Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-10-07 CorrespondencePrepared by: Don Yucuis, Finance Director, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5052 REVOCATION OF ELECTION OF THE $10,600,000 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA SEWER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1997 The City of Iowa City, Iowa (the "Issuer") entered into a Tax Exemption Certificate dated as of June 19, 1997 in connection with the issuance of the above-mentioned Bonds and elected pursuant to Code Section 148(f)(4)(C)(vi)(IV) of the Treasury Regulations to exclude earnings on the Reserve Fund from "available construction proceeds" and to comply with the rebate requirements in the Code from the closing date. The Issuer hereby revokes the foregoing election and instead shall comply with Code Section 148(f)(4)(C)(vi)(11) and shall expend the earnings on the Reserve Fund in accordance with the schedule set forth in Section 3.3 of the Tax Exemption Certificate. Passed and approved this 7th day of October ,1997. CI'T"CGLERK Approved by City Attorney's Office It was moved by Lehman consent agenda item. finadm/sewer97.doc and seconded by Vanderhoef and approved as a Prepared by: Don Yucuis, Finance Director, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, II (319) 356-5052 REVOCATION OF ELECTION OF THE $10 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA SEWER REVENUE BONDS 1997 The City of Iowa City, Iowa (the "Issuer") entered into a Tax June 1997 in connection with the issuance of the Code Section 148(f)(4)(C)(vi)(IV) of the the Fund from "available construction procee< req the Code from the closing date. Certificate dated as of Bonds and elected ulations to exclude earnings on and to comply with the rebate The Issuer revokes the foregoing election and 148(f)(4)(C)(vi)(ll) shall expend the earnings on schedule set forth in ~ction 3.3 of the Tax Exempti( shall comply with Code Section Reserve Fund in accordance with the Passed and approved day of ,1997. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Approved by City Atl~O~fi,~¢.~"~ It was moved by adopted, and upon roll c; AYES: finadm/sewer97.d6c there were: NAYS: and ~conded by !NT: Baker Kubby .ehman orton ,vick ~rnberry Va derhoer the Resolution be Date: To: From: Re: City of iowa City October 1, 1997 City Clerk Doug Ripley, JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner ~v Parking Prohibition on the East Side of Scott Boulevard As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council of the following action. Unless directed otherwise by the City Council, this action will occur on or shortly after October 14, 1997. Action Pursuant to Section 9-1-3A(10) of the City Code, signage will be installed prohibiting parking on the east side of Scott Boulevard from Muscatine Avenue to Court Street. Comment This action is being taken consistent with the policy for the arterial street system. Scott Boulevard is designed to move large volumes of traffic from point to point. The prohibition is intended to maintain the free flow of traffic along Scott Boulevard. Parking was formerly allowed in this area when soccer matches were played at Scott Park. This is no longer necessary since soccer matches have been moved to the park south of town. The west side of Scott Boulevard already has parking prohibited. Im\mem\dr9-30.doc September 18,1997 CITY OF I0 WA CITY TO: RE: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council Civil Service Entrance Examination - B~II~DIN~ INSPECTOR We, the undersigned members of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Building Inspector. Joseph Brumm IOWA CITY CIVIL ? MiChael W. Chair ATTEST: Marian Karr, City Clerk Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 10:13:05 -0500 (CDT) From: "E.W.N. Lam" <ewnlam@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu> To: council@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu Subject: New traffic signal on Melrose Avenue Dear Sir/Madam: I am glad that the renovations to Melrose Avenue south of University Hospital are near completion, and I am most appreciative of the new controlled cross-walk that the city has put in. Throughout the construction I was dreading the thought of having to cross that road without any sort of control light. Since the light has become operational though, I have observed on my walks to and from the University from my home, that a significant number of drivers either do not know the new light exists and simply drive through the intersection, or ignore the light, in spite of the fact that pedestrians are crossing the road. This is not only entirely unacceptable, but it poses a significant danger to pedestrians who are crossing the road thinking that traffic will stop because of the new light. Most recently, I have noted cars entering the intersection on a red light with the pedestrian "Walk" signal active yesterday afternoon, and this morning. Usually, when a new signal is put in at an intersection, there is a sign with small red flags on either side of the light warning drivers of a new stop light ahead. Perhaps such signs could be put in place to advise drivers as they enter this intersection. I appreciate your taking the time to deal with this issue. Thank you. Ernie Lam Ernest W.N. Lam, DMD, MSc, FRCD(C) Radiation Research Laboratory, Department of Radiology The University of Iowa, ML B180 Iowa City, IA 52242-1101 319.335.8026 319.335.7351 (FAX) ernest-lam@uiowa.edu October 8, 1997 CITY OF I0 WA CITY Sally Stutsman, Chair Members of the Board of Supervisors 913 South Dubuque Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Sally and Members of the Board: The City Council has received your request from S & G Materials for a conditional use permit to allow a sand extraction operation on property south of Iowa City and west of the Iowa River. At its September 18, 1997 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission, by a vote of 6-0, recommended that a conditional use permit be approved, subject to a 100 foot buffer being provided between the sand pit and properties with residential uses, and subject to the county requiring the implementation of the reclamation plan developed by Lon Drake and MMS Consultants, or an alternative plan approved by the county which addresses safety, habitat improvement, slope stability, aesthetics, improving wetlands, and avoiding future river blowouts. It is the Council's understanding that the applicant is agreeable to the proposed conditions, and has agreed to furnish a $150,000 performance bond to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to ensure the restoration of the site is completed, as per the reclamation plan submitted with the application. Council recommends approval of the conditional use permit request, subject to the conditions outlined in the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation. The Council also recommends the County consider the following: 1) annual monitoring of the sand extraction operation for compliance with the conditional use permit; 2) the speed limit on Izaak Walton League Road be reduced to 35 mph; 3) a turnaround be provided for the school bus to alleviate bus/truck conflicts; 4) the applicant place in writing their commitment to creating an asphaltic dust free surface on their entry drive; and 5) conciliation be pursued involving the County, the neighboring residents and the applicant. Thank you for the opportunity to review this application. Sincerely, Naomi J. Novick Mayor jw/Itr/nn-s&g2.doc 410 EAST WASHINGTON STREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240-1826 · (319) 356-5000 · FAX (319) 356-5009 October 2, 1997 CITY OF I0 WA CITY Sally Stutsman, Chair Members of the Board 913 South Dubuque Street Iowa City, IA 52240 )ervisors Dear Sally and Members Ioard: The City Council has received allow a sand extraction operation its September 18, 1997 meeting, recommended that a conditional us, provided between the sand pit and requiring the implementation of the Consultants, or an alternative plan improvement, slope stability, request from S Materials for a conditional use permit to property soul Iowa City and west of the Iowa River. At ie Plannine Zoning Commission, by a vote of 6-0, approved, subject to a 100 foot buffer being with residential uses, and subject to the county ~ation plan developed by Lon Drake and MMS by the county which addresses safety, habitat wetlands, and avoiding future river blowouts. It is the council's understanding th~ has agreed to furnish a $150 Supervisors to ensure the of submitted with the applicatio~ Council re< request, subject to the recommendation. )licant is agreeable to the proposed conditions, and bond to the Johnson County Board of site is completed, as per the reclamation plan approval on the conditional use permit in the Planning and Zoning Commission Thank you for the oppo~ to review this appl Sincerely, Naomi J. Mayor jw/Itdnn-s&g.doc 410 EAST WASHINGTON STREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240-1826 4~ (319) 356-5000 · FAX (319) 356-$009 City of Iowa City IVIEMORANDU Date: September 11, 1997 To: Planning & Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Associate Planner Re: CU9706 S & G Materials Conditional Use Application S & G Materials has applied to Johnson County for a conditional use permit to operate a sand extraction operation on property south of Iowa City and west of the Iowa River. The property, which is in the flood plain of the Iowa River, is owned by Tom Williams and ownership will be retained by him. Lon Drake, a professor of geology, and MMS Consultants have prepared an analysis of the site, the mining operation, and the local, state and federal regulations which apply to the site. In addition, they have made recommendations on how to conduct the mining operations and how to reclaim the site to a benign and useful condition. This property lies in Fringe Area C of the Fringe Area Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City. The Fringe Area Agreement does not address mining and mineral extraction uses, though the Johnson County zoning ordinance allows mining and mineral extraction as a conditional use in the A-1 and A-3 districts. This property is zoned A-1. The Johnson County Zoning Ordinance requires that cities be allowed to review Conditional Use Permits within their extraterritorial jurisdiction. Conditional Use Permits in Johnson County require a 4/5 majority vote of the Board of Supervisors to approve said permit if the use is opposed by a vote of City Council whose extraterritorial jurisdiction includes the property involved in the jurisdiction. Physical features of the site: The Iowa River flood plain in this part of the city has a silt cap overlying a package of river sands, which in turn overlay clayey glacial till and bedrock. Data from soil borings on the Williams property indicate that the river sands exist to a depth of 21 feet. Ground water on this site typically flows from the higher ground to the west toward the river to the east. During floods, however, the flow reverses, and water flows from the river into the sand. This site is expected to flood every few years. The flat land on the Williams property is presently used for row crop agriculture. There are also drainageways on the east and south portions of the property which are heavily timbered. The Drake report states that the drainageways will not be mined because the trees are needed to provide stability to the drainageways. The sand reserves on the site are expected to support approximately four years of mining. The sand pit will be reclaimed to other uses as mining progresses. Local regulations: Conditions for mining or mineral extraction use in the A-1 and A-3 districts include the following: 1. The applicant shall obtain approval for withdrawal of water if required by the Iowa Natural Resource Council. The Environment Protection Division of Iowa DNR has advised that if all the water were obtained from the sand unit is returned to the same sand unit without any serious reduction in quality then no water withdrawal permit is needed. 2. The applicant shaft obtain approval for operation in a flood plain ff required by the Iowa Natural Resource Council. The flood plain section of Iowa DNR has advised that no permit is needed as long as the sand pit operation: a) is setback greater than 100 feet from the river channel b) there is no levy construction c) there is no stockpiling of material along the riverbank d) there is no removal of water directly from the river e) there is no discharge of water directly into the river f) items d and e recognize that there is an indirect connection to the river via ground water flow. The sand pit design and reclamation plan proposed can accommodate all of these requirements so that no state flood plain permitting is required. 3. The applicant must obtain a license to operate from the Iowa Department of Soil Conservation M Division of Mines and Minerals. The procedures to obtain a license to operate a mine have been initiated. 4. The proposed site shaft be located no closer than 1,000 feet to any property zoned A-2, RS, R1-A, R1-B, R2, or R3-A. This condition may be modified upon a showing of good cause by the applicant but shall require a 4/5 vote of the Board of Supervisors for approval The proposed gravel pit property is zoned A-l, and the site is not closer than 1,000 feet to any property of the above zones. There is a cluster of residences north of this site on the west side of the Iowa river that fall within 50 to 100 feet of the William's property. However, the land these residences are on is zoned A-3 and does not require the 4/5 vote. There is only a 50 foot buffer planned between the property the residences are on and the sand pit. Staff recommends that the buffer between the Williams property and the property the residences are on be increased to 100 feet, identical with the buffer width along the Iowa River. 5. The applicant shaft agree to provide for buffer area which prohibits excavation within 50 feet of any adjoining property under separate ownership and any and all public right-of-way unless otherwise required by law or other special circumstances. The proposed design takes into account this buffer. 6. The applicant and his or her successors shaft agree to take all precautions and provide such maintenance as may be necessary to prevent fugitive dust contamination along the principle access to the activity. The principle access will be defined as the route of least distance between the furthest entrance to the property involved and a paved public highway approved by the County Engineer. The sand itself is processed while wet and hauled damp so dust contamination should be limited to the access road and Izaak Walton League Road. The access road shall be located along the west side of the property as far as possible from the homes beside the river, and the applicant has agreed to maintain Izaak Walton League Road in a dust free condition so that third parties will not be subject to the dust caused by trucks using the road. State regulations: Beside the regulations noted in the County zoning ordinance above, the state specifies top soil cannot be destroyed or buried in the process of mining. S & G Materials considers the top soil to be an asset and expects to be able to sell it or reuse all of it. Federal regulations: The Army Corps of Engineers is the agency which enforces federal regulations regarding water bodies. A wetland delineation by the Natural Resource and Conservation Service will be required. If any wetlands are deemed present and are rated as "prior converted wetlands," no further action will be required. If any wetlands are determined to be "farmed wetlands," then mitigation will be necessary, with replacement at a ratio of at least 1.5 to 1. The Corps also requires a permit if more than 10 cubic yards of bank sediment is moved 100 feet of riverbank, but this is not planned. The Corps has no specific requirements on how the sand pit is operated or maintained. Description of operation: The mining will be conducted by hydraulic dredge, in which sand and water is pumped out of the pit, and the water is returned to the pit for reuse, so there is no net loss of water. small particles washed from the sand are returned to the pit, where they settle. The net result is that shallow wells a short distance down gradient show no change in water level or quality. There is no blasting or obtrusive odor associated with hydraulic sand dredging. Drake notes that the property is presently in row crops and pesticides can readily enter the shallow sands, and that pesticide use will cease with the conversion to a sand pit and subsequent reclamation. Reclamation: the applicant notes that "as this facility is abandoned, S & G Materials will pursue the proper reclamation procedures to leave the area in a clean and neat condition." The Drake report makes some specific recommendations regarding reclamation of the site, suggesting that a reclamation design should be directed toward creating aquatic and wetland habitat compatible with the flood plain functions, and usable by people and wildlife. Specifically these recommendations include dividing the sand pit into several cells, establishing breeding islands for wildlife species, maintaining the trees in and along the waterways, and incorporating safeguards to help prevent a channel change of the Iowa River. While the Johnson County Zoning Ordinance does not require that a sand mining and extraction service go through a reclamation process, staff feels it is important for the site to be reclamated as it is abandoned. Drake notes six specific design goals of his reclamation plan, including safety, habitat improvement, slope stability, good aesthetics, improving wetlands, and avoiding river blowouts. While this site is outside of Iowa City's growth area, it is close enough to the city limits that its use may affect properties which are within the City, and it may be annexed into the City far in the future. Staff recommends that Johnson County require reclamation of the site that takes into account Drake's six specific design goals. Requiring the implementation of a reclamation plan for this site will help improve the long-term value of the property and surrounding properties. This may be done through bonding or some other financial requirement. Traffic Impact: The applicant has indicated the sand operation will generate 50 trucks per day on average. A 1994 traffic count on Izaak Walton League (IWL) Road shows 220 vehicles per day. Given that IWL Road is a gravel road, the existing traffic plus the additional truck traffic may be pushing the envelope of what a gravel road can handle. The applicant has noted that they will maintain the road in a dust-free condition. Given that the road is entirely under Johnson County jurisdiction, staff defers to the County Engineer on whether the road may need additional upgrading. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending that a Conditional Use Permit be approved, subject to a 100 foot buffer being provided between the sand pit and properties with residential uses, and to the County requiring the implementation of the reclamation plan developed by Lon Drake and MMS Consultants, or an alternative plan approved by the County which addresses safety, habitat improvement, slope stability, aesthetics, improving wetlands, and avoiding future river blowouts. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan Approved by: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner Department of Planning and Community Development ppdadmin~mem\williams.doc CI?Y 0£ IO~A CI?Y LOCATION MAP' S & G Materials CU9706 tZAAK WALTON LEAGUE ROAD OL0 SAND PtT$ ~v[MS CONSULTANTS, INC. 1917 South Gilbert Street Iowa City, Iowo 522~-0 319-351-8282 t<OW CROP FIELDS SIT GUAGE = PROP[RTYUNES = POOR RIPRAP  = wOOO£Z AREA ~)#10 = BORIN3 LOCA~ON SCALE 0 200' L 100' 300' &,~ LAGO0 ROW CROP Ft~-LDS 07/2~/97 PRESENT CONDITIONS REFERENCE BASE - ~092 AERIAL PHOTOGR 400' S & G Materials 4213 Sand Road SE Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 354-1667 September 16,1997 To all neighbors and the neighborhood in the location of the proposed Williams Sand pit S & G Materials agrees to the following conditions being made part of their application for a conditional use permit currently before the Johnson County Board of Supervisors on the William's property. 1) To furnish a performance bond~n the amount of $150,000.00 to complete the restoration as per the reclamation plan on the submittal. 2) To rip rap the interior slope of the river bend area'~nd cover with earth ( within the 100' set-back) in addition to the rip rap in the submittal. ' 3) Place reclaimed asphalt on the Izaak Walton League road and seal coat, with the approval of the County Engineer. 4) To increase the set- back from 50' to 100' from the east property line.b(Kay Hull p,r0perty ~ others) All trucks required to stop at stop signs as a condition of hauling S & G Materials. 6) There will be no asphalt or ready-mix plants erected on the property being considered ( Williams Property). 7) To exert pressure to have all trucks travel north on old 218 upon exit. Robed G. Barker I RECLAMATION OPPORTUNITIES AT THE FUTURE WILLIAMS SAND PIT RECLAMATION OPPORTUNITIES AT THE FUTURE WILLIAMS SAND PIT RESEARCH & RECOMMENDATIONS Report to: S & G Materials By: Lon Drake & MMS Consultants, Inc. June, 1997 FILED AU6 %0. ~ffABLE PURPOSE Figure I Location Map P~T I PRESENT CONDITION OF SITE GEOMORPHIC SE~ING Figure 2 Table 1 GROUNDWATER OF CONTENTS Present Features of Site Boring Summary VEGETATION & SOILS Figure 3 1875 Map of Johnson County PART II THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FEDERAL PERMITS STATE PERMITS COUNTY PERMITS IOWA CITY ORDINANCES PART III RECLAMATION DESIGN Figure 4 Figure 5 Reclamation Design Typical Buffer Cross-Section ASSETS DESIGN WATER LEVEL FLUCTUATION Figure 6 Synthetic Stream Gauge Data Typical Cross-Section of Breeding Island CELLS BREEDING ISLANDS Figure 7 ORIGINAL Page 3 4 5 5 6 7 5 5 8 9 9 9 11 12 14 14 15 16 14 17 18 17 19 20 POTENTIAL FOR RIVER CHANNEL CHANGE Figure 8 REVEGETATION Table II Figure 9 Table III Car bodies in Riprap Recommended Wetland and Aquatic Species Planting Willow Whips Upper Slope Seeding List STOCKING PART IV OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES APPENDIX A JOHNSON COUNTY ZONING MAP 19 22 21 24 25 26 23 27 28 2 PURPOSE S & G Materials have leased a parcel of floodplain land beside the Iowa River, south of Iowa City, for the purpose of developing a sand extraction operation. For location details see Figure 1. The parcel belongs to T. Williams and ownership will be retained by him. L. Drake and MMS have researched the site and in this report ofl~r recommendations how to conduct the mining operations and how to reclaim the site to a benign and useful condition. Specific design goals include: safety, especially for children habitat improvement slope stability good aesthetics improve wetlands avoid river blowouts The sand layel' to be mined is relatively shallow and maximum mining depth will be about 21 feet. Mining will be conducted by hydraulic dredge, in which a sand and water slurry is pumped out of the pit and the water is returned to the pit for reuse. Mining will be limited to the agricultural portion of the property, avoiding the wooded drainageways. The sand reserves are expected to ' support approximately 4 years of mining. The sand pit will be reclaimed to other uses as mining progresses. This report in organized into four parts: Pm't I addresses some relevant aspects of the present condition of the site. Part II outlines the regulatory framework pertinent to developing a sand extraction operation at the site. Pm't III offers our design for reclamation of the site. Part IV evaluates other environmental issues associated wit!~ operating. HILLS QUADRANGLE 4 IOWA F I GU RE 1 ,,o ~ .~_./~ CEOAR R,4~=10$ 28 A~. , ,, --- 9 ! o 30' IOWA CITY ~CHI 2.8 MI. ~ 32 30 622 2 540000 FEET '. -~--':~':~; .L) ....'i~I , sane ~,ts ~/ ~, "~ . ',~' -.~_,_t .... "~ '~-?-- ;~'. -t ~."." / I ~,~ : . ' ' ~PROPOSED SAND PIT .% [', ~ ~¢"-~, Z~'~' _./ 'm ..... ~. x ~, , ~ I,~0, ........ /44 .. ., ' "/ I ' ~ · ~ ' , " ".' ~ x,, ,, (~"'~':~ii~,, ~, f~ ~ ' _ ~ 1000 DISTANCE ¢ / / , ,. ' t ~' .o. ....X .......:~ ~ · n ' :.,. ~, '. ~:: ~ 'l /' ~,./..~ ' .- '~ i : :': ,, ' ' '., ',,it. ~ ..... ,' .¢o] .... ..,., '%~ ~.~ .~ ~ ~'~-:--~'~-'~--'~t~- ~oooo ' .// i " '%~L ~' ...,~,, f ~ ~.~, ,. '..... x '['~;11': .... ' -- 35' I '(~ I ~ 0 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET ! 5 0 CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET "~03 PART I PRESENT CONDITION OF SITE 5 GEOMORPHIC SETTING The Iowa River floodplain on the south side of the city usually has a silt cap overlying a package of river sands. These in turn usually overlay clayey glacial till or occasionally rest directly on bedrock. Data fi'om borings on the Williams property are listed on Table I (locations on Figure 2) and demonstrate that the typical geologic sequence is present. The shallow sands, to a maximum depth of 21 feet, will be excavated. GROUNDWATER Most of the year the top of the local shallow water table will be within the sand package and the bulk of flow will be within the sands. The flow direction is usually from the higher ground on the west toward the river. However, during floods, when the river channel is nearly full or overflowing, the surface water is higher than the sand layer and the groundwater flow temporarily reverses, moving fi'om the river into the sand. The site can be expected to flood once every few years. VEGETATION AND SOILS Originally, the floodplain of tile Iowa River was largely timbered. For example the 1875 map of Johnson County (Figure 3) shows most of the larger thnber to be along the river and creek banks plus their adjacent bluffs. The 1923 Soil Survey of Johnson County mentions the vegetation on these types of floodplah~ soils (Soil Survey Report #23, p.62) and comments that "the areas along the Iowa River in the northwestern part of the county are thinly wooded with elm, ash, soft maple, oak, hickory, wahmt, sycamore and cottonwood. South of Iowa City the type is more heavily wooded." Tile more modern (1977) Soil Survey of Johnson County shows 5 different soil types in the area of the future sand pit. These are all silt loams and loamy f'me sands, reflecting soil types developed from the upper part of the floodplain's silt cap. Development of the sand pit will be limited largely to flat land presently in row crop agriculture. The adjacent intermittent drainageways to the east and south are heavily timbered and will not be mined because the trees are needed to provide stability to these drainageways (see Figure 2). IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE ROAO OLD SAND PITS 6 PROPERTY UNE$ '~ = POOR RIPRAP 0 200' 400' I I I 100' 300' = BORING LOCA~ON ~.~. ----' ~ ~ ~ S~EA~ _ FIGURE 2 ~ ~s co,s~ ~.c ~,~ ~o~ ~. o~/2~/~ PRESENT CONDITIONS G:~0100~0112019~01120196 7-2~-97 9:28:59 ~m EST BI BI #1 #3 #5 #7 #9 #11 0.5' Topsoil 7.5' Fill Sand 10' Concrete Sand 18' 0.5' Topsoil 7.5' Fill Sand 13.0' Concrete Sand 21' 0.5' Topsoil 14.0' Fill Sand 13.0' Concrete Sand 20.5' 2.0' Topsoil 2.0' Clay (silt) 4.0' Fill Sand 9.0' Concrete Sand 17.0' (Fine Sand Bottom) 1.5' Topsoil 10.5' Fill Sand .7.0' Concrete Sand 19' (Fine Sand Bottom) 0.5 Topsoil 7.0' Clay (silt) 6.5' Concrete Sand 14' TABLE I BORING SUMMARY #2 #4 #6 #8 #10 1.0' Topsoil 7.0' Clay (silt) 8.0' V.C. Concrete Sand 16' 2.0' Topsoil 4.5' Clay !0.5' Concrete Sand 17' 1.0' Topsoil 4.5' Clay 10.5' Concrete Sand 22'0" 0.5' Topsoil. 12.5' Fill Sand 4.0' Concrete Sand 17.0' 2.0' Topsoil 8.5' Fill Sand !0.5' Concrete Sand 21' 7 1875 FIGURE .3 MAP OF JOHNSON COUN~( o (7 PART II THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK The network of local, state and t~deral regulations constrain the development and reclamation of the proposed sand mining operation. These regulations m'e outlined below in the context of permits required. FEDERAL PERMITS Gene Walsh, fi'om the Rock Island District of the US Army Corps of Engineers office (309/794- 5674) provided the followhag recommendations regm'ding the federal regulatory role: Wetland delh~eations by the NRCS under the national "404" permitting process will be requked. If any wetlands are deemed present and are rated as "prior converted", no further action shall be requked. However, if these wetlands are rated as "farmed wetlands" then mitigation will be necessary, with replacement at a ratio of at least 1.5/1. The mitigation permit will need to be accompanied by a Phase I archeological survey verifying that no significant archeological site will go unmitigated. The Corps regulations about setback distances fi'om the river will not apply as long as no dkect access to the river is constructed. None is planned. The Corps would view removal of the car bodies presently incorporated in the riprap along the Iowa River as an improvement. Replacement of the cm' bodies with concrete riprap can be done without permit. A Nationwide Permit Number 18 would be needed it' more than 10 cubic yards of bank sediment were moved per 100 feet of riverbank, but this is not planned. The usual riprap requirements apply, including clean concrete with no protruding rebm' and no asphalt. New riprap shah not extend above the level of the natural levee. The Corps has no specific requirements on how the sand pit is operated or reclahned. Sending Mr. Walsh a copy of this report will constitute adequate "notification" of intended activities in the vicinity of the river. STATE PERMITS The Floodplain Section of the Iowa DNR regulates uses of floodplains, including development of sand pits. Jack Riessen (515/281-5029) of that Section has advised that no state level permit is needed as long as the sand pit operation: Is set back greater than 100 lrbet fi'om the river channel. 10 There is no levee construction (meaning elevating the land surface vertically near the river by any means). There is no temporary stockpiling of material along the river bank. There is no removal of water directly from the river. There is no dischm'ge of water directly into the river. o Items 4 & 5 recognize that there is an indirect connection to the river via groundwater flow. The sand pit design and reclamation plan proposed herein accommodate all these requirements so that no state floodplah~ permitting is requh'ed. Groundwater withdrawal from floodplains is regulated by the Environmental Protection Division of the IDNR. Jim Neely of the that Division (515/281-6681) advised that if hydraulic dredging were used to mine the sand, that if all the water were obtained from the mined sand unit and that if all the water were returned to the same sand unit without serious reduction in quality, then no water withdrawal permit would be needed. The proposed operation conforms to the no-permit specifications. Licensing to operate a sand mining operation is regulated by the Division of Mines and Minerals of the Depm'tment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship. Joel Pille of this Division advises that the procedure has tlu'ee components: 1. Licensiug 2. Registration 3. Bonding These procedures will be initiated. In general, while mining,an operator is responsible for keeping soil erosion and topsoil losses to a minimum. Iowa Code section 208.17 (3) specifies that topsoil cannot be destroyed or buried in the process of mining. S & G considers the topsoil to be a valuable asset and expects to be able to sell it all for reuse. 11 COUNTY PERMITS At the county level, the Conditional Use Permit of the Johnson County Code of Ordinances specifically deals with Mining and Mineral Extraction (page 83 of 2/5/97 edition): Item H2a advises that "the applicant shall obtain approval for withdrawal of water it' requked by the Iowa Natural Resources Council." This role is now assumed by the Environmental Protection Division of the IDNR and as noted under the state permitting process, no permit is needed as long as the groundwater is returned hmnediately to the flood plain aquit~r in good condition. Item H2b. "The applicant shall obtain approval for operating in a floodplain as required by the Iowa Natural Resources Council." This function is now assumed by the Floodplain Section of the IDNR, and as discussed in the preceding section of this report the proposed sand extraction operation will not need this permit. Item H2c & d, requires a license to operate from the Division of Mines & Minerals. Joel Pille (515/242-5003) advises that this has three components: 1. Licensing 2. Registration 3. Bonding These procedures will be initiated. Item H2e specifies that "the proposed site shall be no closer than 1000 feet to any property zoned A2, RS[RS3, RS5, RSI0] R1A, RIB, R2 and R3A. This condition may be modified upon a showing of good cause by the applicant but shall require a 4/5 vote by the Board of Supervisors for approval." Rick Dvorak, Johnson County Planning & Zoning Administrator (356-6083) has advised that the proposed gravel pit property is zoned A1. The 1000 foot distance around the property is shown with a dashed line on Figure I and clusters of residences fall within this regulated zone. Dvorak advises that the cluster of residences north of the property on the west side of the Iowa River (the Zahner Subdivision) is zoned A3 and does not require the 4/5 vote. The "original" County Zoning shows that the residences northeast of the property on the east side of the Iowa River (Fountain and inholdings) are also on land zoned A1. (Some of the later derivitive maps are not properly coded and should be ignored.) A copy of the Johnson County Zoning Map is attached - Appendix A. Item H2f prohibits excavation within 50 feet of any adjacent property under separate ownership. The proposed design respects this distance. Ill 12 Item H2g requires that fugitive dust be controlled. The sand itself is processed while wet and hauled damp so dust should be limited mainly to the access road, which shall be located along the west side of the property as far as possible from the homes beside the river. Most of the 8:1.29 FloodPlain Management portion of the Johnson County Code of Ordinances deals with habitable structures and their accouterments, which is not relevant to the sand mining operation. However item 2B6 (page 64 of the 2/5/97 editiou) would indicate that if liquid fuel is to be stored onsite it should be in containers which can be removed in the event of serious flooding. IOWA CITY ORDINANCES The site is located within the "fi'inge area"between the county and the city, so the proposal must also be reviewed for approval by the city. Amongst the City Ordinances, the Sensitive Areas Ordinance is generally the most restrictive. Potential sensitive areas are considered below: Woodland areas greater than 2 acres are to be protected. This project avoids all densely wooded areas and only a l~w scattered trees will be removed. Floodways shah not be blocked. All portions of the rehabilitated landscape will be at or below the level of the present natural floodplain and will not restrict flood flow. * Drainageways, both large and small will be avoided by this project. Any agricultural wetlands delineated by the NRCS survey will be mitigated with reconstructed and revegetated wetlands. * Any archeological sites discovered will be evaluated for mitigation. * No large m'eas offitlly hydric soils are present. No steep slopes are present within the area to be mined (approximately 3 feet of relief in 66 acres). No prairie rentnants are present. In general, the impact of sand mining will be limited to a flat area presently in row crops, which otters little in the way of habitat value or other environmental amenities worth preserving. The proposed post-mining reclamation will offer considerably greater habitat diversity and support more species. Details are presented in the next section of this report. 13 The City Ordinance also requires adequate buftkring for wetlands. Portions of the wooded areas around the south and east sides of the future sand pit qualify as wooded wetlands. Around most of the south and east perimeter of the proposed sand pit, the buflkr distance to wooded wetlands is considerably greater than 100 lket (see Figm'e 4) and the averaged buftkr width is greater than 100 feet. All native species are recommended for the wetland restoration. Stormwater does not enter the site fi'om nearby properties, present drainage is around the east and south edees and will remah~ there. Large floods on the Iowa Rivet' will completely covet' the site, as they do today. Reclamation will be an annual ongoing process as mining proceeds, which will span about 5 years. Cat'bodies along the riverbank will be removed and replaced with more durable and more acceptable concrete riprap. A 100 foot unmined blJft~r will be retained along the Iowa River and planted to a willow fi'inge for improved stability, habitat and aesthetics, which exceeds the Iowa City 50 foot width requirelnent. At present the land is privately owned with the intention of remaining so in the foreseeable future. However, Iowa City is expanding and at some time in the future may wish to annex and possibly purchase this parcel fi'om Mr. Williams or his lieks. The reclamation plan is designed so that a trail could be built along the natural levee beside the river and with other small modifications could become suitable for public use. 14 PART III RECLAMATION DESIGN ASSETS The assets of the site, useful and constraining for a reclamation design, include: Pm approximately 66 acre sand pit to be excavated below the water table on a floodplain. S & G Materials esthnates that approximately 100,000 cubic yards of unmm'ketable silt are ohsitc above the sand and available for reclamation. The regulatory constraints outlined in Pm't II. The floodplain site is not well suited fox' future human habitation. The site is nero' the edge of a growing city and will someday become part of the city. S & G Materials has access to large quantities of clean fill which could be incorporated into the reclamation. Collectively these assets and constraints suggest that the most useful and feasible reclamation design should be directed towm'd creating aquatic and wetland habitat, compatible with the floodplain functions, and useable by people and wildlife. A map of our design plan to accomplish this is illustrated on Figure 4 and details follow. DESIGN In the pre-regulatory era, abandoned floodplain sand pits usually had steep side slopes. These were unstable and would slowly um'avel and over decades would gradually become less steep, f'maily allowing vegetation to become established. Where these slopes extended steeply into deep water they created a safety risk for children because the banks could collapse, with nothing to grab except loose sand. Large floods would occasionally undermine these steep slopes, leading to large scale collapse. The reclamation plan proposes overcoming these problems by buttressing the lower slopes with clean £dl, tbrming a wide ledge to be capped with silt and planted to wetland vegetation. The upper slopes would be excavated back to 4:1 (run:rise), in order to be initially stable and allow more rapid vegetation. This configuration is illustrated in cross section on Figure 5 and is labeled on the map on Figure 4. t ~i~S Co~stzT~rm, I~c. 1917 South Gilbert Street Iowo City, Iowo 52240 319-351-5282 IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE ROAD OLD SAND PETS OPeN WATER , 50' BUFFER SEWAG;¢ LAGOONS 50' S~TE GtJAGE CELL #2 OPEN WATER = W'ETLAND FRINGE = CONSTRucTeD BERId = SRE='DING ISLAND = FULL-FACT RIPRAP = W~LLOW PLANTING FIGURE 4 RECLAMATION DESIGN REFERENCE BASE - 1992 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY BUFFER CELL #3 OPEN WATER 50' BUFFER WOODED 0 200' 400' 100' 300' 16 GUAGE 100' 30' UN~INED BUFFER SITE UPLAND GUAGE ?~ ~:,'.'~ ....~ :.~ ,'..~ ~ ':,. :.~ FIGURE 5 TYPICAL BUFFER CROSS-SECTION SCALE 1/4-" = 4-' M~S CONSULTAnts, INC.  1917 South Gilbe~ Street Iow~ City, Iowo 52240 , ~,~ 319-351-8282 o~ ~. 07/2¥/E7 G:~0100~0112019~01120192 7-2~-97 9:16:41 om EST 17 Sand pits are initially quite barren of vegetation because the sand is a poor medium for plant growth and alternates between being occasionally underwater during floods to being very dry for most of the growing season. The I~od chain is very sparse and the major users m'e ducks and geese which use the open water as a resting place, although little food or nesting cover is available. Over decades, flood silts gradually accumulate and natural reclamation gradually gets underway. The proposed reclamation plan provides the necessary silts in a coufiguration that encourages extensive plant growth within a JEw years. WATER LEVEL FLUCTUATION The elevation of tile proposed wetlands is important because tile water table in the reclaimed sand pit will fluctuate over a wide range, responding both to local storms and runoff from distant storms coming down the river. The U.S. Geological Survey maintains a gauging station 4 1/4 river miles upstream from the site on the Iowa River, located just south of the Burlington Street dam in Iowa City. Synthetic stream gage data fi'om 1978 to 1996 for the site is illustrated on Figure 6. In order to obtain a match between the USGS stream gage measurements and water table fluctuations at the site, reference elevation mm'kers were established along the riverbank on-site. So fro', the match between these has only been made for a few weeks over the midrange of river fluctuation, so the water level elevations shown on Figure 6 are still somewhat tentative and will need correction as longer term measurements become available. Drake returns to the site periodically to obtain more measurements and will continue to do so until a complete empirical correlation between elevations is obtained. The natural flows of tile river are altered by operation of the Coralville Dam. In general, the dam gates are operated so that when major storms pass through the Iowa and Cedar watersheds, the Cedar River floods are allowed to pass tlu'ough unchecked while the Iowa River floods are retained in the Coralville Reservoh' and then released more gradually weeks later, after the Cedar floodwaters have passed down the lowel' Iowa River. This continued operation in the future will tend to leave prolonged high water later into the growing season and can on occassion be deleterious to wetland plant growth. CELLS The sand pit will be long and narrow. There are advantages to dividing it into several separate cells. These include: Reclamation can be completed in each cell sequentially and lessons learned from the first can be applied to the others. M S U ) S T ~ E S ml I , I I r' I I I 18 ICUAGE JUNE, 1997 .I T I ~ t 198d- 1986 19~8 1990 FIGURE 6 SYNTHETIC STREAM GUAGE DATA (GUAGE HEIGHTS IN FE-ZT) I 1992 I 19 During storms with high wind velocities, the total fetch distance will be reduced and reduce shoreline erosion potential. The westernmost cell will be flooded by the river most often and have the most carp and the widest water quality fluctuations. The easternmost cell will flood less regularly and be supplied mainly by groundwater, maintaining better quality for longer periods of time. Because the two sources of water for the ceils, the river on the west and groundwater on the east, come from opposite dh'ections, the cells will have somewhat dift~rent hydroperiod fluctuations, providing some habitat diversity between cells. The berms dividing the sand pit into cells can be composed of umnined sand or can be built fi'om clean fill. In either case, the top of the berm shall be the same height as the present floodplain land surface. The lower slopes should be buttressed with clean f'dl and a silt cap, creating a wetland ledge as previously discussed and shown on Figure 5. BREEDING ISLANDS Some wildlife species can benefit from breeding islands enth'ely surrounded by water. Most waterfowl will utilize them as well as some species of amphibians and reptiles. The islands also provide more edge habitat and make the site more interesting to humans. These m'e illustrated on Figure 4. A Cross-section tlu'ough a typical island recommended for the site is illustrated on Figure 7. In general, low islands are preferred by nesting wildlife, even though this increases the probability of flooding of nests. POTENTIAL FOR RIVER CHANNEL CHANGE The shifting of river channels to new locations is a natural process on all floodplains and is in fact an important aspect of floodplain creation. However, in modern thnes, channel shifting has become very inconvenient for maintenance of bridges, roads, property lines and much of city infi'astructure. Therefore, in and near Iowa City, the Iowa River has been increasingly constrah~ed into a single channel position and it is appropriate to plan for this constraint at the Williams' property also. The location of the weakest link in maintaining channel position for the Iowa River at the WillJain's property is shown on Figure 2 with tlu'ee sets of dashed arrows. During a large magnitude flood event, with or without the sand pit, it is possible that the Iowa River could begin eroding the intermittent stream channel which extends south of the east end of the proposed gravel pit. If the flood were of sufficient depth, velocity and duration (under present conditions, exceeding the 1993 floods) erosion could propagate north across the present cornfield and connect to the Iowa River at the outside of the bend. 20 'm SITE~ GUAGE 50' 48' 30' UPLAND 6 FIGURE 7 TYPICAL CROSS SECTION OF BREEDING ISLAND SCALE 1 SITE GUAGE --12' -- 20' ~S C01'~STj'L,?M,~'~, iNC. o~ ..... JDM o,~. 07/24/£7 1917 South Gilbert Street Iowo City, Iowo 52240 ~ ox. L~D/JJ~ 319-551-8282 ~o.: 0~z2-0~9 ~ ¢ G:~0100~0112019~01120191 7-21-97 11:01:22 o 21 it is likely that the thick stand of trees in and around this intermittent stream channel has been important for preventing such downcutting during past floods and preventing an eroding nick point fi'om propagating north toward the river bend. Maintaining the trees in and along this shallow waterway is therefore a key factor ill preventing channel location change. Restoration of the sand pit can also include some additional sal~guards to help discourage such channel change. These recommendations are shown ill Figure 4 and are listed below: Do not mine sand from the row crop field corner nearest the intermittent stream channel. Replace tile car bodies and rubbish in the present riprap along the Iowa River with better quality riprap, see Figure 8. o Use full face riprap where water will exit the future sand pit during future floods, in close proximity to the intermittent stream channel. Some of the wildlit~ breeding islands are shaped and located to help deflect floodwaters away fi'om intermittent stream access and back towat'ds the main channel. Planting the top edge of all riprap with sandbar willow will create a network of roots to help hold the blocks in place, as well as partially camouflaging them and providing habitat, locations on Figure 4. REVEGETATION Restoration is often def'med as a procedure which allows natural processes to take over and function again. This is especially true for wetland plantings in a dynamic floodplain environment. Regardless of which species are planted today, one should expect that 10 years from now the mix will be different. Floodwaters, depending upon their duration and timing, will kill some species while bringing in seed of others. Muska'ats, beaver, geese and carp may suppress some species while spreadh~g others, and theh' populations also shift from year to year. The species mix recommended on Table II represents durable and adaptable species which can tolerate many different hydroperiod combinations, grow prolifically and are readily available, either as local transplants or from regional wetland nurseries. Most of these species are planted as dormant rhizomes, rootstocks or tubers in the spring, the recommended rate being approximately one plant per square yard. If large sod chunks (4-6 inches) are used, they can be spaced 4 feet apart and will fill in equally fast. Seedlings are not recommended because the combined resident and migratory goose population could do serious damage before the seedlings can become established. A double row of sandbar willows should be deep-planted along tile outermost perimeter edge of the sand pit rim. Unlike many willow species, sandbat' willow does not form large trees but rather FIGURE 8 CAR BODIES IN RIPRAP 2,2, 23 spreads fi'om root suckers to titan dense clonal thickets. Tile tangled mat of roots and suckers helps hold sediment and riprap blocks in place. The thicket helps camouflage the riprap, create habitat and slows floodflows so that sediment is deposited rather than eroded, thus slowly building the natural levee. There are many methods to plant sandbar willow and the one most suited to this site is to harvest and plant long dormant cuttings in late March or early April. A narrow backhoe bucket can be used to dig a slot 5 or 6 feet deep with pairs of 8 or 9 foot long cuttings pushed into the hole before refilling and compacting the excavated soil. The pah's should be spaced about 5 feet on center, with 10-12 t~et between the rows. Deep-planted willow whips can root over theh' enth'e below-ground length in wet seasons with very high rates of survival. If the spring season is dry they should be watered regularly until well established. Details of willow planting are illustrated with a cross-section on Figure 9. Tile upper side slopes of the sand pit should be cut back to 4:1 (run:rise) and planted to a three- stage grass and forb mix. The th'st stage grasses should be either oats for a spring planting or winter wheat for an early autumn planting. These will sprout immediately and provide erosion control. The second stage should be a common pasture mix with timothy, red top, red clover, etc., which develops more slowly that year (or the following year for an early autumn planting). The thh'd stage is s~naller quantities of native prairie species which will attempt to gradually displace the pasture species. Approximate quantities are listed on Table Ill. Floods will bring in additional seed from upstream and the long term outcome is not fully predictable without intensive management, which is not recommended for this site. STOCKING As soon as construction of each cell is completed it should be stocked with 20 pounds of fathead minnows. This species remahls small, reproduces prolifically, eats mosquito larvae plus other tiny plants and animals, and tolerates a wide range of water quality conditions. It is low on the food chain and supports a wide range of predators, from bass to kingfishers. These minnows are available locally. The other small plants and animals, including algae, diatoms, ostracodes, pondweeds, snails, beetles, stoneflies, leeches, mayflies, fah'y slu'imp, rofifers, crayfish, hydras, etc. will migrate rapidly to the site without our assistance and colonize each cell as it becomes available. These do not need to be stocked. TABLE II RECOMMENDED WETLAND AND AQUATIC SPECIES Wild h'is Sweet Flag Canada Anemone Burreed (several species) Sedges (many species) Arrowhead (several species) Deepwater Duck Potato Water Lily Ironweed Water Plantain (plant as seed) Spikerushes (many species) Bukushes (many species) Muskgrass (deep water aquatic) Wild Celery (deep water aquatic) Blue joint 24 Note: cattails and reed canary grass are not recommended because they will move in on their own and could overwhelm other species if planted early. IOWA RIVER 25 WILLOW CUTTINGS //-~"~.~ TEM POR ARILY EXCAVATED SOIL I / I / I / EXISTING RIPRAP FIGURE 9 PLANTING WILLOW WHIPS NOT TO SCALE ~MS CONSULTANTS, 1917 South Gilbert Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 CHECKED BY.. LDD/JJK DRAI~NG NO,: 31 9-351-8282 0112-019 $H£Er OF JO~ NO.: G:~0100~0112019~01120193 7-21-97 9:01:09 am EST Stage 1 (cover) 2 (pasture) TABLE 1II UPPER SLOPE SEEDING MIX Species Oats or Winter Wheat Pounds/Acre 45-55 Timothy Red Top Red Clover Perennial Rye Kentucky Bluegrass Alfalfa 12-20 3 Big Bluestem 9-12 (native prairie) Indian Grass Little Bluestem Purple Coneflower Sideoats Grama Sunflowers (several species) New England Aster Pm'tridge Pea Pale Purple Coneflower Yellow Coneflower Monarda Note: Some pasture mixes and some native prah'ie mixes will contah~ different species. pasture mixes with brome and select mesic prairie mixes. Avoid 26 27 PART IV OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Some mineral extraction industries can create groundwater problems, affecting either quantity or quality. However hydraulic sand dredging, as presently conducted in Iowa City and proposed for this site, uses water fi'om a pit dug into the sand layer and returns all the water to the same sand layer, so there is no net loss. Fines washed fi'om the sand are returned to the pit where they settle out and the water is recycled to dredge more sand. The net result is that shallow wells only a short distance down gradient show no change in water level or quality. The WillJain's site is presently in row crops and applied pesticides can readily enter the shallow sands. This will cease with its conversion to a sand pit and subsequent reclamation. Hydraulic sand dredging is one of the least obtrusive mineral extraction industries. There is not the blasting associated with a bedrock quarry nor the tarry odor of an asphalt plant, so it should be relatively easy for the operators to maintain a good neighbor policy. '? , [l ; : I , iI lI' 2:> r,~, , ',';i,'" ;: Problems with CU9706: Application for Conditional Use Permit for WillJain's Sand Pit Operation presented to the Board of Supervisors site visit October 6, 1997 The proposed sand operation is not compatible with the area, i.e. agricultural and residential. Although the proposal is for -95 acres; a negative response from the Board of Supervisors for CU9706 will send a message that sand mining can NOT be done near residential areas. Since an area along the river and to the south (-350 acres) has one owner not living in the state it seems plausible that other sand operations could be initiated in this area. Izaak Walton Road should serve as a border for sand operations (north of Izaak Walton Road is in Iowa City); no new operations should be approved South of Izaak Walton Road. If you were asked why you didn't want a sand mining operation in your back yard you would probably give some of the following reasons: 1. the road connecting me to main roads would cause potential safety problems: heavy truck vs pedestrian, bicyclists, car or bus encounters on a minimally maintained gravel road 2. noise and dust produced by the extraction, loading and truck travel 3. safety related to open pits 4. replacement of open fields with open 'ponds' when project is completed; the aesthetics of the finished product has not been shown by past history Our reasons for not having a sand mining operation in our back yard are no different than yours. Clearly, from a humanistic point of view the sand operation should not be embedded in a residential/agricultural area. Also after reading written documents, the operation does not meet the guidelines stated in the "Zoning Ordinance for Unincorporated Area of Johnson Cotmty" and the goals and strategies in the "Johnson County, Comprehensive Plan 1997". The proposal should be declined and future decisions should be based on locating these plants away from residential areas: in many areas sand plants are purposely located far from residential areas. The added cost for transporting the material is the price that must be paid to protect the equality of everyonefs home. Expansion is not cheap; in this case the savings in transportation costs can not replace the loss that nearby residents will suffer in their quality of life and in their property values. Present and future plmming must be based on these principles. Further expansion on these points is contained in letters written to members of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors. Please take the time to read these letter and give these concerns your careful consideration. Vicki and Dwight Tardy pitboard.doc 4608 Oak Crest Hill Rd. SE Iowa City, Iowa 52240 October 6, 1997 Members of City Council of Iowa City Civic Center 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa Dear Madam/Sir: We are va'iting to you today to express our concerns for and opposition to Conditional Use Permit application CU9706: Reclamation Opportunities at the Future Williams Sand Pit. Although the Zoning staff recommended approval the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 3 to 2 to deny the application. As you know the application has been put on the agenda for the Board of Supervisors meeting of October 9. We have read the i) Reclamation Oppommities at the Future Williams Sand Pit proposal, ii) the Zoning Ordinance for Unincorporated Area of Johnson County and iii) the Johnson County, Iowa Comprehensive Plan 1997. There seems to be some discrepancies between the County guidelines and the proposed mining at this particular site. We question the compatibility and consistency of a mining operation in this area that has been established as residential and agricultural by the Platming and Zoning Office of this county and approved by the Boai'd of Supervisors. We will cite specifics where we think this proposal is in direct opposition to the goals and guidelines set out in the latter two documents listed above. Comprehensive Plan Section 11.5, Future Land Use-Commercial and Industrial Development states "The county should make every effort to reduce conflicts between commercial and industrial development and residential areas by separating them completely or requiring increased setbacks or buffers between uses where separation is not feasible." We ask: Does 50' from a home sound like it meets the reasonable separation from a mining operation? Would you like a mining operation 50' from your back yard? How would you feel about the safety of your children or grandchildren? How would you like only a row of willow trees separating your home from the benu of a sand pit? Section 11.9, Future Land Use Goals and Strategies. Environmental Protection states "Protect drainage areas, creek beds, and other highly erodable lands." This site is located directly in the floodway of the Iowa River; abandoned sand pits north of here 'blew out in the 1993 flood and caused erosion damage to farmland to the south. A mining operation makes the land more vulnerable to erosion. How will this added erosion affect the sewage lagoons for Regency Mobile Home Park which are located 50' south of proposed cell # 1 ? It is easy to visualize the effluents from 600 people contaminating wells, crop land and the Iowa River. This section also states "Protect Johnson County water quality." There is a concern on how this would affect the wells of residents in this area. Also in this section under Environmental Protection Strategies "Continue to strictly control development wifi~in floodplains." Strictly controlling development would be to deny approval for this permit. The Economic Development Goals in this section also reiterates "Reduce conflicts between commercial and industrial development and residential areas" and "Encourage commercial and industa'ial development in such a manner as to minimize disturbance to natural land features and productive agricultural land". There is no question that a mining operation drastically alters land features and this land is currently being fanned. The Strategies for this subsection state "Separate commercial and industrial and residential land ' uses completely or require increased setbacks or buffers between uses where complete separation is not feasible." And "Prevent access to industrial areas through existing or future residential areas." Residents in this area would have to share Izaak Walton Road (IWR) with 100 trucks a day. The sand trucks would enter IWR from their plant at the exact intersection where children are picked up and dropped off by the school bus. The intersection oflWK with State Highway 923 is another safety concern: there is only 40' between the intersection and the railroad track. There is no doubt that the extensive heavy truck traffic will take its toll on the road and cause even more safety concerns for pedestrians, bicyclists and automobile drivers. Would you like to drive your car on IWR to get to and from your home with a loaded sand truck coming full speed ahead? (Trucks are known to travel -55 mph on this road.) Would you want your child riding lfis/her bike or walking or waiting for the school bus under these conditions? II. Zoning Ordinance Section 8:1.34. Conditional Use Permits "I.A. That the proposed location, design, construction and operation of the particular use adequately safeguards the health, safety and general welfare of persons residing or working in adjoining or sun'ounding property." We are concerned about the noise fi'om the operation of removing the sand from the ground and loading into the trucks and the noise from the trucks moving and can'ying away the sand. The safety concerns mentioned above also apply here. How will the enviromnent be affected if 'temporary' equipment used for producing concrete and/or asphalt is brought to the site? The general welfare of nearby residents will not be enhanced by a mining operation. 'TB. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the quality and supply of water, air, and light to surrounding property." We are concerned about air pollution due to dust from processing sand and fi'om truck travel on gravel roads. We are concerned about noise pollution from digging, loading and transporting sand. We are also concerned about water pollution to wolls in the area. "I.C. That the proposed use will not adversely affect established property values of adjoining or surrounding buildings." Would a sand pit and processing plant affect the value of your property if it were located in your backyard? What will the land look like when the sand is extracted? Past experience shows us that more wasteland will be left behind not the park-like setting illustrated on the front page of the proposal. It can't help but devalue property in the surrounding area. "I.D. That the proposed use is in accordance with the character of the area and peculiar suitability of this area for the proposed use." The current character of the area is residential and agricultural from the Williams site south. Unfortunately, pits north of Williams that were abandoned in the mid 1980's infi'inged on the residential/agricultural/resort area; the promise of a park-like setting still does not exist 12 years later. Just because you can do something does not mean you should. If this proposal is approved, what is to stop the development of mining to the south along the western side of the Iowa River. It would be a pity to turn into a wasteland what is undeniably one of Johnson County's most beautiful areas. Those of us who live along here treasure the serenity and natural beauty of the valley. "I.E That the proposed use is an appropriate use of the land and will not discourage appropriate uses of other land." Some people will say that this is an appropriate use of the land since sand is here and sand is needed. However, it does not seem compatible with the zoning that has been approved in the last couple of years; several small subdivisions have been approved in the area directly south of IWR and are compatible with the raising of animals and growing of crops that is cm'rently the dominant activity in the area. The proposal states that there are only 2 to 4 years of sand on the Williams site; it doesn't take much imagination to see that it would not be worth the time and expense to develop this site unless they are also planning to develop adjoining areas. We urge you to have some foresight when considering this proposal and not to let the gates open to deveioping a wasteland along the western banks of the Iowa River. We urge you to vote to deny approval of CU9706. Thank you for the time you have spent reading this. We would like to meet with you to discuss our concerns next week. Very Sincerely, Vicki Tardy phone: 351-5208 Dwight Tardy (pitierr2. doc) As requested, the following are the highlighted concerns of us property owners and residences adjoining and surrounding the proposed sand operation on the Tom Williams' farm. We feel it is very important for the board to read all of our letters as these are only our points of highlighted concerns without explanation. Our letters (sent to you by mail) explain in far greater detail the very points we list here. 1.) That the proposed site be located no closer than 1000' to any residential property. This is the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance and is a supplemental condition of a sand operation in any other residential area in the county. Strip mining is NOT a compatible use in or around a residential area. We are residential property tax payers in Johnson County and expect our rights of protection. Taxation without representation, regardless of past zoning mistakes, is no more right now than it was when this country was founded. 2.) That the proposed location, design, construction and operation of this particular use adequately safeguards the health, safety and general welfare of persons residing in the adjoining and surrounding properties. 3.) That the proposed site will not adversely affect the quality and supply of water, air, and light to surrounding property. 4.) That the proposed site will not adversely affect established property values of adjoining or surrounding properties. 5.) That the proposed site is in accordance with the character of property uses currently in this area. 6.) That the proposed site is an appropriate use of this land and will not discourage appropriate uses of other lands. 7.) That past mining operations in the area need be assessed in understanding how this proposed operation will truly be run. As well as how the leased property truly will be left after minerals have been exhausted regardless of promises and reclamation plans. 8.) That this operation, where allowed, be properly enforced at every level of government to prevent illegal stockpiling of any kind, or measure, which would impede or redirect the natural flow of flood waters. Perhaps even excluding the county from future FEMA grants. 9.) That there be no easy access for children in the area to wonder to any hazard this company would leave during or after their extraction of wanted minerals. 10.) That trucks using the county owned road provide special health, safety and welfare problems including, but not limited to: dust & noise pollution, speed & traffic violation with increased traffic, and perhaps most importantly the increased probability of accidents. While no resident down here wishes to be in a accident with a 40 ton truck, all agree the school bus that visits the area having such an accident, with a full load of children, would be the greatest tragedy of allowing such an operation in a residential area. 1 l.) That the County road be maintained during and after any new use is allowed upon it. The railroad, county and city all have some interest in the road currently and all need agree to what shall be done and who will have responsibility for maintenance there after. 12.) What security can be expected during and after operation of this site. The current sites have always been an attractant for undesirables in the area. Trespassing and destruction of private properties have in the past been byproducts of new strip mining. 13.) Holding someone responsible for property upkeep after the site is closed for the use of mining. Current sites are never mowed and no effort at all is made to keep the properties up because there is no other possible use for the properties after they have been str/p mined. 14.) The very real possibility of blow outs (in times of floods) permanently changing the current channel of the Iowa river. The combination of all other past strip mining sites in this area, with this proposed new site, weaken further existing "weak-links" that potentially could shorten the distance the river currently flows. 15.) Lastly, we have great concerns about accountability, where this operation is allowed. For each of the concerns we have listed above, we wish to know who will stand up and accept responsibility. While we understand there are many concerns above that simply can not be addressed while allowing this operation, most of these concerns are directly out of the county ordinance for such an operation. The intent of the ordinance was not to have strip mining and residences mixed. The ordinance foresaw residential concerns and tried to account fairly for them. We ask no more than to be recognized as residences and have our rights of protection preserved. September 29, 1997 <<Name>> 913 South Dubuque St. P.O. Box 1350 Iowa City, Iowa 52244-1350 I write today in opposition of a proposed Conditional Use Permit on the Tom Williams' farm. If passed, this Conditional Use Permit would put a sand pit 50' from my back yard. I also wish to explain some of the history of the area so you, as board members, can make a better informed decision. My goal for this letter is to talk about tree major points, I feel can not go ignored. I will explain: 1 .) The current and past zoning of the surrounding area, 2.) Stated requirements for a conditional use permit which, in this case, are not being met and finally, 3.) I will try to explain the history of, now closed, sand pits in the area. Sand pits that were operated by the very same group requesting permits to open a new sand operation now. These "old sand pits" should be considered in assessing value of any future plan to allow strip mining in this area. Zoning: I live in the Zahner's Subdivision. In 1959, when it was originally platted, this area was zoned A-2 Resort. Zahner's stayed zoned A-2 Resort until August 19, 1985. Many people, as a result of this zoning, built there homes in this area, myself included. What happened on August 19, 1985, we as property owners, are just now coming to understand: In a county wide effort to discourage further building of homes inside the 100yr flood plain, Johnson County adopted a Flood Plain Ordinance. This new Ordinance changed Zahner's, as well as other areas in the county, from then current zoning, to A-3 Flood Plain with one blanket action. The new Ordinance was meant to discourage further building inside the flood plain, not to forgo the protection and property fights of existing property owners. The importance of understanding all this is that since 1959 property owners in this area have, and continue, to pay a residential tax rate. Surely, therefore, we too are entitled to the rights and protections that go along with owning a residence. The intent for a conditional use permit for a sand mining operation is rather clear in requiring any proposed site for permit to be no closer than 1000ft to any property zoned for any type of residency i.e.: A-2, RS, R1A, RIB, R2, or R3A. There are many residencies in this area, both in the Zahner's Subdivision and outside the Zahner's Subdivision. The county allowed all of us to invest and build, and residential taxes have been collected on our investments for close to 40yrs now. It is my belief, that since there was a residence on almost every lot in Zahner's Subdivision, that the flood plain ordinance of 1985 (adopted on a county wide bases) provided unfair hardship on the existing residences 0fthe area. Not only did the ordinance take away our existing property use rights, but now, if this permit for a conditional use is granted, we would lose our rights of protection as residential home owners in Johnson County as well. I would tike to see my property in the Zahner's Subdivision zoned back to the A-2 Resort district that it had when I bought my property and built my house. This is the only way I can see to protect the investments I have made, over the long term. I should not have to come back to this board every time a farmer in the area sees the county has me zoned A-3 and thinks my rights of protection can then be ignored as a residential property tax payer. As I have said, there is a house built on almost, if not all, properties in the Zahner's Subdivision; the A-3 Flood Plain zoning we currently have serves no purpose but to forgo our rights o~' protection as residencies. The A-3 zoning does not discourage building in Zatmer's any more than A-2 zoning would. If the area were zoned A-2, it would still fall under every restriction t~ar building in the flood plain: With the addition of the 4/23/87 amendments t~r flood plain regulations, ANY property within the 100yr flood plain, regardless o~'the zoned district, must meet flood plain regulations. At the least, I would ask this board to protect my rights as a residency in Johnson County and deny any conditional use permit for sand mining where tile proposed site is within 1000ft of my residence, regardless of past ntistakes with zoning. Requirements for a Conditional Use Permit: There are five guidelines to be considered in determining whether a conditional use permit should, or will, be granted: A.) That tile proposed location, design, construction and operation of the particular use adequately safeguards the health, safety and general welfare of persons residing or working in adjoining or surrounding property. B.) That tile proposed use will not adversely affect the quality and supply of water, air, and light to surrounding property. C.) That the proposed use will not adversely affect established property values of adjoining or surrounding buildings. D.) That tile proposed use is in accordance with the character of'the area and the peculiar suitability of this area for tile proposed use. E.) That the proposed use is an appropriate use of the land and will not discourage appropriate uses of other land. As pointed out, and agreed to as part of the reason to motion that this conditional use permit be denied, your zoning board recognized none o1' the above guidelines are met by this proposal from S&G for a operation in this area. I would like to go over each guideline, one at a time, as a means to show what information was brought up to aid the board of zoning in there decision: a.) There is a bus stop ilar school children at the very location where S&G hopes to gain easement, both il~gress and egress, to their proposed sand operation. This is not a standard 40' easement, it was given as an agricultural easement and though I have not checked I would think that it can be no more than 25ff wide. The school bus stops a minimum ot'two times a day at this sight, early morning and early evening. The school bus currently uses the mouth of the easement, that S&G wishes to use, to turn around in. There are also several elderly people, with breathing difficulties, living in the surrounding neighborhoods. Proposal of such a plan, so close to residencies, in itself does not adequately provide for the health, safety or general wclfiu'c of persons residing in these adjoining and surrounding properties. b.) Built so closely to my property, fifty feet away, I can expect water, air and light contamination. Less than 75' fi'om my well, I can expect more direct introduction of f'ertilizer residue and nitrates, this farm has used for years, in to my water supply. Even with their best efforts, running trucks and equipxnent 50' fi'om my property line will produce uncontrollable amounts of dust erTecting ankl contaminating both the air and light supply I currently enjoy. c.) There are 2 other abandon sand pits operations within hundreds of feet of this proposed site. Mr. 8'arker and Mr. Albrecht subleased one in 1987 (under the name Central Materials, Inc.) and they own the site of the other. Both sites are totally destroyed for any use, have been abandoned and are a terrible eye sore. Both sites have many unsymmetrical holes dug all about the property, have been let grow up with noxious weeds and most certainly do devalue adjoining properties. We have 2 examples of exactly what S&G will do to devalue property in this area, within hundreds of feet of each other. I have no doubt the value of my property (fifty t~et away from such a site) would, ill fact, fall dramatically. In 1993, with tile flood, pits on BOTH of the sites I speak of above DID partially blow out towards the river on their south ends. The county of Johnson County had to rebuild part of lzaak Walton Road because of one of these blow outs (see inclosed photo) from a pit located on property S&G owns. The other blow out was on property Central Materials (Albrecht & Barker) subleased from Albert Gee in 1987, for the purpose uf sm~d mining. This too, clearly, dewdues adjoinling properties, as a blow out redirects the stream flow of the Iowa river, at times of high waters, to cut away at adjoining lands that in no way would be affected without such a disturbance o1-' existing natural fills. d.) There are homes within flay feet of this proposed site, there is also farm land for the production of crops in this area. This is the character of the area. This was always the intent for this area and is exactly why it originally was zone A-2 resort: To allow t~r both residencies and crop production. A sand operation in this area is not fitting with the character oFthes¢ two intended uses. Nor is a sand operation in this area an effective use of the land. It will become totally useless ground, unsuitable for crop production of any kind within 2yrs of digging. When S&G moves offof this proposed farm land it will sit, just as the land Mr. Albrecht and Mr. Barker leased in 1987 has. Never again will this land have any use what so ever. c.) This proposal is not in any way an appropriate use For any crop producing farm land. Excluding times el' very large lloods this land has produced good crops every year since it was platted. Allowing a sand operation on this land, as small as it is, will provide short term supplies of s,'md (2-4yrs). Thereafter, the land can never again produce a crop or serve any intended use for which it is zoned. Further, allowing this sand operation will discourage appropriate uses of other lands. Already the owners of S&G have offered a large property owner, south of the Williams' farm, timds so they may move this operation southward on to his lands. In ett~ct S&G knows there is only so much sand on the Williams' farin. Their long range goal is to gain an easement (via the Williams' farm) to tile lands south. Again, they will wish to strip mine destroying, almost inexhaustible, crop producing abilities of the farm lands in favor era short term supplies o f sa rid. Past ,¥aml Operations itt This/lrea: I have opposed sand pits in this area belbre. In an attempt to make sure the board is properly briefed on all in/21rmation I currently have that may be of use to them I wish to end here with the histories of sand pits in this area. I also wish to provide the board with ret~rences to get to facts regarding past operations in this area. While I believe it was an honest ntistake, from and honorable man that probably can not be expected to remember every. detail of ever7 business deal 10 yr. in the past (We are, after all, all getting older), I did hear Nil'. Barker of S&G make an error in explaining his involvement (To the Board of Zoning) in 1987 on an adjoining piece of property. Mr. Barker clairned he never had any dealings with Gee Grading & Excavating who, in 1987, held a lease on a tract of farm land from Ed and Mike Inc. (Eddy Pechous & Mike Donevan). I tbught the sand pit in 1987 and the proposed sand pit was a Central Materials operation. Albert Gee subleased the ground to Mr. Albrecht and Mr. Barker who at the time went before the board of supervisors (I am including sorne of tl~ose minutes, as well as some news paper articles). The Board's hands, at that time, it was decided, where tied: They could not stop tile operation argued for by Mr. Barker and Mr. Albrccht. The reasoning given us adjoining property owners was that the mining permits where still in effect t?om the state and that the site (as it had been mined before and never closed) was grandfathered in to the county ordnance. At the time, we were assured (as was the Board of Supervisors) that the site, upon reclamation, would look just like a park. Tile site was closed, the bond at the state was released and the site does not now, and never has, looked like a park. It was also suggested to the Board of Zoning that the I0 acre tract of land (wlfich included 1/2 of an old sand pit originally dug by Stevens' Sand and Gravel) that S&G wishes to build a plant on (And stock pile oil) was part elf'the Tom Williamns' t~,rm. This is in error. The piece of land pointed to in the Board of Zoning meeting is in f~act part ofthe Ed & Mike Inc. farm that Mr. Albrecht and Mr. Barker subleased in 1987. The lid & Mike Inc. arm has been officially closed ~r the purpose of sand mining to my understanding. A seco,~d set of permits and a second conditional use permnit would be needed to reopen this land for a mining operation. Further, this land, too, is within the flood plain and the flood way. It has been in use conibrmance el'the county ordinance (the mine was officially closed) for years now. The Ed & Mike Inc. thrm can no longer claim it is grandt~athered in. It is both in the flood plain and flood way, there can be ao stockpiling or construction that in any way would redirect the natural flow of flood waters. Lastly, there are sand pits (I believe now in the City Limits) directly north oFIzaak Walton Road. All of these abandoned pits are currently owned by S&G, as well. I think we as property owners (as well as you as board members) have many, many, examples of what can be expected from allowing further sand mining in this area with granting of new conditional use permits. It simply is not in the best interest of the surrounding lands, property owners or allowable property uses (as currently zoned) to grant such a conditional use permit for further mining of this area. The benefits gained by the one party of S&G do not out weigh the long term costs to: 1. The county, state, and t~deral governments through loss of revenues when this mine gets abandoned (2-4yrs), 2. Adjoining property owners who's lands and properties (and thereby their values) are directly a~t~cted. 3. The Community as a whole. Already, once, do to a blow out of an abandon mine, Johnson county tax payers have been asked to bare the cost or' repairing the county owned, lzaak Walton road. Where ~his operation is allowed and the river flows over its banks following the path it did in 1993 (directly southeastwardly) It will blow out these mines again. This time there will not be the 95 acre barrier ofthe Williams' farIn to stop the water fi'om avoiding 5 changes in direction over an estimated 13,000 feet of its current bed. Where it blows out all the walls ofthe current and proposed sand pits (Less than a l~w hundred feet max. between each pit) Tile river will t~ave access to an even deeper bed than it has now (most of tile pits are deeper than tile current river bottom). The river will have a more direct "strait line" sc, utheastcrly 11ow of about one third the distance (4500 feet est.). This entire area was constructed from the natural deposition provided from the Iowa River. The area is composed of deposited sand, silts and top soil: All easily erodable substances where their raw mass does not provide greater l'riction and resistance than the current walls and floor of an existing bed. To maintain the current river channel there must be less f?iction and resistance over the estimated 13,000 foot existing bed (which l~rces 5 directional changes) than there would be from eroding through all pit walls to shorten flow between to points by an estimated 8500 feet. If the resistance and friction provided by undisturbed parcels ol' land between two or more bends in the river are not greater than that provided by the current channel, in times of high water, physics dictate the river WILL take the easier path; The river would take a new, permanent, channel. When the river is out of its banks it flows directly south unless otherwise obstructed. On this side of the river and in this area there is a gradual gradient change, the further west you go from the rivers edge. The bulk of the county owned izaak Waltell Road and adjoining properties, for example, are 8' higher above sea level than the Williams' farln. Basically, this means that at a time of flood the water is forced into a southeasterly flow over the flood way. For three months in 1993 it flowed directly southeast in a strait line over the bank of the river, over the old sand pits next to the Izaak Walton road (which blew out, washing a section of Izaak Walton road away), over the sand pits that Central Materials leased and dug from in 1987 (which blew out on the southeast end, towards the Williams' farm), over tile Williamns' farm and eventually t~acl< over tile river bank just south of the Williams' fan-n. With this, a third set el'sand pits, (all witlain hundreds of feet of each other) all in a perfect line to shorten tile distance of the current flow of tile Iowa river around bends that change the flow direction no less than 5 times, It is not unreasonable to expect the fiver to blow out sand pits again. With no more than a few huadred feet between each sand pit and no more than 100' from each bank of the river, taking a new, straighter, path increasing the rivers gradient (down hill slope of the bed or of the waters surface, if the stream is very large) aad velocity (The speed at which a body of water travels from point a to point b) by shortening the distance between two points seems very plausible. The current river bed would become the new sight oldeposition (tbrming an oxbow lake) and the new channel would erode more and more deeply where before there was only deposition: previously useable, taxable, lands, when the river was within its banks, would become the new river chinreel. A~ay point south of the new channel discharge point (The Furthest southeasterly corner of the Williams' farm) could expect an increase in both the rivers gradient and velocity and, thereby, even the discharge rate would increase (channel width, depth and velocity all being factors in the measure of discharge rates) for places south to deal with. The cost o~' reclaiming lands damaged by such a change in the natural flow of the river would, [ am sure, be too catastrophic to expect property owners, down stream, to bare alone. I would point out that tim geological study on the Williams' farm, presented in the reclamation proposhl (page 19, paragraph 5) Admits basically what [ have stated above. A blow out is a probability where a weak link is made even weaker, providing a 100' barrier where currently there stands acres erbarfief. What the reclamation plan does not do is extend past the boundaries of the Williams' farm to include, also, all the weak links that will be made even weaker on all the directly adjoining (previously mined) lands in this area. I wish to thank you for you time in reading this letter and hope you too, in some small way, now feel better intbrmed to decide the issue soon to be before you. The concerns of us property owners are quite real, again, tl~ank you for listening to them. Mary Kay Hull Sally Stutsman Joe Bolkcom Charles D. Duffy Johnathan Jordahl Stephen P. l_,acina