Washtenaw County's bridges in trouble, lack of state funding cited for inability to maintain or replace them
Editor's note: The amount of state funding to replace local bridges in 1992 has been corrected.
Washtenaw County's bridges are in trouble.
And with little state funding available to maintain or replace them, Washtenaw County Road Commission officials say the situation is only expected to worsen.
Of the 111 bridges under the Road Commission's jurisdiction, 43 are in good condition, while 30 are in fair condition, 22 are in poor condition and 16 are in critical condition.
Of the 16 bridges in critical condition, five are closed — four in Lima Township and one in Sharon Township.
The Road Commission currently has $91 million in unmet bridge funding needs, officials said.
And Washtenaw County isn't unique. A report issued by the Michigan Infrastructure and Transportation Association — which represents highway construction companies and suppliers — shows about 3,050 of the state’s 10,831 bridges are rated structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.
The MITA data show Washtenaw County is tied for second in the state, along with Genesee and Mason counties, for the highest percentage of local bridges in poor condition. In addition, the county was ranked fifth — tied with Charlevoix County — for the highest percentage of all its bridges in poor condition.
Local bridge conditions
That's not for a lack of trying for state and federal funding.
The Road Commission submits five applications every year, Townsend said. Those applications are due in June, said Steve Puuri, managing director of the Road Commission.
But there simply isn't enough bridge repair money to go around. Funding comes from a percentage of the state’s gas tax, and gas tax revenues have decreased by more than $100 million since 1997 — the last time the gas tax was increased.
The 2008 reconstruction of the Main Street Bridge in Dexter is one of only a few bridge replacement projects funded in Washtenaw County in recent years.
File photo
In 1992, the state program to replace local bridges was funded with $38 million, and about 150 bridges were replaced, Townsend said.
That same level of funding is expected for 2012, and about 27 bridges and 13 rehabilitation projects will be funded.
“So, that’s about 40 bridges across the state,” Townsend said, noting that costs have more than doubled since 1992.
In the last four years, the Road Commission has received funding for two bridges. The county should be replacing and or rehabilitating two or more bridges annually, and each bridge has a life expectancy of 50 to 70 years, Townsend said.
At the current funding level, each bridge will need to last “more than 300 years,” Townsend said.
This year, the Dexter-Pinckney Road Bridge in Dexter Township was replaced. In 2009, the Plymouth Road Bridge in Superior Township was replaced. And the East Delhi Bridge was rehabilitated in 2008-2009, while the Dexter Main Street Bridge was replaced in 2007-2008.
“It took us about 10 years to get funding for that,” Townsend said of the Main Street Bridge.
A bridge replacement averages about $1 million to $3 million, and state and federal funding pays for about 95 percent of the cost, he said.
“Disinvesting in roads and bridges when Michigan is desperately trying to climb out of a deep economic hole is short-sighted public policy,” Mike Nystrom, executive vice president of MITA, said in a press release. “While it’s easy to point fingers and blame road agencies for the poor bridges, the reality is that they’ve been underfunded for decades.”
Lisa Allmendinger is a reporter for AnnArbor.com. She can be reached at lallmendinger@sbcglobal.net.
Comments
digger
Tue, Nov 30, 2010 : 7:19 a.m.
Some of these issues with at least the secondary roads are the DEQ has regulations that ties the hands of the road commission on cheaper alternatives like culvert tubes or cheaper box culverts. Most of the time if there is a beam structure thats what they want back. another example of uncommon sense govt.
AlphaAlpha
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 11:30 p.m.
All - Bottom line first: WCRC employees are very overpaid, almost as much as A2 employees. Average 2010 total compensation for WCRC employees: $91,182. Adjusting their pay to the US average of ~$58K would save over $4.5 million per year. (How many bridges would that buy?) According to the 2010 WCRC budget, compensation is distributed like this: First: 137 WCRC folks share $4,635,000 in benefit compensation averaging $33,832 per worker. In addition: 89 Operations folks share $4,761,000 = $53,494 each + $33,832 extra = $87,327 total 2010 compensation 39 Engineers share $2,330,000 = $59,744 each + $33,832 = $93,578 total 9 Administrators share $766,000 = $85,111 + $33,832 = $118,943 total. The county's method of sharing budget numbers is substantially more lucid than A2's; there is little room for misinterpretation or miscalculation of their numbers. A few smaller line entries were omitted for clarity and brevity; their inclusion would result in compensation levels marginally higher than those shown above. Commissioner token compensation was excluded as well. To summarize: asserting WCRC may soon be 'broke' is grandstanding at best, deceit at worst. Normalizing compensation would save the county ~ $4,500,000 each year, which is enough to pay for many overdue projects. All that is needed is political will to deliver competitive wages.
AlphaAlpha
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 11:27 p.m.
"Last, but not least, Michigan badly needs to follow the lead of the 33 or 34 states which have adopted a graduated state income tax. The wealthy should pay noticeably more than the current fixed rate, and can easily afford to do do." Why not? The Constitution has already been trashed; who needs equal protection? In fact, there are not nearly enough 'rich' people to pay the bills. The plausible solution is competitive wages for public employees. Savings run into the multi billions. Tax hikes are extremely problematic, and likely impossible to enact during difficult economic times.
Speechless
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 10:55 p.m.
As stated above, most of the funding for bridge repair in the county comes from the state. It's ultimately possible for Lansing to adequately fund this — if and when our elected pols find the will to overhaul the state taxation system. Raise the state gasoline tax, and require big trucks to pay more to help cover costs for the very considerable amount of road damage they cause. Both of these ideas have already been noted here, and I recall a possible gas tax increase being brought up in the state legislature fairly recently. In addition, local reps such as Jeff Irwin and Alma Wheeler Smith, among others, have for some time been calling for a careful review of corporate state subsidies and tax breaks. At least some of these should go away. Last, but not least, Michigan badly needs to follow the lead of the 33 or 34 states which have adopted a graduated state income tax. The wealthy should pay noticeably more than the current fixed rate, and can easily afford to do do.
DonBee
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 10:54 p.m.
Step 1: Use the good time surplus to create extra services. Step 2: Don't save money for bad times Step 3: Get people used to the extra services Step 4: When times are bad, cut the basic services that hurt us all, like fire, police, roads Step 5: As the situation gets worse, start pointing out how underfunded basic services are Step 6: Continue until the basic services are almost in crisis Step 7: Raise taxes Step 8: See step 1
A2transplant
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 8:42 p.m.
The links for the official reports can be found here at the Michigan Infrastructure & Transportation Association website: http://www.mi-ita.com/news_2.asp?page=news&disp=2&id=2545&type=1 The links are at the end of this article. They cover the entire state and are categorized by county.
AlphaAlpha
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 8:37 p.m.
"But I do have one suggestion to fix this: drastically increase the tax charged to trucks. They pay drastically less per pound than do passenger cars and do virtually all of the damage that we see on the roads. Time to raise their registration fees to be the per pound equivalent of automobiles. That simple fix--making trucks pay their way--would brings tens of millions of dollars into the state treasury every year." One consequence with this idea: Where do you think the truckers will get the cash to pay the extra tax? From higher rates. On virtually everything. So, consumers will ultimately pay the increased tax. As usual...
Roadman
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 5:14 p.m.
@SonnyDog09: Most road crew workers are diligent and hardworking individuals and serve in adverse weather conditions most other persons would not tolerate. The public should take their hats off to these individuals who make the streets and thoroughfares of Washtenaw County safe and smooth for everyone.
Roadman
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 4:59 p.m.
Please lobby your elected representatives for full funding for necessary road repairs in Washtenaw County. Roy Townsend should be testifying in Lansing to give state legislators an idea about how crucial the need is in Washtenaw County for bridge repair. This article underscores the fact that eleven bridges in critical condition are still open for vehicular traffic. Now that former Washtenaw County Road Commissioner David Rutledge has been elected to the State House one would expect that Washtenaw will have a strong voice advocating funding for these needed repairs. I hope we will not have to sustain a tragedy before Lansing wakes up and realizes how important it is to properly maintain our bridge and road system throughout the State of Michigan. And remember, be careful when driving through construction zones so as not to endanger the safety of road crew personnel who are working to keep our roads in safe condition.
Peter Vanderzee
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 4:31 p.m.
Unfortunately, like everyone else across the US, the argument about limited funding for replacing bridges stops with "structurally deficient" classification. No one challenges this classification, which is understandable but a shame considering what is at stake. Perhaps if the public knew that 30-40% of bridges classified by visual inspection are in better to much better condition than the inspection showed, that might change the debate. That is because the visual inspection process is subjective and highly variable - not my conclusions, but those of the FHWA. Your State DOT knows about the variety of advanced condition assessment technologies that can be used, but steadfastly refuses to adopt them in a meaningful, statewide way. Too bad, because until you do, the taxpayers will be asked for more and more money for unnecessary repair or replacement projects because they can't or won't challenge the visual inspection results. Strongly suggest interested parties read: "Too Big to Fall" by Barry LePatner. After reading this book, you'll understand the opportunity and demand your State DOT start using better technology to save your hard-earned money.
MjC
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 4:18 p.m.
I agree with Rouzer. Tax gasoline to fund the repair of our bridges. The U.S. was on a fact track to more efficient autos when gas was at $4/gallon. As soon as the price went down, the push to end our dependency on oil also went away.
treetowncartel
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 3:28 p.m.
With respect to truck wweight, enforcement is very slight in this state. Wayne county, which is where all that truck traffic to and from Canada has to pass through, doesn't even have a weigh staitons. The first weigh stations one would encounter after crossing over the border are near the county lines of WWshtenaw and Jackson on I-94 and Oakland and Genesee on I-75. Not to even mention the fact that they are rarely even open.
Forever27
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 2:32 p.m.
Top Cat and EMG agree...I think my head just exploded.
foobar417
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 1:31 p.m.
Raising the gas tax will solve the problem for a while, but even if it's indexed to inflation, we'll still not have enough money (i.e. the same amount of money) as fuel efficiency continues to advance. A better solution would be to charge based on vehicle miles traveled (and weight) and index it to inflation. That will keep the road budgets constant over time, allowing us to keep up with the maintenance. This is also fair, as the relative destruction each vehicle does to the roads is proportionate to vehicle miles (and weight), not fuel efficiency. Of course, given the knee-jerk climate of "all taxes are bad" that prevails in this country, no politician is brave enough to propose such a system, even if the practical effect would be to keep the automobile tax burden where it has been historically and not raise taxes and actually adequately fund road maintenance.
CobraII
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 1:20 p.m.
If we are all supposed to buy small fuel efficient & electric cars; who is going to pay the gas tax to replace the bridges?
Top Cat
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 12:42 p.m.
Bad roads are bridges are not free. ERM's Apparition is absolutely correct....this time. "But I do have one suggestion to fix this: drastically increase the tax charged to trucks. They pay drastically less per pound than do passenger cars and do virtually all of the damage that we see on the roads. Time to raise their registration fees to be the per pound equivalent of automobiles. That simple fix--making trucks pay their way--would brings tens of millions of dollars into the state treasury every year."
jcj
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 12:18 p.m.
When the bridge on Liberty 1/2 mile west of Steinbach was out I witnessed a fire truck having to back up and go about 4 miles out of the way. to get to the fire. Now the bridges are out on Liberty after Dancer and on Dancer North of Liberty. These bridges are more than safe for cars and light trucks that locals would be using. Put a weight limit on them and if some idiot with a cement truck goes over and falls through sue their insurance company for the cost of the bridge! But its political. The county figures if they close the bridge someone will cough up the money. It is my understanding that these bridges have to meet certain specs because the creeks have water year round. But these could have temporary fixes with a culvert that would cost a fraction of what the new bridges will cost.
Alex Brown
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 11:39 a.m.
I also recently saw where the Board of Commissioners is going to follow their long established practice in appointing a crony to the Road Commission. How is more of the "Same old - same old" going to fix the problem?
Alex Brown
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 11:37 a.m.
@bruceae - I agree completely - don't build what you cannot maintain. Also the Road Commission has W-A-Y TOO MANY staff in the building on Zeeb Rd. and not enough in the field doing the work. Get rid of half the overhead.
Leah Gunn
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 11:25 a.m.
Those resolutions to which you refer are "courtesy resolutions" which get passed unanimously by the House and take up little or no time. Maybe some day there might be a resolution honoring YOU for some accomplishment. As to the "tax and spend" Democrats, give me them any day over the "tax-cut and spend" Ropublicans. In 2001, Bush started out with a $243 BILLION budget surplus and it took him no time at all to start a war for which he refused to pay, and to cut taxes on the wealthy.
maallen
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 10:42 a.m.
Dingell is too busy passing resolutions like congratulating Joe Paterno's 400th win (House Resolution 1715), designating a post office as "Sergeant Robert Barrett Post Office Building" (House Resolution 5758), recognizing Brooklyn Botanic Garden's 100th anniversary (House Resolution 1428), congratulating the town of Tarboro, North Carolina's 250th anniversary (House resolution 1475) and adjourning congress (house resolution 332). Heaven forbid that we expect Dingell to tackle the tough issues! Unfortunately, the liberals don't understand that the policy of taxing and spending does not work. Right now, the issue isn't about whether we need to tax more or tax less, it's about allocating our money properly. The government needs to prioritize and allocate where the money should go. We have way too much wasteful spending. Instead of spending millions on new bike paths (is that really a priority?) the money should have been spent on fixing the most critical bridges.
msclean
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 10:16 a.m.
no money for current bridges, but we can build a bike bridge on Geddes that goes over 23? Something stinks about this. Who made this decision? They should be fired knowing other bridges are in need of repair.Must be a bike rider who made this decision. People on bikes seem to have more rights on the road than cars do. Sorry but I think some heads should roll on this decision. Peoples lives could be in danger, but bikes are more important in Ann Arbor then a few thousand cars that will be going over or under these bridges. Name the bridges so people can at least protect themselves. Maybe we can turn those into bike lanes now too.
bruceae
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 10:12 a.m.
@Edward: You are correct we should all be smart enough to figure it out. My concern is that we supposedly don't have enough money to fix what we already have yet we are busy building new. I also go through the US23/Geddes Road intersection and the Lee Road/US3 one a lot and at times they were back up. I just think the priorities should be to fix what we have FIRST and then if money is left over we should be working on these new projects.
Rod Johnson
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 10:10 a.m.
Bruce, just think of the roundabouts as an intelligence test.
David Briegel
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 9:38 a.m.
We don't need bridges, we need more tax cuts for the wealthy! We don't need bridges, we need to trash union workers! We don't need bridges, we need to complain about gov't! The collected wisdom here? Rouzer and Chai were the only ones who made sense!
bruceae
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 9:22 a.m.
@SonnyDog09: You are right on with your comment. Instead of fixing what we have we spend millions building bike lanes and those stupid round abouts that no one can figure out.
L'chaim
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 9:14 a.m.
SonnyDog's comments about road crew workers are both anecdotal and disparaging. Stunhisif's vague attack on "overall government" spending and clear antiworker attacks are useless. Clearly, money is needed to maintain roads. A progressive tax on capital is needed. There's also gobs of greenbacks in the military industrial complex that could be used for far better ends than the wars it's now funding.
stunhsif
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 8:45 a.m.
Disinvesting in roads and bridges when Michigan is desperately trying to climb out of a deep economic hole is short-sighted public policy, Mike Nystrom, executive vice president of MITA, said in a press release." We need to reduce spending in overall government and divert some of those funds to road repair. How about we start by "disinvesting" in the state unions and cutting their costs to the taxpayers. I'll be for raising the gas tax as long as state employees do their fair share to reduce costs.
rouzer
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 8:35 a.m.
Raise the gas tax. We already pay significantly lower prices than any of our European friends. Maybe drivers will start to realize we all need to plan better, drive less, buy more efficient cars.
Greggy_D
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 8 a.m.
Let's see how fast Dingell finds cash for these bridges. Oh, that's right.....the election is over.
RUKiddingMe
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 7:52 a.m.
If $440 million was used to replace 150 bridges in 1992, that means that the cost for each bridge was 2.93 million in 1992. If costs have doubled, they should be 6 mil to replace now. Also, if costs have doubled, that still means we should be able to replace twice as many bridges as stated now (80 instead of 40) with the same $440 million. Even assuming the max of 3 million per bridge, $440 should do way more than 40 bridges. Inflation can't be taking up that much more. Seems like something's either wrong with these numbers or I'm not reading right. Or, there is so much money misappropriated and thrown away that now they don't even try to hide it with clever accounting.
SonnyDog09
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 7:39 a.m.
So, there is not enough money for bridge repair, but we take money from the gas tax to build new bike lanes. The problem is not lack of money, but how we allocate the money that we currently have. I'll say this again. Perhaps we should look at how to spend the money we do have more effectively. I suggest that we change the current road construction standard of having five guys stand around and watch one guy work, and instead we pay only two or three spectators for each worker. Think of how many more bridges we could repair with the current level of funding if we were to squeeze waste from the system.
dading dont delete me bro
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 6:37 a.m.
@ treetowncartel, you are so right. please include a link to the bridges i'd feel safe under too.
Basic Bob
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 6:35 a.m.
The county should reduce all truck load limits by 20%. That would more than double the life of the roads. Critical bridges should be closed to trucks.
treetowncartel
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 6:31 a.m.
@ dading, I'd like to know which bridges i feel safe under in addition to on.
dading dont delete me bro
Mon, Nov 29, 2010 : 6:28 a.m.
first! (post) is there a link to this list? i'd like to know which bridges i feel safe on or which i should (or could) avoid in my daily travels...