The path less traveled?

The cost of repairs and maintenance for proposed walking paths seems to be an ongoing debate since the January 17 meeting for the Transportation Alternative Master Plan.

OV Consulting and the Town of Saratoga’s Department of Public Works have heard these concerns from residents. The next step is trying to figure out how they can balance the budget without overspeeding and using grants that are available for the project.

Saratoga residents appear to be divided on this issue. Residents who support the new plan say improvements are necessary and those who oppose the project say just leave things the way they are. Residents who are neither for nor against the project say the only issue is the cost. The only agreement is safety for children and pedestrians.

Chirs Vogelsang, traffic and transportation engineer for OV Consulting, said he has listened to what residents had to say. He knows this is a divided issue regarding Wyoming Highway 130 and the subdivisions on either side, all the way to downtown and River Street.

“We presented eleven infrastructure projects, programmatic projects, and some monarch projects,” Vogelsang said. “It was the infrastructure projects that we have talked about the most. The issue people are divided on is the connection between Highway 130 up to downtown and the grocery store. There were a few folks at our meeting who said they would like a way for their kids and people to safely get between the subdivision and downtown. Other folks, and quite a few, said, ‘Hey, building a path is more than we need because we have an alternate route on River Street. Can we look at making it better?’”

Infrastructure Projects are a proposed plan where contractors focus on improvements in communications equipment, transportation channels, and electrical systems. Programmatic projects would be located around the city like wayfinding signage, painted crosswalks, and driver speed feedback signs.

Monarch projects are named after the nickname for 8-point bull elk because they are projects that have high rewards but require a lot of time and patience. The project team has identified two of these projects – one at the old Water Treatment Plant Site and the second at the Hot Pool Area. The project team thinks that these two locations provide the Town with big opportunities.

Vogelsang said the number one issue and concern is the cost and maintenance. He said residents are concerned about their tax dollars being mismanaged if city workers need to be keeping up on maintenance necessary to keep everything intact. He hopes he can give a better vision of the project for the next meeting.

“The cost of maintenance, snow in the winter, and construction cost are the main issues people are divided on,” Vogelsang said. “I think people were not quite visualizing what we are talking about so the next time we get together, we are going to show a plan on what that picture looks like.”

Emery Penner, the director of public works, said some grants are available to help with the cost of the infrastructure project. He explains the opposition that can help save money without overspending.

“We can always find grants that usually will help cover all the cost or some of the cost in any new infrastructure project such as the pedestrian path,” Penner said. “The long-term maintenance is not so much and Chris and his guys are aware of that. So when they take those next steps, Chris and I will be thinking of this thoroughly because the cost of asphalt has gone up in price. So we know that putting in and maintaining pavement is expensive. Constructability is always a consideration in the long term of cost. “

Penner also said he is working on figuring out the cost of the budget. He wants to make sure that there is enough funding without going over the limit. Penner also said he understands Mayor Chuck Davis’s concern about the budget and maintenance.

“It depends a lot on what we would decide to put in, and everything’s got a cost-benefit ratio,” Penner said. “So say we spend X amount of money to put something in if that safety and that value, and that usability is worth that cost, then that’s great. I think that’s really at the heart of the the issue is how much money we’re going to spend is it going to be worth the amount of money that we’re going to spend?”

Penner also said that time and material will be the main factor. He said it is now a question: do the residents approve and will the cost be worth what is being spent?

“We spent a lot of money on a big main street, and going through the highway was worth it like we needed good asphalt going through town,” Penner said. “So I think if we spend money wisely, and we do it well, and the use in the value is there, then it’s good. We spend a bunch of money and we have to maintain it long term, it doesn’t get us we don’t achieve the goal, and that’s when we’re gonna have problems. And I’ve seen that happen In different circumstances where you can spend the amount of money in value, and the use is there, people are super happy to see for a board that you spent a lot of money and you don’t get your value, you don’t get your use, because your projection was wrong about how valued it was. And then that’s when everybody’s proud of you.”

Both Vogelsang and Penner agree that they must come up with a solution that will put most residents in agreement with the plan. The goal is to show residents how the money will be spent and how the project can be successful without overspending. The next Transportation Alternative Master Plan meeting will take place in April. A time and date will be announced.