Policy of the Iowa Department of Transportation Highway Division For Accommodating Utilities on Primary Road System, 1990

This policy covers initial placement, adjustment, relocation and replacement of utility facilities in, on, above or below all highway right of way over which the Iowa Department of Transportation exercises control of access. It embodies the basic specifications and standards needed, to insure the safety of the highway user and the integrity of the highway. (1990 revision to 1985 policy.)

Policy for Accommodating and Adjustment of Utilities on the Primary Road System, 2012

This chapter covers initial placement, adjustment, and maintenance of utility facilities in, on, above or below the right-of-way of primary highways, including attachments to primary highway structures. It embodies the basic specifications and standards needed to ensure the safety of the highway user and the integrity of the highway. (2012 revision to 2005 policy.)

Policy of the Iowa Department of Transportation Highway Division For Accommodating Utilities on the Primary Road System, 1992

This chapter covers initial placement, adjustment, improvement, relocation, replacement and maintenance of utility facilities in, on, above or below the right-of-way over of primary highways, including attachments to primary highway structures. It embodies the basic specifications and standards needed, to ensure the safety of the highway user and the integrity of the highway. (1992 revision to 1990 policy.)

Policy for Accommodating and Adjustment of Utilities on the Primary Road System, 2005

This chapter covers initial placement, adjustment, and maintenance of utility facilities in, on, above or below the right-of-way of primary highways, including attachments to primary highway structures. It embodies the basic specifications and standards needed, to ensure the safety of the highway user and the integrity of the highway. (2005 revision to 1992 policy.)

Guidelines for Removal of Traffic Control Devices in Rural Areas, TR-527, 2005

It is commonly regarded that the overuse of traffic control devices desensitizes drivers and leads to disrespect, especially for low-volume secondary roads with limited enforcement. The maintenance of traffic signs is also a tort liability concern, exacerbated by unnecessary signs. The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Traffic Control Devices Handbook provide guidance for the implementation of STOP signs based on expected compliance with right-of-way rules, provision of through traffic flow, context (proximity to other controlled intersections), speed, sight distance, and crash history. The approach(es) to stop is left to engineering judgment and is usually dependent on traffic volume or functional class/continuity of system. Although presently being considered by the National Committee on Traffic Control Devices, traffic volume itself is not given as a criterion for implementation in the MUTCD. STOP signs have been installed at many locations for various reasons which no longer (or perhaps never) met engineering needs. If in fact the presence of STOP signs does not increase safety, removal should be considered. To date, however, no guidance exists for the removal of STOP signs at two-way stop-controlled intersections. The scope of this research is ultra-low-volume (< 150 daily entering vehicles) unpaved intersections in rural agricultural areas of Iowa, where each of the 99 counties may have as many as 300 or more STOP sign pairs. Overall safety performance is examined as a function of a county excessive use factor, developed specifically for this study and based on various volume ranges and terrain as a proxy for sight distance. Four conclusions are supported: (1) there is no statistical difference in the safety performance of ultra-low-volume stop-controlled and uncontrolled intersections for all drivers or for younger and older drivers (although interestingly, older drivers are underrepresented at both types of intersections); (2) compliance with stop control (as indicated by crash performance) does not appear to be affected by the use or excessive use of STOP signs, even when adjusted for volume and a sight distance proxy; (3) crash performance does not appear to be improved by the liberal use of stop control; (4) safety performance of uncontrolled intersections appears to decline relative to stop-controlled intersections above about 150 daily entering vehicles. Subject to adequate sight distance, traffic professionals may wish to consider removal of control below this threshold. The report concludes with a section on methods and legal considerations for safe removal of stop control.

Living Snow Fences, 2006

Blowing snow can cause significant problems for mobility and safety during winter weather in three distinct ways. It may drift onto the road, thus requiring almost continuous plowing while the wind is blowing (which may occur when a given winter storm is over). Snow may drift onto wet pavement (perhaps caused by ice control chemicals) and dilute out the chemicals on the road, creating ice on the road. And sufficient blowing snow can cause a major deterioration in visibility on the road, a factor which has been shown to be significant in winter crashes. The problem of blowing snow can be very effectively addressed by creating a snow storage device upwind of the road that requires protection from snow drifting. Typically, these storage devices are fences. Extensive design guidance exists for the required height and placement of such fences for a given annual snowfall and given local topography. However, the design information on the placement of living snow fences is less complete. The purpose of this report is to present the results of three seasons of study on using standing corn as snow fences. In addition, the experience of using switch grass as a snow storage medium is also presented. On the basis of these experimental data, a design guide has been developed that makes use of the somewhat unique snow storage characteristics of standing corn snow fences. The results of the field tests on using standing corn showed that multiple rows of standing corn store snow rather differently than a traditional wooden snow fence. Specifically, while a traditional fence stores most of the snow downwind from the fence (and thus must be placed a significant distance upwind of the road to be protected, specifically at least 35 times the snow fence height) rows of standing corn store the majority of the snow within the rows. Results from the three winters of testing show that the standing corn snow fences can store as much snow within the rows of standing corn as a traditional fence of typical height for operation in Iowa (4 to 6 feet) can store. This finding is significant because it means that the snow fences can be placed at the edge of the farmer’s field closest to the road, and still be effective. This is typically much more convenient for the farmer and thus may mean that more farmers would be willing to participate in a program that uses standing corn than in traditional programs. ii On the basis of the experimental data, design guidance for the use of standing corn as a snow storage device in Iowa is given in the report. Specifically, it is recommended that if the fetch in a location to be protected is less than 5,000 feet, then 16 rows of standing corn should be used, at the edge of the field adjacent to the right of way. If the fetch is greater than 5,000 feet, then 24 rows of standing corn should be used. This is based on a row spacing of 22 inches. Further, it should be noted that these design recommendations are ONLY for the State of Iowa. Other states of course have different winter weather and without extensive further study, it cannot be said that these guidelines would be effective in other locations with other winter conditions.

Highways and Your Land, January 2006

For most people, highway engineering, design and right of way acquisition are not of immediate concern. However, when you own or rent property that will be affected by highway construction, you begin to consider road building from a different and personal viewpoint Right of way is the land on which highways are built. The amount of land needed depends on the engineering standards that must be met for the type of highway that will be built or improved. This booklet will acquaint property owners, tenants and the public with the procedures the Iowa Department of Transportation follows in acquiring right of way for a highway. It is not a source of technical definitions or legal advice. Further, it is not intended to establish a legal standard.

2012-2016 Iowa Transportation Improvement Program

The Iowa Transportation Improvement Program (Program) is published to inform Iowans of planned investments in our state’s transportation system. The Iowa Transportation Commission (Commission) and Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) are committed to programming those investments in a fiscally responsible manner. This document reflects Iowa’s multimodal transportation system by the inclusion of investments in aviation, transit, railroads, trails, and highways. A major component of this program is the highway section that documents programmed investments on the primary highway system for the next five years. A large part of funding available for highway programming comes from the federal government. Accurately estimating future federal funding levels is dependent on having a current enacted multi-year federal transportation authorization. The most recent authorization, Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), expired September 30, 2009, and to date it has been extended seven times because a new authorization has not yet been enacted. The current extension will expire September 30, 2011. This leads to significant uncertainty in federal funding; however, it is becoming evident that, in Federal Fiscal Year 2012 and beyond, federal funding revenue will likely be reduced by 25 percent from current levels in order to match revenue that flows into the Highway Trust Fund. This Program reflects this anticipated reduction in federal funding. While Iowa law does not require the adoption of a Program when federal transportation funding is being reauthorized, the Commission believes it is important to adopt a Program in order to continue on-going planning and project development efforts so that Iowa will be well positioned when a new authorization is adopted. However, it is important to recognize that, absent a federal authorization bill, there is significant uncertainty in the forecast of federal revenues. The Commission and the Iowa DOT will continue to monitor federal revenues and will adjust future investments as needed to maintain a fiscally responsible Program. For 2012-2016, approximately $2.3 billion is forecast to be available for highway right of way and construction. In developing the highway section of the Program, the Commission’s primary investment objective remains stewardship (i.e. safety, maintenance and preservation) of Iowa’s existing highway system. Over $1.3 billion is programmed in FY2012 through FY2016 for preservation of Iowa’s existing highway system and for enhanced highway safety features. The highway section also includes significant interstate investments on I-29 in Sioux City, I-29/80/480 in Council Bluffs, and I-74 in Bettendorf/Davenport. The FY2016 programming for construction on I-74 in Bettendorf/Davenport is the first of several years of significant investments that will be monitored for available funding. Approximately $200 million of the investments on these three major urban interstate projects address preservation needs. In total, approximately $1.5 billion is programmed for highway preservation activities for 2012- 2016. Another highway programming objective is maintaining the scheduled completion of capacity and economic development projects. Projects that were previously scheduled to be completed within the previous Program continue on their current schedule. However, due to the reduction of projected federal revenues, the Commission has delayed by one year the initiation of construction of all multi-year non-Interstate capacity and economic development projects that cannot be completed within this Program. These projects are U.S. 20 in Woodbury County, U.S. 30 in Benton County, U.S. 61 in Louisa County, and Iowa 100 in Linn County. The Iowa DOT and Commission appreciate the public’s involvement in the state’s transportation planning process. Comments received personally, by letter or through participation in the Commission’s regular meetings or public input meetings held around the state each year, are invaluable in providing guidance for the future of Iowa’s transportation system. It should be noted that this document is a planning guide. It does not represent a binding commitment or obligation of the Commission or Iowa DOT, and is subject to change.

Highways and Your Land, January 2011

For most people, highway engineering, design and right of way acquisition are not of immediate concern. However, when you own or rent property that will be affected by highway construction, you begin to consider road building from a different and personal viewpoint. Right of way is the land on which highways are built. The amount of land needed depends on the engineering standards that must be met for the type of highway that will be built or improved. This booklet will acquaint property owners, tenants and the public with the procedures the Iowa Department of Transportation follows in acquiring right of way for a highway. It is not a source of technical definitions or legal advice. Further, it is not intended to establish a legal standard.

2013-2018 Highway Program Summary, 2012

The Iowa Transportation Commission (Commission) and the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) develop Iowa’s Five Year Highway Program (Program) to inform you of planned investments in our state’s primary and interstate highway system. This brochure summarizes the FY 2013-2017 Program. $2.6 billion is forecast for highway right of way and construction. The Program is updated and approved in June of each year. A large part of funding available for highway programming comes from the federal government. Accurately estimating future federal funding levels is dependent on having a multiyear federal transportation authorization bill in place. The most recent authorization, Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), expired September 30, 2009, and to date it has been extended nine times because a new authorization has not yet been enacted. The current extension will expire June 30, 2012.

Motorcycle Conspicuity – What Factors Have the Greatest Impact, 2012.

The Iowa Motorcycle Operator Manual states that when a motorcycle and another vehicle collide, more than half of these crashes are caused by drivers entering the rider’s right-of-way. Furthermore, in crashes with motorcyclists, drivers often say they never saw the motorcycle. Therefore, increasing motorcycle conspicuity could help address these issues, resulting in fewer crashes (and injuries and damage).

Guidelines for County Engineering Decisions, HR-369, 1997

There has been a great deal of concern by county engineers and supervisors over constrained budgets, lack of resources and a deteriorating infrastructure, as they affect the secondary road system in Iowa. In addition, public input and/or political pressure have been increasing over the years. This study was initiated to determine the most important issues facing counties and document the way in which various Iowa counties have been addressing those issues. The list of issues was developed through meetings of county engineers and supervisors in each of the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) regions around the state. Questionnaires were sent to all engineers and supervisors statewide asking them how the various issues (e.g. snow and ice removal policies, Level "B" roads, and so on) were handled in their respective counties. The responses were then compiled into this document. The subjects selected and used include: county policies, ordinances, resolutions; snow and ice removal policy; dust control; Level "B" roads; vacating roads; rural development; private entrance construction and maintenance; roadside management practices; right of way encroachments and easements; personnel matters, staff and organization; communicating information to citizens; supervisor/ engineer relations; and county leasing/purchasing practices.

This is YOUR Highway Commission,1968

Before the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) was established by legislation in July 1974, there were several state agencies that handled the tasks that are now the responsibility of an integrated, multimodal Iowa DOT. Among those agencies was the Iowa State Highway Commission (IHC). You are invited to read a brief history of the Iowa DOT here:http://www.iowadot.gov/about/organizationalhistory.htm The IHC operated as an independent state agency between 1913 and 1974. In 1968, the IHC created and released This is YOUR Highway Commission, a 24 ½- minute film that showcased the responsibilities and functions of the IHC. The narrator describes the activities of various offices and employees, and explains how those activities benefited Iowa’s citizens and motorists. The film journeys through all areas of IHC responsibility to Iowa’s roadways, including administration, planning, design, bidding, right of way, materials, construction, maintenance and facilities. As part of the Iowa DOT’s effort to preserve and archive its historical resources, the original 16mm film was professionally cleaned, restored and digitized so that it could be made available via this website. The Iowa DOT is currently researching and compiling information necessary to prepare detailed biographies of the IHC employees identified in the film. Included in each biography will be still frames taken from the film, as well as other images from the Iowa DOT’s archives. This more comprehensive description of the film will be available in the future. In the meantime, below is a list of the IHC employees who have been identified. The list is arranged in the order in which each employee first appears in the film. There remain numerous unidentified employees in the film, and the Iowa DOT would greatly appreciate any assistance in identifying them. If you recognize an IHC employee in the film who is not on this list, please contactbeth.collins@dot.iowa.gov with any information you feel would be useful. Identified employees: Joseph Coupal, Jr.—Director of Highways Harry Bradley—Commissioner Derby Thompson—Commissioner John Hansen—Commissioner Koert Voorhees—Commissioner Harold Shiel—Engineer Howard Gunnerson—Chief engineer Martha Groth—Commission Secretary Robert Barry—Commissioner Nancy Groomes—Director’s Secretary Russell Moreland—Planning C.B. Anderson—Planning Gus Anderson—Engineer Carl Schach—Deputy chief engineer Raymond Kassel—Hearings engineer (later director of Transportation) Bob Given—Deputy chief engineer Don McLean—Director of Engineering Howard Thielen—Surveying (using rod) John Huss—Surveying (using leveling transit) John “Harley” McCoy—Surveying (taking notes) Jim Smith—Right of Way Keith Davis—Contracts Sherrill P. Freed—Sign Shop Olav Smedal—Director of Public Information

Stream Stabilization in Western Iowa, HR-352, 1994

Stream channel erosion in the deep loess soils region of western Iowa causes severe damage along hundreds of miles of streams in twenty-two counties. The goal of this project was to develop information, systems, and procedures for use in making resource allocation decisions related to the protection of transportation facilities and farmland from damages caused by stream channel erosion. Section one of this report provides an introduction. Section two presents an assessment of stream channel conditions from aerial and field reconnaissance conducted in 1993 and 1994 and a classification of the streams based on a six stage model of stream channel evolution. A Geographic Information System is discussed that has been developed to store and analyze data on the stream conditions and affected infrastructure and assist in the planning of stabilization measures. Section three presents an evaluation of two methods for predicting the extent of channel degradation. Section four presents an estimate of costs associated with damages from stream channel erosion since the time of channelization until 1992. Damage to highway bridges represent the highest costs associated with channel erosion, followed by railroad bridges and right-of-way; loss of agricultural land represents the third highest cost. An estimate of costs associated with future channel erosion on western Iowa streams is also presented in section four. Section four also presents a procedure to estimate the benefits and costs of implementing stream stabilization measures. The final section of this report, section five, presents information on the development of the organizational structure and administrative procedures which are being used to plan, coordinate, and implement stream stabilization projects and programs in western Iowa.

Reinforced Earth and Stone Columns for Weak Subsoil Conditions, HR-510, 1980

Reinforced Earth is a French development that has been used in the United States for approximately ten years. Virbro-Replacement, more commonly referred to as stone columns, is an outgrowth of deep densification of cohesionless soils originally developed in Germany. Reinforced Earth has applicability when wall height is greater than about twelve feet and deep seated foundation failure is not a concern. Stone columns are applicable when soft, cohesive subsoil conditions are encountered and bearing capacity and shearing resistance must be increased. The conditions in Sioux City on Wesley Way can be summarized as: (1) restricted right of way, (2) fill height in excess of 25 feet creating unstable conditions, (3) adjacent structures that could not be removed. After analyzing alternatives, it was decided that Reinforced Earth walls constructed on top of stone columns were the most practical approach.