Waterfront Park discussion continues

The Town’s Waterfront Park Project began in Sept. 2023. The project’s scope, according to the Town’s website, is the “development and restoration of the last piece of town-owned waterfront property, the former site of the town's sewer lagoons, into a scenic and accessible seven-acre recreational space for visitors to relax and experience the beauty of the Columbia River.” Having received $586,000 in grant funding, the Town budgeted $401,000 in contribution to the project.

During the Feb. 18 meeting of Cathlamet's City Council, Cathlamet Clerk-Treasurer Sarah Clark, speaking on the Waterfront Park Project, noted that cost increases "have led to an overage" with respect to the budget. With this overage necessitating "additional allocations or cost reductions to balance the budget," Clark mentioned staff had suggested the removal of the lighting element and notified Council she would consult with Gray and Osborne and "explore potential solutions to address the budget overage."

Two weeks later, during the March 3 session, discussion of the project's scope and budget changes was "tabled until the next meeting." Councilmember Jeanne Hendrickson noted not only has she “not received recent support for continuing the project" but that the Town "has spent $238,274 to date and could potentially walk away from the grant." With Councilmember Joe Baker and Mayor David Olson expressing their desire that the project continue to move forward, Councilmember Laurel Waller requested a meeting with Clark to "review the budget and explore potential cutbacks."

During the session on Monday, March 17, Clark gave an update regarding the project and its existing cost issues. "Following up on our previous meeting's discussion regarding project elements and associated cost increases, I met with Councilmember Laurel Waller to review the design elements and associated costs," Clark stated in the packet prepared prior to Monday's meeting. "As a result, we have requested Gray and Osborne to remove certain lighting elements, which is expected to reduce the overall cost by more than $26,000. However, we may incur additional cultural resource costs due to RCO's (Recreation and Conservation Office) requirement for cultural monitoring since that service falls outside our existing agreements." Clark noted that staff has directed Vancouver engineering consulting firm Gray and Osborne to install electrical outlets on only three of the six remaining lights and that the restroom infrastructure has also been removed from this phase of the project. Clark anticipates most of the engineering costs for the restroom have already been incurred and "is awaiting further instructions from Gray and Osborne" on the matter. With the reduced lighting and restroom removal lowering costs by $187,000, the Town's total cost for the project would now be $397,112, which is $3,888 under the budgeted $401,000. "We have already accounted for all applicable taxes and factored in a 10 percent ($60k) contingency for potential change orders within the design element costs," stated Clark. "These figures are estimates and can be adjusted on a line-by-line basis as needed once we receive bids."

Concerned about potential costs, especially moving forward, Waller said during Monday’s meeting, "I want to see what these numbers really are."

Recognizing the upcoming bids for the project, Baker said, "Every month we wait past today it's going to cost more."

Bringing the discussion back to her questions on the grant, Hendrickson asked how it would impact the Town’s budget if they walked away. Since all engineering costs had been spent, as well as money on cultural resources, "walking away" would entail having to pay back the grant. Clark noted such an action would only leave $32,000 in the budget.

"We would be solely on the hook without grant funds to do any repairs or improvements," said Mayor Olson. "There's no grant funds available. That's a misleading number in the sense that we would be on the hook solely from our budget to do all these other things in addition to having a perpetual eyesore. It's not just a matter of walking away. The Town would be on the hook to do all these other improvements and repairs that are not budgeted."

Since the item was on the agenda merely for discussion rather than approval, no motion was made. Clark indicated other related issues to Waterfront Park will be on the agenda in April and that "everything should be finalized in May."