Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dubuque City outlines complete street and sewer reconstruction on Auburn and Custer
Summary
Dubuque City staff said a complete street and utility reconstruction on Auburn and Custer will replace aging sanitary sewer installed in 1924, install PVC pipe to reduce wet-weather inflow, and complete one of the remaining pieces of the city’s consent-decree work.
Dubuque City officials described a complete street reconstruction on Auburn and Custer streets that will replace the road and the public utilities beneath it, including the sanitary sewer system first installed in 1924.
City staff said the work responds to chronic inflow and infiltration (INI) identified in a 2009 study. The study isolated five basins where extra water enters the sanitary system during wet weather, increasing the volume that must be treated at the wastewater plant and requiring larger pumps at lift stations.
The project is the final segment of work in Sewer Shed 11, officials said. "We're replacing it all with PVC," the agency official said, adding that PVC allows longer runs without jointing issues and should extend service life. Staff described the Auburn and Custer contract as a "complete street reconstruction," meaning the pavement and all public utility lines—water, sanitary sewer and stormwater—will be replaced.
Officials said the city entered a consent decree in 2011 to address historical sanitary sewer overflows and that, to date, roughly 95% of the public-related work under that agreement has been completed, including manhole replacement and sewer televising. The Auburn and Custer reconstruction was characterized as one of the remaining pieces of that broader compliance program.
City staff said the upgrades should reduce wet-weather flow downstream through the sewer shed and lessen pressure on the wastewater treatment plant and lift stations. No funding amounts or contract award details were specified in the remarks; timelines beyond the statement that this is an active project were not given.
The city did not present a detailed funding breakdown or a completion date in the remarks. Staff framed the project as part of ongoing citywide work to reduce inflow and infiltration and brought up the 2011 consent decree as the program’s legal driver.
The meeting did not record any motions or votes related to the project during the provided remarks; staff described the project scope and compliance context and indicated more work remains elsewhere in the city.
