Infrastructure gets poor marks
Engineers report gives state poor grades on infrastructure; says upgrades needed for state to keep pace economically
BY CHELYEN DAVIS
Date published: 10/16/2009
BY CHELYEN DAVIS
RICHMOND--A state association of engineers has graded Virginia's infrastructure a D+ and says elected officials must commit sustainable, long-term funding for the state to remain economically competitive.
The Virginia chapter of the American Society of Civil Engineers spent the past year evaluating data on Virginia's dams, roads, bridges, wastewater-treatment plants, schools, ports and other infrastructure.
The results, the group says, show that Virginia is failing to adequately maintain its aging infrastructure, in large part by failing to provide a steady stream of money to pay for such maintenance that's not subject to annual allocation decisions by legislators.
If the state continues to ignore infrastructure needs, they said, it will be less economically competitive against other states with more modern systems.
"If we don't address it we're going to be left behind," said Virginia ASCE president Tom Fitzgerald. "You can't just assume [infrastructure] is going to last forever . We can keep ignoring this stuff, but the cost to fix it once it fails is 10 times as much."
Fitzgerald said Virginia sorely needs dedicated, reliable funding for infrastructure maintenance, as well as comprehensive planning for long-term infrastructure needs.
"Our problem is failure to implement and failure to fund in Virginia," he said, calling the lack of money "a failure of political leadership."
The difficulty with funding is that raising taxes and fees is never popular. No one wants to pay more in gas taxes or higher water bills.
But Fitzgerald said he believes in users of infrastructure paying for it.
"Politicians can say they're going to fund something, but where are they going to get the money? It comes from us," he said.
He added that maintaining and improving infrastructure is critical to preserving the strength of America.
"Unless we invest in our infrastructure, we're not going to have that," Fitzgerald said.
The ASCE hopes its report will help educate Virginians about the problem, and that people can then push state and local officials to spend more. The ASCE itself doesn't have a political arm, Fitzgerald said, and doesn't lobby legislators, preferring to simply present facts.
More than 20 engineers volunteered to do research for the report, and they also got elected officials, transportation employees and other experts to participate.
|
No infrastructure in Virginia got better grade than B- in the report by the state chapter of the ASCE, and most areas fared far worse. Here are grades with some comments from the report:
AVIATION: C+
Investments at Reagan National and Dulles airports have helped meet increasing demand, but more must be done at other airports.
BRIDGES: C
Twenty-three percent of Virginia's bridges and culverts are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete, and more than half the state's bridges are reaching the end of their design life span. Virginia has some of the oldest bridges in the nation.
DAMS: D-
More than 1,400 dams were added to the state's inventory after new safety regulations were enacted in 2008. The report says 50,000 people may live in potential danger zones for dam failures. It could cost up to $220 million to bring regulated dams into compliance with safety standards.
DRINKING WATER: C-
Virginia's 2,944 regulated drinking-water systems are becoming overused and outdated. In 2007, the state had more than 880 violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act, affecting about 900,000 people. The report says it would cost about $6 billion to upgrade water systems over the next 15 years, and water bills could increase by up to 80 percent to pay for the work.
ENERGY: C-
Virginia makes a lot of its own energy but relies on coal for about 40 percent of that energy. The growing demand for cleaner alternative energy sources makes it likely Virginia will need to find other sources in the future.
PARKS: B-
State parks drew more than 7 million people and generated $157 million in tourism dollars in 2006. But the report says Virginia needs 12,000 additional acres of parkland to meet high demand.
PORTS AND NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS: C+
Ports in Hampton Roads benefit from being able to create their own revenue, as they're such an economic engine. But they still need more investment to remain an important economic hub.
RAIL AND TRANSIT: C-
Transit ridership is up, as is rail freight, and both need investment.
ROADS: D-
Increasing congestion is "choking major urban areas and is having a negative impact on businesses, commuters and tourists," the report says. By 2025, maintenance and capital needs are expected to be more than $200 billion, while revenues to pay for them are expected to be $95 billion.
SCHOOLS: D+
School enrollment is expected to grow 7 percent by 2016, and 46 percent of schools are more than 40 years old. More new schools are needed, but state and local revenues are declining.
SOLID WASTE: C
State's solid waste facilities will be at capacity within 20 years. It's expected to cost more than $175,000 per acre to close a full landfill, and $250,000 an acre to build a new one. The report says the state needs to plan for how to deal with that.
STORMWATER: D+
Thirty-four percent of stormwater systems in the state are more than 50 years old and 29 percent are 25 to 50 years old. Localities are investing only 25 percent of the $200 million is needed annually just to maintain them.
WASTEWATER: D+
By 2020, the report estimates, 45 percent of the water and sewer pipes in Virginia will need replacing or renovation.
Report card: ascevirginia.org/Lists/Announcements/Attachments/21/Summary%20Sheet2.pdf |
|
Date published: 10/16/2009
Most recent reader comments:
Owners of large, expensive homes have
(posted by
Mandrake
, Oct. 17, 2009 4:33 pm)  
a higher tax assessment and pay higher taxes than a small, less expensive home. Most are more energy efficient than small homes. So what's the beef?
subdivisions with expensive homes are typically on larger lots meaning less density. It seems to me that large homes are better for the environment and the economy than smaller homes.
So, let's build more McMansion and no more shotgun shacks!
we can build McMansions but if we charge
(posted by
larryg
, Oct. 17, 2009 10:42 am)  
proffers for infrastructure - we make them "unaffordable"
this is sort of like saying charging for water/sewer hookups make a house
"unaffordable" - NOT!
but when new houses need new roads and new schools and libraries - we
say charging for those things means people cannot afford their
McMansions anymore.
then the 'no mo tax" contingent thinks we have have more people and
more cars and more homes but we can pay for the infrastructure needs by
cutting waste & abuse..
“WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US!
welcome
(posted by
sixfeetunder
, Oct. 16, 2009 8:39 pm)  
to the commonwealth. a third world state we are.
sustainable, long-term funding
(posted by
derarzt
, Oct. 16, 2009 1:04 pm)  
means an increase in taxes. As long as the bridge I'm driving over holds up, & my drinking water remains potable... But what if they don't? Candidates for office will tell me new taxes aren't necessary, the funds can be wrung from "waste" in the government. Like, perhaps, their salaries?
Thanks Bill
(posted by
DeanFetterolf
, Oct. 16, 2009 11:48 am)  
We have our very own obstructionist Speaker of the House of Delegates, Bill Howell to thank for this mess. He has gutted VDOT, trampled education, and destroyed infrastructure funding just so he could sell our roads to foreign companies who had to take back their illegal campaign contributions a few years ago.
|