The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004-03-11 Info Packet~ CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY March 11,2004 www.icgov.org I MARCH 15 WORK SESSION ITEMS I IP I Memorandum from Jeff Davidson, Executive Director JCCOG: Presentation of Oakdale Boulevard Extension Study Final Report (Available electronically to Council and in City Clerks Office) Letter from Douglas Paul: Oakdale Boulevard Extension IP 2 Memorandum from Matthew Hayek: Scattered Site Housing Task Force IP 3 Memorandum from Steve Rackis and Staff: Iowa City Housing Authority FY03 Self- Sufficiency Programs Report MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS IP 4 Memorandum from City Manager and Staff: Council Laptop Use and Upgrade, Email Policy, Harvat Hall Upgrades IP 5 Memorandum from Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorney: Absent from Office IP 6 Memorandum from Superintendent of Parks & Forestry to City Manager: Trees Please Grant IP 7 Email from Doug Elliott: EClCOG Presentation March 25, 2004 I PRELIMINARY/DRAFT MINUTES I IP 8 Iowa City/Coralville Animal Care and Adoption Center Advisory Board: January 28, 2004 IP 9 Police Citizens Review Board: March 9, 2004 IP 10 Iowa City Telecommunications Commission: February 23, 2004 ~ CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY March 11,2004 www.icgov.org MARCH 15 WORK SESSION ITEMS IP 1 Memorandum m Jeff Davidson, Executive JCCOG: Presentation of Oakdale Boule Extension Study Final Re (Available electronically to Council and in Cit' larks Office) IP 2 Memorandum from hew Hayek: Scattered .~ Housing Task Force IP 3 Memorandum from ~ackis and Staff: City Housing Authority FY03 Self- Sufficiency Prog~ MI: ITEMS IP 4 Memorandum from City Manage~ :il Laptop Use and Upgrade, Email Policy, Harvat Hall Upgrades IP 5 Memorandum from Absent from Office IP 6 Memorandum from Super Park., to City Manager: Trees Please Grant IP 7 Email from Doug ECICOG Presentation .-h 25, 2004 PRELIMINARY/DRAFT MINI S IP 8 Iowa City/Co Animal Care and Adoption Center isory Board: January 28, 2004 IP 9 Police Citi Review Board: March 9, 2004 IP 10 Iowa Ci~ Telecommunications Commission: February 23, / Johnson County Council of Governments 410 E W~sh~ngtonSt Iow~ Qty Iow:~ 52240 · Date: March 9, 2004 To: Iowa City City Council From: Jeff Davidson, Executive Director Re: Item for March 15 City Council Work Session; Presentation of Oakdale Boulevard Extension Study Final Report The attached JCCOG Arterial Street Plan map shows the future extension of Oakdale Boulevard between where it ends currently near First Avenue in Coralville, across the area north of 1-80, to an intersection with Scott Boulevard east of ACT. A preferred alignment has already been determined for the extension of Oakdale Boulevard between First Avenue Coralville and Dubuque Street, and this corridor is protected by a corridor preservation agreement between Coralville, Iowa City, and Johnson County. Coralville anticipates the extension of Oakdale Boulevard to Dubuque Street being completed in the next few years. The City of Iowa City continues to be contacted by property owners along the eventual location of the Oakdale Boulevard corridor who are beginning to think about redeveloping their property. There are also property owners along Iowa Highway 1 north of Northgate Corporate Park who have expressed interest in property redevelopment. Because of these development pressures and the need to identify where the Oakdale Boulevard will eventually be located, a study was recently undertaken to evaluate alternative alignments for ©akdale Boulevard through this area. The goal of the study was to determine the best alignment for Oakdale Boulevard based on the evaluation of the following factors: impact on existing properties and the environment, engineering standards, traffic service, and construction cost. Once a preferred alignment is determined, the next step is to enter into a 28-E agreement with Johnson County so that the corridor can be preserved. Similar to the construction of Scott Boulevard over the last 25 years, it is anticipated that sections of the Oakdale Boulevard corridor between Dubuque Street and Scott Boulevard will be constructed over the next 25 years, both as public projects and as portions of private redevelopment projects. Eventually these sections will connect into the completed Oakdale Boulevard corridor. There are two substantial bridge structures along the corridor, one over the Iowa River and one over Interstate 80. There are no projects in the City of Iowa City Capital Improvements Program at this time to complete any portion of the Oakdale Boulevard corridor. At your March 15 work session I will present the study final report of alternative alignments, and explain the rationale for the preferred alignment. All of the property owners along the preferred alignment were contacted during the course of the study. As you might imagine, those who are interested in redevelopment of their property cooperated fully with us. Those who are not inclined to redevelop their property at the present time did not choose to participate. Where we were denied access to parcels of property that would be impacted by the proposed extension of Oakdale Boulevard, we conducted the study from remote data sources. Oakdale Blvd. Extension Final Report March 9, 2004 Page 2 I wish to emphasize again that there are no pending projects at this time for construction of any podion of the future extension of Oakdale Boulevard between Dubuque Street and Scott Boulevard. The purpose of identifying the preferred alignment is to allow private redevelopment projects in this area to be considered, whether in unincorporated Johnson County or following annexation to Iowa City, while preserving the Oakdale Boulevard corridor. Identification of the preferred alignment will also allow future consideration of public projects to construct portions of Oakdale Boulevard. Bring any questions or comments to the March 15 meeting. Attachment cc: Steve Atkins Karin Franklin Rick Fosse Ron Knoche Johnson County Board of Supervisors ppdadm/mem/oakdale ext.doc Oakdale Boulevard Extension From Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard In Iowa City and Johnson County, Iowa Location Study Report Prepared P~r: City of Iowa City Prepared ~v: Earth Tech, Inc. 321 East Market Street, Suite 103 Iowa City, Iowa 52245 October 2003 E A R T H ~ T E C H OAKDALE BOULEVARD EXTENSION FROM DUBUQUE STREET TO SCOTT BOUEEVARD IN IOWA CITY AND JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA LOCATION STUDY REPORT Prepared For: City of Iowa City Prepared By: Earth Tech October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Exte~sion, Location Stu~;' ReDort Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa CIO,, Iowa TABLE OFCONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1-1 Background .................................................................................................................... 1-1 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................... 1-2 Description of Area ........................................................................................................ 1-2 Description of Proposed Project ..................................................................................... I-4 Scope of Services ........................................................................................................... 1-5 Evaluation Methodology ................................................................................................ 1-6 11. DEVELOPMENT OF INITIAL ALTERNATIVES ................................................. 2-1 Project Corridor Limits .................................................................................................. 2-1 Design Standards ............................................................................................................ 2-1 Data Collection and Research ........................................................................................ 2-2 Description of Constraints .............................................................................................. 2-3 Initial Alternatives .......................................................................................................... 2-8 III. PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES ........................................... 3-1 Description of Screening Process, East Seg~nent ........................................................... 3-1 Results of Screening Process, East Segment .................................................................. 3-1 Screening Workshop ...................................................................................................... 3-5 Field Reviews and Alignment Modifications ................................................................. 3-5 Final Alternatives ........................................................................................................... 3-6 IV. FINAL EVALUATION - EAST SEGMENT ............................................................. 4-1 Final Evaluation Process - East Segment ....................................................................... 4-1 Environmental Evaluation - East Segmaent ..................................................................... 4-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts .............................................................................. 4-3 Engineering Evaluation - East Segment ......................................................................... 4-3 Summary of Engineering Evaluation ............................................................................. 4-6 Traffic Service Evaluation - East Segment ..................................................................... 4-7 Traffic Service Summary - East Segment ...................................................................... 4-9 Estimated Cost Comparisons - East Segment ................................................................. 4-9 Results of Final Evaluation - East Segment ................................................................... 4-13 Alignment Variations - East Segment ............................................................................ 4-13 Summary of East Segment Evaluation ........................................................................... 4-16 V. FINAL EVALUATION - WEST SEGMENT ............................................................ 5-1 Environmental Evaluation - West Segment .................................................................... 5-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts .............................................................................. 5-4 Engineering Evaluation - West Segment ........................................................................ 5-5 Summary of Engineering Evaluation ............................................................................. 5-9 Summary of West Segment Evaluation .......................................................................... 5-9 VI. EVALUATION OF ACCESS MANAGEMENT ON IOWA HIGHWAY 1 ............................................................................................. 6-1 Existing Access Conditions ............................................................................................ 6-1 61976/lO 040/OakdalcBlvdTOCdoc October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Exten,~ion, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa CIO', Iowa Page Review of Sight Distance on Iowa 1 .............................................................................. 6-3 Access Control Categories ............................................................................................. 6-3 Evaluation of Access Management Strategy .................................................................. 6-3 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 6-4 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 7-1 Description of Recommended Alternative ..................................................................... 7-2 Access Management on Iowa 1 ...................................................................................... 7-5 Implementation ............................................................................................................... 7-5 Location Study Updates ................................................................................................. 7-5 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Preliminary Screening Evaluation Factors ..................................................................... 3-2 2 East Segment (Scott Boulevard to Iowa Highway 1) Final Evaluation Environmental Factors ................................................................................................... 4-3 3 East Segment (Scott Boulevard to Iowa Highway 1) Final Evaluation Engineering Factors ........................................................................................................ 4-6 4 East Segment (Scott Boulevard to Iowa Highway 1) Final Evaluation Tt~rough Traffic Service ................................................................................................. 4-8 5 Estimated (Planning Level) Construction Costs - Scott Boulevard to [-80 .................... 4-10 6 Estimated (Planning Level) Construction Costs - 1-80 to Iowa 1 ................................... 4-11 7 Estimated (Planning Level) Construction Costs - Scott Boulevard to Iowa I ............... 4-12 8 Final Evaluation - Environmental Factors West Segment .............................................. 5-4 9 Existing Access Points on Iowa 1 Between Northgate Drive and Rapid Creek Road ..................................................................................................................... 6-1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Project Corridor .............................................................................................................. 1-1 2 Project Corridor - East Segment ..................................................................................... 1-3 3 Project Corridor - West Segment ................................................................................... 1-4 4 Major Physical and Environmental Constraints - East Segment .................................... 2-4 5 Looking North on gcott Boulevard Toward Existing Farmstead ................................... 2-5 6 Looking Northeast From Scott Boulevard Toward 1-80 ................................................ 2-5 7 Looking East on Scott Boulevard Toward Existing Farmstead ..................................... 2-6 8 Looking North From the East End of Northgate Drive .................................................. 2-6 9 Looking South Along Iowa 1 From Just South of Rapid Creek Road ........................... 2-7 10 Looking East From Iowa 1 Toward Existing Farmstead ................................................ 2-7 11 East Segment Initial Alternatives ................................................................................... 2-10 12 Initial Alternatives and Major Constraints - West Segment ........................................... 2-12 13 Final Alternatives - East Segment .................................................................................. 3-7 14 Possible Roundabout Intersection at Scott Boulevard .................................................... 4-15 15 Detail of Possible Roundabout Intersection at Scott Boulevard ..................................... 4-15 61976/lO 040/OakdaleBlwlTOC dor October 2003 Oakdale Bouh, vard Eztension, Location Study Rq~ort Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa CIO,, Iowa Page 16 Typical Wooded Hillside North of Rapid Creek. West of Io~va Highway 1 .................. 5-2 17 Looking South on Prairie du Chien Road ....................................................................... 5-6 18 Looking North on Prairie du Chien Road Toward Rapid Creek .................................... 5-6 19 Looking West From Prairie du Chien Road Toward Recommended Alignment ........... 5-7 20 Looking North on Prairie du Chien Road, From 700' South of Rapid Creek ................ 5-7 21 Looking East From Prairie du Chien Road, 700' South of Rapid Creek ....................... 5-7 22 Looking South on Prairie du Chien Road, From 700' South of Rapid Creek ................ 5-7 23 Looking East, Showing Rapid Creek at Base of Hill ..................................................... 5-9 24 Existing Access Points on Iowa 1 .................................................................................. 6-2 25 Recommended Alternative - East Segment .................................................................... 7-3 26 Recommended Alternative - West Segment ................................................................... 7-4 27 Proposed Future Access Locations on IA-1 ................................................................... 7-6 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix · Preliminary Plan View of Final Alternatives · Preliminary Profiles of Final Alternatives 61976/10 040/OakdaleBh,dlO( ~ doc October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard £~tension, Location $1u~' Rcporl Dithuque Street to Scott Boulevard. Iowa City. Iowa The Oakdale Boulevard Extension is identified as a future arterial street improvement in both the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan, adopted by the City of lowa City as an element of its Comprehensive Plan, and the Northeast Dixtrict Plan, which was adopted in June, 1999. The purpose of this study is to evaluate ahernative alignments for this roadway and to recommend a preferred location to the City. The functional needs of this project have been defined by the City to include the following elements: · To provide local access for potential development areas within the corridor. Recent residential development has been active near the southerly portion of the project corridor and the business park development east of Iowa Highway I continues to expand. The proposed arterial will provide improved access to these and other developable areas through a system of local and collector streets connecting to the Oakdale Boulevard Extension. · To accommodate "through" trq/fic in the corridor and to complete an arterial loop around the north and east sides of the metropolitan area. The proposed arterial would connect Oakdale Boulevard on the west with Scott Boulevard on the southeast, filling a gap between these arterial streets. The Oakdale Boulevard Extension would not be a "beltway highway" but would be designed to urban arterial street standards. · To relieve tra['fic congestion from existing streets, particularly portions of North Dodge Street (lowa Highway 1) and First Avenue. The existing street network in this part of the community offers very few opportunities for traffic to cross 1-80, to connect with Iowa Highway I or to cross the Iowa River. The Oakdale Boulevard Extension would provide i~nproved traffic service for the growing areas east of First Avenue and north of 1-80, relieving the traffic pressure on existing streets. I)lSh( RIPI ION OF ARE*. Much of the area in the study corridor consists of rural and urban fringe areas in and near the northeast side of Iowa City. The landscape in the corridor, typical of this part of Iowa, has a well-developed drainage system which has dissected the landscape with numerous valleys and ravines. East Segment (Figure 2) Between Scott Boulevard and 1-80, the project corridor is currently agricultural land with rolling topography. Several drainageways cross the corridor, each carrying a relatively small drainage area. The total topographic relief in this segment is approximately 70 feet. A small portion of this segment near Scott Boulevard contains an area of"steep slopes" based on the City's Sensitive Area Mapping. Interstate Highway 80 crosses the project corridor at approximately a right angle. 1-80 is presently a four- lane, rural freeway at this location; however, the DOT intends to widen this roadway to six lanes, with the added lanes being constructed within the median. Just north of 1-80, an nnnamed tributary to Rapid Creek crosses the corridor in an east-west direction. The elevation of this tributary is approximately 30 feet lower than 1-80. North of this tributary, and continuing to Iowa Highway 1, the existing corridor is agricultural land with rolling topography. Oakclale Boulevard Extension, Locatio, Stm~v Rt?)ort Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa £'t'0~, Iowa The evaluation of alternatives in this report was conducted in two segments: · East Segment, Scott Boulevard to Iowa llighway 1. This segment included an evaluation of location alternatives as well as possible intersection configurations at Scott Boulevard, and an evaluation of overpass/underpass alternatives at 1-80. · West Segment, Dubuque Street to Iowa Highway 1. For the purpose of this study, the West Segment was considered a "cursory review segment" and was not developed to the same level of detail as the East Segment. It is anticipated that additional public streets may be developed within the project corridor and connected to the Oakdale Boulevard Extension. In addition, private access points may be allowed at selected locations to provide access to properties which would otherwise be cut off. S(oP[ OF S[R~, I( I'?, The Scope of Services for this project was to provide an engineering and environmental evaluation of alternatives for a future arterial street within a corridor approximately 1/2 mile wide. Between Scott Boulevard and Iowa Highway 1, a more detailed evaluation was completed, including the development of geometric alignments, preliminary profiles, drainage structure reviews and estimated construction limits. The evaluation of this segment also included a records search and field review to identify major environmental constraints and issues. In the West Segtnent, between Iowa Highway I and Dubuque Street, a tnore cursory evaluation of alternatives was completed. Mapping in this section was less detailed and utilized the USGS Quadrangle Mapping and available aerial photography. The records search and field reviews were completed in this section, similar to the East Segment. The environmental evaluations in this study are intended to identify the key issues which should be considered in selecting a preferred alternative, and to determine if any "fatal flaws" exist, which would preclude the construction of an arterial street in this corridor. This evaluation, while not meeting the full requirements of a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document, will serve as the starting point for a future Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement. In addition to the evaluation of arterial street alignments, this project included a review of access management along Iowa Highway 1 between Northgate Drive and Rapid Creek Road. Existing access points and property ownerships were reviewed, and recommendations were made for future access locations in this segment. 61976/lO040/OakdMeBhdTEXl doc ] 5 Oclober 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension. Location Study Report Dubuque Street lo &'oil Boulevard, h>wa ('it),', lo,va [\ ~,lt XIi¢)~. The development and evaluation of alternatives lbr the Oakdale Boulevard Extension consisted of several steps which are outlined in this report: · Development of Initial Alternatives. A variety of potential alternatives were developed by the planning team, in consultation with the City. All feasible alternatives which were suggested by the City or the planning team were evaluated. · Preliminary Screening Process. A screening process was used to provide an initial comparison of alternatives and to eliminate the Jess desirable alternatives. Major environmental and engineering factors were identified, and the comparisons between alternatives were quantified wherever possible. The most desirable alternatives were recommended for further evaluation. · FinalEvaluation. Two alternatives were analyzed in detail, leading to a final recommendation. The evaluation of alternatives was a coordinated eftbrt between the engineering and environmental professionals on the consultant team and City staff: The objective of this evaluation is to determine a preferred alignment that provides the traffic service needed in this area while balancing the engineering and environmental impacts and benefits. The remainder of this report describes the process and results in more detail. 61976/lO040/OakdaleBhdTEXI doc 1 6 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Ettension, Location Study Report Dubuque SltYel lo Scott Boult, vard, II I)EVEI~OPMENT OF INITIAI~ ALTERNAIIVES I~RO,IFX'I ('()I,~RII)OR [AMI I N The alternatives for the Oakdale Boulevard Extension were located within a study area established by the City prior to initiating this project (Figures I to 3). The study corridor was approximately I/2 mile wide and was bounded by the following limits. · Scott Boulevard to 1-80. The corridor begins at the east property line of ACT and extends approximately 1/2 mile to the east. This location would place the crossing of 1-80 to the east of the Iowa Highway I interchange ramps. · 1-80 to Iowa Highway I. To the east of Iowa Highway 1, the corridor extends from the Northgate Business Park to Rapid Creek Road, a width of approximately 2/3 mile. The existing residential subdivision on Rapid Creek Road and the planned expansion of Northgate Business Park result in a narrower corridor through part of this segment. · Iowa Highway 1 to Dubuque Street. A corridor approximately i/2 mile wide was examined, with the south limits of the corridor being approximately 1/2 mile north of 1-80. Attempts were made to identify all feasible alternatives within the corridor which would meet the prescribed design standards while avoiding sensitive environmental features and other major constraints in the area. I)[NI(;N S1 *,NI)ARI)N In developing alternative alignments, an attempt was made to maintain the highest geometric design standards practical while minimizing the impact to environmental constraints within the corridor. The following design standards were used as a guideline in developing potential alignments: · Maximum Allowable Grade - 8% · Maximum Desirable Grade - 4% · Minimum Horizontal Curve Radius - 1,000' · Minimum Skew of At-Grade Intersections - 75° · Design Speed - 40 mph (Anticipated speed limit of 35 mph. The roadway design features would meet the highest practical design standards to increase the safety characteristics of the project.) The evaluation and comparison of alternatives considered the above factors as well as the environmental impacts, traffic service and estimated costs of each alignment. 61076/10 040;OakdaleBl~dTEX2 doc 2 ] October 2003 (hd~d~de Boldev~#xl b2rlen~ion, Localion Study Dubuque S~reez to ,~coll Bozdewtrd, lou~t Cio,, Iowa I) klX ('OIA.I,X lION kNI) As preparatory work for thc iaitial alternatives, a considerable anqount of data collection and research was conducted. Major activities during this stage included: 1. An initial project meeting was held with the City on November 19. 2002, to discuss project objectives, confirm the project corridor boundaries and to idcnti~' known constraints. 2. Pertinent documents, such as the lowa (_'it3, Northeast District Plan, .J£?£'OG Arterial Street Plan .fi~r lhe Iowa CiO; Urbanized Area, Joint Municipal Dexign Standar(,~¥, Iowa Ci0' ('omprehensive Plan, .lC(JOG 2002-2027 Long Range Multi Modal Transportation Plan and Iowa ("i(v Sensitive Area Mapping, were obtained and studied. 3. Recent aerial photography was obtained for the entire corridor, and digitized aerial mapping with 2-foot contour intervals was obtained for portions of the project area between Scott Bonlevard and Iowa Highway 1. USGS Qnadrangle Mapping was used in areas outside these limits. This mapping was used to evaluate cngineeriug data such as profiles and cross sections. 4. An initial field review of the corridor was conducted from adjacent pnblic roads to observe field conditions and other constraints. Portions of the corridor were walked to obtain additional information and to review environmental conditions. Photographs were taken throughout the corridor to document existing conditions. 5. Property information was obtained and property lines and ownerships were plotted on the 1" 200' photos. This information was used to evaluate impacts to individual properties from various alignments. 6. Future private property development plans were obtained for the area north of the Northgate Business Park, and filture street locations were plotted on the base maps. 7. Flood plain mapping fBr Rapid Creek and the Iowa River was obtaine& and floodway and flood plain limits were plotted on the base mapping. I'his information was used to locate desirable crossing points and to estimate bridge lengths. 8. Information on significant environmental lhctors was gathered and mapped, including: · National Wetland Inventory Maps for the area. · Johnson County Soil Survey. · Upland and flood plain wooded areas as determined from aerial mapping and aerial photography. · Arcas of steep slopes or other sensitive areas. · Locations of archaeological sites based on reformation from the Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA). Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Sludy R~7~orl Dubuque Sit'eel Io Scott Boulevard. Iowa Cio,. Iowa 9. Side road profiles at Iowa Highway 1 were reviewed to determine possible intersection locations. Areas of poor sight distance or other intersection constraints were identified. 10. Sight distance was further reviewed in the field to confirm possible intersection locations along iowa flighway I and Prairie du Chien Road. 11. Profiles and cross sections along 1-80 were reviewed for a distance of approxi~nately I/2 mile to determine the tnost desirable locations for an overpass or nnderpass of 1-80. 12. Existing access locations along Iowa Highway I were spotted in the field and included in the base mapping. [}l~S( RIPIION t)l~ CONYgl RAIN] 5; Several physical and environmental constraints, which will influence the location of potential streets, were identified as part of the data collection and research. In the East Segment, these constraints were graphically depicted on a constraint ~nap before the initial alternatives were identified. Some of these constraints included: · Flood plain and floodway limits. · Areas classified as "steep slopes" or greater, based on the City's sensitive area ordinance. · Wooded areas. · Known wetlands. · Archaeological sites of record. · Desirable and undesirable locations for crossing 1-80, based on existing topography and cross sections. · Desirable and undesirable locations for intersecting with Iowa Highway 1, based on existing profiles and sight distance. · Limits of existing development. · Limits of planned development (areas which are already platted). · Existing ridge lines, valley lines and contour mapping. The major physical and environmental constraints for the East Segment are shown in Figure 4, and photographs illustrating the characteristics of this corridor are shown in Figures 5 through 10. 61976/lO. 040/Oak&deBhdYlz~2 ~h~¢ 2 3 October 2003 Oakda/e Boulevard tz'¥lension, Location Study Rel)ort Dubuque Street to $coll Boulevard lowa Ci(v, Iowa OakdaIe Boulevard ~Wens'ion, Location Stuch, Repot! Dt~httqtw Slreel to S~ol! Boltfe~'ard. lower C'iO,. Iowa 1'~,4ure 8. L~u~kitL,4 north ]~otlt lh~' ('ll*! t'Iul q] %orlh.~a&, Drive. l'lw ma]or ]olllll'd ~Oll/h i!] R~qfid ~ rl'e~ R~ad. lite ]ll'~!]l,l'! i'orridor Oakdale Boulevard £Lttension. Location Xtuo~v R('por! Duhuque Street to &'olt ~ozt&vard, Iowa CiO,, Iowa I (~urc % Lool~iJl,k, south ahm,~, Iowa I fi'om just soitlh itl Rapid (reck RomL ltl. I.o.ldt(k, ca~t fi o.t Iowa I toward ~t¥i~tink, /arm~tead, Im at~,d midw~O, Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, lowa City, Iowa INITIAL ALTERNATIVES After review of the data and base mapping, the project team identified a series of potential alternatives which took into account the topography, environmental constraints, existing and proposed land developments, existing roadways and drainage patterns. The initial alignments were developed in two segments, with a more detailed review being conducted between Scott Boulevard and Iowa Highway 1 and a more cursory review being conducted between Iowa Highway 1 and Dubuque Street. Within these segments, the initial alternatives are described as follows: East Segment (Scott Boulevard to Iowa Highway 1) In this segment, the first step was to identify potential locations for intersections at Scott Boulevard and Iowa Highway 1 and potential crossing locations at 1-80. These points became the potential beginning, midpoint and end point of the alternatives in this segment. After identifying thc above points, several possible alignments were developed in each segment to connect these points. These alignments were developed to avoid thc known constraints in thc area and to consider thc topography and drainage patterns within thc corridor. Thc initial alternatives are described as follows: Scott Boulevard Intersection. Four locations for a potential intersection on Scott Boulevard were identified. The alignment of Scott Boulevard includes a long horizontal curve which spans most of the corridor, and the potential intersection locations are all located on or near this curve. An existing farmstead also occupies a portion of this area near the top of the hill. Of the four potential intersection alternatives, one is located to the west of the farmstead, two are located to the east of the farmstead, and one alternative would displace the farmstead. These alternatives were labeled A, B, C and D. · 1-80 Crossing. Based on the location of existing culverts and adjacent topography, a section of 1-80 approximately 1,200 feet long was identified as the most desirable crossing location. Existing cross sections were drawn to study several possible crossing locations, and to determine the approximate embankment heights which would be required to overpass 1-80. Two existing culverts cross 1-80 in this segment. An overpass near these culverts would require significantly higher embankments, and these locations were considered undesirable. At one location, 1-80 is located in an existing cut, where an overpass would be easier to construct. Based on an examination of these cross sections, three potential crossing locations were identified in this section and are labeled F, G and H. · Iowa Highway 1 Intersection. Ihe profile of I0wa 1 is relatively flat throughout the project corridor, and sight distance is adequate throughout most of the corridor. Locations for a potential intersection were based on the adjacent topography, location of drainageways, location of adjacent development, and the width of the Rapid Creek flood plain. Based on these considerations, four potential intersection locations were identified and are labeled K, L, M and N. · Alignment Alternatives. Between the above-described terminal points, several intermediate alignments were developed in each segment. Each of these alignments would meet the design 61976/lO. 040/OakdaleBlvdTEX2. doc 2-8 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, lowa City, Iowa standards for the project, and each alignment was designed to fit the existing topography as well as possible so that the cost of grading and drainage structures would be minimized and that the road could provide good access to surrounding properties. This process resulted in the following alternatives. East Segment 1, Scott Boulevard to l-80. Within this segment, 12 altemative alignments were identified and are labeled according to their beginning and ending points. East Segment 2, 1-80 to lowa Highway 1. Within this segment, 13 alternative alignments were identified. These are labeled according to their beginning and ending points. The initial East Segment alternatives are shown in Figure 11. 61976/lO. 040/OakdaleBIvdTEX2 doc 2-9 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa West Segment (Dubuque Street to Iowa Highway 1) This segment is characterized by a wide variety of topographic features, including the Iowa River Valley, two or more crossings of Rapid Creek, relatively flat agricultural land and steep, wooded hillsides. The alternative alignments in this segment were based on a more cursory review of existing land forms and environmental constraints. Detailed topographic mapping was not available for this segment; therefore, the alignments were developed with the use of USGS Topographic Mapping with 10-foot contour intervals. The initial alternatives in this segment are described as follows: · Dubuque Street to Prairie du Chien Road. In this segment, preliminary alignments have already been investigated as part of the Location Study Report for Oakdale Boulevard Extension Between First Avenue and Dubuque Street (Rust Environment & Infrastructure, January, 1997). The alignments from the previous study were refined and modified to match the alternatives east of Prairie du Chien Road, which were developed in the current study. In addition, the beginning point for this segment on Dubuque Road was adjusted to match the actual location of the Oakdale Boulevard intersection, which is currently being designed by the City of Coralville. · Prairie du Chien Road to lowa Highway 1. This segment is dominated by a large hill approximately 120 feet high, surrounded by Rapid Creek to the south and another stream to the north. Four altemative alignments were identified in this segment, including one alignment located along the ridge at the top of the hill, one alignment on the south-facing hillside and two alignments located toward the base of the hill and closer to Rapid Creek. The initial West Segment alternatives are shown in Figure 12. 61976/10. 040/OakdaleBIvdTEX2.doc 2-11 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa III. PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES After development of the initial alternatives, a screening process was used to evaluate and compare the merits and deficiencies of each alternative. The objective of this process was to give equal consideration to each of the initial alternatives, identify those which should be eliminated, and provide a more detailed evaluation of the remaining alternatives. The preliminmy screening process, described below, was applied to the east segment (Scott Boulevard to Iowa Highway 1). In the West Segment (Dubuque Street to IA 1), a more cursory evaluation of alternatives was conducted. DESCRIPTION OF SCREENING PROCESS, EAST SEGMENT The initial alternatives were first compared qualitatively to eliminate those which had excessive impacts or which were "functional duplications" of the other nearby alternatives. In the case of functional duplications, two or more nearby alternatives were examined to determine which of the alternatives had the more favorable environmental or engineering characteristics. If two or more alternatives provided the same traffic service functions, it was possible to select the most desirable alternative and to eliminate the other nearby functional duplicates. None of the alternatives were judged to have "fatal flaws" which would render the alternatives unbuildable, unable to receive regulatory agency approvals or which would be unacceptably expensive to construct. The initial alignments developed for this study were selected to avoid such fatal flaws. The preliminary screening process, therefore, focused on a comparison of other impacts and traffic service issues. As part of the preliminary screening process, several alternatives were preliminarily examined and deleted due to excessive length (and therefore higher construction cost and road user costs), lesser compatibility with existing developments, difficulty with extending the project to the west of Iowa Highway 1, or other major flaws. During this screening process, the remaining alternatives were reviewed and modified to improve their design features or to reduce environmental impacts. A more quantitative review of certain factors was also conducted to provide factual data for selecting the most desirable alternatives for final evaluation. RESULTS OF SCREENING PROCESS, EAST SEGMENT A summmy of the initial screening analysis is outlined in Table 1, and a description of the evaluation factors follows the table. The summary of these factors shown in Table 1 provides a visual, color-coded comparison of the alternatives. For each factor, the alternatives shaded in green would have the most desirable characteristics, the alternatives shaded in yellow would be less desirable, and the alternatives shaded in red may result in significant impacts or construction difficulties. 61976/l(~040/OakdaleBlvdTEX3.doc 3-1 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, lowa The screening factors in Table I are described as follows: · Length of Alignment. This measurement represents total length of new construction between Scott Boulevard and Iowa Highway 1. · Crossing ofl-80. An overpass of 1-80 would require a significant embankment to be constructed on both the north and south approaches. The difference between the three crossing locations (designated as F, G and H on the location map) is relatively minor; however, the crossing locations "G" and "H" which are farther to the east would be slightly more favorable to construct the overpass. (It should be noted that an underpass of 1-80 was also investigated as one of the design variations. Refer to the section on "alignment modifications" later in this chapter.) · Compatibility With Scott Boulevard. All of the proposed alternatives would intersect with Scott Boulevard on or near the horizontal curve. For the lower-speed intersection anticipated for this project, adequate sight distance could be obtained at any location, although some grading and clearing may be required on the inside of the curve. The intersection Alternative "D" would have slightly better sight distance from the south than the other alternatives. However, it should be noted that the required design standards could be met at any of the locations. · Impact to Homes and Farmsteads. Three existing farmsteads are potentially affected by one or more of the alternatives. One farmstead is located on Scott Boulevard, and two farmsteads are located on or near Iowa Highway 1. Alternatives which would displace one or mom homes or farmsteads were considered less desirable. · Impact to Businesses. Several businesses are located near the corridor on Iowa Highway 1 and within the Northgate Business Park. No existing businesses would be affected by any of the alternatives. · Impact to Wetlands. Small areas of wetlands are present in this corridor based on the National Wetland Inventory Mapping. A more detailed delineation of wetlands would be necessary during final design of the project; however, none of the alternatives appear to have a significant impact on wetlands. · Impact to Known Cultural Sites. Of the seven archaeological sites of record within the project corridor, only one site is affected by any of the alternatives. This site (13JH1770) is an old foundation located just inside the curve at Scott Boulevard, and which appears to have already been removed or covered over as part of the Scott Boulevard construction. · Impact to Steep Slopes. Each of the alternatives would have a minor impact to steep or protected slopes as defined in the City's Sensitive Area Ordinance. None of the alternatives appeared to have a major impact on this resource. · Compatibility With West Extension (West of Iowa Highway 1). The major determinant for this factor was the crossing location at Rapid Creek. The alternatives which cross Iowa Highway 1 farthest to the south (Location "K") would encounter a wide flood plain and a major tributary near the proposed bridge location. These alternatives were considered less desirable than the alternatives farther to the north. 61976/lO 040/OakdaleBtvdTEX3 doc 3-4 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street w Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa · Access to Properties. The alternatives were examined to determine the extent of good, two-sided access which could be provided. One of the major functions of the Oakdale Boulevard Extension is to provide access to the surrounding properties. Alternatives which provided less access opportunities on either side of the road were considered less desirable. In particular, Alternatives "MI" and "N" near lowa 1 are located near a major drainageway, and would offer little opportunity for access in that direction. Also, Alternative "D" near Scott Boulevard crossed two relatively deep ravines and would be more difficult to access than the other alternatives. · Design Features and Topography. The initial altematives were designed to fit the surrounding topography as well as possible; however, alternatives connecting with Location "D" on Scott Boulevard would cross two deep ravines and would encounter higher construction costs and a less desirable fit than the other alternatives. SCREENING WORKSItOP Afier completing the screening analysis, a Screening Workshop was held with the City on January 30, 2003, to reach a consensus on the results. The result of this process was the selection of two alternatives (CGL and CHL), which were then advanced to the final evaluation stage. The preliminary screening process eliminated all of the altematives which had less desirable characteristics for the 1-80 crossing, those which impacted homes and farmsteads, those with problems for extending the project to the west, those with less desirable access to properties, those with less desirable intersections at Iowa Highway 1 and other undesirable design features. FIELD REVIEWS AND ALIGNMENT MODIFICATIONS Afier screening the list of alternatives to the final two candidates, a field review was conducted to confirm the conditions along these alignments and to see if any refinements or improvements could be made to the alternatives. In addition, the profiles and alignments were further evaluated to determine if improvements could be made in the design features, traffic service or potential construction cost. It was found that several refinements could be made in these alignments to improve their design and traffic service/access characteristics. These refinements included: 1. The north-south segments of each alignment were changed to parallel the existing north-south property lines. The original alignments had been set for a 90° crossing at 1-80 to minimize the bridge length and cost. It was determined that a slight skew in the bridge crossing would not significantly increase the length of the bridge and would still permit a cost-effective two-span design concept for this bridge. The revised north-south alignments would be more compatible with development and access to the adjacent properties. 2. The segment between Scott Boulevard and 1-80 was changed to eliminate the reverse curves and substitute a single horizontal curve. The original alignments were set to more closely follow the contour of the land; however, it was found that the revised alignments would greatly improve the design features and would improve the visibility of the Scott Boulevard intersection while only slightly increasing the cuts and fills along thc alignment. 3. The intersection location at Iowa Highway 1 was moved approximately 100 feet to the north. This change would eliminate two of the horizontal curves in the alignment and would allow the profile of the new road to better match the existing ground east of lowa Highway 1. 61976/lO. 040/OakdaleBh,dTEX3.doc 3-5 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa 4. A variation of Alternative "CGL" was also investigated to eliminate one of the horizontal curves north of 1-80 and to position the roadway closer to the center of the developable property. This change would improve the potential function of the arterial in providing good two-sided access to adjacent properties and would also shorten the alignment by approximately 220 feet. The new variation was designated "Alternative CGL-2." FINAL AL I ERNATIVES As a result of the field review and alignment modifications, three alternatives were recommended for the final evaluation stage. · Altemative CHL-I · Alternative CGL- 1 · Alternative CGL-2 The final evaluation of these alternatives, shown in Figure 13, is described in the following chapter. 61976/lO. 040/OakdaleBIvdTEX3.doc 3-6 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa IV FINAL EVALUATION - EAST SEGMENT This section of the report describes the final evaluation of the remaining alternatives in the East Segment between Iowa Highway I and Scott Boulevard. FINAl. EVAIAJATIt}N PROCESS - EAST SEGMENT During the final evaluation phase, the three final alternatives were developed in detail to provide a more thorough assessment of impacts, costs and right-of-way needs. Major steps in this analysis included: · A field review of the corridor was conducted by the project biologist and engineer to identify engineering and environmental factors that had not been detectable from aerial photography. · Horizontal alignments were refined to a greater detail to permit a comparison of the design characteristics. Design features, such as curve radii, intersection angles, design speed and drainage requirements, were more accurately determined. · Existing ground profiles along the proposed alignments were examined, and the preliminary design profile was refined for each of the three alternatives. · Preliminary cross sections were designed based on a typical cross section, and approximate construction limits and earthwork volumes were determined. This information was also used to evaluate construction costs and environmental impacts. This method provides a more accurate assessment of impacts than the use of a nominal right-of-way width. · A more detailed assessment of environmental and engineering factors was completed. · A more detailed cost comparison was completed. · The grade separation at 1-80 was further investigated, and a comparison of overpass versus underpass alternatives was completed. Based on the above analysis, the final evaluation factors were quantified and tabulated for each of the alternatives. The remainder of this section describes the final alternatives in more detail and provides the results of the final evaluation. The plan and profile drawings for the final alternatives are included in the appendix to this report. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION - EAST SEGMENT The environmental evaluation was based on the measurement of natural features within the preliminary construction limits for each alternative. These construction limits are based on the actual estimated "footprint" of the road, accounting for the areas of deep cuts or fills. The factors used in this evaluation and a comparison of the major differences between the alternatives are discussed below. 61976/lO.1340/OakdaleBIvdTEX4.doc 4- l October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa A. Right-of-Way Impacts The total acreage of new right-of-way was estimated from the construction limit drawings and the number of affected properties was determined. Each of the final alternatives would affect four properties, and no buildings or homes would be affected by any of the alternatives. The total estimated right-of-way would be least for Alternative CGL-2 and highest for Alternative CHL-I. B. Wetlands Wetlands were located from the National Wetlands Inventory Mapping and from a field review by the project biologist and include all wetlands that are under the jurisdiction of Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. (The locations of these wetland areas were shown on Figure 12.) It was found that none of the final alternatives would affect the known wetlands. C. Upland Woods Based on a review by the project biologist, the existing areas of vegetation in this segment would not be considered "upland woods." The vegetated areas along some of the fence lines and drainageways may include some trees, brush and other vegetation. Therefore, none of the alternatives would have an impact on upland woods. D. Highly Erodible Soils/Steep Slopes Avoiding roadway crossings of steep/critical/protected slopes will help reduce soil erosion and downstream siltation, landslides and mudslides. Crossing these types of slopes, which are often wooded, would detract from the scenic character of the area as well. None of the alternatives would have a major impact on highly erodible or steep slopes. Alternatives CGL-1 and CGL-2 would affect a slightly higher acreage of these slopes. E. Cultural Resources Impacts The locations of archaeological sites of record were obtained from the Office of State Archaeologist and plotted on the base mapping. Six of the seven recorded sites are located near Iowa Highway l,.~ust south of Rapid Creek Road. None of these sites would be affected by the final alternatives. The seventh site is located near Scott Boulevard and has apparently been removed or covered over by the recent Scott Boulevard construction. No standing structures are affected by any of the alternatives. Therefore, none of the alternatives will have an impact on known cultural resources sites. F. Prairie Remnants No prairie remnants or plant indicators of former prairie were found in the project corridor during the field review. G. Threatened and Endangered Species No areas of likely habitat for threatened and endangered species occur in the East Segment, and no known populations are on record in this segment. 61976/lO.040/OakdaleBIvdTEX4.doc 4-2 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa Cisv, Iowa H. Floodplain/Floodway Impacts Thc floodway and 100-year floodplain for Rapid Creek are shown on Figure 12. A small portion of this floodplain extends to thc east of Iowa Highway I and would be affected by any of the final alternatives. SUMMARY ¢)F ENVIRONMENTAl. lMPACTS The results of the environmental evaluation appear in Table 2. Some of the key environmental features are shown in Figure 12. TABLE 2 OAKDALE BOULEVARD EXTENSION EAST SEGMENT (SCOTT BOULEVARD TO IOWA HIGHWAY 1) FINAL EVALUATION ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Alternative Environmental Factor CGL- I CGL-2 CHL- 1 A. Right-of-Way Impacts I. Total Estimated Right-of-Way (Acres) 37.1 35.8 40.3 2. Number of Properties Affected 4 4 4 3. Number of Displacements 0 0 B. Wetland Impacts (Acres) 0 0 0 C. Upland Woods Impacts (Acres) 0 0 0 D. Highly Erodible Soils/Steep Slopes Impacts (Acres) 0.4 0.4 0.2 E. Cultural Resources Impacts 1. Number of Archaeological Sites 0 0 0 2. Number of Historic Properties 0 0 0 F. Prairie Remnants None None None G. Potential Threatened and Endangered Species Habitat None None None H. 100-Year Flood Plain Impacts (Acres) 0.1 0.1 0.1 ENGINEERING EVALUATION - EAST SEGMENT The engineering drawings accompanying this report provide detailed information on the engineering and design features of the final alternatives. This section of the report is intended to quantify the key features of the design and to provide an engineering comparison of the final alternatives. Several design characteristics were investigated and are described below; a comparative summary is included in Table 3 at the end of this section. 61976/lO. O40/OakdaleBIvdTEX4.doc 4-3 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa Ci(v, Iowa A. Length of Roadway The length of roadway is a factor which affects the initial construction cost, long-term maintenance cost and ongoing road-user costs. The total length of new construction ranges from approximately 1.24 miles to 1.41 miles, with Alternative CGL-2 being the shortest route. B. Horizontal Alignment The design of this roadway is influenced by the existing topography, drainage features, location of 1-80, and location of existing property lines and buildings. Alternatives CGL-I and CHL-1 were designed to more closely follow the contour of the land, while Alternative CGL-2 was intended to eliminate some of the horizontal curvature and to be more centrally located for property access. The horizontal alignments were evaluated by comparing the total length of curves as well as the radius of curvature. The radius of curvature is one measure related to the design speed of the roadway. Curves with a radius of approximately 1,000 feet would meet the current City Standards for arterial streets. None of the final alternatives exceeded a 1,000-foot radius. The percentage of each alignment on a horizontal curve, however, varies significantly. Alternatives CGL-1 and CHL-I have a significantly higher proportion of horizontal curves than Alternative CGL-2. C. Profile Grade Preliminary profile grades between Iowa Highway I and Scott Boulevard were established for each of the final alternatives. Profile grades will have an impact on the operating characteristics of this roadway, particularly due to its two-lane configuration. Excessive profile grades will result in lower operating speeds for trucks, while frequent changes in profile grade will reduce the driver's visibility along the roadway. The profile grades were also used to estimate the depth of cut and fill which would be required to construct the alternatives. The maximum grades were designed to be less than 5 percent for any of the alternatives. Based on these grades, over 40 percent of each alignment would experience cuts or fills in excess of I 0 feet. Some of the major fills near 1-80 cannot be avoided if an overpass is to be constructed, while some areas of major cuts and fills am the result of a relatively smooth profile grade line which meets the arterial street design criteria. A comparison of the alternatives shows that Alternative CHL-1 would have a significantly higher proportion of high cuts and fills and a significantly higher volume of total earthwork. It shouM be noted that the preliminary profile grades developed for this project are intended to provide a comparison of the alternatives and are intended to be a starting point for the final design. During the final design stage, these profiles should be carefully reviewed and coordinated with the possible development plans of the surrounding property. Adjustments in these preliminary profiles should be expected during the final design. D. Design Speed The design speed for a roadway determines the allowable horizontal geometry and vertical profile design. Higher design speeds are considered a desirable characteristic for arterial streets, regardless of the speed 61976/lO.(MO/OakdaleBIvdTEX4. doc 4-4 October 2003 Oalcdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa limit to be posted by the City. A higher design speed will typically be accompanied by improved traffic safety and improved operating conditions for all traffic. All of the alternatives will exceed the proposed design speed of 40 mph. E. 1-80 Overpass As noted earlier in this report, the final alignments were changed slightly from the original alignments, resulting in a skew of approximately 10 to 13° at 1-80. The preliminary bridge length for an overpass of 1-80 was reviewed, and it was determined that a 2-span bridge would still be possible for any of the alternatives. A center pier would be required in the median of 1-80. If 1-80 is widened to six lanes in this area, as planned by the Iowa DOT, the center pier would be constructed within the concrete barrier between the eastbound and westbound lanes. The design of the bridge would need to accommodate the widening of 1-80, and the construction of any bfidge would require a major traffic control and staging plan to maintain traffic on 1-80 during construction. The design characteristics of the 1-80 bridge would be approximately equal for any of the final alternatives. As part of a subsequent review, the possibility of underpassing 1-80 was also investigated. An underpass would allow the profile grade of Oakdale Boulevard to be lowered significantly, thus reducing the cost of embankment construction and shortening the box culvert north of 1-80. An underpass, however, would require a new bridge on 1-80 spanning the entire eastbound and westbound lanes as well as the median. The result of the overpass versus underpass evaluation is further discussed under "Alignment Variations." Although an underpass alternative would afford better access to a small area near 1-80, it was concluded that the overpass alternative would likely be more cost-effective. F. Drainage Structures Several drainageways cross the project corridor, including a relatively large drainageway north of 1-80. A twin box culvert is currently being constructed over this drainageway in an adjacent development. Drainage structures will have an impact on the overall project cost, and additionally will need to be maintained throughout the life of the project. Between 7 and 10 drainageways requiring crossroad culverts are affected by the final alternatives. G. Intersections At-grade intersections will be included in the project at Scott Boulevard, Iowa Highway I and other future locations. The intersection designs would be identical for each of the alternatives and would meet the design standards for this project. A possible variation of the Scott Boulevard intersection was considered to provide a roundabout intersection at this location. The possible intersection variations at this location are further discussed under "Alignment Variations" later in this chapter. H. Development Impacts The alternatives will have long-term effects on land use and development patterns in this corridor. Each of the final alternatives passes primarily through undeveloped land and would provide access 61976/lO.040/OakdaleBIvdTk'X4. doc 4-5 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, lowa opportunities to the surrounding property. A system of local streets or access roads would be required to serve these properties and to avoid an excessive number of access points on the new arterial street. Although the accessibility to individual properties will be somewhat different between the alternatives, the overall effect on development potential is seen to be approximately equal between the alternatives. Alternative CGL-2 would be slightly better than Alternative CGL-I in its ability to provide access to adjacent properties. Additional information is provided in the section "Traffic Service and Access Evaluation." SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING EVALUATIt)N Results of the engineering evaluation appear in Table 3. TABLE 3 OAKDALE BOULEVARD EXTENSION EAST SEGMENT (SCOTT BOULEVARD TO IOWA HIGHWAY 1) FINAL EVALUATION ENGINEERING FACTORS Alternative Engineering Factor CGL- I CGL-2 CHL- 1 A. Project Length (Feet) I. South ofi-80 2,540' 2,540' 2,590' 2. North of 1-80 4,240' 4,020' 4,840' 3. Total Lensth 6,780' 6,560' 7,430' B. Horizontal Alignment 1. Minimum Curve Radius 1,000' 1,000' 1,000' 2. Percent of Road on Curves Sharper than 6,000' Radius 43% 28% 44% C. Profile Grade Analysis I. Maximum Grade 4.7% 4.4% 4.7% 2. Percent of Road with 0-2% Grades 50 49 51 3. Percent of Road with 24% Grades 35 38 33 4. Percent of Road Exceeding 4% Grades 15 13 16 5. CuffFill Analysis - L.F. of Roadway · Cuts 0-10' 2,350 2,290 2,320 · Cuts Exceeding 10' 770 700 1,390 · Fills 0-10' 1,630 1,410 1,370 · Fills 10'-20' 710 850 1,100 950 930 550 · Fills 20'-30' 250 250 270 · Fills 30'-40' 130 140 210 · Fills Exceeding 40' 6. Total Earthwork Analysis - C.Y. a. South of 1-80 34,100 34,100 55,900 · Cut 143,400 143,400 179,300 · Fill +30% 109,300 109,300 123,400 · Borrow 61976/lO.040/OakdaleBlvdTEX4.doc 4-6 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa TABLE 3 OAKDALE BOULEVARD EXTENSION EAST SEGMENT (SCOTT BOULEVARD TO IOWA HIGHWAY 1) FINAL EVALUATION ENGINEERING FACTORS (CONTINUED) ~ ..--.--._._._. ~__ Alternativ CGL-I ~ ~ · ------._._._._ CGL-2 CHL- 1 -----.-____._. b. North of 1-80 -'---'----" · Cut · Fill +30% 109,300 98,100 147,400 301,200 299,700 313,400 · Borrow 191,900 201,600 166,000 c. Total Project · Cut 143,400 132,200 203,300 · Fill +30% 444,600 443,100 492,700 · Borrow ~ 301,200 310,900 289,400 E. 1-80 Overpass ~ ~ ~ · Skew Angle ~e Len th ofBrid e (2-S an) 10s 10g 13n 222' 222' F. Drainage Structures ~ 222' N b fC ~- · um er o rossroad Culverts · Box Culvert Len th North of 1-80 8 10 7 380' 380' TRAFFIC SERVICE EVALUATION ~ EAST SEGMENT~ A traffic evaluation was made to compare the traffic service provided by each alternative. The roadway is intended to serve a combination of through traffic and local access to adjacent properties. Each of the three final alternatives was evaluated to determine how well these functions would be served. A. Through Traffic Service Accommodation of "through" traffic is an important function of the Oakdale Boulevard Extension since the availability of other arterial streets is very limited in this part of the community. North Dodge Street is the only other arterial street which crosses 1-80 in this part of the City, and the long-range arterial street plan has shown the need for an additional major street. The three final alternatives will be very similar in their ability to accommodate through traffic and to relieve congestion on other streets, such as First Avenue and North Dodge Street. The only significant difference between the alternatives is the length of new roadway, which will result in a difference in travel distances and road-user costs. The estimated travel distance between Scott Boulevard and Iowa Highway 1 was determined for each alternative and compared to existing conditions. Under existing conditions, traffic destined for northbound Iowa Highway I would use the only other available route, consisting of Scott Boulevard, 61976/lO. 040/OakdaleBIvdThX4. doc 4- 7 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, lowa City, Iowa North Dodge Street and Iowa Highway I. Table 4 summarizes the differences in travel distance and the reduction in total vehicle miles, based on an estimated average daily traffic of 3,750 vehicles per day. Alternative CGL-2 will yield the most benefits for through traffic by providing the shortest travel route. TABLE 4 OAKDALE BOULEVARD EXTENSION EAST SEGMENT (SCOTT BOULEVARD TO IOWA HIGHWAY 1) FINAL EVALUATION THROUGH TRAFFIC SERVICE Alternative Existing Conditions CGL-I CGL-2 CHL-I A. Travel Distance, Scott Boulevard to IA 1 2.60 mi 1.28 mi 1.24 mi 1.41 mi B. Average Daily Traffic Volumes (vpd) 3,750 3,750 3,750 3,750 C. Total Vehicle Miles Per Day 9,750 4,800 4,650 5,290 D. Reduction in Vehicle Miles Per Day --- 4,950 5, 100 4,460 Compared to Existing Conditions E. Reduction in Vehicle Miles Per Year --- 1,807,000 1,861,000 1,628,000 Compared to Existin~ Conditions Notes: A. Travel distances represent the distance between the proposed Oakdale Boulevard intersections at Scott Boulevard and Iowa I. B. Average daily traffic volumes are forecast to be 7,500 vehicles per day by the year 2025 (JCCOG traffic model). This comparison is based on one-half of the 2025 forecast, or 3,750 vehicles per day. B. Local Access Access to adjacent properties is a second major function of the Oakdale Boulevard Extension. Access to these properties is a key element of future development potential. Each of the final alternatives will provide good access opportunities to the surrounding properties. To the south of 1-80, very little difference exists between the alternatives with respect to local access. To the north of 1-80, the alternatives vary by a maximum of approximately 500 feet. In this segment, Alternative CGL-2 is positioned more centrally between two major drainageways and appears to offer a better access location than the other alternatives. However, the quality of local access is largely determined by the development plans for individual properties, and any of the alternatives can provide good access with a complement of additional side streets and access roads. The difference between the alternatives with respect to local access does not appear to be a deciding factor between the alternatives. 61976/lO.040/t)akdaleBIvdTl:'X4.doc 4-8 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa TRAFFIC SERVICE SUMMARY ~ EAST SEGMENT The traffic service evaluation showed a relatively minor difference between the alternatives. It was found that Alternative CGL-2 would be slightly superior to the other alternatives for both through traffic and local traffic service. Alternative CGL-2 would have the following advantages: · It would reduce the travel distance for every vehicle by over 1/10 mile, compared to Alternative CHL- 1. · It would reduce total vehicle miles of travel by an estimated 1,861,000 vehicle-miles per year. · It would provide a more central location for accessing developable properties between the two drainageways east of Iowa Highway I. ESTIMATEI) COST COMPARISONS - EAST SEGMENT A comparison of construction costs was made for each of the final alternatives, based on a series of "planning level" unit costs. These costs are intended for comparative purposes and represent the expected differences in construction cost between the alternatives. Tables 5 through 7 provide a summary of the cost comparisons for each alternative between Scott Boulevard and Iowa Highway 1. These costs are representative of 2003 construction costs and do not include right-of-way acquisition, relocation assistance or design costs. 61976/lO.{MO/OakdaleBIvdTEX4. doc 4-9 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, lowa City, Iowa Est. Unit Alternative CGL-1 Alternative CGL-2 Alternative CHL-1 Alternative CGL-2 UNDER Item Unit Cost Est. Qt7. Est. Cost Est. Qt7. Est. Cost Est. Qt7. Est. Cost Est. Qty. Est. Cost ~.~[~h~9[~.,..~P~.~( ........................... C.Y. .................... ~'~.:~9 ................. ~:...'[~ ..........5!..!.~.~59 34,100 $119,35(2 55900 .......5'[[~..~ .............. ~.~r~B~9[~.,..~.rr9~ ................................................................... G.:'(., ............................. ~:~9 ............... !.9~.,.~9~.._......5~,~0 109,300 $546 50(2 ............... '~.~:}..~:~ ........5t~.'[~.~P~ ................................ (~ ............................ 5(2 ~.~.~.~..~!~.~!.~ .................................... L.~. $~:.~ .......................... ~¢~.~ ............ ~..~(~ ........ ~ ............... ~:~.,~(2 605 $30 2~0 ......................... ~.~ ............ ~,~.~..~(2 ~.~.~,..~¢.~ .................................................................... ~.,'5 .............................. ~.:~ .................. ~.9.,.!.~ .............. ~.:~..,~.~ .................. !.~,.~.~ ............... ~..,~.~(2 .................. !.9,.~0 $82,680 10 16~ ~.0.~!t~!.~!..~.~.r~!~..~..9.~!~ ............................ t::.~.: .............................. ~.:~ ..................... ¢.,~ .............. 5!.~.,~ ..................... ~.,~'~0 ............... ~.!.~.,~(2 ..................... ~,.~0 $!.?,~q .................... ~9.~.ff.[~t,..~}~'...~!~).,..~.![b...~.[~ ................................ ~:~:. ....................... ~}~.:1~(~ ..................... ~.~E~ ..........~.~.,I}~? 9,596 $287 867 ..................... ~...~SE .........5~.:}..E~:} .................... ~,.E~{~ .......... }2~.E.,E~7 ~P.[m..~ 9~9.~.~.!~e. ...................................................................... i~:?.: ....................... 5~:~(~ ..................... ~.,~P0 $99,000 2 200 .............. ~.~..0(~(2 ..................... 2..~0(~ $99,000 ................ ~.,~po .............. Storm Sewer Structures and Inlet Runs EACH $3,500.00 8 $28,000 8 $28,000 8 $28,000 8 $28,000 F~.q~!.9g ................................................................................................... ~]~(~ ..................... ~8.~.:99 .............................. ~.~[ ............... ~.!.~..~.~ 51 . .~.'!.~,7.5(2 ............................. ~2 $13 000 ............... ~.'~ .............. ~.!.~..~(2 ~.r~[~c~s and Side Road Cqg. r]~!~.[~ .............. In:.~: ......... $40 000.00 ..................... ~ ............... ~.~..9~ 1 $40,000 ...... ! .............. ~:.(~..~(~ ................................. [~fl~!.~..~9.~[9!. .................................................................................. I~:.~: .......... ~.~p,p00.00 ....... ] ............... ~.9..~ 1 $20 (~(~(2 .................................. ] .............. ~.(~..~(~ ......... ] .............. ~g.0..(~(~ Miscellaneous Items 30% --- $402,000 $402,000 $444,900 $376,700 Subtotal $1,741,868 $1,741,868 $1,927,812 $1,632,523 Oontin~encies 20% --- $348,400 $348,400 $385,600 $326,500 Total $2,264,468 $2,264,468 $2,506,212 $2,122,323 Total (Rounded) $2,264,000 $2,264,000 $2,506,000 $2,122,000 Notes~ (1) All Costs are "Planning Level" Estimates. (2) Costs Represent 2003 Construction Estimates. (3) Includes Local Storm Sewer Only; Excludes New Storm Sewer Outlet System. (4) Construction Costs Only, Excl. Right-of-Way, Survey, Design, Inspection, Admin. 61976/lO. 040/OakdaleBIvdTEX4. doc ,~ugust 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, lowa Est. Unit Alternative CGL-1 Alternative CGL-2 Alternative GILL-1 Alternative CGL-2 UNDER Item Unit Cost Est. Qt~. Est. Cost Est. Q~. Est. Cost Est. Qt~. Est. Cost Est. Qt~. Est. Cost ~.~r~h~9.rk.,..Bs~ ............................................................... ~.:)~.: .........$3.50 109 300 $382 550 98 10~ ~3,35[ 147,400 $515 900 ....... 141,900 ........... ~.~..~ ~h~.~..~.~[~ ..................................................................... g.:%..... ' .... $5.oo............ !.~.L.~ _........~..~:~ .............. ~'6'i';~6~ $~,oq~..~ .............. !.~..~ .........~.,~P ................................. ~ ............................. ~; ~[9~.~(9~..~J~..~JXff~ ...................................................... ~:.~.: ......................... ¢.~0.:.~ 776 .............. ~.~9 1,123 $56 15C 532 $26 600 1 503 $75 156 ........................................................ ....................... ........................ ....................... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~.~9~.,..~:~9...~[P~ ............................................................ ~.:~: ........................ ~:~. 12,6~ $1,012,320 12,6~ $1,012,326 12,6~ $1,012,320 21,600 $1,728,006 Subbase, Granular S.Y. $8.00 ................. ~'6';~5 '"'"'"'$'~'~'~"~ .................. ~'~"~b~ ........... ~'~'~'"~C ................. ~'~'~ '"'"'"$'~'~'¢~b.................. ~'~6~ .......... ~'~'~"'~ Gh'~iid'8ffi~i"~'~8'~i'fi'~'8"b'fiii~i~ ............................ EE ............................. ~"60 .................... ~'2'6~ .............. ~56' ~'6~ ..................... ~' ~ ............... ~'~'~'~6~ ' .................. ~' ~6 .............. ~5~' ~'6~ ..................... ~' ~'~ .............. ~'q'5' ~'68 ~.~Q~,..~'...~¢.~.~,..~..~.~ ................................ ~.:~: ........................ ~.~.:~. 15,187 $455,600 14,356 $430 667 17 453 $523 600 14 356 $430,667 Sidewalk, 8' S.Y. $22.00 ' .................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 573 $78,613 3 378 $74,311 4 107 $90 347 3 378 $74 311 Storm Sewer Structures and Inlet Runs EACH $3 500.00 12 $42 000 12 $42,000 14 $49 000 12 $42,000 Miscellaneous Items 30% --- $1,058,300 $1,053,400 $1,093,600 $1,106,800 Subtotal $4,585,923 $4,564,798 $4,738,807 $4,796,178 Mobilization 10% ................ ::: ................ $458,600 $456,500 $473,900 ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... $479 600 Contingencies 20% --- $917,200 $913,000 $947,800 $959,200 Total $5,961,723 $5,9~,298 $6,160,507 $6,234,978 Total (Rounded) $~,962,000 $5,934,000 $6,161,000 $6,235,000 Note (1) All Costs are "Planning Level" Estimates. (2) Costs Represent 2003 Construction Estimates. (3) Includes Local Storm Sewer Only; Excludes New Sto~ Sewer Outlet System. {4) Construction Costs Only, Excl. Right-of-Way, Su~ey, Design, Inspection, Admin. (5) "Traffic Control" Costs Include Construction and Removal of Temporaw Crossover Pavement On 1-80, Along With Temporaw Signing, Barricading and Lighting on 1-80 61976/l O 040/Oala4aleBlvdTEX4. doc ZJ ug~t3't 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, lowa Est. Unit Alternative CGL-1 Alternative CGL-2 Alternative CHL-1 Alternative CGL-2 UNDER Item Unit Cost Est. Qb/. Est. Cost Est. Qb/. Est. Cost Est. Qb/. Est. Cost Est. Qt),. Est. Cost .~r~h~gd~.,..F~q~W~y ..................... c.Y.. ..................... ~:~(~ .............. !.4;~..~00 $501,900 132,20(2 $462 700 .......... ~.~:2}..~(~ ..........~.'~.'[J..{~ .......... ~.~},.~.~ E~rth~grk, Borrow .................................~.:~: .............................. ~:~C~ ............. ~t(~.'[.~(~0 $1,506,000 37p,.~ ......?[,.~.~5~.,~(~(~ .............. ~.~}~..:~p~ .....~.!...,~.~..(~.(~ ................................. ~ .............................. C~[9§.~[9a.~..~!1~.~!.~9 r~ ...................................................... ~:.~.: ........................... ~.~(~:q~ ..................... '[¢}~.]. $81,550 1 978 ........ ~9.1}..~(~ ...................... ]....'[~ $56,850 2,~ ........... ~.~..].~..~(~ ~.~!c~99.,..k~9..P~.~rP~ ........................................................... ~.,E: ........................... ~9:q9 ................. j.2.,~5~ .....5.~.,9.!.~,~ .................. !.~,.~ ......~.!.~.9.~.~.3~9 ................. J.¢.,~ .....5.:[,9.!.~,~.~9 .................. ~.~.,~9~ ......~.!.,Z~.~.99c ~.t4 b.~ ~.~,..(~.[~0.L~!a.r~ .................................................................. ~.:~.. ............................. ~.:q~ ................. ~.,~4:~ $209,920 25,360 .~;.~9~.~}.~}9 ! 28,840 $230,720 25,36(2 $202 88C L:pr~[!!.!9.~.!~!..~.~l.[~!~..~[I Outlets L'E'. ............................. ~:qP .................... 6..{}~}~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiii~ii~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~ii~ $31,70¢ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii?i;i~ii~ iiiiiiiiiiiiii~:ii~i~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~i.~ F~.n/~g.~,..~i..}/~!~l.!.h.,..v~!.[h...~.~t~ ................................ ~.,~: ........................... ~3~:.(~0 ................. ~4.,Z¢}~..........$.~:{~.,,~? 23,951 $718,53.' ..~..~{~ ..........~;.~}.!.~..1..:}~ ....... ~.,~.! ........... ~!~?(a.!~.~..{~i ............................................................................... s.Y. $22.00 5,831 $128,284 5,636 $123,982 6,409 $140,996 5 636 $123 98z ~.!~.[~..~ ~.[.?.!p e L.F. $45..0~ .................... 5..ZP~ ..........$.~..~ ..................... ~..~(~ ........... ~.~..P(~(~ 6,100 $274,500 ~..~(~ ........... ~.~..~(~ Storm Sewer Structures and Inlet Runs EACH $3 500.00 20 $70 000 20 $70,00C 22 $77 000 20 $70 00£ I~§.Q~!.D9 ................................................................................................... ~'['~ ...................... ~.:~0 131 $32 750 ........................... ~.~? ............... ~.'[..~(~ 144 $36,0~0 .......................... ~.~ ............. ~:~!...~(~ ~.~.~..~.~...~.!~..~.~...~.o.~.~!~.~ .............. t,:.~: .......... ~.,9q0.:90 1 $1oo,oo~ .................................. ! ........... ~.J.~9..~ ................................. :~ .......... ~!.~..9~ ............................................... Miscellaneous Items 30% --- $1,460,200 $1,455,40£ $1,538,400 $1,483,60C Subtotal $6,327,691 $6,306,66~ $6,666,519 $6,428,801 Contin~lencies 20% --- $1,265,500 $1,261,30£ $1,333,300 $1,285,80(: Total $8,225,991 $8,198,66( $8,666,519 $8,357,501 Total (Rounded) $8,226,000 $8,199,00(~ $8,667,000 $8,358,00(~ Notes: (1) All Costs are "Planning Level" Estimates. (2) Costs Represent 2003 Construction Estimates. (3) Includes Local Storm Sewer Only; Excludes New Storm Sewer Outlet System. (4) Construction Costs Only, Excl. Right-of-Way, Survey, Design, Inspection, Admin. 61976/lO, 040/OakdaleBlvdTEX4 doc /lUgust 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa RESULTS ¢)F FINAl, EVALUATION - EAST SEGMENT The foregoing analysis provides detailed information on the characteristics of each final alternative. To select a preferred route, consideration should be given to the functional and traffic service needs in this corridor as well as the natural and social impacts and costs of constructing each alternative. The most significant differences among the alternatives are summarized as follows: Alternative CGL-1 The length, cost and right-of-way for this alternative are higher than CGL-2, but lower than CHL-1. · This alignment fits the topography slightly better than CGL-2. · Centerline is about 200 feet from farmstead east of Iowa 1. Alternative CGL-2 · Shortest alignment. · Least horizontal curvature. · More centrally located between developable properties east of Iowa 1. · Crosses the most drainageways (10). · Least right-of-way. · Least construction cost. · Centerline is about 300 feet from farmstead east of Iowa 1. Alternative CHL-1 · Longest alignment. · Slightly higher skew at 1-80 crossing. · Slightly less impact on steep slopes. · Least number of drainage crossings (7). · Greatest right-of-way needs. · Highest construction costs. · Centerline is located about 200 feet from farmstead east of Iowa I. ALIGNMENT VARIATIONS - EAST SEGMENT As part of the final evaluation, the alternatives were again reviewed to see if additional improvements could be made. Two specific areas were reviewed, those being the Scott Boulevard intersection and the 1-80 crossing. The evaluation of these two elements follows. Possible Variations to Scott Boulevard Intersection Possible variations to the Scott Boulevard intersection configuration were reviewed. The existing farmstead on the north side of Scott Boulevard was a significant constraint in identifying the initial alternatives. It is possible that this farmstead may not be included in the long-range development of the 61976/lO.(,t40/OakdalettlvdTEX4.doc 4-13 August 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Lo(xttion Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa property. If the farmstead were not present, it would be more desirable to move the new Oakdale Boulevard intersection to the location presently occupied by the farmstead. In consideration of this possibility, other alternatives were reviewed for the Scott Boulevard-Oakdale Boulevard intersection. Due to the higher volumes of turning traffic expected at this intersection, and the two-lane roadways on each approach, a roundabout intersection may be a desirable configuration for this location. A roundabout intersection would have several advantages over a conventional intersection: · Heavy volumes of turning traffic can be accommodated without a traffic signal. · Traffic speeds would be reduced, resulting in a traffic calming effect. · Roundabout intersections have been shown to reduce the frequency and severity of traffic crashes. A reduced number of broadside and rear-end collisions would be expected, compared to a signalized intersection. However, the incidence of lower speed sideswipe crashes may increase. · Roundabout intersections have been shown to reduce delays, stopping and vehicle emissions when compared to conventional intersections. · The traffic volumes anticipated for this location can be accommodated with a one-lane roundabout. · A roundabout would offer an opportunity for developing an enhanced gateway-type approach to this area of the community. For a l-lane roundabout, the diameter of the "inscribed circle" would be approximately 150 feet, and the diameter of the island would be approximately 90 feet. To achieve the preferred approach angles to a roundabout intersection, a portion of Scott Boulevard would need to be realigned if a roundabout intersection is constructed (Figure 14). Since Scott Boulevard was only recently constructed, removal and replacement of a segment of this roadway may not be desirable at this time. However, if the Oakdale Boulevard Extension is not constructed for ten to twenty years, Scott Boulevard would no longer be a new roadway, and it may be more feasible to accomplish this alternative. 61976/lO.(MO/OakdaleBlvdTEX4.doc 4-14 August 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, lcnva Possible Variations to Interstate 80 Grade Separation The original concept for this roadway anticipated an overpass over 1-80. This concept will require relatively high embankments on Oakdale Boulevard, particularly to the north of 1-80 where a deep drainageway must be crossed. The high embankments would also make it difficult to connect an access road to Oakdale Boulevard immediately north or south of 1-80. Because of these issues, the project team investigated the possibility of an underpass instead of an overpass at 1-80. Preliminary profiles were developed, and an estimated cost comparison was completed. It was found that the earthwork quantity would be significantly reduced with the underpass option. However, this design would require new bridges on eastbound and westbound 1-80, instead of a single two-lane bridge on Oakdale Boulevard. 1-80 is planned to be widened to six lanes in this area, and the 1- 80 bridges would need to span the six-lane freeway including the entire median. Construction of this bridge would need to be completed in halves, with a major traffic control and staging plan to accommodate 1-80 traffic during construction. Initial cost comparisons indicated that the underpass and overpass options may have similar construction costs. However, recent bid prices have shown a reduced cost for grading and embankment construction. Accordingly, the underpass alternative is not expected to yield a significant cost savings, and could likely be higher than the overpass alternative. It is therefore recommended that the overpass alternative be adopted for this project. SUMMARY t)F EAST SEGMENT EVAI.UATION Based on the foregoing evaluation, the recommended alternative in the east segment is Alternative CGL-2, with an overpass over 1-80. At Scott Boulevard, the recommended intersection depends on whether the existing farmstead can be displaced. The preferred configuration would be a roundabout intersection if the farmstead can be removed. 61976/lO.l~O/OakdoleBIvdTl:X4.doc 4-16 August 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Seott Boulevard, iowa City, lowa Vo FINAL EVALUATION - WEST SEGMENT This study included a cursory evaluation of alternatives in the west segment between Dubuque Street and Iowa 1. The purpose of this evaluation was to review major engineering and environmental issues within this segment and to compare several alternatives for connecting Dubuque Street and Iowa 1. The final evaluation in this segment included a search of existing records for major environmental issues, a field review of accessible portions of the corridor (where property owner permission could be obtained) and a review of topographic and floodplain mapping. A qualitative comparison of engineering and environmental factors was completed. Prior to developing the final alignments and profiles of this segment, a ~nore detailed examination of engineering and environmental issues is recommended. The results of the cursory evaluation of this segment are summarized in this chapter. Refer to Figure 12 for a location map of the alternatives. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION - WEST SEGMENT The review of environmental factors was based on research of available information, examination of existing mapping and photography, and a field review of the corridor in June, 2003. During the field review, portions of the project were walked in the field, and other portions were observed from public vantage points. Due to landowner refusal of access, the project team was not able to review all of the corridor in the field. The findings of the environmental evaluation are summarized below. A. Right-of-Way Impacts In general, the alternatives in this section will affect private property that is currently undeveloped, and acquisition of existing homes and buildings is not anticipated for any of the alternatives. However, the alternatives in this segment will divide some private properties, and will be located near some of the existing homes and buildings. To the west of the Iowa River, all of the alternatives will be located within 100' to 200' of an existing farmstead. To the west of Prairie du Chien Road, the proposed alignment would be located approximately 500' north of an existing farmstead. Between Prairie du Chien Road and Iowa 1, Alternative 1, which is located along the existing ridge, would pass near several existing homes. Alternatives 2, 3 and 3A in this segment would pass through private properties farther down the slope, between the existing homes and Rapid Creek. B. Wetlands Wetlands were determined from review of U.S Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory maps and field review by the project biologist where possible. These include all wetlands regardless of jurisdictional status. The approximate locations of these wetland areas are shown on Figure 12. The west segment alignment may affect approximately 1.4 acres of potential forested wetlands located east of the Iowa River and south of the mouth of Rapid Creek. It was not possible to field verify these 619 7 6/ l O. 040/OakdaleBlvdTEX4 doc 5-1 October 2003 Oakdale Botdevard Extension, Location Stltd~: Report Dtdmqzte Street to &'oI! Boulevard, low~l CiO, h>wa potential wetlands because of landowner refusal of access. In general, impacts to wooded wetlands are undesirable, because wooded wetlands are the most difficult wetland type to nfitigate. The two crossings of Rapid Creek ~nay have minor impacts to potential wetland areas (about 0.2 acres at each crnssing). Alternative 3A would affect additional wetlands in the Rapid Creek floodplain. Alternative 3 may affect some wetlands at the bottom of the hill, but not to the extent of Alternative 3A. C. Upland Woods In the western segment, npland woodland impacts would occur at three locations: · Review of aerial photography and FEMA mapping indicates that just east of the potential /brested wetlands located east of the Iowa River south of the mouth of Rapid Creek, the alignment would affect approximately 3.3 acres of upland woods located at the base of an adjoining hillside. It was not possible to field verify this area of upland woodland because of landowner refusal of access. · Just east of Prairie du Chien Road, the alignment would cross Rapid Creek south of 320th Street. About 1.4 acres of floodplain forest would be impacted at this location. The project biologist conducted a field review at this location and found it to contain common tree species typical of floodplain forests in this part of Iowa. · Review of aerial photography indicates that about 0.5 miles west of Iowa 1, a wooded hillside is present. The alignment would affect several acres of upland woods at this location with the exact acreage depending on the final alignment and cross sections. Alternative 2 would be located on this hillside and would affect the greatest area of woodland. 16. 1)Tdcal It;uMed Ilill~ide \orth ol R~tpid ('reel,, Ili,~t O/Iowa ll~k, hway I Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City', Iowa D. Highly Erodible Soils/Steep Slope Impacts Avoiding roadway crossing of steep/critical/protected slopes will help reduce soil erosion and downstream siltation, landslides and mudslides. Crossing these types of slopes, which am often wooded, would detract from the scenic character of the area as well. In the west segment, steep/critical/protected slopes were not quantified. The crossing of a wooded hillside located about 0.5 miles west of Iowa 1 would affect a major hillside, particularly for Alternatives 2 and 3. The slope of this hillside ranges from approximately 10:1 to 3:1, based on a review of the topographic mapping. Construction of Alternatives 2 or 3 may result in major cuts, fills and/or retaining walls on this hillside. E. Cultural Resources Impacts The altematives were examined to determine whether they would impact known archaeological sites. In the western segment, the alignment could potentially affect only one archaeological site of record, 13JH280, which is located south of 320th Street and east of Rapid Creek. According to the Office of the State Archaeologist, this site consists of a prehistoric lithic scatter (consisting of stone artifacts) that was reported by a collector in 1980. There is no record that a formal survey of the site has ever been done, so its exact boundaries are in doubt. This site will require further evaluation if the location is to be impacted by the project. F. Prairie Remnants No prairie remnants or plant indicators of former prairie were found in the project corridor during the field review. G. Threatened and Endangered Species Although near an urban area, the project corridor contains some natural areas that may be potential habitat for threatened and endangered species. The project biologist reviewed the areas of natural vegetation in the project corridor and noted some types of potential habitat for the following species: Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) - Federal and State Endangered Species - Summer roosts and nurseries in floodplain and upland woods adjacent to streams. The bark of the large shagbark hickories in these upland woods would provide potential roosting places. Recent U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines list Johnson County as one of the Iowa counties in which this bat could occur. Red-Shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus) - State Endangered Species - This species nests and feeds in floodplain forested areas in large river valleys in Iowa. The protected wooded valley along the Iowa River provides an area that these hawks might use. In the western segment, the project corridor contains one area of potential forested wetland that may provide habitat for threatened and endangered species. These potential forested xvetlands are located east of the lowa River south of the mouth of Rapid Creek. It was not possible to field verify these potential wetlands because of landowner refusal of access. It is possible that potential habitat for the red- shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus, State Endangered) may occur at this location. 61976/lO. 040/OakdaleBlvdTEX4 doc 5-3 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, low,a City, lo,~,a The Iowa Department of Natural Resources commented that it has an old record of a fish species, the orangethroat darter (Etheostoma spectabile, Iowa listed threatened) and that any crossing of Rapid Creek may require a fish and mussel survey (see letter in Appendix). Preliminary field review of the Rapid Creek crossing locations by the project biologist found no suitable habitat for the orangethroat darter. However, when the exact crossing locations have been established, a formal survey should be performed. H. Floodplain/Floodway Impacts The floodway and 100-year floodplain for the Iowa River and Rapid Creek are shown on Figure 12. The west segment alternatives would have considerable floodplain and floodway impacts at three locations. Approximate acreage of impacts is based on a nominal 100-foot right-of-way, and would vary depending on the actual design of this roadway. · At the crossing of the Iowa River (1.4 acres of floodway; 4.1 acres of floodplain, including the floodway). (All alternatives.) · At the crossing of Rapid Creek just east of Prairie du Chien Road (1.4 acres of floodway; 4.1 acres of floodplain, including the floodway). (All alternatives.) · At the crossing of Rapid Creek just west of lowa I (0.9 acres of floodway; 2.3 acres of floodplain, including the floodway). (All alternatives.) · Alternative 3A would have additional impacts to the Rapid Creek crossings between Prairie Du Chien Road and Iowa 1. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The results of the environmental evaluation appear in Table 8. TABLE 8 FINAL EVALUATION - ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS WEST SEGMENT Alternative Environmental Factor I 2 3 3A Gmatest Intermediate A. Right-of-Way Impact (including homes (includes hillside Least Least at top of hill) near homes) B. Wetlands Least Least Intermediate Greatest C. Upland Woods Least Greatest Intermediate Least D. Erodible Soils/Steep Slopes Intermediate Greatest Intermediate Least E. Archaeological Sites One Possible Site F. Prairie Remnants None Found Some Potential; G. Threatened and Endangered Some Potential Some Potential Some Additional Rapid Species Habitat Potential Creek Crossing H. Flood Plain~Floodway Impacts 3 Crossings 3 Crossings 3 Crossings 5 Crossings 61976/l 0 040/OakdaleBIvdTEX4 dor 5-4 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to &:ott Boulevard. Iowa City, Iowa ENGINEERING EVALUATION- WEST SEGMENT The engineering evaluation for the west segment concentrated on several critical areas which will affect the design characteristics and cost of the roadway. Detailed plan and profile drawings of the west segment alternatives are beyond the scope of this study; however, the key engineering factors are summarized as follows. A. Development Impacts Each of the alternatives will have long-term effects on land use and the development patterns in this corridor. Each of the final alternatives passes primarily through undeveloped land and would provide access opportunities to the surrounding property. However, due to the topography and fiver valleys which exist in this segment, access to portions of the adjoining properties may be difficult to construct. Between Dubuque Street and Prairie du Chien Road, access to adjoining properties appears to be feasible, by constructing a system of local or access roads. Except for the Iowa River Valley, most of the property on either side of the proposed alignment is above the 100-year floodplain. Between Prairie du Chien Road and Iowa 1, Alternative 1 would provide access to properties at the top of the hill. However, this alternative would direct the arterial street traffic through the center of a potential residential development, and would not be compatible with a good development layout for this property. Alternative 2 may offer some potential for access connections to the top of the hill; however, this alternative is located on the hillside and would require major cuts and fills for construction. Alternative 2 may not be compatible with good development planning for this property. Alternatives 3 and 3A are located near the base of the hill and would not provide good access opportunities to the higher ground. A portion of the lower ground outside of the Rapid Creek floodplain may be accessible to these alternatives, primarily to the north of the proposed alignment. In summary, Alternatives 3 and 3A appear to be the most compatible with future development opportunities in this segment. B. Iowa River Crossing The floodway width of the Iowa River is approximately 600' to 700' wide at the proposed crossing location. The location and skew of this crossing will have a significant effect on the length and cost of the river bridge structure. The alignment in this area was reviewed to develop a crossing as close as possible to a right angle, while maintaining a reasonable horizontal alignment for the roadway. The proposed crossing location would bc on a linc which runs straight cast-west, and which crosses the river on a skew of approximately 20°, Thc alignment crosses the Iowa River approximately 1,400' south of the north section line of Section 34-80-6. The length of a bridge on a 20° skew will be approximately 7 percent longer than a bridge with 0° skew. 61976/lO 040/OokdaleBIvdTEX4.doc .5-5 October 2003 ()akdale Boulevard ~¥1ension, Location Sludl' R~7~ort C. Prairie du Chien Road Intersection Prairie da Chien Road has recently been upgraded and paved by Johnson County~ and currently consists of a 2-1ant rural highway. The proposed Oakdale Boulevard Extension would cross Prairie du Chien Road somewhere between the Rapid Creek Bridge on the north and an existing farmstead to the south. Possible locations for an at- grade intersection were reviewed in the field. An existing horizontal curve is located on Prairie du Chien Road just south of the farmstead, limiting sight distance in that direction. A backslope cut and wooded area on the west side of Prairie du Chien Road are the cause of the ! i: sight distance limitations. Therefore, an at-grade . intersection could not be located immediately north of the farmstead. Figure 12 LooMn;, south on Prairie du ('hien RmuL showing lindtcd ~[,ht diMance. I"ilt'ln~tt,ad i.~ h)cated on th~, riA, ht, behind A fiat horizontal cu~e is located on Prairie du Chien Road between the t~rmstead and the Rapid Creek Bridge. Visibility in this segment is ~ relatively open, which allows ~ for a "window" in which an at- grade intersection could be constructed. However, the intersection should not be located too close to the Rapid Creek Bridge, where visibility . would be restricted by the ~' ; , ~ -~ ~"~ bridge railings and guardrails. I'~[,ttre I& I. oo~ing not'Ih on Prairiu dn ('hien Road toward Rtq~id ( ruud, ~howing good sight dixtallCt,. The recommended location for an at-grade intersection is approximately 700' south of the center of the Rapid Creek Bridgc. The proposed alignment crosses PraMe du Chien Road on a straight east-west alignment. It should be noted that the exact location of this intersection could be moved approximately 200 feet north or south of this line without exceeding the sight distance requirements. (For a 55 mph speed on Prairie du Chien Road, the required sight distance is 530 feet.) Figures 19-22 show the reconnnended location. 1"4[,ure 19. I. ool~ill,g u'est /)'o,t Pi-ii[i-il, alii I"([~lll'~' 20. LO0]~[II~ IlOl'lh Oil Prairie dtl Chien (']lil,ll Rotld ltlll'llI'd I'l'Cll#lllll'lldt'd llli,[~lllllt'llt. Rotld, ./)'nlll '01]' SOtlth O/Rapid ('red~. l i,~urt' 21. I.o,ldll,~ ~'aw./)',m Prairie du ('hie, I'(~ure 22. LooJdlt,R ~outh tm Prairie du ('hicn Rmld, -00' ~outh o! Rapid (rcc~. Road..fi'o,~ 'OO ~outl q/'Rapid ("~ ~ i~. Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard. Iowa City, lowa D. Prairie du Chien Road to Iowa 1 Within this segment, four alternative concepts were evaluated, as sho~vn in Figure 12. The design features and engineering evaluation of these alternatives is described as follows. Alternative 1, which is located farthest to the north along the ridge, was deemed to be incompatible with the land development expected for this area, and would also add approximately ¼ mile to the length of the roadway as compared to other alternatives. Alternative 2 is located on the south-facing hillside and crosses several deep ravines. The elevation difference between the hilltops and the ravines are on the order of 50' to 70', resulting in significant cuts or fills to construct this alignment. The cuts or fills would also create a wide footprint, requiring significant clearing, embankments and/or retaining walls to construct the roadway. Opportunities for access road connections to the north may be possible with this altemative but could involve steep connecting roadways. Alternative 3 is located along the base of the hill, and would remain at a lower elevation in this segment. At one location, Rapid Creek is situated immediately at the base of the hill, allowing very limited space for constructing a roadway. This area was revie~ved in the field, and it was determined that an arterial street would not fit between the base of the hill and Rapid Creek without the construction of major retaining wails. Additionally, these walls would need to be armored to protect against the flooding and scour of Rapid Creek. Alternative 3A is a variation of Alternative 3, with the purpose of avoiding the narrow area between the hillside and Rapid Creek. Alternative 3A would cross a Rapid Creek channel at two locations, requiring additional drainage structures to maintain the floodway capacity of the creek. A possible design solution in this area would include the construction of low-flow structures (presumed to be box culverts) across the new arterial, combined with a cutoff channel to the south of the new roadway. The normal low flow of Rapid Creek would remain in its existing channel, crossing the roadway twice through the low flow structures. During major flooding events, the flood flows would remain south of the roadway, using the new cutoff channeh lfthis alternative were selected, a more detailed hydraulic analysis of Rapid Creek would be required to determine the structure sizes and to obtain the necessary pernfits. Any of the alternatives, No. 2, 3 or 3A, would traverse areas which are nearly undevelopable due to the Rapid Creek floodplain or steep wooded hillsides. These conditions are characeristic of parts of this corridor and appear to be unavoidable. 61976/lO 040/OakdaleBlvdTEX4 doc 5-8 October 2003 Oakdale Boulel,a~zl Ewenxion. Location .'~?u~v Dubuque SIreet to Scoll Boulevar~ Iowa Ci0, Iowa I'i,&,ure 23. I. ooMn,~ vas/, *lum'in,,4 R~qfid (5'ce~ al base q/hilL he/ween Prairie du (hien Rom/und Iowa I. LO~lllill&~ il i1~,11' i'oud Io Ih(, itol'lh qf Rupid ()'ec~ ( II~crnalive 2) u'ouhl reqldrc ,si~ql~]iciIill clearin.~ q['lrecs E. Rapid Creek Crossings Two other crossings of Rapid Creek are required between Prairie du Chien Road and Iowa 1. The proposed alignments cross the Rapid Creek channel at approximately right angles; however, the roadway would be skewed with respect to the overall floodway. A hydraulic analysis of Rapid Creek will be necessa~ to determine the final bridge sizes in this segment. S[ MM~II~ Ot' EN(;INEERIN{; [~ ~L[ AIION Based on the cursoW evaluation of engineering factors, it is recommended that Alternatives I and 2 be deleted fYom f~her consideration. Alternative I would require the longest length of new roadway and would occupy the top of the hill where future residential development may be planned. Alternative 2 would have significant engineering challenges along the wooded hillside, where a substantial amount of clearing, cuts, fills an~or retaining walls would be required. Ahematives 3 and 3A would oflkr the most desirable characteristics. Of these, Alternative 3A would have the advantage of avoiding the na~ow space between the hill and Rapid Creek, where construction of a new street would be difficult. Thc overall evaluation of alternatives in this segment is summarized as follows: · The physical conditions in this con'idor will pose some significant challenges to the construction of any roadway. One bridge across the Iowa River and at least two crossings of Rapid Creek are Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa required. A major hill over 120' in height is located in the path of the roadway, with very little space between the hill and Rapid Creek. Several deep ravines and wooded slopes accompany this hill. Some existing development is already present in the corridor, occupying some of the desirable areas for construction. · The known environmental issues in this corridor can be mitigated, and do not appear to be a "fatal flaw" to roadway construction. · In consideration of the factors evaluated in this study, Alternative 3A is recommended as the preferred concept. During further project development some variations in the exact location of this alignment should be expected. · Because of the limited cursory review which has been accomplished in this study, a more detailed examination of environmental and engineering issues will be required during project development. 6 l 976/I 0 (140/OakdaleBlvdTEX4.dot 5-10 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa VI EVALUATION OF ACCESS MANAGEMENT ON IOWA HIGHWAY I In addition to evaluating alternatives for the Oakdale Boulevard Extension, this study provides an analysis and recommendations for access management on a portion of Iowa 1. The section of Iowa 1 reviewed in this study extends from Northgate Drive to Rapid Creek Road, a distance of approximately 0.7 miles. The evaluation and recommendations for access management on this roadway are summarized below. EXISTING ACCESS CONDITIONS Within the 0.7-mile segment there are currently 11 access points connecting with Iowa 1. The existing access points are shown in Figure 20 and listed in Table 9. The distances listed in Table 9 are scaled from the centerline of Northgate Drive, and represent the approximate spacing between these access points. TABLE 9 EXISTING ACCESS POINTS ON IOWA 1 BETWEEN NORTHGATE DRIVE AND RAPID CREEK ROAD Distance From Access No. Northgate Drive Side of Iowa I Descriiotion I 0 East Northgate Drive 2 0 West Commercial Drive 3 490' West Utility Entrance - No Median Cut 4 690' East Farm Entrance 5 900' West Field Entrance 6 1,200' East Field Entrance 7 1,270' West Field Entrance Future 1,350' East/West Proposed Oakdale Boulevard Extension 8 1,850' East Farm Entrance 9 2,110' West Farm Entrance With Bridge 10 2,130' East Farm Entrance 11 3,770' East Rapid Creek Road 61976/lO. 040/OakdaleB/vdTEX4 dor 6-1 August 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa REVIEW OF SIGHT DISTANCE ON IOWA 1 The section of Iowa 1 between Northgate Drive and Rapid Creek Road is located on a relatively straight alignment with flat grades and good visibility. Sight distance along this roadway appears to be adequate to permit access points at any location in this segment. However, the actual sight distance would need to be measured at any proposed access location as part of the permitting process. ACCESS CONTROL CATEGORIES Access control on primary highways is categorized by the Iowa DOT Access Policy, which describes six categories of potential access control. These categories range from "Priority I" to "Priority VI", with descriptions as follows: · Priority I Highway: Fully controlled access. · Priority II Highway: Minimum access spacing is 1/2 mile. · Priority Ili Highway: Minimum access spacing is 1,000 feet. · Priority IV(a) Highway: Minimum access spacing is 600 feet. · Priority IV(b) Highway: Minimum access spacing is 300 feet. · Priority VHighway: This category describes highways where access locations were previously reserved with no access spacing limitations, and the DOT has subsequently determined that a higher degree of access control is desirable, or where DOT anticipates acquiring access rights in the future. · Priority VI Highway: A primary highway where the acquisition of additional access rights is not anticipated. EVALUATION OF ACCESS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY As development expands into the areas surrounding Iowa Highway 1, it is appropriate for the City and DOT to review the access along this highway and to establish guidelines for future access management. According to the AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, "The safety and operating benefits of controlling access to a highway have long been recognized and well documented. As access density increases, there is a corresponding increase in crashes and travel times... Some degree of access control or access management should be included in the development of any street or highway .... " As part of the evaluation of possible access control guidelines, the spacing and location of existing access points was studied along with the location of existing property lines and currently proposed developments. It was found that a high degree of access control such as Priority 111 requirements (i.e., 1,000-foot access spacing) would preclude access to the highway from some of the abutting properties. A 1,O00-foot spacing would not allow any new access points between Northgate Drive and the proposed Oakdale Boulevard Extension, thereby isolating these existing properties. One of the properties would be completely landlocked without access to Iowa 1. The next category of access control to be considered was Priority IV(a). This category, which allows access at 600-foot spacings, appears to the most appropriate category for this section of Iowa 1. Some of the existing farm or field entrances would not comply with the spacings, including Access Point Nos. 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 from Table 9. Since these access points are currently low-volume private entrances, they could remain in service until the property develops, but should not be upgraded to a higher use. As the 619 7 6/ l O 040/ Oakdale BIvdTEX4 doc 6-3 August 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa properties develop, these access points could be consolidated, moved, or connected to Oakdale Boulevard Extension and the existing access on Iowa 1 could be closed. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that a Priority 1V(a) access management standard be implemented for this section of Iowa 1. It is further recommended that all existing access points be allowed to remain in service at their present location as long as their usage remains the same as existing. The access points which do not conform with the 600-foot spacing should not be upgraded to a commercial, multi-use or Type "B" entrance. For some of the future entrance locations, an acceptable "window" of space is available which meets the Priority IV access control requirements. The exact location of future access points within these windows would be determined at the time the property is developed and the access permits are requested. Additionally, future access points on the east and west sides of lowa 1 should line up with each other. No offset intersections should be permitted. The proposed access points which meet the Priority 1V(a) requirements include: · Northgate Drive, and the commercial entrance opposite Northgate Drive. · Utility entrance 490 feet north of Northgate Drive. (This entrance is a right-in, right-out entrance without a median break, and could remain as an exception to the Priority IV(a) standards.) · New entrance between 600 feet and 750 feet north of Northgate Drive. · Oakdale Boulevard Extension, approximately 1,350 feet north of Northgate Drive. · Farm entrances right and left, approximately 2,130 feet north of Northgate Drive. (One of these entrances would need to be relocated slightly to be opposite the other entrance.) · One new entrance between approximately 2,730 feet and 3,170 feet north of Northgate Drive. · Rapid Creek Road, 3,770 north of Northgate Drive. 61976/lO 040/OakdaleBlvdTEX4 doc 6-4 August 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa VII. RECOM ENO^T,ONS Based on a review of the factors considered in this study, it is recommended that the following alternatives be selected for the Oakdale Boulevard Extension: · Between Scott Boulevard and Iowa 1: Altemative CGL-2, with an overpass at 1-80 · Between Dubuque Street and Iowa 1: Alternative 3A · Access Control on Iowa 1: Priority 1V(a), or 600' spacing between access points These altematives offer the most desirable balance of engineering factors, good traffic service, reasonable construction costs and lesser impacts to properties and the environment. For the East Segment, between Scott Boulevard and Iowa 1, the specific benefits of Alternative CGL-2 include: · Best overall traffic service. Alternative CGL-2 is the shortest alignment, and will reduce travel distances and road-user costs for many years to come. · Good local access opportunities. Alternative CGL-2 is centrally located between two drainageways north of 1-80, allowing good 2-sided access to the new road. Access to properties south of 1-80 will also be served by this alternative. · Reduced residential impacts, compared to the other alternatives, by locating the road 100' farther from an existing farmstead east of Iowa 1. · Reduced construction costs compared to the other alternatives. · Reduced right-of-way impacts and costs due to the shorter length of the alignment. For the West Segment between Dubuque Street and Iowa 1, the specific benefits of Alternative 3A include: · Reduced environmental impacts compared to the other alternatives, by avoiding roadway construction on the steep wooded hillside west of Iowa 1. · More compatible with future development, by avoiding construction in the prime residential development areas at the top of the hill or along the hillside. · Good traffic service for through traffic, and potential to provide access along portions of the alignment. (Access to some portions of this corridor would be difficult with any of the alternatives. As noted earlier in this report, portions of the surrounding land on Alternative 3A will be nearly undevelopable due to the presence of the Rapid Creek floodplain.) 61976/lO 040/OakdaleBIvdTEXS doc 7-1 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Seott Boulevard, Iowa City, Iowa DESCRIPTION OF RECOMMENDED AL]'ERNATIVE A more specific geomethc layout for the recommended alternative is included in the appendix to this report. Preliminary profiles for the east segment between Scott Boulevard and Iowa 1 are also included. The specific design recommendations are outlined as follows and are shown in Figures 25 and 26. East Segment, Scott Boulevard to Iowa l 1. Construct the roadway in accordance with Alternative CGL-2. 2. Construct the overpass variation at 1-80. The design, traffic control and staging plan of this overpass will need to be closely coordinated with Iowa DOT. The overpass must be compatible with the Iowa DOT's future plans to widen 1-80 in this vicinity. 3. Coordinate the design at lowa I with the Iowa DOT, including their plan for possible widening of this highway. 4. Evaluate access to the new arterial on a case-by-case basis. The spacing between access points should be as long as possible, with a desirable spacing of 1,000' or more. 5. The intersection location and configuration at Scott Boulevard should be examined prior to final design and construction, lfthe farmstead on Scott Boulevard will be removed when this property develops, the intersection should be moved to the location occupied by the existing farmstead. In addition, the roundabout intersection should be considered at this location. This concept would require realignment of a portion of Scott Boulevard near the intersection. A roundabout intersection would accommodate the turning movements at this intersection without a traffic signal, and would provide an opportunity for an enhanced entry or gateway to this area. West Segment, Dubuque Street to Iowa 1 1. It is recommended that the location of Oakdale Boulevard Extension should be fixed at the Iowa River crossing, Prairie du Chien Road and Iowa 1, as shown in this report. 2. If the redevelopment of private property in this area occurs prior to the Oakdale Boulevard Extension, then the property owners should be responsible for refining the exact alignment between these fixed points. The alignment should follow the general concept outlined in this report and should comply with the Iowa City Municipal Design Standards for arterial streets. If changes in the fixed points are requested by property owners, these requests should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. 3. A more detailed conceptual design will be needed in this section to establish the final alignments, profiles, bridge openings and details of the roadway, and a more complete environmental study is recommended when the final alignment is established. 61976/lO 040/OakdaleBIvdTEX5, doc 7-2 October 2003 Oakdale Boulevard Extension, Location Study Report Dubuque Street to Scott Boulevard, Iowa City, lowa ACCESS I~ANAGEMENT ON IOwA 1 Recommendations for access management on lowa 1 are outlined as follows: 1. For future access requests between Northgate Drive and Rapid Creek Road, the requirements of Iowa DOT access control Priority IV(a) should be implemented. This standard specifies a minimum spacing of 600' between access points. 2. Existing access points should be allowed to remain as long as the land use and function of these entrances does not change. 3. If existing entrances are upgraded in the future, the locations should be moved if necessary to comply with Priority IV(a) requirements. For example, this would apply if an existing field entrance or farm entrance is requested to be upgraded to a commercial, multi-use or Type "B" entrance. 4. The proposed future access locations are shown in Figure 27. The exact locations of future entrances can be determined by the adjacent property owners subject to the recommended spacing requirements and subject to City and DOT approval. IMPLEMENTATION The proposed Oakdale Boulevard Extension is suitable to be implemented in stages, corresponding with the need for traffic service and available funding. The major functional segments of the project are from Scott Boulevard to Iowa 1, and from Iowa 1 to Dubuque Street. These segments could be further subdivided based on local need and funding. It would be possible to develop the segment between Scott Boulevard and 1-80 prior to constructing the bridge over 1-80, in order to provide more immediate access to this area. A similar concept could be implemented between Iowa 1 and 1-80. A more detailed preliminary design of this entire segment should be completed before constructing any portion of the roadway. The west segment between Dubuque Street and Iowa 1 could also be developed in stages, corresponding with the need to provide access. A preliminary design should also be developed before constructing any portion of this segment. The access control revisions on Iowa 1 can be implemented immediately, subject to the approval of Iowa DOT. This would not require the removal of any existing access points, but would guide the future requests for new or upgraded access onto Iowa 1. LOCATION STUDY UPDATES This report represents existing conditions and known developments which are pending at the time of the study. If changes occur in the planned development within this corridor, it is recommended that the proposed roadway alignments be reviewed and modified as necessary to correspond with these changing conditions. 61976/10 040/OakdaleBIvdTEX5 doc 7-5 October 2003 I APPENDIX [] I I I I I PRELIMINARY PLAN VIEW OF FINAL ALTERNATIVES. ! ! ! I I I ! ! ! ! ! ! I PRELIMINARY PROFILES OF F~ ALTE~ATI~S 2565 Bluffwood Lane Iowa City, Iowa 52245 March 12, 2004 Iowa City City Council 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 55240 Re: Oakdale Boulevard Extension Dear Mayor Lehman and Members of the City Council: I am writing to you on behalf of my company, Harvest Management Real Estate Holdings, L.L.C., and my neighbors, Leo and Deanna Fuhrmeister, concerning the proposed location of Oakdale Boulevard Extension. We have just obtained a copy of the study which you will be discussing at your meeting on March 15, 2004. We were more than somewhat dismayed to learn the City is continuing to contemplate another arterial street which will tear through the heart of our properties. Leo and Deanna Fuhrmeister own the Century Farm north of Interstate 80 and east of Dodge Street. Harvest Management owns the farm south of Interstate 80, recently dissected by the extension of Scott Boulevard. The study report recommends extending Oakdale Boulevard across Highway 1, looping over 1-80, and through both our properties to connect with Scott Boulevard. As indicated by the status of"Century Farm," the Fuhrmeister family has proudly owned and farmed their land for more than 100 years. They have no intention or interest in housing development, and they do not want the farm broken apart for an unnecessary arterial street. In light of the close proximity of Dodge Street, there is no compelling reason to extend Oakdale Boulevard west of Highway 1 or south of Interstate 80 as the study proposes. The purpose of this letter is to let you know that the Fuhrmeisters and I are adamantly opposed to the proposals before you. As I am sure you know, City planners ignored the very reasonable request from Harvest Management to construct the Scott Boulevard extension along the roadbed of Seven Sisters Road (now Harvest Road), and instead insisted on a route that cut through the heart of the best developable ground, severing many sections of the farm from any convenient access. As a result of this project, Harvest Management invested significant work and money to preserve an historic barn that the City was planning to bulldoze. In order to save the barn, Harvest Management was also required by the City, to construct, at its own cost, a substantial and expensive retaining wall. Either of the preferred alignments of the proposed extension of Oakdale Boulevard would destroy the fruits of this labor. The Fuhrmeisters and I will vigorously defend our farms against any effort by the City to condemn for an extension of Oakdale Boulevard. Please keep this in mind as you consider the study. On behalf of Harvest Management and the Fuhrmeisters, thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Douglas Ld~aul, Ph.D. President (D Copy to: Leo and Deanna Fuhrmeister (*) -', __ .:,, JeffDavidson Meardon, Sueppel & Downer, P.L.C. DATE: March 9, 2004 TO: City Council FROM: Matthew Hayek /~A .~ RE: Scattered Site Housing Task Force At the March 15 work session, I will be present to update the City Council on the formation of the scattered site housing task rome and to provide an outline of the task force's scope. As per Council's direction, the task force will be comprised ora community cross-section of persons representing multiple areas of expertise. The proposed task force would include eight members from the organizations/groups listed below: Housing and Community Development Commission 2 members Io;va City Community School District (! stajfand 1 board membe0 2 members Johnson County Board of Supervisors 1 member United Way of Johnson County 1 member Planning and Zoning Commission 1 member Neighborhood Council 1 member Defining the scope of the task force's inquiry has been a challenge. It is important to describe the scope precisely to enable the task force to fulfill its mission effectively and efficiently. Having reviewed scattered site information from other municipalities, I am proposing the following: · The task force will study the existing distribution, location and types of assisted housing in Iowa City and whether a scattered site policy should be considered by the City Council. If requested, the task force could examine possible policies for future distribution, location and types of assisted housing in Iowa City. · The task force is defining assisted housing as any housing development or acquisition for low-moderate income households' (including rental homeownership, transitional housing and residential facilities) receiving any public assistance or support, including federaL state, city or county funding. Ify0u have questions or would like to discuss this matter, please contact me at 337-9606. Cc: Housing and Community Development Commission City Manager Karin Franklin, Director of Planning and Community Development Steven Nasby, Community and Economic Development Coordinator City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Steven J. Rack/s, Housing Administrator Mary Copper, Self-Sufficiency Programs Coordinator DATE: March 10, 2004 RE: Iowa City Housing Authority FY03 Self-Sufficiency Programs Report The Housing Authority operates a Family Self-Sufficiency Program that is designed to build assets by assisting families who want to move to higher income levels and become economically self-sufficient. The FSS Program helps to identify and remove barriers to economic sufficiency and connects participants by leveraging new and existing community resources. The coordination of services combined with an escrow savings account promotes increased earnings and asset building among families receiving housing assistance. For FY03, 160 households participated in the Family Self-Sufficiency program. Of these, approximately 80% have escrow accounts with an average monthly deposit of $200.00 and an average balance of $2,000.00. Seventy-seven (77) graduates since the program inception (July 1999) reduces our original HUD mandated number of FSS graduates (83) to six. Of these graduates, 29 have moved to homeownership and most of the remaining 48 graduates have reached full rent or left housing permanently. The Housing Authority also operates the Resident Opportunities and Self Sufficiency (ROSS) Program. We continue to graduate and admit additional residents on an ongoing basis, with 163 referrals since June 2001. This number far surpassed the grant goal of serving 130 residents over three years. The ROSS program provides Housing Authority families with the services of a Vocational Specialist that include job seeking skills, job/career exploration, job development, and employment support. Through the Self-sufficiency Programs the Housing Authority has offered a series of free computer classes that included giving away donated computers. Also offered ~vas a series of budgeting and credit classes. To address the transportation issues the ROSS program developed a "Bike to Work" Program that resulted in nine participants receiving bicycles and safety helmets. The Housing Authority acted as a referral agency and case manager for Goodwill's "Wheels to Work" program which resulted in thirty-five (35) families receiving donated cars. What is new in FY04? The Housing Authority received: > A Certificate o f Achievement for Family Self-Sufficiency Program Success from HUD, >' A Certificate of Achievement for Housing Choice Voucher Homeownership Program Sllccess, > A total grant award of $250,000 over three years (FY05 - FY08) to continue our Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) program. Employment, Education & Asset Building! Iowa City Housing Authority Creating, Hope, Opportunities and Success for Tomorrow! · _Family Self- Sufficiency: An escrow savings Program · Resident Opportuni .ty Self-Sufficiency: An employment assistance program · Homeownership education: Plant the seeds- start early! · 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City o Iowa · 52240.1826 Family Self- Sufficiency Program WHAT IS THE FAMILY SELF SUFFIENCY PROGRAM? The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has enabled the Iowa City Housing Authority to establish a Family Self-Sufficiency program. This initiative is designed to help Section 8 and Public Housing families to become self-supporting without the need for public assistance. HUD mandates that we have 83 participants graduate from the FSS program. FSS is a voluntary five-year program and open to all fam i 1 i e s r e c e iv in g S e c t i o n 8 and Public Housing assistance through Iowa City Housing Authority. ,4 desire to become self-sufficient and a willingness to take the steps necessary to make this happen are the only requirements. confi d nc HOW DOES THE FSS PROGRAM WORK? The head of the household enters into a five- year contract with the Iowa City Housing Authority. This contract contains an Individual Training and Services Plan developed by the family, with staff assistance, that identifies the employment goal of the participant and outlines the activities and services necessary to achieve thisgoal, employment A hand-up not a handout! The FSS Coordinator helps the family obtain the services listed in the plan and supports the family while completing their goals. Iowa City Housing Authority establishes an escrow savings account when the family increases its earned' income. HOW DOES When the tenant's portion of the rent goes up due to THE · · · increases m earnings, HUD SAVINGS provides funding to create an ACCOUNT escrow contribution which is WORK? placed in escrow account. When the FSS contract is successfully completed, the family receives the /' d~ accumulated funds with interest. ' self-esteem To complete the program, the family must be working and off public assistance for at least twelve consecutive months before the end of the contract. HOW CAN THIS PROGRAM HELP? families to become and remain HOW CAN THIS PROGRAM HELP? develop or improve awareness of employer expectations. Provide access to education, training and workshops. Offer community resources and referrals. PARTNERSHIPS- MAKING SPECIAL PROJECTS A REALITY The FS S Coordinator will facilitate clients in fid' gth ' n ~n e services necessary to become self sufficient. The FSS Coordinator's role is to leverage and navigate resources for the client. Realtors PLUGGING Lenders Local Non-Profits INTO Local Businesses Local Civic Groups COMMUNITY Universities, ASSETS Community Colleges, Local Trade Schools Retailers WHAT ARE THE FSS PARTICIPANT'S OBLIGATIONS · Make an appointment for enrollment and contract signing. · Agree to seek and maintain employment. · Play an active role in developing their Individual and Training Services Plan. · Complete all the activities within the time frames in the F I'SP. WHAT ARE THE FSS PARTICIPANT'S OBLIGATIONS CONT.? · Comply with the terms of the lease and ICHA'S policies. · Participate in recommended workshops. · Maintain monthly contact with the FSS Coordinator. · When referrals are made to resources available in the community follow up with FSS Coordinator. The Family Self Sufficiency program is committed to empowering low-income families to become self sufficient, productive members of the community. The program will assist unemployed or underemployed families transition from public assistance to productive employment. F$$... ....it works.t These services have promoted personal responsibility, increased self- sufficiency, and resulted in enhanced quality of life for p u b Iic h o us in g residents! ROSS RESIDENT OPPORTUNITY The Ioma CiV I-Ioasing Matho~i~ partnered with Goodmi// Indast~ies to apply for this 3 year grant through HUD and was awarded funding in February of 2001 and again in 2004. In partnership, our agencies have used grant funds to provide employment support services to eligible residents in Iowa City, Iowa and the surrounding Johnson County area. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE GRANT? · This grant assists Public Housing and Section 8 participants with supportive services that are designed to help gain or maintain employment. · It also assists the "under-employed" to increase their skills thereby increasing their wages and benefits. WHAT SERVICES DOES THE GRANT PROVIDE? An Employment Sl~'' ' ec~al~st to assist clients one-on-one with job read~ness, job search and follow up has after job placement occurred. Vocational services provided include · job seeking skills (interviewing, resume/application development, etc.); · job/career exploration (researching different employment options, investigating requirements for self- employment start up, interest inventory); · job development (initial employer contacts, facilitating follow up contacts) and employment support. WHO QUALIFIES FOR ROS S? · Any ICHA Public Housing residents or Section 8 participants who want to increase their earned income and become self- sufficient. · Individuals are referred to ROSS by the FSS Coordinator or other Housing Authority staff. WHAT OTHER SUPPORTIVE SERVICES ARE THERE? · In addition to these core employment services we offer computer classes, budget and credit classes, homeownership preparation classes, as well as financial assistance with barriers such as childcare and transportation! · Transportation includes car repairs, bus tickets, parking fees and cab fare. Vocational training which would include tuition, books, training, cost for exams and certifications or licensure. · There have been 197 referrals to WHO the ROSS program. HA VE WE · Successful placements from active HELPED ? ~ referrals=76O/o. · Of the successful placements, 85% have had retained employment. · The average wage has ranged from $8.30 $8.92 per hour. · Over 70% of ROSS participants are enrolled in the FSS program, over 60% of participants with an escrow account. SUCCESS STORIES · The ICHA has graduated 78 FSSfamilies since theprogram inception in July 1999! · 63 graduating FSSfamilies have left housing or reached full rent! · A total of 29 FSSfamilies have been able to move to homeownership with assets accumulated through FSS escrow accounts! · 35 tenants received cars in FY03 through collaboration with Goodwill's Wheels to Work Program! DATE: March 11, 2004 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Steve Atkins, City Manag~ Gary Cohn, ITS Coordinato(~.~ c~, ,fl Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attor~,e~y~r~'' Marian K. Karr, City Clerk ~l~,~& RE: Council laptop use and upgrade, email policy, Harvat Hall upgrades A number of issues have been emerging over the past weeks concerning computer upgrades and the need to revisit and potential to revise Council procedures concerning use of laptops and packet distribution. Staff has attempted to address many of those issues in this memo. Currently Council has a policy that states Council laptops are provided for Council members receiving their weekly packets via CD, additionally a Council Member may request a City email address. City equipment is to be used for City, not personal business. Presently if a Council Member requests a hard copy packet they do not retain the laptop. All email correspondence addressed to "Council" is forwarded to the City Manager and City Clerk for response and/or inclusion in the next Council packet. (A copy of the March 13, 2002 City Attorney memo outlining the procedure is attached.) Over the past few weeks the following issues have been identified: · A need to upgrade software currently used by the City Clerk and City Council · Finalizing procedure making the Council packet available on the City website · A request from a Council Member to receive the hard copy packet and retain laptop · Growing awareness and use by Council Members of email · Potential wiring of Harvat Hall for internet access for use by Council as well as other Boards and Commissions Given all the above staff recommends the following: 1. Harvat Hall should be wired and monitors installed for Council meeting needs, and could be used by others utilizing the room. 2. Provide dedicated phone line to Council residence for internet access. 3. Encourage Council Members to use personal home computer for accessing internet agenda. Allow Council Members to retain laptop for home access to agenda via internet if they so choose. Council could access the packet via the City website each week at 3:00 Thursday afternoon. Council would then be accessing the same data as they currently do, but in the same manner as citizens. Council laptop use and upgrade, email policy, Harvat Hall upgrades March 11, 2004 Page 2 4. Provide Council Member with city e-mail address to conduct City business. Any City business should be conducted utilizing your City e-mail address and NOT your personal e-mail address. Any City business conducted would be subject to open records requests. 5. Printers would be provided for City laptops only. Council Members utilizing personal home computers would be offered a stipend for supplies (paper, etc) for their personal printer. 6. Council would access via internet in Harvat Hall and all Council meeting set-ups would include the diaz. Special presentations such as joint meetings, or budget deliberations could be set up away from the diaz (on the main floor in the round) since internet access and viewing of packets would not be necessary. 7. Policy for laptop use would need to be amended to delete reference to agenda availability via CD and allow for e-mail use via dedicated phone. As in the past the occasional request for a hard copy packet by Council Members temporarily out of town will be honored. Staff will proceed as outlined unless it appears at the March 15 work session that further discussion may be necessary. Attachment: March 13 City Attorney memo "Advice Concerning E-Mail Communications" U:harvathallinternet.doc City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: March 13, 2002 TO: City Council FROM: Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorne~'~'~~' RE: Advice Concerning Council E-Mail Communications My advice regarding your e-mail communications is given in consideration of the following: 1. Communications via e-mail to or from the City Council or a member or members of the City Council may be public records subject to disclosure. 2. E-mail communications between members of the City Council raise issues under the State's open meetings law. 3. City equipment should be used for city, not personal business. My advice is as follows: A. A city-owned computer and e-mail address will be provided to each Council member to be used for city-related business only and the City will provide and service only that equipment. As I understand it the equipment available to a council member is as follows: Dell (or similar) Laptop computer loaded with: - Operating System (Windows 2000 PRO or similar) Productivity Software (Microsoft Word 97, PowerPoint 97, Excel 97, and Outlook 98 - Adobe Acrobat Reader Version 4.0 LaserFiche Notebook Version 5.0 (electronic packet software package) CD Copy (for use with LaserFiche) - E-Mail Address Printer (Hewlett Packard 890 or similar) Printer Cable Connection Printer Cartridge Miscellaneous equipment/software if requested: WinFax Pro Version 10.0 External Super Disk (Addonics Pocket SuperDisk 240) March 13, 2002 Page 2 B. Only the city e-mail address will be disseminated by the City (e.g. on directories, business cards, etc.) C. Council members should confine their city-related business to the computer and e-mail address provided by the City. D. Council members should avoid providing any personal/private e-mail address for city-related business or encouraging its use for city-related business. E. Council members repties to e-mails should advise the senders that their e-mail communications and Council's reply to those communications may be public information. F. You are discouraged from using e-mail to communicate with each other in any manner whereby a majority of you are discussing an item at the same time. To determine whether a violation of the open meetings law has occurred any occurrence would have to be examined on its own facts. However, due to the instantaneous nature of e-mail communication use of e-mail to communicate among yourselves is problematic. G. If an individual Council member chooses to reply to an e-mail sent to the Council, a copy of the reply should be provided to the City Clerk for dissemination to the entire Council. H. You are reminded that the hardware and software are owned by the City. They are not your private property. You should not consider any communication via the system to be personal and/or private. See attached City policy. I will be available to answer questions at your work session on March 18. cc: Steve Atkins, City Manager Dale Helling, Assistant City Manager Marian Karr, City Clerk Gary Cohn, Information Services Coordinator Colin Hennessey, Information Technology Services Consultant elea no#mem/co uncilemail.d oc .... Email Policy Page 1 of 2 CITY OF IOWA CITY INTERNET/INTRANET/ELECTRONIC MAIL POLICY Last Updated: May 25, 1999 The following represents a policy regarding access to and disclosure of activity conducted on the City's internet/intranetJelectronic mail system. 1. The City owns and maintains an internet/intranet/electronic mail system hereafter referred to as "system." This system is provided by the City for the purpose of conducting City business. 2. The system hardware and software are owned by the City and as such are City property. Additionally, all messages composed, sent, or received on the system are and remain the properly of the City. They are not the private property of any employee, and employees should not consider any communication via the system confidential, personal, and/or private. 3. The use of the system is for the conduct of City business. Personal business or other non-job related activities should be minimized. Supervisors may further limit or restrict personal use. 4. The system shall not be used to solicit or persuade for commercial ventures, religious or political causes, outside organizations or other non-job-related solicitations, except for items posted to the City's intranet bulletin board (bulletin board guidelines and regulations are explained at the bulletin board site). 5. The system shall not be used to send (upload) or receive (download) copyrighted materials, trade secrets, proprietary financial information, or similar materials without specific prior authorization. 6. The system shall not be used to create or retrieve any offensive or disruptive messages or files. Among those which are considered offensive are any messages or files that contain any comment that offensively addresses someone's age, color, creed, disability, gender identity, marital status, national origin, race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation. 7. The confidentiality of any activity or message should not be assumed or expected. Deleting a message may not fully eliminate the message from the system. Further, the use of passwords for security does not guarantee confidentiality. The system automatically records information such as origin, destination, content, and amount of time used. The City Manager or designee may direct Information Services staff to monitor sites accessed. The City Manager or designee also reserves the right to access, review, and audit all messages and files created, received, or sent over the system for any purpose, even after said message or file is deleted. The contents of any electronic mail or file may be disclosed without the permission or prior notification of the employee who sent or received the message or created the file. The City is not responsible if "hackers" retrieve, and make public, employee system activity. Thus, privileged or confidential material shall not be communicated via the system due to potential monitoring. 8. Employees shall not use a code, access another employee's messages or files, or retrieve or modify any stored information, unless authorized to do so by a supervisor. All computer pass codes must be provided to supervisors upon request. I have read the Intemet/Intranet/Electronic Mail Policy and agree to abide by the terms and conditions listed above. I understand the system is a privilege, not a right, and that if I violate this policy or attempt to use the system for improper purposes, I shall be subject to discipline, up to and including discharge. Employee Name (print) Employee Signature Date Employee Department You can either print this page, or download the Microsoft Word 6.0/95 version of this document here. http://www.civic.iowa-city.org/policy/policy_mail.htm 3/12/2002 DATE: 03/10/04 TO: City Council FROM: Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorney RE: I will be out of the office on Wednesday, March 17, 2004. My staff will know how to reach me. Cc: Steve Atkins Marian Karr From: Terry Robinson Ref: Trees Please Grant in FY03 Date: March 8, 2004 As per your request, this is the additional information regarding the Trees Please Grant. In the spring of 2003 grant money from the Trees Please Grant ($10,000) operated by MidAmerican Energy allowed us to plant an additional 38 trees above what our budget would allow. It is important to note this is a matching grant, which highlights the fact that with out our existing budget we would not have qualified. The trees were planted on various City streets; throughout the community at locations we designate. These locations n requests, sites were we have removed trees, trees were planted on the spring 2003 comract at a cost of $20 to three local firms, Iowa City Landscaping being the low bidder. We always plato quite a Variety of trees including large trees like, Ash, Oak, Maple, Locust, and ornamentals, such as Snowdrift and Prairie Fire Crabapples, Ivory Silk Lilacs, and Aristocrat Pears. CC: Teny Tmeblood Director of Parks & Recreation March 1, 2004 '~O/~'~,~ Trees Please Donna Backstrom MidAmerican Energy Company P O BOX 4350 Davenport, IA 52808 Dear Ms. Backstrom On Behalf of the citizens of Iowa City, I would like to take this opportunity to thank MidAmerican Energy for their sponsorship of the Trees Please Program. The additional trees we are able to plant with the grant money enhances our environment and helps to make Iowa City a more attractive place to live. Please pass along our appreciation to the appropriate MidAmerican personnel. Sincerely, Terry ~Sbinson Superintendent Parks & Forestry CC: Steve Atkins - City Manager Terry Tmebtood - Director of Parks & Recreation 410 EAST WASHINGTON STREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240-1826 · (319) 356-5000 · FAX (319) 356-5009 IP7 Marian Karr From: Doug Elliott [doug.elliott@ecicog.org] Sent: Wednesday, Mamh 10, 2004 2:33 PM To: Teresa Meyer; Tamara Coleman; Sonya Love-Smith; Mary Ann Fanin; Marvin Trimble; Margaret Whitson; Kevin Kirchner; Kelly Hayworth; ieff schott; Jacki Michael; Doug Kearns; David Plyman; Cloyce Hutton; City of Wyoming; City of Williamsburg; City of West Chester; City of West Branch; City of Wellman; City of Washington; City of Walford; City of Van Home; City of Urbana; City of University Heights; City of Traer; City of Toledo; City of Tipton; City of Tiffin; City of Tama; City of Swisher; City of Springville; City of Solon; City of Shueyville; City of Shellsburg; City of Robins; City of Riverside; City of Parnell; City of Palo; City of Oxford Junction; City of Olin; City of North Liberty; City of North English; City of Newhall; City of Mt. Vernon; City of Mt. Auburn; City of Monticello Joshua Smith; City of Millersburg; City of Mechanicsville; City of Martelle; City of Marengo; City of Luzerne; City of Lone Tree; City of Lisbon; City of Ladora; City of Keystone; City of Kalona; City of Iowa City; City of Hills; City of Hiawatha; City of Garwin; City of Garrison; City of Fain<ax; City of Ely; City of Dysart; City of Durant; City of Coralville; City of Clutier; City of Clarence; City of Central City; City of Center Point; City of Cedar Rapids; City of Brighton; City of Blairstown; City of Belle PlaJne; City of Anamosa; City of Alburnett; City of Ainsworth; Cindy Pattee; City of Vinton; Ray Garringer; Connie Pence; Jeffrey Garrett; Lil Perry; Mar[ene Thiessen; John Adams; Sandra Fowler; Beth Weeks; Joan McCalmant; Linda Langenberg; Mike Stevensen; William Graezel; Tom Slockett; Tom Kriz; Terrence Neuzil; Sue Peterson; Sharon Hudepohl; Sally Stutsman; Mike Sullivan; Mike Lehman; Mike Goldberg; Marie Krutzfield; Linda Griggs; Larry Andreesen; Klm Tanke; Kim Painter; Kelly Rae Geater; Jill Marlow; Janine Sulzner; Jan Miller; Gary Jedlicka; Dennis Baldrich; Deb Miller; Charlie Thumm; Carol Thompson; Bill Fredrick; Betty Wright; Betty Ellerhoff; Amie Andreesen; Linda Langston Cc: Gina Peters Subject: Presentation on March 25 I'd like to invite any interested parties to attend a special presentation at the next meeting of the ECICOG Board of Directors on March 25, 2004. The meeting will be held at the ECICOG offices, and begins at 1:00 p.m. Dr. Liangfu Wu will give a presentation on PUBLICSALARY.COM, an on-line human resource tool and database. I had the opportunity to see a similar presentation earlier this year, and thought perhaps it was a resource that cities and counties in the region may find helpful. I'd encourage you to visit the PUBLICSALARY.COM website at www.citytechusa.com . There is a cost to participate in PUBLICSALARY.COM, and the fee structure can vary. By providing this presentation, ECICOG not endorsing participation in PUBLICSALARY.COM. Please contact Gina Peters, gina.peters@ecicog.org, to let us know if you intend to attend on March 25th. Directions to the ECICOG offices are available on our website at www.ecicog.org. Douglas D. Elliott Executive Director ECICOG 108 Third Street SE Suite 300 Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 (319) 365-9941, x22 (voice) (319) 365-9981 {fax) Minutes Draft Iowa City/Coralville Animal Care and Adoption Center Advisory Board January 28, 2004 Attended by: Maryann Dennis, Tammara Meester, Kathy Magarrell, John Lundell, Marti Horan (visitor) StaffPresent: Misha Goodman, Tom Widmer, Shane Kron Absent: Mia Barrels Meeting called to order at 6:35 p.m. Old Business 1) Minutes of October 29, 2003 - Lundell moved that we approve the minutes, Kron seconded, motion carried. 2) Update on License Form - IC and Coralville trying to come to agreement on fees. Lundell will take Goodman's recommendations to the next Coralville City Council work session. When fees decided, forms will be printed up and put in high profile public places to make it easy for people to mail in their license fees. Field officers will keep records of these mail-in forms. Owners will get renewal reminders in the mail. A final decision should be ready for the next meeting. 3) Evaluate Fees and Ordinances Both IC and Coralville are addressing fee changes. There was some discussion of the fee schedules, and how they were managed bet~veen IC and Coralville. Goodman stated that fees have not been increased since 1996. Goodman gave overview and explanation of desired fee changes so the new Coralville members would be up to speed. Goodman will put together a list of recommended changes and get it out to the Board next week. 4) Holiday with the Hounds - The event was a great success. Took in about $8,000.00 and received a lot of product. New Business 1) New Coralville Animal Control Officer - Mia Bartles is the new officer. She could not attend the meeting due to illness. Bartles' position is part-time; she does both animal shelter service and community service. Kron related that Bartles said the animal control functions of her job were busier than she had anticipated. 2) Yearly Statistics Not available at this time due to computer problems. 3) Increased Board members/By-law change - Discussion tabled until next meeting. 4) License renewal Chameleon forms - Already discussed. 5) Facility updates/Supervisor report Goodman reported on facility improvements, made possible by FACF: new roof over outdoor kennels, wall siding repairs, inside of shelter repainted; overhangs installed, finished installing automatic waterers, and fenced-in area for dog exercise and training; fencing donated by Jean Walker. Still working on the guillotine doors for aggressive and sick animals. FACF contributed to a digital camera and video camera for behavior evaluation and investigations. FACF also increased the medical fund. In total, about 12-15 thousand FACF dollars. 6) Member reports - No member reports 7) Citizen comment None. Meester moved to adjourn, seconded by Magarrell. Motion carried, meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Next meeting Wednesday, March 24 6:30 p.m. Old Wastcwatcr Treatment Plant, Training Room DRAFT POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD I~ MINUTES - March 9, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Candy Barnhill called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. ATTENDANCE Board members present: Candy Barnhill, Greg Roth, John Stratton, and Roger Williams; Board member absent: Loren Horton. Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh and Staff Kellie Turtle present. Also in attendance was Capt. Tom Widmer of the ICPD and citizen Loralie Dyer. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #03-13. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Stratton, seconded by Roth, to adopt the consent calendar. · Minutes of the meeting on 02/10/04 · ICPD General Order 01-01 (Racial Profiling) · ICPD General Order 04-01 (Personnel Early Warning System) · ICPD Use of Force Report- January 2004 Motion carried, 4/0. Horton absent. NEW BUSINESS None. OLD BUSINESS None. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Loralie Dyer appeared and was advised on board procedures for complaints. Captain Widmer of the ICPD also offered his services if Dyer had any questions or concerns on police policies/procedures. BOARD INFORMATION None. STAFF INFORMATION None. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Stratton, seconded by Williams, to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1 )(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11 )personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably PCRB-Page 2 February 10, 2004 believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 4/0, Horton absent. Open session adjourned at 7:21 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 7:26 P.M. Motion by Roth, seconded by Stratton, to forward the Public Report as amended for PCRB Complaint #03-13 to City Council. Motion carried, 4/0, Horton absent. MEETING SCHEDULE · April 13, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room (*) · May 11,2004, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room · June 8, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room · July 13, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room (*) The Board agreed to cancel the April meeting providing no new complaints are filed. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Stratton, seconded by Roth, to adjourn. Motion carried, 4/0, Horton absent. Meeting adjourned at 7:29 P.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5041 TO: City Council Complainant Stephen Atkins, City Manager R. J. Winkelhake, Chief of Police Officer(s) involved in complaint FROM: Police Citizens Review Board RE: Investigation of PCRB Complaint #03-13 DATE: 9 March 2004 This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB #03-13 (the "Complaint"). Board's Responsibility Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7B (2), the Board's job is to review the Police Chief's Report ("Report") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the report "because of the Police Chief's professional expertise." Section 8-8-7B (2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "findings of fact", it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if these findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence", are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious" or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice or any Federal, State or Local Law". Sections 8-8-7B (2) a, b, and c. Board's Procedure The Complaint was received at the Office of the City Clerk on October 17, 2003. As required by Section 8-8-5 of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Police Chief for Investigation. The Chief's Report was due January 16, 2004 and was filed with the City Clerk January 15, 2004. PCRB # 03-13 Page 1 The Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Section 8-8-~;)(b~:~-qi-] interview/meet with Complainant and 8-8-7B(1)(e), performance by Board~Ot'Tts ow~ -- additional investigation. ~c, o ~ . < r- !Tt Repeated efforts were made to contact witnesses whose full names we~mo~., wit~-~ no success. The complainant was contacted, but efforts to meet for an I~ervie~-were unsuccessful, o~ The Board met to consider the Report on February 11, 2004 and again on March 9, 2004. Findin.qs of Fact On October 17, 2003 the Complainant filed a complaint with the ICPRB regarding the treatment he received when arrested at a downtown bar on August 29, 2003. The Complainant was charged with assault on a police officer, two counts of interference with official acts and disorderly conduct. Five allegations were made against officers A, B, C and D: (1) failure of officers to identify themselves at initial contact; (2) excessive force while searching the Complainant; (3) Complainant sprayed with OC while in back seat of squad car without justification; (4) Complainant struck in head while sitting handcuffed in squad car; and (5) post indictment harassment of Complainant. The incident began when 4 officers assigned to PAULA enforcement were approached by an unidentified employee of the bar who requested their assistance with an individual the employee claimed was picking fights in the bar. The officers were directed to the top floor of the bar where officers C and D observed the Complainant push another individual (unidentified). The Complainant was identified by the bar employee as the person who had been causing trouble. Officer C stated that after observing the Complainant push the other individual, he (officer C) took hold of the Complainant's arm while identifying himself as a police officer (Officer C was in uniform) and informed the Complainant that he was under arrest. (The Complainant reported that the officer did not identify himself.) Officer C attempted to place the Complainant's hands behind his back, but the Complainant resisted. Officers A and D assisted Officer C cuff the Complainant who was then escorted out of the bar and to the SCAT vehicle where he was searched. Officer B described the Complainant as resistive during the search. To control the Complainant, Officer B, grasped the Complainant's right arm and applied pressure to his back with his (the officer's) forearm. The Complainant raised one of his legs several times in efforts (Officer B perceived as attempts) to kick him. To prevent the Complainant from kicking him, Officer B stepped on his foot and trapped it on the PCRB # 03-13 Page 2 ground. After the search was completed the Complainant was taken to Officer E's car to be transported to the Johnson County Jail. The Complainant sat on the rear seat but refused to put his legs and feet inside the vehicle. When Officer B tried to get his feet into the vehicle, the Complainant attempted to kick him, which the officer avoided by backing up. At this point Officer A moved forward and exposed the Complainant to OC spray. This resulted in the Complainant moving his feet into the car. A number of officers reported that the Complainant was sprayed with ware&to prq~de relief from the OC. No estimate of time lapse was provided. Officer E transported the Complainant first to the University Treatmffr~-Cer~r fer~-~ decontamination and then to the Johnson County Jail. Conclusion -- Allegation #1: Officers failed to identify themselves when they first placed ~nds on him (Complainant) and arrested him. The arresting officers were all in uniform. Officers C and A who took control of the Complainant's arms stated that they identified themselves as police officers. Officer D who handcuffed the Complainant indicated that he did not hear the other officer's statements probably because of the noise level in the bar. The Board finds that the ChieFs conclusion is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Allegation #1 is Not Sustained. Allegation #2: Officers used excessive force while patting him (Complainant) down by placing an elbow in his back. Officers report that the Complainant was resistive while being searched and attempted to kick at the officer patting him down. Officer B stood on the Complainant's foot to prevent further kicks. Officers commonly place a forearm in the back of an actively resisting subject to control their movements and disrupt their balance. The Chief's report concluded that this was reasonable force to protect the officer from injury. The Board finds that the Chief's conclusion is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Allegation #2 is Not Sustained. Alle.qation #3: An officer sprayed him (the Complainant) with OC for no reason after he was placed in the back of the squad car. The Complainant refused to place his feet in the squad car and kicked at Officer B as PCRB # 03-13 Page 3 he attempted to place the Complainant's feet in the car. Officer B stepped back to avoid getting kicked and Officer A after confirming with Officer B that the Complainant had attempted to kick him, applied OC to induce the Complainant to get into the car which he did. The Chief's report states that the Complainant was at a Level 4 (assault) Use of Fome and that Officer A responded with a Level 3 Use of Force. The response was within the department's policy and procedures. The Board finds that the Chief's conclusion is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Allegation #3 is Not Sustained Allegation fl4: An officer hit him (the Complainant) in the head while he was in the squad car, The Complainant claims that while he was being sprayed with OC he was also punched in the forehead. The Chief's report indicated that none of the officers interviewed saw anyone strike the Complainant in the head. The Board finds that the Chief's conclusion is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Allegation fl4 is Not Sustained. Alle.qation #5: Post arrest harassment. According to the Chief's report there was no harassment. The report stated the officers indicated they did not know where the Complainant resided. The Board finds that the Chief's conclusion is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Allegation #5 is Not Sustained. COMMENT None. PGRB ~ 034 3 Page 4 MINUTES DRAFT IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2004 - 5:30 P.M. CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST.-TOWER PLACE PARKiNG FACILITY MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Pusack, Brett Castillo, Kimberly Thrower MEMBERS ABSENT: Saul Mekies, Terry Smith STAFF PRESENT: Drew Shaffer, Mike Brau, Bob Hardy, Andy Matthews, Dale Helling OTHERS PRESENT: Phil Phillips, Josh Goding, Susan Rogusky, Jon Koebrick, Andy Kromphardt RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL None at this time. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Koebrick reported that chief operating officer John Pascarelli and regional manager Charlie King were in Cedar Rapids recently and had an opportunity to met with Shaffer and Brau to discuss Mediacom's future plans. At that meeting it was suggested that Mediacom meet with Commissioners for a demonstration of the new services and products Mediacom plans to launch. Mediacom will attempt to set something up for April, probably in Cedar Rapids. A count of the number of non-addressable converters was provided to Shaffer. Information has been developed and made available to the Cable TV Division so that InfoVision can be used to inform subschbers. Subscribers that have a converter that is not being used can return it and that charge will be eliminated. There are about 250 converters out in Iowa City. From some complaints it seems some subscribers are not aware they are being charged for a non-addressable converter. Kromphardt reported that Mike McBride has been hired as the video manager and will have responsibility for U of I TV. Goding reported that PATV's armual report will be ready for the next meeting. The search committee to select a new director for PATV hopes to be able to make a recommendation to the board at their Mamh meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Thrower moved and Castillo seconded a motion to approve January 26, 2004 meeting minutes. The motion passed unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS None. SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS None. CONSUMER ISSUES Shaffer referred to the complaint report in the meeting packet and noted that there were 14 complaints, 4 about rates, 2 about technical problems, 3 about poor service, 3 about programming content, and 2 about the need for competition, Ali complaints that could be resolved have been resolved. MEDIACOM REPORT Koebrick reported that Executive Vice President of Operations John Pascarelli and regional manager Charlie King were in Cedar Rapids recently and had an opportunity to meet with Shaffer and Brau to discuss Mediacom's future plans. At that meeting it was suggested that Mediacom meet with Commissioners for a demonstration of the new services and products Mediacom plans to launch. Mediacom will attempt to set something up for April, probably in Cedar Rapids. The demonstration will include high definition television (HDTV), video on demand (VOD), digital video recorders (such as TiVo), and Internet based phone services. Mediacom representatives met with the Press Citizen to help them understand the things Mediacom is doing in the community that the satellite television service providers do not do such as providing free air time to the City and the community, the amount of property tax paid, and employing people in the community. A count of the number ofnon- addressable converters was provided to Shaffer. Information has been developed and made available to the Cable TV Division so that InfoVision can be used to inform subscribers. Subscribers that have a converter that is not being used can return it and that charge will be eliminated. There are about 250 converters out in Iowa City. VOD and the digital video recorders will be available in Iowa City in the next few months. Cable modem speeds are now about twice what they had been. UNIVERSITY OF IOWA REPORT Kromphardt reported that U of I TV recently started cablecasting the student government meetings. President Skorton and Dean Jones will be featured on a program on diversity. Mike McBride has been hired as the video manager and will have responsibility for U of I TV. Kromphardt thanked the staffs of the library channel and the City Channel for providing information on digital playback systems. U of I program listings are included in the Daily Iowan and the University web site. PATV REPORT Goding reported that PATV's annual report will be ready for the next meeting. The search committee to select a new director hopes to be able to make a recommendation to the board at their March meeting. Two production interns are working with PATV this semester. SENIOR CENTER REPORT Rogusky distributed the February Senior Center TV program guide. Rogusky said that the Senior Center building is 100 years old this year and there will be a number of programs on the "100 year" theme. IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT REPORT No representative was present. Pusack said that the school board meetings technical quality has room for improvement and asked the Community Television Group to offer any assistance they can provide to make improvements. LEGAL REPORT Matthews said he had nothing new to report. Comments on the Rice, Williams contract will be ready soon. LIBRARY REPORT No representative was present. KIRKWOOD REPORT No representative was present. MEDIA UNIT Hardy reported the staff has been working hard on the Avatar program. The new playback system is being tested and will be activated soon. The system should save a significant amount of stafftime. The Community Television Service remains quite busy. CABLE TV ADMiNISTRATOR REPORT Shaffer referred to the memo to Council in the packet on the video voter project concerning the Iowa caucuses and the Presidential election. Mediacom provided multiple playbacks across the state. The project was picked up by some access organizations in New Hampshire and were able to build on the effort started by the Division. CSAPN 3, ESPN, CHANNEL PACKAGING The item was deferred. ADJOURNMENT Castillo moved and Thrower seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Drew Shaffer Cable TV Administrator