An SUV splashes through downtown during the flooding last month. The council is looking into fix the issue.| Enquirer File Photo

During the city council meeting Tues., July 14, the Hartselle City Council rejected bids for the first part of the downtown flood mitigation project.

The city only has $138,200 in funds available for the project and the lowest bid was $433, 454, which is $295,254 more than the funds now available.

This project includes the two detention ponds that are being constructed behind the Hartselle Board of Education and the Hartselle Fine Arts Center. The ponds would detain excess rainwater during heavy rain events, which would then be channeled out of the ponds by a system of pipes and eventually reach the drainage system flowing underneath downtown and into the creek along Hickory and Sycamore streets.

The process would slow down the speed of the water reaching the downtown area and hope to eliminate flooding. Engineers have mentioned that the amount of water coming across the eastern side of the tracks would be less than 10 percent of the rainwater that reaches the downtown drainage system.

The city has received a FEMA reimbursable grant for $244,350 to use for the project.

The city has to put up $81,450 in matching funds for the grant. The city actually received the money to be used for emergency sirens but was approved to use the money for downtown flood mitigation.

Of the $244,350 dollar grant $106,150 has already been spent or obligated for Goodwin, Mills and Cawood design fees, community consultants and an ADEM permit.

According to Hartselle City’s Director of Development Jeff Johnson $225,000 of the overage from the bids would be for demolition of the box culvert behind the Farmer’s Market and for the widening of the culvert. Johnson recommended the council reject all bids submitted for the work and rebid the project with value engineering and let the city public works department do the work that is within their capabilities.

By taking out the box culvert work in the rebid, Johnson thinks the costs could be brought down to around $122,000 and the city would have an additional cost of $30,000.

Johnson also informed the council that removing the work on the box culvert would not affect the funding from FEMA. The hydraulics of the work submitted to and approved by FEMA would still be in tact, and the grant would not be lost.

Councilman Tom Chappell questioned why the city should change the project and the engineer’s design just to fit the amount of money the city has to spend from the grant. He suggested possibly paying for the box culvert retrofit out of reserves.

Chuck Faulkner of GMC told the council that in the long term the box culvert does need to be completed, however there are other areas that could be looked at to slow the excess water down before it gets to downtown. In his opinion by doing the construction on the box culvert it will only reduce the outflow of the water by less than 2 percent.

Mayor Don Hall proposed that instead of spending the money on the box culvert, that $225,000 would go a long way in building another detention pond on the west side of the railroad track.

Council President Bill Smelser commented that rebuilding the box culvert would make the area look better, however, Faulkner mentioned again that this would have minimal affects on the hydraulics of the water.

The council rejected all bids for the project and will change the scope of work and rebid the project. The bids are good until Aug.8. The project will again be discussed in detail at the next work session.

In other business, the council introduced an ordinance for rezoning on Rice Road, authorized the Mayor to sign a Community Service Grant Agreement for the Vietnam War Memorial Sign, approved an application for the annual Veterans Day Parade, approved a budget adjustment for the fire department and approved a budget transfer for public works.

The council held a work session after the council meeting to hear proposals from Public Works Director Daxton Maze on extending the life of the landfill by stream mitigation options. This will be discussed further at the next work session and the council will need to decide what long term options there are for the landfill.  As it stands now, the landfill will be at capacity in 24-36 months.