Jordahl: (Inaudible) Jeff Davidson of the Johnson County Council of Governments Transportation Planner and Director and Mike Gardner, back there in the second row, (inaudible) all have worked together on the Transportation Management Plan. Good morning gentlemen.

Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak: Good morning. The reason I put this on the agenda was actually two-fold. One, I wanted to bring Jeff in and have him meet Carol and Mike and to update the Board on what actually we did last year and what we're proposing to do in the future, meaning the Road Management Study. The second this is this is a very time consuming project for myself, our staff, Mike Gardner's staff and Jeff's staff. So I'm here asking to make sure we have the support of the Board to continue this project. If there's anybody that's not interested in continuing, we would like to know now before continuing on into it. Again, it's a very time consuming project. We want to make sure the Board does use this information in land use decisions and 5 year programs and roads construction and so on. I'm here actually just to bring everybody up to date on what we're doing and hopefully get some support from the Board to continue what we're doing, if not even more. So now I'll turn it over to Jeff and Mike is here too if you have questions.

Johnson County Council of Governments Transportation Planner Jeff Davidson: Yes, just really briefly maybe it would be helpful, especially for Mike and Carol, to just take a quick 2 minute review of what transpired last year. Originally the Board was grappling with some land use issues. Issues that had seemed to focus directly on the adequacy of some roads for some development projects that you were being asked to consider. You asked JCCOG to do a little research for you in whether or not is was possible to develop a system to help you with these kinds of issues, whether or not it was possible to have a system and we coined the phrase Road Management System to give you some criteria to use in assessing these issues of when a road is or is not adequate to support a development project that's under your purview and you're being asked to consider. We did some research for you, looked at the different types of roads that you have in the county and we primarily categorized them as gravel, chip sealed, and then paved, either asphalt paving or concrete paving, PCC paving, and took a look at how that sort of worked in conjunction with the development projects that you were asked to consider a subdivision in the county, whether or not the property was zoned already or not, because that makes a big difference when you're assessing these matters. The first thing that we were able to determine was that, although it sure seemed neat and tidy to do it that way, coming up with some blanket standards that in every instance on a gravel road this would be the standard that you used, probably wasn't a good idea. There's too much variation in the types of roads. One gravel road may be perfectly adequate to support a development project and another one because of horizontal and vertical alignment and how well it's drained and things like that may not be able to support it. That gave us a little bit more difficult project then, as Rick referred to, a more time consuming project. But we decided to do a case study then last year. We took 4 roads, that once again you directed us to take those 4 roads, and they were, just to refresh your memory, Blain Cemetery, Seneca, and Green Castle, up south of Swisher, all 3 of those gravel roads, and then Sugar Bottom Road, a chip seal road. All 4 of those roads were ones where there had been some development projects proposed that there had been some controversy about whether or not the roads were adequate to support those. We then went and collected a whole bunch of information for you pertaining to the safety of those roads, the traffic speed on those roads, the horizontal and vertical alignment of them, the types of vehicles using them, as I mentioned, the accident history, primarily the safety measure that we use. Then as you recall, we had a couple of very interesting public meetings, very well attended public meetings. Mike, you were at least one of those, weren't you?

Lehman: Uh-huh.

Davidson: You might not have been part of the Board at that time. Very well attended... I think we had around 50 up in Solon and around 100 people in Swisher. I think it indicated to you that there is a lot of interest in this subject for people on both sides of the issue. After we went through all of that, the Board then had a couple of discussions subsequent to that and, as a group, came to the conclusion that you did not wish to establish formal measures for evaluating roads in this matter. But you did decide you were interested in continuing to have us collect the data that we had used to do this whole evaluation. You gave us 5 roads for this year, which was later expanded to 6 roads. We added 12th Avenue, extended north of Coralville. Those roads are Amana Road, Newport Road, 180th Street west of Solon, Sandy Beach and Lake Manor Roads around the reservoir. Along with 12th Avenue extended, those are the 6 roads we're looking at this year. All we are doing is collecting the data that you received last year for the original 4 roads and we also have a list of another 8 or 10 roads that... the Board's thought last year was that after we got the 5 or 6 roads out of the way this year, next year we would try to work on the remaining ones. These are the roads that Rick and R.J. have identified as being the ones where either you're currently grappling with a development project or you're going to be at some point in the future. So you know we're really not working any longer. At the Board's direction, we're not working any longer on developing a real process for you to use that's any different that you use right now in evaluating development projects. We are going to collect this data so that you have it available to you to use as you wish. I certainly would echo Rick's earlier thoughts about let's make sure this is what you want us to do. If there's something different that you'd like us to do, then let's do that. If you would prefer to not even have us doing as much as we're doing, let us know and I assure you we could move on to some other projects.

Duffy: Where do you get the data from?

Davidson: Well it just depends. The accident data, for example, Charlie, we get that from the police reports and the County Sheriff's reports and the State.

Duffy: I knew that. I thought that was kind of escalated.

Davidson: What we're trying to do, Charlie, with the traffic data is actually collect brand new stuff that reflects what's out there right now. We're going out, either Mike's folks or our folks, are going out and placing traffic counters. These are pretty sophisticated things now...

Duffy: I'm really glad to hear that because when we talk about this low traffic count on these roads and have to work off of 1994 maps...

Davidson: We all know that especially in an area that has been developing over the last 4 or 5 years, that 94 count isn't that good anymore. These are the areas that are developing. I think collecting new information is good.

Jordahl: Are we getting a 98 DOT traffic count?

Davidson: Yes, those aren't going to be available for several months. It's almost better off for us just to spend a week and go out and place some counters and collect the information.

Jordahl: I'm not really questioning that aspect. I think we should probably do that anyway. I'm just wondering what the status of the 98 count was because that is quadrennial, right?

Davidson: Right. Their inventory division has told us it will be at least May before we get those. We'll start our counting program in April and begin collecting data at that time.

Duffy: That's too bad that we can't get that kind of information before...

Davidson: They take a long time up there.

Jordahl: Well maybe by the time we have our data getting cooked up for these roads and we'll have that data so we can compare them.

Lehman: Will your count only include the 6 roads you mentioned or will you go back and count the 4 that were designated in the past.

Davidson: No, right now, Mike, we're just focusing on those 6 new roads. Every time we take a count, it involves a week. We like to do more than just one day. What we like to do is count for 3 days and average them and make sure we have something that's representative. By the time you place and count, that's a month and one half to do 6 roads.

Lehman: Yes. I understand that on some of these projects Mike has mentioned previously a 1994 count, but that's when the project probably came into view and they started working on it. You just don't do it over night. 94 is probably when you based your stuff you and that's when you applied for your grants and bids and started your engineering work.

Davidson: What the State does is they count a different quadrant of the state every 4 years. Every 4 years you see them sitting on the street corners like you did last summer and the DOT collects information all over Johnson County. That's the information that we'll get. We'll get 98 counts this summer and that's the stuff Mike was referring to.

Lehman: So your counts on the other 4 roads were done last year?

Davidson: Those counts we did last year. (Inaudible).

Jordahl: You said that the Board decided last year that we did not wish to establish a standard so that we could apply it to any given road. As I recall that conversation, it was sort of based on Mike Gardner's presentation primarily, although you certainly have been articulate in all these public meetings, detailing the nuances of curvature and drainage and so forth that really make it a different number for every road as to how much traffic you might be able to put on that thing safely. My thinking since that time has revolved around the idea, this wasn't original with me but I can't remember who suggested it, something like a LESA formula land evaluation and site assessment formula that would factor in the curvature, for example, what the radius of the curves are, the number of tight curves we had in combination with what slope the road has, in combination with how wide the surface is and what the soil type is that it's dealing with, what the drainage is... you could put together some sort of a calculus formula that would in fact take into account in some way, not to firmly and absolutely determine necessarily the traffic that that road could carry, but as we do with the Corn Suitability Rating, averaging a sampling of the soil here and a sampling of the soil there to come up with a number that would serve as one guideline among others when making decisions. I think we could get to there. I don't know how complicated that would be to do. I don't know if such formulas already exist. I'm not opposed to having a formula that would give us a number. I'd like to have a number to work with. I think it's been advantageous for us to have recommendations from that study about what a number could be that we would generally use. I like the numbers that Rick and R.J. presented and was drafted in the Land Use Plan 2 years ago that contained some cut up guidelines, not necessarily firm, hard numbers being the only determinant. I'd like to hear some response about the possibility of developing a formula from any or all of you that could serve us.

Davidson: In fact, Jonathan, I think what you're left with, having gone through the process we went through last year, is basically a formula that the Board uses. I think it is very helpful to the Board to have the information, the broad data type information that we can produce for you, and depending on what kind of information we find on a given road, it then, factoring in the Board's judgement... OK. That seemed to be something that was very important for at least the 5 of you last year, that you didn't want to give up being able to use your judgement in evaluating these development projects. You wanted to have some information and still be able to use your judgement. I don't disagree that that's a reasonable way to proceed. If we give you data that shows that there's a very high accident rate on a particular road, or that on a gravel road the traffic count is 3 or 4 times that we think is reasonable... You remember on Deer Creek Road, we've got a situation where the traffic count is 3 or 4 times higher than what we like to see on a gravel road. That I think makes it very easy to answer those questions in a way that you can use the data to say that this is clearly unacceptable.

Jordahl: Uh-huh.

Davidson: But where it's maybe much more difficult, but I think the system that you've established will still work, is when it's not so clearly defined. When we've got a gravel road that is maybe within the guidelines... remember last year we were using between 100 and 400 as being an approximate amount of traffic that was reasonable on a gravel road, 1000 on a chip seal road. If we've got something that's close, and I think what we found last year was, it was close for all those 4 roads that we were looking at, even Sugar Bottom Road. It wasn't outrageously higher than what we had suggested was a reasonable standard, but that's, Jonathan, when I think you almost have to look at the data and say OK, this isn't going to help us much on this one. You really have to go to more of your own judgement and any other information that you may receive to help you evaluate that particular project. Now in case of the Sugar Bottom Road last year, I think what we indicated to is that things weren't horrible right now, but they could be. If you looked at all the platted lots and the potentially platted lots that had zoning in place on Sugar Bottom Road, there's a tremendous amount of potential traffic that you had on Sugar Bottom Road. You will recall, and we didn't give them to you just strictly to scare you to death, some of the numbers that we showed for potentially improving a road like Sugar Bottom Road were enormous, with respect to the 5 Year Plan of improvements that you have and the amount of resources you can devote to any given road in the county.

Stutsman: I've always been supportive of this type of thing for all the reasons that have been outlined. It's another piece that we can use in making evaluations about these zonings. What I appreciate is the fact that it puts it in black and white what the projections are. Instead of relying on our memory, like how many lots are platted out there, what the traffic volume is... it's right here so we can look at it and say, OK, if we continue to rezone and plat in this area, this is the kind of impact it's going to have on that road. If we're going to make that impact, then I think the Board has to be prepared to upgrade some of these roads.

Davidson: That's the information, Sally, that we've been collecting the last couple of weeks using Rick's folks and it will be part of the information that we give you about the 6 roads this year.

Stutsman: The only thing I would add or want to see added is just a matter of process. I know that we have had some zonings and I don't remember this information being put together with the zonings. I've kind of gone back and looked myself but I wonder if it shouldn't be included in the staff report, just like the other things that you include.

Jordahl: Yes, what I'm thinking in terms to pick up on that is a formula... We have LESA. LESA has never bound the hands of the Supervisors, has never served to erase our ability to judge...

Gardner: You're not talking about Lisa Dewey, are you?

Stutsman: No, LESA.

Gardner: This is like a...

Stutsman: What's the acronym stand for?

Jordahl: Land Evaluation and Site Assessment.

Gardner: Well I think of the County and Lisa...

Jordahl: I understand that the City appreciates our new SEATS Director. The information about a situation is never a problem, it's always an asset. If we can get more information about a particular road, a particular application, to me that's better than less information. If we could have that cooked into a formula that said taking into account, in perhaps the judgement of the County Engineer, given the curvature, the slope, the drainage and the traffic and all these things, whether it's a mathematical formula that we can measure and crank through or whether it's a matter of personal judgement on the part of the engineer where we could set and say I believe the limit before this road is upgraded could be set at a number reported by the engineer in terms of each application as it comes in. One of the things we've been struggling with is how long is it going to take us to study every road in the county. My answer to that would be if we had a formula that factored in the things that can occur and just take sample roads around the county come up with a formula that would serve as a guideline to the Board in making its judgement of the situation that would be advantageous to us. Can we get there?

Davidson: We discussed standards last year and among the 5 of you who were on the Board at that time I don't think there was consensus on any one of them with respect to traffic volume or even what constitutes a high accident rate. You'll recall we cited some accident statistics on Sugar Bottom Road and with a safety issue like that you always get into the close call. There were 6 accidents but there were 600 close calls. Unfortunately Jonathan whether it's Sugar Bottom Road or Seneca Road in the county or whether it's Benton Street in Iowa City, I have not in my 18 years of doing this found a way that through a mathematical formula, you can come to an answer. It still ends up being the judgement of the people, such as yourself...

Jordahl: Yes.

Davidson: ...who have to make that call.

Jordahl: I'm not insisting on a mathematical formula but I'm trying to get the best basis that the Board can have for making those judgement calls. Part of that is we hire professionals. I don't think it's quite as reasonable to ask people who are not experts in transportation to sift through data and come up with a recommendation as it is to have a county engineer who is a trained, licensed, professional engineer look at the situation and make a recommendation to the Board about that road. I think that's what we hire an engineer for and I'd like to have that recommendation, as Sally suggested, as part of the staff reports when we look at zonings.

Davidson: I think the standards that we basically recommended to you last year. I mean we in a quiet way did present things to you that we felt were reasonable. And those were things that we developed. We did a lot of research. But we made sure that Mike had reviewed that and was comfortable with them being proposed as standards for you to consider, for the, I would repeat the words that you just said, you hire the County Engineer to be the authority on those matters and to recommend to you when you're faced with a roomful of people that are saying various things you do want to have that voice of authority that you can listen to and make a decision. The recommendations you received from us last year were that.

Jordahl: Yes.

Davidson: And the Board made a specific decision to not have those adopted as any kind of a formal standard but rather just a guideline that you can use, the 5 of you, to the degree you feel is appropriate, can use that.

Jordahl: Uh-huh.

Stutsman: What were the other roads that we were thinking about doing?

Dvorak: This year?

Davidson: This year is Amana, Newport, 180th, Sandy Beach, Lake Manor, and 12th Avenue extended. And it looks like on the list, this is a list we received from RJ and Rick, it looks like we have maybe 10 more to get to eventually.

Stutsman: OK. Right. I guess I was going to say I don't think every road in the county needs to have this evaluation done. I think that we're looking at those where there is the largest pressure for development and things.

Davidson: I will say if you have, and I did say this last year as well, if you end up with a road, you have a specific issue that's not on the list, you don't have any information for. Depending on how much time you have, if there is specific information you would like us to give you, just the best that we have at that moment, we would be happy to do that. It just means a phone call to our office. The accident data is very easy to obtain. We'll give you the most recent traffic count we have. That kind of information. If you end up with something let us know and we'll be happy to provide that.

Stutsman: Rick, I was going to ask you, do you feel this information has been helpful?

Dvorak: Immensely. I just wanted, since we have 2 new supervisors, I want to make sure that they agree with the need to continue on with the project. Yes, our staff, and I think Mike would probably concur, has been very helpful. We haven't used it, because we've only done 4 roads. And those 4 roads of course we used it but as far as the 5 year program or anything like that, eventually I think it would be beneficial when we get closer to completion.

Stutsman: Right. I just see this as just being one of those long... or those planning tools that we can use for long-term projections about what we're doing in the county. Sometimes we think things are good ideas and it can be a nightmare for staff and I guess I agree, I don't think we should do this if it's a waste of time but I guess I find it beneficial and I'm encouraged by...

Dvorak: Staff has no problem with working on this project as long as the Board really think it's necessary and helpful. We do.

Thompson: I read the report that you prepared last year. And while I haven't participated in a lot of these decisions yet, I found it very thorough and it presented the information that I would want to know if I were making that kind of a decision. So I think you're doing a good job with that. I'm not as interested in having a formula. Knowing that something is a 7 on the scale doesn't beat having the actual information to look at myself I don't think, for me at least. I just wanted to ask Mike if you used these studies when you're preparing your plan for which roads to improve?

Gardner: We haven't to date because this information I don't believe became available until after we did the 5 year program last year. I would say we're using it in evaluating what we're putting on this year.

Thompson: And as we get more studies, more road studies than you'll...

Gardner: Sure, the more information that we've got.

Thompson: Thank-you.

Lehman: Are we scheduled to look at the 5 year plan again here shortly?

Gardner: Al and I spent all day yesterday working on it and we're probably going to spend the remainder of the day today working on it, hoping to schedule a meeting sometime after spring break.

Stutsman: I thought maybe next week while you're gone Al was going to go with it.

Duffy: Yes, I've got stuff to ask.

Jordahl: Yes Charlie.

Duffy: I had something to ask the last time out, I think you know that. I like the idea of the individual roads, but I doubt whether we would have to do the whole county because some roads like Kansas Ave, we're putting the bridge in, the traffic count isn't that great but later on it will be (inaudible). But I did have a problem with the oil roads was stated that a thin layer of oil on the top of it which, that isn't right. Like Newport Road, Prairie du Chien Road, I hear that's been going since 1956. I had one person that used to work for the county says he estimates that it's 12 inches thick. I think we should take more bores right on the side of the road, we seal it.

Davidson: Yes. We talked about that last year Charlie and I think Mike mentioned to you that there going back and redoing a lot of those roads now, and when they redo it does result in a relatively thin initial coat. It is true I think, that if you build up layer after layer after layer you finally end up with some structural support that you don't otherwise have with a chip-seal road. It just depends on the road. And I think those ones that have lasted a long time that are well drained and don't have all the volume on it have been roads that have served you well. But my understanding, Mike correct me if I'm wrong, is that for the last 20 years the goal has been to remove roads from the chip-seal system in the county and that has in fact been what you've been doing.

Jordahl: We've actually, I think maybe a third chair would be a good move up here Mike. We're talking about the road management system and you're the road manager, I'd kind of like to get your input on this deal.

Duffy: A couple of other things. We do have a great county road department. And they know how to grade roads, that has something to do with it. And the gravel we use is high quality gravel. Speed limits, I might go out on a limb here, I really feel that all gravel roads are too fast. 55 miles per hour on a gravel road, the same as on a seal-coater. And you can't blame the roads for every accident. Usually if I get caught in an ice storm someplace and I know a good gravel road, I'll take that home. Better going than hard surface roads. Other counties, as I go to Des Moines I usually take Highway 6 up there and you'll see all these paved roads. And we used to have a lot of seal-coated roads even before I was supervisor. I think it was like 360 miles or something like that and now it's down to 150 or pretty close to that. But I appreciate the work you're doing, but there is a difference.

Jordahl: Mike I asked you to come up to the desk and I don't want to waste that effort. We're looking here at something that's real close to the 5 year plan in assessing which roads are priority for construction, what kind of attention they need. It's very intimately related. It's almost like we're treading all over your turf here. Where are you at personally in terms of making recommendations to us about this. Do you have a formula? Do you like a formula? Do you want to give us numbers or would you like to get personal recommendations? What do you want to see?

Gardner: I guess I see this as another tool to use in developing a 5 year program. I don't think this is the tell all that's going to give you what you want to do because you're only focusing on the areas of development and there are needs in the other areas of the county that you're going to have to address.

Jordahl: Certainly.

Gardner: And so that's something else that's going to weigh in the picture.

Jordahl: Certainly in the 5 year plan picture it will and... See it goes right back to the development question because since we have those needs elsewhere in the county that we have to also provide for, we can't simply put all of our resources into the areas where there is the highest pressure for development. So that piece of the question is again where your overall perspective of the road needs of the county needs to be, for me, a piece of our decisions and considerations in terms of development. So I would like to have your input in these zoning matters if we can have it done systematically, it might save you some time.

Gardner: Yes, it's kind of a chick and the egg deal. Are you going to upgrade the road prior to allowing the development to take place? Or are you going to come in after the fact and try to upgrade, accommodate the additional traffic and so forth?

Jordahl: We're going to plan with you.

Gardner: OK. Well then in that case I guess the 5 year program is where we are doing that. We're coming in and saying here is what we see as our needs for the next 5 years and, as the engineering department, then you people take that into account, and say yes but what about all the development that's taking place up here and all the pressures that we're seeing on this road. And then we can say exactly but do you feel that is an area that you want to spend your money or do you feel that maybe it's more appropriate for the developers to contribute to that upgrade.

Jordahl: See it feels to me like this needs to be pulled into focus as one process rather than two. The 5 Year Road Plan is one set of decisions and each zoning decision is another thing that impacts on that.

Gardner: Right. To me, when you adopt the 5 year program, you are saying this is where the county feels they're going to spend their funds and then you base your zoning decisions on that.

Davidson: I think the other issue with the zoning question that we addressed last year, that I think is critically important in the discussions I've had with the County Attorney, he agrees that it's critically important, that you have a great deal of area in the North Corridor that is zoned residential. And that was done many, many years ago. And what that says legally is that is the appropriate land use for that area. That determination has been made. I suppose to when zoning is requested, you have to make that determination if it is the preferred land use. Well there's been a determination made through your zoning, that legally a property owner has certain rights in those areas that are zoned residential. What that eventually gets you all to is the question of is development going to be allowed to proceed? You've said it's appropriate. Or do we put some breaks on development until the road can be upgraded (inaudible)? That's the question that we grapple with time and time and time again. And then I'll tell you it's no different in the cities, it's just a different type but the question is the same, is that road infrastructure adequate for the development. That's where we get to considering these enormous projects, and very expensive, and makes things very difficult.

Jordahl: I think the Board's hesitation last year was we didn't want to have a hard cut-off where we'd say OK, at this number the road must be improved before development can continue. What happens then if you have a road already past that level. Are we then obligated in some legal sense to do what we can't afford to or couldn't possible, physically do in terms of fixing it. We didn't want to have something that cut against the county in that way and so we needed the flexibility to respond to situations developed over a long period of time. But I still like very much having the recommendations for those numbers and I would like to see that continue and be refined rather than simply an accumulation of data occur. I like the narrative character of the report that put things into the framework of development.

Stutsman: Would do you mean refine? What more information?

Jordahl: We've studied certain gravel roads with certain slopes but the more information is something we'll take into account, different situations on different roads. R.J.?.

Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore: We've discussed this for almost a couple of years now. Jeff is going to give us technical data based on information about the use of any given road that we ask him to look at. Mike's 5 year construction plan is based on technical standards for roads and bridges that he know needs upgrading or replacement. Not on land use policies. You have documents in place that facilitate that. We've got a brand a new Land Use Plan. We've got a North Corridor Plan. So using all that information together allows you to make decisions on rezonings. For instance, Blaine Cemetery Road, we have a report from last that Jeff and JCCOG did for us that tells us what that road is like and what it can handle. We know with the curvature of the horizontal, and the curvature of that road, it really needs to be worked on before we add more traffic to it. You have a brand new land use plan that identifies that area as the rural area where agricultural uses are preferred. Even though in the past we have allowed rezonings in that area, we do not have to do that anymore until we decide to do something with that road. And you are already kind of mandated with your North Corridor Plan, we've identified the north corridor as our residential area and as Jeff noted, we've got thousands of acres up there zoned, where we've said this is the permitted use of this property and yet our road infrastructure won't allow that to continue. I understand, I'd like to see numbers too, but I think that's a very difficult thing and I think with Jeff and Mike, have tried to feed back to you is that most of those decisions are policy decisions that depend on the 5 of you and how the majority of you are going to view any application. To come up with hard numbers, I think as Jeff said, is pretty difficult. I don't know that you could actually do a road improvement thing like... plan like a LESA, to look at it like a lease thing. But using all that data together, you can, and all your plans and information and Mike's word. Mike can't make a recommendation to you about a road on land use policies, he can tell you whether or not it can handle more traffic.

Jordahl: Well, but that's exactly the piece of it. The road number wouldn't be a LESA number taking into account zoning or something. It would be with respect to roads and traffic counts. What can this road handle for traffic. And some combination of what GIS will be able to cook up, which is where Rick's involvement has been important, is to talk about what the potential development in the area is, and to bring the zoning aspect of it together with that. But that road piece of the information is a very important piece of information to have. And the more specific, the more quantified that that can be the more based on the engineer's broad judgement of the county's needs that that can be, the better to me. But I'm one voice, there are 5 Supervisors here.

Stutsman: Well. And I was going to say it seems like I'm hearing a straw poll. People ready to move on with the next roads and I think that's what we're to decide today. To give direction whether we want to proceed. And I think we all agree that it has value, to get this information to help us make decisions and pull this all together.

Davidson: Well it's our intention to have that information to have that information to you in the next few months then. We'll start an account program here the 1st of April and a couple of months we should have it all done.

Lehman: I think we're looking at sitting down with Mike and help him construct his 5 year road plan with the information that Jeff supplies us, and then we have to decide, are we going to have to cap development on some of these roads that we can't afford to improve right now? Do we want to promote it in other areas? We've got to figure our priorities and I think what you're asking is, gives the formula to do that. But I think we still have to have our judgement. We can't... plug these numbers in and this one came out number one, well we have to figure these factors. Well I think number 2 has more priority. We still have to have that capability of not being handcuffed by number factors.

Davidson: I think what you're saying is exactly right though Mike. The 5 of you have the ability to guide where developments going to occur through that road plan. In the city we say road, sewer, water. Well in the county it's primarily roads are the determining factor in where development's going to occur.

Duffy: I've got some real problems with this. We have about, what, 930 miles of county roads that we own, the people in Johnson County. And what I'm hearing here, I might have a little problem with paving roads close to the city so they can annex. And then maybe some of these farmers around, they can't even get over a bridge or something like that. I don't know if we ought to drag in our County Engineer's personnel on this. It's a hard decision sometimes. Now I know that this land that was owned way back in 1960. There's a lot of farmers in the North Corridor, and you know how this farming is, corporation farming here we come. But still, they farm that land, it's been zoned for so many years, if they're still around they're still going to farm it. So you can't say, you start building houses here and we'll fix up the road for you.

Jordahl: Well, we're not going to... I don't think anybody on the Board support telling somebody that they've got to quit farming.

Duffy: Well, what we're saying here that maybe... Say somebody wants to build a house on a hill someplace out there, that don't bother me a bit, it's the kind of land that we should preserve, and if you don't agree with that, even the State and the Feds do. There's a difference in land, that's not what bothers me, what really bothers me, if they want to do it, some of the best farmland in the world is being paved under.

Jordahl: That's part of...

Duffy: Let's be a little careful here. I think our roads are a little bit bitter than what people think they are.

Jordahl: I like our roads too. We've got to move on. I think I do hear consensus that the study should continue and I hope to see that 5 year plan back before us shortly and we can try to balance some of this stuff. I appreciate all of your input and hard work. Thanks for your comments R.J. We have a pretty darned packed agenda this morning and I'd like to try to move through it as well as we can. But if members of the public want to say something about this Road Management Study , I need to offer that opportunity. This is an informal meeting.

Reverend Bob Welsh: Let me make one quick comment. I would hope (inaudible) that making the (inaudible) making of the bill that is used by the Board of Supervisors be important, just be a part of the consideration of Planning and Zoning.

Jordahl: Yes, and I believe that the Planning and Zoning Department actually has the Road Management Study on their web site. Is that correct?

Dvorak: Yes, that is correct. We wait until it's completed. We don't put any information that's submitted. We wait until the document's presented to the Board. It would be 2 to 3 months before this document would be in place. But last year's has been on the internet since we've had internet access on our web site.

Jordahl: Rick, perhaps Mr. Ahrens, is your item a relatively brief one we might be able to get through before we do the...

Dvorak: I'm just actually just presenting to the Board. I gave 2 copies to you last Friday, I don't know if you want to comment on it or not. We're here in case you do have some comments on it. So, I'm glad (inaudible)...

Jordahl: Maybe we could reserve that for the meeting on Thursday to comment or did you want to...

Stutsman: I just think the graphs are great. It really helps to see things in black and white and how things have changed. So I thought it was a lot of good information in there. I'm glad you do it. It takes time to put these reports together and I know you're terrifically busy but it's time well spent.

Dvorak: I think so too. And again, this information also is put on the internet. And people use a lot of this information. The statistical information, we constantly have contacts from developers and appraisers, market value, what are houses going for, what are they being constructed, where are they being constructed at? Things like this are very helpful to the general public. Again, that's the other reason we do it for the Board's information, for the public's information. Yes, I'd be glad to come and talk to you again sometime about this and Mr. Ahrens has to wait because he has to talk to me anyway after this meeting so we're kind of locked in.

Jordahl: I see. OK.

Duffy: R.J., could I ask one question? Could you have some information on how much land was annexed in the cities from 1994 through 1998? Could you get that?

Moore: No, I didn't do that this year.

Duffy: I mean I want the latest.

Moore: Primarily because that wasn't information that we had readily available in our office. I would've had to go outside our office to get it. And it was a variable that we couldn't control. It wasn't output from our office. And basically we wanted to concentrate that this was our office's annual report, what we do or don't do. And the annexations, we had no control over, no ability to impact one way or another for you. So we left that out.

Duffy: I'd like to know R.J. Maybe I can find out myself, talk to the county separate.

Moore: If the Board would like, we can definitely do that. Again, I don't want to be whining here, but staff, we don't have a lot of time so I tried to prioritize what information I felt you should be seeing in that and that wasn't one that I felt that we had control over and did or didn't do.

Jordahl: In terms of our trends, you see I know Charlie's interested in the consumption of agricultural land in the fringe areas, it might be an interesting statistic to have access to. One of the... If people want to get a copy of this Rick, besides looking on the web, are they available in your office, I assume, hardcopy?

Dvorak: Yes. I doubt we'll give out color copies but we definitely will make copies available I think.

Jordahl: Yes, so in terms of the data and the charts and the text and so forth, are they free or are you charging for those?

Dvorak: Well, we'll get a couple of bucks for them. inaudible) a copy.

Jordahl: I really appreciate you providing us. I think this is the, we're trying to move toward more statistical accountability for expenditures in the county, and it really helps us both with planning and with departmental funding.

Dvorak: I have to compliment our interns and R.J. (inaudible) statistical information.

Jordahl: Uh-huh.

Duffy: You did a good job.

Jordahl: You get good interns.

Dvorak: Yes we do.

Jordahl: We're looking to have a university in town.

Dvorak: We're losing one this summer.

Jordahl: Yes? Where's Bridgett going, do you know?

Planning and Zoning Intern Bridget Carberry: I'm graduating. I'm not sure where I'm going yet. I'll tell you when I know.

Jordahl: Bridget Carberry you've been a big help. Put in lots of long evenings. I know we sat up in Swisher for many a night this last summer trying to put that together and we're not done yet.

Dvorak: We're close.

Jordahl: Getting there huh? OK, I look forward to it. All right, thank-you gentlemen. OK now.

Jordahl: Bruce Ahrens, Senior Farm Manager of Farmer's National Company, County Farm Lease Agreement.

Farmer National Company Senior Farm Manager Bruce Ahrens: Good morning.

Jordahl: Good morning.

Ahrens: I just have a short note here. On the second page is a plat map of the county farm, showing the different acreages that we had this past year. And on the third page is just the front page of the copy of the lease that we used with Tom and Guy Williams this past year. We had to make a few key adjustments, that's the reason it's kind of penciled in there. We had some CRP we didn't find out about or we made a decision fairly late in the year to go ahead and rent that out. Because it's not reaccepted back in the CRP because of the $50,000 limitation that the county was up against for the state of Iowa. So basically agriculture is under a little pressure as we speak as far as corn soybeans and hog prices. Cash rents appear to be fairly steady. It seems like a catch-22 but the majority...

Duffy: I can't see how they could.

Ahrens: Again, it just depends on which side of the coin you're on. Representing the Board of Supervisors I have to say they're fairly stead. I mean there's pressure from the farmers. There's still good demand for cash rental properties and so that's indirectly why property rents are staying the same. And again that's just my recommendation. This is our purpose today, is to discuss this. So it would be leasing basically 60.1 acres at $105 dollars which would be paid March 15th and then we have approximately 61 acres that had been in CRP that would be at $100 and that was paid November 30th, at the end of November this year. So those are the figures that I'm discussing right now. Where they had the CRP last year, we had a few trees in there. They lost a few sickle sections where those trees came up so the $100 is probably pretty good rent for that area actually because it was in CRP and there's a real purpose why it was in CRP because it is fairly... It's not as productive a ground as the balance that was never in CRP. Again, that's part of the reason why it's a little a bit cheaper and again that portion's paid at the back as well. Just another point, we had 23 acres of switch grass that had been CRP before. Originally we were planning to try to harvest that for seed. It turns out our stand was not near thick enough to justify the cost of what the nitrogen was going to cost, what the harvesting was going to cost, and also the price of switch grasses dropped by a third. I mean it's a third of what it was a year ago, so again when we're making those... discussing it last year, switch grass is selling for around $10-and-a-half a pound, now you can buy it for $3-and-a-half a pound. So the economics really have changed on us as far what that would, what we could have invested versus what we would of actually capitalized on that. And I'm trying to think of the gal's name that works down at the NRCS office, she's actually a county employee. Is it Lori?

Stutsman: Lori Schnorr?

Ahrens: I need to work with her to, again, open discussion here as to what the county would like to do with this 23 acres. It's inadvertently reverting to a prairie. It's just a matter of focus of where we're going to go with this. We either... We need to make up our mind. We don't have to do anything today because it's a long-term type situation. But we probably aren't going to get much income off the property as it is right now, and so we either need to focus our attention to a potential learning center or we need to redirect it for income.

Jordahl: Have you had a conversation, with now that we're in transition in terms of the Roadside Vegetation Management Program... I assume that you're speaking with Russ Bennett about this earlier.

Ahrens: Right, right. I haven't had a chance to talk to him lately. Again, there's harvestable seeds out there for him. Again, these switch grass plants are kind of intermittent. There's no real solid stand. They'd have to be hand harvested is what they'd have to be.

Jordahl: I think there may be volunteers in the community or something where hand harvesting would actually be a possibility.

Ahrens: Could be...

Jordahl: I also wonder about species of grass that might be more expensive that we could plant and harvest by hand and where the thing really could pay off. But maybe in its present condition it needs some attention. Actually Russ Bennett has resigned his position with the County.

Ahrens: Oh is that...

Jordahl: We can begin the search for the new Roadside Vegetation Manager so that there will somebody new to work with there. Right now this isn't exactly an open question because we don't have a person in place to address it.

Lehman: Mike talked to Solon Water. They have a truax drill. They could go in a reseed here.

Ahrens: Right. Right.

Lehman: You might be looking at some other varieties along with it. You're not going to be able... How many more years are on that contract?

Ahrens: We're outside of the CRP Contract. It expired a year ago.

Lehman: OK.

Ahrens: We initially were trying to rebid it but the County is thrown into the pool with the State of Iowa and other municipalities as far as the $50,000 limitation. The State is over $50,000 limitation. We could have bid it in. We would have maybe received partial payment or no payment for x number of years so we felt there was no reason to jeopardize compliance for something that we would receive no income for.

Lehman: It is definitely poor farm ground. That's why it got...

Stutsman: I wonder if Chris Fowler from Conservation shouldn't be a part of discussions about his area...

Jordahl: Uh-huh. Yes.

Stutsman: ...as far as the Learning Center.

Jordahl: Also seed harvesting... Rod's trying to establish some prairie out there to have within a short span of space 3 different ecosystems.

Ahrens: Oh yes. No, no, it's a...

Jordahl: There's a lot of synergy to be gained here. We will have a Roadside Vegetation Manager shortly so...

Ahrens: We have 18.2 acres that is adjacent to it there to the southwest. Again, I think Russ in the past has found a tremendous diversity of prairie species, native prairie species, out there. Again, both...

Stutsman: It's also kind of a wetland too, isn't?

Ahrens: Oh yes. There's quite a few in it. Again, it's a catch 22. We've got a tremendous... we've introduced to different eco-type systems (inaudible) to introduce species. Some of those seeds have been there so they are regenerating the prairie. Which direction do we want to go? Is money more important than the future or what would we like to do with our...

Jordahl: Can we burn there?

Ahrens: We can burn but in some places we still don't have enough residue to get a good hot fire. There's just...

Stutsman: Why was it so poor?

Ahrens: It's probably (inaudible) plowed probably up and down the hills and lost most of the top soil so we're down to the subsoil, which isn't as productive.

Stutsman: Even for switchgrass?

Ahrens: Well again, it needs certain elements... some of the elements aren't there or sometimes the seed hasn't grown as well. It's a combination. We can diversify

Ahrens: ... the plants that are there. Otherwise we can do some hand seeding. Basically strip the seeds off the existing plants, frost seed or... It just depends on how much effort and cooperation you can get. It has a lot of potential but it's a very labor intensive situation.

Stutsman: Uh-huh.

Jordahl: I think they were there trying to establish a demonstration plot at the fairgrounds. And we've got trees forever people and the project green. I think there's a lot of community interest in this type of thing. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we could get volunteers to do a lot of the handwork just for the sake of seeing what can be done and learning about it and stuff.

Ahrens: Right. What would be Lori's... We need to get Lori involved here as well.

Jordahl: Many hands here.

Ahrens: Yes.

Stutsman: And she'd be a good one to coordinate it. You talk about getting volunteers in. Well it does always take that person to coordinate it and I think she would be an appropriate one to work with that.

Ahrens: And again the normal purpose of my job is to get the agriculture ground leased and when we get into this it becomes very intense. I'll do a good job on leasing the property then we'll let Lori take over.

Stutsman: And I think that's appropriate.

Jordahl: That makes sense.

Lehman: Do you get a lot of interest from farmers on this?

Ahrens: Actually we worked with Williams...

Duffy: Good renters. We're just lucky.

Ahrens: Yes. My recommendation is to continue to work with Williams. We try to work with a fair market rental rate that I look at in relation to other properties that I do manage. As far as outside interest we've not have people inquiring per se.

Lehman: I don't know if you've got operating continuities worth quite a bit.

Ahrens: Tom and Guy, like I say, they had to work around those. They planted soybean roundup ready soybeans in the old CRP last year. In fact, I was just talking to Tom yesterday, they basically had to carry a big box of sickle sections because they busted that many of them just going through there. So they've been very patient, very cooperating in actually moving some trees, and very generous as far as their time and billing back to the county.

Duffy: I was out there yesterday. I think that one big tree, I see that went around (inaudible). But going back to the switch grass, it was what 10 years ago maybe?

Ahrens: It's probably 12 now.

Duffy: 12 years ago. I remember when that was sewed in there. That was the big thing then. Switch grass never did get off to a good start.

Ahrens: No.

Duffy: Model flower rows. There's only one person that, that was sprayed with chemicals several times with, he seemed to like it. They were great until Tom got in there. Remember when he, well you are on board. That really helped.

Ahrens: If you catch them on the right stage you can send them back.

Duffy: So he must have caught them just right.

Ahrens: Well actually there's been a virus. I mean there's been a bacteria. No, it's a virus is what it is, it's been kind of working its way from the south . Not fast enough, but it's working.

Duffy: Well we had the virus because you have this big chopper and he took care of them.

Ahrens: Steel virus.

Duffy: Yes.

Stutsman: When do you need the... I'm sorry.

Jordahl: So we need action to approve your proposal on Thursday.

Ahrens: OK that's fine. I'll get the lease. Well I'll just wait for your approval on the lease then, and then on your approval I'll get the lease and we'll have the Board of Supervisors sign the lease as we've done in the past.

Jordahl: OK. So we have here a map and we have what is a lease, but this is current year so we need a draft of a new one.

Ahrens: Right, that's correct.

Jordahl: Will we not have that Thursday?

Ahrens: I can have it Thursday for you, yes.

Stutsman: And basically it will be just like this one except what is written in pencil will be typed in.

Ahrens: We can handle that this year.

Lehman: But the amount of $6,310 was for how many acres?

Ahrens: 60.1.

Lehman: OK. And then the other, this came into being as... The CRP they wanted soybeans last years?

Ahrens: 61 acres.

Lehman: What is the dollar value on that?

Ahrens: $100 an acre.

Lehman: OK.

Duffy: That's pretty good.

Ahrens: Yes. In reality they didn't make much money because the beans weren't as good as they... It was fairly wet. The old CRP, with the amount of rain we had in June, it was pretty wet, it was pretty tough conditions for them.

Duffy: Would you know the CRP on the north side there next to the County Road Department? There's about 8.7 acres.

Ahrens: Uh-huh.

Duffy: That's not as good as on the south side.

Ahrens: I don't doubt that a bit. That's just a clay knob there.

Duffy: Clay know there, yes.

Jordahl: OK. We've got a couple more learned agenda items we need to get through here today. So I think...

Ahrens: So I'll get you the lease for Thursday to review and to sign if that's what you like.

Jordahl: Yes. Does Mr. Ahrens need to return on Thursday?

Stutsman: Well if we're comfortable with the lease? No. I think we're all right.

Jordahl: If we just have the lease here then that would be good.

Ahrens: Thank-you.

Jordahl: Thank-you very much. I'd like to take a 5 minute recess before we get into our next discussion. Would that be all right with members of the Board?

Stutsman: So be back at 25 of?

Jordahl: Yes. OK? Recessed.

Recessed at 10:31 a.m.; reconvened at 10:37 a.m.

(Continued in Part 3)