People are looking ahead to a future of normal activities with their friends and loved ones, and the same is true in the engineering world. Large public and private construction projects have been deeply affected by the pandemic but getting back to “normal” might look a little different. Going forward there are shifts in behavior that have led to changes in land entitlements, planning, and engineering. Here are six ways planners and engineers will have to think differently as the world gets back to normal:
1) Renewed Emphasis on Asset Management — While the concept of asset management has been a major part of managing infrastructure for decades, the pandemic has made this task even more important for public entities. With budgets expected to do more with less in the near future as government revenues recover, asset management is one of the tools that can help stretch a budget. The core of the concept is having an accurate inventory of the department’s assets, an assessment of their condition, and a prioritization of which need maintenance and replacement and when.
It’s here that your engineering partner can assist with asset management determinations to give your department the direction it needs. That may be recommendations on which projects are done now that will save money in the years ahead, and those that can be delayed since the asset would be ready for replacement in a few short years.
2) The Return of Infrastructure Funding — State, provincial, and local government budgets are expected to be stressed in the aftermath of the pandemic as last year’s shutdown kept commuters at home, reducing revenue from gas taxes and public transportation fares. However, it appears that infrastructure funding from the federal government will be a major priority in coming years and the revival of congressional earmarks promises more enthusiasm from legislators for projects in their districts.
Additionally, funding for broadband infrastructure will see increased emphasis as the pandemic laid bare the disparity that exists and the need for the ability to connect remotely. This appears a growing trend at the local, state, and federal levels. For public works executives with backed-up projects and a need for funding, this is good news. But this is where the job can be difficult. A crucial element to finding funds is having a partner experienced in grant writing and positioning projects for a wide variety of funding sources. One of the essential criteria when looking at an engineering firm is how successful they are at breaking down a large project into smaller pieces that fit various grant programs.
3) Creative Partnerships — The construction slowdown during 2020 gave many public works executives time to think about money and time-saving arrangements when work picked up again. Public-private partnerships have always been a popular go-to choice to leverage funds for projects and Design-Build is an established alternative delivery method to advance projects quickly, encourage innovation, and control costs. Another project delivery method aimed at innovation, speed, and cost control is the Construction Manager/General Contractor model. Here the agency hires both a project designer and a general contractor that serves as a construction manager during the design phase.
These two entities collaborate throughout the design process. The result is that they can creatively solve issues about the design or materials early which helps speed up the design and produces a more accurate cost estimate. When the price for the project is set, the agency has the option of hiring the construction manager to do the work, or they can send it out for bids. Having a designer who knows the construction business is a positive in these partnerships.
Within the private sector and the homebuilding industry specifically, there has been growing investment from private investors funding projects. Strategic partnerships are being formed between landowners, private investors, and the developer/builder that relies less on local banks or other financial institutions.
4) The Old Road Just Won’t Be the Same — COVID-19 required that people stay near their homes for an extended period of time, which increased the desire to utilize public spaces such as streets, sidewalks, and parks. With a reduced ability to travel, even minimally, people found themselves on walks, riding bikes, utilizing parks and open space, and driving less. A question yet to be answered is will that trend continues after the pandemic?
Roadway plans going forward will likely account for not only car and truck traffic, but bicycles, scooters, and pedestrians. New Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg is a proponent of the “Complete Streets” policy, which advocates for more attractive, walkable transportation corridors, and we’ll likely see more grants promoting this type of construction along with addressing equity for all transportation users.
People have shown they like the ability to walk/bike/ride through their neighborhood, which means municipal governments must seek ways to make it happen. Communities with roadway projects should be aware of grants that could take advantage of these changes. Consider the use of context-sensitive design, in which the roadways plans are flexible and sensitive to a community’s values and varying needs of the local demographics. Also important within the context of roadways are parks, open space, and landscape. As people enjoyed the amenities offered by their local parks, exploring connections that may exist between the usage of these facilities and a community’s roadway network could set it apart. Selecting a design partner with experience in these areas can deliver better results for your reimagined projects.
5) New Building in New Ways — The retail industry boomed in 2020 as e-commerce spread around the world. More people made an online purchase than ever before, while brick-and-mortar stores shut down and malls became ghost towns. E-commerce accelerated the growth of distribution and data centers, with developers of these projects barely keeping up with the demand for space. These changes are certainly speeding up the timetable for road and highway improvements to handle greater truck traffic between these locations and consumers’ homes, furthermore, these changes have significantly impacted the development of distribution and commercial centers. A reimagining of the design of these facilities is required and, in some cases, a revamping is needed as many of the changes due to COVID-19, especially those that provided an increased level of convenience for consumers, are likely to continue.
In residential homebuilding, developers are seeing consumers take another look at more affordable housing in far-flung suburbs.The pandemic caused people to realize that if they could productively work at home at least part-time, the long commute to the office didn’t matter as much. And buyers are wanting adaptable layouts in homes, with rooms that can easily change into an office, school space, gym, or bedroom, as well as private outdoor spaces to bring the outside “in.” To respond to this, some developers have shifted their focus away from developing in our inner cities and are focused on the suburbs where there is more space and in some cases better schools. Therefore, developers are engaging in large “land grabs” on the outskirts of major cities, however, there is a lack of infrastructure within these areas. This increases, again, the need for understanding funding mechanisms and true master planning for these facilities that results in the best design.
6) Engineering for Extremes — Besides the disruption caused by the pandemic, engineers have also been aware of the impact of climate change on their work. The rise of COVID-19 didn’t exacerbate climate change (in fact, pollution levels dropped during the shutdown) but it did show the impact of human activity on the environment.
We place “static” infrastructure into a very dynamic environment. Going forward there will be a continued push to design for extremes in the context of sustainable infrastructure. We must be keenly aware that a 500-year flood or a once-in-a-century hurricane could happen twice within a decade. Roadways, buildings, and homes will have to be designed for this reality, such that facilities can withstand extreme events and can recover quickly. We do not have the resources, nor would it be prudent, to design everything for the extremes. However, we must prioritize facilities that need strengthening for critical public safety and economic activity needs and armor other facilities so they are resilient. Asset management can help with this prioritization.
It is critical to be flexible and adaptable to the changes that COVID-19 has exacerbated and to understand the greater context of the challenges we face. Look for an engineering partner who understands how to find the right solutions to your specific needs. Please contact us today.
The purpose of water storage tanks is usually to maintain water service pressure, maintain emergency storage supply and pressure during power outages, and provide equalization volume to meet peak demands, such as fire flows and times of the day when water use is high. It is often desirable to operate wells, water treatment plants, and pump stations at consistent flow rates. Instead of ramping treatment and pumping rates to meet instantaneous real-time demands, equalization storage volume allows for consistent operations and using equalization storage volume to be filled and drained to make up the difference. There are a few items to consider when selecting a new water storage tank for your community or industry.
Traditionally, it has been a common practice for many water utilities to keep storage tanks in full or near full condition to be better prepared for peak water use periods and for emergencies such as fires. As a result, many storage facilities operate with larger water storage capacity than is needed for non-emergency usage. Also, some storage facilities – especially older ones – have an overflow elevation that is below the pressure of the water system. A valve prevents the entry of water into the tank, and pumps are needed to move water from the tank into the distribution system. In these cases, water can reside in the tank for a very long time when sitting stagnant. Long residence times can lead to water quality issues such as loss of residual, thermal stratification during the summer months, or ice formation during the winter months.
Regardless of the type of tank facility, it is critical that the overflow elevation is properly matched to the pressure of the system, as this allows the water surface within the tank to “float” on the system. In other words, the water elevation in the tank itself creates pressure in the distribution system. When tanks are being filled via pump stations, the pressure of the system is increased, and water flows into tank facilities. Normally, the water level in a storage tank routinely fluctuates on a daily basis through a fill and draw cycle. The difference in the fluctuation will vary depending upon the size (diameter and height) of the storage facility, real-time system demand, and location in the distribution system.
The water in the tank should fluctuate several feet prior to the start of the pump station or additional pumps coming online to ensure that proper turnover and mixing of the tank is occurring.
Ground Storage and Elevated Storage – Which is Right for you?
Required water distribution storage capacity for potable water systems is traditionally met by the use of ground, elevated, or standpipe storage tanks or a combination of all three.
Ground water storage
Ground Storage Tanks – These are ground supported, flat bottom cylindrical tanks generally with a shell height less than or equal to its diameter and usually constructed of steel or concrete. A storage tank can be broken down into distinctive water storage components, each of which serves a particular purpose. Equalization storage is located at the top of the tank and is typically cycled on a daily basis. This meets the water system demands that are in excess of the pumping capacity of the system or allows storage when pumping is greater than instantaneous demands. Equalization storage can further be broken down into operational storage, low-end storage, and effective storage.
For ground storage tanks providing direct pressure service to the distribution system, emergency storage is defined as the water level in the reservoir above which 20 psi can be maintained for fire flow and emergency service. The upper end of the emergency storage is typically defined as the bottom of the equalization storage component. The water below the emergency storage in the reservoir is considered to be “dead” storage volume and is not considered usable. This “dead” storage, especially if it is a relatively large volume and the tank is not turned over frequently, can lead to water quality problems in instances where internal tank mixing systems are not in place.
Standpipe Storage Tanks – A standpipe storage tank is also a ground-level water storage tank that is available in a wide range of sizes. Standpipes are greater in height than diameter and can be designed with decorative elements to help blend the tank into the surrounding environment. A standpipe blends the characteristics and performance of both ground storage and elevated storage tank, with their taller design allowing water above the operating range to typically provide gravity-fed pressure. The water below the operating range provides reserve or emergency storage. Standpipes are often used on small systems where less volume is needed, or in situations where a tank site has a high ground elevation relative to the system pressure.
Elevated water storage.
Elevated Storage Tanks – These consist of two primary components: the tank (or bowl which holds the water) and the supporting structure or tower which supports the bowl. These types of tanks are commonly constructed where the ground elevation is insufficient for the use of reservoir-style tanks or where greater storage capacity than could normally be achieved with a standpipe is required. There are several common styles of elevated tanks including spheroid, fluted column, and composite (steel bowl with concrete support structure). These tanks have commonly been constructed of welded steel; however, recently composite-style tanks are gaining prominence. Composite tanks utilize a steel bowl atop a concrete tower. Composite tanks require less long-term maintenance costs as the concrete tower does not require repainting.
What are Equipment, sizing, and Siting considerations?
In order to pick the best solution for a community, there are many factors that need to be taken into consideration.
Pumping Systems – Storage tanks may utilize either a direct or indirect pumping system. A direct pumping system pumps water from the tank through a booster pumping station to supply system pressures. In an indirect pumping system, water is pumped into the ground storage tank and “floats” on the system and flows by gravity from the tank to system pressure. Newly designed elevated storage tanks are almost always indirect systems and float at the connected system pressure. The indirect pumping system has several advantages over a direct pumping system in a water distribution system:
Lowering peak pumping rates, maintain constant, reliable water supply and pressures.
Stabilizing pressure variations as demands fluctuate.
Balancing and leveling pump operations.
Reducing the need for a wide range of pump sizes.
Decreasing power consumption costs – especially for time-of-day electricity pricing.
Dampening extreme low and high low pressures (surge relief).
Enhancing emergency response during water main breaks or power failure.
Enhancing fire flow and pressure response.
Size – Typically, storage tanks are sized to hold approximately one day’s worth of water for the community served by the tower. If the pumps fail (for example, during a power failure), a standpipe or water tower should hold enough water to meet the community’s demand for about one day. In addition, the tank may play a major role during a fire and can affect the community’s insurance rates. During a fire, the water demand increases significantly and may greatly exceed the capacity of the pumps at the community’s water plant.
Height – The elevation of a storage tank and its operational level determines the water pressure in the community. New systems are required to provide a minimum pressure of 20 PSI (pounds per square inch) at ground level at all points in the distribution system under all flow conditions. Typically, normal working pressure in a distribution system will be approximately 60 to 80 PSI and not less than 35 PSI. The water level in the tower must be high enough to supply that level of pressure to all customers in the zone served by the tower.
Location – Available land for new water storage tanks and the location go hand in hand to also determine the required height of the tank. Water towers are typically located on high ground and tall enough to provide the necessary pressure. By choosing a high site, the height of the tower can be reduced, thus reducing the cost of construction. However, many factors can complicate location selection. For instance, overhead or underground utility cables may need to be relocated. Utility relocations are time-consuming and need advance planning and coordination with the utilities and regulatory agencies. In locating an elevated tank, the following criteria are recommended for consideration:
Maintain pressure in the distribution system: The tank’s operational elevation is usually 200 feet (ground to overflow) above the service area to maintain a pressure of 60-80 PSI. Higher ground elevations are preferred so that water towers can be less than 200 feet tall.
Location within a pressure zone: To maximize the benefits from hydraulic water pressure to a pressure zone, the tank should be located in the central portion or the far side of the zone, this allows the tank to supplement demands during peak usage and result in higher service pressures. However, consideration should also be given to the turnover of the tank in order to limit long residence times and the associated operational issues. A tower on the edge of a system may sit stagnant for long periods of time, resulting in low chlorine residuals, thermal stratification, and ice formation. Siting a storage tank requires a balanced approach to maximizing pressures while optimizing water quality and operations.
Distance from existing water transmission main: Storage tanks require large flows to both fill the tank and drain to meet peak usage. Tank sites farther from high-capacity water transmission mains may require an investment in a connecting main at additional cost.
Site area, availability, and accessibility: Adequate site area will be required to provide clearance for construction and future maintenance of the tank. The site needs to be available to purchase, preferably undeveloped, to overcome resistance from other property owners. The site shall provide adequate access for construction and maintenance equipment. The costs associated with acquiring the parcel must be considered.
Foundation Design– Storage tanks and the associated water volume result in a large amount of weight that needs to be supported. Standpipes and elevated storage tanks also need to be designed to resist overturning due to wind loadings. The requirements for Foundation Design make choosing the location of a new water tower important, and sometimes difficult. Engineers must complete detailed geotechnical investigations to understand the underlying soil properties at potential sites. This is an important step to prepare the foundation design for the water tank to resist settlement and overturning.
Water Age – Water quality is impacted by keeping water in the system fresh. This means turning over the water in the tower and reducing stagnant conditions. Increased water age can lead to deteriorating water quality such as the increased formation of disinfection-by-products (DBPs), nitrification, and loss of disinfection residual. Taste and odor problems can also result from excessive water age. Therefore, the location for the water tower must be selected with an understanding of how water moves through a water distribution system. Poor site location can have a seriously detrimental effect on distribution system water quality.
What are long-term maintenance needs?
Maintenance –Once a location is found, proper water storage maintenance is crucial. Water tanks need to be periodically inspected and cleaned to maintain good water quality in the community’s water distribution system and to help extend the life of the storage tank. Regular tank inspections can also help to identify small problems and prevent major problems from developing that can create health-related issues, leading to expensive repairs or premature structural failure of the tanks. Tanks that are not periodically cleaned can cause contamination events that can harm human health or generate aesthetic complaints.
Typically a community should plan on performing an interior and exterior inspection of their water tanks once every three to five years. Some states require that the interior and exterior of all water storage facilities of 10,000 gallons or larger shall be inspected and maintained a minimum of every five years by a professional tank inspection firm or by a registered professional engineer. In addition, the interior and exterior coatings on steel elevated water storage tanks should be inspected by a person trained to evaluate the integrity of the paint system. Although rare today, tanks painted before the late 1970s could still have a lead paint coating if the original paint had not been removed by sandblasting to bare metal. Making sure this has been done should be the focus of any inspection of older tanks.
Inspections – The timing of inspections can be tricky because a tank needs to be taken out of service for comprehensive interior inspections. The first question to be answered is whether the tower can be taken offline and, if so, for how long. A test shutdown is a good way to reveal any potential challenges prior to conducting the work. Numerous factors will dictate when you can most easily take your tank out of service. Location of the tank, required flow rates, peak demand, the ability to isolate the water tower from the system, and the possibility of ice in the water tower (in winter and spring months) are all considerations that affect the final decision.
Elevated storage tanks are best inspected during the warmer weather between late spring and early fall. If the water tower is susceptible to the formation of ice, inspection is not an option until the ice is completely out of the tower. There are also methods of inspection that can occur without taking the tower out of service. One method is to use a remote-operated vehicle (ROV). Alternatively, inspection divers can be hired to visually inspect the interior surfaces. These alternative ROV/diver methods are usually limited to visual inspections and cannot evaluate the interior coating system to the same extent as a dry inspection allows.
Permits– A permit is generally not required from the regulatory agencies to inspect, clean, repair, or paint a tank. However, a permit will be required if any modifications are made to the tank such as installing vents, hatchways, overflows, or any type of mixing devices. It is recommended that the local regulatory agencies be informed before tank inspection or cleaning. After underwater inspection and/or cleaning, and prior to placing the tank in service, water samples from the tank must be analyzed for chlorine residual and or coliform bacteria. If coliform bacteria are absent and chlorine residual is acceptable, the tank can be placed back into service. If not, continue water sampling until two consecutive samples for coliform are negative. If necessary, the tank should be disinfected.
What systems are evaluated during inspections?
Based on the results of a tank inspection, improvements and maintenance needs may include any of the following:
Paint Recoating – The most common water storage maintenance is repainting. The life of a coating system varies based on the type of product, method of application, and the recoating application. Generally, recoatings are needed within a time span of 15-30 years from the initial application. Given the height and shape of water towers and choices in coating systems with different life expectancies, this can be a complicated process. Tank interior coatings should be coordinated to provide an overall system that meets current standards for drinking water applications, this includes products that meet third-party certification.
Exterior painting and interior coatings every 15-30 years extend the life of the storage tank.
Cathodic Protection System – To provide longer coating life and provide a greater level of corrosion protection, a cathodic protection (CP) system can be added to a steel water storage tank. Internal corrosion on steel tanks often begins at pinholes or holidays in a coating system that results in localized, concentrated corrosion and pitting of the steel. CP systems work by installing/suspending an anode inside the tank, which protects uncoated surfaces. There are two primary types of CP systems: 1) passive galvanic systems which use metals such as zinc and magnesium that preferentially corrode over steel, or 2) impressed current systems which utilize an external power source and AC/DC rectifier. When properly installed and maintained, CP systems work in tandem with the coating system to limit corrosion and can significantly extend the time needed for paint recoating. CP systems require regular testing and maintenance to keep the anode systems in working order.
Health and Safety System – Inspections should consider current design standards and safety regulations. Regulations are continually changing, examples include updates to the number and size of access manways, vents, overflow pipe termination height, and proper screening, and fall arrest/safety systems. Regular inspections provide an opportunity to identify any needed improvements to upgrade safety systems.
Tank Mixers – Storage tanks can experience pockets of stagnant water based on a number of factors, including overall tank size/volume, demand/flow in and out of the tank, and the configuration of inlet/outlet pipes. For example, standpipes and water towers that float directly on the distribution system quite often have a single inlet/outlet pipe that connects the tank to the overall system. This configuration often leads to short-circuiting of water through the storage tank, or a “last in, first out” situation. This can result in areas or pockets of water in that tank that sit stagnant resulting in water quality issues such as loss of disinfection residual, DBP formation, thermal stratification, and ice formation.To address these issues, mixing systems can be added to the tank interior. These mixing systems vary in the method used, but can generally be grouped into two types:
Passive Mixing Systems: These systems utilize the benefit of pressure and flow gradients during fill/drain cycles on a tank to induce mixing. However, passive mixing systems generally do not provide active benefits when the tank is not actively being filled. Examples of passive systems include inlet pipes with multiple ports to increase mixing during filling, dedicated inlet/outlet pipes to increase plug-flow behavior, and check valve systems that can be added to a single inlet/outlet pipe to emulate a dedicated inlet/outlet configuration.
Active Mixing Systems: These systems utilize an external source of mixing that can be operated continuously. The benefit of these systems is that mixing can be provided at all times (not just the initial filling), which provides greater control of the mixing process. Active mixing systems can include submerged impellers mounted near the floor of the tank, surface aerator mixers, and external air compressors/blowers that create induced mixing with air bubble-induced turbulence. An additional benefit of active mixing systems is that DBPs are volatile and can be removed via air-stripping methods with these mechanical systems. The systems require an external energy source to facilitate mixing.
Determining the ideal storage type, sizing, location, and equipment for each community’s water needs is a highly customized process. Inspections, protective coatings, regulation changes, and equipment upgrades can impact the frequency and intensity of water storage maintenance. Operation needs may also impact the ability to drain tanks for inspections or determine the timing for larger projects like complete surface preparation and recoating of the exterior and interior wet/dry surfaces. Delaying the maintenance of these critical distribution system components could result in water quality violations, customer complaints, and service disruptions. HR Green has extensive experience in designing, constructing, maintaining, and refurbishing water storage tanks for both public and private uses. We’re ready to answer your questions and help your community evaluate water storage options as well as associated operational and maintenance commitments.
No doubt you have been following the movement in Washington related to the latest COVID-19 relief, known as the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. The current draft has local governments receiving $130 billion, equally divided between municipalities and counties. This equates to $65 billion for municipalities allocated to all 19,000 cities, towns, and villages in the nation. It would not be surprising if you are also questioning how the American Rescue Plan affects your agency and feeling a bit confused about how to prepare for what looks to be an influx of funding to state and local governments.
While much remains at play as to final figures and application of such funds, there are a few things you can be doing now to get ready for what lies ahead.
Conduct an inventory of the costs incurred to mitigate the public health emergency and/or its negative impact on your community’s economy. The Act is likely to include some parameters around the use of funds. Quantifying the effects of the pandemic on your community will be important for the application of funds so this is a good first step.
Document direct and indirect costs to your agency resulting from the emergency, considering impacts on labor, operations, and service demands. Direct costs are sometimes easier to document, so don’t forget the important work of documenting indirect costs as well. Labor, operations, and changes in service demands, all influence your agency’s overall costs.
Gauge and compare pre-COVID budgeted revenuesto actual revenues looking for differences caused by the impact of the pandemic. When evaluating the differences in the budget vs. actual revenues, use the figures as they were in place at the end of January 2020. This is a good place to begin with your comparison.
Evaluate the need for new community improvements, enhancements, operational changes, and other ideas that will help to offset the negative economic impacts caused by the pandemic. The pandemic laid bare the need to address public health emergencies. What did you identify as a need in your community that could have made you better able to weather the uncertainty created during the pandemic? Are there projects you’ve identified in your CIP that mitigate these impacts in the future? Outlining these projects now will help you be ready when the Act is approved.
You can find additional resources through organizations such as the International City Management Association, National League of Cities, and National Association of Counties. Once the American Rescue Plan is passed and funding information is available, you should be prepared to apply for the funds allocated to you. If you would like to discuss in more detail how the COVID relief details apply to your community, please don’t hesitate to contact an HR Green consultant.
Last week, a Federal Court in California upheld nearly all of the FCC’s declaratory ruling that pre-empted local control over 5G deployment. This challenge was brought by cities seeking to regain local authority over the deployment of small cells in the public rights-of-way, which was severely limited by the 2018 FCC Small Cell Order. For most communities, this ruling eliminates the possibility that the FCC rules will be rolled back and creates a regulatory framework that now must be acknowledged as a guide for the management of these deployments.
While the rules upheld by the court continue to limit local control, there are important steps that are being taken by communities around the country to regulate local deployment that are allowed by the ruling and subsequent court decision. HR Green strongly recommends that local governments adopt a number of key policies that can ensure you are prepared to address the coming wave of small cell attachment applications likely to be seen as providers continue their nationwide rollouts.
Recommendations
The following are the recommendations we share with municipalities regarding the development of regulations for small cell facilities in their public rights-of-way. The Court ruling will have some impact on the recommendations regarding the development of small cell aesthetic design standards.
Recommendations include:
Municipalities should develop small cell policies to regulate the siting of these facilities in their rights-of-way (ROW) that align with the FCC’s Small Cell Order and their state’s Small Cell regulations if their state has such regulations. If their state has Small Cell regulations and it has similar regulations to the FCC’s Small Cell Order, then the municipalities Small Cell policy should specify the regulations from the more restrictive regulations, either the FCC Small Cell Order or their state Small Cell regulations. These policies should include regulations regarding shot clocks and fees.
While municipalities cannot say “no” to the siting of small cell facilities in the ROW, it is recommended, as part of their responsibility regarding public safety, that they include in their small cell policy a requirement that applicants submit a site-specific RF report as part of thesmall cell RF application process for each facility. The report shall specify approach distances to the general public and occupational workers at the ground and antenna centerline levels. It is also recommended, again as part of their responsibility regarding public safety, that their policy requires an applicant to perform post-installation field testing of each facility to confirm the information included in the RF report, as well as annual field testing.
Municipalities can charge fees above the FCC Small Cell Order’s safe harbor fees, as long as they can justify those fees. It is recommended that if a municipality wants to charge higher fees, that they perform a cost of services study to analyze their true cost to provide services, including but not limited to application review services, as well as permitting and inspection services.
Municipalities should develop and publish small cell aesthetic design standards regarding the siting of these facilities in their public rights-of-way (ROW). The Court ruling seems to have loosened the aesthetic restrictions of the FCC Small Cell Order, so municipalities may be able to establish more restrictive requirements regarding aesthetic standards for these facilities.
Briefing and Background Information
On August 12, 2020, the three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco granted in part, and denied in part, petitions for review of three orders of the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) concerning the newest generation of wireless broadband technology known as “5G” that requires the installation of thousands of “small cell” wireless facilities.
According to the Summary of the published Opinion of the panel, petitioners seeking review of the FCC orders were numerous local governments, public and private power utilities, and wireless service providers. The three FCC orders were promulgated under the authority of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the “Act”). The orders, issued in 2018, are known as the Small Cell Order, the Moratoria Order, and the One Touch Make-Ready Order. The first two orders spelled out the limits on local governments’ authority to regulate telecommunications providers. The third order was intended to prevent owners and operators of utility poles from discriminatorily denying or delaying 5G and broadband service providers access to the poles.
The panel held that given the deference owed to the agency in interpreting and enforcing the Act, the Small Cell and Moratoria Orders were, with the exception of one provision, in accord with the congressional directive in the Act, and not otherwise arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law. The exception was the Small Cell Order provision dealing with the authority of local governments around aesthetic regulations. The panel held that to the extent that provision required small cell facilities to be treated in the same manner as other types of communications services, the regulation was contrary to the congressional directive that allowed different regulatory treatment among types of providers, so long as such treatment did not “unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services.” The panel also held that the FCC’s requirement that all aesthetic criteria must be “objective” lacked a reasoned explanation. The panel rejected constitutional challenges under the Fifth and Tenth Amendments to both orders.
The August 2020 Court ruling seems to support most of the regulations established by the FCC’s 2018 Small Cell Order. However, the panel granted the petitions for review as to the FCC’s requirement in the Small Cell Order that aesthetic regulations be “no more burdensome” than requirements applied to other infrastructure deployments, and the FCC’s requirement that all local aesthetic regulations be “objective.” The Court vacated those portions of the rule and remanded them to the FCC.
Small Cell Order
On September 27, 2018, the Federal Communications Commissions (FCC) published a Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order, titled “Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment” (the Small Cell Order). The Order establishes fees, new “shot clocks”, and provides limits on local governments’ small cell infrastructure control.
The FCC Order establishes fees (a.k.a.: safe harbor fees) as follows:
$500 for non-recurring fees, including a single up-front application that includes up to five Small Wireless Facilities, with an additional $100 for each small wireless facility beyond five
$1,000 for non-recurring fees for a new pole (not a collocation) intended to support one or more small wireless facilities.
$270 per small wireless facility per year for all recurring fees, including any possible right-of-way (ROW) access fee or fee for attachment to municipally-owned structures in the ROW
The following shot clocks are the FCC’s permit review times for new small wireless facilities:
A 60-day review period for collocation of small wireless facilities
A 90-day review period for construction of new small wireless facilities
Existing shot clocks for non-small wireless facilities deployments remain in place:
90 days for collocation on an existing structure
150 days for deployment on a new structure
According to the FCC Order, the “shot clock” rules are as follows:
Both the new and existing shot clocks apply to “any approval that a siting authority must issue under applicable law prior to deployment”. This includes zoning approvals and building permits and may also include license or franchise agreements to access the rights-of-way, leases for use of municipal poles or property in the rights-of-way, electric permits, and road closure permits, among others.
For small wireless facilities deployments, shot clocks are reset if the siting authority notifies the applicant within 10 days after submission that the application is incomplete. For subsequent determinations of incompleteness, the shot clock would toll—not reset—if the siting authority provides written notice within 10 days that the supplemental submission did not provide the requested information.
For non-small wireless facilities, shot clocks begin to run when an application is first submitted and can be paused—not reset—if the siting authority notifies the applicant within 30 days that the application is incomplete. For subsequent determinations of incompleteness, the process is the same as described above for small wireless facilities.
Failure to act within the new small wireless facility shot clock constitutes a presumptive violation of the Communications Act and applicants may seek expedited injunctive relief in court within 30 days of a local government missing a shot clock deadline. There is no “deemed granted” remedy.
The FCC Order limits aesthetic reviews and requirements (including undergrounding, spacing, and historic/environmental requirements) to what is:
reasonable
no more burdensome than those applied to other types of infrastructure deployments
objective and published in advance
It is important to note that in its August 12, 2020 ruling, the three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted the petitions for review of the aesthetic regulations in the FCC’s Small Cell Order. The Court vacated those portions of the rule and remanded them to the FCC.
The effective date of the 2018 Order with respect to the new limitations on rights-of-way fees and deadlines for acting on permit applications was January 14, 2019.
Conclusions
The August 12, 2020 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco regarding the FCC Small Cell Order reinforced the regulations established in the FCC’s 2018 Small Cell Order, with one exception. The one exception is the aesthetic regulations in the Small Cell Order. The Court vacated those portions of the rule and remanded them to the FCC.
The Court ruling does not seem to have a substantial impact on our municipal small cell regulatory recommendations. We still recommend that municipalities develop small cell policies and aesthetic design standards. However, it is important that municipalities keep in mind that the ruling seems to have loosened the aesthetic restrictions of the Small Cell Order, so they may be able to place more restrictive aesthetic standards on small cell facilities in their public rights-of-way.
HR Green has successfully developed small cell polices and aesthetic design standards for several dozen municipal clients from the Midwest to the West. We have the knowledge and experience to assist communities in the development of these regulations.
Solutions to having good, ubiquitous broadband are very different for each community. Some communities do not have enough broadband providers; others have plenty of providers but pockets of areas that are underserved; still others have so many providers that they are concerned about running out of rights of way, particularly as fiber for 5G and small cells densifies.
This article discusses a process that can help address all these circumstances: broadband master planning. Some ideas might not seem new, but pulling them together into one process might be a solution to the fiber and broadband challenges communities face.
Posted with copyright permission from Broadband Communities Magazine. Broadband Master Planning: A Holistic Approach to Meeting Broadband Goals by HR Green’s Ken Demlow.
A construction project, regardless of size and scope, can be a daunting undertaking. Concept to completion can take months – even years – and comes with unknowns and risks. No two design and construction projects are exactly alike, with the varying site and civil constraints, schedules, building structural components, and numerous types of building materials and equipment. Often, the municipal staff is either too busy to adequately monitor the progress of the project or lacks the knowledgeable and experienced staff to do so. So how can municipal staff overcome these challenges to ensure a project is designed efficiently, sticks to a schedule and budget, and meets required adopted engineering building codes and ordinances?
Enter the Owner’s Representative role – someone hired to act as an extension to your staff. The owner’s representative protects your interests, coordinates, and effectively communicates to the team throughout all phases of the project while performing all site civil inspections, building inspections, overseeing budgets, payout requests, and addendums.
There are many advantages of hiring an owner’s representative; the most evident would be the time and experience. Your contractors and consultant teams may need immediate, on-site answers to technical questions; you will need to attend meetings, prepare documents, talk to vendors, assess the needs of the project, and more. Staying on top of it all takes time. An owner’s representative has additional staff resources to devote the time necessary to oversee that the project is completed on time, within budget, and code compliant.
The owner’s representative is knowledgeable about the construction process and all building disciplines. They know what needs to be done for the project (and when), and depending on the project and location, there are likely additional permits, other agency approvals, and vendors that you might need. Here is where the owner’s representative will be beneficial. The owner’s representative will oversee all the details of the project so municipal staff can focus on the more critical task of managing the day-to-day.
Whether it is for renovating or building a completely new structure, a small or large project, you need experts to represent your best interests. A representative who is aware of best design practices, current codes, permit requirements, and construction trends, and focused on bringing about the completion of a successful project in terms of finances, schedules, and deliverables.
Owner’s Representative for Elk Grove Village
Elk Grove Village hired HR Green to oversee the design of two fire stations and two public works buildings. The goal was to ensure the projects were completed according to the planning documents and approved permit construction documents within the budget schedule and in compliance with newly adopted building codes and ordinances. From schematic design coordination to final construction documents and code review, to site and civil inspections, and all building inspections through final occupancy, HR Green provided owners representative services to bring these unique projects to fruition.
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) (Public Law 116-136) provides the U.S. Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration (EDA) with $1.5 billion for economic development assistance programs to help communities “prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.” EDA works directly with communities to catalyze locally developed strategies to build capacity for economic development based on local business conditions and needs. These funds were appropriated under the Economic Adjust Assistance (EAA) program. The EAA program provides a wide range of technical, planning, and public works and infrastructure assistance in regions experiencing adverse economic changes that may occur suddenly or overtime.
Who is eligible
Eligible applicants under the Economic Adjustment Assistance (EAA) program include:
EDA-designated District Organizations
Native American tribal governments (Federally recognized)
States, counties, cities, or other political subdivisions of a State, including special purpose units of State or local government engaged in economic or infrastructure development activities
Institutions of higher education
Public or private non-profit organizations acting in cooperation with officials of a political subdivision of a State
What is eligible
To be eligible for EDA’s CARES Act Recovery Assistance grants, applicants must explain clearly how the proposed project would “prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus”
Projects that consider economic recovery, in general, must address the direct consequences of the coronavirus pandemic itself.
The extent to which a proposed project responds to needs caused by the coronavirus pandemic is one factor that EDA will consider when evaluating applications for funding.
EDA generally expects to fund at least 80%, and up to 100%, of eligible project costs. To fund above 80%, EDA will consider:
Whether the applicant has exhausted its effective taxing or borrowing capacity
The extent of the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the region
Whether the region meets other thresholds for elevated need based on the relative economic distress of the region
Examples of projects that EDA may fund through under the CARES ACT include:
Economic recovery planning and technical strategies to address the economic impacts of the coronavirus pandemic
Preparation of resiliency plans to respond to future pandemics
Entrepreneurial support programs to diversify economies
Innovation grants focused on technology innovation activities that will help communities prevent, prepare, and respond to the coronavirus pandemic.
How Cares Act Funds will be awarded
EDA is making the majority of CARES Act funds available through an addendum to the FY 2020 Public Works and Economic Adjustment Assistance Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO). You can find the NOFO at grants.gov by searching for the Opportunity Number “PWEAA2020.” The CARES Act Recovery Assistance Addendum is on pages 46–50 of the NOFO.
EDA will award CARES Act funds through its Economic Adjustment Assistance Program, which is EDA’s most flexible program. Grants will be awarded using three separate, parallel processes:
Competitive awards through EDA’s Regional Offices are similar to the normal process. Applicants will submit to the regional office
Non-Competitive awards – Invitation only
Competitive awards through EDA Headquarters
How to apply
As with much of the CARES Act funding, time is of the essence. Applications are already being processed, and awards will continue to be made until funds are depleted. While the funding pool is large, the money will be allocated quickly—so applications should be prepared and submitted as quickly as feasible.
The procedures to apply for competitive grants through EDA’s Regional Offices can be found on pages 18–28 of the FY2020 PWEAA NOFO. Applicants may apply online through grants.gov by searching for Opportunity Number PWEAA2020. All required forms are available at grants.gov or through their state Economic Development Representative.
All applications for CARES Act Recovery Assistance projects must explain how the project will meet EDA’s Recovery and Resilience investment priority. The applicant may also explain how the proposed project will meet any of EDA’s other investment priorities. EDA’s investment priorities can be found at: https://eda.gov/about/investment-priorities
Except for a “Strategy Grant,” each proposed project must be consistent with the region’s current Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS). Contact your regional office to see if a CEDS exists in your region at eda.gov/contact. If a region does not have a CEDS, EDA may be able to accept an alternate regional economic development strategy.
COVID-19 has created several challenges in our daily lives. Many of these challenges will have lasting impacts on the future. Traffic engineering and transportation planning are no exception. Because of the shuttering of so many businesses, mandatory work-from-home policies, and shelter-in-place orders, automobile usage has markedly diminished and resulted in pandemic traffic changes.
Along with the diminished traffic, new traffic flows have taken shape as essential businesses, such as grocery stores and restaurants with takeout-only services, find new ways to operate. These pandemic traffic changes not only impact current transportation network needs; they also may impact current infrastructure investments and future planning.
What are the Impacts of Pandemic Traffic?
The immediate impact of pandemic traffic changes is with traffic operations. Not surprisingly, there are very few cars on the road. However, many signal systems are timed for peak weekday travel when, in reality, they are experiencing off-peak and weekend-type traffic. Drivers and pedestrians are experiencing long waits at intersections without competing traffic. This may result in the unsafe condition of people ignoring the signal and running the lights. Many jurisdictions are evaluating their current traffic signal timing plans and making adjustments to account for the decrease in vehicular traffic, sometimes taking signals out of coordination altogether.
When it comes to traffic safety, the natural assumption is that fewer cars on the road should lead to a decrease in fatalities. However, anecdotally, fewer cars correspond with higher speeds. Today’s roadway fatalities are associated with driving too fast for conditions and a greater speed differential between vehicles as opposed to other congestion-related incidents. Communication between traffic operations and law enforcement could identify locations for targeted speed enforcement in an effort to slow traffic to safer levels and lower fatalities.
Monitoring pedestrian traffic can also play a role in stopping the spread of the virus. Pedestrian pushbuttons are being covered by some jurisdictions to prevent the spread of the disease and signals are operating with maximum pedestrian recall to reduce the use of the pushbutton and crowding at intersections.
What are the implications to project development?
Certainly, there is an opportunity to accelerate some projects currently under construction. With lighter than usual traffic conditions, and perhaps less need to keep a route open, construction may be accelerated while following social distancing and personal safety guidelines.
Projects currently in the feasibility and NEPA phases of design and approval present other challenges. Is the current course the right one? If the project moves forward, how can the prediction of future travel be accurate given current traffic conditions? Moreover, what are the implications to the public involvement portion of this process?
These challenges can be overcome. There are new big data tools available to view changes in traffic and help predict future conditions. In addition, many web-based collaboration tools can be configured to share project information and engage the public.
A more significant issue may be that the decrease in travel also means a reduction in gas tax and sales tax revenue. Jurisdictions are now prudently trying to predict shortfalls and are curtailing expenditures to match forecasted funding streams. This will match the project development with incoming revenue. However, the Federal Government has identified the funding shortfall and is starting to see the need to include transportation infrastructure in future stimulus funding. Continuing project development can position your organization for potential future stimulus funding opportunities by creating projects ready for construction, often called “shovel ready,” and help you achieve your infrastructure needs during these difficult financial times.
What are the long-term policy and planning implications?
There has been a long-standing push for Travel Demand Management strategies such as flex hours, carpooling, and telecommuting to help reduce the stress placed on transportation systems. The COVID-19 situation has forced a vast majority into telecommuting. As the initial challenges of telecommuting are overcome, will the positives indicate that there is a possibility of allowing it to persist beyond this crisis? How will telecommuting affect policy and planning decisions? Perhaps, more infrastructure dollars will be focused on communications and community broadband projects rather than transportation in the future.
The industry has been grappling with Connected and Autonomous Vehicles and what they will mean in the future. A future with increased telecommuting could hasten the need for automated package delivery, as workers will need the products at home that were once needed at the office. Loading and unloading zones for these types of autonomous vehicles is something we can plan for at this time. Many communities are currently re-evaluating the assigned space within the right-of-way to provide additional pedestrian/bicycle amenities, along with multi-modal transit options. Curb-space management becomes an increasingly important part of the planning.
The long-term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic traffic changes will be determined over the course of time. For certain, issues that have not yet been identified will come to the surface. The transportation industry has seen an increased focus on access management, Transportation System Management and Operations (TSMO), and practical design standards since the MAP-21 legislation was signed. While we do not know exactly what tomorrow will bring, thoughtful transportation planning will help all our communities improve the lives of the people who live within them. Now is the time to use available technology and tools to quickly and efficiently mine the data that transportation networks produce. This data will increase confidence in immediate decisions while also tracking the metrics that will be the basis for long-term policy decisions in the future.
The events associated with COVID-19 are unprecedented. As we all work to respond to the pandemic as best we can, cities across the country have been quick to develop underlying policies that address municipal service delivery. We have collected a running list of action points – in no particular order – that you may wish to consider as you contemplate your next steps.
Download the checklist by clicking the image below:
We hope you find this helpful as we respond to this crisis together.
As toilet paper supplies on store shelves diminished with COVID-19 concerns, we witnessed people turning to alternatives. Knowing the problems that are caused with flushing non-flushables, we put together a graphic to remind people that the only thing safe for sanitary systems is toilet paper. Keeping your sanitary systems functioning properly and efficiently should be high on all our priority lists.
This graphic and message are available for your use. Click below to download the graphic and let us know if you need anything to help you spread the word in your communities.
