Pothole Repair 101
Let's Stop Paying to Fix the Same Pothole Over and Over Again.
We have all seen it.
A pothole appears. A crew repairs it. Then, sometimes only weeks later, the repair has failed and another crew has to return.
Every failed repair means more asphalt, more equipment time, more labour and another disruption for residents.
So before we simply spend more money fixing potholes, I want City Hall to answer a more fundamental question:
Which repair methods are actually giving Sudbury taxpayers the longest-lasting repair for every dollar we spend?
Filling a Hole and Repairing a Road Are Not Always the Same Thing
A durable asphalt repair depends on several factors: the condition of the surrounding pavement, preparation of the damaged area, moisture, material, temperature and proper compaction.
Sometimes conditions require a temporary repair simply to keep a road safe.
That's understandable.
But a temporary patch and a durable repair should not be treated as the same thing.
When conditions permit, failed pavement should be properly prepared, deteriorated material removed, suitable asphalt placed under appropriate conditions and the repair properly compacted.
The principle is simple:
Right preparation. Right material. Right temperature. Right compaction.
We Already Tried the Expensive Machine
Greater Sudbury has already learned an expensive lesson about assuming that new equipment will automatically solve the pothole problem.
The City purchased an automated Python 5000 pothole patching machine for approximately $555,000.
It did not deliver the productivity originally anticipated and ultimately cost substantially more per tonne of asphalt placed than conventional crews. The City eventually removed it from service and sold it.
I don't want to repeat that mistake.
I am not proposing that Council simply purchase another expensive machine and hope for a different result.
And I am not proposing another expensive outside study.
Measure What Works
The City is now testing small-area patching crews using equipment that can remove deteriorated pavement, place asphalt and compact the repaired area.
Good.
Now let's measure the results.
City staff should track different pothole and small-area repair methods and answer some basic questions:
How much did the repair cost?
How long did it take?
What material was used?
What preparation was performed?
How long did the repair last?
Did a crew have to return to the same location?
And ultimately:
What is the cost per successful, durable repair?
A repair that costs slightly more today but lasts several times longer may be considerably cheaper than repeatedly repairing the same failure.
What About Recycled Asphalt?
I also want the City to examine whether greater use of reclaimed asphalt and appropriate reheating/recycling technology could improve our ability to perform durable repairs when commercial hot-mix production is unavailable.
But there is an important condition:
Prove the business case first.
City staff already have much of the information required to begin that analysis.
If suitable equipment can use material we already have, extend our repair season, produce durable repairs and save taxpayers money over its operating life, bring the business case to Council.
If the numbers don't work: DON'T BUY IT.
Spend Smarter, Not Simply More
This is the larger principle I want to bring to City Hall.
When something isn't working, the first answer should not automatically be:
“Spend more money.”
It should be:
“Why isn't it working, and can we do it better?”
Every pothole repair that lasts means fewer return visits, less material, less equipment time, fewer labour hours and fewer disruptions for residents.
Before asking taxpayers for more money to fix our roads, City Hall should demonstrate that we are getting the greatest possible value from the money we already spend.
CUT IT PROPERLY. PREPARE IT PROPERLY. HEAT IT PROPERLY. COMPACT IT PROPERLY.
And most importantly:
Measure whether it worked.
Let's stop paying to fix the same pothole over and over again.