Improving Pavement Friction for 

Safety at a Florida Signalized 

Intersection

Summary Report
2

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION PAGE

1. Report No.

FHWA-SA-22-10 

2. Government Accession 

No.

3. Recipient's Catalog No.

 

4. Title and Subtitle

Improving Pavement Friction for Safety at a Florida Signalized Intersection

5. Report Date

November 2021 

6. Performing Organization Code

7.Author(s) 

David Merritt and Scott Himes 

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

The Transtec Group, Inc.

6111 Balcones Dr.

Austin, TX 78731

Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc (VHB)

8300 Boone Blvd., Suite 700

Vienna, VA 22182-2626 

10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-05-D-00024 (VHB)

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Federal Highway Administration Office of Safety 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. Type of Report and Period

Final Report, June 2020 – November

2021 

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

FHWA

15. Supplementary Notes

The contract manager for this report was Cate Satterfield. Andy Mergenmeier provided support for technical content.

16. Abstract

This Summary Report documents the installation of high friction surface treatment (HFST) at an intersection in Tampa, 

Florida in an effort to reduce crashes and improve pedestrian safety at this location. The location was identified through a 

Roadway Safety Audit (RSA), which was unique for the FDOT Tampa Region in that it included continuous pavement 

friction measurement (CPFM) data for the first time. The installation was completed successfully and the early-age 

performance is excellent. Although crash data are not yet available for a statistical analysis of crash reduction, the Florida 

Department of Transportation (FDOT) performed an analysis of driver behavior at the intersection and found there was a

reduction in crosswalk incursions since the HFST installation, significantly improving pedestrian safety. 

17. Key Words: 

high friction surface treatment, intersection safety, 

pavement friction, pavement safety, pedestrian 

safety 

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions.

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this 

page) Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

 22

22. Price

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed pages authorized 
3

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
4

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROJECT OVERVIEW................................................................................. 6

Site Characteristics....................................................................................................... 6

Crash History................................................................................................................. 6

Friction Testing ............................................................................................................. 8

HFST INSTALLATION ............................................................................. 10

Timeline .......................................................................................................................10

Treatment Limits........................................................................................................10

Surface Preparation....................................................................................................11

Materials.......................................................................................................................11

Application Method.....................................................................................................11

Installation Observations............................................................................................13

Post-Installation and Acceptance..............................................................................13

EARLY-AGE PERFORMANCE.................................................................. 14

Functional Performance.............................................................................................14

Safety Performance ....................................................................................................16

Project Summary ........................................................................................................18

REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 19

APPENDIX .................................................................................................. 20
5

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Installation inspection documentation...........................................................20

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Graphic. Dry weather crash diagram at Central Ave. intersection for 

2011-2017 from the RSA................................................................................................... 7

Figure 2. Graphic. Wet weather crash diagram at Central Ave. intersection for 

2011-2017 from the RSA................................................................................................... 8

Figure 3. Photograph. Surface condition, friction, and texture values at the bus 

stop, just prior to Central Ave. ........................................................................................ 9

Figure 4. Graphic. Map of friction, texture, and crashes for the Central Ave. 

intersection from the RSA................................................................................................ 9

Figure 5. Photograph. Shaded area showing HFST treatment limits. ......................11

Figure 6. Photograph. Continuous fully-automated application truck......................12

Figure 7. Photograph. Application of resin binder and aggregate with continuous 

fully-automated installation............................................................................................12

Figure 8. Photograph. HFST condition approximately 8 months after installation.15

Figure 9. Photograph. Small delaminations near west end of project in outside lane.

...........................................................................................................................................15

Figure 10. Photograph. HFST loss at an irregular area applied manually. ...............16

Figure 11. Graphic. Improvement in stopping behavior after HFST application.....17
6

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

PROJECT OVERVIEW 

The Hillsborough Ave. at Central Ave. intersection was selected for high friction surface 

treatment (HFST) to reduce crashes and improve pedestrian safety after a 2019 Road Safety 

Audit (RSA) by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). While the FDOT Tampa 

Region has a long history of using RSAs to assess potential safety enhancements at 

intersections, this RSA was unique in that it included continuous pavement friction 

measurement (CPFM) data, provided through Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) 

Pavement Friction Management Program. Friction data allowed the RSA team to more closely 

examine pavement-related factors that may be contributing to higher-than-average crash

frequency. Although HFST was recommended for application from the Central Ave. 

intersection through the intersections at the Interstate 275 on/off ramps east of Central Ave., 

the 2020 HFST installation was only applied at the Central Ave. location. This summary report 

documents HFST deployment at this intersection. 

HFST is a proven safety countermeasure used specifically to reduce or prevent friction-related 

crashes. HFST significantly enhances pavement friction to reduce both wet and dry pavement 

skidding crashes at locations with high friction demand (FHWA 2021). While the benefits of 

HFST for horizontal curve and ramp applications are well-documented (Merritt 2020), 

intersection applications have seen comparatively limited use to date in the U.S. However, since 

HFST shortens stopping distance, it can reduce or prevent rear-end crashes at intersection 

approaches (FHWA 2020) and potentially angle crashes within an intersection, while also 

improving pedestrian safety at crosswalks. Florida DOT is one state highway agency taking 

steps towards validating the use of HFST for intersection applications.

Site Characteristics 

Eastbound Hillsborough Ave. at Central Ave. has two through lanes, a pocket left-turn lane, and 

bicycle lane on the right which terminates at Central Ave. The intersection is signal controlled 

and is located less than 500 ft from another signalized intersection at the Interstate 275 ramp 

terminals. The existing pavement surface is a dense graded asphalt pavement at Central Ave. 

with a diamond ground concrete surface just east of Central Ave. extending to I-275. A bus 

stop is located in the right-thru lane/bicycle lane just before Central Ave. Traffic volume at the 

time of installation was 54,000 vehicles/day and the posted speed is 45 miles per hour (mph). 

Crash History 

Crash history from the 2019 RSA for years 2011-2017 indicates that of the 72 crashes at this 

intersection (within the limits of the 2020 HFST installation) over 86 percent are dry pavement 

crashes. Rear-end crashes are the predominant crash type (68 percent) occurring primarily in 

the eastbound thru lanes, with the majority in the left thru lane. Right angle crashes in the 

intersection account for approximately 17 percent of crashes and left-turn crashes account for 
7

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

approximately 13 percent, while sideswipe crashes account for less than 3 percent. Figure 1 and 

figure 2 show the wet and dry crash diagrams, respectively, for the intersection as provided in 

the RSA. The preponderance of rear-end crashes may indicate that the existing pavement 

friction (even under dry conditions) may not be adequate for friction demand from vehicles 

braking at the intersection approach.

A more recent analysis of crash data for this location, which included preliminary crash data for 

the years 2020 and 2021 indicated a mean crash rate of 13.5 crashes/year from 2015-2021.

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 1. Graphic. Dry weather crash diagram at Central Ave. intersection for 

2011-2017 from the RSA.
8

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 2. Graphic. Wet weather crash diagram at Central Ave. intersection for 

2011-2017 from the RSA.

Friction Testing 

The RSA dataset included continuous pavement friction measurement (CPFM) and 

macrotexture data that were collected by a Sideway-force Coefficient Routine Investigation

Machine (SCRIM) device in the right lane in 2016 as part of a pavement friction management 

program demonstration. CPFM provides a more comprehensive assessment of pavement 

friction through continuous reporting at a higher resolution than a single spot measurement 

using a locked-wheel skid tester. This allows for identifying friction changes through a location 

that may be contributing to crashes. The SCRIM reading (SR) provides an indication of 

pavement microtexture characteristics while macrotexture is measured directly and reported 

as mean profile depth (MPD). Both are essential for tire-pavement friction, particularly in wet 

weather and at higher speeds. 

Friction measurements from the RSA were reported as SCRIM reading at 30 mph (SR30) and 

MPD in mm. SR30 can be converted to the FDOT standard FN40R value using an equation 

provided by de León Izeppi et al. The friction characteristics from 2016 were (Figure 3): 

• West of Central Ave (approximate milepost 12.55): SR30 = 44.1 (FN40R = 36.9), MPD 

= 0.34 mm. 
9

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

• East of Central Ave. (approximate milepost 12.58): SR30 = 53.9 (FN40R = 45.4), MPD 

= 0.70 mm. 

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 3. Photograph. Surface condition, friction, and texture values at the bus 

stop, just prior to Central Ave.

Figure 4 shows a color-coded map of friction (bottom line), texture (top line), and total crashes 

(numbered circles) from the RSA for the right-thru lane for the Central Ave. intersection as 

well as the intersections at the I-275 interchange. Note that friction and texture vary 

throughout the intersection. They are lower leading up to Central Ave. when compared to the 

asphalt section east of Central Ave. 

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 4. Graphic. Map of friction, texture, and crashes for the Central Ave. 

intersection from the RSA.
10

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

HFST INSTALLATION 

FDOT completed the HFST installation as part of an on-call contract with an HFST installer. 

Installation was completed under the 2017 revision of FDOT’s Section 333 “High Friction 

Surface Treatment” specification. 

Assessment of existing pavement condition subsequent to the RSA led to a decision to repave 

the existing asphalt pavement prior to HFST application. Repaving consisted of a 1.5-inch mill 

and overlay using a dense graded FDOT friction course type FC 12.5, PG 76-22. 

Timeline

The project contractor completed repaving in early June 2020 which required a 30-day cure 

period before installing HFST over the new asphalt pavement. After several weather delays, the 

installer completed HFST placement on July 21-22, 2020. The installer completed placement 

during nighttime closures of the eastbound lanes, with at least one thru lane remaining open 

during installation of adjacent lanes each night. FDOT permitted lane closures from 10:30 P.M. 

– 6:00 A.M. each night, and for the actual installation, the nightly schedule consisted of:

• Maintenance of Traffic Initiation: 10:00 P.M.

• HFST Placement: 11:00 P.M. – 1:00 A.M.

• Sweeping: 1:00 A.M. – 3:00 A.M.

• Opening to Traffic: 4:00 A.M.

Treatment Limits 

The installer applied HFST to the eastbound lanes from west of Central Ave. beginning at the 

taper for the left-turn lane, through the intersection, terminating at the joint with the concrete 

pavement west of I-275. The installer applied HFST to the two through lanes, left-turn lane, 

bike lane, and the third lane added east of Central Ave., as shown in figure 5. The contractor 

installed the left turn and left-thru lanes the first night, and the right thru lane, bike lane, and 

third lane on the second night. The total treatment area was approximately 2,700 square yards.
11

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 5. Photograph. Shaded area showing HFST treatment limits.

Surface Preparation 

Per FDOT specification, surface preparation consisted of a vacuum sweep to remove any loose 

deleterious materials. The installer left the waterborne paint (not thermoplastic) pavement 

markings (placed after the new asphalt surface) in place and applied the HFST over them. The 

installer masked off the drainage inlets along the curb and manhole covers to prevent 

infiltration of HFST materials.

Materials 

Per FDOT specification, HFST materials consisted of a polymer resin binder and calcined 

bauxite aggregate. The installer selected a two-part epoxy resin binder, and independent 

laboratory testing verified that the resin binder conformed to FDOT specification 

requirements. Laboratory testing of the calcined bauxite also verified conformance to FDOT 

specification requirements.

Application Method

Per FDOT specification, the HFST placement required fully-automated continuous application 

methods. The application vehicle conditions, meters, blends, and applies the resin binder to the 

specified application rate, then applies the aggregate to the resin binder immediately, as shown 

in figure 6 and figure 7. Automated application creates a uniform application of resin binder to 

the required mil thickness. Automated aggregate application helps to ensure timely placement 

into the resin binder such that it is properly embedded into the resin binder layer. 
12

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 6. Photograph. Continuous fully-automated application truck.

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 7. Photograph. Application of resin binder and aggregate with continuous 

fully-automated installation.
13

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

Installation Observations 

Project inspectors did not identify any problems with the installation. Inspectors documented 

observations from the various aspects of installation, which are provided in the Appendix. Some 

key observations from this installation documentation include:

• Inspectors noted that the aggregate from the first placement which used only virgin 

aggregate was noticeably less dusty than the second placement which used reclaimed 

aggregate blended with virgin aggregate. However, there were no issues with aggregate 

application or bond with the reclaimed aggregate. 

• The installers used a total of 848 gallons of resin binder (424 gallons of each 

component), which translates to an application rate of approximately 29 SF/gal for the 

2,719 SY placed. This falls within the required application rate shown in the project 

specifications (Section 333) to achieve the required 50-65 mil resin binder thickness.

• The installer used a total of 40,864 lbs of aggregate which translates to an application 

rate of approximately 15 lbs/SY. This falls within the required application rate shown in 

the project specifications (Section 333).

• The installer used a wet mil thickness gage to verify the appropriate resin binder 

thickness during placement. The resin binder application rate (above) provides a 

secondary check of the adequacy of the resin binder thickness. 

• Sweeping to remove excess aggregate began 30-mins to 1-hr after HFST placement was 

complete for each pass. The installer completed follow-up sweeping within two weeks, 

prior to placement of permanent thermoplastic striping. 

Post-Installation and Acceptance 

The project inspectors noted no issues with the installed surface, and the surface was opened 

to traffic on schedule. Temporary striping was placed prior to opening to traffic until the 

permanent thermoplastic striping could be installed after a two-week cure period. The installer 

has since placed thermoplastic striping, in-lane markings (arrows), and raised pavement 

markers. 

FDOT performed friction testing for acceptance approximately two weeks after installation 

using an ASTM E 274 locked wheel skid tester (LWST) in accordance with AASHTO T 242 

using an ASTM E501 ribbed tire. The minimum acceptable friction number is FN40R = 65. 

Testing performed on August 5, 2020 revealed FN40R = 78 in lane 1 and FN40R = 79 in lane 2.
14

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

EARLY-AGE PERFORMANCE 

Functional Performance 

FDOT performed a field review of the HFST on March 11, 2021, nearly 8 months after 

installation to document functional performance. The field review team made the following 

observations based on current conditions: 

• Overall the HFST was in good condition without any cracking or other deformations 

(figure 8). 

• There was little evidence of shedding and loose aggregate particles (note that the 

surface has been swept several times).

• Minor delaminations were noted near the west end of the project in the outside lane 

(figure 9). 

• A small irregular area at the southwest corner of the Central Ave. intersection is 

exhibiting minor HFST loss, possibly due to manual material application required at this 

location (figure 10). 

Although the exact cause has not been determined, it is likely that the small areas of 

delamination near the beginning of the treatment are related to surface preparation not 

completely removing grease/oil deposits. The small area where HFST loss was observed at 

Central Ave. is likely the result of inadequate resin binder thickness at this location during 

manual HFST application to this area where automated application was not possible. Both areas 

should be monitored over time to document any additional surface loss.
15

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 8. Photograph. HFST condition approximately 8 months after installation.

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 9. Photograph. Small delaminations near west end of project in outside lane.
16

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

Source: ©FDOT

Figure 10. Photograph. HFST loss at an irregular area applied manually.

FDOT has not performed additional friction testing. However, per the FDOT specification, the 

contractor warrants the surface against friction values below the FN40R = 65 acceptance 

threshold. The surface is also warranted against surface defects associated with materials and 

workmanship issues during installation. The warrant overs the following surface defects: 

• Surface cracking with severity of cracking of Class IB or greater. 

• Raveling and/or delamination (loss of cover aggregate or lack of HFST on the surface). 

• Soft spots/bleeding caused by uncured resin binder or bleeding due to excess binder. 

Any of these distresses which exceed 10 percent of any given 100 SY of HFST application area 

require remediation.

Safety Performance 

At the writing of this report, FDOT is still processing post-installation crash data and therefore 

the data are not available for an analysis of crash reduction. 

However, to document the possible effects of HFST on stopping distance/stopping behavior at 

the intersection, FDOT traffic cameras mounted at the intersection were used to analyze 

vehicle stopping behavior before and after HFST installation.

The Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the University of South Florida 

performed four iterations of video analysis of the intersection to document any possible 
17

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

changes in stopping behavior after HFST application: approximately 1 week prior to HFST 

application, and at approximately 1 and 9 months after HFST application. The CUTR flagged 

crossing the stop bar and incursion into the crosswalk while the traffic light was red as 

improper stopping behavior. The CUTR normalized data based on the number of red lights 

within the monitoring period. 

The CUTR analyzed video from the same three periods of a given day, although the day of the 

week varied from Thursday to Saturday:

• Morning: 8:00 A.M. to 9:00 A.M.

• Afternoon: 5:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M.

• Night: 10:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M.

All three iterations of the after-period analysis revealed a significant improvement in stopping 

behavior, with far fewer incursions into the crosswalk after HFST application, as shown in 

figure 11. Overall reductions in improper stopping after HFST application were reported as 26 

percent after one month and 31 percent after 9 months. These results indicate that application 

of HFST at an intersection approach helps to reduce stopping distance and inclusions into 

crosswalks, improving pedestrian safety.

Source: © CUTR 

Figure 11. Graphic. Improvement in stopping behavior after HFST application.
18

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

Project Summary 

This project demonstrated the successful application of HFST to an intersection location 

exhibiting high rates of rear-end and left-turn crashes. FDOT selected the location based on an 

RSA which included continuous pavement friction testing that revealed the friction and 

macrotexture levels varied throughout the road section and were lower at the intersection 

approach than surrounding pavement. 

Installation was performed in accordance with FDOT Section 333, with no notable problems or 

issues with materials or application methods. A field review of the project approximately 8 

months after installation revealed only minor, isolated distresses and HFST loss. 

The crash-reduction benefits of HFST at this location are not yet apparent since very 

preliminary results are available from only the first 8 months since installation. However, the 

major benefit realized from HFST at this location to-date has been a significant improvement in 

stopping behavior, resulting in less incursions into the crosswalk, improving pedestrian safety.

This project illustrates how a holistic approach to pavement friction management, starting with 

continuous pavement friction measurement, then incorporating friction data into safety 

assessments like RSAs, and finally by implementing friction improvements like HFST, can be a 

Safe System Approach that benefits all users. 
19

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

REFERENCES 

Merritt, D. K., Lyon, C. A., Persaud, B. N., and Torres, H. N. Developing Crash-Modification 

Factors for High-Friction Surface Treatments, Federal Highway Administration FHWA Research 

Report FHWA-HRT-20-061. McLean, VA. 2020.

FHWA. High Friction Surface Treatment at Intersections. Federal Highway Administration FHWASA-20-012. Washington, D.C. 2020.

FHWA. High Friction Surface Treatments (HFST) website: 

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/pavement_friction/high_friction/ (last accessed, 

October 2021)
20

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

APPENDIX 

Table 1 lists items for documentation provided to project inspectors prior to installation along 

with inspector notes.

Table 1. Installation inspection documentation.

Item Inspection Notes

Pre-installation 

site conditions Pavement condition Milled and resurfaced before HFST application

Pre-installation repairs (if any) N/A

General site observations Urban Corridor with 

slight down grade

Construction 

staging and 

Maintenance of 

Traffic (MOT)

Location of equipment and materials prior to installation Offsite at nearby parking 

lots

MOT used for intersection installation: Standard Index 102-602 

and 102-603

Surface 

preparation

Striping/pavement marking removal and/or masking

RPM removed, existing 

pavement markings 

were paint and remained 

as-is during HFST 

application

Drainage inlet protection

Curb inlet protection 

placed within the project 

limits

Surface cleaning method (e.g., sweeping, compressed 

air wash, etc) Vacuum sweeper

Materials

Resin binder material types and brand names

Cornerstone 

Construction Material

CE330 Epoxy Binder, 

Parts A & B

Aggregate material types and brand name/source

Great Lakes Minerals

GRIPgrain, Round Kiln 

(RD), RD-88 (USS 6x16 

Mesh) - Chinese Bauxite 

- Calcined

Re-swept aggregate used? Yes
21

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

Item Inspection Notes

Subjective evaluation of aggregate cleanliness (dust, 

foreign material, etc):

First application 

relatively clean, re-swept 

aggregate was dustier

FDOT laboratory test results and/or contractorsubmitted test results

Contractor submitted 

material test results 

along with MSDS 

documentation

Installation Scope for each night’s placement (e.g., lane, length, 

width, approx. limits):

1-2 lanes per night, 

approximately 600 ft

Timeline for installation each night:

MOT initiation 10 P.M.

Begin and end time for material placement 11 P.M. – 1 A.M.

Time of sweeping 1 A.M. – 3 A.M.

Opening to traffic 4 A.M.

Quantity of material placed

Square yards placed Approx. 2,719 SY

Quantity of resin binder placed (gal., from contractor)

Approximately 424 Gal 

of Binder A and 424 Gal 

of Binder B

Quantity of aggregate placed (lb/ton, from contractor): Approximately 40,864 

lbs

Processes used to verify proper proportioning and 

blending of resin binder components (e.g., printout from 

truck):

Information not available

Methodology to document resin binder thickness (e.g., 

mill thickness gage, material usage/coverage rate): Thickness gage

Anomalies or other issues noted: N/A

Aggregate 

Removal Timing of aggregate removal: Approximately thirty 

minutes to one hour

Processes used for aggregate removal (e.g, vacuum 

sweeper, compressed air wash, etc.):

Vacuum truck (no 

sweeping) and leaf 

blower
22

IMPROVING PAVEMENT FRICTION FOR SAFETY AT A FLORIDA 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION

Item Inspection Notes

Final Inspection 

and Opening to 

Traffic

Processes used to verify that the surface is ready for 

opening to traffic: Information not available

Replacement of pavement markings (e.g., temporary or 

permanent tabs, striping, etc.):

Temporary paint 

striping, followed with 

more surface vacuuming 

after 2 weeks then 

thermoplastic pavement 

markings

Post-Installation 

Inspection

Documentation of anomalies in first 24-48 hours 

following completion of installation: N/A

Documentation of re-sweeping (e.g., days after 

installation and method used): Information not available
FHWA-SA-22-10