Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Wastewater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Town wastewater plant, sand beds and tunnels flagged as major constraints for MCI Concord reuse
Summary
Consultants and Town of Concord public works staff said the on‑site wastewater treatment plant is in need of major investment; the facility currently treats far less than its permitted capacity and would require phased upgrades costing in the tens of millions to serve extensive redevelopment.
Alan Cathcart, director of public works for the Town of Concord, and engineering consultants told the advisory group that the town’s on‑site wastewater treatment plant is a central constraint for large‑scale redevelopment of the former MCI Concord site.
Cathcart summarized engineering assessments and told the group that restoring the treatment plant to a full permitted capacity (about 310,000 gallons per day) would require on the order of $25 million and would likely need to be accomplished in phases over five to ten years. Consultants and staff said the plant is currently operating at roughly 60,000–80,000 gallons per day, well below the cited permitted capacity.
Consultants emphasized that the wastewater facility currently serves remaining on‑site uses and nearby state facilities; if the town were to assume control or expand the plant’s role for redevelopment, phased investments would be necessary. The conversation also covered the plant’s nuisance impacts: staff warned that, "in the heat of the summer, if we don't put... the minimum amounts of upgrades, the smell will be there," and said mitigation measures such as enclosing treatment pits can reduce odors.
Engineers also identified other below‑grade uncertainties on the site that affect infrastructure planning: a complex nest of utilities and tunnels with unknown vertical locations; former sand beds used for historic on‑site wastewater disposal that are present but not active; and an existing sewer line that serves a nearby farm.
The consultants and public works staff outlined three possible roles for the treatment plant in a redevelopment scenario: continuing to serve adjacent existing uses; serving broader West Concord village needs if the town redirects certain sewer flows; or serving new development on the site. Each role carries different capacity and capital requirements.
Discussion points included whether the town could defer the full $25 million upgrade or phase investments; Cathcart and consultants said short‑term investments would be necessary to keep the plant operational and that multi‑million dollar work would be required within five years to avoid critical failures. When asked by advisory members, staff confirmed the $25 million figure represented an order‑of‑magnitude estimate to restore full 310,000 gpd capacity and that current operating capacity is substantially lower.
No decisions were made; consultants said they will model infrastructure costs and incorporate them into feasibility testing for the draft scenarios.
Provenance: the wastewater plant estimate and operating capacity were discussed by Alan Cathcart and engineering consultants during the utilities portion of the April 3 presentation.
