Our rubberized asphalt freeways--not weathering well (Glendale: transit, paint, motorcycle)

[wase4711]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

Rubberized asphalt overlayment (which is rubberized asphaltic concrete actually) has been used successfully here for over 20 years now.

Interesting; sounds like a hybrid of concrete/asphalt/rubber..makes more sense that they use this out here now..

[jimj]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

Kids claimed it was braille driving. Too drunk to follow the lines you used the the dots.

(No they did not drive drunk...or at least I never could one even close). Had to rescue one a couple of times after they overly enjoyed the juice of the grape. But never driving.

Yeah, I'm thinking of installing a 4 bugle train horn to wake up those wondering souls before they hit me.

Originally Posted by AZ Manager

Funny this gets posted the same day they started resealing the 101. Sections we're closed down this morning for it and they should be resealing the entire thing this month. Nice smooth quiet ride on my way home this afternoon.

I have to say that every person that's visited us from out of state always comments on how nice and smoooooth our roads are compared to where they live.

[mzbk2l]

I agree that it's not holding up well, but when it's new (and new-ish), I feel it's a huge improvement over the concrete we used to use. I remember when the 60 got its first few miles of rubberized (which, IIRC, was one of the first sections in the valley to get it). Heading west and hitting that rubberized asphalt around Val Vista you immediately noticed how much quieter and smoother the paving was compared to the concrete.

I'm all in favor of it... just keep it maintained!

[Valley Native]

News flash: freeways aren't supposed to be nice & quiet! With thousands of vehicles traveling at high rates of speed, they're intended to be noisy ... and with that in mind: who the hell cares if your drive is quieter on asphalt than it is on concrete? When I drive the freeways, I'm much more concerned about getting to my destination than I am about how peaceful the asphalt is on my sensitive little ears.

This wonderful rubber asphalt has numerous cracks, gaps, and chips, and requires MUCH more maintenance & rework than concrete does. What this translates to is entire freeway sections being shut down to repave, and more of our tax money being wasted. The concrete freeways were good enough as they were. ADOT didn't need to supposedly fix what wasn't broken in the first place.

[FirebirdCamaro1220]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

News flash: freeways aren't supposed to be nice & quiet! With thousands of vehicles traveling at high rates of speed, they're intended to be noisy ... and with that in mind: who the hell cares if your drive is quieter on asphalt than it is on concrete? When I drive the freeways, I'm much more concerned about getting to my destination than I am about how peaceful the asphalt is on my sensitive little ears.

This wonderful rubber asphalt has numerous cracks, gaps, and chips, and requires MUCH more maintenance & rework than concrete does. What this translates to is entire freeway sections being shut down to repave, and more of our tax money being wasted. The concrete freeways were good enough as they were. ADOT didn't need to supposedly fix what wasn't broken in the first place.

If that were entirely the case, sound walls wouldn't be a thing. Just saying....

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

If that were entirely the case, sound walls wouldn't be a thing. Just saying....

And that is the issue. the Feds are saying the sound deadening is not a good reason for the rubber asphalt. Works at first but if not maintained tightly it goes away. So they want sound walls.

The sound walls do work. We live a mile from one freeway and could hear it quite clearly in the early morning 20 years ago. Since then the sound walls have gone up and it is no longer detectable.

[FirebirdCamaro1220]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

And that is the issue. the Feds are saying the sound deadening is not a good reason for the rubber asphalt. Works at first but if not maintained tightly it goes away. So they want sound walls.

The sound walls do work. We live a mile from one freeway and could hear it quite clearly in the early morning 20 years ago. Since then the sound walls have gone up and it is no longer detectable.

I lived literally right next to the Loop 202 freeway here just outside Downtown for 2 years, but there were sound walls, so the freeway noise wasn't really noticable

[man4857]

Originally Posted by Hschlick84

I've mentioned SEVERAL times on these forums, ADOT needs to use grooved concrete. Lasts longer than the cheap stuff and is quiet, stop wasting money on rubber pavement.

Isn't that what CA does with their highways? I'm not in the know about how highways are paved.

But I just recall that since the concrete is gray and the lane markers are white, it makes it difficult to see in certain lighting conditions (or even when it rains). You'd have to rely on the reflectors for the most part if it's well maintained and replaced enough periodically, otherwise, you're basically relying on the car in front of you lol. The black on white makes it very easy to see the lane markers.

[Hschlick84]

Originally Posted by man4857

Isn't that what CA does with their highways? I'm not in the know about how highways are paved.

But I just recall that since the concrete is gray and the lane markers are white, it makes it difficult to see in certain lighting conditions (or even when it rains). You'd have to rely on the reflectors for the most part if it's well maintained and replaced enough periodically, otherwise, you're basically relying on the car in front of you lol. The black on white makes it very easy to see the lane markers.

Alot of the freeways in other states like Colorado and Utah use contrast thermoplastic lines on concrete that withstand rain, snow and in the dark without the need for reflectors. Part of loop 303 uses it near the north side west of I-17.

[new2colo]

They’re not holding up well at all. ADOT keeps the rubberized asphalt treatment on the freeways due to the volume of positive comments they receive from motorists who come from places where quiet pavement practices are not in place. Rubberized asphalt is more about aesthetics and noise reduction not practicality as a riding surface. Concrete, like California and Texas use, is cheaper over the life cycle of the pavement and lasts much longer than rubberized asphalt. Concrete was used widespread in the Phoenix area until rubberized asphalt took hold. The 143 and the 303 between Happy Valley Rd and the 17 are the only regional freeway I can think of with concrete surfaces. Unlike other freeways, which seem to periodically shut down for resurfacing and patching, I can’t recall the 143 being shut down for pavement work. The 303 is still relatively new, but the pavement there seems almost new even to this day.