Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs
You know it is getting close to City Council election time when the issue of plowing the streets and pot holes are discussion topics at Council meetings. It is retail politics at its best or at its worst, depending upon your point-of-view.
I for one was pleased with the snow plowing this year. It was not any worse or better than any other year. It was coordinated by the same Assistant Manager who has had this responsibility for years and the effort was led by the same Commissioner of Public Works we have had for decades.
The problem with our City, as with most mid-size cities, there are too many cars, not enough on-street parking space, too many narrow streets, old and malfunctioning equipment, and most importantly residents who do not use their brains when the snow hits.
It seems that every business now owns a bobcat and every household owns a snow blower. So once the streets are plowed, these toys are brought out and the snow is back on the street.
And as for pot holes, well, here they are again. Are we shocked? It happens every Spring when the ground begins to thaw. There is a street repaving list and every year we add to it. A while back, City Manager Bernie Lynch remarked that Lowell had not done as much as it could have when it came to capital improvement projects. I distinctly remember one or two City Councilor challenging that comment.
He is right. We need to maintain and upkeep our streets. If we do not want to repave (read allocate the funds) on a timely manner, then let’s not go through this charade of complaining about pot holes. By the way, I, as everyone else, am certain that the worse pot holes are on the streets that I travel on every day.
[powered by WordPress.]
42 queries. 1.076 seconds
March 28th, 2007 at 9:57 am
Here’s a tip, Laurel - repaving is 100% reimburseable under Ch. 90 from the state as a capital improvement to infrastructure. Pothole filling is regular maintenance, and is not.
You have to pay for the paving up front and GET reimbursed, but it’s free to the city in the end.
You decide.
March 28th, 2007 at 10:03 am
Laurel? There’s no Laurel posting front page here…and this was Mimi, anyway.
March 28th, 2007 at 11:38 am
I assume the 100% reimburseable capital projects have a limit as to what the state will pay. I know that the dialogue between preventive maintenance and capital projects can be a constant battle. If you are too easy with distributing non-local funds, you risk creating an incentive to let preventive maintenance slide to the point of creating capital projects. I don’t know what the specifics of that interplay are in the case of road repaving, but I know of at least one agency that has preventive maintenance requirements that need to be verified before they distribute funds.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Lynne - Sorry!
Mr. Lynne - the limit is what the city received for its Ch. 90 apportionment, plus what is still unspent from prior years as the money ‘rolls’. And since Ch. 90 is considered a form of local aid, it isn’t really non-local in the way you describe. (And many cities DO allow potholes to slide until Ch. 90 allows them to repave, typiclly 5 yr. after last repaving based on moderate traffic).
March 28th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
I’ll give the Cox Admin. a thumbs-up for dealing with the pot hole issue. You see, if a pothole is reported and is not fixed the next victim of that pothole can sue. And it is my understanding that the city had over 200 claims brought against it in one year (for arguments sake it was probably 2002ish) So, Cox made it a priority, and all pothole were filled within an hour of the complaint. The next couple of years claims dropped to less than ten a year. I’m pretty sure Lynch will continue the practice.
March 30th, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Hey, Peter Porcupine, how exactly is it free? Where does the state get the money? Out of free air?
It is taken by theft. You leftists call it taxes. It is not FREE.