CT Construction Digest Monday November 25, 2024
Work steps up at site of Norwalk's $1B Walk Bridge project; winter won't stop construction crews
NORWALK — As construction chugs along to replace the 128-year-old Walk Bridge in the heart of South Norwalk, officials say the $1 billion project won’t face any winter delays.
A crew of 85 to 90 workers has been working at the railroad bridge, moving transmission cables under the Norwalk River and installing structural supports, according to Rory McGlasson, public involvement manager at WSP USA, the program management consultant for the project.
Last month, large equipment arrived on site for the construction of the drill shaft's structural supports for the project.
The new railroad bridge, which carries Metro-North and Amtrak trains over the Norwalk River, is slated to for completion by 2029.
The cable undergrounding process is separate but connected to Eversource's work to install underground transmission cables throughout Norwalk, according to McGlasson and Jeff Bird, WSP construction project manager.
The cables that run over top of the current railroad bridge’s structure need to be relocated under the Norwalk River before the new structure is built to allow trains to run over its tracks, they said. Eversource crews aren’t working on undergrounding at the Walk Bridge site, but rather from Veterans Memorial Park in East Norwalk.
Eventually, the Eversource underground cables will connect to those under the Norwalk River, the WSP representatives said.
The Walk Bridge reconstruction has many moving parts outside of the Eversource undergrounding, McGlasson and Bird said. Four Norwalk bridges housing railroad tracks are also being updated.
Bridges at Fort Point Street, Osborne Avenue and East Avenue are being replaced, as is the superstructure of the Strawberry Hill Avenue Bridge. The East Norwalk Train Station off East Avenue is also being upgraded as part of the Walk Bridge reconstruction program.
All work necessary for the bridges’ northern tracks to be operational will be done by October 2025, Bird said.
But Walk Bridge-related work has begun to impact Norwalkers already: a part of Fort Point Street has been closed for most of November.
Despite local interruptions, McGlasson said the construction thus far has been either staging or preparation for the “real bridge work.”
To passersby, it may look like that work has already begun. Two barges, one with a crane, and five other large cranes are visible around the Norwalk River, Bird said.
Permanent structures being installed also mark the progress. Bird said both the north and south ends of the new bridge will have two towers. Two drill shafts, each 12 feet in diameter, will go on either side of all four towers for a total of eight drill shafts.
“They are concrete columns, if you will, that will take the weight, the load of the bridge itself and transfer it down through the river, through the bed, through the fill of the river, call the way down to a competent bedrock material,” Bird said.
On Wednesday, Bird said three of the eight drill shafts were complete and crews should finish the fourth by next week.
As winter approaches, though, Bird said that crews have no plans of slowing down construction — except in the case of a major storm that makes conditions unsafe. But a little snow won’t stop construction, he said.
The biggest concern is cold temperatures that can make it more difficult for concrete to set, but Bird said crews have ways of warming concrete to ensure it doesn’t freeze.
Contractor discovers substandard soil at State Pier
Greg Smith
New London ― The Connecticut Port Authority said Friday it is working with State Pier contractor Kiewit to remedy what appears to be substandard soil used on a portion of the newly-constructed offshore wind facility.
The remedy for the problem, the cost to fix it and who might pay remains in question.
The problem was discovered by routine soil testing of the 100-foot long section at the south end of the pier where fill was used to expand its size. The area was once two piers.
The soil contains excessive silty material and is not in compliance with the port authority’s contract with Kiewit, said Paul Whitescarver, chairman of the board of directors of the Connecticut Port Authority.
The issue was first made public during the CPA’s Finance Committee meeting on Tuesday after board member John Johnson asked whether capital expenditures were completed. The state and Danish company Ørsted have jointly contributed to the $310 million cost of upgrading the pier to accommodate the massive offshore wind components.
Whitescarver, who said the area where the soil problem was discovered was unusable, said he thought the remedy would be covered by Kiewitt.
“The excessive silty soil negatively affects the load capacity of this area, which is designed to be a transport corridor for terminal operations,” Whitescarver said in a statement. “The CPA is working closely with its designer, contractors and partners to establish an acceptable remediation plan.”
A spokesperson from Kiewit was not immediately available for comment but has said the section of the pier in question represents less than .5% of the total project. Whitescarver said the CPA is working with Kiewit on a solution.
Despite the problem, Whitescarver said operations at State Pier remain unaffected. The pier is loaded with parts ― wind turbine blades, nacelles and towers ― that are bound for the waters off Rhode Island as part of Orsted’s Revolution Wind project.
Whitescarver said the area in question is not intended for component storage and never was intended to have the kind of load capacity that the two heavy lift platforms have.
“The bottom line is there is no change in operations at the pier and no disruption in operations,” Whitescarver said.
News of more problems at State Pier, however, prompted a statement from state legislators already frustrated by the project’s spiraling costs.
Republican senator Heather Somers of Groton, Henri Martin and Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding issued a statement on Friday.
“It seems like every time the tide comes in, it brings with it another controversy for the Port Authority. Now we have this latest revelation. The south portion of the pier is not stable enough for wind component storage use because of the type of fill that was used,” the statement reads.
“There is finger-pointing between the Port Authority and construction management company Kiewit on who is responsible. Meanwhile, the costs paid by the Connecticut taxpayer continue to rise. The price tag is already north of $310 million at this unfinished site, which we now learn has potentially dangerous and costly structural deficiencies.”
The senators called for “full transparency” and urged the port authority to answer questions from the public.
“The taxpayers of Connecticut deserve nothing less,” the statement reads.
Westport approves $5.5M to repair 40-year-old pond walkway, tide gate
WESTPORT — The 36-year-old Old Mill Pond walkway and tide gate, which has fallen into disrepair, will be rehabbed — and some hope access to the site will come with the work.
The Representative Town Meeting, at its meeting Wednesday, approved spending $5.5 million to repair the failing structure, work on which would begin next October and be finished in mid-2026.
Funds to cover the cost will come from the town’s remaining American Rescue Plan Act funds, some $3.3 million, with the balance covered with bond and note authorization to the Municipal Improvement Fund Account.
The ARPA funds, according to the federal government, must be under contract to projects before Dec. 31, 2024, or the funds revert back to the government. The funds must be spent in two years.
But some RTM members, while in agreement the work is needed, lamented the inability to access the property. A gate was installed several years ago as it is private property.
For coastlines, private property ends at the mean high-water line. Some RTM members hope that city officials can investigate, first if the gate is in the proper location and if there can be a way for residents to have access to the mean high-water line on the other side.
For the tide gate and walkway work, Director of Public Works Pete Ratkiewich said most marine structures that involve pilings or concrete in the water last 20 to 25 years. He believes that because the town has performed maintenance on the tide gate each summer, workers were able to expand the life by 11 years.
Tide gates are used to control water flow between a tide area and drained upland area.
The gates are about 15 inches tall and swing in and out of a stop on a concrete slab. One side prevents sediment from moving out, and the other prevents it coming in, thereby improving water quality.
In 2019, the maintenance crew noticed a lot of the structure is falling apart, including the masonry.
This July, the department received a report from someone walking on the bridge who said it felt like walking on a trampoline. This indicated that some of the poles holding the structure had broken, Ratkiewich said.
The department temporarily repaired this, as construction on the permanent fix is expected to start in about a year with a delay in materials, with hopes to finish it in late spring 2026.
The idea is to repair the tide gates, taking every piece of hardware off and replacing it, Ratkiewich said. This will require going down to the foundation, removing the compromised concrete and repouring it.
A cofferdam will also need to be built around the foundations to create a dry work environment, as concrete can't be poured into water. Live wires are also located in the area.
Enfield selling former Nathan Hale School property to private developer
ENFIELD — The site of the former Nathan Hale School, which closed in 2017, is being sold to a private developer who aims to redevelop the property to include residential units, an athletic facility, and a day care facility.d
Members of the Town Council voted unanimously on Monday to sell the property at 5 Taylor Road to Enfield-based The Court LLC for $750,000, which would place the property back on municipal tax rolls while providing more options for homes and recreation.
Plans call for the demolition and removal of a large part of the original school building, and 27,000 square feet of new construction featuring three multi-sport courts that can accommodate basketball, volleyball, pickle ball, and futsal — a soccer-based sport played on a hard court.
All told, there are expected to be eight two-story walk-up residential buildings with four two-bedroom units per building, totaling 32 new residential units, southwest of the sports facility.
Along with adequate parking, the site is also expected to include a two-way street to provide access to the sports facility and residential units.
Initial plans call for an existing portion of the school and its gymnasium to remain, as well as the proposed construction of a day care facility.
Demolition of the school and construction of the new sports facility is expected to take between one and two years. Following completion, residential construction is expected to take roughly three years.
Councilwoman Gina Cekala called the sale and redevelopment of the property "a long time coming."
"I'm happy to see it finally come to fruition," she said, noting the dedication The Court has to its home in Enfield.
Councilman Robert Cressotti agreed, saying, "I think they're going to do a fantastic job."
Nathan Hale School, a kindergarten through Grade 2 school built in 1962, was closed in the summer of 2017 and its 232 students were moved to other schools.
Over the years, the building has deteriorated and the property has remained under the ownership of the school district and then the town, meaning it was not taxed as part of the town's grand list.
After it was closed, it was used for several years for storage and some administrative functions for the school district.
Multiple parties were interested in purchasing the property last year and town officials issued requests for proposal for redevelopment in February, receiving three proposals.
Greenwich officials say $2M more needed to fully fund Old Greenwich School construction
GREENWICH — Town officials set aside $43 million to rebuild Old Greenwich School earlier this year but were told that was never going to be enough to cover the expected cost to rebuild the 122-year old school.
The Old Greenwich School Building Committee had argued for another $1.26 million on top of the $43 million set aside during the budget season in the spring to cover the full project cost, based on professional cost estimates. That request was denied.
The building committee, an all-volunteer group coordinating the pre-construction tasks, is now seeking $1.96 million, a roughly $700,000 increase from the request made in March, to fund the “owner’s contingency” — money held in reserve to pay for unforeseen issues or cost overruns.
The building committee only has enough money to fund the contingency at 2 percent of the project cost, which the construction experts working with the town think is not enough, members said.
“That's not sufficient,” building committee chair James Waters said to the Board of Education on Nov. 21. "We're about to start talking to the state about our grant application, and our team believes that our application will likely be held up until the town demonstrates that it has an appropriate owner contingency for the project.”
The building committee is working with Downes Construction Company and others to rebuild the school.
Owners contingencies on projects like this typically range from a minimum of 5 percent to 10 percent, officials said. The $1.96 million request would put the Old Greenwich School project contingency at 7 percent, if approved.
OGS was built in 1902 and the aged building has fallen into disrepair. The school has been the target of a federal lawsuit which alleged possible discrimination because of inaccessibility at the school.
The building is rife with issues, including the lack of a sprinkler system, no elevator and flooding problems. The planned renovation will bring it into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, as well as fixing numerous other problems.
The school board approved the $1.96 million request on Nov. 21, 7-0 with one member, Wendy Vizzo Walsh, abstaining. Walsh said she objected to cost projections growing year after year.
“Shovels haven't even been put into the ground yet and you're asking for more money,” she said.
Before the vote, Waters said that the building committee has done extensive due diligence and exploratory work at the school to identify potential problem areas.
“We have drilled into ceilings, we've drilled into walls, we've drilled into the soil, we've drilled down to the foundation. We've tried to examine what the team believes are the most risky areas that could be very expensive future change orders,” he said. “Do we know everything today? No, that is not possible while having a working school in place. But we've tried to get as much as we can and we have factored that into our budget.”
The $1.96 million request still needs to be approved by the Board of Estimate and Taxation and the Representative Town Meeting.
None of the six Republicans on the BET, the town’s finance board, voted to approve the previous request for $1.26 million in contingency funding in March. The Republicans control the 12-member BET and the board chair can break a tie if the board splits 6-6 on a given vote.
Waters said in March that the committee would be back to seek extra contingency funding.
Republicans, at the time, objected to the swelling cost of the project and speculated that the old building could contain asbestos or other hazardous materials that could present a danger to students.
Last year, when the asbestos speculations were first raised, school superintendent Toni Jones said it was “reprehensible and egregious” to say that the town would do anything to endanger students.
The building committee plans to take the project out to bid in February and start construction in the summer. That timeline, however, is contingent on BET and RTM approving the funding at their next meetings in December and January, respectively.
Without the extra money, Waters said, the replacement project start would be delayed until 2026. If the project is delayed, the construction advisors estimate it will cost the town an additional $1.92 million.