aaronhirsch
New member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2020
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
Hi. I have a quick question on acceptable substitute for a road restoration method and I would greatly appreciate any feedback on this problem.
See the attached county specification for a utility patch. We have a situation where we need to restore a section of a residential road in a small town. We made a cut in the road to install water and sewer for a house and we are responsible for its restoration. When the cut was made a layer of concrete was found under the asphalt; presumably an old utility patch. The county inspectors told us to add a 4" layer of base asphalt instead of "matching existing condition". If we were to match the existing condition, we would have to match the concrete layer which is more than three times the price. Unfortunately the small town's engineer who has no particular background road engineering wants us to match the existing condition and the town overrules the county in this matter. I am trying to make a technical argument that the county's method is acceptable. My question is: is the county's method acceptable? Is it a better method than using the concrete/asphalt combo? Who is technically correct here?
Here's the statement from the town's engineer: “If the base layer of the existing roadway is concrete, then the base for the widened section must also be concrete. If the existing base of any section of the circle is asphalt, then the new base should also be asphalt. The reason for this is that both materials will react differently to the weight of vehicles, expansion and contraction from temperature differences, frost heaves, and long term settlement. Within five years, the un-matched base materials will telescope through, and appear on the surface as bumps, cracks, and uneven surfaces."
Thanks for any info you can provide!
Aaron
See the attached county specification for a utility patch. We have a situation where we need to restore a section of a residential road in a small town. We made a cut in the road to install water and sewer for a house and we are responsible for its restoration. When the cut was made a layer of concrete was found under the asphalt; presumably an old utility patch. The county inspectors told us to add a 4" layer of base asphalt instead of "matching existing condition". If we were to match the existing condition, we would have to match the concrete layer which is more than three times the price. Unfortunately the small town's engineer who has no particular background road engineering wants us to match the existing condition and the town overrules the county in this matter. I am trying to make a technical argument that the county's method is acceptable. My question is: is the county's method acceptable? Is it a better method than using the concrete/asphalt combo? Who is technically correct here?
Here's the statement from the town's engineer: “If the base layer of the existing roadway is concrete, then the base for the widened section must also be concrete. If the existing base of any section of the circle is asphalt, then the new base should also be asphalt. The reason for this is that both materials will react differently to the weight of vehicles, expansion and contraction from temperature differences, frost heaves, and long term settlement. Within five years, the un-matched base materials will telescope through, and appear on the surface as bumps, cracks, and uneven surfaces."
Thanks for any info you can provide!
Aaron