We need to INCREASE the hours at the TS for safety

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

We need to INCREASE the hours at the TS for safety

Postby Dennis King » Tue Nov 18, 2003 3:54 pm

An increase in the TS hours would reduce the traffic by speading the traffic over a greater time.

Certainly this would make things safer.

It really should be looked at in terms of increasing the convenience for the taxpayers and for safety for the LR residents. The extra costs would be minimal and well worth it.

Just think of the $100,000 extra we paid so we could have more trucks traveling over the bridges (which as it turns out, were safe).

Dick Hinch supported increasing the weight of the trucks to reduce the number of trips. Increasing the hours reduces the number of cars at a given time thus making LR more safe. Same logic for the same reason.

I think this idea has merit and should be explored.

I would suggest Tues-Saturday 7AM-7PM

Dennis
User avatar
Dennis King
 
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2003 10:37 am

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:02 pm

Hmmmmm................that would increase the labor costs 50%.

Oops I stand corrected.......it would actually be much more because the additional 20 hours per week per employee would be at time and a half.

Great suggestion, but I like the point you've made about all costs being on the tipping fee better. I agree with your analysis.....a fuill cost tipping fee will not discourage private collection and therefore could eliminate the cost to the taxpayer. Very good.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby Dennis King » Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:11 pm

True, we would need to hire a couple of part timers for the extra hours but I think we need to realize safety is a factor. We spent $100,000 in the interest of safety (turned out to be a red herring), I think we would all benefit from the increased hours.

As for tipping fee and PAYT,

tipping fee,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, $60-80, rest with taxes

PAYT, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NO a big waste of time, money, and effort

Dennis
User avatar
Dennis King
 
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2003 10:37 am

Postby RBarnes » Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:15 pm

Hey I'm totally with Dennis on this one... safety should be put first.

Let's hold off opening the station and pay for a month or two of curbside to make sure the road is safe.

Let's hire 20 more employees and keep the station open 24/7.

And in another year or two when curbside is once again put up to a vote people will see the 1.8 million a year we'd be paying with curbside and see we spend 3 or 4 million a year to run a SAFE transfer station.

Good suggestion Dennis, I'm writing the BOS with the idea right away!
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby RBarnes » Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:18 pm

Mark Fitzgerald wrote:Hmmmmm................that would increase the labor costs 50%.

Oops I stand corrected.......it would actually be much more because the additional 20 hours per week per employee would be at time and a half.


Mark, I would think the town would just hire a couple more employees so not to over work the 6 already there. Benefits, additional wages… hmm wouldn’t be cheap. But hey Dennis is right on the nose, safety should outrank all costs.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby RBarnes » Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:19 pm

Dennis King wrote:We spent $100,000 in the interest of safety (turned out to be a red herring)


Please expand on just what you think was a red herring. I'm interested in knowing.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:19 pm

$60-$80 /ton???????

How much do you think the taxpayer's can take to keep your buddies viable?????

Where is lowerrtaxes when we need him/her?

:D :D :D :D
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:23 pm

PAYT, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NO a big waste of time, money, and effort


Wait a minute, I must be dreaming. The man who wants fair taxation is against..........fair taxation.

I guess the EPA, NHDES, Old SWAC, Ad-hoc SWAC and every previous BOS were wrong about this........and Dennis is right. Thank God he is there.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby Dennis King » Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:49 pm

Keeping on topic,

An increase in hours should reduce the traffic density. I also agree we need to fast track the repair for the farm house curve and should continue to use a flagger in the interium.

Since we are throwing the trash on the TS floor, perhaps we could stagger the hours needed during the week without hiring new employees.

This could be a win win situation.

Greater safety and greater access.

Dennis
User avatar
Dennis King
 
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2003 10:37 am

Postby RBarnes » Wed Nov 19, 2003 8:17 am

Ok in all serious Dennis; let me explain why this idea will not work...

People in general work during the days. The traffic during the week is not that bad. The traffic from residents comes on Sunday. Opening the station Mondays and longer hours during the week will accomplish very little other then wasting large amounts of taxpayers’ dollars.

Since the residential traffic is low during the week, with the majority of it being the haulers, I see no reason why would couldn't cut back one or two weekdays. It wouldn't create an inconvenience to cut back day hours since most resident do not use it during the daytime hours. So your argument falls flat.

Further more if you were really concerned about traffic safety then you would have been against the Lawrence Rd. location for the TS from the start. I’ve said this before and I’ll now say it again to remind you… safety issues isn’t so much the volume of traffic as much as the TYPE of traffic. HUGE tractor-trailer that just can’t handle the turns in the narrow country roads leading to and from the site. The need for the flagman isn’t due to massive amounts of traffic, it’s due to the fact that the huge trucks cross far into oncoming traffic lanes.

http://home.adelphia.net/~lildog/Merrimack.htm
Look at the pictures of the trucks handling the farmhouse turn and the S as well as the Bedford Rd Bridge. It has nothing to do with volume of traffic as much as SIZE of the traffic. Hours of operation will do very little to stop that. If you are seriously concerned about safety Dennis, then you would DEMAND that the town halt opening the site until the roads leading to and from the site are safe enough to handle the SIZE of traffic they will be required to handle.

One lastly, the overall traffic IS a problem to local residents whether it is spread out over 1 day or 5 it will still be a problem to the local residents. That is why the town would be better off LIMITING the hours of use rather then INCREASE it’s usage. Since volume isn’t the problem we would want the off work hours of operation to stay at a minimum to decrease the impact on residents. So cutting back Saturday hours to just 4 hours total would actually HELP more then it would harm. After all, the town did pick a residential area for the TS and with that comes responsibilities to those resident. If they wanted unlimited hours they should have suggested an industrial area where the hours of operation wouldn’t have mattered.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby RBarnes » Wed Nov 19, 2003 4:50 pm

Since we are on the topic here of road safety in regards to the TS I have a question (Mark, Norm or hopefully a BOS member I hope someone can answer this)...

On June 21st 2002 there was a highway safety meeting. Fran, her husband bob, the chief of police and others were all in attendance. At the meeting they addressed 3 points of concern along the route to the TS site. They were the farmhouse turn, the Bedford Rd Bridge and what they called the Joppa and Bedford Rd triangle intersection (although I consider that still part of the Bedford Rd Bridge area. They pointed out a number of safety concerns such as the fact Lawrence Rd. averages 3 accidents a year, which for a road that at the time had 17 homes on it is VERY high. They concluded that BEFORE a transfer station is to be built on that site extensive studies of the roads would have to be done to determine road safety and most likely those three points would need to be corrected PRIOR to the TS's opening. They also made a point to question if there was a catastrophe and the Bedford Rd Bridge was taken out there should be another key route for traffic.

My question is this, were the studies ever done and if so were can I see the results and if not I would like to know why the town felt they should ignore the recommendation of the highway safety committee? Further more what would the alternate route, which was discussed, be?

I would like to thank a VERY good friend for supplying me with the tape of this meeting, it was very enlightening.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack


Return to Solid Waste, Landfill & Recycling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron