Supervisors support Stone Bridge restoration grant with cash match

     The Jones County Historic Preservation Commission is seeking the board of supervisors’ support in applying for a grant to help fund the restoration of Ely’s Stone Bridge.

     Commission Chair Rose Rohr and Leah Rogers, who is assisting the Commission in their grant writing, spoke with the board during their Jan. 26 meeting and answered a barrage of questions.

     The Commission is seeking a $87,500 grant, the maximum amount they can apply for through the Iowa Historic Preservation Office and National Park Service. This requires a $37,500 match from the county. The total project cost would be $125,000.

     Rogers said this is the first year a large sum of money like this is being offered through the State Historic Preservation Office.

     “This used to be a long shot before,” she said of the chance of being awarded such a grant through the National Park Service. “But now a portion of the money was given to each state through historic preservation. Now we’ll only compete with others in Iowa.”

     Rogers felt like Jones County had a good shot at the grant funding.

     “It’s the perfect opportunity for Stone Bridge, and to start this process,” Rogers continued on the beginning stages to restore and preserve the historic bridge.

     With a grant application deadline of Feb. 1, the board asked the Commission why they waited so long to get on the agenda. Rogers said the grant information was just released in November.

     “We did not have a lot of advanced time,” she said. “It’s a compressed funding cycle.”

     As to whether the Commission could wait another year and apply so as not to rush the application, Rogers said there is no guarantee the funding will be available next year.

     “A short timeline is not the best in the world,” commented Supervisor Joe Oswald.

     The Commission not only needed the supervisors’ approval for a letter of support, but for the 30 percent cash match.

     “We want to put together a viable project,” added Rogers, “to do urgent repairs now.”

     Both Rogers and Rohr explained that this grant-funded project would not be a permanent fix, but a temporary fix until the board of supervisors made a decision on the future of the bridge.

     “It’s a temporary solution to address the drainage issue and buy us enough time until a permanent solution can be made,” said Rogers.

     She told the board it would likely be some time in May when the Commission found out whether they were successful with the grant or not. The project would have to be completed by May 31, 2023, with reimbursement by July 1, 2023. Rogers felt as though construction could begin in the spring of 2022.

     County Auditor Whitney Hein explained the county would pay the bills associated with the physical bridge project, and turn the invoices in for grant-funding reimbursement. The county would receive reimbursement for the total project costs, minus the county’s cash match ($37,500).

     Rogers said based on the engineer’s estimate from Steve Jacobson, NNW Engineering, and a rough quote from Bader Masonry, the project could cost about $103,000. (Jacobson’s engineering estimate is $22,000.)

     Supervisor Jon Zirkelbach commented that he was not comfortable making a decision on supporting the grant without further information.

     “$125,000 won’t even touch that thing,” he said of the work needed on the Stone Bridge.

     Jacobson said he is aware of further deterioration of the bridge since he was last on site in mid-2020.

     “Deterioration has continued, primarily on the side walls,” he said. Jacobson said if the side walls were rebuilt, knowing the arches can withstand the weight, as well as the addition of curb to hold the water back, the bridge could be temporarily saved.

     “New stone would be required,” he added of the façade.

     Jacobson also shared that his plans call for a two-lane bridge, as requested by the board a few years ago.

     Zirkelbach said not knowing the county’s end plan for Stone Bridge, applying for the grant would not help at all.

     “There are so many unanswered questions right now,” he said as to the future of the bridge.

     Zirkelbach also wanted to hear from the public during that evening’s road program hearing before making a decision himself.

     Rohr said it is ultimately up to the board of supervisors to make that final decision of the bridge, not the Preservation Commission’s.

     “The board of supervisors own the bridge,” Rohr reminded the board. “We (the Commission) manage the bridge. Our job is to preserve; the board decides what to do with the bridge.”

     Supervisor Jeff Swisher reminded the board (minus himself and John Schlarmann as the two newest supervisors) of the April 18, 2017 resolution they unanimously supported concerning Stone Bridge. The resolution notes that the Preservation Commission was interested in raising money and applying for grants to restore Stone Bridge.

     “They (the Commission) is doing what they said they would do as outlined in the resolution,” Swisher said. He urged the board to support the Commission in their fundraising efforts, as emphasized in the 2017 resolution.

     “Have we done everything practical to restore this bridge?” asked Swisher.

     “The bridge is not getting any better,” said Schlarmann, agreeing with Swisher’s assessment. “There are so many reasons people come to Jones County, and now we’re taking away less and less.”

     Schlarmann commented that perhaps the county itself caused the drainage problem by paving Stone Bridge Road over the bridge years ago.

     County Engineer Derek Snead said several factors contributed to the deterioration of the bridge over the years. He said Secondary Roads has records over the years noting how much maintenance was put toward Stone Bridge.

     “Our records show years of patching projects prior to it being paved,” he said. “There has been extreme deterioration on multiple levels. A lot of different factors led to this, not just one.”

     Resident Jon Carlson commented that while Stone Bridge is a unique structure, it’s beauty cannot be seen without people stopping and getting out of their vehicles.

     “You drive across it and can’t even see it,” he said.

     Carlson said he would like to see a wider structure for farm equipment, something that works for all types of equipment.

     Swisher said he would not support restoring the bridge for full vehicle traffic. He wanted to see options for a structure built around Stone Bridge.

     Supervisor Ned Rohwedder said he would offer his vote for a letter of support for the grant “because it buys us time to make a decision” on the future of the bridge. “I’d like to see it restored and go from there,” he said.

     The board voted 4-1 to write a letter for the support and provide the $37,500 in matching funds. Zirkelbach was opposed.

     “It’ll still be a narrow bridge when they’re done,” Zirkebach said of the Commission’s immediate plans. “This money is going toward something that is basically an open checkbook for county taxpayers. The decision to give it to the Commission was to keep us from having to spend more money on the bridge.”