College-Wide Pavement Study Jacksonville, Florida

Transcription

1

2

3 Engineering Architecture Planning Allied Services College-Wide Pavement Study Jacksonville, Florida Prepared for: Florida State College at Jacksonville September 27, 2013

4

5

6 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY The pavement areas and sections were rated on several different criteria. If an area did not contain certain pavement flaws, that criterion is not shown on the evaluation form. The severity of most of the criteria is described as Low (L), Medium (M), or High (H). An X indicates a selection but not an accompanying level of severity. 2.1 Evaluation Criteria Below is an overview and brief definition of the evaluation criteria found during inspection. Raveling is the disintegration of the pavement from the surface downward due to the loss of aggregate particles. Rutting describes the creation of ruts or vertical deformations in the pavement surface along the wheel tracks. Usually ruts are only depressions in the pavement, however, in severe cases pavement uplift alongside the depressions may also occur. Low rutting has a depth less than 0.25 inches and is barely noticeable. Medium rutting is readily noticeable and has a depth between 0.25 and 1 inch. High rutting has a definite effect upon vehicle control and is at a depth greater than 1 inch. Potholes are bowl-shaped voids in the pavement surface. Low severity potholes have a depth less than 1 inch and an area of less than 1 sq. yd. Medium severity potholes are greater than 1 inch in depth but less than 1 sq. yd in area or less than 1 in depth but greater than 1 sq. yd in area. High severity potholes are greater than 1 inch in depth and greater than 1 sq. yd. area. Patching is either the placing of asphalt concrete on the surface of the existing pavement or the replacement of the existing pavement in small isolated areas. Low severity patches are less than 1 sq. ft. Medium severity patches are less that 1 sq. yd. Hanson Professional Services Inc. 2

7 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY High severity patches are greater than 1 sq. yd. Settlement is a dip or depression in the longitudinal profile of the pavement surface. Low settlement has a noticeable effect upon the ride; however the driver is able to maintain vehicle control easily. Medium settlement causes some discomfort to passengers; however the driver is able to maintain control with slight corrective action. High settlement is greater than 6 inches and was not found in this survey. Cracking in this analysis includes wheel track cracking, longitudinal cracking, joint cracking, edge cracking, block cracking, transverse cracking, and random cracking. Low cracks are tight with a width less than 0.25 inches and no break up or raveling. Medium cracks have a width greater than 0.25 inches with some raveling. High cracking is characterized by multiple cracks with moderate raveling and an average crack width of greater than 0.25 inches. The parking lot markings are categorized as either acceptable or unacceptable. The curb types are curb and gutter, and header. The quality of the curb is also categorized as acceptable or unacceptable. 3.0 PAVEMENT REVIEW A qualitative review on the condition of each pavement area is included in this section along with recommendations for repair. Refer to Table 1 at the end of this report for a summary of all recommended repairs and associated costs. Table 1 is split into two segments: short term repairs that are recommended to occur within the next 5 years and long term more permanent repairs that can be scheduled in the next 5 10 years. Table 1 is produced for each campus separately as well as for all campuses combined. For the individual campuses, lots are ranked by short term and long term priorities, which were determined by considering the numeric PCR rating as well as field observations of use. For the all-campus table, the PCR ratings and short-term priority rankings were combined with engineers judgments to rank all lots together. Hanson Professional Services Inc. 3

8

9 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY 3.1(b) Police Track (Sections E O of North Campus - A) The Police Track is an asphalt track located on the western segment of campus. It is approximately 1.68 acres and is used as a road course for training police officers in some advanced driving skills. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Cracking Minor Raveling Minor Potholes Minor Patching This pavement is newer than most other areas on this campus and is in relatively good condition. Sealing the pavement cracks and sealcoating/restriping will be required within 4-6 years and another sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (>10 years). 3.1(c) Training Area (Sections P A2 of North Campus - A) The Training Area is an asphalt/concrete area used for police training. This area is occasionally sprayed with water to provide experience in driving under wet conditions. It is approximately 3.47 acres and located on the western segment of the campus. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Cracking Minor Raveling Minor Patching This pavement is newer than most other areas on this campus and is in relatively good condition. Sealing the pavement cracks and sealcoating/restriping will be required within 4-6 years and another sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (>10 years). The concrete is in good condition with minor cracking, so there are no repair recommendations. Hanson Professional Services Inc. 5

10 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY 3.1(d) East Lot (Sections B2 - H2 of North Campus - A) The East Lot is an asphalt parking lot located on the western segment of campus. It is approximately 1.51 acres and is primarily used for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Significant Cracking Minor Patching Minor Settlement This pavement is has cracking throughout and should be repaired soon. Milling and resurfacing and restriping are recommended for this area within the next few years. Some rebuilding of the base will be required due to the settlement. In addition, some minor curb repair is also recommended. Additional sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (>10 years). 3.1(e) Southwest Lot (Sections A H of North Campus B) The Southwest Lot is located on the eastern segment of campus. It is 2.68 acres and primarily used for student/faculty parking. The following discrepancies were found: Significant Cracking Minor Potholes Minor Settlement Extensive Patching Minor Crack Seal Deficiency This pavement is has cracking throughout and should be repaired soon. Milling and resurfacing and restriping are recommended for this area within the next few years. Some rebuilding of the base will be required due to the settlement. Additional sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (>10 years). Hanson Professional Services Inc. 6

11 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY 3.1(f) South Lot (Section I T of North Campus B) The South Lot is located on the eastern segment of campus. It is 3.08 acres and primarily used for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Significant Cracking Minor Potholes Extensive Patching This pavement is has cracking throughout and should be repaired soon. Milling and resurfacing and restriping are recommended for this area within the next few years. Some rebuilding of the base will be required in the pothole areas. Additional sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (>10 years). 3.1(g) Center Lot (Sections U F2 of North Campus B) The Center Lot is located on the eastern segment of campus. It is 3.08 acres and primarily used for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Significant Cracking Extensive Patching This pavement is has cracking throughout and should be repaired soon. Milling and resurfacing and restriping are recommended for this area within the next few years. Additional sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (>10 years). 3.1(h) Maintenance Area (Sections G2 and H2 of North Campus B) The Maintenance Area is an asphalt area near the main building that is used for maintenance and delivery. The pavement area is approximately 0.75 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Significant Cracking Extensive Patching Hanson Professional Services Inc. 7

12 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY This pavement has numerous patches and cracks but is in decent condition. The short term recommendation for this basin is to seal the pavement cracks within 2-4 years. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary after 10 years. 3.1(i) Northeast Lot (Sections I2 U2 of North Campus B) The Northeast Lot is an asphalt pavement area located on the eastern segment of campus that is used primarily for student parking. This area is approximately 3.30 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Significant Cracking Minor Potholes Extensive Patching Minor Settlement This pavement is has cracking throughout and should be repaired soon. Milling and resurfacing and restriping are recommended for this area within the next few years. Some base repair may be necessary due to settlement. Additional sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (>10 years). 3.1(j) North Lot (Sections V2 B3 of North Campus B) The North Lot pavement area is located on the eastern segment of campus. It is approximately 1.56 acres in size and was found to be in decent condition. The following discrepancies were found: Significant Cracking Recommend sealing the pavement cracks in the short term, 2-4 years, and sealcoating/restriping within 6-8 years. Hanson Professional Services Inc. 8

13 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY 3.2 BETTY P. COOK NASSAU CENTER 3.2(a) West Lot (Sections A G) The West Lot is an asphalt pavement area located on west side of the campus. It is approximately 1.98 acres in size and is used for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Patching This pavement is in relatively good condition. Monitoring the asphalt periodically is recommended for the short term. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (6-8 years). 3.2(b) Center Lot (Sections H L) The Center Lot is a 1.27 acre parking lot located between the West and East lots. It is used primarily for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Cracking Faded Striping This pavement appears in good condition. It is recommended to seal the pavement cracks within the next few years. The area should also be restriped in the near future as well. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary within 6-8 years. 3.2(c) Driveways (Sections M Q) The Driveways are the access drives for the campus. The pavement area for these drives is 0.53 acres. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Cracking Minor Patching Hanson Professional Services Inc. 9

14 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY This pavement appears in good condition. Monitoring the asphalt periodically is recommended for the short term. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary within 6-8 years. 3.2(d) East Lot (Sections (R V) The East Lot is an asphalt roadway located on the east side of the campus. It is approximately 1.32 acres in size and is used for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Cracking Faded Striping This pavement appears in good condition. The area should be restriped in the near future. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary within 6-8 years. 3.3 CECIL CENTER NORTH 3.3(a) West Lot (Sections A H of Cecil Center North A) The West Lot area is located on the west side of the campus. The lot is 1.88 acres in size and is primarily used for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Patching Minor Potholes This pavement appears in good condition. Sealcoating may be necessary within 4-6 years. Pavement patch and base augmentation will be required. Additional sealcoating/restriping may be necessary in the long term as well (> 10 Years). Hanson Professional Services Inc. 10

15 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY 3.3(b) East Lot (Sections I L of Cecil Center North A) The East Lot area is located on the east side of the campus. The lot is 1.26 acres in size and is primarily used for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Patching Minor Cracking This pavement appears in good condition. Sealing the pavement cracks is recommended for the short term (2-4 years). Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary within 6-8 years. 3.3(c) Entry Road (Sections M P of Cecil Center North Campus A) The Entry Road is the main access to the campus and the Truck Driving School. The lot is 1.91 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Cracking This pavement appears in good condition. Sealing the pavement cracks is recommended for the short term (2-4 years). Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary within 8-10 years. 3.3(d) Truck School Lot (Sections A - D of Cecil Center North Campus B) The Truck School Lot is an asphalt lot used for student parking at the FSCJ Truck Driving School. The pavement area is approximately 0.90 acres in size. This pavement is in good condition. Monitoring the asphalt periodically is recommended for the short term. Sealcoating may be necessary long term (8-10 years). Hanson Professional Services Inc. 11

16 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY 3.3(e) Truck Training Track (Sections E J of Cecil Center North Campus B) The Truck Training Track is an asphalt roadway used for training drivers at the FSCJ Truck Driving School. The pavement area is approximately 2.75 acres in size. This pavement is in good condition. Monitoring the asphalt periodically is recommended for the short term. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (8-10 years). 3.3(f) Truck Training North Lot (Sect. K O of Cecil Center North Campus B) The Truck Training North Lot is an asphalt lot used training drivers at the FSCJ Truck Driving School. The pavement area is approximately 2.91 acres in size. This pavement is in good condition. Monitoring the asphalt periodically is recommended for the short term. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (8-10 years). 3.3(g) Truck Training South Lot (Sect. P T of Cecil Center North Campus B) The Truck Training South Lot is an asphalt lot used training drivers at the FSCJ Truck Driving School. The pavement area is approximately 3.04 acres in size. This pavement is in good condition. Monitoring the asphalt periodically is recommended for the short term. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary long term (8-10 years). 3.4 CECIL CENTER SOUTH 3.4(a) North Lot (Section A) The North Lot is an asphalt segment used primarily for student/staff parking. The pavement area is approximately 0.24 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Major Cracking Extensive Patching Significant Settlement Hanson Professional Services Inc. 12

17 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY This pavement is in very bad condition. Short term recommendations are to Mill and resurface and restripe within 2 years. There will be base augmentation required as a result of the settlement as well. Long term recommendation is to sealcoat/restripe within 8-10 years. 3.4(b) Center Lot (Sections B - C) The Center Lot is an asphalt segment used primarily for student/staff parking. The pavement area is approximately 0.70 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Major Cracking Minor Patching This pavement is in decent condition but cracks cover more than 50%. Short term recommendations are to seal the pavement cracks. Long term recommendation is to sealcoat/restripe within 6-8 years. 3.4(c) South Lot (Sections D - G) The South Lot is an asphalt segment used primarily for student/staff parking. The pavement area is approximately 0.78 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Patching This pavement is in good condition and appears to have been installed recently. Short term recommendations are to monitor the pavement periodically. Long term recommendation is to sealcoat/restripe within 8-10 years. Hanson Professional Services Inc. 13

18 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY 3.5 DEERWOOD CENTER 3.5(a) West Lot (Sections A - C) The West Lot is an asphalt segment used primarily for student parking. The pavement area is approximately 0.52 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Significant Patching Significant Cracking This pavement is in decent condition with cracks over 20-50% of the area. Short term recommendations are to seal the pavement cracks. Long term recommendation is to mill and resurface within 8-10 years. 3.5(b) South Lot (Sections E G) The South Lot is an asphalt segment used primarily for student parking. The pavement area is approximately 0.92 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Potholes This pavement is in decent condition with a few potholes scattered throughout. Short term recommendations are to patch the potholes which include augmenting the base. Long term recommendation is to sealcoat/restripe within 8-10 years. 3.5(c) Loop Road (Sections H, L, U, V, and D) The Loop Road is an asphalt roadway that circles the campus. The pavement area is approximately 1.03 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Potholes Hanson Professional Services Inc. 14

19 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY Minor Patching Minor Cracking This pavement is in good condition with a few issues noted above. Short term recommendation includes patching the potholes which includes augmenting the base. Sealing the pavement cracks and sealcoating/restriping may be necessary within 8 10 years. 3.5(d) East Lot (Sections I - K) The East Lot is an asphalt section on the east side of the campus. The pavement area is approximately 0.92 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Potholes Minor Patching This pavement is in good condition with a few potholes and patches scattered throughout. Short term recommendation includes patching the potholes to include augmenting the base. Sealcoating/restriping the pavement may be necessary within 8 10 years. 3.5(e) Northeast Lot (Sections M Q) The Northeast Lot is an asphalt section on the northeast side of the campus. The pavement area is approximately 0.79 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Patching Major Cracking This pavement is in decent condition for the most part. A few patches scattered throughout with some areas of major cracking. Short term recommendation Hanson Professional Services Inc. 15

20 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY includes sealing the pavement cracks within 2-4 years. Sealcoating/restriping the pavement may be necessary within 8 10 years. 3.5(f) North Lot (Sections R T) The North Lot is an asphalt section on the north side of the campus. The pavement area is approximately 0.86 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Significant Patching Minor Cracking This pavement is in decent condition for the most part with some patches scattered throughout. The lot has some cracks and raveling as well. Short term recommendation includes monitoring the pavement periodically. Sealing the cracks and sealcoating/restriping the pavement may be necessary within 8 10 years. 3.6 DOWNTOWN CAMPUS 3.6(a) North Lot (Sections A - J of Downtown Campus A) The North Lot is an asphalt section on the north side of the campus. The pavement area is primarily used for student parking and is approximately 3.99 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Patching Minor Settlement Major Cracking This pavement is in bad condition for the most part with some patches scattered throughout. The lot is covered with cracks and has some raveling and settlement Hanson Professional Services Inc. 16

21 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY areas as well. Milling and resurfacing and restriping are recommended within 2 years. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary after 10 years. 3.6(b) East Lot (Sections K V of Downtown Campus A) The East Lot is an asphalt section on the east side of the campus. The pavement area is primarily used for student parking and is approximately 5.17 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Major Patching Significant Settlement Major Cracking This pavement is in bad condition. The lot is covered with cracks, has some raveling, some areas of severe settlement and patches are littered throughout. Short term recommendation includes milling and resurfacing, base augmentation, and restriping within 2 years. Sealcoating/restriping may be necessary after 10 years. 3.6(c) Southeast Lot (Sections W Y of Downtown Campus - A) The Southeast Lot is an asphalt section on the southeast side of the campus. The pavement area is primarily used for student/staff parking and is approximately 1.04 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Major Patching Significant Cracking This pavement is in decent condition. The lot is covered with cracks and has some patches. Short term recommendation includes sealing the pavement cracks and sealcoating/restriping within 4-6 years. Milling and resurfacing and restriping may be necessary within 8-10 years. Hanson Professional Services Inc. 17

22 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY 3.6(d) Maintenance Area (Sections Z and A2 of Downtown Campus A) The Maintenance Area is a concrete area located adjacent to the building that is used for HVAC equipment, storage, and some class work areas. The pavement is concrete and is in good condition. The recommendation is to monitor the pavement periodically. 3.6(e) Southwest Lot (Sections A I of Downtown Campus B) The Southwest Lot is an asphalt section on the west side of the campus. The pavement area is primarily used for student/staff parking and is approximately 2.24 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Significant Raveling Minor Patching Minor Settlement Significant Cracking This pavement is in decent condition. The lot has cracks throughout and it has some patches, a few areas of settlement, and some areas of noticeable raveling. Short term recommendation includes sealing the pavement cracks, repairing the settlement areas with base augmentation and pavement patching, and sealcoating within 4-6 years. Milling and resurfacing may be necessary within 8-10 years. 3.6(f) Center Lot (Sections J T of Downtown Campus B) The Center Lot is an asphalt section on the west side of the campus. The pavement area is primarily used for student/staff parking and is approximately 2.82 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Patching Significant Cracking Minor Settlement Hanson Professional Services Inc. 18

23 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY This pavement is in decent condition. The lot has cracks throughout and it has some patches, one area of minor settlement, and some areas of minimal raveling. Short term recommendation includes sealing the pavement cracks within 2-4 years and base augmentation and pavement patch in the settlement area with sealcoating/restriping as a long term recommendation within 6-8 years. 3.6(g) North Lot (Sections U A2 of Downtown Campus B) The North Lot is an asphalt section on the north side of the campus. The pavement area is primarily used for student parking and is approximately 1.67 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Patching Minor Settlement Minor Cracking This pavement is in good condition. The lot has some cracks throughout, some patches, some areas of minimal raveling, and one area that appears to be settlement. Short term recommendation includes sealing the pavement cracks and repairing the settlement area with base augmentation and pavement patching within 4-6 years. The long term recommendation is to sealcoat/restripe the lot within 8-10 years. 3.6(h) East Lot (Sections B2 E2 of Downtown Campus B) The East Lot is an asphalt section on the east side of the campus. The pavement area is primarily used for student parking and is approximately 1.10 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor Raveling Minor Potholes Minor Patches Hanson Professional Services Inc. 19

24 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY This pavement is in good condition. The lot has some patches, a pothole, and some areas of minimal raveling. Short term recommendation includes pavement patch within 2 years. Sealcoat/restripe application may be required within 8-10 years. 3.7 Kent Campus 3.7(a) West Lot (Sections A I) The West Lot is an asphalt parking lot located on the west end of the campus and includes the driveway entrance from Roosevelt Boulevard. The lot covers 2.89 acres and provides for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Minor pavement cracking Isolated raveling Minor patching One area of settlement The pavement at the West Lot is in good condition with minor cracking, raveling, and patching. Sealing the pavement cracks within the next 2-4 years will probably be necessary with sealcoating/restriping being a long term recommendation. 3.7(b) North Lot (Sections J P) The North Lot is a series of parking areas on the north side of the campus. The pavement area is approximately 2.67 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor pavement cracking Isolated raveling Minor patching Minor Settlement Hanson Professional Services Inc. 20

25 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY The pavement at the North Lot is in good condition with minor cracking, raveling, and patching. Sealing the pavement cracks and repairing the settlement area with base augmentation and pavement patching within the next 2-4 years will probably be necessary with sealcoating/restriping being a long term recommendation. 3.7(c) Northeast Lot (Sections Q Z, and D2) The Northeast Lot consists of the northern half of the parking areas on the east side of campus as well as the entry road from Park Street. The pavement area is approximately 3.59 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor pavement cracking Isolated raveling Minor patching The pavement at the Northeast Lot is in good condition with minor cracking, raveling, and patching. Sealing the pavement cracks within the next 2-4 years will probably be necessary with sealcoating/striping being a long term recommendation. 3.7(d) Southeast Lot (Sections A2 C2, and E2 K2) The Southeast lot consists of the southern half of the parking areas on the east side of the campus. The pavement area is approximately 2.18 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor pavement cracking Isolated raveling Minor patching One area of settlement The pavement at the Southeast Lot is in good condition with minor cracking, raveling, and patching. Sealing the pavement cracks within the next 2-4 years will Hanson Professional Services Inc. 21

26 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY probably be necessary with pavement patching and sealcoating/restriping being a long term recommendation (8-10 years). 3.7(e) South Lot (Sections L2 V2) A series of small parking areas on the south side of the campus along with the perimeter drive and its associated angled parking comprise the South Lot. The pavement area is approximately 2.99 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor pavement cracking Minor raveling Minor patching Two areas of settlement The pavement in the South Lot is in good condition, but will require both sealing of pavement cracks and sealcoating/restriping in the next 2-4 years. The two settlement areas are minor now and will require patching and base augmentation in the next few years. Sealcoating/Restriping will be needed in the long term (>10 years). 3.8 South Campus 3.8 (a) SC-1 (Sections A-C) SC-1 is an asphalt pavement area located on the south segment of campus. This is approximately 0.59 acres. The front drive and parking area appear to be in good condition with some minor cracks. Evidence of crack sealing and sealcoating is present. The area should be monitored on an annual basis to determine if and when additional sealcoating would be beneficial. 3.8 (b) SC-2 (Sections A-D) SC-2 is an asphalt parking lot located on the south segment of campus. It is approximately 1.14 acres. The following discrepancies were found: Hanson Professional Services Inc. 22

27 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY Very minor block, transverse and wheel track cracks Rutting along the bus path This pavement is much newer than most other areas on this campus and is in relatively good condition. This area appears to have been resurfaced. Some rutting was observed in the bus stop area, but there is no significant compromise to its function as a result. 3.8(c) SC-3 (Sections A-Q) SC-3 is an asphalt parking lot primarily used for student parking. It is approximately 5.74 acres and located on the south segment of the campus toward the east. This surface was milled and resurfaced a few months ago. No action is recommended at this time other than reevaluation in five years. 3.8(d) SC-4 (Sections A-T) SC-4 is an asphalt parking lot located on the south segment of campus toward the east. It is approximately 6.68 acres and is primarily used for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Significant longitudinal joint and random cracking None of its cracks have been sealed in any way Some block and transverse cracking Poor pavement markings This pavement is old and beginning to crack in many areas. Significant failure areas can be anticipated within five years if measures are not taken. Milling and resurfacing will probably be warranted within 2 years. At that time the base material should be inspected and tested to determine whether remedial measures are needed. There may be areas which warrant base augmentation. Hanson Professional Services Inc. 23

28 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY 3.8(e) SC-5 (Sections A-V) Also known as the West Parking Lot, SC-5 is located on the south segment of campus. It is the largest parking area at 6.75 acres and primarily used for student parking. The following discrepancies were found: Random cracking Very minor raveling and block and transverse cracking It appears the area previously had an asphalt overlay placed on the original pavement. In addition, some sealcoating has been applied since. Milling and resurfacing will probably be warranted in 2-4 years. 3.8(f) SC-6 (Sections A-Y) SC-6 is an asphalt parking lot adjacent to the Wilson Center for the Arts and it utilized by both students and patrons of the Art Center. The 4.75 acres includes a roundabout for a drop off at the center s entry. The following discrepancies were found: Noticeable raveling as well as block and transverse cracking Minor longitudinal joint cracking Block and transverse cracking occur throughout the majority of the pavement. Although it is extensive, the cracks are not wide or deep enough to require filling. A sealcoat treatment has been applied previously, but its effect has diminished over time. The parking lot will benefit from milling and resurfacing in 2 years. 3.8(g) South Campus Access Road (Sections A-K) The South Campus Access Road is an asphalt roadway located on the south segment of campus. The pavement area is approximately 3.41 acres in size. Only minor longitudinal joint cracking were found. This pavement appears to have been well constructed and in good condition. It offers satisfactory service and appearance and should continue to do so for Hanson Professional Services Inc. 24

29 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY several years. The pavement will benefit from restriping within the next 2 years. Routine annual monitoring should be implemented to keep track of its condition and to determine if and when sealcoating may be warranted to rejuvenate it. 3.8(h) Maintenance Yard (Sections A-B) The Maintenance Yard is an asphalt pavement area located on the south segment of campus. This area is approximately 0.84 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor patching and random cracking Cracking along some of the edges where curb and gutter was paved over Asphalt damage from dumpster This pavement appears to be serviceable for several years. Although there is some cracking present, it appears to be more of a cosmetic problem. For its current use this pavement should be adequate. To extend the life of the wearing surface, it is recommended the cracks be cleaned and sealed. Sealcoating would improve the appearance and also extend the life of the pavement. This work should be done within the next 2 years. If the dumpster location is a permanent feature, it is recommended that the asphalt in the area be removed and replaced with a minimum of 6 inches concrete pavement. The flexibility of asphalt makes it unsuitable for heavy point loads associated with dumpsters as well as the repetitive actions the truck uses to empty it. 3.8(i) Building P Sections A-F) Building P pavement area is located on the north segment of campus. It is approximately 1.49 acres in size. This pavement was placed roughly five years ago. It remains in good condition with no noticeable problems. No maintenance is recommended at this time. 3.8(j) Firefighter Memorial Drive (Sections A-F) Firefighter Memorial Drive is an asphalt roadway located on the northern segment of campus. It is approximately 1.00 acre in size and is used to access Hanson Professional Services Inc. 25

30 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY the Fire Science, EMT and Fire Academy from Alden Road. A large portion of the pavement was resurfaced 3-4 years ago and is in good condition with no noticeable problems. No recommended maintenance at this time. 3.8(k) Building W1 Parking Sections A-C) The pavement area at Building W1 is a 0.78 acres parking lot on the north segment of campus. The following discrepancies were found: Noticeable random cracking Some minor raveling and patching problems No pavement markings This pavement appears to have lived out most of its functional lifespan and should receive some attention in the near future to maximize its use. Significant deterioration can be expected to ensue unless measures are taken. Consideration should be given to milling and resurfacing within 2 years. 3.8(l) Building W3 and W4 Buildings W3 and W4 are located on the northern side of the campus on Fire Training Circle Drive. These areas are currently used for burn props for the Fire Training Academy. The pavement areas at Buildings W3 and W4 are 0.82 acres and 0.83 acres, respectively. The following discrepancies were found: Concrete pavement without any expansion joints Severe random cracking This portland cement concrete pavement is experiencing significant random cracking. Due to the absence of control joints, the pavement made its own. The cracks are on the order of ten to twenty feet apart. This pavement seems to be adequate for its current use. The cracks were previously sealed, however it has all failed. The users are not concerned with cosmetics and there is no indication of vehicle caused damage. Full depth reconstruction should be considered Hanson Professional Services Inc. 26

31 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY sometime in the future to prevent the cracks form expanding and thereby leading to potential pavement settlement. 3.8(m) Fire Training Circle Drive (Sections A-D) Fire Training Circle Drive is an asphalt roadway located on the north segment of campus. The pavement area is approximately 1.41 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor random cracking Isolated pothole along the inside edge This pavement appears to be about half-way through its expected lifespan and is in good condition. There are minor cracks and edge cracking/potholes, but most of the drive is fully functional for its intended use. Areas previously patched were observed. Milling and resurfacing and base augmentation may be advisable in the next 4 6 years to prevent further deterioration. 3.8(n) Skid Pad-A (Sections A-I) This asphalt pavement area is located on the northern half of the campus near the Fire Training Facility. The original intended use was unique since it was constructed to provide a paved surface for exercising driving maneuvers including skidding and other forms of loss of vehicle control. In some instances water was applied to the pavement to simulate wet conditions. Recently, the 1.84 acres area has been used as a parking for firefighting apparatus. The following discrepancies were found: Significant random cracking Isolated yet severe rutting and wheel track cracking where the pavement has completely failed. In a few places the unusual use and heavy repeated traffic over the pavement has caused tearing in the asphalt. Raveling and potholes are also a noticeable problem as well as some longitudinal joint cracking Hanson Professional Services Inc. 27

32 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY Due to the irregular use and wear, there are isolated areas of severe failure. Some previous corrective actions include partial resurfacing and an application of sealer. These areas would benefit from patching which would probably be a less expensive remedy than replacing the entire surface. An alternative base material should be considered in the northeast corner where the wheel rutting has dislodged the asphalt from the limerock base. Asphaltic concrete as a base material in this area might provide a stronger, longer lasting pavement. Additionally, a special design of the paving material might be offered for the special uses on these surfaces. It is also suggested that the pavement use areas be rotated from time to time to decrease the impact of repeated wear and tear. This work should be completed within the next 2 years. 3.8(o) Skid Pad-B (Sections A-E) Similar in characteristics with Skid Pad-A, this asphalt pavement area is also located on the northern half of the campus near the Fire Training Facility. Skid Pad B is a linear pavement area and approximately 0.81 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Severe random cracking Significant wheel track cracking and raveling Rutting This pavement receives unusual and irregular use and wear. For this reason there are isolated areas of significant failure. It may be possible to patch the wheel rut tracks only. The base material should be tested and inspected at this time to determine its suitability for the special traffic conditions it experiences. Alternate base materials and special asphalt mixes could be recommended to provide extended life to the pavement. 3.8(p) Emergency Vehicle Training Track (Sections A-J) The Emergency Vehicle Training Track is an asphalt roadway located on the north segment of campus and provides a round course for training drives on Hanson Professional Services Inc. 28

33 Florida State College at Jacksonville COLLEGE-WIDE PAVEMENT STUDY various conditions. The pavement area is approximately 2.17 acres in size. The following discrepancies were found: Minor edge and longitudinal joint cracking At a few spots around corners there is also some evidence of tearing Edge cracks in a few spots from repaving done to widen the track This pavement is in good condition and should remain serviceable for several years. It was previously resurfaced. It needs only to be monitored annually for routine evaluation. Sealcoat and crack patching may be warranted in 2 4 years. 3.8(q) Maritime Burn Prop The Maritime Burn Prop was built within the past 3-4 years and the pavement associated with it is still in excellent condition. No action is recommended at this time other than reevaluation in five years. 4.0 REMEDIATION Several recommendations for corrective actions are included in this report for individual pavement areas that range from sealing the cracks or pavement to milling and resurfacing. Prior to milling and resurfacing, it is recommended that several pavement cores be taken throughout the pavement to determine the thickness of the different pavement components. Generally at least 1 of asphalt should be milled and replaced with new. Primarily Type S-III or Super Pave 9.5 asphalt will be used in this application. Although there were instances where damage to the curb was noted, the reason to replace it would be mostly for aesthetics since the function of the curb is essentially in tact. Replacing the curb would require cutting it outside of the damaged section, removing the concrete and casting a new curb in place. Since the removal could possibly impact the adjacent pavement, the costs of replacing curb may outweigh the benefits. Although a concrete patch can be attempted, it is generally not recommended since patches, especially on vertical surfaces, Hanson Professional Services Inc. 29

34

35 . Highway Preservation Systems, Ltd Berk Blvd. Hamilton, Oh Pavement Condition Evaluation Manual Pavement Evaluations for use with the DRM System. DATE 01/10/01

36 Forward 3 Raveling (Flexible/Composite Pavements) 7 Bleeding (Flexible/Composite Pavements) 8 Corrugations (Flexible Pavements) 9 Rutting (Flexible/Composite Pavements) 10 Potholes/Debonding (Flexible /Composite Pavements) 11 Patching (All Pavement Types) 12 Settlement (All Pavement Types) 14 Crack Sealing Deficiency (Flexible/Composite Pavements) 15 Wheel Track Cracking (Flexible Pavement) 16 Longitudinal Joint Cracking (Flexible Pavements) 17 Longitudinal Cracking (Composite/Jointed Concrete/CRC Pavements) 18 Edge Cracking (Flexible Pavement) 19 Random Cracking (Flexible Pavement) 20 Block and Transverse Cracking (Flexible Pavement) 21 Transverse Cracking (Composite/Jointed Concrete/CRC Pavements) 22 Pumping (Composite/Jointed Concrete/CRC Pavements) 25 Faulting (Jointed Concrete Pavements) 26 Surface Deterioration (Jointed Concrete/ CRC Pavements) 27 2

37 Pavement Condition Evaluation Manual Pavement Evaluations for use with the DRM System. Forward This document is designed as a tool to evaluate pavements, determine a pavement's condition and as a guideline for use of the DRM System. The document describes various distresses for rigid, flexible, and composite pavements and sets a standard for establishing severity and extent. For each distress, three levels of severity (Low, Medium, and High) and three levels of extent (Occasional, Frequent, and Extensive) are defined. From this description, a pavement condition rating can be developed. This rating will allow an objective determination of where the DRM system can be effectively used. Pavements covered include: Flexible: Asphalt pavements Composite: Rigid base (typically concrete) with a flexible surface Jointed Concrete: CRCP: Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavements This manual identifies various types of pavement distress for the pavement types listed. Provided with each distress overview is a recommended acceptable level of pavement condition that DRM is suitable for. The rating method used is based upon visual inspection of pavement. Although the relationship between pavement distress and performance is not well defined, there is general agreement that the ability of a pavement to sustain traffic loads in a safe and smooth manner is adversely affected by the occurrence of observable distress. The rating method provides a procedure for uniformly identifying and describing, in terms of severity and extent, pavement distress. The mathematical expression for Pavement Condition Rating (PCR) provides an index reflecting the composite effects of varying distress types, severity, and extent on the overall condition of the pavement. The method used to compute PCR is based upon the summation of deduct points for each type of observable distress. Deduct values are a function of distress type, severity, and extent. Deduction for each distress type is calculated by multiplying distress weight times the weights for severity and extent of the distress. Distress weight is the maximum number of deductible points for each different distress type. The mathematical expression for PCR is as follows: 3

38 Where: n PR = Deduct I=1 n = number of observable distresses, and Deduct = (Weight for distress) (Weight for severity) (Weight for extent) A PCR scale has been developed to describe the pavement condition using the PCR numbers calculated from the above equation. The scale has a range from 0 to 100; a PCR of 100 representing a perfect pavement with no observable distress and a PCR of 0 representing a pavement with all distress present at their High levels of severity and Extensive levels of extent. Use of the DRM process as a Surface Treatment would usually begin with a PCR rating of 60 or higher, a range lower than that would typically require DRM Interlayer in a minor or major rehabilitation of the pavement. 100 PCR Condition Very Good Good Fair Fair to Poor Poor Before reviewing the types of pavement 0 distress, a note on using this manual. For each pavement distress a description is provided that gives acceptable conditions for DRM Surface Treatment and DRM Interlayer. Each distress condition includes a description discussing the best practice and use of the DRM. While some pavements may only exhibit a single distress, in many cases the pavement will exhibit several distresses. Treatment selection should be based on the summary of all distress types, severity and extent. Special notes for use of DRM : The DRM System is used effectively on composite, rigid and flexible pavements with or without surface milling as an Interlayer Membrane. For finished surface treatments, DRM System is effective on composite pavements and flexible asphalt surfaces. Typically, when used as a surface treatment, the ADT (average daily traffic) should be less than 5,000 per lane. Consideration should be given to heavy commercial traffic when using DRM as a surface treatment and should not exceed 500 commercial vehicles per day, per lane. DRM as an interlayer membrane has no traffic restrictions when used with Slurry Seal, Micro Surfacing, and Bituminous Overlays as the final surface. Recommended minimum thickness for typical bituminous overlay mixtures is 11/4 inch. Where profiling of the pavement is required, insure that the correct overlay method and thickness is used. 40 Very Poor 4

39 SUMMARY OF PCR DEDUCT VALUES Distress Type Distress Severity Extent Total Weight L M H O F E Raveling (Flexible/Composite) Bleeding (Flexible/Composite) Corrugations (Flexible) Rutting (Flexible/Composite) Potholes/Debonding (Flex./Comp.) Patching (All Pavement Types) Settlement (All Pavement Types) Crack Seal Deficiency (Flex./Comp.) Wheel Track Cracking (Flexible) Longitudinal Joint Cracking (Flex.) Longitud. Cracking (Comp./JC/CRC) Edge Cracking (Flexible) Random Cracking (Flexible) Block & Transverse Cracking (Flex.) Transverse Crack (Comp./JC/CRC) Pumping (Comp./JC/CRC) Faulting (Jointed Concrete) Surface Deterioration (JC/CRC) Total Deduct Total Deduct = PCR Flex Comp JC CRC Flexible Pavement Composite Pavement Jointed Reinforced Concrete or Jointed Concrete Pavement Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement 5

40 SUMMARY OF PAVEMENT DISTRESS Distress Type Surface Treatment Interlayer Membrane Raveling (Flexible/Composite) L:O,F,E M:O,F,E L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O Bleeding (Flexible/Composite) M:O,F,E H:O,F M:O,F,E H:O Corrugations (Flexible) L:O,F L:O,F M:O Rutting (Flexible/Composite) L:O,F,E M:O L:O,F,E M:O Potholes/Debonding (Flex./Comp.) ALL L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O Patching (All Pavement Types) ALL ALL Settlement (All Pavement Types) L:O L:O,F M:O Crack Seal Deficiency (Flex./Comp.) O,F,E O,F,E Wheel Track Cracking (Flexible) L:O,F,E M:O,F L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O Longitudinal Joint Cracking (Flex.) L:O,F,E M:O,F L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O Longitud. Cracking (Comp./JC/CRC) NA - L:O,F,E M:O,F ALL Edge Cracking (Flexible) ALL ALL Random Cracking (Flexible) ALL ALL Block & Transverse Cracking (Flex.) L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O ALL Transverse Crack (Comp./JC/CRC) L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O ALL L&M H:O,F Pumping (Comp./JC/CRC) L:O L:O Faulting (Jointed Concrete) L:O M:O L:O,F M:O,F Surface Deterioration (JC/CRC) L:O M:O All L&M H:O,F Flex Comp JC CRC Flexible Pavement Composite Pavement Jointed Reinforced Concrete or Jointed Concrete Pavement Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement L = LOW O = OCCASIONAL M = MEDIUM F = FREQUENT H = HIGH E = EXTENSIVE 6

41 Types of Pavement Distress Raveling (Flexible/Composite Pavements) Raveling is disintegration of the pavement from the surface downward due to the loss of aggregate particles. Raveling may occur as a result of asphalt binder aging, poor mixture quality, segregation, or insufficient compaction. Severity Level: Medium Severity Raveling Low: Very little coarse aggregate has worn away some loss of fine aggregate, coarse aggregate is exposed. High Severity Raveling Medium: Surface has an open texture and is moderately rough with considerable loss of fine aggregate and some coarse aggregate removed. High: Most of the surface aggregate has worn away or become dislodged. Surface is severely rough and pitted and may be completely removed in places. Extent Level: Occasional: Less than 20% of the surface area is raveling. Frequent: Between 20% and 50% of the surface area is raveling. Extensive: More than 50% of the surface area is raveling. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E DRM sealant will fill the raveled voids and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform sealed wearing surface. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O DRM sealant will fill the raveled voids and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. Where High Severity (Frequent and Extensive) conditions exist, surface milling should be performed then the DRM Interlayer used prior to a bituminous overlay. 7

42 Bleeding (Flexible/Composite Pavements) Bleeding or flushing is the presence of free asphalt binder on the pavement surface. Bleeding is caused by an excess amount of bituminous binder in the mixture and/or low air void content. Severity Level: Medium: Both coarse aggregate and free bitumen are noticeable at the pavement surface. High: Surface appears black with very little aggregate noticeable. High Severity Bleeding Extent: Occasional: Less than 10% of the length exhibits bleeding. Close-up view of Bleeding, High and Medium Severity High severity on left shows most aggregates covered with asphalt and Medium Severity on right shows less aggregates covered with asphalt. Frequent: Between 10% and 30% of the length is bleeding. Extensive: Bleeding occurs in more than 30% of the length. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: M:O,F,E H:O,F DRM sealant usage will be minimized in the areas with bleeding and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform sealed wearing surface. This treatment may slow or reduce future bleeding. A larger aggregate is desirable for this treatment giving greater bridging ability above the bleeding surface. INTERLAYER: M:O,F,E H:O DRM Interlayer is suitable for use with Medium severity; where bleeding is High and Extensive, use of the DRM may only add more asphalt to an already rich asphalt environment. The use of DRM Interlayer prior to an overlay on this condition may not provide a cost benefit. Note: Where bleeding is isolated to wheel tracks only the Interlayer will provide a uniform consistent surface to place the overlay. This treatment may slow or reduce future bleeding. A larger aggregate is desirable for this treatment giving greater bridging ability above the bleeding surface. 8

43 Corrugations (Flexible Pavements) Corrugations are a series of transverse ridges and valleys (or ripples) occurring at regular intervals along the pavement. Unstable bituminous mixture or poor base quality are associated with this distress. Medium Severity Corrugations Severity Level: Low: Noticeable effect on ride, but no significant reduction in comfort. Medium: High: Moderate ride discomfort is noticeable, driver able to maintain vehicle control easily. Vehicle vibration is severe, speed reduction is necessary for comfort and to maintain vehicle control. Extent: Occasional:Less than 10% of the section length is affected by this distress. Frequent: Between 10% and 30% of the section length is affected by this distress. Extensive: Greater than 30% of the section length is affected by this distress. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F Use of DRM on this condition should be limited based on poor ride quality and the poor stability of the underlying mixture. INTERLAYER: L:O,F M:O Use of DRM on this condition should be limited based on poor ride quality and the poor stability of the underlying mixture. Where Medium and High Severity (Frequent and Extensive) conditions exist, surface milling should be performed to remove the unstable mixture then the DRM Interlayer used prior to a bituminous overlay. 9

44 Rutting (Flexible/Composite Pavements) Ruts are vertical deformations in the pavement surface along the wheel tracks. In severe cases pavement uplift may occur along the sides of the rut, but in most instances only a depression is noticeable. Rutting is caused by consolidation or lateral movement of any or all pavement layers, including subgrade, under traffic. Medium Severity Rutting Severity Level: Rutting severity is based upon rut depth, as approximated visually. Low: Medium: High: Barely noticeable, depth less than 6 mm (1/4 inch). Readily noticeable, depth more than 6 mm (1/4 inch), less than 25 mm (1 inch). Definite effect upon vehicle control, depth greater than 25 mm (1 inch). High Severity Rutting Extent: Occasional: Less than 20% of the section length is rutted. Frequent: Extensive: Between 20% & 50% of the section length is rutted. More than 50% of the section length is rutted. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O Use of DRM on the more severely rutted conditions should be limited based on poor pavement profile and the poor stability of the underlying mixture. Note: Medium rutted areas may be corrected by rut filling with Micro Surfacing or bituminous leveling prior to the DRM surface treatment. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O Use of DRM on this condition should be limited based on poor pavement profile and the poor stability of the underlying mixture. Where Medium and High Severity (Frequent and Extensive) conditions exist, surface milling should be performed to remove the rutted unstable mixture then the DRM Interlayer may be used prior to a bituminous overlay. Note: Where the rutting is caused by a weak structure and wheel track cracking exists, the Interlayer will keep water from penetrating the pavement surface and entering the base improving the structural capacity of the pavement. 10

45 Potholes/Debonding (Flexible /Composite Pavements) Potholes are bowl-shaped voids or depressions in the pavement surface. Potholes are localized failure areas which are usually caused by weak base or subgrade layers. Loss of surface by de-bonding is the removal of the asphaltic surface layer from the underlying layer. The problem is most common with thin asphalt surface layers [less than 50 mm (2 inches)] and is caused by freeze-thaw action or poor bonding of the two layers during construction. Medium Severity Pothole Composite Pavement De-bonding Medium Medium Severity Severity Level: Use the following table to determine the severity levels: Depth of Debonded Area De-bonded Area <0.8 m 2 (1 sq. yd.) De-bonded Area >0.8 m 2 (1 sq. yd.) < 25 mm (1 ) Low Medium > 25 mm (1 ) Medium High Regardless of depth, potholes less than 150 mm (6 inches) in diameter shall be considered to be of low severity. Extent: Occasional: < 5 potholes /1.6 km (per mile) Frequent: 5 10 potholes/1.6 km (per mile) Extensive: > 10 potholes/1.6 km (per mile) DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O,F,E DRM surface treatment will effectively fill all cracks and ravels and provide a uniform sealed wearing surface. ALL POTHOLES REQUIRE REPAIR PRIOR TO DRM INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O DRM Interlayer will effectively fill all cracks, ravels and shallow voids and provide a uniform flexible membrane. All potholes greater than ½ inch depth shall be filled prior to DRM. Where High Severity (Frequent and Extensive) conditions exist or severe be-bonding is occurring, surface milling should be performed to remove the potholes then the DRM Interlayer used prior to a bituminous overlay. 11

46 Patching (All Pavement Types) Flexible Pavement High Severity Patching Flexible Pavement High Severity Patching Patching is either the placing of asphalt concrete (or other additional material) on the surface of the existing pavement or the replacement of the existing pavement in small isolated areas. Deductions shall be made for all patches present in the pavement which are the result of deterioration and/or maintenance since the last construction project. For concrete pavements (JRC/JC or CRCP) deductions shall also be made for patches made with asphalt concrete material. On flexible and composite pavements, large patches [greater than 12.5 m 2 (15 sq. yd.)] such as spot overlays or wedge courses, shall be rated for condition as part of the existing pavement rather than as patches. Composite Pavement Medium Severity Composite Pavement High Severity Jointed Concrete Pavement Low Severity 12

47 For concrete pavements (CRC/JC or CRCP), no deductions shall be made for existing patches which consist of sound concrete. Where deterioration exists with a concrete repair, the deterioration shall be rated as part of the pavement. Also, where multiple patches are found along a transverse joint or crack which do not interconnect they shall be added together to represent the size of one patch. Multiple patches found along a longitudinal joint or crack which do not interconnect, but are within the same slab, shall be added together to represent the size one patch. Severity Level: Low: Patch size <0.1 m 2 (1 sq. ft.). Medium: Patch size <0.8 m 2 (1 sq. yd.). High: Patch size >0.8 m 2 (1 sq. yd.). Extent: Occasional:< 10 patches/1.6 km (per mile) Frequent: patches/1.6 km (per mile Extensive: > 20 patches/1.6 km (per mile) Jointed Concrete Pavement High Severity CRC Pavement Low Severity CRC Pavement High Severity DRM Usage: DRM is suitable for use as an interlayer or surface treatment with all levels of patching, as long as the patches have been repaired or do not exhibit a severity level that will prevent effective use of the process. Review the patched areas for other distress levels discussed in this manual. 13

48 Settlement (All Pavement Types) Settlement is a dip or depression in the longitudinal profile of the pavement surface. Settlement shall be considered a distress when it causes a noticeable effect upon riding quality. Settlement should not be confused with corrugation, which is another type of surface profile deficiency specific to flexible pavements. Flexible Pavement Low Severity Composite Pavement Medium Severity Jointed Concrete, Medium Severity In CRC pavements, where short transverse crack spacing is prevalent, short waves or undulation may develop as a result of poor support conditions, frost heave, or permanent deformation of the subgrade. Severity Level: Severity is based upon the effect of the settlement on vehicle control when traveling along the roadway at 60 km/hour (40 MPH). Low: Medium: High: Noticeable effect upon ride, driver able to maintain vehicle control easily. Some discomfort to passengers, driver able to maintain control with slight corrective action. Definite effect upon ride quality. Noticeable profile dips in settlement areas greater than 150 mm (6 inches). Poor ride corrective action needed. Extent: Occasional: Less than 2 settlements/1.6 km (per mile) of roadway. Frequent: 2 to 4 settlements/1.6 km (per mile) of roadway. Extensive: More than 4 settlements/1.6 km (per mile) of roadway. DRM Usage: L:O,F M:O DRM is suitable for use based on ride quality on low/occasional conditions. For usage beyond low/occasional, the pavement will require some type of repair (reconstruction, leveling, etc.) to eliminate the settlement. 14

49 Crack Sealing Deficiency (Flexible/Composite Pavements) Crack Sealing deficiency is crack sealing which is no longer effective in preventing intrusion of water or cracks which have never been sealed. Severity Level: Severity levels are not considered. Extent: Occasional:Less than 20% of the cracks along the pavement section are not effectively sealed. Frequent: Between 20% and 50% of the cracks along the pavement section are not effectively sealed. Extensive: More than 50% of the cracks along the pavement section are not effectively sealed. Unsealed Cracks Cracks Not Sealed Properly DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: O, F, E DRM surface treatment will effectively fill all cracks and provide a uniform sealed wearing surface. CRACKS WIDER THAN 2 INCHS REQUIRE REPAIR PRIOR TO DRM INTERLAYER: O, F, E DRM Interlayer will effectively fill all cracks and provide a uniform flexible membrane. 15

50 Wheel Track Cracking (Flexible Pavement) Cracks located within or near the wheel tracks. For evaluation purposes each wheel track shall be considered 1 m (3 feet) in width. Wheel track cracking usually starts as intermittent, single longitudinal cracks progressing to multiple longitudinal cracking, and eventually interconnected or alligator cracking. Wheel track cracking usually results from fatigue failure of the asphaltic layer. Severity Level: Severity is based upon both crack width and multiplicity of the cracking. Both criteria must be satisfied when assigning the severity level. Low: Single or intermittent multiple cracking with average crack width less than 6 mm (1/4 inch). Medium: Single or multiple cracking (may also include regions of intermittent alligator cracking) with average crack width greater than 6 mm (1/4 inch) with little spalling or loose pieces. High: Multiple cracking with extensive alligator cracking. Raveling is fairly common with average crack width greater than 6 mm (1/4 inch), and some alligator blocks are easily removed. Extent: Extent is based upon percentage of the wheel track length within the section which exhibits cracking. Occasional: Less than 20%. Frequent: Between 20% and 50%. Extensive: More than 50%. Medium Severity High Severity DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O,F DRM sealant will effectively fill the cracks and raveled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform sealed wearing surface. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O DRM sealant will fill the raveled voids and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. Where High Severity (Frequent and Extensive) conditions exist, surface milling should be performed then the DRM Interlayer used prior to a bituminous overlay. 16

51 Longitudinal Joint Cracking (Flexible Pavements) Deterioration or cracking of the longitudinal joints formed by separate passes of an asphalt paver, including shoulders and widening. Poor compaction along the longitudinal joint often results in the disintegration of material along the joint and may be accompanied by single or multiple cracking. Severity Level: Low: Deterioration <25 mm (1 inch) wide at the surface, or single crack < 6 mm (1/4 inch) and no raveling. Medium: High: Medium Severity Deterioration 25 mm 50 mm (1 inch 2 inch) wide at the Surface and may extend down to the intermediate course, or single or multiple cracking 6 mm 25 mm (1/4 inch - 1 inch) with some raveling. Deterioration > 50 mm (2 inches) wide at the surface and likely extending down to the intermediate course or lower, or multiple cracking > 25 mm (1 inch) wide with much raveling. High Severity Extent: Based on the average linear feet of longitudinal cracking per 30 m (per station of 100 feet length). Occasional:Less than 15 m/30 m (50 feet per station). Frequent: Between 15 and 45 m/30 m (50 and 150 feet per station). Extensive: More than 45 m/30 m (150 feet per station). Complete Longitudinal joint cracking along the pavement centerline and edge [60 linear m/30 m (200 linear feet per station)] is termed extensive. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O,F DRM sealant will effectively fill the longitudinal joint and raveled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform sealed wearing surface. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O DRM sealant will fill the longitudinal joint and raveled voids and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. Where High Severity (Frequent and Extensive) conditions exist, the joint should be repaired or surface milling should be performed, then the DRM Interlayer used prior to a bituminous overlay. 17

52 Longitudinal Cracking (Composite/Jointed Concrete/CRC Pavements) A crack or break approximately parallel to the pavement centerline. This type of cracking is usually associated with subgrade settlement or insufficient bearing support. In a composite pavement, longitudinal joints and pavement edges of the underlying rigid base usually reflect through the asphalt surface as a result of thermal movement in the underlying slab. Poor paving lane joint construction can also result in a longitudinal crack (see longitudinal cracking for flexible pavements for description and images). Severity Level: Low: Crack width less than 6 mm (1/4 inch) with no spalling or distortion along crack edges. Medium: Crack opened or spalled to a width between 6 mm and 25 mm (1/4 and 1 inch) over at least one half its length. High: Crack opened or spalled to a width greater than 25 mm (1 inch) over at least one half its length. Extent (Composite): Based upon the average linear feet of longitudinal cracking per 30 m (per station of 100 feet length). Occasional:Less than 15 m/30 m (50 feet per station). Frequent: Between 15 and 45 m/30 m (50 and 150 feet per station). Extensive: More than 45 m/30 m (150 feet per station). Complete Longitudinal joint cracking along the pavement centerline and edge [60 linear m/30 m (200 linear feet per station)] is termed extensive. Extent (Jointed/CRC):Extent is based upon percentage of slabs or sections which exhibit longitudinal cracking. Occasional:Less than 5% of the slabs or section length have longitudinal cracking. Frequent: Between 5% and 20% of the slabs or section length has longitudinal cracking. Extensive: More than 20% of the slabs or section length have longitudinal cracking. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O,F DRM surface treatment is not typically recommended for concrete pavement surfaces. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O,F,E DRM sealant will fill the longitudinal joint and spalled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. Longitudinal joints wider than 2 inches should be repaired, then the DRM Interlayer used prior to a bituminous overlay. 18

53 Edge Cracking (Flexible Pavement) Edge cracks are longitudinal or crescent shaped cracks usually within 0.3 m (1 foot) of the pavement edge line. Severity Level: Low: Tight cracks, width less than 6 mm (1/4 inch) with no break up or raveling. Medium: High: Medium Severity Crack width greater than 6 mm (1/4 inch) with some raveling. Multiple cracking with moderate raveling and average crack width greater than 6 mm (1/4 inch). High Severity Extent: Occasional:Cracking occurs along less than 20% of the pavement edge within the section. Frequent: Cracking occurs along 20% to 50% of the pavement edge within the section. Extensive: Cracking occurs along more than 50% of the pavement edge within the section. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O,F,E DRM sealant will effectively fill the cracks and raveled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform sealed wearing surface. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O,F,E DRM sealant will fill the cracks and raveled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. High severity levels typically indicate a weak structure, repairs may be warranted prior to use of the DRM process. 19

54 Random Cracking (Flexible Pavement) Random cracks are those cracks which are not categorized as wheel track, block, transverse, longitudinal joint, or edge. Medium Severity Severity Level: Low: Tight cracks, width less than 6 mm (1/4 inch) with no break up or raveling. Medium: High: Crack width greater than 6 mm (1/4 inch) with some raveling. Multiple cracking with moderate raveling and average crack width greater than 6 mm (1/4 inch). Extent: Occasional:Cracking occurs in less than 20% of the pavement section. Frequent: Cracking occurs in 20% to 50% of the pavement section. Extensive: Cracking occurs in more than 50% of the pavement section. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O,F,E DRM sealant will effectively fill the cracks and raveled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform sealed wearing surface. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O,F,E DRM sealant will fill the cracks and raveled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. High severity levels may indicate a problem with the surface mixture or structure and may require removal prior to use of the DRM Interlayer. 20

55 Block and Transverse Cracking Block cracks are interconnected cracks which divide the pavement into large rectangular pieces or blocks. Block size may range from 1 m by 1 m (3 ft. by 3 ft.) upwards to 3 m by 3 m (10 ft. by 10 ft.). Transverse cracking is cracks at approximately right angles to the pavement centerline. The occurrence of both block and or transverse cracking is usually related to thermal shrinkage of the asphalt binder. Binder age hardening is also related to formation of these crack types. (Flexible Pavement) Medium Severity High Severity Severity Level: Low: Average crack width less than 6 mm (1/4 inch) with no raveling or distortion along crack edges. Medium: Average crack opened or raveled to a width between 6 mm to 25 mm (1/4 to 1 inch) along at least half its length. High: Average crack opened or raveled to a width greater than 25 mm (1 inch) along at least half its length. Extent: Occasional:Less than 20% of the section length is affected by this distress. Frequent: Between 20% and 50% of this section length is affected by this distress. Extensive: More than 50% of this section length is affected by this distress. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O DRM sealant will effectively fill the cracks and raveled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform sealed wearing surface. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O,F,E DRM sealant will fill the cracks and raveled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. High severity levels may indicate a problem with the surface mixture or structure and may require removal prior to use of the DRM Interlayer. 21

56 Transverse Cracking (Composite/Jointed Concrete/CRC Pavements) A crack or break at approximately right angles to the pavement centerline. This section includes descriptions of composite pavements as well as Jointed Concrete/CRC pavements that may be the underlying layer in a composite pavement or the surface layer of a pavement. Severity Level: Low: Average crack width less than 6 mm (1/4 inch) with no raveling or distortion along crack edges. Medium: Average crack opened or raveled to a width between 6 mm to 25 mm (1/4 to 1 inch) along at least half its length. High: Average crack opened or raveled to a width greater than 25 mm (1 inch) along at least half its length. Composite Pavement Low Severity Composite Pavement High Severity Composite: Where the rigid base layer does not have transverse joints, all transverse cracking is evaluated regardless of location. For jointed bases, a separate evaluation is made of reflective cracks at 1) the joints; and 2) other (non-joint) transverse cracking. Usually all underlying base cracks and joints are eventually reflected through the flexible surface. Additional transverse surface cracking may result from thermal shrinkage and age hardening of the asphaltic layer. 22

57 Extent: For Composite pavements or jointed concrete pavements. The extent level is based upon average crack spacing (CS) as given by the following formula: CS = L/(Z+1) Where: CS = Average crack spacing in m (ft). Z = Average number of transverse cracks per panel L = Transverse joint spacing in m (ft) Occasional:Average transverse crack spacing greater than 4.5m (15 ft) Frequent: Average spacing 3 to 4.5 m (10 to 15 ft). Extensive: Average crack spacing less than 3 m (10 ft) Jointed Concrete Low Severity Jointed Concrete High Severity Jointed Concrete: Some transverse cracks (hairline shrinkage cracks) are expected in reinforced concrete pavements that have large transverse joint spacing. Repeated heavy traffic loading, thermal and moisture gradients and subgrade settlement or consolidation could cause additional transverse cracking. Deterioration of the sealant in a joint is also considered to be a transverse crack in this analysis. Extent: For composite pavements with joint reflection cracks or CRC pavements. Occasional:Less than 20%. Frequent: Between 20% and 50%. Extensive: More than 50%. 23

58 CRC Pavement Low Severity CRC Pavement Medium Severity CRC: Transverse cracking in CRC pavements is normal. The cracking is detrimental if the spacing is less than or greater than optimum spacing of about 1.5 m to 2.4 m (5 to 8 ft.). DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O DRM surface treatment is typically not recommended for concrete pavement surfaces. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O,F DRM sealant will fill the cracks and raveled areas and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. Heavier interlayer, ¾ - 7/8 inch thickness is recommended for slowing the reflection of working joints in rigid pavements. High severity levels may indicate a problem with the structure and may require repair prior to use of the DRM Interlayer. 24

59 Pumping (Composite/Jointed Concrete/CRC Pavements) Pumping is the ejection of fine soil particles through pavement cracks, joints, or along pavement edges. Pumping can be identified by the presence of surface staining and base or subgrade material near joints or cracks. Shoulder disintegration at the pavement edge is often an indicator of pumping beneath the slab. Composite Pavement Medium Severity Composite Pavement High Severity Jointed & CRC Pavement Low Severity Jointed & CRC Pavement High Severity Severity Level: Low: Some staining of the surface around cracks or joints is noted. Medium: Same as Low. High: Clear evidence that pumping exists. Excessive staining, medium severity or greater, faulting, corner breaks or punchouts. Extent: Occasional:Less than 10 of the joints and cracks exhibit pumping. Frequent: 10% to 25% of the joints and cracks exhibit pumping. Extensive: More than 25% of the joints and cracks exhibit pumping. DRM Usage: As a surface treatment and interlayer, the DRM process is suitable for use on low severity levels, and occasional levels of pumping. Other severity & extent levels of pumping would require repair of the pavement substructure prior to use of the DRM process. 25

60 Faulting (Jointed Concrete Pavements) Faulting is the difference in elevation between abutting slabs at transverse joints or cracks. Faulting is usually caused by a pumping action of underlying fine grained materials, settlement of soft subgrade, or from curling or warping of slabs due to temperature and moisture gradients. Severity Level: Low: Less than 6 mm (1/4 inch) fault). Medium: High: 6 mm to 13 mm (1/4 to ½ inch) fault. Greater than 13 mm (1/2 inch) fault. Extent: Occasional:Faulting occurs along less than 20% of the joints and cracks. Frequent: Faulting occurs along 20% to 50% of the joints and cracks. Extensive: More than 50% of the joints and cracks are faulted. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O M:O DRM surface treatment is typically not recommended for concrete pavement surfaces. Faulting INTERLAYER: L:O,F M:O,F DRM sealant will fill the joints and cracks and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. Heavier interlayer, ¾ - 7/8 inch thickness is recommended for slowing the reflection of working joints in rigid pavements. High severity and extent levels indicate a problem with the structure and will require repair prior to use of the DRM Interlayer. The use of an interlayer on faulting pavements will have limited affect on slowing the reflection of those joints or cracks. Joints with vertical movement should be stabilized prior to an interlayer and overlay. 26

61 Surface Deterioration (Jointed Concrete/ CRC Pavements) Disintegration or loss of concrete from the surface of the pavement. Includes scaling and abrasion. Scaling is the flaking away of the concrete surface. Abrasion is usually a result of weathering and traffic wear and is normally confined to the wheel track area. CRC Pavement Medium Severity Jointed Concrete Medium Severity Jointed Concrete High Severity CRC Pavement High Severity Severity Level: Low: Aggregate visible Medium: Surface has an open texture and is moderately rough with considerable loss of fine aggregate and some coarse aggregate removed. High: Surface rough or pitted Extent: Occasional:Less than 20 percent of the surface area Frequent: 20 to 50 percent of the surface area Extensive: More than 50 percent of the surface area. This level includes continuous distress in both wheel tracks. DRM Usage: SURFACE TREATMENT: L:O M:O DRM surface treatment is typically not recommended for concrete pavement surfaces. INTERLAYER: L:O,F,E M:O,F,E H:O,F DRM sealant will fill the joints, voids and cracks and allow the emulsion to provide a uniform flexible membrane. Heavier interlayer, ¾ - 7/8 inch thickness is recommended for slowing the reflection of working joints in rigid pavements. 27

62 Appendix B Pavement Condition Evaluations

63 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: North Campus A Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Other Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A X L Acceptable Acceptable X B L L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X C L L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X D L Acceptable Acceptable X E X X F L X G X H L X I L J Ribbon - Accetable X K X L Ribbon - Accetable Patching X L X Ribbon - Accetable M X X N X Ribbon - Accetable Ribbon - Accetable X O X L Ribbon - Accetable X P X Q X X R L X S X T X H Patching X U X L X V X W L X X X L X Y H Patching X X Z X X A2 L X X B2 X C2 L Unacceptable* X D2 H L L Unacceptable Acceptable Patching X E2 H L L Unacceptable Acceptable Patching X F2 L Unacceptable Acceptable X G2 L Acceptable X H2 L X

64 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: North Campus B Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Other Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A M L H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X B X L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X C M L Acceptable X D L H M Acceptable Acceptable Patching X E M Acceptable Acceptable X F M Acceptable Acceptable X G M Acceptable Acceptable X H L Acceptable X I L L L Acceptable Sealer X J H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X K H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X L H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X M H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X N H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X O H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X P H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X Q H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X R L H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X S L H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X T L Acceptable X U L Acceptable X V L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X W L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X X H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X Y H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X Z H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X A2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X B2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X C2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X D2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X E2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X F2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X G2 H L Acceptable Patching X H2 H L Acceptable Patching X I2 L Acceptable Patching X J2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X K2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X L2 H M L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X M2 H M L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X N2 L H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X O2 L H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X P2 H L L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X Q2 H L L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X R2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X S2 H L Unacceptable Acceptable Sealer X T2 H L Acceptable Patching X U2 L Acceptable X V2 L Acceptable Valley Gutter- Acceptable Sealer X W2 L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X X2 L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X Y2 L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X Z2 L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X A3 L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X B3 L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X

65 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: Betty P. Cook Nassau Center Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Sidewalk Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A Acceptable Acceptable X B H Acceptable Acceptable X C X H Acceptable Acceptable X D Acceptable Acceptable X E Acceptable X F Acceptable Acceptable X G H Acceptable Acceptable X H X I X J L Unacceptable Acceptable X K M Unacceptable Acceptable X L L Unacceptable Acceptable X M L N/A Acceptable X N Unacceptable Acceptable X O H N/A Acceptable X P N/A Acceptable X Q H L N/A Acceptable X R L Unacceptable Acceptable X S Unacceptable Acceptable X T Acceptable X U L Unacceptable Acceptable X V L Unacceptable Acceptable X

66 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: Cecil Center North A Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Sidewalk Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A X H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X B X Acceptable Acceptable X C Acceptable Acceptable X D H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X E H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X F H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X G L H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X H H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X I H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X J H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X K H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X L X L Acceptable Acceptable X M Acceptable Acceptable X N Acceptable Acceptable X O Acceptable Acceptable X P X L Acceptable Acceptable X

67 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: Cecil Center North B Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Sidewalk Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A M Acceptable Acceptable Patching X B Acceptable Acceptable X C Acceptable Acceptable X D Acceptable X E Acceptable X F Acceptable X G Acceptable X H Acceptable X I Acceptable X J Acceptable X K Acceptable X L Acceptable X M Acceptable X N Acceptable X O Acceptable X P Acceptable X Q Acceptable X R Acceptable X S Acceptable X T Acceptable X

68 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: Cecil Center South Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Sidewalk Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A H L H Unacceptable Acceptable Patching X B H L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer and Patching X C L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X D M Acceptable Acceptable Patching X E Acceptable X F Acceptable X G X M Acceptable X

69 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: Deerwood Center Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Sidewalk Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A H M Acceptable Patching X B H H Acceptable Patching X C H M Acceptable Patching X D M Acceptable X E L Acceptable X F L Acceptable X G Acceptable Acceptable X H Acceptable Acceptable X I L H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X J Acceptable Acceptable X K Acceptable Acceptable X L X H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X M M Acceptable Unacceptable* X N X M Acceptable Unacceptable* X O L Acceptable Acceptable X P M M Acceptable Acceptable Patching X Q M Acceptable X R Acceptable X S X Acceptable Acceptable X T H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X U Acceptable Acceptable X V L Acceptable Acceptable X

70 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: Downtown Campus A Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Sidewalk Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A X H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X B X H Acceptable Acceptable X C X H H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X D L H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X E M H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X F H Acceptable Acceptable X G H Acceptable Acceptable X H H Acceptable Acceptable X I H L H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X J H M Acceptable Acceptable Patching X K H L H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X L X H Acceptable Acceptable X M X H H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X N H H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X O H H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X P H L H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X Q H H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X R H H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X S H H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X T L H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X U H Acceptable Acceptable X V H Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X W H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X X H M Acceptable Acceptable Patching X Y L Acceptable Acceptable X Z H L N/A Patching X A2 H M N/A Patching X

71 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: Downtown Campus B Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Sidewalk Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A L Acceptable Acceptable X B L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X C L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X D L Acceptable Acceptable X E L Acceptable Acceptable X F M Acceptable Acceptable X G L Acceptable Acceptable X H H L L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X I L M Acceptable Unacceptable X J X H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X K H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X L M Acceptable Acceptable X M H M Acceptable Acceptable Patching X N L Acceptable Acceptable X O M Acceptable Acceptable X P H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X Q H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X R Acceptable Acceptable X S X H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X T Acceptable Acceptable X U X H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X V L Acceptable Acceptable X W X Acceptable Acceptable X X Acceptable Acceptable X Y H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X Z H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X A2 H L L Acceptable Acceptable Patching B2 Acceptable Acceptable X C2 X Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable X D2 X H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X E2 X L H Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Patching X

72 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: Kent Campus Pavement Condition Evaluation Form 7/3/2013 Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Sidewalk Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete A L Acceptable Acceptable X B L Acceptable Acceptable X C X L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable X D H L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Patching X E L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable X F H L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Patching X G H L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Patching X H H L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Patching X I L Acceptable Acceptable X J H L L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X K L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable X L L Acceptable Acceptable X M H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X N L Acceptable Acceptable X O X H L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Patching X P L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable X Q L Acceptable Acceptable X R H L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Patching X S L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable X T L L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Patching X U H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X V X H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X W L Acceptable Acceptable X X L Acceptable Acceptable X Y Acceptable Acceptable X Z Acceptable Acceptable X A2 X H L Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable X B2 H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X C2 L Acceptable Acceptable X D2 H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X E2 H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X F2 Acceptable Acceptable X G2 L Acceptable Acceptable X H2 H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X I2 H Acceptable Acceptable Patching X J2 Acceptable Acceptable X K2 Acceptable Acceptable X L2 X H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X M2 X L Acceptable Acceptable X N2 H Acceptable Acceptable X O2 L Acceptable Acceptable X P2 H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X Q2 X H L L Acceptable Acceptable X R2 L Acceptable Acceptable X S2 L Acceptable Acceptable X T2 X Acceptable Acceptable X U2 X L Acceptable Acceptable X V2 H L Acceptable Acceptable Patching X

73 Project: FSCJ College Wide Pavement Study Location: South Campus Pavement Condition Evaluation Form Raveling-Extent Bleeding Rutting Potholes Patching- Extent Settlement Crack Sealing Deficiency Cracking Markings Curb- Type Previous Pavement Type Section <20% 20-50% >50% <10% 10-30% >30% <20% 20-50% >50% <2 2-4 >4 <3 3-5 >5 <2 2-4 >4 <20% 20-50% >50% <20% 20-50% >50% Sidewalk Header C&G Treatment Asphalt Concrete SC-1 (A-C) X M L Acceptable Acceptable Patch,Seal X SC-2 ((A-D) X L Acceptable Acceptable Sealer X SC-3 (A-Q) Acceptable Acceptable Resurface X SC-4 (A-T) X L L M Unaccept Acceptable Patch,Seal X SC-5 (A-V) X M H L L Acceptable Acceptable Patch,Seal X SC-6 (A-Y) X H L H Unaccept Acceptable Patching X Access Rd (A-K) X L Unaccept Sealer X Maint Yard (A-B) H L L Acceptable Patching X Bldg P (A- F) X Acceptable Acceptable Resurface X FF Mem Dr (A-F) Resurface X Bldg W1 Pk (A-C) X L H L M Unaccept Acceptable Patching X Bldg W3 Filled (A) X H Cracks X Bldg W4 (A) Patching, Filled Cracks X Fire Tr Cir Dr (A-D) X L M M Patching X Skid Pad A (A-I) X M M L H X Skid Pad B (A-E) X L H L M X Emerg Veh Tr Track (A- J) X M Sealer X Maritime Burn Prop Acceptable Acceptable X X

74

75