Infrastructure Final Report by City of Syracuse Office of Innovation

Stephanie A. Miner, Mayor Andrew M. Maxwell, Director

CITY O F SY R ACUSE

NNOVATION TEAM INFRASTRUCTURE F INAL REPORT August 2016

CON T EN T S Table of contents 04

Executive Summary

Program Overview

Te a m O v e r v i e w

In v e s t i g a t i o n

Id e a Ge n e r a tio n

C h a l l e n g e S t a t e me n ts

Pr e p a r e to De live r

De live r & Ad a p t

L e sso n s L e a r n e d

Ap p e n d ice s

CITY OF SYRACUSE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PRIORITY: INFRASTRUCTURE A vexing obstacle for Syracuse, and other cities like it across the nation, is the challenge of maintaining 20th century infrastructure that is often at the end of its useful life. Roads and bridges are but the most obvious examples of infrastructure systems in dire need of repair and modernization. The hidden nature of underground infrastructure, like water and sewer lines, has led to decades of deferred maintenance enabled by relative obscurity. In May 2015, the City of Syracuse formed an Innovation Team (i-team) funded by a grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies. Innovation Teams help city leaders unlock bold innovation, change culture, and create an ongoing ability to deliver better results for residents. While situated in City Hall, these i-teams work closely, and supportively, with their colleagues across city government - offering them a different set of tools and techniques to innovate more effectively. In partnership with these colleagues, teams aim to deeply understand the problem they are trying to solve by building empathy for the people impacted by it and then work quickly and creatively to co-create and test solutions that deliver meaningful results for residents. The Syracuse i-team, under the direction of Mayor Stephanie Miner, worked to develop a series of initiatives to improve the city’s infrastructure. In order to address Syracuse’s infrastructure concerns, the City adopted an advanced, nontraditional and multidisciplinary approach to improve its systems. Singular focus and creativity allowed the City to explore new ideas and imaginative models for advancing its infrastructure. While there are many infrastructure challenges in Syracuse, the most pressing challenges - based on feedback from internal and external stakeholders - include:

1 2 3

Emergency water system repairs are straining the City. The City’s roads are in poor condition. The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

Syracuse implemented 13 new infrastructure initiatives to address these challenges. The City’s goal when identifying these initiatives was to develop low-cost, scalable solutions that could be replicated in other communities. Now that they are in place, the City will continue to monitor the success of the initiatives and make adjustments to them as necessary. Syracuse realizes that its infrastructure work is not complete, but that it has taken the first step to put the city on track to grow and thrive in the twenty-first century.

CITY OF SYRACUSE

PROCESS OVERVIEW The City of Syracuse’s Department of Innovation was formed in 2015. The six person department, more commonly known as the i-team, develops innovative solutions to Syracuse’s most pressing problems. In 2015, the i-team started to address its first priority area: Infrastructure. The i-team followed a four step “Innovation Delivery” approach to develop initiatives to improve Syracuse’s infrastructure. First, the i-team investigated the infrastructure problem. The team worked with partners and completed a broad and deep research process in which they became intimately familiar with the City’s infrastructure problems. Once the research was complete, the i-team identified three specific challenges that were related to the infrastructure systems.

• Emergency water system repairs are straining the City. • The City’s roads are in poor condition. • The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

The team then entered their second phase of work and generated new ideas. The i-team worked with a variety of stakeholders, including department heads, infrastructure laborers, other city employees, and constituents to collect ideas from people to improve Syracuse’s infrastructure. A series of ideation sessions elicited over 230 ideas that were eventually whittled down to specific initiatives. Once the initiatives were identified, the i-team worked with owners and sponsors to prepare them for delivery. This involved identifying core components of each initiative, developing initiative implementation plans, and selecting metrics and targets to measure each initiative's success. The final phase of the i-team work was to deliver and adapt. In 2016, the i-team launched thirteen initiatives to improve the City’s infrastructure:

• Valve initiative • Water main sensors • Data science for water infrastructure • Road preventive maintenance • Street quality identification device • Road ratings • Road cut medallions • Road cut moratoriums • Five-year planning • Construction coordination • Dig once • Construction notification • Citizen reporting

The i-team measured the initiatives’ success by tracking the metrics associated with each project or program. The team set up recurring meetings with various stakeholders, including the mayor, sponsors, and owners, and held monthly stocktake meetings to discuss the progress of the initiatives. This allowed the team to see where issues may exist and adjust the initiatives if necessary. The i-team continues to adjust and fine tune its infrastructure initiatives, even though it has now moved on to a new priority area.

Water Syracuse delivers some of the cleanest water in the nation, even with a system that has some pipes dating back over 100 years. The historic lack of system investment has never been more evident. During the first eight months of 2016, Syracuse experienced 106 water main breaks and leaks. Many of these breaks are addressed within a few hours. However, some leave businesses and homes without water for multiple days. As a city striving for a more dynamic business climate and a greater quality of life, these daily struggles hurt both businesses and residents alike. In order to address these complications, Syracuse developed and launched a series of initiatives to improve its water system. Valve Initiative: Even when the water system is operating effectively, Syracuse will still experience occasional water main leaks and breaks. When these failures do occur, the City needs to ensure that as few people are affected as possible. This means that the Water Department will need to isolate the break with the closest water main valves. Historically, many of the valves needed to isolate a break donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t function, which forces the Water Department to use valves farther away from the break, thereby affecting more properties and people. The Valve Initiative requires the water department to physically exercise and test the valves, which keeps them in working order and identifies those that are not functioning so they can be replaced. Both of these initiative components will help to ensure that fewer people are without water during a water main leak or break.

Water Main Breaks/Leaks Per Year

Water Main Break Distribution Water Main Sensors: Water main data shows that there are certain hotspots in the City of Syracuse where breaks are more prevalent. The most common area for water main breaks is in downtown, and when water infrastructure fails in the middle of the Central Business District, it is especially inconvenient. Restaurants are forced to shut down, offices send their employees home, and roads are closed to traffic. Over the spring and summer of 2016, the City of Syracuse piloted water main sensors that detect acoustic waves transmitted through the pipes. These waves identify water main leaks and their locations before they become debilitating breaks, thereby allowing the Water Department to repair the water main during off-peak hours, allowing businesses, offices, employees, and residents to function as normal. Darker spots represent areas with high rates of water main breaks and leaks.

Water

Data Science for Water Infrastructure: The Water Department has digitized records of nearly all of its assets. Until recently, this geodatabase was used to help plan upcoming work, and give perspective when responding to a water main break. In the summer of 2016, the City of Syracuse partnered with the Eric & Wendy Schmidt Data Science for Social Good Summer Fellowship to use historice data to develop an early warning system that uses predictive modeling to assign risk scores to each water main. Using existing data about the water system, data fellows built a machine learning model that should increase the accuracy of predicting risky water mains six-fold over a random choice. Knowing which mains are most at risk of failing allows the City to make the most efficient choice when replacing water mains. Additionally, the City can be more prepared if and when those mains do break by ensuring that valves around those mains are operational. Water Main Break Locations in 2015

Red dots represent locations of water main breaks in 2015.

Cumulative Water Main Breaks/Leaks by Week

Roads The City of Syracuse has over 500 miles of roads. Traditionally, these roads have been rated once every two years on a scale of 1 - 10. Over the past decade, the City has seen an ever increasing number of roads rated as poor (1 - 5) and fewer roads rated as fair (6 - 7) or good (8 - 10). Research has shown that it is most economical to conduct preventative maintenance on roads when they are in good or fair condition and to reduce the number of times that a road is cut into. Unfortunately, this has not always been the case in Syracuse, so a variety of initiatives have been developed to address these concerns. Preventative Maintenance: The typical life of a road in Syracuse involves milling and paving, then filling potholes on an as needed or complaint driven basis. With this model, typically roads are rated as poor about 12 years after they were last milled and paved. Simply milling and paving roads, paired with the existing budget, will mean the number of poor roads will exceed good and fair roads within the decade. In order to move away from this model, Syracuse introduced a new type of preventative maintenance to its road reconstruction program during the Summer of 2016, called micropaving. Micropaving involves layering a protective top coat emulsion onto the existing road. This seals the cracks in roads and should increase the road rating by two points. Ten streets were micropaved as par t of the 2016 pilot, and ranged from a rating of 4 to a rating of 8. If micropaving is effective, the City could expect to get 20 - 30 years out of a road before it needs to be milled and paved again. This intervention will help to increase the number of roads rated 6 and above and, because micropaving is less expensive than milling and paving, will also allow the City to conduct improvements and maintenance on more roads within the city each year. Road Cut Moratorium: Even though road cuts are bound to happen, the City of Syracuse is planning to reduce the number of cuts made in freshly paved roads. In August 2016, the Common Council passed legislation which established a moratorium on road cuts. No roads that have been repaved can be cut into with five years of that repavement. No roads that have been reconstructed can be cut into within seven years of that reconstruction. Additionally, a winter moratorium bars cutting into roads between November and April. The moratoriums can be waived by the Commissioner of the Department of Public Works (DPW) in case of emergency or other extenuating circumstances. Between 2009 and 2014, 30% of roads mill and paved were cut into at least once within five years of being paved. The goal of this initiative is to decrease that percentage and increase the quality of City roads.

Road Ratings by Year

Medallions: It is inevitable that at some point in time city roads will need to be cut into because of a water Road Cut main break, sewer collapse, utility emergency, or development project. One problem in Syracuse is that oftentimes these cuts into the road are not repaired to appropriate standards, which lead to water entering the cut, compromising the road base, forming potholes, and leading to faster deterioration. In order to better track who is making road cuts and where the road cuts are being made, Syracuse launched a road cut medallion system in August 2016. Once road cuts are made, plastic colored medallions are placed on top of the patch or asphalt. The medallions are color-coded and state the name of the company/ organization that cut into the road. The medallions identify who was responsible for each cut, so the City can better monitor the quality and Sewer Medallion locations of repairs.

Roads

Pothole Data and Technology: In addition to micropaving, the City of Syracuse is also performing preventative maintenance by filling potholes. The most effective method to fill a traditional pothole in Syracuse is to use a Durapatcher machine, and since April 2016, the City has used GPS tracking on the Durapatchers to collect data on potholes throughout Syracuse. Now, whenever a pothole is filled with the Durapatcher, it will update a map which displays all of the potholes that have been filled throughout the city. This data informs operations from a variety of standpoints. First, it allows the City to see if certain roads or neighborhoods tend to have more potholes. Additionally, it provides a visual which helps to ensure that there is equity throughout Syracuse and that potholes are being filled in all neighborhoods. If this is not the case, it can be a tool for further investigation into why some neighborhoods have more potholes filled than others. Cumulative Potholes Filled by Week

SQUID Road Data Map

Street Quality Identification Device (SQUID): Another new technology that was deployed during the spring of 2016 was the SQUID, which is a low cost camera and accelerometer apparatus. The SQUID was attached to a City vehicle that drove throughout Syracuse. The accelerometer measured the bumpiness of roads, while the camera took a picture of the road every second. The data from SQUID was used to identify which roads were the roughest and which roads where the smoothest. Additionally, the photos provided documentation of the ride, so that if any measurements or locations resulted in questions, the photos could be referenced to learn about what was happening in the road at specific locations. This data has already proven useful in identifying some of the roads with the best and worst ride, but eventually will also be incorporated into an updated road rating system.

Road Rating and Asset Management System: During the summer of 2016, the City of Syracuse participated in the Cornell Asset Management Program (CAMP), in which an intern worked to update the road rating system. Traditionally, the roads have been rated once every two years, and are simply given a score of 1 - 10. CAMP requires that the roads get rated on a series of eight different criteria, including: longitudinal and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, edge cracking, patching, potholes, rutting, bleeding, and roughness. This allows for the identification of specific preventative maintenance interventions that should be implemented on specific roads and for specific conditions. This improved road rating system is time consuming, so it is a method that will be expanded in the future, and once the ratings are complete the Cornell Asset Management Software will be deployed and will use an algorithm to make road maintenance recommendations.

Coordination & Communication Like many other cities in the northeast, Syracuse has a busy construction season from May through October. During these months a variety of entities, including the City, County, State, utility companies, and developers, are busy doing work while the ground is not frozen and snow is not falling. Unfortunately, in the past many of these construction efforts were not coordinated or communicated to others in an appropriate fashion. A series of initiatives was launched to improve coordination and collaboration and ensure that entities are efficiently and effectively working together to improve infrastructure. Additionally, these initiatives have helped to develop a two-way dialogue between infrastructure stakeholders and constituents.

Five Year Planning: In the past, minimal collaborative planning for construction projects was conducted prior to project initiation. The DPW Division of Road Reconstruction would develop an annual plan that would typically be finalized a month or two before construction season. The Division of Sewers and the Water Department would plan out one or two capital improvement projects a year, but wouldn't identify many other planned construction projects. Now, the planning process in Syracuse has been completely revamped. Departments are now required to identify their planned construction and capital improvement projects by August. Then the Infrastructure Coordinator (a new position) reviews all of the operating departments' plans and priorities, as well as planned development projects, and National Grid's three year plan to develop a coordinated construction plan for the following year. The Infrastructure Coordinator uses geospatial mapping tools to identify opportunities for coordination and collaboration between stakeholders. The plan is then reviewed by both internal and external stakeholders, and a preliminary version of the upcoming construction plan is finalized by November. This provides ample time for planning projects, notifying constituents, identifying funding opportunities, and making adjustments.

5-Year Planning Map (2016-2021)

Each colored line represents planned work from different departments.

Construction Coordination: Previously, during construction season, departments and entities typically worked independently and didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t cross paths. Now when construction season starts all departments work together and inspect their underground infrastructure before any paving is done. All of the stakeholders have a running list of the construction projects and their anticipated start dates, and sign-off stating that they have inspected their underground infrastructure at a given project site. As a pilot in 2016, the Water Department, Division of Sewers, and National Grid have all signed off on a form which signifies that their underground infrastructure at planned mill and pave sites has been inspected and that it is in good condition. If the infrastructure is not in good condition, the entity must repair it before the road is repaved. In 2017, this initiative will expand to include other organizations with underground infrastructure. This initiative helps to reduce the number of emergency infrastructure repairs that force a road to be reopened after it has been repaved, and directly supports the Road Cut Moratorium Initiative.

Coordination & Communication

Dig Once: The Five Year Planning Initiative not only provides the framework for infrastructure inspection and construction coordination, but also identifies potential sites for dig once projects. Dig once projects occur when all underground infrastructure systems are replaced and then the road is repaved or rebuilt. This initiative led to three separate dig once projects throughout the City of Syracuse in 2016. One of these projects involved a developer, and a second involved one the City's anchor institution's, Syracuse University, proving that it is beneficial to include development projects in the five year planning process.

Construction Notification: In the past, people located on a street undergoing construction were supposed to receive notification of construction work 24 hours in advance. Now that a deliberate planning process occurs, the City of Syracuse can provide increased notice to constituents. In February, property owners receive a postcard in the mail which states that construction is planned for their street at some point in the upcoming construction season. Then, citizens will receive a doorhanger or a flier 24 to 48 hours before the start of construction. Additionally, a website with construction information (cityline.syrgov. net) was created to provide constituents with information about the planned construction projects for the given construction season. This initiative will improve communication between constituents and the City about construction projects.

Citizen Reporting: An infrastructure request from constituents was to identify an improved way to report infrastructure concerns. Historically, citizens have had to ability to call Syracuse Cityline to report infrastructure issues and could also navigate to a web form. However, this web form was hard to find and difficult to use. Now people can visit cityline. syrgov.net to submit service requests. This site not only allows them to submit issues, but also allows them to track the status of the request that they submitted. People can also tweet service requests to @SyrCityline.

Planned Construction Map

Each colored line represents planned work from different departments.

Cityline Cover Photo

P R O GR A M OV E RVIE W

INNOVATION CALLS FOR CHANGE.

he City of Syracuse’s Department of Innovation was formed in 2015. The six person department, more commonly known as the i-team, develops innovative solutions to Syracuse’s most pressing problems. It leverages idea generation techniques and utilizes a structured, data-driven approach to affect change and deliver results within the city.

The i-team is based in city hall and reports to the Mayor, Stephanie Miner. It serves as an in-house innovation consultant that focuses on different priority areas. The team works side-by-side with senior staff members and departments, however, it is outside of the typical municipal government hierarchy. This structure positions the i-team to coordinate across departments and achieve impactful results.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW The City of Syracuse has the ability to influence and transform the lives of its citizens. However, there are oftentimes barriers to developing and implementing solutions to municipal challenges, including organizational structure, informational systems, and budget constraints. Many issues that Syracuse faces need to be dealt with by multiple city departments. This can be difficult because of the siloed organizational structure of municipal government. Additionally, due to financial and human capital limitations, it is difficult to take on bold new ideas because day-to-day requirements and emergencies get in the way. The resources simply arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t available for people to analyze, plan, and execute new solutions to city challenges. This conundrum has forced Syracuse to maintain status quo or adopt minor changes to policies and procedures rather than institute innovative resolutions. Groundbreaking ideas and bold changes are seldom proposed and implemented, leaving the city in a stagnant place, and not allowing it to address the 21st century challenges that exist in the present day. The i-team was specifically created to help the City of Syracuse address these barriers and more effectively deliver change to citizens. It is structured as an independent office that is tasked to work with each City department. It provides the power to identify challenges that exist within a certain priority area spanning multiple departments. Then it uses the creativity that already exists in city governments to work with partners and follow a specific protocol to innovate, develop, and help execute solutions that address complex city challenges. This procedure and team structure reduces the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s risk associated with innovation, and allows Syracuse to develop and implement effective solutions to high priority problems. The Department of Innovation is excited to promote positive change and bring a culture of innovation to the City of Syracuse. It is a positive influence on the city and will contribute to a renewed focus on innovation, collaboration, and data-driven management.

GRANT AWARD The i-team was established through an Innovation Delivery grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies for up to $1.35 million. The award provided funding to establish an office and hire personnel from 2015 through December 31, 2017. The grant also provides additional funding for OTPS, training for best practice innovation delivery, and convenings to develop a community network.

TEAM OVERVIEW

The Syracuse i-team was operational by May 2015. It currently consists of six members with diverse backgrounds that bring a new perspective to city government and innovation.

ANDREW MAXWELL, DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION

Andrew Maxwell was born and raised in Syracuse and is a proud graduate of the Syracuse City School District. He currently serves as Director of Policy under Syracuse Mayor Stephanie Miner, and the Director of Innovation for the Syracuse i-team. As Director, Andrew works to promote innovation, sound planning, environmental stewardship, and improved quality of life. He is deeply passionate about Syracuse, and is excited for its future.

ADRIA FINCH, PROJECT MANAGER

Adria Finch has a background in both science and economic development. She currently serves as the Project Manager for the i-team. In this role, she identifies challenges that exist within the city and works with the other i-team members to generate new ideas and solutions that address those challenges.

SAM EDELSTEIN, CHIEF DATA OFFICER

Sam Edelstein has a background in consulting and data analytics. He currently serves as the Chief Data Officer for the City of Syracuse. In this role, Sam analyzes data from various departments within the city, conducts research about best practices, and makes data-driven recommendations about potential solutions.

SAMANTHA LINNETT, PROGRAM COORDINATOR

Samantha Linnett is a Syracuse University grad with degrees in public policy and public relations. She currently serves as the i-team’s Program Coordinator. In this role, Samantha manages team communications, develops and implements design strategies, and provides initiative development and support.

SUSANNAH BARTLETT, DATA ANALYTICS COORDINATOR

Susannah Bartlett immigrated to the United States with her family in 1994 and found a new home in Syracuse, NY. She has previously served as assistant planner for the City of Syracuse, and now serves as the i-team Analytics Coordinator. In this role, Susannah collects, analyzes, and presents data to understand and generate solutions to challenges.

JONNELL ROBINSON, FELLOW

Jonnell Robinson is an Assistant Professor of Geography and has been the Director of the Syracuse Community Geography Program in the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University since 2005. Her research and teaching interests include communitybased and participatory action research, and specifically Participatory GIS (Geographic Information Systems). Jonnell collaborates with community-based organizations to use geospatial technologies to better understand and address community concerns. She serves as the i-team’s Research Fellow and helps to manage challenge research and initiative management.

ADDISON SPEARS, FMR. PROGRAM COORDINATOR

Addison Spears was the Program Coordinator for the i-team from May 2015 to June 2016. Addison is a Syracuse native and is deeply passionate about innovation and its ability to improve quality of life. He used his background in visual arts and marketing to couple design thinking with practical application to help transform Syracuse’s infrastructure.

THE I N NOVAT I ON P R O CE SS The Syracuse i-team uses the Innovation Delivery approach developed by Bloomberg Philanthropies to influence change within the city. It combines strategies in developing innovative solutions with project management practices to ensure municipal advancement. The Innovation Delivery Approach emphasizes data, analysis, management, and partnerships. It focuses on one defined priority area for approximately one year. Once the priority area is identified, the i-team advances through four phases: investigation, ideation, delivery, and program monitoring.

Typically, these priority areas require solutions that span across multiple departments, agencies, and stakeholders. They require bold, new thinking to address challenges and make impactful municipal change. Priority areas can be determined by a variety of stakeholders, including the administration, citizens, and internal departments. When the cycle of the Innovation Delivery Approach is complete, a new priority area is identified and the entire process starts over again.

“ Set hi g h ex p ec tati ons a n d thi nk a s c r e a ti ve l y a s p o ssi bl e .”

INVESTIGATION is

Before the initiation of the Innovation Delivery approach, the i-team and its partners must first identify an appropriate municipal priority area. Priority areas are considered to be the topics that are the most pressing issues facing a city.

● Challenges: specific problems within a priority area that the i-team and its partners hope to solve. ● Contributing issues: the causes of a challenge. ● Metrics, or measurable units: data and statistics used to evaluate progress on the challenges.

- i-team playbook

the first step in the Innovation Delivery Approach and requires the i-team to conduct research which allows them to become familiar with the subject matter surrounding a defined priority area. This is an important step because it allows the i-team to gain a deep understanding of the facts and data behind a problem before reaching for solutions. The team also has an opportunity to begin to build relationships with stakeholders that are involved with the priority area, which will help ensure that initiatives can be effectively executed during implementation. By the end of the investigation phase, several items will be identified:

GENERATING NEW IDEAS is the next

step in the Innovation Delivery Approach. This step requires the i-team to work with its partners and also engage people externally to produce ideas which address the previously defined challenges and contributing issues. The key to this step is to rethink, reimagine, and capitalize on new possibilities. It is important to set high expectations and think as creatively as possible in order to develop bold new ideas.

The team works with stakeholders that will be tasked with supervising and executing the initiatives, called sponsors and owners, respectively. Together they draft and revise the implementation plans for each initiative in the portfolio. They also identify initiative targets, which are specific measurable goals, that the initiatives should aim to achieve.

PREPARING TO DELIVER is the third

final step in the Innovation Delivery Approach, and involves the actual launch and execution of the initiative portfolio. During this step the i-team acts as a support network for the sponsors and owners and adjusts the initiatives as necessary to help ensure that they are successful.

step in the Innovation Delivery Approach, and focuses on turning the ideas generated in step two to concrete initiatives that are ready for delivery. During this step the i-team identifies a full portfolio of initiatives that will be implemented.

DELIVERING AND ADAPTING is the

I N V ESTIGATIO N

INFRASTRUCTURE TOUCHES EVERY PART OF LIFE.

vexing obstacle for Syracuse, and other cities like it across the nation, is the challenge of maintaining 20th century infrastructure that is often at the end of its useful life. Roads and bridges are but the most obvious examples of infrastructure systems in dire need of repair and modernization. The hidden nature of underground infrastructure, like water and sewer lines, has led to decades of deferred maintenance enabled by relative obscurity. This deferred infrastructure maintenance throughout the country has started to impact the economy. Businesses that rely heavily on water must locate in regions and areas that have reliable access to clean drinking water. Economies that relies heavily on trade, imports, and exports require road and transportation infrastructure to be top-notch in order to encourage commerce and growth. Without quality infrastructure, the US economy will suffer blows that will affect business, jobs, and the global economy.

Syracuse delivers some of the cleanest water in the nation, even with a system that has some pipes dating back over 100 years. The historic lack of system investment has never been more evident. Figure 1.2 below shows the number of water main breaks that have occurred over the past 12 years, and Figure 1.1 below shows where the breaks have been distributed. These emergency water main breaks require ample resources, and cost the City both time and money. Additionally, as a city striving for a more dynamic business climate and a greater quality of life, these daily struggles hurt both businesses and residents alike. The City of Syracuse has approximately 500 miles of roads. Unfortunately, over the past decade the number of roads that were rated as poor have increased substantially. Figures 1.3 and 1.4 on page 20 show the decline in roads rated â&#x20AC;&#x153;goodâ&#x20AC;? over the past 15 years. This not only affects city-wide expenses, but also constituent vehicle costs. In order to address Syracuseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s infrastructure concerns, the City needed to adopt a more advanced, nontraditional and multidisciplinary approach to addressing its systems. Singular focus and creativity were needed to explore new ideas and imaginative models for advancing the infrastructure of the thriving city. Figure 1.1: Water Main Break Distribution Heat Map

Darker spots represent areas with high rates of water main breaks and leaks.

Figure 1.2: Water Main Breaks/Leaks per Year

250

water main breaks in 2010.

LOOK AT P R OB L E M S T HR OU GH A WI DE L E N S While there are many infrastructure challenges in Syracuse, the most pressing challenges - based on feedback from internal and external stakeholders - are shown below. All of the challenge statements are interconnected and feed into one another.

Emergency water system repairs are straining the City.

The Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s roads are in poor condition.

The City doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

38%

of Syracuseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s roads are rated as poor.

Deficient roads cost each Syracuse area driver

$1,663 per year.

Challenges and Contributing Issues The i-team interviewed stakeholders, observed field work, and analyzed available data to ensure that it understood the infrastructure priority area. This involved learning as much as possible about the causes of the challenges and the current interventions being utilized to address those challenges. Contributing issues of each challenge were identified. Developing a list of all of the contributing issues allowed the i-team and partners to select which contributing issues they would address and respond to with targeted initiatives. Table 1.1 on the following pages breaks down those challenge statements and contributing issues.

Figure 1.3: Road Ratings by Year

Figure 1.4: Percent of Roads by Rating

Challenge

Table 1.1: Challenges and Contributing Issues

Emergency water system repairs are straining the City.

Contributing Issues

• The City doesn’t take a proactive approach to improving its water infrastructure. • There is no water system improvement plan in place. • Water projects are not planned to coincide with other street-level development or reconstruction efforts. • The water department relies heavily on paper data collection techniques with limited processes to make the data machinereadable. • The water department has not adopted the latest water infrastructure technologies. • The water department has not identified water system priorities. • Financial resources are not allocated to make large preventative maintenance infrastructure investments. • Water infrastructure is old and reaching the end of its useful life. • The long winters and extreme temperature swings are taxing on the water system.

The City’s roads are in poor condition.

• Road repairs are not planned to coincide with other street-level development or reconstruction efforts. • The budget for road reconstruction has fallen in recent years. • Extreme cold, excessive amounts of snow, and quickly changing temperature damage the roads. • Political pressure influences road repair priorities. • Public complaints influence DPW’s road repair priorities, even though the complaints may not be representative of real world conditions. • Roads are not assessed using a completely standardized tool. • Financial resources are not allocated to make preventative maintenance infrastructure improvements. • Infrastructure is oftentimes in a state of disrepair. • The City doesn’t take a proactive approach to improving and repairing its infrastructure. • Cuts into the road by utilities increase the rate of road degradation.

Contributing Issues

Challenge

The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

• Entities don’t share a vision for City infrastructure and work together to improve it.

• Departmental silos prohibit the sharing of information about specific departmental projects and priorities.

• The City has a limited budget to make infrastructure improvements.

• Constituents feel like they don’t know about City construction projects.

• Departments don’t maintain up-to-date data on their infrastructure systems or have clear data-driven priorities.

• Constituents find it difficult to submit infrastructure repair requests.

• Departments don’t undertake a detailed infrastructure improvement planning process. • Departments don’t have similar priorities. • Much of the infrastructure departments’ budgets are allocated towards reactive infrastructure projects. • Infrastructure is old and oftentimes in a state of disrepair. • The City does not have an accurate representation of all of its infrastructure systems and their attributes. • Many infrastructure investments have a high initial cost with delayed returns.

• Water projects, road repairs, and sewer repairs are not planned to coincide with other street-level development or reconstruction efforts. • Departments do not always coordinate and prioritize their projects to create a large effect within the community. • The budget for infrastructure improvements has decreased in recent years. • Cuts into the road increase the rate of road degradation. • The City does not fully understand the infrastructure needs of its constituents and local businesses.

Challenge Level Metrics and Targets The targets and metrics respressented in Table 1.2 below were established to track the progress on improving Syracuse’s infrastructure.

Table 1.2: Metrics and Targets

Challenge

Metric

Target

Percentage of proactive water repairs.

Increase the percentage of proactive water repairs from 40% to 60% within three years.

The City’s roads are in poor condition.

Average road rating.

Increase the average road rating by 20% from 5.9 to 7.1 within three years.

The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

Average cost per infrastructure improvement project.

Spend 35% - 40% less per infrastructure improvement project through coordination within three years.

Emergency water system repairs are straining the City.

I D EA GE N E R ATIO N

THI NK B I G & CO M E U P WI TH AS M AN Y G RE AT I DE AS AS P OS S I B L E

uring the second phase of work the i-team completed a variety of Ideation sessions that lead to the collection of These came from a variety of places.

231 ideas.

Ideation Sources Observation and Interviews: Throughout the i-team’s research and investigation, they maintained a list of ideas or suggestions that people contributed. These ideas would emerge from a variety of places and times, including formal meetings, conversations with crews, and even casual observation. Through these preliminary interactions, four distinct themes started to emerge surrounding infrastructure ideas:

Technology and Data

2 3

Communications and Community Engagement

Project and Process Management

Alternative BIG Infrastructure Ideas

F.O.C.U.S. Greater Syracuse Session: The i-team presented at F.O.C.U.S. Greater Syracuse on August 21, 2015, where they discussed the team’s goals and mission. The audience was divided across eight different tables that were labeled with one of the four different emerging themes. A facilitator at each table worked to extract ideas from participants that fit into their given theme, then reported those ideas back to the group. TNT Meetings: The i-team visited Tomorrow’s Neighborhoods Today (TNT) meetings in all city neighborhoods. They introduced their work, and asked citizens to offer ideas about infrastructure changes they would like to see happen. Meeting Piggy-backing: Other departments and organizations were hosting their own infrastructure related meetings that the i-team was able to attend. During these meetings participants would share ideas and suggestions about specific infrastructure topics. The Onondaga Citizens’ League was hosting a series of meetings about transportation, which inevitably lead to many infrastructure discussions and suggestions. Additionally, the City’s IT and Business Development Departments held public meetings about internet and WiFi.

29 Ideation Party: The i-team hosted an ideation party that was held in its office. A variety of people from across City Government were invited to participate. Twenty-five individuals from the departments listed in Figure 2.1 below RSVP’d and took part in a two hour workshop. Figure 2.1: Ideation Party Departments

Department of Law

Central Permit Office

Department of Public Works

Department of Finance

Mayor’s Office

Department of Budget

Department of Research

Department of Neighborhood & Business Development

Department of Engineering

A complete agenda for the Ideation Party is provided in Appendix A. In short, the event focused on a strategy called traveling ideas, in which four tables were spread throughout the room. Each table was home to one of the four themes that had emerged during the ideation process. People rotated from one table to the other, and would end at the table where they started, so there were a total of five ideation sessions. During each session, people would spend five minutes brainstorming ideas for the topic that was assigned to that table. Then they would spend three minutes expanding upon ideas that had already been identified at their table. An example of this is also in Appendix A. When groups arrived back at their initial table, they just expanded upon the existing ideas. Then participants reported back some of the best ideas from each table. Throughout this entire process people were instructed to think in terms of:

“If success was completely guaranteed, what bold steps would we choose?”

â&#x20AC;&#x153; wha t bol d steps woul d we c hoose â&#x20AC;? - ideation prompt

Infrastructure Departments Workshop: The i-team hosted a special four hour workshop with the infrastructure operating departments: Department of Water, Department of Public Works, and Department of Engineering. The complete agenda for the Workshop is provided in Appendix B. The workshop was broken into two different sessions and spread across three different rooms. During the first session, participants were broken into three different categories: Commissioners and Deputy Commissioners, Superintendents and Assistant Superintendents, and Crew Leaders and Laborers. This session focused on challenges that exist between different worker levels. Departments worked together to identify challenges that existed with infrastructure systems. The second session was divided by department, and asked participants to focus on their department as well as other departments. The goals for both sessions were to entertain an open dialogue and also generate ideas. There were two facilitators in each session who took notes, and advanced the discussion. All of the ideas from these interactions are shown in Appendix C.

P R EPAR E TO DE LIVE R

SELECT I NI TI AT I V E S

nce all of the ideas were collected, they were entered into a spreadsheet. Then each i-team member graded each idea based upon three categories:

? ? ?

Does the idea work well with metrics? This looked at whether or not the idea can be measured, and if it directly related back to one of the challenge statements. Is the idea feasible? This looked at whether or not the idea could actually be successfully implemented. Will it have department buy-in? This looked at whether the initiative would have a supportive sponsor and owner, who were excited and passionate about it.

Each category was rated 1 - 3 for each idea. The scores were then averaged across all of the i-team members, and weighted. The metric and feasibility categories were weighted most heavily at 40% each. The buy-in category was weighted at 20%. Once the averaged and weighted scores were calculated, they were added together to give an initiative final score. The most successful ideas scored 2.4 or higher, and were tagged in green. Other ideas were tagged as either yellow or red depending on their overall score. The idea grading sheet can be found in Appendix C. The i-team then reviewed all of the results as a group and discussed the top ideas. They also decided if other ideas that didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t make the top 25 should be advanced. The top ideas emerging from this exercise are represented in Table 3.1 below. There were many specific themes that emerged during this process and several ideas were very similar. Table 3.1: Emerging Ideas and scores

Idea

Use apps that allow citizens to report potholes or other problems to City Hall. Use smartphone apps for real time reports on street and sidewalk conditions, including picture and measurement capabilities. Map every public and private project and update it weekly. Adopt asset management systems for infrastructure. Use social media to alert businesses and residents about water main breaks. Use mapping to identify projects and leverage one project off of another. Develop a Dig Once Policy which includes broadband. Use information about water main breaks, sewer problems, and potholes to select construction projects. Alert the public to construction before major work begins. Utilize sensors to find infrastructure problems. Utilize project management software that is shared in every department. Develop a notification system for residents and business owners. Bring back weekly construction emails and press releases. Adopt Flowfinity and CityWorks. Develop an integrated GIS system with data from all departments. Use web-based work orders to ensure that data is recorded into a standard format. Eliminate paper work orders by giving crews i-pads. Use water sensor technology to detect leaks in water pipes (like the ball). Create departmental focus groups to identify infrastructure challenges and work through them. Provide better notifications for both upcoming and unplanned work. Start a public awareness campaign about the amazing water sources and how Syracuse needs to protect infrastructure to maintain water. Digitize data and use it to inform projects. Give the public the ability to view planned construction projects. Allow citizens to take a picture of a pothole on their phone and automatically send the pothole location to DPW. Use i-pads and tablets for real-time data entry.

Score 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.53 2.53 2.53 2.53 2.47 2.47 2.47 2.47 2.47 2.47 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40

From here, the i-team worked to combine and further narrow its ideas. The i-team identified a list of 13 potential initiatives that were all interrelated. They are represented in the Table 3.2 below. Table 3.2: Potential Initiatives

Citizen Reporting Adopt an application (or build-out existing system) that allows people to digitally submit infrastructure issues to the city. This system should automatically enter complaints into a database, automatically map complaints in GIS, and show that complaints were logged and/or completed.

Data Management Systems Institute a digital initiative in which infrastructure work is tracked electronically rather than through paper work orders. Databases can be developed to extend the capabilities of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s existing digital systems. These databases would track infrastructure, monitor the condition of infrastructure, and document improvements to infrastructure. Give each crew leader a tablet, iPad, or other appropriate technology so that they can track work, access GIS, and use electronic reporting when in the field. The applications and systems used on these tablets would transfer information directly into the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s infrastructure databases.

Predictive Technologies Invest in sensor technologies to monitor and report the condition of infrastructure systems. These could include both above-ground and below-ground sensors. Examples of below ground sensors include those built into new water pipes that detect changes in pressure and acoustics, which can signal a water main leak or break. Examples of above ground sensors include sensors attached to vehicles to monitor and record the condition of roads. Data collected from these sensors could be used to prioritize and advise in the repair of infrastructure systems. Utilize other diagnostic infrastructure technologies such as drones, sounding devices, and cameras to assess the condition of existing infrastructure systems. Use data from predictive technologies to inform an asset management system and help identify areas to make improvements before emergency repairs are needed.

35 Asset Management Systems Create a data infrastructure system by • performing an audit of current data collection techniques, • digitizing data records, • combining datasets to give a better picture of overall operations, • focusing on data governance, • regularly reviewing performance of infrastructure systems based upon data, • and setting up dashboards so top management can monitor infrastructure activity and performance. Update and integrate existing GIS systems across the City (and County), and create a GIS and data consortium so that there can be better knowledge sharing amongst practitioners. Use the GIS system to inform where construction work is completed. Use the data and GIS systems to develop asset management plans to prioritize work for each infrastructure system. These systems should include information about both the likelihood of infrastructure failure as well as the impact that a failure would have on the community. Asset management systems could be developed for many types of infrastructure systems ranging from water mains to street lights. These systems would pull a variety of variables and information from the data infrastructure system as well as the GIS systems. Asset management systems would allow the City to act in a predictive fashion and actively work to improve and/or repair infrastructure before major breaks or failures happen.

Construction Coordination System Develop a GIS based system that allows departments, utilities, the County, and developers to coordinate their planned work. This system would allow entities to enter all of their planned infrastructure improvement projects 3 – 5 years in advance. Once entered, the map would act as a visual tool which would allow groups to see if any planned projects fall in the same area. If they do, entities can work together and coordinate their work.

Leverage Private Projects Create a program which encourages public-private partnerships that improve infrastructure systems. For example, give developers and institutions the materials to make infrastructure improvements on/near their properties so that those entities could take on the responsibility of repairing the road following their planned work.

Construction Notification System Create a construction/work notification system that provides the public with information about both planned and emergency infrastructure projects. This information would include the work that is being done, the planned start date, and the anticipated completion date. The public would be able to look here to learn about all of the construction going on in the City of Syracuse.

Dig Once Initiative Institute a Dig Once Initiative that promotes coordinated planning of infrastructure projects between all departments and utilities. This effort would utilize the construction coordination system to identify potential infrastructure improvement projects. A coordinator would analyze these projects, and identify potential funding sources for them. They would then work with all departments and utilities to plan the road reconstruction projects for a given year. Whenever possible, departments, utilities, and other entities would work together so that a road is only opened up once every 5 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 10 years (or longer).

Open Data Initiative Develop an open data system that gives the public access to different City data sets. As datasets are created through the digital management initiative and asset management systems, this information would be made public online.

37 Preventative Maintenance Emphasize preventative maintenance practices such as patching road deficiencies whenever possible to extend the life of infrastructure systems. In other words, keep the infrastructure systems rated as “good” for as long as possible. Use predictive technologies to identify infrastructure deficiencies and problem areas. Use project management practices to develop work plans which address leaks, cracks, potholes, and other issues before they develop into larger problems.

Valve Initiative Develop a valve initiative in which water system valves are regularly tested and replaced to minimize the number of customers affected by future water main breaks. Valves are key to ensuring that the water system is running effectively and that if a break occurs, it affects a minimum number of people. Technology would be used to test valves. Additionally, if valves need to be replaced, new technologies would be used to ensure that they would operate effectively in emergency situations. Institute an automatic valve closure system which allows valves to be opened or closed with the touch of a button. This type of system would reduce the number of employees that exercise valves. It would also allow the valves to be exercised regularly which would ensure that valves are operating correctly. If valves do need to be replaced, this technology would identify the faulty valves.

Infrastructure Training and Management Institute regular training of both technical and business skills to ensure that all workers are competent in their work. An infrastructure “bootcamp” would help new hires to quickly learn the ropes. Additionally, continuing education workshops would ensure that employees are trained to handle the latest procedures, technologies, and infrastructure trends. Training would also show employees that the city is vested in them, which would ultimately lead to improved job performance and company culture. Emphasize proper project management by adopting appropriate software and using project coordination techniques. This would ensure that individuals, crews, and departments are properly handling their designated tasks.

Business and Development Recruitment Coordinate a public awareness campaign that focuses on Syracuse’s abundance of natural resources and assets that are often underutilized because of the condition of the City’s infrastructure. Recruit companies to Syracuse that would leverage our resources, such as water. Incentivize these companies to locate here, and ask them to invest in Syracuse’s water system for discounted water rates. This would not only improve the water infrastructure, but would also bring new jobs to the region.

Figure 3.1 below shows how all of the initial initiatives were dependent upon one another. Figure 3.1: Initiative Flow Chart

• • • • • • • • • • •

As citizens report infrastructure concerns they will be logged into a data management system. The data management system will feed into an open data portal and will also inform where predictive technologies should be deployed. As predictive technologies collect data, asset management systems will be updated. Asset management systems will feed data to the open data portal and will also inform the planning associated with construction coordination. As construction projects are planned and coordinated, the public will be notified of all planned construction projects. The construction notifications will also be an element of the open data initiative. All of the data from the open data initiative will help to inform economic development efforts, including business development and recruitment. As private economic development projects are planned, the City will work with developers to see if they are interested in investing in infrastructure near their project site, which will help ensure that businesses and projects are not disrupted by infrastructure failure. Any projects in which developers or private entities decide to improve infrastructure will feed into the construction coordination and planning process. During the construction coordination and planning process potential dig once project sites will be identified. Dig once projects and infrastructure repair efforts will be improved through • Better training for employees • Performing preventative maintenance • Regularly testing and exercising valves.

Prioritize and Select Initiatives In order to determine which initiatives were best positioned to achieve their intended impact, the i-team constructed logic models for each initiative. This allowed the team to lay out the reasoning behind each specific initiative and connect the initiatives to their desired impact. The i-team knew that if creating the logic models was difficult it could help to further narrow the initiatives. The logic models for each potential initiative can be found in Appendix D. The potential initiatives were next prioritized along two dimensions: degree of potential impact and feasibility of implementation. The results are shown in Figure 3.2 below. This exercise provided context and guidance for continued initiative refinement.

Feasibility

Figure 3.2: Feasibility-Impact Chart

Impact

As the work continued, the i-team worked closely with initiative owners, sponsors, and stakeholders. Some initiatives were backburnered for another time because of staff capacity. Other initiatives changed and evolved as the i-team worked with the different operating departments. It is important to note that the ideation process is iterative, and new initiatives were added as late as spring 2016.

Final Initiatives The i-team reached the list of final initiatives through a variety of means. First, as implementation plans and charters were developed it was clear that some initiatives would need to evolve. Additionally, sometimes it was clear that the city simply wasn’t in a position to take on specific initiatives at that point in time. Other times, initial initiatives were divided into multiple components. For example, the “predictive technologies” initiative that was first proposed included systems for both water and road infrastructure. In the final initiatives this was divided into two separate initiatives, one single initiative for roads (SQUID) and one single initiative for water (sensors). The final initiatives are as follows:

Emergency water system repairs are straining the City:

• Valve initiative • Water main sensors • Data science for water infrastructure

City roads are in poor condition:

• Road preventative maintenance • Street Quality Identification Device (SQUID) • Road ratings and asset management system • Road cut medallions • Road cut moratoriums

The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts:

• Five-year planning • Construction coordination • Dig once • Construction notification • Citizen reporting

D EL I V E R A N D A DA PT

CR EAT E CO N DI T I O N S FOR LO N G-T ERM SUCCE SS

he final step of the Innovation Process involved the effective implementation of planned initiatives, driven by structured project management practices and a focus on targets and metrics. Several items were prepared in order to ensure effective delivery, including charters, implementation plans, targets, and delivery routines. The charters for each initiative can be found in Appendix E.

Valve Initiative Rationale and Description Even when the water system is operating effectively, Syracuse will still experience occasional water main leaks and breaks. Figure 4.1 shows the number of water main breaks per year over the past 12 years. When these failures do occur, the City needs to ensure that as few people are affected as possible. This means that the Water Department will need to isolate the break with the closest water main valves. Historically, many of the valves needed to isolate a break don’t function, which forces the Water Department to use valves farther away from the break, thereby affecting more properties and people. The Valve Initiative requires the Water Department to physically exercise and test the valves, which keeps them in working order and identifies those that are not functioning so they can be replaced. Both of these initiative components will help to ensure that fewer people are without water during a water main leak or break.

Implementation Plan 1. The Water Superintendent will identify an area or neighborhood of focus based upon upcoming project sites, system data, and other variables. 2. The Superintendent selects which valves are a priority for the upcoming week. 3. A water employee will find and mark the valve locations during the daytime shift. 4. The nighttime shift picks up the Wachs handheld device from the Assistant Superintendents’ Office. 5. The nighttime shift tests valves unless there is an emergency. 6. At the end of their shift, the night crew brings the handheld Wachs device back into the Assistant Superintendent’s Office. 7. The GIS Specialist will pick up the Wachs device in the morning. 8. The GIS Specialist will plug the device into his computer and load in the valves that were tested last night. 9. The GIS Specialist will use the data from the device to update the GIS data base with information about the valves’ functionality. Figure 4.1: Water Main Breaks/Leaks per Year

Targets • •

Increase the number of valves exercised by 150% from 1,000 to 2,500 within two years. Decrease the number of parcels affected by a water main break by 50% within three years.

Water Main Sensors Rationale and Description As shown in Figure 4.2, water main data shows that there are certain hotspots in the City of Syracuse where breaks are more prevalent. The most common area for water main breaks is in downtown, and when water infrastructure fails in the middle of the Central Business District, it is especially inconvenient. Restaurants are forced to shut down, offices send their employees home, and roads are closed to traffic. Over the spring and summer of 2016, the City of Syracuse piloted water main sensors that detect acoustic waves transmitted through the pipes. These waves identify water main leaks and their locations before they become debilitating breaks, thereby allowing the Water Department to repair the water main during off-peak hours, allowing businesses, offices, employees, and residents to function as normal.

Implementation Plan Pilots 1. Identify water sensor companies and set up at least two week long pilots with them. 2. Identify where sensors should be deployed - ensure that there is a known leak within the sensor area. 3. The Superintendent and Assistant Commissioner will receive notifications if any leaks are detected within the sensor network. 4. The Superintendent will send out crews to investigate potential leaks. 5. The Superintendent will plan when the leaks should be repaired. 6. The Superintendent will alert Neighborhood and Business Development if any businesses/properties will be affected by the repairs. 7. The Superintendent will alert the Director of Constituent Services to the planned repairs, so that they may tweet about them. 8. The Superintendent will assign crew to repair the leak. Purchasing Sensor and Establishing Final Network 1. The Infrastructure Coordinator will meet with Water to determine the effectiveness of the pilots and if one system was favored over the other. 2. Water Purchasing will put specs together for the bidding process. 3. The bidding process will commence. 4. Once a vendor is selected, the Water Management Analyst will ensure that all council materials are finalized for contract execution. 5. The GIS Specialist, Infrastructure Coordinator, and Chief Data Officer will work to determine where sensors and collectors should be deployed. 6. The Superintendent will schedule jobs so that valves within the final sensor network are prepped for sensors 7. The selected company will come to Syracuse and install the sensors. 8. The Superintendent and Dispatch will monitor sensors and identify any mains that need to be repaired.

Figure 4.2: Water Main Break Distribution Heat Map

Darker spots represent areas with high rates of water main breaks or leaks.

Targets â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

Decrease the average cost per water main repair in the sensor network by 30% from $7,000 to $4,900 within three years. Decrease the annual number of breaks within the downtown sensor network by 50% from 8 per year to 4 per year within three years.

Data Science for Water Infrastructure Rationale and Description The Water Department has digitized records of nearly all of its assets. Until recently, this geodatabase was used to help plan upcoming work and give perspective when responding to a water main break. During the summer of 2016, the City of Syracuse partnered with the Eric & Wendy Schmidt Data Science for Social Good Summer Fellowship to use historic data to develop an early warning system that uses predictive modeling to assign risk scores to each water main. Using existing data about the water system, the fellows built a machine learning model that should increase the accuracy of predicting risky water mains six-fold over a random choice.The riskiest water mains identified with this model are represented by the yellow and red lines on Figure 4.3. Knowing which mains are most at risk of failing allows the City to make the most efficient choice when replacing water mains. Additionally, the City can be more prepared if and when those mains do break by ensuring that valves around those mains are operational.

Implementation Plan 1. Work with the Water Department and the University of Chicago to identify priority areas for water system repairs, upgrades, and replacements. 2. Assess this plan after DSSG completes their assessment in August. 3. Continue to build upon plan if necessary. 4. Use plan to make decisions about water system repairs and/or pipe replacement strategy. â&#x20AC;˘ Ideally 5 miles of pipe would be replaced each year. Figure 4.3: DSSG Model

Figure 4.4: Cumulative Water Main Breaks/Leaks

Top 50 (red) and 500 (yellow) riskiest water mains. Blue dots represent water main breaks in 2016.

Targets â&#x20AC;˘

Use Data Science Project to Identify 75% of Water Department Infrastructure Priorities for 5 year planning.

Preventative Maintenance Rationale and Description The typical life of a road in Syracuse is to mill and pave it, then fill potholes on an as needed or complaint driven basis. With this model, typically roads are rated as poor about 12 years after they were last milled and paved. Simply milling and paving roads, paired with the existing budget, will mean the number of poor roads will exceed good and fair roads within the decade because of their rate of decline. Figures 4.5 and 4.6 below show the decline in roads rated “good” over the past 15 years. In order to move away from this model, Syracuse introduced a new type of preventative maintenance to its road reconstruction program during the Summer of 2016, called micropaving. Micropaving involves layering a protective top coat emulsion onto the existing road. This seals the cracks in roads and should increase the road rating by two points. Ten streets were selected to be micropaved in 2016, and range from a rating of 4 to a rating of 8. If micropaving is effective, the City could expect to get 20 - 30 years out of a road before it needs to be milled and paved again. This intervention will help to increase the number of roads rated 6 and above and, because micropaving is less expensive than milling and paving, will also allow the City to conduct improvements and maintenance on more roads within the city each year. Preventative maintenance techniques, along with marginal budget increases for road maintenance, should allow the City to maintain, and potentially increase, the number of good and fair roads in the city. In addition to micropaving, the City of Syracuse is also performing preventative maintenance by filling potholes. The most effective method to fill a traditional pothole in Syracuse is to use a Durapatcher machine, and since April 2016, the City has used GPS tracking on the Durapatchers to collect data on potholes throughout Syracuse. Now, whenever a pothole is filled with the Durapatcher it will update a map which displays all of the potholes that have been filled throughout the City. Figure 4.4 on the next page shows the location of all of the potholes that the Durapatchers have filled since April of 2016. Figure 4.5 on the next page shows the number of potholes filled by the Durapatchers from April through October 2016. This data informs operations from a variety of standpoints. First, it allows the City to see if certain roads or neighborhoods tend to have more potholes. Additionally, it provides a visual which helps to ensure that there is equity throughout Syracuse and that potholes are being filled in all neighborhoods. If this is not the case, it can be a tool for further investigation into why some neighborhoods have more potholes filled than others. Focusing on preventative maintenance will keep roads rated as “good” for longer periods of time, thereby increasing the average road rating. Figure 4.5: Road Ratings by Year

Figure 4.6: Percent of Roads by Rating

Implementation Plan Micropaving 1. In late summer, the Superintendent of Street Repair will work with the Slurry Crew Leader to identify candidates for micropaving for the following construction season. These include: a. Roads that were repaved approximately 7 years ago. b. Roads that were micropaved 3 - 5 years ago. c. Roads that are rated 5 - 8. d. Roads that were identified by asset management system as being eligible for micropaving. e. Assess pilot project and spend up to 25% of road recon budget on micropaving. 2. Micropave candidates for the next five years will be submitted to the Infrastructure Coordinator. 3. Finalize list of micropaving streets for upcoming construction season. 4. Develop micropaving specs in October. 5. Send list of micropaving out to bid in November. 6. Micropave August - September. Potholes 1. 2.

Use durapatchers year round to repair potholes. a. Address complaints that come through Cityline or Dispatch. b. Fix other potholes near the complaint potholes. c. If possible, follow snow plow squares to move through the city and fix potholes. d. Use asset management system to identify roads with potholes to repair. Use hot and cold patch as necessary to repair large road deficiencies. Figure 4.7: Potholes Filled Locations

Figure 4.8: Cumulative Potholes Filled

Red dots represent locations of potholes filled throughout the city.

Targets â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

Increase the number of blocks that undergo resurfacing each year by 40%, from 400 to 560 within three years. Increase the number of recorded potholes filled to 20,000 a year within two years.

Street Quality Identification Device (SQUID) Rationale and Description Another new technology that was deployed during the spring of 2016 was the SQUID, which is a low cost camera and accelerometer apparatus. The SQUID was attached to a City vehicle which drove throughout Syracuse. The accelerometer measured the bumpiness of roads while the camera took a picture of the road every second. Figure 4.9 shows the raw data from the initial road survey with SQUID. The data from the SQUID was used to identify which roads were the roughest and which roads where the smoothest. Additionally the photos provided documentation of the ride, so that if any measurements or locations resulted in questions, the photos could be referenced to learn about what was happening in the road at specific locations. This data has already proven useful in identifying some of the roads with the best and worst ride, but eventually it will also be incorporated into an updated road rating system. The data from SQUID will allow DPW to target the bumpiest roads and improve the condition of them.

Implementation Plan Current Pilot 1. 2. 3. 4.

DPW employees will drive SQUID around the city and cover every City street at least once. Argo Labs will review and analyze Syracuse’s road data. SQUID data will be compared with Cornell Asset Management System and existing DPW database. SQUID data will be used to inform the five year planning process.

Ongoing Work 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Determine if the City of Syracuse found SQUID valuable. ARGO Labs and the City of Syracuse will work out an agreement for future road analysis with SQUID. DPW employees will drive all of the city roads in April and October of each year. The City of Syracuse will identify interns or employees to review photos collected by SQUID. The City of Syracuse will incorporate SQUID ratings into the City’s asset management system and five year planning process. Figure 4.9 SQUID Road Data Map

Targets •

Double the number of roads rated each year, from 200 miles to 400 miles within one year.

Road Ratings Rationale and Description During the summer of 2016, the City of Syracuse participated in the Cornell Asset Management Program (CAMP), in which an intern worked to update the road rating system. Traditionally, the roads have been rated once every two years, and are simply given a score of 1 - 10. CAMP requires that the roads get rated on a series of eight different criteria, including: longitudinal cracking and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, edge cracking, patching, potholes, rutting, bleeding, and roughness. Figure 4.10 shows the rating sheet that was used to evaluate each road. This allows for the identification of specific preventative maintenance interventions that should be implemented on specific roads and for specific conditions. For example, if a road is showing signs of longitudinal cracking, crack sealing should be utilized as early as possible to prevent further damage, and extend the life of the road. This improved road rating system is time consuming, so it is a method that will be expanded in the future, and once the ratings are complete, the Cornell Asset Management Software will be deployed and will use an algorithm to make road maintenance recommendations and identify priorities. Once priorities are identified, the City will be able to conduct interventions on the roads that are most in need and increase the average road rating.

Implementation Plan 1. Purchase the Cornell Asset Management Software in April. 2. The Intern starts working with DPW in May. 3. The Intern and DPW Lab Tech attend the Cornell Roads Seminar to learn about the Asset Management Software and road preventative maintenance. 4. The Intern and DPW Lab Tech collect road rating data. 5. The Intern will share the results of their summer work with DPW and Infrastructure Coordinator. 6. The Cornell Asset Management Software and results will be used in the five-year planning process. Figure 4.10 CAMP Rating System

Targets â&#x20AC;˘

Log 33%, or approximately 140 miles, of Syracuseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s roads into an asset management system within two years.

Road Cut Medallions Rationale and Description It is inevitable that at some point in time city roads will need to be cut into because of a water main break, sewer collapse, utility emergency, or development project. One problem in Syracuse is that oftentimes these cuts into the road are not repaired to appropriate standards, which lead to water entering the cut, compromising the road base, forming potholes, and leading to faster deterioration. In order to better track who is making road cuts and where the road cuts are being made, Syracuse launched a road cut medallion system in August 2016. Once road cuts are made, plastic colored medallions are placed on top of the patch or asphalt. The medallions are color-coded and state the name of the company/organization that cut into the road. Figures 4.11 and 4.12 are examples of Sewer road cuts with medallions. Not only does this help with data management, but it also instills a sense of pride in the crew making the cut. Since their name is on it, any citizen can see who was responsible for it, and whether or not they made a quality repair. The goal of this initiative is to improve the quality of road cut restoration, and ultimately improve the overall road ratings.

Implementation Plan 1. 2. 3.

DPW orders medallions for the following entities: a. National Grid - yellow b. Other external companies - orange c. Water - blue d. Sewer - green All of the medallions will contain the entityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s name and the year. The entity installs medallions during the restoration process based upon the following guidelines: a. Utility Repair Tags are installed during the final lift of paving. The Markers shall be embedded at zero grade tolerance, or slightly below, and must be of one piece construction. The use of nails to secure Identification Markers is prohibited. b. Placement of Tags: i. An additional tag must always be placed in the center of every lateral connection that branches off the main patch or trench. ii. Cuts up to 50 linear ft: Must have one tag placed in the center of the patch. iii. Cuts between 50 and 100 linear ft: Must have a tag placed at either end of the patch or trench approximately 12 inches from the edge. iv. Cuts between 100 and 400 linear ft: Must have a tag placed in the beginning, center, and end of the trench, with the beginning and end tags approximately 12 inches from the edge. An additional tag must be placed at every intersecting street. v. Cuts greater than 400 linear ft: Must have a tag placed at the beginning and end of the trench approximately 12 inches from the edge, and at every 200 linear foot intervals. An additional tag must be placed at every intersecting street. c. Utility Repair Tags should not be placed within 12 inches from any casting unless space does not allow. d. Utility Repair Tags should be placed away from direct wheel traffic when able. e. On all cuts partially or fully within the parking lane, the tag should be placed on the center-line side of the patch or trench, 12 inches from the edge of the patch or trench. f. Utility Repair Tags must be placed in all temporary and permanent asphalt patches during all phases of construction. g. When a sidewalk is repaired, tags are only placed on temporary asphalt patches. Permanent sidewalk repairs (concrete, brick, etc.) do not require a tag. 4. Each week the Water Department, Sewer Department, National Grid, and Ballard Construction will send the Permits Office a list of the road cuts that were made that week.

Figure 4.11: Road Cut Medallion Photo

Figure 4.12: Road Cut Medallion Photo

A sewer medallion in a temporary road cut repair.

Targets â&#x20AC;˘

Ensure that 100% of all road cuts have medallions and meet repair standards within three years.

Road Cut Moratoriums Rationale and Description Even though road cuts are bound to happen, the City of Syracuse is planning to reduce the number of cuts made in freshly paved roads. Figure 4.13 shows an example of a road that was reconstructed in 2015 and was cut into in 2016. In August 2016, the Common Council passed legislation which established a moratoriums on road cuts. No roads that have been repaved can be cut into within five years of that repavement. No roads that have been reconstructed can be cut into within seven years of that reconstruction. Additionally, a winter moratorium bars cutting into roads between November and April. The moratoriums can be waived by the Commissioner of the Department of Public Works (DPW) in case of emergency or other extenuating circumstances. Between 2009 and 2014, 30% of roads mill and paved by the city were cut into at least once within five years of being paved. The goal of this initiative is to decrease that percentage, which will in turn improve the quality of city roads and increase the average road rating.

Implementation Plan 1. Map all roads that have been repaved from 2011 - 2015. 2. Maintain the map of roads that have been resurfaced to contain roads from the last five years. 3. As cuts are registered and permits are filed, Permit Office staff will reference the map to see if cuts are proposed in the moratorium area. 4. If proposed cut is located in the moratorium area, Permits Office staff will refuse to grant it. 5. The moratoriums are structured as follows: a. 5 year moratorium in roads that were repaved. b. 7 year moratorium in roads that were reconstructed. 6. The permit applicant may choose to petition to the Commissioner of DPW and request permission to override the moratorium. Figure 4.13: Road Cut Photo

A road cut made one year after the road was reconstructed.

Targets â&#x20AC;˘

Decrease the percentage of roads reopened within five years of being repaved from 40% to 10% within three years.

Five-Year Planning Rationale and Description In the past, minimal collaborative planning for construction projects was conducted prior to project initiation. The DPW Division of Road Reconstruction would develop an annual plan that would typically be finalized a month or two before construction season. The Division of Sewers and the Water Department would plan out one or two capital improvement projects a year, but wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t identify many other planned construction projects. Now, the planning process in Syracuse has been completely revamped. Departments are now required to identify their planned construction and capital improvement projects by August. Then the Infrastructure Coordinator (a new position) reviews all of the operating departmentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; plans and priorities, as well as planned development projects, and National Gridâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s three year plan to develop a coordinated construction plan for the following year. The Infrastructure Coordinator uses geospatial mapping tools to identify opportunities for coordination and collaboration between stakeholders. Figure 4.14 shows an example of the mapping process. The plan is then reviewed by both internal and external stakeholders, and a preliminary version of the upcoming construction plan is finalized by November. This provides ample time for planning projects, notifying constituents, identifying funding opportunities, and making adjustments.

Implementation Plan 1. A document will be created which discusses how infrastructure repairs and priorities are selected. 2. The Infrastructure Coordinator will share the infrastructure selection document with all departments to remind them of the methodology and practices that are associated with infrastructure repair (Here is what department X should be using to select their infrastructure repairs and priorities). Figure 4.14: 5-Year Planning Map (2016-2021)

Each colored line represents planned work from different departments.

Implementation Plan (cont.) 3. In late July of each year the following people will identify their five year infrastructure plans and also priorities if funding was unlimited. a. Superintendent of Street Repair i. Identify five-year plan for roads to mill and pave. ii. Identify five-year plan for roads to micropave. iii. Select priority roads to mill and pave. iv. Select priority roads to micropave. b. City Engineer i. Identify TIP and engineering projects for the next five years. c. Superintendent of Sewers i. Identify five-year plan for sewer improvements. ii. Select priority sewer improvements. d. Superintendent of Water i. Identify five-year plan for water system improvements. ii. Select priority water improvements. e. Deputy Commissioner of Parks i. Identify park plans. f. Deputy Commissioner of Business Development i. Identify planned and potential development projects. ii. Identify key development sites. g. Director of IT i. Identify fiber priorities. 4. The Permits Information Aid will map of all the proposed projects with Esri. Each department will have its own color which represents their projects. 5. In August, the Infrastructure Coordinator will meet individually with superintendents and other project decision makers to understand why they selected the projects they did. 6. In September, the Infrastructure Coordinator will identify conflicts and opportunities for collaboration. 7. The Infrastructure Coordinator will identify mill and pave projects that could be micropave projects. 8. The Infrastructure Coordinator will ensure that no important or priority infrastructure projects were excluded from the departmental submissions. 9. In October, the Infrastructure Coordinator will host meetings with parties involved to finalize the project list and schedule. a. Research and budget will be present in these meetings so they are aware of projects and their funding needs. 10. The Infrastructure Coordinator will present the list of projects to the Mayor’s Office staff. 11. In November, the final list of projects will be identified. 12. The Infrastructure Coordinator and his team will produce a document which explains why each project site was selected. 13. In November, a schedule for the construction will be developed. 14. In November, the projects will be shared with National Grid and other utility companies. 15. In the winter, the construction projects for the following spring will be publicly announced and placed on the Cityline.syrgov.net map.

Targets • •

Increase the number of projects and priorities that the Department of Water submits by 100% from 12 to 24 within two years. Increase the number of projects and priorities that Sewers submits from 1 to 10 within two years.

Construction Coordination Rationale and Description Previously, during construction season, departments and entities typically worked independently and didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t cross paths. Now when construction season starts, all departments work together and inspect their underground infrastructure before any paving is done. All of the stakeholders have a running list of the construction projects and their anticipated start dates, and sign-off stating that they have inspected their underground infrastructure at a given project site. As a pilot in 2016, the Water Department and Division of Sewers sign off on a form which signifies that their underground infrastructure at planned mill and pave sites has been inspected and that it is in good condition. If the infrastructure is not in good condition, the entity must repair it before the road is repaved. In 2017, this initiative will expand to include other organizations with underground infrastructure. This initiative helps to reduce the number of emergency infrastructure repairs that force a road to be reopened after it has been repaved, and directly supports the Road Cut Moratorium Initiative. Ultimately, not only will it improve our coordination and communication efforts, but it will also improve the average road rating.

Implementation Plan 1. In December, the Infrastructure Coordinator will update the google sheet with all of the upcoming construction projects and their anticipated start date. 2. The Infrastructure Coordinator will share the construction google sheet with the appropriate departments and partners: a. Road recon b. Water c. Sewer d. Grid e. WEP f. Verizon g. NBD 3. All departments and partners will conduct their pre-mill inspections and log them in a spreadsheet. a. Road recon i. Grades ii. Curbs b. Water i. Road cuts ii. Valves iii. Hydrants iv. Sound mains c. Sewer i. TV sewers d. Grid i. Inspect mains e. WEP i. TV sewers f. Verizon i. Underground infrastructure and conduit g. NBD i. Planned development projects

Implementation Plan (cont.) 4. The Infrastructure Coordinator will alert the Superintendent of Street Repair when all of the pre-mill inspections have been complete. 5. The Superintendent of street repair will tell the Infrastructure Coordinator when he is milling. 6. All underground infrastructure repairs will be made prior to repaving. 7. The road will be be repaved.

Targets • • • • • •

Water will sound 100% of mains prior to roads being repaved within two years. Water will test 100% of valves prior to roads being repaved within two years. Water will inspect 100% of hydrants prior to roads being repaved within two years. Water will repair 100% of temporary square cuts prior to roads being repaved within two years. Sewer will use CCTV equipment to inspect 100% of sewers prior to roads being repaved within two years. National Grid will inspect 100% of gas infrastructure prior to roads being repaved within two years.

Dig Once Rationale and Description The Five Year Planning Initiative not only provides the framework for infrastructure inspection and construction coordination, but also identifies potential sites for Dig Once projects. Dig Once projects occur when all underground infrastructure systems are replaced and then the road is repaved or rebuilt. This initiative led to three separate Dig Once projects throughout the City of Syracuse in 2016. One of these projects involved a developer, and a second involved one the City’s anchor institution’s, Syracuse University, proving that it is beneficial to include development projects in the five year planning process. The Dig Once Initiative will directly impact the coordination challenge.

Implementation Plan Large-scale Projects 1. The Infrastructure Coordinator will analyze maps and plans from the five-year planning process to identify areas where all infrastructure is a priority. 2. The Infrastructure Coordinator will hold meetings to discuss potential areas for large-scale Dig Once projects. 3. The Infrastructure Coordinator will work with research and budget to identify funding sources for potential projects. 4. The Infrastructure Coordinator will oversee any grant paperwork that is necessary to apply for project funding. 5. The Infrastructure Coordinator will write legislation letters to the council to advance Dig Once projects. 6. The Infrastructure Coordinator will work with the engineering department to complete the bidding process. 7. The Infrastructure Coordinator will work with the engineering department to advance Dig Once projects. 8. The Infrastructure Coordinator will provide project status updates to the Mayor’s Office. Small-scale Projects 1. The Infrastructure Coordinator will consult the 5 year plan and upcoming construction schedule to see if there are any projects that may be completed with smaller scale coordination (Department heads or project leaders will also reach out to the Infrastructure Coordinator directly if they feel they have a project that warrants other departments or utilities replacing their infrastructure). 2. The Infrastructure Coordinator will schedule meetings and connect directly with the appropriate parties to ensure that appropriate action is taken by stakeholders, and that all necessary planning occurs prior to the start of a project. 3. The Infrastructure Coordinator will work with the departments and contractors to help coordinate the construction process (For example: sewer goes in first, then water, then grid, then paving).

Targets •

Increase the number of “Dig Once” projects a year from one project a year to four projects a year within two years.

Construction Notification Rationale and Description In the past, people located on a street undergoing construction were supposed to receive notification of construction work 24 hours in advance. Now that a deliberate planning process occurs, the City of Syracuse can provide increased notice to constituents. In February, property owners receive a postcard in the mail which states that construction is planned for their street at some point in the upcoming construction season. Then, citizens will receive a doorhanger or a flier 24 to 48 hours before the start of construction. A full shift to a 48 hour notification policy is a change we are continuing to consider and discuss. Additionally, a website with construction information (cityline.syrgov.net) was created to provide constituents with information about the planned construction projects for the given construction season. Figure 4.15 is an example of the construction information located on the Cityline website. This initiative will improve communication between constituents and the City about construction projects.

Implementation Plan Map on Cityline.syrgov.net 1. Projects from water, engineering, sewer, street repair, and grid will be given to the Infrastructure Coordinator. a. The broad list of projects for the construction season will be due by January. b. More specific project dates will be due at least two weeks prior to the start of work. 2. The Permits Information Aid will ensure that all construction and road closures are entered into Cityline map. If they are not, they will add and update them. Figure 4.15: Screenshot of Planned Construction Work Map on Cityline

Each colored line represents planned work from different departments.

Implementation Plan (cont.) Social Media 1. 2. 3.

The Director of Constituent Services will tweet about construction or citizen reporting 3 – 5 times a day. a. Planned road closures. b. Emergency water repairs. c. Emergency sewer repairs. d. Respond to tweets and enter issues into IPS. The Director of Constituent Services will consult the twitter handbook for questions. The Director of Constituent Services will maintain twitter office hours.

Press Releases 1. The Press Secretary will contact the Infrastructure Coordinator to confirm all of the planned, upcoming road work. 2. The Press Secretary will send an initial release with all of the season’s planned projects in early May. 3. The Press Secretary will send monthly press release updates on projects for that month. 4. All press releases will contain: a. Link to cityline.syrgov.net. b. Link to twitter account. Mailing and Door Hanger Procedure 1. The Infrastructure Coordinator will identify the projects that will be occurring in a given construction season. a. Planned sewer projects b. Planned water projects c. Road recon projects i. Managed by DPW ii. Managed by contractors d. Engineering projects 2. Cityline Staff will send general notification postcards which state that “construction will be happening on your block this year” to the printer in January. 3. Cityline Staff will mail out notification postcards in February. 4. One to two days before construction begins, the contractor or DPW staff will hang door hangers and distribute fliers which state that construction will be occurring in two days, the road will be closed, and that all vehicles must be off the street. They will also hang “No Parking” signs. 5. For each project, the project manager will alert the Infrastructure Coordinator that the project has started and will provide updates. 6. The Permits Information Aide will ensure that the construction notification map is complete and up-to-date. 7. The project manager will alert the Infrastructure Coordinator when the project is completed, and the Permits Information Aide will remove it from the construction notification map.

Targets • •

Increase the number of Cityline web page views from 0 to 10,000 per year within two years. 100% of addresses on a block with planned construction have a postcard mailed to them and have a door hanger placed on their door.

Citizen Reporting Rationale and Description An infrastructure request from constituents was to identify an improved way to report infrastructure concerns. Historically, citizens have had the ability to call Syracuse Cityline to report infrastructure issues and could also navigate to a web form. However, this webform was hard to find and difficult to use. Now, people can visit Cityline.syrgov.net to submit service requests. This site not only allows them to submit issues, but also allows them to track the status of the request that they submitted. Figures 4.16 and 4.17 below show the number and types of requests being made via the new Cityline webpage. This initiative directly improves communication between constituents and the City.

Implementation Plan Cityline phone number 1. 2. 3. 4.

Citizens will call 448-CITY anytime. a. Between 9 – 5, Cityline employee answers. b. Between 5 – 9, Dispatch employee answers. Employees will enter citizen complaint into IPS. Employees will provide the caller with a report tracking number. Employees will explain that the Cityline.syrgov.net website exists. They will tell the caller that they can check the status of their complaint there, and in the future can enter it without calling. 5. All of the calls will be logged into IPS. Cityline.syrgov.net 1. The City will develop and manage Cityline.syrgov.net which will contain forms that will allow citizens to log complaints and check on the status of complaints. 2. Cityline.syrgov.net will be updated as needed to provide an improved user experience. This may include: a. Interactive mobile form. b. Map for identifying issues. Advertising 1. 2. 3. 4.

The city will use social media advertising to spread the word about Cityline.syrgov.net. The city will place Cityline.syrgov.net bumper stickers on DPW vehicles. Employees will carry Cityline.syrgov.net business cards and will provide them to inquisitive constituents. The city will consider other advertising options: Figure 4.17: Cityline Online Requests by Type a. Newspaper. b. Billboards. Figure 4.16: Cityline Online Requests per Hour

Targets • •

Decrease the average time to address a pothole service request from 19 days to 7 days within two years. Increase the percentage of service requests submitted digitally from 4% to 20% within three years.

Monitoring and Tracking Once the initiatives were ready to launch, delivery routines were developed to effectively implement the planned initiatives. There were five different types of delivery routines established. Innovation Team Updates occurred on a weekly basis and allowed the team to stay on top of all the initiatives within the portfolio. They provided comprehensive reviews of the progress on the priorities, identified systemic issues, and allowed the team to work through challenges as a group. Initiative Check-ins were set up on a biweekly basis between the i-team Project Manager and Initiative Owner. They provided an opportunity to discuss deliverables and tasks to advance the initiatives, and also the progress of the initiatives. They would work together to troubleshoot the initiatives and advance them. Mayoral Updates were in person meetings between the Mayor and the i-team. They were held monthly and provided information on the following: 1. the overall status of each initiative, 2. data surrounding the initiatives, 3. key issues to be resolved, and options to move past the issues, 4. and successes of initiatives. Stocktakes are held on a monthly basis and focus on showing data related to initiative execution. During these meetings, the Mayor, i-team, sponsors and owners, and the Chief of Staff all review data, charts, maps, and other information about initiative success. The i-team helps to plan and develop presentations for the Stocktakes, however, the meeting is managed by initiative sponsors. During these meetings, participants are able to see the status of the priority overall, and if the initiative is on track to achieve its target. The discussion focuses on critical implementation issues and the steps necessary to address them. An example of a stocktake presentation is located in Appendix F.

Lessons Learned As the i-team researched, developed, and implemented the infrastructure initiatives, they identified a variety of lessons can be incorporated in their future work. One of the most important things the Syracuse i-team learned was that oftentimes an initiative's success was dependent upon the relationships, partnerships, and personalities of the people involved. Without a strong personal foundation, an initiative was likely to fail, or in some cases not even take off. It is important to have a team of people behind it who are passionate, excited, and committed. Additionally, the i-team discovered that it is best to have owners and sponsors who are 100% involved with the development of the initiatives. Oftentimes, the i-team would meet with owners and sponsors and discuss their concerns and thoughts associated with initiatives. They would leave and independently adjust or develop the initiatives. A few weeks later the i-team would reconvene with the sponsors and owners to review what had developed. This process would repeat over and over again. The i-team conducted work in this fashion to try and be respectful of the ownersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and sponsorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; time. However, this form of collaboration sometimes led to more questions and concerns during early initiative launch. In the future, the i-team will make sure the development of initiatives and delivery routines are active workshops, which will help to ensure that there is full buy-in and limited confusion during initiative launch. Throughout the innovation process, it was especially important to develop relationships with stakeholders. Stakeholders needed to trust the i-team and feel comfortable contributing to a priority area or initiative discussion. The team discovered that there was a fine line between asking stakeholders inquisitive questions and coming across as pushy. Instead of continually asking questions, it was better to go out with crews, owners, or stakeholders and see them in action. This allowed the i-team to better understand the stakeholdersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; concerns and needs. In future priority areas, the i-team hopes to engage in fieldwork and observation earlier in the innovation process. Another important lesson was the importance of effectively organizing, communicating, and managing its work. When the i-team initially formed, it went in many different investigative directions and it was hard to keep track of who was focusing on what. Eventually the team adopted an agile project management style with weekly and daily check-ins to see what each member of the team was working on. Additionally, the i-team also started sending emails twice a week which summarized all of the work that had been accomplished over the previous few days. The team also set up a structure to formally identify tasks that each member would work on. These changes all helped to ensure that the i-team was highly functioning and able to tackle a variety of tasks and challenges.

Throughout its work the i-team realized the value of having a well rounded team with certain characteristics. All i-team members should:

• Have an inquisitive nature and a desire to learn. • Have a passion for Syracuse. • Have the ability to question, debate, and think logically. • Have the ability to easily adapt and adjust. • Be a strong team player, but also be able to work independently.

However, it is also important to have diversity on the team as well. At a minimum, it is necessary to have someone who likes to look at the big picture and organize and manage projects, an analytical aficionado, and a creative force. It is even better if the team consists of people who are multidisciplined and can jump between these fields. As the i-team has grown and changed, it has been important to look at the skills and personalities that the team is missing, and try to fill the voids. This has meant understanding what type of innovative qualities and characteristics were already accounted for on the team, and ensuring that new members bring unique skill sets and traits to the team's overall make up. The entire Bloomberg Innovation Team network has reflected on teams’ initial priority areas, successes, and struggles. The i-team program has compiled a list of best practices, and is using them as tool to help the program evolve. Now, Bloomberg Philanthropies is encouraging teams to adopt and utilize human centered design in their work. With future priority areas, teams will conduct constituent interviews and observations during their investigative phase, which will help them to identify initiatives and solutions that will most impact the lives of citizens.

Conclusion The i-team has taken these lessons and has started work on a new priority area. However, the infrastructure work will never be complete. The Innovation Delivery Approach is ongoing, allowing for a continuous cycle of innovation and reform. If initiatives are not progressing it will be evident in stocktakes, and the i-team will be able to work with sponsors and owners to identify initiative challenges, and make adjustments to the initiatives. Infrastructure continues to be a priority for the City of Syracuse as a whole. The City and administration will continue to develop solutions to Syracuseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s infrastructure challenges and will work to improve and advance its infrastructure systems. Partners from departments across City government realize the importance of providing constituents with safe, reliable infrastructure, and the i-team initiatives are just the first steps in a long journey to enhance Syracuseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s infrastructure.

Mayor Stephanie Miner speaking about infrastructure in the State of the City address, January 2016

The Syracuse i-team: (left to right) Jonnell Robinson, Sam Edelstein, Adria Finch, Andrew Maxwell, Addison Spears.

A PPE N DIX

Appendix A Syracuse City i-team Ideation Session Date: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 Time: 3:00 – 5:00 pm Location: City Hall LEARNING OBJECTIVES/MEETING RESULTS 1. Participants will develop ideas for Infrastructure future. 2. Participants will practice ideating techniques. SPEAKERS/CO-FACILITATORS 1. Andy Maxwell 2. Jonnell Allen 3. Addison Spears 4. Adria Finch MATERIALS 1. Post-it pads (group agreements, Garden, Questions) 2. Easels - 2 3. Markers large and small 4. Individual Post-its (Adria) 5. Brainwriting sheets (HH provides, AF copies) 6. Index Cards 7. Tent cards for table topics 8. Visual Explorer TO DO • Write and post GA, Garden • Create brainwriting sheets (AF) • Create table tent cards

Appendix A DETAILED AGENDA 3:00 – 3:20 Ice Breaker – “I have a secret” cards - Heidi Welcome – Andy 3:20 - 3:40 CREATIVE THINKING EXERCISE – Visual Explorer. (20 minutes) • “When our infrastructure is functioning at its best, this is what we will look like.” • Everyone has 2 minutes to scan and select an image that reflects the answer to the question. • Share with partner what you saw in the image; partner shares what they saw in your image. 4 minutes. • Switch and do the same thing. 4 minutes • Each person shares the other person’s image, and reasoning, with the group. 2 minutes each. 3:40-4:15 TRAVELLING IDEAS – 35 minutes • Jonnell explains clustering, Heidi explains affinity areas. • GSQ - The affinity areas were drawn from preliminary idea gathering. These aren’t weighted in any way, they may not be the final areas of interest, and they certainly have overlaps – in fact, that is a good thing. Cross-fertilization of ideas works. Now I want you to stretch a little, to throw out ideas that might get you to those great visual images. • We've all been on a journey, and had to decide how to get there - train, or plane? Stay at a bed and breakfast or hotel? Do we go to the beach or the mountains? But What if you embarked on a journey and all you knew is what you wanted to feel like at the final destination, but you were willing to explore any number of possibilities to achieve that end. What ideas, or actions, in each of these affinities would be what if... - what if we did this? What if we did that? • Brainwriting, moving from affinity area to affinity area: Tech/Data Stuff, Communications and Community Engagement Stuff, Project Management and Process Stuff, Alternative Infrastructure Stuff. • Groups of 3-4 at each group, use stickies and post across top sheet with ideas for as fast and as long as you can. New set of ideas, new sheet. 5 minutes. • Move to next table. Start your own brainstorming on the topic, use stickies and post across top sheet with ideas for as fast and as long as you can. New set of ideas, new sheet. 5 minutes. Then read, revise, add and switch in previous ideas: 3 minutes. • Move to next table. Start your own brainstorming, use stickies and post across top sheet with ideas for as fast and as long as you can. New set of ideas, new sheet. 5 minutes. Then read, revise, add and switch in previous ideas: 3 minutes. • Move to next table. Start your own brainstorming, use stickies and post across top sheet with ideas for as fast and as long as you can. New set of ideas, new sheet. 5 minutes. Then read, revise, add and switch in previous ideas: 3 minutes. 4:15-4:35 ICE CREAM BREAK – 20 minutes • Get ice cream and return to your original table. • Read what was written from everyone and discuss as a group. • Amongst yourselves, try to identify what your group thinks are the top 3 best ideas. Use a fresh brainwriting sheet and answer the question: “If our success was completely guaranteed, what bold steps might we choose?”

Appendix A 4:35-4:50 REPORT OUT – Addison – 15 minutes • Each table reports out on their reflections of what was read, and what they see as the top 3 or 4 ideas. Each table has 3-4 minutes. • Heidi records 4:50-5:00 CLOSING AND REFLECTION – Adria • On outcomes of ideation. • On process itself – what worked, what didn’t. • Say you are going home tonight, and someone said how was the ideation session. What one word or phrase might you use to describe it? EXAMPLE OF BRAIN WRITING

Appendix B Workshop Agenda 9:00 – 9:15 • Breakfast and Coffee – Picasso’s • Get settled 9:15 – 9:45 • Welcome/thank you – Mayor?/Andy • i-team explanation - Andy • Introductions • name/role/department • Why we’re here - Addison • Ground Rules (see page 2) - Addison Break into departments • Water in SyraStat – Sam and Adria • DPW in i-team conference room – Addison • Engineering in Ideation Station – Jonnell and Andy 9:45 – 10:15 • Pulse Time by department – Facilitated Discussion, Take notes on post-it pad, record on iphone • What is your department or crew seeing on the street right now? • What are some frustrations that you are experiencing with other departments? • How are departments working well together? • What are you doing that is better now than it was five years ago? • What would your department look like if all of the infrastructure challenges were solved? 10:15 – 10:35 • Ideation by Department 10:35 – 10:50 • Break into position groups • Laborers in SyraStat – Addison and Jonnell • Commissioners in i-team conference room – Addison and Sam • Crew Leaders in Ideation Station – Andy 10:50 – 11:20 • Pulse Time by position – Facilitated Discussion, Take notes on post-it pad, record on iphone • What are you seeing on the street right now? • What are some frustrations that you are experiencing with your own department? • How are do different employees within your department work well together? • What are you doing that is better now than it was five years ago? • What would your job look like if all of the infrastructure challenges were solved? 11:20 – 11:40 • Ideation by Rank 11:40 – 12:30 • Lunch – Dinosaur 12:30 – 1:00 • Wrap up – Jonnell, Sam, Adria

Appendix B Department Pulse Time Questions • What is your department or crew seeing on the street right now? • What are some frustrations that you are experiencing with other departments? • How are departments working well together? • What are you doing that is better now than it was five years ago? • What would your department look like if all of the infrastructure challenges were solved? Department Ideation Questions • What ideas do you have to improve things in your department? • Technologies • Work strategies • What ideas do you have to improve things in other departments? Rank Pulse Time Questions • What are you seeing on the street right now? • What are some frustrations that you are experiencing with your own department? • How are do different employees within your department work well together? • What are you doing that is better now than it was five years ago? • What would your job look like if all of the infrastructure challenges were solved? Rank Ideation Questions • What can the city do in general to improve their infrastructure? • What can department leaders do to improve infrastructure operations? • What can workers on the street do to improve infrastructure operations?

Appendix C Ideation Grading Sheet

Appendix C

Appendix D Logic Models LOGIC MODEL: Citizen Reporting DESCRIPTION

Adopt a mobile-friendly application that allows people to submit geolocated infrastructure issues to the city

OBJECTIVE

Provide citizens with an easy-to-use transparent system for notifying the City of infrastructure issues, and Increase the number of infrastructure issues that are submitted digitally City roads are in poor condition. The City doesn’t communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • • • • • •

Funding to create or purchase application Application and database Training to operate application Staff to manage application IT support Budget to market application Tablets for crew leaders

The city has a limited budget to make major infrastructure investments, and at this point it is unclear as to whether there is a high demand for certain infrastructure improvements. Additionally many of the projects that are undertaken are based upon complaints that may not be representative of the whole city. The city does not fully understand the infrastructure needs of its constituents ACTIVITIES • • • •

• •

• • • •

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) •

Identify funding sources Get buy-in from employees and administration Identify needs for the application (what it should do) Ensure that the application can geolocate complaints and work with existing systems Train employees to use the system Develop procedures to handle complaints that come in through the application Market the application Identify champion Roll-out application Track the usage of the application

Number of infrastructure issues logged by the public

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

Number and/or percentage of work orders created from intake system

•

Number of infrastructure issues submitted digitally

•

Percentage of infrastructure projects that were identified by citizens

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

The i-team has heard that people want and need a better way to make their infrastructure priorities and issues heard within the city. An application will allow for another type of system intake and could provide accountability to show that infrastructure issues are being handled. Additionally, it will provide more data to better inform where work is being performed. Finally, it will promote changes that affect everyday life and business within the city.

LOGIC MODEL: Data Management System DESCRIPTION

Within infrastructure departments, give staff the tools to collect information digitally

OBJECTIVE

Increase the amount of data and information that can be analyzed so that planning and execution of infrastructure projects is more efficient and effective

CHALLENGE

City roads are in poor condition. Emergency water system repairs are straining the city.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

Planned infrastructure repairs are oftentimes selected based upon complaints and observations rather than data. Departments heavily on paper data collection techniques, which makes assessment and planning difficult.

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • • • •

Tablets or iPads Work order form or application Database system Internal database champions Training

ACTIVITIES •

• • • • •

Identify the type of technology to use (both tablets and programs) Identify staff to pilot new data collection procedures Train staff to use new technology Use technology in the field Ensure that data is properly collected and placed in databases Get help and buy-in from outside stakeholders (university students/researchers, CfA)

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) •

Number of work orders logged into the database system

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

The amount of information that is available to be used for infrastructure planning purposes (number of variables, number of datasets)

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

Due to a lack of data infrastructure the city does not make entirely informed decisions about prioritizing projects. This will allow departments to better determine where improvements should be made. Additionally, it will allow for workers in the field to have access to data which can help inform emergency repairs, and procedures that will save time, and potentially reduce the negative affect that infrastructure repairs have on the general public.

Appendix D

LOGIC MODEL: Predictive Technologies DESCRIPTION

Use technology to identify deficiencies in infrastructure systems

OBJECTIVE

Increase the amount of information and data available about the condition of infrastructure systems

CHALLENGE

City roads are in poor condition. Emergency water system repairs are straining the city.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

The city does not take a proactive approach to improving its water infrastructure, and there is no water system improvement plan in place. The water department has not adopted the latest water infrastructure technologies to help identify priority areas. Planned infrastructure repairs are oftentimes selected based upon complaints and observations rather than data. The city has not invested in new technologies for infrastructure advancement.

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • • • •

• •

Funding for research on appropriate technologies Funding to purchase technologies Staff to use technologies Training to use technologies Data infrastructure system to monitor and record technology outputs Asset inventory Digital management system

ACTIVITIES • • • • • •

•

Research potential technologies Purchase technology Train people to use the technology Build a system to collect data elicited from the technologies Analyze data from technologies Use data to advise decision making process and feed into an asset management system Evaluate the quality of the data produced from the technologies

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) •

Number of detected problems in the infrastructure systems such as leaks, corrosion, road scores, potholes

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) • •

Scores for the condition of the infrastructure systems Percentage of infrastructure systems analyzed by predictive technologies

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

Predictive technologies will allow for improved assessment of infrastructure systems, which would help departments to better prioritize and select areas for planned improvements. These technologies would help the city to plan projects where they will have the biggest impact, and positive effect on the city.

LOGIC MODEL: Asset Management Systems DESCRIPTION

Program to evaluate different infrastructure systems based upon condition and the potential impact of a failure/improvement on the community

OBJECTIVE

Prioritize the work on infrastructure systems and undertake construction projects that will have the most impact

CHALLENGE

City roads are in poor condition. Emergency water system repairs are straining the city. The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

There is no water system improvement plan in place. Planned infrastructure repairs are often selected based upon complaints and observations rather than data. Infrastructure systems are old and in a state of disrepair. It is unclear if certain infrastructure investments will make substantive improvements to the city and economy.

RESOURCES REQUIRED •

•

• • •

Classes and learning opportunities to educate city employees about data systems and GIS Integrated GIS system that is used in all infrastructure departments Inventory of infrastructure systems and their characteristics Overall data audit of things related to infrastructure systems (traffic counts, soil composition, etc.) Funding to create data systems and update GIS Internal champions An employee to act as a coordinator

ACTIVITIES • • • •

•

• •

Audit of current data collection Digitize historic data records Electronically record new data records Review the performance of infrastructure s systems based upon data and different variables Develop dashboards to monitor infrastructure performance Update and integrate GIS system Evaluate infrastructure systems based upon multiple variables

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) • • • •

Road ratings Water system ratings Sewer system ratings Eventually ratings of other systems as well (street lights, sidewalks, etc.)

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

•

Number and/or percentage of projects that are taken on because of the ratings system Number and/or percentage of poorly rated areas or systems that are repaired

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

An asset management system will allow the city to better prioritize its planned infrastructure projects, and also determine where it can elicit the biggest positive impact. Additionally, it will help to anticipate where problems may exist so that they can be addressed before an emergency occurs

Appendix D LOGIC MODEL: Construction Coordination System DESCRIPTION

GIS based interface that allows infrastructure stakeholders to plan and coordinate work

OBJECTIVE

Increase the number of coordinated infrastructure projects, and better leverage money for infrastructure projects

CHALLENGE

City roads are in poor condition. Emergency water system repairs are straining the city. The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • • • •

GIS system Asset management system An employee to act as a coordinator Funding to build or purchase a system List of all planned projects for 3 – 5 years out

ACTIVITIES • •

•

Departments and utilities log planned projects in system Coordinator identifies potential areas for collaboration or conflict Departments and coordinator work together to find overlap and adjust project timelines as necessary

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) •

Number of projects logged in system

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) • • •

Number of coordinated projects Number of project timelines moved to foster collaboration Number of additional infrastructure projects undertaken through savings leveraged by construction coordination

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

A construction coordination system will allow departments, utilities, and other entities to better plan their projects. This would make more money available for projects by “cost sharing”. It would also improve the condition of infrastructure systems by reducing the number of road cuts. Finally coordinating projects, will limit the amount of disruption that the general public experiences for infrastructure projects.

LOGIC MODEL: Leverage Private Projects DESCRIPTION

Create a program that gives developers and anchor institutions materials to make infrastructure improvements and allow them to make the improvements themselves

OBJECTIVE

Increase the number of infrastructure improvements made throughout Syracuse by entities partnering with the city

CHALLENGE

City roads are in poor condition. Emergency water system repairs are straining the city. The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

Water projects, road repairs, and sewer repairs are not planned to coincide with other street-level development or reconstruction efforts. Departments do not always coordinate and prioritize their projects to create a large effect within the community. The budget for infrastructure improvements has decreased in recent years. Leaders fear a loss of political capital if they support projects that don’t have an immediate pay-off. It is unclear as to whether there is a high demand for certain infrastructure improvements. Current infrastructure does not allow businesses and properties to thrive.

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • • • • •

Construction coordination system An employee to act as a coordinator Permits employee Funding to purchase materials City inspector to ensure that standards were adhered to Project management system

ACTIVITIES • •

• •

• • •

Map planned projects Coordinate discussions between developer/institution and city Provide materials to entity making improvements Coordinate construction with proper project management techniques Allow private entity to complete construction Inspect project upon completion Communicate openly throughout the process

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) •

Percentage of development projects that utilize this program

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

•

Number of new infrastructure components installed in Syracuse Money saved by leveraging projects

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

The city can only afford to take on a few infrastructure improvement projects a year. This program will allow private entities to make improvements to the infrastructure systems that affect them. It will encourage updates to be made, without requiring the city to make them on its own. It will lead to more infrastructure improvement projects and, save the city money, and allow they city to allocate its resources elsewhere.

Appendix D

LOGIC MODEL: Construction Notification System DESCRIPTION

Create a construction and work notification system that provides the public with information about both planned and emergency infrastructure projects.

OBJECTIVE CHALLENGE

Increase the number of methods used to notify people of construction projects and increase the public’s awareness of construction projects The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

Businesses have limited capacities and cannot reach their full potential, especially when infrastructure repairs are not properly communicated, so that people can appropriately plan for construction.

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • •

• • •

Person to manage and oversee the system Construction notification system Employees to personally alert properties/people directly affected by construction Fliers Relationships with media Funds to implement a system

ACTIVITIES •

• •

•

Build a construction notification system or create a list of planned infrastructure projects Populate a webpage with a list of planned projects Report to media, property owners, businesses, and public about planned construction work Provide personal notification to people and properties within a given radius of planned work

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) •

•

Number of methods used to notify people of construction projects Number of construction projects publically posted

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

•

Number of people that access online construction information Number and/or percentage of calls and complaints made to inquire about construction

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

Construction impacts and disrupts people’s lives. By information people, businesses, and property owners about construction, they can appropriately plan and reduce the negative effect that construction has on them.

LOGIC MODEL: Dig Once Initiative DESCRIPTION

A mayoral mandate in which infrastructure projects are coordinated, data driven, and planned collectively wherever possible

OBJECTIVE

Decrease the number of times that a road is reopened within five years of it being improved

CHALLENGE

City roads are in poor condition. Emergency water system repairs are straining the city. The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • • • • • • •

Digital management system Asset management system Construction coordination system Project management system An employee to act as a Coordinator Funding for infrastructure projects Construction equipment Construction notification system

ACTIVITIES • •

• •

• • • • • • •

Identify funding sources Communicate and coordinate between utilities, departments, and other entities Prioritize and select projects Communication project timelines and work to general public, businesses, and property owners Repair and/or replacing utilities Scheduling the project components Managing project Reconstruction Planning potential road redesign Tracking project costs Project budgeting

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) • •

Number of coordinated projects Number of entities that participated in reconstruction projects

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

Number of times that a road is reopened within five years of being repaved or reconstructed

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

Non-coordinated projects and cuts into a road lead to poor road conditions and missed opportunities to repair undergrounds infrastructure systems. Instituting a dig once strategy will improve the condition and increase the longevity of infrastructure.

Appendix D LOGIC MODEL: Open Data Initiative DESCRIPTION

Make specific city datasets publicly available

OBJECTIVE

Increase the transparency of the condition of the city’s infrastructure systems

CHALLENGE

City roads are in poor condition.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

Roads are not assessed using a completely standardized tool, and road repair priorities are oftentimes influenced by political pressure and complaints rather than more pertinent data.

RESOURCES REQUIRED •

• • •

A digital management system which digitizes infrastructure information Electronic reporting procedures An employee to clean and coordinate datasets Marketing campaign to encourage the use of the open data system

ACTIVITIES • •

•

• • •

Complete an audit of what datasets are available Coordinate with data users throughout the city Identify and open data platform Determine system procedures such as how often the data is updated Make open data portal live Run marketing campaign Track the usage of open data

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) •

Number of datasets available to the public

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) • • •

Number of dataset downloads Number of people that have automatic access to city data Projects completed by outside stakeholders using open datasets

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

Now constituents don’t have information about infrastructure systems and construction decision making process readily available. An open data system will provide the public with this information and could also influence the way roads are selected for reconstruction, by holding departments accountable for their decision making process.

LOGIC MODEL: Preventative Maintenance Initiative DESCRIPTION

Emphasize the early rehabilitation of infrastructure systems to fix deficiencies as soon as they arise

OBJECTIVE

Prioritize repairs in infrastructure that is rated in “good” condition

CHALLENGE

City roads are in poor condition. Emergency water system repairs are straining the city.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

Financial resources are not allocated to make preventative maintenance infrastructure improvements. Infrastructure is old and oftentimes in a state of disrepair. Many potential infrastructure investments have a high initial cost with delayed returns. The city does not take a proactive approach to improving and repairing its infrastructure. Much of the city’s budget is allocated towards reactive infrastructure projects.

RESOURCES REQUIRED •

• • •

Staff that is either hired or redirected from other responsibilities and tasks Training to learn how to operate equipment and make repairs Device and/or application to track work Technology and system to identify where problem areas are located and where work should occur Money for implementation and salaries Materials and machines to make repairs System to geolocate problems

ACTIVITIES •

• • • • •

Identifying deficiencies by sounding water mains, TVing sewers, and using sensors in the road and water systems Compiling lists of daily work Patching potholes and cracks in the road Repairing water mains Repairing sewers Logging where work has been completed and its effectiveness

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) • • •

Number of potholes and cracks filled/fixed Number of water main leaks identified and fixed Number of sewers fixed

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

Average rate of road rating decline.

•

Percentage of repairs in “good” infrastructure

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

By repairing infrastructure systems as soon as they exhibit signs of distress, they city should be able to keep infrastructure systems in “good” condition for longer periods of time which will lead to both improved infrastructure ratings and also increases in money saved.

Appendix D

LOGIC MODEL: Valve Initiative DESCRIPTION

Develop a system to regularly test, add, and replace valves

OBJECTIVE

Decrease the number of people affected by water main breaks by Increasing the number of valves that are exercised each year Emergency water system repairs are straining the city.

CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • • • • •

Employees Training Money to pay staff and purchase valves Automatic valve closure technology and systems Machines to work and exercise valves GIS mapping technology

Valve malfunction leads to water system breaks. During emergency situations, valve malfunction also forces a greater area to be without water. Employees make mistakes while operating valves. There is not enough staff available to regularly exercise valves. ACTIVITIES • • • •

Train staff to property operate valves Test valves Replace valves Document changes in valve system in GIS and data system

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) • •

Number of valves exercised each year Number of valves replaced each year

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

•

Number of people hours without water during system repairs (people affected * hours affected) Number of water main breaks between high and low pressure areas. Percentage of breaks that can be isolated to one block (because valves are properly functioning)

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

When valves are not properly functioning, workers are not able to isolate the impact of water main breaks to one block. Correct valve function will limit the impact that a break has on the city.

•

Improperly functioning valves cause increases in pipe pressure which leads to increased water main breaks. Improving the valves will elicit better pressure levels throughout the water system which will reduce the number of breaks.

LOGIC MODEL: Infrastructure Training Initiative DESCRIPTION

Institute regular training for both technical and business skills to ensure that all workers are competent in their work

OBJECTIVE

Decrease the number of mistakes made in the field by employees

CHALLENGE

City roads are in poor condition. Emergency water system repairs are straining the city.

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

The budgets for infrastructure departments have decreased in recent years, which has led to staffing cuts. Some infrastructure problems occur because of worker error. Proper project management tactics are not always employed when infrastructure repairs are being made.

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • • • •

Training Coordinator Modules and materials Funding for implementation Potential increases in staffing Equipment for training and practice

ACTIVITIES • • • •

Conduct an inventory of current training that is conducted Identify the skills and work for which training is needed Determine how to structure training Conduct training

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) •

Number of training hours

•

Percentage of infrastructure employees who take part in training

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

Number of mistakes on the job

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

Proper training helps to ensure that work is done correctly and allows the city to increase the capacity of infrastructure crews, which will allow more system repairs to be conducted.

Appendix D LOGIC MODEL: Public Awareness Campaign DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVE CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED

RESOURCES REQUIRED • • • •

• •

A budget to develop and execute a campaign Marketing materials Communication strategy Staff to develop marketing materials, research, and recruit companies to locate in Syracuse Incentives to encourage companies to locate to Syracuse Communication training and talking points for all city employees to follow Infrastructure public awareness campaign plan and materials Relationships and partnerships with the media and other entities

Develop a communication strategy around Syracuse’s infrastructure systems which would focus on both the condition of the city’s infrastructure and Syracuse’s underutilized assets. Encourage companies to invest in these assets and locate to Syracuse. Implement and measure a communications strategy to increase the public’s awareness of the condition of infrastructure systems, and increase the amount of attention and funding that the systems receive, and entice companies to locate here because of the resources which would increase the tax base. The City doesn’t coordinate and communicate its infrastructure repair efforts. The city’s infrastructure is old and oftentimes in a state of disrepair, but it has a limited budget to influence it. It is unclear as to whether constituents have a high demand for infrastructure improvement projects and political leaders fear a loss of political capital if they support and invest in projects that the public doesn’t support. Businesses and properties are not able to take full advantage of the resources that exist in the Syracuse area.

ACTIVITIES • • • •

• • •

• • • • • •

Develop public awareness campaign Develop campaign materials Train staff to execute campaign Network with and leverage the media to elicit a larger response to public campaign Launch campaign Evaluate campaign effectiveness Update and build upon campaign as needed Develop a recruitment strategy Research potential companies Court companies Offer and negotiate deals with companies Identify potential company sites and locations Help to identify and cultivate other relationships and opportunities for the companies to use

OUTPUT MEASURE(S) •

•

This will focus on the breadth of the campaign outreach by measuring how many ways the message is pushed out, and the number of people that the campaign reaches. Number of companies recruited

OUTCOME MEASURE(S) •

•

• • •

This will focus on the reception of the message by measuring the impact that it has on the public. One example will be the number of infrastructure related constituent complaints that come in. Another example will be the number of new infrastructure related projects that are undertaken. Number of companies that locate to city that are new to Syracuse Number of new jobs created Increase in the tax base Number of private infrastructure projects that are leveraged because of these relationships

IMPACT ON CHALLENGE TARGET •

•

By increasing the public’s awareness of the state of Syracuse’s infrastructure, the city will be able to better leverage their concerns to institute improvements to infrastructure systems. They city may be able to leverage more public dollars for improvements, and may also encourage more private investment in infrastructure systems. The city’s tax base has been declining since the 1950s because of urban sprawl and business relocation. By bringing businesses back to the city, the number of jobs and the size of the tax base are both increasing. This would mean that more money would be available for infrastructure investment. Additionally, it could leverage more private infrastructure projects within the city proper.

Appendix E

Final Initiative Charters

Charter: Valve Initiative PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: Emergency water system repairs are straining the city.

SPONSOR: Debi Somers, Commissioner of Water

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

The City doesn’t take a proactive approach to improving its water infrastructure. There is no water system improvement plan in place. The water department relies heavily on paper data collection techniques with limited processes to make the data machine-readable. Financial resources are not allocated to make large preventative maintenance infrastructure investments. Water infrastructure is old and reaching the end of its useful life.

OWNER: Henry Rosado, Superintendent of Water

Description Test and exercise the water system valves so that they remain functional for a longer period of time. If a valve proves to be broken, replace it with one that works.

PROJECT MANAGER: Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities • • • •

Identify variables for selecting priority valves Develop plan for initiative implementation Ensure that all technology necessary for initiative implementation is in place Start testing and replacing valves

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

1. 2. 3. 4.

• • • •

Wach’s machine Staff Work orders GIS

Water Superintendent - Henry Rosado GIS Specialist - Joe Zuckerbraun Valve Operators Night Water Crew

Appendix E

Outputs

Targets

• • •

•

Valves tested Valves replaced List and map of infrastructure updates

•

Increase the number of valves exercised by 150% from 1,000 to 2,500 within two years. Decrease the number of parcels affected by a water main break by 50% within three years.

Deliverables

Risks

• • •

•

Map and list of priorities Work orders GPS on Wachs Machine

•

Taking staff away from emergency work to test valves. Lots of valves that need to be replaced will be identified which will prove expensive.

In scope

Out of scope

• • • •

•

Identifying valve priorities Testing valves Reporting test result Replacing valves

Making other water infrastructure repairs

Appendix E

Charter: Water Main Sensors PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: Emergency water system repairs are straining the city.

SPONSOR: Debi Somers, Commissioner of Water

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

The City doesn’t take a proactive approach to improving its water infrastructure. The water department has not adopted the latest water infrastructure technologies. Water infrastructure is old and reaching the end of its useful life.

OWNER: Henry Rosado, Superintendant of Water

PROJECT MANAGER: Adria Finch

Description

Implementation timeline and key activities

Use sensor technology to identify leaks in the neighborhoods that suffer the most from water main breaks.

• • • •

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

•

• • • • • •

• • • •

Funds for investment in leak detection technologies Water sensor network Water valves Water sensor software and dashboard Water main repair materials

Identify sensor companies Pilot sensors Purchase technologies Install final sensors

Water Superintendent - Henry Rosado GIS Specialist - Joe Zuckerbraun Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White Chief Data Officer - Sam Edelstein Water Dispatch Water Repair Crews and Laborers

Appendix E

Outputs

Targets

•

• •

Miles and percentage of water system analyzed with predictive tech Leaks identified Leaks repaired during off-peak hours

•

Deliverables

Risks

•

• • •

• • • • • •

Identify list of companies with sensor technologies Schedule and sign agreements for pilots Evaluate pilots Select and purchase sensors Identify sensor network area Deploy sensors Monitor sensors.

Slow adoption Lack of buy in Constituents say all infrastructure is bad, so why invest in this - or it needs to go everywhere

In scope

Out of scope

• • •

•

Research and select sensors Set up pilots Use technologies to analyze water system

Make sensor information public

Appendix E

Charter: Data Science for Social Good PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: Emergency water system repairs are straining the city.

SPONSOR:

Debi Somers, Commissioner of Water

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

The City doesn’t take a proactive approach to improving its water infrastructure. There is no water system improvement plan in place. The water department has not identified water system priorities.

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNER:

Sam White, Infrastructure Coordinator

Description Work with the University of Chicago’s Data Science for Social Good program to identify the riskiest water mains within the City of Syracuse.

Sam Edelstein, Chief Data Officer

Implementation timeline and key activities • • • • • • • •

Apply to program Enter contract Collect and share water system data with DSSG Visit Chicago Support DSSG Fellows. Recieve risk model from DSSG Use model to inform water infrastructure priorities Update DSSG model annually

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• •

• • •

•

Water system database Assistance from Chief Data Officer and GIS Specialist Funds to travel to Chicago for project kick-off and summer conference

Chief Data Officer - Sam Edelstein GIS Specialist - Joe Zuckerbraun Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White

Appendix E

Outputs

Targets

•

Risk scores for each water main within the City of Syracuse

Use Data Science Project to Identify 75% of Water Department Infrastructure Priorities for 5 year planning.

Deliverables

Risks

• • • • • • •

•

Apply to program Define project scope Execute program agreement Provide DSSG data Kickoff project in Chicago Talk weekly with DSSG fellows Review and obtain control of DSSG model

Too many water main segments will be rated as high priorities, and the City won’t be able to deploy resources.

In scope

Out of scope

• • •

•

Provide DSSG data Review and update DSSG model annually Use risk scores to prioritize water work

Share information with the public in an open data portal

Appendix E

Charter: Preventative Maintenance PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: City roads are in poor condition.

SPONSOR:

Pete O’Connor, Commissioner of DPW

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

Financial resources are not allocated to make preventative maintenance infrastructure improvements. Infrastructure is oftentimes in a state of disrepair. The city does not take a proactive approach to improving and repairing its infrastructure. Much of the city’s budget is allocated towards reactive infrastructure projects. The budget for road reconstruction has fallen in recent years

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNER:

Rich DeMarzo, Superintendent of Street Repair

Description Repair roads proactively, before they develop major deficiencies. In 2016 this will include micropaving and filling potholes. In future years, it could include additional interventions.

Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities • • • • • • •

Prioritize sending out Durapathers to fill potholes Place GPS tracker on Durapatcher Identify funding in existing DPW operating budget for micropaving in 2016 Identify list of roads to be micropaved Micropave streets Identify priority areas for improvements and repairs Identify a way to evaluate micropaving

Appendix E

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• • • • • •

•

Durapatchers GPS unit for Durapatchers GPS unit for hydraulic pump Staff to run Durapatchers $250,000 for micropave pilot Staff to oversee micropave project

• • •

Superintendent of Street Repair - Rich DeMarzo Slurry Crew Leader - Kevin Hunter Durapatcher Crews Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White

Outputs

Targets

• •

•

Slurried roads Filled potholes

•

Increase the number of blocks that undergo resurfacing each year by 40%, from 400 to 560 within three years. Increase the number of recorded potholes filled to 20,000 a year within two years.

Deliverables

Risks

•

• • •

Put GPS tracker on Durapatcher and its hydraulic pump Identify funding for micropaving Enter contract for micropaving Micropave streets

•

Perception of fixing “good” infrastructure over “poor” infrastructure Citizens think micropaving is the same as slurry sealing, and are confused about the assessment structure

In scope

Out of scope

• •

Fill potholes Micropave roads

Pilot other resurfacing techniques Share information on road improvements with the public

Appendix E

Charter: SQUID PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: City roads are in poor condition.

SPONSOR:

Pete O’Connor, Commissioner of DPW

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

Roads are not assessed using a completely standardized tool. The budget for road reconstruction has fallen in recent years. Extreme cold, excessive amounts of snow, and quickly changing temperature damage the roads. Public complaints influence DPW’s road repair priorities, even though the complaints may not be representative of real world conditions.

OWNERS:

Rich DeMarzo, Superintendent of Street Repair

Description

PROJECT MANAGER: Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities

Use a sensor and imaging technology to identify the condition of city roads.

• • • •

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• • • •

• •

$3,000 for SQUID pilot Access to internet SQUID City Vehicle

• • •

Execute agreement for the SQUID Pilot the SQUID Receive SQUID data Evaluate the effectiveness of the SQUID and determine next steps

Argo Labs - Varun Adibhatla Superintendent of Street Repair - Rich DeMarzo DPW Lab Tech - Dale Steele Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White Chief Data Officer - Sam Edelstein

Appendix E

Outputs

Targets

•

• • •

Miles and percentage of road system analyzed with the SQUID Ranking of bumpiest roads Ranking of smoothest roads Pictures of roads

Double the number of roads rated each year, from 200 miles to 400 miles within one year.

Deliverables

Risks

• • •

Ranking of roughest and smoothest roads Map showing bumpiness of roads Photos of City streets

Slow adoption Lack of buy in Liability because the City has data about where the bumpiest roads are located

In scope

Out of scope

• • •

•

Drive City roads for data collection Analyze and obtain the SQUID results Determine how to move forward with the SQUID and Argo Labs

•

Track, record, and utilize variables for public safety purposes Share data on open data portal

Appendix E

Charter: Road Ratings PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: City roads are in poor condition.

SPONSOR:

Pete O’Connor, Commissioner of DPW

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

Political pressure influences road repair priorities. Public complaints influence DPW’s road repair priorities, even though the complaints may not be representative of real world conditions. Financial resources are not allocated to make preventative maintenance infrastructure improvements. The budget for road reconstruction has fallen in recent years.

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNER:

Rich DeMarzo, Superintendent of Street Repair

Description An intern will use more detailed road rating system to examine Syracuse’s roads. These ratings will be input into a computer-based asset management system which will identify interventions that should be conducted on different roads, and will also prioritize road repairs.

Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities • • • • •

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

•

• • •

$50 for Cornell Asset Management Software $4,000 for Intern salary Computer for intern Transportation for intern

•

CAMP Intern - Omkar Mohitepatil DPW Lab Tech - Dale Steele Superintendent of Street Repair - Rich DeMarzo Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White

Appendix E

Outputs

Targets

•

Ratings for: • Longitudinal and transverse cracking • Alligator cracking • Edge cracking • Patching • Potholes • Rutting • Bleeding • Roughness List and ranking of road repair priorities

Log 33%, or approximately 140 miles, of Syracuse’s roads into an asset management system within two years.

Deliverables

Risks

• • • • •

•

• • •

Apply to and be accepted to the CAMP Advertise Internship Conduct Interviews Hire Intern Send Intern and DPW Employee to Training Start Evaluation of Roads Review Final Report from Intern Use the CAMP findings for five-year planning

• •

The intern won’t be able to evaluate the entire city. The intern will need to travel to different areas of the City and doesn’t have a vehicle. The intern is somewhat inexperienced in rating roads.

In scope

Out of scope

• • •

•

Review roads Data entry into software Develop recommendations for road recon priorities

•

Share information with the public in an open data portal Use data and information for five-year planning

Appendix E

Charter: Medallions PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: The City’s roads are in

poor condition. The City doesn’t coordinate and appropriately communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

SPONSOR:

Sam White, Infrastructure Coordinator

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

The budget for road reconstruction has fallen in recent years Departmental silos prohibit the sharing of information about specific departmental projects and priorities Departments don’t undertake a detailed infrastructure improvement planning process Departments don’t have similar priorities Entities don’t share a vision for City infrastructure and work together to improve it.

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNER:

Rich DeMarzo, Superintendent of Street Repair

Description Medallions will be placed in road cuts so that the City can better monitor who is cutting into their road, and the quality of the road repair.

Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities • • • • •

Determine how many medallions are needed for pilot (August - December 2016) Order medallions Develop installation instructions Have entities start placing medallions in cuts Receive weekly reports about where the medallions were placed that week

100

Appendix E

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• • •

• •

Funding for medallions Crews trained to place medallions List of medallion locations

• • • • •

Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White Superintendent of Street Repair - Rich DeMarzo Water Superintendent - Henry Rosado National Grid Representative - Chris Gorman Superintendent of Sewers - Mark Ziolko Ballard Construction Representative Scott Thayer Permits Information Aide - Tiarah Tanyhill

Outputs

Targets

•

List of medallions placed in road cuts

Ensure that 100% of all road cuts have medallions and meet repair standards within three years.

Deliverables

Risks

• • •

• • • • •

• •

Determine number of medallions to order Order medallions Develop guidelines for medallion placement Develop plan for medallion program evaluation Develop plan for list of road cuts with medallions

Lack of buy-in Entities simply won’t use medallions Medallions will pop out Medallions won’t survive winter Entities won’t report where they have placed medallions

In scope

Out of scope

• •

•

Place medallions Evaluate success of medallion program

Publically share medallion and road cut locations

Appendix E

101

Charter: Road Cut Moratoriums PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: The City’s roads are in

poor condition. The City doesn’t coordinate and appropriately communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

SPONSOR:

Pete O’Connor, Commissioner of DPW

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

Road repairs are not planned to coincide with other street-level development or reconstruction efforts. Financial resources are not allocated to make preventative maintenance infrastructure improvements. Infrastructure is oftentimes in a state of disrepair. The city does not take a proactive approach to improving and repairing its infrastructure. Entities don’t share a vision for City infrastructure and work together to improve it. Departments don’t undertake a detailed infrastructure improvement planning process. Cuts into the road increase the rate of road degradation.

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNER:

Sam White, Infrastructure Coordinator

Description The City will prohibit entities from cutting into the road five years after it has been repaved and seven years after it has been reconstructed. Additionally, a winter moratorium prohibits non-emergency cuts in the winter months.

Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities • • • • • •

Research practices in other cities Discuss logistics with the Law Department Draw up legislation Common Council pass legislation Develop steps to check for moratorium violations Enforce legislation

102

Appendix E

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• •

• • •

GIS and permit software Staff to identify violations

Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White Permits Information Aide - Tiarah Tanyhill Commissioner of DPW - Pete O’Connor

Outputs

Targets

• •

•

List of road cut permits List of roads repaved and reconstructed

Decrease the percentage of roads reopened within five years of being repaved from 40% to 10% within three

Deliverables

Risks

• • • •

•

Develop legislation Pass legislation Create map layers Develop system to check for moratorium violations

•

Entities may skip the permitting process (like the county) Initiative may prohibit or discourage development

In scope

Out of scope

•

Evaluate permits for moratorium violations

•

Track the number of times City departments cut into recently paved roads Make permit and moratorium violations information available through open data

Appendix E

103

Charter: Five Year Planning PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: The City doesn’t coordinate and appropriately communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

SPONSOR:

Mary Robison, City Engineer

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNER:

Sam White, Infrastructure Coordinator

Description Work with departments to identify planned and priority projects for the next five years, then select and schedule projects to reduce infrastructure conflicts and promote infrastructure collaboration.

Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities • • • • • • • • • •

Request five-year plans and priorities from all city operating departments Map five-year plans in Esri Map riskiest water mains in Esri Review plans and priorities and ensure that important infrastructure was not overlooked Develop plan for upcoming construction season Prioritize other infrastructure repairs for future years Compare plan to private utilities’ plans. Review plan with departments, budget, Mayor Review plan with private utilities Develop construction timeline

104

Appendix E

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• • • •

• • •

•

Infrastructure Coordinator Asset management systems Esri List of planned projects from infrastructure departments, partners, and utilities List of priority projects from departments, partners, and utilities

• • • •

Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White Permits Information Aide - Tiarah Tanyhill Superintendent of Street Repair - Rich DeMarzo Water Superintendent - Henry Rosado Superintendent of Sewers - Mark Ziolko City Engineer - Mary Robison National Grid Representative - Chris Gorman

Outputs

Targets

• •

•

Number of coordinated projects Number of project timelines moved to foster collaboration Lane miles of additional infrastructure projects undertaken through savings leveraged by construction coordination

•

Deliverables

Risks

•

• •

List of departmental and utility planned projects and priorities List conflicts and opportunities Five year construction plans

•

Projects might be difficult to align Utility companies may not provide information in timely fashion Departments may not submit enough priority projects

In scope

Out of scope

• • •

• •

Map projects Identify conflicts and opportunities Develop five-year construction plans

Planning detours Notifying constituents about planned construction projects

Appendix E

105

Charter: Construction Coordination PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: The City doesn’t coordinate and appropriately communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

SPONSOR:

Rich DeMarzo, Superintendent of Street Repair

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

Water projects, road repairs, and sewer repairs are not planned to coincide with other streetlevel development or reconstruction efforts. Departments do not always coordinate and prioritize their projects to create a large effect within the community. The budget for infrastructure improvements has decreased in recent years. Infrastructure is old and oftentimes in a state of disrepair. Departmental silos prohibit the sharing of information about specific departmental projects and priorities. Cuts into the road increase the rate of road degradation.

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNER:

Sam White, Infrastructure Coordinator

Description Inspect and if necessary repair all underground infrastructure prior to a road being repaved or reconstructed.

Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities • • • • • • • • • •

106

Appendix E

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• •

Infrastructure Coordinator List of roads to be milled and paved or reconstructed Sign-off sheet for planned construction projects Anticipated start dates of construction projects

• • •

Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White Superintendent of Street Repair - Rich DeMarzo Water Superintendent - Henry Rosado Superintendent of Sewers - Mark Ziolko National Grid Representative - Chris Gorman

Outputs

Targets

•

• • • • •

Number of hydrants inspected on roads to be repaved Number of water cuts inspected on roads to be repaved Number of valves inspected on roads to be repaved Number of water mains sounded on roads to be repaved Number of sewers TVed on roads to be repaved Number of gas mains inspected on roads to be repaved

• • • • •

Deliverables

Risks

Develop List of roads to be milled and paved or reconstructed; Develop sign-off sheet; Ensure that departments are inspecting and signing off on underground infrastructure; Mill road; Repair underground infrastructure if necessary; Repave or reconstruct road.

•

In scope

Out of scope

• • • •

• •

Inspect underground infrastructure Repair underground infrastructure Mill road Repave or reconstruct road

• •

Departments may sign-off without actually inspecting the infrastructure Infrastructure repair plans might change Lack of staffing to complete infrastructure inspections

Planning detours Notifying constituents about planned construction projects

Appendix E

107

Charter: Dig Once PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: The City doesn’t

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

coordinate and appropriately communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

SPONSOR:

Mary Robison, City Engineer

Water projects, road repairs, and sewer repairs are not planned to coincide with other streetlevel development or reconstruction efforts. Departments do not always coordinate and prioritize their projects to create a large effect within the community. Cuts into the road increase the rate of road degradation. Departmental silos prohibit the sharing of information about specific departmental projects and priorities. Infrastructure is old and oftentimes in a state of disrepair.

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNER:

Sam White, Infrastructure Coordinator

Description

Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities

Infrastructure improvement projects will be identified in which all infrastructure needs to be repaired or replaced. The Infrastructure Coordinator will work to advance these projects.

• •

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• • • • •

Five-year construction plan Grant and funding information Funds for project Council approval Project site plans

• •

Complete five-year planning process Identify areas where all infrastructure systems are in poor condition Select Dig Once Projects Advance Dig Once Projects through the funding, budgeting, legislative, design, and execution phases

Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White City Engineer - Mary Robison Budget Director - Mary Vossler Director of Research - Janet Burke Superintendent of Street Repair - Rich DeMarzo Water Superintendent - Henry Rosado Superintendent of Sewers - Mark Ziolko

108

Appendix E

Outputs

Targets

•

List of potential Dig Once Projects

Increase the number of “Dig Once” projects a year from one project a year to four projects a year within two years.

Deliverables

Risks

• • • •

• •

• • • •

Identify Dig Once project sites Develop project specs Open project bidding process Identify potential funding sources and apply for grants Bond for project Get Council to authorize the project Select firm/person to manage project Perform construction

•

Lack of buy in from internal stakeholders Not enough capital to invest in large project Other priorities take over this work

In scope

Out of scope

• • • • •

•

Evaluate infrastructure systems Select and plan for infrastructure projects Identify funding options Put project out to bid Complete legislation requests

Plan detours

Appendix E

109

Charter: Construction Notification PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: The City doesn’t coordinate and appropriately communicate its infrastructure repair efforts. SPONSOR:

Sam White, Infrastructure Coordinator

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

Constituents feel like they don’t know about City construction projects.

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNERS:

Chol Majok, Director of Constituent Services Alex Marion, Press Secretary Tiarah Tanyhill, Permits Information Aid ToKay Golden, Public Program Supervisor

Description Develop and utilize multiple channels to inform constituents about construction projects. This will include: • Notification prior to construction season. • Notification immediately before construction begins. • Social media alerts. • Press releases. • Web Page with list and map of construction projects.

Adria Finch

Implementation timeline and key activities • • • • • • • • • • •

Develop Cityline web page and construction notification map Develop plan to update map Create Cityline Twitter page Develop Cityline Twitter guidelines Manage Cityline Twitter account Develop list of construction projects for upcoming construction year Design construction notification postcard. Distribute construction notification postcard in January or February Update the design and content of the construction door hangers Hang door hangers and no parking signs Develop protocol for weekly construction press releases

110

Appendix E

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• • •

• • • • • • •

List of planned projects Cityline web page Person to update Cityline web page and map Twitter handle Twitter guidebook Person to update and manage Twitter Postcard design Funds for printing and mailing postcard Door hanger design Funds for printing door hanger

• •

Infrastructure Coordinator - Sam White Tiarah Tanyhill - Permits Information Aid Chol Majok - Director of Constituent Services Alex Marion - Press Secretary ToKay Golden - Public Program Supervisor

Outputs

Targets

• • •

•

List of construction projects Number of people notified via postcard Number of people who access Cityline webpage Number of tweets sent and received

•

Deliverables

Risks

•

• •

• • • • •

Develop a list of planned projects and their attributes Design website Develop plan to manage construction project information Create postcard and door hanger templates Print and distribute postcards and door hangers Develop social media and press release strategy

Construction projects may change Mistakes may be made when distributing door hangers

In scope

Out of scope

• •

•

Adjust project timelines as needed Market system to the public

Move projects based upon constituent input

Appendix E

111

Charter: Citizen Reporting PRIORITY: Infrastructure CHALLENGE: The City doesn’t coordinate and appropriately communicate its infrastructure repair efforts.

SPONSOR:

Pete O’Connor, Commissioner of DPW

CONTRIBUTING ISSUES ADDRESSED:

The city does not fully understand the infrastructure needs of its constituents and local businesses. Constituents find it difficult to submit infrastructure repair requests.

PROJECT MANAGER:

OWNER:

Adria Finch

ToKay Golden, Public Program Supervisor

Description

Implementation timeline and key activities

Develop or adopt a digital platform that allows constituents to submit infrastructure issues, and track the status of their submissions.

• • • •

Budget and resources required

Core people involved

• •

•

Domain name Web page

•

Build Cityline web page Make Cityline web page live Monitor usage of Cityline web page Market Cityline web page

ToKay Golden - Public Program Supervisor Chol Majok - Director of Constituent Services

Outputs

Targets

•

• •

Number/percentage of issues submitted through platform Time from when complaint is submitted to when it is addressed Number/percentage of constituents that can view the status of their issue

•

112

Appendix E

Deliverables

Risks

• •

Design Cityline webpage Track usage of Cityline webpage

Internal buy-in Administrative and tech delays

In scope

Out of scope

• • •

•

Design webpage Promote and market webpage Training of city line and dispatch employees

Share information with the public in an open data portal

Appendix F Stocktake Presentation

113

114

Appendix F

115

116

Appendix F

117

118

Appendix F

119

120

Appendix F

Appendix G Glossary Bloomberg Philanthropies - Encompasses all of the charitable giving for founder Michael R. Bloomberg. Headquartered in New York City, Bloomberg Philanthropies focuses its resources on five areas: the environment, public health, the arts, government innovation and education. Cornell Asset Management Program (CAMP) - Summer intern project that helps to implement a pavement management system for a Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s highway network. A college student, mentored by a municipal employee, collects pavement inventory and condition data, and creates a five-year maintenance plan for your municipality using the Cornell Asset Management Program-Roads and Streets (CAMP-RS) software. Challenge - A statement of a specific challenge that the city faces within the priority area. Construction Season - A period of months that construction projects are carried out within. For Syracuse, the construction season runs from May to October. Contributing Issues - A list of problems/issues identified to cause or contribute to each specific challenge. Data Science for Social Good Fellowship (DSSG) - University of Chicago summer program to train aspiring data scientists to work on data mining, machine learning, big data, and data science projects with social impact. Working closely with governments and nonprofits, fellows take on real-world problems in education, health, energy, public safety, transportation, economic development, international development, and more. Department of Engineering - The Engineering Department provides engineering services and support for all City departments. The Department reviews and approves private projects that are on or related to City-owned property, assists City Officials with the planning, review, and implementation of City projects and private ventures that require City of Syracuse involvement. Department of Public Works (DPW) - The Department of Public Works serves as the backbone of the city. It plows the streets, picks up the trash, maintains the sewers, keeps traffic flowing, maintains City parks, maintains City streets, and issues handicap parking permits. Durapatcher - Machine used to make road repairs for patching and filling potholes. Implementation Plan - Set of steps that need to be taken to put an initiative into place. Infrastructure - The basic physical and organizational structures and facilities (e.g., buildings, roads, and power supplies) needed for the operation of a society or enterprise. Infrastructure Coordinator - A new position; the Infrastructure Coordinator oversees and assists in all infrastructurerelated planning and coordination efforts between City departments. Initiative - A new policy or plan of action created to address challenges and contributing issues identified within each priority area. Innitiative Charter - Documentation of the purpose, goals, targets, and key tasks associated with each initiative. Innovation Delivery Approach - A series of steps that, from start to finish, chart a proven method for tackling difficult problems at the city level. The steps are: Investigate the problem, Generate new ideas, Prepare to deliver, and Deliver and adapt. The Innovation Delivery Approach emphasizes data, analysis, management, and partnerships, and it focuses on one defined priority area for approximately one year.

121

122

Appendix G Logic Model - A tool that lays out the reasoning that underlies and justifies a specific initiative, explicitly connecting the initiative to its desired impact on the challenge target. Machine Learning Model - Subfield of computer science that “gives computers the ability to learn without being explicitly programmed.” Within the field of data analytics, machine learning is a method used to devise complex models and algorithms that lend themselves to prediction; in commercial use, this is known as predictive analytics. These analytical models allow researchers, data scientists, engineers, and analysts to “produce reliable, repeatable decisions and results” and uncover “hidden insights” through learning from historical relationships and trends in the data. Medallion - A small, color-coded circle placed in every road cut to identify the department or contractor that made and repaired the cut. Micropave - A heavy-duty, Asphalt Emulsion (water based) sealcoating specifically designed to protect and beautify asphalt pavements. Mill and Pave - Pavement milling (cold planing, asphalt milling, or profiling) is the process of removing at least part of the surface of a paved area such as a road, bridge, or parking lot to repave it. Milling removes anywhere from just enough thickness to level and smooth the surface to a full depth removal. Moratorium - A temporary prohibition of an activity. Preventativie Maintenance - Activities performed to extend the life of the road pavement, ranging from simple cleaning or restriping up to fixing severe distresses like potholes and washouts. Priority Area - The area of focus for the i-team. These can be determined by multiple stakeholders, including the Mayor, and are typically one of the city’s largest or most complex challenges that is not well addressed in day-today activities. Risk Score - Score given to each individual water main by the DSSG fellows indicating its risk to break within the next three years based on historical data. Road Cut - The opening and repaving of a section of road to make repairs to underground infrastructure such as water and sewer lines, gas, electric or cable. Road Rating - A score given to each individual section of road indicating the quality of the road, including roughness, potholes, and cracking, among other things. Road Reconstruction - A process of rebuilding a road that includes excavating the entire roadway including asphalt and rock, placing and compacting rock underneath the roadway, placing and compacting Hot Mix Asphalt, and completing restoration of adjacent properties. Sewer TVing - Process of inspecting a sewer line to determine structural condition. Slurry Seal - Acts as a wearing surface and seals the existing asphalt surface, and is usually placed in a thickness of less than 1 inch and can be used on streets where the traffic volume is light, but doesn’t hold up as well on the heavier traffic volume streets. Street Quality Identification Device (SQUID) - A low-cost sensor platform that collects and analyzes data through street surface imagery.

Appendix G Metric Targets - Challenge and initiative level goals that can be measured and monitored to track initiative progress. Water Department (Water) - The Syracuse Water Department is responsible for constructing, maintaining and operating all necessary and desirable facilities for the supply and distribution of a safe, potable water supply for the City of Syracuse. Water Main - A principal pipe in a system of pipes for conveying water, especially one installed underground. Water Main Break - When a principal pipe in the water system breaks, causing water to gush out. If located underground, breaks can cause road and sidewalk damage and flooding. Water Main Leak - When a principal pipe in the water system is leaking small amounts of water. Leaks can often lead to breaks if not addressed. Water Main Sensors - Sensors that detect acoustic waves transmitted through the pipes. These waves identify water main leaks and their locations before they become debilitating breaks. Water Main Sounding - Process of inspecting a water line to determine structural condition and check for possible leaks. Water Main Valve - A control valve located immediately downstream of the water meter, used to turn off/on all water flow to a property or section of the water system.

123

124

Appendix H List of Tables and Figures Table 1.1: Challenges and Contributing Issues - pg. 23 Table 1.2: Metrics and Targets - pg. 25 Table 3.1: Emerging Ideas and scores - pg. 33 Table 3.2: Potential Initiatives - pg. 34 Figure 1.1: Water Main Break Distribution Heat Map - pg. 20 Figure 1.2: Water Main Breaks/Leaks per Year - pg. 20 Figure 1.3: Road Ratings by Year - pg. 22 Figure 1.4: Percent of Roads by Rating - pg. 22 Figure 2.1: Ideation Party Departments - pg. 29 Figure 3.1: Initiative Flow Chart - pg. 38 Figure 3.2: Feasibility-Impact Chart - pg. 39 Figure 4.1: Water Main Breaks/Leaks per Year - pg. 43 Figure 4.2: Water Main Break Distribution Heat Map - pg. 45 Figure 4.3: DSSG Model - pg. 46 Figure 4.4: Cumulative Water Main Breaks/Leaks - pg. 46 Figure 4.5: Road Ratings by Year - pg. 47 Figure 4.6: Percent of Roads by Rating - pg. 47 Figure 4.7: Potholes Filled Locations - pg. 48 Figure 4.8: Cumulative Potholes Filled - pg. 48 Figure 4.9 SQUID Road Data Map - pg. 49 Figure 4.10 CAMP Rating System - pg. 50 Figure 4.11: Road Cut Medallion Photo (Wide) - pg. 52 Figure 4.12: Road Cut Medallion Photo (Close) - pg. 52 Figure 4.13: Road Cut Photo - pg. 53 Figure 4.14: 5-Year Planning Map - pg. 54 Figure 4.15: Screenshot of Planned Construction Work Map on Cityline - pg. 59 Figure 4.16: Cityline Online Requests per Hour - pg. 61 Figure 4.17: Cityline Online Requests by Type - pg. 61

125

The End