Laserfiche WebLink
TO: <br />FROM: <br />DATE: <br />Mayor and City Council <br />Ron Moorse, City Administrator <br />November 5, 1992 <br />y <br />c <br />* <br />44? <br />'*0. <br />SUBJECT: Fuel Storage System for New City Facilities <br />Background - The original analysis concerning the fuel storage <br />system for the new city facilities resulted in a decision to <br />install two 10,000 gallon underground fuel tanks. This decision <br />was based on the following factors. <br />1. <br />2. <br />Provide capacity sufficient for cooperative <br />arrangements with other cities for use of the public <br />works facility and/or services. <br />Because the fuel tanks are a 20 to 30 year <br />investment, the system was planned to be adequate to <br />meet needs for 20 years into the future. <br />3. The tanks were sized to take advantage of potential <br />savings related to large volume purchases. <br />4. The system was designed as an update to the existing <br />fuel storage system. <br />Based on concerns regarding potential future costs related to <br />underground tanks and the cost effectiveness of the fuel storage <br />system, the Council directed a re-analysis of the fuel storage <br />system. The 10,000 gallon fuel tank order has been cancelled and <br />additional alternatives have been reviewed. <br />Fuel Storage System Alternatives - Staff has reviewed four fuel <br />storage alternatives. They are as follows: <br />1. Two 10,000 gallon underground tanks. <br />2. Smaller capacity underground tanks. <br />3. Smaller capacity aboveground tanks. <br />4. Purchase of fuel from private service stations. <br />The following is a summary of the major advantages and dis­ <br />advantages of each alternative. <br />1. Two 10,000 gallon underground fuel tanks <br />A. Advantages <br />1) Provides sufficient capacity to meet needs <br />well into the future <br />2) Would enable the city to take advantage of <br />potential savings related to large volume <br />purchases