IMS survey: Laramie sidewalks score 68 on custom index; full rehab estimate ~$32 million

The City of Laramie received a presentation from IMS on July 8 summarizing a citywide sidewalk and ADA curb‑ramp assessment. IMS said it used vehicle‑mounted LiDAR to gather curb‑ramp geometry and a proprietary sidewalk surface tester to measure longitudinal and cross slopes, vertical displacements and horizontal separations. The dataset has been delivered to the city in GIS format and is intended to support multi‑year planning.

Megan Radliff of IMS said the citywide sidewalk condition index average is 68 on a 0–100 scale and that the index is a purpose‑built metric for sidewalks (no single national standard exists for sidewalk condition indexing). "But you can see the average, on the graph to the right is a 68," Radliff said while presenting visual examples of very poor, poor, fair and good sidewalk segments.

IMS reported that approximately 200 miles of sidewalks were surveyed and that, while the average condition is acceptable, there are localized severe defects and obstructions that merit immediate attention. The firm provided photographic examples of shattered slabs, vertical trip hazards and horizontal separations. IMS also flagged a variety of “hindrances” — objects or vegetation intruding into the clear walking width — such as poles, manholes, signal cabinets, vegetation overhangs and street furniture.

Radliff gave a high‑level cost estimate that assumes every segment would be rehabilitated: approximately $32,000,000 to fully repair the entire sidewalk network. She immediately cautioned that such a full‑network rehabilitation is theoretical and not a typical planning approach. Instead, she recommended that the city use the dataset to prioritize repairs by severity and by community need — for example, focusing on high‑use pedestrian corridors and areas where residents with disabilities report access problems.

IMS also produced a curb‑ramp conformity analysis using LiDAR‑derived measurements and assigned ramps to conformity levels. The analysis found many locations without curb ramps where crossings appear warranted and a range of ramps with slope, width, or tactile‑warning deficiencies. IMS flagged 63 severe obstructions in the network but noted the pie chart of hindrances includes a broader set of items (the “other” category aggregates many different, mostly small or temporary intrusions such as trash cans or temporary fixtures).

City staff and councilors asked about data ownership and public access. Radliff confirmed that the deliverable and spatial dataset belong to the city and can be integrated into the city’s GIS and made available via an online map or story map. City staff indicated they plan to publish the results for internal use and public review and to route the information to code enforcement for vegetation and property‑maintenance issues that can be addressed at the property owner level.

Councilors suggested practical next steps: prioritize severe trip hazards and areas used by residents with mobility impairments, create a simple public reporting mechanism (similar to pothole reporting) for sidewalk obstructions, and pursue targeted repairs rather than attempting an all‑network replacement at once. IMS recommended using the severity data to build multi‑year, fiscally realistic repair plans and to pair short‑term fixes (grinding, vegetation trimming) with longer‑term slab replacements or curb‑ramp reconstructions.

No binding decisions were made during the session; staff will integrate the IMS data into the city GIS and work with council and affected commissions to prioritize repairs and citizen reporting workflows.