HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-05-14 Transcription
May 14, 2007
May 14,2007
Council:
Staff:
City Council Work Session
Page I
City Council Work Session
5:30 PM
Bailey, Champion, Correia, Elliott, O'Donnell, Vanderhoef, Wilburn
Atkins, Davidson, Dilkes, Fosse, Franklin, Helling, Karr, Knocke, O'Malley, Panos,
Yapp
TAPES: 07-39, Both Sides
Plannin!! and Zonin!!
Wilburn:
Franklin:
Franklin:
O'Donnell:
Franklin:
O'Donnell:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Ok. Planning and Zoning items a, band e, as in every.
a) VACATING A PORTION OF HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD LOCATED
SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 6 AND EAST OF BROADWAYSTREET (VAC07-
00001 )
b) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE
5,2007 TO CONSIDER TH!: CONVENYANCE OF A VACATED SIX-
FOOT (6') WIDE PORTION OF HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD LOCATED
SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 6 AND EAST OF BROADWAY STREET TO
NORDSTROM OIL
Ok. Item a is a public hearing and first consideration of an ordinance to vacate a portion
of Hollywood Boulevard located south of Highway 6 east of Broadway. This is a six-foot
sliver of public right of way that is necessary for the Sonic development, to fit in what
they wish to put on their site. So you've got the public hearing on the vacation and then
you have setting a public hearing for June 5th on the conveyance. Just to point out that the
conveyance was negotiated with the City Attorney's office and the agreement that has
been reached between the City Attorney's office and the purchasers is $13.65 a square
foot, and this was based on comparable sales in the area.
e) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND
FINAL PLAT OF PEPPERWOOD PLAZA, A SUBDIVISION OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA
Item e then is the preliminary and final plat ofPepperwood Plaza, which we're gonna ask
you to defer to June 5th. The papers on this are not all together yet.
You said the paperwork is or isn't?
Is not.
Is not.
That's why we're asking for a deferral please.
You're getting offfar too easy.
I know. I'm trying to wind down.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Wilburn:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 2
One foot out the door.
Slacker.
Council Appointments
Wilburn: Council appointments. I believe this is the library.
Vanderhoef: We have three?
Bailey: We need three.
O'Donnell: Three spots.
Elliott: Sounds good to me.
Wilburn: Everyone all right?
Correia: They all look really good too.
Bailey: And they're really qualified.
Vanderhoef: Everyone is.
Champion: Looks good. Good.
Correia: Go for it.
Wilburn: Ok. We'll make that sale.
Dubuque and Church Street Intersection
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Davidson:
Dubuque and Church Street intersection. Reference consent calendar item 3g (7). We also
have the memo about the reallocation of the - oh, that's a different project, sorry.
Different project. Ok.
Ok.
Dubuque and Church Street, anything you want to preface with?
Yeah. What I'm gonna do briefly here before Ron and Dave are prepared to talk about
the specific alternatives - I believe there are four for your consideration this evening - is
just kind of try and frame the issue very briefly in terms of what we're trying to get a
decision on basically, and that's the notion of a federal aid improvement project for the
intersection of Church and Dubuque. Like any arterial street issue that has neighborhood
impacts of which that's pretty much all of them, this is a issue that has a couple of
different perspectives that I think you need to take into consideration when you're
coming to a decision. One is obviously, and very importantly, the perspective of the
neighborhood. And the Northside neighborhood and this, as I said, is pretty universal
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Correia:
Davidson:
Correia:
Davidson:
Correia:
Champion:
Karr:
Champion:
Davidson:
Champion:
Davidson:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 3
with arterial streets that either go along and particularly when they go through a
neighborhood is that they are perceived very negatively by the neighborhood and of
course, they should be. I mean, and the important thing here and what I want to talk about
just briefly is this notion of it being an arterial street. There's been a number of comments
made about is it an arterial, is it not? Is it a collector? Who said it was an arterial? When
did it become an arterial? And my own opinion is that's really not the important issue.
The important thing for us to consider is the number 4,500. Because when we measured
the traffic volume on Church Street just to the east of Dubuque Street, that's what we
measured. 4,500 vehicles a day on what we considered to be an average day. Actually,
we measured it for three days and then averaged it, and that's what we came up with.
And that is an arterial street traffic volume. The reason that it is is that we know for a
local street in a neighborhood such as the Northside neighborhood we would expect to
see a traffic volume of 300, 500, 800 - in that range. And that would be traffic generated
by the neighborhood. For a collector street in a neighborhood like this we would expect a
traffic volume in the 1200, 1500, maybe as high as 2000. 2000 would even reflect a little
bit of cut-through traffic I think. 4500 definitely reflects trips being made that have an
origin and destination outside the Northside neighborhood, and that is an arterial street
trip. And that volume of traffic reflects a lot of arterial street traffic. Now, this issue of
whether or not that's appropriate is one that you definitely should feel free to grapple
with as you discuss this issue, but I think it's important that we have a lot of arterial street
traffic here.
Jeff?
And the - excuse me, Amy?
What's the traffic volume on Jefferson?
On Jefferson? One way couplet - I'm not - I'm gonna say that it's, I'm gonna say that
it's in the range of 7000 to 8000; that's my guess. And of course it's a couplet, and the
other direction traffic is on Market. I mean, it's clearly an arterial street as well and the
volume reflects that.
Oh no, I was just wondering the difference in volume.
But did you just say, you did the count east?
I'm sorry - mic.
Oh.
Just slightly to the east. The volume to the west Connie is, we measured that too, is 3,800.
Ok. Thank you.
Also arterial street volume. Although you also start getting into a higher density
neighborhood on the other side ofthe street as well, which would generate higher
volumes. But both reflect some arterial street volume.
Summit Street?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14,2007.
May 14, 2007
Davidson:
Bailey:
Davidson:
Elliot:
Davidson:
Correia:
Davidson:
City Council Work Session
Page 4
Pardon me?
What is the count on Summit Street?
Summit Street I believe is around 8,500. Again, I don't have these all memorized, but I
think it's about that volume. .
It's pretty impressive to me, Jeff.
If you want to, if you want to - you know, the other end of the spectrum is the major,
major arterials like US Highway 6 you get into 25,000.
Right, I was just -
Now the other thing, the - ok, so one perspective, the neighborhood perspective,
obviously very important for you to consider in your decision making. The other
perspective is the traffic thoroughfare perspective, and when staff was developing CIP
projects that we bring to you in January and you consider as part of your budget
preparation, what we did is we looked to the Dubuque Street corridor. The Dubuque
Street corridor is the major corridor between Interstate 80 and Iowa City. The Dodge
Street corridor has about 2/3 of the traffic of Dubuque Street. Dubuque Street is right
around 20,000 vehicles a day. And when we were looking at this, as you've heard us say
a million times on arterial streets, if you get your intersections working well then the
corridor works well. The intervening segments really aren't that much of an issue. It's
where traffic turns that you have conflicts; you have accidents and that kind of thing. So,
as you know, we've already done the Foster Road intersection. We have a project for
Park Road that you're considering, and Church Street was the other intersection. Again,
looking at the traffic thoroughfare, Dubuque Street traffic thoroughfare issue and the fact
that for eastbound or west; excuse me, northbound or southbound traffic, it basically
pinches down to a single lane when there is turning traffic there. That's predominately
during peak periods right now, occasionally during other times of the day. So two
perspectives for you to consider in your decision making. I did have a question from a
couple of you about the crash rate at the intersection. In our report, our JCCOG report
that we did recently that looked at the years '01 through '04, this intersection ranked 33'd
in the urbanized area, so it's not one of the top 10 intersections that we pay a lot of
attention to, but clearly, that's 33m out of200 or 250 intersections that met the threshold
to be measured. Predominately right angle type crashes that you would expect a protected
arrow, which we'd be able to put in with the left turn lanes to help rectify that. But not a,
not a tremendously high, not in the top 10 or anything like that.
Let's see. A couple of other things. Oh, you know, depending on what you decide to land
on in terms of the functional, the functional classification of Dubuque, whether it's
appropriate to have that volume of arterial street traffic, that's a very, very complicated
issue and I would suggest if you decide that you want strategies to significantly reduce
the traffic volume on Church Street, I would suggest you give that back to the JCCOG
Transportation Planning Division as an issue to work on with the neighborhood. Because
it will clearly impact the neighborhood if decisions are made about Church Street; it will
impact adjacent streets in the Northside neighborhood, so I think we would want to take
an in-depth look. I guess what I'm trying to say is it deserves more than just kind of a
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14,2007
Correia:
Davidson:
Correia:
Davidson:
Correia:
Davidson:
Panos:
City Council Work Session
Page 5
knee-jerk reaction. We really need to look at what the impacts would be to the
neighborhood for doing that. And there were a number of good ideas that were mentioned
at the Northside neighborhood meeting. I was not at that meeting. Ron and Dave were, so
if you have specific questions I'd ask you to direct it to those, but some of those have
found their way to me. For example, bump-outs at the intersections with Dodge and
Dubuque to shorten the pedestrian crossing for people crossing Church Street, that's an
idea that has some merit. A couple of you have talked to me about things involving the
parking during the day. Ifwe allowed parking during the day, right now it's not allowed
8am to Spm on the south side of Church Street, you would clearly have it fill up probably
by 6:30 in the morning with commuters. But, on-street parking does have the effect of
narrowing down the roadway and reducing speeds a little bit; that's typically what we
find. And so again, that's a strategy that you may want to consider as well. So we can, we
can take a look at any of those that you desire to have us look at.
Now, the one other thing I wanted to mention, simply because we do have the next item
on the agenda to discuss, STP Funds, is that right now this is a federal aid project. And as
part of the federal aid project, when we submit our concept statement to them, they want
to see an existing technical analysis and a 30-year forecast technical analysis for this
intersection. That's required if you use the federal money. Ifwe end up with the
alternative that just improves the comer radius that will probably become just a locally-
funded project because the very first thing that the State DOT would ask us is "Why not
put left-turn lanes on Dubuque Street? Looks like there's some justification based on the
peak that would warrant for those." I, you know, you'll have to ask Kevin and Steve in
terms of the funding of that, but that would probably go to being a locally-funded project.
And then of course you'd have another $400.000.00 to put into your next item on the
agenda in terms of possible reallocation. So, any questions for me before Dave and Ron
come up?
When you say 33'd in terms of accidents, I mean, I don't know what that means. How
many accidents?
There's three factors that's considered. One is the frequency, the number of crashes. The
rate, the crash rate, which is the rate per million entering vehicles. It basically puts all
streets on an equal comparison. And then the severity: basically, there's points assigned
based on fatality, personal injury and property damage. All three factors go into that
ranking.
Ok. So we don't have like a number last year, how many accidents.
Ah, no. I mean, we do know that, but I don't have that right here.
Ohok.
Yeah, we do have that number. I can find it if you'd like. Any other questions for me?
Thank you.
I'm just going to discuss a little bit the concepts. Is everyone clear on the concepts that
we had outlined previously? Concepts A, B, C and D, which was do nothing? We have
extra copies of the plan sheets if you're, if you wanted copies of those we can pass them
around. Essentially, Concept A was widening of Dubuque Street and putting the curb and
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription oftbe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 6
gutter on Church. Concept B was to do just the widening on Dubuque Street and Concept
C was just the northwest comer radius for the bus movement. And of course Concept D
was to do nothing. Aside from the general concepts we had laid out, as Jeff had stated
there were a few options that were laid out, additional options the neighborhood had
suggested. One was to possibly add, as Jeff had mentioned, the bump-outs. One was,
another option was to add brick to Church Street to possibly slow the traffic down there.
Essentially, the main concern from the neighborhood, it seemed to us, was a concern for
pedestrian traffic and bike traffic and the concern for doing the widening and essentially
what that would do with the traffic. The other issue of course is the additional traffic on
Church Street, and from a traffic engineering standpoint, I guess we can't assume that it's
going to increase. I mean, we just don't know at this time. Essentially there's no further,
there's no additional development on it outside the City, however, we can't assume that
there may not be an increase in traffic. So essentially I just wanted to state that. And
essentially, as far as engineering is concerned, our viewpoint is that Concepts A and B,
essentially Concept A would provide the 30-year design function that we were looking
for for the intersection. However, we're willing to go with Concept B as well, which
would include not doing the curb and gutter on Church Street. Are there any further
questions at this time?
Vanderhoef: Well, it's about a mile and a half, roughly, from Interstate 80 down to Jefferson Street,
which is the protected turn that people think of as the arterial. But have you measured any
of the other cut-off traffic through the neighborhoods that are choosing to cut off a block
or two earlier, before they get to Church Street, just to avoid the Church Street?
Davidson: There is certainly some, you hear it called rat running, basically, like rats in a maze,
people that try and cut through what we consider the local streets in the Northside
neighborhood. Yes, when we have measured that it hasn't been exorbitant. The one street
where it's clearly an issue just like it is on Church Street is Kimball Road. Kimball Road
is about 2500 vehicles a day; so again, you're seeing that phenomenon of arterial street
traffic. You know, Kimball basically is, for part of it just built on one side of the road
even. So we would expect much lower traffic than that if it was truly a local street or a
collector street. You're seeing arterial volume. Kimball and Church are the streets
between Jefferson and Interstate 80 that are bearing the brunt of the non-local traffic
that's trying to get through the neighborhood.
Vanderhoef: 2500. That's, that's a lot more cut-offs, and Kimball is certainly not at the street standards
that Church Street is.
Champion: But Church Street is also a cut-off street, instead of going to Jefferson.
Vanderhoef: Yeah. I'm just thinking of what the infrastructure looks like up on Kimball, versus the
infrastructure that's on Church Street.
Panos: Well, and the, the idea that was presented (can't hear) The difference being of course is
that the idea is to pull the traffic to Dubuque Street and not to give people an option or a
wanting to go out into the neighborhoods and scatter out into the neighborhoods. Why
not stay within the arterial - why not make the arterial essentially the roadway to be used
and to allow the least delay on that roadway.
Elliott: What is the east, eastbound one-way street?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 7
Vanderhoef: Jefferson.
Elliott: Is that Jefferson?
Vanderhoef: Mmm hmm.
Elliott: Ok. If that intersection were easier to navigate for people, southbound cars wanting to
turn left, I know, for instance, I would not take Church as often as I do, because it's just a
pain in the neck to try and navigate down there and turn east on Jefferson, the one-way
street. So I usually take Church and if there's a backup turning left, then I go up the steep
hill.
Panos: Up Kimball.
Elliott: Whatever street -
Bailey: Brown Street.
O'Donnell: Brown Street.
Elliott: Whatever that is, I go up the steep hill and go that way.
Panos: I think, and I have not extensively looked at Jefferson, but I essentially, the problem, the
situation that's different at Jefferson is that we have a lot higher pedestrian traffic there
and a lot, a lot more conflict with pedestrian traffic which, which tends to slow traffic
down, slow down the timings.
Elliott: It's just a very difficult left turn.
Champion: But we-
Correia: Well I think the issue is not, well my, there's some pedestrians, there are a lot of
pedestrians, but the issue is that there's no left. I mean you, all the protected left turns,
there's a left-turn lane, but there's no protected arrow, because that's the problem. People
are continuing to drive, you have to wait, and there's a lot of people in that left turn lane
Bailey: And there's not, yeah.
Correia: On the light arrow.
Panos: I think the major difference there at that intersection is you have higher pedestrian traffic
and you have less traffic coming from the downtown obviously. You have a one-lane
there; you have a two-lane at Dubuque and Church.
Correia: Is there any way to have a smart light? Like that would trigger a left arrow when you
needed it?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 8
Panos: One of the options that was presented was a, another option that was presented at the
meeting, I'm not sure we'd recommend this, but essentially they requested that we look at
possibly doing a left turn, a no left turn during the peak hour times. And of course, that's
an enforcement issue that we'd have to keep up on and it would be a situation that would
be unfamiliar to people in town.
Correia: We say that about -
Panos: Would they get accustomed to it? I don't know. It would be an issue of enforcement I
believe.
Bailey: Right.
Correia: Well, we talk about that when we talk about traffic circles. People aren't used to it.
Vanderhoef: So you would also have to make it no left turns through the entire corridor though, or you
would just force more people cutting through and then dropping down to Church Street
versus the no turn at the Church Street corner.
Correia: So how many people attended the neighborhood meeting?
Panos: I believe we had around 25.
Correia: So would you say, I mean, our letters are pretty overwhelming comments to not do the
most dramatic.
Panos: Sure. The overwhelming majority of the people that attended would prefer not to have
either option A or B, were against options A and B.
Correia: Right.
Panos: A few were in favor of option C just because it took care of the bus issue, and option D
was obviously out there as well. But yeah, an overwhelming majority were not in favor of
option A or B.
Wilburn: Any other questions? We're going to hear from one more staff member or do you just
want to hear from us what? I'll put out there for the Council: what's the directive for the
staff? What's the pleasure of the?
Bailey: I liked -
Elliott: 1-
Bailey: Go ahead.
Elliott: I guess I'd be surprised ifmost of us don't have our minds made up on A, B, C or D.
Champion: I like C.
Correia: I like C.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 9
Bailey: I want to be responsive to the neighborhood and then try to do some things at Jefferson. If
we go with any other thing, I think we have to be prepared to look at some traffic volume
and speed on Church Street, because it's heavily pedestrian and I think that that was a
huge concern, particularly with the school kids along there.
Vanderhoef: Well I, you know where I usually stand on moving traffic and traffic safety. I did have
some numbers on crashes, that they seemed to be up this year in the early part of the year.
In '04-'05 there were 16 crashes at that corner, and between January I and presently,
we've already had 13 this year at that corner, which is worrisome to me. And that is also
one ofthose corners where neighborhood people cross to use the parks. And to get over
to Park Bridge, they choose to do it at that location rather than down at the Park Bridge.
Bailey: There's no sidewalk on the east side of Dubuque. They don't have a choice.
Vanderhoef: I know, but the further north people are cutting across the street elsewhere. But I tried to
compare this street with one school and then I look at the east side neighborhoods and we
have Rochester that is a arterial that is going past a grade school, junior high and high
school. We have I " Avenue that is passing past Hoover School on one side of it. We have
Court Street that is going in front of Hoover School. And we've been able to manage that
traffic quite well and we have not had accidents with school children. So yes we have to
be aware, and yes we have to have assistance at those corners, but that is not a reason to
change what happens on Church Street. It's being managed very well right now with the
traffic volumes that we have. I think we will see a little bit more traffic come on that, on
Church Street, but I think it will be the same cars that have been cutting through the other
parts of the neighborhood. And I would rather just see them on a controlled situation
rather than rolling through that mishmash of stop signs up there and not being aware of
children that might be crossing that street and there might be a car parked there that you
don't see around them. I think the visual of Church Street is good. I would consider some
more parking on the other side of the street for daytime hours just to slow traffic down.
But it still needs the protected turn there and to manage the speed on that street.
Bailey: The speed is horrible and the turn would work better on Dubuque Street ifthere was
some speed enforcement, because there are natural gaps. I came home at 5 to 5:00 today
_ there was no backup to Park Street by the way - and the gaps are a problem. Because
people going north out of town are going in excess of 25 miles an hour. You can make a
turn if people are going the speed limit easily. And I didn't wait, I didn't wait through
one light. I got the light, I went, there was a gap, but it was a tight one, and that's part of
the problem is the speed in that area.
Vanderhoef: It's the same way on I" Avenue, it's the same way on Court Street-
Bailey: Well I don't, well I can't speak to experience ofthat.
Vanderhoef: I use Church Street occasionally. I certainly don't-
Bailey: Ifwe do this turn we're gonna have to do something about speed on Church Street. It's
too fast. Well. It's a compromise position.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 10
Vanderhoef: Yeah. And I think that's reasonable. But I think we ought to be looking at good use of our
transportation dollars and go ahead and if we're going to put in infrastructure of any kind
that has a 30-year life to the concrete and so forth, it's, it's important that we really look
at what's happening. The one figure I don't have that I should have asked earlier is what
are we seeing on the increase of numbers of cars on the north south of Dubuque Street.
Have we had a gradual increase in number of trips per day on that street? I suspect that
we do but I don't, it doesn't say that.
Davidson: I'm sorry, Dee, what are you asking, precisely?
Vanderhoef: Ok. If you're - the traffic count on Dubuque Street, over the past 4 years, say. Have we
had a continuing increasing number of cars per day on that strip?
Davidson: Well we don't measure it, you know, we measure it in general in town every 4 years and
we generally see a 1 or 2% increase sort of in overall traffic volume. I can't tell you
exactly. I think Dubuque Street has been relatively stable in terms of the traffic volume
around that 20,000 number. It's certainly not declining, but it's not increasing
tremendously like you would see in a developing area or something like that.
Vanderhoef: Ok, but. Thank you.
O'Donnell: You know it all, it all started when the Council asked staffto come up with solutions. I
felt that if you're going south on Dubuque Street it's absolutely ridiculous to hit an area
where you've got a car turning left and a bus turning right and all traffic stops. That's
what I thought we should resolve. I still think we need a left turn lane. I don't know if a
turn signal would handle it. We also need more room to turn a bus on the right. But Ijust,
I just don't think you can, a community can, and there's 4500 cars a day on the street.
You know, I would love to have that many cars on my street. I think we double that
where I live. But the question, we really need to respond to traffic safety in that area. You
have to be able to turn left and the bus has to turn right, and you can't stop traffic on the
main artery coming into town.
Champion: Well if you did the corrections for the bus you would handle that problem. And the other
thing - when we do new neighborhoods now we nice little arterials and we have
collectors and we have residential streets. But when the town was first built, started to
build up, those things weren't done. And I think we have to decide are we gonna destroy
all of our older neighborhoods for the purpose of moving cars? I, I really am not willing
to do that. I think cars move in this town with relative ease, to be totally honest with you.
I know people think I'm crazy when I say that but I mean it. And I'm not willing to
further destroy the north side with automobiles and apartments. I think it's time to say no.
But I am willing to allow those buses to turn.
Wilburn: Without rehashing the positions we've already done that led us to this point, my issues,
my preference is off the table, but at minimum I think we need to take care of the bus
radius. And I believe Amy, Connie and I make three. And I wasn't quite clear, is that
what you?
Bailey: Option C. The bus radius is, it makes a lot of sense and I think we have that
responsibility.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14,2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page II
Wilburn: If, so there's, there's the majority feeling right there for staff. Ifwe're going to do
anything, if we're gonna look at some of the recommendations from the neighborhood
that's gonna result in changing traffic patterns and possibly removing people off that
street and putting them into other streets then I think we should send it to JCCOG. That's
my recommendation.
Bailey: Mmm hmm.
Vanderhoef: It, it needs to go to JCCOG.
Bailey: Well yeah, some things, the neighborhood obviously wants some things looked at
regarding speed and potentially, if you reduce speed you may reduce volume.
Wilburn: And that way at least we know what some of the impacts are to some of the, to each and
any of those changes that were to come about.
Champion: I think another thing that might help, and maybe JCCOG would look at this too and that
is if we had a protected turn signal on Jefferson.
Bailey: I agree.
Champion: So that people could know that they could turn left when they get up there. Because it's
not always easy with the pedestrians and the traffic coming from downtown.
Bailey: Well-
Elliott: That's what I said.
Bailey: It cuts through these pedestrian -
Elliott: Go ahead.
Bailey: Yeah.
Elliott: That's what I said earlier Connie.
O'Donnell: That would help.
Elliott: The reason you have people wanting to turn left on Church is because turning left on
Jefferson, which you tell me is the one-way street going east, is a bearcat.
Bailey: I'll corroborate.
Elliott: I'll do anything to get away from that because you sit through multiple lights there. So if
you can fix that I think that pretty much takes care of the situation on Church.
Bailey: Well, and for such a heavily pedestrian area we need countdown timers. I mean, we need,
I mean, and those, I've heard drivers like those as well because they don't get as
impatient because they know what to expect. So I think we should look at that as well.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 12
Elliott:
We're at least going to provide the bus latitude to turn right. Fine.
Davidson:
Regenia, your request about countdown timers - was that at Church and Dubuque or
Jefferson and Market and Dubuque.
Bailey:
Yes.
(laughter)
Bailey: But first and foremost at Jefferson and Dubuque.
Davidson: We've been limiting those to multi-lane (can't hear)
Elliott: Yeah.
Bailey: I like countdowns.
Correia: Jefferson we were talking.
Bailey: You said that there's a lot of pedestrian friction at Jefferson and Dubuque. Let's start
there.
Elliott: Yeah
Bailey: But I, you know, I like countdown timers. I'd have them all over the city.
Vanderhoef: But there's extra car exchange happening at Jefferson because we have a gas station,
Quick Trip.
Correia: Market.
Bailey: No, that's Market.
Vanderhoef: Market - you're right.
Wilburn: You've got -you understand where to?
Panos: Sure. Council gives us the approval to proceed with Option C then, is that correct?
Wilburn: Ok. Thank you.
Champion: And one more question. How far does parking come down Dubuque Street? Does that
come to Jefferson?
Panos: I'd have to look at the queue lanes. I mean, we're designing for 150 foot so.
Bailey: Yes.
O'Donnell: Yes. It's to Jefferson.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Elliott:
Champion:
Correia:
Champion:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Champion:
Davidson:
Champion:
Davidson:
Champion:
Davidson:
Champion:
Davidson:
Champion:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
City Council Work Session
Page 13
Yeah.
Because I mean, I think it would help if we didn't allow parking in that next block of
Jefferson for cars who are wanting to go straight instead of turning.
Jefferson? Dubuque.
No. I don't mean Jefferson. I mean Dubuque.
Dubuque.
Take off the meters on the west side?
There's parking on both sides between Jefferson and Iowa.
Yeah. There's parking on both.
Because the right hand lane ends where the parking begins.
Yeah. And that makes it bad if you're not going to make a left-hand turn. You have to cut
over right away into the left-hand lane.
A few years ago, maybe 5 or 6, we added parking on Dubuque between Iowa and
Jefferson.
Right.
Are you suggesting taking that off now?
Except for Sundays.
Except for Sundays.
I mean, I'm putting it out to you. I'm not a traffic planner. I'm trying to find a way.
Oh, you just want us to take a look at it?
Yeah.
No - I'm not sure-
I, I don't know that that would make a difference.
I like the way it -
I don't like that at all.
(all talk - can't hear)
Bailey:
I can always find a spot there. If I'm driving.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Davidson:
Correia:
Champion;
Wilburn:
Davidson:
Wilburn:
Davidson:
Wilburn:
Davidson:
Elliott:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Correia:
Elliott:
Champion:
Correia:
Champion:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Correia:
Bailey:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 14
That was kind of where downtown started.
Well the thing is is that it's clear. You're in the left, you're turning left because you can't
go straight because the people on the right are going into that lane and I think that helps
to make it work.
Right.
When you put this all together can you at least comment as to why the change had
occurred and what you think the results?
The change where Ross?
That Connie just brought up.
That Connie just brought up.
Just address it so we all have it in front of us. Thank you.
Ok.
Ross, we've decided that the only thing that will happen at the intersection in question is
latitude for right hand turn, unobstructed by the bus?
Or a left-hand, whatever they need.
Option C.
For turning right.
No, because the bus I think only turns right there.
Turns-
Oh, they turn left onto?
They turn left when they come.
Is that my understanding? Is that correct?
Option C.
They turn left too when they come off of Church Street.
That's not a problem.
Left onto Dubuque.
Oh, that's not the problem?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Correia:
Bailey:
Panos:
Champion:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 15
The problem is turning right onto -
Right.
The northwest comer widening will increase the radius for the buses to turn southbound
on Dubuque as well as, well, I guess the main idea is to get the bus movements from the
southbound lane out ofthe traffic.
Great. Terrific.
I like it. I can live with it.
Reallocation of Surface Transportation
Wilburn:
Davidson:
Elliott:
Davidson:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Davidson:
Elliott:
Davidson:
Reallocation of surface transportation. STP funds. We've got a memo on information
packet #2 about the Highway 6/Gilbert Street intersection improvement project that's no
longer going.
Yeah. We discussed this at your last meeting and you asked for one additional piece of
information before you deliberate the issue, and that was the list of projects that had been
requested for STP funds. Previously the 3 projects that were funded are listed on page I
of your memorandum. There's one other project, Gilbert/Bowery/Prentice which is under
contract currently and funded through other sources, so that's not listed here either. What
you see then are the remaining 6 that did not receive funding, and these are just the Iowa
City projects, of course, that did not receive funding last time we considered STP funds
and transportation enhancement funds at JCCOG. And you can, you could fund either a
transportation enhancement project, which is a non-road project, or a road project with
these funds if that's your desire. I would suggest that the amount we're considering now
is 2.4 million because of your previous action, and it is possible, besides the 6 of you on
JCCOG you need 2 other votes on JCCOG to amend the TIP, which we'll be asking for
approval on at your meeting next week. You would amend that TIP to shift the money
from the Church/Dubuque project and the US Highway 6/Gilbert project to one of these
other projects.
Is one of those other projects, I didn't see that in my materials, is one of those other
projects the extension of Oakdale to?
No. Because that's not an Iowa City project.
That's not an Iowa City project.
Yeah. But it could happen.
Yes. That is a project for which the funds could be -
It could happen. It is at least a viable or a possible alternative.
Yes. It is an eligible project.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 16
Elliott: Ok. Good. Ok.
Vanderhoef: Oh, I really, really would like to get Lower Muscatine Road done as we're waiting for
our other dollars for the I't Avenue Railroad Overpass. To have Lower Muscatine Road
done prior to that I think would be very advantageous.
Correia: Would it help us to get money for the I " Avenue Railroad if we had more other dollars in
there?
Davidson: Ok, you know -
Correia: Because I would prefer doing that before improving Lower Muscatine.
Bailey: I'd like to get that project done.
Vanderhoef: I would too, but we can't-
Davidson: I don't know that it would help with the congressionally designated funds Amy. In our
deliberations with our folks in Washington that doesn't seem - I mean, they want to make
sure the local match is there. Remember, you can't use other federal money to match.
Champion: Oh, ok.
Davidson: So we'd have to come up with 1.25 I think it is million to match the funds. You know, if,
when we've discussed this with our congressional people, we initially were asking for 2
million now we're asking for 5 million. Quite frankly, they didn't act like those two
numbers in Washington are that much different in terms of our request.
Correia: Mmm hmm.
Davidson: I mean it is for us here, but you know when they're considering CDF projects of a
hundred million and three hundred million - I believe the Quad Cities is asking for six
hundred million for the new 1-74 bridge between Bettendorf and Moline. So order of
magnitude wise, we're in pretty good shape even with the 5 million we're asking for.
Correia: So how much - I didn't bring my CIP today.
Champion: The list? It'd have to be-
Correia: No, no, I don't mean that. How much were we planning to spend locally in GO bonds on
the Highway 6, Gilbert Highway 6?
Atkins: GO bonds?
Correia: Whatever the local part of -
Atkins: Gilbert and Highway 6, 2.3.
Correia: That was gonna be. So I mean essentially-
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Atkins:
Correia:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Correia:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Correia:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Correia:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 17
Bond issue next year and the following.
Right. So there's local funding that we were going to direct to this project. So if we
wanted to direct it elsewhere, there's, the I" A venue continues to, you know, get worse.
There are the safety concerns for a lot of reasons: the junior high, the fire safety.
My only concern is that the balance of that is still unknown.
Right.
And we're uncertain, so I was thinking, especially since numbers wise we are gonna need
two other people from one of the other entities would be otherwise they can try and rally
and get something to fund one of their projects would be to go for something that maybe
some others from some other jurisdictions might go for, and so I was looking at the
Highway I trail between Riverside and Mormon Trek. I believe that we could get the
County in and possibly, probably Coralville could go along with that.
Well and add to that the Butler Bridge, because we're not gonna get the funding and
we've taken that out to DC a couple of years and there's the money.
So either one ofthose again, trying to draw some folks in too.
And additionally, I mean, looking at some commuter traffic coming in from north of
Iowa City to alleviate some of our vehicular problems that we have on Dubuque Street,
that appeals to me.
Couldn't we do both of them?
I'm sorry, what project appeals to you?
#4. If we did #4 and #5 it's 2.4 million.
Oh, right.
There you go.
That's fine. I think we need to figure out how to fund this without congressionally - the
I" Avenue.
Oh no. We can fund it with congressional money.
I don't think that's going to happen right now.
Not right now.
The decision that we have in front of us is related to a reallocation of funds that were
already.
I'm certainly interested in doing I" Avenue, but if other people would like to wait to find,
to see if we're gonna get additional funding. I mean, just as much as people have been
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 18
against our recent, some of our recent projects, people are supportive of that. And there
are more safety issues there than in anything we've talked about.
Elliott: You're talking about the 1" Avenue overpass?
Bailey: Yeah, yeah.
Champion: And I think we'll get some congressional money for that.
Vanderhoef: I do too.
Elliott: That's overwhelmingly, in recent years that has become, as opposed to a periodic pain, it
has become a real serious situation. Just multiple times every day traffic backed up for a
half mile.
Davidson: And just for your information, they're supposedly marking up the federal transportation
bill as we speak, and we're hoping to have that adopted somewhere around October 1" - I
mean, we're hoping by October 1 ".
Elliott: Does that need to be involved in the current discussion regarding where the transfer of
funds would go at this time for something right now?
Davidson: Well, Amy suggested taking all of the money from US Highway 6 Gilbert -
Bailey: The local and the federal.
Davidson: The local and the federal plus the federal from Church and Dubuque. And that would just
about fund, I mean, wasn't that what you were advocating Amy?
Correia: Right.
Davidson: That would just about fund the railroad overpass project. And then we would have to, we
would have to rescind it as a CDF request.
Elliott: Well, that is my highest priority project.
Champion: But we're gonna find out in October, isn't that correct, whether we're gonna get that
money?
Davidson: I believe by October, yes.
Champion: So that's-
Correia: But then this money will be gone.
Vanderhoef: Yeah. That's-
Correia: That's why, I like these other projects.
Champion: Well, we'll have the other money.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 19
Vanderhoef: I don't disagree with you Amy. I want it done. But if we have the opportunity for 5
million for that project and that project alone versus these others that we don't have
possibilities for a designation.
Correia: But what's the opportunity cost? If we're waiting, we have 4 million dollars that could go
to this, that could fund it but we're waiting for October, the timing's not right - come
October we didn't get it. And we wait another year.
Bailey: Is there a general commitment that come October that if we don't get it that we'll find a
way to program it quickly next year?
Vanderhoef: But we can't use these funds as matching funds to the congressional designation.
Correia: But our local funds we can.
Bailey: The GO bonds that we were gonna -
Vanderhoef: Local funds.
Correia: Right. That's what I'm suggesting.
Vanderhoef: GO bonds, but not this money.
Bailey: Right, but that's-
Correia: No, but I'm saying that we can transfer the local money that we were going to put into
Highway 6 -
Atkins: We can't-
Correia: Wait, I know - along with the STP.
Vanderhoef: It would have to go.
Correia: To JCCOG.
Champion: We can save those local funds.
Vanderhoef: There's a placeholder in there.
Davidson: That would, that would-
Correia: Yeah, there's a placeholder in there, right.
Davidson: It would be roughly, well it would be obviously 2.4 million in federal and then the
balance to 6.2, whatever that balance is, 4.1 that would be all local money.
Champion: Yeah, that's too much.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14,2007
City Council Work Session
Page 20
Vanderhoef: Mmm hmm.
Champion: What about, what would give us the most economic impact? What about the Foster Road
construction? What will that open up?
O'Donnell: About 40 acres in there, isn't there?
Davidson: That's simply residential and we've been considering that as a developer-driven project.
You would accelerate that obviously if you built it -
Champion: No, no, that's - no, that's fine.
Vanderhoef: I would consider doing some of the bonding to match up with the Lower Muscatine Road
construction and then do some likewise on one of the trail projects. I don't think we'll
ever do Highway I in a full complete project. It'll be staged. Am I correct that it probably
would be staged over a couple or three years?
Davidson: It certainly could be staged, depending on how much money you wanted to devote to it at
one time.
Vanderhoef: And I know there's a lot of up front work to do with a lot of business owners and
properties and so forth. So I'd rather get - how far are we on a plan for the Highway I?
Davidson: For the Highway I sidewalk now you're speaking Dee?
Vanderhoef: Mmm hmm.
Davidson: Not far at all. Nothing more than just a concept.
Vanderhoef: Ok. So we need planning money for that project. Ok.
Davidson: Yes. We would have to go through planning.
Correia: Are we (can't hear), this is #5?
Vanderhoef: #5.
Correia: Ok.
Vanderhoef: So if we took part of the money for the planning stage of that one and then took part of
the money to do Lower Muscatine Road we'd be in the position finally to do the I"
Avenue overpass when the designation comes through.
Correia: Oh, you're saying hold back some. I'd rather, if we're gonna do something, #5, I'd rather
just do it.
Vanderhoef: But we aren't ready to do it. That's what I'm saying.
Correia: . We aren't ready to do it?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 21
Davidson: We don't have a design or anything.
Correia: No, but we could get a design and have it done within-
Vanderhoef: A year.
Correia: A year.
Davidson: Ah, it's probably pretty fast.
Correia: Yeah.
Davidson: Probably design and property acquisition would take at least a year. And a year - well,
actually it took 2 years to construct Highway 6. So figure 2-3 years.
Elliott: What's the, there's an obvious problem-
Correia: Would it take 4 years?
Elliott: At Kirkwood and Lower Muscatine. What is your concept of what can be done to at least
alleviate if not resolve that problem?
Davidson: Well the concept that we have, again, not fleshed out very much-
Vanderhoef: We saw that.
Davidson: Is between Sycamore Street intersection and between the I" Avenue intersection,
converting that to a 3-lane section. So that would involve converting the 4-lane part of it
from 4 lanes to 3 lanes and converting the 2-lane part of it from 2 lanes to 3 lanes.
Elliott: So that which you had described previously is what you're still looking at as the way to -
Davidson: Yes.
Elliott: Ok.
Davidson: And that would, the Sycamore intersection, the Kirkwood entrance, the Mall Drive
intersection and the I,t A venue intersection would all have the ability for turning traffic to
get out of the through traffic stream.
Vanderhoef: And doesn't that include the short stretch from Kirkwood up to or down to Highway 6?
The two blocks in there?
Davidson: It does not include that at the present time Dee. It has also been pointed out to me
offstage here that I should mention that there's significant pedestrian facility
improvements with that Lower Muscatine Road project. We would make sure there was a
contiguous - as of right now there are parts of it that doesn't have any sidewalk
whatsoever, and we would make sure that our design standard of an 8-foot sidewalk on
one side of the street, 4-foot sidewalk on the other side was adhered to through that
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 22
corridor. And get the linkages with, right now the linkages are terrible with Sycamore
Mall. We'd try and make sure we would improve those as well, pedestrian linkages.
Vanderhoef: And that's partly going then also to get that high concentration of pedestrians from
Kirkwood College along Mall Drive and to eating establishments.
Davidson; Yeah. Well I think there are a lot of Kirkwood kids that park at the mall or at least some,
and trying to make the pedestrian crossings we would at least make sure we had marked
crosswalks and that sort of thing.
(cut off - end of tape)
Vanderhoef;
And it will tie in nicely then with the Mall Drive/l" Avenue Bridge project.
Champion;
Well, I don't really like it.
(laughter)
Bailey; There you have it. Ok. Let's just take it off any list.
Champion; But no, I golla say that I think something needs to be done there. Even though I don't like
it. I have to think about it for a minute. I don't like it at all.
Correia; That wasn't a minute.
Bailey: Are you sure?
Correia; Do you like #4 and 5?
Champion: No, but I think something needs to be done with it. There's a tremendous amount of
pedestrians down there. A tremendous amount of pedestrians. And it is really dangerous.
We haven't had any hit.
Vanderhoef; A lot of turn traffic there in and out of -
Champion; Oh, I know, I know.
Correia; At certain times of day.
V anderhoef: Yeah. The college.
Champion; Every hour.
Wilburn; I have a question about, this is just for - I'm trying to refresh my memory. Is this a
similar type project related to Lower Muscatine that was brought up before Council
maybe about, yeah, 5 years ago, that there was neighborhood opposition and it vanished?
Is that what this project is, or is that a different project? I thought for some.
Vanderhoef: That's a different one.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 23
Wilburn: Is it?
Bailey: I've heard neighbors concerned about the widening of Lower Muscatine near Kirkwood.
Atkins: It's been longer than that.
Davidson: Yeah, we have had some phone calls from people asking "hey, what's in the plan?" You
know, people that own property along there, they just wanted to know what was in the
plan, and we've expressed that that, I think at the time I got the calls that I received it was
in the unfunded list. I said "the project's there. Council is going to be considering it at
some point."
Wilburn: Maybe it was a little longer then. I'm sorry.
Champion: How many houses are affected by that widening?
Davidson: Well, we don't know for sure Connie but I think probably everything along there in the 2-
lane part, certainly, which is the residential part. The 4-lane part is more commercial,
although there are a couple houses down there as well, but in the 2-lane part, you know,
we probably would be talking about strips of property, isn't that likely Ron, potentially at
least, for all those properties. You know, not, certainly not taking any structures or
anything like that, but strips of property along the front.
Elliott: And how far, how far back from where it is now 4-lane did you say you were gonna go?
Davidson: We would go all the way to 1;( Avenue, including the whole 1st Avenue.
Elliott: No, no - I'm going the other direction.
Davidson: The other direction - Sycamore Street intersection.
Elliott: To Sycamore Street. Ok. I'm thinking that the residences are only on one side of it.
Champion: They are not - they're only on one side.
Vanderhoef: Yeah. They are.
Davidson: Kirkwood and MidAmerican are on the other side.
Elliott: Right.
Champion: We can't take it all from their side?
Davidson: It's possible. You know, you're tying in to existing streets all over the place. We have to
take a look at that. It's not out of the question, but typically we would look at the impacts
of doing all on one side or - well you know that from the GilbertlUS 6. We had the
different strategies.
Wilburn: The closest that I thought we came to some type of consensus was #4. I thought I heard 3.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Davidson:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Davidson:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Davidson:
Champion:
Davidson:
Elliott:
Davidson:
City Council Work Session
Page 24
Way to go, Mare.
That was myself, Regenia, and Amy.
Coralville has committed 1/4 of the local match for that project.
Let's just get that done. Let's do something we can do.
That's one we've taken 2 years to the federal issues trip.
Yeah. They're not, it's not gonna get federal funding. I think we've run it up that flagpole
a couple times.
Coralville's gonna participate so there's the other, do they have 2 votes?
Coralville? They have 2 votes.
Yeah.
Ok. So there's the other 2,3 votes that we needed for this.
I can support that. I do want to think about that Kirkwood business though. I think that
really something has to be done. I drive down that street a lot and I can't believe the
number of pedestrians and the number of people turning into Kirkwood and trying to get
out of Kirkwood.
Yeah. And I would emphasize that Kirkwood has some decisions to make on their end to
make that situation better.
I was going to ask if -
And they have not been able to do that. We have tried to work with them in terms of
strategies for having access. Basically, they have this huge parking lot there with one way
in and one way out. And the class changes are all, you know, at the same time. They are
not staggered so that the volume would be staggered. And so as you all know when you
have that kind of a situation it is almost impossible to manage it. And we have looked at a
driveway out the back behind the brush factory over to Mall Drive - haven't been able to
get that done. We've looked at possibly going out through MidAmerican Energy and I
mean, Steve, you were in those meetings. I think, I think there's been some progress there
but they have not been able to get it done. So everything goes in and out of that one
entrance. And we have told them that even with our 3-lane improvement project, it's not
going to fix everything in terms of, as long as they have one way in, one way out all at
the same time there's gonna be some issues.
I would suggest it will continue like that until we decide we're serious about going to do
something and tell them that, you know, if they don't get on board, something will
happen that will be distasteful to them.
It will help, but I don't want anybody to think it's going to be perfect when we get our
project done.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 25
Wilburn: So far we are at #4.
Correia: What about #5?
Davidson: Did you have four for #4?
Bailey: Yes.
Correia: Yes.
Davidson: Ok so.
Vanderhoef: But, but is Coralville going to be ready to do it? Do their 25% this year?
Davidson: Well, Kelly had indicated when we had, when Regenia and Ross went to Washington
with that project, Kelly indicated that they would, since Y. of it, the quarry comer, is
gonna be eventually in Coralville, Kelly said they would commit 25% of the local match.
The other three comers are Iowa City.
Vanderhoef: So this would be like for the summer of '08.
Davidson: Well, at the soonest. Yeah, probably. That's not designed yet either Dee, it's just concept
planned. So probably '09 more likely.
Elliott: And #4 is more than a half million dollars for a bicycle trail over a bridge.
Davidson: It's a new bridge hung offthe existing bridge.
Bailey: Cantilevered.
Davidson: On the side of the existing bridge. So it would be separate, solely for bikes.
Wilburn: It connects the-
Elliott: I'd be disappointed but I think that's where the majority wants to go.
Wilburn: It connects the County's trail with our trail.
Bailey: Gas is over $3.00 a gallon. It's a good thing.
Davidson: Yeah. It's a good project. Now that, the $600,000.00, you still have 1.8 million.
Vanderhoef: I'll go for Lower Muscatine.
O'Donnell: Is anybody interested-
Bailey: How about #5?
Correia: #5.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 26
O'Donnell: How about #3? If, if we -
Champion: Well he thought that'd be done by developers.
Bailey: Yeah, I think so too.
Vanderhoef: Mmm hmm.
O'Donnell: Well I do think that would encourage development. I can see them collaborating with uS
on this but -
Correia: Have we had interest?
Vanderhoef: Not if we build.
Davidson: The collaboration that we've envisioned has been the developer constructing the
equivalent of a local street and the City doing the overwidth.
Vanderhoef: Same as we're doing down on-
Champion: Right, so we -
Bailey: I'd rather wait.
Champion: Right.
Elliott: Well, I can't think of anything that would involve more addressing safety and
transportation efficiency than the project on Lower Muscatine at Kirkwood.
Champion: I know. I still don't like it.
Wilburn: Connie wants to mull over it.
Champion: I have to mull over it. Could I, could I make my decision at Council Time after the City
Council meeting?
Davidson: Let him know to let us know?
Champion: I have to mull.
Davidson: Yeah. The imperative here, I think everybody recalls, is that tomorrow there's a
transportation technical advisory committee meeting and Brian Boelk, Ron and Rick
want to know what projects you would like to have the money proposed for transferring it
over to.
Elliott: Move it or build a garage around it.
Bailey: How would -
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14,2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 27
Champion: But you're saying that it's not going to solve the traffic problem at Kirkwood. But it will
increase pedestrian safety.
Davidson: It will definitely improve pedestrian safety. It will help the issue of the turning traffic at
Kirkwood. It will get the majority of the turners out of the through traffic stream. But
until they get another way in and out of there and spread some of the volume around, it's
not going to fix it completely.
Elliott: Connie -
Bailey: But can we talk - I mean, I don't want to do another project where we come in - hi, we're
the government here to help - and, once again, it's a project that people don't want. I
mean maybe Kirkwood wants it, but they haven't done their part of it to make, to help
alleviate the traffic problem. I don't want to move ahead unless we know that they're
going to do their part. And that I'm interested in taking most of the property from the
east, or whatever it is, the Kirkwood - MidAmerican side. Because Kirkwood traffic is
the challenge and I think therefore they need to participate more vigorously.
Vanderhoef: They have built up to the road pretty near on that building so -
Bailey: I know, but that's part of the problem. I mean, and if they're not ready to do their part of
it then-
Elliott: I think they'll get ready if they know we're serious.
Bailey: Yeah, we thought Hills Bank would get ready too.
Elliott: Yeah, but that was inappropriate.
Panos: You know, depending on what the street width is going to be there for the 3-lane section,
there's a possibility that we wouldn't need to widen both ways. We could just widen to
the north and on to Kirkwood. And they, through some of the improvements that they
made when they added their building, they allowed for a wider right of way in there, so
they've got their parking lot set back to allow for the widening of the right of way in
there.
Bailey: But what about other access or egress of their parking lot? Are they going to actually take
that on?
Davidson: I mean, they keep telling us. Steve and Karin were at the meeting with me. They keep
telling us they're working on it. I mean Steve, do you recall them saying more
specifically?
Atkins: They, I, you know, they've made a genuine effort. I mean, I think they really would like
to have that road constructed and Oral-B purchased by Gillette, purchased by Braun,
purchased by somebody. And every, each one of those -
Bailey: P & G owns it.
Atkins: Yeah, whoever. That's right. P & Gnow. It gets set aside.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Champion:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Davidson:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
O'Donnell:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
Davidson:
O'Donnell:
Panos:
Bailey:
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
Correia:
Knoche:
City Council Work Session
Page 28
Well, if you can do that project without destroying those houses or making them
unlivable I could support it.
Yeah.
I don't know ifhe can decide that by tomorrow.
Pardon me, Ross?
I don't know if that can be decided by the meeting tomorrow.
Well that's my concern too. I mean, once again it's another neighborhood issue. I mean,
and, I think that we don't do a good job of engaging discussion about these projects. We
come in, people get upset. There are ways to do it that people don't get so upset that we
actually have conversations about these projects. Ifwe can do it that way I might be
interested.
(can't hear)
What?
(can't hear)
I think we do a great job bringing them in.
But I do think, well no -
Approximately how much are you talking each side of the street?
Another lane is essentially 12 feet altogether.
12 feet, so 6 feet each side.
And I think we're 31 foot back to back in that area. I can't, don't quote me on that-
A lot of people -
You have alignment issues there also. So, I could support that project also.
You can get 4 with it, but I'm not going to-
I mean I like, I, before I could support it, I'd like to know more, I'd like to talk to the
neighborhood. I'd also like to have it be contingent upon something happening with
either changing class schedules so everyone's not leaving or arriving at the same time or
if there's anything we can do to have a City street go through behind Oral-B. I mean, I
don't know.
I, part of the planning - I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off - but part of the planning
process for it would be looking at the periphery. Working with MidAmerican and
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 29
working with Kirkwood and potentially getting another access point out through the other
properties. You know, obviously it still offloads all the traffic onto Lower Muscatine, but
by adding multiple access points maybe that would help. And that's part of the process is
we meet with the neighbors, not only the residential neighbors but also meet with Oral-B
and.
Bailey: Right. So let's meet early so they -
Vanderhoef: They're neighbors also.
Bailey: But, so we don't bring them a plan, we ask them what they'd like to see.
Knoche: Sure. Definitely. And the one thing I'd like to point out is, you know, the Lower
Muscatine project is a funded project. And I don't know exactly what the funding source
is, but it's one that's in our 3-year program that is, you know, a funded project.
Champion: Yeah, ok.
Knoche: So I think it makes sense to try to utilize the federal funds to help pay for it.
Champion: It makes a lot of sense to me to utilize the federal funds.
Wilburn: So, did you mull over it enough Connie?
Champion: Yeah. Because they have to come up with a plan, right?
Bailey: Yeah.
Davidson: Well sure.
Champion: Ok, great.
Wilburn: So that's Connie, Mike, Dee and Bob?
Elliott: Mmm hmmm.
Wilburn: Ok.
Davidson: Thank you.
Champion: I'm not against all roads.
Wilburn: Ok.
Bailey: Getting there.
Trail Gaps
Wilburn:
Trail gaps.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription oftlie Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 30
Yapp:
Hello. John Yapp, Assistant Transportation Planner with JCCOG. And I prepared a
PowerPoint for you to help you visualize some of the trail gaps. Thank you, Karin. What
I'm going to do is give a broad overview of some of our more significant trail gaps as
well as some locations where there are barriers to pedestrian and bicycle traffic and some
ways to overcome them. Just have to find the PowerPoint presentation real quick. There it
is. In putting this list together I consulted - well, what projects did I focus on? Those that
contributed to overall connectivity. Those that required little to no property acquisition.
There's lots of planned trails in areas proposed to be developed and annexed. I did not
include those. Those that are already part of an adopted plan, either the JCCOG Trails
Plan or one of our district plans, which do receive significant public input. And also
projects that are priorities of the Parks and Recreation Commission.
This is the Iowa City Metropolitan Area Trails Map. The JCCOG Trails Map. We added
some color to it, which came up in a discussion a few months ago. We're focusing onjust
the Iowa City area. The two projects that are funded and these will be constructed in
FY08 are the Court Hill Trail on the east side and the McAllister Boulevard wide
sidewalk, part of the bridge and McAllister Boulevard project.
Elliott: Do you have an arrow or a pointer so you can point those out?
Yapp: I think Marian has one.
Vanderhoef: The red line.
Champion: Two big red lines.
Yapp: Here's the Court Hill Trail and McAllister Boulevard. The Highway I Trail, which can
be broken up into 3 segments: from the Lodge to Riverside Drive, from the Lodge to
Sunset Street and then from Sunset Street to Mormon Trek Boulevard. That corridor is,
has the highest traffic volume and a very large mix of destinations both commercial and
employment destinations in that corridor. And also the Highway 6 Trail extension, the
next phase for that would be Broadway Street to Sycamore Street.
This is standing at Hawk ridge Drive in front of the Lodge, just looking at what that
terrain looks like right now. It does have a large drainage ditch. Here's looking in the
other direction. There is a short sidewalk that we installed to get the pedestrians to a bus
stop in that corridor, but the rest of the Highway I corridor does not have sidewalks
currently. This is the Highway 6 sidewalk, constructed a few years ago in front of
Pepperwood Plaza. This is what the result would look like in the Highway I corridor.
Now, the Highway 6 Trail did require filling in that drainage ditch and constructing storm
sewers, so it is a little more to it than just installing a trail.
We have a couple pedestrian tunnels we'd like to highlight. This is Riverside Drive at the
Iowa Interstate Railroad tracks, right next to Hartwig Dodge. In the neighborhood
workshops several years ago for the southwest district plan, this came up consistently as a
barrier to pedestrian traffic on Riverside Drive. You, there's about an 18 inch place where
you can walk. Most people told us they do step into the street there. The solution to this
would be a pedestrian tunnel. This is the Longfellow pedestrian tunnel.
O'Donnell:
Where was that last picture?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page31
Champion: Right across from -
Yapp: Right next to Hartwig Dodge on Riverside Drive.
Bailey: Near -
O'Donnell: Is that a trail right behind that on the River?
Vanderhoef: Yes.
Yapp: On the opposite side of the street. The Iowa River Trail is on the River side of the street.
This is one the west side of the street.
O'Donnell: Ok.
Yapp: This is what the solution would be. This was also the Iowa Interstate Railroad for a
pedestrian tunnel. Another pedestrian tunnel in both Iowa City and JCCOG plans is
proposed to extend the Willow Creek Trail to the west side of Highway 218 into Hunters'
Run Park area. This is the culvert under Highway 218 where we have just started
discussions with Iowa DOT whether it's possible to use this culvert as a pedestrian
tunnel. It's a little undersized. So one of the things we'll have to investigate is how much
of that is needed for water flow and how much might be able to use for a tunnel.
Coralville did a real similar project in the late 1990s. You're probably familiar with this-
this is a culvert under Interstate 80, between Northridge Park and Coral Ridge Mall.
That's what the solution would be at Highway 218. At the end of the presentation I'll
summarize all these.
Our two bridge projects that are both part of adopted plans. The Butler Bridge or the
Dubuque Street Iowa River Pedestrian Bridge. And I think we might have a solution for
that now. This is a narrow bridge with 2-way bicycle traffic on one side of the bridge,
using an 8-foot shoulder. The, there's a lot of quarry traffic; the quarry entrance is just to
the north. A lot of gravel on the roadway. This is another view of the bridge. The
pedestrian bridge would connect the Waterworks Park where we have a trail head, some
parking area, to the County's Dubuque Street Trail just to the north. Also there's some
fishing traffic in that area. The other bridge project, which is one of the priorities of the
Parks and Recreation Commission, would be the Iowa River Pedestrian Bridge from
Rocky Shore Drive to The Peninsula. This is a simulation of what that might look like.
Another trail project would be an extension of the Court Hill Trail. Court Hill Trail will
be constructed here. The Scott Park Trail, to further extend that trail into the Windsor
Ridge area, which Windsor Ridge neighborhood has some trails which were constructed
by the developer and then dedicated to the City for maintenance. A trail through Scott
Park would connect that to the Court Hill Trail, which extends, will extend further all the
way to Muscatine Avenue. This was a very flat terrain, all public property in Scott Park.
This is a shot of where the trail would be located, right adj acent to the creek. Another
trail that's long been a part of our trails plan but has never gathered significant support
would be extending the Iowa River Trail to Sturgis Ferry Park on the west side of the
river. Currently the trail extends to the east side all the way to Napoleon Park, on the west
side of the River, as development projects have been proposed over the years we have
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 32
acquired some easements for a trail. This is behind the Sturgis Comer businesses. There
is an existing easement in place for a future trail. Then it would be proposed to go under
the Highway 6 Bridge and this is standing behind the transit building and could extend
further into Sturgis Ferry Park, which would start to set up the network for further
extensions to the south, where there are, there's a mobile home park to the south here.
Sturgis Ferry Park is located here as well as future connections to McAllister Boulevard.
This would be the 1" link to set that up.
South Sand Lake would be another proposed project, to extend the Iowa River Trail
around the Sand Lake Recreation Area. Not really a gap, I would say, but it is an adopted
plan. And finally, the other significant project that when we did the Northeast District
Plan, and I believe this was, at least part of this was proposed to be addressed with the
sidewalk infill project is the Rochester Avenue sidewalks. A lot of residential
development in this neighborhood, well-worn paths along Rochester A venue showing
there is pedestrian traffic in that area. This would be on the south side of Rochester
Avenue.
Vanderhoef: 45 mile an hour when you get out a little further.
Yapp: Yes, yes. The traffic exiting town does pick up speed.
Elliott: Is that, you're talking about east of 1" Avenue?
V anderhoef: Yes.
Yapp: Yes.
Elliott: Ok.
Yapp: Between 1" A venue and Scott Boulevard.
Elliott: Ok.
Vanderhoef: This is the connection to get you to Scott Boulevard without walking in the street.
Yapp: There are certainly lots of other gaps in sidewalks and trails, but these are the ones that
are the most significant, based on my experience and based on input I've received over
the years.
Champion: That's a great picture. You know, Harry Truman once said "put sidewalks where people
walk." It looks like we could really use one there.
Yapp: Yes. Well that's actually, you know, it's kind of, in sidewalk planning, one of the theories
is you just wait and watch where people walk. And that's of course where you build the
sidewalks.
O'Donnell: Have we got a recent trail count?
Yapp: Yes.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
O'Donnell:
Yapp:
O'Donnell:
Yapp:
O'Donnell:
Yapp:
Bailey:
Yapp:
Bailey:
Yapp:
Bailey:
Yapp:
Bailey:
Yapp:
Correia:
Yapp:
Correia:
Yapp:
City Council Work Session
Page 33
We do have one?
For which location?
For just trails in general.
Oh, trails in general. Over the years I have been taking trail counts for almost 8 years
now. Within your average neighborhood trail consistently, and this is Iowa City,
Coralville and North Liberty, 300-500 people a day. The Iowa River Trail, both on
campus and through City Park is several thousand people a day.
And that runs down Park Road along Rocky Shore Drive.
Yes. That's correct. So in summary, the gaps, these are significant gaps we've identified.
The Highway I Trail, which could be done in 3 different phases. The Highway 6 Trail
extension from Broadway Street to Sycamore Street. The Riverside Drive Iowa Interstate
Railroad pedestrian tunnel. The Willow Creek Trail Highway 218 pedestrian tunnel. The
Dubuque Street Iowa River pedestrian bridge, also known as the Butler Bridge. Rocky
Shore Drive pedestrian bridge to The Peninsula. Court Hill Trail extension through Scott
Park. Iowa River extension through Sturgis Ferry Park. Sand Lake trails and Rochester
Avenue sidewalks.
And that Highway 6 Trail extension, the Broadway Street to Sycamore Street, that's, is
that the last gap to filling in all along there?
As far as, let me go back to that graphic.
Yeah.
As far as what we have as on an adopted plan, yes.
Ok. Because -
Now there is as development continues to the east in the future, I think there will be more
demand for more extensions to the east.
Sure, but that would actually -
Well, actually we do have it in the plan, so I take that back, to extend that Highway 6
Trail even further east of Sycamore. I take that back.
How far down?
What's shown on the plan is roughly, this would be roughly where the residential
development, about where the Moose Lodge is now.
All the way down like past -
The Heinz Road.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 34
Bailey: Very nice.
Correia: That would be -
Bailey: That would be great.
Yapp: All the Sycamore Farms area, in front of that area.
Bailey: Wow.
Yapp: And there's a few pieces of trail in place there already. So I wasn't sure where you
wanted the conversation to go from here, but I'd be glad to take any questions or in the
future follow up in more detail on any of these projects.
Correia: Can you at least keep the list up?
Vanderhoef: We had a placeholder.
Bailey: Again, sorry -
Yapp: What's that Regenia?
Bailey: Can you put the list up again?
Yapp: Oh sure.
Bailey: Thanks.
Vanderhoef: I think we need the list and I think we need project costs on them.
Correia: Yeah. We had a, we put a placeholder like you said.
Bailey: Right.
Vanderhoef: There's a placeholder in the budget for these and of course I'm gonna push for Rochester
Avenue to be completed. I hadn't thought about that extension of the Court Hill Trail, but
that one makes so much sense right now if we're building Court Hill, because that's
from the middle part of the east side residential area to get them out to Scott Boulevard
where they can use that full extension and get down to Highway 6.
Correia: You said that that, the City already owns that propertY?
Yapp: Through Scott Park? Yes, that's all public property.
Correia: Scott Park. So that project would not involve acquiring, that sort of thing.
Yapp: It should not, it should involve propertY acquisition. The one location where it might,
would be on the very east end of it where you connect to some Windsor Ridge Trails, but
I, I believe most of those are in dedicated outlots. But that's something we would check.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14,2007.
May 14, 2007
City Council Work Session
Page 35
Champion: Well, I think we need to have some estimates and have discussion of this again.
Bailey: Right.
V anderhoef: Yeah.
Yapp: We've got estimates for some of these but not all ofthem, so the next step would be
working with engineering staff on developing some cost estimates.
Correia: Well, I guess at first I'd like to see which we have estimates for, because maybe the ones
that we like are -
Vanderhoef: That may be all we need at this point in time.
Correia: And then direct, get cost estimates after that.
Vanderhoef: I think so. At least some of the first lists, and then if there's something that somebody's
really specifically interested in that we don't have figures on, we'll let you know.
Bailey: What kind of criteria are you all using to decide?
Champion: To join.
Bailey: To join?
Vanderhoef: Join. Yes.
Bailey: Safety? Getting people to leisure or work or?
Champion: I think they're both important.
Bailey: Ok.
Vanderhoef: The join and the thing that was very apparent there when there was a lot of building
happening on the west side of the river, we got, we had opportunities to build trails that
made some really great connections. And in our older sections of town, we don't have as
good a connection to the newer trails that are along the major, major arterials, like
Highway 6.
Bailey: Well, I'm real concerned about not having any trail along Highway I, so that's interesting
to me, but I'd have to see some costs.
Wilburn: It would be, for the ones that we don't already have estimates; I agree to just go ahead for
the ones that we do get those up there. But it would be helpful on that list if you could
just in general - x number of miles of trail.
Bailey: Cost per linear foot.
Wilburn: Understanding that, you know property acquisition all that adds up. But for, sometimes
we have constituents ask us "you know why isn't there a trail?" Well, this weekend I had
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Yapp:
Wilburn:
Yapp:
Elliott:
Yapp:
Elliott:
Yapp:
Elliott:
Champion:
Correia:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Karr:
City Council Work Session
Page 36
4,5 folks down in the, down past the airport in some of the mobile home parks asking you
know, how much are trails to come from, to bring us into town so that we're not out. So it
would be helpful to know in general x number of miles trail costs. And then we could let
them know that, you know -
In general it's about $200,000.00 a mile.
$200,000.00 a mile.
Now that's just, that's a IO-foot wide paved trail with no bridges, retaining walls or
tunnels.
And what moneys pay for that.
Ah, typically it's a, it really depends on the project, but any combination of grant funds,
typically through JCCOG, local money, bonds or otherwise.
How much of that is road use?
Well, all the local money would be road use tax revenue.
I'd sure like to see the Bike Association start raising money to pay for this.
It isn't just bikers who use it.
This isn't just used by bikers.
Because this is being paid for by the automobile drivers and the people who buy gasoline.
I'd like to see the bike, the bike riders starting to pay for some of this.
Well there are some who are primarily operating automobiles that would love it if you
could get bikes off the street, so some of them might.
Ijust figure of the automobile, 5-10% of the automobile drivers ride bicycles and the rest
of us are paying for the ones, to build pathways for the people who ride bicycles. I'd like
to see them start paying for it.
You can ride a bicycle Bob.
I know I can.
That's not something that we're going to be able to resolve tonight.
No, but that's something to think about.
I'm going to recommend that we move on from this.
I was just going to note that if there's any Council interest, although the agenda did not
allow it, you certainly could recess the Work Session if you wanted to reconvene it after
the formal.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14, 2007.
May 14, 2007
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Karr:
Champion:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Karr:
Elliott:
Champion:
Elliott:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 37
Let's do that.
Oh good.
Let's do it.
Rather than adjourning the Work Session you just recess to reconvene it if you're
interested in doing it.
We need to do that.
Yes.
Just so we don't move it to another location.
Or you could end it. I mean, I'm not saying that, I'm just offering it.
That's fine.
I move we recess.
That's fine.
Until after our regular meeting.
I don't think we need a motion. We canjust do that.
Ok.
Good. All right.
I wanted to make a motion.
You can make a motion then. Let's take a break 'til 7:00.
Good.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of
May 14,2007.