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 VII 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.