"Where Fillmore County News Comes First"
Saturday, December 7th, 2013
Volume ∞ Issue ∞
- 3:29:59, Nov 27th 2013 - Eric - Good Website ... [Read More]
Fri, Jul 11th, 2003
Posted in Features
Posted in Features
The Rushford City Council held a special meeting Monday night, July 7th to continue discussion of site selection for the city’s planned back-up generator. At their June 23rd meeting the council felt the issue deserved a special meeting because of all the citizen concerns. The July 7th meeting consisted of presentations on four proposed sites with Steve Schreurs of Associated Consultants Engineering, Brian Guenther of PowerPlus Engineering, and Mike Wish of Dairyland Power available for consulting. No audience was given to concerned citizens in attendance even though Eric Hoiland came with another prepared list of questions for the council.
The council discussed again the pros and cons of the three previously presented sites—the substation site, the industrial park, and the bluff. A new site was also presented. Located on West Winona Street (Cemetery Road), the site would cost $262,500 compared to the substation site at $164,500, the industrial park at $333,750, and the bluff site at $312,000. Pros for the Cemetery Road site were that it was cheaper than the bluff or industrial park sites, it was not as close to homes as the substation site, it would not need the 12.47 kV circuit as the industrial park does, it has better access than the substation and bluff sites, and the lines could be all buried underground. Cons for the site were that it was more expensive than the substation site, and there are bluff protection and zoning issues to deal with. The council chose the Cemetery Road site as the new home for the standby generators. The site was considered to be a good compromise with an additional cost of $98,000 over the substation site. That $98,000 difference in cost will amount to a true cost of $200,023 with a repayment at five percent over twenty years. The electric rates will need to be minimally increased to cover that cost. With the substation site there would have been a positive cash flow sooner. The council felt the new site was a "reasonable, sensible compromise," one which would appease residents of the substation site and save money over the more expensive proposed industrial park or bluff site.