Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2017-07-13 Info Packet
Ls -t-- CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 13, 2017 IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule JULY 18 WORK SESSION I132 Work Session Agenda IP3 Bike Master Plan Report (Draft) I134 Pending Work Session Topics MISCELLANEOUS I135 Memo from Neighborhood Services Coordinator: Affordable Housing Action Plan Update IP6 Memo from Assistant to the City Manager: Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County FY2017 report I137 Memo from Human Rights Coordinator & Equity Director: Social Justice and Racial Equity Second Quarter Update for 2017 IPS Emails from A.J. Mahler to Council Member Cole and Assistant City Attorney: Moratorium [Staff responses included] IP9 Bar Check Report — July, 2017 Agenda: Joint Entities Meeting: July 17 [Distributed as late handout to I.P. on 7/17; posted as agenda and distributed on 7/14] DRAFT MINUTES IP10 Airport Commission: June 27 IP11 Housing and Community Development Commission: June 15 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 13, 2017 I131 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule I \ JULY 18 WORK SESSION , I IP2 IP3 IP4 IP5 IP6 IP7 IPS M Work Ses'on Agenda Bike Master P Report (Draft) Pending Work Ses on Topics MISCELLANEOUS Memo from Neighborhood Se ' es Coordina Memo from Assistant to the City M ager: c report Memo from Human Rights Coordinato & q Second Quarter Update for 2017 Emails from A.J. Mahler to Coun I Member [Staff responses included] Bar Check Report — July, 2 7 Affordable Housing Action Plan Update ig Trust Fund of Johnson County FY2017 Director: Social Justice and Racial Equity and Assistant City Attorney: Moratorium DRAFT MINUTES IP10 AirportCommiss� June 27 11311 Housing and C munity Development Commission: June 15 i r A CITY OF IOWA CITY Date City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule IP1 Subject to change July 13, 2017 Time Meeting Location Monday, July 17, 2017 4:00 PM Reception Johnson County 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting 855 S. Dubuque St. Health & Human Services Building #203 Tuesday, July 18, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, August 1, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, August 15, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, September 5, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, September 19, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, October 3, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, October 17, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, November 7, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, November 21, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, December 5, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, December 19, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting 1 � i YY1®i�Il CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org City Council Work Session Agenda Tuesday, July 18, 2017 Emma J. Harvat Hall - City Hall 5:00 p.m. Presentation of final Bicycle Master Plan and preliminary Gilbert Street discussion [IP #3 of 7/13 Info Packet] • Clarification of Agenda Items Information Packet Discussion [June 22, June 29, July 6, July 13] BICYCLE MASTER PLAN IOWA CITY, IOWA SUMMER 2017 m Boma now BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Dodge St BICYCLE MASTER PLAN IOWA CITY, IOWA SUMMER 2017 - � t AWW will ii Now r o� Iowa City Staff Kent Ralston, AICP, Transportation Planner Sarah Walz, Associate Planner Technical Advisory Committee Jeff Barnes, Director of Facilities, Iowa City Community School District Jay Geisen, GIS Analyst, University of Iowa Zac Hall, Parks Superintendent, Iowa City Parks and Recreation Jason Havel, City Engineer, Iowa City Darian Nagle-Gamm, Senior Transportation Engineering Planner, MPOJC Jon Resler, Superintendent of Streets and Traffic Engineering, Iowa City David Ricketts, Director of Parking and Transportation, University of Iowa Juli Seydell-Johnson, Director of Parks and Recreation, Iowa City David Schwindt, Officer, Downtown Liaison, Iowa City Police Department Bicycle Advisory Committee Kris Ackerson, Community Development Planner, Iowa City Ben Anderson, Iowa City Bicycling Club Anthony Branch, Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County and Youth Off -Road Riders Wayne Fett, Goosetown/New Pioneer Racing Team Cody Gieselman, Iowa City Bike Library Brian Loring, Blue Zones and Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County Benjamin Nelson, University of Iowa Student Government Susie Poulton, Iowa City Community School District, Safe Routes to School Emily Robnette, University of Iowa Bicycle Advisory Committee Jennifer Selby, Think Bicycles of Johnson County Jacob Simpson, University of Iowa Student Government Consultant Team: Alta Planning + Design, Inc. Cynthia Hoyle, Project Manager Paul Wojciechowski, Principal Kevin Neill RDG Planning & Design RD .. Marty Shukert, Principal •°° °° Cory Scott Acknowledgements r Iowa City City Council -�.�- Jim Throgmorton, Mayor CITY OF IOWA CITY Kingsley y y Botchwa II, Mayor Pro Tem Rockne Cole Terry Dickens Susan Mims Pauline Taylor John Thomas Iowa City Staff Kent Ralston, AICP, Transportation Planner Sarah Walz, Associate Planner Technical Advisory Committee Jeff Barnes, Director of Facilities, Iowa City Community School District Jay Geisen, GIS Analyst, University of Iowa Zac Hall, Parks Superintendent, Iowa City Parks and Recreation Jason Havel, City Engineer, Iowa City Darian Nagle-Gamm, Senior Transportation Engineering Planner, MPOJC Jon Resler, Superintendent of Streets and Traffic Engineering, Iowa City David Ricketts, Director of Parking and Transportation, University of Iowa Juli Seydell-Johnson, Director of Parks and Recreation, Iowa City David Schwindt, Officer, Downtown Liaison, Iowa City Police Department Bicycle Advisory Committee Kris Ackerson, Community Development Planner, Iowa City Ben Anderson, Iowa City Bicycling Club Anthony Branch, Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County and Youth Off -Road Riders Wayne Fett, Goosetown/New Pioneer Racing Team Cody Gieselman, Iowa City Bike Library Brian Loring, Blue Zones and Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County Benjamin Nelson, University of Iowa Student Government Susie Poulton, Iowa City Community School District, Safe Routes to School Emily Robnette, University of Iowa Bicycle Advisory Committee Jennifer Selby, Think Bicycles of Johnson County Jacob Simpson, University of Iowa Student Government Consultant Team: Alta Planning + Design, Inc. Cynthia Hoyle, Project Manager Paul Wojciechowski, Principal Kevin Neill RDG Planning & Design RD .. Marty Shukert, Principal •°° °° Cory Scott Executive Summary ................... 6 Process ........................... 6 Vision and Goals ................... 7 The Vision ......................... 7 Existing Conditions ................. 7 Needs Assessment ................. 7 Recommendations ................. 7 Implementation ................... 8 Vision and Goals ..................... 10 The Vision .........................11 108 Goals and Objectives ...............11 109 Existing System ...................... 14 The Six Es Framework ............. 14 The Bike Network ................. 16 Building a Culture of Bicycling....... 35 Existing Plans and Policies.......... 41 Needs Assessment ................... 49 Types of Bicyclists ................. 49 DR�gFT Demand for Bicycling Facilities ...... 50 Community Input ................. 58 Online Mapping Tool Input ......... 64 Conclusion ....................... 67 Recommendations ................... 69 The Iowa City Bikeway Network ..... 69 Programs and Policies ............. 90 Implementation .................... 107 Going for Gold: Immediate Actions . 107 Corridor and Project Prioritization. . 108 Cost Estimate Assumptions........ 109 Project Phasing Strategy ...........111 Funding Sources ..................114 Ongoing Maintenance and Operations . . 119 Plan Monitoring and Evaluation .... 121 TABLE OF MAPS Map 1. Existing bike facilities........... 17 Map 2. Bike network gaps ............. 24 Map 3. Barriers to bicycling............ 25 Map 4. Bicycle level of traffic stress for arterial and collector streets in Iowa City 28 Map 5. Bicycle crash clusters .......... 31 Map 6. Bicycle crashes by severity...... 32 Map 7. Bicycle parking and repair stations. . 33 Map 8. Population -based demand...... 51 Map 9. Employment -based demand .... 52 Map 10. Recreation -based demand..... 53 Map 11. School-based demand ........ 54 Map 12. Retail -based demand ......... 55 Map 13. Transit -based demand ........ 56 Map 14. Composite demand........... 57 Map 15. Current bicycling route density. 64 Map 16. Desired bicycling route density. 65 Map 17. Combined bicycling route density (existing and desired) ................. 66 Map 18. Community destination density 67 Map 19. Functional bicycle network..... 72 Map 20. Functional bicycle network .... 73 Map 21. Functional bicycle network..... 74 Map 22. Functional bicycle network .... 75 Map 23. Functional bicycle network .... 76 Map 24. Bicycle network with proposed facility types ........................ 79 Map 25. Bicycle network with proposed facility types by quadrant ............. 80 Map 26. Bicycle network with proposed facility types by quadrant ............. 81 Map 27. Bicycle network with proposed facility types by quadrant ............. 82 Map 28. Bicycle network with proposed facility types by quadrant ............. 83 Map 29. Bikeway project prioritization ..110 Map 30. Project phasing strategy ....... 115 TABLE of Table 1. Bicycle PdRAFT Table 2. Segment Scoring Matrix for Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress ................. 26 Table 3. Relevant Plans and Policies..... 41 Table 4. Mileage by Bicycle Facility...... 78 Table 5. Characteristics of Short- and Long - Term Bicycle Parking ................. 88 Table 6. Recommended programs and policies ............................. 90 Table 7. Prioritization Criteria ......... 109 Table 8. Cost estimates by facility type ..111 Table 9. Immediate -term projects (2017- 2018) ...............................112 Table 10. Near-term projects (2019-2022) ... 113 Table 11. Planning -level maintenance costs . 120 Table 12. Implementation performance measures .......................... 122 >� 5EC710N 1 Executive Summary Executive Summary Bicycling is an integral part of the character and identity of Iowa City. From families traveling on the city's scenic greenways and trails, to children and young adults bicycling to school, to adults traveling to work and running errands, people of all ages and backgrounds are traveling throughout the city by bike. In recent years, Iowa City has demonstrated its commitment to making bicycling a safer, easier, and more convenient form of transportation and has earned the League of American Bicyclists' Silver Bicycle Friendly Community. This Bicycle Master Plan provides the framework and recommendations for the city to become a Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community. The plan is divided into five chapters. The first chapter outlines the plan and states the vision, goals, and objectives to guide the planning process and subsequent implementation. The second chapter describes the current bicycling environ- ment, characteristics of the transportation system, programs and activities to encourage bicycling and raise awareness for all road users, and plans and Community Engagement 111:41�1 ii i policies that impact bicycle transportation. The third chapter focuses on bicycling needs and includes an examination of demand for bicycling facilities and a summary of the public engagement activities and community input that shaped the plan recommen- dations. The fourth chapter outlines the physical and programmatic recommendations to achieve the vision of a more bikeable community. The fifth and final chapter provides a framework for imple- mentingthe plan and includes early implementation actions, cost estimates for bicycle facilities, funding sources, a project phasing strategy, and mainte- nance considerations. Process The planning process, which took place over the course of eight months from December 2016 to July 2017, is grounded in objective analysis and best practices in bicycle network and facility design, and driven by the vision and ideas of the many commu- nity residents and stakeholders who participated in the process. Key engagement events, including technical advisory committee (TAC) meetings, Exisitng Vision Draft Policy, Conditions and Goals / Bicycle Programs, & Draft and Analysis High Priority Facility Implemen- Final Plan Areas Plan tation December January February March 2016 2017 2017 2017 6 >> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN ul 21717 20ril a7 2017 une 2017 bicycle advisory committee (BAC) meetings, and public open houses, were scheduled to share infor- mation and garner feedback at critical stages during the eight-month planning period. Vision and Goals The plan's vision reflects Iowa City's needs, values, and aspirations for bicycling bydepictingthe commu- nity's desired future for bicycling. Supporting goals and objectives provide clear paths to achieve this vision. The Goals Six goals provide general themes that mirror the League of American Bicyclists' Building Blocks of a Bicycle Friendly Community. Together, these six goals provide a comprehensive approach to creating social and physical environments that welcome and support bicycling by people of all ages and abilities. Existing Conditions Iowa City's existing bikeway system consists of more than 85 miles of off-street trails and sidepaths and on -street bike lanes, marked and signed routes, and wide shoulders. The city's linear trails and green- ways provide excellent recreational opportunities 11 akfll 911 for people of all ages and abilities, but the on -street network, which lacks in both connectivity and coverage, does not support bicycling activity to a similar degree. While many local roads throughout Iowa City offer quiet, comfortable corridors for bicycling, major barriers like difficult intersections, major highways, and the Iowa River limit people's ability to travel by bicycle to everyday destinations like parks, schools, places of employment, shopping, and entertainment. Iowa City is aware of these chal- lenges to bicycling and has been actively addressing them through continued bikeway development and through planning and policy tools to direct munic- ipal resources and support bicycle -friendly private and public development. Needs Assessment An assessment and understanding of community needs for bicycle transportation and recreation is necessary to effectively direct local resources and investments, Iowa City and its community partners. Through an objective analysis of trip origins and destinations and a broad range of feedback gener- ating through various public engagement activities and tools, a clearer picture of bicycle -related needs began to emerge. While the trip origin and desti- nation analysis painted a general picture of high concentrations of land uses that are generating bicycle trips, the public input provided more specific detail about desired routes, barriers to bicycling, corridors in need of improvement, popular destina- tion in need of bicycle parking, and other valuable information to guide the plan recommendations. Recommendations Plan recommendations focus on both building the physical bike network and creating an under- lying support system through strategic programs and policies. There are over 100 miles of recom- mended bikeways in the plan, including 72 miles of on -street facilities like bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, bicycle boulevards, and 28 miles of off- street facilities like trails and sidepaths. When complete, the full bike network will offer residents INTRODUCTION>> 7 and visitors opportunities to travel by bicycle and access everyday destinations safely and comfort- ably, regardless of age or ability. Recommended programs and policies help to build a culture of bicy- cling by engaging residents through fun and exciting bicycling events, providing education opportunities for both youth and adults, and creating systems to measure and monitor bicycling activity, safety, and other key variables. Implementation Implementing the plan recommendations begins even before the plan is complete. Seven imme- diate actions provide the foundation for long-term commitment to the plan and set the stage for progressive network growth. 8 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN DRAFT Project prioritization assigns value to project recom- mendations based on key metrics established with guidance from advisory committees and publicfeed- back. Prioritization results in turn effect the project phasing schedule, which groups the recommended bikeways into four phasing groups: immediate term (2017-2018), near term (2019-2022), long term (2023-2027), and unscheduled. Cost estimates and potential funding sources support capital improve- ment planning, project financing, and project development. General maintenance considerations reinforce the commitment required to effectively maintain the bikeway network as a valuable asset to Iowa City and its residents. As the plan is implemented, it will be critical to monitor the progress of Iowa City and its community partners and periodically reevaluate the commu- nity needs and update this plan document. The plan concludes with monitoring and evaluation metrics to guide the city towards its goal of becoming a Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community. I I IMNIF i 3ECTION S Vision, Goals, and Objectives I Ir e Vision and Goals Bicycling is an integral part of the character and identity of Iowa City. From families traveling on the city's scenic greenways and trails, to children and young adults bicycling to school, to adults traveling to work and running errands, people of all ages and backgrounds are traveling throughout the city by bike. In recent years, Iowa City has demonstrated its commitment to making bicycling a safer, easier, and more convenient form of transportation through the development of trails, bike lanes, designated bicycle routes, bicycle -supportive policy changes, and programs in partnership with local advocacy organizations and community groups. In its 2016- 2017 Strategic Plan, the City Council stated its intent to raise Iowa City's Bicycle Friendly Community status from Silver to Gold by 2017, and to aspire toward Platinum status in the future. This Bicycle Master Plan provides the framework and recom- mendations for the city to become a Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community. The Iowa City Bicycle Master Plan establishes a strategy to support bicycling as a viable, inclusive mode of transportation. Over the course of the 1110L 41�1 It i planning process, community residents, businesses, institutions, and other stakeholders have shared their hopes and ideas for bicycling in Iowa City, and these hopes and ideas are encapsulated in the plan vision, goals, and objectives that will guide the city's actions for bicycling for years to come. The plan vision is aspirational and ambitious, representing the desired future for bicycling. The plan goals are broad, value -based expressions of the community's desires that can guide decision-making and bring the plan vision to life. Goals give direction to the plan as a whole and are concerned with the long- term. As a core foundation of the plan, the League of American Bicyclists' Building Blocks of a Bicycle Friendly Community organizes the goals into a clear and comprehensive "Six Es" framework based on proven elements of great bike plans. Multiple objectives have been identified to add measurable actions to each goal. The plan vision, goals, and objectives are firmly rooted in input from commu- nity members, guidance from the bicycle advisory committee and technical advisory committee, and detailed analysis of existing conditions. gxnee,-,dvcati0 �aWat o / Equip people with the ✓ knowledge, skills and ` confidence to bike and walk x Create safe, connected, Monitor efforts to active and comfortable places transportation and plan for for bicycling and walking the future / 0�pfce/??, equity a0\3fage, Foster a culture that supports and encourages active transportation Build safe and responsible (including crease access and tunity for all residents, behaviors on the road and disadvantaged,d respect among allrity, and low incom road users populations 10>> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Goals and Objectives Goal 1: Engineering. Implement safe, comfort- able, and convenient travel for people of all ages and abilities through an interconnected network of low -stress bicycling facilities. Objective 1.1: Increase total bicycle network miles. Objective 1.2: Increase network connectivity by reducing gaps between existing facilities. Objective 1.3: Increase network connectivity by expanding facilities into underserved areas. Objective 1.4: Increase bicycling safety through improvements to existing bicycle facilities and network expansion. Objective 1.5: Meet or exceed minimum design standards and incorporate best practices in facility design, utilizing national resources including the latest editions of the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and the Federal Highway Administration's Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks Guide. ilililil I Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllluuw�"�� ��������������_ � � � Objective 1.6: Preserve the safety and quality of existing and newly installed bikeways through ongoing facility evaluation and maintenance. Objective 1.7: Coordinate with adjacent munici- palities and other local and state agencies to increase regional connectivity, particularly for projects that extend to the city limits or connect with bicycle facilities outside the city'sjurisdiction. Objective 1.8: Balance bicycle mobility needs with pedestrian, motorist, and transit needs through implementation of the city's Complete Streets policy. Objective 1.9: Maximize bicycle amenities at transit stops and centers to support multimodal transportation. Objective 1.10: Utilize the zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations, and other policy tools to create a bicycle -supportive built environment. Objective 1.11: Provide support facilities to enhance the bicycle network in the form of short - and long-term bicycle parking, bicycle repair stations, bike share stations, and wayfinding signage. Goal 2: Education. Provide educational opportu- nities that teach roadway safety for all roadway users in Iowa City, including practical skills for bicycling, awareness of bicycle facilities and how to use them, and the rules of the road for people driving and bicycling. Objective 2.1: Increase opportunities for adults, college students, teens, and youth to learn basic bicycle skills and traffic safety through regularly offered courses and training. Objective 2.2: Work with private and public schools to increase bicycle skills and traffic instruction as a part of school curricula. VISION AND GOALS >>11 Objective 2.3: Support community part- ners' bicycle -related education initiatives to reach targeted populations and the broader community. Objective 2.4: Incorporate multi -pronged outreach efforts into bicycle project develop- ment to increase understanding of new bicycle facilities and raise awareness for the diversity of road users in Iowa City. Goal 3: Encouragement. Offer diverse and inclusive programs, events, and activities that encourage all Iowa City residents and visitors to enjoy bicycling. Objective 3.1: Support community partners' bicycle -related encouragement initiatives to reach targeted populations and the broader community. Objective 3.2: Use the City's various social media platforms to promote bicycling. Objective 3.3: Work with local businesses and the chamber of commerce to create incentive programs for bicycling to work, to shop, and to community events. Objective 3.4: Work with the university and local schools to create incentive programs for students and employees to bicycle to and from school. Goal 4: Enforcement. Establish a shared under- standing of and respect for bicycling among all road users through enforcement activities that promote responsible travel behavior and help educate the entire community on roadway safety. Objective 4.1: Support law enforcement with training opportunities to address the needs of bicyclists and other road users. Objective 4.2: Develop law enforcement programs and activities to promote safe and responsible travel behavior. 12 >> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Goal 5: Evaluati i le ilit targets and pro n of th state of bicycling in Iowa City to monitor plan implementation progress, identify opportunities for improvement, and address bicycling -related needs and issues as they arise. Objective 5.1: Create an annual implemen- tation agenda to guide bicycle project and program development and delivery within budgetary constraints established in the Capital Improvement Plan. Objective 5.2: Establish a bicycle or active transportation advisory committee to support evaluation, data collection, and implementation tracking efforts. Objective 5.3: Use evaluation and implementa- tion tracking measures to highlight plan -related accomplishments and communicate the impor- tance of bicycling to the community. Objective 5.4: Encourage community participa- tion and feedback through ongoing engagement activities and open communication channels. Objective 5.5: Achieve Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community status. Goal 6: Equity. Contribute to a more equitable, affordable, and accessible transportation system in Iowa City by ensuring bicycling is a viable choice for all people throughout the entire city, with special focus on underserved popula- tions, including youth, the elderly, people with disabilities, racial and ethnic minorities, immi- grants, and low-income households. Objective 6.1: Increase bicycle network coverage to underserved populations. Objective 6.2: Develop programs and materials that increase access to bicycling and bicycle - related information for underserved populations. SECTION 3 Existing System Existing System Take a ride through Iowa City on any given day, and it quickly becomes clear: Iowa City is a bicycling city. From the scenic trail system to the busy streets and paths in and around Downtown and the University of Iowa, people of all ages and backgrounds are using the bicycle for transportation and recreation. The culture of bicycling in Iowa City is the result of concerted efforts by city and state governments, local bike shops, citizen advocacy groups, bike clubs, schools, and individual residents—all committed to supporting bicycling as a means of connecting to people and places in Iowa City. This chapter exam- ines the current state of bicycling in Iowa City, with a focus on existing bicycle facilities and network characteristics, relevant plans and policies, and supporting programs and initiatives offered by Iowa City and its many community partners. These are features that have helped Iowa City earn silver -level Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC) designation as defined by the League of American Bicyclists. ljh:41�1 ii i The Six Es Framework Building a culture of bicycling that will take Iowa City to the next level takes more than bike lanes and trails. It will require the addition of low -stress bike- ways that support bicycling by people of all ages and abilities; programs, training, and organized rides to give people the skills and confidence to travel by bike; enforcement programs and laws that create an environment of mutual respect among all road users; and guidelines and policies to guide city staff and elected officials to enable smart, responsible choices. It takes a comprehensive approach, and, above all, it takes ambition, will, and perseverance. Iowa City has many of these assets and character- istics already. In recognition of the city's efforts, the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) designated Iowa City a silver -level BFC in 2013, improving on the bronze -level designation awarded in 2009. The LAB's Bicycle FriendlyAmerica program acknowledges the KEY OUTCOMES Figure 1. The building blocks of a Bicycle Friendly Community 14 >> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN P.d."'� THE LEAGUE ffUFAICH31MUm There no ingh, ro b,,ng a Bicycle Friendly Com airy. In fi—,she beauty of,he BFC. prom grarhe rung. o. she re the en and each u ca,vnfiize wiyne engihs, make biking beW BumV,, 1n, parr decade, ve pored hrongh nearly 600 applica...... d idemihed rhe key benchmark,,h., d,f—she BFC .yard levels. Here's a glimpse a[ rhe average pertomra.ce of,he BFC, i. import.., caregones, hkc ridership, saf,ry and ed- efforts of communities, universities, and businesses to institutionalize bicycling as a viable form of trans- portation. The program measures success using five key indicators, often referred to as the "Five Es" or the building blocks of a BFC: education, encourage- ment, engineering, enforcement, and evaluation. LAB is currently working to incorporate equity as a sixth key indicator, thereby creating the "Six Es" that were used for this planning process. These six indicators are used throughout this plan as a frame- work for evaluating the current state of bicycling and developing recommendations that can help Iowa City reach its goal of becoming a gold -level BFC. Bicycle Friendly Community Feedback When awarding a Bicycle Friendly Community desig- nation, the League of American Bicyclists provides applicants with detailed feedback about strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement. Much of Iowa City's success in achieving silver -level BFC was due to the large network of shared -use paths and the thriving bike culture strengthened by community partners like the University of Iowa and Think Bicycles Coalition, and through annual events like Bike to Work Week. One of the major weak- nesses was the lack of dedicated on -street bicycle facilities, particularly on arterial and collector roadways. The LAB provided the following recom- mendations in its feedback report to enhance the bicycling environment: Engineering: Provide bicycle facilities on arte- rial and collector roads to help bicyclists of all skill levels reach their destinations quickly and safely. Consider protected infrastructure like cycle tracks and buffered bike lanes on roads with posted speed limits over 35 miles per hour. Education: Develop public education campaigns to encourage respectful and responsible travel behavior among all road and trail users. Enforcement: Use targeted information and enforcement to encourage all road users to safely and respectfully share the road and provide information about road users' rights and responsibilities. Make information available in both English and Spanish. Encouragemeo i wit the University p li in an around the campus and educate students on safe cycling practices. Evaluation & Planning: Have the Bicycle Advisory Committee meet monthly to support plan implementation and build broad public support for bicycle improvements. Encourage law enforcement to participate on the Bicycle Advisory Committee. Additional recommendations were divided into the Five Es categories and subdivided into "low -hanging fruit" (short-term actions) and long-term goals. Early action recommendations ranged from offering more training opportunities for engineering and plan- ning staff on accommodating bicyclists, to hosting a "Summer Streets" or "Sunday Parkway" event in which a major corridor is closed to auto traffic and programmed for bicycling, walking, group exercises, and other outdoor fun and games. The full feedback report is included in the appendix of this plan. Area Bicycle Friendly Designations Other municipalities, institutions, and businesses in Iowa City and the surrounding region have also received recognition for their efforts to support bicycling. These community partners are listed in the table below. Table 1. Bicycle Friendly Designations Name Bicycle Friendly Communities City of CoralviIle Designation' Bronze BFC 12016 City of University Heights Bronze BFC 2016 City of Iowa City Silver BFC 2013 Bicycle Friendly Universities University of Iowa I Silver BFU 12014 Bicycle Friendly Businesses World of Bikes Gold BFB 12010 ACT, Inc. Bronze BFB 2014 Neumann Monson Architects Bronze BFB 2013 The Broken Spoke Bronze BFB 12009 EXISTING SYSTEM �� 15 The Bike Network While people in Iowa City are legally permitted to bicycle on all public roadways except interstate highways, most people bicycling prefer to travel on the trails, designated on -street bikeways, and low -speed local streets. This national preference for separated facilities and calm local streets was echoed by Iowa City residents during the initial open house for the planning process. Together, these trails and on -street bikeways comprise the bike network, which is shown in the map below. To better understand how the existing bike network functions in Iowa City, it is important to understand the different types of bicycle facilities. Facility Types For the purposes of establishing the existing network in Iowa City, bicycle facilities are broken into two categories: off-street trails and paths, and on -street bikeways. Off-street trails and paths are generally located along natural features like rivers and streams or along other transportation infra- structure like arterial roads and railroad corridors. On-streetbikewaysare located on the roadwaypave- ment itself, often in the form of bike lanes, marked shared lanes (also called sharrows), or simply iden- tified as signed bike routes. The following bicycle facility types are present in and around Iowa City. Shared -Use Paths (Trails) A shared -use path, also called a multi -use trail, allows for two-way, off-street bicycle use and may be used by pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers and other non -motorized users. These facili- ties are frequently found in parks, along rivers, and in greenbelts or utility corridors where there are few conflicts with motorized vehicles, except at roadway crossings. Because of their separation from motor vehicle traffic, shared -use paths appeal to the widest variety of user types, from families with children to adult recreational riders to everyday commuters. When these linear shared -use paths lead to popular destinations or connect to the on -street bikeway network, their utility expands greatly, offering a 16 �>� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 11 akfll 911 comfortable, low -stress bicycling environment for people to use for everyday trips. Currently, there are over 37 miles of shared -use paths in Iowa City and over 35 more throughout Johnson County. The signature Iowa River Trail is the backbone of the Iowa City bike network and draws hundreds of recreational riders and bike commuters every day. Other popular shared -use paths include the Clear Creek Trail, the Willow Creek Trail, the Sycamore Greenway Trail, and the Court Hill Trail. While most of these trails are designed to current standards, there are some sections of the trail system that are sub -standard, mostly due to narrow widths in constrained environments. A prime example of this is along Iowa River Trail between Riverside Drive and the Iowa River from Iowa Avenue south to Burlington Street, where widths as narrow as 6 feet and the presence of utili- ties in the sidewalk create potential obstacles for trail users. Figure Z. Shared -use paths offer people of all ages and abilities a comfortable bicycling experience. S ;finis _� r �v°° 35anJeH r j4° PJs � e x' r N d gyp,. .....,........., c „ . r l _us ,uH r KIEW ]J�H /T-- w D N Cl) N o iu°J v, M o LL �► ^ o v :U, � LL J r U w v V 2 N o m E m �� ^ d Q r o >, t > u n o '� W °� o v -° `° 0% m N UJ °J Y 7 CL i U o N (6 N Y t6 ^ O T -a bA m 6 Y > o R d .S �_ o o m o r L:C C ;n n m a Ucn X J W I I I I I 0o II w U `ti Wide Sidewalks/Sidepaths Wide sidewalks along arterial and collector road- ways in Iowa City combine the design characteristics of a shared -use path with the directness and conve- nience of the roadway system. Also referred to as sidepaths, these wide sidewalks are separated from the road by a curb and a planting strip, providing at least a minimum separation from adjacent motor vehicles. Wide sidewalks (sidepaths) are an integral compo- nent of the bike network in Iowa City. Nearly 52 miles of sidepaths provide a comfortable, low - stress bicycling environment for people of all ages and abilities, and expand the off-street trail system into neighborhoods, schools, and other commu- nity destinations. Examples of wide sidewalks that support bicycle activity can be found on Mormon Trek Boulevard, McCollister Boulevard, Scott Figure 3. Sidepaths like the one shown here on Highway 1 function like an extension of the trail system, providing low -stress, all -ages connections to important commu- nity destinations. 01 ko - fil ; k i Boulevard, Lower West Branch Road, North Dodge Street, North 1st Avenue, Camp Cardinal Boulevard, and Highway 1 and Highway 6 in south Iowa City. Sidepath widths in Iowa City vary from 6 to 10 feet. Current design guidelines in the Iowa Department of Transportation's Statewide Urban Design and Specifications Manual (SUDAS) manual recommend a minimum width of 10 feet. Greater widths should be considered where large volumes of trail users and/or larger maintenance vehicles are anticipated. Consistent with the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Ed., the SUDAS manual does state that path width can be reduced to 8 feet but only where specific conditions prevail, such as minimal expected bicycle traffic, minimal pedestrian use, or the presence of physical constraints for short distances. Paths with widths below 8 feet should be identified and examined for their potential to be widened to minimum standards or greater if they are to remain a part of the bikeway network. Bike Lanes Bicycle lanes designate an exclusive space for bicy- clists with pavement markings and signage. The bicycle lane is located adjacent to motor vehicle travel lanes, and bicyclists ride in the same direction as motor vehicle traffic. Bicycle lanes are typically on the right side of the street (on a two-way street) between the adjacent travel lane and curb, road edge, or parking lane. Standard bicycle lanes can be found on Sycamore Street south of Highway 6, Rohret Road from Mormon Trek Boulevard to the western city limits, and on Melrose Avenue from the Universityof Iowa Campus westward into University Heights. On one-way streets, bicycle lanes may be located on either the right or left side of the street. Left -side bicycle lanes are present on both Market and Jefferson Streets. In total, there are approxi- mately 6 miles of bicycle lanes in Iowa City. Bike lanes can also include travel -way or parking -side buffers to add a level of comfort for people bicy- cling. There are no buffered bike lanes in Iowa City. EXISTING SYSTEM >> 18 01 ak_fll 911 Figure 5. The left side bike lanes on Market and Jefferson Streets provide a convenient connection between Central and East Iowa City. Signed Routes Shared streets in Iowa City are where bicyclists and motor vehicles use the same roadway space. Most signed shared roadways use warning signs to provide to alert people driving motor vehicles to be aware and respectful of other road users. Signed routes can also include wayfinding signage to guide bicyclists to important community destinations. Typical wayfinding signage in Iowa City includes route destinations, as well as distances and travel times. Signed shared roadways are often installed on streets that have constraints prohibiting a more separated bikeway type, but are essential for addressing a gap in the bikeway network or serving as the final leg of a bicycle route on a low-volume, low -speed roadway. In Iowa City, signed routes comprise a significant portion of the on -street bike network. While many of these signed routes are located on low -speed, low-volume local roadways, they would benefit from additional traffic calming and diversion measures to increase bicycle comfort and prioritize bicycle traffic. 19 > IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Figure 4. Warning signage on Prairie du Chien Road raise the street's visibility as a popular bicycling corridor. Figure 6. College Street combines shared lane markings and warning signage to alert motorists and reinforce the street's designation as a cycling route. Marked and Signed Routes A marked and signed shared roadway builds on the basic signed shared roadway described above by incorporating shared lane markings (sharrows). Sharrows are road markings used to indicate a shared lane environment for bicycles and automo- biles. Sharrows remind drivers of bicycle traffic on the street and recommend proper bicyclist posi- tioning within the travel lane. Shared lane markings are often accompanied by wayfinding signage to direct people bicycling to both local and cross-town destinations. In Iowa City, shared lane markings are located on a number of streets, mostly in and around the Central District. Key streets with shared lane markings include Gilbert Street, Dodge Street, College Street, Market Street, and Jefferson Street (west of Dubuque Street). While shared lane mark- ings provide a degree of awareness to motorvehicle Figure 7. Cyclists riding on one of many paved shoulders in the region (Source: Iowa City Womens Cycling Club) drivers and other road users, they do not offer an added degree of safety or separation and there- fore are limited in their impact on bicycle networks beyond assisting in wayfinding. Paved Shoulders Paved shoulders on rural roadways can accommo- date bicycle travel. Paved shoulders are generally used by commuter and long-distance recreational riders, rather than families with children or less experienced riders. Paved shoulders can incorpo- rate bicycle lane markings and signage to increase visibility and support safe and responsible roadway use by people on bicycles and people driving motor vehicles. In Iowa City, paved shoulders on Prairie Du Chien Road, Highway 1, Sand Road, and Oak Crest Hill Road increase access to numerous regional rural cycling routes that are well used by recreational riders and area cycling clubs. EXISTING SYSTEM ��20 Network Characteristics Together, the trails, wide sidewalks, and on -street bicycle facilities described above make up the Iowa City bike network. To better understand how the network currently functions, the plan examines the key network characteristics of quality, connectivity, comfort, safety, wayfinding, and support facilities. Quality The quality of roadway and trail surfaces, pavement markings, wayfinding signage, and bicycle parking facilities is critical to the safety of people bicycling and the functionality of the bicycle transportation system. Network quality varies throughout Iowa City. Shared -use path and wide sidewalk surfaces are in generally good condition and offer smooth, accessible surfaces for bicycling, walking, skate- boarding, inline skating, and other trail activity. 01 ak_fll ;k i Pavement quality on the road network and asso- ciated on -street bikeways is more variable. Road surfaces in poor condition can deter bicycle activity and create safety hazards. Notable wear on existing shared lane markings and bike lane striping points to the importance of durable marking and striping products and the need for routine scheduled maintenance to extend the life cycle for on -street bikeways. Connectivity Strong network connectivity is critical to the success ofanybike network. Intersectingtrails and low -stress bikeways can extend the distance that people feel comfortable bicycling and can better help people reach nearby destinations. While still growing, the Iowa City bike network has notable linear and area gaps that limit opportunities for bicycling. For Figure 8. Cracks, debris and potholes like the one seen here on College Street represent significant hazards to bicyclists. 21 > IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN example, there are bike lanes present on seven different streets in Iowa City, yet none of these bike lanes intersect. In addition, major barriers like the Iowa River, Highway 6, and the Iowa Interstate Railroad create challenges to bicycle mobility. Major gaps and barriers are described below. Network Gaps Bikeway gaps exist in various forms, ranging from short "missing links" on a specific street or path corridor, to larger geographic areas with few or no facilities at all. Gaps are organized based on length and other characteristics and may be classified into five main categories: Spot gaps: Spot gaps refer to point -specific locations lacking dedicated facilities or other treatments to accommodate safe and comfort- able bicycle travel. Spot gaps primarily include intersections and other areas with potential conflicts with motor vehicles. Examples include bicycle lanes on a major street "dropping" to make way for right turn lanes at an intersection without guidance for the bicyclists on how to travel through the intersection. Connection gaps: Connection gaps are missing segments (1/4 mile or less) on a clearly defined and otherwise well-connected bikeway. Major barriers standing between destinations and clearly defined routes also represent connection gaps. Examples include bicycle lanes on a major street "dropping" for several blocks to make way for on -street parking, or a freeway standing between a major bicycle route and a school. Linear gaps: Similar to connection gaps, linear gaps are 1/4 to 1/2 mile long missing link segments on a clearly defined and otherwise well-connected bikeway. Corridor gaps: On clearly defined and other- wise well-connected bikeways, corridor gaps are missing links longer than 1/2 mile. These gaps will sometimes encompass an entire street corridor 11 akfll 911 where bicycle facilities are desired but do not currently exist. System gaps: Larger geographic areas (e.g., a neighborhood or business district) where few or no bikeways exist are identified as system gaps. System gaps exist in areas where a minimum of two intersecting bikeways would be required to achieve the target network density. Gaps typically exist where physical or other constraints impede bikeway network development. Example constraints may include bike lanes "drop- ping" at an intersection to provide space for vehicle turn lanes, narrow bridges on existing roadways, severe cross -slopes, or limitations of pavement width due to environmental impacts associated with the roadway. Traffic mobility standards and other policy decisions may also lead to gaps in a network. For instance, a community's strong desire for on -street parking or increased vehicle capacity may hinder efforts to install continuous bicycle lanes along a major street. Map 2 highlights gaps in the Iowa City bike network. In some cases, a formalized bikeway itself may represent a gap despite its status as part of a desig- nated network. This condition typically occurs when a corridor (often a major street) lacks the type of bicycle facilities to comfortably accommodate a broader usage by a range of bicyclist skill levels, including infrequent or less confident cyclists. Some signed routes that lack dedicated bicycle facilities represent gaps in the bike network, especially for less experienced riders. Other examples include roadway corridors lacking formalized facilities (e.g., bike lanes) where conditions such as higher vehicle speeds and volumes would otherwise justify greater separation between motorists and cyclists. A network in early stages of development is likely to have more system and linear gaps, indicative of a lack of bikeways. Gaps in a more mature bike network are likely to be spot and linear in nature, a reflection of a more complete network with short EXISTING SYSTEM »22 segment gaps, difficult intersections along existing bikeways, and difficult transitions between facility types. Most identified gaps in the Iowa City bike network are linear in nature - segment, linear, and corridor - reflecting the current state of network growth and development. Many segment and linear gaps represent missing links in the trail and wide sidewalk/sidepath system. Addressing these gaps can increase connectivity for less skilled and less confident system users. Many system gaps that cover larger areas are in well-established neighbor- hoods and industrial developments. In the absence of additional right-of-way for sidepaths or off-street trails, on -street bikeways like dedicated bike lanes, separated bike lanes, and bike boulevards can serve most bicyclist types. Figure 9. Despite the presence of shared lane markings, many people in Iowa City find Gilbert to be a barrier to bicycling and choose to alternative, lower -stress routes. Barriers Natural barriers, major land uses, and even trans- portation corridors like interstates and railroads present challenges to bicycling activity in Iowa City. Through input provided at the first open house and online via the online mapping tool, commu- nity members shared their concerns about specific barriers they face while bicycling in and around Iowa City. Barriers identified through the online mapping tool are presented in the map below (current as of Friday, February 3rd, 2017). Many of these barriers are located close to the center of the city and along 23 )>>> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 01 ak-f1l 911 major highways, and point to the challenges to cross -city bicycling. Spot barriers are location -specific impediments that deter bicycling activity or create additional hard- shipsfor peoplewho bicycle. Thefollowingexamples of spot barriers were identified by community members through the online mapping tool: Difficult to traverse intersections, including: Benton Street at Riverside Drive Grand Avenue and Burlington Street at Riverside Drive • Newton Road and Iowa Avenue at Riverside Drive • Gilbert Street and Benton Street • Burlington Street and Muscatine Avenue • Pinch points and narrow facilities like the Burlington Street Bridge • Wide sidewalks that terminate abruptly Linear barriers like the Iowa River and Highway 6 divide the community and isolate residents from even the closest destinations just across the barrier by increasing real and perceived distance. These barriers can also present safety challenges by funneling bicycle travel onto higher -stress road- ways like major collector and arterial roads in order to cross from one side to the other. In most cases, these intersecting roads lack dedicated bicycle facilities that support a wide range of bicycling skill and confidence levels. The Iowa Interstate Railroad functions in much the same way as the major high- ways, bisecting the street grid as it travels east to west through the heart of the city. Most local roads do not cross the railroad, and, as a result, all traffic—including motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians—are funneled onto larger and busier roads in order to cross. m p N � 3 a Y ights p --H E � o w �3a ¢ n E A � 3�3 aY en � JPS o w, d o �a»o5N O W santl � 0 c o V0 w W D 1 ail 2 n " cl p 3 O � yea r ♦ f ¢e oo O a� 6 phi P e � 4M js uoPue P9 .°G a . _ inh,_ 2 l7 c i p VI N 16- 02 2 O O — U °' t o � dj •V ~ a R y R � LL v v -a v d mo Z — O r m o v ly V 30 W- m m v v v 0 R o 0 m m i Z co (n Q m d — d U IY Y d t c W W IM • 11 IM N® w --H 1 LN L QID ° L RPauOa Jam°yla,5 [Ce mm N® w 3 a o" z o eenW° e C7 w rn O rn � d o J//ed JanoSN 0 Santl � �E o ° a o Mo a W j 60 2 i7 N® w v o O N a L a � W J O rp v v v a v 7Y 1% u L � N r O Y 7 0 E '� U -6 Q V7 '6 y6 C y Q O U fn U m E v 0 v Y O i '� p ^ L .a U m Y > O o i i om C vii in om a d U Y I� Q m b4 • in LU I I I I 41 I I tii �j LL J O �,r17 O C U N® w While the linear barriers mentioned above create crossing difficulties for people bicycling, other linear barriers present challenges for those bicycling along the barrier itself. These linear barriers are primarily busy roadways that lack dedicated bicycle facilities to support safe and comfortable travel. Specific corridors identified by community resi- dents include 2nd Ave from Coralville to the Iowa River Trail, Gilbert Street from downtown south to Highway 6, Benton Street west of Riverside Drive, and Burlington Street, which has been noted as one of the most direct east -west routes, yet one of the most difficult and uncomfortable to ride. Major land uses like the Iowa City Municipal Airport can create long, circuitous routes for bicyclists, which are unavoidable. The University of Iowa, on the other hand, has multiple routes by which riders can travel through campus, yet the lack knowledge of these routes or wayfinding signs to guide people across campus limit east -west bicycle traffic. Comfort An analysis of Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (BLTS) on arterial and collector roadways in the study area reveals the extent to which the current bike network is limited in its accessibility for a wide variety of bicyclist types. Using the Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress methodology established by the Mineta Transportation Institute's (MTI) Report 11-19: Low -Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity published in 2012, the plan analyzes levels of bicycle traffic stress on arterial and collector roads in Iowa City. While many routes on the existing bike network are located on local roadways, sidepaths, and off-street trails, most people bicycling in Iowa City must travel on or across these major roadways to reach their destinations. The analysis combines individual roadway characteristics, like the pres- ence of dedicated bicycle facilities, number of travel lanes, presence of parking, and posted speed limit, to assign a level of traffic stress to the roadway. Definitions for each of the four levels of traffic stress, as defined in the MTI Report 11-19, are as follows: BLTS 1: Presenting little traffic stress and demanding little attention from cyclists, and attractive enough for a relaxing bike ride. Suitable for almost all cyclists, including children trained to safely cross intersections. On links, cyclists are either physically separated from traffic, or are in an exclusive bicycling zone next to a slow traffic stream with no more than one lane per direction, or are on a shared road where they interact with only occasional motor vehicles (as opposed to a stream of traffic) with a low speed differential. Where cyclists ride alongside a parking lane, they have ample operating space outside the zone into which car doors are opened. Intersections are easy to approach and cross. Table 2. Segment Scoring Matrix for Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress Number of Traffic Mixed Lanes Volume <= 30 mph Traffic >= 35 mph Street with Bike Lane <= 30 mph 35 mph >= 40 mph 2-3 lanes <=3k 3k - 10k 10k -20k >20k 1.5 2.5 1 2 2.5 2 3 1.5 2.5 3 3 3.5 2 3 3.5 3.5 4 2.5 3.5 4 4lanes <=3k 3k - 10k 10k -20k >20k 2.5 3.5 1.5 2.5 3 3 4 2 3 3.5 3.5 4 2.5 3.5 4 4 4 3 4 4 6+ lanes All volumes 4 EXISTING SYSTEM ��26 BLTS 2: Presenting little traffic stress and there- fore suitable to most adult cyclists but demanding more attention than might be expected from children. On links, cyclists are either physically separated from traffic, or are in an exclusive bicy- cling zone next to a well -confined traffic stream with adequate clearance from a parking lane, or are on a shared roadway where they interact with only occasional motor vehicles (as opposed to a stream of traffic) with a low speed differen- tial. Where a bike lane lies between a through lane and a right -turn lane, it is configured to give cyclists unambiguous priority where cars cross the bike lane and to keep car speed in the right -turn lane comparable to bicycling speeds. Crossings are not difficult for most adults. BLTS 3: More traffic stress than BLTS 2, yet mark- edly less than the stress of integrating with multilane traffic, and therefore welcome many people currently riding bikes in American cities. Offering cyclists either an exclusive riding zone (lane) next to moderate -speed traffic or shared lanes on streets that are not multilane and have moderately low speed. Crossings may be longer or across higher -speed roads than allowed by BLTS 2, but are still considered acceptably safe to most adult pedestrians. BLTS 4: A level of stress beyond BLTS 3. At its core, the BLTS scoring decreases in comfort (1 is the highest comfort level) as the number of lanes, posted speed limit, and traffic volumes increase. Scoring in BLTS is based off of the four basic cate- gories defined in the MTI report. This scoring methodology is summarized in Table 3. The BLTS scoring decreases comfort (1 is the highest comfort level) as the number of lanes, posted speed limit, and traffic volumes increase. Traffic volumes reduce comfort more where bicyclists share the road with motorized vehicles, but comfort also decreases in bicycle lanes as traffic volumes next to those bicycle lanes increase. It is important to note 27 ��� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 11 akfll 911 that the presence of wide sidewalks along arterial and collector roadways was not factored into this analysis in order to represent on -road level of traffic stress for bicycling. Wide sidewalks and shared -use paths along roadways generally earn higher scores than adjacent on -street facilities, but those higher scores are often reduced when the path crosses a busier roadway with a lower BLTS score, reflecting the impact of major roadway crossings on a facility's safety and comfort. Map 4 displays the level of travel stress scores for arterial and collector roadways in Iowa City. Lowest levels of traffic stress are shown in yellow, while highest levels of traffic stress are shown in dark brown. The highest levels of traffic stress are located along major highways that bisect the city. Highway 1 and Highway 6 bisect the city north and south, and Riverside Drive bisects the city east and west. Other major arterials and collectors outside the core of the city—like Mormon Trek Boulevard, Melrose Avenue, and North Dubuque Street—present significant chal- lenges for bicycling as well. These roads carry larger volumes of motor vehicle traffic at higher speeds than most roadways in Iowa City. Most arterials and collectors in the core of the city and to the east have lower posted speed limits and fewer travel lanes, and carry fewer motor vehicles. However, at a BLTS 3, many of these roads provide a level of comfort only accessible to more confident adults. Numerous BLTS 3 roadways function as signed roadways within the bike network. Roadways characterized by low levels of traffic stress for bicyclists include streets like Market and Jefferson Street, both with dedicated bike lanes, and roadways on the perim- eter of the city with relatively low traffic volumes. By addressing level of traffic stress along key corridors and at major intersections, the city can enhance network connectivity and increase bicycling acces- sibility to a larger, more diverse segment of the population. Q O J -H o Z 0 E 9 w J/Jed O JaJJo SN w/ E o a` E 0 W j ¢ W O O .. W — —va - dery ieW "I" Wi Z ''^^ `(a /V/ � w (D U) d U_ W J V O 0 L N N 0 �• ^` O V .� Q Ul '6 O 0] N > Qi v O V Com. Q ¢ d' O Ln J JJ J J J J J '2 C C 0 d CO CO CO CO m m y a [if Y a • t m � � w Safety The analysis of reported bicycle and pedestrian related collisions can reveal patterns and potential sources of safety issues, both design and behavior - related. These findings can provide Iowa City with a basis for infrastructure and program improvements to enhance bicycle and pedestrian safety. Bicycle and pedestrian related collisions and colli- sion locations in Iowa City were analyzed over the most recent five-year period of available data, 2011 through 2015. It is important to note that the number of collisions reported is likely an underes- timate of the actual number of collisions that take place because some parties do not report colli- sions to law enforcement, particularly collisions not resulting in injury or property damage. Although under -reporting and omissions of "near -misses" are limitations, analyzing the collisions can reveal spatial and behavioral trends or design factors that may contribute to collisions in Iowa City. Number of Crashes During the five-year period from 2011 to 2015, there were a total of 138 bicycle -related collisions in within the Iowa City limits. The data shows a significant increase in the number of crashes during this period, growing by 187 percent from fifteen crashes in 2011 to forty-three crashes in 2015. It is important to note that this increase in crashes corresponds with an estimated 21 percent increase in bicycle commute mode share in the metro area from 2010 to 2015, as well as a 12 percent increase in population for the entire metro area from 2010 to 2014. While the lack of reliable exposure and bicycling activitydata limits the ability to draw a direct relationship between the corresponding rises in bicycle commute mode share and bicycle crashes, these corresponding increases highlight the importance of bicycle facili- ties and bicycle crash countermeasures to support the growing number of bicyclists in Iowa City. Time of Day Much like motor vehicle crashes, bicycle crashes =o DRAFT 43 40 U 30 0 20 E 10 I 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Figure 10. Bicycle crashes byyear, 2011-2015 generally occur during peak travel periods. However, it is important to note that many people bicycling in Iowa City are children, whose afternoon "peak period" corresponds with school dismissal and late afternoon play. The figure below shows crashes by time of day. The greatest number of crashes per hour occurred in the 6 p.m. evening rush hour (20), followed by the 3 p.m. school dismissal hour (16), and the 4 p.m. afternoon hour (10). The evening rush hours (5 p.m. to 8 p.m.) accounted for 28 percent of all crashes, while the school dismissal hours (2 p.m. to 5 p.m.) accounted for 23 percent. Time of Year Bicycle crash data during this five-year period also highlights seasonal variations in bicycling activity corresponding to daylight, presence of college population, and temperature. Months with the highest volumes of crashes generally correspond to favorable weather conditions, average to above average daylight, and spring and fall semesters for college students who represent a significant portion of the city's population and are more likely to travel by bicycle. Forty-six percent of all crashes occurred in the months of April, September, and October, and an additional 40 percent occurred during the late spring and summer months of May, June, July, and August. Conversely, colder winter months EXISTING SYSTEM >>29 experienced the lowest number of bicycle crashes, with only one crash in February and zero crashes in January. Figure 4 displays crashes for each month by time of day, as well as sunrise and sunset times for the first day of each month. According to crash report data, 77 percent of all crashes occurred during daylight conditions, while 15 percent occurred under dark conditions. An additional 8 percent occurred during dusk, and 1 percent at dawn. Crash Location Bicycle collisions were clustered along major thor- oughfares and popular bicycling routes, including Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Madison Street, College Street, Clinton Street, and Highway 6/2nd Street leading into Coralville. As displayed in Map 5 below, which groups collisions that occurred within 100 feet of one another, most clusters are located in Downtown and the Central District where a signifi- cant portion of the city's bicycling activity takes place. Crash Severity While none of the reported crashes involving people bicycling were fatal, 67 percent resulted in injury, and an additional 32 percent resulted in possible injury. 25 DRAFT m 20 16 m 15 0 12 11 11 X10 8 8 8 E 6 6 5 5 z5 3 3 10000 O ■' ' I I■' ti ti� G h 6 1 � 9 y0 titi titi ti ti� G y 6 1 6 9 ti0 titi titi Hour of Day Figure 12. Bicycle crashes by time of day Of the 102 crashes resulting in injury, only seven were incapacitating. The locations of bicycle crashes by severity type are displayed in Map 6. It is impor- tant to note six of the seven the crashes resulting in incapacitating injury occurred at intersections along or across major thoroughfares, including Burlington Street (2), 2nd Avenue (2), Highway 6, and Mormon Trek Boulevard. This fact highlights both the existing level of bicycling activity along and across arterial and collector roadways, and the need for dedicated bicycle facilities and intersection treatments to reduce bicycle crashes. Time of Day 12:00 AM 3:00 AM 6:00 AM 9:00 AM 12:00 PM 3:00 PM 6:00 PM 9:00 PM 12:00 AM 1 2 • N 3 u •• • • • y 4 • • !M• ! M as • r aE 5 • • r r • 00 •r M m 6• • r• r • rr r r r r ••� •• • r w ! • 8 • • M• • a• • ! • L 9 • �N • • M • i • •• • c 10 NM • r M •M • !! • • • r • ! 11 •- r ! ! • N ! ! • Crashes Sunrise Sunset Figure 11. Bicycle crashes by month and time of day 30>> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN m em 20 w v 3 y � o v o s4 o T �c e a c z 0 ayp.., !'� """' � tP /X 35an3eH „ r °R a n ( • ?4 o Em . L• Dover X 3LE�3 o v. � ,� y uz • Q N a • y 6 d o �O Pk W n 6 o m y n 305 a QT a) T ��........ uo Puel sand Pra N � ::;` ,..... -,..fin„aaN yaL ; ,ase DP. w E .,.% .... 33^H V Q Qo °A 3.9suosuy (� o a m 0 • l`_ z D U Wo ayl!D a +� m em 20 w v 3 y � o v o _ c 0 � tP . L• o v. � ,� 6Pau0a .._`Isle W 6 ��........ uo Puel yA N � 3aMoy3o15 \ .,.% .... 33^H z a +� a � Y U m H Y r N R UE a m TO 4LL r - W U ” w , Y m e Z - o m HA t (n R U C w Y a) 0 O (n - U 3'0 m J m....•W I I I l o l l ��1 �o I��o m em 20 w v 3 • j1 .. liey a z I'Il """' v. /X 35anJeH „ r � � a a 6Pau0a E Dover _ w 3LE�3 s v 6 G 0 pY� � W p m JaJJoS � r v �r�Qn......�.. ...... a „ N p 3 sada � D ' I eaBpoD -E � Q m suyp o ¢` m E J I_D — yA U N 33agll m / p W D � v • j1 N m w v z o v. � ,� 6Pau0a 6 3 ��........ uo Puel yA N 3aMoy3o15 � \ .,.% .... 33nH z N Z tr z � a > Y (ncu_ L y U m s m r _ N m U WE m Q t! o A N Y 0 O O Z d Z c n (n m d d U K Y d *y U m m••••W I I I l o l l X010 �,I'e o U N m w v z uei f R _.. Ilel a ' Shis. CZ7 L o ° O xnoi5¢ _. ____. .__. ea n.�. Sc t 0 t _ '"" --H r a ° Dover X o 0 ♦ o o _ a0' 0 a 3 Sot G enWa �. a o 6 z o A d o y a ��o p.y tl � w p m w i T W a "�v o A w �o o $ , Q _ a O su4°� x O 0 U «u° b0 oo q 10 vm OQ aql� oOma— 'H /p W D ,7 ff tt 0 o p v _. ®4 O BN Y Yoit �r�itle a rn ,J to ° O,, 0 OFq Oc Sunset .. ,..._. o B —�� � r O tP [YeeK f � u L o v. � ,� 6Pou0a -4'.15 R -H m A 20 H z H w Cl) T U (uLL � Y N m m o WJ }rN y � � Q f6 o LL t)QL LL cn Y Y NQL m N Y m 0 ro j 3 R 0 Y (0 v O > C U m m -j ca L C (n U m I I ro d K Y d 0yR�yy'�j I l .50 U �„ IIgot U m A 20 H z H w Support Facilities End -of -trip facilities like short-term bike racks, bike lockers, and long-term secure bike parking areas are essential to the success of the bike network. A lack of secure parking can deter people from bicycling to destinations, even for short trips. Iowa City and major institutions like the University of Iowa and the Iowa City Community School District provide bicycle parking at popular destinations like the university campus, Downtown Iowa City, and public schools. The city has made a concerted effort in recent years to incorporate additional bicycle parking into streetscape projects and new developments in and around downtown. In addition, the city maintains ten bike lockers for secure bike storage at the Court Street Transportation Center. Locker rooms and showers are located at many sites across the city as well, but many are located in University buildings and open only to staff, faculty, and students. Bicycle repair stations, or "fix -it" stations, have become an important part of the bicycle landscape in recent years. Each station provides a bike stand, tools, and in most cases tire pumps for people to fix a flat or make other basic adjustments to their bikes. Many bicyclists have noted that ineffective pumps at Figure 13. Public bike repair locations provide tools for minor bicycle maintenance. 01 ak_fll 911 Figure 14. The University of Iowa has multiple bicycle parking and fixit stations on campus. numerous stations, likely a result of water damage from rain and snow. There are nine bicycle repair stations in Iowa City, eight of which are located on University of Iowa campus. The map below displays bike parking and repair station locations throughout Iowa City. While the data for bike parking locations (not repair stations) dates from 2011, the relative concentrations of bike parking reveal the extent to which investments in bike parking have focused on high-density destina- tions, including the university, downtown, schools, and commercial nodes. Despite these efforts, many people biking in Iowa City have pointed to a lack of secure parking options throughout the community as a deterrent to bicy- cling. Bicycle parking ordinances, which are already in place in the city code, and incentive programs can increase the bicycle parking supply and reduce this perceived barrier to bicycling. Wayfinding Landmarks, destinations, neighborhood business districts, natural features and other visual cues help bicyclists navigate through Iowa City and reach their destination. However, many of the recommended bicycle routes rely on lower -volume roadways that may not be as familiar to many people, who may typically use an alternate route when traveling by bus or car. Iowa City has installed wayfinding signs EXISTING SYSTEM y>34 along most on -street bikeways and shared -use paths. These signs provide critical information to people bicycling, including directional guidance to key desti- nations and districts, as well as distance and time to reach these locations by traveling the designated route. The addition of travel times to wayfinding signage is more common in cities across the country for its ability to counter the perception of travel times as a significant barrier to bicycling, especially for utilitarian and commuter purposes. Figure 15. Wayfinding confirms locations of bicycle infrastructure and provides directions to local destinations. 35>> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 01 ak_fll ;k i Building a Culture of Bicycling Creating a bicycle friendly community does not happen overnight. The strong bicycling culture in Iowa City is the result of decades of determina- tion, perseverance, and hard work by community businesses, non-profit organizations, advocates, institutions, civic leaders, and public agencies. That bicycling culture continues each day with every single person who walks out their door, hops on her or his bike, and rides. Whether large or small, the contributions of those who have made bicy- cling safer, easier, more enjoyable, accessible, and more liberating are meaningful and important. The community partners listed below have been instru- mental in building a culture of bicycling and will continue to be so in the years to come. Community Partners University of Iowa The University of Iowa is silver -level Bicycle Friendly University, as awarded by the League of American Bicyclists (LAB). The University has a strong online presence for bicycling and organizes a wide array of bicycle -related education and encouragement programming, including the Winter Warrior Bike Challenge and spring and fall bike tune-ups. As the name suggests, the challenge aims to inspire university faculty and students to use bicycles as year-round transportation options. The university's online transportation cost calculator helps students understand the financial costs associated with driving alone by car. Students, faculty, staff, and local bicycle advocates make up the University's Bicycle Advisory Committee. The group advocates for improved bicycling on campus, in the city, and throughout the county. In May 2016, university students from the College of Public Health led a demonstration project to test temporary bicycle facilities on College Street. The route included a painted bike lane, a protected bike lane, a bike boulevard, and shared lane markings. D e�eP _ Figure 16. The annual spring and fall bike tune-ups help university students keep their bikes in good working order. (Source: University of Iowa) More Information: the county. The website also offers resources such ■ University of Iowa Bicycle Transportation: as links to other organizations' group bicycle rides. https:Hsustainability.uiowa.edu/initiatives/ More Information: transportation/biking/ Think Bicycles: http://www.thinkbicycles.org/ • University of Iowa Drive Alone Cost Calculator: https:Htransportation.uiowa.edu/cost-calculator Iowa City Bike Library The Iowa City Bike Library began in 2004 by a • Iowa City Bike Boulevard Project: group of local volunteers. The group continues https:Hsustainability.uiowa.edu/news/ its mission of encouraging more people to ride student-group-tests-iowa-city-bike-boulevard/ bicycles by repairing donated bikes and offering Think Bicycles of Johnson County them for six month checkout periods. Community members receive their initial deposit once the bike Think Bicycles is a non-profit organization that is returned in good condition within the checkout brings bicycle shops and other community organi- period. System patrons may choose instead to keep zations together to advocate for improved bicycling the bicycle for themselves in lieu of obtaining the in Johnson County. Think Bicycles helps organize deposit. Children's bicycles are available for sale. Bike Month, held in May, with events throughout EXISTING SYSTEM��36 Figure I Staff at the Bike Library help instill area residents with basic bike maintenance skills and provide tools. (Source: Iowa City Bike Library) The Iowa City Bike Library offers a Rent -a -Bench focuses on maintaining and activating the Sugar (RAB) program for members of the public to repair Bottom Trails and other mountain biking facilities in their bicycles by gaining access to the shop's tools the Iowa City area and also hosts numerous rides and repair stands. RAB operates according to a low and events throughout the year in partnership with hourlyfee. Patrons who check-out a bicyclefrom the local bike shops, clubs, and other organizations. library have access to repairs during their checkout period. The Iowa City Bike Library covers the cost of More information: minor repairs and adjustments. https://www.facebook.com/ I CO RR -105507021120/ More Information: Iowa City Bike Library: http://www.bikelibrary org/ Iowa Coalition of Off -Road Riders Mountain bicycling is an important element of Iowa City's bicycling culture, and the Iowa Coalition of Off -Road Riders is leading the charge to promote, preserve and improve mountain bike trail access. The volunteer -based non-profit organization 37 > IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Bicyclists of Iowa City With over 450 members from the Iowa City area, Bicyclists of Iowa City (BIC), organizes multiple group recreational bicycle rides per week. Group rides are available at multiple speeds and distances. Shorter, slower rides help people who are new to bicycling gain confidence. Longer rides are available for those training for RAGBRAI (Register's Annual Great Bicycle Ride Across Iowa), the renowned long-distance bicycle event. The group's weekly rides foster camaraderie by ending with a social event, such as dinner or ice cream. BIC also works with organizes bike rodeos each spring at local elementary schools to teach children basic bicycling skills and safety tips. More information: http://bicyclistsofiowacity.org/ Iowa City Cycling Club The Iowa City Cycling Club workstoadvance the sport of cycling in the region through race promotions, team sponsorship, training, mentoring programs, and women -only rides, clinics, and race series. The organization also promotes cycling through advo- cacy, safety, and community involvement efforts. More information: http://iowacitycyclingclub.com Goosetown Racing Club Goosetown Racing is an Iowa City race team that participates and encourages others to enjoy cycling, running, skiing, and triathlons. More information: https://www.facebook.com/ Goosetown-Racing-204841488525/ Iowa City Womens Cycling Developed as an initiative of the Iowa City Bicycling Club in 2009, Iowa City Womens Cycling provides a positive environment to encourage women to ride and race. The group hosts numerous events throughout the year, including weekly rides and the popular Chamois Time race series. Other regular activities include social events and racing and main- tenance clinics. More information: https://www.facebook.com/ iowacitywomenscycling/ i_ ilililili lilililil I IIIVuuuuuuuuuuuuiuuiuum����° iuuuuuuuui uu Iowa City Women on Wheels Iowa City Women on Wheels (ICA -WOW) was founded by a group of women who work at the local bicycle shop, World of Bikes. ICA -WOW offers no -drop, social rides twice a week during the summer. Women -only bicycle maintenance clinics and social gatherings offer women a chance to learn about basic repairs in hopes that participants are empowered and excited to ride more often. Events and rides use World of Bikes as starting locations and bicycle rentals are available. More information: https://www.meetup.com/ ICA -WOW -Iowa -City -Area -Women -On -Wheels/ BIKEIOWA BIKEIOWA has connected community members with resources about bicycling for sixteen years. BIKEIOWA is an online compendium designed to help residents stay knowledgeable about upcoming rides and events including bicycle -friendly city designations, organized rides, new infrastructure updates, advocacy and legislative news, and more. An online user can create a membership to add or update event information and interact with other users' online content. The website was created in 2001 and now has over 70,000 unique visitors per month. Over 4,500 opt -in e-mail addresses receive biweekly ride reminder e-mails. More information: http://www.bikeiowa.com/ Iowa Bicycle Coalition The Iowa Bicycle Coalition (IBC) provides statewide advocacy, events, rides, and online resources to further its mission to "build partnerships, educate Iowans, and help to establish safe and enjoyable bicycle transportation and recreation networks throughout Iowa." The organization supports community design, facility design and mainte- nance, and public policy goals to help make Iowa the most bicycle -friendly state in the country. The EXISTING SYSTEM y>38 Iowa Bicycle Coalition also works to increase youth bicycling by offering bike training to area children through the school district's physical education program and by providing Safe Routes to School assistance. Other events and activities led bythe IBC include the annual Iowa Bike Summit, Bike Expo, the RAGBRAI ride announcement party, and numerous group rides throughout the year to encourage all skill levels to get out and ride a bike. More information: http://iowabicyclecoalition.org/ Iowa City Community School District The Iowa City Community School District (ICCSD) supports active transportation and encourages children and families to walk and bike to school. The school district has a Safe Routes to School Coordinator who provides support to individual schools and their PTOs to organize local programs and events. The ICCSD also partners with organiza- tions like the Iowa Bicycle Coalition and BIC to offer bicycle safety and skills training to children. Safety Village Located at Grant Wood Elementary School, Safety Village is a child -size town that uses pedal -driven cars to teach children about real-life traffic situa- tions and safety measures. Annual camps hosted by Mercy Hospital are available to children who have finished kindergarten. The program regularly attracts over 200 children a year. More information: Safety Village: http://www.mercyiowacity.org/ safety -village Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County The human services agency called Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County serves local schools and neighborhoods including Broadway, Pheasant Ridge, and Breckenridge. The agency is community based and focuses on bringing resources to underserved 39 > IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 01 ak-f1l 911 Figure 18. Children learn about the basics of traffic safety while pedaling through Safety Village. (Source: Iowa City Safety Village) families by offering programs and activities. The two community centers are located in Iowa City and act as common space for neighbors to gather. In addition the other services, Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County operates Youth Off -Road Riders Cycling Program (YORR). The program intro- duces youth to recreational cycling for competition or leisure. Youth receive coaching and meet new friends as they learn new skills. Yellow Velo Bikes and Food is part of Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County's youth employment program. Youth sell healthy food and operate hourly, daily, and weekly bicycle rentals. Figure 19. The 2016 Telenet UCI Cyclo -Cross World Cup drew thousands of visitors and contributed to the local economy. More information: Yellow Velo Bikes and Food: http://www.ncjc. org/yellow-velo.html Youth Off -Road Riders: http://www.ncjc.org/ youth-off-road-riders.html Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County: http://www.ncjc.org/ Iowa City Blue Zones Project Sponsored by Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield, the Iowa City Blue Zones Project began in 2011 as a catalyst for healthy and active living through direct interventions and policy changes that support physical activity and healthy eating. The project has impacted more than 67,000 individuals and has helped lower the city's obesity rate from 18.7 percent in 2014 to 15.8 percent in 2015. The project has been supportive of Safe Routes to School programs, complete streets projects, and other initiatives that encourage residents to make physical activity a part of their daily routines. More information: • Iowa City Blue Zones Project: https://www.face- book.com/pg/lowaCityBlueZonesProject • Iowa City Blue Zones Project: http://explore. bluezonesproject.com/iowa-city/ • Press: http://www.press-citizen.com/story/ 01 ak_fll 911 news/2016/02/03/iowa-city-earns-blue-zones- certification/79765076/ Iowa City/Coralville Area Convention & Visitors Bureau (CVB) The CVB works to increase visitor volume and spending to the region by attracting and operating conventions and events, supporting many of the area's signature events, and providing comprehen- sive information to visitors. The CVB has been a major proponent of bicycling in Iowa City through both the promotion of bicycling activities, bicycle facilities, local bike shops, and events. The bureau's support of regional events like the granGABLE and international events like Jingle Cross and the 2016 Telenet UCI Cyclo -Cross World Cup have helped to establish Iowa City's reputation as a bicycling desti- nation. The 2016 UCI World Cup event, which was estimated to have brought 10,000 visitors, including professional and amateur racers from across the globe, was so successful that the UCI has announced that Iowa City will open the 2017 UCI World Cup series, and local organizers are expecting more than 15,000 visitors and $1.2M in local revenue.' More information: http://www.iowacitycoralville.org/ Local Bicycle Shops Local bicycle shops are essential to bicycling in Iowa City, not just for the products they sell, but for their classes and events that instill confidence in new riders and build relationships around bicy- cling. Programs offered by Iowa City bicycle shops offer basic bicycle skills and safe maneuvering courses, bicycle repair courses, regularly -scheduled group rides, bicycle rodeos in partnership with local schools and organizations, and bike races. 1 Davis, Andy. "Iowa City selected to host another cyclo - cross World Cup race." Iowa City Press Citizen, January 27, 2017. http://www.press-citizen.com/story/news/2017/01/27/iowa- city-uci-cyclo-cross-world-cup-jingle-cross/97141576/ (accessed March 13, 2017). EXISTING SYSTEM y>40 Existing Plans and Policies From long-range plans to statewide facility design standards, Iowa City staff and elected leaders rely on many existing plans, policies, and regulations to inform their decisions relating to bicycling infra- structure planning, funding, design, construction, and maintenance. The following list of existing documents and resources were reviewed early in the planning process to better understand the regulatory and policy environments and to identify common themes and goals on which the Bicycle Master Plan can expand or improve. A brief over- view of key findings from these documents are described below. Table 3. Relevant Plans and Policies Plans Local Plans Iowa City and other local agencies in the metro- politan area have developed comprehensive plans, sub -area plans, and bicycle and trail plans that have impacted and will continue to impact bicycle facility development and supporting programs. Transportation -focused plans like the Metropolitan Bicycle Master Plan (2009), the Future Forward 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (2017 draft), and the Johnson County Bicycling & Multi -Use Trails Plan (2012) include recommendations for the installation of bicycle facilities on local roadways, the devel- opment of additional trail corridors along riparian Plan/Policy/Regulation Agency Year IC2030: Iowa City Comprehensive Plan Update Iowa City 2013 2016-2017 Strategic Plan Update Iowa City 2016 South District Plan Iowa City 2015 Central District Plan Iowa City 2012 Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan Iowa City 2013 City Code (including bicycle regulations, parking standards, subdivision design standards, and Iowa City Updated 2016 Complete Streets Policy Iowa City Updated 2015 Metropolitan Bicycle Master Plan MPOJC 2009 Future Forward 2045 (Long -Range Transportation Plan) MPOJC 2017 (Draft) Complete Streets Policy MPOJC 2015 Coralville Community Plan Coralville 2014 Bicycling & Multi -Use Trails Plan Johnson County 2012 Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) Iowa DOT 2017 Edition Iowa in Motion 2040, Iowa In Motion 2045 (Draft) Iowa DOT 2012, 2017 (Draft) Iowa Trails 200 Iowa DOT 2000 41 ��� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN and other undeveloped corridors, the evaluation of some roadways for travel lane conversions or road diets, maintenance and sweeping of trails and high- priority bike corridors, bicycle parking ordinances for commercial and multi -family properties, and additional bicycle parking in downtown and other popular destinations. The Metropolitan Bicycle Master Plan provides the most detailed history, analysis, and recommendations pertaining to bicy- cling in Iowa City and applicable to this bicycle master planning process. Recommendations for on -street bikeways, trails, supporting programs and policies, and plan evaluation create a compre- hensive and robust strategy to increase bicycling activity and enhance bicycling safety in Iowa City and surrounding communities. Like this current bicycle master planning process, the Metropolitan Bicycle Master Plan also utilizes the LAB's building blocks of a BFC to frame existing conditions inven- tory and plan recommendations. Comprehensive and sub -area plans like IC2030: Iowa City Comprehensive Plan Update (2013), the South District Plan (2015), and the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (2013) also stress the importance of bicycling as a desired transporta- tion mode for transportation and recreation and an integral component of future growth and redevel- opment. The city's 2016-2017 strategic plan update points to the importance of bicycling as a means of promoting environmental sustainability. The city set an ambitious goal of earning a gold -level BFC desig- nation in 2017. State Plans At the state level, bicycle transportation and recreation are addressed in both the statewide transportation plan, Iowa in Motion 2040, and in the statewide trails plan, Iowa Trails 2000. The state also commissioned a statewide bicycle and pedes- trian plan which included multiple public meetings across the state in 2013 and an anticipated release of the draft report in 2015. However, no documents are made available on the project website as of February 2017. Iowa in Motion 2040's broad scope encompasses active transportation and includes considerable focus on the state's growing trail system. The plan's three broad-based and far-reaching goals of safety, efficiency, and quality of life provide significant latitude for Iowa Department of Transportation to address unique statewide, regional and local chal- lenges and opportunities. With regard to bicycling, key findings include the need for bicycle system funding, complete streets policies, increased coor- dination to connect local and regional trail systems, and more education and encouragement programs. An update to the plan is currently underway and is expected to be completed in 2017. Draft documents released so far build on these same keyfindings and include greater focus on the prevalence of bicycle and pedestrian injuries and fatalities. Iowa Trails 2000 is a resource document devel- oped to assist local governments, non -profits, and other trail developers in achieving a shared vision of an interconnected, multi -modal, easily accessible statewide trails system. The plan provides the over- archingvision for a statewide trails system, guidance for facility planning and design, and enunciates the benefits of trails as valuable recreation, transpor- tation, and quality of life assets. The plan stresses the importance of local agencies as "the primary developers and owners of specific trail projects at the local level.... They are responsible for local coor- dination, public involvement, and final trail design, including alignment determination. They are also usually responsible for seeking funding through federal, state, local, and private sources; contracting with appropriate consultants; and operation and maintenance of the completed trail." The diversity of planning documents that address bicycling is a reflection of local, regional, and even state interest to diversify transportation choices, increase safety for road users, utilize bicycling and bicycle infrastructure as a catalytic tool for economic development, support community health EXISTING SYSTEM »42 and physical activity, and enhance quality of life. The following recommendations emerge from these planning documents for consideration in this plan- ning effort: Acknowledge that the needs and abilities of all people bicycling differ and that different strate- gies and facility types are necessary to support this wide target audience. Develop cross -city routes that combine wayfinding, off-street trails, and on -street bike- ways to guide people bicycling to key community destinations and adjacent municipalities. Raise Iowa City's Bicycle Friendly Community status from silver to gold in 2017 and aspire for platinum in the future. Construct additional wide sidewalks along key arterial corridors to extend the off-street network, connect the trail system to nearby destinations, and provide facilities appropriate for younger and less experienced people bicycling. Expand bicycle parking in high -demand areas and create policies and ordinances to standardize bicycle parking in future commercial and multi- family residential developments. Expand the trail network with extensions to the Iowa River and Willow Creek Trails and additional trails along other riparian corridors, including Ralston Creek from the future Riverfront Park northeast through downtown. Apply complete streets principles to all roadway projects to ensure the needs of bicyclists are considered and infrastructure is included in roadway improvement projects and develop- ment projects. Incorporate bicycle facilities into district and area development and infrastructure projects to better link neighborhoods to key community destinations. 43 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN I 1L'7_1 ii i Encouragement and education programs are crit- ical to the success of bicycling as a viable mode of transportation. The Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County (MPOJC) maintains a GIS data layer of existing and planned bikeways that includes many (but not all) of the recommendations included in the plans referenced above. These recommended facili- ties, as well as all recommended facilities referenced in these planning documents, will be screened and analyzed in this planning process for their potential to contribute to the future Iowa City bike network. Policies and Legislation Existing policies and legislation have a significant impact on the development of trails and bikeways in Iowa City. State and local regulations determine the design, construction specifications, and safe use of trails, sidewalks and on -street bicycle facilities. The current regulatory environment in Iowa City is similar to other municipalities of similar character in Iowa. Local Policies and Regulations Local regulations and policies impact the presence and character of bicycling facilities in new develop- ment, provide procedures and design guidance for roadway design and traffic calming additions, and support safe and responsible use and enjoyment of public roadways by all road users. The City Code includes bicycle parking ordinances to integrate bicycle parking into new commercial and multi- family residential developments; subdivision design standards to incorporate trails, bikeways, and traffic calming into new subdivisions; and traffic -related regulations to encourage safe bicycling and restrict motor vehicle use of dedicated bicycle lanes. A summary of some of these regulations and policies is provided below. Complete Streets Policy Iowa City has adopted a complete streets ordinance that establishes the city's commitment to designing, building, operating, and maintaining public streets that accommodate people of all ages and abili- ties, regardless of their mode of travel. The city's complete streets policy stresses the importance of context within the street network and requires that capital projects incorporate complete street facilities like sidewalks and bicycle facilities set forth in City Council -adopted plans like the comprehen- sive plan, district plans, and bicycle and pedestrian plans. The ordinance references a number of design manuals to be used for design guidance, ranging from traditional sources like the AASHTO Green Book and the Iowa Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) manual, to more innovative publications like the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide and the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide. The ordinance includes exceptions to the use of complete streets principles and performance measures to evaluate its effectiveness and impact. The MPOJC adopted a complete streets policy in 2015 to ensure that projects receiving federal funds through the MPO -administered Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) and Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) adhere to complete streets principles and apply context sensitive design. Subdivision Regulations The layout of the street network exerts the most profound influence upon how the commu- nity develops and the opportunity for safe and active transportation between neighborhoods and to various parts of town. Streets are also the most unalterable element in development. Once constructed, for better or worse, street system, which includes block lengths and intersections, will remain unchanged for decades if not centu- ries. Except for arterial streets, most roadways are designed and constructed by private developers to meet city standards. The goal of Iowa City's current subdivision regula- tions (updated in 2008) is for each new subdivision to contribute to the larger interconnected street pattern to ensure: Street connectivity between neighborhoods Multiple travel routes resulting in the diffusion and distribution of traffic Efficient routes for public and emergency services Provide direct and continuous vehicular and pedestrian travel routes to neighborhood destinations It is a requirement that "all streets, sidewalks, and trails should connect to other streets, sidewalks, and trails within the development, and to the prop- erty line to provide for their extension to adjacent properties." Iowa City's subdivision regulations restrict the use of cul-de-sacs and other roadways with a single point of access and, when unavoidable due to topography or other constraints, limit their length. Along local and collector streets block lengths are to be between 300 and 600 feet in length. Blocks longer than six hundred feet (600') must have midblock pedestrian connections between adjacent streets. Zoning Code Iowa City plans for and encourages commercial nodes located at key intersections throughout the community to provide opportunities for basic retail uses and services close to where people live. All commercial zones require pedestrian access routes from the public sidewalk/street to the building entrance. All multi -family uses must have facades and entrances oriented to the street with vehicle parking to rear of the building or underground. All commercial and multi -family residential uses have minimum bicycle parking requirements. EXISTING SYSTEM y>44 The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code also encourage mixed use development in the Downtown and Riverfront crossings but also in the Neighborhood Commercial and Mixed Use zones dispersed throughout the community. Olde Towne Village at the intersection of Rochester and Scott is an example of this sort of mixed use in a more suburban context. The form -based code that is now in place for the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown focus on the pedestrian aspects of the street: Building facades and entrances are oriented toward the street. Building placement is located close to the sidewalk. Sidewalks are wider with space for landscaping (trees). 01 ak_fll 911 Driveways/curb cuts are minimized with alley access or cross access/ coordinated access preferred. Pedestrian streets, especially on existing long blocks are encouraged. Parking is located behind buildings or underground. Traffic Calming Policy To address the need for traffic calming for streets not programmed for improvements in the near future, the city developed a policy and procedures for traffic calming driven by neighborhood request. The policy, which applies to local and collector streets, establishes a process for neighborhood engagement, corridor study, design considerations, and final approval of the installation. The traffic calming program has resulted in a variety of improvements on local and collector roadways, Figure 20. The raised crosswalk and speed humps along Shannon Drive calm traffic and increase safety forbicyclists. 45 > IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN including Morningside Drive, College and Summit Streets, Shannon Drive, and Kimball Road. These installations create a safer environment for all road users, especially people bicycling and walking. Bicycle Parking Policy Bicycle parking codified in the city's zoning ordi- nance as part of the off street parking and loading standards. Like motor vehicle parking require- ments, minimum bicycle parking requirements vary for different land uses. Bicycle parking minimums are calculated as a percentage of motor vehicle parking spaces, usually between five and twenty- five percent, or as a fixed number per dwelling unit. In all cases in which bicycle parking is required, a minimum of four spaces shall be provided. The ordi- nance also includes general design standards that focus on parking area surface type, rack design, and rack placement. Parking may also be provided in the form of bicycle lockers or secure indoor storage facilities, but does define conditions under which these parking facilities should be used, nor does it require their use. State Policies and Regulations The Iowa Code acknowledges and supports trail development as a catalyst for economic devel- opment and improved community health. The adoption of sections of the Iowa State Code pertaining to pedestrian, bicycle and motorist movement and operation on public roadways also promotes behavior in conformance with statewide regulations. The SUDAS manual provides detailed design guidelines and standards for the development of consistent non -motorized transportation facili- ties. Design guidance is heavily dependent on the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (2012 draft) and discusses traditional facility types such as shared -use paths, shared roadways, paved shoulders, bike lanes, and bicycle boulevards. The document does not include design guidance for newer, more innovative bicycle facili- ties such as separated bike lanes or cycle tracks. The 11 akfll 911 recent inclusion of an entire chapter for complete streets (Chapter 5) expands bicycling -related infor- mation beyond design details and establishes a more comprehensive context for the inclusion of bicycling facilities and impact of general geometric design principles on non -motorized transportation. Key themes and considerations from this review of existing policies and legislation include the following: Through numerous ordinances, regulations and policies, Iowa City has established a layered system of safeguards to ensure that bicycle transportation is considered in all transporta- tion investments, land subdivisions, and future developments. The city code requires people to park their bicy- cles at bike racks if they are within 300 feet. While this encourages bike rack usage, it can be diffi- cult to abide by this law when bike racks in dense, high -traffic areas are full and no other bike parking is available, which indicates the need to expand the presence of bike parking. Bicycle parking regulations lack the level of design detail necessary to ensure that private developers provide secure and functional bike racks. Additional language regarding design spec- ifications in accordance with the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals' Essentials of Bike Parking (2015) should be referenced and provided to developers at the initiation of the site planning process. Design guidance for bicycle facility development relies heavily on AASHTO design manuals that do not incorporate recent developments and inno- vations in facility design, such as buffered bike lanes, separated bike lanes, and cycle tracks. This is especially apparent at the state level. EXISTING SYSTEM ��46 01 ak-fll 911 This page left blank intentionally. 47 >> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 55crioN A Needs Assessment ONE WAY Needs Assessment There is no single formula for building a bicycle - friendly community. Each community has unique values and needs with respect to bicycling. The needs and values of Iowa Citians shape the content and character of this plan, from the overarching vision and goals to the detailed facility and program recommendations. This chapter assesses the needs of the community with regard to bicycling and includes the following key elements: A description of bicyclist types Demand for bicycling facilities based on land use, population, and destination densities Public engagement processes and feedback, which consisted of an online survey, open house events, an online mapping tool, and a survey distributed to junior high school students Types of Bicyclists Similar to motor vehicles, bicyclists and their bicy- cles come in a variety of sizes and configurations. This variation ranges from the type of bicycle a bicyclist chooses to ride to the behavioral charac- teristics and comfort level of the bicyclist. Bicyclists by nature are much more sensitive to poor facility design, construction, and maintenance than motor vehicle drivers. Bicyclist skill level also leads to a dramatic variance in expected speeds, traffic tolerance, and behavior. Several methodologies for classifying bicyclists are currently in use within the bicycle planning and engineering professions. These classifications can be helpful in understanding the characteristics and preferences of different bicyclists. Historically, the most conventional framework classified the "design bicyclist" as advanced, basic, or child. In 2012, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials' Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities consolidated these three categories to into two: "Experienced and Confident," and "Casual and Less Confident." Both 49 > IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN DRAFT of these methodologies at the federal level consider only existing bicyclists and do not examine the American population as a whole, particularly those who do not currently bicycle but have interest. A third methodology has been developed by planners in the City of Portland, Oregon and is supported by data collected nationally since 2005. This methodology identifies four types of bicyclists and describes their preferences and needs: Strong and Fearless: These users will typically ride anywhere regardless of roadway conditions or weather. These bicyclists can ride faster than other user types, prefer direct routes, and will typically choose roadway connections. Enthused and Confident: This user group encom- passes "intermediate" bicyclists who are fairly comfortable riding on all types of bicycle facilities, but usually choose lower -volume streets or shared - use paths when available. These users may choose a longer route to ride on a preferred facility. Interested but Concerned: This user type comprises the bulk of the cycling population and represents bicyclists who typically only ride a bicycle on low traffic streets or shared -use paths under favorable weather conditions. These bicy- clists perceive significant barriers to their increased use of cycling. No Way, No How: (approximately 30-35 percent of population): Persons in this category do not bicycle, either because of general lack of interest or percep- tion of severe safety issues with riding in traffic. Bicyclist type within a city varies widely based on residents' previous bicycle facility exposure and experience and city population makeup. University cities such as Iowa City offer a special environ- ment that varies significantly from the rest of the nation and even the general population within the same city. Students, faculty, and staff on university campuses typically walk and bicycle in much higher numbers than their counterparts elsewhere. STRONG is FEARLE55 ENTHUSED is CONFIDENT 1 INTERESTED BUT CONCERNED 3 0 °% 10i.40j.J4 0 0ot NO WAY, NO NOW 11 ak 4A! 19 11 Demand for Bicycling Facilities Determining geographic demand for bicycle facili- ties requires a layering and analysis of diverse inputs, from population and employment density to schools and parks to input gathered through the public engagement process. This memorandum compiles and synthesizes these diverse inputs to create a comprehensive picture of demand for bicycle facilities in Iowa City. The Live/Work/Play Demand Model provides a general understanding of expected bicycling activity by combining individual spatial analyses represen- tative of where people live, work, play, shop, access public transit, and go to school into a composite sketch of demand for bicycle facilities throughout Iowa City. Methodology Categorical data representing each demand factor (e.g., live, work, play) are processed individually. The resulting values for each category are spatially joined to a uniform point grid that is used to develop a visual representation of category density using GIS -based kernel density tools. The result is a model of demand for bicycle facilities accounting for the impacts of destination proximity and density. Scores increase for areas that have a high density of destinations that are close together, like a down- town. Scores decrease in areas with lower densities of destinations that are further apart such as fringe strip commercial. Thus, on the demand mapsaccom- panying this memorandum, the highest density/ usage/activity locations (shown in brown) do not represent specific physical facilities, but rather represent relative higher use zones as calculated. Categories are scored on a scale of 1 to 5 based on densityand proximity and then combined with equal weighting to develop a composite Live/Work/Play score. This composite representation of demand for bicycling facilities is an important factor that will inform bikeway network development. NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS y>50 Map 8. Population -based demand Results Live Population density is based on 2010 decennial census block level population information. Population distribution and density represent potential trip origin locations. More trips can be made in areas with higher population density. Student housing, multi -family housing complexes, and compact single family subdivisions are concentrated close to Downtown and the University of Iowa. The Central District, Southwest District, the South District, and the eastern end of the Northwest District have some of the greatest concentrations of residential popula- tions in the city. Newer residential developments in 51 » IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN N the Northeast and Southeast will drive demand for quality of life amenities, including bicycle facilities to increase access to nearby destinations. It is also important to note the many residential communi- ties immediately adjacent to Iowa City that rely on the local transportation network, as well as goods and services within the city. While not reflected in the population -based demand assessment, connec- tions to the adjacent municipalities of University Heights and Coralville, as well as residential neigh- borhoods in unincorporated Johnson County, such as Sunrise Village and Lake Ridge, will increase regional access to destinations throughout Iowa City. Employment -Based Demand Lower Demand Higher Demand Map 9. Employment -based demand Work Employment density mainly represents trip destina- tions for people working in Iowa City, regardless of their place of residency. This data layer is based on 2014 total employment by census block. Depending on the type of job, this category can represent both trip attractors, like retail stores and cafes, and trip generators, like office parks and office build- ings. Hot spots for the "work" analysis include the University of Iowa, Downtown Iowa City, the Iowa City commercial developments along Highway 1 ,yJJ 0 0.5 1 2 Miles and Highway 6, the industrial corridor north of Highway 6 from Sycamore Street to the eastern city limits, and various employment sectors along North Dodge Street surrounding Interstate 80. As shown in the map below, the density of employ- ment in Downtown and at the University of Iowa far outweigh all other employment concentrations in Iowa City. Their importance as two of the greatest trip generators in the city will be critical to future network development. NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS >>52 ■ r qb Recreation -Based Demand Lower Demand Higher Demand Map 10. Recreation -based demand �I L Play Recreation -based demand represents a combination of parks and linear trails that support recreational activities in Iowa City. Much like schools and other neighborhood amenities, many of the "play" hotspots are scattered throughout the community. As Map 3 illustrates, much of the demand generated by trails and parks is located adjacent to the Iowa River, from the Waterworks Prairie Park north of Interstate 80 south along the Iowa River Trail to the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area, with numerous parks in between. Future development of a regional 53 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 2 ?00. 5 1 2 e Miles riverfront park, as identified in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, will further strengthen the Iowa River as the primary recreation corridor in Iowa City and will increase recreation opportunities in the core of the city. Other high -demand areas include Hickory Hill Park, Sycamore Greenway, Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park, Scott Park, Court Hill Trail, Mormon Handcart Park, and the Willow Creek Trail. The map illustrates the importance of trails and greenways as links between city parks and other major land uses. G ---------------------------------- - School -Based Demand Lower Demand Higher Demand Map 11. School-based demand Learn School-based demand represents where students K-12, at community college, or at university go to school. K-12 schools are distributed across the entire city and generally reflect residential popu- lation distribution. Iowa City High School, West High School, and Regina Catholic Education Center generate a large number of trips, but their atten- dance zones are much larger than most middle and elementary schools. An increased focus on bicycle infrastructure surrounding elementary and middle schools, which have smaller attendance zones and shorter average distances from home to school, may yield a greater increase in youth bicycle trips. A new Iowa City Community School District elementary 0 0.5 1 2 e Miles school, Hoover Elementary, is slated to open in the fall of 2017. While not reflected on this map, the new elementary school, which will be located at the intersection of American Legion and Barrington Roads, will impact student attendance zones, travel routes, and mode choices. University and community college demand is concentrated at the University of Iowa Campus. This overlaps with other demand factors like employ- ment, residential, and retail, all of which stress the importance of the urban core as the area with highest demand for infrastructure supporting bicycle mobility. NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS »54 �N"L Retail -Based Demand Lower Demand Higher Demand Map 12. Retail -based demand Shop Retail -based demand is calculated using a combi- nation of retail, arts, entertainment, food services, and accommodation employment sectors from the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). Together, these sectors provide a rough sense of shopping and entertainment destinations in Iowa City. In addition to a high density of retail employment in the Downtown, smaller nodes of retail and shopping destinations are located along Gilbert Street south of Downtown, along Highway 1 and Highway 6, at First Avenue and Muscatine Avenue, at First Avenue and Lower Muscatine Road, and at North Dodge Street and North Summit Street. 55 » IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 0 0.5 1 2 e Miles ui: Illlllllllllliui ■ 1i I■ w i IIWUn� ��' � liliww luu ww uid ice'" iu W�� 71, Transit -Based Demand 1 Lower Demand f e Higher Demand 0 0.5 1 2 Miles Map 13. Transit -based demand Transit Transit -based demand is assessed by the location of bus stops in Iowa City operated by the region's three transit providers: Iowa City Transit, Cora lviIIeTransit System, and Cambus (University of Iowa). The city as a whole is generally well served by public transit. The high density of transit stops in Downtown and through the University of Iowa campus reflect the high number of routes that service the urban core. Additional corridors like Muscatine Avenue and Melrose Avenue are served by multiple routes as well. By improving bicycle access to these transit hotspots, the city can effectively increase bicyclists' ability to travel longer distances and access destina- tions outside comfortable bicycling range. NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS >> 56 k %G ), "Ji f Composite Demand Lower Demand Higher Demand Map 14. Composite demand Composite Demand The composite is determined by overlaying the indi- vidual density maps and applying standard weights to each factor. This composite demand analysis shows that the areas of Iowa City with the highest potential for bicycle travel demand are dispersed in clusters throughout the city, often surrounding land uses that generate high volumes of trips, bicycle or otherwise. Downtown and the University of Iowa campus generate the most demand for bicycle facil- ities, followed by major commercial corridors and nodes, trails and recreation areas, and clusters of schools. 57 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 0 ,,,..;,, 0.5 1 2 e Miles Community Input Iowa City residents have played an active role in shaping the character and content of this plan through multiple on-line and in-person engagement activities and events. The following section of this chapter summarizes the process and input received through these engagement opportunities, including two open houses, an online survey, and an online mapping tool. Junior High Survey Iowa City reached out to students at South East Junior High to learn more about their experiences bicycling in the community. Nearly three hundred students shared information about their riding preferences, helmet usage, interest in earn -a -bike classes or mountain biking classes, and what they like and do not like about riding a bike. Over three hundred students completed the survey, providing valuable information about the bicycling habits, preferences, and desires of Iowa City's junior high students. The input is incorporated into recommen- dations for programs and network improvements to support bicycling by people of all ages, especially children and young adults. The results of this survey are shown in the figures below. Which of these words describes your typical biking experience? (check all that apply)? (279 responses) Fun Free / independent Safe Challenged/ struggle Nervous or 3.6% unsure Inconvenience' 3.6% Where do you feel comfortable / safe riding a bike? (Check all that apply) (285 responses) Sidewalks Trails On Streets Other uu ■ Which of these wor s escries your AtyyPng experience? (check all that apply)? (279 responses) Fun Free / independent Safe Challenged/ struggle Nervous or 3.6% unsure Inconvenience' 3.6% Do you have a bike of your own? (285 responses) 88.1% Do you know where the nearest bicycle trail is? (283 responses) 0 Yes No Do your parents think it is safe for you to ride your bike without adult supervision? (285 responses) io F_� Yes =No 0 Not sure NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS »58 Open House Events The community engagement process included two open houses. The first of these, held at the begin- ning of the planning process on January 26, 2017, provided the more than 120 attendees with an overview of the planning process and focused on collecting information, ideas, and inspiration to guide plan development. On display were boards illustrating different bicycle facility types and maps and displays of specific geographic sectors, asking participants to identify key issues for each area as well as more general citywide issues. Their comments proved very important in the planning of the overall network. Frequently mentioned issues by sector follow: East of the Iowa River Gilbert Street, include the possibility of a road diet with bike lanes Highway 6 corridor, including both paths along the corridor and better accesses across it. Kirkwood Avenue An east -west quiet street route incorporating an improved Sheridan Avenue Downtown commuter routes using the Muscatine and Lower Muscatine corridors 01 ;-f1l " Figure 21. Participants at the first open house commented on key issues related to biking in Iowa City. East -west route using Glendale Boulevard, and improvements of transition to the Market/ Jefferson pair Rochester Road Downtown/Campus Burlington Street (Highway 1) Bridge and connec- tion to Downtown campus River crossings in general, with connections to rest of a system Continuity and safety of Melrose More direct routes to Coralville Figure 23. Community members discuss existing Figure 22. Community members review potential barriers and desired routes during the first open house. facility types at the first open house. 59 �> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Facility improvement of the Market/Jefferson/ Glendale corridor Bicycle boulevard on College Avenue West of the River • Improved facilities on Benton Street • Melrose continuity as principal east -west route • River crossings • Completion and connectedness to Clear Creek Trail General Issues • Wayfinding • Bicycle boulevards and commuter routes radi- ating from Downtown • Good north -south bicycle arterial • Protected bike lanes on bridges • More effective pavement markings than sharrows • Better law enforcement and education Protected lanes downtown Better maintenance of streets and bike lanes The second open house was held on May 25th, 2017 to share initial plan concepts and recom- mended bikeways and solicit input from community residents. Residents viewed project boards that displayed results of previous engagement activities, illustrated different facility types, outlined the plan vision and goals, and described different supporting programs to help build a culture of bicycling in Iowa City. More than 40 residents attended the open house. The comments and themes presented below highlight the diversity of input and ideas shared by attendees: Willow Creek Trail extension to Hunters Run Park Bike lane markings on outer lanes/shoulders of Highway 6/Riverside Dr 11 ak 4A! 19 11 Figure 24. Network recommendations were discussed during the second open house. Links to schools, especially West High Hawkins and Melrose are hilly, need traffic calming Myrtle -Riverside intersection is dangerous Improved connection from Hwy 1 to IRT Jefferson problem crossing 2 lanes from left side bike lane; variety of other comments about speeds on Jefferson and Market I • <;• • la,1111, F-1 1111,11 Figure 25. Community members reviewed potential supporting programs during the second open house. NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS >> 60 Online Survey The Iowa City Bikeway Survey was designed to The Bicycle and Pedestrian Survey helps define the pref- erences and opinions of these prospective cyclists and pedestrians, and provides important guidance for designing the network. Who are Iowa City's Cyclists? While the Bikeway Surveywas not a scientific survey, the number and diversity of responses suggested that it represented a fairly representative sample of citizens with interest in urban bicycling. The first questions explored the characteristics of these responses, and found that: Survey respondents represent all parts of the city but were most concentrated in the central part of the city. While residents in all parts of the city are clearly interested in active transportation, about 40% of survey respondents live in the central part of the east bank between the river and 1st Avenue. Almost 60% were from areas east of the river, although central west bank neighborhoods also were well represented. Figure __ illustrates the distribution of responses. It is important to note that these areas do not have equal populations, so higher percentage responses will come from areas with higher populations. Central Iowa City destinations - Downtown and University of Iowa campuses and facilities -are dominant. Over 3/4 of respondents reported that their most frequent destination was in the central part of the city on both banks of the river. Of the two, the east bank (Downtown Iowa City and the downtown campus) represented the greatest share of destinations. Most survey respondents are frequent bicyclists. A large majority (about 77%) of participants reported riding at least once or twice weekly, with 53% riding several times per week to daily. By way of contrast, 65% report walking for enjoyment or transportation on at least a weekly basis; and 17% report at least weekly use of public transportation. 61 > IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 11 Wk 41�1 M Exercise and commuting are the most frequent reasons mentioned for bicycling. Notably, 72% of respondents commute by bicycle, suggesting a highly committed survey sample. But people bike for a variety of reasons - over half of respondents reported biking for routine errands, social visits, and trips to parks and recreational facilities. The largest group of respondents are cyclists most interested in improved infrastructure. The largest group, over 60%, were committed urban cyclists comfortable in streets, but recognizing and supporting new facilities to expand ridership and improve safety. The next largest group at over 31% of respondents characterized themselves as inter- ested cyclists who are capable of using low-volume streets, but concerned about riding in mixed traffic. Very small groups were at the edge of the interest spectrum. Only 2% viewed themselves as comfort- able in every situation and seeing no reason for infrastructure development, and less than 1% were unlikely to ride under any circumstances. Exercise Commuting Pa rks Social visits Errands Touring Library Family outings Shopping Business Other Do not ride 0 100 200 300 400 500 Number of responses Destinations A bicycle transportation network should get people where they want to go. The survey listed a number of different community destinations or destina- tion types, and asked respondents to rank them based on the importance of good bicycle access to them. Figure 6 describes the results, indicating the percentage of participants who considered good access important or very important. These in turn suggest the places that the network should serve. The top five destinations reported as "important" or ,'very important" by respondents were: • The University of Iowa Downtown campus • Downtown Iowa City • The University of Iowa West Campus • Trails • Iowa City Public Library Next in this ranking were parks (notably Terry Trueblood, City Park, and neighborhood parks) and schools at all levels. The lowest ranking destinations in terms of importance were shopping centers or office parks on the periphery of the city. Central Central -West West Coralville North East Southeast North Liberty Rural Northeast Outside Boundaries Rural Southwest Tiffin Number of responses uuuuuk Trail Use The survey showed that trails, a key part of a bicycle transportation network, are also a top destination. To go deeper, the questionnaire asked respondents to rate the frequency of their use of individual principal trails. The most frequently used trails (measured by largest percentage of respondents using the facility at least weekly) were: • Iowa River Trail (36% of respondents) • Dubuque Street (29%) • Clear Creek (21%) • North Liberty (19%) • Highway 6/Highway 1 (18%) Infrastructure Types Much of the survey was designed to assess the comfort of current and prospective bicyclists with different types of bicycle environments. The survey asked participants to respond to a gallery of photo- graphs of streets and facilities. Most of the images for evaluating streets were local to Iowa City, while infrastructure solutions typically came from other cities. Favorable ratings for these examples included: This presents a very safe route that can be used by all people. (2X weighting factor) This is a comfortable cycling route for most users. (1.5X weighting factor) 1 am comfortable using this street myself, but do not advise itfor inexperienced cyclists oryounger riders. (1X weighting factor) The facilities were grouped on the basis of a weighted score, calculated by multiplying the percentage of favorable participant responses by each weighting factor for individual responses and adding the results. The top-rated settings include completely sepa- rated paths, both along roads and on exclusive NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 62 right-of-way), or a bike route with a physical sepa- ration from travel lanes. Given the importance of sidepaths in Iowa City's existing system, the high rating for an enhanced sidepath with clearly marked crossings may be of special interest. Iowa City's Court Hill Trail was placed in this top group. The next highest-rated group included buffered bike lanes, high quality sidepaths with bike lanes, and quiet local streets. Iowa City's 7th Avenue was included in this group. The third highest rated group included conven- tional bike lanes and bicycle boulevards, as well as the very unconventional median cycle track on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC. Three local settings (Camp Cardinal, Highland Avenue, and the Jefferson Street bike lane) were included in this group. priority for infra r RpAFiT that ranked highest (over 2/3 of respondents rating the initiative as either effective or very effective) included: • Buffered bike lanes (rated effective or very effec- tive by 94% of respondents) • Trail development (88%) • Bike lanes (85%) • Safe routes to schools (86%) • Better project design for bicycle access (80%) • Strong bicycle advocacy organization (75%) • System of destination -based on -street routes (73% Law enforcement (71%) • Next in preference order were conventional bike lanes on arterial streets and collectors with no ■ Bike safety activities designed for kids (69%) markings or shared lane markings. Showers and changing facilities at workplaces • The lowest rated settings were arterial streets (69%) with no markings shared lane markings. Widened sidewalks or sidepaths along major Importance of Various Actions streets (68%) Responses to a list of possible actions to improve 0 Better crossings/intersection controls at major Iowa City's bicycle environment indicated a strong streets (68%) Trail development Protected bike lanes Safe routes to schools Bicycle parking ««� Bicycle access design Bike lanes IIS Strong bicycle advocacy Wayfi nd i ng _ Designated bicycle routes Bike safety for kids Showers/changing facilities Clubs, events, programs ILIIIIIIIIIIIIfiP4u,� 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 ■ Very effective Effective Neutral Relatively ineffective ■ Completely ineffective 63 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Map 15. Current bicycling route density Online Mapping Tool Input More than seventy individuals shared their ideas for bicycling in Iowa City using the online mapping tool developed specifically for this planning process. The feedback provided using this online mapping tool included current bicycling routes, desired bicycling routes, and community destinations, among others. These three categories of input expand the analysis for high demand areas by supplementing the Live Work Play Analysis with community -driven data that combines route selection with trip destination information. Current Bicycling Routes Map 8 depicts the density of current bicycling routes identified via the online mapping tool. Blue lines indicate more heavily traveled trail and street segments. Yellow lines also indicate the presence of bicycling activity, but to a lesser extent. The results show that people are bicycling on roads of all sizes from state highways and country roads to local and neighborhood streets. Many people also travel on the city's extensive trail system. High concentra- tions of bicycling activity are present in the Central District, most notably on east -west corridors such as College Street, Washington Street, Market Street, Jefferson Street, Rochester Avenue, Glendale Road, and Bowery Street. This concentrated activity in the Central District stresses the need for quality facili- ties to support travel to Downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa campus, as well as cross -city routes that connect to west Iowa City and neigh- boring Coralville. NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS »64 Map 16. Desired bicycling route density Desired Bicycling Routes Desired bicycling routes provide critical information regarding trip destinations, existing corridors in need of physical improvements to support bicycle activity (corridors that peoplewould use if notforthe current lack of bicycle infrastructure), and new trail corridors in undeveloped areas and along riparian or other corridors. Iowa City residents identified 121 desired routes using the online mapping tool. Map 9 displays the density of these desired routes. The majority of desired routes are shown in yellow on the map, indicating lower density. Road segments and trails shown in blue indicate a higher densityand 65 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN a corresponding need for improvements to facilitate safe and convenient bicycle travel. Higher density routes include Muscatine Avenue, Burlington Street, Second Street (Highway 6) leading into Coralville, North Dodge Street, Prairie Du Chien Road, and Highway 1 West / Highway 6 across the Iowa River from Hudson Avenue to Gilbert Street. The higher density corridors east to west, as indicated by Second Street, Burlington Street, and Muscatine Avenue, point to the need for a cross -city route to support longer distance trips and supporting access to high demand areas like Downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa. Map 17. Combined bicycling route density (existing and desired) Combined Route Density When existing and desired route densities are combined, a more complete picture emerges that combines commonly traveled, lower -stress corri- dors and trails with busier thoroughfares that provide more direct routes to cross-town destina- tions. Map 10 highlights a two -fold need to both improve existing bicycle routes and develop new bicycle routes. NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS >> 66 Map 18. Community destination density Community Destinations Eighty-nine individual destination points were added to the online mapping tool during the plan- ning process. Map 11 displays high-density areas of Iowa City destinations using a similar technique to the Live Work Play analysis. The blue areas repre- sent either concentrations of adjacent destinations, or a single destination identified by more than one map user. The results of this spatial analysis overlap with many high -demand areas identified in the Live Work Play analysis. Major destinations and desti- nation areas include Downtown, the University of Iowa, the University of Iowa Hospital and Clinics, the Sycamore Mall, Mercer Park and Southeast Junior High School, Iowa City High School, West High School, and Terry Trueblood Recreation Area. 67 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Conclusion The combination of data -driven analysis with community input creates a compelling case for a complete bicycle network that serves all of Iowa City, notjust the urban core surrounding Downtown and the University of Iowa. While these two destina- tions generate the highest demand for facilities to support bicycling activity, the series of maps in this chapter highlight the need to serve other significant destinations as well. The diversity of destinations for bicycling trips reflects the diversity of bicyclists themselves. People shopping, running errands, going to school, commuting to work, catching the bus, cruising along the trails and to the parks— everyone can and does travel by bicycle. By creating a complete, interconnected, and comfortable bike network, more and more Iowa Citians can enjoy the benefits of bicycle travel. r �Pa r ,�rt�,,�;,� � � ,.�,� rxro u � ,v,,,• .rig �, 3ECTION 5 Recommendations T �44��' a Y „W t �. M,` �4.,a•'� ,�-+ rift w� s ..Yyw�eTy^" Il"` edL � 94A�W A I qW� v, m Recommendations Iowa City's target of becoming a Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community will be achieved in large part due to expansion of and improvements to the bikeway network. This memorandum outlines the principles, attributes, and structure for bicycle network development, followed by recommenda- tions for specific infrastructure improvements. At full build -out, the envisioned bikeway network will support bicycle transportation and recreation for people of all ages and abilities. The memorandum concludes with recommendations for support systems that enhance the bicycle network, including wayfinding systems, bicycle parking facilities, bike share, and integration with transit. The Iowa City Bikeway Network Network Principles An effective bicycle network for Iowa City should follow specific principles and performance measure- ments. Some of the world's best work in identifying design principles was done by the Netherlands Centre for Research and Contract Standardization in Civil and Traffic Engineering. This plan adapts the Netherlands concepts to medium-sized American cities like Iowa City, identifying six guiding elements for an effective active transportation network: Integrity. The ability of a system to link starting points continuously to destinations, and to be easily and clearly understood by users. Directness. The capacity to provide direct routes with minimum misdirection or unnecessary distance. Safety. The ability to minimize hazards and improve safety for users of all transportation modes. Comfort. Consistency with the capacities of users and avoidance of mental or physical stress. Experience. The quality of offering users a pleasant and positive experience. Feasibility. The ability to maximize benefits and 69 ��� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN DRAFT minimize costs, including financial cost, inconve- nience, and potential political opposition. These six elements express the general attributes of a good system, but must have specific criteria and measurements that both guide the system's design and evaluate how well it works. More information about these network principles can be found in the plan appendix. Attributes of the Network Based on this development of the six elements presented above, the Iowa City network design follows the following major attributes: Tailored to User Groups. Planning a bicycle network for Iowa City, with a geography that includes signifi- cant grades, the meandering Iowa River that creates some relatively isolated areas, and the University of Iowa campus on both sides of that river, requires us to understand the specific user groups for the system. In addition, Iowa City's street and trail system is integrated into the networks of Coralville, North Liberty, and University Heights. These user groups include: Commuters traveling to the city's (and metro- politan area's) core destinations - Downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa campuses. The central location of these districts keeps most trip distances within very manageable ranges, although community expansion to the west and east also increase their length. Cyclists making utilitarian trips to other desti- nations outside of the two core districts. In Iowa City, where an unusual number of people use bicycles for basic urban transportation, the ultimate system must serve a variety of desti- nations, including schools, commercial clusters and corridors, and employment centers. From a framework point of view, this requires a grid of routes that complement a radial approach to Downtown and campuses. Travelers to parks and trails. Iowa City's bicycle network should be integrated with its park system, which also went through a master planning process in 2017. Additionally, trails themselves are both facilities and popular desti- nations, so on -street routes from neighborhoods to trails are important. Recreational users. The Iowa River, Clear Creek, North Liberty, Court Hill, and Dubuque/Mehaffey Bridge Trails are major elements of the regional trail system, and receive heavy use. These facili- ties serve both recreational users and cyclists bound for specific destinations. A number of Iowa City residents also travel by bike or on foot within the city for recreational purposes, from serious road cycling to comfortable in -city workouts. Users out of necessity. Many people in Iowa City depend on active transportation for basic travel. This is especially true of individuals or families with limited incomes who may not have regular access to cars. For these residents, the bicycle offers an invaluable tool, connecting them to economic opportunities and commu- nity resources that might otherwise be difficult to reach. A transportation system that serves the interest of social equity must also expand options and access to these areas of affordable housing. Iowa City youth. Children, teens, and young adults in Iowa City can be grouped into most of the categories described above; however, these younger residents are unique in both their lack of experience with motor vehicle traffic and ability to anticipate and negotiate interactions with other road users. In addition, this group represents the future of Iowa City, and their potential to influence transportation behavior and patterns is tremendous. Building a bicycle network that supports Iowa Cityyouth, including safe routes to school and parks, will help to build an appreciation for and commitment to active transportation for future generations. Destination -Based. A key market for the Iowa City 111111111111111 DRA111111111 network is people headed for specific destinations. Destinations that the community and both existing and potential users identify as important contribute powerfully to the structure of the network. The proposed network is more than a system of bicycle - friendly streets. It is instead a transportation system that takes people to specific places. Function Model. Several reasonable models for network planning exist, with choices dependent on the nature of the city. The Iowa City system identifies principal routes that offer long-distance continuity along destination -rich corridors, some- what analogous to transit lines. Other types of facilities such as bicycle boulevards and connecting links serve specific functions, such as neighborhood connectivity or short links to specific destinations. Incremental Integrity. Incremental integrity - the ability of the network to provide a system of value at each step of completion - is an important attribute. The first step in completion should be valuable and increase bicycle access even if nothing else is done. Each subsequent phase of completion follows the same principle of leaving something of clear value and integrity, even if it were the ultimate stage of completion. Evolution. As part of the concept of incremental integrity, the system is designed to evolve and improve over time. For example, a relatively low- cost project or design element can establish a pattern of use that supports something better in the future. Independent segments should connect with other segments by means of an interim signing or marking strategy so it is not isolated. Conflict Avoidance. Projects should demon- strate the multiple benefits of street adaptations. On many streets, traffic calming and signage can provide satisfactory facilities that focus on the positive and minimize divisive conflicts. On others, upgraded facilities can be provided with minimum impact on traffic operations. For example, bikeway design elements such as speed tables and traffic RECOMMENDATIONS y>70 diverters can slow motorists and keep unwanted through traffic out of neighborhoods, benefiting both cyclists and neighbors. Use of Existing Facilities. Existing features like the Court Hill and Iowa River Trails, major sidepaths, and existing bike lanes are integral to the bikeway system. Of special importance is the emergence of the Outer Loop, combining facilities along Mormon Trek Boulevard, McCollister Boulevard, and Scott Boulevard to provide a multi -modal peripheral route. "Found" but underused features such as the Longfellow Tunnel, the Ridgewood alley, and short existing walkway links can also be very useful. Fill Gaps. In many cases, the most important parts of a network are small projects that complete connections. These short links can knit street or trail segments together into longer routes or provide access to important destinations. These gaps may include a short trail segment that connects two continuous streets together, or an intersection improvement that bridges a barrier. The devel- opment of the overall network is strategic, using manageable initiatives to create a comprehensive system. Low -Stress Facilities. The Iowa City Bikeways Survey showed that much of the city's potential urban cycling market is comfortable in on -street situations, but understandably prefers separa- tion from moving motor vehicles, through physical buffers or using quiet streets or corridors separated from heavy traffic. For example, bicycle boule- vards—lower volume streets that parallel major arterials —satisfy the comfort requirement success- fully. However, some important destinations, including major employers and shopping facilities are served by major arterials. Here, Iowa City policy incorporates bicycle and pedestrian accommoda- tions in new major street projects. Along Mormon Trek Boulevard, First Avenue, and Clinton Street, the City is also implementing road diet programs that both accommodate bike traffic and manage traffic speeds. Many of these complete street treatments 71 > IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 11 akfll 911 provide users with the choice of on- and off-street facilities within the same corridor. This provides choices to cyclists with different capabilities and levels of comfort with on -street riding. Regional Connectivity. The Iowa City network must also connect to regional facilities, including trail and on -street routes in Coralville, North Liberty, University Heights, Tiffin, and rural Johnson County. Network Structure Map 1 at the end of this document illustrates the proposed conceptual bicycle network for Iowa City, consistent with information gathered through the citizen engagement process, analysis of existing conditions and demands, and the guidelines and criteria described previously in this chapter. The conceptual network map displays the ultimate build -out by component type. The components of the system include the facilities details below. On -Street Facilities Principal Bikeways These corridors are the spines of the system, and are generally oriented in ordinal east -west and north -south directions. They often follow arterial and collector corridors and have good crosstown continuity. They form the bike "arterials" that lead to the core destinations and many other key locations around the city and have the capability of connecting to on- and off-street systems in other metropolitan area communities. The principal bikeways also direct users to crossings of major potential barriers: the Iowa River, Highways 1 and 6, and other major arterial intersections. Infrastructure for these routes typically use more separated types of bicycle facilities, including existing and proposed bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, cycle tracks, enhanced sidepaths, and short segments of multi -use trail. However, in some cases, they may include segments of relatively low-volume local streets. These facility types are described below in the recommended bicycle facilities section of this memorandum. 0 a eaY v Camp m r � A, M i e Q X eado e �s - w n3 rn "9 s LE 3 a ynq meaa� O y�,ore TO prf rillY i - 7,h LL oe 5 C ONa s O - Summlt = Sand C7 pvCh— Z Ol nog o 3 - YnYoa� a aaa r^\ 0 -U, E QPua m - �Y�pueS We`¢ I�~o 'om O w j oauo a Wanly tYD � C7 a ipeyy � ut � _E ` Y o m m° ooM • r p 3 o E a a) 3`0 ° c o v 0� 0 a eaY v Camp rillY C ONa Z Z w E f2 a a 0 o � o � _E ` Y o m m° a) 3`0 ° c o v 0� A> 3 o r a �_a) zY o w Q) CC a� L m °a 0-0 LL?� j m >. 3> a L a a a) Q >, m r ids p. N U O O L C 0 N O N N `p v a) O Q a d E = U cm, o w° a 00 0 � Q C a` U)z a` a"i cn i7)° . - >, m Ww - ° ° °- U o v I ��L:_aT �>3 ji ° a) 0 Fww�m HO UUww°a) x) LL u - ai to 3 2 7 `m n5 0 ¢. bb )y ry a� e� 0 Donega � V ml)ng 0 Z2 a!�Le�d PD e J dweD `v a yea i ©a � RYan aFP lJ e �aMoy;olS Oe` i .._.,....._..�...._....; nH.... _..� tai t 1,1 oo n Wawa _ r„ a ll L O /00** NtS N.N. p N .0. p L C> U NY 0 0a= D O C S O Y N w � °c uosi uewo6e¢ 3 d m 45 uot6uix Mackinaw LL B gyp° Q 'Cia�� Cly A llb%l ui N = N 0_ N O N o' N m Sunset O � p a Z 11J § Z u �JnWWUD g` 0 - C' E SS b lieil W MV _ ate6;saM C7 a /�°\ T PPgnepy dAq.S.N N3 - ai to 3 2 7 `m n5 0 ¢. bb )y ry a� e� 0 Donega � V ml)ng 0 Z2 a!�Le�d PD e J dweD `v a yea i ©a � RYan aFP lJ e �aMoy;olS Oe` i .._.,....._..�...._....; nH.... _..� m A O Q 0 20 20 O K a ll L O NtS N.N. p N .0. p L C> U NY 0 0a= D O C S O Y N w � ri W N = N 0_ N O N o' N a Z Z C' E SS b a m m _ C, m p-0 A T 3Q; o r a a �_ ZY o w �.4 �Lm °LE v ?� j >. 3> a L o m r o ids O m U S L C 0 0_ -0 N E w \V m �+ a OL m �+ a O Q O m Y N O u, m p U d N N m d t� d S IM _° y S m a m m 3 0 ° °° `o O � a` cn z � a` cn cn ° Q Y � : � m co w C, � r °- � o, m Q o ! J O O rm�Y�mm Lo' y oo a aw ° m m �N( I%• LL u m A O Q 0 20 20 O K N � ` wb Barrington veer.- � z o v�ounp eyOJa}sey °s� w`a'3' C7 Iln slang = a AJo)ysy r rn c 1 H a m c Renin, ej 'n y)auua�l ¢c y o E C7 X LindeR`a"" w 'estb' Scott Pa r rn w n L nden Z Z m�wwE o y m o w,w)saMU m 0 - r'C�ia uie}un. yy aos0 III m o 0 U apo o % T x o O 61 \ }sod .� Q Y m o w o -, ' Q° ° o 0 m Fza rn 5 � 1 Q Z � o N N O = Q 3 q) r a Goodridge 3 ZY o n a.4 aaw) m °a u de LL ?� j i n >. 3> -5; L m a) a 8 Q >, r " as ids /y� R -al M m anbngn0 >. Oakland p. N U C L C 0 ° N `p W O� Y m Q j Y_Q ouay Clark BanbuN _ \V m v"ash a = m pra rie CL m Y U C, c 0 � E� o m � m osuyo� 9 UeA S ° ° y S a bnq Q o a o °° i ide O waa ,�� a` co WapNer aJ2 ewJ� A � a` cn cn °Qm w r aya o O Z Z m�wwE SSwa a `o a o o _ Y m o w o -, ' Q° ° o 0 m Fza WJ � o N N A T 3 o r a �_ ZY o n a.4 aaw) m °a u LL ?� j >. 3> -5; L m a) a 8 Q >, r o ids /y� Y m O L >. p. N U C L C 0 ° N `p W Y m j Y_Q -° _ \V m a m a CL m Y U C, C:d S ° ° y S o a o °° O ,�� a` co z ,�� a` cn cn °Qm w r LL ° oQ as ) Q o !y J O O r o 0t o r o 'o ° ', Q az oCD �N( LL u Va QIP o v c o - °O d ra � A n ?� a 4b, C7 � y Z < OD 0 - e Lake m 3 c \ N 3 O 5 S n a nw 1.17 3 tea° aaaarJ anl�M ° o r - N w 2p!g ds M tray C7 ViesaldeN -__ o Vi." _ m 4�m o on U aal Ri1!H sal eN �•• wo R� o" aaaOn 9r y O Ranan �U¢s�4 a!eW Go enrod / p Praine ai!eld PI!M Fa aeW � 0x �s a Lake Oaam J..agToIS ... uoPuel ala J A S N.N. 6-2 N Y 0-Fz 0 a= N w O .0. ° L C> U C>Z' O Ocz Y � a W = N Q Z Z �9ww SSwa > N U O E w o m a _ o CZ o ° oc m m m° v A T 3 o r A N j_ Z Y o w a�.0 O -0 a)ai r m °'LE rn Cc, S>. 3> a L a CL o ids cm E Y m r� Y CL ° m ma of _ w ° E O r O L r Oa o w r a` cn z ZS� a` cn cn °QY�: �m �a aim °w00 m V c w LL o o CL Q o ! y J O O r a Y ° m L o 'o a� 'o m cL—llr,r� o �N( � Hw w� m.�w. H U U ww ° m m I%• LL u z 0 Q 0 Z 20 20 O u t T 0 a O Z o ssedw o� 0 a" E .—puedep,j igw3 dAd � wapoW �11OCS xn ols �rta aa41s3 -\ Y� J :1 sa�l�e4� V61 �a/AA{l'�1We�/arBerd 1, d DU h3 v 3 m m W j � � 3 3 Meadow w 5 naN a�,e ao Q le6aa iu �� Soccer Park - \ wa]saM POOhUelE) 0 m k c Ne E v (9 U Q t _4up e j Q 3 mRuss21 ell Z cm lla / m m C9 u- �olRel m � m Q Qm �¢� t a Pue alb' LL wn of MWIt' G\bW p �` uenrooa suana}g cT off° g R,vetsde N c 8�2 d ?A �y6y -- a c a m O ww AEp .0. L C > > U ° c O O Y � -ca,2r Y° 4 $ m° a W Z Z = N Q O w w N t/1 .S S 0 a a� a a � _ ` 0 a o m m° A> 3° a) 3`0 ° zYow��.4 c v °�a�Lm°->> r A �_ ?� j >.3 >mL m co LE Qom, u o m O � N a mr L ids M Y Y m >. O. U -° C 0 ° cm N `O E _ W Q -O \V m Q a m a 0 m Y N� U U m Y O d S a` U) z � y S � a` U) ° a i7)C, ° m 3 0 ° Q Y � : � m U `o o° m m w � a o r fn w LL 0° r o °- � � O E a >,— ° Cl Q o t{ J O O L O d Y a) L EE >O N U M '� Q H ° _l�r ° I�, LL U U ww a a N u z 0 Q 0 Z 20 20 O u t Secondary Bikeways Secondary bikeways are the primary routes for local bicycle travel around town, and serve most of the city's key destinations and attractions. They are typically local or collector streets with relatively low volumes that have good continuity and in many cases parallel higher order streets. In some cases, secondary bikeways are long segments of single streets; in others, they are logical assemblages of local streets to create an easy -to -follow, continuous route. These facilities are more comfortable for many cyclists than the busy corridors they parallel. Common infrastructure types for secondary bike- ways can include bicycle boulevards, signed and marked routes, short segments of multi -use trails that connect on -street bikeways or provide segment connecting to an important destination like a park or school. In some cases, secondary bikeways on wider streets can also take the form of bike lanes, which can have a calming effect on motor vehicle traffic and create an environment supportive of bicycle travel by people with less comfort or experi- ence bicycling in traffic. Neighborhood Connectors These are short, primarily on -street routes, usually on low-volume local streets, that connect through routes with neighborhoods and local destinations like parks and schools. In some cases, they provide important connections between higher -order components, but are too short to function as bicycle boulevards. Most require minimal infrastructure investment beyond wayfinding signage. Off -Street Corridors Principal Multi -Use Trails These major off-street trails are the strength of Iowa City's current active transportation network. They are long-distance facilities located on their own rights-of-way and corridors, primarilythe Iowa River and area creeks or on defined corridors within the campus environs or developments. Major existing principal trails include the Iowa River, Clear Creek, and Court Hill Trails and the Sycamore Greenway. New principal trails include future corridors that should be phased with adjacent development and short but critical links to increase connections. Because of their length and strategic locations, these trails serve both transportation and recre- ation functions. Connector and Park Trails Multi -Use Trails These multi -use trails are usually internal to neigh- borhoods and new developments or make short connections from neighborhoods or principal trails to specific destinations. They also include trails that are internal to parks. Sidepaths (or widened sidewalks) These are wide paths, typically built to trail stan- dards, located within a street right-of-way but fully separated by curbs from travel lanes. They provide a level of separation from traffic that many users find comfortable, but require a great deal of design attention when they intersect driveways and streets because of potential traffic conflicts. They are a very important part of Iowa City's network, and city policy includes sidepaths in all major arterial roadway projects. Sidepaths work best along streets with controlled access and relatively few driveway interruptions. Some corridors offer both a sidepath and on -street bike lanes, providing users with a choice of facilities. Recommended Bicycle Facilities As described above, bicycle facilities vary greatly in character, context, and intended user. These facility types are based on national standards and best practices in bikeway design using state-of- the-art resources like the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and the FHWA Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks Guide. Transitioning from the conceptual level map to more detailed infrastructure recommendations, Map 2 accompanying this document displays the proposed bicycle network by individual facility type. RECOMMENDATIONS y>77 It is important to note that some recommended bicycle facilities shown on this map replace existing bicycle facilities, and that those existing bicycle facilities are not shown to increase map legibility. An example of this is the recommendation for buffered bike lanes on Jefferson and Market that will replace the existing left -side bike lanes. Table 1 lists recom- mended bicycle network mileage by facility type, each of which are described below. Table 4. Mileage by Bicycle Facility Facility Type Recommended On -Street Facilities Miles 72.5 Bike Lanes (including climbing lanes) 29.7 Buffered Bike Lanes 4.0 Protected Bike Lanes/Cycle Tracks 3.0 Bicycle Boulevards 22.7 Marked and Signed Routes 9.5 Corridor Study • 3.5 04 Multi -Use Trail/Shared-Use Path 10.6 Sidepath (Wide Sidewalk) 17.8 Tota 1 100.9 On -Street Facilities Conventional Bike Lanes Conventional bike lanes, or simply bike lanes, desig- nate an exclusive space for bicyclists with pavement markings and signage. The bicycle lane is located adjacent to motor vehicle travel lanes, and bicyclists ride in the same direction as motor vehicle traffic. Bicycle lanes vary in width, but are typically five to six feet. Most bike lanes are on the right side of the street (on a two-way street), between the adjacent travel lane and curb, road edge or parking lane. Some bike lanes are located on the left side of the street, particularly on one-way streets. 78 ��� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 01 ak_fll ;h i While bicycle lanes can be added to new arterial and collector streets as they are built, bike lanes can also be added to existing roadways through a number of modifications, including reallocation of excess width, lane narrowing, 4 -lane to 3 -lane road diets, modifications to parking, and roadway widening. ED, Climbing Lane Climbing lanes (also known as "uphill bike lanes") enable motorists to safely pass slower -speed bicyclists by providing a bicycle lane in the uphill direction of travel, and shared lane markings in the downhill direction, thereby improving conditions for both travel modes. This treatment is typically found on retrofit projects as newly constructed roads should provide adequate space for bicycle lanes in both directions of travel. Accommodating an uphill bicycle lane often includes delineating on -street parking (if provided), narrowing travel lanes and/or shifting the centerline if necessary. O Q 0 Z 20 20 O K Fi Csr a e� d p,0 W.— 0 �4 uv a a (9 �tlllouM C 0 ,)gi1L5— S L'/Ca 35 .1e H sc t x nois 4 j4a Q '6 H aq% b E Dover w s � r d e a ynorc � � � uz Q1 Q P,cl _ v n0 )/led dY u� � 6 s saidery 2 i A 0 summit 2 v w �eMpeoie ;•� A Sand C7 eOV CM1ien ...,..,, _ aAa�M2F1 Yw 0 C E Q _ uyo( m es We` — m o D U .•_ — waaw�kt� I 2 (D O Q 0 Z 20 20 O K Fi Csr a d p,0 W.— i �w �tlllouM C s � aeeD � 6 s saidery 2 aAa�M2F1 3 O Q `eek I edY �c ' w n xp �`k �7 n•o" C i Q dcq c' camv e )aMo43o1s uo Puel `6 P yf ,. RN' de ell C N 2 Y L Z i.� in m a � - O U o m a Y mn r� W./ ` � Vw N o 3 Y Q z Z Y U m m m U U lE N -) U) l4 l0 U _ m 0 FO U m a m U U) D J v v o JV V yyu� yyu� yyuy yyuy yyuy yyu� yyu� yyuy r 3 3 r r 2 d 3 3 m ^ O H /y� 0 W m d fl fl fl �yujJ fl fl fl Il m d fl fl N c - r v v aRE a�U o _j�91� �+ l I I I I I l I o � O w O w i 11 11 11 11 11 11 c O Q 0 Z 20 20 O K a� Donee \} xp o J dw eD Q Ryan a �� �aMoy;olS G i nnH — `ma u9 0 tYe N (DCL 2 a7ideD 0 o — ..... a rr d OD LL uowaJ ue=6e _.......... 0 4 `°� — m a Mackinaw 0 � m � a Ge e r iE — N o �9 olowwoG a� ela Q _ Y U Oc - w in LL w_ edtaiizm .� � �e6)saM VfA O _ N o ii vCL �yyuny 0 z z JV V ymyuy yUyuy ymyu� yayuy ymyuy y�yuy y�U{JJ y�yuy 2 w N 0 W z h3 fl fl fl Il m d fl fl N c 3 O 3 3 3 .1� X - a a m m� w w r H ¢ ^ I..L r v v & w v a� t is ¢ ` '$A 3 99t1; SPuiM7saM S o� 0 ? a` aRaN^^eH � W 12 4L � 1 O o 0 Q c a� Donee \} xp o J dw eD Q Ryan a �� �aMoy;olS G i nnH O �W ^A .L, z O Q 0 E 20 20 O u t N (DCL Z, a � m � r W m Y m U '' W o �' ela Z Y U Oc in LL LL .� � VfA O N o ii vCL �yyuny 0 z z JV V ymyuy yUyuy ymyu� yayuy ymyuy y�yuy y�U{JJ y�yuy 2 w N 0 W m d fl fl fl fl fl fl Il m d fl fl N c 3 O 3 3 3 .1� X - a a m m� O r H ¢ ^ I..L r v v w v a� is ¢ N '$A 3 99t1; I o � 1 O w l I I I I I O w. c O �W ^A .L, z O Q 0 E 20 20 O u t IlnsJang AJo)ysy s — _ RennJiej � ooJuyuaJg / N / Lgauuaj� E Charles �o� X / w / Lindam�n Scott Pa Nlesib`�� p 4 a 9 mhursl uanea� �s o U G y �i11W � v rm ..�... )sod � r. Q� _ Goodridge 3 1I 1 A 1 II 1 / ` • -. 1 4 I II I 1 . 1 11'� I • 1 1 1 1 •1 . 1 1 1 1 •1 1 1 �®.■1 � '1 1 1 m aw,J� lr� V m u A s 0— � m � m Y m r N � � � `m m N � N � n � LL Z _ m m m o m U VfA LL � Y � w o u o LL .D O � yr ymyuy yUyuy ymyu� yayuy ymyuy y�y{J y�U{JJ � vii y�yuy �yyuny 0 � z z V 0 m C fl fl fl fl fl Il Il m d fl fl c 3 3 3 3 - 2 w rr N r JV N .1� X m O H Ill ^ O a a m� LL w w it 2 41 3 r v :r v Im a aU fi® o �+ O w l I I I I I O w l a 11 11 11 11 11 11 �o � c z O a 0 z 20 20 O K I z O a 0 z 20 20 O K ,ge aaq�M UaaArJ aP/ //�♦/ tl O .Lr 0` apis �eekt Vi. c Q� a` l ion 5 m«" �o y ,callan ;uas�v G \de—d Ufa C Prairie a —d PIIM is oa �P� Q yco Lake Ile �aN,oy{oIS m Crest 09� a o 0 U v� W:s � m � O m U o a 02 r LL N Z V/ ,^ LL o U L_ _ o ii= r z - v V V' O Y V) o 6 vii �yyuny 0 z z JV V ymyuy yOyuy ymyu� yayuy ymyuy y�yuy y�U{JJ C2L y�yuy 2 w N 0 m d .2 m d c 3 3 3 3 - r W ^ fl fl fl fl fl fl Il fl fl O a�U o _j�91� �+ V) MA o � O w l I I I I I O w l a 11 11 11 11 11 11 c 2 yoga _.TT 1-1__.,d�C wapoW ups dad m J aay�s3 Dover O sled -3 ' aouapuadapul I 1 Y 1 1 I 1 Y 1 Y 1 - Y 1 ♦♦ y � 1 / j♦ 1 1�♦ Y ♦ 1 / 1 I 1- 1 1. 1' pua iYSoccer Park W Ls y6ti oakcre .� �¢ aws,aNa CL _ v � m � L Yo O U a W./ r N `m LL W m Y Z_ m m m o — L U °� m m m U U m V L Y fA LL N Y w o u o LL O � N ymyuy yUyuy CL ymyu� yayuy ymyuy y�yuy y�U{JJ � viiV y�yuy �yyuny 0 m d fl fl fl fl fl fl Il m d fl fl c 3 3 3 3 - 2 w N r JV N .1� X m O H m a o w� V) l I I I I I O w O l a 11 11 11 11 11 11 a�U � c m m z O tE 0 E 20 20 O u I rr„ H ll sa;�eyD d,P�sraora a Le o pV/ �,eaaour JP—NUte I 1 Y 1 1 I 1 Y 1 Y 1 - Y 1 ♦♦ y � 1 / j♦ 1 1�♦ Y ♦ 1 / 1 I 1- 1 1. 1' pua iYSoccer Park W Ls y6ti oakcre .� �¢ aws,aNa CL _ v � m � L Yo O U a W./ r N `m LL W m Y Z_ m m m o — L U °� m m m U U m V L Y fA LL N Y w o u o LL O � N ymyuy yUyuy CL ymyu� yayuy ymyuy y�yuy y�U{JJ � viiV y�yuy �yyuny 0 m d fl fl fl fl fl fl Il m d fl fl c 3 3 3 3 - 2 w N r JV N .1� X m O H m a o w� V) l I I I I I O w O l a 11 11 11 11 11 11 a�U � c m m z O tE 0 E 20 20 O u I Buffered Bike Lanes Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes paired with a designated buffer space, separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. Buffered bike lanes are designed to increase the space between the bike lane and the travel lane or parked cars. This treat- ment is appropriate for bike lanes on roadways with high motor vehicle traffic volumes and speed, adja- cent to parking lanes, or a high volume of truck or oversized vehicle traffic. Protected Bike Lanes/Cycle Tracks Protected bike lanes, also commonly referred to as separated bike lanes or cycle tracks, are designed for exclusive use by bicyclists and are located within or directly adjacent to the street and is physically separated from motor vehicle traffic by parking and/or a three-dimensional element. Protected bike lanes have different forms but all share common elements—they provide space that is intended to be exclusively or primarily used by bicycles, and are separated from motor vehicle travel lanes, parking lanes, and sidewalks. In situations where on -street parking is allowed, protected bike lanes are located to the curb -side of the parking (in contrast to conventional bike lanes). Cycle tracks may be one-way or two-way, and may be at street level, sidewalk level or at an interme- diate level. If at sidewalk level, a curb or median separates them from motor traffic, while different pavement color/texture separates the cycle track 01 ak - fil J I i from the sidewalk. If at street level, they can be separated from motor traffic by raised medians, on -street parking or bollards. Advisory Bike Lanes Advisory bike lanes provide a unique design option for low-volume streets that lack the width neces- sary to install conventional bike lanes, but require a greater treatment than shared lane markings or signage. Advisory bike lanes are bicycle priority areas delineated by dotted white lines. The auto- mobile zone should be configured narrowly enough so that two cars cannot pass each other in both directions without crossing the advisory lane line. Motorists may enter the bicycle zone when no bicycles are present. Motorists must overtake with caution due to potential oncoming traffic. This treat- ment is not currently present in any state or federal RECOMMENDATIONS y>84 design standards though it is being implemented in the US and is common in many European countries. While not recommended in this plan, the design option has been considered during this planning process and may be viable option for project devel- opment moving forward. o� Bicycle Boulevards Bicycle boulevards are a special class of shared roadways designed for a broad spectrum of bicy- clists. They are low-volume local streets where motorists and bicyclists share the same travel lane. Treatments for bicycle boulevards are selected as necessary to create appropriate automobile volumes and speeds, and to provide safe crossing opportunities of busy streets. Bicycle boulevards incorporate treatments such as signage, pavement markings, traffic calming and/or traffic reduction, 85 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 01 ak - fil J I i and intersection modifications to support through movements of bicyclists while discouraging similar through -trips by non -local motorized traffic. The appropriate level of treatment to apply is depen- dent on roadway conditions, particularly motor vehicle speeds and volumes, and on community- based support and design processes. Marked and Signed Routes A marked and signed shared roadway is a general purpose travel lane marked with shared lane mark- ings ("sharrows") and signed with Bikes May Use Full Lane and/or wayfinding signs to encourage bicycle travel and proper positioning within the lane. In constrained conditions, the shared lane markings are placed in the middle of the lane to discourage unsafe passing by motor vehicles. On a wide outside lane, the shared lane markings can be used to promote bicycle travel to the right of motor vehicles. In all conditions, shared lane markings should be placed outside of the door zone of parked cars. Placing shared lane markings between vehicle tire tracks will increase the life of the markings and minimize the long-term cost of the treatment. The marked and shared routes are most applicable on low-volume, low -speed roadways linking destina- tions and endpoints to principal bikeways, bicycle boulevards, and multi -use trails. 'a i Corridor Study Some roadways identified for bikeway development have been designated as corridors for future study, a reflection of geometric, operational, or juris- dictional challenges inherent along the roadway. Gilbert Street is currently under study to examine the safety and operational performance of road diet, and Newton Road is identified for future study to develop bikeway treatments that meet the safety and internal circulation needs of the University of Iowa while also addressing city-wide network considerations. Off -Street Facilities Shared -Use Paths/Multi-Use Trails These facilities are frequently found in parks, along rivers, beaches, and in greenbelts or utility corri- dors where there are few conflicts with motorized vehicles. Eight feet is the minimum allowed for a shared -use path and is only recommended in low traffic or physically constrained situations. Ten feet is recommended in most situations and is adequate for moderate to heavy use. Twelve feet is recommended for heavy use situations with high concentrations of multiple users such as runners, bicyclists, rollerbladers and pedestrians. A separate track (5' minimum) can be provided for pedestrian use. 01 ak-f1l 911 Sidepaths Sidepaths (also referred to as wide or widened sidewalks) are located adjacent to a roadway and provide for two-way, off-street bicycle use. Sidepaths may also be used by pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, runners and other non -motorized users. These facilities are frequently found in parks, along rivers, beaches, and in greenbelts or utility corridors where there are few conflicts with motor- ized vehicles. Eight feet is the minimum allowed for a shared -use path and is only recommended in low traffic or physically constrained situations. Ten feet is recommended in most situations and is adequate for moderate to heavy use. Twelve feet is recommended for heavy use situations with high concentrations of multiple users such as runners, bicyclists, rollerbladers and pedestrians. A separate track (5' minimum) can be provided for pedestrian use. RECOMMENDATIONS ">>86 When designing a bikeway network, the presence of a nearby or parallel path should not be used as a reason to not provide adequate shoulder or bicycle lane width on the roadway, as the on -street bicycle facility is preferred over the sidepath by experienced bicyclists and those who are cycling for transporta- tion purposes. Bikeways Network Support Systems Bicycle Wayfinding Landmarks, destinations, neighborhood business districts, natural features and other visual cues help residents and visitors travel through Iowa City. However, many of the recommended bicycle routes utilize less familiar, lower -volume roadways that may not be as familiar to many people, who may typically use an alternate route when traveling by bus or car. The placement of wayfinding signs throughout Iowa City will indicate to bicyclists their direction of travel, the location of popular desti- nations, and the distance (and travel time by bike) to those destinations. This will in turn increase the comfort, convenience and utility of the bicycle network. Wayfinding signs also provide a branding element to raise the visibility of Iowa City's growing active transportation network. Signage can serve both wayfinding and safety purposes, including: • Helping to familiarize users with the bikeway system • Helping users identify the best routes to destinations • Helping to address commonly -held perceptions about travel time and distance • Creating seamless transitions between on -street and off-street bikeways Helping overcome a "barrier to entry" for people who do not bicycle often and who fear becoming lost 87 » IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Alerting motorists that they are driving along a bicycle route and should use caution Signs are typically placed at key locations leading to and along bicycle routes, including the intersec- tion of multiple routes. Iowa City should develop a community -wide Bicycle Wayfinding Signage Plan that identifies: • Sign locations along existing and planned bicycle routes • Sign type—what information should be included and what is the sign design • Destinations to be highlighted on each sign—key destinations for bicyclists • Approximate distance and riding time to each destination General cost estimates for wayfinding signage range from standard Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) signage to customized signage with branded elements and posts. Costs of wayfinding signage will depend on the type of signing and materials chosen for fabrication of the signs. Figure 26. Wayfinding directs users to areas of interest and can alert users to active transportation opportunities. End -of -Trip Facilities End -of -trip facilities are an integral component of a successful, functional bicycle network. Without secure, accessible, and convenient bicycle parking, people are less likely to choose to ride a bicycle. Iowa City and community partners like the University of Iowa should continue to increase bicycle parking supply with secure, attractive, and highly visible bicycle parking facilities, including short-term bicycle parking solutions like racks and corrals, and long-term solutions like lockers and secure parking areas. Providing context -appropriate facilities to enhance Iowa City's bike network could be as simple as providing short-term bicycle parking outside popular destinations and secure bicycle parking at transit stops. Policies requiring secure long-term bicycle parking in new residential and commer- cial buildings, or the retrofit of older buildings 11111111111 111111111 1111111111 with secure bicycle parking and shower/changing rooms in large employment centers, will make it easier to make bicycling a habit for future building users. Recognizing that the plan focuses on people of all ages and abilities, bicycle parking should be designed to accommodate a wide variety of bicycle types. Table 2 shows the general characteristics of short- and long-term bicycle parking. Bicycle Transit Integration When designed properly, transit and bicycle facili- ties can have mutually beneficial impacts. Transit stops with good access and secure parking for bicy- clists can support multi -modal trips, increase bus ridership, and extend bicyclists' trip distance to reach areas previously inaccessible by bicycle travel alone. Typical integration design elements include improvements to transit stops and transit centers, Table 5. Characteristics of Short- and Long -Term Bicycle Parking Criteria Parking Short -Term Bicycle Parking Less than two hours Long -Term Bicycle Parking More than two hours Duration Typical Bicycle racks and on -street corrals Lockers or secure bicycle parking (racks Fixture provided in a secured area) Types Weather Unsheltered or sheltered Sheltered or enclosed Protection Security High reliance on personal locking devices Restricted access and/or active supervision and passive surveillance (e.g., eyes on the Unsupervised: street) . "Individual -secure," e.g., bicycle lockers "Shared -secure," e.g., bicycle room or locked enclosure Supervised: • Valet bicycle parking • Video, closed circuit television, or other surveillance Typical Commercial or retail, medical/ healthcare, Multi -family residential, workplace, transit, Land Uses parks and recreation areas, community schools centers, libraries RECOMMENDATIONS >>88 Figure 27. Secure bike lockers of transit stops let commuters store their bicycles. on -bus bicycle racks, and roadway improvements that increase safe interactions between buses and bicycles. Transit Stop Planning Determining the appropriate type of bicycling infra- structure for each transit stop is critical to attracting and maintaining transit riders. Recommended provi- sions at transit stops, which will vary depending on the type and use of stops, include: Trip information: essential information that should be provided at every stop includes the route number and the stop number. It is prefer- able to also provide a route map and timetable. Real-time arrival information may be appro- priate where there are frequent bus arrivals and multiple lines at a stop and if the required tech- nology is in place (at the new transit center, for instance). Bicycle parking: In general, minor and local stops can make do with bike racks. As the stop's importance increases, more secure options should be provided. End -of -trip facilities: major transit hubs and stops may offer end -of -trip facilities beyond parking such as showers, washrooms, clothing lockers, etc. 89 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN lililililili lilililil I 1111111111 The Transit Cooperative Research Program report, Integration of Bicycles and Transit, recommends that bicycle parking receive priority siting near the bus loading zone. Parking should also be located so that bicyclists do not need to carry bicycles through crowds of travelers. The parking facility should be located in the clear view of the general public, vendors or transit staff as security is a particular concern with bicycle parking. Bicycle/Transit Interface In addition to providing safe routes to get to transit, it is important to minimize potential conflicts between bicyclists and transit vehicles as well as people waiting or boarding transit. Where bicycles and transit share lane space, buses frequently stop to pick up or drop off passengers. This can delay bicyclists or require them to pass the transit vehicle creating a potentially unsafe "leapfrog" scenario. Recommendations for improving bicyclists' safety around buses include: Designate dedicated space for bicyclists through use of bike lanes or other pavement markings. Provide infrastructure to increase bicyclists' visi- bility at intersections. Educate transit drivers about areas where bicy- clists may be present and typical bicycle behavior. Bike Share Iowa City and the University of Iowa are in the process of developing the first phase of a bike share system to support short trips in Downtown and on the university campus. Funding has been secured, and vendor selection and station siting are underwayfor an anticipated launch in 2018. Success of bike share systems are in large part dependent on bicycle network infrastructure to support their use. Iowa City and the University of Iowa should coor- dinate station siting and routing between stations with bikeway development in and around campus and Downtown. Programs and Policies Iowa City's status as a Bicycle Friendly Community is sign of the community's commitment to bicycling and rests as much on local agencies' and organiza- tions' effective programs and policies as it does the growing network of trails and bikeways. To further support Iowa City and its many community partners (identified in greater detail in the Existing Conditions Chapter) in building a culture of bicycling, this plan identifies a range of new policies and programs that build on and diversify current offerings. The programs and policies listed in the table below, and described in greater detail in this chapter, reflect 11 akfll 911 the needs and values of the community residents and address service gaps identified in the League of American Bicyclists' Bicycle Friendly Community feedback provided in 2013. The table shows the applicable Six E's of a Bikeable Community for each program, and also identifies if a program addresses a specific recommendation in the LAB's BFC feedback. With more than twenty specific programmatic and policy recommendations included in this section, it will be essential for the city to coordinate with its many local partners to identify appropriate program sponsors according to mission, capacity, funding, target audience, and other related factors. Table 6. Recommended programs and policies Bicycle Coordinator Position X X X X X X Ira Standing Bicycle Advisory Committee X X X X `' Annual Implementation Agenda X X X X X X Adopt NACTO Bikeway Design Guide X Zoning Code and Subdivision Regulations Updates X X Complete Streets Implementation Plan X X X Youth Bicycle Training Classes X X X X Earn -A -Bike Program X X X Public Education Campaigns X X X X X Bike Light Campaign X X X X Themed & Targeted Bicycle Rides X X X X Create a Commuter Program X X X RECOMMENDATIONS >>90 W Bike Mentor Program X LU X LU LU X 9 Bike Month/Bike to Work Events X X X Targeted Law Enforcement Activities X X Speed Message Board Deployment X X Specialized Bicycle -Focused Training for Law Enforcement Officers X X Publicize and Enforce "No Bikes on Sidewalks" and Dismount Zones X X Bicycle Facilities Fact Sheets X X Project Outreach X X X X X Pop -Up Demonstration/Pilot Projects X X X X Annual Report Card X X X X X X X Expanded Bicycle Count Program X Crash Monitoring and Evaluation X X X Economic Impact of Bicycling Study X X X X Bicycle Master Plan Updates X X X X X X X Apply for Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community Status X Bicycle Coordinator Position To enhance interdepartmental coordination, support interagency coordination, and streamline communications with community residents, stake- holders, and media, Iowa City should establish a Bicycle Coordinator position responsible for over- seeing the city's diverse range of bicycling activities. This staff person'sjob responsibilities may include: 91 > IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Monitoring facility planning, design, and construc- tion of bicycle and bicycle -related projects Coordinating the implementation of recom- mended projects and programs in this Plan with city staff and external agencies Provide regular updates to the City Council related to bicycle initiatives and projects • Leading annual evaluation programs like bicycle counts, annual reporting, and crash evaluation • Identifying new projects and programs to improve the bicycling environment • Pursue funding sources for project and program development • Research and oversee policy development Represent the City of Iowa City for matters related to bicycle infrastructure projects and supporting programs It is common for a bicycle coordinator to also oversee matters related to pedestrian mobility or active transportation in general. The title of Active Transportation Coordinator may reflect the broader scope and responsibilities of the position if the city should choose to consolidate bicycle and pedestrian matters under a single person. Standing Bicycle Advisory Committee During the Bicycle Master Planning process, Iowa City convened two committees to provide oversight and guidance for the planning team. The Bicycle Advisory Committee consisted of community part- ners and residents whose knowledge, experience, insight, and involvement were critical to the creation of the Plan. The Technical Advisory Committee consisted of Iowa City department representatives and key staff from other agencies whose technical expertise and understanding of department proce- dures, planned projects, and other information provided a framework for plan recommendations and implementation considerations. As Iowa City transitions from planning into implementation, it will be critical that these partners and department representatives remain involved with implementa- tion decision-making and provide leadership and/or support to carry out projects, programs, and other actions pertinent to their focus areas. Iowa City should continue to have regular Bicycle Advisory Committee meetings and include department staff tojoin meetings on an as -needed basis. Membership should be reevaluated periodically to include repre- sentatives from relevant agencies, organizations, and community groups. Similar to the expansion of responsibilities of a bicycle coordinator to see all active transportation matters, it may be necessary to combine bicycling and pedestrian issues under a single Active Transportation Committee to reduce committee fatigue. The mission of this committee will be to implement this plan, as well as provide information to the City in an advisory capacity regarding pedestrian issues. Annual Implementation Agenda In partnership with the Bicycle Advisory Committee/ Active Transportation Committee and representa- tives of Iowa City departments, Iowa City should develop an annual implementation agenda and budget that identifies specific projects, programs, and targets for executing the Bicycle Master Plan. The annual agenda and budget should be based upon available staff capacity, funding resources, and similar considerations. Adoption of Best Practice Design Guides Design guidelines are critical to the development of a safe, consistent bicycle network. In order to support local agencies in developing bicycle facilities based on sound planning and engineering prin- ciples and best practices from around the country, NACTO created the Urban Bikeway Design Guide. From Seattle, Washington to Washington, D.C. to Des Moines, Iowa, over fifty progressive cities have adopted the guide to inform city staff and consul- tants during project design and development. The guide expands upon basic facility guidance and standards included in the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition (2012) and the FHWA's Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), both of which are regularly used to for local bikeway projects, along with guidance from state design standards in the SUDAS. In 2013, the FHWA signed a memorandum expressing support for the Urban Bikeway Design Guide as a valuable RECOMMENDATIONS y>92 resource to "help communities plan and design safe and convenient facilities" for bicyclists and actively encourages agencies to use the guide to go beyond minimum requirements and design facilities that "foster increased use by bicyclists... of all ages and abilities." The Federal Highway Administration has devel- oped a number of new resources in recent years to support bikeway planning and development as well. In 2016, the agency released Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks (STAR guide) to support transportation practitioners by applying national design guidelines to the unique settings found in small towns and rural communities. The guide encourages innovation within the bounds of MUTCD and AASHTO compliance by providing unique engi- neering solutions and design treatments that address small town and rural needs. Iowa City should adopt by resolution the NACTO Bikeway Design Guide and the FHWA STAR guide as a supplemental resources to implement the recom- mendations included in this plan. Figure 28. National standards provide detailed guid- ance for facility design. Resources NACTO Urban Bike Design Guide: http://nacto. org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/ Sample Endorsement Letters: Des Moines, IA: http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ Des- Moi nes-Endo resement-all-Guides. pdf 93 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 01 ak_fll 911 Minneapolis, MN: http://nacto.org/wp-content/ uploads/2015/06/Minneapolis_Urban-Bikeway- Design-Guide-endorsement-letter_08.24.11.pdf Zoning Code and Land Subdivision Regulations Updates Land use patterns have significant impact on how people travel in and around Iowa City. Bicycling and walking are disproportionally impacted by land use patterns when compared to other travel modes, as travel distances, street connectivity, and other environmental factors can restrict or deter altogether bicycling and walking activity. Zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes, and other policies create the framework for physical development. Zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations in particular focus on environmental design considerations, including aesthetics and safety, street connectivity, development scale and density, building setbacks, and mixture (or separa- tion) of land uses. As a result, these regulations can change the way individuals relate to the people and places around them by affecting travel distances, streetscape character, presence of sidewalks and bicycling facilities, and even trees and landscaping. An expanding body of scientific research points to the direct link between land use policies like zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations, and active transportation. Zoning regulations can impact the percentage of population making trips on foot or by bicycle instead of car. Zoning regulations and supportive land use policies and infrastructure improvements can increase bicycling trips and the percentage of the population riding bicycles. In recent years, Iowa City has been proactive in updating zoning and development regulations to ensure that new development and redevelopment incorporate bicycling considerations and support active transportation. As bicycling continues to grow as valued transportation mode in Iowa City, it will be important to integrate and codify this value to ensure it is reflected in future developments. The following amendments to Iowa City Zoning Code and Land Subdivision regulations should be consid- ered to increase bicycle safety, connectivity, and accessibility: Increase minimum sidewalk widths. (City Code, Chapter 15 Section 3 Subsection 3 Paragraphs B -D) The 8 -foot wide sidewalks adjacent to many roadways throughout Iowa City function as an extension of the trail system and are intended to serve bicycle traffic. In addition, many local sidewalks are used by children, young adults, and adults less comfortable bicycling on the roadways. Iowa City should consider increasing minimum width for wide arterial sidewalks from 8 feet to 10 feet, and increasing minimum width for sidewalks along collectors from 5 feet to 6 feet to more comfortably accommodate all sidewalk users and increase overtaking and bi-directional passing safety. Incorporate bike lanes into all collectors and arte- rials. (City Code, 15-3-2, Table 15-1) The current standards for street rights-of-way and pavement width differentiate between roads with and without bike lanes. This differentiation increases the difficulty of retroactively adding bike lanes due to pavement width constraints. Iowa City should consider standardizing bike lanes (or separated bike lanes) as a required element of all collectors and arterials. This policy amendment will help fulfill the League of American Bicyclists' metric examining presence of bike lanes on arte- rial roads and will also ensure bicycle network growth is commensurate with future land devel- opment and surface transportation system growth. Differentiate between long-term and short-term parking requirements. (City Code, 14-5A) Bicycle is an important element of the current off-street parking requirements of the city's zoning code, specifying the quantity, type, and site location of bicycle parking facilities for developments. The lack of differentiation between short-term 11111111111 111111111 1111111111 parking and long-term parking does not provide adequate storage for long-term parking, which includes bicycle lockers, indoor secure parking areas, and covered, weather -protected parking areas, and may discourage daily bicycle commuting. The City should consider updating bicycle parking requirements to differentiate between these types of bicycle parking and asso- ciated requirements for each. Resources Zoning Regulations for Land Use Policy, Roadmaps to Health, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation: http://www.countyhealthrankings. org/policies/zoning-regulations-land-use-policy Bicycle Parking Zoning Modifications, City of Cambridge, MA http://www.cambridgema.gov/ CDD/Projects/Planning/bicycleparkingzoning Complete Streets Implementation Iowa City has an adopted and very good Complete Streets policy that will contribute to the implemen- tation of facility recommendations included in this plan, as well as the general bikeability of streets and public rights-of-way throughout Iowa City. To ensure implementation of the policy and the bicycle master plan, it is recommended that representa- tives across City departments work together to review existing plans, processes, and procedures related to the transportation system and establish goals and targets for complete streets implemen- tation. Suggestions for how to best proceed with creating such a process and recommendations for key elements are provided below. Create an Implementation Plan Process Objective: Create a Complete Streets Committee that includes representatives from all city departments/divisions and relevant city boards/ committees that will be charged with develop- ment of an implementation plan and schedule that will review and revise all procedures, plans, RECOMMENDATIONS��94 regulations, and processes of implementation and will perform an annual review. If there is considerable overlap in duties and responsi- bilities with other existing committees, consider assigning these responsibilities to an existing committee. Objective: secure training for pertinent city staff and decision -makers on the technical aspects of Complete Streets principles and best practices, as well as providing for community engagement and education on Complete Streets. Objective: Identify and recommend land use patterns, parking requirements, and develop- ment policies that increase overall mobility, which improve and support compact, mixed-use, bikeable and walkable development and connec- tions to rural routes and areas, and that support local economic development. Establish Design Criteria Utilizing Up -To -Date Standards, Innovative Design Guidance, and Current Best Practices The City will utilize the latest design guidance, standards, and recommendations available to implement the Complete Streets Policy. Objective: The City will utilize the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Street and Bikeway Design guides as the formal guidance for the development of city roadway and development projects. Objective: The City will the current version of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), for signal, signing and striping operations. Objective: The City will utilize the current version of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Bicycle and Pedestrian guides for the development of bicycle and pedestrian projects. 95>> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Objective: Use design to enhance and support expansion of services for active modes of trans- portation including, but not limited to transit, walking and bicycling, through increased funding and cooperative regional planning. Objective: Ensure the design of projects promotes the health and enhances the economic benefits of walking and bicycling as practical modes of transportation. Objective: Design projects so that they assure the protection of local and regional investments in transportation and assure proper maintenance and improvements of the facilities over time. Objective: Establish a detailed set of design guidelines for transportation system safety, user comfort, and maintenance. Objective: Include pedestrian lighting, connec- tions through parking lots, short-term and long-term bicycle parking located near building entrances, and consideration of strong aesthetics in core or high -activity areas of town. Objective: In addition to infrastructure recom- mendations, provide programmatic elements such as wayfinding, kiosks, public art, and events such as open streets, and along sidewalks such as walking tours, street festivals, and public markets. Youth Bicycle Safety Classes Instilling a love for bicycling in children and young adults can support long-term gains in cultural accep- tance of and support for bicycling activity. While many children learn bicycling at a young age, it is not a part of physical education curriculums in most schools in Iowa City and across the country, partially due to the lack of access to resources. Some school districts, however, have begun to incorporate basic bicycling safety and skills into physical education curriculums with great success, often partnering with local police departments, non -profits, and certified bicycling instructors to provide bicycles for students and offer effective instructions to encourage safe riding practices and a basic under- standing of rules and responsibilities when riding around motor vehicle traffic. Iowa City should coor- dinate with the Iowa City Community School District to explore opportunities to teach basic bicycling skills to younger students. Resources SHAPE America (Society of Health and Physical Educators) Bicycle Safety Curriculum: http:// www.sha pea merica.org/pu bl ications/resou rces/ teachingtools/qualitype/bicycle_curriculum.cfm • League of American Bicyclists Bicycling Skills 123 Youth and Safe Routes to Schools courses: • http://www.bikeleague.org/content/ find -take -class • Safe Routes to School National Partnership Traffic Safety Training Resources: • http://www.saferoutespartnership.org/state/ bestpractices/cu rricu lu m Figure 29. A recent bike rodeo at Weber Elementary School taught children safer bicycling skills. 11 ak - fil 9 11 Earn -A -Bike and Create -A -Commuter Programs Many children and adults in Iowa City lack access to quality bicycles and bicycle maintenance training and tools. In order to address this lack of access, the City and its community partners should develop Earn -A -Bike and Create -A -Commuter programs for children and adults, respectively. In March 2017, the Iowa City Police Department announced an Earn -A - Bike pilot program for local youth in collaboration with the City of Iowa City and World of Bikes, one of Iowa City's local bike shops. The program will focus on teaching children basic bike maintenance and bicycling skills and provide each participant with a refurbished bike, helmet, and bike lights. The initial program is limited to 15 children. If successful, the City should determine capacity and resources needed and available to expand the program to a wider audience. Similar in concept to the Earn -A -Bike program, Create -A -Commuter programs provide low-income adults with limited access to transportation choices a function bicycle, as well as bicycle maintenance and skills training. The program was first developed in Portland Oregon bythe Community Cycling Center using federal Job Access and Reserve Commute (JARC) funding. Bicycles are outfitted with fenders, cargo racks, lights, and other equipment essential to safe bicycle commuting. Resources Earn -A -Bike Program, St Louis Bicycle Works (St Louis, MO): http://www.bworks.org/bikeworks/ earn -a -bike/ Create -A -Commuter Program, Community Cycling Center (Portland, OR): http://web1. ctaa.org/webmodules/webarticles/articlefiles/ Portland TriMet.pdf http://www.communitycyclingcenter. org/?s=create+a+commuter RECOMMENDATIONS 96 Public Education and Awareness Campaigns A broad public outreach and education campaign can help normalize bicycling as an accepted and welcomed way for people to travel in Iowa City through compelling graphics and messages targeted to motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists. These campaigns utilize a variety of media to share their messages, from billboards, bus, and bus stop shel- ters to websites, online ads, social media outlets. Common topics for media campaigns include safety and awareness; sharing the road and travel etiquette; light and helmet use; and even human- ization of bicyclists as fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters. Iowa City should develop a public educa- tion and awareness campaign to further establish bicycling as a valued mode of travel for all commu- nity residents. Resources We're All Drivers, Bike Cleveland (Cleveland, OH): http://www.bikecleveland.org/our-work/ bike -safety -awareness/ Drive with Care, Bike PGH (Pittsburgh, OH): http://www.bikepgh.org/care/ Every Lane Is a Bike Lane, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Los Angeles, CA): http://thesource.metro. net/2013/04/11/every-lane-is-a-bike-lane/ Every Day Is a Bike Day, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Los Angeles, CA): http://thesource.metro. net/2014/04/30/1-a-metro-lau nches-new- bike-ad-campaign-in-time-for-bike-week-l- a-may-12-18/ A Metre Matters and It's a Two -Way Street, Cycle Safe Communities, Amy Gillett Foundation (Australia): http://cyclesafe.gofundraise.com.au/ cros/home 97 �> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 01 ak-f1l ;h i Figure 30. A public education campaign can include traditional advertisements, maps, and educational brochures. Bike Light Campaign Bicycling at night without proper front and rear bike lights is dangerous, yet many people bicycling in Iowa City lack the proper lighting to stay safe and visible at night. In order to increase bicycling safety and overcome cost barriers that prohibit many indi- viduals from purchasing bike lights, Iowa City should coordinate with community partners to create a bike light giveaway campaign. Community organizations with a public health focus may be effective partners and see a need to sponsor such a program. Similar programs across the country combine catchy names like "Get Lit" or "Light Up" to garner public and media attention. The City should consider scheduling the program to coincide with back to school events for college students or the end of daylight savings. This would differ from the"Light the Night" campaign organized by the Iowa City Police Department and Think Bicycles, in which bicyclists who were issued citations for lack of proper lights could purchase bike lights and have their citation fee waived. In contrast, this new program would reduce or eliminate the cost altogether and therefore have a greater posi- tive impact for low-income individuals. Resources How to Do a Successful Bike Light Giveaway, League of American Bicyclists http://www.bikeleague.org/content/ how -do -successful -bike -light -giveaway Get Lit, Community Cycling Center (Portland, OR): http://www.communitycyclingcenter.org/ get -lit/ Pop -Up Bike Light Giveaway, BikePGH (Pittsburgh, PA): http://www.bikepgh. org/2013/09/30/pop-up-bike-light-giveaway/ Themed & Targeted Bicycle Rides Organized bicycle rides offer people a comfortable and fun wayto explore Iowa City's bicycle routes and trails in a group setting. For many, these types of events build participants'confidenceand knowledge of the bicycle network, giving them the tools neces- sary to choose bicycling for short daily trips. Target audiences for these organized bicycle rides should reflect the diversity of the community and include children, seniors, low-income residents, minority residents, immigrants, and college students. Smaller group rides with capped attendance can capitalize on cultural assets and amenities like historic monuments and buildings, city parks, busi- ness districts, and other unique locations. In St Louis, Missouri, Trailnet's free weekly Community Rides center around the city's history and culture, with themes ranging from museums, breweries, jazz, prohibition, greenways, and the Underground Railroad. Many of these rides are organized and led by local historians and civic enthusiasts. Larger group rides called cruiser rides that offer family -friendly environment have become main- stays in communities across the country. The Denver Cruiser Ride, the Slow Roll in Detroit, and Freewheel in Memphis attract hundreds to thou- sands of participants, move at a leisurely pace, and welcome people of all ages and abilities. The City should coordinate with local advocacy organizations and other community partners to explore opportunities to diversify and strengthen organized bicycle ride offerings as an essential tool to encourage bicycling activity in Iowa City. Resources Trailnet (St Louis, MO) Community Rides: http:// traiInet.org/tag/community-rides/ Slow Roll (Detroit, MI): http://slowroll.bike/ Denver Cruiser Ride: http://denvercruiserride. com/ People for Bikes, How to Start a Cruiser Ride: http://pfb.peopleforbikes.org/take-a-brake/ how -to -start -a -cruiser -ride/ Figure 31. Community rides, like this one held by the Iowa City Cycling Club, can attract raise awareness. RECOMMENDATIONS yy98 Bike Mentor Program For many Iowa City residents, bicycling to work can be a daunting challenge. Timing, route planning, selectingthe right clothing for both work and the ride itself, and dozens of other considerations can over- whelm potential commuters, even if it's only a short ride from home to work. A bike mentor program addresses this need by matching new commuters with experienced commuters who can assist with route planning, commute preparation, and other nuances of commuting by bike. The City of Iowa City should coordinate with community partners to establish a network of bike mentors to share their experiences, assist new commuters with helpful tips and resources, and even ride to and from work destinations together. Bike mentor programs can even be established internally by major employers. These opportunities should be explored as well. Resources Hartford County, MD Bike Mentor Program: http://www.harfordcountymd.gov/763/ Bike -Mentor -Program Bike New York's Gear Femmes: http://www.bike. nyc/education/programs/gearfemmes/ National Institute for Health Ride Mentors: http://www.nihbike.com/home/ride-mentors Bike Month and Bike to Work Events Local agencies and organizations have developed a robust slate of Bike Month activities and events in recent years, having grown out of the shorter Bike to Work Week period, usually the third week of May. A full calendar of activities during the month of May is kept up to date on Bike Iowa and Think Bicycles of Johnson County websites, and local partners and residents can submit events to the calendar. This participatory approach to creating a full calendar of events is modeled after the Pedalpalooza in Portland, which compiles over 100 events during the month of June to encourage bicycling across the city. 99\ IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 1111111111 In Iowa City and neighboring municipalities in Johnson County, over 30 events were held in Bike Month 2017, including bike rodeos, party rides, slow rolls, farmer's market rides, trail rides, and repair clinics. The City of Iowa City should continue to support its local partners to increase Bike Month's visibility and impact within the community, and also explore opportunities to expand Bike Month's reach to traditionally underserved communities. For bicy- cling to become accepted and enjoyed by all, it must be accessible to all as well. Bike Month presents a prime opportunity to create inclusive events that serve a diverse audience and build shared support for bicycling. Resources Think Bicycles Bike Month: http://www.thinkbi- cycles.org/bike-month.html Bike Month Iowa City Facebook Page: https:// www.facebook.com/bikemonthiowacity/ Bike Iowa Events Calendar: http://www. bikeiowa.com/Events Figure 32. Iowa City holds many events for Bike Month in May. Figure 33. Police office training should include riding. Specialized Bicycle -Focused Training for Law Enforcement Officers Law enforcement officers receive considerable training annually to effectively enforce local and state laws, but little of that training focuses specifi- cally on bicycle laws and safety. To address this gap in education, the Iowa City Police Department should invest in training opportunities targeting bicycle (and pedestrian) laws, law enforcement, travel behavior, and education tactics in order to better support active transportation. Funding support from local agencies, state departments of transportation, state highway patrols, and non- profit advocacy organizations have helped to bring valuable training and resources to law enforcement agencies across the country. 01 ak_fll 911 Resources Bike Cleveland Enforcement Education (Cleveland, OH): http://www.bikecleveland.org/ enforcement/ Continuum of Training. We Bike, etc: http:// www.webike.org/services/enforcement/ continuum -of -training Targeted Law Enforcement Activity Targeted enforcement is an effective way of encour- aging lawful travel behavior and instilling respect for other road users. Enforcement activities may include deployment of speed reader boards, police "sting" operations at high crash intersections, wrong -way riding enforcement, bike light enforcement, and even distribution of safety literature along corri- dors with high volumes of bicycle activity. In the City of Chicago, police officers partner with the City's Bicycling Ambassadors educate road users. The Iowa City Police Department should explore opportunities for regularly -scheduled enforcement activities at strategic locations around the commu- nity to support bicycling activity and create safer environments for all road users. Resources City of Chicago Targeted Enforcement (Chicago, IL): http://chicagocompletestreets.org/safety/ targetedenforcement/ Figure 34. Police can partner with other groups to educate the public during enforcement activities. RECOMMENDATIONS >>00 Publicize and Enforce "No Bikes on Sidewalks" and Dismount Zones Bicycling activity on busy sidewaIks can be dangerous and obstructive for bicyclists, pedestrians, and even motor vehicles. Iowa City has a number of sidewalks and pedestrian malls in Downtown and surrounding the University of Iowa campus where bicycling on sidewalks is prohibited. Bicyclists are also required to dismount and walk their bicycles on a numerous pedestrian bridges that lack sufficient width for multi -use activity. In order to create safe spaces for all road users, Iowa City Police Department should combine targeted public messaging and visible enforcement of bicycling prohibitions on sidewalks in these designated areas. The resources below highlight efforts from other cities across North America. Resources Sidewalks are for Pedestrians, City of Toronto, Canada: http://wwwl.toronto.ca/wps/portal/ contentonly?vgnextoid=94230995bbbc1410VgnV CM10000071 d60f89RCRD Iowa City Bicycle Program Web Presence The City of Iowa City's website provides an ideal platform for the distribution of educational mate- rials, project updates, upcoming events, public meetings, and other relevant information to inform, educate, and encourage residents to travel by bicycle. Iowa City should consolidate and organize bicycle -related information on the City's website to provide a single point of entry for website users to access bicycle information. While the primary focus should be on city -driven initiatives, it should also include resources from and/or links to community partners websites and highlight the importance of these community partners in creating a bicycle friendly community. Resources Honolulu Bicycle Program Webpage (Honolulu, HI): https://www.honoIuIu.gov/bicycle 101 �> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 01 ak-f1l 911 Bicycling in Minneapolis Webpage (Minneapolis, MN): http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/bicycles/ Seattle DOT Bicycle Program (Seattle, WA): http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/bikepro- gram.htm ��•�P�1 �. � E�il<� Figure 35. The Bike Long Beach website provides information on bicycling in Long Beach, California. Project Outreach Iowa City has used multi -pronged outreach efforts for many capital projects in order to actively engage and educate residents about changes to public infrastructure. As bicycle facility projects are devel- oped and installed, it will be important to continue these outreach efforts and inform residents along project corridors about how to interact with these new bicycle facilities and the likely increase in bicycle activity that will result. By using online videos, door hangers, neighborhood meetings, and other outlets, Iowa City can build awareness and support for these new facilities as important elements of the trans- portation system. Examples of project outreach via community meetings and an online presence are listed below. Resources Seattle DOT Bicycle Program Projects (Seattle, WA): http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/ bikeprojects.htm Cincinnati Bicycle Transportation Plan Current Projects (Cincinnati, OH): http://www.cincinnati- oh.gov/bikes/bike-projects/ Denver City and County Current Projects (Denver, CO): https://www.denvergov.org/ content/denvergov/en/bicycling-in-denver/infra- structure.html Pop -Up Demonstration/Pilot Projects Many bicycle facility types recommended in this Plan are new to Iowa City residents. Many bicy- clists and motor vehicle drivers will be unfamiliar with how to operate their vehicles on, adjacent to, or across these new bikeways. By developing day -long or weekend -long pop-up demonstration projects, Iowa City can introduce these new bike- ways to the community in a low-cost and effective way. Pop-up demonstration and pilot projects have proven effective for their ability to build support for new bicycle facility, gain acceptance among skep- tical residents, and generate community interest in the City's efforts to build a more bicycle friendly Iowa City. Public health students at the University of Iowa conducted a bicycle boulevard demonstration project in 2015 in collaboration with more than a dozen local partners, generating considerable press and positive feedback from community members. The City should work with community partners and neighborhood groups to use pop-up demonstration and pilot projects introduce new bikeways to the community and build support for safe, comfortable, low -stress bicycle facilities as an accepted part of the street network. Resources WALC Institute Pop -Up Demonstration Toolkit: http://www.walklive.org/ popup-demonstration-tool-kit/ Iowa City Bike Boulevard Demonstration Project: https:Hsustainability.uiowa.edu/news/ student-group-tests-iowa-city-bike-boulevard/ https://www.facebook.com/ iowacitybikeboulevard Annual Report Card/Bicycle Account An annual report card that tracks implementation progress is an effective way to communicate the community's efforts to integrate bicycling into the fabric of the community. A report card captures plan successes and highlights the importance of collabo- ration to achieve shared goals and objectives. The document can be posted on the City's website, shared via social media, and printed for dissemi- nation at public facilities and community events. Depending on the volume of actions completed and the capacity of available staff, the report card can range in size and scope from a brief one-page information sheet to a more detailed report, which can include resident surveys, economic impact anal- yses, and other tools to communicate the value and benefits of bicycling. Resources Gateway Bike Plan Report Card, Great Rivers Greenway (St Louis, MO): http://greatriversgre- enway.org/about-us/projects-in-partnership/ gateway -bike -plan/ Bicycle Account Guidelines, League of American Bicyclists: http://www.bikeleague.org/content/ bicycle -account -guideline -provides -tools - monitor -biking -your -community Auckland, New Zealand Cycling Account: https://at.govt.nz/cycling- walking/cycling-walking-monitoring/ auckland-cycling-account/ DowNroivn MONTEREY ROAD COMPLETE STREET PROJECT EVALUATION MEASURES ©Ex°° �. O sennnucux QoEUicniE QaKF a[ „.E L. © sMVL[ a� Figure 36. An annual report card helps track progress on bicycling -related initiatives throughout the city. RECOMMENDATIONS >>02 Expanded Bicycle Count Program Bicycle count programs are valuable mechanisms for tracking bicycle facility usage over time and evaluating the success of infrastructure projects for their ability to increase ridership. MPOJC currently conducts annual counts of trail users with using infrared automated counters. Count locations are based on requests from MPO entities and included seven locations in Iowa City in 2015. The City should investigate expansion of the annual bicycle and pedestrian count program of trail users to include on -street locations along key corridors throughout the city. The same locations should be counted in the same manner annually. This will provide the City with information about the growth of bicycle ridership and pedestrian usage of facili- ties, determine where improvements need to be made, assess who is using the facilities, and provide a dataset to accompany grant applications. The City should consider additional counts along corridors slated for future bikeway development, like Clinton Street and Madison Street, to evaluate before and after conditions. The installation of several perma- nent counters can also be used to calibrate annual extrapolations at other count locations to increase data reliability. The National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project has developed recom- mended methodology, survey and count forms, and reporting forms for local agency count programs. Figure 37. Trail counts can be manual or use automatic systems. 103�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 11 akfll 911 Resources National Bicycle & Pedestrian Documentation Project: http://bikepeddocumentation.org/ Innovations in Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts: A Review of Emerging Technologies: http://altaplanning.com/resources/ innovative -counting -technologies/ The National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Guidebook on Pedestrian and Bicycle Volume Data Collection: http://www.trb. org/Publications/Blurbs/171973.aspx Oregon Metro, Portland, OR Count Program: http://www.oregonmetro.gov/ how-metro-works/volunteer-opportunities/ trail -counts Crash Monitoring and Evaluation Crash reports from collisions involving bicyclists can be an invaluable resource for learning about the behavior or motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, as well as roadway conditions and characteristics that may lead to collisions. Regular monitoring and evaluation of crash locations can help to identify high-risk areas and develop solutions to minimize crash risk. While total crash volumes each year in Iowa City are relatively low, a 5 -year sample size can help identify trends with regard to crash time, contributing factors, crash type, location, and other key details. Iowa City should look at conducting a more detailed analysis of reported bicycle crashes, including a review of individual crash report narra- tives, every two years. In addition, an online tool on the City's website can allow those biking to report concerns that are not necessarily crashes that can help identify a problem before a crash occurs. Resources Denver Bicycle Crash Analysis: Understanding and Reducing Bicycle & Motor Vehicle Crashes (Denver, CO): https://www.denvergov. org/content/dam/denvergov/Portals/705/ documents/denver-bicycle-motor-vehicle-crash- analysis_2016.pdf University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Analysis Tool (PBCAT): http://www.pedbikeinfo. org/pbcat_us/ Cambridge Bicycle Crash Fact Sheet (Cambridge, MA): https://www.cambridgema.gov/—/media/ Files/CDD/Transportation/Bike/Bicycle-Safety- Facts_FINAL_20140609.pdf Economic Impact of Bicycling Study Bicycling is more than just a way to get around Iowa City; it's an important part of the local economy. Trail and recreational tourism, annual events that draw thousands of visitors to the area, and perma- nent jobs are dependent upon the bicycling activity that the community has cultivated over the years. In addition, bicycling also impacts insurance savings, healthcare cost savings, transportation cost savings, and other economic factors. The City of Iowa City and its regional partners should conduct an economic impact study to quantify the value of bicycling on the local economy and to serve as a catalyst for continued investments in bicycle facili- ties, programs, and events. More than a dozen states have conducted economic analyses of bicy- cling activity or the bicycling industry, and numerous regions and municipalities have done the same, including the Pikes Peak Region, New York City, the Capital Regional District (Victoria, British Columbia), and Portland, Oregon. Resources The Economic Impact of Cycling in the Pikes Peak Region, Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments, Trails and Open Space Coalition (Colorado Springs, CO): http://www.trailsando- penspaces.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ Economic-Impact-of-Cycling.pdf The Economic Impact of the Bicycle Industry in Portland, Portland Bureau of Planning and 11 akfll ;k i Sustainability (Portland, OR): https://www.port- landoregon.gov/bps/article/555482 Bikeonomics: A Primer on the Economic Impact of Cycling in the Capital Region, Capital Region District (Victoria, B.C.): https://www.crd.bc.ca/ docs/default-source/regional-planning-pdf/ Pedestrian-Cycling- Master- Plan/crd_bikesed- boo klet-version.pdf?sfvrsn=2 Apply for Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community Status In its Strategic Plan, the City Council has made clear its commitment to improving bicycling condi- tions in Iowa City and has targeted application for Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community designa- tion from the League of American Bicyclists in 2017. The achievement of this designation in 2017 would be largely dependent on activities conducted and projects completed prior to the adoption of this Bicycle Master Plan. The current Silver -Level Bicycle Friendly Community Designation is due to expire in 2017, and the City must therefore reapply in August of 2017 regardless. Bicycle Master Plan Updates Like all plans, this Bicycle Master Plan will lose its efficacy and relevance as the bike network grows, physical development occurs, travel patterns change, and community needs and values evolve. Iowa City should revisit the plan every five years for a comprehensive update, at which point implemen- tation progress can be measured, new goals and targets can be established, and bike network and support systems can be evaluated and updated to reflect current conditions and opportunities. The City should also establish a process whereby changes to the bike network itself can be made to reflect newly identified fatal flaws in project recommendations or route changes that capitalize on unforeseen oppor- tunities during initial plan development. RECOMMENDATIONS >>04 01 ak-fll 911 105> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN >� SEC710N 6 Implementation -77 1 �rc 77 ^ . r NX t tf, %i' At L' x Implementation The Iowa City Bicycle Master Plan provides a comprehensive set of recommendations and phys- ical improvements intended to weave bicycling into the physical and social fabric of the commu- nity. Implementing the Plan will require collective commitment and persistence from Iowa City and its community partners to pursue the opportunities identified in this plan, as well as those that arise in the coming years. This chapter of the plan sets forth a multi -pronged strategy to implement the bicycle network, programs, and policy recommendations to ulti- mately achieve the vision of a bicycle -friendly community in which bicycling is a safe, comfortable, convenient, and preferred mode of travel and recre- ation for people of all ages and abilities. Included in this chapter are immediate actions to transition into plan implementation, capital project prioritization, cost estimates, funding sources, a project phasing strategy, ongoing maintenance recommendations, and evaluation activities. Going for Gold: Immediate Actions The following immediate action steps are designed to initiate plan implementation, sustain momentum built during the planning process, and help Iowa City become a Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community. These action items, which represent a mix of policy, procedures, capital projects, and programs, provide early opportunities expand the bicycle network, engage community partners, and establish strong and lasting relationships on which successful imple- mentation efforts will depend. Adopt the Plan Adopting the plan is the first step and represents the City's commitment to bicycling. Adopting the plan will also provide guidance for future capital investments and transportation decisions. Iowa City should pursue a formal adoption process to incorporate this plan as a supplemental document supporting the comprehensive plan. This will add 10I) IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN DRAFT legitimacy to the plan recommendations and open funding opportunities that favor or require poten- tial projects to be part of an adopted plan, as in the case of the State Recreational Trails Program. Establish Bicycle/Active Transportation Advisory Committee Implementing this plan will require cooperation among city departments, local agencies, advocacy organizations, and other community partners. Through the creation of a bicycle or active transpor- tation advisory committee, Iowa City can increase coordination among those responsible for imple- menting the plan and ensure that the needs and values of the community are represented and reflected in decision-making processes, provide for delegation of responsibilities, and ensure collec- tion of key data and evaluation metrics. For more information about this committee, see Programs & Policies Memo. Create Bicycle Coordinator Position Iowa City should establish a Bicycle Coordinator position responsible for overseeing the city's diverse range of bicycling activities to enhance inter- departmental coordination, support interagency coordination, and streamline communications with community residents, stakeholders, and media. For more information about this position, see Programs & Policies Memo. Complete Immediate -Term Bikeway Projects Initial investments in bicycle facilities to target gap closure, safety improvements, and network connections will serve as visible statements to the community that Iowa City is committed to making bicycling a valued form of transportation and recre- ation. Immediate -term bikeway projects to be completed within the first two years of plan adop- tion are identified in the project phasing strategy. The 12.4 miles of immediate -term projects below represent critical additions to the active transporta- tion network and will substantially improve bicycle safety and connectivity, particularly through the provision of new on -street bicycle facilities. Apply for Bicycle Friendly Community Designation Iowa City's current Silver -Level Bicycle Friendly Community Designation is due to expire in 2017, and the city must therefore reapply in August of 2017. Failure to do so will result in a revocation of the current Silver -Level designation. The lack of a significant on -street bicycle network, particularly dedicated, protected, or low -stress facilities, may be a limiting factor in the city's search for Gold -Level status; however, adoption of this plan and early plans for implementation of the expanded on -street network will help support the city's application. Regardless of the outcome, Iowa City will receive additional feedback to further refine its bicycle - related projects and programs and identify specific recommendations in this plan that will advance their efforts to achieve gold. Collect Baseline On -Street Bicycle Counts A bicycle count program is a valuable mechanism for tracking bicycle facility usage over time, evalu- ating the success of infrastructure projects for their ability to increase ridership, and demonstrating impacts on roadway safety. The City should coor- dinate with the MPOJC's to expand their annual bicycle and pedestrian count program to include on -street locations along key corridors throughout the city. The City should consider additional counts along corridors slated for future bikeway develop- ment, like Clinton Street and Madison Street, to evaluate before and after conditions. The instal- lation of several permanent counters can also be used to calibrate annual extrapolations at other count locations to increase data reliability. For more information about this immediate action item, see Programs & Policies Memo. Establish Baseline Performance Measurements and Set Target Benchmarks Evaluating plan performance will require measur- able objectives and benchmarks that define success. The plan identifies specific metrics that relate to one or more goals and objectives to track implementation efforts over time. Iowa City, in collaboration with the Bicycle/Active Transportation Advisory Committee, will collect baseline measure- ments and propose targets for each measurement based on available resources and capacities. When proposing targets, it will be important to maintain the plan's aspirational vision for bicycling while also being cognizant of practical limitations such as time, funding, and capacity. Corridor and Project Prioritization The City of Iowa City is responsible for the effi- cient, effective, and values -driven expenditure of taxpayer dollars. Bicycle -related infrastructure proj- ects and programs must compete with other capital improvements and municipal services, as well as with one another, for limited internal and external resources. In order to maximize investment and provide the greatest benefit, Iowa City should use a prioritized approach to invest in bicycle trans- portation infrastructure and plan implementation. Using the corridor approach to facility development as outlined in the Bicycle Plan chapter, each bicycle corridor and associated project has been assigned a score according to its ability to address speci- fied prioritization criteria. These criteria are based on the plan Goals and Objectives, input from the community, and feedback from the Bicycle Advisory Committee. The prioritization criteria have also been weighted based on their relative importance based on public input at the second plan open house, and on Bicycle Advisory Committee input. The criteria and their relative weights are listed below in Table 1. IMPLEMENTATION >>08 Table 7. Prioritization Criteria Gap Closure 25 Degree to which the corridor addresses a gap in the existing bikeway network by providing a facility type of equal or greater level of comfort Safety 25 Degree to which the corridor increases safety along streets with bicycle -related crashes from the last five years Demographic Equity 15 Corridor's ability to provide bicycle access to underserved popula- tions, including minorities, low-income households, youth, elderly, and households without access to a vehicle Connections to Existing 15 Number of existing facilities to which the corridor connects Facilities Nearby Parks & Schools 10 Number of parks and schools to which the corridor connects All -Ages Facility 10 Ability of corridor to provide a low -stress, all -ages bicycle facility Corridors are scored with a total of 100 possible points and then grouped into three categories— high, medium, and low—to reflect corridor value based on the criteria above. The prioritization results for each corridor and associated projects are shown in Map 1 and Table 7 at the end of this document. While these prioritization scores are a critical factor for project phasing, other important factors like available funding, programmed proj- ects, funding sources, and logical network growth and development inform the phasing schedule for network buildout as well. The phasing plan is described later in this chapter. Cost Estimate Assumptions Cost estimates are an essential planning tool used for programming capital improvements and drafting applications for external funding sources. Cost estimates were developed for each project based on initial planning -level examples of similar constructed projects and industry averages. These costs were then refined with the assistance of local staff based on local experience. All facility designs and associated cost estimates proposed in this plan are conceptual in nature and must undergo final engineering design and review through coordina- tion between all concerned departments in order 10y ') IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN to arrive at detailed project costs. These costs are provided in 2017 dollars and include a 20 percent contingency. Inflation should be included in costs in future years when bikeway improvements are programmed. The cost estimates do not include costs for corridor planning, public engagement, surveying, engi- neering design, right-of-way acquisition, and other work required to implement a project, since these are planning -level costs. Based on city experiences, these elements can and should be added as these projects are programmed into the CIP. Depending on the type of improvement, these additional costs can generally be estimated at up to 25 percent of the facility construction cost, in the case of a shared use path design or a two-way cycle track. Construction costs will vary based on the ultimate project scope (i.e., combination with other projects) and economic conditions at the time of construction. When combined with larger roadway projects, the city can achieve economies of scale and maximize the value of every dollar spent on transportation infrastructure. Cost estimates for unfunded recommended projects included in the immediate-, near-, and long- term implementation phases are listed in Table 2 o o � I ` � 35anJeH / o. Dover `m X v ° w `09 3�3 _.. ` < 1p o a W O >, o anbngnD m Y° p w O 60 Ke ide k CO d� _ }unset .vim_ e aFa>1meH f:J FE^upe "yp'_� f d—D a/�a � o� `t¢ -4'.1s uopuel Py,, O 33^H 2 O � — � z _ C • L 16 dJ j6 /L E O 1y y E N f4 Ou O �z o '6 O N v v y i+ _cc 3 v L O d E p •� d Y 41 Q dJ '6 0] v _� dro L O m O '6' o Q O d a a a N ¢ [ifro v v A -C 'o .N v o v _ ro ^o o o LIP v 3 �moi ll lollCa ° ti Table 8. Cost estimates by facility type Shared Use Path i �k�s44,� $1,132,250 �pdqutioqidIjIItiSSf�14�V) , 6.0 $6,821,925 Sidepath $638,040 5.0 $3,205,320 Two -Way Cycle Track $1,493,500 0.5 $724,516 Buffered Bike Lanes* $64,071 3.2 $202,674 Standard Bike Lanes $102,034 15.7 $1,604,888 Climbing Lanes $55,130 0.2 $10,598 Bicycle Boulevards $80,470 22.7 $1,828,675 Marked and Signed Routes $17,110 9.5 $162,506 All Recommended Bikeways 66.4 $14,561,101 * Majority of these projects are one-way buffered bike lanes, resulting in lower average costs per mile. below. Bikeways to be developed as part of other programmed projects or as integral components of roadway reconstruction projects according to the city's street design standards are not included in the cost estimates table. A complete list of cost estimates for each individual project can be found in Tables 8 through 12 at the end of this document. Project Phasing Strategy Given the limited resources available to implement the plan, it is necessary to phase recommended projects over time in a manner that best supports the vision and the goals of the plan, addresses safety issues and network gaps, and provides for orderly and logical network expansion. The City's Annual Complete Streets Improvements and Traffic Calming line items in the FY2018 Capital Projects Fund identifies $150,000 and $20,000 per year, respectively, from 2018 through 2021. With opportunity to leverage this line item for external funding at a 50/50 or 80/20 matching level, the City can increase annual investments in bikeway projects by an additional $150,000 to $600,000. In addition, some recommended projects are already identi- fied as separate projects in the FY2018 five-year CIP, and others can be developed in tandem with programmed roadway construction, reconstruc- tion, repaving, and other improvements included in the five-year CIP. For example, new arterial road- ways like the McCollister extension from Gilbert to Sycamore, a sidepath and bike lanes will be constructed per design standards. Other projects on existing local roadways may be incorporated into resurfacing projects funded through the Annual Pavement Rehabilitation line item. Using a combination of project prioritization, cost estimates, programmed capital improvements, available funding in city budget, and other informa- tion, recommended projects have been grouped into three distinct project phases: immediate term (2017-2018), near term (2019-2022), and long term (2023-2027). It is important to note that project phasing should not restrict the development of proj- ects outside their identified phasing term should opportunities arise to move a project forward. With over 100 miles of recommended bikeways included in the plan, full network buildout cannot IMPLEMENTATION y>111 01 ak_fll 911 Table 9. Immediate -term projects (2017-2018) Project Length Phasing Notes Clinton Street 4 -lane to 3 -lane 1.28 Programmed capital improvement scheduled for 2018. conversion with bike lanes College bicycle boulevard 1.02 Incorporate wayfinding signage and pavement markings. Traffic calming already present. Camp Cardinal bike lanes 1.11 Add markings and signage to existing wide striped shoulders. Governor bike lane/protected 1.10 Project 53942 - Scheduled for resurfacing in 2018. bike lane from Bowery to Brown Dewey/Summit/Brown 0.42 Complete in tandem with Governor resurfacing to provide bicycle boulevard complete connection to Dodge sidepath and Prairie Du Chien. Prentiss & Bowery bicycle 0.86 Provide east -west connection extension from Clinton. boulevard Mormon Trek Street 4 -lane 1.72 Programmed for road diet in 2018. to 3 -lane conversion with bike lanes from Melrose to Westside Madison Street 4 -lane to 0.74 Programmed for road diet in 2018. Include signage and mark - 3 -lane conversion with bike ings to extend facility north to the Iowa River Trail. lanes from Market to Court Myrtle and Riverside N/A Project 53933 - Programmed for improvements in 2018, intersection and signal including crosswalk improvements and trail access improvements with sidewalk improvements. access to the Iowa River Trail Greenwood & Myrtle bicycle 0.64 Complete in tandem with Myrtle/Riverside intersection boulevard improvement project 53933. Wetherby bicycle boulevard 2.22 Increase bicycle access to parks and trails south of Hwy 6. (Lakeside, Sandusky, Taylor, May incorporate phased approach beginning with wayfinding Southgate, Wetherby) signage and pavement markings. Keokuk road diet from Hwy 6 0.37 Increases safety and Hwy 6. Completes link in Southside to Sandusky Bicycle Boulevard. Highway 1 Sidepath Trail 0.52 Project R4225 - Programmed for construction in 2018. Willow Creek Rd neighbor- 0.18 Gap closure project should be completed in conjunction with hood connector Hwy 1 sidepath to enhance connectivity to Willow Creek Trail. Total Miles of Immediate- 12.38 Total Cost for Immediate -Phase Projects: $786,177 Term Projects 112)) IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN be accomplished within ten-year timeframe identi- fied in this phasing plan. As the network expands and the plan is revisited phasing strategies will be adjusted to reflect changing priorities, opportuni- ties, and constraints. Table 10. Near-term projects (2019-2022) 11111111111 111111111 1111111111 The project phasing strategy is shown on Map 2 at the end of this document. Immediate and near- term projects are listed below, and all phases are included as an attachment. Project Length Phasing Notes Dodge bike lane/buffered 1.87 Improve Dodge to provide buffered bike lane/bike lane bike lane from Governor to corridor along with Governor. Kirkwood Benton bike lanes from 1.24 Complete following installation of facilities on Greenwood and Greenwood to Mormon Trek Myrtle. Provide direct link between Mormon Trek and Iowa River Trail. Hwy 6 sidepath from Heinz to 1.66 Project R4227 - scheduled for completion in 2021. Addresses Hollywood gap in sidepath network. Market & Jefferson buffered 1.98 Enhances safety and comfort along high-volume, high-priority bike lanes corridor. Project include Clapp marked and shared route. Jefferson/Glendale bicycle 0.97 Extends critical Central Corridor bikewaywestto 1st Ave. boulevard Washington 1.07 Extends critical Central Corridor bikeway west to Scott. Keokuk bike lanes/marked 0.44 Improves north -south access across Hwy 6. and shared route from Kirkwood to Hwy 6 Kirkwood bike lanes from 1.13 Establishes east -west route south of downtown. Connects to Clinton to Lower Muscatine Clinton near-term project. McCollister bike lanes from 0.85 Project 53934 - Programmed for 2018-2019. Incorporated into Gilbert to Sycamore standard arterial design McCollister sidepath from 0.85 Project 53934 - Programmed for 2018-2019. Incorporated into Gilbert to Sycamore standard arterial design Sunset bike lanes from 0.61 Provide north -south corridor in west Iowa City Benton to Hwy 1 Lower Muscatine bike lanes 1.0 Complete east -west corridor from south of downtown to Hwy 6. Church bicycle boulevard 0.6 East -west connector in north Central District Dover/Westminster bicycle 1.48 North -south route through east Iowa City. Includes trail boulevard segment connecting to Court Hill Trail. Emerald bicycle boulevard 0.42 Provide north -south route through west Iowa City. IMPLEMENTATION ��113 01 ak-f1l 911 Project Length Phasing Notes 1st Ave sidepath from 1.02 Critical north -south corridor. Addresses gap in existing side - Rochester to Court Hill Trail path network. Burlington Street Bridge from 0.22 Address critical river crossing. Madison to Riverside Grand/Byington bike lanes 0.44 Increase connectivity between existing bike lanes on Melrose, and marked and shared Iowa River Trail, and downtown Iowa City. routes Evans/Muscatine marked and 1.45 Key arterial corridor. Bike lanes can be striped and signed with shared route and bike lanes no disturbance to pavement. from Market to 1st Ave American Legion sidepath 1.08 Project 53854 - Scheduled for completion in 2021 from Scott to Taft American Legion bike lanes 1.08 Project 53854 - Scheduled for completion in 2021 from Scott to Taft Court Street sidepath 0.39 Sidepath infill projects to address gaps in the corridor segments between Friendship and Taft Capitol Street shared 0.15 Short 2 -block segment connecting Iowa River Trail, U of I connecting route Campus, and Market & Jefferson couplet. Total miles of Near -Term 24.53 Total Cost for Near -Term Projects: $2,388,265 Projects Funding Sources Funding bikeway projects and bicycle -related programs will require a diverse and creative approach. While Iowa City sets aside a certain amount of annual funding for complete streets projects, external funding sources will be necessary to implement plan recommendations in a timely manner. When possible, this set-aside should be leveraged as local match for external funding in order to maximize the city's return on investment. In addition, Iowa City must be flexible and sponta- neous enough to capitalize on partnerships, in-kind matches, and other non-traditional opportuni- ties to implement the plan recommendations. The following section of this chapter provides an over- view of funding sources that can be utilized. 114> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Federal and State Funding Sources The federal government has numerous programs and funding mechanisms to support bicycle and pedestrian projects, most of which are allocated by the US Department of Transportation to state, regional, and local entities. In many cases, state and regional entities administer these funds to local agencies through competitive grant programs. In order to clearly convey the roles and respon- sibilities of all agencies in the administration and spending of federal transportation funds, the Iowa Department of Transportation has created the Guide to Transportation Funding Programs of Interest to Local Governments and Others (2017, revised edition). This guide is an invaluable resource for funding exploration, project development, and procedural compliance. 9 m lsan+eH �e a —T- 0 0 x.ais trP n v - f7 B LE ..... r aRa+�meN L. 41 +owe+RS +a5So5N ,..��E Q D U `v u W D w L/+ 20 8L2 O £ PyvBy pak CYest y�t4 p�0 O 1PW �4� o Pvs, W a p z 0 Q z L� � v N � � 2 L � o N N N ,AC, q NU m y i R y N d, ('s N N 3 Y m N U m 0 0 IL mW Q N .N R i .0 rO .� C 00 i N � > V �"� E (� O Z 0 J 7 x W O C d U J d' 0- 0 U •� J I I I I I � 9 � o ��@®_ o d O � W a p z 0 Q Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act In 2015, the FAST Act was signed into law, autho- rizing $305 billion in transportation infrastructure planning and investment for a five-year period from 2016-2020. Multiple programs have been carried over from the previous transportation bill, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century, or MAP -21. Funding for FAST Act programs available to Iowa City is allocated to the MPOJC based on apportion- ment formulas determined at the federal and state levels. These programs are described below. Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Program The STBG provides funding that may be used by States and localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions on any Federal -aid highway, bridge and tunnel projects, public road projects, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects. Bicycle and pedestrian infrastruc- ture projects include ADA sidewalk modification, recreational trails, bicycle transportation, on- and off-road trail facilities for non -motorized transpor- tation, and infrastructure projects and systems that will provide safe routes for non -drivers, including children, older adults and individuals with disabili- ties to access daily needs. Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) The Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) was authorized by the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP -21) in 2012 and has been continued by the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, through federal fiscal year 2020. Eligible project activities for TAP funding include a variety of smaller -scale transportation projects such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, recreational trails, safe routes to school projects, and community improvements such as historic preservation, vegetation management, and some environmental mitigation related to storm water and habitat connectivity. The TAP program replaced multiple pre -MAP -21 programs, including the Transportation Enhancement Program, the Safe Routes to School Program, and the National Scenic Byways Program. Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program (ICAAP)/ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Program This program funds highway/street, transit, bicycle/ pedestrian, and other projects or programs which help maintain Iowa's clean air quality by reducing transportation -related emissions. Eligible highway/ street projects must be on the federal -aid system, which includes all federal functional class routes except local and rural minor collectors. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/ cmaq/ https://iowadot.gov/systems- planning/grant-programs/ iowa-clean-air-attainment-program-icaap Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is intended to achieve significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads by funding projects, strategies and activities consistent with a state's Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). https://iowadot.gov/traffic/sections/HSIP Section 402 State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program Section 402 funds can be used to develop educa- tion, enforcement and research programs designed to reduce traffic crashes, deaths, severity of crashes, and property damage. Eligible program areas include reducing impaired driving, reducing speeding, encouraging the use of occupant protec- tion, improving motorcycle safety, and improving bicycle and pedestrian safety. Examples of bicycle and pedestrian safety programs funded by Section 402 are comprehensive school-based pedestrian and bike safety education programs, helmet distri- bution programs, pedestrian safety programs for older adults, and general community information and awareness programs. IMPLEMENTATION y>116 TIGER Discretionary Grants Program The US Department of Transportation's Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Discretionary Grants Program was created as part of the American Recovery and Rei nvestmentActof2009with the purpose offunding road, rail, transit and port projects that achieve crit- ical national objectives, including livability, economic competitiveness, environmental sustainability, and safety. Forty projects were awarded funding in 2016 for a combined total of nearly $500M, and fifteen of the forty projects directly benefit bicycling through the provision of dedicated and often protected bicycle facilities. Examples include a $21M in complete streets projects in Mobile, Alabama, $22M in bridge reconstruction and rehabilitation in Des Moines, Iowa, and $40M in roadway reconstruction and multi -modal improvements in Flint, Michigan that will occur in tandem with water transmission line replacement. https://www.transportation.gov/tiger National Recreational Trails (NRT) Program The Iowa DOT maintains and awards federal funding through the National Recreational Trails (NTP) Program. The program was originally established as part of the Inter -modal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) in 1991 and has been incorpo- rated into all subsequent transportation bills, even if under different titles. Trail projects can include hiking and walking, bicycling, cross-country skiing, snowmobiling, horseback riding, canoeing, and off- highway vehicles. https:Hiowadot.gov/systems_ planning/grant-programs/ federal -and -state -recreational -trails State Recreational Trails Program Similar in scope and purpose to the NRT Program, the State Recreational Trails Program uses funding collected within the State of Iowa to support local 117> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 11111111111 111111111 1111111111 trail projects. In addition to land acquisition and actual trail construction, other eligible costs include bridge and culvert repair, intersection and crossing improvements, restrooms, trailheads, storm drainage, trail signs, landscaping, and even trail resurfacing and overlays. https://iowadot.gov/systems- planning/grant-programs/ federal -and -state -recreational -trails Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) The goal of the Land and Water Conservation Fund is the creation and maintenance of high quality recreation resources through the acquisition and development of public outdoor recreation areas and facilities. The program, operated by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, requires a 50 percent match from the project sponsor. After the funding is awarded and the project is completed, the local agency receives a reimbursement of 50 percent of the actual project costs. http://www.iowadnr.gov/ About-DNR/Grants-Other-Funding/ Land -Water -Conservation -Fund Revitalize Iowa's Sound Economy (RISE) Program The RISE Program promotes economic development through the establishment, construction, improve- ment, and maintenance of roads and streets that inject money into the local and state economies and support economic growth. Bicycle projects associated with roadway resurfacing, rehabilita- tion, modernization, upgrading reconstruction, and initial construction are eligible for funding through the program. Bicycle trails, sidepaths, and wide side- walks are not eligible for RISE funding except when replacing facilities already in service and affected by or as an integral part of a roadway project. https://iowadot.gov/systems- planning/grant-programs/ revitalize-iowa-s-sound-economy-rise-program Community Attraction & Tourism (CAT) As part of the IEDA's Enhance Iowa Program, the Community Attraction & Tourism fund assists communities in the development and creation of attraction and tourism facilities, recreational trails, heritage attractions, museums, and recreational centers. Eligible projects include land acquisition, construction, major renovations, site development, and recreational trails. In 2011, Iowa City received $1.6M in CAT funding for the development of Terry Trueblood Recreation Area. https://www.iowaeconomicdevelopment.com/ Enhance Local Funding Sources While external funding sources for bicycle and pedestrian projects and programs continue to be in short supply and high demand, local funds can often be the most reliable funding source for projects or for development of an encouragement or education program. In addition, local funding is often required as match for external funding sources. With this in mind, it is imperative that Iowa City explore, iden- tify, and pursue one or more of these local funding strategies as a means of implementing the plan. Capital Improvement Plan Set -Aside As with most cities, Iowa City has limited funds with which to implement bicycle projects and programs. The City's current Complete Streets and Traffic Calming set -asides support bicycle -related projects within the larger framework of multi -modal trans- portation enhancements, but will likely not provide the funds needed to expedite the plan in a timely and impactful manner. By creating a dedicated set-aside in the Capital Improvement Program or increasing the Complete Streets line item, the City can focus, prioritize, and plan for capital expen- ditures for trails, on -street bikeways, and other projects that improve conditions for bicycling. This set-aside may also be used as a local match for external funding sources, or as contributory towards bicycle elements of larger projects. The City should also create a dedicated set-aside in the general fund budget for equity -related bicycle programs that target the city's underserved, minority, and low- income residents. Local Option Sales Tax A Local Option Sales Tax is a special-purpose tax implemented and levied at the city or county level. A local option sales tax is often used as a means of raising funds for specific local or area projects, such as improving area streets and roads, or refur- bishing a community's downtown area. Special Improvement Districts are often created to define a sales tax area and administer the collection and expenditures of generated tax. General Obligation Bond General obligation bonds offer local agencies the opportunity to acquire necessary finances for capital improvements and remit payment overtime. These general obligation bonds are among the most common form of capital project financing and can cover everything from stormwater and sanitary sewers to streets, sidewalks, and trails. General obli- gation bonds require majority approval of a popular vote for passage. Private Funding Community Foundations Community and corporate foundations can play an important role in funding bicycle and pedes- trian infrastructure and programs. There is growing evidence highlighting the connection between the built environment and community health outcomes, and health foundations throughout the country have joined environmental foundations to support infrastructure projects that increase opportunities for walking, bicycling and physical activity. National foundations like the Surdna Foundation and the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation have funded initiatives to reduce obesity, increase physical activity, and achieve other positive health-related outcomes. Locally, the Community Foundation of Johnson County has awarded grants to Bicyclists of IMPLEMENTATION y>118 Iowa City (2014-2015) for bike rodeo support and to The Children's Charity (2012-2013) for their Bikes for Kids program. In addition to the well-documented health benefits, investments in bicycle facilities and the bicycling economy can generate a signifi- cant economic return for the community and its investors. People for Bikes Community Grants Program People for Bikes, formerly known as Bikes Belong, is a national organization working to make bicy- cling better throughout the United States through programs and advocacy work. People for Bikes has funded numerous infrastructure projects and education and encouragement programs since itfirst launched in 1999, including six projects in the State of Iowa. These include the Iowa Bicycle Coalition's economic impact study of bicycling across the state, paving assistance on the Raccoon River Valley Trail, and trail project in the City of Asbury. While these are small steps to improve bicycling, they are steps in the right direction. http://www.peopleforbikes.org/ get-local#state-IA Private and Corporate Donations Private donations and corporate gifts can be accepted by the city to support capital projects and programs. Many individuals and corporations see the value of a bicycle -friendly environment, notjust as an asset to the community as a whole, but as an attractive amenity that can support the quality of life for their employees as well. Ongoing Maintenance and Operations Bicycle facility maintenance is important to the overall quality and condition of the network and supports safe and comfortable travel. Different facility types require different maintenance activi- ties, from trail sweeping and snow clearance to bike lane restriping and sign replacement. Iowa 119�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN City should develop a maintenance schedule and program to delegate maintenance roles and responsibilities, develop funding projections, and provide the budget for long-term sustainability of the system. Maintenance can be separated into two categories: routine maintenance and remedial maintenance. Routine Maintenance Routine maintenance refers to the regularly - scheduled and day-to-day activities to keep the greenways, trails, sidewalks, and on -street bikeways in a functional and orderly condition. These activi- ties, which can be incorporated in normal routine maintenance by operations staff, include trash and debris removal, landscaping, weed and dust control, trail and street sweeping, snow removal, shoulder mowing, and tree and shrub trimming. Spot main- tenance such as sealing cracks, spot replacement of small sections of sidewalk, filling potholes, and replacing damaged or worn signs also fall under this category. Remedial Maintenance Remedial maintenance refers to the correcting of significant facility defects and the repairing, replacingand restoringof major facility components. Remedial maintenance activities include periodic repairs like crack sealing or micro surfacing asphalt pavement; restriping of bike lanes; replacement of wayfinding and other signs; repainting, replace- ment of trail amenities and furnishings (benches, bike racks, lighting, etc.); and more substantial proj- ects like hillside stabilization, bridge replacement, trail or street surface repaving; and trail repairs due to washout and flooding. Pavement markings and striping maintenance will depend on anticipated and actual product lifecycle, which can range from one to ten years, depending on material type. Minor remedial maintenance for trails and greenways can be completed on a five to ten-year cycle, while larger projects should be budgeted on an as -needed or anticipated basis. Maintenance Cost Estimates Maintenance costs vary depending on the quality and durability of materials, expected lifecycle, use and wear, climate, weather, and other external factors. Conservative planning -level maintenance cost estimates are provided below in Table 5 to assist in the development of maintenance budgets and resource allocation. These are conservative esti- mates based upon the best information available at the time of this plan. They should be used as a guide for allocation of resources and should be refined as Iowa City gains more experience with maintaining various types of bicycle facilities. These costs do not include time and staff. As the city's bikeway network continues to expand, Iowa City should plan to devote additional time and staff labor to support maintenance of trails and on -street facilities. Network Stewardship and Enhancement An important element of on-going maintenance activities is stewardship, which refers to the long- term care and oversight of Iowa City's active transportation network as a resource that adds value to the community and enhances the quality 11 akfll 911 of life for citizens of the region. The trail and bicycle network will require active stewardship by those who operate the facilities (and those who benefit from it) to ensure this valuable recreation and trans- portation infrastructure can provide a high level of service and a quality user experience for Iowa City residents and visitors. This will require coordination among all agencies involved in the care and main- tenance of the trails, bikeways, sidewalks, and their surroundings; protection of these resources from external factors that may reduce their value and utility; and encouragement of community participa- tion in the upkeep and enhancement of the network as a valuable community asset. Community partici- pation through Adopt -A -Trail and Adopt -A -Street programs, annual trash cleanup events, and educa- tional programming activities along trails and greenways can heighten community awareness of bicycling facilities as valuable community assets. Bicyclists of Iowa City, Think Bicycles of Johnson County, the Johnson County Public Health, and other local agencies and organizations have over- lapping missions and audiences likely to engage in stewardship activities. Table 11. Planning -level maintenance costs Shared -Use Path $10,000 Sweeping, trash removal, mowing, weed abatement, snow removal, crack seal, sign repair. Sidepath $2,500 Sweeping, trash removal, mowing, weed abatement, snow removal, crack seal, sign repair. Separated/Protected $4,000 Debris removal/sweeping, repainting stripes and stencils, Bike Lanes sign replacement, replacing damaged barriers. Bike Lane/Advisory Bike $2,500 Repainting stripes and stencils, debris removal/sweeping, Lane snow removal, signage replacement as needed. Bicycle Boulevard $1,500 Sign and shared lane marking stencil replacement as needed. Shared Connecting $1,000 Sign and shared lane marking stencil replacement as needed. Route IMPLEMENTATION ��20 Plan Monitoring and Evaluation It will be critical to periodically monitor and eval- uate implementation efforts to document trends and outcomes, identify implementation strengths and weaknesses, and realign annual action plans to maximize the benefit of Iowa City's investment in plan -related projects and programs. Programs like annual bicycle counts, bicycle -related crash analyses, and an annual implementation report card, all of which are described in the previous chapter, will highlight efforts in Iowa City to support bicycling and shed light on areas in need of improve- ment. Additional metrics relating to the League of American Bicyclists' Building Blocks of a Bicycle Friendly Community and to the plan's goals and objectives will help Iowa City and its community partners determine the impact of the expanding bicycle network and bicycle -related program- ming. Baseline data for many of these metrics will be collected as the city applied for Bicycle Friendly Community designation in August, 2017. The table below provides a list of performance measures and associated Gold -Level Bicycle Friendly Community Targets. Reaching all targets identified below is not necessary to achieve Gold; there is flexibility with the rating system, with importance given to key outcomes supported by a diverse and comprehen- sive approach. 121) IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 11 akfll 911 Additional performance measures that will be useful for implementation evaluation purposes but not essential to achieving Gold include: Bicycle counts collected through an annual bicycle count program Miles of low -stress bikeways, total and as a percentage of all bikeways Network coverage: land area, population, and underserved populations within 1/2 mile of a bicycle facility • Number of education and encouragement programs, classes, rides, and events • Number of Bicycle Friendly Businesses • Number, type, and distribution of bicycle parking facilities/spaces • Number of bicycle parking facilities/spaces at transit stops and centers • Percentage of bikeway miles annually inspected for maintenance needs Percentage of bikeway miles improved through maintenance activities (striping, pothole filling, etc.) 01 ak_fll 911 Table 12. Implementation performance measures IMPLEMENTATION ��22 Ridership: people commuting by bicycle 5.5% Crashes per 10k daily commuters 100 Fatalities per 10k daily commuters Bike access to public transportation 0.6 730% Total bicycle network mileage to total road mileage Arterial streets with bike lanes 65% Education —70 Public education outreach Very good Annual offering of adult bicycling skills classes At least two Percent of primary and secondary schools offering bicycle education 50% Encouragement Active bike clubs & signature events Yes Bike month and bike to work events Very good Active bicycle advisory committee Yes Active advocacy group Yes Recreational facilities like bike parks and velodromes Law enforcement/bicycling liaison Very likely yes Bicycle -friendly laws/ordinances in place Bike program staff per population yes 1 staff person per 32,000 Bike plan is current and being implemented yes IMPLEMENTATION ��22 01 ak-fll 911 123> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN >" IX PONDA > Implementation �. ZD 75 75 0 O 0 CL 2: Lu LU oc � LL LU LU LU co LL. �U � P,kAFT bA 0 U ° .z� r. r o U O 0, r U ° - - o O� O0 E ;x 2 � cn 0 3 U b4 4-j I U •� z � ¢'CZU `° cn cz .. O u cz cn Q) ° • a a '0 }� O cz c O cz u cn U U cz +cz U cn a)O OU p ccn 4-j � � cn � ~ U cz U ;--4 O c czo a)w cn o s� cn ta U o ,� �, . o � bA + O U + U U ;--4 bbn U s• CZ CZ U U° O U U ¢,� 4-jQ ate--+ U U U U w O ZOx-j Cnx-j Q� O a o CD p aj .o O b a +� >o U o a ° O -0 Ul o a cz o .o 'cn CD+ O U O cz '" '� "4 — O . — 0 -. "5 + +� U CZ � U cz cn a a U> x cz O U U as U U �, .� ... a) O ... O a cz CO U U ro cz o ° a 4-jrw, °�' En a) Ucz �' acz cz ars U U �„ U = c„ �, c„ b4 o °� j cn o . +, +, CZ U cn� O 4-j NU 0�vv�OU O cnacz c;--4 OO cz U ~v pa ~ cz 2U U O C p '+ O .. ;--4 O O • C U CZ a, s� a) 4-j U- U + V a� U U i 'r _� -4 CD U o c ra w� " 3 .~ U w cz u o '� +� ° .� o bA ° o °41 x °�'cz U ~Uj cz �, � U (n CD U v c v° p . Q O ..cn m aro ro czQ) +� c cz a x Ucz cz U° ' iro aA ocz bn +J O � °�' U a) ;--4 s+ a CZ vn U C p `: .. cn >> .. U O Q., 3 U U bA 'o s� +- U w M U CZ U ~ cn cz _� M b4 cn cz U UCZ cz U cz U ars U cz 4- 4- a C/� p U a 1=1U V] 4- x a -j -- N U 3 + U *r U C O U U U +� cz b4 o W-4 � + ;bb � .- U °4 ¢+ �U � P,kAFT bA 0 U ° .z� r. r o U O 0, r U ° - - o O� O0 E ;x 2 � cn 0 3 U b4 4-j I U •� z � ¢'CZU `° cn cz .. O u cz cn Q) ° • a a '0 }� O cz c O cz u cn U U cz +cz U cn a)O OU p ccn 4-j � � cn � ~ U cz U ;--4 O c czo a)w cn o s� cn ta U o ,� �, . o � bA + O U + U U ;--4 bbn U s• CZ CZ U U° O U U ¢,� 4-jQ ate--+ U U U U w O ZOx-j Cnx-j Q� bA a p aj 3 O b +� p o a l .o CD+ O U O cz '" '� "4 — O . — 0 -. "5 + +� U CZ � U cz a a U> x cz O U U as U U �, .� ... a) O ... O a cz CO U U 3 cz a �j °�' wcn ars °cz °' cz U pa ~ cz U C U O .. CZ CZ bbn CZ U U U o '� +� ° .� � bA ° °41 CZcn °�'cz U o 's ra O +� } a x Ucz cz U° aA ocz cz °�' U a) r U `: U '� U cz M b4 cn U UCZ cz U Z ars ap 5— 'n � �=... 3 + U *r U , O U U U +� cz b4 o W-4 � + ;bb � .- U °4 ¢+ o u cz U U o E �° aA � cz 3 o Cn;--4 U U cz c � O o o � � ta U . ° 1-4 O 4--J o O °oo bn o '+Uoj a� a aa °o a3 Hacz a ro ,c w ,jo , U C cn � cz vo a) rd .o ." s., o a� M .5 50 r= O O a�'� Ow CZ 4uo -J � rd ao 3 UO 4 a `� 5 uo -- O UO v p uo w O bA ;-� CZ uo (ulo,.. � is O U O Z +L � p� O p cz 'u cz cz Q)o 'v p vii ¢�, L v O •.. bA w +J V1 i" r O O4-1 cz O 4-1} •5 � in s.. � � � � s.. � ... +J v� � ... • O +J vii � • U Q,, ,� � � � O . �� gyp. • y 75 v] ¢ cz un U0 u bA viuo U w bbz v o 3-4 pU moi] � .- U cz pU cz �° OV c U = .5 o z 11 akfil ;k i —4--J. ' s-4 cin WO cz cn cb"c } .. U +j C) .. ta Cn cz U O O pw s�� UES Cn cn w '� cn CZ U U �O cz ° cn cn U O CZ T44 Cn 0 cz ¢ o a r cz °; �� cz cn bl U� 3 Cn � cn WA Q) :Z O cz U cn W cz E b.0U a) U I O +-+ u s- U CZ cn cn U p. s '� �, cn.5 U + �, U c O U c U E � w + U X U U U aU O 3 cn O U OU ... U ;--4 cn Z CZ Ucn "4 cn } rj .. U cn U cz ... U U cz cn cz r-14 WO U U Q �, U U O cn O cz �l U cz W O • �4 • • • • O O O c �O c p cz cn � E c c + 'o U r U O L— � � � cn cn i a 3 CZ o c U aU� a) bA 4-j U U .' cn - O O U U U �' cz s" .. U cn U cz `n U ;--4 O c¢' t :3cz O ' b44 4-j w E : O O;--4 U cn u :n U U a--+ + cn t, b o o +cn o CZ 4-j cz w cn ;--4 O cz cn U O u, U cn a O W a • • • • • bA 0 U F-, w O O cz U H v� O cz cn O W-4 cz cz w cn 0 cz 4� U cn b1J RAFT 4-j c 'jcn �, cz 4-j U o O w cn p b45 U cz w cn cz UD 4-j v� cz a)j cnaU • 5mcn cn cz cn..v. a ¢ U s s ch x E- sm _� ... O x M a--' xj s� U CZ 4-j 0 d O v)¢+ �U 0 cn U ¢+ bb4 � O cn 0� x oo cn 0 cn cz cz cn cn o a a cz o En cn cn u CZ ' � UU cz � ;-4cn bc U a ... O • • �4 • U � } cn cz cz x c s-4 cn U4 -j bc CZ CZ cn cz ra ° acz cz + 1-4 o CZ Cn 4--J czO � x O o ta CCZ b.0Z U U w p a+ s-4 5 0 U '� ° � cz cz be 0 0� u �, 0 °' o cn 5 cn ta O .. x 4-j 'n U +�cn + s-, O U S- CZ +-+ cam, CZ cz S- +j cz cz o czO r .. 0 4M CZ bA p O Q O U U 0 w U '0 U 0 3 U v � a cn 0 aA cz 'd o • • W a • U o RAFT 4-j o c cn 0 cn CZ CZ a) ;--4 a) 0 CZ cn o b4 U w U O w w ° p 0 Cia U a� cz w U a) O O 4 UO UO .. 0 U 5 C%) cz 0 w O bA CZ� cz J- �+ 2-4 4J U} B O O fx ;cz CZ -4 (1) U U LO r o UO cz cz u U O U 14-4 1UU U 0 cn UO U 0 bc cz 0 CZ O O o '� j cz +- U 4a cn s- '� 0 }' o s- :ns '� U � U aj ` C) s- �' O bp U U O cn cn U b�A U O U � ;-4 v� ° c}� O b -A (1)U s°'' '� UO O + U O cz CZ cz U U so - U o 4-j W o En P� +-+ cz cz b1J o bbc cz U cz 'sem �i cz + 0 • • �4 • • w w U � �>" O p CUia 0 M4 --J a--++ '� ° O x + cz ' o+ O cn cz 3 • ° o Q oo �, 4- ;--4cz U .. .. U cn cn 0 U c� cz 0 cn U ;-4 _U '� U U O U ;--4 UO t O Os s +, s � p U * w �' bUA U x � cz U a a a 0 0 0 ... U 4-j U o ro Cis U °' U -W +� cz~ o o cz u CZ U l u 0 Cis �° H°cn cn CZ cn 0 b4 0 w° o w a a w 3 x° 6-z H ° ro Cn° 0 O a� U O U U r;:! + O cam, O E m cz CZ cQ ~ o M a --J Cn gU cn U � O OO cz � U 4-j o a O s cz cn .. CZ O O } w o U b.0 cn cn cz b.0 -0 CZ rO � U Cn PCZ ro ate--+ bA 9 U O x U U U cn cn 4--J'� a--+ U 24 CZ (�U U � x cz C) �� cn cz cn U � cn } cn p 1-44 0 c� U x 3 4 O cz O U w'4--' q 00 �+ ;-4p cz a) o UCZ ate- 4 3 cn �czcn bb O O b�A cz cz '� U a� U cz aCZ t C) --J CZ U O a --J O } '"' � cz U - U -C! ;-4 O " m ate-+ En a--+ U CZ z v 4-1 c ro ate-+ O 3 cn 1-4 CZ cn cn 4-j4 , U ocn S-4 U O U� U 4--JaU-+ U U -• O �+ U � � c� 0 ' � :ncz 4 \ O . 0 O� U U U C) `+'' CZ 4-U OCZ .O aUU b�A cz •� 4--+ O U c~ _(=I� U 4 � ;-4w U C6 CZ cz V]czU :z cz O � U 6 U U ...U cz U b- s-4 cn =. �O 0 3 :z + U p ra a� W ... o 4 m a Q' a--+ r -O .. ..En U 1-4 cz .— a-� cz a -j } 1C.,� ab 3 U b.0 w CZ — WO p O M '� 1-4� a --j cn cn - w �Cn�° �. czrx4cn �� CZ uo; -• :i c O U cn 4--J U u cz�. � O ;-4 "— U � b�A SU- cl. 'd 4--J czcz C 4a O U cz � +, U CZ U cn ~ ~ acn z cn � =, U �O O Cn a--+ U cn a1) U U P cz O a--+ b.0 0, O • '+ • b.0 U U W a O a� U O U U r;:! + O cam, O E m cz CZ cQ ~ o M a --J Cn gU cn U � O OO � 'mc 4-j �:l O s cz cn .. CZ O '+-4 ' cn cn cz b.0 -0 CZ rO U Cn f-' cz;--4cn ro ate--+ bc O x U CZ cn 4--J'� a--+ U 24 (�U U � x cz C) cz cn cz cn U � cn } cn p 1-44 U c� U x 3 4 U cz O CZ_ w'4--' :Z cz as ;-4p cz a) o UCZ �y 4 3 U �czcn U O O b�A cz w '� U ro c cn}cz aCZ t C) U o O b. '"' � cz OCZ' O " m � 4--J ;.4 z v 4-1 c ro ate-+ O 3 • CZ cn cn 4-j4 , W 4 gU OO 'mc 4-j �:l +-+ cn .. CZ O '+-4 U 4-j 'd ate--+ U as U U U CZ cn U 24 U WO O b. cz 3 � � b:! U � U UE O w cz :z CZ_ w'4--' ;-4p '+ U 3 U O O U cz w '� U CZ c cn}cz aCZ t a--+ U o O '"' � p 'd O " m ¢ " aA U 'cn U ate-+ O w0cn CZ CZ cn cn 4-j4 , cn S-4 U O U� U � U} U U ... U U U 0 w 0 ' � U cz \ O . 0 O� U • ~ U 4-j CZ 4-U OCZ .O O , b�A •� �;-4 _(=I� 4 � a--+ p U C6 CZ cz V]czU U ." U U ...U cz cn + U p ra cz 43 W ... 4 m a Q' a--+ r -O OO +-+ cn .. U + cz U cz U x cz 3 U U � U ^CZ ;-4p '+ O cz �, '� U CZ a--+ 41 U Cn '"' � p ' O . - m '+� " aA U U O 0 r ate-+ U , S-4 SU-� U � U ... U U 0 w 0 ' � U cz \ cz O� .U. w U U cz cn U -- 4 _� b(1).0 bU 4- cz O O .. ..En U U x cz .— a-� cz a -j } 1C.,� ab 3 ti= — WO O U a� b.0 U ;--4 � �Cn�° czrx4cn uo; -• :i — U O U cz s- W U u r: U � O ;-4 "— U � cz — o � U C 4a O r W a=' +� +, O U 0 o 'n � =, U �O O Cn a--+ U cn a1) U U P cz O a--+ b.0 0, ate-+ '+ c b.0 U U UO o O + cz O O J cn �+ ... c x U a--+ cn cz Q� S -i w W U = 2 11 akfil ;b i cz cz o O c Q '� U U O r cn U 2i O xU cZ U (1) a cn ... .. U cz cz cn ra ti O O +-+ U O ra cz � a1) cn � y � I bA O °' U cz °) .�o O °) o U CZ U � O � N Q V � cz v U 0 O bA O z Iz bA U I E t U a U cz C cn bb4 ' u- U . o ro ¢ a--+ CZ O ;--4 bA 'O 1=1 ' N O "-� 3 .a) . UCZ U, cz U a� 0 cn � u z U 'd O U O cn U cn O U O W w + 0 p r. O . cn 'c� -�-j U 11 akfil ;b i + Q '� U U O r cn U 2i O xU cZ U bA .. cz cn ra ti U +-+ U w a)5 O °' cz °) .�o O °) o U o N a � cz v U 0 O bA O z cn U O CZ C U a U C cn bb4 p U N +j O ro ¢ U a--+ CZ O O ' N O "-� O a U N +U cz U cn � u cn 0 cn + 0 p r. cn 'c� -�-j U U m Z cz .� O +-' O 4-j CZ �+ ¢,oro C3 0 N cz } w 4-j } 4-j Ni W 11 akfil ;b i 01 ak-fll 911 125> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN >APPONDIX D > Prioritization and Cost Estimates Table Bl. Corridor Prioritization Corridor Gilbert Corridor High 90 25 25 W 15 OW us 12 8 5 Central Corridor High 89 25 25 12 12 9 6 Campus / Melrose Corridor High 86 17 25 15 15 6 8 Hwy 6 Corridor High 78 25 15 9 12 7 10 Clinton Corridor High 73 17 20 15 12 5 4 College Corridor High 72 25 15 12 6 6 8 Governor Corridor High 66 17 10 15 12 6 6 Iowa River Trail Corridor High 65 0 15 15 15 10 10 Mormon Trek Corridor High 64 8 15 12 15 6 8 1st Avenue Corridor High 62 25 5 6 9 9 8 Madison Corridor High 61 17 20 6 12 2 4 Hwy 1 Sidepath High 60 25 10 6 6 5 8 Muscatine Corridor High 58 17 15 6 6 10 4 Dodge Corridor High 57 17 0 15 12 7 6 Kirkwood Corridor Medium 57 25 5 6 9 8 4 Greenwood/Myrtle Corridor Medium 57 17 15 6 9 6 4 Melrose Sidepath Medium 56 17 10 9 9 3 8 Hollywood Corridor Medium 55 17 10 9 6 5 8 Benton Corridor Medium 54 17 15 3 9 4 6 South Crosstown Corridor Medium 54 8 10 15 6 7 8 Washington Bikeway Medium 54 17 15 9 6 1 6 McCollister Corridor Medium 52 25 0 3 12 4 8 Westminster / Dover Corridor Medium 52 17 10 3 9 5 8 Wetherby Corridor Medium 50 8 10 9 9 6 8 APPENDIX B -PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES �� B1 Corridor Willow Creek Trail Corridor Medium 50 8 10 W 9 9 4 10 Church Corridor Medium 49 17 5 9 6 4 8 Riverside Drive Sidepath Medium 49 17 10 3 6 5 8 East Court Sidepath Medium 48 17 10 3 6 4 8 Davenport Corridor Medium 47 8 10 9 6 6 8 Normandy Sidepath Medium 46 25 0 3 6 4 8 Court Corridor Medium 44 8 10 12 3 3 8 Rochester Corridor Medium 41 17 0 6 6 8 4 Huntington Trail Extension Medium 39 17 0 3 6 3 10 Ridgewood / Friendship Corridor Medium 38 8 5 6 3 8 8 Windsor Ridge Trail Extension Medium 37 17 0 3 6 1 10 Sunset Corridor Medium 36 17 0 6 6 3 4 7th Avenue Corridor Low 35 8 10 3 0 6 8 Court Hill Trail Low 35 0 5 3 9 8 10 River to River Corridor Low 35 8 0 6 9 4 8 Gilbert Sidepath Low 34 17 0 0 6 3 8 Foster Sidepath Low 33 17 0 0 6 2 8 Newton Road Corridor Low 33 8 5 3 9 3 5 Rohret Corridor Low 33 8 0 12 6 3 4 Iowa River Trail West Extension, Phase 1 Low 31 8 0 3 6 4 10 Clear Creek Trail Low 30 0 0 6 12 2 10 Emerald Corridor Low 30 8 5 3 3 3 8 Ridge / Broadway Corridor Low 30 8 0 9 3 2 8 Southeast Corridor Low 30 8 0 3 6 5 8 Highland Corridor Low 29 8 5 0 3 5 8 B2 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Corridor Summit Corridor Low 29 8 0 W 6 3 4 8 Arlington Corridor Low 28 8 0 3 6 3 8 Park Road Corridor Low 28 8 0 3 9 4 4 Taft Corridor Low 28 8 0 3 6 3 8 Orchard Sidepath Low 27 0 10 3 3 3 8 Foster Corridor Low 26 8 0 6 3 1 8 Hickory Hill Corridor Low 26 8 0 0 6 4 8 Camp Cardinal Corridor Low 25 8 0 6 6 1 4 Sycamore - Sand Connector Low 23 8 0 0 6 1 8 Oakcrest Corridor Low 22 0 0 6 3 5 8 Whispering Meadow/ Pinto Connector Route Low 22 8 0 6 6 2 0 Kennedy Neighborhood Connector Low 21 8 0 6 6 1 0 Prairie Du Chien Corridor Low 21 8 0 6 6 1 0 Keokuk Corridor Low 20 8 0 0 3 5 4 McCollister to Sycamore Greenway Trail Low 19 0 0 0 6 3 10 Duck Creek Neighborhood Connector Low 18 8 0 6 3 1 0 Iowa River Trail West Extension, Phase 2 Low 18 0 0 0 6 2 10 College - Jefferson Link Low 17 0 0 3 0 4 10 3rd Avenue Corridor Low 16 0 0 0 3 5 8 Mackinaw/ Manitou Neighborhood Connector Low 15 8 0 0 6 1 0 Union / Fairmeadows Neighborhood Connector Low 15 0 5 6 0 4 0 Windsor Ridge Trail Low 15 0 0 3 0 2 10 Lower West Branch Corridor Low 15 0 j 0 j 3 6 2 4 APPENDIX B -PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES �� B3 Corridor Burns Neighborhood Connector Low 14 0 0 W 9 3 2 0 Wetherby Park Trail Extension Low 14 0 0 0 0 4 10 Heinz Corridor Low 12 0 0 0 3 1 8 Capitol Neighborhood Connector Low 10 0 0 6 3 1 0 Longfellow Neighborhood Connector Low 7 0 0 3 0 4 0 Sandusky Neighborhood Connector Low 7 0 0 0 0 3 4 Covered Wagon Neighborhood Connector Low 6 0 0 0 3 3 0 Ferson Neighborhood Connector Low 5 0 0 3 0 2 0 Deforest Neighborhood Connector Low 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 B4 \�� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 01 ak-fll 911 APPENDIX B - PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES yy B5 DRAF'I"' Table B2. Principal Bikeway Cost Estimates and Phasing Corridor & Project Project Limits Benton Corridor Notes Project Length Cost Estimate Project Phasing Myrtle Bicycle Boulevard Riverside to 0.25 $20,180 Imm. Greenwood Greenwood Bicycle Boulevard Myrtle to Benton 0.39 $31,225 Imm. Benton Bike Lanes Greenwood to Sunset 0.47 $44,019 Near Benton Bike Lanes Sunset to Mormon Trek 0.77 $71,858 Near Benton Bike Lanes Orchard to Greenwood Widen road with 0.46 Unsch. new construction to meet city street standards Benton Bike Lane (One Way) Gilbert to Dubuque 0.08 $4,386 Long Benton Bike Lane (One Way) Dubuque to Clinton 0.08 $8,333 Long Benton Bike Lanes Clinton to Capitol 0.08 $12,212 Long Benton Bike Lanes Capitol to Riverside 0.21 $22,229 Long Benton Bike Lane (One Way) Riverside to Orchard Widen road with 0.07 Unsch. new construction to meet city street Camp Cardinal Corridor standards Camp Cardinal Bike Lanes Melrose to Kennedy Wide shoulders in 1.11 $19,036 Imm. place. Add mark- Campus / Melrose Corridor ings and signs. Burlington Cycle Track Madison to Iowa River 0.10 $142,026 Near Bridge Burlington St Bridge Buffered East end of bridge to Road diet, remove 0.12 $18,329 Near Bike Lanes Riverside Drive outermost lanes Grand Climbing Lane Riverside to Lane diet for WB 0.19 $10,598 Near Roundabout climbing lane Byington Bike Lane (One Way) Grand to Melrose Lane diet on 0.12 $6,445 Near one-way road Grand Shared Connecting Melrose to Roundabout 0.13 $2,163 Near Route Melrose Bike Lanes Olive to Sunset 0.37 $34,805 Long Melrose Bike Lanes Sunset to Emerald 0.26 $24,014 Long B6 ��� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project Length Cost Estimate Project Phasing Melrose Bike Lanes Emerald to Hawkeye Lane diet 0.99 $149,839 Long Park Rd Melrose Bike Lanes Hawkeye Park Rd to 0.56 $52,431 Long Central Corridor Camp Cardinal Market Bike Lanes Clapp to Union 0.11 $9,789 Near Clapp Shared Connecting Rochester to Jefferson 0.13 $2,162 Near Route Jefferson Buffered Bike Lane Clinton to Madison 0.16 $9,673 Near (One Way) Jefferson Buffered Bike Lane Clapp to Madison 0.75 $45,300 Near (One Way) Market Buffered Bike Lane Clapp to Governor 0.07 $4,247 Near (One Way) Market Buffered Bike Lane Governor to Gilbert 0.38 $23,008 Near (One Way) Market Buffered Bike Lane Gilbert to Madison 0.39 $23,572 Near (One Way) Jefferson / Glendale / Heather Hwy 1 to Clapp Right-of-way 0.97 $77,897 Near path Bicycle Boulevard likely required for Heather path Washington Bicycle Boulevard Clinton Corridor Scott to Hwy 1 1.07 $86,112 Near Clinton Bike Lanes Benton to Kirkwood Programmed with 0.11 Imm. road diet Clinton Bike Lanes Church to Jefferson Programmed with 0.39 Imm. road diet Clinton Bike Lanes Jefferson to Burlington Programmed with 0.32 Imm. road diet Clinton Bike Lanes Burlington to Court Programmed with 0.09 Imm. road diet Clinton Bike Lanes Church to Harrison Programmed with 0.08 Imm. road diet Clinton Bike Lanes Harrison to RR S/O Programmed with 0.15 Imm. Wright road diet Clinton Bike Lanes RR to Benton Programmed with 0.15 Imm. road diet, parking removal required APPENDIX B -PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES �� B7 01 ak-fll 911 Corridor & Project Dodge Corridor Project Limits Notes Project Cost Length Estimate Project Phasing Dodge Buffered Bike Lane (One Way) Summit to Burlington 1.30 $78,546 Near Dodge Bike Lanes Burlington to Bowery Parking removal 0.26 $27,067 required Near Dodge Bike Lanes Bowery to Kirkwood Road diet 10.32 1 $48,993 Near Foster Bike Lanes ��Goyernor Corridor Prairie Du Chien to Dubuque New road to city standards 0.67 Unsch. Governor Bike Lanes Burlington to Bowery Programmed project, parking removal required 0.26 Imm. Governor Buffered Bike Lane (One Way) Brown to Burlington Programmed I project 0.85 Imm. Dewey / Summit/ Brown Bicycle Boulevard Keokuk Corridor Dodge to Dodge 0.42 $33,716 Imm. Keokuk Bike Lanes Kirkwood to Highland Parking removal required 0.24 $22,742 Near Keokuk Shared Connecting Route Highland to Hwy 6 0.20 $3,408 Near Keokuk Bike Lanes Kirkwood / Lower Muscatine Hwy 6 to Sandusky 10.37 Corrido 1 $56,730 1 Imm. Dubuque Shared Connecting Route Benton to Kirkwood 0.14 $2,475 Near Lower Muscatine Shared Connecting Route Fairmeadows to 1st Ave 0.31 $5,363 Near Kirkwood Bike Lanes Dubuque to Clinton Road diet 0.08 $11,424 Near Kirkwood Bike Lanes Lower Muscatine to Clinton 0.91 $84,302 Near Lower Muscatine Bike Lanes Sycamore to Kirkwood 0.26 $24,180 Near Lower Muscatine Bike Lanes 1 st Ave to Friendly Lane diet 0.45 $47,172 Near PIP Court / Grant / Longfellow Shared Connecting Route Ridgewood to Railroad Underpass Trail 0.52 $8,918 Long B8 >> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 11111111111 111111111 1111111111 Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project Length Cost Estimate Project Phasing Longfellow Tunnel Trail Longfellow to Lower Improvements 0.10 $113,240 Long Shared Use Path Muscatine to visilibilty and Madison Corridor wayfinding Madison Bike Lanes Iowa River Trail to 0.11 $34,074 Imm. Market Madison Bike Lanes Market to Court Programmed 0.48 Imm. project Madison Bike Lanes McCollister Corridor Court to Prentiss 10.15 1 $14,114 1 Imm. McCollister Protected Bike Gilbert to Sycamore New road to city 0.85 Near Lanes standards McCollister Protected Bike Hwy 6 to Gilbert New road to city 1.68 Unsch. Lanes standards McCollister Bike Lanes Gilbert to Old Highway 1218 Lane diet 0.85 $90,390 Long Mormon Trek Corridor Mormon Trek Bike Lanes Melrose to Hwy 1 Road diet 1.72 Imm. Mormon Trek Bike Lanes Hwy 1 to Old Highway Lane diet 1.31 $139,070 Long 218 Mormon Trek Bike Lanes Muscatine Corridor Hwy 6 to Melrose Lane diet 1.02 $155,496 Long Evans Shared Connecting Iowa to Market 0.16 $2,668 Near Route Muscatine Bike Lanes 1 st Ave to Iowa 1.29 $120,413 Near Muscatine Bike Lanes Scott to 1st Ave 0.58 $53,637 Unsch. Muscatine Bike Lanes Scott to 1st Ave Widen road with 0.41 Unsch. new construction to meet city street standards American Legion Bike Lanes Taft to Scott Widen road with 1.07 Near new construction to meet city street Park Road Corridor standards APPENDIX B -PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES �� B9 01 ak-fll 911 Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project Cost Length Estimate Project Phasing Park Road Bike Lanes Rocky Short to Widen road with 0.61 Long Riverside new construction to meet city street standards Iowa River Trail Bridge Shared Park / Rocky Shore to 0.10 $110,229 Long Use Path Peninsula Park Rochester C;= Prairie Du Chien Shared Linder to Dodge 1.02 $17,387 Long Connecting Route Rochester Corridor Widen road with 0.39 Long Rochester Bike Lanes 1 st Ave to Mt Vernon new construction to meet city street standards Rochester Bike Lanes Mt Vernon to Scott 0.65 $60,532.10 Long Rochester Bike Lanes Rochester Ct to Market Widen road with 0.56 Long new construction to meet city street standards Rochester Bike Lanes 1 st Ave to Rochester Ct Widen road with 0.51 Long new construction to meet city street standards Herbert Hoover Bike Lanes Scott to Taft Widen road with 1.10 Long new construction to meet city street Rohret Road Corridor standards Rohret Bike Lanes Lake Shore to Kansas Widen road with 2.10 Unsch. new construction to meet city street standards Taft Bike Lanes Herbert Hoover to 420 Widen road with 3.00 Unsch. new construction to meet city street Washington Corridor k. standards Washington Cycle Track Gilbert to Madison T 10.39 1 $582,490 Long B10>> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Corridor & Project Wetherby Bicycle Boulevard Corridor Southgate - Iowa River Trail Project Limits Notes Gilbert to Iowa River Project Length 0.21 Cost Estimate $241,562 Project Phasing Imm. Connector Shared Use Path Trail 0.40 $31,935 Long Southgate Bike Lanes Keokuk to Gilbert 0.44 $41,413 Imm. Sandusky / Taylor Bicycle Burns to Keokuk 0.52 $42,100 Imm. Boulevard Rochester to F Lower West Branch to American Legion 10.92 0.20 1 $74,036 $16,128 Long Long Wetherby Bicycle Boulevard Hwy 6 to Wetherby 0.24 $19,457 Imm. Arlington Bike Lanes Church Bicycle Boulevard Park Trail 0.71 $66,592 Long Lakeside Bicycle Boulevard Hwy 6 to Wetherby 0.80 $64,122 Imm. Park Trail Table B3. Secondary Bikeway Cost Estimates and Phasing Corridor & Project 3rd Avenue Bicycle Boulevard 3rd Bicycle Boulevard Project Limits Notes G to J Project Length 0.22 Cost Estimate $17,854 Project Phasing Long 3rd Bicycle Boulevard A to G 0.40 $31,935 Long A St Bicycle Boulevard 3rd to 4th 0.07 $5,990 Long 4th Ave Bicycle Boulevard 7th Avenue Bicycle Boulevard City High to A 0.18 $14,389 Long 7th Bicycle Boulevard Arlington Bicycle Boulevard Chadwick Bicycle Boulevard Rochester to F Lower West Branch to American Legion 10.92 0.20 1 $74,036 $16,128 Long Long Arlington Bicycle Boulevard Lower West Branch to Court 0.29 $23,624 Long Arlington Bike Lanes Church Bicycle Boulevard Court to American Legion 0.71 $66,592 Long Church Bicycle Boulevard College Bicycle Boulevard College Bicycle Boulevard Court Bicycle Boulevard Governor to Clinton Morningside to Linn 1 0.60 11.20 1 $48,398 1 $96,221 Near Imm. APPENDIX B- PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES �� B11 01 ak_fll 911 Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project Length Cost Estimate Project Phasing Court Bicycle Boulevard Davenport Bicycle Boulevard Gilbert to Madison 10.39 1 $31,379 Long Long Davenport Bicycle Boulevard Bloomington to Capitol 1.16 $93,648 6,—NNW Emerald Bicycle Boulevard Melrose to Benton 0.42 $33,554 Near Highland Bicycle Boulevard Keokuk to Gilbert 0.45 $35,833 Long Highland Bicycle Boulevard Sycamore/Lower Muscatine to Keokuk 0.63 $50,841 Long Hollywood Bicycle Boulevard Hwy 6 to W/O Taylor 11.12 $90,355 Long Lower West Branch Bike Lanes Clakcrest Bicycle Boulevard Taft to Scott 1.12 $104,202 Long Woodside / Oakcrest / Koser Bicycle Boulevard Greenwood to Emerald Connector Trail 0.90 $72,769 Long Koser-Emerald Connector Shared Use Path Koser to Emerald 0.05 $54,079 Long Ridge Road Bicycle Boulevard Highland to Brookwood 0.27 $21,378 Long Ridge -Hwy 6 Connector Shared Use Path Ridge to Hwy 6 0.07 $80,794 Long Broadway Bicycle Boulevard Hwy 6 to Sandusky 0.32 $25,621 Long JIip Friendship / Ridgewood Bicycle Boulevard Court to Court 1.71 $137,678 Long Court St Sidepath Ridgewood to Muscatine 0.05 $30,019 Long Riverside to Woolf 0.52 $41,888 River St Bicycle Boulevard Near Woolf Ave Bicycle Boulevard River to Newton 0.30 $24,425 Near Rider/ Dill / Black Springs Bicycle Boulevard Sandusky Secondary Bikeway Woolf to Rocky Shore 0.41 $32,934 Near B12> IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN DR A�111111111 Sandusky Bikeway Keokuk to Future 0.28 $4,842 Long Wetherby Park Trail Connector Prentiss Bicycle Boulevard Gilbert to Madison 0.39 $31,319 Imm. Bowery Bicycle Boulevard Summit to Gilbert 0.47 $37,773 Imm. Sheridan Bicycle Boulevard 7th Ave to Summit 0.49 $39,664 Long F / 5th / G Bicycle Boulevard 7th Ave to 3rd Ave 0.42 $33,903 Long J St Bicycle Boulevard 3rd Ave to 1st Ave 0.15 $11,909 Long Bradford Bicycle Boulevard 1st Ave to Dover 0.42 $33,664 Long Wayne / Village / Wellington Wellington to Dover 0.33 $26,257 Long Bicycle Boulevard Wellington Bicycle Boulevard Scott to Dover 0.40 $32,463 Long Summit Bicycle Boulevard Summit Bicycle Boulevard Sunset Bikeway College to Kirkwood 10.65 1 $52,386 1 Long Sunset Bike Lanes Benton to Hwy 1 1 10.61 1 $57,119 1 Near Westminster/Dover Bicycle Boulevard Westminster/ Teton Bicycle Rochester to Court Hill 0.79 $63,604 Near Boulevard Trail Court Hill Trail Extension Westminster to 0.12 $134,342 Near Shared Use Path Friendship Dover / Meadow Bicycle Friendship to Bradford 0.57 $45,574 Near Boulevard APPENDIX B- PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES �� B13 DRAFT Table B4. Neighborhood Connector Bikeway Cost Estimates and Phasing Corridor & Project 7th / Winston Neighborhood 7th / Winston Neighborhood Project Limits Notes Connector Woodridge to Project Length 0.36 Cost Estimate $6,229 Project Phasing Long Connector Burns Neighborhood Connector Rochester Burns Neighborhood Sycamore to Taylor 0.34 $5,889 Long Connector Capitol Neighborhood Connector Capitol Neighborhood Davenport to Market 0.15 $2,605 Near Connector Covered Wagon Neighborhood Covered Wagon Connector Future Wetherby Park 0.24 $4,133 Long Neighborhood Connector Trail Connector to McCollister DeForest Neighborhood Connector Deforest NeighborhoodSycamore to Ridge 0.37 $6,370 Long Connector Duck Creek Neighborhood Connector Duck Creek Neighborhood Hunter's Run Park Trail 0.41 $7,069 Long Connector Ferson Shared Neighborhood I to Rohret Connector Ferson Shared NeighborhoodPark to Hwy 6 0.52 $8,891 Long Connector 1 Hickory Neighborhood Connector Hickory Neighborhood Tamarack to 1st Ave 0.46 $7,951 Long Connector Kennedy Neighborhood Connector Kennedy Neighborhood Camp Cardinal to 1.65 $28,299 Long Connector Mackinaw / Manitou Neighborhood Melrose Connector Mackinaw/ ManitouExisting Trail to Foster 0.39 $6,635 Long Neighborhood Connector Union / Fairmeadows Neighborhood Connector Union / Fairmeadows Hwy 6 to Fairmeadows0.31 $5,346 Long Neighborhood Connector Meadow / Pinto ParkWhispering / Paddock Neighborhood Connector B14)>� IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 1111111111 APPENDIX B- PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B15 Table B5. Multi -Use Trail Project Cost Estimates and Phasing Corridor & Project Hickory Hill Corridor Project Limits Notes Project Length Cost Estimate Project Phasing Hickory Hill Park Trail Shared 1st Ave to Bloomington 0.94 $1,069,250 Long Use Path Hickory Trail Connector Scott to Hickory 0.34 $387,068 Long Shared Use Path Iowa River Trail Corridor Kirkwood - River Trail Link 1 to 0.07 $84,505 Unsch. Shared Use Path Kirkwood - River Trail Link 2 to 0.09 $103,491 Unsch. Shared Use Path Iowa River Trail West Extension, Phase I Iowa River Trail West Benton to McCollister 1.62 $1,833,670 Unsch. Extension, Phase 1 Shared Use Path Iowa River Trail West Extension, Phase 2 Iowa River Trail West McCollister to Izaak 1.26 $1,427,710 Unsch. Extension, Phase 2 Shared Walton Use Path Willow Creek Trail Corridor Willow Creek Trail Extension West Terminus of 0.30 $2,900,000 Unsch. Shared Use Path Willow Creek Trail to Hunter's Run Park trail Willow Creek Trail Extension South Willow Creek 0.16 $184,512 Unsch. Shared Use Path Windsor Ridge Trail Corridor Trail Terminus to Hwy 1 Windsor Ridge Trail Extension American Legion to 1.94 $2,201,320 Long Shared Use Path College - Jefferson Link Hwy 6 College -Jefferson Link Jefferson to College 0.37 $416,586 Unsch. Shared Use Path Huntington Trail Corridor Huntington Trail Extension Lower West Branch to 0.34 $389,924 Long Shared Use Path Huntington' McCollister to Alexander Elementary Diagonal Connector B16') IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN �-i Table B6. Sidepath Project Cost Estimates and Phasing Corridor & Project Ist Avenue Sidepath 1st Sidepath Project Limits S/O Bradford to Hwy 6 Notes 1 Project Length 0.53 Cost Project Estimate Phasing 1 1 Long 1st Sidepath Rochester to Court Hill 1.02 $648,752 Near Court Sidepath Trail Court Sidepath Lindemann to Scott 0.16 Near Court Sidepath Lindenmann to 0.09 Near Peterson Court Sidepath Foster Sidepath Taft to Huntington Trail 0.13 Near Foster Sidepath Laura to Calibria Incorporated into 0.27 Long future design project Foster/ Bjaysville Sidepath Prairie Du Chien to 0.67 Unsch. Gilbert Sidepath Dubuque Gilbert Sidepath Existing Sidepath @ 0.83 $530,422 Long Napoleon Park to Heinz Sidepath Trueblood Trail Heinz Sidepath Paddock to McCollister New construction 0.32 Long Extension to meet city street standards APPENDIX B- PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES �� B17 01 ak-fll ;k i Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project Length Cost Estimate Project Phasing Hwy 1 Sidepath Sunset to Mormon Trek Programmed 0.52 Imm. project Hwy 1 Sidepath Iowa River Trail to 0.29 $183,483 Long Orchard Hwy 6 Bridge Sidepath Iowa River Trail to 0.06 $39,873 Long Orchard Hwy 6 Sidepath Heinz to Hollywood Programmed 1.66 Near project Hwy 6 Sidepath Kirkvvood Sidepath Sioux to Heinz 0.50 $319,217 Long Lower Muscatine / 1st Ave to Hwy 6 0.31 $199,122 Near Fairmeadows Sidepath MiCollister McCollister Extension Gilbert to Sycamore New construction 0.84 Near Sidepath to meet city street standards McCollister Extension Gilbert to Hwy 6 New construction 1.68 Unsch. Sidepath to meet city street Melrose Sidepath standards Melrose Sidepath Emerald to Hawkeye New construction 1.00 Near Park to meet city street standards American Legion Sidepath American Legion Sidepath Taft to Scott New construction 1.08 Near to meet city street standards Riverside Drive Sidepath AOL "M Riverside/ Old Highway 218 Benton to McCollister 1.44 $916,735 Long Sidepath Rochester Sidepath 131% IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN �-d APPENDIX B- PRIORITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES >>1319 01 ak-fll 911 1 r � CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CF OF UTERRTURE PENDING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TOPICS July 13, 2017 August 1, 2017 1. Discuss Johnson County Health Department and Parks Commission recommendation to adopt a Tobacco Free Parks and Trails Policy 2. Presentation of Parks Master Plan 3. Preliminary FY 2019 budget discussion August 15, 2017 1. Presentation on Data Driven Justice Initiative 2. Presentation on Form Based Code final report Strategic Plan / Budget Related Topics: 1. Significantly improve the Council and staff's ability to engage with diverse populations on complex or controversial topics 2. Identify a substantive and achievable goal for the provision of affordable housing in Iowa City and implement strategies to achieve this goal 3. Determine scope of Council identified complete streets study 4. Discuss expectations for working with the ICCSD, Kirkwood Community College, Iowa Works, labor organizations, and others to explore the feasibility of an industrial arts/crafts facility in Iowa City Other Topics: 1. Review the Child Data Snapshot (IP2 2/18) and discuss related strategies with local stakeholders 2. Discuss creation of an ad-hoc committee on social justice and racial equity 3. Joint meeting with the Telecommunications Commission 4. Code review in light of Lusk Avenue project r -;,p CITY OF IOWA CITY ''�� MEMORANDUM Date: July 10, 2017 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Tracy Hightshoe, Neighborhood Services Coordinator Re: Affordable Housing Action Plan Update The City Council approved fifteen affordable housing strategies to encourage and develop additional affordable housing in Iowa City on June 21, 2016. The strategies and their corresponding status can be found on the table below. Strategy Status 1. Continue to fund existing local programs FY18 budget includes $200,000 for GRIP & including GRIP and UniverCity. $250,000 for the UniverCity program (up to five homes). To date, the City has purchased 62 homes for the UniverCity program. 58 have been rehabilitated and sold for homeownership. Two homes are currently being renovated and staff is working on the bid documents for the other two homes. 2. Adopt an Inclusionary Zoning code Completed 6/2016 amendment for the Riverfront Crossings District. 3. Adopt code amendments that enable the Completed 6/2016 FUSE Housing First use in the community. 4. FY18 Budget Process: Provide aline item FY18 budget includes $650,000 for affordable for affordable housing (goal of $500,000 based housing. Projected $650,000 for FY19 as well. on budget conditions). 5. Distribution of Affordable Housing dollars • $325,000 to be issued to the HTF in August (FY18-$650,000): 2017. • 50% to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson • $162,500 reserved for land banking County (HTF) HCDC approved Land Banking Guidelines • 25% held in reserve for land banking at their June 15, 2017 meeting. Council to • 5% reserved for emergent situations (if consider/adopt at their August 1 meeting. unused, reserved for land banking) • $32,500 reserved for emergent situations. • 20% directed through HCDC for LIHTC Any remaining balance, as of 6/30/2018, will support or supplemental aid for housing be reserved for land banking. applications • $130,000 directed through HCDC for LIHTC support. Anticipate summer/fall funding round for FY18 LIHTC applications. July 12, 2017 Page 2 6. Hold the $1,500,000* million in Housing City Council approved an agreement for Authority funds for an opportunity to leverage Augusta Place on 5/2/2017. The City will significant private investment and/or to purchase six units for affordable rental housing develop/acquire low income replacement at $1,080,000. housing. City Council approved a developer's *$2.5 million was available, $1.0 million agreement for the Chauncey building on committed to the Chauncey units, for a 6/18/2015. The City will purchase five units at balance of $1.5 million) $1,000,000 for affordable rental housing. The building is scheduled for completion on 12/31/2018. There is approximately $420,000 remaining to develop/acquire low income replacement housing. 7. Consider an annexation policy that Policy to be considered in the fall by provides for affordable housing contributions. Development Services staff. 8. Consider use of TIF on a case by case First possibility may be McCollister Road, basis to support residential development budgeted in 2019. and/or annexation through the provision of public infrastructure and capture the required LMI set-aside for use throughout the community (Ex: McCollister and Foster Road). 9. Consider regulatory changes to City Code: • Parking waived in Riverfront Crossings for • Waive parking requirements for affordable affordable housing, June 2016. housing units. • Development Services will review and • Review possible changes to the multi- consider regulatory changes to the multi- family design standards for all units in an family design standards this summer/early effort to reduce cost and expedite fall. This is impacted by the on-going form - approvals. based code assessment • Eliminate minimum size requirements for • Anticipate summer/fall for eliminating PUDs. minimum size requirements for PUDs. • Increase allowable bedrooms from 3 to 4 • Will consider increasing the number of outside the University Impact Area (keep bedrooms this summer/fall. This is occupancy at 3 unrelated). impacted by the pre-emption on regulating • Permit more building types by right as occupancy, and may be impacted by opposed to requiring a PUD process proposed code changes related to rental (density, multiplex units, cottage clusters, occupancy. etc.). Permitting more building types by right is part of the form -based code assessment. Ongoing 10. Pursue a form -based code for the A consultant contract to analyze the potential Alexander Elementary neighborhood and the of a form based code was approved Northside. December 2016. Completion estimated August 2017. Several rounds of public meetings have been held for the Northside and the South District — A third presentation is planned for July 24. July 12, 2017 Page 3 11. Strategically seek LIHTC projects through Discussing potential possibilities with the tax an RFP process overseen by the HCDC (in credit development community. Difficulty lies conjunction with #5). with assembling land for a multi -family residential development with the required zoning. Council to consider land banking guidelines at their August 1 meeting. Will actively starting looking for land once $750,000 is available. 12. Create a committee of staff, developers Committee of six community members and and other interested stakeholders to determine City staff formed to review tax exemption the viability and potential parameters of a tax possibilities. First meeting held 1/17/17. abatement program that would support Committee meets monthly and anticipates a affordable housing. recommendation for Council this fall. 13. Exempt the Riverfront Crossings from the Completed 4/2017 Affordable Housing Location model (AHLM) The Housing and Community Development and consider modifications to reduce size of Commission recommended amendments to restricted areas and/or account for exempt Riverfront Crossing from the AHLM neighborhood densities (consider University and reduce the size of restricted areas. Impacted and Downtown neighborhoods for Council approved HCDC's recommendation at exclusion as well). their April 4, 2017 meeting. 14. Tenant Displacement City Council approved Comprehensive Plan • Council approval of major site plans when amendments to support amendments to the 12 or more households will be displaced Site Plan Chapter. Amendments to the Site and there is no accompanying rezoning. Plan Chapter are anticipated to be forwarded • Such applications would require a to Council in August 2017. transition plan to better inform residents and the general public (requires a comprehensive plan and a site plan ordinance amendment). 15. Rent abatement for emergency orders Legal is working on a draft ordinance. when vacation of property is not necessary Anticipate Council review in August 2017. (use simpler language for ease of understanding). • Increase education about housing code violations and how to report Should you have any questions about the strategies of their status, please contact me at 319.356.5244 or tracy-hightshoe@iowa-city.org. I ��.®ter CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: July 6, 2017 To: City Council From: Simon Andrew, Assistant to the City Manager Re: Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County FY2017 report Introduction: The Executive Director of the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County has submitted a report thanking the City Council for the $500,000 fiscal year 2017 contribution to support affordable housing projects and detailing how these dollars were obligated. Below is a short description of each project. Projects include a new rehabilitation initiative and three new construction projects adding to the community's affordable housing stock. Projects serve both renter and homeowner households. Loan repayments support future Trust Fund project applications. Projects: Healthy Homes Iowa City - $75, 000 grant • Invest Health initiative/pilot project to address chronic childhood asthma • Up to $7,500 in rehabilitation costs per home/minimum of 10 households below 80% Area Median Income (AMI). Limited to improvements that improve indoor air quality - (rental & owner -occupied) • Collaboration between City of Iowa City housing specialists and the University of Iowa College of Nursing • All funds dedicated to repairs/no staff costs are included • Iowa City Community School District — School Based Clinics to provide referrals of children with uncontrolled, persistent asthma • Coordination of asthma interventions with the Iowa City Free Medical Clinic for items with no other funding source (smoking cessation, allergy free mattress covers, etc.) • Projects expected in: o Towncrest Neighborhood (including Town and Campus apartments) o Broadway Neighborhood o Hilltop Mobile Home Park o Pheasant Ride Neighborhood Lot purchase - North Governor - $40,000 loan July 11, 2017 Page 2 Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity project/new construction • $40,000 10 year loan/1 % interest for lot purchase • One single family home/buyers below 60% AMI - (homeowner) • Lot purchase summer 2017; home construction 2018 • Construction approximately $118,700 (different funding sources) Saddlebrook Meadows down payment assistance - $75,000 loan (half forgivable) • Down payment assistance/new construction on Pinto Lane and Blazing Star Drive • Three homes/$25,000 assistance per home/buyers below 80% AMI - (homeowner) • $12,500 10 year forgivable loan; $12,500 10 year 0% interest loan • City Council has also supported a $1,000 per home Workforce Housing Tax Credit match for the project, leveraging an additional $10,000 grant to the homebuyer from the developer for down payment assistance Riverfront Crossings multifamily project - $800, 000 loan • 28 unit new construction in Riverfront Crossings • 30 year loan/2% interest/30 year affordability period • 20 affordable units/8 market rate units - (rental) o 13 units affordable at 60% AMI o 5 units affordable at 40% AMI c, 2 units affordable at 30% AMI • Trust Fund award contingent on Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) award from the Iowa Finance Authority (IFA) by March 2018; LIHTC application due late 2017 • Total project cost approximately $6.8 million, leveraging approximately $5.7 million in private funds • Site is walkable to services, including transit service City staff and Housing Trust Fund staff are happy to answer any questions. Housing Trust Fund lohnsoS County Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County 322 East Second Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Email: tachenbach@htfjcotg Website: m%,%v.htfjcotg Office: 319.358.0212 Fax: 319.358.0053 Board afDireciors in my March update to you, I reported that HTFJC had received nearly $1.5 million in Bob Dvorsky, Prrrident Date: June 30, 2017 Slate Seualor, 37" Disliia Committee recommended, and the Board approved, awards totaling $990,000. Ellen Ilabel, P,Yfident Elect To: Tracy Hightshoe Cip. ofComloille The following shows the April award amounts, the type of project and the number of Ron hlavrias,.raretap From: Tracey Achenbac xecutive Director Permit Cities n be utilized on a portion of all of the awards, because all projects are located in Iowa John Warren, T nararrr Re: Report on City FYI Affordable Housing Funding through June 2017 Beegan KD I/ --------------- Thank you again for the opportunity to report on the progress of the use of the City's Simon Andrew, Gy ofleaw $500,000 contribution to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County. As a result of the City spring 20107 awards, the City's funding will be utilized to create and preserve several Jerry Anthony, U,dtewo-of new housing units. Iowa, Uri ou & Regiona/Plm,ning At the present time, I am considering the FYI Iowa City contribution of $500,000 Robert Brooks, Pritear Citil n As reported previously, the City's affordable housing finding of $500,000 was first Atony Bronco, Hil/f Batik & offered in the December 2016 application round, and because little was awarded, nearly Tills/ Co. all of the City finding was offered again in the March 2017 application round. As Bob Burns, B,Nar, &Bariu, always, any affordable housing project located in Johnson County may be eligible for LC. HTFJC funding; however, per the City's request, HTFJC is currently dedicating the Executive Director City funds to projects located within the city of Iowa City limits. Crissy CangancW, S/Kher Ileum significantly in Johnson County. hlaryyann Dennis, E..bifioio in my March update to you, I reported that HTFJC had received nearly $1.5 million in The Horning Fellonubip requests for funding in the March application round, and in April the Distribution Kirsten Frcy, Kenxrdj, Crain, Committee recommended, and the Board approved, awards totaling $990,000. M9, and Gdner Steve Gordon, AM ellana&1treal The following shows the April award amounts, the type of project and the number of Steve Long, HBKEagiaeering, households that will be assisted with the $990,000. The City of Iowa City funding may LLC be utilized on a portion of all of the awards, because all projects are located in Iowa City. Tracey Ahdcahey, Cihe ojNalb I-ib,,Dr Healthy Homes Rehab 10 Renter Households $ 75,000 Phil O'Brien, UrbanArrcr Real Lot Purchase — N. Governor I Owner Household $ 40,000 Erlate Down Payment Assistance 3 Owner Households $ 75,000 Scott Schroeder, ,1/idlVer/0rn . Riverfront Crossings New 20 Renter Households $800,000 BONA At the present time, I am considering the FYI Iowa City contribution of $500,000 Rod Sullivan, johnin CoNnq, obligated. Of course, some awards are contingent on other things, such as securing Board ofSNpem orr other sources of fielding, so actual payment on these awards has not yet occurred. Larry Wilson, Uai,vrrty Heigbu 0/410 please pass on my thanks to the Mayor and City Council and other city staff. I am Stat]'' happy to attend a City Council meeting to give a more formal presentation, if that is Tracey Achenbach, preferred. The City's dedication to affordable housing is inspiring to all of us. Thank Executive Director you for giving HTFJC the opportunity to impact affordable housing even more significantly in Johnson County. Casey Cooper Operations Coordinator r -4 CITY OF IOWA CITY 1P7 MEMORANDUM Date: July 13, 2017 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Stefanie Bowers, Human Rights Coordinator & Equity Director SJ�� Re: Social Justice and Racial Equity Second Quarter Update for 2017 Attached please find the second quarter Social Justice and Racial Equity Update for 2017. Included as a part of this update is the Police Department's second quarter report on community outreach, community presentations, cultural competency trainings, public education efforts on rights, and community partnerships. Social Justice & Racial Equity Second Quarter Update (April — June 2017) CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE SOCIAL JUSTICE K RACIAL EQUITY Aw-A Accountability April 4, the City of Iowa City, along with the City of Dubuque and the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE), sponsored a daylong conference held in downtown Iowa City titled Advancing Racial Equity: the Role of Government. The conference had over 100 participants representing governmental bodies, community, and organizations from across the State. The aim of the event was to demonstrate how local and regional governments have the ability to implement policy change at multiple levels and across multiple sectors that can drive larger systemic change in jobs, housing, health, education, and the criminal justice system. April 19, staff from the Office of Equity and Human Rights participated in Diversity and Inclusion program sponsored by the Employee Resource Group Consortium. Oather Taylor was the presenter. Mr. Taylor is the Director of Recruitment and Diversity for Alliant Energy. The event was held at the Iowa City Public Library. May 10, the City Manager's Roundtable was held with representatives attending from the Center for Worker Justice, the Coalition for Racial Justice, the Human Rights Commission, the Black Voices Project and the Community Police Review Board. The discussion focused on summer and programs for youth. For meeting notes and the list of participants, visit https://www.icgov.org/city-government/deoartments-and-divisions/equity-and- h u m a n-rights/socia I -i u st ice-and-ra cia I-eg u ity. May 12, the City renewed its membership with the Central Midwest Higher Education Recruitment Consortium (HERC). The City joined HERC in 2016. HERC is a nonprofit consortium that assists its members in attracting the most talented and diverse professionals across the nation. May 16, the City Council passed a resolution at its formal meeting reaffirming the City of Iowa City Law Enforcement Non -Discrimination Policy. The resolution reaffirms a similar resolution passed in 2001. May 26, the City renewed its membership with the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE). GARE is a national network of local and state government entities working to achieve racial equity and advance opportunities for all. The City first joined in 2015. June 1, staff from the Office of Equity and Human Rights participated in the Government Alliance on Race and Equity's Midwest (GARE) members' meeting. At the meeting, initial plans were discussed for a Regional Convening on Racial Equity in late 2017 or early 2018. SOCIAL JUSTICE 8 RACIAL EQUITY .r -V Conversations April 14, staff from the Office of Equity and Human Rights and Parks and Recreation participated in a dialogue about opportunities, needs, and the state of youth and youth at risk in Johnson County. The meeting was held at City High School and had representatives from the school district, youth organizations, and government agencies. April 14, City staff participated in an open house held by the Iowa City Mosque. The event was planned to show appreciation and gratitude for local support and solidarity. April 27, the City Council held its sixth Listening Post in the lobby of the Broadway Neighborhood Center. City Council listening posts provide opportunities for the community to engage with City leaders on topics that are important to them in an informal setting. April 28, the Police Department held Coffee with a Cop at T. Spoons in the Old Capitol Town Center. May 19, the Police Department held Coffee with a Cop at The Dingo Bar located on Martin Street. June 15, the City Council held its seventh Listening Post at Kiwanis Park. It was held in conjunction with Party in the Park sponsored by Parks and Recreation. CIIY SOCIAL JUSTICE 8 RACIAL EQUITY Justice April 28, the City added a link to American Friends Service Committee's Iowa Immigrant Rights Program. The program works with immigrants in Central Iowa to help them build a sense of community so that new immigrants will be able to participate in the political processes in their communities. The City also added a link to the 2017 Greater Iowa African American Resource Guide. This guide is published in part to enhance relationships between the African American community and system professionals. Both links can be found under the Resources menu on the Equity and Human Rights web page of the City's website. June 24, the City was a co-sponsor of the annual Juneteenth celebration held from noon to 6 p.m. at Mercer Park Recreation/Scanlon Gym. Staff from various City departments, including Fire and Police, volunteered at the event that included a health fair, information booths, entertainment, and activities for youth. 4 SOCIAL JUSTICE K RACIAL. EQUITY Outreach April 1, Parks and Recreation, along with the Local Food Project, collaborated to offer a pilot beginner gardening class. The classes are intended to introduce participants to basic gardening skills that will aide in the growth of their very own garden. Outreach focused on individuals and families from underserved areas and demographics. The classes ran from April 1 to June 24. April 12, the Office of Equity and Human Rights collaborated with the University of Iowa Legal Clinic to sponsor a training for employers on the hiring and employment of non -US citizens. Over 20 participants including City staff participated in this Lunch and Learn held at the East Side Recycling and Education Center. May 20, Neighborhood and Community Development sponsored Building Business Basics: Learn How to Develop a Plan to Launch Your Own Business at Kirkwood Community College, Iowa City Campus. Other sponsors included the University of Iowa Community Credit Union, Kirkwood Community College, Hills Bank and Trust Company, Center for Worker Justice, Sankofa Outreach Connection and Midwest One Bank. Over 80 community members participated. May 30, Higher Education Recruitment Consortium (HERC) was invited to participate in the pilot and launch of Google's improved search experience to help people quickly explore jobs from across the web in one place. The City joined HERC in 2016. HERC is a nonprofit consortium that assists its members in attracting the most talented and diverse professionals across the nation. June (whole month), the Library celebrated Pride month with LGBTQ+ displays in adult and children's areas. June (whole month), the Library partnered with YES! (Youth Empowered to Serve) and the Summer Youth Institute, two programs that focus on helping teens build job skills, to that they can find employment. They used meeting rooms and the computer lab with groups of teens. A library representative made a presentation at the Iowa City YES! Day on June 14 about youth employment opportunities at the Library. June (whole month), the Library's Summer Reading Program (SRP) theme is Build A Better World. Themes of social justice and racial equity were part of the SRP. June (whole month), the new bookmobile regularly visited neighborhoods with high minority populations and children's programs were delivered weekly at Wetherby, Mercer and Willowcreek Parks. June 14, the City Manager, Mayor Pro -Tem, Parks and Recreation, Library, Office of Human Rights and Equity and Neighborhood Services hosted 30 youth enrolled in the YES! program (Youth Empowered to Serve). The program administered through Johnson County Social Services provide, youth ages 14-17 with the opportunity to develop job skills, build positive community connections and prepare for a productive adulthood. June 29, several City Departments including Parks and Recreation and Human Rights and Equity sponsored Serving Up The Community BBQ presented by Black Voices Project. Other sponsors included Field to Family, Center for Worker Justice and Backyard Abundance. CITY OF IOWA CITY SOCIAL JUSTICE 8 RACIAL EQUITY Training April 11, Parks and Recreation staff participated in the National Recreation and Park Association webinar on Park Equity: How an Equity Lens Can Change the Way You Do Business. The webinar looked at forward -thinking agencies from around the country who have adopted racial equity plans that allow them to make investments and better engage communities of color and other under -served communities. April 6, two staff from the Library attended The National Building Coalition Institute: Leadership for Equity and Inclusion daylong workshop. April 24, staff from the Office of Equity and Human Rights participated in a webinar on Racial and Ethnic Disparities: How States and Communities Can Work Together to Combat Disproportionality. Shay Bilchik, Director of the Center for Juvenile Justice Reform at Georgetown University, was a presenter. May 16, staff from Police, Parks and Recreation, City Manager's Office, Office of Human Rights and Equity, Human Resources, and the Senior Center participated in a two hour training on The Safe Zone Project program. The program offers a visible message of inclusion, affirmation, and support to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people in the community. The training was led by the University of Iowa's Chief Diversity Office. May 31, staff from the Office of Equity and Human Rights participated in a webinar on Understanding and Minimizing Unconscious Bias in the Hiring Process sponsored by Turner Consulting Group. June 26, staff from the Office of Equity and Human Rights participated in the Government Alliance on Race and Equity's monthly Membership Network meeting. TO: Geoff Fruin, City Manager FROM: Jody L. Matherly, Police Chief RE: ICPD Strategy on Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) DATE: July 13, 2017 The Iowa City Police Department has participated in collecting demographic data in traffic stops since 1999. While disproportionality in minority contacts (DMC) in traffic stops still exists, much progress has been made. After my hire, I reviewed the DMC study, arrest statistics by race, and met with numerous community members and police staff. As a result of this initial review and dialogue, the police department has developed a strategic plan to aggressively address DMC issues over the next five years. There are four components to this plan: Goals and Objectives, Education and Training, Community Outreach, and Deployment of Resources. Goals and Objectives Goal k1 Reduce DMC involving discretionary charges in non -traffic related incidents o Objective: address DMC in crimes where officer discretion may be a factor. Officer discretion is typically at the highest levels for low level offenses. Officers will be reminded that in addition to the relatively minor nature of the offense, they should consider the need to build community trust and determine if alternative enforcement will have a stronger, long-term positive impact on low level offenders. Examples of such crimes are disorderly conduct, possession of drugs, interfering with police, and curfew. Juvenile diversion programs that presently exist such as LADDERS are preferred and will be expanded on as appropriate. • Goal #2 Reduce disproportionality in DMC statistics in the St. Ambrose University traffic study regarding traffic stops, consent searches, citations and arrests. Education & Training • Dr. Barnum will present his DMC study to all ICPD officers so there is a full understanding: o What the results of the study mean o How to properly define, document and submit data o Include a lesson on dispelling the crime/race association and reiterate our expectation that we deploy resources based on crime trends and not solely by neighborhoods or specific populations within our community. o Scheduled for July 24, 25, 26, 2017 • Sara Bruch (UI) will present on negative effects that police interaction has on minority communities. o Scheduled for July 24, 25, 26, 2017 • The department presently trains annually in cultural diversity, understanding racial profiling and the policies, civil and criminal liability that applies. New police recruits also receive such training at the basic police academy. We will continue to combat implicit bias through regular training. Emphasis will be placed on supervisor training in identifying racially equitable police practices. Continue to train in crisis intervention, use of force with emphasis on de-escalation, verbal influence and defense, reasons officer have discretion in arrest, etc. o Two 40 -hour classes held as of 6-9-17 Community Outreach • Enhance problem -oriented policing and increase involvement in social organizations and community groups. The goal is to educate the public and continually reassess what the public wants and expects from their police agency. • Increase neighborhood foot beat patrols and encourage officers to get out of their patrol vehicles to engage the community and build relationships through non -enforcement interactions. Constant interaction with minority populations will help reduce implicit bias. o Increased foot patrols since May, 2016 • Continue and enhance ICPD's formal community policing programs such as Coffee with a Cop, Citizen's Police Academy, Special Olympics, Shop with a Cop, Free Wheels bicycle program (which teaches bicycle safety and donate bikes to deserving youth), etc. Ongoing • Invite interested community members to use of force training that requires police to make judgment calls in a matter of seconds. This will provide a better understanding of what options officers have in various scenarios and how they prepare to make difficult decisions regarding the use of force. The opportunity for the public to attend and participate is intended to help foster healthy dialogue and understanding of a topic that can be quite controversial. • Launched a police/community events calendar to enhance the effectiveness of community outreach positions. This calendar is available to all police and city employees and will encourage greater participation and interdepartmental cooperation. Completed and in use as of 4-1-17. • Start a police chiefs informal committee consisting of community members to enhance their involvement in police matters. Example of topics for discussion would be what information can legally be released during critical incidents, review of police general orders particularly those related to bias -based policing, body worn cameras and use of force. By allowing the community to have a part in these decisions, it will build trust in the decisions we make. The City's Equity Director and Community Police Review Board will continue to be a part of the policy review process. • Create innovative programs to be part of the solution for our community members to maintain their vehicle equipment and possess a valid driver license. Deployment of Resources • Deploy resources to address crime trends without targeting entire communities, particularly communities of color. Assigned our crime analyst to develop robust system so crime trends can be quickly identified and communicated to patrol officers 7-5-17 • Assign supervisors of community outreach unit and patrol officers to coordinate collaboration so options can be formulated to address crime issues to reduce formal enforcement action. Assigned to SCAT Sgt 7-5-17 to begin process • Increase foot and bicycle patrols by police officers and community outreach officers in all neighborhoods to foster dialogue between police and residents, build trust, enhance quality of life and reduce crime. The downtown beat officer is an example of success in this effort. Full implementation would be a long-term goal as it requires additional resources. Increased foot patrol as of 5-1-17. • Encourage our police chaplain unit to attend police/community events. This solves two issues: it enhances the involvement of the chaplains and gives ICPD another tool to collaborate into the community. Began expanded services of 5-15-17 • Maintain systems that provide checks and balances internally. This will serve as a means to quickly audit enforcement activities, and address signs of disparate practice. This process is being researched to determine if the records system can produce the information needed to carry out the review. Began monthly supervisor reviews of stats 6-2017 • Form an ICPD internal disproportionate policing committee consisting of a captain, lieutenant, sergeant, two patrol officers, and a civilian position. Mission: to develop strategies to reduce DMC, increase trust in the community, improve internal communication/education regarding DMC, and develop creative and supportive ways for our officers to be more effective at their jobs. Appointed members 6-8-17. Lt -1, Sgt -3, Officer -2, civilian analyst -1. • CALEA —continue participation in national accreditation to ensure that policies and procedures are considered best practices. Achieved 6th reaccreditation (Meritorious status) March, 2016. • Build better communication with our Human Rights Office. That starts with ensuring that public copies of police reports involving hate crime and similar conduct are sent to them in a timely manner. Completed as of 3-1-17 • While citizen complaints are one tool to address alleged acts of use of force, racial profiling, etc. we also are keenly aware that many community members, especially young people and minorities, are reluctant to report their concerns due to a lack of trust in law enforcement. As such, our supervisors will continue to closely monitor officer activity and review in -car and body camera video. o Developing an online reporting process for commending or complaining about police interaction. In progress Capt. Campbell as of 5-15-17. Continue to diversify our police force. This means not only hiring staff that reflects the diversity of our community but also ensuring that once hired, they can remain being an individual and have equal opportunity for sought-after assignments and promotions. This was a discussion the Police Chief had recently with Jason Sole, NAACP Minneapolis Chapter. As of 5-1-17, ICPD is at parity with black officer: population ratio (8%). Enhance use of Southside Precinct o It should be a remote site serving many neighborhoods to report crimes, use as resource center and community meetings. It should not be considered as a police outpost only used to oversee a particular neighborhood. Assigned COR Harper office there 5-2017 Through implementation of these actions, I believe the ICPD can significantly reduce DMC and become a national leader in community-based policing that is rooted in trust with residents. Building trust will take time but we are committed to doing what is necessary to accomplish this goal. Lastly, the ICPD will continue to refine our data collection in an effort to be very transparent on our progress with the entire community. As I continue to meet with community members and engage with our officers and staff, additional strategies will be developed to help us reach our ultimate goal of eliminating DMC while providing extremely high-level policing services to the community that result in safe, healthy neighborhoods for all. Updated items as of 7-12-17 in RED font rMrTrol IP8 Kellie Fruehling From: Sue Dulek Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 9:07 AM To: Kellie Fruehling Subject: FW: moratorium For Information Packet. Sue Susan Dulek Assistant City Attorney 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-356-5030 319-356-5008 Fax sue-dulek(aiowa-citY.org Notice: Since e-mail messages sent between you and the City Attorney's Office and its employees are transmitted over the internet, the City Attorney's Office cannot assure that such messages are secure. You should be careful in transmitting information to the City Attorney's Office that you consider confidential. If you are uncomfortable with such risks, you may decide not to use e-mail to communicate with the City Attorney's Office. Without written notification that you do not wish to communicate with the City Attorney's Office via e-mail communication, the City Attorney's Office will assume you assent to such communication. This message is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2515, is intended only for the use of the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege. It should not be forwarded to anyone else without consultation with the originating attorney. If you received this message and are not the addressee, you have received this message in error. Please notify the person sending the message and destroy your copy. Thank you. From: Geoff Fruin Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 2:26 PM To: *Council Members Cc: Sue Dulek Subject: FW: moratorium Council Members: It appears many of you received an email from A.J. Mahler regarding the moratorium. Please see the response below that was sent to A.J. earlier today. A second email from A.J. is also included in this string. Please call Sue or me if you have questions. Thanks, Geoff From: A. J. Mahler [mailto:aj@ajmahler.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 2:22 PM To: Sue Dulek Cc: 'Rockne Cole'; Geoff Fruin; Eleanor M. Dilkes; John Yapp Subject: Re: moratorium Ms. Dulek, Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, after watching the first forty minutes of the June 6 council work session, I am left with a queasy feeling, like I have been hung out to dry after a spin cycle. I hope my pessimism is ill founded, but I fear that my economic potential has been lopped off at the knees by the council's reaction to HF 134. While I am acutely aware of the need to manage this issue, it seems remarkable that the council has stopped all permitting in the zone described and is unable to commit to whether a property such as mine would be able to have a permit for a single bedroom accessory apartment attached to a single family, owner occupied home on a virgin infill lot. This is not the type of situation that the council has stated is their primary concern, a house going from three unrelated occupants to seven or eight. You may think that the previous familiar regulation was working, but 1178 E Jefferson St proves it was not. Our neighborhood banded together to deal with an unruly owner who had more than three unrelated tenants thanks to sleep overs that amounted to additional tenants. That property has since been resold and is being managed appropriately by the new owners, but it took over a year to bring the situation under control. It is one thing to restrict the issuance of new permits for expanding existing housing and even important to look at total number of permits in neighborhoods to work on change at the granular level of a block; however, excluding something as customary and traditional as an accessory apartment seems extreme and in my case, economically harmful. I look forward to being as involved in this process as I am able in order to protect my rights and interests. Sincerely, A. J. Mahler A. J. Mahler Author of The Betty Chronicles ajcaajmahler.com (319) 530-4686 ajmahler.com vita brevis, ars longs, occasio praeceps, experimentum periculosum, iudicium difficile. Life is short, and art long, opportunity fleeting, experimentations perilous, and judgement difficult. On 7/5/17 12:37 PM, Sue Dulek wrote: Hello: Council member Cole asked that I respond to your email. In answer to your question, I cannot assure you that after Dec. 31, assuming all other criteria are met (that is, payment of the rental fee and passing an inspection), an accessory apartment that would be built on Parcel 1011333002 will be eligible for a rental permit. Rental permit eligibility depends on what actions the City Council decides to take. The purpose of the moratorium is to give City staff time to make recommendations to the City Council about how best to mitigate the impact of increases in occupancy and for City Council to decide what actions it wishes to take. Below is a link to the City Council work session from June 6 at which the City Manager discusses the issues presented by the change in the law (HF 134) on occupancy. At this same link, you can also find the City Manager's power point presentation. https://www. icaov.ora/proFect/neighborhood-rental-occupancy-study There are no City Council meetings scheduled yet on this issue. City Council usually meets on the first and third Tuesdays at 5:00 pm (informal session) and at 7:00 (formal session). You are welcome to attend in person or watch on City Channel 4 or stream it on the City's web site. City Council agendas are posted on the City's website the Thursday afternoon before a City Council meeting. Please note that the City Council does not take comments from the public at works sessions, only formal meetings. You can also communicate with the City Council by email at councilaicgov.om Please feel free to email me or telephone me if you have additional questions. Sue Dulek Susan Dulek Assistant City Attorney 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-356-5030 319-356-5008 Fax sue-dulek(&,iowa-citv.org Notice: Since e-mail messages sent between you and the City Attorney's Office and its employees are transmitted over the internet, the City Attorney's Office cannot assure that such messages are secure. You should be careful in transmitting information to the City Attorney's Office that you consider confidential. If you are uncomfortable with such risks, you may decide not to use e-mail to communicate with the City Attorney's Office. Without written notification that you do not wish to communicate with the City Attorney's Office via e-mail communication, the City Attorney's Office will assume you assent to such communication. This message is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 1510-2515, is intended only for the use of the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege. It should not be forwarded to anyone else without consultation with the originating attorney. If you received this message and are not the addressee, you have received this message in error. Please notify the person sending the message and destroy your copy. Thank you. Dear Mr. Rockne, I have contacted John Yapp regarding the Rental Permit Moratorium to request additional information. He forwarded to me the PDF of the council's ordinance and explained that "A single family home with an accessory apartment may be constructed provided it meets building code. The new home may be occupied by an owner -occupied household. We are restricted from issuing any new rental permits at this time." Unfortunately, that gives no indication as to whether a permit will be allowed after the moratorium is completed. This is a significant issue for me because I am being harmed in that the sale of my spare lot (Parcel 1011333002, no street address but next to 1150 E Jefferson St) is being stymied by the moratorium. I have had two verbal offers and two other persons expressing a desire to purchase the lot to build upon, primarily as a single family home with an accessory apartment, however, because of the moratorium, they have backed away from making a written offer. This harm is significant as I planned on using the proceeds from this sale to fund the launch of my third novel this summer. I have had to push the release date back to August already and am concerned I may have to push it back farther. All three of my novels have made the Kirkus Reviews Best Books list as Recommendations, but if I do not get on the road to promote them, they will not move off the shelves and provide me with an income. Can you please give me assurances that once the moratorium has passed that my lot, assuming all other criteria are met, will be eligible for a rental permit for the accessory apartment that would be built on the land? Sincerely, A. J. Mahler PLEASE NOTE: THIS EMAIL IS SENT TO PROVIDE THE COUNCIL WITH TIME -SENSITIVE INFORMATION. TO AVOID AN UNINTENDED "MEETING" IN VIOLATION OF THE IOWA OPEN MEETINGS ACT, PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY TO ALL." IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, PLEASE CALL THE CITY MANAGERS OFFICE AT (319) 356-5010. Iowa City Police Department and University of Iowa DP IP9 Bar Check Report - July, 2017 The purpose of the Bar Check Report is to track the performance of Iowa City liquor license establishments in monitoring their patrons for violations of Iowa City's ordinances on Possession of Alcohol Under the Legal Age (PAULA) and Persons Under the Legal Age in Licensed or Permitted Establishments (Under 21). Bar checks are defined by resolution as an officer -initiated check of a liquor establishment for PAULA or other alcohol related violations. This includes checks done as part of directed checks of designated liquor establishments, and checks initiated by officers as part of their routine duties. It does not include officer responses to calls for service. The bar check ratios are calculated by dividing the number of citations issued to the patrons at that establishment during the relevant period of time by the number of bar checks performed during the same period of time. The resulting PAULA ratio holds special significance to those establishments with exception certificates, entertainment venue status, or split venues, in that they risk losing their special status if at any time their PAULA ratio exceeds .25 for the trailing 12 months. Note, while the resolution requires that bar checks and citations of the University of Iowa Department of Public Safety (DPS) be included in these statistics, the DPS ceased performing bar checks and issuing these citations to patrons in May of 2014. Previous 12 Months Top 10 Under 21 Citations PAULA Citations Btj'rc•. N'm: Visits Citation Nrtio Business Name \;i, it,. Ct loc,'' Pn+lo Union Bar 94 130 1.3829787 Union Bar 94 85 0.9042553 Summit. [The] 61 43 0.7049180 Summit. [The] 61 30 0.4918033 Eden Lounge 38 22 0.5789474 Sports Column 62 23 0.3709677 Sports Column 62 21 0.3387097 Fieldhouse 52 11 0.2115385 DC's 58 18 0.3103448 Eden Lounge 38 6 0.1578947 Bo -James 10 3 0.3000000 Airliner 28 4 0.1428571 Pints 28 7 0.2500000 DC's 58 7 0.1206897 Martini's 28 6 0.2142857 Brothers Bar & Grill, [It's] 88 7 0.0795455 Fieldhouse 52 it 0.2115385 Martini's 28 2 0.0714286 Airliner 28 5 0.1785714 Blue Moose- 25 1 0.0400000 Only these atab!ishrnent, .sith at lea, t 10 bar checks r.ro listed in the chart above Current Month Top 10 Under 21 Citations PAULA Citations Bualne-a Name Visits Cltatlons Rat? B rsin ss Name Vigns Citations Ratio Sports Column 1 2 2.0000000 Fieldhouse 4 3 0.7500000 Fieldhouse 4 1 0.2500000 DC's 2 1 0.5000000 Brothers Bar & Grill, [It's] 6 1 0.1666667 -exception to 21 ordinance Page 1 of 6 Iowa City Police Department and University of Iowa DPS Bar Check Report - July, 2017 Possession of Alcohol Under the Legal Age (PAULA) Under 21 Charges Numbers are reflective of Iowa City Police activity and University of Iowa Police Activity Business Name Monthlv Totals Bar Under2l PAULA Checks Prev 12 Month Totals Bar Under2l PAULA Checks Under2l PAULA Ratio Ratio (Prev 12 Mo) (Prev 12 Mo) 2 Dogs Pub 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Airliner 0 0 0 28 5 4 0.1785714 0.1428571 American Legion 0 0 0 Atlas World Grill 0 0 0 Bardot Iowa 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 Baroncini— 0 0 0 Basta 0 0 0 Big Grove Brewery 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Blackstone— 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Blue Moose— 1 0 0 25 2 1 0.08 0.04 Bluebird Diner 0 0 0 Bob's Your Uncle 0 0 0 Bo -James 0 0 0 10 3 0 0.3 0 Bread Garden Market & Bakery _ 0 0 0 Brix 0 0 0 Brothers Bar & Grill, [It's] 6 0 1 88 11 7 0.125 0.0795455 Brown Bottle, [The]— 0 0 0 Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar' 0 0 0 Cactus 2 Mexican Grill (314 E Burlington) 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Cactus Mexican Grill (245 s. Gilbert) 0 0 0 6 0 8 0 1.3333333 Caliente Night Club 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Carl & Ernie's Pub & Grill 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Carlos O'Kelly's— 0 0 0 Chili Yummy Yummy Chili 0 0 0 Chipotle Mexican Grill 0 0 0 — exception to 21 ordinance Page 2 of 6 Business Name Monthlv Totals Bar Under2l PAULA Checks Prev 12 Month Totals Bar Under2l PAULA Checks Under2l PAULA Ratio Ratio (Prev 12 Mo) (Prev 12 Mo) Clarion Highlander Hotel 0 0 0 Clinton St Social Club 0 0 0 Club Car, [The] 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Coach's Corner 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Colonial Lanes— 0 0 0 Dave's Foxhead Tavern 0 0 0 DC's 2 0 1 58 18 7 0.3103448 0.1206897 Deadwood, [The] 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Devotay— 0 0 0 Donnelly's Pub 0 0 0 Dublin Underground, [The] 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Eagle's, [Fraternal Order of] 0 0 0 Eden Lounge 4 0 0 38 22 6 0.5789474 0.1578947 EI Banditos 0 0 0 EI Cactus Mexican Cuisine 0 0 0 EI Dorado Mexican Restaurant 0 0 0 EI Patron 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 EI Ranchero Mexican Restaurant 0 0 0 Elks #590, [BPOI 0 0 0 EnglertTheatre` 0 0 0 Fieldhouse 4 1 3 52 11 11 0.2115385 0.2115385 FilmScene 0 0 0 First Avenue Club- 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Formosa Asian Cuisine" 0 0 0 Gabes- 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 George's Buffet 0 0 0 Givanni's" 0 0 0 Godfather's Pizza 0 0 0 Graze` 0 0 0 Grizzly's South Side Pub 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Hilltop Lounge, [The] 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Howling Dogs Bistro 0 0 0 -exception to 21 ordinance Page 3 of 6 Business Name Monthly Totals Bar Under2l PAULA Checks Prev 12 Month Totals Bar Under2l PAULA Checks Under2l PAULA Ratio Ratio (Prev 12 Mo) (Prev 12 Mo) IC Ugly's 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 India Cafe 0 0 0 Iron Hawk 0 0 0 Jimmy Jack's Rib Shack 0 0 0 Jobsite 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Joe's Place 1 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 Joseph's Steak House` 0 0 0 Linn Street Cafe 0 0 0 Los Portales 0 0 0 Martini's 2 0 0 28 6 2 0.2142857 0.0714286 Masala 0 0 0 Mekong Restaurant— 0 0 0 Micky's" 0 0 0 Mill Restaurant, [The]— 0 0 0 Moose, [Loyal Order of] 0 0 0 Mosleys 0 0 0 Motley Cow Cafe— 0 0 0 Noodles & Company" 0 0 0 Okoboji Grill— 0 0 0 Old Capitol Brew Works 0 0 0 One -Twenty -Six 0 0 0 Orchard Green Restaurant— 0 0 0 Oyama Sushi Japanese Restaurant 0 0 0 Pagliai's Pizza" 0 0 0 Panchero's (Clinton St)— 0 0 0 Panchero's Grill (Riverside Dr)— 0 0 0 Pints 0 0 0 28 7 1 0.25 0.0357143 Pit Smokehouse 0 0 0 Pizza Arcade 0 0 0 Pizza Hut" 0 0 0 Players 0 0 0 Quinton's Bar & Deli 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 -exception to 21 ordinance Page 4 of 6 Business Name Monthly Totals Bar Under2l PAULA Checks Prev 12 Month Totals Bar Under2l PAULA Checks Under 21 PAULA Ratio Ratio (Prey 12 Mo) (Prey 12 Mo) Rice Village 0 0 0 Ride 0 0 0 Ridge Pub 0 0 0 Riverside Theatre— 0 0 0 Saloon— 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Sam's Pizza 0 0 0 Sanctuary Restaurant, [The] 0 0 0 Shakespeare's 0 0 0 Sheraton 0 0 0 Short's Burger & Shine— 0 0 0 Short's Burger Eastside 0 0 0 Sports Column 1 2 0 62 21 23 0.3387097 0.3709677 Studio 13 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Summit. [The] 0 0 0 61 43 30 0.7049180 0.4918033 Sushi Popo 0 0 0 Szechuan House 0 0 0 Takanami Restaurant— 0 0 0 Taqueria Acapulco 0 0 0 TCB 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 Thai Flavors 0 0 0 Thai Spice 0 0 0 Times Club @ Prairie Lights 0 0 0 Trumpet Blossom Cafe 0 0 0 Union Bar 3 0 0 94 130 85 1.3829787 0.9042553 VFW Post 93949 0 0 0 Vine Tavern, [The] 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Wig & Pen Pizza Pub" 0 0 0 Yacht Club, [Iowa City]- 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Yen Ching 0 0 0 Z'Mariks Noodle House 0 0 0 - exception to 21 ordinance Page 5 of 6 Monthly Totals Prev 12 Month Totals Under 21 PAULA Bar Under2l PAULA Bar Unde21 PAULA Ratio Ratio Checks Checks (Prev 12 Moi (Prev 12 Maj Totals 26 3 5 674 279 185 0.4139466 0.2744807 Off Premise I 0 I 0 2 1 0 0 93 0 0 Grand Totals 7 278 exception to 21 ordinance Page 6 of 6 Posted and distributed on 7/14/17. Johnson JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA C~ic tj� BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING AGENDA JULY 17, 2017 Conference Rooms 203 BIC Joint Entities Meeting 4:30 PM HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES BUILDING 855 SOUTH DUBUQUE STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52240 Late Handouts Distributed PHONE: 319-356-6000 www.JOHNSON-COUNTY.com www.JOHNSON000NTYIA.IQM2.com (Date) AGENDA FOR JOINT ENTITIES MEETING BETWEEN THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, UNIVERSITY OF IOWA, IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD, CLEAR CREEK AMANA COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD, AND THE FOLLOWING CITIES: CORALVILLE, HILLS, IOWA CITY, LONE TREE, NORTH LIBERTY, OXFORD, SHUEYVILLE, SOLON, SWISHER, TIFFIN, AND UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS ---- MEETING PRECEDED BY JOHNSON COUNTY COMMUNITY ID TWO-YEAR ANNIVERSARY EVENT AT THE JOHNSON COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FIRST FLOOR LOBBY AND PARKING LOT, 913 SOUTH DUBUQUE STREET, WITH COMMENTS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS AT 4:00 PM ---- A. CALL TO ORDER: 4:30 PM B. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS C. DISCUSSION/UPDATE 1. Affordable housing (ICCSD) 2. Facilities Master Plan (ICCSD) 3. Iowa City Community School District Strategic Plan (ICCSD) 4. General obligation bond (ICCSD) 5. Crisis Intervention Team update (Johnson County) 6. Fireworks legislation and resulting challenges (Johnson County and City of Iowa City) 7. Update on County projects and planning efforts (Johnson County) 8. Other business 9. Schedule next meeting 10. Other Johnson County Iowa Published: 711412017 12:00 PM Page 1 Agenda Board of Supervisors July 17, 2017 D. ADJOURNMENT ---- TOUR OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY AMBULANCE SERVICE & MEDICAL EXAMINER BUILDING, 808 SOUTH DUBUQUE STREET, IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE JOINT ENTITIES MEETING ---- Johnson County Iowa Published: 711412017 12:00 PM Page 2 June 27, 2017 Page 1 MINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION JUNE 27, 2017 — 6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Minnetta Gardinier, A. Jacob Odgaard, Chris Ogren Members Absent: Julie Bockenstedt, Robert Libby Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Eric Goers, Simon Andrew DRAFT Others Present: Matt Wolford, David Hughes, Christopher Lawrence, Regenia Bailey RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None. DETERMINE QUORUM: Odgaard called the meeting to order at 6:01 P.M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes from the May 25, 2017, meeting were reviewed first. Ogren stated that she had one small point, on the last page where the conversation is about the Young Eagles. It states, "Tharp noted .... with the EAA Chapter out of Cedar Rapids." Ogren stated that technically this Chapter is Iowa City and Cedar Rapids, and she suggested adding Iowa City. Gardinier moved to accept the minutes of the May 25, 2017, meeting as amended. Ogren seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0; Bockenstedt and Libby absent. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: At this point, Chairperson Odgaard asked Tharp to introduce the newest Commission Member. Tharp stated that they had several guests present this evening and he proceeded to introduce Chris Lawrence, the newest Airport Commission Member. His term will start July 1. Tharp also introduced Simon Andrew from the City Manager's office. Ogren then introduced herself to Chris Lawrence, as did others present. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. FAA/IDOT Projects: AECOM / David Hughes i. Obstruction Mitigation — Hughes noted that at the last meeting this item was being held up by the FAA's response. He stated that this issue has been resolved and they now will see if they have a grant application going back to the FAA, based on the original numbers presented and the independent fee estimate that they requested be done. Tharp stated that June 27, 2017 Page 2 due to a short turn -around time, it would be useful to authorize the Chair to sign the grant once it is received. 1. Consider a resolution authorizing Chair to sign grant offer — Odgaard moved to approve Resolution #A17-09, authorizing the Chair to sign the grant offer once received. Gardinier seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bockenstedt and Libby absent. Hughes spoke to what the plans are once they can move forward with this. He noted some general timeframes, including what would be due to the FAA at the end of September, along with a draft version of the EA for review mid to late October. That would be followed up with a public comment period, and then the final version of the EA shortly after the first of the year, with finish of the EA being anticipated by May of 2018. ii. South Taxiway Extension — Hughes stated that this is under construction currently, with the rock and storm sewer in place now. The next phase will be paving, according to Hughes. He noted that they had to make some adjustments with the apron they were planning for, and that they will be having Metro put some additional concrete in to adjust the grades. He then responded to Member questions regarding these adjustments and the project in general. iii. North T -Hangar Restroom — 1 . Public Hearing —The public hearing was opened at 6:16 P.M. by the Chair. Tharp briefly reviewed this project, noting that it is to add a restroom to hangar B on the south side. The storage area that was there is being removed in order to do this. Tharp stated that the State is putting in 70% of the funds for this project. He then gave Members a brief rundown of the timeframes involved. The public hearing was closed at 6:20 P.M. 2. Consider a resolution authorizing plans, specifications, form of contract and authorizing bid — Gardinier moved to approve Resolution #A17-10, authorizing plans, specifications, form of contract, and authorizing bid. Ogren seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bockenstedt and Libby absent. b. Strategic Plan — Regenia Bailey started off the strategic planning session by stating that they would be holding off on the SWOT analysis until Jeff Davidson is able to join them. She noted that he had a previously scheduled trip and therefore is unable to attend this evening. Bailey stated that they would be focusing on the 'mission' and 'vision' statements this evening, with the objective being to look at the current statements and decide if any changes are desired. Beginning the review, Bailey began with the mission statement portion, noting that basically it states the organization's reason or purpose. She added that ideally it should be both unifying and inspiring internally, as well as concise and clear. Externally the mission statement should be clarified. Moving on to the vision statement, Bailey stated that this is what is seen in the future, if the organization is successful. This is more aspirational in nature. Continuing, Bailey further clarified what these statements are meant to do. She shared with Members what the Airport's current statements are. Bailey then asked Members to start a discussion regarding their mission and vision statements and what they may propose changing. Gardinier stated that for the June 27, 2017 Page 3 vision statement, she would question 'meets the needs of its stakeholders.' She asked what 'its' refers to here, the City of Iowa City or the Airport. Gardinier believes the current vision statement is more of a mission statement, as Bailey had alluded to. Bailey asked if other Members agree that the current vision statement should become the new mission statement. Members then discussed some possible word changes to the statement. Bailey suggested clarifying wording where possible, in order to provide accurate information to anyone reading the strategic plan. Members continued to discuss the wording for the mission and vision statements, and how perceptions by the public should be taken into account. Ogren suggested the wording of 'directed by the Airport Commission,' rather than 'through the direction of.' Matt Wolford with FBO Jet Air also made some suggestions about moving wording around. Another suggestion was made to change 'area' to 'community.' Gardinier read the current version being discussed: The Iowa City Municipal Airport, directed by the Airport Commission, provides for safe, cost effective general aviation that creates and enriches...., as Members continued to discuss the wording. Ogren then suggested: The Iowa City Municipal Airport, directed by the Airport Commission, provides a safe, cost effective general aviation facility. The Airport creates and enriches economic, educational, etc. Tharp suggested using the full name of the Airport throughout the statement. Some Members agreed that they prefer the statement broken down into two sentences. Odgaard stated that he would almost prefer one sentence here. Bailey stated that she will draft this both ways, so that Members can think about it and then revisit it at the next meeting. Ogren then reviewed changes that Wolford had suggested, such as '....through providing a safe, cost effective general aviation,' portion being moved, which would eliminate the 'that creates' portion of the statement. Reading the statement suggestions again, Wolford stated: The Iowa City Municipal Airport, directed by the Airport Commission, creates and enriches the economic, educational, healthcare, cultural, and recreational opportunities for the greater Iowa City community through safe and cost effective general aviation.' Moving on to the current mission statement becoming the vision statement, Bailey noted that Ogren had said it was a pretty generic statement. Bailey added that in strategic planning, you do not always need to have a vision statement. Members continued their discussion on this issue, with Ogren asking if there is truly a need for a vision statement, that perhaps it is to continue to do the mission. Gardinier stated that she believes they do need it, that they should aspire to be more. Bailey asked the group what aspirations they may have for the Iowa City Municipal Airport, as it goes about its new mission basically. Odgaard responded that in a sense it is to make the Airport a more prominent community facility than it is today, in order to look forward to an even better facility. He believes the Airport should be more integrated with the community than it currently is. Ogren made the suggestion of: .... will continue to provide all of the things above in a way that is integral to the Iowa City community. Others agreed, noting that the Airport needs to be seen as an asset to the entire community, not just the aviation community. The discussion continued, with Members discussing just what it is the Airport is attempting to 'foster' in the community. Odgaard responded that he sees it as recognition of the University and fostering awareness of the potentials for the Airport, or something to that June 27, 2017 Page 4 effect. Bailey suggested 'community pride,' and Odgaard agreed. Bailey asked if Members want to say something regarding the programming that takes place at the Airport. The suggestion was made '...fostering involvement of all ages,' and 'building a sense of community around the Airport.' The other Members were impressed with these suggestions. Bailey continued to ask Members if they had any other key words they wanted to add to the statement, and Members continued to discuss just what it is they want to convey to the public. Bailey stated that what she is hearing is that the group wants the Iowa City area to see the Iowa City Municipal Airport as an asset or integral to the community. Gardinier brought up a comment from the Pekin Municipal Airport: '...will serve as a crucial component of the Pekin and greater Peoria area transportation infrastructure and play a critical role in the advancement, growth, and economic development of the region.' This comes from a combined mission and vision statement, according to Gardinier. Odgaard spoke to how the Airport can be a driver for economic growth. Bailey suggested using: '....that supports or drives or contributes to the area's economic vitality,' or something along those lines. She stated that she and Davidson will work with these suggestions to come up with a draft for the next meeting. Regarding the public surveys, Bailey noted that they received 575 responses, with 80% from Iowa City. She relayed the various avenues used to get information about the survey out to the public. C. Airport Operations L Budget — Tharp noted that the fiscal year is just about over. He stated that there aren't any real surprises in the budget and they should have a stable year-end. Odgaard asked if Tharp had prepared a graph like he did last year at this time, and Tharp stated that he will try to have this for the next meeting. 1. FY2018 Preview — Tharp noted that there are two key points in this budget — the initial funding for the 100 -year anniversary event and $5,000 for furniture replacement in the conference room. ii. Management — Tharp noted that they are currently working through the strategic planning process. iii. Events 1. Young Eagles — June 10 and 17 were Young Eagle events. Tharp noted that June 10 was the originally scheduled date, but this had to be cut short due to high winds. 2. SERTOMA — This event is planned for August 20. Tharp noted that this is a week earlier than normal. d. Mid -American Energy — Tharp stated that this came to the Commission last year, as well, but due to various reasons it was deferred. He noted that they now know the actual location of the gas line and would like to be able to recommend approval to the City Council. Tharp briefly responded to Member questions regarding this issue. I. Consider a resolution recommending Council approve a utility easement — Ogren moved approval of Resolution #A17-11, recommending the City Council approve a utility easement with Mid - American Energy. Odgaard seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bockenstedt and Libby absent. June 27, 2017 Page 5 e. North Commerce Park Outlot B — Tharp stated that Outlot B is the small parcel located between the Alexis Park Inn and Ruppert Road. Members briefly discussed the offer of $20,000, which Tharp noted is backed up by an appraisal. I. Consider a motion recommending Council accept purchase offer — Odgaard moved to recommend to the City Council acceptance of the purchase offer. Ogren seconded the motion. The motion carried 3- 0, Bockenstedt and Libby absent. FBO / Flight Training Reports I. Jet Air — Matt Wolford shared the monthly maintenance reports with the Commission. He stated that May continued with the usual types of maintenance being done — light bulb replacement, grass mowing, and trash pick up. In June they have been doing some weed control around the hangars. An expensive item noted was the filter replacements for the various fuel system components. Wolford noted that they were able to spread some grass seed around the new hangar area, in hopes that the rain will get it started. Moving on to Jet Air business, Wolford noted that the big news is the completion of the hangar. He stated that Jet Air is looking forward to being able to use the new space. The shop has been keeping busy, with Wolford noting the addition of another mechanic. Charter flights have been busy, as well, especially in the business sector. Wolford also noted an increase in the flight training. Wolford stated that he would like to show the Commission the new hangar sometime soon, and Odgaard suggested at the next meeting. Gardinier suggested that they consider adding a flat screen monitor to the main area of the terminal building that could be used to show recent student pilots who have earned their license, for example, or to do some marketing for the Airport. She added that she has seen these used at other airports around the country. Tharp and Wolford will work together on the flat screen monitor idea. g. Commission Members' Reports — Gardinier stated that this year's Air Race Classic was very successful. She earned third place this year, her best race yet. Ogren shared that they were at the EAA Chapter meeting this past weekend. She also stated that she was able to meet Congressman Dave Loebsack recently, along with Wolford and Tharp last week. Ogren noted that she will be gone for two weeks, should Tharp need an interim Chair during Odgaard's absence. Odgaard stated that he leaves Friday for Beijing and returns the following Friday. h. Staff Report — Tharp also noted Congressman Loebsack's visit and what they were able to briefly discuss. He then noted that he was able to speak with Bockenstedt recently and she asked that he extend her thanks to the Commission. Ogren stated that she wanted to add one more comment about the Loebsack visit. She noted that Tharp and Wolford were very impressive in their representation of the Airport. The discussion turned briefly to drones and the use of them in the immediate area. Gardinier asked if they have considered switching out the current hangar lights for LED ones. Tharp stated that they have not, as the bulbs are basically the renter's responsibility and the renter can put in LED bulbs if desired. Odgaard then spoke about the hangars up in Dubuque, June 27, 2017 Page 6 noting that they have a fresh coat of paint on them. He asked how often the Airport does this. Tharp noted that it does not happen very often, but that they do have a project to 'reskin' the hangars on their list of projects for the future. Odgaard asked if this is something they should do prior to any 100 -year anniversary celebration. Members agreed that they should look into this further. 100 -year Anniversary Committee — Ogren stated that she has not yet received any responses on the form she sent out. Tharp stated that he is over 50% done with his portion. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, July 20, 2017, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building. ADJOURN: Ogren moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:52 P.M. Odgaard seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bockenstedt and Libby absent. CHAIRPERSON DATE June 27, 2017 Page 7 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2017 Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time TERM o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T = co cc O s = N W A f= 0) NAME EXP.�+ o 01 m rn rn o 0 N Of T M O1 a) CD V V -4 V V V V Minnetta 07/01/19 OI O/ Gardinier O/E X X X X X X X X X X E 'E X Chris 07/01/18 O Ogren I X X X E X X X X X X X X X X A.Jacob 07/01/18 O/ Odgaard X X X X X X X X X X E X X X Julie 07/01/17 O O Bockensted / / o/ O/ t X X E X E X X X X X X E X E Robert 07/01/20 O Libby / OI O/ X X E X X O O E X X X X X E Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CON JUNE 15, 2017 — 6:30 PM IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY, MEETING ROOM A PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Byler, Syndy Conger, Christine Harms, Bob Lamkins, John McKinstry, Harry Olmstead, Dorothy Persson, Paula Vaughan MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Kris Ackerson, Tracy Hightshoe OTHERS PRESENT: Barbara Bally, Mark Patton, Carla Phelps, Roger Goedken, Roger Lusala By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends approval of the proposed FY17 Annual Action Plan Amendment #2. By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends the following allocations for FY18 HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) Funding: Habitat for Humanity $35,000 Successful Living - Rehab $50,000 The Housing Fellowship — New Construction $100,000 Successful Living—Acquisition increased from $36,000 to $51,000 $15,000 MYEP — Rental Acquisition $50,000 $250,000 By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends approval of the FY18 Annual Action Plan (see page 2): Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 2017 Page 2 of 10 Projects Planned activities CDBG Award HOME Award Low -Mod Clientele Public Services/Facilities Aid to Agencies Shelter House $ 49,696 NA Aid to Agencies NCJC $ 43,434 NA Aid to Agencies DVIP $ 4,570 NA MYEP Facility $ 31,000 NA Little Creations Academy $ 73,000 NA Crisis Center Remodel $ 85,000 NA Neighborhood and Area Benefits Wetherby Park Improvements & other eligible improvements $ 75,000 NA Homeowner Housing Rehabilitation Comprehensive rehabilitation $ 235,000 $ 90,000 Other Housing Activities CHDO Operating NA $ 18,000 The Housing Fellowship Rental Rehabilitation $ - $ 86,000 Successful Living -Acquisition $ 36,000 $ 51,000 Habitat for Humanity— Acquisition/Rehab. $ - $ 35,000 THF Rental — New Construction $ $ 100,000 MYEP Rental Acquisition $ $ 50,000 Successful Living Rental Rehab $ - $ 50,000 Economic Development Economic Development Set-aside $ 50,000 NA CDBG and HOME Administration/Planning CDBG Administration $ 126,049 NA HOME Administration NA $ 46,635 Total $ 808,749 $ 526,635 By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends City Council approval of the draft Affordable Housing Land Bank Guidelines with the following language to replace the criteria that would disqualify a property from consideration: • More than an incidental portion of the site is in the 100 -year floodplain. • The site cannot be serviced by utilities. • The site is not in the City's designated Growth Area. • There is environmental contamination on the site that prohibits residential development. • The site is not in compliance with the Affordable Housing Location Model. By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends City Council approval of the draft Citizen Participation Plan. A thirty day public comment period must be observed before Council consideration. Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 2017 Page 3 of 10 CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Byler called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 20. 2017 MINUTES: Olmstead moved to approve the minutes of April 20, 2017 with edits. Conger seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: 00iC- ANNUAL ACTION PLAN ITEMS — AVAILABLE ONLINE AT www.imov.orp/actionotan: a) Recommendation to City Council regarding proposed FY2017 Annual Action Plan Amendment #2 Ackerson reminded the Commission that at the last meeting Maryann Dennis from the Housing Fellowship gave an update on their projects. Originally it was an acquisition of rental housing and she was requesting to convert those funds to a rehab and would be combined with the FYI funds received. This request was put out for public comment in mid-May and will be considered by City Council next week on Tuesday. Olmstead moved to approve a recommendation to City Council regarding proposed FY2017 Annual Action Plan Amendment #2. Persson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. Byler commented that there is a need for rehab in Iowa City but is concerned if more rehab dollars are awarded that means less new housing is becoming available. Persson agreed and said it is important to look at what homeowners in the area think (if there are rental units in the area that are in disarray) and it will be a balancing act to assist with rehabs as well as adding to the inventory. Lamkins noted that it is less expensive to rehab than bring in new homes and agrees there needs to be more housing stock in the affordable range but also need to keep the current housing up to date. Ackerson noted that the houses they are requesting to rehab are not currently under affordability clauses and could sell the homes at any time. Ackerson noted that since the non -profits do not have to pay taxes that is a benefit to them. For profit housing providers have to pay property taxes on their units,even if considered affordable. b) Recommendation to City Council regarding applications for FYI HOME Investment Byler discussed the five applications. He began by looking at the medians for each application. The median Habitat award was $35,000 due to four Commissioners giving it $70,000 and four awarding $0. Rental construction for The Housing Fellowship the median was $97,000 and three Commissioners were around that number. Vaughn asked about The Housing Fellowship application and asked how 102 persons were served by that project, it is 28 units and 20 are affordable. Byler explained that they look at the number of beds and that figures to 3.6 beds per unit which probably seems a bit high. Lamkins noted he proposed an award of $120,000 because he misread the number of units or persons. Barbara Baily (The Housing Fellowship) noted it is figured from 1.5 persons per bedroom which is the HUD guideline. Byler noted that The Housing Fellowship serves families so there is realistically more than one person per bedroom where Successful Living serves individuals. Mark Patton (Habitat for Humanity) Stated that the application doesn't ask for number of beds or Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 2017 Page 4 of 10 bedroom count, just for the number per household. Persson suggested it needs to be consistent for all applicants to see the number of persons each project will serve whether it be by beds, bedroom count, or household. Ackerson stated that they typically count households. For SRO properties (tenants have their own bedroom but share bath and kitchen facilities) we count each tenant separately (each their own household). Byler said it would be beneficial to know how many people they can help. Then to be fair Habitat homes should count for 12 individuals if figuring 1.5 persons per bedroom. Byler stated the MYEP (Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program) award was split by the Commissioners, half awarding $0 and half $75,000. The Successful Living rehab had a median of $50,000 which was also close to the average. Vaughn voiced a concern about the MYEP and Successful Living applications that they both receive funding from Medicaid and if that will be viable in the future. Carla Phelps (Successful Living) stated they currently have five houses and were awarded money for two additional houses this year. This application would take them to nine houses. They have looked at staffing for this increase and the type of housing they will be going to are rehabilitation homes which have a higher reimbursement from Medicaid which will increase the organization's bottom line and allow for this growth. They are looking very closely at possible cuts to Medicaid and noted it will be cut over the course of time, not so much in the foreseeable future. They have begun seeking alternative sources of funding, which all non -profits are going to need in the future. Phelps stated they are secure with funding for at least the next three years and it is difficult to predict what will happen after that or what Washington will do. Roger Goedken (Successful Living) agreed and said they have done substantial financial modeling and predictions are ahead of the curve from what they were predicting even just six months ago. Phelps also noted that regarding the rehab homes they are placing in these home are people who just don't function well even at their transitional level. Olmstead acknowledged that many providers right now are having difficulty being reimbursed from State Medicaid and asked if Successful Living has dealt with that as well. Phelps said they are anticipating it more than having seen it. The bigger concern is Medicaid cutting down the services they will allow. Phelps said they will be looking into the future and pursuing aggressively grant and fundraising opportunities. Byler asked what the timeline for these dollars are, if the FY18 dollars are approved. Hightshoe said the funds must be committed within two years. Phelps noted that if they cannot get new rental permits for six months, they can subsidize the rental income with Medicaid money. Hightshoe noted that was a concern because the pro forma has to show rental income cash flow and also there is a concern about increasing the number of homes by four in such a short period of time. They are doubling their properties. Do they have the staff capacity for such fast growth? If the homes are not viable or can't comply with the HOME rules, the City must step in and ensure it is affordable rental until the compliance period expires. Byler noted they were awarded $36,000 for two separate homes each (down payments) earlier in the year and questioned why they are now asking for $100,000 for just one home purchase. Phelps said they would like to have a smaller debt service and it was recommended to ask for a larger amount to cover any contingencies needed for rehabilitation. Hightshoe stated they have a debt coverage ratio of 0.75 which means they are not collecting enough money to pay for their expenses. Their proforma shows they are not viable. Phelps agreed stating they don't, they subsidize the units. Hightshoe stated that the City needs to see that the rents will cover expenses. It is a requirement of the underwriting analysis. If the project is not viable at the time we complete the underwriting analysis, the City can't invest the HOME funds into the project. Persson asked if Staff was more comfortable then with the rehab request rather than the acquisition request from Successful Living. Ackerson noted that both of the debt coverage ratios are below the minimum. The City's minimum is 1.2 and the acquisition is at 0.75 and the rehab is only 1.06 which means they are not collecting enough revenues to cover their expenses. Olmstead asked if Section 8 contributed to the funding. Phelps said they do receive a certain amount Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 2017 Page 5 of 10 of Section 8 funding but it is not a whole lot. Hightshoe noted that for a four-bedroom household Section 8 typically gives the standard divided by four. Goedken said it is a double -edge sword because they want to keep the rents low because it is usually half or more of their tenant's income however he understands that when applying for grants it is seen as not enough income. Byler suggests that since the Habitat for Humanity median and average are the same perhaps they can award one lot, $35,000 for Habitat. Lamkins stated that can't be done, noting the minimum award must be $50,000. Patton agreed, noting they cannot buy a lot for $35,000. Hightshoe said it could be allowed, they aim for awards of $50,000 or more. Looking at the Successful Living rehab dollars, Byler noted the median and average are also almost the same, so perhaps they can award them $50,000. The Housing Fellowship also has a similar median and average, so that could be $100,000. Byler noted that the Successful Living rental acquisition (that they have discussed earlier) has a median and average that is far below what their award would need to be to be viable. There is $65,000 left and one thing the Commission could do is give MYEP $65,000 towards their $75,000 unit acquisition. Byler stated on a personal level he gave his full support to The Housing Fellowship project due to the number of people it would serve. Hightshoe clarified Staffs opinion, they are not stating the Commission should not fund the Successful Living acquisition; it is just that they have serious concerns about their cash flow/long term viability and how quickly they are increasing properties. Additionally if they are asking for money to rehab units. They don't have the cash flow to rehab existing units, but are also requesting more funds to purchase additional properties. McKinstry agreed, he feels for the mental health housing needs state-wide but also feels The Housing Fellowship project is really important. Persson also voiced concern about giving Successful Living more money for acquisitions and would rather give for rehab. She is not necessarily wed to her recommendations and is flexible except for her concern for the rental acquisition. Ackerson noted that it is important to remember if the Successful Living projects don't cash flow/document long term viability the City cannot proceed with the project no matter how badly the beds are needed. Roger Lusala (Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program) stated they received $50,000 in the last allocation of HOME fund from the City and they purchased a unit with those funds. Byler asked if they were to receive only $50,000 again would they still be able to move forward on the next allocation. Lusala stated they would, they always try to put more down to keep the debt low. Byler suggested changing the MYEP award to $50,000. That leaves $15,000 on the table to be allocated. He suggests to add the $15,000 to the $36,000 acquisition that was approved for Successful Living at the last round. Lamkins moved to recommend to City Council the following allocations for FY18 HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) Funding: Habitat for Humanity $35,000 Successful Living - Rehab $50,000 The Housing Fellowship — New Construction $100,000 Successful Living — Acquisition (increased from $36,000 to $51,000 $15,000 MYEP — Rental Acquisition $50,000 Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 2017 Page 6 of 10 $250,0001 Vaughn seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. c) Recommendation to City Council on approval of FY18 Annual Action Plan Ackerson showed the table that summarizes all the CBDG and HOME funding allocations, which becomes the Annual Action Plan. The left column shows all the projects, the activities are the second column. In January the Commission allocated funds for Aid to Agencies. Staff expected to have $100,000 available but funding was reduced by 0.61 %. Ackerson also noted that the table differs from the one in the Commission's handout because they just received the actual funding grant amounts so they were able to input final numbers and this final table will be the one sent to Council. Hightshoe stated the good news was the City did not get a cut; they received $1,000 less than expected in CDBG funds but $35,000 more in HOME. She noted they are down in HOME program income. Byler asked about the owner -occupied rehab, the $325,000. How many homeowners are served by that money. Hightshoe said it would serve about 25 low/moderate income homeowners. She noted that HOME projects are usually more expensive than CBDG because all the homes must meet all Code requirements prior to occupancy. Byler suggested perhaps they turn the program into a housing rehabilitation program (rental and owner -occupied), and make it a bigger program perhaps using $100,000 or so from HOME and then non -profits could apply for the rental housing. Hightshoe said that would have to be a recommendation to Council as it is a Council set-aside at this time. Byler sated it serves low income households either way, whether by ownership or by working with the non- profit partners for rentals. Hightshoe noted that the City did just apply to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County for $75,000 for rental rehab. Because there are so many regulations with Federal funded rehab programs as it relates to lead, the City applied to the Trust Fund of Johnson County for rehab. of rental or owner - occupied housing in low income neighborhoods. A family member must have asthma. The City will partner with the University of Iowa College of Nursing, Free Medical Clinic and ICCSD School Based Clinic to reduce asthma disparities in low income neighborhoods. Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 2017 Page 7 of 10 Olmstead moved to recommend City Council approval of the FY18 Annual Action Plan: Projects Planned activities CDBG Award HOME Award Low -Mod Clientele Public Services/Facilities Aid to Agencies Shelter House $ 49,696 NA Aid to Agencies NCJC $ 43,434 NA Aid to Agencies DVIP $ 4,570 NA MYEP Facility $ 31,000 NA Little Creations Academy $ 73,000 NA Crisis Center Remodel $ 85,000 NA Neighborhood and Area Benefits Wetherby Park Improvements $ 75,000 NA Homeowner Housing Rehabilitation Comprehensive rehabilitation $ 235,000 $ 90,000 Other Housing Activities CHDO Operating NA $ 18,000 The Housing Fellowship Rental Rehab $ - $ 86,000 Successful Living SRO units $ 36,000 $ 51,000 Habitat for Humanity $ - $ 35,000 THF Rental Construction $ $ 100,000 MYEP Rental Acquisition $ $ 50,000 Successful Living Rental Rehab $ - $ 50,000 Economic Development Economic Development Set-aside $ 50,000 NA CDBG and HOME Administration/Planning CDBG Administration $ 126,049 NA HOME Administration NA $ 46,635 Total $ 808,749 $ 526,635 Lamkins seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion was passed 8-0. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND BANK GUIDELINES: Byler noted that land banking was part of the Affordable Housing Action Plan and $150,000 was allocated for land banking. Staff has created general guidelines, included in the Commissioner's packets. Byler's general question regarding the document is if anything is binding or if it is all just suggestions. Hightshoe stated they are guidelines, but there are certain criteria that automatically will remove a property from consideration. Byler then asked about the yes/no questions and it seems as if neither answer would disqualify an applicant and Hightshoe confirmed he was correct. Lamkins asked about the disqualifiers, it cannot be easily serviced by utilities or not in the City's designated Growth Area, and it seems to make if very hard to find reasonable priced land. Ackerson Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 2017 Page 8 of 10 stated the Growth Area is based on what can be sewered based on topography so beyond that it would be too expensive to build. Byler agreed with Lamkins and doesn't want to make these guidelines too restrictive for fear of losing a great potential project. Some of the words could be construed in different ways. Whether the site cannot be "easily" serviced by utilities is a judgment call. The section on pre -development costs covers the utility questions. Additionally, stating "incidental portion" of the site within the 100 -year floodplain. What is the definition of incidental? Hightshoe stated there is a HUD definition for incidental portion. There is an environmental review, basically none of the building can be in the floodplain. Persson said that at the time they were looking to build the Shelter House they looked at property and the building was not going to be in the floodplain but a parking lot would be and therefore the site was rejected. Hightshoe believes it means that the building and access to the building can't be in the floodplain. People must be able to get out of the building safely during a flood event. Vaughn stated the Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition looked at this and it wasn't clear to them how the form would actually identify a purchase. Is there any weighing of the questions, or anything quantifying on the application. Hightshoe said Staff didn't want there to be a points basis because it is so hard to acquire land for affordable housing. Persson questioned the validity of planned transit, noting that when she bought her property on the southwest edge of town they were told there would be transit within a couple years and it was more like 15 years before it happened. Hightshoe agreed that with land on the outskirts of town it is hard to know how soon transit will get to those locations. Byler suggested removing the first bullet from the disqualifiers and including that information regarding floodplains to question 6. Additionally the second bullet could be removed because question 5 discusses utilities, as well as the fourth bullet could be included in question 5 or question 7. Lamkins suggested leaving the fourth bullet but removing the wording "severely limits" and therefore if environmental contamination prohibits residential development then the property is disqualified. Persson doesn't think it is in anyone's benefit to approve anything that was in the 100 -year floodplain. McKinstry likes the use of the incidental portion language, there are often situations where a backyard will flood but not the house or the access to the house and would hate to disqualify low income housing just because a backyard floods. Conger doesn't feel the bullet points are unreasonable. Lamkins agrees with Conger, but the first priority has to be getting people a place to live and, yes, maybe deal with rare inconveniences of flooding but at least have options of where to live. Byler noted the bottom line is fear of disqualifying a project because of certain words that can be seen as different meanings from two different people. If the Commission wants to keep all five bullets, perhaps they can just be reworded to be more specific (removing "easily' or "severely limits," etc.). The Commission discussed language changes and agreed to keep all five bullets but remove the language from "easily" from bullet two and "severely limits" from bullet four. Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 2017 Page 9 of 10 Lamkins moved to recommend City Council approval of the draft Affordable Housing Land Bank Guidelines with the following language to replace the criteria that would disqualify a property from consideration: • More than an incidental portion of the site is in the 100 -year floodplain. • The site cannot be serviced by utilities. • The site is not in the City's designated Growth Area. • There is environmental contamination on the site that prohibits residential development. • The site is not in compliance with the Affordable Housing Location Model. Persson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING DRAFT CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN AMENDMENT: Ackerson noted that the Citizen Participation Plan is the document that outlines how the City presents the decision making of federal funds to citizens. These are requirements by HUD and the Federal Government. This document was last updated in 2004 and the City is now required to update it to incorporate the Assessment of Fair Housing. Essentially it is a year-long process to research and get input from agencies in the community to find out what the critical needs are. That document is then used to craft the City's Consolidated Plan (the five-year funding plan). In the process of updating the document to include the Assessment of Fair Housing, Staff also is making some housekeeping changes such as replacing the word "hearing' with "meeting' and replacing "citizen" with "resident". Ackerson pointed to the footnote on page 2 of the document describing why the word citizen is still in the title of the document. He stated that because most people access City documents online, they are proposing to remove the language on page 11 that states they will send an updated copy of the document to the library. The main changes are how the City defines amendments to Action Plans. In the past Staff would present a lot of minor detail changes in the Annual Action Plan which would require a 30 -day public comment period for activity level changes. The projects and activities in the FY18 Annual Action Plan will reduce the number of "Substantial Amendments" but retain activity oversight by the HCDC and City Council. Olmstead moved for approval with minor edits. Lamkins seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT: Hightshoe provided a brief update on Invest Health activities underway, including survey results. Ackerson noted the enclosed information regarding the Housing Iowa Conference. ADJOURNMENT: Lamkins moved to adjourn and Persson seconded. The motion was passed 8-0 and the meeting adjourned. Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 2017 Page 10 of 10 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record Name Terms 8/18 9/15 10120 11/17 12/15 1/19 2/9 2/16 3/7 4/20 6/15 Byler, Peter 7/1/17 X X X X X X O/E X X X X Conger, Syndy 7/1/18 X X O/E X X X O/E X X X X Harms, 7/1/19 X X X X X X X X X X X Christine Lamkins, Bob 7/1/19 O/E X O/E X O/E X O/E X X O/E X McKinstry, 7/1/17 O/E O/E X X X X X X X O/E X John Olmstead, 7/1/18 X X O/E X X X X X X X X Harry Persson, Dottie 7/1/17 X X X X X X X X X X X Seiple, Emily 7/1/18 X X X X X X X X X X -- Vaughan, 711/19 X X O/E X X X X X X X X Paula I I Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant or prior commissioner