+ All Categories
Transcript
Page 1: 2011 Local TWN Match Program

Kent County Road Commission Partnering with 21 Townships serving over 235,000 residents and 1312 miles of Local Roads

Page 2: 2011 Local TWN Match Program

MDOT8%

Primary/ Major 27%

Local/ Minor65%

Centerline MilesPrimary/ Ma-

jor34%

Local/ Minor12%

MDOT54%

Distribution of Revenues

Page 3: 2011 Local TWN Match Program

2011 Local TWN Match Program

• Townships contributed over 2.5 millions dollars.• Upgrading gravel roads to asphalt .80 miles• Re-Surfacing Asphalt Roads 24 miles• Appling new gravel to existing gravel roads 53,000

tons• Improving drainage• Applying dustlayer

Page 4: 2011 Local TWN Match Program

Construction vs. Preservation

Page 5: 2011 Local TWN Match Program

 

KENT COUNTY ROAD SYSTEM MILEAGE CERTIFICATION

 MARCH 2012 SHEET 1

  TOWNSHIP

  DISTRICT

 PRIMARY ROADS

 LOCAL ROADS

 TOTAL LOCAL

 TOTAL PRIMARY AND LOCAL

 PAVED

 GRAVEL

 ADA

 3

 22.39

 8.04

 11.62

 19.66

 42.05

  

 4

 12.55

 32.90

 3.74

 36.64

 49.19

  

  

 34.94

 40.94

 15.36

 56.30

 91.24

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 ALGOMA

 2

 36.64

 51.42

 8.19

 59.61

 96.25

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 ALPINE

 3

 26.01

 66.87

 0.60

 67.47

 93.48

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 BOWNE

 4

 31.65

 20.69

 16.83

 37.52

 69.17

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 BYRON

 5

 41.60

 93.23

 2.39

 95.62

 137.22

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 CALEDONIA

 4

 40.12

 32.66

 10.02

 42.68

 82.80

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 CANNON

 2

 13.36

 57.33

 3.02

 60.35

 73.71

  

 3

 7.96

 7.01

 4.64

 11.65

 19.61

  

 4

 0

 0.09

 1.93

 2.02

 2.02

  

  

 21.32

 64.43

 9.59

 74.02

 95.34

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 CASCADE

 4

 40.92

 73.44

 5.43

 78.87

 119.79

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 COURTLAND

 2

 23.95

 52.67

 6.77

 59.44

 83.39

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 GAINES

 4

 32.12

 27.81

 0

 27.81

 59.93

  

 

16.85 

36.27 

36.27 

53.12

  

  

 48.97

 64.08

 0

 64.08

 113.05

Page 6: 2011 Local TWN Match Program
Page 7: 2011 Local TWN Match Program

PASER Good Pavements (10 – 8)

Little or no distress observed Requires little to no maintenance

Fair Pavements (7 – 5) Non-structural distresses observed Requires surface treatment or

overlay to preserve base & sub-base Poor Pavements (4 – 1)

Distress indicates structural failures Requires heavy rehab or

reconstruction

Page 8: 2011 Local TWN Match Program

Practical Selection Considerations

Right Fix, Right Road, Right Time Pavement Management Philosophy Preserve base & sub-base

Address Specific Safety Issue Wet pavement & rut filling Wedge paving & crown correction


Top Related