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.