Cleburne council approves six design contracts for water and sewer upgrades

The Cleburne City Council on Jan. 29 unanimously approved six professional services agreements to design water and wastewater projects intended to expand capacity and replace aging infrastructure.

Jeremy Hutt, presenting to the council, said the projects are part of the city’s 2026 capital improvement program and identified the six contracts: a 16‑inch water main design with Tignall and Perkins Inc. (not to exceed $510,000) to extend about 7,400 linear feet along Burgess Road; a wastewater treatment plant rehabilitation design with Garver LLC (not to exceed $401,640) for Aeration Basin/Clarifier No. 1; a Pump Station No. 12 expansion and rebuild with Hazen and Sawyer PC (not to exceed $600,000); a 27‑inch sewer main replacement with Lockwood, Andrews & Newman (not to exceed $749,805) covering roughly 6,400 linear feet; a Phase 3 15‑inch gravity sewer extension with Shield Engineering Group PLLC (not to exceed $593,700) for about 6,000 linear feet; and a new 3,000,000‑gallon‑per‑day lift station with STD Inc. including a 16‑inch force main (not to exceed $1,595,000).

Hutt said the 16‑inch water main will “greatly improve our ability to move water” on the north side of town and accommodate future industrial growth. On the Pump Station No. 12 project he told the council the existing pump station handles about 3,000,000 gallons per day and the proposed station would handle about 5,000,000 gpd. He described design schedules ranging from about six to 12 months and said funding is available in the Utility Water and Sewer Fund or from the city’s Series 2024 certificates of obligation as noted for specific projects.

Each item was moved, seconded and approved unanimously by the council. The meeting record shows motions carried without roll‑call tallies stated in the public record.

Hutt said several items were continuations of prior master‑plan work: the wastewater rehabilitation follows a 2024 criticality assessment and other sewer projects continue earlier replacement work around Hulen Park. For the lift‑station agreement, Hutt explained that the contract consolidates work identified in multiple wastewater projects (labeled 15, 16 and 17 in the city’s asset list), which contributed to the larger contract amount.

After approving the engineering agreements, councilmembers entered an executive session to consult with the city attorney on tax‑credit development requests; the council returned without taking public action and adjourned.

Votes at a glance: each of the six design contracts (items 8.1–8.6) was approved unanimously; the public record does not include detailed roll‑call counts.