CT Construction Digest Monday November 8, 2021
Jim Cameron
Last week was a good one for our transportation future, on several fronts.
First, of course, was Congress finally passing the massive infrastructure bill. This once-in-a-generation, trillion-dollar package will bring a massive rebuilding of our crumbling bridges and highways as well as expansion of the nation’s power grid and internet infrastructure. It will also invest in the ways we must prepare for the impact of global warming.
The bill will also mean thousands of construction jobs over the next decade, what the White House called a “blue collar blueprint” for decades-delayed repair and enhancement of the nation’s infrastructure.
For rail riders there will be $66 billion invested in expansion and upgrades, the biggest federal investment since the creation of Amtrak in the early 70’s. Almost half of that amount will be pumped into the Northeast Corridor from Washington, D.C. to Boston, which already sees some 2,200 trains each day.
All of this we will benefit from in the years to come. But in our more immediate future is the project that’s been happening right under our feet at Grand Central
Station since 2006… a new rail station.
Yes, the MTA’s much delayed, terribly-over-budget East Side Access project to bring the Long Island Railroad into GCT is all but done and should be opened late next year. Though this $11 billion subterranean behemoth won’t be home to any trains from Connecticut, it will have a profound effect on our train service.
The new station in Grand Central’s lower, lower, lower level is built hundreds of feet below Vanderbilt Avenue just to the west of GCT itself. It was literally carved out of solid rock and connects to a tunnel built under the Park Avenue line served by Metro-North, another tunnel under the East River and ends up in Queens.
The station will measure 350,000 square feet serving 24 LIRR trains an hour on eight tracks. To access the station, you’ll take several escalators from GCT’s lower level, deep down into the bedrock, served by dozens of shops. The MTA says the new station will save LIRR commuters 40 minutes travel time from Queens if they’re heading to Manhattan’s east side.
What’s in it for Connecticut commuters? Actually, a faster ride to the West Side.
By moving some LIRR trains out of Penn Station and sending them to GCT, some Metro-North trains will be able to travel from Connecticut directly to Penn Station by way of the Bronx, the Hells Gate Bridge and the East River tunnels, a route now exclusively used by Amtrak.
That new routing will actually be a faster route to midtown Manhattan than the current Grand Central routing. It will also mean Penn Station connections to Amtrak to the north and west and New Jersey Transit deep into the Garden State.
As Manhattan’s West Side expands with more offices, many of them built over the LIRR yards, Connecticut commuters will see this new Penn Station service as an attraction.
More spending on rail nationwide and a new train station at GCT and service to the West Side… as I say, it was a good week for transportation.
Jim Cameron is Founder of the Commuter Action Group, advocates for Connecticut rail riders. Contact Jim at CommuterActionGroup@gmail.com
Here’s what Connecticut will receive under the $1 trillion infrastructure bill approved by Congress
The massive, tortured $1 trillion infrastructure bill that Congress finally approved late Friday will bring billions of dollars in federal spending to Connecticut on railroads, highways and bridges, while also expanding internet access and creating a statewide network of electric vehicle charging stations.
President Joe Biden on Saturday called the package a “monumental step forward for the nation.”
“Finally, infrastructure week,” a beaming Biden told reporters. “I’m so happy to say that: infrastructure week.”
The House passed the measure 228-206 late Friday, prompting prolonged cheers from the relieved Democratic side of the chamber. Thirteen Republicans, mostly moderates, supported the legislation while six of the Democrats’ farthest left members — including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Cori Bush of Missouri — opposed it.
Connecticut’s all-Democratic Congressional delegation was effusive in praising passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, even after weeks of divisive and bitter infighting among liberal and moderate members of Congress. A much larger $1.75 trillion spending plan remains mired in debate and could be voted on before Thanksgiving.
Rep. Jim Himes, D-4th, said the bill “will provide almost $5.4 billion to the state of Connecticut and will create more than $100 billion in competitive grant programs for which organizations across the state will be eligible to apply.”
Although the bill does not include specific funding to repair and rebuild the I-84/I-91 interchange in Hartford, Rep. John Larson said Connecticut will now be able to push forward on the project and “achieve a 50-year goal of recapturing the riverfront.’'
Connecticut’s two senators said thousands of jobs would be created to help rebuild and expand infrastructure in Connecticut and the United States.
U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal called the bill “a gigantic breakthrough” that will open up funding for public works projects across Connecticut. U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy said it was “the biggest bipartisan investment in infrastructure in our nation’s history.”
U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-3rd, said the legislation is about “jobs, jobs, jobs.”
“We are finally making historic infrastructure investments that will create millions of good-paying jobs and shape our economy in a way that meets the moment,” she said.
The bill includes an infusion in funding for:
Railroads
The bill provides $30 billion for the Northeast rail corridor. The money will fund maintenance and upgrades to Connecticut rail infrastructure, including repair of major bridges and station upgrades.
Bridge replacement and repairs
Connecticut will receive $561 million for bridge replacement and repairs over five years. Connecticut will also be eligible to compete for a portion of the $12.5 billion Bridge Investment Program and the $16 billion set aside by the legislation for major projects that will deliver substantial economic benefits to communities.
Connecticut has an estimated 248 bridges and more than 2,100 miles of highway that are in poor condition.
Highways
Connecticut is expected to receive $3.5 billion for highway programs.
Charging stations for electric vehicles
The legislation provides $53 million over five years to support the expansion of an EV charging network.
Expanding broadband
About 12% of Connecticut households do not have an internet subscription. Connecticut will receive at least $100 million to help provide broadband coverage across the state. Under this legislation, 654,000 people in Connecticut will also be eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Benefit, which was created to help low-income families afford internet access.
Public transit
The new act provides $1.3 billion over five years to improve public transportation options.
Safe drinking water
Over the next five years, Connecticut is expected to receive $445 million to improve water infrastructure across the state.
Long Island Sound
More than $100 million will go toward protecting the Long Island Sound watershed. This will fund local projects to improve water quality and restore shoreline habitats.
Airports
Connecticut airports would receive approximately $62 million for infrastructure development over five years. The bill also provides $6 million to upgrade City Pier in New London.
Developer Avner Krohn building an apartment empire in central Connecticut
At first look, Avner Krohn wouldn’t seem likely to be a mogul in the central Connecticut housing industry.
Krohn, a Long Islander who grew up near Westchester County, has no relatives or family business in Connecticut. He broke into the real estate world in Brooklyn, and his early work was all near New York City.
But Krohn, 40, has rapidly become one of the major development names in this region: He’s partnering with Zelman Real Estate to build 360 apartments in East Hartford and another 111 in Bloomfield.
A half-hour to the south, Krohn’s Jasko Development is embarking on its biggest undertaking yet in downtown New Britain, The Brit, a stylish six-story, 107-unit apartment building.
“There’s so much in New Britain. I love doing this in places where there’s a vision. And it comes down to one thing — partnerships,” Krohn said recently when asked about his rise as one of the region’s major builders.
Krohn wasn’t specifically eying Connecticut when he began investing in real estate.
In his early 20s, he and a partner bought a house in an upward-bound neighborhood in Brooklyn for $280,000. They leased it to a tenant and 16 months later sold it for about $350,000.
Krohn has been looking for value markets ever since. He concluded central Connecticut was a good investment.
“It’s about opportunity. You build a niche,” he said.
Early on, a lot of his business was constructing or rehabbing small clinics for dentists and urgent care centers. Jasko’s website lists a number of those along with small shops in commercial strip centers in Torrington, Enfield, Vernon and elsewhere.
But New Britain got his attention around 2005, and in recent years he’s been focusing more of his work there. At the same time, Jasko has been shifting to mixed-use and residential development, initially with small- and moderate-scale buildings.
“I might live in New York, but I’m here every single week for 15 years. I spend more time here than at home,” he said.
The company renovated the historic Rao, Raphael and Andrews buildings into apartment complexes of 14 to 20 units each, and with each one Krohn has expanded what he sees for the revival of the Hardware City’s downtown.
His vision for the projects in the city has energized officials and business leaders alike.
Mayor Erin Stewart and Downtown District Executive Director Gerry Amodio both praise him for coming back over the years to steadily take on new projects.
The city has pumped millions of dollars into a facelift for Central Park and the appealing Beehive Bridge, but Amodio credits Krohn for bringing sorely needed private capital into the downtown renewal.
This year, Krohn bought the decaying, abandoned Burritt Bank building at Main and Bank streets and promptly demolished it. In its place, he plans 107 apartments in what would become the city’s most attention-grabbing building.
Krohn plans a ground-floor restaurant, a 5,000-square-foot open-air courtyard with seating outdoor dining along the edges of the building facing the Main and Bank sidewalks.
Curving glazed windows will face the corner of Main and Bank on the second through fifth floors, but Krohn did away with sixth-floor corner apartment to leave space for a terrace for tenants. Neon lettering will spell out The Brit.
Krohn, who describes himself as “a fiend for architecture,” is spending heavily for marketing and branding for The Brit. In the end, he sees it as a centerpiece of a downtown revival that can raise all property values and inspire fresh enthusiasm for the city. But as much as he enjoys designing projects to be more than ordinary, he’s serious about making them profitable.
“I’m numbers-driven, too. As many times as towns have great ideas, if the economics don’t work then they don’t work,” he said. “As much as I have a vision and a plan, I always start with the numbers.
Krohn seeks tax incentives from the communities he works in. But he insists that the value his projects create — construction jobs and new residences for tenants who spend in the neighborhood — far outweighs the cost.
When a community balks, he simply looks elsewhere.
“I’m impatient to a fault. I have no time for dilly-dallying, none. I come in with a presentation. I start with the numbers that it needs to work,” he said. “I have a very candid conversation.
“Right now we’re in development or pre-development for over 700 units. I wouldn’t be surprised if in eight weeks from now that gets up to 1,000. It’s not wild or eccentric. I know exactly what we’re were doing, what we’re building, why we’re doing it.”
Krohn attributes part of his business success to his grandmother’s motto: “Don’t clean the table.” To Krohn, that means leaving some profit and progress for his subcontractors, his investors and the communities Jasko operates in.
“We under-promise and over-deliver. And it’s paid off. You talk to any of the municipalities we work with, we’ve come through on our promises,” he said. “You live one life. You want to do something that’s meaningful.”
BRISTOL – By Carrier, the development firm planning to add retail space and apartments to Centre Square in downtown Bristol, offered updates to the Bristol Economic and Community Board of Commissioners.
Developer Gino Carrier and President of Development Planning Solutions Charles Talmadge presented information to the board Thursday evening. According to Bristol Economic and Community Development Director Justin Malley, the project comprises lots five, six, seven and eight of Centre Square. “Basically, the northern portion of the site,” he said.
“After the purchase and sale agreement were signed back in July, we’ve dived into full steam. When we had done the concept, we were anticipating 90 apartments and about 15,000 square feet of retail as a rough estimate of what we thought we would be able to do,” Talmadge said.
He said developers had a stronger grasp of what the project was going to look like now with 88 apartments slated for build, 49 of them having two bedrooms and two bath units, 20 units consisting of one bedroom and one bathroom and 15 of them having three bedrooms and two baths.
“Our commercial component has grown a bit,” he continued. “We thought we were doing 15,000 and now we’re just north of 17,000 square feet on the first floor of all three buildings.”
Talmadge said the project was working with around 300 associates and presented the graphic architecture in front of the board. He said the project may start at the corner of North Main and Hope Street before working north toward McDonald’s.
He said the buildings should look similar to other recent By Carrier build projects but that flat roofs and retail space was being designed to suit a more downtown atmosphere.
Developers are considering the addition of covered parking in the area in the form of car ports and potentially some fully enclosed garages.
“We’re shooting for at least one car per unit covered,” Talmadge said. “Our biggest challenge from an engineering standpoint right now is locating the North Creek Conduit (Pequabuck River) which runs along the entire frontage. Unfortunately the control points that tell us where that thing is have been lost to time over years.”
Talmadge said it was possible the city may see some digging in the area next week to test and see what’s in the ground in the area.
Project leaders said they didn’t think it would be a major challenge but they needed to determine the conduit's location for purposes of zoning concerns and the need to maybe push the buildings back from the street a bit further.
Board members said this could work to the advantage of the project because it may create larger areas for outdoor eating space or green space between the buildings and street.
By Carrier is looking to begin building and breaking official ground for the project next year.
Killingly power plant dealt a major setback as ISO-NE abandons plans
Jan Ellen Spiegel
A proposal for a natural gas power plant in Killingly, which has drawn the ire of environmental activists for six years, was dealt a major setback after the regional electric grid operator — ISO-New England — said it doesn’t want Killingly to be part of its future plans.
In a Nov. 4 letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the independent system operator that runs the New England grid — known as ISO-New England — has requested permission to cut Killingly from future power considerations. ISO-NE set up a battle over the proposed Killingly plant with its decision to include it in future power plans, known as Capacity Supply Obligation (CSO). Killingly is owned by NTE Energy.
The letter to FERC says, in part, that after consultation with NTE Energy, ISO-NE is “exercising its right to seek to terminate Killingly’s CSO.” If accepted by FERC, ISO-NE will “draw down the financial assurance” NTE Energy was required to provide to back up their commitment to the project, and ISO-NE would remove Killingly’s qualified capacity from future plans. ISO-NE asked FERC to issue an order within 60 days from the date of the letter and set a date of Jan. 3, 2022 for the termination, in advance of the next time ISO-NE is scheduled to pick future generation facilities in February.
Without a commitment from ISO-NE to use the 650 megawatts the plant would have supplied, building the Killingly Energy Center would likely be a less economically viable project. Whether NTE would simply scuttle the project at that point is unknown. NTE did not reply Friday morning to a request for comment.
Opponents of the Killingly plant were heartened by the news Friday.
“This is hugely welcome news,” said Samantha Dynowski, state director of the Connecticut chapter of the Sierra Club, one of several groups that have relentlessly fought the Killingly plant for years. “Without a capacity supply obligation, I don’t think we’re going to see this get built.”
Kate Donnelly, of the group No More Dirty Power, was equally optimistic.
“I think that we noticed that the signs were building against the plant,” she said. The financing wasn’t secured and certain land areas hadn’t been secured, but most of the final permits were in place, except for one for a natural gas pipeline Eversource needed to build to connect to the plant.
“We think this really is the beginning of the end,” Donnelly said.
FERC still needs to approve the request, which is predicated on ISO-NE’s existing commitment to the power having timed out.
In a statement, an ISO-NE spokesman explained its action this way: “Any new resource acquiring a capacity supply obligation is required to meet several development milestones, including, among other things, financing, permitting, major equipment orders, and commercial operation. Developers who face delays in meeting milestone deadlines have the ability to find other resources to cover their obligations for up to two years. After these two years, if a project is still unable to meet their milestone deadlines, the ISO has the right to seek to terminate of the resource’s obligation through a filing with the Commission. The ISO is exercising this right with regard to the Killingly Energy Center.”
ISO-NE had long contended that just because it had committed to Killingly didn’t mean it would necessarily be built – noting that many projects it commits to are abandoned.
But it noted that NTE would have the option to re-enter Killingly in the capacity market at a later time but would need to begin the qualification process for new resources again.
Climate change advocates weren’t the only ones who objected to the plant. More recently, state officials have argued that another fossil fuel plant would be contrary to the state’s mandate for a 100% zero-carbon electric sector by 2040 and its other climate change reduction goals.
In January, Gov. Ned Lamont said outright: “I don’t want to build Killingly.”
On Friday he said: “If ISO said we need Killingly in order to keep the lights on, I’m going to keep the lights on. But I wanted to do everything I could as a governor over the last two and a half years and make sure we didn’t need the last natural gas-fired plant in New England in order to keep the lights on.”
Katie Dykes, the commissioner of the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, has long used the prospect of Killingly as an example of why the New England grid operation needs to change. She has repeatedly said it ignores the climate change mandates and goals of the individual states.
“I believe that we have to change the system that brought us this plant in the first place. We’re doing that by working with other states to reform the ISO-New England,” she said in January. “That is the place we can have the greatest and most lasting impact.”
On Friday, she said there had been questions around the plant’s viability for quite a while. “The latest communication from the ISO indicates that it also thinks this plant is not viable,” she said.
With infrastructure vote, Buttigieg gains a multibillion tool to speed up megaprojects
Michael Laris, The Washington Post
WASHINGTON - The $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill adopted late Friday creates a multibillion fund to spur the type of complicated, ambitious projects that have been stymied by decades of tentative investment and inattention from Washington.
Modern-day equivalents of megaprojects like the Hoover Dam can benefit broad swaths of the United States, but infrastructure experts say they have often stagnated. President Joe Biden campaigned to address the issue. Now his transportation secretary, Pete Buttigieg, is tapped to speed up such projects, which can straddle state lines and take years to complete.
The bipartisan 228-206 vote after months of delay marked a final milestone in an effort to improve the nation's roads, bridges, pipes, ports and internet connections. Administration officials see the megaprojects program - and others intended for large-scale projects - as tools to break long-standing logjams.
Among the projects that could see a boost: the Gateway rail project, a vast plan to expand capacity for train traffic between New York and New Jersey; and a long-delayed effort to replace the outmoded Brent Spence bridge, which connects Kentucky and Ohio, and is one of the nation's worst bottlenecks.
"No matter where they live or who they voted for, all Americans deserve to have a transportation system that works for them," Buttigieg said in a statement after the vote.
The infrastructure bill includes about $16 billion for "major projects that are too large or complex for traditional funding programs," but that have big economic benefits, according to the White House.
"We think it puts us in the game to get funding," said Mark Policinski, chief executive of the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments, which has championed the $2.7 billion project that also includes road improvements for miles in each direction. "The federal government has basically given a cold shoulder to infrastructure across this country for a long time - not just a few years, but for a few decades."
Policinski said federal support could push the project over the finish line after years of complications that involve dealing with two states, myriad competing interests and insufficient money for a Cincinnati-area project that has broad support. He said a bridge designed for 3,000 trucks a day now carries 30,000.
Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, one of the bill's architects, cited the bridge in a statement that described the benefits of creating a National Infrastructure Project Assistance program within the Department of Transportation. Portman pointedly noted that Congress appropriated $5 billion for the megaprojects program and authorized billions more over five years for efforts "like the Brent Spence Corridor project."
The bridge is also a top infrastructure priority of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who was among the Republican backers of the bipartisan infrastructure bill.
Under the program, some projects must cost at least $500 million, while others must be between $100 million and $500 million to be eligible.
That broader infrastructure package also includes what the White House calls the nation's biggest investment in transit and clean energy transmission in U.S. history - as well as new spending on highways and bridges - and billions for replacing lead pipes and extending broadband. It includes investments in passenger rail, electric vehicle infrastructure and programs to address past environmental damage, reduce road deaths and improve airports and waterways.
Buttigieg late Friday called it "the most significant investment in jobs and infrastructure in my lifetime," saying the bill will "rebuild and replace infrastructure that is decades, or even a century, old."
Biden late last month announced a framework for a separate, $1.75 trillion climate and social policy package that represents a major piece of his agenda. It includes funding for universal preschool, expanded health care, and new clean energy and other investments. A draft of the reconciliation bill, released as negotiations continued, includes billions in spending on high-speed rail and transit connected to affordable housing or benefiting disadvantaged communities.
Congressional and administration officials said the one-two punch of an infrastructure bill followed by the Democratic budget plan would have deep effects across the country.
The Gateway Program, a top priority of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is among the megaprojects set to benefit from the just-passed infrastructure bill.
After a tour of parts of the project this summer, Schumer said he was confident that congressional action, in the infrastructure bill and reconciliation process, would provide "the billions of dollars we need to build Gateway."
"One of the first things I mentioned to President-elect Biden was Gateway. He said he's on board," Schumer said. With Buttigieg looking on, Schumer said he heard the same from the transportation secretary. "He's all on board . . . Things will move very quickly," Schumer said.
Buttigieg said he told Schumer he would "tear down any unnecessary bureaucracy and work together to make sure that these things could advance." After seeing up-close "the best construction that you could possibly get - 110 years ago," he added that an outage in the critical tunnel would be felt "all the way back in Indiana where I come from."
Stephen Sigmund, spokesman for the Gateway Program, said the first two projects - a planned Portal North bridge over the Hackensack River in New Jersey and a new tunnel under the Hudson River - have financing plans in place and are not dependent on the infrastructure bill. Still, Sigmund added, the billions in additional funds the bill will provide to the U.S. Transportation Department's Capital Investment Grants program will be "a great help to the project."
Later phases of the Gateway Program, including far-reaching track-improvements and other bridge projects, could benefit from the megaprojects fund and other large pots of money in the bill, Sigmund said.
The critical Northeast rail corridor "narrows down to this old straw that gets crimped in various places," Sigmund said. "The whole idea is to establish a four-track system between New York and New Jersey, which would replace the current two track system - one track in, one track out - which is 110 years old."
The bulk of transportation funds in the infrastructure bill will flow through existing programs, in which states get money according to federal formulas and have discretion over how they use the money. It will allow states to make progress on routine projects, such as repaving roads, upgrading bridges and buying new buses.
But large sums also will be distributed through competitive grant programs, giving the Biden administration an opportunity to select projects that align with its priorities and policy aspirations, particularly efforts to combat climate change and address inequities caused by past transportation projects.
Transportation Department officials cited bridges or tunnels connecting two states; new rail and transit lines; and a freight hub integrating ship, train and truck traffic as examples of the type of projects that might be considered.
While some funding has been available in the past for such work, the demand for those dollars has far exceeded the supply. More than 150 applications for one major grant program earlier this year sought about $6.8 billion in funds, seven times the amount that was available, according to the department.
In addition to providing funding for expensive and time-consuming projects, Transportation Department officials say the megaprojects program is also intended to build long-running partnerships between federal, state and local officials to solve technical and other barriers to ambitious projects.
Kevin DeGood, director of infrastructure policy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank in Washington, said many existing competitive grant programs aren't big enough to handle megaprojects.
He said officials around the country have big ideas that might benefit from such funding, including plans for passenger rail along the Front Range in Colorado, a regional rail plan in San Diego, expanding transit from the San Fernando Valley to the Westside in southern California, and efforts to tear down, reroute or reimagine highways in Louisiana, New York and elsewhere.
Even with billions in new money to spend, DeGood said, the administration may feel pressure to try to spread itself too thin, something he said should be avoided.
"There's a tension between saying 'yes' to more projects and the fact that if you say 'yes' too many times, your grant awards are too small and you're not necessarily doing transformative projects anymore," DeGood said.
Ana Maria Dimand, Boise State University
The U.S. Congress passed an infrastructure bill that funds more than a trillion dollars in nationwide federal spending on Nov. 5, 2021.
The bill puts about US$240 billion toward building or rebuilding roads, bridges, public transit, airports and railways. More than $150 billion is slated for projects that address climate change, like building electric vehicle charging stations, upgrading energy grids and production to work better with renewables, and making public transit more environmentally sustainable.
There’s funding for cybersecurity, clean water and waste treatment systems, broadband internet connections and more.
The bill is the largest investment in the nation’s infrastructure in decades.
So how does the government go about spending all that money?
Officials are required to follow certain procedures, regulations and guidelines for advertising and gathering bids, reviewing them and then hiring contractors to do the work. This process is called “public procurement.”
What’s interesting to me and my colleagues who study public procurement policy is how this massive influx of spending can be used as an innovative policy tool to further the government’s social, economic and environmental goals.
Judging from President Joe Biden’s executive orders prioritizing action on climate change in contracting and procurement and ensuring equitable compensation for workers employed by federal government contractors, his administration will encourage the use of the power of procurement to achieve environmental, social and economic policy goals.
To understand how public procurement can be used to improve social equity or speed up climate action, it helps to know the basics of how it works.
How do government officials buy infrastructure?
The process starts with a formal demand from an agency like the Department of Transportation or Public Works and the selection of the best procedure for awarding the contract for a funded project.
For several decades, government infrastructure procurement processes have generally taken one of two forms: “design-bid-build” or “design-build.”
In the design-bid-build option, governments separate the contracts into two tracks – project design and project construction, one following the other. A major advantage of design-bid-build is that agencies are familiar with this traditional way of building things. The main disadvantage is that it requires a three-way relationship – with the government working with both the designer and the builder, and the designer and builder also working together – that heightens the potential for conflict during the project. And that can sometimes lead to increased costs.
An example of the design-bid-build method is the Virginia Department of Transportation’s I-95/Telegraph Road Interchange project, which involved building 11 new bridges and highway flyover ramps in Alexandria. A professional services firm named Dewberry designed the project – winning engineering awards as well as praise for avoiding negative impacts on local residents and businesses – and the separate construction firm was Corman Kokosing.
In the design-build procurement process, potential contractors bid to do both the design and construction of the infrastructure as a single package. The main advantage of this type of contract is the direct relationship between the contractor and the government. The designer and construction firm work together as a unified project team, which may significantly decrease project completion time.
However, design-build also requires a high level of expertise in drafting design and construction specifications from the government, because decisions need to be made early in the process, and changes may lead to an increase in costs.
An example of the design-build methodology is the US 15 over Indian Field Swamp Bridge Replacement Project in Dorchester County, South Carolina.
With both of these infrastructure procurement options, the process is typically competitive among contractors, and the government owns, operates, finances and maintains the final bridge, roadway, mass transit line or other asset.
Public-private partnerships
The Biden administration has also proposed using another common type of procurement for the infrastructure spending – public-private parnerships.
These partnerships divide the costs of designing, building, operating and maintaining a project between a private sector firm and the government over 25 or 30 years before the agreement phases out. The private firm may receive some or all of the revenues the project generates during that time.
Let’s say the infrastructure needed is a new toll road. The government enters into a contract with a private company to design, finance, construct, operate and maintain this new highway for a certain period of time. In exchange, the private company makes back its costs by collecting the revenues from the tolls.
The Capital Beltway High Occupancy Toll Lanes project in Fairfax County, Virginia, also called the 495 Express Lanes project, is just such a public-private partnership. The government agency is the Virginia Department of Transportation, and the private partner is a company formed specifically for this project called Capital Beltway Express LLC.
Proponents argue that public-private partnerships may help the government provide better infrastructure without increasing public debt.
Public policy researchers in the Netherlands have also found that by supporting the development of trust and commitment between the partners, public-private infrastructure partnerships can lead to better results in many ways, such as effective design solutions, reduced environmental impact, lower costs and better relations with and support from local communities or organizations.
But there are also critics. Policy scholars have noted that these partnerships may not really save governments money. Other scholars have raised concerns that these arrangements cede too much public control of infrastructure to the private sector, which may look out more avidly for its own financial interests than those of the public.
By inserting demands into government contracts, the new infrastructure spending could be used to promote fair wages, health care benefits, fair working conditions for people employed by government contractors and ensure that products are sourced in a sustainable and ethical manner. This approach can also be used to demand locally produced goods and services, support for veteran-, minority- and women-owned businesses and spur market innovation, environmentally friendly products and services.