Taking The Politics Out Of Repaving: Amherst’s Repair Priorities Are Data Driven

Report On The Meeting Of The Town Services And Outreach Committee, April 21,2022

The meeting was held on Zoom and was recorded.  The meeting packet can be found here.

Present
Dorothy Pam (Chair, District 3),  Anika Lopes (District 4), Shalini Bahl-Milne (District 5), Ana Devlin Gauthier (District 5), Andy Steinberg (at large).  Staff: Paul Bockelman, Town Manager; Guilford Mooring, Superintendent of Public Works, Jason Skeels, Town Engineer, Athena O’Keefe, Clerk of Council
In addition:  Mandi Jo Hanneke and Jennifer Taub – co-sponsors of the Residential Rental Property Permit Bylaw and six members of the public.

Highlights:

• Powerpoint presentation by Town Engineer Jason Skeels and Superintendent of Public Works Guildford Mooring on the data used to set repaving priorities
  
• Voted unanimously to recommend that Town Council adopt the new fee schedule for rental properties in the proposed new general bylaw 3.50 
  
• Voted unanimously to recommend that the Town Council Approve the Town Manager’s nomination of Gregory Bascomb and Suzanne Shilling for two year appointments to the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee
  
• Responded without a formal vote to the Government, Organization and Legislation Committee’s proposal to create a new council committee to be responsible for outreach and economic development

Report On The Repaving Of Town Roads And Sidewalks
The bulk of the meeting centered on a PowerPoint presentation by Town Engineer Jason Skeels and Superintendent of Public Works Guilford Mooring on the data used to set repaving priorities in town.

The town contracts with Street Scan, a company that specializes in automated roadway assessment and management.  Street Scan travels all 103.5 miles of Amherst’s roads with sensor equipped vehicles (see photo above), similar to the way that Google Street view collects images, to produce a fine-grained map of every bump and crack and hole in our roads. Street Scan then rates each road by condition, scoring each road with a pavement condition index (PCI) and assigning each road to one of six categories  from excellent (PCI =85-100) to failed (PCI = 0-10).

The data are then used to produce a color coded map showing conditions of each of the town’s roads.  A Street Scan assessment of Amherst takes about five days of data collection and costs the town about $7,000.  The town undertakes a new study roughly every three years.

Skeel explained that the cost of bringing all of the town’s roads up to a rating of excellent would cost over $48 million. Since the town roads budget is considerably smaller (typically $1-2 million/year depending on state aid) repairs must be prioritized.  In addition to prioritizing which roads will receive attention in the coming year, the assessments are used to determine what kind of repairs should be done.  Roads that are deemed poor or failing typically receive more comprehensive treatment such as a “full depth reconstruction” while roads that are in better shape may receive a “mill overlay” or  just have cracks filled.  Skeels notes that in 2018, the average PCI score for town roads was 63 or fair, and that the average PCI score for 2022 was 65 suggesting that the repaving program is slowly improving the overall condition of Amherst’s roads.  He noted that the town has pretty much eliminated all of the town’s “really bad” roads with only 3 miles of bad roads remaining to be repaired in 2022.

” the algorithm that we use takes the politics out of repaving”

Town Engineer Jason Skeel

The analytics that the town uses are capable of modeling several different approaches and different costs to determine what to prioritize.  Skeels said that they tend to put more emphasis on main roads or arterials,  simply because these are the roads that get the most use and degrade quicker. The town takes its anticipated annual budget and tries to spread the work around town, slightly prioritizing main roads but also including side streets that feed into the main roads if they need work as well.  Priorities are set pretty much based on the PCI score with those with the lowest score getting the most attention. The town also uses a degradation model that predicts how quickly roads will deteriorate and this also factors into setting the priorities for a given year.

Skeels noted that” the algorithm that we use takes the politics out of repaving”.  Devlin-Gauthier agreed and voiced her appreciation for the process  stating that the PCI score seemed to be the most equitable way to prioritize repairs.

Prioritized repaving for 2022 is indicated in the table below and in the map that follows showing the kind of work that is needed. The Power Point presentation contains a listing of all repaving that has been done over the last six years. The town is now taking bids for its 2022 roads campaign. Skeels reported that the repaving of Pomeroy Lane remains  “iffy” because current pricing may place it out of reach without additional state aid.

Approach to Sidewalks Is Less Systematic
Skeels reported that Street Scan also has a segway-style  vehicle that can scan sidewalks but the cost of producing a map of the entire town would be prohibitive. He estimated that it would cost  around $60,000 to scan all of the sidewalks in town and that it would take considerably longer than it does to scan the roads.  Skeels implied that the town’s approach to sidewalk repair is somewhat opportunistic though the town tries to be sensitive to complaints received.  He said “In our pavement management program we attempt to treat the adjacent sidewalks to roads that are being repaired if we can afford it.  But we don’t have a specific sidewalk management plan”.

Bockelman pointed out that some sidewalks are harder to pave than others.  And ADA compliance when there’s a change in grade adds considerably to the cost.

Skeels concurred, adding that costs do add up when there are large grade changes or lots of driveway cuts, so this year “we’ve focused  on the low hanging fruit of flatter sidewalks.  It would be really hard to make a street like Amity 100% accessible, and we’d need a variance in order to do it.  So we do the easier ones first.”

Mooring added that sidewalks tend to last longer than roads.  What destroys roads is weight plus traffic while the biggest threat to a sidewalk is tree roots.

The 2022 sidewalk replacement schedule (slide) reflects several specific requests from the disability access advisory committee.

All of this information will soon be posted on the town DPW web site.  The pavement conditions map currently posted there reflects data from 2018. 

Discussion
Councilors praised the report and noted that they had learned a lot from it.  Dorothy Pam asked about a few specific streets in her district (segments of Lincoln, Fearing, and Nutting) and wondered why they weren’t slated for repaving, given their poor condition.  Skeels noted that in the case of Nutting, it does not receive the high traffic that the ones that were chosen for repair do, and it was felt that it was possible to hold out another year or two to address Nutting.  He also pointed out that Lincoln’s PCI is about 45 – just a bit higher than the streets that have been chosen for repaving.

Devlin Gauthier asked several questions concerning creating and maintaining bike lanes and making them safer.  She asked about the cost of adding a reflection strip for bike lanes and rumble strips that separate bike lanes from traffic on busy roads like Bay Road.  

The upshot was that adding or improving bike lanes costs a lot more than people might think. Mooring noted that Thermoplast (for reflective strips) can cost up to $1.50/foot so it ends up being a considerable cost for a substantial stretch of road. He noted that the town does use reflective strips on roundabouts and for downtown crosswalks but has shied away from rumble strips because people living near the road complain about the noise that they produce.

Bahl-Milne also asked about the prospects for adding more bike lanes in town.

Mooring responded  that a new bike lane requires adding eight feet of new width to the road  (the width of 2/3 of a travel lane).  So adding a bike lane often requires expanding the road, and that can escalate costs quickly and that in turn, can push the town further behind in road maintenance.  He added “when we have special funding we try to squeeze that (bike lanes) in under special projects.  Also, when the road is a little wider than usual we might be able to squeeze in a new bike lane.  So we do it when we can on a case by case basis.”

Bockelmnan added that the state needs to step up in providing more support for road maintenance and repair, especially for rural communities that may have lots of roads and comparatively few people.

Public Comment
George Ryan commended the DPW on their paving report. 

Chris Hockman  of Pelham Road said that he is quite happy with the resurfacing of Pelham Road.  He suggested that DPW has an excellent opportunity to connect with their constituency by responding to folks who use the town’s SeeClickFIx site. He suggested that people advocating for a repair should always receive a response with additional information of how town processes work.

Residential Rental Permit Bylaws
TSO voted unanimously to recommend that Town Council adopt the new fee schedule for rental properties in the proposed new general bylaw 3.50. (Look here and here for previous discussions of the bylaw.

The proposed new schedule of rates for rental permits is as follows:

• Increase the overall fee for obtaining a rental permit to $250. This will reflect the increase in costs to maintain a self-funded permit system for residential rentals.

• Provide an exception to the increase for those parcels where the property owner lives on-site(commonly known as owner-occupied properties). Owner-occupied parcels would retain a $100 fee.

• Charge $150 per inspection required under the bylaw (required inspections will remain complaint-based). This is the fee amount the Board of License Commissioners had tentatively proposed for inspection fees.

Town Manager Appointments To Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Advisory Committee
TSO voted unanimously to recommend that the Town Council approve  the nominations of  Gregory Bascomb, of  Chadwick Court and Suzanne Schilling, of  Alpine Drive for two year appointments to the CDBG advisory committee. Rika Clement will continue to serve with a term expiring June 30, 2024. Nathanael Larson and Becky Michaels will continue with terms expiring June 30, 2023. Gail Lansky, who chairs the committee, and Lucas Hanscom will continue as members with terms expiring June 30, 2022.

The Town Manager provided the following biographical profiles of the nominees.

Gregory Bascomb has served in many capacities in the town, both for town government and for nonprofits. He has been a member of the Human Rights Commission, and Housing Rent Review Board and currently serves on the Council on Aging. He has also served on the board of Amherst ABC, Inc. He has identified transportation and housing along with social services as needs the CDBG program can address and brings a broad range of experiences to the committee’s deliberations.

Suzanne Schilling has served in many different volunteer roles with Amherst schools and sports team organizations but has not served on a Town committee. She has chaired the Amherst Regional Middle School Parent-Guardian Organization and serves on the Board of the Amherst Hurricane Boosters. In her professional life, Schilling serves as the Associate Director of Financial Aid at the University. In that role, she is required to determine financial aid packages of varying amounts distributed among  qualified aid applicants…knowing there will not be enough aid to meet the needs of all of the applicants. She will bring that experience to the decision-making process of the CDBG Advisory Committee. 

Discussion of GOL Proposal To Create A New Committee For Outreach and Economic Development
TSO was asked for feedback on two proposals from the Governance, Operations and Legislation (GOL) committee;  one to change the charge of TSO and one to change the charge of the CRC.  (Community Resources Committee). The TSO proposal removes responsibility for outreach from the committee’s charge. The CRC proposal removes responsibility for economic development from the committee’s charge and  proposes to create a new committee that would be responsible for both outreach and economic development.

In a substantial discussion, none of the councilors voiced enthusiasm for the proposal.

Devlin Gauthier said the concerns addressed by the GOL proposal are important, but that councilors are already swamped with too many committee responsibilities. She doubts that the council has the capacity to adopt another committee and guessed that there were not five members on the council who would be able to take on another committee assignment and said that “we will likely need to take something off of our plate if we’re going to be able to do anything with this”.  She noted that TSO has not done much in the way of outreach to date and wondered when it would be able to incorporate it into a packed agenda. 

Bahl-Milne saw the outreach charge as a one-time mandate to create an outreach plan for the town council and its committees.  “It’s just a one-time thing so I don’t see the need for a separate committee.”

Pam commented that committee work was turning being a councilor into a full time job.  “I don’t think creating another committee is a realistic option,” she said.  Concerning outreach, she said that “we can try to work more closely with our community participation officers (CPO). I think we can keep it (outreach) here in TSO and come up with that plan”.  TSO will hear a presentation from the CPO’s at their next meeting.

Regarding an economic development committee, Devlin Gauthier thought the idea was worth further exploration though she reiterated her doubts about the council having the capacity to staff such a committee. “We don’t know what we don’t know”, she said,  “and if we had a special committee we might be able to start to figure out answers to some of the most important economic questions facing the town”.

Bockelman said that the town decided to not fund an economic development director for next year in order to fund a diversity, equity, and inclusion director. ” That was a strategic decision”, he said  “Maybe instead of a council committee, we should consider a town EDC with broader representation”. He suggested that the council might consider creating a new town committee composed perhaps of residents and council members to take on that work.

Devlin Gauthier wondered if TSO wanted to follow up on Bockelman’s suggestion for a committee with broader membership, how would they do that?  And does the town have the staff to support such a committee.

Bahl Milne cautioned that the council had previously voted (in the case of the Energy and Climate Action Committee) to not have councilors sit on town committees with residents.

Pam noted that GOL had not requested a decision from TSO and so she proposed that she just relay the gist of the preceding discussion to GOL, noting that TSO is not enthusiastic about creating a new council committee and encourages the Town Manager to look into the possibility of a town committee.