Bradenton council approves procurement for temporary Lift Station 13, pledges faster timeline and community outreach

The Bradenton City Council voted 5-0 Wednesday to buy and install a temporary pump and piping to relieve a failing sewer structure known as Lift Station 13 and to start work while a permanent collection‑system redesign proceeds.

The procurement authorizes up to $355,000 (staff said they built contingencies so the total approval could approach $500,000) to purchase a packaged temporary lift station and associated piping so crews can pump wastewater away from an at‑risk concrete station that staff said is deteriorated and could fail into the Manatee River. Councilwoman Lisa Moore moved the procurement, saying: "I move to proceed with the procurement of the temporary lift station with the location to be determined by council at a future date." The motion passed unanimously.

City officials described the vote as the first step in a multi‑year program to remove several legacy lift stations from riverfront locations, redesign street drains and replace private rear‑yard laterals so wastewater flows to modern collection mains rather than into waterways. The council directed staff to continue vetting alternative sites for the temporary unit, to begin community meetings and to return with specific site recommendations and procurement updates while the longer Lift Station 3 and collection‑system designs proceed.

Why it matters: Lift Station 13 sits within an older neighborhood where homes drain directly toward the river; during heavy rain and high tides the station and surrounding manholes flood and the wastewater utility receives large volumes of stormwater and infiltration. That inflow and infiltration (I&I) increases flows at the treatment plant, raises operating cost and can force emergency discharges. City staff and councilmembers said removing the station from the river and building a new collection system will reduce those risks and improve river water quality.

What council and staff said

City Administrator Perry and city engineers told the council the existing concrete encasement at Lift Station 13 has thinned from roughly 16 inches to as little as 4 inches in places and is at risk of structural failure. "We better solve the problem," Perry said, urging action to avoid a potential collapse and consequent environmental and public‑health consequences.

Ken Clayback, identified in the meeting as the city engineer, and staff described the multi‑part program: (1) install a temporary packaged lift station and piping to restore reliable pumping away from the river; (2) design, permit and build a new permanent Lift Station 3 (staff estimated design time about nine months and permitting and bidding about 90 days, with a full year before groundbreaking under typical schedules); and (3) design and construct a new collection system that redirects private rear‑yard laterals into right‑of‑way mains. Staff estimated there are roughly 70 homes directly tied to the existing Lift Station 13 area that will be affected by the collection‑system work, and said the collection project would be a separate, larger capital program that could take several years to implement.

Residents and engineers from the neighborhood urged the council to move quickly but to avoid locating the temporary unit in the public “pork‑chop” right‑of‑way if practicable. Several neighbors offered an alternative: the Saebold family (transcript spelling varied) offered a vacant lot adjacent to their home as a temporary site at no charge; staff said they will evaluate that and other nearby alternatives before final placement. Neighbors and Councillors repeatedly asked for clear, public timelines; staff said materials for a packaged temporary unit take about 8–12 weeks to arrive and installation typically requires another 4–6 weeks once a site is set.

Costs and funding

Staff told council a packaged temporary lift station vendor estimate is about $355,000 and the administration had included contingency to account for delivery and piping costs so that the total authorization could approach $500,000. Council and staff also discussed longer‑range funding: the state and federal programs discussed at the meeting include large EPA allocations routed through FDEM; staff noted federal/state grants and SRF loans are possible funding sources for the larger Lift Station 3 and collection‑system projects and that some programs cap awards (staff referenced a $20 million grant cap per applicant in a state allocation discussion).

Discussion versus decision

Council’s vote authorized procurement only; it did not fix a final placement for the temporary station. Councilmembers emphasized the difference: the temporary purchase is intended to restore reliable pumping and reduce immediate flood and environmental risk, while the permanent solution (new Lift Station 3 and the new collection mains and lateral replacements) remains a separate, larger design, permitting and outreach undertaking. Council directed staff to prioritize neighborhood communication, schedule community meetings, return quickly with site options and updates while procurement and delivery proceed.

Timeline and next steps

Staff said: materials delivery 8–12 weeks after order; typical installation 4–6 weeks; demolition of the old Lift Station 13 would follow once the temporary unit is operational. Design and permitting for the permanent Lift Station 3 will run in parallel with the collection‑system design; staff estimated roughly nine months for the station design and roughly a year before construction would start under optimistic assumptions. Council asked staff to present interim updates and to schedule community briefings as soon as possible.

Votes and formal action

- Motion: "Proceed with the procurement of the temporary lift station with the location to be determined by council at a future date." Mover: Councilwoman Lisa Moore. Second: not specified on the record. Vote: 5–0 (yes: Wards 1–5). Outcome: approved.

Quotable

"We better solve the problem," City Administrator Perry said, urging action to avoid a structural failure. Councilwoman Moore, who moved the procurement, framed the vote as a way to start work while staff continues to vet location alternatives and designs for the permanent system.

Community context and concerns

Residents stressed long experience with the aging system and a history of storms and tidal flooding that left back‑yard pumps and temporary generators running for years. Several speakers said eight years of a temporary generator on the riverfront was unacceptable; councilmembers acknowledged a trust deficit and directed regular, transparent outreach and reporting to neighborhood residents.

Ending

The council’s unanimous procurement vote begins a series of steps the city says will move the system away from the river and toward a modern, right‑of‑way collection network. Staff committed to frequent updates to council and to community meetings on site options, schedule and restoration plans for any disturbed yards or streets.