Inland Empire Infrastructure Report Card

INLAND EMPIRE INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD

An Overview

Mark Norton, P.E. Chair, I.E. Infrastructure Report Card Water Resources and Planning Mgr., SAWPA National Infrastructure Report Card

Need for Infrastructure Support in California Public works infrastructure expenditures – 1960’s: 20 percent of statewide spending – Today: Less than 3 percent State traffic congestion – 65% higher than national average – increasing by 10 percent annually Traffic congestion cost (per driver): – 50-140 hours a year – $2500 in wasted time and fuel Causes of Low Grades

State and local budget crises Population growth Voter opposition to infrastructure projects Continuing deterioration of an aging system Diversion of maintenance and growth funding for infrastructure security measures.

History 1998 – First National Report Card 2002 – Orange County Report Card – Los Angeles County Report Card 2003 – Inland Empire/San Bernardino and Riverside Counties Report Card – Kickoff meeting held in October 2003 for IE Report Card 2004 – Progress meeting held in June 2004 on IE Report Card 2005 – Inland Empire Report Card released in January 2005 – Orange County Report Card Update released – Los Angeles County Report Card Update released – ASCE National Report Card Update Released 2006 – State Infrastructure Report Card released in October 2006

Genesis of the IE Report Card

100+ public and private organizations invited Initial meetings – Focus goals and objectives – Develop methods/approach Processes were very similar to efforts in Los Angeles and Orange Counties Objectives Focus on Riverside and San Bernardino Counties

Report Card needs to be credible and defendable

Prepare an impartial assessment

To maintain consistency with the National Report Card

Build support for funding sources

Objectives (Con’t)

Do not re-invent the wheel! Use existing data Develop standard methodology but with flexibility Use recognized experts Focus is County-wide

Fundamental Assessment Criteria Condition

Capacity

Operations

Suggested Weighting Factor

Condition - 30% Capacity - 30% Operations - 30%

Discretionary - 10% Grading Criteria

Follow ASCE Report Card Methodology

Utilize grading criteria that public easily understands

Grading Criteria

A = 90-100% B = 80 - 89% C = 70 - 79% D = 41 - 69% F = 40% or lower The Grades Transportation D+ Severe capacity constraints along SR-91 and I-15

Bridge condition is overall good

Transit systems condition is good – Capacity is below average

Continued investment necessary to keep up with growth

School Facilities (K-12) C+ Increasingly expensive facilities are needed for growing enrollment

Proper maintenance of existing facilities will reduce future capital outlay costs

Need to modernize existing facilities Aviation A- Airports generally available Poised to meet anticipated demand requirements Infrastructure in good to excellent condition Maintenance funding sufficient Regulatory compliance satisfactory

Urban Runoff/ Flood Control

Over 50% of system is D nearing end of design life Major portions of flood control system has insufficient capacity Growth increases urban runoff volumes New stormwater regulations adds compliance needs Parks, Recreation & Open Space

Urban areas must be balanced with open C+ space, parks and recreation opportunities Regional systems are very beneficial Lack of maintenance funding is a concern Programs are vulnerable to funding cuts

Solid Waste

Permitted capacity B- – Riverside County 2025 – San Bernardino County 2018 Recycling programs have reduced waste delivered to landfills Support is needed to keep up with future growth Wastewater

Agencies are generally B- keeping up with needs Treatment plants provide baseline dry weather river flows Water recycling made difficult by high water quality standards Land application of biosolids prohibitions result in increasing cost

Water Increasing demands from growth C+ Water costs increase due to finding new pollutants Keys to success – Water storage – Recycled water – Groundwater management – Surface water management Funding is needed – Maintain and replace aging water infrastructure – Build facilities to deal with new pollutants Overall Average Grade

C Some Key Messages

Riverside and San Bernardino counties are among nation’s fastest growing Growth is outpacing infrastructure needed to support Infrastructure investment must be long term and sustained An additional $40 Billion is required for infrastructure needs over the next 10 years A Benchmark and a Call to Action This Inland Empire Infrastructure Report Card serves: – As a benchmark for tracking future progress – As a catalyst for taking necessary steps to sustain our infrastructure A dollar spent now can save $5 in future expenditures Milestones

Report card results shared with governing bodies and interested parties throughout the two county area.

ASCE National Conference on October 27-29, 2005 (Los Angeles) – Focus on infrastructure issues – Publicize all California report card efforts Organization

Coordinating Body

Executive Communications Committee Committee

Infrastructure Working Committees

Review Committees Coordinating Body

Report Card Chair Communications Chair Infrastructure Working Committee Chairs Executive Committee Members

Executive Committee Objectives

“Supports the infrastructure coordination group in providing overall review of the report card and providing interaction with press and other media in discussing the report card results” Executive Committee Name Organization Mark Norton Water Resources & Planning Mgr., Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority Bill Green Sr. Vice President, RBF Consulting Rick Bishop Exec. Director, Western Riverside Council of Govts. Eric Haley Exec. Director, Riverside County Transportation Commission Norm King Exec. Director, San Bernardino Associated Govts. Bob Bein Past President ASCE National Bob Wolf President, Germania Construction and Former California Transportation Commissioner Tom Mullen Former Riverside County Supervisor April Morris President, Associated Engineers Mark Matsumoto Dean of Engineering, Univ of Calif. Riverside Barbara Cram Riordan California Air Resources Board, Former San Bernardino County Supervisor Ron Roberts President, Southern California Association of Governments Infrastructure Working Committee Objectives

Include technical experts from field Gather data Compile and analyze the data Develop a summary report Determine initial grade Develop final infrastructure committee report Infrastructure Working Committees Subject Chairperson Transportation Peter Bucknam, Bucknam & Assoc. School Facilities Scott Shira, San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools Aviation Mat Huff, VanderHawk Consulting Urban Runoff/Flood Control Mike Thornton, TKE Engineering

Parks, Recreation & Open T. Jarb Thaipejr, City of Loma Linda Space Solid Waste Paul Ryan, Inland Empire Disposal Association

Wastewater Jeff Davis, California State University, San Bernardino, Water Resources Institute Water Allen Evans, Kleinfelder Water Jeff Davis, California State University, San Bernardino, Water Resources Institute Review Committee Objectives

Consists of senior management experts Responsibilities include: – Review and evaluate methodology – Review Committee findings/Report – Develop statement of what grade means Adjust the grades up or down – based on information not considered by the Infrastructure Working Committees Review Committee Members Subject Members Transportation Les Card, LSA Associates School Facilities Kent Van Gelder, State of CA Dept. of Education Tom Tooker, State of CA Dept. of Education Aviation Paula McHargue, Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) Parks & Recreation & Open Pete Dangermond, The Dangermond Space Group William Havert, Coachella Valley Mountain Conservancy Solid Waste Eric Herbert, Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. Robert Nelson, Retired, Riverside County Chief Engineer Officer Review Committee Members (con’t)

Subject Members Water/Wastewater Rich Atwater, Inland Empire Utilities Agency Tony Pack, Eastern Municipal Water District Bernie Kersey, City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dept. Dieter Wirtzfeld, Riverside Public Utilities (Water) Steve Schulz, Riverside Wastewater Robert DeLoach, Cucamonga Valley Water District Jerry Thibeault, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Dan Parks, Coachella Valley Water District Communication Committee Objectives

Plan and organize the communications of the report card results to the public and policy makers Prepare drafts of the Report Card Executive Summary Plan all PR events Implement an outreach & communications plan Communications Committee

Name Organization Co-Chair: Bill Green RBF Consulting

Co-Chair: Ron Moreno RBF Consulting John Standiford Riverside County Transportation Commission Andrea Zureick San Bernardino Associated Governments Meredith Maloney Inland Empire Economic Partnership

Andy McCue University of California, Riverside

Catherine McMillan Coachella Valley Association of Governments Sponsors

Company or Agency In-Kind Contributors ASCE, Riverside-SB Branch RBF ASCE, LA Section SAWPA APWA, So Cal Chapter C R Reprographics Inc. CELSOC, Riverside-SB Chapter CA Infrastructure Coalition Water Resources Institute SANBAG Psomas RCTC DMJM+Harris, Inc. David Evans & Assoc.

Questions ?

For Further Information: