CCAgenda_95Jan11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

and would not be :available as a permanent public works a itraticm site. This property, while not the most convenient lo for several of the partner cotrhmunities, s closer than the alternative landfill site. A long-term solution will be sought curing the grant period. The ,goal would be t6 x a larger mot of Land more central for the partners, suds as the old Army Arsenal party in Arden Hills. A�second difficulty will be in finding the best operations to processing the material. However, equipment vendors and other sources can be used to help suggest proper adjustments for the equipment and other material handling techniques. 1 A third will be to calculate the appropriate cots of processing the materials. To some degree, much of the needed information is already known. Other information will be collected during the process and added into the equations. ft would appear that costs will be more accurately determined as the p,arject evolves. Formalizing operations an being awarded a service sharing grant to carry out this project, the partner ,o oxnmunities that will directly benefit from the troject will formalize their operations through a written agreement that defines all partuers's relationships. i 'tloject Budget The Aroposed project includes an estimated budget of $198,265. This includes amounts of $92,000 of grant funds and $100,265 or in -kind funds from the participating con mxtnitics. Table 3 shows the major areas and cost estimates for each. dz i -kind resoi rem include ?mine, mineptrient and a site for pioneasing this material. The fonds for hose rt ortrees are from p p� C resgetive ootarnunity's general operating fund for that par�,ular function_ ere ::re several reasons which prompt the partner communities 'to seek grant funds for this proposal. These iiio}ude 7ifo" ,..i ..--i, .ne environment and concern for providing cost -effective services. Underlying these is the fact that none of t° partners are large enough to initiate this service on its own. r =or he -environment is a key reason why these communiiirs are pursuing this proposal. Highway maintenance riionnel have the clinic= of ice e.ontmi_ One is to use an aggregate, like mod, to reduce the danger of driving on ;crew and ice-packed maids. A cccond is to ttse l00 percent de-aver, such as salt or chlorides. This choice has other onsequences for the environment. The third is to use a combination of the two, with more use of and than salt. Although rand is a cneep, non- rene:vabie resource, :raving to deal with it atter the winter is prone of a problem, The second reason is the rxu a ern to provide cost- ctfcetivv services. Citizens are very concerned and alert to increases in the cost of their government. The partner commimiiies see the proverbial handwriting on the wall —costs will rise Jratnatically if alternative ways to deal with street sweepings are not end_ lrte proposed technology might well be the theme aohitten to boning to provide 3aft streets and highways to the motoring public. This technolog needs to be dceloped and refined so others can benefit as well. if we -t:rt preparing bcforu the newt becomes overwhelming, coats to taxpayers will not need to raise. 1 Pihaily, operations such as that proposed by member cammunities are naturals for the joint participation of several smaller co mmunitiea. T+rrrherntore, success at such an operation may have a carry -over effect, leading to additional multi- jurisdiction operations. Grant Prripysal Wage 6