STARKVILLE — If the city wants to follow through on its ambitious plan to redesign a mile of Highway 182, it will either need to find $19 million more or throw itself at the mercy of federal and state agencies.
Time and scope restraints also are hampering the project. For the city, all options appear to be on the table.
On Tuesday, aldermen voted 4-3 to request the Mississippi Department of Transportation cede to the city control of Highway 182, from Old West Point Road to Beattie Street. That stretches 200 feet farther west than where the redesign project would end at North Long Street.
If approved, that would give the city all maintenance responsibility for that section of what is now a state highway. But it would also allow the city to install water, sewer and drainage lines underneath the roadway, which could save millions on the redesign project’s bottom line.
The city also is asking the U.S. Department of Transportation’ Federal Highway Administration for an extension to complete the project, while also seeking more federal funds.
Without some grace from USDOT or more money from somewhere, the city may have to surrender more than $12 million in grant funds already approved for the project.
Even as all these questions loom, Mayor Lynn Spruill said she believes there’s hope all the necessary pieces will fall into place.
“It’s not dead in the water,” she said.
Evolution of price
The redesign plan calls for reducing the road to two lanes divided by landscaped medians, adding pedestrian/bike lanes to flank each side of the street and installing new underground utilities, among other things. Along with beautification, it aims to spur economic development in the corridor.
When the city announced in November 2019 it had received a $12.6 million grant from the USDOT Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development, the estimated price tag for the entire project was a little more than $15 million — the grant plus the city’s 20% match.
Then came the COVID-19 pandemic, along with supply chain issues and rising material costs that upped the estimate closer to $25 million. That cost has swelled to $41.8 million, according to the latest figures — which include a $33.2 million low bid for construction aldermen rejected Aug. 1, along with another $8.6 million in engineering, material and contingency costs.
In hand, the city has only $22.8 million, including the grant and $10.2 million from the American Rescue Plan Act that is dedicated to water, sewer and drainage infrastructure. The city has already spent $2 million on electrical work and design.
What’s more, the grant requires substantial completion by July 2025 and full completion by the end of 2026, something Spruill said simply isn’t possible. The city hopes to get an extension through 2027.
“If you dropped $40 million on me right now, without it being extended, we could not meet the time requirement,” she told The Dispatch. “… We couldn’t meet that if you gave me $100 million.”
The city has also requested a change in scope from current grant requirements, but Spruill doesn’t seem as hopeful USDOT will go for that.
“Can we ratchet it down from a mile to a half-mile, for example?” she said. “… Normally you don’t get that. They aren’t flexible. (It’s more), ‘You asked for it. You got it. Here it is. Take it or leave it.’”
If the grant goes back or the full project goes kaput, the ARPA projects could still be completed.
“The money we spent will have gone for things that still have value,” Spruill said.
Taking over the highway stretch
If MDOT releases maintenance of the project area to the city, Spruill said it won’t necessarily impact the federal grant.
What it will do, Associate City Engineer Chris Williams told The Dispatch, is make the project “more constructable.” He said his discussions with MDOT indicate the state agency is open to the request.
“We’re still going to have to get an extension on the grant,” he said. “(Taking the highway) doesn’t solve everything, but it makes it … easier to build.”
MDOT regulations require underground utility infrastructure — like water, sewer, electric distribution lines and fiber optic cable — to lay along rights-of-way outside the road itself. They can cross under the road, but only if they are covered with the proper steel casings where they cross, Williams said. That keeps a water line, for example, from bursting and creating potholes or cracks in the pavement.
Those requirements have driven up costs considerably, Williams said. For one, the casings cost $250,000 per crossing, and there are several crossings in the original plan. Mainly, the requirements restrict the right-of-way where everything must be installed to only 30 feet wide, which contractors have cited as a challenge. Buying more right-of-way along that mile would take about a year, Williams said, and obviously add more cost.
By taking on the highway stretch, the city can install water and drainage utilities parallel underneath the road, as it does with most city streets, adding 50 feet of width to the work area while also dispensing with the casings. How much these measures could save is still being determined, Williams said.
Spruill said city staff did not fully understand, at the outset of the project, the challenges and costs associated with working in 30 feet of right-of-way width, and the city relied on estimates from its contracted outside design firm, Kimley-Horn. If she knew then what she knows now, Spruill told The Dispatch, the city might have initially asked for a smaller project area or not applied for the BUILD grant at all.
“Hindsight is 20-20,” she said.
While Williams didn’t estimate the annual cost for maintaining the road, he said it would take $400,000 or so to repave it every eight to 10 years.
Spruill said she intends to request MDOT provide the funds for one repavement as part of the agreement for the city taking on that mile.
“I hate we would necessarily have to take this section of road, but when you look at the upside, I think it outweighs the downside over the long haul,” Spruill told aldermen during their work session on Friday.
Spruill, however, said MDOT often looks to release roadway between bridges or between city limits. She opposes taking on that much.
MDOT representatives did not return requests for comment by press time.
An act of desperation?
Ward 5 Alderman Hamp Beatty, along with Ward 1’s Ben Carver and Ward 3’s Jeffrey Rupp, voted Tuesday against taking on maintenance of the road. Beatty told The Dispatch he thinks the request is an “act of desperation” to save the redesign project.
Spruill first presented the possibility at Friday’s work session, expecting a decision Tuesday. Beatty doesn’t believe that gave the board enough time to consider all the implications. He tried to have it removed from the agenda after Tuesday’s meeting started, but his motion failed.
“We’re about to take on something that will be a maintenance headache long-term,” he told The Dispatch. “… I think it’s a terrible policy decision.
Zack Plair is the managing editor for The Dispatch.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 30 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 30 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
Join the Discussion