Overview:
Montague town officials are considering an amended contract for the design and bidding phase of the demolition of the former Strathmore mill complex. The amended contract is for $1,088,550, which is an increase of $890,850 from the original contract.
MONTAGUE — An amended, significantly more expensive contract for the design and bidding phase of the former Strathmore mill complex’s demolition is being mulled over by town officials, citing a need for community engagement with the new proposal.
The amended contract, for nearly $1.09 million, represents a $890,850 increase to the original $197,700 agreement that the town entered with the Tighe & Bond engineering firm in August 2024. The need for a revised contract arose due to complicating factors related to a hydroelectric turbine that is privately owned by Eagle Creek Renewable Energy inside Building 9 at the center of the 20 Canal St. complex.
On Thursday, Assistant Town Administrator Chris Nolan-Zeller said the revised contract would allow the engineering firm to further explore demolition of the structures around Building 9 and options for which buildings will be torn down. The contract change has been anticipated, but the cost to design and bid was higher than the town had expected.
The budget for this project is $10 million, which includes $4.92 million from the U.S. Department of Environmental Protection and a $5 million earmark from the state Department of Conservation and Recreation.
The original cost estimates for two demolition options that were presented to the Selectboard in February included $7 million to demolish 10 buildings at the complex and stabilize Building 9. The other option, just to demolish and completely rebuild Building 9, would cost $10 million — the total amount the town has available for demolition and redevelopment at the 1.3-acre riverfront property.
The Selectboard entered into a contract with Tighe & Bond to create alternative demolition designs in April, paid for using the state earmark. A base bid for demolition of Buildings 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 would cost $6.6 million, according to a probable cost estimate by Tighe & Bond. Nolan-Zeller explained that with the existing funding available to the town, the base bid could be completed.
“If we’re able to either receive additional funding or if bids somehow come in lower than the current estimates, alternates might end up being on the table,” Nolan-Zeller said.
Nolan-Zeller said the town is pursuing other funding options for the demolition, including an application to the Federal Funds & Infrastructure Office within the state’s Executive Office for Administration and Finance to match the EPA grant.
“We have not heard any correspondence back on that yet,” he said, adding, “while we make every effort to secure the funds that are necessary to complete the full extent of the project as intended, our existing resources are sufficient to make significant progress toward the goal of a clean site.”
On the high end of costs, Alternative Design 3, which includes the base bid for demolishing Buildings 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 as well as additional fees to tear down Buildings 1, 2 and 11, would cost $13 million. This price tag includes demolition, costs for building retaining walls around Building 9, site work, code upgrades, construction and engineering.
Selectboard Chair Matt Lord, speaking Monday, said he’d like to hold off on voting to give time for people to think about the amended contract, and to have Vice Chair Richard Kuklewicz, who was absent during Monday’s meeting, also weigh in.
Lord explained his apprehension, based on how discussions on handling the challenge of Building 9 have played out among the public, rather than between town officials and Tighe & Bond, along with the cost of the amended contract, the unknowns of how bidding might play out and ensuring the public understands how the Selectboard vets this project.
“I want to make sure that it is understood what the different options are,” Lord said, “that the Selectboard’s knowledge of options is good and understood, and that the town at least understands that the Selectboard is making a choice between different options in terms of how this thing is going to proceed. Those options all involve tearing these buildings down.”
However, Lord also acknowledged the time frame in which a revised contract with Tighe & Bond needs to be signed. Nolan-Zeller said an extra week would be acceptable.
“But I do agree that an extended delay is not going to be of our best interest,” Nolan-Zeller added.
Anecdotally, Nolan-Zeller said he’s heard from members of the public about the demolition’s delay, saying residents have told him they want the town to “get it done, by any means necessary.”
“I feel like the population of the town has just been begging for some affordable way to get rid of the crumbling buildings for at least a dozen years,” Town Meeting member and Economic Development and Industrial Corporation board member Ariel Elan said about her recollection of public involvement in the property’s future.
As for the timeline of the demolition plan, the goal is to have the bulk of the design work by Tighe & Bond continue throughout the winter, then tackle environmental permitting in spring 2026, followed by bidding in the summer. Starting that fall, the goal is to begin demolition and site cleanup between the fall of 2026 and fall of 2027.
The Selectboard will meet on Monday, Nov. 17, at 6:30 p.m. on Zoom to continue the discussion on the amended contract.