Mills County reviews five‑year roads plan, proposes addressing and surfacing ordinance changes

Jacob, a county roads presenter, reviewed Mills County’s five‑year road and bridge program submitted to the Iowa Department of Transportation and outlined projects planned by fiscal year, including a 1.3‑mile rehabilitation on Kane AB and bridge projects such as work on 215th Street and a planned replacement of the 310th Street Bridge over Spring Valley Creek.

Jacob said the 310th Street Bridge replacement is being advanced in part after a fatal accident at that location and because the structure’s end lacks a guardrail and its brick railing is deteriorating. He told the board the project could be paired with the Hungry Canyons program to secure funding and programming sooner. He also noted a funding constraint: "We cannot use our HVP funds to purchase just the materials for this bridge," and said that federal or DOT requirements mean a contractor may be required rather than county crews if the county seeks to use certain funding streams.

Staff also outlined proposed local ordinance updates that will be brought forward for public hearings and formal readings. Amber, the staff member answering procedural questions, described the main changes: chapter 3 (addressing) would set a default maximum of three addresses per single entrance (with a possible administrative procedure for four), chapter 7 would add language clarifying parking rules during snow‑removal operations and for subdivisions, chapter 12 (reconstruction and maintenance) would allow the county discretion to add seal‑coat roads to the maintained system rather than mandating concrete for all paved roads, and chapter 25 would add allowances for private roads and give the board and the county engineer discretion on surfacing standards.

Jacob walked the board through additional projects on the submitted program: overlays on specified routes (including an H34 overlay into Emerson), a smaller non‑bridge structure that would be locally funded if not eligible for HBP/HVP money, and other bridge repairs. He cautioned that some items will require adjustments after DOT review, including restrictions on the use of certain grant funds and potential contractor requirements for bridge work.

The board did not take final action on any ordinance changes during the meeting; staff said drafts will be returned for review and scheduled for the required public hearings and readings. The DOT submission will be revised as necessary following DOT comments and the board’s direction.