This is KPBS midday edition. I am Maureen Cavanaugh. More bad news about what has been called San Diego's crumbling infrastructure. An analysis of 349 city-owned buildings was presented to the city Council this week. And I found that about -- found that about half our import condition. That adds tens of thousands of dollars to the repair estimates for San Diego's building infrastructure. Joining me with more on the city building survey are Mark Kirsty. He is in San Diego City Councilman and chair of the city's infrastructure committee and Mark welcome back to the show. Thank you appreciated. James Nagel Park is a San Diego city engineer. He presented the report to the Council yesterday. James, welcome. Thank you for having us. Now Mark is in the latest survey of the city's infrastructure needs. Remind us what the city had looked at before this. So we have been taking a look at all of our infrastructure categories. So we have done streets and roads, and now in the second wave of doing streets and roads. We just completed the city's first-ever sidewalk condition assessment in the city's sidewalk rock the city building facility is an important one because the city has a lot of different facilities. We talk about everything from libraries and rec centers to restrooms down the beach, City Hall. And everything in between. So there's a lot of different facilities and up surprisingly a lot of them are not a very good shape. We talk with the previous surveys that have been done with the city streets and the sidewalks, what kind of repair bills did those surveys tell us -- in store for us. Will what we have been working on is getting all the data together -- and compiling it into a conference of infrastructure investment plan. Another something that the cities really not done in the past. And was long overdue. So we have that committee a few months back. And the total discrepancy between the money that we needed the money that would have is about $1.7 billion just over the next five years. So with the big number. Now I am going to ask you get it again about the amount of the kinds of city buildings that you are taking a look at. I made reference to the beginning that City Hall has been found that -- be import condition. There are a lot of city-owned buildings that people are perhaps aware that she not aware of. Of course libraries but the struggles or pavilions -- is something that you also look at. And lifeguard stations. Right? That's right you have a number of different voting facilities that people don't really think about too much. In the city occupies a lot of those. We also reach out to some of those at [ Indiscernible ] elbow up Park. So that's about to exceed hundred -- citywide I think. So we have a lot of them. And unfortunately a lot of them are getting up there in age. And unfortunately just not been at the top of the priority list historically for maintenance and repair. Now James what are the types of infra structure albums he found in these buildings? So what we are looking at is what we call subsystems when we look at the heating and ventilation systems, plumbing systems. You're looking at roofing. The key and also some of the athletics. You're looking at paint, carpet, they think that. And put it all together and evaluate all of that. And look at it as you mentioned 349 buildings across the city which is about half the buildings that will become the general fund buildings now. And you gave great city buildings, right -- according to the level of disrepair you found good, fair and poor. Amy is the formula. How we score them which is the condition index. We calculate that -- and through that but then we put them in three categories, good, fair and poor. What constitutes poor? What gave a building a poor grade? Well when you start looking on the subsystems, so roughly -- roofing, electrical systems, elevators. You start calculating -- PC excessive cost in terms of repair systems, first is divided by the value of the building itself. That the property. But the Valley of the building itself. We start excessive amounts that -- asserts indicate that it was in poor condition. And so tell us some of the beginnings related is poor. The city administration building is rated as poor. What we call the [ Indiscernible ] is a development services building is rated as poor. And there was a lot of repair needs terms of athletics but just in some of those other upgrades that are needed. Are the buildings that our import condition structurally dangerous on anyway James? And they're not that she's aware the package is about as you look at the superstructure of the structures and buildings themselves and think about. You can foundation systems. The good news is that those systems systems -- as an engineer would be much more interested in are actually holding up well. But it should be a surprise. Those in the life safety systems that we do make the investment in. But we haven't kept up with his use of carpet paint, roofing. You have custom systems on those that are not necessarily life-threatening. But every likes to be a building that has a leak. And things like that. So those other pieces and recently asked Councilman Kirsty mentioned, you are looking at buildings have reached into their life. The subsystems have and we need to start looking at making repairs. Now or Kristi you work at City Hall. What is your experience been with that building? Popular been down to City Hall understand that it is a building that is aging. It is obviously not a very architecturally beautiful building. But by any means. But my concern is really with the holdings that the public is in such as libraries and rec centers. Fire stations to a smaller extent of police stations. We need to make sure that those are in good shape. And the public really deserves to have a building better shape. And a lot of it in addition to items that James is talking about there's a lot of political work that needs to be done. Just upgrading panels. A brain circuits of things like that. There is a lot of work that you would necessarily see that is kind of behind-the-scenes or off in a closet somewhere but it is very important to the operational funds -- functionality. Now the report says repairs should be prioritized. And as you say buildings used by the public should be upgraded to good condition. What about the other buildings? In an ideal world we would be a redo all the buildings but obviously we have limited resources in which to work and we really need to focus on the guts of the building that make it operational. As it is indicated the buildings of the public interacts with the most and the reality is that the buildings at the public does not see such as maintenance yards and things like that, those are actually in worse shape than most of the buildings that the public to see. So getting those even just two of their condition is going to require a substantial investment let alone trying to get them in good condition. We have is about -- soundbite from the city employee who spoke during public -- [ No audio ] [ silence ] Buildings that are in good condition I think that's well-deserved with the public. It sends a message to the employees that you are willing to give them fair condition facilities. So we will have more to say on that. I think it's when the public does engage city employees, city employees take pride in the work that they do they don't like to see facilities that they work in substandard. So Mark Kirsty what is your reaction to that comment? While Ms. Higgins is a great advocate for her members and I don't disagree with her. We would love to upgrade all these buildings at once. Unfortunately we don't have a silver bullet that can do that. So in as much as we do have to prioritize, it is our sense that we need to prioritize the buildings the public has the greatest contact with. And we're certainly not going to neglect the nonpublic face of buildings. But you kind of have to triage a little bit. And we have made a determination and I think is appropriate that the buildings of the public sees the most should probably get the biggest priority. While also making sure that the electrical panels in these other buildings and things like that that are really key to the operation -- that those are upgraded as well. So what is the estimated price tag for repairs to this -- to the city buildings that are included in the survey. Well to get everything into an overall condition of fair, to get the public facing once to good condition and then to get essentially the nonpublic facing ones into a fair condition, is going to be about $27 million. Now that number does not include for the most part carpeting, paint, so the more cosmetic things. It is really focused on again electrical heating and ventilation and air-conditioning and elevators and things like that the really critical to the operation. So that is just addressing kind of the core of what has to be done. And James are the resources there at this point to begin to make these repairs? Or do you have to wait -- you have to -- do you have to -- [ Audio cutting out ] [ silence ] Wait until there is more allocations or the critical repairs begin soon. Well I went for the buildings in context with the larger infrastructure needs of the city as a whole. What is that I want point out all the buildings are really important, our primary focus is what we call the city's right away. City streets, roads. Because the drought situation, water, sewer -- must the staff that works for me in much of the resources is targeted on working on fixing this growth. Those bridges. Focus on what we call the right-wing -- but we're setting the stage is the Council talk about -- we are starting to put together the data for something that we see that we need to start addressing in the outer years. And going forward with that. But in terms of resources and that, right now we still need to build those resources. And also we still need to finish the condition assessment. We are only halfway there. Right you would with the other half of the city buildings be assessed? We anticipate having it all done by January -- about six months from now. And then by the time we should probably be back in front of the interest of committee that would include all 700 buildings. Now I am curious when you go into a building to assess it especially people are there and they have been working in it, do they run it with a list of things to check out say here check these things out because they are not working. [ laughter ] Yes. [ laughter ] There are some buildings that have not been touched in a while. And depending upon what this buildings are, that answer is yes. So Mark is a situation that we find yourself in as we keep uncovering more needed repairs -- whether it is city streets or sidewalks or city buildings. The total estimate that well the actually the discrepancy between the money we have to make these repairs and be needed repairs I think you said was about $1.7 billion. What is the city's plan to finance these repairs? Well that is the next step -- is after we get all the data together and we have a good handle on what the totality of the problem really is, then the question is what to do next. We started with a couple things. What we have a deferred capital bond program. That which was started under Meyer Sanders -- and we not -- Mayor Sanders and Exley's will for the round of this. Within the last few weeks. Unfortunately it was supposed to be done in year ago we tied up with some frivolous litigation at the city when the prevailing -- but we did delay some of that money getting up there. And also the committee has been advocating for a couple years now as the economy improves the increase in the cities general fund revenue is coming from natural -- from taxes this year tax revenue coming in the city going up because you are improving economy even have that increase goes towards infrastructure. And that is something that the mayor adopted in his budget this year. And we're deftly in alignment with him on that an appreciative of that. That is something that the city is doing now. These are not going to solve the problem -- we understand that. But we need to understand that we are making progress for the money available today. And then I sit in my commitment is that we will do good to the voters next year within the structure finance ballot measure. That were developing -- we are developing this year and figuring out what that should look like -- if it's financially feasible as well as politically feasible. We talk about politically feasible are you talking about some way to avoid this being a tax text Well I think in an ideal world we would talk it is a question of chemic enough money together utilizing other sources such as enhanced if structure finance district, partnerships. I think there are ways that we can leverage some of the somewhat new ways of looking at things. And then pass that -- we would just have to see. 1.7 billion that -- we would just have to see. $1.7 billion is obviously a very large gap. Now what -- have you gotten any support from mayor for her when it comes to this idea of putting something on the ballot next year -- because I remember speaking to you and to Mayor Faulkner about this earlier this year. And there seem to be some discrepancy there. There may be a lot of things that are actually on the 2016 ballot for the city of San Diego. So has given you his support to go ahead, move forward, it some sort of infrastructure ballot initiative on extras ballot box Weatherman I talk about this and he is certainly open to discussing it. And we are still obviously for relating the plan but I would certainly share the concern about 10 should be in a crowded ballot in the November's 2016 -- November 2016 depending on what happens locally. In [ Indiscernible ] looking at initiative up and down the state. When you're coming up in Sacramento before coming -- talking about. 30 -- tax extension. We have got other things that are being discussed. So that would be a concern that we have a crowded ballot. I think part of our calculation is seeing what else is going then about. Now there has been some reporting on things that the surveys of -- our infrastructure needs have not been covering. There has been some reporting on the fact that a lot of what is really sort of dilapidated in Balboa Park -- the buildings and so is there. Have not been covered like any surveys. In some issues about the seawalls that we may need to improve because of climate change and that is not involved -- that has not been involved in any surveys. Are you going to -- thinking of expanding what you are looking at so that basically everything is taking in under that relic? Well I can let James speak to the specifics of this -- there are some facilities that are included in here and he can talk more specific about which ones. Of the 700 buildings that she that does include lease facilities. And of the assessments that we did of the 349 -- the -- about 75 of those are in lease facilities and that is included. We are not done. We still have many more lease facilities to do. The little bit of a challenge of these facilities is the next app is not just the condition of the facilities, we have got to work with assets to start looking at the lease requirements. I figure out who is responsible for what types of repairs. And you're talking but the buildings on Balboa Park. They are included. I have one last question for you and it's a little bit off the topic of you. You we go. You have been mentioned as a possible challenger for Dave Roberts even the County Board of Supervisors. Are you considering running for that seat next year? Well it is something I'm taking a look at obviously. There was [ Indiscernible ] in the supervisor's office and it seems like those aren't going away anytime soon. I have been approached by some people who asked me to take a look at that so I am taking a look at it. To announce here today. But in obviously this is -- I live in that district and I want make sure that we have the representation. So I will be watching closely. To see how it all plays out. What I want to thank you gentlemen. San Diego City Councilman Mark Hersey and James Nagel worked as San Diego's city engineer. Thank you both very much. Thank you very much.
An assessment that found 115 city-owned facilities to be in poor condition was unanimously forwarded Wednesday by the Infrastructure Committee to the full San Diego City Council.
The city has been conducting assessments of a variety of types of public assets in order to get a handle on the scope of a backlog of capital improvement projects estimated to be around $3.9 billion.
The latest report covers 274 facilities owned and occupied by the city. Other reports have looked at roads, sidewalks and parks.
Among the buildings listed in poor condition was City Hall in downtown San Diego. The 15-story structure on C Street that is also known as the City Administration Building has nearly $69 million in repair needs, and would cost more than $157 million to replace, according to the report.
Other facilities listed as being in poor condition are the Spreckels Organ Pavilion in Balboa Park, the San Diego Fire-Rescue Department's training tower, the vacant Mission Bay Information Center, 14 recreation centers, nine fire stations, five libraries and four lifeguard stations — including the headquarters.
Numerous other facilities fell into the "poor" category, including the North Park Senior Center, the rangemaster's office at the police shooting range, tool sheds and other storage facilities in Balboa Park, and numerous "comfort stations" — city terminology for public restrooms.
"What we know is that we have a lot of city facilities that are just like our roads, and our sidewalks and other things, where they're not in the condition we want them in and it's going to take a lot of investment to get them that way," committee Chairman Mark Kersey said.
"To some extent, we do need to triage the patient here, if you will, and we do need to set service levels so we have some understanding of where these dollars should be going," Kersey said.
The authors of the report said the results point to a "significant need for action" but noted that the findings aren't out of line with the average age of the buildings examined, which was 35 years old. The interior finish, electrical, and heating and air conditioning problems detected in such buildings fit with their age, they said.
James Nagelvort, the city's director of public works, provided a word of caution for the public and city employees in interpreting a "poor" rating — that it doesn't mean a building is unsafe. He used City Hall as an example.
"In this building, we have made the investments — you may remember we did a project a few years back for asbestos removal, we did a project a few years back on the sprinkler system, and also have done the generator — we've been doing those projects necessary to be able to keep the building occupied," Nagelvoort said.
"I'm not sure if people are thrilled about that, but I don't think anybody would label this building as an excellent building in great shape," Nagelvoort said. "It is safe, but as you can see, for those of us who work in this building, it still needs a lot of attention."
The authors recommended the city develop an action plan for the facilities that were found to be in poor condition, including deciding whether to repair or replace them. They also suggested creating funding plans, setting a goal of reducing the average condition rating within five years, establishing a preventative maintenance program and setting a schedule for regular condition assessments.
