Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Water topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Temple Terrace awards $1.71 million contract to rehab Chinaberry booster pump station

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The City of Temple Terrace voted to award a $1,709,620 contract to CEC Motor and Utility Services LLC to rehabilitate the Chinaberry Booster Pump Station, funding the gap with water impact fees after bids came in far above earlier cost estimates.

Utilities staff told the City of Temple Terrace City Council on Nov. 21 that the Chinaberry Booster Pump Station needs a full rehabilitation and recommended awarding a $1,709,620 contract to CEC Motor and Utility Services LLC.

The Chinaberry station, built in phases beginning in the 1960s and substantially rebuilt around 1984, serves northeast portions of the city and supplements system capacity during morning and evening peak demand, Utilities Director Troy Tinch said. "So we've got about 4 years of service life out of that system and it's so it's well beyond that design life," Tinch said.

Staff presented a design package that increases pump size from 50 to 75 horsepower, replaces controls with variable-frequency drives, adds a climate-controlled control building, repaints tank and station, and installs a self-contained, wind-rated generator. Tinch told council the upgrade is intended to improve available water quantity for future growth rather than to change system pressure.

The project’s estimated cost rose sharply between the engineer’s original opinion of probable cost (about $800,000) and the bids opened in September. Bids ranged roughly from $1.7 million to $2.3 million; the low bid, from CEC Motor and Utility Services LLC, was $1,709,620. Tinch told council the city will bridge the roughly $910,000 budget gap by drawing from the city’s water impact fee fund, which had about $3.2 million on hand.

Council members asked whether the low bid omitted any items that higher bids included and whether the city risked substantial change orders. Tinch described the bid-verification process, saying staff checks that required line items and quantities are present and noted that missing major line items could render a bid non‑responsive. He said, "If they've underestimated that, that's on the contractor. If for some reason we have underestimated that as a city, that is something they could talk to us about to do a change order."

Council also discussed timing and urgency. Tinch said much of the work will require lead time; the generator could take 12–14 months to procure. He and councilors expressed reluctance about paying significantly more than initial estimates but said the engineering age of the facility and recent construction-market inflation factored into the decision.

City staff recommended adoption of a resolution to award the contract; a motion to approve the resolution carried on a voice vote and the motion passed. Council directed that the project be managed by the city’s engineering/water staff with consultant support; Tinch said "Nate will be likely overseeing this effort."

Construction sequencing and outreach: staff said construction would include a period of initial work with limited visible changes to customers, and that there will be public outreach prior to construction. The manager and utilities staff said the improvements qualify for water impact fee funding because they increase capacity for future expansion.

The awarded contract is for $1,709,620 to CEC Motor and Utility Services LLC for the Chinaberry Booster Pump Station Rehabilitation. Work will include larger pumps, variable-frequency drives, a new control building, generator, tank and facility repainting, and other associated improvements. Funding will come from the water enterprise with approximately $910,000 drawn from water impact fees to cover the bid‑to‑budget gap.

The resolution passed by voice vote; the council did not record individual roll‑call votes in the meeting minutes.