MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
APRIL 8, 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chairperson Neuzil called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 8:12 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Mike Lehman, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Carol Thompson.
Assistant County Engineer Al Miller said they need an agreement approved that is for STP Federal Funds allocation for Johnson County to apply towards the resurfacing and pavement widening on Wapsi Avenue south of Lone Tree. County Engineer Mike Gardner said Secondary Roads has signed several agreements with the DOT to get Federal funding. Gardner said the Federal Funding would be $184,000 because the second option, 80% of the $360,000 project, would exceed the $184,000 maximum. The Board agreed to place this item on an upcoming formal meeting agenda for approval.
Neuzil said that the second item on the agenda is the calcium chloride bids for the 2004 Safety Program as well as further discussion of inclusion of several roads following the DOT and Secondary Roads traffic counts. Gardner said Secondary Roads sent out bid documents to 7 suppliers for the Safety Program’s calcium chloride application. Secondary Roads received 3 bids, one of which was not read because it did not include the required $5,000 proposal guarantee with the bid documents. He said the low bidder was Binns and Stevens of Oskaloosa at $.619 per gallon, with a total of $162,487.50. Gardner said this amount is one cent higher than last year, but just under the engineer’s estimate. Neuzil asked if the changes on which roads would be included in the Safety Program are included in this bid. Gardner agreed, saying that the bid was based on the adjustments. He explained that the County pays for only the calcium chloride applied to the road based on the per gallon unit bid price. Neuzil asked how Board members could approach road changes in the Calcium Chloride Safety Program. He asked what the process is for keeping roads in the program that recently fell below the minimum threshold. Gardner replied that the Board would have to notify him which roads they want to make exempt. Lehman said Secondary Roads would be charged for the extra gallons. Thompson said residents on those roads could pay the cost themselves. Lehman asked if Gardner anticipates calcium chloride applications on road detours that were not previously in the program. Gardner said that detours are paid out of the project budget at the same unit price. Lehman asked if it would be applied by the same company and on the same schedule. Gardner agreed. Thompson asked if people living on roads removed from the program were notified. Gardner replied that they have been. Neuzil said he and other Board members have received calls about these roads being removed from the program and he wants to be able to explain the process and how it affected the bid cost. Gardner said he thought the Board wanted the bid written with the thresholds of the current policy followed. Stutsman asked if she’s hearing that all a resident would have to do to have a road placed back in the program is call a Board member. Neuzil replied that the issue would go before the Board. Gardner said the bid is a per gallon unit price, so changes made to the program will not change the bid price. Neuzil asked if the Board will be able to make changes in the program without changing the bid price. Thompson said that they could. Neuzil said this item will be on next week’s formal meeting agenda.
Howard R. Green Company Senior Project Manager Jim Halverson said that he is present to give to the Board a proposal for the North Corridor Land Use and Transportation study. He said that based on discussion with Board members and staff, his first concern is to provide some project oversight in the process, working with Executive Assistant Mike Sullivan. He recommended the creation of a Technical Advisory Committee, primarily composed by staff and a North Corridor Study Committee, including members of stakeholder groups. He said that he would offer his expertise in land use and urban planning by serving as the Project Manager and would bring in Professional Engineer Gill Janes and Transportation Planner Doug Rippley to assist with the Technical Advisory Committee as well. He said the Committee would be comprised of Planning and Zoning staff, Secondary Roads staff, Sullivan, and representatives from JCCOG. Halverson also suggested involving an Iowa DOT representative for future improvements to Highway 1.
Halverson said the North Corridor Study Committee would be comprised of Board members, residents from the affected area, Corp of Engineers, cities located within 2 miles of the area, and the Planning and Zoning Commission. He said the first step in the process is to initiate key person interviews in order to engage the stakeholders in a more meaningful way to get a better understanding of why the North Corridor Area has been a focal point from a planning and infrastructure perspective. He said they would look for issues that are common to all stakeholder groups. He listed the targeted audiences which includes the Board of Supervisors, Secondary Roads, Planning and Zoning, North Corridor residents, cities within a 2 mile territorial area, JCCOG, the Corps of Engineers, and developers involved with North Corridor Area within the past 3 years. Halverson said they would focus attention on land use issues and changes in the affected area, which would then provide a history of the area including annexation, plats, rezoning, and building permits. He said they would investigate current and future land use impacting the area including population demographics, relevant ordinances and policies, changes in development plans and the impacts of septic systems and fringe area agreements.
Halverson said that the Committee would also look at transportation issues including traffic and pedestrian volumes, safety history and design alternatives as well as calculating existing roadway performance based on delay and level of service. Because of the number of families living in the area, the Committee will need to consider the need and design guidelines for buses and public safety vehicles. They would coordinate with JCCOG and fringe cities to forecast traffic volume in the area. The Committee would then blend those 2 elements into a Planning Issues report that would highlight existing conditions, community and regional trends, community needs and issues, planning and transportation needs, and opportunities for regulatory changes or procedural refinements. Halverson said that one of the key issues in the process is being accessible during the planning process. In order to allow individuals to be engaged in the process and provide feedback, he recommended a monthly email status report, open houses and public meetings. He said that the end product would be a focused Land Use and Transportation Plan that addresses roadway and pedestrian needs based on design guidelines that are linked to future land uses. He said an Alternatives and Drafts report will be subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Advisory Committees, and Board of Supervisors. Halverson said that the Committee will work from staff’s research instead of creating new, independent studies. The timeline for this study is 5 to 6 months and beginning next week.
Harney said they had previously discussed including other rural residents that do not live in the North Corridor area. Halverson said that involving parties from the affected area can be both meaningful and cultivate a lot of support for other alternatives that might be overlooked, but involved residents from other areas is the Board’s decision. Neuzil asked how Halverson’s company will handle the project if it exceeds the timeline. Halverson said those issues can be addressed in the course that they have outlined, addressing any additional issues in the advisory committees. He said that the key goal is to keep the Board informed so that they can direct the process through feedback.
Harney asked if the Howard R. Green Company would include needed changes in their recommendation. Halverson said that a series of recommendations will be presented so there will be alternatives. He said that the key person interviews increase understanding of the practical realities associated with how policies and practices are implemented, which provides a better understanding to parties who use the information. Halverson said the success of the venture will be based on usable recommendations that state a clear course of action. Harney asked if there are projects Halverson has done locally that the Board could review. Halverson replied that there are a number of projects stemming from his position as the Planning Director in Cedar Rapids and the head of the Metropolitan Planning Organization. He said that since he has been with Howard R. Green, he deals mostly with urban planning projects. Thompson asked if the company would use only the existing design alternatives to make recommendations. Halverson replied that they would use current alternatives in order to keep the fee associated with the project reasonable. Thompson asked if the company would advise the Board on the route alternatives. Halverson replied that it would not be outside of the scope of the project. Thompson clarified that North Corridor residents will only be involved in the Key Person Interviews. Halverson replied that they will be involved in the Study Committee as well, but not the Technical Advisory Committee. He explained that the Board, or Planning and Zoning could select the representatives, or residents could select their own representatives from residents in the area or business owners. Thompson said one of the purposes of this study is to involve residents.
Lehman said the Board is concerned with spending money not in the budget and allocating additional staff time for this study. He said by using information already collected, this proposal may help the Board complete the review. Thompson said they have already invested approximately $50,000 in a feasibility study. Lehman said that this project has always been a community effort. He said that not everyone would agree with the project’s conclusions, but he feels the openness of the process is important. Lehman said the public wants to feel they have been heard. Halverson agreed. He said the Board has defined the North Corridor as a growth area, which means the Board must define what they mean by growth and economic development. Halverson said that by defining it, they can provide the right kind of decision making and investments that cultivate that asset into what they envision for the area. He said that as investments occur within the area, they should use them in a matter that achieves an ultimate goal for that area. Lehman said that they hear complaints from the public, regarding resources used in the North Corridor instead of County-wide, which is why the Board is concerned with having input from individuals from other parts of the county. He said that those individuals will want to know how their tax dollars are spent on infrastructure in this area. Halverson explained that the Committee will look for other sources of funding during this project.
Stutsman said that they need to remember that this is a North Corridor Plan, but they are also updating the Land Use Plan, which involves all of Johnson County. She said that the Board needs to be careful not to confuse their focus. Halverson agreed. He said that if you have a focal point in a comprehensive plan, the level of specificity supersedes the general elements. He explained that the committees will help develop a vision for this area. Halverson said that normally the company develops projects in a utility perspective, but there are elements that will impact development and ultimately will have to be considered.
Stutsman asked Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell if he had looked at the contract. Chappell replied that he preliminarily looked at the contract and said he would like to discuss it with the Board. Neuzil said the Board’s budget has to be in by April 23, 2004 which will affect the timeline of this project. Thompson asked if this project falls into Fiscal Year 2004. Sullivan replied that it may require an amendment to the budget. Neuzil said it is important for people to understand the cost. Halverson said that the timeline would be a great basis for understanding what types of resources the Board would commit to the project and when they would be committed. He said that meetings add costs, so they could come up with more creative ways of engaging the public without having a team of people assembled in a facility. He said that currently the fee is $70,000. Lehman asked if Halverson has engineers or will need to hire an engineer from this fee. Halverson replied that he has professional engineers on staff. Halverson said that the Board should make a distinction in the scope of this project because his understanding of this project was not to critique an existing design but to identify alternatives related to the design.
Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak expressed his surprise with the proposal. He explained that his vision of the proposal was to look at alternative alignments within the North Corridor. Dvorak said he is not aware that the Board is dissatisfied with the North Corridor Plan, which was approved 2 months ago. He said they are currently reviewing the Land Use Plan. He suggested a firm consult on the revisions of the Land Use Plan including the North Corridor as a section of that plan if there are concerns with the Land Use Plan. He said that a project of this magnitude should have an RFP to allow other firms to participate. Lehman asked about Planning and Zoning staff’s availability. Dvorak replied that they are anticipating spending most of the summer and part of the fall revising the Land Use Plan. He said they would have to speak with Halverson in order to determine staff time for this project. Lehman said that the Board does not want to take time away from Planning and Zoning’s work on the Land Use Plan. Neuzil suggested a work session to discuss the proposal further.
Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore asked if there is a need for this project. Moore suggested hiring consultants after the Land Use Plan has been reviewed. Thompson said that postponing the decision may set Halverson’s schedule back. Halverson said that the objective is to have a product available by the first part of September so the information will be available for capital projects budget deliberations. Stutsman asked if the Board wants to send out RFP’s. Thompson replied that they do not have time for the process and it is not required.
Adjourned at 9:04 p.m.
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By Casie Kadlec, Recording Secretary