Laserfiche WebLink
Breadcrumb Navigation:
351 <br />this property but the Water Department had not had a chance <br />to locate it yet. Mr. Wrightington said that the Town <br />might have some further cause for action if it is found that <br />the townts water pipe is damaged or town property is being <br />endangered. He said that in the process of excavation, they <br />might leave holes that may hold water and endanger the public <br />health, but he did not believe that would be so, as they said <br />they were going to strip down to the sub -soil only. <br />Mr.. Sarano moved that the Town Counsel be instructed <br />to ,claim an appeal and take the necessary subsequent steps <br />until the Board directs him to the contrary in the case of <br />Lexington vs. Menotomy Trust Co. and John Cadario. Mr. Rowse <br />seconded the motion and it was so voted. They retired. <br />Mr. Harrison P. Eddy, Mr. Raymond and Mr. Wrightington <br />appeared before the Board. <br />Mr. Eddy read a letter from Metcalf & Eddy as follows: <br />June 26, 1939. <br />Board of Selectmen <br />Lexington, Mass. <br />Gentlemen: <br />As agreed in our letter of a week ago, we wish to make <br />a further report regarding the contract of Mr. A. P. Rounds, <br />with the Town for the construction of the North Lexington <br />Sewerage system pumping station. <br />Upon inquiry of the bonding company we find that their <br />investigation led to no recommendation for expediting the <br />work. <br />Under the contract (page 52, Section 30) there are two Rounds <br />possible grounds under which the contract might be terminated;Contract <br />one under Par. d, which is based on refusal or failure to <br />pursue the work with such diligence as will insure its <br />completion within the contract time or any duly authorized <br />extension thereof; and the other under Par. f7, is based on <br />the Contractor's failure or refusal to regard laws and <br />ordinances. <br />It is extremely doubtful whether the Contractor can <br />complete the work within the contract time, even were this <br />to',be extended a few weeks on account of delays, as has <br />been requested by the Contractor. A number of well-established <br />labor law violations have been recorded. <br />In considering the Town's interest in either continuing <br />' with this contract or terminating it, the following matters <br />should be understood. If the contract is to be terminated , <br />presumably the work would be completed by readvertising and <br />