My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 08/19/2009
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Public Works Committee
>
2000 - 2009
>
2009
>
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 08/19/2009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2025 9:34:30 AM
Creation date
8/13/2009 2:10:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Public Works Committee
Document Date
08/19/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />CASE # 5 <br /> <br />CONSIDERATIONS OF CONCRETE VERSUS ASPHAL T PAVEMENTS <br />By: Steve Jankowski, Assistant City Engineer <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />The Council has inquired about the potential use of concrete for the construction of City streets. <br />Staff reported on this topic at the July 15,2008 Public Works Committee meeting. The primary <br />element in the debate between the use of these two paving materials centers on which is cheaper. <br />Last year staff reported that in general terms the initial cost to construct a concrete street wass <br />approximately 50% - 100% more than asphalt. However Minneapolis had bid a downtown street <br />project last year when asphalt prices were at their peak and received a concrete bid within 5% of <br />asphalt. However, since that time asphalt prices have declined making it more price competitive <br />again. To stay current on this topic staff has requested a cost comparison for the construction of <br />one mile of residential street constructed with both our standard asphalt pavement (32 feet wide <br />from face of curb to face of curb, 1.5 inches bituminous wear, 2 inches bituminous base, and 4 <br />inches of class 5) and an equivalent concrete pavement. This analysis had not been completed at <br />the time of this agenda preparation but will be available at the meeting. <br /> <br />Factors other than initial cost <br />Below is a listing the some of the nonmonetary factors which are typically cited when comparing <br />these two paving materials: <br /> <br />. Durability - Concrete streets typically have a design life of 40 years, whereas bituminous <br />is approximately 30 _years. When concrete streets are constructed they generally don't <br />require maintenance other than some minor rehab/joint sealing every 12 - 15 years. It is <br />possible that the road wouldn't need to be resurfaced for the entire design life, or beyond. <br />As you are probably aware from our existing street maintenance program, bituminous <br />streets require routine maintenance far more frequently; crack sealing and seal coating <br />every 5 to 7 years and overlays every 15 to 20 years. <br /> <br />· Noise potential - In a municipal environment the noise level coming off a pavement is a <br />consideration. Asphalt pavements have a smoother surface initially and are quieter. <br />However as asphalt pavement ages and deteriorates it can exceed the noise level of <br />concrete which is relatively constant throughout its service life. <br /> <br />. Temperature Considerations - Concrete pavement is lighter in color and better reflects <br />the sun. As a result it is a cooler pavement. This is considered an environmental plus in <br />terms of combating environmental warming. However, asphalt pavements tend to absorb <br />the sun in the winter and achieves bare pavement quicker following snowfall events. <br /> <br />. Light Reflection - Concrete is lighter and more reflective making street lighting more <br />effective. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.