HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-09-18 Correspondencey
DATE: September 20, 1973
Ia��
TO: Planning an& Zoning,'Commission
FROM: Iowa City City Council
RE: Referral
At the',September 18th meeting of the Council, Attorney Emil
Trott,; representing the Kirkwood Ave. Ry-Vee, 'appeared con-
cerning the vacation of the alley. As he had not been advised
of the:: hearing, he requested that the Council refer the matter
back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The motion was
passed'to refer the matter back to P&Z, in light of the
informationbrought by Mr. Trott, for additional study and
report back: to the Council.'
Abbie Stolfus
City', Clerk
September 18, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Iowa City, Iowa'
Gentlemen:
Attached is a photocopy of an Application for 'Vacation of Alley which I
filed with the city clerk on August 16, 1973. This was considered on
September 133, 1973, by the Planning and Zoning Commission, which recent-
mended
ecommended that the application be denied. However, through oversight the
Commission did not notify me that they were going to consider the matter
at their meeting on the 13th; so I; was not present. Had I been notified,
I would have been there with important information for the Commission to
consider, information which I like to think would have made a difference
in the Commissions recommendation:
I request that you refer the matter back to the Planning and Zoning Com-
mission so that it may be reconsidered by the Commission and so that I
may be given an opportunity to be present at the time of the reconsidera-
tion.
Respectfully submitted,
Emil G. Trott
Attorney for Chariton Storage Company
Owner of Kirkwood Avenue
Hy -Vee Food Store "
EGT/pt
Attachment
sp, and westi!Ip, Block 2,,Co6k
1;1:-11 IIV411:1-111
I
if( August ;! 197
RESISTENCE TO APPLICATION FOR VACATION
-OF ALLEY
To the Honorable Mayor and City Council
of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, and The
Planning and Zoning Commissionofthe 'City--
of Iowa City.
The Undersigned, _Thomas Blakley and, Eugene Kunkel owner and
Lessee respectively of certain properties adjoining the following described alley
The alley running east and west in
Block 2, Cook, Sargent and Downey
Addition to Iowa City, Iowa, according
to the Recorded Plat thereof;
hereby file their resistence to the-proposedvacation of said alley; That the
alley serves as an access to the property owned and businessoperated' by
Thomas Blakely known as Toms Auto Repair, that the garage built by Mr. Blakley
is so arranged and is opened either at the rear ,or-the front, -that the traffic
situation at heavy traffic periods makes access into said place of business
citremely difficult particularly at heavy traffic periods and the only reasonable
access to the place of business' during, such periods is at the rear of the
garage across said alley. That the lot owned by Mr. Blakley and leased by
r. Kunkel on the other sid of Toms Auto Repair wouldnotnrovide such access.
That it the understanding of the undersigned that this alley would be of value
in the event of fire in access to Tom's Auto Repair. It is the further belief-
of said indersinged that said alley provided a.puhlic service and is of use
by the public of Iowa Citv and should not be vacated, and it is the further
belief that on vacation thereof that this alley would be blocked by buildings
and its usefullne_ss-ended for traffic purposes. -
Dated at sown Citv, Iowa this-`13th day of 1;entcmbcr,"1J?+
19�
' �gj� ��G1-Egi� akley
G\Ti — —
BY ��,t,v�-,--c-✓ d
Newman loomey
Attorney for Thomas /
Blakley
P.O. Box 1026 L /
Iowa City, Iowa 52230 I`
gen Kunkel
., 3�0�
APPLICATION FOR VACATION OF ALLEY
To the Ilonorable Mayor and City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa:
Chariton Storage Company, owner of the Kirkwood Avenue 11 -Vee Focd
Store in Iowa City, respectfully requests that the following described
alley:
The alley running east and west in Block 2, Cook,
Sargent, and Downey Addition to Iowa City, Iowa,
according to the recorded plat thereof,
be vacated. Vacation of this alley would enable us to move our pop shed and
ice cream freezer adjacent to our building. 'This would increase the efficiency,
and improve the working conditions, of our, employees, especially in :bad wezither,
but more important t'would take a large obstacle; out of the center of our
parking lot, making'the movement of traffic in the parking lot much safer because
of the clear view which would be provided. As it is, there have been three
minor accidents in the last three years and several close calls inhere children
have run out from the sheds as now located. We have black topped this alley and
maintained it and removed the snow`
from it for many years.
Attached is .the trust. account check of Trot It & Jansen,, Attorneys for
$200.00 for the, deposit required in connection with applications of this
kind.
Dated at Iowa City, Iowa, this 13th day of August, 1973.
E DAUG1 61973
A B B I E S T 0 L F U S Respectl•ul ly submitted,
CITY CLERK CHARITON STORAGE COMPANY
TROTT $ JANSEN By >
By ��{ Kennetn u. eickens, Manager
call
,�`c`t—
Emil G. Trott Kirkwood Avenue Hy -Vee Food Store
Attorneys for Applicant '-?7 Kirkwood Avenue
9 South Linn Street Iowa City,' Iowa 52240
lova Citv_ tn,.,., coo;in
PHONE 319 338.2321
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
September 11, 1973 R1cHARD BARTEL
ROBERT J. BURNS
ED L. KESSLER
City Council
Civic Center
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Re: bus fares
Dear Sirs,
During the summer of 19711, I abstracted all of Iowa City's Transporta-
tion Studies from 1937 to the Summer of 1971.
Enclosed is the abstract, iincluding my critique, of. the "Study of Bus
Transportation in Iowa City, Iowa" which was conducted by M.C. Gil-
man and Company and dated!March, 1967.
The two major conclusions of the study were that a decrease in bus
fares causes a significant increase in
gn ridership p to the Central Busi-
ness District area with the corresponding beneficial effects on the
Central Business District transportation problems (a decrease 'of fares
from $0.20 to $0.10 caused a 4000 increase in ridership), and that the
bus system ownership, should remain private, with adequate subsidies fr
from the City of Iowa City,
As the City has taken over ownership of the bus system, the conclusion
that ridership has an inversely proportional relationship to bus fares
is a lesson that should be learned and utilized.
In considering the increased; deficit of a lower fare it is important
to remember the beneficial effects of the increased ridership on the
Central Business District area which save substantial hidden and
other costs to the community.
Increasing bus fares can only be a harmful blow to the community and
the Central Business District interests.
Sincerely,
Richard ':- rtel, Supervisor
Johnson County
Study of Bus Transportation in Iowa -City, Iowa - W. C. Gilman &
_-Company - March, 1967 -
-INTRODUCTION: The University-UBD parking problem is of :rvpto/
proportion and will increase with University enrollment. With
a limited number of parking places where foe -;greatest need is,
the overflc a-cs-Pvssthe University .into the CBD. Lack of circumfer-
ential arteries causes University traffic to traverse the CBD.
The traffic patterns flow comparatively easy but -the parking
problem would generate interest in bus transit if it
were convenient, fast, accessible, and operated with reasonable
frequency.
I14PORTAITCE OF BUS TRMSIT: Public apathy is 'responsible for.
decaying bus services in many communities. Trying to reestablish
bus service under decayed eircumstances.;is very difficult. Loss
of a bus system would increase traffic and parking problems. It"
isessential tomaintainan; existing bus system.
EFFECTIVENESS OF PRESENT -BUS SERVICE : -The Tactors considered in
measuring bus service are: area coverage, frequency of service,
dependability and schedule adherence., rate of'fare, schedule
speed, condition of equipment, and ability to expand service.
The six existing routes in Iowa City meet at a common intersection
in the CBD. The routes are either 20 minute or 30 minute frequency
extending the travel time to the outer terminals to 15 minutes.
The University Hospital route is the most utilized and has over-
taxed the service during the rush hour. The three "short" routes
operate in loops at their outer ends to _improve coverage and
2
serve the southeast and northeast_ sections of the city and are
residential in character. ' Two of the routes are through-routed
in the CBD eliminating the need for downtown terminal for Phrough
passengers. The west route to the Hawkeye Apartments is occasionally
over-taxed during rush periods. A reduction.in rare to 10� in
November, 1966 caused a 1.00% increase of passengers from the 20X
In November,_ 1965. Two.- additional routes are operated for; school
bus service and also "pinch-hit" during the rush hour. The routes
are basically adequate but could be extended'in.the south-east
sectorwith 'a'sacrifice of frequency. Additional equipment is
needed to improve.service. -
POSSIBLE ROUTE EXTENSIONS:- A survey was conducted by the University
in 1966 that showed the existing bus service adequate for students
_(residence-bus line comparison) except for an area beyond; one of
the "short" routes in the Rundell Street area and an area west
on Benton Street.- Another route is feasible-to the Coralville'
area. The landfill area east of the airport '.would be utilized
as University parking with bus service to the CBD. A private
operator could not afford to make these expansions and wait for
the "build-up" of users. Iowa. City or the University could
-- ---obtain a federal grant by furnishing matched funds under the
Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 to subsidize an existing
service.
OPERATING COST OF PRESENT BUS SERVICE: The Iowa City Bus' Company
operates three. types.of services: city bus, school bus, and chartered
service._ The city bus service has-a;fleet of 11 small capacity
buses (27-35. passengers) which operated below ,capacity until the
3 .
fare reduction-to-10p�. The rolling stock is in dependable condition.
The school bus operation has a fleet of 20 school -type buses in -
contract with -the Board of Education and has been steadily increasing.
The school -type buses are available for charter service.; The City
Bus accounts for 54% of the annual mileage. Certain fixed costs
are difficult to allocate to the different services. Operating
costs steadily increase as passenger service tends to decrease.
Total revenue for the 10¢ reduction for - University oriented users
in September 23, 1966 and November 3, 1966 increased slightly ($689)
for the last 5 months of 1966 compared to the last 5 months of 1965.
There was ,an increase of; -$19,300 in operating'` costs for the same
period, however. Management problems in maintaining level of
service are monumental (increased wages, taxes, repair bills, etc.)
The deficit for city buses was $4,000/month for the last five
months of 1966. Buses lost -an average of $14,000.
POSSIBLE REMEDIES_ -POR REDUCING DEFICIT: Increasing fares would
tend to eliminate the deficit but: the patronage would decrease
adding tothe community problem. Decreasing operating cost could
only be achieved by. decreasing service. Restricting parking with
the lower bus fares has proven to be an effective method off' in-
ducing bus use. Bus service in Iowa City should be increased and
not decreased. Expanding the service from 20 minutes to 30
minutes ,on the "short" routes would also be self-defeating. A
service out at low rider periods would spread a driver's 8'hour
work day over a 12 hour period and doimtoim merchants would object.
NEED FOR SUBSIDIES: The University and City Officials recognize
4
the need for subsidy to maintain the bus system. Optimum faros
for increased patronage should be agreed to -.by the University, City
and Transit Owner. A careful study of additional -areas `to be
served is necessary, before "trial service." One form of subsidy
would be a guaranteed operating cost per vehicle mile or vehicle
hour. The management of the finances should be jointly- handled.
PIIB ------------ vIiED BUS SERVICE?: Advantages of acity-owned bus line
is the saving of a variety of taxes and some residents and taxpayers
would feel compelled to use the service for it is their system.
Most other problems would continue, hcwever, and this study
recommends underwriting the bus transit by the City and/or Univer-
sity if sufficient area coverage; proper routing, reasonable fre-
quency of service and fares prescribed by City and/or University
officials.
CRITIQUE: This study amply covers the bus transit system and, its
problems, Alleviation of ,private auto congestion can only be
realized by public acceptance and use of amass transit system.
Improved roads and parking will only increase fatalities, pollution,
and cost of transportation. This study is lacking in ;that its
chief recommendation is subsidizing the transit system which is
perhaps the only question it intended to resolve, It is not enough
to make a transit system attractive to the patron unless it approxi-
mates door-to-door service and no delay. A mass transit system
would be costly to initially build it up to a'paying basis. The
general public needs to be farced in a subtle way to utilize the
transit system.. Definitely, the frequency and access of service
y
1.
5-
will have to be grossly; improved. One 'Play ;would ,be to purchase
passenger vans in the $300045000 range instead of'$14,000/bus.
The capacities would be smaller but investment and operating cost
would be considerably smaller except for wages and the fleet
could ,be enlarged from 3-5 times its size. The vehicles are more
mobil and would speed up a run. The frequency could be cut to
a -third or less. The initial investment to "build" up patronage
would not be prohibitive and the "buses" could be "backed" up
with additional units during rush hours or the capacities could
be increased gradually to serve, the patronage needs. Smaller _
units could be, operated during off-peak hours and as "back-up"
units during the rush hour. The routes could easier be extended
and part-time help utilized during the rush-hour times (patrolmen,
firemen, Hospital personnel, etc.). Large buses cannotbeefficiently
operated at high frequencies and require better roadway facilities
to manuever. The best subtle method for restricting parking to
encourage bus patronage is the abandoning of parking restrictions
at the University and in the CBD. No further.parking facilities
should be provided. Motorists would tend to occupy "choice" parking
spaces for long periods reducing space availability. The city
should prevent overnight storages however. Extreme shortage
of space would force ,the user to make his own choice of a more
convenient tray of commuting to the CBD area. One study concludes
that only 76% of the parking spaces is used by the "pure" CBD patron.
CBD business men would object to the lifting of parking regulation
but would not be harmed in fact be benefited, by a greatly improved
mass transit system that could possibly attract a percentage of
the shopping center patron. The sacrifice of an improved mass
"h '1 7"
E236.1 - C City,
Hall
Iow�a-Cityo Iowa 52242
3eptember 14, 11073
City Council
Iowa CiiyCivic Center:
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Council Memberst
In(October of 1972 the Citizens for Environmental Action
presented to you a petition signed by over 8000 Iowa City
res,idents supporting the establishment of a total recycling
program,iby the city. Why then', in light of such support q
from the the 'community, has'no specific action been taken with
regard to-the proposed pilot project to provide for the,:
recycling of newsprint? It seems to me that this project
is the very least that can be donetoward the '6stablishment
of,the kind-of full-scale recycling program originally re-
quested by-'the petition.
I I ope th
.,You will consider the need for such environmental
concern ,in- he,,i;cilty,!.:S.�budgeti:tds^i.-t ha's!,bein"expressed,by the
city's citizens;,.Ando-accordingly, I hope YOU will-vote,to
support thi6'project.
Sincerely,
Deborah Stuckwisch
JPL E
SEP 14 1973
A.B61E STOLFUS,
dTY CLERK
"� •
-. rv- � .aa u
F a
September 20, 1973
,I
I
,
tl
Deborah Stuck' iech'' '
L`23G Currier hall
I
Iowa City, L Iowa 57.242'•',' L t t,.t
•: rr t I ; �t'' r. r r , ,n tt;J. ', : L i .r:
Doar ma. Stuckwisch . .,
At its Geptember,` 18; 1973 meeting the .`Caty'Ceuncil oEfici:ally
recaived
and placed on file your correS�ondence,concernin
recycling in 'the City Iowa, ' g
of
City
^ih,znl: you'fOr bringing ,this matter to thea attention
City Council. p
of the
, +r ,:r.; r,:L'' ',.1 t 1 tri .
•. i C't
,.�
Sincerely
Ray'S. 1•7e11S
City Manflger
RST9 d b
•r
�
Dear Councilmen
I -.am enthused that you gentlemen sdpport the proposition that there should be
a good: transit system in Iowa City. You 'support in the past has made ,'possible
a`substantial increase in the ridership and service provided. I am concerned
however, 'that what progress has been made may be jeopardized with a fare
increase. A nationwide; study of cities, which included Iowa @itygshowed that
an increase in fare to 25¢ would have produced 22% fewer riders in cities.
This would be unfortunate for our city ,which was sited this summer in ,the
Smithsonian magazine as being one of three`cities, besides Seattle and
Atlanta that had substantial increases in ridership when the fare was
.dropped to 15#.
The reduced fare of 15$ in Iowa City has been a positive inducement for
<citizens to use the transit system as a practical alternativetodepending
upon automobiles. The transit system has provided a needed service directly
and in many indirect ways not shown in the 'fare box. This is truesfor example, for
wives who can send their husbands and children on the bus and afford it.
This applies to business buses bring people comfortably directly to
stores andoorking people can leave the car at home. The system provides a
convenient and safe means of travel for the elderly and women. There has
also been the reduction of vehicles on the roads and lessc ongestion and
pollution. The transit system in conjunction, with the Council's ambitious
and commendable urban renewal plans, are helping to provide the citizens with
'a healthier and enriched environment.
We should not disrupt the progress that has been made. We should wait.
A long range transit study is presently being prepared for publication.
This has been initiated by the ,Johnson County Regional Planning Commission
and has, contracted part of the research to the Institute For Urban and
Regional' Research. Thereport will deal with future transportation needs and
many alternatives which can be of use to our city., to reduce costs and
improve service.
I realize the deeision you all have to make is difficult and there are
competing suggestions. Y8u all have made an excellent beginning in
providing the public with a transit system of this quality.I don't
want to see your work and the service' jeopardized particularly at a
time when the system is, growing and more in demand.
Thank you very much for your consideration.
Sincerely yours,
&GZstein
10 Lakevielif Dr.
RR# b
Iowa City 1� L F II II
TO THE CITY COUNCIL:
I URGE YOU TO MAINTAIN THE 15¢ BUS FARE. MANY MEMBERS
OF OUR COMMUNITY (SENIOR CITIZENS, YOUTH, LOW INCOME FAMILIES)
ARE DEPENDENT UPON IAN INEXPENSIVE MASS ,TRANSIT SYSTEM:
THE PROPOSED 67*' RATE INCREASE WILL UNDOUBTEDLY RESTRICT
THEIR PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY LIFE.
I ENCOURAGE YOU TO"SEEK WAYS TO INCREASE BUS PATRONAGE
SO THATTHESYSTEM BECOMES MORE SELF ..SUFFICIENT. .'.�.IF
NEED BE, IRECOMMEND THAT YOU EXERCISE YOUR AUTHORITY TO.
LEVY THE .ADDITIONAL 2 MILLS AS PROVIDED FOR IN IOWA LAW,.
WOULD CONSIDER THE ADDITIONAL 2 MILLS A STOP GAP
MEASURE: WAYS ',MUST BE FOUND. TO PROVIDE A DEPENDABLE, LOW
COST 'MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM-YET NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER
CITY SERVICES.
THANK YOU. _
:.RICK LAREW
248 4YOOLF AVE.
IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240
Pad � c�-ESV'
1 I .1A'i 71ia1oJ11'
L. ,, s." •>li 7' , i
�, a.. l ''l1 5.pt r(i
. C' .1 5 rl G
`Mr. Rick Larew
240 Woolf Avenue 11 i :.;; U " 71•
Iowa City,', Iowa 52240 t-
rY :I
1 I ni„ '.V 1;.. I'. '.'I)i .. ...5 :I,i'. Til•. .I I'• 'i i
Doar Tir. Larew
At its: Sep tember.18,•1973 meeting the City Council officially
received and placed on filo your, correspondenceconcerning
the Iowa City ',Transit syctcm. •.
Thank you for bringing this natter to the'attention,of the
City 'Council.;
Sincerely,
Iowa Citi Babe Ruth League
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
September 15, 1973
Members of Iowa CityCity, Council:
This letter is written in behalf of over 800 Iowa
City young boys in an effort to provide the means to
continue a`summer baseball program for them. 600 of
these boys ,are in age group 9 thru 12 and are members
of the Iowa City Boys Baseball Program and 200 are in
age group 13 thru 15 belonging to the Iowa City Babe
Ruth Baseball Program.
In attending a Parks and. Recreation, Commission
meeting onLSeptember 12th we learned that, the entire
direct financial support from the City 'to'these two
programs is to be cut from the Parks and Recreation
1974 budget.
While'fully realizing that Iowa City is faced
with £inancial'problems in the 1974 budget, we cannot
understand the logic of a total financial cut to these
two programs.- If this decision is being 'made based
on some of the erroneous information presented at the
September 12th Parks and Recreation meeting, we wish
to submit the true facts. As previously stated, the
total number of boys served by these two programs is,
in excess of 800, not "some 150 to 200" which was the
figure stated at the,meeting. Also as to the statement
that we do .not spend taxpayer money wisely, to quote',
"paying 44.00 per night for scorekeepers",'we answer
that neither program does this nor have they ever
employed paid scorekeepers.
Another reason stated was that "priorities" must
be excercised in determining where cuts are to be mpade.
-1- SEP 1 71973
ABBIE STOLFUS
CITY CLERK
Iowa CityBabe Ruth League
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
We as members of the'Iowa City Babe Ruth Parents Board
want to present the positive side of our program to
show that this recreation program certainly deserves
as high a priority as any other.
1. The Babe Ruth Program has a history of approx-
imately 15 years in Iowa City. It has shown a
steady growth from some 6 teams to the present.
14 teams: This growth is ,even more significant
in 'considering that Coraville wasincludedin
the intial program and they now have their own
program.' As recent as 1971 we expanded from 12
teams to 14. This does not, present a picture of
a dying program.
2. Tax monies are spent for necessities, specifically
umpire fees and baseball equipment such as bats,
balls,, catchers gear etc. This money helps provide
8 weeks of baseball with a schedule of 2 games
per week for,each team. This program not only
provides just an opportunity to learn to play
baseball, but also serves the important function
of providing them with something to fill the
important leisure time hours'. We would also point
out that this is an open program, that is, no -boy
` is required to meet any specific athletic capability
in order to participate. We only have two basic
requirements, that he be in in the 13 thru 15 age
group and that he register and pay a 414.00 fee.
3,. The involvement of people in the program is more
than the 200 boys. It requires approximatel';y �8
adults as coaches and a 14 member Parents Board.
The games are attended by parents and entire families
-2-
For
Iowa City Babe Ruth League
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
of the boys which provides a family type of
entertainment.Continued' interest in the
program is shown by attendance of older boys
who have played Babe Ruth baseball and still
follow their teams. We now have some ,young
coaches who ate former. players and believe
in the program strongly enough to give their
time and effort even though they do not have
sons playing.
4. The Babe Ruth Parents Board provides and is
responsible for uniforms, insurance, coaches
and a great number of adminstrative functions
suchias registration, player team assignment,
issuing and collecting uniforms and all post
season tournament activities. We also operate
a concession stand. The proceeds from this
stand are totally used for the Babe Ruth
Program. :As all of the board members are
strictly volunteer, we feel that if the'City
attempted to provide these services thru Recrea-
tion Department employees that it would actually
cost more tax dollars than the present support
now provided.
We certainly hope that these facts will encourage the
council to see fit to continue the support to these
vital programs.
incerely,?%
Eldon R Christensen
cc: Mr. Ra W P
,y. Wells resident,. Iowa City Babe Ruth..
wn
1
00
" $10,819:13
$1027.18
1.0`i 941,s'
131198
600.00
v4AGUE 0� • •
w The Voice of Ioib a's ,,United Toivlts and Cities
111 Insurance Exchange Bldg. Des hfolnes; sown 60309 Ph. 616-298.2110
MUNI CIV
Pv
September 12, 1973
Mr. C. L. Brandt
Mayor
City Ha11
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Mayor:
Enclosed is a check for $2,500 which represents half of your city's
grant award made possible as part of the League's grant underthe
Intergovernmental Personnel Act.
rite balance is available for distribution before the end of November,
however, the minimum local match in the amount of $1,750 as outlined
in our letter of.August,2, 1973 and monthly narrative statements out-
lining progress
linin of your program are required as conditionsfor cmlpleting
our reporting requirements to'the'.state.
A preliminary progress, report and outline of action taken to date along
with any local match should be reported to us as soon as possible.
Should you have any problems or questions leting your reporting
requirements, please call.
'i
lY, ,
�r w.
Administrative Assistant
RNE/sw
Enclosures
CC: Mr. Ray S. Wells
1'rrxidrnt—Lloyd L. Turner, Mayor, Waterloo a Vier Irrsident—Robert L. Rasmussen, Councilman, Fairfield. • Immerfiale
Post Pr•rsident-L. ,1. "Sam" .Wise, Mayor, Altoona o Mrrclor•s—Donald J. Camtey,, Mayor, Cedar Rapids; Donald Carlson,
Mayor, Slater 'Virtus J. Clasen, City Clerk, Rellevue; Charles W. Coates, City. Administrator, Muscatine; Charles F. Eppers,
Mayor, Keokuk; James M• Jessen, Alayor, Atlantic; ,lomeph, 11, Katelman, Mayor, Council Bluffs; Richard E, Olson, Mayor, Des
Moines; Jorry C, O'Sullivan, Mayor Pro Tem, Sioux .City; R. N. Rosso, City Attorney, Dubuque;. Ccorge M. Strayer, Mayor,
Hudson 0 Execafive Director -Robert'. E. Bays
I
i 17
Se ptember 20, 1973
Karen Schuessler
4508 Burge
Iowa City, Xowa, 52240
Dear Ms. Schuessler:
At its SGPt6hber 18, :19.73 meeting the City Coun'cil off icially'
received and. placed on filo,your
correspondence concerning.
t.
recycling in the City,o.1
f Towa!City•
ThunIt you fort bringing 'this
matter,to the attention of. the
City'Council.
A
v
Sincerely,
Ray S. Wells A
City Manager
v
RSW/db
, t'l
555 Hawkeye Court
Iowa`City, Iowa 52240'
City Council
Iowa City Civic Center
°Iowa City, Iowa 52240
!
Councilpersons:
It has recently come to my attention that a
proposed pilot project, in which''
one of the city's garbage trucks would be outfitted
with means to collect
newspapers for recycling, is on the verge of
being ignored in the city budget.
My understanding of the project is that it
is an experimental program to assess
the feasibility of recycling newspapers. The costs for.such a feasibility test
seem to ,be very low compared to.other programs the city finances. It'appears
tome to be a very practical suggestion and
one which could lead to expansion
of recycling if the project made a profit or
broke even. If the city lost
money on the project, the loss :would not be
so.great, since it is being done
on only one garbage truck.
I think such a risk would be a wise use of
the peoples' money and could possibly
lead to a much broader recycling program and
henceforth a nicer and cleaner
Iowa City.
rIt seems more prudent to dabble one's toes
in the water before plunging in
b headfirst. I think the city has a chance to
do that now... therefore I shall
be watching your action or inaction on the
recycling proposal with hopeful
optimism
Sincerly
James E. Murphy
M,
I
�&fst. /1)1913
Cikj Co on
.AWA OiiL 30-W Cvd!rr
OUM i
16 ohom MO -f) Oonc!?rl):
,�O.t EF I-) G rh/W \MCLI- 6L PLJ�q 'IL�au 0,
A(urn (,o OL ficSS/ 61
IDCS *)rd \aw (DE:
I ttd-Ln
biz
LJF-
4u-) �AW6-(,U��w MOE Cc I&Mit,
(-,L;: ck <.o r) � olmwry cit `111aY unC�.ts')Ccncl.
chk Usz&/l &O -u '-A.C)U*M hCO
up) V -
'I \/-)Yjj-, 0 -as usedke
410CusN''al)(F-K66-A . fyb(16-c
Cuo ��JC�(ECI Wal '�&AP W ho y
budc/0, t4� pKlb ) !�O rE
rocrum ))�Du Cats
ub7'
otb,&d 6F9
vnq-c) y w;
-) �y;,�h� (cam 61'Ze5 -T- -�ZC( piLo
small ca
l�
�n rcCc C l�nc is � c6�1 �c/l/F'a Q.
�I�OJ�C�� 1 �j L -,E LG/I2C�C� �yt(i"ni1(��1�pp,,'
� ra�-v�n `� }�a� C� � f' � Nt��'J
p ct-s i
C-
asi In
, PPEd WAO a recd Cuss
September 20, 1973
Pir. ll
Ms. Donna Hotz
41.33 'Burge V
University of Iowa.
!.lIowa City, Iowa 152240
If
Dear Ms., Tlotz-
At its Septebber 10, 1973 meeting the City'Council' Officially f
received] and placed on If ile
'your corresnondence concernincz
rocycling.,in the City :of lown city-.*.
Thank you for bringing,this
matter to the attention, of, the .
Cityl Council. IJ i i,
......
Sincere
if
Ray S. volls
City Manager
A
psw/dho
Il. J1. i
f
:k If
27. Leamer Court
Iowa City, Iowa
10 'September 1973
City Council
Civic Center
Iowa City, Iowa
Dear Members of the City Council
I would like to have you consider a matter of
public safety'. My mother lives in
Oaknoll Retirement
Residence, but it is'a hazard, to, go and visit her.
Parking is allowed on one side of Oaknoll Drive, Since
there is
room left for only one lane, it means that I
-must drive up Oaknoll Drive on the wrong
side of the
street, directly into the path of cars coming down from
Benton Street: Because of the hill and the turn in it,
this is
completely blind and it is only,a matter of
luck that Ihave
not' collided with someone' :yet'.
I would strongly 1
g y urge that you do not allow parking
on either side of Oaknoll Drive.
Sincerely yours,
•
1
1
1 ,
`
II
f
September 20, 1973
('
Sarah Lee Schuenmaker
2.7 Womer Court .i
Iowa City!, Iowa 52240
x rr+, r
Dear: M.s.. Schuenmaker
The City Council at'its rJoptember 1S, 1973 meeting officially
received and placed on file
10,.1973..
your correspondence of September;,
Your request`to
Daknoll Drive has
remove parking from both sides of
been referred
to my .,office'. for roview and
report back'to.Council
ThaNc'you for bzingingl,this
matter to the attention of'the
City 'Council:
Sincerely,,
Ray S. Wells'
J
City Manager
i
i
RSW/db
Io':ra City City Council-
Civic
ouncilCivic Center
Icl•:d Cit,; , icxe c40
Dear I..r. ';;ells;
42; DcuFlees Court t
.•
September 6, lc1977,'telG
ecar.;`e C"..ldren play ir, and near toe streets in this
area, we
Dcual?=F
the Undersicr.ed
Court
residents of DomplaFo Street and
recue.st signs
to:
i)
?)
warn motori-ts
ic".0r
c:' children 'l.rtyinF in streets and
the speed
'_ie;it on Dou:lass Street end
Doupla=s Court.
L it 1 1
C^role � ;i
- --
me
__
r'GL" �s4 c- err• �, C��c;�, `
lJ t� r.t.c i
,! ., ... A.
Ali/' . /
i� , �(. !i'•
J �•�1fc l/,:i�, .� L
•,i.; �.-- / ';� �u,�.y: L�
,,
Ll
I
I
I /
2
Nerve
Address
-,age
Name
9
Address
J
P 4
j�.7
�7 .�Jptc llJGc • � ,J i`
i
ir:ol Clt.v
September 20, 1973
L1 rlc U1'tlLr J.
j, .'fit: 1,1 . 1w l 1
,L. ., ' its 7;i, •'r•ttii T' s; l
:i r7!• i'U,tc'1^t .. St'^�I � ,i
') II•It n;c�t'!^'.a ct ! t .i'!
.tl :i" v!tIn if; at: .�• ;e
"i `.li':•`. (: i!-tl:�nf. .I_ ,1'.
1'l iri• ,�.tl7.,,�L rlr`.t
Carol Rnnlsey
423 Douglaso Court
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Ms. Ramsey_
At its Soptember'13, 1973 meeting the City Council officially.
received and: placed on file your correspondence concerning,
Children 'inor near the streets' in your, *residential area. ;
Your request for warning signs
and the lowering of the speed
'
limit have been,reforred to my
office for'reviow_and,report
back to Council:
!
r
I
.Thank you for bringing this matter to'the'attention of the
City Council.)
1 ,I
!Sincerely,
•
1
I
i Ray S. Spells
'City Manager,
i -
r,
,
RS 11/db ail
cea X- • •
AREA AGENCY ON AGING
Kirkwood Community College
6301 Kirkwood Blvd. S.W. September 11, 1973
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 5M6
The Honorable C.L. Brandt
(319) 398-5559 Civic Center
Iowa City, Iowa 52240 '
Dear Mayor Brandt:
I would like to take this opportunity on behalf of the Area
Agency on Aging, to represent views of numerous senior citizens
in the Iowa City area.
Working relationships with existing agencies serving elderly in
the Iowa City vicinity, and members of the Area Agency on Aging
Johnson County Task Force, and senior citizens themselves have
requested that I offer the following suggestions for:the'Council^s'
consideration:
1. If the City Council does', decide to raise the fare for
the City Transit System, we would ask that special
consideration be given to''exempt senior' citizens from
this raise.
2. That if the City Council does decide to increase property
tax levy in order to support the, transit system, we
would ask that special consideration again be given
to exempt' senior citizens.
We feel' that suggestions are consistent with local and national
concern for elderly; simultaneously consistent with property tax
relief passed earlier by the Iowa legislation.
I thank you for your time and consideration with this matter.
I would ask that you share this concern with members of the City
Council.
Please feel free to contact, me in the event we may be of.any
further assistance.
,I
Thank you.
ncere�ly
ichA' and 'A. a �.
Area Agencelle Director
y
Aon Aging
RAF : iw
£L61 `ZZ aagw daS
vcaol `Rano vtvol
nzvgd azaiO
NO11d"J103O 33b1 WO033bd
— n
,1
r•(ti-
M/I r
896T `£Z aagwanoN
2aagy2n. °0 SaToazg uT-92duo,
Saturday, the TNen-,y-Second of September
nineteen hundred and seventy-three
at 12;00 in the morning
Civic Plaza
Washingron and North Van Buren Streets
An infornnt, dutch treat ($1,50)
luncheon will folioo at,
the Sit 'Orleans Restaurant
The dedt.catton u4l! take p r;icc a.s
scheduled should the: ueaOer be
inc lemen t.
I �
Arnold Air Society
and Angel Flight of
Aar Force ROTC Det 255, Univ. of Iowa
cord-CaZly request the honor of your presence '
at the "Freedom Tree Dedication"
for
Captain Bradley 0, Cuthbert, U,S.A.F.
ldtiss2�g in Action, North V-�etnam
November 23, 1968
A Living Tribute
To All
Men Missing in Action
in Southeast Asia
R.S.V.P. - (319) 3.53-39.3?
During Business Hours
LOUIE SHULMAN
WILLIAM V. PHCLAN
WILLIAM M. TUCKER.
DANIEL W. SDYLE
CHARLES A. MULLEN
5TCYHCN F. BRIGHT
BRUCE L.WALMER
SHULMAN, PHELAN, TUCEER, BOYLE & MULLEN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
BHCMCRBUILDING
P. 0. Box 1291'I'
IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 TCLEPHONL
(ARG CGaC 319)
September 13, 1973
City Council of Iowa Citv
c/o Mr.. Ray Wells
City Manager
Civic Center
Iowa City, Iowa '52240
Re:', Vacation of Alleys Hest of Pleasant Street
and North of Davenport Street.
Gentlemen:
I have been asked to make a response to you in
answer to your objections filed concerning the above
alley vacations,, and specifically the objections made
on behalf of the;George,Chervinka Estate.
I. It is difficult to see how the Chervinka
property, or forlthat matter the property across the
alley west of the Chervinka property, could be injured
by the alley vacations requested. The portions of the
alley for which the vacation is requested affect only
the Fox, Klaus, and Manary properties. The alley would
never be used for fire protection purposes since the
most 'direct access to the Chervinka property would be
from,Davenport Street or Pleasant Street
As we
understand it, the fire hydrant is at the southeast
intersection of Davenport,and Reno Streets. For this
reason,' as well as the fact that the alley is practically
impassable at this time, it seems unlikely that the
fire protection argument has any validity.
2 Secondly, it is my information from the
neighbors that the alleys ,have not been used for access
to the Chervinka property in at least the last 16 years.
3. There has already been a vacation of the alley
to Reno Street, west of the north -south alley.
4. The Foxes, Klauses, and Manarys are extremely
interested in ',purchasing portions of the alley if it
is vacated. They have already deposited $200.00 with
the, City to show their good faith.
S. The vacation of the allev would really be no ;
hardship on the property south of'Klauses and Manarys'
in that no vacation of the portion of the alley in
back of •ti4T-F'`-properties is requested, and they would
still have access off of Davenport Street to the back
of their properties through that portion of ,the alley.
For all of the above reasons together with the
reasonssubmitted in the original Petition for Vacation,
ive.would'urge ',the City Council to enact the ordinance
vacating the alleys as requested.
Very truly yours,
c'C
Daniel 1V. Bo�e ` \r
D1VB : s z
cc Mr.
Carl Klaus
t`
of+nom DEPARTNT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVE�PMENT AREA OFFICES
A R E A OFFICE Kunuu° City. Kan°°-
III' , t�
*,.III (I OmuhoNebnuk.
oo UNIVAC BUILDING, 7100 WEST CENTER ROAD, OMAHA, NEBRASKA 68106 Str Loui., Ml.wurl
September 13, 1973
REGION VII
REGIONAL OFFICE E
KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI )N REPLY REFER TO,
Mr. Ray Wells
City Manager
Civic Center
Iowa City, Iona 52240
Dear Mr. Wells:
This is in response to your letter requesting additional assistance
in determining the disposition of the College Block Building and to
related questions raised by Mr. Klaus in recent weeks.
You'have expressed concern over the impact of the College Block
Building on the successful completion of the Iowa R-l4,project.
Your concern,is not only with regard to the impact on reconstruction
of the area and of this particular building (which was 'designated
fordemolitionin the original
plan) but also with regard to the
financial impact on the Project.
The R-14 Draft Environmental Impact Statement does suggest several
alternatives with regard to the future of the College Block Building.
The preliminary conclusion of this Statement is that the continued
presence of the College Block Building would not prove disastrous
to redevelopment plans from a purely physical standpoint, if the
structure were rehabilitated. In other words, we now feel that the
preservation of the structure is consistent with Renewal objectives.
We anticipate comments from several organizations, including the
City of Iowa City, about this conclusion and will be considering
them in preparation of a final impact statement. Although demolition
of the College Block Building is not strictly prohibited in existing
regulations, it is, certainly discouraged, and any such action would
require our concurrence. We would have, to have very strong evidence
of the problems tolbe'caused by preservation of the building before
a different alternative would be recommended.
We are aware that the nomination of the building to the Register came
as 'a surprise to the City, and this was certainly a serious error on
the part of state preservation officials, as the City owned the
structure at the time and was preparing to demolish it. We have made
•
2
this unfortunate circumstance known to individuals in Wash'
but', suggest that you make the implications of this Washington,
to both State and National officials from the viewpoint of the
City. Problem known
Now that the building has been no
and presumin milted and accepted on the Register,'
advised thatg , we have been
that the structure will be preserved
Joint memorandum should be developed' between HUD,. the
LPA,the State Liaison Officer of the State Historical Society,` and
the Executive Director of the Advisory Council, on Historic P
shortly after the Final of the Environmental Impact
is released, reservation
This memorandum wot On
uld briefly outline ho tthe nstructure
might be preserved and restoredo, indicate potential purchasers and
their qualifications to restore the building, sources of funds to
restore and preserve the structured and how, the immediate environment
Of the structure would be affectedby y other renewal activities.
We recognize that such a memorandum
in light of at least two .h understanding will be difficult
have paid a subs Problems. The first is, fi.nancial:., you
substantial sum to acquire the ',building'had hoped to
incur only a small cost in demolishing it and then sell the land for
as much as $50,000. You may still b
from sale of the land and structureble to realize some proceeds
e '
have
buildingand anybut the cost of restoring the
tenhancement of value due to its historic value will
doe
It is difficult to advise
have btaken into account in determining the fair market value.
might be secured until we you with regard to where restoration Hinds
have better estimates of value
-of the
structure in its unrestored state. Such an'aporaisv can be approved
as an eligible item of expense 'under the Survey and planning line
item provided you have funds available in the line item. Should you
desire such approval, please send a brief justification and request
to our Technical Services Branch. The same is true, under the operation
of acquired properties line, for waterproofing the wall.
The second problem is finding a firm or
the structure and who will maintain its architectural1integrity. If.
,the financial . g purchase
problems of restoration can be resolvedt such i pur_
chaser'should'be found with little difficulty.
As to the financial burden that, can be assumed b
that the structure is preserved c the LPA inseeingthat
I see no and restored, I can advise you that
possibility of obtaining additional grant funds at this
time in connection with that stricture. Hopefully, the State
officials responsible for the 'building, snnomination will be able
3
to assist you in locating other sources of financing for this purpose.
If this is not possible, I see little alternative at this time but
to absorb the cost within the existing grant, with our prior
concurrence. Before we would give such concurrence, and presumably
before you would request it, vie would have to be assured that you
had explored all other financing alternatives.
I recognize that the acceptance of this structure on the National
Register has posed some additional and unforeseen problems in the
Progress of the R-14 project. As Mr. Klaus has suggested, the time
consumed by this matter alone is a major problem. I would suggest
that steps be taken soon to insure that the structure lasts through.
the winter, and that a skilled appraisal is conducted. Once the
value of the structure is known and comments on the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement are received, further steps say be taken.
Sincerely, )n
4 11,1V
His S ks' I/
Deeppttity rector of Operations
v
'I
I
• ~
.
U.L.I.. ••
1
September 20, 1973
�U �� •lr,
,
/
1. ,
I
t I r
Till Brown
Lot 3„Iowa City'Trailer'Park ii!✓;�.
Iowa.'City, Iowa 52240
:
-
Dear Mr. Drown:t
At its September 18, 1973 meeting 'the' City Council officially_
received and placed on file
,your correspondence concerning the
Iowa' City. Transit System.
Thank you for bringing this
matter to.the attention of the
City,Council.
sincerely,',
1•
�.
Ray. S: Wells
City Manager
'
I
I
I
i
RSW/db
I
Inwn Onicinl Farm 156.631 • •�- • • e.di cnuw co.. o� .nen, ,ou -
Town —city Budget Estimate ^`
EXTENDED PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1974 -.LUNE -:30, 1975
In compliance with Chapter:1020, Acts of 61 -2nd General Asseml;ly; (1972)-
NOTICEThe Town/City Council of Iowa City -
: _
- in
Johnson County, Iotea, kill meet October..2...
_.. _• - -- -------- -- _ ,1973'
at 4:00 T. Ji. :it..;. Council, Chambers ;..Civic Center, -410„E,--Washington -St...-:. ..... - -•-
Taxpayers will he heard at that time for or against the following BudgetEstimate. This is a Summary of the
Supporting Detail of Budget Receipts and, Expenditures: on- file with the Town/City Clerk. Copies of the Supple-
mental Detail (Schedule 031-A). will be furnished any taxpayer upon request. Taxes
sccollectible
,00nthis budget will,
be collected in three installments during the eighteen month transition period
�Gf
Is/ .. _ :.;,;, w.. Clerk .
- FUNDS-
-.(Use Whole Dollars) ,-..
- -
A--:_... -B C
EXPENDITURES FOR YEAR
:.: .. D
- Estimated-
:. Cash -
:Reserve �..
=(7-1-75)
Estimated
Balance
:and A71' --;
-. Other
- Receipts.'.
(18 mos.)
Estimated ;-
-Amount :
�.(C:+D—E)r-
To Be Raised-
By Taxation,”
(18 mos.)
1972
Actual
(12 most
: _
---1973 `
Actual and
Estimated--
(12 nio9J :-.
January1;:1974'
June 30, 1975
_ Proposed
;(18 mos.)
'ACTIVITY FUNCTIONAL
1. - AdministrationsGeneral"- -
-
--
--
-
2. Street - Street
-
3.- Police -:: Publ. Safety
"3a. Fire XXXX.-
3b. Other XX.l-X
4. Sanitation Sanitation.
-5. Library Man. Enterp.'-
-.5a. Cemetery - -. X X X,X
-5b: Airport X X X X
5c. Other. X.X X X-
-f,.. Park-- -Recreation:
Ga. Other XX.XX
SL Lighting Lighting Utilities
_- Functional sub -total (or)
10. Ge.reral Fund—new definition
$A, 238, 892
$ .51261,770;$
8'1464473
".$'-� 318090
$' 4-'979763
-
3--802 801
11. Utility: XXXX
X -X -XX X
12. Utility: X X X X
- -
- -- -
X - X- X X=z
13.. Utility: X \ S X
X X'
14. Federal Rev. Sharing Trust-
- -
:'-XXX:X X
15. Emergency
Ir,: Debt Service --
-$-636;95-
$ _. 641,055"$
757;154
373;036
$ "'.262,622
867;561
47:-T 8t A Pensions Tr. & Agency
__ ' 284 .725
- 362.658
- 628,703
- ` - - --
45719
_5 U, 98i
17:1. Other
.. _
,..
18.- To, Liability
- -
- ---
171 535
19. fGa talnEral•ects
2.986,899
- 2 191,556
11,216 470
1,306 594
12-S23,064
- -'-
20.
-
-
2530500
-
-
253;50(
•-,I• Enterprise ` -
— --
22. Sewer Rental _
23. Street(R.U.T.).
-- 2;307;913
2,331;729
3,591,405
845,996
4,437,401
- -=
-
--
24. Liquor Profit- - -
- -
25. PnrkingHleter20. Parking-Lot2�ial
:2384705
Assessment C
nst. 153,900
- 815 076
100 000
- 138 705
28.
29. Street (Ag. Land)
30. Total
10 609,283
11,603,844
Estimated Taxes per $1,000 Assessed Valuation
- _-�-cd+�C.:•»�/.r..'. ..70-: `/993 -.-, .
INSTRUCTIONS ' t<
Only Form 631 is to be published. Schedule 631-A' Supplemental Detail and the Bond Schedule on Form 63ii
are to be completed before transferring details to this sheet (Form 631). Schedule 631-A' must be prepared- for
' any interested taxpayer and for attachment to the certified budget copies.: (`Home Rule cities may: provide com
plete working budget in lieu of Supplemental Detail.) ;
Round all figures to the nearest dollar. Data will be keypunched for computer processing: `Inclusion of cents
could shift decimals two places, thereby distorting computations and analysis.
Expenditures for, Debt Service must conform to resolutions on fileiwith the County Auditor.
Columns A -F must be completed for a tax levy. Columns A-E are to be completed if,an expenditure is proposed
not requiring.a tax levy. This includes municipally -owned utilities. The amounts published inColumnC'control
expenditures and represent maximum expenditures' authorized bylaw.
•
ENTRY RECORD OF- FILING `AND ESTEMATE_-CONSIDERATION
On. , September 18
19 73__, the city/IFXMcouncil of ;ZoWa__C.i
.�. r --- -
In -.-`--
-•- -- Johnson __ County, Iowa, met for the purpose of film
considering the estimate for the local budgetof said'city/town.; Thetejwas ipresent a.quorurn as regmred by lane
w.
Thereafter and on `said day there was filed the foreg
the council. oing estimate and said estimate ryas duly considered by
The council, being folly advised, found that a date of hearing on said estimate s 11 hould be fixed for the
2nd .-----day of --- - October---- — _ A. D. 1973
at 4: 00- P.: `I• said hearing to be held at
_the .Council Chambers in_,the Civic; Center_•
The clerk was directed to publish the estimate and notice of hearing as required by law in the __-____.
Iowa: City Press Citizen - - - - -- ---
------ , a newspaper of said county. (or)
The clerk was directed to post the ostimate and notice of hearing to the following three public.places in lieu
of publication under provisions for towns tinder 200 population
---------
-Mayot
- --------- ,Clerk
INSTRUCTIONS AS TO PUBLICATION OF NOTICE
Publication is to be for one insertion and at least ten days nriou to the date set for the hearing. l-
Publication in :i' \r «sp;tper Necessary. Levies are vont unless notice is published in a newspaper -except for f'
towns uncle: 200 population. ;The, newsp tper.publisher sh ill c u efuily go over each estimate submitted to hmt and
should advise the loc d council of ani_ errors so that they may`lie.'corrected pt for%to`printing:11-The. _form l:d id :-H
be set up two columns wide and include the matter beginning with the:
columnar form preceding -the word "Instructions." word "Notice" and ending with;the:
i
Municipal
ities publishing in a newspaper shall causa such publication to be in it newspaper published in the `
city or town if any, and if not, then in a -newspaper -of general circulation therein.
_ r
Proof of Publication. Verified -proof of; publication shall, be filed in.;the.o8tce-of the county auditor and pre
sewed by him.' NW levy shall 6e valid unless anil;uritil such nottce'is published and filed:
0
• U
_ o
0
,
11■
DATE: 'September 17, 1973
TO: City Council
FROM: Ray S. Wells, City, Manager
RE: Swartzendruber Request to Construct a Basketball Court
at '333 S..Lucas
Listed below are some of the reasons why we object to thi
proposal: J s
1. The lot is very small, (50 or 60 feet wide by 160 feet long).
2. The lot was purchasedfor street purposes. There is no
indication that the,lot will not be used for said purposes,
nor, is there any indication that the lot will not 'be:used
for street purposes'in the hear future:
3. The lot is not very far from the Longfellow School area
which g,
we use for neighborhood playground purposes.
4. Because of the proposed Oak Grove Park, College Hill Park,
and Longfellow School 'site,,this;area is not considered
one of our recreationally-deprived'' neighborhoods.
5. Current budgeting levels do not provide for additional'
mini-parks.
6. Demands would follow for additional, equipment and
development.
7. The City must protect itself from 'extending its liability.
a. We would not want unsafe activities on the property.
b. We would not want unsafe facility construction on the
property.',
c. We would not want unsafe facility maintenance.
For the above reasons it is recommended that this request be
denied.
!1f < r .
u
City, of Iowa City 1�
MEMORAN, D
DATE: September 17, 1973
TO: City Council
FROM: Ray S. Wells, City Manager
RE: Confinement of Vicious' Animals
Subsequent to discussion with Dick Braun
and Dave Epstein
in
regarding an ordinance to control', or prohibit the
ownership of, vicious animals,',i.e., the pet leopard which'
has injured a child in Iowa City,'the following information
has been generated.
The Iowa City. Municipal Code, Section 4.21.6_,entitled
"Confinement -of vicious Animals" creates an appropriate remedy
for this situation. Further investigation of the possibility
of an _ordinance to-create',either criminal liability or to make
it 'illegal' to own such animals resulted in the following
conclusion
1. The City cannot prevent ownership of such animals.
2. It cannot create criminal liability for the
activities of such animals unless they are a`nuisance'
"per se", which under ,the law they.are not determined
to be.
3. The remedy that we have available under 4.21.6 appears
to be as far asrwe can go.. This remedy is an'-
administrativepiocedure` involving -_the City Council,
in which they determine that the', animal is either
fierce, dang Brous or vicious and that ,the owner has
failed to restrain a n he animal on'hisremises ,and it is
destroy the animal. They,
in the public'interest 'to deet
therefore, enact a"resolution tothat effect
directing that the animal be destroyed in a humane manner.
'I
Thus, the administrative process is the only adequate remedy,
under the law, that we have.
I`
City!: of I City
owa
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 14, 1973
TO: :;City Council
FROM: Ray S. Wells, City Manager
RE: :Request for BUS Service on Bristol Drive
This is in'response to the petition to Council for extension
of our North Dodge Bus Route to serve the'Bristol Drive-wDubuque
Road residential area. In reviewing the:petition andthe
proposed routing, I would have to recommend against serving
the area at this time.
There are two:basic reasons for My negative
I recommendation,
one is operational:and the other,has todo withlackof:,:
dem8nstrated'need for the service. Oper . ationallyl we do have
nine ,miriutes of layover at the end of the North Dodge route.,
This - time comes in handy on, many: occasions during the/,day for
schedule" recovery due to delays at railroad crossingson the
Lak eside end of the ,route .`J'The nine:minutes:at Caroline and
Prairie du Chien Road is the only,recovery time built into_'theschedule. The:Lakeside round trip is.a
tight thirty minute
schedule and, as.n6ted previously, is often plauged with r.
delays at rail crossings.f The route extension'yould require
another five to six minutes, which would leave only three
minutes for layover.on the.route.-- not,a situation desir ble
M ' %� , a
from 'either the driver's or operational standpoint.,
In trying to ascertain need for thelservice,:the Transit
Division reviewed the names on the,petition,;specifically
noting occupations or places of employment. Our findings seem
to indicate that relatively few of the people in that area l
:would benefit on a daily basis from having the bug, route there.
The route extension:! Would add thirty-six miles per\day'to the
operation and even if one-half of the seventy or 96 residents
of the area were to ride the lbus daily, this would only, yield
one passenger per, mile; about -one-third of the system average.
It is actually more:likely that only five to ten people per
day would use the bus from that area.making the additional
mileage difficult to justify.
Iowa, July 1, 1968`
.CNO73O 7/72 DI
APPLICATION FOR ASSISTANCE
IN PLANNING AND CARRYING OUT IVORKS OF 'IMPROVEMENT
Under The
WATERSHED PROTECTION AND FLOOD PREVENTION ACT
PUBLIC LAW 566,• 83rd CONGRESS, AS AMENDED
The local organization(s) signing this application requests the United States. Departmentof
Agriculture to provide assistance in developing a work plan for the Ralston Creek watershed
(HANE Or RATEASN(0)
In accordance with Public Law 566, 83rd Congress, this application is being submitted to the
state soil Conservation Committee, James W. Grimes state Office Building, Des Moines. Iowa
50319, for review and action before submittal to the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.
I. Soil Conservation District(s);.in which watershed Is located. Qjylgpn County,
Iowa'Zoil Conservation' District
A. Age(s) of district(s) 27 years
B. District policy on watershed treatment Ralston Creek watershed will receive ton
priority on assistance with land treatment.
II. Name of Watershed Ralston Creek
A. Size in sq. miles 8.75 SQ. miles Acres 5621 _
B. Name of 'major drainage basin _Iowa River Basin
C. Location in district (Attach map showing location)
D. Farmer organization: Ass'n,_ Committee
L Date organization comp Iated i18-- epte_IDb9x-1972__'
2. Objectives of watershed group end sponsors to prQmote _J=A trgatIDerit� ri_the_,
w.±Prehed=to_publicize_watershad_.pmogram:
E Number of farms all or partly in watershed
F Farms owner -operated - No._ 9' % 64
6. Avernge size of farms 175 acres.
N. Operations and maintenance organization proposed (Flood waters, recreation, water man-
agement)' City of Iowa City will maintain improvements.
I '
-I-
* The -normal flooded area was taken as being the floodway cross-section
required to move a 100 year flood. The maximum 'flooded 'area was taken
as the total Iuroa within tho 100 your flooding fringe area. l Approxi-
alaColy j0 110111up my 111m11nd. ilii 1,1.1.11 w(I'tocilhdd by a 5 year f.o.:.
•
s
III. Description of Watershed Problems
A. Land use in watershed (Approx.)
PRESENT RECOh1�M1igrypgp
CONVERSION
I. Cropland -'.acres ............ 1225
2. Pasture - acres .. 864 244
80
3. Woodland - acres ............ 140 160
20
4. Other acres _ 3392 3392
_
B. Areas subject to flooding: FLOODEn
FLOODED nELOd Bi -
WITHIN
WATERSHED
RUN-OFF FROM
WATERSHED
.NORML ..PAXIMUM
NORVAL MAXIM01
I. Farm lands ......... - ... 50
Cropland - acres .......I ............. 20 50
Pasture:- acres 25 50
Woodland - acres •• 5 10
2. Oth er.'land - acres
3. Farm building sites - No
....
_
4. Urban areas -acres
_
55.2 336
_—
Residential dwellings -I No• * - 360
-
Businesses - No. stores _ 65
_
Industrial plants - No,
5. Drainage improvements - open ditch - Miles..- NIA
Clean-out, required average of once each. NIA
i- 6. Municipal water supply _ -.NSA
C. State or federal lands within the watershed or affected by flood waters
from the
shed:
water -
I. State lands
Type National Guard Armory Acres
I State dept. involved State Department of Defense
2. Federal lands
Tyne none
Acres
Federnl nennnv illy vI.d
-I-
* The -normal flooded area was taken as being the floodway cross-section
required to move a 100 year flood. The maximum 'flooded 'area was taken
as the total Iuroa within tho 100 your flooding fringe area. l Approxi-
alaColy j0 110111up my 111m11nd. ilii 1,1.1.11 w(I'tocilhdd by a 5 year f.o.:.
Y
of
D Transportation ortntio
facilities i
n
p c lities nffected:,(list only those,facllities actually ,Off ected by
flood waters or siltation)
Urban Streets
1. 7.6 ; a Farm — Secondary_ 5
Primary Bridges, No. 32
2. Railroads, Miles_ .7 Bridges No. 2
IV. Progress of soil conservation work
A. Soil conservation district cooperators
all or partly in watershed No. 12 Acres 2227 1
B. Active farm conservation plans
all or partly in watershed No. 8 Acres —1 3V1 I
C. Soil surveys completed Acres 2670
0. Major conservation praotioes
APPLIED APPLIED P
NEEDED PLANNED APPLIED (END OF .(END OF
ONE YEAR) TIIREF. YEARS) r.
I.- Contouring (Acres)3.......... 700 500 250 -350_ 459-
2. strip Cropping (Acres) ;200 100 - 50100
3. Terraces (Miles)'- . 11 8 1 4 8
4. Diversions (Miles).........., — — —
5. Waterways (Acres),,, ,,, 20 _ 16 12_ ___14__ LJ14_
6. Farm Ponds (No.).......:.....3 2 —2— 2
7. Gully Control 4
Structures (No.) 5 3 2 2 3
8. Woodland hlgt. (Acres)........ 80 20 10 —2-0-
9.
9_9. Drainage (Acres) .. 30 20 10 20 25
10. Other Treatments ....
1 'Areas covered by district anreements should bit cro44-ltntched slid areas covered by form connervation plans should lit-
shaded sol idly on the location map referred to in Item 11-C.
These figures should include the estimated total accomplishments at the and of the respective perltsls.
3 Report that portion of rotation cropland In the watershed needing Contouring thnt Is to he In cultivated ria crops
ench year. Also Include arena of rotation cropland needing trarraces that will be In row ernes each year.. Do lint
Include areas reported underthe contour strip, cropping practice.
A Rcport here the number of gully control structures needed in stabilize gullioa -here nnly one farm is Involved.
(Do not Include here structures expected to be Installed with P.L. #56O. funds.)
.3-
_'I
V Progress of soil conservation work in subwatershods (If data on more than onesu)-
watershed is inc)uded, use separate sheet for each. Additional sheet, such as this may
be obtained from the State Soil Conservation Committee.)
A. Farms all. or partly in subwatershod No. - Acres�___-
0 Sni.l conservation district .cooperators
.
all or partly in subwatershod No. - Acres
ive farmconservation plans
3r partly in subwatershed No. — Acres_— —•,,-1
z.
APPLIED AI`PLIF.0
D. Major conservation practices NEEDED PLANNED APPLIED (END OF (END OF
,. UNE YEAS)-. TIME YMI-XI)
I., Contouring (Acres) - - --
2... Strip Cropping(Acres) ;:., --•---
3. Terraces (Miles) • • • • .. • •
4. Diversions (&Iiles) ••• - - '-
5. Waterwkvs (Acres) ---
6. Farm Ponds (No.) .......... '-- -..•.
7: Gully Control a
Structures ((No.) — B. Woodland Mgt. (Acres) - -
9. Drainage (Acres) ... —7--
10.
10. Other Treatments
I' Arras coerced by district acrvements should be'cross-Irntehnd and arpax covered by farm conservation. Diu- nho'Id I
' shmlud sulidly an the location. map referred to in item 11-C-
I lgal.qS hilialld
I-C.ttgnrr.vnhuuld include the estimated total acromplinhmentr•nt. the end of the rosPpctivc Par las.
9 h„pur:)Dirt Portion (it . rotnlloil cropland in the watershed needing contourlsg that is to be In cultivateg
d to- en.n
lrorh t that
Also Include occas of 'rototlon cropland needing terrncee that will be in row crops ,ench year. Do lint.
: uwludunreos reported under the contour .strip cropping Practice,
') :sepl`rt here the number of gully control structures needed to atnbllize gullies where only one farm in Involved,(Dn
rel lnnludo Dore. structures aspected to be Installed with P.L. N566 funds.)
.q.
f '
VI. Physical Data Available on Watershed
Watershed base ,map: Type Photo mosaic- "Scale 1" = 660
Farm planning progress shown x "
Conservation survey progress*shown x
Other information',shown See attached sheet)
VI1. Motor Problems in Watershed (Such as gully control, sheet erosion, flood prevention,
dJainage, recreation development, etc.)
A major problem is flooding of downtown Iowa City occuring on the
average of',onoe every five years. !Sheet erosion,and to a lesser
extent gully erosion, is also severe on the,uplands. The area is
rapidly urbanizing:- sites for impoundment'etruoturee must be preserved.
Thereis a need for comprehensive planning in this watershed.
Severzlimpoundment sites could be developed as recreation areae.
Multi-purpose structures could be"built `at several locations.
There are also several sites where: impoundment structures oould be
used as part of a"new planned road system.
VIII, Interest of'Local People
I
The City of Iowa City is strongly supporting this,projeot. Over
three milliondollars has-been approved for Ralston Creek in the City's
five year capital improvements budget." It has :.been a high priority
for the Johnson County Soil Conservation District for several years.
District commissioners have allooated 30Yo of the total;county alloca-
tion'of state cost sharing funds to this watershed. This money will be
used for building terraces. As of October 1973 almost,all of this has
*been requested by farmers in the watershed for terraces to be built in
the fall 1973•
.6-
IX. General ProductivO'Capacity of the Land
List major soil types:
Payette Silt Loam These are loess soils formed under forest,
Tama Silt,Loam mixed forest and Prairie, and prairie
Downs Silt Loam 'vegetation. They ,are Productive but very,
0010 Silty Clay Loam erosive as slope
increases. A complete
soil conservation program is needed to
Preserve Productivity and reduce downstream
siltation.
X. Other Pertinent Information
The Ralston Creek Basin with its problems offlooding,
and rapidly and erosion,
pidly changing land use is the most severe long term resource
problem facing the City Of Iowa City and surrounding area. Dam
sites must be preserved and development wellPlIanned. Local people'
do not have the resources available' to plan and carry out the
comprehensive Program'needed for the watershed. A planning prooess,�
must be b,egun here for urban flood protection and Proper land use.
all sites for improvements
city. This PXOJect will not b will be purchased by the
e held up awaiting easements, eto.
XI. Estimated Time to Complete the Project Five veare`
(Land treatment and structures)
XII. Nondiscrimination provision
"The progrnm conducted will be do compliance with, all requirements respecting non-
discrimination ns contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the regulations
of
the Secretary of Agriculture (7 C.F.R. Sec. 15.1 - 15,13), which provide that n
person in the United Stntes shall, on the ground of race, color, ov national origin,
be excluded from Participation in, be denied the benefits of
or he subjected to
discrimination under.any activity receiving Federal financial ass istanco,
.6.
.7-
S
• v-3
It is the belief of the undersigned local
organizations that federal assistance under the Water-
shed Protection and Flood Prevention Act
is needed. _Wil.ness the'' signatures of the undersigned
local organization(s) -- legal sponsoring
organization(s) on the dates below. (Type or print all
information except signatures.)-.
'.
(It is desirable that one of these be the
soil conservation district or districts in which the
watershed is located.)
City of Iowa'Cityj Iowa
(NAME OF LOCAL ORGANIZATION)
This action nuthorized at an official meeting
of '_City •O TT7 .il OP TOW Qyty
G, /7
�!.':=lel/
_
', '(NAME Or LOCAL ORGA141ZATIOIII
By: (Sig.) /; -i/
on 9/18 197 at Iowa City..
Title Ntayor
State, of Iowa
Attest: °(Sig. ) /r/./✓_: _ ..lif!r._iL./'
IGAT41
: 1/eM[TARYr
This action authorized,at an official meeting
Johnson Co. Soil Conservation District
of Johnson SCD Comm l,Sj%;U llyrs
�IN6
OF p AL' nANIZAT ION1
)NAME OI LOCAL ORGANIZATION
. By^ (Sig:) V1 ,' '/ � I4�<N �-�c
i_. on 919 73 at, IowaCi+y
,, /'A9,,
Title'_Di_ ict Chairman
State of
11/2173-
Attest: (Sig.)UJ-Ct.
IOATEI
ISECRETARY)
This action authorized at an official meeting
of
_. (NAME 0( LOCAL ORGANIZATION)
(NAME OF LOCAL ORGANIZATION)
,. BY (Sig.)
on_;. 19 ,'..at
Title
State' of —
Attest: (Sig.)
IDA iC I.
ISECRETARY) ..
The above local organization(s),request that
all correspondence',or contacts pertaining to this
application be directed to
I
This:applicaiinn is hereby
by the State, Soil Cons-
(APPROVED
OR DISAPPROVED)
cruation Committee, acting on behalf of
the State of Iowa, and by designation of file Governor
in accordance with the prnvisions of Public
Law No. 566, 83rd Congress, and as amended.
ICNAIRMAN. STATE SOIL CONSERVATION C04417TECI
Wil(ershed ADplicatinn Form Amended
Ioaa, November 1, 19G5
(DATE)
.7-
The signatures of the undersigned local organization(s)appcar
as supporting groups only and are
signatures. (Additional
not sponsoring organization(s). Type or print all
information except
copies may be obtained from the State Soil Conservation
Committee.)
JohnsonCounty ASCS County Committee
Ralston Wat oxshleir o0mm;Utee_
(NAME or LOCAL ORGANIZATtOUI
(Creek
ME
/
By: (Sig. ) o
By: (Sig.)—
� 'G IL r'
!. -
LE)
Committee
Title
Title -Chairman County
November 1,197
DAT
(DATE 1 . '.
•.
Johnson Counts Region ], P4 zr "Oo eaicn
A
NAMc OF L«AL oAOANIUTION)
TIOIIt3
(NAME 01 LOCAL OPOAN I2AT ION(
C�I
By: (Sig.)
BY: (Sig.
Title_
Title Chairman
1112179
,DATE I
IDATE)...
Johnson County Extension Council
qME or LOCAL oncANlz.nall.
,NAME -0r LOCAL ORGANITAT N)
By: (Sig.) —
By: (Sig.)_/� —
Title
• Title
aovemhpr A. T07Z
IDATEI
..,.IDATEI
Iowa City Chamber of Commerce
(NAME of LOCAL ORDAN11Anan —
(NAME or LOCAL OPGAN RAT ION(
BY: (Sig.)
By: (Sig.)
Title
Title President
— _
—
" IDATEI.
(DATE 1
•
WILLIAM WHITE BLVDi
STORM SEWER
OIJNER
PRESENT ASSESSMENT
PROPOSED
Rowan
439.32
439.32
Frank
658.98
658.98
Shima
439.32
439.32
Lu
439.32
439.92
Ebert
439.32
439.32
Marner
648.09
216.03
Burger
2485.62
1242.81
Ekstein
849.63
- '283.21
Horner
845.23
281.74
Wescott
530.69
195.93
goleh
685.32
228.44
Shimon
685.92
228.44
Tomlinson
1450.60
725.30
Original Assessment
11,234.97
Proposed Assessment
5,818.16
Reduction
5,416.81
Original Cost to City
4,618.20
Balance if proposed adopted
to be paid by City.
:10,035.01
i
his
IOWA C6A LI r I ON
FOR RESOURCE;
C � clrr GAs 11 :'�. RECOVERY
DUMP CO. GLUE
o WOIZKS
p 8i '0'a ,-oow ; 4 , NEWSLE ITER' 0 z
-------------------------- - -- ---------'------------
SEPTEMBER, 1973 ALL THE NEDIS THAT FITS - WE PRINT! VOLUME 1, a2
------ ---------- ------
NEXT COALITION MEETING PLANNED
AU membe'ts, and itttertested pertsons arte invited .to a coat .tiott meeti.ny tnt
Saturday, SeptembeA 8, at the Iowa State Un,ivmitq .in Ames. The meeting wife.
be heed in the P.ionev Room o6 the Memo4ia£ Union 6h0m'10a.m. to about 3p.m.
Therte wi t be a Lunch brteak,in.thc Union ca6ctenia.
Dtuting .the mortung sesaion Sam Townaend has weed to share his rtepoAt o6
tune months 06 operation 'o6 the Iowa State Univena.i.tg Recgeting Center. Much
intesesti.ng data has been compited duAing'the succei5a6ut vut 06 .the center..
The P£ann,Zng Committee o6 the CoaZi.ti.on twit£ a.6k membeu to divide into
task 66rtcee bon the a6ternoon session. With the active invo£vement o6 each mem-
beh on'.one 06 tile' t4sk;60rtces, the committee hopes the Coatition can begin mean-
ing6ut opeaation. Fo£towing iA a tist and bAi.c6 descA,iption 66 the Gash 6ohcea:
1. DATA`COMUNICATION - Th,i.s task 6011ce wilt Bathe& and cumpite. spc.c.i6ic
.ut ortmatcan rtom recyc.£ing eettiteAs .in openatcoi, ouch as (n onmaLion on
equipment and dea£e&s,' votuntteert sDctem6, techniques' and pnoce.duites, sic-
cwses and'6a.i.£unee, 66iances, s.tortage u6 matmiats, and Uan6po!t:tatum
sya.tema. Hope6u.££y -Mis i.n6ortmati.on can be compi.ted and ztandaAdized into
mea>-i.ns6ut statements that exp£ai.n how to start a Aecycti.ng centeA and haw
to opeAate a center. With .the diascmcnT at op' this data. the Cna.f.i,ti.on
top educe the ttiat and moA eetabUzhment and opmation o6 Aecgcfing
centeAs .
2. 'MARKET RESEARCH - Tlu.a task, 6ortce wit£ ortgani.ze market in604mation rtepatted
O o on members as wet£ as rtesenrch newouttets 6or .iecyctab£e matert-
in£s in the state. Nationa£ conceptus deati.ng with g£ass, meta.t, and paper.
tvi,C£ be contacted 60A,hetp wUh Iowa marhet'prtob£ema. The scope o6 kli.i:a'
task 6ortce cou.td inc£ude worth on .5timutating use o6 ptoducts cot:.tain•uig
zecondaiy mateAiat.
3. REGIONAL COLLECTION - This tach 604ce wi££ estabti6h the. Location 06 itegi.onaC
centcu and orgaize.trtatispoA.tati.on.to these Locations and then to maahet.
4. ALTERNATIVES RESEARCH - Th.is, tach 6orce wiet compi£e rteseaAch on the varied
prtopoa 02 e rig with soCid waste. Pit0i progaanu .uwo£ving "total
AecYcti.ng" wi-te be studied. It has been suggested that this gAoup might
afro study paoduction with ilt.tent 604 Aecovc.iy.
2-
5., PUBLICITY -PUBLIC RELATIONS - Th,i .task 6oace wdtZ pubtic.i.ze .the 6oAmation
and goats o e o on. ' It wilt compite'.tn6oamation to create .inte&-
est .in nesouAce aeeovehy de6ini.ng pn.obtema and ezptaCning ,.the necessity.
Ma pubZici,ty hope6ueZy w.itt,dnaw new mem,beu, -in6oAmation, ort nequeato
6oA`in6onmati.on.:' I.t has been suggested that this .taek 6ortce could give .in-
put .to g)toups attempting .to eatabtish ecotogicat education pnogndms in the
schools. Th,i.s',;gaoup could poss.ibty getinvotved with communication between
necycting centeAs and pAivate,and goveAnmen.tat "garbage" cottec.tons, urging
coneidehnti.on' 06 necycting and cooperation between .the ha4ti.ea invotved in
management o6'sotid'waste. This ,.task; fiance coutd deveCop',teg.i.atati.ve .input
when matteA.6 concerning iecycCing cute' being cona.idened at att tevefs a6
goveAnment. "This .input m.igfvt .inctude waiting tette-is o6 support 60 .the
es.tabWhment o6 %ecycVng c6ttens.
As pAev.iousty;s.tate.d, membens'tuitt be a.aked .to meet with one o6 these.
.task,6oaces and discuss ptaiis.
POLICY QUESTIONS
Ptantii.ng Committee membeAs 6on.esee some,poticy questions netatcd .to .the _
ztuictu4e o6 .the Coalition and,opetation o6 .the .task 6oAces. Ptease conzi.den
.these questions and be %eady 6oA discussion:
i. Shoutd teg.ionat. committees be 6onmed .to handte .the speei6ic prtobtems and
de.tmUu .invotved :in tAanspo&tntion o6 ma.tc4iaes .to .the negi.onnt coCtection
centers? How'ehoutd .the state be divided .into<negions? How 'many Aegions?
2. Is .there a p4acticat. method bon paying communities who bn.ing ma.tenials .to
.the n.egion caZ oMc.tion cen.ten.s? Shoutd .the Coatition keep .the money? How
shoutd .it be d:iettti.buted? 'Do'you have o.thea ideas 60A opehation o6 neg.iona.t
cottecti.on cente46?....
3:'. How shoutd the Coati.tion 6.inance .its present communications expenses --
.tetephone. Batts'and mai.tings?
4. How should .task 6o.aces be organized? Shoutd each teg,ion o6 .the state .take
on aespons.ibi tity 6oA a d.L65ehent .ta6k'6oace? Shoutd each memba loin .the,
.task 6ouce o6 lhi6 choice PLegandtess o6 his Zoeati.on .in .the state? ' Woutd
.task 6onces opeha.te mope e66ecii.vety i6 membeAs weAe tocated .in .the same
Aeg-ion 06 .the state?
MARKET INFORMATION
An inzatation 6.i)un 6nom Hamet,' Minnesota sends .three semis o6 6duushed
paoducts into.th.is area every week. This 6iAm o66eAz .to ck !1E newapniitit
ani uhene .in Iowa using pI .the em :t< .tracks Aetua.ning to the iAm.. The' 6itzm pays
�
$12/.ton ''6oA bundted newspn.i.n.twith a cehta.in pehcen.Cage o6 magaz.inesatZowe.d.
H.igheA pti.ces' age. paid 6ciL bated newepnint and conrtuga.ted caAdboaAd. Contact
Sam Townsend at 515-294-5355 .i6 you needmote zn6oAmation be6cae .the September. 8
meeting:; At that meeting ptaim 6ok negi.ona.f, cutfeetion'and sere o6 hewsp' nt .to
this 6iAm witt, be 6o4mutated:
-3- •
COALITION NOTES
Thanks boa the Aeeponsea .to .the 6uavey in the 6iut netv6tetteA conceAning
.the goaZ6 and 6unctionz 06 .the Coati.ti.on. The ideas weae. used in deciding on
.task, 6oAces and attttining .theiA scope 06 action. The Ptanning Committee appae.
cia.te.6 yoult exeetlen:t'heZp .thnough,.tltese 6uavejs'1
The'secaetaAy o6 the CoaCi_Lion, Rafph Johnson, te6t Iowa in May bon: a job:
i.n'Viag.ini.a wi.tlt Eco -Cycle, a pAi"vate entehpnise nesouAce Aecoveay 0pel�ati:0tt.
A membe!c o6 .the ptann,utg committee, Mani:Cynn Johnson has agaeed .to take oveA
the job. -Hen addaes6 is 3001 Meadow Lane, West Des, Moines, Iowa 50265, phone:
515-225-3697. QuUtti.ons oh nequut6 can be sent .to hen on. to Sam Totunaend,
515-294-5355.
RECYCLING PROGRESS REPORT
The Coatiaion has in6o4ma.tion 640m newzte.tten. and aetephone'scutvey6 .that
aecycZi.ng cen.ten.a aae operating in .these Zocations:
MIES - aecy(Ite.6 papeA (nelu6pa, nt, mixed, coAAugated caadboaAd, magazines), gfaes
and'cans fatuntutum sepaAated)
ANKENY - Amy KaoZl, 515-964-3325
ALGONA - Ed SindetaA, 515-295-3694
May in6oamation takes "about. anything" -paper, cLaas, comp0c,ting
mateLi"ats, att" kinds 06 discarded .items which ane tude.d; consideautg
buying a baleA and asking city'.to pay a man .to tun baten.
ADEL - MaAy Lea Holcomb, 515-993-3542
CEDAR FALLS - Jim Ledenbach, Dinec.toa 06 Recyci'.ing, 319-268-0141, ext. 40
MARSHALLTOWN Ceci.t J. Stveaxingen, 515-753-5626
May Zn6oltination - papeA accycting by a votunteelt gaoup, Cen.taat
Iowa Helping Hands
SPENCER - Dick KAuse, 712-933-2717 ('home phone 10a.m.-2p.m. )
WAVERLY•- McutgaAct Vanden Baoucke, 319-352-2091
May in6onmation - papeA aecyctuig - votun.tee't cot ection 06 papea;`
coltsideAin9 asking City Co
uncie boa dooa-.to-door coUecti"on o6 neos-
' pA:ir.t
GRINNELL - The Rev. Michael Tan Caen., 515-236-4458
April in6atmation - City cottee-tion 06 newspaint; boa aecYding
The 6oUotui"ng is a Gist o6 Qocation6'wheae .thelte .is .intenes.t .Zn %ecyct.6ig.
cenaeAs': ChaAZes City, Chmokee,Indianota, JewcU, Latium, BAitt, Iowa ci4y,
Fa-t:6ietd, Cot6ax, Independence, ManchuteA, MadA,id, La Polite City, Atbion, Cfar.ion,
CaAnoU Marion, WateAi0o, Spin.it Lake, Oskatoosa, Mason City, Sioux Cen.tea, Tama,
Reinbeek, S.tuW, Jewell, and West Uniolt.
In .the Des Moines mea a citizens' Aecyceing committee .is paepaning a detaited
pupozat boa a .iccycting centelt to be opeaated by .the Mewpotiitan Soeid Waste "Agency.
I i •
IOWA
COALITION FOR RESOURCE'RECOVERY
BOARD MEMBERS
ADELSPENCER
h- any' Lea' Ho£comb ' '"'
.cc K�ufee `'' ' `
David Dozanh ,
118 S. 9th
EAC - Box 363
1011 6.t1t'Ave "S.W
Adet, Iowa' 50003
SpenceA, Iowa ."51301 ;,
Indepetnde'l' Iowa 50644
515-993 3769"
112=933=2717'" '
=
Jim and.,,P?am Lc.denbach,
ALGONA
E `citdeEar ':r `
STUART h
'G Robe&
Box 88' s ,
De£awaAe ToNh- 52036
1326}'MeGitego2'
Stiant'GaAderi" CCub
AY'°ona Iowa' 50511 `'
9
S.tuant Iowa, 50250 : ,
M J Brennan „I I,
' ,u ` ;
Abb.t. ".to Btivine66 , hlmtagen
AMES '
TAb41 a'
Uni.veuity'of' towa,
DabheA
Iowa blowy ,522401
29344iotv66'et ,t'" ''
Tama;Lown 52339
,City, .t
Amu, Iowa '50010
1
}r, s,us szs}r, r.
Betay Ch&iztenaen
2814 45th
ANKENY " "' i�
URBANDALE
Dee Mo•ine6, Iowa 50300•,
e eg.en
each
' � �
209 fUaEnut
�
3001.Woodtmid' ' ;,
,* , • �. ,. , .,.
Liz Hatt
Anhen�; I'o`wa'' 50021''"" i
Urtbandate,' Ioiva, '50322'
416 Phobpect S Aeet
515-964 4988' "
blanchutels Iowa 52057:,
,
BRITT
WAVERLY
hina.„Sandy GQnee.•
C�.�eb Sweeny
�an.gartet-Vandenb,%bi
. 513 E:' 4th
Bn.i,tt, Iowa 50423 rt
4' . , U,NtW'u'
824 Second St.,
Ankeny, Iowa 50021.,
J,
,;
;,
waveA£y, Iowa 50677''
CEDAR FALLS
"
Mnb.;;S. E. Tk' nasit.
Ratph o inbon
WEST UNION
i l'E.'"Baoadtbay.
,,'`%22�12s'Cedak'Hecght6'DnLve
Leve;.; an ab '-' °
Cot.6ax, iowa,,.,50054
Cedar. FaU,6; Iowa '50613
108','Upticn StAcet ;
WeA.t`Uwcon; Iowa- 52175'
CWAe Moohe-
DESVINES•;;:, . rG
yn ohitaon
Madrid, Iowa 50156
3001 Meadow'Lane
ADDITIONAL MAILINGS
West Deb Mobiea, Ia. 50265
Loib'"StJiiehQea'
515-225-3697
Katy,ER,6on '. '
75 TkiAd St. S.E
Bondunant Junior Women's
By tt, Iowa 50423
QUAD CITIES
Ctub
. Jo,5epT GW4
Bonduhan.t, 'Iowa 50035' '
Betty Mo66ettt
Genebeo, I.Ctino.i.b 61254
Rt. 4
Bance"Wiede'
Giiinnnett, .Ioiva 50112
IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY
262 Fedehat—Bu,itiding
Sam Town6end
Foizt Dodge,,I,owa 50501
h(u. Geohge'Ho66ma)t
6tv:LtonmentaC HeaUh
Lauhenb, Iowa 50554
Iowa State Uttii.veu ty
JeAAy Ludwig
Ameb, Iowa 50010
Box 498
Mu. Iona Woo6 ide
515=294-75355 an 294-8059
EPma, Iowa 50628
Phebcott, Iowa 50859
It is our city... J�ee`a % »acr,�cc Xeercc61re (ire.
1824 S.'20 ST. OMAHA, NEBR. 68108
TELEPHONE (402) 346-3169, 341-6122 EXT. 488
KEEP OMAHA BEAUTIFUL
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE August: 20, 1973
Mrs. Lea Anderson -
Chairmen Mr. Ray S. .Wells, City Manager
David s: Hamilton
Pro; Civic Center
410 E. Washington Street
Miss roeCent-Elaci`h Iowa City.,' Iowa 52240
Clyde white
Vice President Dear Mr. Wells:
Mrs. Dorothy schwid Reference is made to yourrecentletterYequesting information about
.secretary -Treasurer t p - q g p 'Beautiful
_ Howartl Gro ory -
aa Omahas One -Ste Collection Center. Although Kee Omaha
immediate Past- sponsors :the Center, we have,a uni ue situation in that we have City
government blessing plus much volunteer backing and support.
Frank H. Gaines
Chm: Planning A Programming
The One -Stop Collection Center has been in operation since March of
Arden Swisher
Membership 1972 at Financing the 20th Street location and we now have t
cnm.Mowo satellite sta-
tions. They are located on lots donated by Hinky,Dinky stores. En -
1 Legal counsel closed you will find a .pollution. solution sheet listing the materials
Thomas D. Stalnakar ,
we accept, how to ready them, and the hours the collection centers are
open.
ADVISORY FIRMS-''
Non-profit organizations are allowed to complete the attached form
AaronFerer A sons for _payment of .the articles listed and,. thus help by serving as pick -
Sevington aJohnson. Inc. up facilities. Their .organization is credited by weight of materials
conunontalcanco. brought over a four-month .period. At the end of a period, all ac -
Falstaff Growing Corp. counts are tabulated and checks amounting to $10 or more are mailed.
First National Bank Those `totaling. less .than $10 are Carried' over to the end',. of the next pay;
First Westsmo Bank '. pay period.
Guarantee Mutual Life Co.
Hinky-Dinky SupermarketsMany changes are transpiring and have transpired, since our opening.
imperial outdoor Adv. co. Much hard work has been, invested .with.. the materials all being.. handled
caouor. ooros, Wooldridge Inc. manually , except for one loaned fork lift. As of July 31, 1973,
XFAB 7,012:1/2tons had beenprocessed which involves much loading and un-
KOiL loading. Mrs. Anderson's favorite expression is, 11we,prepared for
Mid•Commomeoulon Inc. twins and ,got..triplets,"abut she feels we are barely. scratching the
Mohd Oil Cote• surface of the solid waste being taken to the landfill.
Mutual of Omaha
Northwestern Boll Much promotional and educational work is, planned to increase partici
-
NortherdNmuralGasco.. pation. The -news media has been. most cooperative in telling the
Omaha National Bank `story which' is a must.''. Hopefully this will answer some, of your ques-
OmahaPaper stock tions, but the actual mechanics of moving the material' in and out al-
OmahaWorld•Horald Most must be seen or participated in rather than described in written
Swart, May, Smith A Anderson, Attys form. The physical plant and amount of space you have available de-
Shasta'Bovotegus termine the. quantity that can be handled and'. how.
Transit Dench Co.
Union PacificYours for a BETTER ENVIRONMENT,..
i
United Stales. National Bank
West Omaha Nations Bank
Western Electric Co. NB/art Mrs. Del Blair for
WOW-Mierodllh Broadcasting Div. 2 Encls: '.: P.S. & Appl. Mrs. Les Anderson
Weodrnan'ofinewoad We are using Recycled Paper are you?
IOWA COALITION FOR RESOURCE
'RECOVERY
BOARD MEMBERS
ADEL, SPENCER
'T Lea'HoQcomb' " cc Krtua�e
118 S 9th David DozaAk
Adef', Iowa '50003 EAC -:, Box 363 1011 6th "Ave'.,, S 'W
5f5-993-3769" SpenceA, Iowa 51301 Independence„ Iowd} `5,0644
712-933 2717
ALGONAJim and Pam Ledenbach`
STUART ,
Ls Box
'8 , a,• ,
die-p'G"Robe�'ta �y
1326`;MeGAegort `" S.tuana&' m-' en"C£ub'''`1'' D e', Iowa 52036',
AQgona', Iowa- 50511 1 S.tuaat, Iowa 50250
A•72,it�Y �,> M. J.
MES
f, TAhW 3: i s�^. A6,6t.`.to B"in'eaa ManageR
�,Da6heh°} >> Un,iveu-(*ty a6',lowa
i44'3 MOM'" "' ! Iowa Ccty, Ionia 52240"
Tama, Iowa 52339 -q4C d.r. ,,.• ._ ;r,.. Sr
Amen;' Iowa 50010 t'.! ,
1 BetAy Ch2c.6teneen ,
ANKENY !6,PM, M, ,' r , ' 1 2814 45,th ;or
URBANDALE >, , ;,.,,,
e egen 1'x 1 .�'i eDu Moine6';"Iowa „'50300.;
209' WaCnut h
3001'WoodCand ` Liz Ha.QQ'"'
Ankeny, Toiva'"50021',0 ,".1 aA
515964 4988'", UAbandaQe,''Iowa` 50322. 416 PAoapect StAeet
Manchu teA, I uwa 52057
BRITT WAVERLY
McOiZu Swee!c6 Mna . ,, Sandy Gtaaa
Mitt lo- wa"50423 ;�: Awa TangaAet `Vandenbhbuckc 51'3'E.`
824 `Second S .'' N.W. '' " r Ankeny, Iowa 50021
CEDAR FALLS Wave4ty, Iowa .50677
peon WEST UNION blhs S: E Tennant ,
''2112"Cedan'He,i ht6"Dici.ve 11`E:'`BAoadiva
g 08'U an as Cot6ax, Iowa y50054
CedaA' Fa,CCs;Iowa 50613 ')OS'•'Uiii.oit S.tneet
. �:�
DES?MOINES 'T
Went Union'
lo 52175' CQaihe hlootie '
an yn ohn6on RR'2
3001 Meadow LaneADDITIONAL bb1ILINGS { hladAcd, Iowa 50156-
West Dea Mo.inea, Ia. 50265
515-225-3697 Katy, EQaon ' Lo.ia, StAiu kte,
BOlidUAa)tt Junior Women a 75 ThiAd St. S. E.
UAD CITIES CCub Baht; `Iowa 50423
04e GQaaa BonduAant,' Iowa' 50035
Geneaeo, I tblo.i,6 61254 Betty 11066ett
Bance"cui Cde
Rt. 4
IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY262_FedenaC BuiCdti�ig GacnneCQ; Iowa 50112
am ow�>b en
Font Dodge;,Io
EnvihonmentaQ Health wa 50501' Mia. Geoage'Ho66man
Iowa State Univeu ty Je%Ay Ludiuig Lauaeu, Iowa 50554
Amu, Iowa 50010 Box 498
515-294-5355,oA 294-8059EQma, Iowa '50628 Mu. Iona Wood6ide
PAUcOtt, Iowa 50859
•
MAe. Gatand Robente Alk. Flank Bogg6
Stuan.t, Iowa 50250 Alk. F4anktBogg,sS,(U;r Lamy and Sue S.toch
„'.:-„ 2217 S. 'Je65eason
Kiik Jensen' CQaiuon; (owa `50525' hlabon, city, Iowa50401
1008 Btachhatoh Mu. Le.tha MoA an.t
Re.tnbech, Iowa 50669 g hh • Thomas '60'el w6 '
Box 117 506 Dennis Daevc ;;,t
Dono.tllea ,Lalunde JeweCC, Iowa 50130' 7 ;;;j MnnsGnLetUwn ,,I nwa, J. 1,
1333 Etm'S.taeet ,
Jay'CutteA ,:, S Chnattu Tati.o
GA cnneCC, `Iowa 50112 ChaAtcIs C.i.ty High SelLooQ 1616 5t, Ave.nuc
Cha eee_City, Iowa' 50616 Manion, Iown, 52302
hlAe:'Mauti ca TeP"ke
402, 4th Ave. • N F Yn
S.touz)Ce'nteii, Iotua'''51250 l. Ate' n,`16" ".Setby, Mae. Juanita Vettea �,.,.
Atbion,s Iowa t 50„005 3011 Saoohsidc DAcvc
AfAh , ',SotL c a 7olianiib eYi ; , Mae C`ec i t SWeaicing'en ` Iowa C4 Iowa .522
.....
Mayort's 066ice` 206 N. 16th
-(-tlf�lla.Pe. "ti 1� t.0 it�.,;tt EK11e6,t&c Gad.6woid Jt s
La')PoAte Cly, Iowa 'S065L Mauhafttown, Iowa -50158 7222 FAank&n, r 1 A
„>A ,,.
S<' ;T n7 Deb Moines, Iowa 150322
Jon T. C�Le!od� u; Rev. Michael Tan c,,Et , -
' „Fl GA.C11Yle.tQ., IOWA 50112
Mayo2,s 066.tce MAe. J. D. Mgoae
C4.ty'-.Ho- ' "J; ijAl, iA,lrjo 1731 No&tl1 Main
Cedaaj Fans, 150
Iowa 50613 Jacky Tuaclueh
Camott Iowa :,51x01
5 VerunoYLt
. l r
Watehtoo, Iowa 50700
P(cuject GAee.n K(1111e�t11 Ch4i,6t(.aYL5en
$Miu:`'S apAt.eng'r 066iceGninnef� CnPEege
Civic Cen-ten _ . 06 Envinulamentat GA.i.nneft, Iowa 50111
Iowa City, Iowd 52240 Studies ry
324 BakeA ,Hatt „
,., � t. ROYI Benge n �, , , t
Lee BeclieA Un.cv'euity o6 No)tthenn [
�� 306 E,,•WuOh gton
MetAOPO c tan-Sotid.Wa6.te Iouta, Mt. PQea6ant; Iowa 52641
Des Mo.enea; Iowa 50300 Cedai Fat t6; `Iowa 50613
Pea
BAuce. iLy Ratph JohYl6On— ,
Ro6eniwucij`Sheahea Sp.iltit Lake., Comm Schoot6 D66�ce:o6 Enuiaonnlentat Studi.cs
6706 fUa6hington ., Spout Lake;"" lowaa 51360 324�Bafien,.NaCQ°,' ,
Des Mo.tne6, Iowa 50322„ 7121336-2820 Univelus ty o6 N62tltert,t Iowa
CedoA FaM,Iowa 1 s50613ri
Jim Stiunbo, Pa.
etoa.' Barb Panhs,,,
Ftiuti Bapt:i.st thuncit 320 K ieage
Boz 358, Simpson Cott,
ege
FaiA6.iefd, Iowa 52556 Indianota, Iowa _50125
BaAky:Futteh. MA,rffanotd;S oan
%Media Speciati6t 1208'Ea6tt bart Dative
ECtswoA.tlL Community, Cottege Macon City, Iowa 50401
I100'Cotteg' 'Avenue
Iowa FaCt6IoWa 50126, MAe. Emit SchA6ibeA
MU- V, G. Rokt6 813 Na,1, B. 'Street
SttLnat, Iowa 50250 0ahatoo6a, Iowa 52577
,
Union Pacific
United States National Bank
West Omaha National Bank
Western E$Octrlc Co. NB/art
WOW -Meredith Broadcasting Div.
2 Encls:
Woodman of the World
P.S. & Appl.
Weare
Yours for a BETTER ENVIRONMENT,
!DB1 Blair for
Mrs. Les Anderson
sing Recydede aP-7-
'T, �- areyou?
. ..........
Y
It i5 Our city...,-,,
1824 S. 20 ST. OMAHA, NEBR. 68106
KEEP OMAHA BEAUTIFUL TELEPHONE (.402) 346-3169, 341-8122 EXT. 488
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Mrs. Los Anderson
August 20,'1973,
Chairman
David S. Hamilton :
Mr. Ray S. Wells, city Manager
President
Civic Center
M133 Barbara Bo1sch
410 E. Washington Street'
Plosldont-Elect
Iowa!City, Iowa 52240
Cly do While
Vice President
Dear Mr. Wells:
Mrs. Dore Y Schwid
Sec .,=h Tress urer
Reference is made to your recent ?otter
tter requesting i I nformation about
Howard Gr cry
Immediate P115M,
Omaha's One -Stop collection Center. Although
t gh Keep, Omaha, Beapurtif ul,
asidont
shave
ponsors the Center, we havej unique situation in that we have City''
1 Frank H. Going,
gove rnment blessing plus much volunteer backin g' and 'support.
Chm. Planning & Programming:
A'don'SwIsher
The One -Stop Collection Center has been in operation since March of
Chm. Membership & Financing
1972 at the 20th Street, location and we,now.have two satellite -SL a -
Thomas D. Stainaker.
tions They are located.oii lots donated,by Hinky'Dinky stores. En-.
Legal Counsel
closed you will find ap'611ution solution sheet listing the materials
we accept, how to ready,them,.and the hours the collection centersare
open. k
ADVISORY: FIRMS
Aaron Foter & Sons
Non-profit organizations are allowed to complete the attached form
Bevinglon aJoneaon, Inc.
for.payment of the articles listed and thus help by serving as pick-:'
Continental Can co.
up facilities. Their, :organization is credited by weight: of materials
11 . I I I
Falstaff Brewing Corp,
brought over a four-month: period. 'At the end of a period, all ac -
First National Bank
counts are tabulated and checks amounting to $10 or more are mailed.'
:Those
I
First Wastrildo Bank
totaling less than $10 are carried over to theend of the next ly
P
pay period.
Guarantee mutual Life CO.
Hfnky-Dinky Suporma I rkets
Imperial Outdoor Adv. Co.
Many changes are transpiring and have transpired since our opening.
Xautier. Derns, Wooldridge lnc.
piuch hard work has been invested with the materials all being handled
I I
KFAB
manually except for one loaned fork lift. As of July 31, .1973,
KOLL
7,012 1/2 tons had been processed which involves much loading and un-
Mid-continunt Bottiors Inc.
loading. Mrs. Anderson's favorite'expression is, "we prepared for
Mobil 011corp.:
twins and got triplets," but she feels we are barely scratching tile!
I
Mutual of Omaha
surface o f the S olid waste being taken to the landfill.
Northwestern soft
1 Northern Natural Gas Co.
Much promotional and educational work is planned to increase partici-
Omaha Nallonni Bank
pation The: news media has been most cooperative in telling the
n
's
Omaha Paper Stock
story which ismust. Hopefully this will answer some of your ques-
tions, but the I
Omaha world -Herald
actual mechanics of moving thee. mate rial in and out al -
Swart, maY. Smith A Anderson. Atlys
most must be seen or participated in rather than described in written
form.
Shasta Beverages
The physical plant and amount of space you have available de -
termine the quantity that can be handled and how.
Tt.nsil Donch Co.
Union Pacific
United States National Bank
West Omaha National Bank
Western E$Octrlc Co. NB/art
WOW -Meredith Broadcasting Div.
2 Encls:
Woodman of the World
P.S. & Appl.
Weare
Yours for a BETTER ENVIRONMENT,
!DB1 Blair for
Mrs. Les Anderson
sing Recydede aP-7-
'T, �- areyou?
PAPER 1 Te'n
2.,iyDo inc
eis
" 4
a . U"
Brow
5.—
Wax
Comp
„ 7.
IBM` i
8.
Maga
9.
Telep
'
10. :Cardbi
eis
ram.
I
Survey Y of City-
University University Financial Relationships
This 'report summarizes the findings of a survey of selectedmedium-sired
cities with large colleges or universities. Appendix A contains a list of the
cities and the universities. The mayors of twenty-eight cities received ques
tionnaires; twenty-four of them responded with completed questionnaires. A'
slightly modified questionnaire was sent to the Principal financial officers of
the universities in these twenty-eight cities. Twenty-five of the universities
completed. and returned the questionnaires. Questionnaires were returned by the
universities in the four cities whose mayors did not respond. Consequently,rin-
formation is available for all twenty-eight university cities although only the
university responded for four cities and only the mayor responded for three
cities. Appendix B contains copies of theuestionnaires sent ntrto the
mayors
and to the universities. Each questionnaire gives the percentages of respon-
dents that answered in the indicated way. Not all respondents answered every
question. In some lof these cases, the information was 'apparently not known or
the question was not considered relevant for the respondent.
The cities selected for the survey were medium-sized and were known to
contain a large college or university. All but four of the cities had popu-
lations of less than 100,000 in 1970. rhe four largest cities were all under
200,000 in population. Two cities with under 100,000 population were in metro-
politan areas with populations much larger than 100,000. Some of Uie cities had
more than one university. Except for one such case, only the dominant univer-
sity was included in the survey. The exception was Denton, Texas, where both North
Texas State and Texas Women's University were included in the surveyof univer-
sities. The University of Illinois is partly in Champaign and partly in Urbana.
'.. U_b1.
2 -
In all cities, the following property was exempt from propertytaxes:
structures used primarily for educational activities, university -owned dormi-
tories, sports stadia or arenas, and research institutes (when universities
had such institutions). Three-fourths of :the cities exempted rental houses
iouses,
and,apartments owned by the universities. The other one-fourth either taxed
such housing or else the universities in them did not own any. Land sLruc-
tures purchased by the universities and held for expansion were tax exempt
in 82 percent of the cities. Fraternities and sororities were subject to
property taxation in 56',percent of the cities.
Nearly four-fifths (twenty-two) of the cities provided fire protection
to the universities. When universities provided their own fire protection,
they usually had an agreement with the cities to help each other in emergen-
cies. Only ten of the twenty-two cities supplying universities with fire
protection received a specific payment from the universities for the service.
The payments ranged from $7,400 to $316,000; the average for the ten cities
was $88,000.1 Ten universities reported that they made their own fire and
safety inspections.
Five cities provided police protection to the universities whereas in
twenty-three the universities provided their own police protection. In most
of the latter group, the city provided police services in emergencies. Only
two of the universities paid the cities for police protection.2
Six cities apparently supplied all roads and streets for their univer-
sities while nineteen of the universities supplied their own roads and streets.
In many cities, the universities provided the streets on the inner campus while
the cities provided certain major streets that passed through the campus, ran
along the periphery, or both. Several universities paid the cities a share of
-3 -
the construction costs of city roads and streets on or adjacent to the campuses.
Only one city reported receiving payments from the university for maintenance of
roads and streets on campus.
The respondents obviously gave different interpretations to the question
concerning roads and streets. Some said the city supplied the service if it
maintained or built any streets on or adjacent to the campus. The intent was
to classify 'cities as providing this service if they had the primary responsi-
bility for all streets on the campuses. If cities provided only a few streets
on the campuses with the universities having primary responsibility, the uni-
versifies were considered
to,be supplying their own roads and streets. Generally
the responses contained enough information to permit the classification of an
-
sweisin accord with the intent of the question. But three cities were not
counted in the tabulations because there was no
way to determine how the res-
pondents interpreted the question. A similar problem arose with street lighting.
Universitiesprovided their own water in 43 percent of the cases while the
cities or private water companies provided water in the other 57 percent. The
most common financial arrangement
was for tile university to purchase water from
the city or I a private company at commercial rates. Four cities Supplied water
to universities at no ccst. Most cities (89 percent) provided sewage disposal
for the universities. The responses indicated that cities generally clinrged
universities the commercial races for sewage disposal. Four universities re-
ported
e -
ported that they made Lhei-, own health and sanitation inspections. Trash col-
lection was perform
ed by C:lc universities themselves in 36 percent of the cases.
In the few cases where the cit
iesprovided this service, the universities paid
for it -21:cr!pL in onc! Unijer4itLes
ng their own traqJ1 col-
lection generally used a city landfill and paid For this use.
-4 -
Universities provided their own street lighting in 80 percent of the
cases.3 In the other five cases tabulated, the cities provided the street
lighting ,at'no cost to the universities. 'Only, six universities made pay-
ments either
ay-ments<either directly or indirectly to school corporationsfor children
attending public schools but residing in university -owned, tax-exempt
housing.', Such payments generally, depended upon formulas involving aver-
age daily attendance and operating costs or upon a regular tuition charge.
Two cities reported supplying all but one of the services listed in
Question 3. In both cases, trash collection was the one service not pro-
vided. One of these two cities received no payments for the services :it
supplied. At the other extreme, three universities provided all but one
of the services in Question 3, and another eight supplied all; but two of
these services. All but one of these eleven -universities relied upon the
city (or sanitation district) for sewage disposal'. Universities 'generally
paid for city -provided utility', services such as water and sewage disposal
at regular commercial rates. Payment for other services, when it existed,
was usually, the result of negotiations and might or might not depend upon
a'formula.
In one question, city officials were asked for 'their views concerning
the adequacy of compensation for services provided to the universities. Two
thirds of the cities responding to this question felt- that they were inade-
quately compensated.; SeveraL respondents recognized the important economic
,j
impact of the universities on their communities but still felt that the uni-
versities caused
ni-versities'caused a drain on the fiscal operations of the cities. Six cities
reported that they felt they were receiving adequate compensation from the
universities for service supplied., Three 'did not answer this question. Nine
cities reported that they are currently considering alternative arrangements to
receive compensation for services supplied to universities.
-5 -
The response of the universities to this question contrasted with that
of the cities. Roughly 70 percent of the universities felt that they were
adequately compensating their home cities. University officials generally
point out benefits that accrue to the cities in addition to direct payments
made for services. In all but a few universitiesin the survey, 50 percent
or more of the students lived off campus in hourting that is subject to pro -
party taxes. These students presumably paid rents that reflected property
taxes, so they helped support the pity expenditures to that extent. Also,
students were generally, counted as part of the localpopulationin the dis-
r;
tribution formulas'for,grants in:aid. ',Finally, universities frequently per-
mitted,persons not associated with them to use 'certain of their facilities
without charge. :'Examples are ,outdoor recreation facilities, park areas,,
meeting rooms, library facilities, and so on. Highly trained university
personnel'commonly serve on community study groups, committees commissions,
and in public office. Obviously the non -university segment of these commun-
ities benefited from the flow of such services from the universities.
Several interesting, items, showed up in comments on the questionnaires.
For instance, Oklahoma State University owns a lake from which it sells water
to the City of Stillwater. This arrangement is the reverse of that found in
most university cities. Many respondents noted the difficulty of determining
holo much the city spent to provide services such as, police and fire protection
to universities. One, respondent suggested that universities should bear a per-
centage of total municipal expenditures based on the relationship of students
to total population in the community. One city and university agreed to divide
the costs of fire protection on the basis of. the ,share of total floor space in
the community accounted for by the university. Officials of the big Eight uni-
versities and 'their cities,meet annually to discuss city -university problem.
Some a t . ate legislatures have recognized the financial problems of cities
with large.amounts of tax-exempt property. In 1972-1973 Ohio provided limited
ited
"impacted aid" for the cities in which the twelve state universiti.es were lo-
cated. The legislature provided the money to the Ohio Board of Regents for
disbursal to the cities in recognition of the burden of police and fire ser-
vices generated by the presence of the university. 11)e disbursal was on the
basis of enrollments. Apparently each city got the same amount per student -'-
approximately $2.50. Athens received $43,000; Bowling Green got $39,000; Kent,
$45,000; Oxford, $37,000. The Ohio Legislature recently approved an appropriation
of $400,000 for the 1973-75 biennium to provide,impacted'aid for only four of the
twelve university cities --Oxford, Kent, Bowling Green, and Athens. presumably
the I universities in these four cities are a much more dominant segment oftheir:
local communities than are
the state universities in the other eight cities that
received aid in 1972-1973.
The Florida legislature provided,a payment to Gainesville in 1972 for water
supplied to the University of Florida. The city had previously Supplied water
without compensation. It is not known whether this payment is:continulng or
was for just one year.
Other state legislatures, have indicated some concern with the effects of
property -tax exemption.4 The Wisconsin Assembly passed a hill in 1972 to pro-
vide for payment by the State to local governments for services supplicri to
State facilities, departments, or agencles.? She major services for which pity-
ment was not being made were police and fire protection. The stnL(: ngejjci(rs
were already paying the going rates in most instances for local sewer, watfor,
and electrical services. 't'he actual payments for police and fire protection
were to be negotiated between the state agencies and each local government.
The governor item vetoed the appropriation contained in the bill because
-7 -
he felt
the bill as drafted was unworkable. He urged the Assembly to remedy
the defects in the original bill which remains on the statute books.
The Illinois legislature passed a bill in 1965 to reimburse university
cities for fire prote6tion.6 The payments continued for three years at a
rate of approximately $4.00 per student per year. Apparently the legisla-
ture no longer appropriates funds for this bill because the universities
started including such payment in their biennial budgets. In 1970 a new
bill c ! alled the "University city Impaction Bill" was introduced in the Il-
linois I legislature. As originally drafted it would.have been provided a
university citywith 3 percent of the operating budget of a university lo-
cated within, or not more than a mile from, the city limits. Although the
amount! was laterreduced to 1 percent, the billstill failed to pass. The
Illinois State Auditor does Pay tuition to local school districts for child-
ren residing in university -owned, tax-exempt housing.
In several states, bills have died that would have provided financial
assistance to local governments for services supplied to
state-owned, tax-
exempt facilities. in some cases, the bills authorized direct payments by
the state; in others they required or permitted charges for services supplied to
&e,tax-exempt property. A bill in the 1969 Oregon legislature would have pro-
vided direct payments to local governments. It died in the House Committee on
Taxation. A similar fate befell a bill in the 1973 Indiana legislature that
called for state payments to local governments in lieu of property taxes..
The Massachusetts legislat!
ure has had several bills dealing with property
tax exemption but none has passed.7
Two bills in the 1971 hJassachUSCLLS legis-
IaLure would have required local, consent for property tax exemptions for real
estate acquired in the future by: chariLable organizations. The idea of re-
-8- ,
quiring local consent for tax exemption is an appealing one, but the imple-
mentation of such a proposal would encounter many problems. Other bills in
Massachusetts would permit or require municipalities to charge for services
rendered to tax-exempt property. None of these bills received approval.
Several university cities have taken 'steps 'to obtain more revenues from
tax-exemptinstitutions by direct action. A few cities have local sales or
income taxes. Sales taxes:apply to university -food service and bookstore
sales in Raton Rouge. Dekalb,'_Illinois, had adopted a municipal utilities
tax that falls upon Northern Illinois University as well as on other institu-
tions. The university pays about 25 percent of'the total revenue from the tax.
Pittsburghimposed a privilege tax on gross receipts of exempt institutions
as the result of state enabling legislation. Columbia, Missouri, is fighting
a legal battle to have its city, sales tax collected 6y the University of Mis-
souri -Columbia. Bowling Green and Athens (Ohio) both impose a city income
Lax which university employees pay. Lexington, Kentucky, has a payroll tax
of 2 percentthat applies to university employees. Boulder, Colorado, has
an admissions tax that apparently was intended to apply to university events,
but the 'courts have held that the university is under no obligation to collect
tax for the city and it does not do so. .Norman, Oklahoma, is seeking a'city
sales tax and a capital improvements charge (13.80/sq. ft. of floor space in
newly constructed buildings). Evanston, Illinois, is considering a tuition
tax on university students.
By shifting to taxes or charges other than the property tax, cities can,
of course, obtain more revenue from the tax-exempt organizations either di-
rectly or indirectly. Some cities are simply appealing to tax-exempt insti-
tutions to contribute more to municipal revenues. Nashville, Tennessee, is
-9-
requesting each exempt organization to contract to pay the city for services
rendered. Cambridge, Massachusetts, is "respectfully requesting" voluntary
payments from exempt institutions for amounts equivalent to the, property tax
applied,to the land they own, not the buildings.
The focus of this survey has been on the financial and service relation -
.ships between the city and the university. City officials naturally are con
cerned`with the, impact of the universities on 'their fiscal positions rather
than with the total of community benefits and costs that stem from the unlver
sities. University officials are generally sympathetic with city fiscal prob-
lems but prefer, to view the city - university financial relationships within
the context of the total Impact of the university on the community.
Clearly universities generate much income and employment is their ;com-
munities as any large institution does. .Universities create generallyfavor-
able spillover effects on their cities that distinguishes them from most busi-
nesses and other organizations. Local residents have access to numerous edu-
cation I al:,
ducationIal, cultural, and athletic events of the universities. Furthermore, most
campuses have a park -like atmosphere that enhances the aesthetic qualities of
cities.,' Universities do, however, have some 'negative spillover effects. Local
residents may resent (and suffer welfare losses because of) the, congestion in
the cities caused by the many students and their cars; the life styles of Stu-
dents (including drug usage) ; student demonstrations rallies, Pranks, etc.
students voting in local elections; and others. Yet most cities clearly con
Sider their universities to be major assets to their communities.
The survey also avoided the question of what the financial position of the
city would be if the university were not located therein. When this question is
posed, the usual implicationis that the city would have much less industry, much
FOOTNOTES
iThe four Ohio universities (Bowling. Green, Kent, Miami, and Ohio U.) did
not actually make payments to the cities but the Ohio Board of Regents dLd
as the result of specific legislation. The payments were for both police and
fire protection although the total was included for fire protection only in
the tabulations.
2The four Ohio universities (See Footnote 1) were not included among
those that reimburse the cities for police services.
3The respondents obviously interpreted this question differently asthey
did' the one on roads and streets. Some responded that the city 'supplied street
Lighting if it lighted city streets that went through the campus, eventhough the
universityilighted..its own streets.: Others said the city supplied street Lighting
y g y y'
only if it'li hted;universit streets as well asrcit streets on the campus. Our
intent, which was probably, not ,clear in the wording, was for the respondents to
report that the city supplied street lighting only if it supplied lighting for
university', streets' as well as for -city streets. Generally we 'could tell which
interpretation the respondents gave and edited the questionnaires to be in ac-
cord ;with our intent. Three responses were not tabulated forlthis.question be-
cause the interpretation given by: the respondentcould not be determined. Fre-
quently the
requentlythe university provides street lighting on its campus but will share
the lighting costs with the city for streets on the perimeter of the campus.
4The remainder of this discussion draws upon sources other than the question-
naires`returned by the twenty-four cities in the survey:
SLetter from Mayor William Dyke of Madison, Wisconsin, to Mayor Francis X.
McCloskey of Bloomington, Indiana, dated December 21, 1972.
61nternational City Management Association, Management Information Services,
Vol. 11, No. 5-7 (July 1969), "The, City and the University," p:8.
7Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, Institutional Property Tax Exemptions in
Massachusetts, Boston, December,' 1971:
Appendix A
Cities
'and Universities in the Survey
City. and State
Universities
1
Ames, Iowa
(Iowa State)
2.
Ann Arbor, Michigan
(University of Michigan)
3.
Athens, Ohio
(Ohio University)
4.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
(Louisiana State University)
5.
Bloomington,: Indiana
(Indiana University)
6.
Boulder, Colorado:
(University of Colorado)
7.1
Bowling Green, Ohio
(Bowling Green State University)
8.
Champaign, Illinois
(University of Illinois)
9.
:L,
Missouri uri
(University of Missouri)
10,
Denton, Texas
(North Texas State & Texas Women's University)
11,
East Lansing,, Michigan
(Michigan!State University)
12.
Evanston, Illino is
(Northwestern University)
13.
Gainesville, Florida
T
(University of Florida)
14,
Iowa City, Iowa
(University of Iowa)
15.
Ithaca, New York
(Cornell University)
16.
:Kent, Ohio
(Kent State)
17,
Knoxville, Tennessee
(University of Tennessee),
18.
Lawrence, Kansas
(University of Kansas)
19.
Lexington, Kentucky
(University of Kentucky)
20.
Logan, Utah
(Utah State University)
21.
Manhattan, Kansas(Kansas
State University)
22.
Nashville, Tennessee
(Vanderbilt)
23.
Norman, Oklahoma
(University of Oklahoma)
24.
Oxford, Ohio
(Miami University)
25.
South Bend, Indiana
(Notre Dame University)
26.
Stillwater, Oklahoma
(Oklahoma State University)
27.
Urbana, Illinois
(University of Illinois)
28.
W. Lafayette, Indiana
(Purdue University)
Appendik B
QUESTt 41I E SENT TO MAYORS OF UNIVERSIT*TIES
Date
City of University
1. Which of the following types of property owned by the University are exempt 'from
property 'taxes in your city?(Check the appropriate items)
waza. Structures used primarily for educational activities;
& b- Dormitories;
,&c. Rental houses or apartments (rented to students or faculty);
$,2 d. Land and structures purchased and held for expansion;
/0 e. Sports stadia or arenas;
Research institutes;
g. 'Other (describe)
Explanations or qualifications
2.' Are fraternities and sororities tax exempt? ayes fNo
3. For the following services, please indicate whether the City supplies the services
to the University, what charges or contributions the University makes (if any)
for each service, and what share of. the City's total cost for these individual
services is contributed by the University.
Annual University's payment as
Supplied by City?,' Payment by University of City's total budget
Service (circle yes or no) (latest year) for the service
a. Fire Protection Yes 79%No.?/67,9 $
b. Police Protection Yes No0/a $ `
c. Roads 6 Streets Yes2(%No7t% $
d. Water Yes07 y37,0 $
e. Sewage Disposed Yes f9%No // /pOH $
f. Trash Collection Yes&7,No $
g. Street Lighting Yes,2197,Nospo 90 $
Explanations or qualifications
� � � -2- • r
4: If the University makes payments for ,individual services or a lump -sum payment for
!all services, please explain how the size of, payment is determined.
5. Does the University pay the ;local school corporation for children attending public
schools but residing in university -owned, tax-exempt, housing? 2,1M Yes _=,No,
If yes, what was the amount, paid per annum and how was the payment determined?
6.I Do you think the payments by the University adequately compensate the city.for the
services it supplies to the University? ,
Al�Faa.arE- 33
/NA/)C(u rr
7. Are you currently considering alternative arrangements whereby the University would'
compensate the city for services? If so, please describe them briefly.
Na 6/ %n
I
QUESTIONNAIRE Appendix B
TO CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERS COAIIVERSITIES
Date ;.
University
;City
1, -Which of the following t
taxes ypes of property owned by the University are exempt from property
in your city? (Check the appropriate items)
/00 a: Structures used primarily for educational activities;
/�. Dormitories;
Rental houses or apartments (rented to students or faculty):.
Land and structures purchased and held for expansion;
L 4e. ' Sports stadia or arenas;
Research institutes;
_�. Other (describe)
Explanations orualifi
q cati
0
_ na
'Z. Are fraternities and sororities exempt from property taxes7
total enrollment of'
approximately how many live in ersity Oofnthe
fraternity housing?
3. For the following services, please indicate whether the City supplies the services to the
University,
and what charges or contributions the University makes (if any) for each service.
University purchases of
Annual capital equipment for
Supplied by City. Payment by Universitytype a
Se
st)
rvice (latest ui (circle veq or no) City (Date t q p_
year) ment, and co
a. Fire Protection YesJ9%pNo,2/% $
b. Fire and Safety Yes y0%No607
Inspection
c. Police Protection Yes/P%No
d. Roads & Streets
(Includes construction
and maintenance) Yes 2gNo76t7o $
e. Water YeS57%NoY37 $
--------------
f,
Sew �
.age Disposal Yes,iF%No // /d $
g. Trash Collection Yes $70No86% $ 1
h, Street Lighting Yes,Z0%No XO 90 $
i. Sanitation and health p� Or
inspection Yes/rf /ONo ,i.3 /G
Explanations or qualifications
-------------
i
-2
4. If the University makes payments for individual services or a lump -sum payment for all
services, please explain how the size of payment is, determined,
5. Does the University pay the local school corporation for children attending public schools
but residing i,n,University-owned,tax-exempt housing? A3 17aryes 0
If yes, what was the total amount paid per annum, and how was the —paTment determined?
6. Do you think the payments by the University'adequately compensate the city for the
services it supplies to the Universit y?
YZ7 T «%
32
7. Are you currently considering alternative arrangements whereby the University would
compensate the city for services? If so, please describe them briefly.
YC-
Va q/ 0/0
8. Does the University provide services (e.g., use of faculty or staff; use of space; use of
clinical, hospital, educational, and recreational facilities) without charge to the city?
If yes, please indicate what the services are.
Aln
9. Do students count in the formulas for distributing',any state funds that result in revenue
to the city? If yes, please indicate what funds are involved.
■
■
Cody/ ® 00� Cit •
m 'l"= N / u MY
DATE: August 29, 1973
TO: City Manager
FROM: David G. Epstein
RE: Revision of Animal Shelter Fees
Present animal shelter fees do not reflect the realities of
the amoral control problem in Iowa City. Adoption fees are
too lm; and there is no requirement, for forced licensed
acquisition upon adoption. Furthermore, there is no'e;:courage
men', given to people which would cause them to neuter animals.
The requirement that persons turning animals over to the
snelcer pay, a fee is also self-defeating. This causes animals
not to be turned over to the shelter in order to avoid fee
payment:
Therefore, I recommend the following reoomputation in the
animal shelter fees.
1. Animal turn -in fee should be eliminated. rdmals should
be accepted' without charge from persons desiring to' get rid
of pets or strays. This would encourage people to bring
animals in to the shelter rather than turn them loose.
2. Raise the adoption fee to an uniform.$10.00. This would
discourage a current practice which sees students purchasing
a dog for $1.00 or $2.00 than abandoning it at the end'of the
school year. It is felt that a larger initial investment
would discourage persons who are not serious about maintaining
pets.
3. Require all person who purchase animals from the"'shelterto
obtain the proper shots for the animal and a license. 'This
could be done, by requiring an additional deposit of $15.00
(when an animal is adopted), which would be refunded upon
presentation of, proof of license and shots. This method
is recommended due to the fact that the owners must take
the amoral out of the shelter in order to obtain shots.
Th of b ab
er ore, we, must e le to assure ghat license and shots
are obtained even though the animal is no longer in custody.
4. Lower general license fees for animals that are neutered.
For example, the current fee of $9.00 for animals could be
reduced by 1/2 for neutered animals.' This would reduce funds,
but it may also cause the animal population to be considerably
COMMITTEE. ON PUBLIC WORKS
JOHN A. BLATNIK, Minnesota, Chairman
ROBERT.E. JONES,Alabama WILLIAM'H.HARSHA, Ohio
JOHN C. KLUCZYNSKI, Illinois JAMES R. GROVER, in., New York
JIM WRIGHT, Texas JA31ES C. CLEVELAND, Neu' Hampshire
KENNETH J: GRAY. Illinois DON R. CL.\USES, Callfornln
FRANK AI. CLARK, PennshAanla GENE SNYDER. Kentucky
HAROLD T. JOHNSON,:California ROGER It. ZION, Indiana
W. J. BRYAN DORN, South Carolina JOHN PAUL HAMMERSCHMIDT, Arkansas
DAVID N. HENDERSON, North Carolina WILMER D. MIZELL, North Carolina
RAT ROBERTS, Texas LAMAR BAKER, Tennessee
JAMES J. HOWARD, Nes' Jernel '� '. D. G. SHUSTER, PannsylTanla
GLENN M. ANDERSON; California WILLIAM F. WALSH, New York
ROBERT A. ROE, New Jersey TIIAD COCHRAN, Mlesladpid
TEND RONCALIO, Wyoming L. A. (SKIP) BAFALIS, Florida'
MIKE MCCORMACK, Washington JAMES D. ABDNOR, South Dakota
JAMES V. STANTON, Ohio ROBERT P. HANRAHAN, Illinois
BELLA S. ABZUG, New York - GENE TAYLOR, Missouri '
-JOHN B. BREAUX, Louisiana
GERRY E. STUDDS, Masaaehusetta
YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE,
California
BO GINN, Georgia
' DALE MILFORD, Texas
PHOFESSIONAL STAFF
RicnaaD J. SUIMMAN, Chief Coassael
LLOTD A. RIVARD, Sapiaeer.Caoaaltaat
.. I.. Laaxaa EDaLIIAN, CONARCI
CARL H. SCHWAars,' Jr., OMMSfael-Profeate a" Prat/msaa
JAman L. OaaaTu, Administrator'.
Curwt; W. EXTTZLD. Minority Caaasrl'
RICHARD C. PLR,. Aasoctlac Yiaorily Coaoatl
GoaDon E. WOOD. .Assistant Minority Coatsael
"JOa[PH A. ITALIANO. BAiteriai Aasgtast
R069aT, F. Lorres, Toohnlea7 Slain AnAtaat
Sun0omurrTEE OS INVESTIGATIONS AND RL%'izw
JIM WRIGHT. Tesae. Chaff man
ROBERT E. JONES. Alabama JAMES C. CLEVELAND, New Uempshlre
DOHS C. KLUCZYNSKI; Illinois - JAMES R. DROVER, JI., New York
KENNETH J. GRAY, Illlnols DON H. CLAUSES, California
FRANK DL CLARK, Pennsylvania ROGER H. ZION, Indiana
DAVID N. HENDERSON, NorthCarolinaJOHN PAUL HAMMERSCHMIDT, Arkansaa
JAMES J. HOWARD.New Jersey WILMER D. MIZELL, North Caroline
ROBERT A. HOE, New Jersey, E. G. SHUSTER, Peousylvanls,
TEND RONCALIO, Wyoming WILLIAM F. WALSH,'Near York'
MIKE MCCGRMACK. Washington THAD COCHRAN. Mlsdasippl '.
JAMES. V. STANTON,. Ohio _. L. A. (SKIP) BAFALIS, Florida
JOH. B. DREACS, Lonlsiaoa R0BERT P. UANRAHAN, Illinois
GERRY F. STUDDS, Masmelousetts
BO GINN, Ororght
DALE MILFORD, Texas
Pa0rruZONAL STAFF
WALTER R. \Lt T. Chief Counsel .
SIZELDON S. GunnaT• Minority Caansel-
GtORGE P. K.IRs COOOD. Profrasfunal Staff. Member -
Gronrr M. KOPGCKf, Chiet Investigator
C11A11.1:5 .1. KRorsr. Profrs.lonal Stasi Mrmber
RnaenT G. LAWRENCE, .040eiatr Counsel.
XVILLIAv O, NouE , InCatluafor
JOIIN 11. O'LIAL%. Aee0riaff COuned
PAIL R. S YATI3. J/inority Profresfonal Slog Jrember
rill
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
Hon. Jour ,\. BLATxts.
Chaiman. Coinlaittrt' an public 11-01.6•x. U.S. Uouat of Peprnventa-
NITV. 11OXllUl1)toll, li,(; ...
De_ut Alit. Che Subcommittee on Investigations and
Review has been rxtautiuillg the subject of orban h:utsportation.
The tindings ofthe suLCmnIII ittee stair. including an itImIvsis of pro-
posed and on-going programs to reduce traitlie con;2stion"and deal
kith, other problenns, are included ill the attached report entitled
"Urban Transportation—Dilemmas at it Time of Decision.-
I hope )-oil,trill find the report to be a useful document. Please be
assured thnt the subcommittee and its staff 'are ,read} to mist. cou in
any way possible.
JIM `{ FIGHT.
Chairman. Subconnnlittee 01n
Ini•eatigation-5 and Reoicta
I-,ntooLCrIOS
Stattmembers of the Subcommittee of Invest i actions and lieview
of the Cotmiiittee on Public Works. C.S. house of Representatives.
in recent nuntths'have studied till general subject of urban transpor-
tation. Theireffort bas involved an examination of articles. studies and
reports of both government and non-governmentlorigini interviews
With o6ieials of federal, State unl local awencies of government and
private interests; and visits to a half dozen major cities to view urban
transportation conditions.
It Is an understatement to declare that there is uncertainty about
the most prudent course for the Nation to pursue in improvmg urban
transportation: It is likely to continue, for the subject does easily yield
to empirical analysis.'
Urban transportation is call glit up in the whirlpool of the Nation's
apparently shifting values and aspirations. There is no straightforward
and obvious way to answer the question of hots the public is best
served. How are such considerations as the public's clear preference
for the freedomand privacy, of the personal automobile,concern for
the natural environment, the Nation's declining enery resources, the.
transportation needs of the young, the elderly and the handicapped,
and trends in population distribution and lana use to be amalgamated .
into national urban;tiansportation policy f =Horn much of the detailed
responsibility does" the Congress ,wish to assume for itself I What
options and authority can best be delegated to State and local juris
dactiona?
Arhile it may be a foreboding task to plot a precise courso for the
future, it isnot so difficult to assess what has happened. This isnot to
suggest that the momentum of the past should necessarily constitute &P
outline for.thc future. Still, there may be some clues.
TnE DECLINE or PrmLro TRANSIT
Most arguments about the various modes of urban transportation
have been rendered academic by, the relentless preference of the public
for one mode --the, private automobile. The preference has: been ex-
pirssed at`the'expense. of the four major modes of urban'; public
transit—bus; subway and surface rail, trolley coach, and. to a lesser
extent, the commuter train.
In the post 25 years, the number of ppassengers carried by the public
transit modes has declined from 23 billion passengers annually to 6.8
billion. At the same time, the use of the automobile in urban areas has
burgeoned. In the decade of the 1960's nlone, while transit ridership
was droppin from 9.4 to 7.3 billion passengers annually, automobile
passenger miles in urban areas increased from 423 billion to ;31 billion.
According; to L the Department of; Transportation's 1972 National
Transportation Report, almost 94 percent of all urban parsenlmr,miles
of travel today is by the private automobile, with buses itcco I ti11 f r
2.i percent, subii'ays and other rail systems 2.2 percent, coninnnera•ail
and taxicabs less than 1 percent. each.
Passeng r mile statistics somewhat underestimate the relative im-
portance of taxicabs. fit 19,6, taxicabs actually hauled more passen-
gers,'albeit f ii. ,shorter distances; than file combined, total or tile
subwn}/sur(ncc r]il holler coaell "fill connnuter train modvs.'niid
more than one-half as maneas the bits ]Iloilo. In malty cominunitie', ;ts
bus service has disappeared altogether, taxicabs are the onli`
public transportation available. forni of
A voluminous re ort prepared for the DOT by the institute
Defc ase .lnnlyses (I D:1) characterizes t lie past decade its 11 "decade of
dee In e• for public or mass transit. ,rlu; JD -1 report. as (to other sur-
rcysand relanits, chnd's henril}' on still istical information provided by
the American Transit Association (ATA), a Washington -based trade
ussoeiation representing the miss transit.
liltoATA �inchistryeef(vrd),sr.
rtile
f o englaretrnsfers excluded), dfont i8.91ilioi
191::1 to an estimated.)..,) billion in 1071.
Operating income;after the payment of all expenses and taxes,
dropped from an aggregate $149 million in 191:] to $31 million in
1960. Sin then: oneratinP ]name hits cl idd r
of." m,lltnn, 1g71
syIn 1945, the Nation's bus, trolley bus, subway and other surface rail
stems managed a profit of almost 11 cents for every dollnr in operat-
Ing revenue, the Payment of taxes`and depreciation included. By ]900,
every dollar was returning a little more than 2 cents profit. In.1971'
every dollar of operating revenue produced an estimated :loss of,t
little more than 23 cents.
This record of decline has taken its toll.
The .ATA reports t.here.rrere 261rfewerprivately owned transit
systems on Desi-'�ber.31, 1971, than on the same dnte in 1959. In
creasirigly, the communities served by deficit -plagued priralc ojierntors
have had to buy then] out rather than face a total loss of service. Hence;,
While the number. of private systems has declined the number of public'
systems has increased. One recent tabulation showed n neGincrrnse of
99 public systems during the 1960,s to 1971 total d t net
This figure
would not include recent or impending takeovers, for example, of D.C.
Transit and three other Washington area bus companies as provided
for in legislation passed in the final days of the 92d Congress,
As it result, of the changing ownership of mass transit, publicly
owned systems, chile accounting for only ]4 percent of the Nation's
total of 1,053 mass transits carry 84 percent of all revenue
passengers, generate 8;1 percent. of all opernting revenue. tra•el 70 per-.
cent off all vehicle miles, and employ s percent of all mass transit'
empployees.
Public transit is, in fact, becoming a service provided by the local
community with revenues derived not onh• from the far• I but from "
R variety of taxes and subsidies.
The major Category of private ownership nunm
smell bricall} remains the
us contlianres tl]nt opet'ate in cities m• suburban connnunities
of 100,000 Inopulation or less. This does not wean these companies are.
profitable. rile Instituter for Defense Analyses found flint in cities of
all sires in 1196]9. ;if percent of bus rroperties did not make ends o
moneytocmertheircosts:,11
inell n0,�eprecintion.IntliesmnI1pri,rn„
were in a net (.e crt
33 percent o a u
inn,c eprec]n ton coo s are not considered.
operties incurred deficits. 18'percent of the
■
rrc
1
3
smaller operations. Oyer"alis )ast. decade , revenue Paoengels carried
by urban bus s"stems declined fioni t.3 billion to an cstinuded 3.7 bil-
Lrna in 19r1 l
Huacioxlcllh. while bus public transit contmues to ecperience eco-
nomic hald�Ltp the Department of Transtwiiation and many State
,Ind local ")urlsdictions ;are emphasizing bus transportation as n more
cilicient tar of urilizinr limited street and Li para" c
(ion is bens. i
4
Worth 'notipr'air the conclusions of the institute for
yses following its examination of urban has trill )or
(1) 4 'ven ]stet. properties' that provide It hei
cn ita hove es nen:ter n�— tro�Iq
)efense Anal-
ltion:
hoc milno ..er
nage-lis suggests .cni
proved seree , attract riders]
creased. The is,
s
revenues lead to
ship. In a study`
fare of -99 ro„ta-
6.7Percent declin
a Xpercent fare
gets, which the 11
versely, when the
15 cents 'in`Marci
and an'owen grow
ridersli increase
3
sons int e 19 to
tel _ cod tin
benf
foe th'n
Tg�Bus patron
holds in'the loadi
reasons may, he ll
o..y o ar ]leu--vlclous Circle;, in w
fare increases which, in turn, further
A 1968 conditions,' the IDA found"thi
c im-
!resse will produce a 3 percent decline in passen.
calls an"underestimation" of fare impact. (Con.
V of Atlanta reduced its bus fares from 40 cents to
972, ridorship increased 24 percent oil weekdays
pelaaritage on weekend& Thopermanency of hii:
irUlm k n cities where thertion /
yup 1sig er. io I 1 says ` t is ecte .
K UU10A Will or
�3 transit i3 for work hr" on.i
of.
of the labor ”
tion of house -
.Some of the
:"'this group
is higher; they lack the funds to ride, they often can walk to work, and
transit servico is not accessible.
;
Roil rapid transitsystcins include subway and elevated trains which.
operate on' ecclusivenghts-of-xay. There are 10'sMema of signifi
csnce in the United States that meet this definition and they are
located in New., York/New',iersey (3°systems) ,'Philadelphia/New`
jersey/Southeast Pennsvlvallia (2 s}stems), Cleveland -Shaker
Heigfits (2 systems), Chirago. Boston, and San Francisco -Oakland.
In the. latter metropolitan area, the newly opened Bay Area Rapid
Transit. (BART) is �erving.onh• part at n proposed t -5 -mile route
and was not naialvzed by the ID:1. A rail.rapid transit system is under
construction in Nashinraton, D.C., and systems have been proposed for
about a dozen other large cities-
Reprdless of :what kind of indicator is used, the biggest single rail
transit system is the New York City Transit :Authority, part of the
New York 'Metropolitan Transit :Authority. In 1970, it accounted for
well over 75 liercent of therevenile, revenue passengers, and passenger
car miles of nine U.S. systcrosstudied. The second largest, tile Chicago
Transit Authority. is about one-eighth as large. .
DOT fignnres slick that 64 percent of 7711 ronsit ridership. notching'
dill modes, is concentrinted.in richt metrolxilitnn areas. pith the 'Newl'orh \ea Jemey consolidated urea accounting for 38 percent
The iDA found (tends in rail transit are almost identical to those
is has transit: with the industry caught in a revenue -cost squeeze.
Hei'ennr pas rotors iu the industry declined from.7 billion in 19rio
to, 1.6 billion ill]970, The`industry*s agf regnte operating deficit for
eight properties studied (BART and Philadelphia's Lindeniwold Linc,
s
J
irhiclt hcr,it operntirns in 191i!). not included) increased room 4100 opp
to flit r mr,-.-w during rl!e same period. Seic York's system alone uc-
comin d fm �,if million of lite 1970 loss.
Amer;OSt nqit stelils
Iyl
ID sobse r, . seen ro bare erervrhing in the rt_.ht pirol>otimrs,.. the
IDA nit t rri•:; inrornpletc mfnrmal!on m;tilc arniliWo r the "tit
u '_'est the loe•r i rusts and bi_'her atili-ration of Those systems'may
rent from n rmnbnr jrion ,if factors involving t l) eniphnsI on metro-
polintn aeapla!tu!n= and the inter-rclatingof hanspor'Grsaltion modes,
I O Ve high l erelapnierrr and an historic transit orientation; (;)
rmore elbcient blend of labor wall technology, and (1) msomorv(3)
datlerem type of work foare ridership,
The er!dence is abut corinnater rail apparcntlr' is daring no better
Of I hn uaci:ally 1111m bit.,; or snbrra''transit• 7'he Intl paints oat that 14
Pate t deka atafioln ter ara lablec epo is arlltlons nioaamti ifillein 19707 with
miltile
onnRnil-
io;ads ge'lle slj. iheime not been enthusiastic about eontmiiing commuter
mains. the sntxonunitlPe statf belieros the'l,otential for commuter
11111 York
helpvallci'hate urb:ni congestion shou4l not be overlooked. Alen
fork and Comreeticut ae relying heavily oil nen' cars and improved
service on the \eii ffar•ell Railroad to reduce automobile nsnbre in the
conamauc corridr r betncen .\e to York will \err Haven, Conn, Rela-
hrely success' fill commuter train operations have been achieved in the
Chicago arca and they merit c]oser'scrutiny.
c•
+rr; at�t
s
During the 1960's, the Congress and various State and local govern-
anents have. had to address themselves to the deterioratin- condition
of urban mass transit.",In 1961 the Congress pnssed the I°rban Mass
Transportation Act. Iia 1970 it enacted the Urban Mass Transporta-
tion Assistance Act. Last October. Secretary of 'Transportation .John
A. Volpe announced that the $3.1 billion authorized under the 1970 Act
alone had resulted in Federal dollars helping to bit,,, 7.823 buses,'522
rapid transit mars and 656 rail commuter cars. Federal 'assistauce:was
helping to stabilize public transit in 60 cities. It is important to under-
stand that. the Federal Government does not make available funds to
subsidize transit operrrtrona. The subsidizing of deficit operators has
occurred entirely it the State and local
levels.:
tile
sulmonnuitteestn6'. based on in(h stry data s ,nw.
I average nice.
_..a Cells 7R al aas supported by abort ruts an StAt t„ m.,a
subsa�—
e DOT, in late 1971 reported 81 systems were being subsidized by
State and local revenues. An industry spokesman estimated during
the summerof 1972 that the number had grown t6 more than 130
systems then receiving aid beyond the fare box. Aggregate aid report-
edly was running lit about $,150 million annually.
Sources of transit aid in theNat ion are yariedand include it cigarette
taXr in llnsstchusetts higher gas and electric rates in New Orleans,
a' 1 percent sit tax in :1t.lantn; n special property tnx.in Toledo,
dedicated parking meter revenues in.Raton Rouge, and a payroll tax
in, Portland. Additionally, there are,sales and other general taxes in
several cities, tas'relief or rebates to public operators in at least 15
States, and reimbursement to public operators; for discounted fares for.
school children and senior citizens."Tbe State of California'' recently,
added it .5 percent, sales tax to gasoline, thc;reveriue°to be dis-
tributed to cities and .counties' mainly to: meet ppublie'transit needs.
The above list isnot neves ass rily all-inclusive l'he public transports=
tion scene is a rapidl changing one. The news media almost daily
report new developments in communities around the country. As the
material , for this; repot was being gathered, (1) the State of Com
necticnt Was offering to subsidize strikebound ])its companies that said
they could not meet labor demands and resume operations, (2) the
Governor of lh>_ssachusetts announced it ban on freeway construction
in downtown ,Roston coupled with a $1.2 billion mass transit capital
expansion program. (3) the Michigan Legislature .()tell to raise the
Sante gas tax 2 cents n gallon and to divert 25 percent of the increase
to help rescue financially ailing local transit systems, primarily bus
companies. and (1) a IPederal judge in Newark granted the Jersey
Central Railroad, permission to eliminnte passenger service because
he said the line should lint he forced to absorb losses of Ci00.(ft a
nmrith oil its commuter service.-
CPayroll costs re , •.sent nl rent of the total expenses of tile
nnss transar uulustt•r. according to a 1511) shu }• on "The Feasi-
bi rt} o ec ear assistance for 1:7rbnn .11nss Transportation Opernt-
ine Costs" Studies have shmvn; however. that payroll costs under-
estinalte total labor costs. When pensions and other employee benefits
�1
=_l _110 titled. toat
lo •e tavout in some s% ns is actuall • closer
"� two s0. x�nru_t: liven
ill tile HR_ systeTo hailed as ntt rZIng t le
att•,� = t ill autoiihotvd control Technology LxpeneRced observers expect
labiu''costs to troll near tile tipper end of the scale. B.kirr bill enhploy
fewer persons. but they will be highly trltiued technicians, salaried
well above the industry's Il Vera_e of SHMOO I year.
mm
_011e of the dileas facing* public transit systems is that they must
acquire capital equipment and pay` operating; personnel to meet the
i teak demmid.tltat falls nw.,bh• in It 3 -Low• teriod ill the niorning
and .1 nun In re a erT T ins, is no unit ora bus driver to
taN work ar l +l.m., make'one trip into the central business district
(C111)), and spend the rest of his day in nonproductive trips. enraged
in -make work" tasks. or even ill complete idleness.
I DOT Las o > sed the lacment of o Ceratin subsidies to ublic
trans to a Ions stems. le 19i 1 feast r Iry re as transml c
10 Ol1�,reSS 111C u C Ia S Itelnent ]n Its cOnc uslons an recorn-
mendatons:
In sum; there is not enou h'reliable or belhaviorall vali-
t ll I ','formation arallil eat resCn Or an�'One a t'O-
Itr
-'.11 Ct uli rrRRCt nr tnnr
lir `on w.n ary.a,y, SOhI tIORt0 1C r0 L•m O
e t le one CanLc r hof C
'..� i•�ulClyl SI Ob
ncertanties extend to such fundamental questions as �U
w`liether or'not con ' 1 res an
mere wd to chap es in'transit
seryl - w Ia mlg 1 ',Ill uC0
su dent y, large numbers of commuters, to leave their cars;
what clot savings or service improvements would be possible
t)lrough management improvements,. marketing techniques,
new uses of ori -peak capacity, and regulatory ur,other policy
changes; and how transit operators would respond to differ.
oat: operating subsidy'mcchanisms.
Despite the uncertainties''ussociated ttith any Federal subsid} pro -
"nun, the DOT reported as part of its 1972 asscssnlentof national
tensport tion needs that •3O States favored tee use of Federal fluids
to help, dofrac, transit O)x'17lI lIIg expeRSPS.
Is RELIEF I\ .SCAT?
Are there forces at work within the dynamic American society that
call Lclp restore mass transit to popularity, and reasonable economic
healtlI and, in:tile proc(ss, ameliorate some of the auto -related prob-
loins that exist in urban areas? In short, can the public be expected in
an)• sense to oIt away from ""bill use of the prnnte automobile and
back into the.latses, subways, and street cars ridden with such regu-
Inrit• in the 1l140sand 'lm)( s?
Given' continued free choice and the absence of external constraints
the prognosis isnot 11 favorable one: ,
IIaving Icon it freedom. nail is unlikely to give it up.
(Buelcminster Fuller)
8
the private vehicle is at least a psychological Weeps.
situ for ass transit s man and it is not likely to be replaced
suburb mass transit sc I em now, envisioned.... In' urban and
suburban Wrens, the It" is racticallvt a on
o rrnac u•. las a parser , e vs i !canal t
From There to ere) p , • obili,
C sistently and rredictabl
most eo le who�resnjo
will not ride on it r rr rune aand Jfobil� ( tb'!wa 1tY sets F erahon'orafety
To attempt to meet such a proven, formidable competitor
as the automobile with more IF the same inferior comen-
ti fight public transit service in mrxlerrr areciti�infers ton be the
height or depth of futility and n waste of resources.' (Leon
bfonroe Cole, of the universih• of Texas, writing in n publi-
cati000fthe High
int- $c+rh I3oerd of the National Acad
1emY of Sciences/\ntional Academy of Etr th eers)
Theins[ majority of,curreIn travel is by'prii,atc,sutomo-
bile,Thcre is little to so
life style (�fiiutesota 1� an eppreeiAle'cbange in'this
pegaard) Commissioner of Highways, It IAP_
e Organization net',[exult of,this ono' ence, declares C. Kenneth Ots]d of
the for Economic Cooperation and Development' a
research-orientedinuan co body of 2:3 advanced:, nations,•, wilh.be.;a.,�ara
increase in urban con^pstion in the next'decade Swills ei R;,sharp
are therefore like!} to develop: especlally;yvithin arid around the great
metropolitan Areas. bringing about a Progressive deterioration in the
qualih of frnnsportatimt scryice procrded to the motorist.....,
_ss di too, Observes that fhr drrhning importance', of the central busi-
nrss district. in most cities and the massive
jobs to suburban areas has relocation of homes and
resulted in these areas already "beginning
to show• sontp of tlrr signs of congestion and decline common to the
CBDJ'
emaybBut strnurts or lialitritions on the use of the personal nutonm-
tion off ct dcvcloping lir some in
ureas through n combine -
and a factors that can to ch he groupicd as relater! to (1) congestion
and hence delay for motorists. (T) the casts to the individual of driv-
ing aprirntP crhiclP. (aT public ix>licv rnuP (4) to an as vel unnrpnsur-
ahle extent, pos3rble eltitllging indiridnal values
Same of flip r•mm�ner is out of our airnir,with the motor gni, nrski
told a 1!17$ intprnntiomrl t'"'wporhrtion congress. `•h'or fhb lint limp
rrc Wore ar the thresh, of wrircedingthat perhirps there arp limits to
how fir ive should allow the unto to Prrcrmu'll oil our lives."
I
9
An. advertisement by the Atlantic Richfield Compare-. in a recent
issue of a national magazine proclaimed: "Our lobe for the automo-
bile has blinded us to the totaf transportation needs of our metropoli-
tan complexes . But we must begin to untangle our growing metro-
politan complexes -even if it means banning, the car from certain
parts of our cities."
The overall task is one of monumental proportions. Urban trans-
portation problems have resulted, because of a complex and interactive
set of forces associated with increased automobile ownership, dispersal
of residential and employment locations, freeway constnidaon; escala
tion of public transit fares. and the lack of innovatibiilm`the transit
industry to adjust to these clranges.IWhile constraints have developed
in certain local situations, and a number of uncertainties loom in the
years;'ahead'largely groicing out of envirimmental and energy con
siderations,' transportation planners 'see little; to interrupt the basic
forces that have created present urban transportation conditions.
Last year saiv a record 10.9 million cars purchased in the.United
States, and sales for the first feir'weeks of 1973.were running ahead
of 1972. With the Nation's growing population and growing affluence,
new. 'teeords arc iedicted or the years ahead., In 1970, nearly 80 per
oent`of all households owned at least one automobile; vn–th'30,percent
owning two or more. A decade earlier, 75.5 percent of all households
owfied an automobile and only 13 percent had'two or more:
What's more. more than.) out of every 100 American families today'
own at least 3 automobiles and this trend is on the increase. Some of
the: reasonswere outlined in a December 10 New York Times article
reporting strong' national used car sales:
"It used to be two cars in the tinily was really something,"
said ,foe O'Neal, a used car dealer in Louisville, Ky.. last week.
"Now it's three or four. Dad needs an old`car to get to and
from work. Mom'eithei' needs one for the'same purpose or to
get to the grocery or to hick,up the children at school- Toe'
son or daughter nuty be in highschool or college and has to
have it car to drive. And there has to be a family car. This one
usually is the newest and best the family can afford"
Expanding multiple car ownership is not a good augury for 'revi-
talized mass tninsit, since one of the cars in a multiple -car family is
Usually used by the wage earner for transportation to work and back.
,t ; overument study. shows that its vehicle ownership increases, the
-mileage each vehicle is'driven also increases. Thus, a one car family
drives it an average of 10,800 miles annually; The average for families
having two cars is 12,000 miles per vehicle, wind families havingthree
or more drive them an average of 12,800 miles per year.
Census figures show virtually all net population growth in the
United States in recent years has been in metropolitan' areas, where
about 52 percent of alllmotor vehicle miles are driven. The Federal
Highway Administration further reports thaturban travel is increas-
ing at n fluster rate than rural travel.
According to the 1970 census 67 percent of the \'ration's pnpnlation
now resides in standard metro politan"statistical area (S.IiSAh t of
100,000 or more, 1lfore than one-halfof the population is fotnul ill G5
SMSA's of 500,000 or more
The National Corals Research Staff predicts as much as 85l>etrent of
the net aced se'inI population pito remainder of this century . tri11 be
concentrnted in the \Nation's 12 largest metrofiolitan areas; Ry will it
is urba ureas. at percent sithe Population willbo.liringin.urban-
suburban ui ens—a true explosion in metropolitanliring, "
But it is itaPto exambie closely, what is described as metropolitan
lining, ti5'hntt we have had in the p
for the futureast, and what demographers predict
, is continued growth in the suburban areas around our
cities and pat•ticularlc otir largest cities. From 19)0 to 1970 the pope_
lation outside centraf cities increased 33,5 percent as against only L-
percent in file centrnl cities themsclves,,The population ill 14 of the
Nation's 18 largest cities either remained relatitely'stable or declined
compared with 1980.
In examining this trend to spread more'_ Americans over More acreage
around the central cite rnther than in the central city itself, Professor
I-ee Rninwuter of ,I-lnrrnild unitersit� points out population lxr
square mile in [[rens defined as urbnnized «•ill Mite decreased front
G,580 in 1;1`30 to around 3,860 bl. 798:i. Atrother iesearehcr, I'iofessar
Trying TCristol of Xen• Vork tinirensih. obcerty tl,it n recent Plofes tile
article tilut deterioration ;uid'deenipFinsis of Ihe,rore'cit}' is likeh le
continue thatet'er' turn et•ents take, there is one etmikeh-to
that is too utopian tri csl>ect in tilt `)0 Year orso nhend of its. This is
the izationl of the centrnl vittas the nucleus lot Aiuerican nrbittt
civilization.!,
This poses n dileimm� for any public irnnspnrt tion ststi•no Ihnt re•
lies on hi h cnpacih hnuhtte ot•er fixed routes into n CRD. TTisloi i•
11
call}, rail systems generally have required it highly concentrated city
center to serve, as recognized in a recent Department of Transporta-
tion review of rail and bus transit operations:
Experience with existing operations, related to various pa-
rameters of the urban structure, provide insight as to condi-
tions which may be considered conducive to rail rapid transit.
Some of these are:
High central -city dnsity.
e
Largo downtown employment.
Intensely developed central business district.'.
Linear urban'idevclopmeat with high density corridors
E�istingcorrido sof high voltuiie surface transit usage
providing a built-in demnrai' for rapid transit.
The foregoing should not he construed, however, as demonistrating.
the nonfeasibility of CBD -oriented mass transit systems. The reason
is that mass transit carries about 50 percent of its daily riders during
the so-called peak commuter'periods, when streets and freeways often
are choked with traffic. Perhaps the only conceivable way congestion
in some areas can be controlled .is to get commutersinto; higher occu
pancy',bus* subway and commuter trains, and even carpools.'
'Pho -DOT's 1972 National Highway Needs Report says in this
regard:
The twice daily peaking phenomenon caused by the com-
muting rush is much more critical than total travel in towaiinngg
highway capacity iw urban areas. If t olid be spread
uniformly�th oughnnt thn day, ur p s
ttnu—
wou ce�� onsiderablp mitt at d. The virtua it mpossiblity of
adopting. us solution, however, heightens the relevance of
progr s aimed at' providing gGA transit alteratives for
work trips during peak hours.
It is erroneous,however, to conclude that a transit alternative can
exist for all work-related trips during peak hours. Jobs, like homes and
- shopping( centers are being dispersed outside .the,central:cities. Even
in. metropolitan.. 1'Vashingion, D.C..-with its traendous '.concentra-
tioii of government and government -related employment—only 24 per-
cent, of all vehicle travel during the morning peak period is to jobs in
the core of the metropolitan region. Twice as much vehicle travel is to
jobs outside the core. Bits transit may be the only conceivable public
transportation to highly dispersed employment sites, and even this
does.not loom as being economically profitable for any private operator
called upon to provide the service. Given present conditions, heavy:
subsidization appears inevitable.
Considerable attention is being directed at the potentin] social bene-
fits of revitalized'public transit. It is pointed out, for example, that
mass transit call provide low-cost transportation to the handicapped.;
the elderly. and the poor who constitute is large percentage of the
central city population. Federal legislation already has addressed it-
self at: least urparCto this need. It is apparent that thee .roll s
c groups. n
PI t .
.well as those under the legal driving age, need some alternative to the
g 6,
90-083 a-73-8
12
private automobile. Among households headed by a'person 65 or older,
44.8 percent do not own an automobile. Among households with au
annual income of less than $3,000 thepercentage not ownill n cur is
57.5. Experience in several cities suggests thut elderly citizens caw
constitute an important segment of off-peak transit ridership, particu-
larly if they are offered special low fares. New York Cit ; when it
establish .
ed a half -fare stem
for the he elderly, found that their use of
buses increased 27 percent.
Another: hoped-for benefit is that new or improved mass transit
syms stecan provide tragsportation for the jobless poor in the central
city to employment opportunities in the fast-growing suburbs. Studies
by Martin Wohl of the Urban Institute, however, cast some doubt on
the ability, of new rail rapid transit systems to accomplish this
purpo e
"Generally, the lines for these new mil rapid plans range far into
the suburbs and concentrate most of the stations within the suburbs,"
Wohl'doclares,'noting that Washington's METRO will have only '4
stations within 2.2 Mare milsquare
of the downtown area and San
Francisco's BART wit haveonly five stations in almost 1 mile.
Boston's high ridership rail system, by contrast, concentrates 23'sta'
tions within a 1.4 square mile downtown area. Wohl suggests the em-
phasis'on delivering, distant commuters rapidly into the CBD miti-
gates against the use of rapid mil systems by those already located in
the center city. This is no small, problem, since he found in a study of
seven of the Nation's largest cities that the percentage of workers who
both lived and worked in the cent city ranged from 62 to 90 percent.
The DOT's report on the "Feasibility of. Federal 'Assistance for
Urban bfass Transportation Operating Cody" concludes that "it would
be droirablo toaeeessthe;degree'to,.which,tnays transitis actually
serving the mobility needs of those who are dependent on the public,
transportation system -the young, aged handicap d, the poor and
anyone else who does not have access to all automobile. Available in-
formation does not allow evaluation of transit use by those kraus or-
tation disadvantaged' " P
Demographers ofier.little optimism about natural population;forces
ameliorating vehicle -related problems. lfuch has been written about
such revolutionary concepts as "zero population growth" and a "no.
growth economy," and a national debate about their implications
would, seem' desirable. But the former, even if women were to con-
tinue to bear children at or below the replacement rate, could itself
have no significant transportation -related impact for 15 or 20 years.
The no -growth concept, while capable of reducing the transportation
demand nssocinted %-ith growing affluence, could be expected to en-
counter strong resistance from those who have not shared in this
affluence.
The biggest bulge populntimi-wise in the nation is in the 10-1.1 age
group, with nearly 21' millimr }•01111- people poised on the brink of
driver Mocation placses and subspgenl access to. and ownership of.
an automobile. There is an interesting side note in this respect.
Teen -alters and young ,adults appear to be opting toward motor-
cycles, motorbikes and bicycles to a degree unprpcpdenhvl in recent
f3„
years. Statistics sholc a 35 percent increase in motorcycle and motor-
hike regish7uions ill, tile last Iwo -•ells llievele sales exceeded that
percentage increitse in 107._ :11oIv. (1f inestiiuuU+d 13'million bicccles
purchased hv1073, about linlf Werc bought hy persons l.•i yLars aml
older. Five Yeas ago. this rronp t•epVORnted only 20 percent of the
market.
r _
�$ n
y
fa:
Bieeyyefee ppaarked on a` unimreity,ca� indicate growing popularity of two- +
wheelsd� hides But no one Predicts lessened desirefor urban mobility
about by"lifestyle" changes. - Y
While a good share of bicycle popularity clearly is related to re.c
rattion, there has.been tin increase i bicycle commuting. reported in
It
number of cities and particularly on college campuses. Writers like
Charles Reich,'demorraphers like Charles S. Westotf, and pollsters
like Daniel Yankeloeich speculate that environmental and social issues
tnny be combining to effect certain life-style changes among young
people.'
I�
I4 ,.
In a recent issue of Exxon Corporation's mngacine, "The Lump'';
him that
said 5 years of studying college students had convinced
him flint "neti values" flint have pervaded college campuses Are more
deeply' supported, nldrouelr less actively publicized, than ever before.
Are today's hicycles and motorbikes iit any sense it harbinger of at-
titudinal char ewes that will occuramong Broader strata of our popula-
tion? "Tint is the potential impiact on ourdesir•e for mobility' and the
tray we Achieve it1.It is not for tite investigators to
thesattempt to enswer
Moste 'intriguing questions
litheprertranslrortation planning And forecasting seems to be based
on the Premise that all of our tomorrows sill be like our vesterdays—
only, .more so. Urideilltandably; the cltamctcristic approach is to pro-
] past and carmt trends into the future, recognizing that such pro-
jo eas can be tern red,bv unquantified variable factors. Thus, the
Federal'Highway'_-ministration estimates the number of registered
vehicles in the nation will increase from 122 million in 1972 to 149
million in 1980.+ General-\foteis Rei;earch Laboratories estimates.8
110 percent increase in Autom
1990. The Deotive transportation in urban areas by
ment of Transportntion postulates that the upjicr
limit Of the Nation's highway, uiban transportation, and airport needs
by 1990 will be 5702 billion.
In; such 'relatiiely unchrttenei forecasting the underling social
foroea"etre".not,ypc�t� d.�p t�hys an.empiiic-1 6asis.,ior,doing
so- Somo`plannetii,' however: do gnestion•1rhethei our urban"develop-
meat vltould continue to be'ahL'^
Ped by.I same hietonc.foroea'(#oing
one stdp';'further, they enticize some highly ublicrzed recent ed Ing
at cnntrollin; these #orm aei;not being,equal to`tha task, en
rfs
F,nrest Schwrebeit, executive drractor of� Ecoevstetnics,,.one of -the
planners ;of
regard: tbetneg Dallas Fort'Zpoeth ,Airport, declues` in this
Our deroo9Mpbic realities have chifiged and nie stilt ebang-
ing so radically that the planning concepts of the 1930's, with
their bucolic'new towns and greenbelts And the romanticism
of ata almost pastornl human scale, are. seldom relevant, at the
Scale of our."growth. and have ill some cases become n kind
Of sentimental detrihrs that is 'clearly inhibiting the kind of
herd Sze le ht that the need.tO solve vast problems at n bold
new scale nithout abandoning the root, valuesof our
philosophy .. .
Cohnuntb18 And Reston Are ndmir•nhle examples of planning,
but tlicv fail to attack the urgencies of our time, whatever
their charm or success: Our remaining open space will er
Wallowed up in less than :i0 renis if ur attempt to meet the
drriuntds of oar cvolvin_ drmographv At their scale. Less
than 10 percent of our• rxistiu_ population can Alford such
developments and these people already have the economic
nnrmcle to fend for thrnisel•es.
A recent research Piper by }• Howard C. Gi aad Kenneth 0. Nilsen
of the firof Tipprtts-Abl>-tt-\feCnrthc-Srrtttan poses the question
of tchether mercer of the benefits of trill cl am illnsorv:
Indeed. dors much personal travel reflect It failure of our
life stvle And, therefore. invol•e a' misapplication of our re-
15
sources and our technology? Do ire move about at such u '
frenetic' 'pnee because w.e cannot comfortably reflect.
meditate. contemplate. or etrectiveiv con mitnic:ite otheriyise?
• • . It would appear that if, we plan for and strive to build
transportation facilities to accori niodate this hectic hither -in,
:iiid con-ing we maybe involved in a colossal misapplication
of resources.
These fire provocative thou,lrts that question some of our most com-
fortable nssumptions.:lnother• assumption (lint may be ripe for ierien
relates to the historic tile' placed on eliminating congestion to Incil-
itatc the movement of the individual in his pprivate (,chicle "Avoid -
line(, of delay' traditionally has been one of tltc paramount objectives
of hest pri priority.
n improvements. It continues todayy to enjov the
percent priorit}: In \ew York Cit}, officials point }vith ride to'a 30 -
percent lime saving in moving traffic along major arteries in
through' computerized traffic control. One jai of. the arteries
melt Queens
almost y of
an
tems'is � nj uponttlmt%ve of prori cruel n'1 junt} and TRW betlyeen points in u similar computerized network
reduction in
fic,sigrmis For ever), 1/15 of delay avoided 'the firm will frecerive 1/15
of the contract balance due. -Other cities attach the same;impoiinnce
to "ncoidance of delay" for tho peak period user of the private, vehicle.
Tw•o;questions.must be asked in all such'�rojectsc (1)
lAkM hornihl Mwtb in th number of tali, t a
i cancel out whatever h
How. o suuare sae --or dela th void q o
to.reduco overrall� ehicle travel'intscores of metropolitan atelia to
Com with Federal air quality standards q. oblecttve of trying
Obviously, if an}}• substantial number of daily commuters aro to he
induced to leave ttieir cars at Lome and to opt for;publie transit, a
significant 'ppart of the inducement under present conditions seems to
be some`cnlialated preference in time saving balanced in favor of
public transportation. Local ofrcials are actingaccordingly.
The use of exclusive lanes for buses and car is bby "rationing"
nyailnble'road spruce and ?,•iyiii,ee preference tohigh-occupancy vehicles
is one example. The Shirley'I[ighw'sy bus lane project is nn attempt
to transfer the time•snying benefit to commuters in high -occupancy
buses. So are similar exTerimcnts underw ny in Boston, New York, San
Francisco, Louisville. „cattle; and a number of other cities.` All claim
timo saving for the bus commuter at least during the period he actually
is Oil the public thoroughfare.
Closely related is the idea of peak period pricing or congestion pric-
ing. Motorists who, drive or park during certain peak gxriods, or in
highly congested livens are required to pit),
more for contributing to
the congCstron. Consistent with this
erately increasing ie trice of n I•day dor' tv in
rt 'as i ❑b on. ••tie :eco Management and Budget has cir-
culalerl a tnemorandum•to Federal a envies suggesting that ninny Fed-
oral employees be required to pay t�e equivalent of commercial park-
ing rates it, Government rnlrat w and lots. There is little doubt that
the Federal government's policy of granting free or low-cost parking,
unless restricted to car pool vehicles, encourages the use of the private
M
Hato. It is worth noting that the average vehicle entering the District
Of Columbia duriug.the morning peak period carries in average of 1.5
`icrsoras. Sixty. percent'of all autos carry only'one person. Would this
be the case if (lie government and many private employers were not, in
fact, subsidizing the. use of the private vehicle: Sonne are. asking re o the
Federal employee 1010 uses public transit is not entitled to'a subsidy
Of at least equal worth.
UI prograuns to save time (eliminate congestion) are successful',
only to the exteirt that some price is aid or some transfer or trade.olf
effected.'But as We enter an era in Ir iich;the highway.itself is becom
ing an'tobjtctof public opprobrium in'sotne of our big cities. it is im.
portanto remember that congestion isnot nen•. Serious congestion
preceded the massive Interstate and urban highway construction pro-
Wams which began on n large scale inthe late ]9:i(1's.
ff_'Nati the time the Interstate ro ivin was authorized in 1rJ58, the,
r—On a was deli o cram on motorvehrcles onto a total
rut, s stem desi ne to handle onl 'about a t n
o`ut su neat ur n g way rn any. o sl e
oma a ru a an of confor
As hitt HS , ie efitof in si t
c IV
through tho central biismess"d countngs,ki sucl8cities us Houstoti,�Dn]llited directly
St Louis, Indianapolis, ,planta aild � ilmingtan. If con estion is
abletthat con 0iuoon iu ghats today, pine caro only �ionder hor. insu(fer.
if nit be,'lrith some 118 million- 'autoniative ve-
liicles now on the road, were it not for the"circumfeiraitiplr otiveays
and expn urban.thoroughfaris which have been'consttucted.in the
past 15 years to expedite the flow of,through traffic mto and`aroun e
urban centeis,'often by-Pass ing,dowinto'wn business districts"
It can be ar�ired very persuasively that without:the hricU y'con-
struction the"'Notion` has niideiteken m` receiit'gesis that'ive''wiitild
todn} be Bogged down m urbair congestion of mi iinirtingivable'scnle.
Mie chronic trafficItie =ups that have developed in citits of iVestern
Europe and Jnpau. Where urban highlcay constructio'm o not kept
Pace with the grolrinp'rate of auto ownership, underscores this argu-
ment To singulnri blame the highway,Zirogram for downtown nuto-
motive cung<5tion is, like blaming hospitals for the continued'prev-
alence of disease.
e'oo-goi
sniand cong projects to reduce congestion represent obvious trade-
era con', %vitli safety. A fifth lane. has been added to sev-
eral I.os Angeles freea•nvs kv reducinrr the lridth of the existinkhines
from 1? to 11 feel and by
shoulders. entirely eliminating the left and right, side
Mile cxpmss buses using reversible lanes in such cities as Bo.gton
and \ens Tork overall appeair to have excelleitt snfety'rncorris,'them
buses 'to triivcl in'ininiedinte juxtaposition to oncoming cords, these
trary to the concept of the divided roadway that has become fiurdn.
in in the design of high-speed hia±hways and freclvays.
The indi0idnal historically has made its chance nmoiig nlnilnble
anodes,of prhiui trnnslinrtatimr lased on n iombinaii of factors tiarn
liiting to st eed: comf-
ort, coil and perceived economic costs.
The interpla}• of force: within the
auto to euierre free market haw
s alloed fie private
preeminent over all other modes.,Some claim this
1
emergence has been aided by a series of hidden subsidies rind transfers
and that perceived economic costs do not reflect true economic costs.
For the nnonnent these arguments are'irrelevnpt. 11'hat is relevant,
however. is that a, whole new series of considerations is beginning to
emerge. In this regard. it is inescapable that urban transportation
decismn-tusking. it& so much for the individual as for policy-making
agencies of rove'rnment. henceforth must grapple with energy and
environmentalfactors only now tieing brought to focus.
Tim B.,,ERGY.. QOESTION
The Subcommittee on. Flood Control and Internal Development
held hearing in August 1972 on the relationship of the Nation's energry-
upply and its internal development. The testimony otieied during
those hearings wits far from conclusive, but there is a consensus among
responsible agencies and observers that the Nation is faced with an
energy shortage of undetermined severity and duration: Some of the
scenarios projected for tfic future are not comforting. Predictions of
gasoline costing 75 and 80 cents a gallon are not uncommon and fuel
rationm and restrictions on some types of high -consumption vehicles
are openly discussed.
Arooent fiill=page newspappeer advertisement placed by the chairman
of the National petroleum Councips Committee on U.S. Energy Out.
look declared: "Energy costs are bound to rise. We lurvc exlmusted n
large share of our cheapest and most necessible enemy materials." For-
tuna ma��aazine headlined a September 1972 articho The Energy 'Joy
ride Is Over.
18
Against this backdrop, demand for petroleum products continues to
soar. More people are owninh cars, more miles are being driven, and
mileage.for the standard sire vehicle has'dro npcI into the range of
9 to 12 miles per gallon, the latter the result o� our aliinity for heavy,
high-powered autos, ail' conditioning and other power.denuwding
extras" and the federally mandated program to reduce vehicle emis-
sions. Without, ortside influences, the 1972 consumption of an esti-
mated 97 billion gallons of gasoline will climb to 131 billion gallons
by 1980. One ;veteran of covering the automobile industry from his
Detroit cartage point wrote in a recent issue of Autopioducts muga
zine:
If the auto industry hopes to survive and expand it must
concentrate on, either (1) finding a replacement for the fossil
fuel burning engine or (2) sharply reduce the rate of fossil
fuel consumption in an individual vehicle. But there is little
evidence' of headway toward either goal despite industry
claims to thocontrary. Earliest estimate for an alternate
Power source eating into production of internal combustion
engines is 15 years.
Ara interagency staff study has "conservative)yy"estimated that the
Nation's total energy consumption of 69'quadrillion m t edisjjthermal
imine in;19i1, will rise to 96, quadrillion B.t.u.'s by;1980,;a 39, percent
increase. By 1990,"energy consumption is expected to be'mo
double last year. re than
31WMPI
d ".
n consumes 25 percent of the total enerev mna� a
m eum accounts f
m nt in ortation` ca au
perpen
`ener ,trucks 1 pe acre
Enormous dnfteMnces exist in the energy "efficiency" of the various
thas Po°�a�imR malls. A research team at Carnegie-Mellon University
'.Iallcm Of gasoline if used in a double decker su-
hurliari'trninfcairproduce 200 Passenger" miles of.tMV61. One gallon
will Produce only, `22 passenger miles o£travel in a-747 jumbo jet or in
an automobile carrying less than • two; persons. Crenerally speaking,
airplanes arc less energy-efficient than sutoniobiles, and autos are m
turn less energy-efficient than buses and railroads for passenger move-
meat. Autos, for example, use abort three times as many. B.t.u: s of
enargy, licr passenger mile as regular trains.
Based on its predicted riders�nip, the Iiay Area Rapid Transit sys-
tem claims it. will.burn only 1130 B.t.u.'s to carry; one Passenger 1
mile, compared; with 18.610 B.tan.s for the average car cnrrvnng 1.3
°ecul'ants Considering all enemy requirements--station lighting, con-
trol and traction systems—BART says it will be four times as energy.
efficient as the automobile. Needless to say, BART's claims are con-
tingent upon achieving its predicted' ridership. Empty trains could
be the most ellwastefil of all.
Representanres of 11 Federal departments and nlmncie4 in October
1912 publicized the results Of'a study carried out. under the auspices
is
Of, the L.S. Office of Emergency
has received very little attentio,,Pre�aredtiess Strangely,tl
Conservation.' it. Entitled "The :Yotentilfor rE nergj
icy dwkel•s in the months�Id yeaisrimme 1 questions
rhe that will force poi-
1'hc growtlr in automobile consumption, and the; optimistic
septaplans for,qunntum, jomPs in air transportation, seem Italic•
ceptnble given present Concern over the environment, world'
fuel Inserves, and "Col"ir•ed U.S. depende
learn .... nce on foreign petro-
All examination of intercity and urban transportation
modal miles and the energy-efficiency of each of the tranepor
tation modes suggests that modest redirectionof interci
trimsportation pnttei•us would be feasible and helpful in lty
ow-
m•ingoverall energy demand.
I/nr�dner I.>aian trnneportotion is the prime candidate,101"
Odeon. (Emphasis by stair) A comparismt of two futures for,
trends, file of one based on the extrapolation of,currenf'
trends; the other bused on.:a steady but nonrevolutionaryl
shift toward more energy, efficient transportation modes,
ar ie
Y eats n possible energy savin�s;of 6,110 trillion B.t.n.as in the
Yet 2000, a 20 percent reduction:
CI Ire t vernment tic
bhs v I •s to rate t e ever in at least two
development o air an roblem, i arispol, it avors
pcefercntial policies' ,coati ue,�,'nnutomobiles ft t and
trucks a ill rrininnU their high rate of groicth.
4 Present environmental/national y
(11 +rouse Pollution tliroilgh emission Oustconssecols and (2) eosu-
serve fuel —qiC in irogflict,;Beliance on It
Scheme scheme ivhidi requires a fuel penalty estimated to lie iylpros-
imntel3' 15 percent can seriously"nggrn{,ate file]
nationalsecurity problems....reserve and
.
mother major factor contributing to the enormous growth
transportation fuel consumption •is attributable to the
tastes, habits, and aspir•ations'of the American Public. Forc-
host among those is an almost total disregard of ally prob-
lem posed by the rate of'energ3• consumption, As n conse-
quence, Americans tend to ignore any trade-ofrs behreen fuel
ciuisumption and sliced. cmiyenience, safety and comfort of
transportation. Therefore, tfie'trend toward more
lard r cars Wild Dion: cars per family has been persistent.
J(ortover, lolvayerail• powerful.
short trips, and disregard 'car occnpnnCT, use of cars fair mnn3.
then 11 • rnrd for congestion problems '11aye far-
„},uri•nted both lxlllutioa had fuel cansudrptioa
The stnd3' group i•ncoui•ages the' conservation' of fuel rnsoulres bI
Wun doubling up of cumlullfel� III ear pools• the installation of has Innes'
al other lnn�s transit facilities. limit fhcilities fm bici'clin�
wnikiu�•; nn,l eveli the enromyl(,enier]t of leisure-time activities close'
to home. Te achieve Ixhnviorrd chmi., and
lits in the _lmerienn puhlic'tile
bn-csa n-ra._.,
team urges consideration of it combination of incentives, such as tax
concessions, and penalties, such as higher taxes and user fees. St
acknowledges the massive educational and political faitors couconti-
tent in any such iesbapin of the Nation's travel babits.
There fire ;t number of imponderables in the energy, picture. Possi-
ble technological breakthroughs could make feasible tine broad exploi. -
tation of widely available oil-bearing shale or the gassilication of coal.
National polici- changes maN-serve to encourage exploration and de-
velopment of oft-shore and ocean floor', petroleum resources. Cheap
nuclear power maty, become widely available and adaptable for use in
motor vehicles• This is all conjectural.
Most informed opinion suggests a turbulent Reriod ahead, with bill-
ance of payments national security; and environmental factors all
operating to influence the soaring demand of the marketplace. So-
called "doomsday" forecasters generally underestimate the capacity
of the free market to stretch available supplyy. But even this isnot con-
solin .' A contraction of demand brought a"
g g b
.could mean a'contrachon of trough unless avnilalile fueler ] wefre utrices
ilized
in the most energy-eHncient modes of transportation.
Today, Americans trac 1 nn of n,mm f q rwur ti t
son r ear an private motor i ehtcl ymg on traditional estimat-
ing tools, t no eshmntes tae evel will rise to G,500 in in 1980
and 81000 in" 1990. Given thepparent dimensions of the energy prob-
lem, the Subcommittee investigators can only wonder.
Stall Investigators are convinced .that tine comPlexity of the task
facing the Congress; the States, and metropolitan areas in balancing
economic,' social, ;legal, and environmental factors in formulating
rational urban ttnnsportation policy is not fully comprehended. The
essence of the American dream-is that if `cceappply our minds and our
resources somehow ire can hate everything. Rut the here-and-now
world Produces harsh trade-offs.'-More and more the elected official is
placed r the position of rel ring to compromise one objective to achieve
governr and to neigh relative values. This is trite at all levels of
government.
One recent study showed thnt the removal of lead as it part of pol-
lution control can cause an increase of up to one million barrels per
day- in the Nations Petroleum needs by 1980. The question f hilt must. be
asked is hoc important is the removal of lead i' Or, from
make
view
how; important is the travel that 1 million barrels of fuel
ake possible 4
EN17nONME\TAL CONSM%1S1715
The national goal of reducin¢ airPollution is another section of the
maze that, must be traversed by, the committee Members in wkin_l
to arrive 'it a national urban transportation Policy that best serves
the Nation.'
n. motor vehicles ar held res onsiblefor about 00 er-
cent of nil nnr of anon. nr on monoxide is the singe antes con-
tammn;rt nn a WPI",—a.�..:..
anti about 58 "percent
rs with Ills-powered
:
of all carbon 1.
motor vehicles. ',
21
Although readings up to 500 parts per million have been reported,
average street level concentrations of carbon monoxide do not exceed
40--50. However,scientists are concerned about the effects of carbon
monoxide even nt these lower levels, especially on persons already in
poor health. CO is pcisonous because it is absorbed into the blood-
stream in preference to oxygen; posing h special problem for those
already afflicted with heart, respiratory; and other disorders.
A reduction in' carbon "monoxide levels is one of the major objec-
fives of the, pro�rnm announced by ,the Environmental Protection
AtGency in comphance`ur the1970 amendments to'the Federal Clean
Air Act. Other target pollutants are unburned hydrocarbons and nitro-
gta oxides, for which motor vehicles are held responsible; respectively,
for about one-half and one-third of thesesubstunces emitted into the
Nation's air.
Regulations published by the EPA will require automobiles to
achieve'a 90 percent reduction from 1970 emission rates of carbon
monoxide and hydrocarbons by 1975 and a 90 percent reduction of
nitrogen, oxides'' from 1971 emission rates by the 1970 model year. A
debate has raged since the standards were published as to whether
the automobile, industry should be, required to meet the,deadlines. The
AAs this report was "penalty" has been discussed:
ibility of n concomitant nt
fuel
ap u
already
( po g published. the Administrator of,'EPA
extended the 1975 deadline by 1 yearn Lesser interim standards were
set' for hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide emissions.)
In addition to programs aimed at dealing, with pollution at the
source—the vehicle itself-.States and cities have been required to sub=
mit plans to the EPA detailing their overall strategies to deal with air
pollution involving other methods of attack. Many of the tactics in-
eluded within these plans relate to transportation control and:redi-
rection. Thev include the 'encouravementof mass transitusage, the
creation of; revcrsible. lanes and express lanes to encourage bus'rider-
ship the imposition of 'downtown' parkinx restrictions on private
vehicles. sthe 'encouragement of car, pooling.` the staggering of work-
ing hours and even work days to reduce congestion, outright traffic
bans on some thoroughfares, emphasis ^-- regionn] planningg and land
use controls. and a variety of trn& floe improvements such as'ramp
metering and computerized signal control.
The California Air Resources Board has imposed •an admittedly
optimistic' goal of reducing vehicle usage by 20 ppercent in the Cali-
fornia South Coast .fir Basin (Los Anaeles and vicinity);by 1975.
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency recently
proposed gasoline rationing for the same air basin. R'ashington, D.C.
is scrkin,&a 25 percent induction in private vehicular commuting. EPA
reports thnt 37 American cities may have to curtail auto travel to
achieve federalh• mmndnted ambient air quality standards.
The U.S. Office of Science and 'Technologv; has calculated that 65
percent of till registered 'U.S. motor vehicles lire loented in metro-
politnn nrens considered' under one set of criteria to have "unaccept•
nhle" levels of air pollution. Fourteen States and the District of
Columbia' have vehicular densities so great thndthe entire State falls
in such a category
The Air PollutionPrubtem. Smo'han •• 1
on a day described to subcommittee investigators stigatorsras be n°� Los Angeles
average.', g "clearer than
\nowhere has the staff encountered any measure of optimism'that
the Contemplated plans still accomplish what they hope to accomplish.
There is an underlying questioll of Tcbat,jveight the public gives to
cleaner air if.it mu t be Achieved at the expense of individual mobility;
and convenience. 117iat will be, the staying power of air. pollution; as
an issue ill the 'absence of incontrovertible scientific evidence, Ander
stnndnble to the layman. that ]inks its effects on human healtli, longev-'
itt', ai d licredlty ?viva if this evidence should be forthcoming-und
some medical experts'arc Tcai•Iting today, about damage being inflicted
on pinlit and anirilal organisms m an' Insidious, nontraumatic wnv—
what will the public lie willing to forego to achieve cleaner air?
'MlM Los _Ugeles; attempted a publicized "Share n Ride" day on
the city's freeways on October 6, 1971; the public responded with
classical indifference.'. Vehicle'occupaney rates were virtually un-
cllnnged and three special bus lines set up especihll}}' for the creat car-
ried n total of seyem passengers. The day was billed as "Operation
Oxygen's
It is Also relevant to point. out. that Americans continue to smoke
cigarettes in record quantities desppite the duh• communicated'icnrn-
ings of the surgeon general aboutthe rinncrer tlicy constitute to human
health.
PROCRAir FLEXIBILITY
The redernl Tfi rhwn}• :Administration in rnrlc 1911 surveyed the
]highwn}' mmmnnitc ns to what the next. In pears would bring in
trnnsnortntiml development• The replies ,were synthesize I by the
FHii .1 And a picture for the 197o's emerged.
23
In Che opinion of those polled, "the toughest problems aro expected
ve center of urban areas, becoming worse as population and In, of
vehicles continue to grow,"
Another consensusview was "the immediate short-range ap-
proach appears to be a combination of the best
rate automobiles on surface streets and freeways; and, ivheiti
uses of buses and pri-
tion density warrants it, rail transit in subways or, within freeway
right-of-w•uys." reewa -
Third, the highway officials predicted "increasin
the concept of integration of all modes—hi he a g interest, in
tet`mto unified local, State and national transportationy' rail' air and wa-
The investigation by the subcommittee staff tot}i date c fiemmys the
need for the application of various expedients—as suggested by the
surrey—to improve urban transportation overthe:short range. But
flus is in no way intended to minimize the need, for long.
tional planning and goal setting. It would mage na-
be folly to wait for
breakdowns to occur in'urban transportation before addressing
If . the fundamental issues that will have to be add
But while the Congress B some
irioritie can state broad nationald
t s -sometimes ni conflict with one lecti�' and
the States and local communities th'emselve�s'amo h the te,appeais'; that
ripply relative 4 aloes to the objectifies roves are The _ position to
tlio best position to create the ectiris 1 y s i?esr to be in
grams required in•the real world: ,.; � modal and �sud usaipro-
T'lie investigation so far has made the staff aware of the pitfalls m
hereat in any -approach that is too'doctrinair1 or ri Id.
portntion "solutions" and "remedies" must be care IIrbnn trans.
.
they turn out'not to be solutions and remedies at re 11 few examples
may serve to•illusti ate fully app xa-)' ]est
this point:
Ca
pooling while apparently successful in 1Yashtngion, D.C., in
achievingg n higher occupancy rate in vehicles nn�
The Federal biiildmgs, could 6e counterproductive id'Ke y ` certain
orkremilhtf any campaign' to' encourage car" ork City.
g be to entity individuals out of higher I ui.l1*ew
buses, commuter and subway trains. 8 1, Upancy
—Staggered work hours is the only way some high density me111 tro-
areas can cope with the large numbers of people who
inelalready ctor'. gGeo on parking garages, subway stations and build-
ing elevators: l3utstnggeirnrcdl work hours also lessen the economic
incentive of bus companies to run express buses that depend on
hourspads alsotmketit difficult a sschedi led et utimes: end on
great number of work hours already Piave lie onols. d rk
itdio ally tit"
olliicial involvement or public fanfare, 7n make n mu or imlmc0 :30(
wnrl, hours must Ix, st
scrod to i
nn later than tl 30 a. and there is
ncrall
worker resistance to . i . • ay staggered workweek holdsteven
nioro potential from n traffic standpoint, but the disadvantages
aromany.
— r' • ereasm the cost of don'nt
he number of a -day parcis in t ie CBD, but t may also mesa t
24
in more-Iviv vino thpir M el .7
rather thin n duan the number of avorl -oriented tri n,
—' e< or, to en arcs or cu•cu atm
reduce uses on city streets ma} not
of igili'tr c to um� ata 'lt%
free bus service on an ecperimenbi] bis yid they aTs in iomefoun* the
increased number of riders was mainh' people who used to walk
t' work. Vehicle congestion persisted:
—Limiting access of private cars to the CBD, or to certain streets
in the CBD, without provision of an eqqua11 fast and convenient
substitute mode ma acre eratn' the exodus of commercial
s to the su nr m;, d public policy be to encourage eve op-
ment of a g ensity CBD} -or to encourage a`dispersal into
suburbs and satellite towns? Should there be a uniform national
policy or should it be left to each metropolitan area to determine
what it wants to becomo P
—Rai] rapW transit is indispensible for A'ew York City,' where
almost 2 million people go t work daily in Miltown and Down-
townManhattan alone. But rail transit is a questionable solution
to Lae Angeles' commuter needs, where fewer than 300,000 are
employed in'the CBD.
Rarl:espid transit systems. have been faced with cost -revenues
squeasaa that take erent,forma indifferent cities The,Chicxgo,
system' news to im, prove its; iiderehip hi density to improve ita'op_., -{
erating ratiol Boston has high ridersbut, would ser+m,t need
to reduce its; oppeerating,coakw, o
at. ram box revenues can defay.tnaneit onarai ntereo
not Mn!cutarty where deprecl on arias are mvo v is
,r-
u.Mr puuran areas oe.suppotted ro n
common source,, or should, variety: of. revenue:sourcev be e:- I'
pinrtedi a , is curnently the cava P1;
Who>e to;say'that the 1 1 uee of State gas hz funds in at least {`
four, Statag t construct bicycle patiis,'snd tax-sapported'bibyclo
projects that are:underway m'a;nunlber'of'citi*' 'is not the cutting
edge of a' movement; that eventually will have,more impact on
ameliorating rusk- dur congestion than many conventional meth-
odsP Washin�ton, D.C.; claims 0,000'daily ;bieycle commntrs.
Chicago which has added '59'miles of on -street bike routes, re-
corded a
1 -year perilriod.i percent increase in bicyclesentering the CBD. over a
The DOTS 1972 National Highway Needs Report declares: :`•
Urban transportation in particular is extremely complex,
and proper, resolution of a'particular.'city's problems can
only be based on detailed information on local conditions and
tho nocessary decisions can only be made by State and local
officials who know and reflect local priorities and values ... > t.
Only, by, the proper combination of highways,and transit;'
in can we hopo'to'make 'progress'
tion. Such!pmgress can only be obenefit t transit and auto 1
users alike, for the better working of the urban transports -
tion system will be a boon to all the users of. that system,
regardless of the mode thev use.
d
OT
Li like vein, a,196
9 report by the Bay Area Transportation Study
Commission concluded:
There is no single urban transportation problem. There aro
it Wide Variety of problems, each of which is likely to require
n tailor-mride solution to satisfy the particularchameteristics:
;AND -A t stty. aY,
'b�,
Ali, f .
f
Utiluotiongnwdsawrway
"formpidtranaitinChicago'sDan$ an Ea�
is one form of modal harmony that most planners agree must charaderrizee
urban trans eforts in years ahead
Urging the consolidation of metropolitan area decision-making so
that a wide variety of options can be weighed, .Jack Kinstlinger of the
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation made a similar point:
Because of the rapid change of human values and environ.
mental concerns, it is;beaommg increasingly difficult to pro.
ride adequate levels of transportation service in urban com-
munities solely, b • �
}, } const new: fiacihties. The range of
options and approaches must be broadened even to include
economic and,landdevelopment policies and programs to
alter or reduce eXcessive travel demands. T.ow capital invest-
tnent alternatives must be given full consideration.
'Phew ,cirpoints are not unique. The staff analysis to date suggests
(1) the wisdom of providing mechanisms whereby the Problems of
each metropolitan area can he examined within the area s goals and
vahies, (3) the need to abandon the concept of the city per se and to
26
approachurban transportation more fro
Po 'tan region, and (3) the meed to develomt the
onal.3Point unit a I o o
lir'
possible dispersal of Am
ericnns away from certain nretropolitan arIr t c
rata smaller communities that are"
Recojnitio» of the ren economically and culturally viable
is not nen; 1'hc Federal -Aid Hi >},rweaalvxle approach to transportation'
in
9ulrcment for Federal•aid'high av y `pct of 162 introduced the re
or more to be based on «a continui grol m�rehurban areas of 50,000
Planning • process 'carried on cooperative) �r a transportation
communities' y b9' States and local
clared The Advisory Commissioningrran In
Relations has de.
appropriateness Planning ng� wider rtation facilities ranks third in
related to the n consideration, Wert only to Programs
Regional au ties throughou
t dair.
construction of new or ex and the country are involved in the
Pro"Ments, the support of bus ttrransil',transit systems; highway im
and land use 00% and dozens of of y the determination of parkin
Proghms.:s:M'hila.tlieir her urban transportation- g
lining mu^��v{�_i�tually all 'A/ fewerreePrns�eiitati{ a is
arerespothe lMetmo.,.i
a), ,
Ali- all .
-• •��� oropmeon about - 1nero may be a strong
The coordinated y required actions.
needy is pproach to State (and urban transportation
acted in a creation of at least ?0 State departments of
Turns rtation—reasonable counterparts`to the II.S:' Department of
Portation, Other States are cape ted to create such departments
in upcoming legislative sessions.
Regionalization and localization is not without its pitfalls.' Some
planners warn that c°rruption and parochial interests aro more apt
to' prevail at the local level. Several States in their contributions to the
1972'Iiin)) Needs'Ruport expressed concern about the "fragq-
mentation and lack of statewide coordination inherent in the snb-
a ention of urban transportation funds directly to municipalities, This
apprehension' way voiced to subcommittee investigators as wall. At
the same time, officials. of: both New York City and Los *01
strongly urged that Federal TOPIC$ (Tra16c Operations os A rale
Increase Capacity and Safety) funds flow,;dircatly to their jurisdic-
tions, eliminating the delay, expense, and
with required State a Paperwork commensurate
now Federal -aid highway
Wbntever position may be state
wa y Bina
g n n
act
agreement with it, y , there is going to be a great deal of dis
The DOT's 1972 National Trans
of whnt'would happen in portation Report includes a survey
35 of the Nation's largest urbanized areas by
2T.
1090'if they were given more flexibility in making capital investments
inurban transportation. This was the concept underlying the admin-
istration's proposal in the 92d Congress to replace categorical, mode -
rebated grants with a 'single urban fund. The 'survey showed there
would bo some major. changes from 'city ,to city in the period to 1990,
demonstrating that cities are inclined to take advantage of any flexi;
bility they may be granted.
New -York City, would reduce projected highway -related capital
improvements by 18 percent and increase its transit expendituree.34
percent. Los Angeles, on the other hand, would maintain its same
highway program and reduce its urban public transportation pro -
grain 4 percent.
Two other urbanized areas of comparable size—San Francisco and,
Detroit --show San Francisco would cut its highwayy pprogram 21,ber-,
cent and increase its transit program 127 percent, while Detroit would ,
increase its highway program 4 percent and reduce its transit program
14 percent.
Among the 35 areas --all projected to have a population of at least
one million' by,1990-highway-related investments would drop.5, per-
cent and urban transit investments would increase 18
_. .. . perceat:_This >e ...:
passable because base urban highway, investment wds projected to 1990
at a',much higher level than urban' -transit -475.4 billiontoompated
with $24 billion.:Tota1'ocurall OWL 75.4
by
no mora than 2 percent, based on State estimates, if categorical grants
were replaced by a single urban fund.
T1uNarr-Amo CompmusoNs
The staff has sought to focus on the relative dollar costs, to the user
and to
ociet various o
of the yaous m f urban transportation: This field
of research is very sparse,Most of what has been attempted in the'
represents the rather superficiil efforts of the advocates of one mode or
disagreement to ca tits mode m the bestpp��ss��'ble light. There is widespread
(; to rhatcosts and benefits 'should be included in any
such comparison and how, they, should be weighted.
-Should depreciation of the'origmal capital investment be eon-
sidered in determining operating costs for mass transit systems?
I f so, over what period of time? How should brand new systems be
compared, with 40- or, 50 -year-old fully depreciated systems?
Should land lost to taaataon by rail transit or. highway right-of-
ivnys be considered a chargeable cost against that mode l
—11'hat is the comparison of rail transit lines and freeways in stim-
"hiting economic development along their routes?
—Hou- significant is tax revenues, from. nonhighway soureea in
supporting the ,highway program? Some research suggests that
for every dollar spent by the motorist, another 30 cents is pro-
vided in public subsidies in his behalf.
What hidden snbsidies exist beyond the direct support now beim
ottered'to'thass transit systems in dozens of cities? As mentioned
earlier. a staff extrapolation shows the average fare of 30 'cents
in 1971 was subsidized by about 8 cents of State and local revenues.
These are only n few of the questions to be answered, and some
research' is underway to attempt to produce meaningful data. Even
`�
28
where reasonablv "hard" data now exist, how lire they to he applied
from one commcinity to another?:
The FederalHighway Administration, for example, has calculated
the cost ofowning and operating a standard -size automobile based
in a majorlsuburban area to be 13.6 cents a mile:' Figured into this
computution is an average of $54 a year for parking away from home.
But commuters into downtown Washington can pay $54 for parking
for a singlo month, suggesting the 13.6-cent figure can easily be ex-
ceeded in largro metropolitan centers:
A study of the new Lindenwold Hi-Speed Line, a14.2-mile subur-
ban electric' railway connecting Philadelphia with suburbs across the
Delaware River in New Jersey, is a classical case of available data
supporting almost any Preconceived viewpoint: Built by the Dela -
ware River Port Authority and operated by a DRP A subsidiary, the
line carries upwards of 40,000 passengers a day. The American auto-
mobile Association notes that the average rider in 1970 paid 48 cents
for a ride that was "actually costing $1.30, including depreciation, to
f�rovide.'Motorists paying tolls on the Walt Whitman and Ben Frank-
Iin Bridges -were, in fact, subsidizing the train. rider to the sum of 82
cents W ride. A spokesman for the allitharity points out, however, that
the: rail line was handling the equivalent'of three lanes of traffic during
the rush-hone periodilanes that-otherwise would"have'requited the
building of`anather bridge. The Hi-Sped'Bail Line cad $!>)4 million
to build,''&' neva bridge would cost an &iimafed fj100 millionC `(As this
report was being written officials of the Lindenw•old.reported the line
had operated in theS black in 1972, collecting almost $700,000 more
in fares from its riders than it spent to rate the lino—not includ-
1. ing amortization for the expenso of buil the system.)
Th of of whether the Lindenwold has reduced vehicle
con gestion'oii oxisting' bridges is'di�deed; the stag has found
a _ netance on tha'part of oi$ciahl with'ptojects`of all de-
scription, involving all modes; to'ma "laysigiiificant claim about re-
duced traf ii cona�ttiion es a benefit•'of'such Qro'� The increase in
the number of ie 'cles,' drivers,'commutin'g ifs ces and miles trav-
eled in metropolitan areas, pparticularly' during periods of economic
s _ prosperity' appear' inexoral override any congestion benefit—
often in a very short period of time- Less it appearthe value of express
bus operations,' reversible.lanos, and oilier prolecte; to better utilize
highway'space and achieve higher rates of vehicle occupant �- is being
questioned, the staff :would speculate that rush-hour coni)!, on along
some arteries would now.be intolerable without these innova tions. And
existing public transportation, despite its many shortan.nings, does
keep millions of Americans off thestreete
The fli hwav'Users Federation for Ssfety and'\fobility, on the
basis o sums bucilgetea for fiscal 1972, has; calculated Hilat Ene r ec eral
fnr
,ocerumen s ac
enc i m irtrnnsittrip. ie mires are rived by dividing the total
num .r o >e. 244 billion by auto. G.1 billion by:public trnu-
sit, by the amount o money bull, ted'in each category: This totnled
$5 billion for highway, $G06 million for public transportation.
29
A_ study of this ty
average trop lenpe is of limited value. It fails to ,factor in
gth, (3.7 miles for auto, 13.7 miles for commuter rail,
6:} for rapid,rail, :1 for buses), and'also fails to consider ,time -of -lay j
and destination information. As mentioned earlier; public transit trips
are highly concentrated, with 20 to 25 percent of all commuter,trauu
and �15 to 20 percent `of rapid rail trips occurring -during 1 -hour
penperiods in the morning and again in the afternoon;,On]y 8 to 10
percent of all iauto travel occurs during each 1 -hour peak period.
went tof`all Lull -
versus tri are CBD oriented,
versus 3 to rcent o auto tri :'In many ci res r ere were no
pu is transit tiring peri t ere would have to be a substantial
Investment in highway capacity ;to hold congestion to manageable
levels. It its doubtful that some major cities currently could function
for long without public transit. A recent strike on the Ung Island
Railroad, while affecting'only a fraction of the commuters that travel
into New York City, is known to have created one-way travel times of
2 t 3 hours for some reddents of Long Island who as a'result had to
travel by auto or bus or a combination of both.
The capital costs of uew rail systems should not be underestimated.
The:Washington bfE 1 RO system will cost'an'estimated $3 billion be
fore,itis completed, and San Francisco's:BART,$1A billion''A'atudy
made by Alnn, Voorhees Associates ns part of a contract with'the ,
Urban"%foss Transportation `Administration produced'' r'ca'}ta
cost of $913 for all residents of the?Washin n metrop
(based on 1960'. population). to`construct.,the gnew ME1RO�syatem,
Residents of the. San Francisrn.Oakland area will pay.$l31 each for
their BART
or: 'Vo ghees,bus estimates of per ca__pputa capital costs of other proposed rail
systems included Seettlel'17871 Baltimore, 7; Minna
apolis-St Paul,'$623; Honolulu, '$}76;' Athuita, $467;,Pittsburgh,
$322, and Los Angeles-fxing Beach, $265.
A DOT in-house review of bus and rail rah}d transit systemsOffice
Of Systems Analysis and `Information, Davis d Weiner), estimates it
costs $37,000 to $.15,000 to ppnrchnse a'bus used for local service; about
MOM more for bnses'hsed:in express or exclusive'bus systems, and
$22,x,000 for a rapid rail car. Qpprg}j�� 5 am pstimx/.vi
ter mile for the local br 85 �ronrs co r ror the bus a t f,3 cents
system,'an 1.21 or t e rapr rat car, ig t -o -way and line con-
struction costs can vary,pridely.
The number of passengers each system can carry per hour ranges
from -1,000 to 8,(x10 for local buses, 18,000 to :r1,00t1 for nonstop express
buses, and 72,000 for rapid rail trains makint 00
believe the levels Of passengerSIOPmovement cited in theoDOT brerierrs
rnnv he difficult to achieve orsustain in real-world Operations.
While seeking to goantify the costs of the vnrions bus and rail sys-
tems, the, authors conclude with. essentially the same obserrntionmade
earlier in this report: i°IAowerer, the decision to implement a new
transportation s}stem involres more'than these quantifiable indicators.
It also invokes reviewing the goals and objectives sought each
community.fl'
Tire Himnvw Trsesr Fess
Urban transportation plan
rers are in general agreement tbat rari-
ous investment alternatives should be given full consideration i t rani
Ing With urban transportation needs. Additional freeway capacitydeal
and
better jectic control may be among the vital needs of a community.
But objectives such as reducing sir pollution' and noise, meeting the
travel needs of the handicapped, the elderly and other disadvantaged
develop who do' not inn automobiles' and controlling lend use and
development may.be equally important objectives. In this res
staggerin of work hours pest, the`
gg
vehicles,' the imposition of Preferential
axes treatment for high occupancy
merit or expansion of public transit and s, evug fees, the improve_
deficit -plagued systems, may be more germs even the subsidizing. of
construction. The question then appropriate in than new
Federal 'Go vernment pnrticipate irbirnucl�i'atb wl'at extent should the
and on irhat tiasis should Federal aid be road rangeof
A fundamengrant tal issue to grantedq PiOb'mms
rains)be highways
.is the validity of categorical
a C?Mmunityla nee Tether for be hwar�s' ma smp� r Whatever, when?
a community's needs ma , g } ass transit o
y be au dive Should there be
ta single; he,' dmi 1. fund, a'aingle urban fund as proposed in a be
r the •tdaunistration, or. should urban t Pottation, fled in 1 all
Por4tion needs.be,funded anew from general revenues e
session of; the Congress q Is it, appropriate for. revenues accumulated
In the Highwa Y each
IIrban areas Trust Eund fo.be used for a variety of Pur' q
merit throe 1, generally do not believe they are gettin �wecs
g Present highway g fai treat
cal rant.pro rsms.,Astatementapporrt'ri
d sin j tbormnlea and cat
of Citieq, U, 'Conference of bfa o 7 Y U+e_National League
�et23' 972 appealing and RailRay� T'�19rt `�s intron,
planed « ' ppealing to the Congress fort Instituto on
fact tha Stany,of the public transportat5on tope `ti°gaid,com-
make beti' eeXn cam d•local.governmenta have not had real Choi to
The National
competing modes.2) .. "ces
billion in, highee�a�1e of Cities, points out that an estimated $18
overnrnenL Y.han Cases was collected in 1971these; by all modes of
srnco more Oran half of alllvehicle miles traveled
in urban areas,
and highR•aysystems. veled are on urban street
"At tho'Fodoral loves, there
'exists a bettor then 2 to 1 differential
favoring. nonurban a
Off theInterstnleIli •hRa�ln allocating highway assistance for
Highway System, the I.eajnrc declared in a 1971 edii. 1
Cities in. itsutes
,
\*ntinn's Cities "Since the;19(18'Congrccs of
Cities, NIX'S municipal Policy has warners that local otficinls
will not qu tiiruo support for the Iiighrta}' Trust Fetid ural
noir. adequate financing is proi•irled for urban systems. I'oda •, '
dition to finruicing problems serernl other factors n' mach
wil imPortnnce which'demnnd ei revica-of 3. in efts -
will require not osis that a are gainese ing me tors
Y „rent deal more Stateand rFederal money
t>c spent ou impe'oving eee'ball Irnnspxrihuion s}stems• but also that
;I
31
local officials be riven much greater control and discretion in develop-
ing the inixes of transportation systems most appropriate to serve their
needs."
IVilliana .I. Ronan. chairman of the New York Metropolitan Transit
Authority and President of the Institute for Rapid Transit, points out
that in 1970 Americans spent $94 billion on motor vehicles and another
$21 billion on streets and, highways. Expenditures for mass transit
amounted to about 3percent of that amount nationally. Basing much
of his appeal for a, large -wale step-up in Federal support of mass
transit on the air pollution hazard of the automobile, Ronan said in n
1972 Speech: "Clearly, we must better control the motor vehicle, and
provide ndequate mass transportation alternatives to our cities, if they
aro not to become immobilized or drown in their own pollution.'! Ronan
maintains the stakes go "much beyond the provisions of a service to
the rider. The whole community, region and the Nation benefits from
these facilities—and; rightfully", should share in some of the costs."
His last point is a fundamental one, for it relates to what is perhaps
the .thorniest question :facing ;the subcommittee ,Members and the
Congress.
Do the best interests of,the motorist who,'pays gasoline and other
user taxes into the trust fund lie solely with the,use of that fund for
hi�he ny construction and safety.4In the broad context in which the
citizen ',lnust judge his 'orerall welfare can it 6*y.be said that the
highway user avonld be better, served by. the application6fatleast it
share of those moneys to'other urban transppoortation uses? To what
extent could those who hate waited ',patient ly9Jfor, safer and modern
highways in,areas that badly need. them object to the use of road
user taxes to support. transit systems that directly may serve only a
relatively small number of urban dwellers?
First;,it is necessary" to ask, whoiis the highway usorf.,1;'ho con-
tributes the more than $5.�_billion annually that accumulates in the
trust fund?
LOOM. 79.6 of, all households in the United States owned at least
one automobile. These households were direct contributors through
the lasses they paid on motor fuel, oil, tares, and other items.'
At the same tine, the :American'Trucking Associations claims that
trucks account for 35 percent of total road use taxes. These taxes be-
come part of the, operating,expenses of it trucking firm, an ;expense
that ultimately must be reflected in the purchase price of any goods
delivered by truck. ha this sense; these taxes aro passed on to the public.
Virtually all Aniericuns consume goods transported by truck and are.
indirectly at least. contributing to the Ifighway,Trust Fund just its
they'tire sharing in the benefits in goods made possible by
ths transport
e fiord:
Also to be considered are ,the air pollution and environmental dis-
ruption that atfpct nonowners as will ❑s owners of automobiles. The
oavnpt•.nuty be willing. even,en'ger, to accepttbese indirect nonquanti-
fiablesoeinl costs for the convenience and pplensure afforded him he his
private auto. Bnt'these detrinients are being i
m iosed on the he non-
nwnpr acnhout nnv direct Lrnptit in return.t•nder these circumstances,
is
32
it could be argued that any re derived from the operation of
the motor vehicle might be earmarked to ameliorate damages being
inflicted on others. One approach might, be to provide mass trans¢
facilities in the hope that large numbers of motorists would be hired
or ovetrcoereed from their automobile&'Another might be to provide
a highway system with the capacity, and traffic control techniques that
permitted'frecu•ity and city str�cr trntlic to move freely and mini-
muted Pollution -re lated stops;and starts.''
The issues ill"oh•cd are not only o
11re historic preferennes of economic self interest and
ce of the urban traveler. They are philosophical
and moral its well, rind intertwined with fundamental questions of
what a democratic society ivnnts for itself.
It can be forcefully argued that the creation of fho Highway Trust iy
Fund in 1aJ56 represented a commitment made to the Nation—it com-
mitment. that is not yet fulfilled. The Interstate System isnot pro-
jected for completion until the end of this decade. 4,n untold number
Of rural citizens who have contributed tax dollars into the trust fund
are still With
out'hard surface roads past their homes; and far removed
from ligg. ways`of Interstate'quali
Accordin t
g to tho Department ofrtStpn estimated $2!)4
billion in'rurnl highway ands eXist now or, will exist by 1'990. The
focus of'attention on urban transpa ttion conditions' should not be
to a
permitted to overshadow other cl 104 ea of trianWrtation;needs or
izaton edrze long -rang° national o^oals of regional economic rovital-
or, population redistribution, Neither ahould,the:transpiiAj-
for problem' b' viewed as one.of moving only people rucks account 1'
tiia
n°>jel4,pereettt of ell'nrb°n vehicle milee, 2S`peeceut'of "nl6 rural
b'G Goods movement retrains n vital consideration. ;r
A moral ar�rrment hes been persistently raised in the Congress that �
the inviolability of the trust fun for highway pu u
of keepung, faith with' the taxa MOWS, is a matter L
fund. Some members have expre&,c a� moeloffense a�enues'comp iselthe
moneys as they feel, toward diverting $orial Security revenues for '.t
other purposes than payer -related beiuefita
,i Mobil At the same time; 6oices are heard in the advoca-ev of change. The 1pt
"Let's Etnd tl Co
he Hi to wecola in a series of newspaper ads entitled, i3
one of imbalance,' hwa (Trust Rid, that "the problem,, lnrgcly
h y baildinw has dominated Federal
transportation policy."Henry Ford II'has urged di6ersion of trust "a
fund revenues for mass transit research'"and development.
Since the integrity -of the Highway:Tnist Fund is so cleaarly a innlier
of Conscience torso many, the staff would
Hero use oe ti t
f fha fund may be resolvable only ctrl (tree anin 'd ���nropose "
in which the Congress asic TT 1 `
of the economic, environment 1, RI sincialrmalities fof tiutheum9df19in 70ha
The underlying question is not what is the law, but whether that law
should be changed.
What, are the \,ation's urban public transportation needs, and what n
impact could trust fund revenues hnvc in meeting them? '
33
The, I)01' projects urban public transportation capital needs in the
period 197Q-11!)0 to lx (t3.-1 billion, about So percent for rail'trnnsit.
The estimetc isbased lu•geh on existing plans in ]argue• mbnniri•d
areas and on rough calculation; for smaller ones. At the same time it
is estimate another ma hilhem will be needed to complete the Itit,
stile System niud bis l billion for all `other highn'ny needs. Aboat'42
ell -
percent of the 1560 billion is projected for use m urban arras. Another
$9.9 billion will be required by
urban areas such as TOPIC1990 for Lighdny related projects in
S and: parking impmbemcnts. 11'hile
possible constraints could develop out of ener,%, enviroiiiiuntal, fund-
Ing.'mud land use corlsiderations,'total,"candidate projects" to 19.9t)_
fund.,
highway and mass transit =amenuit to $665 billion.
The Highway Trust Fund, projected aheadat the prment tato
and on the same taxable items, can be expected to generate:revenues
of $130, billion' if continued over the same period. Clearly; ho trust
investment. sty fund does not emerge as an adequate source for all arch transportation
tires of hi hwae saf needed highway construction and the impera-
c Y ett amid exute a vehicle numbers themselves
could, Ue considered to constitute a strong claim on forraeeable
revenues.
It'isa point Of,honest debate, however, as to �phether•future trans-
port.atiem needs'ere likely to develop at the same rate"and scale the
Past. The DOT declares in its 1912 transportation'repott< .
To extrapolate investment needs mechanically on.the basis
of projected trdk levels would be to tie the Nation to past
solutions for'nocommadatneg traffic growth and to underplay
the dynamic,feetlbsek of transportation services on the lis-
Soluntion of population y economic activity, and land, use Past
sohutuons are
not necessarily, right for the future.
Similarly, the Fall Street. Journal' declared in a D
editorial, in which"it advocated diversion farch 17, 1972,
of trust fimdtrovonuee•
"Dfany Americans with no strong emotional commitment either for
or agninst•the' automobile obviously sense that its future role cannot
be the Same as in the past unless, we are.willing to submerge cannot
raft, of`testhetic'and economic ,considerations to an ever-expanding' t
horde of curs" The, editorial added that since clwngiug:,a complex
transportation infrastructure takes mnny years, the role of the
automobile in years hence has to be a very real rnnsidcuntion'todny:
Statistics show thgbulk of motor vehicles I'm registered in metro-
politan areas and more than 51 percent of all vehicle miles are driven
on nrbiur roads.,The stair iniest1gatous have. sought to collectdata'mu
revenues paid into the T ighnay Trust Fund by such metropolitan
areas find hu turn allocated to them. Records are not. kept ire the Fed
era) lfighe•uy Adininistration on thil.bnsis.
What is available is at tabulatioui on dollars paid into the fiord State.
bvState, along with a bn•akdown of apportumuui'nts toren thr fiuiui]
since it was created in 105n:''1'he tnUle shon•s States receiving the hrrg-
est n.hu'u for dollar contributed to be Alaska. !t.!0: I)iatu ret ref Co-
lnnihm. 11'coming. �S.Ut: lelnho, $21.97 • 1•ernuint. N4.80: \lin-
34
tuna, $3.61; Nevada. $3.1S; [,(all', $3.15: and Kest Virginia $3.11. The
10%%*6t apportionmentsPer dollar contributed tire Ihose foi- NollIt ell •-
olina $0.53: Florida. $0.68; Wisconsin. $O i -: Texas, $0.79 , South
Carolina. $0'.19 New Jersey, $0.82. Oklahoma. $0.83; Indiana; $0.83;
and California;.SO.84.
Khat these ligures demonstrate is open to interpretation. One con -
elusion )'light he that the trust fund is viewed its it method of redistri-
buting highway -related income, maintaining integrity as to modal use
bill not necessarily as to geographic distribution. Early empphasis was
Oil intercity hugtum•av construction. e.g., the Interstate hig iwa • pro-
gram. its (ho Nation's population has been migrating to urban areas
and the bulk of motor vehicle travel swinging from rural to urban
and suburban roadways, dollar emphasis in federally assisted high-
ways has heat shifting toward urban construction.
There can be no uestioning of the need for a net of primary
roads, including the Interstate Systetn.A priority status for highway-
buildin ,has been consistent, with national values and objectives that
have been in ttto ascendancy throughout the post World War iI period.
An official of the then Bureau of Public Roads wrote in it 'May 1969
issue of the American Road Builder:
The basic reason for linking Federal highway use revenues
+ and Federal aid "expenditures %x -as it simple, one. The Nu- !
tion's commerce had grown much more rapidly than highway
capacity, Commerce was strangling; better highways were
needed; more money was needed to-Orovide'thern and this
change in philosophy (creation of the Trust Fund) was a
natural 'outcome.
There is Verylittle factual information that the 'staff can. add .to
the debate over use of the IIigh}ray Trust Fund for urban transporta-
tion other than highway construction, safety, and'certain'spectally
designated purposes written into'the law in recent years. 7'he latter
include, the action of the Congress in 1970 establishing Federal funding
for projects fortheconstructionofexclusiveorpreferentialbuslanes,
hi��h�vay traffic control devices. bus passenger;loading areas and fa-
cilities, including` shelters: and fringe and trenspoutationlwrridor
parking facilities to serve'bus and other public mass transportation
passengc+rs 77
The basici issue is really to what extent and in what direction the
Congress at,,this time wishes to influence the course of urban't•uuus-
portahon development. Diversion of Highway Trust Fund moneys to
urban transit or other urban transportation uses would appear to ), ave
more symbolic than real meaning—giren the staggering dimensions
of all funding that may iltimately be needed. The impact of wise ex-
pmditures. hoa evor, cannot be minimized. 'r i
It is conjectural'as to how much argument a majorpolicy change
would encounter from the average citizen-highwayuser.,bilferent ref-
erenda. polls and :samplings seem to Yield different results. The staff
canonly'womler how fully the public really understands the under-
lying issues and trade-ofl's that are" invohrd.
TICUT
' rHNAINU
Sticker on the wind+hiefd of this vehicle parked in a specielHart
State government lot identifies it as being used in a car pool and t
- ing to reduce An
and trafficcongestion.
COSGE:T1o\-REJ.ml) STRAT?:GIr_i
There arp a ❑uutls•r of hi-he•a�-related ��rojpcfs tutreni
�)a�
10 allpviatr urban Con,estiou. The thrust is twofold: (1
36
vehicles more eflicientlr over existing urban higheny;'ficewin s tae
and, (3) to increase the occupancy of vehicles rising IIIc existing
system.
Francis Turner.recently retired Fellenrl Iliahivav Adminishutor
declared hate in U42: "Ili'all but a handful of cities the only Practical
solution to this problem is to divet•t comnntters from primate seautri al
higher cupncit} vehto
icles, namely buses and carpools, and thereby in
crease the -snori
is the only soluti ng Capacity of our urbut highway
nurtter of it year or so'
<1nt! this
solution tharerua be nliplied in the immediate futIIrejn ,t
-
It is :difficult for the staff to generalize based on the limited
amount of field work completed to date- Some cities obViousl' erre n•v
ing to change the pattern of urban commutink and to. iufliience the
travel habits of citizens. The obstacles are massive. I
tions studied by theubcon all local situs
miirittee staff, State,'city andregional ofli-',
vials are encountering the same dichotomies, the, same' conflicts, the
same kinds of sobering trade-offs that vire faced at the congressional:
level. In tampering even subtly with individual freedom and with all
urban ojraphy'thnt has been.ahapedby pOrful:social forces
over a ri ofj•many,years the7ocal oieid oft ecpaees himself to
misunderstanding and criticism.: ler.
The'ample and official attitude toward'downtorin4parkin' is a per-
fact ezamplc:'In every city visit ed LS staff mveetigat6, there is an
obviously ambivalent attitude in parking policy
The San :Francisco. Board of;Su rvisors rmptroed a 25 percent tai
ori downtown parking that reporte y reduced parking demand by leas
than l percent, Still,,city merchants compluned about its impact on '
business—real or imaFinary—and the tax was reduced
In. Boston, new buildings have included hundreds of nen g
spaces,°obvious ly posing a counterforce to that city's new ly pt oclnik
stance: Commercial establishments have'ol>enl} flaunted
parking ordinances and Boston police have been reluctant to enforce
rules relatedllo stopping, standing, and double-parking,
In the Nashington, D C, area. a small number. of fringe parking
lots accommodate only It fract'on'of the vehicles they are capable of
handling At the snmetime, parking rates at -National Airport, south
of the CBD, were increased sharply to discourage drivers who were
leaving their cars ax apirport lots and catching biases to work. ,1
�l all -day tax roposed for the District of Columbia crentLA
such a furor that it was quickly withdrawn.
The staff believes parking policy to be a fundamental element in the
strategy of'auy community to deal With congestion and auto -related
air pollution, As long as relatively cheap are avaihiblc for all-
' day parking, vehicles will flow into the CBD to fill them. Xew York
officials try to "fine ttuic'• downtown parking rates, setting them hi h
enough to discourage,nll-day porkers butlniv enough to accmnniodrite
those who wish to shop or transact short-terni business. It nntst1te ret
o;;nized that a policy of pricing pm•kiug Co thatonly' high income
ronuturters call atrorii it. or denviug it t„ pervms not served by safe
and eflicient, public transit is unfair and can earue untold harm to
%corkers and employers.
i
37
t
'As
rrr
�° a/Su am iyailable &'r a0-day parlone,
w'll now into the central
b!uineaa distract to all them.^
The availability of parking in,the 'rightfpinces appears Unsic to
increasing, rideishipp on casting and Proposed mass transit systeuts.
Ridership on Seattle's "Blue Streak' express bus service bears a direct
relationship to the a mount_ Of parking made avuilable in suburban
collector areas.;As more parking becomes available, mora people rule
the buses. The staff saw overflon• parking lots rat several stations along
the New Haven commuter line in southern Connecticut. The'n6v
BART systemis emphasizing parking' availability at outlying
stations for commuters who want to park-and-ride.
Federal funding for fringe and corridor parking, established on n
regular project basis in the'1970 law, is not rking,. gtabli priority
status for a number of masons. These include continued modal rivalry,
falhlre or inability look
sysletn, the "red tapee* at. all urban transportation as an integrated
" at
with Federal ptirticipation, Stnte im-
posed limitations, and Problems encountered in building Parking lots
m residential and comulercial sectors.
The, Federpl'Htghwnl,' ldministrntion. in reporting on the demon
stration fringe parkin_,program that existed prior to 19-11. said the
program 11has not achieied its basic objective. of eolul•ibuting to
the improvement of :Gilericn's urban transportation systein ,' The
backlog of regular ttrb:an higlla•n}• construction projects (,Ill Ule he
fituutcing with these funds is so grenl., that',tile States hove not,(.11
to assign n hi,all prioritV to dcmonstrntion Erin c parkinOSPIIg I facilities.'
�I
MeP"a
hrA NJ.n,n�rdon Dark•aad ride 7777:77,77! transce rtn by �rarl Into New V more than 800 •eh da �hoeedbndge Town.
',Brioua►q. 6eapon. ehe:FRWA,e f ng - ty �gndo�prpot se jwup&at ,nR ,.
aro
uses arebei n pp dam lags }
Seal cities, suchI'S o{{ ash�gon�\rrs,bl or1,� or ecpress lanes in sev-
Seattle and Louisville, pro e;
pr
have bxn rnncisco,,ton
instances itis too earl $'and 171f7 ►n fu rIOSed'for a nl,mher of
Ing benefits of on Y to cis
assess the total }m S. involred.Tq most
just
Buses trrirelin„ going bus. Rtn-eels [ pct or to determine
nificant eXpress lanes and But,one fact is unmistakab)e,
munbers of commute reversible lanes n
irorildbe""In•iratenntos,nriddoia rrork.'man�• Of,i�jl�tlrrYingSig.
sa"Ingif the Priority Innes. It ig not 1'so at a ti m Otherwise
work for tbr.. bus con IS n. IPossrble to me sarr°gor er tlic le
Work. claim a portal -to. ntSth
,enernll}'takes lon�mr forlun o l tna
Sc•�t� mile reversible lane o o_get to
world ofks All 11 Tunnel mai. leading from'\err ,1,
sp+Ice. Thrs sin .h nra_Xinimn perfo a file ontstandirh use%• into
Ie bnlocnrf glObuses''badel kith '34 3uexa) in the
into'\LulIsSilln rinrin. arnilnblc hi«
Thii•entherPnrnllellalusslle ive r �hnnp
1,30(1 persons (fill -ill" nrrra,m -- "I rynrnin,. cormm�tc•rs
ttheHod
snllll,y InG>tbetllnPelc°I1}atot{Ilofenk rnboru
11011111.
■
Perhaps the outstald ssrwlde in the world of getting people-carry"I capac-
ity out of a Binglevra lane. Buses traveling an exclusive reversible lane '
on1-e95appeoachingtae Tunnel deliver mon then 34,000 commuters.,.
into' Manhattan during the average 2 -hour morning peak perlo&The other
three lanes combined earry 944 persona.
The New York Port Authority, which operates the Lincoln Tunnel
sI•stem, claimsabout.?' percent of the passengers in the express lane"':
&uses became passengers since the project;was inaugurated m Decem
ber' 190—about -1 Percent formerly commuting by auto and 3 percent <'
not previously having made the trip.
Another, reversible lane. on'the. Long Island Expressway leading
to the l(queens-Ifidtown Tunnel, carries only about 200 commuter t:
buses with ,a1ittle'morethan 10.000 total passengers during the
morning 2 -hour, peak period. While New lork City officials say
then] probably is it higher potential ridership, it has not developed .
itecause the bits company, does not have additional lenses to put into
service, buses dupiics!e existing' subway service, and ;buses coining
froin the east create corm scion at. 'uilloading' points in' midtown
\lnnhattail. ,
Considerable success is being claimed for the Shirley Highway ex -
elusive bus lane demonstration project. Statistics provided lay the `
Northern Virginia ;Transportation C nnniaiott Show the- Ixrec llt. of
persons on buses who tnivel Shirley ifigbway (I -Ob) 'during the'
0:304:00 a.m. peak period incrensedfrom 27 percent of till travelers
in Mlle 1970 to 5's pent -lit in nctn1wr 1972. Thus. more livople wen,
coming to work by bus'along Shirley Highway than by rrivatenuto.
A late 1971 su ter showed'1 percent of the Shirley f�ighwny bus
riders previously ctirove"alone. 13 percent enr pooled, 20 �ereent rode
another buss nerd 40 ixrcent previously did not nulke tl'c,trip. The
40
number of autos on the highway (Ili'
pped from S.0,29 to x.9;30 for the
:'avl0a'e nloraillg penk period over the •28Sntonths studied.
It is too ell ch• to arrive lit definite conclusion, about the SI' •1
e.IIe3
- Highway exim'I'llent—for it number of reayuls. For example. while
lthe total nunilavi• of bus riders tnf Shirley Highway increased from`
4.392 to 10,77-2 from .lune 1970 to October 1972. the number of bus '
riders oil other parallel routes (Arlington Boulevard. Columbia Pike,
Jefferson Davis IiigLwny, etc.) decreased from 9.108 to 7,8x38 suggest -
ing thnt• at least pert of Shirley's gain has been at the expense of con-
ventional bus service elsewhere.
Brom the very beginning the Northern Cirrinia Transportation
Commission lifts been required to pay "diversion' foes to the bus line
with which it competes for riders over part of the area served, by its
express bus service.' Even' without these diversion fees, .fare-boa'reve-
nues have not covered'opierating expenses of the NVTC's fleet of mora
than 70 buses. This is true even though, as an FHWA-IIMTA Federal
demonstration project, there have been no appreciation charges for
capital equipment and an exemption from Federal taxation.
Project' officials stress that bus operating expenses have reflected
" a steady, series of start-up costs associated with the extension of service
into more. distant neighborhoods. It appearto the subcommittee staff,
however -that tile operative forces;(relativelv'1oir fares, increasing
labor costs) in the Shirley' Hi ggh way express bias project am not really
different from those extant in bus service elsewhere. When the demon-
stnition.phase ends, the express bins service very likely: will be faced
with; the same' unfavorable economic facts of life that Lave; plagued
other transit operators.'
San Francisco offers two interesting case studies. Confronted with
the, prospect having to widen the Bolden GateBridge (one consul-
tant projected the need for an 18 -lane bridge within .50 years) .or.even
make`it double=deck to`accommodate increasing rush-hour'traffic, the
Bridge Distriet'acted'tinder authority given to it in 1969 to become
multi -modal in'scope.;In addition to instituting a`ferry service that
carries commuters from Marin County to San Francisco, theDistrict
owns and'operates a fleet of 175 buses that serve Marin County and
communities
to the north. The'buses utilize an outgoing reversible
lane'on the bridge;daring the 4-6:30 p.m. rush lieu, and about
20 percent of commuters crossing the bridge during that period are in
buses.
The new buses nre the most luxurious that the staff has encountered
,in public transportation nnywhere-air conditioned, nide seats, and
ample leg room: Officials say thev deliberately have sought to upgrade'
tile. plebiall image of bus irmisportntion. promoting their buses via
the niass cotlunanicntions media as being in the "Cndillac Blass".'Rider-
ship has been climbing, as service has been extended. But the same
ecominrie realities 'exist. The average bits fare of 4N renta'is stm
ported by bo cents of subsidy to reach the break-even point. The sub
Sid.) is derived Brom reserves and from the'tolls paid by motorists who
use the bridge:
Another Innovation in the ;;in Franci;-en area mes two Innes of the
approach to the ;:in Francisco-Oakhnnd Bay• Bridge reserved exclu-
sively for ant• pools and a third lane reserved for buses. The three lanes
41
together account more than 50 percent of all commuters rho enter `
San hianeisco oi•er the bridge (hiring the a -hour morning peak period.
During the first months of 1972, cars with three or more occupants
1 en leveled off tit about
urcreasid.from.l,lg1 ton nn6 of :..8011 iuul tlr,
2,100, with about three-fourths of them utilizing the two express lines.
Paradoxically, the total number.of cars crossing the bridgeduring this
p 3 ,
same period actually from :,0 500 to 21,500.
• ::ori, r � .a ,•' ti Ii >�. ,{ '!l• is tor:
J:
The arrows in this photgra/A identif� seven buss approaehin� the toll Pk
of the San F randeco4skland Bay ZrldR The seven buses are earryint as
mangy commuters ae ail of the aatoa+obites visible.
Some of the problems associated with changing the habits'of the
American commuter are dramatized by experience to California. On
an average morning, about 600 cars (one-third of all vehicles) in the
Oakland Bay ,=Bridge car1 lanes are there illegally, with their
drivers generally hating riven' over semi-rigid lane delineators to
enter the tdo` forbidden Panes. Similnrh•, studies in southern Califor-
nia show• that 10 percent of the motorists on "metered" freeway ramps
in Los Angeles will drive through at red light to merge into freeway
— trallic Enforcement of both priority car pool lanes and metered ramps
is difficult and costly.
-its. staff is persuaded on the basis of the
In spite of these rnte
limited experience to (late that a useful public pacoff can be realized
tbrouglann expansion ii( experiments to preferential and reversible
bus Innes and corridor;
Almost evervwhere the investigation has turned ear pooling has
been n(Iv(wnteil as a?ieniticant technique to achieve'Irigher t•rhiele
i
42
occulaun•y for work-oriented trips. 'rbe,evidence ofsuccess forcar.
pooling is like'u i verv`clusire. The fipQroach in ul()srcitics is c.rstml `I
and loosed%• strutured. 1vashin_'toll. R(.. has nperhaps erhaps fire orost
concerted effort, but overall car occupancy during peak travel has re-
nmined unchanged at about 1.5 persons ger vehicle. Sixty percent. of
the commuters coming to work in the District on a given morning still
are alone in their vehicles. Cars bound for job locations clsewhero in
i.-(he'nit-tropolitan area carry oven fewerversons-1.2 persons,tmr ce-
hicle.Cni• pooling has a m6ber'of disadvantages that seemingly can
>)e ovccome'oidy by determined parking or, pricing strategies or a
combination of loth.
One undertaking that has been successful in getting some com-
muten out of their private vehicles find into'hiela occupancy buses is
at Reston, Va., a new town 20 miles west of Washington, D.C. Resi-
dents have formed a bas club' that charters 20 buses a day from
a private. bus company to carry.` commuters into:Washington :D.C.,
and home am'xin. Abouf Vx) riders use the system each way every work-
day. A survey shows 21 percent of the bus riders say they have been
able to reduce the number of automobiles in their household as a result
of the bus service. Forty-three percent saythe bus servicepprobably
has reduced their need to'ncqurre an additional vehicle..The buaserv-
ice is highly personalized (nt one time, liquor was served) and utilizes
some volunteer help. 116 service is more than bveakh14g even by charg-
ing $1.20 per one-way trip'tmd paying ti $10 charter .fee per, bus trip.
. developing so-called "demand responsive"trans-
There is deyelo in interest
-portation systems. A;dnil-a-bus system is, being tested in Haddonfield,
N.J., as a Pederal deritonstiation project, and other bus schemes have '
operated inBatavia, N.Y.,Afansfield; Ohio. and Peoria,111.
Several personalized, rapid transit';(PRT) systems were exhibited
at the 1972 WashingtonTRANSPOandonesystemcurrently:isbeing
-
tested oil the campus of the University of Wt:-A Virehain at Morgan-
town Wr Va Another is scheduled to be installed in Denver on a triol
basis
Such advanced approaches as the PRT certainly must be' part of
long-range testing and planning. but they appear to offer little in
'terms of short-term amelioration' of.orbamtransportation, Problems.
Capital outlays will necessarily be huge to install PRT systems on any
large settle, and there are important ener-gy and environmental:.ques-
tions that remain unanswered. \fest experts advocate if strategy at
,least for the shortYernt of getting more efficient use of the massive
Investment already made' in highways and existing transit facilities.
Capitnrl investment in new rail facilities is perceived in n somewhat
long time frame.
31nny of the first principles related to the role of the automobile
in modern society, are being subjected to rigorous examination. The
very thoroughfare's' that have been built to move roods and people
into file,heurts of cities sive insonte cams now heing,closed to them.
Cnes have been banned in ptirts of Tokyo on Sunday Jnpa is higgest
shoppin-g day. London. Copenhagen aml' F-en hove closed certain
sheets to vehicles. New Yorlt Cite nllicials nnmm�u•ed plmisto cbucert
several blocks of Jlndison Aveil tie ,itit o a p edestriaif mall for if three-
43
month test perioti, bill merchants objected and the 11luve bas been post-
poned. -111 oflicial of tilt• New York Delinrhnent of ;Transportation
predicts flat h• than banned
1:p• is nppr»nchin;: %ellen the use of thr'privnte
vehitlo
%%-ill Ie b;uumd ill Manhattan nit°V.elhci. Stich cities as Bre-
"I Rome Gothenburg. an I Rome have been divided into gtiadrnnts, with
vihicle access prohibited between quadrants..Sd•eets m•e being con-
verted into pedestrian malls hi several American cities.'
The need to use the private vehicle is lessened by the practice of. ;
some cone iercial estahlrshments, restaurant. ,hotels and •o
:1,2nciesin rod government
idut b meat
P . � shuttle buses and other ground trpnsporlrition ns
a service to patrons and employees. One Fort Worth department
store
ofrers free rail transportatiomda•
ontown for shoppers n•ho pae
rk at storr
outlying lot. Circulating mini-huses arovipnenrutn
sumo vesring
out of
cities encountethe usual problem
the fare box. bg oil the streets
of
themselves out paying for
Staggered pork hours, slIVImced work days, zoning and land use
controls all can be pari of any local stntte�y orating
ei fia brat context.
urban congestion, bw their ejJicacy must Lc etemained icitaimed at amelihin the apc-
Some planners and gocernment officials foresee n shift to smaller
vehicles as a means of better utilizing highway andparkinghs
ducing air and noise pollution, and conserving enc per' re .
for n vxrioty; of rea9ons of thein own Amen �9 In recent years,
compact and sub -compact cars ' have opted toward
I'hcro are many kinds of projects underw 3, not herein discussed•
One of them is fhe use of bus -actuated traffic si nals'',fhat.p'rovide'
priority to buses in moving along city streets. Ken techU
the operating level holdsgreat promise in this regard, 1°gy at
COSVCLUSI°N
Itecent years have seen the emergence of anew kind of serious think -
1119 about urban transportation• Emphasis is shifting from the move-
ment of vehicles to the movement of people and,goods, from rigid
balani orientation a theidea of merging'the'various modes into
balanced s}stems that best serve a a letr°lsolifnu'arra:
[lie staff has been impressed with the quality of most of the docu.'
mems them tl e�ln,om the Department of Transportation,''foremost
u°r°rig - National Transportation ReporU Likewise; the
attitude of most of,the indii-iduals with whom it has consulted in the
Frderal Ili}thvvay Administration• the Urban Mass Transportation
Administration, 'the grate and local;agencies
officinhas 1>ren'encoiirnging
Most and serious tridents of urban transportation
thatri more flexible tphroath involving both capiagree
tal investment and
noncapit tl stiatetrc:� %%-ill 'I)" irquircd i l the Yet nlimd.'Listitu-
tional rrgrdrty often is cited as the main obstacle to be overcome in
environment. progre, in Moving jveopinandgoods in the urban
Al fhv `unr tithe• there is caution at all levels ulwuf liromisingsuc-
u alter env of the approaches or programs novv advocated. There are
uuup' cro`..cnrrent-, many imponderables. Mitient American society
44
1;ns a nannentu i of its own. We are experiencing an accelerating
11 ch:ul � alilid m�ionat, a � acc of +e•
r. tool li of socia +� • .,
I � d >< nt national ob-
t
•ectives. New i•ioriti i
i es nui�• �>c spinning into prominence ' o '
'] 1 1 I t tc out .f the
wll rl. of mu•aspiriltions' blit ghat are they:
i »r esoh-ed'questions abound. What do we .cant our cental cities
alid our "lehoplilif:ui areas to become? Khat value do we attach to
freedom of mobility at the, possible expense of other individual and
national desires? llow hutch'weight should be- 'given'to energy and
enrii•iuna'nt0 i-oustraints as we now perceive them? Khat is the ohli-
gation of it society to provide reasonable mobility for its young; its
aged. and (]loseuho are ``ihysicalh• and ecouominilly disad;•antaged?
t
flow, willing are we to submit to the grana desigus of the urban plan-
nets schen their designs may, interfere to ani unprecedented degree with
how we use our land or where we use our automobiles? How much do
we wish to control or even countervail the forces of the free
marketplace?
j
% that e inlrBenefits from nature
"there is nn such thing: ns a ft 1111+Ph ** In uarliti ing its report oil
'ltr^ en t allSLgrtail�n thncn}mjttee staff would CBU�tlfon that t CIC
w.�..l[lingasnfreerude.
F
isnosa
Item area dilemmas at every turn. Noce and mote the elected 'offi-
cial is placed in the position of having; to compromise one objeetjre
to achieveanother, to weigh one set of values against another. Some
}.
of the trad&offs are shilling and harsh. Major decisions aro bound to
i
r
antagonize large and vocal segments of the populace. 1
4
But in a democracy them is no other place that these, decisions can
be 'made other than with' the elected reptesentatives`of the people.
Uniinistrators, technicians and scholars can provide objective infor-
#
nation to help' unravel complex issues. Even the honest advocacy of
sppeeccial interest groups has its place. But ultimately the task is one of
+.the'Congress and other' elected bodies weighing all empirical data
a&nst the backdrop of the Nation's values; gtals and aspirations' and
exercising judgment to determine what best serves the people.
:-
u.1 While there may many hazards and uncertainties, the investign-
tion to date suggests them is no b-iter time to confront the issues than
the present.
y
�1
y.
TO: Members of the City Council
Presented herewith for your consideration and approval are the 'following
documents:
1. A restatement of the Summary By Fund estimate for the twelve-month
period ending December 31, 1974, which reflects the addition of the
transit alternative A plus (1) and (2).
2. A Summary By Fund estimate for the six-month period beginning J-
1,-1975, and ending June 30, 1975. - aruary
3. A.Summary .By Fundforthe eighteen -month period beginning January 1,
1974, and ending June_30,"1975.
4. A Tax Certification for the eighteen -month period beginning January 1,
1974, and ending June 30,'1975.
The above documents have been prepared at Council,direction for the purpose of
publishing the notice of a public hearing on the operating; budget and tax -certifica-
tion for an eighteen -month period beginning January 1, 1974, and ending June 30,-1975.
The eighteen -month period is necessary. because of the conflict involving the so-called
Fiscal Year bill and its relationship; to Home;Rule legislation. Two opinions of the
Attorney General; have been issued on this subject so far; thefirst on:May -l6; 1973;
and the latest on July 10, 1973. Extracts from these opinions are as -follows:
May 16 ,1973 --"The fiscal year of cities -and -towns is the calendar year.
Sect1 83 of Chapter 1088 is a special act which prevails over Chapter
1020, a_generai act."
July 10, 1973 --"All cities and -towns on a calendar year basis on July 1,
1972, must file an eighteen -month budget even though they will remain on
-a-calendar year in 1975." -
As we have discussed with the Council, it doesn't appear that we have much
choice at this point but, to certify an eighteen -month tax levy even though we will
continue to operate on.a calendar year basis in 1975 and thereafter.`
Furthermore,
it is not clear as to what action the Council will be free to take with regard to
the last six months of 1975, or if this ''eighteen -month certification will be followed
by another eighteen -month certification in order to adjust back to an annual tax
certification basis. The final outcome hopefully will be determined by the next
session of the Iowa Legislature.
In making this presentation, there are several items which should be called
to your attention as follows:
1. In arriving at a tax levy estimate for the 'six-month period of 1975,
a full 15 -mill levy has been assumed for the General Fund. Following
- Council direction, a`1 -mill -levy has also been assumed for Mass Transit.
The 1 -mill levy for tort liability is necessary because for the most
part 'these expenditures take place during the first six months -of each
year.
2. Generally, expenditure estimates for the six months of 1975 have been
predicated upon amounts established for the twelve -months -of 1974 with
modifications being made in those instances where they were obviously
required. An-example;,of-such a- ;,edification would 'include `adjustRents
_.£or non-recurring Revenue Sharing expenditures in, the General Fund, or
the elimination of some non-recurring expenditures such as the purchase
of a $48,000 fire truck.
One adjustment of an unusual nature deserves special mention. In the
millage requirement for the Debt Service Fund for the first six months
of 1975, we are anticipating that the amount of principal and interest
- scheduled to be paid on General Obligation Bonds by November 1,- 1975,
will not be available from tax collections during the first partof
- the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1975. Therefore, the tax -supported
amount of that principal and interest representing 4.34 mills, has
been budgeted to be collected with this levy,. The breakdown of the
Debt Service to be collected in the six months ending June 30, 1975,
is as follows:
b ^Ill'
SL",.:'iltY l:g T'L:;n
01L'3R
iRAPSFERS
FUNDS
TP ANSFERS
EXPEIIDTTUI:F.S
TOTAL
LST, 1;'.?..
FUND LLCC3'i'EU
ES'T, FALti:CE
YF.OPE1tTi'
TOTAL
12-31-74
TAX
RECEIPTS
IN
RECEIPTS
AVAILABLE
OUT
DISBURSERENTS
6-30-75
AD:1111ISiR:TI0:1
$ 459,319
$ -
$ 375,000
$ 55,205 $
430,205
$
889,524
$
-
$
468,478
$
46£,478
$ 421,(
M-24TMITY,D3yELORMIT
62,227
35,000
-
97,227
97,227
-
200,183
200,183
(102,s
'PUBLIC S -Nn Y
-
593,524
100,000
=
693,524
693,524
693,524
693,524''
-
i aIS1O .&TI0,7
-
223,176
554,260
-
777,436
777,436
134,100
643,336
777,436
ETIt'LO 'S 1>T:+I PROTECTION
-
154, 605
29, 000
-
213,605
213,605
-
213,605
213, 605
LSISL u, & CULTURAL OPPORTUNITIES
-
372,968
80,000
-
452,968
452,968
-
452,968
452,968
_
SUB TOTAL
459,319
$1,436,500
$-1,173,260
$ 55,205 $ 2,664,965
$
3,12!i 284
$
134 100
2�72,C_ 94 5 2.8_06;194 $ 318,t
EBT SERVICE
$ 6,297
$ 416,518
$ - -
$ 33,275 $
449,793
$
456,090_
$
-
$
83,054
$
83,054<
$ 373;(
APITAL P:OJI;CTS
23003,588
- -
3,500,000
303,,006
3,803,006
5,805,594
-
4,500,000
4,500,000
1,306,`
2 iur,PRISE:
P��^ Il'3 FrGE1Rr
326,586i
135,275
-
135,275
461,861
100,000
40,000
- 140,000;
321.,1
S m M, R FtiVEltJ3
48,984
-
263,500
_
263,500
312,484
95,712
125,.!3h
220,946`
91,.`
SE{7i R R'SERVE
181,619
-
-
57,230
57,230
238,849
"24,000
46,458
70,458
168,'
S:uTER R.731M,
94,158
491,500
-
491,500
585,658
216,964
294,267
511,231
74,4
.
EATER s :SERVE
249,506
-
-
140,810
140,810
390,316'
36,000
164,537
200,537
189,
-'RUST AGEKCY
$ -
$ 220,000
$ 5,000
$: - $
225,000
$
225,000
$
-
$
2251000
$
225,000
$
7PECIA-L ASSESSIE T CONSTRUCTION
138,705
-
-
-
-
138,705
-
-
-
138,
TOut3
X3,5093762 $0731018
$ 5,568,535
$ 589 ,57.6 $,8
9, "31,079
$
7.1,739,841
$
606;776
$:
S 150,64h
.r
C
8' 757 420 2 98?.•
[ILL LEVY REQUI.RED:
,Ml RAL' FUIND
15.00
WSS L?."SIa
1.00
TORT LIABILITY
1.00
'DEBT S'..RVICE
4,93
'TRUST t. A ::CY
2,60
�! 53
CITY OF IU:1._ CIl'Y`
x:,15
-- -- _ _-_ SU`f.IP1:Y BY IMUD
PU.iD E[fL �i;D __ _ `
'ssT
i' LST 12-31-73 Oii� t 1RAi1Str1;P,S --
`- ---.T`
pi,CEi:PTS TOTAL 1 UIiD5 TPA.lSrullS E
ltITUrSS?ATIOil Ltf IECEIF�S`VAII:AELE OUT XPEIial.T-Upg 10""-Tll
�C Icli1 t DEYc1 OP'" liT S -
DISBURS) I.. ;TS
PUBLIC SA�.TT + 210,055 $
172'447 $ 1,1.77.,859 S 165,615 c 1 G_.
+98 115,050 , 1,473,121 $ 1,826,479 $
!°'u.SrC iAiIOil 99,5,07 1,698,164 330,900 - 287,548 497,593 $ 1,405,433
Ef ITRO"O'I'VIL PROTECTI011 377,068 t - 600,549 $ 1,405,[,33 $ y"
74,188 1,803,980 2,029,064 2,128,571 600,549 (1
LEISURE CLZTUI±AL OPPORTUNITIES (['9,075) 703,389 2;278,168 y - 2,128;571 2, 128,SJ1
67_,825 1,044,94S 86,131 - 789,889 655,236 402,300 2,252,936 2
$1 053 / 251,131 740,814 2,647 ,65
i, 296, 080 738,167 5,236
SUS TOTAL - 1,358,905 _ 7[,0,814
28 54 227 E35 3,760 4 0 $ 165 615 1,358,905 1,358,905 •
EBT SEP.YICE $ 2U7 598
kPITAL PRO.7ECTS $ 6,297 $ 867,568 $ $ 8 153,S7pw o ��1947 $ 8,4814
SGl
�TEP3P,ISi : 54 , 811 _ $ 256, 325 $ 1,123, 893 S ''"'- $ S L889 505
11,6II5,900 782 353 + 1,130,190
PE -,!ER *G R3:4Y+I1U� , 12, 468, 253 12, 523, 064 $ 757,154 $ 757 LSti $ , 3J
SEC REVE,UE 211,426 - 405,825 - 405 E2 - 11;216,470 11,216;470 1, 3f
SZsr P, R-S�P,"vTs 168,375 _ 5
ILAT R R:,VE�IIFE 194,444 740,300 - 740,500 617,251 189,320
1II5,320
908 ,875 106 070 3;
WATER RwSL;;YE 325,621 185,320 391 635 2 295 390
365,959 _ 1,414,500 - 379,764 4_5,702 817,337 5
1,414,500 1 `72,000 139,373 211,373 1
RUST & AGEIZCYi - -
622,431 ,740;121 702;892
422,43, 791 390 962,807. 1,665,69[,
PECIAL ASSESS23hi co" TP,UCTlr 24,S47 582,984 , 108,000 493,611
(66,295) 20,772 - 601,611 1,
300,000 603,756 62II,703
TOTAL 5,000 305,000 628,705 _ 628,703 6�II 70
22 342 313 $5 67 3
,18 4 100,000
ILL LEVY _ C 387 S 27,91_7 $1,817 0-'o-4 100,0'00
R. UIRF $25 E I,
R D. `__ �_,�23,345 aS28,1G5,661 $1,8GII,79r, $7.3 314 !!
G?1�P�AL i'Uiv'D-------- �-=_.-..�! iG $2� 184 7t �
V- SS T/'AIISIT ---_ _ L; ' 0 L2
45.00 ==-
TORT LIABILITY 3.00
DEBT SERVICE 2.03
TRUST & rGEI;CY 10.27
TOTAL; 6.90
67; 2p
wu) ' W
i. Q r u I _ I ( I I � N'I I •') ^1N
n: ! v niTn
.0 o
V.F. y �O I C5 O nl• 1-
Z m,_
'R .O- is y r•a uV O N 1 1 -N - J •:
t� I ti U A:: W f�� tV •y. M ,� q... .v w
V' c.3 U
O ,V to a V U
C71 0
0 F \ E-1''_ :.... m m .+ O N L �O r.y
' U ta.. Q':Ea° <c0 I N Ma t s0.
(ti •W [mss CDu F t. �: oU� s [ r��1j,R ;; a ,
' c P to M c n
'[' L' <U t' W O. yiv I
CJ J P
i t � � , t ,c ,,y p •tom U 7
Ol v co
a rty lyfV a•a t'[i t1. ,it .' f r 4' `i .- F u,�+
n ci . N O.F a
tUy iVi F -a a +rL .i• V} Ey.
In C v O a F:O �ti �:: ,,.1 :'.v. fit ::I�,< .tli qU8(
N[t x W Pat"CO..w+ , �. 4 , ✓�. :... y V �, ++S)a> to ;'
abVwam�•,cRi;-.� al+.,G. . w"oaRt°�,mplr"� _ �4,' L .±t' °Ocrog0.
5. C.—too
y
to _uH�
"(.C'1 .i \ �. G
c =� '�-•.iV r t{ ? 0 F Rw m ' a"o}'• t a j tp r ata v "��0 to
.I7m OyC X.F\
Y.0 r �~ s' .g to
N 1-1...: a i, y '
7 Va 1 4Y .�.✓. N /v� f r f. •la
.C.lw•w. tiFS Lw 'O •t1.p v
• .q ti'' ° a'G �'ta �, y r ° a o ;, + I' t r If)M.,o
a a R ?
t 0'jN td7.•_ �•h a� ALO �...� HS N. 1 i; IN V) v0� vi � � �... O O
3 , °' [J:q A y{aa i7 onv _ "ii t M F u....
�,.a /-oi' W F'.�. ...H <W w xcc� :°)w m 3 u c
t O /
.� ? la..:V�[�'�'' U .Hs.'�"..z - ,�'c ''.dm6 bo
pgr+; o .;0., 1
44
o •,a .^aM^naN ! NM
. ,��iiW�+.�; tI I Oi .M•I 1;'' .qo au ,wC N tiaY co
� ':.w.i Ooo
w gal 11
i Iat.
M m V Q.;j
NCNi. weH tw''
'F s. pia !(M
0 7 r. N tn' 2...o q i. e,., •• - c7 r F
41
F w to o .a,,,a a •,u V r/1 '.o .F �I
o
o o~ F:ro o. rJ
j/- s
O O , +' r i7• r / a ` < �' t. .: a
N CS J
L.i O /. 1' J I •� I u L Y r/ v -. •_ O N l , a L P.._
h O-
1. ;I
u •+ I •: � r'
'• v :x:;1'1 1 i.:'I�. ..; t i' '� • ;I �