Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1958-02-10 Board of Public Works Minutes February 10, 1958 Regular Meeting of the Board opened at 7 :30 P. M. Present were Chaimpan Donahue, Messrs, Hopkins, Zanni, and - Superin- tendent Putnam, ` Minutes of previous meeting read and approved. Signed voucners and payroll for payment. Public Hearing held at 8:00 P. M. regarding petition of New England Tel, & Tel, Co, to install underground conduits on Lowell Street at Beverly (Private) Road and at a point North-Westerly of Lowell Street Rail Road Bridge, for temporary overhead cable installation during bridge reconstruction. No abuttor appeared at the hearing. Petition granted. Moved, seconded and voted to abate the April 1, 1956 water bill in the amount of $24.00 for the property at 29 Lawrence Road, formerly owned by Louis Ferrullo, now owned by William Swift et ux. Received letter from Reading Council of Girl Scouts, Inc„ Mary K. Hobart, Secretary, requesting abatement of two (2) Sidewalk Assessment bills for -sidewalk construction on Forest Street. Inasmuch as the Reading Council of Girl Scouts, Inc. , is a non-profit organization, supported by community funds, it was moved, seconded and voted to abate the two bills as requested, as listed: ASSESSORS AMOUNT BILL NO. OWNER PIAT LOT ABATED 41 Reading Council of Girl Scouts, Inc, 68 1 $19231 .91 43 Reading Council of Girl Scouts, Inc. 68 4A0,1 Total Amount Abated - - - $1,472.04 Received several requests for abatement of Sewer Frontage Assessment, Sidewalk Assessment and Street Assessment bills, Each request was carefully reviewed, and the following action was moved, seconded and v6ted : SEWER FRONTAGE ASSESSM"r:NTS . TOTr APPLICANT ADDRESS ASSES34ENTTT ACTION OF BOARD war parker 34 Woodward A*/anue s e , Edward J. Taylor 232 High Street 480.63 No Abatement James T. Rankin 73 Grand Street 695.38 Abate $212.50 Itndrew J. Crovo 62 Deering Street 446.88 No Abatement SIDEWALK ASSESSMENTS R. W. Peterson 1056 Main Street. r .86 Abate $34.00 ST=T ASSESSMENTS Edward E. Bangs 2� Cali£orn a Road, 9 .13 Abate $614.35 Beulah R. Powers 151 Howard Street, 111.92 No Abatement , Lawrence J. Delaney 159 Howard Street, 111.92 No Abatement Received written opinion from the Town Counsel regarding method by which owners of private property may be permitted to construct sidewalks on public ways abutting their properties, which hereby becomes a part of these minutes: February .5, 1.958 James T. Putnam, Superintendent Board of Public Works Municipal Building Reading, Massachusetts Dear Jim: You have asked for my opinion as to whether or not the Board of Pub- lic Works can permit owners of private property to construct sidewalks abutting their properties and at their own personal expense . Section 4 of Chapter 85 of the General Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts provides that : "A person owning or occupying land adjoining a public way in a town may construct a sidewalk within such way and along the line of such land, indicating the width of such sidewalk by trees, posts, or curbstones set at reasonable distances apart, or by a railing, But this section shall not affect the authority of surveyors of highways or of road commissioners, or any other authority which can le gally be exer- cised over ways, or diminish the liability of any person for unreasonably obstructing ways, nor shall it apply to cities." Section 25 of Chapter 83 of the General Laws gives the Board of Pub- lic Works, acting as road commissioners,. the general authority over the establishment of sidewalks in the public wbys. I also find that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in a deci- sion rendered in 1928, stated that. a person building a sidewalk under the provisions of Section 4 of Chapter 85 is liable for negligence in caring for it.' It is my opinion that the Board of Public Works, acting as the road commissioners, have the authority to enter into an agreement with a person "owning or occupying land adjoining a public way in a town" to construct a sidewalk within such way, such sidewalk to be built at the entire expense of the abutter and on the terms and conditions as established by the Board of Public Works. Ther terms and conditions would include the items set forth in your letter of May 22, 1957 and particularly the specifications determined by the Board. Such an agreement should also be clear to the effect that the abutter would be responsible for all claims arising out of the negligent maintenance of that sidewalk. As previously stated, the an- it 3 tire cost of construction of such a sidewalk would , under these conditions, be paid' for by the abutter. Very truly yours, ( signed) Carl H, Amon Jr, ar , Amon, r, Received written opinion from Town Counsel regarding occupancy of a drain easement by a property owner with consent of the Board, which hereby becomes a part of these minutes: February 5, 1958 James T. Putnam, Superintendent Board of Public Works Municipal Building Reading, Massachusetts Dear Jim: you have asked for my opinion as to whether or not the Town can enter into an agreement with the owner of land through which the Town has a storm drain easement, whereby the owner could erect a garage over the easement, with a reservation to the Town of the right of access to the drain, - A land owner has no right to erect an obstructing building over a drain in the absence of an agreement or license and the construction of such a building would be enjoined by the courts. Chapter 83 Section 4 of the 'General Laws of the Commonwealth, gives the Tmwn the autnority to install storm drains o2f the highways. It also provides that the land owner may erect a. bridge over the drain with the per- mission of the Town and that the easement may be discontinued by recording. I find that there is a decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Court in 1845 to the effect that a license granted to a land owner to obstruct an easement may constitute an abandonment of such an easement. I do not find any specific authority either by statute or by cases ' giving the Town ,the right to enter into any agreement for construction over an easement. However, there is an inference to be drawn from Section 4 of Chapter 83 as well as certain cases which deal with easements in general and the granting of licenses in connection therewith. It is therefore my opinion that the Town can enter into an agreement with the owner of land for the construction of a garage over an easement. Such an agreement would have to be very carefully worded so that it could not be interpreted as either an abandonment of the easement or an unlimited right for the use of the lard, �y I enclose herewith a draft that I have prepared for such an agree- ment. Tnis is only a draft and would have to be changed in order to state the appropriate facts and also to ment your practical requirements. If you proceed with such an agreement, will you please be sure that I examine it before it is executed. Very truly yours, ' ( signed) Carl H. Amon Jr. Carl H. Amon, Jr. Received letter from Weston & Sampson, Consulting Engineers, enclos- ing a supplement to Table H on Pane 5 of their Water Supply Report dated January 6, 1958, said supplement estimLting in detail Engineering Services, Design and Inspection. Moved, seconded and voted to revise the costs listed in Report to Finance Co=ittee, Proposed 1958 Water Supply Improvements, dated February 81 1958 to include the Engineering Services, Design and Inspection, includ- ed in Weston & .Sampsons letter previously voted herein, and to present to the Finance Committee on February 11, 1958 the following Report: REPORT TO FINANCE CO1.MITTEE PROPOSED 1958 WATER SUPPLY IMPROV>2,71NTS FE_RUARY 8, 1958 Tne Board of Public Works, at a Special Board Meeting held Saturday, February 8, 1958 voted unanimously to recommend to the Finance Committee an the Town Meeting certain items, as listed in the Report on Water Supply dated January 6, 1958 by Weston & Sampson, Consulting Engineers, for con- struction in the year 1958. The Board fully realizes the seriousness of the present economic problems besetting the Town of Reading-it also Is acutely aware of the inadequacy of the present municipal water supply and the rapid continued growth in pupulation of the Town, with increased demand for water usa e. Therefore the following items are recommended : ITEM: OF WORK ESTEv ATED COST SCHEDULED FOR Booster Pumping Station for County, Lothrop, Jere Roads, Incl. Engineering and Inspection 6,025.00 1958 2. First .75 MCD Gravel Wall Well, pumping sta- tion in Revay Brook Meadow, and 10" connect- ing main via Bradford Road, Fluoridator, etc . incl. Engineering 55,875.00 1958 3 . Westerly Loop Main, 10,000: feet of 12" mµ10.00 (incl, connections, ledge,. Engineering and In- spection) 100,000.00 1958 - 1959 .f 4- Second .75 MGD Gravel Wall Well, pumping Station in Revay Brook Meadow, incl. Engin- eering, Inspection and connection. 31,100.00 1958 -1959 Estimated Total Cost - - - 0193,000.00 - - - plus costs of land damages, which have not been determined as yet. It was also voted unanimously by the Board of Public'-Works that action on the proposed 1.0 MG low level standpipe and 0.3 MG high level elevated tank off Lothrop Road, estimated to cost ip137,500.00; and the 16^ connecting main from the proposed low level standpipe to the Westerly Loop Main, and the 8" connecting main from the proposed high level elevated tank to Lothrop Road estimated to cost 016,200.00; be held in abeyance for no longer a period of time than is required to determine the effects of the additional water supply, pumpage and distribution improvements recommended under the first four items in this Report. Coleman J. Donahue, CHAIRMAN Walter S. Hopkins, Jr. Kenneth R. Johnson Domenick Zanni, Jr. . , , Harold D. Kilgore, Jr. BOAd) OF PUBLIC WORKS TOWN OF READING Received written and oral report from Superintendent regarding negot- iations with Roderick. Hogan, 20 Summer Avenue, concerning drain and headwall 'easement through his property. Superintendent instructed to continue nego- tiation. Moved, seconded and voted to authorize the Superintendent to write a series of articles for publication in The Reading Chronicle giving a his- torical background o£ the municipal water supply development, for the pur- pose of publicizing the articles to be presented at the annual Town meeting regarding additional water supply. , Received petition signed by several abutting property owners on Dana (Private) Road, requesting a re-hearing on acceptance of said road on the grounds that sufficient time was not given at the Hearing held January 27, 1958 for proper discussion of the acceptance. Moved, seconded and voted to advertize for a re-hearing on February 17, 1958. �` Received written opinion from Town Counsel regarding authority of the Board relative to imposing water restrictions in certain instances, which hereby becomes a part of these minutes: ' February 5, 1958 James T. Putnam, Superintendent Board of Public Works _ Municipal Building Reading, Massachusetts ` Dear Jim: Ygu haveaskedfor my opinion as to whether or not the Board of Public Works may, in times of a shortage, restrict or cut off the supply of water to industrial users, and if so, whether it can discriminate against a particular user. ' Chapter 405 of the Acts of 1889 gave the Town the right to establish its own water supply. Section 3 of this Act specifically provided that the Town "may .regulate the -use of water. . .^ As a general rule, a water company is not allowed to discriminate against individual users. _ This was decided by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in a 1922 decision. Along the same lines, Section 92 of Chapter 164 (applicable to water works by reason of Section 2 of Chapter 165) provides that a person may obtain ' an order for a watsr company to supply him with water "upon such terms and conditions as are legal and reasonable". It appears that as a general principle of law, a water company must act rea- sonably to provide water without discrimination to all persons within its area of service. I assume that we do not have specific contracts with all water users, irre- spective of whether they are residential or industrial. However, the ini- tial supplying of water and the continued practice in doing so over a period of time, might give rise to an ir-plied contract to provide water irrespective of the circumstances unless there is a restriction on all customers. It is my opinion that, in the aosence of a, specific contract, the Board of Public Works, as the Water Commissioners, does not have the authority to restrict the use of water by any particular customer or to shut off water for any particular customer. The Board of Putlic Works can either restrict or shut off all users in a stated class, such as industrial, provided that the action taken is reasonable under all the circumstances. It is my fur- ther opinion that such action would be reasonable if all industrial users were restricted in times of abnormal and severe water shortages. I have one further thought in the matter. In view of o ur experience over the past few years, and the possibilities of problems arising even if there were a restriction for the general industrial class, I suggest that the Board give some thought to the possibility of special legislation giving the spec- ific authority to the Water Commissioners under stated circumstances. , Very truly yours, ( signed) Carl H. Amon lr - Carr H. Amon, Jr, Received written opinion from Town Counsel regarding the legality of constructing a wading pool in Memorial Park, which hereby becomes a part of these minutes: February 5, 1958 James T. Putnam, Superintendent Board of Public .Works Municipal Building Reading, Massachusetts Dear Jim: You have asked for my opinion as to whether or not the construction of a wading pool at Memorial Park would conflict with the terms of the deed con- veying this area to the Town. The deed of gift of the land cor..prising Memorial Park, contained the follow- ing languaze: "Said land is to be improved and maintained as a public park, shall be laid out and ornamented with trees and shrubbery, as a place for healthful rest, recreation and amusement for people of all ages, with proper facilities for such children' s sports as can be gener- ally indulged in by them, and tend to their proper development and [ furnish them with amusement, but said land shall not be used as a playground for football, baseiAail, soccer, and kindred games, or any games that are in their R-ture hazardous or require fenced en- closures or tend to draw together crowds of pipople or interfere with the quiet enjoyment of those whose homes are intheimmddiate neighborhood." It is my understanding that the Recreation Committee desires to construct a wading pool which would be used by only the younger children, would be completely fenced, and would be similar in all respects to the one present- ly located at Birch Meadow. The terms of the deed exclude the use of the land for "games" that are (1) "in their nature hazardous", or (2) "require fenced enclosures", or (33 "tend to draw together crowds of people", or (4) "interfere with the quiet enjoyment of those whose homes are in the immed- iate neighborhood". The restrictions as enumerated in the previous paragraph are conditioned upon "games" being involved. I find that the Massachusetts Supreme Court in a decision rendered in 1934 stated, "the word 'game' is very comprehen- sive and embraces any contrivance or institution which has for its subject, the furnishing of sport, recreation, or amusement" . This is every broard definition and would undoubtedly include "wading" as being "recreation". However the U. S. District Court for Massachusetts in a 1937 decision stat- ' ed, "it must be conceded that, as generally understood, a name involves a sport or div4nsion in which two or more persons compete". This latter de- cision Seems to me to be the more practical one inasmuch as it calls for some f$rm of competition. This definition would also be supported by the terms of the deed because there is a reference to "Football, baseball, soccer, and kindred games" which indicate that the grantor had in mind com- petitive activities, as distinguished from amus;ment generally. It is therefore my opinion that the construction of a wading pool in "iem- orial Park is not a gave" as intended by the deed of gift of the land and such a pool may therefore be constructed. I think that this $pinion is further supported bJ the fact that the -deed also states that the land shall be "laid out and ornamented. . .with proper facilities for such children' s sports as can be generally indulged in by them and tend to their proper development and furhish them with amus :ment." In my opinion, a wading pool for children would clearly come within the terms of the deed as being a facility for the stated purpose. In considering this question and arriving at my opinion as stated, I have not consulted with any of the original grantors of this land, nor with their heirs. ' I am send a copy of this letter to Mr. Rixon. Very truly yours, (signed) Carl H. Amon Jr Car H. Amon, F. Examined Registry of Deeds Plan for approval-land owned by Lewis Estate on New Service Road off West Street. Superintendent reported plan might not be legal, and was instructed to investigate further and report back to Board. Board adjourned at 11:30 P. M. Respectfully submitted: Secretary