The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1978-05-01 Correspondence14iCR0FIL:4E0 BY JORM MICROLAB i i TO: FROM: CEDAR RAPIOS AND JL'3 AbillL,, :Jew DATE: April 28, 1978 City Council Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development RE: Comprehensive Plan As a result of the comments and discussion at the informal Council meeting on Monday, April 24, the staff has prepared the following reports and recommendations: 1. A synopsis of various traffic studies on Melrose Avenue. 2. A statement on the position of the City staff and the University of Iowa with regard to the West Campus bypass. 3. A report on the size and best land use of the Advance Drainage Systems tract currently shown as putty (8-16 DU/A) on the land use map. The alignment for the SE bypass, favored by Council members, has been drawn in on the land usd*•map for Council approval. In addition the following text changes are recommended as a result of the discussion on non -conforming uses and the agricultural zoning recommended on the west side. 1. P. 107 -- include the following paragraph: The fact that the Comprehensive Land Use Map shows only generalized land uses means that it will not in all cases reflect small areas of existing use which may be zoned to reflect such use or density. This recognizes that while the Land Use Map depicts the long-term goals for development within the City, the zoning must consider the reasonableness of a classification as applied to a particular property. Therefore in instances where a zoning classification in strict accordance with the Land Use Map would appear to cause such harm to a property owner as to outweigh the benefit derived from strict conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, a given property may be zoned to allow an existing use. r I41CROFILIIED BY 1 JORM MICR+LA6 btiL,,(Ui !LMLO BY JORM 141CRULAB CEOAre RAPIDS AND ul, li_::,L,, .Jl", In regard to the City's Land Use Plan as it relates to the site presently occupied by the Advanced Drainage 90 pany.: g mpany.-: We the undersigned support the zoning and development of the site as a residential area with the same density and character as our existing neighborhood. We do not support its development at a higher residential density or the construction of apartments or townhouses. NAME ADDRESS _ _.. . 5Z 3 '+MICN01 ILMED DY DORM MICROLAB hiiu(Ui !LMLO BY JORM MICROLAd LEDAR RATIO-� A(lD uL.`, >IU,11L:, In regard to the City's Land Use Plan as it relates to the J wcg site presently occupied by the Advanced Drainage We the undersigned support the zoning and development of the site as a residential area with the same density and character as our existing neighborhood. We do not support its development at a higher residential density or the construction of apartments or townhouses. NAME ✓Ltd- � •"Vln Li' -W, -c. ?w e, Q Oe117 . G ADDRESS ' i 3S Q!'lir � rbt 7,J, �eCL+�GdY-vtJ 7 9 _ LQ, 30 7�� Sl o -1416 C. �1�-IL�L..F'I/J'✓ TS'Y ,�Al2?aQni• 14MR01 ILMED BY JORM MICROLAB 30 7�� Sl o v /' � C. �1�-IL�L..F'I/J'✓ /S -J 2, �t�cfLc�L��cy✓ 14MR01 ILMED BY JORM MICROLAB h11L;<Ui IL; -40 BY JORM MICROLAb I.LOAk RAPIu� ANO JL ^" In regard to the City's Land Use Plan as it relates to the 94/415 site presently occupied by the Advanced Drainage We the undersigned support the zoning and development of the site as a residential area with the same density and character as our existing neighborhood. We do not support its development at a higher residential density or the construction of apartments or townhouses. NAME_ ADDRESS /iC-, (,Z� /b. 03 Ld Pic YY Vi'�/cC,GL-c/L U,.�G vL� Ia-�U �M-�h.c,c��rtsN LLiL:" 21 - joro�i( St 141a0l ILMCD BY JORM MICR6LA6 b110(0� ILALU HY JORM IAICROLAb LLDAk kAPIJS AND JA's Ix regard to the City's Land Use Plan as it relates to the site presently occupied by the Advanced Drainage Systems: We the undersigned support the zoning and development of the -- site as a residential area with the same density and character - as our existing neighborhood. We do not support its development - -- at a higher residential density or the construction of apartments - - or townhouses. NAME �J)o:nv 03 efuna // '30 L Y lG�(ly C✓.�.iC�✓?'L/i 141CRef ILMLD BY JORM MICR6LAB tiiLttJi LMLO BY JORM MICRULAB • CEUAk RAPWS AND JL In regard to the City's Land Use Plan as it relates to the site presently occupied by the Advanced Drainage We the undersigned support the zoning and development of the site as a residential area with the same density and character as our existing neighborhood. We do not support its development at a higher residential density or the construction of apartments or townhouses. NAME _ _ -_ __._ADDRESS_ �ii;✓j�Ce— _. 1133 l l�vi� 73� at ,&<n.d Oe w [ 2c�2�Cyr` ,..�.. IdILROCILVICO BY 1 JORM MICRIOLAB ff;1�P I•�rl �, . "iS .,i��.l l.r MILRUFILMED BY DORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS AND UES MUINL:,, !Ueb, STAT!P'N 17T TO THE CITY 0011"'SIL I(11A CITY Presented on 1 Pay 197P by the t.elrose Neirrhborhoods Association i MAY 1197b ABBIE STOLF_U.S CITY CLERK We wish to call to your attentinn the 96-paee P`EMCRAKD?'F1 which the Melrose roirrhborhoods Association presenters to the City Council on October 2, 1973, conies of which ,you aaaln have before you. This is a carefully reasoned, detailed analysis of the traffic problem of the Grand Avenue --Melrose area and its relationship to some aspects of the traffic, needs of the University Hospitals, to urban renewal, and to westward expansion of Iowa rity. Since that time, the Johnson County Reeional Plannine ComF�ission Area Transportation Study Reports Nos. 1,2, and 3, prepared by a rhicaao traffic consulting firm, have been published. The findings in these reports confirm, with additional data, our 1973 analysis. Therefore it remains our unshakeable conviction that the wideninK of Melrose Avenue and the construction of a new diagonal are unnecessary, wasteful and imprudent. 1) Except for the bottleneck at the Riverside --Burlington Bridce intersection, Melrose Avenue has already, ns the two-lane roadway it now is, the capacity of hnndlinrr whatever incr-aces are predicted. for the next twenty years. Furthermore, even if Melrose were widened to ten lanes and realie:ned, the real bottle- neck at th- river crossing would still remain. (For nn analy- sis of this situation sop Attachm-nt A) Pmgever, to exnedite thy, floss of Lraffic, in 1.h,a CrnA Avl�nue-4-lros,! area, we suc- 8a3 MICROFILMED BY I JORM MICR�LAB CFOAI? VAPIPC 7CS A10mrl; MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS AND ULS ;,1U1NL,, lino: Eested in our 1973 MSIOORANDUF an alternative traffi,. pattern which would in effect provide a non -diagonal four -lane con- nection.(See our 1973 MSFORANDtIN, Appendix P, with map; here summarized in Attachment P(a).) 2) We do not want our homes and neighbordhoods destroyed. There are several stately old homes in the F^lrose are, many of them recently acquired, restored and preserved with great care by their owners. Not only is the proposal for the widening of Mel- rose a constant anxiety to these people, it would immediately and drastically lower property values. The quality of life in the entire area would deteriorate in the same measure. Also, as we learned in 1973 from a questionaire distributed among the residents of Slater Hall, and from a meeting with them, these students were very much opposed to an expressway being built so close to their dormitory. Nor is there any reason to believe that this sentiment has chanrred in the meantime. 3) We therefore urge the city to oppose the construction of a .518 interchange at Melrose (See pp. 23-4 of our 1973 MEMORANDUM.) Also, consider in this connection that the so-called bubble around University Fleirrhts, made necessary by the position that community has taken on the widening issu-, ,rould involve new and expensive intersections and signal lights where it leaves Melrose and again where it rejoins east of the railroad bridge. These are problems that would have to be workpd out both with University Heights and the university of Iowa, whose property ^Gr ILMED BY JORM MICR�LAB CMAE RAPID'. 7rt !40mrs MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS AND UES MWNL3, lue-A 3 would be affected. 4) The financial burden accruing from this project was esti- mated at around. 2 million 1973 dollars (See our MEMCRANDUM,PP•3-5•) A more recent estimate of the diagonal alone was $630,000. This apparently did not include the cost of property acquisition (See Area Transnortation Study RPport No. 3, n.10). Yet the whole benefit to the Iowa city taxpayer would be the saving of a few seconds' time in reaching the persisting bottleneck at the Bur- lington Bridge intersection. 5) Population trends and time schedule must be reexamined. The more exuberant trend predictions of the late 1960's and early- '70's arly'70's now meet with increasing skepticism. Orowth of the popu- lation of Iowa City and of the enrollment in the University is now thnught to be appreciably more modest than once predicted.. (See Area Transportation Study ReDort No. 1, Figure .5, P•15•) Since the r,omprehPnsive Plan places the Melrose Project in its Phase Three, i.e., at least 12 years from now, "as something_ which may be implemented within the next twenty years," we urge that the Melrose Project be deleted. t `�1 141CROr I DIED BY DORM MICR+LAB CEOAP PAPM . ?rs ,4O1!4E5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB Attachments • CEDAR RAPIDS AND ULS ;IO1NL,, IU4L 4 A. Analysis of the Burlington F.ridae bottleneck. B. Three proposals to expedite traffic flow during peak hours without the costly and destructive Melrose Project, including a summary of the alternative traffic pattern proposed in Appendix B of our 1973 MEMORANDUM. Bibliography 1. Johnson County Regional Planning Commission Area TranSDorta- tion Study Reports, Nos.1,2,3. 2. Melrose Pyeiahborhoods Association MEMORANDUM, 1973• 3. Sonksen,C., Data Analysis of the April, 1977 University of Iowa Melrose Avenue Origin -Destination Survey (Institute of Urban and Regional Research, University of Iowa, July, 1977.) I MICROFILi4F.O BY .I JORM MICR+LAE MAP PAPM'S • OFS MOPIFS MILRO11LAED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAVIOS AND UL5 MUihLj S Attacment A RIVERSIDE DRIVE -BURLINGTON BRIDGE INTF.RSECTICN J"', There are traffic slowdowns at the existing central city bridge intersections. (See Johnson County Regional Planning commission Area Transportation Studies.) Since our concern is with Melrose Avenue and the flow of traffic onto the Burlington Street Bridge, we quote from'Report No. 2(-p. 4-31):°The inter- section of US 6/218 and Burlington Street Bridge is already a highly developed intersection. The potential of substantially increasing the traffic carrying capacity of this bottleneck in the street and higway network is probably low." We quote again from Report No -2 (p.4-26): "The four -lane widen- ing of Melrose from Emerald and its diagonal connection to the US 6/218 Burlinton Bridge intersection would provide no traffic service benefit to these bridge crossings if no other major changes in the street and highway network were made to relieve these facilities. Additional traffic (1000vpd) would be loaded onto the Burlington Street bridge above the forecasted deficiency levels /already) identified." On the basis of these various studies and tests one must con- clude that only the building of a new river crossing would justify the widening and realignment of Melrose Avenue. Without a new river crossing, widening and realigning Melrose Avenue 111CROFILMED BY + JORM MICR+LA6 CrON` VIM,' C 1-j1LkDFILMED BY JORM 141CROLAB • CEDAk RAPIDS MD ULS MUIIIL'l, ;UrA 6 would only worsen the situation by inviting more cars to converge at the Burlington Bridge. The Melrose Avenue Nei ghbor- hoods Association is firmly opposed to the allocation of public funds for the building of an unjustifiably expensive additional river crossing, as well as to the development and building of a 'lest Campus bypass. 141CROFILMED By ' I 'i JORM MICR�LAB CFMP PAPIPG MOINB MILROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB Attachment P, CEDAR RAPIDS AND ULA Auil Li, .01111 THREE PROPOSALS TC EXPEDITE TRAFFIC FLC'd DURING PEAK HCURS Considering that "even now, congestion occurs for a relatively few minutes per day" (Report No.3, p.40) and that, as pointed out last week before the Council, 51.1% of peak hour traffic on Melrose is either work or school related and has both its origin and destination on the west side of the Iowa River within a one -mile radius (Melrose AvenueOrigin-Destination study, pp.1-2,6-7.) We propose the following; relatively minor and inexpensive measures: a. chance of traffic flow combined with some minor altera- tions, along; Grand and Melrose Avenues, as proposed in our 1973 MEMORANDUM, namely: 1. widen corners of P,yington at Melrose and at Grand 2. make Grand Avenue ONv: WAY WEST from Pyington Road 3. make Melrose ONE WAY EAST from S. Grand to Hyington, thereby providing in effect a non -diagonal, four -lane connection. b. construction of bikeways on Woolf Avenue and Melrose Avenue. *63.7 per cent. of all trips on Melrose Avenue past Woolf are work related. *45.4 per cent. of all work trips are University re- lated and have both origin and destination on the west side of the Iowa River. (Sonksen, p.3) *Many respondents jo the survey% stated that they would prefer to ride their bicycles to and from work or classes but due to heavy auto congestion and unavailablity of bike lanes on Woolf and Mel- rose, they felt that bicycling on these streets was too dangerous. (Sonksen, p.6) t� MICRor ILMED BY JORM MIC R�LAB MAR RN'In, n(5 MM'ILS I.1ICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS AND UES MUMLj, iuvilk c. establishment of shuttle bus lines from peripheral parking lots to the blest Campus and other adjacent areas. d. increase of narking fees in medical center ramps in order to disc^urage parking of cars there, lowerinm of parking fees at peripheral parking, lots with shuttle bus connections. f i 1 Id ICROMMED BY .� JORM MICR+LAB MAP HAI'M • lrS MOINES