National Academies Press: OpenBook

Preservation Approaches for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways (2011)

Chapter: Chapter 4 - Implementation of Preservation Guidelines

« Previous: Chapter 3 - Development of Preservation Guidelines for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Implementation of Preservation Guidelines." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Preservation Approaches for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14508.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Implementation of Preservation Guidelines." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Preservation Approaches for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14508.
×
Page 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Implementation of Preservation Guidelines." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Preservation Approaches for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14508.
×
Page 78

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

This chapter discusses how the pavement preservation guidelines developed in this study and presented in Guide- lines for the Preservation of High-Traffic-Volume Roadways can be successfully implemented within a highway agency’s existing program for managing and maintaining pavements. It also describes several potentially significant barriers to putting the guidelines into practice and offers suggestions for overcoming these barriers. Barriers to Implementation Like so many other paradigm shifts that have taken place over the years in highways agencies, there are sure to be a variety of institutional and external issues that will hinder imple- mentation of the preservation guidelines developed in this study. These issues are to be expected when a new process or a new way of thinking leads to substantive changes in an agency’s policies and practices. One of the most significant barriers that can be expected is the resistance to allowing the use of preservation treatments traditionally linked to lower-volume roadways, such as micro- surfacing and chip seals, on higher-volume roads. There will certainly be skepticism that certain preservation treatments are not durable enough for use on high-volume roads, partic- ularly those in severe climates. Furthermore, for those agen- cies still in the early stages of developing a general preservation program, in order to minimize risk they may choose to focus on lower-volume road applications. Although a few agencies might be inclined to immediately expand the scope of their program to higher-volume applications, the preference of most would be to first develop rational, proven practices at the lower traffic volumes and then gradually adapt those practices to higher-traffic-volume facilities. Hence, use of the preserva- tion guidelines developed in this study may be perceived as premature. Another major barrier is the ability of the highway agency to persuade elected government officials—and ultimately the traveling public—of the net positive benefits of apply- ing preservation treatments on high-traffic-volume road- ways. Justifying the importance of performing preservation work on lower-volume roadways in good condition has been difficult enough over the past several years. Convinc- ing government officials and the traveling public of the need to perform work on good roads that are used by much higher percentages of the population can be expected to be even more difficult. A third major barrier involves marketplace pressures that are bound to be applied by affected industry groups. On one side of the highway construction aisle (i.e., suppliers of tradi- tional rehabilitation materials), there will be significant resis- tance to a shift from worst-first to best-first because of the potential loss of market share. On the other side of the aisle (suppliers of various preservation treatment materials), there will be pressure to move more aggressively to preservation because of the potential gain in market share. Several other specific institutional barriers are likely to be encountered. These include the following: • Inadequate database for assessing preservation treatment best practices and cost-effectiveness. Many of today’s pavement preservation programs have been challenged by the lack of good quality data upon which to base its precepts. As a result, engineering judgment and experience are the pri- mary basis for decision making, making the program more subjective and oriented toward traditional practices. While it is generally the case that pavement data are more com- plete and accurate for higher-traffic-volume roads than for lower-volume roads, every database has issues and these issues will likely have to be dealt with to some degree dur- ing the implementation process. • Greater perception of risk. Over the years, many highway agencies have developed and continually refined their pavement preservation activities and procedures. They have experienced both successes and failures along the C H A P T E R 4 Implementation of Preservation Guidelines 79

way. In most cases, the initial proving grounds for preser- vation activities have been on lower-volume roadways where, if a premature failure occurred, the consequences beyond the monetary aspects were not tremendously seri- ous. Application of preservation treatments on higher- volume roads yields the same kinds of uncertainties to inexperienced agencies as it did to those agencies that long ago started using preservation techniques on lower-volume roads. However, because the activities will now be per- formed on higher-type facilities, the consequences of pre- mature failure will be much more serious. Not only will a failure be visible to a much higher percentage of the trav- eling public (who will then complain about the waste of taxpayer funds), but the traveling public will be affected by the delays and congestion associated with fixing the failure. Thus, agencies will perceive a much greater risk of implementing preservation activities on high-traffic- volume roads. • Heightened battles for dedicated funding of preservation activ- ities. Although several states have made significant progress over the years in establishing dedicated funding for preserva- tion activities, the overwhelming amount of transportation infrastructure money is earmarked for capital improvement projects. The main difficulty lies in the agency’s reluctance to treat good pavements while a backlog of significantly deteri- orated pavements exists (Zimmerman and Peshkin 2006). If the preservation program is expanded to include more high- traffic-volume applications, an even greater reluctance may be expected because the projects will be on roads with higher risk and greater scrutiny. • Lack of experienced individuals to champion and direct the development of a high-traffic-volume roadway preservation program. As has been the case with the development of sev- eral current preservation programs, the lack of experienced pavement management, maintenance, design, materials, and construction personnel can be a significant barrier to implementation. • Complexity in assessing treatment performance and cost- effectiveness. Evaluating and determining treatment per- formance is not an easy task, considering that there are different ways in which performance can be evaluated (many performance indicators, various performance analy- sis techniques) and there are a number of factors that affect performance (existing pavement type and condition, traffic level, climatic conditions, construction/materials quality, and so on). Cost-effectiveness analysis can also be complex. Both the EAC and BCR approaches require the development of reliable unit cost data to go along with the treatment performance data. Although EAC is a simplified approach, the added importance of evaluating user costs for high- traffic-volume facilities can complicate or prolong the analysis. Furthermore, the inclusion of user costs in either analysis approach requires special judgment in weighing them against the computed agency costs. Keys to Implementation Although there are several potential barriers to implementa- tion of the preservation guidelines, there are also actions that can be taken to either eliminate the barrier altogether or lessen its impact on implementation. Depending on the issue, these actions or measures may either need to take place at specific times in the implementation process or throughout the entire process. Issue 1: Resistance to Allowing the Use of Lower-Volume Preservation Treatments on Higher-Volume Roads Overcoming skepticism and doubt about the benefits and importance of pavement preservation is an ongoing and long- term issue that must rely on documented evidence and veri- fied proof. Overcoming skepticism about the durability and performance of preservation treatments applied to high- volume roads requires the same tactic, and it begins with (a) showing the successes of treatments applied in the past within the state or in a neighboring state having similar con- ditions and (b) pressing for research studies that will provide opportunities for demonstrating preservation treatment effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Issue 2: Ability to Convince the Traveling Public of the Benefits and Importance of Preserving High-Traffic-Volume Roads As noted by Galehouse et al. (2003), most of the public understands the importance of maintaining a car or a house to prevent major repairs. Pavement preservation engineers should be able to explain the value of preservation treatments now, compared with the cost of major repairs later. Also, since preservation activities do entail work zones that disrupt traffic and present safety hazards, preservation engineers must also be able to document and communicate the trade- offs between shorter work zone durations now versus much longer ones in the future. Issue 3: Marketplace Pressures Like the persistent debates between highway agencies and the two major pavement industry groups regarding pavement type selection, it is important to have documented performance and cost information that can help justify or support a change in pavement treatment policy. A thorough understanding of all 80

81 the issues surrounding the performance and cost data is often just as crucial. In cases where performance and cost data are limited, a more incremental implementation approach, such as construction and monitoring of research test sections, may be warranted. Issue 4: Database Inadequacies A key tool in establishing sound preservation practices is a reliable database containing complete and accurate pavement history, construction/materials, performance, and cost infor- mation. Information from a reliable database can be used to quantify the benefits of preservation on high-traffic-volume facilities, which can help overcome skepticism and gain buy- in to the process. It can also be used to analyze the adequacy of treatment designs and the quality of treatment construc- tion, so that improvements to the processes can be made that enhance performance. Further, it can be used to evaluate treatment performance and cost-effectiveness, so that the treatment-selection process is benefited. If the agency’s prac- tices associated with monitoring treatment placement and performance are not adequate for achieving these purposes, then the deficiencies and shortcomings should be identified early on so that steps can be taken to improve the database or alternative sources of data can be sought. Issue 5: Greater Perception of Risk Besides a gradual approach to implementing preservation activities on roadways with higher and higher traffic levels, the highway agency can do at least two things to minimize risk. First, it should be selective in the types of projects chosen for preservation and the type of treatment to be used. In trying to get “the right treatment on the right pavement at the right time,” special attention must be placed on selecting the right pavement (and time). Second, the highway agency should commit all additional available resources toward conducting a proper design of the treatment, performing the necessary quality tests, and overseeing the construction workmanship. These activities will give the treatment the best possible chance of performing successfully and reducing the likelihood of pre- mature failure. Issue 6: Heightened Battles for Dedicated Funding As is often the case with the development of pavement preservation programs, gaining the commitment of top-level management is vital to the successful implementation of preservation guidelines for high-traffic-volume roads. This commitment should include not only dedicated funding of preservation projects but also the resources needed to collect information on the effectiveness of preservation treatments (Galehouse et al. 2003). Issue 7: Lack of Experienced Individual(s) to Champion Preservation Like any new effort or program within an agency, the imple- mentation of preservation guidelines for high-traffic-volume roads requires a champion or group of champions. This indi- vidual or group not only is instrumental in addressing the many technical issues surrounding the use of different preser- vation treatments but can also be a powerful voice for cre- ating opportunities for preservation techniques at various management levels, including the districts. Ideally, the cham- pion or champions will consist of the individual(s) responsi- ble for championing the general preservation program. If this individual(s) is not interested or available, then alternatives must be explored, focusing on someone with a passion for, and substantial experience in, pavement preservation and preservation-related issues. Issue 8: Complexity in Assessing Treatment Performance and Cost-Effectiveness To the individual(s) directly involved in implementing the preservation guidelines, the task of assessing treatment per- formance and cost-effectiveness can seem daunting. However, by identifying champions in other areas of the agency, such as the pavement management group or the construction/ materials group, the burden of performing these tasks can be lessened. This is because the champions can identify and del- egate the right people to do the job (i.e., personnel who ana- lyze performance or cost-effectiveness on a daily basis).

Next: Chapter 5 - Conclusions and Recommendations »
Preservation Approaches for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2) Report S2-R26-RR-1: Preservation Approaches for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways documents the state of the practice of preservation treatment on asphalt and concrete pavements. The report focuses on treatments suitable for application on high-traffic-volume roadways but also discusses current practices for low-volume roadways.

The same project that produced SHRP 2 Report S2-R26-RR-1 also produced SHRP 2 Report S2-R26-RR-2: Guidelines for the Preservation of High-Traffic-Volume Roadways. The report provides suggested guidelines for the application of preservation treatments on high-traffic-volume roadways and considers traffic volume, pavement condition, work-zone requirements, environmental conditions, and expected performance.

An e-book version of this report is available for purchase at Google, iTunes, and Amazon.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!