Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Storm Sewer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montrose council approves spot repair for Industrial Park storm sewer; packet/approval figures differ
Summary
City of Montrose council voted to approve a Keeley Underground spot repair for a sinkhole in the Industrial Park storm sewer, while debate continued over whether to replace the entire line; the transcript shows a discrepancy between the packet bid and the motioned amount that staff will clarify.
The City of Montrose council approved a motion to accept a contractor's spot repair for a sinkhole in a storm-sewer main serving the Industrial Park, instructing staff to report back with findings after work is done.
Council members were told a sinkhole had opened on the east side of the Industrial Park adjacent to the storm-pond and that the 24-inch storm sewer had failed. Staff presented two contractors' proposals from the meeting packet — Keeley Underground (which offered a spot repair and a full-line replacement option) and another contractor with similar options — and recommended proceeding with the spot repair to address the immediate public-safety risk and to allow an upcoming mill-and-overlay road project to proceed.
Council discussion focused on trade-offs between the lower-cost spot repair and a full replacement in concrete. Several council members warned that repeated spot repairs can cost more over time and acknowledged a desire to replace the entire storm line, but also noted the city's current capital constraints and the complexity and higher cost of a full replacement, including utility conflicts (engineers reported a gas line in the trench) that would lengthen the schedule.
The transcript records a motion to "approve the bid from Keeley Underground for 24-inch HDPE spot repair," and the motion was recorded as passing with a roster count of four in favor. The meeting packet referenced a Keeley Underground spot-repair figure in staff materials (the packet presentation mentions approximately $18,200 for a spot repair). The motion text in the meeting transcript, however, records the total as $8,200. City staff told council members they would push contractors to proceed quickly and return to the council with a report on what they found once work is underway.
Because the transcript shows conflicting numeric figures for the approved contract (packet vs. motion text), the city intends to confirm the executed contract amount and will present the contractor's report and final costs at a subsequent council meeting.
The council also discussed short-term funding options; staff noted existing general-fund commitments and that a recent street grant payment of $46,000 (with a second payment expected in December, for roughly $92,000 total) could influence next-year street budgeting but is not an immediate, unrestricted source for the full replacement option. The council emphasized public-safety urgency for repairing the sinkhole and asked staff to produce a follow-up report after contractor work and inspection.
The motion to approve the Keeley Underground spot repair (as recorded in the meeting transcript) passed; council members directed staff to report back with contractor findings and any further recommendations at the next council meeting.
