Contractor and city spar over 2024 chip-seal work; on-site review planned

A contractor and city officials debated the condition of streets resurfaced in the city's 2024 Cape Seal project and agreed to a field inspection to determine repairs.

Mark Bettis, who said his company performed the work last year, told commissioners they wanted to "come to a resolution with Fort Scott and be a good business partner" and acknowledged concerns about drivability, noise and an "inconsistent fog seal." Bettis said he had discussed the issues with city staff and asked to work with the city to resolve them.

Donald Watson, identified as the contractor's quality-control manager, presented test results and photographs and said samples he ran showed the material did "not meet KDOT specs" in some respects, though his five sample average did not show large oversize rock. Watson said visual inspection showed the fog seal had failed in places and that fines and dust had prevented the fog seal from adhering.

City commissioners and staff told the contractor they had documented a heavy dust problem while crews were applying the material last fall and that the fog-coat application failed in many locations. A city official said residents called city hall about dust on cars and houses while sweeping and cleanup continued.

Bettis said his company's remedy proposal was to clean the roads and reapply fog seal across the affected streets, and said the contractor would sweep and clean before reapplication. Watson described an alternative, a KDOT-acceptable "sandwich" or additional chip-seal layer placed over the existing surface, but said he was unsure that adding a new chip seal on top of failing material would stop continued flaking unless the roots of the problem were removed.

City Manager Brad Matkin said a site visit would be arranged: "I think it would be a good idea so we can get this thing cleaned up and figured out." Commissioners and contractor representatives agreed to meet on site and attempt to reach an agreement on remediation before the commission took further action.

The commission did not vote on a remedy at the meeting; staff said they would arrange a field inspection with the contractor and report back to the commission.

Why it matters: The Cape Seal work affects numerous residential and collector streets. Commissioners, the contractor and residents reported visible dust, failing fog seals, and local complaints about cleaning costs and noise. The city and contractor agreed to on-site inspection to determine the appropriate next steps.

Background: The project was described to commissioners as a conventional chip-seal application followed by a fog coat (the city had advertised the work under a Cape Seal program). Disagreement centered on whether the top fog seal failed due to excessive dust/fines in the aggregate as placed, or because of material gradation; contractor representatives and the city's reviewer disagreed on some lab results and on whether large oversize stone had been used.