Scarce Resources Make for Difficult Choices
Photo courtesy of Pennsylvania Department of Transportation.
Nearly every state faces funding shortages that prevent them from ongoing, stable investment in preventive maintenance, repair and replacement. Although bridge engineers know how to manage bridges so that they stay sound indefinitely, nearly all states lack the money to do so. As a result, they must carefully balance the conditions of their bridges against the public’s need for safety.
A Safety Net, Not a Solution
The Maine Department of Transportation illustrates this dilemma. It is diligently inspecting each bridge and ordering maintenance, repair or closure as necessary to keep the public safe. However, it is seeing overall conditions deteriorate since it can replace only 14 bridges annually and between 30 and 40 bridges need replacement each year.
“Though Maine has programs and processes in place to assure bridge safety, they are more of a ‘safety net’—not a sustainable solution,” according to a report Keeping Our Bridges Safe, published by the Maine DOT last November. “We are falling behind in bridge preservation and replacement at an increasing rate. The age and deterioration of our bridge infrastructure is becoming critical, and without a significant infusion of funding, Maine DOT will be forced to post and close an increasing number of bridges, which will significantly impact the economic vitality of the state.
“In summary, there are only two ways to protect public safety over the long term: Repair or replace poor bridges and preserve fair bridges before they become poor, or continue to close bridges when their condition warrants. With over 2,000 bridges in fair or poor condition, Maine’s economy cannot afford to have the highway network become unconnected, nor can we allow unsafe bridges to stay open. Without a balanced, sustainable bridge work plan, load postings and closures will be the only ‘safety net’ left.”
The state legislature of Maine recently approved additional funds dedicated to bridges.
The Tennessee Department of Transportation reports, “we have been impacted by rising materials costs and fewer federal revenues than anticipated as well as relatively flat state revenue returns. This requires us to look at the most cost-effective way of addressing our structurally deficient bridges. There are three key areas of our bridge management program that we look at with these bridges: repairs, rehabilitation, and replacement. 
In some instances, it is possible to extend the life of the bridge by rehabilitating the structure and we have opted to rehabilitate rather than replace it due to the limited funds. Those bridges are still scheduled for replacement. However, by rehabilitating the bridge we are able to safely extend the life of the structure in lieu of the more expensive total replacement. We also elevate some bridges to annual inspections rather than inspecting them every two years. No projects have been cancelled due to a lack of funding, however some projects have been delayed until a new fiscal year because of funding concerns.”
A diver inspects a bridge piling. To the left,
the diver has placed steel rebar, which reinforces
the bridge’s concrete piling, around the
pressure-washed and cleaned piling. A new pile
jacket will be placed around it.
Photo courtesy of
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Sparsely populated and dry Nevada has only 1,045 state bridges, one of the lowest numbers in the nation. Despite the state’s relatively strong economy, sound bridge inspection history and its relatively young infrastructure, the Nevada DOT still is very concerned about the long-term health of its bridge inventory. It uses the state-of-the-art Pontis® bridge management system to assess its inventory and predict needed investment levels.
The state DOT has a $134 million backlog of bridges needing repair or replacement, despite the overall health of its inventory. It knows that it needs to increase its average level of expenditure incrementally each year through 2019 in order to keep its inventory in its current condition. Despite sound planning and diligent inspection, the ability to make these needed investments will depend on many factors beyond its control. Affecting its available funds will be the impact of inflation, declining fuel tax receipts caused by high fuel prices, uncertain federal funding, and competition for resources for needed pavement and safety projects.
How the Nation Pays for Bridges
Meeting the needs of the nation’s bridges requires funding from federal, state, and local agencies.
-
In 2004, the federal Highway Bridge Program provided some $5.1 billion to the states for bridge repair and rehabilitation.
-
States also applied another $1.5 billion from other federal spending categories to bridge improvements.
-
State and local funding added another $3.9 billion for bridge repairs.
-
As the FHWA reports, in 2004, a total of $10.5 billion was invested in bridge improvements by all levels of government.
-
However, the U.S. DOT’s 2006 Conditions and Performance Report states that an annual investment of $12.4 billion would be needed to improve bridge conditions.
National Needs Dwarf Resources
Construction and completed bridges at intersection of Interstate 35 and Loop 340 in Waco.
Photo courtesy of Stan A. Williams, Texas Department of Transportation.
Bridge rehabilitation needs dwarf the amount of funds currently available and compel states to remain in a “triage” mode of managing deficiencies as best they can for the next foreseeable decades.
The U.S. Department of Transportation’s 2006 Conditions and Performance Report notes that $8.7 billion in capital investment annually is needed to maintain bridge conditions at current levels and $12.4 billion would be needed to actually improve “conditions” to a level that would help relieve congestion and reduce accidents.
However, it is impossible to totally separate bridge needs from the adjacent highway needs. Expanding highways without widening bridges is impossible. Interchanges are the most common highway congestion chokepoint. Each interchange relies on bridges to separate and elevate lanes of traffic. By looking only at repairing structural deficiencies or addressing current width insufficiencies, it would be easy to underestimate how much the nation needs to be investing.
According to data from the FHWA, it would cost $140 billion in 2006 dollars to immediately repair every bridge that is deficient in the country. This estimate is based upon the amount of bridge area considered deficient as of December, 2007, multiplied by the cost per square meter for bridge replacement, estimated at $1,550 per square meter.
Using that methodology, it would cost roughly $48 billion to “repair” structurally deficient bridges and $91 billion to “modernize” functionally obsolete bridges that are no longer adequate to serve traffic.
Since immediate total repairs would be impossible to undertake, this price tag would undoubtedly increase with inflation over time.
The Rio Grande Gorge Bridge being inspected after the I-35W bridge collapse in Minneapolis.
Photo courtesy of New Mexico Department of Transportation
The National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission estimates that the United States should be investing about $225 billion annually for the next 50 years on all modes of transportation. Today, the U.S. is spending about 40 percent of that. A significant portion of that additional investment would be needed to improve, expand and widen bridges on the nation’s highways.
The U.S. DOT’s Conditions and Performance Report estimated the existing backlog of investment needs for bridges was approximately $65 billion. In other words, “$65 billion could be invested immediately in a cost-beneficial fashion to replace or otherwise address currently existing bridge deficiencies.” At the $10.5 billion spending level in 2004—the backlog should have been reduced by about half over 20 years.
By comparison, the total highway investment backlog or economically justifiable improvements stood at $430 billion in 2004.
These estimates, however, could not foresee the incredible increases in bridge construction costs that have taken place since 2004. Those increases significantly reduce the progress that can be made in meeting the nation’s bridge needs.
Future Funding Prospects Troubling
Federal funding accounted for 63 percent of the money spent on bridge rehabilitation and repair in 2004, with state and local governments providing the rest.
But the future of federal funding is uncertain. In the short-term, a shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund could result in a federal funding reduction of 34 percent in FY 2009, unless Congress takes action. Even if that is remedied, without new revenue, the Trust Fund could only support a $20 billion Federal-aid Highway Program in 2010, half the current funding level.
State and local transportation funding is also likely to be hard-hit, as those governments cope with reduced tax revenues as fuel, sales and property tax income decline.
State examples further demonstrate the magnitude of the nation’s bridge needs:
-
The Texas DOT has estimated that it would need to invest approximately $1 billion annually or, about $12.5 billion overall when inflation is considered, to bring at least 90 percent of its bridges to a “good or better” rating within 10 years. Total federal funding to Texas is about $2.5 billion annually for all highway needs.
-
Tennessee estimates $1 billion is needed to remedy the structural deficiencies on state bridges, with another $741 million needed for locally owned bridges.
-
Pennsylvania has estimated it would cost $14 billion to repair just its structurally deficient bridges, not including bridges that need to be widened for increasing traffic.
-
New Mexico estimates it has some $220 million in bridge needs, but can fund only about $13 million per year.
-
Oklahoma estimates that $2.5 billion would be necessary to replace 626 bridges on the state system. That is currently not funded.
An increasing number of states are concluding that a decline in the quality of their bridge inventory will be inevitable if additional investments are not made. To protect the public, states will be forced to put weight limits on many bridges and close others outright unless they can fund the necessary investment levels. These closures and postings will impede commerce and decrease the efficiency of the nation’s transportation network.
Bridges Move People
Market Street Bridge: Ain’t Nothin’ Closed But the Bridge
by Robin Derryberry, President, North Chattanooga Council of the Chamber of Commerce
A two-year closing of a major downtown bridge is reason for concern.
Will local businesses close? Will traffic slow to a crawl during rush hour? Will patrons stop going to area restaurants and salons? In the case of the Market Street Bridge in Chattanooga, Tennessee, the answer to all of these questions was, “No!”
When one of the nation’s oldest bascule bridges closed in the fall of 2005 for a two-year renovation, members of the North Chattanooga Council of the Chamber of Commerce formed a team to come up with a strategy to keep business humming and positive attention on the project.
A website (www.MarketStBridge.com) provided weekly updates and photographs about the work being done. Activities were planned to draw visitors to the North Chattanooga area, and they started on the first day of demolition with the “Ain’t Nothin’ Closed but the Bridge” march and festival across the bridge. The construction contracting team was the last to cross the bridge and started demolition at the end of the parade (on a Sunday). That effort set the tone for the entire project.
The culmination was the grand re-opening of the Market Street Bridge with an equally high-level of public engagement. A multi-course gourmet dinner was served on the bridge to over 300 guests, followed by dancing under the stars. The next day, the bridge turned into an open air market for local merchants to sell their products and for the public to get an “up close” look at the structure. When it was time to open the bridge to traffic, the first official vehicle across was an electric shuttle which showed the Market Street Bridge was geared up and ready for the future with more than a nod to the past.
The Market Street Bridge opened in August 2007, two months ahead of schedule.
