Platteville council pauses decision on East Main Street reconstruction after new cost, relocation and lead findings
Loading...
Summary
Council heard staff briefings that the East Main Street project may require buying 250 E. Main, paying federally‑mandated relocation reimbursements, and cleaning lead‑contaminated soil. Staff recommended increasing borrowing by about $679,000 but council asked for more investigation—including a structural review of 230 E. Main and final soil results—before any vote.
Platteville city staff told the Common Council on Feb. 10 that the East Main Street reconstruction has become considerably more complex and costly after recent engineering findings and preliminary soil testing.
Staff said the Federal Highway Administration determined acquiring 250 East Main Street would trigger federally required relocation payments for the building’s commercial tenant and four residential units. Consultants also reported heavy rock work for a storm‑sewer realignment would occur within about 10 feet of the building’s foundation and observed existing cracking and leaning, prompting a recommendation for further structural investigation. Preliminary soil testing returned elevated lead levels in some samples, which could require excavation and hazardous‑waste disposal under state rules.
Howard, the staff presenter, said staff’s analysis increased some budget line items from about $600,000 to roughly $1,279,000 and that consultants estimated relocation and associated services could be as much as $554,000. "Staff is recommending option 1, increasing the borrowing to keep everything on track," he told the council, noting the estimate was conservative and intended to avoid repeated budget increases.
Council members pressed on who would receive relocation payments and why federal rules require them even when a property owner is selling. Staff and consultants explained federal relocation guidance can include reimbursement for a property owner’s replacement costs and reimbursement for tenants’ moving expenses and rent differentials (typically paid over 24–36 months). Staff characterized the consultants’ $554,000 figure as a high‑end budget number, subject to verification when relocation specialists develop an itemized breakdown.
Members also raised questions about the effect on long‑term borrowing capacity and other city priorities. Nicola and staff said adding the $679,000 would push the city toward about 80% of its borrowing limit and could affect future water and sewer projects and other CIP items. Several council members argued for weighing near‑term safety and long‑term fiscal constraints; one member summarized the tradeoff as "pay me now or pay me later," noting storm‑sewer and sidewalk failures could pose public‑safety liabilities if repairs are deferred.
Because final lead‑test results and a structural assessment of the adjacent Avercamp Building at 230 East Main Street were not yet available, the council declined to select a final funding option that evening. The council asked staff to: obtain the final soil report, provide a detailed breakdown of relocation‑cost components, pursue a focused structural investigation of 230 East Main Street, and present a relocation specialist to answer procedural questions. Staff said they would include a proposed $75,000 additional design/investigation item for the 230 E. Main review on a future agenda for council authorization.
Next steps: staff will return with the final soil results, an itemized relocation‑cost spreadsheet, and the structural investigation findings before the council considers increasing borrowing or selecting an alternate funding option.