
HARPSWELL
The pier at Mitchell Field has been demolished — on time and under budget.
That’s what Mark Eyerman, Harpswell’s town planner, said Wednesday, who said all that remains is to ensure that all debris have been removed from the seabed and from around Mitchell Field.
“Reed & Reed, the town’s lead contractor, did a sonar survey of the bottom of the seabed last week,” Eyerman said. “That will determine whether there’s any additional cleanup. This is the final sweep, if you will.”
Unless something unexpected arises from the sonar survey, the remaining cleanup work should be completed by the end of September.
The project began early this year, with the contractor demolishing the pier, using cranes to remove the pieces of the structure to land at Mitchell Field, where it was then transported offsite.
First used as a fuel terminal 65 years ago, the pier had not been in use since the Navy abandoned the property more than two decades ago. It had deteriorated, with parts of it collapsing into the ocean. With no use for it and understanding it would be cheaper to remove the structure before it collapsed further, the town opted to remove it.
The project is set to come in far below the $5 million approved by voters at the annual Town Meeting. Reed & Reed was the low bidder for the project, estimating that it would cost $3,157,765 to complete the demolition and removal. In December, that estimate was reduced by $125,250 due to a change in billing that reduced some equipment needs, leaving the contract amount at $3,032,515.
“At this point, we’re projecting that the cost will come in substantially under that” Eyerman said, “probably in the range of $250,000 less.
“Reed & Reed and their subcontractor, Ray Labbe, have been extremely professional,” he added. “I think they would get high marks from everybody in the town.”
nstrout@timesrecord.com
The Times Record Sustaining Sponsor
We believe a community must be informed to thrive. bowdoin.edu
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less