Stutsman: OK, business from the County Engineer and Physical Plant Manager. This is discussion regarding the Capital Projects and Rural Capital Projects fund. I wonder if we should call Lynnette about up to be a part of that discussion. Have Jo give her a call. Jo do you want to call Lynnette, we're going to be talking about that Capital Project. Good morning Mike.
County Engineer Mike Gardner: Good morning. I don't believe Lynnette's here today. She told me the other day when I was down there that she wasn't going to be here today.
Stutsman: Oh, OK.
Gardner: I'm not sure, you might want to check.
Stutsman: All right.
Gardner: Just to make sure.
Stutsman: Chris is going to come. I don't know if that's...
Bolkcom: So we've got to figure out a way to spend $13,599?
Stutsman: From the...
Bolkcom: For starters?
Stutsman: Yes, for the rural projects. Do you have some things outlined?
Gardner: Well, there's a little bit of a problem with it in that the only accounts, the only projects that we're allowed to use this money for are the A accounts, or our construction 300 accounts. Nothing has been programmed. Basically what I'm saying is all of our projects that we've got that are eligible for this money have already been programmed out of our budget, the 300 accounts. So if we move one of the projects from there to be eligible for this money, then it's not going to come out of our construction budget. I guess we're not going to be gaining anything one way or the other the way it's set up now. There's been some confusion about this in the past, and I wasn't even clear on it until Linda and I came up last week and spoke with Lynnette about it.
Stutsman: OK.
Gardner: It's not a problem coming up with the project, the problem occurs in that it's additional survey design and so forth, projects that we're not, weren't planning on doing this year. $13,000 is not a biggie. We've got some projects sitting there that it's going to be a minimal amount to take care of. The problem is the balance of that money that we thought we were working on in the past, last year about this time, I believe there were 5 projects that were put into resolution that were going to come out of that account. Well those projects actually fell in our 300 accounts, they were budgeted to come out of there and that's where they have been paid out of. So what I'm saying is that I don't have a project with me right now to take care of this $13,000. It's not going to be a problem coming up with one.
Bolkcom: OK.
Lacina: 2 questions. One would be on the Lone Tree resurfacing project, that would be one that you say we've already fully allocated funds for, so we couldn't switch that $13,000 to go towards that.
Gardner: Right.
Lacina: OK, the 2nd question would be, we did some projections in the past of a need to replace a bridge that we continue to lower the tonnage on, on Dingleberry Road, at the bottom of the hill down there. At one time we had discussed going in with some precasts, concrete culverts, instead of a bridge. I guess you would have to answer the question of one, is that still a need, or is it adequate at this time, and 2 would that be a priority project, or is there something you think, or do you need more time to encumber it?
Gardner: We've got several projects that would be eligible that we could come up with. That was one of them. I think last year you had Ed come up with a list of several projects. Like I say, there was some misunderstanding. Those projects get worked on, so we're working on the list, but they're being done as maintenance money and then we can't, the way the resolution was initially set up, we can't use that money to do that work.
Bolkcom: So that was what, like a half a million dollars or something? 500 and something?
Stutsman: So what do we need to do?
Bolkcom: So we need to fix that too?
Gardner: Well that's what I'm proposing. If there's some way that we can redo the resolution and then still have the projects listed individually, so that you would have, because I think you guys had something in mind when you set it up that way, is you didn't want it to be used for rock in the road or clearing some brush or something. You wanted it to actually be structures or something used for that. So, if we could just change it so that it doesn't say that it has to come out of the A accounts, but we could still list the projects and what the work is, and then you could approve, be involved in it that way and tell us if that is what you had in mind or not on an individual project and things.
Stutsman: So will you get that information back to us then before the 30th? Or by the 30th?
Gardner: Yes, right now all I have to do is for the $13,000 right? We're not talking about the other. I think that needs to be taken care of at some point, but we're just looking at this number right now for that and that's not going to be a big problem coming up with a project that we could use up that much money.
Lacina: I'm going to suggest that Sally, you and Mike and Lynnette sit down and redraft the resolution, but since we've changed our meeting dates, we either have to do it the 23d or the 30th since we're not going to meet on Thursdays.
Stutsman: Right.
Lacina: We'll just change the resolution to encumber the $13,000.
Jordahl: Let me see if I understand this and maybe ask a question that might be clarifying. If I remember our discussion almost a year ago now about Capital Projects funds that, part of the idea of these is that they can carry over, that you do not have to spend, but rather just sort of identify what these moneys may be used for. So it might be something that's actually going to be done in 5 years. So it's just a question of labeling the money or whatever it would be, some larger project, allowing as a way of advanced budgeting. I think the Auditor's Office concern, if I'm right in understanding this, is more to say, OK, we can't just have that money sitting there, we have to say what it will be for. It might not be the most appropriate thing to do, to convert this into ongoing maintenance projects, but in the spirit of Capital Projects to do some long-range planning with it. Am I right in understanding that sense?
Bolkcom: I think it's both. I think it's not only define what you're going to spend it on, but put a time frame on what you're going to spend it. You just can't be we're going to spend it on this without some sense of time.
Jordahl: OK, so put a 5-year time frame on it. I'm saying that if there are projects that fit into that kind of category, that it might be more appropriate to do that than to spend it on some current thing, if we're having trouble finding some current thing to spend it on.
Gardner: I think what I see the miscommunication coming in, is that we program to replace a structure and we program that as construction coming out of the accounts. Now, we've got several other structures that are smaller scale, that our own crews go out and replace with maybe a pre-cast culvert, it's the same work, it's just coming out of a different account. We're putting a new box culvert in there. It's not coming out of construction, it's coming out of maintenance, but as such it's not eligible for those funds.
Bolkcom: So Mike, the $500,000 approximate dollars that we transferred, have those been spent then, or are you saying we've...
Gardner: No.
Bolkcom: OK, so we did spend those on the maintenance, or the construction budget?
Gardner: They've not been spent at all because the projects that were given to you...
Bolkcom: So were those...
Gardner: ...were programmed under our 300 accounts and so if we shifted them over there, we'd have been just upping our balance from the end of the year that didn't get spent.
Bolkcom: All right. So then we would need from you what do you want to spend the $13,599 on and then another list for the $500,000 of new projects.
Gardner: Right, we need (inaudible) with that.
Bolkcom: OK, that makes sense to me.
Stutsman: All right, then why don't Mike and I and Lynnette get together and then we'll have a redraft of the resolution and a list, hopefully by the 23d, no later than the 30th.
Bolkcom: Can we do it by the 30th?
Gardner: Yes.
Lacina: We have to don't we?
Gardner: I can get the first part done anyway. I don't know how pressing the 2nd part is as far as the whole 500.
Stutsman: OK, all right.
Gardner: I mean...
Lacina: Just so we stay in compliance with the State Auditor with this.
Stutsman: We'll prioritize. OK.
Bolkcom: It would be nice to wait until we talk about the 5-year road plan to talk about that $500,000. If we, if it's time, if Lynette says it's OK to do that.
Gardner: Yes, Linda and I came in to talk to...
Stutsman: Linda's behind you on the other side...
Gardner: Lynette the other day and we've kind of bounced a few things back and forth and we've got a few options, I think, that you might want to look at anyway.
Bolkcom: OK.
Stutsman: All right. We'll just arrange a time to get together then. OK.
Gardner: That would be great.
Stutsman: Good. Any other questions about that? Talk about the Capital Projects.
Langenberg: I've got a list of items that starting with the Administration Building, we have talked about before with remodeling the front entrance for 4 offices, with costs being $110,000. I don't know what you're talking numbers here.
Stutsman: Oh, was it 108? Yes, $108,710 for the Capital Projects.
Langenberg: OK. Well anyway, I'm going to give you these 3 estimates anyway. The 2nd floor, remodeling for $220,000, and then remodeling the front entrance with 5 offices and a conference room for $260,000. We have talked about, with the Recorder and your additional office or whoever it may be, if we go that way, we're estimating $20,000 on that, if we were to put a room in for the Recorder and you guys were to make 2 offices or one additional office back in behind here. At the storage building on Capitol Street, additional decking, we're talking $40,000.
Stutsman: Oh, is that to give more space up on the 2nd floor?
Langenberg: Right, right.
Stutsman: OK.
Langenberg: Down at the Sheriff's Office, it's cells, we're looking at replacing the carpet in the office areas and the hallway on the first floor, which we're talking $15,000 there. Again, each year I bring up on that retaining wall on the south side of the Courthouse for replacing the limestone.
Stutsman: What's the estimate on that?
Langenberg: $55,000.
Stutsman: OK.
Bolkcom: It sounds like we spent the money a couple of times.
Langenberg: Yes.
Bolkcom: 108.
Stutsman: So what's the feeling of the Board?
Duffy: I'll just make a statement, I used the word I about 5 years ago. The space needs was one of the most important and expensive things that we have to contend with for the County. I think we're just kidding ourselves, we can do all these within a year or 2. It goes down to priorities, which one should we do first. I'm glad in the past that we did a lot of things, like when I got some information, you Pat, like out at Chatham Oaks, spent a lot of money that's paid for other projects, but then of course on Capitol Street, what was that...
Langenberg: 150 basically, 149 thousand.
Duffy: Yes, at least that is paid for, but...
Stutsman: Well do we want to look at, if you're talking about space needs, Charlie, the decking in the storage building over here for $40,000, because that would give us storage capacity.
Langenberg: Different departments have... Yes.
Lacina: I would rank that as number one, because anytime we can move paper or stuff off of facilities where we've got office space, that helps. I'd rank that as number one.
Stutsman: How about the Recorder's space?
Bolkcom: Yes, I think that's number... People space...
Stutsman: Well we don't have to prioritize.
Bolkcom: Yes. I think the Recorder's space is right up there, $20,000. There was also this other suggestion about moving people on this side of the building from moving Dan to Jerry's Office, Jerry to Rick's Office, Rick to the back of the...
Stutsman: That's on for discussion later, let's...
Langenberg: That was option number 2. They had also talked about moving this wall out into the hallway too. That was part of that option.
Stutsman: Well, we've got $60,000 earmarked. The carpet, I'm hesitant about the retaining wall, maybe I'm being optimistic.
Langenberg: OK, no that's fine. That's fine, I just bring it up each year so...
Stutsman: Right, and I know you do, but I think in the overall, when we start looking at the overall space needs of the County and maybe the Courthouse and some options there.
Duffy: You brought that up for several years, I just hope it stays where it's at.
Bolkcom: Well, can we leave some, I know we aren't supposed to leave some unidentified, but if we're talking about something over at the Recorder's Office, I would say actually we could do something at both ends of the building to create more space up here for the needs that have been identified with the Human Resource, our administrative person, the Board has decided more clerical. We don't have an estimate, so I hate to encumber all this, and then say, well we've got this extra little amount that we need to spend.
Stutsman: I see what you're saying.
Jordahl: Uh-huh.
Lacina: You could shift, though. Say we encumbered it by saying, OK, we're going to allocate x amount of dollars toward the retaining wall. Then the needs committee comes in and says OK, here's the space needs. As long as we don't move money out of the rural fund in Pat's budget, I think we can reallocate that money.
Stutsman: Do we want to do anything with carpet at the Sheriff's Office?
Lacina: Yes.
Langenberg: Well, it's 18 years old, it's wearing pretty bad in some places.
Stutsman: Well do we want to do the, that would give us 75 and then leave the rest 25, that's kind of...
Lacina: For now a retaining wall and change it later if we see another need.
Jordahl: Well I think we've been, meeting after meeting, discussing needs in this building of our office and what's happening in the Recorder's Office and possible changes here, up to and including a new Board Room in some different places in the building. I think we could easily spend the money here. So the question is, is the retaining wall a priority. Is this thing going to fall down.
Stutsman: Well you were just saying to say retaining wall.
Lacina: Leave the retaining wall there, but right now we just encumbered the funds.
Stutsman: If we don't need it there, then we can shift it into the...
Lacina: Shift it out of there and into the building.
Jordahl: I guess I'm not following what you're saying.
Bolkcom: It's kind of just, we're going to put it in the retaining wall, so we can identify a project.
Jordahl: To retain it.
Stutsman: A project.
Bolkcom: Even though we're not going to really do a retaining wall.
Jordahl: OK, is that a good way to run the show here?
Lacina: Well, we're looking for suggestions.
Bolkcom: That's what Steve...
Jordahl: Well, I think we could encumber that amount for this building more realistically. I don't think we're going to spend it on the retaining wall this year.
Bolkcom: Well, we could say space needs, County Administration Building.
Jordahl: Yes.
Bolkcom: Before we earmark money for Courthouse space remodeling, I think we could just say Administration Building space remodeling probably with the additional. It would be more accurate probably, even though we don't have a specific project in mind.
Stutsman: So are we saying Recorder, $20,000; the building for the decking, $40,000; carpet at $15,000; and the rest of it for space needs at the Administration Building?
Langenberg: Yes.
Stutsman: OK, are we in agreement with that?
Duffy: No, I have a problem there. I know we're the head honchos on this subject, but I don't think we should have any more leverage than other people that have space needs problems.
Jordahl: Well we're going to have this, part of this is all with a big footnote that says to be seen in the perspective of the space needs study and if the space needs study indicates that some other department really ought to have the $50,000, then we should put it there.
Stutsman: But just for the purposes of earmarking this before December 31st.
Duffy: If you want to earmark it and have a study, I don't have any problem with that.
Lacina: Let's put the 20 in the Recorder into the Administration Remodeling.
Bolkcom: Yes, I agree
Jordahl: There you go.
Lacina: So that if we happen to go into one of the other offices, they also don't say, well and now I want $20,000 in my office and so we're going to look at the total needs of the building.
Jordahl: Right.
Lacina: That way it can be used for whatever purpose makes the most sense encumbered.
Langenberg: So you're combining space needs and Recorder.
Bolkcom: Right, just put...
Lacina: All one.
Jordahl: All under Administration space needs.
Stutsman: You got that broke down then, Pat?
Langenberg: Yes.
Stutsman: OK.
Lacina: Our action needs to take place and then you'll get together with Lynnette to make this proposal to us.
Stutsman: And we'll include it with the Secondary Roads stuff and have it done by the 30th. Put it on for...
Duffy: Did you say space needs with Recorder incorporated in the whole...
Jordahl: Yes.
Lacina: Space needs.
Duffy: No, I'd be against that.
Bolkcom: The word Recorder's not going to appear here.
Jordahl: You mean you want the Recorder separately lined out as a...
Duffy: I think so. The taxpayer's know just... Yes.
Bolkcom: Well we haven't made any decisions about this, is the problem.
Duffy: Well, I'll bring it up when we do.
Bolkcom: More generically stated probably makes more sense.
Lacina: We'll just say remodeling costs.
Bolkcom: Right.
Stutsman: Yes. OK. I guess I'm comfortable with that. I hear at least 3 votes for that, so we'll go ahead with that. Any other questions, comments?
Bolkcom: Just to comment on the space needs at the storage building, the $40,000, obviously we're not saying that we're going to spend that, I'm interested in finding out what that's going to get us in terms of who needs the space and obviously we'll need more information before we make a decision to spend that money. But that seems like a lot of money.
Lacina: Sure.
Stutsman: All right.
Langenberg: Sure.
Stutsman: We don't need that decision though before the 30th though.
Bolkcom: Not at all.
Stutsman: All right.
Jordahl: We're putting a lot of weight on the Space Needs Committee and I wonder if we've got a time frame on that yet?
Stutsman: No, we don't. OK.
Bolkcom: Thanks.
Stutsman: Yes, thanks, Pat.
Langenberg: Yes.
Stutsman: Discussion regarding request for speed zone on Angle Road at the Washington Township School. Mike and Duane are here to discuss that. We received a petition that was signed by over 120 people, plus the 6th grade class at Washington Township school requesting a lowering of the speed limit in front of the school. As usual procedure for the Board when we get a request like that, it's referred to Secondary Roads and to the Sheriff's Department for investigation. So do you have a report this morning? Do you want to kind of tell us what you did as far as looking into the situation. I want to say too, that we have representatives from the school with us today. Denise Bush is here. I don't know which one is Denise. Hi Denise. Then other members of the class. They were interested in seeing how their petition is heard and what the procedure that the Board goes through in looking into a request for the speed limit.
Lacina: For the students' purposes, Mike Gardner is the Engineer in charge of the road systems for the County. Over 900 miles of roads and Captain Lewis is 2nd in command under Sheriff Carpenter for our Sheriff and is in charge of policing the roads to make sure everybody follows the speed limits and also the other laws in the County. Welcome to you.
Gardner: Yes, I'm glad to see everybody here. Just a little background, I guess. Back at the end of October, Miss Bush called me and then faxed me all the materials that you have just gone through, the petitions and so forth. At that time, I copied them and brought them up to you so that you could review them as well. I talked to Captain Lewis at that time and we initiated, we put our counters out on Angle Road near the school and on Derby Avenue on the other side of the school. What I've handed you is a pamphlet that you would have seen earlier, I think. I hope you've read it. I found it very informative on speed zones and how they're set up and so forth.
Stutsman: Who put this out, Mike?
Gardner: Iowa Department of Transportation.
Stutsman: OK.
Gardner: There's some very good information, I found it done very well. We put the traffic counters out on October 29th, and they ran for a 24 hour period. What I've also given you on the other 2 sheets is a histogram showing the speed distribution of the vehicles we had down there. The information basically what it showed us was that on Angle Road at that point, there was approximately 1,155 vehicles per day.
Stutsman: Excuse me, Mike, did you give Denise a copy of that? It might be helpful.
Gardner: No, I can.
Stutsman: For her to follow along with some of the other people too.
Gardner: The counters give us not only volumes of vehicles, but also size of car, speed, and so forth. So what you're seeing there is something very similar to what is shown in the pamphlet as a distribution of the vehicles' speeds. What it shows is that the way you try to set a speed limit, speed zone, is to get the 85th percentile speed. Which means that 85% of the vehicles going past that point are traveling at or lower than that speed. What we found when our counters were out down on Angle Road, the 85th percentile speed for the northbound traffic was 62.6 miles per hour and the 85th percentile speed for southbound traffic was 59 miles per hour. What that's showing is with the speed posted at 55, they're not obeying that. The problem occurs if you try and artificially set a speed limit low, what they've found is people don't pay any attention to it. The 85th percentile speed shows that 85% of the traveling public feels comfortable at or below that speed. So they basically set their own speed in their mind what the conditions, what they feel comfortable driving at, what speed they feel comfortable driving at. They've done studies as outlined in this thing, where they have artificially raised or lowered speed signs. It's the sign out there and they'll artificially lower it or raise it, the numbers on it, and it has very little effect on what the cars themselves do. So the 85th percentile speed is a pretty good indication of what the speed limit should be. I did an accident history of the site as well. I went back, our records that we get from the State. I have 10 years worth of data that run from January of 1986 through December of 1995. There were no accidents on that stretch of road, that were reported anyway. So that's another thing that we try to take into account when we're trying to set these speed zones. I don't know if Duane has anything he'd like to add to that. I guess if not, I would entertain any questions you might have.
Sheriff's Department Captain Duane Lewis: The only think I might expand on is after Mike and I got this information together, then we went down and looked at the site and checked the same information he had and pretty much confirmed what he had on that location.
Lacina: One question would be if we make a change in the speed limit, is there a potential of diverting traffic to parallel roads, and having them travel at a higher rate of speed on perhaps a road that is not as safe. Or is it going to be and as you implied the driver will just ignore the sign and continue at a higher rate of speed? You kind of implied that's the answer, that they're not going to go onto the side roads, they're just going to ignore the sign.
Gardner: Yes, that would be my guess, that they'll just continue to use that road, and...
Stutsman: There's really not another hard surface road is there?
Gardner: No.
Stutsman: That would be a good alternative.
Gardner: Right. That's why I guess I would tend to think that they'll probably just continue to travel on this road.
Duffy: Mike, from Frytown down to past the school to the road that goes to the Mennonite School, how many miles is that, about 3 or 4?
Gardner: Yes, off the top of my head, I guess that's about that.
Duffy: I would rather see the whole road, I think it's too fast. It only takes one person that's speeding to kill somebody on this road. Even if there isn't any accidents, but you're right. If the law enforcement officer isn't around, they'll go 55, 65, and 75. It would make sense to have the whole road down there at least 45.
Gardner: See I think we're going to run into the same thing, though. People are right now traveling at those higher rates of speed, I don't think they're going to, even if the whole stretch is posted at that, I don't think they're going to pay any attention to it.
Lewis: I would agree because the problem we've got is in enforcement. As you know, we've always taken a position that if we start reducing speed limits all over the country, without justification, there's no way we can enforce it. So we have that incident down there. There's nothing in the accident history or in the speed survey that would indicate that's a hazardous area over and above what could be said for any road in Johnson County.
Stutsman: I was going to...
Lewis: This majority is all under 60 miles per hour where the posted speed limit of 55, which could be said for I think probably any road in Johnson County. We would not resist what the Supervisors from the Sheriff's Department side, simply because it is school. But we'd want to make it for that reason, not because of the road conditions or the speed conditions and so forth. Because like Mike says, we also feel it's going to be an enforcement problem because the sight distance is good and the road is good, and the speed survey shows that people are probably going to drive that anyway. We'll give what enforcement we can, but as far as being able to say we're going to be able to sit there every day and hold people down to a speed limit, I can't make that commitment either. So we don't resist what the Supervisors decide to do because it is a school location, but we want to make the point that this road is not, by anything we have, a hazard that should be used to reduce it because of road conditions.
Stutsman: Do we have any other situations where schools are on County roads like this?
Gardner: IMS. They have a posted speed zone, but there is a sight problem at that location.
Lacina: Over a hill.
Gardner: Yes. I've got a page out of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which is kind of the bible for our signing it. I'll just read from it: The speed limit sign shall display a limit established by law, or by regulation after an engineering and traffic investigation has been made in accordance with established traffic engineering practices. In order to determine the proper numerical value for a speed zone on the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation the following factors should be considered. There are 7. Number 1, road surface characteristics, shoulder condition, grade, alignment, sight distance. In this particular case, those are all adequate. The 85th percentile speed and pay speed. I've just gone through that information with you. Roadside development and culture and roadside friction. This is the area that Duane's talking about, is the one point that there is a school there, so that would come into play. Safe speed for curves and hazardous locations within the zone. With the accident history, that doesn't appear to be a problem either. Parking practices and pedestrian activity. There is no parking allowed there and I'm not real certain what the pedestrian count might be. Reported accident experience for a recent 12 month period. I've got the most recent 10 years that I can get right now.
Stutsman: No accidents reports.
Gardner: No accidents reported, right.
Lewis: Mike and I have talked about this and we've done these studies and surveys in a couple other locations. The only reason that we want to make that clear, what our position is, because of the school, is because you're going to get a lot of these, (inaudible).
Stutsman: OK, right.
Lewis: There is no reason for conditions to reduce it. If we do without an exception of the rule because of the school, then you'll have no place to stand on these many, many other requests that are going to come in from all over the County.
Bolkcom: So you're saying because it is a school, this is a special circumstance.
Lewis: That we would not resist it, because it is a school and if the Supervisors chose to take that action for that reason rather...
Stutsman: That would be good justification for the next person that comes in and wants it reduced in front of their house or whatever.
Lewis: Right. And we would have a position as to why it was done as an exception in this case, rather than...
Lacina: For the class too, you need to understand that as we look at these things, many times we look at one situation, but we establish something called a precedence. So that's what they're referring to. For example, we had a petition a while back to reduce the speed limit by a playground. Because of the situation, decided that we would not do that. If we just make a decision on a particular road without good reason or cause, then everybody else in the County that might have a similar situation of where there might be a factory with a large number of people working, or any gathering could come in and ask the same request. To be fair, we have to have good logic and reason when we pass these rules so that it applies to everybody.
Duffy: Sally. Of course in Iowa City here, right up the line on top of the hill, that school, you'd better slow down if you go by that, it's 20 miles an hour and some other schools are a little bit higher than that, so indeed when there's a school, but there's more than the school problem with me, because I've had a lot of calls on this and I drove down several times, there's other people that don't live on this road, but close to it and use it, and hold onto your hat, here comes somebody, zoom. I just think we're a little lax here, I really do. I'd like to go from Frytown right on down.
Stutsman: 45? Duane's shuddering at that. Trying to control that.
Duffy: Well there's only one thing about, if you can see a clear distance ahead, sure you're going to get going because there's no law enforcement around. Same way on a highway or something like that.
Lewis: Well, I wouldn't pretend to say that there may not be speeders on the Angle Road at any given time. That's not my point, but in real life, there are speeders on every road at any given time. So along with your precedent statement, that would be, just something to be aware of, because that can be said for any road in Johnson County or the State.
Bolkcom: This seems to be, I don't know if this is unusual, but you've got 37% of the people using this road are exceeding the speed and the posted speed limit. I understand how, we want to have a road, if people feel comfortable driving 62 miles an hour on this road and we lower it to 50, they're still going to drive 62. But when it's, when the average is greater than 7 miles an hour over the speed limit, we just say, go ahead, we're comfortable with that?
Gardner: No, I guess there might be some misunderstanding. That's not the average speed. That's what 85% of the people... 85% of the people are driving lower than that. The average speed is on there too, and that is 53.9.
Bolkcom: But, the 85th percentile, which would be that target speed limit we'd shoot for, looking at it would be 62, right? Is that what you're saying? That 62 miles an hour is what most people feel comfortable with? Is that what you're saying?
Gardner: That or lower. Something less than that is what they feel comfortable with.
Lewis: If you look, most of the 214 exceeding, are exceeding within 5 miles an hour. Under 60, actually. So it's not the extremes. As a matter of fact, I was surprised to find that one of the things that throws it off is the 65 miles an hour coming through there at midnight, it wasn't during the day.
Lacina: The class chose a wonderful project. Because whatever decision comes down on this, one of the things that you did was to draw attention to some of those people that are driving too fast and by doing that, maybe you'll help them drive a little more carefully on that road. So it's a very good project and you're to be commended for the work that you're doing on that.
Stutsman: Are there any comments from any of the students or adults, or teachers that came along with the group?
?: I do have one question. Nobody addressed the one problem with that road is there's no shoulder at all. It's just a paved road and that's it. You have a ditch. I was just curious if that changes the safety of the road? Whether or not you have a decent shoulder.
Gardner: That is a typical, I guess that's a typical County road for what we have out in the County. It's better than a lot, and not quite as good as some. For our rural road system, that is a fairly typical cross section.
Lacina: As we reconstruct the roads, the State has changed some of the guidelines on slopes on the ditching and that. So you'll see some, Local Road is an example of where the ditches are far different. A car could drive in and not hit a bank. As we do major reconstruction's on those roads then we upgrade them to meet the State requirements. But again, as Mike said, with all the miles that we have, that is somewhat of a slow process because the limit of money that we have.
Stutsman: Does the Board have... a recommendation or...
Bolkcom: I had a couple more questions. Could we get a sense of pedestrian use in front of the school?
Stutsman: There's not any...
Bolkcom: Are there kids crossing, are they walking up and down? OK.
Stutsman: I'm assuming all the kids are transported by bus.
Bolkcom: Sure. OK. Do we have other, what's a typical rural speed limit in front of schools? Is there one. I know in town it's like 20 miles and hour in front of schools, I was recently out in Las Vegas, it's like 20 miles and hour. What's very interesting out there, you can be driving 50 miles and hour down the road and all of a sudden you get to a school and these flashing lights and there's 4 lanes of traffic going one direction, and everybody immediately slows down to 20 miles an hour.
Stutsman: Is this in town or...
Bolkcom: In town, actually. But there are people flying along and then suddenly they slow down. I think it's because of expensive enforcement, they enforce it and it's expensive. But are the typical...
Lewis: It's 35 at IMS.
Gardner: Right. But I don't think there's anything standard. Not that I'm aware of.
Jordahl: There's a 35 at the Corner Christian School up there north...
Stutsman: North Liberty?
Jordahl: It's not in Johnson County, but there's a 35 mile an hour in the middle of the highway, the same idea, it's past the school, and it's only less than a mile I think.
Stutsman: So what's the feeling of the Board? Are we...
Duffy: I'm for putting some kind of a speed limit.
Stutsman: Any other comments?
Lacina: I guess based on our concern about being able to enforce it, I guess I'm hesitant to lower the speed limit if we can't have an effect on the drivers. So, again I think by your coming to us that will raise awareness for the drivers. So enforcement would be a concern. The other thing is to look at the need. As has been reported, it is a straight road, good surface, and we haven't had accidents, where we do have other areas in the County that we have concerns and I think I would probably lower the speed limits on some of the curves and places where ice would form in the winter time rather than a straight road. I think you have a very good request, and you did a lot of work on it, though.
Jordahl: We have a... when areas are under construction on State highways, we have a drop in the speed limit to accommodate the construction and people to some extent respect that, especially when people are there working on it. Middle of the night, traffic may tend more to fly along, because you think well there's no construction going on here. It would be possible, I suppose, to have a speed limit, like, during school hours or something. Have a posted hours of enforcement for a 35 mile an hour speed limit. So before 7 or after 5 or something like that it would revert to 55. Some sort of a...
Stutsman: Would that be an option?
Gardner: That I guess I don't know.
Lewis: I'm not sure either, what you'd have to do with signing and.... I know it can be done because it's done. I have never seen it and I have never experienced it, so I don't know.
Jordahl: Well in town I've seen these things, when children are present, or when light is flashing is another way to do it and then flashing lights can get somebody's attention. I don't know how expensive they are, but...
Stutsman: Well we don't really have anything like that or ability to maintain something like that. I think it gets pretty costly to start going that route.
Duffy: How many students are in the school, could I ask?
?: 120.
Duffy: 120. We've got a stoplight for West High and rightfully so out here on the IWV road.
Lacina: Well that's Iowa City's though. We don't maintain that.
Duffy: Well I know it's Iowa City, but Iowa City looks like they're doing a pretty decent job of protecting their children and their students.
Bolkcom: Maybe we could have Mike do some reading. I like that idea, about having it posted when children are present or during these months or these days, or not weekends, that kind of thing. Maybe we could figure out what kinds of posting things other folks have done on that question.
Stutsman: I guess I'm supportive of lowering the speed limit in front of the school. Quite frankly, I was surprised when this was brought to my attention that it wasn't already lowered. I had just assumed that any time you've got a school or a school area, you just had a lower speed limit. I guess I too like the idea of just during the hours when buses would be coming or people would be picking up kids after school and things like that and just let it go at the 55 other times.
Lewis: And don't misunderstand, we'll give it all the enforcement we can and...
Stutsman: I know you will and...
Lewis: It's like any place we change here, what we're going to have to do is sit on it until the word gets out and it will bring most of them down, but...
Lacina: And with warning signs, if people approached it and they'll learn quickly that it was right in front of the school. Again, I would have problems with the entire road, but I think I could support in front of the school itself.
Jordahl: Well I think these studies too that the DOT refer to here are kind of just an attempt to lower the speed limit on the whole road. People are maybe not going to do that. If they've got a great big clear straight road and it says 35, it's like why? But I think these studies would probably look different if the sign said school zone.
Gardner: There are school zone signs up down there now.
Jordahl: And a speed limit though. The study of the impact on traffic would differ. People would tend more, I would assume. It's very enlightening work you've got here, it's a very interesting pamphlet.
Stutsman: Mike, could you get back with us with some information about a limited speed zone and see if that isn't something we can do?
Gardner: I'll do a little research and see what I can find.
Stutsman: OK. All right.
Lewis: I know it would have to be supported by resolution, but I don't know how we get to that.
Gardner: Yes.
Stutsman: All right. Well why don't we continue this discussion. It sounds like there's at least 3 votes to do something as far as lowering the speed limit. We just need to know if we can do it for a limited period of time or... I think it's just right in front of the school is what we're looking at.
Duffy: What time is school out? Do you have some classes at night or...
?: No, school is out at 3:30. The buses are...
Stutsman: That would help the people going to and from work. They still could hurry home from work.
?: I don't know if you saw in our survey, we had quite a few people passing buses while they were turning into the school and things like that. I guess it's just a safety issue and you have to remember what are we telling the public, oh it's not important to have a speed limit in front of the school? Regardless if you're going to do it or not, I guess it's what are we saying to them, their kids are important or they're not important.
Jordahl: Yes, I think that's a very good point and that's the way I feel when I drive past one of those things on the highway up there at Corner's, that it sort of reminds me of the value of the kids. OK. For me it slows me down.
?: And the signs that are out there currently are just the yellow signs with the mother and the child walking. When we did our poll of people in the area, only 31% of the people even knew the sign was there.
Stutsman: I thought that was interesting too. I don't know if the Board had a chance to review what the class did do. We all saw the letter, but it was a good survey, lots of good information.
Lacina: One question that we will need to answer is what will the appropriate speed be if we do make a change. I guess to go from a 55 that people are driving 60 and go to a 20, 25, wouldn't be realistic. I would assume you would come back to us with a recommendation of a 45, whatever would be appropriate.
Jordahl: We were discussing 35, but it may be that you could get something from the State or something on that.
Stutsman: OK. Any other comments?
Bolkcom: Just one. As we approach a decision on this, it would be helpful maybe from the school, to get some assistance from the school in terms of, I assume there's maybe a newsletter or flyers go out that once we make a decision that we promote the heck out of it both through you and through maybe the Riverside paper.
?: (Inaudible).
Bolkcom: Yes.
Stutsman: Well good.
Bolkcom: Thanks.
Stutsman: OK. Thank you.
Lacina: In closing, you can also get a copy of our minutes, informal, which would be fairly well verbatim if you want to put it in your library for future projects for the kids and the other thing I guess is to ask any of you if you have any questions for us while you're here to talk to any of your elected officials. Any questions for us?
Stutsman: Quite a group, are they usually this quiet?
Lacina: You did a very nice job on preparing them.
?: I would maybe just make one comment. I'm a parent of one of the children in this class, I'm a bus driver that drives away from that school, and we also live on that road and when you did your survey, you must have done it on a really calm day, because I know how the traffic is on that road and how they drive. I've tried to walk for exercise along there and it's just a dangerous road. I would say too, I'm not sure what your sight distance, I don't know what you're referring to in that, but I know when I come out of the school driveway with the bus, when I'm looking... when you look either way, when you look to the south, there is kind of a hill there that in the wintertime if a bus has to make a wide turn coming out of there and people pop over the hill, that can be a dangerous situation. In fact, there was a girl that flipped her car in the ditch right there just last winter or the winter before. If you look the other way, to the north, the trees tend to be in your way to see very far and then you pull out and the bus takes a while to get going the speed limit and this traffic comes piling up behind you. I would make those comments for you to think about too. People do speed on that road a lot.
Stutsman: Thank you. Any other comments?
?: One of the comments a parent had and I asked her if she would like to sign our petition. She said no, because she felt like sometimes she had to speed to get to that place that she was going. But I don't think that's right.
Stutsman: That shows you that there's different views on what the speed limit should be.
?: Does the school zone sign mean to slow down anyway?
Stutsman: Mike can you answer that?
Gardner: There's no enforceable speed limit associated with it. What it does is tries to raise the awareness of the driver that he is entering a school zone, he is made aware of it, and to react accordingly.
Lewis: It's trying to make a reasonable person respond like they should.
Stutsman: We've got another comment in the back.
?: We figured how much time it would save you if you would speed over just this little place and it was only like 4 to 8 seconds.
Stutsman: Oh, is that right?
Jordahl: There you go.
Stutsman: Good answer for those people that say that they need to get moving fast to get to work on time.
Lacina: If they get caught by law enforcement, it's going to take them a lot longer to get there.
Stutsman: OK.
?: We were watching to see how many people were speeding. One of us saw a cop speeding.
Jordahl: Uh-oh.
Lewis: I read that in the report.
Jordahl: It probably wasn't ours.
Lewis: I tell you what we need to do about a deal like that, first off if it happens or you see it, let us know of the time. So I know who we're talking to and why. I may be able to give you an explanation, or I may need to make some adjustments. Because I can't say it wasn't, I may have had a reason for it that I've been able to check it out at the time. If not, I may need to remind somebody.
Stutsman: Good.
?: When you said there was no report of accidents in the last 10 years. What type of accidents are you talking about? Are you talking about 2 cars hitting each other?
Gardner: No, this is any accident that occurs that they are required to fill out a State Accident Report. That's the only information that I have available to me. Because I'm sure there are, someone runs off the road and they're able to come back with a tractor and pull it out themselves or something and they don't get reported to law enforcement.
?: Because on the gravel road, my brother totaled his car because, there was another lady on his side of the road going 60 (inaudible).
Gardner: Which road? Where I was looking at was on Angle Road myself, right in the area of the school. From actually the intersection with the cheese factory up to the intersection beyond Derby. That was the stretch of the road that I did my studying on.
?: It was on Derby.
Gardner: It was on Derby? OK, no I didn't check the accident history on Derby.
Stutsman: We're going to have to move along on the agenda. So once again I thank the kids in coming in and the teachers and parents for bringing them in.
Duffy: Sally. From time to time we have troops like the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts that we show our different levels of County government and take them through this building and other places so if you ever need a class project and you tell us when you're coming, we could show you around all the different departments and give you some information that these departments do.
Stutsman: Good, thank you Duane and Mike for your work on this too. I appreciate your time.
Jordahl: Thanks.
Stutsman: Does the Board want to take a short break?
Jordahl: The Board does.
Stutsman: Or do we want to go...
Bolkcom: The Board does.
Jordahl: Break.
Stutsman: OK, we're going to take a short break,
Mike. OK.
Recessed at 10:43 a.m.; reconvened at 10:51 a.m. with Lacina
absent.
Stutsman: Association Service Bureau Agreement. Mike, you have information on that for us?
Gardner: Yes, I brought down a packet I received from the Iowa County Engineers Association. I gave copies to Carol to circulate with you people. It was pretty self-explanatory. I don't know... If you have any questions, I'd be glad to try and answer them for you.
Stutsman: Well, I guess my question is what do you think. Is it worth a $1,200 investment?
Gardner: I think it will be over time. In the past, the County Engineer's Association had received a grant from the Highway Research Board to do a Bulletin Board Service. So we had access to a lot of this information through the Bulletin Board Service. We could dial up on the modem and download, letting information, special provisions that the DOT came up with, actual data files for different things, and plan sheets, specifications, that type of thing was all available to us that we could get to if we wanted. Well, funding ran out for that, so that's no longer available to us. This is going to be an expansion on that even. They're talking down the road, actually being able to do the program budget, all of the DOT correspondence electronically. So that's where it's headed. Initially it won't be that elaborate, but initially I see it taking the place of the bulletin board that's no longer available to us.
Jordahl: The idea that counties can kind of opt out of this, or not opt in. I could imagine a county with a real small budget, not wanting to pay anything extra in. In a word an urbanized county would be more than happy to have the resource. I'm wondering about what your sense of buying around the State is.
Gardner: The engineers at the meetings have all been very supportive. They're all real gung ho for the thing.
Jordahl: Great.
Gardner: Now how that's going to translate into when they actually go to sign up, I can't tell you, but that's the feeling I've got.
Jordahl: Great.
Stutsman: And you have the money in your budget right?
Gardner: Right.
Stutsman: Well, any other comments or discussion?
Bolkcom: So the projected budget in the first year is like $68,000. It goes up to like 176 and then $200,000 in the third year. Do they have any projections, there's going to be 2 full time staff and they're going to get some support through ISAC. Do we have any sense as to how this might grow Mike, in terms of... I assume we could, a thousand or $1,200 is not very much as a first and second year contribution.
Gardner: Right. I guess I can't honestly answer that. I don't know. I don't think they're looking at anything to grow much beyond that other than normal inflation costs.
Bolkcom: So this Bulletin Board thing that's happening. Are all the Counties, is everybody electronically hooked up?
Gardner: I don't believe so, probably. I can't imagine that a lot of those Counties are.
Stutsman: Can you opt out, so that if it turns out not to be beneficial, we can...
Gardner: Right.
Stutsman: Decide not to do it.
Gardner: Right. Exactly.
Stutsman: OK.
Jordahl: Now, when you go to download stuff on the web, I mean when I do, it's like go make a cup of coffee, breakfast, take a nap, it's amazing to try and download something over a modem on a telephone line. The State has this Iowa Communications Network, this is a State DOT Project, right. It seems like the 2 are natural allies, what's the, is there any discussion of using the ICN for this?
Gardner: Not that I've heard, but that's a good point.
Jordahl: I would sure raise that with somebody at a State meeting. Because it might be a nice foot in the door to realize that a lot of our functions could be enhanced by having more facile access.
Gardner: Right.
Stutsman: Charlie, do you have any comments about the Secondary Roads doing it?
Duffy: Well...
Stutsman: Are we ready to put this on for Thursday?
Bolkcom: I'm OK with it.
Stutsman: You need action because we need to sign that contract right?
Gardner: Right, there's a resolution that will need to be passed and a copy of the agreement that you have to sign.
Stutsman: OK, so we'll put that on then for Thursday.
Bolkcom: Will you try and serve on one of these, Mike? Have you thought about that, you certainly have the different...
Gardner: Yes, I sure can. Over time I haven't been that involved with it yet.
Bolkcom: Sure.
Stutsman: OK. Discussion regarding biennial bridge inspection for Johnson County for 1997.
Gardner: OK, every 2 years we're required by Federal regulations to inspect all of our bridges. This was the year that we had to do that. It was completed late last summer. We've compiled the information and I've got a resolution here that we need to act on Thursday, hopefully. What it does is basically update the entire bridge system. In the last 2 years, you know, we had taken out some bridges, built new ones, so those postings will be removed. There have been a couple or 3, there were 6 that the posting was reduced on them. So that's what's involved here I guess. The resolution would just bring things up-to-date as far as all the bridges in the County.
Duffy: And this is the one from the Feds. Do the Feds do any inspection themselves? I thought they did.
Gardner: No, not of our bridges.
Duffy: Not our bridges. I remember one year, we had a total of 5 bridges, that wasn't.
Gardner: Right, that were closed, yes.
Duffy: But now we're fixing them up, we're in pretty good shape aren't we?
Gardner: Not too bad, there's always room for improvement, but actually 2 of those 6 that were downgraded, are in the 5 year program already, needing to be replaced.
Duffy: That's good.
Gardner: There were 5 bridges that the postings were removed because we've replaced them with new ones since the last inspection.
Bolkcom: Is Tri-county open yet Mike?
Gardner: Yes.
Bolkcom: Great.
Gardner: Jim McGinley called me this morning and the FEMA people were coming today to go inspect those.
Bolkcom: Is that right, great.
Stutsman: And that Lone Tree, I guess that wasn't a bridge but that...
Gardner: The by-pass
Stutsman: Right, that's completed.
Gardner: That's completely open now.
Bolkcom: It is. Excellent.
Jordahl: Oh, done now.
Gardner: So I guess that's another thing we're going to have to take the next step on to vacate the old road or something to...
Stutsman: All right. So are we ready to put this on then for Thursday? Resolution for the biennial bridge inspection. OK. We'll put that on then. Anything else Mike?
Gardner: That's all I've got.
Stutsman: All right. Thank you.
Bolkcom: Thanks.
Stutsman: Business from the Board of Supervisors. Space needs for new staff. I guess I had put this on, I didn't know if we needed to continue discussing this in view of our discussion this morning.
Jordahl: Well we could toss out some ideas. This is an informal. There have been a number of different thoughts floating around. One of them was to kind of carve up the space in here. I don't know if...
Stutsman: I wonder if we need Pat in here for this discussion.
Jordahl: Yes.
Bolkcom: Wouldn't hurt.
(Continued in Part 3)