Loading...
Bee Branch Alignment Study WKS D~ ~<k~ MEMORANDUM May 12, 2004 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: Work Session - May 17, 2004 Bee Branch Restoration Alignment Study Attached is the material for the Bee Branch Restoration Alignment Study Work Session scheduled for Monday, May 17, 2004, at 5:00 p.m. in the third floor auditorium of the Camegie-Stout Public Library before the City Council meeting. The objectives of the Work Session are as follows: . Brief the Council on the evolution and status of the project; . Present the Council with preliminary recommendations developed by BBCAC; . Allow the Council and BBCAC representatives the opportunity to discuss the background and reasoning behind the preliminary recommendation; and . Obtain feedback from the Council on the preliminary recommendations. fì1J;{ ~ J2zh Michael C. Van Milligen MCVM/jh Attachment cc: Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Gus Psihoyos, Assistant City Engineer Dawn Lang, Budget Director Vi "'1"'r' i::i":HU I D : ¡ I Ii\! £ ¡ À Vi¡ i¡O D~ ~<k~ MEMORANDUM May 12, 2004 TO: FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager Gus Psihoyos, Assistant City Engineer ßD. May 1 ih City Council Work Session for the Bee Branch Restoration Alignment Study SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memo is to provide a summary of the status of the Bee Branch Restoration Alignment Study in preparation for the Council Work Session on May 1ih, 2004. The memo summarizes the progress of the project and the BBCAC process utilized for developing the preliminary recommendation. The Bee Branch Citizens Advisory Committee (BBCAC) has been meeting since September 2003 to understand the problems and potential solutions associated with the Bee Branch flooding problem. They have recently developed a preliminary recommendation for an acceptable alignment and their desired solution to the Bee Branch flooding problem. WORK SESSION OBJECTIVES The Work Session is intended to accomplish the following objectives: . Brief the Council on the evolution and status of the project . Present the Council with preliminary recommendations developed by BBCAC . Allow the Council and BBCAC representatives the opportunity to discuss the background and reasoning behind the preliminary recommendation . Obtain feedback from the Council on the preliminary recommendations BACKGROUND On December 16, 2002, the City Council authorized City staff to issue a request for proposals to develop preliminary design and to conduct an alignment study for the Bee Branch Creek Restoration Project from 16th and Sycamore to 24th and Elm. On the 27th of February, 2003, the City Council adopted Ordinance 7-03 establishing the stormwater management charge of $1.29 per single-family unit. The charge was based on a twenty-five (25) year funding scenario for stormwater management that included the $17.1 million for the Bee Branch Creek Restoration Project. The adopted five-year Capital Improvement Program Budget included the Bee Branch Creek Restoration Project with initial funding scheduled for Fiscal Year 2006. An RFP was presented to the City Council in March of 2003. The Council approved the RFP that identified the goals of the study to: 1. Establish the optimum alignment for the proposed open waterway along its approximately 4,500-foot length (from the 16th Street detention basin to 24th and Elm) based on existing environmental, utility, social, and economic. constraints; Provide a preliminary design to a level that it establishes: a. What the waterway will look like at different locations along its entire length; How the waterway will function before, during and after rainstorms of different magnitudes; and Work with impacted residents in the form of a citizens advisory committee to ensure that the recommended alignment location and waterway design are based on input from the neighborhoods impacted by the proposed open waterway. 2. b. 3. In May of 2003, the City Council approved the proposal review committee's recommendation to select CDM (with WHKS) to provide engineering and design services for the study. In August of 2003, the City Council established the roster of the Bee Branch Citizen Advisory Committee (see attachment). PROJECT EVOLUTION AND BBCAC MEETINGS The Bee Branch Citizen Advisory Committee has met five times since September. Project Objectives and Evaluation Criteria At the first meeting, discussion included project objectives such as solving the (Bee Branch) flooding problem, minimizing acquisitions, maintaining safety, preserving Comiskey Park, and preventing the loss of jobs. In order to rank potential solutions, the Committee selected seven criteria that were used to establish a rank for each potential solution. In order of importance, they are: preserve local businesses and services, minimize property acquisitions, affordability, preserve neighborhood access and connectivity, minimize health and safety risks, and consider impacts to quality of life and the environment. Potential Solutions To better understand the source of the flooding problems and to help identify appropriate solutions, the committee asked the engineers to consider the feasibility of the open channel, more detention basins, a bigger storm sewer, runoff reduction controls, stormwater pumping, and various improvements to the existing sewers. CDM developed a computer model to analyze and develop a solution that safely conveys stormwater through the study area. In addition, the model is used to show how each potential solution/alignment is capable of eliminating or reducing the flooding problems. At the second meeting, committee members were shown that CDM's model generally reflects the flooding they saw in 1999 and in 2002. By the end of the second BBCAC meeting, committee members dismissed the use of upstream detention basins because they would require the removal of over 130 homes. Rain gardens, rain barrels, cisterns, and porous pavement were considered; but because of limited benefits, they are suitable only as a component of the final recommendation. Pumping and pipe efficiency improvements proved to be too costly, estimated to exceed $60 million. Therefore, the committee turned its attention to an open channel or relief pipe solution. Alignment Development At the third meeting, the BBCAC was divided into three working groups that were asked to develop potential project alignments. Three alignments were developed for a basic project "footprint". CDM evaluated these three alignments and considered 9 additional alignments to focus on the most appropriate alignment for a Bee Branch solution. The alignments were evaluated primarily in terms of commercial acquisitions, residential acquisitions and road closures. The 12 alignments were reduced to 1 primary alignment that was contingent upon resolving issues with the railroad and access to Audubon School. Alternatives The BBCAC asked CDM to evaluate both a pipe solution and an open channel solution for the selected alignment. The first alternative that the BBCAC analyzed is an open channel between 24th and Elm and the 16th Street Detention Basin. This is the principal solution that HDR Engineering recommended to the City Council at a cost estimate of $17.1 million (1999 cost). CDM produced a preliminary cost estimate of $29.7 million (2004 cost), later revised to $25.1 million, based on the selected BBCAC alignment. This altemative would require the acquisition of 65 homes and 13 businesses. The HDR Engineering Drainage Master Plan investigated multiple relief pipe solutions. One alternative consisted of five equivalent Bee Branch sewers running under various streets. This option did not require the removal of any homes or businesses and was estimated to cost $93.5 million (1999 cost). A second option called for rebuilding a larger underground pipe in the location of the existing Bee Branch sewer. While this estimate was less, at $57.1 million (1999 cost), it required the removal of approximately 50 homes and businesses. The second alternative that the BBCAC considered is a combination of a relief sewer and an open channel. The relief sewer would be built from 24th & Elm to the railroad tracks at Garfield and the open channel would be built from the railroad tracks at Garfield to the 16th Street Detention Basin. The relief sewer portion would consist of two (2) underground pipes ranging between 10-foot high by 28-foot wide and 10-foot high by 42-foot wide. This option would still require the acquisition of 64 houses and 14 businesses. CDM produced a preliminary cost estimate for this option of approximately $42 million (2004 cost), later revised to $41 million. Attached are typical cross sections of the open channel and relief pipe systems. PUBLIC MEETING A public meeting was held from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on March 30, 2004(after the fourth BBCAC meeting). The agenda for the meeting was: 6:00 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. Open House This initial session was comprised of an open house much like an IDOT public information meeting. This open house comprised of displays and handouts. A five (5) page frequently asked questions handout prepared by Engineering staff (attached) and an acquisition/reloCÇItion process handout prepared by David Harris was made available. Comment forms were also available for written questions and comments. Stamped envelopes were given out to individuals who wished to comment after the meeting (see attached comments). 6:30 - 7:00 p.m. Project Backqround Presentation CDM Project Manager, Dan Lau, presented the history of the project and status of the alignment study. In addition, David Harris spoke about the relocation process. 7:15 - 8:00 p.m. Question and Answer Period At this time individuals were able to attend six different information stations to speak directly to BBCAC members, engineers and City staff about concems and get answers to their questions. The majority of BBCAC members were present and helped answer many of these specific questions and concerns. 8:00 - 9:00 p.m. Public Input At this session, individuals were given the opportunity to step up to the microphone and express their thoughts, concerns and opinions concerning the project. Only two individuals opted to voice their opinions and these comments were tape-recorded, transcribed and presented to the BBCAC (see attached transcript). Sixty-nine (69) people signed the attendance sheet. The meeting was extremely beneficial to the citizens, BBCAC, CDM and City staff. The meeting atmosphere was highly conducive to providing citizens with the information they sought and providing the BBCAC, engineers, and City staff a better understanding of citizens' concerns. BBCAC MAY 3,2004 MEETING A fifth meeting of the BBCAC was held to discuss resolution of the railroad and school issues, and to reach consensus on the final alignment, to evaluate the pipe and open channel altematives, and to select a preferred altemative. The meeting produced the following: . Recommended project alignment . Preliminary recommendation for a preferred alternative Recommended Project Alignment The BBCAC unanimously selected the Elm/Kniest Alignment (attached) by voice vote, regardless of whether the open channel or pipe alternative is selected. This alignment was selected because it best met the evaluation criteria developed by the BBCAC in that it minimized the impacts associated with the loss of services in the area and also minimized the number of residential acquisitions. Preliminary Recommendation for a Preferred Alternative The BBCAC approved by a 12 to 3 paper ballot vote, the Pipe Alternative as its preferred alternative to address the Bee Branch flooding problem. This recommendation was characterized as a "preliminary recommendation" based on the information available to the BBCAC and without any knowledge of budget limitations that might be imposed by the Council". The intended use of this recommendation was to seek feedback from the Council on the affordability of the Pipe Alternative. There was considerable discussion on this issue with the minority position being most concemed about the possibility that project would never be implemented because of the $41 million price tag. The specific wording of the BBCAC recommendation was: "The BBCAC recommends the Council identify funding to construct the Pipe Alternative as the preferred altemative. The BBCAC prefers the Pipe Alternative because it preserves neighborhood accessibility, presents fewer health and safety risks, and enhances the quality of life." Contingent Solution The BBCAC discussed a contingent solution, the Open Channel Alternative, as a fall- back position if the Pipe Alternative could not be implemented. The BBCAC did NOT approve the contingent recommendation by a 7 to 8 paper ballot vote. The specific wording of the question was: "The BBCAC would accept the Open Channel solution as opposed to doing nothing, provided the Council has pursued timely, adequate and comprehensive funding for the Pipe Alternative". This question was defeated by a 7 to 8 vote. Potential Funding Impacts The proposed alternatives have preliminary cost estimates of $25.1 and $41 million. These costs are significant increases over the previous HDR cost of $17.1 million. The BBCAC asked about the potential change in the stormwater rate to pay for either the Open Channel or Pipe Alternatives. CDM has developed preliminary costs and the potential impact that these alternatives might have on the stormwater rate. The current rate is $1.29 per SFU per month. The majority of single-family property owners currently pay this fee to help fund Dubuque's Stormwater Management Program. The rate was established based on a twenty-five (25) year funding scenario that included $17.1 million for the Bee Branch Creek Restoration Project. It was also based on the use of $5 million from the State of Iowa associated with the back taxes owed the DRA. However, the recent DRA settlement forgave the back-taxes resulting in a decrease in the projected revenue for stormwater management activities. Unless another funding source is found to replace the $5 million DRA distribution, replacing this lost revenue through bonding would necessitate raising the rate $0.50, from $1.29 to $1.79, per SFU per month to retire the debt. This potential increase was reported in the FY 2004 Citizen's Guide and in the Public Works' FY 2004 budget presentation. Table 1 outlines the potential impacts to the stormwater management rate based on the alternatives being discussed as part of the current study. These rate assumptions do not include access to any future federal funding which has proved difficult at best. Table 1. Potential Stormwater Rate Increase Comparison Required SFU Rate Required SFU Rate if other Funding is ALTERNATIVE Unavailable to to Fund Alternative Replace Unrealized $5 M from DRA $17.1 Million Open Channel Project $1.29* $1.79 (Original Estimate) $25.1 Million Open Channel Project $2.65 $3.15 (Current Estimate) $41.0 Million Open Channel/Relief Sewer $5.30 $5.80 (Current Estimate) *Current Rate The potential rate changes presented herein are preliminary and are intended for planning purposes only. While the original financial model was utilized to determine the relative rate differences, they are presented with the understanding that the City's budget resources change and that actual rate increases would be derived from an updated financial model produced by the City. Discussion of the BBCAC Recommendation There was considerable discussion in the May 3rd BBCAC meeting surrounding the recommendation and the contingent recommendation. Those that voted for the pipe solution were most concerned about the risks associated with an open channel solution that they perceived did not currently exist in the area or greatly exceeded the pipe solution risks. Those that voted for the contingent solution were concerned that nothing might be done if the pipe solution was unaffordable. In the end, the BBCAC agreed that the recommendation should be viewed as preliminary subject to feedback from the Council on the affordability of the pipe solution. Several members of the BBCAC agreed to attend and participate in the Council Work Session on May 17th to assist in developing a final recommendation. attachments Cc: Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Dawn Lang, Budget Director Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager David Harris, Director of Housing & Community Development Ken TeKippe, Finance Director Don Vogt, Operations & Maintenance Manager Bill Baum, Economic Development Director John Klostermann, Street & Sewer Maintenance Manager Deron Muehring, Civil Engineer II Jerelyn O'Connor, Neighborhood Development Specialist Susan Gwiasda, Public Information Officer Dan Lau, CDM Bee Branch Citizen Advisory Committee Roster Name Association/Background Address 1. Long Range Planning Dr. Charles Winterwood Advisory Commission 1 -Chair of CAC- 2. League of Women Voters 1555 Montrose Terrace 3. Sierra Club 4. Bee Branch Watershed resident 1. Community Development . David Shaw Advisory Commission 2 2. Assistant Manager of Eagle 2835 Elm Street Foods (1800 Elm) 3. North End resident Wayne Klostermann 1. North End Neighborhood 3 Association representative 2636 Queen 2. North End resident Dan Morgan 4 Audubon PTA 704 Lincoln Jim Lansing Dubuque Board of Realtors 5 representative 4029 Pennsylvania Michelle Harry 1. Impacted resident 6 2. North End resident 2316 Prince Street Faith Kramer 1. Impacted resident 7 2. North End resident 2362 Washington Audrey Morey 1. Impacted resident 8 2. North End resident 2545 Eim Street Owns property at: John Gronen 2027 Elm 1766 Plymouth Ct. 1. Impacted property owner 2006 Washington 9 2. Developer 2015 Washington 2032 Washington 2042 Washington 2046 Washinoton Richard Sullivan 1. Soil Conservation District 10 2. Bee Branch Watershed 817 Garfield resident 3. Senior Citizen Frank Miller 1. Sacred Heart Parish 11 2. North End resident 602 E. 22"d Street 3. Professor of Physics (Ret.) 4. Senior Citizen Pam Jochum 1. State of Iowa Legislature 2368 Jackson 12 2. North End resident 3. Impacted Resident 1. Impacted resident Irene Waltz 2. Impacted property owner 1552 Maple Street 13 3. Bee Branch Watershed resident 4. Senior Citizen Bee Branch CAC Membership 7/30/03 Laurie Bartolotta 14 1. Impacted Resident 2104 Kniest Street Rita Brothers 1. Impacted Resident 15 2. Member of Washington 2130 Elm Street Neighborhood Council David Fuerstenberg 1. Impacted Resident 16 2. Retired Deere worker 2259 Prince Street 17 Sue Denlinger 1. Impacted Resident 2369 Washington Bee Branch CAC Membership 7/30/03 Bee Branch Creek Restoration Alignment Study City of Dubuque, Iowa May 3, 2004 COM with WHKS & Co. N A 0 500 1000 Feet 250 750 LEGEND (\j - ETI Bee Branch Mainline Existing Buiidings Detention Basins I Open Channel Alignment ~ :: (\j Edge of Low Fiow Channai Edge of Construction I Buffer Zone Culverts Road ø r::? / -. , L.-- "--""j<C" "-,,,,"r _/0/, (180') . / 100' / rY.rmÆ.v. " ;r--. ,A",,:,:-s.,..f¿,. ,q,o..d"..C,{."".¿ ,r." /'/6dc'/.-wu/ Y ¿o<vr;¡;war 15' "::;,~ s~e" 1 &//ev;, /,,7-= ('(;Fe) . /" -A'r"",,- /4' / ) 25' " ,-, / ~ 30' I (..-<->€"""""-' Ar;ð- :"'\;".\"""~ i r "",- : ¡ 32.5,rr'~ ~' "-.;Y , , i ' . ,.....-' I . - i ..' ," ~<::.;:5'! . --", .' ,. -~."~"'-~ -' - . r'Y' / .0.. ¿>~~.,' r /<f""-1TQ¡"1/1~'~=C>(' . ." c'6~4.P"AC or ......",/'¿.<v<t-y) Typical Open Channel Cross-Section r---'" ~","'" J' (;; ,;¡;;"..~-.- -A.~""L G-..'¿r (150') ,cill !- - ~.-"- -"""."-. -", --"-=---"""", .¡ ---_.._--~-q,.,C"d" "\"_---, ....-1'C<;,¡¡u-,""t...--, ':- . ","" I _c_-,y~ , , '," ,--: è'------ ' "" , ~ "'-~'---,"--'--'~'~""'" ","'~' f k~ J" Jc=:5,"~' / ~r'" ,é/ b. X --,,- -, - , o.v«."""-' ." ¿'~"s ' .- &~~£,.: ) ~«, ~ '7 Bee Branch Creek Restoration Alignment Study City of Dubuque, Iowa Typical Relief Pipe Cross-Section May 3, 2004 CDM with WHKS & Co. Stormwater related frequently asked questions Question: Answer: Question: Answer: 1 ) 2) Question: Answer. Question: Question: Answer: March 30, 2004 Stormwater Frequently Asked Questions What is stormwater runoff? Stormwater runoff is the rain that does not soak into the ground. It is the portion of rain that flows down streets, ditches, and creeks. What is a stormwater management plan? It is a plan to solve drainage problems and prevent new problems from developing. Dubuque's stormwater management plan that pertains to flooding consists of two things: A Stormwater Detention Policy that requires developments to construct detention basins to prevent new drainage problems and The Drainaqe Basin Master Plan that recommends the construction of drainage improvements to solve existing flooding problems in the North Fork Catfish Creek and Bee Branch watershed basins. What is the Bee Branch watershed basin? The Bee Branch watershed basin is the land that contributes rainfall-runoff to the Bee Branch storm sewer. Totaling just over seven (7) square miles, it includes land surrounding W.32nd Street, Kaufmann Avenue, W. Locust Street, Windsor Avenue, and the North End between Peru Road and 14th Street. - What is the Bee Branch storm sewer and where is it? . - The ajProximately two-mile long storm sewer originates at the W.32n Street detention basin. Traveling in a southeasterly direction, the sewer resides under buildings, running diagonally with respect to the streets, until it reaches 28th and Washington Street where the alignment begins to follow Washington Street. The storm sewer gradually increases from a 60-inch concrete pipe at W.32nd Street to a 20-foot wide by 12-foot high stone box near the old Dubuque packing plant. What is a 100-year rainfall event? It is a rainstorm that has a 1 % chance of occurring each year. The predicted amount of rainfall associated with the storm was established looking at the rainfall records over the past 100 years. - 1 - Stormwater related frequently asked questions Question: Answer: Question: Answer: Question: Answer: Question: Answer: March 30, 2004 What is a 100-year floodplain? It is the area of land that has a 1 % chance of being covered with water each year. How did the City identify the homes that are in the 100-year floodplain? A computer program developed by HDR Engineering modeled the rainfall-runoff process and determined how the stormwater flows through the Bee Branch storm sewer. The model determined how deep the water would pond between the 16th Street detention basin and 32nd Street. The boundary of the flQodplain was established using these elevations. The fact that a home has been identified within the boundary of the floodplain does not mean that it will receive flood damage during every heavy rainstorm. Why is my home shown in the floodplain when it wasn't flooded in 1999? 2002? A home can be within the floodplain boundary and be above the floodwater elevation. If this is the case, the home might not flood. The fact of the matter is that a home could flood for a variety of reasons. The obvious way is that stormwater gets so deep in the street that it reaches the height of a door or window and then enters into the house. . Basêmenf flooding is more complex. What causes basement flooding? Three (3) common things can cause basement flooding: 1) Water moving through the soil (groundwater) can enter your basement through the floor and walls. This threat can be reduced using sump pumps and foundation drains or draintile around the outside of the home; 2) Rainwater can get into the sanitary sewer causing it to back up into homes. Sanitary sewers are not designed to drain stormwater. The City takes steps to prevent this. Home inspections are done to ensure that downspouts or sump pumps are not illegally connected to sanitary sewers. Broken and cracked sanitary sewers are repaired. Every year old-brick manholes are replaced with concrete manholes. Finally, drainage improvements are constructed so that the stormwater drainage system can drain more rain; and -2- Stormwater related frequently asked questions Question: Answer: Question: Answer: Question: Answer: Question: Answer: Question: Answer: March 30, 2004 3) Rainwater on the ground can enter a basement through a window well. Placing covers over window wells can reduce this threat. What's wrong with the existing Bee Branch storm sewer? HDR Engineering determined that the existing storm sewer is unable to drain the rainwater from large intense rainstorms. In fact, 15% of all rainstorms will cause flooding and likely result in flood damage. Does the City remove debris from the Bee Branch storm sewer? City employees regularly inspect the entire two-mile stretch of storm sewer. Debris is removed on an as needed basin. On three separate occasions over the past four years, debris was been removed from different sections of the sewer. Two locations were identifIed during the fall inspection where debris has collected. Funds have been budgeted to remove the debris this summer. Why not build more detention basins? Only two viable sites were found to build detention basins, an area just west of Carter Road, east of Eisenhower Elementary (referred to as the Carter Road detention basin) and the existing W. 32nd Street detention basin. When will the Carter Road detention basin and W. 32nd Streèt detention basin be constructed. The Carter Road detention basin is currently under construction and scheduled to be completed by June 30t\ 2004. The City has already purchased three of the homes needed to expand the W. 32nd Street detention basin. The improvements will be designed thjs summer with funding available for the construction next summer. Why not just build the Carter Road detention basin and the improvements to the W.32nd Street detention basin? While the two construction projects will significantly reduce the flooding between the Carter Road detention basin and 26th Street, over 900 homes & b.usinesses will still be at risk of flooding. c3- Stormwater related frequently asked questions Question: Answer: Question: Answer: Question: Answer: Question: Question: Answer: March 30, 2004 Why not build a bigger storm sewer? Whjle building an additional sewer could solve the problem, the cost is estimated to be between $12,000,000 and $40,000,000 more than the open channel option. Why doesn't the City just dig the W. 32nd Street detention basin deeper? If the basin was dug deeper, water would just fill up to the elevation of the existing storm sewer, the Bee Branch, that drains the basin. Therefore, no additional storage volume would be available for runoff. . The proposed W. 32nd Street Modifications Project involves the removal of homes around the basin and digging a basin twice as big as the existing basin. The improvements will be designed this summer with funding available for the construction next summer. What is the BBCAC? The BBCAC is short for the Bee Branch Citizen Advisory Committee. The citizen committee members were appointed to represent the needs and views of impacted residents as the City seeks a solution to the North End flooding problems. Along with City staff, and an engjneering consulting firm, the committee has been working on the Bee Branch Restoration Alignment Study. What is the Bee Branch Restoration AlignmentStudy? Many questions and concerns have been raised about the possibility of an open channel extending through the North End and Washington Street neighborhoods. The study is to determine: 1) What the optimum alignment for the proposed open waterway along from the 16th Street detention basin to 24th and Elm Streets based on environmental, utility, social, and economic constraints; 2) What the waterway will look like along its entire length; and 3) How the channel will function under different seasonal conditions. When is the City planning to construct the open channel? The first available funding for the portion of the open channel between Garfield and the 16th Street detention basin is budgeted -4- Stormwater related frequently asked questions March 30, 2004 for July of 2005. Purchasjng property will be the first task and it is expected to take up to three years to acquire all of the necessary property. The portion of the project north of Garfield that would run up to Comiskey Park has not been budgeted. Pending the outcome of the Bee Branch Alignment Study, the City Council will consider budgeting money for the improvement. The project schedule depends on the funding. -5- Received week of - April 1,2004 COMMENTS PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING DAR/Ç¡J HIfYvJl//?,ò :J-367 PI? IJVC¡ÇST: .Cf'?-tJlb:1- COMMENT: 7~ ~ h 0-- ~ ~ cnJ~ AM""~~ ,rv./ 3 - .1ò, ,n- - (J ~ft~~~3ÞJÅi':~~ ~þ~~, ~~~ ~~ ßdTf ~~. ~~~~~~ ~ J,:), þ ft-- I ~ ~ p-, ~ ~ þ.d: ~ ~ -J.:?Þ~Þ~ d-s-~k~.' q(/~ .d/~~ ~~~ 13,~~~~.~~~' ~ ~ ~ /Ið- :J-4.ß.. p. P ~ -4 dI' ~ ~ ~ ~~~, d;t~~O-;.Þøf'.~~ ~~~~' ~ dDJ~~ CI--'~~P/~ ~. '. JJW 'f.W=~~~~~- r;¡¿J ~ k ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ß-.J.~~J~íf~~' fl/~d '4/f-/~ cJ-~ ~(À./~~' rI~ -¡ S-,~.c.-d; ~ cI ~ ~..;t;-~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~' ~~túL ~ "..J ~ ~ 01 ;".... ~ ~ ~ ~, cI~~ßd~'f'þd~' UL-L-~~~ ~ .Ç- ¡¡- ~ ~ )l- ~ ~ ~ ~. 'k-- ~ ~ ~þþ~~~ ~~J~ ~~. {7~~~~~...M-...~ ~'f~~~~~q -' ~ 6?lAÆ ~ ;&-þ~~~s--/o~, rd(~ 3 ~ ~~:;LJI~ hu~ (ýVJ~~ . þJ~, arJ~~~cltßk~co;/y;k,. ~.~~þ~~~~~~ cr-.~~~~-¥ ~þ-. þ~~ I?'ðþ,~/. ~~~~~~~¡;~y; Üu- q!/~P ~~ ~~ ~ Du<-». ~~~~~~Þ-~~" ~~~~~~k~~ ~~. cI.~ ~~~~ ~ .~J ~~~O--<L ~~~ ~~þ~ c!tøv ~ ~~~~ ' 01 ;i:tu:b~ ~þ~þ~,~~~ ~~ ~A»-~~W~~~. -r~~. ð~~ COMMENTS PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING ,M'C'¡'¡'E'LLE; CL£ME./t 3:J'Ç> €. f'I v Box f7S4 fí¡æ £Lj)ON {-¥I;# eJ.£H£¡(fi 1) Uf!Ju¿þvE COMMENT: 58' ..Ja;z/3 TJ FoR. #£;4 VEC¡1/'s $/lfjG I1dfJE A þEð/S/D,v SÞ P£ðPL c- 1j/l!~JtJ) LLÞ}/!It-r;! ~ØIlE~' A¡(/jJ rl ßvGII ((¿i)Ht:/i)) cSt> úJ£ e-/!;J fí;l!-K£ t!Jv¿ o¿¿J# ,7L!I)J5 15/3"'7> 0)/ 'IbUtK.. þ5eU/cA/-5! 7.Ts ~ " If £ JJ- Ii D '/ J< 1,10 úJ J ,V G W If?/- T$ cØfI-,4--r. v ,It J)1-rt2H IS ,4 DITCH It .A P/Tc./-I/ e"",,- {1',4 tJi'rr5f'úM'f) þR7J¡¡J/fG'li' Ptl7'-r/; ðf'BÑ W/J%?- J2¡J}/ DFp6 'Is ¡£"H J:'i'5.5 TI L.L 7'f. ¡;u ,d/. . J 911MI ;J£/etfBð!2.J-toóÞ ¡po- p¡Ç FLfL.L tI7Vf$/-I IfJ A M;4TTE'< br Hðffí+-lS f -. ~ cJíY t -¡J-IE L!.illzEltf$ ~ f.J - lUlL!- II C!-~:;( /1ff::. ~ (// +hÆ'1 -< AJ?J L" f1 e:fr ¡j Å ~tfG¡V Á e¡+ILD (ÆJJþfJ]ðJJ-t fi/E~ '~'- " ,-" .5JL<A,-L ~<+'LD) 1'E'6A1s BpD" :>u~rcÞ !<JtlJPf1/I'¡" ';) u Q.¡ N <; -r1I .4-1 . ¡=)ß" JJ :J .D r?J' uJ AI :5 I II Å- Q'L L- D teAl ¡¡,fAr;; b fJ ¡re-II]? .. ~~~ CO MMENTS PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING Fulton School iJo'-ù'1 Be /á.V\.f(í V <.SO! E451-;;DYJd sri š¿Jl -OJ"9'Þ COMMENT: I wcJcJ like o.¡YIo..f dl'(Ãj'£,\vY1oFfkt .,J-o V II C LikJq' w~ a(C6- Se",+- -~. PUBLIC INFORMATION Mca MMENTS EETING Fulton School ') .-.."" l e.¡¿ ,~ð b ~ ~ " ¡'é--)¥l> ,-~~Tð-1d-93 COMMENT" -?úAilv~ m~~;L~ ~ h d~~7~ ~ ~p",:, r ~ N ~r~/~J:.~~ -~ 7 n r~:ÞI' :f ------ -------- ~. ~-- CO MMENTS PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING c5rt!£¿ a¡/¿/?JOL( d,7778~o<9}:,~j)ly ~ -;/j?§:Þ COMMENT: W/ m cYt!-e4::L ~/ ~---~£}I ~~?- ¡¡¿-:e{'>¿/ / / ~'-- ~,¿?¿Ç' G:D SE;þ/ ~ p-f?~ ~ aø J~:d~~w~(j r~A Ðd 7i& ~ r~ ?t-~ . ~,Lc?/¿£r«t;€ +' ~d fI¿¿ :zJ4-~?' Æw~ - COMMENTS PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING ¡t'l '~L/If-¿ Í/ !;te¡J;fl ¡) '1 :,s ~ :>-Y- 2- ~ 2;t;-r ò COMMENT: ß f/v1l~- ;ÇO p (-he- (J ¡eo/.) (! Ie ¡f-p¡v¿L °rrt ~AJI - Q~ SftJ/Jt:-- (I PIs.-- oe<;:¡ ~7;J fA.j6{¿¿ D :ì flA-e& ro£.- frt-L 7ÒÖ\ (, j. / Á. rZ/f-¡)c, 1'..) t<.... ¡ I) ( ¡Ji 50 A- ¿¡'òs.ef) f;,e. A- 1-4e v/lte/L !ov DII-¡/Ce/lÞ<-<- S. fù/L- ~ CZi.{.f-¡ de.¿ 5> eÆ, L 9 ¡¿ e;J COMMENTS PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING D/4L j~B ~ ay, . -r<l'/ ÞJ' S'6B -Jø.yJ COMMENT: ~~~4r -7~~' ¿(/ ~~~;,if1'í ~ ~ /,-/ ;é #~ ,;-;¡. J ~ H .2. '}k~' ;» ~. ~ r--r- ~ð ~ ~'Ji 46 ;d; ~^ ~ ~~~~h,!~~ß ~ ~.-tJ~~3M ~~ &,~ A- ~ ~ r/ ~ ~#-'ï/Ci ~ ~. ~1-7~~~~ CO MMENTS PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING Fulton School ðYì f~ . W VeJ,^",'ì tuV1 COMMENT: ~ ~ ~ ~~IA- a-ß ~ ~ ~l ~ 40 w~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ 4 :3 ï.. ~ ,j- ~ úLJ ~ f~ .~~ ~' Ì/>'\3-w.t .~ ~ 1M. ~ ~ - c.. 5~ ~ ~ ~ * \:11 r- ~ :n--J 7~' J IV>vtJ\ ~ (k b ~ IÀ. ~ ~ f tJ>'- ð-- ~ 'K- ~ aHJ 5 ~ ~.4J-. ~'N't,.- ~ J.J- ~. --¡-k W~/¡(J;, Received week of April 1,2004 COMMENTS PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING Fulton School (!Áar/otbe. /f'¡a.qee. V aS5'1 Jackson 513-Jf3t/f:> COMMENT: Ldtlj dflaJuJ. I am in favor of the open channel solution to the Bee Branch flooding problem. I have lived in several communities across the nation, even though most of my adult life has been spent in Dubuque. In all of those communities, the properties ITonting on streams, rivers, and lakes were valued higher than other properties in the community. The view of an open channel that the engineering finn proposed is very attractive and I feel will accomplish several things. First, the open-channel solution is closer to the proposed budget, while the underground pipe solution could end up costing twice as much. I assume this would delay the project until funds could be gathered to cover the costs. I do not live right on the proposed route ofthe channel or pipe, but I am impacted by the flooding because I live at 2554 Jackson Street and in 1999 and 2002, my basement had seepage of ground water caused by this flooding problem. I was happy to hear that many of the projects that are intended to help this situation have either been started or are nearing completion. I have waited five years for the city to move positively toward a solution to toms problem. Secondly, any underground pipe solution, as discussed in the last BBCAC meeting, may limit the effectivity ofthe solution because the pipe presently available would be divided in half, not being large enough to handle the volume of water anticipated. The engineering finn agreed that this did cause mction and would inhibit the flow to some extent. Nothing was said about the open channel stopping any of the flow. Thirdly, there was no discussion about the time it would take for the underground piping to break down, as we all know piping will do over time. Although this was not discussed, it would appear that the open channel had very little to deteriorate over time. In the seven criteria, where is it stated that the solution needs to happen in a timely manner? Also, there needs to be a definite deadline for making a recommendation to the City Council, not a vague one. People respond best to a definite date. At the last meeting of the BBCAC, I sat next to a gentleman who lives right in the path of all of the alternatives. He knows that whatever the committee chooses, he will lose his house. He has already been asked to wait five years for a solution, as I have. However, he is in an even less-tenable position, because it is less likely that he can sell his house to anyone. They know they wouldn't be able to keep that house as soon as acquisition starts. Also, he is being asked, as I am being asked, to put up with the basement water while these discussions continue. I know, since I have worked in a real estate office in the past, that the possibility of water in the basement is a negative when you are selling a house. Is this having a negative impact on the value of my property? I think it is. One warning I wish to raise. I see a danger in the underground pipe solution. I grew up in Cedar Rapids, Iowa and lived within biking distance to a large underground pipe opening into an open channel. We kids knew of the dangers associated with walking up into that pipe - we knew if water should come rushing down, we would have no place to escape it. That only made it more attractive to us. We never went near the open channel. While either solution has possible dangers associated with it where children are concerned, I think the open channel has less danger based on my personal experience growing up. Charlotte Magee 2554 Jackson St J ~ } '\ ~ ~ i I ¡ " ""'\\ ! \ , 1 , Ij i )~,r-¡5 { 1'--- ,; ~ ( ! ~I!' I ! I ! ~ \ fj II) ... 0 ':':"<t C )Q C )Q 3:N 1:1": C )- >"¡: "- a. ~« C ) a:: - PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING Co,,- tt..$'<:'-I 'd>õoo<o-, è....m~j ç;ç;,1.c- 12 "1- COMMENT: .:x: \;\'1\4'" d...'\ LYv- 7" \:, ~,<- \.,.",(..", "",~{t """')- s~ "-""'-\ ~~~ cø""'...-N-~ ~L~ - ~ ~"~'V::> (,,~ ~\ """'<"\ ~ ~Hlh.,- :s:... <ç:",",,"f\. ~ O~'I) c;'y-, ""'"'~ (.p", 4.. ~~"<."-'-'\ ~^~ '\<A. 'VI \L.."'----\""""'V) \ "'G'<-~ s\~ 't-\G\"JL ~\:;> ~û G...-.'Lb w':¡-,<-~ Cso"""~"\ aU ~ "¡"\\..L - 3:-S¡:- ~ C:'h"v-..~ ~d..i) (p\)'i:.1U-<.À\~5 \.D~".ot.,... w",~'ìJ..~\ '{-""",........ o.'""'->\.'-'-'~~ ~{j ~ ~~ ~ o~ <:.."""-",,,~ \<,. "\Vv- C)~ ~'" ~ ",,;J" \..>..>..J.i}, ~,~" ~~""'> - ole c...",,~ --;). ~ !>-")-,.."'-~"'" ,"\0 \v- ~ ~ 'ti-~L"'~'-"C" C;\"'~ ~~~C,...~. Á:",""",,^, ö 4- o-<,-""","<c,,-,,-...., \V\ ~",-w..o 'V) , 'r-r> '" . Ernest Pfeiffer 2931 Jackson I'll be first, I ain't proud. You might say well he lives way up on Jackson, it don't really affect him. Yes it does affect me. I was talking to some of you people before about this drainage issue. They are doing it down in Texas because they are 2-foot above sea level they got to go with that, they are very very dangerous. When I was down there I looked at them and the water when the rain comes is very dangerous. You heard and seen on the news when kids got in the drainage ditches and drowned. We want to create the same thing in Dubuque, Iowa, I don't think so. This is a new century 2004 this ain't 1900. We got modern technology, modem equipment to make a new pipe line if you want to call it, water line if you want to call it, sewer line, as to tearing down houses that people can afford. I was born and raised next to the Packing House, 16th & Maple, I seen kids almost drown down there and at one time a kid did, a young Urbain kid, before my time, I'm 61 years old, did die down there. My father saved a little girl from drowning down there, and that girl today when she sees my family she says, do you remember that day your dad pulled me out of that water? We don't need open lagoons, we can pipe that water. Bee Branch sewer, years ago when I can remember when th~y cleaned it out we had no problem, now you come down 24th Street and you have all kinds of problems now, why? There is something wrong, the City has neglected to clean that out properly, it needs to be done properly, do you understand? Getting back to the houses, people lived there, my dad lived on 16th & Maple for one reason, two reasons, itwas close to work and he could afford that house. I retired from John Deere I could afford taxes for a house on the north end, south end, west end, these people live down here, my father couldn't afford a house on the west end, north end, south end, he had to stay where he could afford, I'm sure when you displace these people they aren't going to be able to afford it, there's no way. Why do you want to displace people that can't afford something later on in life? The Bee Branch, where it comes down to 24th Street why couldn't you run another pipe, a Y off of that and go wjth two pipes going into 16th Street detention basin instead of one? As far as the railroad tracks down there go, you got maps, you let people look at maps, they don't know much, they can't tell you much, they aren't map readers, if you take a person down there, 16th Street, Garfield Avenue, and let them look at that area, how flat it is, how easy it is to put a pipe down there or put a pipe down the middle of the street where the Bee Branch is now, today, it's all down the middle of the street if I'm not mistaken, you could still run it down Elm Street, I think I'm pretty positive it runs under the Packing House, if I'm not mistaken. When I was a youngster the Packing House wasn't as big as it was today, you know back in '42, which is when I was born. Conlon Construction Company, which was the main operator for the Packing House, kept building out and building out and building out. So that's why you got there what you got today. That's why they run the Bee Branch sewer under the Packing House years ago, when Harry Wahlert was alive they could do that and why can't you do that today, why do you have to tear peoples houses down and make an open lagoon for a death trap for a child? What is a child's life worth to you, to me? It's priceless. Somebody was saying a couple million dollars but it cost a couple of million dollars more, b.s. the City wastes millions of dollars. To me, why'd they even thought of it, I got my own reasons why they thought of it, cause they live up there on the west end, up on the hill, well I'll tell you one thing, I'm proud when I lived down in the flats and I'm proud now where I live today, I'm no better or any worse than what that man on the hill is, he puts his pants on the same way I do, one leg at a time. I ain't college educated but it don't take no rocket scientist to figure out where we're at here. Thank you. Dan Lau CDM Thank you for the comment, anyone else. John Mitchell 2320 Washington Street I appreciate what this man is saying but we have had a railroad track running up there for how many years, and the parents kept their children away from the railroad tracks. Now I had my basement full of water right to the rafters in '99 and I don't want to see it again. I had to replace everything in my basement from refrigerator, freezer, washer/dryer, fumace, hot water heater. My furnace and hot water heater were 2 years old at the most. I have nothing against an open water way, there will not be that much water in it in dry time. Like I say, parents are going to have to teach their children that when there is a rainstorm they shouldn't be playing in the damn thing, the way I look at it. I have children, I have grandchildren I don't expect them to be out there playing in it when there is a flood going through or whatever, but I just like to see something done. The part that I don't like is that if everybody pulls in a different direction, it isn't going to happen, it will never get done. I won't live to see it, I would like to see everybody try and get together on this thing so something gets done, I really do. That's about alii can say. Dan Lau CDM Thank you. Anyone else? I know I spoke to a couple of people who did have some questions of us and maybe they got answered at the stations, and I know that there were some people who had questions of the Citizen's Advisory Committee, and if you do have a question for them that you didn't get a chance to ask, you could ask that now and we could direct that question to them also, or specifically provide them with some direction for the next meeting, this would be an opportunity to do that also. Ernest Pfeiffer I got a question for you. Do you think this is ain't set in stone, that the City Council has predicted what they want to do? Dan Lau CDM The Council has basically provided a frame work to the Citizen's Advisory Committee that says, "we would like you to look at where you would place this solution an "open channel solution", that was their direction, to basically pick the best alignment to minimize impacts to the adjacent development and the existing property owners. The Committee wanted to maintain the pipe solution because they thought that would have minimal impacts so we continued with both altematives at this point in time. The Committee, basically has been charged with making their own recommendation to the Council, and the Committee can recommend to do nothing, the Committee can recommend a pipe solution, the Committee can recommend an open channel solution at any location that they feel is best within the constraints that we have to work with and those are, we want to be able to provide a solution we want to be able to afford a solution, we don't want to have major safety impacts, we don't want any major property impacts, within all those kinds of constraints. Ernest Pfeiffer Right, I agree with you, but why was these people flooded out, why, because the City "failed to maintain Bee Branch sewer". Whether you like that or not, is immaterial, everybody knows what the City of Dubuque is like, they lived here long enough, that's history, what the City of Dubuque does, Pfohl, Hartig, and Chavenelle, and some other people, our forefathers run the City of Dubuque, what they did, and we got a bunch now, they think they're god, they aren't god, ya know, and like I said, I don't know why they want to get rid of thjs area down here, they consider it slum area degraded area, I don't know, I sure can't determine that, and I would say no, I think it is a very proud neighborhood, they are just as proud there as the rest of the west end, south end. We never had problems till they quit cleaning out the sewers, when they quit cleaning out the sewer system that's when we got the problems. It don't take a rocket scientist like I said before, if you clean something out, like your heart, your arteries you keep em' clean it's gonna flow, you neglect that heart, that one vein and you got a heart attack. Dan Lau CDM You make several good points, and one stations over there, when you look at the existing Bee Branch sewer and put a couple of feet of sediment in there you certainly reduce it's capacity and under certain conditions that could contribute to some additional backing up and some ponding. So I agree with you 100% there, however, when it comes to a major design event, like the 100-year event that we talked about, it doesn't have the capacity, it probably has as we showed, 20 - 50 percent of the capacity that it needs, we would still have the flooding problem, regardless of sediment in there or not. Ernest Pfeiffer Absolutely, now why is this problem created, because they took up on the hill, they took away the land, the grass, the soil to hold the water and put concrete on it, and what happens, water runs off of concrete it won't run off the grass. Dan Lau CDM Absolutely.... and Ernest Pfeiffer The City has created the problem, now they want to blame people here, you can't take problem A and give it to B down here. Dr. Winterwood ...( cannot understand due to the fact he was not speaking into a microphone) Ernest Pfeiffer Right, you could put a pipeline down there real easy. You were talking about the City, I can't remember now, but the, anyway with open lagoons, I really don't think that's the answer, I think the City neglected to clean the Bee Branch sewer out. They wanted to create a problem whether they will admitto it or not, 99% of the people behind me know that they created the problem, and when they create problems its "lets fix jt, lets do this lets do thaF, yeah. And the City of Dubuque ain't growing, somebody said the City is growing, we're not growing. A quick question for you guys, when was the last time there was a manufacturing industry brought into Dubuque? I'm 61 years old, I can't remember any, manufacturers like John Deere, Ford Motor Company, Caradco or them kind of places, there is nothing come in to Dubuque to bring young kids to Dubuque. My son and daughter-n-Iaw went to Texas to get work, my grandkids are down there, I don't get to see em', why? Cause there's no Packing House no more, yeah know. Sure I agree with you, greed took over the Packing House. When Harry Wahlert was alive you never had them problems, but when his kid and his in-laws took over, then the problems were created. That's basically kind a what the City does, the City says well lets slow things down, lets create something here. I think they stay up all night thinking of these things, it's hard to say, you may think I'm a goofy nut but .....1 been... Dan Lau CDM I appreciate all your comments, and we probably can't solve all those... Ernest Pfeiffer I know, I ain't gonna cure the world tonight neither, your right, but by god I finally got a chance to put my two-cents in, I just wish there was a full house to hear it. I usually attend a lot of Council meetings and I try to get my two-cents in but I might as well talk to the ceiling. AI Mosen was right and.. .hated AI Mosen because he knew what the City was all about. and ....Gordon Kilgore of KDTH, they cut his sound-off program off because he tried to help the City of Dubuque, City Council people, whoever, the higher echelon said no. Ya knownya know.. Dan Lau CDM We appreciate your comments tonight and if you want to basically submit some of those and then there will be some additional time for public input down the road, one is if you want to basically go through any of the BBCAC members and bring that kind of a comment to our meetings. The other thing would just to attend the Council meeting or contact your Councilman or Councilwoman. The finally, the last thing is we anticipate another Public Informatjon Meeting down the road, after our Committee comes to a preliminary recommendation, to basically get the word out in terms of where we think we are going to head. Ernest Pfeiffer I know Irene Waltz, she lives on 15th & Maple, I live on 16th & Maple. Another gentlemen here that is on the Committee and they, them two people I talked to are definitely for the for the pipjng,. ..so you watch, the whole Committee could be for the piping, and I think the City already has their mind made up. Thank you. Dan Lau CDM Thank you for your comment. Anyone else? Well as I said I think there will be other opportunities down the road if you kind of watch the newsletter for how things progress. We will definitely get the word out. .... Deron.. Deron Muehring If you are not getting the newsletter, come to me and I will put you on a special mailing list. Some properties might not be getting them... Dan Lau CDM If I could close, I guess I should close, we just appreciate you all taking the time to come out tonight. I know I observed some really good interaction back and forth and I would guess that the Advisory Committee members also got some good feedback from you and got an opportunity to interact with where they are headed, what they are thinking and what some of your concerns. We appreciate that input feedback and that was really one of our objectives of the meeting. I thank you very much for coming and wish you a good night and we will see you again in another couple of months. Thanks so much.