Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Project Costs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers press on escalating project costs after staff cites scope changes and inflation
Summary
The committee examined projects whose engineered estimates rose sharply since programming (notably Clinkridge, which rose from a 2014 preliminary plan of about $13.2M to a current estimate near $31M), and staff said scope additions and inflation explain much of the increase but that treatment revisions could cut costs.
Senate Transportation members on March 19 scrutinized several projects whose updated design estimates exceeded earlier programming figures, asking staff to explain scope changes, inflation effects and what could be done to reduce costs.
Matt Pagotic, highway safety design program manager, pointed to projects flagged in the department's 10G expanded-cost reports. He said one example, Clinkridge (a post-Irene project), had a preliminary-plan estimate from 2014 of about $13.2 million; the current estimate is "almost $31 million," driven by scope additions such as box culverts and slope repairs as well as inflation. Pagotic said staff are reviewing treatments and expect the revised treatment could reduce the estimate by about $5 million.
Committee members asked whether the increases reflected constant-dollar comparisons or current-dollar numbers. Pagotic said the presented amounts are current dollars and that older figures reflect the preliminary-dollar values at the time they were prepared.
The committee also discussed intersection and reconstruction projects that moved onto expanded-cost lists after scoping refined the preferred alternative. The I-89/Exit 19 scoping example produced a decision (a roundabout preferred alternative) that materially increased the estimated cost and will add years to the design and construction schedule. Pagotic explained that scoping results go through a management approval-of-scope that triggers any updates to estimates.
Several projects noted by staff were already in construction at higher low-bid amounts (for example, signal and DDI projects), while others remain in design and have seen inflationary increases since early estimates.
The committee requested a clearer table showing preliminary plan dollars, current estimates (in constant- and current-dollar terms), and the specific scope changes that drove increases for large projects. Staff said they would return with that information.
