[Board-2017] Fwd: Preliminary Review of Underwood Water System Study

[Nancy Gulley]

Thought I would continue to send info on the water problem in New Castle.
This is something that could put an enormous amount of stress on our
finances.
Nanc

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <aptarlton at comcast.net>
Date: Monday, November 14, 2016
Subject: Preliminary Review of Underwood Water System Study
To: Dennis Dinsmore <dgdinsmore at comcast.net>, Jeff Reilly <
reillyjeff at gmail.com>, Laura Ludes <ludesl at comcast.net>, Andrew Moore <
amtmoore at comcast.net>, Nancy Gulley <nancgulley at gmail.com>, Len Seagren <
laseagren at comcast.net>, Rita Fusco <r.p.fusco at prodigy.net>, Sugden Murphy <
Mickseadog at gmail.com>, Sara <lynnsrb at comcast.net>, Dave McCArdle <
dnmc at comcast.net>, Irene Bush <irbush at comcast.net>, Craig Strehl <
Cfstrehl at sbcglobal.net>, VJ Strehl <vjstrehl1 at gmail.com>, Sandra Bisset <
bissetconsulting at comcast.net>, Paul Hamblett <phamblett at aol.com>, Jane Finn
<rimplefinn at gmail.com>, John Small <jwilliamnh at gmail.com>, Teddy Golter <
teddyg at comcast.net>, Nancy Borden <Nancy at nancyborden.com>, Peter Rice <
mayorduckshead at comcast.net>, Bob Rais <esrcr53 at yahoo.com>, Jim Zuckerman <
james_zuckerman at hms.harvard.edu>, Ann <annhtarlton at gmail.com>, William
Smith <willsmith975 at yahoo.com>, Jim Munton <j.munton at comcast.net>, Jim Rini
<nhimager at gmail.com>, Terri Golter <terri.golter at comcast.net>, Grant
Drumheller <Grant.drumheller at unh.edu>, Bill Cronin <
bill.cronin at quickservicesllc.com>, Reggie Whitehouse <elmct at aol.com>, Sam
Asano <sasano at cablynx.com>, Andy Schulte <andyschu1 at aol.com>, Barbara Moore
<barbaramoore at aol.com>, Rich Ferdinand <raferdinand at comcast.net>, Bill
Duncan <waduncan at gmail.com>


Some of us have read and discussed the Executive Summary of the recent
study by Underwood Engineering of the New Castle Water System. Selected
highlights and some preliminary interpretations follow:

1. The present system has woefully deficient capacity to provide proper
fire fighting water

    a. The largest gap between current flow rates and ISO Needed Fire Flows
(gallons per minute) exists in the area of highest risk – downtown large
structures and closely spaced historic district homes; Wild Rose Lane and
Wentworth Road on the Portsmouth side are also very high risk areas
    b. The fragile Odiorne water supply pipeline is currently inoperable,
to mitigate leaks, so that current water flows in some areas would
therefore be overstated in the study

2. Possible Solutions will likely cost around $9 million:

    a. New 12 inch diameter pipe in a loop from Portsmouth to-around New
Castle, or
    b. 140 feet high water tower with four hours of supply to entire island
of New Castle

    Note: It will be important to know if the recommended 12” pipes are
based on current levels of water consumption and fire fighting demand, or
for projected increases over the next 30 – 50 years, particularly if older
homes are replaced with larger structures and/or residents install an
increasing number of sprinkler systems. These are important considerations,
because actual fire fighting flow rates are the total flow capacity minus
operational flows (household uses for showers, laundry, dishwashing, et
al), which fluctuate during the day and night, demands being higher during
the early morning and early evening.

3. New Castle depends upon Portsmouth for water supply, as well as their
willingness to act and their bond underwriting capacity for water
infrastructure

    a. Our New Castle Select Board will soon meet with Portsmouth officials
to explore the feasibility, timing and enthusiasm for different courses of
action
    b. Funding may be available with 50 – 70 year bond duration,
appropriate for subject infrastructure (reduced tax impact from a longer
amortization period)
    c. Interest rates are likely to rise, perhaps strongly and quickly,
such that interest costs could be reduced by earlier, decisive action

   Note: the conveyance of the New Castle Water District to Portsmouth has
been mentioned on many occasions by the Select Board. Some believe that
such a step should be considered only after system upgrades have been
accomplished, to avoid the possible risk of further delays (due to New
Castle possibly being a lower budgetary priority in City of Portsmouth
deliberations).

4. Underwood presented a five year project to complete the installation of
the 12” pipe system

    a. Five equipment set ups and takedowns might be more expensive than
get-it-done-in-one complete loop operation
    b. The above highest risk area would not be addressed until the third
of five annual projects, if and once approved
    c. There are many aspects to this project and likely many public
opinions to be considered, all consuming time (these include financing,
respective New Castle and Portsmouth responsibilities, timetables, et al)
    d. One could describe a process schedule for
“consider-approve-fund-install”
that required 7-9 years - before safe levels of fire fighting water would
be available to protect residents, firefighters, homes and historic identity

5. The Select Board has the desire and responsibility to do the right thing
to avoid a repeat of the Tarbell “game changer” fire

    a. They next meet on Monday, November 21 at 7 pm in New Castle Town Hall
    b. We should attend, ask questions, and encourage them to undertake an
effort to solve the problem sooner rather than later
        - Get approval at 2017 Town Annual Meeting for the entire amount to
minimize interest costs, while securing 50 – 70 year bonds
        - Raise funds to complete the project in one year instead of five
years
    c. If the essential 12 inch upgrade will be stretched out for too long
a period, interim steps must be explicitly defined to reduce the risks in
highest risk areas?

We have a voice. Let’s help!

Peter Tarlton
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://portsmouthyc.org/pipermail/board_portsmouthyc.org/attachments/20161114/6a6f47c9/attachment.htm>