Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Franklin officials outline $55 million plan to replace buried treatment tanks, seek low‑interest state loan
Summary
City staff described a multi‑year project to replace buried chlorine contact and pump tanks, citing state sanitary survey concerns and a recommended above‑ground solution with ultraviolet disinfection; staff plan to apply for a Safe Drinking Water loan and expect an estimated 6% rate increase after construction.
Mike Sullivan, a project presenter to the Franklin City Utility Board, told the board Wednesday that the city plans a roughly $55 million underground facilities rehabilitation project to address state regulatory concerns and reduce public‑health risk.
The project centers on replacing the existing buried chlorine contact tank and a high‑lift pump wet well — both currently below the groundwater level — with a new above‑ground chlorine contact tank, a new intermediate pump station with ultraviolet disinfection, and a new high‑lift pump station, Sullivan said. He said the city selected “Alternative 2b” after a multi‑decade review of options.
Why it matters: Sullivan said the buried tanks are single points of failure and that groundwater sits higher than tank interior water, which creates an infiltration risk the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources raised in a sanitary survey. “The biggest one is the protection of public health,” Sullivan said when describing the project’s primary justification.
Sullivan reviewed the system history and capacity during the presentation, noting the plant’s rated capacity is 35 million gallons per day and describing previous plant expansions and wholesale agreements with nearby sanitary districts and the city of Franklin. He said the city has evaluated eight alternatives over about 25 years and completed a feasibility study in 2024 that recommended the selected option.
Cost and funding: Sullivan said planners are using a $55 million total‑project estimate (about $45 million of construction cost). The preferred funding source is the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program; Sullivan said the loan program currently offers a subsidized interest rate of about 2.2 percent and the city intends to pursue as much loan financing as it can. He cautioned the program may be oversubscribed, noting Oshkosh and others are seeking similar assistance.
Timing and rate impact: Sullivan said the city will apply for the loan by the program deadline of June 30, 2025, and expects loan awards to be announced in the fall (September–October). He estimated the Public Service Commission review could take about five months and anticipated bidding and award in November–December of this year, with construction starting early next year and lasting roughly three years. The presentation included a planning estimate of a 6 percent water‑rate increase projected after project completion in 2030.
Other system work: Sullivan also summarized several cash‑funded projects and routine repairs the utility plans over the next several years, including a $1.2 million HVAC project at the treatment plant, cleaning and repair of a 1914 intake pipe in Lake Michigan, a 16‑inch transmission main relocation at Shepherd Avenue and Ryan Road tied to DOT work, security and access upgrades, several motor control center replacements (including at Janet Drive pump station), and a planned 20‑inch main replacement on Tenth Street. He said the six‑year cash‑funded program was estimated at about $6.6 million.
Board next steps and approvals: Sullivan said the city will submit applications to the Public Service Commission and DNR and pursue the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program. He described outreach with DNR staff and said the city expects to know loan readiness and priority rating later in the summer and fall. Sullivan did not report a formal board vote on adopting the project during the presentation; he framed the update as a planning and funding brief and indicated formal regulatory approvals and loan closing steps will follow.
Context and background: Sullivan said the DNR raised the sanitary survey issues in February 2012 and that the buried chlorine contact tank and wet well both fail current DNR code expectations when groundwater stands above tank interior water. He said some alternatives would have comparable cost but lower benefit, and that the selected alternative had the highest combined benefit: water quality, maintainability, and lowest operational risk during construction.
Sullivan invited questions and said staff will continue design and regulatory submittals. He also noted the city has built cash reserves for some projects but expects to rely on the low‑interest loan for the large rehabilitation project.
The utility board held no formal roll‑call vote on the $55 million rehabilitation plan during the meeting; regulatory approvals and loan awards remain pending.
