Barge Fleeting
.%
.1ilIIIt
1.$
"-
'.......
.........
""
"
-------
~
-,
--
,~
.....
E
~
CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA
MEMORANDUM
,/
/ ~;;;r/ /
/0/ I?
/'
November 2,2000
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
SUBJECT: Barge Fleeting on the Mississippi River
On February 7th the City Council directed that staff discuss with Artco Fleeting options for barge
fleeting in Dubuque now that they were losing approximately 60 spaces they lease along the 4th
Street Peninsula. After reviewing the six sites identified by Artco for possible fleeting, Artco
advised that the site along City Island, just south of the Wisconsin Bridge, was probably the only
practical site.
Several steps were taken during the process, including:
· Survey of cities with barge fleeting
· Examination through the Dubuque Metropolitan Area Transportation Study of the history
of barge fleeting in Dubuque
· Review of the February 7th Barge Fleeting Proposal from Artco through several meetings
with the local representative, Brent Nissen
· Artco parked 35 barges in the proposed site and pictures were taken from Highway
61/151
· An appraisal was obtained for the proposed site assuming 24 barges would be allowed to
fleet there
Several calls and letters of opposition have been received to this barge fleeting location.
I now need direction from the City Council on the next step. If the process is to proceed I
respectfully recommend that a Request for Proposals be issued and a Public Hearing be set for
December 4th to consider the responses to that Request for Proposals.
I would further recommend that the minimum requirements in the proposals be as follows:
· Up to 24 barges would be fleeted
· The minimum acceptable payment would be $38,000 per year
· The lease would be for a five-year period
· The City could cancel the lease at any time with a six-month notice
· The Lessee would be responsible for constructing and maintaining the necessary
improvements for fleeting, including any approvals that would be needed
· The City would not reimburse the Lessee for any improvements, including dredging
· The Lessee would remove the barges for dragon boat festivals, canoeing events, or
\..-,11
v/
GOwn ;:'
.-"rinO
1'-11 I
r
hUO
OS :[] Htl s-- liON Of)
-:J .. '--~,. -, . '-, u
U~/\f::JJ:ju
fishing tournaments for up to three events per year and for up to three-day periods, with a
thirty day notice from the City.
iJ1t{&,1zl1
Michael C. Van Milligen ~
MCVM/jh
Attachments
cc: Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel
Tim Moerman, Assistant City Manager
Mike Koch, Public Works Director
Pauline Joyce, Administrative Services Manager
Mr. Brent Nissen, Manager, Artco Fleeting Services, P.O. Box 585, Cassville, WI 53806
Mr. Gary Newt, Newt Marine, 5 Jones Street, Dubuque, IA 52001
Mr. Walter Hartman, President, Dubuque County Conservation Society, P.O. Box 645,
Dubuque,IA 52004-0645
Mr. Ray Weigel, President, Dubuque County Conservation Society, P.O. Box 645,
Dubuque, IA 52001
Mr. Chris Buckleitner, East Central Intergovemment Association, P.O. Box 1140,
Dubuque, IA 52004-1140
Mr. Wilfred Bahl, Dubuque County Board of Supervisors, Dubuque County Courthouse,
Dubuque, IA 52001
Mr. Charles L. Baule, P.E., Dubuque County Highway Department, Box 409A, RR#2,
Dubuque,IA 52001
Mr. James Grafelman, Assistant Environmental Impact Coordinator, Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, 3911 Fish Hatchery Road, Fitchburg, WI
53711-5397
Mr. Gerald Bade, Fish & Wildlife Biologist, United States Department of Interior, 1830
Second Avenue, Second Floor, Rock Island, IL 61201
Mr. Robert D. Hudson, Dubuque Harbor Service, P.O. Box 585, Cassville, WI 53806
Mr. Earl S. Brimeyer, Vice President Dubuque Dragon Boat Association, 2455 Kerper
Blvd., Dubuque, IA 52001
Mr. David C. Sherman, President, Iowa Coaches Tour and Travel, P.O. Box 3220,
Dubuque, IA 52004
CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA
MEMORANDUM
October 31, 2000
To: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
From: Tim Moerman, Assistant City Manager
RE: Barge Fleeting on the Mississippi River
Purpose
The purpose of this memo is to provide you information on the request by the City
Council to explore potential alternatives for barge fleeting in Dubuque.
Background
The City received a request from the American River Fleeting Company (Artco) for an
additional barge fleeting site in Dubuque in February of2000. They currently have a
lease for barge fleeting along the Fourth Street Peninsula; however, the construction of
the new riverwalk on the peninsula will eliminate this site for barge fleeting. The City
Council gave direction to City staff in February to explore other sites along the river for
potential barge fleeting. Information has been gathered on the issue is listed below and
highlighted according to the topic and attachments.
Discussion
Survey of cities with barge fleeting
A survey was conducted in November of 1999 to see how barge fleeting occurring in
other cities along the river. I contacted individuals in six cities and asked them various
questions about barge fleeting. Attached is a copy of the survey results.
Barge fleeting history on Fourth Street
Steve Williams, DMA TS Senior Transportation Planner, submitted a letter on the history
of barge fleeting in Dubuque. Attached is a copy of the letter.
Artco Barge Fleeting Proposal
Brent Nissen, Manager for Artco, submitted a barge fleeting proposal for City Council
consideration at the February 7, 2000 City Council meeting. The proposal and
presentation requested that the City examine six sites with potential for providing barge
fleeting spaces to replace the spaces eliminated from the Fourth Street Peninsula.
Attached is a copy of Artco' s Barge Fleeting Proposal.
The proposal included (1) the area on the east side of City Island, south of the Wisconsin
Bridge; (2) the area east of the Brewery; (3) Peosta Channel; (4) the area along the lih
Street Peninsula; (5) the 16th Street Detention Basin; (6) the area on the west side of
Dove Harbor.
City staff conducted a review of the sites submitted by Artco and met with a
representative from Artco for a discussion on their potential. There was agreement that
some of the sites were not good candidates for barge fleeting for logistical reasons. The
16th Street detention basin had no access for barges and was not feasible. The area in the
Peosta Channel is not deep enough for barges and the bridge limits access. The area
along the 12th Street Peninsula is located between two wing dams and would be hard to
navigate.
The area east of the Brewery was eliminated because of it is directly in front of the
riverwalk. The area on the west side of Dove Harbor is leased to another firm and has a
capacity of only four to eight barges. This analysis left the area along City Island as the
site with the most potential for barge fleeting.
Pictures of the site from the Wisconsin Bridge
City stafftook photographs of the site from the Wisconsin Bridge, while Artco had 35
barges parked there for the photographs, to determine the number of barges that could be
fleeted without being clearly seen from the bridge. Copies of the photographs are
attached.
Map of the barge fleeting site
City staff then prepared a map of the site with the boundaries being the area with fleeting
three barges deep and eight barges wide. A copy of the map is attached.
Appraisal of proposed barge fleeting site
The next step for City staff was to conduct an appraisal of the property when used for
barge fleeting purposes. Roy R. Fisher, Inc. conducted the appraisal using the area sized
to fleet twenty-four barges. The appraisal valued the property for lease at $38,000 per
year. A copy of the summary of the appraisal is attached.
The next step in the process is to issue a Request For Proposal (RFP) for the lease of this
property. City staff would prepare the RFP for City Council review. Ifthe form of the
RFP is approved it would be issued to the public for proposals.
The RFP could include terms such as the following:
· The lease would be for a five-year period
· The City could cancel the lease at any time with a six-month notice
· The Lessee would be responsible for constructing and maintaining the
necessary improvements for fleeting, including any approvals that would
be needed
· The City would not reimburse the Lessee for any improvements, including
dredging
· The Lessee would remove the barges for dragonboat festivals, canoeing
events, or fishing tournaments for up to three events per year and for up to
three-day periods, with a thirty day notice from the City
Recommendation
I recommend that the City Council review the above information and give City staff
direction on preparing an RFP for leasing the property.
Cc Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel
Mike Koch, Public Works Director
City of Dubuque Survey
Barge Fleeting Policies for Cities
November, 1999
Purpose of the survey: To see how other cities along the Mississippi River are accommodating
barge fleeting and balancing it with tourism and recreation needs ofthe river.
Cities on the Survey:
Red Wing, Minnesota
Winona Minnesota
La Crosse, Wisconsin
Clinton, Iowa
Davenport, Iowa
Muscatine, Iowa
RW Myron White
WI Judy Bodway
LC Bob Fisher
CL
DA Charlie Hesston
MU Larry Wolf
651-385-3697
507-457-8250
608-785-9396
319-242-2144
319-326-7756
319-264-1550
Questions for Cities:
1. Do you have barge fleeting along your city limits?
R W Yes, 20 spaces in two places, serving 3 businesses
WI Yes, 60 spaces in a separate commercial harbor serving 5 businesses
LC Yes, 63 spaces on a City fleeting site serving 8 businesses
CL Yes, 24 spaces and a municipal dock
DA No
MU No, in fact there is a "No Parking Zone" ordinance for barges
2. Do you have barge fleeting near your city limits?
If yes to questions 1 and 2, how many businesses are served by barges and how many
barges are fleeted at one time?
RW No
WI No
LC Yes
CL Yes, in Illinois, which serves 2 businesses
DA Yes, south ofthe city which serves 3 businesses
MU Yes, in Illinois; businesses also have their own facilities
If yes to questions 1 and 2, how many businesses are served by barges and how many
barges are fleeted at one time?
3. Do you have policies for the location of barge fleeting along or near your city limits?
If so, what are they?
RW No
WI No
LC Yes, to keep the fleeting in particular areas
CL No, the barges are not seen by the public because of the floodwaU
DA No
MU No
4. What is your city's general philosophy to barge fleeting along or near your city limits?
RW No philosophy
WI No philosophy
LC Barge fleeting is important because of the businesses it serves
CL No philosophy
DA There is a tendency toward reorienting the river toward recreation and tourism
MU The community does not want barge fleeting along the city portion of the river
5. How do you balance the barge fleeting with tourism and recreation needs of the river?
R W Most of the fleeting is in the commercial harbor which avoids conflict between the
different interests
WI The fleeting is confined and avoid the conflict between the different interests
LC There is not enough room for all interests and they have to work to accommodate both
CL There are no issues
DA Barges need to find different places to fleet than the city
MU There is no problem because barge fleeting is not allowed
6. Have you been approached in the recent past on barge fleeting opportunities?
If you have, what has been your response?
RW No
WI Yes, local businesses are interested in expanding their barge usage
LC Yes, they are having discussions on how to increase the number of spaces
CL No
DA No
MU No
7. Have you ever quantified the economic impact of river dependent businesses?
RW No
WI No
LC Yes, a plan will be completed in December
CL Yes, a report is being drafted
DA No
MU No
8. Have you ever quantified the economic impact of barge fleeting businesses on your
community?
RW No
WI No
LC See # 7
CL See # 7
DA No
MU No
9. Have there been any changes in the level of barge fleeting in your community?
RW No
WI Current users are expanding and needing more space for barge fleeting
LC There is more demand for barge fleeting
CL It changes constantly
DA There is more activity
MU It changes constantly
City of Dubuque Survey
Barge Fleeting Policies for Cities
Purpose of the survey: To see how other cities along the Mississippi River are accommodating
barge fleeting and balancing it with tourism and recreation needs of the river.
Questions for Cities:
1. Do you have barge fleeting along your city limits?
2. Do you have barge fleeting near your city limits?
If yes to questions 1 and 2, how many businesses are served by barges and how many
barges are fleeted at one time?
3. Do you have policies for the location of barge fleeting along or near your city limits?
If so, what are they?
4. What is your city's general philosophy to barge fleeting along or near your city limits?
5. How do you balance the barge fleeting with tourism and recreation needs of the river?
6. Have you been approached in the recent past on barge fleeting opportunities?
If you have, what has been your response?
7. Have you ever quantified the economic impact of river dependent businesses on your
community?
8. Have you ever quantified the economic impact of barge fleeting businesses on your
community?
9. Have there been any changes in the level of barge fleeting in your community?
Cities on the Survey:
Red Wing, Minnesota
Winona Minnesota
La Crosse, Wisconsin
Clinton, Iowa
Davenport, Iowa
Muscatine, Iowa
612-385-3612
507-457-8233
608-789-7510
319-242-2144
319-326-7763
319-264-1550
EAST CENTRAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ASSOCIATION
DUBUQUE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY
EASTERN IOWA REGIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY
JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS (JTPA) (PJ) (WIW)
ECIA REGIONAL PLANNING AFFILIATION
E.C.I.A. BUSINESS GROWTH, INC.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Michael Van Milligen, City Manager
Stephen Williams, DMATS Senior Transportation Planner
February 1, 2000
SUBJECT:
DMA TS Barge Fleeting Committee
Per your request I have reviewed the histozy of DMATS Barge Fleeting Committee and
adopted plan and have prepared the following summary:
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has statutozy authority to regulate barge fleeting and
related activities as part of it's responsibility for inland navigation under the River and
Harbor Act of 1899 and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) has authority to manage much of the Mississippi River waterfront in the
Dubuque area on the Illinois side as part of a wildlife refuge.
In the early 1980's two barge fleeting permits on the Illinois side of the river expired. At that
time, the FWS set the fees for the two sites at fair market value as of 1981 and reissued the
permits to the same parties. This practice was perceived to be anti-competitive and the FWS
received some criticism. The FWS determined that it would reevaluate it's permitting
practices. At the same time the FWS undertook a Refuge Master Plan to provide policy
direction for it's management of the entire refuge. The FWS determined that it would not
consider new fleeting locations until the Refuge Master Plan was completed. One option
under consideration at that time was the leasing of FWS owned fleeting sites to units of local
government for management in the best interests of the local communities.
At that time, concern arose among members of the public that fleeting sites could ultimately
be lost and that such a loss would have significant economic impact on the Dubuque area
due to the importance of barge shipping in the local economy. In addition, it was felt that
DMA TS might be the appropriate organization to provide local management to FWS owned
sites. Ultimately, the DMATS Barge Fleeting Committee was created to prepare a plan which
addressed these concerns. The committee consisted of 31 members representing local
shippers, fleeters, conservationists and local, state and federal government agencies. The
committee prepared a plan which addressed both long and short term fleeting needs. The
plan that was adopted evaluated and prioritized existing and potential fleeting sites on the
Mississippi River in the Dubuque area. The highest priority of the plan was the retention of
existing fleeting sites. After adoption of the plan by the DMA TS Policy Committee the
group suspended meeting until such time as the Refuge Master Plan was completed and the
FWS decided how it would manage permitting in the future.
Suite 330, Nesler Centre · P.O. Box 1140 · Dubuque, lA 52004-1140. (319)556-4166 . Fax (319)556-0348
E-Mail: ecia@mwcLnet
In 1988, the Fish and Wildlife Service completed it's plan and the accompanying EIS. At that
time, the pennits for two fleeting sites on the Illinois side of the river on FWS property
expired. To preserve those sites, and also allow time for the development of a long term
approach to management by local governments, the sites were leased for one year by the
City of Dubuque and sub-leased to the existing permit holders. The City of Dubuque then
requested that the DMATS Articles of Agreement be amended to allow DMATS to lease
barge fleeting sites and manage their use. Amendment to the Articles of Agreement required
the agreement of all the original signers of the agreement. Ultimately, two original signers,
the City of East Dubuque and the lllinois Department of Transportation did not agree to the
proposed revisions.
It was then detennined that under the Iowa Code, the City of Dubuque could acquire or
lease and manage fleeting sites. In the meantime, the FWS decided" that for future fleeting
pennits it would accept bids that included both cash payments and also land exchanges that
would increase the area of the refuge. In 1989, bids were requested for the two existing FWS
fleeting sites on the Illinois side of the Mississippi River. The City of Dubuque submitted
bids on both sites. The only other bids received were from the existing pennit holders who
each proposed a combination of cash lease payments and land exchanges. The bids of the
existing pennit holders were accepted and the pennits issued.
There has been no activity by the DMATS Barge Fleeting Committee since that time. Please
feel free to contact me if you have any other questions regarding the DMA TS Barge Fleeting
Committee.
P\ ~ \.J t fA! rt""j t v-. (IA{ e. t (,'1)
, L...J') ~(~ ~ jJ,) l'1.fc.e f<. .
d- f;w'/ ~LEPHONE 608/725-2311
FAX 608/725-5044
ARTCO FLEETING SERVICES
P.O. BOX 585. CASSVIlLE. WI 53806
0/<8 @
\D:c{)
May 4, 2000
City of Dubuque
City Hall
50 West 13th Street
Dubuque, IA 52001-4864
Attn: Michael Van Milligen
Dear Mike,
As we progress to an applicable solution to the barge fleeting problem for the City of
Dubuque, Artco Fleeting Service officially requests the City to consider leasing the
Mississippi River frontage at City Island for the use of barge fleeting. The area is the
most viable place for fleeting use in the City-front region.
The site survey and picture taking that took place this week went well and I appreciate
the City taking the time and effort to work with us. I will be contacting your office or the
Engineering office next week to try and line up another meeting to discuss the future of
barge fleeting in Dubuque.
Sincerely,
~~
Brent Nissen
Manager
vI\ Btv'rY j; '/YI jJ1./<e I<
(V'-lt \ L 11 J J. (u u ./'/
TELEPHONE 608/725-2311
FAX 608/725-5044
ARiCO FLEETING SERVICES
P.O. BOX 585. CASSVILlE. WI 53806
'-i~
~ ( \1 @ ;:;.. DO
March 9, 2000
City Manager
City Hall
50 West 13th Street
Dubuque, IA 52001-4864
Attn: Michael Van Milligen
Dear Mike,
Thank you for the time spent last week at our meeting regarding fleeting space in Dubuque. I owe you
some information pertaining to capital outlays for the various projects discussed.
Installing the fleeting area directly below the Highway 611151 bridge on City Island would require the
installation of six concrete deadmen buried in the bank with a shorewire attached to each deadman. Each
deadman costs approximately $200 each and each shorewire is about $250 each, totaling $2700. Labor
including a crane on a barge and the boat to move it would take approximately four hours and cost $1600.
Total for installing the City Island fleet would be $4300.
Installing a fleeting area between the wing dams outside of the Koch property would require the installation
of three pile structures. The pilings would consist of a minimum of 13 piles per piling at a total cost of
$28,600 each, including labor, boat and crane time. To install 3 pilings would be a total of$85,800.
Both of the above projects should not require any dredging, which would add substantial cost. Obviously,
Artco prefers the City Island site due to easier access and reduced cost of installation.
J
Regarding the topic of whether a lease would be required for the property outside of the Koch property, I
am being told that any time you block access to the frontage property, a lease would be required.
I
According to the Fischer Properties lease terms, we owe an annual lease amount on April 1,2000, which
covers April 1,2000 through March 31, 2001. Termination terms are as follows: If landlord wishes to
cancel lease, 60-day notice must be given and any prepaid lease money will be returned prorated. Tenant
has option not to renew at end of lease with a 9O-day notice. Our plans are to pay the lease amount due
April 1, 2000.
If you have any questions, please give me a call. I have a meeting set up with Mike Koch on March 15th to
do the sight surveys, hopefully we will be able to meet after that to discuss them.
Sincerely,
~~
Brent Nissen
Lt H-v CO~.,r1j'
'f(LJ~ 0/~J 0"1
(;v~t Urt~/ 1'41 ~
(}/Cvt r e~{~. /tC ~ (/\ cleft- .
..._=-___lI'.~.
.
._-~-Ii'I..1II
NOV-01-00 WED 12:36 PM
_-""::1.-":...:.0_..
------.-.............
--
DUBUQUE CITY CLERK
FAX NO. 3195890890
P, 01
/1!( ,,1
2:;;..-;'l"t/
lRlHUQUE COONTY CONSERVATION SOCIETY
cC
?J_-~_."
",/ ./ .....-"..4/ /"
(.............(~ ,:/,1.---'/
"'Oronnlzod iIl1~JJ ~Of f',,)!oCllM "I SOil. 'l'i<lodc, Wut,l'. nnd Wlldhfl,"
P.O. Box 645
D1.IBUQUE, rOWA
52004-0645
rnC:>lDr:rH
MArI'( ~<:I\Llf'M,' N
1::;,1 VH:'r rnL~.H~)fN r
mLL KI'MP
~}nti VJ(:r~ flr~I:-f.iIJ)f~l...r I
I'.('l .1{"J'~f j'll K.'.1'l r
'~rl_1 vh~li ,lfr,..-Sl(\f 'I'.t T
I',\I-'L I'A\J!-MMI
,~II, Vier:: rnU;1D,IH
WALH~n IIMl"IMA,."
~;I:cm: rArIV
l1^'JICII.CIrI~rfl
Tflt'A.:lIW,f.'1l
rAI.I~ f'l"(ltll.
1'^!U ",'" ''.If>L'N'~';
nrnr>A I"Fjr.mON IIARTMI\N
[)^N l':IMl)1\l
J"k..~l':f, t;nN4
Pf,UI. ",Allf'rv'AN
rAnNr ~ 1 1'1't:IITHl
r.1MlyIv\II.U'[1
lIM,,;'1 WI'I!':II
I,AV,I) l(,rlff"1
/lAnnl D l,n~1 riCK
CAr',..,' Ir.o\MnOl}(::f' J'
rlLIIH r" t, CAJllll.
I to t.I,'l.J1UCI ;1IT~
W,'..! l)' F,Ur1!~
\)(111/1'1'11 N I NUl
1'1. Cf A",,'rl I"JlS I
,'1\, ~;lll\"Nr}\
iU;:--',:-, l.tAf'illl-;
(01 (]n(~( :~r.J II I MA(;f\L'r1
t ,(\nAt""f.: 1'\')(\11.;
,II.1I.>(\i: JOI'IN (;~IAI M(' II':,
1',\UI. NAI.JI.\MI
I,U,; I.\l YI,II
JAM!::;) t.lr,YCn
r n ('lIl nANN
".\\;(.'1 Will FIN
.IA(;!< Mil, I f.<
AI IIIIN,,<)N
L'J
LU
;;.~.
LL'
C....
LU
(L
<y\
("')
C-:.)
(11
,g....,.
:~;: "L-
0"-
~,
,.,.'~: \n5
'.:: {'~I-
, -\
~ ',~ j.')
~...' ....;
.c.:J.)
()
... ...
"',.....
.;-.::
(.-)
. .-
(...')
eJ
C.".l
t.':.)
October llt 2000
- ,- 'j - .
'1'0 The Mrlyo17 nnlt
City Cc)unc:i 1. of Dubuque
RE: OPPOSITION TO: PROPOSAL TO RELOCA'l'E BARGE FLEETING
ARl!:A TO SOTlTHEAST PORTION OF SCHMITt/CITY IST,AND
'1'h~ Bor.n.-c1 of Di ree 1:0rS ....oted to reiterate thei t'
opposition to the proposed reloc~tion of the bnrgc
flc::ctine area trom Elouth or the railroD.O brhlr;e to tlH~
southc(lst portion of Gity Island. Without repenting .!111
of our 9tatementR in our prior correspondence, we oppose
the relocation for ~everol rcasons. First, it will
dafinite,ly cr~n.tf! <l sarious hazard for boaters in the
area. Ther.e nt'c ~\.1rilla1:l nnd bmit"'i<1unchj.ng are~\s on or
n~nr both ~nd" of City l~lnnd nnd very heavy bont
traffic dur lng thr,~ '10mI'm weather months. Second, the
pL'opo:~cd Ioention provides hnbi.tot for a numbt~J: of
wildlife ~;pecicls, ,~hich will be destroyed. '111ird, the
proposed use ir. incompatible with the eXprCli;:5Cd purpose
<1nd pllst \lse of: the island, !~. t'ccTcDtional use. Our
society mainto'inco the Miller Rivct'vicw Conservation
Park urea f.or n:;Jny y".ars. We spent countless hours and
a Jot of money pr.e::lCl1:'ving that area or City Island.
S~lce then vnrinus other recreational uses or the island
have come into being. We with othars fought the
industrlali~ution of the island fo~ years.
We t:lr:;k YOll toeonsitler the environnlcnt <lnu the citizens
of the, tri-litnte :ll:en and dony the us~ of :my portion or
the wc~ter~ ndjl'lce:nt co Ctty Island for bnrge flccti.1;\g
pllIpose6. In this conjunction we believe you should set
a public hcal:inr~ wi tll ptlblic. input on the mnttl;!r.
VOUI'S Truly)
t,t;Jk i.,6~~
Wnlter Hartman, Pre!::ident
cc:
TaJllgrnph Ilernld
" ,'.., J" .~ ".~ ",'\1,.' H.
<=:)
Q 0
MARINE c::> "JJ
NEWT rJ'< n ;11
5 JONES STREET .-.
;.-=-.- \.. ~ 0
DUBUQUE, IOWA 52001 ( , N '.
r- ill
(319) 557-1855 J;d , . <:
(.:. -ry
<.') ::0:; m
~O
>-"'-: N 0
() c::>
CD N
October 10, 2000
City Hall
50 West 131h Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
RE: Barge fleeting on City Island
It has been brought to our attention that the City Council is being approached to approve barge
fleeting on City Island.
On July 29, 1983, Dubuque Barge and Fleeting Service, Inc, d/b/a Newt Marine Service
requested that the Dubuque City Council Dock Committee grant permission to do fleeting on City
Island. This proposal was denied by the city. Attached is a copy of the letter from the Dubuque
County Conservation Society and a copy of the summary from a study done by the Dubuque
Board of Dock Commissioners stating their objections to our request for fleeting (see
attachments). Among the objections:
* Environmental issues
* Entrance into the city from the Wisconsin Bridge
* Disfavor with location to Dog Track Facility
* Location to water-orientated recreation
* Political disfavor with location to commercial recreation-zoned property
I feel that the city made the best decision for the community, especially now with the city
emphasis on the Riverfront Beautification. As a riverfront business, Newt Marine, along with its
sister company, Dubuque River Terminals, Inc. has worked with the city to enhance the view
from the Julien Dubuque Bridge. Why now would the city consider moving fleeting from one
visually unacceptable site to a even more obtrusive location?
Artco and Newt Marine currently share fleeting on Island #228, known as Catfish Fleet,
approximately 5 miles south of the city. In this fleeting area there are 186 barge spaces, which
are evenly divided between both companies. This division of fleeting space places both companies
on the same competitive basis. Dove Harbor, which is located between the Julien Dubuque
Bridge and the Wisconsin Bridge, handles the majority of the commercial barge traffic in the city
of Dubuque. In this harbor Artco can fleet roughly 10-] 2 barges. Newt can fleet 9. Dove
Harbor, when used efficiently, allows us the advantage of having barges readily available for the
docks, and in turn, a place for finished barges to be held until several barges can be moved to
catfish fleet at one time. This makes our trips to Catfish fleet fewer, more efficient and less
costly.
Should the city approve Artco' s request for fleeting off City Island, Newt Marine Service should
be entitled to 50% of the fleeting area. If not, we are placed at a significant disadvantage. Newt
Marine would be working with the 30% higher cost that Artco refers to in their Barge Fleeting
Proposal statement presented to the City Council on February 7, 2000 (see attachment) .
We strongly urge the council to consider these facts and base their decision on what will best
serve the community and the long term goals of the Riverfront Beautification Project.
Sincerely,
~
G&Y~
Newt Marine Service
cc: Michael C. Van Milligen
Terrance M. Duggan
John H. Markham
Roy Buol
Joseph T. Robbins
Patricia Cline
Daniel Nicholson
Ann Michalski
Tom Harkin
Charles Grassely
.
/
/
RESIDENT
RANDL (RAY) WEIGEL
Sf VICE PRESIDENT
MARY MILLER
"d VICE PRESIDENT
BOB CAHILL
rd VICE PRESIDENT
CHUCK MILLS
th VICE PRESIDENT
STEVE' NANNENGA
ECRETARY
JIM EGAN
REASURER
JIM MURPHY
AST PRESIDENTS
DAVID LEIFKER
JACK MILLER
HAROLD HEDRICK
JAMES WALTON
ROBERT l. CAHILL
LEO McLAUGHLIN
GARY RAMBOUSEIC
AL HANSON
WALLY SUHR
BOB ZEHENTNER
jECEASED PAST
RESIDENTS
ROSS HARRIS
GEORGE SCHUMACHER
HORACE POOLE
JUDGE JOHN CHALMERf
PAUL NAUMAN
GUS MEYER
JAMES MEYER
ED GILGANN
,1)""ufue Counlll Con~e"lIation $ocielll
.~ ia 19)) IW ~ of Soil, Woodo. W..... ... WiWliIe"
P. O. Box 645
DUBUQUE, IOWA
52001
February 22, 1983
u.s. Department of the Interior
Regional Director, Fish and
Wildlife Service
122 West 2nd Street
Winona, MN 85987
Dear Director:
This letter is in reference to a Barge Fleeting Special Use
Permit No. 146 issued to Newt Marine Service of DUbuque, Iowa.
Our interest in this matter concerns the 1984 renewal application
for the two Barge Fleeting sites located on islands at Mile 579
and 581.5 in re upper Mississippi River. It is our understanding
that this renewal application may not be reissued by your department.
The Dubuque County Conservation Society is a 50 year old
conservation organization with a long successful history of active
participation in the conservation movement in the Tri-State Area.
The Society is presently invovled in the recreational planning
process for Chaplin Schmidt Island w.;i th the Dubuque Dock Board.
This island has been the location fO~ the Society's Riverview
Conservation Park (35 acres) and now that the new Highway 151
bridge is open, serves as a very beautiful gateway to our city as
oneapproa~hes from the Wisconsin side of the river.
The shoreline below the new bridge (on the iSland) presently
under lease to Beecher Quarries has been regarded as a possible
Barge Fleeting si tee This area probably will not be considered
for development as it could be" needed if Fish and Wildlife chose
not to renew Newt Marine's Fleeting application. The Dubuque
County Conservation Society, by unanimous vote of its Board of
Directors, wishes that Fish and Wildlife would extend Newt Marine
Service's application at present capacities to continue fleeting
on the islands at Mile 579 and 581.5. Newt Marine has a good
record of avoiding environmental damage at the present sites and
certainly the wildlife and habitual has acclimated to this use
during the past twenty years of fleeting.
~ESIDENT
FlANDL (FlAY) WEIGEL
It VICE PRESIDENT
MARY MILLER
,d VICE PRESIDENT
BOB CAHIl.L
-d VICE PRESIDENT
CHUCK MILLS
:h VICE PRESIDENT
STEVE NANNENGA
ECRETARY
JIM EGAN
=lEASUAER
JIM MURPHY
~ST PRESIDENTS
DAVID LEIFKER
JACK MILLER
HAROLD HEDRICK
JAMES WALTON
ROBERT I... CAHILL
LEO McLAUGHLIN
GARY RAMBOUSEK
AL HANSON
WALLY SUHR
B08 ZEHENTNER
"CEASED PAST
lESIDENTS
ROSS HARRIS
GEORGE SCHUMACHER
HORACE POO LE
JUDGE JOHN CHALMERf
PAUL NAUMAN
GUS MEYER
JAMES MEYER
ED GILGANN
,1)",,","_ COlUl.t!1 COn$ervatu- SocUtll
.~ iD 19JJ IW ......... 01 Soil. "..... W_ .... ..........
P. O. Box 64.5
DUBUQUE, IOWA
52001
U.S. Department of the Interior
Page Two
February 21, 1983
The Conservation Society further feels that the Chaplin
Schmddt Island area is a very poor alternate site as it would
be, 1) very noticeable from the new bridge, 2) force the
recreational boater to compete with the commercial interests for
the same water surface, and 3) cause unnecessary exposure to
the commercial interests by high wind and current with the
danger of runaway barges doing damage to the railroad bridge and
shoreline comnercial structures.
., .1 am sure ydU will find our request most unusual as the
Barge Fleeters and Conservation interests have traditionally
been at odds with regard to river use. We also agree that the
request is unusual but necessary. Much time has been spent
discussing the issue wi th the Dock Board and Newt Marine and we
feel that the best interests of the co.llmity, the future of the
river, and Newt Marine could be served by extension of the permit.
Our society would be most pleased to discuss our request
with Fish and Wildlife at your convenience. A prompt reply would
be appreciated.
Sincerely,
Q~~~." ~"
Ray Weigel~Siden~~'
Memorandum
DATE: Sept~mber 7, 1984
TO: All Barge Fleeting Committee Members
FROM: Chris Buckleitner
RE: Committee members' input on potential fleeting sites;
and M~eting date for September 19, 1984, 1:30 p.m.
E.C.I.A. Conference Room.
Please find a~tached all input received from committee mem-
bers as of 9:00 a.m. Friday, September 7. If more is re-
ceived it will be forwarded to the chairman of the committee
before the September 19 meeting.
NOTE: Attached is an aget1da r-01' the fleeting C(jIlUll.n~ee'
meeting on the 19th.
, . .:' !()
,-
,.j ;' </. "1.-'-< ~ (1... ~_ ~
Board 0/ Super/lijorj
DUBUQUE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
DUBUQUE. IOWA 52001
13191 583-3511
Augus t 28, 1984
Barge Fleeting Committee, ECIA
Suite 330 Nesler Centre
P. O. Box 1140
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Dear Committee:
This is how we rate these ::;1 u~s:
LONG TERM
1. Catfish Creek South could be developed. Mile 577 to
578 right bank - 30 capacity.
2. Lower East side Chaplain Schmitt Island - 70 capa~ity
3. Mile 574.5 to 575 left bank - 60 capacity.
4. Mile 572 to 572.5 right bank - 40 capacity.
5. Mile 570 to 570.5 right bank - SO capacity.
6. Upper Lake Peosta Channe::1 - 200 capacity.
7. Lower i.;)k~ P~ost;) Ch.:1On('1 - ]2 capacity.
8. Betl.Jecn Dove Harbor and ['eosta Cllanne1 - 40 capacity.
SHORT TERM
We believe that th~ existing sitli:s coulJ be expanded \"her~
they are.
l'tlll rs t !"lIly,
~ \.
I
l"
I....;.
Wi 1 Fred Bah]
WILFRED R. BAHI
LLOYD C. HA YES
DONNA L SMITH
Box 409A, R.R. #2
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
DUBUQUE
COUNTY
Phone 557-7283
HIGHWA Y DEPARTMENT
AVe 2.q 7984
August 28. 1984
Barge Fleeting Committee. ECIA
Suite 330. Nesler Centre
P.O. Box 1140
Dubuque. Iowa 52001
Dear Committee:
This is how \ole rate these: ~-;iLes;
LONG TERM
1. LO\ver east side Chaplain Schmitt Island - 70 capacity
2. Catfish Creek south could be developed.
Mile 577 to 578 right bank - 30 capacity.
3. Mile 574.5 to 575 left bank - 60 capacity.
4. Mile 572 to 572.5 right bank - 40 capacity.
5. Mile 570 to 570.5 right bank - 50 capacity.
6. Upper Lake Peosta Channel - 200 capacity.
7. Lower Lake Peosta Channel - 12 capacity.
8. Bet\oleen Dove Harbor and Peosta Channel - 40 capacity.
SHORT TERM
\.Jc believe that the .::xisting sites could b~ expanded 1.;I1C[('
they are.
Yours truly,
/'
/
/,
" ,;-.?"",,- ')
/' '~./.\ / /
,1 . ."'. ..' 'j. J /,; ,
Charles L. gaulc, P.E.
Dubuque County Engineer
I";
THE PILLSBUR Y COMPANY
P.O. BOX 330
DUBUQUE, IOWA 52001
TO: Chris Buckleitner, DMATS Staff
SfP 5
1984
FROM: Joseph H. Fall
RE: Ranking of Fleeting Sites by Pillsbury Company
DATE: September 4, 1984
Site 1 - This is by far the most desirable area for barge fleeting. It could
be used immediately, has deep water, is out of sight from the bridge coming
into town from Wisconsin, has enough capacity to solve our short term needs,
is out of the channel, is not owned by other agencies like U. S. Fish and
Wild Life, has a minimal deleterious effect on the environment or wildlife.
This is the only area that fulfills all of the above stated advantages.
The problem is serious enough that only short term considerations should be
considered and acted upon. Once a substantial size fleet is in.place in
the city of Dubuque, then we can look at long term needs and plan for the
future.
All other fleeting areas are either too small, do not have deep water.
use Fish & Wild Life prohibited land or are too far away fr~m the major
shipping terminals in Dubuque to be considered in any way in solving our
short te~m fleeting needs. .
, j
, I j
\t1.; i;. .
" - /
/
. ~.I '
;-/ /ill
I t'o
JHF/pjw
/
('
~ tt' 5 ./~84
State of Wisconsin \ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Southern District Headquarters
3911 Fish Hatchery Road
Fitchburg, Wisconsin 53711-5397
Carroll D. 8ssadny
StlCrBtary
August 31, 1984
1600
Mr. Thurman Schweitzer
DMATS
Suite 330, Nestler Center
P.O. Box 1140
Dubuque, IA 52004-1140
Dear Mr. Schweitzer:
Re: Input on Feasibility of Potential Fleeting Sites
I have reviewed the materials you have sent me, dated August 24, 1984.
Following are the environmental concerns of each of the potential fleeting
sites. Included is the site at River Mile 581.5, left bank. Since my primary
concern is with the waters of the State of Wisconsin, those sites immediately
impacting Wisconsin waters are dealt with first.
River Mile 581.5, Left Bank - Both sides of the southern tip of the island are
being considered where a government day mark is located. This site is located
completely within Wisconsin waters and is subject to the permitting
requirements contained in Chapter NR 327, Wis. Adm. Code. It will be
difficult for the Department to grant a barge fleeting permit for this site
due to the presence of an important mussel bed containing Lampsilis hig1insi,
a Wisconsin and Federal endangered species listed under Sec. NR 27.03(2 (f)1,
Wis. Adm. Code. Presence of a barge fleeting site in this area will
negatively impact the mussel bed and the endangered species in the following
manner.
Increased barge traffic to and from the fleeting site as well as within the
fleeting site will cause bottom erosion to the area of the mussel bed.
Physical damage will. be caused to shells of the mussels and the endangered
species. These will be caused by propeller scouring, increased wakes and bed
erosion from barge and tow hulls. Damaged live and dead mussels have been
observed by scuba divers within the barge channel of the Mississippi River
near Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin. This same situation will certainly result
if this site at R.M. 581.5 is developed and used for barge fleeting.
Importand wildlife habitat will be negatively impacted if barge fleeting is
allowed.
This area also sees a substantial amount of sport and commercial fishing.
This habitat will also be adversely affected by barge fleeting.
Mr. Thurman Schweitzer - August 31, 1~~4
raye L
As part of the permitting process, the Department must prepare an
environmental assessment pursuant to Sec. 1.11, Wis. Stats., and
Sec. NR 150.03(2)(b)11, Wis. Adm. Code. We will require the applicant to
submit information for the environmental assessment pursuant to Sec. 23.11(5),
Wis. Stats. This information will pertain to environmental consequences and
impacts, physical changes both aquatic and terrestrial, information on the
affected enironment, alternatives, socio-economic impacts and impacts on
threatened or endangered resources.
Lower East Side of Chaplin Schmitt Memorial Island - Although the barge
fleeting area will be on the Iowa side, the presence and operation of the
fleet will have impacts on Wisconsin waters. The primary impact will be
caused by increased barge traffic over the same important mussel bed impacted
by the site at R.M. 581.5 which contains the endangered species Lampsilis
higginsi. More information is needed on this site to determine what the
impacts will be on the mussel bed.
Site Between Dove Harbor and Peosta Channel - This area between the wing dams
on the Iowa side contains a stump field with important fish spawning
habitat. Sport and commercial fishing will be negatively impacted by barge
fleeting in this area, as will the fishery resources of this entire stretch of
river.
Upper Lake Peosta Channel - This area is a good commercial and sport fishing
area, with good fish spawning habitat. Barge fleeting in this area will
negatively impact that habitat, substantially reducing the habitat available
and the fishing opportunities within the river system.
Lower Lake Peosta Channel - This area does not appear to have as much
fisheries or wildlife resources as the above four sites. Environmentally,
this will be the least damaging of the sites thus far selected.
Mile 577 to 578, Right Bank - This entire area from R.M. 576 through 579 is an
important commercial and sport fishing area. Significant spawning habitat
exists in the immediate area of the proposed fleet. Barge fleeting in this
area will negatively impact the fisheries resources for the entire river
system.
Mile 574.2 to 575, Left Bank - Important wildlife habitat exists on and around
the island proposed as a fleeting site. Fish spawning habitat also exists in
the immediate vicinity. Barge fleeting will have negative impacts on both of
these habitats.
Mile 572 to 572.5, Right Bank - Important wildlife habitat exists on an around
the island proposed for fleeting. Commerical and sport fishing occur near the
site. Both wildlife and fish habits may be negatively impacted.
Mile 570 to 570.5, Right Bank - This site appears to be near the navigational
channel. A mussel bed is located in the immediate vicinity which will
certainly be impcted by the fleeting activities. This also appears to be a
popular water sport area.
All the proposed sites will have some environmental drawbacks, some more than
others. Since the river is a system, fleeting activities will affect the
whole river. Of all the sites selected thus far, the Lower Peosta Lake
Channel seems to be the least environmentally damaging. Although the site on
Chaplin Schmitt Memorial Island is not directly over the mussel bed,
activities from the fleeting may cause harm. Since the mussel bed is on the
Wisconsin side and contains an endangered species, the State of Wisconsin will
seek to protect it. The site at R.M. 581.5 is in Wisconsin waters and will be
subject to our permitting requirements.
I hope this will be sufficient information for your purposes. I will look
forward to meeting with you on September 19, 1984.
Sincerely,
.'
-,
/--
'---Jartles Grafe lman
Assistant Environmental Impact Coordinator
JG:ps
cc: BEARI3
DQdgeville Area Office
I
if;: v 1984 ,.p 5 1IU
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLU+ SFRVIU.
ROCK ISlAND FIElD OFFK:E (ES)
1830 Second A\lcnuc. Second Floor
Rock Island. illinoIs 61201
IN REPLY REFER TO:
Com:
FTS:
309-793-5800
386-5800
September 5, 1981~
Mr. Chris Buckleitner
East Central I~tergovernmental Association
P.O. Box 1140
Dubuque, Iowa 52004-1140
Dear Mr. Buckleitner:
The following is my evaluation of each of the eight proposed barge fleeting
sites for Pool 12. I have listed the factors about each site that influence
my acceptance or rejection of the site. These conunents aplJly in both the
long and short term unless specifically noted otherwise. In addition, for
the Committees information, I have completed a pairwise comparison matrix
considering the environmental factors of each site. This was done for two
scenarios, (1) considering only environmental factors, sport and corr~ercial
fishing and water based recreation and ignoring site ownership; and (2) where
FWS Refuge lands were present, the site was always the least preferred
alternative. It should be noted that this was done without the input of
other environmental agencies and the figures could change. It was done for
the Committee to see how the mechanics of pairwise comparisons work.
As can be seen, the comparison not only ranks the sites from the
environmental point of view, but also enables the evaluator to see the
relationship between alternatives or lIhow muchll one site is ranked better
than the others. I believe, if all interest groups (not individuals) were to
use this methodology, and assuming equality between evaluation criteria, a
logical, fair and statistically valid ranking would be obtained that is fully
defensible.
Site I - Lower East Side of Chaplain Schmitt Island
Advantages - no fish or wildlife concerns.
Disadvantages - aesthetic impact to land based recreation on Schmitt Island.
Site II - Area Between Dove Harbor and Peosta Channel
Advantages - no wildlife concerns
Disadvantages - area is a stump field providing fish habitat for spawning,
escaping predators and other life requirements. It is a sport and commercial
fishing area. Dredging would be required necessitating a disposal site.
This agency would require replacement habitat or enhancement of existing
habitat elsewhere as mitigation. Fleeting activities could interfere with
2
recreational access to lower Peosta Channel and would be visible from Schmitt
Island (aesthetic impact).
Site III - Mile 574.5 to 575.0, left bank
Advantages - None
Disadvantages - Island owned by U.S. Fish and \vildlife Service and fleeting
cannot be considered until 1986. Long term use cannot be predicted at this
time. Site is close to important fish and wildlife habitat and fish spawning
may take place in the structures (revetment) along the shoreline. Impact to
heron rookery, river otter, white bass and sauger would need to be carefully
considered. Fleeting activities could interfere with recreational access to
the side channel.
Site IV - Upper Lake Peosta Channel
Advantages - none
Disadvantages - The channel is spawning habitat for fish and is utilized by
commercial fishermen. The shallow water zone and adjacent island habitat is
important for wildlife. Fleeting activities ~ill cause turbulence and
disturb and reaistritiute sediments which could affect fish spawning.
Fleeting activities could also interfere ~ith access and us~ of the side
channel. Fleeting would impose a visual impact from Schmitt Island.
Site V - Lower Lake Peosta Channel
Advantages - no fisheries or wildlife concerns.
Disadvantages - Fleeting activities would ill~erfere with recreation access
and use of the lower side channel.
Site VI - Mile 577.0 to 578.0, right bank
Advantages - None
Disadvantages - Important fish and wildlife habitat. Paddlefish spawning
area, commercial fishing area, river otter sighted in area, popular
watersport area. Fleeting would result in a negative aesthetic impact from
Julien Dubuque Overlook and could interfere with access to Catfish Creek.
Dredging is require~ necessitating disposal sites and mitigation.
Site VIr - Mile 572.0 to 572.5, right bank
Advantages - None
Disadvantages - Important fish and wildlife habitat. Owned by Fish and
Wildlife Service and cannot be considered until 1986. Long term use cannot
be predicted at this time. Heavy sport fishing use at lower end of site and
some commercial fishing.
3
Site VIII - Mile 570.0 to 570.5, right bank
Advantages - no wildlife concerns.
Disadvantages - Mussel beds located at site, no mitigation of impacts
possible. Popular watersports area.
Two additional sites were suggested. The first is at the tip of the island ..
at River Mile 581.5, left bank.
Advantages - none
Disadvantages - area is shallow and would require dredging, disposal sites
and mitigation. Our Resources Inventory identifies the area as being
important for wildlife. The mussel bed located inmediately downstream could
be affected by sediments resuspended by tow boat activities.
Secondly, sites above Lock and Dam 11 were suggested. I-believe that it is
impractical to consider any site in Pool 11 as fleeting for terminals in Pool
12 because of the inefficiency of passing through the lock. Since the scope
of our study was limited to the Dubuque area and no terminals currently exist
abov~ the dam, I feel it is inapproprigte for us to consider any upstream
si tes at this time. Expanding the study above the dam will significantly
complicate the issue.
~dV
~ins~rely," .
. '1.1 11-./ "-:--.
, I ~^--'-,) /}~ // ',-c-,; ((.0"
Gerald Bade !
Fish & Vildlife Biologist
EnclosurE::
~ ..
~
DUBUQUE HARBOR SERVICE
608-725-2311 · P.O. Box 585. Cassville. Wisconsin 53806
September 6, 1984
DMATS Barge Fleeting Comcitte
c/o Mr. Chris Buckleitner, ECIA
Dubuque Harbor Service presently has a maximum fleet
capacity of 83 barges. In May of 1984, as many as 80
barges were in these fleets on a given day, allowing
no room for operating. The ideal condition would be
two barge spaces available for each barge fleeted,
providing a space for each barge, and a space to move
it. Ui~h the shortage of potential fleeting sites
available, Dubuque Harbor Service could reasonably
operate with an increase of forty additional spaces.
Remarks by Dubuque Harbor Service' on each potential
fleeting site are based on DHS needs for additi~nal
spaces, site locations, ability to work tows, etc.
I Lower East Side of Chaplain Schmitt Memorial Island
This site is located at mile 581 RB with an estimated
capacity of 70 barges. It has adequate water depth,
and is located above the RR bridge eliminating bridge
delays. It is located on the main channel allowing
access to work line haul tows. For fleeting purposes
this site would be an excellent location, and far
superior to any other sites considered.
II Area A between Dove Harbor and Peosta Channel
This site is located at mile 580.5 with an estimated
capacity of forty barges. It has all of the location
advantages of Site I. The main disadvantage, which
renders this area unusable as is, is the low water
depth and stump fields. Dredging operation would be
required before use, with costs expected to be much
greater than affordable for a barge fleeter.
CASSVILLE RIVER TERMINAL
CLINTON HARBOR SERVICE
DUBUQUE HARBOR SERVICE
DMATS Barge Fleeting Committee
III Mile 574.5 to 575 LB
This site has an estimated capacity of 60 barge spaces.
The advantages of adequate water depth, access to the
channel, and large capacity are outweighed by the distance
of approximately six miles from Dubuque Harbor. In add-
ition to time consumed moving barges that distance, a
fleet so remote would be impossible to monitor frequently,
and have a higher risk of undetected breakaways. Future
needs, as volumns increase farther south such as E. D.
Sand and Gravel, would make this site feasable for long
term needs. These comments also apply to sites located
at miles 572 RB and 570 RE.
IV Upper Lake Peosta Channel
This site has an estimated capacity of 200 barges if'
fully utilized. It has adequate water depth and the dis-
tance from Dove Harbor would be less than three miles.
A serious disadvantage of this site is lack of access by
line haul tows. Many line boats require unfacing from
their tows during rearranging of barges, and would have
no place to tie off. This would require many barges to
continue to drop at Mines of Spain, over three miles
south of Dubuque Harbor.
V Lower Lake Peosta Channel
This site has an estimated capacity of 12 barges. It
has the same disadvantage as Upper Peosta Channel with
less barge capacity. Distance from Dove Harbor is less
than one mile. This site would provide some relief to
the space problem, but would still require additional
area to fully solve the problem.
VI Mile 577 to 578 RB
This site has an estimated capacity of 30 barges. The
portion of this site below Catfish Creek is very shallow,
and silt from Catfish would continue to fill in requiring
constant dredging to be usable. The portion of this site
above Catfish is divided by an existing dock, and has no
way to place deadmen between the RR tracks and river.
An anchor barge just above the Mines of Spain area would
relieve some congestion, but would be closer to the
main channel na~igation than desired, and would not be
as safe as a fleet secured to shorewires.
DMATS Barge Fleeting Committee
VII Mile 581.2 LB (Above new highway bridge)
This site would have an estimated capacity of 23
barges, utilizing an anchor barge. For location,
.see "X" on attached map. The adj acent shoreline
area would not accomodate dead men, making an
anchor barge mandatory. Shallow water caused by a
sand point extending south of the upstream island
would require the fleet to locate and estimated 200'
above the new bridge. This would be an undesirable
area to'work tows, and be adversely subjected to
high water currents. Possible obstruction to navi-
gation may also be present.
VIII Little Maquoketa Site
This area, proposed for future fleeting and harbor
activity, would be located north of Lock and Dam II.
This seperation requires fleeting for this area to be
considered totally seperate from the Dubuque Harbor.
Barge shifts through the lock would cause totally un-
reasonable delays and expense.
Total fleeting for the Dubuque Harbor area now consists of
the following:
Owne'r
US Fish & Wildlife Svc
'State of Iowa
Private Lease
City of Dubuque
Capacity
93
48
23
21
185
Percent of Total
50.27%
25.95%
12.43%
11.35%
100.00%
I summary, the short term needs of Dubuque Harbor Service
include additonal capacity of at least 40 barge spaces.
This site should be located along the main channel, allowing
access to tie 'off line haul tows. Presently, most tow work
must be performed at Mines of Spain fleet, over three miles
south of Dubuque. Potential fleeting sites below Mile 575
are totally unfeasable for use to solve the short term needs,
due to both distance from Dubuque, and US Fish & Wildlife
policy not to consider any new fleeting site applications
until after 1986.
Sincerely,
~cYi12~
Robert D. Hudson
BARGE FLEFrING SIUDY
PROS AND CONS FOR FLEErrnG SITES
"
SITE #
I Lower East Side Chaplain Schmitt Island
A. Advantages:
1) Location/Distance to Elevators
2) Adequate Water Depth
3) Barge Capacity
4) Located Above RR Bridge Eliminating Potential Bridge Delays
B. Disadvantages:
1) Political Disfavor with Location to Ccmnercial Recreation-Zoned Propert:
2) Political Disfavor with Location to Dog Track Facility
3) Potential Conflict with Riverroat docking
4) Location to Water-oriented Recreation Facility
II Area A Between Dove Harrer and Peosta Channel
A. Advantages:
1) Location - Distance to Elevators
2) Located Above RR Bridge Elirninating Potential Bridge Delays
'.7'
4.7
B. Disadvantages:
1) Water Depth Inadequate - Stunp Field
2) Potential High Cost of Dredging to Eliminate Stump Field
3) Heavy Sports and Ccmnercial Fishing Area
4) Recognized as Fish Spawning Area
III Mile 574.5 to 575 LB
A. Advantages:
1) Adequate Water Depth
2) Location to Sand and Gravel Facility
3) Good Barge Capacity
B. Disadvantages:
1) Remote Location to Elevators
2) ()..med by U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and will not tc
considered for fleeting until 1986
IV Upper Lake Peosta Channel
A. Advantages:
1) Location/Distance to Elevators
2) Located AOOve RR Bridge Eliminating Potential Bridge Delays
3) Adequate Water Depth
4) Potentially Large Barge Capacity
B. Disadvantages:
1) Commercial Fishing Area
2) Heavy Recreation BoatingjFishing Area
J) Strong CUrrent
4) Bridge Located Directly Below
5) Location to Highly-used Recreation Park
6) Location to Important Wildlife Habitat
7) Location to Water-oriented Recreation Facility
V Lower Lake Peosta Channel
A. Advantages:
1) Location/Distance to Elevators
2) Located Above RR Bridge Eliminating Potential Bridge Delays
3) Adequate Water Depth
B. Disadvantages:
1) Location to Crnmercial Recreation Area
2) Relatively Small Barge Capacity
3) Heavy Recreational Boating Area
4) Presently Leased as Tenninal
VI Mile 577 to 578 RB
A. Advantages:
1) Adequate Barge Capacity
B. Disadvantages:
1) Inadequa te Water Depth
2) Mouth of Catfish Creek DiSCharge and Susceptible to Siltation
3) Relatively Remote Location to Elevators
4) Below RR Bridge/potential Delays
5) Scenic OVerlook Directly Above
6) Spawning _ Habi ta t
7) Cammercial Fishing Area
8) Important Wildlife Habitat
VII Mile 572 to 572.5 RB
A. Advantages:
1) Adequate \\later Depth
2) Location to Sand and Gravel Facility
3) Adequate Barge Capacity
"
B. Disadvantages:
1) Rsoote Location to Elevators
2) Owned by U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and will not be
considered for fleeting until 1986
3) Heavy Sports Fishing Area
VIII Mile 570 to 570.5 RB
A. Advantages:
1) Adequate Water Depth
2) Adequate Barge Capacity
B. Disadvantages:
1) Raoote Location fran Elevators
2) Mussel Beds
3) Location to Navigation Channel
.~~4 /1J~/
Uor~
- c19/~/81
-----
'~;'
Dubuque Metropolitan Area Transportation Study
Barge Fleeting Summary Report
October 15, 1984
.~
~
Site I - Lower East Side of Chaplain Schmidt Memorial Island.
Capacity about 70.
ECONOMIC/LEGAL
Advantages
1. This is a superio~ site to others considered. It is
being dredged for land fill for the dog track and therefore
has adequate water dep~h and lowered development costs.
2. It is located above the I.C.G. bridge, eliminating bridge
delays and reducing time shuttling between the site and
terminals. It i.s located very near the main channel,
allowing access to line haul tows that are to be worked on.
3. This area could be used immediately after the sand dredge
is removed.
4. Sufficient capacity for Dubuque Harbor short term needs.
5. This area is locally controlled by the City of Dubuque,
foregoing most permitting procedures necessary with federal
and state controlled areas.
Disadvantages
1. Local land use conflict. Problems are associated wth
perceived aesthetic detriments to the Schmitt Memorial Island
development:
a) Visual impact on surrounding areas.
b) Possible Conflict with river boat tour docking
facilities.
c) Possible Conflict with general recreational activity.
ENVIRONMENTAL/RECREATIONAL
Advantages:
1. There are no fish or wildlife concerns of significance.
Disadvantages:
1. The fleeting area would be located just upstream from the
Chaplain Schmitt Boat Harbor and this represents a
possibility for conflicts between barge fleeting operations
and recreational boating.
2. The presence and operation of fleeting will have impacts
on Wisconsin waters wth a primary impact caused by traffic
over a mussel bed on the Wisconsin side. Wisconsin DNR feels
that more information would be needed to determine what the
impact would be.
>'
Artco Fleeting
Services
Barge Fleeting Proposal
City Council Meeting
February 7, 2000
,
Costs
Facts & Fi~ures
. Other workable fleets are 4 miles downstream from current city-front fleets
. Boats travel at approximately 5 mph
. It takes several minutes to get up to speed and to slow down
. With above 3 factors = I hour extra per switch
. Current average switching time one way is 40 minutes not counting delays
. 5-year average number of barges handled in the upper harbor = 1000 (Artco only)
. Typical season lasts 9 months or 270 days
. 1000 barges x 2 switches (l to dock. 1 from dock) = 2000 switches per year
. 2000 switches x 1 hour extra each = 2000 hours (83 24-hour days) per year
Adding 83 days to a 270 day season is a workload increase of over 30%. In order to
accommodate the extra 30% of work. an extra boat will need to be utilized in the harbor.
30.;" increase in costs include: (but not limited to)
. Cost of a boat is approximately $500,000.
. Costs $400,000+ per year to operate (labor, insurance. repair &. maintenance; ere).
. Fuel burn will increase by making so many additional trips.
. Fuel prices continue to rise - currently 25% more than this past summer.
Unfortunately an increase in costs to us will most likely create an increase in rates to the local
businesses. When businesses have increased transportation costs it can affect:
1. The price Alliant charges for electricity
2. The price Peavey and AGM pay farmers for grain (resulting in farmers taking their grain to
other communities thereby the City losing out on taxes and revenues)
3. The cost the City pays for salt for roads
4. The cost farmers pay for fertilizer
All these things, but not limited to, may be affected with increased prices and we do not want to
have to raise our rates, but may be forced to.
By having a large enough fleet in close proximity of the city that we can service Dubuque's
businesses efficiently, we are not only preventing additional costs but adding to the economy by
paying additional money to the City in the form oflcases.
PRESIDENT
MARK KAUFMAN
1st VICE PRESIDENT
BILL KEMP
2nd VICE PRESIDENT
DR. JOSEPH KAPLER
3rd VICE PRESIDENT
PAUL KAUFMAN
4th VICE PRESIDENT
WALTER HARTMAN
SECRETARY
DAVID LEIFKER
TREASURER
PAUL PFOHL
PAST PRESIDENTS
GERDA PRESTON HARTMAN
DAN SIMON
JAMES EGAN
PAUL KAUFMAN
EARNEST PFEIFFER
MARY MILLER
RANOL WEIGEL
DAVID LEIFKER
HAROLD HEDRICK
GARY RAMBOUSEK
ROBERT L. CAHILL
LEO McLAUGHLIN
WALLY SUHR
BOB ZEHENTNER
DECEASED PAST
PRESIDENTS
ROSS HARRIS
GEORGE SCHUMACHER
HORACE POOLE
JUDGE JOHN CHALMERS
PAUL NAUMAN
GUS MEYER
JAMES MEYER
ED GILGANN
JAMES WALTON
JACK MILLER
AL HANSON
o
w
--
:::::...
W
C
w
a:
0"'1
C"')
CO
:I:
c:::
Q)
U
~<(
,''''-
U ,
'1'
..,..., 1....;".1'
,'- ; :::J
"'/ ;-0:-
--- - ..-:
::3 ?
,", D
, ' --,
;6
(5
C"')
I-
Co-)
o
o
a
DUBUQUE COUNTY CONSERVATION SOCIETY
"Organized in 1933 For Protection of Soil, Woods, Waters and Wildlife"
P.O. Box 645
DUBUQUE, lOW A
52004-0645
cC
At//}
-' J
.,!~
A; 4t~
October 11, 2000
To The Mayor and
City Council of Dubuque
RE: OPPOSITION TO: PROPOSAL TO RELOCATE BARGE FLEETING
AREA TO SOUTHEAST PORTION OF SCHMITT/CITY ISLAND
The Board of Directors voted to reiterate their
opposition to the proposed relocation of the barge
fleeting area from south of the railroad bridge to the
southeast portion of City Island. Without repeating all
of our statements in our prior correspondence, we oppose-
the relocation for several reasons. First, it will
definitely create a serious hazard for boaters in the
area. There are marinas and boat launching areas on or
near both ends of City Island and very heavy boat
traffic during the warm weather months. Second, the
proposed location provides habitat for a number of
wildlife species, which will be destroyed. Third, the
proposed use is incompatible with the expressed purpose
and past use of the island, ie recreational use. Our
society maintained the Miller Riverview Conservation
Park area for many years. We spent countless hours and
a lot of money preserving that area of City Island.
Since then various other recreational uses of the island
have come into being. We with others fought the
industrialization of the island for years.
We ask you to consider the environment and the citizens
of the tri-state area and deny the use of any portion of
the waters adjacent to City Island for barge fleeting
purposes. In this conjunction we believe you should set
a public hearing with public input on the matter.
Yours Truly,
iU~ f~
Walter Hartman, President
cc: Telegraph Herald
I!~ ) 4Gl CA - tlCVj eJ
Dear Councilman Dan Nicholson,
As a board member of the Dubuque Dragon Boat Association I would like to express our
opposition to the idea of parking barges directly below the Iowa -WISCOnsin Bridge on
City Island. We have worked very hard to bring people from all over the world to our
dragon boat festival each year. This attention from our foreign guests and their many
positive comments about how beautiful the City Island area is especially Miller-Riverview
Park, has encouraged the city to make important improvements including showers, a new
bike trail, a skate board park and a paved road.. It would be a shame to ruin the aesthetics
of the most beautiful gateway into the city and detract from all the recreational potential
that has been created..
We are also concerned about safety issues, since the race course for the dragon boat
festival is directly upstream from the bridge. This poses the nightmare possibility of a
capsized or out of control dragon boat being swept downstream by the strong currents
and forced under the bow of a parked barge.
Our organization, the Dubuque Dragon Boat Association, has successfully bid on the
United States Canoe Association's National Aluminum Canoe Championships for 2001.
This event will bring more national attention to our city island. The course for this event is
planned to circle around the island so that more people can observe the race. Parked
barges below the bridge would definitely be an unwanted hazard and obstacle and make it
almost impossible to run the race completely in Dubuque.
Our long range plans call for the eventual installation of a public dock where interested
people could store their human powered craft. We have paddled and rowed around the
island hundreds of times. It is a convenient location for a challenging waterway trail( that
coincides nicely with the beautiful, new bike trail) for someone who wants a different but
terrific aerobic workout.
We want to be clear that we are not opposed to barges on the Mississippi. We believe
there is a place for commerce on the river and with a little common sense barges do not
pose a threat to small craft. We strongly believe that city island has too much value for the
community as a recreation and wildlife area and that purpose is what we believe will make
Dubuque a better place to live in the long term. We ask that you along with other council
members vote for an alternate site for parking the barges than City Island.
Sincerely,
fhi;? vf ~
Earl S. Brimeyer
Vice president
Dubuque Dragon Boat Association
p. >- r;L, ~ ~/. ~J 4 ~ ~ f<<~~-J-
~.~ ~~ 1f'~ tl-L</O""v~'lJ~ ~,
~.~~,
11_ e..llls T...III TI'I.I
~
P.O. Box 3220
Dubuque, Iowa 52004
Phone 319-556-5385
Fax 319-556-0174
October 12,2000
Michael Van Milligen
1504 lowaStreet
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Dear Michael,
Dubuque city officals are spending a great deal of money purchasing property to develop
and beautify the waterfront north of the Julien Dubuque bridge. This stretch of riverfront is the
only area left in our area that is still a natural resource. It makes no sense to pour large amounts
of money into developing the property between Julien Dubuque Bridge and the Railroad Bridge
and then move a barge terminal in front of the only natural beauty left along Dubuque's riverfront
Enclosed you will find pictures in panoramic view from our residence in East Dubuque IL.
looking at the Dubuque IA. Riverfront. Also enclosed is a past article from the Telegraph Herald
dated 9-30-2000. As I'm sure you know river front property comes with a premium price.
Dubuque has finally attained a four-lane highway through the city. As one enters from
Wisconsin, what was a city dump has been transformed into a beautiful park like setting. The
Dubuque Greyhound Park on the right and recreational fields as well as a marina on the left. Both
are wonderful attractions. The city's proposal to move a barge terminal in front of this seems
detrimental. The first thing prospective tourists will see is a bunch of rusty, disgusting barges
along a beautiful stretch of riverfront property.
These are my opinions as I see them for I also am in the tourism business and the owner of
Iowa Coaches Tour and Travel Inc. of Dubuque,lA. This ensuing project will have an effect on
me both personally and professionally.
Another view point to consider is a safety issue as well as possible future cost to the city
of Dubuque. As you can see from the photograph labled #1 the Schmitt Harbor boat ramp is
located next to the proposal sight. During the summer months this harbor handles thousands of
private boaters. The private crafts will be going to and from the channel either in front or behind
these barges. Having been a boat owner for many years in the past my experience tells me that
page 2
the visibility of a tug boat behind an empty barge is very limited, empty barges sit very high out of
the water.
With the barges on the point, they are more susceptible to untimely movement due to the
wind and river currents making it more difficult for a tug boat operator to control them. In the
past, on occasion, barges have been known to "break loose." If one ofthese barges were to hit a
private craft loading or unloading at Schmitt Harbor...who would be liable?
As you will notice in the foreground of photograph labeled #1 showing the exposed river
bottom as it is now, the churning ofthe tug boats and the river current itself will advance the build
up of sediment filling in the opening to the marina and possibly Schmitt Harbor boat ramp. When
this happens, who will be responsible for dredging again so the pleasurecraft can enter and exit the
boat ramp as well as the marina? More importantly, again, who will pay for this? It is my strong
belief there should be more time and consideration spent on this issue before a :final decision is
made.
If you were to move the terminal south I see very little conflict. I thank you for your time
to address my views and opinions concerning the relocation of the barge terminal north.
~u~
David C. Sherman, President
Sherri E. Sherman, Secretary
Enc: 3
/:?fl;
~
..,;--~
CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA
MEMORANDUM
November 6, 2000
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
SUBJECT: Barge Fleeting
With the original packet of information I provided on barge fleeting, I did not include any
information about the Freeway 61/151 Corridor Plan, the Riverfront Plan or the Comprehensive
Plan. These Plans all include a reference to riverfront development. Planning Services Manager
Laura Carstens has provided the attached information.
/~; j /1/(:.. /kfl.
/ l/;, .. {- .,' {,~. < ._
Michael C. Van Milligen
MCVM!jh
Attachments
cc: Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel
Tim Moerman, Assistant City Manager
Mike Koch, Public Works Director
Pauline Joyce, Administrative Services Manager
Mr. Brent Nissen, Manager, Artco Fleeting Services, P.O. Box 585, Cassville, WI 53806
Mr. Gary Newt, Newt Marine, 5 Jones Street, Dubuque, IA 52001
Mr. Walter Hartman, President, Dubuque County Conservation Society, P.O. Box 645,
Dubuque,IA 52004-0645
Mr. Ray Weigel, President, Dubuque County Conservation Society, P.O. Box 645,
Dubuque, IA 52001
Mr. Chris Buckleitner, East Central Intergovernment Association, P.O. Box 1140,
Dubuque, IA 52004-1140
Mr. Wilfred Bahl, Dubuque County Board of Supervisors, Dubuque County Courthouse,
Dubuque,IA 52001
Mr. Charles L. Baule, P.E., Dubuque County Highway Department, Box 409A, RR#2,
Dubuque, IA 52001
Mr. James Grafelman, Assistant Environmental Impact Coordinator, Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, 3911 Fish Hatchery Road, Fitchburg, WI
53711-5397
Mr. Gerald Bade, Fish & Wildlife Biologist, United States Department of Interior, 1830
Second Avenue, Second Floor, Rock Island, IL 61201
Mr. Robert D. Hudson, Dubuque Harbor Service, P.O. Box 585, Cassville, WI 53806
Mr. Earl S. Brimeyer, Vice President Dubuque Dragon Boat Association, 2455 Kerper
Blvd., Dubuque, IA 52001
Mr. David C. Sherman, President, Iowa Coaches Tour and Travel, P.O. Box 3220,
Dubuque, IA 52004
CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA
MEMORANDUM
November 6, 2000
FROM:
Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager ~
TO:
SUBJECT: City Plans Related to Riverfront Development
Attached for your consideration are excerpts from three adopted City plans that pertain to
riverfront development, and Schmitt Island in particular, relative to the relocation of barge
fleeting from the Fourth Street Peninsula to the island.
Freeway 61/151 Corridor Plan
The Freeway 61/151 Corridor Plan, adopted in February, 1990, includes Schmitt Island as
one of twelve study areas. The Freeway Plan recommends commercial and open space
uses on the island. Commercial development is recommended for Miller-Riverview Park.
A mix of commercial and open space uses is recommended for the river shoreline south
of the Wisconsin Bridge. The eastern edge of Schmitt Island is proposed for dredge and
fill operations. New waterfront zoning districts are proposed for Schmitt Island and the
Fourth Street Peninsula; draft language was reviewed by the City Council, but the
waterfront zones have never been adopted. The area currently proposed for barge fleeting
is one of the sites originally considered for riverboat gambling in 1989-1990, before the Ice
Harbor was selected due to its proximity to downtown Dubuque.
Riverfront Plan
The Riverfront Plan, adopted in 1994, includes goals and recommended land uses for
Schmitt Island that contrast with the Freeway Corridor Plan. The recommended focus is
on recreational opportunities, and the protection and preservation of the existing wetlands
and natural vegetation. Further commercialization is to be restricted to the greyhound park
and marina. The plan does not address the barge fleeting issue specifically.
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1994 and 1995, includes goals and objectives for
riverfront development. The plan does not speak directly to either Schmitt Island or the
Fourth Street Peninsula, because it is much broader in scope than the two previous plans.
The Comprehensive Plan refers to industrial, commercial and recreational uses on the
riverfront, and refers to the planning components of the Riverfront Plan.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need more information.
r-L- 1'1'\0 F-=eewA"i PLA N
"--'-
Schmitt Island
. Background/Existing Conditions
Physlcal Constraints and Oooortunlties
The soi I condit10ns on the island reflect the river bottom nature of the site
which has been enlarged over time with sand and garbage fill. Development
must take these conditions into account. Since the island is City-owned,
any new development must first obtain a lease from the Dock Board and be
approved by the City Council. On/off ramps will provide direct access to the
island at its westerly edge. A wetlands wildl ife area is currently being
established in the NW corner of the island and thus is not available for
development purposes; however, other property, may be available for
development.
Full City ut il ities are not presently avallable to all of this area.
Capital Improvement Projects: current 5-year plans include development of
the wetlands area and maintenance of the McAleece Park building and
parking lot.
There will be no vacant leftover parcels due to freeway construction.
Total acres: approximately 200 acres, with approximately 23 vacant acres
east of Admiral Sheehy Drive which could be dredged/filled for development.
Estimated residential population: none
Deve looment History
Formerly a City airport and landfill, the island has, only since the mid-
1980's, been specially reserved and developed for park and recreatlon
activities. Under a Commercial Recreation zoning designation, Dubuque
Greyhound Park, McAleece Park, a boat dealership, an RV park and Pelican
Pier with its cruise boat. the Island Princess, have been developed in the
past five years to enhance tourist and recreation usage of the island.
-"-/
Riverview Park, located along the NE edge of the island, is generally
undeveloped park land with overnight camping available with minimal
amenities. The former beachfront has not been enhanced primarlly because
of the City's prohibition against swimming in the area. "-
,"
"t'",.___;f'
.,..-
\_,..
prooerty Ownershlo
The City is the sole property owner (plus Corps of Engineers authority).
Current land Use
Commercial. recreation. park. open space
Current Zonlng
CR
. Goals
. To retain existing commercial/recreational focus and promote additional
compatible uses on the island.
. To recognize the visual impact this island will have as an entrance
to the ct ty.
. To differentiate the economic development goals for the island as opposed
to the I ce Harbor area.
. To maximize public access and orientat10n to the water.
. Recommended Policy IImplementation Steps
. Encourage and support redevelopment along the eastern edge of the island
which will involve dredge and fill operations.
. Refocus commercial-type development north of the Wisconsin Bridge in
the current location of Riverview Park.
. Develop for either commercial or park/recreation usage that area east
of Admiral Sheehy Drive. south of the Wisconsin Bridge.
. Investigate creation of additional harbor facl1it1es along the eastern
edge of the island.
. Encourage further development of other smaller parcels on the island.
. Retain pubHc control of island through carefully considered lease
arrangements that ensure appropriate usage and high standards of
site design.
. Ensure that public access to the waterfront. whether the island is
publ1cly or pr1vately developed, 1s safeguarded.
. Rezone 1sland to a WF-l tourist- and waterfront-related commercial
and recreation district to promote appropriate development and use
of this prime riverfront property.
--..-'
"-
,"
"'#.f#,"~+
40
"
12
Schmitt
PROPOSED LAND USE
COMMERCIAL
~
~
PUBLICI QUASI- PUBLIC r~3~~j
YACAIfT
o
c"
~
J..
0,
o
41
~
lq
~
~
...,
}
"-
....4'~.
-
~ t,q It R.\vEJeA20N\'" PLAN
4 PLAN COMPONENTS
Smaller scale plan elements, such as fishing piers, hike/bike paths, picnic spots, observation towers, vista
points, public parking, etc., will be located throughout the study area and are described under the Public
Infrastructure Planning Components.
Two primary opportunity sites have been identified forrecreation, entertainment, cultural, and educational
uses:
1. Schmitt Island
Schmitt Island currently has the largest concentration of active and passive recreational uses along the river
corridor. The active recreational uses include:
· Greyhound track
· Ball fields
· Soccer fields
· Public boat ramps, and
· Commercial marina.
These uses can become the foundation for a program of recreational facilities since a sizable investment
in public infrastructure, such as bridges, parking, and island circulation, has already been made. The
objective of the plan is develop Schmitt Island as the major center for community based passive and active
recreational opportunities as well as maintaining and supporting the existing regional attractions (the
Greyhound track and Riverview Park). The intent is to protect and preserve the existing wetlands and
natural vegetation and to create an ecology center that becomes a learning center for studying the river
ecology; to restrict future commercialization of the island by limiting those opportunities to the existing
city leases for the Greyhound track and the Schmitt Island Marina; to create a fitness/youth center and to
improve the public amenities in Riverview Park by providing boat dock facilities for small boats, pathway
systems, and improved pedestrian links to the mainland; and to avoid the further erosion of its natural
beauty by restricting the vehicular access and parking to the current configurations.
2. Fourth Street Peninsula/Ice Harbor
This area has great development potential to house recreational, entertainment, and culture plan elements.
Building upon the existing investment in the Ice Harbor, the strategic siting of the plan elements can serve
three fundamental objectives:
.
To bring more people from the region to this subarea of the river corridor
To improve the public infrastructure on the peninsula, and
To enforce the concept of a major riverside activity center linked to downtown.
.
.
....
. Dubuque Riverfront Planning
Dubuque, Iowa
.
4 PLAN COMPONENTS
Since the entire peninsula is flood protected, the range of uses can be of a high investment nature.
Candidate plan elements include:
· Riverside Park
· New Harbor/Marina for Transient Boaters and Tour Boats
· Festival grounds and public events space
· Amphitheater
· River Museum
· Housing, and
· Small scale business and light industrial buildings.
The intent of the plan is to utilize the proposed marina as a central water amenity located at the point of
arrival for traffic using both the 3rd and 5th Street access streets. In this location, it brings the apparent
waterfront activities closer to downtown and, at the same time, creates development opportunity sites that
frame it.
The other important planning element is a promenade designed as a wide boardwalk located on top of the
existing flood wall. It links the various activities and amenities (Ice Harbor, hotel, amphitheater, and
festival grounds). This public space functions as an area for local citizens to stroll, chat, and watch the
river, and on certain occasions, it can be utilized as part of the festival grounds activity area.
The housing programs anticipated for the su barea have been organized as an urban neighborhood clustered
around the new marina. The zone designated for housing is sufficiently large enough to create the critical
mass of people to create a secure, urban neighborhood (500-1,000 persons).
Even though the subarea may be redeveloped with a relatively wide mix of potential land uses, this
apparent incompatibility can be mitigated through the employment of a consistent set of subarea design
standards that control such aspects as scale, height, and the urban form of each building type.
Planning Component #2: Economic Development
This component consists of those uses which contribute directly to the local economy through jobs and
tax base. Since a major part of the developed portions of the river corridor are occupied by river dependent
industrial uses, no significant changes in these land use patterns are expected in the foreseeable future.
However, nonriver dependent industrial uses are candidates for a change in use on the 4th Street peninsula.
'-
. Dubuque Riverfront Planning
Dubuque, Iowa
"
.
4 PLAN COMPONENTS
· Landscape upgrades to provide shade trees
· Rest rooms
· Seating and picnic areas, and
· Designation of hike{bike trails.
3. Subarea C - Schmitt Island
Public infrastructure, including vehicular access and public parking in the flood protected areas of
Schmitt Island, is in place except for the following:
· Improvement to campsites and amenities in Riverview Park
· Pedestrian pathways
· Signage and lighting
· Fishing piers
· Small boat docks, and
· Peosta Channel bridge/dam connection to mainland to improve pedestrian access to island and to
create an improved "wetland" habitat for this area of the island.
4. Subarea D- 12th St Peninsula and Dove Harbor
This subarea is home to river dependent industrial activity associated with heavy truck and rail traffic.
Therefore, public infrastructure needs should facilitate improved safety and traffic circulation rather
than provide amenity value. Improvements include:
· Street upgrades
· Designation of hike{bike paths along an existing street right-of-way, and
· Improved public safety at rail crossings.
5. Subarea E - 4th St. Peninsula and Ice Harbor
To accommodate potential plan elements, this subarea requires the highest level of public infrastruc-
ture improvements. Given its proximity to downtown, circulation is critical. The street system is not
only inadequate, but confusing; it must be rationalized before other uses such as housing and new
business uses can be developed.
Since the riverfront combines both river dependent industrial uses, tourism facilities, and undeveloped
land, the nature of public infrastructure required is varied and complex. Infrastructure improvements
must be used to buffer land uses, link activities and provide visual continuity. Infrastructure needs
include:
....
. Dubuque Riverfront Planning
Dubuque, Iowa
.
6 Actio." Agendas
PRO.JECT TITLE:
Subarea C: Schmitt Island Public Improvements
RESPONSlnLE PARTIES: City
PRIORITY:
ShOrl Range
DESCRIPTION:
. Upgrade public amenities in Riverview Park; provide transient docks for small boats; picnic spoL<;, beaches, and
hike/bike paths (jogging track, fitness trail) around island; and seating, restrooms and public parking at Kerper/
16th S1. intersection.
HACK(;J~()UND CONI>ITIONS FOR SUCCESS:
BENEFITS:
. Community SlIppOrl
. Enhancement of quality of life
. Economic benefit of overnight campers al
Riverview Park
l'UULlC SECTOR CONTRlnUTION:
PROJECTED COST r~ANGE:
. Commitment of funds and/or manpower to prepare
development plan
. $150,000-200,000 with limited hike/hike trail
. $200,000-250,000 wilh rull perimeter hike/bike
trail around island
NEXT STEPS:
FUNIJIN(; SOURCES:
Prepare development plan
Prepare cost estimates for hudgeting
Prepare gram applications
City
StHte
Federal (ISTEA)
Not for profit "adoption" programs
""'.
.
Dubu.que River:frrmt Planni1lg
Dubuque, Iowa
.
1995 City of Dubuque's Comprehensive Plan
Goals and Objectives Related to
Riverfront and Downtown Development & Redevelopment
The City of Dubuque's Comprehensive Plan is the result of a multi-year community visioning
process. Over 5000 area citizens participated in the Vision 2000 community planning process
leading to a shared vision statement for the tri-state area. Adopted by the City Council in two
phases in 1994 and 1995, the Comprehensive Plan builds on Vision 2000 with policies, goals and
objectives for physical, economic and social aspects of the community. The plan consists of 14
elements:
· Physical Environment - Land Use and Urban Design, Transportation, Inftastructure, and
Environmental Quality;
· Economic Environment - City Fiscal and Economic Development;
· Social Environment - Health, Housing, Human Services, Education, Cultural Arts,
Recreation, Public Safety, and Diversity.
Riverfront and downtown development and r~evelopment are recurring themes in the 14
elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, these themes relate to 39, or almost 20% of the
goals and 78, or 13%, of the objectives from the Comprehensive Plan.
While the themes of riverfront and downtown development and redevelopment are part of the
"likely" elements such as Land Use and Urban Design and Economic Development, related goals
and objectives are also present in many of the social environment elements. Riverfront and
downtown development and redevelopment related goals and objectives are present in 11 of the
14 Comprehensive Plan element~.
The City's plans for redevelopment of the 4th Street Peninsula area, encompasses many of the
riverfront and downtown development and redevelopment goals and objectives. This is
summarized by the statements below.
· The Comprehensive Plan speaks to the importance of infill redevelopment
or adaptive reuse opportunities within the city to revitalize unused or
underused property.
· Many goals and objectives speak to the value of an aesthetically attractive
city riverfront for use by industrial, recreational, residential and commercial
interests. This leads to a strengthening of Dubuque's position as a tourist
destination and becomes an economic development opportunity.
· Partnerships with the private sector and schools are a key part of the
Comprehensive Plan for riverfront and downtown development and
redevelopment.
· The opportunities for diverse cultural and recreational amenities along the
riverfront are also common themes in the Comprehensive Plan.
....
Attached is a list of all of the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives related to riverfront and
downtown development and redevelopment.
,,'
1Ili.~.".,~
....-
1995 City of Dubuque's Comprehensive Plan
Goals and Objectives Related to
Riverfront and Downtown Development & Redevelopment
LAND USE AND URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT
2. Ensure that opportunities for convenient and concentrated commercial
development are provided to support both the local and regional market.
2.1 Protect downtown commercial core and encourage continued reinvestment and
redevelopment. "-
5. Encourage that the physical character and form of the city reflects its
historic setting and that the built environment is compatible with the city's
natural environment.
5.1 Define and enhance city gateways and focal points t9 create a sense of place.
5.4 Promote quality in the design and construction of new public and private
development.
. 7. To encourage redevelopment opportunities within the city in an effort to
revitalize unused or underused property while promoting the preservation
viable and affordable housing stock.
7.1 Encourage redevelopment or adaptive reuse of vacant or underutilized buildings
and sites.
7.2 Promote infilJ development, where appropriate, to encourage more compact urban
form and avoid needless and costly sprawl.
7.3 Promote redevelopment that maximizes existing infrastructure.
7.4 Strive to eliminate slum and blight.
8. To provide physical accessibility throughout the city.
8.1 Encourage and facilitate urban accessibility by walking, cycling and/or public
transit as well as by auto.
8.2 Encourage new development concepts that by design enable people to walk to
work, school, day care, shopping and recreation.
9. To promote principles of good urban design as part of all development.
9.1 Enhance the aesthetics of new and existing development -- design, landscaping,
parking, signage -- with special sensitivity to 'the historic character and building
materials found in the community.
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
4. To encourage an efficient, affordable and accessible transit system in the city
for the transit-dependent population and as an alternative means of
transportation. {
4.3 Obtain Federal and State capital and operating assistance grants to the maximum
extent possible.
4.5 Continue to provide the best possible transit system in the most cost-efficient
manner.
4.~ Work with proper agencies to continue to receive adequate funding.
...
"
'\",t'.'.....~:.-'\'
..-
6. To maintain safe and efficient utilization of the riverfront for both land and
water based commercial, industrial and recreational traffic.
6.1 Coordinate the implementation of the four planning components of the Riverfront
Plan with other public and private organizations.
6.3. Encourage development and maintenance of riverfront facilities.
9. To establish improved hike and bike routes in the city to encourage
alternative modes of transportation. --..
9.1 Develop a comprehensive regional system of bikeways and/or multi-purpose trails
which minimize conflicts between motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians.
9.2 Provide a more bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly transportation network.
9.3 Consider relevant bicycle and pedestrian elements in all new transportation
projects.
9.4. Encourage development patterns more compatible with non-motorized travel.
INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT
7. To provide, maintain and improve the floodwall, harbors and boat ramps
industrial, commercial and recreational use of the riverfront.
7.1 Coordinate the implementation of the Public Infrastructure planning component of
the Riverfront Plan with other public and private organizations.
7.2 Provide aesthetically attractive waterfront areas.
7.3 Encourage the development and maintenance of riverfront facilities.
11. To plan for, build or improve infrastructure'systems to meet anticipated
growth and development needs.
11.3 Investigate usefulness of technological advances to optimize services.
11.10 Continue to encourage and enhance downtown development by striving to meet
current parking needs and providing expansion programs that are cost-effective
and innovative.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ELEMENT r
1. To create a sustainable environment that successfully balances urban growth
and development with ecological constraints.
1.2 Maintain and plan for open/green space as development and public improvements
occur.
1.3 Promote linkages or connections of open/green spaces.
1.4 Coordinate the implementation of the Environment Planning component of the
Riverfront Plan with other public and private organizations.
7.
7.2
7.3
7.4
8.
8.1
To promote the protection, preservation and enhancement of the city's bluffs,
wetlands and waterways.
Encourage environmentally appropriate public use of, and access to, the
community's bluffs, wetlands and waterways.
Enhance protection and restoration of these sensitive areas as development and
redevelopment occurs, including along the riverfront.
Provide an aesthetically attractive city riverfront for use by industrial, recreational,
residential and commercial interests.
'-
To promote community clean-up and beautification efforts with other public
and private interests.
Encourage clean-up/beautification for the public, private and business sectors.
"">>,~
-
CITY FISCAL ELEMENT
4. To minimize the impact of economic swings on the City's operating budget
by making the budget more recession-proof.
4.1 Promote economic development efforts to expand the property tax base and to
improve and/or implement "growth" revenues for the City.
4.2 Allocate revenue sources sensitive to economic conditions primarily to deferable
capital improvement projects, when possible, to allow the City to maintain a
steady revenue stream to fund operating expenses.
9. To examine public and private funding sources and alternative means to
accomplish goals in aU elements of the CompreheQsive Plan.
9.1 Collaborate with members of the community to implement City Council goals and
priorities.
9.2 Identify public and private funding sources, and alternative means to accomplish
goals for which the City government has direct authority and responsibility.
9.3 Encourage other area service providers, private entities and community leaders to
identify private funding and other similar means to realize goals within their areas.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
1. To reduce unemployment, achieve economic-stability, and increase the
standard of living for all citizens.
1.2 Continue to diversify the commercial/industrial Qase.
1.3 Facilitate access to economic incentives for quality job creation and/or tax base
enhancement.
2. To build a highly skilled, flexible work force.
2.5 Continue to develop and deliver educational programming over the widest array
of media.
3. To concentrate on retaining and expanding existing local businesses.
3.2 Assist local firms in finding appropriate development sites for expansion.
3.5 Maintain and strengthen Dubuque's position as a retail center in the trade area.
3.8 Support downtown revitalization and neighborhood business development.
6. To work toward identifying the economjc needs of the chronically
unemployed and underemployed in Dubuque, and encourage programming -
- including education and retraining - to meet those needs.
6.4 Promote access to resources and tools for education, training and supportive
services through a variety of means and media.
7. To maintain and strengthen Dubuque's PQ~jl;j.9;q;cf.\$,t!~'i!~-q,i$tF(J.estin.ation.
7.1 Promote existing attractions. C
7.2 Establish a variety of additional year-round tourist attractions.
7.3 Implement recommendations in the Riverfront Plan to add amenities for both
citizens and tourists along the Mississippi River.
8.
8.1
8.3
To strengthen the local tax base.
Expand and diversify the tax base.
Encourage property improvements and revitalization throughout the City.
....
;"
--t'-""~
~-
9.
9.3
10.
10.1
11.
11.1
11.2
11.3
11.4
To establish and maintain housing and transportation, communication, and
utility systems which support and foster quality development.
Capture the opportunities of the information superhighway for economic
development.
To promote the provision of an adequate supply of vacant, development-
ready land for commercial and industrial use. "
Evaluate potential commercial and industrial development sites, based on the
City's Future Land Use Map.
To utiliie tlieri'Vetfr()nt.~s>anolltstandmg~~()no~ccdevelopIrient
o~~~@1I1ity.
Coordinate the implementation of the Economic Development planning
component ofthe Riverfront Plan with other public and private organizations.
Promote a vision and development consensus for the Fourth Street Peninsula.
Promote retention and expansion of river-dependent uses, while recognizing
environmental constraints.
Foster enhanced recreational access to the river as an economic development
strategy.
HEALTH ELEMENT
5. To create safe and sanitary work, play and housing environments.
5.1 Strive for a community which provides a variety of easily accessible recreational
programs and opportunities at moderate or no cost to participants.
HOUSING ELEMENT
1. To preserve existing housing and existing, older residential neighborhoods.
1.6 Recycle existing vacant or under-utilized structures, such as convents and
industrial buildings, into affordable housing, where appropriate.
2.
2.2
3.
3.3
To promote the creation and maintenance of an adequate supply of sound,
affordable housing integrated throughout the community.
Promote mixed-income, mixed-rental housing developments.
To expand the opportunities for homeowners hip, especially for low income
househ.~i~~~' '
Promot~~~llhO\.l~ingdevelopment opportunities, in the city's older
neighborhoods, through a combination of public subsidy, affordable housing
incentives and owner sweat equity.
EDUCATION ELEMENT
1. To support opportunities fOl"life.J(O:~g"!~~rning for residents of all ages.
1.2 Promote access to all levels of education for all persons.
1.3 Support individuals of all ages in pursuit of a sustained program of learning
independent of any educational provider.
6. To build partnerships beby.~~:p.theptivate seCtor..andsch.9.0IS to ensure that
educational outcomes meet the needs of both future employers and "-
employees. ,.
"
"'".....~
..-
6.1 Encourage employment programs that promote partnerships among business,
social services and educational institutions to train and educate the workforce.
6.2 Foster business and industry involvement in the educational process.
6.3 Seek the support of the entire community to meet the educational challenges of
the future.
8. To provide quality educational facilities in appropriate locations throughout
the community to meet changing demographic and development patterns.
8.2 Extend infonnational opportunities beyond the walls of existing institutions.
8.3 Enhance the capability of educational facilities to meet the needs of citizens, as
changing demographic projections indicate.
8.4 Foster a learning environment that utilizes state-of-the-art technologies.
9. To identify new sources of funding and increased efficiencies to maintain
and/or expand educational programs and facilities.
9.2 Identify innovative strategies to seek major funding from new sources to
supplement shrinking traditional local, state and federal funding.
CULTURAL ARTS ELEMENT
2. To provide a variety of affordable and accessible cultural arts activities and
resources for all ages.
2.5 Develop expanded, affordable use of public facilities.
6. To safeguard the cultural and historic resources of the community as critical
to the quality of life and the attractiveness of Dubuque.
6.3 Explore, preserve and interpret for present and future generations, the history of
Dubuque and the Mississippi River.
6.4 Increase appreciation, education, technical assistance and funding for the
community's historical and architectural heritage.
7. To encourage the availability of adequate facilities to support arts activities.
7.2 Strive to maintain cultural arts, entertainment and continuing education services
offered by local cultural and educational institutions.
7.3 Encourage coordinated services and shared resources among cultural arts
organizations in the Dubuque area.
RECREATION ELEMENT
1. To provide a safe park and recreation system that continues to meet the
community's needs for useable and accessible park and open space.
1.3 Identify potential park and recreation sites and hikelbike trails to meet the needs
identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. To provide a variety of affordable and accessible recreation classes and
activities for people of aU ages. -
4.4 Assess the facility needs of the community (including the need for a recreation
center building) so as to meet the recreational needs of the community.
5.
To provide opportunities for young people to learn the skills of various
sports and leisure activities.
....
i;-
~,,\':__f'
...-'
5.1 Identify the needs and interests of young people as to what sports they would like
to participate in.
5.2 Review periodically the concept of offering programs that stress fundamentals,
skills development and sportsmanship.
8. . !~...9~.~mi:l;e.....t!t~0.~~~~.~ilR~Il~I..~Dlel1i~~~..~~~~~ef!hY'/~~~i~~~~.~.~.~!~~f.)nt.
8.1 Coordinate the implementation of the Recreation, Entert~iirtffient, Culture and
Education Planning component of the Riverfront Plan with other public and
private organizations.
8.2 Coordinate the implementation of the Environment Planning component of the
Riverfront Plan with other public and private organizations.
'-
~.
~~.
.
.
.
C')
Q 0
<-:> :0
rJ"<-: CJ :11
,..'.... -4
"- 0
c ( N [11
-.
.:d - .-;::;
(.i -0 <---
(D ::.;: m
- 0
)> N 0
0 C>
CD N
NEWT MARINE
5 JONES STREET
DUBUQUE, IOWA 52001
(319) 557-1855
October 10, 2000
City Hall
50 West 13th Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
RE: Barge fleeting on City Island
It has been brought to our attention that the City Council is being approached to approve barge
fleeting on City Island.
On July 29, 1983, Dubuque Barge and Fleeting Service, Inc. d/b/a Newt Marine Service
requested that the Dubuque City Council Dock Committee grant permission to do fleeting on City
Island. This proposal was denied by the city. Attached is a copy of the letter from the Dubuque
County Conservation Society and a copy of the summary from a study done by the Dubuque
Board of Dock COmmissioners stating their objections to our request for fleeting (see
attachments). Among the objections:
* Environmental issues
* Entrance into the city from the Wisconsin Bridge
* Disfavor with location to Dog Track Facility
* Location to water-orientated recreation
* Political disfavor with location to commercial recreation-zoned property
I feel that the city made the best decision for the community, especially now with the city
emphasis on the Riverfront Beautification. As a riverfront business, Newt Marine, along with its
sister company, Dubuque River Terminals, Inc. has worked with the city to enhance the view
from the Julien Dubuque Bridge. Why now would the city consider moving fleeting from one
visually unacceptable site to a even more obtrusive location?
Artco and Newt Marine currently share fleeting on Island #228, known as Catfish Fleet,
approximately 5 miles south of the city. In this fleeting area there are 186 barge spaces, which
.
.
.
are evenly divided between both companies. This division of fleeting space places both companies
on the same competitive basis. Dove Harbor, which is located between the Julien Dubuque
Bridge and the Wisconsin Bridge, handles the majority of the commercial barge traffic in the city
of Dubuque. In this harbor Artco can fleet roughly 10-J2 barges. Newt can fleet 9. Dove
Harbor, when used efficiently, allows us the advantage of having barges readily available for the
docks, and in turn, a place for finished barges to be held until several barges can be moved to
catfish fleet at one time. This makes our trips to Catfish fleet fewer, more efficient and less
costly.
Should the city approve Artco's request for fleeting off City Island, Newt Marine Service should
be entitled to 50% of the fleeting area. If not, we are placed at a significant disadvantage. Newt
Marine would be working with the 30% higher cost that Artco refers to in their Barge Fleeting
Proposal statement presented to the City Council on February 7, 2000 (see attachment) .
We strongly urge the council to consider these facts and base their decision on what will best
serve the community and the long term goals of the Riverfront Beautification Project.
Sincerely,
~
Gary~
Newt Marine Service
cc: Michael C. Van Milligen
Terrance M. Duggan
John H. Markham
Roy Buol
Joseph T. Robbins
Patricia Cline
Daniel Nicholson
Ann Michalski
Tom Harkin
Charles Grassely
.
/
/
.
RESIDENT
RANOL (RAY} WEIGEL
st VICE PRESIDENT
MARY MILLER
nd VICE PRESIDENT
BOB CAHILL
rd VICE PRESIDENT
CHUCK MILLS
th VICE PRESIDENT
STEVE"NANNENGA
ECRETARY
JIM EGAN
REASURER
JIM MURPHY
AST PRESIDENTS
DAVID LEIFKER
.CK MILLER
ROLD HEDRICK
MES WALTON
ROBERT L. CAHILL
LEO McLAUGHLIN
GARY RAMBOUSEK
AL HANSON
WALLY SUHR
BOB ZEHENTNER
JECEASED PAST
RESIDENTS
ROSS HARRIS
GEORGE SCHUMACHER
HORACE POOLE
JUDGE JOHN CHALMERf
PAUL NAUMAN
GUS MEYER
JAMES MEYER
EO GILGANN
.
,1)ul,uque County ConJervalion $ociety
"Orpai.ool iD 111)) Few ~ of Soil. W...... w.._ ..... Wil....if...
P. O. &x 645
DUBUQUE, IOWA
52001
February 22, 1983
u.s. Department of the Interior
Regional Director, Fish and
Wildlife Service
122 West 2nd Street
Winona, MN 85987
Dear Director:
This letter is in reference to a Barge Fleeting Special Use
Permit No. 146 issued to Newt Marine Service of DUbuque, Iowa.
Our interest in this matter concerns the 1984 renewal application
for the two Barge Fleeting sites located on islands at Mile 579
and 581.5 in re upper Mississippi River. It is our understanding
that this renewal application may not be reissued by your department.
The Dubuque County Conservation Society is a 50 year old
conservation organization with a long successful history of active
participation in the conservation movement in the Tri-State Area.
The Society is presently invovled in the recreational planning
process for Chaplin Schmidt Island with the Dubuque Dock Board.
This i.sland has been the location fbr the Society's Riverview
Conservation Park (35 acres) and now that the new Highway 151
bridge is open, serves as a very beautiful gateway to our city as
one approaches from the Wisconsin side of the river.
The shoreline below the new bridge (on the island) presently
under lease to Beecher Quarries has been regarded as a possible
Barge Fleeting site. This area probably will not be considered
for development as it could be: needed if Fish and wildlife chose
not to renew Newt Marine's Fleeting application. The Dubuque
County Conservation Society, by unanimous vote of its Board of
Directors, wishes that Fish and Wildlife would extend Newt Marine
Service's application at present capacities to continue fleeting
on the islands at Mile 579 and 581.5. Newt Marine has a good
record of avoiding environmental damage at the present sites and
certainly the wildlife and habitual has acclimated to this use
during the past twenty years of fleeting.
.
RESIDENT
RANOL (RAY) WEIGEL
It VICE PRESIDENT
MARY MILLER
'ld VICE PRESIDENT
BOB CAHIl.L
rd VICE PRESIDENT
CHUCK MILLS
th VICE PRESIDENT
STEVE NANNENGA
ECRETARY
JIM EGAN
REASURER
JIM MURPHY
AST PRESIDENTS
DAVID LEIFKER
JACK MILLER
HAROLD HEDRICK
.MES WALTON
BERT L CAHILL
o McLAUGHLIN
GARY RAM80USEK
AL HANSON
WALLY SUHR
B08 ZEHENTNER
ECEASED PAST
'lESIDENTS
ROSS HARRIS
GEORGE SCHUMACHER
HORACE POOLE
JUDGE JOHN CHALMERf
PAUL NAUMAN
GUS MEYER
JAMES MEYER
EO GlLGANN
.
~:-"
.1JubuqU-e Count!l Con~erllation Societ!l
''Orpooi.d ill 19)) IW ~ of Soil. W...... W_ ..... WiWlila"
P. O. Box 645
DUBUQUE, IOWA
52001
U.s. Department of the Interior
Page Two
February 21, 1983
The Conservation Society further feels that the Chaplin
Schmidt Island area is a very poor alternate site as it would
be, 1) very noticeable from the new bridge, 2) force the
recreational boater to compete with the commercial interests for
the same water surface, and 3) cause unnecessary exposure to
the commercial interests by high wind and current with the
danger of runaway barges doing damage to the railroad bridge and
shoreline commercial structures.
., .1 am sure ydU will find our request most u"nusual as the
Barge Fleeters and Conservation interests have traditionally
been at odds with regard to river use. We also agree that the
request is unusual but necessary. Much time has been spent
discussing the issue with the Dock Board and Newt Marine and we
feel that the best interests of the community, the future of the
river, and Newt Marine could be served by extension of the permit.
Our society would be most pleased to discuss our request
with Fish and Wildlife at your convenience. A prompt reply would
be appreciated.
Sincerely,
Q~~~."~..,,
Ray weigel~!rSiden~--~'
.
Memorandum
DATE: Sept~mber 7, 1984
TO: All Barge Fleeting Committee Members
FROM: Chris Buckleitner
RE: Committee members' input on potential fleeting sites;
and M~etinq date for September 19, 1984, 1:30 p.m.
E.C.I.A. Conference Room.
Please find a~tached all input received from committee mem-
bers as of 9:00 a.m. Friday, September 7. If more is re-
ceived it will be forwarded to the chairman of the committee
before the September 19 meeting.
.
NOTE: Attuched 1.s an ageL1da {"01 the fle~ting COIlUlI.Lt:tee
meeting on the 19th.
, ,
. .:'!() :___),'</.-1.-<--<{.lt.<_,
.
Board 0/ SuperviJorJ
DUBUQUE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
DUBUQUE. IOWA 52001
13191 583-3511
Augus t 28, 1984
Barge Fleeting Committee, ECIA
Suite 330 Nesler Centre
P.O. Box 1140
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Dear Committee:
This is how we rate these ~l.Les:
.
LONG TERM
1. Catfish Creek South could be developed. Mile 577 to
578 right bank - 30 capacity.
2. Lower East side Chaplain Schmitt Island - 70 capa~ity
3. Mile 574.5 to 575 left bank - 60 capacity.
4. Mile 572 to 572.5 right bank - 40 capacity.
5. Mile 570 to 570.5 right bank - 50 capacity.
6. Upper Lake Peosta Channe::l - 200 capacity.
7. Lower L;]k~ PeostLl Channel - 12 capacity.
8. Betl.Jecn Dove Harbor and I'eosta Cllannel - 40 capacity.
SHORT TERM
We beli.:ve that tht: existing sit0s coultl be .:xpanded \.Jher~
they are.
)'llll rs t t"uly,
1\ {\.. I......;.
~ '\.
Wi 1 fred Hahl
.
WILFRED R. BAHI
LLOYD C. HA YES
DONNA L SMITH
.
Box 409A, R.R. #2
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
DUBUQUE
COUNTY
Phone 557-7283
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
AVe 2.q 7984
August 28, 1984
Barge Fleeting Committee, ECIA
Suite 330, Nesler Centre
P.O. Box 1140
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Dear Committee:
This is how '.le rate these: ~,lLes;
.
LONG TZRM
1. Lower east side Chaplain Schmitt Island - 70 capacity
2. Catfish Creek south could be developed.
Mile 577 to 578 right bank - 30 capacity.
3. Mile 574.5 to 575 left bank - 60 capacity.
4. Mile 572 to 572.5 right bank - 40 capacity.
5. Mile 570 to 570.5 right bank - 50 capacity.
6. Upper Lake Peosta Channel - 200 capacity.
7. Lower' Lake Peosta Channel - 12 capacity.
8. Between Cove Harbor and Peosta Channel - 40 capacity.
SHORT TEJUol
i.Jc believe t}-,at t.he existing sites could be expanded h'l1c(e
they are.
Yours truly,
/'
/'
~/ ,,,'
, :'.".-.......
/ . ':, \ . /
..J/,,,
L. Haule, P.E.
County Engineer
/1
Charles
Dubuque
.
.
.
.
THE PILLSBURY COMPANY
P.O. BOX 330
DUBUQUE, IOWA 52001
TO: Chris Buckleitner, DMATS Staff
SfP 5
1984
FROM: Joseph H. Fall
RE: Ranking of Fleeting Sites by Pillsbury Company
DATE: September 4, 1984
Site 1 - This is by far the most desirable area for barge fleeting. It could
be used immediately, has deep water, is out of sight from the bridge coming
into town from Wisconsin, has enough capacity to solve our short term needs,
is out of the channel, is not owned by other agencies like U. S. Fish and
Wild Life. has a minimal deleterious effect on the environment or wildlife.
This is the only area that fulfills all of the above stated advantages.
The problem is serious enough that only short term considerations should be
considered and acted upon. Once a subAtantial size fleet is in place in
the city of Dubuque, then we can look at long term needs and ~lan for the
future.
All other fleeting areas are either too small, do not have deep water,
use Fish & Wild Life prohibited land or are too far away from the major
shipping terminals in Dubuque to be considered in any way in solving our
short term fleeting needs.
. j
;J.i. i;/
/ f
I
I
. ,.'/ '
h~ / f II
,t.,
/
('
JHF/pjw
.
.
.
~ t 1-" 5 '1~84
State of Wisconsin \ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Southern District Headquarters
3911 Fish Hatchery Road
Fitchburg, Wisconsin 53711-5397
Carroll D. 8esadny
Secretary
August 31, 1984
1600
Mr. Thurman Schweitzer
DMATS
Suite 330, Nestler Center
P .0. Box 1140
Dubuque, IA 52004-1140
Dear Mr. Schweitzer:
Re: Input on Feasibility of Potential Fleeting Sites
I have reviewed the materials you have sent me, dated August 24, 1984.
Following are the environmental concerns of each of the potential fleeting
sites. Included is the site at River Mile 581.5, left bank. Since my primary
concern is with the waters of the State of Wisconsin, those sites immediately
impacting Wisconsin waters are dealt with first.
River Mile 581.5, Left Bank - Both sides of the southern tip of the island are
being considered where a government day mark is located. This site is located
completely within Wisconsin waters and is subject to the permitting
requirements contained in Chapter NR 327, Wis. Adm. Code. It will be
difficult for the Department to grant a barge fleeting permit for this site
due to the presence of an important mussel bed containing Lampsilis hi insi,
a Wisconsin and Federal endangered species listed under Sec. NR 27.03 2 f 1,
Wis. Adm. Code. Presence of a barge fleeting site in this area will
negatively impact the mussel bed and the endangered species in the following
manner.
Increased barge traffic to and from the fleeting site as well as within the
fleeting site will cause bottom erosion to the area of the mussel bed.
Phys i ca 1 damage wi 11. be caused to she 11 s of the mussels and the endangered
species. These will be caused by propeller scouring, increased wakes and bed
erosion from barge and tow hulls. Damaged live and dead mussels have been
observed by scuba divers within the barge channel of the Mississippi River
near Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin. This same situation will certainly result
if this site at R.M. 581.5 is developed and used for barge fleeting.
Importand wildlife habitat will be negatively impacted if barge fleeting is
allowed.
This area also sees a substantial amount of sport and commercial fishing.
This habitat will also be adversely affected by barge fleeting.
.
.
.
Mr. Thurman Schweitzer - August 31, 1~~4
raye L
As part of the permitting process, the Department must prepare an
environmental assessment pursuant to Sec. 1.11, Wis. Stats., and
Sec. NR 150.03(2)(b)11, Wis. Adm. Code. We will require the applicant to
submit information for the environmental assessment pursuant to Sec. 23.11(5),
Wis. Stats. This information will pertain to environmental consequences and
impacts, physical changes both aquatic and terrestrial, information on the
affected enironment, alternatives, socio-economic impacts and impacts on
threatened or endangered resources.
Lower East Side of Chaplin Schmitt Memorial Island - Although the barge
fleeting area will be on the Iowa side, the presence and operation of the
fleet will have impacts on Wisconsin waters. The primary impact will be
caused by increased barge traffic over the same important mussel bed impacted
by the site at R.M. 581.5 which contains the endangered species Lampsilis
higginsi. More information is needed on this site to determine what the
impacts will be on the mussel bed.
Site Between Dove Harbor and Peosta Channel - This area between the wing dams
on the Iowa side contains a stump field with important fish spawning
habitat. Sport and commercial fishing will be negatively impacted by barge
fleeting in this area, as will the fishery resources of this entire stretch of
river.
Upper Lake Peosta Channel - This area is a good commercial and sport fishing
area, with good fish spawning habitat. Barge fleeting in this area will
negatively impact that habitat, substantially reducing the habitat available
and the fishing opportunities within the river system.
Lower Lake Peosta Channel - This area does not appear to have as much
fisheries or wildlife resources as the above four sites. Environmentally,
this will be the least damaging of the sites thus far selected.
Mile 577 to 578, Right Bank - This entire area from R.M. 576 through 579 is an
important commercial and sport fishing area. Significant spawning habitat
exists in the immediate area of the proposed fleet. Barge fleeting in this
area will negatively impact the fisheries resources for the entire river
system.
Mile 574.2 to 575, Left Bank - Important wildlife habitat exists on and around
the island proposed as a fleeting site. Fish spawning habitat also exists in
the immediate vicinity. Barge fleeting will have negative impacts on both of
these habitats.
Mile 572 to 572.5, Right Bank - Important wildlife habitat exists on an around
the island proposed for fleeting. Commerical and sport fishing occur near the
site. Both wildlife and fish habits may be negatively impacted.
Mile 570 to 570.5, Right Bank - This site appears to be near the navigational
channel. A mussel bed is located in the immediate vicinity which will
certainly be impcted by the fleeting activities. This also appears to be a
popular water sport area.
.
.
.
All the proposed sites will have some environmental drawbacks, some more than
others. Since the river is a system, fleeting activities will affect the
whole river. Of all the sites selected thus far, the Lower Peosta Lake
Channel seems to be the least environmentally damaging. Although the site on
Chaplin Schmitt Memorial Island is not directly over the mussel bed,
activities from the fleeting may cause harm. Since the mussel bed is on the
Wisconsin side and contains an endangered species, the State of Wisconsin will
seek to protect it. The site at R.M. 581.5 is in Wisconsin waters and will be
subject to our permitting requirements.
I hope this will be sufficient information for your purposes. I will look
forward to meeting with you on September 19, 1984.
Sincerely,
-~
/-"
----Jarlles Grafe lman
Assistant Environmental Impact Coordinator
JG:ps
cc: BEAR/3
DQdgeville Area Office
I
.
.
.
SEre;
J984
.p 6 1WJ4
United States Department of the Interior
IN Il~PLY REFER TO:
FISH AND WILDl.IFI; SFRVICI..
ROCK ISlAND FIElD OFFICE (ES)
18;0 Sc:cond ^"c:nuc, Second Floor
Rock hland, IllinoIS 61201
Com:
FrS:
309-793-580G
386-5800
September 5, 1<)8'~
Mr. Chris Buckleitner
East Central I~tergovernmental Association
P.O. Box 1140
Dubuque, Iowa 52004-1140
Dear Mr. Buckleitner:
The following is my evaluation of each of the eight propo~ed barge fleeting
sites for Pool 12. I have listed the facturs about each site that influence
my acceptance or rejection of the site. These comments aplJly in both the
lonE, and short term unless specifically noted otherwise. In addition, for
the Committees information, I have completed a pairwise comparison matrix
considering the environmental factors of each site. This was done for two
scenarios, (1) considering only environmental factors, sport and con~ercial
fi5hing and water based recreation and ignoring site ownership; and (2) where
FWS Refuge lands were present, the site was always the least preferred
alternative. It should be noted that this was done without the input of
other environmental agencies and the figures .could change. It was done for
the Committee to see how the mechanics of pairwise comparisons work.
As can be seen, the comparison not only ranks the sites from the
environmental point of vi~w, but also enables the evaluator to see the
relationship between alternatives or "how much" one site is ranked better
than the others. I believe, if all interest groups (not individuals) were to
use this methodology, and assuming equality between evaluation criteria, a
logical, fair and statistically valid ranking would be obtained that is fully
defensible.
Site I - Lower East Side of Chaplain Schmitt Island
Advantages - no fish or wildlife concerns.
Disadvantages - aesthetic impact to land based recreation on Schmitt Island.
Site II - Area Between Dove Harbor and Peosta Channel
Advantages - no wildlife concerns
Disadvantages - area is a stump field providing fish habitat for spawning,
escaping predators and other life requirements. It is a sport and commercial
fishing area. Dredging would be required necessitating a disposal site.
This agency would require replacement habitat or enhancement of existing
habitat elsewhere as mitigation. Fleeting activities could interfere with
.
.
.
;:
recreational access to lower Peosta Channel and would be visible from Schmitt
Island (aesthetic impact).
Site III - Mile 574.5 to 575.0, left bank
Advantages - None
Disadvantages - Island owned by U.S. Fish and Hildlife Service and fleeting
cannot be considered until 1986. Long term use cannot be predicted at this
time. Site is close to important fish and wildlife habitat and fish spawning
may take place in the structures (revetment) along the shoreline. Impact to
heron rookery, river otter, white bass and sauger would need to be carefully
considered. Fleeting activities could interfere with recreational access to
the side channel.
Site IV - Upper Lake Peosta Channel
Advantages - none
Disadvantages - The channel is spawning habitat for fish and is utilized by
commercial fishermen. The shallow water zone and adjacent island habitat is
important for wildlife. Fleeting activities \Jill cause turbulence and
disturb and reaistribute sediments which could affect fish spawning.
Fleeting activities could also interfere ~ith access and us~ of the side
channel. Fleeting would impose a visual impact from Schmitt Island.
Site V - Lower Lake Peosta Channel
Advantages - no fisheries or wildlife concerns.
Disadvantages - Fleeting activities would illLerfere with recreation access
and use of the lower side channel.
Site VI - Mile 577.0 to 578.0, right bank
Advantages - None
Disadvantages - Important fish and wildlife habitat. Paddlefish spawning
area, commercial fishing area, river otter sighted in area, popular
watersport area. Fleeting would result in a negative aesthetic impact from
Julien Dubuque Overlook and could interfere with access to Catfish Creek.
Dredging is required necessitating disposal sites and mitigation.
Site VII - Mile 572.0 to 572.5, right bank
Advantages - None
Disadvantages - Important fish and wildlife habitat. Owned by Fish and
Wildlife Service and cannot be considered until 1986. Long term use cannot
be predicted at this time. Heavy sportfishing use at lower end uf site and
some commercial fishing.
"'t:;"
.
.
.
3
Site VIII - Mile 570.0 to 570.5, right bank
Advantages - no wildlife concerns.
Disadvantages - Mussel beds located at site, no mitigation of impacts
possible. Popular watersports area.
Two additional sites were suggested. The first is at the tip of the island "
at River Mile 581.5, left bank.
Advantages - none
Disadvantages - area is shallow and would require dredging, disposal sites
and mitigation. Our Resources I~venLory identifies the area as being
important for wildlife. The mussel bed located in~ediately downstream could
be affected by sediments resuspended by tow boat activities.
Secondly, sites above Lock and Dam 11 were suggested. 1- believe that it is
impractical to consider any site in Pool 11 as fleeting for terminals in Pool
12 because of the inefficiency of passing through the lock. Since the scope
of our study was limited to the Dubuque area and no terminals currently exist
above the dam, I feel it is in~ppropriate fer us to consider any upstream
si tes at this time. Expanding the study above the dam will signi ficantly
complica~e the issue.
~CN"""
Sinserely, ", '
"'- "I ___
/ ' 1/1 /- i " '
I ~"-'-'~ I} / / "',-c-,; (-C../
Gerald Bade !
Fish & \iildlife Biologist
Enclosure:
.
~~'
DUBUQUE HARBOR SERVICE
608-725-2311 · P.O. Box 585 · Cassville. Wisconsin 53806
September 6, 1984
DMATS Barge Fleeting Comcitte
c/o Mr. Chris Buckleitner, ECIA
.
Dubuque Harbor Service presently has a maximum fleet
capacity of 83 barges. In May of 1984, as many as 80
barges were in these fleets on a given day, allowing
no room for operating. The ideal condition would be
two barge spaces available for each barge fleeted,
providing a space for each barge, and a space to move
it. Hi~h the shortage of potential fleeting sites
available, Dubuque Harbor Service could reasonably
operate with an increase of forty additional spaces.
Remarks by Dubuque Harbor Service" on each potential
fleeting site are based on DHS needs for additional
spaces, site locations, ability to work tows, etc.
I Lower East Side of Chaplain Schmitt Memorial Island
This site is located at mile 581 RB with an estimated
capacity of 70 barges. It has adequate water depth,
and is located above the RR bridge eliminating bridge
delays. It is located on the main channel allowing
access to work line haul tows. For fleeting purposes
this site would be an excellent location, and far
superior to any other sites considered.
II Area A between Dove Harbor and Peosta Channel
This site is located at mile 580.5 with an estimated
capacity of forty barges. It has all of the location
advantages of Site I. The main disadvantage, which
renders this area unusable as is, is the low water
depth and stump fields. Dredging operation would be
required before use, with costs expected to be much
greater than affordable for a barge fleeter.
.
. . . . - .. -
CASSVILLE RIVER TERMINAL
CLINTON HARBOR SERVICE
DUBUQUE HARBOR SERVICE
DMATS Barge Fleeting Committee
.
III Mile 574.5 to 575 LB
This site has an estimated capacity of 60 barge spaces.
The advantages of adequate water depth, access to the
channel, and large capacity are outweighed by the distance
of approximately six miles from Dubuque Harbor. In add-
ition to time consumed moving barges that distance, a
fleet so remote would be impossible to monitor frequently,
and have a higher risk of undetected breakaways. Future
needs, as volumns increase farther south such as E. D.
Sand and Gravel, would make this site feasable for long
term needs. These comments also apply to sites located
at miles 572 RB and 570 RB.
IV
Upper Lake Peosta Channel
This site has an estimated capacity of 200 barges if
fully utilized. It has adequate water depth and the dis-
tance from Dove Harbor would be less than three miles.
A serious disadvantage of this site is lack of access by
line haul tows. Many line boats require unfacing from
their tows during rearranging of barges, and would have
no place to tie off. This would require many barges to
continue to drop at Mines of Spain, over three miles
south of Dubuque Harbor.
.
V
Lower Lake Peosta Channel
This site has an estimated capacity of 12 barges. It
has the same disadvantage as Upper Peosta Channel with
less barge capacity. Distance from Dove Harbor is less
than one mile. This site would provide some relief to
the space problem, but would still require additional
area to fully solve the problem.
VI Mile 577 to 578 RB
This site has an estimated capacity of 30 barges. The
portion of this site below Catfish Creek is very shallow,
and silt from Catfish would continue to fill in requiring
constant dredging to be usable. The portion of this site
above Catfish is divided by an existing dock, and has no
way to place deadmen between the RR tracks and river.
An anchor barge just above the Mines of Spain area would
relieve some congestion, but would be closer to the
main channel navigation than desired, and would not be
as safe as a fleet secured to shorewires.
.
.
DMATS Barge Fleeting Committee
VII Mile 581.2 LB (Above new highway bridge)
This site would have an estimated capacity of 23
barges, utilizing an anchor barge. For location,
.see "Xli on attached map. The adj acent shoreline
area would not accomodate dead men, making an
anchor barge mandatory. Shallow water caused by a
sand point extending south of the upstream island
would require the fleet to locate and estimated 200'
above the new bridge. This would be an undesirable
area to. work tows, and be adversely subjected to
high water currents. Possible obstruction to navi-
gation may also be present.
VIII Little Maquoketa Site
.
This area, proposed for future fleeting and harbor
activity, would be located north of Lock and Dam 11.
This seperation requires fleeting for this area to be
considered totally seperate from the Dubuque Harbor.
Barge shifts through the lock would cause totally un-
reasonable delays and expense.
Total fleeting for the Dubuque Harbor area now consists of
the following:
Owne"r
US Fish & Wildlife Svc
State of Iowa
Private Lease
City of Dubuque
Capacity
93
48
23
21
185
Percent of Total
50.27%
25.95%
12.43%
11. 35%
100.00%
I summary, the short term needs of Dubuque Harbor Service
include additonal capacity of at least 40 barge spaces.
This site should be located along the main channel, allowing
access to tie "off line haul tows. Presently, most tow work
must be performed at Mines of Spain fleet, over three miles
south of Dubuque. Potential fleeting sites below Mile 575
are totally unfeasable for use to solve the short term needs,
due to both distance from Dubuque, and US Fish & Wildlife
policy not to consider any new fleeting site applications
until after 1986.
.
Sincerely,
@:uIf)(/i12~
Robert D. Hudson
,
.
d
.
BARGE flEETING SIUDY
PROS AND CONS FOR FLEEl'ING SITES
SITE #
I Lo.ver East Side Chaplain Schmitt Island
A. Advantages:
1) Location/Distance to Elevators
2) Adequate Water Depth
3) Barge Capacity
4) Located Above RR Bridge Eliminating Potential Bridge Delays
B. Disadvantages:
1) Political Disfavor with Location to Ccmnercial Recreation-Zoned Prepert:
2) Political Disfavor with Location to Dog Track Facility
3) Potential Conflict with Rivertcat docking
4) Location to Water-oriented Recreation Facility
II Area A Between Dove Harbor and Peosta Channel
A. Advantages:
1) Location - Distance to Elevators
2) Located Above RR Bridge Eliminating Potential Bridge Delays
B. Disadvantages:
1) Water Depth Inadequate - Stump Field
2) Potential High Cost of Dredging to Eliminate Stump Field
3) Heavy Sports and Ccmnercial Fishing Area
4) Recognized as Fish Spawning Area
III Mile 574.5 to 575 LB
A. Advantages:
1) Adequate Water Depth
2) Location to Sand and Gravel Facility
3) Good Barge Capacity
B. Disadvantages:
1) Rem:>te Location to Elevators
2) ()..med by U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and will not tc
considered for fleeting until 1986
N Upper Lake Peosta Channel
A. Advantages:
1) Location/Distance to Elevators
2) Located Above RR Bridge Eliminating Potential Bridge Delays
3) Adequate Water Depth
4) Potentially Large Barge Capacity
.
B. Disadvantages:
1) Commercial Fishing Area
2) Heavy Recreation BoatingjFishing Area
3) Strong CUrrent
4) Bridge Located Directly Below
5) Location to Highly-used Recreation Park
6) Location to Important Wildlife Habitat
7) Location to Water-oriented Recreation Facility
V ~r Lake Peosta Channel
A. Advantages:
1) Location/Distance to Elevators
2) Located Above RR Bridge Eliminating Potential Bridge Delays
3) Adequate Water Depth
B. Disadvantages:
1) Location to Commercial Recreation Area
2) Relatively Small Barge Capacity
3) Heavy Recreational Boating Area
4) Presently Leased as Tenninal
.
VI Mile 577 to 578 RB
A. Advantages:
I) Adequate Barge Capacity
B. Disadvantages:
1) Inadequate Water Depth
2) Mouth of Catfish Creek Discharge and Susceptible to Siltation
3) Relatively Remote Location to Elevators
4) Below RR Bridge/potential Delays
5) Scenic Overlook Directly Above
6) Spawning _ Habi tat
7) Commercial Fishing Area
8) Important Wildlife Habitat
VII Mile 572 to 572.5 RB
A. Advantages:
1) Adequate \'Jater Depth
2) Location to Sand and Gravel Facility
3) Adequate I3a.rge Capacity
.
.
.
.
B. Disadvantages:
1) Rerrote Location to Elevators
2) Owned by u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service and will not be
considered for fleeting until 1986
3) Heavy Sports Fishing Area
VIII Mile 570 to 570.5 RB
A. Advantages:
1) Adequate Water Depth
2) Adequate Barge Capacity
B. Disadvantages:
1) Remote Location fran Elevators
2) Mussel Beds
3) Location to Navigation Channel
/(/cr?J 4 /JJ ~/
Uo/~
- C9/~/8<f
~
-" -~
./-
--
.
Dubuque Metropolitan Area Transportation Study
Barge Fleeting Summary Report
October 15, 1984
.
.
.
.
.
...
Site I - Lower East Side of Chaplain Schmidt Memorial Island.
Capacity about 70.
ECONOMIC/LEGAL
Advantages
1. This is a superio~ site to others considered. It is
being dredged for land fill for the dog track and therefore
has adequate water dePrh and lowered development costs.
2. It is located above the I.C.G. bridge, eliminating bridge
delays and reducing time shuttling between the site and
terminals. It i,s located very near the main channel,
allowing access to line haul tows that are to be worked on.
~. This area could be used immediately after the sand dredge
is removed.
4. Sufficient capacity for Dubuque Harbor short term needs.
5. This area is locally controlled by the City of Dubuque,
foregoing most permitting procedures necessary with federal
and state controlled areas.
Disadvantages
1. Local land use conflict. Problems are associated wth
perceived aesthetic detriments to the Schmitt Memorial Island
development:
a) Visual impact on surrounding areas.
b) Possible Conflict with river boat tour docking
facilities.
c) Possible Conflict with general recreational activity.
ENVIRONMENTAL/RECREATIONAL
Advantages:
1. There are no fish or wildlife concerns of significance.
Disadvantages:
1. The fleeting area would be located just upstream from the
Chaplain Schmitt Boat Harbor and this represents a
possibility for conflicts between barge fleeting operations
and recreational boating.
2. The presence and operation of fleeting will have impacts
on Wisconsin waters wth a primary impact caused by traffic
over a mussel bed on the Wisconsin side. Wisconsin DNR feels
that more information would be needed to determine what the
impact would be.
.
Artco Fleeting
Services
· Barge Fleeting Proposal
City Council Meeting
February 7,2000
.
.
.
.
Costs
Facts & Figures
· Other workable fleets are 4 miles downstream from current city-front fleets
· Boats travel at approximately 5 mph
· It takes several minutes to get up to speed and to slow down
· With above 3 factors = I hour extra per switch
· Current average switching time one way is 40 minutes not counting delays
· 5-year average number of barges handled in the upper harbor = 1000 (Artco only)
· Typical season lasts 9 months or 270 days
· 1000 barges x 2 switches (1 to dock, 1 from dock) = 2000 switches per year
· 2000 switches x 1 hour extra each = 2000 hours (83 24-hour days) per year
Adding 83 days to a 270 day season is a workload increase of over 30%. In order to
accommodate the extra 30% of work, an extra boat will need to be utilized in the harbor.
30.1c. increase in costs include: (but not limited to)
· Cost of a boat is approximately $500,000.
· Costs $400,000+ pel" year to operate (labor, insurance, repair & maintenance, etc).
· Fuel bum will increase by making so many additional trips.
· Fuel prices continue to rise - currently 25% more than this past summer.
Unfortunately an increase in costs to us will most likely create an increase in rates to the local
businesses. When businesses have increased transportation costs it can affect:
1. The price Alliant charges for electricity
2. The price Peavey and AGM pay farmers for grain (resulting in farmers taking their grain to
other communities thereby the City losing out on taxes and revenues)
3. The cost the City pays for salt for roads
4. The cost farmers pay for fertilizer
All these things, but not limited to, may be affected with increased prices and we do not want to
have to raise our rates, but may be forced to.
By having a large enough fleet in close proximity of the city that we can service Dubuque's
businesses efficiently, we are not only preventing additional costs but adding to the economy by
paying additional money to the City in the form of leases.
TELEPHONE 608/725-2311
FAX 608/725-5044
ARTCO FLEETING SERVICES
P.O. BOX 585. CASSVlLLE. WI 53806
Dubuque City Council Meeting Regarding Action Item - Barge Fleeting on City Island - 11/6/2000
General Statement -
I am in agreement with the proposal from the City Manager with the exception of one point. I feel that when the City
enters into a lease with another party that all the terms of the lease should apply to both parties. The part where Artco
is required to he held to a certain amount of time and the city is not, is not an equitable contract.
I would like to address some ofthe concerns that 4 have arisen in letters written to the City:
1. Serious hazard to boaters -
1. Wing dams above and below the proposed area keep boaters from running through it.
2. Marinas have natural protection from the land.
3. There is barge traffic through the area on a regular basis and boaters are aware of this and have
done an excellent job coexisting with commercial traffic over many years.
1. In 23 years we have only had one recreational boat-barge accident - an intoxicated boater ran
into us and there were no injuries
2. We have rescued many loose boats and helped numerous boaters with mechanical problems
2. Commercial use -
I. Dubuque Greyhound Park & Casino is a for profit business using the Island
2. Dubuque Yacht Basin is a for profit business using the Island
3. Area to the east of Admiral Sheehey Drive is not considered part of the recreational area or park.
4. Newt Marine is a competitor and has bias when it comes to statements made by him.
5. Environmental impacts
1. No additional fleeting - actually less - 1100' less than what we have had at the 4111 Street Peninsula
site.
2. 12 miles of shoreline between upper and lower harbors of Dubuque, 52 miles between lock and
dams in Dubuque and Bellevue. We currently use 1.1 miles of it and 83% of it is south of town.
That amount will decrease to less than 1 mile when we move from our current area.
3. Area was both dredged for fill and used to deposit dredge spoils in the past.
6. Visual
1. Photos show barges placed in the area are 9 barges wide and 6 barges long - many more than in the
proposal from the City. Proposal is for 8 barges wide and 3 barges long, half of the length that is
in the photos. Exposure from the bridge will be much less than what is in the photos.
2. Photos show barges sticking out at an angle due to the way we had to hold them into the bank
because ofthe absence oftie-offs. With the proposal, the barges would be flat against the bank as
show in the drawing from the City.
3. The fleet would not be 24 barges at all times - most times there would less.
7. Surveys
1. Some of the cities involved in the survey do not have multiple elevators in the city, therefore they
do not have the critical need for fleets nearby.
2. Davenport has most ofthe fleets on the Illinois side across from the City.
8. "Go somewhere else!"
1. No other compatible areas in upper harbor.
2. No other areas available south of town.
3. Our other fleeting areas south of town are 75% utilized
(water levels prevent 100"10 utilization most of the time)
4. I am open to any suggestions or suggested places that anyone may have.
Brent Nissen, Manager Artco Fleeting Services
The Dubuque Dragon Boat Association's Position on Barge Fleeting on City Island
The mission of the Dubuque Dragon Boat Association is to enhance the attractiveness of
our community by providing unique opportunities for recreation and sport on our river
front that will impact the health of all residents.
Soon the City Council will be deciding whether to allow a barge company, being relocated
from the Ice Harbor area by the new River Walk, permission to fleet their barges on the
South east side of City Island directly below the Wisconsin Bridge.
We are opposed to this location for many reasons related to our mission statement. We
are not opposed to the improvements being made at the Ice Harbor nor are we opposed to
barge commerce on the river. We are simply opposed to the placement of barges on City
island.
We appreciate the efforts of the council and the manager trying to work out our safety
concern in leasing this area We were very relieved to hear about the idea that the barge
company would have to move the barges when events are being held at the Miller River
View Park. However, that compromise does not satisfY all of the reasons for not parking
barges there. In 1984, the Dubuque City Council on the advice of the Dock Commission,
refused to allow a locally owned barge fleeting operator the right to fleet at this very same
location. The reasons given by the City were:
I. The location of the barges to water-oriented recreation.
2. Entrance to the city from the Wisconsin Bridge and the visual blight the barges
would cause.
3. Disfavor with the location of the dog track facility.
4. Environmental issues
5. Not consistent with the nearby location of commercially zoned recreational and
city owned recreational property.
Our response:
1. The reasons given in 1984 have proven to be very foresighted. Recreational boating is
heavier now than back in 1984. The marinas are full in addition to the increase in
dragon boating, canoeing, jet-skiing, and sailing near the island. Barges here create a
downstream hazard for the dragon boats but they also block the view of boaters coming
down river as they approach the out going traffic from the marina and the boat ramp.
The barges also narrow the river at a very busy section especially if there are tows
coming up or down the river.
2. The council strictly enforces ordinances preventing any bill boards along this highway. It
would not be consistent with their own rules to allow these arguably ''ugly'' barges to
park there. It makes no sense to us to move these barges from a less visible location to a
more visible place.
3. Negative impact on the dog track should be a concern. We question the wisdom of
putting all the effort and expense into making one area more attractive to casino
-customers if that casino has out of town owners and not help the casino that is owned
by the Dubuque Racing Association where half of the profits go directly to the city and
a large part of the profits also support local charities.
4. The barges and the ensuing increase in tow traffic will contribute to the disruption of a
known endangered species mussel bed. More significantly this is a known winter
holding area for walleye and sauger. In the fall ofthe year when the barge fleeting
tends to be the busiest is exactly the same time the walleyes begin to move into this
area for wintering.
5. Since 1984 terrific improvements have been made to City island recreation. Barges
clanging and banging 24 hours a day is not compatible with the camping at Miller
River View park or Shanley's RV Campground. The recently built bike trail and skate
board park are examples of how this use has expanded. We believe this area below the
bridge is ideal for a handicapped accessible fishing dock that augments the nearby
campgrounds and skate board park for the kids. Other cities are recognizing the value
of these structures along their waterfronts. Why not Dubuque?
One barge company says that fleeting barges here is critical to them because of the 30% in
increased costs shuttling barges would cause. The competing barge company says that this
is simply not true. We did some math calculations ( See Attachment A) and determined
that even under the worst case scenario for the additional cost for shipping of
commodities, ifbarges were not fleeted at City Island, amounts to pennies per house
hold. We, the DDBA, believe that the residents of Dubuque would be willing to pay this
tiny amount to preserve this part of the river for recreation. In fact we have not yet
found anyone on the street who supports this idea of fleeting barges there.
From the infonnation we could find, especially the infonnation from Newt Marine's letter
to the Council on October 10, we have concluded that there is no legitimate reason to
fleet barges on City Island below the bridge. We urge the council to honor the
commitment made in 1984 by their predecessors to reserve City island for its zoned
purposes.
S~cere!>"
C~ /~ 13t.-e'- -c r~
Earl Brimeyer .
Spokesperson for the Dubuque Dragon Boat Associaton
Attachment A
(page 1)
If we asswne the nwnbers that Artco gave in there letter back in May are correct they
imply that the cost of shipping by barge in Dubuque could increase by 30%. What does
that mean to the businesses that use the barges. Artco says that they could increase their
expenses by $900,000.00 per year. On an average year they transfer 1000 barges.
$900.000.00
1,000 = $900.00 more per barge load
a barge can hold on average 1500 ton of coal or salt. $900.00 divided by 1500 = 60 cents
more per ton of coal or salt. Alliant Energy says it pays between $20 to $40 dollars per
ton of coal on average. .60 divided by $20.00 = 3% actual increase in cost for coal.
.60 divided by $40.00 = 1.5% increase
Under this scenario, Alliant Energy uses on average 200,000 tons of coal a year, the extra
cost of coal would be at the worst $120,000.
The city uses 7,000 ton of salt a year at an average price of$24 per ton.. If you added the
extra .60 per ton the additional cost for the city is $4200.00 for salt.
So add the extra cost of coal $120,000.00 and the extra cost of salt $4200.00 and you get
$124,200.00. Divide that among the approximately 60,000 residents of Dubuque and it
cOI~S out to about $2 per person per year to save the island for recreation! This is the
worst case situation.
Newt Marine says that there is adequate parking for barges south of Dubuque. That
barges can be shuttled back and forth in groups of five to ten and held in the spaces at
Dove harbor so that there is very little or no extra delay. Newt Marine says it charges
$150.00 an hour for tow service. Just for the sake of simplifying the math lets say it takes
an hour to take full barges down and an hour to bring back empty barges from island 228.
Lets asswne on average they push six barges at a time. $300.00 in time rental divide by 6
barges equals a cost of $50.00 extra per barge cost.
$50.00 divided by 1500 ton equals an additional 3.3 cents per ton shipping cost for coal or
salt under this scenario. 200,000 tons of coal and 7,000 tons of salt would therefore cost
an extra 207,000 X .033 = $6831.00. Divide this additional cost by the approximate
60,000 residents in Dubuque and you have less than 12 cents per person per year to keep
our island set aside for recreation!
We suspect the real cost would come out somewhere in between these two figures.
Com is even more interesting. A barge holds 52,000 bushels of com. Using Artco's
figures of$900.00 extra cost per barge. $900.00 divided by 52,000 bushelslbarge equals
1.7 cents additional cost per bushel.
Attachment A
(page 2)
Using Newt Marine's estimate of$50.00 per barge divided by 52.000 bushe1slbarge equals
less than one tenth of one penny per bushel.
You can see that when broken down this additional cost does not seem so threatening. In
fact, everyone we have talked to has been against this proposal.
Our math has not taking into account the money that river recreation brings into Dubuque
to offset these additional shipping costs. It is much more difficult, unfortunately, to
quantify recreation dollars. But we would venture to say that the economic impact of the
International Dragon Boat Festival, by itself, offsets some of the extra cost to the
community that the barges might cause.
, .
Artco Fleeting
Servi-ce-s
, . Barge Fleeting Proposal
City Council Meeting
February 7, 2000
Existing Fleeting Areas
The existing fleets were utilized at over 80% in order to accommodate Dubuque's barging
requirements. Listed below are the 3 fleets we operated in the upper Dubuque harbor area and the
possible new sites we would like the City to consider. We are going from a capacity of92 barges
to 12, a decline of 87% usable space. So far approximately 8 spaces may be obtained but the City
holds the key to the success of an efficient river industry in Dubuque. (# refers to area on
enclosed map)
1. #6 Peavey Fleet - Existing 12 barge fleet. Too small to accommodate all of Dubuque's city-
front docks' switching needs and barge holding requirements alone.
2. #7 AGM Fleet - Previous 20 barge fleet that was surrendered December 31, 1999 to the
City for riverfront expansion. Possible renewal option offleet to combine with the theme of
the riverwalk expansion. Riverfront could combine the historical museum, recreational,
excursion and casino landings, wetlands, and past riverboats with current river operations.
Locals and tourists will be able to see how current riverboats operate and contribute to the
community in a river town.
3. #S Fischer Fleet - Previous 60 barge fleet that will be lost to the city for the Riverfront
project in the Spring of2000. Was directly in front of new Riverwalk site.
Possible New Fleeting Areas
1. #2 City Island - Establish a fleet with very minimal disturbance of existing land. Capacity
of 24 to 50 barges. Fills the needs of a replacement fleet with limited visibility from land and
would be able to establish a lease with the City.
2. #7 Old Agri Fleet - Previous 20 barge fleet that was surrendered to the City for riverfront
expansion. Possible renewal of fleet to combine with the theme of the Riverwalk. Riverfront
will combine the historical museum, recreational, excursion and casino landings, wetlands,
and past riverboats with current river operations. People come to the river not only see the
beauty but also to be able to see how current river operations combine the community with
the world.
3. #1 Peosta Channel- Develop barge fleeting along the west or east bank ofPeosta Channel
above H wy 61 bridge. May require some dredging and installation of an anchor system.
Capacity of 15 to 35 barges.
/ .l
i
\ 4./
J
#4 Channel Fleet - Locate fleet between two upper and lower wing dams adjacent to the
industrial area shown. Will require installing pile type structures in river bottom. Capacity of
30 barges.
5. #3 Storm Basin - Long term project to be cons idered as an alternate site. Capacity of 20 to
60 barges. Would require development and investment but long term lease could established
with City for payback possibilities.
6. #5 Dove Harbor;- Install mooring devices along the west side of the harbor. Capacity of 4
to 8 barges. Currently working with City and lessee to try and establish a lease. Helpful but
too small to compensate losing 80 fleeting spaces.
Costs
Facts & Figu res
. Other workable fleets are 4 miles downstream from current city-front fleets
. Boats travel at approximately 5 mph
. It takes several minutes to get up to speed and to slow down
. With above 3 factors = 1 hour extra per switch
. Current average switching time one way is 40 minutes not counting delays
. 5-year average number of barges handled in the upper harbor = 1000 (Artco only)
· Typical season lasts 9 months or 270 days
· 1000 barges x 2 switches (I to dock, I from dock) = 2000 switches per year
· 2000 switches x 1 hour extra each = 2000 hours (83 24-hour days) per year
Adding 83 days to a 270 day season is a workload increase of over 30%. In order to
accommodate the extra 30% of work, an extra boat will need to be utilized in the harbor.
30% increase in costs include: (but not limited to)
· Cost of a boat is approximately $500,000.
· Costs $400,000+ per year to operate (labor, insurance, repair & maintenance, etc).
· Fuel burn will increase by making so many additional trips.
· Fuel prices continue to rise - currently 25% more than this past summer.
Unfortunately an increase in costs to us will most likely create an increase in rates to the local
businesses. When businesses have increased transportation costs it can affect:
I. The price Alliant charges for electricity
2. The price Peavey and AGM pay farmers for grain (resulting in farmers taking their grain to
other communities thereby the City losing out on taxes and revenues)
3. The cost the City pays for salt for roads
4. The cost farmers pay for fertilizer
. All these things, but not limited to, may be affected with increased prices and we do not want to
have to raise our rates, but may be forced to.
By having a large enough fleet in close proximity of the city that we can service Dubuque's
businesses efficiently, we are not only preventing additional costs but adding to the economy by
paying additional money to the City in the form of leases.
~ijtt~'y,;}~'?S;'~:'~~
~~"5'-~'j;;'iJ(,',4i"
,.- -"'.,.-..,,-.- .-~-,.......-~-~
. - ...~+;~<::.:~~..1 ]"'?~:ft;'-::;
#2 City Island
# 1 Peosta Channel
#3
Storm
Basin
Reservoir
#4 Outside
Industrial
Island Area in
the channel
#7 Directly below
Railroad Bridge
'mnitrd ~tatf5 ~rnatr
WASHINGTON, DC 20510
February 4, 2000
The Honorable Terry Duggan
Mayor
- -- - City of Dubuque
SO West 13th Street
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Dear Mayor Duggan:
Dubuque has made great strides in showcasing the importance and many facets of the
Mississippi River. We can think of no other community along the Upper Mississippi that
has put as much effort into river development. The entire community is to be highly
commended for the long hours of work and successful fund-raising that has already
occurred to achieve your goals. Dubuque is truly a major jewel of the Upper Mississippi.
We understand the necessity of making changes along the riverfront in order to complete
the community plans centering around tourism and other future development. Indeed,
change is a hallmark of American life. However, we encourage that these changes be
equitable and fair to all parties involved. While beautiful to look at, we are reminded that
the river is a working river. It a major transportation artery that involves not only local,
but national and international trade. That trade is the lifeblood of Iowa agriculture. It is
of considerable importance to the Dubuque economy as well.
To that end, we ask that you give careful and thoughtful consideration to maintaining at
an appropriate location, perhaps near City Island, barge fleeting operations that will need
to be moved under the current riverfront development plan. This will be necessary to
maintain the service as a viable participant in the trade life of the river, allow the
continuation of efficient and competitive barge service based in Dubuque, and provide for
future economic opporh+nities. The barge service not only moves Iowa's agricultural
goods to national and international markets, but also brings fertilizer, coal, salt and other
commodities to Dubuque.
,-
Again, we commend Dubuque on its riverfront efforts. You have much of which to be
proud.
Thank you for your consideration of our concerns. We look forward to continuing to
work \Vith you and the community.
Sincerely,
Tom Harkin
United States Senator
---~. Charles E. Grassley
United States Senator
:J
ALLlANT ENERGY~
Alliant Energy Corporation
Worldwide Headquarters
U2 West Washington Avenue
P.O. Box 192
Madison, WI 53701-0192
Office: 608.252.3311
www.alliant-energy.com
January 21, 2000
Dubuque Mayor Terry Duggan
City ~vfanager ~/fike V an ~filligen
Dubuque City Council Members
City Hall
Dubuque, Iowa 5200 1
Re: Upper Harbor Barge Fleeting
Dear Sir or ~/fadam:
Interstate Power Company has been providing energy for the tn-state region for many
years and has depended on river transportation for our fuel in order to keep the costs to
our customers at the lowest level possible. IPC unloads from 75 to 200 barges of coal per
year at our facility here in Dubuque. Low-cost river transportation and timely switching
from the local tugs are key elements that allow IPC to keep generating costs here at the
Dubuque Power Plant at an economical level.
Inkrst3.te Power Company/Alliant Energy's Dubuque Plant supports .Mco Fleeting
Service and their need tor barge fleeting within the vicinity of the Dubuque harbor and its
docks. Without adequate barge fleeting and syvitching services our facility would not be
able to operate etnciently and our costs would most likely rise. Please assist in any way
that you can to help provide .Meo Fleeting with the needed space to keep Dubuque
Harbor businesses efficient.
Sincerely,
Patrick W. I-Tank\'
P Iml! l\rf:U13gcr
Cc: Brent N iSSCll
a4'•Ci,„�' 4 ycy , �}
r n.iPr h •• " t a•.e
at+ �11
4,
.n!
.44
Yn
PRESIDENT
MARK KAUFMAN
1S1 VICE PRESIDENT
BILL KEMP
2nd VICE PRESIDENT
DR. JOSEPH KAPLER
3rd VICE PRESIDENT
PAUL KAUFMAN
41h VICE PRESIDENT
WALTER HARTMAN
SECRETARY
DAVID LEIFKER
TREASURER
PAUL PFOHL
PAST PRESIDENTS
GERDA PRESTON HARTMAN
DAN SIMON
JAMES EGAN
PAUL KAUFMAN
EARNEST PFEIFFER
MARY MILLER
RANOL WEIGEL
DAVID LEIFKEFl
HAROLD HEDRICK
GARY RAMBOUSEK
ROBERT L. CAHILL
LEO McLAUGHLIN
WALL Y SUHR
BOB ZEHENTNER
DECEASED PAST
PRESIDENTS
ROSS HARRIS
GEORGE SCHUMACHER
HORACE POOLE
JUDGE JOHN CHALMERS
PAUL NAUMAN
GUS MEYEFl
JAMES MEYER
ED GILGANN
JAMES WALTON
JACK MILLER
At HANSON
C"\ (!)
C'? U
0 CO '+- S
W (-.,
:c ~-"
..........~"" ",
::::::..- c::::: iI"', ~~~:-
LL~ ,
C'? ---
C ~.:;~
W \.- ......\
0: u :>,0
a ~'.~
0 G
0
I
DUBUQUE COUNTY CONSERVATION SOCIETY
__ /~ f/') j/ /!,
c..-'-- /';; /
;;;-~
"Organized in 1933 For Protection of Soil, Woods, Waters and Wildlife"
P.O. Box 645
DUBUQUE, IOWA
52004-0645
October II, 2000
To The Mayor and
City Council of Dubuque
RE: OPPOSITION TO: PROPOSAL TO RELOCATE BARGE FLEETING
AREA TO SOUTHEAST PORTION OF SCHMITT/CITY ISLAND
The Board of Directors voted to reiterate their
opposition to the proposed relocation of the barge
fleeting area from south of the railroad bridge to the
southeast portion of City Island. Without repeating all
of our statements in our prior correspondence, we oppose
the relocation for several reasons. First, it will
definitely create a serious hazard for boaters in the
area. There are marinas and boat launching areas on or
near both ends of City Island and very heavy boat
traffic during the warm weather months. Second, the
proposed location provides habitat for a number of
wildlife species, which will be destroyed. Third, the
proposed use is incompatible with the expressed purpose
and past use of the island, ie recreational use. Our
society maintained the Miller Riverview Conservation
Park area for many years. We spent countless hours and
a lot of money preserving that area of City Island.
Since then various other recreational uses of the island
have come into being. We with others fought the
industrialization of the island for years.
We ask you to consider the environment and the citizens
of the tri-state area and deny the use of any portion of
the waters adjacent to City Island for barge fleeting
purposes. In this conjunction we believe you should set
a public hearing with public input on the matter.
Yours Truly,
t~
/U~
Walter Hartman, President
cc: Telegraph Herald
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
APPRAISAL OF MARKET RENT FOR THE
CITY OF DUBUQUE PROPERTY
(BARGE FLEET SITE)
DUBUQUE, IOWA
AS OF SEPTEMBER, 13, 2000
PREPARED FOR:
TIM MOERMAN
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
CITY HALL
DUBUQUE, IOWA 52001
PREPARED BY:
EDMONDC. FISHER, MAl, SREA
THOMAS F. HOWE, ASSOCIATE
ROY R. FISHER, INC.
2010 E.38TH STREET-SUITE #201
DAVENPORT, IA 52807-1163
08/02/00 < 5912 > 2 + 1
~d1'~.~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
IUDI FISHER, INC.
2010 EAST 38TH STREET, SUITE #201
DAVENPORT, lOW A 52807
PHONE 319-355-6606
FAX 319-355-6612
APPRAISAL CONSULTANTS
Roy R. Fisher, Sr., Founder 1890-1978
Edmond C. Fisher, MAl, SREA
Kevin M. Pollard, MAl
David Mark Nelson
Thomas F. Howe
Michael E. Curtis
October 13,2000
Mr. Tim Moerman
Assistant City Manager
City Hall
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
(319) 588-4110
RE: The appraisal of the Market Rent of the
City of Dubuque property (proposed
barge fleeting site), Dubuque, Iowa.
Dear Mr. Moerman:
Pursuant to your request for an appraisal of the Market Rent of the above mentioned property, please be
advised that we have completed said appraisal, and submit it herewith. This is intended to be a Complete
Appraisal - Summary Report, in conformance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice (USP AP).
This appraisal explains and supports our opinion of the market rent of the subject and was prepared after
a personal inspection of the site, and an analysis of comparable rent data, as well as other factors deemed
pertinent.
As a result of our investigation, and based upon the analysis of the following data, it is our opinion that
the Market Rent of the Fee Simple Estate in the property, as of September 13, 2000, is:
MARKET RENT
$0.15/SQ.FT.
168,000 SQ.FT.
84.000 SO.FT.
252,000 SQ.FT.
$25,200
$12.600
$37,800
(SAY) $38,000
THIRTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS
Respectfully submitted,
ROY R. FISHER, INC.
~~~
Edmond C. Fisher, MAl, SREA
IOWA GENERAL CERTIFICATION #CG01144
Date Signed: 10/13/2000
Thomas F. Howe, ASSOCIATE
IOWA GENERAL CERTIFICATION #CG01320
Date Signed: 10/13/2000
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Letter of Transmittal
Table of Contents
Photographs of Subject Property ........................ 1.
Statement of the Appraisal Problem ..................... 2.
Salient Facts Summary ................................ 3.
Legal Description ....................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.
Neighborhood Data ................................... 5.
Site Analysis ......................................... 6.
Description ofImprovements ........................... 7.
Highest and Best Use Analysis .......................... 8.
Market Rent Analysis ................................. 9.
Correlation and Final Market Rent Estimate. . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.
Certification ........................................ 11.
Contingent and Limiting Conditions .................... 12.
Appraisers' Qualifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13.
Addenda
~.ge .F~ "'na-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1.
PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
A view looking southerly along the Mississippi River from the U.S. Highways #61 and #151 (Iowa-
Wisconsin) Bridge at Dubuque.
~dC'~~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2.
STATEMENT OF THE APPRAISAL PROBLEM
PURPOSE AND INTENDED USE:
The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the Market Rent of the Fee Simple Estate in the City of
Dubuque property, just south of the U.S. Highways #61 & #151 bridge, in and along the Mississippi
River, Dubuque, Iowa. The City of Dubuque intends to use the appraisal in negotiating a lease for the
property.
DEFINITIONS:
Market Rent is defined by The Appraisal Institute in it's The Appraisal of Real Estate, Eleventh
Edition, page 142 as "the rental income that a property would most probably command in the open market
(as of the effective date of the appraisal)."
Fee Simple Estate is defined in The Appraisal of Real Estate, published by the Appraisal Institute (11 th
Edition, 1996, Page 137), as: "absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only
to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and
escheat. "
ANALYSIS OF THE SUBJECT:
The subject is located along the west side of the Mississippi River, just south of the U.S. Highways #61
& # 151 bridge and east of Admiral Sheehy Drive in northeast Dubuque. The site contains an estimated
area of 168,000 sq.ft. (3.86::t: acres) which are designated specifically for a 24 barge fleet cluster (in the
Mississippi River), and up to roughly 84,000::t: sq.ft. (1.93 acres) for pile clusters, "deadmen", etc., to
anchor barges. The total area is estimated to be 252,000::t: sq.ft., or 5.79 acres.
DATE OF APPRAISAL:
The subject property was inspected by Edmond C. Fisher, MAl, SREA, Appraiser, and Thomas F.
Howe, Associate, on September 13, 2000, which is the effective date of valuation. The date of this
report is October 13,2000.
OWNERSHIP AND SALE HISTORY:
Title to the property is reportedly held by the City of Dubuque. The City of Dubuque acquired a larger
area than the subject many years ago. City ownership was conveyed via either chapter 249 (Iowa), Acts
of the Fifty-first General Assembly, chapter 299, Acts of the Fifty-ninth General Assembly, or Special
Charters enacted by the legislature in 1856 and 1857. No other transfers of title to the property were
discovered within the past three years.
-Continued-
~dl18T~ #na
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2-A.
STATEMENT OF THE APPRAISAL PROBLEM (CONTINUED)
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL:
In preparing this appraisal, the appraiser and associate:
1. Inspected the site, and completed a review of the proposed barge fleeting location preliminary
drawing on a copy of an aerial photo;
2. Researched public records to determine ownership and other pertinent information;
3. Identified and investigated appropriate rent data;
4. Developed an estimate of Market Rent.
All of the comparable rents used in this report were not personally inspected, but were verified by the
appraiser or associate.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:
The value estimate contained herein is based upon the assumption that there are no hazardous
materials present on the site (above, or below ground). The appraisers are not qualified to discern the
presence or absence of such materials (asbestos, petroleum, etc.), but are aware that they can have a
significant negative effect upon value.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT:
The Americans with Disabilities Act ( ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. No specific compliance
surveyor analysis of the property has been completed to determine whether or not it is in conformity
with the various detailed requirements of the ADA.
REASONABLE EXPOSURE AND MARKETING TIMES:
The 2000 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice require the estimation of a reasonable
exposure time for the subject property, when appropriate. Reasonable exposure time is defined
immediately below in modified form from Statements on Appraisal Standards No.6 (SMT -6), Page 80,
as:
"the estimated length of time the property interest being appraised would have been offered on
the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a lease * at market rent * on the effective
date of the appraisal; a retrospective opinion based upon an analysis of past events assuming
a competitive and open market. "
-Continued-
~$C.F~ #.na
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2-B.
STATEMENT OF THE APPRAISAL PROBLEM (CONTINUED)
REASONABLE EXPOSURE AND MARKETING TIMES (CONTINUED):
The 2000 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice also require the estimation of a
reasonable marketing time for the subject property (when appropriate). Reasonable marketing time
is defined in Advisory Opinion AO-7, Page 110, as:
"an opinion of the amount of time it might take to sell a real or personal property interest in
at the concluded market rent * level during the period immediately after the effective date of
an appraisal."
* We have substituted the word lease for the word sale and the word rent for the word value in the
above definitions.
The subject is a barge fleeting site which is located in a modest sized Iowa charter city along the
Mississippi River. These types of properties are seldom on the market. Demand for barge fleeting is
increasing, and a modest marketing time is anticipated. The property is in a primarily recreational,
industrial location, and considering the lack of improvements, zoning, and flood district location of the
subject, we feel that it could be marketed within a period of nine to twelve months, assuming reasonable
pricing. An exposure time of six months has also been estimated.
~dC '~.fT_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.
SALIENT FACTS SUMMARY
DATE OF APPRAISAL:
September 13, 2000.
ADDRESS:
Mississippi River, Dubuque, Iowa.
TYPE OF PROPERTY:
Barge Fleeting.
LAND AREA:
168,000 sq.ft. (barge cluster), 84,000:t sq.ft. for piling
clusters. Total: 252,000:t sq.ft. (5.79 acres).
IMPROVEMENTS:
None. The tenant will be responsible for all permits and
anchoring improvements.
PRESENT OWNERSHIP:
City of Dubuque.
ZONING:
Water: HI (Heavy Industrial District), Land: CR
(Commercial- Recreational District).
ASSESSED VALUE AND TAXES:
2000 Assessed Value (100%):
Land NA *
Improvements + -0-
Total NA *
1999 Taxes: NA * * Not applicable.
RIGHTS APPRAISED:
The Market Rent of the Fee Simple Estate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MARKET RENT ESTIMATE:
MARKET RENT
$0.15/SQ.Fr.
168,000 SQ.FT.
84.000 SO.Fr.
252,000 SQ.FT.
$25,200
$12.600
$37,800
(SAY) $38,000
THIRTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Continued-
~~.F~#_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Part of Mineral Lot 294, and part of Section 20, T 89 N, R 3 E, 5th P.M., City of Dubuque, Dubuque
County, Iowa.
[The above description was modified from a copy of the aerial photo with the barge fleeting cluster
drawn on it which was provided by the City of Dubuque. A copy is facing Page 6.]
~gc .;T~~
NEIGHBORHOOD
- I
. I
. - ~ ..."
I
-I
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5.
NEIGHBORHOOD DATA
Kerper Boulevard is a two-way, four lane asphalt road which only serves the immediate neighborhood,
and is the main north-south traffic artery through the neighborhood. The on-off ramps for U.S.
Highway #151-61 at Kerper Boulevard and 16th Street serve as connection points for the neighborhood
to the highway system in the area. Connecting the southeastern areas of the city through the subject
area is U.S. Highway #151-61, an elevated roadway, which extends via a bridge over the Mississippi
River easterly into Wisconsin.
The subject property is located along the west side of the Mississippi River, and the east side of
Chaplain Schmitt Memorial Island, in northeast Dubuque. The island is a former landfill, and
is currently a recreational, and commercial area located between the Peosta and main channels of the
Mississippi River, which extends from the northwest to the southwest as it flows past Dubuque.
Generally, the extended neighborhood to the north, west, and south is an industrial, industrial service,
recreational, and commercial area. There is a levee, referred to locally as the flood wall, along the
entire easterly river boundary of the city, which was constructed for flood control. The island and both
of the river channels, which includes the subject property, are east of and unprotected by the flood wall.
The specific location of the subject is a portion of the Mississippi River just south of the U.S. Highways
#151-61 bridge, and a small portion of the shore just east of Admiral Sheehy Drive. Its only access is
from the river.
Numerous enterprises and activities in the neighborhood influence the subject property. Immediately
north of the subject is the U.S. Highways #151-61 bridge. To the north of the bridge is Miller Riverview
Park which extends along the easterly side of the island to the inlet of the Peosta Channel at the north
end of the island. The westerly portion of the island which is north of the bridge is primarily wooded
and is relatively low lying. To the south of the wooded area is Dubuque Greyhound Park Casino which
is just northwest of the intersection of Greyhound Park Road and Admiral Sheehy Drive. Both streets
are two lane, two way, and concrete paved, and provide adequate circulation around the island.
Admiral Sheehy Drive extends south from the greyhound racing and gaming facility under the highway
bridge past the subject property. There is no roadway access to the subject, which is well below the
grade of and roughly 200 feet easterly of the road. Immediately south of the subject is a wooded
shoreline. Farther south is an inlet to a public boat ramp with two small docks, which is accessed from
Admiral Sheehy Drive near the point where it turns westerly toward its intersection with the highway
near the base of the bridge. Farther south is the outlet of the Peosta Channel into the main river chanel.
To the south of the bridge along the west side of the north-south section, and the north and south sides
of the east-west section of Admiral Sheehy Drive, is Gerald W. McAleece Park (soccer and softball
complex). At the southwest corner of the island is Dubuque Yacht Basin which is a boat sales, service,
docking, and storage facility which includes a restaurant.
Along the east side ofthe Mississippi River is the State of Wisconsin. There is a rail line and a relatively
undeveloped steeply sloping wooded series of hills and bluffs, with a few residences along the top of
the bluffs.
-Continued-
~~$T~~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5-A.
NEIGHBORHOOD DATA (CONTINUED)
The transition in the extended neighborhood over the years has been from an industrial/river
recreational area to one with an increasingly service and commercial character. Convenience stores and
restaurants have replaced prior less commercial uses. The subject neighborhood retains an essentially
industrial character, but there is increasing service, office, and commercial growth in the pattern of use.
The island neighborhood is physically separated from the surrounding area by the river channels, and
is mostly recreational in character. No detrimental influences were observed which would negatively
affect the subject property. A City of Dubuque administrator reported that the proposed subject barge
fleeting site is not visible from the bridge traffic. During our inspection, we were not able to see the
subject while driving over the bridge or from Admiral Sheehy Drive. The site may be visible from
Admiral Sheehy Drive after the trees loose their foliage in winter.
The outlook for the neighborhood is stable. There are at least two interested tenants for the barge
fleeting site being reported by a city administrator.
~dfl'~ .P"_
!3
14
15
I
16
;oo/',.,.....,!'"ii...,.:~
.-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6.
SITE ANALYSIS
GENERAL:
The site is rectangular in shape and contains an estimated total area of 252,000 sq.ft. (5.79:!: acres). It
includes a 168,000 sq.ft. (280' x 600') rectangularly shaped parcel, which is the easterly portion of the
subject, all of which is in the river. The 168,000 sq.ft. area is designated for fleeting a cluster of up to
24 barges. The balance of the subject is the westerly portion, and includes a section in the river and a
section on land. The westerly portion is estimated to be 140' x 600' (84,000:!: sq.ft.), and is designated
for piling clusters, "deadmen", etc., for the mooring of barges. There is 600 feet of frontage along the
river, and the combined depth is 420 feet. We will refer to the 168,000 sq.ft. portion as Parcel A, and
the 84,000:!: sq.ft. portion as Parcel B. We assume the depth of the water of Parcel A is sufficient for
barge fleeting use.
TOPOGRAPHY:
Parcel A is all in the Mississippi River. Parcel B includes a portion which is in the river, and some land
(during normal non-flooding seasons). The land slopes moderately upward from the river. The land
farther westerly slopes steeply upward. Surface drainage appears to be adequate, and the property is
reportedly not protected from flooding by the flood wall along the eastern boundary of the City of
Dubuque. The FEMA map (see Addenda) indicates that the subject is in the shaded Zone AE district.
AE districts are "Special Flood Hazard Areas Inundated by 100- Year Flood."
ZONING:
The portion of the subject which is in the river is presently zoned HI (Heavy Industrial District), which
allows numerous types of heavy industrial uses. The present zoning of the portion of the subject which
is on the land is CR (Commercial Recreational District). During a conversation with a member of the
City of Dubuque zoning staff, we were informed that barge fleeting is allowed in the HI district, but not
in the CR district. The staff member further indicated that if the land were to be used for barge
fleeting, a re-zoning would be required.
ACCESS:
There will be access from the water only for the proposed use.
UTILITIES:
The subject is located within the city limits of Dubuque. However, no public utilities are reportedly
available.
-Continued-
~~,~#-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6-A.
SITE ANALYSIS
EASEMENTS. ENCROACHMENTS:
No detrimental easements (including typical utility easements), or encroachments are known to exist.
There may be a flood control easement which impacts the subject. We have reviewed other flood
control easements in the general area, but did not research whether one applies to the subject property.
~/R1.gT~~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7.
DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS
GENERAL:
There are no known improvements above or below grade, or above or below the waterline of the
subject property. Should any become known at a later date, the appraiser and associate reserve the right
to reconsider the impact of the improvements on the Market Rent.
~~ .F~#.na
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS
DEFINITION:
The Appraisal Institute defines Highest and Best Use in The Appraisal of Real Estate, Eleventh
Edition, c. 1996, Page 297, as:
"the reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or improved property which is physically
possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value."
Therefore, when estimating the highest and best use of a property, four basic questions must be
addressed. Is the use physically possible, is it legal, is it financially feasible, and is it maximally
productive? The analysis must include the highest and best use as if vacant, and as improved.
Physical Analysis:
The subject's size, shape, topography, and the fact that much of it is in the Mississippi River would
support a limited number of uses. It has the necessary access and zoning for specialized industrial and
recreational uses, and is located in or adjacent to a major river. It is also in the City of Dubuque, which
is the largest community in a 70 mile radius. No public utilities are available, and the subject is
reasonably proximate to most amenities.
Legal Analvsis:
Part of the site is zoned for heavy industrial use, and the balance for commercial recreational use, and
most of the neighboring properties are similarly used. The proposed barge fleeting reportedly conforms
to the zoning ordinance for the portion zoned for heavy industrial use, and the balance would
reportedly require re-zoning for such use to be a legal use of the site. Any permits for barge fleeting
are typically the responsibility of the tenant, and for the purposes of this report are assumed to be
obtainable. Agencies mentioned in Chapter 17 (referenced above) which may require review of the
proposed use include the Iowa Department of Transportation, Iowa Department of Economic
Development, Iowa Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
U.S. Coast Guard, and the natural resources and transportation management agencies of the adjacent
state. The agencies cited immediately above are not intended to be a comprehensive list.
Feasibility:
Based upon our analysis of the local market, demand for well located parcels in the neighborhood and
elsewhere along the Iowa boundary of the Mississippi River is relatively strong, as evidenced by recent
publicity, discussions with market participants, and a survey conducted by the City of Dubuque. A copy
of the survey is included in the Addenda.
-Continued-
~~.F~#_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8-A.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS (CONTINUED)
Maximallv Productive:
A barge fleeting use of the subject would be its most productive use.
ANALYSIS AS IF VACANT:
Considering the location, size, topography, and access of the property, it is our opinion that if vacant,
the highest and best use of the site would be some type of specialized industrial or recreational use.
ANALYSIS AS IMPROVED:
As improved, it is our opinion that a barge fleeting use is the highest and best use of the property,
consistent with the assumed proposed mooring improvements, which would be the responsibility of the
tenant.
~dC'~.F_
IOWA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
BARGE FLEETING RENTS
NAME CO UN RIVERMILE :XPDA TE FRONTA DEPTH ANNUALFEE RENT/sqh.
.....................................................................................,.................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................
AG Clayton 633.3 12nt02 1000' 140' 4375 $0.031
Cassville River Tenn Clayton 636.2 6/30/02 1200' 200' 4200 $0.Q18
Cassville River Term Clayton 607.5 8114/02 4000' 105' 8000 $0.019
Cassville River Term Dubuque 576.75 12/31102 1800' 200' 7875 $0.022
Interstate Power Co. Alla.make 659.9 10/31102 1400' 200' 5250 $0.019
MattesonMarineSer Des Moin 405.81 12131101 800' 150' 2800 $0.023
Matteson Marine Ser Louisa 427.7 10/3 1103 600' 100' 1500 $0.02:
Matteson Marine Ser Louisa 430.3 4/30/02 1600' 175' 5600 $0.020
Orba-Johnson Lee 370 5/31103 400' 350'
Orba-Johnson Lee 370 5/31103 1000 150 15625 $0.026
Orba-Johnson Lee 370 5/31/03 1000 150
Orba-Johnson Lee 370.8 5/31103 1000' 150'
Pattison Bras Clayton 623.37 2200' 175'
Pattison Bros Clayton 623.74 1400' 175'
Pattison Bros Clayton 624.1 12131102 400' 175' 14000 $0.02(,
Monday, September 25,2000
Page 1 of 1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9.
MARKET RENT ANALYSIS
METHODOLOGY:
The concept of Market Rent presumes that no prudent tenant will pay more to rent the subject than
for comparable space which is available, based upon the tenant's analysis of the market place as of the
effective valuation date. The tenant will only be willing to pay the present value of what he or she
perceives those benefits to be.
ESTIMATED MARKET RENT:
In recent years, environmental concerns have impacted the barge fleeting industry, reducing the use
of historical locations along shorelines, some without formal mooring arrangements. These changes
are reflected in recent publicity, and have caused some parties we interviewed to anticipate an
increase in formalizing barge fleeting locations, which may also lead to increased fleeting costs,
including rents. Lessors are well advised to stay informed of the changes, and to consider lease terms
and rent modification provisions to reflect market changes.
t.
Barge leasing is sometimes available from cities which own their river frontage, from the State ofIowa
which owns a significant proportion of the frontage along the Mississippi River, or from a few private
parties. The private parties either own the land and water frontage outright (rare), or lease the land
and related water area from a governmental body and sublease portions of the property to other
tenants. Due to the limited number of privately leased barge fleeting facilities, we have researched
both public and private leasing arrangements.
The terms and conditions of the leases are set by law for the property owned by the State of Iowa. A
copy of Chapter 17 of the Iowa code, "Barge Fleeting Regulations", is included in the Addenda. In
it, a table of charges for leasing for barge fleeting use was last modified in 1997. The modification was
reportedly an across the board increase of25% above the schedule which had existed since 1987. The
revised schedule results in leases which are typical, but in our opinion, may not be arm's length. It is
also important to note that the leased area may not always be for the exclusive use of the barge fleet
tenant. Chapter 17 and/or the leases allow inspection by the Department of Natural Resources and
do not exclude the general public for any lawful purpose (ie, boating, fishing, swimming, etc.), as long
as the public use does not interfere with the barge fleeting operation.
Ten leases of fifteen parcels for barge fleeting were identified and copies of leases and/or summary
information were obtained from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. A copy of the summary
is on the facing page. We added the right column, Fee/sq.ft. The rents range from $0.018 to
$0.031/sq.ft.
We also obtained leases from the City of Burlington, the City of Clinton, and a private owner (Fischer
Investment Company). These leases are summarized on the following facing page, and are discussed
below.
-Continued-
~gc.F~~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9-A.
MARKET RENT ANALYSIS (CONTINUED)
ESTIMATED MARKET RENT (CONTINUED):
Lease Comparable #1: The City of Burlington leases 97,383 sq.ft. for $6,330.00/year to L.W.
Matteson, Inc. The lease began May 1, 1987, for 15 years, and allows adjustments at the end of the
initial term (six years) and every three years thereafter. The adjustments can be by a negotiated
amount, or by the" percentage change over the proceeding three (3) years of the general 'shelter'
index of the January Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor." A City of Burlington Finance Department
manager verified that the current rent is still $6,330.00/year, or $0.065/sq.ft. The tenant pays permits,
taxes, and all expenses in this net lease.
A knowledgeable market participant has indicated that it is reasonable to adjust barge fleet leases at
a rate of roughly 3% annually for roughly the past 15 years. If we adjust $6,330 upward by 3%
annually, the compounded current rent, which we are interpreting would be more reflective of market
rent, would be $9,295.82, or $0.095/sq.ft.
Lease Comparable #2: The City of Clinton leased its municipal dock and related property to Archer-
Daniels- Midland Company (AD M) beginning April 02, 1992, for $140,000 for 20 years, with scheduled
increases. The current rent (since April of 1999) is $169,400. This is a total facility rent which includes
the municipal dock and a significant amount of land and improvements with road access, and does
not include tollage for tonage which the city also receives. The current rent for the 1,167,408 sq.ft.
property is $0.145/sq.ft. This lease is net to the owner.
Lease Comparable #3: Finally, Fischer Investment, Inc. leases a parcel which is 160' deep outward
of the flood wall in Dubuque to Wisconsin Barge Lines, Inc. A recent plat indicates that the easterly
boundary (which is in the water) of the parcel is roughly 1113 feet long. Thus, the total area, which
includes part of the shore, is estimated to be approximately 178,080 sq.ft. This is an inexact estimate
of the area due to the irregular character of the parcel. The lease began in 1988 for $14,000 and
increased to $16,000 in 1989, or $0.090/sq.ft. The tenant pays all permit fees, and the landlord pays
taxes. Since the City of Dubuque owns the subject property and there are no property taxes, taxes is
not an issue of difference which requires adjustment. The current rent was confirmed to be $27,000,
or $0.152/sq.ft., by the owner of the company which receives the lease payments (the former owner
of the property). The party is knowledgeable, and also commented that the comparable is very similar
to the subject property.
Note also that Lease Comparable #3 has increased from $14,000 in 1988 to $27,000 in 2000, an
increase of $13,000 in 12 years. The cumulative increase is 92.86%, or an average of 7.74% annually.
This is significantly greater than the rate of inflation generally, and appears to be reflective of the
advantage to the barge fleet operation being able to moor close to a relatively large city (by size
standards along the Mississippi River along Iowa). Comparable #3 is the most similar to the subject
in its location and configuration, and is given the most weight.
-Continued-
COMPARABLE CHARTER CITY AND PRIVATE RENTALS
NO. IDENTIFICATION
RENTABLE-
SO.FT.
ANNUAL
FEE
RENT/
SO.FT.
City of Dubuque
Dubuque, IA
(SUBJECT PROPERTY)
168,000
84.000
252,000
NA
NA
1. City of Burlington
Burlington, IA
(L.W. Matteson)
97,383 :t
$ 6,330
$0.065
2. City of Clinton
Clinton, IA
(ADM)
1,167,408:t
$169,400
$0.145
3. Fischer Investment Company
Dubuque, IA
(Wisconsin Barge Lines)
178,080 :t
$ 27,000
$0.152
~dl! '~#na
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9-B.
MARKET RENT ANALYSIS (CONTINUED)
ESTIMATED MARKET RENT (CONTINUED):
MARKET RENT ESTIMATE (SAY)
$0.15/SQ.Fr.
168,000 SQ.Fr.
84.000 SO.Fr.
252,000 SQ.Fr.
$25,200
$12.600
$37,800
(SAY) $38,000
THIRTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10.
CORRELATION AND FINAL MARKET RENT ESTIMATE
MARKET RENT ESTIMATE
$0.15.SQ.FT.
168,000 SQ.FT. (Parcel A)
84.000 SO.FT. (Parcel B)
252,000 SQ.FT. (Combined)
$25,200
$12.600
$37,800
(SAY) $38,000
Only direct comparison of rents of similar properties was used to develop an estimate of the subject rent.
Adequate rent data was discovered and analyzed, and this approach should yield a meaningful rent
estimate. After considering adjustments for differences, a per square foot value was selected and applied
to the proposed barge fleeting area of the subject. Note that the area is composed of the barge cluster
(Parcel A) and area for piling clusters, "deadmen", etc. for mooring (Parcel B).
Therefore, based upon the preceding analysis, it is our opinion that the Market Rent of the Fee Simple
Estate in the subject property, as of September 13, 2000, is $0.15/sq.ft., or roughly $38.000 divided as
follows:
MARKET RENT ESTIMATE
$0.15.SQ.FT.
168,000 SQ.FT. (Parcel A)
84.000 SO.FT. (Parcel B)
252,000 SQ.FT. (Combined)
$25,200
$12.600
$37,800
(SAY) $38,000
Respectfully submitted,
ROY R. FISHER, INC.
~~~
Edmond C. Fisher, MAl, SREA
IOWA GENERAL CERTIFICATION #CGOl144
Date Signed: 10/13/2000
~~
Thomas F. Howe, ASSOCIATE
IOWA GENERAL CERTIFICATION #CG01320
Date Signed: 10/13/2000
~9f1'~#.Na"
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11.
CERTIFICATION
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief. . .
the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and
limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial and unbiased professional analyses, opinions,
and conclusions.
I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and I have
no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.
my engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined
results.
my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in
value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a
stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this
appraisal.
my analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in
conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Foundation and
the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal
Institute.
the use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by
its duly authorized representatives.
as of the date of this report, I have completed the requirements under the continuing education
program of the Appraisal Institute.
I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report.
no one provided significant professional assistance to the persons signing this report, unless
otherwise noted.
ROY R. FISHER, INC.
~~/~
Edmond C. Fisher, MAl, SREA
Generally Certified Appraiser
IA License # CGO 1144
Date Signed: 10/13/2000
~~,~~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ll-A.
CERTIFICATION
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief. . .
- the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
- the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and
limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and
conclusions.
- I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and I have
no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.
my engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined
results.
- my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in
value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a
stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this
appraisal.
- my analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in
conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Foundation and
the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal
Institute.
- the use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by
its duly authorized representatives.
I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report.
- no one provided significant professional assistance to the persons signing this report, unless
otherwise noted.
~4~
Thomas F. Howe
Generally Certified Appraiser
IA License # CG01320
Date Signed: 10/13/2000
~~$~"'-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
12.
CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
The legal description, which has been furnished by others, is assumed to be accurate, but no
responsibility is assumed for its correctness. The report rendered herein is based on the premise that
the property is free and clear of mortgage indebtedness unless specifically stated otherwise, and that
there are no special assessments against the property.
No report of title is rendered herewith, and it is considered good for purposes of this report. It is further
assumed by the appraiser that all leases and lease amendments which have been furnished the appraiser
are correct and accurate. If this is not the case, all values contained herein are voided.
Any sketches in this report are included to assist the reader in visualizing the property. No survey of
the property has been made by the appraiser and no responsibility for its accuracy is assumed. Lacking
any contrary evidence, subsurface soil conditions are assumed to be adequate to support the existing or
proposed improvements.
The proposed industrial improvements for barge fleeting are assumed to be within the lot lines and in
accordance with all local zoning and building ordinances. Also it is assumed that no asbestos, or any
other hazardous materials are located in the structure, or the site.
Possession of this report does not carry with it the right of publication, nor may it, or any part thereof,
be used by anyone but the client without the previous express written consent of the appraiser.
The appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or appear in court with reference to the appraisal
of the property described herein, unless prior arrangements have been made.
Although reasonable attempts have been made to obtain corroborative evidence, information supplied
to the appraiser by the client is assumed to be basically correct and heavy reliance has been placed upon
this information.
Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report shall be conveyed to the public through
advertising, public relations, or other media, without the written consent and approval of the author,
particularly as to the valuation conclusions, the identity of the appraiser or firm for which he is
connected, or any reference to the APPRAISAL INSTITUTE, or the MAl designation.
This appraisal report has been made in conformity with, and is subject to the requirements of the Code
of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct of the Appraisal Institute.
This is a Complete Appraisal - Summary Report, and is intended to comply with the reporting
requirements set forth under Standards Rule 2-2 (b) of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice.
~~'~.Fna
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13.
APPRAISERS' QUALIFICATIONS
~~,~~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
EDMOND C. FISHER
Graduated with B.A. Degree in Speech from the University of Idaho in June, 1953.
Served as USAF Instructor Pilot from 1953 to 1956.
Licensed as a Real Estate Salesman in the State of Iowa in July, 1953, and as an Iowa Broker in
August of 1959. Received Illinois Broker's license in October, 1975. Still currently licensed.
Passed Course I of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (AIREA) in 1957, Course II in
1958, Course III in 1961 and Course VI in 1968.
. Published "Zoning in Eminent Domain - A Moral Hazard?", The Appraisal Journal, July, 1964.
Received Senior Residential Appraiser (SRA) Designation November 1, 1963, and the Society of Real
Estate Appraisers (now The Appraisal Institute) Senior Real Analyst (SREA) Designation, Certificate
#353, in October, 1968 (re-certified October, 1973, October, 1978, October, 1983, October, 1988, and
now through December 31, 2000.)
Received the Member Appraisal Institute (MAl) Designation, Certificate #3570, granted by the
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (now The Appraisal Institute) in May of 1964.
(Currently certified through December 31, 2002.)
Awarded Certificate #CG-01144 by the Iowa Real Estate Examining Board, as a GENERAL
CERTIFIED REAL PROPERTY APPRAISER, December 9, 1991, and am currently certified
(expires 6/30/2002).
Awarded Certificate #153-000681 by the State of Illinois, Department of Professional Regulation, as
a STATE CERTIFIED GENERAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER, March, 1992, and am currently
certified (expires 9/30/2001).
Has qualified as an expert valuation witness in District Courts in Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin, and
Missouri, as well as Federal Court for Northern District of Iowa in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Has also
qualified as expert witness in Federal Tax Court in Washington, D.C., as well as before numerous local
City Councils, Boards of Adjustment, Real Estate Assessment Review Boards, School Boards, and
Zoning Boards.
Served as Editor-in-Chief of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers' publication The
Appraisal Journal, 1972 through 1973.
Served as AIREA Iowa Chapter #34 President in 1975.
Served as Secretary-Treasurer, Greater Davenport (Iowa) Board of Realtors, 1972; a three-year
Directorship, 1973-74-75; as Vice president in 1976, and as President in 1977. Elected Director, 1 year
term, 1978.
-Continued-
.~ .0//. .tj'~ 9nc.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
EDMOND C. FISHER (CONTINUED)
Served National SREA two terms as District Governor, District #26 (1977 through 1983).
Served as Chairman of National SREA Pro-Position Paper Committee re: Consolidation ofSREA and
AIREA October, 1979 to March, 1980 (which failed and failed again in 1985 and subsequently passed
in mid 1990).
Was granted the CRE (Counselor of Real Estate) designation, by invitation of the American Society
of Real Estate Counselors (of the National Association of Realtors), November, 1981.
Resigned in 1994.
Served as instructor for the following:
Society of Real Estate Appraisers (now The Appraisal Institute):
National course offerings - April 1968 thru 1992.
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (now The Appraisal Institute):
National course offerings - March 1968 thru 1992.
Instructor for:
Real Estate Courses - Local (current and past)
Blackhawk College, Moline, Illinois
Eastern Iowa Community College, Davenport, Iowa
St. Ambrose College, Davenport, Iowa
Des Moines Area Community College, Ankeny, Iowa
Burlington Area Comm. College, Burlington & Keokuk, Iowa
Marycrest College, Davenport, Iowa
Wisconsin Board of Realtors, Wausau, Wisconsin
Instructor for Iowa, Illinois, North Dakota, Wyoming, and Wisconsin State Associations of Realtors
in their Realtor's Institute program 1974-1984 and Appraisal Review 1991.
Serves currently as appraisal instructor (Senior Faculty Member) for the Lincoln Graduate Center,
San Antonio, Texas, teaching 1 and 2-day appraisal seminars throughout the United States.
Current Faculty member Real Estate Education Co., Chicago, IL.
Served as member of AI REA National Standards Board from 1985 through 1988.
Served in 1995 as instructor for seminars for IAAO (Iowa) and Illinois Bankers Assn.
Served as SPP panel member, 1985-1995 for Appraisal Institute, Standards of Professional Practice,
Regional Committee. Served as Asst. Regional Member, retiring in 1995.
Currently Practicing Fee Appraiser, Real Property Valuation Consultant, and Appraisal Instructor.
Extensive experience in appraising residences and most commercial property types including railroad
right-of-ways, coal transshipment (train to barge) facilities, scenic easements and avigation easements.
[Revised Sept., 1999]
,Cfloy ,0//. 5~ dnc.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
THOMAS F. HOWE
EDUCATION:
Loras College, Dubuque, IA; graduated with BA in Sociology, 1968
USMC, Viet Nam, 1969-70
University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa; undergraduate and graduate studies, 1970-71
Illinois State University, Bloomington, IL; graduate Assistant Sociology, 1971-72
BASIC APPRAISAL COURSES
Society of Real Estate Appraisers:
101: An Intro to Appraising Real PropertyIPrincipals, 1977
R2: Narrative Report Writing and Applications of Principles, 1978
201: Principles of Income Property Appraising, 1981
Appraisal Institute:
Standards of Professional Practice - Part A, 1991
- Part A & B, 1994
Continuing education programs attended include:
Steps for Successful Code Enforcement, 6/97
Appraising High-Value and Historic Homes, 6/97
Securization of Capital, Use of Demographics, 3/97
EDI Committee Report, 11/96
Appraisal of Retail Properties, 9/96
An Afternoon with the Board, 4/96
Chapter Meetingffax Seminar, 2/96
Technology Videoconference, 10/95
Marshall & Swift's Residential and Commercial Properties, 9/95
Real Estate Tax Update for 1995, 5/95
Iowa Appraisal Law, 2/95
URAR as per FHA Guidelines, 1/95
Perspectives on Appraisals, 11/94
Rural Residence & Farmstead, 9/94
Practical Overview of Evaluations and Limited Scope Assignments, 7/94
DESIGNATIONS:
Certified General Real Property Appraiser, State of Iowa, 1992
Affiliate Member, Candidate, Appraisal Institute
Iowa Real Estate Salesperson, 1976
Iowa Real Estate Broker, 1986
Secretary, Cedar Valley Chapter of Society of Real Estate Appraisers, 1979-86
~ fR. .~~ dnc.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
THOMAS F. HOWE (Continued)
EXPERIENCE:
Real Estate Sales in Dubuque, 1976-77
Created and developed the Appraisal Department at Harvest Savings Bank (formerly Dubuque
Savings and Loan), and served as Staff Appraiser from 1977 to 1989, serving Eastern Iowa,
Northeast Illinois, and Southwest Wisconsin.
Howe Appraisal, August 1, 1989 to Present
Affiliated with Roy R. Fisher, Inc. as of January, 1998
lYPES OF PROPERTIES APPRAISED:
Residential, 1-4 Family, Multi-Family, Transitional Development, Commercial and Industrial,
MotellHotel, Restaurant, Church, Life Estate and other special purpose.
EXPERT TESTIMONY:
Have appeared several times as an expert appraisal witness in a court of law.
~ !Yl.. $~ 9ne.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ROY R. FISHER, INCORPORATED
The company was initially organized in 1922, but was legally incorporated in 1958. This firm
specializes in real estate counseling, and valuation. The corporation is owned by Edmond C. Fisher,
MAl, SREA, and Kevin M. Pollard, MAl, who also serves as President of the Corporation. Some of
the notable appraisals and professional assistance completed by this firm are listed below.
Exide Battery Corporation plant, Burlington, Iowa.
Pella Corporation Manufacturing plant, Pella, Iowa.
Winnebago Industries plant, Forest City, Iowa.
Dial Corporation food processing plant, Fort Madison, Iowa.
Stone Container Corporation plant, Keokuk, Iowa.
General Electric Corporation plants, West Burlington and Carroll, Iowa.
Butler Manufacturing Company plant, Galesburg, Illinois.
Deere & Company Parts Distribution Warehouse (1.8 million SF), Milan, Illinois.
Deere & Company Harvester Works, East Moline, and Deere Harvester Works, Moline, Illinois.
Deere & Company Corporate Administration Center and Insurance Headquarters, Moline, Illinois.
Kraft, Inc. Knudsen Ice Cream plant, Los Angeles, California.
IBP Meat Processing plants, Columbus Junction, and Tama, Iowa, and Madison, Nebraska.
Caterpillal" Tracior Co., and J.I. Case plants, Burlington, Iowa.
Aluminum Company of America rolling mill, Riverdale, Iowa.
N-REN Anhydrous Ammonia plant, Jo Daviess County, Illinois.
Black Hawk County Landfill & Hazardous Waste Facility (condemnation), Waterloo, Iowa.
MRI X-Ray Imaging Center, Bettendorf, Iowa.
Over 3,000 apartment units in various projects in Eastern Iowa and Western Illinois.
K-Mart stores, Iowa City, Ames, and Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and Rock Island, Illinois.
Tones Brothers, spice plant, Ankeny, Iowa.
Comfort Inns, Fairfield Inns, Days Inns, Residence Inns, Comfort Suites, and Super 8 Motels in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota,
Nebraska, and Missouri.
Heilig-Meyers Furniture Stores (6) in Iowa and Illinois for Sale/Leaseback project.
Iowa DOT right-of-way acquisitions in Dubuque, Waterloo/Cedar Falls, and Clinton, Scott and Muscatine Counties in
Iowa.
Village Shopping Center, Old Town Mall, and Northpark Mall, Davenport, Iowa, Duck Creek Mall, Cumberland Square
Shopping Center, Bettendorf, Iowa, Muscatine Mall, Muscatine, Iowa, Fairway Plaza, Burlington, Iowa, Marshalltown
Mall, Marshalltown, Iowa, and South park Mall, Moline, Illinois. (rev. 2/00)
,-;L) <ib (j~".1 n
,--nOli .71. ~'l.)lle)~ tY"C.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
REFERENCES
Michael Eason Ahlers, Cooney Des Moines, IA 515/243-7611
Randall Romei Ashcraft & Ashcraft Chicago, IL 312/819-4010
Steven Jacobs Betty, Neuman Davenport, IA 319/326-4491
Charlie Brooke Charlie Brooke Davenport, IA 319/355-6060
Frank Coyle Coyle, Gilman, Stengel Rock Island, IL 309/788-0471
Kevin Connors Crane & Norcross Chicago, IL 312/726-9161
Patrick Williams Doherty, Rumble, Butler St. Paul, MN 612/291-9337
Patrick Doody Doody & Lafakis Chicago,IL 312/236-7216
Edward Gallagher Gallagher, Langlas Waterloo, IA 319/233-6163
Duane J. Goedken Goedken & Creasey Muscatine, IA 319/264-8926
Gregory A. Johnson Johnson & Skewes Ft. Madison, IA 319/372-2532
Terry Giebelstein Lane & Waterman Davenport, IA 319/324-3246
Dick Davidson Lane & Waterman Davenport, IA 319/324-3246
Richard R. Phillips Lewis & Stevens Muscatine, IA 319/263-0565
Charles Meardon Meardon, Sueppel Iowa City, IA 319/338-9222
Michael Koury Michael Koury Davenport, IA 319/326-4066
William H. Napier Napier, Wright, Wolf Ft. Madison, IA 319/372-2934
John O'Connor O'Connor & Thomas Dubuque, IA 319/557-8400
Theodore Priester Ottesen, Priester Davenport, IA 319/322-5386
Michael Baccash Sarnoff & Baccash Chicago, IL 312/782-8310
Bob Sarnoff Sarnoff & Baccash Chicago, IL 312/782-8310
Richard Garberson Shuttleworth & Ingersoll Cedar Rapids, IA 319/365-9461
Charles Coulter Stanley, Lande, Hunter Muscatine, IA 319/264-5000
Jim Sawtelle Sullivan & Ward Des Moines, IA 515/244-3500
Clark Stojan Wessels, Stojan Rock Island, IL 309/794-9400
Lloyd Schwiebert Schwiebert & Schwiebert Moline, IL 309/762-9369
Robert Krone American Bank Rock Island, IL 309/794-0111
Duane T. Frick American Trust Dubuque, IA 319/582-1841
Steve Seat Bank Midwest Kansas City, MO 816/471-9800
Alicia Gonzales Bank of New York New York, NY 212/635-4638
James Anderlik Bank One Moline, IL 309/757-8400
Todd Hovermale Bank One-Springfield Springfield, IL 217/525-9600
Jim Knuth Bankers Trust Des Moines, IA 515/245-2802
Jerry Welker Bankers Trust Des Moines, IA 515/245-2466
Jack Knepp Blackhawk State Bank Milan, IL 309/787-7567
Terry Farmer Bonz IREA Wellesley, MA 617/431-1911
Arin Crandall Brenton Bank Davenport, IA 319/328-8369
Richard Bergez Brenton Bank Davenport, IA 3191328-8369
Stephen WilIs Central Illinois Bank Champaign, IL 217/355-6200
Martin Tessler Chemical Bank Nev..' York, NY 212-622-3622
Stephen Thacker Clinton National Bank Clinton, IA 800/243-9007
Gary Jaeger Du Trac Com. Cr. Un. Dubuque, IA 800/475-1331
Kenneth J. Erickson Dubuque Bank & Trust Dubuque, lA 319/589-2124
Denise Maher First Midwest Bank Moline, IL 309/797-7640
Mark Evans First Midwest Bank Moline, IL 309/757 -7566
Scott Ingstad First National Bank Muscatine, IA 319/263-4221
Randy J. Petsche First National Bank Iowa City, IA 319/356-9000
Bob Forsek Firstar Bank Milwaukee Milwaukee, WI 414/765-5545
Karen Friel Fleet Bank Boston, MA 617/346-4000
William F. Kusy GMAC Com. Mortgage Urbandale,IA 515/251-8783
Brian Bidne GMAC Com. Mortgage Omaha, NE 402/391-0588
Carol Pugh G.E. Capital Mtg. Houston, TX 713/964-4636
Tom Andresen Great River Bank LeClaire, IA 319/289-4321
Thomas Carmody Harris Bank Chicago, IL 312/461-7499
Brad Langguth Hills Bank & Trust Iowa City, IA 319/338-1277
Jay Hall Homeland Bank Waterloo,IA 319/291-5200
Richard Schroeder Iowa State Savings Bank Clinton, IA 319/242-9111
Dan Uphoff Iowa State Savings Bank Clinton, IA 319/242-0272
Richard J. Wilson Jefferson Bank Mo. Jefferson City, MO 573/634-0800
Samuel Eismont KC Facilities Service Overland Park, IL 913/831-1855
Paul Gillespie LaSalle National Bank Chicago, IL 312/904-2000
- Continued -
oiL) "iL) 1"i7'.' d
'7IO!l .71. /;'<HU!'~J ,.,nt:.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Kathryn Bader
James Peterson
Charles A. Buttle
John Fisher
Phil Wilson
Jay Schweer
John Crowe
James Richardson
Beth Dunn
Anthony Knobbe
Jeff Ehrmann
Ted Gerber
Mark Johnson
Scott Means
John Bradley
John Anderson
Mark McCreight
Timothy Fritz
James Vanemburgh
Dawn Sitton
Kent Kennedy
Stanley Goodyear
Steve Gaal
Paul Chovan
Mike Norris
David Weiner
Tom Jarrett
J ames Cairo
Dave Collier
Johnathan Ponader
John Axe)
Wendy Cook
Jerry Janata
Rob Fick
Kathleen Mullen
Chris Niemann
Rockne Brosman
Jeff Miller ','
Chuck Ruhl
Harry Wolf
Mark Wakeland
Joe Schnitzer
James Sodemann
Deb Petersen
D.D. Brown
Mike Barry
Charles Heston
Nick Doenges
John Martin
Jeff Schott
Vernon Gottel
Pat Kretchmer
Scott McDaniel
Carolyn Olson
David Hicks
Jerry B. Musser
Dale McCrea
Shelley Weikert
Glen Erickson
Dale Denklau
Susan Carpentier
Ken Griffin
Candy Fuller
REFERENCES - Continued
Mark Twain Banks
Metrobank
National City Bank
Nations Bank
Northwest Bank
Northwest Bank
Northwest Bank
Norwest Bank
Norwest Bank
Norwest Bank
Norwest Bank
Norwest Bk. Minn.
People's Bank
Perpetual Savings Bank
Quad City Bank & Trust
Quad City Bank & Trust
Quad City Bank & Trust
State Bank of Orion
Sunflower Bank
UMB Bank
Valley State Bank
Walcott Trust
Wells Fargo Bank
ALCOA
Commonwealth Edison
Ruhl & Ruhl
Deere & Company
Dial Corporation
Frito-Lay, Inc.
General Electric Co.
Hon Industries
IBP, Inc.
International Appraisal
Mel Foster Company
Nelli~ Corp.
Niemann Foods, Inc.
Equity Growth Group
Premier Partners
Ruhl & Ruhl
Southgate Development
Staubach Alliance
The Rouse Company
The Sodemann Company
Trinity Health Systems
Union Pacific Railroad
Wal-Mart Corp.
City of Davenport
City of Davenport
City of Davenport Atty.
City of Marion
City of Sterling
General Services ADM
GSA R.E. Sales
Iowa DOJ
Iowa DOT
Johnson Co. Assessor
Muscatine Co. Assessor
R.I. Co. Board of Review
Scott Co. Administrator
Scott Co. Assessor
S.R.I. Twsp. Assessor
U.S. Postal Service
U.S. Postal Service
S1. Louis, MO
Davenport, IA
Cleveland, OH
Charlotte, NC
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
St. Paul, MN
Cambridge, IL
Iowa City, IA
Bettendorf, IA
Moline, IL
Moline, IL
Orion, IL
Salina, KS
S1. Louis, MO
Eldridge, IA
Walcott, IA
Chicago, IL
Davenport, IA
Chicago, IL
Moline, IL
Moline, IL
Phoenix, AZ
Dallas, TX
Fort Myers, FL
Muscatine, IA
Dakota City, NE
Uppr. Saddle River, NJ
Davenport, IA
Rockville, MD
Quincy, IL
Bettendorf, IA
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
Iowa City, IA
Dallas, TX
Columbia, MD
Davenport, IA
Rock Island, IL
Omaha, NE
Bartonville, AR
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
Marion, IA
Sterling, IL
Kansas City, MO
Ft. Worth, TX
Ames, IA
Ames, IA
Iowa City, IA
Muscatine, IA
Rock Island, IL
Davenport, IA
Davenport, IA
Rock Island, IL
Memphis, TN
Overland Park, IL
314/746- 2609
319/355-6767
216/575-2663
704/386-2545
319/388-2561
319/388-2503
319/388-2561
319/383-3211
319/383-3381
319/383-3286
319/383-3286
612/291-2327
309/937-3341
319/338-9751
319/344-0600
309/736-3580
309/736-3580
309/526-8011
913/827-5564
314/621-1000
319/285-6914
319/284-6202
312/345-7662
319/359-2262
312/394-3496
309/797-2600
309/765-8000
602/207-7540
214/334-5062
941/418-5185
319/264- 7400
402/241-2665
201i934-7000
391/324-4488
301/881-5950
217/222-0156
319/3L'A-5350
319/324-7000
319/355-4000
319/337-4195
972/716-6378
410/992-6479
319/322-7686
309/779-2813
402/271-3753
501/277-9104
319/326-8659
319/326-8659
319/326-7735
319/377-1581
815/622-2224
816/926-1390
817/334-4243
515/239-1521
515/239-1258
319/356-6078
319/263-7061
309/786-4451
319/325-8738
319/326-8635
309/788-4513
901/747-7419
913/831-1855
;'?loy fYl. /hJ/,e~~ /j,u:.
.
.
: 101 FISHER, INC.
.
. 2010 EAST 38TH STREET, SUITE #201
DAVENPORT, lOW A 52807
. PHONE 319-355-6606
. FAX 319-355-6612
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
APPRAISAL CONSULTANTS
Roy R. Fisher, Sr., Founder 1890-1978
Edmond C. Fisher, MAl, SREA
Kevin M. Pollard, MAl
Jeanette Fisher Pollard
David Mark Nelson
Thomas F. Howe
Michael E. Curtis
August 1, 2000
Mr. Tim Moerman
Assistant City Manager
City Hall
Dubuque, IA 52001
(319) 589-4110
Re:
Appraisal of Market Value of the City of
Dubuque property (barge lease property),
south of the Iowa- Wisconsin bridge,
Dubuque, IA.
Dear Mr. Moerman:
You have requested a lease analysis and a report in summary format of the above referenced
property. Based on our preliminary discussion on July 12th with Mr. Jim Burke, a July 14, 2000,
letter from Edmond C. Fisher, and your subsequent telephone approval to proceed, I am
providing this engagement letter for your signature. The cost to provide the report will not
exceed $3,500, subject to review of formal identification of the subject property. It can be
completed no more than 60 days from our receipt of your written engagement. Please provide
the following.
1. Copies or summaries of leases of other similarly leased city properties, and any
codicils.
2. Complete legal description.
3. I understand there is only water access, and assume there are no existing
improvements. If this assumption is incorrect, please identify and provide details
about the improvements.
Please call me at (319) 355-6606 if you have any questions.
Respectfully,
For the CITY OF DUBUQUE, I accept the
proposal as indicated above.
... .k ~~1~"f
Tim Moerman
Assistant City Manager
Thomas F. Howe
Generally Certified Appraiser IA
License # CG01320
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.'
i~
.
.
.
.11
.
. ZONE X
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.'
.
.
.~
.~
'~f-t: ".
. ,,//.j--;t,"r-."':' ~::..>
:l(:~::;;;f;];'" ...
. '~;'-" ./~;c"" "~"","";"
. . .;J;.~~;t~T~~~~~~~~~"'>'
. . ",' ~(,j..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ii"
'0'
;...../
II
/' .
I ,;'
I'
'" , II
/
'''''(1<,..
/
;;""'''1,..
~i...
~
'. \
\ '.,
"'O~t;;
~<"'/ "
" \
\ '
\~~,
\~,
'Z\
;' -'
/,'
,~~;
:<r.
,,-
';:;':'
~).
., ~.~'~~'~ """-'"
"<~
~~~~flfl"'"
/
1\1!)~i 1 0
,'..'.\; ."
.~., _' J
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURUCE nOSRlIl
CS.I "".._ INOlM. '0l1li ,....I:L.$ NQT JtIlllINTIOI
!~~
-.-J
COMMUNITY .PANEL NUMBER
195180 0003 B
MAP REVISED:
SEPTEMBER 6, 1989
LEGEND
_ ~f:~:~::O":::A........u"v''''llT''
,..... -----
...... ----
__",t..,___",
-----
..-_....t___
------
_,f__"'_"_
----
ftM.... ===r:...::=-..::
----.........
------
-----..-
-----
_ 'LOOCN..'.U,u....ZClllll..A1
~ 0"'1.'\,001..1t",.
~ r_. ~~=E::=
_..__1__:-
-....-..,...--,..
--,
00::::..:.:...._...._,...
--_.
r_ 0 ::.:..:.- _ ....., _... ..
-"3-
@-----@
=....r=-'-'-<I...:=
~ ....... _ 0.--
c.-.. ... ,_ ._
= *- ,- --
... ,_ 1_ "..;..'""
_..,.....
""_1__'-
......~_l_.
""7)( ..__....
.~.
...._..........._~"_..o-.,I'2't
Nons
....-..'--...----..-,....-.
......-.-----......--........
_........ 1_.... ~ _.... -.II _. _...
...----...........-..-
r____.....'"".........____...
_.....a._~_..._
--..-------...--,--
-.-.-....---- .....--.......-
-.-.:~.._-........_............
'-''---''-''
,"""'-"-..---....--.-.....
~....:::_..o-,...................._...._"
(-......-...................................-
,....-.........--"-..............,.....-"""""
- .
r__"-"'__..-........._..__ "-
-.-.-.,---..........----
::.:,.----.............-.....-..-
................... --.........-..........
....~.1PO\l'IOft
(.........,""-('"-..~.--~....
-.-..---
......-...........,
..._------
......__'..._11...."
;:..-..---...-..-.-.--
---....-..-
..-..........-....-- -............---
--- - "'--'--- ._-
-----._~.----
."'-...1--
.._~._----.......__......-.
--....-....-.---.....-.......-
~
.
.
.
....'
:" .
.:~:.
.',
...
-.;. ::jo.~.
e:c:::
.,.;,l1"
'-.
......
.~~;;
.......
... - ~
.';';':i
.f';.
.~.;:.:
'. .,
...,.
-...,
....~..~
......
.....
.,...,
.:";
...
..:..
..
..' .
.'--.
.... ,
.':::'
". ..
.:::,
.:.":
.:...
..
....
..,:
.....
. ""
...,..
.r::,
..:~,.
'"
.:;;.,
'"
.:.,
..:..
.. ..
.,'.
.::'.:~
.:",
.:,
.::~.':
....
.::....
.... .,
..:.
.
lAC 7/16/97
Natural Resource Commission[571]
Ch 17, p.1
CHAPTER 17
BARGEFLEETINGREGU~ONS
[Prior 10 12/31186, Coascrvation Commission(290) OJ 54 ]
571-17.1 (461A) Applicability. This rule is applicable to all waters under the jurisdiction of the com-
mission except that portion of the Mississippi River conveyed to certain cities by chapter 249, Acts of
the Fifty-first General Assembly; chapter 299, Acts of the Fifty-ninth General Assembly or Special
Charters enacted by the legislature in 1856 and 1857.
;"::.. 571-17.2(461A) Fleeting operations. No person shall assert any exclusive privilege to conduct
C}:'~f:~ barge mooring service for hire, or not for hire, and prevent or obstruct any lawful use of public waters
.~.. ::" except within a fleeting area authorized by the department of natural resources, or at a load;ng or off-
loading facility constructed under appropriate permits and necessary to carry on commerce.
571-17.3( 461A) General The following requirements shall apply to all fleeting areas designated or
constructed under permit from the department of natural resources.
17 .3(1) '~leeting area" means an area within defined boundaries used to provide barge mooring
service and to accommodate ancillary harbor towing under care of a fleet operator. The term does not
include momentary anchoring or tying off of tows in transit and under care of the line haul towboat
17.3(2) The duration of a fleeting area permit shall not be more than five years. Permits may be
renewed for a period of five years where a continuing need exists unless a person aggrieved or adverse-
ly affected shows cause why the permit should not be renewed. A decision not to renew shall be made
..... . only after notice and opportunity for a hearing. During the time specified in 571-17.13(461A) the
.: ... fleet operator must submit an application for a new permit. Renewal shall be subject to 571--Chapter.
17 as it exists at that time.
17.3(3) A fleeting permit shall be construed to do no more than give the permittee the right to des-
ignate and improve an area to be utilized for fleeting. The permit creates no interest, personal or real, in
the real estate below the ordinary high water line except as provided in 17.10( 461A).
17 .3( 4) Improvements permitted in designated fleeting areas shall be limited to items such as
construction of dolphins, mooring piling, deadmen anchors, sunken barge anchors, and other similar
methods of assuring retention of barges in the designated area.
17.3(5) The fleeting activities allowed in the area designated for the fleeting of barges shall be lim-
ited to barge mooring service, ancillary harbor towing and minor barge repair or servicing. No washing
or cleaning of barges is permitted in such areas, unless conducted in a manner to meet the requirements
,." ;.: of Iowa Code chapter 455B and the cleaning activity is specifically approved by the department of
.:;-:::": natural resources.
17.3(6) Fleeting area permits are not transferable without written approval of the department of
natural resources.
17.3(7) Barges shall not be moored to trees or other natural features of an area except with the ap-
proval of the riparian property owner or during an emergency.
.'
.~~;;;j
.~~~f~
.'.::.F,:.:
;!~:~
.':~':~:
.:~'.'o;,
.~
. .;".".
~t~ . ':,
. .~... ~ ,
.i2;~
.....,......
~~
.~.~~
....-1
:;:;:,~
.0f!~
.~
"...........
~,..
.~~
:;:~:4
.'........
..~ ~ t
.~{j~
.:~;~
;H~
...,.;..,
..'; 'Z.,..:..
.::::3J
,...........,
-.,......:
,- ',.
.., .;
..-'~ ..
.tt~
.....:.'
i,. :..:
.~,:1
~I~ f~ 1
.":"~;
-""'"
~:~;:.~
.~~=:l
.....,..
~~~:;.~
.....'.;
"'I'_"ll
.~:.~ ~
.-'~~;
..-;-,
....::;
..;-...
h__'"
.:. ::,
.--.
.~Uff;
.~~;;,
..,...
.7:~;.::
......
.'d~J
.~i~
.::::~
"- .~..
.:....
........
.0:';:'
~.'. -
.:: '~
.;:'-'.~.:
-.....
.~f~1
.~..:.'
......
.'.::'"
Ch 17, p.2
Natural Resource Commission[571]
lAC 7/16/97
17.3(8) Designated fleeting areas may be used for recreational pursuits such as boating and fishing
only to the extent that such use does not interfere with fleeting activities. No person shall obstruct use
of a designated fleeting area except with permission of the permittee.
17.3(9) The permittee shall, at all times, be responsible for the safety and security of the barges in
the fleeting area and shall take reasonable precautions to eliminate hazards to boaters or other persons
in the fleeting area. .
17.3(10) Moored or fleeted barges shall be marked by such lights or other warning devices as may
be required by state or federal regulations.
17.3(11) The department of natural resources permit shall be issued subject to all other permits
which may be required by any governmental agency having jurisdiction in the area.
17.3(12) The permittee shall notify the department of natural resources of the current name, ad-
dress, and day and night telephone numbers of the person directly responsible for supervising the fleet-
ing area to be notified in case of emergency.
571-17.4(46IA) Riparian rights. No fleeting area shall be placed in a location that would interfere
with the rights and privileges of the riparian property owner without written permission of the riparian
owner or lack of response to the notice provided for in 17.7(2) "j. "
571-17.5(46IA) Prohibited areas. Permits shall not be issued for fleeting areas in the following
locations:
17.5(1) Immediately adjacent to or over a darn, sill, lock, breakwater, revetment, navigation aid, or
wing dam.
17.5(2) Within established navigation channels for commercial or recreational vessels.
17.5(3) Within the approach area for a lock portion of a dam structure.
17.5(4) Adjacent to bridge structures or vessel approach areas to bridges.
571":"-17.6(46IA) Restricted areas. Permits shall not be issued for fleeting areas in the following
locations unless the department of natural resources determines there is a compelling reason for fleet-
ing in such an area and there is no other feasible site.
17.6(1) An area which would have a substantial adverse affect on fish or wildlife (water-fowl or
furbearer) habitat due to dredging, propeller wash or other activity related to fleeting.
17.6(2) Locations subject to unusual hazards including but not limited to high wind, strong cur-
rent, violent ice movement, and hydraulic surges during the time fleeting operations are proposed to be
carried out.
17.6(3) Locations receiving high use for recreation, sport fishing, and commercial fishing unless
the fleeting area can be placed or structured to be compatible with such uses.
17.6(4) Locations immediately adjacent to industries or other facilities which together with fleet-
ing operations present a substantial risk of fire, explosion, water pollution, or other serious safety haz-
ards.
17.6(5) An area in which barge fleeting activities would restrict or interfere with or have a substan-
tial adverse effect on the use and enjoyment of an area owned by federal, state, or local government,
including but not limited to public parks, game refuges, forests, or recreation areas used for access to
docks, slips, harbors, marinas, boat launching ramps or the unique biological or physical features of the
river valley itself.
--
it:;:.
f~-~;::t.
:..""........:.
~..~,.......
.
.
.
.ir: ;
e-:...
....
.{:~.;
.;),,'
.':':;;~~
n.O_...
.......~
..~.
.. ..-''''
~1;;
.~,
.~.:}
......
......
~t2:
......
.,....
.::.."
...
.-.,~
a.
~..
-. .
e':::'"
.......
.'"::::;
...... .
. .
....
..
.-:..:
..,
...
..;.
...~~
.'"''
. .'.
. -~ -..
.,~.~
.~!::"
.f".::~."i
'"
...:.:
.::
.:..
.... .
.:':',:
.:.....
..~~..;
..'"
. .
.--...:
.':~:
.~..
..
. .~.
.:.
lAC 7/16/97
Natural Resource Commission[S71]
Ch 17, p.3
571-17.7(461A) Applicant~ontent of application.
17.7(1) Applicant. The applicant for a fleeting area permit must be the shoreline-based indus-
try(ies) or the fleeting company(ies) which will use the services of the barge fleeting area.
17.7(2) Content of application. The following information shall be stated in an application for
fleeting area permit.
a. Name, address, and telephone number of applicant.
b. Location of proposed fleeting area, including a map or drawing showing its relation to major
identifiable features in the immediate area (river mile, adjacent structures, etc.).
c. Name of river and channel, slough or chute if applicable.
d. Section, township, range, and county.
.,t:f~f;... e. Name(s), addressees), and telephone number(s) of owner(s) of land adjacent to river (riparian)
~;;'~:::~f::J in front of whose property the fleeting area will be constructed.
.:. f Sketch of proposed area (to scale) with dimensions and location in relation to shoreland prop-
erty lines and placement of improvements within the area and configuration of the maximum number
of barges to be moored.
g. Sketch showing proposed area (to scale both vertical and horizontal) in relation to pertinent
topographic, hydrographic, and cultural features, current flow and relation to the compass direction
north.
h. Sketch (to scale) showing the following features for a distance of one-fourth mile above and
below the proposed fleeting area: bridges, lock and dam structures, wing dams, navigational aids,
docks (public and private), residential areas, recreational areas and other publicly owned property, oth-
er fleeting areas, islands, left and right buoyed channel lines, power or utility lines (above ground and
.. '" buried), and boat marinas or harbors.
i. Barge fleeting facilities shall be constructed in a manner consistent with engineering stan-
dards of the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers.
j. Written permission of owners of riparian property adjacent to the area if other than the appli-
cant.
In lieu of written permission, the applicant shall certify that he has notified the riparian owners of the
proposed establishment of a fleeting area. Notification to riparian property owners shall be on forms
furnished by the department of natural resources. The riparian property owner shall notify the depart-
ment of natural resources within 30 days of receipt of notice if the owner objects to the issuance of a
permit. The department of natural resources shall consider the effects of permit issuance on the ripari-
an property owner's rights.
k. Signature of applicant or authorized agent.
...-. . 1. Documentation of the need for the size, capacity, and location of the fleeting area for which a
<:"~>, ': new or renewal permit is requested.
"~; ~...'
y.
571-17.8(461A) Notices and opportunity for hearing.
17.8(1) Notice of receipt of application.. Upon receipt of an application which complies with the
requirements of 17. 7( 461A) of these rules, the department of natural resources staff shall give notice of
receipt of the application as follows:
",
.. .
'.' ,"
.
.
.
~,;.
......
....,
..
..,',
.'~:~,;
... .
-"-',
.:.::,..,
". .~~'."
.~:~if}
..:~;:.
,-"'"
";...:,,:,:
.:x:
.~, ..
.F~';'!
.r.....
......
.~.:~.:3.
.f.~~
.,...;
.<
.~....
.-....
.'" .
a....'
.~h:::
.....
..~:.::;
..., ..
.....'.
..
.:';,.':
.~::
.':
.:;
.,.,:'
...."...
. '.'
.c~:..
.;:::,
......
.....
. :~f/
.:;;;;
.'..
., .
.::, , 1 t;"l00'
~~~.; 0, ~ ~
., ':: 1t;J1 ?oo'
:.: } , ! ' . -
.:.';' :;::-
.': ::~ .,";: 300'
... .;/ - ..' ,; ,
.. .." ,
..! c>
.';.::.::-
.....
...,..
.:..
..
.
Ch17,p.4
Natural Resource Commission[571]
lAC 7/16/97
a. Publication of notice. The department of natural resources staff shall publish one notice in a
newspaper as defined in Iowa Code section 618.3 published in the county where the proposed fleeting
area is located or in an adjacent county. The newspaper shall be of general circulation in the vicinity of
the proposed fleeting site. The notice shall briefly describe the location and nature of the proposed
fleeting area, identify the department of natural resources rules which are pertinent to the application,
state whether the application is a new or renewal, and provide that a hearing will be scheduled if the
department of natural resources director determines that there is a material issue concerning whether
the application complies with applicable criteria in these rules. The notice shall allow interested per-
sons 30 days from the date of publication to submit comments or a request for hearing, and shall state
that a request for hearing must be supported by documentation of potential adverse effects of the pro-
posed fleeting facility on an affected or aggrieved person.
b. Notification of governmento.l bodies and interested persons. The notice as prepared for publi-
cation shall also be sent by first class ordinary mail or an equivalent method of service to the directors
of the Iowa department of transportation, Iowa department of economic development, the Iowa secre-
tary of agriculture, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Coast
Guard, natural resources and transportation management agencies of the adjacent state, and to any per-
son who has requested in writing that the person's name be placed on a mailing list for notification of
barge fleeting facility applications adjacent to a designated county or counties. The mailing list win be
updated at the beginning of each calendar year, requests to remain thereon shall be current.
17.8(2) Hearing. Upon determining that there is a material issue concerning whether an applica-
tion for a fleeting facility permit satisfies the applicable criteria in these rules the Iowa department of
natural resources director shall cause a contested case proceeding to be commenced in accordance with
natural resource commission rules 571-Chapter 7. Notice of the hearing shall be sent to the govern-
mental agencies listed in 17.8(1)" b" of these rules and to any person who has requested a hearing on
the application.
571-17.9(461A) Application review. Applications will be reviewed by the commission staff, in
:onsultation with other state and federal agencies as necessary, to determine the potential impacts on
the natural conditions, shoreland uses, and other public water uses.
571-17.10( 461A) Lease. The permit issued by the department of natural resources shan constitute a
lease under Iowa Code section 461A25 of the state property involved. The following table shall be
used to determine the annual permit and lease fee to be paid by the permittee to the department of natu-
ral resources. The fee is based on the dimensions of the area to be used as a fleeting area.
FRONTAGE
Depth
50' 100' 150' 200' 250' 300' 350' 400' 450' 500' 550' 600' 650' 700' 750'
800' c
$125 250 375 500 625 750 875 1000 1125 1250 1375 1500 1625 1750 1875 200Q.
$219 438 657 875 1094 1313 1532 1750,1969 2188 2407 2625 2844 3063 3282 3500
$282 563 844 1125 1407 1688 1969 2250 2532 28133094 3375 3657 3938 4219 4500
400' $313 625 938 1250 1563 1875 2188 2500 2813 3125 3438 3750 4063 4375 4688 5000
~~
~~ri~f~
~..:,;:.:;.;'
~
~r~~
~~
t;t:;.---- .
:::::~':.::
~.::::
~
_.~;!t~
~~
""...,.'~.
~--..
...:::.;..
~_."._'-
';!'.:~~..!.:~.,~~
--,..._-
"-'"
--
.
.
..
....
'!: .
.-:..
.'.
...
.....s.....
.,.".
.:c',:
."'~~
.0X
'. ~ ....
.~.:. -,
.... .~
.".,
.&:"i
.~;:,
.....
......
.;.:;.:
.:....;
.....
.,....
.'"
... .
.,,:.,
.,".
....
.:;:'.
....
.~:.:::,
., ..
~.;..
.:.;.
..
.:,:
....
.o,
.,;'
..::
.":
, .,
...:.,
.r:i'
.:~;
-,
.:;;;
....
. .
.,:.
. .
.".
....
.;",
..
.....
.';;:
..:.
..'
IAC 7/16/97
Natural Resource Commission [571 ]
Ch 17, p.5
When the ar.ea leased is larger than that designated by this table, the fee for each additional segment
of 50'x100' or any portion thereof shall be detennined as follows:
A The fee for increased depth shall be at the rate of $50 per segment (50'x100') or any portion
thereof.
B. The fee for additional frontage shall be proportionate to that indicated on the table.
C. When a fleeting area is located totally adjacent to privately-owned riparian property and an-
choring system is above the ordinary high-water line, the fee for each segment (50'x100') or portion
thereof on areas in excess of the first 1,000' of frontage shall be one-half that for a like segment on areas
with up to 1,000' of frontage.
D. The reduced fee referred to in "C" is not applicable for fleeting areas located adjacent to the
.:'~;fl~:~: riparian property under public ownership or when the anchoring system is located below the ordinary
?,: ;!::)~'7 high-water line.
.' .;. <'Frontage" is the dimension parallel to the river's flow or along the shoreline. "Depth" is the width
crosscurrent or perpendicular to the shoreline.
These fees may be adjusted every five years and all existing leases are subject to such adjustments.
571-17.11 (461A) Nonuse. Evidence of limited or nonuse of a fleeting area shall be cause for review
by the department of natural resources in consultation with other state and federal agencies and may be
cause for reduction in size or termination of a fleeting permit. The permittee may request a contested
case proceeding in accordance with Iowa Code chapter 17 A and natural resource commission rules
571-Chapter 7.
571--:-17.12(46IA) Reports of use. The permittee shall submit annual reports of the average daily
number of barges moored during the preceding year. These reports are to be received by the depart-,
ment of natural resources no later than the thirty-first day of January each year.
571-17.13( 461A) Renewals. The permittee shall request renewal of the permit not more than six nor
less than two months prior to its expiration. Failure to request renewal shall terminate the permittee's
rights to the fleeting area.
571-17.14(46IA) Permit and lease revocation. A fleeting area permit and lease may be revoked
upon determination that operation of the facility is in violation of a condition of the permit. Revocation
proceedings shall be in compliance with Iowa Code chapter 17 A and natural resource conunission
rules 571-Chapter 7.
. . "..:'
.,.'".
571-17.15( 46IA) Severability. Should any section, paragraph, phrase, sentence, or clause of this
chapter be declared invalid or unconstitutional for an y reason, the remainder of this chapter shall not be
affected thereby.
These rules are intended to implement Iowa Code sections 46IA4, 461A25, and 462A32.
[Filed 9/4/81, Notices 3/4/81, 5/27/81-published 9130/81, effective 11/5/81 *]
[Filed without Notice 12/12/8&-published 12/31/86, effective 2/4/87]
[Filed 6/27/97, Notice 4/9/97-published 7/16/97, effective 8/20/97]
. EfTecti'IIC date of29O---Ol54 delayed by the Adminisn'alive Rules Review Committee 45 days afler convening of the next General Assembly pwsuan1 to
~17A.8(9). [Published 10/28/81].
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
City of Dubuque Survey
Barge Fleeting Policies for Cities
November, 1999
Purpose of the survey: To see how other cities along the Mississippi River are accommodating
barge fleeting and balancing it with tourism and recreation needs of the river.
Cities on the Survey:
Red Wing, Minnesota
Winona Minnesota
La Crosse, Wisconsin
Clinton, Iowa
Davenport, Iowa
Muscatine, Iowa
R W Myron White
WI Judy Bodway
LC Bob Fisher
CL
DA Charlie Hesston
MU Larry Wolf
651-385-3697
507-457-8250
608-785-9396
319-242-2144
319-326-7756
319-264-1550
Questions for Cities:
1. Do you have barge fleeting along your city limits?
RW Yes, 20 spaces in two places, serving 3 businesses
WI Yes, 60 spaces in a separate commercial harbor serving 5 businesses
LC Yes, 63 spaces on a City fleeting site serving 8 businesses
CL Yes, 24 spaces and a municipal dock
DA No
MU No, in fact there is a "No Parking Zone" ordinance for barges
~
2. Do you have barge fleeting near your city limits?
If yes to questions 1 and 2, how many businesses are served by barges and how many
barges are fleeted at one time?
RW No
WI No
LC Yes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
CL Yes, in Illinois, which serves 2 businesses
DA Yes, south of the city which serves 3 businesses
MU Yes, in Illinois; businesses also have their own facilities
If yes to questions 1 and 2, how many businesses are served by barges and how many
barges are fleeted at one time?
3. Do you have policies for the location of barge fleeting along or near your city limits?
If so, what are they?
RW No
WI No
LC Yes, to keep the fleeting in particular areas
CL No, the barges are not seen by the public because of the floodwall
DA No
MU No
4. What is your city's general philosophy to barge fleeting along or near your city limits?
RW No philosophy
WI No philosophy
LC Barge fleeting is important because of the businesses it serves
CL No philosophy
DA There is a tendency toward reorienting the river toward recreation and tourism
MU The community does not want barge fleeting along the city portion of the river
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5. How do you balance the barge fleeting with tourism and recreation needs of the river?
R W Most of the fleeting is in the commercial harbor which avoids conflict between the
different interests
WI The fleeting is confined and avoid the conflict between the different interests
LC There is not enough room for all interests and they have to work to accommodate both
CL There are no issues
DA Barges need to find different places to fleet than the city
MU There is no problem because barge fleeting is not allowed
6. Have you been approached in the recent past on barge fleeting opportunities?
If you have, what has been your response?
RW No
WI Yes, local businesses are interested in expanding their barge usage
LC Yes, they are having discussions on how to increase the number of spaces
CL No
DA No
MU No
7. Have you ever quantified the economic impact of river dependent businesses?
RW No
WI No
LC Yes, a plan will be completed in December
CL Yes, a report is being drafted
DA No
MU No
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8. Have you ever quantified the economic impact of barge fleeting businesses on your
community?
RW No
WI No
LC See # 7
CL See # 7
DA No
MU No
9. Have there been any changes in the level of barge fleeting in your community?
RW No
WI Current users are expanding and needing more space for barge fleeting
LC There is more demand for barge fleeting
CL It changes constantly
DA There is more activity
MU It changes constantly