Association of Idaho Public Works Professionals...S:\Public Works\DIVISIONS\Administration\Admin...
Transcript of Association of Idaho Public Works Professionals...S:\Public Works\DIVISIONS\Administration\Admin...
S:\Public Works\DIVISIONS\Administration\Admin Information\AIPWP\Fall 2011 Meeting\Minutes 11-3-11 FINAL.doc Page 1 of 3
Association of Idaho Public Works Professionals Fall Conference Meeting Minutes
November 3, 2011
President Michael Fuss brought the meeting to order. A plaque of appreciation was presented to John Tensen, P.E., City of Boise for his dedicated service to AIPWP as former president. Ken Harward of the Association of Idaho Cities (AIC) thanked all the attendees for their contribution to building their communities. Three events are coming soon:
November 18, 2011, 10 AM-12 Noon, meeting (he will send an email invitation) December 9, 2011 – AIC Legislative Committee Meeting at the Capitol in the large
auditorium – water rights issues, airport zoning issues (to repeal ITD’s zoning right and give them to the city), stormwater issues and how to pay for them, transportation funding (unlikely to have increased revenue for 2012-13),
June 20-22, 2012 - AIC Annual Conference at Boise Center on the Grove – would like to collect ideas for workshops
Secretary/Treasurer Tom Barry presented the Treasurer’s Report. (See Attachment A) As of November 3, 2011, the balance of the AIPWP checking account is $4,956.58. No dues collections were made for 2011. Dues notices will be sent out in January 2012. Dues are determined by the number of employees in the PW departments. In 2010, 64 cities had AIPWP membership. All information is on the AIPWP website for those members not able to attend the meetings. The following topics were presented (See Attachment B): ACEC Report Card (see Atttachment C) Presented by Tim Haener, P.E., J-U-B
ACEC represents about 60 companies in Idaho and has eight legislative liaisons Presented an update on the issues they have been dealing with over the past year. Presented a brief update on issues they are currently dealing with and those slated for
the future Question on Changes in ITD selection process (mini solicitation). They may use a
selection committee for certain term agreement projects ($150,000-$500,000). Cities should voice their opinion by contacting Jerry Flatz at LHTAC and Leo Hickman and Holly McClure at ITD. The committee will have an ITD representative, LHTAC representative and a local representative. ACEC will be working on this issue
Transportation Safety and Bridge Rehabilitation Presented by Donn Carnahan, P.E., Keller & Associates
Safety PowerPoint presentation (See attachment D)
S:\Public Works\DIVISIONS\Administration\Admin Information\AIPWP\Fall 2011 Meeting\Minutes 11-3-11 FINAL.doc Page 2 of 3
o Highway Safety Manual (HSM) available – new edition, 3 volumes o Bruce Drewes of LHTAC will be doing HSM Lite training soon in Idaho o FHWA Road Safety Audits (RSA) o ITD – Road Safety Audit Manual –The North Overland Road, Burley project
was provided as a practical example of safety improvements advocated by the manual
Bridge Rehabilitation PowerPoint Presentation (see Attachment E) o Bridge Rehabilitation
Can be cost-effective solution Recommend going with higher contingency Bridge will still need to be replaced
o Four examples of bridge projects were discussed Idaho T2 Center Road Scholar & Master Program Presented by Bruce Drewes, Idaho T2 Center Manager, LHTAC
Local Highway Efficiency Summit PowerPoint Presentation (see Attachment F) o Personnel costs are largest expense – most have various education/training
needs o Idaho T2 – Federal and local funding to provide training and technical
assistance to all local highway jurisdictions in Idaho 2010 LTAP/TTAP Program Assessment Report (see Attachment G)
o Training opportunities: Road Scholar/Road Master Program (see Attachment H) Safety Fest – very beneficial training for employees at no charge in
several cities around Idaho o Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) – established minimum retro-
reflective requirements in the 2009 MUTCD – is proposing to change/remove compliance dates. Regulations are still in place so minimums are still required. There will be a MUTCD course this spring.
o ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act – sidewalks are an issue but facilities must also be compliant. There will be ADA compliance training this spring. Organizations with 50+ employees must have an inventory and compliance plan for facilities.
o New FHWA program called Every Day Counts (EDC) – initiatives that will reduce construction time/costs on projects and explore new technologies (from 5 to 16). December 15, 1st national training event (7 locations) for an EDC
training activity to include web-conferencing and a discussion period with ITD, LHTAC and engineering organization subject matter experts.
Other 2012 training dates include Feb 16, Apr 19, Jun 21, Aug 16 Notices for these classes will come out this week ITD will adopt 12 of these technologies
Transportation Funding
S:\Public Works\DIVISIONS\Administration\Admin Information\AIPWP\Fall 2011 Meeting\Minutes 11-3-11 FINAL.doc Page 3 of 3
Presented by Mark Bowen, P.E., CH2M Hill
PowerPoint presentation (See Attachment I) o Discussed the Transportation Funding Task Force Study mandated by the
governor UPRR Proposal Regarding STOP/YIELD Signs Presented by Michael Fuss, P.E., AIPWP President
Change in MUTCD – UPRR has approached ITD and local agencies (Bill Intz) that if local agencies will provide the signs, UPRR will install and maintain the signs. According to Idaho Code, railroad crossings are required to have stop signs.
Open Forum
ASCE Infrastructure Report Robyn Mattison of Forsgren Associates - PowerPoint Presentation (see Attachment J)
o ASCE has a national Report Card o Undertaking an ASCE Idaho Report Card o Survey has been sent out with 46 responses so far o Questions, responses and grades were discussed
Idaho Overall Composite Scores: Drinking Water C+, Wastewater B- o Fact Sheet will be written and released in February/March 2012 o Open discussion suggested that a higher weight be assigned to
Repaired/Replaced Annually and Condition categories
McCall Public Works Director o LHTAC can provide free pavement management software to communities of
less than 5,000. o Proposed Amendment to Idaho Code (see Attachment K)
Water rights issues regarding land application – proposal to add #8 Rapid infiltration credits may be beneficial Suggestion offered to delete remaining language after “disposal of
effluent” in first sentence. Idaho Water Users may have concerns about that.
Discussion on who really owns the water once it reaches treatment Meeting adjourned at 12:25 PM Respectfully Submitted, Thomas H. Barry, P.E.G. Secretary/Treasurer
S:\Public Works\DIVISIONS\Administration\Admin Information\AIPWP\Fall 2011 Meeting\Treasurer's Report 11-03-11.doc
Association of Idaho Public Works Professionals Fall Conference, November 3, 2011
Secretary/Treasurer’s Report Checking Account: Beginning balance as of June 22, 2011 $5,034.32 Receipts $0.00 Expenditures $145.95
Net balance as of November 3, 2011 $4,956.58
Expenditure Summary: Date Amount To Purpose 10/21/11 $3.00 Wells Fargo Fee for sheet of checks (3 per sheet) 10/25/11 $42.95 Bulldog Shirt
Shop Plaque for John Tensen
10/25/11 $100.00 IRS Reduced User Fee TOTAL $145.95 Type of Checks:
3 per page sheets @ $3.00 each
OR 150 checks @ $29.36
Dues Collection: Letters out first part of January, 2012 Membership dues collected during February, 2012 Dues per city are determined by the number of Public Works employees:
o > 20 employees $40.00 o 6-20 employees $20.00 o ≤ 5 employees $10.00 o Dues are collected from only one active member per city. Additional
membership is at no charge. Dues Statistics
o In 2010, 64 cities with AIPWP membership o Total collected for 2010 $1,240.00 o No dues collected in 2011
Respectfully Submitted, Thomas H. Barry, P.E.G. Secretary/Treasurer
AIPWP FALL CONFERENCE November 3, 2011
City of Nampa Fire Training Facility 300 West Railroad Street
TOPIC
8:00 am 8:30 am Sign In
8:30 am 8:45 am Welcome and Introductions Michael Fuss, P.E., AIPWP President
8:45 am 8:50 am Treasurer’s Report Tom Barry, P.E.G., AIPWP Secretary
8:50 am 9:15 am ACEC Report Card Tim Haener, P.E., J-U-B
9:15 am 10:00 am Transportation Safety and Bridge Rehabilitation Donn Carnahan, P.E., Keller & Associates
10:00 am 10:15 am BREAK Sponsored by Keller & Associates
10:15 am 10:45 am Idaho T2 Center Road Scholar & Master Program Bruce Drewes, Idaho T2 Center Manager, LHTAC
10:45 am 11:30 am Transportation Funding Mark Bowen, P.E., CH2M Hill
11:30 am 11:45 am UPRR Proposal Regarding STOP/YIELD Signs Michael Fuss, P.E., AIPWP President
11:45 am 12:00 pm Open Discussion
12:00 pm Adjourn
AIPWP FALL CONFERENCE
Transportation Safety
November 3, 2011
Presenter:Donn Carnahan, P.E. ‐ Keller Associates
““NewNew”” Transportation Transportation Safety InformationSafety Information
Highway Safety Manual (HSM)
1st Edition, 3 Volumes
AASHTO Publication
Resource to provide safety knowledge
Provide tools in a useful form
Facilitate improved decision making
Quantitative information
HSM assembles current information and methodologies
Convey safety knowledge for use by a broad spectrum of users
2
HSM Overview and OrganizationHSM Overview and Organization
Part A - Introduction
Part B - Safety Management Process
Part C - Predictive Methods
Part D - Crash Modification Factors
3
FHWA Road Safety Audits (RSA)FHWA Road Safety Audits (RSA) Excerpts from 2010 Highway Safety Summit April 28, 2010 by Lance Johnson, FHWA
Definition: An RSA is a formal safety performance examination of an existing or future road or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team. The team considers the safety of all road users.
Benefits Reduces the number and severity of crashes
Promotes awareness of safe practices
Process to identify and address problems
Considers human factors and multimodal issues
Low cost & time investment
Concerns & Barriers New process
Expectation of immediate results
Results in additional project costs
Liability exposure
4
RSA National ActivityRSA National Activity
5
Excerpts from 2010 Highway Safety Summit April 28, 2010 by Lance Johnson FHWA
RSA ProcessRSA Process
6
Excerpts from 2010 Highway Safety Summit April 28, 2010 by Lance Johnson FHWA
Resources and ReferencesResources and References
7
Excerpts from 2010 Highway Safety Summit April 28, 2010 by Lance Johnson FHWA
RSA ResourcesRSA Resources
Website updates http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa
RSA Quarterly Newsletter
RSA Toolkit CD
RSA Guidelines
RSA Pedestrian Guidelines
RSA Case Studies
RSA Tribal Case Studies
RSA Software
RSA NHI Course (#380069)
RSA Peer-to-Peer Program
8
Excerpts from 2010 Highway Safety Summit April 28, 2010 by Lance Johnson FHWA
ITD ITD –– Road Safety Audit ManualRoad Safety Audit Manual Executive Summary
Road Safety Audits (RSAs) have become a proven countermeasure for improving safety on roadways. The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) plans to utilize this countermeasure to reduce the number of crashes and the severity of crashes on Idaho’s roads.
The RSA process is a formal, independent safety evaluation on planned or existing roadways by an experienced and multidisciplinary team of specialists. The team looks for existing and/or potential safety hazards that may affect any type of roadusers and identifies possible countermeasures to address those safety issues. The RSA team is composed of transportation professionals and individuals with special safety knowledge from federal, state and local agencies and may include engineers, law enforcement, first responders, maintenance and other disciplines that may provide valuable input for a section of road.
9
The following guidelines formalize ITD’s procedures on RSA’s. It contains the steps for conducting an RSA on an existing road or project. The principal purpose of the RSA is to identify potential safety issues that may be caused by the design, or some operational aspect of the facility and is meant to be proactive. It should consider all road users such as drivers, pedestrian, motorcyclists and bicyclists. The RSA is not meant to rank projects or to determine compliance with standards.
The key to a successful RSA is capturing essential safety and operational issues. The prioritized recommendations are low cost suggestions that generally pertain to traffic signs, striping, rumble strips, bike and pedestrian safety enhancements, sight distance and other safety issues.
The guidelines presented in this manual utilize information from the NCHRP SYNTHESIS 36 & 321, FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines 2006 and from Nevada’s Department of Transportation’s RSA Procedures and Guidelines 2009.
RecommendationsRecommendations Short term (within six months) Medium term (within six months to three years) Long term (three years or more)
10
North Overland Road, Burley North Overland Road, Burley Example of safety improvements, more access - less conflict Project Goals: Improve existing pavement condition and eliminate congestion points
11
After
Before
Three Alternatives were Developed for EvaluationThree Alternatives were Developed for Evaluation
Traditional TWLT lane with combined access where possible
“Limited Access” Alternative Hybrid using parts of frontage roads and off-system improvements
“Median” Alternative Right-in / right-out driveways only, with opportunities for U-turns.
12
13
Excerpt from Concept Report, January 2007“Median Alternative”
Conflict AnalysisConflict Analysis
14
Conflict SummaryConflict Summary
15
After
Before
After
Before
ConclusionConclusion
“New” Highway Safety Manual (HSM)
FHWA Road Safety Audits (RSA)
ITD – Road Safety Audit Manual
Practical example of safety improvements – North Overland Road, Burley
Questions?Questions?
16
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Bridge RehabilitationAIPWP Conference November 3, 2011
Presented by: Donn Carnahan, P.E.
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Bridge Rehabilitation Can be a cost‐effective solution – especially with current economic and funding situation
Budget a higher contingency than for new construction
Don’t forget replacement will eventually be needed
Today – Four Bridge Rehabilitation Examples 16th Avenue Overpass, Nampa
Igo Overpass, Power County
Custer Street Bridge, Pocatello
Snake River Bridge, Blackfoot
East Parkway Corridor Plan
1616THTH Avenue Overpass, NampaAvenue Overpass, Nampa
History / Facts 766 feet long
58 feet wide
11 spans
Built in 1969
69.9 sufficiency, structurally deficient
8” cast‐in‐place Portland cement deck
Open steel girder system
Concrete piers and pier caps
Overpass crosses the UPRR tracks
4‐lane, 2‐way structure
Vehicular and pedestrian traffic
Substructure (sacrificial anodes) rehabilitation in 2003
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Problems / Investigation Joints leaking
Chain drag method ‐ 17% deck delamination
Upper 0.75 – 1.25 inches of deck had chloride ion concentration; exceeds American Concrete Institute's allowable content of 0.85 pounds chloride per cubic yard
Reinforcing steel corroding
1616THTH Avenue Overpass, NampaAvenue Overpass, Nampa
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Options / Solution Replace Deck
Deck Overlay
Rehabilitate Deck
1616THTH Avenue Overpass, NampaAvenue Overpass, Nampa
Annual Cost for Rehabilitation Alternatives
Action Considered Service
Life (Yr) Capital Cost
Salvage Value
Annual Cost
Alternative No. 1, Rehabilitate Deck 25 $1,914,000 0 $149,732 Alternative No. 2, Replace Deck 50 $3,121,000 $1,560,500 $215,708 Alternative No. 3, Deck Overlay 40 $2,599,000 $974,620 $185,552
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Igo Overpass – Power County
History / Facts 181 feet long
30 feet wide
Built in 1935
Concrete girders and deck
Concrete piers and caps
45° skew
3 span, center span over railroad tracks
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Igo Overpass – Power County
Problems / Investigation Power County Highway District decided to replace
Igo Overpass
The rate at which the Districty was accumulating money was only keeping up with increase in construction costs
Likelihood of receiving full funding to replace the structure was low
Keller was asked for other ideas; goal to complete adequate rehabilitation to extend the life of the bridge until a new bridge is constructed in 15 years
11 core samples, 28 chloride tests
Only one sample exceeded recommended maximum
Microscopic analysis showed only mild to moderate ASR, has not weakened concrete significantly
Difficult to determine amount of deck delamination
Used ground penetrating radar to penetrate asphalt and map delaminated areas of deck
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Igo Overpass – Power County
Options / Solution Construct New Bridge
Rehabilitate Bridge‐ Repair deck surface‐ Repair beam cracks‐ Improve drainage‐ Replace wing walls
Cost EffectivenessAnnual Cost for Rehabilitation
Action Considered Service
Life (Yr) Capital Cost
Salvage Value
Annual Cost
Rehabilitate the old bridge 15 $546,000 0 $56,182 Construct a new bridge 50 $1,150,000 0 $60,283
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Custer Street Bridge, Pocatello
History / Facts 56 feet long
58 feet wide
Over the Portneuf River
7” cast‐in‐place deck with 2” asphalt overlay wearing surface
Built in 1953
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Custer Street Bridge, Pocatello
Problems/ Investigation Deck in poor condition
Exposed reinforcing steel
Sidewalk and curbing deteriorated
Deck is 77% delaminated
High concentration of soluble chlorides
Chloride concentration accelerated corrosion of reinforcing steel
Concrete has alkali silica reaction (ASR) and is weakening the strength of concrete
Bearing plates corroded
Concrete was incompetent through core sample
Delamination at ½” to 1” below the surface
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Options / Solution Reconstruct superstructure
Repair deck only
Replace deck and repair girders‐ Replace deck (Fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP))
considered‐ Repair girders‐ Replace bearing plates
Custer Street Bridge, Pocatello
ANNUAL COSTS FOR REHABILITATION ALTERNATIVES
Alternative Service Life
(Yr) Capital
Cost Salvage Value
Annual Cost
Alt 1 – Repair Deck Only 10 $234,000 $92,000 $24,803 Alt 2 – Replace Deck and Repair Girders 30 $259,000 0 $18,803 Alt 3 – Reconstruct Superstructure 50 $306,000 0 $19,412
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Snake River Bridge, Blackfoot
History / Facts 483 feet long
24 feet wide roadway, 4 feet sidewalk
Built in 1936
4 spans
7 ½ inch concrete deck over steel floor beams
4 spans
Over the Snake River
47.5 sufficiency, structurally deficient
Structure has more freeboard than upstream Highway 26 bridge
Regionally unique truss type bridge, Warren Camelback Truss
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Snake River Bridge, Blackfoot
Problems / Investigation Deck in poor condition
Piers in poor condition, large cracks
Parapet in poor condition (historic)
Alkali‐silica reaction (ASR) detected in all samples
High chloride content found
Approach slabs have vigorous ASR
Approach slabs less than adequate compaction
Concrete parapet in advanced stage of deterioration
Vehicle damage to lateral brace
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Snake River Bridge, Blackfoot
Solutions Extended rehabilitation ($4 million)
Replace bridge ($10 million)
Extended rehabilitation and new 2‐lane parallel bridge ($12 million)
Basic rehabilitation ($700,000)
Limited budget
Replace approach slabs
Bridge deck rehabilitation
East Parkway Corridor Plan
Take Aways Bridge rehabilitation can be a cost‐effective solution
Budget a higher contingency than for new construction
Replacement will eventually be needed
Questions?
Bruce DrewesManager
LHTAC/Idaho T2 Center
Training to Improve Administrative and Operational Efficiency
Demographic of Idaho Transportation Idaho Transportation Department
Maintains 5,400 miles State Highway System Local Highway Jurisdictions
Maintains 34,000 miles of Local highway system
Definition Idaho Law, Title 40 defines “Highway” as mean roads, streets, alleys
and bridges laid out or established for the public or dedicated or abandoned to the public. Highways shall include necessary culverts, sluices, drains, ditches, waterways, embankments, retaining walls, bridges, tunnels, grade separation structures, roadside improvements, adjacent lands or interests lawfully acquired, pedestrian facilities, and any other structures, works or fixtures incidental to the preservation or improvement of the highways. Roads laid out and recorded as highways, by order of a board of commissioners, and all roads used as such for a period of five (5) years, provided they shall have been worked and kept up at the expense of the public, or located and recorded by order of a board of commissioners, are highways.
Local Highway Jurisdictions 44 Counties 55 Highway Districts 180 Cities
We don’t know what we don’t know
Education of employees and administration occur through a number of methods: On the job training Conferences and events (Associations and member sponsored events)
Other outside organization (Vocational Technical Schools, Colleges and University)
Idaho Technology Transfer Center (Idaho T2)
On the Job Training The least costly type of training. Effective in maintaining the current process or practice.
Specific job related training Both the good practices as well as the bad are taught. Standard often will be modified through each training
Conferences and events All four Associations have conferences and provide education opportunities to those in attendance (City, County, Highway District and County Engineers and Road Superintendents).
Web conferences (American Public Works Association (APWA), National Association of County Engineers (NACE), Federal Highway Administration and Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP).
Other conferences (Idaho Asphalt Conference, Roads and Streets Conference and the Association of Idaho Cities Conference)
Other outside organizations Vocational Technical Schools:
Provide some general maintenance and management education on an individual need.
Colleges and University:Specific advanced educational opportunities for the professional level staff as identified by the individual.
Idaho T2 Federally and Local Agency Funded Located at Local Highway Technical Assistance Council Charged with providing Training and Technical Assistance to all of the Local Highway Jurisdiction in Idaho.
In 2010 the Center provided 136 courses to 2,538 students. The Safety Fest of the Northwest is held in Pocatello and Lewiston.
3.5 FTEs
Other programs within the T2 Program
Video/DVD lending library (1000 titles) Road Scholars Program(basic level)
Nine Core Courses Two Electives
Road Master Program (upper level) Eight Core Courses Two Elective
Road ScholarCity of Nampa
City of Hayden
Gem County
Lakes Highway District
City of Emmett
Road MastersNez Perce County
Gem County
Bingham CountyCity of Chubbuck
City of Hailey
Pay for Performance City of Nampa
Complete the Road Scholar= 3% pay increase(98%) Complete the Road Master = 4% pay increase(98%)
Value Better understanding of Seal Coating principles. Purchase newer and more efficient equipment. Reduction of waste, improved efficiency and reduction of complaints and claims= $$$ Saved.
Don’t get left holding the bag!
Questions?
Mark BowenMark BowenJune 23, 2011June 23, 2011
Transportation Funding In Idaho
Mark Bowen
Nov. 3, 2011
Idaho has 36,870 lane miles of local paved roads
4
Local Paved Roads
People Per Lane Mile
75
61
71
17
56
18
13
Governor’s Task Force on Modernizing Transportation Funding
December 2, 2009
Thomas R. Warne, PETom Warne and Associates
Situation: Transportation Faces Historic Policy Issues
Financing the System
Climate Change
Situation: Capacity Improvements Don’t Meet Demands• Idaho‐from 1990 to 2007Population grew 48.6%Vehicle miles travelled grew by 55%Roadway capacity grew by 3.3%
Situation: The System is Over 50 Years Old and Wearing Out
Situation: The Purchasing Power of the 18.4¢ Federal Tax Lags
Situation: EPA Finds GHGs as a Significant Public ThreatEPA finding that greenhouse gas emissions pose a significant threat to public health and safetyIncludes CO2
Rulemaking would allow them to regulate CO2emissionsUnknown but significant impacts on transportation projects‐particularly capacity projects
Situation: TIGER Discretionary Grants Are Over SubscribedTeam created to expedite $1.5 Billion in Discretionary Grants
Grants will range from $20 Million to $300 Million
Competitive application acceptance process1,361 applications receivedTotal value of the applications‐$57 billion (38 times available funding)
• (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery‐TIGER)
Financing the System: National Initiatives
National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission
National Transportation Infrastructure Finance Commission
Financing the System‐National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission
Reduce funding categories from over 108 to 10Increase the motor fuels taxTransition to a vehicle‐mileage taxStreamline environmental processesLeverage Public‐Private‐Partnerships
Financing the System – National Transportation Infrastructure Finance CommissionConsider implementation of multiple financing optionsTransition to a vehicle mileage tax10¢ gas tax and 15¢ on dieselTolling provisions
Situation: Late Authorizations Create Programming Problems
States have no idea about future funding levels and are unable to plan ahead
States cannot embark on large projects due to uncertainty of funding levels
Capacity demands continue to increase. Funds are diverted from maintenance to capacity projects
Situation: Probable Outcomes of the New Transportation BillNo significant increase in Federal funding
More regulation and oversight
Climate change impacts
EPA with a greater role in transportation
Less flexibility on how money is spent
May not be a six‐year bill
Summary: Federal Funding Implications for Idaho Idaho cannot solely rely on the federal
government or programs to solve their
funding problems
Idaho should be engaged in the climate change debate
ITD will have to respond to more federal regulation
Summary
Federal Aid will not substantially increase and will be fraught with more regulationStates are taking the initiative in solving their own transportation funding challengesCitizens are willing to pay for transportation if there is a plan that includes projects, a schedule and a limit on the tax increase
Task Force Recommendations
• Funding Need
Task Force Recommendations
• Funding Need• Highway Cost Allocation Study
Task Force Recommendations
• Funding Need• Highway Cost Allocation Study• Prioritized Additional Revenue Sources (The Matrix)1. Fuel Tax (1 cent = $8.9M net to HDA)2. Wholesale Fuel Sales Tax ( 1% = $22.5M to HDA)3. Index Fuel Tax (CPI – 1996 to 2010 = $73.8M)4. Rental Car Ex Tax (3% = $1M to HDA)5. Registration Fees (10% increase = $5M PV only)
Task Force Recommendations
• Funding Need• Highway Cost Allocation Study• Prioritized Additional Revenue Sources (The Matrix)
• Allow Local Jurisdictions to Fund Public Transportation1. User Fees and Fares2. Local Option Sales Tax
Additional Task Force Recommendations
• Legislative Germaine Committees to examine the HDA Distribution Formula– Encourage Increased Efficiencies
Where Are We Today 2011?
• Federal Level–Divided Congress (Uncertainty is Certain)–Continuing Resolutions –American Jobs Act (Ongoing Debate)
• Senate’s Version = – $50B for Transportation– $10B Infrastructure Bank– 0.7% surtax on incomes over $1M– Little chance of passage
Where Are We Today 2011?
• Federal Level• State Level
– 2012• Redistricting has much attention• No significant Transportation Legislation
– Tough Economy• LHTAC structure reviews• Ballot Initiative on Local Option Tax (Idaho Voters for Local Control PAC has been established)
– 2013• Expect a comprehensive legislative package in concert with Task Force recommendations
– Gas Tax– Registration Fee– Bridge Safety
Idaho Transportation Funding
• Barriers to New Funding– Economy– Political Environment (no new taxes!)– Lack of Public Perception that there is a Problem– Lack of Trust at the Legislature (Efficiencies)
• ITD (Improved since 2008)• Locals
Transportation Funding In Idaho
Mark Bowen
Nov. 3, 2011
Questions?
Local Transportation FundingSurrounding State Comparison
Water & Wastewater Infrastructure
Robyn Mattison, P.E.Vice‐President, ASCE‐SIS
RoadmapReport Card Introduction
Survey
Survey Questions, Responses, & Grades
Summary
and
Overa
ll Grad
es
Your Thoughts
What’s Next?
ASCE Report Card
ASCE Idaho Report Card Goal
Assess the condition of our infrastructure and provide this information to the public and policy makers in an understandable way.
Subcommittees assigned for categories Transportation Water Resources
Dams, Levees Municipal Environment
Water, Wastewater Energy
Production, Transmission Public Facilities
Public Parks and Recreation, Schools
Survey Emailed or mailed to:
AIPWPs list Tim Wendland (DEQ) contacts
Idaho Rural Water Association
Responses received via email, mail, or on‐line.
No. of responses so far: 46 entities
Survey Questions and ResponsesQuestion:What is your service population?
Drinking Water441,000 people
Approximately 28% of Idaho’s population
(2010 Census)
Wastewater740,000 people
Approximately 47% of Idaho’s population
(2010 Census)
Survey Questions and ResponsesQuestion:Total length of distribution or collection lines (approximately)
Drinking Water Distribution
Total (miles) 2,578 3,176
Length of distribution or collection lines repaired/replaced annually
Total replaced/ 9.4 14.0Repaired annually (miles)
100 year pipe life 25.8 (36%) 31.7 (44%)D+ C‐
Wastewater Collection
Survey Questions and ResponsesQuestion:Condition ‐What is the general condition of your drinking water or wastewater system?
2.68
C+
Response Options
Grade
Excellent A – 4.0
Good B – 3.0
Fair C – 2.0
Poor D – 1.0
Failed F – 0.0
Drinking Water Wastewater
Weighted Result
Weighted Grade
2.81
B‐
Survey Questions and ResponsesQuestion:Capacity – Drinking water or wastewater system can support…
3.00
B
Response Options Grade
100% + long‐term growth
A – 4.0
100% + short‐term growth
B – 3.0
90% to 100% C – 2.0
80% to 90% D – 1.0
70% to 80% F – 0.0
Drinking Water Wastewater
Weighted Result
Weighted Grade
3.32
B+
Survey Questions and ResponsesQuestion:Operations Budget – The current budget is adequate for facility
maintenance, operations costs, and planned upgrades required for increasing capacity or meeting regulatory requirements.
3.36
B+
Response Options
Grade
I agree A – 4.0
I somewhat agree B – 3.0
I somewhat disagree
C – 2.0
I disagree D – 1.0
I strongly disagree F – 0.0
Drinking Water Wastewater
Weighted Result
Weighted Grade
2.99
B‐
Survey Questions and ResponsesQuestion:Drinking Water System – Source water…
2.61
C+
Response Options Grade
is extremely well protected and has no significant pollution sources. A – 4.0
is protected by significant and active source water protection program, but some pollution sources may exist
B – 3.0
has some protections but no significant and active source protection program.
C – 2.0
is not well protected, and there is clear evidence of substantial source water pollution.
D – 1.0
is largely unprotected and has serious contamination problems. F – 0.0
Weighted Result
Weighted Grade
Survey Questions and ResponsesQuestion:Collection System – In the last 10 years, what percent of your
sewer collection lines have you inspected using CCTV techniques?
2.86
B‐
Response Options
Grade
>80% A – 4.0
60% to 80% B – 3.0
40% to 60% C – 2.0
20% ‐ 40% D – 1.0
<20% F – 0.0
Weighted Result
Weighted Grade
Results SummaryWeighted Results
Drinking Water Wastewater
Repaired/Replaced Annually
Condition
CCTV
Capacity
Operations Budget
Source Water
Average (4.0 scale)
Grade
1.53/D+2.68/C+
3.36/B+2.61/C+
3.00/B
2.63C+
1.77/C‐2.81/B‐
2.99/B‐
2.86/B‐3.32/B+
2.75B‐
Your Thoughts? Should the 5 questions be weighted equally?
Is one more or less important in Idaho than another?
Is it fair to weigh the grades based on population? Large cities had a big impact on the grades
Are the grades given fairly? Should a “C” response actually be a “D” or “F”?
Our next step Develop Grades & Category Write‐up
Explain how the grades were developed Not as much detail as provided today
ASCE National Report Card Committee Review Goal to send to ASCE National by December 9, 2011
Release late February/early March Bound copies & online Media Event/Press Release IEF Legislative Gala