By KRISTYN HALBIG ZIEHM
Ozaukee Press staff
Posted 7-23-08

Port Washington should begin planning for the day when it needs to rebuild its wastewater treatment plant with an eye to moving it from the lakefront, members of the Plan Commission said last week.

“Isn’t it about time we start talking about moving the treatment plant, or at least start to plan for it?” asked commission member Earl Kelley.

“Maybe we want to start putting a little money in the bank every year or two for this purpose.”

Mayor Scott Huebner concurred, saying this would be one way to open the lakefront and increase access to the city’s north beach.

“We’ve got to keep pushing the idea that this is important,” he said. “We should incorporate it into the plan to let people know that this is our wish. We’re making a priority of our beach and taking some of it back. I know we’re getting more beach access (with the south beach) but this beach is important too.”

The city should identify potential sites for a new plant, he said, as well as look at ways technology could be used to minimize the facility’s impact on the lakefront at its current location.

“The way budgets are today, it (moving the plant) is probably not going to happen,” Huebner acknowledged. “Unfortunately, the decision was made years ago to place it there and now we have to live with it. But if we have to redo it anyway, this is something we should consider.”

Residents have long complained about the fact they have to walk around the wastewater treatment plant to get to the north beach, calling it an unattractive nuisance.

Kelley’s comments came as the commission reviewed the utilities chapter of the city’s proposed comprehensive plan.

But while many commission members favored the concept, Public Works Director Rob Vanden Noven, a member of the commission, said it isn’t feasible for the city, especially given today’s economic climate.

“We’re talking tens of millions of dollars,” he said. “I’d be reluctant to think the city has that kind of money.

“I would guess it would be $40 million just to have a piece of parkland along the lake. I’m not saying it wouldn’t be nice to have, but moving the plant just isn’t realistic.”

The idea of moving the wastewater treatment plant from the lakefront has been debated by officials periodically, especially as the city has worked to showcase its beach.

But when the plant was initially built in about the 1940s, people didn’t consider the lakefront a recreational asset, City Administrator Mark Grams said.

“Back then, the decision probably boiled down to cost and location. I’m sure what they looked at was the fact that everything flows downhill and that’s the low point,” he said, noting that the city’s wastewater travels to the plant via a gravity system.

Vanden Noven said the plant is located “in the right spot from an engineering standpoint. It sits on Lake Michigan. It’s in what is the lowest spot.”

The only other likely spot the city could build a wastewater plant is an industrial park, Vanden Noven said, and that would require major changes to the city’s infrastructure because the sewer pipes all lead to the existing plant.

The concept of moving the facility from the lakefront was studied as recently as 20 years ago, when the city rebuilt the wastewater treatment plant, Grams said.

“We looked at that and the cost was $12 million to $15 million,” he said, a cost that the city couldn’t bear.

“You can borrow anything you want, but how high do you want your sewer bill to go?” Grams asked. “People are complaining about their utility bills now.”

Vanden Noven noted there is room to expand the plant at its current site, and added that the city will probably look at renovating the plant in the next 10 to 20 years.

But, he warned, “we’re a long way from a total rebuild.”

Even if the plant can’t be moved, commission members said, the city should at least look at ways to reconfigure it.

“Even if the location stays the same, the configuration could change, and maybe that way we could free some lakefront space,” said commission member Bud Sova.

Technology is changing, he noted, and could make it easier for the city to alter the plant and make the beach and lakefront more appealing. Perhaps the city could cover the tanks at the plant or place them underground, he suggested.

“What we can think of is as things need to be replaced, as those units need to be changed, maybe we can shuffle them around. It would be expensive too, but not as expensive as moving the plant,” Sova said.

Ross Larson, 228 Garfield Ave., supported the concept of moving the plant from the lakefront.

He suggested the city someday build a second plant away from the lakefront that could serve as a secondary facility initially, but eventually become the city’s only treatment plant.

“I think it’s a brilliant idea to start thinking about taking it out of there,” he said. “Reclaim that land ... I think it’s invaluable.”