Citizen Portal
Sign In

Council briefed on Inner Harbor desalination project; staff outlines phases, costs and schedule

3227005 · May 6, 2025

Loading...

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

City staff updated the council on the Inner Harbor Water Treatment Campus (desalination) project, including procurement, permitting, schedule and preliminary cost-model timing; staff said Kiwi Infrastructure South is the progressive design-builder and that a draft cost model is due at month-end with a GMP targeted later this year.

City staff told the City Council that work on the Inner Harbor Water Treatment Campus — the city’s seawater desalination project for the Inner Harbor — is progressing through design and early procurement phases, and that staff expect higher cost certainty over the next several months.

Brett Van Hazel, director of the city program management office for the project, presented a status update. He reviewed recent council authorizations that started the current procurement track (amendments to engineering contracts and bond issuance authorization) and summarized the procurement outcome: a progressive design-build contract with Kiwi Infrastructure South (referred to in the presentation as the design-builder that will move the project from planning into guaranteed maximum price stages). Van Hazel said the project team has delivered a draft basis-of-design report and is reviewing a draft cost model. “We’re transitioning out of phase 1 a, which is June 1 is the actual completion date for phase 1 a, and then we’re transitioning into phase 1 b,” he said.

Staff listed key permits already secured: an Army Corps authorization and a TCEQ discharge permit. Van Hazel said the city and the design-builder have begun targeting long-lead procurement items and have engaged technology suppliers early; he also said the design-builder is scheduled to operate the plant for one year after construction completion to train city staff.

Schedule and cost process: Van Hazel told council staff expect to receive a draft cost model at the end of the month and to undertake an internal and independent review before sharing final numbers, and he warned that a reliable project cost will take several months to vet. He described the timeline presented to council: completion of the current planning phase, guaranteed maximum price (GMP) development by late 2024 (staff indicated the GMP is planned later this calendar year), construction starting in 2026 and plant completion targeted in 2028; the design-builder would operate the facility for 12 months after completion alongside city staff.

Budget and commitments: Van Hazel traced prior council actions on the project and the bond authorization that could be used to fund construction, and in response to council questions he said the city has issued approximately $25 million in commitments so far for planning and preconstruction services (amounts cited included a Friese Nichols amendment, an initial Kiwi award and a phase 1b amendment). He warned that the demonstration/pilot facility and some early work packages were coming in higher than early estimates — council members referenced a reported gap between an earlier $5 million estimate for a demonstration pilot and a new figure in the teens of millions — and staff said that a complete, vetted cost model is required before the council would decide on any major construction approval.

Grants and financing: staff confirmed work to pursue large federal grants, including application planning for a Bureau of Reclamation program that staff said can provide substantial non‑reimbursable funding for large water projects; staff said the usual application window would be in the fall with award notices in the following spring.

Council members asked detailed operational questions — about likely energy use, day-to-day operating costs and whether a publicly visible education/operations building shown in renderings could be scaled back — and staff said cost tradeoffs would be part of further design decisions. Multiple council members asked for ongoing, frequent briefings; staff said they would present project updates at least twice monthly through the year.