Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Wastewater topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

PDA board gives concept approval to wastewater treatment plant rehab at 135 Corporate Drive

Pease Development Authority Board of Directors · May 20, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Pease Development Authority board provided concept approval for a wastewater treatment plant rehabilitation plan for 135 Corporate Drive, including three PDA land‑use control waivers; Director Conrad abstained and the motion carried. The action follows an engineering memorandum dated May 9, 2025.

The Pease Development Authority board voted to give concept approval to a wastewater treatment plant rehabilitation plan for the property at 135 Corporate Drive, including three PDA land‑use control waivers.

Director Parker moved the measure, citing the memorandum of Michael Armas, director of engineering, dated May 9, 2025. The motion received a second and, after an abstention by Director Conrad, passed by voice vote. The board did not record individual roll‑call tallies in the transcript; the chair announced that “the ayes have it.”

The approved concept, as described in the accompanying memorandum, is an early step: the motion authorized concept approval and referenced the engineering analysis and requested waivers rather than adopting final construction contracts or budget appropriations. Staff did not present a final cost estimate or construction schedule during the discussion; those details, and any required permits, are to be addressed in subsequent board materials.

Board members briefly discussed process and compliance during the motion; Director Conrad declared an abstention on the record. The board declined to amend the concept at the meeting and no formal amendments were offered.

The board’s next procedural steps for the project were not specified during the meeting. Staff referenced the engineering memorandum attached to the motion as the primary supporting document and indicated future materials would come before the board when design, funding, or permits are ready.