Long Range Infrastructure Planning The Gilbert, Arizona Experience Kenneth C. Morgan, PE Public Works Director

A number of municipal agencies have a “run to failure” mindset as it relates to their infrastructure. This approach is more expensive and often has a greater negative impact on their citizens and customers.

The Responsibilities of a Municipality to their customers are to: Be a good steward of the public trust Establish system and component goals Be a transparent partner with the regulators in the interest of the consumer Be a responsible operator of system infrastructure Make consistent and timely assessments and/or replacements of system components Perform the appropriate execution of maintenance activities to guarantee operation

A Bad Day at the office The meaning of an Assessment for some agencies is to determine the cost of replacement once the component has failed

Infrastructure Misconceptions If it is built or constructed new- we do not have to budget for maintenance for a few years A 20-year life on a component means it lasts for 20 years It is cheaper to just run it, patch it up, and replace it when it fails There really are no measurable differences between preventive and reactive maintenance

An effective Long Range Infrastructure Planning process aligns the agency’s goals and strategies with the operational realities of managing system components

The Town of Gilbert has been transitioning from a “high growth- CIP driven” approach to a more balanced asset management effort based on Long Range Infrastructure Planning (LRIP)

A “High Growth-CIP driven” approach involves: Building new infrastructure in isolation or independent of other associated components Minimal focus on maintenance with little regard to the longevity of the assets The replacement of assets only when broken or unusable No consideration of rehab or enhancement activities The creation of huge budget spikes at the end of the asset’s useful life

A balanced long range approach involves: An active assessment of assets to determine their useful life expectancy Planned maintenance consistent with industry standards over the useful life of an asset A predictive approach to repair and enhancement efforts The collaborative use of rehab options More balanced annual requests for necessary replacement activity to reduce budget spikes

Asset Assessment and Prioritization considers: The age and effective use of the asset The criticality of the asset to a specific portion of or to the entire system The possibility of available rehab, repair, and/or replacement options

Planned “industry standard” Maintenance involves: Performing maintenance activities on a more frequent basis Incorporating maintenance activities with enhancement and rehabilitation opportunities Monitoring the amount of maintenance a component receives to identify its useful life Accurately determining the most appropriate time to replace a component

A balance of the capital and operating budgets considers: A combined strategy for improvements A criticality-based response A collaboration of initiatives and processes An evaluation of alternative approaches A consideration of effective enhancement versus replacement The impact of “not doing anything”

A balance of the capital and operating budgets considers (continued): A predictive or preventive approach as opposed to a “reactive” one An assessment of where to get the best value of spent funds Capital programs established in light of operational realities A “Right Spending” Approach to extend the life of a component where necessary

Anticipated results of new processes: More consistent program approaches to the maintenance of assets Preventive maintenance efforts instead of reactive ones The development of methodical processes for the assessment of critical assets Prioritization of assets to identify the best practices for their enhancement

Anticipated results of new processes (continued) Procedural standardization to gain efficiencies in asset operation and maintenance Tools to better equip workers in the execution of assigned tasks Continuous improvement mechanisms to strengthen the knowledge base of employees The development, implementation, and maintenance of “value added” responses to customer needs

The overall goals of LRIP Plan it with the long view in mind Design it with consideration of the present and future Build it with the expertise and technology to cause it to reach it’s useful life Operate and Maintain it like it may be a while before it is replaced Replace it when that is the most cost-effective option

A short-term approach to LRIP will: HAVE YOU OUT ON A LEDGE!!

QUESTIONS???????