MONROE - The Board of Public Works moved the construction plans for upgrading the wastewater treatment facilities into the next phase, along with an approval to expand the administration building by 1,000 to 1,200 square feet.
The larger administration building will allow the wastewater and water departments to share the facility. The two utilities began sharing personnel and other resources last year.
The project is ready to go out for bids, according to Jay Kemp, project manager with AECOM, the engineering firm hired for the project. The additional design work for the admin building will delay the project going out for bids by a couple of weeks; however, Kemp said ground breaking for the project could still be managed by early February.
Under the proposed time frame for construction, the wastewater plant can have additional capacity in place starting the summer of 2013.
Alan Eckstein, director of the water and wastewater utilities, had hoped to get the board to approach the project in phases, even as he recognized staff concerns with failing equipment should be addressed soon. Repairing and replacing equipment could be done "with a look toward fitting the coming plan," he added.
He believes the project, as outlined in the plans, would require an additional 16-18 percent increase in users' fees to cover debt, once the project is finished. One recommendation he made was to separate operational from non-operational segments of the plans, proceeding with segments that justified the time and efforts to reflect the costs.
"The plan is solid," Eckstein said, and he agreed "some parts have to be done" as laid out in the project plans. "But I think we can do better for our community," he added.
He advised the board to "move with a more cautious approach before we say, "'here's a check; build this plant.'"
To accommodate Eckstein's suggestions, Kemp said, it would take about six weeks to redesign the plans, and that would "compress construction time" up to four weeks. He expressed concern for "not losing hard construction" time.
AECOM has been working on the project for about 18 months. Kemp said there is an "economy of scale" in doing the project all at once, a cost savings that would not be realized if the city pieced out the project.
Kemp also believes the current bidding climate is favorable. "I don't know of any other projects of this size at the moment," he said. "Contractors will be able to offer competitive pricing at this time."
The project costs are estimated at about $23.5 million. The utility has about $6 million on hand, and it qualifies for a Clean Water Fund loan for the remaining $17.5 million. The DNR approved the designs in September. The utility could also receive a principal forgiveness grant and a Focus on Energy grant.
Board member Charles Schuringa asked Kemp, "If we delay, I suppose you would come back (for) more money for redesign." He also expressed concerns about Eckstein's ideas to proceed in phases. "If we do (just) what is necessary, built what is necessary, we'll have to reopen to do more," he said.
Following the unanimous vote to continue with AECOM's plans as designed and to go out for bids, motioned by Tyler Schultz and seconded by Schuringa, City Administrator Phil Rath recommended the board consider bringing the water department into the wastewater treatment facilities.
Rath said the move would bring "long-term cost savings" from sharing facilities, and the city would be able to put the current water facility back on the tax rolls by selling it.
Reid Stangel made the motion to enlarge the administration building at the wastewater plant, seconded by Michael Boyce, which passed unanimously.
Before closing the issue of the wastewater treatment plant, Boyce noted a letter from members of the plant's staff delivered Sunday to members of the council was not the proper process to address their concerns. He said they needed to use the chain of command process that had just been discussed and set up, or to bring the issues up in committee meetings.
Alderman Jan Lefevre disagreed, saying aldermen had agreed to the chain of command process "not knowing all the circumstances."
"There are extenuating circumstances," she added, and in this case, "there were enough people who felt strongly about this" to bring their issues to the aldermen.
"I think we boxed ourselves into a corner" with the chain of command process, she said, "and I'd like to see that changed."
The larger administration building will allow the wastewater and water departments to share the facility. The two utilities began sharing personnel and other resources last year.
The project is ready to go out for bids, according to Jay Kemp, project manager with AECOM, the engineering firm hired for the project. The additional design work for the admin building will delay the project going out for bids by a couple of weeks; however, Kemp said ground breaking for the project could still be managed by early February.
Under the proposed time frame for construction, the wastewater plant can have additional capacity in place starting the summer of 2013.
Alan Eckstein, director of the water and wastewater utilities, had hoped to get the board to approach the project in phases, even as he recognized staff concerns with failing equipment should be addressed soon. Repairing and replacing equipment could be done "with a look toward fitting the coming plan," he added.
He believes the project, as outlined in the plans, would require an additional 16-18 percent increase in users' fees to cover debt, once the project is finished. One recommendation he made was to separate operational from non-operational segments of the plans, proceeding with segments that justified the time and efforts to reflect the costs.
"The plan is solid," Eckstein said, and he agreed "some parts have to be done" as laid out in the project plans. "But I think we can do better for our community," he added.
He advised the board to "move with a more cautious approach before we say, "'here's a check; build this plant.'"
To accommodate Eckstein's suggestions, Kemp said, it would take about six weeks to redesign the plans, and that would "compress construction time" up to four weeks. He expressed concern for "not losing hard construction" time.
AECOM has been working on the project for about 18 months. Kemp said there is an "economy of scale" in doing the project all at once, a cost savings that would not be realized if the city pieced out the project.
Kemp also believes the current bidding climate is favorable. "I don't know of any other projects of this size at the moment," he said. "Contractors will be able to offer competitive pricing at this time."
The project costs are estimated at about $23.5 million. The utility has about $6 million on hand, and it qualifies for a Clean Water Fund loan for the remaining $17.5 million. The DNR approved the designs in September. The utility could also receive a principal forgiveness grant and a Focus on Energy grant.
Board member Charles Schuringa asked Kemp, "If we delay, I suppose you would come back (for) more money for redesign." He also expressed concerns about Eckstein's ideas to proceed in phases. "If we do (just) what is necessary, built what is necessary, we'll have to reopen to do more," he said.
Following the unanimous vote to continue with AECOM's plans as designed and to go out for bids, motioned by Tyler Schultz and seconded by Schuringa, City Administrator Phil Rath recommended the board consider bringing the water department into the wastewater treatment facilities.
Rath said the move would bring "long-term cost savings" from sharing facilities, and the city would be able to put the current water facility back on the tax rolls by selling it.
Reid Stangel made the motion to enlarge the administration building at the wastewater plant, seconded by Michael Boyce, which passed unanimously.
Before closing the issue of the wastewater treatment plant, Boyce noted a letter from members of the plant's staff delivered Sunday to members of the council was not the proper process to address their concerns. He said they needed to use the chain of command process that had just been discussed and set up, or to bring the issues up in committee meetings.
Alderman Jan Lefevre disagreed, saying aldermen had agreed to the chain of command process "not knowing all the circumstances."
"There are extenuating circumstances," she added, and in this case, "there were enough people who felt strongly about this" to bring their issues to the aldermen.
"I think we boxed ourselves into a corner" with the chain of command process, she said, "and I'd like to see that changed."