September 10, 2009

Turning up the heat

A proposal to turn off the furnace at a little-used former school is generating plenty of heat at City Hall.
At a time when city officials are scrambling to find ways to hang on to taxpayers’ cash, one source of savings could be to turn off the boiler at the 165 Hill St. building that’s only used for a little storage.
Fire Chief Jon Pose, whose department controls the old South Chippens School, said there’s no reason to leave the heat on. He said it costs almost $10,000 a year to keep the place heated to 50 degrees during cold weather.
But Public Works Director Walter Veselka said that turning off the heat would cause so much damage to occur that future repairs would far exceed the cost of maintaining it now – if the 73-year-old building could be used at all.
City councilors urged the Board of Finance to come up with the money to keep the heat on this winter. The only dissenter was city Councilor Ken Cockayne, who said that leaving the furnace off for a couple of years wouldn’t harm the building.
Finance board members said last winter they were deeply skeptical of the need to heat the building, which is next door to Engine 2. They did not include any money in the budget to cover the tab.
City Councilor Cliff Block said he has a house in Vermont that he leaves without heat every winter after draining its pipes. He said it’s been fine for 20 years.
But Veselka said the old school has a “very moist” basement and the plaster walls would deteriorate quickly if the air is too frigid.
Pose said the walls are already in bad shape and he doesn’t think they’d worsen much.
He said the city should use the building only for cold storage. Someday, he said, the structure may be torn down to make way for a renovation of the neighboring firehouse.
Minor said that if the city isn’t going to turn on the heat, it should demolish the building or lease it out.
Pose said that if the city rents it out, the lease should be short-term so that it won’t get in the way of any firehouse project down the line.
The structure has been vacant since the nonprofit CW Resources moved out a year and a half ago for new quarters on Broad Street. It had been paying $1 a year to use the building since 1974.
The site has been used as a school since 1755, when a one-room school was put up there. After a fire destroyed an early building, the existing one was erected in 1936. It remained open until about 1970, officials said.
The property is assessed for nearly $500,000.

*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

If the chief wants this building, he needs to take care of it in the proper way. The people who are in "the know" have said it will deteriorate if not heated in some form. If that's the case, then do it otherwise we will waste money in keeping it and then having to tear it down when it falls apart. Mr. Cokayne, it seems to me you are the only no vote because you want to seem like you are attempting to save the public money. It's obvious you are pandering to us and you are only doing what you think looks good to the public. Yes, we do like to see fiscal prudence, but not when it means that a building will become structurally unsafe and then be of no use to anyone but the bulldozers.

Anonymous said...

Mr Cockayne, you ought to go on Jeopardy. You have all the answers.

Anonymous said...

...The ultimate use of the building will be demolition for future expansion of the fire department that is next door. Heating the building is just wasting money to prolong the life of a building we intend to tear down in the future anyway. The best idea would be to lease or sell the building, or to leave it completely alone and use it for cold storage. Ken was right on with his vote, too bad the rest of the council is too blind to see this waste of money. Then again, they are responsible for the mess we are in, so it's not surprising.

NOT mine said...

Hey .... maybe the council should consider snow removal on the missle test site across from city hall so that the lighting system won't go to waste .

That would be yet another way for them to waste our tax dollars .

Anonymous said...

Pose is 100% correct - waste of money to heat the building. Let it go to pot afterall the city will tear it down anyway. Seems the Mayor is trying to pawn this building off so he doesn't have to deal with it. Pass the buck Mayor you are really good at that.

Anonymous said...

Maybe we could turn into a crack house supported by welfare monies so our less fortunate have a place to smoke. Just a thought.

Anonymous said...

How big is this building? $10k to heat??

Steve Collins said...

I think the maintenance also includes cutting grass and shoveling snow, but most of the expense is for heat.

Anonymous said...

DO WE REALLY TRUST OUR DEPT HEADS TO MAKE A DECISION.

Anonymous said...

Its a historic structure, even though its not the original. They should take appropriate steps to protect it.

Anonymous said...

9:36 am NO. THEY JUST COLLECT A CHECK AND THE MAYOR DOSEN`T HOLD THEM ACCOUTABLE FOR ANYTHING.THAT`S WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS CITY. I HOPE AS A TAX PAYER WE GET SOME NEW BLOOD IN THIS TOWN, GET RID OF THE GOOD OLD GUY DEMS.

Anonymous said...

Bristol has a lot of people just collecting checks. A lot of possitions in bristol being abused.

Anonymous said...

Where is Stortz, now that we really need him?

Anonymous said...

12:26 Probably taking a nap.

Anonymous said...

1:44

I doubt it.

I see Stortz almost every day woprking out at Golds.

Seems to be in pretty good shape to me.

Anonymous said...

Even if he took an occaisonal nap, he would still be a better choice than what we have or what the other choice is.

Anonymous said...

Too bad the Republicans don't turn up the heat on the democrats.

Actually they would have to turn it on first.

Anonymous said...

The Republicans blew it when they didn't try to get Stortz to run