MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
FEBRUARY 22, 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Chairperson Sullivan called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 1:30 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Larry Meyers, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak said that they were asked to do the road performance study a long time ago but were delayed due to traffic counts concerns that had to be addressed by the State. Dvorak said that the Board requested information regarding the transit system and noted that currently there are 1,000 vehicle trips per day. He said that the purpose of the study was to monitor the changes that would occur if the vehicle trips would increase to 1,500 and then 2,000. In addition, Dvorak said, the study also looked at vacant lots and residentially-zoned land, and concluded that the Board would not have to rezone any more land if the 1,500 and 2,000 thresholds would be reached. He said that one option would be to simply not have a threshold, and noted that he invited Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG) Executive Director John Yapp to refresh the Board on the process of establishing numbers and road performance concepts and standards. R. Sullivan said that one important thing that did not get mentioned enough was that the Board was only discussing chip-sealed roads and identified growth areas. Dvorak added that they have not included gravel roads in the study.
Yapp said that the initial desire for the road performance standards grew out of emotional land use and subdivision cases that took place in the 1990s and accusations for and against developments that certain roads were not adequate for development because of the roadway surface and the level of traffic. The Board at that time had a desire to develop a more objective and consistent criteria for traffic on certain roadways to be used when reviewing development proposals, and when determining if development should be allowed or not based on traffic and roadway surfaces. He said there were two essential questions: if the road infrastructure could support additional residential development and traffic, and where should the County improve road infrastructure to encourage residential development. Yapp said it was his understanding that the road performance standards were not meant to be solely used as a growth management tool, but also to direct growth and improve roadway surfaces where there was a desire for more development.
Yapp said that cities encourage and control growth through the extension of water and sewer lines, and in the county where there are wells and septic systems growth is encouraged via the roadway infrastructure. He noted that chip seal roads do not hold pavement markings, and adding sidewalks adjacent to them is difficult, they have embargos in the spring on heavier vehicles, they have a higher maintenance surface than paved roads, and are not a permanent surface but mainly a method of dust control.
Yapp said the existing standard of 1,000 trips per day on chip seal surfaces was based on discussions that occurred in the 1990s. While the standard was not 100% precise it was meant to be applied consistently to development and growth areas. He said that the existing figure was derived from traffic volume, roadway surface, safety, and the type and speed of traffic. He said that they could all agree that 10,000 trips per day would be excessive and unsafe, but that plus or minus 1,000 would be reasonable. Yapp explained that the standards should be consistent and across the board, and that they are not just meant to control development but also to direct it through certain parts of the county with paved roads.
R. Sullivan referenced Yapp's assessment that 10,000 trips per day would be inappropriate, and asked if there was an engineering estimate that recognizes a certain level of traffic as inappropriate. He said he knew some residents that had moved to the area from Westchester County in New York who lived on a chip seal road that had 20,000 vehicle trips per day. Yapp said that they did not have an engineering estimate and added that the standard would depend on the weight of the vehicles, the curvature of the roadway, the speed of the vehicles, and the collision history on the roadway. Yapp explained that chip seal roads are gravel roads that have been oiled and are not designed for high speeds and high volumes of traffic. He explained that the initial gravel surface is still there and over time it would begin to degrade due to heavier vehicles and faster volumes of traffic. He added that in the 1990s the Board created the 1,000 vehicle trips per day standard. Parker said that as a general rule of thumb, if traffic levels are between 400 and 500 the road should be changed from gravel to seal coat and for traffic counts between 800 and 1,200 the road should be paved. He reiterated that this was a general rule of thumb for the state of Iowa mainly due to cost-effectiveness and noted that a heavier volume of traffic requires a higher level of maintenance.
Assistant Planner Josh Busard said that he and Planning and Zoning Intern Hillary Copeland have conducted a review of oiled chip seal roads within the growth areas of the county and would present their findings to the Board. The current ordinance states that subdivisions on chip seal roads with the projected traffic volume greater than 700 vehicles per day should not exceed a density of one lot for every 20 acres. Busard added that subdivisions should not be approved on chip sealed roads with an average daily traffic count (ADT) over 1,000 vehicles per day. Busard said that they used the current lot ADT determined by the Iowa Department of Transportation in 2006. They determined the average daily traffic count of all vacant lots that were built, or the vacant lot foldout ADT, by summing the current lot ADT and 8 trips per day per every vacant lot present on that road.
Busard said that they also determined the zoning build-out ADT that represents the average daily traffic count of all residentially zoned land. He said that the zoning build-out ADT was computed by summing the current lot ADT, the vacant lot foldout ADT and the total acreage of unsubdivided residentially zoned land, subtracting 5% for infrastructure, dividing the total by the Health Department's minimum lot size and multiplying the result by 8. He reiterated that the current threshold was 1,000 vehicle trips per day, and said that the examined changes were at 1,500 and 2,000 vehicles per day.
Copeland said that if the standard was raised to 1,500 or 2,000 vehicle trips per day Newport Road, Steward Road, Prairie du Chien Road, Linder Road, Sugar Bottom Road, and Scales Bend Road would have changes. She said that the 2006 Newport Road ADT was 1,290 and that there were seven vacant but subdivided lots which, multiplied by eight, would result in an ADT of 56. Copeland said that given the Health Department minimum lot size standards the lots were large enough to be resubdivided which would result in 15 lots and an ADT of 120. She stated that there were also 131.65 unsubdivided residential acres that could produce a maximum of 116 lots that would result in an ADT of 928 on top of the current ADT. Copeland said that if the vacant lots were fully occupied the ADT would be 1,346 and added that if the vacant lots were resubdivided and fully occupied it would result in an ADT of 1,410. She said that for a full build-out the unsubdivided residential acres would need to be platted and every lot that was vacant and resubdivided would be filled in which would result in an ADT of 2,338, the maximum ADT based on the current zoning.
Copeland said that the 2006 ADT for Stewart Road was 1,180 and noted that there were 12 vacant subdivided lots that result in an ADT of 96. She said the lots could not be resubdivided because they do not have twice the size of the minimum recommended lot size. Copeland said that there were 57 unsubdivided residential acres that could provide 54 lots and an ADT of 432. She said that if the vacant lots were fully occupied the ADT would increase to 1,276, and if the unsubdivided residential acres were fully subdivided and the vacant lots were fully occupied the ADT would increase to 1,708.
Copeland said that on Prairie du Chien Road there were 11 vacant but subdivided lots that resulted in an ADT of 88. If resubdivided, there would be 44 lots and an ADT of 352. She added that there are 158.8 unsubdivided residential acres that would equate to 150 new lots and an ADT of 1,200. Copeland said that the current ADT was 1,080 Copeland and if the vacant lots were occupied the ADT would increase to 1,168. She said that if the vacant lots were resubdivided and fully occupied the ADT would jump up to 1,432 and noted that the full residential zoning build-out was 2,632.
Copeland said that the 2006 Linder Road ADT was 1,150 and that there were 11 vacant but subdivided lots resulting in an ADT of 88. She said the lots could not be resubdivided because they are too small and added that unsubdivided residential acres totaled 126.32 that could be divided into 120 new lots therefore resulting in an ADT of 960. She said that if the vacant lots were fully occupied the ADT would be 1,238, and added that the full residential zoning buildout was 2,398.
Copeland said that the 2006 ADT on Sugar Bottom Road was 860, and added that the 68 vacant but subdivided lots would result in an ADT of 544. She noted that the lots could be resubdivided into 109 lots that would raise the ADT to 872. Copeland said there were 576.9 unsubdivided residential acres that could result in a maximum of 184 lots that would create an ADT of 1,472. She said that if the vacant lots were fully occupied the ADT would increase to 1,404. If the fully occupied vacant lots were resubdivided into smaller lots the ADT would jump to 1,732, and stated that the residential zoning build-out was 3,204.
Copeland said that Scales Bend Road had an ADT of 940 in 2006 and said the55 vacant but subdivided lots would result in an ADT of 440. She said that if the lots would be resubdivided they could create 68 lots and raise the ADT to 544. Copeland said that the 165.8 unsubdivided residential acres could be subdivided into 157 lots that would create an ADT of 1,256. She said that with the vacant lots the ADT would jump to 1,380, and that if those vacant lots were resubdivided the ADT would be 1,484. Copeland said that the residential zoning build-out was 2,740.
Copeland said that Sandy Beach Road has a current ADT of 2,180 which is over the threshold of 2,000 used in the study, and added that Lake Manor Road is accessed off of Sandy Beach Road and has no platting activity taking place. She said that even with the proposed threshold changes there would be no improvement of the current situation in the area.
Talking about the build-out impact, Busard said that every road would exceed the current threshold of 1,000 ADT and the road infrastructure should be able to support new development. Busard stated that the road performance standards should not be a hindrance to development. Busard suggested that possible courses of actions included doing nothing, rescinding the road performance standards, raising the road performance standards to 1,500 vehicle trips per day on chip sealed roads, or raising the road performance standards to 2,000 vehicle trips per day on chip sealed roads. He said that if no action is taken the growth would be forced out of the designated growth areas, every road would exceed the current road performance standards at full build-out, and the Board might be forced to rezone agricultural land to accommodate development. Busard said that if they rescinded the road performance standards safety may become an issue because there could be a dramatic increase in development and the roads could receive more traffic than they are designed to accommodate.
Busard said that raising the road performance standards to 1,500 vehicle trips per day would allow for more development in growth areas without significant safety concerns or increase in maintenance costs. Busard said that Sandy Beach Road had an ADT of 2,100 vehicles per day and had three multi-vehicle crashes between 2001 and 2005. He said that if the ADT was raised to 1,500 it would allow for more development without additional rezoning of land and it would allow for up to forty additional homes on Steward Road and 28 new lots on both Sugar Bottom Road and Linder Road. Situations on Sandy Beach Road and Lake Manor Road would not change. Busard said that if the ADT were raised to 2,000 vehicles per day it would result in greatly increased infrastructure maintenance costs, long daily commutes, and significant safety concerns.
Neuzil asked if there were many residentially zoned areas on gravel roads. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore said they had several villages and noted that the area south of Frytown had a chip seal road. Neuzil asked if those areas were being discouraged from development because of the road performance standards. Moore said there had been a couple of inquiries that they had had to turn down. Neuzil said that they were talking about residential zones where individuals could not plat because of the ordinance and noted that there wasn't very much that wasn't covered. Neuzil said that the land zoned residential in 1960 was mostly centered around the cities.
Harney asked if increasing the ADT on Steward Road would allow for more development in the residentially zoned areas. County Engineer Greg Parker said that the traffic manual currently states that there are eight vehicle trips per household, and that would definitely be raised to ten vehicles per household. Stutsman said that the ADT does not only cover the trips from people residing on a specific street but also the trips made by UPS and garbage trucks. R. Sullivan added that some of the roads serve very different purposes, and that for example people only go to Steward Road if they live there or are visiting someone who lives there, but people who go on Newport Road have a number of reasons for traveling in that direction. Parker said that classification of the road should determine what the increased traffic level would be.
R. Sullivan said that the issue that keeps coming up was regarding Sandy Beach Road and Lake Manor Road, and asked if increasing the ADT to 2,000 would affect the maintenance costs, and public satisfaction with the road. Parker said that they have received several complaints about both roads, and especially regarding Sandy Beach Road because there are a lot of residents with older homes located close to the road who feel the speed limit is unsafe. He said there would always be a percentage of drivers who would go over the speed limit and that raises safety concerns because those roads were not designed to handle cars going 75 miles per hour. R. Sullivan asked if they received more complaints regarding the speeding cars on Sandy Beach Road than on any other chip sealed road, and Parker said no.
Moore said that the comfort zone was about 45 miles per hour on Sandy Beach Road. He said that posting the speed limit signs was important because people who are not from the area do not realize that the speed limit, if not posted, is 55 miles per hour. Moore said that when Parker posted the speed limit sign in that area even some of the residents were shocked to find out the speed limit was 55 miles per hour. Parker said that unless there was law enforcement officials out on the roads people would not obey the speed limit signs and noted that they do not post signs on roads that are 55 miles per hour on the seal coats or gravel roads because the Code includes the provision of driving 55 miles per hour during the day and 45 miles per hour at night and posting more signs would be an additional expense.
Chris Huberty said that he called the Sheriff because there were cars passing going 60 or 70 miles an hour. He said that if there are no markings on the road the speed limit is 55 miles per hour, and that they could not lower the speed limit until the road has markings on it. Parker said that striping a road in a rural setting gives people a false perception of safety. Huberty said that, according to the Sheriff, you have to have a stripe there in order to place the speed limit sign. Harney said that that was not true, and that the Board could place a slower speed limit on a road via resolution. R. Sullivan said that in 2007 they had lowered the speed limit on Scales Bend Road. Parker said that if the speed limit would be changed by the Board through resolution they would have to put a sign out there. Huberty said that kids ride their bikes, people ride horses, and people walk alongside the road and that was dangerous because the cars are speeding. He said that the road was in good shape and could handle more cars. Moore said that Huberty was allowed to resubdivide his 55 acres property and because of the road performance standards he was not able to get more than two lots.
Mike Bell said that he has lived on Sandy Beach Road for 17 years and the traffic counts have gone way up over the years. He said that there have been multiple incidents when he had to dive into the ditch because of cars driving side by side, and because of deer and speeding cars. Bell said that there are a number of people walking, jogging, and biking alongside Sandy Beach Road and pedestrian traffic would need to be addressed by the Board. Meyers asked Parker if there was a 66-foot right-of-way along Sandy Beach Road. Parker concurred and added that there were certainly a number of close call incidents that were not being reported. Meyers said that if there is no personal injury or property damage, close calls do not need to be reported. Moore said that Busard's numbers do not include deer collisions. Meyers said that deer collisions had to be taken out because Johnson and Linn counties have the highest deer accident rate in the state. Parker said that having a wider and clear right-of-way allows drivers to react more quickly. He added that by increasing traffic levels the volumes of accidents on any road would increase.
Ruthann Huberty said that she had encountered road rage on Sandy Beach Road from a man who had been driving behind her while she was only going 40 or 45 miles per hour on a 55 mile an hour road. She said that she contacted the Sheriff and only then learned that the speed limit was 55 miles per hour. She said that the Deputy she spoke to said he was very concerned about the conditions on Sandy Beach Road and if a fatality would occur the County would be held liable for not responding to the overcrowding on the road. She said that the few Sandy Beach Road residents present at the meeting represented a small minority of the residents concerned about the safety of the road and said she could not understand why the problem was being ignored.
Chris Mottinger said that while he knows the rules and regulations most local land-owners do not, he felt it would be prudent for a notice detailing such information be published in the paper or in a brochure. Mottinger said he is frequently asked why Johnson County does not have as many good-quality roads in the rural areas as other counties and added that he was also asked why Sandy Beach was not extended and transformed into a real road. Stutsman said that Mottinger hears from the people who want something done and the Board hears from the people that don't want anything done, and thus it was a difficult task trying to find a direction for development in the county. She said the Board has done a pretty consistent job of following the Land Use Plan but that she also understood the position of the land owners. Mottinger said that he is neutral, and believed it was important to inform the public who were often given the wrong answers. Harney said that a lot of the roads and bridges need to be upgraded and the County does not have the dollars to upgrade all the roads that need to be done. He said they also have problems with Sharon Center Road and Newport Road but citizens did not want growth in those particular rural areas and noted that roads like Steward Road could have the speed limit lowered without making it a full hard-surface road because it's a dead-end road and carries only residential traffic.
Stutsman said it had been the policy that when the Board upgrades a chip-sealed or gravel road to a hard-surface paved road the road would be reconstructed because so many of the roads have curves and hills in them and noted that people do not want the roads upgraded because they like the curves and hills. Stutsman said that when doing realignments the issue of right-of-way comes up, and things get very complicated. Mottinger said that sometime a decision has to be made for public safety and functionality on Sandy Beach Road. R. Sullivan said that Sandy Beach was the most heavily-traveled chip seal road but Sharon Center Road has the most accidents and stated that the Board hasn't really decided to deal with either one of them. Mottinger said the traffic count on Sandy Beach Road from May to September was at least two or three times more than what it was in 2000. Busard said the counts are usually taken during the summer and that the Department of Transportation takes into account seasonal factors when determining the average annual traffic count.
Phyllis Ruppert said she did not understand how the staff came up to the number of 40 additional lots for development on Stewart Road. Copeland said that there were 12 vacant lots on Stewart Road and raising the ADT to 1,500, 40 would be the difference between 1,500 and the current traffic count divided by eight. She added that if the ADT was raised to 2,000 there would be a total of 102 lots, but only 54 would be completely platable lots therefore there was nothing gained by raising the ADT to 2,000 because the land was just not there. Ruppert said that she owns 48 acres and that a good part of it is in the floodplain, and asked how many lots she could have on the property. Busard said that if Ruppert owned 30 acres in the floodplain she could have 30 lots minus land for infrastructure and sensitive areas, which could reduce it down to 20 lots.
Richard Ruppert said that the area across Stewart Road had homes on it. Busard said it was residentially-zoned land that had not yet been subdivided. Copeland said that the lots in the blue area were not necessarily vacant, but were lots that have not been platted. R. Ruppert said he wants to encourage the Board to raise the ADT to 2,000. Moore said they estimated that each unit in the development made eight trips per day. R. Sullivan said they could reduce the buildable area and make up for it with density bonuses. Busard added that they could also mitigate. P. Ruppert said her family had owned the land since the 1950s and she wants to be able to work with the staff and the Board in a welcoming manner.
C. Huberty asked it there was a way to improve the existing roads by putting stripes on the side and middle of the road and asked if that would save the County money as opposed to rebuilding the road. Parker said the design guidelines were based on current traffic levels and future projected levels and noted as an example that 120th Street in Shueyville was in bad condition but their minimum design guidelines only allow for widening the road, adding a six-foot shoulder, and making vertical corrections. Parker said that Sandy Beach Road has several design deficiencies that would need to be accommodated and the projected traffic levels would not allow them to just put an asphalt surface down without rebuilding the road to take care of deficiencies.
Parker said he was licensed by the State of Iowa and is required to follow design guidelines and not arbitrarily go out and perform work on certain roads. Stutsman said that Parker would not sign off on any road, and Parker said that the reason for that was because the set design guidelines existed for safety reasons. He said that designing a substandard road would put his job and license in danger and possibly drag him into court if an accident occurred. C. Huberty said he did not want that to happen, but reiterated that he wanted to know if a compromise could be reached and Parker said he wished he could accommodate the issues and added that he wanted to keep the roads safe. Parker said that Sandy Beach Road had not been designed; and that most likely it started out as a cow pass that turned into a dirt road, then in a gravel road and finally into a chip-sealed road and putting asphalt down would not solve all of the problems. Parker said that the right-of-way of 66 feet was set up a long time ago, and the current guidelines require at least 100 feet which causes an additional burden because he needs to go to each property owner and explain that additional right-of-way is needed. Parker said that putting asphalt on the road gives the perception of safety even though the road alignment and curvature has not changed.
Moore said the road performance standards were hurting and noted that the speed on Stewart Road was 30 miles an hour but very few people adhere to that speed limit. Moore said that safety should be the first priority and secondly achieving land use policies and applying them and giving people the choice to live outside the cities as the Board agreed. R. Sullivan said that given the choice he would rather have development on land that was already residentially zoned land than on land that would have to be rezoned from agricultural to residential. Moore said that ordinances must be applied fairly and they would need to work closely with the Attorney's Office. Stutsman said that the Board did the road performance standards because it felt arbitrary to approve zoning on one area and not on another. R. Sullivan the Board has been able to work with the growth areas in Phase I and Phase II. Stutsman said the Board could approve, for example, Sharon Center Road because the Land Use Plan is a guide and not an ordinance.
Neuzil said that he was against the road performance standards and the ordinances on chip seal surfaces since he joined the Board and noted that he was also against Phase I and Phase II, because residents did not want to lose their homes or trees in order to get the required right-of-way. Neuzil said that if there were chip seal roads in the county with an ADT of 2,000 or more, the Board ought to allow development to occur on a road with an ADT of 1,000, 1,5000, 2,000, or 2,500. Neuzil reiterated that if the Board truly and fundamentally believes that growth and development should occur in areas zoned residential the people should be able to infill that development and the Board should allow that.
R. Sullivan said that from a practical view it would be hard to go back to having road performance standards once they had been thrown away and said that changes should be made in incremental steps rather than completely getting rid of the road performance standards. Harney asked Yapp about JCCOG’s recommendation in terms of allowing more growth on roads that have a speed limit of 35 or 40 miles per hour compared to 55 miles per hour. Yapp said that most of his experience has been with town roads not chip seal roads and he needed to know the history and specifics of the road in question to make a recommendation. Yapp noted that visibility, sight distance, and condition of the road surface are just a few things considered. He said that a long straight road with adequate visibility would allow for more traffic to travel safely than a very curvy hilly road with less visibility. Harney said that with a lower speed limit they should be able to allow more vehicles on the road.
Meyers said that it was his inclination to keep things the way they are but if any changes are made they should make them in small steps to determine what the effects would be as opposed to just tossing everything out. Neuzil repeated that he has wanted to get rid of the road performance standards since he was elected but that he would support an ADT increase of 1,500 or 2,000 to get the Board in the direction of removing the road performance standards because it creates an impasse for designing roads in areas where houses are up against roads. He said the only solution would be designing rural roads at city standards, which could be difficult.
Stutsman said that when the performance standards were created the Board was looking for a logical way to deal with growth and development in the unincorporated areas. R. Sullivan said that the incredible growth over the past 10 to 15 years in Coralville and North Liberty is in large part due to the fact that Johnson County encouraged people to build in the cities. Stutsman said they always end up coming back to the 1960 rezoning to residential property, and that to allow for citizens to develop their land the road performance standards seemed like a logical way to keep up with the infrastructure and accommodate growth. She said she didn't want to be on a board where the community would question their decisions 20 years later. Stutsman said that if the Board does not have the political will she would likely be in favor of getting rid of the road performance standards. Meyers said that the 1960 zoning was always at the heart of development issues, and noted that the world back then was different and people today could not live like that.
Moore said he stood up for the 1960 Board and noted that their intent was to keep development in an area where they could support it while keeping the rest of the county agricultural and fixing the roads in the meantime. He said citizens had come to meetings and complained about certain roads being terrible, so then the road performance standards were put into place and added that now the roads are perfectly fine but are not properly maintained. Stutsman said she was waiting for someone to accuse the Board of not adhering to the road performance standards and take them to court.
Harney said that he understood why the road performance standards were put into place but noted that they are not working. He said that the Board is trying to build roads and the residents do not want them and the only alternative was to throw the road performance standards out because they stopped growth which in turn hurt the economy. Harney said that the Board has tried to build roads even though the idea was that a road upon reaching a certain threshold, would be upgraded. Dvorak said he would hate to throw the standards away because there was some merit to them. Stutsman said that it always goes back to tweaking something enough to make it work, but that never works. Harney noted that the performance standards were just referring to already zoned land and that Iowa City and North Liberty are growing taking up some of the best farmland.
Stutsman said that by creating the road performance standards the Board meant to manage growth, not stop it and that they had stopped upgrading roads when they had reached a certain count because they had been unable to follow through on the ordinance. Stutsman reiterated that the Board's intentions were good but they hadn't been able to follow through. R. Sullivan said that it was not fair to say that growth had been stopped because every month there had been zoning or platting applications completed. Stutsman and Harney said that those were farmsteads splits. Stutsman said the problem with the farmsteads splits was that the Board was allowing them all over the county. R. Sullivan said that the language needed to be accurate and noted that the county had mostly grown within the cities, and that there were policy casualties like Stewart Road.
Harney said there are 40 acre properties that were considered farms but now people build a house on 40 acres of land. Neuzil said the farmstead split issue would solve itself because sooner or later you can't do that anymore. Stutsman said that farmstead splits were meant to allow farmers to split off a lot for a relative without having to go through rezoning. Neuzil said that as far as the road performance standard ordinance, they did make a tweak in 2002 so that they could have a farmstead split even if it was on gravel road. R. Sullivan said he would like the staff to come up with a recommendation and run it by Planning and Zoning and then the Board could hold a public meeting and decide how to move forward. Dvorak said that everything started with a committee that could reconvene and provide a recommendation. He noted that in 2003 the committee started the chip seal policy and implemented the exemption dead end roads of a mile or less.
R. Sullivan said that the Board needs to provide further opportunities for the public to give input. Neuzil asked staff to identify the dead end roads being exempt. Moore said that only 2-3 roads fit that criteria. Harney said they should still consider the speed limits on dead end roads. Dvorak asked if they should propose an amendment to up the ADT numbers and present it to Planning and Zoning and then the Board.
R. Sullivan said Sharon Center is the road with the bad accident record. Stutsman said she thought there was only one fatality there on an icy day. R. Sullivan said if they are assessing volume, they would need to talk about Sandy Beach Road and if they are assessing safety they would need to consider Sharon Center Road. Harney said he understood why the road performance standards were there and somehow they need to determine a threshold of where the recommendation is to upgrade a road. Neuzil said the impasse is the problem. Meyers said that road upgrading would be financially impossible if the County would need to buy land from everyone to provide 100 foot of right-of-way. R. Sullivan said they could go to a curb and gutter system like in Iowa City where in a 60 foot right-of-way they are putting a trail, a curb and gutter along with the new road. Mottinger said the chip sealed road is not a bad road if it is maintained well. R. Sullivan said the only way to upgrade roads would be if the County would not need to buy additional right-of-way. Dvorak said that for future development they would require the applicant to give additional right-of-way through the subdivision process.
Stutsman said she felt the performance standards should be thrown out unless the Board would follow through when reaching the threshold. Moore agreed and said that if the Board does not have the political will to deal with it, they should throw it out and make decisions case by case and added that the Board would not have much control on already zoned land. R. Sullivan said he did not have any problem paving a road unless it is done in a damaging way.
Meyers asked Parker if the standards he followed were State standards or nationwide. Parker said they follow the National American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Design Guidelines which are utilized throughout the United States. He said that engineers could only do design exceptions to accommodate an issue without compromising safety and added that the design guidelines are created for safety reasons and would become more stringent in the future. R. Sullivan said that if there would not be room for ditches, they could do storm sewers. Parker said yes and added that installing a curb and gutter system to a rural cross-section would increase the cost by 30-40%. Parker said they could not fit everything in 66 feet because they would need a separated sidewalk and noted that the cities require a minimum of 100 feet of right-of-way that includes back-to-back curb width, plus separated sidewalk on one or both sides.
Neuzil said that on Lower West Branch Road they had to tear out everything to meet the 66-foot requirement. Meyers asked how they were going to do Scott Boulevard because there are oak and maple trees along the road and not decorative trees. Parker said that cities can get away with that because of lower enforced speed limits, and noted that the speed limit and traffic levels determine the required clear-zone. He said the cities have their own set of guidelines and ordinances, which requires that they put trees back where they removed them. Harney said that in Solon they plant all kinds of trees in the ditches and along the highway. Meyers said that those trees are decorative. Harney said that he did not mind doing curbs and gutters in a designated growth area, and Parker said that they would still need to meet the horizontal-vertical maintenance requirement.
R. Sullivan and Neuzil asked if a stop sign could be put in. Parker said that by artificially placing a stop sign people would not follow it and therefore would create an additional safety hazard. Neuzil said that they would meet the guidelines with a stop sign. Stutsman said that part of the reason people move out into the country is because they do not want to deal with stop signs at every block and low speed limits. Meyers said that people would drive as fast as they could and added that some differences in the speed limit are imperceptible to the naked eye. Parker reiterated that they have to meet the design guidelines, and that generally roads are designed to accommodate traffic going five miles over the speed limit. Meyers said there would always be people who would drive 70 miles per hour.
Harney asked if any other counties have road performance standards. Parker said that Johnson County is the only county in the state that has road performance standards in terms of planning and zoning. Stutsman said that it might be better to lower the road performance standards because the Board had a much better success rate before development occurs rather than after. Neuzil said the best way to curb growth was to not redevelop more residential land, or to at least focus on areas that are already zoned residential. Harney said that since he had been on the Board certain residents present at the meeting had been asking to do the infill on their property, and that he thought they deserved an answer in the near future.
Adjourned at 3:47 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By:
On the _______ day of _____________________, 2008
By Wendy Meyers, Recording Secretary
Sent to the Board of Supervisors on March 25, 2008 at 9:00 a.m.