Concerns raised on salt storage facility site
JANESVILLE — Council member Tom McDonald wants the Janesville City Council to discuss changes to an approved plan to build a $195,000 salt storage facility.
During Monday night's council meeting, McDonald asked that the issue be placed on the agenda for the next meeting, May 11.
The council last year approved borrowing to build a facility with capacity to store 2,000 tons of salt.
One of the justifications then was that it would be built at a remote location to reduce the number of trips to salt storage at the City Services Center, 2200 N. Highway 51.
City administration is now recommending the new shed be built at the City Services Center.
Plow drivers make trips back to the center during a typical shift, and the size of the proposed facility is not necessary at a satellite location, according to a memo from Operations Director John Whitcomb.
McDonald isn't so sure.
"For the expense the project will cost, I think for a major change like that, the council should be briefed on it, the public should be briefed on it, and we should decide whether we need to spend $200,000 to increase our storage capacity," McDonald said.
McDonald said his raising the issue doesn't necessarily mean he's against the changes, but he wants the council to have the discussion.
Whitcomb said maximizing storage capacity remains the primary goal because of negative experiences the last two seasons with salt markets and vendor supply, delivery and cost.
A fabric-on-frame salt storage shed at a remote location would represent about 40 percent of the city's total storage capacity, but it would likely only serve about 28 percent of the routes, according to Whitcomb's memo.
"Storing this much salt at a satellite location could negatively impact the efficiency of operations during extreme seasons," Whitcomb wrote.
City staff had little success finding remote locations, according to an e-mail sent to the council from Jay Winzenz, director of administrative services.
"These are not the most attractive structures, and the vehicle noise (back-up alarms) do not make for great neighbors," he wrote.
May 1, 2009 at 6:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
so build a bigger storage facility for less salt, that dont make sense
Apr 30, 2009 at 5:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
It seems like the city might be reaching the point where satellite facilities could be of use, but just for salt doesn't seem like the best use of money, unless it's intended as the beginning of a larger facility.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.