Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port Washington releases near-term $100 million TID 5 infrastructure plan to serve Vantage site
Summary
City staff and consultants outlined about $100 million of near-term, developer‑financed city-led projects for Tax Incremental District No. 5 — including water‑main looping, sewer upgrades, booster stations and treatment‑plant planning — intended to serve the Vantage development and nearby areas; permitting and phasing were emphasized.
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port Washington officials and outside consultants presented an informational plan for Tax Incremental District No. 5 that identifies roughly $100 million in near-term city-led projects tied to the Vantage development and related growth.
The presentation, led by Ben Wood of Strand Associates and Aaron Girl of Kapur Engineers, said the overall TID project plan lists about $180 million of projects, with roughly $100 million expected in the next five years that are developer financed under recorded development agreements. "Approximately 180 million of city-led TID projects are identified in the approved TID project plan for TID number five," Wood said during the presentation.
Why it matters: the projects would extend municipal utilities and add capacity in areas north of the city, enable service to the Knellsville and Canalsville obligation areas, and provide redundancy and resiliency intended to accommodate new large users tied to the Vantage site. Officials described the plan as informational only; no council action was required that night.
Key elements and timing outlined • Utility looping: two near-term projects (26-1 and 26-2) would extend roughly 9,000 feet of water main and about 3,000 feet of sanitary sewer to complete a loop and serve Knellsville; plans were described as about 90% complete, with bidding targeted for May and construction timelines of roughly four months per segment. • Offsite conveyance and treatment: the presentation included an interceptor package (27-3/27-4/28-2) to convey increased wet‑weather flows to the wastewater treatment plant and a Jackson Street interceptor upsize (28-1) to address inflow and infiltration concerns. • Water system upgrades: a new consolidated booster station (27-1) was proposed to replace aged Oakland and Sunset stations and provide capacity for the expanded service area. • Lift stations and phasing: lift‑station projects will be sized and scheduled later (some work pushed toward 2030) because of equipment lead times and the need for site‑specific flow studies. • Treatment‑plant planning and resiliency: a facilities plan is underway to forecast plant needs; Valley Creek restoration and limited bluff stabilization at the treatment plant site were included to mitigate flooding and site vulnerability, with related work slated for later years as the facility plan dictates.
Officials emphasized coordination and permitting: presenters said they met with the Public Service Commission and the DNR during pre‑submittal discussions and plan to submit permits in the coming weeks. Melissa (city staff) stressed that projects will proceed through normal public‑works and council review and that the presentation did not grant budget authority — the projects are to be implemented as flows and developer financing materialize.
Community impacts and mitigation Councilors pressed for communication and phasing that minimizes disruption to residents and businesses. Staff described phasing rules (contractor coordination to avoid concurrent work on the same corridor) and preliminary detour plans for County KW. The presentation also noted coordination with the county on the Interurban Trail, which can be closed for utility work managed by We Energies.
Next steps Staff said final permit submissions and bidding are imminent for some segments; other, larger components (lift stations, major treatment‑plant upgrades) will follow detailed planning and facility studies. Consultants recommended continued public engagement and a rolling construction calendar so residents and frequent trail users can anticipate closures and detours.
Funding and payor Presenters characterized the near‑term city‑led projects as developer financed under the recorded development agreements; staff said these TID 5 expenses will be managed through the TID and are not a direct city general‑fund obligation.
The council did not take action on the TID plan that night; staff and consultants will return with project‑level bids, permits and schedule updates.

