HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-05-29 Transcriptions Page 1
Council Present: Botchway, Cole, Mims,Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton
Council Absent: Salih
Staff Present: Fruin, Monroe, Dilkes, Fruehling, Ralston, Knoche, Havel, Sovers,
Andrew, Bockenstedt, Laverman, Hightshoe, Bothell, Sitzman
Others Present: Stewart, Wu (UISG)
Review Gilbert Street concepts for bicycle accommodation IIP3 of Info Packet of 5/241:
Throgmorton/ Iowa City City Council work session for Tuesday, May 29, 2018, and the first
topic on our agenda is to review Gilbert Street concepts for bicycle accommodation.
Looks like Kent Ralston's gonna speak to us. Good evening, Kent!
Ralston/Good evening, Mayor and Council. Thank you for having me. My name's Kent
Ralston. I'm the Transportation Planner for the City and the topic, as the Mayor
mentioned, is the Gilbert Street transportation study. Uh, for the presentation format,
quickly,uh, I should be able to get through the presentation in 20 minutes or so. I know
you've got other items on the agenda. Uh, as far as the time, or excuse me, as far as the
presentation format, I'll quickly go through the timeline and the purpose of the study, the
overview of the study area, an overview of the facility types that were included in the
transportation study, uh, the findings of the study, and the staff recommendations. And,
Mayor, whether you want to ask questions as we go through the presentation or at the end
is (both talking)
Throgmorton/Yeah, okay. We'll see.
Ralston/Uh, as far as the timeline and the purpose of the study, uh, it was initiated in the fall of
2017 at the direction of the Council. Uh, it stemmed from a recommendation in the bike
master plan that was adopted earlier that year,uh, recommending that the Gilbert Street
corridor be further researched, uh, to see whether a road diet could be implemented. Uh,
subsequent to that,we extended the Ulta's plan....Ulta Planning and Design's contract,
uh, to do the additional work. Uh, the purpose was to determine available alternatives
within the Gilbert Street corridor to allow for improved traffic operations and safety for
all modes of travel. Uh, in particular whether bike lanes could be added to the corridor or
some other form of, uh,bicycle accommodation. Uh, the study included the review of
existing studies, uh,both the Riverfront Crossings' plan, as well as a downtown traffic
study that was completed in 2014, uh, and encompasses the entire corridor between
McCollister Boulevard to the south and Market Street to the north. Uh, the study
included in, uh, an evaluation of existing conditions, uh, which has been completed, uh,
some stakeholder engagement, which has also been completed, uh, that included an open
house back in September. Uh, had about 30 or 40 attendees and was....and was fairly
well attended, and then the,um, consultant also had three stakeholder meetings with, um,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 2
prominent landowners along Gilbert Street. One was with Southgate Development. One
with, uh, the owners of the Big Grove Brewery, and then one with a member of the Clark
family, uh, because of their,uh, their....(noise on mic) because of their, uh (mumbled)
holdings along the corridor. Uh, there was also,uh, the development of three conceptual
designs which I'll go through this evening, and then the last thing and the goal of the
evening is to, uh, decide what functional design we want to move forward with,uh,
whether that's bike lanes or....or several other options. Little bit of, uh, slow, uh,
reception here.
Throgmorton/I thought for a second that time had stopped.
Ralston/ It sort of has! (laughter) I'm not sure what, uh, what's occurring. Does it change on
your screens or is it just not changing on the(several talking) Well, hold on one second.
Now we got it! We're back! Sorry about that! Uh, so this here is an image of the study
area, uh, again the, urn, in this image the Iowa River's to the north of the image. Uh, so
north is actually to the right of the screen, south is to the south, or excuse me, south is to
the left of the screen. Urn, again, at the far right is Market Street, which is the northern
terminus of the study area, um, McCollister to the south. Uh, what this shows is just the,
um, there were nine signalized intersections that were analyzed by the consultant. Those
show up in the, with the signals, and then there were also six additional stop controlled
intersections,uh, that were included in the study. Uh,just a quick overview of the study
area. Uh, as far as existing conditions are concerned, uh, as we all know it's a major
arterial corridor that goes north-south, uh, through the heart of Iowa City. Uh, it's a
relatively high collision corridor as it exists today, and I'll touch on that here in a minute.
Uh, I can tell you that two of the top five, uh, worst intersections in Iowa City, in terms of
collisions, are within this corridor. That's the Gilbert-Burlington intersection and then
the Gilbert, um....uh, Highway 6 intersection. Uh,the intersection as it stands has
relatively poor access control, and when I say access control I mean basically private
driveways, uh, accessing private property. Um, we also try and minimize, of course,
alleyways and streets,but primarily we try to, uh, minimize the actual number of
driveways to private property, and then I would argue that the corridor also has, uh, sort
of three distinct sections, which I'll go through here in a moment. Uh, also a large
student population at the north end of the corridor, as we know. Uh, as far as the future,
uh, transition of the corridor, uh, I can see it becoming a very vibrant commercial
corridor in the near future. Uh,both with the Riverfront Crossings, uh, District and the
Riverfront Crossings' plan, as well as, uh, our downtown's growing. As we know we've
got development both to the north and south of us, uh, here tonight. Uh, we can expect
more residential growth and development in the Riverfront Crossings District and we've
already seen some of that with The Rise project and other projects that are occurring, uh,
down around the, uh, Big Grove Brewery. Uh, we anticipate more growth in traditional
neighborhoods at the south end of the corridor, and I think we've already seen sort of a
boom here in the last, oh, half dozen years or so, down around the Langenberg
neighborhood,uh, the Covered Wagon Drive and so on and so forth. Uh, also,uh, in
addition to that, in the capital improvements program,urn, McCollister Boulevard, uh,
is....is under design this year and should be constructed next year,between, uh, Gilbert
over to Sycamore. And then I think we'll also see a lot more recrea....lot of more
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 3
recreation uses along the corridor, uh,both with Terry Trueblood Park, urn, which I think
has become wildly popular, and then with the new, uh, what I'm calling River Park, uh,
down here where the old sewer plant was, uh, between Gilbert Street and the....the river.
Uh, again I think you can break the corridor up into three distinct sections, which I've got
outlined here. Urn, as I mentioned earlier in looking at the corridor, uh, you can break
these down pretty evenly. You've got, uh, sort of the Market to Prentiss corridor, which
is....is pretty, urn, similar to itself,uh,that' s the number one section. Number two then
would be Prentiss to Highway 6, which I think sort of has a different character all
together, and then lastly, uh, Highway 6 down south to McCollister Boulevard. Again,
which, uh, is sort of different and distinct from the other two. Uh, we'll start by looking
at the first, uh, section—Markus....Market to Prentiss. Uh, as far as existing conditions
are concerned, uh, it's primarily a residential and commercial in use. Uh, it's got good
street connectivity. It's a grid street pattern, urn, it has good access control for the most
part. Uh, it's average daily traffic, uh, ADT is about 9,500, about 12,000 vehicles a day.
Uh, it's obviously a four-lane, uh, roadway with a width of 45-feet,back of curb to back
of curb. Um, I think it's got minimal pedestrian barriers because it's got a good grid
street pattern. Uh, for the most part you've got pretty good street connectivity. Decent
sidewalks, urn, but I would say that it's got poor bicycle accommodations as it exists
today. We've got on-street, uh, sharrows within the corridor, uh, but those have largely
become sort of out of favor with bicyclists, uh, the way I understand it, uh, and certainly
don't help, uh, novice or intermediate users. Uh, it's got a....this area's got large bike
and ped generators, as we know. Um, I say limited development potential, although I
already mentioned we've got development both to the north and the south, um, lot of
development potential downtown,but I think in this part of Gilbert Street at least, uh, not
a ton of development potential. And then, uh, in the last three years, 2015 to 2017, uh,
there were 132 vehicle collisions, uh, and 14 bike and ped collisions. And of those 132
collisions, 59, uh, had injuries. So no small amount of collisions, uh, in that section. Uh,
quickly then moving on to....the next section to the south, Prentiss and Highway 6. Uh,
you've got primarily again commercial, uh, land uses in this area, not so much residential
as, uh, the area to the north. Uh, you've got poor street connectivity, I would argue, uh,
because you've got the railroad tracks, um, at least along a portion of the corridor to th
east and you've got the river then to the west. Urn, you've also got relatively poor access
control with a lot of, uh, driveways to private property. Uh, you've got the, uh, much
higher average daily traffic in this area from about 13,500 vehicles a day to about 17,000
vehicles a day. Uh, again it's a four-lane roadway, uh, width is 45-feet. Uh, and I would
argue that you have frequent pedestrian barriers because of either, uh, a lack of
sidewalks, or in most cases just undefined sidewalks,because of all the access points, uh,
in the corridor. Uh, again, I would argue you have poorer bicycle accommodations for
the most part again because of those undeveloped sidewalks. Uh, or....or, urn, poorly
designed sidewalks I should say. Uh, large bike/ped generators. High development
potential, uh, and then for the last three years you've had 108 vehicle collisions in this
area, uh, slightly less than the first section, urn, and three bike-ped collisions. Uh,
moving on to the third section, uh, identified here in red, uh, from Highway 6 down to
McCollister. Uh, primarily, uh, this section is commercial and public land uses. Um,
there's a little bit of residential to the north, but primarily commercial, uh, with a lot of
public land use in this area. You've got the Forest, um....um, Forestry division's
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 4
building. You've got Napoleon Park. You've got the softball fields, and then again,
Terry Trueblood, uh, to the south. Uh, I would argue you have relatively poor street
connectivity because we don't have a lot of east-west connections in this corridor, at least
down towards the south. Urn, relatively poor access control in the north portion of this,
where all of the, uh, commercial activity's occurring. Uh, and then you've got •
substantially lower average daily traffic than you do in the other two sections of Gilbert
we've previously talked about. Urn, about 65,000, uh, down in the southern end, up to
about 12,500 vehicles a day in the north. Uh, this section is slightly wider than the first
two. It's 49-foot back, uh, of curb to back of curb rather than 45-feet. Uh, I would argue
as pedestrian barriers, uh, because of; again, uh, sort of a lack of sidewalks or at least
undeveloped sidewalks in certain areas, although you could argue that the Iowa River
Corridor Trail, uh, parallels a large portion of this section. So, um, you do have that. Uh,
relatively poor bike accommodations. Again large bike-ped generator, um, high
development potential in a portion of this corridor, and then in terms of collisions, it's a
little bit lower in the last three years. About 44 vehicle collisions, one bike-ped collision,
and uh,23 of those, uh, total, um, included injuries. As far as the existing conditions
assessment, that the consultant conducted, uh, again they looked at these 15 different
intersections and I know these'll be hard to read, uh, but the take-away is that they did
a.....a level of service analysis for all 15 intersections, again, uh, the nine signalized and
six unsignalized intersections from the north to the south, uh, and for the most part, uh,
the corridor's behaving relatively well and functioning relatively well. Um, most of the
corridor is, uh, operating with a total intersection, uh, level of service at a D or better, and
if you remember from past conversations we've had, we rank intersections based on, uh,
level of service and its delay per vehicle, and we rank them from A to F, A being very
good, free-flow traffic and we'll rank them all the way down to F, which is essentially
gridlock, uh,because of the level of service, urn (mumbled) vehicles are, um, witnessing.
Uh, we also can do the same thing for bikes and peds,but this particular image is just for
vehicles. Uh, as far as the, uh, existing conditions assessment, the consultant also looked
at collisions,which we've already talked about. This just happens to be one of the
images they shared at the, uh, stakeholder meeting last September. Uh, now on to the
facility types review. So as part of the contract, I mentioned that there were three, uh,
potential options that they were to come up with and review, and they have. Uh, all
three utilize a four to three-lane conversion or road diet as it's commonly referred to, uh,
similar to what was recently done out on First Avenue, uh, between Bradford and the
highway. Um, as you may recall, the primary reasons to use a road diet are to reduce
collisions, and uh, the United States Department of Transportation and some other groups
will typically state that you'll....you'll look at about 25 to 30% reduction in total
collisions,uh, with a road diet. Um, some different periodicals and things will say it's
higher than that, but I think that's generally what the USDOT will say you'll get out of a
road diet. Uh, and they're also used where bike lanes are desired,because again, you've
got that four to three-lane conversion where you've typically got two lanes, north and
south. Uh, you reduce that to one lane north and south, and then you've got that center
turn lane, uh, again typical, um.....um,to what we did on First Avenue and then it adds
that additional space where we can put in conventional bike lanes. Um, that was
alternative one is the conventional bike lane option, which again is... is similar to what
we did on First Avenue. Uh, alternative#2 is a cycle track, which I'll get into in a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 5
moment, and then there was a third alternative also, which was a shared path, uh, that
could be implemented within the corridor. Uh, this next image is just a high level review,
uh, of what was included in the study. Um, it sort of breaks up the corridor into those
same three sections that we've already, uh, briefly discussed. Uh, it identified
constraints, uh, potential loading zones and other improvements that can be made,uh,
and also just visually depicts how the three different alternatives could be, uh,
implemented within the corridor. I'll kinda go through, uh, each one of these, but this is
just a high level review of what was included in the study. Um, and I'll run through the
pros and cons of each one of those alternatives for you. Uh, alternative#1, uh, as I
mentioned, is the conventional bike lane option. Uh, the image on the screen, uh, depicts
a typical 45-foot wide back-to-back, uh, cross section of a roadway, which is exactly
what we have for the, urn,both the first and second section, uh, of Gilbert that I
discussed. Uh, the advantages of...of this are that you get all the benefits of a road diet,
with the reduction in collision and then of course you can add conventional bike lanes to
the corridor. Uh, a relatively low cost. The consultant, uh, ballparked the cost at about
$236,000 for the entire corridor. Um, there's an ease of implementation with road diets,
as we know and what we've experienced on First Avenue. It's essentially, uh, lane
striping and some modifications to the signals. Uh, it provides on-street accommodation,
which I think most bicyclists would argue, uh, is what they're looking for in Iowa City.
Um, there's no sharing of space with pedestrians, which is also a benefit, uh, that I think
you'd hear from most bicyclists in town. Um, and there's no street width constraints for
this alternative. Uh, you'll see in the next few alternatives there's some pinch points in
the corridor that make....make them rather hard to, uh, to implement. Uh, the
disadvantages of the conventional bike lane option are there's no physical separation, uh,
from bicyclists, which, um, is a drawback, and then of course the drawback is it's not
comfortable for all users and I would argue it's not comfortable for....for a lot of users.
You certainly don't see a lot of families using conventional bike lanes without a physical
separation.
Botchway/Kent, is this cost across the, um, one, two, and three?
Ralston/No, this is just for alternative one. Yep. Good question.
Mims/And they're not from....from....they're not doin' the four to three all the way through,
right? It's from Market to Kirkwood, and then from McCollister to Highway 6....is what
was in the packet.
Ralston/Yeah, so what...what we, what the staff's recommending is slightly different than what
the (both talking)
Mims/Okay!
Ralston/ ...than what the actual consultant states is possible, and....and that's a good question,
Susan. I think I can get into that here in a minute.
Mims/Okay. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 6
Ralston/Uh, this....this 236,000 is for,uh, the road diet from north to south, from Market all the
way through. Um, whether or not that's, uh, you know, the way we move ahead remains
to be seen, of course, and then I've got some more information to share with you about
those other alternatives. Uh, for alternative#2, this is a cycle track,uh, option. And a
cycle track, generally, if you again look at the cross section to the right, utilizes a four to
three-lane conversion, a road diet, like we talked about, urn, but a cycle track generally,
this is a bi-directional cycle track, uh, that can be implemented with portions of the
corridor, uh, but the general idea betwhy...between, behind a cycle track is that you've
got the....the space identified on the roadway, uh, within the existing curb, uh, curb-to-
curb pavement width, and you're able to have that bike facility, uh, on one side of the
street, which has a bike lane in each direction. So it's a bi-directional bike lane, um, that
can be implemented within the corridor. Uh, it does not work well throughout the entire
corridor because, again, we've got this 45-foot cross section width and it gets pretty
narrow. So what this image shows is a 4-foot buffer and 10-foot of,uh, space for the
north and south bike facility. In some sections that buffer would have to be more like 2-
feet, and you'd have to get down to a minimum of about 8-feet for the, uh,bike lanes,
which is the minimum recommended bike lane width,um, by NACTO. Uh, the
advantages of a cycle track are you get all the advantages, uh, of a typical road diet. Um,
you've got, uh, an on-street accommodation, which I think is a....is a positive. Uh,
there's no sharing of space with pedestrians, which is also a positive. Um, and you've
got this physical separation from, um, motorists. Now that physical separation can come
in a lot of different forms. Uh, what's shown here is kind of a jersey barrier, kind of a
concrete barrier,um, some communities will use, uh,pylons, kind of white, plastic
pylons that are, uh, put down on the roadway. There's a whole host of options available,
um, and I think the option that we would have to choose, uh, is sort of limited by that
space. Um, again, there's, uh, constraint at the Iowa River, or excuse me, the Ralston
Creek crossing, uh, on Gilbert, and then under the Iowa Interstate Railroad, uh,both
south of Burlington Street, where the width is 45-feet and there's really not a lot of extra
space, uh, because of the bridge and because of the railroad abutments. So it gets a little
bit tight in those sections. Um, I would argue that this is comfortable for more bicyclists
than a....a conventional bike lane would be certainly, because there's some level of
protection. Uh, the disadvantage is that it's got a moderate cost, uh, what I'm calling a
moderate cost, of over a million dollars, urn, and again, you've got those pinch points that
when we move into functional design, if this is the....the, uh, concept that you choose to
move forward with, we'll have to work out how we....how we address that when we
cross Ralston Creek and then, uh, cross underneath the railroad tracks. It's relatively
difficult to implement, uh, because of those....those issues. Uh, there's also some safety
concerns with the contra-flow movement, so because you've got that, uh, north-south
bicycle traffic all on one side of the road, as you can imagine if you're entering Gilbert
Street, you're gonna have bicyclists coming at you from the right, which is not typically
what you're used to and not typically what you're looking for. Urn,we're used to having
pedestrians come from the right, but not always bicyclists. So there is a little bit of a
disadvantage there, uh, and again I already mentioned it won't work in constrained
sections. Uh, so a little bit difficult to implement. And then the final alternative that the
consultants, uh, worked through was a shared path, urn, a shared use path, it's often
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 7
referred to as. Urn, in this concept, if you look at the image there on your screen, urn, it
has all the benefits of a road diet again. You're taking that four lanes down to three
lanes. In this case you're actually moving the curb line in. So in options 1 and 2, you
know, we're working with the pavement that we have, and this option, uh, and it's
reflected in the price. You're actually moving that curb line in then, so you've just got
the three lanes of...of pavement essentially. And then you've got about a 10-foot, and
it'll vary based on the corridor, but 10-feet or so of space for, uh, bikes, and then you've
got sort of the 5 or 6-foot sidewalk we already have for pedestrians. Uh, now typically
when you have that 15-foot section for bikes and pedestrians, you'll still paint off a path,
um,just for bicyclists or just for the pedestrians, so there is some delineation, uh,but
typically it's not a physical delineation, uh, between those two uses. Uh, again you get
the benefits of a road diet, uh, in the shared use path option. Uh, there is physical
separation from motorists because the bicyclists are no longer, uh, within the curb. And I
would argue that this is probably most comfortable, uh, for the most users. Urn, this is
something you'd probably see families using, uh, so on and so forth. Uh, the
disadvantage as I mentioned, it's got a high cost of almost $3 million because you've got
a lot of reconstruction activity that would have to occur, uh, relatively difficult to
implement. Uh, again you've got that safety concern with the contra-flow movement
because you're not expecting bicyclists to always be corning from your right if you're
entering, uh, the Gilbert Street corridor. Urn, there's no on-street accommodation, which
I think some bicyclists would, um, argue is a bad thing. They don't wanna be with
strollers and dog walkers and that sort of thing. Uh, even though you might be able to
separate that space out with pavement markings, uh, you know, you're still all relatively
sharing the same, urn, the same pathway. And again, uh, this has the same issue as the
cycle track, where we've got those constrained, uh, areas, crossing Ralston Creek, uh,
south of Burlington and then also crossing under the Iowa Interstate Railroad. Uh, as far
as the study findings are concerned, uh, the study suggests that a road diet would
generally improve the corridor, uh, providing better accommodations for bikes and peds,
and would improve safety for motorists, which I think, uh, most of us probably expected.
Uh, it recommends that a road diet be implemented in the near term throughout the
corridor, uh, with the addition of bike lanes. Uh, the study suggests that a road diet
works well in the long-term, uh, between McCollister and Highway 6, so starting at the
south end between McCollister and Highway 6. In that section you could have buffered
bike lanes; uh,they wouldn't be protected bike lanes with the physical protection,but
actually buffered with a...maybe a 1 1/2 to 2-foot wide painted hashed area, uh, similar to
what we will be installing on Governor and Dodge, uh, this year. Uh, the study suggests
that a road diet works well in the long-term between Kirkwood and Market, so I'm
skipping that...that middle section and skipping to the north end here, um, and....and the
study suggests it would work well there,uh,however, a sensitivity analysis that the
consultant, uh, put together does indicate that a road diet may fail as soon as 2022, uh,
between Highway 6 and Kirkwood. So that middle section, uh, down around Big Grove
and....and the other, uh, commercial activity down there, they're stating may actually fail
as soon as 2022. And when I say fail, urn, basically what they looked at was the average
daily traffic we have today, with out gro....growth projections, uh, using the MPO's
model, shows that really it will surpass kind of the threshold where road diets work. Urn,
they're saying about 18,000 vehicles a day or so is that....where that threshold's at.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 8
Some'll say, you know, 19,000, but the consultant was concerned that...within a short
period of time that we'll actually surpass that,just with the sheer volume of traffic.
Urn....
Throgmorton/You can linger there for a second.
Ralston/Yeah!
Throgmorton/I'm wondering about....the difference in time of travel between Highway 6 and
Prentiss/Kirkwood, under LOS D, E, and F, I mean how do they differ timewise?
Ralston/Uh huh.
Throgmorton/I understand the LOS concept, but....time.
Ralston/Right. Uh, I don't know if I can give you a....a, urn, a really good answer, because all
corridors are going to vary, but the issue is that, you know,maybe between a D and an E.
So level of service D may have been a level of service E. You know, it may be a minute
to two minutes, let's say, and I'm just throwing those out there. We haven't studied that.
Urn, the issue is that once you get into a level of service F, things, urn, as you can
imagine when you're in a situation like that, where everything just locks up, you know,
because you can't get traffic in from the side streets, and you're actually just sitting, you
know, there's cars in the intersection that have creped in, on a red because they've waited
so long. Everything just gets bound up and a certain amount of time sort of,um, it just
carries....it kind of gets carried away. And I would....I would say, uh, it's a cons...it's
under construction,but Dubuque Street traffic, uh, earlier this year because of the
Gateway project, that was a level of service F, and there were times when,urn, the
Church(mumbled) the Church and Dubuque intersection was just blocked, because
people would try and creep through, and when that happens you kind of lose all level of
service, so, um,that's a little bit difficult to answer, but I, you know, a level of service D
to E may not be a huge deal, but once things start locking up it's a little bit harder to
predict what's gonna happen, and that's where we get a little bit nervous about, uh, what
their analysis showed. Uh, because of that, because they're a little bit concerned and
because staff's concerned too about that section, uh, they also recommended that a...the
....if and when that that section's reconstructed and the Riverfront, uh, Crossings' plan
has a....some images of what the reconstruction could look like, they would then
recommend at that point in time, uh, we also implement either, uh, protected bike lanes or
maybe a cycle track, depending on how,uh, the Council chooses to move forward. So in
that instance, um, if we....if we move forward with conventional bike lanes, let's say,
um, in the north section. You know, say Kirkwood to Market. What we would then do,
if and when, uh, that section between Kirkwood and Highway 6 is reconstructed, is
perhaps, uh, be smart about what we do and put in protected bike lanes. The Riverfront
Crossings' plan calls for on-street parking in that area, uh, and if that was to be
implemented, we could then put the bike lane on the backside of the parking, so you've
got that physical, uh, barrier then, uh, for bicyclists. Uh, they also note that the Iowa
River Trail can be used as an alternative route,uh, during these difficult times, whether or
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 9
not we implement bike lanes in that section or not. Um, with the new park, uh, what I'm
calling River Park. I'm not sure what it's been, uh, named yet, but, uh, with that park
there's a....the trail is already in place and you can avoid this section by using the trail.
You can actually go under Highway 6 currently and then come out, uh, south of, urn, the
highway onto Gilbert Street. So it actually provides a pretty nice connection, uh, if and
when you're either having trouble getting through this section or if we choose not to put
bike lanes in this section. So then, uh, moving on to staff recommendations, staff agrees,
uh, largely with what Ulta came up with, and recommends moving forward with a
functional design. So right now we've got these conceptual designs, but they....they
would actually give us a design that we could work off of. Uh, we would recommend
moving forward with a functional design and implementation of a road diet, with bike
lanes, uh, the conventional bike lane option, uh, in the near term,between McCollister
and Highway 6, and then Kirkwood to Market. Uh, we would not recommend moving
forward with that section right now, uh,between Highway 6 and Kirkwood, and I think,
Susan, that's what you were referencing earlier. Um, staff just doesn't feel comfortable
with that, again, because we're not sure what happens. Uh, in all fairness, you know, all
of this is based off traffic modeling. You know, none of it's....it's all sort of, uh, best
guess prediction, um, and in all fairness, we could implement that....that road diet in the
Highway 6 to Kirkwood section, and it could function well for....10 years. Uh,
alternatively we could also implement that today and it could fail, uh, at the opening day,
which is first what we don't want to see. Um, so that....that, with what Ulta gave us,
gives us some real pause about moving forward with that section. Um, in the interim
period, uh, I think we could ask the consultant to work on a....a functional design that
helps bicyclists get to the Iowa River Corridor Trail to avoid that section. Um, I also
think, in my own experience, that a lot of bicyclists, if you're comfortable with, um,
riding on street now in a conventional bike lane, uh, chances are you would just pass
through that section and then get on the bike lanes again, either south of Hi....Highway 6
or north of Kirkwood. Urn, likely if you're already riding in the bike lane you're going to
be comfortable enough to just stay on the street, uh, go those three or four blocks and
then get back in a conventional bike lane. Urn, in the interim period I think we could use,
as I mentioned,the Iowa River Corridor Trail as an alternative route. And, um....you
know, if....I think we just need to give some real pause to that....that section and wait
and see what happens. Um, for next steps, uh, as I mentioned the goal tonight is for
Council to provide us with direction on how to move forward. Um,we....if we move
forward with conventional bike lanes,uh, you do have a CIP project currently, uh, in the
capital improvements program for 2020. There's about $300,000 budgeted. That
$300,000 was budgeted for conventional bike lanes on Gilbert Street and it was also, urn,
a placeholder for the Market and Jefferson buffered bike lanes. So if you remember,
there's some direction, uh, given to staff to turn the conventional bike lanes on Market
and Jefferson into buffered bike lanes. Urn, I'm guessing with the$300,000 we could
probably do both projects,but you know, time will tell. Um, and the other thing that staff
would continue to do is, um, to acquire right-of-way as properties redevelop along that
corridor, uh, between Kirkwood and Highway 6. Uh, we've already done that with a few
properties that have redeveloped,but we would continue to acquire, uh, additional right-
of-way for future reconstruction on that section. So I know I just threw a lot at ya,
um.....I'm happy to answer any questions you have. It's, uh...it's somewhat confusing,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 10
uh, but the, I think....the....the thing to take away is that there's a lot of different options
in the corridor and, urn, you know, at least in the near term I think there's some
relatively, uh, cost effective options, if you....if you want to move that direction.
Botchway/ So in the...I can't, I don't have...have it in my notes, but I can't remember exactly
where it is, and I know it was in the study, it said something about 2030 we would need
five lanes? Which section was it talking about?
Ralston/Uh, I don't recall that exactly, but it would definitely be the Kirkwood (several talking)
So in the Riverfront Crossings' plan, uh, that was completed....maybe, it's been two or
three years back now. I....I can't recall exactly, um, in that there was sort of a
preliminary, uh, traffic analysis done, and they at that time are seeing the same things that
Ulta saw, is that that section it will likely have the heaviest amount of traffic on the
Gilbert Street corridor, uh, into the future. Um, it's a symptom I think of just the
connectivity it provides, but it's also because of all the development that's occurring in
the Riverfront Crossings' area. Um, the....the Riverfront Crossings' plan, uh, the cross
section they had, Kingsley, was basically two lanes north and south with, uh, dedicated
turn lanes. And there's actually an image of that in the, uh, info packet. Yeah. And then
what, uh, we asked Ulta to do is say, okay, they reviewed the Riverfront Crossings' plan,
uh, and they basically took that concept,which has on-street parking, two lanes north,
south, with dedicated turn lanes, and then they put the,uh, conventional bike lanes on the
backside of the parking, like we talked about earlier. So if we move forward with the
road diet, um, that would be, I think, the ideal situation in the future is to, urn....to put
that bike lane on the backside of the parking. If that's the way the development occurs.
Cole/ So for option 2, that's the cyclocross option, it's my understanding the estimate for that
was $1 million and that's for all three sections?
Ralston/That's from Highway 6 north. That's a good question. So, what the consultant realized
was south of Highway 6, there's just not a high enough average daily traffic to really
require a cycle track, so that.....yeah, roughly a million dollars is from Highway 6 to the
north.
Cole/ So do we have any cost estimate if we did option 2, the cyclo track option, from Kirkwood
to Market?
Ralston/Urn, we don't, but I'm.....they're already put together the preliminary estimates. I'm
sure they could....they could tease that out I'm sure.
Cole/ Okay.
Botchway/That kinda goes to my next question, um, in general....from a direction standpoint,
are you comfortable with us coming forward or providing you with direction as far as
kind of a hybrid model, so kind of to Rockne's point, urn, you know, certain elements, as
you kind of articulated from the staff recommendations, won't necessarily, you know,
have let's say, um....alternative 3 across the entire, um, 1, 2, and 3 sections....
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 11
Ralston/ Sure!
Botchway/ ...but you're looking at something where we may say, well, let's look at alternative I
for this section, alternative 2 for this section.
Ralston/Yeah, I...I certainly think you can. Urn, and what will be the challenge then in the
design is how you blend those together. Right? Because if you've got a...um, a cycle
track, let's say, Burlington north, uh,hypothetically speaking, and then you wanna
convert to conventional bike lanes from, you know, Burlington south. The...the challenge
then is how you actually design those so they all mesh together. I mean that's....that' s
the real challenge. I mean certainly we can move forward with, um, I mean we can
attempt to do that, but I don't know, until they work through the functional design what's
actually possible and what's not. Um, I think clearly, urn, choosing one of the options
and not blending them is probably easier from a design, uh, aspect, but that...that doesn't
mean it can't be done.
Mims/From....my looking through it, urn, one thing that just to mention to the, uh, people who
did this, some of their, uh, some of their diagrams were north....showing northbound and
some were southbound. That was very confusing.
Ralston/Right. It is confusing. (laughter)
Mims/You....you're used to thinking, okay, I'm going south, no wait a minute! This one's
north (both talking)
Ralston/Right.
Mims/ ...trying to figure out which side of the street things were on (both talking) Yeah, okay!
Urn, my preference is to start with option 1. I think the idea of trying to mix different
ones together, I just...I mean I've just gotten back into riding in the last year and I look at
that cyclocross option and think of....I'm.....I'm confused already trying to think how
I'm going to turn and where I'm going to turn and....and it just seems like there's the
potential for more conflict at intersections between bikes and....and motor vehicles, if
you're on "the wrong side" of the road. Um, I think as....as a city, as we're starting to
move to these road diets, and I think that's a real positive thing. I think....um, helping
people get used to it,just the road diets themselves and the conventional bike lanes, um,
north of Kirkwood and south of Highway 6, I....I think we really need to wait for that
middle section, um, to redevelop, and I think as you said, Kent, I think we have a lot of
cyclists in this community who, um.....do a lot of riding and ride on that section and will
continue to ride, even though obviously it's not as safe as we would like it to be,but if we
can get the connection to the trail, urn, well marked and easy to get back....from there
and to the street, etc., then people who are more comfortable that way can easily do it and
not feel like they're going, you know, miles and miles out of their way, plus it takes 'em
through that nice new park that we....we have down there. Um, so to me this moves us
in the right direction, with I think, hopefully, a reasonable cost with something that's
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 12
really gonna help bicyclists. It's gonna I think also help motor vehicle traffic in this
community get more used to how to really operate, hopefully, in a more responsible way
for some people, um, with the bicyclists on the road, and it also, um, gives us that
opportunity....to me we're not giving up that opportunity to go to one of those other
options later on, because really by starting with the first option, we're basically restriping.
And if we decide later that we, you know, because of road reconstruction in some area or
other development that we want to go to one of those, the second or third option, which is
gonna be more costly, cause more construction, we could always take advantage of....of
circumstances later on to do that.
• Botchway/ So I would, uh, I would generally agree. I think that going back to the hybrid concept
I was talking about, urn....one of the things I heard specifically on the campaign was, you
know,just the feeling about safety, riding on the street, and so in general you have folks
that can do it, and prefer doing it, but then I think, you know, the majority of people I
talked to wanted that dedicated bike lane, urn, but like with.....I'm not necessarily so
much in favor of the cyclatrack piece,but um, more from a standpoint of how are we,
what kind of buffer are we providing? If it's just a stripe, I feel a little bit less
comfortable than, um, I know, you know,plastic or, I mean one person said, uh, concrete
barrier. I don't know if we can go that far, but um....I guess that's where I'm looking at
that 1 and 2 piece of it. So if....if it is, and that's where I'm thinking of it also maybe
depends on the section,because I think I feel a little bit differently,um, going out
towards, uh....south of Highway 6 than I do in town,just because of the level of traffic
that we talked about. Um, but that's where I'm at, from kind of that hybrid stand...so I
would agree with Susan. I would want to do something that isn't necessarily going to,
um, force us in a particular path right now,but I do think that we do need (mumbled) a
level of safety element to bicyclists,but I also like the fact that pedestrians have their
own space, and so that's where I'm between the 1 and 2 piece.
•
Cole/My recollection is too is south of Highway 6, isn't there already great cycling infrastructure
south of Highway 6, as it stands now?
Ralston/Yeah. On street, I mean there's a wide sidewalk for a portion of it. Urn (both talking)
Cole/ ...what I was getting at(both talking) right into the trail down to Terry Trueblood.
Ralston/Yeah, and that's the thing about the whole corridor is we've got the Iowa River
Corridor Trail that runs...the whole length of the section. It....it stays with the river, of
course; as you get downtown that trail's a little bit further away but, urn, yeah. We....it's
not as though we don't have other options in the corridor. Urn, you know....
Cole/ Is the south of Highway 6 piece, is that the, urn, segment 3 or is that the segment 1?
Ralston/Three(both talking)
Cole/Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 13
Taylor/And that would be, urn, I think you were talking about the blending. You already talked
about that, urn,probably alternative 1 would be the best for that McCollister section and
so if we did blend, it's already blending. Do the 1 and if we did the 2 for the rest of it.
And I don't know about the rest of you but I've received like, oh, at least over 50 emails
this morning(laughs) regarding this conversion, but they....and most of'em were
bicyclists, thank you to all of them for their input, but they didn't really talk about which
alternative they preferred. Did you get any sense from your, uh,meetings with the the,
what they might want? I....I (both talking)
Ralston/You know, generally....so I'm not sure who you spoke to, Pauline, obviously but I think
generally speaking, um.....the folks that I talked to want something done sooner than
later.
Taylor/Right (both talking)
Ralston/I think generally speaking, is....is fair to say. Urn, obviously option 1, the conventional
bike lanes is the quickest, it's the cheapest, it's the easiest, and it doesn't really, uh, pin us
down to anything in the future because we're not changing curb lines. We're not, you
know, it's striping and, uh, signal modifications. So I think....I think it's fair to say that
people want things done quicker, urn, but that's not to say people don't want something
else in the future. You know I think you're....you're gonna hear everything, uh, across
the board in terms of what people want. I will say generally speaking, urn, as time goes
on I think folks are wanting more of the protected bike lane, you know, with an actual
physical barrier. I think that's also a....a generalization that I can make. Urn, so....there
....there's the difficult part is something quick and something, uh, relatively more
expensive and....and provides more protection.
Taylor/ I think(both talking)
Ralston/I think that's mostly what I'm hearing.
Taylor/I think the safety, uh, part of it should be the most important (both talking) should
consider that.
Throgmorton/ So, I think we should....my own personal judgment, we should move ahead with
what the staff is recommending. Uh, but I wanna focus on some things. It seems to me
there's no significant challenges associated with the first and third sections, and doing
what's recommended. It's the second section basically, between Kirkwood and Highway
6, that really needs thought, and we need to be clear about, but the reasons for doing the
road,uh, the three-way, the three-lane conversion are pretty clear, I think. It's really
hazardous to use a bicycle on most of Gilbert Street. That's the most important thing, it
seems to me. And I've done this a thousand times. If you try to ride on the sidewalks,
which you have to do because it's too hazardous to be on the road, then you're
encountering barriers all over the place and conflicting with pedestrians and all that kind
of stuff. So that's not an adequate solution. There are places where pedestrian crossing
is really bad. One thing you did not mention is that the....the consultant's recommending
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 14
at least a couple spots where,uh, pe...new pedestrian crossings would be clearly marked
and that kind of thing, especially, uh....near the Sanctuary basically. Yeah, and also
there're gonna be substantial economic benefitseconomic development benefits
associated with slowing the traffic down some, which makes me think about the speed
limit. It's 30-miles-an-hour right now between Highway 6 and Kirkwood.
Ralston/About, yeah.
Throgmorton/Yeah, so 25! (laughs) Uh, and that would be good for bicyclists, good for
pedestrians, and good for development along the corridor. So, those are the things I think
about,uh, primarily, and then the question becomes what about that segment between,
uh, between Prentiss, Kirkwood, and Highway 6. And if....if, uh, help me out here. I'm
trying to remember, you're recommending in the short run...we enable the sort of detour
over to the Iowa River Trail, while we're also tryin' to work with developers to obtain the
property needed to do a cyclocross, or...which...which one?
Ralston/Well it....I think it....it depends on how....how you all choose to move forward, but I
think the....the, really the sky's the limit then, Jim. Uh,you know, when we get to that
section, urn, and reconstruction, it's....it's whatever we want to make it at that point in
time. Uh, we're getting about 30 additional, uh, feet of right-of-way, if I recall correctly,
which will really allow us to do a lot of different things in that section. So it could be a
cyclocro....uh, cycle track. It could be, uh, the parking protected bike lanes. It could be
something totally(both talking)
Throgmorton/Yeah,we're not talking cyclocross (laughs)
Ralston/No, sorry! It was on my mind! (laughter)
Throgmorton/Maybe I said that too, I don't...
Ralston/ So yeah, so I don't think it pins us into doing something in that section, and again, you
know, to my knowledge there's not a CIP project right now for that reconstruction cause
we're still acquiring, um, right-of-way, you know, property owners are still dedicating
right-of-way. So, um, what the consultant really said was, you know, we can.....if we
can get a good way for people to get to, you know, from a conventional bike lane to the
park to use the park and then come back to Gilbert, south of the highway, they thought
that'd be a....a nice way to move forward.
Throgmorton/ So on the spur of the moment (laughs) standing here and, uh, getting asked this
question, how do you imagine that connection being designed?
Ralston/Uh, there' s a....I mean there's a couple of different ways it could go, and in fact in...the
packet, with the cycle track option, they actually had, uh, sort of a contra-flow bike lane,
just in the section by Aero Rental. So if you can picture Kirkwood,just north of Aero
Rental there, um, they would....they would actually reduce one lane and they would
actually get people into that...and it would be a kind of a bi-directional cycle track on
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page Is
that little piece, which would take you over to the new park entrance. So I think there are
some creative ways, urn, that we could get folks over to the park.
Throgmorton/Yeah, it's only a block or so (both talking)
Ralston/Yeah, and I think when we....when we....whatever the direction is that I receive
tonight, I think we can certainly ask, uh, the functional design and.....and the team to put
some thought to that. Um, they already have, so I think there are some options there.
Um, certainly wayfinding signage, pavement markings, I mean all the typical things, but I
think there maybe some creative ways that can get people over to the park.
Cole/Kent, I wasn't able to see from the study, um, but with the cyclocross option, which I
believe that's option 2.
Ralston/Uh huh.
Cole/Um, are you able to do projections as to the increase in cycling ridership on the basis of
that projection, and related to that, the types of riders that will be riding, cause one of my
concerns is is we have really experienced cyclists, but I think what I'm trying to do is
expand, at least that's what I would like to see happen, expand the age, the types of
cyclists that feel comfortable biking, um, so as to those two questions do you have any
elimination on that?
Ralston/ You know, I don't think I can answer the first question about the increase in usage. I
mean it's, um....I don't think I can.
Cole/Right.
Ralston/Uh, as to the second part, you know, I....I could foresee, uh, even with a conventional
bike lane option, you getting, you know,maybe 10-plus-year-olds out there with parents,
urn, you know, I'll ride on the side of the road now in the county with....with my 10-
year-old and I, you know, with some reluctance, but it's there, and that's with no striping.
Urn, but I...I could see you getting some middle-school to high-school aged kids certainly
interested in that. Uh, with a cycle track, you know, if there's a physical barrier, I mean I
could see it being more of a family, um, a family type facility. It's kind of, you know,
it's always in the eye of the beholder, but you know, if there's a physical separation I
could certainly see, you know, a concrete barrier of some kind, I could certainly see more
families wanting to use that. Still got a lot of intersection crossings, but again,they'd, uh,
they'd have pedestrian signals,just like we do now for pedestrians, so I think, you know,
you could certainly see a lot more family use.
Cole/ I guess then for my vote, I would like to see cyclotrack from Kirkwood to Market,because
I had a little bit of sticker shock. That's my preferred option, but it seems like it's a
pretty expensive option, especially if you, urn, do the full thing. Urn, my concern is is
that if we adopt the conventional, um, road diet lane, uh, that we'll find ourselves with a
similar outcome,perhaps with First Avenue. We won't see the projected increases. It's
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 16
not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, um, but I would like the first....cause I think
this is a low-hanging fruit, uh, street and that we need to do it right, and I think if we can
really catalyze, as I see, a lot of the students in the residential that lives right along there,
to facilitate them taking their bikes as opposed to their cars, um, and taking pressure off
that, I think that has the greatest potential. That's...and then just defer to staff for the
remainder, but that's what I would like to see.
Botchway/ So,Rockne, actually agree and disagree with you on that. I'm not....against again
having that protected bike lane area. I just don't....speaking going back to the, urn, the
First Avenue piece, I mean....when I was talkin' to people, the reason why they don't
feel comfortable is there's no protection.
Cole/Yeah.
Botchway/ I don't necessarily know that I like the cycl...the cyclotrack option, cause I feel...I feel
like it yeah, I don't think it's conducive for, urn, you know, amateur bicyclists, and so
I guess my....my point or my, I guess my, uh, argument against it is would there be any
reason why we couldn't just do the protected bike lane on both sides?
Cole/It's cost. Wouldn't that be like $2.8 million?
Ralston/The....so you're sayin' to break up the....the cycle track options you're actually having
a barrier on either side.
Botchway/Correct. Because the $2.8 million which was actually having the shared path.
Ralston/Right.
Cole/Okay.
Botchway/And yeah, I would say no to that (both talking)
Ralston/Primarily it's because the extra space you need to actually protect the bike. So we run
out of real estate. So because you've gotta have that 3 or 4-foot area where you can have
some protection,the current width won't allow us to have two of those barriers. So with
the bi-directional you have one barrier, right, and then you've got north and south bi-
traffic on one side of the barrier. If you split that up like a conventional bike lane but
then have protection, there's just not enough....cause then you've got to have two
physical buffers and there's just not enough space as the....as the roadway exists today.
Botchway/Well then my question/comment to that is, you know, we frequently talk about the
size of the streets. Is this conducive for, urn, what we have normally suggested for buses
to be used on the streets or do we give ourselves a little bit more space.
Ralston/Uh, with the cycle track option that's provided I think there'd be enough space. Uh, I
think the minimum lane width is about 11-feet, with that option. Urn....the issue, and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 17
(mumbled) cycle track option is we have two major hurdles, which is the river, uh,
Ralston Creek crossing and then the Iowa Interstate Railroad. Because on either side of
the curb, urn, if you're familiar with the....the corridor, it's maybe 4-feet of sidewalk. So
if...if we do move forward with the cycle track option,there's gonna be some real, uh,
impediments to having....kind of a good cycle track, until we address those two
obstacles, which will certainly not be cheap.
Taylor/(several talking) ...Kingsley brought up the buses cause I think somewhere in the report it
talked about the number of stops that are along Gilbert, and it's a significant number, and
how will that work into the plan as far as the buses having to pull over to their stops.
Ralston/Under which scenario, Pauline? I'm sorry.
Taylor/I think it was any of the scenarios, they would need a lane to pull over to their stops and
(both talking) would that be the bike lane, would that be the north-south through lane,
how would that work?
Ralston/Right. So this'd be similar to First Avenue. It'll be similar to, urn, Clinton Street,uh,
this year if we get the bike lanes down. Um, primarily the bus will either pull over
temporarily and block the bike lane, or there could be a potential pull-off provided, urn,
but what most bicyclists will tell you is there's no bike lane now and they're going
around cars and things, you know, so having to wait for a bus, uh, for a minute while they
pick someone up, typically isn't that much of a nuisance.
Thomas/Kent, what is....what is the facility on Clinton, uh,you know, I'm just....I'm thinking,
you know, in reading this, the, urn, there's an acknowledgement in terms of the safety of
using conventional bike lanes. Where....where would be the nearest....bike lane piece
that would be at a safer level than what we expect Gilbert, you know, if we were to do the
alternative I...
Ralston/Uh huh.
Thomas/...where would a bike rider looking for a safer, more comfortable ride go?
Ralston/Right, so Clinton Street would be probably the next option, when Clinton Street's
completed. Um, and that will go from, basically the new park, from Benton Street, all the
way north to the President's house, at the north end of Clinton. That is slated to have
conventional bike lanes, but certainly a much lower, uh, average daily traffic(both
talking)
Thomas/And when will that be comple....that's planned in the....
Ralston/I believe....is that.....July. Yeah. They'll start in July. So, and then I would say the
next, um....so certainly Clinton Street will be much calmer,just because the speeds are
slower. There's a lot, I mean, there's significantly less amount of traffic, and then again,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 18
I think outside of that you're back onto the Iowa River Corridor Trail, which is really
very nice and, urn, you know, about as safe a facility as we can offer for the most part.
Thomas/That's probably,with my level of(laughs) bike riding skill, that's....that's the route I'm
taking(laughs) most likely. Um, but I....I.....I think alternative 1, uh, offers for me
anyway the most overall safety for all users, uh, you know, it certainly would improve
things for....for motorists, urn, also for pedestrians. I don't know if we've talked too
much about this,but just the setback from the sidewalk, I feel, is a huge improvement.
Um, you know, having the....the traffic lane right up against the curb is....is.....is both
dangerous and then it also, you know, with the lane reduction you have a shorter crossing
distance. So it seems like there are all kind of benefits overall to safety, uh, with I'd say
the one outstanding issue in my mind is the safety for the bicyclists and uh, you know,
we....we really haven't talked about traffic lane widths. I mean I guess, one, and I...this
is really kind of I don't know if we....if I would describe where we are preliminary but if,
you know, we had talked about lane widths recently on those three roadway extensions
and Jim mentioned the 25-mile-an-hour speed limit and, you know, we went through that
exercise where we were basically saying, and I...I think, you know,there's a correlation
between lane width and traffic speed, and when it....when we have on-street bike
facilities, that's a critical issue, because it affects the safety of the rider, um, and it seems
to me if we were....if there is some wiggle room in terms of lane width, then that....that
could add to our buffer, correct?
Ralston/Certainly!
Thomas/Um, which then....depending on conditions as we see them unfold, could then be
armored with a protected bike lane component, such as the pylon, correct? (both talking)
So I..I see some flexibility in terms of the safety level, uh, that alternative 1 provides, and
then it has all the other benefits of being cheap and um.....really improves the safety for
everyone.
Ralston/Yeah, and I'm glad you brought up the Clinton Street corridor(mumbled) I failed to
mention that,because I think what...regardless of what happens on Gilbert Street, we're
really starting to develop a nice north-south (both talking)
Thomas/I love Clinton!
Ralston/(both talking) ...because of the new park and because of Clinton Street, in July,um,
we're really starting to develop that north-south network, which is, um, I think great
regardless of how we move forward with Gilbert Street.
Thomas/Yeah, Clinton now, in my opinion, is a really pleasant ride.
Ralston/Right! I agree.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 19
Stewart/Urn, in this plan for, uh, in Gilbert Street with the study, urn, are there considerations
for, urn, improving the crossing towards, uh, through Gilbert Street to Court Street?
Across Gilbert Street?
Ralston/There....there is. It's, I think the Mayor had noted that(both talking) there is a, what
they....it....it's probably not included in the cost estimate, but there is, urn, either
signalization or maybe a refuge island, somethin' that could be done there.
Stewart/Yeah,urn, and then one of the things I would kind of emphasize,uh, to think about, urn,
is that there's...at least as a bicyclist, urn, that there's a lot of times where, um, a bike lane
ends into like a sea of cars and that's an important thing to consider, especially with that
Kirkwood to, uh, Highway 6,urn,but obviously the, uh, traffic, urn....estimates are
something to also consider.
Throgmorton/ So I'm gonna bring up one other point, uh,that I think about quite a bit with
regard to this. I think we should proceed with the road diet as recommended by the staff
It's all 1 and, you know, the temporary diversion through Iowa River Trail. Partly
because I think we need to be careful....to minimize, uh, adverse, well negative reaction
from the driving public, and we're all drivers in one way or another. So...I think we need
to have that in mind, and proceed in a way that, urn.....really makes a major step forward
with regard to gettin' this road diet present on...on Gilbert Street, without causing a
severe negative reaction that,uh, befuddles our whole effort. So, and I know in other
cities, different circumstances, different cities and all that, there have been pretty strong
negative reactions, so we need to be very fou...thoug...sorry! Thoughtful about what
we're going to proceed with. So anyhow, I recommend that we proceed with alternative
1 as recommended by the staff.
Ralston/I just, sorry to interrupt. I just wanted to mention one thing too. You know we'll have a
functional design that the Council can see. You know this isn't saying this was exactly
what's gonna happen and we're moving forward. I mean they....they still need to design
it. They need to make sure the City engineer's okay with it, City Manager's okay with it,
and you're all okay with it. So certainly you're not agreeing to, urn, putting it on the
ground just yet.
Botchway/I would actually agree with Jim. I'm glad you brought it up, Jim, urn, because not
only am I thinking about the potential reaction, but also it was noticed, or it was
mentioned in the report, but in....I know it just because I'm an aggressive driver, you
know, the urn, looking at how traffic patterns would change in relation to, um,the....
auxiliary streets, for lack of a better word, because I, I mean Gilbert isn't really an issue
for me because I use other streets because I think Gilbert traffic is bad and the LOS
currently is a D and so I, you know, I expect the LOS to be somewhat further down in the
alphabet and so I will continue my current traffic pattern getting across the city, and so I
think that...that, not to give away my trade secret, but I think that's a....a piece to be
concerned about because I currently just use all the auxiliary streets. I don't even worry
about Gilbert,because of the....the level of traffic, and it just being tough to get to point
A to point B pretty quickly.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 20
Thomas/ I see that as the beauty of the grid. I mean there is...it does provide flexibility so that
when something happens or you have your own concerns about traffic levels on Gilbert,
there are other options for you. I mean I....in my view I'm seeing that now with all the
construction work. I'm....I'm taking al....alternative routes (laughs) because you know
you're....you're forced into it, but fortunately there are alterna...alternative routes. I
mean I...you know I've lived in places where freeways have been removed and going into
that it was the fear of`carmageddon' it was called. It was going to be carmageddon when
we take down that freeway. It never materialized (laughs) You know, so people figure
out if you....if you have a roadway system where people have alternatives, they typically
will figure it out.
Throgmorton/ So we could keep talking about this for quite a while,but in the interest of
enabling staff to move ahead, uh, do we have sufficient agreement about how to proceed?
I....I see a head nod, head nod....head nod, head nod (laughs) Yeah, so I think we do and
uh, we don't know in the end what we're gonna do, ultimately, with regard to the second
segment.
Ralston/ Sure! Yeah, that's understandable, and I think because these are easily implemented,
they're easily, uh, changed as well, you know, if you decide to do somethin' different in
the future.
Throgmorton/Okie dokie. Thank you, Kent.
Ralston/Thank you very much.
Throgmorton/So our next topic is to discuss SUDAS standards for road design.
Discuss SUDAS standards for road design:
Fruin/Jason Havel's gonna speak to this, but just as a...um, reminder why we're doing this, uh,
we have been looking at adopting SUDAS standards for a....a couple of years now and
we're getting,uh, closer to the point where we're ready to bring that item for a formal
vote. Urn, but before we do so we wanted to have a high level check-in with you, let you
know the direction that we're going, have you cor....you know, do a course correction if
needed,um, that way when we come back to you for the formal action, hopefully there's
no surprises. So, Jason's gonna walk you through the, uh, the main criteria that we're
concerned about now, and if you can just keep that in mind if you're comfortable with
where we're goin', let us know. If you'd like to see us, uh, change course, this'd be a
good time to raise those concerns.
Throgmorton/Hi, Jason.
Havel/Good evening. Yeah, like Geoff mentioned, we're kinda just startin' out this process, urn,
as you'll remember there's kind of two pieces to the SUDAS piece. There was the
specifications that we, um, adopted last, at your last meeting. That really addresses kind
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 21
of once you have something designed, you're ready to build it, kind of the specifics of the
construction of that project. Now we're taking a...basically a step back and looking at the
design piece of that. Um, you know, on your agenda it says discuss SUDAS standards. I
just want to point out, you know, SUDAS kinda has their standard...roadway design.
They have their standards for complete...what they call complete streets, urn, and so
really what we're looking at is that's kinda where we....we're starting, but looking at
how do we turn that into what we want it to be, and so sort of our version of SUDAS,
what that design might look like. So I don't think the expectation is that we would just
go with that, uh....wholly, so it would basically be how do we revise that to be kind of
our version of SUDAS. So, um, with that,just kind of startin' out here. Um,just wanted
to point out that we've kind of been looking at a number of reference manuals so
you...you can see the NACTO. SUDAS is in there. ASI-ITO's in there, um, ITE as well,
so all these manuals kind of have their own version of....of what they think street design
should be and the....and the considerations of that, and so kind of taking all these into
consideration, kinda trying to figure out what's the best way to kind of take the best of
each one maybe and figure out what's going to be our best, uh, version of that. So,here
you can see a list of items. I'm not gonna read 'em off, but it's just kind of all those
things that kind of go into street design. I'm sure there's others that we're forgetting, urn,
but these are a lot of the big ones, a lot of the ones that are the main talking points when it
comes to street design. So the first one obviously's a big one, looking at lane width. Urn,
what we would be looking at doing is recommending sort of the default lane width would
be 10-feet. So that'd be kind of what you would start with in most situations,um, and
that would be for really for collectors and arterials and I'll explain what we're going to do
with locals,kind of further down the page here, uh, but kinda setting 10-foot as our
recommended default lane width. Um, with the....the recommended alternative being
11-foot lanes, and that would be in kind of those situations where you have, um, transit or
truck routes, urn, without any sort of bike buffer, um, so really that's in situations where
you have physical lanes where there's nowhere for those vehicles to go. If they're
passing, uh, so if you have two-way traffic and you have one coming in each direction,
there's just nowhere for them to go without being kind of caught in that lane. Um, if you
do have a bike....a buffered bike lane,the thought being that they would have that buffer
area to kind of, um, maneuver through, so really it's kind of making sure that you have
situations where if you do have these vehicles, they have somewhere to go without
impacting other users in other lanes. So really the I 0-fo would...10-foot would be the
default,but we would allow for 11-foot in those situations. Um, also allowed would be
shared lanes on local streets, which is really what we kind of have now,urn, and so what
it would do...in those local street situations we'd be looking more at pavement width as a
whole, versus breaking it down by lane widths for traveling lanes and parking. So it'd
really be based more on the pavement width as a whole, which is what we do now, urn,
you can see our current options are 22-feet. That's two-way traffic with parking on one
side, and right now that's basically limited to loop streets and low-volume cul-de-sacs.
So that's really the low volume streets where, um, traffic volumes really aren't an issue.
Uh, more of our standard is really the 26-foot and the 28-foot. The difference bein' there
is the 26-foot would be two-way traffic and then parking on one side, and then 28-foot
bein' two-way traffic with parking on both sides. Urn, in those situations, if you were to
kind of put a minimum parking lane and minimum travel lanes, the travel lanes would
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 22
actually have to be below our minimum, um, based on those widths. The next thing is
curb offset, and so really what this is it's that distance between what you can consider
your travel lane and the back of curb. So it's that curb and gutter section that really
would allow for conveyance of storm water, urn, so it's kind of the area that would be
adjacent to the travel lane, uh, and include the....the curb section as well. What we'd be
looking at would be a recommendation for, uh, 1 1/2 feet, um, a lot of places call out for
2 1/2-feet so we've kind of narrowed that up a little bit. Um, still allowing for,um, that
conveyance of storm water and not having that impact, uh, the travel lane during, uh,
heavier rain events. We do call out an...an allowable width of zero feet. So basically
eliminating that curb offset when there's a...a bike lane or parking lane or some other
non-travel lane on the street. So basically we would allow for sort of overlap of that, um,
on one.....in one of those situations. Next thing is clear zone, and really this is kind of
that area between the travel lane and any obstacles, urn, or obstructions that would be on
the side of the road. The...the biggest one people really think about is utility poles. Um,
so this is kind of having that area next to the travel lane to allow for if somebody were...
an errant vehicle were to go out of their....their lane,that they're not going to hit
something, um, and cause....either damage or injury. Um, so we are recommending 6-
foot on street with....streets with speed limits greater than 25-miles-an-hour, and then
reducing that down to 3-feet on streets with speed limit of 25-mile-an-hour or less. Um,
and then we do call out a minimum, which is our current minimum, of a foot, uh, 1 1/2-
feet. Basically in no situation would we want to drop below that, um, and just kind of
have that be sort of the....the floor of what we would want for clear zones. One deviation
that we note here is there are some funding sources that require differences in the clear
zone, so we would have to follow those requirements, urn, if they're required for funding
that we are using for a project. Curb radius is the next one. Um, and so this is.....you
can kind of see there on the,urn, illustration at the top there, it kind of shows the
difference between a tighter curb radius and a wider curb radius, and what it really does.
The tighter the curb radius, it kind of sucks in those, um, edges of the pavement, narrows
up the....the crosswalk. Urn, if you have the wider curb radius it's a little.....it's
obviously a larger radius, so it allows for a....a larger vehicle path. Um, it does result in
a....um, longer crossing distance. So what we've kind of looked at here is areas that area
really in the downtown area, um, narrowing that up to,or....or reducin' that down to a 10-
foot radius. So that would be the....the tighter option, and then going with a 25-foot
radius in....basically outside the downtown area or areas....what I have kind of called out
here is really in areas where it's fully paved. So you have curb ramps, but there's....the
whole corner is paved. That would be areas where we'd likely have the...the tighter
radius, urn, and then in areas where you have curb ramps but then you have grass,
basically on both sides of the curb ramps or in the middle, that would be the wider curb
radius. Uh, part of the reasoning for that is....if you do have vehicles go over it, whether
it's trucks or....or whatever, it's not gonna likely have as much of an impact on the paved
corners. Um,you're not gonna see it as much. It shouldn't be much....as much of an
issue. On the unpaved corners, you're gonna see more broken ramps. You're gonna see
rutting. Um, we....occasionally get complaints of vehicle rutting in those areas where it's
grass and who repairs it and....and how do we deal with that. Um, so the thought being
that.....the.....downtown areas really are....you're likely going to have the higher
pedestrian volumes, which would benefit from the....the shorter crossings, and also, urn,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 23
likely to have more of the paved, uh, quadrants. Design speed obviously is another, uh,
popular one. Um, here we have kind of just two bullet points. The first one being that
design speed would match the speed limit. Urn, in the past, um, one school of thought is
that you would have your design speed basically be whether it's 5-miles-per-hour or
some.....measure, um, higher than your....your speed limit(mumbled) and the thought
then was it's kind of a factor of safety. So it's....it's designed for a higher speed, even
though your speed limit would be at a certain level. So we would propose that the design
speed would match the speed limit, which is,uh, pretty common I think for the more....
more current reference manuals, um, and then we had recommended a....a blanket design
speed of 25-mile-an-hour for all roads, based on....partially on past conversations and
some of the discussions that have taken place. I know there's also been discussion of
potentially looking at 25-mile-an-hour, um, design speed. So that would be an option.
Um, obviously when we talk design speed, one of the big things that we look at for....
from a design standpoint is curves, you know, horizontal curves, vertical curves, that's
kind of where design speed plays a lot into it. Um, a lot of urban streets you don't have a
lot of curves, so it's gonna be, urn, probably a little different process, and so we would
have to figure out how we want to do that,um,but....that would be an option, obviously,
to look at 25-miles-an-hour, if that's something that we want to do. Urn, and I think it
would be helpful if that's the direction we want to go to get some guidance on what....
specifically you'd....you'd want to see with that, um, is there specific areas, is there
specific types of....of roadways we'd wanna see,just to kind of get a better idea of how
we might be able to accomplish that, um,through the design. So....
Fruit)/And if I could add into that, Jason, um....cause we had this conversation at a staff level.
Twenty....20-miles-per-hour is pretty difficult to design to. Uh, if you don't have the
curvature in the road. Um, what you're probably talking about here is creating,
potentially creating those give-way situations, where, um, you know that there's going to
be some street parking, and you just know when you've got two vehicles coming over
that....that one's gonna have to pull over. That happens naturally on some of our....on
some of our streets, when you get two cars parked on either side, but um, we don't design
for that situation, urn, now, inn, as bein' the norm, and if we go down to 20, really I think
the only way to really achieve that 20 is to intentionally create those conflicts on the
street.
Mims/Jason, you talked about...you know, part of the difference in the design is like the curves
and things like that. Is there, would you say that there's a significant difference in
designing say for 25-mile-an-hour speed limit versus a 35...mile-an-hour speed limit?
Havel/I don't think you're going to see a significant difference. Um, you know,your curves
will probably be a little longer, a little...the radius'll be a little bit larger, but I....I don't
think it's going to be significantly different.
Mims/ I raise the question cause...I mean, in our last meeting, or the meeting before, whatever,
when we talked about the new arterials and the consensus of the Council was 25-miles-
an-hour on those. And I can tell you, I don't believe that that's the will of the
community. Urn, I....as I've talked to people, they're quite shocked that we would look
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 24
at, urn, out on McCollister Boulevard or, uh, American Legion, that we're looking at 25-
miles-an-hour. Urn, as I've even talked with some of our police officers,they're like
`there's no way that's gonna happen and there's no way we can keep it enforced all the
time.' I...I think when people look at arterials,they look at them as....for vehicles....a
way to get from point A to point B, not as a residential street that is 20 to 25-miles-an-
hour, and I'm concerned that we don't start doing designs based on one Council's
perception that lock us in for the next 30 or 40 years when potentially the bulk of the
people in this community totally disagree with that concept, and so that's why I'm kind
of asking how much difference there is, and so how much leeway we really would have
with speed limits in the future.
Havel/And I think it's going to depend on what type of road you're talking about. You know,
the grid pattern really not much because it's going to have to be, you know, like Geoff
mentioned, either give-way situation or....you're not going to design a street where
people are going to go exactly 20 the entire stretch. So it's gonna be kinda more....you
may go a little faster during a stretch, but there's....periodic checkpoints where you're
not gonna be able to go above that, is likely how you're going to get to that situation.
Urn, you know if we do design say for example the example you mentioned, if you were
to design for 25, obviously if you....if you do that, you're gonna....and it's....take, uh,
McCollister for example. Those curves would not be sufficient to just simply raise the
speed limit to say 35. Urn, you know how much would you have to change. It's....it's
tough to say exactly,but I mean there would be a certain, at least in the curves, that
would have to be likely be revised to...change the speed limit to...to raise it. Uh, next
thing is on-street parking. Urn, so.....what we're looking at here is having 8-foot parking
lane be the preferred....and....preferred width, and then allowing for a minimum down to
7-foot. Urn, so again it's kind of the goal being 8-foot but, uh, there would be....it would
be allowable to go to 7-foot. Street trees, this is one that we don't really do, or don't
really deal with right now in our roadway design. So, urn, the first thing I would mention
is that with that it would likely come with the requirement that this would be part of
either development or redevelopment, and including that in what the developmer...
developer would include with their....their project. Urn, looking at a preferred minimum
parkway of 9-feet. Obviously for trees a little wider would be even better, urn,but
having kind of 9-foot be the preferred minimum to allow for, uh.....a number of options
for tree types. Obviously it....it's not mentioned here, but it kind of goes without saying
that this also would be subject to, uh, the Forestry Division's, urn....guide I guess is for
diversity of tree type and that kind of stuff,but...um, we would allow for a minimum
parkway of 6-foot. Um, in talking to Forestry, it does limit the options that you'd be able
to have there so, um, obviously the goal would be to stick with the 9 or above, but we
would allow for 6-foot parkways, um, and still have street trees if it needs to be done
to...to fit 'em in. Urn, one limitation that would be there would be overhead utility lines.
This is probably more of an issue in kind of a redevelopment or,urn, that type of situation
where there's overhead existing. Obviously with new subdivisions it's gonna be
underground, um, to start, but, um,just somethin' to keep in mind. Bike lanes, urn, so
the....the main thing here with bike lanes, obviously, is it would be per the master plan.
So that's what we would really use as our guide for where those bike lanes would go, urn,
kind of what type we'd be looking at, um, but if it does call for bike lanes, the....the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 25
design that we would recommend would be a preferred width of 6-feet. So that'd be a 6-
foot, uh, width of the actual bike lane. We would allow for it to go down to the minimum
of 5-feet, uh, which is what we have in some locations now. Uh, we also called out a
buffered bike lane width of 7 1/2-feet. Um, I don't know at this point one thing
we'd....we'd want to work through is whether that's a 6-foot lane and a 1 1/2-foot buffer
or if we wanna widen that buffer and...and go more towards the minimum bike lane. Urn,
we could work through that,but I think that 7 1/2-foot width is probably a good number
for kind of that...that buffered bike lane width. Um, and then....with separated bike
facilities, I think at this point we would want to see something that would be, uh, a design
that would be specific to any separated bike. So that would be the ones that actually have
the barriers and are physically separated. Um, I just don't think we have a good handle
on what those would be throughout the community, so we'd want to see kind of design-
specific for those situations. Uh, sidewalk, uh, right now our....our minimum width for a
sidewalk for new installations is 5-foot. I think we would plan to leave that as kind of the
minimum width,with the....um, preferred width being 6-foot along collectors and, um,
arterials. We've done that in some locations and I think it....it makes sense, uh,
with....anticipating that pedestrian volumes would be higher, uh, allowing for that extra
width. And then on arterials, also allowing for one side to be 10-foot sidewalk. Urn, now
it....a lot of times it's 8-foot on one side. As part of the bike master plan they had
recommended bumping that up to 10-feet. Uh, additional costs wouldn't be all that
significant since you're gonna be out there constructing it anyway, so just kind of going
from 8-foot to 10-feet, urn,would be the recommendation, and again, that would be on
one side. Sub-base, urn, this one's not so much, I guess you know it's not something that
most people think about with, um, street design. The main reason I wanted to mention
this is this would be a change for, um, subdivisions, especially, urn, in new development.
Currently we do not require this, um, the biggest benefit here is this allows for a drainable
base, so it allows the water to get out, urn, from underneath the pavement, which is...has
a,potentially has a large impact on the longevity of the pavement, and reducing
maintenance costs. It just, urn, water gettin' trapped between the sub-grade and the
pavement, um, has the potential, again, to cause a lot of issues over time and, uh,
reducing the life span of the pavement, which obviously increases maintenance costs.
So....um, this is pretty standard I think for a lot of communities, urn, so we would kind of
just be, um, making that switch to this. It's recommended by the professional
organizations that deal with these....this, uh, pavement, uh, so I think really, again, it's
more just kind of an FYI that I think it's somethin' that makes a lot of sense for us to do.
Uh, we've been talking about it for a while. So I think now's a good time to do it. With
the adoption of SUDAS, it just kinda makes sense, I think. A lot of developers know it's
coming at some point and so now's the time. So....with that I'll open it up to questions
and discussion, urn, again,this....at this point it's really just kind of a menu of items. We
don't have specific cross sections necessarily at this point,uh,but just trying to get some
feedback on the....the individual items and what, um, we may be....good on, what we
may need to....to work on, and kind of get some feedback on that.
Throgmorton/Well done, Jason. It's a really terrific overview and the amount of precision
you've provided is also very helpful. But we only have about five minutes to discuss
this. We may have to return to it after our formal meeting, which wouldn't be a great
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 26
thing for you I think(laughter) but uh....so, does anybody wanna raise any partic....
really key points right now, knowing we might have to come back to this after the formal
meeting?
Thomas/Well I...I would say, um, you know, uh, it was a good presentation. I guess my....my
difficulty is, um, it would be most helpful for me in understanding, uh, what's being
recommended if I had an idea of....the.....the differences between some of the standards,
you know, we've discussed,NACTO for example is one standard, and how did these
recommendations compare to those standards. Uh....cause I, you know, again it's sort of
where are we going as a community, in terms of...of the designs, and I understand that,
you know, Iowa City and most communities in effect are struggling with the fact that we
have...uh, basically....parts of cities which in towns which are more pedestrian-oriented
and some that are more auto-oriented. But even in the auto-oriented, you have...
particularly in residential areas, um, questions about safety for the....for the residents
who live there. Uh, so it's difficult for me to really comment on....where your
recommendations fall.
Havel/Well and I think it...it's gonna be a situation where I don't think there's any of'em that
are gonna tell you this is what you do. It's gonna be, you know, here's allowable
from...I....I think some of`em go as low as 9-foot in sur...certain situations up to
probably 14-feet. Um, so I think NACTO tends to point towards 10-feet as kind of
the....I.....I think I would probably even go as far as (mumbled) recommend. Um,
ASHTO...and SUDAS probably are a little wider than that, probably more in the 11 to
12-foot range, urn....
Thomas/Right.
Havel/But again, they....they kind of come at it from different angles, you know,the ASHTO
and SUDAS probably tend to be a little more auto-oriented. NACTO's probably a little
bit more on the bicycle-ped, uh, focus. So, I...I don't think that you're gonna see a lot of
conflict between them as far as one saying you can't do what another has recommended.
I think they've all kind of had that, but certainly we can....can put something together
that would, um, and I know the....the Des Moines' MPO had done somethin' similar to
that, um, but again, it's.....it's....which....which way you're kinda looking at it.
Thomas/One particular one that I've really struggled with is the curb offset, because you're
basically, you know, what we're talking about is effective with respect to lane widths.
The effective lane widths. And when you add that offset, the curb lane is 1 1/2-feet wider
than what we're calling lane widths. So it's, even if it was 10 it's going to 11.5. Uh, I...I
don't really see a value, urn, in the....in the curb offset. Uh, it....it seems to create, you
know, you've created lane widths which are pretty much de facto 11 1/2-feet.
Havel/Well and one thing to keep in mind is that would really only be in areas too where you
don't have bike facilities and you don't have parking. So it....any new facility that would
have bicycle lanes or parking would not have that curb offset.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 27
Thomas/Right.
Havel/So....and I don't have that, what the number of those would be for new streets, but I...my
guess is that a lot of those would have one of those two and so it wouldn't be an issue on
those.
Throgmorton/Does anybody else wanna make any kind of quick comments right at the moment?
Cole/Was Jason gonna be here later on. I hate to make Jason stay later.
Throgmorton/Yeah, can (both talking)
Havel/I can be here!
Throgmorton/Can...we're gonna have a long meeting I think. Sorry!
Havel/That's all right. I've already warned my wife, so....
Mims/ Sure you don't wanna roll this over to our....(several talking)
Throgmorton/We could do (several talking)
Botchway/ Is there anything that we can do for questions, I mean...questions that can be
submitted and get some feedback from that standpoint?
Fruin/Well we can do whatever you'd like. Jason can stay. I can field questions, um, it's.... it's
okay to have staff stay when you're....when you're workin' through agenda items.
Um....
Mims/I'm just thinkin' by the time we get through our formal meeting, we may not want to
(both talking)
Throgmorton/I think you're right about that. I think it'd be better not to return to this tonight.
Thomas/ I would like to have more time to refresh my understanding of the(several talking)
Throgmorton/I...so let's ask Jason to come back, not tonight,but probably at our next meeting or
maybe the one right after that, uh, so we can pin this down more. Yeah? All right, I
wanna toss out something for the rest of us to think about. For all of us to think about!
In itself the roadway design is, seems like it has...it's not the kind of thing we oughta be
talkin' about, but it....to talk about roadway design is to talk about....what kind of vision
we have for development of the...of....of new land, new properties, that are....are, you
know, that will be emerging,uh, within our city, and we can continue doing things the
way we have done them for 30-plus years, or not. And I think at the...our, at least a
majority of our Council, maybe everybody—I don't know—wants to make a shift. It's
hard to do! Tryin' to make a shift away from the way things have been done for a long
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 28
time, without bein' really clear about the connection between roadway design and land
development standards, and all the stu....the work that Opticos has been doing for us and
may be doing for us in the future. This is a tricky thing and we...we need to proceed
thoughtfully about it and....be clear about what we're tryin' to do, and try to
communicate it as effectively as we can to the general public.
Cole/And values within embedded professional engineering standards. So we're not coming up
with these, we are selecting(both talking)
Throgmorton/These are from NACTO, etc. (both talking)
Cole/ ...professional standards, so I think that's the key point too.
Throgmorton/Okay, I think given the time, we probably should break off there. We'll come
back to, um, well we won't clarify agenda items (laughs) yet again, unless...we'll touch
on it, if there's somethin' that needs to be said we'll say it. And otherwise we'll re...
return,uh, to the work session after the formal meeting by discussing the information
packets. Thank you, Jason!
(adjourn to formal 6:40 P.M.)
(resume work session 10:25 P.M.)
Information Packet Discussion [May 17, May 241:
Throgmorton/We're actually at questions about the agenda packet but....I, unless somebody has
(several talking) really wanna bring up, we should skip that. All right,hearing nothing
let's move the....move to the May 17 packet.
Mims/I'd point out that the, IP4,the 2018 Party in the Park schedule is there, so if people wanna
know when the....when those are. It's a great piece to print out and put on your
refrigerator so you don't miss any of'em.
Botchway/Awesome. They're awesome.
Cole/IP2, did anyone have any chance to speak with, um, Mazahir about the Richard's Express
Service?
Botchway/I didn't speak to Maz about it, but I did, um, speak to the,um,person in charge of it.
I feel uncomfortable.
Cole/Yeah (several talking)
Mims/I just felt(both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 29
Cole/I thought the same thing, and so that's why I was wondering if she had anything else to
offer, that people had talked to here about it. It didn't seem tailored enough to Iowa City.
Taylor/I had some questions for like Eleanor as far as the legalities of it, I mean, would they
need to be licensed? Are they basically like a chauffeur? It's not a taxi service.
Cole/ So...I'm not supportive of it. I just wanted to see if anyone (several responding)
Throgmorton/Okay, I think we (several talking)
Botchway/ I had some interesting comments about West Philadelphia,born and raised. (several
talking)
Cole/But not related to Iowa City. Okay.
Throgmorton/All right (several talking)
Cole/ So my issue's been addressed. (several talking)
Throgmorton/Moving along, how bout the May....well, anything else on May 17? All right,
May 24.
Taylor/On IP5 I just had some questions for Geoff,uh,just being a little naive. If you could
kind of explain quickly difference between an RFP and an RFQ.
Botchway/Qualifications.
Frain/Yeah, with a request for proposals, we know more or less what we want. We can define
the scope and the....the, um, consultants will come back and respond to that scope and
say we'll deliver that scope of services for X amount of dollars, and then we select those
consultants not only based on price,but also based on experience and the team members
and....and any other criteria that we define, uh, so it's....it's not a hard bid, but it's able
to be defined. Requests for qualifications is....is geared towards selecting the most
qualified company, um, without.....a.....a.....a very weighted look at price. Um, and the
reason I'm suggesting that we do this route is because it...it is very difficult at this stage
when....when the University of Iowa and Coralville want to participate for us to...fully
define the scope. We feel like we need to engage with the consultants to learn from them
and say, here's....here's a situation where there's three different agencies, we have
similar interests,but...but different in some respects. Help us craft a scope, um, and then
we would select the person that we felt most comfortable with. We would still have to
request some pricing,basic pricing information, upfront, um,but the selection is much
more geared towards the qualifications and the fit of the consultants than the price itself.
Taylor/Okay. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 30
Fruin/Little different but...it's also a little bit different to embark on a study with three different
agencies who may have different objectives that they want to get out of the study.
Taylor/Yeah (mumbled)
Mims/I think it's a good way to move forward. I liked your explanation of why you wanted to
approach it that way, so I'm supportive of that.
Throgmorton/Yeah. Me too.
Cole/Geoff, is one of the things that they're going to evaluate is people always talk about this
issue of combining services between Coralville, University of Iowa, and City of Iowa
City. It always seems to be that that's sort of a simple....uh, thing to raise, but very
complicated to implement.
Fruin/Yeah.
Cole/Um, is that something that will be (mumbled) they're not interested in that?
Fruin/No, we're not....we're not looking at a....a merger, per se. What we would be looking at
is, uh, situations where routes overlap. So you think of Iowa City, buses and, uh...um,
well Coralville, but more, uh, more with Cambus. There's a lot of the same buses going
down the same roads that aren't makin' the same stops, and of course there's difference
in fee structures and pass, with Cambus bein' free based on student fees, and....and us
havin' a fee but I think there are some situations where, urn, we want to explore whether
it makes more sense for the City to accept a....a student I.D., um, as opposed to running
Cambus down there, and perhaps there's some, uh, it makes more sense to....to run a
Cambus out into some neighborhoods that are heavily populated with student housing.
So those are the types of things we wanna explore, again, it's just hard to kinda define
that at this stage in the process.
Throgmorton/Make sense. (several talking) Come up!
Stewart/(unable to hear, away from mic) I just want to make short comment on Cambus. I think
to the best of my knowledge they're not actually allowed to operate off campus, like off
University property for the most part. So....anything like that would probably have to be
covered by Iowa City Transit or....anything that's not Cambus.
Fruin/Yeah. Those...those are issues that...that we would work out. They....they travel off
campus quite a bit to get to other campus destinations, so if you think of the, uh, River
Landing area where they have Hospital, or the Oakdale, uh, Research Park, or even out to
where, um,the....the, uh, student housing is on the west side of town. I'm drawin' a
blank on the name there, the old....
Stewart/Is it the Aspire on (several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 31
Fruin/They would pass through a lot of non-campus areas, and that's what we wanna explore,
uh, are particularly on those routes, how do....how do we work together on those.
Throgmorton/Okay! IP #6, the overview of, uh, the Senior Center membership and
participation. Thank you so much for the very informative, short memo.
Monroe/ You're welcome!
Throgmorton/Yeah. Gives me better insight into how many people are members, etc., and
where they come from and all that.
Monroe/There's....it just kind of shows the breadth of....just a snapshot of what is offered and
how many people are involved in, uh, how much expansion we might still be able to
have.
Taylor/Very impressive number of volunteers and classes and membership. I think I might have
asked for this originally because I was concerned, I was hearing from folks outside of
Iowa City that since we raised the price, they weren't going to be a paid dues member
any longer, and it does look like, 83% Iowa City, 17%Johnson County, but I don't think
that it affected it that much,but it is a concern.
Throgmorton/ ....pretty close to what it's been. (several talking)
Mims/Urn, IP #4, there's, under the `other topics,' #8, um...review the Riverfront Crossings
form based code, including density bonus provisions and height allowances. My
understanding of our procedures has always been if we're adding things on here, that's
a...that's a Council decision of at least like three or four Council Members.
Throgmorton/It's my understanding that the mayor has the ability to add topics to the agenda,
which is why it's on there.
Mims/I don't....cause we've never considered this the agenda. I mean we've always....our past
practice has always been that topics going on our work session....were things that we
discussed as a Council and at least three Members put those on. I...I'm just sayin' that's
....that has always been our past practice.
Throgmorton/Well I....I....I thought it was my understand the mayor had the ability to put this
kind of thing on the agenda. That's why it's there. If that's not correct, then, you know,
we need four people who would want to, or is it at least(both talking)
Mims/And I'm not necessarily disagreeing with it being there. I'm....you know me, I tend to
focus on process and try and be consistent with things like that. I've never seen us do
this before. I thought the change in the Charter for the mayor being able to put things on
the agenda, I guess my interpretation was always that that was the formal agenda. Not
...topics that we were gonna discuss at a work session.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 32
Cole/I thought that applied to the Council Members....Council Members needed two additional
to put something on the agenda but the mayor....but I could be wrong on that.
Mims/I guess it depends on how you interrupt agenda.
Botchway/Looking at Eleanor(laughter) So I would....I would....in general I would agree with
Susan's comment, I mean,just my recollection it's always been that way. Doesn't mean
that it...it's supposed to be different. I just think if it is different, I mean...to note that it's
different.
Fruin/I didn't go back....I didn't look at the Charter language. I...I would guess if I did, it...it
probably strictly refers to the....the....the formal agenda, but I'd have to go back and
look. In this case, I think it's whatever the Council wants. I mean right....before....
before Item 8 was added, it's always been three Council Members, urn, or staff, and
frankly staff adds quite a bit on here, um, more than....more than Council does, but um
(laughter) I...I guess in my view, Susan, if, um....Mayor would have the authority to add
agenda items to the....um, formal agenda that...that's again for you guys to decide,but I
would...think that this is a step (several talking)
Throgmorton/Let me suggest a way to proceed. With regard to this particular item, I'd like to
ask if there are two other Council Members who would agree to have it put on the work
session. Beyond that, uh, I would ask Eleanor and/or Geoff to look at the Charter and
give us a sense of whether the mayor has the power to do this. I mean we need to know
that for procedural reasons. So, are there two others who would like to have this on the
agenda, on the work session, pending work session agenda?
Thomas/This is#8 under Other Topics?
Throgmorton/Yeah, review of RFC, Riverfront Crossings form based code, including density
bonus provisions and height allowances.
Thomas/Yeah, I...I'll support that.
Throgmorton/Anyone else?
Taylor/ (mumbled)
Throgmorton/ Okay, so....(unable to hear) two-step kinda thing. All right! Uh, anything(both
talking)
Fruin/ ....on that item, sorry, the, uh, July 3`a, um, work session, if I understood today's meeting
correctly will have the SUDAS discussion,uh, will have the P&Z consult on Pentacrest
Garden Apartments, uh, assuming they're available, and then, uh.....the,uh, Prairie, uh,
Du Chien rezoning discussing City assistance. So that would take that...July 3'd agenda
(several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 33
Botchway/And we're all gonna be here (both talking)
Throgmorton/What about Prairie Du Chien?
Fruin/There was a request for a future work session agenda to talk about City assistance (both
talking)
Taylor/Oh, for the additional monetary assistance.
Throgmorton/Ah, yes!
Cole/Yeah, I....I want the Prairie Du Chien on. I don't know if anyone else does but....
Fruin/That would....that'd be a full work session on July 3`d, if you're all comfortable with those
three items.
Botchway/Is there any reason, um, why we couldn't go earlier...is there any reason we couldn't
go earlier? (several talking)
Cole/ ...the meeting itself, as opposed to....
Throgmorton/You mean like 4:30, is that what you have in mind?
Botchway/ Or 4:00.
Fruin/All right, I may....I may need to come back to ya on that. Sony, we're a little sidebar
here, but the....the consultants for the climate plan are already booked on July 3`d so
we're gonna have to work that out.
Throgmorton/Let's talk about it tomorrow. Yeah, we understand there are things that we want
to discuss.
Mims/The other thing is we wanna try and get a special meeting scheduled for the third vote on
the Camp Cardinal.
Throgmorton/Right. Okay, anything else? Hearing nothing else, I think we're finished with our
work....no we're not! We have the one last thing. Excuse me, the...whether there's any
information about, uh, updates on assigned boards, commissions, and committees.
Maybe John, could you start please?
Council updates on assigned boards, commissions and conunittees:
Thomas/ I don't have anything.
Throgmorton/Rockne?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.
Page 34
Cole/Urn, I asked John Kenyon and he just basically reaffirmed how well the conference went,
where they invited all the UNESCO Cities of Literature and they developed a(mumbled)
and all is well with the City of Literature. No other pending events though for City of
Literature.
Throgmorton/Kingsley?
Botchway/I had about an hour's worth of stuff to talk about(laughter) but....nothing at this
time.
Cole/McDonald's is gonna close at 11, right? (laughter)
Taylor/ I think we have MPO, tomorrow, don't we? Reminder, MPOJC tomorrow. And then,
urn, I don't have anything. Uh, ECI....ECICOG meets this Thursday. I bet I'll have
something next meeting.
Throgmorton/Okay.
Mims/I won't be at MPO. I have an alternate. I believe Eleanor's going in my spot. I have a
conflict. Urn, the Executive Committee for the Access Center had a meeting with
individuals from Cedar Rapids who run the federally qualified health care, urn clinic up
there and so we're just having discussions with them because, uh, Johnson County is part
of their area to serve, and so looking at if there are possibilities working together,
so...nothing firm at all but just exploring op...options there.
Botchway/ Susan, I did have a quick question. How does the, what....what happened at the state
level, urn, affect what's currently happening right now?
Mims/We don't know for sure. Urn, the rules and regulations are still being written. We have a
couple people on the Steering Committee, or at least one on the Steering Committee,
another person who's coming quite a bit, um, Geoffrey Lauer from the Brain Injury, uh,
group, who's involved in those, uh, writing of those regulations. We're very concerned
about some of those regulations and how they can....they might impact the development
of our Access Center and whether we will or will want to fall under the State's definition
of an access center. So, um, suffice it to say it's complicated, but we have people who
understand a lot more about that stuff than I do who are on top of it.
Throgmorton/In seemingly endless complications, huh?
Mims/Yes.
Throgmorton/I have one thing to mention. Pauline and I will be meeting with Janet Godwin and
Lori Roetlin of the School Board on June the 5th, Monday June the 5`11, and we'll talk
about school renovations, we'll talk about their redistricting process, probably talk about
our proposed annexation policy. I look forward to the conversation! All right, I think
that's it for the night, folks. Thank you!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 29, 2018.