAMM

Traffic Facilities

• Retaining Walls Retaining Walls RAMM

• Other Structures Traffic Facilities RAMM

• Parking Meters Traffic Facilities RAMM

• Traffic Signals Traffic Signals RAMM

• Raised Pavement Markers Markings RAMM

Fords Minor Structure RAMM

Markings NA Council supplied data

Signs Signs RAMM

Railings Railings RAMM

Streetlights Street Light RAMM

Bridges and Bridge Culverts Bridge RAMM

Car Parks Treatment Length RAMM

4.3.2 Data Verification

The RAMM database has been checked and any issues, errors, or missing data that need to be addressed before the valuation could run were identified and passed onto the RAMM team for updating.

4.3.3 Significant Assumptions

The default construction date will be 50% of the Total Useful Life (TUL) – unless it is otherwise stated – and only used where there is no construction date contained in RAMM. Default dates are calculated as the first of January of the year that would make the asset halfway through its life.




Straight-line depreciation has been used in this valuation except where assets are deemed not to depreciate.

All assets that have been valued in RAVM have been identified as asset owner “L” (or “LA” in the signs table) for Local authority in the RAMM database.

All replacement rates, where appropriate, have included in the cost an amount for removal and disposal of the existing asset, an amount for site establishment, and an amount for the formation, supply, placement, shaping, etc., of materials.

All significant assumptions were reviewed by Council prior to the 2015 full valuation and confirmed as appropriate for the purposes of running the 30 June 2017 valuation.

4.3.4 Obsolescence

Potential physical, functional and external obsolescence has been considered in terms of the Application Guidance to PBE IPSAS 17. The replacement cost of bridges and culverts is calculated as the cost of building it “today”. It is assumed that modern equivalent construction techniques and materials are used but that the physical result replaces the asset as it exists. For this valuation we have assumed that all bridges and culverts will be replaced with a similar dimensioned concrete bridge/culvert.

4.3.5 Impairment

We have also considered impairment of assets as defined in PBE IPSAS 21. This new Standard does not specifically require impairment testing in a periodic revaluation of non-cash generating assets. However during the course of our valuation no assets have been identified, or been brought to our notice that we would consider to be impaired.

4.3.6 Unit Replacement Costs

For this revaluation we are utilising cost adjustment factors provided by the New Zealand Transport Agency. These factors, for the period 31 March 2016 to 31 March 2017 are as follows: Maintenance = 1.0338, Bridges = 1.0465, Reseals = 1.0202 and Construction = 1.0343 (used for all other assets). In the same period, the median property price for the Gisborne region has increased by 2.0%.

4.3.7 Total Useful Lives

All total useful life assumptions were reviewed by Council in 2016 and confirmed as appropriate for the purposes of running the 30 June 2017 valuation.

4.3.8 Residual Lives

For the purposes of this valuation we have assumed that assets have no residual value except for footpaths and pavement subbase.

4.3.8.1 Footpaths

RAVM does not currently have the ability to deal with footpaths in components and does not allow them to be broken down into basecourse and surface components. To deal with this we have used the residual value field, where necessary, as the cost of the basecourse. The replacement rates for footpaths include the cost of the footpath basecourse and surface.

4.3.8.2 Pavement Subbase

50% of pavement subbase has been assumed to depreciate to allow for the reconstruction work undertaken at the time of pavement reconstruction. To account for this a residual value equivalent to 50% of the pavement subbase cost has been used.




4.3.9 Minimum Remaining Useful Lives

The Minimum Remaining Useful Life is applied to assets that are older than their useful life. It recognises that although an asset is older than its useful life it may still be in service and therefore have some value. Where an asset is older than its standard useful life, the minimum remaining useful life is added to the assets age and used in the calculation of the depreciated replacement value. The minimum remaining useful lives of assets in this valuation are included in the asset assumption tables, and in Table 4-6. Where an asset description has NA it indicates an asset type that is either deemed to not depreciate, or has a one year Total Useful Life.

Table 4-6: Minimum Remaining Useful Lives

Asset Description Minimum Remaining Useful Life

Land NA

Formation NA

Pavement Surface 1

Sealed Pavement First Coats 2

Sealed Pavement Basecourse 2

Sealed Pavement Subbase 2

Unsealed Pavement Wearing Course 2

Unsealed Pavement Subbase NA

Drainage 2

Surface Water Channels 2

Footpath 2

Traffic Facilities 2

Minor Structures 2

Signs 2

Railings 2

Street Lights 2

Bridges and Major Culverts 5

Car Parks 2

4.3.10 Restoration/Dismantling/Removal

All replacement rates include, where appropriate, an amount for removal and disposal of the existing asset, an amount for site establishment, and an amount for the formation, supply, placement, shaping, etc. of materials.

4.3.11 Activity Management Plan Review

The assumptions used in this valuation have been reviewed to ensure they are in line with current best practice and with the Council’s 2015/25 Long Term Plan (LTP). Areas where the valuation differs from the 2015/25 LTP are listed below.

4.3.11.1 Activity Management Plan

A comparison between the Activity Management Plan (AMP) and this valuation has been conducted. It is believed any differences in useful life information is more a result of the AMP being at a summarised level than the detailed valuation information.




4.3.11.2 2015/25 Long Term Plan

A comparison of the useful lives between the LTP and this valuation is listed below. We are unaware of the specific reasons why some useful lives reported in the LTP differ from those assumed in this valuation.

Table 4-7: Comparison of useful lives; 2017 Valuation to 2015-25 LTP

Valuation

2015 – 2025 LTP

AMP

Pavement Surface (seal) 5 – 20 years 1 – 20 years 1-20 years

Pavement Surface (unsealed) 5 years 5 years 5 years

Pavement Layers (basecourse) 40 – 100 years 75 – 100 years 75-100 years

Formation Not Depreciated Not Depreciated Not Depreciated

Culverts 70 years 25 – 50 years 25 – 50 years

Footpaths 20 – 75 years 20 – 75 years 20 – 75 years

Surface Water Channels 75 years 50 years 50 years

Signs 12 years 12 years 12 years

Streetlights 15 – 25 years 15 – 25 years 15 – 25 years

Bridges 25 – 80 years 25 – 80 years 25 – 80 years

Retaining Structures 80 years 80 years 80 years

Traffic Signals 15 years 15 years 15 years

Parking Meters 15 years 25 years 25 years

Railings 10 – 15 years 10 – 15 years 10 – 15 years

Safety Projects 10 – 13 years 10 – 13 years

4.3.12 Quality Assurance Process

Quality checks, based on NZ Infrastructure Asset Valuation and Depreciation Guidelines – Version 2.0, Section 6.2.2, have been undertaken on this document by both the valuer and the reviewer.

4.3.13 Borrowing Costs during Construction Period

No borrowing costs have been included in this valuation. The Financial Reporting Standard PBE IPSAS 5 gives Public Benefit Entities the option to exclude or include borrowing costs on assets during the construction period. GDC has opted to exclude borrowing costs.

4.3.14 Asset Inspections

No asset inspections were required as part of this valuation.




5 Breakdown by Differential Rating Area

The tables below show the results for each Differential Rating Area (DRA) broken down by asset type. These tables do not include Carparks or accessways, as they are not assigned a DRA.

5.1 DRA 1

Table 5-1: Summarised valuation results for DRA 1

Asset Type Replacement Cost

Depreciated Replacement Cost

Annual Depreciated Replacement Cost

Bridge Culvert $180,651 $90,325 $3,613

Bridges $10,552,452 $2,488,389 $141,628

Drainage $150,444 $101,097 $2,149

First Coat Seals $8,073,964 $4,466,336 $201,849

Footpath $38,923,448 $23,108,919 $537,276

Formation $21,114,189 $21,114,189 $0

Land $491,861,245 $491,861,245 $0

Railings $443,430 $113,420 $20,961

Retaining Walls $230,126 $166,408 $2,877

Sealed Pavement Basecourse $16,408,037 $9,133,099 $410,201

Sealed Pavement Subbase $21,889,343 $17,500,442 $119,380

Signs $762,829 $157,075 $63,122

Streetlights - brackets $1,036,941 $561,095 $69,130

Streetlights - lights $1,410,216 $793,703 $94,005

Streetlights - poles $2,305,160 $1,179,600 $92,882


Surfacing $20,998,456 $10,525,890 $1,231,139

Traffic Facilities $650,639 $64,407 $30,989

Grand Total $670,374,827 $600,953,720 $3,466,310




5.2 DRA 1A

Table 5-2: Summarised valuation results for DRA 1A




Bridge Culvert $168,996 $34,188 $4,273

Bridges $422,525 $191,274 $7,333

Drainage $826,741 $417,708 $11,811

First Coat Seals $1,108,607 $620,473 $27,715

Footpath $1,409,078 $1,049,601 $18,848

Formation $6,290,715 $6,290,715 $0

Land $124,190,350 $124,190,350 $0

Railings $37,840 $10,576 $2,276

Retaining Walls $107,770 $55,010 $1,347



Signs $47,905 $11,346 $3,964

Streetlights - brackets $67,891 $37,076 $4,526

Streetlights - lights $141,537 $93,450 $9,436

Streetlights - poles $149,087 $75,824 $5,999


Surfacing $1,568,697 $629,118 $104,019

Unsealed Pavement Subbase $106,112 $79,582 $531

Unsealed Pavement Wearing Course $9,867 $5,921 $1,974

Grand Total $144,146,984 $139,061,651 $304,404




5.3 DRA 2





Bridge Culvert $703,956 $317,119 $18,118

Bridges $6,118,122 $2,534,620 $77,263

Drainage $4,954,617 $2,484,464 $70,780

First Coat Seals $4,968,089 $2,863,684 $124,202

Footpath $728,658 $411,315 $9,770

Formation $35,430,025 $35,430,025 $0

Land $91,831,446 $91,831,446 $0

Railings $374,802 $82,739 $17,521

Retaining Walls $100,478 $70,586 $1,256



Signs $180,055 $61,158 $14,763

Streetlights - brackets $12,810 $7,094 $830




Surfacing $5,091,705 $1,922,261 $396,354


Unsealed Pavement Subbase $760,979 $612,010 $3,805


Grand Total $181,455,719 $160,461,629 $1,161,901




5.4 DRA 3





Bridge Culvert $676,567 $288,286 $13,795

Bridges $25,573,720 $9,565,698 $319,647

Drainage $8,366,528 $4,273,195 $119,704

First Coat Seals $5,149,478 $2,952,978 $128,737

Footpath $675,902 $407,959 $12,156

Formation $67,084,358 $67,084,358 $0

Land $16,892,020 $16,892,020 $0

Railings $1,430,250 $396,502 $57,091

Retaining Walls $721,981 $394,236 $9,025



Signs $154,947 $79,345 $12,682



Streetlights - poles $16,636 $8,224 $691

Surface Water Channels $963,355 $541,407 $12,845

Surfacing $4,547,273 $1,543,162 $334,352


Unsealed Pavement Subbase $5,004,352 $3,924,922 $25,022


Grand Total $164,714,161 $128,140,390 $1,506,190




5.5 DRA 4





Bridge Culvert $2,220,258 $1,132,390 $65,267

Bridges $45,349,330 $18,419,252 $578,024

Drainage $23,155,259 $12,052,647 $332,160

First Coat Seals $7,058,303 $3,829,559 $176,458

Footpath $156,535 $71,750 $2,334

Formation $169,210,537 $169,210,537 $0

Land $16,621,386 $16,621,386 $0

Minor Structures $127,056 $63,528 $1,588

Railings $2,550,116 $683,510 $105,695

Retaining Walls $1,294,865 $744,905 $16,186



Signs $242,150 $124,963 $19,615



Streetlights - poles $13,821 $7,778 $604


Surfacing $6,698,855 $2,070,361 $476,007

Traffic Facilities $1,881,726 $969,136 $40,094


Unsealed Pavement Wearing Course $1,652,654 $644,604 $227,300

Grand Total $333,278,798 $267,402,732 $2,649,216




5.6 DRA 5





Bridge Culvert $705,121 $358,621 $20,163

Bridges $34,937,155 $10,502,309 $459,752

Drainage $12,567,964 $6,529,005 $180,317

First Coat Seals $3,530,727 $1,996,076 $88,268

Footpath $2,065,188 $1,284,715 $29,521

Formation $101,058,514 $101,058,514 $0

Land $4,312,852 $4,312,852 $0

Minor Structures $46,202 $23,101 $578

Railings $1,694,602 $271,107 $60,765

Retaining Walls $1,029,896 $370,210 $12,871



Signs $106,396 $58,462 $8,828

Streetlights - brackets $29,462 $17,405 $1,964




Surfacing $3,739,841 $944,946 $247,965

Traffic Facilities $6,735,577 $3,468,991 $85,121



Grand Total $203,053,057 $153,980,353 $1,658,310




6 Land

This component covers all land that is identified as local authority in the RAMM treatment length table and comprises the land required to form the road corridor from boundary to boundary.

Where reserve widths were missing a standard width of 20.1 metres has been applied.

Land has been separated into groups based on geographic area.

Table 6-1 shows the total valuation results for Land.

Table 6-1: Valuation Parameters and Results for Land

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t D

es

cri

pti

on

Un

it

Len

gth

(m

)

Qu

an

tity

Un

it C

os

t

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m

Re

main

ing

Us

efu

l

Re

pla

ce

me

nt

Co

st

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

City Residential ha 165835 324.1 $1,394,963.65 N/A N/A $452,170,021 $452,170,021 $0

Gisborne City CBD ha 14686 33.2 $2,916,820.64 N/A N/A $96,972,927 $96,972,927 $0

Industrial Subdivision ha 4616 11.0 $1,648,627.03 N/A N/A $18,197,049 $18,197,049 $0

Northern Hill Country ha 505281 783.0 $5,353.65 N/A N/A $4,228,040 $4,228,040 $0

Poverty Bay Flats ha 203119 390.3 $95,139.18 N/A N/A $37,121,719 $37,121,719 $0

Prime Beachfront ha 11339 21.9 $5,706,870.17 N/A N/A $125,042,231 $125,042,231 $0

Southern Hill Country ha 938188 1568.9 $5,961.61 N/A N/A $9,413,236 $9,413,236 $0

Tolaga Bay Flats ha 39630 69.9 $36,742.18 N/A N/A $2,564,076 $2,564,076 $0

TOTAL 1882694 3202 $745,709,300 $745,709,300 $0

The unit cost for land has been rounded in the valuation process as land is valued in m2 in RAVM.




7 Formation

This item comprises bulk earthworks (excluding retaining structures) required to form the road corridor. It is not possible to accurately determinate the quantities involved, as much of the construction was completed on a progressive basis over the earlier part of last century when detailed records were not kept.

Formation includes all earthworks necessary to prepare the cut and fill batters and bring the road foundation up to the underside of the subbase. It also includes formation of swale drain, side drains and shoulders.

The formation is assumed not to depreciate as regular maintenance (slip clearing, etc.) will allow it to provide adequate service indefinitely.

Each rate included an allowance for: i) Engineering fees (10%).

ii) Clearing vegetation and stripping topsoil.

iii) Bulk earthwork costs (cut-to-fill, borrow-to-fill, etc.).

iv) Preparation of subgrade (over excavation in “soft” areas).

The replacement cost for formation is calculated as the length x (width + extra) of the treatment length multiplied by the square metre rate. The extra width allows for additional shoulder, feather edge and surface water channel (SWC).

Table 7-1: Formation Extra Widths for Each Formation Type

Rural Sealed Extra Urban Sealed Extra Unsealed Extra

Formation Extra Width 4 metres 4 metres 4 metres

Table 7-2 shows the total valuation results for Formation.

Table 7-2: Valuation Parameters and Results for Formation

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t D

es

cri

pti

on

Un

it

Len

gth

(m

)

Qu

an

tity

(m

2)

Un

it C

os

t (I

nclu

din

g

Fe

es

)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m

Re

main

ing

Us

efu

l

Re

pla

ce

me

nt

Co

st

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Urban Sealed m² 227884 2831013 $9.89 N/A N/A $27,998,718 $27,998,718 $0

Rural Sealed m² 617036 6120199 $19.62 N/A N/A $120,078,301 $120,078,301 $0

Unsealed m² 1037774 8546146 $29.50 N/A N/A $252,111,319 $252,111,319 $0

TOTAL 1882694 17497358 $400,188,338 $400,188,338 $0




8 Pavement Surfacing

Pavement surfaces have been placed into groups based on surface material and pavement use for valuation purposes.

Each rate includes an allowance for: i) Engineering fees (5%).

ii) Surfacing supply and placement based on recent contract rates.

Table 8-1 shows the key parameters used in the valuation of pavement surfaces.

Note that the capital cost of installing first coat seals have been allowed for as part of the sealed basecourse.

Table 8-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Pavement Surfacing

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t D

es

cri

pti

on

Un

it

Le

ng

th (

m)

Qu

an

tity

(m

2)

Un

it C

os

t (I

nclu

din

g F

ee

s)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Re

pla

ce

men

t C

os

t

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Asphaltic Concrete m² 31253 362119 $43.13 20 $15,618,202 $8,267,725 $777,468

Single Coat (reseal) m² 231208 1391649 $5.43 12 $7,556,652 $2,629,496 $565,904

Single Coat (second coat) m² 41783 235933 $5.39 12 $1,271,680 $266,057 $92,000

Two Coat (reseal) m² 344815 2293629 $5.39 12 $12,362,661 $4,250,657 $900,007

Two Coat (second coat) m² 52566 345407 $7.19 12 $2,483,474 $940,961 $190,122

Slurry Seal m² 768 12036 $4.92 5 $59,219 $33,864 $11,541

Void Fill Seal m² 46739 290844 $4.52 12 $1,314,615 $525,396 $99,743

Rack in Seal m² 53442 385208 $4.52 12 $1,741,140 $665,970 $133,377

Texturising Seal m² 8532 52474 $4.52 12 $237,183 $55,613 $19,674

Single Coat (first coat) m² 597 4534 $0.00 N/A $0 $0 $0

Two Coat (first coat) m² 33217 197698 $0.00 N/A $0 $0 $0

Totals 844920 5571532 $42,644,828 $17,635,738 $2,789,836

The pavement surface results show that some roads surfacing are exceeding their assigned Total Useful lives (TUL). It is recommended that Council review these lives for the next valuation.




9 Sealed Pavement Layer Structure

Pavement structure includes that of the subbase and basecourse layers.

The rates allow for: i) Engineering fees (10%)

ii) Supply, placement, shaping and compaction of layers.

Note that the capital cost of installing first coat seals has been allowed for as part of the sealed basecourse.

50% of pavement subbase has been assumed to depreciate to allow for the reconstruction work undertaken at the time of pavement reconstruction.

This layer depth information is stored in previously empty fields in the Treatment Length table that the valuation module then uses to calculate the pavement volume. Basecourse depths are stored in ‘dtims_p020 (percent passing through a 2.0mm sieve)’ and subbase depths are stored in ‘dtims_p425 (percent passing through a 0.425mm sieve)’.

Table 9-1 contains the matrix used to estimate the structure of existing pavements.

Table 9-1: Matrix for Estimating Sealed Pavement Structure

Hierarchy Depth Estimates (mm)

Basecourse Depth Subbase Depth

Arterial 150 200

All Others 100 150

The replacement cost for pavement layers are calculated as the length x depth x (width + extra) of the treatment length multiplied by the cubic metre rate. The extra width allows for additional pavement under the shoulder and batter slopes (see Figure 9 1 and Table 9 2). Extra widths are calculated through analysis of the shoulder widths plus an allowance for the batter slopes. Basecourse extra widths are stored in the ‘dtims_growth_light’ field of the treatment length table and the subbase extra widths are stored in the ‘dtims_growth_heavy’ field. Treatment lengths are considered to have surfaced SWC if more than 40% of the total possible SWC length (twice the length of the treatment length) consists of surfaced SWC.

Table 9-2 below shows the extra allowances.

Table 9-2: Sealed Roads Extra Width Allowances

Component Rural Sealed without KCC Urban Sealed without KCC Sealed with KCC

Arterial Basecourse 0.45m each side 0.45m each side 0m each side

Arterial Subbase 1.05m each side 1.05m each side 0.3m each side

Other Basecourse 0.3m each side 0.3m each side 0m each side

Other Subbase 0.75m each side 0.75m each side 0.3m each side




Figure 9-1: Effective Width for Sealed Pavement Structure Volumes

Effective Width (with KCC) Effective Width (without KCC)

Table 9-3 shows the total valuation results for sealed pavement layers.

Table 9-3: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Sealed Pavement Layers

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t D

es

cri

pti

on

Un

it

Len

gth

(m

)

Qu

an

tity

(m

3)

Un

it C

os

t (I

nclu

din

g

Fe

es

)

Re

sid

ua

l V

alu

e

(In

clu

din

g F

ee

s)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m R

em

ain

ing

U

se

ful

Lif

e

Re

pla

ce

me

nt

Co

st

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

An

nu

al

Dep

rec

iati

on

First Coat Arterial m² 142,799 1,170,079 $7.15 40 2 $8,366,064 $4,839,917 $209,152

First Coat Other m² 702,121 4,401,453 $4.89 40 2 $21,523,105 $11,889,190 $538,078

Basecourse Arterial m3 142,799 194,230 $108.20 40 2 $21,015,684 $12,152,940 $525,392

Basecourse Other m3 702,121 480,766 $87.39 40 2 $42,014,157 $23,218,360 $1,050,354

Subbase Arterial m3 142,799 292,748 $81.40 $40.70 75 2 $23,829,650 $19,783,779 $158,864

Subbase Other m3 702,121 814,806 $78.25 $39.13 100 2 $63,758,558 $52,489,490 $318,752

TOTAL 844,920 7354081 $180,507,218 $124,373,675 $2,800,592

Width/2 Extra

5

1

AP65 M/4

Width/2 Extra




10 Unsealed Pavements Layers

Unsealed pavements are separated into wearing course and basecourse (valued as subbase) components. The estimates of basecourse depth are based on local knowledge and were provided by the GDC. Regular maintenance of the wearing course, through replacement of lost metal, ensures the basecourse layer will be unaffected by surface wear and tear and will provide a service indefinitely.

The rates allow for: i) Engineering fees for unsealed basecourse (6%).

ii) Engineering fees for unsealed wearing course (6%).

iii) Supply, placement, shaping and compaction of layers.

GDC replenishes the required pavement structure on a cyclic programme. Table 10-1 shows the matrix developed for this calculation. This layer depth information is stored in previously empty fields in the Treatment Length table that the valuation module then uses to calculate the pavement volume. Wearing course depths are stored in ‘dtims_p020 (percent passing through a 2.0mm sieve)’ and basecourse depths are stored in ‘dtims_p425 (percent passing through a 0.425mm sieve)’.

Table 10-1: Matrix for Estimating Unsealed Pavement Depth

Wearing Course Depth (mm) Subbase Depth (mm)

Unsealed Pavement Depth 50 100

Table 10-2 shows the total valuation result for unsealed pavements.

Table 10-2: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Unsealed Pavements

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

De

sc

rip

tio

n

Un

it

Le

ng

th (

m)

Qu

an

tity

(m

3)

Un

it C

os

t (I

nclu

din

g F

ee

s)

Re

sid

ua

l V

alu

e

(In

clu

din

g F

ee

s)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m

Re

ma

inin

g U

se

ful

Lif

e

Re

pla

ce

men

t C

ost

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Unsealed Wearing Course m³ 1,037,774 219,753 $14.55 5 2 $3,198,058 $1,378,069 $479,001

Unsealed Subbase m³ 1,037,774 439,505 $78.25 $39.13 100 2 $34,393,027 $27,664,695 $171,965

TOTAL 1037774 659258 $37,591,086 $29,042,764 $650,966


As unsealed wearing course is exceeding its assigned TUL, council will need to review this for the next valuation.




11 Drainage

This component covers the following drainage assets only: • Culverts (with end areas less than 3.4m2).

• Canvas socks.

• Sumps.

• Subsoil drains.

• Flume down batters.

• Headwalls.

NZTA classifies any culvert with an end area greater than or equal to 3.4m2 as a bridge and as such, they are valued together with the bridge valuation.

The rates allow for: i) Engineering fees (12%).

ii) Supply, placement and compaction of backfill.

The RAMM database has many different culvert material types that when replaced would be replaced with concrete pipe.

The replacement value for earthenware, steel, wood, aluminium, PVC, etc. have had the concrete value assigned to give a more accurate modern equivalent replacement cost.

Where culverts diameters are missing, we have assumed that they are the most common size of 300mm.

Table 11-1 shows the total valuation results for all assets.




Table 11-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Drainage Assets

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

De

sc

rip

tio

n

Un

it

Le

ng

th (

m)

Qu

an

tity

Un

it C

os

t (I

nclu

din

g F

ee

s)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m

Re

ma

inin

g U

se

ful

Re

pla

ce

men

t C

ost

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Culvert dia <600mm m 76,572 8,144 $297.01 70 2 $22,742,650 $12,050,110 $324,895

Culvert dia 601 - 675mm m 57 6 $387.85 70 2 $22,107 $11,054 $316

Culvert dia 676 - 750mm m 1,934 165 $1,377.38 70 2 $2,663,853 $1,357,802 $38,055

Culvert dia 751 - 825mm m 124 9 $1,449.12 70 2 $179,691 $89,845 $2,567

Culvert dia 826 - 900mm m 3,290 271 $1,614.13 70 2 $5,310,649 $2,695,124 $75,866

Culvert dia 901 - 975mm m 117 9 $1,721.73 70 2 $201,442 $109,674 $2,878

Culvert dia 976 - 1050mm m 213 14 $2,044.55 70 2 $435,489 $217,745 $6,221

Culvert dia 1051 - 1200mm m 2,817 223 $2,367.37 70 2 $6,669,355 $3,357,675 $95,277

Culvert dia 1201 - 1350mm m 323 24 $2,332.78 70 2 $753,488 $390,241 $10,764

Culvert dia 1351 - 1650mm m 1,442 115 $4,335.00 70 2 $6,252,804 $3,164,705 $89,326

Culvert dia 1651 - 1800mm m 555 45 $5,276.86 70 2 $2,928,657 $1,464,329 $41,838

Culvert dia 1801 - 2080mm m 269 18 $6,283.65 70 2 $1,690,302 $845,151 $24,147

Canvas Sock Each 92 11 $1,351.37 20 2 $14,865 $5,541 $743

Sump Each 301 52 $1,251.15 70 2 $65,060 $45,578 $929

Subsoil Drain m 150 5 $27.96 20 2 $4,194 $1,826 $210

Manhole Each 168 69 $323.11 70 2 $22,295 $18,228 $319

Flume down batter Each 396 82 $788.45 25 2 $64,653 $33,490 $2,569

TOTAL 88821 9262 $50,021,554 $25,858,116 $716,919




12 Surface Water Channels

This component covers all surfaced surface water channels, such as kerb and channel, dish channel, and mountable kerb. Earth surface water channels have not been valued under this component as they are considered to be part of the road formation.

The rates allow for: i) Engineering fees (6.5%).

ii) Supply, placement and compaction of backfill.


Table 12-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Surface Water Channels

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t D

esc

rip

tio

n

Un

it

Len

gth

(m

)

Un

it C

os

t (I

nc

lud

ing

Fe

es)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m

Re

main

ing

Re

pla

ce

me

nt

Co

st

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Dish Channel (Concrete) (DC) m 1,731 $145.42 75 2 $251,722 $157,290 $3,356

Kerb Only (Concrete) m 26,899 $126.68 75 2 $3,407,565 $1,965,526 $45,434

Kerb and Channel (Concrete) (KCC) m 245,109 $149.32 75 2 $36,599,676 $20,229,742 $487,996

Mountable Kerb Only (Concrete) m 1,360 $126.68 75 2 $172,285 $87,291 $2,297

Mountable Kerb and Channel (Concrete) m 4,672 $149.32 75 2 $697,623 $398,318 $9,302

Other Type m 234 $149.32 75 2 $34,941 $17,703 $466

TOTAL 280005 $41,163,812 $22,855,871 $548,851




13 Footpaths

This component includes all footpaths in the road network. Footpaths in this valuation use the residual value fields in RAMM. This is because RAVM does not currently have the ability to deal with footpaths in components. The RAVM software does not allow for footpaths to be broken down into its basecourse and surface components. To deal with this we have used the residual value field, where necessary, as the cost of the basecourse. The replacement rates for footpaths include the cost of the footpath basecourse and surface. The basecourse layers are assumed to depreciate or not depreciate as per Table 13-1 and the residual values (the cost of the basecourse) have been included to allow for this.

Table 13-1: Footpath Depreciation

Footpath Type Depreciation

Concrete No depreciation of basecourse

Asphalt 25% depreciation of basecourse

Sealed 25% depreciation of basecourse

Slurry Seal 50% depreciation of basecourse

Pavers 100% depreciation of basecourse

The rates allow for: i) Engineering fees (6.5%).

ii) Formation, supply, placement, shaping and compaction of layers.


Table 13-2: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Footpath Assets

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

De

sc

rip

tio

n

Un

it

Le

ng

th (

km

)

Qu

an

tity

(m

2)

Un

it C

os

t (I

nclu

din

g F

ee

s)

Re

sid

ua

l V

alu

e

(In

clu

din

g F

ee

s)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m

Re

ma

inin

g U

se

ful

Re

pla

ce

men

t C

ost

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Asphaltic Concrete m² 19.80 60242.2 $34.35 $8.62 20 2 $2,069,320 $726,852 $50,781

Concrete m² 197.74 247994.4 $149.07 75 2 $36,968,525 $21,953,767 $492,914

Pavers Each 9.05 34086 $138.20 75 2 $4,710,685 $3,475,943 $62,809

Seal m² 0.13 759.8 $23.98 $6.01 20 2 $18,220 $5,249 $681

Slurry Seal m² 0.10 300.3 $51.05 $25.60 20 2 $15,330 $8,140 $365

All Other Types m² 0.82 2137.5 $82.68 75 2 $176,729 $164,308 $2,356

TOTAL 227.64 345520.2 $43,958,809 $26,334,259 $609,906




14 Traffic Facilities

This component includes retaining walls, other structures (counterfort drains, flumes, other structures), parking meters, traffic signals, raised reflective pavement markers (RRPMs) and pavement markings.

The rates allowed for: i) Engineering fees for edge marker posts and raised pavement markers (5%).

ii) Engineering fees for markings (5%).

iii) Supply and placement.


Table 14-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Traffic Facility Assets

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

De

sc

rip

tio

n

Un

it

Qu

an

tity

Un

it C

os

t (I

nclu

din

g F

ee

s)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m

Re

ma

inin

g U

se

ful

Re

pla

ce

men

t C

ost

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Parking Meters

PM - Electronics each 172 $722.34 15 2 $124,242 $14,752 $7,376

PM - M70 Body / Pole each 266 $560.44 15 2 $149,077 $11,258 $5,629

PM - Mechanism each 94 $653.81 15 2 $61,458 $3,152 $1,576

PM - Pay and Display each 41 $8,406.79 15 2 $344,678 $33,987 $16,994

Traffic Signals

TS - Aspects each 2 $105,649.30 15 2 $211,299 $16,891 $8,445

TS - Controller each 2 $22,121.35 15 2 $44,243 $3,537 $1,768

Retaining Walls

RW - Retaining Walls m 4,323 $806.18 80 2 $3,485,116 $1,801,354 $43,561

Other Structures

OS - Counterfort Drains m 1,125 $1,245.40 70 2 $1,401,075 $700,538 $20,015

OS - Flumes m 2,391 $311.32 20 2 $744,366 $372,183 $37,218

OS - Other Structures m 4,640 $1,556.87 80 2 $7,223,877 $3,611,938 $90,298

Other Traffic Facilities

OTF - RRMPs each 3,258 $11.71 4 2 $36,881 $14,752 $7,376

OTF - Markings LS 1 $332,217.02 N/A N/A $332,217 $332,217 $0

TOTAL 16315 $14,158,529 $6,916,558 $240,258

Council have undertaken a data collection and validation exercise on the Retaining Walls assets, which are now stored and valued in the Retaining Walls table. Previously these assets were stored in the Traffic Facilities table, with limited information attached. Now that there is more complete construction, dimension and material type data attached to these assets, it is recommended that the way these assets are valued should be reviewed and that the new dataset is cross compared with the old dataset in order to ensure that all retaining walls data is complete and accurate.

Additionally, Traffic Signal assets have been moved from the Traffic Facilities table into the Traffic Signal table prior to this valuation, and are now valued in the correct table.




15 Minor Structures

This component currently only includes Concrete Fords.

The rates allow for: i) Engineering fees for Concrete Fords (12%).

ii) Substructure formation and construction

iii) Superstructure construction.

Table 15-1: Ford Structures

Sta

nd

ard

Re

pla

ce

me

nt

Co

st

Des

cri

pti

on

Un

it

Le

ng

th (

m)

Qu

an

tity

Un

it C

os

t (I

nclu

din

g

Fe

es

)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m R

em

ain

ing

Us

efu

l L

ife

Re

pla

ce

me

nt

Co

st

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lace

me

nt

Co

st

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Ford - Concrete ea 169 15 $11,550.54 $80 $5 $173,258 $86,629 $2,166

TOTAL 169 15 $173,258 $86,629 $2,166

The concrete fords are assumed to have twin culverts set under a concrete pad as a standard. However there are fords that could be of a different configuration. Future data collection could focus on the arrangement of each ford for a more accurate valuation.

Metal fords have not been valued as more needs to be known of the asset and costs in terms of maintenance as these are usually natural causeways through waterways that council have maintained for economic benefit to the region.




16 Signs

The replacement rates for posts are included in the signs rate.


ii) Supply and placement.


Table 16-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Sign Assets

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t D

es

cri

pti

on

Un

it

Qu

an

tity

Un

it C

os

t (I

nc

lud

ing

F

ees

)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m R

em

ain

ing

U

se

ful

Lif

e

Rep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

Dep

rec

iate

d

Rep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Guide Each 11 $239.54 12 2 $2,635 $1,697 $220

Hazard markers Each 559 $53.35 12 2 $29,876 $10,260 $2,260

Information General Each 35 $225.67 12 2 $7,898 $2,072 $538

Information Signs Each 139 $225.67 12 2 $31,368 $15,601 $2,591

Information Miscellaneous Each 11 $225.67 12 2 $2,482 $448 $139

Miscellaneous Each 1,824 $295.34 12 2 $538,996 $128,025 $44,680

Motorist Services Each 42 $225.67 12 2 $9,478 $2,069 $790

Permanent Warning Each 1,373 $224.86 12 2 $308,958 $129,025 $25,378

Regulatory General Each 1,783 $225.72 12 2 $402,684 $135,484 $33,141

Regulatory Heavy Vehicles Each 137 $225.59 12 2 $30,906 $20,890 $2,568

Regulatory Parking Each 636 $194.19 12 2 $123,505 $43,948 $10,234

Tourist Each 13 $239.43 12 2 $3,113 $1,816 $259

Warning Miscellaneous Each 15 $158.82 12 2 $2,382 $1,013 $175

TOTAL 6578 $1,494,281 $492,348 $122,974




17 Railings

This component covers all guard-rails and sight rails stored in the RAMM railings table.

The rates allow for: i) Engineering fees (10%)

ii) Supply and construction.


Table 17-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Railings Asset

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t D

es

cri

pti

on

Un

it

Le

ng

th (

m)

Qu

an

tity

Un

it C

os

t (I

nc

lud

ing

F

ees

)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m R

em

ain

ing

U

se

ful

Lif

e

Rep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

Dep

rec

iate

d

Rep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

Bridge Rail m 24657 1314 $211.75 15 2 $5,221,120 $877,517 $167,676

Guard Rail m 2911 33 $193.50 15 2 $563,279 $451,719 $37,371

Sight Rail m 9991 799 $63.68 10 2 $636,227 $191,369 $51,905

Steel or Aluminium m 19 1 $211.74 15 2 $4,023 $2,146 $268

Timber m 42 2 $63.68 10 2 $2,675 $349 $175

W Section Guard Rail m 536 17 $193.50 15 2 $103,716 $34,753 $6,914

TOTAL 38156 2166 $6,531,039 $1,557,853 $264,309

45% of Bridge Railings have exceeded their Total Useful Life of 15 years. Council need to investigate the Total Useful Live assigned to these assets as in most cases they are designed to last the life time of the bridge they are attached to.




18 Street Lights

This component covers all the street lights that were identified in RAMM as owned by the GDC roading department.

Lights were valued as entire head and lamp units to account for the discrepancy in price between Kendelier and other brands.

In previous valuations, Street Light Brackets that had been physically replaced had not had their data updated to reflect this, and as such were being included in the valuation.


ii) Supply and construction.

Table 18-1 below shows the total valuation results for the street lights.

Table 18-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for Street Lights

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

De

sc

rip

tio

n

Un

it

Qu

an

tity

Un

it C

os

t (I

nc

lud

ing

F

ee

s)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m R

em

ain

ing

U

se

ful

Lif

e

Re

pla

ce

men

t C

ost

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

An

nu

al

Dep

rec

iati

on

Pole

Concrete ea 68 $1,650.11 25 2 $112,207 $56,236 $4,488

Fibreglass ea 20 $1,269.32 15 2 $25,386 $13,032 $1,692

Steel ea 1,713 $1,396.25 25 2 $2,391,776 $1,227,695 $95,671

Wood ea 35 $1,269.32 20 2 $44,426 $25,715 $2,195

Unknown ea 2 $1,396.25 25 2 $2,793 $1,340 $112

Bracket

Unknown ea 1,825 $635.92 15 2 $1,160,554 $629,768 $77,347

Light

Corysal Sodium 150W ea 954 $496.50 15 2 $473,661 $386,523 $31,568

Corysal Sodium 70W ea 1 $362.73 15 2 $363 $193 $24

Gough Metal Halide 70W ea 1 $401.22 15 2 $401 $294 $27

Gough Sodium 100W ea 34 $362.73 15 2 $12,333 $6,698 $822

Gough Sodium 150W ea 648 $496.45 15 2 $321,700 $173,625 $21,447

Gough Sodium 250W ea 73 $636.54 15 2 $46,467 $25,292 $3,098

Gough Sodium 70W ea 1,517 $362.77 15 2 $550,322 $295,957 $36,680

Kendelier Sodium 100W ea 4 $2,163.62 15 2 $8,654 $4,616 $577

Kendelier Sodium 70W ea 185 $2,036.41 15 2 $376,736 $199,704 $25,116

Total 7081 $5,528,181 $3,046,982 $300,891




19 Bridges and Bridge Culverts

This component includes bridges and bridge culverts with end areas greater than 3.4m2.

The replacement cost of a bridge is calculated as the cost of building it “today”. It is assumed that modern equivalent construction techniques and materials are used but that the physical result replaces the bridge as it exists. For this valuation, we have assumed that all bridges will be replaced with a similar dimensioned concrete bridge or culvert.

This year footbridges were moved from the Minor Structures table to the Bridge table.

Bridge approaches have been valued in the formation, pavement surfacing and pavement structure sections of this report. Any railings attached onto the bridges have been valued with the bridges.

The rates allow for: i) Engineering fees for bridges and bridge culverts (12%).

ii) Substructure formation and construction.

iii) Superstructure construction.

The remaining life of a bridge or bridge culvert is dependent on a number of factors. For the purpose of this valuation we have assumed that the most predominate factor is the superstructure construction material.

Table 19-1 shows the total valuation results for bridges and bridge culverts.

Table 19-1: Valuation Parameters and Results Summary for the Bridge and Bridge Culvert Asset

Sta

nd

ard

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

De

sc

rip

tio

n

Un

it

Qu

an

tity

Le

ng

th (

m)

Un

it C

os

t (I

nc

lud

ing

F

ees

)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m

Re

ma

inin

g U

se

ful

Re

pla

ce

men

t C

ost

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

ost

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

1 Lane Reinforced Concrete m 265 7564 $11,429.71 80 5 $86,454,326 $32,767,739 $1,074,602

1 Lane Timber m 22 939 $11,429.71 50 5 $10,732,498 $1,835,951 $177,183

2 Lane Reinforced Concrete m 43 1124 $20,573.25 80 5 $23,124,333 $8,272,922 $282,040

Ped - Composite m 1 11 $7,606.69 80 5 $83,669 $41,834 $1,046

Ped - Concrete m 1 10 $7,606.69 80 5 $76,067 $24,722 $951

Ped - Timber m 12 373 $6,655.26 50 5 $2,482,412 $758,374 $47,826

Bridge Culvert Concrete m 47 513 $5,827.45 50 2 $2,988,899 $1,356,136 $58,564

Bridge Culvert Steel m 21 286 $5,827.45 25 2 $1,666,651 $864,794 $66,666

TOTAL 412 10820 $127,608,855 $45,922,472 $1,708,877




20 Car Parks

This component includes car parks owned by Council, and was valued using a spreadsheet.

The Rates allow for: i) Engineering fees for surface water channels (6.5%).

ii) Engineering fees for all other components (5%).

Table 20-1 shows the total valuation results for car parks.

The asset information associated with car parks has yet to be collected therefore we have assumed the following. These assumptions are in line with those made for the sealed pavement structure (sealed pavement with KCC not an arterial). • Formation extra width = 4 metres. • Basecourse depth = 100mm. • Subbase depth = 150mm. • Basecourse extra width = 0 metres each side. • Subbase extra width = 0.3 metres each side. • Surfacing is single coat seal (reseal).

Table 20-1: Car Parks Valuation Parameters and Valuation Summary

Sta

nd

ard

Rep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t D

esc

rip

tio

n

Un

it

Qu

an

tity

(m

2)

Un

it C

os

t (I

nc

lud

ing

F

ee

s)

Re

sid

ua

l V

alu

e

(In

clu

din

g F

ee

s)

To

tal

Us

efu

l L

ife

Min

imu

m R

em

ain

ing

U

se

ful

Lif

e

Re

pla

ce

me

nt

Co

st

De

pre

cia

ted

R

ep

lac

em

en

t C

os

t

An

nu

al

De

pre

cia

tio

n

First Coat m2 38231 $4.84 40 2 $185,018 $92,509 $4,625

Surface m2 38231 $5.61 12 2 $214,517 $107,258 $17,876

Basecourse m2 38231 $16.36 40 2 $625,331 $312,666 $15,633

Subbase m2 38231 $11.38 $5.70 75 2 $434,979 $217,489 $5,800

Formation m2 38231 $8.24 N/A N/A $315,025 $157,513 $0

TOTAL 38231 $1,774,870 $887,435 $43,935





21 Recommended Improvement Actions

The following recommendations will improve the accuracy of future valuations by reducing the number of assumptions required and by ensuring that those assumptions that are used best represent the conditions in the District.

Table 21-1: Recommended Improvement Actions

Recommended Improvement Actions

Priority Links to OAG Assessment Criteria for

Asset Management*

Sealed Surfacing Methodology

Research is required to find the appropriate total useful life break-down for these assets to be used in the next valuation.

Incorporate the results of dTIMS, TSA, condition assessments, and other decision making tools into the calculation of total useful lives.

1 Life cycle optimised decision

making

Unsealed Pavement Layer

Methodology

Research is required to find the appropriate total useful life break down for these assets to be used in the next valuation.

Incorporate the results of dTIMS, TSA, condition assessments, and other decision making tools into the calculation of total useful lives.

1 Life cycle optimised decision

making

Retaining Walls Now that there is more complete construction, dimension and material type data attached to these assets, it is recommended that the way these assets are valued should be reviewed and that the new dataset is cross compared with the old dataset in order to ensure that all retaining walls data is complete and accurate.

1 Description of assets

Car park Assets Currently only surface and pavement data exists for council car parks. Further auditing needs to be undertaken to capture such assets as, lighting, parking meters, kerb and channel, that may exist.


Railings Investigate TUL for bridge railings, these assets are usually designed to last the life of the bridge they are attached to. Currently assigned a TUL of 15 years.


Fords Gather further information to value more accurately and determine whether they require inspection with the current bridge stock.





22 Completed Improvement Actions

The following recommendations have been undertaken during the year to improve the RAMM database. They are all recommendations made in the 2016 valuation.

Table 22-1: Completed Improvement Actions

Recommended Improvement Actions

Action Taken

Construction Dates

Drainage, streetlights, and surface water channels are missing almost all of their construction dates. Bridges and signs have large percentage of assets missing construction dates. Investigate other sources of construction date data. Ensure construction date data is recorded for all assets in the future.

On-going updating is occurring through inspections as part of maintenance contracts.

Missing Data

Collect and record in RAMM all missing asset data including, but not exclusive to, railings, footbridges, ADLS (large cantilever signs), retaining walls and stock underpasses.

On-going data collection is taking place with new assets being added to RAMM when identified through field visits




23 Glossary

Annual Depreciation

The Annual Depreciation is the amount the asset depreciates in a year. It is defined as the replacement cost minus the residual value, divided by the estimated total useful life for the asset.

Depreciation

Depreciation is a measure of the consumption of the economic benefits embodied in an asset. It distributes the cost or value of an asset over its estimated useful life. Thus depreciation only applies to those assets with finite lives. Assets with infinite lives (e.g. Land, Formation and Subbase) are not depreciated. Straight-line depreciation is used in this valuation.


Depreciated Replacement Cost is the current replacement cost less allowance for physical deterioration and optimisation for obsolescence and relevant surplus capacity.

Where the remaining life of an asset can be assessed, the Depreciated Replacement Cost has been calculated as:

Remaining useful life X (replacement cost – residual value) + residual value

Total useful life

Note: That for assets that have exceeded their Total Useful Lives (TUL) the Adjusted Total Useful Life is calculated as the age of the asset plus the Minimum Remaining Useful Life (MRUL).

Minimum Remaining Useful Life (MRUL)

The Minimum Remaining Useful Life is applied to assets that are older than their useful life. It recognises that, although an asset is older than its useful life, it may still be in service and therefore have some value. Where an asset is older than its standard useful life, the minimum remaining useful life is added to the standard useful life and used in the calculation of the depreciated replacement value. The minimum remaining useful lives of assets in this valuation are included in the asset assumption tables.

Optimised Replacement Cost

The Optimised Replacement Cost is the cost of building the asset “today”. In arriving at the value, it is assumed that modern construction techniques and modern equivalent materials are used, but that the physical result replaces the asset as it exists.

Residual Value

The Residual Value is the value of the asset when it reaches the end of its life. For the purposes of this valuation we have assumed that all assets have no residual value. The residual value has been removed due to the minimum remaining useful life being a more appropriate way of valuing assets that have reached the end of their TUL.

Total Useful Life (TUL)

The Total Useful Life is the period over which an asset is expected to be available for use by an entity.




24 References NZIAMM (1996) “New Z e a l a n d I n f r a s t r u c t u r e A s s e t M a n a g e m e n t

M a n u a l ”, F i r s t Edition, Second Issue, November 1996.

IIMM (2000) “International I n f r a s t r u c t u r e M a n a g e m e n t M a n u a l ”,

A u s t r a l i a /New Zealand Edition, Version 1.0, April 2000.

NZIAV&DG (2001) New Zealand Infrastructure Asset Valuation and Depreciation

Guidelines”, Version 1, April 2001.

Hawkes Bay

1st Floor, 100 Warren Street South Hastings 4122

PO Box 13-052, Armagh Christchurch 8141

Tel +64 6 873 8900 Fax +64 6 873 8901

www.mwhglobal.com

2017 road asset valuation - gisborne districtpo box 13-052, armagh, christchurch 8141 tel +64 6 873...

Documents