If the communications between the Administration and the PSS/BOE took place over several days or weeks as reported in Plaintalker II today; when did the situation become the emergency that the Mayor states? The Mayor also remarked of a bill for over $700 for the catering of food for the 440(?) attendees. That is almost $1.50 per person.
The other day one of the network TV stations on a news period ran a segment about Pothole repairs using a special equipped truck with multiple infrared heat lamps mounted on an adapted tailgate. The pothole was heat filled and then compressed with a small roller making a sealed hot patch. This repair would last unlike Plainfield's cold patches which depend on compression by passing cars. The new method binds the patch to adjacent pavement so there are no cracks for water to leak in and cause deterioration. Planfield's patches do not last. They are a waste of money. The demonstrated method not only makes a permanent repair but uses lees patch material and requires only a crew of two to take about 20 minutes per patch. Not only better but cheaper. Perhaps the new Director of PW would look into this.
Doesn't the City Code require repair of street openings to be "infrared patched" ie: "Hot patched"? That doesn't seem to have ever been enforced.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Road openings (excavations for water and gas line replacements, sewer repairs, etc.) don't lend themselves to the infra-red repair technique.
ReplyDeleteWith road openings, proper backfill materials (stone tamped at regular intervals as the ditch is filled), followed by stabilized base (a stone and asphalt mixture that is also tamped in place) and then topped with the finish layer of asphalt, with the edges of the excavation first sealed with an asphalt-based emulsion, will give you an excellent, permanent repair.
Why doesn't this happen? 1. It is too costly to do it right. Contractors are quick to backfill with the dirt they excavated, "tamp" it with the bucket of the backhoe pressing on the dirt, and then asphalt over that - voila, a "permanent" repair.
2. No one follows up on the excavations and makes the contractor do it right.
A properly administered and enforced road opening permit system would facilitate proper repair work. I don't know if the City has such a system in place - it doesn't seem like it does.
Nichael, who should be responsible? The City Engineer or the Director of Public works? It has been obvious that neither the "Utilities" or in dependent contractors have been held accountable. No one seems to ever checked the restoration of the sub-base and base. There have been cases where the the road surface was apparently not "hot" repaired.
ReplyDeleteAccountability as you stated Doc...who's accountable ??? Why isn't there a spot on the city website to report pot holes with a status update on said "report". Because it's not required, not in the REALM of possibility to this Mayor to be held accountable ( she is above that, and like wise, anyone working for her )so the tired wheels keep grinding away..
ReplyDeleteAlthough I am a rocket scientist ( why, I must be, since things like this come so easily to me and 1,000's of municipalities and state governments across the nation -- YES SRB supporters, believe it or not, she's really NOT that smart or are you too dumb to realize )I often wonder why people don't look to where things are better and say, "Hey...if they can make it work, I'm going to try and do it better! The reason: When you expect nothing and are satisfied with it, it's exactly what you get.
VOTE DEMOCRAT THIS ELECTION !!!! Time for a change...uhhh...oh...wait a minute.
Maybe we can get Jerry Green and Adrian Mapp to discuss the benefits of "status quo".
The City Engineer is usually responsible for all road openings, construction and re-construction, and any other work within the right-of-way. When permits are issued for openings, they come out of the engineer's office. I believe that most municipalities don't inspect every opening, but have the record to fall back on when the opening fails.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was "in the business," our engineering staff did require contractors and utility companies to return and repair their initial work when it failed. Our public works crews would make a temporary repair if needed, but the permanent fix was up to the contractor or utility.
We did not charge for the permits, but had a penalty provision in our ordinance for failure to comply. We rarely had anyone open a street without a permit.
Michael, once again thank you for the insight. Perhaps the Council can get a report from Administration if such a policy is being enforced. If not why not?
ReplyDeleteMichael, once again thank you for the insight. Perhaps the Council can get a report from Administration if such a policy is being enforced. If not why not?
ReplyDelete