Download - Proposed 2020 Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program (OP3) Documents/2020... · Proposed 2020 Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program (OP3) Page 3 Introduction The City of Wichita’s

Public Works & Utilities

Maintenance Division

Proposed 2020 Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program (OP3)


Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3

Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program Project Selection Process ..................................................... 3

Traditional Approach ................................................................................................................................ 3

1. Pavement Condition Index (PCI) ................................................................................................... 3

2. Completion of Locations Previously Identified ............................................................................. 4

3. Stakeholder Requests ................................................................................................................... 4

4. Maintenance History and Other Programs ................................................................................... 4

Enhanced Approach .................................................................................................................................. 4

1. Continued Emphasis on Preventive and Preservative Maintenance ............................................ 4

2. Pilot Projects ................................................................................................................................. 6

3. Investment Optimization .............................................................................................................. 7

2020 Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program Summary ..................................................................... 7

Definitions ................................................................................................................................................. 7

1. Brick Crosswalk Replacement ....................................................................................................... 7

2. Crack Seal ...................................................................................................................................... 8

3. Concrete and Asphalt Repair ........................................................................................................ 8

4. Microsurfacing Seal ....................................................................................................................... 9

5. Preservative Seal ........................................................................................................................... 9

6. Scrub Seal .................................................................................................................................... 10

7. Ultrathin Bonded Asphalt Surface (UBAS) .................................................................................. 10

8. Localized Repair of Drainage and other Anomalies .................................................................... 11

Proposed Expenditures ........................................................................................................................... 11

Network Funding/Expenditures Summary.......................................................................................... 11

District Expenditures Summary .......................................................................................................... 12

Network Impact Summary .................................................................................................................. 12

Proposed Locations ................................................................................................................................. 13

Outsourced Pavement Preservation Overview Map ............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.


Introduction

The City of Wichita’s paved street network is comprised of more than 5,100 lane-miles of residential,

collector and arterial streets and expressways, representing a total paved area of more than 325 million

square feet. In order to cost effectively maintain this vast network of assets, the City supplements the

critical preventive, corrective and emergency maintenance efforts of its internal staff by leveraging the

resources and expertise of private contractors. Each year outsourced pavement maintenance efforts

are proposed and submitted for approval in the Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program (formerly

the Contract Maintenance Program, or CMP). In order to effectively manage both internal and external

pavement maintenance resources, the Public Works & Utilities (PW&U) Department has always striven

to effect “the right treatment, on the right road, at the right time”. But, just as socioeconomic and

technological influences continue to evolve, so too does the department’s approach. At present, the

department is continuing its implementation of a project selection, evaluation, and reporting process

that is:

1. More objective, relying greater on economic measures like return on investment (ROI) and

remaining service life (RSL), and less on subjective measures like “good”, “satisfactory”, or “poor”

2. More supportive of experimentation and less adherent to past practice

3. More likely to incorporate new technologies

4. Better able to quantify the cost of deferred maintenance

5. Better able to maximize the City’s returns on future investments

6. Better able to assist in the identification of optimum funding levels

Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program Project Selection Process

Traditional Approach Locations to be addressed in the Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program (OP3) were traditionally determined using the following criteria.

1. Pavement Condition Index (PCI)

Every street segment in the City is reviewed and assigned a PCI number. The PCI number can

range from 0 to 100, and is determined by evaluating each segment for various pavement

distresses.

Traditionally, a PCI value of 70 has been considered satisfactory. Streets with PCIs below 70,

and especially below 50, were formerly considered first for inclusion in the OP3. PCIs were also

used to guide preventive maintenance, but only as funding allowed. (Preventive maintenance

delays streets from dropping into a lower condition range, which averts significantly more costly

repair.)


2. Completion of Locations Previously Identified

If repairs to previously programmed locations are not able to be completed, they are typically

included in the following year’s OP3.

3. Stakeholder Requests

Stakeholder requests are continually evaluated and prioritized against competing demands and

existing commitments. Qualifying locations are addressed either in-house, or via the OP3, as

resources allow.

4. Maintenance History and Other Programs

Streets that have required extensive mitigation by City staff, or for which routine maintenance

operations are no longer effective, also receive special consideration. Streets that are scheduled

for repair or replacement via other programs, such as the Capital Improvement Program (CIP),

are not included in the OP3.

Historically, OP3 expenditures were distributed equally among the City’s six council districts. While not

overtly a criterion, the practice was prioritized above other considerations, and thus had a profound

effect on project selection.

Enhanced Approach As part of ongoing efforts to maximize the City’s return on continued investments, several enhancements are proposed anew, or for continued exploration in 2020.

1. Continued Emphasis on Preventive and Preservative Maintenance

While preventive maintenance has historically been programmed as funding allows, it is

apparent that to ensure maximum return on investment, preventive maintenance must be

made a priority. Much like maintaining a functional roof over one’s home, the cost to maintain

a good road, in good condition, is far less than the cost to rehabilitate a failed one.

For example, a preservative seal can extend the service life of a good pavement by

approximately 5 years, at a cost around $1/sy, whereas milling and overlaying a bad pavement

may extend the service life just 8-12 years, at a cost of $10-$15/sy. When applied to a

hypothetical, quarter mile section of 4-lane arterial roadway (1 lane mile) the total cost to

preservative seal the section at $1/sy would be $7,040. The total cost to mill and overlay the

same section of roadway (7,040 sy) at a later date, assuming a midrange unit cost of $12/sy,

would be $84,480. Assuming service lives of 5 and 10 years, respectively, one finds that it costs

just $1,408 to add one full lane-mile-year of service life by preservative sealing, while the cost to

add the same one lane-mile-year of service life via mill and overlay is six times higher, at $8,448.

When one considers, again, that the City’s paved street network consists of roughly 5,000 lane-

miles of pavement, the financial prudence of preventive maintenance is clear. We know that

each lane-mile in the network has but a limited number of years remaining until the end of its


useful service life. Thus, in the absence of any maintenance improvements over a one year

period, we can surmise that the remaining service of each lane-mile will be reduced by one year.

Applied across the entire network, this represents a total service life reduction of 5,000 lane-

mile-years, each year. Pavement preservation treatments, as well as rehabilitative repairs and

reconstruction, however, add service life to the network. In order to offset the annual loss, the

City must add at least 5,000 lane-mile-years back to the system through its maintenance efforts

each year. Any less, results in an overall decline of the network’s condition. Any more, and the

overall condition improves.

While the City employs numerous strategies in its approach to pavement management, for the

purpose of example, we’ll examine a simplified approach using four common treatments,

including the two previously described, in the table below.

Treatment Type Approx. Cost/SY

Approx. Service

Life Extension

(Years)

Lane-mile-years

Needed to Maintain

Status Quo

Lane Miles to

be Treated

Cost to Maintain Status Quo

(Using prescribed treatment alone)

Rejuvenating Seal

Preventive $1 5 5000 1000 $7,040,000

Micro Surfacing

Preservative $3 6 5000 833 $17,592,960

Mill & Overlay Rehabilitation $12 10 5000 500 $42,240,000

Asphalt Reconstruction

Reconstruction $35 25 5000 200 $49,280,000

While none of the above hypothetical approaches is optimized for the City’s existing network,

the exercise serves to illustrate three points.

1. Preventive and preservative maintenance are better financial values than extensive

rehabilitation and replacement.

2. To successfully operate under the best of these scenarios – the one that serves to

maximize ROI – one would need to begin with a near perfect system and maintain 20% of

that system each year. In reality, less than 20% of our existing system falls within the

appropriate condition range for that treatment. Consequently, we must endeavor to

employ some optimum combination of treatments across the full spectrum of pavement

condition.

3. The example serves to demonstrate the scale of maintenance required and alludes to the

cumulative impact of deferred maintenance.

In light of the benefits, preventive and preservative maintenance have increased significantly

since 2011. The result has been a dramatic increase in the total number of lane miles


maintained each year. This is somewhat less pronounced in 2020, due to a higher concentration

of qualifying arterial pavements and the absence of standalone thermal crack repairs.

Nevertheless, as demonstrated below, approximately 478 lane miles will be touched be touched

in 2020, which is more than six times the number touched in 2011.

2. Pilot Projects PW&U is committed to the evaluation and incorporation of new pavement maintenance

strategies and techniques. A number of treatments have been successfully piloted in recent

years. In order to further evaluate the department’s developing preservation and mitigation

strategies (mitigating streets in poor condition, rather than undertaking significantly more costly

rehabilitation and reconstruction), several treatments are proposed for additional testing in the

coming year, as follows:

1. Preservative seal over micro surfacing seal (preservation)

2. Micro surfacing seal over scrub/crack seal (preservation)

3. Ultrathin bonded asphalt surface treatment (preservation/mitigation)

4. Failed brick crosswalk replacement with stamped colored concrete (mitigation)

5. Localized repair of drainage and other anomalies

Additionally, given its low initial cost and high overall ROI, a significant portion of the 2020

program is proposed to be dedicated to crack sealing. Historically, crack sealing has been

performed almost exclusively in-house. Consequently, continued large-scale outsourcing of the

work represents an ongoing pilot in and of itself, and lessons learned during 2019 will be

implemented in the coming year.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

72 106240

446 463

660813

410 466 478

Lane Miles Maintained per Year

Year

Miles


3. Investment Optimization Ongoing economic pressures have exposed the limitations of the City’s traditional use of PCI.

The PCI effectively illustrates network trends, but in and of itself does not allow for an objective

means of characterizing streets as “failed”, “deficient”, or “in need of repair”. More

importantly, it does not afford an objective means of quantifying the cost of deferred

maintenance. In order to accurately and objectively do so, an approach other than PCI is

needed.

PW&U believes the City will be best served by evaluating economic measures, rather than PCI

alone. Toward that end, the department has developed a computerized investment

optimization model. The model allows staff to analyze and compare various alternative

maintenance approaches in terms of ROI, RSL and asset value. Using these measures, priorities,

strategies and budgets may be optimized in terms of their long-term fiscal performance. Staff’s

evaluation of alternative approaches is ongoing and driven by the department’s commitment to

identify:

1. The short and long term results of the department’s existing strategy and budget

2. The strategy and budget required to maintain current condition and asset values

3. The strategy and budget that results in the optimum ROI

2020 Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program Summary

Definitions

1. Brick Crosswalk Replacement Many of the City’s older brick crosswalks suffer from significant, recurring deterioration. In order to stem the tide, PW&U proposes building on its 2019 pilot to replace a select few with stamped colored concrete. Concrete is less susceptible to displacement than brick, and boasts an expected useful service life up to four times as long. Before After (partial completion)


2. Crack Seal “Crack Seal” is an application of hot liquid rubberized asphalt material placed into or above moderately sized pavement cracks. The treatment is used to prevent moisture infiltration in order to mitigate the occurrence of further distresses and reinforce the adjacent pavement.

Before After

3. Concrete and Asphalt Repair “Concrete repair” and “asphalt repair” includes the limited full-depth removal and replacement of concrete or asphalt pavement, in order to address myriad pavement distresses, including spalling, pop-outs, and base failures. Asphalt repairs are typically required and undertaken well in advance of asphalt treatments, like micro surfacing.

Before After


4. Microsurfacing Seal A “microsurfacing seal” is a mixture of relatively large aggregate, polymer modified emulsion, mineral filler and additives are combined and applied to an existing pavement using a specialized mixing and paving machine. The treatment is used to reduce water penetration, correct minor surface irregularities, improve aesthetics and extend the useful life of underlying pavement.

Before After

5. Preservative Seal A “preservative seal” consists of the application of an emulsion specially formulated to penetrate, restore and preserve existing asphalt binders. By keeping the pavement flexible, it serves to seal against water intrusion, inhibit oxidation and improve aggregate retention.

Before After


6. Scrub Seal

A “scrub seal” is constructed by spraying emulsified asphalt onto an existing pavement, dragging a broom across the surface to scrub the emulsified asphalt into the surface cracks, spreading aggregate over the emulsified asphalt, and rolling the surface with a roller. The treatment is used to quickly and affordably seal streets with extensive surface cracking. Before After (outside lane, only)

7. Ultrathin Bonded Asphalt Surface (UBAS) An “ultrathin bonded asphalt surface”, or UBAS, consists of a thin, coarse aggregate hot mix asphalt over a special asphalt membrane. Both the membrane and the wearing surface are applied in one pass with a spray paver. The membrane mitigates water intrusion and provides a superior bond to the existing pavement. The bonded surface corrects minor surface irregularities, improves aesthetics and extends the useful life of underlying pavement.

Before After


8. Localized Repair of Drainage and other Anomalies “Localized repair of drainage and other anomalies” encompasses a multitude of procedures that may be necessary to resolve persistent, but relatively isolated pavement issues. Though isolated, these issues tend to both negatively and disproportionately affect the condition of pavements that are otherwise in generally good condition. They also consistently and disproportionately consume in-house resources during and following catalyst events, like thunderstorms.

Proposed Expenditures Proposed 2020 outsourced pavement preservation expenditures total $10.8 million. Funding of $10,800,000 is included in the 2019-2028 Adopted Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and will be financed with GO at-large bonds ($10,500,000) and funds from the state’s CCLIP program ($300,000).

Network Funding/Expenditures Summary

Funding Expenditures Percentage

CIP ($10.8 million)

Ultrathin Bonded Asphalt Surface $2,940,000 27%

Microsurfacing Seal $1,692,000 16%

Concrete Repair $1,507,000 14% Crack Seal $1,332,000 12%

Preservative Seal $757,000 7%

Localized Repairs $260,000 2%

Crosswalk Replacement $59,000 1%

CCLIP Project ($300,000 state funds) $525,000 5%

Contingency $540,000 5%

Engineering Salaries, Overhead and Bonding $1,188,000 11%

Total Funding $10,800,000 100.0%


District Expenditures Summary

Network Impact Summary

Project District

1 2 3 4 5 6

Ultrathin Surface

$682,000 $450,000 $604,000 $458,000 $503,000 $243,000

Microsurfacing Seal

$0 $592,000 $102,000 $382,000 $0 $616,000

Concrete Street Repair

$378,000 $0 $405,000 $378,000 $0 $346,000

Crack Seal $67,000 $330,000 $41,000 $48,000 $703,000 $143,000

Preservative Seal

$282,000 147,000 $62,000 $109,000 $71,000 $86,000

Localized Repairs

$114,000 $18,000 $4,000 $86,000 $7,000 $31,000

Crosswalk Replacement

$0 $0 $0 $59,000 $0 $0

2020 CCLIP Project

$93,000 $94,000 $76,000 $93,000 $79,000 $90,000

Engineering Salary/OH

$211,000 $213,000 $169,000 $210,000 $181,000 $204,000

Contingency $96,000 $96,000 $78,000 $95,000 $82,000 $93,000

Total Expenditures

$1,923,000 $1,940,000 $1,541,000 $1,918,000 $1,626,000 $1,852,000

% of Total Expenditures 17.8% 18.0% 14.3% 17.8% 15.0% 17.1%

% of Total Paved Network

in District 17.7% 18.0% 14.3% 17.7% 15.1% 17.2%

Project Arterial Lane Miles

Residential Lane Miles

Total Lane Miles

Crack Seal 221.83 48.17 270.00

Preservative Seal 54.84 39.32 94.16

Ultrathin Surface 57.82 0 57.82

Micro Surfacing 0 44.86 44.86

CCLIP Project 6.28 0 6.28

Concrete Repair 0 5.14 5.14

Totals 340.77 137.49 478.26


Proposed Locations

District I

STREET FROM TO PROJECT

ALOMA HILLSIDE GEORGE WASHINGTON Concrete Repair

S ELLIS AVE FUNSTON HARRY Concrete Repair

***Please refer to map (numerous locations)*** Crack Seal

BATTIN 1ST DOUGLAS Localized Repair

BATTIN CENTRAL 3RD Localized Repair

CHRISTINE 10TH 9TH Localized Repair

LIGHTNER 10TH 9TH Localized Repair

PATRICIA BEACHY 9TH Localized Repair

PATTON 2ND BLUERIDGE Localized Repair

ROOSEVELT 2ND 1ST Localized Repair

WATERMAN EDGEMOOR PARKWOOD Localized Repair

45TH ST EOP W OF K254 K254 Preservative Seal

9TH ST HILLSIDE AVE EOP W of MINNESOTA Preservative Seal

SAKER SAKER THUNDER Preservative Seal

THUNDER SAKER EOP E of 48TH Preservative Seal

21ST ST ROOSEVELT AVE HILLSIDE Preservative Seal

21ST ST BROADMOOR ST WOODLAWN Preservative Seal

22ND ST HILLSIDE AVE CHAUTAUQUA Preservative Seal

22ND ST LAMSON ST EDGEMOOR Preservative Seal

22ND ST WOODLAWN BLVD LAMSON Preservative Seal

23RD ST HILLSIDE AVE CHAUTAUQUA Preservative Seal

24TH ST BLECKLEY ST OLIVER Preservative Seal

25TH ST GLENDALE ST EOP E OF GLENDALE Preservative Seal

26TH ST VOLUTSIA AVE MADISON Preservative Seal

ARLENE DERRICK LORRAINE Preservative Seal

ARLENE EOP N. OF BATTIN OLIVER Preservative Seal

ASH 26TH 25TH Preservative Seal

BATTIN EOP N OF BATTIN LOOMAN Preservative Seal

BLECKLEY EOP N OF BLECKLEY LOOMAN Preservative Seal

CALLEN CALLEN EDGEMOOR Preservative Seal

KANE KANE EDGEMOOR Preservative Seal

CARRIAGE PKY EDGEMOOR CENTRAL Preservative Seal

CHARLOTTE 23RD LAMSON Preservative Seal

CHARLOTTE MAINSGATE CROYDEN Preservative Seal

CROYDEN EOP E OF FARMSTEAD CHARLOTTE Preservative Seal


District I (continued)


CHAUTAUQUA 23RD 21ST Preservative Seal

CHAUTAUQUA 26TH 25TH Preservative Seal

DERRICK 24TH ARLENE Preservative Seal

EDGEMOOR DR MAINSGATE 21ST Preservative Seal

ERIE AVE 23RD 21ST Preservative Seal

ERIE AVE 26TH 25TH Preservative Seal

ETHEL GLENDALE OLIVER Preservative Seal

FARMSTEAD 23RD 21ST Preservative Seal

GLENDALE 25TH ETHEL Preservative Seal

GREEN 27TH 25TH Preservative Seal

GROVE EOP E OF 28TH 27TH Preservative Seal

LAMSON EDGEMOOR 22ND Preservative Seal

LOOMAN OLD MANOR OLIVER Preservative Seal

LORRAINE 24TH 22ND Preservative Seal

LORRAINE EOP 25TH Preservative Seal

MADISON 27th 25TH Preservative Seal

MINNESOTA MINNESOTA 25TH Preservative Seal

OLIVER 1ST DOUGLAS Preservative Seal

OLIVER ENGLISH OAKLAND Preservative Seal

OLIVER 2ND 1ST Preservative Seal

OLIVER LEWIS ENGLISH Preservative Seal

OLIVER CENTRAL 2ND Preservative Seal

PARKWOOD MAINSGATE ARLENE Preservative Seal

PIATT 26TH 25TH Preservative Seal

PINECREST LOOMAN 21ST Preservative Seal

POPLAR 27th 25TH Preservative Seal

PRINCE AUDREY 21ST Preservative Seal

RIDGEWOOD MAINSGATE CROYDEN Preservative Seal

SPRUCE 27TH 25TH Preservative Seal

VOLUTSIA 27TH 25TH Preservative Seal

WOODLAWN 29TH 21ST Preservative Seal

E DOUGLAS Ave S PERSHING AVE N HILLSIDE AVE Ultrathin Surfacing

HILLSIDE 53RD K254 Ultrathin Surfacing

HYDRAULIC K254 DOUGLAS Ultrathin Surfacing

ROCK 37TH K96 Ultrathin Surfacing

End District I


District II



JACKSON HEIGHTS CENTRAL 1ST Localized Repair

35TH COMOTARA ROCK Microsurfacing

BARRON BARRON CIR CYPRESS Microsurfacing

BEDELL WEBB BRECKENRIDGE Microsurfacing

BEECH BEDELL LINCOLN Microsurfacing

BENT TREE BENT TREE CIR GREENLEAF Microsurfacing

BOSTON WEBB BRECKENRIDGE Microsurfacing

BOXTHORN GREENLEAF WINDWOOD Microsurfacing

BRECKENRIDGE HARRY BEDELL Microsurfacing

CEDARIDGE CIR SWEET BAY EOP Microsurfacing

CHAMPIONS ROCK SWEET BAY Microsurfacing

COOPER LINCOLN LAUREL Microsurfacing

CYPRESS DOS RIOS LINCOLN Microsurfacing

DOS RIOS CYPRESS BRECKENRIDGE Microsurfacing

GREENLEAF GREENLEAF CT 21ST Microsurfacing

JASMINE ROCK RD OAKMOUNT Microsurfacing

LAUREL BEDELL LINCOLN Microsurfacing

LINCOLN EOP LINCOLN Microsurfacing

LINCOLN EOP LINCOLN Microsurfacing

MULBERRY ROCK EOP Microsurfacing

OAKMOUNT JASMINE SWEET BAY Microsurfacing

PEPPERTREE GREENLEAF EOP Microsurfacing

SWEET BAY SWEET BAY CIR 37TH Microsurfacing

WINDWOOD GREENLEAF BOXTHORN Microsurfacing

127TH K96 21ST Preservative Seal

17TH WINSTEAD RUTLAND Preservative Seal

18TH WINSTEAD DOREEN Preservative Seal

21ST ROCK WOODLAWN Preservative Seal

BONITA MICHELLE TARA FALLS Preservative Seal

BROADMOOR 21ST ROCKHILL Preservative Seal

CHADOWES TALLYRAND RUTLAND Preservative Seal

CHELSEA TALLYRAND RUTLAND Preservative Seal

DEER HAVEN EOP FAWN GROVE Preservative Seal

DOREEN 18TH 17TH Preservative Seal

EAGLE BRACKEN EAGLE CT Preservative Seal

GREENWICH OSIE S OF MOUNT VERNON Preservative Seal


District II (Continued)


HARRY HARRY CT BRECKENRIDGE Preservative Seal

HORSEBACK HORSEBACK HORSEBACK Preservative Seal

MICHELLE S OF BONITA CHERRY CREEK Preservative Seal

ROCKHILL WINSTEAD ROCK RD Preservative Seal

RUTLAND CHADOWES 17TH Preservative Seal

TALLYRAND BROADMOOR 17TH Preservative Seal

WINSTEAD ROCKHILL 17TH Preservative Seal

29TH WEBB ROCK Ultrathin Surfacing

ROCK K96 CHAMPIONS Ultrathin Surfacing

WEBB 37TH K96 Ultrathin Surfacing

End District II


District III


K15 RAMP AT I-135 BIRDGE OVER I-35 CCLIP Project


BALDWIN WACO WICHITA Concrete Repair

CHRISTINE BOSTON ZIMMERLY Concrete Repair

FUNSTON MISSION WOODLAWN Concrete Repair

GREEN OSIE HARRY Concrete Repair

MISSION S OF FUNSTON EOP OSIE Concrete Repair

WASSALL ROSE MARIE HYDRAULIC Localized Repair

31ST HYDRAULIC WASHINGTON Microsurfacing

PATTIE 31ST DONNELL Microsurfacing

WASHINGTON 31ST EOP N OF LUTHER Microsurfacing

BROADWAY EOP N OF ORME MOUNT VERNON Preservative Seal

JADE EOP JADE Preservative Seal

SENECA 30TH 27TH Preservative Seal

EDGEMOOR HARRY ORME Ultrathin Surfacing

HYDRAULIC 47TH MACARTHUR Ultrathin Surfacing

OLIVER GEORGE WASHINGTON COLFAX Ultrathin Surfacing

End District III


District IV


BONN JEWELL MAY Concrete Repair

BURTON GORDON EDWARDS Concrete Repair

GORDON BURTON DOUGLAS Concrete Repair

SAINT CLAIR DOOLEY IRVING Concrete Repair


31ST CUSTER MERIDIAN Localized Repair

BURTON WALNUT HANDLEY Localized Repair

CUSTER 31ST SUNNYBROOK Localized Repair

MCCORMICK GLENN BONN Localized Repair

29TH GLENN MILLWOOD Microsurfacing

30TH GLENN SENECA Microsurfacing

32ND SHERIDAN GORDON Microsurfacing

33RD SHERIDAN MOUNT CARMEL Microsurfacing

CHASE EOP 31ST Microsurfacing

CUSTER 31ST EOP Microsurfacing

DIANE GLENN MILLWOOD Microsurfacing

ELIZABETH 31ST MARLBORO Microsurfacing

EXPOSITION 31ST 30TH Microsurfacing

FERN 30TH 29TH Microsurfacing

GORDON 31ST EOP Microsurfacing

MARLBORO VINE MILLWOOD Microsurfacing

MARTINSON 31ST 30TH Microsurfacing

MILLWOOD 27TH 31ST Microsurfacing

MOUNT CARMEL 33RD 31ST Microsurfacing

REGAL VINE MILLWOOD Microsurfacing

SAINT PAUL EOP 31ST Microsurfacing

SHERIDAN 33RD 31ST Microsurfacing

VINE MARLBORO REGAL Microsurfacing

47TH BROADWAY SENECA Preservative Seal

JEWELL JEWELL CT JEWELL CT Preservative Seal

MAPLE ANNA SHERIDAN Preservative Seal

SENECA HASKELL 27TH Preservative Seal

HOOVER MACARTHUR 47TH Ultrathin Surfacing

MAPLE 119TH 135TH Ultrathin Surfacing

TYLER K42 YOSEMITE Ultrathin Surfacing

End District IV


District V STREET FROM TO PROJECT


WESTLINK 13TH 12TH Localized Repair

119TH CT 119TH EOP Preservative Seal

13TH MAIZE 119TH Preservative Seal

BREEZY POINTE MAPLE BREEZY POINTE CT Preservative Seal

FORESTVIEW MAPLE ANGELA Preservative Seal

WHEATLAND CENTRAL S TO EOP Preservative Seal

CENTRAL RIDGE RD GILDA Ultrathin Surfacing

CENTRAL TYLER WOODCHUCK Ultrathin Surfacing

RIDGE 21ST 37TH Ultrathin Surfacing

End District V


District VI


17TH GARLAND HOOD Concrete Repair

HOOD 19TH 18TH Concrete Repair

NEWELL MOUNT CARMEL CUSTER Concrete Repair

SAINT PAUL 3RD 2ND Concrete Repair

WACO 26TH 25TH Concrete Repair

***Please refer to map

Crack Seal

21ST LAKEWAY ZOO PARK Localized Repair

ARKANSAS 26TH 24TH Localized Repair

ARKANSAS 30TH MEADOW CREEK CIR Localized Repair

HOOVER 23RD ZOO Localized Repair

WESTDALE CORNELISON WESTDALE Localized Repair

12TH SAINT FRANCIS BROADWAY Microsurfacing

14TH MERIDIAN CLARENCE Microsurfacing

14TH SAINT PAUL EDWARDS Microsurfacing

35TH LITCHFIELD ARKANSAS Microsurfacing

36TH EDWARDS MERIDIAN Microsurfacing

37TH BROADWAY 37TH Microsurfacing

37TH ARMSTRONG JEANETTE Microsurfacing

60TH LEGION LEGION Microsurfacing

8TH WEST KESSLER Microsurfacing

ARMSTRONG 37TH 35TH Microsurfacing

ATHENIAN 15TH 13TH Microsurfacing

BAEHR 9TH CENTRAL Microsurfacing

CLARENCE 15TH 13TH Microsurfacing

ELM NEVADA WEST Microsurfacing

HIGH 15TH 13TH Microsurfacing

ILLINOIS 8TH ELM Microsurfacing

JOANN 15TH NANTUCKET Microsurfacing

KESSLER ZOO MURDOCK Microsurfacing

LEGION 53RD N OF BELLA Microsurfacing

MCCOMAS 8TH ELM Microsurfacing

MERIDIAN EOP N OF 37TH EOP S OF 34TH Microsurfacing

MURDOCK WEST KESSLER Microsurfacing

PORTER EOP 53RD Microsurfacing

SAINT CLAIR 15TH 13TH Microsurfacing

SEDGWICK 15TH 14TH Microsurfacing

SHERIDAN 15TH 13TH Microsurfacing


District VI (continued)


WOMER 15TH ATHENIAN Microsurfacing

26TH HOOVER 26TH CT Preservative Seal

2ND W OF MOORE WASHINGTON Preservative Seal

BRISCO EOP PARADISE Preservative Seal

BROADWAY 23RD 25TH Preservative Seal

CURTIS CURTIS EOP Preservative Seal

DORIS BRISCO EOP Preservative Seal

DORIS CT DORIS EOP Preservative Seal

KOLLMEYER KOLLMEYER EOP Preservative Seal

MCLEAN MERIDIAN SENECA Preservative Seal

BROADWAY 29TH 25TH Ultrathin Surfacing

HYDRAULIC 39TH 37TH Ultrathin Surfacing

End District VI


Pavement Joint & Crack SealPreservative SealMicrosurfacingConcrete Repair Ultrathin SurfacingLocalized RepairCCLIP ProjectBrick Crosswalk Replacement

Map Legend


District 1 District 2

District 3

District 4

District 5

District 6

RO

CKW

EST

TYLE

R

31ST S

RID

GE

HARRY

MA

IZE

47TH S

55TH S

21ST N

61ST N

45TH N

37TH N

13TH N

29TH N

53RD N

OLI

VER

SEN

ECA

12

7TH

E

PAWNEE

14

3R

D E

15

9TH

E

HIL

LSID

E

CENTRAL

HO

OV

ER

KELLOGG

15

1ST

W

11

9TH

W

13

5TH

W

16

7TH

W

18

3R

D W

MER

IDIA

N

HYD

RA

ULI

C

BR

OA

DW

AY

MAC ARTHUR

WEB

B

GR

EEN

WIC

H

WO

OD

LAW

N

Download - Proposed 2020 Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program (OP3) Documents/2020... · Proposed 2020 Outsourced Pavement Preservation Program (OP3) Page 3 Introduction The City of Wichita’s

Top Related