Council hears East Main Street update as structural, relocation and lead-remediation costs widen project scope
Loading...
Summary
Staff and consultants told the council that 250 East Main is leaning and may require demolition or extensive reinforcement, that relocation benefits for tenants and the owner could add hundreds of thousands to city costs, and that localized lead contamination could require about $200,000 in remediation; staff will return with a detailed cost breakdown before a vote.
Staff and consultants briefed the Platteville Common Council on March 24 about new risks and costs for the East Main Street project, including structural concerns at 250 East Main, relocation-benefit estimates for tenants and the owner, and lead-contamination cleanup the city expects to incur.
Howard, the staff lead for the project, summarized the grant framework and timeline: the design and construction phase remains eligible for a federal share capped at $1.5 million while real-estate and relocation costs fall to the city. He said staff had originally budgeted roughly $395,000 for the city’s share (excluding separate water and sewer work) but that new findings have shifted some costs into 2027 and 2028.
Michael Mertens, the structural engineer from Jewel Associates, told the council his inspections indicate 250 East Main leans and shows mortar loss in the stacked-stone foundation. "From that inspection, it appears they are separate structures," Mertens said, describing 230 East Main as a poured-concrete foundation with clay-tile bearing walls that could remain if 250 is removed carefully. He said the brick veneer on 230 above the roofline is a key unknown that contractors would need to address as a contingency during demolition.
TerraVenture’s real-estate and relocation specialists, Laura Humphrey and Cathy Rudolph, explained relocation mechanics and eligibility. Rudolph said eligibility depends on timing of offers: relocation benefits can apply to tenants (residential and commercial) and to the building owner for certain reestablishment or moving expenses. She described the rent-differential calculation as a 48-month basis under Wisconsin practice, and the council learned the city’s preliminary high-end relocation estimate ranged from about $245,000 to $420,400 for payments, plus roughly $134,000 in consultant fees; staff had cited a combined, conservative total of about $554,000 in the staff note.
On environmental costs, staff reported an environmental report that found localized contamination near former gas stations at Water Street and estimated approximately $200,000 for hazardous-waste removal tied to water and sewer work (scheduled in later construction phases). Howard said the $200,000 contingency for lead remediation came from comparable DOT contracts and the scope identified in the report, and that staff will verify whether allocations should be charged to water/sewer or street construction.
Council members pressed for a clearer breakdown of the $554,000 figure, copies of leases and the statutes that govern relocation benefits. Howard and the consultants agreed to reconcile differing estimates, provide statute citations and links to the federal and Wisconsin laws cited, and bring a clarified budget and recommendation back to the next meeting for formal action.
The council did not vote on project funding at the March 24 meeting; staff said they will return with corrected spreadsheets and statutory references before any vote.
