A new Department of Public Works (DPW) facility is a high priority, according to Seekonk town officials.
Following the rejection of the $40 million project at last fall’s town meeting, the project is likely to be revived.
The Select Board met with members of the DPW Building Committee on Wednesday to discuss how to move forward.
The facility would have been located on Town-owned land at 351 Fall River Avenue. The proposed design was for a 61, 815 square-foot building.
“If we’re going to be married to the site, let’s do it,” said member Justin Sullivan. “We need to get the resources and the funding. We can play with the budget and the engineering and a few other things, but that’s not moving the needle. We need to move the needle on this building. This building is a high priority for this town.”
Sullivan proposed putting an article establishing a building committee on the warrant for the Spring Town Meeting. Time is of the essence, according to Sullivan: “Every day is a wasted day for the guys at DPW. We’re going to have some other issues as the building continues to fail and these guys use duct tape, super glue, and bubble gum to keep it together.”
“We need a new DPW,” said Chair Michelle Hines. “We can’t keep neglecting things.”
The building is “already way past its lifetime,” said member Pam Pozzi. “We need to keep moving forward.”
Sullivan estimated the DPW would cost between $25 - 30 million.
The DPW Building Committee outlined the need for a new building on their webpage:
· Repairs/renovations needed would not fulfill the DPW’s current needs.
· Administrative spaces are insufficient for the current staff and lack infrastructure for security, technology, communication and energy efficiency.
· Crew spaces lack basic necessity for continuous operations, including restrooms, locker rooms, showers, and storage.
· Undersized service bays.
· Fleet and equipment exposed to the elements causing shortened equipment life.
· Lack of vehicle wash bay
A debt exclusion, which is a temporary tax increase to pay for the bonds on the project, was also rejected by voters in last November’s special election. 1,967 residents, representing 15.59 percent of eligible voters, cast ballots. 353 were in favor with 1614 in opposition. The average Single Family Tax Bill Impact would have been $267 a year for a period of 30 years.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here