Login to Portal

Forgot your password? Click here.

Don’t have an account? Click here.

IUOE

CT Construction Digest Monday November 7, 2022

Talking Transportation: Why Not a Cheaper, Simpler Replacement for the $1B Walk Bridge?

 Jim Cameron

Imagine having to replace the George Washington Bridge, in-place, while still handling thousands of cars and trucks each day.  The railroad equivalent of that is still underway in South Norwalk, replacing what’s known as the Walk Bridge, a vital rail link in the Northeast Corridor for Metro-North, Amtrak and the occasional freight train.

We all remember the woes of this 125-year-old swing bridge that sometimes refuses to close, stranding thousands of riders.  The 2017 plan to replace it includes $161 million in Federal Sandy relief money.  But the total cost has ballooned from $600 million to over $1 billion (thanks to added rail yards and such) and again seems to be climbing… and the old bridge is still there.

Some skeptics in Norwalk opposed the plan because of the cost, others because they would lose their land by eminent domain.  And everyone’s concerned about the years of construction and mess… including demolition of the Maritime Aquarium IMAX Theater.

The CDOT had considered all sorts of new bridge designs… truss, lift, bascule, counter-weight and even an elevated fly-over.  But one design seemed conspicuously missing that might have be cheaper… a non-movable, “fixed” bridge.

Why not just “close the river” and replace the old bridge with a cheaper bridge that doesn’t have to swing or lift open because it’s permanently closed?    That option was not even discussed in the voluminous Environmental Assessment Report. Why? 

Blame the US Coast Guard and Army Corps of Engineers.  They want to keep the mighty Norwalk River, all two miles of it, open and navigable.  But do they really have that much power?  Isn’t it possible to force those Federal agencies to, in effect, close the river to boat and barge traffic by edict or a bill put through Congress?

Couldn’t the few companies still on the river… a concrete company, an idle asphalt plant and a small marina… be bought-out with money saved by building a cheaper fixed bridge that doesn’t raise or lower?  The answer is yes, but it wasn’t considered, and here’s why.

Six years ago I cornered then-CDOT Commissioner Jim Redeker and asked him.  (Spoiler alert:  critics of the bridge plan won’t like his answers.)   The Commissioner said that CDOT did ask the US Coast Guard and Army Corps of Engineers about a fixed bridge that would close the river and were told “no way”… though critics say such concessions have precedents elsewhere in the country.

I even asked a member of our Congressional delegation about introducing a bill to “close” the river.  He said he could do that, but nobody official has requested that.

More important, then-Commissioner Redeker said whether fixed bridge or movable, construction would still disrupt the neighbors just as much and for just as long.  And, said Redeker, the cost savings for going to a smaller, simpler fixed bridge would only be 10 – 12%.  Really?  Hard to believe.

The Walk Bridge project is worth watching because it may act as a template for other “billion dollar bridge” replacements farther east in the years to come.  Everyone just wishes, five years after it started, they’d get on with replacing that old bridge and keeping trains running.


How will Stamford fund its half of a $1.5B plan for school buildings? Board of Finance weighs options.

Brianna Gurciullo

STAMFORD — The Board of Finance is grappling with how the city will fund its share of a $1.5 billion school facilities plan.

Earlier this year, the architectural firm SLAM gave a presentation to city boards showing that if Stamford wanted to address 100 percent of deferred maintenance in its schools as part of a master plan, the city’s share of the cost would be about $541 million over 12 years.

SLAM has now updated the plan, stretching it out over 20 years and adding in factors such as inflation. Full implementation of the plan, including addressing all the deferred maintenance, would cost the city about $952 million over two decades.

Officials have zeroed in on a $756 million price tag, which is expected to allow the city to address 60 percent of deferred maintenance. A previous estimate left out a project at Stamford High School.

The new plan projects that the state will contribute a total of $766 million.

Sandy Dennies, the city’s director of administration, summed up some of the key decisions the Board of Finance will need to make.

“I think you need to decide what you’re going to do by selling bonds and what you're going to do by raising cash,” Dennies said during a meeting last week. “And you’ve got to find the balance. How much do you raise through tax increases and how much do you raise through bonding?”

Laura Berwick, who joined the Board of Finance in September after Democrat David Mannis resigned, said the city has long “kicked the can down the road” when it comes to its school buildings. She praised those who worked on the master plan, saying that implementing it is feasible.

“But it is extraordinarily expensive, and I want to make sure that we’re not putting an undue burden on the taxpayers of Stamford and that we’re not over-bonding to a point where we put our (credit) rating at risk or the debt service costs over the next 20 to 30 years (are) just a staggering amount for the taxpayers to support,” Berwick said.

For the current fiscal year, the Board of Finance set the city’s so-called safe debt limit at $40 million. Wednesday evening, the board explored the idea of the city bonding $70 million per year, with $30 million dedicated to long-term school facilities projects and $40 million to city capital projects, like road paving, as well as short-term school projects.

But $30 million won’t be enough to meet the goals set by the schools master plan, Freedman said.

The plan calls for about $39 million in funding from the city for the coming fiscal year. The number rises as high as $51 million in future years. Freedman said the city will have to make up the difference through taxes.

“If we bond $30 million, we’re still short,” Freedman said. “Unless we’re going to bond even more than $30 million, we’re going to have to have something in the mill rate. I don’t see how we get around that.”

This year, the Board of Finance and Board of Representatives agreed to raise $20 million for school construction projects through an increased tax rate. Freedman said he will recommend that Mayor Caroline Simmons include another $20 million in her budget proposal for fiscal 2023-24.

Freedman also noted that there is a lag between when the city pays for construction work and when it receives reimbursement from the state. He said there were a couple ways the city could fill the gap, including drawing against a line of credit or using tax money.

“It’s not enough to just fund the local share in a given year,” Freedman said. “We do have to have the cash available to float the state’s share.”

The meeting, which included school district officials, grew tense when some finance board members suggested that the city and the Board of Education will need to tighten up their budgets.

“Not only the administration, but the different departments, the Board of Ed, they’re going to have to sharpen their pencil and make sure that their budgets come in as low as possible so we can afford to fund the capital side of the budget,” said Board of Finance Vice Chair Mary Lou Rinaldi, a Democrat.

“I agree with Mary Lou,” Republican member Dennis Mahoney said. “I think it’s incredibly important every day of the week and twice on Sunday to focus in on where the city can become more efficient.”

Mahoney took issue with the fact that after the Board of Finance and Board of Representatives cut the schools budget this year, district officials decided to use federal COVID-19 relief dollars to temporarily fund some positions, setting up what is known as a fiscal cliff.

In response, Superintendent Tamu Lucero pointed out that the Board of Finance slashed the schools budget by $12.5 million during the 2020 pandemic-influenced budget season.

“At that time, we said to everyone that we were going to have to put back some of these positions, and we laid out a plan for how we were going to do it,” Lucero said. “But then the cuts kept coming to our budget. At some point, I have to defend our children and the need for them to be educated properly.”

Kemp Morhardt from the architectural firm SLAM told the Board of Finance that the updated facilities plan factors in inflation, includes new cost escalation numbers and reflects recent changes to the state’s reimbursement rates for school construction projects in Stamford.

A provision within a state budget bill granted an 80 percent reimbursement rate for a new Westhill High School — a major jump from the 20 percent rate the state previously agreed to pay. Another provision increased the state’s contribution for certain school projects from 20 percent to 60 percent for 25 years. Still, the overall price tag for Stamford has gone up. 

The old plan assumed a 95 percent reimbursement rate for Westhill and an 80 percent rate for a new south Stamford school. 

Cost estimates within the plan were based on 2021 dollars. SLAM has increased those estimates 20 percent to reflect current dollars, Morhardt said.

He said the plan’s timeline changed from 12 years to 20 in an effort to keep Stamford’s share under $50 million per year. He noted that federal COVID-19 funding will cover the cost of addressing some “immediate needs” in the first phase of the plan, while other deferred maintenance work will be pushed out to later years.

Morhardt also said that the new plan accounts for the possibility that even if the state agrees to pay for a portion of the project, some of the work may not be eligible for reimbursement. 

“This is a bit of a conservative approach,” Morhardt said. “As the projects get more defined and the projects unfold, of course we’re going to maximize reimbursement as much as possible.”

Though the projected costs have changed, much of the plans for closing, expanding and building new schools have remained the same. Dolan Middle School, Cloonan Middle School, Toquam Magnet Elementary School and K.T. Murphy Elementary School would close. Three K-5 schools — Hart Magnet Elementary School, Roxbury Elementary School and Westover Magnet Elementary School — would become K-8 schools.

K.T. Murphy would close in 2028 followed by Toquam in 2030, Cloonan in 2033 and Dolan in 2035, according to the updated plan. The new Hart school would still be built where Cloonan now stands as previously planned.

A new K-8 school would be established in south Stamford. The school would have two sites under the new plan: one on Lockwood Avenue for kindergarten through fourth grade, and another on the former K.T. Murphy campus for grades five through eight.

Includes prior reporting by staff writer Ignacio Laguarda.


Millions in federal aid to boost offshore wind in Bridgeport

Brian Lockhart

BRIDGEPORT — With an infusion of $10.5 million in federal dollars, the city and a private company on the harbor are aiming to make Bridgeport a hub for future offshore wind energy projects.

But the direct beneficiary of that federal aid is not Avangrid's previously ballyhooed Park City Wind project, but instead local shipyard operator Bridgeport Boatworks.

This week members of Connecticut's congressional delegation announced $17 million for improvements to Bridgeport's and New London's ports. According to the notice of grant award from the U.S. Department of Transportation, $10.5 million is headed to the Bridgeport Port Authority to design and build an "operations maintenance and wind port" that involves harbor dredging, the installation of bulkheads, a floating service dock and pads for cranes.

The grant award document made no mention of a specific site, but the congressional delegation's press release named Bridgeport Boatworks along Seaview Avenue.

"This announcement will ensure that Bridgeport plays a pivotal role in the emerging wind industry in our region," Boatworks' owner Harry Boardsen said in the release.

"This investment in Bridgeport's port infrastructure will help create hundreds of jobs in our region and generate millions in direct economic benefits," said Robert Christoph Jr., the developer who owns the acreage where Boatworks is located. "This transformative grant award will help continue to unlock Bridgeport Harbor's enormous untapped potential to serve as an economic hub for the region and the State of Connecticut."

Park City Wind received similar accolades for its plans to locate a temporary construction staging area and, later, a permanent maintenance and operations facility, elsewhere on Seaview Avenue on a parcel owned by the Bridgeport-Port Jefferson ferry.

But as reported in July, a lease announcement between Park City Wind and the ferry was premature, and, because of re-zoning under Mayor Joe Ganim's administration, the proposed staging area cannot proceed, though the operations/maintenance building could.

Then last week it was announced during Avangrid's third quarter earnings call with Wall Street analysts that Park City Wind's completion date had been pushed back from 2026 to 2027.

The company has continually, including this week, insisted that Bridgeport will continue to play "a central role" in its plans. But asked about the $10.5 million federal grant, an Avagrid spokesman replied, "Park City Wind was not involved."

Boardsen, meanwhile, in an email did not name down a user for its future offshore wind facilities.

"We have been a part of many conversations over the years with many offshore wind developers," he said. "We hope any of the projects coming online could utilize our facility."

"Bridgeport Boatworks has been part of the offshore wind power conversation from the start," Boardsen said. "We actively encouraged the state to write legislation to procure offshore wind power as a ... renewable energy source and also knowing one day it could be an integral economic driver in Bridgeport Harbor."

As for additional financing and a timeline, Boardsen said the entire project budget is around $30 million and will include "a private contribution."

"We are not pursuing additional state or federal money at this time," he said, and also confirmed no municipal dollars are involved.

"We will begin the permitting conversation soon," Boardsen said. "The grant application has been in the works for over a year. Depending on how quickly we navigate the various permitting requirements we will get to work. Would love to get going sometime next year."


Norwich residents get chance to comment on proposed second business park

Claire Bessette

Norwich ― As permitting gets underway for a proposed $24 million, 384-acre second business park in Occum, neighbors are rallying opposition to the plan many say would ruin Norwich’s quiet corner.

The first chance for public comment will be at a neighborhood meeting at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday at the Norwich Worship Center, 165 Lawler Lane. Norwich Community Development Corp. officials will explain the Business Park North plan and answer questions.

Wednesday’s meeting will be less formal, with more audience interaction with project officials than the City Council-zoning board public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Monday Dec. 5 at Kelly Middle School, 25 Mahan Drive.

In Norwich, the City Council serves as the zoning board, which handcuffs aldermen and Mayor Peter Nystrom from discussing the project outside the public hearing and zoning board review.

Nystrom, Alderwoman Stacy Gould and Alderman Swaranjit Singh Khalsa are voting members of the NCDC Board of Directors and have had to recuse themselves and skip executive session discussions at recent meetings, as the project neared permit stage.

The Commission on the City Plan must give a recommendation on the proposed business park master plan to the zoning board. The commission will discuss the plan at its 7 p.m. meeting Nov. 15 at City Hall, but there will be no public hearing at that time.

NCDC has an option to purchase the 17 properties for $3.55 million from M&A Holdings LLC and Byron Brook Country Club LLC. The owners had purchased the properties, including the former Tarryk and Doolittle farms, in the early 2000s for a golf course resort and residential project that fell through. The parcels now are zoned for a planned development district or general commercial development.

NCDC’s option expires Dec. 31. The agency had hoped to secure federal funding as part of a larger, unsuccessful regional federal grant application this summer. NCDC President Kevin Brown said the agency continues to work on alternative purchase avenues.

Meanwhile, NCDC and real estate consultant Henry Resnikoff have pushed forward with design and permitting. The City Council-zoning board approved zoning regulations for a Business Master Plan District in April 2021. The Dec. 5 meeting will review the specific plan for the property.

The conceptual master plan map submitted in September shows the property divided into potential development parcels with a dozen buildings ranging from 9,000 square feet to 500,000 square feet.

The plan calls for reconstructing Exit 18 ramp off Interstate 395 at Route 97 to create a designated main entrance into the business park. A roundabout is proposed where the new road intersects with Canterbury Turnpike to keep business park traffic off the rural road.

There are 148 abutting property owners to the 17 business park parcels on Canterbury Turnpike, Scotland Road, Lawler Lane and Route 97 in Occum.

Dozens of residents have taken to Facebook forums to voice opposition to the project and rally residents to attend public meetings. Opponents pledge to circulate petitions to present to the City Council-zoning board to a project some say would ruin the rural character of the city’s “quiet corner” and disrupt wildlife habitat.

Opponents questioned the need for a second business park, citing vacant commercial and industrial buildings in the current Stanley Israelite Norwich Business Park and elsewhere in the city. Others questioned promises of a property tax windfall if the city grants generous tax breaks “only to have the business pack up and leave” once the tax breaks end, one commenter posted.

Samuel Browning, a local attorney and former alderman, is an abutter on Scotland Road. “I’m probably in the minority in that I don’t oppose this,” Browning said. But he has questions and concerns, especially about the access road and traffic.

“I hope they get the highway ramp done,” Browning said. “If they don’t get the access right from day one, it will be screwed up. it will increase the opposition.”

Browning also said the first city business park is nearly full, because the city allowed condominiums and apartment complexes. “They turned great swaths of it into condos.”

Pastor Jeff Sharp at the Norwich Worship Center said he was approached by a neighbor who asked the church to host the neighborhood meeting. The church seats about 200 people, and if necessary could set up an overflow video viewing room downstairs.

Sharp said the congregation, which has about 120 to 130 active members, has not discussed the business park much. The church itself sold rear land to the former golf course project in 2007. Sharp said the church uses its large lawn that would overlook the development for barbecues and youth activities.

“We’ve known for a number of years that something would be built around us,” Sharp said.

NCDC President Brown said project officials will give a presentation and answer questions in an informal setting Wednesday. They will discuss impacts on residents, buffer zones and a proposed public bikeway and walking path.

Brown said officials will assure residents that no construction is imminent. The project needs local, state and federal permitting, including approval from the Office of State Traffic Administration for the access road. NCDC will apply for federal funding again in spring.

Brown said he understands concerns about traffic on residential roads and said the proposed access roads would come first.

“We would not put the cart before the horse,” Brown said. “Yes, we understand the concern about the traffic pattern.”


Windsor logistics center built on spec signs major national tenant

Greg Bordonaro

Alarge Windsor logistics center that was being constructed on spec has signed a national tenant to occupy the entire property. 

Columbus, Ohio-based Safelite Group, parent company of the well-known Safelite AutoGlass brand, has signed a long-term lease to occupy 165,625 square feet in the Baker Hollow Logistics Center, at 105 Baker Hollow Road.

Safelite will be the property’s sole occupant. It will use it for its windshield replacement operations and support office, according to Condyne Capital Partners, the logistics center’s Massachusetts-based developer.

Condyne paid $1.65 million for the 15.8-acre Baker Hollow Road site last December. The seller was Windsor-based O.J. Thrall Inc., which previously used the land as a tobacco farm.

The logistics center is still under construction but should be completed by the end of the year. After that, Safelite will make some improvements to the property. The lease starts in April, according to Shawn McMahon, a broker with Jones Lang LaSalle’s Hartford office. He and Daniel McGillicuddy brokered the lease deal. 
 
When complete, the property will feature a 5,000-square-foot office, warehouse space, 32-inch ceiling heights, 38 dock doors, four electric vehicle charging stations, a 100,000-gallon fire storage tank and 25% of the roof will be reserved for solar, Condyne said.

Condyne and its partner, Polar Design Build, contracted  Flood Consulting, Maugel DeStefano Architects and Quieto Consulting Engineers for the overall design of the building and its grounds, the company said.