From the Department of Public Works via Mr. Cressman
This is related to a bridge inspection that took place several months ago. Due to the inspection weight limits had to be posted and the use of the bridge by District 1 fire apparatus had to be negotiated. This closure is to correct those deficiencies.
David Cressman, Executive Administrator
TOWN OF DARTMOUTH
PUBLIC NOTICE
PROJECT SUBJECT TO WEATHER PERMITTING
BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION
APPONAGANSETT BRIDGE AT GULF ROAD WILL BE CLOSED
Wednesday, April 21 - Friday, April 23, 2010
7:00 AM-5:00 PM
Local Detours Will Be Posted
WE ARE SORRY FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE THIS MAY CAUSE
PER ORDER OF: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
You heard it here first. HA!
Posts
7 comments:
People who drive over the Apponaganstt Bridge/Padanaram bridge should be charged a user fee for the cost of bridge repairs.
Bill
Now that our town is going into the department budget time of the year, why not allow the Hitching-post to become an open forum, so the people can bring up town related issues and have the posters make their comments?? Personally, have have some issues that I'd like to post for discussion. What say you?
You can obviously comment here as you like as you obviously already know. If you would like to post here under your name or a pseudonym, send me an email at pokanoketlax@hotmail.com
and I'll correspond with you about it. I can set you up with rights to post but we have to talk over the ground rules first.
Yes and I think that anyone that drives over town owned pavement should pay a user fee - oh yeah we already do. Its called taxes.
Apponagansett bridge, padanaram bridge are both located in South end of town where all the rich people live. As a liberal left winger, I believe the higher income people should pay more tax/fee's. Allow me to introduce myself. North end white collar worker, who never uses the Apponagansett or padanaram bridge. Dartmouth trash pick up has a pay as you throw program that is called a fee, and 1 or 2 dollar bags to put your garbage inside or the garbage will not be picked up. All this garbage ends up on my side of town. The selectmen should implement a pay as you cross fee for those people who use the above mentioned bridges.
I cant resist..this pay as you throw seems to be working in dartmouths favor, howver New Bedford has seen in INCREASE in the amount of trash it brings to the SAME DUMP. So what did we gain? NOTHING. The dump still take New Bedford trash and Dartmouth's trash and its still the same amounts of trash ! My trash goes to Acushnet which goes to SEMASS..at least the trash is used and not buried in a huge hole on land that cant be used ever again.
To Anon
April 22, 2010 5:34 PM
You said : "New Bedford has seen in INCREASE in the amount of trash it brings to the SAME DUMP. So what did we gain? NOTHING. "
This is incorrect. According to the FY09 District Auditors report, New Bedford's tonnage has decreased by 7,560 tons since FY07 and Dartmouth's tonnage dropped by 6,003 tons. This resulted in a total decrease in tonnage entering the land fill by 40% in FY08 and another 25% in FY09. What you are misinterpreting is the 'ratio' between New Bedford's tonnage and Dartmouth's.
The costs of the landfill, after taking into account other revenues earned, are divided between Dartmouth and New Bedford in proportion to the amount of trash each deposits. Yes ... if Dartmouth's tonnage decreases faster than New Bedford's, due to recycling, then our 'share' of the costs decreases and New Bedford's rises. In other words if New Bedford deposits 80% of the total municipal member refuse then New Bedford pays 80% of the residual costs of running the landfill.
The FY09 reconciliation report provided us on November 13th, 2009 shows Dartmouth's FY09 'share' to be at an all time low of only 10.41%, with New Bedford paying 89.59% of the costs. This is due entirely to citizens participating in recycling efforts. As New Bedford steps up its recycling program we can expect further decreases in the tonnage entering the land fill, thus further extending its life.
As for SEMASS, several communities have approached "The District" and requested inclusion due the rising costs of SEMASS. Such inclusions will NOT increase the amount of refuse entering the landfill. We have a set amount of commercial tonnage that is allowed and non-member communities are considered commercial.
The District Committee will vote shortly on including Freetown and have met with several other interested communities... Acushnet among them.
Greg Lynam
Fin Com
Post a Comment