Traveling up Sante Fe north of Memorial a fairly new street that has been butchered with a re-paving that is of poor materials, poorly applied, and because of its un-evenness may even be a safety issue. Who specifically would be responsible with the city? Does the city employ any specifications and quality control mechanism?

"Slightly better than crappy..."

The answer to your first question would be the lowest bidder of all the companies that can consider themselves "disadvantaged" in some way (since that allows an even lower bid).... having said that, do I need to answer your second question?

I'm going to guess no one and no, most of the brand new paving going on is a joke. I.e. NW 23rd street and Classen Blvd.

The problem is everybody can point fingers. Cities with a Strong Mayor form of government are held accountable with elected posts like "Street Commissioner" etc. And then, ultimately, the mayor. With the mayor here being little more than Cheerleader-In-Chief, the City Manager is ultimately responsible. But to who? The city council who can point to problems with the budget, or problems with coordinating with the county. As many good things there are about the council-manager form of government, the lack of accountability is a glaring problem. It works best in smaller towns.

Everyone, these road complaint threads are starting to pile up. Perhaps part of the problem is you are taking your case here to a message board when it clearly resides with the City of OKC. Take your case there, or complain to the city manager.

Rover, as I have explained before, oftentimes the city will extend the life of the arterial by applying and oil and chip seal to the surface of the street. It drastically reduces the chance of a pothole or buckling, and is more resistant to inclement weather. It is rough, and the way it is applied is difficult to make it "good quaility"... as in they do not apply the seal with a steamroller.

Even though it extends the life of the structure itself, I do agree it is a nuisance. If anything, OKC should seriously consider white-topping. It's expensive at first, but the life of the street lasts MUCH longer than asphalt or even asphalt with oil and chip seal.

Everyone, these road complaint threads are starting to pile up. Perhaps part of the problem is you are taking your case here to a message board when it clearly resides with the City of OKC. Take your case there, or complain to the city manager.

Rover, as I have explained before, oftentimes the city will extend the life of the arterial by applying and oil and chip seal to the surface of the street. It drastically reduces the chance of a pothole or buckling, and is more resistant to inclement weather. It is rough, and the way it is applied is difficult to make it "good quaility"... as in they do not apply the seal with a steamroller.

Even though it extends the life of the structure itself, I do agree it is a nuisance. If anything, OKC should seriously consider white-topping. It's expensive at first, but the life of the street lasts MUCH longer than asphalt or even asphalt with oil and chip seal.

Whatever the method or materials it is just poorly done. I travel to third world countries with better streets. And this was a fairly new street they messed up. Whoever did it needs to be banned from doing more jobs. They are obviously unqualified.

How can we find out who had the contract and how can we publicize their ineptness? Then we need to name the person responsible in the city who authorized their use and the one who signed off on the finished product. They need exposed to light.

Whatever the method or materials it is just poorly done. I travel to third world countries with better streets. And this was a fairly new street they messed up. Whoever did it needs to be banned from doing more jobs. They are obviously unqualified.

How can we find out who had the contract and how can we publicize their ineptness? Then we need to name the person responsible in the city who authorized their use and the one who signed off on the finished product. They need exposed to light.

Agreed! I've contacted the city about bad things happening on road construction projects and had a little bit of success, but it was painful getting to the right people and actually having them do something about it. It'd be fantastic if the city gave a cr*p about how roads are repaired or created, but it does seem like they don't a lot of the time. We, as citizens, have limited abilities to change this kind of thing, which is sad. I'd bet that no matter how much light was poured on these pathetic contractors, they'll *still* get contracts from the city/county/state.

How could we change things so that bad contractors are known about and actually have punitive action taken? Don't know, don't know if there is a way since that's all such an internal process...

A start would be what okclee suggested - post all construction projects for the city on their website, start/end dates, contractors, cost, etc.

Agreed! I've contacted the city about bad things happening on road construction projects and had a little bit of success, but it was painful getting to the right people and actually having them do something about it. It'd be fantastic if the city gave a cr*p about how roads are repaired or created, but it does seem like they don't a lot of the time. We, as citizens, have limited abilities to change this kind of thing, which is sad. I'd bet that no matter how much light was poured on these pathetic contractors, they'll *still* get contracts from the city/county/state.

How could we change things so that bad contractors are known about and actually have punitive action taken? Don't know, don't know if there is a way since that's all such an internal process...

A start would be what okclee suggested - post all construction projects for the city on their website, start/end dates, contractors, cost, etc.

Very true. Politics and.......money.

Even though it extends the life of the structure itself, I do agree it is a nuisance. If anything, OKC should seriously consider white-topping. It's expensive at first, but the life of the street lasts MUCH longer than asphalt or even asphalt with oil and chip seal.

If I'm not mistaken, I thought a legitimate reason for using asphalt over concrete in many areas of OKC is because of the soft soil, which leads to excessive cracking and shifting, making the concrete just as expensive or even more in the long run. (Not saying that every road should be asphalt. There's clearly an excessive amount of cost cutting going on with many of these new roads, and I seriously doubt that most areas of OKC cannot support concrete)

Good point about the soil bbhil. It seems like that problem could be solved by just going deeper though. Ever hear of problems with European freeways regarding bad cracks? Nope, primarily because their roads are several feet thick compared to perhaps a foot here (and they give a crap lol).

Even if that is the reason cited for asphalt being the predominant material used here, I'd rather have cracked concrete in 30 or 40 years that is still relatively smooth than have literally buckled and warped asphalt in 5 to 10 years.

Ever hear of problems with European freeways regarding bad cracks? Nope, primarily because their roads are several feet thick compared to perhaps a foot here (and they give a crap lol).

I'd rather have cracked concrete in 30 or 40 years that is still relatively smooth than have literally buckled and warped asphalt in 5 to 10 years.

Having some first hand experience with the government, citizens cant keep on demanding lower taxes (tax cuts, tax credits, smaller government) and expect to get the same sort of service.

If you want European or Jap. roads you will have to pay the same taxes they do.

Having some first hand experience with the government, citizens cant keep on demanding lower taxes (tax cuts, tax credits, smaller government) and expect to get the same sort of service.

If you want European or Jap. roads you will have to pay the same taxes they do.
Thats not entirely true, but your general premise has some truth to it.

Have to agree OUGrad, at least on the local level, voters seem more than happy within recent memory to keep shoveling more tax dollars the City's way (even when shoddy work is the result)....