Loading...
Proposed Development Moratorium in the Southwest Arterial Corridor '. LAW OFFICES OF REYNOLDS & KENLINE, L.L.P. LEO A. McCARTHY DAVID L. CLEMENS WILLIAM J. MAIERS CHADWYN D. COX* MARK J . SULLIVAN JEFFREY L. WALTERS PAULA M. STENLUND** JENNIFER A. CLEMENS-CONLON JOHN T. NEMMERS TODD N. KLAPATAUSKAS*** SUITE 222 FISCHER BUILDING P.O. BOX 239 DUBUQUE, IOWA 52004-0239 TELEPHONE: (319) 556-8000 FAX: (319) 556-8009 E-Mai1:rkenline@mwcLnet . ALSO LICENSED IN MINNESOTA .. ALSO LICENSED IN WISCONSIN AND ILLINOIS ... ALSO LICENSED IN ILLINOIS September 7, 200b C)',<. rU'A C:,- c: .~.2 > _ c. (I' C.) o c") !-'1 -0 \ 0.) :0 in C"J :T1 ~? "- nl o The Honorable Terrance M. Duggan, Mayor and Members of the Dubuque City Council City Hall 50 West 13th Street Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 ~ :I: ".__C! >:::--:;: o' CD -.0 .c- \.0 Dear Mayor Duggan and Council Members: RE: Proposed Development Moratorium in the Southwest Arterial Corridor As I previously advised, we represent Bill and Janet Siegert. They own property subject to the proposed development moratorium. First of all, we wish to express our appreciation for the Council's attention and cooperation to date regarding the Siegerts' concerns. In my previous letter of August 7, 2000, I stated that the proposed moratorium was overly broad in subject matter and in time. As a result of your subsequent communications with IDOT, I think the property subject to the proposed moratorium has now been refined by the DOT within a reasonable scope. It continues to be our position, however, that the proposed moratorium is overly broad as to time. The proper procedure for "protecting" the proposed Southwest Arterial corridor is set forth in Iowa Code Section 306.19. For reference purposes, I attach a copy of correspondence I have today sent to the City's corporation counsel setting forth our legal position. We respectfully request that this issue be set for a public hearing before any final decision is LAW OFFICES OF REYNOLDS & KENLINE, L.L.P. 2) made on the moratorium. This proposed moratorium will have a significant financial impact on the property owners subject to it. They deserve the right to be heard before any final decision is made. Thank you. Sincerely, ~~9-- ~ William J. ~aiers WJM/dms enc. cc: Mr. and Mrs. William A. Siegert 13836 Old Highway Road Dubuque, IA 52002 S,\WPS\DONNA\Siegert\Corr\MAYOR-CITY COUNCIL-LETTER.wpd ,-" . . . LAW OFFICES OF REYNOLDS & KENLlNE, L.L.P. LEO A. McCARTHY OA VID L. CLEMENS WILLIAM J. MAIERS CHAOWYN O. COX. MARK J . SULLIVAN JEFFREY L. W ALTERS PAULA M. STENLUNO.. JENNIFER A. CLEMENS-CONLON JOHN T. NEMMERS TOOO N. KLAPATAUSKAS." SUITE 222 FISCHER BUILDING P.O. BOX 239 DUBUQUE, IOWA 52004-0239 TELEPHONE: (319) 556-8000 FAX: (319) 556-8009 E-Mail:rkenline@mwci.net . ALSO LICENSED IN MINNESOTA "ALSO LICENSED IN WISCONSIN AND ILLINOIS ."ALSO LICENSED IN ILLINOIS September 7, 2000 Barry A. Lindahl City Attorney Dubuque Building 700 Locust Street, Suite 196 Dubuque, IA 52001 Dear Barry: RE: Development Moratorium in Southwest Arterial Corridor As you know, I represent Bill and Janet Siegert. They own property subject to the proposed development moratorium in the Southwest Arterial corridor. I previously wrote the City Council expressing our opposition to the proposed moratorium. To ensure there is no miscommunication, I thought it appropriate to express and reduce to writing our opposition (and basis therefor) directly to you. I have found no statutory authority to support the City's position to enact the one-year moratorium. Further, I have discovered no case law to support the position. I have found cases involving moratoria on zoning changes. That, however, is not our situation. The requisite zoning is in place on the property in question. There is no argument that the property is compatible for development. Issues of public safety, health, or welfare are not involved. The issue is one purely of money. The DOT wants to save money on acquisition cost to the detriment of the affected property owners. ...- .. LAW OFFICES OF REYNOLDS & KENLlNE, L.L.P. 2) It is our contention that Section 306.19 of the Iowa Code is controlling. The Iowa Department of Transportation is attempting to have the City achieve something which the DOT has no authority to accomplish. The policy behind Iowa Code Section 306.19(5) is to balance IDOT's interest in preserving right-of-way property and the property owner's right to develop the property. I will not recite all the particulars of Section 306.19. I know you are familiar with its contents. Indeed, a preservation zone was previously established by the City along the Highway 20 corridor. The proposed moratorium is contrary to the provisions of Section 306.19. It is a fundamental principle that state laws are superior to municipal ordinances. To totally restrict a property owner's right to develop his/her property for a period of one year would constitute a compensable taking in our opinion. On a practical level, implementation of Section 306.19(5) would also address the frustrations the Council has experienced to date with the DOT. The notice establishing a preservation zone is valid for three years and can be renewed. If the City receives an application for a building permit, subdivision plat, or zoning change, it notifies the DOT. Then the DOT would have up to 90 days (initial 30 days plus 60-day extension) to decide whether it needs the property and proceeds toward acquisition. This process would force the DOT to move the project forward and not allow it to languish as it has in the past. Barry, if you have specific statutory authority or case law supporting the City's position, let me know. If I have missed something material in my research, I will gladly re-evaluate my position. Thank you. Sincerely, William J. Maiers WJM/dms cc: Mr. and Mrs. William A. Siegert 13836 Old Highway Road Dubuque, IA 52002 S.\WP8\DONNA\Siegert\Corr\LINDAHL-LETTER.wpd ~ ~ CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA MEMORANDUM September 26, 2000 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: Proposed Development Moratorium in the Southwest Arterial Corridor Corporation Counsel Barry Lindahl has determined that the request from the Iowa Department of Transportation to enact a moratorium along the proposed Southwest Arterial Corridor at Highway 20 must first be considered by the Zoning Advisory Commission. I respectfully request that the Mayor and City Council refer the request to the Zoning Advisory Commission. ~ ll" L l,,~ Ii MCVM/dd Attachment o n<:o- cc: Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel Tim Moerman, Assistant City Manager Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager C' )> ::;; o ill 0 0 (/) ~.D r-., -0 iTl r,,) -") -.J '- :-n -0 <~ :l:: - ill .. 0 (,,'1 N LAW OFFlCES OF REYNOLDS & KENLINE, L.L.P. LEO A. McCARTHY DAVID L. CLEMENS WILLIAM 1. MAIERS CHADWYN D. COX. MARK 1. SULLIVAN 1EFFREY L. WALTERS PAULA M. STENLUND" 1ENNIFER A. CLEMENS-CONLON JOHN T. NEMMERS TODD N. KLAPATAUSKAS... SUITE 222 FISCHER BUILDING P.O. BOX 239 DUBUQUE, IOWA 52004-0239 TELEPHONE: (319) 556-8000 FAX: (319) 556-8009 E-Mail:rkenline@mwci.net . ALSO LICENSED IN MINNESOTA .. ALSO LICENSED IN WISCONSIN AND n.LINOIS ... ALSO LICENSED IN ILLINOIS September 7, 200'b ~~ 0'< C_ C) o .....- Ie ;S :-'. -c c;- CD -0 )>~ (") CD The Honorable Terrance M. Duggan, Mayor and Members of the Dubuque City Council City Hall 50 West 13~ Street Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 Cl <::) cn !...., -0 I 0) :0 m C) r11 < m o :tl'- :Jl: '.D ~ \,,0 Dear Mayor Duggan and Council Members: RE: Proposed Development Moratorium in the Southwest Arterial Corridor As I previously advised, we represent Bill and Janet Siegert. They own property subject to the proposed development moratorium. First of all, we wish to express our appreciation for the Council's attention and cooperation to date regarding the Siegerts' concerns. In my previous letter of August 7, 2000, I stated that the proposed moratorium was overly broad in subject matter and in time. As a result of your subsequent communications with IDOT, I think the property subject to the proposed moratorium has now been refined by the DOT within a reasonable scope. It continues to be our position, however, that the proposed moratorium is overly broad as to time. The proper procedure for "protecting" the proposed Southwest Arterial corridor is set forth in Iowa Code Section 306.19. For reference purposes, I attach a copy of correspondence I have today sent to the City's corporation counsel se~ting forth our legal position. We respectfully request that this issue be set for a public hearing before any final decision is LAW OFFICES OF 2) REYNOLDS & KENLINE, L.L.P. made on the moratorium. This proposed moratorium will have a significant financial impact on the property owners subject to it. They deserve the right to be heard before any final decision is made. Thank you. Sincerely, -W~9- ~ William J. ~aiers WJM/dms enc. cc: Mr. and Mrs. William A. Siegert 13836 Old Highway Road Dubuque, IA 52002 S,\WP8\DONNA\Siegert\Corr\MAYOR-CITY COUNCIL-LETTER.wpd JL .--...... ..-----., . J ;' _/,1 .....:::...,..; " ~; ~. .....,------- LAW OFFICES OF REYNOLDS & KENLINE, L.L.P. LEO A. McCARTHY DAVID L. CLEMENS WILLIAM 1. MAIERS CHADWYN D. COX- MARK 1. SULUV AN lEFFREY L. WALTERS PAULA M. STENLUND-- lENNIFER A. CLEMENS-CONLON JOHN T. NEMMERS TODD N. KLAPATAUSKAS--- SUITE 222 FISCHER BUILDING P.O. BOX 239 DUBUQUE, IOWA 52004-0239 TELEPHONE: (319) 556-8000 FAX: (319) 556-8009 E-Mail:rkenline@mwci.net . ALSO LICENSED IN MINNESOTA "ALSO LICENSED IN WISCONSIN AND ILLINOIS ... ALSO LICENSED IN ILLINOIS September 7, 2000 Barry A. Lindahl City Attorney Dubuque Building 700 Locust Street, Suite 196 Dubuque, IA 52001 Dear Barry: RE: Development Moratorium in Southwest Arterial Corridor As you know, I represent Bill and Janet Siegert. They own property subject to the proposed development moratorium in the Southwest Arterial corridor. I previously wrote the City Council expressing our opposition to the proposed moratorium. To ensure there is no miscommunication, I thought it appropriate to express and reduce to writing our opposition (and basis therefor) directly to you. I have found no statutory authority to support the City IS position to enact the one-year moratorium. Further, I have discovered no case law to support the position. I have found cases involving moratoria on zoning changes. That, however, is not our situation. The requisite zoning is in place on the property in question. There is no argument that the property is compatible for development. Issues of public safety, health, or welfare are not involved. The issue is one purely of money. The DOT wants to save money on acquisition cost to the detriment of the affected property owners. LAW OFFICES OF 2) REYNOLDS & KENLINE, L.L.P. It is our contention that Section 306.19 of the Iowa Code is controlling. The Iowa Department of Transportation is attempting to have the City achieve something which the DOT has no authority to accomplish. The policy behind Iowa Code Section 306.19(5) is to balance lOOT's interest in preserving right-of-way property and the property owner's right to develop the property. I will not recite all the particulars of Section 306.19. I know you are familiar with its contents. Indeed, a preservation zone was previously established by the City along the Highway 20 corridor. The proposecrmoratorium is contrary to the prOV1S10ns of Section 306.19. It is a fundamental principle that state laws are superior to municipal ordinances. To totally restrict a property owner's right to develop his/her property for a period of one year would constitute a compensable taking in our opinion. On a practical level, implementation of Section 306.19(5) would also address the frustrations the Council has experienced to date with the DOT. The notice establishing a preservation zone is valid for three years and can be renewed. If the City receives an application for a building permit, subdivision plat, or zoning change, it notifies the DOT. Then the DOT would have up to 90 days (initial 30 days plus 60-day extension) to decide whether it needs the property and proceeds toward acquisition. This process would force the DOT to move the project forward and not allow it to languish as it has in the past. Barry, if you have specific statutory authority or case law supporting the City's position, let me know. If I have missed something material in my research, I will gladly re-evaluate my position. Thank you. Sincerely, William J. Maiers WJM/dms cc: Mr. and Mrs. William A. Siegert 13836 Old Highway Road Dubuque, IA 52002 S.\WPI\DONNA\Siegert\Corr\LINDAHL_LZTTBR.wpd . . . pI ~~ !;~;~:c~epartment of TranSPO~~,:~~n ~ 430 Sixteenth Avenue SW FAX: 319-364-9614 P.O. Box 3150. Cedar Rapids. IA 52406-3150 August 29, 2000 Ref: STP-32-1 (I 0)--2C-3 I Dubuque County City of Dubuque iVlichael C. Van Milligen City Manager 50 West 13th Street Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 SUBJECT: Moratorium on U.S. 20 - Southwest Arterial Dear r-.like: This letter is in response to your letter dated August 9,2000 concerning my earlier request for a moratorium of one year on approving development actions along U.S. 20. This request is based on a proposed Southwest Arterial connection to U.S. 20 near Seippel Road. In my letter 1 stated that I would provide limits of the impacted area when available. Please find attached the corridor study limits for the proposed Southwest Arterial connection to U.S. 20 near Seippel Road. The properties affected are identified. Also attached is a letter from our engineering consultant, HDR of Omaha, Nebraska, which provides a very preliminary environmental review of the proposed study area. I hope this information addresses your first concern. The area included in the corridor study limits north of U.S. 20 does exceed the limits for corridor preservation for the proposed U.S. 20 improvement project. The reason for this is the possible need for a different interchange configuration than those previously considered (no Southwest Arterial connection). As we proceed with the location and environmental studies for both the U.S. 20 and Southwest Arterial corridors. we will continue to better define and, therefore. reduce the area of potential impact. As an ongoing effort, the limits of the moratorium can also be minimized, \vhich is your second concern. If the eity determines that it has the legal authority to impose the moratorium based on the request of the department, then I will also ask the county to do likewise. This should answer your third concern. I plan to attend the City Couneilmeeting on September 5.2000. Please contact me at the above phone number if you have any questions. Vcry truly yours. f2i.ch(L~ C? r~f J Richard E. Kautz. r.E. District Engineer R E KO h Attachment cc: Anne O'Shea, Zoning. Dubuqlle COllnty C0l1rthollse Robert Kl':1l1se, Transportation Planner, (O\va DOT. Dyersvillc. 11\ 52040 To Brad Hofer . From Will Sharp Dick Gorton Randy Graham li)~ Memorandum Date August 3, 2000 Subject DUBUQUE COUNTY PROJECT NO. STP-U-2100(12)-70-31. STP-32-1(1 0)-2C-31 Proposed Study Area - Southwest Arterial Junction with U.S. 20 A brief environmental review was conducted of the proposed interchange alternatives of the Southwest Arterial junction with U.S. 20 in the vicinity of Seippel Road, and is documented below. Wetlands and floodplain issues were evaluated. Based on the conceptual interchange design and environmental review completed to date, we propose the study area on the attached figure. The study area was developed by overlaying the various concepts developed to date to determine a worst case scenario. As noted below, all alternatives currently being considered have varying levels of impact to the Catfish Creek floodplain, and this is anticipated to be a key issue in the environmental process. . Wetlands Investigation. A field investigation of the site determined that there are no wetland resources that would be impacted by the interchange. Catfish Creek exists at the site and has a well defined bed and bank and is, therefore, a 404 jurisdictional water. Some of the interchange concepts at the site involve relocation of this creek. The Corps of Engineers will view this as an impact that should be avoided. Consequently, any attempt to pursue an alternative requiring relocation of the creek will require a demonstration that the other interchange alternatives are not practical. The field investigation did identify one problem in conjunction with Seippel Road Extension that should be corrected. There is a wetland developing at the culvert on the west side of Seippel Road extension where it junctions with U.S.20. This area is in the process of becoming a wetland. Although it would not have yet developed hydric soils, the site has developed wetland vegetation. Unless the city intends this area to become a wetland, drainage should be installed to X prevent ponding. Otherwise, this area will eventually become a jurisdictional wetland. Attached are captioned photos of the area which show the wetland, Catfish Creek, local drainage, and the vegetation of other areas. As can be seen from the photos, most of the area has- no 404 regulatory issues. Floodplain Review. This following is a brief hydraulic review of four proposed Southwest Arterial alignments with U.S. 20. This review is not intended to be detailed in nature, but a general evaluation of potential hydraulic advantages and disadvantages for each proposed concept. . General: In general all four concepts may require channel modifications, including channel relocation. The mapping provided reflects a channel that may have already realized channel straightening Ll. d 1..'''' 1<;~C'r..l-.::-'- iJ/ z:-Il.. KC\.(. ~ ?/II~'c S' !tv I() CJ L..;..... . from approximately the downstream portion of the knee of the bend of Catfish Creek, located approximately in the Southwest portion of the project, up to the next bend situated upstream. Although channel straightening may lead to channel instability, with upstream migrating channel bed degradation and subsequent bank sloughing, a relatively short realignment, with design and construction of appropriate grade control structures, should not present a significant hydraulic problem. However, channel straightening or relocation is anticipated to present difficulty in the approval of other permit applications. A more significant hydraulic impact of any of the four concepts to Catfish Creek will be the floodplain impact. All four appear to present a potentially large constriction to the available conveyance capacity of the floodplain. All four concepts appear to eliminate the left (north) floodplain with the placement of the ramps as well as the highway alignments. The right floodplain, located along the outer portion of the bend, also appears to have significant blockage due to the highway alignments. Such constrictions increase the potential for bridge structure failure due to local scour during rare event floods at the abutments and piers. Such potential may be mitigated through the design and construction of appropriate river training and grade control structures. It is noted that the existing U.S. 20 embankment within the Catfish Creek floodplain does block a significant portion of the conveyance potential within these floodplains. However, relative to the proposed alternatives, the existing condition does present a more localized constriction and, subsequently, less impact to design water surface profiles. . Because construction in the floodplain is required for all concepts, a permit from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources will be required. As a part of the permit approval, Iowa DNR will likely want documentation that construction in the floodplain cannot be avoided. This review will be more critical if the construction is in a designated FEMA floodway. Should the floodplain be in a FEMA designated floodway, a mitigation channel would need to be provided, or the floodway would need to be redefined through a public process, in order to allow the higher regulatory water surface profile. The design of a mitigation channel would appear to be difficult due to the apparent large compensation necessary for the loss of floodplain conveyance. The design would need to increase the main channel size, or an improved channel and floodplain channel, to compensate for the lost conveyance. The design would also need to incorporate the effects of flow being redirected from the natural floodplain and channel into an improved floodplain and channel, resulting in additional momentum losses. Such design would again present difficulty in the approval of other permit applications and present a potentially high construction cost to provide the mitigation channels. . Concept SW-Al This concept was briefly reviewed to evaluate the option of shifting the Southwest Arterial east at the U.S. 20 junction to minimize Catfish Creek impacts. This option would require partial reconstruction of the Seippel Road extension to tie into the shifted Southwest Arterial alignment. This concept effectively blocks floodplain conveyance for approximately a third of a mile, from the exit ramp from eastbound Southwest Arterial onto southbound U.S. 20 to the exit ramp from southbound Southwest Arterial onto the westbound U.S. 20. In addition, the ramp allowing eastbound U.S. 20 traffic to exit onto southbound Southwest Arterial also is situated just . downstream of a bend and is placed in a strong skew position. The bend situation presents problems in that shear forces are typically tripled along the outer edge immediately downstream of a bend, increasing the potential for significant scour. In addition, with the potential loss of floodplain conveyance, the channel will be carrying the additional flow, further increasing the stream power of Catfish Creek. Finally, the piers will need to be angled normal to the flow to avoid additional inducement of scour, thus increasing design costs. It is noted that the most downstream ramp is also placed in a skew position, thus realizing the same potential for either increased cost or additional inducement of scour. Concept SW-Bl This concept effectively blocks floodplain conveyance for approximately a third of a mile, from the Cousins Road extension to the exit ramp from northbound Southwest Arterial onto the eastbound U.S. 20. In addition, the ramp allowing eastbound U.S. 20 traffic to exit onto the Southwest Arterial also is situated just downstream of a bend and is placed in a strong skew position. The bend situation presents problems in that shear forces are typically tripled along the outer edge immediately downstream of a bend, increasing the potential for significant scour. In addition, with the potential loss of floodplain conveyance, the channel will be carrying the additional flow, further increasing the stream power of Catfish Creek. Finally, the piers will need to be angled normal to the flow to avoid additional inducement of scour, thus increasing design costs. It is noted that the most downstream ramp is also placed in a skew position, thus realizing the same potential for either increased cost or additional inducement of scour. . Concept SW-B4 This concept effectively blocks floodplain conveyance for approximately a third of a mile, from the exit ramp from eastbound U.S. 20 onto Southwest Arterial to the bridges of the Southwest Arterial. This concept does not present the bridge obstruction just downstream of a bend as the previous two concepts, nor does it present a significant skew of the bridges to the stream as the previous two concepts. Concept SW-B6 This concept effectively blocks floodplain conveyance for approximately a third of a mile, from the exit ramp from eastbound U.S. 20 onto northbound Seippel Road Extension to the exit ramp from northbound Southwest Arterial onto the eastbound U.S. 20. In addition, the ramp allowing eastbound U.S. 20 traffic to exit onto southbound Southwest Arterial also is situated just downstream of a bend and is placed in a strong skew position. The bend situation presents problems in that shear forces are typically tripled along the outer edge immediately downstream of a bend, increasing the potential for significant scour. In addition, with the potential loss of floodplain conveyance, the channel will be carrying the additional flow, further increasing the stream power of Catfish Creek. Finally, the piers will need to be angled n0I111al to the flow to avoid additional inducement of scour, thus increasing design costs. It is notcd that the most downstream ramp is also placed in a skew position, thus realizing the samc potential for either increased cost or additional inducement of scour. . '..', I ~(. ?~ ("'\ .... / ~ /:/ ... / / \ /./ . ...- '~/,/ :- . ...... ..... . '" --.:....._/"1.;, A ......:..."'..... \/' " ," '-,", /' 0"'..' ' ,. ~/< ~'~-\.'-~ . '/" ' '/ ,,~ .' ;' \~ \ .' :/ ~ ," b~~ ~/ " .> I .... G~ ~""r' ,/ . I' ' / / - ' /~:\.:~' . /, , .. .' ,... ."" .;- I I I' :-:-..:::..~::::. :-~' ,/ \v/ // . ~., , , ~ ( ., -- . . /(,~~.:fi _,~.'=~_-::_'- _/ ~'.. ~ 1( .' ' .-. ,.\ /-;. ~'~~. (', ~ ,\ \: ) '\~ ," .--.-,/ "' ... ~ ", ,~ ......... ....... c~..~.--'- , , " " \ . I I , '.... ....... \ -' .,.- ----...j i/ '" ~:, I r-__I (' -::~' ('-) "..; \., \ ,_~..... i " -J .: ',- " \ \ I J ,.. )\ {}' '------ y ... ' 1 ~ ~'-'--~~,~(~/-'X~:/. . I" /" /. , ' I " ,~ ..' ' ,', -- ) " ", . ~..:__:) // '<" \ i \" \ Y /--.,j ') \ ...... \. ): I .\\,'" ./ I. /" ~\ \ // CtJ \ / / ' I \ :~ \. \ ~) ') \ -..J /' \ Cj (. ) \ ()/> /) \ /' ~; / '- -.~. : : -' {-\ , } ,-- .I \_, . L- r-- I I LL z o ~tJ ~Z -<{~ "0 2)--lN :J -<{ , ~02~ V')~:J ~ O-<{I u.J ~ V')~- OV)~ a...u.J o 5 ~ ~I g a... ~ N :J c-J o l- V) V) ::) o ::) <t: u../ c; 0> .C L Q) (l) C :V b.I.. ~.'( . .( . . Disk 1 Photo 1 Facing c:ast toward US 20 from Point 1 on the map . . Disk 1 Photo 2 r-ai.:ing north p:J.r.llkling L'S 20 from r,)inr I on rh<: map , . Disk I Photo 3 ElCing wes[ away from US 20 dO....l1 Scippd Road from Point I on [he map. . . Disk I Photo 4 FJ.cing C:lS[ toward L:S 20 from Point Ion the map at the intersection of S<:ippt:1 Road and US 20. . . . ~isk I Photo 5 Facing south irom Scip~1 Road along US 20 irom Point I. OJ,\( I Photo 6 Facing southwest from Point I. Looking:l[ a cornridd and sm311 developing wet J.rea J[ the base of [he culvert. . Di~k ! Ph,}t,) 7 EKing w..:st along Sc:ippd RO;1d from Point t on m.Jp. . . 11,,)... 1 I'h.)t(\ S F:\..:i1\~ n\\rlh\\CSI ;II Point l. 1.'''lkin~.1f ":lI!vcrt lInJcr &ippd Road with dt:vdoping \\Cll.ll1d \\1111111 20 fect ,If (uhcn \lutk!. . . Disk I Photn <) EKing nOl1hw::st at Paine l. Looking;u culvel1 umkr Scippd Road from top of US 20 ;rf:J.J::. .-\ developing \.\etbnJ is loc:J.teJ within 20 tc:c:t of culvC::1 outlet. . Di:;k I Pho(u 10 F:h:ing sOllth .llong l:S 2ll trlllll Point I lHI Ilt\p. Shllwing th:: low an:a between L;S 20 .lllt! (he comtio.:ld. .~.~- . Disk I Phoro I] Close up photo of culvert on northwest side of Scippd Road at Point I on IT'.ap. . . Disk I Phoro 12 FJcing cast. Looking [OwJrd l'S 20 bridge over Cauish Creek from Point 2 on map. . Di::k I Pht}{O 13 EKing C:lSL LODling do\\nsrr-~:lm 3t C3rtlsh Creek towJ.fd US 20 tram Point 2 on m:lp. . . 1)l\k 1 I'hd(,l 14 F:t(il\~ cast. L'h\killg l!<ml\.;tn:alll.1l Catfish Creck toward US 20 rTOl11 Point J on map. . Disk I Photo 15 Facing wt:St. Looking upstn::lm :J.C Catfish Cn:ek from Point J on map. . . Disk I Ph.)!,) I b EKing :--':onh. Frum Point 3 looking ;\[ low bench ;m:;J Jlld nonh bank of Cl[tish Creek. . . Di~k I Photo 17 F:l..:ing south from Point -+ on n1Jp. LOt)king ;\Jong ditch th:lt parallels US 20 to Cattish Cr~d;:. . Disk I PhUILl I S l~:!.:ing soulhc;\SI rrom Paim -+ un m~lp. Luoking (()w:![d Clllish Creek from ditch shown in Di,k I PIll'(O 17. . Disk 2 Photo I Facing north looking along rht: direh. on (he t:::l.Sr sidt: of US 20 that Hows into Cattish Creek. . . Disk :2 Phoro:2 F:.King north (away from Cattish Cn:ck) from Poine 5 on map. . Disk 2. Pharo 3 Facing south tow:u-d Cattish cre~k from Point 5 on map. . . Disk'" Phoro 4 F:lcing .:ast looking at Cattish Cre.:k from Point 5 011 Imp. . . DI~k 2 Ph,Hl) 5 F:Jcil\:!,ou{h from Point 501\ m:lp. L"okin:; :Jcros.., Cutlsh Cre::'k. inro {he dr:linage channel rh'k"\.! j{ P,Jin{ -! on lllap, . 1 )1';" 2 I'hl'II'" 1:;k'lll:; ,\t:sc (1t'11I 1"'llIt ~ 1.1)\\l.;in~.1t l.'S 20 hriJ~t: Iller CJ(cIsh Cn:d:, ~/ (, , , \ I / ..- ...... ... "/ .~ .i , N . ~-,/ ~ ... 0./ /.i)1'-. , I--'Y /;/ // -? k )( \~ . "\ ' r---....-J \ " .) \ ". \J ..- -* ~' ,~ .... ,'" , .- ...-:--. - . -) ,\' ~-~-' ~ \. -- ,~ ...... " . -" .. . ,. .' .' / ./' -. f // j' ~\z / ..~. , r ..., \.t.. ." ./ \)\ .~'( ..' .' :~\. ). ./ ,/ ~ ~, ,,'\..~/;/ ~ .' \. ~ I "-' "'---_....-p ---- --- /" . ",. ----. ,. "- ') / -.....-. ....__~t ') r' (--_..? ,C.."-.; ... -- \ "- \ ) ~."'/--""'..._-",. ,:' , '-",>,~ " , ~ , .'",l ; \, :; , \'''\.'''"'- /-.-...._...~ /"'-.. J ... ~., \. l ,; '~i' ,/ "'-".:. // -". \ , ,~.-_. ...-.....\. ./ '\ ~.:...~ - ~ A \ '\./ /' -.:l i' /// ""', \ '/ 'J) , // . ,'" '" . ....... I. ~ }' -...; .I ...,. .-.... . \ \ \ Cj ::. ()...) '. " ,- ~ \ '\ .' . \:~~..._'" ~, .' '\ \, ..//....., f'. " ,.' /" " \ ":" ~\ , " P" \\..' t,; .. ,'.. . '--: ' ; " , , , ( f f , I r . . /. , 'f:' ,; l./ ) ( i , J, ('/ / " / , , ,.- ,./" / , , -.---.... " ."-'-...-.,/'" \,... (if . \. \ " ,~'. .jO -. 0 " CO, I',~ ~ Ii" ~ ~;. ~ ." r;ff/'// ,.:t -,' : 0 - .' " , ,./ '.:t .,' I'" Q/" ..., , 0' r... [ . '- \' " '~ ( ') / ) r\ ( \ \ ''7 >"\ :~~'\ \~;;' 0 ~'\.,,/0~\ ,/J .~ ,J . l . , ( , 'I ....l '. "4 , , ~ , "''"1 1 . -0" -)- . '( \ .og~\ . " ". Z ~ '. ". ' . ~ ~ -;i \\,' - ~ ~:~\' \',;:-\~ '\ 'j ,,,---.:;.--'> '<'" . -J, \.\ '\ \J ~ ,-' f ~ \,>,\" '- ,,-:1',)., \" ' -!..' ~.----...-> ',l \. I ; I I ,\. i / · I { \ {r-----J ~. . , " -' i J f - . . ,1/,\. I..... r. \ , , f r " , , I. · / .I ,~ ~._......... .,. ......:.:.:.'> ..-/ ,- ( \ .; f i ( \ " ) / I ~ t" I- W W lL. z ;' I / . . ':'- : ~ . \..)) ,/' i ,.J ,..--,- f \ \ --.. .-. '-' , ' ~. ' ... \ i. j !'/ " .L .-'\ ! . ~~ ~<S.'i <,/r~ , ~.~, . '-,~ '\ "'-. " ,\ ~. '.-- /'\ \ ; . '.' . '., (, " ,.'.~., :\ .(:i' \ -.. ,.\ -, .:, \ - ~. \ -. " " ! ... n. \. ,.... Li ~ ' ' 1. \/ \ '\ \ ) 'I ,./ \ ,--I"'" ,..... :' .f-j-) ,/ ~~ I (/ i \." >, / .' .,~ \ /' \ '\ /.~</ \\ '-- ". '-......... / ,.- ; /" \"~'l --"'--...,.,./' ./ '~:'~ ~ ClO "\.' .,/ ..,..,.-" . , l' '-... . ~/ ?L 1 \ \ ..........~.....<.~ . 'l '-.-.., - , ( .(: .'" ~ ........., " ,/--; j :-,-.,\ i / / ( (/ ----- v' ~ ~ w " a. r/ 0 \ ~a. O...-NM<:TIO-or-.. j ...-NM<:TIO-o~~~...-...-...-...-...-...- r--./ r'/ /_..) "" j?, I ~..( \ \ '-) J .' I \,' . \ \..'-......, \ \.., \ - . . ", ),' ~....,. '--..,,:.- ~r.-c( :~._~ J';' ~s z ( {~,.' "--~)'-~"\" ~ ,_ ~.... ! f "- , " ". "'t-L . " ,'~ '~.........--.. 0 . \,' "'_' \' \ t'., _'--;.'\.. L" l... ( i,/ \ ~ ~ '\.', ...."'.- \_--. ';~ ) .- _'-..."'----\. \,"':"-;.-.~ ", ;~ /' \ -:: ~ ~ .. r-'''' 'I- -:> /' " ---- \. V-'j ~ ~ ; ( /~~\'_--.:: \ )v~ L..-, c=: ,~ / /. t' .,.' ___ V\ \C:-\ {w i\ .' ~.~,~ ! ,,' \ ,I / .' - , .::' . Ii J // 't(", ....." c~ i......_ ~ ......; ~C":, # ........., , :' . /.--......... . ,i....,. Ci:' ". ----'. \ . ! ! . . )', ( { \ ; '"'-~' -.- -.- 1 I . , " . '.J . , ~~ . ~ ~! --- " " \, , \ " \ \ \ \ (/"'t ~ \.j ''\ CO \- ~ ~ ~0 ."'~"~ Vl ,~ r-----. " w /J ,/"7) Z V / \ ~ " L..O I , " ,.- J, '/ . , I : (" , I I ' .1 ;) t. . ...-~ ::.~- ..af ,-- ~., r-~, I ": \ ""'~ J ...~ .. ,.i! r-:;~'~'''' 'i ,If; " ~~_'.i~~-"\~:i z o .. ~ U ~ Z . :tl-;;;I-I-I- J: Z WW wwwZw Z ZZ~ZZZOZ ~a1S c:t >-~ .<t~C=:i=>-o/S....>! wo/S->I ~"'>"'''''''U~O'''''~ 'Q ..,;> :J'" W " ~I-a/Sa/Sa/S~ UJ:otX:: U a/S .~ . . .I-a/Sgwa.~.... ~w .c:twc:(c:(c:(Vl 'coZOJ:<tZ-'Z ~i~iii~~=~:nUOJ:w~ ""~~~~~U""~:J~~Z~<t;:) ~ .. >-=" .. .. .. I- ~ .. w 5 w" ~ ,,0 w ~l-wl-l-l-~~W .. U Vl .. a.lX....~~~c:ta.J:Vl "c:t'''~ "Vl ..wowww> "UW~....~W~W w~~~~~;>~Vl~a.""W~O~c:( ~~~~~~~~~~:Jc:(~O~~~ UVlCOVlVlVlVlUa.I-U~t:;a.~....Z ----.,.. ;.-...... \, "- " \, \~. '-:--' >- o :J I- VI VI I- 0- w:E Vl- 0"" a.~ Ow ~lX a.c:( Vl ~ w Z ~ o_ w ~~ ~c:( WI- a. Ow ~w a.~ " .'\ 0 0J~~'/ ~ .5 .... R>l l2J8 , . \" " , .... U ~ J: a. c:( ~ ~ o .- Oz ~Q I- 95 ~o u.. .... w oc ~ :J 'i', ~ '!\. ~ ,\\ " ~ I .\ z o ~tJ ocZ -<:J --'0 >---.IN 0< ~ocU1 v>UJ:J f- oc O<I UJ f- V>f-- o v> 5: n..!t.l 0;> g oc I 0 a... f- N :J t"') o ~ V> .~ EJ .'0 \ ~':: :J (,) -. <: \\ " u c. o " C L (lJ (lJ C 0' C-' w. "- a: \ 0"- :I: ' " r, ':, i '.\r \ . ',' . '7" \ \. ~.. "'. . . \--... \ " ./ -.' ..... ... i <...-- ,. -~_........ .. ",-,' '.. , " ----.. "., " '...~ ~ .c~ ~ ( , , \, . ,/,- a/S ''\ " ...., , . '- '- '~'-:l:"; ......-:. g \ / .{ ~ . !:.. --. ,", .~:--"'\ , '- " \' ~. .'.VI:, . \. ,4: '1;,. \.\ \ ~ \ , \ 1 ,,~ LAW OFFICES OF REYNOLDS & KENLINE, L.L.P. LEO A. McCARTHY DAVID L. CLEMENS WILLIAM J. MAIERS CHADWYN D. COX* MARK J. SULLIVAN JEFFREY L. WALTERS PAULA M. STENLUND** JENNIFER A. CLEMENS-CONLON JOHNT. NEMMERS TODD N. KLAPATAUSKAS*** SUITE 222 FISCHER BUILDING P.O. BOX 239 DUBUQUE, IOWA 52004-0239 TELEPHONE: (319) 556-8000 FAX: (319) 556-8009 E-Mail:rkenline@mwci.net . ALSO LICENSED IN MINNESOTA .. ALSO LICENSED IN WISCONSIN AND ILLINOIS '''ALSO LICENSED IN ILLINOIS September 19, 2000 Supervisor Donna Smith Dubuque County Board of Supervisors Dubuque County Court House 720 Central Avenue Dubuque, IA 52001 Q a 0 ...+ '.l") :JJ 0.....,:: 1'1 c: -0 ill r~ .."-' ,') c: 0 ...:J .'".'- :n f/: ;::;. :;:::; ....,' 3: '-., )> 0 m ~ co 0 ('s- CD .r.- .... The Honorable Terrance M. Duggan, Mayor City Hall 50 West 13th Street Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 Dear Supervisor Smith and Mayor Duggan: RE: Northwest Arterial Just a short follow-up on behalf of my client, the City of Sageville. I previously copied you in on correspondence I sent to Dick Kautz dated September 7, 2000. I have also had phone conversations with each of you regarding that correspondence and issues involving transfer of jurisdiction of the Northwest Arterial and ongoing maintenance. The City of Sageville has asked that I apprise the Dubuque County Board of Supervisors and the City of Dubuque that Sageville's next City Council meeting will take place on October 3, 2000, at 7:00 P.M. at the Pepsi-Cola plant. Dick Kautz from IDOT will attend that meeting to address these matters. f ~ LAW OFFICES OF REYNOLDS & KENLINE, L.L.P. 2) This is a public hearing. If either the Dubuque County Board of Supervisors or the City of Dubuque wants to provide input regarding roadway jurisdiction, future maintenance and 28E Agreements, the City of Sageville would welcome your comments. Sincerely, ~, willia Maiers WJM/dms cc: City of Sageville Attention: Mayor Ralph Dean 11948 Sherrill Road Dubuque, IA 52001 S,\WP8\DONNA\SAGEVILL\CORR\091900-SUPERVISORS AND MAYOR.wpd ,. . 'EAST CENTRAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ASSOCIATION DUBUQUE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY EASTERN IOWA REGIONAL HOUSING AUTHORI1Y JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS (JTPA) (PJ) (WIW) ECIA REGIONAL PLANNING AFFILIATION E.C.I.A. BUSINESS GROWTH. INC. o g n..? (- ...J - c: C r"'. ST f'-.) MEMORANDUM DMATS Policy Board and Technical Advisory Committee Stephen Williams, Senior Transportation Planner July 19, 2000 (..~ I - -.\..-.:. "" ~; Cf)~ :...- C) )>:::;.; (')" CD :0 i-n '~ .-n TO: FROM: DATE: :0- :J:: ~? ...... fll o N W SUBJECT: Iowa DOT Commission Workshop on the IA 32 (Southwest Arterial) Project The Iowa DOT Commission conducted a workshop concerning the status of the IA 32 (Southwest Arterial) project on July 17) 2000. I was in Ames for a meeting with the Federal Highway Administration on July 18 and so I decided to attend. All of the Commissioners were in attendance. Iowa DOT staff was represented by Director Mark Wandro) Highway Division Director Tom Cackler) Planning and Programming Division Director Denny Tice and District #6 District Engineer Dick Kautz. In addition) DMA TS Vice Chair Supervisor Donna Smith also chose to attend. Tom Cackler made the presentation on the IA 32 project for Iowa DOT staff. Wandro began the discussion by stating that the staff recognizes that the Commission will not accept the IA 32 (Southwest Arterial) as proposed and that a process is needed to reach a point where a new alignment location can be approved. Cackler then began the presentation by stating that he would address three issues: 1) Schedule for the IA 32 (Southwest Arterial) project) 2) The status of IA 32 (Northwest Arterial)) 3) Activities the Commission has approved on US 20. In regard to the IA 32 (Southwest Arterial)) Cackler stated that at this point the environmental assessment is done for the proposed B-1 alignment. What is needed is a supplemental environmental assessment that addresses a new alignment whose north end intersects US 20 at approximately Seippel Road. He stated that a supplemental environmental assessment for the segment from North Cascade Road north to US 20 will take approximately one year. Commissioner Aller expressed continued concern regarding the impact of the proposed alignment on the Mt. Olivet Cemetery and asked if the supplemental EA should address alternative southern endpoints. Cackler said that the cemetery director would prefer no impact on the cemetery at all. However) that the impacts of the other potential southern end points were very severe. As a result) Cackler said that exploring additional mitigation measures in the area around the cemetery was the best alternative. Depressing the road below grade) adding buffer mounds and vegatation planting were all discussed as potential options for mitigation. Aller stated that he would continue to look very carefully at the Suite 330. Nesler Centre · P.O. Box 1140 · Dubuque. lA 52004-1140. (319)556-4166 · Fax (319)556-0348 E-Mail: ecia@mwcLnet .-- , . cemetery impacts and would not hesitate to vote against any proposal that involved significant impact to the cemetery. Cackler then moved on to discuss the existing IA 32 (Northwest Arterial). He stated that he went to Dubuque to look at IA32 and was convinced that it would provide a reasonable level of service for the expected future traffic demand. Cackler stated that he did not think there was a need for a realignment of the IA 32 (Northwest Arterial) to the west as had previously been discussed. He thought and local officials had told him that such a change would present problems for the local area for land use planning and infrastructure. He also stated that given the Commission preference for a IA 32 (Southwest Arterial) which intersects US 20 at Seippel Rd. that he does not think the need exists now for IA 32 (Northwest Arterial) as a state route. He recommended that after Phase IV of the Northwest Arterial is complete that it should be transferred back to the local jurisdictions. The Commissioners stated that they agreed. Wandro restated that the staff would reopen discussion of the Memorandum of Understanding and that the state would finish the Northwest Arterial to US 52 and then transfer jurisdiction to the local governments. Wandro stated that the state interest was in US 20 and IA 32 as a connector between two NHS routes (US 20 and US 61/151). Cackler then moved on to discuss issues related to US 20. He stated that the US 20 study would be moving forward. He said it was clear that in the future an interchange would be needed at US 20 and the Northwest Arterial. He showed the members of the Commission preliminary drawings for interchanges proposed by HDR Engineering of Omaha. The Commissioners asked about the level of business impact. Cackler and Kautz stated that it would be greatly reduced. Cackler also stated that the staff was now considering a diamond interchange at US 20/IA 32 (Southwest Arterial)/Seippel Road and that this would have less impact than the system interchange previously proposed. Cackler told the Commission that a letter had been sent at his direction by Dick Kautz to the City of Dubuque. This letter requested that the city not approve anything which will impact the US 20 corridor in the area around Seippel Road until the US 20 study and the supplemental EA for the IA 32 (Southwest Arterial) project are completed. Cackler then asked Supervisor Smith and myself if we wanted to say anything. Supervisor Smith stated that DMA TS and Iowa DOT had been moving forward cooperatively since 1993 based on the MOU and that the Northwest Arterial remained an important state route. I stated that the transfer of jurisdiction for the Northwest Arterial to the three local governments would be very difficult. Director Wandro then summarized the Commissions direction to Iowa DOT staff: 1) Reopen the MOU with local jurisdictions seeking transfer of jurisdiction of the Northwest Arterial after it's completion. 2) Initiate the development of a supplemental Environmental Assessment for the IA 32 (Southwest Arterial) project to examine western alignments that connect to US 20 around Seippel Road.