HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 06-26-2018 SpecialCITY OF PLYMOUTH
AGENDA
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 26, 2018, 5:30 p.m.
MEDICINE LAKE CONFERENCE ROOM
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. TOPICS
A. State of the streets
B. Set future Study Sessions
3. ADJOURN
Special Council Meeting 1 of 1 June 26, 2018
rp)City of Agenda 2A
Plymouth Number:
Adding Quality to Life
SPECIAL
COUNCIL MEETING
June 26, 2018
1. ACTION REQUESTED:
To: Dave Callister, City Manager
Prepared by: Jim Renneberg, City Engineer
Reviewed by: Michael Thompson, Director of Public Works
Item: 2018 State of Streets
Discuss the City of Plymouth's pavement management program.
2. BACKGROUND:
Pavement Manaeement Histo
The City's pavement management program began in 1987 with mill and overlay and
street reconstruction projects. In 2005, the "Mix of Fixes" report was presented to the
City Council and at that time the streets had a weighted average PASER rating of 6.6 out
of 10 and the City Council was concerned about funding of more projects. The direction
at that time was reconstruction of more streets and to also phase in mill and overlay
projects to obtain an equivalent PASER rating of 7.0.
In 2010, "Pavement Management 2010 and Beyond" was presented to the City Council.
After tripling funding for street improvement projects from 2005 to 2010, the results
showed that the ratings decreased to 6.0. While significant funding was allocated to
street reconstruction projects, which are high cost investments, minimal money was
spent on mill and overlay projects, which are much less costly per mile.
Recommendations at that time included significantly increasing the amount of mill and
overlay projects and performing fewer reconstruction projects to help move the PASER
rating higher. This approach projected a rating of 7.4 by the end of 2015.
Current Status
An update to the pavement management program was completed in 2016 (attached)
which generally showed the streets in failed, very poor or poor condition decreased
between 2010 and 2016 and the streets in very good to excellent condition increased in
the same years. For comparison purposes the attached photos show pavement
condition just prior to overlay projects in 2011 and 2012, and also this year (2018).
Braun Intertec was consulted in 2018 to analyze Plymouth's street pavement network
including history of past projects, pavement life cycle curves, and pavement
preservation options for example, to ultimately provide recommendations for our
program moving forward.
Page 1
The attached report shows the street ratings have increased since 2010 and reached a
7.4 based on the 2016 street ratings.
The results of this increased rating can be seen by spring pothole patching amounts
(shown below) which generally shows a reduced demand to patch with the increasing
PASER rating values. The report also provides options to preserving and repairing
streets.
1600
1400
1200
t 1000
CL
Q 800
0
Ln
0 600
400
200
N
Spring Pothole Patching
lilt III
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 20
Year
I
15� 2016'x` 2017
*2015 and 2016 amounts are higher than expected due to Schmidt Lk Rd and Fernbrook Ln needing
—C significant patching. These streets could not receive a project until Vicksburg Ln and 1-494 projects
were completed.
Page 2
Historical Plymouth Street Rating
8
7 7.1 7.4
7
6.6 �........•........*
0
ro 6
.............................
•
ao W
6
M 5
ca ra
°C CU 4
aC M
LU
Q +; 3
C1 -
UO
2
3
" 1
0
2004
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
Year
The results of this increased rating can be seen by spring pothole patching amounts
(shown below) which generally shows a reduced demand to patch with the increasing
PASER rating values. The report also provides options to preserving and repairing
streets.
1600
1400
1200
t 1000
CL
Q 800
0
Ln
0 600
400
200
N
Spring Pothole Patching
lilt III
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 20
Year
I
15� 2016'x` 2017
*2015 and 2016 amounts are higher than expected due to Schmidt Lk Rd and Fernbrook Ln needing
—C significant patching. These streets could not receive a project until Vicksburg Ln and 1-494 projects
were completed.
Page 2
The City's current pavement management program has worked as intended in
exceeding the 7.0 PASER rating goal. To continue to ensure the streets are maintained
properly and receive the right treatment at the right time, it is proposed to fine-tune the
program as noted below.
1. Maintain a minimum PASER rating of 7.5.
A proactive pavement management program is desired. With an average PASER
rating of 7.4 in 2016, pothole patching has decreased, therefore, this appears to
be an appropriate minimum street rating to allow for a proactive program.
Also, the City receives very few complaints about current street conditions.
After the streets are rated every two years, a new average PASER rating will be
determined. The upcoming Capital Improvement Program (CIP) may be
adjusted if there is a drop in the ratings.
Develop a long term plan to reconstruct streets without curb and gutter.
The standard for all city streets is to have concrete curb and gutter. An
aggressive plan to achieve this is proposed by 2034, which on average
reconstructs 2.5 miles of streets at a total project cost of $8,382,000 per year. It
is recommended to reconstruct these streets while the average PASER rating is
a 4 to avoid excessive preventative maintenance costs (i.e. pothole patching).
CIP years one and two will be locked in terms of program delivery year however
the out years may be adjusted each year to ensure the worst neighborhoods are
reconstructed first which could also take into account sewer and water pipe
condition and flooding issues for example. However, pavement condition will
continue to be the major driver of program delivery year.
Engineering staff will continue to play a large role in delivering these projects.
With current staffing, the design and construction services will continue by the
Engineering staff for projects up to $5 million. Years where reconstruction
projects are expected to be higher, all or a portion of the project design and/or
construction services are anticipated to be consulted out.
Add Full Depth Reclamation Project (FDR) as a new Pavement Investment
Option in the Toolbox.
As discussed by Braun, FDR's provide a longer service life than a mill and overlay
project, and avoids the reflective cracking seen with mill and overlay projects.
The FDR is cost effective as compared to a street reconstruction project and is
ideal on streets that are in need of more than a mill and overlay, already have
concrete curb and gutter, and do not require major utility excavation work. A
minimum of two years prior to the construction of mill and overlay or FDR
projects, investigative testing as identified by Braun, and a review of the
pavement ratings and historical records shall be completed to assist with project
identification. Two years would allow sufficient time to transition to other
projects that may be more appropriate (i.e. change mill & overlay to an FDR) if
the analysis suggests so.
4. Continue five year CIP for specific overlay and FDR Projects. Years 6-10 would
include funding placeholders for non-specified projects.
Page 3
Since streets deteriorate at different rates, providing a longer plan than five
years for specific street segments can be difficult. Currently, projects in year
five are placeholders and reevaluated two to three years in advance of
construction. This would continue to provide flexibility. It is also recommended
to combine all mill and overlay projects as one project to simplify the project to
the stakeholders and create more economies of scale for the streets in which a
contractor would be utilized.
5. Implement a Fog Seal Program as a new Pavement Preservation Option in the
Toolbox.
Fog seals are meant to protect streets that are in excellent or good condition to
protect the investment. This would be completed in years two or three and
reviewed again between years seven and ten after new construction, street
reconstruction, FDR, and mill and overlays with an engineered section as
determined by staff. It is not proposed to fog seal streets without an
engineered section as it has a lower pavement life cycle.
6. Crack repair streets following all overlays, FDR, reconstruction, and new
construction.
Typically, streets that are overlaid (mill and overlay) will receive crack repair
within 3-5 years after the project while reconstruction, FDR, and new
construction will receive crack repair 10-15 years following a project. These are
guidelines and actual observed conditions will dictate priorities. Crack repair of
low volume roadways will be completed by the City's maintenance staff every
year. A contractor will be utilized to supplement the program and focus crack
repair on higher volume roadways as they are better equipped to perform this
work and perform traffic control. This may be performed every year or every
other year and would be funded from the street maintenance budget which
receives an allocation from Municipal State Aid (gas taxes) for maintenance
purposes.
Attached are photos showing the pavement condition of potential projects.
3. BUDGET IMPACT:
Below are expected cost for the recommended pavement treatment options.
Option
Cost/Mile
(per 28' wide street)
Frequency
Fog Seal
$16,000
—3 and 7-10 years after project
Mill and Overlay
$205,000
10-15 years*
FDR
$500,000
25-30 years*
Reconstruction
$1,560,000
50+ years*
* With appropriate preventative maintenance measures such as crack repair and fog seal
**The actual total project costs are expected to be higher as major utility work is not included
Since 2014, $40.69 million ($8.14 million per year average) has been invested into street
reconstruction projects (including neighborhood and Vicksburg/Peony projects) and $22.3
Page 4
million ($4.46 million per year average) on overlay projects. The proposed 2019-2023 CIP has
included per year averages of $5.38 million for reconstruction, $1.8 million for FDR and $4.3
million for overlays project, which equates to $11.48 million per year. The below charts show
comparisons of the last five years and proposed 5 year CIP for both funding and miles included
with each project.
Project Comparison by Cost
$70.0 $65.0
$60.0 $57.4
V)
$50.0 $40.7
$40.0
$30.0 $26.9 $24.3
$21.5
U $20.0
$9.0
$10.0 $0.0 ■
$0.0
Reconstruction FDR Mill and Overlay Total
Project Type
0 2014-2018 0 2019-2023
*Includes wider, high volume streets such as Vicksburg and Peony lanes
Project Comparison by Mileage
120.0
I I
100.0
80.0
Total
60.0
40.0
20.0
7.1 11.3
M -
0.0
Reconstruction
99.9
90.7
83.6
75.5
0.013.1
I I
I I
.
FDR Mill and Overlay
Total
Project Type
0 2014-2018 ■ 2019-2023
Using the long term reconstruction plan as well as forecasting future FDR, mill and overlay, and
other capital projects, the chart below shows the total proposed work on our street pavements
on both local and state aid streets. Funding for our streets are mainly comprised from the
Street Reconstruction and Municipal State Aid (MSA) Funds. In projecting the proposed street
investment plan through 2034 against incoming revenues the plan is fiscally sound and also
Page 5
$38,000,000
$36,000,000
$34,000,000
$000000
30,000,000
$28,000,000
26,000,000
24,000,000
$000000
20,000,000
$18,000,000
16,000,000
$14,000,000
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
6,000,000
$2,000,0$00
allows for the flexibility of partnering on County and State projects of high priority of the City in
the future.
Total Combined Municipal State Aid and
Street Reconstruction 2008 - 2034
O`b 0°' yo yti yL ti3 yo y0 yro tiA y -b y°' do Lti LrV L'' Lb y0 Lro til L`b
,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,ti0 ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO
Revenues —Expenditures Cash Flow
4. ATTACHMENTS:
Executive Summary
Photos of Streets: Past and Future Pavement Treatment Methods
2016 Mill and Overlay Update Report to City Council
2018 Pavement Management Review & Recommendations Report by Braun Intertec
2016 PASER Ratings Map
Proposed 15 Year Street Reconstruction Map
Proposed 2019-2023 CIP Map (Reconstruction, FDR, Mill & Overlay)
State of Streets Presentation
Page 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The pavement management program in the City of Plymouth is on a successful trajectory. From
2010 to 2016 the average weighted pavement condition rating increased from a 6.0 to a 7.4.
The City needs to continue a proactive approach to maintaining a high pavement rating and
ensuring the selection of the right pavement treatment at the right time.
With a robust internal review with the assistance of Braun Intertec as an independent third
party the City will be fine tuning the pavement management program. Two new pavement
treatment options will be included in the program moving forward including full depth reclaim
(FDR) for pavement replacement and fog seal as a preservation method. These will be in
addition to the current program supplementing crack repair, mill/overlay and reconstruction to
ensure streets maintain a minimum street rating of 7.5. The proposed standard in the City is for
streets to have concrete curb and gutter, therefore, an aggressive long term street
reconstruction program has been developed.
The City's Public Works staff will continue to play an instrumental role in delivering on the
pavement management program promise. The Engineering Division will continue to manage,
design and provide construction services for these projects and the Maintenance Division will
continue to perform and manage preventative maintenance such as the crack repair program.
Many communities issue debt for street improvement projects. Fortunately this is not the case
in Plymouth given its strong financial planning and commitment to invest in a sound
infrastructure system. The City not only has a very positive pavement condition rating but also
will continue to maintain its strong financial position going forward even with the aggressive
investment in street reconstruction over the next 15 years. Revenues exceed proposed
expenditures and Plymouth will continue to remain fiscally sound while maintaining flexibility to
adjust the program and projects as needed.
The "State of the Streets" in Plymouth is strong.
Page 7
Alvarado Lane north of 6ch
Avenue
Overlaid in 2011
Minimal reflective cracking
177
Page 8
Page 9
owl
iliff"W �w
I
rp) City of
Plymouth
Adding Quoiity to Life
To:
SPECIAL
COUNCIL MEETING Prepared by:
Reviewed by:
September 13, 2016
Item:
1. ACTION REQUESTED:
N/A
2. BACKGROUND:
Agenda
Number:
Dave Callister, City Manager
Doran M. Cote, Public Works Director
Update on Mill and Overlay Program
Definitions
Street reconstruction - the complete removal and replacement of the roadway and
subgrade and often includes utility upgrades when needed.
Mill and Overlay - The full width removal of the top 1-1/2" of pavement and installing a
new driving surface.
Temporary overlay— Removing the top 1-1/2" of the outside 6 feet of pavement and
installing a new driving surface over the full width of the roadway. Intended for streets
awaiting complete reconstruction.
Edge Mill and Overlay - Essentially the same as the temporary overlay as defined above
except it is normally performed on roadways that are in better condition than needing
reconstruction.
Mill and Overlay Program
The city has had a Pavement Management Program since 1987 which focused primarily
on what was termed street reconstruction, however, those projects focused mainly on
pavement work and minimal subgrade removal and replacement. True street
reconstruction did not begin until 1998. The city began performing mill and overlay
projects in 2001 but those projects focused primarily on higher volume roadways.
Prior to the current edge mill and overlay program, the city was actively performing
similar projects under the moniker "temporary overlay" after a report entitled "Mix of
Fixes" was presented to the City Council on January 18, 2005 (see attached meeting
minutes). Notable streets that received a "temporary overlay" after that report was
presented included Gleason Lake Drive and Carlson Parkway, 34th Avenue near City
Hall, all of which currently maintain a "good" street rating.
Page 12
The city has been formally engaged in the edge mill and overlay program since 2011
after a report entitled "Pavement Management 2010 and Beyond" was presented to
the City Council on January 18, 2011 (see attached report and meeting minutes). The
attached Street Rating Guide was accepted as the new method of street ratings, the
PASER method, and PASER recommended pavement management strategies.
In 2010, the system -wide average PASER rating was 6.4. Since then nearly 100 miles of
streets have received an edge mill and overlay, mill and overlay (full width milling) or
maintenance overlay that collectively had an average 5.5 PASER rating in 2010 and now
maintain an average PASER rating of 8.2 compared to a system -wide average PASER
rating of 7.6. The system -wide average PASER rating is projected to be 8.0 upon
completion of the 2016 street improvements.
Since 2010, the city has invested $19,000,000 in the edge mill and overlay program and
$1,750,000 in the mill and overlay program (full width milling) which equates to
$210,000 per mile. This investment also represents 55% of the total investment in the
city's street system since 2010 excluding large transportation projects like Peony Lane
and Vicksburg Lane. Street reconstruction and new streets (Dunkirk Lane) comprise the
remaining 45% of the total investment.
Street Reconstruction
Since 2010, the city has also reconstructed 9.8 miles of streets excluding large
transportation projects like Vicksburg Lane. Those streets had an average PASER rating
of 6.9 in 2010 and currently maintain an average PASER rating of 8.5.
The city has invested $15,500,000 in the street reconstruction program which equates
to $1,580,000 per mile or over 7.5 times the cost per mile for mill and overlay projects.
This investment also represents 41% of the total investment in the city's street system
since 2010. The current cost for a street reconstruction project based on the bid prices
on the Ponderosa Ponds street reconstruction excluding the watermain replacement is
over $2,100,000 per mile or 10 times the cost per mile for mill and overlay projects.
If the city was not performing edge mill and overlay and mill and overlay projects since
2010 and only focused on street reconstruction projects it would have cost nearly
$172M to improve the same miles of streets based on the average cost per mile for
street reconstruction over that same period. If the same investment that has been
made in edge mill and overlay and mill and overlay projects since 2010 were spent on
street reconstruction projects an additional 13 miles of street reconstruction could
have been performed and the average system -wide PASER would have gone from 6.4 in
2010 to 6.8.
The city has approximately 35.6 miles of streets that lack curb and gutter and adequate
storm sewer. Most of these streets are located in southwest and southeast Plymouth
and around Medicine Lake. These streets at some point will need to be reconstructed
to current standards and two such neighborhoods are currently included in the
approved Capital Improvement Program. The estimated cost based on the average
cost per mile for street reconstruction since 2010 would be approximately $56,400,000.
Page 13
Using current funding levels in the Capital Improvement Program, it would take roughly
20 years to completely reconstruct all of these streets.
Other Considerations
Low temperature cracking is the most prevalent distress found in asphalt pavements
built in cold weather climates. As the temperature drops the restrained pavement tries
to shrink. The tensile stresses build up to a critical point at which a crack is formed.
Thermal cracks can be initiated by a single low temperature event or by multiple
warming and cooling cycles and then propagated by further low temperatures or traffic
loadings. None of the street projects discussed above are immune to this type of
cracking, however, streets that have been reconstructed typically do not show cracking
as quickly as streets that have received a mill and overlay.
Mill and overlays are commonly applied on existing flexible pavements when pavement
conditions have reached an unacceptable level of service. Overlays are designed to
resist fatigue and/or rutting failure mechanisms; however, overlays may still show
cracking patterns similar to the ones which existed in the old pavement after a short
period of time. This distress is known as reflective cracking. The discontinuities (cracks
or joints) in underlying layers cause reflective cracking, which propagate through the
overlay due to continuous movement at the discontinuity prompted by thermal
expansion and traffic loading. Cracks and joints in the existing pavement often
propagate to the surface within one to five years or as early as few months. Seasonal
temperature variations may also accelerate the reflection cracking process, especially
when dealing with rehabilitated pavements.
Until 2013, the city had a modest annual contracted crack repair program in place. For
the 2013 budget, staff proposed doubling the crack repair program to address the
streets recently paved under the new edge mill and overlay program. However, due to
ongoing contractor performance issues, the crack repair program was suspended and
the budgeted crack repair funds were used for additional edge mill and overlay
projects. Contractor performance issues included failing to route cracks before filling,
failing to blow debris out of the crack before filling, unscheduled work at night and on
weekends when observers were not present and wasting crack repair material where
there were no cracks. Contractor performance on the 2012 contract was so bad that
the contract was terminated.
In 2017, staff is proposing to begin the crack repair program utilizing Street
Maintenance staff. Street crews will perform crack repairs on streets that have gone
through at least two freeze/thaw cycles and would perform the work in the spring and
fall months when pavement is coolest and cracks are widest. Attached is the Plymouth
Crack Repair Guide which details the proposed program. Staff proposes to use the
funding in the 2016 budget for crack sealing to purchase crack repair equipment and
supplies for the program moving forward. There are currently 48 miles of recently
paved streets that meet the criteria for crack repairs. It is estimated that repairing
these streets will take 1-1/2 years.
Page 14
Preventative Maintenance
Under the current mill and overlay program, maintenance crews perform preventative
maintenance activities in mill and overlay programmed areas the year before the
scheduled pavement work. The preventative maintenance activities include gate valve
repairs, replacement and bolt replacement, catch basin repairs, manhole sealing and
curb and gutter repairs. Only the curb and gutter that meets the criteria for
replacement according to the attached Plymouth Concrete Curb and Gutter Rating
Guide is replaced. The costs for preventative maintenance is included in the
maintenance operating budgets and charged back to the projects. The costs of the
various improvements listed above include the preventative maintenance costs as well.
Attached at the end of this report are maps, charts and graphs that depict historic
trends of the city's street projects and conditions since 2010.
3. BUDGET IMPACT:
The 2017-2021 Draft Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes funding for the
following street improvements (excluding large transportation projects):
Annual Street Reconstruction - $9,320,000
Mill and Overlay Projects - $7,100,000
Edge Mill and Overlay Projects - $13,600,000
Total - $30,020,000
4. ATTACHMENTS:
City Council January 18, 2005 Meeting Minutes
Pavement Management 2010 and Beyond Report
Charts, Maps and Graphs
Street Rating Guide
Crack Repair Guide
Curb and Gutter Rating Guide
Page 15
2014 PASER Rating by Last Year Paved
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0 ,
6.0 .. ......
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0 —
��
J�
� 2014 Rating . • • • • • Linear (2014 Rating)
2014
2011
2008
2005
2002
1999
1996
1993
1990
1987
Unknown
0.0 5.0
Miles Paved by Year
10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
Page 16
Rating History
2016 ■ 2015 ■ 2014 2013 2012 2011 ■ 2010
Average PASER Rating
2010 PASER Ratings
■ Failed, Very Poor or
Poor
36%
Fair or Good
Very Good or
Excellent
55%
2012 PASER Ratings
4%
■ Failed, Very Poor or
Poor
Fair or Good 45%
51%
Very Good or
Excellent
8.0
- 7.8
_ 7.6
7.4
7.1
6.7
6.4
Page 17
2014 PASER Ratings
o%
■ Failed, Very Poor
or Poor
Fair or Good 48%
Very Good or
Excellent
52%
Projected 2016 PASER Ratings
o%
■ Failed, Very Poor
or Poor
Fair or Good 39%
61%
Very Good or
Excellent
Page 18
Pavement Management Review and
Recommendations Report
City of Plymouth
Plymouth, Minnesota
Prepared for
City of Plymouth
Professional Certification:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report
was prepared by me or under my direct supervision
CIH that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer +►►kt"44a ++
under the laws of the State of Minnesota. %*%4L.�;, 1► ray'/
r
' LICENSED
PROFESSIONAL: t
ENGINEER
1
Z
Daniel E. Wegman, PE
Associate Principal - Senior Engineer
License Number: 19091
June 14, 2018
Prepared by:
Braun Intertec Corporation
Project B1801145
June 14, 2018
Page 19
BRAUN
I NTE RTEC
The Science You Build On.
June 14, 2018
Jim Renneberg, PE
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Braun Intertec Corporation
1826 Buerkle Road
Saint Paul, MN 55110
Project B1801145
Re: Pavement Management Review and Recommendations Report
City of Plymouth, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Renneberg:
Phone: 651.487.3245
Fax: 651.487.1812
Web: braunintertec.com
We are pleased to present this Pavement Management Review and Recommendations Report to the City
of Plymouth. The purpose of our work was to review the City's current pavement management practices
and to provide recommendations as to whether or not adjustments should be made to better manage
the system overall.
Please see the attached report for a detailed discussion on our findings and recommendations. The
report should be read in its entirety.
Sincerely,
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION
AR�( Taa�
Amy J. Grothaus, PE
Associate Principal/Project Engineer
Daniel E. Wegman, PE
Principal Engineer
Page 20
Table of Contents
Description
Page
A. Introduction......................................................................................................................................1
B. Pavement Network Characteristics..................................................................................................1
B.1. Pavement Surface Condition Ratings..................................................................................1
B.2. Pavement Age.....................................................................................................................5
B.3. Current Maintenance and Repair Practices........................................................................6
C. Pavement Life Cycle Curves..............................................................................................................7
D. Considerations..................................................................................................................................9
D.1. PASER Ratings and Anticipated Conditions.........................................................................9
D.2. Investigative Testing..........................................................................................................10
D.3. Repair Options...................................................................................................................12
E. Project Selection Recommendation Process..................................................................................18
E.1. General Discussion............................................................................................................18
Appendix
Repair Selection Chart
Page 21
A. Introduction
The City of Plymouth currently maintains a pavement network consisting of approximately 321 centerline
miles of bituminous surfaced streets. The network is comprised of low-volume residential streets, as well
as some higher volume collector streets. To monitor pavement conditions, the City is performing the
PASER rating procedure which is a qualitative based surface evaluation that applies a rating of 1 to 10 to
the streets. Pavement repairs, which are determined in part by surface conditions, currently include
crack sealing, edge mill -and -overlay, mill -and -overlay and reconstruction.
The City has established a five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) plan for years 2018 through
2022, with a funding total of about $30 million, or about $6 million per year. Furthermore, for years 2018
through 2030, the City has identified streets for reconstruction.
Pavement networks are best maintained when conditions are monitored and the right repair treatment
is applied to the right roadway at the right time. Doing so ensures pavement life is maximized. The
purpose of this project was to review the City's current pavement management practices, and to provide
recommendations as to whether or not any adjustments should be made to the processes that may assist
the City in better managing their pavement network.
B. Pavement Network Characteristics
As previously noted, the City's network consists of about 321 centerline miles of bituminous streets. For
the most part, prior to the mid 1990's, pavements were constructed with 4 to 5 inches of bituminous
overlying 6 to 8 inches of aggregate base. After the mid 1990's, pavements were typically constructed
with 4 inches of bituminous overlying 8 inches of aggregate base and 12 inches of sand.
Underlying soils in the City mainly consist of clayey materials. Approximately ten percent of the City's
streets do not currently have concrete curb and gutter.
B.1. Pavement Surface Condition Ratings
To assess pavement surface conditions, the City has been performing PASER evaluations on all city
streets. Evaluations are performed every two years and provide a qualitative numerical rating between 1
and 10, where 1 represents a street in failed condition and 10 represents a street in excellent, brand new
condition. According to the data provided, since 2010, the PASER ratings have increased from a weighted
by area average of 6.0 to an average of 7.4 in 2016.
Page 22
Figure 1 depicts both the numerical network average and the weighted by area average for each of the
evaluation years.
Figure 1: Pavement Rating History
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
oc
S 6.0
co
0:cc 5.0
w
Q 4.0
a
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
Historical PASER Ratings
2010 2012 2014 2016
■ Numerical Average ■ Weighted Average by Area
Pavement condition ratings are often categorized to further evaluate network level trends. Using the City
of Plymouth's scoring categorization, Figures 2 through 5 depict yearly average conditions weighted by
area. It should be noted that the Figures may vary somewhat from previous figures that may not have
been based on weighted area averages.
Failed, Very Poor or Poor — PASER 1 to 3
Fair or Good — PASER 4 to 7
Very Good or Excellent — PASER 8 to 10
In general, according to the PASER rating procedure, streets with a rating of 3 or lower likely require
some type of structural improvement or reconstruction. Those streets with a rating between 4 and 7 may
require preservation treatments, such as seal coating or overlays. Streets that have a rating between 8
and 10 require little to no maintenance. It should be noted that preservation treatments are typically
most effective when applied to streets at the highest condition ratings.
Page 23
Figure 2: 2010 PASER Ratings
■ Failed, Very Poor, or Poor
■ Fair or Good
■ Very Good or Exellent
Figure 3: 2012 PASER Ratings
2010 PASER Ratings
2012 PASER Ratings
■ Failed, Very Poor, or Poor
■ Fair or Good
■ Very Good or Exellent
3%
Page 24
Figure 4: 2014 PASER Ratings
2014 PASER Ratings
■ Failed, Very Poor, or Poor
Fair or Good
■ Very Good or Exellent
Figure 5: 2016 PASER Ratings
0%
2016 PASER Ratings
■ Failed, Very Poor, or Poor
Fair or Good
■ Very Good or Exellent
0%
53%
51%
Page 25
As can be seen in the above figures, the City no longer has pavements with a PASER rating of 3 or lower.
At the same time, the amount of pavement within the excellent/very good category has increased from
36 percent of the network to 49 percent of the network. The amount of pavements within the fair/good
category has decreased from 56 percent to 51 percent.
B.2. Pavement Age
When managing a pavement network and determining appropriate repairs for the system, it is important
to not only consider pavement condition, but also pavement age. Pavement age is defined as the number
of years since the last structural improvement was performed on the street. For the City of Plymouth,
structural improvements include reconstruction, edge mill -and -overlay, and mill -and -overlay. Using the
historical repair maps provided by the City, Figure 6 provides a breakdown of pavement age by area.
About half of the network (roughly 47 percent) has a pavement age of less than 10 years. Thirty percent
is between an age of 10 to 20 years, and 15 percent is more than 20 years old. It should be noted that
about 8 percent of the system did not have historical project information for determining pavement age.
In terms of pavement age data only, the network age may indicate roughly half of the network requires
minimal repairs or repairs that are preventive in nature. Preventive repairs, such as crack sealing and seal
coating, are generally less costly to perform and keep good condition pavements in good condition.
About 30 percent of the system may need some type of structural repair, such as a mill -and -overlay.
Major repairs "catch" pavements before they deteriorate into worse conditions that may require
complete removal and replacement. If these types of repairs are performed on pavements that are too
deteriorated, the life provided by the major repair will be shortened. Lastly, based on pavement age,
about 15 percent of the network may be in need of major rehabilitation, such as full -depth reclamation
(FDR), stabilized full -depth reclamation (SFDR) or full -depth removal and replacement.
Page 26
Figure 6: Pavement Age
8%
5% 25%
3% ■ 0-5 years
5-10 years
7% 10-35 years
■ 15-20 years
--
Mott
a 20-25 years
■ 25-30 years
■ n 30 years
13% ■ Unknown
22%
17%
B.3. Current Maintenance and Repair Practices
The City's current maintenance and repair program consists of crack sealing, edge mill -and -overlay, mill -
and -overlay and reconstruction. Preventive repairs such as seal coating or fog sealing are not currently
being performed. It should be noted that crack sealing was temporarily on hold between 2012 and 2017.
The year prior to mill -and -overlay or reconstruction projects, the City is performing maintenance
activities including gate valve repairs, bolt repairs, catch basin repairs, manhole sealing, and curb and
gutter repairs.
Figure 7 was provided by the City and indicates the total number of miles paved each year, including
edge mill -and -overlay, mill -and -overlay and reconstruction. Starting in 2010, the City began investing
about 55 percent of the overall street investment budget into the edge mill -and -overlay and mill -and -
overlay program, resulting in an increased number of miles being paved each year. The change in
network condition from 2010 to 2016 depicted in Figures 2 through 5 shows the effects of the increased
level of funding and miles being paved each year.
Page 27
Figure 7: Miles Paved, by Year
Miles Paved by Year
2014
2011
2008
2005
2002
199a
1996
1993
1990
1987
U nknown
0.0 5.0 10.0 15,0 20.0 26,0 30.0
C. Pavement life Cycle Curves
Figure 8 depicts a typical bituminous pavement life -cycle curve where both preventive and major repairs
are applied to the pavement at certain conditions to prolong pavement life. A street that may have had
an original design life of 20 years (represented by the red curve) may be extended up to 60 years by
performing timely repairs (represented by the blue curve).
When pavements are in good condition (within the green band), preventive repairs such as seal coating
or fog sealing are performed. These types of repairs are generally low in cost and help keep good
pavements in good condition. They extend pavement life by sealing open cracks, preventing water and
debris from entering into the pavement structure and adversely affecting pavement life, and sealing high
in-place voids, which may cause raveling and premature potholes. These repairs are best performed in
the upper condition ranges (PASER ratings of 8 to 10) and may add 5 to 7 years of life to the pavements.
If sealing is performed at lower pavement conditions, the benefit provided will be less. At the same time,
they may be less cost effective due to required prep work before sealing.
The blue band is representative of major repairs, such as edge mill -and -overlay, mill -and -overlay or FDR.
These repairs should be applied to pavements in fair or good condition with a PASER rating of 4 to 7.
Page 28
Major repairs are more costly than preventive repairs, but provide a much longer added life (typically 12
to 20 years). They restore the pavement surface and provide structural benefit. Similar to preventive
repairs, it is critical that major repairs not be performed too late in the pavements life cycle (PASER
ratings of 3 or less). If they are performed in these lower condition ranges, the life provided by
performing the major repair will likely be shortened.
The most costly repairs occur within the red band and includes major rehabilitation, such as
reconstruction, FDR or SFDR. These repairs completely disrupt existing crack patterns by providing a new
pavement surface.
Figure 8: Typical Pavement Life Cycle Curve
100
0
= 70
60
fl
u
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 s0 60
Pavement Age
Figure 9 is a depiction of the City of Plymouth's current life cycle process. According to the data provided,
street segments that have not yet been overlaid appear to be lasting about 45 years. We assume this has
been achieved by incorporating a 12 -inch sand cushion into recent pavement designs, crack sealing
operations, although temporarily on hold between 2012 and 2017, and past seal coating practices which
are currently no longer being performed.
Page 29
About 62 percent of the City's network has had an overlay project; the remaining 38 percent of the street
network has not been overlaid. For those streets that have been overlaid, the data indicates the first
edge mill -and -overlay or mill -and -overlay project is typically performed at an age of about 20 years. This
is depicted in Figure 9 where the pavement condition increases to a PASER rating of 9 around year 20
when the first overlay is performed. Based on available data, we assume a second overlay would be
performed 10 to 15 years after the first overlay, but would be based on pavement ratings. Best practices
indicate two overlay projects can be performed during the pavements life cycle due to pavement crown
and underlying pavement conditions, which deteriorate overtime and make overlays less feasible. Given
this repair cycle, pavement life may be extended as shown below.
Figure 9: City of Plymouth Life Cycle Curve
10
8
2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Pavement Age
D. Considerations
D.I. PASER Ratings and Anticipated Conditions
As previously noted, the City is performing PASER ratings on all city streets every two years. In general, it
is recommended that high volume streets (collectors and above) be evaluated at least every two years
and low volume streets (typically local streets) be evaluated every four years (conditions don't change
Page 30
quite as rapidly on low volume streets). As such, the City's evaluation system and cycle is appropriate and
allows the City to closely monitor changing street conditions.
As with any street rating procedure, ratings should be performed consistently and should follow the
rating procedure guidelines. Continuing with a consistent PASER rating process, given the number of
miles planned for resurfacing within the City's CIP plan, we would expect the weighted by area network
average to continue to increase in the coming years. This is based on the data provided which indicates
since 2010, about 1.6 miles were reconstructed each year and about 16.5 miles were overlaid each year.
The CIP plan shows 1.2 miles will be reconstructed and about 19.7 miles will be overlaid each year of the
plan.
It is important to note, however, that as the average increases due to the number of miles being
resurfaced, conditions on the streets not included within the City's CIP plan will deteriorate. On those
streets, which have likely already had at least one overlay project, conditions may deteriorate more
rapidly than they did after construction given the amount of underlying and reflective cracking that may
exist. To prolong the life of these pavements, particularly those that were overlaid within the last five
years, we recommend some type of preventive treatment be applied. Options are discussed in further
detail below.
D.2. Investigative Testing
The majority of the City's current CIP repair plan includes either edge mill -and -overlay or mill -and -
overlay. To ensure these repairs provide the anticipated benefit on the streets they are planned for, we
recommend performing some upfront investigative testing, such as pavement coring or Ground
Penetrating Radar (GPR) testing. Although a pavement's age and surface condition may determine that a
mill -and -overlay is appropriate, underlying conditions, such as insufficient material or material stripping,
may indicate otherwise. Material stripping typically occurs at the bottom of the bituminous layer where
water becomes trapped between the aggregate base and bituminous layer. This is especially common
with clayey subgrade soils that do not allow for water to drain properly.
Figure 10 shows a bituminous pavement core with material stripping within the bottom 1 inch of the
core (top of the photo), and also a surface layer that has debonded from the pavement structure
(bottom of the photo). If a mill -and -overlay were to be performed on this street, the debonded layer
would be milled along with some portion of sound bituminous. What is left in place is unsound
bituminous on which a new bituminous overlay would be placed.
Page 31
With this type of unsound bituminous base, the life of the mill -and -overlay will be reduced. Reflective
cracking will also occur within a year of two of the mill -and -overlay. As reflective cracking occurs, crack
sealing should be performed so as to prevent water and debris from entering the pavement structure.
Figure 10: Underlying Material Stripping*
v
*The pavement core pictured above was not obtained on a City of Plymouth street.
Although most city streets are anticipated to have an in-place pavement section consisting of 4 to 5
inches of bituminous overlying 6 to 8 inches of aggregate base, some may have a thinner bituminous or
aggregate base layer. When performing milling, at least 1 inch of sound bituminous pavement should
remain in place. If streets have less than the expected bituminous layer, the milling operations may break
though the bituminous layer. To ensure enough there is enough material for milling, GPR testing may be
performed. GPR can penetrate the pavement structure to a depth of about 24 inches under ideal
conditions and provides a continuous profile of in-place materials. Information obtained from the GPR
testing can be used to determine mill depths, as well as reclamation or removal depths if more extensive
repairs are warranted based on underlying conditions.
For roadways that may be structurally deficient, Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) testing can be
performed. Pavement distresses such as alligator cracking or wheelpath rutting may be indicative of
structural deficiency. FWD testing applies a load onto the pavement structure and measures the
pavement deflections. Results from FWD testing can be used to identify weak spots that may need
correction before performing the planned repair.
Page 32
D.3. Repair Options
In general, pavement repairs can be categorized as either preservation repairs or rehabilitation repairs.
Preservation repairs are those applied to pavements ranging from excellent to good condition.
Pavements with an excellent to very good condition benefit from repairs that are relatively low in cost to
perform and help keep good pavements in good condition. They represent a proactive approach to
pavement management and are applied early on in the pavement's life cycle. They include repairs such
as crack sealing, chip sealing, fog sealing, and microsurfacing, and may provide 5 to 7 years or more of
extended or additional pavement life. Other than crack sealing, the City of Plymouth is currently not
performing any of these types of repairs.
Rehabilitation repairs are applied to pavements in good to poor condition. These repairs are typically
applied when a pavement's condition has deteriorated beyond the point of benefitting from a
preservation repair as previously discussed. They are reactive in nature and are typically several times
more costly than preservation repairs. On the higher condition ranges where pavements are classified as
being good to fair, mill -and -overlay type repairs may be performed. The City is currently performing the
majority of their repairs within this repair range including edge mill -and -overlay and mill -and -overlay.
Mill -and -overlay type repairs may provide 12 to 15 years of pavement life. FDR or complete removal -and -
replacement of the bituminous layer are other rehabilitative repairs that can be performed on
pavements in fair to poor condition. Each of these repair options disrupt existing crack patterns and may
provide 20 to 25 years of life.
Various repair options the City could consider are discussed below.
Crack Sealing
In general, there are two methods for repairing cracks; crack filling and crack sealing. The type that
should be performed is determined by the type of crack that exists in the pavement. To ensure the City is
realizing the benefits of the crack repairs being performed it is critical to select the proper procedure and
materials for the type of distress present. On average, crack repairs may cost about $0.50 to $1.20 per
linear foot to perform. The price range depends on volume and whether the crack is sealed or filled.
Sealing often requires routing, which can increase the cost of the repair significantly.
Chip Sealing
Chip sealing applies a heavy asphalt emulsion membrane to the pavement followed by a single layer of
high quality aggregate chip. It has a very fast construction process and when applied to the right
pavements, those in excellent to good condition, chip sealing can extend the life of the pavement by 5 to
7 years or more.
Page 33
It should be noted that the City of Plymouth, along with several other cities in Minnesota, have
experienced issues with stripping under the chip sealing. Because of this issue, until ongoing studies are
complete, we understand the City will not be performing chip seals.
Chip sealing does an excellent job of sealing the pavement surface and increases friction with proper chip
selection. To be effective, however, it is critical that chip sealing be performed when pavements are
completely dry. If any moisture is present within the pavement structure when the chip seal is applied,
that moisture will be trapped by the chip seal and may lead to stripping and material loss. We
understand the City has not been performing chip sealing for this reason. In our opinion, the City could
see a benefit by applying chip seals, assuming they are applied under the correct conditions and when
pavements are in the upper condition ranges.
To further ensure chip seals provide the best benefit possible, proper density on overlay projects should
be verified. Having proper density will eliminate high surface voids that have shown to hold water under
the pavement surface. The trapping of that water can cause stripping underneath a chip seal. Irrigation
systems should be considered prior to chip sealing. Asking the residents to avoid sprinkling a day or two
prior to chip sealing can avoid the trapped water condition mentioned above. Chip sealing may cost
about $1.00 to $1.50 per square yard to perform.
Figure 11: Chip Sealing Operation
Page 34
Fog Sealing
Similar to chip sealing, fog sealing is applied early on in the pavement's life. It is a proactive pavement
repair that extends the life of the pavement by keeping good condition pavements in good condition. Fog
sealing should be reapplied every 3 to 5 years, is relatively low in cost to perform and can inhibit raveling,
as well as enriching hardened or oxidized bituminous. Fog sealing can also be performed on City trails
where chip sealing may be undesirable for recreational activities.
Fog sealing includes a light application of diluted, slow -setting asphalt emulsion. As compared to chip
sealing, fog sealing does not have an aggregate cover. It seals the pavement and prevents water from
entering the pavement structure. When applied, the fog seal penetrates the bituminous up to a depth of
about 1/16 of an inch, filling any open air voids. When it is first applied, the fog seal will be dark in color,
making the street appear brand new. Over time, however, the fog seal will wear off of the pavement
surface. Because it penetrates into the voids, it is still performing below the surface by increasing the
density of the in-place pavement. On average, fog sealing will likely cost about $0.50 to $1.20 per square
yard, depending on the product selected.
Figure 12: Fog Sealing
Microsurfacing
Microsurfacing is a homogenous mixture of aggregate and asphalt emulsion. Benefits include filling
pavement ruts, improving ride, and improving friction. This treatment could be applied to City streets in
good to fair condition. While more expensive than fog or chip sealing, Microsurfacing provides a safe and
durable surface that addresses surface distress and provides a new surface.
Page 35
Higher friction is provided with Microsurfacing, which has a rougher textured surface. Microsurfacing
may cost about $2.50 to $3.50 per square yard to perform.
A"am RI
PMM Binh
i
NIMarsd Emdsl F
F
Brovm In dac.k Calor Change
Figure 13: Microsurfacing Process
Texas Underseal
When performing mill -and -overlay, the City could consider what is referred to as a Texas Underseal. This
treatment is the application of a chip seal that is applied to the milled surface prior to applying the
bituminous overlay. By applying the chip seal layer, water is prohibited from entering the base layer. At
the same time, the chip seal layer seems to retard the reflective cracking by acting as a stress relief
membrane. As such, the life provided by the mill -and -overlay may be extended. Studies have shown that
a Texas Underseal may delay reflective cracking up to 3 years or longer.
Edge Mill -and -Overlay and Mill -and -Overlay
The City is currently performing both edge mill -and -overlay and mill -and -overlay repairs. Both repairs are
typically applied near a pavement condition rating of about 5. When performing an edge mill -and -
overlay, milling is performed at the outside pavement edges only versus milling the entire street width
when performing a mill -and -overlay. Edge milling is typically performed to a depth of 1 inch with a 6 foot
taper at the edges. Since only the pavement edges are milled, this approach will increase the crown of
the street, which often improves pavement drainage and can enhance pavement performance.
Page 36
When performing mill -and -overlay, mill depths are typically about 1 % to 2 inches. Following milling, an
overlay is applied to the entire street surface.
Overlay repairs should be applied prior to any fatigue -related distresses, such as rutting or alligator
cracking, and when underlying bituminous conditions are sound (i.e. no material stripping is present).
When performed, overlays will provide a smooth, uniform surface; however, reflective cracking will likely
develop within a year or two. Typical mill -and -overlay type repairs last about 15 years and cost about
$6.00 per square yard based on recent City projects.
Full -Depth Reclamation (FDR)
FDR is generally performed on pavements in fair to poor condition and uses in-place materials. Using a
predetermined depth, a reclaiming machine pulverizes the in-place bituminous pavement and blends it
with some amount of in-place aggregate base material. Following reclaiming, to meet existing grades in
urban environments, a portion of reclaimed material is removed so that a bituminous overlay can be
applied. To provide additional strength into the pavement section, the reclaimed material can also be
stabilized, referred to as stabilized full -depth reclamation or SFDR. The cost for FDR and SFDR may vary
between about $5.00 to $9.00 per square yard, and will depend on the depth of reclaiming and whether
or not stabilization is performed. Following the reclaiming, a bituminous overlay is then applied. Overlay
costs will vary depending on the thickness of the overlay.
• i
i
r'
zn,
Wo Eking direOon
=400,
$labilind owatm lon MOM and
material mix rirtlxkV mbar
Figure 14: Full -Depth Reclamation (FDR) Process
Pro-ypcged Ilme
or pgmeoi
Cansbuctiorr materi9l
mix priar to sUbilizatign
Page 37
By pulverizing the entire bituminous layer, existing crack patterns are disrupted, eliminating the potential
for reflective cracking. Although this treatment is more costly than mill -and -overlay type repairs, it is less
expensive than full reconstruction and may provide a similar design life of 20 to 25 years depending on
the underlying materials. When performing either FDR or SFDR, it is critical that the reclaiming not
extend into clayey subgrades. The reclaiming machine must stay within the bituminous and aggregate
base layers. When a reclaimed base is contaminated with clayey subgrade material, the stabilization
binder is limited to cement. It is more desirable to stabilize with Engineered Emulsion, which creates a
flexible fatigue -resistant base and provides better performance.
Once FDR or SFDR are complete, depending on the original pavement section, the new pavement section
may consist of 2 to 4 inches of new bituminous, about 6 to 8 inches of reclaimed material, which may or
may not be stabilized, and some portion of the original aggregate base material.
Prior to FDR, pavement coring or GPR testing should be performed to confirm in-place material
thicknesses. This will help with determining the depth to which FDR should be performed. It may also be
that the pavement cores show signs of underlying stripping, which would likely reduce the life of the mill -
and -overlay, making FDR a better alternative.
Removal and Replacement of Bituminous Pavement
As another alternative to reconstruction for streets in fair to poor condition, the City could consider the
removal and replacement of the bituminous layer only. This repair would be applicable on streets with
good aggregate base material that would be regraded and compacted prior to the new bituminous
pavement. Similar to FDR, this option eliminates the potential for reflective cracking and uses some of
the materials already paid for by the City.
Reconstruction
Eventually, pavements reach the end of their useful life and will need to be completely reconstructed.
Reconstruction includes the complete removal of in-place materials, regrading of the subgrade, and
placement of new materials. Depending on project specifics, reconstruction costs may be about $20.00
to $25.00 per square yard.
During reconstruction, however, it is beneficial to leave existing base materials in place. An existing base
has had years of consolidation/densification under traffic, which is difficult to replicate in the
reconstruction process. Proper density in all layers of a pavement structure is the most important
attribute to achieve for longer pavement life.
Page 38
When repairing or replacing any pavement, proper selection is critical to maximizing pavement life.
Braun Intertec may be consulted for testing of the in-place materials and repair recommendations
including pavement mix/material designations, reclamation and other material considerations.
E. Project Selection Recommendation Process
Street networks are best maintained when pavement conditions are frequently monitored to ensure the
right repair treatment is applied to the right street at the right time. Doing so improves overall pavement
quality and helps prolong pavement life. When determining the proper repair treatment for a given
street, several factors should be considered including pavement surface condition, underlying pavement
conditions, and pavement age. Other extenuating factors may determine the need for a project such as
utility work, drainage improvements or capacity issues.
As previously discussed, the City if currently monitoring pavement surface condition by performing
frequent surface evaluations on a two year cycle. This frequency will ensure changes in surface
conditions are captured so that the proper repair treatments can be performed at the right time. The
chart provided in the Appendix provides criteria for selecting streets for repair. It should be noted that
the City may elect to be more proactive on higher volume streets. For example, the City may also elect to
perform FDR as opposed to mill -and -overlay on higher volume streets so as to avoid the need for
reflective cracking repairs. They may also elect to perform mill -and -overlay near a condition rating of 6 or
7 for higher volume streets and near a condition rating of 4 or S for local streets.
A general discussion related to repair selection is provided below.
E.I. General Discussion
In terms of preventive maintenance, the City is currently only performing crack sealing. While crack
sealing is an excellent preventive maintenance repair treatment that will help prolong pavement life,
some type of surface sealing repair should also be incorporated. When surface sealing is performed, not
only are smaller existing cracks or high air voids sealed, but the entire pavement surface is improved
through visual aesthetics, resistance to oxidation from the sun, and by replacing eroded surfaces. Both
crack sealing and sealing treatments should be applied systematically so that a series of these types of
repairs are performed on the streets to improve pavement surface quality and extend pavement life.
Page 39
Edge mill -and -overlay and mill -and -overlay repairs are currently being performed extensively by the City.
We recommend the City continue to perform these types of repairs, however, it is not always cost-
effective to wait for a pavement to deteriorate to the point of needing a mill -and -overlay. The City's
network would benefit if a more pro -active approach to pavement management were implemented,
including applying more preventive maintenance repairs. This can be done by systematically applying less
costly preventive maintenance activities as shown in Figure 8. The City should also be performing some
investigative testing before any mill -and -overlay projects to ensure the selected repair is suitable for the
street's underlying conditions. Depending on the findings, a more extensive repair such as FDR or SFDR
may be warranted.
We understand the City has streets planned for reconstruction for years 2018 through 2030. We assume
conditions on the streets warrant reconstruction, as well as other factors such as the need for concrete
curb and gutter or utility repairs. Depending on the circumstances, even though pavement conditions
may be very poor, it may be that FDR, SFDR or bituminous removal and replacement could be performed
instead. These repair options would reduce life cycle repair costs while still providing a design life similar
to that of full reconstruction, assuming the in-place base material is in good condition and required
design thicknesses can be met.
Within the City's five-year CIP, about 30 percent of the total budget is allocated to reconstruction and
about 70 percent is allocated to mill -and -overlay type projects. A shift in funding is recommended so that
a portion of the budget is reallocated to preventive maintenance and FDR type repairs. Depending on
street conditions, agencies may typically allocate about 10 to 20 percent of their total budget to
preventive repairs. Preventive maintenance projects are comparably lower in cost to perform and will
keep good condition pavements in good condition longer. The amount of funding that should be
dedicated to mill -and -overlay versus FDR should be determined by underlying pavement conditions and
the desire to eliminate the potential for reflective cracking, particularly on higher volume streets.
Funding for each repair type should be determined using criteria provided in the Appendix.
In general, we recommend the City follow a more proactive approach to pavement management that
follows a maintenance cycle similar to that depicted in Figure 8 and Table 1 below. This cycle will provide
a more balanced funding approach where a portion of the budget is allocated to preventive
maintenance. Over the life of the pavement, this proactive approach will be more cost effective than the
City's current approach which allocates funding to costly repair types that are applied later in the
pavement's life cycle.
Page 40
Table 1: Typical Maintenance Cycle
Approximate
Pavement Age
(yrs)
Typical Maintenance Schedule
0
Construction
Crack sealing should be performed
on an annual basis, as needed
2
First Sealing Treatment*
7-10
Second Sealing Treatment*
20-24
Edge Mill -and -Overlay, Mill -and -Overlay or FDR
22
First Sealing Treatment following resurfacing*
27-30
Second Sealing Treatment following resurfacing*
45
Edge Mill -and -Overlay, Mill -and -Overlay or FDR
47
First Sealing Treatment following resurfacing*
52-55
Second Sealing Treatment following resurfacing*
55+
Full Reconstruction
*Pavement conditions should determine when sealing treatments are warranted.
Page 41
PASER Rating 1 to 3
Failed, Very Poor, Poor
PASER Rating 4 to 7
Fair, Good
PASER Rating 8 to 10
Very Good, Excellent
Full Reconstruction. Should be performed when factors other than
pavement condition dictate the need for reconstruction, including
the need for curb and gutter or capacity issues.
FDR, SFDR or Bituminous Remove and Replace. Testing needed to
confirm feasibility, but can be performed at a lower cost than full
reconstruction while providing a similar pavement design life.
Mill -and -Overlay, FDR or SFDR. Testing needed to determine most
appropriate repair method. If underlying conditions are sound, mill -
and -overlay can be performed on streets with a rating of about 4 or
5. Depending on the cracking extent and in-place materials, FDR or
SFDR may be performed to eliminate the potential for reflective
cracking.
Edge Mill -and -Overlay. Should be performed on higher condition
pavements (likely PASER ratings of 6 or 7). If extensive cracking is
present in non -milled areas, a full mill -and -overlay should be
performed. Pavement crown should also be considered.
Mircosurfacing. Microsurfacing can be considered if the street has
rutting, raveling, or needs improved friction. Microsurfacing will
cost less than mill -and -overlay and may provide 8 years of
additional pavement life.
Fog or Chip Seal. Sealing should be performed 2-3 years after any
new surfacing has been performed. Sealing should also be
systematic in that a second treatment is performed again around
age 7 or 8. Depending on the level of cracking, crack repairs should
be performed prior to the seal.
Crack Sealing or Crack Filling. Should be performed at the first signs
of pavement cracking. May be 1 to 2 years after construction.
Do Nothing. Pavement has no cracking present and proper voids.
20+ years
10 to 20 years
0 to 10 years
Page 42
13161 G11
gg
are
■1111■ I: �■ �`/ 1 /1 ► Ob ��i -�i �� ��■I� a
1►I �
.■n►�111 NOW..u.
111111111 , a 1
WON
� 1� pill
ow
"11�n •
in
■■■■1111►
. �� .:.►�►_.__' onnnni` 7I ' lllllJ_�a�1°��i■ ■■■■■ ■11� ■!■r3■l=.ai
■ - n in MEN
-.-
in in Sol
in in
in in
Min
in Ell
:�►� �.����i1111►1 i; p �c�
:
■■ y ��/11::1 p vi■
1► � III � � � \I
•iii: 111111 ;.,
r.....�■11111111
•/A ■► �j '
■ � /" II r ��►��iiiilii
■ ��
MEN
moll irralli,*iko,
p
:'V
oil
��_• ,l is ii
-'SIMI
'► G�`
404
QOA ■��'�
1\1 X11■ �
Innllnl■ �
0
\I 1t i� •Z p-r-�.•m74y����\I Ii' ..��ii�r, a- -- ■■■li�i
i�■�■ ■� . �p _��/ � ',� I� ♦� � 'room. � - 's ��
,'1111 �� �� C� �ii�/ `� ►?���� :OiP�L ��,in■■rnA��I�►i�iiw`� -1Millis
- � 1■■I �p _ a : _� :"`': ������ X111 1 lid■ ■MII■lMM
� t■MI =� �_ �ii� ` •� � � II''�: � :,:r ■ � ��■ � ►I■IIM■■MMI
� � -� �� _� �i//p QO '���r►� � 11::11 i. • � 7
ME� w lllll/\\\\\\ III va p� 1� •■1■■■ i
loon nn \\\\\� O m t•`•
11111
41V
■
>� V ,, ■
O1
■l■■■1®�" 111
1,
��► / ♦ -11�■ ■■ N:111■l■■■■■■� �■■
�■ I■■■l ■■�►�
■■.1l1l1l■1l■1l1l■1l■1l■1l1l1l■1la1l_1l1l�1l1l_,��IIIIIM■1I��:1■ x,•.1,,,' °1"°■"■a: .. .■r..,. rr■■■om� :■►5■ r���•i��1
".
Atli
1'�1_i■_�i=�jr�
�'-�m_■teANNE
01 .■■1 .i
■■■'�'=�1111111111111111111f�` °���/I' -,�; �`r�G.;:�J ►..
1■■■� � I �i�mml�i►ZG��i � -Wnn�
1■■■—�=111111111111111111 � — � --- � —
��� � � ■1■■r■r■■■�IIII► �IIIIIIIIIII� ����
��It�11�1IIIIIIIIIIII1• ��'I ■/N ■i ii - r ■1111', r�''
, a �■ ■■ �1�IIIIII■1111 ■■ ■■■I
■■■■- 111:-�;`..,�����i► `SLI ♦ �1\�� = ■IMIIIIIl1 :i �� :: M
��w►�• . 1q, :,� , `�Ir■r� � ■111111111 �_ z■ _■ ME
� � - � Im'lllll�l�lll , ■■ ■■1■//IIS �■m . - -� �■ �� ■� MM��:
Bob
.. ..� II■� ■■■N■NNN■11■■■■■ -� ====in= ME
■■ ■-
Vii' �r �►♦ rr ■ice 11 mmm
m
11 ru
SENSE ■■■■■ 1■O �� ■
�►oi_ �_ MOOSE son■■■■■N■■■■ MNEEN 11110
L.111
ILP.
oG,
.,
ft
Q�\II■1■I�����I■■■■■
__in moom
in SS
So
iil•■*l* 4
�■ ■■■■1111111■11. - �
■ \ \■■11■1■11111■� :`_I■■1111■�
\I� ■■■111■1■11■1.
1 1111
WON
•■ ■■■1■11111.1■C //.
103
k"ww.— 0
��pn■i
\i
,w �..--
�g �� i ����i:
'%■■■■■■■
LTN-W-
i�
P
on
ON
ON
LiFol iTiTi
a
01 _0 U
> L
UJ -0 f6
c p o c r>s v ,� Qy > c u L °' -°c m o 0 0 3 0 0) 0 0 3 0 �' o o _0 ro o _) 0 0 o c D o v ra
O p to a-•, p -a > vpi I6 i O 'ru ++ i O O i r4 C O C '> . V O .O i i OL O L o �' O L O O O O >i O O _= U C > v o p> ?j v� pp L L H C 00 i nJ
170 o �o � 4-1 c rca v v ay 'v .L a� > r—ca a) _Y a) ra 0 4" Ln0 c c M 3 >„ ra o a� 0 -5.L (13 C.� r3 3 3 '� "� 3 t 3 ay e„ 3 co r`a c .� > c o o E c uLn 1,0
L j —_ c en o ra c a) o .> E 3 o r`a v c E c v Q a� c ' c ra L Q —_ c •� a� on U L E -0 v a� +- _� o E _v o c r>3 > rn L a� f° +, ro ay rH
O N f6 rn 0 L ro
Ui N 3: O > O r6 3 41 v t rn O r3 M N E M t N c O N C 4J > O r6 O ,`� OJ N O p j N p ru ra O ra c OJ OJ i } p C E
m Q N X H to DC a O Z � 2 C7 LL LU 0 U m Q N>- X H In tY Cr a O Z 2 3�- +- 2 LD LL w 0 U m Q N X H rn Cr a O Z 2 ? 2 L7 LL w 0 U m Q N> X H rn a O ro —_
0 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O O O O O 00 O O O O O O O O 00 O O O O O Z J�:e~
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo00
ri O M wr� Q0 In C M N ri O M mr� Q0 In C M N r -I O M 0D I, Q0 Ln -;zr M N-1 O M w I, Q0 In C M N r --I O M w r� Q0 In K* M N r -I O M w I, l0 Ln m N r -I O m w I, lfl In K* m N r -I O m w I, lfl Ln -U m N �--I O m w I- 6 Ln i m N r -I O o o O O O
M O) DO 00 00 DO 00 00 00 w w mr� r� h r� r� h h r� nr� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln -:t K* 4 K K* Ki 4 4 K* m M M M M m M M m N N N N N N N N N N ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri O O O O O O O O O O m 00 ^ 3 N
ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ci ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri Ol Ol M O) 0)
5
a
O J ¢ G\P
2 ? 3 ❑ OO
61 STgV W� 6—i( •.o ro { • SFS i9 6. -k O< R NQ Y P►--� 7 U > 62NDA <�
CO F Y o O O c E N]-
0 o r O
�P m z z NTi� v, v > U 5 ?l J J -�
RO rsi AvA� �N N C i( A D 1 J� q)"-. - -"N/q O E wm Pike Lake TRENTO LA
4 ~ ,� 60TH 4m r RD Ati z s ? P r S (PV
o s W KQ r p Z i V 2Z 67 ST V '�� 97- 60TH 6�S > w o ❑
both Avenue m M z �_ y r z r g �4- g s r PL �' o
T r
Z VE y Z 60T^ 47 LjZ O .O "(FI x p- •--{ 0,r.. >,
m < " P NVEN O a O
BH AVEC 2 6 TH o Im 1 Q = rpO�N C, Wr� E • `..HAL O Off_^Y/( p C p
�' N 6TH r' @T Nz 2 ❑U • 1�rVn��� 07 [�.� Q- O s p.�. ❑ v: 60th Avenue
.� oY�{5gT PL L Ni+ y C 6i -`7-''L ,Z, -v 40i ¢ A`O NO O QODTH �` °
59 E w 2 U 5 H Z fF F Q\,T �9 "rV - - 57�{ PLS: < S� \`r w �, J
J • w Q Z 59tH•_ d. lm cn VE u� 9 K a J w ❑ Z
D z AVE 9T qV 'fi r U "-� C\ - T 59TNP n CO 00 O Y O d` ❑ DP 59TH
N F H x TF3•K`�1`. ¢ z j VI 'y'
Z aar�- Z ARitp ISR Z r�mA N P+dE A /'F c m Z 2'.� O \�2 ` `�'C bi A �91iP
-(H L N 3 a s �, Q Z v 59T _ z N Lake 8T ya 59TH A Y-, t �O �O �� Z i'
6 �Fo 58TH g z A Nom. ZQ. P.y VN y T HA E P'j- ¢ O: w I
o J Z z CT <ti ��L 5g5"P = �F Camelot <�S �, Wo 3 ❑
�---- ° w
TH qVE T ° YLN N -.q y� oS �` BASS LA C RD N 0
Z G m H
EN
Spy z S> H 6tH PVE' `8Th 'fN ¢
7TH AVE, p 2 w er 57TH PL 1TH PLN z Z N `_ >� O 5 Q a Fr�T�u- 3 - 54TH AV® _TI�AVE PL 'J
THQ i <'V ❑ 5 A E NHo c EN t NAVE "• JONEPU �� ✓ 7TH PVfN � qS a 57TNP04 57TO• o �AS� OGi OA + 1 57 57TH' y'I TIi AVF_Na rl
ss NA r z Z ,< • ❑7. AV °i •TN 2 • v q7THE w�~ ¢
g z rN4V QO S3 6TyA comg, oo x m r 51mN Z, 56TH AVE ;�`9F 1 1 H VF oo o �: �e�'�4V.8 0� F`�FO� 6 N PVE @� qV z a
Z i EEN LAND LN S DM,9� v - Z Zm Z° PL F,ygNDO J -_ �P-OOK � + rn z w )W � R 11 00 A g O 5 L P��p.N Z 56TH AVE 1 69
1 ti CT Z �"? • q z• Z❑ 5 `ssF Bass Lake
O 56TH AVE y ~ I!y_ m,,, H(ry 2� • cl w J P\Fz S > 5�H AVE O � �c lam ^ } 'A L Q
r ¢ 56TH AV p �� y <NP 55TH AVE N fS' 2 �' �'s ¢ o LU ¢ g 3 o f �9 z < O 5 'tN p� .'-2-
•� 'Si C p T J 9 = Oa. O Ty a r x 2y
55th Avenue (7 c m s�r SAV N p C i n mss 2 U p w A( D U OR
O U \n z PV v . 2 �' P mP 56 •z W. Y .: i ° m 1 '(� N P�
54TH AVE z 2 q 5 9! C rr -o q J w rg 5g= . - .\� S NPVE
LU
{S O 2 2 w E s ❑
����gg'�� _ 55th Avenue
z Q v `S4-41AVc•r •aTHCTNP � c j P Pomerleau w Q JP ° > 0: U`O v
O h o f 2 • P 4TH --. ra
¢U¢ e�'3PDgI�FN i39'N R Lake SS��' F HAVE �'r= f5 OO�p a 14T5'q *__ '14S LA g ° �SrT F' LQ�-54THPL
54TH A E NT �r �O P/ w rt m l P OqL a'� S10 LF �O ❑ �-� Z
Y O a N � ,r 41)v F 54 AVE 9 O m O ' •9V 2 54TH AVE
? ® ru z h N �� NO 54T�- • -i O F v - a'
_ 54T AV D 2 - .� qL RAG 54TH f O m 53 D A A J ON O 2D
r 52ND gVEN < 53R E Z H •` �54T ''X
530AVF2 3RD 'F'a 53RDs 52 DP L <ym PVE _ J •. FAL ct� JF' O - 'P _ * ATFA� �c 4
N 9 2N AVEN�AG ,,`G F2ig53R0<yP,� a .°��PVE j� 5 1 h�R. O i ~a •' _.. -QG,p m O N!'i /11VRgZ O ? ¢ o- cry. 1 pr o 62N0 r� F1'P�� K l 3C s� z • h 0 tea. � JE _.ANp w 521�pAV r Ui 52ND - A%C1F�
�_- S q \�• E 2 6 2N ¢ • J P O-.�A D. �' @ �F 10R D W qL.
z 5 �< F o' s n Fs1Sq
v 51 STPL BLAC90 V9 O_T c, �P Z ST � PAVE !9 5 SAVE 3RD ¢53Q '' �' m O CPVE
J O i N Q,' L Z- F Q S'
m Z } S z 0 2 ��'O >J 6yS `N qV •5. 0.- 1 0S g 10 i J 51SAVE 51ST AVE
g • Y ! w OT `47 GO tHP • _ O LL 2i- }_ _ I. S Vi' 1� O Q z
A r�1_St rtP- 50TH C? i S -(\ 50 <n ❑ •� J 51STAVE 0..� v v- D_' a� C' S •,
00 w 51 TA_VE Ov •Fo 1cm 2� -• ,SLS AVE J � U 52ND AVE ° OU❑ m H L� 0 a • D. qVF
W N90 w - 2 Gti �ASir =.50 h U<G. VE - O P J <<` 0 SCHMIDT.LAKE� 00 51 T i D
51St PJE -! ti yO Q • Tq� �' F-�TNgI' q\. U QS" �� AV O QOD ; ..z. 1 STA �°j/ 50 C ��H < •AE �Q.� 501/2 P� 1% -.P, 5P D
50th Avenue Y < o.
C (N SC DT KE F yJ� �> 50TH PW Q� 515lr S� 1,� 7 �q� P 4� O 5��1y ti z
r e' 4i C� - R m V 3 2 ,�- o�� C? 2 THA 50tH !�-� - TH AVE �0 g
m ?` T Q o ` r e ` �< 5 Q o Y m 2
Q 49T ¢ O z S U OT TH AV,� ° < N q
IIr m Ot 9P •--1P SETH A J C p l 1 O❑ °i Q AVE F `v9T N 4 r
5 Y MIDI 7L�AKE . y �49Tm J� �r� L o o l 6 50th Avenue
3 SCHM LAKE RDS �E o G J 0 �q�C _ R - _ 0 SC IDT LASE RD Z A( z o AVE O SCHMIDT LAKE
J J 20 ai j 49TH A F n "��p .. ��' g m '� o V4 49T �KIRKII, PO m I'AF49`lil AV L Ag Fi qv� Av3°o m .� r _ W T. m�o o • p` �� ° .1. • 0 f9F v_
vl• ✓, g � a O m WOOD LN N O �i O< A -4 ! O tai O
z-418TTi Pj - U U P TH 2 ` y ❑• -< a Uy 2.O 049-r A z O� 48i PL <G�' g4�N . 0 °Zz�xAl7E -r `{''J. z J 4-�T� Z
o O T > w 2 48 :AVE 2 I..l
? G yJ� �' w 'C�` lg 8 > wl U48=H Vm NT ® o G� �I 3 ¢ 2 F D 3 w 1¢ A m D
PV ¢ ,. a8 ¢ o C w r AVE�® /1! I f I • R T O O 7 W ° V 8 !g m ❑ �tL <Y O g Ir Q 5 �1N1°2r m 0 4 C D
4TH AVE N PLE Lq N �'TH CT 'l' z J A L a O:' P� - a D E F z> h ° i, w ~ Om• 4ST VE 1�1� " ?� 47TH 1 P" $ w 9
m O a8�� A- O _ > r ' 47TH O A rn OBr 47TH iH PV z a a •48T O C Z' 7 2
D e v & GL S \�`P 1 Z U O zl �O �� v z a 47THA - SS Q SC -7 ❑ THA y 4 HPAV6 za A jc�L �v
c� < P SG G /(r' O \G y w Q- O- a 2 C 4 O a4
CQ Q, Z FF S eft E U a0 ¢ 2 ? S g z w g6TF pL ¢ PC' 46TH PL r p O S\ ° v 7 m4 j m n O
Pr Z > U w c C1 w 46a�H AV O O m s T > P .o
0 -¢ i 11 ? 3 G f a r W_ x 'c2i ° z q o1�Ty,r d1 �5 z Oa �7Ti7iVE Cz9 ° ° Z 1 J A y < TTS Irv'' F
z m •O7' � J �` '1FW o F z a a\ H �► w Op.. ❑ J J 4� jvE a Lake = Q ORES `L �S, 4 TH A �' y IpN < 9 �G
U r o 6TH P r a 46TH d6 F = • T N a / P -Z1 ❑ ° C �i �V 2 q O l
O z r z :� �y �'�j U < - C !� z AST LU -C W R ul• O '\ 0 �i 46TH A .. TRENT '9
Zm e Fid < r HAVE F,AL v �H + 45THAWE Z w O -(HAVE O O lU \
45th Avenue HAVE. ,N rU UC Z "9 < r — >�T E N 2 Q O H r p,6 a r Oa /, O
m o JQ0 V S t$" F� D x J A 1 4TH P r�HiA 0 O Y � 0 �TH AVE O J R4 H PL C� � 3 w� z
QO ��'i N HAVE '2- 10 - - .° v D S ° -
d P E VE = m VE °5TH AVE< 45TH AVE
Q4",• 2 2 45� R` g g U 45�iq w O P O, 45TH AVE Z -d^ V ❑ w -f 45tH 4
-� z /` LO �� /2 O StHAVE O 4� �..G 19p m O'' -A g 44TH PL S atN� w T 4Th 45th Avenue
h r O Q 44 H AVIS H A 44 q 2r
•Fl S '-' c Ty '?l 44TH-14VE yAV ❑ W AV �y�`1 KRK J -•�v.� HAVE VF Q
TH AVE ➢ > a ` KF R rY- r Z D aJ�y . rn \. 4 H� \[� O ! O O u�1 44Ty��✓$- POD q Y W wZ Fr�
acs Z� r- O J OR[ U/ G 2� x �< ��- �J 3RDP Z ry O O O ,� y� a
•m ¢ �S\ 1 43RD AVE K w p3RDq 4 S k, to �1. Q'i C� 43 AVE O
o a3R O Q s w u. P ¢ Q :1:
4:RD R SHIRE CT g m�. `7�D P- F_ ..'. Z ~3 s g 43RD
43R AVEN zND P AVE 7 W 2� 43R tl �/ v AVE fur#le Lak@ z O h �• w .• O w J E �' ) z
z a43 w' FOUNTAIN CI ¢ • U ... P� q3� (7 m' z w z o y y w ❑ 43RD AVE 1�
' R 0 �_ Q z AVE w O 7 • Z S 2 ?ter - I] (COC� r!D O 9)
ya QAVF •]q2 PL �P, O❑ a3 O�_7 aye? X 3 z v •0 42ND PL _ --
v _S Y = w PL� 42ND z� �� 9 zZ l '¢ i2 2 U ES Lq,,GKP° '� A --
,� O J O Off. P� S rO�e J� g = 4 DP 3 w AV w _ •� 42 VE T
t-�-�p(� `t�+\k.• [}s�2N�`,,�yo'N ERPRFF O O n� R <v T NLA j • zti AV w ❑ 2-- P O �,42ND • zam
.9 7 C\�:: F A `C 1J 42 o' i .�j �Y41S A '4STPyt Ali 42N' . Q S W K m O N ° ° °°° o ZZe b ♦v
AcO LL w A 1 O r -. GPO2 -4^ Lost o ❑ OAKS LA X 41ST rU = p'` �Z STA EVE ❑ C2 �Ut 't'F ^ VE n M - AV 'P O O.r T r9 w o ¢ 2 41 AV O O
Lw Y 6 ^ z 'D 40THP cQ• `{ s0� 41St ,n 4 TAV� .a,\ °O Ory F SON. Ow o O fJ g "k Lake e"• •m <9 �\.
40th Avenue S1� 40T K jS N r7 F D R / r O OF m� 42ND AVE U ❑ OTH y Pp\S
z Z 40 W Z Z OLD ROCKFORD 2 U 0TH A 0
< 40TH A V ~ ❑ "' "y ❑ `• < P C F q \ Ri
i
CD s• m b AVE .Nic 40TH AYE 40TH PL J > r� O� O mGi /� �,PTH�JO "9 40th Avenue
J Ffn m @ .-p 39TH PL m O .q a z m OJ�tOSTP.VE o `S' ( !
S 9N. 40TH AVE �/1 Q m •may �n vy �r Y Oh `ty_ -O 9 O '1 `�!'
MEDINA Rp A w �10
� rU J' Ce 3gy{ PL �y p a �O(;a U • s \.9¢ w 'P ccs A P
g✓�eID Q e� �i a- 1� 40r a�13rgy/� FS, p / n �\l 'fj, ,1.j.r m
m Edina pV `J EV asrHY v Y �. R RD 39TH` ,..�'iv_< BTH PL-19THA OT JV c�i TAU"(NP�IeG�F CSI 3 •9N VE 0 - 39 �T'P m 338T 'P
0* O r3�T (� �39TN�• 3 TH CT • !i1F O ¢ 3 T
AV `l O '9V� Off"" • 'P C9 39TH AVE r O n, d` ��.my r m > w
-� C, •ST F a 0�Z` C� w �i NO S ? a 39TH VE O� �. .1\''�"y-F D ��H < �yg O Y •��
?Ui.l'� Jil t� 39TH AVE H '' _3$jHq 38TH P 'P (''!� TH PL' f <O L r0 FL �,,�OF ,5°'. . 4 U ON T RACE - y
07 I`��i! m �_ N 38TH AVE,J r �� F 37TH AVE <-9 C < y Q E4F LA y 1 - - 7S THA ?
38TNP U °U '� w J • II 3b r g•( w F �i `� r w-
Jt`3atNP 004�t�PV O ,y. g \F'TH AVE .t.P 38TH AVCy A< 38 AVE ¢ ��� ' -d-. - AVEO 0p�'•, ❑ 38TH IWU
yn w �/ p'Oi 3 OR'. A 111 2 3 J Q 37 H P- UP:'
urs J ^ Y R'F< G °�P --[� = g4 8 7T 37T a L = 7 A` THAV_ BTA1p A m QQl� �p Ix .J o: _ ¢ S 7 P
3> �° Oz ❑ z P �(- Q,\. �J < TH Z rrp N _ "� _ EF • O ro cV <9 g g 2
i- z D ❑ g\�• 4,� �I: m • "c - c0 0 Mf m -i b \ G� W ?
m a T2 w 3iLL �liF °.-A- ? O
v 1\: - G� y m m z O� . P ❑ M HAVE O --I
04`�fk4 A 2 .p g'1•C i N JO'C r a,\(pQ' N� ¢ 37TH ACTH AVE
Op rr��OV.I m J NDALE LA Q- w G ITN )D.. 3J iZ 'SA w ! z ❑
�P .'�� 31tN P� J �' .POU �+'6,TP• w f S- < Q 36 H m M m h m FO E 37T" "6T x
a -- - Ny ?O ST �e ¢¢ _ LF ¢ 36TH
36TH AVE DALLAS
P36TH AV a� 22 q -'o 4-OCIA�KIC
�S� 36rH AA/EP"(�> 6T >' 336THO 36T �L 36TH AVE
z90)L2 T Y,NIR� � Avt� -_MFDN 0 �0 *' J 3 HPL +O o w35th Avenue O �F72J�LF >>�� g O RO 35THAVt�'J ow D I- le 5 H 3&TH AVE
- C1. O tl, < AT VF 0 O nnnN O g -D ST E
C ? S r 35TH PV y1m 7 U
^+ 3 .. ,> s' atHAv� o o �� a 11q U7 C = w G 35th Avenue
LP 3 • < G �` Z X> C •.Op,,� V RIM Lq
J P U) V A-'S}S, N'PD L O ! r0 �4.TH a < a Co 0 A,_'
QO = RD a m < �YVI a L O DI < ~ J 34TH AV 33R VE �U4 �' p O 34TH AVE
cu
z> D 33 D F! ,<G 9 2 R O tiND Q O JQ, Z 34TH N
S �u S = - e2, 32� OF`�y Q- - E - 1
1• Z ND AV "a3 ❑ z z �e �T �O P < 32ND AVF� I �O P� O PV z O G1 N
p10 < w 2i of �' g y U 9 00 �. 2ND AVEg 32ND AVE ��,
w �E @��i' "9G P9 zl m vi w 3 L > ,C�frO 1 w 3 D
O w P O. m Y 7S. ¢ g F N• O r
31ST Vl7L 31S AVCD" o < L �.. d l N U = �Tq�,,. -!W r�J n22 z U D _ �1,ST
"• ° J CO D NO •Y RVy ��O y "•3 AVE -~>, MEDT z 31 ST AVE I' ` � m'9 } PQ z
o a gZO 0E .�rUv •, O �2 - r' 30TH VE 29 `IAVE v'P S `j `'Sq RBO L • . OSFWO +4'F%O J`f `NION J 'C AVE 0 PV J
J 7, h< Q w, J ! O 1' m P{ -i" 'F <�P 0--,Z) 30`�---s' 3'(tP <
30th Avenue AVE �CZN 30TH PL 3 HP K �? THS C �� Y < ED/ / ° �0 O K��q ,,1 30THA~ < r
30'('5'? 1 PV& AV < 0q;�(�<'9w Y Y E N'9 Sc 'P v LM �� i2 �•• w 9 J_ WE
Jo 30TH AV w` o_29T ?�h v NO ❑ 2 O RO v F 30th A
rl, ti,"
.� w LF < ❑- 2 z 8 H 28THA O '`/F�0 �2��. 29y MFOr y'\ cV, 29TH AVE Y venue
¢ _ E c y NIER A O m 2 28T A O U TH VE )Q FVi VE T c g
J 9TH A \ .• 28TH AV_�_ y )(u H ( < N m28TH VE O CO
- 28TNP Q� P THP 1
G z� F`
10",}-. �8 2 TH AVE ^� 0 < y Ply tUpa ¢• ' 27 H L * O• < z U •DL O m qAq =Q❑J �� y r PL D T •> F 9L 1 �r., G Y P >i 2 g gu, --•(/0 w ❑- ♦! Q'y\UPLA oAH ?>TH A O h t f r 27TH AV ti w / �� <'O RV W 2 QQ( O F 5 lT F ^;�' ti N ��< 7 H FY`/ Z < 27TH AVE O y S 2 < 27TH PL g 3 0 ¢ ❑ .�" O = z
`-•• O ,� 1- F A E VE �ti Y _mom' TH"A�/Ey2s z 8 �m 2 -° ❑° w > 3 z = o d C '•� :•J�ir J
27T41 A_V `ti <y TH j 2 r
�e 26TH V <q �� QV 26 27 O o. AV N 26TH a Z y r m 27TH AV z z a 27TH AVE'
�< r .� AVE N C.. 26 m w 26TH < E A' Y m 26TH AVS Q i Y 0 '\ 26TH AVE
z Oa� 25TH AVE O-4�I �. AV )Q'� <<`! H pVE� P a •�-EN STHC 25 gH A LL 25TH AVE
25th Avenue y V2 w G O\Pw x C Z gv < Y 26TH A' E P 25TH AVE Z = z
A HA DYV mr�`�\' � ¢1 w O qR NO LA-) 25T PV PVE F 24TH 0�, z 24TH AVE ¢' 4THq Q m NiBdICinB L81GB GFz 25THA
E 24T�' S J O dl, '( CK O S r in m -� C �7 '(N qV
P F �� < `� J w> O S F .. DO
24TH A1� 2 `G r f U < by V n. Q. ` g Z �z O `2� y tON O CjN. 5th AV��u�
, •F tl€- ?qT/y > EO 7 . '9,p Y � [NINNESOTA O'OD�A U K
w 3R0 N P �P ! N �S 23RD AVE O 23RD AVE 0 D �r " -� - qkF
LU E v 'L A AJ '9`l�' ELq�L ✓ oil, 2 crAVE @<L7 3RD P
O, 23RD Q g MST • F r O m w QUID O F
�' P 23RD AV O J 22
QG 2• 23R0 S ❑ ° 3 i P 2`'2 2G c7 Q m • w
r 22N AV oL FF.nyde 42ND 22 D9 'E� -l� O E m z J w x a m v
f�• Y q V �-- U, J INDUSTRIAL PARK BLV ' A g > A 0 r m
�j Z < OV LPm2�ST A* ak Krea RL•'c ¢ Y9 O ¢ :ji_;M-
\�+ENT ✓2 �� y21� L <U % a 1 0 p 3 ¢21 ST E 21 ST AVE rTl ° ✓ R` N 2 VE o Lakm1 ?vTOH�Q.Z W a m '' z a o 0 a 0 �• 21 ST A J U �] a O '• Y20th Avenue ZL �20TH m �a Y A 19TH AV Z_ O 7T Z'b 21S AV j 2� m a m w z zZ J O g o � Zm ti9 PO L ��
Maaney+ z F z z o 19TH AVE 9TH A- x O Y e! Z m RPCEVIx1Ey Oa H _ 7 a G ° y Q O f \ �2
0 79tH Q O iH PVE O D w 7 2F�NZI JMA LAY wit Nr7� 7eTH AV a J y�1 A~ Oj L C m �J •in - PJFY'F\,
a: r 19 r v ❑ ¢ O UI ;GUyP _ r _10"�- F'-- ATERTOWE CIF- 2 18T PL 55 A
Lake �sl rU� FQ D < y A9 0� O 7gr~ < 18TH AVE O' K I SLA�� O 1 of O
N. m 20t Avenue
r O�l�--,,-- P PLG _ m `' U z 4 ro 169
W m 1 tNC DP O J Lqq C'T 18TH .� 1lSN P�f�ii ¢� z = W • OJ 18TH E T IN AL 2d C�ZIe D
P i BTH Alia g w ❑ z N 18T P = ir0 C� I i2 11 P�• 4 (0 z 17TH AVE % X r 'O 011 mA O L8 @n
CQ w r z > I� •-1 tN K w� I /� < 7y J cP G\ 1� G
O 17TH ? Om(�y�j�c S 6 HAV° 1�� P � �O \`�O Z f VO R NO 16TH AVE • Y O N����
P tN . - F { <v O
J r o r- (�. !
< • Z C9 O T PV 1ST `¢ GO C D 1 ' 2 -z , m > >ST
15th Avenue O N NO 6 ¢ OY S N 5TH AV ° V U y O� Nq VF SNS f
j Z Re J m , 7 15tH P.. w w 0% 'C /
❑a'. 3 r O J z •. r, STH AVE m T S yyy��
❑ 4 O Z C \ N O _ 2q;I r �U� -u' ,4��5' LA - N /yp Ty 15th Avenue
>. N 4TH AV A �� R q
w > wr a' 14TH AVE P a 14TH AVE D- LAR 1 F V
Ja >' 14 H A E ]�Z Z \�' 2I J 1a W AO R� 'p I f I N Z �U� �� • r�cb COLaNIAL CIR D�
o N ~c� •- N s-- QP Or� tr�° m D g y Parkers Lake TH PLS ® a ty l7i 13THAV
z O 13TH A THA Y A E w Z Z 13TH A g 11 7TH VEYL Y❑' +
1J ❑ KI&ERLEY LA r y N� 2 3
F_O ake 12 HAVE
LL CON LAO 13 w J�"`� 13TH AV� • 4w o3 F+� A6 {.w' u~if0 0 7 T - D o ❑ °t H.9K��� -� O
LLI
12TH AVE 3 �, ❑ Y J ❑ Dr �• w °0 7 N 3 AVED ° r z <EVERGREEI � K tRF g
�• ¢ z p v 12TH AVE Ire ^� c>7 e1..ACK Q vP Y < U 12TH AVE 12 HAVE 12TH AVE f D 8 O, . OI w gy m}},,
z 12TH -'•�. T. CHER 2 U y \�,� • O J a ?.' -Q: ❑-_ �'i
�P �,\ W 0 j 11TH AVE Q, 70 so J A D O N P• Y r m m � 11TH AVE O <
10th Avenue 1A� H < ❑ r S Q Zy'� W 2 p E 11TH E Z N D p ! Z F
> 11TH VE 11TH AVE mu lG't2u�l w_ 'SAVE o ¢ �•''LU tb, 4i W c1 ,, q� a -r °
F 10TH AVE 'c • n! > x ttS 1 m '' 11 w� >_ ` FO J TH AVE 10TH AVE
c0� QS NVZ a L) < ,�c, 1 <� cc �P _ p.A NWOOD RD z RW 10th Avenue
T H % Q y < 0 9TH A iC a Qi 10TH AVE L. y�
@ ❑ •9 9T O z - TH U Q w W
1S00 z F J.Fq, HAVE VE ¢ O v� x Y 2 w.
a RESDEN n D E
°THA S�I, a 8TH AVE 9T gRl g'(N P w STH A E O w STS' • w Z • 8TH A
9w, ,f.�"9 - C9 ,L STH AVE tHE S -rqp 8, 7TH AVEg Z• = g z N ,"yi�P�V °° J 3 0. Sl �' -j
�� Ny.QUE JO Z��YLA • K� l,Jf rHAV ALS -v.,`1^�'" C n _ a WOOD LA V. V�'7
P VFE. - ifl l,_JTpN 6TH AV Q O �= o _11 O A `p 000
6 FAG DIM— 6TH A` V� ,\H PJ p -- I PVF 6'(N AVE � ❑ J' z � � 1 � ST AVE 5T AVE U SY 9 � g �Z1 NSE 7 -
Ar
T Q_GREE rC� �D
> ( Lg 3 m Z a a < '. J } 3 • ❑ T'G SJ R W V �-.",y'�p •('� _(� CO "S L
U v ti Z J 1 D U, < 5TH AVED ❑ x J �_ m < m ° O h "}'
5th Avenue -. 4r rCso spH•�L� _ 2 uy �o arHAVE ° a W z • ° Q-�' A z SI/ a °� Q O o /� F
O hq ! F x D a > 4T AVE �- ATH,�VE ti N -0) I O O�
�o �Lr3 Z !� Gleason Lake •.- o i �sL ' s'° CY$varrau z Y P <, a 5th Avenue
AV Q z ❑ P m ti Z w 0 3RD AVE W RF L7
<� _41
M� 3R0 AV� Y CDy- 3RD qV qa 3RDAVE O° Z GPF;LS�N. F r S TR `9p' i Lake ` 3 Ti ¢ I.
Z �J a 3RD AVE w ' ���p�E 9.i,!m Zi S SET v N D m r m Z
ti J 2N y J a �9 z s� TR SES �� _ ~ 9 Y
l AV < m c� J d 6 3 G�EP 0. ❑ O U z <
'9 � J -z� D 14 � rr 2ND AVE 0 x a - G p0 �.. S� O g � � p 0
U ENSLAN
�" U O Z S 2 ❑ w C7 7
J 'z < w U y CR DR
w 1 ST A O Y GL KE DR F Q 1ST AVEAV 1 S 3 AVE m¢ J -
S. w O w
O
Ridgemount Ave 2 mWE �0 > • < y: Q C, z ❑ m G
BLACK OAKS LA 0 - KINC' U O - a U "S! 'WO P' Y
lv o Ridgemount Ave
C O C 41 v a O ? a ? O U O ? -O >• -O C +-' ,C >` (D Ui C 00 L 2� O -O (O tB -O ?y r0 L O1 Ui nJ ra ra -O a -O ni -O a -O r6 t a = ,C -O C a -O a >• c N c OJ 41 c ra U3 c O Q1
Y 0 0 +� O H .v ro O "' m ro E OJ (O O a� O �_ O N v 'U r O N .v O .� .L .'_ .O O O O O LO O O p ._ p O> _p O v 41 O O p L O •C �O O �O W (6 .F rD W 4O+ E l0
+ a Lc :3 O > ra — v O cz)_Q nJ — Z i c O1 C O N X -o ra -� -> ro Lkn >� O Q= Q O O O O O O>> O O — ) O O O un c W W +L U E
o> N o a 'L c c Y L c} ay v c o ro a� 3 �, +, ra E 0 a� r6 N ny 3 3 3 3 E 3 3 a� 3 eD w 3 0 o E a� obn 3 3 3 u E c u- w z5
O X +' tln ro O O OJ o 0 r6 W 3 E O o 0 (7 o LU in E U Q ro O Q �_ 0 a 0 O S (7 i w 0 N O O On C O ru rn •E p (6 O Y O N O O m 0 > H` r6 or C7 a Z c c
m¢ o � m �M a�oQOZ raYo LL O r�oNo " c �C>Q c Qx a �a O O �_ - > W LN Dix W W ~v10 o rao
O O a1 OO C J 0 00 Ln -1O rn cG J O m Q 0 0 0 0 U m 0 0 Cq 0� O L O o o- o O p O O p O O Q m O Oo N O Z Y O N= O LU > N 4- o - c O O O
ci O r -I O ri 0 0 0 0^ f� `� O o 0 C: O O'D ri O oo N O m N 0 C) LnO LLC'J r -I O a rM-I i c H 0 0 0 CC cf C)0 0 0 ri O O ri 0 (7 p O 0 0 0 0 Q 0 > c Ln O Q O O o O J rn Ln
O O 00 } ^ ry O O O I� rH 0 0 0 ri o tD -1 0 O Ln Ln ri O O � O � O O M Ln O p o O O N Ol 0
Q1 Ql O 00 Ln o o O f� Ln `� I� O `� t 110 (n -1-I o 0 0 r -I ri Ln 0 0 00 rH rH rH 0 -1 41 O M o O o O O 0^ In O't C14 -1 O CD DO U O `� o O O o D o o O O o O Ql
ci ri o -1 O 00 00 N O r, N N r -I ri ji Lo� Ln ri Ln O O Ln Ln rH o M M r�-I m m O m o m rn O N r4 rN-I _j N N N -1 00 N Ln DO r 1 ri `-' 00 O o r -I O ci 00 O)
00 0 W 00 0 ri ri ri f� 0 Ln w rH ri N r -I ri ri ri ri ri '� ri O Ol
00 ri 00 ri Ln ri ri m ri m ri ri ri rH 0 0
ci � r-1 ri r -I r -I r -I r -I 0
c 1 r-1
Proposed 15 Year Street Reconstruction Map
• Culdesac
Private Roads
Railroads
City Boundary
Lakes
August, 2017
City Of
Plymouth
N
0 1
Miles
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
.mxd- M:\Ply_gis\Projects\Published Maps\Street Map_dsize.mxc
Page 44
2019-2023 Capital
Improvement Program
DRAFT Street Projects
0 2019
0 2020
D 2021
D 2022
2023
Legend
Mill and Overlay
......I FDR
— — — Reconstruction
�ii
City of
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
Page 45
2018 State of Streets
June 26, 2018
City of Plymouth irp)
State of the Streets Presentation
1. Importance of "State of the Streets" overview
2. Pavement management history
3. Repair options (Amy Grothaus, P.E. and Dan Wegman, P.E. with
Braun Intertec)
4. Current analysis and recommendations
5. Budget impacts/fund reserves
Page 47
of F '.
r0 `-0rvoar + � [[ 1
J• 1
vp
r[�Rv�s
�^ r
n
2010 Paser Ratings
1
2
3
4
5
8
7
8
9
,a
Page 48
T-
Lf
s, 1i�
v:
e SS L/AWIDL
2 I f
4v
iMidr [ ao � � � T ' � . 'j .
T
E
S�SNSEK ��
2016 Paser Ratings
t
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
44
Page 49
Page 50
Pavement Management History
• Began in 1987
• Reconstruction and mill/overlay projects
• Reconstruction has evolved � Stronger, properly drained streets today
'L
N{AEM CURB & GUTIE
S18 CONCRETE CIIURB & GU
l
GRAIN T1LE
Non -Engineered section
Missing sand and drain tile
Engineered section
Page 51
Pavement Management History
• Early 2000's
Pavement conditions deteriorated
36 petitions mailed between 2002 and
2005, many of which became street
reconstruction projects
( I l l 01� IT) X101 I H
PETITION
We. lltc undersiPncct. Jirlxr:h7 pe; uuni Ilse Cit}• of Plynmuth. Mu%ur And I',nmciI for the ir.wIIarum of Ihr
following public itnprm etren t.
S•tMd ZZ aOWWutti2n iT4 Jtny n:th and butter mstallotion on 'u Avenur. P Aventto, 4" Avanne. 6":1.c:�,i-.
�ictri c I ane,Narcissus l.nnc and C lire 'a the uzIacluxl Sir•
RAcmmnivdun Assess neat Policv
We understand Ilutt these irnpn+venwils Will be Suhjuct to asseximentspt:rsunnt it, the Pity's SPC..i
Asti'ffiIrLV Policy (-we 4;tacltrdP.
Pri:gcd `l:m:e S ned Name :LSJr—
7f" is us 5� `r'c'. 1-
J11iliZK �lihog��� ,.a]ja .•• �,.i� f,(Il+{c+ssus 1.nNa y -re
J
�.ro�j 011V+r 1
v LIC-\ i L+Y+i L f '�' ILC l.'
4U� �-)A t 1SV LA I Q
q -(6
fSIcL- KAPITCK6 /St (k' � r.:,s Iu>�t�rr LS '4-14-6y
Page 52
Pavement Management History
• 2005
"Mix of Fixes" Report presented to City
Council
Pavement condition and funding were
concerns
Direction was to obtain a rating of 7.0
Proposed "Mix -of -Fixes"
Approach to Address Street
Condition Deficiencies
Submitted to
Lnuric Ahrrus, City Manager
January 14, 2005
Written by
iv ike Kohn. Financial Analyst
CoM41buting Stall
Dale ] Jahn, Finance Director
Anne Hur)bart. Community Development J]irectur
Eric Blank, Park and Recreation Direczae
Dan Faulkner, City Engineer
Rap. Quanheek, City Engineer
Ross Beckwith, Assistant City J�ngineer
D4TI CBmpbell, Sr. EngiueeringTechnirian
Steve Kuskela, Sr. L•ngirwering Technician
.Jim Rennetwrg, Civil Engineer
Brian Youn& Sewcr and Water SurrtviNor
Tam Vetrch, Public Warks Superintendent
Clary Smith, Street Supervisor
Scott Newberger. Street Supervisor
Page 53
Pavement Management Histo
• 2010
"Pavement Management 2010 and
Beyond" presented to City Council
Pavement Management
2010 and Beyond
Final Report
January 18, 2011
Page 54
. sL 5
'zn
2010: 5.9 Miles,.
City of Plymouth
Funding tripled between
2005 and 2010 for street
reconstructions
r _
2010: 19.1 Miles
�F
PASER Rating 3/10
Page 56
PSFit"
1 n
—
Pavement Management History
• Post 2010
Increase mill/overlays + Reconstructs streets that need it
= 2016 ratings increased to 7.4
g
W 7
aA 6
+� 5
4
LU
Ln3
a 2
bA
0
'Ir%r%A
Historical Plymouth Street Rating
11 nno
-1 n -1 n
11!1'1 n
'1!1'1 A
'1/l1 0
Page 58
Comparing PASER Ratings from 2010 to 2016
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2 3
4
Ratings per Mile
In
11
6
PASER Rating
7 8
11
�E
10
Page 59
,W
IZL
2016 0 Miles
City of Plymouth
City of Plymouth r�
31
y r�•' i
2010: 19.1 Mi-
es
2016: 0 Miles.
Ism Ilk—
City of Plymouth r�
ialn
7 J.0
2'010:': 34.1 Miles 7-�
2016 :. 1 5 M i Ies
City of Plymouth
PASER
Rating
7/10
r
2010: 67.5 Miles
?n1 F • 44 4 NAiIAc
Page 63
PASER Rating Comparison 2010 vs. 2016
■ Failed, Very Poor, or Poor
• Fair or Good
N Very Good or Exelleat
2010 PASER Ratings
2016 PASER Ratings
■ Failed, Very Poor, or Poor
■ Fair Qr Good
■ Very Good or Exellent
Failed, Very Peer or Poor - PASER 1 to 3
Fair or Good - PASER 4 to l
0%
51%
Page 64
1600
1400
1200
CD
Q 1000
N
Q 800
O
N 600
C
400
200
0
Spring Pothole Patching
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015* 2016* 2017
ran
x`2015 and 2016 amounts are higher than expected due to Schmidt Lk Rd and Fernbrook Ln needing
significant patching. These streets could not receive a project until Vicksburg Ln and 1-494 projects
were completed.
Page 65
Pavement Repair Options
• Presented by Braun Intertec
• Amy Grothaus, P.E.
• 20+ years experience in pavement management
• Assisted many agencies in all pavement management areas
• Dan Wegman, P.E.
• Instructor at U of M Local Technical Assistance Program classes
• Extensive experience in FDR, pavement research, repair recommendations and design
Page 66
BRAUN
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On,
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT
SESSION
June 26, 2018
Page 67
Typical Life Cycle Curve
BRAUN Keep good pavements in good condition
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
23
Page 68
BRAUN
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Pavement Management
Repair Options
Preventive ($$)
• Crack Repair
• Fog seal
• Extends pavement life by 5 to 7 years
Major Repair ($$$)
• Mill & Overlay (10-15 years of pavement life)
• Full -depth reclamation/FDR (20 to 25 years of pavement life)
Complete Rehabilitation ($$$$)
• Reconstruction (25+ years)
Page 69
Repair Alternatives: Preventive
BRAUN
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Crack Repair
Crack Sealing/Crack Filling
Treatment used to prevent water and debris from entering the
pavement structure.
Benefits/Construction - Prolongs pavement life, low cost to
perform. Streets can be driven on immediately after cracks are
repaired and lightly covered.
Typical Cost => $1.00/linear
foot
25
Page 70
BRAUN
I NTE--- -
The Science
Cr
Cr
Repair Alternatives: Preventive
Page 71
Repair Alternatives: Preventive
BRAUN
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Fog Seal
Light application of diluted, slow -setting asphalt emulsion,
Rejuvenator or Bio Seal product without aggregate cover.
Creates a "brand new" appearance to the street.
Benefits/Construction - Seals pavement, inhibits raveling, can
enrich hardened/oxidized asphalt. Applied at a rate of 3 mph,
open to traffic within hours of application.
Typical Cost => $16,000/mile
Page 72
BRAUN
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Fog Sea
Repair Alternatives: Preventive
Page 73
Repair Alternatives: Preventive
BRAUN
29
Page 74
Repair Alternatives: Major
BRAUN Repair
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Mill and Overlay
Repair technique that includes the removal of a top layer of
bituminous by the grinding action of a large milling machine.
After the bituminous is removed, a new layer of bituminous is
placed.
Benefits/Construction — reduces surface roughness, address
kk minor deformations, and cracking. Provides a smooth
pavement surface. Milled surface can be driven on.
Contractor usuallv naves within 2 weeks. Open to traffic as
Typical Cost => $205,000/mile
Page 75
Repair Alternatives: Major
BRAUN Repair
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Mill and Overlay
Page 76
;f' ilk• effi-
-4j
I f fj Y
Repair Alternatives: Major
BRAUN Repair
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Full Depth Reclamation
Existing bituminous and a portion of aggregate base are
pulverized, mixed together and compacted as base material,
followed by the placement of a new bituminous overlay. May
require the removal of some reclaim material.
Benefits/Construction — Eliminates reflective cracking, uses
materials already paid for, cost and time savings as compared to
reconstruction. Pulverization can per performed at a rate of
about 1 lane mile per hour. Street may be temporarily closed for
a few hours.
Typical Cost => $500,000/mile
33
Page 78
Repair Alternatives: Major
BRAUN Repair
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Full -depth Reclamation (FDR)
Stabilized oonslructidn
material mix
WQr! ing ddreOQn
=4100.
Pre -spread lime
or Carnenk
Cansiructinn material
mix our to stabilization
34
Page 79
BRAUN Repair Alternatives: FDR
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) —
fs'4 ; determine in-place pavement layer
thicknesses
i6�Il��¢'�-„��m®4E31�PI «•. troy
35
Page 80
Repair Alternatives: Major
BRAUN Repair
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Full -depth Reclamation (FDR)
Distressed Pavement
Base/Sub-base
ILubgrade
Sa
Subgrade
New -overlay
Reclaim
material
Page 81
Repair Alternatives: Major
BRAUN Repair
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Full -depth Reclamation (FDR)
First pass with
reclaimer. City of
Shoreview
Page 82
Repair Alternatives: Major
BRAUN Repair
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Full -depth Reclamation (FDR)
38
Page 83
Repair Alternatives: Complete
BRAUN Rehabilitation
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Reconstruction
Includes the complete removal and replacement of the in-
place pavement structure.
Benefits/Construction — allows for roadway widening or
realignment, replacement or repair of utilities or structures
(curb and gutter, water main, etc.), re-establishing crown.
Typical Cost => $1,560,000/mile
39
Page 84
The Science You Build On.
Repair Alternatives: Complete
Reconstruction
A
ARI
- r
Construction of new street section
Page 85
R6 Typical Life Cycle Curve
BRAUN Keep good pavements in good condition
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On.
Reconstruction
10
a
r- 7
0
0
5
4
3
2
1
U
Fog seal/
'V""/ Keconsiruci or rUK
Complete Rehabilitation $$$$ Overlay (recommended at 4)
Pavement Age
Page 86
BRAUN
INTERTEC
The Science You Builc
Repair Selection Chart
Full Recanstructi on Should be performed W
pavement evndiTion dictate the need for reur:don
constr, hieluding
the need for curb and gutter or capac,ty issues.
PASER Baling 1 to 3 70+ years
Failed, Very Povr, Povr FOR, SfOR or Bituminous Remove and Replace. Testing needed to
canhrm feasibility, but can be performed at a lower cost than full
reconstruction while providing a similar pavemem design ffe� J
-
M 11 l-and-❑ved ay, FOR or SFDR. Testing needed to determine most
approprrate repair method- if underlying condgions are sound, mill -
and -overlay can be performed on If with a rating of about 4 or
5- Depending on the cracking extent and in-place ma reria ls, FOR or
VOR may be performed to eliminate the potential for reflective
a
cracking.
v
Edge MilVand-0verlay. Should be performed on higher condition
PASER Rot] ng 4 to 7 pavements (likely PASER ratings of 5 or 7). It eaten slve cracking is
— 16 to 20 years
Fair. Good present in non -milled areas, a full mill-and•overfay should be
performed. Pavement crown should also be considered.
3
Mlrcosurfacing. Micniw rfaCing can be considered if She street has
rutting, raveling,or needs improved friction. Microsurfacing will
cost less than mil i•a nd• overlay and may provide 8 years of
additional pavement IiFe-
Fag or Chip Seal. Sealing should be performed 2-3 years after any
new surfacing has been performed- Sealing should also be
systematic in that a second treatment Is performed again around
age 7 or S. Oe pending on the level of cracking, track repairs should
he performed prior to the seal-
PASER (sating St. 10 - 0 to to years
Very Good, Excellent Crack Sealing or Crack filling. Should be performe=rirsl of pavement cracking- May be 1 to 2 years after cd
- BRAUN
Do Nothing. Pavement has no crack) ng present and proper voids. _ I NT E R TEC
42
Page 87
BRAUN
INTERTEC
The Science You Build On,
THANK YOU
1
Page 88
Current Analysis and
Recommendations
1. Maintain a minimum
PASER rating of 7.5
• Continue to rate streets every 2 years
• Create proactive program
• Adjust upcoming CIP if needed if ratings drop
Page 89
Current Analysis and Recommendations
2. Develop long term reconstruction plan
Standard is to have concrete curb and gutter
Reconstruct streets when rating average is 4.0
Page 90
;1,71' -.
PropoMe N20 Reconstruction Project
Page 91
Current Analysis and Recommendations
3. Add FDR Projects as
new option - - -
Provides longer service
life than mill/overlay
-_ .• Wit= - _"'�' _�..�: _ - ��Y ,,,� : t . . - �., r- ,.�� - - _ � - = � � -
Cost effective compared
to street reconstruction
projects
Project selection based
-
_ . - ...—. - - _ .. -- _. .a4 F. — Y— 4 4�•- _
on investigative testing
pavement ratings and
historical records
Pro osed _0_0 FDR Project
Page 92
Current Analysis and Recommendations
4. Continue 5
year CIP for
overlays and add
in FDR projects
w
2019-2023 Capital
Improvement Program
DRAFT Street Projects
2023
Legend
Mill and Overlay
FDR
— — — Reconstruction
City of
Plymouth
Addrns Qwaty to Life
Page 93
Current Analysis and Recommendations
Page 94
Current Analysis and Recommendations
6. Crack repair streets
3-5 years following overlays
10-15 years following
reconstruction, FDR and
new construction
These are guidelines
-> actual observed
conditions will dictate
priorities
Local streets -City's
maintenance staff
High volume streets -
P -. .
Page 95
Budget Impacts
• Expected costs for pavement treatment options
Option
C05t/mile
(per 28' w i de street)
Frequen-cy
Fog Seal
$16,000
-3 and 7-10 years after project
Mill and Overlay
$205,000
10-15 years*
FDR
$500,000
25-30 gears*
Reconstruction
$1,560,000
1 50+ yea r5 *
* With opproprfare preventative moonfenance rneosrures such as crack repair and fog seal
**The actual total project costs arae expected to be higher as major utility work �s not 1n-cladea
Page 96
Budget Impacts
• Previous 5 years compared to the proposed CIP
Project Comparison by Cost
$70.0
$60,0
$54.4 X40-7
$30.0 526.9 524-3$21-5
"o $20.0
+� $9,0
$10.4
$0.0 ■
$0.0
Reconstruction FDR Mill and Overlay
Project Type
0 2014-2018 0 2019-2023
Project Comparison by Mileage
124-0
557.4
100.0
80.0
.0
40-p
24-0
7.1 11-3
0-0
Total
Reconstruction
*Includes wider, high volume streets such as Vicksburg and Peony lanes
83.6
75.5
4.0 .
FUR Mill and Overlay
Project Type
■ 2014-2018 ■ 21)19-2023
90.7
Total
Page 97
Funding
��,�oa�aao
QDQ
�a,�aa.aao
.1,U.000
a,�oo,000
z�,�0.oao
24,Da, X00
X0,000, 000
1-8,000,000
Z-Fp,[)no,00Q
14,000, 000
12,Oaa.000
101OD �dy��❑y�4yQ
' V�yy�V�yy 0, 4ry+4ry+0
Wa.aao
7lDf)fDrj❑}f❑O
2 . 4+4f 01000
Total Combined Municipal State Aid and
Street Reconstruction 2008 - 2034
—Revc-nuesExpenditures C2511 -Flow
Page 98
r
In Conclusion...
The State of Streets in Plymouth is Strong
Page 99
rp)City of
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
To:
SPECIAL
COUNCIL MEETING Prepared by:
June 26, 2018 Reviewed by:
Agenda 2B
Number:
Mayor and Council
Dave Callister, City Manager
Item: Set Future Study Sessions
Pending Study Session Topics (at least three Council members have approved the following study
items on the list):
None at this time.
Other Council requests for Study Session Topics:
None at this time.
Staff's requests for Study Sessions:
• TwinWest update (to be scheduled later this year)
Page 1
r�ity
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
July 2018
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
INDEPENDENCE
DAY
CITY OFFICES
CLOSED
8
9
10
11 7:00 PM
12
13
14
ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY COMMITTEE
MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
5:30 PM - 10:30 PM
Music in Plymouth
Hilde
Performance Center
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
7:00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING
Council Chambers
22
23
24 5:30 PM
25
26
27
28
SPECIAL COUNCIL
7:00 PM
MEETING
Economic
HOUSING AND
Development
REDEVELOPMENT
Strategic Planning
AUTHORITY
Medicine Lake
MEETING
Room
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
MEETING
Council Chambers
29
30
31
CITY COUNCIL
FILINGS OPEN
Mayor, At Large,
Ward 2 and Ward 4
Page 2
r�ity
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
August 2018
Page 3
1
2
3
4
7:00 PM
6:00 PM - 9:00 PM
PLANNING
Kids Fest
COMMISSION
Hilde
MEETING
Performance Center
Council Chambers
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
8:00 AM -4:30 PM
8:00 AM -4:30 PM
8:00 AM -4:30 PM
8:00 AM -4:30 PM
10:00 AM -3:00 PM
ABSENTEE/DIRECT
ABSENTEE/DIRECT
ABSENTEE/DIRECT
ABSENTEE/DIRECT
ABSENTEE/DIRECT
BALLOTING
BALLOTING
BALLOTING
BALLOTING
BALLOTING
Medicine Lake Room
Medicine Lake Room
Medicine Lake Room
Medicine Lake Room
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
EQC MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
12
13
14 �
15
16
17
18
VOTE
7:00 PM
5:00 PM
8:00 AM -5:00 PM
ABSENTEE/DIRECT
PRIMARY
PLANNING
CITY COUNCIL FILINGS
BALLOTING
ELECTION
COMMISSION
DEADLINE TO
Medicine Lake Room
Polls Open
MEETING
WITHDRAW
7:00 AM to 8:00 PM
Council Chambers
5:00 PM
CITY COUNCIL
FILINGS CLOSE
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
7:00 PM
5:30 PM
HOUSING AND
SPECIAL COUNCIL
REDEVELOPMENT
MEETING
AUTHORITY
Budget and CIP
MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
Medicine Lake Room
26
27
28 5:30 PM
29
30
31
SPECIAL COUNCIL
MEETING
Budget and CIP
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING
Council Chambers
Page 3
r�
City of
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
September 2018
Page 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
SPECIAL COUNCIL
PLANNING
LABOR DAY
MEETING
COMMISSION
Budget and CIP
MEETING
CITY OFFICES
Medicine Lake Room
Council Chambers
CLOSED
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
7:00 PM
7:00 PM
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
ENVIRONMENTAL
PARK £t REC
MEETING
QUALITY
ADVISORY
Council Chambers
COMMITTEE
COMMISSION
MEETING
MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
Public Works
Maintenance Building,
14900 23rd Ave. N.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
7:30 PM
VOTE
10:30 AM - 2:00 PA
PLANNING
Plymouth on Parad
COMMISSION
qQw
Celebration
MEETING
City Center Area
Council Chambers
ABSENTEE VOTING
BEGINS FOR GENERAL
ELECTION
2330
24
25
26
27
28
29
7:00 PM
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
HOUSING AND
MEETING
REDEVELOPMENT
Council Chambers
AUTHORITY
MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
Page 4
r�ity
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
October 2018
Page 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7:00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING
Council Chambers
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
7:00 PM
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
ENVIRONMENTAL
MEETING
QUALITY
Council Chambers
COMMITTEE
MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
7:00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING
Council Chambers
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
7:00 PM
7:00 PM
6:00 PM - 9:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
HOUSING AND
Halloween at the
MEETING
REDEVELOPMENT
Creek
Council Chambers
AUTHORITY
Plymouth Creek
MEETING
Center
Medicine Lake Room
28
29
30
31
8:00 AM -4:30 PM
8:00 AM -4:30 PM
ABSENTEE/DIRECT
ABSENTEE/DIRECT
BALLOTING
BALLOTING
Council Chambers
Council Chambers
Page 5