Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater Treatment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Flagler Beach tables $46.3 million wastewater plant construction award after commissioners demand more details
Summary
Bids for a new biological nutrient removal (BNR) wastewater plant came in at roughly $46.3 million, far above earlier estimates. Commissioners objected to limited backup material and urged a technical workshop with the engineer (CPH) to review design options, value engineering (gravity vs. pumped systems), reuse integration and timelines; the award was tabled 5–0 for further review.
The Flagler Beach City Commission tabled action on Resolution 2025-92, a proposed award for Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) improvements at the city's wastewater treatment facility (WWTF), after commissioners said they lacked enough packet backup and technical briefings to approve a roughly $46.307 million low bid.
Staff and the city engineer reported the current plant (constructed in 1987) serves roughly 1,000,000 gallons per day capacity and was being expanded to 1,500,000 gpd (with future expansion options). Pre-COVID cost estimates made in 2020–21 were in the $15–18 million range; the bid from L7 Construction (the low responsible bidder) arrived at roughly $46.3 million. Presenters cited industry cost escalation attributed to supply-chain disruptions, increased demand for construction, and other market forces.
Commissioners pressed staff and the project engineer on design specifics (which parts of the existing plant are being reused, layout/siting on the existing facility grounds, the contract bid schedule and contingencies, and whether reuse facilities were included). Several commissioners said prior discussions with the design engineer (CPH) included options and value-engineering that appear not to have been revisited before bid—particularly choices that materially affect cost such as gravity versus pump-driven systems and the degree to which reuse (storage, desalination, conveyance) is integrated.
Given the timing constraints (state rules and the federal/state SRF loan and reuse requirements tied to Senate Bill 64) but also the scale of the cost increase, the commission voted 5–0 to table the award and directed staff to schedule a technical briefing/workshop with the project engineer (CPH) to re-present design options, cost drivers and potential value engineering before any award is finalized. Staff noted an SRF loan is available, that they've sought expanded SRF funding to cover the higher costs, and that reuse projects are being pursued in parallel.
