Interstate 81 in Syracuse

[froggie]

Based on his recent post, Scott seems to think that costs in Upstate New York are comparable to those in Maryland.  That's simply not true.  Labor costs are considerably higher in New York, and that's reflected in the project estimate.

[kalvado]

I actually agree with Beltway. Since NYSDOT doesn't have enough money for all the improvements, fixing just the viaduct and nothing else works well, and it is even cheaper than the community grid plan that was accepted. I-81 will be able to stay where it is, and no capacity is lost compared to what it is now.

Fixing as-is is out of the question. Fixing to standards require a lot of extra footprint, eminent domain on city center property and quickly consumes a lot of money and goodwill.

[Rothman]

I actually agree with Beltway. Since NYSDOT doesn't have enough money for all the improvements, fixing just the viaduct and nothing else works well, and it is even cheaper than the community grid plan that was accepted. I-81 will be able to stay where it is, and no capacity is lost compared to what it is now.

Fixing as-is is out of the question. Fixing to standards require a lot of extra footprint, eminent domain on city center property and quickly consumes a lot of money and goodwill.

^This.

[hbelkins]

Based on his recent post, Scott seems to think that costs in Upstate New York are comparable to those in Maryland.  That's simply not true.  Labor costs are considerably higher in New York, and that's reflected in the project estimate.

And THIS is one of the places where I think transportation agencies can get a handle on costs. I know that when federal funds are involved, federal prevailing wage laws apply, but maybe, just maybe, one of these days we can get those repealed. Most of the contractors who build highway projects went into business strictly to get government contracts to build roads. It's basically all they do. It's their sole source of revenue. If the government says, "we're paying X amount of dollars for this project, and not a dime more," the contractors will either reduce their bids or they will go without work.

[kalvado]

Based on his recent post, Scott seems to think that costs in Upstate New York are comparable to those in Maryland.  That's simply not true.  Labor costs are considerably higher in New York, and that's reflected in the project estimate.

And THIS is one of the places where I think transportation agencies can get a handle on costs. I know that when federal funds are involved, federal prevailing wage laws apply, but maybe, just maybe, one of these days we can get those repealed. Most of the contractors who build highway projects went into business strictly to get government contracts to build roads. It's basically all they do. It's their sole source of revenue. If the government says, "we're paying X amount of dollars for this project, and not a dime more," the contractors will either reduce their bids or they will go without work.

Which can be the case. But I still wonder how much non-labor items, such as machinery depreciation and raw materials - e.g. steel an concrete, actually contribute towards the grand total.

[Rothman]

If I understand HB's intriguing proposal correctly, I am not sure that paying some pittance for labor is the best route when we want bridges built to spec.  That said, I really am not that familiar with the prevailing wage legislation.

[hbelkins]

If I understand HB's intriguing proposal correctly, I am not sure that paying some pittance for labor is the best route when we want bridges built to spec.  That said, I really am not that familiar with the prevailing wage legislation.

It's easy to tell a proposal in Kentucky when it's federally funded vs. state only. The federally funded proposal will have pages of labor requirements and wage listings. The state proposal will basically have one page stating the minimum wage.

As for building bridges to spec, this is why the transportation agencies employ inspectors.

[Rothman]

Kentucky pays everyone on a 100% state-funded job minimum wage?  No wonder the state is known for poverty.

Also makes me wonder about KY's split between federal and 100% funded state jobs and if their split is affected by that policy.

[Beltway]

Kozel: Fact is, things cost what they cost. Stop asking us.

I don't think he's asking.  He's just stating his opinion and insisting he's right, despite not having been directly involved with the project -- like the people who developed the estimates were.

I asked a couple questions, rendered some opinions, and put 3 alternatives out for perusal.

Not really questioning any engineers, I realize that the people who actually published the report were most likely not engineers per se.

I am aghast at this project, and the fact that the national "remove urban freeways" advocates will glom on to this and demand the removal of other urban freeways in the country.

So yeah this does affect me personally and many other people around the country.

[Beltway]

Based on his recent post, Scott seems to think that costs in Upstate New York are comparable to those in Maryland.  That's simply not true.  Labor costs are considerably higher in New York, and that's reflected in the project estimate.

Baltimore is a much bigger city than Syracuse, and it is quite plausible that Baltimore would be more expensive.

[sprjus4]

Not really questioning any engineers, I realize that the people who actually published the report were most likely not engineers per se.

People who published the report were not engineers, of course. The people who came up with the engineering cost estimates on the other hand in the background were on the other hand.

I am aghast at this project, and the fact that the national "remove urban freeways" advocates will glom on to this and demand the removal of other urban freeways in the country.

Agreed. I will say some interstates, like urban spur routes that don't have much use, or elevated freeways that get little traffic, I'm fine with removing. But long-distance thru routes like these, I'm completely against. Same with important urban spur routes.

[kalvado]

Kozel: Fact is, things cost what they cost. Stop asking us.

I don't think he's asking.  He's just stating his opinion and insisting he's right, despite not having been directly involved with the project -- like the people who developed the estimates were.

I asked a couple questions, rendered some opinions, and put 3 alternatives out for perusal.

Not really questioning any engineers, I realize that the people who actually published the report were most likely not engineers per se.

I am aghast at this project, and the fact that the national "remove urban freeways" advocates will glom on to this and demand the removal of other urban freeways in the country.

So yeah this does affect me personally and many other people around the country.

The situation with I-81 Syracuse was discussed quite a bit in 20 pages of this thread.
There is no simple solution, and you're certainly not inventing one by your posts. I suggest you read what was posted before - yep, all 20 pages - before coming up with your valuable opionion. BTW, did you drive the highway in question? I did a few times, and I certainly don't think I can invent something really new here.

[Beltway]

Not really questioning any engineers, I realize that the people who actually published the report were most likely not engineers per se.

People who published the report were not engineers, of course. The people who came up with the engineering cost estimates on the other hand in the background were on the other hand.

The people who published the report were not necessarily using the work of engineers on their document ...

[kalvado]

Not really questioning any engineers, I realize that the people who actually published the report were most likely not engineers per se.

People who published the report were not engineers, of course. The people who came up with the engineering cost estimates on the other hand in the background were on the other hand.

The people who published the report were not necessarily using the work of engineers on their document ...

And 9/11 was an inside job, right?

[Beltway]

Not really questioning any engineers, I realize that the people who actually published the report were most likely not engineers per se.

People who published the report were not engineers, of course. The people who came up with the engineering cost estimates on the other hand in the background were on the other hand.

The people who published the report were not necessarily using the work of engineers on their document ...

And 9/11 was an inside job, right?

No, wrong conspiracy, you need to look at the real conspiracies.

[vdeane]

@Beltway
Detailed cost estimate information - https://www.dot.ny.gov/i81opportunities/repository/Appendix%20A-5_Alternative%20Cost%20Estimate%20Tables_04-19-2019.pdf
April 19, 2019
Viaduct is $2.2 billion. The actual 0.9 mile bridge replacement itself is only $539 million, but there's a lot more than just than. Take a look yourself.

It says that Elevated Structures is $539 million, which is a lot more than just the 0.9-mile I-81 bridge which is the critical infrastructure that they are talking about removing.

What is the cost of replacing that bridge?  Alt. 1 - same width.  Alt. 2 - same number of lanes (6) will full right shoulders.  Alt.3 - if they don't want to build a wider bridge then build it with 4 lanes and full right shoulders.

While Alt. 3 would have capacity issues a 4-lane Interstate highway would be immensely better than losing that segment altogether, and it would meet current urban Interstate highway standards.

Alt. 3 would be very similar to the $240 million I-895 Canton Yards Viaduct replacement under construction in Baltimore which is also 0.9 miles and with 4 lanes and full right shoulders, plus in a northern unionized city where the construction costs should be fairly similar.

It doesn't have 6 lanes over the majority of it - it's 6 to exit 18, 4 within exit 18 (where the majority of the viaduct is), and then you're in the I-690 interchange.  I-81 south even goes down to one lane just past the ramp from I-690 east.

[Alps]

"The Davis-Bacon and Related Acts (DBRA) require payment of prevailing wages to laborers and mechanics employed on federal and federally-assisted construction projects." - That sounds good. I would want to see that.
"The Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (CWHSSA) requires contractors and subcontractors on federal contracts to pay laborers and mechanics at least one and one-half times their basic rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek. This Act also prohibits unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous working conditions in the construction industry on federal and federally financed and assisted projects." - That all sounds pretty good. The 1.5x pay is fairly typical in most states with strong unions and not at all unreasonable.
"The Copeland "Anti-Kickback" Act prohibits a contractor or subcontractor from inducing an employee to give up any part of his/her compensation to which he/she is entitled under his/her contract of employment." - Interesting. In theory an employee should be able to voluntarily give up pay, but in practice this could lead to coercion - "if you won't do it, we'll hire someone who will." So I guess it's necessary.

All in all, Federal prevailing wage laws seem pretty damn reasonable and I see no reason to repeal them. They're protecting workers in anti-labor states with weak unions.

[hotdogPi]

The 1.5x pay is fairly typical in most states with strong unions and not at all unreasonable.

From what I can tell, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 requires this nationwide, not just in "most states with strong unions".

[hbelkins]

Kentucky pays everyone on a 100% state-funded job minimum wage?  No wonder the state is known for poverty.

Also makes me wonder about KY's split between federal and 100% funded state jobs and if their split is affected by that policy.

Kentucky does not pay them. The contractor pays them. The documentation pretty much just lists the minimum wage requirements; I'm sure the guys driving the dozers or excavators make more than minimum wage.

"The Davis-Bacon and Related Acts (DBRA) require payment of prevailing wages to laborers and mechanics employed on federal and federally-assisted construction projects." - That sounds good. I would want to see that.

But what, exactly, establishes a prevailing wage? I have no idea whether the highway contractors here are unionized or not. My argument is that there are really only two places where project costs can be controlled, labor costs and corporate profits. Material costs are pretty much going to remain the same no matter which contractor gets the job. Even with labor costs set by law, it's sometimes amazing how much difference there can be in project bids.

"The Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (CWHSSA) requires contractors and subcontractors on federal contracts to pay laborers and mechanics at least one and one-half times their basic rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek. This Act also prohibits unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous working conditions in the construction industry on federal and federally financed and assisted projects." - That all sounds pretty good. The 1.5x pay is fairly typical in most states with strong unions and not at all unreasonable.

Time-and-a-half is standard for everyone, not just federal contractors, here.

All in all, Federal prevailing wage laws seem pretty damn reasonable and I see no reason to repeal them. They're protecting workers in anti-labor states with weak unions.

Except they drive up the cost to taxpayers.

[hotdogPi]

All in all, Federal prevailing wage laws seem pretty damn reasonable and I see no reason to repeal them. They're protecting workers in anti-labor states with weak unions.

Except they drive up the cost to taxpayers.

Not by that much. For example, in an area where the minimum wage is the minimum $7.25 per hour, a whatchamacallit would cost $725. In Massachusetts (where it is $12 per hour), it would cost $900, in addition to living in a state with better healthcare and education.

[The Ghostbuster]

I don't think anyone will be successful in overruling NYSDOT in this. I expect that, eventually, the "Community Grid" will replace the Interstate 81 viaduct in Syracuse.

[kalvado]

All in all, Federal prevailing wage laws seem pretty damn reasonable and I see no reason to repeal them. They're protecting workers in anti-labor states with weak unions.

Except they drive up the cost to taxpayers.

Not by that much. For example, in an area where the minimum wage is the minimum $7.25 per hour, a whatchamacallit would cost $725. In Massachusetts (where it is $12 per hour), it would cost $900, in addition to living in a state with better healthcare and education.

Well, to put things in perspective:

Eventually, the two unions worked out a deal in which the dockbuilders, who earn $92.47 an hour in wages and benefits, would be assigned the work.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/tappan-zee-bridge/2015/10/23/tappan-zee-builder-wins-again-union-wage-dispute/74454228/

[Rothman]

Kentucky pays everyone on a 100% state-funded job minimum wage?  No wonder the state is known for poverty.

Also makes me wonder about KY's split between federal and 100% funded state jobs and if their split is affected by that policy.

Kentucky does not pay them. The contractor pays them.

And where does the contractor get their money from?

[signalman]

Except they drive up the cost to taxpayers.

These workers are taxpayers too, ya know.  They too have living expenses and deserve to be paid well for the work that they do.  Bottom line is that people want nice things, but no one wants to pay for them.

[froggie]

Bottom line is that people want nice things, but no one wants to pay for them.

This.  A thousand times this.  And this is in no small part why we're in this infrastructure mess.