Learning lessons from speedy 35W bridgework

It's a question metro area motorists no doubt can't help asking: If the gigantic Interstate 35W bridge can be built in 11 months, why is the freeway project on my way to work taking three, four or (gulp) eight years?

The answers provide little immediate solace for detour-weary commuters -- but perhaps a little hope for avoiding eight-year construction marathons such as the troubled Wakota Bridge on Hwy. 494 in the future.

Although public officials heralded the 35W bridge as a symbol of a new way to get things done, it's clear that emergency circumstances and funding played a big role in the rapid completion. Still, the state hopes to glean some new "best practices" to at least tap the accelerator on other projects around the state.

"It shouldn't take a tragedy to build a bridge this fast in America," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters when she was in Minneapolis a few days before the 35W bridge opened. "But it has, and it would be a travesty if we didn't share the secrets that this state, this community brought together to make this project happen so quickly," she said.

"There's a different kind of expectation from our public," said Tom Sorel, who became Minnesota's transportation commissioner in April. "When they see projects that they think are lingering, they're going to think about this project. 'How the heck can you do this in 11 months?'"

Paying for speed

Under Flatiron's contract with the state, the 35W bridge's builders could have earned up to $27 million in incentives for finishing before its Dec. 24 deadline.

Because of when the bridge was deemed "substantially complete," the firm missed out on $2 million, but is still eligible for $25 million. That may seem like an enormous incentive, except that Flatiron says it has spent 95 percent to 97 percent of the money on overtime and equipment needed to finish the bridge early.

For taxpayers, bonuses can add to the cost of a project. But the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the governor have said that, in the case of the 35W bridge, it was worth it to the public. State officials frequently said the absence of the bridge was costing road users -- commuters, truckers and other drivers -- an estimated $400,000 a day because of detours, fuel costs and the like.

No similar figure was calculated for the Wakota project, which was begun in 2002 and won't be done until 2010. Mary McFarland Brooks, a MnDOT spokeswoman, said it wouldn't have been appropriate because Wakota users were never without a bridge. Even now, with only one-half of the new bridge complete, drivers have six lanes to use. (The old bridge only had four lanes total.)

When both spans are done, there will be five lanes in each direction, just like the new 35W bridge. The main spans over the Mississippi River also have comparable dimensions: 504 feet for 35W, 466 for Wakota.

But Wakota has been plagued by design problems and contractual disputes. Traffic had to be maintained and accommodated. The twin spans couldn't be built at the same time because the old bridge was in the way.

Also, a slower construction method is being used. Instead of precast concrete segments being assembled, the girders are being poured in place.

Crews were affixing four segments a day at 35W, said Adam Josephson, MnDOT's project manager for Wakota, where only one or two a week were being poured.

At the 35W bridge, the piers and segments could be built simultaneously. Prefabrication could speed construction, Sorel said, noting that in some cases it's basically possible to buy a ready-made bridge and lower it into place.

Staffing for speed

Having one person in charge throughout the entire project -- instead of different managers for the environmental assessment, design and construction phases -- made things go faster at the 35W bridge, Sorel said. He hailed Jon Chiglo as a "role model" for future MnDOT project managers.

Putting all the engineers -- from MnDOT, the construction companies and the Federal Highway Administration -- in the same office building and having them on site made it much easier to resolve problems and get questions answered, Sorel said.

Environmental reviews can easily take several months, but in the case of the 35W bridge, such reviews leapfrogged ahead of other projects and were completed very quickly, he said. Requirements weren't waived, he said. Agencies just worked together to make things happen fast.

"I think that's a place to look" for future efficiencies, he said.

Road closed

Complete road closures are one way to speed up a project, said Nancy Singer of the Federal Highway Administration. The absence of traffic in the construction zone made the 35W rebuilding easier.

With the bridge collapse, drivers had no choice but to accept the closure of 35W. But there was a public uprising in 2001 when shutting down parts of Crosstown Hwy. 62 for reconstruction was proposed. The westbound lanes would have been closed for up to four years, the eastbound for up to two.

That project was supposed to start in 2002, but the opposition, a redesign and financing problems delayed the work until 2007 -- and the cost nearly tripled. But the freeway's main lanes have remained open except for weekend closures. The project is to be completed in 3 1/2 years.

All four lanes of Hwy. 36 in North St. Paul were closed for four months last year, a first for a major commuter route in the Twin Cities. Sorel said that move helped speed up that project. Calculating a "road user" cost was part of selling the closure to the public.

Efforts to build public support for a project, such as Minnesota's first-ever bridge design "charette" meeting for the 35W project, won't necessarily speed a project up, said Kevin Gutknecht, MnDOT's communications director. But they might head off opposition that could slow it down, he added.

Other changes at MnDOT may be in the offing. "I think we need to be introspective on our practices and how we deliver projects now because of this," Sorel said. "And in the end I think we can speed things up."

Jim Foti • 612-673-4491