CT Construction Digest Wednesday March 1, 2023
A major improvement project at Bradley International Airport that is part of $230 million in upcoming renovations got another financial boost from the federal government’s infrastructure program aimed at improving air travel.
Bradley will receive a $5 million grant in a second round of funding from the Federal Aviation Administration. The grant comes on top of about $20 million from a first round of funding last summer.
The state’s largest commercial airport will construct a system that will transport checked baggage along a mile-long network of conveyor belts to a new building near the Sheraton hotel for security screening. The $185 million project will remove baggage screening from the terminal lobby, freeing up space for at least 16 new airline ticket counters.
Few airports around the country still screen baggage in their lobbies, the majority having moved them to separate buildings as Bradley now plans.
The Connecticut Airport Authority, which oversees operations at Bradley said it was “very grateful” for the the support of Gov. Ned Lamont and the state’s Congressional delegation in securing the additional funding for the baggage screening project.
“The project will serve as a major customer service enhancement for passengers, and it will open up significant space for additional growth of airline routes and services,” Kevin Dillon, the CAA’s executive director, said, in a statement. “We anticipate kicking off construction within the next couple of months.”
A companion, $42 million project will include additions to the east and west sides of the terminal. New sets of escalators and elevators will connect the concourse and baggage claim, also creating new lounge areas for people waiting for travelers arriving at the airport.
The idea is to relieve the congestion on the one central stairwell that now serves all passengers. The central stairwell will eventually be eliminated, opening up more space for travelers standing in line at the nearby passenger screening checkpoint. At heavy travel periods, the line often spills out into the lobby.
The projects are expected to be completed in the next two to three years.
The FAA grant to Bradley was part of more than $1 billion in funding to 99 airports around the country to improve baggage systems, security checkpoints and “multi-modal connections. The funding also comes as air travel recovers from the pandemic.
The funding is drawn from the infrastructure program’s Airport Terminal Program, one of three, aviation-focused components of the infrastructure legislation. The legislation provides $1 billion annually for five years for airport terminal improvements around the country.
“These grants will make it faster and easier to check your bags, get through security and find your gate, all while creating jobs and supporting local economies,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said, in a release.
Buy America provisions can improve construction lead times — for a price
A reliance on construction materials produced overseas has left U.S. contractors susceptible to long lead times and extreme price volatility, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic slowed global supply chains.
About 32% of building materials come from outside the U.S., according to Marcum, a New York City-based accounting and advisory firm. The top countries the U.S. imports construction materials from include nations in the European Union as well as China, South Korea, Canada and Japan, said Joe Natarelli, managing partner in Marcum’s New Haven, Connecticut, office.
The main building materials sourced outside of the United States are some of the most foundational materials used in construction. They include:
Cement.
Lumber.
Steel.
Insulation material.
Electrical equipment.
This reliance on foreign-made products and materials could soon change, said Barry LePatner, construction attorney and founder of LePatner & Associates, a New York City-based law firm. For instance, new “Buy America” provisions for publicly funded projects will require government-funded projects to use construction materials that are made in the United States.
“It is to be expected that prices for domestically manufactured projects and materials will increase,” said LePatner. “But the assurances of more certain delivery dates will be well worth the time and cost to achieve a greater certainty for project completions.”
Challenges of onshoring
The make-it-here push raises issues for the construction industry and project owners, namely increased expenses. Many building groups have pushed back on the Biden administration’s onshoring initiative, claiming some materials simply aren’t available domestically at any price and will cause even more construction delays.
“Our projects require a very complex mix of materials, some of which are not domestically manufactured,” said Doug Carlson, CEO of the National Utility Contractors Association, in a statement. “Some components are not made in the United States and must be bought overseas to complete a job. Other materials sourced from foreign sources are significantly cheaper and hold down federal government infrastructure expenditures.”
After all, cost savings were the primary reason why much of American manufacturing emigrated overseas decades ago.
“With a ‘build here in North America,’ there is going to be higher costs, higher labor costs, higher technology costs,” said LePatner. “... Prices for things will go up.”
Increased material prices, limited availability of labor and difficulties in new technology adoption are the main challenges of onshoring, according to a Marcum report on the supply chain.
High material prices were also recently identified as “the biggest challenge right now for the construction industry,” according to Felice Farber, executive director of the Subcontractors Trade Association, a New York-based association of union subcontractors. This, despite the fact that historic inflation spurred by the pandemic is finally coming down.
Nevertheless, increased costs may be the price owners and contractors have to pay to ensure stable lead times and to meet federal guidelines, said LePatner.
The White House’s Office of Management and Budget recently issued proposed guidance on how to implement the Build America, Buy America Act provision in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The Department of Defense also recently increased its domestic content threshold from 55% to 60% through the end of 2023 for components required to be produced within the U.S. That mandate will increase again to 65% from 2024 through 2028, and finally to 75% thereafter.
A silver lining for both contractors and owners is the fact that closer, more predictable sourcing paths will help alleviate common issues that lead to disputes on projects, said Natarelli.
“Dependable lead times would avoid delay penalties and escalation clause expenses,” said Natarelli. “It would also give banks and surety companies more comfort in job completion dates.”
Long lead times linger
Lead times remain at “unprecedented levels,” especially for critical mechanical and electrical equipment, said Richard Kennedy, president and CEO of Skanska USA. Minneapolis-based contractor Mortenson also indicated elongated lead times as a continuing headwind for the construction industry in its latest Construction Cost Index report.
Yet despite the increased urgency to buy construction materials closer to the projects they help build, LePatner said the make-it-here push “will be a slow transition for the next few years” for projects not under federal guidelines.
That’s especially true as owners and contractors grapple to find a balanced solution for keeping projects in line while maintaining tighter control over completion schedules. So, during that span, there will remain a reliance on materials shipped from overseas, he said.
“From talking around to a lot of contractors and architects, they’re able to still specify products from overseas and are willing to wait a little bit to get cheaper prices,” said LePatner. “They know similar products are not readily available reliably here in North America so quickly.”
STAMFORD — The owners of Stamford's historic lock factory — which may be headed for demolition — has filed a wide-ranging lawsuit claiming they were deceived into purchasing the property.
Manhattan-based GAIA Real Estate has sued South End developer Building and Land Technology, the city of Stamford and multiple other entities over their handling of the Lofts at Yale & Towne. GAIA bought the factory-turned-apartment building around October 2016 from BLT.
The building — one of the last remaining reminders of the South End's industrial past — has been empty for about a year and a half. Loft residents were forced to move out by the end of July 2021 after property owners reported numerous structural faults.
According to the lawsuit, the complex — about six stories tall and 725 feet long — has unsalvageable problems with its foundation. Based on "information and belief," the lawsuit states the building has settled 11 inches since its 2010 renovation.
The lawsuit goes in depth on what exactly the underlying deficiencies are. In doing so, GAIA's lawyers pin the blame on BLT and its associates, primarily, for alleged negligence in how it developed, maintained and sold the complex to them.
BLT spokesperson Nicholas Kyriacou said the developer cannot comment on pending litigation.
The three connected buildings composing the lofts were built at different points between 1910 and 1920 by lockmaking giant Yale & Towne, which crafted the South End into a factory town in the late 1800s before departing the area in 1955. In the company's aftermath, the site was labeled a brownfield — formerly industrial land that is not currently in use and often polluted.
In October 2005, it was purchased by Greenwich developer Antares Investment Partners. In September 2008, BLT took over when it assumed Antares' investment portfolio for the Harbor Point redevelopment. After renovations, BLT opened the building to renters in 2010, the first building to go in BLT's Harbor Point project.
Antares and BLT both leaned on an engineering firm, Loureiro Engineering Associates, to handle remediation. The firm proposed the installation of an impermeable liner to protect the site from contaminated soil.
According to the lawsuit, the liner prevented contamination from spreading, but it also stopped surface water from reaching the soil underneath the building. Since the building's groundwater can't be replenished, the soil beneath the structure is constantly compressing. This causes a process known as settling, where a building sinks into the ground to adjust to its shifting foundation.
An environmental land use restriction prohibits GAIA Real Estate from altering the liner because of the risk of releasing pollutants, the lawsuit states.
GAIA alleges that BLT did not properly inform the company about the groundwater issues before the 2016 sale.
That year, when a consulting firm visited the property to survey conditions, BLT did not inform consultants of any issues with the substructure, the lawsuit says. The firm reported that its survey was made "of areas readily observable, easily accessible or made accessible by the property contact."
The firm alleges that BLT and its associates knew of the deteriorating subsurface conditions.
"To the extent that defendants ... were not aware of those generalized subsurface conditions, it was because they actively and intentionally sought to avoid knowing them in an effort to make the site marketable," the lawsuit says.
Additionally, the company is suing the city of Stamford for negligence, which it says has resulted in further damages. Per the lawsuit, the city did not properly maintain stormwater drainage and sanitary sewer pipes underneath the Henry Street property.
"The city of Stamford was informed that the utilities along Henry Street in the vicinity of The Lofts building were filled with debris in 2021, preventing investigation into the conditions of the utilities," the lawsuit says. "Upon information and belief despite being informed of the problems with the utility pipes, the city of Stamford has not maintained or repaired its utility pipes."
Lauren Meyer, a special assistant to Mayor Caroline Simmons, said Friday that city officials are not able to comment on the pending litigation.
Of the 14 counts in the lawsuit, BLT is named in six and the City of Stamford in two.
Neither GAIA Real Estate nor the New York-based law firm representing it, Anderson Kill P.C., responded to a request for comment.
"Due to the ongoing damages from continued settlement activity and continued groundwater depletion, The Lofts building cannot safely be repaired," the lawsuit says.
Demolition of historic buildings must be referred to the city's Historic Preservation Advisory Commission, city planner Vineeta Mathur said in an email. The property owner filed a pre-application review for redevelopment to the Zoning Board last year. The application was referred to HPAC, and the commission discussed it at a meeting last year.
"A full Zoning Board application for the redevelopment has not been filed yet," Mathur said.
Wallingford BOE votes to consolidate Sheehan, Lyman Hall high schools into one building
WALLINGFORD — The Board of Education took a major step toward consolidating the town's two high schools this week, voting by an 8-1 margin to combine Mark T. Sheehan High School and Lyman Hall High School into one school on the current Pond Hill Road site of Lyman Hill, Superintendent of School .
The new high school would be nearly 300,000 square feet, according to information presented to the school board in a virtual meeting Monday night.
It would cost $216.06 million, with the town's share of that being $122.68 million. The state would reimburse the town for its share at a rate of about 43 percent, board Board of Education Chair Tammy Raccio said Tuesday.
The Town Council still must approve before the town can put the design out for bid and apply for state funding, said Raccio and Superintendent of Schools Danielle Bellizzi.
Vice Chairman Ray Ross was the only member who voted against the consolidation. The vote came after more than five years of discussion.
"He was in favor of keeping two smaller schools," said Raccio.
The problem with that for many on the board was that "basically, if we renovated both schools, the Sheehan High School ... utilization would only be 59 percent" — and state reimbursement would drop because of it, Raccio said.
According to a study done for the board, Sheehan's highest enrollment over the next eight years would be just 738, Raccio said.
"If they renovated to new, they're renovating to much higher than our projections need," she said. "If we renovated both schools to new, it would have cost the taxpayers an additional $20 million ... That's a financial piece that really got most of the board members' attention."
Under the plan to consolidate the two schools, class-size "will still be the same" at about 25 per class, Raccio said.
Right now, with certain programs running at just one school or the other, "there's not equity in opportunity," she said.
"Last night ... at their monthly meeting, the Board of Education voted to move forward with the process of building one consolidated high school for the students of the Wallingford Public Schools," said Bellizzi in an email. "...We are excited to look ahead to the future of this flagship school for our learning community," Bellizzi wrote.
"The Wallingford Board of Education commissioned a second study to include the elementary, middle, and high schools to review student enrollment, make recommendations on the best use of space to achieve educational objectives and ensure equitable class sizes and access to programming," Bellizzi said.
"Consultants' provided an in-depth view of projected enrollment for the next 10 years, programming, and facilities information to better understand the issues facing the district," she wrote. "After reviewing and discussing the finding from the study, the Wallingford Board of Education decided to narrow the focus to the high schools to start.
"The options were to either renovate both high schools as new or consolidate them into one high school," she said. "This lengthy process culminated in last night’s vote to bring the recommendation to the Town Council for their consideration and in order to issue a request for proposals for architectural specifications needed to apply for state funding."
The process "included input from the community, an extensive study from the architectural firm of Silver, Petrucelli + Associates as well as a significant educational cost/benefit analysis," Bellizzi said. "The recommendation will be shared with the Town Council with the intended outcome being the Town Council would support the Board of Education moving forward with a second level (deeper dive) study."
If approved by the Town Council, "the next steps in the process will include reviewing the second-tier study and determining the feasibility to move forward with one consolidated high school," she said. "If the decision is to continue with one consolidated high school, then a grant application would need to be submitted to the Office of School Construction Grants and Review for approval."
Norwich selects East Hartford firm to oversee first phase of $385 million school project
Claire Bessette
Norwich ― The School Building Committee has selected an East Hartford firm to manage the construction of the first three new schools included in the $385 million school construction project approved by voters in November.
The committee voted unanimously to hire Construction Solutions Group of East Hartford for $3.68 million as the city’s owner’s representative. The firm will oversee the applications for state reimbursement for the bulk of the cost, design and construction of the three schools in the first phase of the project. The group will review the project master plan, firm up cost estimates and file for state reimbursement grants by the June 30 deadline.
The project calls for building four new elementary schools to replace the current seven schools, either renovating or replacing Teachers’ Memorial Global Studies Middle School and renovating the Samuel Huntington Elementary School to become the adult education center and administrative offices.
The plan calls for construction of a new school on grounds of the former Greeneville School and construction of new schools to replace the John B. Stanton and Uncas schools on the grounds of those schools. Once completed, students in current schools will move to the new buildings, and the old buildings will be torn down and new sports fields and playgrounds built.
The City Council last week delayed votes to submit requests to the state for project reimbursement for the first three schools, preferring to wait until the owners’ representative is on board to verify that Greeneville, Stanton and Uncas should be the first schools built.
School Building Committee Chairman Mark Bettencourt said five firms applied to be the owner’s representative. Construction Solutions was one of three finalists interviewed by the committee. The firm was “in the median range” for price, and comparable to the other finalists, Bettencourt said.
City Purchasing Agent Bob Castronova verified the firm’s references before finalizing the selection.
“Obviously, money is an element, but our primary concern is bringing someone in who has a good understanding of the project,” Bettencourt said. “They’ve been watching the process and have a very good understanding of the timeline, and they have ideas to adjust the timeline.”
Jim Guiliano, president and founder of Construction Solutions Group, said the company which was founded in 2014, has 18 employees. It primarily works on school and nonprofit projects. The company’s website lists work on projects at Farmington High School and the Colchester Senior Center and new construction at the Maritime Aquarium in Norwalk as recent projects.
Guiliano said the most important first step in the Norwich project is to organize all the paperwork and requirements and verify cost estimates in order to submit the reimbursement application to the state by the June 30 deadline.
Construction Solutions Group will represent the Norwich School Building Committee, organize and coordinate the design and construction process, ensuring maximum reimbursement rates from the state, Guiliano said. He called it “a balancing act” to meet the educational needs of the project, the budget and state requirements.
Mixed-use complex with 244 apartments planned in Southington
ATexas-based developer is planning a multi-building, mixed-use apartment complex with commercial space on West Street in Southington.
Developer and applicant Anthony Properties LLC and Brian Shiu of Dallas, Texas, are looking to build at 1303, 1193, and 1177 West St., property owned by the trust of Roger C. Toiles of Southington.
The planned development includes 244 residential units over eight buildings, with a pool and clubhouse, and 17,500 square feet of commercial space over two buildings at the corner of West and Curtiss streets.
Anthony Properties would purchase the roughly 40-acre property from the owner if the plan is approved. The land currently contains vacant commercial buildings, owners said.
The three properties have a combined total appraised value of roughly $890,000.
It is not known how many bedrooms the units will have, whether any will be affordable and if the commercial space will be suitable for restaurants, retail, commercial, medical or office space.
The project will go before a public hearing of the Planning and Zoning Commission in March.