9.4 SR 02-16-2021Request for Action
To
Item Number
Mayor and City Council
9.4
Agenda Section
Meeting Date
Prepared by
Work Session
February 16, 2021
Justin Femrite, P.E., Public Works Director
Item Description
Reviewed by
Trail Rating Index and Maintenance Goals
Cal Portner, City Administrator
Reviewed by
Action Requested
Provide direction, by consensus, to establish trail maintenance standards and discuss funding strategy.
Background/Discussion
In the fall of 2020, staff was directed to map all trail segments and rate their pavement condition on a 0-10 index,
much like the street pavement rating index which uses a 0-100 index.
The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the trail condition rating system at their February 10, 2021, meeting.
Staff is asking for concurrence around a rating goal for the average condition of the trail system. From this, funding
scenarios will be reviewed and recommended to achieve the system average goal as we work into budget and CIP
development this year.
Financial Impact
N/A
Mission/Policy/Goal
The Elk River Mission states council and staff work with citizens to develop a sustainable and prosperous
community for all to live, work and play: and to appropriately govern in an ever -changing environment.
Attachments
Street Pavement Condition Map — 2020
Trail Condition Map — 2020
Asphalt Trail Rating System
The Elk River Vision
A welcoming community with revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional
service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires pi ospei ly.
M
TUREJ
Updated.• August 2020
i -
i
Ir \11-f
i
�-
City of Elk River
Pavement Condition
Ratings - 2020
90 - 100 Excellent
80 - 90
70-80
60-70
50-60
40 - 50
30 - 40
20 - 30
10-20
0 - 10 Failed
.t
December 2020
1
System Average
75.28 ! -
i
City of
Elk
•
River
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
_._._._._._._._._._._._._,_._._.......... .......................... ................................................
- -
i
City of Elk River
Trail Condition
Ratings - 2020 December 2020 i
System Average i
10 - Excellent 5'99 i
9
8 ! i
i
7
i
i
6 `
5 City of �'•�.�,
4 Elk
3 e ,
2Ri er
�• i
•. i
1- Failed 0 0.5 1 2
Miles �`..-
Asphalt Trail Rating System
None
None
No longitudinal cracks. Occasional transverse crack, widely spaced (40' or
greater). All cracks sealed or tight (open less than 1/4").
New Construction. Fog seal within 2- years of
construction.
Recent overlay, like new. Fog seal within 2-
years of last overlay.
First signs of aging. Recent fog or micro seal.
Little or no maintenance required.
Very slight or no raveling, surface shows few signs of wear. Longitudinal and
transverse cracks (open 1/4") spaced 10' or more apart, little or slight crack Shows limited signs of aging. Maintain with
raveling. Few patches and trail edges in excellent condition. Tree root or rodent standard crack filling (routed and rubber filled).
damaged (heaves or sunken) areas spaced 500' or more.
Slight raveling (loss of fines), surface showing signs of wear or degradation. Shows signs of aging. Sound structural
Longitudinal and transverse cracks (open 1/4"- 1/2") spaced 10' or less apart with condition. Cracks treated with a combination
some block cracking developing. Patches and trail edges in good condition. Tree of standard filling and velocity patching.
root or rodent damaged (heaves or sunken) areas spaced between 200'-500'. Surface condition should be extended with
micro seal.
Moderate raveling (loss of fines and course aggregate). Longitudinal and Surface aging and edge degradation.
transverse cracks (open more than 1/2") with secondary cracks now developing. Recondition most cracks and edge deformation
Signs of longitudinal cracking developing along trail edge. Patches and trail edges with velocity patching. Potential candidate
in fair condition. Tree root or rodent damaged (heaves or sunken) areas spaced for a micro seal or bituminous overlay after
between 100'-200'. patching.
Severe surface raveling. Longitudinal and transverse cracks (open more than Very aged with structural edge degradation.
1/2") with secondary cracks fully developed. Longitudinal cracks developed along Recondition with patching of worst areas and
trail edge. Patches and trail edges in fair condition. Tree root or rodent bituminous overlay of full section. Consider
damaged (heaves or sunken) areas spaced between 50'-100'. root treatment in isolated areas.
Severe surface loss with closely spaced longitudinal and transverse cracks that
Candidate for a Full Depth Reclamation (FDR)
have developed into second and third cracks. Patches and trail edges in fair to
with new pavement. Consider root treatment
poor condition. Tree root, rodent damage and other pothole areas spaced less
as part of the reconditioning effort.
than 50'.
Severe surface loss with closely spaced longitudinal and transverse cracks that Nearly unusable. Redesign and reconstruction
have developed into full alligatoring. Patches and trail edges in poor condition. of trail including aggregate base, areas of
Tree root, rodent damage and other pothole areas spaced less than 50'. subgrade correction and drainage
improvements.
Severe distress with extensive loss of surface integrity
Failed. Redesign and reconstruction of trail
including aggregate base, areas of subgrade
correction and drainage improvements.
Supplement distress review with the Asphalt PAS ER Manual, produced by the University of Wisconsin -Madison Transportation Information Center.