Winning I-69 Proposal Available from Indiana Finance Authority

23 Feb

On Friday, I wrote about the winning and losing proposals for I-69 Section 5 (the section from Bloomington to Martinsville, IN):

Today, the Indiana Finance Authority released the winning proposal (well, most of it — some parts are redacted) on its Web site. The proposal is in a number of separate files. To find it, go to the Indiana Finance Authority I-69 Web site and scroll down to “Selected Proposer”.

Right off the bat, based on a very quick read, I would think that the parts of the proposal most interesting to the public include:

  • Executive Summary
  • Financial Proposal Volume I
    • The section labeled “Type and Purpose of Each Funding Source and Facility” details the sources of funding used for the project as well as the overall costs of building and financing. I’ve included a screen shot below.
    • The equity member (prime contractor), Isolux Infrastructure, is committing $44.75M of its own investment to build the highway. They also plan to raise $253.51M through private activity bonds (PABs). Commitment of PAB funding by the underwriters is provided in this volume as well.
    • The “Uses” column on the right outlines how the funds would be spent. The first three items (Construction Costs, Construction Oversight Costs, and Operations & Maintenance Costs during Construction) add up to the $325M in construction costs that has been quoted in press releases.
  • Technical Proposal Volume 1
    • This section details the team’s approach to construction, design, operations and maintenance of the highway. A lot of this volume is very high-level and not particularly specific. Most of the pages consist of required letters of authority, certifications and representations, references (the contents of which have been redacted!), responsible proposer forms, etc. However, there are a couple of factors of note in the volume:
    • Page 7 includes a high-level Gantt chart (which I screen-shot below) outlining the design and construction schedule, indicating a construction start in mid-late 2014 and a finish by the end of 2016 (Volume 2 of the technical proposal, page 20, refers to a deadline of October 31, 2016 as the”Baseline Substantial Completion” deadline).
    • Rehabilitation of the pavement is scheduled for years 15 and 30.
  • Technical Proposal Volume 2
    • Volume 2 contains a wealth of information about the proposed approach to all aspects of design and construction, including pavement, bridge structures, bicycle and pedestrian access, drainage, lighting, traffic signals, etc., as well as communications and public outreach — far too much to summarize here.  There are just a couple of elements I quickly wanted to call out.
    • Page 43 provides a more detailed schedule of key completion milestones:
    • Page 47 indicates that the proposal design specifies that the construction will be asphalt, rather than concrete. Both were acceptable in the Request for Proposals; sections 1-4 are being constructed using concrete. Per this proposal, bridge structures, retaining walls, and noise walls will be constructed using concrete. As mentioned above, rehabilitation of the asphalt pavement is scheduled for years 15 and 30. Assuming that the asphalt pavement has a 15-year useful life, the rehabilitation at year 30 will mean that the pavement will have 10 years left of useful life when contract is completed (year 35).
    • Screenshot 2014-02-23 12.07.07

Undoubtedly there is much more to comment on in the thousands of pages of this proposal; however, I wanted to get a couple of quick highlights out to the public as soon as possible.

Advertisements

3 Responses to “Winning I-69 Proposal Available from Indiana Finance Authority”

  1. Bob Poortinga February 23, 2014 at 1:49 pm #

    There is no way an asphalt surface with heavy trucks will last 15 years. What are the State’s options if the road surface becomes unsafe? Does the Isolux proposal depend on Federal dollars for maintenance?

    • geoffmckim February 23, 2014 at 3:30 pm #

      I agree that 15 years seems to be pushing it, based on the research (although I saw an MIT report the other day citing 17 years). But the contract is for 35 years — so there will be plenty of time to incorporate actual experience before the handback. And if it lasts less than they expect, Isolux is the one holding the bag…they have to keep the highway operating and maintained throughout the 35-year period of performance of the contract AND have to turn in the highway to the state after 35 years with 10 years left of life on it.

      As for Federal $ for maintenance — the only thing the contractor gets is $28.1M per year from the state (some of which may include Federal money), and that has to cover all design, construction, operations, financing, and maintenance for the 35-year life of the contract. Failure to perform to standards could also reduce that $28.1M/year.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. I-69 Section 5 Synopsis Provided at Open House | in53 - MoCoGov - October 30, 2014

    […] night, I-69 Development Partners, the contractor hired by the Indiana Finance Authority to design, build, operate, finance, and maintain Section 5 of I-69 held a (contractually-required) open house to share with the public some more specifics about the […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: