Spring Hill holds public meeting on proposed wastewater treatment plant; city seeks SRF and WIFIA loans

Allison Abel, Spring Hill’s city engineer, opened a public meeting held during the council session to present a proposed new Spring Hill Wastewater Treatment Facility and explain why the city is pursuing state and federal financing.

"I'm Allison Abel, the city engineer here at the City of Spring Hill," Abel said as she summarized the project purpose and schedule. She said the existing plant, built in 2001, is operating at about 71% of its permitted capacity and — with current growth trends — would reach capacity within about 10 years.

Abel walked the council and the public through three alternatives from an engineering study: (1) expand the existing plant, (2) construct a new plant about 1.5 miles south of the current site, and (3) build a new plant further south to serve a larger watershed. She told the room that the city had concluded Alternative 2 offers the right mix of capacity, expandability and fiscal responsibility and said the city already acquired a 160‑acre parcel northwest of the corner of 239th Street and Woodland Road for $1,300,000 as a preferred site.

Consultant Jacob, who spoke about the existing facility, told the council the current packaged plant is built to an older, single‑manufacturer design that is limited in footprint and sensitive to cold-weather operation. "So rather than investing tens of millions of dollars into that 1980s–1990s technology, we feel it's much better to position ourselves for the future to start now with a new plant, new location, [and] new technology," he said.

Funding and schedule Abel said the city applied to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) for state revolving fund (SRF) support and learned $25 million — plus an additional $5 million that became available — can be requested for the project, for a total SRF pool of $30 million being pursued. Separately, the city is preparing a Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) application to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requesting $130 million; Abel said the WIFIA application is lengthy and the city hopes to submit it by May 2026.

Abel described design‑build procurement steps already underway: BG Consultants was retained as the city’s owner’s representative and Crossland Heavy Contractors was contracted to begin design; Black & Veatch, Lamp Rynearson and GBA provide engineering expertise. She said the Basis of Design report is expected by the end of March and the city targets final completion of the initial plant phase by December 2028.

Phasing, capacity and operations Staff said the project will be phased. The first phase is being sized at either 2.5 million gallons per day (MGD) or 5.0 MGD depending on demand and efficiency considerations; Abel explained design‑build allows off‑ramps so the city can build the smaller plant now and expand later if necessary. "In order for wastewater to be fully efficient... we need to have a minimum flow," Abel said, explaining that operating a very large plant at low flows can reduce efficiency.

On staffing, Abel estimated the initial facility would require about four to five additional operations staff, with more positions added as the plant expands. Planned site components include an administration building (north entrance), vehicle storage, a laboratory, locker and laundry facilities, and room to expand the treatment footprint as nutrient‑removal requirements evolve.

Public questions and response Resident Pat Ross asked why the city would consider starting at the smaller capacity and whether adding capacity later would cost more. Abel and consultants replied that minimum-flow efficiency and the ability to valve off portions of a larger facility are key considerations; they explained that design‑build phasing and value engineering are intended to preserve fiscal responsibility while keeping expandability.

Next steps and permitting Abel said the city submitted preliminary studies to KDHE, which oversees permitting for wastewater expansions in Kansas, and will update the anti‑degradation study and related reports as preliminary design proceeds. She invited councilmembers and residents to the separate public hearing scheduled two weeks later, when the finance director will present budget and financing details.

The public meeting concluded with questions answered and a plan to continue detailed design and the funding applications. The city framed the project as a multi‑year effort with off‑ramps to limit unnecessary early spending and to preserve the ability to expand as growth warrants.