Table 1 Summary of local agency survey responses
From: Design of local roadway infrastructure to service sustainable energy facilities
County | Is the plant operational? | General response | Upgrades performed |
|---|---|---|---|
Cass | Yes | No response | Unsure |
Grant | No | No upgrades were performed on county roads. The nearest state highway was widened to accommodate the large-radius turning paths of long trucks. The plant does not have a county access road. | No |
Henry | Yes | The plant is located right adjacent to a state highway; thus, there was no need for any upgrades. However, roads are deteriorating quickly, and there is no funding from the state or other sources. | No |
Jasper | Yes | No provisions were needed because the plant is located adjacent to a state highway. | No |
Jay | Yes | Upgrades were performed on county roads. The plant created a tax increment financing (TIF) district, and the new roads were paid for using the money from the bonds sold. Upgrades included widening and resurfacing of a section of a county road. The main problem is that truck drivers do not always use that route; thus, other roadways may deteriorate. | Yes |
Kosciusko | Yes | The Highway supervisor expressed concern about the highways. Attempts were made to get funds to perform repairs. No legal agreement between the plant and the county was made | No |
Lake | No | No response | No |
LaPorte | No | No response | No |
Madison | Yes | No response | Unsure |
Montgomery | Yes | No response | No |
Posey | Yes | There are two plants; one is adjacent to a state highway, the other is not. The latter required road upgrades. The upgrades were paid for through setting up a TIF district. Also, there were two low-volume roads that the plant wanted to build a bridge over. The county engineers were able to reach to an agreement with the commissioners to close these two roads, saving the expense of building an overpass. In return, the county received one million dollars which they used to repair and upgrade highways. The upgrades included mainly 5 to 7.5Â cm of resurfacing on access roads. | Yes |
Putnam | No | No response | No |
Randolph | Yes | The plant built a private access road to a county road that was partly upgraded. The county is currently working on an agreement with the plant to upgrade the roads used by farmers. | Yes |
Shelby | Yes | No response | Unsure |
Wabash | Yes | The county established a TIF district in the area to be developed. The county performed road upgrades which included digging up the existing pavement, placing a 33- to 38-cm Portland cement-stabilized soil and HMA on top. The project cost was $1.2 million. The county was later reimbursed by the plant (as agreed before the start of the project by selling TIF district bonds). The county also received an economic development stimulus from the state of Indiana. | Yes |
Wells | Yes | There were no upgrades performed. However, there were discussions at the time of construction that the plant had a budget set for upgrading the roadway. Due to technical difficulties on the county/city side, the roads were not upgraded. The plant did not spend any of the allocated budget. The county engineers tried to mitigate the damage by channelizing the truck traffic produced by the plant onto roadways that could accommodate the traffic. The county engineers provided this channelization through verbal coordination with truck companies and drivers. The highway supervisor stated that the truck companies were very cooperative. | No |