What is your basis for saying 10% is too low?

I'm not suggesting that you are wrong, I just want to figure out how you would determine if the spend is too high or too low for any given town.

the potholes continued existence is probably an aspect

The delayed capital works. If 10% is normal, off the back of the Eisenhower era spend, the JFK spend, the LBJ spend on infrastructure, then capital works budgets have been lick-of-paint since. They're overdue for significant re investment.

The federal capital works improvement spending proposed as recovery intervention identifies 100 major bridges nationally, and another 10,000 worth investing in.[1]

Since then 10% can't stop, the likely spend has to be more. It's that simple.

[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...

Your reply is useless, but I'll rephrase to clarify anyway: how would one determine what percentage is appropriate for planning long term? I.e. so that I don't see potholes in 10 years, would I need 12% or 18% or 44% or <>% ? What factors would this depend on? E.g. is it always above 10% or only if the town has a very low density?