In Borough of Ebensburg v. Prevailing Wage Appeals Board, 893 A.2d 181 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006), the Courts held that the Act applied to the work respectively at issue therein, and upon which precedents the Board relied in its conclusions. In Ebensburg, the Court rejected an argument that concrete sidewalk and curb replacement should be found to be exempt from the Act as maintenance. Therein, the Borough of Ebensburg planned to replace deteriorated sidewalks and curbs with in-kind replacements, and as such, asserted no change in the size, type or extent of the subject of its project. In Ebensburg, we concluded that the demolition and reconstruction of curbs and sidewalks at issue, which replacement was not significantly different from the facilities replaced, was not maintenance under the Act. In that case, the Court expressly rejected an in-kind replacement goal as insufficient, in part, as a basis to conclude that the work was mere maintenance. Ebensburg, 893 A.2d at 184-185.