Residents press board to prioritize DPW building; architect plans delayed, workshop set for Feb. 20

Public commenters and trustees at the Village of Waukesha meeting on Feb. 12 urged the board to move forward on a Department of Public Works (DPW) building as part of the larger village campus discussion. The board also postponed final action on architect plans and scheduled a workshop on Feb. 20 to review building options.

Sandy Hom, a resident, said longtime campus planning discussions have stalled and advised the board to “pick off something that you can get done” rather than seeking a full campus referendum she said likely would not pass.

Resident and DPW worker Mike Borchard told the board he had prepared specifications for a DPW building and shared them with trustees. Borchard said a contractor reviewed his package and initially estimated $1,500,000 for a building that would accommodate up to 10 snowplow trucks; with a 20 percent contingency he presented $1,800,000 as a likely budget figure. “Once he got my plans and reviewed everything, he comes back … He says, 1,500,000.0. I said, okay. … what if we put a 20% contingency on there? He says, I'll sign a contract right now,” Borchard said.

Several trustees and staff members expressed concern about the larger cost picture. One trustee said they had sought informal analysis from Baker Tilly and described a possible total campus price tag around $23 million; the board chair and others said that level of discussion would be better handled at a separate, noticed meeting because it was not the agenda item for the night.

Architect Fisher Theis, Inc. had been scheduled to present plans for a new DPW building, a remodel of the existing fire station and an electric upgrade for the village campus, but trustees were told Fisher must redraw plans after a recent meeting with the fire chief. The presentation was postponed to the second meeting of next month; the board scheduled a workshop for Feb. 20 at 5:00 p.m. so trustees could review the revised drawings and ask questions before any formal action.

Board members also clarified that while the president had been working with one other trustee and staff on the project, there was no formal committee; trustees cautioned that any group that becomes a quorum would require public notice under open-meeting law.

No formal action on design or funding for the campus took place at the meeting; trustees asked staff and the architect to return with revised plans and materials for the workshop and the subsequent meeting where decisions could be made.