INFRASTRUCTURE SOLUTIONS
Issue 13 — 2015
Resilient Infrastructure
FI R
ES
Is it possible to create a system that comes back
after a natural disaster?
TO
R
NA
DO
Ef fe c
S
Ef
RR
I CA
NE
nt
S
Adapt
able
HU
ie
fic
tive
ad
e
in
pen
dabl
e
Re
KE S
De
E AR
UA
TH Q
ss
FLOODS
THINK Editorial Advisory Board
Harvey Hammond Jr., PE
Executive Chairman
Paul Yarossi, PE
Executive Vice President
Rob Slimp, PE
CEO, HNTB Corporation
THINK is available to view on the iPad and iPhone. To access this
issue of THINK, along with other HNTB publications, download
the free HNTB Publications App from the App Store.SM
HNTB is an infrastructure solutions firm providing
award-winning planning, design, program management
and construction management services.
hntb.com
@HNTBCorp
facebook.com/HNTBCorp
linkedin.com/company/hntb
youtube.com/HNTBcorp
THINK is published by the Corporate Communications and
Brand Optimization Department of the HNTB Companies,
P.O. Box 412197, Kansas City, MO 64141.
Patricia Mosher, senior vice president, [email protected]
Phyllis Schallenberg, editor, [email protected]
E Recycled with 10% post-consumer waste.
HNTB is an equal opportunity employer M/F/V/D.
© 2015 HNTB Companies. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole
or in part without written permission is prohibited.
Topics
This edition of THINK explores how
transportation leaders are responding to
increasingly devastating natural disasters
through a combination of innovation,
technology and working across boundaries.
4
Can we enhance infrastructure
to more effectively prepare for
natural disasters?
HNTB examines strategies that transportation leaders
are using to protect against disaster damage and
hasten post-event recovery, while suggesting systemic
improvements to make all of our transportation
infrastructure more resilient.
8
Six strategies for a more effective
disaster response
Jorge Ramirez, Deputy Director of the Resiliency
and Recovery Program at the Texas General Land
Office, offers ideas for reinventing disaster recovery
based on the state’s experience in the wake of twin
2008 hurricanes that impacted 62 counties and
11 million Texans.
12
Achieving both physical and
financial transformation
Projjal Dutta, Director of Sustainability for New York’s
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, tells why
Superstorm Sandy represents a challenge for the
U.S. to reimagine how our public transportation systems
can perform across a wide range of exposures, and gain
the funding to do it, in the years ahead.
hntb.com/think THINK ISSUE 13 — 20153
Can we ENHANCE
to more effectively prepare for
Many leaders have seen their communities damaged or virtually disabled
by a range of major storms, floods, wildfires and earthquakes. And there is
increasing likelihood that our transportation infrastructure will continue to
be tested by intense natural forces in the coming years. Although no one
can predict the next disaster, there are ways to minimize its impact.
The first line of defense against a potential disaster is, of course, to
fortify those elements of the infrastructure that are both critical and in
peril. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has helped to guide
communities in tackling this task. The process, multi-hazard mitigation
planning, aims to preempt certain disaster losses so the vicious cycle
of continuous destruction and rebuilding can be broken. These plans
help communities make decisions about where to invest — and what
to do — to reduce the human and economic toll of disasters. As of
September 2014, FEMA reported that nearly 24,000 communities in
all 50 states, the District of Columbia and five territories now have
FEMA-approved state mitigation plans. While every community tackles
its risks in a different way, best practices for hardening public assets,
including transportation systems, are well known.
4
THINK ISSUE 13 — 2015
hntb.com/think
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL DISASTERS?
Bracing for Impact
Moving toward
Resilience
In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, for example,
the Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Hardening infrastructure can address only part
invested in a range of hardening tactics
of our response to increasing storm damage.
designed to protect underground assets from
Many states already are pioneering better ways
damage. These tactics ranged from the simple,
of using technology to improve resilience. The
such as constructing a raised ledge around
Texas General Land Office, for example, has
subway stairwells to stem the influx of water,
put a priority on consolidating disaster-related
to the more complex, such as placing vulnerable
institutional
knowledge and policies and
electronic equipment in watertight rooms. Such
grant-related
processes on the web. This effort
approaches not only mitigate damage, but also
is
part
of
a
broader
strategy to improve how
make it easier to restore public transportation
the
state
responds
to
devastating hurricanes,
service quickly.
such as 2008’s Dolly and Ike. The GLO also is
Engineers and designers are working together
pursuing a novel way to quickly rebuild homes
to create infrastructure that can better withstand
stressful natural phenomenon without sacrificing by predesigning and precontracting a set of
modifiable house models that can be erected in
aesthetics or budget considerations. Clearly,
weeks
rather than months.
there are advantages to using the most advanced
Standardization
and modularity are powerful
materials available in construction. In reality,
concepts
that,
if
applied
nationally to elements
hardening is not about materials, but about
of
transportation
infrastructure,
could greatly
the system in which those materials function.
reduce today’s construction costs and tomorrow’s
Building redundancy into a bridge or elevated
responsiveness to disasters. A prime example
road design, for example, can keep a transit
of the benefit of standardization is Missouri’s
system or highway functioning despite the loss
“Safe and Sound Program,” which completed
of a structural element in a disaster. Modifying
the delivery of 802 new or improved bridges in
a tunnel so that it resists flooding — but also
about
three and a half years. Packaged as a mega
can be quickly pumped dry if it floods without
design-build
contract, the program enabled
degrading its structure or electrical systems — designers
and
engineers to look at the bridges
is another example of this philosophy.
holistically and achieve significant efficiencies
and cost savings. They first designed a dozen
independent, nonstandardized bridges, and then
hntb.com/think THINK ISSUE 13 — 20155
looked for elements that could be standardized
and replicated for hundreds of other bridges.
The immediate result was that construction
on each bridge site moved more swiftly — in fact,
the average bridge replacement took 42 days,
about half the normal time. From a resilience
standpoint, this standardization also set the
stage for accelerated recovery in the event of
the sudden loss of one or many bridges.
If state and federal transportation leaders
were to collaborate to define national
standards — or even craft technical
specifications for modules that could be used
nationally in bridge construction — it would
greatly boost resilience in communities
everywhere. Theoretically, if 10,000 typical
highway bridges were to share certain common
modules, it would be possible to pre-fabricate
them and deploy them swiftly to disaster
sites. Also, the economies of scale that could
be achieved in manufacturing would free up
vital transportation funding for other strategic
projects or lagging maintenance issues.
Rapid Reset
We are in an era when several significant factors
are converging, compelling us to look at our
transportation infrastructure in a new way. As
we’ve noted, we find ourselves under undeniable
pressure to improve how we prepare for and
recover from large-scale weather events, which
appear to be increasing in intensity. At the same
time, our ability to fund infrastructure of all
kinds has been constrained, challenging us to
become more innovative and cost-effective in
our approaches. A third factor, and one that
presents tremendous opportunity, is the rapid
evolution of technologies such as building
information modeling systems, mobile devices
and ultraprecise digital mapping.
The private sector, with its advanced
technology and best-practice knowledge, has an
enormous role to play in helping transportation
infrastructure owners bolster resiliency within
realistic funding parameters. One promising
strategy is to preposition capabilities, rather
Resiliency Initiatives to Explore
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is complementing
FEMA’s disaster preparation initiative (see page 4) with a detailed Community
Resilience Planning Guide, which was released for public comment in April 2015.
(www.NIST.gov)
100 Resilient Cities, a project sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation, is helping
cities globally to approach resiliency holistically, addressing physical, social and
economic challenges. Sixteen cities in the U.S. have taken part in the project,
(www.100resilientcities.org)
6
THINK ISSUE 13 — 2015
hntb.com/think
Such proactive and productive dialogues — across jurisdictions and
public-private boundaries — will be key to creating more resilient
infrastructure in America. The more we coordinate our efforts and
share best practices, the better we will withstand the next great
weather event that forms on the horizon.
than materials, before a disaster strikes. To
pursue this strategy, the engineer of record
would reach out to contractors and engineers
in the marketplace to fill in the gaps between
broad-strokes recovery plans and the negotiated
contracts that would be required before work
could theoretically begin after a disaster.
At a high level, the transportation entity and
engineers/contractors would agree on certain
rates, indexed to inflation, to complete recovery
work for high-value, high-risk infrastructure.
Initial designs would be rendered and the
parties would agree on a plan of action,
accepting certain responsibilities should
a disaster occur. Part of the process could
include identifying digital resources — BIM
files, lidar data, surveying maps, environmental
studies — that would facilitate a quick response.
These proactive negotiations and tentative
agreements would easily shave weeks, even
months, off of the commencement of postdisaster work by the private-sector entities.
Owners would be able to use the designs and
game plans, negotiate any final changes before
contracting and get things in motion. The plans
would designate a DOT team or consultant
to oversee implementation, so that every
damaged asset would get appropriate focus
and inspection.
hntb.com/think Importantly, pursuing concepts, such as
prepositioned capabilities, has the potential to
achieve two goals at once. The first, as noted,
is a more rapid restoration of transportation
assets to partial or full service after a disaster.
A second goal, cost-effectiveness, also is more
within reach, because owners and contractors
can negotiate mutually beneficial agreements
with less pressure when disaster scenarios are
not imminent.
Such proactive and productive dialogues — across jurisdictions and public-private
boundaries — will be key to creating more
resilient infrastructure in America. The more
we coordinate our efforts and share best
practices, the better we will withstand the next
great weather event that forms on the horizon. n
THINK ISSUE 13 — 20157
Texas General Land Office
Six strategies for a more effective disaster response
By Jorge Ramirez
Mention “The disaster of 2008” to most
Americans, and the phrase is likely to conjure
up memories of stock market losses and
plummeting home values. To Texans, however,
2008 marked one of the most devastating
natural disasters in the state’s history — the
one-two punch of Hurricanes Dolly and
Ike. Striking Texas barely two months apart
in July and September, the two hurricanes
impacted 62 counties and more than 11 million
Texans — nearly half of our state’s population.
While the death toll of these hurricanes was
low, the storm damage was extensive. Ike’s impact
was particularly severe: It remains among the top
three costliest Atlantic hurricanes, resulting in
more than $37 billion in damage. Federal funds
were made available through disaster recovery
grants provided by the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development through its
Community Development Block Grant program.
Distribution of these grants, totaling $3.1 billion,
to communities was the task of the two separate
state agencies with limited disaster recovery
experience.
Like many states, Texas had dealt with natural
disasters episodically. That is, after a disaster,
state and local agencies would staff up, do their
best to manage through the recovery, and then
staff down. Even the most effective ideas and
policies soon would wither in file cabinets.
Those who could add significant brainpower
and know-how to a future event often moved
on to other work. Institutional knowledge was
lost and, to a degree, unrecoverable.
During that same early timeframe, the Texas
General Land Office had demonstrated its
effectiveness in disaster recovery by successfully
managing post-storm cleanup of the state’s
coastline. The governor, confident the GLO
could use those same skills to bring greater
order and efficiency to grant distributions
across the rest of the state, decided in mid-2011
to transition management of the various HUD
disaster grant programs from two agencies
to the GLO. The agency’s charge was to give
communities a single contact for grants, cut
bureaucracy, lower administrative costs — and
generally get things moving faster. I was invited
to direct the GLOs efforts in pursuing this
mission.
Reinventing Disaster Recovery — 6 Strategies
Over the past three years, those of us in the
Disaster Recovery CDBG Program at the GLO
have been on a steep learning curve. While
we have a range of backgrounds and areas
of expertise, what was required in rebooting
the disaster recovery process was more about
innovation and exiting the comfort zone.
Below I offer six strategies that our office has
pursued and which, I hope, will be instructive
for those who are charged with helping their
states either prepare for, or recover from, major
natural disasters. I will not presume that Texas
has all of the answers — certainly every state,
and every disaster, is unique in some ways. You
may, however, discover the gem of an idea that
may work for your state.
Jorge Ramirez is deputy director of the new Resiliency and Recovery Program at the Texas General Land
Office. He was previously the director of the land office’s Disaster Recovery CDBG Program. He and his
team are responsible for managing a $3.1 billion program, designed to fund the rebuilding of more than
12,000 homes and completing more than 3,600 infrastructure projects across the state. Before taking on
this challenge, he was deputy executive director of the Facilities & Energy Management Division of the Texas
Facilities Commission, where he was responsible for starting a new Office of Energy Management Program.
In pursuing these roles, Jorge has drawn upon three wells of experience: he is an accomplished attorney,
an experienced engineer, and a proven business manager and MBA holder.
8
THINK ISSUE 13 — 2015
hntb.com/think
STRATEGY 1
STRATEGY 2
When we prepare for disasters, our focus is
generally on the mechanical aspects of success.
That is, how can we build this road or bridge
or resist damage? Or, how can we limit the
advance of flooding in this neighborhood?
These plans can be made more complete by
adding a communications dimension, one that
increases transparency among stakeholders
and reduces barriers to collaboration in the
event of a disaster.
In our case, we stepped into an environment
of intense polarization, with active lawsuits
being pursued against the state related to fair
housing. Among our first steps was to have
informal meetings with the parties — such
as coffee with advocates for various interest
groups — to begin to shift from an adversarial
to a cooperative relationship. A key outcome
of these meetings was to more openly share
plans and progress with these groups. This
meant that, rather than make an “open records
request” when they sought certain information,
these consumer advocates were welcome to
call or access online information that we more
systematically shared.
In the aftermath of a disaster, communities
are desperate to get funds to rebuild. Thus,
the application process — HUD guidelines,
wrapped in state guidelines — can be daunting.
Sometimes the application process involves
multiple rounds of submissions, rejections
and re-submissions. Valuable time is lost,
and government officials earn a reputation
for stifling progress in unnecessary red tape.
Very early in our work, we established
some core values for the team, which were
intended to guide how we served our customers.
They weren’t novel (many organizations
have vision and value statements), but we
made a commitment to pursuing them.
Among these values are customer services,
innovation and integrity. Together, these
values reinforce a fiduciary responsibility to
the taxpayer. Underpinning these values is our
acknowledgement we are here solely to ensure
that recovery dollars are spent within the federal
guidelines — not to second-guess communities.
This philosophy has manifested itself in
a number of ways. For example, instead of
rejecting community applications, our team
helps to guide them to address inconsistencies
or other issues. We find out what they want,
and find a way to complete their applications
effectively. Similarly, our staff and attorneys
Proactively engage
stakeholders
hntb.com/think Attack complexity to
enhance responsiveness
THINK ISSUE 13 — 20159
We’re counting on our team, our private-sector partners
and our colleagues in the region to meet the next big
hurricane with a disaster response that’s efficient, speedy
and delivered with exceptional professionalism.
have focused on reducing the complexity of
policies, so that they will present the least
possible burden on vendors, citizens and
communities.
STRATEGY 3
Capture and unify
disaster-related knowledge
with technology
As noted earlier, many state agencies lose
valuable institutional knowledge in the years or
decades between major natural disasters. The
knowledge that remains behind often is difficult
to access, trapped in thousands of spreadsheets,
or so outdated that disaster recovery staff must
create much of their process from scratch.
Also, even when policies are up to date and
accessible, there may be room for individual
interpretation — between applicants and agency
staff or even between different staff members.
One of our major initiatives has been to create
an online web page “Texasrebuilds.org” that
unifies all of our policies into one user-friendly
resource. By visiting the site, communities can
review the most recent policies, guidelines and
procedures. An important additional benefit
of this web-based approach is that we can
amend policies to clarify points that are being
frequently misunderstood. It is always the
system of record, replacing the proliferation
of outdated policies.
Another major initiative is our web-based
enterprise system “TRecS” (Texas Recovers).
This site replaces more than a dozen former
databases and countless spreadsheets. If the GLO
team discovers an issue with an application,
the community member can make necessary
changes right away. This reduces frustration for
the applicant and increases the bandwidth of the
GLO team to address complex issues.
Applicants always can call us if they are
unable to sort through their issues, and with
the new systems, both the applicant and the
GLO professional can look at the same policy
and application at the same time.
10
THINK ISSUE 13 — 2015
STRATEGY 4
Analyze key vulnerabilities
and opportunities in advance
Communities hit hard by storms are under
intense pressure to rebuild quickly as funds
become available. As a result, they often focus
on putting infrastructure back “as it was”
without having the opportunity to explore
options for hardening or fortifying it to better
endure future storms. In some cases, more
resilient options may actually cost less than
simple replacements, which can save money
in both the short and long terms.
It helps when communities have foreknowledge
of what’s possible, so we’ve undertaken a
large-scale resiliency study across 62 counties
harmed by Hurricanes Dolly and Ike. The study
is identifying infrastructure that’s at risk from
future storms and will sketch out conceptual
projects to give officials an idea of what could be
done in the future to address these exposures.
These projects are not pre-designed, but will
be enough to jump-start projects more quickly,
which alone could save many months, if not
years, in the recovery process.
STRATEGY 5
Develop practical models
for large-scale rebuilding
A heartbreaking consequence of widespread
natural disasters is that many people lose
their homes. In fact, we’re rebuilding up to
10,000 homes due to Dolly and Ike here in
Texas. The resources necessary to rebuild
are extraordinary, demanding expertise and
materials that must draw from far beyond the
affected region. What’s more, because no two
homes are identical, it takes significant time
to settle on appropriate designs, construction
approaches and costs for rebuilding. This can
take months or even years to achieve.
Our team is advancing an approach that’s
designed to build quality homes faster in
the wake of a disaster. With this approach,
architects create specific designs for houses,
hntb.com/think
and a number of contractors bid on these plans.
Ultimately, the contractors bid to build certain
home plans for a specified price. These were not
one-size-fits-all homes but customized within
a preset range of options. Also, certain elements
varied within a range, based on the home site,
such as the degree of lot preparation, or the
length of a driveway. We set a high bar in terms
of windstorm resistance and resiliency, and our
inspectors ensure the quality of the structure
matched what the contractor agreed to build.
The result: new, quality homes, built in an
average of 20 to 30 days, rather than several
months. We think many communities could
pursue this course, and people would get
the quality construction they deserve, while
builders also would be successful and contribute
to a strong local economy.
Not Just Watching the Radar
If history has taught us anything, it’s that Texas
is bound to be struck by a major hurricane in
the near future. Whenever this occurs, whatever
the storm’s ferocity, we are actively preparing
for it. We acknowledge that no amount of
preparation can ever be enough — you can be
highly resilient and yet something will be lost.
But, it’s one thing to suffer damage, and another
thing to have that damage amplified by a factor
of 10. We’re counting on our team, our privatesector partners and our colleagues in the region
to meet the next big hurricane with a disaster
response that’s efficient, speedy and delivered
with exceptional professionalism. n
STRATEGY 6
Extend a hand to
experts who can help
Government agencies often seem to operate
with built-in, though merely theoretical,
borders. At one level, there is an organizational
border between the insiders (staff) and outsiders
(vendors). At a higher level, the state’s borders
act as a dividing line between which activities
are “in scope” and which are not. For some
government activities, this may make sense.
However, for disaster preparedness and
response, these borders can get in the way
of many things: accessing the right skills,
improving scalability, gaining best-practice
knowledge, and cooperating with those who
face similar challenges. In essence, because
storms ignore borders, our disaster response
should operate beyond them, as well.
At GLO, we’ve made a concerted effort to
balance our agency staff and vendor staff in
ways that bring the most effective skills to bear.
We naturally have a number of key functions
within the agency and program, but we also hire
talented program managers, engineers, lawyers
and others who bring significant know-how to
the task.
We also understand that, while we are trying
many strategies, we know we may not have the
optimal approach for improving how we prepare
for and respond to natural disasters. This is why
we reached out to our neighbors Louisiana and
Mississippi — two states that frequently share in
the destruction of hurricanes in the Gulf — to
begin a dialogue about how best to work together.
We are only beginning the process, but envision
a more robust planning approach that would
help us make efficient use of resources while
improving our response to the next major
hurricane that comes our way.
hntb.com/think THINK ISSUE 13 — 201511
New York’s MTA
To brace for tomorrow’s storms, public transportation must
achieve both physical and financial transformation
By Projjal Dutta
In late 2012, Hurricane Sandy brought devastation
to the east coast of the United States, killing
more than 100 people, causing billions of dollars
in damage and virtually wiping out many
communities. Parts of Greater New York City
were awash as the rains and the rising waters of
the Atlantic simply inundated the underground
world, where many of our transportation and
utility networks function. The net effect of Sandy
was that much of the region’s economic and
social activity was stopped in its tracks. And,
while we’ve come a long way in the past three
years, the region in reality still is recovering and
will be for a long time.
One of the least helpful aspects of Sandy’s
legacy is how it has earned the nickname
“superstorm” in the news media and in popular
culture. The problem with such labels is that it
implies a kind of special status — that this storm
is an aberration, a monster that could not be
foreseen and that, now that we have survived
it, we may never face the likes of it again for a
century. This perspective is naïve, in my view
and that of many others.
It’s very important for our society to
acknowledge that Hurricane Sandy and other
such phenomenon are more than merely one-off
weather events. Regardless of how one views
climate change, we cannot ignore the reality that
so-called hundred-year storms are becoming
more common and the intensity of many storms
is increasing. Many people retain the mindset
that these large, destructive storms represent a
moment in time. This is not the case. Instead
preparation and recovery have both become
ongoing processes.
So we have to accept a new paradigm, one
that says that storms such as Sandy — or
Katrina — are unfortunately part of a “new
normal.” Thus, it’s not merely about building
back our transportation and other systems after
a storm but re-imagining how the system needs
to perform across a wide range of exposures.
Fabric Worn Thin
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority
operates the largest transportation network
in North America, serving more than 15
million people in New York City, Long Island,
southeastern New York State and Connecticut.
On an average weekday, as many as 8 or 9
million people take advantage of — more
specifically, rely on — the system. There is
unyielding pressure to stay operational at all
times because every outage or backup causes
ripple effects across the system. As such, the
challenge of running the system and keeping
ahead of the inevitable wear-and-tear of
operating it, even as we try to forestall major
issues or, ideally, make vital improvements.
But, here’s the real challenge: Much of our
system is very old. Parts of it were built by our
grandfathers’ grandfathers — far more than a
century ago. To put that in context, imagine a
scenario like this: What if you were to inherit
an ancient family coat, not as an heirloom or
relic, but as a coat you would have to wear every
day? Likely, you would find yourself making
numerous and frequent repairs, and when a
catastrophic weakening occurred, you would
have to replace some section of the garment
at a significant cost.
Projjal Dutta is the first-ever director of sustainability for New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority,
a position he has held since 2007. Before joining the MTA, Dutta served as the director of sustainable
strategies at an architectural and engineering firm. Dutta has prior experience with the MTA as the primary
author of environmental guidelines for New York City Transit and as the manager of sustainability for the
preliminary engineering phase of the Second Avenue Subway capital project. He is a LEED-Accredited
Professional and a graduate of MIT.
Twitter @projjal
12
THINK ISSUE 13 — 2015
hntb.com/think
Associated Press
Like this metaphorical coat, the MTA’s system
encompasses a set of extraordinarily valuable
assets. But, they are worn and are showing their
age. As a result, unlike building a new system
from the ground up, our system is so consumed
with operational requirements and vital repairs
that it’s very difficult to invest in improvements
to make it more resilient and responsive. So, it’s
not at all like creating a new system in Dubai
or Shanghai, where you can take advantage of
all the most recent knowledge, materials and
technologies. You are constrained by legacy.
entrances and installing coverings for sidewalk
vents and other avenues through which water
could enter.
Another strategy has been to fortify
those underground elements of the system
underground that are most vulnerable to
damage from water. Traditional electric cables,
for example, have been replaced by marine
cables that resist water and corrosion. Rooms
that contain fundamental circuits have been
rebuilt with watertight doors to keep them dry
in the event of flooding. It can be much more
Power of Nature
Although Hurricane Sandy
The point here is that brute strength cannot
declaratively illustrated the
be our only approach to dealing with massive,
frailty of our system, we have
long been acutely aware of
destructive weather events. We need a
its vulnerabilities. In 2007,
number of coordinated strategies — involving
for example, torrential rains
effectively paralyzed the transit fortification and natural systems alike — to
system and put most of our
focus resources on what will deliver both
subway lines out of operation.
In response, the MTA found
greater security and a more sustainable
ways to fortify low-lying
infrastructure to resist flooding, system overall.
and developed a strategy for
suspending service and moving
effective to focus resources on preserving these
trains out of harm’s way for certain extreme
elements. If a tunnel floods, it can be pumped
weather events. These steps helped to lessen the
out and service can be restored more swiftly
damage and disruption caused by Hurricane
because the lights, control systems and safety
Irene in 2011 and Hurricane Sandy a year later.
systems are more resistant to exposure to water.
Underground transportation infrastructure
The point here is that brute strength
always is at threat of flooding in New York
cannot be our only approach to dealing with
City. The underlying problem is that when
massive, destructive weather events. We need a
it rains excessively or weather-driven storm
number of coordinated strategies — involving
surges occur, the city’s normal drainage system
fortification and natural systems alike — to
cannot handle the flow and the streets become
inundated. When the water cannot flow into the focus resources on what will deliver both greater
security and a more sustainable system overall.
storm drains, it seeks another path the subway
system. To keep water out, we have adopted a
number of strategies, including raising subway
hntb.com/think THINK ISSUE 13 — 201513
For many transportation agencies across the country, the
increasing frequency of major storms is sounding the alarm
that vital change is necessary. Catastrophic events, such as
Sandy, shine the light on the broader issue of maintenance
and upkeep of old infrastructure.
Funding the Future
In the aftermath of Sandy, the federal
government provided significant financial
resources to repair the damage. Across the
region, many “fix and fortify” projects have
been completed, and there are many more
in the works. We are in many ways on our
way to being much stronger than we’ve been
in decades, but this doesn’t mean we have
solved our essential vulnerability: systemwide
weakness that comes from underinvestment
in the post World War II era.
Neither the MTA nor any other transportation
agency can rely on emergency awards to address
this long-term issue of underinvestment. It takes
a lot of money to fortify infrastructure, and
maintenance alone consumes many operating
budgets. There may be better, non-traditional
ways in which we could fund infrastructure, but
exploring these options will take a concerted
effort across our society.
Public transportation faces a particular
funding challenge, often relying on state, city or
federal dollars, as well as rider’s contributions.
More often than not, these revenue sources
cannot keep up with the costs of running the
system. One reason for this, I believe, is that
we look at public transportation too narrowly.
We need to broaden the perspective.
Public transportation is a system, of course.
But when you really think about it, it’s much
more than that. It’s essentially a “green
machine.” When people use the system, they
are automatically reducing use of other, higherpolluting vehicles. In other words, trains, buses
and subways certainly produce greenhouse
gases, but they also generate a benefit: Transit
Avoided Carbon.
Not long ago the MTA used survey data,
spatial analysis and other approaches to model
our network’s carbon reduction impact. We
found the carbon avoidance generated by
14
THINK ISSUE 13 — 2015
the MTA was more than eight times (8.24)
the carbon generated. That is, for every unit
of greenhouse gas our vehicles emit, the
MTA region avoids 8.24 times that in carbon
emissions. Using other research, we determined
that the MTA in 2008 generated about 2.73
million metric tons of greenhouse gases.
If you put these numbers together, it suggests
that the MTA helps the region avoid about
20 million metric tons of greenhouse gas
emissions each year. If, theoretically, there were
a transparent and accessible carbon market,
what might 20 million metric tons generate for
a system like ours financially? At $30 a ton (one
commonly used benchmark), it would translate
to about $600 million. Such a sum would go
a long way toward creating more resilient and
sustainable transportation infrastructure.
What’s more, it would help to reframe public
transportation as a valuable asset to the
economy and the environment and not merely
a way for people to get to work and back.
Challenge for Tomorrow
For the MTA, and many transportation agencies
across the country, the increasing frequency of
major storms is sounding the alarm that vital
change is necessary. Catastrophic events, such
as Sandy, shine the light on the broader issue of
maintenance and upkeep of old infrastructure.
We can’t go back, but we can go forward with
clearer goals.
Building a resilient transportation
infrastructure is the biggest challenge facing
the next generation of engineers in America.
It is not something we can tackle in a few years,
and it cannot be framed solely as a reaction to
the increasingly frequent destructive storms
we face. Rather, we must find a path forward
in which every investment is weighed not only
for the service it will deliver today but for its
ability to perform and endure when the next
storm clouds form on the horizon. n
hntb.com/think
hntb.com/think THINK ISSUE 13 — 201515
The HNTB Companies
Infrastructure Solutions