Dartmouth has a couple of very large buildings in storage (160ft by 70 ft and 200 ft by 100 ft, I think) that could be used to store equipment. The buildings are called Sprung Instant Structures and are easy and cheap to erect. These buildings are federal government surplus and were procured through the Harbormaster's efforts. Many town departments, police, DPW, Parks, COA, Harbormaster, and others have a need to store equipment that is not in everyday use. Currently the storage is a hodge podge of buildings, parking lots and sheds in locations throughout the town. Erecting one or more of these buildings would give the town a central location for storage of the equipment. The buildings are fabric covered ...
... and the manufacturer needs to inspect and repair the covering before the structure is erected. There is a request on the Fall Town Meeting Warrant for capital improvement funds to get one of these buildings built. The proposed location is behind the police station on Russell's Mills Road.
I think it is a good use of the town's funds. Some of the equipment is being stored outside and in open sheds where it is being degraded by constant exposure to the elements. This building could extend the life of that equipment. Additionally the building would consolidate of the storage in one location, cutting down time and miles. The Finance Committee is not so sure. I hope that Town Meeting will approve this funding request.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Sprung buildings
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Bill,
The subject of the 'Sprung Buildings' has been around for a couple years now. It was originally intended for these buildings ( there are two of them )to be used to consolidate DPW & Water Dept vehicles and operations into one area. The economics came from shuttering the outlying buildings currently being used, but to date there is no agreement to close these 'other' buildings.
Additionally, the $95K requested is not the whole cost. These buildings need a foundation, then will require electricity and lighting, a poured floor and doors and on and on. The costs are open ended and still with no identified savings.
It is impossible to equate the vehicles being under cover with extending their useful life. I can not think of a case where a piece of equipment was needed to be replaced because of weathering.
Bottom line: I would need to see some defined cost savings that would justify the expenditure of $95K +++ along with an estimate of just what the final cost will be. To date there is no such information available.
Greg Lynam / Fin Com
These buildings will only need a slab. A foundation and a poured floor are not two different expenses, also town vehicles being under cover will extend the life of the body of the vehicle,especially compared to those vehicles left out in the weather all year. Corrosion will occur alot sooner if left outside.
Why do they make covers for cars? To protect them from the weather. Remember these vehicles also have electronics installed and any adverse weathe cant help with corrosion and malfunction of the electronics. Maybe that's what is intended, job security.
Ok Mr.Lynam so your against an investment that would provide protection for our investments.
Post a Comment