Supervisors hear progress updates on Deep Lakes and courthouse projects; seek independent review of geothermal cooling limits at county facilities

County Development Director Eric Furnace updated the Muscatine County Board of Supervisors on multiple facilities projects on April 14 and asked the board to consider commissioning an independent engineering review of the county’s geothermal cooling system for several county buildings, including the jail.

Furnace told the board the Deep Lakes Park Campground contractor has nearly finished grading and is close to completing water and sewer installations; a septic holding tank has been installed. Furnace said crews encountered an underground concrete wash area that required a change order to remove with heavy equipment. "They're probably nearing completion of the water and sewer line installation," Furnace said of the campground work, noting favorable weather helped progress.

On courthouse repairs he said scaffolding has come down and crews are finishing gutter and copper work; Furnace said work remains and the contractor expects to complete roof work in May, weather permitting. The jail exterior panel project was described as likely to mobilize around May 21 and run two to three months.

A substantial portion of the discussion focused on the county’s geothermal system, which furnishes heating and cooling to the jail, courthouse and other county buildings. Furnace said consultant Vic Amoroso — the original system designer — and county staff documented that the system meets design expectations for roughly 94–95% of days but can fail to shed sufficient heat on the hottest days each year. Furnace said Amoroso identified three possible remedies, including additional geothermal wells, a chilled-water submerged exchanger system (identified in the meeting as a "Darcy" system) and a cooling tower. "That Darcy's system was gonna be around $750,000," Furnace said, describing one consultant estimate.

Furnace recommended a second, independent evaluation by an HVAC/mechanical engineering firm to review capacity and options; he said a proposed scope from a firm recommended by staff would cost about $10,000. Several supervisors said they wanted all options on the table, including a conventional cooling tower, and asked staff to return with the independent report, cost estimates and financing options. The board did not authorize spending on a particular remedy at the meeting; members directed staff to bring firm proposals and cost comparisons back to the board for a decision.

The board also formally accepted two variances previously granted by the Muscatine County Board of Adjustment — one allowing a small addition to a preexisting detached garage in Spring Valley Ranch to sit at a 41-foot front-yard setback instead of the 50-foot standard, and another allowing a detached garage within the front-yard area of a rural parcel on Elder Avenue due to topography and site constraints. A supervisor moved to accept the two variances and the motion carried.

Furnace and supervisors agreed to bring proposals and independent analyses back for board consideration before committing to any major expenditure on geothermal enhancements.