MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
JANUARY 9, 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Discussion: Presentation by Anderson-Bogert Consulting Engineers for Projects Fm-CO52(80)—55-52, FM-CO52(81)--55-52, Lower Newport Road and the Corridor Location Study Report Between Newport Road and Highway #1 1
Discussion from the Public...................................................................................................... 7
Chairperson Lehman called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Southslope Conference Center in North Liberty at 2:30 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Mike Lehman, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Anderson-Bogert Representative Jeff Morrow said that he would like to go through some of the scrolls that he worked on with the citizens’ advisory group. Morrow started with the Prairie du Chien corridor. He showed a scroll of Prairie du Chien with an aerial photograph. He said much of the design corridor very closely follows the existing alignment. Morrow indicated that they tried to minimize impacts to trees and to yards based on input from the participants in the citizens’ advisory group meetings. They went out and surveyed each of the individual trees and highlighted in red the trees and brush that might be impacted by the project. Out of all of the trees along the entire project, they were able to get the number of trees impacted down to 20. Of that 20, over half were in the right-of-way. Many of those trees are less than six inches in diameter and could be relocated. Morrow said that the dash green line is the existing ground from the side view of the road. Mostly, they followed very closely to the existing ground, though there are some places where they lowered the road a foot or two in order to allow for a wider road bed without having to take their grading limits into yards and so forth.
Morrow said that right now, the existing road on Prairie du Chien is around 24 feet wide from edge of shoulder to edge of shoulder. He said that the County standard is 40 feet wide. The group also looked at a 28 foot top width, but to accommodate some safety standards based on the investments they are looking at, they came to the compromise of 34 feet, a number which balances safety and width requirements that exist in the constrained corridor. There are a couple of ways to get that width. They could leave the existing road and start to widen and do some grading and fill out into the ditch, as he demonstrated on the diagram. The other way is to lower the road and build the roadway surface without impacting a tree or some other fixed object. When they looked at widening, Morrow said it is not just about accommodating the road itself but also accommodating clear zone. Clear zone is if a vehicle were to leave the road surface and get out into the ditch, they need to have some minimum area for recovery so that a vehicle has an opportunity to regain control. Usually, that clear zone is measured from the edge of the traveled lane. Morrow stated that the shoulder can count as part of the clear zone. In this case, the clear zone is 16 feet, so they needed an extra 10 feet where there aren’t any fixed objects or slopes more than 4 to 1 or flatter. Trying to minimize grading and lane widths, they pull the clear zone limits in as tight and close to the road as they possibly can. Prairie du Chien road was not as difficult on this front as South Newport Road, he noted. He said that for the most part, Prairie du Chien follows the existing roadway alignment but around Dick Gibson’s and Harvey Henry’s properties, they did move the centerline closer to the edge of the road. Morrow said they were able save much of the hedge in front of the Gibson house. They were also able to stay away from the steep slopes over by the Henry and Yoder properties, and by adjusting the grade they were able to minimize impacts to the trees in the front yards. He said they were almost able to custom fit the road to the existing driveways. Further, by adjusting their roadway, they are able to minimize the amount of right-of-way acquisitions. Morrow said that the orange areas on the chart are the areas being proposed for acquiring right-of-way. They did not try to get or artificially acquire a minimum right-of-way width.
Morrow offered a handout of an activity that the citizens’ advisory group did at their first meeting. The handout showed some goals that they come up with at the very first meeting, by asking the participants to rank various issues that were identified in the public meetings as important. They could also add concerns that were not on the list. Morrow said that all four advisory groups are represented. Among the most important issues were the corridor appearance and loss of trees as well as excessive right-of-way taking. Morrow said that this is where their goals came from. Looking at Prairie du Chien Road, one of the things that they started with is a 40 foot top width, a County standard, and an 80-100 foot right-of-way, also a standard. The things they gave up were depth of ditch for snow storage. This means that the County will have to do a little more maintenance. However, he said, this decision probably isn’t a tremendous sacrifice but it is something. In a few cases, they eliminated ditches entirely to try and help grade out yards. Concerning roadway width and top width, there is a difference between top width and paved width. The top width is 34 feet including 30 feet of paved width, which will be split into an 11 foot lane, a four foot shoulder, and a two foot gravel shoulder, which gives a total of six feet of shoulder. The County standard is a 40 foot top-width, and they went down to 34 feet. They did consider going down to a 28 foot top width. The difference in the grading is 3 feet on either side. Since there was really no discernable impact between those two options, they felt that the safety benefit of the 34 foot wider top width was worth it. He said that they wouldn’t save any more trees or disturb yards any less by going with the 28 figure. In response to a question, Morrow said that they located about 20 trees along the corridor and presented them to the citizens’ advisory group. He explained that the trees highlighted in red are in the clear zone or in the grading limits. If they are outside the clear zone, they may be able to do something to save the trees. He said that within the clear zone, they want to maintain the flat 4-to-1 slopes, but once they get outside the clear zone, they can go to a steeper slope on the back slope and reduce the amount of intrusion into the property. The slope could be as steep as 2 to 1 if the property owner wants that.
Regarding North Newport Road, Morrow said that this shows a lot more right-of-way acquisition. He said that North Newport is more agricultural than Prairie du Chien. He said that they show the possibility of acquiring significantly more right-of-way, going out to about 80 feet. The reason is that when they start grading on farm ground, the property left to the owner would be on a slope and therefore unworkable for farming. So, they propose acquiring out the edge of the slope since that area is not as valuable to the farmers. Neuzil asked what the distance is. Morrow said it is about 15 feet or so. He noted that some of the people said that they would rather keep the ground, and that is certainly an option. He said that the thin blue line dash lines are the edge of the clear zones inside the existing right-of-way, so he thinks they would not have to acquire much right-of-way at all. He indicated that the two most contentious issues on this particular project are design speed and the “S” curves. Morrow showed a diagram that the speed on Newport Road near Prairie du Chien Road is around 35 mph. At North Newport Road, the speeds are usually around 45 or 50 mph except for at the “S” curves, where the speed lowers to about 31 to 36 mph. Morrow said that they typically design a road at the 85th percentile speed because that is where people feel comfortable driving.
One of the things that came from the group discussions was to try to keep things as close to existing conditions as possible. Morrow said that North Newport Road currently consists of many straight aways and wide curves, and people are typically driving at 45 mph. Since they aren’t changing the road much other than widening, he expects that people will drive it as they do today. At the “S” curves, it can get very tight, perhaps a 20-25 mph design speed. They have shown a 50 mph design speed with a posted speed of 45 mph. He said there was a request to look at a lower design speed, and they did lay out a 35 mph curve about halfway between this design and the existing. Morrow thought that if they are going to drive the road at 45 mph and they have this inconsistency right here and if they were to go ahead and spin the line to realign it, he would think that since there isn’t much difference between 35 and 50, they should be designing it for that speed.
Morrow said that as they go through this corner, property owners have noted that there are people who have been leaving the road at this location. Property owners have had to repair a fence or more than one occasion. However, they do not have documented crash data for this particular curve. They would expect this deficiency to magnify as there is increase traffic. Neuzil asked about the right-of-way for this section. Morrow said that the right-of-way would have to be acquired. He said he thinks the property owner owns up to about the center at the road. At its widest, they are looking at 130 feet. He said he has walked through here with the property owner to show him where the road would go. Morrow noted that he doesn’t think the owner is happy about the roadway coming any closer to his house. Morrow said that the house will get about 15 to 20 feet closer to the road than it is today. Morrow said that they are proposing to have a 45 mph speed limit from Highway 1 to somewhere near Kotts Lane depending on how they design the rest of the project. He said that they had designed everything else at 35 mph to be posted at 30 mph. He said that the 85th percentile speed for the southern parts of Newport Road and Prairie du Chien Road is about 35 mph, even though the posted speed is 30 mph. Morrow said that they chose not to increase the speed on that road. He also thought that on the southern portion of Newport Road and the crossover road because there are enough hills and valleys and so forth to control the speeds at about 35 mph. North Newport Road is so flat and straight that there is nothing they can add to the design without really getting into some major farm acquisitions, said Morrow. None of the property owners wanted to give up the land to do that.
Morrow presented the southern section of Prairie du Chien Road. He said that they highlighted the right-of-way acquisition areas in orange. They tried to move the road around to minimize the impact on trees and yards. At the Prairie du Chien and Newport intersection, if South Newport is selected as the primary future growth, they recommend realigning Newport at some point as the through route and bringing Prairie du Chien in as the subordinate route. Currently, it is the other way around. Morrow said that when they look at this intersection and try to keep the existing alignment, even under the revised design, it has significant encroachments on the Sedlacek property. One of the big goals of this project was to stay out of front yards and avoid trees and right-of-way. He said that when they first looked at this project, they just looked at an alignment that came off of the existing roadway and tied into Prairie du Chien which was much closer to the Sedlacek house. In the current proposal, they have made some changes to decrease the impact on that property. They were able to pull a curve away from that house. Still, they would have to replace Sedlacek’s recently redone driveway. One alternative they looked at since the last citizens’ advisory group is leaving the T in place until such time as the traffic volumes would warrant the realignment. They would recommend still acquiring the right-of-way for the future. There are some issues with that. There would be some throw away costs when they T back into Prairie du Chien. Also, some of this would have to be super elevated to prepare for the curve. They could probably put together some solution that would leave the existing intersection of Prairie du Chien and Newport in place right now, but Morrow expects that in ten years, there would need to be realignment.
Morrow said that most of South Newport Road is 66 feet of right-of-way. It is very tight and very wooded with very little extra room. Again, one of the main goals was to stay out of people’s yards and not take anyone’s house. The County’s original alignment came through too close to the Kemp house that it would have had to been acquired. They also looked at moving another curve down, but that came into the Gable, Foster and Stroud front yards. He said that in a conversation with the Gables, they said they did not like the curve going to the east, but saw it as the lesser of two evils. The curve in question does have a lot of impact on trees. There are many mature oaks in the area. There is a steep drop off that goes down into this ditch, so all of the impacts aren’t shown. They are estimating that there are about 100 trees that would need to be cleared. Morrow said that residents wanted to look at the possibility of a T intersection instead, which he sketched for the audience. This way, most of the traffic would be coming eastbound and turning left to go north on Newport Road. Morrow said controlling the traffic is a question. They could put a stop sign in one spot and leave the other open. As people become habituated to the stop sign with little cross traffic, they will just slow down, which increases the potential of a right angle accident. The other issue with this is that this is supposed to be the collector roadway system that moves traffic from residential areas to the arterial street systems such as Highway 1 and Dodge Street. Adding more delay and stops is not in line with that goal. Morrow said that he will distribute some literature about unwarranted stop signs that actually increase speed between stop signs and increase accidents. Morrow said that one could argue that neither should have a stop or the other could have a stop, but this would just slow everyone way down. He explained that there was a injury accident at this corner in May 2004 where the south bound vehicle was overdriving the curve and lost control and came into the opposite lane and there was a head on collision. The curve does not meet any of the safety standards and they have already had one injury accident that can be attributed to the geometry.
Lehman asked Morrow to address the use of guardrails. Morrow said that guardrails aren’t intended to correct a deficient geometry. They are great for preventing the vehicle from leaving the road if there is something in the clear zone that could be hit. In this particular accident, a guardrail would not have helped because the geometry was the issue. Neuzil asked about putting a guardrail up in a slightly different location so that they wouldn’t have to take out so many trees. Morrow said if they put a guardrail over on the other side, it would have to be in combination with a retaining wall in order to save some of those trees. He said that is a possibility if the property owners wanted that. Morrow thought that a retaining wall would be expensive but it is something they could look into. He also said that something that he doesn’t like about the guardrail is that it has to end at some point and that becomes a fixed object and a hazard. Again, this still could be done if that is what people wanted, Morrow said.
Continuing north, Morrow said that they did a couple of things. There was a section of South Newport Road that was at 45 mph right in this area. Right now, this is a straight shot. Since they will need to revise the geometry and the alignment, they tried to introduce additional curvature to help people slow down. Geometry is the biggest control factor for speed. If people cannot see as far or if they have to negotiate curves, their speed will be limited. Of course, they want to make curves safe, and this particular one is not. The other benefit of doing this is if they bring the road over to this side, they can minimize the amount of culvert extension just to the east and not get as much grading over on the west side. They could just extend the culvert on the east side. That reduces the number of trees and wetlands affected. Morrow said that they have reduced their right-of-way requirements to slivers. They do get into some trees just to the north. Morrow said that this is a tight corridor, but they were able to get the curves to fit pretty well. He said that they met with Mary Ellen Hill and reviewed the trees that she was concerned about, and they were able to miss those trees. R. Sullivan asked if all of the trees in one area are in the right-of-way now. Morrow said that they are, but they still tried to avoid them in order to maintain the original ambience. They might need some temporary easements but they won’t need any permanent right-of-way acquisitions. As they break out near the Dooley place where the terrain levels out, speeds will probably increase. Somewhere in this area is where they will have the break from 35 mph to 45 mph. They will probably accomplish that through a median or a visual device to get people to see that the terrain is changing.
Morrow said that the two alternatives that they are strongly considering start near Saddle Club Road and have the same alignment for quite a while because there is enough terrain to mask the roadway from view of the houses on either side. One thing they looked at doing is lowering the roadway a couple of feet and putting some burns on either side to add some plantings to further mask the roadway. Going east, the center alignment is actually below the terrace and would be hidden from the farmstead. One problem with this alignment is that it does split the farmstead in about half, about 53%/47%. He said he knows this is close to the Dooley property and that they have some plans for this area. He said that the Anderson Bogert proposal is not in line with the Dooley plans. Then, they looked at this alternative alignment that goes to the north. It cuts across the north property line between Dooley and Stebral on the opposite side of a big ditch. This keeps the farm split to 85%/15%, which is a significant improvement. It also avoids archeological issues, which the archeological consultant indicated in preliminary findings that this is the worst area in terms of possibly significant archeological findings. Another downside is that the Stebrals are not in favor of this plan in any way, neither are the Dooleys.
Morrow said that in terms of their overall recommendations, they feel that the crossover alignment offers a lot of benefits. It cuts off about 4 to 5 minutes from Solon to the Lake Area in terms of emergency response. When they compared cost, they looked at the cost of the crossover plus north Newport Road versus south Newport Road all the way around Prairie du Chien Road. The crossover cost does not include Prairie du Chien Road cost. Morrow said that his understanding is that Prairie du Chien Road is very near the threshold for performance standards and is an important link out to the lake. That project is on the books to be done either way. All that project does is give them an opportunity to shortcut from Saddle Club Road over to this vicinity on Newport Road. Therefore, the cost comparison between doing the crossover versus south Newport Road is just that: it does not include Prairie du Chien in this part of the crossover cost. That just seems to be a given. Lehman asked what the crossover design speed would be. Morrow said that it will be designed at 35 mph and posted at 30 mph, particularly on the north alignment with the geometry and curves, they can make it drive at 35 mph. He noted that this was another reason to promote the north alignment.
Morrow said he thinks he covered all of his main points and most of the questions he received informally. He asked if there were any other questions. Lehman said he had a question regarding the preservation of the corridor from Newport Road to the Kott’s Lane area over to Highway 1. Morrow said that their recommendation on the future corridor between Newport Road and Highway 1 depends on which of these alignments they are looking at. If they go with the center alignment, they would expect that future corridor to line up with this. If they are looking at the north alignment, they would expect that future corridor to line up. That is one thing they would like some input about the Board about. The consultants recommend the north alignment, however they need some direction from the Board about which one to do. Lehman said that what they are waiting for Anderson-Bogert to finish their end of the contract which calls for alignment and design. The Board is going to need to give some direction in the near future, and will hopefully put this issue on Thursday’s formal agenda for action. Lehman asked if there were any questions from the Board or staff. There were no questions.
Lehman opened up the discussion to the public and asked that people who haven’t spoken before who might have new information or questions that they haven’t asked before to step up to the podium first. He also asked that speakers limit their comments to 3 to 5 minutes and to identify themselves for the Auditor’s records.
Lehman asked when the archeological study will be done so that one of the proposed routes to the Dooley property could be chosen and that in turn would match up with the alignment over to Highway 1. Morrow said that no further archeological investigation will be done until spring.
Jim McCarragher, representing Kirk and Mary Ferentz, said he would like to talk a little about the government body that has established a Land Use Plan, residents that have purchased to live in an area surrounded by natural and beautiful surroundings, to establish a land plan and the residents live in harmony until a plan is presented to a road improvement. A new road connector that conflicts with both the underlying policies of the Land Use Plan and would destroy the natural and beautiful surroundings in which the residents live. Why would anybody do this, asked McCarragher. The proposed road construction by Anderson-Bogert would ruin redeeming features of the area. In 1998, in the Land Use Plan, Johnson County describes this area as in close proximity to three recreation areas including the Lake MacBride State Park and the MacBride Nature Preserve Area. The policies established at that time in order to preserve the scenic rural and natural character of the area were to encourage growth which is sensitive to the surrounding areas, and plan for and allow growth in areas with existing infrastructure that require a minimum of new or additional services. The County based this plan on data collected from five public forums in which 109 citizens participated. The number one objective with 63 points was to preserve County environmentally sensitive areas and rural ambiance with strict regulations. The number two goal with 59 points was to preserve the County’s agricultural land. The fifth goal was to improve the road by hard surfacing, but there is nothing in that that said they wanted new roads or improvements that would interfere with the number one and number two goals.
McCarragher said that they heard from Anderson-Bogert today that the number one concern of all the residents was appearance. Yet, when it comes down to whether or not it is a 28 foot road bed or a 34 foot road bed and neither one makes a difference, they choose a 34 road bed. That is not taking into account any kind of appearance, he said. If it doesn’t make a difference, leave it at 28. If the difference between speeds of 35 and 50 are insignificant as Morrow says, then why not leave it at 35, asked McCarragher. He noted that he has a hard time believing that it is an insignificant speed difference. McCarragher explained that is where he is saying there is a conflict that isn’t being addressed. In other studies that have presented the Board, the area has been presented as unique to its residents in geography and location rather than access to the City. Development not attracted by proximity but rather to escape urban areas, he read from one such study. He said that redeeming features of the area are not the roads and that is a major contention here. Prairie du Chien Road and Newport Road should be improved by constructing a hard surface on the existing road bed. This alternative does not allow the higher speeds as others might, but it does preserve the character of the area. If the natural features weren’t a big feature of the area, the design wouldn’t matter as much, but they are a big feature. So, when they are looking at differences, they should be looking at the differences that go in favor of the residents in their natural area rather than a rural road.
McCarragher said that Prairie du Chien and Newport Road are currently low traffic feeder roads, and the County plans to upgrade them to a higher traffic collector road and reroute them. The crossover would destroy the nature of the area. New construction that has already been done on Prairie du Chien has been described in the newspapers as half an interstate. This doesn’t sound like it is a sensitive nature area. He said they could let Highway 1 or future Oakdale extension or other roads become the collectors but not these roads. He said that there are two legal principles that need to be considered in all of this. In section 309 and 306.9, it reads that the improvement of two lane roads should utilize existing right-of-way unless alignment or other conditions make it imperative to do otherwise. In that same section, unless otherwise required by Federal law or regulation, it also the policy of the State that Road Use Tax fund moneys be used to rehabilitate and reconstruct existing roads using substantially existing right-of-way. It doesn’t talk about new roads, said McCarragher. Thus, it would appear that these statutory provisions and considerations support the same goals that the Land Use Plan does.
McCarragher asked the reasons are to support this road. The one McCarragher hears the most is development. He asserted that there is no need to improve these roads for development needs. McCarragher showed a diagram that he thought many would have seen. The area south of the intersection includes 1,459 acres just between the river and Highway 1 in that area alone that are undeveloped. McCarragher said this doesn’t include what is not already developed in Prescott Heights and other areas. The conceptual plan for a subdivision is already there, which shows how the infill can take place. He said that at River’s Edge, all the roads go down to a potential extension of Oakdale Boulevard. He said that it doesn’t draw any traffic or any demand on Newport Road or Prairie du Chien Road. He said that his point is that there is no purpose to develop Newport Road. He asked where it was going. He asked where they will be drawing the traffic to. He asked where they will be focusing Newport Road and Prairie du Chien Road. He stated that a narrow windy road that is never going to be improved to an intersection near Hilltop tavern, which is probably the worst intersection in Iowa City. Are they going to take it and point it to the dam that can’t be changed? Why not encourage the traffic to go to Highway One? It is going to go to four lanes, and the interstate is going to go to three lanes. McCarragher said that if they build a road, that encourages people to use it when they should be discouraging people from using that road.
McCarragher went on and said he would like to talk about the proposed connection which will affect the Ferentzs and the Dooleys. He said if it is development driven as he heard, it should be paid by when and where the developer would like, and it should not be paid out of County funds. It is his understanding that the County has not paid for a newly aligned road in recent past history, and he has heard rumors that might even go back to World War II. If that is the case, it should be paid for by the contractors and not by the County. A diagonal road across this property will take up agricultural land. One of the Board’s primary responsibilities is to be stewards of land, preservers of land. So, this road across agricultural land should not be done unless there is an imperative and compelling reason to do so, and he hasn’t heard any yet. He also wondered what happened to the archeological study. Why are they talking about a connector when no one even knows whether it is there? Finally, McCarragher said he has heard some talk about penciling in the road here into the future. What does it mean to pencil and reserve a road? There is a cloud of uncertainty about the land. It is as if they have condemned the road but they haven’t. What does it mean to a future purchaser who doesn’t want to develop the land? He asked why hasn’t there been any public discussion about this? He added that if it is developer driven, and not be reviewed again by the Board until some developer purchases the Dooley and Ferentz property and comes in with a development plan, it is premature to pencil it in now. The developer knows where he wants to put the roads in harmony with the development and at that time, he will also know what is best for traffic movement at that time. He said that at the present time they neither know what is best for development in the future on these particular pieces of property nor what is best for the movement of traffic in the area at this time. If they pencil in this uncertainty, it is just going to leave a cloud over the families of both the Dooleys and the Ferentzs. They will be anxious and worried about when they will resurface again.
McCarragher said the Dooley and Ferentz home has been in constant stress over the proposed connector road. The connector needs to be removed at this time and driven by a developer, if the property is later purchased by a developer. He said that doing this would assure the Dooleys and the Ferentzs that this is truly a developer issue. He said that there are a lot of people present at the meeting. Some are residents and some are concerned members of the community. Unless some of these people approach the Board to speak in favor of the Anderson-Bogert proposal, he thinks it is fair to assume that all of the people here support the request of the residents that the Board not approve the Anderson-Bogert proposal and that they not approve the construction or the penciling in of the connector. If they want to improve Prairie du Chien and Newport Road, then just resurface them in their existing roadbeds and leave them at 28 feet. He said that they all ask and hope that the Board does the right thing.
Carmella Knight said that she lives near Prairie du Chien. She said that she has three children and they have spent 15 years riding those roads on their bikes. They mean a lot to her. She said that she has been to Hawaii several times and seen beautiful sunsets there, but none come close to the spectacular sunsets she has seen out on Newport road. She said that now she has grandchildren and desperately wants to ride those roads with them. She noted that the she hopes the Board will not cavalierly take this away from the residents. She said that something the previous speaker said is really important. She said that once when she was riding her bike, she was hit by a truck at the corner of Prairie du Chien and Dodge Street. It was a long time before she recovered from that. She said that there were a lot of ways that this plan will impact the residents, and asked that the Board please not take it away from them.
Dick Gibson said that he would like to talk about cost. He has been trying to talk with County staff about this and has not been successful at all. He said that he believes that the report they received a couple of weeks ago was somewhat misrepresentative. He said he heard it acknowledged that there was some confusion about it, but there was still no acknowledgement about what the differences between those costs are. He said that his number may be wrong, but he believes that they will find if they look at the report, the cost including Prairie du Chien is $3,988,000. The cost of the Newport alternative not including several alternatives for saving some money is $538,000 less than the other options. There could be additional saving associated with the intersection of Prairie du Chien and Newport. He explained that he has been trying to find out what the cost associated with the Kemp corner is, and no one will give him an answer. So, he encourages them to direct their County staff and their consultant staff to give a report about what these missing cost numbers are. They are not trivial; they can make a considerable difference in how they go about making a decision on this issue.
Kathy Gable lives on the S curve of south Newport Road. She would like to make a statement about a comment attributed to her about the lesser of two evils. She said that she did not say that. She said that she brought it to Morrow’s attention that she was stopped in a grocery store one day by someone who had heard that she was giving them okay to go through her property to straighten out the curve. She said to him that she had not said that. She went to Morrow or Andersen and made it clear that she has not given them permission to favor that option over anything else. She told them that she wanted them to stay on the existing roadway that is there. The other statement that they made about the accident involving the injury, that did not happen at the curve. Gable said that that happened further south on Newport Road more on the straight away right next to the Sedlacek property. It happened on a rainy day when the visibility was really bad. The vehicle was a logging truck that was way too big to be on that road to begin with. She said that she remembers the accident and it was not at that S curve as they said.
Gable said that she has appraisals for every tree that is in question on that lot. She said there are approximately 30-40 trees, and the value is as little as $700 a tree, and 4 or 5 are over $5,000 and a couple are over $15,000 in value. There is one that is approximately $20,000-$30,000 in value. All of these would be destroyed if the County chose to go through that lot to change that curve. She said she takes offense at the statement that people won’t obey the stop signs. She said that she always does and imagines that others who live out there do the same. She noted that she and Dan purchased that piece of property about three years ago. They are buying it in contract, she explained. They will be paying for it in the next year or so. They didn't pay for it all at once because the people who previously owned the property didn't want them to. They bought the property to keep someone from building on it because it is a beautiful piece of property with many trees and lots of wildlife. She has pictures of the area if anyone would like to see them.
Irene Schroeder said that she is an avid cyclist with over 100,000 mile of cycling in her legs. She teaches cycling at the University of Iowa and classes on these particular roads. She said she thinks the roads are safe as they are and that the County is planning to take away the people's freedom as cyclists and as passengers by taking this road. She thought that cars should be on Highway 1 or Dubuque Street, which could certainly be widened.
Jerry Anderson of the Johnson County Farm Bureau emphasized the main point of the letter sent to the County on this issue. At the November Board meeting, the Dooleys and the Ferentzs came to the meeting to outline their concerns. He said that the major reason that the Board decided to lend their support to not build this connector road was due to financial reasons. As the movie from several years ago says, if you build it, they will come. Developers and houses and more rural residents will come. He said that when looking at the impact study of 1999 about the cost of new rural homes, for every dollar of tax revenue that rural homes generate, the County spends $1.09. The true cost doesn't end there. They have to build the road, the services, and then there is the threat of annexation. Annexation could come down from the north as well. Anderson thinks that all taxpayers should be worried about this expansion the County is considering. He said that in the five counties that he has worked in, he doesn't know of any who have built a new road. That is something that municipalities do. Anderson urged the Board and his board urges them to not build the connector road, to not go with the further expansion, and do not place the temptation out there for developers. If you don't build it, Anderson said, they won't come.
Fred Malley said that the existing road is already a very good black top road. He said he bought his place 50 years ago when there were two farmhouses out there. Right now, they have approved 20 houses to be built in that area and they still have that gravel road. The money that they spent on consulting fees could put a black top road a foot thick on their current road. Take care of the roads out there first, he said.
Heather Hicks agreed that the road should be left alone. She said that she has boarded horses out in that area and the roads are very dear to her. She said that voices of the residents should be heard, but if that is not enough, one should consider what they have to offer to people who come from other parts of the country to work in Johnson County. Maybe they are coming from California or Montana or other areas with good wilderness, and this could be a plain place to come back to. Areas like the one out on Newport gives Iowa character and make Iowa a more alluring option.
Edith Merryman said that from what she has been able to gather, the Supervisors want to build a connector road for reasons pertaining development. She said she currently owns enough land to develop, but she has no plans to do so. She said that she would like to speak about the issue of building roads for development. She said it is really not a matter of giving the County or the developer permission to do that. She said that when a developer builds a road, s/he is building it on property that has been acquired at a fair price. The developer pays for the land and should pay for the construction of the road. When the County decides to build a new road, as in this case, the road is built on property that has been forced from the hands of the owners, the taxpayers pay for the road. In this case she said the property owners are unhappy, and the developers are ecstatic. Merryman said that she has lived on Newport Road for 20 years. She said she has traveled the road thousands of times, and she is very concerned about safety. She said that if she ever thought that Newport Road was unsafe, she would support this project. She said that the only thing keeping that speed from being higher are the curves, and that people don’t go 45 mph because of this. Although Andersen-Bogert disagrees with her, she strongly believes that if the road is straightened, people will drive faster. She asked that they ensure a 35 mph speed limit. In the area where she lives where the consultants want to straighten the road and increase the speed, she has a number of young grandchildren who would be endangered by the increased speed limit.
Sally Kroll said that she just recently moved to rural Johnson County from Iowa City, where she was known as the traffic calming expert. She said that she worked with trafficking engineers all over the country to see what could be done. When she listened to this presentation, she heard no traffic calming technique other than curves even though they are out there. She thinks it would be well worth while to talk to traffic engineers all over the country and find out what could be done to keep the speed limit within reason. She said that this key intersection could be made into a circle so that they wouldn't have to use stop signs, for example.
Greg Morris from Solon said that he has watched this whole issue evolve from a distance via television, radio, and newspapers. He said it comes down to something very simple. The Board of Supervisors is voted for by the people. The government is for the people and by the people. Currently, the majority of the people whom this impacts are not in favor of this change. The County just spent hundreds and thousands of dollars on something that the people don't want. He challenges the Board on this issue and others to spend their dollars wisely and remember that they are for the people and by the people.
Jim Baker, a member of the executive committee of the local Sierra Club, he is pleased to comment for the 1,500 members in this area. They oppose the connector and hope they will see fit to shelve this project for a period of time if not indefinitely. He has three questions for the Board. Who is the constituency for this project? What is the rush? He said that seems that with all of the opposition, a period of time to take another look is in order. Baker's third question was: what happened to the developer pays principle? Why is the County in the business of making it possible to put more homes out in an area that has outstanding rural and environmental values? The Land Use Plan that they have adopted says that growth should go in the corridor; it does not say that the County Supervisors should be facilitating that growth. He hopes that he will get an answer to these questions before the Board takes their vote on Thursday. Lehman said that the Board did receive the petitions from the group and has received correspondence as well.
Harvey Henry said that they have missed one important thing. If they go back to the active daily traffic rate rules that they developed about thirty years ago, many roads in the County were measured in number of traffic. They talked about 941 cars here and 2,500 cars somewhere else. He said that they are missing the boat here because they are working on a road that has much lower active daily traffic rate that many other roads in the County. He said that 1,000 cars a day is the number used to decide when a road needs to be upgraded. The problem is that that number was kicked out of thin air. He doesn't see how that number was justified. He looked at the previous records, and the number was picked pretty arbitrarily and unscientifically. This bothers him a great deal, said Henry. He said that there just isn't a demand for housing in this area at this time. The economy is not as sound as far as housing is concerned today, so he doesn't see why they build a super highway or half an interstate to draw people out there. It just doesn't make economic sense, noted Henry. The other thing is that they have a beautiful area that bikers like to ride. There are no serious safety problems out there. Henry said he thinks they will be creating more problems. Henry said that their roads don't even really need to be repaired given the low level of traffic out there. It seems that they are putting the cart before the horse. He thinks they should take this whole thing off the plan and wait for ten or fifteen years to see if the demand is actually there.
Hetty Hall said that one thing that brings her to say something is this concept of the corridor connection. She said that she used to live on the extreme southwest of Iowa City just inside the City. She used to go to Cedar Rapids for services, and it took her 30 minutes. Now, off of Sugar Bottom Road, it takes her 45 minutes to get to the same place. One of the assumptions is that because the corridor connection is closer geographically, but it is an extra 15 minutes to travel. She said that they also need to consider the bicycling community. This isn’t just an Iowa City or Solon question. A huge number of cyclists appreciate this area.
Vernon Eden said he thinks they should do Prairie du Chien Road first. Then, they could do Newport Road. If they still need the bypass, twenty or thirty years down the road, then go ahead and build it. To him, it is really premature to think about it now. At the Sedlacek corner, he tried to get the County to put in another stop sign, but they won’t. Cars come by him but it takes them a long time to get to a decent stopping speed. They might think that cars are going faster now than they were before they built the new road, they are not. They are all going as fast as they can. He said you can see from his property people running the stop sign. They are all local residents, asserted Eden. Concerning sewers, they put in a new system at his place, and they can do that anywhere. They work beautifully and can be put in anywhere. He said he thinks trying to stop this road is very selfish. He said most of the people behind him have gray hair and have kids who are going to want some place to live and they are trying to stop them. He thinks the attitude is I was here first and we don’t need anybody else.
Mila Grady said she lives on Post Road and has been biking these roads for thirty years. She noted that she grew up on the south side of Chicago where she had no beauty around her, just concrete. She noted that these roads are what make Iowa City a unique city in which to live. She said that the City attracts people of all ages especially retirees. She explained that as a nurse, the ability to get on her bike and get out in the countryside and look at the beauty of nature is so important for her physical health and her mental and spiritual health. One simply cannot put a price tag on the natural beauty of this area, she speculated. Once the area starts developing, the beauty cannot be reclaimed. She implored the Board to leave everything the same. She asked that they please not change the roads because they are beautiful as they are.
Richard Gneida said he is a transplant from New York state. He mentioned that he comes from a suburban community about fifty miles north of New York City where their town board has done everything conceivably possible to keep growth down and keep the town a rural community. They have never done anything to change the roads. The have limited housing by going to two acre zoning. Gneida said that Johnson County is one of the most beautiful areas he has been to and he would hate to see the Board, as representatives, change this area.
Lisa Sedlacek said that she has attended three or four of these meetings. She asked that they observe the photos in the entryway of the Sedlacek’s moving their livestock. She said that they are talking about safety and speed limits on that road. She said that the road is safe right now considering that the family can move their livestock three or four times a year in the daytime on that road without having any accidents or injuries to the animals or to the people who are moving them or to the drivers. She said there is nothing wrong with that road. She said she has lived out there 25 years and was born and raised in Iowa City. She noted that the only accidents that occur out there are occasional deer accidents. If a car goes into the ditch, it is because the high school kids overestimate it. She urged the Board to leave the road alone. She wonders what the Board would do if this plan were to go through their personal property.
Paul Morff said even if they get to 1,000 average daily traffic, that comes down to maybe 40 cars an hour. If you sit out there and watch for cars, more than a minute can go by between cars. A person could probably wait 20 minutes before s/he sees cars meet. It seems like a solution for a much higher density of traffic than we have. The other issue is money. He said the S curve is of particular interest to him. He explained that they are told by the consultants that they can’t slow people down there because it is too flat and too straight. He said he doesn’t know what it costs to hire a police officer, but even if they were to hire a police officer and hire him to sit right there on that stretch of road (which, of course would be overkill) they could endow that position for well less than a million dollars a year. If that didn’t work, then they could look at other options.
Bob Norton said that he moved to this rural area about 10 years ago. He taught school for 43 years. During that time, they were always trying to fix something that wasn’t broken. That is kind of the way that he looks at this. It really isn’t broken and they are trying to fix it. He acknowledged that one gentleman said that they need to have road for people to live. Norton said that he has been watching the North Liberty council meetings, and they are now covering farmland with asphalt. He said that someone at the meeting said that the developers are getting approval to build but they are not living up to what they say they will live up to. Norton said that his concern is that years ago he heard that they were going to improve Prairie du Chien Road and now Newport is included in that. He said that he lives in one of the most beautiful areas he has ever seen and that is Sugar Bottom Road. He said that his worry is where does the development stop. He would hate to see Sugar Bottom go the way of Newport Road.
Ted Pacha said that he lives in the County. He said that he heard from the consultants and others that they were going to add stop signs. He said that he wasn’t sure if the consultants were consultants or police officers because of all the stop signs. Maybe the Board of Supervisors should spend more time with the Sheriff’s Department and local law enforcement and just have the stop signs be adhered to.
Julie Nessler said that she grew up in this are on Prairie du Chien Road. She said that anywhere in the country, routes like these are treasured and marked as scenic routes. People stop and get off the fast moving traffic to go to these little narrow roads where they can wind around and look at the scenery and go at a decent pace. These roads are not something they can make again once you add on. She said they need to let people slow down and enjoy the scenery because our lives right now are moving way too fast.
Jim Sedlacek said he lives at Newport Road and that a few years ago, he went down to the zoning office because he was concerned about a fence around some of these development properties. He said that the guy there said they will take care of the fence but that they should keep in mind that they are kind of a nuisance. According to Sedlacek the zoning representative said that these people build $350,000 houses, so Sedlacek and others are going to have to get their cattle and get out of there. He said he is a third generation resident along with his brother, and he doesn’t see why he should have to leave. He said that the comment didn’t sit well. He said he knows there aren’t many farmers around anymore, but they are needed. Another problem is the connector road. He said that they say that getting safety people over to the reservoir quicker is important and he agrees, but people who move out in this area know where they are building. They know they are not right beside the fire station. He figured that if people had a problem with that they wouldn’t have built there. Another issue is the price. He said he thinks a lot of this is B.S. He said that he drives on Newport all the time, and he knows that a lot of people like to drive fast. There are a few trouble areas there that could be handled by cutting the brush back. He said that there are three roads that go off of Newport over to Highway One and that about bogged his mind. He said that in the past the County has given that area very little attention when the roads needed to be fixed and now, he doesn’t see why they want to spend all this money out there now.
Dan Cilek said that he would like to comment on the previous gentleman who said that they are acting selfishly. He mentioned that he was out at the Dooley’s on New Year’s. He said that if you are in Iowa City at night, you can’t see the stars, but when you are out in the Dooley’s area, it is such a beautiful experience. It reminds him of when he goes to Minnesota on the lake. When he says he is selfish, Cilek said he thinks they are fighting for the whole community here, for the people of Iowa City as well as themselves. He said that he hopes the Board decides not to do this road.
Jordette Stern said she represents Engineers for a Sustainable Future. On behalf of them, she said that Iowa truly has the culture that they would like to preserve. Iowa City has an amazing number of small businesses instead of ones owned by huge corporations, and building the road would be in line with the huge corporations. She said they don’t want to see development on this road because it is beautiful. She noted that it is important to attract people who want to preserve this beauty not those who want to develop it or sell it. On behalf of Engineers for a Sustainable Future, sustainability is something that they really need to be in line with because they can save everyone money. They don’t need to waste money. They should focus on preserving the environment. One thing that they support is to calm traffic, which can be done without spending millions of dollars. She said that her group would be happy to help.
Vernon Eden said that he wanted to clarify his thoughts on the T intersection at Prairie du Chien and Newport Road. That should be left a T intersection not cut into the Sedlacek land. He said it is a perfect intersection right now; it joins the new road they put out there. He thinks it is just fine the way it is. Just add a stop sign.
Lehman said that on behalf of the Board, he really appreciates individuals who are attending the meeting for the first time and especially those who brought up comments that the Board has not heard in the past. He said that he thinks they have more food for thought and will visit with the consultants a little bit. The Board agreed to put this item on Thursday evening’s agenda. Lehman thanked everyone for attending.
Adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By Casie Kadlec, Recording Secretary