Laserfiche WebLink
recondition the plant on that site, if it were possible to <br />do so. Mr. Mendez noted that neither of these estimates <br />include the irrigation pumphouse, off site parking, <br />contingencies, cost of financing, and other things that <br />would apply to both plants. Neither has anything been <br />qualified as to the advantages of operating one plant over <br />three plants. Mr. Mendez continued to review costs of the <br />proposed plant, adding to the bid price of the costs for a <br />25 h.p. bore, an irrigation pumphouse, lift station <br />modifications, etc., which came up to a total cost of <br />$900,000. Mr. Mendez emphasized that this plant will meet <br />DER requirements and meet the needs of The Moorings in an <br />environmentally sound and fiscally responsible manner. <br />Commissioner Lyons wished to know if the existing plant <br />is designed so it can be repaired without shutting down, and <br />Mr. Mendez noted that the only advantage of having two <br />plants is that you can divert flows so even if you are <br />running more than design flow through a plant, you can still <br />treat it. <br />Commissioner Bird stated that he is confused because <br />one very reputable engineer states that it is possible to <br />modify the plant on site and meet all requirements and <br />another reputable engineer has just stated the opposite. He <br />asked Utilities Director Pinto for his opinion as to whether <br />the existing plant can be remodeled and meet state and <br />federal requirements. <br />Mr. Pinto did not believe there is any question that <br />the plant can be renovated; it is a question of cost which <br />he is not in any position to estimate. He emphasized, <br />however, that you have to consider the full scenario, i.e., <br />whether the property is available and whether the renovation <br />could be accomplished under its present zoning requirements, <br />62 <br />JAN 18 1984 BOCK r,c <br />