Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Utility Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Middleton advances Well 7 design and hears long‑range water planning as growth outpaces prior projections
Summary
The Public Works Committee recommended approval of task orders for a Well 7 design ($480,000 cap) and an EPA-required RRA/ERP update ($25,000) and heard a Strand Associates presentation showing faster-than-expected growth, higher max‑day demand, and recommended capital projects including Well 5 construction, Well 7, and northern looping.
The Middleton Public Works Committee on Feb. 23 recommended several water utility actions and received a comprehensive long‑range planning briefing from Strand Associates that found the city’s growth and water demand have outpaced the 2019 master plan, requiring accelerated capital work and system changes.
The committee recommended approval of Task Order 26‑07 for design and bidding services for Well 7 with Strand Associates, not to exceed $480,000, and recommended approval of Task Order 26‑04 for the five‑year Risk & Resiliency Assessment and Emergency Response Plan update (RRA/ERP) in an amount not to exceed $25,000. Both recommendations will be forwarded to the Finance & Personnel Committee and the Common Council for final approval.
Consultant Ryan Wood (Strand Associates) summarized recent planning and facility condition work, noting that the 2019 desktop master plan has been supplemented by 2024–25 facility condition evaluations and by updated development projections. He said the updated analysis shows max‑day demands and storage needs have increased and that, without the planned projects such as Well 7 and circulation improvements, the utility’s reserve capacity could be insufficient for future peak events. On project sizing, Ryan reported the current construction estimate for the Well 7 full build is about $6.2 million (construction OPCC), with additional services and treatment equipment raising the all‑in cost.
Staff and consultants discussed technical constraints tied to water quality and existing well construction. Ryan explained that chloride levels are substantially lower when well casing extends below the confining shale and that wells 2 and 3 have structural or diameter constraints that limit options to correct elevated chloride without losing capacity. As a result, the staff/consultant plan includes phased investments: finish Well 5 construction, complete Well 7 design/bid, loop water mains in the northern service area, and plan later work on booster stations and tank inspections.
Committee members raised operational and communication concerns. Charles and Mary urged staff to incorporate sustainability practices and to communicate staffing needs and program-level rationales to the Common Council; Mike Meyer (water utility manager) and Strand noted lead times for major electrical gear and pumps and the need for coordinated budgeting and potential borrowing strategies.
Provenance: Presentation, technical findings, cost estimates and follow‑up motions are recorded across the meeting's utility planning and task‑order agenda items, including the recorded motions recommending Task Orders 26‑04 and 26‑07 to Council.
