Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pavement Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Town hears pavement-management report showing $19M in town pavement and tradeoffs between prevention and reconstruction
Summary
Trustees received a pavement management presentation that put Lyons’ pavement asset value at about $19 million, explained PCI scoring and treatment recommendations, and reopened debate over how to fund major reconstruction projects such as 2nd and 3rd avenues.
Trustees on July 6 heard a detailed presentation on the town’s pavement management report and options for funding repairs. The consultant and staff said the town’s pavement asset is valued at roughly $19,000,000 and that the pavement condition index (PCI) score used to prioritize work runs from 0 to 100, with 70–85 considered good and below 25 indicating likely reconstruction.
The presenter said the PCI process follows ASTM standards and factors such as distress type, severity and roadway classification into automated treatment recommendations. Staff emphasized preventive maintenance — crack sealing and chip sealing — typically costs about $5 per square yard compared with roughly $100 per square yard for full reconstruction, meaning maintaining better streets can save substantial reconstruction costs over time.
Trustees pressed staff on how much the town has drawn from the streets capital fund and operating budgets since 2024. Staff said the capital fund had once peaked near $600,000 but that it has been drawn down to a smaller balance; the finance director agreed to provide exact figures. Trustees also noted that the PCI report predates last year’s street work and that current scores likely improved after those projects.
The presentation included modeled scenarios: the unconstrained “perfect‑world” scenario to get pavements into the mid‑80s, the current funding scenario based on existing budgets, and a mid-range scenario sized to available revenues. Board members focused on how to balance year‑to‑year preventive work with the need to assemble down payments to qualify for larger grant or loan packages for projects such as Upper 5th and 2nd Avenue.
For next steps, trustees requested staff provide more precise historical expenditures from operating and capital accounts and to run scenario planning for best‑ and worst‑case grant outcomes so the board can discuss priorities at an upcoming workshop.
