Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Repairs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
War Memorial repair transfer tabled while DPW provides technical details on leaks and waterproofing
Summary
The finance subcommittee tabled a $30,000 transfer request for War Memorial building repairs after members requested further detail from the Department of Public Works on whether waterproofing of the elevator pit is needed in addition to steam-pipe repairs.
The Holyoke City Council finance subcommittee tabled a $30,000 transfer request intended to fund repairs and waterproofing at the War Memorial building, citing unanswered technical questions from the Department of Public Works (DPW).
The transfer as presented would reallocate $30,000 from the capital stabilization account to cover waterproofing of an elevator pit, repiping steam return lines, and a $5,000 contingency for unforeseen issues. Laddie (surname not provided), a War Memorial commissioner who attended the meeting, described the problem: “after our repairs, we did notice that there was an area that water was seeping in,” and said the commission seeks to waterproof the elevator pit and correct condensate-return piping to preserve a recently renovated elevator.
Committee members pressed for technical detail. Councilor Sullivan asked whether investigators had determined the water’s source and whether fixing the condensate return would eliminate the need to waterproof the pit. Laddie and other speakers indicated the leak stems from damaged condensate-return piping and backflow issues; they said temporary measures have halted active spread of water but that a more permanent solution is needed.
Why it was tabled: Several members worried the request lacked adequate engineering detail and cost breakdown. Councilors noted they had seen an earlier 2009 proposal to waterproof the building and raised concerns about waiting several months since the problem was first identified. Committee members proposed tabling the item until Carl (DPW), who was unavailable at the meeting, could provide estimates and explain why both piping repairs and waterproofing are required.
Next steps: The chair accepted a motion to table the item so DPW can return with a fuller scope, cost estimates and documentation, including whether the recent elevator work is under warranty and whether the waterproofing is a preventative step or required by unresolved site conditions.
Ending: The subcommittee unanimously voted to table the request. Members said they are willing to consider the transfer at a future meeting after receiving clear technical justification from DPW.
