Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City council backs reduced repair of coastal water tank, signals planning for replacement within 10 years
Summary
After bids came in higher than expected, Seaside city staff and council discussed options to reduce scope, use a state grant and plan for a long‑term replacement (concrete tank) over the next decade; council gave informal backing to a reduced‑scope repair to buy time for a future concrete replacement.
Seaside councilors and staff on July 7 reviewed bids for an interior repaint and rehabilitation of the city’s coastal steel water tank, and gave direction to pursue a reduced scope that would extend the existing tank’s service life roughly ten years while the city plans for a longer‑lived concrete replacement.
Staff reported three bidding rounds produced widely varying prices: an initial single bid around $2.0 million, a second higher bid above $2.2 million, and a later round with five bidders that came in near $1.65 million. City staff said the project’s largest cost component is interior tank painting, particularly the underside of the tank roof where paint was failing; the tank sides and base were described as being in better condition. City staff noted the project was originally estimated at about $800,000 and the city had budgeted about $1,000,000. The city has a state funding package of about $1,000,000 tied to this project — $500,000 forgivable principal plus a $500,000 low‑interest loan.
Public Works Director Paul (last name not transcribed) told council that a full rehabilitation (the original scope) would cost roughly $1.6–$1.7 million in the most recent bids; he proposed a smaller, focused rehabilitation (Option 2) that would treat the underside of the roof and the most‑affected wall and floor areas. That reduced scope, staff said, should fall in the $1.2–$1.3 million range — a savings of roughly $300,000–$400,000 relative to the higher bid — and would be expected to deliver about ten additional years of service from the current steel tank.
Staff and council also discussed replacing the steel tank with a concrete tank that would carry a far longer service life (50–100 years). Paul said a new concrete tank at the site would likely cost in the $5 million range but would have substantially lower maintenance costs over its lifetime. Council members asked staff to begin planning and budgeting for a concrete replacement during the city’s upcoming water and sewer master‑plan updates so that the long‑term financing implications can be coordinated with anticipated sewer capital needs.
Councilors did not take a formal binding vote to award a contract at the July 7 meeting, but staff reported council support for Option 2 — the reduced‑scope rehabilitation — so the project can proceed within available funding while staff continues planning for a replacement concrete tank in the coming decade.
Ending: Staff will proceed with contracting for the reduced scope if pricing stays within budget; the city will begin long‑term planning for a concrete replacement tank (estimated design and procurement work to start in about six years) and coordinate funding strategies with upcoming sewer master‑plan work.
