Agenda Item No.
CITY OF YUCAIPA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Fermin Preciado, Director of Development Services/City Engineer Landon Kern, Assistant City Engineer Z K
Katrina Kunkel, Assistant Engineer ``L
FOR: City Council Meeting of May 13, 2024
SUBJECT: FY24/25 Draft Pavement Management Program
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1) Review and approve the FY24/25 Draft Pavement Management Program; and 2) Approve the recommended pavement maintenance and rehabilitation projects for FY24/25.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The Pavement Management Program (PMP) was initially prepared and approved by the City Council in 1998. It has since been updated on an annual basis and "recalibrated" through field testing and analysis every five years in 2003, 2008, 2013, 2018 and the most recent analysis completed in 2023.
The recalibration process is performed in order to provide an updated Citywide assessment of the current street network pavement conditions and has historically been the primary resource used as the basis for prioritizing the streets to be maintained or rehabilitated.
One of the goals approved by the City Council in 2023 was a to `Take a more inclusive and aggressive approach to road maintenance". To accomplish this goal, additional equipment and resources were authorized by the City Council to address potholes and asphalt failures as part of the City's Public Works operations. In addition, staff logged and included input provided by the public related to asphalt street conditions throughout the City during the process of developing the FY2024/2025 PMP Update.
To further meet this goal, on February 5, 2024, the City Council conducted a public workshop and field trip to visit various public streets with varying asphalt conditions to correlate the results of the 2023 analysis with real -world examples. Staff provided explanations of asphalt maintenance and rehabilitation options and identified specific asphalt failures that contributed to the results of the analysis. As part of that workshop, the City Council directed staff to use the information learned and the input received from the public to provide a PMP Update for FY2024/2025 at a future City Council meeting.
Utilizing the results of the 2023 analysis and incorporating a more inclusive and aggressive approach, a five-year plan of prioritized streets to be maintained and rehabilitated has been prepared for City Council consideration. The recommended maintenance and rehabilitation treatments are based on the measured pavement condition of the streets, or Pavement Condition Index (PCI). Staff is recommending the following asphalt pavement maintenance and rehabilitation treatments to be utilized over the next five-year cycle:
• Microsurface:
The application of a thin layer of an asphalt mixture that provides a new roadway surface across the entire street while leaving the remaining asphalt pavement in place. This "surface treatment" method is recommended for streets that have small, shallow cracks, and will protect and seal the asphalt from water penetration to extend the life of the pavement while providing a rideability and aesthetic enhancement.
• Edge Mill and Overlay;
The removal or milling of 1 to 2 inches of the top section of pavement along the outer edges of roads (Edge Mill), followed by the placement of a 1.5-inch thick layer of new asphalt over the entire roadway surface (Overlay). This method is recommended where a new layer of asphalt pavement can repair larger/deeper cracks and seal the roads from water damage while providing a new roadway surface.
• Full Width Mill and Overlay:
The removal or milling of 1 to 2 inches of the top section of pavement, followed by the placement of a 2 to 3 inch layer of new asphalt over the entire roadway surface (Overlay).
This method is recommended where a new thicker layer of new asphalt pavement can repair streets with more significant cracking and raveling providing for a better structural section and new roadway surface.
• Full Removal and Rehabilitation:
The removal and milling of the entire existing asphalt pavement as well as the top layer of base soil beneath the roadway. After milling the asphalt grindings are blended into the soil and compacted to form a new structural base for the new asphalt section. This method is recommended when the street is not repairable with the other treatment methods and this process results in a new paved street.
The FY24/25 Draft PMP includes these treatment recommendations by street segment and is being presented for City Council consideration.
Funding for the FY24/25 PMP includes Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account funds (RMRA), Measure I funds, Highway User Tax Account (Gas Tax) funds and funding provided by other agencies as part of paving agreement funding commitments as identified in the table below:
Proposed Funding Source
Proposed Amount
RMR,
$1,85000
Measure I
2,182,388
Gas Tax
85,000
Inter -Agency Paving Agreements
$40,000
Total Funding for FY24/25
$4,157,388
The proposed expenditures for the FY24/25 PMP include:
Proposed Sub -Programs
Proposed Amount
FY24/25 Street/Pavement Rehab Program
$2,058,694
FY24/25 Surface Treatment Program
1,152,868
FY24/25 Crack Seal Program
205,869
FY24/25 AC Berm Program
82,348
FY24/25 Patching Program
226,456
FY24/25 Concrete Program
205,869
FY24/25 Understreet Drain Pipe Program
41,174
FY24/25 Striping Program
82,348
FY24/25 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program
61,761
Total Proposed Expenses for FY2024/2025
$4,117,388
FISCAL IMPACT:
The recommendations approve the FY24/25 PMP with the use of restricted funding of $4.1 million.
The use of unrestricted funding is not proposed. These amounts are included in the forthcoming FY25 proposed budget.
Attachments:
1. 2023 Pavement Management Report
2. FY24/25 Pavement Management Plan Update
Approved by:
ATTACHMENT
CITY Or
Yucaipa, CA
Pavement Management Report
November 2023
w�ness /
r k•�
-=Ado'JA
IRA
Infrastructure Management Services
an ICC Company
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 1.1 Project and Methods Overview
1 1.2 Results Overview and Recommendations
2 2.0
PRINCIPLES OF PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT
5 2.1 Pavement Management Principles
5 3.0
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
7 3.1 Field Survey Methodology
7 3.2 Data Quality Assurance
8 3.3 Pavement Condition Survey
9 3.1 ESA Pavement Management System
18 3.2 Summary
20 4.0
PAVEMENT CONDITION SURVEY RESULTS
21 4.1 City Street Inventory and Condition Summary
21 4.2 City Network Condition Imagery
22 4.3 City Network Condition Distribution
29 4.4 Condition By Functional Classification
30 4.5 Condition By Pavement Type
31 4.6 Summary
32 5.0
REHABILITATION PLAN & BUDGET DEVELOPMENT
33 5.1 Key Analysis Set Points and Assumptions
33 5.2 Network Budget Analysis Models
35 1.1 Post Rehabilitation Condition
39 5.3 Summary
39 6.0
PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
40 6.1 Project Summary and Recommendations
40 6.2 Closing
40 1.1 Project and Methods Overview
In May of 2023, IMS Infrastructure Management Services, LP (IMS) utilized a cutting -edge integrated Road Information System (IRISpro Pave) (Figure 1) to capture continuous, high -resolution pavement and right of way images that was used to assess pavement cracking, rutting, and roughness on 202.6 centerline miles of predominantly asphalt roadways in Yucaipa, CA (City). IMS followed the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D6433 standard to analyze the images and distress data collected by the Road Surface Tester (RST) to determine the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for each segment of the road.
PCI values were recorded to provide an indication of the surface conditions and structural integrity of a pavement.
Using the ESA pavement management system, IMS developed multi -year pavement maintenance and rehabilitation (M&R) recommendations for the roadways surveyed. The recommendations take into account the severity, quantity, and type of pavement distresses, surface type, pavement strength, and functional class. By utilizing these recommendations, the City can make informed decisions on how best to allocate their resources to ensure the longevity and safety of their roadways.
Figure 1- IMS Integrated Road Information System platform (IRISPro Pave) The Pavement condition index (PCI) method was used in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D6433 to assess the condition of the City's pavements. This method is considered a standard, objective, and repeatable approach to assess pavement condition, which is preferrable to alternative methods that rely upon potentially biased human ratings. Based on the PCI results, ESA prioritizes funding using a cost -of -deferral approach, recommending M&R activities that optimize funding by selecting rehabilitation candidates only when they approach the critical point where a heavier maintenance activity will soon be needed to restore the roadway to full service.
IMS also conducted a comprehensive pavement condition survey for the city of Yucaipa in 2018. The results indicated that the overall PCI was 64, with a backlog of 12%. Crack detection was conducted using the Ramboll-based RST, using a total of 11 lasers directed at the pavement surface to capture cracking IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 1
densities and rutting profiles. Compared to the current methodology, the old system was not capable of detecting unique pavement distresses, such as raveling, shoving, and potholes, which can be accurately measured by the modern Laser Crack Measurement System (LCMS-2). As a result, the LCMS-2 cameras allowed the 2023 survey to capture distresses more accurately than the survey completed in 2018, and the repeatability of distress identification was higher in 2023 as well.
The analysis and data presented in this report are based on the inspections performed by IMS in May 2023 on the City's pavement network, using available work history and other assumptions that are elaborated on later in this report.
1.2 Results Overview and Recommendations
PCI values provide an indication of the surface conditions and structural integrity of a pavement. The 0- 100 PCI range is commonly divided into categories using descriptive terms: Very Poor, Poor, Marginal, Fair, Good, Very Good, and Excellent. Divisions between the terms are not fixed but are meant to reflect common perceptions of pavement conditions. These divisions are discussed in more detail in Section 3.0.
The City's roadways were found to be in Fair condition with an average PCI of 51. Figure 2 provides a visual breakdown of the distribution of pavement area across different PCI categories at the time of analysis. Approximately 29.6% of the City's roadways were found to be in Excellent or Very Good condition. If structurally sound, these pavements are often suitable candidates for cost-effective preventive maintenance treatments. On the other hand, pavements with a PCI below 40 (i.e., pavements in Poor or Very Poor condition) comprise the City's "backlog" of M&R. The City's backlog was found to be
34.3%. These pavements typically require full or partial reconstruction. Pavements falling within the middle categories, such as Fair or Marginal condition, often benefit from mill and overlay projects. It's important to note that these are general recommendations, and the specific M&R strategy may vary based on factors such as distress types, soil conditions, structural adequacy, and other project -specific details.
11.6 11.4 13.0
0 209i 40" : 60` ;, 80 b 100 X
Proportion of Total Network Distribution (%)
■ V Poor (0 to 25)
■ Poor (25 to 40)
Marginal (40 to 50)
Fair (50 to 60)
Good (60 to 70)
® V Good (70 to 85)
■ Excellent (85 to 100)
Figure 2 - Distribution of the City's Pavement System on a Condition Scale IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 2
Metrics of Health
Yucaipa did not meet any of the three metrics used to evaluate the quality of pavement networks:
• Avg. PCI —The network's average PCI score is a good global indicator of its overall health. o The City's average PCI of 51 is below the national average currently seen by IMS of 65.2. • Percentage of Excellent Roads — The percentage of pavements in Excellent condition. o The percentage of Excellent roads is below the recommended target of 15%. • Backlog — The percentage of pavements with a condition category of Poor or Very Poor. o The backlog (34.3%) is above the national average currently seen by IMS of 10.6%.
The analysis conducted by IMS using the ESA Pavement Management System has provided the City with valuable insights into the condition of its roadways. To assess the effect of annual budget on PCI over a five-year period, Figure 3 has been generated to depict the anticipated PCI in five years relative to different annual budget allocations. The blue line allows the user to assess the effect of a given annual budget on the PCI in five years, serving as a valuable tool for understanding the potential effects of budget decisions on future pavement conditions.
.X
O
O
V
Analysis Period 2024 to 2028
Analysis Start Date = 1/1/2024
Current PCI = 51 (2023)
O
-----
------------------ - - - - -- -�
tw
M
L
O
,
,
Q50
------•....---•-_
�
L
O
�
3 '
N
Z
'
45 M
s
DC
N
O
a
40 '
0 10 20 30 40
Annual Budget Each Year for Five Years ($1M/Yr)
® 2024 to 2028 Rehab
Analysis Results
- - - - - Maintain Current
Backlog: Final PCI = 53,
Backlog = 34%, Annual
Budget = $27.69M/Yr
Steady State PCI: Final
PCI = 51, Backlog =
37%, Annual Budget =
$22.47M/Yr
- • - - Backlog Control Budget:
Final PCI = 50, Backlog =
38%, Annual Budget =
$20.58M/Yr
PCI Control Budget: Final
PCI = 46, Backlog =
43%, Annual Budget =
$10.19M/Yr
Yucaipa, CA Budget:
Final PCI = 46, Backlog =
43%, Annual Budget =
$10M/Yr
Figure 3 - PCI Based on Five -Year Annual Budget Funding Models IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 13
To get the most return on investment, IMS presents the following recommendations:
• Continue dedicating a portion of funding to inexpensive preventive maintenance activities, such as slurry, crack, and chip seals; and continuously monitor their short- and long-term benefits in the network. On these activities, make sure to apply them on good roads with minimal structural defects or properly address the structural deficiencies through localized patching and crack sealing prior to slurry seal application.
• Concentrate rehabs on the critical PCI candidates selected by ESA. These recommendations are focused on the cost of deferral and offer an efficient use of City funds.
This two -pronged approach allows for a gradual increase of the network's average PCI and decrease of the percentage of roads in Poor or worse condition over time.
It is important to note that the information presented in the Executive Summary is condensed from various sections of this report. Reviewers are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the detailed information provided in subsequent sections of the report prior to making any specific decisions based on these results. This will ensure that decisions regarding M&R activities are based on a comprehensive understanding of the conditions of the roadways and the recommendations provided in the report.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 14
This section provides an overview of pavement management, including its objectives and the best practices for M&R planning throughout the lifecycle of a pavement. It also highlights the integration of these concepts in the ESA pavement management system, which was used in this report to develop recommendations and analyze the City's pavement network. This context is important for understanding the content and findings of the report.
2.1 Pavement Management Principles
Pavement management is the process of assessing, prioritizing, and preserving or rehabilitating pavements through a logical system that attempts to use available funds in the most cost-effective manner possible. The process is iterative, and as more data becomes available, prediction models are refined to improve accuracy. Figure 4 illustrates that pavements typically start deteriorating rapidly once they hit a specific threshold. Therefore, it is more cost-effective to invest in cheaper surface treatments during the first 40% of a pavement's lifespan than to defer maintenance until heavier overlays or reconstruction is required just a few years later. Streets that are repaired while in good condition will have an extended lifespan and will cost less to maintain over their lifetime than those left to deteriorate to a poor condition. Without an adequate routine pavement maintenance program, streets will require more frequent reconstruction, thereby requiring significantly greater funding. 5 10 15 20
Pavement Age (Years)
Figure 4 - Pavement Deterioration and Life Cycle Costs
The types of rehabilitation activities that the City chooses to deploy can have a significant effect on the longevity of a pavement. Depending on the PCI zone in which a pavement falls, a detailed rehabilitation strategy needs to be formed. Common rehabilitation types include localized preventive or stop gap activities (e.g. crack sealing, joint sealing, and patching), global preventive maintenance (e.g. fog seals, rejuvenators, slurry seals, microsurfacing, chip seals, cape seals, and thin overlays), major Rehabilitation IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 5
(e.g. thin or thick mill and overlays), and major Reconstruction (e.g. surface reconstruction or full reconstruction). Popular examples of cost-effective preventative activities include:
• Crack and Joint Sealing • Microsurfacing • Fog Seal and Rejuvenators • Patching • Slurry and Chip Seals • Thin Overlays
A proactive Pavement management program focuses on the Preventative Maintenance category and advocates proper incorporation and application of cost-effective preventative activities. These activities help maintain and repair the surface integrity which can slow deterioration and, depending on the treatment, also extend the life of a pavement. The outcome of this exercise is to increase long-term cost savings and network -level pavement quality over time. Figure 5 illustrates the concept of extending pavement life through the application of timely M&R activities.
When completed within the target zone for preventative maintenance, a pavement's lifespan can be conveniently extended. The dashed curves in Figure 5 show the typical lifespan of a pavement that does not undergo any preventive maintenance. Major reconstruction becomes necessary after approximately 20 years. The blue curves show the benefits of preventive maintenance during the first 40% of a pavement's lifespan. The gray lines demonstrate how pavement rehabilitation, when a pavement's condition crosses into the Fair or Marginal category, can extend the pavement's lifespan as well.
Eventually, all pavements will need to undergo reconstruction; however, proactive maintenance and rehabilitation can delay this process for up to an additional 40 years. 20 40 60
Pavement Age (Years)
Figure 5 - Pavement Life Cycle Curve
The most effective approach to ensure optimal usage of available funds or to determine the necessary funding to achieve a predetermined level of service is by using a pavement management system. An effective pavement management system can assist agencies in developing an organized catalog of pavement assets, storing periodic condition assessments, and tracking spending and costs. This enables the City to compare trends in data to assess the effectiveness of maintenance activities and new technologies.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 16
3.1 Field Survey Methodology
IMS deployed one of its IrisPro Pave Integrated Road Information Systems for data collection. IrisPro Pave integrates industry -leading subsystems, including 3D Pavement Imaging systems, lasers, accelerometers, right-of-way cameras, GPS antenna, Distance Measurement Instruments (DMI), computers and more. All collected data is captured with Drive" data collection software, which is designed to simplify the collection of quality road data with built-in calibration schedules, real-time quality control, GIS maps, section tracking, audible alerts and voice memos, fly -by events, and exception reporting. The custom - designed hardware and software on IrisPro Pave provides sub -millisecond synchronization between all subsystems.
Ramboll System vs LCMS-2 System
IMS conducted a pavement condition assessment survey and analysis for the City previously in 2018, adhering to the ASTM D6433-11 standard for distress protocols and PCI calculation. The field survey employed an older Ramboll-based RST that used dated point laser technology and lower -quality forward image cameras. The results of the survey showed that the City's network average PCI was 64 with a backlog of 12% at the time of survey.
An in-depth review of the distress data found that the current LCMS-2 system was able to provide more accurate and verifiable detailed data than the previous point laser system. The LCMS-2 system has several advantages over the old system. It is equipped with a single -pass 3D sensor capable of automated geo- tagging at 1mm resolution and a 28,000 Hz frequency. This enables the system to detect special pavement surface features like surface treatments, crack seals, potholes, raveling, bleeding, delamination, shoving, pavement markings, the edge of pavement, rumble strips, etc. The LCMS-2 can collect pavement data seamlessly all day and night at a free -flow traffic speed. Moreover, the 4K resolution camera used in the LCMS-2 enhances the collection of detailed pavement features. 3D Pavement Imaging
The LCMS-2 captures continuous 2D and 3D images at 1 mm resolution in the lane of travel up to 4 m (13 ft) wide at highway speeds, allowing for the visualization and characterization of all features on the road surface. The system allows for collection rates up to 28,000 profiles per second, five times faster than the first edition of LCMS. This allows smaller cracks, especially transverse cracks, to be detected more consistently than in the past. The vertical accuracy has also improved from 0.50 mm to 0.25 mm.
Right-of-way Imaging
The Ladybug 5+ captures high quality 30MP spherical images using six cameras for a 360-degree view of the roadway and surroundings. The images can be viewed in panoramic mode, 360 mode, or individual directional images can be extracted at any desired camera angle. An overview of the vehicle is provided in Figure 6. Both the Pavement imaging and right of way cameras are triggered on a fixed -distance basis, image capture is precisely synchronized to GPSTime and DMI, and cameras are calibrated for asset inventory and geo-referenced image measurements.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 17
J.%difield
JdiAyes-ses
Safety Lighting
Front and back facing
flashing fights ensure
high visibility.
r
ledyne F1JRadybug S+
Captures 360'
imagery at defined
intervals GPS Positioning-
. GPS with integrated
IMU, sub meter
positional accuracy
,y
Samsara
Monitoring
Real time tracking and
reporting It
Profiler Linear Distance
Continuous right Positioning Texture
and left wheel DMI lot predse linear Continuous
path roughness distance measurements surface texture
measurements measurements
Figure 6 — LCMS-2 data collection vehicle
3.2 Data Quality Assurance
Pavement Distress
Imaging
LCMS•2, continuous 3D
imag'in% tmm resolution
The collected data is processed in the office using the ConnectTM software. Connect provides a perfectly synchronized multi window platform to view and alter all collected data including profile, distress, slope, International Roughness Index (IRI), events, images, and GPS map. Figure 7 some examples of how data can be viewed in Connect. Using Connect, the LCMS-2 3D pavement images are analyzed to identify and classify distresses, and the longitudinal profile of the road is analyzed to determine the IRI and ride quality under the wheel paths according to industry standards. All processed data is matched to the segment ID of the roadway.
To ensure the accurate determination of PCI scores, the field data undergoes a rigorous series of processing phases and quality checks. These checks encompass synchronized assessment of both processed and raw data streams. The automatic distress identification and classification process involves various steps: First, different rules and processing parameters are applied on different pavement types; next, the auto detected lane markings are manually adjusted to exclude non -pavement areas and limit the assessment area for cracking and rutting to between the lane markings and invalidation rules are applied to exclude additional anomalies (e.g. near railroad crossing or bridge decks) from the assessment area. Finally, a team of highly trained pavement raters who are well -versed in both the distress standards and the data in its digital format review images and make the necessary corrections on areas with gross under/over detection.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 18
it m • L: <..1. a.�n .!. i,•, . . J X ..- • �.+:�
Figure 7 - QC Image from ConnectTM Software
To further confirm the accuracy of our condition data, spot checks are conducted on a network -wide basis by both the QC team and engineering staff. These spot checks are carried out on a random selection of road sections across the entire network to verify that the condition data is consistent and accurate. They also help to identify any potential issues that may have been missed during the initial data collection and review process.
Once the QC team and engineering staff have established the integrity of the data, an initial condition spreadsheet with detailed data and summary tables and charts is prepared and submitted for review by the Client. This review process involves a careful examination of the condition data and includes a comprehensive analysis of the data's completeness, accuracy, and consistency before preparing data for import to City's pavement management system.
3.3 Pavement Condition Survey
The goal of the pavement condition survey is to determine an accurate rating for each pavement section.
The process of collecting and assessing data involves both automated and manual observations that originate from the data collected with the IrisPro Pave equipped with LCMS-2 downward imaging lasers, an array of 4k cameras, and trained rating personnel.
Within the "Network Analysis" tab in ESA, IMS has populated values for Surface Distresses, Roughness score, and Strength Rating. These three indices form the foundation on which ESA operates. They allow weighing factors to be uniquely specified for PCI calculation.
Surface Distress Index (SDI)
ASTM D6433 provides a method of categorizing surface distress observations for both asphalt and concrete pavements, based on the extent and severity of distresses along the roadway. The Surface Distress Index (SDI) is used to represent the observed pavement defects on a scale from 0 to 100.
However, not all surface distresses are given equal weight. Load -associated distresses (LAD), such as IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 19
rutting or alligator cracking on asphalt streets, and divided slabs on concrete streets, have a greater impact on the SDI than non -load associated distresses (NLAD), such as raveling or longitudinal and transverse cracking. Even when present in low extents and moderate severity, LAD can significantly decrease the SDI.
The SDI inputs are shown in Figure 8. As discussed earlier in Section 3.1, the more upgraded LCMS-2 facilitated IMS engineers in capturing a broader range of distress varieties with enhanced precision through powerful lasers and an intelligent detection system. In comparison to the 2018 survey results, the 2023 assessment reported a PCI score of 51 and a Backlog of 34.3%, reflecting a decrease from the previous scores of 64 and 12%, respectively. This large decline in PO scores can be at least partially attributed to the improved detection capabilities of distresses and the identification of a higher quantity of distresses in the more recent survey.
Distress Type
Distress Quantity
Surface Distress
Index (SDI)
Distress Severity
7'Pbo FborMEN
Very Good Excellent
Figure 8 - SDI Inputs and Detailed Scale
ASTM D6433 covers nearly forty unique distress types that may or may not be present in an agency's road network. For that reason, IMS uses a modified approach that collects the most common and relevant distresses. The descriptions in Table 1 outline some of the distresses collected for the City:
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 10
Table 1 - Distress Descriptions
Alligator
Asphalt
• Quantified by severity
Cracking
and square footage
• Caused by the repeated
bending from vehicle
loads
• Propagate from the
bottom, meaning that
structural failure has
occurred
• An LAD with significant
impact on the condition
score, even at low extents
Asphalt
• A minimum depth of
Rutting
inch
• Quantified by their
depth and square footage
• Caused by the
permanent deformation
of the pavement and/or
subgrade layers
• Low densities can have
I
a large impact on the final
condition score due to
their implication of
possible structural failure
Longitudinal
Asphalt
• Quantified by their
& Transverse
length and width
Cracking
• Results from pavement
shrinkage due to natural
daily and seasonal
temperature cycles,
construction issues, or
other factors
J-
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 11
Block Asphalt
Cracking
Patching Asphalt
Raveling I Asphalt
Bleeding
Asphalt
• Quantified by their
width and square footage
• Form interconnected
longitudinal and /
transverse cracks
• Divides the pavement
into rectangular pieces
a=
• Results from aging and
environmental factors
• Quantified by the
square footage and
severity
• Always considered a
surface defect
• Affects ride quality and
condition of a pavement
• Loss of coarse aggregate
on pavement surface
• Measured by severity
and square footage
affected
• Presence of free asphalt
t
binder on the roadway
surface ;>
i'
• Caused by either an
excess of asphalt in the
pavement or insufficient
voids in the matrix
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 12
• Results in a pavement
surface with reduced skid
resistance
• Measured by severity
and square footage
Edge Asphalt • Run parallel to the road,
Cracking usually within 1 to 2 feet
of the outer edge of the
pavement
• Caused by traffic
loading and weakened
base conditions resulting
from poor drainage
• Measured in linear feet
Distortion Asphalt • Includes various
localized unevenness in
the surface
Weathering Asphalt
• Examples include
bumps and sags,
depressions, swell,
corrugation, and shoving
• Caused by several
factors, such as
construction issues,
subgrade failure, mixture
failure, environmental
influence, etc.
• Wearing away of
asphalt binder and fine
aggregate matrix
jb
Quantified by severity ,, •r r ' r� s t •
and square footage
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 13
Divided Slab Concrete • Slab divided by cracks
into four or more pieces
• Caused by overloading,
inadequate support, or
both
• Categorized as a severe
corner break if all pieces
or cracks are contained
within a corner break
Corner Concrete • Crack that intersects
Breaks with a joint at less than
the slab length
• Cracking extends
vertically through the
entire slab thickness
Joint Spalling Concrete
Faulting
Durability
Cracking
Concrete
• Typically caused by
repeated load on a
surface with a failing base
• A breakdown of the
edges of a slab within 2ft
of a joint
• The depth of the
cracking and area
affected determine the
severity
• Identified by a
difference in elevation
across a joint
• Severe faults have a >%
inch elevation difference
between two adjacent
concrete slabs
Concrete • Caused by the freeze -
thaw expansion of the
large aggregate
• Breaks down concrete
over -time
• Typically runs parallel to
a joint or linear crack
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 14
• A high severity "D"
crack covers more than
15% of the overall slab
Scaling Concrete
• A result of the surface
layer of concrete being
worn away over time by
weathering
• A % to % inch
breakdown in the surface
• Measured by severity
and total area affected
I_
Punchouts Concrete
• A localized, broken area
of the slab
• Caused by heavy and
I,
repeat loads, inadequate
slab thickness, and a
deterioration of the base
foundation
• Measured by severity
and number of individual
cracks within the distress
Roughness Index (RI)
..:77!= ='
The Roughness Index (RI) provides a quantifiable measure of ride quality, which is determined using the industry -standard ASTM E1926 for calculating the International Roughness Index (IRI). This value is derived from the longitudinal profile captured by the LCMS as it records the change in elevation over a distance. Once calculated, it is expressed as a slope and reported in millimeters per meter (mm/m). Typical IRI levels for new, older, and damaged pavements are displayed in Figure 9. The IRI is lower on average for roads or pavements that are normally used for higher speed travel.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 15
IRI (mm/m)
20 T
18 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
0 Normal Use
- 20 mph
--- 30 mph
------------ ----------------------------------------------- Airport New Older Maintained Damaged Rough
Highways Pavements Pavements Unpaved Pavements Unpaved
Road Road
Road or Pavement Type
Figure 9 - IRI Scale Definitions
40 mph
50 mph
60 mph
To enable the use of a blended condition score that incorporates both PCI and IRI scores, the IRI value is converted to an equivalent scale for analysis purposes. This is achieved by converting the IRI value into a score on a scale from 0 to 100 and reporting it as the Roughness Index (RI) using the following formula:
RI = (11— 3.5 x In(IRI)) x 10
In(IRI) is the natural logarithm of IRI.
To provide some context, a newly constructed street would typically have an RI value of above 85, whereas a street that requires an overlay would fall within the range of 40 to 70. Roadways in poor condition generally have RI values below 40, although they may achieve higher blended scores if the distresses responsible for the low RI score are not due to structural failure or other severe causes. For instance, rapid construction can lead to a pavement surface with less -than -optimal smoothness, resulting in a low RI value. However, since the distress or imperfection is not caused by severe failures within the pavement structure, the blended PCI value may not be significantly affected.
Structural Index (SI)
Structural adequacy testing was not requested by the City. Instead, IMS investigated the relationship between the PCI and the number of LAD observed in each pavement section to generate structural indices. Based on this analysis, each section was assigned a rating of Weak, Moderate, or Strong in terms of its strength. These ratings were represented by an SI of 30, 60, or 80, respectively. The established SI IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 16
was not used in calculating the overall pavement condition score but rather to help determine appropriate rehabilitation strategies based on the pavement strength rating.
Pavement condition index (PCI) — Following the field surveys, the condition data was imported to ESA for calculating the overall PCI. The PCI for each segment was calculated using the following percentages of weighing factors: PCI = 100% SDI
Table 2 presents each PCI category along with a brief description of the typical distresses and recommended treatments for each.
Table 2 — Pavement Condition Categories
Minor cracking, raveling, and other NLAD 70<PCI:585
Very
Good Routine or preventive maintenance.
E.g., Crack sealing, surface treatment
Minor to moderate cracking and low severity LAD such as alligator 60<PCI!570 cracking and rutting.
Good
Surface treatments with localized repairs and overlays
E.g., Surface treatments, localized surface patching, thin overlay More extensive and severe longitudinal and transverse cracking, as 50<130560 well as moderate severity LAD
Fair
Localized repairs or major rehabilitation.
E.g., Localized surface and/or full -depth patching, moderate overlays
Localized high -severity alligator cracking, and rutting 40<PCI!550 Marginal Major rehabilitation.
E.g., Localized full -depth patching, mill and overlay, traditional overlay
A greater extent of severe alligator cracking, rutting 25<PCI:540 Poor Major rehabilitation.
E.g., More extensive full -depth patching, mill and overlay, i traditional overlay
Extensive and severe alligator cracking, more extensive and deeper 0<PCI<_25 Very rutting, and potholes.
Poor
Major rehabilitation.
E.g., Full -depth reclamation, reconstruction
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 17
3.1 ESA Pavement Management System
The ESA software provides all the functionalities of a standalone software package while being user-friendly. It provides the City with a tool that can effectively catalog, classify, assess, track, and analyze condition data to aid in the processes of budget planning and pavement rehabilitation.
More specifically the program helps the City streamline its pavement management by giving structure to the basic information required for a management system:
• Pavement Section Inventory
• Pavement Deterioration Modeling
• Prioritization
• Funding Analysis
• Inspection Data
• Rehabilitation Selections & History
• Work Planning
• Reporting
The following pages will briefly detail the reasoning behind why this information is collected and used within the management program.
Pavement Section Inventory
An accurate inventory of all city -owned streets is necessary to make any determinations, assumptions, or projections within a management system. Individual attributes such as length, width, location, traffic use, surface type, condition, and other factors may be tracked and tied back to a single management segment within ESA. Thereafter, they are given a unique ID within the program. These attributes are critical in determining appropriate rehabilitation activities, prioritizing the management segments within the system, and facilitating placement and sorting during reporting.
Inspection Data
ESA provides the City with the flexibility to use a blended condition index that can be tailored to meet specific goals and requirements. The inputs for this index rely on inspection data from the field survey.
This custom reporting value is built based on various aspects considered while ranking the condition of a pavement. The inputs for this index are derived from inspection data collected during the field survey, including PCI and International Roughness Index (IRI) data. Details on the individual components of the inspection are available earlier in Section 3.0.
Pavement Deterioration Modeling
Inspection data by itself is only capable of representing conditions at the time of collection. Nevertheless, within ESA there are customizable curves that can predict the rate of pavement deterioration based on a streets functional class, pavement type, and strength rating. These deterioration curves are critical in predicting future pavement conditions and determining appropriate rehabilitation strategies. The model assumes that pavements with similar attributes and usage will deteriorate at similar rates. For instance, high volume asphalt arterials that are already in poor condition are expected to deteriorate faster and are represented in Figure 10 by a purple line. In contrast, low volume concrete local streets are expected to deteriorate slowly and are represented by a blue dashed line.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 18
100
90 80
K 70
Q�
= 60
Q
50 0
U
E 40
d
a 30
20 10
0 •.........
. ..
........................................
........................................
..............................
NX
- ACP Curve-1
- ACP Curve-2
- ACP Curve-3
ACPCurve -a ............
................
...
... ... �.
.. ... a�..
....... a.. ...
......
ACP Curve-5 -
ACP Curve-6
-----PCC Curve-9
----- PCC Curve - 10
- - - - - PCC Curve - 11
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Time (Years)
Figure 10 - Asphalt Concrete Pavement (ACP) and Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Deterioration Curves
Rehabilitation Work Selections & History
ESA uses a set of protocols that allow for activities to be assigned to PCI ranges based on filter criteria that give the City the ability to create detailed rehabilitation strategy sets for each functional class and pavement type according to the best practices determined for that pavement.
As planned rehabilitation work is completed, a record of the work should be added to the pavement management system. This ensures that conditions are up to date for future selections and creates a repository of information to aid in planning.
Prioritization
Within ESA, the option is available to prioritize pavement projects for rehabilitation based on six main criteria: PO, Cost of Deferral, Pavement Strength, Pavement Type, Functional Class, and the Area of a segment. Depending on the goals set forth at the beginning of the project, these criteria can be weighted differently based on their definition to create an overall priority factor for a project. Additional details on these factors are available in Section 5.
Project planning
The ability to plan work as needed allows the management program to better reflect the realities of a paving program. Certain constraints may be applied to funds that require their use within a certain year and activities relating to other assets may dictate the time and type of work to be performed. ESA allows for predefined projects to be entered into the management plan to account for work that is known. This ensures that the outcome is consistent with overall town planning and accurately reflects current funding allocations.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 19
In terms of pavement management efficiency, a program based on worst -first, that is starting at the lowest -rated street and working up towards the highest, does not achieve an optimal expenditure of funds. Generally, under this scenario, agencies cannot sufficiently fund pavement rehabilitation and lose ground despite injecting large amounts of capital into the network.
The preferred basis of rehabilitation candidate selection is to examine the cost of deferral of a street against increased life expectancy.
Funding analysis
The actual process of determining where and when to spend funds is a function of the inputs mentioned in this section. Information from the street section inventory, condition survey, deterioration modeling, rehabilitation activity protocols, prioritization, and project planner are all assessed to predict the potential outcomes of funding scenarios. These can either be goal -based or budget -based. A more detailed description is available in Section 5.0.
Reporting
ESA has the ability to generate basic reports for common data requests through a set of predefined layouts. This allows for quick access to section condition summaries, inspection data, budget scenario summaries, and data charts. The GIS data used to generate this report is also linked to the section summary information to allow for quick and easy visualizations of the data if imported into a GIS utility.
An example of data, as presented in ESA, can be seen in Figure 11. i Os UM1 leas 9bssa to fbwl -� .. _ .. .. ^..•- .,,...�w�.t�i"". leas %p .r e� .._ ...s�.r � •. w.... _.r ... .
f»] 4E3 .aW !: ia.tan... NrWI �.r_'r.•
!"
41l }�7 flTii :C: Yusa�W .ala:II Sr" � -
Ml1 !t
oat 744? ....- _ ♦..� .r ... r_s ... .. --_- It -
aat! Y61
b
• `: SAC'
3836 >
Re
Figure 11- Example of ESA City Data
3.2 Summary
This section outlined the fundamental concepts of pavement management and described the implementation process for the City's pavement management system. The operating parameters of ESA were reviewed, and the inputs provided by the LCMS-2 technology were explained to provide context for calculating PCI, Roughness Index, and Pavement Strength.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 120
This section will review the results of the pavement condition survey performed in May 2023. This section includes a summary of conditions in the functional classes used in the City's analysis, followed by a review of network photos taken from the RST. A series of charts will then summarize the findings of the condition survey and provide an overview of the PCI distribution across the City's pavement network.
4.1 City Street Inventory and Condition Summary
The City of Yucaipa is currently responsible for approximately 202.6 centerline miles of pavement with an overall PCI of 51 and a backlog of 34.3%. On the following page, Table 3 presents the City's inventory and pavement condition breakdown across different functional classes. Detailed information for each management section is available in Appendix A.
Table 3 - Network Inventory Summary by Functional Class and Pavement Type Segment (Block) Count
Network Length (mi)
Average Width (ft):
Network Area (yd2):
Current Pavement Condition
Index (CPCI)
5/28/23
Current Backlog (%)
Current Surface Distress Ind
5/28/23
Current Roughness Index (RI)
5/28/23
ex
All Streets
1998
Asphalt
Concrete
1976
22 All Streets
202.6
Asphalt
201.1
Concrete
1.4 All Streets
Asphalt
Concrete
All Streets
Asphalt
39.0 39.0
31.7 4,630,085
4,603,205
Concrete
All Streets
Asphalt
Concrete
All Streets
26,880
51 51
82 34
All Streets
(SDI) Asphalt
Concrete
All Streets
Asphalt
Concrete
51 51
82 66
66 52
299
424
1275
283
422
1271
16 2
4 42.3
50.6 109.6
41.7 50.2
109.3
0.7 Percentage
0.5 0.3
48.2 37.1
r
1 37.3
36.2 36.3
48.3 42.4
20.3 26.4
1,198,405
1,102,170
2,329,510
1,182,007
1,096,472
2,324,726
16,398
5,698
49 i 49
65 4,784
54 54
82 48
47 88
of Network with a PCI < 40
48 49
47 49
88 — 65
70 65
70 65
52 56
54 54
82 64
64 49
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 21
4.2 City Network Condition Imagery
The images presented in this section provide a sampling of the City's streets that fall into various condition categories. A discussion of potential rehabilitation strategies is included for each category.
Very Poor (PCI = 0 to 25) — Complete Reconstruction
Ave B from End of Pavement to 2"d St (GISID 21276, PCI = 3) — Rated as Very Poor, this street displays a large quantity of alligator cracking severe enough to suggest that the pavement structure is inadequate for current traffic loads. The rehabilitation of roads in this condition through a mill and overlay is generally ineffective, as the failures usually extend to the bottom of the pavement layer. Streets in this condition require rehabilitation that involves removal and replacement of the asphalt layer, base stabilization, or complete reconstruction based on design requirements.
Deferral of reconstruction of streets rated as Very Poor will not cause a substantial decrease in overall pavement quality. The streets have passed the opportunity for overlay -based strategies, meaning that reconstruction, which can be expensive, is the most suitable solution. Thus, Very Poor streets are often deferred in favor of rehabilitating more streets at lower costs, resulting in a greater net benefit to the Town. This strategy, however, must be sensitive to citizen complaints that may demand the prioritization of these street repairs. In addition, this type of street can pose a safety hazard for motorists since severe potholes and distortions may develop. It is important to consistently monitor these streets and check for potholes or other structural deficiencies until the street is eventually rebuilt.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 22
Poor (PCI = 25 to 40) — Last Opportunity for Surface Base Rehabilitation Casa Blanca Ave from Acropolis Dr to Oak Glen Rd (GISID 20062, PCI = 28) — Rated as Poor, this segment contains alligator cracking and dispersed longitudinal and transverse cracking across the pavement. If left untreated, a partial to full reconstruction would be required within a short period of time.
On heavily trafficked roadways, Poor streets often require partial to full reconstruction. On local roadways, they generally require removal of the pavement surface through grinding or excavation, base repairs, restoration of the curb line and drainage, and then placement of a new surface.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 123
Marginal (PCI = 40 to 50) — Thicker Overlays
121h St from Avenue E to Avenue D (GISID 20654, PCI = 46) — This street displays deep transverse and longitudinal cracking throughout the entirety of the pavement.
Marginal streets that display high amounts of load associated distresses (LAD) are selected as a high priority for rehabilitation as they generally provide the best cost/benefit ratio to the City. If left untreated, Marginal streets with high amounts of LAD will deteriorate to become partial reconstruction candidates.
Marginal streets that are failing due to materials issues or non -load associated failures may become suitable candidates for thick overlays if deferred, without a significant cost increase.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 124
Fair (PCI = 50 to 60) — Thin to Moderate Overlays
Kentucky St from 13th St to 12th St (GISID 21439, PCI = 54) — Fair streets have similar characteristics to Marginal streets in that the distresses present tend to be localized and moderate in severity; however, the distresses will predominately be non -load related (i.e., caused by environmental or other factors). This street displays moderate amounts of longitudinal and transverse cracking, with some cracks being deep but localized.
Like Marginal streets, Fair streets can provide a good cost/benefit ratio to an agency if addressed with an adequate rehabilitation technique. Stretching the application for surface treatments into this range can pose a cheap alternative to overlays but does not provide the appropriate renewal to the structural capacity of the pavement and may allow load related deterioration to continue unabated.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 25
Good (PCI = 60 to 70) — Surface Treatments
Fir Ave from Sandalwood Way to Larkspur Way (GISID 21936, PCI = 65) — Rated as Good, the primary cause of deterioration for this street is the longitudinal and transverse cracking. The pavement surface shows signs of sport patching; however, some crack patches have failed and could be restored with additional patching or surface treatments to remedy the more heavily distressed areas.
Preventive measures on streets considered Good can have a positive impact on the City's funding needs.
While the expected life of a slurry seal is not as long as that of an overlay, its ability to slow deterioration and relatively low cost can free up funding for streets in worse condition.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 26
Very Good (PCI = 70 to 85) — Surface Treatments and Localized Rehabilitation Avenue E from Birch St to Avenue E (TC) (GISID 21176, PCI = 75) — Rated as Very Good, this street displays minor amounts of transverse cracking. It is an example of a candidate for preventive maintenance to extend the life of the roadway.
Also, routine maintenance prevents water intrusion by sealing and slowing crack growth. By keeping water out of the base layers, the pavement life is extended without the need for heavier rehabilitations.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 127
Excellent (PCI = 85 to 100)
Cornell Dr from Grant Dr to Holmes St (GISID 21195, PCI = 97) — Rated as Excellent, this pavement displays little to no surface distresses. The ride is smooth, and the surface and the base are intact. Excellent roads should be periodically assessed for crack development that would trigger routine maintenance activities.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 128
4.3 City Network Condition Distribution
Figure 12 shows the distribution of pavement condition for the roadway network in Yucaipa. • Just over six percent (6.2%) of the network can be considered in Excellent condition and should be closely monitored to ensure timely application of early localized preventive measures. • Approximately twenty-three percent (23.4%) of the network falls into the PCI range considered Very Good. These are roads that benefit most from preventive maintenance techniques, such as spot patching and slurry seals.
• Thirteen percent (13.0%) of the streets are rated as Good and may still be candidates for slurry seals or thin overlays.
• Twenty-three percent (23.0%) of the network can be considered in Fair to Marginal condition and represents candidates for progressively thicker overlay -based rehabilitation. If left untreated, they will decline rapidly into reconstruction candidates.
• Approximately thirty-four percent (34.3%) of the network is rated as Poor or Very Poor, meaning these roadways have deteriorated to the point where surface rehabilitation can no longer restore the pavement to a point of structural adequacy. Rehabilitation of the entire pavement structure is required for these segments.
45 Current Network Average Condition = 51, Backlog = 34.3% 40 c�
L 35
Q
CO 30
oBacklog
3 25
Z 19.1
O 20
15.2 OA
M 15 13.0
C 11.6 11.4
�1
10 CIO 0
0 0
V Poor Poor Marginal Fair Good
(0 to 25) (25 to 40) (40 to 50) (50 to 60) (60 to 70)
23.4 V Good
(70 to 85)
Current Pavement Condition Using Descriptive Terms
Figure 12 - Roadway Network Present Status Using Descriptive Terms
6.2 Excellent
(85 to 100)
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 29
National and State Comparisons
The current national average PCI as measured by IMS and its clients is 65.2. The City was found to have a lower than average PCI of 51. When the current recorded average for the state of California is calculated using IMS data, the City again scored lower with an average PCI of 51 compared to 67.7.
The City's backlog is higher than the national average, 34.3% compared to 10.6%. The state of California also has a lower overall average backlog of 7%.
4.4 Condition By Functional Classification
Analyzing subsets of data in addition to the overall pavement condition can provide a better understanding of where an agency should focus its resources. Figure 13 displays the distribution of pavement conditions for each functional class, revealing that arterial and collector roads contribute almost equally to the portion of the City's network categorized as Marginal or below in condition (under 50 PCI). Although residential roads have the highest average PCI of the three functional classes and
41.3% of roads in this class are categorized as Very Good or Excellent, 32.5% are still categorized as part of the network backlog.
M
a
L
Q
CO
L
O
Z
4-
0 W
bA
c�
L
a
40 ■ Arterial, PCI = 48
■ Collector, PCI = 49
■ Residential, PCI = 54
30 20
10 X
r]
V Poor Poor Marginal Fair Good V Good Excellent
(0 to 25) (25 to 40) (40 to 50) (50 to 60) (60 to 70) (70 to 85) (85 to 100) Pavement Condition Using Descriptive Terms
Figure 13 - Condition Rating by Functional Classification IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 130
When evaluating the condition of pavement based on the percentage of network it covers, the proportion of each class in the overall network must also be considered. This distribution is illustrated in Figure 14. Local and minor arterial roads have the lowest PCI out of the four functional classes. Even so, minor arterials make up only 6% of the total network, so their condition will likely affect fewer citizens compared to a larger class like local roads. Therefore, the City should focus its preventive maintenance efforts on the class types that contribute to a greater degree to the overall network.
Arterial,
1,198.4, 26%
:tor,
l,luZ.Z, 2470
Total Mileage = 202.6 Miles
Total Area = 4630k Scl Yards
Figure 14: Functional Classification Distribution By Area
4.5 Condition By Pavement Type
The maintenance and improvement of asphalt and concrete pavements may require different rehabilitation activities that come at different costs. Figure 15 displays the distribution of pavement conditions for each pavement type.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 31
50 40
L
Q
Co 30
Y
L
0 3
4-1
a 20
z
4-
0 a�
10 a
U
L
a 0
Current Asphalt Network Average Condition = 51,
Backlog = 34.5%
Current Concrete Network Average Condition =
82, Backlog = 0%
V Poor Poor Marginal Fair Good V Good Excellent
(0 to 25) (25 to 40) (40 to 50) (50 to 60) (60 to 70) (70 to 85) (85 to 100) Pavement Condition Using Descriptive Terms
Figure 15: Current Pavement Condition By Pavement Type
The graph shows that the City's concrete network has a higher average PCI than its asphalt network. A total of 74.3% of the concrete network was categorized as being in Very Good or Excellent condition, while only 29.5% of the asphalt network falls into these categories. It is important to note that concrete pavements make up only 1% of the City's total network. This means that the average PCI of the asphalt pavement type has a greater impact on the overall PCI of the network.
4.6 Summary
Section 4.0 of the report provided a detailed analysis of the results obtained from the pavement condition survey conducted in the City of Yucaipa. The section covered the three functional classifications in the City and their respective PCI values, which were further illustrated with pavement photographs taken during the survey. Additionally, the section provided a breakdown of the pavement condition distribution for each functional class and pavement type. Overall, the network average PCI for Yucaipa was found to be 51 with a backlog of 34.3%.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 32
This section discusses the results of the pavement management analysis that was performed using the ESA pavement management system, starting with an overview of the assumptions that were used when implementing the system, such as the unit rates and the selection methodology for rehabilitation candidates. The subsequent section, 5.2, details the results of each of the various five-year budget runs beginning in January 2024, along with their predicted conditions. This is highlighted further through a series of charts that are used to demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of various funding models.
5.1 Key Analysis Set Points and Assumptions
Pavement management analysis requires user input to complete its condition forecasting and prioritization. A series of operating parameters were developed to create an efficient program that is tailored to the City's needs.
Selecting Segments for Rehabilitation
The selection of rehabilitation candidates through a worst -first approach or subjective committee input is neither efficient nor cost effective. It is important to establish a set of criteria and determine their importance in the selection process. ESA has defined commonly used criteria within the program that allows different weighting factors to be applied depending on the City's goals. This approach can lead to more objective and effective selection of rehabilitation candidates. • PCI — As mentioned earlier in this section, the results of the pavement condition survey are used to generate a PCI that ranges from 0-100 where 0 is considered the worst and 100 the best. This factor can be given a higher weight to give greater priority to poor condition streets. • Cost of Deferral — As time passes a pavement will deteriorate and require more costly repairs as it ages ESA can be configured to prioritize streets nearing the point where this cost increase occurs. • Pavement Strength — Through the use of deflection testing or the prevalence of LAD, the relative strength of a pavement can be determined. A prioritization factor can be applied that gives preference to streets that may deteriorate faster in order to apply more cost-effective rehabilitation early in the life cycle.
• Pavement Type — Depending on costs, design life, and the City's goals, a weighting factor can be applied based on the materials used to construct the pavement.
• Functional Class —Generally higher volume streets are given the greatest priority within a program since they serve the most vehicles.
• Area — Project selection can consider the size of a project when determining rehabilitation priority. The City can decide to select large groups of streets over small ones if that approach suits the goals set forth at the beginning of the project.
• Planned or Committed Projects — When developing the rehabilitation plan, projects that are already scheduled to be completed are taken into consideration. This is done by adjusting the PCI scores to reflect the expected improvement resulting from these projects.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 33
For the City, the weighting factors for these categories were established with the aim of maximizing the cost savings associated with the concept of deferred maintenance and addressing Weak pavements with lower PCI scores. The goal is to minimize the growth of the backlog.
Rehabilitation Strategies and Unit Rates
The funding requirements for the City are mainly determined by the rehabilitation strategies and unit rates used in the budget analysis. Table 4 presents a breakdown of the costs associated with different pavement rehabilitation activities and their application. The table also suggests a recommended rehabilitation funding sequence based on the cost of deferral. A lower number in this column indicates a higher priority for rehabilitation based on the cost of deferral.
The parameters to consider when forming rehabilitation strategies include:
• Rehab Activity — This includes the assigned identifier and name of each rehabilitation strategy. Various degrees of slurry sealing are outlined to highlight the increasing cost associated with additional patching requirements for lower PCI streets.
• Min, Max, and Critical PCI — The PCI range for the application of a specific rehabilitation activity is determined by the Min and Max values that set the upper and lower limits, while the Critical PCI indicates the threshold at which rehabilitation becomes a higher priority to leverage the cost of deferral factor. There can be overlap in the PCI range to allow for further differentiation based on pavement strength.
• Unit Rates —The cost of rehabilitation is presented per square yard for each combination of pavement type, functional class, and rehabilitation activity. A base unit rate is set for the lowest assumed cost of a work type, and it is adjusted for each functional class to account for additional work such as traffic control, intersection improvements, landscaping, utility adjustments, and right-of-way (ROW) infrastructure. IMS worked closely with the City to determine rates that accurately represent the cost of work.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 134
Table 4 - Rehabilitation Rates
All Routine Maintenance
85 l
100 1
100
0.00 i
0.00 0.00
0.00 Asphalt
Slurry Seal / Seal Coat
82 85
4.29 4.70 4.60
4.50 85
15 80
Asphalt
MicroSurface / Chip Seal
73 80
6.50 - --,
7.25 -
7.00 --
1 70
6.75 88
Asphalt
MicroSurface / Chip Seal +
Structural Patch
7.15 8.00
7.75 7.50
88 4
60 50.50
92 12
Asphalt j Edge Mill + Thin Overlay (1.5 -
63 70 47.97 53.00 51.50
2.0)-
50 58.00
94 11
Asphalt Edge Mill/Full Width Mill (FWM) +
54 60 53.73 62.00 ' 60.00
Moderate Overlay (2.0 - 3.0)
40 96
2 Asphalt FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 -
44 50 58.31 70.50 67.50
64.50 3.0)
25 118.00
98 3
Asphalt Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM
30 40 106.9 129.00 124.00
+ Structural Patch + Overlay
3 0
179.00
100
4 Asphalt ACP Full Depth Reconstruction
15 25 170.6 188.00 183.00
3 80
83 11
Concrete PCC Joint Rehab & Crack Seal
82 100 5.00 5.50 5.50
5.25 Concrete
PCC Localized Rehab
73 80
11.00 12.75
12.25 11.75
85 3
70 Concrete
PCC Slight Panel Replacement
63 70
22.50 27.25
26.00 24.75
--
1 60
88 Concrete
(<10%)
PCC Moderate Panel
54 60
34.50 44.00
41.50 39.00
50 90
6 Replacement (< 20%)
Concrete
PCC Extensive Panel
40 44
50 47.50
63.00 59.00
55.00 94
8 Replacement (<33%)
25 30
40 65.50
83.00 78.50
74.00 96
5 Concrete PCC Partial Reconstruction
Concrete
I PCC Full Depth Reconstruction
10 0
15 25
99.50 132.50
123.50
115.00
100
5.2 Network Budget Analysis Models
The pavement management analysis using the ESA system involved combining the condition assessment, deterioration model, prioritization factors, and rehabilitation assignments to conduct a budget analysis.
With this information, the program can predict the outcomes of different funding levels or suggest the funds necessary to achieve specific goals. To model network trends and estimate the funding levels needed to reach certain condition and distribution targets, IMS conducted an analysis using a series of budgets. The results of this analysis are detailed in this section.
Budget Targets
The following scenarios were generated to forecast the outcomes of the current estimated City budget compared to City's target PCI goals over the next five years. The models determine what level of funding may be appropriate going forward. The values for backlog and PC[ have been rounded to the nearest whole number to improve legibility. Varying budget figures will have slightly different outcomes that are visible in the charts but may not be completely represented in the legend text. 1 Unit rate names were shortened in the table to conserve space. All unit rates are provided in dollar per square yard ($/yd2).
Please refer to the following list for the complete names: Base Unit Rate (BUR), Arterial Unit Rate (AUR), Collector Unit Rate (CUR), and Residential Unit Rate (RUR).
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 1 35
Five-year Models:
• Yucaipa Budget (Green Line) — This represents the City's current average annual budget of $10M/Yr. dedicated to pavement preservation and rehabilitation. This level of funding will result in a network average PCI score of 46 and a backlog of around 43% after five years. • Maintain Current Backlog (Red Dashed Line)— The Maintain Current Backlog budget was developed in order to maintain the current backlog of around 34%. This results in a budget value of $27.69M/Yr. and a PCI increase to 53 after five years.
• Steady State PCI (Red Line) —This is simply the funds required to maintain the current network average PCI at around 51. The annual budget required to do so is approximately $22.47M/Yr. Backlog will increase to 37% of the network after five years.
• Backlog Control (Purple Dashed Line) — The Backlog Control budget was developed in order to restrict the backlog to a maximum of 38%. The funding required to achieve this backlog goal is $20.58M/Yr. and will also decrease the PCI to 50 after five years.
• PCI Control (Purple Line) —The PCI Control model determines the funding required to maintain the PCI at a minimum level of 46. This budget is $10.19M/Yr. and will result in a backlog of 43% after five years.
The results of the analysis are summarized in Figure 16. The x-axis highlights the annual budget, while the y-axis plots the five-year Post Rehab Network Average PCI values. The diagonal blue line is the network trend model developed to show estimated PCI along with a funding range up to $40M/Yr. 60 Analysis Period 2024 to 2028
c
O
55 O
U
O
hA
M
L
Qi
a'
L 50
O
3 O
Z
M
s
45 (A
O
a
40 Analysis Start Date = 1/1/2024
Current PCI = 51 (2023)
Control PCI = 46
0 10 20
W
30 40
Annual Budget Each Year for Five Years ($1M/Yr)
2024 to 2028 Rehab
Analysis Results
Maintain Current
Backlog: Final PCI = 53,
Backlog = 34%, Annual
Budget = $27.69M/Yr
Steady State PCI: Final
PCI = 51, Backlog =
37%, Annual Budget =
$22.47M/Yr
- Backlog Control Budget:
Final PCI = 50, Backlog =
38%, Annual Budget =
$20.58M/Yr
- PCI Control Budget: Final
PCI = 46, Backlog =
43%, Annual Budget =
$10.19M/Yr
Yucaipa, CA Budget:
Final PCI = 46, Backlog =
43%, Annual Budget =
$10M/Yr
Yucaipa, CA has a Backlog
controlled network
Figure 16 — Five-year Post Rehab Network PCI Analysis Results IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 136
Figure 17 presents the resultant network backlog against the annual budget. It is similar to Figure 16, but instead of plotting the average PCI score, it displays the total backlog after five years with a blue diagonal line. The City currently maintains a backlog of 34.3%. As the backlog grows, the funding required to return to the current level will increase.
50 0
RT
v
U
a
0 \aA 45
O
Y
U
fC
m
bb
M
4-0
40 c�
L
a
Y
L
O
4-0
W
Z 35
t
a
OC
N
O
a
W
2024 to 2028 Backlog Analysis
Results
Yucaipa, CA Budget: Final PCI
= 46, Backlog = 43%, Annual
Budget = $10M/Yr
Steady State PCI: Final PCI =
51, Backlog = 37%, Annual
Budget = $22.47M/Yr
- - - - - Maintain Current Backlog: Final
PCI = 53, Backlog = 34%,
Annual Budget = $27.69M/Yr
- - - - - Backlog Control Budget: Final
PCI = 50, Backlog = 38%,
Annual Budget = $20.58M/Yr
PCI Control Budget: Final PCI =
46, Backlog = 43%, Annual
Budget = $10.19M/Yr
Current Backlog = 34% (2023)
0 10 20 30 40
Annual Budget Each Year for Five Years ($1M/Yr)
Figure 17 — Five-year Post Rehab Network Backlog Results IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 137
Figure 18 presents the analysis results on an annual basis. This shows that if the budget falls below $22.47M/Yr. (Steady State PCI Budget), over time the overall condition of the roads is expected to deteriorate as the backlog grows. The City's current budget of $10M per year follows the same pattern as the backlog control budget and the majority of the green line representing the budget is covered by the solid purple; however, it is still possible to see that a budget of $10M is not enough to keep the condition of the City's network from declining.
919
4�
X
GJ
85 p 80
75 O
+� 70
GJ
E 65
GJ
a 60
Cl
hA
L 55
G1
Q 50
.Y
L
O 45
4-0
Z 40
35 30
2023
2024 2025 2026 2027 2028
Year
Figure 18 — Five-year Annual PCI
® Fix All Budget = $495M Over 5
Years
- — — Maintain Current Backlog:
Final PCI = 53, Backlog = 34%,
Annual Budget = $27.69M/Yr
- - - Recommended Budget: Final
PCI = 52, Backlog = 36%,
Annual Budget = $25M/Yr
®Yucaipa, CA Budget: Final PCI
= 46, Backlog = 43%, Annual
Budget = $10M/Yr
Steady State PCI: Final PCI =
51, Backlog = 37%, Annual
Budget = $22.47M/Yr
— — — Backlog Control Budget: Final
PCI = 50, Backlog = 38%,
Annual Budget = $20.58M/Yr
PCI Control Budget: Final PCI
= 46, Backlog = 43%, Annual
Budget = $10.19M/Yr
Do Nothing
Yucaipa, CA has a Backlog
controlled network
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 138
1.1 Post Rehabilitation Condition
Figure 19 compares the percentage of the City's network area separated into each pavement condition category for two scenarios: the current network average condition (shown in red) and the projected condition in five years with the City's budget (shown in blue). The analysis shows that if the City's current budget is maintained, the average PCI is expected to decrease to 46 by the end of the five-year analysis period, and the backlog is projected to decrease to approximately 43.4%. The total percentage of Very Good and Very Poor pavements are predicted to be affected the most, with the total percentage of Very Good decreasing by almost 10% and Very Poor increasing by approximately 8%. ca
i
a
m
O
3 a,
z
O
W
aA
c�
c
W
U
i
W
a
50 40
30 20
10 IC
■ Current Network Average Condition = 51, Backlog = 34.3% ® Post Rehab Network Average Condition = 46, Backlog = 43.4% Analysis Period 2024 to 2028
Annual Budget = $10000 k/Year
V Poor Poor Marginal Fair Good
(0 to 25) (25 to 40) (40 to 50) (50 to 60) (60 to 70)
V Good Excellent
(70 to 85) (85 to 100)
Pavement Condition Using Descriptive Terms
Figure 19 — Comparison of Pavement Condition Outcome of Two Potential Budgets over Five Years
5.3 Summary
The pavement analysis models conducted using the ESA program showed that the current annual budget of $10M for pavement management would result in negative change in pavement condition over a period of five years, resulting in a five-year post rehab PC] of 46 and a backlog of 43.4%. Maintaining the current backlog level at 34.3% would require an annual budget of approximately $27.69M and increase the PC] to
53. These findings highlight the importance of adequate funding for pavement management to maintain the quality and safety of the City's roads.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 139
6.1 Project Summary and Recommendations
A pavement condition survey was performed in May 2023 on the full City pavement network. The results of the condition survey were aggregated into the ESA pavement management system. This system facilitated the creation of a georeferenced pavement inventory, enabled the development of a precise model of the network's current condition and anticipated future deterioration, and provided recommendations for funding to meet various level -of -service objectives.
The following broad recommendations are presented to the City as an output from the pavement analysis and must be read in conjunction with the previous sections. • The City should make efforts to keep the ESA spreadsheet up to date. — By maintaining and updating the rehabilitation unit rates, work history of the segments, and accuracy of the inventory, the City will be able to reliably forecast funding needs for future years. This allows the City to be proactive in maintaining the condition of the pavement network at an acceptable level.
• The City should periodically resurvey the pavement network. — Pavement performance over time involves many variables, such as traffic volumes, environmental factors, maintenance timing, and design standards. As these variables change, the rate at which a pavement deteriorates will change with them. The periodic resurvey of pavement conditions allows the City to track these changes and update models accordingly, ensuring that appropriate rehabilitation measures are being planned. • The City should investigate new and additional rehabilitation activities. — Advancements in pavement rehabilitation technology are constantly being made, and it is recommended that the City periodically update its planned rehabilitation activities in the ESA program to take advantage of these advances
• The City should strive to maintain or better its current condition if possible. — Maintaining a pavement network in good condition is more cost-effective than restoring conditions after deterioration. The City's current pavement network has an overall PCI of 51 with a backlog value of 34.3%. If the current annual budget of $10M is maintained, the models show the PCI will decrease to 46 and the backlog will increase to 43% after five years.
6.2 Closing
The IMS Team greatly appreciates the opportunity to work with the City on this pavement management update. Over the course of this project, the team has observed the City staff's dedication to offering the best possible service to their community. IMS stands ready to assist the City with training and technical support as necessary and welcomes the opportunity to work with the City on future pavement management projects.
IMS Pavement Management Report Yucaipa, CA 2023 Page 140
ATTACHMENT 2
FY24/25 PAVEMENT
MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM
FY23/24THROUGH FY28/29 PMP
BUDGET SUMMARY TABLE
FY24/25 - FY28/29 PMP BUDGET SUMMARY TABLE
Pavement Maintenance Item Description
FY 23/24
FY 24/25 FY 25126
FY 26/27
FY 27/28
FY 28/29
Pavement Rehabilitation (Residential and Arterial/Collector) $2,181,790
$2,058,694
$1,808,694
$1,619,611
$1,493,555
$1,367,500
Surface Treatement (Microsurface)
$140,000
$1,152,868
$1,085,216
$906,982
$896,133
$765,800
Patchinq (subqrade failed areas)
$94,920
$226,456
$198,956
$178,157
$164,291
$150,425
Crack Seal
$49,000
$205,869
$180,869
$161,961
$149,355
$136,750
Additional Maintenance Programs
AC Berm Replacement
$0
$82,348
$0
$64,785
$0.00
$54,700
Concrete Replacement
$80,000
$205,869
$180,869
$161,961
$149,357
$136,750
Understreet Drain Pipe Repair
$30,000
$41,174
$36,174
$32,392
$29,871
$27,350
Striping/Pavement Markings
$30,000
$82,348
$72,348
$64,784
$59,742
$54,700
Neighborhood Traffic Calming
$30,000
$61,761
$54,261
$48,588
$44,807
$41,025
Interagency Paving Agreements (Utility Companies)
$40,000
$40,000
$40,000
$40,000
$40,000
$40,000
Street Maintenance Total $2,675,710
$4,157,387
$3,657,387 (4)
$3,279,221
$3,027,111
$2,775,000
Revenues & Transfers of Revenues From Other Funds
Inter -Agency Pavinq Aqreements (YVWD)
40,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
Measure I - Sales Tax �'�
900,000
2,182,387
2,182,387
1,804,221
1,552,111
1,300,000
Gas Tax/Prop 42 (2)
130,000
85,000
85,000
85,000
85,000
85,000
SB1 13)
1,000,000
1,850,000
1,350,000
1,350,000
1,350,000
1,350,000
General Fund
876,800
0 0
0 0
0 Total Transfers & Revenues:
$ 2,946,800 $
4,157,387 $
3,657,387 (4)
$ 3,279,221
$ 3,027,111
$ 2,775,000
Annual Recommended PMP Expenses:
$ 2,675,710 $
4,157,387 $
3,657,387
$ 3,279 221
$ 3,027,111
$ 2,775,000
Proiected Year -End Fund Balance:
$271,090
0 0
0 0
0 (') Includes one-time carryover balance of $2,521,107 (2) Includes one-tme carryover balance of $38,965
(3) Includes one-time carryover balance of $659,941
(4) Does not include costs or funding for rehabiliatation of County Line Road between Bryant Street and Calimesa Boulevard
STREETS COMPLETED
FY23/24 MAP
FY23/24 COMPLETED STREET
SEGMENTS BY TYPE
FULL -WIDTH MILL/EDGEMILL AND
OVERLAY
MICROSURFACE
RoAo
�,
AVENUEE
IpdaW 3/06/2M3
PROPOSED FY24/25 PMP MAP
AND STREET LIST
LVdaW 4/30/24
Pavement
Pavement
Pavement Area
Current Segment
Segment Rehab
On Street
From Street
To Street
FunCL
Width (ft)
Length (ft)
(yd2)
PCI (CPCI)
Results
Rehab Activity
Rehabilitation
Arterial/Collector Streets (Classification 1-4)
BRYANT ST
WILDWOOD CANYON RD
WILDWOOD CANYON RD
Arterial
24 6
17 46
Non-Cricl Yr 1
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
WILDWOOD CANYON RD
6TH PL
6TH ST
Arterial
41 779
3,725
47 Non-Crtcl Yr 1
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
WILDWOOD CANYON RD
6TH ST
5TH ST
Arterial
43 1,159
5,812
41 Selected Yr 1
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
AVENUE E
6TH ST
5TH ST
Arterial
51 1,316
7,828
44 Selected Yr 1
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
5TH ST
AVE H
AVE G
Arterial
30 913
3,197
21 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Clay
5TH ST
AVE G
WILDWOOD CANYON RD
Arterial
40 1,344
6,271
29 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Olay
COUNTY LINE RD (TC)
COUNTY LINE RD
CALIFORNIA ST
Arterial
50 68
397
26 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Clay
16TH ST
DUNLAP BLVD
AVENUE E
Collector
39 1.519
6,910
36 Non-Crtcl Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Olay
16TH ST
AVE D
YUCAIPA BLVD
Collector
40 976
4,556
51 Selected Yr 1
EM/FWM + Moderate Overlay (2.0 - 3.0)
16TH ST
YUCAIPA BLVD
TENNESSEE ST
Collector
26 336
1,019
29 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Olay
6TH ST
WILDWOOD CANYON RD
NEBRASKA LN
Collector
34 553
2,192
28 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctri Ptch + Clay
AVE D
16TH ST
15TH ST
Collector
40 1,321
6,164
28 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Clay
AVE D
2ND ST
1ST ST
Collector
37 659
2,845
23 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Olay
AVE D
1ST ST
CALIFORNIA ST
Collector
38 660
2.927
35 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Clay
BELLA VISTA DR
BELLA VISTA CT
GRANT ST
Collector
33 669
2,575
29 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Olay
DUNLAP BLVD
16TH ST
KENTUCKY ST
Collector
42 225
1,103
27 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Olay
PENDLETON RD
FREMONT ST
DATE AVE
Collector
20 3,262
7,610
29 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Olay
PENDLETON RD
DATE AVE
DS@151N DATE AVE
Collector
24 151
423
32 Selected Yr 1
Surf Recon + Base Rehab / FWM + Strctrl Ptch + Olay
* OAK GLEN RD
RIV_CO_LIVE OAK CANYON RD
CALIMESA BLVD
Asphalt
42 609
2,982
69 Fall Thru Yr 2
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
* OAK GLEN RD
RIV CO_LIVE OAK CANYON RD
CALIMESA BLVD
Asphalt
41 609
2.912
63 Fall Thru Yr 2
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
' OAK GLEN RD
CALIMESA BLVD
13TH ST
Asphalt
74 940
8,119
52 Fall Thru Yr 3
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
" OAK GLEN RD
13TH ST
COLORADO ST
Asphalt
74 889
7,678
52 Fall Thru Yr 3
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
" OAK GLEN RD
COLORADO ST
DS@706E COLORADO ST
Asphalt
61 706
5,022
46 Fall Thru Yr 3
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
" OAK GLEN RD
DS@706E COLORADO ST
AVENUE E
Asphalt
57 2,200
14,628
48 Fall Thru Yr 3
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
Residential Streets
CUSTER ST
MOUNTAIN VIEW ST
EOP
Residential
26 131
399
28 Selected Yr 1
ACP Full Depth Reconstruction
BELLA VISTA CT
EOP
BELLA VISTA DR
Residential
41 365
1.748
61 Selected Yr 1
EM/FWM + Moderate Overlay (2.0 - 3.0)
HOLLYBROOK LN
HOPE LN
EDP
Residential
24 49
137
13 Selected Yr 1
ACP Full Depth Reconstruction
SIDANA RD
AVE H
DAMASCUS ST
Residential
26 291
884
42 Selected Yr 1
FWM + Thick Overlay (> 2.0 - 3.0)
Surface
Treatment
Arterial/Collector Streets (Classification 1-4)
AVENUE E (TC)
2ND ST
AVENUE E
Arterial
11 63
81 66
Selected Yr 1
MicroSurface / Chip Seal
AVENUE E (TC)
3RD ST
AVENUE E
Arterial
12 62
86 71
Selected Yr 1
MicroSurface / Chip Seal
AVENUE E (TC)
AVENUE E
3RD ST
Arterial
12 69
97 78
Selected Yr 1
MicroSurface / Chip Seal
YUCAIPA BLVD
16TH ST
15TH ST
Arterial
43 1.398
7,011
83 Selected Yr 1
Slurry Seal / Seal Coat
YUCAIPA BLVD
16TH ST
DS@822E 16TH ST
Arterial
36 822
3,454
84 Selected Yr 1
Slurry Seal / Seal Coat
YUCAIPA BLVD
DS@822E 16TH ST
15TH ST
Arterial
35 585
2,388
87 Selected Yr 1
Slurry Seal / Seal Coat
Residential Streets
MOUNTAIN VIEW ST
BRYANT ST
CUSTER ST
Residential
34 643
2,551
86 Selected Yr 1
Slurry Seal / Seal Coat
MOUNTAIN VIEW ST
CUSTER ST
LINN ST
Residential
25 151
440
81 Selected Yr 1
Slurry Seal / Seal Coat
SUNLIGHT DR
BRYANT ST
MONTEREY DR
Residential
34 209
829
72 Selected Yr 1
MicroSurface / Chip Seal
Segments prioritized based on public comment
PMP MAP OF PROPOSED
STREETS FOR NEXT FIVE (5)
YEARS
LV60W s/m/2024
UNIT COST BY TREATMENT
TYPE
Table of Overlay and Reconstruction Options with Guidelines for Applications 2024-2025
Est. Cost
Rehab Options
Rehab Descriptions
Where Used
Street Conditions
Per/SF
OVERLAY OPTIONS
Edge Mill & Thin
Clean, Repair, CF, Apply Weed Control Edge
Residential
Extent & Magnitude of cracks is
$2.09
Overlay 1 1/2"
mill (6' Wide), Install 1 1/2" Overlay
moderate to high.
Full Width Mill and
Clean, Repair, CF, Apply Weed Control Mill
Arterials & Collectors-
Extent & Magnitude of cracks is
$2.64
Moderate Overlay 2-
width of roadway, applit 2' to 3" Overlay
Special Cases Residential
moderate to high. Moderate sub-
3"
grade failures
Full Width Mill and
Clean, Repair, CF, Apply Weed Control Mill
Arterials & Collectors-
Extent & Magnitude of cracks is
$2.96
Thick Overlay >2-3"
width of roadway, apply >2" to 3"
Special Cases Residential
high. Moderate to high sub -grade
failures
RECONSTRUCTION OPTIONS
Pulverize & Overlay
Pulverize existing pavement (usually when less
Arterials, Collectors &
Significant failed areas of sub-
$3.17
than 3 1/2") to a maximum depth of 8"-9" if
Residential.
grade or pavement (30% or more)
there is an adequate base to mix. Do not
making O/L not an cost effective
pulverize into the existing dirt sub -grade.
approach. (Cost of material
Grade and compact (no removal of excess
removals and to maintain grades
material regrade cross slope to accomodate for
is an important factor.)
additional pulverized material, O/L 3 1/2".
Abreviation Summary:
Clean- Remove loose dirt, debris and vegetation growth FC- Functional Classification- Arterial (Primary Highways (usually in cracks) & Secondary Higheways), Collectors & Residentials Repair- Remove and Replace areas where pavement or O/L- Asphaltic Concrete Overlay (Thickness as shown in sub -grade has failed. chart above.
CF- Crack filling of the street surface. FM- Full Mill- Milling of the street for the full width EM- Edge Mill- Usually 6' wide along the edge of an Petromat- Thin layer of fabric used between new and existing curb & gutter or berm existing pavement to prevent crack reflecting
Table of Surface Treatment Options with Guidelines for Applications 2024-2025
Est. Cost
Rehab Options
Rehab Descriptions
Where Used
Street Conditions
Per/SF
Surface Treatment
Microsurface
Clean, Striping. Apply approximately 1/2"
Arterials, Collectors &
Streets where the extent &
$0.44
Micro -Surface paving material. Pavement
Residential Streets.
magnitude of cracks are moderate
Patching (Patch) and Crack Filling (CF)
to high. Moderate sub -grade
failures. May have been previously
slurried. Cost of an O/L cannot be
justified.
Abreviation Summary:
Clean Remove loose dirt, debris and vegetation growth.
FC Functional Classification- Arterial (Primary Highways apply weed control (usually in cracks)
& Secondary Higheways), Collectors & Residentials.
Repair Remove and Replace areas where pavement or
O/L Asphaltic Concrete Overlay (Thickness as shown in
sub -grade has failed.
chart above).
CF Crack filling of the street surface.