Supervisors receptive to new plan but need to figure out costs

Although nothing is set in stone, the board of supervisors on Sept. 6 discussed more details of the county engineer’s new plan for gravel roads during an hour-long work session, which resulted in officials being receptive to the targeted approach but wary of the overall costs to fund so many endeavors.

Jasper County Engineer Michael Frietsch provided a preview of his Granular Road Assessment & Maintenance Strategy (GRAMS) in mid-August with the expectation that he and supervisors would have a number of work sessions to develop and alter the plan. This recent meeting was the first of many to come.

Four different types of maintenance strategies were identified by Frietsch and his secondary roads staff: stabilization, reclamation, resurfacing and spot rock/minimal maintenance. Frietsch showed supervisors how the first three duties would target and cycle through different territories in the county.

Year-by-year the secondary roads department would cycle through the different territories to stabilize, regrade or resurface roads. Priority will likely be given to the most traveled roads. Although the four types of maintenance will be cycled around each year, the territories and coverage may chance.

For instance, stabilization fits into a five-year cycle, whereas reclamation or regrades would be on an eight-year cycle. So their territories differ.

“This is a starting porting,” Frietsch said. “Let’s be very honest, this is a framework. I mean this gives us a framework that we can start planning on and moving forward with. This is something we’ll adjust and modify. Road conditions and road traffic counts can change.”

To give supervisors an idea of what kind of impact the plan will have on the county’s budget, Frietsch presented five scenarios for the first year:

• Budget Scenario No. 1: Five miles of stabilization at a total cost of $465,000; 15 miles of reclamation at a total cost of $465,000; 114 miles of resurfacing at 450 tons of rock per mile for $1.14 million; and 914 miles of spot rock for more than $1.82 million. In total, this would cost $3,898,000.

• Budget Scenario No. 2: Ten miles of stabilization at a total cost of $930,000; 20 miles of reclamation at a total cost of $620,000; 114 miles of resurfacing at 450 tons of rock per mile for $1.14 million; and 914 miles of spot rock for more than $1.82 million. In total, this would cost $4,518,000.

• Budget Scenario No. 3: Five miles of stabilization at a total cost of $465,000; 25 miles of reclamation at a total cost of $775,000; 114 miles of resurfacing at 450 tons of rock per mile for $1.14 million; and 914 miles of spot rock for more than $1.82 million. In total, this would cost $4,208,000.

• Budget Scenario No. 4: Ten miles of stabilization at a total cost of $930,000; 15 miles of reclamation at a total cost of $465,000; 114 miles of resurfacing at 450 tons of rock per mile for $1.14 million; and 914 miles of spot rock for more than $1.82 million. In total, this would cost $4,363,000.

• Budget Scenario No. 5: Five miles of stabilization at a total cost of $465,000; 15 miles of reclamation at a total cost of $465,000; 114 miles of resurfacing at 300 tons of rock per mile for $800,500; and 914 miles of spot rock for more than $1.82 million. In total, this would cost $3,558,500.

All five scenarios for the first year exceed the secondary roads’ fiscal year 2023 budget of more than $2 million. Jasper County Supervisor Brandon Talsma said budget scenarios No. 2 and No. 4 are the two largest proposals, with the only major difference being the total reclamation miles.

“If we can figure out the funding piece of the puzzle, if we could get you an additional almost $2.5 million in funding or $2.3 million in funding, could you have the man hours or the man power to be able to do that amount of miles in every calendar year?” Talsma asked.

Frietsch answered, “I think we can probably do a total of 30 miles between stabilization and reclamation. That is probably the most we could do.”

Other funding sources may start to dry out, too. The funding coming from the state, Frietsch said, is stagnant or even declining a bit. Talsma expects it is only going to continue to go down. Which adds another layer of financial challenges, particularly when it comes to sustainability of the plan.

“It depends on how much state funding would be affected, because if it’s affected largely then we would have to shift more of our local funds,” Talsma said. “…If it is not largely affected, this program would be pretty much 100 percent property tax funded.”

Jasper County Supervisor Doug Cupples is concerned about the “accidental gaps” that could come up from prioritizing some roads over others. Frietsch acknowledged that is where spot rock or minimal maintenance designations will come into play, giving the county more flexibility to address those gaps.

With three different kinds of maintenance cycles plus the spot rock work, Talsma questioned if the county was going to chase too many things at the same time. For instance, Talsma asked if it would be better to divide some maintenance to a specific year and then address others the year after.

Frietsch said, “I think we’ve got to keep up on resurfacing and I think we’ve got to keep up on reclamation. Those are lower cost routes that we can tackle.”

Randy Freese, maintenance superintendent for secondary roads, backed up Frietsch and said it is better to ease into the plan and keep a close watch on the progress before dumping a bunch of money into it. Either way, the county has a tough road ahead when addressing its gravel roads.

Plus, not every road can benefit from the same solution. There is also issues with communication that need addressed, specifically when it comes to divvying out spot rock to an exact location. Josh Britton, motor grader foreman, said some of those bad habits are being addressed and corrected.

“It’s the communication between the blade operator and the trucker,” Britton said. “Part of that is that we have some truckers that can speak farmer, and then we have some blade operators that only know streets and numbers … I think we’ve gotten better this spring when we were hauling rock.”

Challenges will be plentiful, like handling the characteristics of road surfaces in different portions of the county, the types of farm routes that need to be prioritized and how best to handle requests for spot rock. Britton said if nothing else the GRAMS plan shows the county just needs more rock.

“When push comes to shove, we just need more rock,” Britton said. “It kind of comes down to that. Stabilization is great, but then what is it going to do in Colfax with the sandy soil. Is it going to be the same? Or is it going to fall apart?”

Freese added, “We need the rock where the traffic is. I think this plan does that.”

Supervisors will continue the GRAMS discussion in the coming weeks.

Contact Christopher Braunschweig at 641-792-3121 ext. 560 or cbraunschweig@newtondailynews.com