Skip to Content
Streetsblog San Francisco home
Streetsblog San Francisco home
Log In
Streetsblog.net

Why Are American Infrastructure Projects So Expensive?

You could hear a collective gasp last month when Amtrak released a plan to upgrade service on the Northeast Corridor with a $150 billion pricetag attached. Many rail advocates expressed shock. The Amtrak plan is hardly an outlier: California High Speed Rail has been dogged by similar cost concerns.

false
While the high cost of rail building seems to generate the most attention, the problem isn't just with projects that involve laying track. The state of Wisconsin is preparing to spend $1.7 billion on an interchange. Kentucky and Indiana are getting ready to spend $2.6 billion on a bridge. The Portland region will spend at least $3.2 billion on its own bridge/highway. And New York's car-centric Tappan Zee Bridge replacement is projected to cost in the range of $5 billion. Part of the reason these projects cost so much is that they involved rolling major road widenings into what should be simpler infrastructure fixes.

In a recent piece for Bloomberg View, Stephen Smith touched on a factor that contributes to higher costs for both road and rail projects: how governments deal with private contractors.

David Alpert at Network blog Greater Greater Washington weighed in on the issue yesterday:

Public unions often create bad press because of excessive labor costs and inefficiencies, but they should not be blamed for the high costs of projects in the US. Projects even cost far more here than in heavily unionized nations like Spain.

US agencies rely more and more on contractors because they offer advantages. Sometimes they can get something done faster and more efficiently. It's hard to hire public employees, and even harder to fire them if they turn out to do a bad job.

Another advantage of hiring contractors is less transparency and therefore less bad press. The reporters have almost no way to tell if a contractor is spending funds wisely. To build Beltway HOT lanes, Fluor-Transurban is getting $409 million directly from Virginia, $585 million in loans from the Federal Highway Administration, $586 million in subsidized bonds and $349 million in private equity. They also will get all of the money from driver tolls on the lanes. Are they making any sweetheart deals? How much are they spending on travel? Since they are a private entity, FOIA doesn't apply.

Elsewhere on the Network today: Empty Lots contemplates what it would take to repair downtown Minneapolis's parking glut. Seattle Transit Blog wonders if linking housing construction permits to the cost of housing as a percentage of median income would help make housing more affordable in expensive cities. And Human Transit tries to separate the role of the city from the role of the developer in transit projects.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog San Francisco

Alameda Advocates Celebrate Clement Bike Heaven

The tiny island city-state keeps hitting it out of the park with new, concrete, pretty-darned-quick-build infrastructure

November 1, 2024

Summit Asks: How Great Could Bay Area Public Transit Be?

A short summit brought together a who's who of advocates, officials, and leaders to talk about their vision for the future of public transportation in the Bay Area.

November 1, 2024
See all posts