July 17, 2011

$1,200,000 Sewer Line

Telegram has story on the Common Ground sewer line.   The total cost was $1,200,000!!!!!!!!!   Of which $1,000,000 is being paid by us, the tax-payers.  This whole story is amazing, but I bet the City Council will not even discuss it.

Here is the bottom line. The City of Worcester becomes partners in all of these no-lo housing developments and have a vested interest in keeping these projects viable.   The original project cost $16,000,000 of which the City/State has given funds (grants to Common Ground) to build this no-lo project.  The developer, Common Ground, in turn, does not have to pay back these grants as long as they maintain the units as no-lo for a certain affordability period (typically 15 years).

If for some reason the projects goes under the City/State has to pay back all the grant monies that they gave Common.   Bottom line spending an extra $1,000,000 now on a sewer line will be cheaper then having to pay back all the grant monies that they gave Common Ground in the first place.   This sewer line has became a "community responsibility" , because the community has a s---load of money invested already here.

Let me make this very clear there was no "actual responsibility" for the tax-payers to kick-up $1,000,000 for this sewer line.    Next time a road is not paved, a pool can not be opened or there is no money for summer impact police, remember we diverted $1,000,000 to this sewer line.

My favorite line, however, "the city never put anything in writing about risks associated with basement units."     Are you kiddin me.   It is not the City of Worcester's job to warn a developer about risks in developing anything?     If the engineers assured Common Ground, why hasn't Common Ground sued their engineers?????

Also can not help but remember the poor guy up on Vernon Hill a couple years back when a sewer back-up in the street wrecked his house.   Bob Moylan, rightfully so, told him it was not the City's responsibility to repair the home-owner's house.  It was not a "community responsibility". 

This sewer line will not benefit the entire neighborhood, who already have sewer connections along this stretch?   Make no mistakes about the tax-payers had to pony up $1,000, 000 for a sewer line that benefits one party , Common Ground, to save their 8 basement units.      In other words we just spent $150,000 per apartment. 


Steve Foley said...

The Washacum Village Homeowner's Association in Sterling recently built a sewage system (shared septic type) serving 75 homes, 134 bedrooms for $1,500,000.

How did the City of Worcester choose the contractor who repaired a sewer line for $1,200,000?

Paraphrasing from Jack Nicholson in "As Good as it Gets": How do you make a politician? Start with a man and take away reason and accountability.

Bill Randell said...


Not their money, they don't care how much it costs. $1,200,000 to run a sewer line to benefit 8 basement apartments and nobody is outraged?

The tax-payers of Worcester deserve what they get.


Paulie's Point of View said...

It is evident that little is cared about.....we do not have enough qualified urban planners working for the city....how many times does a story come out on Woo Common Ground before someone anyone of importance stops giving Woo Common Ground....they are not qualified for these projects...

Side bar.....Wilson at Baba Sushi is moving in to my historic renovation behind his restaurant...he is also looking at Store 16 next door....I have a.manager of the Woburn "Boston Athletic Club" also moving in to a flat.....some light was starting to show in the tunnel.....now SMOC....oy vey is all this plastic paddy can say!

Bill Randell said...

$1,200,000 spent on a sewer line to keep afloat eight 350,000 No-lo income apartments.

Nobody sees a problem with that?? City of Worcester is on the move all right......

signman said...

prevailing wages... government job...plus what Bill said... don't care how much...

Jahn said...

I dont have the articel in front of me but seesm to me a city official said some tot he effect Worc has a moral obligation to fund this ......huh???

Back flow preventers failed....is that plural as in multiple back flow preventers?? No one like the sewer line contractor or the back flow preventer manufacturer is held liable??......makes no senseme. No pun but these explantions stink.

The explanations in thsi article would never hold water if these exlpantions were touted on a witness stand.

I am thouroughly disgusted and bill u deserve all the credit for exposoning thsi to Sutner. aND you werent mentioned at all??? Maybe that was your choice?

Cheaper to just demolish the basement apts and forget about em.

Who OK'ed the spending of this taxpayer money and when?

Jahn said...

Couple otehr comments I forgot last night. Not thinking too clearly in this heat.

So if thsi project has 42(?) apts and $16M (?) was spent....thats $380,000 per apt then add in another $150,000 to revive the basement apts and we have $530,000 for the 8(?) basemtn apts. To the best of my knowledge, that breaks the record for low income apts in Worc, Hadley Buliding at Mian & Madison I believe came in at $513,000 per unit

Anotehr oddity i noted when reading this is that the CEO at ECoN Dev'ment and Neighborhood Services was not quoted in the article, yet the the CEO at DPW was interviewed/questioned. Maybe someone is on vacation, but I dont think the deputies in this dept s/b answering T&G inquiries on this issue. It should come right from the horses mouth.

OT HERE, but I been wondering WHERE'S BLUTO GONE?

Also OT here but we'd like to place a new DWP garage/facility ALmost in Hillbury vs. the central location it now enjoys. Makes no sense to me. What about response time to DPW emergencies in north Worcester? Can you say delayed??. Why does the bus company get a nice new, relativley central location like Quinsigamond Ave, yet DPW is eyeing the Worcester Hillbury line for a new facility. What abou tteh old Crompton Knowles site for new DPW plant? Is Qinsigamond Ave too small for DPW? Who does the DPW think they are Walmart, Applebees, or the soon to be new Sams' club locating almost on the Hillbury line.

SignMan , I have asked the prevailing wage question re CDC low in come projects and never gotten an answer . Are you certain they are 'rated' aND'OR "PREVAILING WAGE" JOBS? TThanx.

Also here we go with another heat wave and we have all the politicians and oterh gov't officials telling/warning us about the heat. WHF are we, imibiciles or something? STFU, we know how handle the heat. Sorry for the 'tude. Thank yew.

Jahn said...

Does anyone get a sense of discrimination when a fraternity or a sorority comprised of more more than 3 unrelated occupants is an allowed zoning use (allowed by special permit) in single family residential districts.....YET...a lodging house comprised of 3 or more unrelated individuals is not an allowed use.

As some would say, look at it this way. If you own a 3 decker in a college neighborhood or anywhere for that matter and you want rent one floor to 4 unrelated college students you are not allowed to do it. Yet this same 3 decker could have all 3 floors occupied by 33 unrelated frat boys or sorority sisters and it is an allowed use.

Is this blatant discrimination in favor of what are basically lodging houses diguised as frats and soroities loaded with college students (frat & Sorority folks)....yet the same structure loaded with NON fraternity and/or non sorority types is an illegal use in single family districts.

Where is Shaun, Thomas, and Martha Coakley when the poor, downtrodden lodging house folks are kicked to the curb becuase lodging houses are not allowed in Single famliy RS 10 and RS 7 zoning districts?

It's only a question of time before the city is facing litigation on this issue.

Anonymous said...

heard SMOC is interested in 5 May St http://www.worcestermag.com/blogs/dailyworcesteria/City-council-live-blog-12412-Palmieri-Are-those-25-trains-coming-137998078.html?blog=y