Neighbors oppose proposed salt/storage barn on Bottom Road; commissioners say they are seeking alternatives

Residents of North Bottom Road urged Morgan County Commissioners on Jan. 8 to reconsider placing a county salt barn or storage facility on a two‑acre parcel the county acquired by eminent domain.

Why it matters: Neighbors said the parcel sits in a floodplain, was taken to straighten a dangerous curve and should not be repurposed for a county building that would increase heavy vehicle traffic, safety risks for children and school buses, and the potential for salt runoff into nearby fields and waterways.

Debbie Harter, who identified herself as a property owner at 6221 North Bottom Road, said she and her son purchased the adjacent property in March 2023 after confirming through title work and a survey by Holloway Engineering that the parcel the county acquired sits in a floodplain. "We were aware of that," Harter said, and said the previous owner had provided a temporary entrance she and neighbors were allowed to use until road work was completed. Harter said neighbors have organized a petition opposing any structure on the county parcel because "the original eminent domain was to straighten the road," not to establish a storage or maintenance facility.

Chase Harker, who said he is an engineer and also owns the adjoining property at 6221 North Bottom Road, told commissioners the county acquired the two acres with a stated public purpose of improving drainage and rounding a sharp turn to make the road safer. Harker said he has seen minimal progress on those stated intents since the county took control of the land in 2023; instead he said county equipment and piles of dirt have been placed on the parcel, he reported deer carcasses dumped there, and the site still floods during heavy rain. Harker told the board that building a salt barn or other storage facility there would be "a direct negative impact to the original goal of the eminent domain" and requested the board reconsider location.

Other nearby residents — including Brent Millhone, Hailey Summers and Bonnie Lamb — also spoke. Their public comments emphasized safety (school buses and emergency vehicle access on a narrow road and at a sharp corner), the parcel’s flood hazard, the loss of a neighborhood sledding hill and potential property‑value impacts from increased heavy‑equipment traffic.

Commissioner response and next steps Commissioners acknowledged the neighbors’ concerns and said they had previously voted to move forward with the project’s engineering work. One commissioner told residents he had voted to proceed because the county risked losing ARPA funds if the project did not advance; that vote was recorded earlier in the county’s agenda actions. At the Jan. 8 meeting commissioners said they would seek alternative sites and make additional contact with landowners who might offer property outside the floodplain.

Highway superintendent Eddie (surname not provided in the audio) told commissioners he and staff had inspected the site and described operational reasons county crews had used the parcel (equipment staging and clearing a canopy producing contact with school buses). Commissioners said they would contact a nearby property owner (described in the meeting as living on Henderson Ford Road) to explore options outside the floodplain and slow further planning for a permanent structure on the taken parcel while they evaluate alternatives.

What the record shows and what it does not - The meeting record contains multiple public comments opposed to siting a county building on the eminent‑domain parcel; residents provided a petition and said they have surveys and floodplain documentation. - Commissioners acknowledged an earlier vote to proceed with engineering and said ARPA timing influenced that vote; at this meeting they described renewed efforts to find alternate land outside the floodplain and contact owners directly. - There was no final recorded vote at the Jan. 8 public comment period to fix the salt barn at the disputed parcel. Commissioners described engineering work already authorized and said they would follow up with additional site evaluation and landowner outreach.

Ending: Commissioners asked staff to continue due diligence on alternative sites and to report back to the board; residents said they will continue to organize and submit documentation (floodplain surveys and petitions) to the county clerk.