Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-02-07 Board of Public Works Minutes February 7, 1972 Meeting of the Board of Public Works opened at 7: 30 P.M. in Room 16, Municipal Building. Present were Chairman White, Board Members Cochrane and Hodgkins and Superintendent Louanis . In the absence of the Secretary, Mr . Cochrane read the minutes of the previous meeting which were approved. Board Members Florence and Watt joined the meeting. Mr . White read letter from the Department of Public Health regarding policy for drinking water facilities. It was accepted as a point of information. The Board adjourned temporarily at 7:45 P.M. to meet as the Board of Survey. The Board reconvened at 7: 50 P.M. Mr. White read note from the Superintendent regarding acceptance of Spruce Road. It was moved, seconded and voted that the Board recommend acceptance of SPRUCE (Private) ROAD as a Public Way under the Betterment Act at the Annual Town Meeting. The Chairman read note from the Superintendent regarding proposed meeting schedule through March 20 and it was agreed to follow the Superintendent's recommendation. Public Hearing was held at 8:00 P.M. regarding the pe- tition of the New England Telephone & Telegraph Company for permission to lay and maintain buried cable in the following loca- tion: OVERLOOK ROAD: Southwesterly side, northwesterly from pole 225/4, approximately eighty (80) feet of buried cable, northwesterly Mr . George Cooley represented the Telephone Company at the Hear- ing. Mr. Cochrane moved, Mr. Hodgkins seconded and it was voted ' to approve the request. The Board signed the petition. Mr . Kilgore of Dustin Associates, Inc. joined the meeting. Mr. White stated that he and the other Board Members had reviewed the report and he, for one, had some points which he wanted clari- fied by Mr. Kilgore. A discussion ensued and the following points were discussed: 1 . The chart showing water consumption and other data was discussed in detail . Mr. Kilgore pointed out that the Town 's water supply is critical and the proposed improvements would carry the Town through a 10-year period to 1983• 2. The proposed improvements as listed and estimated on Page 27 of the report were discussed in detail as to order of priority, and it was concluded that all ' the items should be completed as soon as possible and the construction program would take approximately two years . The items of work would be scheduled in such a manner as to cause the least inconvenience to the con- sumers. 3• The proposed financing of the project was discussed and it was agreed that it should be paid out of Water Department revenue, and the proposed improvements by a ten-year bond issue. This bond issue would coin- cide with other bonded indebtedness which would be paid by 1983, leaving the Water Department free of debt. This would place the Water Department in a good position to face a large expansion anticipated at that time. 4. Mr. Kilgore pointed out that the possibility of re- ceiving water from the M.D.C. Water Division appears not to be in the near future and the Town of Reading cannot wait and must act now to meet its short-range needs . 5. Mr . Kilgore stated that he had investigated the follow- ' ing major watersheds within the Town: Hundred Acre Meadow ' Bear Meadow Brook Cedar Swamp Timberneck Swamp Mill Meadow and the Hundred Acre area, as stated in his report, is the area which should be developed for the Town ' s immediate water supply. Mr . Watt moved, it was seconded and voted unanimously that the Board accept Dustin Associates ' recommendations for the improvements to the water system and that $445,000.00 be raised by bonding over a ten-year period and paid for out of Water De- partment revenue, and authorization for bonding be obtained at the Annual Town Meeting. The Board signed the Billroll dated February 11 and Payroll for the period January 31 through February 6. Meeting adjourned at 9: 20 P .M. Respectfully submitted, Secretary a 1 TOWN OF READING OFFICE OF NATHAN C. WHITE. cNAiRmAN OFq DONALD E. FLORENCE. SECRETARY BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS GEORGE W. COCHRANE. ED Lo a GEORGE L. HODGKM9 " 46 MUNICIPAL BUILDING WILLIAM N. WATT READING. MASS. 01867 E. ROGER LOGANIS. SUPERINTENDENT MASSACHUSETTS February 2, 1972 Mr . Arthur J. Santry, Jr. , President Combustion Engineering, Inc. 277 Park Avenue New York, N . Y. 10017 Dear Mr . Santry: During the latter part of 1969 and early part of 1970 we received a first-rate proposal from your Company for the fabri- cation and erection of two (2) "Combustopak" Incineration Units. We were subsequently able to convince the electorate of the Town of Reading that your proposed solution to our refuse disposal problem was the best available and Reading voters authorized the _expenditure of funds for the building of a Municipal Incinerator. On April 10, 1970, Combustion Engineering, Inc. entered into a contract with the Town of Reading for the fabrication and erection of an Incinerator, with a contractual completion date of April 10, 1971 • Today is February 2, 1972, ten ( 10) months after your contractual completion date. Today we have no operable In- cinerator . This delay in the completion of the Incinerator by your Company has hurt us in many ways , some of which are tabulated below. 1 . We have used up an additional three (3) acres of precious dumping area because we have had to dump all rubbish there, rather than just the residue from the Incinerator . 2. We have had to renew our annual contract for sep- arate collection of garbage at a cost of approx- imately $56,000. (We had planned to burn the garbage with the rubbish. ) 3. We have paid additional amounts to our Engineers, Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. for services of a resident inspector many months beyond the original contrac- tual` completion date. Mr. Arthur J. Santry, Jr. , President - 2 February 2, 1972 4. Based on one of many promised completion dates, we employed and have paid personnel to be trained in the operation of the Incinerator . We currently have no operable Incinerator, and our utilization of these people is therefore grossly inefficient. We, and thousands of other Public Works officials, have seen your impressive advertisement (two-page colored spread of the Reading Incinerator) in a recent issue of American City. The Incinerator pictured is still not operable. We have had numerous assurances from your Sales Depart- ment that the Incinerator would be operable by specific dates, all of which have long passed. We have had correspondence and discussions with Mr. John P. Tully, Vice President of Combustion Engineering, Inc., with the hopes that he could bring about ex- peditious completion of the project. These hopes were appar- ently unfounded. In summary, we are extremely disappointed in the failure of your Company to produce the product which you cur- rently advertise, and are under contract to build for the Town of Reading. We are equally disappointed by the absence of evi- dence that your Company is making any concerted effort to pro- duce in accordance with either your contractual or moral obliga- tions . Will you, as President of Combustion Engineering, Inc. , take any actions to restore our earlier faith in your Company? Very truly yours, BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS C� Chairman ` ecretw-y NCW:MC cc James A. Fife Metcalf E Eddy, Inc.