Marco to build 'green' utility building

MARCO ISLAND — While council chose to delay making several costly decisions, an audience of residents let out an audible moan following a close council vote in support of spending about $484,000 to design a new “green” utility building.

The city’s former Finance Director Bill Harrison attended his first City Council meeting since his sudden retirement in October. Harrison assisted council and staff through several financial issues on Monday afternoon’s agenda.

Astorino, an architectural and design firm based in Naples, has spent about three months working with Public Works Director Rony Joel to begin designing an environmentally-friendly utilities operations building at 803 Elkcam Circle.

The building is planned to incorporate “green” architecture elements including water efficiency and energy efficiency. Design, material and air quality are also planned to be sustainable, according to preliminary agreements between Astorino and the city.

Representatives of Astorino said solar energy planned for the building is not as efficient and inexpensive as some might hope, but that is anticipated to change in the next two to three years.

Joel said the utilities department has been spread across the city in temporary offices for about a year and a half.

“Can’t you just survive another year and a half ... Put a new roof on what you’ve got,” said resident Charles Murray, who suggested council not spend any money unless it was absolutely necessary due to the economy.

Resident Phil Kostelnik agreed saying the current “nearly half of a million dollars on architectural designs for a building that will cost $4 million” is a price tag that will likely go down due to the economy.

Councilman Rob Popoff said he was “alarmed by the fee” and took issue with the city not bidding on the design.

Resident Ken Honecker said a “design and build” firm which would combine a bid for both the architectural plans and construction would likely be a cheaper option.

Joel said a design and build firm may be faster, but not cheaper.

“This is not a nice-to-have. It is a must-have in my opinion,” Joel said of the 24,000-square-foot building design.

Councilman Ted Forcht was among the three Councilmen who voted against awarding the design contract to Astorino.

“I thought the green part of the building was the expense,” Forcht said.

Forcht, Councilman Chuck Kiester and Councilman Frank Recker opposed the idea, but Ostorino won the contract in a 4-3 vote.

“I can’t support any expenditure of this magnitude,” Recker said.

Waldack agreed with Joel’s assertion that it was a necessary expense, as did Councilman Jerry Gibson, Chairman Bill Trotter and Councilman Rob Popoff.

Sewer vac truck and other expenses

Council chose to table a request to purchase a $330,000 vacuum truck for sewer maintenance. They also put off deciding whether to award a contract to design the third phase of the reclaimed water production facility. These items will likely be addressed in a workshop session tentatively scheduled 3 p.m., Jan. 19.

Also tabled was a request to carry forward about $1.3 million in 2008 capital projects to 2009. According to the memo from interim Finance Director Bob Creighton to City Council on the issue, the money was left over from projects not completed in the year they were budgeted.

However, Recker questioned several of the items and found Council may be doing more than extending the time frame of projects council already approved.

“We’re creating a new project here for $400,000,” Recker said.

Harrison stepped-in upon request to help explain the transfers.

He said council was approving transferring money, but any project of $100,000 or more would still require separate approval from council.

City Manager Steve Thompson said he would generate a report to show all ongoing projects and where they stand with money allocated versus spent and the amount of time anticipated to complete the project.

Council voted 6-1 to approve carrying forward money for ongoing projects already approved by Council, with Keister casting the dissenting vote. Money that was being transferred for projects or capital improvements not already approved by Council were put-off until the next meeting.