The Iowa State Capitol Grounds 1913 Extension and Reconstruction Project, October 2012

The Capitol grounds have been evolving through planned and unplanned actions for more than 150 years. The 1857 Constitutio established Des Moines as the capital. The commissioners appointed to choose a site decided on land donated by Wilson Alexander Scott and Harrison Lyon. Located on the east side of the Des Moines River, on a gently rising hill, the site for the Iowa State Capitol began with fewer than 10 acres. The Old Brick Capitol was built in the center of that 10-acre plot, and the area to the north was used as a public park until work began on the present day Capitol. In 1884, the two-year process of moving from the Old Brick Capitol to the new Capitol began. The state commissioned John Weidenman to design the first formal decoration of the grounds. Weidenman’s plans for the west approach to the Capitol included planting statues, and walkways. The State held some additional land but not necessarily land adjacent to the Capitol. In 1909, legislation was passed, and in 1913, the Thirty-Fifth General Assembly enacted controversial legislation to acquire additional land. A commission was formed to locate a purposed monument honoring the long-serving U.S. Senator William B. Allison. E.L. Masqueray was hired as the architect expert focusing on the selection of a proper site for the proposed Allison Memorial. Masqueray’s plan detailed the placement of buildings and potential monuments. Growth of the Capitol Complex, as known today, began.

Public Perceptions of the Midwest's Pavements - Executive Summary: Iowa

This report summarizes Iowa results of a five year, Pooled Fund study involving the Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota Departments of Transportation (DOTs) designed to 1) assess the public's perceptions of the DOTs' pavement improvement strategies and 2) develop customer-based thresholds of satisfaction with pavements on rural two lane highways in each state as related to the DOTs' physical indices, such as pavement ride and condition. The primary objective was to seek systematic customer input to improve the DOTs' pavement improvement policies by 1) determining how drivers perceive the DOTs' pavements in terms of comfort and convenience but also in terms of other tradeoffs the DOTs had not previously considered, 2) determining relationships between perceptions and measured pavement condition thresholds (including a general level of tolerance of winter ride conditions in two of the states), and 3) identifying important attributes and issues that may not have been considered in the past. Secondary objectives were 1) to provide a tool for systematic customer input in the future and 2) to provide information which can help structure public information programs. A University of Wisconsin-Extension survey lab conducted the surveys under the direction of a multi-disciplinary team from Marquette University. Approximately 4500 drivers in the 3 states participated in the 3 phases of the project. Researchers conducted 6 focus groups in each state, approximately 400 statewide telephone interviews in each state and 700-800 targeted telephone interviews in each state. Approximately 400 winter ride interviews were conducted in Wisconsin and Minnesota. A summary of the method for each survey is included. In Phase I, focus groups were conducted with drivers to get an initial indication of what the driving public believes in regards to pavements and to frame issues for inclusion in the more representative statewide surveys of drivers conducted in Phase II. Phase II interviews gathered information about improvement policy tradeoff issues and about preliminary thresholds of improvement in terms of physical pavement indices. In Phase III, a two step recruitment and post-drive interview procedure yielded thresholds of ride and condition index summarized for each state. Results show that, in general, the driving public wants longer lasting pavements and are willing to pay for them. They want to minimize construction delay, improve entire sections of highway at one time but they dislike detours, and prefer construction under traffic even if it stretches out construction time. Satisfaction with pavements does not correlate directly to a high degree with physical pavement indices, but was found instead to be a complex, multi-faceted phenomenon. A psychological model was applied to explain satisfaction to a respectable degree for the social sciences. Results also indicate a high degree of trust in the 3 DOTs which is enhanced when the public is asked for input on specific highway segments. Conclusions and recommendations include a 3-step methodology for other state studies.