My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/18/1999 SEWER COMMISSION Minutes
>
3/18/1999 SEWER COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/9/2019 2:01:44 PM
Creation date
12/9/2019 2:01:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
SEWER COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/18/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
} <br /> NIASUPEE SEWER COMMISSION MIE TING MINUTES <br /> THURS AY,MARCH 1 , 1999 <br /> TOWN BALL <br /> 'resent: Demos Balzarini,John Cahalane, Toni Fudala <br /> Meeting convened at : 7 p.m. <br /> There is are article on the town meeting warrant to increase the membership of the Sever <br /> Commission to 5 members. Worn does not know who submitted it or why. <br /> Torn drafted a memo to the Selectmen from the Sewer Commission objecting to this. It is in <br /> violation of MA general laws under which the Sewer Commission was created. All members <br /> signed the memo. <br /> The Commission received a letter from.Bill ball, one of the owners of Stearns & Wheler. <br /> Because the cost factor seems to be the largest area of concern between the two firms,there is <br /> clearly a difference erence in the level of effort between S & W and SEA. If Stearns and Wheler <br /> reduced their proposed scope to match SEA's, there will be a reduction in cost. <br /> SEA has a$50,,000 contingency, which brings it up to $300,000 <br /> S & W is $366,000. They had budgeted $48,000 for hydro geo work in the New Seabury area but <br /> they now think there is enough information available and that can be subtracted. With the <br /> additional proposed subtractions that are acceptable,heir proposal i's reduced to $303,500. <br /> Therefore they are essentially the'same price. <br /> In their original proposal SEA did have some suggested cast reductions. <br /> Tom made some additional calls to references for both firms and reviewed all comments he had <br /> previously received. <br /> r. Howes, S & W is a traditional engineering firm, do they have a grasp of environmental <br /> approach., do they have sensitivity to how days work. Have a good grasp of VEPA and CCC <br /> permitting process. All Cape projects are presently incomplete. <br /> SEA: have innovative on site experience, involved in effluent,re-use. Did New Se bury hydro <br /> geo work, have community relations person on staff, good grasp of MEPA process. Did excellent <br /> work in Barnstable on similar issue. Are the most creative efigineers. <br /> March Ells from Barnstable- S&W: were organized, good on details, middle price range. DEP is <br /> excited about injection wells, landfill project was done under budget. Good quality of work, no <br /> unseen expenses. <br /> e has lithe experience with SEA. Thinks Tony Zuena is impressive but not as impressed with <br /> others in the organization. <br /> Dan Ayers: S&W would be his choice. Have 1.000 more hours of work budgeted, $ - 9 price <br /> range. SEA has lower end people working on the project. Regina Villa does good work. <br /> Torn spoke with someone at MEA who said special procedures is flexible process agreed to by <br /> town and Sec. of environmental affairs. They have a model approach but is clone on a case by <br /> ease basis. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.